Then there’s the fall which has its own setup, rising action, and climax. A second protagonist comes in who brings them down: Henry Tudor, Mark Anthony, or Macduff. The latter half is this protagonist destroying the first.

You could think of this as a 2-act chiasm or a 6-act circle of two 3-act plays. Not all of his plays follow this (Othello is 3-act where there climax is right at the end, it’s closer to standard movie structure). But I think it’s a matter of picking what’s best for your story. Some films like Full Metal Jacket are really two separate movies.

Thanks!

Act 1: Normal World, Curveball taking them in a new direction, declare false goals.
Act 2: New world, new cohorts, continuing to go after “false goals”, stakes raise (end of act 2 comes the midpoint that changes everything)
Act 3: Same false goals (but now with higher stakes and a new plan to get them) OR New, more truer goals emerge. False high point, followed by lowest point. (end of act 3 is low point)
Act 4: After low point, finally realizes that false goals haven’t been what they really want. Discover “true” goals. Throw off the old world. On to a new future.

The only scripts I study are comedic ones. When I say “false” goals and “true” goals, I have noticed that many characters spend most of the movie pursuing goals that they are lying to themselves about, or that they realize later they don’t really want.

Take 40 year old virgin for example:

Act 1: Normal World (introvert virgin working at best buy) Curveball (co-workers find out he’s a virgin), False goal established: Get him laid. .
Act 2: New world (the world of trying to get laid), new cohorts (his sex-advice co-workers who are now friends), and continuing to go after “false goal”(each co-worker has their own way of trying to teach him, failing each time); stakes raise/end of act 2 (he meets a girl he actually likes)
Act 3: Same ostensible false goals (have sex) but now with higher stakes (he really likes her, doesn’t want to lose her), emerging of a truer goal (get this woman he likes to like him) and a new plan to get there (25 dates before sex). False high point (“yay, we get to have sex now!”) Rapidly followed by lowest point (they fight, he runs away, crashes, she finds out he’s a virgin)
Act 4: After low point, finally realizes that goals haven’t been what he really wants (he doesn’t just want to lose virginity). Discover “true” goals (he wants real love with her). Throw off the old world (his virgin self). TRUE high point (gets married, has sex). On to a new future (“let the son shine in).

Take Book Of Mormon for example:

Act 1: Normal World (mormons getting ready to go on mission) Curveball (popular price is paired up with the biggest nerd…and their location is UGANDA), False goal established: (do something “incredible” / have a “best friend”)
Act 2: New world (Uganda) new cohorts (other mormons, village people), continuing to go after “false goal”(try to convert villagers with “All American”); stakes raise (nearby general is threatening circumcision to all girls) /end of act 2 midpoint (price leaves, cunningham now has to “man up” and take over)
Act 3: Same ostensible false goals (get the villagers to convert) but now with higher stakes (the general is threatening them) and deeper meaning (if they believe the book, they will band together) and a new plan to get them (lie about the book of mormon, so that they believe and band together against general). False high point (“we are africa”) followed quickly by lowest point (the elders discover the lies and disown them) end of act 3 is low point = it was all a lie, they are disowned from churh
Act 4: After low point, finally realizes that false goal (convert villagers) hasn’t been what they really want. Discover “true” goals (spread message of hope and strength. REALLY do something incredible by overcoming the general) . Throw off the old world (book of mormon). On to a new future (book of arnold).

Legally blonde follows this structure (original false goal is to get her ex boyfriend back. Final true goal is to save her client and become a great lawyer). Maybe it doesn’t always work, but so far, all of the classic comedies I love seem to follow this 4-act structure.

I guess I should come up with my own diagram.

The way I see the 2-Act structure is more like a 3-act structure with a promoted MPR (Mid Point Reversal). That second act still needs its own climax and resolution.

In other words: a 2-Act structure doesn’t deliver different stories, it is just a different way of looking at the same, in order to help write that dreaded mid section of the story.

I hope this helps…

Thanks Tony. The idea is not to worry while you’re writing. I love your metaphor!
When you fire again, I’m assuming you aim based on the outcome of the first shot. ;)