Because of its incredible success, it is worth studying the Avatar screenplay and its story structure. With the top two highest grossing movies ever behind his name, writer/director Jim Cameron knows what he is doing. These are not studio-driven movies: they are personal obsessions. Titanic was Cameron’s excuse (and funding source) to continue his infatuation with the deep ocean, while Avatar is now apparently all he wants to do – ever again. The sequels Avatar II, III and IV, which the director is working on in his new home in New Zealand, are currently scheduled for 2017 and 2019.

The Avatar Screenplay

Avatar is in essence a simple ‘boy meets girl’ story within the action genre, and it covers a whole range of themes – if you want to see them – from environmentalist, anti-colonialist, to buddhist. The movie is long, but clearly not too long, telling from its success. The post-production script  was only 110p.

How come Cameron’s movies put half the planet at the edge of their seat? No-one – probably not even Jim himself – know. But I believe his understanding of mythical storytelling has something to do with it. The only way to connect with a planet-wide audience, is to tap into the mythology of the times.

The film abounds with mythical imagery and archetypes. Jakes doesn’t just have one mentor. He has three. In the Ordinary World, Colonel Quaritch gives him the life lessons; once on Pandora, Neytiri will take that function. During the transition from the one world to the next, Jake’s third mentor, the ‘threshold mentor’, is played by played by Sigourney Weaver as Grace. The last thing she says to Jake, just before the start of the Threshold sequence is “Just keep your mouth shut.” He is going into unknown territory and will have to let his mentor(s) lead him. Throughout the scene, Grace keeps giving Jake advise. “Don’t run,” but a moment later “Run! Definitely run!”

Join Cameron’s Screenwriting Class

Avatar has been lauded for its eye candy, but too easily despised for its screenplay. In my view, any critics just don’t like this type of cinema, as Cameron’s screenplays are excellent. In fact, many of his peers could learn from him. Cameron doesn’t have to deliver a script to the industry standard, or any standard for that matter. Yet his screenplays are prime examples for any beginning screenwriter: clear, tight, visual, well-formatted, and with clear, dramatic subtext written into the scenes where necessary. Don’t forget that these are action movies, after all.

Cameron has a brilliant action writing style, with ample use of double dashes (—) to build and keep suspense for the reader.

Alien for dessert

The threshold sequence opens as the crew flies into the jungles of Pandora. Have you noticed that we never see the choppers take off? We never even see them climb. In this sequence, we can only see them descend. Do you believe this is coincidence, when every Hero’s Journey begins with a descent into the Special World? I don’t.

Jake goes exploring and the tension rises gradually, as he passes his first few tests in this new territory, assisted by Grace and her team. The third test – the Thanator – chases him away from his mates, until he is completely separated, and there is no way back before nightfall. Again, all mythical imagery…

Have a look at how the Thanatos is introduced in the script:

You have got to admit: this is a fun read. James Cameron doesn’t have to sell his script as badly as you and I do. He has to raise financing, yes, but by the mid 2000’s, people were pretty confident that Cameron would deliver the goods.

“This thing could eat a T-rex and have the Alien for desert.”

Note also that in this Threshold passage, Jake loses his rifle and his backpack. These are typically tools from the Ordinary World, and they are of no use in the new world. In a mythical sense, Jake is stripped naked from all that protected him, ready to be reborn.

And guess where he ends up in the final moments of this sequence… amneotic fluid, also known as Pandora water.

– Karel Segers

[vimeo 117134935 w=960 h=540]

Download the Avatar screenplay sample here.

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

:: The Complete ‘The Dialogue Series’
:: Your Opening Scene Better Be Awesome
:: Movie Analysis: ‘Edge of Tomorrow’

Script Perfection

:: How to Take the Terror Out of Writing
:: James Cameron Talks Writing Three Avatar Sequels Simultaneously
:: Writers’ Rooms Vs. Solo Scribes: Where Does TV Creativity Flourish Best?

Pitching & Selling

:: ‘Edge of Tomorrow’ is the Kind of Sharp Action Film We Need
:: Employers Should Pay Their Interns. Here’s Why

Best of the Rest

:: ‘Edge of Tomorrow’s Doug Liman on the Blockbuster That Almost Broke Him
:: I Am A Straight White Man And I Want More Women In My Games
:: FX’s ‘Tyrant’: The Dramatic Backstory
_______________________________

With thanks to Cameron Pattison.

Jamie Campbell

Jamie Campbell is an author, screenwriter, and television addict.

Jamie is proud to be an Editor for The Story Department.

Her latest series Project Integrate is out now.

jamiecampbell.com.au

Syd Field was the first true screenwriting guru and his book Screenplay is still a standard, more than forty years after its initial publication. Syd visited Sydney only once in his life and during that occasion, he was very generous with his time and we interviewed him at the offices of Screen Australia. This interview was published in three parts, which we will republish this week.

Final Part, continued from Part 2
Interview: Karel Segers, David Trendall and Niels Abercrombie
With thanks to Screen Australia

Karel: When Avatar broke out so massively and the whole planet went to see it, still people were in denial about the craft of that screenplay. What didn’t they see?

Syd Field: They wanted some type of screenplay that was totally new and just so foreign to their normal state of consciousness like Inception. What people don’t see about James Cameron is that he does not create screenplays, he creates a cinematic experience, going to the movies is a cinematic experience.

If you don’t have them in the first 10 pages,
I’m outta there, there’s no reason I need to read more.

I talk about that in my book Going To The Movies: what is the nature of going to the movies? I mean what do we do when we sit down in a darkened theatre, and the curtains part and the screen becomes alive and we are all united in this community of emotion? At that moment we are all united and the film grabs us in the first 10 minutes. So I teach people that if you don’t have them in the first 10 pages, I’m outta there, there’s no reason I need to read more.

Karel: You pitted Inception against Avatar, how do you see it so different?

Syd Field: In Avatar I was emotionally engrossed, because of the choices the character had to make. In Inception I found this wonderful, inventive, intellectual state that I could really relate to but it was so hard-working to find out where I was.

Once I began to see that there was 3 levels of dream and he kept stating in dialogue “Well we’re in the second level and now we can get out of the dream” and so on, then it became very very interesting. I have to tell you I watched that film on the plane coming over and I was not touched, I was not moved. But Avatar I watched in 2D at home and I was moved and I was touched.

Avatar I watched in 2D at home and I was moved.

I think that is where the future is going to go, into that hidden state of consciousness which no one has explored yet. What Chris Nolan does is explore that and that becomes really exciting and new and so on. But as a film it’s pretty dull for me, a lot of great special effects, yeah a lot of interesting things once I think about them, but it was not a dynamic experience that Jim Cameron can create.

Karel: Apart from Jim Cameron, are there any other screenwriters today that are delving into–

Syd Field: I like a little film called 500 Days of Summer , that Scott Neustadter did, I like that very much. Benjamin Button was just brilliantly done. There’s a sequence I show in my workshops of the Brad Pitt character when he goes to the hospital and he sees his mother. She got her coat and she went back to get it when she opened the door and the phone rang and then she went to pick up her package, it wasn’t wrapped because the shop girl had a fight with her boyfriend. If she had gone back 5 minutes earlier that present wouldn’t have been ready and she would not have been hit by the car and her dancing career lost forever.

Karel: Like the butterfly effect.

Syd Field: Exactly. I mean that’s brilliant.

Karel: Why did Forrest Gump work and Benjamin Button didn’t?

Syd Field: Many people think Benjamin Button was too long. I would say it needed the extra length to set up the notion that as he ages he gets younger. You can’t just accept that notion with any degree of reality, you have to set that up. I don’t think it had enough moments of dynamic action or interaction between the two of them. It was more intellectual headgame whereas Forrest Gump was just there. Very emotional, very real, very authentic.

Karel: Benjamin Button needed a long setup, which becomes an issue for the screenplay’s proportions. Would you therefore say that some concepts aren’t right for film?

Syd Field: Never. I think if you want to do any kind of concept for film, you can do it. You just need to find out how. As a writer all you have to do is have the responsibility to go into your idea, because it’s probably a great one, and begin to find out various ways that you can best illustrate that dramatic premise.

I think if you want to do any kind of concept for film,
you can do it.

If you’re lazy and you don’t want to take the time and you want instant gratification like many of us do, then that’s too bad, go onto another story. Write a simple three guys hold up the Chase Manhattan bank and just do that kind of a story.

Karel: Karel: What do you think about Eric Roth’s process? Apparently he only ever writes one draft?

Syd Field: Eric lived right up the street and every night during the seventies when I was teaching he was just beginning his career, we’d get loaded, we’d talk and hang out maybe 3 or 4 times a week and he was experimenting.

Now, I can see that one draft and you change it a hundred thousand times because normally when you’re working on a draft like that I find there’s nothing I can change. It feels right so I’m not going to go in and change something that’s foreign to my sensibility so I will keep it there but will change the dialogue, change the voice, add a preceding scene, write a scene after or something like that so I will re-do that over and over.

I just kept rewriting those scenes because it worked for me…

It happened when I wrote for an Indian producer, which is now in pre-production in Mumbai. We talked about the storyline, we both agreed on the story form and unfolding of the structural dynamic and then I wrote a draft based on that structure and added 30% new scenes but after that point I just kept rewriting those scenes because it worked for me… and it worked for him as well. He did some doodling and then he sent it back to me and that was it.

Karel: How do you approach a culture like that to allow them to grow but at the same time stay true to their own.

Syd Field: It’s very difficult, cultural heritage in India, that is not easy to break through and I feel the only way I could relate to them is through their spiritual side. I’ve been a meditator for many years now, and I’ve been to India several times, and I go to an Ashram. I know some of the culture, a little bit of the culture. Even last night an indian girl said “I hate to bother you but in India we have this tradition in India where we honour the teacher where we honour them by giving a gift”, and I said “a dhakshana”, and she just was floored.

You have to blend into the dynamics of that culture, like going into a burocratic or governmental system, and find out how that system works, how you can get into that system as a flow rather than an obstacle. I had to do that when I was a single parent when I in LA many years ago. I was living with a woman, she had a nervous breakdown, she was institutionalised, the state was going to take her son away from me.

You have to blend into the dynamics of that culture,
like going into a burocratic or governmental system,
and find out how that system works.

The system went haywire but finally I worked through a number of social workers, found I had to get support and have to be able to defend your position and that’s what I did and I finally got the license to become a foster parent.

Karel: What was harder, be a single parent or surviving Hollywood?

Syd Field: I don’t think you ever survive Hollywood. I don’t know if you ever survive being a single parent! But, you know, there are great rewards and great drawbacks, but I knew it was a great teaching experience for me.

Karel: I would like to ask one final question about the craft side. Some people say ‘the more you know, the less you will achieve’ or ‘I don’t need all that formula stuff because I won’t be able to be think creatively’.

Syd Field: That’s an interesting question, I’ve learned over the years that life consists in options. We have choices to make so if you want to receive something you need to be open to receive it. Whether it’s right or wrong makes no difference. It’s just that you have to be open to receive and that was a hard thing for me to learn, how to receive.

Whether it’s right or wrong makes no difference.
It’s just that you have to be open to receive.

Through that choice of receiving everything is when my life started changing. I talk about it in my courses about the neuroplasticity of the brain: the brain is such a unique organ that it can adapt to any situation with practice and training. We have these Vets coming back from Iraq, the same in Australia and so on, they have to learn how to live again. But the brain is able, with the right practice to find a way to handle that situation.

Karel: It was a great pleasure talking to you. Thank you for sharing your wisdom with us in the Story department.

Syd Field: Thank you for meeting me, Thank you for your invitation. I have to thank Screen Australia for getting me here. I ‘ve wanted for years to come to Australia, I was never invited, so it’s a great pleasure to be here.

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

:: Hook Them From The First Line
:: A Failure To Communicate
:: Make Your Relationships in Action Films Count
:: Important Considerations When Deciding Your Core Concept
:: Get to Know Your Characters by Interviewing Them
:: Screenplay Review: Dark Harbor. Keep it Thrilling, But Make Us Believe

Script Perfection

:: Make The Evil Likable
:: Should You Read What You Write?
:: How Important Are ‘Script Rules’
:: Palahniuk Gave Me Another Rule for Write Club
:: How James Cameron Immersed Us in Avatar With a Purposeful Scene Description
:: Who Doesn’t Love a Pie In The Face?

Pitching & Selling

:: Write a Script That Will Win Contests And Help You Rule The World
:: Why Feedback is Critical for You (and Me)
:: The Definitive Spec Script Sales List 1991
:: Screenwriting News From This Week

Best of the Rest

:: ‘Where Do Ideas Come From?’
:: The Late Ray Bradbury Talks Inspiration and Advice
:: Exciting Debut Trailer For Django Unchained
:: 10 Best Changes Game of Thrones: From Book to Screen
:: Portait of Writer, Abi Morgan (Shame, The Iron Lady)
:: Balance ‘Artist-You’ with ‘Goal-Orientated-You’
_______________________________

With thanks to Jamie C.

Enjoy!

Karel

Jamie Campbell

Jamie Campbell is an author, screenwriter, and television addict.

Jamie is proud to be an Editor for The Story Department.

Her latest series Project Integrate is out now.

jamiecampbell.com.au

by Steven Fernandez

Some (if not most) local screenwriters see themselves as champions of local culture when they write loads of “G’day mate” dialogue in their scripts. They think that they are being stalwart defenders of charming “dinkum Aussie” characters when they write the same-old, same-old, rustic larrikins who are shallow and hardly evolve.

The problem with these over-done elements is that they are superficial and largely meaningless to the international audience.  And, like it or not, this audience matters a lot.  Why?  Because without overseas success an Australian film has almost no chance of making a profit.

Without overseas success an Australian film has
almost no chance of making a profit.

But what can we do to turn this around?

In short, we should stop perpetuating empty local stereotypes and start telling stories on the basis of universal themes.  Themes that everyone – including the overseas market – can relate to.  Two larrikins speaking ‘Aussie’ and drinking beer by a billabong do not cut it by this measure.  Unless, that is, there is a deeper context to this scene that is in fact universal.

For example, perhaps one of the men fears losing his wife to a more refined rival.  Or, alternatively, he has a son or daughter who adamantly does not want to carry on the family farm after he dies.  To make this second example less hackneyed, you can have the father himself conflicted about how much future his farm really has.

We should stop perpetuating empty local stereotypes and
start telling stories on the basis of universal themes

If you really must load your script with “G’day mate” dialogue, then at least have your characters deal with challenges that the world can immediately relate to.  Do not write or make a film that has little relevance to an overseas viewer.  No matter how important you think it is to put local idiosyncracies on a pedestal.

Let’s take the specific example of racism.  Suppose we want to craft an Australian story around this universal theme.  And to do so without resorting to over-done elements or shallow characters.  How could we go about doing that?

Well, I can immediately think of two different ways.

One story concept could be a nineteenth century version of Avatar.

The basic idea would be for some English infantryman to get lost in some east coast bush and then find himself rescued by the very “savages” that he has been ordered to hunt down.  You can have the familiar clash of cultures tension here, as well as the slow and grudging respect that grows within the soldier as he learns of the more elegant aspects of their culture.

To make this story less trite, you can show the indigenous culture having brutish and distinctly un-noble aspects.  For example, in the way that their women are treated.  In fact, on that basis, it is arguably more convincing that the pale-skinned stranger would actually succeed in winning the heart of the spunky huntress.
Simply because he treats her with comparative respect.

Do not write or make a film that has little relevance to an overseas viewer.

This story could be made less predictable (as well as historically more accurate) by having the local tribe lose on the whole.  Mind you, you need to be very careful when doing that.  In particular, you must still have the film end with hope rising.  So the colonial military must not win easily.  At a minimum, the tribesmen need to go down fighting heroically.  And, in addition, both the hero and the huntress must manage to escape into deeper woods.  (So that hope still rises.)

Additional tweaks could be made to this story to separate it from all the “white man goes native” films we have seen before.

Photo Credit: DaedaLusT – The U.S. Army – Dave Gray

-Steven Fernandez

What is your view on the stories told in Australian films?
Do you have an opinion? We’d love hear it in the comments!

Steven Fernandez is a writer-director of short films and theatrical shows in Sydney, Australia. He is currently writing Human Liberation – an epic novel and screenplay package set in mythic ancient Greece.

This week Sam Worthington mentioned our project in an interview to the press in the US as he is first in line to play the lead. Sam voiced the narration for the documentary from the same producer Martin Walsh and this documentary is now available for the first time at no cost, in HD video. I have embedded it on this web page.

This is a fascinating story and when you watch it, you’ll understand what an amazing opportunity it is to work on the movie, with my three co-writers James Nicholas, Paul Sullivan and Jack Brislee.

From the Long Tan web site:

A true story of 108 ordinary young Australian and New Zealand soldiers and their extraordinary courage, heroism and triumph against an overwhelming enemy force of 2,500 soldiers.

With a large budget, an internationally appealing ensemble cast featuring three generations of Australia’s best onscreen talent and the best creative team offscreen, Long Tan will be remembered for its visceral scenes of combat, its deep and broad range of characters, and the extraordinary drama of a true story.

Happy Australia Day!

If you liked this, check out more videos about screenwriting or filmmaking. And if you know of a great video on Screenwriting, let us know in the comments. Thanks!

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

Final Part, continued from Part 2
Interview: Karel Segers, David Trendall and Niels Abercrombie
With thanks to Screen Australia

Karel: When Avatar broke out so massively and the whole planet went to see it, still people were in denial about the craft of that screenplay. What didn’t they see?

Syd Field: They wanted some type of screenplay that was totally new and just so foreign to their normal state of consciousness like Inception. What people don’t see about James Cameron is that he does not create screenplays, he creates a cinematic experience, going to the movies is a cinematic experience.

If you don’t have them in the first 10 pages,
I’m outta there, there’s no reason I need to read more.

I talk about that in my book Going To The Movies: what is the nature of going to the movies? I mean what do we do when we sit down in a darkened theatre, and the curtains part and the screen becomes alive and we are all united in this community of emotion? At that moment we are all united and the film grabs us in the first 10 minutes. So I teach people that if you don’t have them in the first 10 pages, I’m outta there, there’s no reason I need to read more.

Karel: You pitted Inception against Avatar, how do you see it so different?

Syd Field: In Avatar I was emotionally engrossed, because of the choices the character had to make. In Inception I found this wonderful, inventive, intellectual state that I could really relate to but it was so hard-working to find out where I was.

Once I began to see that there was 3 levels of dream and he kept stating in dialogue “Well we’re in the second level and now we can get out of the dream” and so on, then it became very very interesting. I have to tell you I watched that film on the plane coming over and I was not touched, I was not moved. But Avatar I watched in 2D at home and I was moved and I was touched.

Avatar I watched in 2D at home and I was moved.

I think that is where the future is going to go, into that hidden state of consciousness which no one has explored yet. What Chris Nolan does is explore that and that becomes really exciting and new and so on. But as a film it’s pretty dull for me, a lot of great special effects, yeah a lot of interesting things once I think about them, but it was not a dynamic experience that Jim Cameron can create.

Karel: Apart from Jim Cameron, are there any other screenwriters today that are delving into–

Syd Field: I like a little film called 500 Days of Summer , that Scott Neustadter did, I like that very much. Benjamin Button was just brilliantly done. There’s a sequence I show in my workshops of the Brad Pitt character when he goes to the hospital and he sees his mother. She got her coat and she went back to get it when she opened the door and the phone rang and then she went to pick up her package, it wasn’t wrapped because the shop girl had a fight with her boyfriend. If she had gone back 5 minutes earlier that present wouldn’t have been ready and she would not have been hit by the car and her dancing career lost forever.

Karel: Like the butterfly effect.

Syd Field: Exactly. I mean that’s brilliant.

Karel: Why did Forrest Gump work and Benjamin Button didn’t?

Syd Field: Many people think Benjamin Button was too long. I would say it needed the extra length to set up the notion that as he ages he gets younger. You can’t just accept that notion with any degree of reality, you have to set that up. I don’t think it had enough moments of dynamic action or interaction between the two of them. It was more intellectual headgame whereas Forrest Gump was just there. Very emotional, very real, very authentic.

Karel: Benjamin Button needed a long setup, which becomes an issue for the screenplay’s proportions. Would you therefore say that some concepts aren’t right for film?

Syd Field: Never. I think if you want to do any kind of concept for film, you can do it. You just need to find out how. As a writer all you have to do is have the responsibility to go into your idea, because it’s probably a great one, and begin to find out various ways that you can best illustrate that dramatic premise.

I think if you want to do any kind of concept for film,
you can do it.

If you’re lazy and you don’t want to take the time and you want instant gratification like many of us do, then that’s too bad, go onto another story. Write a simple three guys hold up the Chase Manhattan bank and just do that kind of a story.

Karel: Karel: What do you think about Eric Roth’s process? Apparently he only ever writes one draft?

Syd Field: Eric lived right up the street and every night during the seventies when I was teaching he was just beginning his career, we’d get loaded, we’d talk and hang out maybe 3 or 4 times a week and he was experimenting.

Now, I can see that one draft and you change it a hundred thousand times because normally when you’re working on a draft like that I find there’s nothing I can change. It feels right so I’m not going to go in and change something that’s foreign to my sensibility so I will keep it there but will change the dialogue, change the voice, add a preceding scene, write a scene after or something like that so I will re-do that over and over.

I just kept rewriting those scenes because it worked for me…

It happened when I wrote for an Indian producer, which is now in pre-production in Mumbai. We talked about the storyline, we both agreed on the story form and unfolding of the structural dynamic and then I wrote a draft based on that structure and added 30% new scenes but after that point I just kept rewriting those scenes because it worked for me… and it worked for him as well. He did some doodling and then he sent it back to me and that was it.

Karel: How do you approach a culture like that to allow them to grow but at the same time stay true to their own.

Syd Field: It’s very difficult, cultural heritage in India, that is not easy to break through and I feel the only way I could relate to them is through their spiritual side. I’ve been a meditator for many years now, and I’ve been to India several times, and I go to an Ashram. I know some of the culture, a little bit of the culture. Even last night an indian girl said “I hate to bother you but in India we have this tradition in India where we honour the teacher where we honour them by giving a gift”, and I said “a dhakshana”, and she just was floored.

You have to blend into the dynamics of that culture, like going into a burocratic or governmental system, and find out how that system works, how you can get into that system as a flow rather than an obstacle. I had to do that when I was a single parent when I in LA many years ago. I was living with a woman, she had a nervous breakdown, she was institutionalised, the state was going to take her son away from me.

You have to blend into the dynamics of that culture,
like going into a burocratic or governmental system,
and find out how that system works.

The system went haywire but finally I worked through a number of social workers, found I had to get support and have to be able to defend your position and that’s what I did and I finally got the license to become a foster parent.

Karel: What was harder, be a single parent or surviving Hollywood?

Syd Field: I don’t think you ever survive Hollywood. I don’t know if you ever survive being a single parent! But, you know, there are great rewards and great drawbacks, but I knew it was a great teaching experience for me.

Karel: I would like to ask one final question about the craft side. Some people say ‘the more you know, the less you will achieve’ or ‘I don’t need all that formula stuff because I won’t be able to be think creatively’.

Syd Field: That’s an interesting question, I’ve learned over the years that life consists in options. We have choices to make so if you want to receive something you need to be open to receive it. Whether it’s right or wrong makes no difference. It’s just that you have to be open to receive and that was a hard thing for me to learn, how to receive.

Whether it’s right or wrong makes no difference.
It’s just that you have to be open to receive.

Through that choice of receiving everything is when my life started changing. I talk about it in my courses about the neuroplasticity of the brain: the brain is such a unique organ that it can adapt to any situation with practice and training. We have these Vets coming back from Iraq, the same in Australia and so on, they have to learn how to live again. But the brain is able, with the right practice to find a way to handle that situation.

Karel: It was a great pleasure talking to you. Thank you for sharing your wisdom with us in the Story department.

Syd Field: Thank you for meeting me, Thank you for your invitation. I have to thank Screen Australia for getting me here. I ‘ve wanted for years to come to Australia, I was never invited, so it’s a great pleasure to be here.

_______________________________

With thanks to Sol.

Enjoy!

Karel

_______________________________

COMING SOON to the Story Department:

• The next week articles

With thanks to Sol.

Enjoy!

Karel

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

The scene in this clip is a trademark Cameron setup.

Remember the unobtainium – ‘floating rock’ scene in Avatar? That is a case of exposition that some love and others loathe.

This scene from The Abyss sits around about the same time into this movie and sets up an equally important concept, which will be crucial in the movie’s climax.

The scene is in my view one of the most supreme examples of exposition. It combines character and tension with essential story information.

It shows how James Cameron has always been a tremendously gifted screenwriter.

Enjoy!

In fact – and contrary to the unobtainium scene – Ron Cobb confirmed to me that the fluid breathing system is not sci-fi but fact.  Hippy’s rat is submerged in actual fluid breathing system liquid and in this scene it is really breathing underwater. Apparently, Beany the rat survived for quite a while afterwards and died of natural causes.

(On the contrary – as you might have guessed – in the movie’s climax Ed Harris did not breathe liquid. The glass of his suit was tinted amber to suggest it was filled with the liquid.)

_____________________________________

Check out this video link…

_____________________________________

For more videos about screenwriting or filmmaking, look in the sidebar or click on the category link under the title of this post.

If you know of a great video on Screenwriting, let me know!

Just complete the form below and send me the link.

Thank you!

Karel

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!