Mystery Man vs. Sherlock Holmes: 1-0

Last Tuesday was Australia Day, so that was my excuse for not publishing my own weekly blog post.

This week I was going to break down SHERLOCK HOLMES because you guys voted for it.

Was going to…

You’ll have to wait. I have been fighting some pretty fierce resistance: I have no desire whatsoever to see that movie again. Why? Not sure.

Possibly because it felt so damn formulaic to me?

Which is exactly what Mystery Man was writing about yesterday in his manifesto for A Screenwriting Revolution.

I have been mulling over that post and was not surprised to see it get heaps of page views but I WAS astonished it didn’t generate a more animated discussion among readers. Perhaps because MM cunningly sneaked in his opinion about Robert McKee – parts of which I share with him and other respected sources – and therefore effectively made two distinctly different points in one post. (This might have divided people about the issue more than if it had been purely about the need for a radical breach with formulaic storytelling and the tyranny of the character arc.)

I’ve replied to MM’s post in a comment and would love to see your feedback, too.

BTW, consider the SHERLOCK HOLMES breakdown postponed, not abandoned.


1 thought on “Mystery Man vs. Sherlock Holmes: 1-0”

  1. I hear you about getting away from formulaic writing BUT
    it is easier said than done. It also calls for a mastery of storytelling that few writers have.
    When unskilled or thinly skilled writers try this, we end up with movies especially
    With no story or stupid endings or endings that just stop and the audience says WTF?

    Breaking the formulaic cycle is useless unless there is a story
    Left when the smoke clears.

    Good post – keep up the good work!


Leave a Comment