The adventures of a professional screenwriter and frequent film festival jurist, slogging through the trenches of Hollywood, writing movies that you have never heard of, and getting no respect. Voted #10 - Best Blogs For Screenwriters - Bachelor's Degree
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Book Report: Secrets Of Action Screenwriting
It's Book Report Tuesday...
Though I have read a pile of books, what you really want to know is Where The Hell Is The Secrets Of Action Screenwriting?
That's a very good question. Originally it was supposed to be finished by... well, originally probably 2005. But it was supposed to be finished last year, then in July... then about every month since then. I *thought* it would be done by November 1st, so I put an excerpt in Script Magazine's November issue back in August... but November 1st passed without the book being finished. Then the plan was to have it finished by the end of this month... which is tomorrow.
The weird thing is – I'm working on it and working on it... and still haven't finished it. So, a couple of days ago when I finished the last major rewrite chapter (where almost nothing remained the same), I decided to add up the word count to see how close I was. The remaining chapters are “easy” (except for 3 that need more than a touch up), so they won't take much time. And by the 10th new chapter I realized I had more words than the original 240 page book... and that's why it's been taking me so long! I pretty much wrote a whole new book!
So the good news is: Next week the new version of Secrets Of Action Screenwriting should be available for sale on Amazon and B&N in e-book format – probably around 500 pages, and for only $9.99 (the 2000 price was $21.95). There will be a paper version, but now my problem is *price* - I could have sold the 240 page version for the old price of $21.95 and made a couple of bucks even though paper and printing prices have increased... but a 500 page book? I'm going to have to figure this out – and probably do some editing.
But I hope by this time next week there will be a place to click and buy it here. For $9.99 at Amazon... and that's for a rewritten version that will be about 500 pages!
Director Ken Russell has passed away - he was one of those interesting British directors from the 60s and 70s who was making films up until his death. The thing about a Ken Russell movie was that it would always be visually interesting, often in an acid trip kind of way.
I wrote this a couple years back about his very first film...
Last week I had an entry about one of my favorite movies, THE IPCRESS FILE starring Michael Caine. That was his first starring role after playing bit parts and supporting in films and TV series, and he performed like a veteran. The film was both a critical and financial success - and based on the first in a series of novels by Len Deighton - so you know what happens next...
Sequels.
The first sequel, FUNERAL IN BERLIN, is one of those great Cold War movies - directed by James Bond vet Guy Hamilton (GOLDFINGER) and is pretty good. Not as great as IPCRESS, but it’s a fine second film. Maybe because it didn’t measure up to the wild director of Sidney J. Furie, the producers decided to bring in someone arty for the third film, so they hired the flamboyant Ken Russell to direct BILLION DOLLAR BRAIN.
Ken Russell is an interesting director, and I believe this is his first feature film. He would go on to direct WOMEN IN LOVE a couple of years later, which features Alan Bates and Oliver Reed wrestling naked - I am still trying to remove those images from my mind. He would then specialize in over the top musicals and musical biographies like THE BOY FRIEND, THE MUSIC LOVERS, TOMMY, MAHLER, LISZTOMANIA, and VALENTINO before going through ALTERED STATES and coming out the other side as a kind of kinky horror movie director with the wacky CRIMES OF PASSION and GOTHIC and LAIR OF THE WHITE WORM. I believe he is now making erotica with a consumer camcorder - and I’m sure it’s inventive and strange. Russell is one of those crazy geniuses like Orson Welles who needs someone to tell him when he has gone too far, someone to tell him when he has ventured into the really weird.
There was no one like that on BILLION DOLLAR BRAIN... so we have a movie where the army is dressed in white outfits with purple helmets and look like a bunch of penises (or penii) and everything is bright and crazy and the plot goes way off the rails about halfway through and it seems to be a parody of James Bond movies. You keep expecting a big musical number to break out. Ed Begley Sr is so over the top he ends up in the stratosphere somewhere. I have no idea what this movie is - but it is *not* a Harry Palmer movie. I saw it at the American Cinematheque a couple of years ago double billed with FUNERAL IN BERLIN, and it was entertaining in a "How Much Acid Did Ken Russell Drop Before Making This Film" sort of way... but not a Harry Palmer movie.
But here is the trailer...
And here are Maurice Binder's opening titles - you can see they are turning Harry Palmer into some sort of artsie-fartsie James Bond, instead of the more realistic look at espionage from the first two films.
Though this movie is completely crazy, and killed the franchise dead for a couple of decades, you may want to check out Russell’s WOMEN IN LOVE and some of his other films - he’s a wild director, and with material that isn’t supposed to be realistic he makes some interesting films. I've seen most of them. (Amanda Donahoe is mostly naked in LAIR OF THE WHITE WORM...)
- Bill
CYBER MONDAY SALE:
*ALL* CLASSIC CLASS CDs
ALL SIX CLASSIC CLASSES!
Why break up a set? Get ALL of the Classic Classes on CD for one low price - and save on postage, too! SIX CDs packed with information!
From IDEAS & CREATIVITY to WRITING INDIES to WRITING HORROR to the 2 part WRITING THRILLERS to GUERRILLA MARKETING. These classes used to sell for $15 - for a total of $120 with postage & handling. Buy the whole set and get 'em for only $50 plus *discounted* postage and handling.
It's the big deal - You SAVE $60!!!! ENDS SOON! BUY NOW!
Expanded version with more ways to create interesting protagonists! Print version is 48 pages, Kindle version is almost *200* pages!
Only $2.99 - and no postage!
NEW CLASSES!
STRUCTURAL FREAKS! - 80 minute CD packed with information! Ready for the freak show?
William Goldman says "Structure is everything". Do you understand structure? Is your script running out of steam halfway through? Exploring different methods of structuring your screenplay - alternatives to the three act structure like the Navajo Story Circle, Tag Teams, Strange Chronologies, and more. Using examples like INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, RUN, LOLA, RUN and PULP FICTION and THE HANGOVER and TIMECRIMES and CRASH and SLACKERS and other odd storytelling methods. The Structural Freaks Class sells for $15 (plus $5 S&H)
NOIR & MYSTERY - 80 minute CD packed with information on writing Film Noir and Mystery scripts. Using examples from CHINATOWN to OUT OF THE PAST to DOUBLE INDEMNITY you'll learn how to create stories in this dark, twisted genre. How to plant clues, red herrings, suspects, victims, spider women, fallen heroes, the funhouse mirror world of noir supporting characters... and the origins of Film Noir in literature Noir dialogue and how noir endings are different than any other genre. All of the critical elements necessary to write in this critically popular genre. The Noir & Mystery Class is only $15 (plus $5 S&H).
THEME & VOICE - Theme is the center of your story - the reason for telling your story. How to find theme with your character and use theme to explore your character. Why theme is the most important element in any screenplay. Theme and nexus. Theme and dialogue. Theme and scenes. Your personal themes and finding your unique voice as a screenwriter. This 80 minute CD is packed with information - THEME & VOICE sells for $15 (plus $5 S&H)
Lancelot Link Thursday! If you wonder what the President has for dinner on Thanksgiving after he pardons the turkeys, here are some articles about screenwriting and the biz plus some fun stuff that may be of interest to you. Brought to you by that suave and sophisticated secret agent...
Here are five cool links plus this week's food chase...
Today is THANKSGIVING in the USA, a time when we eat until we explode... much like Mr. Creosote. So - no car chase this week...
Happy Thanksgiving!
- Bill
BLACK FRIDAY SALE:
*ALL* CLASSIC CLASS CDs
ALL SIX CLASSIC CLASSES!
Why break up a set? Get ALL of the Classic Classes on CD for one low price - and save on postage, too! SIX CDs packed with information!
From IDEAS & CREATIVITY to WRITING INDIES to WRITING HORROR to the 2 part WRITING THRILLERS to GUERRILLA MARKETING. These classes used to sell for $15 - for a total of $120 with postage & handling. Buy the whole set and get 'em for only $50 plus *discounted* postage and handling.
It's the big deal - You SAVE $60!!!! ENDS SOON! BUY NOW!
Expanded version with more ways to create interesting protagonists! Print version is 48 pages, Kindle version is almost *200* pages!
Only $2.99 - and no postage!
NEW CLASSES!
STRUCTURAL FREAKS! - 80 minute CD packed with information! Ready for the freak show?
William Goldman says "Structure is everything". Do you understand structure? Is your script running out of steam halfway through? Exploring different methods of structuring your screenplay - alternatives to the three act structure like the Navajo Story Circle, Tag Teams, Strange Chronologies, and more. Using examples like INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, RUN, LOLA, RUN and PULP FICTION and THE HANGOVER and TIMECRIMES and CRASH and SLACKERS and other odd storytelling methods. The Structural Freaks Class sells for $15 (plus $5 S&H)
NOIR & MYSTERY - 80 minute CD packed with information on writing Film Noir and Mystery scripts. Using examples from CHINATOWN to OUT OF THE PAST to DOUBLE INDEMNITY you'll learn how to create stories in this dark, twisted genre. How to plant clues, red herrings, suspects, victims, spider women, fallen heroes, the funhouse mirror world of noir supporting characters... and the origins of Film Noir in literature Noir dialogue and how noir endings are different than any other genre. All of the critical elements necessary to write in this critically popular genre. The Noir & Mystery Class is only $15 (plus $5 S&H).
THEME & VOICE - Theme is the center of your story - the reason for telling your story. How to find theme with your character and use theme to explore your character. Why theme is the most important element in any screenplay. Theme and nexus. Theme and dialogue. Theme and scenes. Your personal themes and finding your unique voice as a screenwriter. This 80 minute CD is packed with information - THEME & VOICE sells for $15 (plus $5 S&H)
My first job (other than moving lawns and delivering papers and helping my dad) was at the Century Movie Theater in Pleasant Hill... where I was a doorman, an usher, and acting manager (which required me to run the projectors sometimes).
Back in those days they didn't have digital projectors, they didn't even have those platters that held a whole film... Films were in reels that were 20 minutes or less and had to be changed over from one projector to another seemlessly - you've seen how that works in FIGHT CLUB.
But what FIGHT CLUB didn't have the balls to show you - or the research to mention - is that projectors did not have *bulbs* back then... they used *fire*. There were not light bulbs bright enough to project a movie on a screen that far away, so the only other option is FIRE. A carbon arc. So I had to learn how to run the projectors and replace the carbons (probably once a night for each projector) in case the projectionist got sick or drunk or just didn't show for some reason. The show must go on - and that meant I had to run the projectors. And I did this *many many many* times.
A couple of years later I had a job as manager/projectionist at a little indie cinema and ran the projectors 6 nights a week. Those projectors also used fire and had a changeover about every 17 minutes. Here's how that works...
Though Hitchcock is most closely associated with thrillers, most of his films have humor... and he actually made a romantic comedy and some other non-thriller films, plus this nice little comedy. Don’t expect to laugh out loud at THE TROUBLE WITH HARRY, it’s more of a “smile comedy” - gentle humor. And though it isn’t a romantic comedy, it is a comedy about romance... and a dead guy. The trouble with Harry is that he’s dead. Though I’m sure this comparison will result in angry comments, the film is kind of like WEEKEND AT BERNIES... just not as stupid and a lot more charming. Screenplay by John Michael Hayes who also wrote REAR WINDOW and TO CATCH A THIEF and THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH remake for Hitchcock... and I believe is still alive and writing. The dialogue in this film *sparkles* - lots of double meanings and clever lines... and all of it low key.
Nutshell: Little Arnie (Jerry Mathers - the Beav) is playing army in the woods when he hears gun shots - three of them - and hits the dirt. When he thinks it’s safe, he approaches, toy gun ready for action, and discovers Harry (Philip Truex) dead. When he runs home to tell his mom, a hunter comes out of the woods, rifle in hand - Captain Wiles (Ed Gwenn - Santa in Miracle On 34the Street). He approaches Harry’s body carefully, sees that he is dead... and realizes it’s his fault. He fired three shots - he hit a can, he hit a sign... and he hit Harry. Before he can hide the body, a freakin’ parade of people walk past... and either don’t notice Harry (they aren’t looking down) or in the case of a homeless guy, sees Harry and Harry’s fancy shoes - and takes them. By the time the Captain goes to drag Harry away, he’s discovered, corpse’s feet in hand, by town spinster Miss Gravely (Mildred Natwick - who played spinsters all of her life) who asks, “What seems to be the trouble, Captain?”
No one in this film reacts to the dead guy as you would expect... and that’s part of the fun. No one is shocked that Harry is dead, they all just see him as an inconvenience. Miss Gravely kicks Harry’s body a few times to make sure he’s dead.
And here’s where the story gets weird... in order to remove Miss Gravely’s attention from the dead guy, the Captain begins flirting with her. It’s awkward - both are past middle aged and single all of their lives. But anything to keep her from thinking about the dead guy. Miss Gravely asks if he’d like to come over for tea and muffins later. Harry is the “love corpse” - bringing couples together in this film!
Our hero is abstract artist Sam Marlowe who has just moved into this small town, and has put his strange paintings up for sale at the general store. He’s fussy about getting them right-side-up, even though they’re just blobs of paint. When he’s out sketching in the woods, he comes across Harry... and sketches him. Then discovers the Captain hiding behind some trees. They discuss the Harry problem... and that’s when little Arnie and his mom Jennifer (Shirley MacLaine in her first film) come to check out Harry... and Jennifer does something strange - she says Harry deserved it, instructs Arnie not to tell anyone about Harry, and the two leave.
Sam helps the Captain bury Harry... which ends up being an amusing scene.
Since Jennifer seems to have known Harry, Sam tells the Captain that he will talk to her and find out whether she’s going to call the police.
Oh, the police in this small town is a part time deputy sheriff named Calvin Wiggs (Royal Dano - one of those character actors who is in every movie ever made). Wiggs gets paid by the arrest - so he’s like a commission cop, out to make a sale. When someone says they heard shots in the woods, he’s going to try to close the deal and arrest someone. He’s in direct contrast to Sam, who is all about art - not money. All of the characters are in contrast to each other in this film. We have an older couple and a young couple, etc.
When Sam slyly interviews Jennifer about Harry, he discovers that Harry was her evil ex-husband... and she clobbered him when he showed up at her doorstep. She’s sure that *she* killed Harry. Of course, the sparks of attraction fly and now Sam wants to cover up Harry’s death to help the woman he’s falling in love with.
And when the Captain goes to eat muffins at Miss Gravely’s house, he finds out why she was so casual about Harry’s dead body earlier - she’s certain that *she* killed Harry. She was taking a walk in the woods and this strange man accosted her, so she hit him repeatedly with her shoe... and he went down, dead.
CAPTAIN
A real handsome man's cup.
MISS GRAVELY
It's been in the family for years.
My father always used it... until he
died.
CAPTAIN
I trust he died peacefully. Slipped
away in the night?
MISS GRAVELY
He was caught in a threshing machine.
Now we have three possible Harry-killers (four if you add little Arnie with his toy gun) and one commission cop looking for the body.
Harry’s body gets dug up and re-buried a bunch of times, and the body is dragged all over town... ending up in Jennifer’s bathtub at one point. Eventually, they solve the Harry Problem and the film is over. The end.
Hitch Appearance: Early in the film, walking down a country road.
Sound Track: This is the very first movie Bernard Herrmann scored for Hitchcock - and it’s a fun, jaunty bit of music that keeps the tone light and frothy while they are discussing what to do with a dead guy.
Great Scenes: One of the great things in this film is the look - beautiful color photography of New England in the fall - everything is red and yellow and orange. It’s like a bunch of the best postcards you’ve ever seen.
Dead Body: Another great thing about HARRY is how Hitchcock finds the perfect framing and angle and composition to make the dead guy *funny*. Shot after shot has you *laughing* at a dead person - which is not exactly normal. The two things going against laughter from a dead body on screen is that is’s a dead body... and the actor is severely limited in delivery and gesture. So finding that one perfect angle that makes the dead body look silly is required... and that takes someone who understands film. There is a shot of the *feet* used at the end of the film (and earlier) that makes a dead guy funny as hell. Every time someone stumbles on Harry we get another funny angle of the dead guy.
Captain’s Rifle: I’ve said before that there is often a fine line between thriller and comedy, and HARRY lives on that line. There’s a great little suspense scene that is *funny* as the Captain, with his rifle, the one that shot Harry, must walk past Deputy Sheriff Wiggs... so he tries hiding it, and isn’t entirely successful. We worry that Wiggs will notice the rifle, but the Captain trying to keep it hidden is funny. Note that this is all about the situation... and the tone used in the film. Change the tone to straight thriller and you have a great little suspense scene as the suspect has to walk past the policeman while carrying the murder gun.
Harry In The Tub: Another comedy- suspense scene has Harry in Jennifer’s bathtub... just as Deputy Sheriff Wiggs shows up! At this point in the story, they’ve spent the whole day burying and digging up Harry, but Miss Gravely has decided to confess to Wiggs that she killed Harry by accident. It was really self defense, Harry accosted her. But Harry is covered with dirt. So they have put him in the tub to clean him up, and are cleaning his clothes (which ends up funny because each has a cleaning method they think works best, which leads to a debate over something trivial in the grand scheme of things)... and that’s when Wiggs shows up. Now they have to keep Wiggs from accidentally opening the door to the bathroom or finding the clothes hastily hidden around the room. All of the cast is here - our older couple, our young couple... and Arnie. And it’s Arnie who comes out of the bathroom, leaving the door open so that we see Harry’s legs hanging over the edge of the tub looking silly, and asks, “What’s Harry doing in our bathtub?” Hitchcock used keeping the dead body hidden from authorities to create suspense in ROPE, but here a similar situation is played for laughs.
Art Trips Up Artist: Wiggs has come to Jennifer’s house because of Sam’s sketch of Dead Harry... which perfectly matches the description of the dead guy the homeless guy says he got his overly fancy shoes from. Just like in a thriller where the protagonist’s life is used against him, here we have an artist’s skill at sketching someone - and making it lifelike (I guess deathlike in this case) is what leads the Deputy Sheriff to Sam - as suspect! Sam is the only person in this whole film who we know didn’t kill Harry. Now Sam must find a way to explain the sketch of the dead guy to Wiggs... and that creates comedy.
The Millionaire & The Secret: While the Harry Problem is going on, down at the General Store, a Millionaire driving by has noticed Sam’s paintings, and returns with an art critic. The Millionaire wants to buy all of the paintings - and will pay millions. But Sam has no use for money, so he makes a deal - everyone gets to make a wish, and the Millionaire will make that wish come true in exchange for the paintings. This is a great piece of cinema magic, because *you* start to think of what you might wish for. All of the wishes are the perfect mix of fantasy and practical - like Jennifer who wants a big delivery of fresh strawberries every week - even when they are out of season. The only wish we do not hear is Sam’s - he whispers to the Millionaire. This creates suspense and mystery for the rest of the film - what did he wish for?
THE TROUBLE WITH HARRY is a magical light comedy about a dead guy who brings couples together... Imagine pitching that logline! With Halloween coming up, it might be a fun film to watch (the fall setting - and it’s about a dead guy), and it’s okay for kids - though I’m not sure the pacing is fast enough for kids.
The scene of the week is a nice bit of threatening dialogue from THE THIRD MAN, and a reunion between two old friends Holly (Joeseph Cotton) and Harry (Orson Welles)... after one of their funerals. The great thing about this conversation is how charming and fun Harry makes his threats and his justifications for criminal activities. He's a bad guy you just want to hang out with.
The British Film Institute selected THE THIRD MAN as the Best British Film Ever Made - and it's hard to argue with that. It does a million things right, it has one iconic scene after another, some amazing lines (this scene doesn't have the film's best lines!) and is a great thriller with a huge action-chase set piece at the end which has been lifted in dozens of other films. If you haven't seen it - check it out. Actually filmed in the rubble of Post WW2 Vienna!
Comments section is open for discussion of the scene.
Screenplay by Samuel Taylor based on the novel by Leon Uris
The worst of Hitchcock's two cold war movies made in the mid-60s, this film was based on a big best selling beach read by Leon Uris - one of those ripped from the headlines things about the secret shenanigans behind the Cuban missile crisis, filled with as much intrigue between the sheets as behind the doors of the embassies... and a cast of thousands. And the major problem with TOPAZ is probably with the source material's scope. Novels are an entirely different medium than screenplays and the movies that come from them. There are many things that you can do in a novel that just don't work in a movie. A movie is viewed all in one gulp and we expect the story needs to flow and the pieces connected to each other. Usually the audience does what I call the “skin jump” where they imagine themselves as the lead character and live the story on screen vicariously. They imagine they are James Bond or Indiana Jones or Neo from THE MATRIX or the character looking for love in a romantic comedy.
A book is a completely different animal – though there are books that you might read in one gulp, for the most part books are read chapter-by-chapter and we put a book marker in and set it aside. We may take days or weeks or even months to read a single book. So the focus is often on the *chapters* rather than the overall story. Even if a chapter ends with a cliff-hanger, it also usually works as a self-contained unit, giving us someplace to put a book mark and set the book aside. Due to the way the story is delivered to us – chapter by chapter – a book can be episodic and doesn't need to be from the protagonist's point of view. Because we can “get into a character's head” it is easier for us to identify with everyone, even the antagonist. We can bounce from character to character without ever being pulled out of the story. So the problem with adapting some novels is that they work so much differently than a movie works that our best set is probably just to toss the book and just run with the concept... or just leave it as a book. Some things are more at home in the medium they were created in.
The big problem with TOPAZ is that there is no lead character - it bounces back and forth between characters - so most of the scenes “star” minor characters that we haven't really gotten to know. The tone also works against it – a “ripped from the headlines” story often plays like a “just the facts” documentary, which means low key drama and less focus on emotions and drama. Combine that tone with no lead character to identify with and we end up with a story that was probably exciting in book form but ends up dull on screen. The screenplay is by Sam Taylor who wrote VERTIGO, but his skill set may not have been able to tame this all- over-the-place novel. The film just isn't very good...
Experiment: A big one! The film actually has four plots - and each is like its own little story. This film paved the way for movies like PULP FICTION. Different lead characters in each story with some overlapping characters who show up in more than one story, and one character who connects all four. It's a great experiment that probably comes directly from the novel's structure – but like most experiments, it fails. But let's look at it anyway, since PULP FICTION shows that it *can* work. Here are the four stories...
In Denmark: A top ranking Russian and his family defect to the USA. In the USA: While the Cuban delegation is in town, secret documents are photographed that hint at Russian missiles sent to Cuba. In CUBA: Spies find the Russian missiles. In FRANCE: A high level spy ring in the French government is exposed.
Wow, that seems almost linear and not nearly as complicated as the movie is.
Anthology films like PULP FICTION contain more than one story, so the whole thing can't be broken up into the traditional three acts because the over-all story is actually a collection of smaller stories. Other anthology films include the horror anthology ASYLUM and the dramatic anthology O. HENRY'S FULL HOUSE, the Neil Simon comedy PLAZA SUITE and Ray Bradbury's weird tales anthology THE ILLUSTRATED MAN, not to mention Stephen King's horror anthology CAT'S EYE.
These are collections of short stories all with a similar genre or writer... but there's something else holding all the pieces together. A thematic structure that connects the stories.
Your anthology is usually going to have some sort of a common theme. A collection of short stories is collected for some reason. If you are a famous writer like Stephen King or Neil Simon, that might be a good enough excuse to lump a bunch of stories onto the same reel of film. Even if you *are* a famous writer, why are these stories all in the same collection and other stories not? In TOPAZ the stories are connected because they are all part of an over-all story in the same way an anthology movie like ASYLUM where the new psychiatrist at a mental institution interviews each of his murdered predecessor's last patients to see if he can figure out which one is the killer. Even though each segment is it's own self-contained story, they are also part of a larger story. In TOPAZ each of the four stories has a beginning and middle and end, but each is also a piece of a larger story. That story doesn't really have a traditional beginning-middle-end... In fact, Hitchcock ended up filming three different endings to TOPAZ and the test audiences hated every single one of them, forcing him to cobble together and ending from the footage on the cutting room floor.
An anthology film may be exploring love after divorce, or people facing their own mortality, or maybe flawed people searching for redemption like PULP FICTION. Each story usually explores the theme, showing different aspects of the theme or different characters struggling with elements of the theme. Basically, you are exploring the theme of redemption or mortality through different stories. One of the problems with TOPAZ is that there is no theme connecting all of the stories, so we just have some minor threads of one story's plot that just happen to connect to the next story's plot – and sometimes those threads aren't very strong.
Remember, the more specific you can be about what your theme is, the deeper you can explore it. If your theme is "love" you won't be digging as deep into the subject as if your theme is "first love" or "the end of love" or "the love of my life" or "second chances at love" or "love hurts" or "love is blind" or... well, love is a vast subject. Figure out what theory about love you want to explore in your stories and then come up with different stories that explore that theory. The PULP FICTION stories are a great example...
The first story with Travolta and Uma - what happens?
The second story with Bruce Willis as the boxer - what happens?
The third story with Travolta and Jackson and Harvey Keitel - what happens?
Now let's look at the wrap around - what is Samuel L. Jackson's life plan?
See how all four deal with issues of redemption? The problem with TOPAZ is the four stories above have no thematic connection... except maybe a character who sends another character to do something dangerous that may result in their death. Um, not as uplifting as a search for redemption. In fact, kind of off-putting. When you add that to the episodic nature of the story and the lack of a protagonist and we end up with something that is really hard to get into and really hard to like.
Okay, now let's take away Sam Jackson and Bruce Willis and John Travolta from PULP FICTION and replace them with unemotional and uncharismatic and mostly unknown actors. When a star plays a role, for good or for bad, their baggage comes with them. Though Travolta and Jackson play *killers* - both are charming guys who usually play roles that we like or admire (or are just bad-asses in the case of Jackson) so we instantly buy into them. We have liked them in past roles, so we like them in PULP FICTION the moment they walk into frame. But when Frederick Stafford (who?) walks into frame, we have no idea who the hell he is and he has to “earn” our identification... and in TOPAZ the characters are each on screen for only a brief time before we are on to the next character. Not enough time to get to know them, let alone like them or care about them or hope they resolve whatever problems we really don't have enough time to learn about.
Nutshell: In the USA segment, an American CIA agent (John Forsythe) wants to bribe the secretary (Donald Randolph) to Castro's right hand man (John Vernon) to steal his papers.... but doesn't want it traced back to the USA, so he goes to his pal in the French espionage pal (Frederick Stafford) who is having problems with his wife (Dany Robin) to get his son-in-law (Claude Jade) to provide a sketch of the secretary so that his agent (the late great Roscoe Lee Brown) whose cover is a florist, can pretend to be a reporter for Ebony Magazine in order to get past security and bribe the secretary so that he can photograph the papers. Oh, and Castro's right hand man has a head of security and the florist has an assistant and the son-in-law is obviously married to the French espionage pal's daughter and... well, there are no shortage of characters in this one segment alone! And the character who does the actual spying stuff is Roscoe Lee Brown - a peripheral character who we will never see again.
That's the big problem with the story - in the Cuba section it's not any of our main characters who sneak onto the military base to photograph the missiles, it's some characters we've never seen before who are only in this once sequence... so when they are in trouble, we don't care. They are disposable characters... and *all* of the characters in this film are disposable - they do their little bit of the story and then we never see them again.
It's like a movie about the extras instead of stars.... and there are no movie stars in the film. Zilch. Hitchcock had paid *half* the budget of his previous film TORN CURTAIN on Newman and Julie Andrews' salaries and that film bombed... so he ditched stars completely for this film, and it suffers because of it. The closest we have to a lead character is the French espionage guy - but he never goes on any dangerous missions himself - he hires someone else. Which means he ends up with soap opera plots - his marriage is in trouble, he's having an affair with an agent, his wife is having an affair with a guy who ends up being a Russian spy, his daughter and son in law have issues... All kinds of silly things that make for a great beach read, but don't work very well on the big screen.
Hitch Appearance: A nurse pushes him through the airport in a wheelchair... then he stands up and walks away.
Great Scenes: Here's where the film really dies - even the worst Hitchcock film usually has a couple of great sequences... but here we get nada. Because the tone is realistic and documentary, there are no real suspense scenes. Let's look at each of the four stories individually...
Denmark: What’s interesting to me about this segment is that it seems to be written for paranoia - but just falls flat. Only a few years later we would get some of the greatest paranoid thrillers of all time - THE PARALLAX VIEW and THREE DAYS OF THE CONDOR and MARATHON MAN - but here the paranoia just never takes hold. Would it be the shift in society after Watergate that sparked the paranoid thrillers that followed? Was this movie just made too soon?
At the Russian Consulate a Guard looks out a peephole, into a mirror - all we see is his face in the mirror... watching. Boris Kusinov, his wife and daughter leave the Consulate... the man in the mirror watching. A moment after they leave, a KGB man exits the Consulate and follows. The Kusinov family walks down the streets of Copenhagen... followed by the KGB man. When the KGB man passes a parked car, the man and woman inside get out and join him - 3 KGB Agents following the Kusinovs.
Because this is shot realistic instead of evocative and emotional, the bit where Kusinov realizes they are being followed and walk between a row of buses *just* as another bus comes to block the KGB Agents falls flat. It seems kind of clever, but there is no suspense at all. The Kusinovs think they have lost the KGB Agents and join a tour group for a china figurine factory. Then the daughter spots one of the KGB Agents... except it’s boring. The daughter splits away from her father and mother, drops a figurine so that she will be taken to the office... and uses a phone to call...
CIA Agent Mike Nordstrom (John Forsythe) - the puppet master of this story. He tells the daughter to be at a department store just before closing and they will help them get rid of the KGB followers. Forsythe is ultra-low key, completely unemotional.
When the department store closes, the Kusinov family leaves and a group of CIA Agents block the KGB Agents. Kusinov and his wife and daughter run to where Mike waits on the street with a car... but the daughter is hit by a bicycle as she is running to the car... goes down screaming in agony and *not moving* while the KGB Agents get past the CIA Agents. Is she an idiot? Probably - but this piece of manufactured suspense doesn’t work at all because Mike just grabs her and helps her to the car. It’s but it's no big deal. A little suspense generated, but it’s over in a blink.
After that they go to the airport, put the Kusinovs on a plane, fly to Washington, DC and take them to a safe house where they are debriefed. Boring on purpose - so that it seems realistic. Kusinov is a KGB Agent himself, and he’s seen many top secret US papers. The CIA boss asks Kusinov if he’s ever heard the word “topaz” used - and Kusinov says it’s a gem stone. Hey, it’s also the title of the movie, so maybe it’s important?
Just then Mike gets a call... from French spy Devereaux (Frederick Stafford - also bland) who asks him to come to dinner. Why would he ask him to dinner? Why is that an important question? But in this movie, an offer of dinner is *exciting*.
Mike and Devereaux have dinner, along with Mrs. Devereaux (Dany Robin). After she excuses herself, Devereaux says that Paris *knows* they have Kusinov - but how did they get the information? You might think this question would drive the rest of the film - but it’s basically forgotten for the middle two stories. So for *half* of this LONG 143 minute film, the whole “topaz” thing (mole in the French Intelligence Bureau) doesn’t even come up. Until the last segment, it’s just this single line - how did Paris find out about Kusinov defecting?
Now, here is the problem with this segment: not exciting, and no real story. Unlike any of the three stories in PULP FICTION, we just have stuff happening. Compare it to THE GOLD WATCH or the last story where they blow the kid’s brains all over the inside of the car and have to call Mr. Wolf for help. Those stories were *stories* and had beginnings and middles and ends. Here we just have this fragment... It was all about the Kusinovs - but we will never see them again!
New York: Devereaux and his wife go to New York on holiday because his daughter and son in law will be in town - son in law is a journalist who is covering the Cuban delegation addressing the United Nations. When they check into their hotel they find Mike waiting for them... Kusinov said that the Cubans have some top secret papers with them about some top secret thing those danged Cubans are doing... could Devereaux find out what those papers say? The son in law has sketches of everyone from the Cuban delegation and they find the sketch of the #1 Cuban Guy’s assistant Uribe - who has been known to take a bribe now and then.
This segment is all about what the Cuban Guy’s secret papers say. Oh, #1 Cuban Guy is played by a bearded John Vernon from POINT BLANK and ANIMAL HOUSE.
Now we have Mike as puppet master pulling Devereaux’s strings... and Devereaux as puppet master pulling the strings of his informant Dubois (Roscoe Lee Brown) who pretends to be a reporter from Ebony Magazine to bribe Uribe to steal the #1 Cuban Guy’s briefcase with the secret papers so that Dubois can photograph them. There’s a suspense scene that doesn’t work at all where Dubois photographs #1 Cuban Guy while Uribe steals the briefcase a few feet away, and then some suspense that doesn’t work where #1 Cuban Guy is looking for a document that may be in the briefcase... while Uribe and Dubois are in a bathroom down the hall taking pictures of the documents. The problem with both of these scenes is that they are shot blandly (to keep the film real looking) and, well, what the hell do we care about Dubois? He’s a puppet of a puppet!
#1 Cuban Guy finally notices his briefcase full of top secret papers missing and grabs #2 Cuban Guy (red beard) and they kick down the bathroom door and see Uribe and Dubois taking pictures of the documents. Dubois jumps out the window, and there is a chase... but it's not very exciting. It’s emotionless action, and part of that might be that we don’t really think of Dubois as anything more than a pawn in the story... that story experiment biting the film in the butt big time. Well, Dubois gets the camera to Devereaux during the chase - and then the rest of the chase doesn’t matter because if they catch Dubois - what does it matter? He’s a pawn, so we don’t care about him... and he doesn’t have anything important on him.
Off screen - Devereaux develops the film, meets with Mike, discovers the Russians are shipping something into Cuba that may be nuclear missiles, and Mike pulls the puppet strings again so that Devereaux will go to Cuba to investigate...
Which brings us to On Screen after all of this happens and Devereaux is having a big soap opera argument with his wife because she thinks he has a mistress in Cuba and wants him to quit his job and pay more attention to her and... well, soap opera stuff. It’s as if someone notice how completely unemotional this film has been and decided to throw in some fake emotions half way through. But who cares?
Cuba: This segment is all about photographing what is on the ship that just arrived from Russia - are they nuclear missiles?
So Mike’s puppet Devereaux goes to Cuba where he *does* have a mistress - Juanita (played by Karin Dor from the James Bond movie YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE). Juanita is *also* the mistress of #1 Cuban Guy! She gets around. She is also the head of the Cuban underground. So Mike has Devereaux have Juanita have her agents the Mendozas (middle aged husband and wife) go to take pictures of the ship. Okay - how much do we care about the Mendozas? They are only in a few minutes of this film, we have no idea who they are other than Juanita’s agents... and we kind of have no idea who Juanita is other than Devereaux’s mistress. We are so far removed from any characters we *might* care about that what happens to the Mendozas doesn’t matter.
Well, due to a bird taking their picnic sandwich (I’m not making that us) the Cuban Army spots the Mendozas and gives chase. A really short chase... and they are captured because the woman is bleeding. Not a big scene. Hitchcock talked about using blood as a trail of “bread crumbs” for bad guys in an interview about another film, but here it’s not really used here. Still a great idea, and I’ve used it (complete with a fake out trail to throw the pursuers off the trail) in a film. Here it seems like more of an excuse for capture - the agents notice the bleeding and slap the cuffs on her.
But the camera and the pictures get back to Devereaux, who leaves Cuba just as #1 Cuban Guy figures out what is going on (thanks to #2 Cuban Guy recognizing Devereaux from New York) and the Mendozas are killed, Juanita is killed, but Devereaux gets away.
The film shows nuclear missiles being unloaded from a ship... and Devereaux’s wife leaves him... and Mike tells him that there is a mole in French Intelligence named Topaz, and would Devereaux go back to Paris to flush him out?
Paris: The last segment is unmasking Topaz. From this description is may seem like these pieces all fit together - but for that whole center section of the film we have completely forgotten about Topaz, and once Topaz is unmasked... there will still be nukes in Cuba. This doesn’t resolve the problem at all.
Devereaux has lunch with French espionage agents (including an impossibly young Philippe Noiret) and when one of the French guys leaves he goes home to... Devereaux’s wife who he is having an affair with! Dunt-dunt-daaaa! And when she leaves she sees Noiret arriving (or maybe it was the other way around) and Devereaux gets his son in law to go to all of the French Intelligence guys as a journalist and say “TOPAZ!” to see if they react... and gets a reaction from Noiret... and the son in law gets captured off screen and escapes off screen and maybe even goes to Disneyland off screen, but shows up after Noiret has been murdered by Topaz and Devereaux’s cheating wife sees the sketch of Noiret and realizes she saw him at her lover’s house and that means the lover is Topaz and that means we can grab our coats and leave the cinema.
There was originally a different ending - a scene where Devereaux and Topaz (who is his wife’s lover) have a duel to the death in a sports arena... but audiences laughed at test screenings and Hitchcock had to change it to an off camera suicide. Actually, there were a couple more ending tries that failed before Hitch was forced to find cutting room floor footage and create the suicide.
Music: Maurice Jarre does an okay score that sounds a lot like his JUDGE ROY BEAN score - so maybe he recycled it.
The best thing in TOPAZ is probably the *seamless* integration of actors into a real Castro speech. It shows the power of editing to make you believe things that never happened. But this sort of trick may make the film seem “real” but doesn’t make it engaging and interesting and involving. We are not pulled into the story.
The whole film is kind of ho-hum and shows the problem with doing experiments in a script and film - most experiments fail. That’s why we call them experiments. Even though some of the experiments in Hitchcock’s films don’t entirely succeed, they usually have a handful of great scenes, or the experiment itself is interesting to watch (like in ROPE). Here we discover the importance of having a protagonist who is involved in the entire story - *the* pivotal character in each segment. He learn this because this experiment fails - four stories with four different protagonists squeezed into a 143 minute film doesn’t give us much time to care about any of these people or get to know them... so they remain chess pieces moved around the board to tell the story. The more you split the focus among different protagonists, the more you split our emotions so that we don’t have time to care.
Lancelot Link Thursday! If you believe that monkey from RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES should get nominated for best actor, here are some articles about screenwriting and the biz plus some fun stuff that may be of interest to you. Brought to you by that suave and sophisticated secret agent...
Here are EIGHT cool links plus this week's car chase...
If you got the new issue of Script Magazine, there's an excerpt from the fully revised version of THE SECRETS OF ACTION SCREENWRITING... and I fully expected it to be available by now. But things happened. It looks like it will be available in 2 weeks, now.
I also expected to have a new entry in Fridays With Hitchcock up today - THE LADY VANISHES. But I'm still working on it. I'm going to try to get it up by the end of today. Problem is - it's another monster! I'm at the intended word count right know... but only half done! So check back later today or tomorrow and you should find it.
Meanwhile - all 3 of the Blue Books are in tghe Amazon Top 10! Kind of cool.
Lancelot Link Thursday! Here are some articles about screenwriting and the biz plus some fun stuff that may be of interest to you. Brought to you by that suave and sophisticated secret agent...
Here are five cool links plus this week's car chase...
They Gave us the Business: An Interview With Margin Call’s J.C. Chandor
by Bob Verini
It was the “Masters of the Universe” who turned all Americans into high rollers during the “Me Decade,” but it was the ordinary Wall Street Joes and Janes who brought the ride to a halt. A scintillating new suspenser, Margin Call — from first-time feature filmmaker J.C. Chandor, suggests how and why they did it.
From Script to Screen: The Rum Diary
by David S. Cohen
To adapt Hunter S. Thompson’s The Rum Diary, screenwriter Bruce Robinson (The Killing Fields) had to break a promise, go off the wagon, and risk the wrath of Thompson’s fans.
Writers on Writing: J. Edgar
by Dustin Lance Black
Scribe Dustin Lance Black (Milk) bucked preconceived public opinions in his search for the “real” J. Edgar Hoover when cracking the script for his powerful biopic of the enigmatic founder of the FBI, J. Edgar.
The Last Ride: An Interview With Writer Howie Klausner
by Randy Rudder
Howie Klausner (Space Cowboys), along with co-writer Dub Cornett, remained true to history while scripting the last days of music legend Hank Williams while retaining just enough creative license to leave their fingerprints on this touching story of an icon gone too soon.
An Interview With Final Draft, Inc. Hall of Famer Steven Zaillian
by Ray Morton
This October, Steven Zaillian (Schindler’s List) was presented the Final Draft, Inc. Hall of Fame Award, adding to his already extensive list of accolades — an Oscar®, a WGA Award, a BAFTA, a Golden Globe®, a Humanitas Prize, and, just last year, the Writers Guild of America, West’s Laurel Award honoring a lifetime of achievement. Script takes a look at his inspiring career as Zaillian recounts how he has honed his craft over more than two decades of penning unforgettable screenplays.
Beyond the Page: Change of Art
by Peter Hanson
Searching for new ways to explore his favorite themes led screenwriter Joe Forte (Firewall, Say I Do) to a thriving second career as a painter.
What are Your Real Chances of Success?
by Corey Mandell
Writers know it’s not easy to launch and sustain a career. After all, the odds aren’t necessarily stacked in your favor. But, what exactly are your chances of making it in the industry? The answer might surprise you.
Goldman’s Rule on Structure
by John Buchanan
No element of a successful script is more important than a solid, effective structure. And no fundamental discipline of screenwriting is more misunderstood or misapplied. Here experts weigh in on the art of mastering structure.
10 Tips for Talking to Hollywood
by Peter Hanson
Practicing savvy techniques can help ensure you’re taken seriously by the film industry — even before you’re a working professional. Learn why the movie business is just like any other private club: Once you learn the secret handshake (metaphorically speaking), you can get in the door.
Booze Control: Terence Winter and a Sip of HBO’s Boardwalk Empire
by David Radcliff
Last year, Terence Winter (The Sopranos) traded Mafia stories for tales of gin mills and moonshine during Prohibition-era Atlantic City in the first season of HBO’s gripping drama Boardwalk Empire. The result was a smash-hit cable series that left frenzied fans immediately clamoring for the show’s second season.
Pacing Your Script
by Mike Kuciak
One of the elements that makes a professional-level script stand out is it moves in a speed and rhythm that feels like what we’re used to seeing in a theater. There are several common missteps that often contribute to making the pacing slow or uneven in a screenplay. Finding and addressing them will help turn your works into fast, fun, professional reads.
Wind From the East, Part 2: Manga and Anime
by Northrop Davis
Script further examines the growing influence of Japanese manga and anime in Hollywood and the opportunities the global medium presents to creative minds looking to start a career in film or television.
Script Secrets: Hero is Villain?
by William C. Martell
For every yin there is a yang, for every hero there is a villain … unless they are the same person. In an excerpt from his book The Secrets of Action Screenwriting, columnist and professional scribe William C. Martell explains this unique story situation.
I've written 19 films that were carelessly slapped onto celluloid: 3 for HBO, 2 for Showtime, 2 for USA Net, and a whole bunch of CineMax Originals (which is what happens when an HBO movie goes really, really wrong). I've been on some film festival juries, including Raindance in London (twice - once with Mike Figgis and Saffron Burrows, once with Lennie James and Edgar Wright). Roger Ebert talked about me with Gene Siskel on his 1997 "If We Picked The Winners" Oscar show. I'm quoted a few times in Bordwell's great book "The Way Hollywood tells It". My USA Net flick HARD EVIDENCE was released on video the same day as the Julia Roberts' film Something To Talk About and out-rented it in the USA. I've also written a whole bunch of theatrical projects that never got made (I got paid) and was stupid enough to actually *turn down* the job of adapting Dan Brown's ANGELS & DEMONS. On the personal side - I'm single and fat and 6 foot 4 inches tall. Like dogs, hate cats. Why is the blog called Sex In A Submarine?
80 minute CD packed with info on writing Film Noir and Mystery scripts. With examples from CHINATOWN to OUT OF THE PAST to DOUBLE INDEMNITY, learn how to write scripts in this dark, twisted genre.
