The ice cream vendor disappeared. Not because we didn’t like ice cream any longer. No, cinemas made more money selling popcorn instead, as the markup of popcorn is 900-1200%.

Then the intermission disappeared.

Couldn’t we wait for the second half? Well, the truth is: exhibitors earned more by adding an extra session. Suddenly, movies just seemed a whole lot longer… except those with a strong mid point.

If you study that halfway point in the greatest movies, you will learn that it is almost always the most dramatic moment, second only to the story’s finale.

You will also find that the mid points from different films have a lot in common.

The Mid Point Pit Stop

Often around the halfway point, the action moves to a location that looks very different from the rest of the story. It feels refreshing, a little like an intermission.

• At the mid point of The Untouchables, we leave Chicago temporarily, and instead of the urban cityscape, we are now watching a mountainous view near the Canadian border.
• At the mid point of One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest(*), we leave the confined space of the mental asylum to go on a boat for a short fishing trip. This gives us a strong sense of freedom, an important theme in the film.
• At the mid point of The Queen, we leave London for a short stay at Balmoral in the Scottish highlands. Here, the Queen seems to enjoy her relief from the pressures that are haunting her in London.
• This one may sound a little far-fetched but I still like it… At the mid point of Die Hard, John McClane throws a body through the window, and for the first time since he entered the Nakatomi building, we are getting some fresh air through the hole in the window.

(*) During Milosz Forman’s commentary on One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest, he explains that he considered cutting the fishing trip from the movie. He ended up keeping it, because the shorter version actually felt longer.

This is one of the functions of the mid point: it gives the audience a break, before venturing into what is often the darker half of the film.

This break is mostly an emotional high point. The hero achieves something important. It may even seem as if they have reached the story goal. If they haven’t, at least it seems within reach.

Then, however… the tide turns.

Reversal Of Fortune

Rapidly, the upbeat vibe changes, as the hero learns that things are not what they seemed. Instead of celebrating a victory, they realise that the target has moved. The road is still a lot longer and more dangerous than was initially hoped. The mood drops.

In many great movies, the Mid Point Reversal (MPR) consists of these two distinct beats: an upbeat moment of victory/achievement, followed by a downbeat moment of realisation/disappointment. This mood flip forms only the first aspect of the MPR: the Reversal of Fortune.

As a result of this Reversal of Fortune, the character shows a Reversal of Action/Approach. Because it is such a critical part of well-told stories, I will focus on this in a little more detail in a later article.

Meanwhile, see if you can identify this +/- reversal around the halfway point of your favourite movies.

-Karel Segers

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!

In a previous life I was a radio producer and film festival presenter. Once I interviewed the director of Glengarry Glen Ross, which you might expect to be playwright David Mamet. After all, Mamet has directed most of his own screenplays. Glengarry, however, was helmed by James Foley.

Mamet – Elephant In The Room

We didn’t talk much about the movie’s theme. The topic of conversation was David Mamet, given this was an adaptation of a very significant Mamet play.

From what Foley told me, I suspect Mamet must have been a strong presence during production. Foley stopped short of saying that Mamet de facto co-directed.

My first exposure to Mamet was at the 1986 Venice Film Festival. Two great movies saw their world premiere on the Venetian Lido: De Palma’s The Untouchables and Mamet’s own remarkable directorial debut House of Games.

House of Games‘ deals with ‘living life direct‘, as opposed to vicariously. The heroine experiences her existence through her clients, until she embarks on a journey of change.

Mamet cast Joe Mantegna in the role of the story’s villain, after the actor won a Tony for his performance as Ricky Roma in the Broadway production of Glengarry Glen Ross. His terrific performance in House of Games instantly put Mantegna on the map as a screen actor.

Glengarry Glen Ross went on to win the Pulitzer Prize for drama. However, it would not be adapted for the screen until nine years after its massively successful 1983 world premiere in London’s West End.

The Metaphor

Glengarry Glen Ross shows a handful of real estate agents, struggling to save their jobs on a rainy night in Chicago. All but one are vying for the ‘Glengarry leads’. Each has their own strategy of chasing the precious lead cards, which are only handed out to ‘closers’.

What is this story really about? What is its theme?

It shows the mechanics by which the rich only get richer, as Aaranow (Alan Arkin) states. Perhaps this was Mamet’s stance at the time, and it surely makes sense for the real estate world, where it takes steel balls to survive.

Perhaps Glengarry Glen Ross is simply a microcosmos of the American capitalist society? This theme would be illustrative of Mamet’s socio-democratic views at the time. He left those ideas behind, and famously converted to the right in 2008.

To me, Glengarry is – like every truly great story – a metaphor for life. The ‘leads’ are ‘the cards’ we are dealt. Some accept them, and make the best of it. Others keep fighting them, trying to change what they cannot – and ultimately ending up exhausted. Or worse.

Deadline – Theme – Stakes

The inciting incident of the movie underscores this theme. In a spectacular monologue, the agents are dealt not the precious lead cards, but a deadline. Now it is closers vs. losers.

Baldwin’s lines imply that this is about a lot more than some real estate. Where Little Miss Sunshine would become a more lighthearted take on the winners vs. losers theme, in Glengarry we go the heart of darkness. The stakes are sky high. Lives depend on these cards. As a result, the players will show us their darkest side.

Why is this the inciting incident? Because it confronts the players with a challenge they have never faced before. It also puts them in a situation where they must act. How they will each respond, will be seen in the next act. Note that screen act structure is quite different from theatre structure, and in this respect Glengarry is compositionally somewhat of a hybrid.

The Scene

The stage play was so short, Mamet needed to extend it for the movie. He added material, including this early scene with a character that didn’t originally exist. Alec Baldwin was cast to play the role of a character who only refers to himself as “Fuck you! That is my name!” The super salesman tells our anti-heroes in the first act that they will have to close – or lose their jobs. Baldwin embraced the material so vibrantly, it became a career-defining moment.

Al Pacino does not appear in the movie’s most important scene. His character Ricky Roma does his own thing. He doesn’t need to take lessons from Head Office. Putting him in the scene would have diminished the dramatic impact of the speech, while Al Pacino’s screen presence would have undermined Baldwin’s.

It was a bold move to keep the movie’s biggest star out of its strongest scene. Yet it resulted in an instant classic moment, full of dialogue fireworks, and rich in theme. It also confirmed that Mamet once was not only a great playwright, but an equally brilliant screenwriter.

-Karel Segers

https://ozzywood.wistia.com/medias/ush8p7akqm?embedType=iframe&seo=false&videoFoam=true&videoWidth=640

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!

by Karel Segers

Ironically, the success of House of Games and his ensuing directing career might have been the nail in the coffin of Mamet’s screenwriting genius. Never did he reach the level of e.g. The Verdict again. Something Wag The Dog may have fun, but ridiculously overrated to my taste – and certainly not a huge success, given its star power.

I believe Brian De Palma has never reached the standard of The Untouchables again, either. So let’s reminisce about the good times.

UNTOUCHABLE

The Untouchables is a classic in every sense. Masterful storytelling, lush art direction, outstanding cinematography and solid performances, most of all by De Niro in his landmark role as Al Capone. Some people argue that Morricone’s outdated music score ruins a contemporary viewing of the film, but I don’t mind the added touch of melodrama. (De gustibus et coloribus… I also love Bowfinger) The Untouchables is textbook example of storytelling in the tradition of Aristotle, with a strong Hero’s Journey framework. It shows again how powerful movies pay off on these essential story elements.

THEMATIC QUESTION: WHAT ARE YOU PREPARED TO DO

Our movie moment follows right after the hero’s lowest point, when Eliot Ness’ mentor Malone is found murdered by Capone’s right hand guy Frank Nitti. The scene is a screenwriting master class in designing “The Ordeal”. Malone hands Ness two gifts before passing away: in the outer journey he gives Ness the time tables of the train Capone’s bookkeeper will be on and for the inner journey he reminds Ness “What are you prepared to do?” The question refers to an earlier scene where Malone explained that Ness can only succeed ‘the Chicago way’, which is basically an upgraded version of ‘an eye for an eye’. The Ordeal scene is preceded and followed by a brief shot showing Capone enjoying a night at the opera (the Shadow’s high point).

(I can’t seem to get the audio in sync with the picture – apologies for this)

THE MOMENT: CHICAGO TRAIN STATION STEPS

You may have noticed that most mainstream movies have a scene of travel or movement at the opening of Act Three. In this healthy tradition, David Mamet wrote a train chase in the script but De Palma had splurged most of the budget by the time they had to film it, so he had to improvise.

For years De Palma had toyed with the idea of paying homage to Sergei Eistenstein’s ‘odessa steps’ scene from Battleship Potemkin. Now the circumstances were handing it to him on a golden plate. When Ness (Costner) and Stone (Garcia) enter the train station and descend the steps, two marines cross them, going up. At this moment, every true movie buff subliminally makes the connection. Of what follows, most people will remember the spectacular Mexican standoff, but what makes this scene really work is the suspense leading up to it.

De Palma had been doing Hitchcock style exercises for over twenty years and here we see him at full maturity. The scene runs for six minutes before the first bullet is fired and another two before the standoff is fully established. A great example of a beautifully built, meaty scene with a totally satisfying climax. The purest of cinema.

– Karel Segers

(first published for ScripTips)

Karel Segers is a producer and script consultant who started in movies as a rights buyer for Europe’s largest pay TV group Canal+. Back then it was handy to speak 5 languages. Less so today in Australia.

Karel teaches, consults and lectures on screenwriting and the principles of storytelling to his 7-year old son Baxter and anyone else who listens.
He is also the boss of this blog.

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!

:: Interview with A Nightmare on Elm Street’s Eric Heisserer.

:: Put lumps in those throats! Getting your viewers emotionally involved.

:: Protocol: how to dump your agent.

:: Missing: villain. Writing a story without an antagonist.

:: Fight Club’s Jim Uhls on writer’s block.

:: A sensitive formula: blending physical and emotional journey.

:: Money matters. Selling a treatment.

:: Expository scenes, when too much is too much.

:: Writing fight scenes, some things to know.

_______________________________

With thanks to Sol.

Enjoy!

Karel

Some people speak of the Point of No Return. Because every strong plot point is in essence a point of no return, I don’t find this approach helpful. Both the Inciting Incident and the 1st Act Turning Point are almost always strong points of no return.

Mid points are often at a location very different from the rest of the movie (One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest, The Untouchables), near rivers (The Queen, The Untouchables), bridges (A Fistful of Dynamite, The Untouchables) or cliffs (Butch & Sundance, The Incredibles, Forgetting Sarah Marshall). The ‘cliff mid points’ often include a jump into the unknown, showing the Hero’s newly found Faith.

At first sight, in the Untouchables there seems to be one Mid Point, mathematically placed right in the middle of the movie at 58mins (out of 112), at the end of Sequence D (fourth out of eight).

At closer inspection, there is a little more to it.

If Ness’ outer objective in the first half of the movie is ‘to catch Capone’, then this changes once they get hold of the bookkeeper’s ledger. Now the objective is ‘to catch the bookkeeper’ in order to decode the names of the recipients of money. The overall objective remains the same: ‘to protect the people of Chicago from violence by bringing Capone to justice’.

The Inner Journey is more complex, because two themes are at play: Ness’ struggle to stay within the law and his naivety around the effects of his type of work on a family life.

At the end of Sequence D, Ness shows he is willing to go beyond ‘The Law of the Land’ and adopt ‘The Chicago Way’. He shows this by replying to the mountie who disapproves of his methods by saying “Yeah? Well, you’re not from Chicago.”

A stronger mid point is yet to follow. Note that exactly halfway Sequence D, Ness kills one of Capone’s men.

Exactly halfway the next sequence, one of Capone’s men kills Wallace. The two killings form the transition into the second, darker half of the movie.

Both ‘families’ (Capone’s and that of the Untouchables) lost a member and they’re now both ‘Touchable’.

Soon after this reversal Hero and Shadow (the antagonist) will face each other for the first time, on the stairs at Capone’s hotel.

To summarise, the following reversals happen around the movie’s mid point:

Change of Ness’ approach:

1. Bring Capone to trial
2. Bring the bookkeeper to trial

Change of Ness’ morality:

1. The Law of the Land
2. The Law of Chicago

Change of energy, mood:

1. Untouchable
2. Touchable

These are not mere points of no return, they are complete reversals.

So, what’s there to learn?

The second act is by far the hardest to write, we all know that.  Creating a strong mid point or mid sequence is the first way of dealing with this.  You have successfully chopped the story into smaller, more manageable bits: you will only have to bridge story sections of 25-30mins (two sequences) maximum.

Although this may seem a purely structural device; it is not.  It is impossible to create a meaningful mid point without knowing exactly what your story and characters are about.  I really believe that once you have truly nailed the mid point (or sequence), your story will have its foundation and the other sequences will fall into place much more easily.

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!