How to Change the World at Bedtime - The Art of Storytelling - Didactic vs Narrative

There are many ways of trying to convince someone that something is true. There is the "BOP!" method, frequently employed by our parents and school teachers.

"I'll tell you what you're suppose to believe, and if you don't repeat it faithfully I'll bop you on the head with this here book."

Such is the method currently being used in segments of our political sub-culture. Either you toe the party line or I'll kick you off my Facebook page, out of my store, or the safe zone at the local university. So much for the pursuit of truth through dialogue and tolerance.

Many of us grew up in such fascist environments. But I don't think those who think much, think much of the effectiveness of such methods. In a pedagogical sense we might describe the BOP method with terms like rote, punishment, telling, didactic, or tyrannic. But most of us more likely appreciate learning through personal experience, discovery, experiment, showing, and simulation. Oh, yes, I should add the verbal pedagogies like dialogue, debate, and argument (as long as the arguments are the logical, not the yelling kind).

To those in the communication professions these two styles of communication can be identified simply as "TELLING" or "SHOWING."  Or, I could use more esoteric terms "DIDACTIC" and "NARRATIVE."  Experience is the best teacher, of course, but TELLING a little boy not to touch the hot stove is safer than actually letting him touch it. And yet, telling him may only elicit the question, "Why?" And that's where SHOWING or perhaps a simulation through a story is better.

Jeremy, you're too young to remember, but one time your Auntie Francine touched the stove when it was turned on, and her hand went up in flames. She screamed and hollered, and cried so hard. We took her hand and put it on ice, but that was so cold she cried even harder. Then the doctor came and took her hand completely off her arm and kept it a bandage for 2 months way up there on the shelf, and she couldn't reach it, or use it, even to pick her nose. How would you like that? Wouldn't it be sad if you couldn't pick your nose?"

Stories are like simulations if you can get your audience to emotionally identify with your protagonist and internally make decisions for the protagonist as the story goes along. There are many techniques for getting your audience to identify with the characters in a story...but we have not the space in this blog. See the on-line training. Yet, when you do it right, your audience will make the transition to believe that THEY are IN the story, and that THEY can HELP the protagonist toward the goal.

Oh, Daisy, don't open that door, there's a monster on the other side and he might eat you and it would really be ugly and I don't want to see that.

But of course, Daisy, being immortalized on the celluloid, can't hear you, so she walks through the door and is eaten by the monster. Blood everywhere. Quit memorable. Next time she'll listen. Oh, right, there won't be a next time. But the "Daisys" in the audience who are living through the simulation WILL remember...which is the point.

[Where does preaching fall into the above lists? Well, it depends on whether the preaching primarily involves didactic or narrative techniques. A good rule of thumb based on research of best selling books is 75% narrative and 25% didactic. Hook the heart, imagination and memory with the story, and then sum up the message with a short didactic explanation. Now, I've heard preachers who will a tell a story that has nothing to do with their message...which only hinders and create cognitive dissonance. The assumption is that that story embodies the applicable moral premise. ]

What Happens When We Tell Stories

I so much want to tell a story here, but your time is valuable. So let me NOT practice what I'm trying to preach and just share with you (e.g. tell you) what happens when you rightly use a story to communicate a particular truth, assuming you're using the Audience Identification Techniques described below.

When you tell a story correctly your audience will:

• Work mentally to fill in the narrative gaps, and figure out what is going on and why. (Narrative communication is inductive. It provides information but the audience has to figure out the premise that holds it all together. That "figuring it out" requires mental engagement.)
• Follow the narrative hook created by the story and try to answer the "story question." Listening to narrative communication is thus very active and engaging.
• Identify with the flawed character, because they (the audience) are flawed.
• Be intrigued about how the protagonist will successfully achieve his/her goal.
• Be held in suspense as the protagonist overcomes obstacles.
• Root for the protagonist at turning points to make the right decision and progress.
• Be sad when the protagonist makes the wrong decision and falls back.
• See themselves in the protagonist's journey.
• Learn with the protagonist what to do and what not to do to have a good life themselves.
• Subliminally recognize the moral truth, even though the outward story may be fictional.
• Ride the emotional roller coaster of the story's ups and downs. This creates adrenalin rushes that burn memories into the brain. 
• Remember the story and its subliminal message because it's visual and a simulation of a life experience. 

Now granted, I'm short-handing a lot of theory and practice here, but perhaps this blog will encourage you to learn how to tell better stories and change the world. ...Now, onward and upward!

What Happens With Didactic Communication

Let me contrast Didactics with Narratives. Unfortunately this will be a lot of propositional pronouncements...the very thing I'm preaching against:

• Didactic communication tugs on the brain. Narrative stories, properly told, tug on the heart.
• Didactic communication involves precisely defined propositional statements, logic, and syllogisms -- (think theology). Narrative communication involves suspense, intrigue, irony, conflict, and metaphors (think bedtime stories).
• Didactics use abstract formulas that pertain to all time, all places and all persons. They are thus impersonal and objective. Narratives pertain to one time, one place, one person and are thus personal and subjective. 
• Didactics make intellectual connections but generally produce no adrenaline rush to burn-in memories. Narratives make emotional connections by producing adrenaline rushes that do burn-in memories.
• Didactics are void of emotional cantharis and are easily forgotten. Narratives, properly told, lead to emotional catharsis and are easily remembered.
• Didactics frequently require rhetorical embellishment (volume, gestures, and pacing)  to keep an audience awake. Narratives can benefit from rhetorical techniques but don't require it. The audience's imagination supplies the embellishment to keep tuned. 
• Didactics require deductive thinking where the conclusion is pronounced up front by the presenter and assumed to be true. Narratives require inductive thinking where the conclusion is derived by the audience through assimilation of the character's experiences. Thus, the conclusion is owned by the audience, not the presenter, and is thus remembered longer.
• Didactics offer theoretical and general descriptions of life leading to the embrace of ideologies that may not  have practical meaning to the audience. Narratives offer visceral and specific portrays of life leading to personal verisimilitude. 
• Didactics treat "cause and effect" intellectually and philosophically. Narrative treat "cause and effect" emotionally and practically.
• Didactics explains truth. Narrative imbues truth.
• Didactics tell audiences what to think, so they leave believing, "It's the presenter's idea, I'm skeptical." Narrative leads audiences to discover for themselves, so they leave believing, "It's my idea. Ah-ha!"

Audience Identification Techniques - How to Tell a Story That Connects with Your Audience

There are numerous ways to get your audience to emotionally identify with your characters and thus learn through your character's successes and failures how to make their lives better, which is the subliminal reason people loves stories...they're like safe simulations of life that teach what is good, true, and beautiful.  But there are "catches" to telling successful stories. Here are some of them. They apply to short and long form stories. If you learn more about these and use them, you'll connect with your audience and they'll learn what you're trying to teach them through the experiences of your characters.

• Imbue in your story a true and consistently applied moral premise. This means that the underlying moral truth of your story must not conflict with Natural Law, although the outward physical story may be a fairytale.  This is the definition of a myth—a story vehicle, which may be true or fictional, but nonetheless communicates a universal moral truth. Much of my book, "The Moral Premise," the on-line "Storycraft Training," and this blog is about this.
• Start with a strong, ironic physical hook.  e.g. your protagonist's goal is out of his or her league and sounds impossible to achieve.
• Articulate an engaging log line. There is a good blog post on this.
• Be sure the conflict of inner values is universal to your audience and not parochial. (That is, don't beg your message and assume something is true your audience may think is false.)
• Your hero or protagonist must be flawed but wanting to be better.
• Your hero must pursue a physical and visible goal that may metaphor a deep moral goal.
• Your hero must be passionate and active, not passive or slothful.
• Structure your story's emotional ups and downs so that there is a regular emotional roller coaster with ever increasing risks. Using the technique in the Moral Premise book, the Storycraft Training, and this blog you can learn that every other scene or sentence must be an ironic, nearly impossible journey for your hero.

Well, there is more!!!  ...and if you're familiar with all of this stuff, you will have recognized this last list as some of the "Secrets of Successful Story Structure" from my free bookmark.

How to Emotionally Connect a Protagonist to Your Audience.

 This is an updated post from 2010.

Our full house at EXTRAORDINARY's premiere

A  recent workshop attendee who works with teen filmmakers asked this question:

What are the major events in a story that a protagonist must face and overcome to make sure the audience emotionally connects with the character?

That question tells me the filmmakers believe it's the external (or visible) story EVENTS or ACTIONS that connect the audience to the character. But that's only half the truth.

The action a character takes is valued by the audience only because of said character's motivation to take said action. If the protagonist kills another character, the event will be judged differently by the audience depending on whether the killing is pre-meditated murder or self-defense. That is, what's important to the audience is WHY the character took said action. And that is all about who the character is internally. It's the character's internal values that mostly dictate the emotional connection of the audience.

The way the audience discovers those values is the work of the plot and how the character responds to the beats of the plot. More about the plot beats below, but first let's look at how the audience will come to recognize the character's internal values. This is how it works in real life, too.

This diagram from a workshop I give will help. On the left side of the circle, items 2, 3 and 4 happen internally to a character. In a motion picture the audience does not see these unless the character shares his thinking with another character. In a novel, internal monologue often supplies these points.  But everything on the right side of the circle, items 1, 5, and 6 are in the visible, physical realm which the audience sees.

So, let's begin with No. 1. Here our character observes a situation in the external world.

2. Almost immediately the character compares what he observes to his own value system.

3. Let's assume that there is an internal value conflict between what he observes and his own value system. That leads to:

4. The character deciding upon a course of action to remediate the situation, and try to change the external situation to be more in line with his own internal values.

5. The character's thoughts morph into the physical realm and he takes some action.

6. As a direct consequence of the action some natural consequence occurs that is totally outside the character's control. Nature has the upper hand now, and some physical conflict may occur.  This physical conflict is a metaphor of the internal conflict from step 3.

And the cycle repeats itself, as the character...

1. Observes the new situation created by his intervening action, and

2. Evaluates....

If the Natural Consequence is evaluated as good in the character's mind, then his original internal value is reinforced. If the Natural Consequence is evaluated as bad, then the character may revisit and revise their original internal value....and transform.

TURNING  POINTS AND BEATS

Now this sort of logic appears most dramatically at a story's TURNING POINT or at Major Beats of a story. I discuss these beats in various places in this blog. But here's a starting point: 13 Major Beats.

So, this goes back to the original question.

What are the major events in a story that a protagonist must face and overcome to make sure the audience emotionally connects with the character?

The answer in an external sense are the dramatic story beats reflected in the 13 Major Beats link above. But the key to those beats emotionally connecting with audiences all depends on whether or not the internal value arc of the character's transformation coincides with or diverges from the audience's values.

And that is where the Moral Premise comes in. The decisions and actions that the character makes, if you're going to have a successful story, must all coincide with the moral and physical arc described by the moral premise statement, which we are assuming is true and in compliance with Natural Law.

MOONLIGHT and Screenplay Rules

Each year I read one or both of the screenwriting Oscar winners. The theory is, in doing so, I'll learn how to write better screenplays and help others do the same.  In this case the learning from MOONLIGHT (Best Adaptation) was two fold.

I watched the movie on iTunes, then found the PDF shooting script HERE. The challenge I knew was to discover how Barry Jenkins wrote something that was so interior in scope, and was so silent. While there is some action and dialogue, the interior emotional tension is thick.

A screenplay is suppose to describe what is SHOWN and HEARD on screen, without TELLING us what the character is THINKING. The screenwriter describes the setting, the props, the posture, the bodily response, and when all of that is done rightly, then we give the writer permission to tell us what is actually going on inside the mind.

The adage is, learn to do it well, and then you can break the rules. Here's an excerpt from the third act. There are somethings here, expertly done, but they break the rules. Can you identify the rule breakers? (I use the term "rule breakers" with derision. )

This starts on page 79.

0. We watch the children at play a moment longer. We’ve seen none of these kids before, we’ll see none of them again. 

   A final beat of this, then... 

   EXT. JIMMY’S EASTSIDE DINER, PARKING LOT - NIGHT 

   A door closed -- Black’s car parked deep in the corner of this parking lot, in the farthest back corner away from street light, obscured by low-hanging shade trees.  

   The diner is away from us, across the parking lot. Black takes it in a moment, pulls on a fresh shirt. 

   He’s moving, crossing the parking lot at an easy clip. It’s quiet out, a few passing cars to Black’s left running north on Biscayne Boulevard, no foot traffic -- can hear the SOUND of his footfalls on the pavement. 

   As he nears the threshold of this diner, takes the handle on the entry... 

   CLOSE ON: an old school bell, the sound of it jingling as the door it’s affixed to parts. 

   INT. JIMMY'S EASTSIDE DINER - NIGHT - CONTINUOUS 

   And right away, the sound of music, something old, soft, and lilting (think Aretha Franklin’s One Step Ahead). 

   Black scanning this room, his view of the place a clue for us: this is definitely the same diner we saw Kevin working in during the earlier phone call. 

   All the details are there, the old-school register, vintage chairs and table-tops. And in the corner, that old school jukebox blessing us with Aretha. 

   BLACK 

   ...on the move now, crosses the diner with eyes down and ahead of him. There’s a counter lined with stools, directly opposite the staging station and adjacent the register. 

   Black eases up to the counter, places his cell atop it and takes a seat. 

   No one stirs at Black’s movement, no one watches. Looking about the place again, we notice the other patrons: a quartet of college girls in a corner booth shoring up for a night on the town, an elderly gentleman sitting to himself, staring into a cup of mild coffee. 

   As Black watches the elderly gentleman... 

                   VOICE (O.S.)                                        (moving)                                            Be right with you. 

   A figure moving past, carrying an urn over to the old man, sets a new cup down and pours a fresh coffee, scoops up the old cup as he moves on. 

   As he crosses to the girls, we see him better: it’s Kevin. 

   We watch as he speaks to them; can’t hear any of it but from the feel of it, very jovial, Kevin is good at this work. 

   A beat of watching Kevin here, isolated bits of him from Black’s perspective: Kevin’s lips as he speaks, the hand he rests to his neck instinctively.

   Finished with the girls, Kevin turns back toward the counter, hands full with their spent dishes. As he approaches, he looks right at Black, right at us... 

                   KEVIN                                                (moving)
             Be right with you, boss, just                           let me get this out the way. 

   ...and moves past. 

   Somehow, Kevin has not noticed him. 

   Something lodged in Black’s throat, without thinking places his hand there: Am I breathing? 

   He must be, he’d better be: those dishes discarded somewhere in the back and... here comes Kevin. 

                   KEVIN
            How you doin’ tonight, what                            can I get you? 

   Kevin flipping through a stained note-pad, hasn’t bothered to look up yet. As he does, his eyes settle on Black’s. 

   Beat. 

   Kevin watching this man. And Black watching back, the two of them silently holding each other’s gaze, pure curiosity. 

Here's what I noticed throughout the script, but I'll restrict my examples to the passage above.

1. The tone and mood of MOONLIGHT is expertly included in the visual descriptions. The setting, the lights, the movement (all visual), are also metaphors for what the audience should be feeling. We're not TOLD how the audience should feel, but phrases like those underlined SHOW us.

• "Black's car parked deep in the corner of this parking lot..." 
• "the farthest back corner away from street light, obscured by low-hanging shade trees."
• "...away from us, across the parking lot..."
• "...no foot traffic -- can hear the SOUND of his footfalls on the pavement."
• "...the sound of music, something old, soft, and lilting..."
• "...with eyes down..."
• "...staring into a cup of mild coffee..."

But the "rules" tell us that we should never use past tense verbs, present participles, break the fourth wall, use adverbs or gerunds. And all of those "errors" are used extensively throughout the MOONLIGHT script. Can you see them in the bulleted list above? Here are a few more.

2. We're told: Don't break the fourth wall. Yet, the MOONLIGHT script includes the audience/reader a great deal.

• "We watch..." 
• "We've seen..."
• "We see..."
• "...he looks...right at us..."
• "...we notice..."

3. We're told: Avoid adverbs, present participles, and gerunds. Yet, they're everywhere. 

• "scanning the room..."
• "blessing us with Aretha."
• "Looking about the place..."
• "an elderly gentlemen sitting to himself, staring into a cup..."
• "As Black watches the elderly gentleman..."
• "...watching Kevin..."
• "Kevin watching this man. And Black watching back. The two of them silently holding each other's gaze..."

4. We're told: Only describe what can be seen, and never say what the characters are thinking:

• "..but from the feel of it, very jovial..."
• "...Something lodged in Black's throat, without thinking places his hand there: Am I breathing?"
• "He must be, he'd better be..."

NOW, this is NO CRITICISM of BARRY JENKINS. The screenplay reads easily, visually, and most of the writing is PRESENT ACTIVE. But to communicate this interior sense of emotions, the gerunds, the adverbs, and the other things work wonderfully. 

Yes, you might argue that this is an example of learning to follow the rules so you can break them. But here's what's different about Jenkin's situation. He had written and directed a bunch of shorts, but this was only his second full length movie, and his first, MEDICINE FOR MELANCHOLY, was something he directed for $13,000 and no studio readers were involved. Add to that, Plan B executives (Brad Pitt) had seen Medicine for Melancholy and liked it and wanted to work with Jenkins, so with Plan B behind him,  they persuaded a A24, new distributor, to get behind Moonlight as their first feature to finance and distribute.  (Jenkins also said in an interview I watched from a Netherlands film festival, that the OSCARS SO WHITE protest from 2015, heightened awareness of movies by black artists.) So, Jenkins was not in a situation where the grammar or the format was ever an issue. His previous work and his connections spoke louder than the grammar of his screenplay. In other words, the executed work is what's important, not the screenplay's grammar.

COME THE OSCARS

This is further reinforced when voting occurs for the Best Screenplay categories. It was clear to me (having lived it numerous times) that no common Hollywood reader had ever read Jenkin's screenplay without being told by their boss, first, "We're going to make this movie." Of course, I don't know for sure, but I'm willing to bet MOONLIGHT was never subjected to the anonymous eyes of a first tier reader. Had it been, I'm sure it would have been immediately rejected. But yet, like a Quentin Taratino script, it wins an Oscar. (And, PLEASE, do not tell me that Quentin Taratino has learned how to write a script so he can break the rules. If you've ever, ever seen a Taratino script you would know by page 2 he never learned the rules in the first place.)

Yesterday, I wrote four screenwriters I know in Hollywood, all who have worked on many films that were produced and two who are Academy members. I asked if those voting for the BEST SCREENWRITING categories actually read the scripts they're sent. The answers came back: "Probably not," and "Usually, no." What they do is watch the finished movie and infer what the screenplay was like. 

So, I'll say this again....as I have in past posts. If you're a screenwriter that wants to waste your time, heave your screenplays at the anonymous studio blockade, and see them bounce off into the rubbish pile. They may be Oscar winners, but 90% of the readers in Hollywood wouldn't recognize it as such. Readers generally are not going to take the time to understand your story, but find fault out of a personal bias or tell you to follow the rules. For the rest of you, who want to get your screenplays made....ignore the obsessive format and grammatical rules, and find someone to help you make the story into a film.

EMOTIONAL ROLLER COASTER - THE REVENANT

This is a long post written over several weeks and three different posts. If you see a typo, please tell me. Thanks. stan@moralpremise.com

I've taken this long to post this long analysis because the movie demonstrates a perfect structure that resulted in a visible roller-coaster effect, thanks to LIGHTWAVE. It is, therefore, worthy of study. The turning points match the idea perfectly and yet are portrayed in several ironic ways. In terms of structure THE REVENANT, is the "same thing only different."

Dir: Alejandro González Iñárritu
Writers: Mark L. Smith, Alejandro González Iñárritu,  based book by Michael Punke

HG - Hugh Glass (LEONARDO DICAPRIO)
FITZ - John Fitzgerald (TOM HARDY)
CA - Capt. Andrew Henry: DOMHNALL GLEESON
JB - Jim Bridger (WILL POULTER)
HK - Hawk (FORREST GOODLUCK)
PO - Powaqa (MELAW NAKEHK'O)
TO - Toussaint (FABRICE ADDE)
Hikuc (ARTHUR RED CLOUD)
HG's Wife (GRACE DOVE)

LENGTH: 106 minutes.

DISCLAIMER: The controversy swirls about what to call indigenous Native Americans, and whether to capitalize the term referring to them. There are arguments and interest groups on at least a dozen fronts. I don't pretend to have an opinion on the topic. In this post I've taken the common term "indian" to refer generically to these "first nation" peoples. 

Post 1-14-16: 
Here is the proof of what a number of us story gurus have been preaching for years. LIGHTWAVE (TM) has measured the emotional response of an audience watching THE REVENANT. I've been able to talk with Rana June, Lightwave's CEO. She supplied the higher resolution image below than was first disseminated to the news bureaus (click on it), and I'm attempting to get more information so I can correlate my forthcoming beat analysis of THE REVENANT to this chart. The wrist band that LIGHTWAVE has come up with to collect the biometric data and the data manipulating that they do will change how movies are written.

I predict that this wristband will be worn at table reads, or silent individual reads of the script. The analysis effort some of us provide can ensure this emotional response so the "slow middle" and other problems with stories, can be effectively eliminated. Just compare the structure of THE REVENANT biometrics with the chart I've been using for years, below.

Here is the chart we try to get filmmakers and novelists to follow. Look at the similarities. And I can tell you how to get there.

Post 1-30-16:  

Prompted by the Northville Screenwriter's Meetup Group I started in on analyzing the beats of REVENANT. I watched the movie for a second time from the back row, my iPhone's stopwatch giving me timings and a light to take many pages of notes of scene breaks and action. I then overlaid my notes on Lightwave's charts, here overlapped.

I've turned the chart below on it's side so the action/scene/sequence descriptions can be easily read, and I've put in the far right margin the traditional major story beats. They line up very closely if you have an idea about what the story is really about....there's a hint in my notes. I'll write a blog about this in the future, and on April 23, 2016 I will present a workshop on this at the Rochester Writer's Conference at Oakland University. 

BEAT ROLLER COASTER CHART

In the meantime, (1) click on the image for a larger size, and then (2) download it for your own study. Again, a major hit movie follows the moral premise beats, whether or not the writer and director knew anything about them from my book or work. This doesn't prove anything about me, but rather about the natural law of good stories. As one Pixar writer/director told a friend of mine recently who was exposed to this stuff..."We didn't know any of that. We just kept working at it until it felt right." Exactly. Perseverance will get you there if you have enough smart people in the room and put in the time to do it. But knowing what makes good stories work...can get you there faster. I love this stuff. Writer better, write faster. Know the Moral Premise of your story and apply it to everything. 

13+ MAJOR BEATS EXPLAINED

Post 2-15-16

For a generic explanation of the major beats (explained below for THE REVENANT) see my post on StoryStructure Basics. I'll try to avoid duplication below and assume you understand that earlier post. 

While each of the major beat labels below work best in a general sense, in some instances there are other names for these beats used by other story gurus, (as well as beats within these beats). A good guide to what other structuralists term these major, accidental, and minor beats can be found on my expanded Story Diamond Key PDF.

The beats below focus on the protagonist, Hugh Glass (HG), his main arc, and the movie's major plot. HG has subplots, which also have beats, but not as many as the main plot described below. Other main characters also have beats and an arc, but not as many as HG's main plot. 

ACT 1 BEGINS

1. LIFE BEFORE

HG avoids conflict where possible. When given a choice between fight or flight he chooses flight. He is not seeking to confront the French who ravaged his wife's village and killed her (flight). When the indians attacks the American trappers he guides through the NW wilderness, he runs for the boats. When Fitz verbally attacks him for marrying a Pawnee woman and expresses his hate for Hawk, their son, Hawk wants to defend himself, but HG tells his son that to survive he must be silent.  

2. INCITING INCIDENT (Ideally 12.5%)

At 12% Fitz verbally attacks Hawk and HG. This is the challenge to HG not to take a neutral, Laissez-faire, avoid all conflict worldview. HG's best retort to Fitz is that he holds the "smart end of the gun," the barrel of which is pointed at Fitz's gut.  

At 16% the bear attack is the inciting incident for HG's "moral wound" sub plot (see THE GOAL below), but it is not the I.I. for the main plot. However, there's a rich connection. See 3, below).

3. REJECTION OF THE JOURNEY

HG tells his son, Hawk, to be silent and not confront Fitz's hatred.

Although Fitz never stops in his condemnation of HG, Hawk and such, HG avoids putting the confrontation front and center and dealing with it. HG lets the hatred ferment. 

The bear attack is a clear metaphor for Fitz's hatred. Consider: (a) the bear attack is more visible than Fitz's verbal taunts. (b) the bear's vicious attack of HG SHOWS us what Fitz would like to do to HG. (c) When faced with the bear, HG is on the "smart end of the gun" but he AVOIDS the confrontation at first and does not fire fast enough, and the mother bear (attempting to protect her cubs) attacks. (d) When his fellow trappers find HG and try to save his life, Fitz goes off and smokes his pipe commenting that they ought to let HG die. At one side of the screen is a passive (dead) bear; on the other side of the screen is a passive Fitz, but who is very much alive and is every bit the threat to HG that the bear was. It's like a WWF tag team. The first bear is defeated and the other bear jumps into the ring. In this case, dramatically, the bear and Fitz are allies, and Fritz takes this into account and his action coming up.

If I recall the scene correctly, also notice that just before HG goes off early morning to hunt and during which he encounters the bear, he consoles Hawk, who is grieving Fitz's hatred, his mother's death, and HG's insistence that he stay silent. If HG and Hawk were not in conflict over how to deal with Fitz, Hawk would not be grieving, and he would be capable and willing to go hunting with his father as he has done before. Had Hawk gone with HG, it is unlikely that HG would have been mauled by the bear because Hawk would have protected HG's flank. Thus, the bear attack is the  indirect consequence of HG's rejection of the journey to confront his oppressors.

4. ACT 1 CLIMAX - ACCEPTS NEED FOR JOURNEY (Ideally 25%)

At 25%, after difficulty carrying HG's litter through the wilderness, HG's litter slides down the rocky, ice covered embankment, announcing the litter's occupants silent decision to stay behind and not endanger the rest of the party's lives by being a burden to their ability to get quickly out of the wilderness and survive. 

This normally would be a clear choice of the protagonist to cross the threshold and go on the journey, but in this scene is it implied and not explicit. 

Another unique aspect to this turning point is that the protagonist STAYS IN PLACE while the rest of his "world" crosses the hill and continues on their physical journey. HG's journey begins with him staying put, thus endangering his life in multiple ways....but also forcing him to deal with his weakness of non-confrontation. 

ACT 2 BEGINS: CROSSES THRESHOLD

"Crossing the Threshold" is counted as part of the Act 1 Climax, and not usually a separate beat, although it is usually a separate scene. It is here, nonetheless, that the protagonist's goal is revealed. So, let's take this moment to highlight three things: HG's goal(s), the Hook, and the Moral Premise.

1. THE GOAL. HG's Goal is to survive against all odds. To do that he must overcome various threats to his life and those he loves.  Each of these threats forms a subplot; one is the main plot. If you've taken my Storycraft Training Series or workshops you know that EACH subplot for each character must have a physical and visible goal. For HG, his goals for the various sub plots are:

1. Overcome the extreme cold and wilderness.
2. Avoid indians who war against the American and French trappers.
3. Neutralize John Fitzgerald's hatred and bigotry (the main plot)
4. Heal from his mortal wounds from a bear attack
5. Defend and befriend his Pawnee in-law indian family
6. Bring justice to and neutralize the French trappers who have killed HG's wife and ravaged her village

2. THE HOOK. A good hook pits an under achieving protagonist against impossible odds. While HG is a capable mountain guide and trapper, his weakness from non-confrontation, makes him an under achiever in the beginning of this story. And while any of the above threats to his life would be enough for most stories, THE REVENANT thrives on having all six. 

3. THE MORAL PREMISE

We have a Nicomachean Value Conflict (Continuum) upon which the moral premise is based. Here's the diagram. (If you can improve on this PLEASE let me know. These things always challenge me.) Remember the values (or virtues and vices) on these continuums are the MOTIVATIONS of the characters. You can't have action without a logical motivation for it.)

Embracing neutrality (absence of self-respect) or practicing
despotism (the extreme of self-respect), leads to death; but

seeking self-respect and justice for self and others leads to life.

5. ACT 2A: MAKES POOR PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL 

(Motivated by Negative Side of Moral Premise)

Now the journey begins, with the purpose of achieving HG's six goals for the six plots listed above. This is an extreme of the David vs. Goliath tale. Here Goliath has almost slain David, who lies helpless on a litter. And this helpless shepherd (which HG is by shepherding the trappers through the wilderness) can't even pick up a sling or a small stone. He's immobile on a litter, and in a moment will be tied down to it, no less.....as Goliath attempts for a second time to kill HG the shepard.

At the beginning of Act 2, HG is thinking of just surviving his wounds. But (out of necessity) he's taking the epitome of avoidance. He's staying in bed. He's NOT trying to get out. He's trusting in OTHERS, even his enemy, to take care of him. This is HG's weakness. You may think that HG is incapable of doing anything but just lie there in the litter. But notice he is capable of action, as will be evident soon after Fitz leaves HG to die, and takes off with JB for the fort. So, in retrospect, Act 2 starts off just like a well structured movie should, with the protagonist pursuing the goal, but using the negative side of the moral premise. (Read those motivating values again on the left side of the diagram above, and see if they don't apply to HG as he lies on his litter.)

This avoidance results in HG not just making SLOW progress, but when Fitz tries to kill him and does kill Hawk, HG experiences NEGATIVE progress. 

Fitz's attempted murder of HG and his murder of Hawk is PINCH POINT A—the antagonist's presence in obstructing the protagonist from reaching his goal. Such points accelerate the plot. Avoiding them in a story slows down the middle. (Pinch Points are terms novelists use, but to keep the roller coaster going, screenwriters need to embrace them, as THE REVENANT DOES SO WELL. 

Three other moments in Act 2A that indicate not slow progress include:

1.  HG crawling out of his grave to mourn his son. This is NOT progress for HG's plots, although it is a Dark Night of the Soul for Hawk, and it does explain some of HG's motivation for going after Fitz. But notice he crawls screen left, and Fitz and safety is screen right. It's NEGATIVE progress, yet again.  This may be subtle, but it signals to the audience that the filmmakers are increasing the stakes. Every step back is one that has to be recovered in going forward. 

2. Cauterizing the hole in his neck with gunpowder knocks him out.

3. After hiding in a cave with a fire to keep him warm, he flights from some indians that try to kill him. But notice they don't try to kill him until he tries to get away from them. This is important in terms of storytelling because it's just the opposite of what is about to happen.  (Notice this is the skill of the storyteller to make scenes seem reasonable, even if in retrospect they could have happened differently. It seems entirely reasonable for HG to run from these indians and slip into the river to AVOID them.)

6. MID POINT MOMENT OF GRACE (Ideally 50%)

At 49%-50% HG passes from one part of the diegesis (or world of the story) to another. We do not see an explicit Moment of Grace as we do in more typical movies when the protagonist has a revelation—the camera zooms in, there's a musical cue, and the character says something revealing. But there is clearly here a "rebirth." THE REVENANT uses "baptism" (in both forms) as the metaphor. When first escaping the indians and their arrows HG immerses himself under the water, and moments later he passes over a waterfall which reminds us of the baptismal water that is poured over a converts head. And then, having been cleansed of his sin, he floats through a beatific vision — a beautiful scenic river as he holds onto a floating log (the tree of the cross?) It's as if he is floating away from a bad past and into a beautiful, hopeful future.  At 50% HG climbs out of the river a new man, and the first sign we see of his newness is when he casts off the bearskin, his old nature. (Although in a practical sense it was the bearskin that kept him from hypothermia in the cold river.) In terms of semiotics (or the significance of signs and symbols), the bearskin is a sign of the bear attack, which is the consequence of HG's avoidance of conflict and confrontation (explained earlier). And we are going to see in the next scenes a totally different HG as he pursues his goal.) Again, baptism and the removal of the old nature are classic metaphoric ways of communicating a turning point. 

As a further sign that something is new, HG witnesses a falling meteor, even as part of it (a meteorite) falls into the river from which he climbed. The falling star is a mythic sign of the Wisemen following a star of hope and salvation.

But the filmmakers do not let us forget the antagonistic forces that HG must still face, and with the falling meteor HG remembers the slaughter of his wife's village and his wife's death.

Altogether, this is a significant MOG right at the 50% mark in the movie.

7. ACT 2 B: MAKES GOOD PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL 

(Motivated by Positive Side of Moral Premise)

And now HG makes progress, through providence and his own decisions. 

He hears a stampede of bison. He climbs out of the river valley to see this glorious sight and wolves carving out a calf for food. Notice he does not AVOID this wilderness danger, the stampede or the wolves, who might have attacked him, a wounded human. He stays nearby, and at night is awakened by another sound and flashes of firelight. 

Hikuc, a Pawnee warrior, chases the wolves away with fire, and kneels beside the ripped open bison and begins to feast on the raw flesh. 

Now, notice what HG does. He approaches the warrior and begs for food. This was not entirely necessary because HG had just hours earlier eaten fish he had trapped from the river. Yes, red meat would be a plentiful source of energy and more sustaining than fish. But what's important here, from a story structure standpoint, is that HG does not avoid the indian, but approaches him and after a tense standoff during which we think HG may get killed with an arrow at point-blank range, Hikuc throws HG the bison's liver, which Leonardo DiCapro actually tires to eat...the raw, bison liver. (His non-acting reaction is left in the film. Later he said it is something he will never do again.)

This event, meeting Hikuc, saves HG's life. It is is Salvation. If the baptism (a Catholic sacrament) is not salvation, then drinking Christ's blood in the Eucharist after baptism is. And it is Hikuc who acts as the priest who serves up the "Eucharistic" sustenance of body and blood. 

After hearing HG's story, Hikuc says he is traveling south to find other Pawnee rather that find the killers of his own son who was murdered as well. He tells HG: "But revenge is in the creator's hands. Travel with me." 

They travel together, with HG riding Hikuc's horse, and then Hikuc builds HG a healing shelter and cares for his "rotting" wounds. This is a metaphor for Christ healing the sick, even in the midst of a storm.

To reinforce that meaning, the filmmakers shows us HG's dream as he is being healed. The dream involves him in the ruin of a Catholic Chapel where he meets his deceased son...consolation that Hawk is in heaven...and on the wall behind where the altar once stood is a fresco of a crucifix—Christ on his crucifixion tree.  Don't miss what happens next, as HG makes both physical and spiritual progress toward his six goals. 

When the storm is over, HG comes out from his chrysalis a new man. At PINCH POINT B, moments later HG (like the Roman centurion in the Gospels and like Brad Whitlock's centurion character [George Clooney] in HAIL, CAESAR), finds Hikuc (his Christ) hanging lynched on a tree.  And like Pontius Pilate had a signed nailed to the cross above Christ's head mocking who he was ("The King of the Jews"), so Hikuc's crucifiers hang a mocking sign around Hikuc's neck, which in French reads, "We Are All Savages."

Now, comes the big test for HG. Has he been changed by his Moment of Grace? Has he learned his lesson about avoiding conflict and confronting it? Just beyond Hikuc's lynching HG sees the French trapper's camp. This is represented in the movie at least, by a group of men who are associated with the French that killed his wife and destroyed her village and another village that Fitz and JB come upon during their trek to the fort. But notice what HG does. HG does not avoid the camp, he steals into it, to steal supplies and Hikuc's horse. And as he does, he witnesses their leader (TO) raping the indian chief's daughter (PO) which the trappers have captured as their sex slave. PO's kidnapped disappearance from her tribe is one reason the local indians are on the warpath, and the indians suspect every white man they come across. 

HG gets supplies, Hikuc's horse, and frees PO, directing her to take TO's knife and kill him. Which she does, and in so doing scares off the French trappers, and after which she walks to freedom. This is a big turning point for HG as it frees him, eventually, form the indian's wrath.  This invading of the French camp also provides a climax of sorts for neutralizing the French threat against the indians and it finds justice for HG's wife's death. The implication is that it was TO that was responsible, and it is an indian, like HG's wife, who kills TO. 

But all the indians don't get the message, and soon HG is running for his life from indians on horses with guns, and as Hikuc's horse is shot by the pursuing indians, HG and the horse jump over a clip to what is certain death. Their dive into white oblivion is broken by a tree, but the horse dies and HG almost does so. 

8. ACT 2 CLIMAX - NEAR DEATH, FAUX ENDING (Ideally 75%)

At 75% is where HG and Hikuc's horse take their death dive.  HG came near being killed by the indians. The horse indeed dies, but HG, whose fall is broken by the tree, lives, barely.  

ACT 3 BEGINS

9. DARK NIGHT OF THE SOUL

Here again the filmmakers take the beat to the extreme. It's not enough that there is a near death experience, or that he must mourn his horse's death, but they put HG, naked, into the dead corpse of the horse, ironically to survive in the cold weather. Thus, HG spends the "night" not "near" death, but in "IN" death, in the darkness of the horse.  

THE RESURRECTION BEAT (Ideally either 85% or 90%)

At 82%.  This is not one of the 13 beats, but I see it more and more in good movies. It's step 11 in Chris Vogler's The Writer's Journey. In THE REVENANT it comes when a survivor from the French camp reports to the fort and CA and they discover that HG is in fact alive, and not dead as Fitz (who is now with CA) has reported. CA rushes out with a team and at night finds HG slogging through a dark forest. 

HG is brought back to the fort where he is fed, bathed, and his wounds are further treated. 

Meanwhile Fitz has escaped, having stolen money from CA's safe. Fitz knows that HG is coming after him, mostly for killing Hawk.  

10. FINAL INCIDENT (Ideally 87.5%)

At 89% as CA and HG track Fitz, Fitz ambushes and kills CA. 

11. PREPARING TO DIE TO ACHIEVE GOAL 

HG gives chase, now willing to die for the cause of justice and revenge. HG and Fitz battle hand-to-hand in the snow near a small stream.

12. ACT 3 CLIMAX - FIGHT TO THE DEATH (Ideally 98%)

At 97% HG shoves an nearly dead Fitz into the stream saying, "Revenge is in God's hands not mine." Waiting down stream is the indian chief and a small war party who have been searching for PO, who, now, is with them on horseback.  The chief pulls Fitz off out of the river and finishes him off.  

Now it appears that there is one last hand-to-hand battle, between HG and the indians...who cross the stream and come toward HG. Now, not afraid of conflict as he's faced death many times, HG does not run from the indians. It's tense, but they pass him by, looking down on him with disgust, but letting him live. This is because PO is with them, and she has told them what HG did for her. 

13. DENOUEMENT (LIFE AFTER)

HG struggles up a hill and sees a vision of his wife. She smiles at him and walks away. As she does we are left with a image of thin forest with crooked branches.  They trees stand, but not tall. They are frail and not strong. But they stand nonetheless.

This is in contrast to the many images we've seen throughout the movie of very tall trees and forests bending in the winds of mighty storms. And with each beautiful shot (perhaps 12-18 of them) we're reminded of the parable HG tells his then small son during the opening montage as we peruse the destruction of his wife's village:  

When there is a storm, and you stand in front of a tree. If you look at its branches, you swear it will fall. But if you watch the trunk,  you will see its stability...it's roots grow deep.

The final shot is a Reverse CU of HG looking off-camera toward where his wife's vision was. He's cold, weak, shivering. Then, slowly he turns his head and his eyes gaze directly into ours.

Fade Out. 

First Entertain

There's an adage in Hollywood, and similar industries, that says: "FIRST ENTERTAIN."

Successful entertainment, to me, is defined as emotionally engaging audiences so that they're willing to buy a ticket, or dispose of some of their free time. 

For me, the term "entertain" has an emotional element and a training element. (I'm sure this is NOT the word's etymology, but humor me.) Successful entertainment always emotionally engages your audience, AND it passes onto them some true moral message usually hidden in the subtext.  (For the girl on the right that truth is "Never, ever believe your mom when she says, 'Trust me, you'll love it.'")

So, we have something that is emotional (E) and we have a training element (TRAIN). That gives us E-TRAIN. Also there is the idea that both the emotional and the training enter into the person's consciousness and become INGRAINED (which rhymes with ENTER-TAIN-ED -- like I said, humor me). The key word there is ENTER.

Successful entertainment, therefore, ENTERS into a person EMOTIONALLY and TRAINS them about something true. First ENTERTAIN as you EMOTIONALLY TRAIN.

Okay, Okay, so TRAIN and TAIN are not the same. Let me  s t r e t c h  it for ya. TAIN rhymes with STAIN, and good entertainment leaves behind a stain.... no, no, you potty head... a stain in your brain—a memory. (Geez! I can't take you anywhere.) Another way to understand this is that ENTER-TAIN is a lot like INNER-TRAIN. That is, something is "entertaining" because it has the ability to train our memories. The reverse is also true: if we want to train our memories there must be some emotional involvement, some entertainment. Memories do not "stick" without adrenalin burning some synapses together in our brain.  

The long of this short post is that successful communication has three components. It must ENTERTAIN, and for it to do that it must be MORALLY TRUE (at a psychological, spiritual, or subliminal level), and it must EMOTIONALLY ENGAGE (it must be be a visceral simulation of life).

That is what stories do better than a thrill ride at an amusement park, and what stories do almost as good as real life experiences (life's best teacher), but with out the physical danger.

(And you can believe the little girl above would feel a lot safer at the movies. Real life does have its drawbacks, especially when your mother is C R A Z Y!)