GLADIATOR : story analysis

Randall_Oelerich

Randall_Oelerich

Veteran
Let's see if this thread takes on some life-- anybody feel free to jump in who wants to help work through a story analysis of the film / screenplay GLADIATOR (if this works, maybe try it for another story).

t52011dnvwu.jpg


Primarily interested in analysis of the following elements of the story, as taken from Truby's book The Anatomy of Story, but the elements are pretty universal from most techniques for screenwriting. IMHO, I think doing a story analysis of GLADIATOR could help us screenwriters better structure our stories.

Resources: IMDB.com (cast...), screenplay (2nd draft)

IS THE STORY HIGH CONCEPT?
HERO'S DESIRE (outer visible goal)?
HERO'S [inner] NEED?
PREMISE: Reduce story to a single sentence.
THEME: What is the moral argument the story makes?
HERO's MORAL CHOICE: What moral choice must the hero make?
CHARACTER CHANGE: How does the hero change by the end of the story?
CENTRAL CONFLICT: Who fights whom for what?
REVELATIONS: What are the revelations that occur that heighten the story's mystery, intrigue the viewer?
SEVEN KEY STEPS (basic spine of the story):
Hero's weakness and [inner] need
Hero's Desire (outer goal)
Opponent
Plan
Battle
Self-Revelation
New Equilibrium
​
 
Last edited:
I'll take a stab at some important basics:

IS THE STORY HIGH CONCEPT? Yes. The logline alone (one sentence premise) is enough to draw people into the theater or rent the film.

HERO'S DESIRE (outer visible goal)? Maximus seeks revenge against Commodus (for murdering Commodus's father and emperor Marcus Aurelius, for murdering Maximus's family, and for ordering the execution of Maximus from which he escapes to become enslaved to a life as a gladiator, a death sentence).

HERO'S [inner] NEED? Heal the inner wound caused by loss of his wife and son, murdered by Commodus.

PREMISE: (logline) A roman general seeks revenge, after his family is murdered and he is thrown into slavery as a gladiator by a corrupt emperor.
 
Last edited:
Alex, OMG, you have not seen Gladiator? I envy you getting ready to watch it for the first time-- ancient rome, gladiators, political intrigue and backstabbing (literally). Gladiator (along with e.g. Erin Brockovich, Training Day, etc) has been used as a model for screenplay analysis by several writing gurus; but I am hoping we can try an analysis from scratch, learn something along the way (I am studying Truby's method right now, hope to apply it to analysis of a few movies, then apply it to a high concept story I am starting).

I too am going to watch Gladiator again tonight or tomorrow night, though I have seen it several times. But this time I will pay attention more closely to the story elements, take some notes.
~Randall

alex whitmer said:
I need to watch the film. Not a Crowe fan. I'll download and watch asap and participate.
a
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Okay I am not so sure about the hero's (Maximus's) desire (outer visible goal). I am rethinking my original stated hero's goal of revenge. Revenge seems logical, but according to Truby the best hero's goal is also the Antagonist's goal, viz the two opponents want the same thing.

So, perhaps the hero's goal is to have revenge on Commodus by having Commodus removed from power as emperor-- with the added bonus of revenge killing against Commodus for the killing of Maxiumus's family. Thus the same goal for both Maximus and Commodus: the power of Rome. Commodus wants the power of Rome, as emperor; Maximus wants the power of Rome as emperor (promised to him by Marcus Aurelius before the assasination).

I think this is a revenge story, but the hero's goal is that of the opponent-- power as emporer, thus creating maximum conflict as both vie for the role of emporer, Maximus having to overcome huge obstacles to gaining power since he is thrown from power into slavery, and Commodus having to overcome the negative will of the people towards his role as emporer.

Thoughts? Agree? Disagree?
 
Last edited:
I think you had it right the first time. I thought Max's goal was fully personal, not political. Marcus wanted Max to be "Protectorate" of Rome until power could be restored to the senate -- Max's goal for political power was only vis a vis his commitment to his master and was secondary to avenging the murder of his family.
 
OK, if this is going to have any sort of uuummppphhh, we need to be reading from the same screenplay, which one is it?

For me I like the shooting script, I can't see using prior screenplays discarded by the film makers.

It's also worthwhile to consider the edit, because that's the final rewrite. In particular, this film uses shots of Maximus walking through a field touching grain which becomes a powerful motif that is called upon later on in the film creating symbolic unity. I don't remember this field/grain scene in the screenplay but it's a very powerful tool for setting mood and creating symbolism. These sort of things need to be in an analysis because it's in the movie and it works!

While "Truby" opens Chapter 3 of "The Anatomy of Story" with his 7 step story structure:
  1. Weakness & need
  2. Desire
  3. Opponent
  4. Plan
  5. Battle
  6. Self Revelation
  7. New Equalibrium
there are many more things that occur in the film. Also there are many needs in the 1st 10% of a screenplay for it to work beside the rest of the structure. These need to be identified and analyzed. Given this, I will combine all these elements together so we consider many important factors. I expect others to contribute as well with their insights. Maybe we could ID these elements and then go back and add in some meat.

Let's start with the Premise & the Story World.

PREMISE: (logline) A roman general seeks revenge, after his family is murdered and he is thrown into slavery as a gladiator by a corrupt emperor. I don't know about you, but this doesn't really excite me too much but it is what it is. One aspect of the premise is to act as an anchor and help keep the story heading toward fulfilling the premise during the writing phase. It's easy to go astray so this is helpful. It's also helpful because to come up with a short concise statement takes a lot of thinking. This process alone makes one create the major layout of the story. I guess we could call this fundamental/foundational work. It is also good for determining if the story is worth writing, if it has a potential audience and is worth listening to.


What other mechanical things does the PREMISE do?
 
Last edited:
Agreed. Revenge is a powerful goal, motive, seems logical here. It just so happens that the revenge goal merges with the simultaneous goal of removing Commodus from power, from position of tyrannical emperor whereas Maximus wants "Rome" be belong to the people, as ruled by a just leader and a just senate; brilliant storyline making the two work together. I was just trying to think of "revenge" would fit with John Truby's notion that the best hero's goal is one that is also the same goal of the Antagonist-- but I should think merging the revenge goal with the rule of the people of Rome goal sort of works that way.


brianluce said:
I think you had it right the first time. I thought Max's goal was fully personal, not political. Marcus wanted Max to be "Protectorate" of Rome until power could be restored to the senate -- Max's goal for political power was only vis a vis his commitment to his master and was secondary to avenging the murder of his family.
Click to expand...
 
For sure, and I am totally down for such an analysis. I would love to go into the deeper levels of story analysis for Gladiator than just the seven steps, premise, etc. Lots to be learned doing so imho.

10s said:
...there are many more things that occur in the film. Also there are many needs in the 1st 10% of a screenplay for it to work beside the rest of the structure. These need to be identified and analyzed. Given this, I will combine all these elements together so we consider many important factors. I expect others to contribute as well with their insights. Maybe we could ID these elements and then go back and add in some meat. ...
Click to expand...
 
10s said:
...What other mechanical things does the PREMISE do?
Click to expand...

According to Truby, what is called the Designing Principle (DP) is teased out from the Premise. E.g., my notes from Truby:

The Premise: the story in once sentence. Some event that starts the action, some sense of the main character, and some sense of the outcome of the story. High concept is best. Example: Tootsie. Premise = When an actor can't get work he disguises himself as a woman and gets a role on a TV series, only to fall in love with one of the female cast members.

The Designing Principle: An overall strategy on how the story will be told. Induce or tease out the designing principle from the premise. Example: Tootsie. Designing Principle = Force a male chauvinist to live as a woman.

So the Premise can be used as a mechanical tool to create a Designing Principle (to keep one's eye on as the story's structure). For Gladiator, the premise is basically about revenge against the corrupt Commodus for killing Maximus's family and sending Maximus off to be executed; the designing principle would seem to me to be about Maximus surviving and rising in the ranks of the gladiatorial world he finds himself thrown in to, in order to win the favor of the people of Rome so as to get close enough to Commodus to kill him--thus getting his revenge for being wronged.
 
Randall_Oelerich said:
Agreed. Revenge is a powerful goal, motive, seems logical here. It just so happens that the revenge goal merges with the simultaneous goal of removing Commodus from power, from position of tyrannical emperor whereas Maximus wants "Rome" be belong to the people, as ruled by a just leader and a just senate; .
Click to expand...

My interpretation of the story/character is that Maximus lived by the warrior or soldier ethos of honor, loyalty, and duty. At the beginning, when he's preparing his troops for battle, the troops salute him and repeat the mantra "Strength and honor". Those early scenes show his value system more transparently than in the film's latter scenes. For me, aside from the revenge he sought against Comodus, which was the story's driving element, the notion of restoring representative government to Rome had little to do with Maximus's character, it was about fulfilling an order/directive from his commander (Marcus) -- all part of the Soldier ethos.
I agree though, a lot of the story elements dovetail -- a hallmark of a great script.
 
Good points on the Premise. I hate to do a "Premise," but it's often such a key task, maybe that's why I hate it ;)

OK, I'll throw this out and see how it floats.

DESIRE: I agree Revenge seems to be a desire/motive and also Maximus was a soldier dedicated to the preservation and growth of Rome so his desire would be to see it not fall into the hands of Commodus but to deliver it to the Senate. But there's something else, throughout the story his true desire is to be with his family, and in the end, while it ends as tragedy, he does succeed and go to be with his family. I would say his driving desire is to be with his family, but before he does so he must be honorable and fulfill his duty as a military professional and a Roman citizen. He must right the wrong (Commodus in charge) and for the last time, defend Rome by killing Commodus and making the ultimate sacrifice. His death is sweet because as he passes from this life to the next we see his wife & son happily waiting for him on the other side while democratic Rome rises up to fulfill it's promise after the death of Commodus.
 
If I remember correct COMMODUS didn’t trow MAXIMUS into slavery. He falls in slavery in a pretty unrealistic way. You can’t enslave generals only because they are fainted.

I find too the premise rather simple, I kill yours you kill mine, two time’. The hero doesn’t change during the story, he’s the same soldier following dully the same moral code.
 
djinjis said:
If I remember correct COMMODUS didn’t trow MAXIMUS into slavery. He falls in slavery in a pretty unrealistic way. You can’t enslave generals only because they are fainted.

I find too the premise rather simple, I kill yours you kill mine, two time’. The hero doesn’t change during the story, he’s the same soldier following dully the same moral code.
Click to expand...


Maximus the general is suppose to be dead from direct execution orders of Commodus. The general more than fainted, he was near death from wounds and travel. It is a somewhat strange transition but I think it worked, I never heard anyone really complain about it. The idea that a general could become a slave is not unheard.

Premise: I tend to think a simple appearing Premise is a sign of good work when it takes a complex story and reduces it to one line without compromising any major story point. That can be a difficult task to accomplish.
 
10s said:
Premise: I tend to think a simple appearing Premise is a sign of good work when it takes a complex story and reduces it to one line without compromising any major story point. That can be a difficult task to accomplish.
Click to expand...

I agree, there is virtue in simplicity. Also, it's true that Maximus doesn't change, neither did William Wallace, James Bond, endless list. Not every story requires character arc, there are no real rules to a screenplay -- although if you read enough "How to" books you might think otherwise.
 
Great point. A good story has theme or what Truby calls the moral choice or moral question. Well evident in Gladiator where we see the contrast between the hero and opponent's set of values and how they deal with the world, and later see which set of moral is best, which wins the day.

brianluce said:
My interpretation of the story/character is that Maximus lived by the warrior or soldier ethos of honor, loyalty, and duty. At the beginning, when he's preparing his troops for battle, the troops salute him and repeat the mantra "Strength and honor". Those early scenes show his value system more transparently than in the film's latter scenes. ....
Click to expand...
 
I think in any good story there is the want, aka outer motivation (Hauge uses this term), visible goal, or "desire" (as Truby calls it), and there is also the inner [psychological] need. Hero's always have both.

The goal or desire is what the audience roots for and can see by the end of the story, and as Truby says it is a goal that in a good story is a goal that both the hero and the opponent seek. In Gladiator that would have to be Commodus's life and his place of power-- Commodus wants his life and power as emperor; Maxiums wants Commodus's life and his removal from power, revenge to the max (haha no pun intended).

The need is the inner desire. What is that in Gladiator? I think in Gladiator Maximus has a need to heal his inner longing for seeing his wife and son again. Only Maximus see this (along with the audience through his out of body experience), so it seems to me to be the inner psychology need, fulfilled at the end along with the outer goal of killing Commodus.

Desire and Need. AKA outer visible goal and inner psychological need. Both necessary for the hero if the story is to be good.

My dime's worth of thought (and you likely get some change back!). =) randall

10s said:
...DESIRE: I agree Revenge seems to be a desire/motive and also Maximus was a soldier dedicated to the preservation and growth of Rome so his desire would be to see it not fall into the hands of Commodus but to deliver it to the Senate. But there's something else, throughout the story his true desire is to be with his family, and in the end, while it ends as tragedy, he does succeed and go to be with his family. I would say his driving desire is to be with his family, but before he does so he must be honorable and fulfill his duty as a military professional and a Roman citizen. He must right the wrong (Commodus in charge)...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Well that is a good point. I have thought about Gladiator and I am trying to find the weakness in the Maximus, as all good heroes should have, to allow for character arc (change) by the end of the story. What is the weakness, if anything, for Maximus? How does the hero Maximus change by the end of the story?

djinjis said:
...I find too the premise rather simple, I kill yours you kill mine, two time’. The hero doesn’t change during the story, he’s the same soldier following dully the same moral code.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top