Dara Marks / Inside Story: flaw/theme? (ping Ted Spencer?)

Randall_Oelerich

Randall_Oelerich

Veteran
I recall reading Inside Story by Dara Marks and one element of her writing I was very interested in was her discussion of how the protagonist's flaw should-- to make for a more interesting and deeper story-- be the inverse of the story's theme. I would love to have a discussion on this here, get clarity on this, have some seasoned writers explain or discuss this for some film titles.

And rather than cherry pick titles to fit what Dara posits, I am going to list a few films right now and see if there are any takers, see if or how often the protagonist's flaw is indeed the inverse of the story theme. Is flaw as inverse of theme necessary, or does it just make for a better screenplay? Is it more necessary for certain genres? Can flaw as inverse of theme be negated for simple horror stories, or does it even make horror genre the better for it in so doing/structuring?

Some film titles: Jaws, Dark Water (Jennifer Connelly), American Beauty, Cinderella Man, Silence of the Lambs, Lake Placid, Dances With Wolves, King Kong (Naomi Watts), The Return (Sarah Michelle Gellar), The Grudge, Road to Perdition. Pick other titles if you want, I am really just looking to see if what Dara posits works for even horror as well as drama and action movies, look into how critical flaw as inverse of theme is for a good story.

Any takers? Ted? (a self proclaimed Dara Marks fan!)
 
Last edited:
That I am!

I'll have to look at the book again to refresh my memory on this point. My main takeaway from it was largely her superb description/discussion of thematic content and its delineation into A/B/C-type story threads and their text/subtext structures/themes as they all interrelate synergistically to form a deeper, more satisfying story. It deals with that in much greater detail (and clarity) than any other book I've read.

But the notion of 'protagonist flaw opposing theme' is interesting. I'll have a go at it. The good news and bad news though is that I'm way overloaded with paying work here, so I shouldn't promise a quick/comprehensive response...

PS: I just started reading Sokoloff's book on my iPad over lunch. Very cool so far. Thanks again for the recommend...
 
I dug up some notes I had taken on this from Dara's book. Here is what I wrote down, perhaps something useful to work with in this thread. From Inside Story by Dara Marks:


Fatal Flaw
Needed to show a transformational arc of protagonist. (The astronauts of Apollo 13 were brave to begin with, leaving no room for an arc.). The fatal flaw is a struggle within a character to maintain a survival (defense mechanism) system long after it has outlived its usefulness. Identifying the fatal flaw immediately clarifies the internal emotional journey for the protagonist.

How to find the fatal flaw: Create the fatal flaw around a value that opposes the theme and the internal goal of the protagonist. It is the opposite value of the theme, the inversion of the internal goal of the theme / protagonist. If the fatal flaw is chosen randomly, if it is not related to the subplot / theme, the story will be shallow and ineffective.

Example: The Dead Poet's Society

​
SUBJECT OF FILM = Manhood.
THEME = Seize the Day, Take Control of Your Life.
SUBPLOT (internal need/goal) = Become true to your nature.
FATAL FLAW = Being false to your nature.
ARC = being false to one's nature >>> being true to one's nature.​

Backstory should be created to explain the protagonist's fatal flaw, gives it a history, allowing the writer to connect with the character's humanity.



​
 
Yes, now I remember the idea, and its being illustrated well with "Romancing The Stone" (the female lead - Jane?). She was the opposite of what she needed to become to survive the situation (retiring, escapist; needed to be bold, confrontational). So the extreme situation/theme (wild jungle, gangsters, etc.) represented the opposite of her character. Which made her character the 'fatal flaw', thus enhancing audience interest in the outcome under the circumstances.

Make sense to you?

Neo in the first Matrix movie might be another example, at least before we *very* belatedly find out he actually is 'the one' (an anagram of Neo, btw).

I have yet to revisit the book though - maybe I don't quite have the idea nailed...
 
I find the idea of flaw being opposite to theme very pedantic and obvious, almost boring.
It feels very film school-ish to me and like a tacked on quality, as opposed to a natural outgrowth and development of the character.
When I see it in a movie I start tuning out to the experience.

Yes, character's arc, we know that, but what about subtle choices, writing should not be about one-size fits solutions.

Can you discuss the main character's flaw in relation to the theme for films like "Chung King Express", "RatCatcher", "Yi-Yi", "A Man For All Seasons", "The Blue Kite", or "Au Hasard Balthazar"? Not all great movies work for the same reason.

Just for grins, you listed the movie "Jaws". Can you break that down to flaw vs theme?
 
bill totolo said:
...Can you discuss the main character's flaw in relation to the theme for films like "Chung King Express", "RatCatcher", "Yi-Yi", "A Man For All Seasons", "The Blue Kite", or "Au Hasard Balthazar"? Not all great movies work for the same reason.
Click to expand...

I have never seen any of those films, so I can not comment. How did those movies do at the box office? (boxofficemojo.com

bill totolo said:
Just for grins, you listed the movie "Jaws". Can you break that down to flaw vs theme?
Click to expand...

Well this is my point-- maybe flaw in opposition to theme is not needed for certain genres, or for any genre, for box office success. Or maybe flaw in opposition to theme is in fact needed for box office success (or for selling a spec?). That is why I would like to explore this aspect of what Dara Mark's posits, see if it really holds water. Because it is one thing to cherry pick a few movies that indeed have flaw in opposition to theme, then write about as a 'rule'; it is another to almost randomly (as I tried to do) pick a half dozen films, then look at their box office success and look at if their protagonist's flaw is or is not in opposition to theme.

So yes, I would like us to to a break down of some of those films I listed-- see if Dara's 'method' works as she did it for Dead Poet's Society.
 
Flaw/Theme/Need: Silence of the Lambs

Flaw/Theme/Need: Silence of the Lambs

Silence of the Lambs
Here is my take on this film. As powerful as this film/screenplay is, I do not see the protagonist's fatal flaw or internal need subplot as being at odds with the theme. I can somewhat see it with the internal need as indicated below, but it is a stretch and perhaps more an invention to fit Dara Marks' method. Interested what others think of my analysis or take on this.
~randall

How to find the fatal flaw (Dara Marks): "Create the fatal flaw around a value that opposes the theme and the internal goal of the protagonist. It is the opposite value of the theme, the inversion of the internal goal of the theme / protagonist. If the fatal flaw is chosen randomly, if it is not related to the subplot / theme, the story will be shallow and ineffective."

SUBJECT OF FILM = Find serial killer, rescue senator’s daughter.
THEME = Change is for the better, leads to a better life (moth larvae change to adult, killer wants to ‘change’ to a woman, Clarice wants to ‘change’ to be part of (accepted into) a man’s [male dominated FBI] culture), Hannibal Lecter wants to ‘change’ from being a prisoner to being free.
SUBPLOT (internal need/goal) = Clarice needs to save the lamb (senator’s daughter) to heal her internal wound of not saving the lamb from slaughter when she was a child. Perhaps a bit of stretch, but one could say that Clarice can not change (arc), can not let go of this guilt she clings to it, until she redeems herself by saving another lamb.
FATAL FLAW = Doubts her ability to piece together the clues, to find the killer and the senator’s daughter. Thus she relies on Lecter as mentor. (interesting to note that in classic story structuring, mentors die so that the hero must then use the lessons learned to finish the quest on their own; and indeed Lecter ‘dies’-- separates from Clarice [escapes from his bondage], leaving her on her own to finish the quest and prove herself as a hero, ‘saving the village’ [society] from danger by killing the ‘dragon’ [Buffalo Bill]) and rescuing the princess [senator's daughter].
ARC = doubt >>> confidence

"Backstory should be created to explain the protagonist's fatal flaw, gives it a history, allowing the writer to connect with the character's humanity." Indeed this is the case with Silence of the Lambs.

 
Last edited:
Flaw/Theme/Need: Jaws

Flaw/Theme/Need: Jaws

Here is my take on Jaws. As simple as this story is (kill the dragon to save the village and prove oneself a hero and village protector), I do see Dara Marks' method holding true in this story. Interested in others' take on this, agree or disagree.
~randall

Jaws

"How to find the fatal flaw (Dara Marks method): Create the fatal flaw around a value that opposes the theme and the internal goal of the protagonist. It is the opposite value of the theme, the inversion of the internal goal of the theme / protagonist. If the fatal flaw is chosen randomly, if it is not related to the subplot / theme, the story will be shallow and ineffective."

SUBJECT OF FILM = Find and kill shark (‘the dragon threatening the village’) -- a sociopathic giant shark.
THEME = Overcoming fear leads to a better life.
SUBPLOT (internal need/goal) = Prove to himself he is worthy as the village protector, given the village elders think he is repeatedly ‘crying wolf’. To do this he must overcome his fatal flaw.
FATAL FLAW = Afraid of the water (can’t swim).
ARC = Afraid of water (stays in boat) >>> Not afraid of water (in water to kill shark, swims [kick paddles] back to safety)

Backstory should be created to explain the protagonist's fatal flaw, gives it a history, allowing the writer to connect with the character's humanity. I do not see any backstory setting up the fatal flaw in Jaws.
 
Last edited:
bill totolo said:
I find the idea of flaw being opposite to theme very pedantic and obvious, almost boring.
It feels very film school-ish to me and like a tacked on quality, as opposed to a natural outgrowth and development of the character.
When I see it in a movie I start tuning out to the experience.

Yes, character's arc, we know that, but what about subtle choices, writing should not be about one-size fits solutions.
Click to expand...

I think this overstates the value of this particular piece of advice from Ms Marks's book, which I'm guessing you haven't read. The opposition of theme and protagonist's flaw is just one 'brick' in the overall structure of her book, which is far from formulaically conceived in its overall message. The primary thrust of the book (as I'd call it anyway) is about multiple, layered, interrelated thematic arcs (hence the title "Inside Story"). The 'fatal flaw' point was a relatively minor one IIRC.

But I do think, in large and small ways, it can really add to a story. Indiana Jones's fear of snakes in "Raiders Of The Lost Ark" was a fairly small part of a great film, but IMHO it greatly heightened the few scenes in which it played out (snakes in the archeological dig, pet snake "Reggie" in the seaplane rescue scene). We got to share his fear, in this case in a mostly humorous way. Good stuff, I say...
 
Last edited:
The Grudge
Hugely successful horror film ($200M box office on $10M budget). Here is my take on this film. Interested what others think of my analysis or take on this.
~randall

How to find the fatal flaw (Dara Marks): "Create the fatal flaw around a value that opposes the theme and the internal goal of the protagonist. It is the opposite value of the theme, the inversion of the internal goal of the theme / protagonist. If the fatal flaw is chosen randomly, if it is not related to the subplot / theme, the story will be shallow and ineffective."

SUBJECT OF FILM = Haunting, Haunted house ghost story (supernatural thriller, mystery to be solved; ‘monster in the house’, monster/ghost needs killing, to be vanquished).
THEME = evil / hate can exist in the supernatural realm (surviving death)
SUBPLOT (internal need/goal) = belief in romance / love / good: boyfriend
FATAL FLAW = disbelief in supernatural evil
ARC = disbelief >>> belief (in ghost, supernatural)

"Backstory should be created to explain the protagonist's fatal flaw, gives it a history, allowing the writer to connect with the character's humanity." I do not see any backstory for the protagonist’s flaw, although there is a backstory for the ghost antagonist. One could look at the ghost entity as being the protagonist, then indeed there is a backstory for such a protagonist.
 
Ms Marks herself explains it much better of course:

From "Inside Story" chapter 5 (of 10), "The Fatal Flaw: Bringing Characters To Life":

[The] "unyielding commitment to old, exhausted survival systems that have outlived their usefulness, and resistance to the rejuvenating energy of new, evolving levels of existence and consciousness is what I refer to as the fatal flaw of character."

She goes into it in much greater detail in the 41 page chapter of course, and cites several characters/films as examples: Joan Wilder in "Romancing The Stone", Both Riggs and Murtaugh in "Lethal Weapon I", and all three main characters in "Ordinary People".

I'll take a longer re-look at it over lunch today...
 
Ted / Others
What I would like to look at is really just how important is her (Dara's) positing of that (inverse) relationship between flaw and theme/need, for a succe$$ful story/script? Do we really see what she posits as common in great scripts or at least in financially successful screenplays? Or has Dara 'cherry picked' examples to fit her paradigm? Do we see her paradigm in great horror and action films? Or just in drama/other? I want to know this as a writer.
randall
 
How is your question about box office receipts relevant to the conversation? Based on your response you should ask Michael Bay how to write a film.

For what it's worth, these are not obscure films, most of them are discussed on Roger Ebert's "Great Films" series and all are available on Netflix.
 
bill totolo said:
How is your question about box office receipts relevant to the conversation? ...
Click to expand...

Dara Marks posits that a flaw that is inverse/opposed to theme/need makes for a deeper and more enjoyable story. I would assume that (a more enjoyable story) would translate into box office $. I did not pick obscure films because I am looking to analyze films that are known by most, but I would like to see if the issue of flaw/theme/need holds regardless of genre. Feel free to analyze some other well known film$.

We could surely also look at obscure unsucce$$ful films, see if they use Dara's method, or not.
 
Last edited:
I liken it to pop music: just because Britney Spears or Justin Beiber outsell other artists doesn't mean they are creating art on a higher level than someone who can barely get their music on iTunes.

But, yes, I agree if done in a way that is germane to the story and theme of the script a "flaw" working in opposition can help to more clearly define the themes at hand. It's only when people drop these in as plug and play modules that turn me off. A perfect example is "Casablanca" where all the characters have flaws that elevate the emotions surrounding the theme.

Like Aristotle said, theme first, but don't forget, Tolstoy said the most valuable tool a writer has is his ability to master transitions.
 
Randall, here's my quick 2 cents on this interesting question.

Why do we consume stories? IMO, as a spectator we enter into the spell of a story because it takes us elsewhere. It expands our experience and awareness. When it's successful we are changed and we become new in some small but significant way. Story helps us feel alive. It takes us out of the hum-drum experience where we find momentary relief. A cinematic film is a 110 minute vacation.

As a human it's only natural that we connect to a main character displaying human qualities of some sort; you already know this stuff but stay with me. Once we understand this character and their world we become involved with this person. Often something of significance occurs which presents a challenge to the character. We go on the journey with this character. We're curious.

Stories are vehicles that teach us something; this is the basic reason why we consume stories. We learn in stories about how others solve their problems, and in a way it helps us to deal with our own life challenges regarding physical, emotional and social survival. Often we already know the lesson but it reaffirms the lesson and we continue to embrace those values.

The theme is the lesson of life we learn/reaffirm; the character is the vehicle for our acclerated vicarious life experience and the arc is the process the character/we, go through. A good lesson is best when the student starts the journey in a state that is opposed to the values learned in the end. I would agree with Dara and add that it is critical for the character to start in a contrasted position. Choices made on how to deliver this makes a difference. A crude in your face approach has limited value to many audience members. Films that are atmospheric journeys evoke moods and continue to brew and churn in the mind of the viewer long afterward; often wthout resolution. Traditional/popular stories have clear endings where values are made clear; they achieve full resolution.
 
Dara is a genius... dont speak about her if you haven't read her... its sad, but it is that simple... best book out there.
 
@10s et al ---
All good what you said, totally agree. As for what Dara posits, is it necessary for a successful horror film? Would it enhance a horror film? Or do we just see it, is it indeed almost required, in more dramatic (okay horror is drama, conflict, but you know what i mean) genres more so? I am just asking the question, not arguing one way or the other, just seeking to learn.

Ultimately I have a two-fold selfish agenda: (1) sell a spec, (2) write a kick arse indie horror to produce in a few years. So if what Dara posits greatly elevates a story, including horror, well then I am going to do my best to make sure I incorporate the 'fatal flaw' as opposed to theme and the inverse of the inner journey need (i generally have no problem at all with the latter, that is kind of a no brainer for me, i always pick a protag flaw to be overcome in order to achieve the inner journey emotional arc, and also to achieve the story [outer] goal).
--randall
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top