I really appreciate insight like this, but as a working writer, it drives me CRAZY to hear people talk in absolutes like this. "This normally doesn't work," or "This usually causes a big issue..." are all good. But, "You cannot do this," and "This does not work," are total and complete BS notions. Immediately causes me to discount what the person is saying because any kind of absolute must-do-this approach is really the only absolute no-no in writing.
Yeah. Ultimately what works depends on the questions you want to answer, but it is different if you want to write for a popular audience. Then you have to apply constraints of what your target viewer/reader will likely enjoy. These type of advice tidbits are just heuristics.
@@ssssssstssssssss I guess it applies if you are just starting out and your goal is to sell a script. But that should be stated. Maybe that's her mindset. Still drives me batty.
@@puffy9257 What she's saying certainly does have merit. Carlito's Way comes to Mind. Or Heat. But no educator should frame it as a MUST. I guess I would agree that a brand new writer should almost surely employ what she is suggesting if the goal is to sell a script. It just makes me insane that she is talking as if that's the only way to make a movie work. It most certainly is not.
@@tam653m yeah same here. I don’t know why she’s talking in such absolutes when anyone involved in creative work knows that there is no one way to create produce good work and that there are often successful exceptions. She seems to really believe what she’s saying though. Which is why I’m discounting her advice from now on.
Jill is talking about the requirement of poetic justice to make tragedies satisfying, but it doesn't always have to be that way. In Moulin Rouge and Romeo and Juliet "Bad things happen" to the characters that are not inevitable or by design of their charcter flaws. But both stories do feature an "up, up, up", most notably in Moulin Rouge. Christian and Satine beat all the odds and achieve a euphoric happy ending immediately before tragedy strikes, so the audience still gets that cathartic emotional fulfillment. In Romeo and Juliet, the ending isn't entirely tragic, despite the lovers deaths, in so far as it brings peace to the warring families. So my advice for a tragic ending, is to *also* include a happy ending of some kind.
This is why fiction is boring now. It's going around in circles, if not nowhere at all. It's all recipes and templates, gatekeepers and such. You can't do this, and you must do that. Yes, there are more efficient ways to do things, but in such a dynamic world, why limit storytelling in such a way? And people wonder why there is nothing new under the sun.
The death of new ideas in storytelling has nothing to do with the pressence of structures or patterns and teaching them. These structures are actually hepfull to take your ideas and organizing them. That's why many new ideas usually fail, specially with major audiences. They are purely focused on their "grandious original ideas" that they are too arrogant to care if their audience also care, so they forget of things like tensions, increasing action, clarity in objectives, etc. Narrative structure is not there to limit you, is to help you organize your ideas in compelling ways. After having the hummility to understand what others have discovered in this art, then you can fill it with your totally new awesome characters and messages and settings.
With all due respect, I think Ms. Chamberlain missed the point of the ending to _Casablanca..._ Rick would probably never love another woman as much as Ilsa, but they both needed to go their separate ways, to do their part for the cause. Ilsa goes with Victor to spread the word about the Nazi atrocities, and Rick goes off with Louis to sabotage the German Wermacht. I mean, he lays it all out in the airfield speech: _"...The problems of three little people don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world..."_ Here's lookin' at you, kids.
I think tht's why 'Breaking Bad' worked so well; at first we got to see Walter White defeat all the odds and get one over on the haters, and we were all like "Yeah, you GO, dude! Stick it to the MAN!" Even when he started doing really morally questionable things, for a while we could still excuse it because he was only hurting people who were worse than him. But then it got to a point where we were going "Oh.... no dude, you're going too far now..." and when he finally met his demise, it felt inevitable; he flew too close to the sun, ignored all the warnings - and he got burned. Even if we're sad that it happened, and wish things could've turned out differently, we can still see why they didn't.
Rosemary's Baby is in my mind a tragedy, but I seem to fail to see what flaws she has or what kinds of mistakes she makes - is "being naive and disbelieving" enough of a flaw?
Hollywood culture is unable to write a good ending. Thats not technique. Thats money. When a show ends the writer knows the gravy train is over. Usually the original producer or director is already gone. Major stars leave the sinking ship. So instead of writing for posterity they write a lazy garbage ending or it gets rewritten by a replacement. Thats how you get the soprano’s, Dexter, HIMYM etc. Hollywood has created a new way to turn a good ending bad: sequel trillogy. Read; more cash grabbing.
Memento was a pretty satisfying tragedy and I don't think I ever felt it was going up, up, up as she puts it. But maybe I'm misinterpreting it or she's talking about what's satisfying to your average viewer. Nightmare Alley would be something more along the lines of what she's talking about.
I think that if you were to relate it to what she's saying the ups in Memento could be it seems promising that you and him are simultaneously figuring out the truth only to find out it was never the truth because you can't count on him as a reliable narrator. I didn't really see the definition of tragedies the way she defines it either I never looked at it that way for example Hereditary but at the same time you could see some of it in there too however they might be very subtle ups and fewer than you would use in her examples. Idk I'm just blabbing at this point.
@@EnterTranscendGodfather isn't a tragedy. Michael rises to Godfather, it's a Comedy not a tragedy. Bear in mind she's referring to the Aristotlian definition. As for Heat it depends who you call the protagonist. If it's Pacino character it's a Comedy, if De Niro it's Tragedy. Even then his character has success before the final job.
I think memento, like a previous reply said, the hero does progress through the story. At least in the narrative we're given, he up up up succeeds in overcoming his memory difficulties and figuring out who killed his wife, finally gets revenge. Then the ending, he makes a choice where he throws that triumph away.
@@Respect2theFallen Yeah. Perhaps the ups can be more subtle or at least there can be the promise of overcoming the flaw. I have seen tragic social problem films that somewhat violate other things she said like having the tragedy being primarily due to the environment/circumstance more so than a character flaw. I think it's best not to take what she says as gospel.
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
What does it take to write a great climax? Jill shares her thoughts in this video - th-cam.com/video/SpBGiZnaf90/w-d-xo.html
She is brilliant. It takes a while to understand her theories but they make a lot of sense.
She is indeed brilliant! What is your favorite screenplay of hers?
@@4inchesofpleasure I have no idea what films she has written herself. As far as I know she's more of a consultant than a writer.
Love this!! All of this totally makes sense about every season of Supernatural 😆
Would love to hear Jill dissect Rebel Moon 1 and 2. Those movies are....🤦🏾♂️🤦🏾♂️ I have so many questions for her.
Her saying "no, you could have had it all" reminds me of the movie 'Heat' (1995).
I really appreciate insight like this, but as a working writer, it drives me CRAZY to hear people talk in absolutes like this. "This normally doesn't work," or "This usually causes a big issue..." are all good. But, "You cannot do this," and "This does not work," are total and complete BS notions. Immediately causes me to discount what the person is saying because any kind of absolute must-do-this approach is really the only absolute no-no in writing.
Yeah. Ultimately what works depends on the questions you want to answer, but it is different if you want to write for a popular audience. Then you have to apply constraints of what your target viewer/reader will likely enjoy. These type of advice tidbits are just heuristics.
I felt the same way too. Maybe she just wants a formula but I can think of so many tragic stories where everything just goes wrong from start to end.
@@ssssssstssssssss I guess it applies if you are just starting out and your goal is to sell a script. But that should be stated. Maybe that's her mindset. Still drives me batty.
@@puffy9257 What she's saying certainly does have merit. Carlito's Way comes to Mind. Or Heat. But no educator should frame it as a MUST. I guess I would agree that a brand new writer should almost surely employ what she is suggesting if the goal is to sell a script. It just makes me insane that she is talking as if that's the only way to make a movie work. It most certainly is not.
@@tam653m yeah same here. I don’t know why she’s talking in such absolutes when anyone involved in creative work knows that there is no one way to create produce good work and that there are often successful exceptions. She seems to really believe what she’s saying though. Which is why I’m discounting her advice from now on.
To correct an error in the sub-titles: 'climactic' relates to the climax, 'climatic' relates to the climate.
to me she's saying "climatic" repeatedly, and it drove me to the comments to find this lol.
Another wonderful interview
Thanks Howard!
“The character has to be written well.” “The story has to be written well.” “The climatic choice has to be earned.” Gee…thanks.
Jill is talking about the requirement of poetic justice to make tragedies satisfying, but it doesn't always have to be that way. In Moulin Rouge and Romeo and Juliet "Bad things happen" to the characters that are not inevitable or by design of their charcter flaws. But both stories do feature an "up, up, up", most notably in Moulin Rouge. Christian and Satine beat all the odds and achieve a euphoric happy ending immediately before tragedy strikes, so the audience still gets that cathartic emotional fulfillment. In Romeo and Juliet, the ending isn't entirely tragic, despite the lovers deaths, in so far as it brings peace to the warring families. So my advice for a tragic ending, is to *also* include a happy ending of some kind.
I love this channel
Cheers!
The intro to OEDIPUS REX or ANTIGONE quoted Freud defining tragedy: You do everything right and it still turns to shit.
When writers, students, or teachers equate "happy ending" with "good ending", you know you're in trouble.
This is why fiction is boring now. It's going around in circles, if not nowhere at all. It's all recipes and templates, gatekeepers and such. You can't do this, and you must do that. Yes, there are more efficient ways to do things, but in such a dynamic world, why limit storytelling in such a way? And people wonder why there is nothing new under the sun.
The death of new ideas in storytelling has nothing to do with the pressence of structures or patterns and teaching them. These structures are actually hepfull to take your ideas and organizing them. That's why many new ideas usually fail, specially with major audiences. They are purely focused on their "grandious original ideas" that they are too arrogant to care if their audience also care, so they forget of things like tensions, increasing action, clarity in objectives, etc.
Narrative structure is not there to limit you, is to help you organize your ideas in compelling ways. After having the hummility to understand what others have discovered in this art, then you can fill it with your totally new awesome characters and messages and settings.
With all due respect, I think Ms. Chamberlain missed the point of the ending to _Casablanca..._ Rick would probably never love another woman as much as Ilsa, but they both needed to go their separate ways, to do their part for the cause. Ilsa goes with Victor to spread the word about the Nazi atrocities, and Rick goes off with Louis to sabotage the German Wermacht.
I mean, he lays it all out in the airfield speech: _"...The problems of three little people don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world..."_
Here's lookin' at you, kids.
I think she is correct, and I think you are over-romanticizing Rick's feelings.
I think tht's why 'Breaking Bad' worked so well; at first we got to see Walter White defeat all the odds and get one over on the haters, and we were all like "Yeah, you GO, dude! Stick it to the MAN!" Even when he started doing really morally questionable things, for a while we could still excuse it because he was only hurting people who were worse than him. But then it got to a point where we were going "Oh.... no dude, you're going too far now..." and when he finally met his demise, it felt inevitable; he flew too close to the sun, ignored all the warnings - and he got burned. Even if we're sad that it happened, and wish things could've turned out differently, we can still see why they didn't.
informative interview
Curious how she views Hereditary... such a tragic ending for the family but no ups at all.
Maybe this is what they tried to do in GOT.
Like how we are with "Sweeney Todd" in his desire for revenge. But through his blood lust, he lost more than he ever imagined.
Rosemary's Baby is in my mind a tragedy, but I seem to fail to see what flaws she has or what kinds of mistakes she makes - is "being naive and disbelieving" enough of a flaw?
Talk to Me it's a great tragedy, as well as Hereditary.
Hollywood culture is unable to write a good ending. Thats not technique. Thats money. When a show ends the writer knows the gravy train is over. Usually the original producer or director is already gone. Major stars leave the sinking ship. So instead of writing for posterity they write a lazy garbage ending or it gets rewritten by a replacement. Thats how you get the soprano’s, Dexter, HIMYM etc. Hollywood has created a new way to turn a good ending bad: sequel trillogy. Read; more cash grabbing.
'Climatic'....I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Those, this is it, the end!!! Movies suck!... If you know what i mean hehe
Film school ideas like this are exactly why Americans make the same movies over and over again
Every young modern "writer" should be made to watch this channel cause none of them have a clue as to what they are doing.
Handmaids is nothing but tragedy and very good. So not sure what shes on about
Memento was a pretty satisfying tragedy and I don't think I ever felt it was going up, up, up as she puts it. But maybe I'm misinterpreting it or she's talking about what's satisfying to your average viewer. Nightmare Alley would be something more along the lines of what she's talking about.
Also The Godfather and Heat
I think that if you were to relate it to what she's saying the ups in Memento could be it seems promising that you and him are simultaneously figuring out the truth only to find out it was never the truth because you can't count on him as a reliable narrator. I didn't really see the definition of tragedies the way she defines it either I never looked at it that way for example Hereditary but at the same time you could see some of it in there too however they might be very subtle ups and fewer than you would use in her examples. Idk I'm just blabbing at this point.
@@EnterTranscendGodfather isn't a tragedy. Michael rises to Godfather, it's a Comedy not a tragedy.
Bear in mind she's referring to the Aristotlian definition.
As for Heat it depends who you call the protagonist. If it's Pacino character it's a Comedy, if De Niro it's Tragedy. Even then his character has success before the final job.
I think memento, like a previous reply said, the hero does progress through the story. At least in the narrative we're given, he up up up succeeds in overcoming his memory difficulties and figuring out who killed his wife, finally gets revenge. Then the ending, he makes a choice where he throws that triumph away.
@@Respect2theFallen Yeah. Perhaps the ups can be more subtle or at least there can be the promise of overcoming the flaw. I have seen tragic social problem films that somewhat violate other things she said like having the tragedy being primarily due to the environment/circumstance more so than a character flaw. I think it's best not to take what she says as gospel.
These are pretty old recipes.
Guys, I have a question.
Is it possible to make a 90 minutes movie from a 40 pages screenplay ?
yeah bro just use double spacing so you have a 80 page
She should be lecturing Hollywood - not us!