Tag Archives: Antagonist

The Revenant – A Good Idea for a Film – Part 2 of 2

5 Replies

the-revenant-picA screenplay bridges the gap between novel and movie and converts the story into images and dramatized action. In the narrative-heavy novel, The Revenant by Michael Punke, readers know Hugh Glass’s thoughts and motivations as if inside his head, third person point of view close. Although this works well in the book “The Revenant – A Good Idea for a Novel,” on the big screen, viewers would see Hugh Glass and be clueless. What is he thinking?

Screenwriter, Michael L. Smith converts the novel into scenes that comprise a screenplay. The motives and conflicts are visible with dialogue, action or flashbacks. The director, Alejandro G. Inarritu, morphs the screenplay into award-winning creative expression. Smith minimizes the object story of the stolen Amstadt and maximizes the relationships, injustice, and personal loss. The screenplay shows theme, motivation and key conflicts in ten pages translating to ten minutes of screen time. In a quick comparison of the first ten pages, see how the movie builds on the screenplay scenes.

It’s a Good Movie When . . .

  1. The opening scene draws viewers into the character. Smith begins the screenplay with Glass whispering “not yet” to his sweat-soaked shivering son. The film takes this touching scene and places it in the aftermath of an attack where Glass finds his injured son and reveals his own motivation in the words, “Don’t give up. As long as you can grab a breath, you fight.” Contrast this to the novel which uses in medias res (beginning in the middle) to show Glass experiencing Fitzgerald and Bridger in the act of abandoning him and stealing his gun and knife. Each opening scene shows injustice – a sick child, a burned village, and an injured man left behind. Each version begs to know what happens next to this character.
  2. The antagonist is a worthy adversary. The screenplay, scene two, begins in the middle of a campsite of hungry and homesick trappers. Dialogue centers around Fitzgerald challenging and undercutting the leadership of Captain Henry who wears a buckskin jacket with long fringe. I visualize Daniel Boone or Davy Crockett; the Captain must be a good guy. We know Fitzgerald will be trouble. In the film, scene two luxuriates with precious minutes of water running in trees and nature sounds with camera angles the Sierra club would envy. The camera catches the quiet step of Glass and two others creeping toward an elk. Scene three opens to Fitzgerald ordering the trappers to bundle more furs together. He appears to have some authority. Then when the Arikara chief attacks, Fitzgerald proves to be a fighter. So far, the chief has my vote for the antagonist. In scene four on the boat and scene five at the next camp, Fitzgerald challenges the Captain and insults Glass. Now it is known. He will be a problem when left to care for Glass. In the novel, Glass pursues Fitzgerald regardless of dangerous weather or hostile tribes of Arikara warriors. These two immediate threats are far more interesting than the eventual meeting of Glass and Fitzgerald at the end of the story. In the film, the meeting of Glass and Fitzgerald is a Hollywood big ending.
  3. Art is not forgotten. Inarritu deserves his Academy Award for his choice of setting alone. The scenery behind the blood and mutilation is ruggedly beautiful. My in-house cinematography expert reports the crew filmed only with natural light in many Canadian locations and in Argentina. Cinematographer, Emmanuel Lubezki, also wins an Academy Award for his efforts on this big screen epic. The film sports many talented actors, but only one can win, best actor at the Academy Awards. For the record, Hugh Glass did not sleep inside a horse; it is a Hollywood stunt. If you haven’t seen the film, do it for this scene — Leonardo Dicaprio, horse, cliff and snow.

Contrast Inarritu’s production with Jason Blum and his low-budget film production company (films with price tags in the thousands and receipts in the millions). NPR’s Ari Shapiro recently interviewed Blum. A 2013 Forbes article by Mark Hughes puts Blum’s movies in perspective. Blum is responsible for Paranormal Activity 1, 2, 3, 4 and however many he produces after the sixty plus films already on his resume (including Whiplash). He says production costs are contained by restricting the number of locations, eliminating big stunts, and using unknown actors.

The filming of the Revenant did none of these. The Revenant is big budget, multi-continent, 156 minutes, and a makeup artist’s dream for blood, wounds and semi-frozen big star talent.

Plotting for the Flaw

6 Replies

Stories begin with character. I usually develop a character by writing his or her thoughts, language and interactions. A more efficient writing style would first plan and construct character flaws to build the story.

“Write Fiction Like a Pro,” an online class by Steve Alcorn, defines a flaw as an emotional shortcoming of the character.  All great stories build on the protagonist realizing and overcoming one of these flaws. The classic flaws include lack of self-confidence, lack of self-worth, insecurity, naivety, inability to put the past behind, inability to face the past, inability to trust others, inability to make a commitment, stubbornness, rashness, prejudice, selfishness, arrogance, envy and greed.

Earlier this year, the New Yorker published a short story, “All You Have To Do,” by Sarah Braunstein. One of the reviews claimed the narrator’s flaw was that he sees his world in a limited way. What kind of flaw is that? A real flaw might be naivety, lack of self-worth, or inability to make a commitment.

The next on the plotting block is the antagonist’s flaw. A story’s conflict originates from the antagonist’s opposing force with an equal but opposite flaw. For example, Divergent by Veronica Roth, pairs protagonist, Tris (lack of confidence) with Erudite leader, Jeanine Matthews (overconfident). Unlike the protagonist, the antagonist’s flaw is tragic and causes failure. The antagonist’s composition was perhaps my biggest take away from this online class.

My goal in any class is to refine my work-in-progress list. The target this time was a short story I wrote in March. The story was too big for 1500 words, and additional scenes were already forming in my mind. Then, Ginny Wiehardt posted Top 7 Signs Your Short Story Wants to be a Novel, and I knew what I had to do. My protagonist’s flaw was an inability to put the past behind. While he fought a secret enemy, the opposition was missing. I tweaked the teenage shopkeeper to focus on his own selfish future with a hint of sociopath in the mix. The lack of concern for others gave my protagonist a reason and a cause to live in the present.

Another exercise in the class included identifying the passion that inspires my writing. My answer was relationships, secrets and science. Consider the relationship of parents and their teenage children. Both are ready to part, fearful of the separation, and concerned about the secrets lurking between them. To practice flaws — opposition and a subtle mirroring — here is an example of characters I dreamed to life today:
matriculation ceremony2The parent, the story’s protagonist, selects the farthest seat from the incoming students at the matriculation ceremony. His folding chair, one of the few seats in the late afternoon shade, has a slight leftward tilt, the ground slanting toward the sidewalk of the college quadrangle. The protagonist takes a printed program, a quality piece designed for a permanent place in the bottom of some mother’s drawer, and finds his son’s name. The boy reminds him somewhat of his ex-wife but more specifically of his brother-in-law, currently housed at the federal penitentiary in Otisville, New York. He scans the other students’ names. From the thousand enrolled in the same graduating class with his progeny, one name is a blatant defiance of the strict and conditional wording that accompanied his generous gift to the college of science. He stands, tosses the program in the trash can and glances right just in time to see his son, the antagonist, hand lifted in a mocking wave as if nothing was wrong.

This character sketch offers many potential flaws to build a story. The protagonist is rash and unable to put the past behind. The antagonist hints at some arrogance and naivety. Many things could go wrong on a near perfect August day.

Another practice idea is to watch movies for the character flaws in the protagonist and the antagonist. Watch for the conflict, and you will find the flaws whether the movie is Silver Linings Playbook, Man of Steel, Run All Night, or Woman in Gold.

Amazon, Hachette and “the wretched $9.99 price point”

8 Replies

Print is dead.

At least, that’s what the Big Five publishing houses fear. One company is fighting the potential loss of sales and its possible demise in a public battle that affects readers and writers alike.

Before 2007 or so, the only way an author’s story was read was through a print copy in brick-and-mortar bookstores. The only way to get into a bookstore was through a major publisher. Knowing their control, these large publishers chose the stories and genres people read, the prices at which books were sold and what the authors got paid.

Now that snippy digital upstarts like me are snooting our way in and circumventing the system they so strategically designed, publishers are no longer needed. With digital formats, there is no gatekeeping; I can write and publish any book at any length in any genre I choose and at any price.

Without hardcover or paperback books, the publishers’ choking grip on the market disappears with the turn of a page. The Big Five lose all public prestige, respect, expertise, control and sales. Especially sales.

Welcome to the battle between Hachette and Amazon.

Hachette wants to charge high e-book prices to discourage electronic sales and boost paper sales. Amazon wants to keep prices of e-books favorable to consumers. This dispute has been going on for years. To understand the impact of today’s feud, let’s go back in time for a brief history….  (Shout out thanks to J.A. Konrath’s timeline for the format inspiration that I use.)

NOVEMBER 2007

Amazon releases the company’s Kindle e-reader.

NOVEMBER 2009

Barnes & Noble introduces the company’s Nook e-reader.

Retailers continue buying books and e-books using “wholesale pricing,” an agreement in which publishing houses charge half the printed cover price to those retailers. The booksellers then compete with each other by discounting books or offering sales. At this time, hardback book prices range from $15-30.

Amazon is a large company with a large share of the e-book market. They rarely sell at full price, offering book titles below the printed cost, even as far down as $9.99 for bestselling novels. The Big Five publishers make a lot of money through the sales of higher priced hardcover books, and this consumer-friendly price point might encourage more digital sales than paper. These companies didn’t want that to be the standard that consumers would expect to pay.

JANUARY 2010

Apple prepares to release its iPad, but if they offer books in their iBookstore at a price to compete with Amazon, the company will lose money. A publishing executive blames Amazon’s “wretched $9.99 price point.” Apple and the Big Five publishers work out an agreement that benefits everyone. The publishers switch book distribution away from wholesale pricing to the new and improved “agency pricing” model. In this agreement, publishers control the price of the e-book rather than the retailer. Sales percentages are split favorably, as well: 30% to Apple and 70% to publishers. In this scenario, consumers who choose to buy e-books instead of physical copies are, in a sense, be punished for affecting paper sales.

The only caveat is that all publishing houses have to sell this way to all of Apple’s competing retailers, including Amazon. Amazon pushes back, but with everyone else agreeing to this method of distribution, the company has to accept these terms. Book prices on Amazon’s site rise to $12.99 and $14.99. The term “colluded” is later used when referring to this agency pricing arrangement.

APRIL 2010

Apple releases the iPad.

JULY 2010

Amazon reports that digital e-books outsell hardcover books for the first time in history. The agency pricing continues for two years before the U.S. government steps in.

APRIL 2012

The U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) accuses Apple and the publishers of conspiring to raise e-book prices and filed a civil antitrust lawsuit. By developing and utilizing agency model, “the publishers prevented retail price competition resulting in consumers paying millions of dollars more for their e-books” especially for the most popular titles by big-name, best-selling authors.

Three of the Big Five publishing houses, which include Hachette, settle immediately. Retailers resume discounting and offering sales. The publishers pay financial restitutions to consumers and are “prohibited for two years from entering into new agreements that constrain retailers’ ability to offer discounts or other promotions to consumers….” The DoJ settled with two other publishers and Apple by 2013, yet Apple appeals the decision.

Now fast forward to the present year. Apple’s appeal is ongoing as of this post.

JANUARY-FEBRUARY 2014

The 2-year contracts are ending, so new ones need to be negotiated or extended. Amazon sends a contract to Hachette. Because they do not receive a response from Hachette, Amazon removes the site’s pre-order buttons and stops discounting Hachette titles.

MARCH 2014

Hachette’s contract to sell books with Amazon expires, but Amazon extends it into April while both sides negotiate. Because the outcome is uncertain and shipping dates cannot be guaranteed, Amazon reduces the print inventory of Hachette titles.

APRIL 2014

There is now no longer any contract for Amazon to sell Hachette titles on Amazon. Hachette finally makes counter offer, Amazon rejects it.

MAY-JUNE 2014

Hachette authors notice slower sales, so Amazon makes several proposals that they and Hachette offer financial provisions for the authors during negotiations. Hachette declines all of them.

JULY-AUGUST 18, 2014

Here’s when media runs wild with statements, press releases and proposals, oh my!

Hachette compiles its press releases and statements regarding Amazon here.

Propaganda or perspective? Article from Random House editorial assistant Alison Herman with intriguing links at the end.

Big Five authors want print to thrive. Who can blame them? Without physical books, bestselling authors like Stephen King, John Grisham and James Patterson lose their dedicated personal assistants and vacation beach houses. They each become “just another little writer” in a writer’s ocean.

There is a letter from Douglas Preston, a Council Member of the Author’s Guild, signed by authors supporting Hachette. As of August 9, the letter had approximately 900 signatures, published as a full 2-page $110,000 advertisement in the New York Times as “A Letter to Our Readers.”

There is a petition by Change.org urging readers and writers to support the company who supports readers and authors. As of August 9, the petition reached 8000 electronic signatures. (8466 as of my post)

On August 9, The Amazon Books Team releases a letter discussing their point of view from within the negotiation. There are some good links at the end. It’s worth a read through.

The email reply from Hachette CEO Michael Pietsch in response to Amazon’s August 9 letter request for consumers to contact executives about the negotiations.

Amazon releases a statement justifying the $9.99 price point: “For every copy an e-book would sell at $14.99, it would sell 1.74 copies if priced at $9.99. So, for example, if customers would buy 100,000 copies of a particular e-book at $14.99, then customers would buy 174,000 copies of that same e-book at $9.99. Total revenue at $14.99 would be $1,499,000. Total revenue at $9.99 is $1,738,000.”

And here we are, readers and writers, reeling in the wake of potential propaganda from both sides. Marketers in any company can spin numbers any way they want to make the numbers show in their favor. I don’t necessarily believe in Amazon’s exact number or those calculations empirically, but the rationale behind it is solid. If I had $15, would I spend it on one book? Am I more inclined to buy a $9.99 book and a coffee and muffin to enjoy while reading the book? If a purchase like that gives me that pleasure, then I’m encouraged to buy another similarly priced book for a similar experience.

“Why should e-books cost as much as, or more than, a printed copy?” my husband asked me. “There’s no shipping or printing.” He’s a chemist and not in the publishing industry. If this is so elementary to someone outside the industry, how is it lost on someone in the publishing business?

I’m not necessarily pro-Amazon, but I am pro-information. Some people do not have the drive or desire to do it all, so turning their work over to a Big Five publisher is the best option for them. But how is Hachette assisting and nurturing its authors when it let their contract with Amazon expire, and thus all its authors’ contracts as well?

If Amazon wins this battle, they will dominate the market…for now. At some point, all Amazon authors could be stuck with a business model that no longer offers today’s benefits, and then Amazon becomes the Big One publisher. If that happens, authors are not stuck.

Unlike print, where the only way to publish was through a publisher, there are now numerous electronic options. No doubt any number of smaller publishers and retailers will develop online stores. Any author can sell directly from their website. These were options never available before.

Who needs who more, Amazon or Hachette?

Who, or what, do authors need?

Print may be dying, but books and stories never will.

Bad Boys–Watcha Gonna Do

4 Replies

What is it about bad boys? Those loveable scamps who are utterly irredeemable but still attract us because their badness is so much more interesting than the good guy’s goodness. You can count on the hero to do the right thing because he’s the hero. You can count on the bad boy to be bad. Now, the bad boy may do the right thing if he feels like it, or for a selfish and egocentric reason. Or he may do the wrong thing and try to spin it as the right thing. But when he eventually does a bad thing, he can’t really be blamed because he’s “bad.” It’s in his nature to do bad and we should have expected it. Here’s an example.

SPOILER ALERT! I started thinking about bad boys after seeing the film Thor: The Dark World (IMDB) in November. My thoughts were prompted by the film’s fascinating bad guy, Loki (Tom Hiddleston – IMDb). Loki is a handsome schemer and magician who casts intricate illusions that fool even his brother, Thor (Chris Hemsworth – IMDb), who should know better than to take anything Loki does at face value. While Loki helped Thor do the right thing (Thor is, after all a hero), he still manages to twist appearances to suit himself and his ultimate goal. He steals a great scene where he repairs his relationship with his brother and perhaps squeezes a tear from the unsuspecting audience. *sniff* But watch out! Loki is, at heart, a bad boy, one might even say SUPERVILLIAN, who surprises the same audience within the hour. I left the theater totally psyched for Loki’s next film appearance, ready to embrace the badness.

From the author’s point of view the role of bad guy, or villain, or antagonist, can be a lot of fun to write. Most modern fiction writing guides suggest that the hero needs to grow and change in some manner by the end of the story, but the bad guy can get away with staying the same. No one expects the villain to be redeemed, only subjected to justice in some form. This means that an author can write his or her bad boy as sneaky, lying, and irredeemably bad as wanted–and most people won’t mind. What a rush that is, right? The antagonist doesn’t have to be sympathetic, yet he is. His backstory might include tragedy, drama, and loss suffered at a formative age, but remember you’re hearing the story from a bad boy. Can you believe any part of what he tells you? The author doesn’t have to make a charismatic villain logical or even give him a solid motive. The reader will accept him because he’s charming. The author doesn’t have to spend time researching the psychology of badness; he can make the villain sink from bad to worse to worst.

While the mindless and indestructible killing machine type of bad boy like Freddy or Jason may strike horror in the minds of filmgoers, a reader needs a different type of villain. A charming, cultured bad boy can heighten mystery and sexual tension in a story while fulfilling his role as someone for the protagonist to fight. Think about that the next time you’re writing a bad guy. Instead of writing him greasy and disheveled, try making him debonair. And then he can kill dozens of people, or sell the international secret, or betray the unsuspecting hero and we’ll accept him for it.

Oh, and apparently the makers of Jaguar automobiles agree with me. Check out the Superbowl commercial called British Villains Rendezvous (british villains rendezvous) which features Hiddleston, Ben Kingsley and Mark Strong. Then let’s have a spirited discussion about the bad boys you find irresistible.

P.S. I wrote my post weeks before seeing this ad, and I can prove it.

 

Tags: