Screenwriting : Five Films That Prove There Are No Rules When It Comes to Script Structure by Amanda Toney

The article feels like a reaction to "Save the Cat," and I applaud anyone who joins the chorus of voices decrying that paint by numbers approach to screenwriting.

Good article, I loved the use of the word "organic" relating to script structure. A story should live and breathe, and "out" its own unique execution, not be tailored by past conventions.

I appreciate this article's ability to copy Corey Mandell's class (which is ALL this article does, almost word for word), bu the truth is...whether you call it a beat sheet, a character journey, emotional beats, or "building the plot organically" - it's all structure. And there is NO book that says the inciting incident is supposed to be on pg 17 - it's actually supposed to be within the first 15 pages. But that aside, look at the scripts this article notates... Let's discount Godfather because it was 40 years ago, 3 and a half hours long, and the film biz and screenwriting was different then. When Harry Met Sally was a different structured type of love story and it worked - granted. But there was still a structure. Juno had the inciting incident happen on page 3 - but there still IS one! The Hangover's inciting incident isn't losing the groom - it's going to Vegas! And that happens on page 14. And in terms of The Fugitive, I just heard Jeb Stuart (the writer) talk about the importance of structure at AFF! So, no offense to this article or to my friend Corey Mandell, but the writers who purposefully DONT use structure are in the VAST minority, and the amateur writers who try not to use structure aren't experienced enough to do so. I'm not saying there are LAWS or RULES or SPECIFIC page numbers something has to happen at - but there IS a natural structure to story. And unless you're a nonlinear master like a David Lynch or something, bucking structure is NOT the way to go, especially as you're starting out.

People who fight structure are letting it control them instead of using it. Today's script tip looks at movie like MEMENTO and structure: http://www.scriptsecrets.net/tips/tip128.htm It's a tool that you use, not a cage or a rule that binds you. People who fight against it want to be controlled.... they seek it out. You find whatever you look for. If you are looking for tools to help you, that's what you find.

In other words... (following Danny and William) first learn everything about possible ways of structuring a screenplay and then begin to play with the knowledge, talent, handcraft and fantasy to find your own style. It never works the other way round.

Yep, I felt that the article doesn't excommunicate structure, but moreover hints that the story should evolve its own unique structure, not necessarily conventional. I do agree that only a few "who break the mould" completely, end up having a film made, but that doesn't mean we should all impose self limitations. A story should have a heart and soul, that an audience absorbs organically, we are aiming at their thoughts and feelings. It's our job to Move audiences/readers, to compel them to physically turn the page, this is not dependent on the intellectual wisdom of how the template was structured. Last year I did a survey on a cruise liner, the most popular film they "remember now" turned out to be Pulp Fiction. In itself beyond analysis.

Lol. Horses for Courses.

Yeah, I'm with this article all the way. Rigid rules about this has to happen by page that and the like frustrate me no end, that's not how storytelling works!

I personally just believe you must know the rules before you break them. Imagine a newby driver just running through red lights and stop signs and not acknowledging right of way, etc. Eventually he will crash and burn. There will be exceptions of course but the more he breaks the rules the likelihood goes up. Once he learns the rules he won't run a light while a cops nearby or there's oncoming traffic.

I think structure is a bit overrated. Many problems boil down to knowing where your story starts. Most beginning writers begin their story too early, and spend a lot of time developing the world and the characters before anything really happens. In my first screenplay, I actually started the story a bit too late, and needed to revise it to show a bit of the "day in the life" of my two main characters before they were drafted into the Soviet military. Once you learn where your story starts, you start to tell it. By forcing your story onto a fixed beat structure ala "Save the Cat" you can certainly avoid the pitfalls of not starting it at the right time, but the resulting stories are often quite predictable. Furthermore, I see no compelling reason to "learn all we can" about structure when really the essential skill one needs is the knowledge of where the story begins.

Last night I was flippin' through channels, and stopped at the beginning of 'Magnolia'. After watching it until I fell asleep, and reading this thread today, I must chime in that as I read this topic and its' opinions... the opening fifteen minutes of that movie had roughly 7, SEVEN inciting incidents. Nevertheless; that script was well received, and the movie was made, and yet - without a detailed structure, it hit what it needed to right from the get go... there were many inciting incidents that happened and each one of them "II" got my attention to keep watching. Standard formula may not be important, (when each film is different)... but the DETAILS they require definitely attract me.

I did not like Magnolia at all. I feel the gameshow thread was extraneous to the rest of the movie. Would it have been cut entirely, the movie becomes shorter and more focused.

I didn't like it either... Regardless, (i didn't continue) channel surfing BECAUSE of the inciting incidents.

I watch movies/tv shows all the time where I don't like them. I try and use them regardless. I used to re-fill salsa containers at local grease spot in my home town too... I still remember the smell of that dirty restaurant, and think about it sometimes as I complain about the market, in a day job where I manage money for a living. My point.... Sometimes we must do things, (watch trash) / (work jobs we hate) to find out what exactly we DONT WANT TO BE A PART OF.

I enjoy "fix films" where I look at a movie I hate and propose a way to make it work. We come up with some good storylines. My favorite is to take "The Hours" (you will notice a theme about me not liking Oscar bating movies) and to make it so that Virginia Wolfe does black magic: her suicide is the last step in a dark ritual that creates "Mrs. Dalloway" a horcrux that contains her soul. This horcrux then infects other women in time drawing them into the drama that was Virginia's life. Can they resist the spell? I find that far more entertaining and compelling than the tripe that "The Hours" put forward.

First, thanks to Shannon for posting an article that’s already stimulated a lot of discussion in 24 hours. To list these films and say they’re sterling examples of movies that didn’t adhere to rules of structure seems odd to me. I agree with Danny in saying these movies all employed classic elements of structure. These included inciting incidents early on, overcoming obstacles challenges and character transformations, particularly, “The Godfather”. With successful storytelling, the other magic ingredient is lots of conflict along the way. And as far as the inciting incident in the Godfather; if Vito wasn’t shot, you’d have no second inciting incident with Michael in the hospital. Here’s what I do agree with. Storytelling should be an organic process. But it’s also a talent process. And I’ve recently read several scripts that were technically well written, but they didn’t offer stories that I found compelling. I say no matter what you do, you have no right to bore your reader with superfluous narrative, flat, uninspired dialogue, scenes and for that matter, stories that go nowhere. You have to look at every scene and every word and decide whether or not they add value in moving your story forward. When I say you have no right, I mean you can’t expect someone to read past page five of a dull, poorly written script. So I always advocate opening your story with a bang. Most great movies have exciting opening scenes. Sure, the Godfather has a long wedding sequence at the beginning. But watch the first three minutes of that, film with the Bonasera character delivering America monologue and Brando’s riveting entrance into the movie. He helps Puzo’s well written words jump off that page. If you can write that level of quality you can pretty much do what you want.

So know my head hurts. Sometimes it just gets confusing but I continue writing the story that I feel. Then I put it away for a while before I strip it to bare bones and start over again. My latest script got to the semifinals of a competition but then I sent it to a different one and it didn't get noticed. I did get feedback on it. Now I'm scared to touch the thing again and mess it up.

Excellent advice, Mel. Go with your instincts and always write about stories that you are passionate about and those who's characters talk to you and touch your heart, so that your readers and ultimately your audience will experience the same emotions your characters are feeling.