Adding Scenes To Beef Up A Script?

Michael Bay said:
Alright, the love stories are overplayed but are usually strong and are a good subplot. I'm not one to judge people I don't know but I think that you need some kind of psychology.
Click to expand...

No thanks, I majored in philosophy instead! ;)

And no, they are not a good subplot, they are annoying, built for the lowest common denominator, people with IQs hovering in the 90-range.
 
Why's anyone taking this thread seriously? Not to criticize Michael Bay or his apparent doppelganger here, but for a "spoof" thread, this one is sorely lacking in originality and fun factor. We've already hit three pages and I've seen only the faintest trace of wit.

Come on! We're on a writer's forum! We can do better than this. Do I need to make a "Steven Spielberg" thread to show you how a spoof thread needs to be done?

Edit: Okay. I'll even get you guys started.

You want internal conflict? Have you seen Man on Fire? Do it. No, I'm not talking about Denzel Washington's poignant arc from drunk loner badass to loving protector. I'm talking about jamming explosives up a man's derriere and fiddling with a remote detonator in front of his face. Now that is some internal conflict that Michael Bay can get behind.

See? It's so easy even a deep-sea oil driller in outer space could do it!

Edit 2: In the interest of full disclosure, I have to admit that I really do like The Island, The Rock, and Armageddon.
 
Last edited:
Michael Bay said:
I'm really not thinking that the romance subplot would work. It wouldn't fit the character. He's a loner who only uses assistance from anyone when necessary.
Click to expand...
So have a chick that wants in and he won't let her in. You've underscored character and created conflict.

But what's the point of a subplot? Usually, and this is why romantic subplots often work, it carries the theme of the movie. Plot carries, well, the plot. The A to B cause and effect of the story. The central question / Mcguffin that we want to see answered or solved. The subplot usually deals with a relationship (it need not be romantic) and is therefore more personal and therefore comments on the plot / shows the emotional effect of the plot / carries the theme or highlights it in some way.

So what's your movie about - trying to say. That's your theme, and your theme is what your subplot should serve. That way it's not tacked on.

If, for example, your theme has to do with being a lone wolf or working as a team / accepting help - well that starts to suggest all kinds of personal subplots. As I suggested before you could have a love interest that wants in, but he won't let her. How does that work for him or make his task harder - now you're addressing a theme - in this case looking at depending on each other, or relying only on yourself - and it's directly related to the plot if the plot deals with him being effective because he's a lone wolf.

You could, for example, in the main plot, come down on the side of lone wolfing it being good. He's able to cut through B.S. and get the job done when no one else can. You could also, for example, in the subplot, i.e., personally,come down on the side of lonewolfing it being bad. The cost is too great. Personally being a lone wolf = loneliness and bitterness. Now you've examined a theme more complexly showing one approach to be the best in some instances and not so good in others.

Finally, when done right, the subplot and plot intersect at some crucial moment, often the climax of the story. Trying to save the universe becomes dependent on mending a relationship with your father, which carries the theme of trusting in one's self / using the force / doing the right thing, i.e., Starwars VI.
 
Jonathan:

One of my favorite song lyric lines is from Rufus Wainwright's "Poses":

"Life is a game and true love is the trophy"

Many of us care deeply about love and intimate relationships, including a whole lot of men. You might want to do a little looking into that before you paint the entire subject as boring, irrelevant, or whatever you called it (can't see your comments right now). Without a central love story, a classic like Casablanca (or for that matter, the all-time box office champ "Titanic") would be, um...empty vessels.

Your view of the value of love and "animal instinct" are fine for you, but you might want to cop to the fact that you're decidedly in the minority on the subject. It will serve your filmmaking success to do so, if I may opine.
 
You are correct in that not everybody is looking for love. Until just a few centuries ago most people only lived to be 30, the average lifespan, still in mating mode, LOL. Now we live well past that on average, and things other than sweaty sex become more important. But still, the majority of movie goers still want to be loved, and love--thus it is a universal need. And they buy the tickets to pay the prodco, that pays the screenwriter, so that is why I think a prodco looks for some semblance of a romantic subplot, however small, to round a movie, even a hard core action movie. You do not have to put in a romantic subplot, but then a prodco also does not have to buy your screenplay. It is your story, your screenplay, you certainly have the right to decide to use or loose any romance in the screenplay.

The romance can be subtle, almost non-existent. One story that comes to mind is one of the greatest action westerns ever made, Silverado. All star cast, anybody who is anybody is in it! No overt romance, just a subtle, very subtle romantic attraction between Scott Glenn's character and Rosanna Arquette's character. Not even hand holding, no kissing. Very very subtle. 99% of the movie is pure action, breaking out of jail, gun fights, showdowns, stabbings. Definitely not a chick flick.

Again, not telling you want to do. Just that commercially viable $cripts tend to have at least a subtle romantic subplot. Not necessarily chocolates and smooching, but something however small. I won't harp on it any more. I could be wrong, completely wrong, so ignore me if you are dead set against any romantic subplot. Maybe your story doesn't need one.

I am actually listening to a new movie soundtrack right now. Dark Water. Supernatural thriller. And there really is no romance in that movie, other than romance gone bad (divorce), although the film does address a mother's love for her daughter, thus addressing the universal theme of love. But I guess that shows that not every story requires or should have a romantic subplot. So maybe your story does not, only you know that.
randall

JonathanLB said:
No thanks to romantic subplots, and NO, we are NOT all "looking for love," I have nothing in common with mediocre plots like that. It's just really a drag, it's very disturbing, just in general it's crap. The last thing I want to see when I watch a great action movie is some stupid love story. Leave that crap OUT of my manly movies, put it in the chick flicks. I don't mind if my action star gets some tail on the side, but it shouldn't be some hokey love story that just ruins a good movie.

I'm sorry that Hollywood feels we all want to see mediocrity in our films. I do not. Leave the love stories for Danielle Steel novels.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I would argue YOU are in the minority if you think most people want to see a love story in an action film. Honestly most moviegoers could care less, and there are plenty of good examples of action films that don't even bother with that.

I didn't say that if I am writing a script I wouldn't put something like that in it, back off, I'm writing a romantic comedy here for christ's sake. But that doesn't mean I'm a big fan as a viewer of seeing that mushy crap in my films. And Titanic, oh god, please don't bring up Titanic, that is one of the most retarded films of all time. It is an embarrassment to the Academy, it's an embarrassment to the American public, it's just a terrible, terrible film. Ok great it has some nice physical effects work. Yay. Besides that, it sucks hardcore. James Cameron is better than to lower himself to something like that. The story would have been far superior if it were just about the boat, not about some teenage romance. That cheapened the entire event and forever associated a previously tragic and interesting historical event with a cheesy, corny, awful film.

Casablanca is a great film, yes. It also succeeds at being very funny and witty, just in general well directed.

You cannot tell me with a straight face that the "romance" storylines in most action films really do them any credit whatsoever. Like in The Rock, all we get is a hot sex scene with Vanessa Marcil. As much as I appreciate that, the whole "I'm pregnant" scene makes me want to barf. I guess we have to see him "having something to fight for," which I really don't understand. It would have been just as good of a film, well actually better and tighter, if she didn't exist at all, and he could have just gone and done his job. The story wasn't even about her, and it wasn't even a subplot about her really, it was just useless garbage thrown in I guess to make the girls go "awww he's going to be a daddy isn't that cute." No, it isn't. What was important is the "villain," actually, standing up for his rights and the rights of the veterans, but realizing by the end that he has made a horrible mistake and found himself on the wrong side of a deadly conflict. It's a smart action film, and that little nonsense at the start detracts a bit from that.

Transformers 2 would have been way better without the stupid romance scenes, except I suppose they had to be invented for us to see Megan Fox.

And it's one thing seeing our character get a piece of ass, I have no problem with that, that's fantastic, I just don't want to see love stories. I think it's annoying and hokey. It's great I guess for idealistic people whose dream in life apparently extends only as far as finding "the perfect match," but for those of us with a bit more of an examining, philosophical disposition, the idea that one person is somehow going to make you happy for life is pretty flawed and idealistic, and really not supported by the facts. GIRLS go to see movies for that kind of crap, sure, that's fine, but keep it in girlie films. I don't want to see that in my action movies, nor does anyone else I know.

The only reason they do that is because with "date night" you can get the girl to go see the film and there's something for her too. Well I'd honestly rather direct an indie film that made its budget back, but had a much smaller budget, and make it pure, without all of that nonsense, than make a big budget film and have to appeal to everyone so therefore water down the point of my film.

In my current script, the point of the film IS for the couple, that breaks up, to get back together at film's end and all of that, but the film itself is about many things, it's not primarily about their relationship. That's just sort of the way we can see the effects of the primary plot, so it's a very strong subplot.

What I'm saying is that I think it's lame when Hollywood films have to water everything down in an attempt to appeal to all people at once. If I'm going to see an action film, I really don't want to see a romance too, I just want to see a great action film. The more pure it can be, the better it can be. I want an interesting, dynamic plot, but I don't want the primary plot to be distracted by romance scenes. It's just hokey. It's totally different when significant others exist as plot points, like in Face/Off for instance, or in True/Lies, these are films that integrate those elements well. But a lot of films it is extremely forced -- like, "Well, ok we have the script, but... we really should add a love story. Ok so we have this girl, umm, so our hero starts to like her. And... yeah, she likes him, because he's buff and he's tough and stuff. So... by the end, they need to get together." Hero kills the bad guys, hero gets the girl. What a freakin' reward that is. Except that people aren't a reward, because people aren't property, and "getting the girl" is really not much of a reward at all.
 
I have a question. Would this be considered a subplot?

Right now, the hero is always getting assistance from his buddy who is also his contact for weapons. The hero is always going to his buddy's hideout to plot or to just chill. Throughout the script, the tension rises between them to the point where the hero gets thrown because the buddy can't take his stubbornness and how he just walks in and takes whatever he wants. Would that be considered a subplot? It's not the main plot as that's how the hero is trying to take out a crime lord who is after him.
 
Michael Bay said:
I have a question. Would this be considered a subplot?

Right now, the hero is always getting assistance from his buddy who is also his contact for weapons. The hero is always going to his buddy's hideout to plot or to just chill. Throughout the script, the tension rises between them to the point where the hero gets thrown because the buddy can't take his stubbornness and how he just walks in and takes whatever he wants. Would that be considered a subplot? It's not the main plot as that's how the hero is trying to take out a crime lord who is after him.
Click to expand...

No. A subplot is when you have a storyline involving a heavily armed nuclear submarine. See U571 and The Hunt for Red October as examples.

Sorry for the confusion. Remember, a periscope does not automatically qualify you for a subplot, but it comes pretty damn close.
 
Last edited:
Michael Bay said:
I have a question. Would this be considered a subplot?

Right now, the hero is always getting assistance from his buddy who is also his contact for weapons. The hero is always going to his buddy's hideout to plot or to just chill. Throughout the script, the tension rises between them to the point where the hero gets thrown because the buddy can't take his stubbornness and how he just walks in and takes whatever he wants. Would that be considered a subplot? It's not the main plot as that's how the hero is trying to take out a crime lord who is after him.
Click to expand...

First of all, there are some different definitions for "subplot" (and none involve boats that travel underwater...ahem...). One definition is a storyline/arc that takes place inside the mind or heart of a character, sometimes known as "subtext" in character terms (this is the definition that Dara Marks uses in her excellent book "Inside Story"). An example of this type of "B" (inner) story would be the crucially important romantic history/tension between between Rick and Ilsa in "Casablanca", where the "A" (outer) story is about the need for Victor Laslo to escape and help the French Resistance to the Nazis. The inner story in that case basically is what made Rick who he is at the point in his life that the film takes place (bitter, cynical, etc.), and it's vital to the overall story.

The more common definition would be a secondary external storyline that exists at least somewhat apart from the main story, but usually later feeds into, merges with or otherwise modifies the main story. Gene Hackman's secret life as an ex-CIA surveillance vigilante in "Enemy Of The State" would be an example of this. "Pulp Fiction" is basically multi-plot, where the various sub-plots gradually tie together. "Sin City" also has clear subplots involving the Elijah Wood and Bruce Willis characters.

The example you cite wouldn't really qualify as either type because it's not A: a key internal subtext/inner story for a given character, or B: a separate storyline that exists substantially apart form the main one for at least a considerable length of time. If the buddy was secretly conspiring against the protagonist with the police, with whom he had an entire history/secret life (as in "Donnie Brasco"), it might.

HTH
 
JonathanLB said:
I would argue YOU are in the minority if you think most people want to see a love story in an action film. Honestly most moviegoers could care less, and there are plenty of good examples of action films that don't even bother with that.

I didn't say that if I am writing a script I wouldn't put something like that in it, back off, I'm writing a romantic comedy here for christ's sake. But that doesn't mean I'm a big fan as a viewer of seeing that mushy crap in my films. And Titanic, oh god, please don't bring up Titanic, that is one of the most retarded films of all time. It is an embarrassment to the Academy, it's an embarrassment to the American public, it's just a terrible, terrible film. Ok great it has some nice physical effects work. Yay. Besides that, it sucks hardcore. James Cameron is better than to lower himself to something like that. The story would have been far superior if it were just about the boat, not about some teenage romance. That cheapened the entire event and forever associated a previously tragic and interesting historical event with a cheesy, corny, awful film.

Casablanca is a great film, yes. It also succeeds at being very funny and witty, just in general well directed.

You cannot tell me with a straight face that the "romance" storylines in most action films really do them any credit whatsoever. Like in The Rock, all we get is a hot sex scene with Vanessa Marcil. As much as I appreciate that, the whole "I'm pregnant" scene makes me want to barf. I guess we have to see him "having something to fight for," which I really don't understand. It would have been just as good of a film, well actually better and tighter, if she didn't exist at all, and he could have just gone and done his job. The story wasn't even about her, and it wasn't even a subplot about her really, it was just useless garbage thrown in I guess to make the girls go "awww he's going to be a daddy isn't that cute." No, it isn't. What was important is the "villain," actually, standing up for his rights and the rights of the veterans, but realizing by the end that he has made a horrible mistake and found himself on the wrong side of a deadly conflict. It's a smart action film, and that little nonsense at the start detracts a bit from that.

Transformers 2 would have been way better without the stupid romance scenes, except I suppose they had to be invented for us to see Megan Fox.

And it's one thing seeing our character get a piece of ass, I have no problem with that, that's fantastic, I just don't want to see love stories. I think it's annoying and hokey. It's great I guess for idealistic people whose dream in life apparently extends only as far as finding "the perfect match," but for those of us with a bit more of an examining, philosophical disposition, the idea that one person is somehow going to make you happy for life is pretty flawed and idealistic, and really not supported by the facts. GIRLS go to see movies for that kind of crap, sure, that's fine, but keep it in girlie films. I don't want to see that in my action movies, nor does anyone else I know.

The only reason they do that is because with "date night" you can get the girl to go see the film and there's something for her too. Well I'd honestly rather direct an indie film that made its budget back, but had a much smaller budget, and make it pure, without all of that nonsense, than make a big budget film and have to appeal to everyone so therefore water down the point of my film.

In my current script, the point of the film IS for the couple, that breaks up, to get back together at film's end and all of that, but the film itself is about many things, it's not primarily about their relationship. That's just sort of the way we can see the effects of the primary plot, so it's a very strong subplot.

What I'm saying is that I think it's lame when Hollywood films have to water everything down in an attempt to appeal to all people at once. If I'm going to see an action film, I really don't want to see a romance too, I just want to see a great action film. The more pure it can be, the better it can be. I want an interesting, dynamic plot, but I don't want the primary plot to be distracted by romance scenes. It's just hokey. It's totally different when significant others exist as plot points, like in Face/Off for instance, or in True/Lies, these are films that integrate those elements well. But a lot of films it is extremely forced -- like, "Well, ok we have the script, but... we really should add a love story. Ok so we have this girl, umm, so our hero starts to like her. And... yeah, she likes him, because he's buff and he's tough and stuff. So... by the end, they need to get together." Hero kills the bad guys, hero gets the girl. What a freakin' reward that is. Except that people aren't a reward, because people aren't property, and "getting the girl" is really not much of a reward at all.
Click to expand...

I don't know how old you are Jonathan, and I don't mean to be insulting here, but I suspect the above point of view would be quite common among pre-teen and teenage boys. As boys become men, theses preferences usually soften, at least somewhat.

On the other hand, I'm sure my father would agree with you if he were still around to do so. He pretty much hated romantic plots in anything but outright romances, and he didn't have much use for those either. "Hokey" was the word he used for those, just as you did.

But in my conversations with my adult friends (and I'm sure I'm *much* older than you - not that that makes me superior to you or anything - just further down life's road), such romantic subplots as you'd find in "Titanic" or "Casablanca" are highly engaging, and make us care a great deal more about the story outcome. In fact, both of these films are basically love stories first, with the external plots being secondary.

I don't want to start (or continue) an argument though. I respect your point of view (as I did my dad's), and your right to express it, however much I may differ with it.
 
Last edited:
Agreed. JonathonLB seems to be a little young. Not that it's bad it just seems that way. I have to strongly disagree that movies like "Titanic" are full of unneeded, mushy crap. Titanic was brilliantly done and had a great romance plot. I do think that some [especially modern action] films have these subplots so the audience cares a little more but most are at least decent.
 
Thanks for the kind words Michael. I'm wrapping up a project right now, but get in touch with my agent in a few weeks and maybe I can give you a few tips on your new action piece. Let me be blunt: you should've listened to Steven more on Transformers 2. You're at a crossroads in your career. I might be able to steer you in the right direction. And please listen to me when I say that if you start delivering at 48fps, you won't want to go back.

Sidenote. Funny thing happened to me today. I was perusing this board and saw on the left side: "Edit Avatar."

"Holy ****," I thought to myself, "how did they manage that?" Luckily, it was a different "avatar."
 
LOL, no Michael, I just don't care for overrated romance scenes in my films, I think it's ridiculous. And Titanic is a terrible film, almost anyone would agree the romance in that is ridiculously sappy except a 14-year-old girl. It's just a joke of a movie. The only redeeming quality is the physical effects work, the CG effects work is terrible, even by the standards of the day, it's not realistic looking whatsoever.

It's only girls who want to live vicariously through some character having a relationship in a movie or TV show. That kind of crap doesn't interest guys 99% of the time. I just thank god that none of my friends are such huge pussies that they sit around watching romance movies going, "Aww that's so sweet, I wish I was that guy! How cute." Wow... honestly? Go hang out with the girls and paint your toenails or something, what a joke.
 
Nothing personal Jonathan, but there are over 1.84 billion reasons why you're wrong. That's a lot of reasons.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/1997/TITAN.php

JonathanLB said:
LOL, no Michael, I just don't care for overrated romance scenes in my films, I think it's ridiculous. And Titanic is a terrible film, almost anyone would agree the romance in that is ridiculously sappy except a 14-year-old girl. It's just a joke of a movie. The only redeeming quality is the physical effects work, the CG effects work is terrible, even by the standards of the day, it's not realistic looking whatsoever.

It's only girls who want to live vicariously through some character having a relationship in a movie or TV show. That kind of crap doesn't interest guys 99% of the time. I just thank god that none of my friends are such huge pussies that they sit around watching romance movies going, "Aww that's so sweet, I wish I was that guy! How cute." Wow... honestly? Go hang out with the girls and paint your toenails or something, what a joke.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
JonathanLB said:
LOL, no Michael, I just don't care for overrated romance scenes in my films, I think it's ridiculous. And Titanic is a terrible film, almost anyone would agree the romance in that is ridiculously sappy except a 14-year-old girl. It's just a joke of a movie. The only redeeming quality is the physical effects work, the CG effects work is terrible, even by the standards of the day, it's not realistic looking whatsoever.

It's only girls who want to live vicariously through some character having a relationship in a movie or TV show. That kind of crap doesn't interest guys 99% of the time. I just thank god that none of my friends are such huge pussies that they sit around watching romance movies going, "Aww that's so sweet, I wish I was that guy! How cute." Wow... honestly? Go hang out with the girls and paint your toenails or something, what a joke.
Click to expand...

I have to say that I'm really surprised at your insistence on this version of reality regarding "Titanic". It's one thing to say you hate the film or whatever, but it's another thing altogether to make statements like "that kind of crap doesn't interest guys 99% of the time" or "Titanic is a terrible film, almost anyone would agree the romance in that is ridiculously sappy". The only thing "ridiculous" in all of that is your presumptive 'understanding' of what other people think of the film. An 82% rating on rottentomatoes.com and $1.8B in theatrical is mighty darn hard to reconcile with all that.

If you want to figure the critics as "for sale" or whatever, and the theatre crowds as their "ticket buying bitches" or some such thing, take a look at "Titanic's" DVD sales and rentals, which started over eight months after theatrical. By then, the hoopla had pretty much died down and and everyone had their chance to weigh in on the reality of the actual film. Whoever thought it was "terrible" had said so. So how did it do? An additional $1.2 *billion* worth, that's how (one copy of which is mine - the big boxed set version). That's more than the second best *theatrical* ever: ($1.12 billion for "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King"). Think about that for a second...that "ridiculous" Titanic movie, as you call it, made over 50% more money than any other film in theatrical history (12 years ago!), and then...made more than the all-time worldwide *second* place theatrical release... *in DVDs*.

Over $3 billion in total revenues....and counting...

So, Jonathan, I'd humbly suggest...please...pick your battles with a bit more understanding of...your understandings. Assessing popular opinion of "Titanic" is clearly not one of them.
 
Last edited:
I might be guilty of jumping in here with only a cursory look at this thread but it's hard to read beyond a certain point sometimes...If your script is short then adding characters or scenes is more than just deciding the type of character or an exciting scene not done before...whoever or whatever you add has to reflect the theme...if it is a character, than what is their opinion of that theme and how do they affect it...The theme is the glue that holds it all together...what are you trying to say in this film? What is the point? It is not enough to just say I have a great effect or way to blow something up or a great love scene or moment...all those have to be connected to the point of your story (or the theme). If you say it doesn't need one then you will likely lose your audience at many points and it may not be memorable...

Again, apologies to anyone who may have said the same thing...if so, I concur with you.

Best,
Stan Harrington
 
The theme is that your true friends are always there for you. I do worry that the audience will be lost if I direct it the way I envision it because it has a lot of just awkward moments and dry humor that you will either love or hate. For the humor, think The Spirit crossed with Shaun of the Dead.
 
Then you're looking good...if you know the theme then just make sure that any character or event you add reflects that somehow...Gary Ross once gave me the best advice about getting stuck...when you get writers block, always go back to theme...that will usually give you a direction in which to go.

Stan Harrington
 
Randall_Oelerich said:
The romance can be subtle, almost non-existent. One story that comes to mind is one of the greatest action westerns ever made, Silverado. All star cast, anybody who is anybody is in it! No overt romance, just a subtle, very subtle romantic attraction between Scott Glenn's character and Rosanna Arquette's character. Not even hand holding, no kissing. Very very subtle. 99% of the movie is pure action, breaking out of jail, gun fights, showdowns, stabbings. Definitely not a chick flick.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of some other great subtle romances that never really go the generic guy gets girl route that many movies end up exploiting.

Ripley and Hicks from Aliens: there is definitely an attraction there, but also a mutual respect for each other. They both realize that they are capable and know how to get the job done. Maybe that's why there is some natural attraction there. Of course, the love story in Aliens is the one of a mother's love, which is Ripley's love for Newt.

Maximus and Lucilla from Gladiator: which is a romance that never comes to fruition due to Maximus' plight and various political reasons.

Commander Adama and President Laura Roslin from Battlestar Galactica: another one of those romances that is suppressed for a long time because of the near end of their civilization, various political reasons, and the character's professional responsibilities, not to mention some ideological differences between the characters.

I tend to think that these types of romantic plots are the most interesting, because aren't they just like how real life romance is in a way? There are complications and normal everyday life stuff that gets in the way, professional walls that crop up for workplace romances, or our fears of asking the other person out on a date, etc.
 
I can add a decent subplot which will work fine but I don't have the actors for it. There's literally nobody in my area that acts. My cast is only like 5 or 6 people excluding some extras. The extras don't have the time for a larger role.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top