-
Day 20 Assignment
Reply to post your assignment.
-
14 Replies
-
Janeen’s Character Relationships
What I learned doing this assignment was that I wasn’t always using the character’s traits in my current version to take advantage of built-in conflict and bonding opportunities. Doing this exercise gave me more motivations for conflict than I had before and that should make the story more emotional.
I changed Abby from being Cagey to being Lazy. Cagey was close enough to her manipulative trait that it didn’t add much.
I had already changed Noah to Vengeful in Lesson 11 and I left him alone.
I didn’t change Greg. I added Diffidence to Whitney’s list of traits (she only had 3 before) and it explains a lot about her reactions to bullying by her boss.
Canine Comedy Crew Characters and their traits:
NOAH WILLIAMS, 10 yo boy
Traits: Low key, observant, responsible, vengeful
2. ABBY PAXTON – 13 yo girl
1. Traits: Manipulative, smart-mouth, lazy, exuberant
3. GREG PAXTON – 40-ish workaholic dad
1. Traits: Self-sacrificing (at work), guilty, indulgent, unchallenged
4. WHITNEY WILLIAMS – 30-something WFH mom
1. Traits: Efficient, smart, over-organized, diffident
5. BETTY WHITE – 80-something devious neighbor
1. Traits: Cagey, manipulative, frail due to age, loving
Character Pairs:
Noah/Abby
Rapport: Noah’s low key and observant traits coupled with Abby’s manipulative smart mouth mens he sees and keeps quiet about how Abby manipulates their parents. He learns from her.
Conflict: Noah’s responsible and vengeful traits make him resent that he does all of the work with the dogs while she manipulates people into doing her bidding and exuberantly claims the lead on a job she’s not really doing.
Contrast: Noah’s low key trait is in direct contrast with Abby’s exuberant one.
Competition: Noah’s responsible trait competes with Abby’s manipulation to get others to do her bidding. He isn’t manipulated into taking responsibility, but Abby thinks that’s what she’s done. She thinks she has power over him.
Subtext: The subtext of their relationship is that Noah’s vengeful and low key traits allow him to let Abby talk a big game and then fail when she doesn’t do the work.
If I change Cagey (which is akin to manipulative) to Lazy, Abby and Noah will have more conflict (responsible vs. lazy).
Abby/Greg
Rapport: Abby’s manipulative trait complements Greg’s self-sacrificing and indulgent traits. She takes advantage of him and it assuages his guilt about Abby’s mom leaving them.
Conflict: Abby’s laziness and smart mouth constantly challenge Greg’s indulgent nature. He can never win but knows he’s not being a good parent.
Contrast: Abby is lazy while her dad is unchallenged at his job so he jumps on anything new that comes up.
Competition: Abby’s exuberance and Greg’s self-sacrificing are often in competition. She gets excited about something she wants to do and he goes to work instead.
Subtext: Abby’s sense that she wasn’t enough to keep her mom from leaving feeds Greg’s guilt about his wife’s departure. No amount of “making up for it” on his part can ever make up for it in her eyes.
Abby/Whitney
Rapport: Abby’s exuberance and smart mouth play to Whitney’s smart trait
Conflict: Whitney (Efficient and Smart) is not blind to Abby’s manipulative trait like Greg is and she hold’s Abby’s feet to the fire to get her tasks done.
Contrast: Abby’s laziness is in direct contrast to Whitney’s over-organized smart efficiency.
Competition: Abby competes with Whitney for Greg’s time and attention.
Subtext: Abby’s exuberance and manipulation grate on Whitney’s diffidence. Whitney feels outgunned.
Noah/Whitney
Rapport: As a single mom, Whitney shaped Noah from birth. He has great respect for his mom and the limitations on her career that working from home to care for him have caused.
Conflict: Noah isn’t a little kid any more. He’s more responsible and doesn’t need the over-organization his mother provides. He is also growing more confident than she is and at times, doesn’t respect her as much as he used to.
Contrast: Noah’s low key manner of getting things done is invisible compared to Whitney’s giant white boards and other over-organized detritus.
Competition: Noah has observed how to plan and organize all his life and competes with his mom to organize the CCC. Her diffidence allows their relationship to change over the course of the screenplay.
Subtext: Noah wants to show the world that’s he’s just as good as anyone else regardless not having a father. Whitney still feels she needs to make up for this disadvantage she has saddled Noah with and that she is constantly “not good enough”. Noah knows it’s not true and feels he must avenge his mother for the sacrifices she’s made for him.
Noah/Greg
Rapport: Greg and Noah are both responsible. Their low-key and self-sacrificing traits make them good work buddies.
Conflict: Noah sees how easily manipulated Greg is by Abby and resents him for this weakness. He wants to get revenge for Greg on Abby even though Greg’s guilt makes him cave to Abby every time.
Contrast: Noah takes on more responsibility in things he’s good at. Greg is bored and unchallenged with his job and wants only the few exciting parts of it — firefighting at the factory.
Competition: Noah and Greg both want to come up with the best technical ideas for the CCC. Greg, due to his education and experience, assumes he has the better ideas. Noah, due to working with the dogs and reading the dog training books, knows what will work better.
Subtext: Noah wants revenge on Abby for manipulating Greg, a guy that values his mom as much as she should be valued. Noah functions as the man of the house in many ways. Greg thinks that Whitney has coddled Noah the way he has Abby even though the resulting kids are very different.
-
Lesson 20: Dramatic Character Relationships
Characters & Traits
David: obsessive, determined, escapist, intelligent
Lydia: impatient, caring, insightful, truthful
Emily: self-centered, short-sighted, direct, unforgiving
Mark: people-oriented, altruistic, hard on self, compassionate
Character pairs – David with others:
Look at: rapport, conflict, contrast, competition, subtext
David and Lydia – Lydia can be impatient with David’s obsessions (conflict), and yet caring about his tendencies toward escapism (rapport). The subtext is that Lydia’s impatience can mask a desire to protect herself emotionally, while David’s subtext is that he has a better handle on reality than most people due to his higher intelligence. The contrast between David and Lydia is that Lydia is more direct, and David is more indirect in his approach to life. Competition occurs when each tries to apply their intelligence and truth-telling to provide analysis of any given situation in order to prove ‘who is right’.
David and Emily – David and Emily have very little rapport. David conflicts with Emily on a few fronts: her self-centeredness conflicts with his obsessiveness, and it can run counter to his desires. David’s intelligence also sees through Emily’s short-sightedness. The subtext is that Emily seeks something from David he cannot provide, while David is inclined to escape from this realization. The contrast is that David and Emily have different orientations toward life; David looks inward and is determined to find a path forward by taking responsibility for his life, while Emily turns outward and blames others for her problems. Competition occurs in terms of world view: who has the superior world view? Emily believes David is a hopeless and useless escapist, while David believes Emily will never find happiness in her unrealistic and unforgiving expectations of others.
David and Mark – Mark’s people-oriented attitude mean he will sign on to David’s obsessions and try to find the positive in them (rapport). If he questions David, he will turn on himself (be hard on himself) and attempt a more compassionate attitude. The subtext is that Mark is supportive of David but doubts his ability to help him in an effective way, leading to an internal conflict in Mark. The subtext with David is he feels guilty about Mark’s concern for him and doesn’t believe that Mark can really assist in his life journey and help resolve his personal problems. The contrast is that Mark always turns to others to find his life purpose, while David turns inward. There is little competition between the two as their traits tend to provide an incentive to support one another in some fashion.
-
Sandra Hildreth Character Relationships
What I learned about doing this assignment is that how the characters interact with each other is just as, if not more, important than the character’s profile.
I am unable to copy and paste the spreadsheet I created, so will sum it up by saying the four characters I chose, by changing one trait, changed the entire dynamic of their relationships and will make for a much more interesting screenplay.
-
Carolyn’s Character Relationships
What I learned doing this assignment was…it’s important to be aware of how your character’s traits will help shape their relationships with the other characters.
Jess Jenkins – anxious, curious, ambitious, tenacious
Smooth Carver – deceitful, driven, conniving, controlling
JESS / SMOOTH
Jess’s ambitious trait works well with Smooth’s driven trait, providing rapport and also competition. There is conflict when Jess is curious about something and Smooth is deceitful about it. When Jess is anxious, Smooth takes advantage and becomes conniving. Subtext is they share a deep wound over the deaths of their respective parents.
May O’Malley – domineering, vulnerable, unflappable, forthright
Cleo Shanty – Sad, dreamer, stubborn, traditionalist
MAY / CLEO
May’s domineering trait contrasts with Cleo’s dreamer trait. May’s vulnerable trait provides rapport with Cleo’s sad trait. The unflappable trait of May’s could compete with Cleo’s stubborn trait, but I need to think more about that. The subtext is they are both hurting emotionally and want different things to ease their pain which causes conflict. However, their rapport is what allows them to help one another in the end.
-
Rebecca’s Character Relationships
What I learned from this is by making a small trait change I could now hit all of the boxes in character states with each relationship, and even elevate a few of the new ones.
Sherwood – brilliant, industrious, disassociated, discontent, damaged
Cornelia – intellectual, cunning, feministic, discontent, devoted
Mr. Lane – successful, chauvinist, judgmental, arrogant
Madam LaBelle – smart, unconventional, female chauvinist, confidant (changed survivor to female chauvinist when I looked it up to find it is really a term)
Takes place in early 20th Century.
CORNELIA/SHERWOOD
Rapport: she’s intellectual and educated, he’s brilliant but less educated.
Conflict: She is a devoted wife but jealous that she (because she is a woman) can’t run the business to allow him to be a writer. Sherwood wishes to walk away from the business to write full time.
Contrast: She comes from a wealthy family and highly educated. He comes from a poor abusive family, less educated, and disassociated at a young age.
Competition: She competes with him in their successful business, joins forces with him but must step back at the birth of their third child.
Subtext: Cornelia plots to keep Sherwood focused on business rather than his compulsive writing. Sherwood deceives Cornelia by pretending to focus on the now failing business.CORNELIA/MR. LANE (her father)
Rapport: She is educated and like him smart in business decisions.
Conflict: He believes a woman’s place is in the home. Cornelia, a feminist, believes women should be judged by ability and not sex.
Contrast: Cornelia is a feminist, her father a chauvinist.
Competition: She secretly strives to prove her business ability by completing against her father.Subtext: Cornelia feels she is more educated and capable than either her brother or husband to run a business, but convention in the early 1900’s prevent women from owning a business.
CORNELIA/CLAUDEE LABELLE
Rapport: Both are smart savvy women in a male dominated world.
Conflict: Cornelia is jealous of Maude owning her own successful business.
Contrast: Cornelia abides by social convention, Maude runs a successful string of high end brothels.
Competition: They compete in a chess game. Maude comes out on top. Cornelia, has more than met her match.
Subtext: Cornelia envies Maude as Maude schemes to get Cornelia to join her in a new business venture, a party mansion with a brothel and gambling to cater to millionaire men.-
This reply was modified 3 years, 9 months ago by Rebecca Sukle.
-
This reply was modified 3 years, 9 months ago by
-
Subject: Monica’s Character Relationships
What I learned doing this assignment was by looking at character relationships like this your characters become richer, more dramatic and it demonstrates where you need to elevate traits to get more conflict.
Compare the traits of your four main characters and elevate those relationships.
1. Select your top four characters and list their name and four traits each.
ECHO STUART – Protagonist: Selfish, Mystical, Arrogant, and Devious
ECHO STUART – Antagonist: Insane, Self-serving, Ignorant, and Logical (Note: Echo the Antagonist is a clone made by Echo the Protagonist with tech and witchcraft – just to clarify any confusion.)
MARK STUART (Dad): Genius intelligence, Driven, Pre-occupied, Controller
GRANDMA STUART “MOM”: Cunning, Survivor, Rebel, Laid back
2. Put the characters up against each other in pairs as I’ve done with Jack above.
Echo/Echo: Echo P’s SELFISH trait works well with Echo A’s SELF-SERVING trait until Echo P realizes Echo A is INSANE. This is where you have Rapport and Competition and Conflict.
Put Echo P’s ARROGANT trait together the Echo A’s IGNORANT trait and you have opposites. Echo P is so sure she’s created the perfect clone until Echo A’s shows signs of not knowing what to do in certain situations. This is where you have Sub-text (she’s not so smart after all) and Contrast.
Put Echo P’s MYSTICAL and DEVIOUS traits with Echo A’s LOGICAL trait and you have conflict. Echo P made Echo A with a combination of tech and witchcraft spells from using very ancient, very dark magic. Echo A doesn’t understand and you have her Sub-text (how can this be?). This also has contrast and conflict.
Echo P/Mark
Put Echo P’s MYSTICAL trait with Mark’s GENIUS INTELLIGENCE and right away there are problems. But the usual father/daughter problems are escalated because Mark doesn’t believe in hocus pocus. This is where you will have lots of conflict and contrast.
Put Echo P’s SELFISH trait with Mark’s CONTROLLER trait and you have the two at each other again. Mark wants to control Echo’s life and that’s why she’s created the clone. So you have sub-text, conflict and contrast.
Put Echo P’s ARROGANT trait with Mark’s DRIVEN trait. There is some rapport here because Mark thinks he has to do everything in order for it to be done right and so does Echo. But that soon turns to conflict when the crisis happens and Echo P doesn’t want Mark’s help because she thinks she can fix it – more sub-text. It also creates competition as both are thinking they’re smarter than everyone else.
Put Echo P’s DEVIOUS trait with Mark’s PRE-OCCUPIED trait. With Mark pre-occupied with everything except parenting, Echo manages to create her clone who goes off the rails creating conflict.
Echo A/Mark
Put Echo A’s LOGICAL trait with Mark’s GENIUS INTELLIGENCE trait and at first they get along so there’s rapport. But when Mark realizes Echo A is a clone with no emotion then there is contrast and conflict.
Put Echo A’s INSANE trait with Mark’s CONTROLLER trait there is rapport as one believes the other is just like themselves. But as soon as Mark recognizes Echo A’s insanity you have contrast and Echo A’s sub-text.
Put Echo A’s IGNORANT trait with Mark’s DRIVEN trait and there is conflict. When things start to go wrong and Echo A doesn’t know why because of her ignorance of how the human world works, Mark’s driven trait spurs him to fix the problem(s) but Echo A doesn’t want to be fixed so it also creates sub-text.
Put Echo A’s SELF-SERVING trait with Mark’s PRE-OCCUPIED trait and at first you have a sort of rapport because Mark is not really paying attention. Until he snaps out of it and then you have contrast, conflict and competition.
Echo P/”Mom”
Put Echo P’s MYSTICAL trait with Mom’s REBEL trait this creates rapport because Mom taught Echo everything she knows about witchcraft. But then it creates competition and contrast because Echo also learned dark magic.
Put Echo P’s SELFISH trait with Mom’s SURVIVOR trait this is contrast because their motivation is different but it also is rapport because they are thinking of only themselves at times.
Put Echo P’s ARROGANT trait with Mom’s LAID BACK trait this is contrast because Echo P thinks she knows everything which is arrogance where Mom actually does and is comfortable with that. Conflict, sub-text.
Put Echo P’s DEVIOUS trait with Mom’s CUNNING trait while this looks like rapport and in some instances is, Echo P uses dark magic while Mom uses white magic. Competition, contrast, sub-text.
Echo A/Mom
Put Echo A’s LOGICAL trait with Mom’s REBEL trait and you have instant conflict and competition. Mom’s a grandma and has so much life experience that she can outwit any logic the clone can come up with. Comes down to whose method is best. Sub-text too.
Put Echo A’s INSANE trait with Mom’s LAID BACK trait creates a difficult relationship as Mom just sits back and lets the clone get angrier and angrier which creates contrast and conflict.
Put Echo A’s IGNORANT trait with Mom’s CUNNING trait, in a dark way there is rapport as the clone learns from each mistake it makes but when Mom starts to outwit it, there is conflict, sub-text and competition.
Put Echo A’s SELF-SERVING trait with Mom’s SURVIVOR trait creates empathy toward one another which is rapport. But Mom has survived ritual abuse to climb the witch’s ladder to success which creates sub-text, conflict and contrast. As Echo A’s self-serving trait is to make sure she replaces the “real” Echo.
4. With each pair, make at least one improvement, changing a trait to elevate one of the above states.
ECHO STUART – Protagonist: Selfish, Mystical, Arrogant, and Devious
Change – Selfish to vengeful
ECHO STUART – Antagonist: Insane, Self-serving, Ignorant, and Logical
Change – Self-serving to deceptive
(Note: Echo the Antagonist is a clone made by Echo the Protagonist with tech and witchcraft – just to clarify any confusion.)
MARK STUART (Dad): Genius intelligence, Driven, Pre-occupied, Controller
Change – Controller to fixer
GRANDMA STUART “MOM”: Cunning, Survivor, Rebel, Laid back
Change – Laid back to adventurous
-
Kathleen S.
What I learned from doing this assignment is that every character interaction should be as dynamic, and dramatic as possible to play out on screen. Good clear thinking seems to be the key element to the foundation of a good screenplay.
Here are my characters and their traits:
JDog
Beyond the pale
Reprehensible
Flea bitten Mad
Rascal
And
Jesse Evans
Leader
Strong
Rustler
Unprincipled
Rapport: Jesse has to tell JDog what to do, or he doesn’t know what’s going to happen.
Conflict: JDog operates out of his madness and does whatever he wants unless Jesse catches him.
Contrast: Jesse drives his gang towards a given goal and stays on task. JDog causes only distractions.
Competition: JDog will find women first, and get them before Jesse does.
Subtext: Jesse lets JDog tag along because he kind of likes him although he probably won’t admit it.
Something to change to elevate the quality of these dramatic states: Jess isn’t just unprincipled but downright … dastardly. So, I think that this will bring out the evil villainous deeds that they gang is going to be capable of doing.
Charles Lee Ray aka “Pony”
Death Defier
Possessed
Daredevil
Hellacious
And
Dolly
Midget
Loyal Compadre
Bandit
Jester
Rapport: Dolly is the loyal companion of Charles Ray who is “Pony”. Pony loves his friend, and the two of them are bad guys. Pony helps him along because he is a midget. Most of the calamities Pony experiences, and every time he comes through alive even though he is shot or killed.
Conflict: The conflict is that Pony might die although Dolly needs his help so badly.
Contrast: Dolly is too short to ride unless Pony takes him. Dolly can be bad but it’s almost easier for him to be good.
Competition: Pony is a comic relief due to his death defying, but Dolly is also a sort of jester.
Subtext: This pair of bad guys is loveable for their drawbacks.
Something to change to elevate the quality of the character drama is: Pony could be …kamikaze. Meaning that with every crime, assault, or gunfight he is first to jump into the thick of it and get almost killed.
-
What I learned: Considering the traits this deeply (for the first time with this new script) made me see much more clearly how relationships will be impacting every single scene and decision for these characters. It also showed me (in a couple places) where the traits would be better changed.
Charlotte “Charlie” Piper: Creative, loyal, caring, disorganized.
Amber Anders Piper (stepmom): Ambitious, secretive [changing to bitchy], plotting, loyal.
Jared Mack: Smart, professional, protective, blunt.
Lois Piper (mother): Entitled, creative, optimistic, impulsive [changing to VAIN]
CHARLIE/AMBER
Charlotte “Charlie” Piper: Creative, loyal, caring, disorganized.
Amber Anders Piper (stepmom): Ambitious, secretive, plotting, loyal.
Rapport: Charlie’s caring and loyal traits work well with Amber’s loyal trait when they’re focused on saving the company that Charlie’s dad/Amber’s husband started. They both have a lot invested emotionally in the company and will try everything they can, and then some, to get the company through its current crisis.
Conflict: Charlie’s disorganized trait drives Amber’s ambitious trait crazy, because Amber sees absolutely nothing advantageous in being sloppy and disorganized. In Amber’s mind (and it’s true), this is what has brought the company to the brink of bankruptcy. Amber’s plotting creates conflict with Charlie’s loyal trait once she falls in love with the farm and the little herd that came with it.
Contrast: Charlie’s creativity also confuses Amber’s ambitious trait. Charlie lets her creativity take her on whatever direction it wants to go, while Amber is uptight in her ambition.
Competition: Charlie was spoiled by her late father, and he let her join his company even when he knew it wasn’t her thing. Amber, the young widow, knows she was never the real love of her husband’s life. But she’s willing to accept that so long as she can keep the multi-million dollar company solvent.
Subtext: Even though the man is dead, These women are always competing for Charlie’s late father’s love.
CHARLIE/JARED
Charlotte “Charlie” Piper: Creative, loyal, determined, disorganized.
Jared Mack: Smart, professional, protective, blunt.
Rapport: Charlie and Jared have a growing rapport through Charlie’s loyalty to her great aunt’s farm and vision for it. Jared appreciates that she’s willing to learn and do what it takes to succeed.
Conflict: Charlie’s disorganized trait drives Jared crazy, though, because as a veterinarian, he has to be professional. In his mind, disorganization is the polar opposite. Her determination to sell the farm at first causes a lot of conflict with his being protective of the farm because of his longtime friendship with the great aunt.
Contrast: Charlie’s disorganized creativity pretty much makes Jared’s professional, blunt traits do somersaults.
Competition: Charlie realizes she can save the farm by being creative when Jared is sure that only a big-time lawyer will make that happen.
Subtext: Opposites attract.
AMBER/LOIS
Amber Anders Piper (stepmom): Ambitious, secretive [change to bitchy], plotting, loyal.
Lois Piper (mother): Entitled, creative, optimistic, impulsive
Rapport: They were both married to Charlie’s late father, and they both loved him and miss him. Amber’s ambitious trait and Lois’ optimistic trait also work together well when they have a problem to solve.
Conflict: They were both married to Charlie’s late father, and they are jealous of each other.
Contrast: A trophy wife vs. the first wife, even though she was a celebrity. Lois is an open book in a lot of ways, which contrasts a lot with Amber’s secretive streak.
Competition: They once competed over a man; now they’re competing to run Charlie’s life.
Subtext: They secretly admire things about each other – Amber admires Lois’ creative trait coming out in an entrepreneurial spirit; Lois sees Amber as generating a long-lasting career through her brains.
CHARLIE/LOIS
Charlotte “Charlie” Piper: Creative, loyal, caring, disorganized.
Lois Piper (mother): Entitled, creative, optimistic, impulsive [change to VAIN]
Rapport: These women are both creative and appreciate that about each other. Charlie’s loyalty trait refuses to see her mom as a has-been. Lois’ sees Charlie’s disorganized trait as her right brain on steroids .
Conflict: Lois’ sense of entitlement often means she assumes Charlie will drop everything for her or agree to Lois’ every whim, even when the whims are unrealistic.
Contrast: Charlie’s ultimate loyalty to the farm’s success gets in the way of Lois vain trait, sure she’s on the verge of big break 2.0. Charlie’s caring trait also contrast with Lois’ vanity and sense of entitlement.
Competition: They’re two creative women who show their creativity differently. They also compete for Jared’s attentions, with Lois’ entitlement ratcheting up her play for Jared.
Subtext: The mother and daughter love each other, but they really shouldn’t be allowed to live together.
-
Carol Paur’s Character Relationships
What I learned doing this assignment was I needed to get deeper into Raymond’s personality. He was flat.
Raymond: Reserved, intelligent, worried, deceptive
Barbara: Compassionate, driven, strong sense of justice, adventurous
Frank: Controlling, self-serving, charming, misogynist,
Bishop: insightful, joyful, humble, manipulator
Raymond/Barbara (Rapport): Raymond won’t say anything while Barbara is effusive in conversation
Raymond/Barbara (Conflict) Raymond is worried about what people think of them having a Down syndrome son, Johnny. Barbara is compassionate and is proud of their son.
Raymond/Barbara (Contrast): Raymond wants to keep a low profile in the community; Barbara seeks justice at every turn and is not afraid to be in the public eye.
Raymond/Barbara (Competition): Raymond thinks his job as a lawyer is enough for the family without drawing attention to them; Barbara enters the fight against the KKK despite her husband’s reticence.
Raymond/Barbara (Subtext): Raymond fears his wife Barbara is going to discover his forced membership in the KKK; Barbara wishes her husband would be more vocal on important issues.
Raymond/Frank (Rapport): Frank often has the upper hand when Raymond and Frank are together.
Raymond/Frank (Conflict) Raymond worries about his membership with KKK while Frank thinks he’s being a wimp.
Raymond/Frank (Contrast): Frank is a charmer while Raymond is reserved.
Raymond/Frank (Competition): Frank lusts after Raymond’s wife, Barbara; Raymond is worried Frank will seduce Barbara
Raymond/Frank (Subtext): Frank plays Raymond like a marionette puppet.
Raymond/Bishop (Rapport): Bishop notices something is not right with Raymond
Raymond/Bishop (Conflict): Bishop wants Raymond to let his wife be more involved
Raymond/Bishop (Contrast): Bishop is joyful while Raymond is worried
Raymond/Bishop (Competition): Bishop is taking Barbara’s time away from Raymond
Raymond/Bishop (Subtext): Bishop suspects something is not right with Raymond; Raymond wants to avoid the Bishop at all costs.
Raymond: Reserved, intelligent, de-sensitized from war, deceptive
Barbara: Compassionate, driven, strong sense of justice, adventurous
Frank: Controlling, self-serving, charming, misogynist,
Bishop: insightful, joyful, humble, manipulator
I changed Raymond’s worried to de-sensitized from the war.
Raymond/Barbara (Rapport): Raymond often walks away or falls asleep when Barbara is speaking which infuriates her.
Raymond/Barbara (Conflict) Raymond is worried about what people think of them having a thinks Johnny, their Down syndrome son, should be placed in an institution. Barbara is compassionate and is proud of their son and wants him to stay with the family.
Raymond/Barbara (Contrast): Raymond is hardened after serving the war and just wants to avoid conflict: Barbara seeks justice at every turn and is not afraid to be in the public eye.
Raymond/Barbara (Competition): Raymond thinks being a lawyer is a good way to hide from society; Barbara thinks people have a moral obligation to right the wrongs of society.
Raymond/Barbara (Subtext): Raymond deceives Barbara by secretly being a member of the KKK.
Raymond/Frank (Rapport): Frank often has the upper hand when Raymond and Frank are together. Raymond, de-sensitized to the ravages of war, allows Frank to intimidate him.
Raymond/Frank (Conflict) Raymond is trying to figure out how to get out of being in the KKK without Frank finding out.
Raymond/Frank (Contrast): Frank is a charmer while Raymond is reserved.
Raymond/Frank (Competition): Frank lusts after Raymond’s wife, Barbara; Raymond does little to discourage this behavior.
Raymond/Frank (Subtext): Frank plays Raymond like a marionette puppet. Raymond seems to allow it but is working behind Frank’s back against the KKK.
Raymond/Bishop (Rapport): Bishop notices something is not right with Raymond, who says he’s struggling after serving in the war.
Raymond/Bishop (Conflict): Bishop wants Raymond to let his wife be more involved against the KKK; Raymond doesn’t want any more attention on his family, especially since he’s working with KKK.
Raymond/Bishop (Contrast): Bishop is joyful despite the events unfolding in their city; Raymond, living a duplicitous life, is cranky and unpleasant.
Raymond/Bishop (Competition): Bishop is taking Barbara’s time away from Raymond
Raymond/Bishop (Subtext): Bishop suspects something is not right with Raymond; Raymond wants to avoid the Bishop at all costs.
-
James’ Character Relationships
What I learned doing this assignment was that fully dimensional characters deepen the story, make it more engaging, offer a multitude of ways to create and deliver situations in the script, and gave me a method to design possibly the best characters for this story.
Characters:
Pappy: Studious, martial artist (explosive), concealing, lover.
Eli: Adventurous, naïve, inquisitive, mad scientist.
Don Assante: Philosopher, circumspect, covert, enterprising.
Tabitha: Sexologist, street-smart, polite, lacking companionship.
Pappy/Eli:
Pappy and Eli would team up to live out new experiences given their studious, adventurous and inquisitive traits (rapport). They may bang heads on how to go about these new adventures (conflict).
Pappy may approach a new quest in a traditional sense, while Eli may approach these tasks from a more cerebral angle (contrast). Given they are essential nerds, Pappy and Eli may compete on situations that require know-how and who can outsmart the other (friendly competition).
Pappy could secretly attempt to get Eli a woman given he’s naïve with sexual situations. Pappy could play into Eli’s world view subconsciously and not see their lack of “manly” prowess as something to worry about (subtext).
Pappy/Don Assante:
Pappy and Don Assante could have illuminating conversations on the wonders of the world and women (rapport). They could oppose each other on how best to carry out “business” (conflict).
Pappy could see women as a chase while Don Assante could see them as part of his business empire (contrast). Pappy and Don Assante could use their world views to engage in games with wagers (competition).
Don Assante could use his knowledge of Pappy’s situation to covertly help him out and make him feel “manly” (subtext).
Pappy/Tabitha:
Pappy and Tabitha could engage in long talks about the birds and the bees (rapport). Pappy may want many conquests as Tabitha would like to settle down with someone special (conflict).
Pappy views the birds and the bees as perhaps not vital, while Tabitha accepts it to be the basis of humanity (contrast). They may try to out do each other on who knows more about the birds and the bees (competition).
Given they both know about the other’s “virginity status,” Pappy could attempt to come across as a tough guy to appear all-knowing, while Tabitha uses her polite trait to cover her true emotions (subtext).
-
Joseph’s Character Relationships:
What I learned doing this assignment was how to improve the story and the contribution of its characters in terms of maintaining the maximum audience interest in their actions and dialogue, simply by playing with/adjusting various traits. This will ultimately reveal the greatest relationship conflict between the characters and their goals.
CHARACTER TRAITS:
EMILY- demure, family oriented, angry, resilient
JANUS- Flamboyant, survivor, confrontational, sensitive
FARNSWORTH- Bitter, vengeful, suave, demanding
RAYELLE- secretive, murderous, greedy, deceitful
EMILY/JANUS-
Rapport- Resilient/survivor commonality allows them to carry out a difficult and challenging plan.
Conflict- Demure/Flamboyant traits clash when they have discussions or work together on theft plans.
Contrast- Formally educated, faith oriented, solid family background vs street survivor without roots.
Competition- resilient/survivor will ultimately test who has the greater inner strength. Also, family oriented, survivor, as Janus wants to have all the things in life that Emily has.
Subtext- Demure and inner anger vs confrontational/survivor demonstrates how each has handled their respective life crises.
CHANGE:
Janus- Jealousy for sensitive
Subtext change- Every action Janus takes would now undermine Emily’s success.
Emily- Family oriented for Lone wolf
Subtext change- Emily would reject any strategy for the team put forth by Janus as likely to fail
EMILY/FARNSWORTH-
Rapport- Angry/Bitter, as both come from not dissimilar background rearing
Conflict- resilient/demanding, each pushes beyond their apparent limit when threatened with losing
Contrast- Family oriented/honest to the core vs suave and pretentious exterior only
Competition- resilient vs vengeful/demanding in pursuit of theft item
Subtext- See rapport!
CHANGE:
Farnsworth- Crass for suave.
Contrast change- Emily’s sophistication and social rearing vs Farnsworth’s crude language/behavior
Emily- Lacking confidence for resilient
Competition change- Emily would eventually crumble under the demands of Farnsworth, and would have to find a new solution.
EMILY/RAYELLE-
Rapport- resilient/greedy, as both are after the same prize. Also, angry/murderous, as both have deployed similar end-game strategies.
Conflict- Family oriented/murderous, as Emily still has a soul, but Rayelle has lost hers long ago.
Contrast- Emily is grounded in faith and family. Rayelle is driven by greed at any cost.
Competition- resilient vs deceitful and secretive, as both vie for the prize using different approaches.
Subtext- resilient, Emily has something to prove for an old mistake. Murderous/deceitful/secretive Rayelle enjoys picking on the meek/mild targets.
CHANGE:
Rayelle- Benevolent for greedy
Rapport- as both would now be operating from the same beneficent playbook, though Rayelle’s deceit will allow her to con others with her generosity.
Emily- aggressive for demure
Competition change- each deceit or secretive action by Rayelle would be met with an in-your-face response by Emily.
JANUS/FARNSWORTH-
Rapport- survivor/confrontational vs demanding/vengeful, each knows how to get through life, in spite of any obstacle.
Conflict- confrontational/vengeful, as neither will back down when it comes to the theft prize.
Contrast- sensitive vs vengeful, Janus is aware that her survival has a deeper meaning than materialism. Farnsworth simply takes what he wants for the moment’s gratification.
Competition- confrontational/demanding, as each is highly competitive
Subtext- sensitive survivor vs bitter/vengeful. Janus has discovered what is truly important in life. Farnsworth will be unable to escape his past.
CHANGE:
Janus- hard-hearted for sensitive
Rapport change- Janus would blow off every attempt by Farnsworth to reconcile their relationship
Farnsworth- forgiving for vengeful
Subtext change- Farnsworth would allow Janus to step all over him with her confrontational attitude, until his bitterness can no longer be contained and takes over!
RAYELLE/FARNSWORTH-
Rapport- Greedy/demanding, as both made from the same mold. Deceitful/suave, as both know how to manipulate their opponents.
Conflict- greedy/demanding, as they are old nemeses, will also get them into direct battles today, as well as in the future.
Contrast- none
Competition- see conflict
Subtext- secretive/suave, but both have hidden agendas for the other.
CHANGE:
Rayelle- Openness for secretive
Competition change- Rayelle will lay out her intentions, but this will create uncertain footing for Farnsworth due to her past deceits.
Farnsworth- accommodating for demanding
Competition change- Farnsworth will allow Rayelle to control the course of events during the theft/double-cross
RAYELLE/JANUS-
No association of any consequence
-
Doug Ryan:
Character Relationships
Darius- Intelligent, Loyal, Haunted, Smooth
Gus Gatorman- Braggart, Scheming, Easy going, Competitive
Albert Fletcher- Meticulous, Didactic, Distant/Aloof, Self-aggrandizing
Darcy Fletcher- Precise, Calculating, Conniving, Opportunist
Darius/Darcy
His intelligent trait mixed with her precise trait brings out a rapport when they need to work together to keep staff in line and get things done. It is also a source of competition when she makes comments or references that she thinks he won’t get and he lets her know he does.
Her conniving traits help her achieve her goals which butt heads with his loyalty and smooth traits to his fellow staff and guards which creates the conflict and contrast.
His haunted trait leaves him open at times for her opportunist trait which causes subtext for her to take advantage of his loyalty.
I changed her calculating trait to unhinged, and with that it gives him a chance to contrast with his intelligent trait.
Gus/Albert
Gus’s braggart trait and Albert’s self- aggrandizing trait gives them report as they both like to talk themselves up. Under the surface lies only little admiration though.
Albert’s meticulous trait contrasts with Gus’s easy going trait. He can’t stand that Gus is a loud person in volume and appearance. It causes conflict.
Gus’s competitive trait kicks in when Albert’s self aggrandizing trait kicks in. It becomes a measuring contest to see who’s wallet is bigger, which leads the the subtext and realization for Gus he is not that rich.
I am changing Gus’s scheming trait to hot headed, and this contrasts with Alberts distant/aloof traits causing Gus great consternation because Albert is no help in stressful situations.
What I learned is that I can change the traits to fix problems with dramatic situations in the script. Finding these specific relationships with my characters helps keep things dramatic and fun.
-
Joe’s character relationships
What I learned doing this assignment that improved my writing is how changing one trait may have an effect on more than one relationship, but changing a trait to produce or improve a relationship increases the drama
1. Select your top four characters and list their name and four traits each.
Ray: secretive, impetuous, brave, determined
Nturu: angry, controlling, confident, confrontive
Serena: honest, conforming, protective, grounded
Burt: fatherly, practical, careful, loyal
Ray/Nturu
Rapport: secretive/controlling
when they are on the same page regarding the “government” project moving
forward
Conflict: angry/impetuous when
they have conflicting goals
Contrast: secretive/confrontive
when facing issues
Competition:
determined/controlling when Ray is bypassing him.
Subtext: Nturu hides the truth
from a determined reporterRay/Serena
Rapport: brave/protective when
they are a couple
Conflict: secretive/honest when
Ray feels she needs to be kept at a distance from this dangerous project
Contrast: impetuous/conforming in
their approach to the project
Competition: brave/conforming when
figuring out the mystery
Subtext: Ray hides the level of
danger from protective SerenaRay/Burt
Rapport: brave/fatherly as they
cooperate on reporting
Conflict: impetuous/careful as the
story gets dicey
Contrast: brave/careful in
handling danger
Competition: none
Subtext: Burt fears for Ray’s life
as Ray uncharacteristically withholds facts about the story he uncoversNturu/Serena – none/no contact
Rapport:
Conflict:
Contrast:
Competition:
Subtext:Nturu/Burt – none/no contact
Rapport:
Conflict:
Contrast:
Competition:
Subtext:Serena/Burt
Rapport: protective/fatherly
toward Ray
Conflict: none
Contrast: conforming/careful about
the unfolding story
Competition: none
Subtext: none3. With each pair, make at least one improvement, changing a trait to elevate one of the above states
Ray/Nturu – change angry to mocking to increase the conflict
Ray/Serena – change conforming to fearful to improve contrast
Ray/Burt – change impetuous to bold to improve conflict
Nturu/Serena – change grounded to curious so they interact
Nturu/Burt – change confident to suspicious so they interact
Serena/Burt – change loyal to intrusive to produce conflict
-
Tom’s Character Relationships
I learned doing this assignment that it’s fun to mix and match traits between characters to achieve a multitude of desired emotional dramatic scenes.
Top four characters:
Kate – curious, ambitious, adventurous, smart
Warren – aggressive, ruthless, self-serving, revengeful
Clare – insightful, observant, jealous, sullen
Roswell – happy go lucky; suspicious, guarded, conspiratorial
Kate and Warren:
– Rapport: Kate’s ambition Warren’s aggressiveness can combine to reach a common goal.
– Conflict: Kate’s curiosity and Warren’s self-serving are constantly at odds.
– Contrast: Kate’s smarts keep her moving ahead while Warren’s revengefulness pulls him down.
– Competition: Kate’s adventurousness and Warren’s ruthlessness set them to fighting.
– Subtext: Kate’s smarts vs Warren’s aggression causes them to clash when decisions are made.
Change Kate’s ambitiousness to stability, she clashes with Warren’s self-serving that elevates conflict.
Kate and Clare:
– Rapport: Kate’s curiosity and Clare’s insights harmonize when seeking a common goal.
– Conflict: Kate’s ambition to go to Mars vs Clare’s jalousie Kate’s not spending time with her.
– Contrast: Kate’s adventurousness nature vs Clare’s sullenness because she doesn’t like it.
– Competition: Kate’s smart vs Clare’s observations compete for the correct truth or fact.
– Subtext: Kate’s curiosity about Clare’s evasive actions to protect herself heightens subtext.
Change Clare’s sullenness to self-protection vs Kate’s curiosity elevates subtext even more.
Kate and Roswell:
– Rapport: Kate’s curiosity and Roswell’s suspicions fit hand in glove.
– Conflict: Kate’s ambitions and happy-go-lucky attitude are at odds and cause conflict.
– Contrast: Kate’s adventurous nature and guardedness show them in deep contrast.
– Competition: Kate’s science smarts and Roswell’s conspiracy theories compete to learn the truth.
– Subtext: Kate’s ambitions grind on Clare’s fearful insight that Kate will abandon her.
Change Roswell’s happy go lucky to paranoia, combine it with Kate’s ambition to raise conflict.
Warren and Kate:
– Rapport: Only when Warren’s aggression combines with Kate’s ambition can they have rapport.
– Conflict: Warren’s ruthlessness vs Kate’s smart approach make for deep conflict.
– Contrast: Warren’s self-serving is in steep contrast to Kate’s adventurous approach.
– Competition: Warren’s need for revenge competes with Kate’s smarts to prove who’s right.
– Subtext: Kate’s smart approach to Warren’s aggressive acts makes for lots of subtext.
Change Warren’s ruthless to nasty, and he fights with Kate’s smarts to up the conflict.
Warren and Clare:
– Rapport: Only when Warren’s self-serving combines with Clare’s insight can they have rapport.
– Conflict: When Warren’s aggressive and Clare’s sullen, there’s great conflict between them.
– Contrast: Warren’s ruthlessness with Clare’s observance creates high contrast between them.
– Competition: Warren’s need for revenge with Clare’s
– Subtext: To hide Warren’s need for revenge and Clare’s jealousy much subtext is needed.
Change Warren’s ruthless to predatory. Matched with Clare’s sullenness it ups the conflict.
Log in to reply.