<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Structure: Michael Clayton	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/</link>
	<description>Story. Screenplay. Sale.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 17 Nov 2024 22:38:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Karel FG Segers		</title>
		<link>https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-381913</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Karel FG Segers]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Nov 2024 22:38:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/michael-clayton/#comment-381913</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-381904&quot;&gt;Sebastian&lt;/a&gt;.

Hi Sebastian - thank you so much for your kind words.
The article is now 16 years old, and I have to say that my analysis today would look very different.
I don&#039;t think at the time I fully understood the 8-sequence method.
Only yesterday I mentioned the film to my son, so I think it is time to revisit it.
Expect an updated article soon!
Cheers,
Karel]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-381904">Sebastian</a>.</p>
<p>Hi Sebastian &#8211; thank you so much for your kind words.<br />
The article is now 16 years old, and I have to say that my analysis today would look very different.<br />
I don&#8217;t think at the time I fully understood the 8-sequence method.<br />
Only yesterday I mentioned the film to my son, so I think it is time to revisit it.<br />
Expect an updated article soon!<br />
Cheers,<br />
Karel</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Sebastian		</title>
		<link>https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-381904</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sebastian]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Nov 2024 13:55:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/michael-clayton/#comment-381904</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Dear Karel,

I read those mean comments and just have to respond. I have been a working screenwriter for twelve years now, and I really like your analysis. I made one myself for a project I&#039;m working on right now, and it matches yours almost 1:1. And it doesn&#039;t matter whether the first sequence is a flash forward or not. Screen time is screen time. Thanks for your effort and don&#039;t let those kids troll you. 

Best
Sebastian]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Karel,</p>
<p>I read those mean comments and just have to respond. I have been a working screenwriter for twelve years now, and I really like your analysis. I made one myself for a project I&#8217;m working on right now, and it matches yours almost 1:1. And it doesn&#8217;t matter whether the first sequence is a flash forward or not. Screen time is screen time. Thanks for your effort and don&#8217;t let those kids troll you. </p>
<p>Best<br />
Sebastian</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Karel Segers		</title>
		<link>https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-342268</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Karel Segers]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Sep 2017 08:07:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/michael-clayton/#comment-342268</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-342267&quot;&gt;Gary Kennedy&lt;/a&gt;.

Hi Gary,

A few clarifications:

I never read the script. This is actually a breakdown of the film. I&#039;m not sure how close it follows the script.

At the time, I was responding to the Variety review. Meanwhile, the audience has decided that the film worked. If the budget was indeed only $25m, it must have gone into profit at an accumulated worldwide B.O. gross of $93m.

This very crude breakdown is 10 years old, and is definitely up for a review. Most likely I&#039;ll have a different take on it. Gilroy&#039;s Nightcrawler is one of my all-time favourite scripts.

Also, this is not &#039;my theory&#039;. The terminology was borrowed from Campbell/Vogler.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-342267">Gary Kennedy</a>.</p>
<p>Hi Gary,</p>
<p>A few clarifications:</p>
<p>I never read the script. This is actually a breakdown of the film. I&#8217;m not sure how close it follows the script.</p>
<p>At the time, I was responding to the Variety review. Meanwhile, the audience has decided that the film worked. If the budget was indeed only $25m, it must have gone into profit at an accumulated worldwide B.O. gross of $93m.</p>
<p>This very crude breakdown is 10 years old, and is definitely up for a review. Most likely I&#8217;ll have a different take on it. Gilroy&#8217;s Nightcrawler is one of my all-time favourite scripts.</p>
<p>Also, this is not &#8216;my theory&#8217;. The terminology was borrowed from Campbell/Vogler.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Gary Kennedy		</title>
		<link>https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-342267</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gary Kennedy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Sep 2017 05:17:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/michael-clayton/#comment-342267</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Wow, this is amazingly obtuse. If the screenplay of Michael Clayton doesn&#039;t fulfill your theory of good screenwriting, then your theory must be seriously flawed.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, this is amazingly obtuse. If the screenplay of Michael Clayton doesn&#8217;t fulfill your theory of good screenwriting, then your theory must be seriously flawed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Karel Segers		</title>
		<link>https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-341863</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Karel Segers]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Aug 2017 07:05:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/michael-clayton/#comment-341863</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-341855&quot;&gt;Michael Damore&lt;/a&gt;.

Thanks for your note, Michael.
Are you interested in a constructive discussion about this?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-341855">Michael Damore</a>.</p>
<p>Thanks for your note, Michael.<br />
Are you interested in a constructive discussion about this?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Michael Damore		</title>
		<link>https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-341855</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Damore]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Aug 2017 20:42:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/michael-clayton/#comment-341855</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[You are so wrong.... you have no idea of structure. Beyond belief -- and words -- that you published this as your version of the structure of Michael Clayton.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are so wrong&#8230;. you have no idea of structure. Beyond belief &#8212; and words &#8212; that you published this as your version of the structure of Michael Clayton.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Rosalyn Williams		</title>
		<link>https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-340360</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rosalyn Williams]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2017 19:07:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/michael-clayton/#comment-340360</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[What&#039;s the  logline for michael Clayton?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What&#8217;s the  logline for michael Clayton?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: paul graunke		</title>
		<link>https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-16</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[paul graunke]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Jun 2013 22:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/michael-clayton/#comment-16</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Re the criticism: &quot;Michael’s relationship with his family, both as an irritated brother and a single dad — occupy time at the outset but really don’t lead 
anywhere.&quot;

I demur.  It dramatizes another aspect of Michael&#039;s failed life.  He&#039;s failed professionally (to make partner), in business (the restaurant went belly up) and his personal life has gone to hell in a hand basket (wife divorced, got the kid, etc.)

In terms of his personal life, he and his corporate adversary Karen share a secret symmetry in the sense of their hollowed out personal lives.  They made a Faustian bargain with the corporate world for the sake of their careers.  In Act 1, it&#039;s been a the bargain that has paid off for Karen. Not so for Michael. 

And the connection with his irritated cop brother does lead somewhere.  It&#039;s who he needs to get into Arthur&#039;s apartment, to get sprung from jail, to get his revenge on Karen (and redeem himself).]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re the criticism: &#8220;Michael’s relationship with his family, both as an irritated brother and a single dad — occupy time at the outset but really don’t lead<br />
anywhere.&#8221;</p>
<p>I demur.  It dramatizes another aspect of Michael&#8217;s failed life.  He&#8217;s failed professionally (to make partner), in business (the restaurant went belly up) and his personal life has gone to hell in a hand basket (wife divorced, got the kid, etc.)</p>
<p>In terms of his personal life, he and his corporate adversary Karen share a secret symmetry in the sense of their hollowed out personal lives.  They made a Faustian bargain with the corporate world for the sake of their careers.  In Act 1, it&#8217;s been a the bargain that has paid off for Karen. Not so for Michael. </p>
<p>And the connection with his irritated cop brother does lead somewhere.  It&#8217;s who he needs to get into Arthur&#8217;s apartment, to get sprung from jail, to get his revenge on Karen (and redeem himself).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: ozzywood		</title>
		<link>https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-15</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ozzywood]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Jun 2013 22:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/michael-clayton/#comment-15</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-14&quot;&gt;paul graunke&lt;/a&gt;.

Thank you Paul, you&#039;re spot on. I need to rework this one (and some of the others published here before).]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-14">paul graunke</a>.</p>
<p>Thank you Paul, you&#8217;re spot on. I need to rework this one (and some of the others published here before).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: paul graunke		</title>
		<link>https://www.thestorydepartment.com/michael-clayton/#comment-14</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[paul graunke]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Jun 2013 22:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/michael-clayton/#comment-14</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The &quot;Ordinary World&quot; at the FADE IN: is anything but. It&#039;s a teaser, a flash forward, to grab viewer interest with a (literally) explosive hook. Repositioned chronologically, it comes around 90 minutes into the story --- the pivot into Act 3.

(For another example of a flash forward teaser see the pilot episode of Breaking Bad. Same plotting technique.)

After the explosion, the the story commences in the ordinary world (4 days earlier) and moves forward chronologically.

Subtract about 15 minutes from all the time stamps after the teaser, and l the plot beats  unfold like a conventional plot.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8220;Ordinary World&#8221; at the FADE IN: is anything but. It&#8217;s a teaser, a flash forward, to grab viewer interest with a (literally) explosive hook. Repositioned chronologically, it comes around 90 minutes into the story &#8212; the pivot into Act 3.</p>
<p>(For another example of a flash forward teaser see the pilot episode of Breaking Bad. Same plotting technique.)</p>
<p>After the explosion, the the story commences in the ordinary world (4 days earlier) and moves forward chronologically.</p>
<p>Subtract about 15 minutes from all the time stamps after the teaser, and l the plot beats  unfold like a conventional plot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!--
Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: https://www.boldgrid.com/w3-total-cache/?utm_source=w3tc&utm_medium=footer_comment&utm_campaign=free_plugin

Page Caching using Disk: Enhanced 

Served from: www.thestorydepartment.com @ 2026-01-31 16:37:19 by W3 Total Cache
-->