Lessons from the Screenplay Iron Man 1 still takes the cake for us. Felt unique at the time, its writing is superb and RDJ is seriously incredible in that role. Is there going to be a Blade Runner 2049 or Last Jedi video? I know you did all those notes on TLJ but would still love to see them condensed and focused in for a video
Winter Soldier is my personal favorite. It’s one of the few MCU movies that deals with interesting themes beyond simple good and evil. The action scenes are tight and brutal (well, as brutal as you can get in a PG-13 movie). Even though I knew Winter Soldier is Bucky from the comic books, the reveal of it to Cap is heartbreaking. Cap’s character shifts from Lawful Good to Chaotic Good once he realizes that pretty much everyone has been lying to him. And there were actual consequences that reverberated through the rest of the MCU with SHIELD being destroyed.
Say what you will about Joss Whedon, but I feel like people (mostly the ‘intense film fans’) enjoy to belittle his talents because he makes popular, and for the most part, simple movies. But you don’t get movies like Toy Story and The Avengers in your filmography by dumb luck. The guy has some serious writing chops.
I think it’s the fact that he can make a movie “simple” but not stupid. There’s nothing inherently complicated about the avengers at all, but it doesn’t suffer from dumb action movie lines or deus ex machina plot devices. That’s why the MCU is currently my favorite movie franchise
That was a disgusting level of detail for this breakdown... I love it. Thank you so much for making these incredibly helpful videos. Can't wait until next weeks episode!
@@LessonsfromtheScreenplay How can the midpoint of Avengers possibly be described as the climax of the film? Surely the climax is when they all come together to defeat the great enemy at the end. That is objectively the culmination, the apex of the story. Otherwise, this is my favorite breakdown of structure that I have ever come across. Thank you for a great channel.
@@sol8140 He describes this at 5:52, where he defines the "climax" as the high point of a conflict that leads to victory or defeat. This can apply to smaller conflicts or storylines, like Loki's escape, not just the big climatic finale.
Fincher's point is commendable as he really cares about avoiding formulaic screenwriting. I absolutely love the question-and-answer approach to act structure that you've presented, since one could basically look at most Marvel movies and assume their structure is generic, and disregard their ideas and extensive character development. Not only is it pragmatic in a way, but it could truly help look at screenplays differently. Just excellent.
The best and quickest way I can summarize the major plot points in a three act structure is the following: Act 1 into Act 2: "There's no turning back" Act 2 into Act 3: "All is lost"
Holy shit! You did a much better job of defining act and story structure much better than my Shakespearean lit class I took. Like a lot better. Props man. Props.
Vinny H. Half and half. It was a requirement to take a performing arts credit or the Shakespearean Lit class to take part in the theater productions. I really liked running theater tech and set design, so I took the class so I could participate.
nooranik21 It's amazing what happens when you're taught by someone who legitimately wants to teach rather than someone who's trying to drag out the curriculum to continue getting paid.
Lessons from the Screenplay No problem at all. I think most, if not all of us understand these take a lot of work and, hey, the content you make is always worth the wait! So thank you for your hard work.
Oh man this is the best way a youtuber has introduced square space as a sponsor. This whole video was so informative, so well articulated, and the editing was exemplary! Well done!
I have to ask, does every series of movies that becomes popular suddenly become obligated to sate every creative desire possible? I love the Marvel movies, but I'm not here to espouse them as timeless masterpieces. But I don't recall any other popular movies that were constantly shit on because they aren't Citizen Kane. The fact the the Marvel movies trigger all these film snobs to me proves my long suspicion that people can't delineate between a subjective "like" and an objective "good."
Even though their not all extremely complex movies their still for the most part objectively good from a script writing standpoint. The characters are good with really good thorough arcs and they create a great balance between drama and comedy. Theirs no overwhelming existential themes but don’t let do hide the fact there are some standout really good movies in the mcu
Writer and long-time viewer here. I’ve been banging my head against the wall trying to figure out the second act of the script I’m writing. This helped me see through the structure to focus on character motivation and action. I can’t say thank you enough!
I think the biggest issue I have with act structure is that it trains us to know exactly where in the film we are, and if the acts aren't delineated where we expect them to be, the film can "drag" or "fly by" without any reason except the structure isn't the same. I think Marvel films have to be a bit formulaic not because of the act structure, but because they have to fit into a "universe" narrative that hogties them into very specific parameters. I'd love to see something that covers a few films that just break act structure expectations directly to the audience. The three films I'd choose to do that would be Run, Lola, Run (repeating acts with different outcomes), Funny Games (directly telling the audience they're expecting the wrong things, especially in the remote control scene) and Limbo (basically ending the film at the end of Act II).
One of my favorite things about Fantastic Beasts was that at one point I thought "I have no idea where this is going". I couldn't tell you if there were fifteen minutes left of film or fifty, and I love it.
Would love if you did a video on "writing the mis-en-scene." One of the early lessons I learned in writing screenplays was that it's not "appropriate" to detail camera angles (my first short film was a screenplay and shot list rolled into one...) However, great writers often include the mis-en-scene embedded in their story. The comment above made me think of this, in mentioning Funny Games. In the English-Language version, Naomi Watt's character has a significant character change near the remote control scene, in which she's forced to take her dress off. However, when she goes to put the dress back on, the audience realizes that the print/pattern of the dress material is completely different, thus signifying her change. No mention of this is made by the characters, and one can assume that she is technically wearing the "same" dress, as her character. To the audience, this is a pivotal character change, as she not only stops trying to make sense of the unpredictable terror in her home, but it shifts us into an entirely new act, posing a new question of survival over sense-making. I'd love if you did a video in this ballpark... not sure how many American films you'll find that are this brilliant, but I'm sure many would love if you tackled a smattering of foreign films if need be!
I don't think it it's an issue. For me at least, since I've been studying three-act structure (maybe 2009), it has helped me to watch movies. I think understanding it challenges the writer to step their game up and for an understanding audience to have higher expectations of quality. I also don't think it is an issue because of the immeasurable intangibles like taste & talent. Since there is no accounting for taste, you have to ask the question did it work? I think that you have to understand and possibly master the rules in order to break them effectively. I would argue that it didn't work in Funny Games. I respect the ambition, but that was a bait and switch in content and tone through 4th wall breaking rather an element of act structure. The story was not about the desensitization of violence on modern audiences, the gimmick was. If the film had any semblance of character development and we saw the two young men enjoying violent films and acting out on it, I'd get it. But the totally out of left field thing did nothing for me. I think We need to talk about Kevin & Se7en were much more effective films about violence and audience expectations without gimmicks. Seven provides it's commentary in dialog, the moral choice of the protagonist and the fact that none of the violence is shown yet many consider it a violent movie.
The tree act structure is nothing new, it is a variation of the greek drama structure, it is used because it works. Directors could subvert those expections while keeping a tension with resolution intact.
I've been confused with these act structures for a long time, finding it hard to identify in stories and to apply in my writing. Most of the time, for me, it felt like it restrained storytelling, instead of helping it. But watching this cleared all that up, and everything makes a lot more sense now! With that definition, act structure seems more flexible, allowing stories to really flow organically. I feel so enlightened omg. Thank you so much for this video and all your videos! Your channel is one of my favorites ever, to be honest. I am absolutely ecstatic for the next one! :D
One thing I love about this channel is how many different movies Mike uses to get across his message. He is willing to use superhero movies, movies that are often seen as inferior to Academy Movies, for his own benefit. It's awesome
I was skeptical that you'd manage to say anything I hadn't heard about 3 act structures before, but was pleasantly surprised to see you reference and integrate all the different stuff I've heard before, into a more useful and coherent take. Wish I could like this video twice
I've seen Captain America (1 & 2), Iron Man (all 3), Thor, Black Panther, Avengers, Doctor Strange, and Ant-Man, more than I thought honestly. I guess I don't seek them out because I'm afraid of safe storytelling. I'm a writer and I want my stories to surprise people; Marvel movies don't do that, at least in my experience.
Don't you think it's a little unfair of fincher to specify marvel movies and not all blockbusters as a whole? I mean the problem he's talking about, to me, isn't a result of fun or argue restricted superhero movies, it's the hero of a thousand faces that restricts these characters. And the same could be said of Star Wars and many other franchises, even the ones that use adult themes. Great video once again! I always look forward to a new post from this channel
Someone who was in the audience commented that in context, Fincher was using "working for Marvel" to mean blockbusters as a whole. So, it's probably unfair that the quote is taken straight at face-value.
As someone who's practiced screenwriting for over 20 years, I've learned that act structure is more of a suggestion and should be discarded if the story demands it.
I happened to watch the original Iron Man last night. It's very tame in comparison to later Marvel films, but by god does it hold up from a screenplay perspective. It's just so rock solid. Such a great way to start the MCU
I actually wouldn't consider Homecoming an "origin" film. Peter Parker already has his powers at the beginning of the story. I guess you could say he really doesn't "become" Spider-Man until the end - but it's different I think. I actually think the best superhero origin movie is The Rocketeer (1991) from Joe Johnston (who would later direct Captain America: The First Avenger!) In terms of structure, it's about as solid as can be. I would love to see you do a video about it sometime!
I am legitimately impressed. We're kind of tired of the expo dumps, the action, sad part, action, and conclusion with some blue beam in the sky. This is literally the answer we needed. Keep it up with these great videos!
Wow. I am consistently stunned at how helpful and inspiring your videos are. Even when you just describe the structure of the stories for the films, I am occasionally moved as if I were watching the actual movie. My favorite of your videos would have to be the "Logan" and "Children of Men" one, but this has come pretty close. The classical 5 act structure has opened up a ton of new possibilities and made it easier for me to understand how to tell stories better. I love how you explain everything in a simple yet engaging manner, complimented by your use of visuals and music choices. You are by far my favorite screenwriting channel and I always look forward to your videos. Phenomenal work!
One of the most important virtues a UA-camr can have is to be gracious with the viewer's time. Your voice-overs are deliberately paced and in a relaxed tone, making them super easy to follow and absorb. Your bullet points are clear and concise, and well-ordered. Your cinema footage is high-quality. These traits streamline the viewer's experience by reducing stress and heightening enjoyment. And finally, one of the most important traits of all, you keep your energy positive, not negative. Your opinions are humbly stated and not bombastic. You don't use cinema criticism to stir controversy, to incite gossip and sensationalism, but rather to inform and spark personal enrichment. Good job! :)
I love watching video essays in my free time, especially ones about movies. There's just something...stimulating? (I feel like there's a better word for what I mean but Oh Well) about learning How these processes behind making movies work, how we look at them, and how we Should at them/into them. But I feel like something Clicked in my brain with this one. Less of a "Oh cool, I didn't know that" and more of a "Whoa, I never thought about that" feeling. It's like you just explained in 15 minutes a concept my 12th grade English teacher couldn't in half a semester.
Your videos always have such high quality animation and graphics. I can tell that you've spent a lot of time and care making them. Thank you for educating the world on the beauty of screenwriting!
Wrapping my brain around your Question/Answer act definition. I think it's definitely a cool approach to analyzing a story and figuring out what the thrust of an act *was*, from a critical perspective, but I don't think the questions you're asking are useful as a writing tool. Each question is based on an outcome you already know. They can only be asked after the story has been told, which doesn't help during the plotting and planning stage. (which, if I'm not mistaken, was the main goal of your video) Example: Act 1. "Will Nick Fury recruit our heroes to help stop Loki?" There is no drama in this question because the answer was Yes before the audience even bought their ticket. I think the only time this question was ever dramatically relevant was after the end credits scene of the first Iron Man. That's the only time when the answer was uncertain. The reason I don't find this valuable from a writing standpoint is that it doesn't propel me to discover the story. If I only write with the intent to answer "Will Nick Fury recruit the heroes?" then I'm assuming the audience doesn't know the answer, which, from my view, is the death of stakes, the death of drama. If all I've accomplished with Act 1 is showing people, "Hey, look, he recruited them all!" Then I've given the audience nothing of value. What *does* help the writing and structuring process, I think, is to ask a nonbinary question. "What does Nick Fury do next?" Close. We kind of already know that too. Coulson asks Fury this exact question and the answer is literally the title card. But what about "How?" Act 1. "How does Nick Fury recruit the heroes?" That's a question neither I nor the audience know the answer to, and so it propels me forward and helps me understand what purpose the following scenes need to serve. It begs extrapolation. It invites surprise. Answers: Fury chooses to dispatch select SHIELD agents to recruit specific heroes. An old friend for Stark. A commanding officer for Rogers. And who for Banner? Why her? (More extrapolation and surprise. Just how does a spy catch a hulk?) Act 2: "Once assembled, how do they track Loki down, and what is the outcome?" Answers: Loki chooses to reveal himself, Cap chooses to go after him, Stark chooses to help, Thor chooses to visit. Act 3: "Now that our heroes are together and they've seemingly won (a little too easily), how does the next shoe drop?" Answers: Tony chooses to distrust SHIELD. Steve chooses to believe Tony. Natasha chooses to confront Loki. Loki chose way back in act 2 to let himself be captured in order to cripple the team. Act 4: "Everything has fallen apart. How do the heroes recover and save the day?" Answers: Fury manipulates them to spur them into action. Each hero follows their own path to the final showdown, and in the end they choose stand together against the overwhelming threat. Act 5: "Now united, how might the heroes fail? How do they succeed?" Answers: Loki chooses to up the ante. Each hero chooses to put themselves in increasing danger to stop him and save civilians. The world security council chooses to place their faith in a bomb instead of the heroes. Tony chooses to sacrifice himself to save the city. The hulk chooses to smash a god and catch a colleague. I kind of found my way through this as I was writing it, but it feels like this may be the key. For it to be useful in plotting the story, it has to be a question I could ask without knowing the outcome already - something that helps me understand what NEEDS answering so I can find my way to the choices that resolve the act.
I think this is definitely a really useful way of thinking about it. What I like about the “will they...” method is that it tracks the thought process of the audience and helps me keep track of pacing. Ideally, they don’t know what is going to happen, but you’re right, they often do-one of the problems that come with narrative conventions. But as writer, you definitely need to ask yourself how you are answering the question. So essentially I’m saying that I like your definition too, and this is why it’s important for each of us to figure out what resonates with us.
I think I was latching onto his stated goal at the beginning of the video - "What is the most useful way for a writer to think about act structure?" - and then just kind of projected my own needs as a writer onto that question. :) I agree 100% with Michael that each person needs to find a way of thinking about this stuff that resonates with them - and I totally agree that the Question/Answer format he presents is a great tool to aid critical thinking about film and storytelling. What's more, I definitely wouldn't have found the pathway, or even the impetus, to my own definitions without the crucial work he does in laying out his concepts. It's why I love this channel so much. It's a great education. :D The root of my disagreement was just that "for a writer" bit, because it implies a tool I might then carry forward into my own writing. And the specific issues I had with those questions were, in order for the questions to take those forms, the story would already need to be written. But then, that's me projecting my own needs and thought process as a writer onto the thing. I still find these videos (and his next one if you haven't checked it out yet) incredibly valuable.
That's fair! And you're totally right - it's ultimately up to each person to find their own use for the "idea" of acts. I just watched this one again and I really appreciate the work you put into this! Thanks for such a great channel!
Fincher's own films have a tendency to deviate from the standard three-act structure, so it's understandable he'd feel this way. Or rather, they _seem_ to follow it up until the last thirty or forty minutes of the film. _Benjamin Button_ for example has no real climax, it seems to "fade out" rather like a song, and _Girl with the Dragon Tattoo_ feels like it climaxes at the two-hour mark, but then takes another half-hour to resolve the b-plot. And looking back at _Zodiac_ it has a "third act" which lasts almost as long as the second act, despite having a familiar climax at the end.
Eoin O'Connor It would be interesting to see Fincher make a marvel movie on a panic room budget. There are plenty of stories to mine from, I'm sure one would appeal to him.
Notice how in the Question & Answer format, it also involves 3 acts within an act. First, it establishes a situation: Act 1. Then, it asks the question that arises from said situation: Act 2. Finally, it gives us an answer to the question and resolves this part, moving on to the next: Act 3
OMG MAN!! This is a phenomenal exposition on screenplay! I really love the point that you made about how a 3-act structure is more about the details and the journey of how characters are driven to make certain choices. How those choices effect the direction of a story. This is what keeps the Marvel movies fresh and lovable! I personally believe that when people argue that Marvel is too formulaic, they don't consider the details that go into the 'formula' which have continued to be so interesting, entertaining, and intriguing! Thanks man! 💪🏽
I'm so glad you made this video. I learned about three-act structure in a film analysis class last semester, but my teacher wasn't very clear on the particulars, and my current screenwriting teacher keeps mixing up three-act structure and five-act structure without ever specifying that they're two separate ways of looking at it. I've been confused for a while but this really cleared it up for me. Thanks!
Loved this, Michael! I've been using The Avengers (and Guardians of the Galaxy) as great examples of blockbusters with plot structure for years. It's just so refreshing to see someone on UA-cam making essays about storytelling concepts, and not just technical filmmaking.
I’ve noticed this general concept in and around the film industry that comic book movies are somehow “low effort” or “lesser quality” simply by the fact of being a superhero film. It’s really sad to see people write off good storytelling and great characters just because it’s a film about superheroes.
It's not because they're super hero movies. they're low effort because Disney doesn't see them as art. Disney sees them as products. The characters are shallow and one dimensional and the villains are even more so. The stories are simplistic and repeated film after film. These movies aren't made to tell good stories or present good characters. They're made to sell toys and tickets based on the logo's strapped to the main characters chests. Good super hero movies use to exist and they didn't have to pander to the audience to do it. All they had to do was tell a good story with well rounded characters. The Richard Donner Superman movies, the Sam Raimi Spiderman movies (1 & 2), the Bryan Singer X-Men movies (1 & 2), Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy, and yes, even Zack Snyder's Watchmen. Those movies where made with the story and characters in mind first and they each have unique voices behind them. They where directed by directors who where interested in making a good movie, not just pushing a cinematic universe to pump out as many films as they can until they finally kill the genre. None of the marvel or DC movies are directed by directors anymore. They're directed by a board of business men only interested in how best to pander to the widest audience possible. The movies have no unique voice. They all feel like the same movie and all tell the same story. So no, it's not because they're "Super Hero" movies. it's because they're lazy, cynical, products designed to print money. The fact that Marvel fans don't ask for better from Disney blows my mind. Being a fan means wanting the thing you're a fan of to be as good as it can be. Not just blindly fallowing what ever has your favorite logo slapped across it.
Shepp Husky I was merely talking about the somewhat elitist atmosphere that has prevented superhero movies from being more recognized. However, I actually completely disagree with what you’re saying. While Disney may certainly see them as only products, it’s plain to see that Marvel Studios has a deep respect for these characters, and works extremely hard to bring them to life. The heroes are neither shallow nor one dimensional, and it’s kind of sad that you’d even suggest so. Every single movie dives deeper and deeper into existing character’s psychology, and introduces new ones to boot. And this idea that they’re all the same is so laughable. Guardians of the Galaxy is a space opera, Spider-Man Homecoming is a highschool coming-of-age film, and Captain America: Winter Soldier is a political-spy drama. These are so far from the same movie, and so far from telling the same story that they couldn’t get much further if they tried. If Marvel only ever cared about making money, they never would have greenlit a Guardians or the galaxy movie, a nigh unknown property that wouldn’t sell unless the product was truly good. They wouldn’t have greenlit an Ant-man movie, or given Hawkeye prominent roles to play throughout the avengers films. If they were truly only interested in pandering to the widest audience, they would’ve kept Captain America on ice, since he’s not guaranteed to work well with foreign audiences. But they didn’t. I am a Marvel fan, and I DO demand better when they don’t deliver on the quality I would like. But that hasn’t happened often. I am a fan. And yeah, that does mean that I want Marvel to be as good as they can be. And so far, they’ve done a pretty grand job of it. They’ve had a couple hiccups, sure, a couple wrong turns. But overall they’ve delivered quality stories and characters. And that’s all I want, as a fan.
bobunitone True, they say this about comics, cartoons, and now superhero films. They seem to think that *bright colors and the occasional joke = for children and devoid of any critical good*. And it’s just sad to see people completely ignoring their quality because of their genre, or their origins.
This is legitimately going to change the way I approach writing acts and structuring my stories. It also perfectly captures what I've always appreciated about the Avengers. How, despite the many big-name characters, it manages to give them all their own stories, balancing their own arcs with the larger plot. Your points at the end make me respect it on an even deeper level.
One of my favorite videos of yours’ so far! Whenever anyone asks me about underrated UA-camrs, I always recommend you! Thank you for creating such incredibly thoughtful, well-executed, and inspiring content. You’re inspiring the next generation of screenwriters and filmmakers!
Incredible. Incredible video. I’ve been watching your channel for a while and have been taking notes on almost all your videos. This is one of your best. Thank you. You’ve become one of my favorite UA-cam channels. I’ll make sure I support the Patreon. Keep up the great work!
I think an interesting topic is about the limitations of the 3 or 5 act structure. Basically, where is it necessary and where is it limiting? The best way to answer it is by referencing to foreign films, which often use no 3 or 5 act structure, but a more episodic one. Incidentally, it would be so great if you also did the occasional foreign film, just to analyze how different films can be and look from the American style of filmmaking. They write their stories in such unique ways. But great video, like always!
I find a kind of strange irony in a video about act structure being so perfectly structured in itself, another brilliant, intelligent and well structure video. Long time subscriber who can’t wait for he next video. Keep up the brilliant work!
@@peterfrank3365 that is excellent strategy for screenwriting in my opinion.character should be given slightly bigger priority than the plot.because they are the pens through which we see the plot.the plot is well understood only if the characters are well developed
I used to run into problems writing the middle of my stories all the time... until I wrote my first serial and had to break the story into 8 parts. That was a game changer for me and led me to find the 8-sequence structure. I'd love to see you talk about it, because I think this is game changer for writers (and for viewers interested in storytelling)!
This is something I've never really considered. I'm ridiculously formulaic with my writing. Thank you for broadening my understanding of this! Can't wait for the other half^^
THANK YOU! As someone who was introduced to acts through Shakespeare's structures, and then tried to make sense of the obsession with three act structure in light of that, this video was really helpful in understanding how to think about this all.
I subbed a while back because I've always been a very science-oriented person I wanted to improve my crummy literary/film analysis and thereby writing. I don't know if this video was more accessible to me, or if I've somehow let a little knowledge soak in, but I finally feel like I'm not in over my head anymore! I cannot thank you enough for your generosity helping me and the rest of us understand this stuff; keep up the great work!
That same Film Crit Hulk piece totally shaped my own exploration of the three act structure, it was really cool to see how the same piece influenced your exploration. Great content as always, keep up the good work!
Great video! Delineating between acts has always been something really difficult for me. I was actually going to suggest the "when a character makes an irreversible choice" definition so I'm glad you brought it up in the video. On another note, I think the 3 Act structure is such an unshakable paradigm because it seems to make so much logical sense, at least superficially. If you see it simply as Beginning, Middle, and End, you can theoretically fit everything into it.
Agreed on all accounts, and I too have always had trouble delineating acts, which I think is why I became obsessed with finding a definition that I actually liked.
Your work is always informative and well-organized, and this video is no exception. The topic of acts and their structure is one I find myself returning to often, and this is by far the most efficient and effective analysis I've seen of it. Excellent work. Thank you for creating and sharing this video.
I love this video because it also enhances the idea of the antagonist, because the antoganist is simply the person who wants a different answer to the question that is posed in each act!
Wow, in all my life I've never heard an in depth lesson about act structure for movies as well as I have heard here man. Truly, this is if not the best explanation of it I ever read/heard. Really fantastic job man. You never dissapoint. On that note, if you could do more videos analyzing the act structure other than next week's I'd greatly appreciate it man! What about another suggestion for a comic book movie like Spider-Man 1 or 2, and then with another movie that close to this structure but with even more quality nuances to dissect, such as Blade Runner 2049? All in all excellent video Michael, one of your best!
Since I start to watch videos about screenplaying, reading articles and writing myself I've realized that creating a script is pretty formulaic but that doesn't mean that we can't add original and cool stuff throughout the process. Thank you so much for another awesome video. You rock ¡¡¡
Greta Gerwig had some really interesting things to say about story structure. She believes its intuitively part of us as human beings and we don't need formulas to stick to.
I cannot express how great this video is. Every Screenwriting student should look at this! It is a culmination of everything I read so far, synthesising the definition, function and purpose of an act into one coherent string of thoughts. And you're right: While all of the books have the same purpose overall and basically all talk about the same things, it's somewhat difficult not to lose sight of the bigger picture. You should totally put Film Crit Hulk's book "Screenwriting 101" up on your Recommended Reading list. Also, it's amazing that you gave a shout out to Lindsay Ellis' video, as she responds directly to his article. Keep up your work very valuable and I'm looking forward to the follow-up video.
I freaking love this. The well-balanced structure of the first Avengers movie is one of the main reasons I consider it the best MCU film. Great video and I can't wait for part 2.
Love these kind of “nerd writer” videos on UA-cam because it helps me understand appreciate things I would normally turn a blind eye to and helps me define what I like and dislike so thank you and keep it up mate.
They're called video essays. And now for a totally unwarranted/unsolicited opinion... Nerdwriter is a pompous hack, who occasionally strikes a neat idea (probably gleaned from smarter people online) and manages to illustrate it well enough while grating your face off with pretension.
Hey Mike! I've been lost from your channel lately, but what's a better way to come back than with one of the most interesting videos you've made by far dude! Congratulations! I'm currently studying "Creating Character Arcs" (thanks to you btw) and i have seen lots of interesting things about story structure that i've already readed on that book. Pretty great video man. Glad to watch this quality on your work.
Joss is one of those writers who really know how to make a structure work for him instead of the other way around. And being a tv writer, he lives and breathes structure - even the final battle from Avengers has a 3-act structure!
Nice work. It reminds me that Captain America the First Avenger was broken down as a 5 act story in the short lived podcast 'We can do this all day' episode on CA:FA. Part of the appeal to that structure there was the visuals of Steve's shield - Trashcan lid, to Taxi Door, to Prop shield, to silver shield, to painted shield.
It would've been cool if you'd turned that Last Jedi article into a video as well. Also, I'm really looking forward to your next video in this series as i'm fascinated by the conclusions that you'll draw. When I heard Fincher's comments I also didn't know what to make of them because I didn't know enough about it myself. I mean, we've clearly seen talented film directors able to put their stamp on these Marvel films like Joss Wheden, James Gunn and Taika Waititi even within the constraints put it place to keep the films as part of a cinematic universe.
The five act structure is something I've never really thought about in much detail before, but this video really caught my interest and did a great job of making me think deeper about it. I've been stuck on an outline for my latest attempt at a screenplay for ages and thinking about it in terms of 5 acts rather than 3 has made so many things click into place. Excellent work!
Hey Michael, I just became a Patron of yours on Patreon and wanted to say thanks so much for all the hard work that goes into these videos. Since most of your videos have fewer than 500k views (I have no idea why), I'm guessing you don't make a ton of money off of ads or product mentions in the videos. So hopefully me making a small contribution through Patreon can help you to continue to make these videos that are undoubtedly helping thousands of screenwriters out there. Keep up the great work!
Liked the video before watching I because it contains three of my favorite things; The Avengers, writing, and Lessons From the Screenplay. I love every video of yours and anticipated the new video. I couldn't wait to watch it seeing my notification. Keep up the amazing work! 👌
Dear Michael, Thank you for sharing your knowledge. Your channel is the best source of professional story design I've found so far. There are channels that do nothing more than just tell me what you see anyway when watching a movie. But you show what's under the surface. How it works in itself. That's real knowledge. Your contributions to Hidden Figures, Ghostbusters or Logan Vs. CoM and others are fantastic and applicable tools. I wanted to do more of your videos, but of course I see how much work that is for you. Keep it up. A big thank you with great respect from Germany
Your videos always seem to come out right when I am in the middle of working on my screenplays, they are so insightful and inspiring to watch and study! Thank you Michael, your work is passionate and professional and I love the hook you put at the end of this video! Can't wait to see everything that you talk about this year! I just watched Hunt For the Wilderpeople and Swiss Army Man recently and they all made me think about the importance of voice in a Screenplay, so I would love to hear you discuss the topic of how a Screenplay and film services a creator's voice.
I really enjoyed that video, but the problem with defining acts with the rise and fall of tension is that it can easily lead to mechanical writing, with tensions rising and falling irrespective of the character's motivations and actions. I'm not saying that Lindsey is wrong, far from it, if I remember correctly, she explicitly states that act structure is more useful in analysing a story than it is in writing one. If you are in the process of writing a story, the definitions provided above will probably be far more useful in determining a structure that works.
Yeah i saw that one. Im a writer and her rigid adherence to three act structure baloney is what results in hackneyed, un-organic writing. the way a story develops should totally come from the characters and conflict and not an arbitrary paradigm superimposed on the story.
+Presto 76 I think you sort of misunderstood her point then... She never adhered to the structure to prove anything besides an analysis of already selected works... She gets into 5 act structure and, as the above comment states, says that it is better for analysis than actual writing
I literally had Freytag's Pyramid like a week ago in my german class, was fun seeing you talk about it as well. Finally, school has taught me something useful.
The one David Fincher film that I remember having a 4 acts structure is Girl with the dragon tattoo. After the mystery is solved, we are left with around 30 extra minutes finishing Lisbeth's arc. I don't know how they use this 4 acts structure, but for me, it can be very useful when you have more than one really interesting character. The film is mostly about Mikael Blomkvist, but as soon as we are introduced to Lisbeth the focus of the film seems more concerned about her than Blomkvist. That is why it was so necessary to finish her story, which was only parallel to the mystery of the film.
I never gave much thought to the MCU being a subject for my critical film observation and that's wrong on my part. Michael, thank you for awakening us. You're doing a wonderful job!
Hey Michael, this might be a bit of an offbeat request but I was wondering if you could cover the importance of sounds in the form of background music in some movies?
I love your videos. They are always so calm and well though out. Really good analysis of the act and the structure. I look forward to part 2. P.s. my favorite MCU movie is Guardians of the Galaxy, I just love movies that manage to work a musical journey in the plot. Maybe an idea to consider for a video?
Really great video. I'm a comic/screenwriter and I learn something new every time I watch your series. Please keep making more and thanks again for all your efforts. -A fan-
This is such a wonderfully useful and informative video. Thank you for all the work you put into these videos, and I can't wait to see what you do next.
Hey all! What is your favorite Marvel film? And what films / shows should I take a look at this year? Let me know!
Lessons from the Screenplay I suggest another Pixar movie. Finding Nemo, perhaps? That or Up will do for me.
I would suggest the Truman Show!
Or Dunkirk!
Lessons from the Screenplay Iron Man 1 still takes the cake for us. Felt unique at the time, its writing is superb and RDJ is seriously incredible in that role.
Is there going to be a Blade Runner 2049 or Last Jedi video? I know you did all those notes on TLJ but would still love to see them condensed and focused in for a video
Lessons from the Screenplay Age of Ultron is possibly my favorite (it is a very hard choice).
favorite is definitely the first Iron Man but purely for nostalgic reasons
*TENET has a 2 act structure:*
Act 1: What is Happening?
Act 2: What The *Hell* is Happening?
HAHAHA
🤣!!!!!!!
......Agreed.
@@mik3y448 Act 5(Resolution): Okay my brain is inverted now.
@@adithchandra1 well act 3 is both the climax and the resolution, only some movies have 4 acts, like the dark knight
Winter Soldier is my personal favorite. It’s one of the few MCU movies that deals with interesting themes beyond simple good and evil. The action scenes are tight and brutal (well, as brutal as you can get in a PG-13 movie). Even though I knew Winter Soldier is Bucky from the comic books, the reveal of it to Cap is heartbreaking. Cap’s character shifts from Lawful Good to Chaotic Good once he realizes that pretty much everyone has been lying to him. And there were actual consequences that reverberated through the rest of the MCU with SHIELD being destroyed.
Totally agree on all points. And Winter Soldier STILL has the best fight choreography in any MCU movie, hands down.
Plus, the movie is about freedom vs security,,,, Being out of time,,,,,, Trust,,,, etc.
@@anthonybranch4712 I got a feeling Black Widow is going to be a lot similar for some reason
*simple good and evil*
Literal Nazis are in this.
Civil War.
Say what you will about Joss Whedon, but I feel like people (mostly the ‘intense film fans’) enjoy to belittle his talents because he makes popular, and for the most part, simple movies. But you don’t get movies like Toy Story and The Avengers in your filmography by dumb luck. The guy has some serious writing chops.
Blake Bonecutter Without him, there would be no Avengers, Buffy, Angel or Firefly. He is a good writer, sure.
I think it’s the fact that he can make a movie “simple” but not stupid. There’s nothing inherently complicated about the avengers at all, but it doesn’t suffer from dumb action movie lines or deus ex machina plot devices. That’s why the MCU is currently my favorite movie franchise
Blake Bonecutter ... Toy story? I thought John Lasseter and Lee Unrickh directed those.
Whoops. He was the writer. Ignore me.
@@jumbobungus2292 Then why is Age of Ultron more flawed than Assemble (the UK name)?
Whedon is very good, but seemingly very structured.
I usually don't like the direction he goes with some of my personal favorite characters
That was a disgusting level of detail for this breakdown... I love it. Thank you so much for making these incredibly helpful videos. Can't wait until next weeks episode!
Thanks! It was definitely a lot...but hoped some people would appreciate it.
“Hi minecraft animation guy”
@@LessonsfromtheScreenplay How can the midpoint of Avengers possibly be described as the climax of the film? Surely the climax is when they all come together to defeat the great enemy at the end. That is objectively the culmination, the apex of the story.
Otherwise, this is my favorite breakdown of structure that I have ever come across. Thank you for a great channel.
@@sol8140 He describes this at 5:52, where he defines the "climax" as the high point of a conflict that leads to victory or defeat. This can apply to smaller conflicts or storylines, like Loki's escape, not just the big climatic finale.
Fincher's point is commendable as he really cares about avoiding formulaic screenwriting. I absolutely love the question-and-answer approach to act structure that you've presented, since one could basically look at most Marvel movies and assume their structure is generic, and disregard their ideas and extensive character development. Not only is it pragmatic in a way, but it could truly help look at screenplays differently. Just excellent.
Act 6: Did LFTS made an awesome video?
Answer: Yes
New Choice: Press Like
The best and quickest way I can summarize the major plot points in a three act structure is the following:
Act 1 into Act 2: "There's no turning back"
Act 2 into Act 3: "All is lost"
Pretty much.
then act 4 is "growing above loss/suffering or being overcome with it"
Holy shit! You did a much better job of defining act and story structure much better than my Shakespearean lit class I took. Like a lot better. Props man. Props.
Vinny H. Half and half. It was a requirement to take a performing arts credit or the Shakespearean Lit class to take part in the theater productions. I really liked running theater tech and set design, so I took the class so I could participate.
nooranik21 ❗❗❗
👁️👁️🏁💒📽️📽️📽️📽️📽️
"Shakespearean lit"
Dayum dude. Whoa das lit!
nooranik21 It's amazing what happens when you're taught by someone who legitimately wants to teach rather than someone who's trying to drag out the curriculum to continue getting paid.
_Where's Michael gone? He hasn't uploaded in a couple months_
*Watches a brilliant 15 minute video that's only the first half*
_Oh_
lol. This comment is really cathartic for me. Sorry it's been awhile! But yes, been working on a big chunk of content.
Lessons from the Screenplay No problem at all. I think most, if not all of us understand these take a lot of work and, hey, the content you make is always worth the wait! So thank you for your hard work.
Speaking of this being only the first half, what happened to the second? I was actually crazy excited for part two :(
Oh man this is the best way a youtuber has introduced square space as a sponsor. This whole video was so informative, so well articulated, and the editing was exemplary! Well done!
Thanks Gabrielle!
Well that's a lot of 5 dollar words. I think I smell a writer among us 😊
Hahaha, perhaps in another life... but in this one, i'm a nurse :p
I agree! Along with the Squarespace plug Mango Street has, where they make waffle.
This is, by far, your best video so far. Amazingly edited and very well thought.
Thank you!
I have to ask, does every series of movies that becomes popular suddenly become obligated to sate every creative desire possible? I love the Marvel movies, but I'm not here to espouse them as timeless masterpieces. But I don't recall any other popular movies that were constantly shit on because they aren't Citizen Kane.
The fact the the Marvel movies trigger all these film snobs to me proves my long suspicion that people can't delineate between a subjective "like" and an objective "good."
I feel you. Maybe I'll do a video on "Like" vs "Good" at some point. Cause it drives me crazy too.
So true. I realized that too.
Even though their not all extremely complex movies their still for the most part objectively good from a script writing standpoint. The characters are good with really good thorough arcs and they create a great balance between drama and comedy. Theirs no overwhelming existential themes but don’t let do hide the fact there are some standout really good movies in the mcu
Writer and long-time viewer here. I’ve been banging my head against the wall trying to figure out the second act of the script I’m writing. This helped me see through the structure to focus on character motivation and action. I can’t say thank you enough!
Fantastic! I'm really happy to hear that. You just validated the last three months of me banging my head against the wall.
I think the biggest issue I have with act structure is that it trains us to know exactly where in the film we are, and if the acts aren't delineated where we expect them to be, the film can "drag" or "fly by" without any reason except the structure isn't the same. I think Marvel films have to be a bit formulaic not because of the act structure, but because they have to fit into a "universe" narrative that hogties them into very specific parameters.
I'd love to see something that covers a few films that just break act structure expectations directly to the audience. The three films I'd choose to do that would be Run, Lola, Run (repeating acts with different outcomes), Funny Games (directly telling the audience they're expecting the wrong things, especially in the remote control scene) and Limbo (basically ending the film at the end of Act II).
I agree-which is why I think it's important to learn what the audience is expecting, so you can surprise them in intelligent ways. Good suggestions!
One of my favorite things about Fantastic Beasts was that at one point I thought "I have no idea where this is going". I couldn't tell you if there were fifteen minutes left of film or fifty, and I love it.
Would love if you did a video on "writing the mis-en-scene." One of the early lessons I learned in writing screenplays was that it's not "appropriate" to detail camera angles (my first short film was a screenplay and shot list rolled into one...)
However, great writers often include the mis-en-scene embedded in their story. The comment above made me think of this, in mentioning Funny Games. In the English-Language version, Naomi Watt's character has a significant character change near the remote control scene, in which she's forced to take her dress off. However, when she goes to put the dress back on, the audience realizes that the print/pattern of the dress material is completely different, thus signifying her change.
No mention of this is made by the characters, and one can assume that she is technically wearing the "same" dress, as her character. To the audience, this is a pivotal character change, as she not only stops trying to make sense of the unpredictable terror in her home, but it shifts us into an entirely new act, posing a new question of survival over sense-making.
I'd love if you did a video in this ballpark... not sure how many American films you'll find that are this brilliant, but I'm sure many would love if you tackled a smattering of foreign films if need be!
I don't think it it's an issue. For me at least, since I've been studying three-act structure (maybe 2009), it has helped me to watch movies. I think understanding it challenges the writer to step their game up and for an understanding audience to have higher expectations of quality.
I also don't think it is an issue because of the immeasurable intangibles like taste & talent.
Since there is no accounting for taste, you have to ask the question did it work? I think that you have to understand and possibly master the rules in order to break them effectively. I would argue that it didn't work in Funny Games. I respect the ambition, but that was a bait and switch in content and tone through 4th wall breaking rather an element of act structure.
The story was not about the desensitization of violence on modern audiences, the gimmick was. If the film had any semblance of character development and we saw the two young men enjoying violent films and acting out on it, I'd get it. But the totally out of left field thing did nothing for me. I think We need to talk about Kevin & Se7en were much more effective films about violence and audience expectations without gimmicks. Seven provides it's commentary in dialog, the moral choice of the protagonist and the fact that none of the violence is shown yet many consider it a violent movie.
The tree act structure is nothing new, it is a variation of the greek drama structure, it is used because it works. Directors could subvert those expections while keeping a tension with resolution intact.
I've been confused with these act structures for a long time, finding it hard to identify in stories and to apply in my writing. Most of the time, for me, it felt like it restrained storytelling, instead of helping it. But watching this cleared all that up, and everything makes a lot more sense now! With that definition, act structure seems more flexible, allowing stories to really flow organically. I feel so enlightened omg. Thank you so much for this video and all your videos! Your channel is one of my favorites ever, to be honest. I am absolutely ecstatic for the next one! :D
This is so great to hear! I’m glad you found it helpful!
I keep coming back to this 4 years later. New project, new opportunity to learn this again. Thank you, this has been super useful since day one.
One thing I love about this channel is how many different movies Mike uses to get across his message. He is willing to use superhero movies, movies that are often seen as inferior to Academy Movies, for his own benefit. It's awesome
I try to mix it up! Writing is hard no matter the genre, and each comes with its own set of limitations and challenges.
I was skeptical that you'd manage to say anything I hadn't heard about 3 act structures before, but was pleasantly surprised to see you reference and integrate all the different stuff I've heard before, into a more useful and coherent take.
Wish I could like this video twice
Awesome! That's great to hear. I learned a lot, so was hoping there would be some new useful information for others too.
i cannot believe i saw the words "spoilers ahead" seriously used in relation to the avengers in the gregorian year 2018
lol. Just covering bases.
Duncan Urquhart My friend has only seen Iron Man and Guardians of the Galaxy. So....
De-Friend him lol
I've seen Captain America (1 & 2), Iron Man (all 3), Thor, Black Panther, Avengers, Doctor Strange, and Ant-Man, more than I thought honestly. I guess I don't seek them out because I'm afraid of safe storytelling. I'm a writer and I want my stories to surprise people; Marvel movies don't do that, at least in my experience.
Chris Bauer One of the only times they weren’t safe was with infinity war which made for a way better movie than basically every other marvel movie
Don't you think it's a little unfair of fincher to specify marvel movies and not all blockbusters as a whole? I mean the problem he's talking about, to me, isn't a result of fun or argue restricted superhero movies, it's the hero of a thousand faces that restricts these characters. And the same could be said of Star Wars and many other franchises, even the ones that use adult themes.
Great video once again! I always look forward to a new post from this channel
Someone who was in the audience commented that in context, Fincher was using "working for Marvel" to mean blockbusters as a whole. So, it's probably unfair that the quote is taken straight at face-value.
you should analyze a David Fincher to prove or not prove his point
As someone who's practiced screenwriting for over 20 years, I've learned that act structure is more of a suggestion and should be discarded if the story demands it.
Thanks.
Also, How hard is screenwriting?
I happened to watch the original Iron Man last night. It's very tame in comparison to later Marvel films, but by god does it hold up from a screenplay perspective. It's just so rock solid. Such a great way to start the MCU
Yeah, it really is a fun movie. Probably the best origin story film, though Spider-Man Homecoming is pretty good too.
I actually wouldn't consider Homecoming an "origin" film. Peter Parker already has his powers at the beginning of the story. I guess you could say he really doesn't "become" Spider-Man until the end - but it's different I think. I actually think the best superhero origin movie is The Rocketeer (1991) from Joe Johnston (who would later direct Captain America: The First Avenger!) In terms of structure, it's about as solid as can be. I would love to see you do a video about it sometime!
I am legitimately impressed. We're kind of tired of the expo dumps, the action, sad part, action, and conclusion with some blue beam in the sky. This is literally the answer we needed. Keep it up with these great videos!
Wow. I am consistently stunned at how helpful and inspiring your videos are. Even when you just describe the structure of the stories for the films, I am occasionally moved as if I were watching the actual movie.
My favorite of your videos would have to be the "Logan" and "Children of Men" one, but this has come pretty close. The classical 5 act structure has opened up a ton of new possibilities and made it easier for me to understand how to tell stories better.
I love how you explain everything in a simple yet engaging manner, complimented by your use of visuals and music choices. You are by far my favorite screenwriting channel and I always look forward to your videos. Phenomenal work!
One of the most important virtues a UA-camr can have is to be gracious with the viewer's time. Your voice-overs are deliberately paced and in a relaxed tone, making them super easy to follow and absorb. Your bullet points are clear and concise, and well-ordered. Your cinema footage is high-quality. These traits streamline the viewer's experience by reducing stress and heightening enjoyment. And finally, one of the most important traits of all, you keep your energy positive, not negative. Your opinions are humbly stated and not bombastic. You don't use cinema criticism to stir controversy, to incite gossip and sensationalism, but rather to inform and spark personal enrichment. Good job! :)
This was tremendously informative. You da man.
I love watching video essays in my free time, especially ones about movies. There's just something...stimulating? (I feel like there's a better word for what I mean but Oh Well) about learning How these processes behind making movies work, how we look at them, and how we Should at them/into them. But I feel like something Clicked in my brain with this one. Less of a "Oh cool, I didn't know that" and more of a "Whoa, I never thought about that" feeling.
It's like you just explained in 15 minutes a concept my 12th grade English teacher couldn't in half a semester.
haha, awesome!
fascinating or captivating
Your videos always have such high quality animation and graphics. I can tell that you've spent a lot of time and care making them. Thank you for educating the world on the beauty of screenwriting!
Wrapping my brain around your Question/Answer act definition. I think it's definitely a cool approach to analyzing a story and figuring out what the thrust of an act *was*, from a critical perspective, but I don't think the questions you're asking are useful as a writing tool. Each question is based on an outcome you already know. They can only be asked after the story has been told, which doesn't help during the plotting and planning stage. (which, if I'm not mistaken, was the main goal of your video)
Example: Act 1. "Will Nick Fury recruit our heroes to help stop Loki?"
There is no drama in this question because the answer was Yes before the audience even bought their ticket. I think the only time this question was ever dramatically relevant was after the end credits scene of the first Iron Man. That's the only time when the answer was uncertain.
The reason I don't find this valuable from a writing standpoint is that it doesn't propel me to discover the story. If I only write with the intent to answer "Will Nick Fury recruit the heroes?" then I'm assuming the audience doesn't know the answer, which, from my view, is the death of stakes, the death of drama. If all I've accomplished with Act 1 is showing people, "Hey, look, he recruited them all!" Then I've given the audience nothing of value.
What *does* help the writing and structuring process, I think, is to ask a nonbinary question. "What does Nick Fury do next?" Close. We kind of already know that too. Coulson asks Fury this exact question and the answer is literally the title card. But what about "How?"
Act 1. "How does Nick Fury recruit the heroes?" That's a question neither I nor the audience know the answer to, and so it propels me forward and helps me understand what purpose the following scenes need to serve. It begs extrapolation. It invites surprise.
Answers: Fury chooses to dispatch select SHIELD agents to recruit specific heroes. An old friend for Stark. A commanding officer for Rogers. And who for Banner? Why her? (More extrapolation and surprise. Just how does a spy catch a hulk?)
Act 2: "Once assembled, how do they track Loki down, and what is the outcome?"
Answers: Loki chooses to reveal himself, Cap chooses to go after him, Stark chooses to help, Thor chooses to visit.
Act 3: "Now that our heroes are together and they've seemingly won (a little too easily), how does the next shoe drop?"
Answers: Tony chooses to distrust SHIELD. Steve chooses to believe Tony. Natasha chooses to confront Loki. Loki chose way back in act 2 to let himself be captured in order to cripple the team.
Act 4: "Everything has fallen apart. How do the heroes recover and save the day?"
Answers: Fury manipulates them to spur them into action. Each hero follows their own path to the final showdown, and in the end they choose stand together against the overwhelming threat.
Act 5: "Now united, how might the heroes fail? How do they succeed?"
Answers: Loki chooses to up the ante. Each hero chooses to put themselves in increasing danger to stop him and save civilians. The world security council chooses to place their faith in a bomb instead of the heroes. Tony chooses to sacrifice himself to save the city. The hulk chooses to smash a god and catch a colleague.
I kind of found my way through this as I was writing it, but it feels like this may be the key. For it to be useful in plotting the story, it has to be a question I could ask without knowing the outcome already - something that helps me understand what NEEDS answering so I can find my way to the choices that resolve the act.
I think this is definitely a really useful way of thinking about it. What I like about the “will they...” method is that it tracks the thought process of the audience and helps me keep track of pacing. Ideally, they don’t know what is going to happen, but you’re right, they often do-one of the problems that come with narrative conventions. But as writer, you definitely need to ask yourself how you are answering the question. So essentially I’m saying that I like your definition too, and this is why it’s important for each of us to figure out what resonates with us.
I think I was latching onto his stated goal at the beginning of the video - "What is the most useful way for a writer to think about act structure?" - and then just kind of projected my own needs as a writer onto that question. :) I agree 100% with Michael that each person needs to find a way of thinking about this stuff that resonates with them - and I totally agree that the Question/Answer format he presents is a great tool to aid critical thinking about film and storytelling. What's more, I definitely wouldn't have found the pathway, or even the impetus, to my own definitions without the crucial work he does in laying out his concepts. It's why I love this channel so much. It's a great education. :D
The root of my disagreement was just that "for a writer" bit, because it implies a tool I might then carry forward into my own writing. And the specific issues I had with those questions were, in order for the questions to take those forms, the story would already need to be written. But then, that's me projecting my own needs and thought process as a writer onto the thing. I still find these videos (and his next one if you haven't checked it out yet) incredibly valuable.
That's fair! And you're totally right - it's ultimately up to each person to find their own use for the "idea" of acts. I just watched this one again and I really appreciate the work you put into this! Thanks for such a great channel!
@@joeycruz7667 this is amazing
Fincher's own films have a tendency to deviate from the standard three-act structure, so it's understandable he'd feel this way.
Or rather, they _seem_ to follow it up until the last thirty or forty minutes of the film. _Benjamin Button_ for example has no real climax, it seems to "fade out" rather like a song, and _Girl with the Dragon Tattoo_ feels like it climaxes at the two-hour mark, but then takes another half-hour to resolve the b-plot. And looking back at _Zodiac_ it has a "third act" which lasts almost as long as the second act, despite having a familiar climax at the end.
Eoin O'Connor It would be interesting to see Fincher make a marvel movie on a panic room budget. There are plenty of stories to mine from, I'm sure one would appeal to him.
I doubt he would care or like to do a Marvel film.
Notice how in the Question & Answer format, it also involves 3 acts within an act. First, it establishes a situation: Act 1. Then, it asks the question that arises from said situation: Act 2. Finally, it gives us an answer to the question and resolves this part, moving on to the next: Act 3
OMG MAN!!
This is a phenomenal exposition on screenplay!
I really love the point that you made about how a 3-act structure is more about the details and the journey of how characters are driven to make certain choices. How those choices effect the direction of a story. This is what keeps the Marvel movies fresh and lovable!
I personally believe that when people argue that Marvel is too formulaic, they don't consider the details that go into the 'formula' which have continued to be so interesting, entertaining, and intriguing!
Thanks man! 💪🏽
That transition into the ad was so smooth!
I'm so glad you made this video. I learned about three-act structure in a film analysis class last semester, but my teacher wasn't very clear on the particulars, and my current screenwriting teacher keeps mixing up three-act structure and five-act structure without ever specifying that they're two separate ways of looking at it. I've been confused for a while but this really cleared it up for me. Thanks!
Oh awesome! Great to hear.
Oh, you've been sorely missed Michael. Thanks for this brilliant video.
Loved this, Michael! I've been using The Avengers (and Guardians of the Galaxy) as great examples of blockbusters with plot structure for years. It's just so refreshing to see someone on UA-cam making essays about storytelling concepts, and not just technical filmmaking.
Thank you :)
HoustonProductions1 wow didn't know you watched his videos also you did a great work on it too
I’ve noticed this general concept in and around the film industry that comic book movies are somehow “low effort” or “lesser quality” simply by the fact of being a superhero film. It’s really sad to see people write off good storytelling and great characters just because it’s a film about superheroes.
Yeah, we're incapable of nuance these days.
It's not because they're super hero movies. they're low effort because Disney doesn't see them as art. Disney sees them as products. The characters are shallow and one dimensional and the villains are even more so. The stories are simplistic and repeated film after film. These movies aren't made to tell good stories or present good characters. They're made to sell toys and tickets based on the logo's strapped to the main characters chests.
Good super hero movies use to exist and they didn't have to pander to the audience to do it. All they had to do was tell a good story with well rounded characters. The Richard Donner Superman movies, the Sam Raimi Spiderman movies (1 & 2), the Bryan Singer X-Men movies (1 & 2), Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy, and yes, even Zack Snyder's Watchmen.
Those movies where made with the story and characters in mind first and they each have unique voices behind them. They where directed by directors who where interested in making a good movie, not just pushing a cinematic universe to pump out as many films as they can until they finally kill the genre. None of the marvel or DC movies are directed by directors anymore. They're directed by a board of business men only interested in how best to pander to the widest audience possible. The movies have no unique voice. They all feel like the same movie and all tell the same story.
So no, it's not because they're "Super Hero" movies. it's because they're lazy, cynical, products designed to print money. The fact that Marvel fans don't ask for better from Disney blows my mind. Being a fan means wanting the thing you're a fan of to be as good as it can be. Not just blindly fallowing what ever has your favorite logo slapped across it.
Shepp Husky I was merely talking about the somewhat elitist atmosphere that has prevented superhero movies from being more recognized. However, I actually completely disagree with what you’re saying. While Disney may certainly see them as only products, it’s plain to see that Marvel Studios has a deep respect for these characters, and works extremely hard to bring them to life. The heroes are neither shallow nor one dimensional, and it’s kind of sad that you’d even suggest so. Every single movie dives deeper and deeper into existing character’s psychology, and introduces new ones to boot. And this idea that they’re all the same is so laughable. Guardians of the Galaxy is a space opera, Spider-Man Homecoming is a highschool coming-of-age film, and Captain America: Winter Soldier is a political-spy drama. These are so far from the same movie, and so far from telling the same story that they couldn’t get much further if they tried. If Marvel only ever cared about making money, they never would have greenlit a Guardians or the galaxy movie, a nigh unknown property that wouldn’t sell unless the product was truly good. They wouldn’t have greenlit an Ant-man movie, or given Hawkeye prominent roles to play throughout the avengers films. If they were truly only interested in pandering to the widest audience, they would’ve kept Captain America on ice, since he’s not guaranteed to work well with foreign audiences.
But they didn’t. I am a Marvel fan, and I DO demand better when they don’t deliver on the quality I would like. But that hasn’t happened often. I am a fan. And yeah, that does mean that I want Marvel to be as good as they can be. And so far, they’ve done a pretty grand job of it. They’ve had a couple hiccups, sure, a couple wrong turns. But overall they’ve delivered quality stories and characters. And that’s all I want, as a fan.
They've been saying that since they were just comics in the beginning!
bobunitone True, they say this about comics, cartoons, and now superhero films. They seem to think that *bright colors and the occasional joke = for children and devoid of any critical good*. And it’s just sad to see people completely ignoring their quality because of their genre, or their origins.
This is legitimately going to change the way I approach writing acts and structuring my stories. It also perfectly captures what I've always appreciated about the Avengers. How, despite the many big-name characters, it manages to give them all their own stories, balancing their own arcs with the larger plot. Your points at the end make me respect it on an even deeper level.
One of my favorite videos of yours’ so far! Whenever anyone asks me about underrated UA-camrs, I always recommend you! Thank you for creating such incredibly thoughtful, well-executed, and inspiring content. You’re inspiring the next generation of screenwriters and filmmakers!
Incredible. Incredible video. I’ve been watching your channel for a while and have been taking notes on almost all your videos. This is one of your best. Thank you. You’ve become one of my favorite UA-cam channels. I’ll make sure I support the Patreon. Keep up the great work!
Awesome, thank you! Much appreciated.
I think an interesting topic is about the limitations of the 3 or 5 act structure. Basically, where is it necessary and where is it limiting? The best way to answer it is by referencing to foreign films, which often use no 3 or 5 act structure, but a more episodic one. Incidentally, it would be so great if you also did the occasional foreign film, just to analyze how different films can be and look from the American style of filmmaking. They write their stories in such unique ways.
But great video, like always!
PS- favourite MCU film is a tie between Iron man and the Avengers.
I find a kind of strange irony in a video about act structure being so perfectly structured in itself, another brilliant, intelligent and well structure video. Long time subscriber who can’t wait for he next video. Keep up the brilliant work!
Thank you! :)
The 'Guardians of the Galaxy' movies actually influence my recent writings so I guess they're my favorite MCU entries.
Oh cool. In what ways are they influential?
SuperWillHatch My recent works are now more character-driven.
Peter Frank You have excellent taste, sir.
@@peterfrank3365
Quill's arc is classic
I'm always trying to think of different ways to stay true to:
"Characters over spectacle"
@@peterfrank3365 that is excellent strategy for screenwriting in my opinion.character should be given slightly bigger priority than the plot.because they are the pens through which we see the plot.the plot is well understood only if the characters are well developed
I used to run into problems writing the middle of my stories all the time... until I wrote my first serial and had to break the story into 8 parts. That was a game changer for me and led me to find the 8-sequence structure. I'd love to see you talk about it, because I think this is game changer for writers (and for viewers interested in storytelling)!
That's interesting to hear, I don't know a ton about that one, but want to learn more!
Two of my favorite things: analyzing movies and superheroes. Great break down
Thank you!
"Does any of this...really matter?"
*background muzak slows down, distorts and fades out*
SO GOOD!
This is something I've never really considered. I'm ridiculously formulaic with my writing. Thank you for broadening my understanding of this! Can't wait for the other half^^
:) ua-cam.com/video/yYMhaILOs-I/v-deo.html
THANK YOU! As someone who was introduced to acts through Shakespeare's structures, and then tried to make sense of the obsession with three act structure in light of that, this video was really helpful in understanding how to think about this all.
Awesome!
I subbed a while back because I've always been a very science-oriented person I wanted to improve my crummy literary/film analysis and thereby writing. I don't know if this video was more accessible to me, or if I've somehow let a little knowledge soak in, but I finally feel like I'm not in over my head anymore! I cannot thank you enough for your generosity helping me and the rest of us understand this stuff; keep up the great work!
Wow, that's awesome to hear! Thanks :)
"Sicario/Hell or High Water/Wind River - Telling a Story with Minimal Exposition"
And they are all great movies to boot.
Dunkirk/Pulp Fiction?
That same Film Crit Hulk piece totally shaped my own exploration of the three act structure, it was really cool to see how the same piece influenced your exploration.
Great content as always, keep up the good work!
Awesome! Yeah, it definitely provokes thought.
This made me cry and I don't even fully understand why. Thank you for all the excellent work and craft you put into your videos.
I absolutely love the director/crew voice excerpts. So interesting to hear their thoughts
Great video! Delineating between acts has always been something really difficult for me. I was actually going to suggest the "when a character makes an irreversible choice" definition so I'm glad you brought it up in the video.
On another note, I think the 3 Act structure is such an unshakable paradigm because it seems to make so much logical sense, at least superficially. If you see it simply as Beginning, Middle, and End, you can theoretically fit everything into it.
Agreed on all accounts, and I too have always had trouble delineating acts, which I think is why I became obsessed with finding a definition that I actually liked.
Your work is always informative and well-organized, and this video is no exception. The topic of acts and their structure is one I find myself returning to often, and this is by far the most efficient and effective analysis I've seen of it. Excellent work. Thank you for creating and sharing this video.
That's so great to hear, thanks!
I love this video because it also enhances the idea of the antagonist, because the antoganist is simply the person who wants a different answer to the question that is posed in each act!
Wow, in all my life I've never heard an in depth lesson about act structure for movies as well as I have heard here man. Truly, this is if not the best explanation of it I ever read/heard. Really fantastic job man. You never dissapoint. On that note, if you could do more videos analyzing the act structure other than next week's I'd greatly appreciate it man! What about another suggestion for a comic book movie like Spider-Man 1 or 2, and then with another movie that close to this structure but with even more quality nuances to dissect, such as Blade Runner 2049? All in all excellent video Michael, one of your best!
Thank you, Tony!
Since I start to watch videos about screenplaying, reading articles and writing myself I've realized that creating a script is pretty formulaic but that doesn't mean that we can't add original and cool stuff throughout the process. Thank you so much for another awesome video. You rock ¡¡¡
Greta Gerwig had some really interesting things to say about story structure. She believes its intuitively part of us as human beings and we don't need formulas to stick to.
I cannot express how great this video is. Every Screenwriting student should look at this! It is a culmination of everything I read so far, synthesising the definition, function and purpose of an act into one coherent string of thoughts. And you're right: While all of the books have the same purpose overall and basically all talk about the same things, it's somewhat difficult not to lose sight of the bigger picture. You should totally put Film Crit Hulk's book "Screenwriting 101" up on your Recommended Reading list. Also, it's amazing that you gave a shout out to Lindsay Ellis' video, as she responds directly to his article. Keep up your work very valuable and I'm looking forward to the follow-up video.
9:14 Gettin' Jiggy Wit It - Will Smith
It’s sad whenever people write off a film because it’s based off a comic, the best work is yet to come!
Agreed.
ian lee Comics are a medium of storytelling. It really is a shame that some people can totally write off an entire medium.
I freaking love this. The well-balanced structure of the first Avengers movie is one of the main reasons I consider it the best MCU film. Great video and I can't wait for part 2.
Thanks!
Love these kind of “nerd writer” videos on UA-cam because it helps me understand appreciate things I would normally turn a blind eye to and helps me define what I like and dislike so thank you and keep it up mate.
They're called video essays.
And now for a totally unwarranted/unsolicited opinion...
Nerdwriter is a pompous hack, who occasionally strikes a neat idea (probably gleaned from smarter people online) and manages to illustrate it well enough while grating your face off with pretension.
Hey Mike! I've been lost from your channel lately, but what's a better way to come back than with one of the most interesting videos you've made by far dude! Congratulations! I'm currently studying "Creating Character Arcs" (thanks to you btw) and i have seen lots of interesting things about story structure that i've already readed on that book. Pretty great video man. Glad to watch this quality on your work.
I started getting goosebumps as you described the five acts of Avenges towards the ending with Silvestri's theme in the background.
Probably not a coincidence that you are referring to Shakespeare when Joss whedon has a lot of experience with Shakespeare
Yeah, as I was going through I had that realization.
Joss is one of those writers who really know how to make a structure work for him instead of the other way around. And being a tv writer, he lives and breathes structure - even the final battle from Avengers has a 3-act structure!
Nice work.
It reminds me that Captain America the First Avenger was broken down as a 5 act story in the short lived podcast 'We can do this all day' episode on CA:FA. Part of the appeal to that structure there was the visuals of Steve's shield - Trashcan lid, to Taxi Door, to Prop shield, to silver shield, to painted shield.
Thank you for posting this. I have had issues truly understanding the substance of what makes up an act. The questions method you propose was perfect!
I love your cuts from the schematics into the film and back again, so elegant!
It would've been cool if you'd turned that Last Jedi article into a video as well. Also, I'm really looking forward to your next video in this series as i'm fascinated by the conclusions that you'll draw. When I heard Fincher's comments I also didn't know what to make of them because I didn't know enough about it myself. I mean, we've clearly seen talented film directors able to put their stamp on these Marvel films like Joss Wheden, James Gunn and Taika Waititi even within the constraints put it place to keep the films as part of a cinematic universe.
The five act structure is something I've never really thought about in much detail before, but this video really caught my interest and did a great job of making me think deeper about it. I've been stuck on an outline for my latest attempt at a screenplay for ages and thinking about it in terms of 5 acts rather than 3 has made so many things click into place. Excellent work!
this was fantastic to watch, LFTS always is man, good to see you back for 2018
peace!
Hey Michael, I just became a Patron of yours on Patreon and wanted to say thanks so much for all the hard work that goes into these videos. Since most of your videos have fewer than 500k views (I have no idea why), I'm guessing you don't make a ton of money off of ads or product mentions in the videos. So hopefully me making a small contribution through Patreon can help you to continue to make these videos that are undoubtedly helping thousands of screenwriters out there. Keep up the great work!
Liked the video before watching I because it contains three of my favorite things; The Avengers, writing, and Lessons From the Screenplay. I love every video of yours and anticipated the new video. I couldn't wait to watch it seeing my notification. Keep up the amazing work! 👌
Thank you! :)
Dear Michael,
Thank you for sharing your knowledge. Your channel is the best source of professional story design I've found so far. There are channels that do nothing more than just tell me what you see anyway when watching a movie. But you show what's under the surface. How it works in itself. That's real knowledge. Your contributions to Hidden Figures, Ghostbusters or Logan Vs. CoM and others are fantastic and applicable tools. I wanted to do more of your videos, but of course I see how much work that is for you. Keep it up.
A big thank you with great respect from Germany
i've wonder how much time you spend for analyzing any of this. great works man you're the Best!!.
I started researching this in November!
Your videos always seem to come out right when I am in the middle of working on my screenplays, they are so insightful and inspiring to watch and study!
Thank you Michael, your work is passionate and professional and I love the hook you put at the end of this video! Can't wait to see everything that you talk about this year!
I just watched Hunt For the Wilderpeople and Swiss Army Man recently and they all made me think about the importance of voice in a Screenplay, so I would love to hear you discuss the topic of how a Screenplay and film services a creator's voice.
Thanks Micah! And good suggestions!
Clicked on this so fast! Always excited to have new content form you.
Looking forward to the next video! Going to the last jedi blog post right now!
Lindsay Ellis made a very similar video to this one a while back. Instead of questions and answers she used the rise and fall of tensions.
It is mentioned at the end in the outro. I enjoy her work, even if I don't always agree with it.
oic, I may or may not have clicked off after the ad. This was an excellent video though.
I really enjoyed that video, but the problem with defining acts with the rise and fall of tension is that it can easily lead to mechanical writing, with tensions rising and falling irrespective of the character's motivations and actions. I'm not saying that Lindsey is wrong, far from it, if I remember correctly, she explicitly states that act structure is more useful in analysing a story than it is in writing one. If you are in the process of writing a story, the definitions provided above will probably be far more useful in determining a structure that works.
Yeah i saw that one. Im a writer and her rigid adherence to three act structure baloney is what results in hackneyed, un-organic writing. the way a story develops should totally come from the characters and conflict and not an arbitrary paradigm superimposed on the story.
+Presto 76 I think you sort of misunderstood her point then... She never adhered to the structure to prove anything besides an analysis of already selected works... She gets into 5 act structure and, as the above comment states, says that it is better for analysis than actual writing
Glad you're back! Fave film is Captain America: The Winter Soldier, think it's their high water mark, personally.
I literally had Freytag's Pyramid like a week ago in my german class, was fun seeing you talk about it as well. Finally, school has taught me something useful.
Oh cool! :)
Gettin jiggy with it!
Mindblowingly great video! I cheered when you asked "Does any of this matter?" Brilliant insight. It leads to and calls for authentic storytelling.
Incredible content. I found your channel yesterday and haven't been able to stop watching. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE dissect Moonlight!!!
3:09 3:28 11:38 Bless you.
😂
More gushing about the amazing groundbreaking film that is the Avengers (and the MCU as a whole)? Count me in, sir. Count me in.
The one David Fincher film that I remember having a 4 acts structure is Girl with the dragon tattoo. After the mystery is solved, we are left with around 30 extra minutes finishing Lisbeth's arc. I don't know how they use this 4 acts structure, but for me, it can be very useful when you have more than one really interesting character. The film is mostly about Mikael Blomkvist, but as soon as we are introduced to Lisbeth the focus of the film seems more concerned about her than Blomkvist. That is why it was so necessary to finish her story, which was only parallel to the mystery of the film.
I think you'll like the next video ;)
Damn it! Now I'm super hyped. You are the best.
..."and I"ll talk about it, on my next video"...
-Awesome!
..."next week"
-DID I JUST DIED AND WENT TO HEAVEN?!?!?
lol.
Lessons from the Screenplay Did that video ever come out? I searched for “Anatomy of an Act” and couldn’t find it. HELP!
I'm so enlightened, as a self taught writer I find your videos most helpful, thank you for all your efforts and sharing the knowledge so generously！
Hey loved your defining act ,can you make a video on a failed movie which has followed the 3 act /5 act structure
Maybe!
abhiraj Batman V Superman
Fan4stic maybe, or suicide squad
That would be a very long list. The 3 act structure doesn't define a successful film.
I never gave much thought to the MCU being a subject for my critical film observation and that's wrong on my part. Michael, thank you for awakening us. You're doing a wonderful job!
Hey Michael, this might be a bit of an offbeat request but I was wondering if you could cover the importance of sounds in the form of background music in some movies?
Maybe if a script happens to mention sound or music a lot; I recommend checking out www.soundworkscollection.com
The Quiet Place video might be what your looking for?
I found this to be my favourite video about the Three Act Structure...it's just amazing
I love your videos. They are always so calm and well though out. Really good analysis of the act and the structure. I look forward to part 2.
P.s. my favorite MCU movie is Guardians of the Galaxy, I just love movies that manage to work a musical journey in the plot. Maybe an idea to consider for a video?
Really great video. I'm a comic/screenwriter and I learn something new every time I watch your series. Please keep making more and thanks again for all your efforts. -A fan-
This is such a wonderfully useful and informative video. Thank you for all the work you put into these videos, and I can't wait to see what you do next.
Thanks!