Robert McKee went in the right direction with his statement “If the scene is about what the scene is about…” But great writing does not stop at avoiding to ‘write on the nose’.

We just need to go a little further.

I saw Easy Rider for the first time a long time ago. In fairness, I was never too keen on seeing it again. My recollection of it was slow, self-indulgent, and celebrating a culture I am not a part of.
Recently I studied thresholds, those sequences in movies where characters are on the move, as a metaphor of their psychological progress. I wanted to understand what this legendary road movie had to say about that.

Arthouse With A Story

Easy Rider was released in the year Nixon took office. Close to fifty years later, it is baffling how little has changed in the grand scheme of the American socio-political landscape. Easy Rider feels like an end-of-an-era movie, and today we are there again. While all hope is lost, the masses are watching Captain America and preparing to vote for Trump.

The first seven minutes of Easy Rider show what anti-heroes Billy and Wyatt (Captain America) are all about: two seemingly careless bikers who finance their freedom with the occasional drug deal.

When the opening credits roll over Steppenwolf’s Born To Be Wild, the film is already breaking new ground, as soundtracks had never consisted of existing song compilations. Against some spectacular cinematic backdrops – trademark of the movie and its cinematographer Laszlo Kovacs – the sequence launches the first minor threshold, leading us into the story.

And this may be an arthouse pic, but there is a clear visible goal: to make it to New Orleans in time for Mardi Gras.

Of course this is not the type of film that keeps you hooked because of its riveting plot. What matters lies under the surface.

No Subtext Without Serious Digging

After the hippies pick up a hitchhiker, and fill up with gas, we’re in for some serious musical sightseeing. Over The Weight by The Band, the bikers cruise through Monument Valley, where they hole up for the night.

After the beauty, fun and freedom of the riding scenes, Wyatt now seems reflective; perhaps even tormented.
Billy asks “What’s the matter?” Wyatt replies: “I’m a little tired.” Later he says “I’m just getting my thing together.” I believe that’s exactly what this movie is about.

In the non-verbal, conventional sense , what Wyatt is saying here is “I don’t really want to talk with you any further right now.” The real subtext of the scene will only transpire later in the movie, when a pattern is established.

That pattern: Wyatt is tired of this life. He is ready to make new choices. Always being on the run from society may not be the solution for him. To me this seals the first act of this film; we know the destination, and we understand the psychological challenge the hero is facing.

America Getting Its Thing Together

Easy Rider is Captain America’s quest for identity and purpose, and by association, this is a metaphor for the nation’s journey towards redemption. Metaphors are part of the deeper subtext of a story.

When Billy laughs irreverently, the hiker tells him to be ‘a trifle polite’, as “the people this place belongs to are buried right under you.” In a non-verbal sense, the hitchhiker doesn’t like Billy’s attitude.

On a broader subtextual level, this may be why the hiker has fled the city. Because it builds on the burial grounds. His remark to Billy may also be criticising the nihilist attitude of those who attack everyone and everything, but don’t have a valuable alternative to offer.

Billy has long lost any values he might have had. He now floats from one high to the next, ignorant and numb. Without Wyatt, he is nobody. Wyatt seems to be more aware. He wasn’t born to follow – tons of subtext in the music, here – and he is still hopeful for that redemption. If only he might find himself somewhere along Route 66.

Spoiler alert: he won’t.

What Subtext Really Is About

Father Henry Fonda didn’t understand what his son Peter was going on about with Easy Rider. This is not your regular Hollywood picture. Its meaning doesn’t lay bare on the surface. But it’s there for those willing to look.

A scene early in the movie sets it up. Billy (Hopper) and Captain America (Peter Fonda) invite themselves for lunch with a farmer and his large family. “My wife is catholic, you know.” Wyatt commends the rancher on the fact that he’s built a good living for himself.

The contrast between the rancher and his family, and the free-riding bikers who haven’t achieved anything tangible is stark. For Wyatt, this is a call to adventure. Perhaps it is a solution to his empty soul.

“No, I mean it, you’ve got a nice place. It’s not every man that can live off the land, you know. You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud.”

And although Captain America is literally saying what he means, this line of dialogue provides true subtext. It is the meaning of the movie, and we are not (yet) aware of it. It will gain greater depth as the movie rolls on, and if we make an effort to look beyond merely non-verbal communication, we will slowly become aware of it.

Wyatt is ready to seek a purpose. He even considers settling. Easy Rider is the journey he goes on to figure this out.

-Karel Segers

https://ozzywood.wistia.com/medias/eo7ckdll5v?embedType=iframe&seo=false&videoFoam=true&videoWidth=1080

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 Trevor Mayes

Prom Date

Here’s a quick metaphor to illustrate what I’m trying to say…

STUDENT

Is my prom date’s dress hot or what?

CONCERNED FRIEND

I guess. But dude, your date is a chimp.

STUDENT

Okay now you’re just being rude.

CONCERNED FRIEND

No, I mean your date is literally a chimpanzee. Does your dad work for the circus or something?

STUDENT

The zoo.

CONCERNED FRIEND

Ah.

Awkward silence.

STUDENT

Smokin’ hot dress though, right?

It doesn’t matter how hot your scenes are, if your script is a chimp!

5 Things

Here are five BIG things you should sweat over, long before worrying about things like correct formatting, clever descriptions or upping the tension in a particular scene:

Concept

Concept is probably the most important aspect of your script. If you have a fantastic one, readers/producers will be more likely to forgive minor problems.

When you tell people about your concept, do they ooh and ahh? Do their eyes light up? If it’s a comedy, do they smile or laugh? Do they immediately connect with the material. Make sure you have a winning concept before you start writing your screenplay.

True story. I once had a woman pitch me the following sole movie concept: “It’s about a black Hollywood producer who has a small dick.” FAIL!

Concept is probably the most important aspect of your script.

Character Motivations

By the time a reader reaches the second act of your script, he/she should be able to answer at least two fundamental questions. The first one is: “What does the protagonist want?” Make sure the answer to this question is clear and primal.

“My protagonist is just kinda going with the flow at this stage of the script.” FAIL!

Rooting Interest for Your Main Character

The second question a reader should be able to answer by the start of the second act is: “What do I want for the protagonist?” Depending on your story, this may, or may not, be the same thing as what the protagonist wants. But either way, at this stage, the reader should be rooting for your main character(s).

Moreover the reader should have an implicit understanding of where the story is going, and care about that direction.

READER: “I hate the protagonist, so I don’t care if he finds his lost doughnut… not that I would have been at all interested in that anyway.” FAIL!

At this stage, the reader should be rooting for your main character.

Overarching Story

Have you provided a solid structure and an engaging plot?

Do cool or powerful things happen in your story? Have you fulfilled the promise of the premise? Have you executed a story that maximizes the potential of the concept? Thrilled the audience? Shown them something they’ve never seen before, or in a way they’ve never seen it?

“Yes, it’s a global apocalypse movie, but we learn what happens through first person accounts only. It takes place entirely in one interview room.” FAIL!

Theme

Is your movie about something? The movies that leave an impact on us are the ones that teach us something, or, at the very least, have something to say that will resonate with audiences. Something specific.

“The theme is danger.” FAIL!

***

Do you have all of these bases covered in your script? Or are you taking a chimp in a pretty dress to prom?

Any “big stuff” you would add to the list?

-Trevor Mayes

Trevor Mayes is a screenwriter, script consultant, and cat whisperer who absolutely loves movies.

Through his website Scriptwrecked he has helped dozens of screenwriters, at all levels, improve their craft.

Photo Credits: Stock XChng

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

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!

by Steven Fernandez

A second story concept about racism could be set in a contemporary urban setting.

Suppose we have a migrant family.  A family where both parents work unglamorous jobs and the three children are expected to be responsible and self-sufficient enough to mind the household after they come home from school.  The eldest child, in this case, plays the role of deputy parent. 

He or she may not necessarily be comfortable with that role, but practical considerations force him or her to assume it.  Of the younger children, one could be studious while the other could be artistic or disabled (or both!).

Suddenly we have three characters (the children) who are ripe with possibilities.  In each case they can experience the ugliness of racism in somewhat different ways.  For example, the eldest child could be torn between his or her duties as housekeeper, versus the deepening desire to date someone who happens to be of the “wrong” race.

While the studious one could be constantly teased as being a “nerd” and/or as being “un-Australian” for not playing football or cricket.  And, of course, the artistic one could be branded as a freak in the schoolyard.

Everyone on this planet can relate to each of these characters and their individual plights.  So this story passes the universality test.  Furthermore, every one of these characters display indications of deeper layers within themselves.

Everyone on this planet can relate to
each of these characters and their individual plights.

So there’s already the potential for viewers to grow to care about all three of them as their deeper layers unfold.  In short, we have a completely viable second story about racism.

Now what is true for racism is true for other universal themes as well.

So the lateral thinking and creative process I have shown for racism can equally apply to writing interesting stories that are based on other themes.  Themes such as sexism, ecology, capitalism, the alienation of the individual in an overly commercialised or homogenised society, and so on.

The key thing is to think outside the square of pre-established conventions.  And, especially, not to be lazy and unimaginative with respect to your characters.

The key thing is to think outside the square of pre-established conventions.

In summary, then, Australian film stories need to be universal instead of parochial.  Whatever “G’day mate” dialogue they may have should be pertinent to conveying a story that the world can relate to. 

And there are no excuses left for not being able to write an Australian story on a universal theme in an interesting and different way. 

Making our films universal will substantially improve their quality.  Both artistically and commercially.

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

-Steven Fernandez

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.

_______________________________

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!

With thanks to the wonderful Sol.

Enjoy!

Karel

_______________________________

With thanks to Sol.

Feel free to give your feedback in the Questions and Comments below.

Enjoy!

Karel

In 2008 the festival potential of my own short animation Tin Can Heart – wr/dir. by Rod March – vaporised when Wall-E appeared weeks after the completion of our film. The similarities were striking…

Still, I was pleased to see we were thinking along the same lines of the master storytellers of Pixar.

I’ve seen UP twice now and I find it thematically one of the most powerful movies of recent times.

Perhaps it resonates with me because I feel I’m at the Mid Point of my own life.

“A life, Jimmy, you know what that is? It’s the shit that happens while you’re waiting for moments that never come.” – Freamon (From: The Wire)

SPOILER ALERT – FULL STORY ANALYSIS

What follows is a rough but complete analysis, based on notes made in the dark of the cinema. Not all turned out legible afterwards…

At the bottom of this post I touch briefly on the Inciting Incident (I.I.) or Call to Adventure of UP.

Here’s another great movie that seems to fit itself wonderfully into an eigh-sequence Hero’s Journey.

Enjoy!

A. Prologue: Dreaming of Adventure (10mins)

00.00 TITLES
01.30 Little Carl in cinema: ‘Spotlight on adventure!’
02.00 Explorer Muntz found to be cheating.
02.30 Muntz off to capture the monster & clear his name.
03.30 Carl follows a girl’s voice into a house.
04.30 Ellie: You & me are in a club together now! Badge.
05.00 Getting the balloon down – Carl falls…
05.30 Carl in bed – a balloon with a message floats in.
06.00 Ellie’s Adventure Book: I’m going where he’s going…
07.00 Carl & Ellie are getting married.

08.30 Ellie wants lots of children but can’t have any.
09.00 Saving up for the trip. Misfortune keeps striking.
10.00 Carl sees Ellie’s childhood photo, time is passing.
10.30 Carl buys plane tickets; Ellie gets sick & passes away.

ACT ONE

B. Ordinary Life in an Ordinary World (10mins)

11.30 Carl’s life alone: daily routine.
13.30 House is surrounded by a building site.
14.00 Mail: ‘Shady Oaks’ retirement village.
15.00 “You can have my house when I’m dead!”
15.30 Russell knocks: Need assistance today?
17.00 Carl sends him off: Find the snipe. -I’ll find it!
17.30 Mailbox damaged: Carl injures a man with his cane. (I.I.)
18.30 Court summons: ‘Shady Oaks’ guys will pick you up.
19.00 Carl is packing. Crosses his heart.
20.30 Meet you in a minute: a last goodbye.
21.00 Balloons: UP (PP1 – Crossing the Threshold)

Threshold Seq.: Up & away to South America (7mins)

21.30 House takes off: Postcard from Paradise Falls!
22.00 Flying through the city.
24.00 Knocking – Russell: “Please let me in”

25.30 Russell steering – sees cumulo-nimbus… 26.30 Storm, causing damage. Carl knocked out.

ACT TWO

C. Moving House across the plateau (12mins)

28.30 Carl wakes up. Russell: I thought you were dead!
29.30 Descending, landing the house in the fog.
31.00 Fog clears: Paradise Falls on the other side!
33.00 I’ll assist you over there. Only 3 days of helium.

34.30 Dogs POV, after bird. Hearing aid noise stops them.
35.30 Russell’s wilderness toilet: dig hole before or after?
36.30 Russell has found the snipe – does it like chocolate?
37.30 Bird likes Russell. Russell wants to keep it: ‘Kevin’.

D. Dug and other dogs (9mins)

40.00 Voice: Are you OK over there? Dug.
41.00 Dog is trained. Speak! “Hi there.”
42.30 Other dogs and Alpha dog
44.30 Muntz: locate them. The dogs leave.
45.00 Trying to get rid of the bird: escape.
46.30 Setting up the tent in the rain.
47.30 Russell tells of his absent father and foster mum.

E. Entering the Spirit of Adventure (12mins)

49.00 Kevin calling (can’t read my notes ;)
50.30 Kevin back with the dogs
52.30 Carl & Russell surrounded by dogs – Muntz
54.30 Muntz: no longer intruders; guests

55.00 The Spirit of Adventure zeppelin
55.30 The museum
56.30 Dinner served.
57.00 They called me a fraud: bring the creature home.
58.30 Russell talks about his bird.
59.00 Muntz sees the bird.
60.00 Dessert. Kevin calls from the house.

F. Muntz goes after Kevin (12mins)

61.00 Muntz sends dogs after Kevin. Chase.
63.00 Kevin injured, his chicks are calling.
65.30 Russell: boring stuff I remember the most.
66.30 Kevin caught, Muntz sets fire to the house.
67.30 The dogs take Kevin.
68.00 Russell: You gave away Kevin!
69.00 Carl pulls house to Pacific Falls.
70.00 Russell throws his badges in the sand.
70.30 House stuck. Carl goes inside, memories.
71.00 Finds entries in Book of Adventure.
72.00 Ellie’s photos: her life was an adventure.

ACT THREE

G. Climax: Carl vs. Charles (12mins)

73.30 Russell on leafblower to rescue Kevin.
74.00 Carl throws old stuff out to get the house flying.
74.30 Flying again.
75.00 Dug: “hiding under the porch because I love you.”
76.30 The dogs have Russell “small mail man”.
77.00 Russell to be kicked out, Carl saves him.
78.00 On board, past the dogs, find Kevin.
78.30 Distracting the dogs: Carl throws the ball.
79.00 Russell falls.
80.00 Dogs attack in planes.

80.30 Charles attacks Carl with the sword. 81.00 Carl escapes with Kevin.
82.00 Alpha dog caught. Dug is now Alpha Dog.
82.30 Fighter pilot dogs distracted: “Squirrel!”
83.30 Carl, Dug & Russell on top of the zeppelin.
84.00 Muntz attacks with gun.
85.00 Muntz falls to his death.
85.30 ” Just a house.” Descending into the clouds.

H. Return with the Elixir (3mins)

86.00 Kevin reunited with her chicks.
87.00 Our friends flying the zeppelin.

87.30 Explorers’ Graduation.
88.30 Zeppelin parked for icecream.
89.00 The house has landed on Pacific Falls.
THE END.

NOTES ON ACT ONE

UP has a classic 3-Act structure Hero’s Journey. The only journey stage that may not be immediately clear is the Inciting Incident (Call to Adventure).

What is the Inciting Incident (I.I.) in UP?

If the Adventure is the trip to Paradise Falls, then the strongest Call is surely Ellie’s “I’m going where he’s going”.

However, this is not the trigger to the story of UP. It only triggers the Prologue journey – thank you James – leading to Carl’s WOUND: at the end of this (seemingly) failed journey, Carl Fredricksen is a jaded senior, frustrated because his desire for adventure has ultimately left him alone, disappointed and unfulfilled. He is doomed to spend the rest of his life without longing, without passion for anything. Because passion will lead to disappointment.

This frustration over the things he never did is Carl’s flaw, the weakness he needs to overcome.

To understand the true Call to Adventure, let’s see in what way Carl’s Ordinary World is a fragile equilibrium. Then, the Call to Adventure (or I.I.) is the collapse of this untenable situation.

The one shot that shows the fragile equilibrium is the zoom out from Carl’s front porch to show the building site surrounding the house. Once we know that Carl will only give up his house over his dead body, we understand that something major is waiting to happen here.

The first event heralding the call to adventure is the brochure for the ‘Shady Oaks’ retirement village.

It reminds Carl that his time is running out and he needs to act now if he wants to do something with his life. But this is not the type of incident that immediately changes his life irreversibly.

So Carl refuses the call until a stronger Inciting Incident happens: a truck backs into his mailbox and causes a continuous series of consequences, leading to Carl’s decision to finally depart to South America.

It means that Russell comes knocking on Carl’s door at the exact moment in the story when we’re expecting the Mentor to turn up. Is Russell the mentor? It’s an ironic reversal of the archetypes but I think he is a combination of the Reflection character and the Mentor.

What are your thoughts on the story of UP? Please comment below!

Here is some awesome stuff for the fans of the UP artwork.

Did you see UP in 2D or 3D? Which do you prefer? Vote 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!

National Screenwriters’ Conference 2009: Kenny – Plumbing the depths
by: David Tiley
Screen Hub
Thursday 26 February, 2009

Before opening a completely charming discussion with Andrew Knight about the writing of ‘Kenny’, Clayton Jacobson produced some very sobering numbers.

Kenny cost $500,000. By the time the film returned $5m, he was still $250,000 in debt. When it made $8m, his investors started to get a return. He has still not seen a dollar. As he said later, if he had cleaned toilets for all those hours he put into the film, he would have doubled his income.

However, he was determined to follow a film through the entire process, from idea to audience, and experience all the details in the middle. He is glad he did this, and learnt a lot, but he wants a fee for service in the future.

Andrew is an experienced comic writer and producer himself, and he brought a knowledgeable eye to the clips, the Jacobson touch, and the craft of comedy. Again and again he reiterated the same point – that the comedy works because it carries an exquisite sense of detail.

Indeed, Clayton acknowledged that the film is a mass of details driven by an underlying theme.

Here are the stages in the development of the project:

1. The Jacobson family assembles a gallery of fabulous characters with a fine sense of the vernacular. (His grandfather, for instance, ran a carnival, and the family lived for years in the big tent after it became unfinancial.) In a film mad family, the children are named after characters and actors. Raised on Jerry Lewis, Clayton sees Midnight Cowboy when he is fifteen and the skies open up.

2. Clayton goes to Swinburne, cleans toilets to pay for the course, graduates in 1984, ends up in high end commercials, develops many friends, writes extravagant features that have nothing to do with life.

3. Younger brother Shane runs a business doing lights for big shows. One day he imitates Ray, an old toilet plumber, and Clayton is fascinated. It sticks in his mind, and liberates in him the ability to write (O cliché! O wisdom!) what he knows about.

4. For months he collects lists of assets – dozens of connections, insights, lines, quirks and resources. Mates who can act, gear that is available, stuff that can go in the film, places that inspire him. Stories he is told. All to take him further than the limited world of his imagination.

5. Inspired by Paul Harris at the St Kilda Film Festival, they use a bunch of experimental rushes as a the basis of a 47 minute mockumentary.

6. They show this to the poo people, who supplied trucks, equipment and support, along with material from Shane. They are enchanted and want a feature film. They even want to put the money up. Clayton can’t see an extended version. Then they tell him about the toilet cleaning convention in the US, and it opens up for him.

At this point, Clayton made many decisions about the script. The first fifteen minutes is all about cramming scatology into the film, so the audience gets tired of it and happy to move on. We, the audience, see Kenny in his disregarded role, plodding on optimistically and decently doing a job we all need, and look down on. We are the antagonists in the film, it is our journey too.

He is driven by the desire “make the audience secretly love every character in the film” which means he gives space and emotional journeys to small sidebar stories and people. This is about an overwhelming ethic. He takes something crucial from Jerry Lewis – his ability to undercut humour with sudden tragedy, and then move on quickly.

He deals with the underlying melancholy of the characters and their crappy social tragedy by giving them an almost unshakeable sense of optimism. Bad things happen but they stay positive.

The film is built around a dual journey – we learn to respect and love Kenny, while he doubts himself. Moves into a crisis, goes to America, resolves the crisis – but it comes back. We want him to respect himself, but that is becoming less and less possible. The crisis is resolved because his father gives him some acknowledgement, and because he decides to reject the desk job which takes him away from his fundamental identity.

He plotted the film around the various events which the real company had, up to and including the trip to America. He invited ideas and talked incessantly about the projecte and its story, refining it as he saw how others responded, sometimes having them tell the story back to him. He recruited actors, mostly in his family – even his pestiferous brother in law who wanted to be in the movies, and developed a simple philosophy of performance: get people to exagerrate themselves, and use their own memories.

He plotted the emotional development in detail, and how the audience responded. He is an editor, and was keenly aware of set ups, and the way the audience can be placed on its feeling journey. This is very important – he managed the viewer’s knowledge of the characters very carefully.

He knew the script thoroughly, and would tell the actors what they were doing on the same day. He mined their knowledge of dialogue, and capacity to improvise. But he always knew the crucial lines and moments that had to be delivered exactly. Again and again, the right details.

Over six months, they shot the basic story, and over the next year they went back to the same events, for additional shots, to put in particular characters, to create atmosphere or simply reshoot.

Then Clayton went into the editing room until he just about went insane. With money, risk and family chaos layered on top.

He is now working on a web series called Mordy Koots: Blazing Angels, Clouds of Fear. Google as the project develops.

David Tiley
David Tiley is the editor of Screenhub, and can be contacted at editor@screenhub.com.au. or 03 9690 6893.

editor@screenhub.com.au
https://www.screenhub.com.au

https://www.screenhub.com.au/ | For Australian screen professionals

Republished with permission

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!