25 Responses to “The Transformational Character Arc Part 12 Theme me up Scotty…”

1. James on Saturday: 26 May 2007|1502

   I couldn’t agree more with this post.

   I do have a few questions on your thoughts about readers.

   I find that readers rarely ever understand theme, unless it is blatant and obvious. That is, not to say, they don’t get the theme if it is subtle, but they simply can’t tell their boss, “Yeah, this one is about ‘Love Conquering All’.” And if they can’t, it’s easier and less risky for the reader to assume it doesn’t have one.

   In my own personal expereience with reading, the majority of scripts that have been recommended to me by the powers that be, tend to state their theme within the first 10 pages in a very on the nose fashion.

   The better scripts I’ve read, don’t. It’s there, not just in the first ten pages, but in every scene, on every page, throughout the screenplay.

   I know this is a stupid question… but you tend to favor ability to sell a screenplay over content. I was wondering what your experience has been with this issue?

2. Unk on Saturday: 26 May 2007|1533

   James,

   Hmmm. I don’t know where you got the impression that I favor the ability to sell a script over the content of a script. I’ve never said that and I sure as HELL don’t believe in it.

   What I do believe in is that once you have a great script with great content, you now have to shift gears a bit and become somewhat of a marketer.

   The script however, should be able to sell itself. Even if the reader doesn’t get the theme. There’s a fine balance between just the right amount of action and theme. Some scripts scream theme all the way through it while others slide it in there in plain sight where it attacks your senses instead of your brain.

   Readers are an entirely different story… Some are good — some are bad — some are just plain crappy. That’s pretty much the luck of the draw since in reality, you have no control over it.

   Rest assured that when you have a script that has great content along with a wide audience appeal, you’re gonna sell it eventually. The reader who passed on it will probably lose their job so it all works out in the end. LOL.

   My personal experience with many readers is that they often try to HEDGE their bets because they want to keep reading screenplays.

   In other words, even if they like your script, they’re gonna find something wrong with it so when they hand in the coverage, it’s rather neutral i.e., damned if you do — damned if you don’t.

   All you can hope for is that the producer hiring these readers knows his readers well enough to know when they see hedged coverage, they should probably go ahead and read the script themeselves.

   At least that’s what I do.

   Unk

3. Clive on Sunday: 27 May 2007|0506

   I’ve got a slightly different spin on theme, why it’s important and why it’s so often missing in newbie screenwriter’s scripts.

   It all goes back to the initial motivation for writing the script.

   When I first started writing I was more obsessed with writing a script that would launch my career, than I was in telling stories that actually meant something to me.

   Now, if your primary motivation in writing a script is to achieve success, your screenplays will tend to mirror the demands of the market and you never really ask yourself the very basic question “On a deep human level, what is this film about?”

   You don’t ask it because the answer I would have given at that stage is: well, it’s a low budget horror and it’s about people getting stabbed to death in an isolated log cabin! LOL

   However, when you stop doing that and start writing films you really believe in, then you start writing about the things that are important to you. At this point a film’s themes arise naturally as part of the development process.

   For me this was a seminal change of approach. So, I knew when I started my new spec I wanted to write a story about a man discovering he couldn’t save the person he loved and if he made this his goal, he’d miss out on loving that person in the time they have together.

   The funny thing is, once I started writing about themes which were important to me, I found my writing improved dramatically and not only that, this spec got an incredible reaction in the market place. Producers are getting very excited about this movie.

   For me theme is always about the broader emotional journey for the protagonist/s within the story and without it your hero will just be a reactive drone.

4. James on Sunday: 27 May 2007|1349

   Unk,

   I re-read the part about favoring selling a script over content… It came out wrong. I know you preach content, content, content. But you also talk about marketability. And that’s what I was getting at. I didn’t mean, throw everything out the window and write crap.

   I meant, you have a great script. But you can write it with the theme buried… Or you can write it with the theme literally stated on page 5, as some screenwriting books (Save the Cat, which is now outselling Robert McKee’s STORY) profess is the correct way to write a screenplay.

   I think the better movies have a buried theme. (For a variety of reasons). But I think most scripts go farther if they literally state the theme because most readers and producers (as you have pointed out) are already hedging their bets against your script.

5. Unk on Sunday: 27 May 2007|1618

   James,

   I have to agree with you there… Hence, the reason I CHOOSE to read most of the scripts that come past me no matter what the reader says…

   I too would much rather have the theme buried (as you say) so that I can absorb it.

   In fact, I would rather have the movie/script entertain me and then, after I put it down or walk out of the theater — have the THEME hit me right over the head later.

   Screenplays with themes that are literally stated usually come off as a little too preachy for my taste…

   But you are once again correct… The DUMBING DOWN OF HOLLYWORD has got the NOOBS tossing it in their script like croutons on a salad.

   Trust me when I tell you that not every prodco likes that formula… It’s easily split in half…

   Unk

6. MaryAn on Sunday: 27 May 2007|1901

   Theme separates the pointed from the pointless writers – those who have something to say from those who just want to say something.

7. Script Demon on Monday: 28 May 2007|0453

   UNK = TRUTH
   TRUTH = UNK

8. Clive on Monday: 28 May 2007|0638

   I’m not sure the industry is dumbing down.

   For every “Wild Hogs” there is a “Little Miss Sunshine,” a “Sideways” or “The Hours.”

   The industry has always been a mixture of lowest common denominator popcorn fodder and more intelligent films.

   As a consumer, the truth is I watch both. A large proportion of the movie going public do.

   When I was in Ghana I got to see “The Prestige” for the first time and I was blown away at what an intelligent movie it was, but the same time it was also definitely a Hollywood project.

   And, from my own recent personal experience proves that Producers will go for a project that has a serious intentions, providing the writing is good, the characters are fresh and the idea excites them.

   I think this idea that Hollywood producers are a bunch of dumb beasts who deliberately turn out mindless pap in order to turn a buck, is totally at odds with even the most cursory look at cinema history, the buying habits of the public and the track record of the industry.

   Look at a movie like “American Beauty.” Here you have a magnificent mid-life crisis movie, with a great script and a stunning cast. It did phenomenal business and was the hot movie at the time of its release. Mindless pap it wasn’t.

   The thing is, it’s not an aberration — it’s not a film that slipped though the net by accident. It is exactly what the industry is always looking for.

   My personal feeling is that the reason Hollywood doesn’t make more movies like that is simply because the scripts aren’t out there. Period.

   My take is most actors in Hollywood want to do “serious” work. Once they’ve made your money, most of them want to be taken seriously as actors. What this means is a strong “actor’s script” is always going to have good currency in LA.

   Directors are the same, they’re all looking for the opportunity to create something outstanding.

   As screenwriters we can’t afford to buy into the “Hollywood only buys pap” thinking that seems so common amongst spec script writers. It doesn’t. Never has and probably never will.

   I know I keep banging on about this, but my personal experience in the market place backs it up. If you create a unique, interesting, well written screenplay which delights you and is the kind of movie you’d like to see, it will get interest, it will get taken seriously and it will build your career.

   You don’t have to sell your soul to sell your script.

   At the same time you still have to work within the business contraints of the industry, so even an intelligent movie needs to have a strong high concept hook.

   Where my blood boils, is when people assume that high concept, structured screenplays are automatically lowest common denominator movies. And, that to create something beyond that, to create an intelligent movie you have to flout, break and ignore the conventions of good story telling. That is the tiredest and frankly lamest argument on the circuit at the moment.

   There really isn’t a clear cut choice between good technique and artistic freedom. The people who turn out jaded formula movies because they believe it’s the only way to succeed are just as tedious and in my opinion wrong headed as those who cling to the idea that the only way to create a unique film is to knock out the next “worm farm debutante” movie.

   Both camps spend too much time blaming the industry for their own shortcomings. The formula hacks blame the industry for only buying pap and forcing them to compromise and the “artists” trot out the same toss and use it as an excuse for self indulgent writing.

   It’s actually very simple, learn some damn technique and then apply it to the ideas about which your are most passionate. Write well about the things you care about and pitch it in the manner the industry requires.

   It’s not rocket science. It’s also not easy and it also can’t be achieved overnight.

   Rant over — for the moment.

   Good Script = Sales
   Good Technique = Good Script
   All Work And No Rant = Jack Being A Dull Boy

9. nic on Monday: 28 May 2007|0711

   Theme very essentially comes out of the character in my mind, because whether you arrive at the theme after creating your characters, protagonist, or vice versa (character created out of theme) I always kinda of hold that a character’s relationship to the theme is one of the most basic, elemental ways of making them dynamic, whether they are textbook dynamic* characters or not (as I certainly believe there’s a time and a place for static characters).

   Protags and major chars are being formed from a variety of places, voices and ideas, which is why if I have a char so fully fleshed out I think it’s possible to arrive at the theme from within that character. I think you’re right Unk, in that it doesn’t really matter where it comes from and there being no ‘right’ way, because where ever it came from may have absolutely no bearing on how well a writer is able to fortify the theme into their story. Therein lies the craft.

   One other way I’ve always used the theme to my aid is to give secondary characters more depth. Secondary characters as tangents, or even misrepresentations of the theme (once arrived upon). I think all characters should have a relationship to theme and a good way of burying the theme is to play out all these different and skewed takes over the course of your story. Somewhere at Wordplayer there’s a post that I took to heart laying out that an antagonist’s relationship to theme may be counter to the protagonist’s, or may in fact be an extremist take that’s actually not that far-flung from the protagonist. (This idea is probably somewhere in McKee’s Story or Trottier’s book but I can’t swear by it) In so doing you’ve managed to make the character’s transformation, the story’s major conflict and the theme all converge pretty handily. And even better, if you can pull it off without folks seeing the wires and mirrors, well goddamn, that’s something isn’t it?

10. Unk on Tuesday: 29 May 2007|0112

    Clive,

    Again we agree… Notice I said the dumbing down of Hollyword… NOT HOLLYWOOD. LOL.

    Hollyword is the glut of screenwriters writing garbage and then trying to market that garbage.

    Meaning that 98% of the scripts out there are shit so there’s a lot of sifting going on.

    It’s a lot like the Indie film industry… Everybody’s making a movie but they keep forgetting about the storytelling. Just having a program that formats action and dialogue AIN’T GONNA GET IT.

    nic,

    I tend to agree… The better you get to know your characters, the more a THEME will emerge. It might take a few drafts — it might not.

    But you’ve gotta start somewhere and to be honest, there’s a myriad of ther places you could start that are a hell of a lot worse than theme.

    MaryAn,

    Agreed.

    Script Demon…

    Aw shucks…

    Unk

    Great comments so far…

11. ThomasR on Tuesday: 29 May 2007|0249

    It’s a shame that some newbies think people in Hollywood are like little kids or teens watching cartoons or kids-shows where at the end of the episode the characters of the cartoon/show explain you the morale of the story by pointing out how bad smoking is or how to treat weak people.

    Blame it on bad/lazy writing.

12. Clive on Tuesday: 29 May 2007|0344

    I do sometimes wonder whether trying to encourage people to be better writers and filmmakers we might both be better spending our time persuading people to STOP writing and STOP making films.

    You’re right, one of the main handicaps and time constraints any producer faces is sifting through the mountains of crude that gets slung at them, whilst they desperately try to find the one good script amongst the thousands upon thousands of “train-wreck” screenplays. (by train wreck I mean a script whose content and structure resemble a full blown, head on collision between the Cliche Express and the 10.45 commuter train from Crudsville).

    The whole idea of script readers, specs only via agent representation, high concept loglines as queries and all the other “gate keeper” strategies that drive newbie screenwriters nuts as they try to find a way into the industry, all exist in order to manage the avalanche of sub-standard, poorly written, derivative, toss that rolls into town everyday. In a sense we only have ourselves to blame.

    With the digital revolution, exactly the same is now starting to happen to distributors — only now the same people who were once littering Hollywood with lame specs, now cut out the middle man and commit their train-wrecks to tape.

    So, it’s hardly surprising that distributors, who used to be very, very approachable are now adopting more and more gate keeper strategies.

    I think my goal for this month ought to be to persuade at least one person a day to quit screenwriting and filmmaking, or at least convert them to the idea that it’s OK to do this as a hobby, that you don’t have to send out your stuff to producers, agents and distributors.

    But. let’s face it that’s never going to work because my personal experience is this:

    The worse the screenplay is, the less able the writer is to see it.

    Truth is a good writer is always more likely to consider quitting than a bad one, simply because a good writer is always critical of their own work and the bad writer almost never is.

13. MaryAn on Tuesday: 29 May 2007|0707

    So, Clive, based on your theory that a good writer is always more likely to consider quitting than a bad one, your goal for the month would help sweep the path clear for the dreck.

14. Christian Howell on Tuesday: 29 May 2007|0914

    Wow, this was a great post. Especially the comments. Fortunately (perhaps) I haven’t had the pleasure of exploding my head with a bad script, but I can see where the problem is.

    A lot of it is that people don’t reaize that if you can only get a job as a bartender or waiter, this may not be for you. Screenwriting has, in my mind, proven to be the most complicated form of artistic release.

    I think a lot of people would serve themeselves well to really look at their personal vocabulary and grammar, much less that which makes it wayto paper in the form of character dialogue, and see if they can really create sentences that flow off the lips like butter. Or if their most heartfelt speech reminds one of the gas station attendant Mike Myers replaced in Wayne’s World.

    Having ideas and relating those ideas effectively are two juxtaposed skills. On the one hand anyone can produce an idea, but when it comes to “going from Point A to Point C, screenwriting books can only show you the direction, they can’t make you understand what you see on the trip.

    A good example is a very difficult story (read:boring as crap) I’m currently writing. The theme has undergone several natural evolutionary phases and now I find that the Theme is actually echoed in reverse.

    What I mean is it echoed in reverse. Take the “People Have to Face Their Fears” theme. It could be established by other characters remarking how the person never stands up for themselves or that they don’t express hemselves.

    I can see this type of exposure in “You’ve Got Mail” where no one actually says Meg Ryan is not built for business (Tom Hanks intimates it with his girlfriend after she mentions she may hire her) or that she is too passive.

    In the end though I think the movie says, “going to the mattresses isn’t for everyone.”

    Some people would say it’s true love overcomes all, but hey one man’s truth is another man’s anathema.

    Again great post and thought provoking comments. It feels good to know that someone knows what the hell I’m talking about. At least in terms of “vocabularic output.”

    One more thing, I’m not downing bartenders or waiters, but I wouldn’t even consider this if I didn’t feel my grasp of words was somewhat above average.

    My favorite characters in movies are the Christopher Plummer types, followed n a close second is Denis Leary and the cousin from “The Wedding Date” and characters like those have a wealth of information they are dying to let out of their souls.

    Wow, wasn’t this about theme?

    Oops.

15. Christian Howell on Tuesday: 29 May 2007|0955

    Wow, this post is a cornucopia of cinematic foresight. I have been thinkng about theme a lot lately as I craft the 4 projects I’m currently working on.

    What I am finding is that a character arc is sometimes not a character arc.

    I mean, really sometimes, it’s not a flaw in our character tha causes problem but the lack of a flaw that our antag may have. I thinkthat cause a lot fo the “sparks” in “You’ve Got Mail” asTom Hankshad no problem going to the mattresses where Meg Ryan thought it had to do with making stupid boxng moves in the store.

    Had Tom’s character had a similar flaw it wol dhave made the movie borng but if Meg’s character didn’t it would have opened up more ways to “keep them apart.”

    Again, that’s just an opinion and I loved the movie as it is.

    I think that’s a major “theme” of all movies, JEALOUSY.

    Hans Gruber was jealous that McClain could do what he did.

    Boggs was jealous of Andy because Andy was intelligent.

    Wild Bill was jealous of Coffey beause he got special privileges.

    I coul dgo on and on but I think my point is that a ot fo the time the protag is not actually flawed but has to deal with juxtaposed “personality positions” with the antag.

    At first I thought I was being too good to my characters but then I realized that a person does’t have to have a flaw to be mugged, raped or kidnapped, they just have to come across their antithesis.

    Perhaps their “flaw” is that they won’t change to be safer.

    Perhaps it’s that they won’t apologize to a moron boss when the boss is wrong but they got “excited” in trying to relate it.

    Maybe that should be your next post.

    What exactly is a character flaw?

16. Christian Howell on Tuesday: 29 May 2007|1057

    Let’s visit the old take on the 3 Act Structure where they say:

    Act 1: Get your Protagonist up a tree.

    Act 2: Throw rocks at your Protagonist.

    Act 3: Get your Protagonist down out of the tree.

    If you use the 3 Act Structure (I don’t actually use it but apparently most do), your Protagonist’s transformational character arc could be something along the lines of…

    and the plethora continues. I thought I was crazy for dumping the 3 Act structure. Now I think it was the best thing for my style.

    I think beginning, middle and end but I don’t like to have a static structure for a dynamic task.
    I let each movie determine what it is.

17. suburban screenwriter on Tuesday: 29 May 2007|1316

    I think I would rather help newbies try to get better at their writing etc(like others have for me–thanx Unk) than go down the negative route and discourage someone from being a writer. And while I agree about good writers being critical of their own work I think if they are good any way they get assistance in honing their skill even more will prove beneficial because they will know how to use it to improve themselves.

18. ThomasR on Wednesday: 30 May 2007|0222

    Christian Howell
    Character flaw should be necessary to further the story into directions where the character can solve his own dilemma.

    John McLane’s major turn in Die Hard came in the restroom fixing his foot while talking to Sgt. Al Powel thru the Walky Talky admitting his mistakes and love for his wife.

    Every character needs a flaw, even the minor ones. The more the better.

19. Clive on Wednesday: 30 May 2007|0322

    “So, Clive, based on your theory that a good writer is always more likely to consider quitting than a bad one, your goal for the month would help sweep the path clear for the dreck.”

    Yep, that’s my plan. And, it should be your plan too! LOL

    More dreck and fewer good writers means less competition in the marketplace.

    Nah, not really…

    Even if I thought I could really persuade the writers who flood the market with train-wreck scripts to quit writing to take up ballet, sculpture or worm farming I wouldn’t. Mainly because I know just how long it takes to develop as a writer and how many train-wrecks I had to write to get to the point where I could finally write something worth reading. So far it’s taken ten years of almost constant screenwriting and the development of eight feature scripts, with at least a dozen rewrites on each, to get to the point where I can put stuff into the market place and get it read at the right level.

    The point I was really trying to make was, the marketplace for spec scripts looks the way it does because there is so much dreck and at the same time a shortage of good scripts.

    Anyone looking to sell their spec has to understand why it is the way it is and why the industry operates the way it does.

    The truth is producers are desperate to find great scripts, but for them it’s needle in the haystack time. That’s the reason the industry looks so impenetrable from the outside.

    What I’m not convinced by is the idea that you can turn bad writers into good ones, no matter what information you give them. Not because writing is that hard. It’s not that, it’s more to do with the fact that too many people want to succeed for the sake of succeeding. In my experience there is a real difference between writing a script because you have something to say, because you are carrying a story that needs to be told and the endless struggle of many people to validate themselves as human beings by achieving success in what they perceive to be a glamorous industry.

    That’s where this all links back to a discussion on theme. Themes are by their very nature an expression of the core values of the writer. The writer needs to have something to say something about the world and the way human beings interact with each other. These ideas and values get played out in the drama. If the writer has no ideas or values beyond that of getting recognition or making a sale, then the story is all form and no content.

    The irony of all this is that in the chase for success many writers decrease their chances of achieving it, simply because the scripts they write don’t resonate with anyone. The thing that really hooks people into reading a script is when they find an idea in a logline that fascinates them. In the main, a film with a strong theme, written by someone who has something to say and who then has the technical skills to tell that story in a filmic way, is almost bound to find a producer who will be as passionate about it as the person who wrote it.

    Where Unk and others, myself included, can pass on the knowledge we’ve gained as both writers and filmmakers, what none of us can do is pass on that passion for story telling and an innate interest in humanity. Yet, it’s in that passion and fascination that the real work happens.

    Charles Bukowski was once asked by a grad student “Is writing a good career” to which he answered, drunkenly “Son, you don’t choose writing, writing chooses you.”

    I so agree with him and once it’s chosen you, success or failure are irrelevant, sales or not sales is irrelevant.

    My personal experience is that once writers stop trying to figure our how to succeed and figure out what it is they are supposed to be writing, just because they HAVE to write it, at that point the good stuff starts happening.

20. Joshua James on Saturday: 2 June 2007|1131

    Jesus Hamilton Christ, Unk, that’s the best breakdown of theme I’ve read yet, and I’ve read many a breakdown of one . . .

    It may be time for you to climb out of your batcave, rip off your mask and show the world who you are, if only so you can write a book about this stuff and get real credit for it . . .

21. Daily Dojo of Joshua James » Blog Archive » Theme = Truth & Truth = Theme on Saturday: 2 June 2007|1134

    [...] all wise and powerful Unk has a post on theme called The Transformational Character Arc Part 12 Theme me up Scotty… that is one of the best explanations I’ve read . . . not only for screenplays, but for all [...]

22. MaryAn on Saturday: 2 June 2007|1624

    “the endless struggle of many people to validate themselves as human beings by achieving success in what they perceive to be a glamorous industry”

    I’ve tried to reply to the comment for days but each time, I get a knot in my stomach.

    I hate it when you people make me think.

23. ScreenwriterJ on Tuesday: 5 June 2007|0725

    I once met Francis Ford Coppola, and he said the same thing. He chooses one word for each of his films, and when he gets into a situation and doesn’t know where to turn, he uses that word to help guide him to the answer. This is theme.

24. suburban screenwriter on Wednesday: 6 June 2007|1128

    Unk–

    I see that part 13 is up on ice rocket but it isn’t showing on here. I was able to read it on google reader but thought you should know in case other people are having same issue.

    SS

25. Script Frenzy update and others - nicolle c jones.com on Tuesday: 17 March 2009|0809

    [...] Unk’s got a discussion about theme that really beats the band over at theunknownscreenwriter as part of his Transformational Character Arc. I’ve always [...]

Leave a Reply