Penning the Outline

Post by **steve hyde** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:02 am

Comrade Matthew raises some important things to consider here. A period piece is an expensive undertaking and since Nathan has yet to secure financial backing on this piece, it may be worth exploring your theme in the hear and now.

What is the theme? It is unclear to me. If you were to describe the process you are representing with one verb, what would that verb be?

I think a screenwriter needs to be able to express the central concept of a story in one verb. What is the spine? The cental line of action? What is the process at work? This is something I took away from Tarkovsky's writings on "the authors work" (S. in time, pp.76)

...just trying to offer more obstructions here. And also a favorite quote from T.S. Elliot:

"When forced to work within a strict framework the imagination is taxed to its utmost - and will produce its richest ideas. Given total freedom the work is likely to sprawl."

-- quoted from McKee's "Story" at the beginning of the chapter "The principles of story design"

Steve

Post by **Evan Kubota** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 4:46 am

"A period piece is an expensive undertaking and since Nathan has yet to secure financial backing on this piece, it may be worth exploring your theme in the hear and now."

It can be done at (less) cost - I think the period aspect lends a richness to the themes that can't be easily found in modern settings. I'm working through a similar issue with my current film which is set in WWII. I enjoy trying to get as much accuracy as possible, though.

Post by **steve hyde** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:32 am

Evan,

you seem to be missing the *structural theme* of this thread. We are discussing a treatment not a script. I think thematics are the single most important and difficult aspect to filmmaking -primarily because understanding themes requires research into how a given theme is generated by social practices. It is the accuracy of the social practices that underpin the story that give it truth-power.

To be honest I'm not seeing themes being seriously discussed anywhere on this forum.

Steve

Post by **npcoombs** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 11:42 am

comradejones wrote:In practical terms it is a bit of a task - period piece, costumes, horse and carriage, props, rain...and especially with a period piece (not wanting to get technical in this particualr forum) I think you should shoot on film as for my money HD is still an aesthetic choice not a substitute for film - eg. in Cache the qualities of HD complement to the story while a period piece may be fighting against them.

I completely agree with this, that period pieces especially look better on film. Particularly without slick lighting setups. Better with using mostly natural ambient light with reflections to soften up the shadows. Film is much better at supporting this kind of naturalistic lighting setup. One thing I felt about Mattias's Jag Bara Undar was that although it was shot on super-16 the lighting was so harsh and artificial, the end result almost looked more like video than his most recent short which actually was shot on video! Although this was through comparing them in a small quicktime window.

That said, if I end up self-funding (credit cards, parents etc.) then most of my budget will be absorbed by the logistics of the pieces: a rented horse and carriage, rented HD cam with nice primes, long sections of dolly track (which cost a fuck load to rent) etc.. oh and this is all presuming I can find good actors prepared to work for almost free.

A huge undertaking. I will develop the script until I am satisfied, then pull together a group of collaborators then begin the long process of putting it all together.

Post by **npcoombs** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 11:56 am

steve hyde wrote: What is the theme? It is unclear to me. If you were to describe the process you are representing with one verb, what would that verb be?

The theme is hope. Hope lost and hope regained.

The sub-text, which I need to tighten a lot from the story I posted here, is revolution - its ethics and excesses. Particularly the use of capital punishment, murdering your leaders to substitute them with another lot. But not a pessimistic outlook. In the end the aristocrats (the prisoner and is savior) are the most callow of the group, the most cynical. The aristocrat savior in the story is a kind of Scarlot Pimponel figure, robbed of all the traditional virtues associated with the character.

On top of this the script is a toned done period, action piece. I want the script to play on perceptions at every turn. When watching you should not know who to feel sorry for, who is right, who is wrong by the end of the film, except of course for the aristocrat who represents 'evil' in the most explicit form.

I agree with Evan that period pieces can add to the richness of the story. Visually you can get away with a lot more, because people will suspend their disbelief to a great extent. This suits my purposes of creating a staggeringly beautiful film, almost gothic horror in its setting and atmosphere. Cast in a light blue light.

For me a contemporary piece will be the next stage after this, when I have some experience with actors (perhaps even found some great ones to work with). Uzak (nuri Bilge Ceylan) is the greatest example of a film set in the contemporary which has a transcendental beauty which distills its themes into timeless themes.

In regard to Kaufmann, I think he is a great writer, but to be honest his work does not really connect with me. He relies on gimmicks and formal trickery far to much to engage my emotions. 'Eternal Sunshine' had moments of brilliance, but lost me when Kaufmann lost control of his own script and let it descend into pure silliness.
[/i]

Post by **Evan Kubota** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:47 pm

"He relies on gimmicks and formal trickery far to much to engage my emotions. 'Eternal Sunshine' had moments of brilliance, but lost me when Kaufmann lost control of his own script and let it descend into pure silliness."

I tend to agree, I felt the same way about Being John Malkovich. He's fine at what he does but it's not what I want to do.

"you seem to be missing the *structural theme* of this thread. We are discussing a treatment not a script. I think thematics are the single most important and difficult aspect to filmmaking -primarily because understanding themes requires research into how a given theme is generated by social practices. It is the accuracy of the social practices that underpin the story that give it truth-power.

To be honest I'm not seeing themes being seriously discussed anywhere on this forum."

Steve, you brought up the period aspect, not me. I was simply responding to the fact that it *is* part of his treatment and you can't just excise anything that doesn't directly correlate with the theme, since everything affects it, including presentation and (obviously) aesthetics.

The reason why I didn't specifically comment on the theme is because that's personal (and probably fixed at this point) and I doubt Nathan posted his treatment to get suggestions on whether that theme should be changed or modified at all. It can certainly be developed more economically and I have no problem giving advice on how to do that.

Post by **steve hyde** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 3:17 am

npcoombs wrote:
steve hyde wrote: What is the theme? It is unclear to me. If you were to describe the process you are representing with one verb, what would that verb be?
The theme is hope. Hope lost and hope regained.

...nice. okay, so to continue posing questions:

What is hope? How does hope materialize? Why would someone want to find hope or have hope? How is hope lost? How is hope regained?

Having some answers to these kinds of questions should offer some firm ground for building structure.

*Hope* seems like a very general theme to me, but hope is, no doubt a process and if you focus on how the process of hope works I'm sure it will be fascinating. Hope is huge. What are the smaller components of hope? What constitutes hope (for your protagonist)

It seems like *trust* is at least one component of hope. The psychological architecture of trust seems like it would be worth exploring.
How is *trust* lost and how is *trust* regained?

Thematics. Once you commit to your theme, fight for it. All your efforts should be in service to the theme...

Steve

Post by **steve hyde** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 3:28 am

...by the way, I'm currently reading an interesting book by Paulo Freire for a phenomenology seminar that I'm in right now. It is a classic that some of you may have encountered before. If not, you may want to check it out. I found a complete copy on line:

http://www.marxists.org/subject/educati ... /pedagogy/

In chapter three he offers some fascinating insights into "meaningful themes" and "generative themes".

Dialogue, Dialogue, dialogue. I'd be curious to hear any reactions to the Freire peice. I think it is loaded with insights for filmmakers even though he never explicitly makes reference to anything filmic....other than photography maybe once....

anyway, back to it.

Steve

Post by **steve hyde** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 3:37 am

Evan Kubota wrote:
Steve, you brought up the period aspect, not me. I was simply responding to the fact that it *is* part of his treatment and you can't just excise anything that doesn't directly correlate with the theme, since everything affects it, including presentation and (obviously) aesthetics.

The reason why I didn't specifically comment on the theme is because that's personal (and probably fixed at this point) and I doubt Nathan posted his treatment to get suggestions on whether that theme should be changed or modified at all. It can certainly be developed more economically and I have no problem giving advice on how to do that.

I re-read my post. It sounded a bit ubrupt. I brought up the theme question because structure and theme go hand in hand. I don't think Nathan's theme is well developed and that is why I asked him what it is. I still think it needs to be narrowed to something more explicit...some little kernal of hope not the universe of hope...

Let's talk themes concretely or abstractly....

Steve

Post by **Evan Kubota** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:11 am

I agree that it could be clarified. What's the statement about the human condition? Specificity is important.

Post by **comradejones** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 3:00 pm

What's the statement about the human condition? Specificity is important.

When you sit down the write a story, be it a short film or otherwise, is it imperative to have a theme in mind? - for instance, 'I want to explore the theme of "hope"' - then write the story around that - "what's the best/easiest/most practical way for to me to explore this theme? how can I best say what I want to say? Am I asking questions or answering them?" etc, etc.
Or could it be the other way around - "I want to write a story/make a film. I have an idea of the character/s I want to have in it, the setting, place; a plot that is coherent, moves along at a good pace." and then alow the theme/s to emerge from the story? Perhaps ideas emerge that you didn't intend to touch on, that by following the basic rules of story telling (whatever they may be - 3 act structure, the hero's journey - whatever's fashionable at the time) you allow the themes to form, ideas will materialise, you discover your 'voice' as a filmmaker/storyteller...
I guess I suffer from that in my own storytelling - "what, if anything, am I saying???"
hmmm...chicken and egg...

BTW, love Kaufman but Adaptation was a bit too much of an in-joke. Eternal Sunshine? one of my favourites - and Evan - like your site: where can I see your films?!

Post by **npcoombs** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 3:16 pm

steve hyde wrote:
npcoombs wrote:
steve hyde wrote: What is the theme? It is unclear to me. If you were to describe the process you are representing with one verb, what would that verb be?
The theme is hope. Hope lost and hope regained.

...nice. okay, so to continue posing questions:
Thematics. Once you commit to your theme, fight for it. All your efforts should be in service to the theme...

I'm not sure I like the direction this is heading in. It seems to me utterly artificial to construct a script starting on a theme (verb) - this is not how real writing emerges, but films scripts that take place in some abstract movie-land. Maybe I don't understand what you are getting at because you have read literature that explains this in a different way, but I am more interested in characters and situations than themes. I hope the themes emerge through the process of writing.

The situation is thus: this is the scenario I want to work with. These 4 characters and this basic plot - how can I tighten up the themes?

Well I am going to start writing the script soon and during this process I will cut the fat off the script and develop the key themes more.

Im not really sure what you are suggesting I do?

Post by **Evan Kubota** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 4:34 pm

"be it a short film or otherwise, is it imperative to have a theme in mind? - for instance, 'I want to explore the theme of "hope"' - then write the story around that - "what's the best/easiest/most practical way for to me to explore this theme? how can I best" say what I want to say? Am I asking questions or answering them?" etc, etc. "

No! As Nathan said, this is totally artificial. When I asked about what the statement was, it was only for discussion purposes...it's not really worth discussing in a sense because it shouldn't be a consensus-based determination anyway.

Post by **comradejones** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:13 pm

Sure, choosing a theme and writing your story around it is a contrivance but still as good to place to start as any. All fiction writing is 'artificial' to the extent that it is fiction! I don't see how working from a theme differs in legitamacy from say, picking a particular genre and all the inheirent limitations that come with that and constructing your script around it. They're just different ways of working. For instance Nathan said -

The situation is thus: this is the scenario I want to work with. These 4 characters and this basic plot

A good a place to start as any! I thought it would be interesting to look at the pros and cons, different approaches, etc - also 'for discussion purposes'. Thoughts?

Post by **Evan Kubota** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 12:14 am

"I don't see how working from a theme differs in legitamacy from say, picking a particular genre and all the inheirent limitations that come with that and constructing your script around it."

I don't think that's a good idea either. What limitations come with genre? They're only there if you choose to believe them. I'm not just giving you a hard time, but does anyone really say 'I am going to write a horror film' and think only in terms of the cliches involved in that 'genre'?