Simply put for those that don't know what it is...the three act structure is at its basis the structure by which most storytellers tell a story. There is the beginning (the setup), the middle (the conflict) and the end. (the resolution.
According to Wikipedia
"The three-act structure is a model used in writing and evaluating modern storytelling which divides a screenplay into three parts called the Setup, the Confrontation and the Resolution."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-act_structure
This is a general rule that everyone follows. No matter what movie, you have seen, it follows this structure. Even a film like Momento, uses this structure. It's just one of those sort of things that goes unsaid. You write a film, it follows this structure, end of story..so to speak.
After having an insightful conversation with a customer who also is a screenwriter, I discovered something. Eiko, doesn't follow that structure. Not exactly.
When I wrote the original screenplay, I based it heavily on the 4 part comic mini-series that I created some years back. Though much of the content evolved over time, what I did keep was that the story was divided into four parts; not three. Some would assume like most comic to film adaptations that I condense the story into a three act structure which is normally the case, however at the time, I was new to screenwriting, and I followed my own rules. Maybe this was a bad thing, or maybe not.
You see one of the disadvantages of following a rule, is that while you get to reap its advantages, you also inherit its disadvantages.
Case in point.
Have you ever watched a film, and by the time you reach a certain point, you already know what is going to happen? I mean you have already reached that point in the film where there is no need for the introduction of any new elements. As you have reached the end, you know that the inevitable conclusion is coming. The film has to basically "wrap it up."
This is usually the case with many movies, because they are following the rules of the three act structure. Because most films are geared towards 90-120 minutes (1 hour, 30 min to 2 hours max) they have to tell a story within a certain time frame. If you think about it, a 90 minute movie makes a great example of the three act structure and its use
Act 1: First 30 minutes
...usually used for exposition, to establish the main characters, their relationships and the world they live in.
Usually a call to action which helps drive the movie is introduced, this is known as the inciting incident. It helps establish a purpose for the protagonist to do something (to act, to seek revenge, to learn, to grow)
Act 2: Next 30 minutes
...also referred to as "rising action", typically depicts the protagonist's attempt to resolve the problem initiated by the first turning point, only to find themselves in ever worsening situations. This is important, because this is usually when the at stake moment is declared. It helps determine who the protagonist is, internally, and helps establish their actions to resolve the events established in the first act. The character by the end of this act, knows what must be done, and it is during this time we are introduced into the deeper world of their conflict. Alot of character development happens during this stage, which sets up the third and final act.
Act 3: Last 30 minutes
...features the resolution of the story and its subplots. This is where everything comes to an end, and the main plot as well as the subplot are resolved through the actions of the protagonist. This is usually played straight in most cases, and with a twist in others, but the point of a climax is to bring an end to the story. It will answer the questions that were first introduced in the first act and resolve the issues. The protagonist will be a better/stronger/more powerful/more informed person at this point.
The three act structure is a beautiful thing, but it is also predictable to a point. If you are sitting in the theatre watching the Dark Knight, by the time you get towards the climax, you know two things are going to happen. Batman is going to win, and the villains are going to lose. Sometimes that victory might be a pyrrhic victory, where the protagonist won the battle, but at a great cost to themselves.
In Eiko, I did something that most would consider, ill-advised. I didn't follow the rules. It isn't as if I didn't know them. They are one of the first things taught in every single screenwriting book I've ever read (and there have been a few). I knew what I was doing. I had made a conscious decision to *not* follow the traditional structure. My story was going to be my own; written the way I wanted to tell it.
Since Eiko was written, I've seen a couple of similar assassin type movies. Ninja Assassin and Hanna being the best examples to date. They were decent movies (I loved them) but they too like many other movies, followed the three act structure faithfully. You reached a point where you just knew a certain thing was going to happen. That wasn't the type of story I was going to tell. Mind you both were set in modern times, so Eiko was going to be different in that regard alone. What would also seperate Eiko was the climax point and where it was actually located. If you haven't read Eiko, I won't spoil it for you, but I will say, it's not where people would assume it to be.
There is a twist, and the twist is important for storytelling purposes, because of what the source material was based from. I break some rules, and I'm okay with doing that, because the alternative would have been to rely on a very formulaic method, that I just don't agree with. Don't get me wrong. I don't hate three act structure, and in fact rely upon it for every other work of fiction I have completed. Three act structure is a godsend for planning a story to the end, as my method often works of plotting out the three acts and their plot points and then connecting the dots with events...often times backwards. Eiko wasn't written in that way. I already knew everything that would happen and why, and following the three act structure was only going to serve as a limitation in my execution.
In closing I am not saying that you shouldn't follow the rules. They are there for a reason, but I am saying that sometimes you have to break the rules if they don't abide by the story you are telling.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you'd like to read more on an interesting breakdown of three act structure, here is a link I recommend.
Building the Dark Knight screenplay by Dan Calvisi
If you like the movies, you can purchase them here.
NINJA ASSASSIN BY RAIN (Blu-Ray) [3 DISCS] (Google Affiliate Ad)
CHRISTOPHER NOLAN DIRECTOR'S COLLECTI BY NOLAN,CHRISTOPHER (Blu-Ray) [ (Google Affiliate Ad)Hanna (Digital Copy In Edition) by Wright, Joe/ Ronan, Saoirse/ Bana, (Google Affiliate Ad)
DARK KNIGHT BY BALE,CHRISTIAN (Blu-Ray) (Google Affiliate Ad)
MEMENTO BY PEARCE,GUY (DVD) (Google Affiliate Ad)
No comments:
Post a Comment