What about stories like " Dear white people" where every episode tells the story from a different point of view, elaborating more on each with every episode?
I like the idea that the second protagonist might actually be the antagonist. We tend to think of the antagonist as a "villain" but at their core they're simply a character who challenges the protagonist in their beliefs. Definitely some food for thoughts in there. Thanks Tyler!
@@rickyvvvvv I was thinking exactly the same thing. I wish Tyler would take the time to break down the rom-com genre one of these days. One of the hardest to write IMO, so many cliches and tropes to avoid.
@@rickyvvvvv Honestly, I gotta disagree. But to be fair, I'm already not a fan of romance stories, so that might be a problem in it's own right. Whenever I see a romance plot in a story, I'd much rather see the characters involved work together than against each other. I really don't like the trope of having two people who don't get along kiss immediately after. I'm okay with the budding romance as they begin to trust each other as stuff, but there's too many "beginning of relationship" stories when compared to "middle of relationship" stories. Seeing character compliment each others weaknesses and, especially, reinforce each other's strengths are an amazingly entertaining dynamic.
@@alexandredesouza3692 I don’t mean simplistic situations where they kiss immediately after. I mean movies where their differences are worked out or not through the story. Like Annie Hall, When Harry Met Sally, the Before Sunrise series. Sometimes their situations and backgrounds are the ones which are in conflict with each other, even if they are so much in love with each other. That is the case with films such as Romeo and Juliet, The Age of Innocence, and The Bridges of Madison County. Maybe, you can say that the antagonist here is society, but each character is just acting out the conflicting elements given to them by their backgrounds.
I think this can have it's ups and downs. Kid's films and Comedies have this annoying trope of starting some rift between the protags by the end of the 2nd act and resolve it in 10 minutes of runtime. But Toy Story and Sherlock Holmes do this well. In Toy Story-types, the protags are clearly opposed, but they need to set aside their differences to achieve a common goal. In Sherlock-types, the characters have the same goals, but different methods/reasons to achieving it (Holmes solves crimes for fun and is too extreme, Watson Foils him by calming downs his impulses and solving crimes because it's the right thing, usually) There are other ways to do this however if your protags have opposing goals. A chase, a race or a debate in which each character one-ups each other is very entertaining. And if they have unrelated goals which still involves or forces their mutual interaction, it can sometimes be funny to see where that leads.
You can have multiple protagonists in stories that go longer than a single feature film character arc. Such as series, or film trilogies. The key is that you complete the character arc before handing off the baton. Likewise, it'd be good to introduce the new protagonist early, by giving them a role in the story before focusing on them.
Reminds me of Captain America: Civil War where Iron Man and Captain America are two main protagonists of MCU. But in that movie, they made Tony Stark an antagonist both from their ideology of superhero management and personal drama since it's Cap's movie.
i feel like the two protagonists things is often used in books. generaly, each has its own story line that's seems completely disconnected and then the two stories lines bump into each other at the story climax i love this moment where it's all connected after all ( like in the miserables by victor Hugo and in the end of times by murakami and probably ton of other )
Yeah, but i feel as though that goes hand in hand in what he's saying here as i'd be inclined to say that those kinds of books are telling two different stories for the majority, up until the protagonists converge
It would be awesome to see a video of how each genre sets up the entire movie with point 1. I think everyone struggles with how to start, but first, remember, the story begins before the script
Currently, I’m writing a story with two main characters. The idea is that they’re both interacting with their own separate stories and fails. Once their arcs come together, one becomes an antagonist to the other, even if she isn’t a “villain”. Despite one being an antagonist, I want them to both have equal screen time. How can I accomplish this type of story well?
That feels really challenging. If it were me, I’d have your future antagonist be a B character/ B plot, or at least show the protagonist first so they get latched onto first. If you really want them equal, make sure your first character continuously sets up questions that the second answers, without repeating story beats and vice versa. I’m no professional, but the best advice I have is that If your audience can immediately pick out their favorite character/ the more interesting story within the first quarter of your work, you have some rewriting to do. Hope this helps :)
I was also thinking of the Prestige. About halfway through the video, I wondered if Tyler would classify them as a Protag/Antag relationship (though really it's Protag/and two Antag. Such a brilliant movie!)
Among many, many others. I haven't watched the video yet but I'm not sure what the argument would be against two-handers, since it's been done with great success numerous times.
Okay, but most writers who are still learning the craft shouldn't be trying to write Christopher Nolan-type stories. Master how to write a great story with 1 protagonist first. Then experiment. I've never read a complicated spec from an amateur that was coherent and marketable as a movie. Most people just get lost in the sauce.
Most people (including Tyler) confuse “protagonist” and “main character.” Yes. Most of the time they are the same person. But “protagonist” as Tyler said is the driving force of a story while “main character” is the one who goes through a character arc. They can be, and, often are seperate characters in a story. Think The Good, The Bad and The Ugly (1966). Blondie (Clint Eastwood) is the “protagonist” as he drives the story forward but he doesn’t change or grow throughout. Meanwhile, Tuco (Eli Wallach) is the “main character” as he is the only character with a semblance of a character arc. (Same goes for Mad Max (Mel Gibson) in The Road Warrior (1981)).
I think Tuco is the real protagonist in desguise. The movie even starts and ends with him alone. Clint's character definetly feels more like a sidekick.
Counterargument: Road to El Dorado. Yes, two protagonists can be done poorly... but like with all other rules of writing / storytelling, knowing the rules is critical to breaking them effectively.
Certain romances (like When Harry Met Sally, for instance) feature two protagonists. You could argue that they operate structurally as one because most of their scenes are together. But they are also the antagonist to each other, opposing and questioning the other's views.
I'm currently writing a short action drama about English walnuts escaping prison, and I decided early on that the story was missing something, after turning one of my major side characters into a second protagonist I tried to keep their story as tight as possible, meaning they are motivated by the same inciting incident but in different ways and they both have gone too far to the extreme in their beliefs. So as the story progresses they learn from each other's successes and mistakes and despite not fully becoming new people by the end of the story (it is a short after all) they are far more balanced.
Yes, Tyler's advice is mostly geared for mainstream film screenplay, so it should be taken with a grain of salt when applied to other stuff like novels, comics/manga, TV, etc... The fundamentals are solid, but I'd also recommend reading other books on story in addition to watching his videos in order to have a more general grasp of things. Like, in this instance for example, if you apply Tyler's advice to a 120 min film, he's 100% correct, it makes the story too convoluted and takes away from the message/theme, but if you apply it to literature, or manga, you can cite numerous examples of good stories that feature multiple protagonists. His advice should be heeded though, like consciously think of it in terms of how he's expressing it. Like, you can look at Star Wars for example, when you look at the 6 films, you can see that the "two protagonists" are actually the antagonist and the protagonist. With the prequels telling you the story of the antagonist and his fall from grace.
RRR was great, and both the protagonists had approximately equal screentime, but they had different reasons for being where they were, but at the end, both of them had the same goal (killing the antagonist). What made it interesting was that both the characters were given something to stick together, and were also given the Fire and Water symbolism.
True rrr is a perfect example and i think 2 protagonist with a same theme but different agendas are so thrilling and exciting for the Story and the audience because it's not normal
This was so helpful and just saved me so much time. I’m in the early stages of writing my story and have been confused on this topic. Now I just need to choose a character to be my protagonist. Back to the drawing board
In my story, it’s more like protagonist and deuteragonist. Basically majority of the chapters in my book focuses on the one main character the story is about. While occasionally switching to the other main character the primary main character meets early on. Eventually though, both main characters occupy the same space together the rest of the way through.
Interesting topic. I recently replayed Cyberpunk 2077 which also has a story with two protagonists, V and Johnny Silverhand. However, like explained in this video, Johnny's role changes a LOT. That man goes from antagonist to side-kick to protagonist in the span of 4 hours. V's role is very clear and static on the other hand. He is the protagonist although a weak one compared to Johnny's persona.
Prisoners (2013) does this well with 2 protagonists. Both protagonists are full of emotional depth which creates good development on screen from both of them. Detective Loki "needs" to find the two girls and solve the case. Keller Dover "wants" to find his daughter and her friend, but takes matters into his own hands and that's when the act of "morality" comes in. I'm probably wrong with what I've written and I might be overthinking it but that's just my opinion of the film, love it so much.
How do you think a movie like "Magnolia" by PTA has worked out with multiple protagonist and with multiple story lines. I don't think each of them are characters but they tend to have their own character arc which is why they meet the definition of a protagonist. Can you explain this?
After watching this I was still confused about whether or not I had two protagonists in my story because it felt like I had second inciting incidents for one of my main characters. Afterwards though, I went and watched the video on “How to stop being confused about story structure” and realized what I was perceiving as a separate inciting incident for a different character, was actually part of the “adapt” section of the story. A conflict for one of the other main characters that was inadvertently caused by my protagonist’s reaction to her inciting incident. So thank you for helping me sort out that confusion.
In "real life" stories, sometimes there are "chain reactions" where one person's actions are misinterpreted by the next, and so on for several people. This is how incidents happen to people, but in a movie story the audience doesn't know whom to root for.
If I take the film Se7en, I would say both -- the character of Brat Pit and Morgan Freeman are the protagonists, but they do not work in unison, and I would not say that one is the support or antagonist to the other. Thus I think it is possible to have two characters both being the protagonists, since they both create a dynamic with Pit's character being the one who is more pushing and thus driving while Freeman's character is the one who has in the end the complete character arc of a protagonist. Maybe their banter could be seen like a soliloquy in theatre of a single protagonist who is trying to reconciliate different aspects of themselves. Still, since they fall apart at the end, it would not work with a single protagonist (except maybe in sci-fi where the character could maybe then be separated into two different quantum personas). Guess what I want to say is: that if one is really experienced as storyteller then one can do that and make it work.
I would argue that Morgan Freeman is the protagonist and Brad Pitt a form of antagonist or challenger. Hear me out on this one: Morgan Freemans character has the strong believe that the world is dark and rotten and not worth fighting for. He even thinks about quittung his job. Brad Pitts character on the other hand is full of energy and hope for the world. He strongly believes in his job and his duties. They're working together but are both in conflict because of their beliefs. In the end that is what inspires the change in Freemans character, while Pitts character finally succumbs to evil and kills an "unarmed man"
"Chariots of Fire" is a good example of two protagonists who only seem to oppose each other - it really is telling two complete stories side by side, each with their own "circle" or "arc" or however you choose to chart it. Harold's accomplishment at the end has a real ache to it because of Eric's absence in his race, but both stories are a triumph of faith over (potentially crippling) cynicism. Tyler's point is well-taken, though - it makes for a long movie, and Eric's switch to a different race does feel like a "bait 'n' switch." Still a great film that doesn't get enough love these days.
I get what you're saying Tyler, it can be confusing and difficult to write a story with two protagonists - however I would add that if done well, two-handers can make for very interesting stories. You can also add elements of surprise and reversals when the character you were rooting for actually becomes more of an antagonist, e.g. when the audience learns something about a character that changes their loyalties to the other "protagonist" and they eventually come out on top.
What about "Django Unchained"? For some reason they gave Christoph Waltz the Oscar only for "Supporting Character", but Dr. King Schultz was clearly the character who drove the story forward, thus he was the protagonist. Django however took over at the end, and of course the movie was named after him. Do we have two protagonists here, and would you recommend it for a story?
In T.V. shows it might be a good idea to not introduce all your characters in the first episode. This works especially well with antagonists or villains as it allows you to build tension, suspense or intrigue around a character.
Is a deuteragonist the same as a second protagonist? I think of Dawson's Creek and there are definitely a few main characters, but one could argue Dawson and Joey are two protagonists, Pacey is a deuteragonist, and Jen is a triagonist OR Dawson or Joey as THE protagonist and the other as a deuteragonist, while Pacey/Jen are triagonists or just main characters. I mean, all four definitely have episodes, story arcs, or even seasons that are mostly their story, but overall it seems Dawson and Joey are the center of the story.
I was having trouble rewriting a story that seemed to have four main characters, operating as a dysfunctional unit, and one hidden villain. If the protagonist is the character that most defines how the story moves forward, I'm thinking that the four 'main' characters are actually heroic antagonists, and the villain may be the real protagonist? Any advice for writing a protagonist that manages to remain off screen for big chunks of the story? Or would that be a mistake?
I think this is one of the many faults that led the assassin's creed movie to failure, there were two characters and two completely different stories they were trying to focus on and drive forward and neither meshed with each other very well even though it seemed like they really tried to mesh them together.
This is something I just struggled with on a limited series project I started. I almost tried the 2 protagonist thing, but realized that it was never necessary. One of them is really the antagonist, but because it is a "main character" with an arc I really wanted to focus on, I confused it with being a protagonist. You can have main characters who are focused on as much as the protagonist, who are not the protagonist. Just because they have a lot of screen time or are more interesting than your protagonist, doesn't make them the driving force of your story. What I really had to decide in the end was: Do I want to tell this story from the point of view of this "good" protagonist hero type?... or just let this evil villain of a person become the protagonist and tell it in the spirit of Infinity War with the bad guy-protagonist. I chose to keep a traditional hero protagonist character and just write a really interesting villain with his own clear philosophical beliefs. Honestly, toying with this idea of every "main character" being the protagonist is a great tool for developing your characters. You just have to know that in the end, after you've fleshed them out, you have to put them back in their place and keep your 1 true protagonist.
I think the most important thing to remember is that your protagonist is the one who gives meaning to your story and all the other perspectives in your movie. So let's say in The Incredibles: Sure you have in both movies a big family with many members who have interesting perspectives and stories - But in the end it's the care and struggle of the father (the films protagonist) that gives meaning to this. Like when we see the kids struggle in school and normal life, but we as the viewer ultimately see this through the lens of the father, who struggled a lot in the two movies, to give his family that normal life and in hope they'll be more happy so. That doesn't mean that the father is the most important member of the family or even that he struggles the most. It's just that his characters want, is what sits at the core of the films structure and everything else is just another perspective on that core story. A lot of movies with big ensembles make it sometimes difficult to see, which main character is the protagonist. A good method I've found to clear this up is to look at the first and the last sequence of the movie and identify who's perspective (and later character-change) we're focusing on. Like in Se7en: Where it might seem like we have two protagonist, but ultimately it's the change in Sommerset we're focusing on. Or Sherlock where it was always (until they f it up in the last season) about Watsons change and him becoming a more competent person through being challenged by Sherlock.
Some stories actually pull it off and switch protagonists successfully at some point (Psycho and Midnight Mass come to mind) but there's probably a reason why that's not the norm.
Except in comedy. Unlike couples like Martin Riggs and Roger Murtaugh, but also Frasier and Niles. Two similar brothers pushing each other forward is the most masterful decision in screenwriting ever.
In tropa de elite you have two, but then something happens. In Love and Mercy you have one protagonist in two time frames. In Heat, you have two and it works well because the real protagonist is Hanna and we think it's McCauley. In The Departed it's Sullivan but we want it to be Costigan. Also, you can have a shared journey eg the buddy cop genre. Also Godfather Part 2....split between two time frames. Traffic...split between different geographical regions. Frodo and Aragorn.
Have to disagree. One of my favorite movies from 2011 was X-Men First Class. Charles and Eric are the protagonists of that movie and both are needed for the story to move forward and for the story to happen the way it does. I wouldn't want either of them removed or even lowered to supporting character since the film would have to be very different for that to happen. Now yes, Eric does become an antagonist later but first of all that doesn't happen until the last 20 minutes and secondly the primary antagonist for both Charles and Eric was Sebastian Shaw. He's the main antagonist for most of the film and it's not until he dies that Eric takes his place as a new villain. Another example is the 2018 God of War on PS4. Kratos you would think would be the main character but Atreus is every bit as important to that story as Kratos is in fact if you remove Atreus or put him out of commission then the story just wouldn't happen. Again both are needed for the story to happen and for it to happen the way it does. Neither of them are villains or central antagonists even though they have antagonistic moments towards each other. The antagonist of the story is Baldur and it stays that way until near the end of the game and he's finally killed.
Currently I'm working on a novel where I'm planning to put two protagonists. U ituslly it focuses on a guy and hid brother who get seperated. The guy becomes an antagonistic figure to the world and once he would reunite with his brother, his brother also sees him as an antagoidt due to their same goal but different ideals. But he doesn't nessecsrily hate this "antagonist" but this "antagonist" hates him cuz he sees what he could've been if things were different. Thoughts?
I'm a little confused. Nolan said that they decided to make Harvey Dent the Protagonist in the Dark Knight. In one of your videos, you explained the story circle. You said Batman is the Protagonist. Do you think, Nolan uses a different definition of Protagonist and not the one, you explained in this video? I really liked the video btw
Can you do a few videos on the different types of non linear films? Also how would you describe something like Game of Thrones which seems to have multiple protagonists?
I guess somebody forgot to tell several of the greatest authors of our time who wrote blockbuster novels with two protagonists. Such as Charles Frazier, author of Cold Mountain, which sold 5 million copies and won the National Book Award. And Anthony Doerr, who wrote All The Light We Cannot See, which sold 15 million copies and won the Pulitzer Prize.
I think the ting that people need to know is that there is a difference between a "Protagonist" and a principal (Lead) role. a Protagonist is the driving force behind the story (and the story is usually told from their perspective) a Principal role (often referred to as a lead) supports the protagonist. (But they still have a large part in the story, either in the inciting incident, rising action, climax, falling action or resolution and they can make decisions that advance the plot) Take a musical like Zombie Prom or Grease as a shining example. in Zombie Prom, Toffee is the protaginist because we see and hear more from her perspective throughout the show, although Jonny Warner (a LEAD) makes choices and decisions that directly move the plot along. it's because of Jonny's desire to return to school that almost gets the prom cancelled and it's his love that brings the principal to her senses. In Grease, Sandy is the protagonist (as, Like Toffee, we see and hear more from her perspective). throughout the show, Sandy makes decisions and Danny Zuko (a LEAD) also helps to advance the plot through things like the Thunder road rumble subplot.
I have written a play with 2 protagonists that makes sense, however it's the format the show is being presented in. the show is essentially one giant bedtime story being told to young children by their parents and the Junior versions of the characters (Kodi and Athena in the past) also play an instrumental role in tellling the story. The play periodically shifts in POV between Kodi and Athena based on who is the focus of the next song. E.G: During the Hadestown auditions in scene 3 with "Wait for me", Kodi and his friend, Michael Greene are the focus, so we know we're in Kodi's perspective. but in scene 5, when Kodi runs off to get celebratory milkshakes with Jason, Mike and Connor after the verdict of their auditions are revealed, the perspective shifts to Athena as she denies to her friends about her love for Kodi.
So with films like Magnolia where there are 5 or 6 strong characters that we follow... how do you write that? I am writing a script that calls for multiple characters like that, and am trying to figure out the best way to structure it. Should I story arc 7 characters and "braid" 7 Dan Harmon story circles together, but with one main protagonist we follow for the primary plot? In other words, do I burn out the first draft focused on the protagonist and then incorporate the other arcs afterwards. In Magnolia all characters are disjointed but intertwined in their stories, but I could not identify one protagonist.
@@MajorJack92 thats true. I should have specified that I like the triology. The book my not be perfect on its own (or in general) but I think it does a great job at being "Act 1" with small steaks and small mysteries that are left to be answered later, but aren't so big it takes away from the catharsis of the end
This is the problem with plotting. Suddenly all of your story beats are too closely coupled and you become constricted in the types of stories you can write. My story has a protagonist who 'converts' an antagonist early on. The protagonist leaves the story and that antagonist becomes the protagonist for a major portion of the story. The original protagonist reappears but the mantle of the story has been handed off to a third character who completes the story arc.
👀 Oooo reference to Doctor Strange & Wanda 😂 I’m actually re-writing Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, so I really appreciate this video. Cheers Tyler
Hello, I love this video! I have something to say regarding this two protagonists things. So I was wondering, how does this works in stories like Sherlock Holmes? I know the obvious answer is that Holmes and Watson act as one entity and thus a single protagonist, but I was like, do they really? I thought about this a little: Obviously the most interesting character, the one the story does not exist without, is Holmes, which makes him the protagonist, but... Everything is told through the eyes of Watson, since, at least in the books, Watson is the 'narrator', and usually in the screen adaptations there is a certain focus on maintaining the viewer stuck to Watson's point of view as well (since he is the everyman that allows the audience to be surprised at Holmes' ingenuity). They are mostly always together but there are many conflicts that involve them being separate, which is why I started to think this isn't a case of them being "one protagonist" - for example when Holmes fakes his death, the stories cannot continue without him so usually there are no prolongued moments, not many scenes in the story until Holmes returns (as in, we don't get to see what Watson does when there's no Holmes in the equation). This almost makes it seem as if Watson is a secondary character, even though he is the one we, audience, are always with! But then I realized, this doesn't mean Holmes is the sole protagonist. Sure he is the most important one, but the Sherlock Holmes stories cannot exist without Watson either - the stories begin precisely when they meet, even though Holmes had already been doing investigations for years. I thought this was super interesting to think about and tried analyzing it as an exercise for myself, so I wanted to share 😄😄
In my story I have two protagonist. But I wanna separate them after the first story (it'll be a trilogy bc how much I wanna explore). Just want feedback
Umm, tell me if I'm wrong here, but aren't all those buddy cop TV shows and movies filled with a pair of protags? How would you break down the Batman TV series with Batman AND Robin? I can see making characters who work together actually have a rivalry, like a narcissist who leads a codependent.
I have always been contemplating about knowing who the main character should be in my story.. this really helped a lot with making me decide! Relating question: Do you have any advice on writing an ensemble cast that affect one whole big story like its the Avengers or something?
The duo of protagonists is a well established concrpt and exists in all kinds of genres and popular works lmfao what are you talking about lmao Every buddy cop movie ever made in the 80s and 90s is that exact trope 😂
I disagree. Avatar: the Last Airbender managed two protagonists like Aang and Zuko which managed to bring a flow to the story that truly made it different from other stories.
Get Practical Tools to Write Your Great Screenplay: www.practicalscreenwriting.com
What about stories like " Dear white people" where every episode tells the story from a different point of view, elaborating more on each with every episode?
I like the idea that the second protagonist might actually be the antagonist. We tend to think of the antagonist as a "villain" but at their core they're simply a character who challenges the protagonist in their beliefs. Definitely some food for thoughts in there. Thanks Tyler!
Yes. In the best love stories, the protagonist and the antagonist are usually the two romantic leads.
@@rickyvvvvv I was thinking exactly the same thing. I wish Tyler would take the time to break down the rom-com genre one of these days. One of the hardest to write IMO, so many cliches and tropes to avoid.
@@rickyvvvvv Honestly, I gotta disagree. But to be fair, I'm already not a fan of romance stories, so that might be a problem in it's own right.
Whenever I see a romance plot in a story, I'd much rather see the characters involved work together than against each other. I really don't like the trope of having two people who don't get along kiss immediately after.
I'm okay with the budding romance as they begin to trust each other as stuff, but there's too many "beginning of relationship" stories when compared to "middle of relationship" stories. Seeing character compliment each others weaknesses and, especially, reinforce each other's strengths are an amazingly entertaining dynamic.
@@alexandredesouza3692 I don’t mean simplistic situations where they kiss immediately after. I mean movies where their differences are worked out or not through the story. Like Annie Hall, When Harry Met Sally, the Before Sunrise series. Sometimes their situations and backgrounds are the ones which are in conflict with each other, even if they are so much in love with each other. That is the case with films such as Romeo and Juliet, The Age of Innocence, and The Bridges of Madison County. Maybe, you can say that the antagonist here is society, but each character is just acting out the conflicting elements given to them by their backgrounds.
I think this can have it's ups and downs. Kid's films and Comedies have this annoying trope of starting some rift between the protags by the end of the 2nd act and resolve it in 10 minutes of runtime.
But Toy Story and Sherlock Holmes do this well. In Toy Story-types, the protags are clearly opposed, but they need to set aside their differences to achieve a common goal. In Sherlock-types, the characters have the same goals, but different methods/reasons to achieving it (Holmes solves crimes for fun and is too extreme, Watson Foils him by calming downs his impulses and solving crimes because it's the right thing, usually)
There are other ways to do this however if your protags have opposing goals. A chase, a race or a debate in which each character one-ups each other is very entertaining. And if they have unrelated goals which still involves or forces their mutual interaction, it can sometimes be funny to see where that leads.
You can have multiple protagonists in stories that go longer than a single feature film character arc. Such as series, or film trilogies. The key is that you complete the character arc before handing off the baton. Likewise, it'd be good to introduce the new protagonist early, by giving them a role in the story before focusing on them.
Reminds me of Captain America: Civil War where Iron Man and Captain America are two main protagonists of MCU. But in that movie, they made Tony Stark an antagonist both from their ideology of superhero management and personal drama since it's Cap's movie.
GRRM with different protagonists every chapter: *"Dammit this guy says it doesn't work, now I gotta change the whole series"*
What’s GRRM?
@@echidnanation8239George rr Martin, author of the a song of ice and fire book series (Also known as yhe game of thrones books)
"You shouldn't have dual protagonists." - Go watch Your Name.
i feel like the two protagonists things is often used in books. generaly, each has its own story line that's seems completely disconnected and then the two stories lines bump into each other at the story climax i love this moment where it's all connected after all ( like in the miserables by victor Hugo and in the end of times by murakami and probably ton of other )
Yeah, but i feel as though that goes hand in hand in what he's saying here as i'd be inclined to say that those kinds of books are telling two different stories for the majority, up until the protagonists converge
Scully and Mulder are probably a good example of 2 characters working as a unity
Yea I think they’re the main characters and the protagonist counted as one.
Mulder is the protagonist, no doubt about it, all the arcs have him in the center, even the ones he isnt even present
@@NUCLEARDASH interesting! Thanks for pointing that out
@@NUCLEARDASH Also, Scully is always challenging Mulder's wacky beliefs.
"Why you should never do anything different than the way it's already been done before"
That mindset could make your story ordinary. Every attempt has a first guy.
It would be awesome to see a video of how each genre sets up the entire movie with point 1. I think everyone struggles with how to start, but first, remember, the story begins before the script
Currently, I’m writing a story with two main characters. The idea is that they’re both interacting with their own separate stories and fails. Once their arcs come together, one becomes an antagonist to the other, even if she isn’t a “villain”. Despite one being an antagonist, I want them to both have equal screen time. How can I accomplish this type of story well?
That feels really challenging. If it were me, I’d have your future antagonist be a B character/ B plot, or at least show the protagonist first so they get latched onto first. If you really want them equal, make sure your first character continuously sets up questions that the second answers, without repeating story beats and vice versa. I’m no professional, but the best advice I have is that If your audience can immediately pick out their favorite character/ the more interesting story within the first quarter of your work, you have some rewriting to do.
Hope this helps :)
Just watch avatar
I think you should watch fate/zero, there is basically 7 protagonists, and it is an incredible show
they're arcs?
@@NoNameAtAll2 I meant to say “their arcs”. I’ll correct.
The Prestige would like to have a word (and also the X-Men reboot movies)
I was also thinking of the Prestige. About halfway through the video, I wondered if Tyler would classify them as a Protag/Antag relationship (though really it's Protag/and two Antag. Such a brilliant movie!)
Among many, many others. I haven't watched the video yet but I'm not sure what the argument would be against two-handers, since it's been done with great success numerous times.
Okay, but most writers who are still learning the craft shouldn't be trying to write Christopher Nolan-type stories. Master how to write a great story with 1 protagonist first. Then experiment. I've never read a complicated spec from an amateur that was coherent and marketable as a movie. Most people just get lost in the sauce.
I think in The Prestige, Nolan keeps us on our toes in deciding who the actual protagonist is throughout the whole film and maybe even after.
@@dustyhills8911 I think that's absolutely correct. One protagonist is hard enough to write without keeping track of two.
Most people (including Tyler) confuse “protagonist” and “main character.”
Yes. Most of the time they are the same person. But “protagonist” as Tyler said is the driving force of a story while “main character” is the one who goes through a character arc.
They can be, and, often are seperate characters in a story. Think The Good, The Bad and The Ugly (1966). Blondie (Clint Eastwood) is the “protagonist” as he drives the story forward but he doesn’t change or grow throughout. Meanwhile, Tuco (Eli Wallach) is the “main character” as he is the only character with a semblance of a character arc. (Same goes for Mad Max (Mel Gibson) in The Road Warrior (1981)).
I think Tuco is the real protagonist in desguise. The movie even starts and ends with him alone. Clint's character definetly feels more like a sidekick.
The Shawshank Redemption is like this, too. Andy is the protagonist, but Red is the main character, and the story is told through his eyes.
There are antagonists but there are also contagonists, mentors and sceptics which are also main character that aren't either protagonist or antagonist
Counterargument: Road to El Dorado. Yes, two protagonists can be done poorly... but like with all other rules of writing / storytelling, knowing the rules is critical to breaking them effectively.
Certain romances (like When Harry Met Sally, for instance) feature two protagonists. You could argue that they operate structurally as one because most of their scenes are together. But they are also the antagonist to each other, opposing and questioning the other's views.
Thanks for this! I was confusing the word "protagonist" with "hero" or the ethically correct person in the story.
I'm currently writing a short action drama about English walnuts escaping prison, and I decided early on that the story was missing something, after turning one of my major side characters into a second protagonist I tried to keep their story as tight as possible, meaning they are motivated by the same inciting incident but in different ways and they both have gone too far to the extreme in their beliefs. So as the story progresses they learn from each other's successes and mistakes and despite not fully becoming new people by the end of the story (it is a short after all) they are far more balanced.
My novel has 6 protagonists. I’m going for a true ensemble fantasy.
Obviously novels are different from screenwriting which you mainly talk about
So like GOT ?
Yes, Tyler's advice is mostly geared for mainstream film screenplay, so it should be taken with a grain of salt when applied to other stuff like novels, comics/manga, TV, etc...
The fundamentals are solid, but I'd also recommend reading other books on story in addition to watching his videos in order to have a more general grasp of things.
Like, in this instance for example, if you apply Tyler's advice to a 120 min film, he's 100% correct, it makes the story too convoluted and takes away from the message/theme, but if you apply it to literature, or manga, you can cite numerous examples of good stories that feature multiple protagonists. His advice should be heeded though, like consciously think of it in terms of how he's expressing it. Like, you can look at Star Wars for example, when you look at the 6 films, you can see that the "two protagonists" are actually the antagonist and the protagonist. With the prequels telling you the story of the antagonist and his fall from grace.
RRR was great, and both the protagonists had approximately equal screentime, but they had different reasons for being where they were, but at the end, both of them had the same goal (killing the antagonist). What made it interesting was that both the characters were given something to stick together, and were also given the Fire and Water symbolism.
True rrr is a perfect example and i think 2 protagonist with a same theme but different agendas are so thrilling and exciting for the Story and the audience because it's not normal
seeing indian films making it to the western writing community s going to make me cry real quick kajskja
This was so helpful and just saved me so much time. I’m in the early stages of writing my story and have been confused on this topic.
Now I just need to choose a character to be my protagonist. Back to the drawing board
I do feel like even when there are 2 protagonists, the POV is skewed towards one vs the other
Isayama: and I took that personally
In my story, it’s more like protagonist and deuteragonist. Basically majority of the chapters in my book focuses on the one main character the story is about. While occasionally switching to the other main character the primary main character meets early on. Eventually though, both main characters occupy the same space together the rest of the way through.
I dunno, I think it works when your protagonist can't be in more than one place and the plot requires it.
I'd certainly like a video addressing how to write an ensemble cast. Maybe something that could better guide those writers who like larger casts.
The Last Watch and The Exiled fleet, published by Tor, great story two protagonists.
Well said. I'm on my 2nd draft already :) so I have to make it work.
Interesting topic. I recently replayed Cyberpunk 2077 which also has a story with two protagonists, V and Johnny Silverhand. However, like explained in this video, Johnny's role changes a LOT. That man goes from antagonist to side-kick to protagonist in the span of 4 hours. V's role is very clear and static on the other hand. He is the protagonist although a weak one compared to Johnny's persona.
Prisoners (2013) does this well with 2 protagonists. Both protagonists are full of emotional depth which creates good development on screen from both of them.
Detective Loki "needs" to find the two girls and solve the case.
Keller Dover "wants" to find his daughter and her friend, but takes matters into his own hands and that's when the act of "morality" comes in.
I'm probably wrong with what I've written and I might be overthinking it but that's just my opinion of the film, love it so much.
How do you think a movie like "Magnolia" by PTA has worked out with multiple protagonist and with multiple story lines. I don't think each of them are characters but they tend to have their own character arc which is why they meet the definition of a protagonist. Can you explain this?
magnolia imo wasnt a good screenplay at all, felt PTA was in over his head, but hes a great director and obviously had some major talent to support it
Nothing Is Imposible:- RRR. Imaginary Boundries pushed.
A film which is one of my all time favorites and is also one of the most underrated of all time has 2 protagonists: Mikey and Nicky (1976).
Is it okay for 2 characters to undergo the same sort of character arc but in different ways?
Yes it is. Watch Memories of Murder by Bong Joon-ho. (Despite two main character arcs, there is still one protagonist.)
I think he’s trying to say they’re both the protagonist coupled as one in that case.
@@jezebulls what about 3 protagonist?
After watching this I was still confused about whether or not I had two protagonists in my story because it felt like I had second inciting incidents for one of my main characters. Afterwards though, I went and watched the video on “How to stop being confused about story structure” and realized what I was perceiving as a separate inciting incident for a different character, was actually part of the “adapt” section of the story. A conflict for one of the other main characters that was inadvertently caused by my protagonist’s reaction to her inciting incident.
So thank you for helping me sort out that confusion.
In "real life" stories, sometimes there are "chain reactions" where one person's actions are misinterpreted by the next, and so on for several people. This is how incidents happen to people, but in a movie story the audience doesn't know whom to root for.
If I take the film Se7en, I would say both -- the character of Brat Pit and Morgan Freeman are the protagonists, but they do not work in unison, and I would not say that one is the support or antagonist to the other. Thus I think it is possible to have two characters both being the protagonists, since they both create a dynamic with Pit's character being the one who is more pushing and thus driving while Freeman's character is the one who has in the end the complete character arc of a protagonist. Maybe their banter could be seen like a soliloquy in theatre of a single protagonist who is trying to reconciliate different aspects of themselves. Still, since they fall apart at the end, it would not work with a single protagonist (except maybe in sci-fi where the character could maybe then be separated into two different quantum personas). Guess what I want to say is: that if one is really experienced as storyteller then one can do that and make it work.
I would argue that Morgan Freeman is the protagonist and Brad Pitt a form of antagonist or challenger.
Hear me out on this one: Morgan Freemans character has the strong believe that the world is dark and rotten and not worth fighting for. He even thinks about quittung his job.
Brad Pitts character on the other hand is full of energy and hope for the world. He strongly believes in his job and his duties. They're working together but are both in conflict because of their beliefs. In the end that is what inspires the change in Freemans character, while Pitts character finally succumbs to evil and kills an "unarmed man"
"Chariots of Fire" is a good example of two protagonists who only seem to oppose each other - it really is telling two complete stories side by side, each with their own "circle" or "arc" or however you choose to chart it. Harold's accomplishment at the end has a real ache to it because of Eric's absence in his race, but both stories are a triumph of faith over (potentially crippling) cynicism. Tyler's point is well-taken, though - it makes for a long movie, and Eric's switch to a different race does feel like a "bait 'n' switch." Still a great film that doesn't get enough love these days.
I'm thinking 9 main characters with 3 protagonist. 1 main protagonist and one main antagonist.
I get what you're saying Tyler, it can be confusing and difficult to write a story with two protagonists - however I would add that if done well, two-handers can make for very interesting stories. You can also add elements of surprise and reversals when the character you were rooting for actually becomes more of an antagonist, e.g. when the audience learns something about a character that changes their loyalties to the other "protagonist" and they eventually come out on top.
What if there are 3 protagonistes?
by this logic I can say that Thanos was the protagonist of the movie avengers infinity war
He was.
@@nobudgetshortfilms5510 yes
I think there's exceptions to every rule. Lethal Weapon has two protagonists. Saw has two protagonists.
What about "Django Unchained"?
For some reason they gave Christoph Waltz the Oscar only for "Supporting Character", but Dr. King Schultz was clearly the character who drove the story forward, thus he was the protagonist.
Django however took over at the end, and of course the movie was named after him. Do we have two protagonists here, and would you recommend it for a story?
In T.V. shows it might be a good idea to not introduce all your characters in the first episode.
This works especially well with antagonists or villains as it allows you to build tension, suspense or intrigue around a character.
Is a deuteragonist the same as a second protagonist? I think of Dawson's Creek and there are definitely a few main characters, but one could argue Dawson and Joey are two protagonists, Pacey is a deuteragonist, and Jen is a triagonist OR Dawson or Joey as THE protagonist and the other as a deuteragonist, while Pacey/Jen are triagonists or just main characters. I mean, all four definitely have episodes, story arcs, or even seasons that are mostly their story, but overall it seems Dawson and Joey are the center of the story.
I was having trouble rewriting a story that seemed to have four main characters, operating as a dysfunctional unit, and one hidden villain. If the protagonist is the character that most defines how the story moves forward, I'm thinking that the four 'main' characters are actually heroic antagonists, and the villain may be the real protagonist? Any advice for writing a protagonist that manages to remain off screen for big chunks of the story? Or would that be a mistake?
I think this is one of the many faults that led the assassin's creed movie to failure, there were two characters and two completely different stories they were trying to focus on and drive forward and neither meshed with each other very well even though it seemed like they really tried to mesh them together.
This is something I just struggled with on a limited series project I started. I almost tried the 2 protagonist thing, but realized that it was never necessary. One of them is really the antagonist, but because it is a "main character" with an arc I really wanted to focus on, I confused it with being a protagonist. You can have main characters who are focused on as much as the protagonist, who are not the protagonist. Just because they have a lot of screen time or are more interesting than your protagonist, doesn't make them the driving force of your story. What I really had to decide in the end was: Do I want to tell this story from the point of view of this "good" protagonist hero type?... or just let this evil villain of a person become the protagonist and tell it in the spirit of Infinity War with the bad guy-protagonist. I chose to keep a traditional hero protagonist character and just write a really interesting villain with his own clear philosophical beliefs. Honestly, toying with this idea of every "main character" being the protagonist is a great tool for developing your characters. You just have to know that in the end, after you've fleshed them out, you have to put them back in their place and keep your 1 true protagonist.
I think the most important thing to remember is that your protagonist is the one who gives meaning to your story and all the other perspectives in your movie.
So let's say in The Incredibles: Sure you have in both movies a big family with many members who have interesting perspectives and stories - But in the end it's the care and struggle of the father (the films protagonist) that gives meaning to this. Like when we see the kids struggle in school and normal life, but we as the viewer ultimately see this through the lens of the father, who struggled a lot in the two movies, to give his family that normal life and in hope they'll be more happy so. That doesn't mean that the father is the most important member of the family or even that he struggles the most. It's just that his characters want, is what sits at the core of the films structure and everything else is just another perspective on that core story.
A lot of movies with big ensembles make it sometimes difficult to see, which main character is the protagonist. A good method I've found to clear this up is to look at the first and the last sequence of the movie and identify who's perspective (and later character-change) we're focusing on. Like in Se7en: Where it might seem like we have two protagonist, but ultimately it's the change in Sommerset we're focusing on. Or Sherlock where it was always (until they f it up in the last season) about Watsons change and him becoming a more competent person through being challenged by Sherlock.
Some stories actually pull it off and switch protagonists successfully at some point (Psycho and Midnight Mass come to mind) but there's probably a reason why that's not the norm.
Place beyond the Pines uses this device well too.
Except in comedy. Unlike couples like Martin Riggs and Roger Murtaugh, but also Frasier and Niles. Two similar brothers pushing each other forward is the most masterful decision in screenwriting ever.
In tropa de elite you have two, but then something happens. In Love and Mercy you have one protagonist in two time frames. In Heat, you have two and it works well because the real protagonist is Hanna and we think it's McCauley. In The Departed it's Sullivan but we want it to be Costigan. Also, you can have a shared journey eg the buddy cop genre. Also Godfather Part 2....split between two time frames. Traffic...split between different geographical regions. Frodo and Aragorn.
“why u shouldn’t have 2 protagonists”
Arcane: hi
This is why I find Akira to be so confusing. Is the protagonist Kaneda or Tetsuo? Or Akira? wtf!
Have to disagree. One of my favorite movies from 2011 was X-Men First Class. Charles and Eric are the protagonists of that movie and both are needed for the story to move forward and for the story to happen the way it does. I wouldn't want either of them removed or even lowered to supporting character since the film would have to be very different for that to happen.
Now yes, Eric does become an antagonist later but first of all that doesn't happen until the last 20 minutes and secondly the primary antagonist for both Charles and Eric was Sebastian Shaw. He's the main antagonist for most of the film and it's not until he dies that Eric takes his place as a new villain.
Another example is the 2018 God of War on PS4. Kratos you would think would be the main character but Atreus is every bit as important to that story as Kratos is in fact if you remove Atreus or put him out of commission then the story just wouldn't happen. Again both are needed for the story to happen and for it to happen the way it does.
Neither of them are villains or central antagonists even though they have antagonistic moments towards each other. The antagonist of the story is Baldur and it stays that way until near the end of the game and he's finally killed.
Would you say that castle in the sky has two protagonists? If so how does it not feel disjointed? Just a thought
Quick question, so 1 protagonist makes perfect sense, but can you have 2+ antagonists as well? Or is that just as bad?
Currently I'm working on a novel where I'm planning to put two protagonists.
U ituslly it focuses on a guy and hid brother who get seperated. The guy becomes an antagonistic figure to the world and once he would reunite with his brother, his brother also sees him as an antagoidt due to their same goal but different ideals. But he doesn't nessecsrily hate this "antagonist" but this "antagonist" hates him cuz he sees what he could've been if things were different.
Thoughts?
I'm a little confused. Nolan said that they decided to make Harvey Dent the Protagonist in the Dark Knight. In one of your videos, you explained the story circle. You said Batman is the Protagonist. Do you think, Nolan uses a different definition of Protagonist and not the one, you explained in this video?
I really liked the video btw
Dent is definetly not the protagonist of that movie.
Then there is Heat.
And The Departed
Good advice. It's fine to have multiple characters but the story must be driven by the desire, decisions and actions of one particular character.
Wrong! : The Departed.
So... you shouldn't write romance novels?
Can you do a few videos on the different types of non linear films? Also how would you describe something like Game of Thrones which seems to have multiple protagonists?
I guess somebody forgot to tell several of the greatest authors of our time who wrote blockbuster novels with two protagonists. Such as Charles Frazier, author of Cold Mountain, which sold 5 million copies and won the National Book Award. And Anthony Doerr, who wrote All The Light We Cannot See, which sold 15 million copies and won the Pulitzer Prize.
I think the ting that people need to know is that there is a difference between a "Protagonist" and a principal (Lead) role.
a Protagonist is the driving force behind the story (and the story is usually told from their perspective)
a Principal role (often referred to as a lead) supports the protagonist. (But they still have a large part in the story, either in the inciting incident, rising action, climax, falling action or resolution and they can make decisions that advance the plot)
Take a musical like Zombie Prom or Grease as a shining example.
in Zombie Prom, Toffee is the protaginist because we see and hear more from her perspective throughout the show, although Jonny Warner (a LEAD) makes choices and decisions that directly move the plot along. it's because of Jonny's desire to return to school that almost gets the prom cancelled and it's his love that brings the principal to her senses.
In Grease, Sandy is the protagonist (as, Like Toffee, we see and hear more from her perspective). throughout the show, Sandy makes decisions and Danny Zuko (a LEAD) also helps to advance the plot through things like the Thunder road rumble subplot.
I have written a play with 2 protagonists that makes sense, however it's the format the show is being presented in. the show is essentially one giant bedtime story being told to young children by their parents and the Junior versions of the characters (Kodi and Athena in the past) also play an instrumental role in tellling the story.
The play periodically shifts in POV between Kodi and Athena based on who is the focus of the next song.
E.G: During the Hadestown auditions in scene 3 with "Wait for me", Kodi and his friend, Michael Greene are the focus, so we know we're in Kodi's perspective. but in scene 5, when Kodi runs off to get celebratory milkshakes with Jason, Mike and Connor after the verdict of their auditions are revealed, the perspective shifts to Athena as she denies to her friends about her love for Kodi.
So with films like Magnolia where there are 5 or 6 strong characters that we follow... how do you write that? I am writing a script that calls for multiple characters like that, and am trying to figure out the best way to structure it. Should I story arc 7 characters and "braid" 7 Dan Harmon story circles together, but with one main protagonist we follow for the primary plot? In other words, do I burn out the first draft focused on the protagonist and then incorporate the other arcs afterwards. In Magnolia all characters are disjointed but intertwined in their stories, but I could not identify one protagonist.
...I got 4 main characters lol but its important for the story I'm telling x3
Dang, I must have messed up. I only have a tagonist.
What about Asoiaf or GoT?
George RR Martin: task failed succesfully
Best book I’ve read with two protagonists is Scythe
I liked Scythe but the the protagonists didn't get much development in that book
@@MajorJack92 thats true. I should have specified that I like the triology. The book my not be perfect on its own (or in general) but I think it does a great job at being "Act 1" with small steaks and small mysteries that are left to be answered later, but aren't so big it takes away from the catharsis of the end
@@MajorJack92 also havnt read many two protag books
This is the problem with plotting. Suddenly all of your story beats are too closely coupled and you become constricted in the types of stories you can write. My story has a protagonist who 'converts' an antagonist early on. The protagonist leaves the story and that antagonist becomes the protagonist for a major portion of the story. The original protagonist reappears but the mantle of the story has been handed off to a third character who completes the story arc.
👀 Oooo reference to Doctor Strange & Wanda 😂 I’m actually re-writing Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, so I really appreciate this video. Cheers Tyler
But... Wanda's the villain
@@ApolloMusicWasTaken Yup, (super)hero turned Antagonist since Wanda Vision. Who has a soft spot and a realization end.
Ask cars 2 why you shouldn't have two protagonist.
There is difference between stories and tales .stories have single protagonist and protagonists in tales are different
Hello, I love this video! I have something to say regarding this two protagonists things. So I was wondering, how does this works in stories like Sherlock Holmes? I know the obvious answer is that Holmes and Watson act as one entity and thus a single protagonist, but I was like, do they really? I thought about this a little:
Obviously the most interesting character, the one the story does not exist without, is Holmes, which makes him the protagonist, but... Everything is told through the eyes of Watson, since, at least in the books, Watson is the 'narrator', and usually in the screen adaptations there is a certain focus on maintaining the viewer stuck to Watson's point of view as well (since he is the everyman that allows the audience to be surprised at Holmes' ingenuity). They are mostly always together but there are many conflicts that involve them being separate, which is why I started to think this isn't a case of them being "one protagonist" - for example when Holmes fakes his death, the stories cannot continue without him so usually there are no prolongued moments, not many scenes in the story until Holmes returns (as in, we don't get to see what Watson does when there's no Holmes in the equation). This almost makes it seem as if Watson is a secondary character, even though he is the one we, audience, are always with!
But then I realized, this doesn't mean Holmes is the sole protagonist. Sure he is the most important one, but the Sherlock Holmes stories cannot exist without Watson either - the stories begin precisely when they meet, even though Holmes had already been doing investigations for years.
I thought this was super interesting to think about and tried analyzing it as an exercise for myself, so I wanted to share 😄😄
Would love to see Tyler review some Anime.
What about love stories?
Should pick a protagonist and make thr other one the antagonist ?
In my story I have two protagonist. But I wanna separate them after the first story (it'll be a trilogy bc how much I wanna explore). Just want feedback
Umm, tell me if I'm wrong here, but aren't all those buddy cop TV shows and movies filled with a pair of protags? How would you break down the Batman TV series with Batman AND Robin? I can see making characters who work together actually have a rivalry, like a narcissist who leads a codependent.
I have always been contemplating about knowing who the main character should be in my story.. this really helped a lot with making me decide!
Relating question: Do you have any advice on writing an ensemble cast that affect one whole big story like its the Avengers or something?
What about friends?
Tyler Durden doesn't approve this message.
😂😂😂
Tyler Durden is the antagonist though... and the mentor.
The Departed is more a multi protagonist film than Fight Club, as Norton is clearly the protagonist having Durden as mentor turned to villain.
RRR has two protagonist and film is just 🔥🔥🔥🔥
Free information
How do feel about an ensemble cast of characters?
I 100% agree… but i did it by accident!
So you can only have one character arc in a story
I’m so jealous of the instant view count 🥺 #SubscriberGoals 😢😅😊
Keep making your content; don't get discouraged! Everyone's TH-cam journey is different :)
Can describe writing romance
The duo of protagonists is a well established concrpt and exists in all kinds of genres and popular works lmfao what are you talking about lmao
Every buddy cop movie ever made in the 80s and 90s is that exact trope 😂
Hi Tyler the script you posted here are gone. Where can I find the scripts to continue reading?
Solid video. Thanks
So what about buddy cop movies?
I disagree. Avatar: the Last Airbender managed two protagonists like Aang and Zuko which managed to bring a flow to the story that truly made it different from other stories.
I don’t think Zuko was a protagonist he was an antagonist that got a redemption arc. Basically just another main character
Batman is the only protagonist of BvS.
Yo can put Superman in the same level of importance as Lex, and Lex isn't a protagonist, right?
Okay? But I don't think Infinity war was a super disjointed story. I mean the movie had at least two protagonists
RRR
What about LA Confidential and The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo?
And how about Scorses's The Departed