Then I asked you for exceptions, i.e. strong Inciting Incidents that are actions by the protagonist.

Now have a look at the first three responses I received: 1.) THELMA & LOUISE, 2.) PULP FICTION and 3.) KING LEAR.

Look at them again and see if you remember 1) who causes the inciting incident and 2)how does the character end in the story?

The answer is baffling.

1. Louise kills a man. The end: Louise dies.
2. Vincent kills Marvin. The end: Vincent dies.
3. King Lear excludes Cordelia. The end: King Lear dies.

“If the protagonist triggers the story, he/she dies at the end of the story”.

Story rule or rubbish?

Either way, for these three striking examples, Tom, Brett and Margaret each earned themselves three months Premium Subscription. Well done.

Recently UNK blogged about Inciting Incident (another exciting coincidence: one day earlier, someone hit my web site using the key words inciting incident definitions.) and among his favourite I.I.’s he lists COOL HAND LUKE.

Here we go:

4. Luke cracks open parking meters. The end: Luke dies.

OK. It is getting quite convincing now, if you ask me. Does it mean that EACH TIME a protagonist incites the story, we have a down ending? Probably not. Perhaps the readers of this blog just have a slight predilection for somber movies. ;)

Anyhow, I found the examples you sent to me striking.

Here are some more exceptions to the “event-not-action” rule I received later:
– Simon: “Not my kind of thing really, but what about Ferris Bueller’s Day Off?”
– Simon D.: “What about any story where the protagonist activates something, like the Princess and the Frog in the pond, Pandora’s Box etc”
– Jim: “If Russell Crowe is the Protagonist in ‘Yuma’, then it happens in that.”
– Chris: “3 Movies that the protagonist is responsible for the inciting incident: Scarface, June, O Brother Where Art Thou.”
– Robert: “Chow Yun Fat’s Hitman character accidentally blinds a girl during a hit on a triad boss that he is carrying out. Therefore he himself sets in motion the “inciting incident” and for the rest of the film sets out to redeem himself and possibly help the bling girl regain her eyesight by doing more “hits” to pay for the operation!”

Thank you all! It was a great exercise.


WHERE TO START

As to screenwriting theory, there are so many sources of conflicting advice it is difficult to know who to listen to. Each new piece of advice can be as convincing as the one that came before it. What should you do?

How do you choose who to listen to?

Do you take the word of

• the most influential,
• the most popular,
• the most convincing,
• the loudest,
• the most confident,
• or maybe what they perceive to be the safest.

As a person who dishes out daily doses of advice I am as guilty as anyone out there who tries to offer opinions of what you ‘should’ do.

The fact is, at worst people do not have any idea what will work for you, and at best they can only rely on their own experience. Certainly I give you the benefit of what I have learned through my work, but you still have to work out what will work for you.

I am still learning, things still take me by surprise. You may have read me say before, I am of the opinion you can learn something from every person you meet. Your job is to not blindly accept what you are told but collate it, cogitate on it and apply it in your own unique way.

Work out the approaches that suit you best, that fit what you are trying to achieve and how. Which stories resonate with you, and enthuse you, separate out those that leave you cold.

You can never take the same journey twice, your journey is yours and yours alone, but you can learn about possible pot holes and beauty trails from people who have traveled a similar path before you.

Here I have to confess something: all the above (except the first four words “As to screenwriting theory”) was taken literally from Chris Garrett’s blog on blogging. When I read it, I found it so completely true for pretty much any field of learning, including ours.

My own little piece of advice on where to start learning?

Just write, every day, undisturbed by what you learn or what people say. While you are doing so, go through the list below. And take your time.

1. Read McKee’s STORY, or better: listen to the audio book. You won’t learn too much about the craft, but you’ll get a feel for what you’re in for. If you have less time and you want to be fashionable, read Blake Snyder’s SAVE THE CAT.

2. Take a craft workshop. Mine, Hauge’s or John Truby’s. Read the stuff they have published.

3. Watch movies a second time to break them down into acts, sequences and plot points. Dozens of them, until you start seeing the light.

4. Carefully choose a story consultant you can trust and you like to work with. You will continue to learn, but now specifically about your own strengths and weaknesses.

At this point, you will have found your vision and direction. You will see which of the savants out there fall within your view on storytelling. Read their books, join their seminars.

Finally, you are on your own, confidently.

And while you just continue writing, your craft will improve, and improve, and improve…

CONFIDENTIALITY KILLED THE CAT

My apologies if you were re-directed here from the newsletter. The article will be re-published at a later stage.

WHERE ARE YOU GOING? YOU AND YOUR HERO?

It has been the core of my consultancy and teaching: the protagonist needs a clear and present desire.

Nothing new, though, Michael Hauge has been teaching this for much longer. In the context of Michael’s visit to Australia in two months, I interviewed him and the full text will soon be available to my clients and for subscribers of The Story Dept. Here’s an excerpt:

Karel: Two problems I often find in screenplays by inexperienced writers are 1) the choice of protagonist and 2) the key qualities of the protagonist. Would you mind giving us an insight?

Michael: In almost every case where the problem seems to be choosing the wrong protagonist, the writer isn’t clear about what the story concept is, about what the hero’s visible goal is.

In other words: if the writer is operating under the belief that they just need to portray characters and show them going through a situation in their life and let’s see what happens, then that‘s the quicksand they have stepped into. Because movies are about heroes who are pursuing specific visible goals.

It is about stopping the serial killer, about escaping from the panic room or from N.Y. or from Alcatraz, about winning the love of another person or winning an athletic competition. Or it’s about getting the buried treasure. But the goal must be specific, must be visible, must have a clearly defined end point.

The first part of the full interview is now online on the Premium Ed. As usual, it will be visible for a few days only. After that you will need a subscription to see it. Part two and three will follow over the next few days, as well as a podcast (audio) version of the telephone interview.

NO POV, NO PLAY

The RATATOUILLE DVD shows has 1 (one) deleted scene. It is a long, uninterrupted travel from a wide establishing shot of the Paris skyline down to street level, through the Auguste Gusteau restaurant and ending on Remi, our hero.

The shot could have been spectacular, reminding of the opening shot of TOUCH OF EVIL and its pastiche in THE PLAYER.

Brad Bird’s commentary talks about the reason why it was cut and it is simply: Point of View.

The natural question that would occur is “Why would you cut this spectacular shot?”, because it is obviously great. “I want to see that film!” Well, I feel that way, too.

The problem, once you get passed the initial sort of rush of seeing this very elaborate shot that shows you a lot of different things in one shot and very impressively, is that it is no character’s point of view.

It is just a sort of God-like shot where you’re presented this whole world and it is spectacular and there have been many fine shots like that – Touch of Evil being one – that were great but I felt that this is Remi’s movie and it needed to be Remi’s perspective.

And I want to know the emotions that lead up to Remi looking into the kitchen. I don’t just want it laid on a platter, you know, just cut to Darth going “You’re my son, Luke.”

We should be with Remi when he has that moment. We should know how he is experiencing it and what is he feeling when he is experiencing it. And you kind of aren’t, this way.

It did lay everything out, but I don’t think that it took the audience with it.

-Brad Bird

Brad Bird’s reasoning confirms what I have written about ‘omniscient POV’: it is weak, or worse, it doesn’t work.

Movies are inherently about empathising, even identifying with characters.

When you step out of the protagonist’s POV, it should be to shift to another POV, never to take an omniscient POV.

Omniscient POV is devoid of emotion.

Read some more about Point of View 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 Lives of Others
(Das leben der anderen)
(Germany, 2006)
Written and Directed by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck

-by Stuart Voytilla

The Lives of Others is a story about transformation and learning how to do the right thing. This film also reveals the interdependence of physical and emotional journeys that characters often take. In some stories, the protagonist may initially enter the journey anticipating an emotional change or elixir; romance and romantic comedy are two genres that regularly celebrate a character’s willing pursuit of emotional growth. For other journeys, the Hero may not initially realize that he or she needs to change; their view of life may be clouded by a flaw or misperception, or even restricted from seeing life’s potential benefits. This protagonist begins a trek determined to accomplish a physical goal, unprepared that this pursuit will transform him or her in an emotional and significant way. Such is Wiesler’s Journey in The Lives of Others.

Captain Wiesler initiates his journey to reveal playwright Georg Dreyman as an enemy of Socialism. This is Wiesler’s physical goal, and one that he willingly pursues as part of his Ordinary World as a loyal agent of East Germany’s secret police, Stasi. Initially a dispassionate observer, Wiesler becomes an active participant in the lives of Dreyman and Christa-Maria, and his loyalty to his career and government crumbles. His transformation becomes a poignant metaphor for the collapse of the German Democratic Government. In Act III, the fall of the Berlin Wall signals a resurrection for Germany and for Wiesler; the former agent is honored by Dreyman for his service as a ‘good man. ‘

Since movies allow us to show character, revealed by action, we can appreciate von Donnersmarck’s choice to mark Wiesler’s transformation by his profession. Initially, Wiesler’s job is secluded in an attic, with earphones attached to his head, listening and monitoring the secrets of others. He sacrifices his career for the lives of Georg and Christa-Maria. Still under the Stasi, Wiesler steams envelopes. But with Glasnost, Wiesler leaves the basement steaming room, and soon serves his country and his countrymen as a mail carrier. No longer the isolated revealer of secrets, he now walks the streets as a deliverer of people’s privacy.

But Wiesler isn’t the only character that grows in this story. He becomes a catalyst that triggers transformation in the others that he observes. Notably:

• Georg Dreyman goes from celebrated and loyal playwright of the GDR to activist against the system.

• Christa-Maria transforms from loving girlfriend to tragic informant.

As you explore this movie, also consider how art, or lack of it, defines a character’s life:

• Art provides contrast between protagonist and antagonist, for example, Wiesler’s austere apartment versus Dreyman’s richly decorated flat.

• After seven years of being blacklisted, Jerska questions his life for he’s no longer allowed to create his art. How can he be a director without a play to direct?This realization pushes him toward suicide.

• Wiesler’s supervisor, Grubitz, relishes that their interrogation practices effectively destroys the creative life of the artist.

• To show his allegiance to the system, Wiesler threatens to destroy Christa-Maria’s ‘life’ in the theatre. This pushes her to reveal the hidden typewriter. However, she realizes that by informing upon her boyfriend she may have retained her life on stage, but she’s destroyed the creator of her stage world.

• After Christa-Maria’s death, Dreyman can no longer write. When he discovers that his apartment was wired, and that Wiesler protected him, Dreyman elevates Wiesler’s life into art with his published work ‘Sonata for a Good Man. ‘

JERSKA AS MENTOR

Jerska becomes an important mentor for both Dreyman and Wiesler. Jerska is Dreyman’s master director, but he’s been silenced by an informant. As Wiesler observes Dreyman, he too becomes influenced by Jerska:

• Wiesler questions the evidence that destroyed Jerska’s career and life.

• Wiesler ‘borrows’ the book of Brecht that Jerska was reading at the party, thus bringing this inspirational art into his own apartment.

• Wiesler cries as Dreyman plays the ‘Sonata for a Good Man’, a birthday gift from Jerska and the inspiration for Dreyman’s final dedication to Wiesler’s sacrifice.

And of course, we must consider the significance of Jerska’s gift as it helps structure the story.

JERSKA‘S GIFT

Jerska’s gift of the ‘Sonata for a Good Man’ marks the turning points of the Journey of Transformation for both Dreyman and Wiesler. This birthday gift was intended to push Dreyman to act as the ‘good man. ‘The unwrapping of the gift is a Turning Point from Act I to Act II in Dreyman’s journey, and sets up the larger Journey’s Crossing of the Threshold.

Jerska’s suicide forces Dreyman to do the right thing, and compose the article for Der Spiegel. The Sonata’s title resonates during the scene in the tavern when Wiesler helps Christa-Maria, and she thanks this ‘good man. ‘Their encounter and Jerska’s suicide/Dreyman’s decision to write the article are significant during the Journey’s Ordeal or Midpoint.

During the Journey’s Road Back Sequence, and the Plot Point from Act II to Act III, Wiesler acts as the ‘good man’ and steals the typewriter. During the story’s final moments, the Sonata’s title becomes the title for Dreyman’s book that celebrates Wiesler’s sacrifice, and completes Wiesler’s Resurrection as a ‘Good Man. ‘

THE JOURNEY

In the following Journey Breakdown, I’ve presented some of the key story moments with an interpretation of their representative Hero’s Journey stage. The focus here is on Wiesler’s Journey. I encourage you to also look at this story through Dreyman’s journey, through his eyes and his actions.

Note that in Act IIA and IIB, I’ve emphasized two Ordeals. Since Wiesler travels a physical and emotional Journey, he experiences two central ordeals, one for each Journey. Each Ordeal brings a Reward but these Rewards collide, as Wiesler must choose between his loyalty to country, and his allegiance to his new friends, Dreyman and Christa-Maria.

Act I: The Journey‘s Separation

‘Will Captain Wiesler reveal Dreyman as an enemy of Socialism?’

Captain Wiesler serves as a loyal agent of the Stasi, determined to reveal the enemies of Socialism. (Ordinary World)

A former classmate and now head of the Culture Department at the State Security, Grubitz assigns Wiesler to monitor playwright Georg Dreyman, and his girlfriend-leading lady Christa-Maria. (Call to Adventure)

Wiesler’s team bugs Dreyman’s flat (Ordinary World), and he inhabits the attic for monitoring. (I see this sequence as another reflection of Wiesler’s Ordinary World. The unexpected problem that disrupts Wiesler’s Ordinary World arrives with the mysterious car. )

Wiesler observes a mysterious car drop Christa-Maria off at Dreyman’s flat, and Wiesler notes the license number. (Call to Adventure)

Wiesler listens to Dreyman’s birthday party, and observes that Dreyman does not speak up against the GDR. Later that night, Dreyman opens his gift from Jerska, piano music titled ‘Sonata for a Good Man. ‘He and Christa-Maria make love. (This rich sequence weaves several stages. Notably, it is a Refusal of his Call to reveal Dreyman as an enemy. But it’s also a Meeting of the Mentor, an invitation for Wiesler to be influenced by Dreyman’s world and his love shared with Christa-Maria. )

Grubitz informs Wiesler that the mysterious car belongs to Minister Hempf. And Grubitz warns Wiesler to strike this information from the record, for they are not allowed to monitor fellow members. (This Meeting of the Mentor is a significant Plot Point that initiates Wiesler’s Crossing of the Threshold. Wiesler realizes that he’s being used by Hempf to get rid of a rival, and Wiesler questions his loyalty. )

Wiesler completes the Crossing of the Threshold when he rings the doorbell, prompting Dreyman to discover Christa-Maria emerging from Hempf’s car. (This signals a moment of decision and action on the part of Wiesler. He’s longer a passive observer, but an active participant in the lives of Dreyman and Christa-Maria. )

Act IIA: The Journey‘s Descent

‘Will Wiesler help save the relationship between Dreyman and Christa-Maria?’

Wiesler’s Crossing of the Threshold has unsettled Wiesler’s personal world and his professional loyalty. His observations and actions are beginning to affect him and his world; these series of events Test his transformation.

Having observed Dreyman’s and Christa-Maria’s night of pain and shame, Wiesler’s doesn’t know how to feel and finds comfort with a prostitute. (Test)

Later, Wiesler enters Dreyman’s flat and takes his Brecht book, bringing this literature and art into his own apartment. (Test)

Hidden in the attic, Wiesler listens to Dreyman’s phone call announcing the suicide of Jerska. Dreyman mourns his friend’s death by playing the ‘Sonata for a Good Man’. Wiesler listens and cries. (Approach to the Inmost Cave)

When a boy at an elevator confesses his father’s disdain of the Stasi, Wiesler stops himself from demanding the father’s name. (Test)

With growing pressure from Hempf, Grubitz pushes Wiesler to ‘find something’ on Dreyman. Grubitz warns Wiesler of a rendezvous planned between Hempf and Christa-Maria that will jeopardize her relationship with Dreyman. (Approach to the Inmost Cave)

The Story’s First Ordeal works as a ‘death’ that affects several characters and their goals. Mourning Jerska’s death, Dreyman fears he’s lost his passion for writing. (An Ordeal)Christa-Maria prepares to leave Dreyman to ‘see a classmate’. Dreyman speaks his suspicions that she is going to sleep with Hempf. Dreyman asks her to trust herself as an artist, and to stay. But Christa-Maria questions both of their ‘needs’ for Hempf and the system he represents. She may sleep with Hempf for her art, but as the GDR’s favorite playwright, hasn’t Dreyman been sleeping with the system as well?Wiesler observes this Ordeal – a ‘death’ of their relationship, of their art, and of their allegiance to the system. Wiesler is interrupted by his surveillance replacement before knowing the outcome of this Ordeal. But Wiesler can’t simply walk away from these lives, and slips into a nearby tavern where he has an accidental encounter with Christa-Maria. Boldly Wiesler complements her as a great artist. She thanks Wiesler, telling him that he is ‘a good man. ‘Wiesler’s actions prompt Christa-Maria to rush back to Dreyman. The celebration of their love also gives Dreyman renewed strength as a writer. (The Resurrection of the Ordeal)

Act IIB: The Journey‘s Initiation

‘Will Wiesler protect his job and reveal Dreyman’s disloyalty?’

The primary Reward earned from the First Ordeal is Dreyman’s renewed passion for his writing. But his writing is now directed against the system that has destroyed his friend, Jerska, and threatened to destroy Christa-Maria. Dreyman prepares to write an essay revealing that the GDR has been hiding statistics of the high rate of suicide, especially amongst the artists.

This is also the Reward that Wiesler has been seeking to confirm his initial goal: to reveal Dreyman’s disloyalty.

Dreyman brings his friends back to his flat to make their plans. He assures them that his flat isn’t bugged. They Test his theory speaking openly about secretly bringing a relative across the border. Wiesler prepares to call the Border Agent, but doesn’t go through with it. (Wiesler’s monitoring Dreyman’s ongoing plot Tests the Stasi agent’s two conflicting goals: to reveal Dreyman as traitor; and to protect Dreyman as artist – to help him become the ‘good man’ that Jerska had hoped Dreyman would become. )

Wiesler’s transformation as a ‘good man’ is rebuffed when he discovers that the person he helped cross the border was the editor of Der Spiegel. Furthermore, Dreyman’s arrogant shouting in defiance of the system pushes Wiesler to compile the evidence for Grubitz. (Approach to the Inmost Cave)

Wiesler meets with Grubitz where his two conflicting goals collide head-on. Holding his sealed report in his hand, Wiesler listens to Grubitz praise their interrogation system that successfully destroys the artist. Witnessing his mentor’s arrogance, Wiesler keeps the evidence and requests that they step down their operations against Dreyman. (The Second Ordeal)

Wiesler’s action allows Dreyman to complete the anti-GDR article, which is published in Der Spiegel. Dreyman and Christa-Maria make love, while Hempf sulks without a bedmate. But these Rewards threaten Wiesler’s career; Grubitz begins to question Wiesler’s loyalty.

With pressure from Hempf to destroy Christa-Maria’s theatrical career, Grubitz interrogates her and forces Christa-Maria to name Dreyman as the author of the Der Spiegel article. Monitoring from the attic, Wiesler listens to the search of Dreyman’s flat. He now knows that Grubitz is suspicious of Wiesler, but Wiesler’s relieved when the search team fails to find Dreyman’s typewriter. Grubitz pressures Wiesler to interrogate Christa-Maria, and prove that he is still on the ‘right side’. Wiesler faces Christa-Maria and threatens to destroy her art and her ‘life’ unless she can reveal the location of the typewriter. She gives up the location, but Wiesler defies Grubitz and returns to Dreyman’s apartment to take the evidence. Christa-Maria’s revelation is the story’s Plot Point or moment of greatest despair – and it initiates the Road Back sequence.

Act III: The Journey‘ Return

‘Will Wiesler recognize himself as a Good Man?’

The Road Back continues at Dreyman’ flat. As Dreyman arrives, Wiesler slips away with the typewriter. Armed with his search team, Grubitz personally uncovers the hiding place, but it’ empty. During this ‘death’ moment, Dreyman confirms Christa-Maria’ deception. And she realizes that she has lost love and life. Wiesler witnesses her tragic exit.

Without the damning evidence of the typewriter, and with the death of Christa-Maria, Grubitz closes the investigation against Dreyman. But Grubitz makes Wiesler suffer for his sacrifice, and demotes him to years of service steaming open envelopes.

This Road Back sequence is a Resurrection for Wiesler’ Journey to do the right thing, and become a ‘good man’. But this doesn’t complete his transformation, and his Journey. He has sacrificed his career to protect Dreyman, and now recognizes how the system destroys its people. Wiesler’ Resurrection will be complete when he’ honored for his sacrifice, and receives the assurance that indeed he is a ‘good man’. That assurance comes from Dreyman who takes over the Journey in Act III.

Christa-Maria’ death and the fall of the Berlin Wall have silenced Dreyman’ voice as a playwright. After an encounter with Hempf, Dreyman confirms that his flat was wired. He investigates the agent in charge of the surveillance and discovers that agent ‘HGW XX/7′ was his protector. Dreyman and Wiesler have now switched positions within the story’ journey. Dreyman observes his ‘guardian angel’ from a distance and finally writes his ‘report’ – a book celebrating Wiesler’ sacrifice. This Resurrection sequence restores Dreyman’ faith in humanity, his passion to write, and elevates Wiesler’ life to a work of art.

Delivering mail, Wiesler passes a store window and discovers the display of Dreyman’ Elixir ‘Sonata for a Good Man. ‘Wiesler reads the dedication, and purchases the gift. ‘It’ for me. ‘ (Return with the Elixir)

FADE OUT.

Stuart Voytilla

Stuart Voytilla is a writer and producer, known for Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (2002), The Death of Poe (2006) and The Sorcerer of Stonehenge School (2005).

write-brain.com

Michael Hauge closes the first of his six story stages with it, at the 10% point of the story (10mins in a 100mins movie).

Paul Gulino sees it as the end of the first of a typical eight sequence movie. Christopher Vogler says:

The hero is presented with a problem, challenge, or adventure to undertake. Once presented with a Call to Adventure, she can no longer remain indefinitely in the comfort of the Ordinary World.

This moment better be BIG. If it ain’t, it may go unnoticed and the audience will still be waiting for the story to start.

Michael Tierno, in Aristotle’s Poetics for Screenwriters says:

It’s a self-initated action, a virtual “big bang” that sets the entire plot in motion, that can be committed by either the protagonist or antagonist, and that is an act of pure will.

According to Robert McKee:

The INCITING INCIDENT radically upsets the balance of forces in the protagonist’s life.

And later he says:

The protagonist must react to the Inciting Incident.

I wish authors would develop a common terminology but, alas, they don’t. Here is Linda Aronson’s approach:

Early on in the film there will be an event which changes the normal scheme of things and forces the protagonist in a new direction, effectively starting the story. This is called a catalyst or disturbance.

Linda Seger writes in her book Making a Good Script Great:

The catalyst is the first main “push” that gets the plot moving. Something happens, or someone makes a decision. The main character is set in motion. The story has begun.

Next: Inciting Incident: Key Aspects and Examples >>

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!

It is not enough to know and understand Syd Field’s set of phrases, as some hot shots may only be familiar with McKee. Unfortunately different people have different definitions for the exact same term.

This is my attempt to broadly define the most essential notions, informed by the best known theories, but influenced by the need to make them useful to the screenwriter rather than the analyst. Some theories are great to analyse finished films, but useless when you are stuck in your second draft. I hope that my definitions will help in identifying problems.

I will occasionally add to the list and modify definitions. If you disagree with anything or the explanation is not clear, feel free to flag this to me.

Normal Life

Also: opening, ordinary World, normal life, prologue, Journey Stage One.

Inciting Incident

Also: disturbance, catalyst, beginning

First Act Turning Point

Also: act one turning point, first threshold, first turning point, plot point one.

Mid-Point

Also: mid point reversal, point of no return, mid turning-point

Crisis

Also: ordeal, low point

Second Act Turning Point

Also: plot point two, crossing the 2nd threshold

Climax and Resolution

Sequence

Also: journey stage, block

Plot Point

See: Plot Point

Point of View

See: Point of View

From the above follows:

Act One

Some people will say this is the

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!

]]> https://www.thestorydepartment.com/glossary/feed/ 0 112