Personal Transformation - the internal journey - the character’s arc
Each of these expressions touches on the “need” of a protagonist. They describe the steps that a character takes to progress towards (or regress away from) a better version of themselves.
One of our key decisions as writers is how to engage with this aspect of narrative structure.
Do we want our characters to change? If we do, how schematic should those steps be and how much do we need to spoon-feed the audience when we illustrate these steps? How much change is truly plausible, given that most of us change very little over the course of our entire adult lives? How much does this “character arc” enrich the impact of our movies?
There are no rules. The majority of writing “gurus” expend enormous time and energy persuading us that this “personal transformation” is the holy grail of script writing. But is it? Watch your favourite movies, read the scripts - make up your own mind.
What follows is a brief introduction to the principles...
INTERNAL JOURNEY – TO WHERE?
Sydney Pollack says “every” film is a love story.
So:
“One Flew Over…” love of justice, love of fellow man.
“Godfather”… love of son, love of family, love of power
Identity:
For women - “Educating Rita”, “Erin Brockovich”, “The Piano”
The love of authenticity - “American Beauty”.
Any film that engages with these issues will find its rhythm through the development of an INTERNAL JOURNEY.
INTERNAL JOURNEY = TRANSFORMATION or REGRESSION.
“the movement of a character towards a more desired state” ?
- “Advanced Screenwriting”, Linda Seger
- (Seger doubles up a bit? Ch 6 and Ch 9 really both dealing with the issue of the internal journey.
But, general definitions:
A change towards a more positive life, set of values.
A journey from a flaw towards a solution to that flaw.
Or.
A positive value that is not useful; e.g. naivety in the big city.
Lack of assertiveness in women.
Too much aggession in men.
External Transformation, ILLUSTRATING Internal Transformation.
e.g. “Jerry Maguire”
INTERNAL JOURNEY – WHOSE?
Generally, the protagonist – but not always.
“Unforgiven”, William Munny doesn’t really change but his actions and mentoring stop the Schofield Kid growing up to be like him.
“The Fugitive” – small change, several small beats make Sam Gerard (Tommy Lee Jones), change his mind about Kimble (Harrison Ford) and believe that he might be innocent.
INTERNAL JOURNEY – HOW?
Through confrontation, through trials, through impossible CHOICES.
Generally, a minimum of 3 big beats:
Act 1 The problem – characters find themselves in a situation where they have to confront their “fault”. Often get there without planning it.
Act 2 The realisation (the acknowledgement by the protagonist that, yes, she HAS a flaw)
– FIRST HALF work hard, struggle, fall back on old habits, don’t get it, get shoved by people and circumstances, all “designed” to test THE FAULT. SECOND HALF – from mid-act turning point, character begins to change.
“Jerry Maguire” – greater compassion – Jerry marries Zellwegger.
“As Good As it Gets” – Melvin drives The Fag to meet his parents.
Second big turning point – BIG DECISION, will the character stick with their emerging transformation or will they go backward?
“Schindler’s List” – Schindler is rich now but has to decide will he leave with his money or stay and save his workers.
Act 3 The change – proof of the decision with one last test.
Character is now open enough to fall in love
“Jerry Maguire”
Confident enough to get promotion
“Working Girl”
Strong enough to win/survive the contest
“Rocky”
Generally – SHOW DON’T TELL.
Sometimes there is a tell “Schindler’s List” (I could have done more)
“Jerry Maguire” – (you complete me – you had me at hello) speech.
SGM- both of the above are risky and not entirely successful.
Most journeys take many more 10, 20, 30
INTERNAL JOURNEY – FELLOW TRAVELLERS
WHAT? & WHOM?
By EVENTS “perfectly” designed to TEST the fault.
By CHARACTERS perfectly designed to TEST the fault, or HELP repair it. c.f. pretty much ALL love stories.
e.g. “As Good As It Gets”
THE HELP: The hugely intelligent, good, compassionate waitress – Helen Hunt.
THE TEST: Simon “The Fag” neighbour, his ugly mutt dog, the BLACK manager etc.
FOR A WRITER – REMEMBER, ACTOR’S CAN DO A LOT WITH A GLANCE. BIG DECISION IS WHETHER TO WRITE THAT GLANCE AND WHAT IT MEANS OR NOT.
c.f. “When Harry Met Sally” – not written.
“As Good As it Gets” – every nuance written and explained (beautifully).
ULTIMATELY – the transformation, or lack of it, is the writer’s underlining of his philosophical message.
“As Good as It Gets” – even a leopard can change his spots, great love will transform the devil himself.?
“ACADEMIC” NOTES ON PHILOSOPHY BEHIND THE INTERNAL JOURNEY -
in response to Linda Seger:
PHILOSOPHICAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL, THEOLOGICAL (METAPHYSICAL?) –
Cf Linda Seger, “Advanced Screenwriting” p95 –
Linda Seger suggests a theological/metaphysical aspect to the internal journey. I think this is misleading and could lead to poor storytelling.
Theological points to possible redemption/forgiveness/transformation?
(can’t all this be achieved from a Humanist perspective – I think so.
All of the above is a matter of SUBJECT not TREATMENT OF SUBJECT.
Surely, ALL storytelling is fundamentally PHILOSOPHICAL. You can make affirmations of an after-life but they are only that. The subject matter of storytelling in film is the HUMAN CONDITION, NOW, in real time for us, ALIVE who only too soon are going to die. Why? Because that is who comes to see the movie!
When gods start sitting in the front row, THEN we can deal with the issues of being eternal.
Analyze your own reactions to films as you watch them. One asks, “How does this story and these characters’ experience reflect and inform upon my own experience to date and my hopes, dreams and fears for my future.”
Look at some non-classical forms:
“My Dinner With Andre”
“Sacrifice” by Tarkovsky.
“Breaking the Waves”, Lars Von Trier – a good example of a film whose plot takes a Deus Ex Machina twist (a woman’s sacrific of her life, the gods reward her paralyzed boyfriend by letting him walk again, and answers it whole-hearted by having, literally, the bells ringing in heaven.
But, whatever the plot, the emotional engagement is with the experience of man/woman here and now. When we go to the movies, we don’t care about the after-life - we care about now.
No comments:
Post a Comment