There are only so many ways to tell stories, especially given the fact that storytelling has been around since the early days before even the Greeks and Romans were making names for themselves. And yet, even now in the year 2008 we find ourselves enraptured by similar stories, constantly drawn into the magic that raconteurs seem to weave with their words and structures. This "magic" of course can be learned, by anyone who is willing to find the common ground and the system lurking just beyond the colorful imagery and base grammar.
Writing stories (plays, novels, film, short stories, anything) usually follows a simple three-act principle. Anyone who's gone to Elementary School English knows what this is.
ACT I: BEGINNING
ACT II: MIDDLE
ACT III: END
Simple enough, right? Well in screenwriting we must understand more of the dynamics that each of these phases or stages holds for an audience sitting in a darkened theater. Especially considering that movies are based on emotionally involving the audience, not simply telling them some kind of thesis and follow-up information. We must engage our audience, at least emotionally, if not mentally as well. So with that in mind, we more specifically break up the film structure like this:
ACT I: ATTRACTION
ACT II: ANTICIPATION
ACT III: SATISFACTION
In ACT I, the ATTRACTION phase, we hook the audience into the action by introducing intriguing characters and some kind of perilous situation they find themselves in. Sometimes the character isn't enough to get the audience involved, but the situation they find themselves in may be the kicker that draws in that attention. It is important that the audience ask themselves "How will this character make it out of this mess?" If that's the case, than ACT I has succeeded.
In ACT II, the ANTICIPATION phase, the screenwriter must constantly provide more and more difficult challenges for the character, to keep the audience on the edge of their seats and building up the suspense of whether or not the character will achieve their dramatic need or goal. If the consequences and danger of each encounter in ACT II don't top the previous one, the action will get repetitive and stale, and the audience will surely begin to lose focus, the same way that walking down the same road day after day will eventually dull the experience down to a subconscious blur. This phenomenon is (unfortunately) far too common and is known as "Second Act Sag."
In ACT III, the SATISFACTION phase, the Screenwriter allows the character to overcome internal and external conflicts and achieve their goal. This is important because it relieves all the tension built up through the events of ACT II and let's the audience leave satisfied that they have seen a complete story. The ending can be sad, happy, dramatic, upbeat, whatever, it doesn't matter, so much as the story has come to a complete and full resolution. Otherwise the audience will feel gypped like they wasted their money to see a half-finished narrative and therefore you'll have let them down, and the entire movie will be a bust. No one's going to recommend a film that had an incomplete ending (with very rare exceptions from screenwriters who are exceptional at bending/breaking rules).
NEXT PENTALK: THE ELEMENTS OF A SCREEN STORY
No comments:
Post a Comment