Using Little Miss Sunshine, explicitly stating the argument, and listing the philosophical stakes was like a refreshing splash of water, tbh. Exactly what I wanted and needed to hear this morning.
I was in the group chat a couple weeks ago when Tyler 1st mentioned treating your story like an essay. The week that followed was the most productive writing week I have had all year, it really helped things to finally click into place AND help to clarify plot beats that needed to happen in my story. Glad to finally see the video up Tyler!
These through-lines are helpful. Not only do I use a through-line to center my story. But I also use one for each of my main characters. I've found it helpful to explain my entire characters transformation through a single sentence. And then I run every possible action a character could take through that sentence as a litmus test. It shows me instantly if an action is in character or not. I think that prevents the risk of flanderization or "jumping the shark".
I have been watching many of your videos, they are impressive, I am not a writer, but I really love all the technology and skills behind Filmmaking, thanks
This is great advice. Make sure you have a clear theme that the characters exhibit. I’m working on a show right now that had a similar problem. The messaging felt weird and contradictory, the characters motives and beliefs were confusing and shallow, and the overran story just felt kinda disjointed. But once I took a step back and looked at the bigger picture, It all fit into place. I realized I didn’t have a clear theme, I was just trying to let the theme develop as the story went along. So I took this theme and worked it into the characters, and it dramatically improved both my story and especially my characters
I believe it’s also important to find a way to state (or ask a question about ) the thematic argument so it’s also clear to the viewers! Page 5 or so I believe!
I'm amazed by your Avatar fix. It's right there but the writers didn't see it. When you give your character conflict that's as philosophical as it is personal, it's significantly more interesting to see their circumstances challenge it. In Avatar, we had him learn a lot about nature. But very little about himself. And I think that's why it comes across as so basic.
i completely disagree with this, this idea that a story is basic because just cause a character doesn't go through a spine bending arc is just very wrong. Movies are much more than the formulaic techniques people who teach writing claim it is. its a verrry complex thing
@@afrosymphony8207 Oh i actually agree with you. I never meant to say that at all. The spine bending arc part too. Giving a philosophical conflict isn't formulaic. And it doesn't have to be spine bending either. Giving the same philosophical conflict is. My problem with avatar is that it was formulaic
I’m 2 1/2 minutes in and feel compelled to share something. This is possibly trivial or possibly interesting: the Spanish word for plot is “argumento”. 😊
I really enjoyed this and it makes a lot of sense to me. A question though....does this principal apply to the horror genre? For example ROSEMARY'S BABY is a terrific, well written movie, but I can't find anything resembling a thematic argument in there.
I think the thematic argument has to do more with what you feel vs what people are telling you to feel. Rosemary feels like something is wrong with the pregnancy but everyone is constantly telling her she's worrying for nothing and nothing is wrong. Gaslighting and trapping her into her predicament. And the gaslighting of those around her lends to the horror of the rest of the plot! You feel trapped reading/watching along with rosemary. She Does finally decide to escape from her environment to no avail and her love for her child is so strong that even when she discovers the truth, she stays anyway. It's an anti-development in my opinion but it's so beautifully written anyway. I hope this made sense and was correct, this was just my interpretation. I read Rosemary's baby for the first time two months ago!
Tyler, why do you need to wait until after you finish a first draft to figure out your thematic argument? Wouldn't your first draft be so much stronger if you start with a thematic argument to begin with? I think that would help prevent muddiness and confusion.
From what I learned through Tyler Mowery's videos, I think a lot of scripts start with a clear theme but end up dissolving the thematic points and statements with some other ideas, and it is only after a good reread that the writer can spot these flaws or weak points to make them stronger and closer to the theme at the rewrite. Hope it helps!
No plan survives first contact with the enemy, or rather, you might have an idea of what the thematic argument is but after writing your first draft you'll notice it's not as clear on the page as it was in your head. Sometimes you realize the story is arguing an entirely different theme all together! But you'll never know if your first draft is in need of big edits until it's written. Whether you knock it outta the park first try or realize you've gotten lost somewhere, it's always a good idea to read over your first draft and check whether or not your thematic argument is clear and decisive!
I often enough don't even know what my story is until I've written a first draft. It seems clearer when I start, but I really don't, it's the writing it that makes me realize that.
You don’t need to wait. Tyler didn’t say you should wait. What he said is that this is a tool you can use to unmuddle a screenplay with which you’re struggling. You can use it as you write your first draft if you want, but there are also reasons you might not want to. Here is a reason that I might not want to: I find it very helpful to blow through the first draft as quickly as possible. I don’t care if the first draft is crap if I’ve found something during the writing that makes it worth a second pass. If there is nothing, it goes into the Nah Folder. I’ve got a stack of unfinished scripts from before I decided to just write a first draft without thinking about the second draft. Sometimes I purposefully set the goal of writing something badly just to get myself started. The tip in this video will help me write a less crappy, more coherent second draft from one of my first drafts that have potential.
I am currently writing a trilogy of feature films, and I am curious of how you think this methodology applies to writing a trilogy. Is it best to have an overarching argument for all three films, and then a sub argument for each respective film? Or is there another way you would suggest going about it?
That's about it. That's how book series are often written too. Are you familiar with the arc diagram that has a "roller-coaster" swirl through it, curving in and out of it, but also still following the same arc? It represents the ups and downs of the story, while still arching. You'd just create one main one for the overall trilogy, then an individual one for each, each having their own thematic element, but still relating back to the main overall one. I kind of interpreted Tyler's thesis statement in this video as either a logline, the theme, both, or some combo thereof. I figure I can try a all ways, so what works best for me and the story. Happy writing!
Also, maybe this explains it better. You know how one story has one theme yet several scenes? Each scene relates to the theme, but is it's own little, wrapped up story inside a bigger story, while still needing the bigger story for completion, and somehow so blend together with the rest of the story? Each script is it's own version of that, the bigger overall story, while literally being its own standalone. It's more advanced and thorough than a scene, but the concept is a lot the same.
:01 -- 10:01 So, don't bother living, writing, or attempting any level of conversation in the least without some personal attention to focus. Sure. Why not.
Your avatar example makes me realise the flaw in your argument. As excellent a point it is. It runs a risk of getting cliched. Take Avatar as an example. If Jake Morals started off in the other side, it wouldn't have been the same impactful (and spiritual) journey it was. It would've felt like a repeated story instead. Jake's story "felt" the way it did because at some deep level we all want environmental balance. But if he started with different set of morals, most people would catch it as a trope and the story would've felt like a drag. Take LOTR for an example. Most key characters have no character arc. But people love it because they already start of as rich and well thought out characters. What I'm tryna say is. You're right about exercising themes and character arcs for storytelling. But if you want to be the cut above the rest. You need nuace. You need to write sincere stories and rich characters. What I'm trying to say is, in some cases: Don't worry too much about the Arc and focus on writing the character and the world. Write the character's defaults and their triggers. Something beautiful will come. If not that. Something sincere will..
Except that a story is not a thesis. It's an exploration of the theme or great philosophical question. Audiences hate the heavy handed point that writers are trying to push. Consider every argument that the antagonist and protagonists will have. Create complex characters--even from the thug enforcers like in Pulp Fiction--and let your story become character-driven. Let it go wherever they take it. As Paddy Chayefsky used to, write down your thematic or philosophical question and keep it where you write. Try to figure out your theme before the 1/3 point and add arguments to both ideas.
The tips are nice but everyone following these set of rules means films will all be alike. Which btw is already happening for decades in Hollywood. "You need to give your key character the opposing view so you have a character arc". It sounds so arbitrary. Little Miss Sunshine is indeed a great film but not all films should be about transformation. Look at life and the people around you. Is everyone actually changing or some people just stay believing their entire lifes in the same lies? I think the best way to look at it is understanding these set of rules is important so you can consciously choose if you'll follow or ignore them or even find your own way to subvert it.
Know what ruined so many potentially great comic book movies? Too many bad guys and/or too many heroes in the mix. I call it Writers' Schizophrenia. Neil Peart is one of my favorite writers who kept to themes and illustrated his themes with visual storytelling and deeper concepts than his peers; here is one that explains to stick to the theme... ua-cam.com/video/bYnH49COePY/v-deo.html
How do I challenge my protagonist's belief with characters that agree with their current view, and others that disagree with their current view? That is the only one that matters in any story told. The others belong to a theological view point or a children's book. Your characters aren't you. You aren't a god. You're meant to be an impartial reporter. The audience may want the god guy to win regardless the challenge. Why always fantasy fiction.
The Little Miss Sunshine section is a great base level example for demonstrating the concept but it's too heavy handed. True filmmaking is about actions, not words. It's more impactful if you demonstrate your opposing philosophies through the things the characters DO, not having them blatantly state the themes of the film. A rule I generally follow is to create subtext, I basically have my characters lie all the time and say the opposite of what they mean, because that's what we do in real life. You're having a shitty day, someone asks you how you are, you say, I'm great
For example, I'll fix Little Miss Sunshine right now. Don't have Grandpa literally say, "It's not about winning and losing it's about having fun and trying." Instead, make it Gramma. The girl stands in front of the mirror with a bodice on too tight, sucking in her gut to look thinner, and looking at the sexy magazine she has tacked on her wall to compare herself to it. Gramma comes in, tears the magazine down, unties the bodice, and smiles at her. This immediately communicates the same thing -- comparing yourself to others only leads you to hating yourself, and you should instead embrace yourself for who you are. But it's done in a much more dynamic way, also opening room for more conflict. Maybe the girl gets very upset with Gramma for destroying her magazine she idolizes and then goes and destroys some of Grammas possessions, etc, and things spiral.
Get Practical Tools to Write Your Great Screenplay: www.practicalscreenwriting.com
Jake dying is not original. No need to martyr him to the Navi
"A real loser is someone so afraid of not winning, they don't even try"
Not an accident you chose to include that clip. Thank you for helping us try.
Using Little Miss Sunshine, explicitly stating the argument, and listing the philosophical stakes was like a refreshing splash of water, tbh. Exactly what I wanted and needed to hear this morning.
@@MarcosElMalo2 Each of us has those mornings. Great literature and movies we love long-term help create the courage to achieve.
I was in the group chat a couple weeks ago when Tyler 1st mentioned treating your story like an essay. The week that followed was the most productive writing week I have had all year, it really helped things to finally click into place AND help to clarify plot beats that needed to happen in my story. Glad to finally see the video up Tyler!
I always learn something new from your videos. Makes my writing even tighter, makes the script even better every time. Excellent channel, thanks
This ties really nice into your last 4 corner video. Appreciate the work you are putting out for us
I can't tell you how much this helped me in writing my story! Thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge.
These through-lines are helpful. Not only do I use a through-line to center my story. But I also use one for each of my main characters. I've found it helpful to explain my entire characters transformation through a single sentence. And then I run every possible action a character could take through that sentence as a litmus test. It shows me instantly if an action is in character or not. I think that prevents the risk of flanderization or "jumping the shark".
I have been watching many of your videos, they are impressive, I am not a writer, but I really love all the technology and skills behind Filmmaking, thanks
This is great advice. Make sure you have a clear theme that the characters exhibit. I’m working on a show right now that had a similar problem. The messaging felt weird and contradictory, the characters motives and beliefs were confusing and shallow, and the overran story just felt kinda disjointed. But once I took a step back and looked at the bigger picture, It all fit into place. I realized I didn’t have a clear theme, I was just trying to let the theme develop as the story went along. So I took this theme and worked it into the characters, and it dramatically improved both my story and especially my characters
''Better call saul'' has impressive character development.
I really love that video from Michael Arndt
this is very similar to Abbie Emmons' views on the "misbelief" a character has. great video~
Thank you! This is what my short film needed 😭
I believe it’s also important to find a way to state (or ask a question about ) the thematic argument so it’s also clear to the viewers! Page 5 or so I believe!
I'm amazed by your Avatar fix. It's right there but the writers didn't see it. When you give your character conflict that's as philosophical as it is personal, it's significantly more interesting to see their circumstances challenge it. In Avatar, we had him learn a lot about nature. But very little about himself. And I think that's why it comes across as so basic.
i completely disagree with this, this idea that a story is basic because just cause a character doesn't go through a spine bending arc is just very wrong. Movies are much more than the formulaic techniques people who teach writing claim it is. its a verrry complex thing
@@afrosymphony8207 Oh i actually agree with you. I never meant to say that at all. The spine bending arc part too. Giving a philosophical conflict isn't formulaic. And it doesn't have to be spine bending either. Giving the same philosophical conflict is. My problem with avatar is that it was formulaic
Wow! Thank you.
Dwayne out here dressing like Mitchell Musso
Helpful thank you!
Thank you so much.
This man never disappoints me ❤️
Great video. :) Just one thing, the ou in Proust is pronounced more like the ou in ghoul or tool.
I’m 2 1/2 minutes in and feel compelled to share something. This is possibly trivial or possibly interesting: the Spanish word for plot is “argumento”. 😊
Thank you. Subbed ❤
Thanks for the sub!
everything said here is what i was thinking while watching TAR
The lead not changing is "The fool, triumphant" and "dude with a problem." They change everyone else, usually after being underestimated
I sure do hate it when a video says "linked below" and the link is not, in fact, below
Aw man. That really does suck
I really enjoyed this and it makes a lot of sense to me. A question though....does this principal apply to the horror genre? For example ROSEMARY'S BABY is a terrific, well written movie, but I can't find anything resembling a thematic argument in there.
I think it's something on how the catholic church suppresses women's reproductive health.
I think the thematic argument has to do more with what you feel vs what people are telling you to feel. Rosemary feels like something is wrong with the pregnancy but everyone is constantly telling her she's worrying for nothing and nothing is wrong. Gaslighting and trapping her into her predicament. And the gaslighting of those around her lends to the horror of the rest of the plot! You feel trapped reading/watching along with rosemary. She Does finally decide to escape from her environment to no avail and her love for her child is so strong that even when she discovers the truth, she stays anyway. It's an anti-development in my opinion but it's so beautifully written anyway.
I hope this made sense and was correct, this was just my interpretation. I read Rosemary's baby for the first time two months ago!
@@aang_arang Well, that's the great thing about movies. We all have our own take on them. Each movie is somehow our own.
this vid slapped
Tyler, why do you need to wait until after you finish a first draft to figure out your thematic argument? Wouldn't your first draft be so much stronger if you start with a thematic argument to begin with?
I think that would help prevent muddiness and confusion.
From what I learned through Tyler Mowery's videos, I think a lot of scripts start with a clear theme but end up dissolving the thematic points and statements with some other ideas, and it is only after a good reread that the writer can spot these flaws or weak points to make them stronger and closer to the theme at the rewrite. Hope it helps!
No plan survives first contact with the enemy, or rather, you might have an idea of what the thematic argument is but after writing your first draft you'll notice it's not as clear on the page as it was in your head. Sometimes you realize the story is arguing an entirely different theme all together! But you'll never know if your first draft is in need of big edits until it's written. Whether you knock it outta the park first try or realize you've gotten lost somewhere, it's always a good idea to read over your first draft and check whether or not your thematic argument is clear and decisive!
I often enough don't even know what my story is until I've written a first draft. It seems clearer when I start, but I really don't, it's the writing it that makes me realize that.
You don’t need to wait. Tyler didn’t say you should wait.
What he said is that this is a tool you can use to unmuddle a screenplay with which you’re struggling. You can use it as you write your first draft if you want, but there are also reasons you might not want to.
Here is a reason that I might not want to: I find it very helpful to blow through the first draft as quickly as possible. I don’t care if the first draft is crap if I’ve found something during the writing that makes it worth a second pass. If there is nothing, it goes into the Nah Folder.
I’ve got a stack of unfinished scripts from before I decided to just write a first draft without thinking about the second draft. Sometimes I purposefully set the goal of writing something badly just to get myself started. The tip in this video will help me write a less crappy, more coherent second draft from one of my first drafts that have potential.
Just write a first draft
I am currently writing a trilogy of feature films, and I am curious of how you think this methodology applies to writing a trilogy.
Is it best to have an overarching argument for all three films, and then a sub argument for each respective film?
Or is there another way you would suggest going about it?
That's about it. That's how book series are often written too. Are you familiar with the arc diagram that has a "roller-coaster" swirl through it, curving in and out of it, but also still following the same arc? It represents the ups and downs of the story, while still arching. You'd just create one main one for the overall trilogy, then an individual one for each, each having their own thematic element, but still relating back to the main overall one.
I kind of interpreted Tyler's thesis statement in this video as either a logline, the theme, both, or some combo thereof. I figure I can try a all ways, so what works best for me and the story.
Happy writing!
Also, maybe this explains it better. You know how one story has one theme yet several scenes? Each scene relates to the theme, but is it's own little, wrapped up story inside a bigger story, while still needing the bigger story for completion, and somehow so blend together with the rest of the story? Each script is it's own version of that, the bigger overall story, while literally being its own standalone. It's more advanced and thorough than a scene, but the concept is a lot the same.
@@beebuzz959 hell yeah, thank you for the insight!
I’ll keep that in mind as I continue writing.
thanks
Видео реально заставляет задуматься
Do I fixed Spiderman 3
Woohooo
I like your stuff but kinda weird to just directly pull from Michael Arndt's videos without even giving a link.
It's in the descriptio... it's not in the description.
why?
Can a antagonist share the same argument as the protagonist, but with dire consequences to their actions?
Yes
:01 -- 10:01 So, don't bother living, writing, or attempting any level of conversation in the least without some personal attention to focus. Sure. Why not.
Your avatar example makes me realise the flaw in your argument.
As excellent a point it is. It runs a risk of getting cliched.
Take Avatar as an example. If Jake Morals started off in the other side, it wouldn't have been the same impactful (and spiritual) journey it was.
It would've felt like a repeated story instead.
Jake's story "felt" the way it did because at some deep level we all want environmental balance. But if he started with different set of morals, most people would catch it as a trope and the story would've felt like a drag.
Take LOTR for an example. Most key characters have no character arc. But people love it because they already start of as rich and well thought out characters.
What I'm tryna say is. You're right about exercising themes and character arcs for storytelling.
But if you want to be the cut above the rest. You need nuace. You need to write sincere stories and rich characters.
What I'm trying to say is, in some cases:
Don't worry too much about the Arc and focus on writing the character and the world. Write the character's defaults and their triggers.
Something beautiful will come. If not that. Something sincere will..
The thesis of this video is THESIS.
Millenials discovering the premise
Except that a story is not a thesis. It's an exploration of the theme or great philosophical question. Audiences hate the heavy handed point that writers are trying to push. Consider every argument that the antagonist and protagonists will have. Create complex characters--even from the thug enforcers like in Pulp Fiction--and let your story become character-driven. Let it go wherever they take it.
As Paddy Chayefsky used to, write down your thematic or philosophical question and keep it where you write. Try to figure out your theme before the 1/3 point and add arguments to both ideas.
The tips are nice but everyone following these set of rules means films will all be alike. Which btw is already happening for decades in Hollywood. "You need to give your key character the opposing view so you have a character arc". It sounds so arbitrary. Little Miss Sunshine is indeed a great film but not all films should be about transformation. Look at life and the people around you. Is everyone actually changing or some people just stay believing their entire lifes in the same lies? I think the best way to look at it is understanding these set of rules is important so you can consciously choose if you'll follow or ignore them or even find your own way to subvert it.
Know what ruined so many potentially great comic book movies? Too many bad guys and/or too many heroes in the mix. I call it Writers' Schizophrenia. Neil Peart is one of my favorite writers who kept to themes and illustrated his themes with visual storytelling and deeper concepts than his peers; here is one that explains to stick to the theme... ua-cam.com/video/bYnH49COePY/v-deo.html
How do I challenge my protagonist's belief with characters that agree with their current view, and others that disagree with their current view? That is the only one that matters in any story told. The others belong to a theological view point or a children's book. Your characters aren't you. You aren't a god. You're meant to be an impartial reporter. The audience may want the god guy to win regardless the challenge. Why always fantasy fiction.
So, you "fixed" the screenplay for AVATAR? The most successful movie literally of all time? Wow. What are you going to fix next, CASABLANCA?
Just because a movie makes a lot of money doesn’t mean it’s script is perfect. That should be pretty obvious don’t you think?
Depends on why you write screenplays. Three BILLION dollars is pretty close to perfect, by my standards. YMMV.
@@Gunnion stories are more than money. If we make stories only about the money then we’ll get all sorts of average stories like Avatar
@@TylerMowery Well, you do you, but I'm in this business as a business. I'd be delighted to be as "average" a writer as James Cameron.
The Little Miss Sunshine section is a great base level example for demonstrating the concept but it's too heavy handed. True filmmaking is about actions, not words. It's more impactful if you demonstrate your opposing philosophies through the things the characters DO, not having them blatantly state the themes of the film. A rule I generally follow is to create subtext, I basically have my characters lie all the time and say the opposite of what they mean, because that's what we do in real life. You're having a shitty day, someone asks you how you are, you say, I'm great
For example, I'll fix Little Miss Sunshine right now. Don't have Grandpa literally say, "It's not about winning and losing it's about having fun and trying." Instead, make it Gramma. The girl stands in front of the mirror with a bodice on too tight, sucking in her gut to look thinner, and looking at the sexy magazine she has tacked on her wall to compare herself to it. Gramma comes in, tears the magazine down, unties the bodice, and smiles at her. This immediately communicates the same thing -- comparing yourself to others only leads you to hating yourself, and you should instead embrace yourself for who you are. But it's done in a much more dynamic way, also opening room for more conflict. Maybe the girl gets very upset with Gramma for destroying her magazine she idolizes and then goes and destroys some of Grammas possessions, etc, and things spiral.
Great insight!