-
Post Day 26 Assignment Here
Reply to post your assignment.
-
12 Replies
-
Don Thompson’s Solved Character Problems!
What I learned: I’ve learned over the course of writing several screenplays that the issues pointed out by Hal are generally found in most first drafts.
Note: below is a PLAN that will need to be executed during the rewrite, along with the plan to address structural issues noted in the previous lesson. As of 2/1, I have an initial rewrite that allows me to flag this and the previous lesson as done.
The PLAN:
1. My protagonist and antagonist are fairly well thought out and drawn, based on the source material on which the story is based.
2. I actually felt this was an issue in the original ‘Billy Budd’ film – that is, the antagonist was *too* evil. I humanized the antagonist (Claggart) in this updated version. Billy is still as naïve as in the original, but, I feel, believable.
3. I will revisit the character intros.
4. Characters are, for the most part, included in action – I will review to ensure this is the case.
5. All the characters are the same – this is true of the Captain, Seymour and Racliff in particular – the officer leadership of the ship. They need to be differentiated more.
6. Lead characters not present – I’m fairly good about having characters be ‘in the moment’ and not too ‘on the nose’ in terms of sermonizing or ‘giving us the author’s message’. That said, I will look for moments that seem too ‘on the nose’.
-
VIC VALLEAU lESSON 26 SOLVING CHARACTER PROBLEMS
WHAT I LEARNED DOING THIS ASSIGNMENT: iT PAYS TO LOOK DEEPER THEN DEEPER OVER AND OVER AGAIN. hOWEVER hAL’S PROMPTS ARE GOOD STARTING POINT TO LOOK FROM.
A. WEAK PRO OR ANTAG. SHE COULD SHOW MORE STRENGTH MOSTLY BY ATTACKING HIS WEAKNESSES OF WOMANIZING, GAMBLING, BEING THOUGHTLESS, INSENSITIVE.
B. PROTAG TOO GOOD? SHE KNOWS MEN, SLEEPS AROUND,
ANTAG TOO BAD- HE’S IS LOVED BY MANY FOR HIS CASUAL ATTITUDE ABOUT WOMEN.
C. SCENE SITUATION WHERE NANCY STANDS OUT. SEE F. BELOW.
D. TALKING HEADS NOT IN ACTION
AREA MOST LIKELY TO BREAK THIS RULE IS TWO LEAD WOMEN TALKING. SOLUTION IS TO CREATE SOME OUTSIDE INTEREST IN SCENE SUCH AS BUSY STREET, SQUABBLING, ETC
E. NANCY FACES HER LIFE’S MARRIAGES FAILURE. NOW ITS TOO LATE FOR CHILDREN. i NEED TO PHYSICALIZE HER INTERNAL FAILURE FEELINGS MORE.
F. Dialogue reveals chardacter
She says
: Put a leash on that man, means she’s disrespects him. Also she is accustomed to dominating men.
Courageous to tell high class Elie her date is gross.
Elie: Says stay away: means she is high class and ok bossing people LIKE NANCY around.
ELIE
Just dont seduce another attractive man.
Page 5 Elie implies Nancy is morally lose, out of control, not her class.
POROTAGONIST SAYS: PAGE 5
YOU DON’T know what you want in a man? Or is just getting pregnant enough for you?
MEANS HE’S TALKING TO INFERIOR INTELLIGENCE. JUDGES HER HARSHLY. SHE’S A SCATTERBRAIN WITH GUTTER MOTIVES, VERY INSULTING.
Lucky says: page 3
LUCKY
What bet? WE didn’t have sex.
He takes moral high ground, ruling out almost all sexual activities, hopes his angry denial will stop her. He’s testing, thinks she’s weak, or simple or naieve. In the past with other women, this may have worked. This implies he’s has a dark past.
Her response:
LUCKY
What bet? WE didn’t have sex.
NANCY
Does that ever work? Do you have a pile of dumb women scattered in your dark past?
She doesnt buy his denial, nitpicking definition of sex. He overlooks her insult of “Dumb women”. His comeback is self aggrandizing and he’s proud of being unmarried.
LUCKY
Just lucky I guess, not married.
G. LEAD CHARACTERS NOT PRESENT. ALL SCENES HAVE LEAD CHARDACTERS EXCEPT:
WAIT UNTIL SCENES ARE WRITTEN TO EVALUATE.
-
Lesson 26: Draft 2: Solving Character Problems
ASSIGNMENT
BG’s Solved Character Problems!
What I learned doing this assignment: I had shortchanged character intros for the sake of speed and brevity. I have added some, and not just into the scenes, but into my summary, as well. When I’m trying to fix structure problems, rearrange scenes, and figure out what is missing, I find the summary much easier to work with. It’s only 3-5 pages, making it easier to edit, print, and get a global view.
2. For any character problems you find, make the prescribed improvements.
In my outline, I marked where each major character first appears and added a short description there. I also marked where more information is provided about them in later scenes, through action, other characters talking about them, etc.
Cast of Major Characters (in order of appearance)
BILLIONAIRE
(First appears in Opening/Old Ways)
Seated around the table are five very important men, each with his own agenda and needs, who have come together in a conspiracy, codename NORTHSTAR.At the head of the table sits BILLIONAIRE, a man of immense wealth, who uses his media empire as a weapon in his crusade to fight off any challenge to the Western-led world order.
(We find his age, foundations, Davos speeches, etc. through Reporter’s research.)ENERGY MOGUL
(First appears in Opening/Old Ways)
To his right sits ENERGY MOGUL, another billionaire. His needs are pecuniary and easier to understand. He wants Germans to stop buying cheap Russian gas and buy, instead, his five-times more expensive LNG.
(We find out about his age, his gout, etc. in later meetings of the conspiracy.)REPORTER
(First appears in Inciting Incident)
A young man walks in. Late-twenties, medium-build. Broken-heart written all over his face. He is REPORTER, a mechanical engineer. He’s dropped out of grad school mid-thesis, bummed around Europe for a year, and then drifted into a job as a reporter for a U.S. weekly magazine.
(We find out more about him when CIA staffers discuss him later.)EDITOR
(First appears in Inciting Incident)
EDITOR, mid-fifties, a fatherly type, stands by a giant monitor, watching curiously as information streams down and Reporter explains.
(I know, skimpy! This poor guy heads a regional weekly magazine that covers serious topics. He has aspirations of becoming national, but he has a small budget, and, unfortunately for him, serious topics mean few advertisers!)HACKER
(First appears in ACT 1 Turning Point)
In two little windows in a corner are Reporter and HACKER, his close friend from grad school, same age, different departments.
(I can’t decide what else to say at this point. Maybe address his technical qualifications?)HOSTESS/GERMAN SPY
(First appears in ACT 1 Turning Point. Introduced through action.)
A big, beautiful WOMAN catches up.
WOMAN: Hi! Reporter! It’s Reporter, isn’t it? We met at Chez Jean. Don’t you remember?
REPORTER: Uhhh… No…
WOMAN: You were working there! Well, I’m HOSTESS.
(extends her hand)
HOSTESS: I work at The Club as a hostess. The Club for Patriots. Right behind you. Very well-known. Are you still at Chez Jean?
REPORTER: Uhhh… No…
Gorgeous. Big, but not over-weight. Rather, covered by a layer of smooth muscle. Hostess takes his arm firmly, turns him around and marches him toward The Club.
(We find out later that she is a German spy. At this point, I was thinking that her being bigger than him would be interesting. Think Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman. She was a head taller than him.)CIA DEPUTY DIRECTOR
(First appears in ACT 2 Midpoint Turning Point)
INT. CIA CONFERENCE ROOM – LANGLEY – DAY
DEPUTY DIRECTOR for Eastern Europe in a meeting with several STAFFERS.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR: We have received an alert from the NSA. Their keyword monitoring systems have picked up a reference to Northstar in an encrypted overseas communication.
(No description yet. Needs work. In the meantime, all I can think of is: He looks like what you would imagine a guy working at a job like that would look like.)ASSASSIN
(First appears in ACT 3 New Plan)
Next to him is a nondescript man, wearing glasses, a cap and an expensive light trench coat. He is ASSASSIN. They seem to know each other well.
(Needs work! Probably tall. Sophisticated-looking, Eastern European, slight accent, could be from Czech Republic. Does not like proximity to subject. Weapon of choice: A used Glock 17 with night sights. We learn more about him later from HOSTESS/GERMAN SPY, because intelligence agencies also use him occasionally.)CIA SAFE HOUSE CHIEF
(First appears in ACT 3 Turning Point: The lowest of the low)
INT. OFFICE OF STATION CHIEF – CIA SAFE HOUSE – NIGHT
STATION CHIEF sits at her desk, sifting through piles of paper. Looks like this lady hasn’t been promoted in ages. A harried-looking DOCTOR enters.
(I’m not sure I can say any more about this person without sounding crude.) -
Patrick Downey – Solving Character Problems
What I learned doing this assignment was that I needed to fill in some areas that were weak. I didn’t realize how much until this outline. Good stuff!!!!!
A. Weak Antagonist – My character was missing in many of the action scenes and only popped up halfway through the story
D. Talking heads not in action – many of my scenes took explanation to build but there was a lack of action from them. Subtle little moves made them come alive.
G. Lead characters not present – I tried to move around with various different scenes, engaging as many different characters into the story or back story as possible but in doing so, there were pages and pages without my main characters at all.
-
Charles Ferrell’s Solved Character problems
What I learned doing this assignment is to evaluate how or if each characters wound, or motivation shows up. In that I altered some scenes, added scenes, and moved some character intro’s up.
Protagonist I delved into the wound more but also gave him more initial confidence to provide more contrast with the inciting incident.
Antagonist change agent I began to work in dialogue and more direct interaction with the protagonist and less implied.
Antagonist enemy I began to work on showing his positive side and that he evolved into the enemy out of his own fear, weakness and not pure evil, he is human also.
-
Robert Wood’s – Solving Character Problems.
What I learned doing this assignment is a reinforcement that in some ways the structure of my script is less typically “Hollywood” than this course is prescribing, as are its character conflicts. That said, I am very much aware that the dialogue for my character Bert needs considerable work in order to better reflect the fact that he is suffering from dementia. That is going to be an ongoing effort as I work on rewriting the script.
-
Benito Selim’s Solved Character Problems
What I learned in the assignment was to go back and look at your entire outline to see what depth your characters have and are they properly contributing to the story.
Darryl Case- Protagonist
I went back to add more levels to him. He is naïve and kind of weak-minded, but now I have him using his psychic ability to help fellow students cheat on exams. He still has the likability, but not totally innocent.
Also, I added him to two other scenes where he was not included, being the main character, he should be seen more.
Karen Young- Antagonist
I added her in an entirely different opening giving her more dialogue as a living person since she is a ghost in more than half of the story.
Gary
I added him to more scenes with Darryl since he plays a very crucial role in the story. He is not just Darryl’s roommate, but responsible for the whole journey Darryl goes through.
I gave him more background as well.
Marcus
I added him to more scenes as well in the beginning of the script. Marcus essentially becomes Darryl’s hero so I felt he needed to have more substance and a bigger role.
-
Andrea Cabañas – Solving Character Problems
What I learned: reading the script focusing on characters actions makes indeed a good difference in the story development. I discovered more dimensional layers that I can add to my protagonist and other lead characters.
A. Weak protagonist or antagonist: I need to work harder on both sides. Katrina, my antagonist, needs to be meaner towards the protagonist so the willingness of leaving her mother to be independent (and finally come out) is stronger. The dialogues between them need to show more how the mother is domineering and the daughter submissive, still trapped by religious pre concepts despite considering herself a woman without prejudice. I also have to work more on both characters’ dimensionality/contradictions.
D. Characters not in action – I can definitely add more characters’ behaviour through actions instead of using too much dialogue. I also have two beats of Montage and just realised that I can easily change it to one or two scenes with action to summarise Zoe’s ‘progression’ better.
E. Protagonist journey not strong – I realised that I need to make Zoe’s journey clearer by adding more action/reaction to what’s happening in her world. I need to make it more feasible through actions and maybe by adding stronger lines in dialogues.
-
TIM’S SOLVED CHARACTER PROBLEMS – DAY 26
What I learned doing this assignment is that my characters are still developing. I’ve given more thought to how active my antagonist is as an obstacle to the protagonist. My supporting characters need attention, not so much in their purpose/subplot story, but in making their unique, quirky, etc.
A. My protagonist is strong, but my antagonist needs to have a more personal grudge with the protagonist to make his a bigger obstacle.
B. Protag and Antag aren’t too good/bad. Duke is good but does bad things, trying to fit in with the bad dogs. Rex is bad, but he has a backstory that explains why and we can empathize with him to a certain extent.
C. Character intros are good but could be better. I’ll give this more thought.
D. Characters are mostly active. I don’t have excessive dialogue or talking head scenes.
E. Duke’s journey is strong. He’s a good dog who’s gone bad but will end up good again. The addition of the risk of death to his dilemma makes the journey more exciting.
F. I’m giving more thought to character’s dialects, quirks, tendencies, etc. I haven’t written much dialogue yet, but this is one element that I do well, although creating unique voices is a challenge.
G. My lead character is in most scenes and the antagonist is highly visible from his introduction late in Act 1 right through to the end. I’ve moved the introduction of Emma to earlier in Act 2, as she’s a significant character.
-
Rebecca Jordan’s solved character problems. Lesson 26
What I learned from doing this assignment is that, though all of the characters have plenty of room to grow and will continue to become more dimensional, I feel I have a pretty good grasp of their overall essences. So far I think I have fulfilled the basic requirements per the check list. However, I look forward to expounding further on each character’s idiosyncrasies. It’s fun exploring the possibilities. With each pass!
-
Dana’s Solved Character Problems
What have I learned from this assignment?
I realized my dialogue was flat in some areas or too long. I needed to tighten the character interaction and try to shorten the scenes to make the script read faster. I don’t wasn’t the reader/producer bogged down by too much description or narrative or dialogue.
A. Weak protagonist or antagonist
I put my two protagonists at greater odds with each other, making one more violent, having been corrupted by his prison term.
My two primary antagonists, the governor and his wife, had competing but confusing journey. I better defined each one, separating their journeys to make their motives clearer and more sinister.
B. Protagonist Too Good or Antagonist Too Bad.
Protagonists: Neither are too good, but I added a sexual liaison with a female Russian mobster after I changed the sex of her character.
Antagonists: I made the governor ignorant of his wife’s plotting. This added for greater tension between them when her truth is revealed.
C. Weak character intros.
Both my protagonists are confronted by their lives as they’re released from prison. The governor’s wife is good but can be stronger. I need to work on her character more.
D. Characters not in action.
I had too much dialogue between my main characters in a bar scene. I need to still cut it down in another edit.
E. Protagonist journey not strong
I changed the ending for my protagonists to fulfill his journey, but not in the way he anticipated. He solves the murder but does not reclaim him life.
F. All the characters seem the same.
This was not a problem as they all have different agendas.
G. Lead characters not present.
My lead characters are almost in every scene.
-
Lori’s Solved Character Problems
What I learned is to keep asking myself how I can improve my characters.
Check your lead characters to see if they have any of the problems listed in this lesson.
A. Weak protagonist or antagonist.
Make these characters more clearly defined. I realized that my antagonist represents the person the protagonist will eventually become if he doesn’t change. I want the reader/audience to see this as well.
B. Protagonist Too Good or Antagonist Too Bad.C. Weak character intros.
My character intros could be stronger.
D. Characters not in action.E. Protagonist’s journey not strong.
My protagonist’s journey needs to be more clearly defined, and I’d like the journey to show him in the stages of grief.
F. All the characters seem the same.G. Lead characters not present
The protagonist is very present in nearly every scene. I feel like I have a character that I need to flesh out more. He’s a young man thinking about marriage and asking if it’s better to have loved and lost than never have loved.
Log in to reply.