Is it better for a protagonist to be motivated by action or dialogue?
- Thread starter JimS2
- Start date
- Status
Oh well, I originally wrote it so that after there is an attack on her place, he feels guilty and then takes her to a motel and protects her after that. However, I was told by readers that that makes him too unrealistic and too Hollywood, and why should he feel guilty when it was his superiors that did not assign anyone, and that it's unrealistic for a cop to go against protocol and watch someone without being ordered to, because they will be fired otherwise. He's not going to want to ruin his career over it.
Are those good points the readers make? Or is it a matter of what's more interesting? The main character choosing to do something out of guilt, or choosing do something because he is ordered as assignment, before the attack on her place?
Yeah that makes sense. I guess it depends on what is more interesting. If the character would be developed more with guilt, by not watching her place, even though he wasn't ordered to, or just have him ordered to because it's more realistic... But would I be sacrificing character development for realism then, and is that good?
Last edited:
I'm not sure, because they both have pros and cons. That's what I was struggling with on this section. However, if he is assigned to protect her beforehand, would he even take her back to her place for her to pack a bag, which is when the attempt on her would happen, at her place?
Last edited:
1. 2 characters on stage and not in conflict cut scene. Best rule I read from Mamet.
2. Get rid of any wincing moments in your script. Got that from a great actor. That covers a lot of ground.
The last thing you want an actor to ask if that is a coincidence ( unless maybe farce or some real specific situation). The audience will see it or at least feel it. Kinda like over salting the soup. They might not say anything but it isn’t good.
2. Get rid of any wincing moments in your script. Got that from a great actor. That covers a lot of ground.
The last thing you want an actor to ask if that is a coincidence ( unless maybe farce or some real specific situation). The audience will see it or at least feel it. Kinda like over salting the soup. They might not say anything but it isn’t good.
Oh okay thanks. I hope I don't have any wincing moments. Do you think the some coincidences are okay, as in pointed out in Star Wars?
Oh okay. Well is the main character cop telling a witness he cannot protect her because it goes against protocol, then he drops her off at her place and leaves -- and then after she escapes her house being attacked, she then calls 911 -- he gets the call and comes back to help her escape -- and then he is then assigned to protect her, like she wanted originally. Is that too much of a coincidence?
ahalpert
Major Contributor
The first part doesn't strike me as that much of a coincidence in the sense that if he's on duty, he could drop her off and then be in the vicinity to receive the 911 call. (Of course, I'm not sure they would drop her off instead of making her take a cab or get picked up. But maybe they're nice.)
If this is a huge metropolitan police department, it would seem like a coincidence to me that he gets assigned to protect her. (Of course, I dont know. I dont know much about policing. But maybe that ignorance makes my opinion valuable.) In a large department, they may have more specialized roles. Also, I think the federal witness protection program is run by the US Marshall's. But there are also state programs. So much of the issue comes down to manpower and funding anyway, right?
If it's a small town with a sheriff and a couple cops, I wouldn't blink an eye that the same cop is doing everything.
If it's a mid-size department then sure maybe he could get assigned. Maybe they assign him because he knows her already or maybe she even requests him.
I think what solves these issues is having him make the request. He feels guilty that he dropped her off at home while she was pleading with him ("but they're gonna kiiiiiill me!") And now he wants to make things right. Maybe he's even attracted to her, or maybe he has a paternal feeling for her.
If he makes the request and the duty is within his purview, then it's not a coincidence. And you have a chance to develop his character by showing why he feels that way
If this is a huge metropolitan police department, it would seem like a coincidence to me that he gets assigned to protect her. (Of course, I dont know. I dont know much about policing. But maybe that ignorance makes my opinion valuable.) In a large department, they may have more specialized roles. Also, I think the federal witness protection program is run by the US Marshall's. But there are also state programs. So much of the issue comes down to manpower and funding anyway, right?
If it's a small town with a sheriff and a couple cops, I wouldn't blink an eye that the same cop is doing everything.
If it's a mid-size department then sure maybe he could get assigned. Maybe they assign him because he knows her already or maybe she even requests him.
I think what solves these issues is having him make the request. He feels guilty that he dropped her off at home while she was pleading with him ("but they're gonna kiiiiiill me!") And now he wants to make things right. Maybe he's even attracted to her, or maybe he has a paternal feeling for her.
If he makes the request and the duty is within his purview, then it's not a coincidence. And you have a chance to develop his character by showing why he feels that way
Oh okay thanks. It's huge metropolitan department, but I thought maybe he could be assigned since he is already worth her when he brings her in after the attack, and his superiors do not want to look for anyone else, since he's there. But maybe that's still a coincidence?
I could have it so he volunteers, it's just that if another officer would be assigned, wouldn't he still be able to get a good night's sleep, knowing that as oppose to him volunteering himself? Why would he feel guilt if another officer is assigned?
As for him driving her home after the interview, as oppose to calling her a cab, I can see what you mean. Is this a plothole?
I could have it so he volunteers, it's just that if another officer would be assigned, wouldn't he still be able to get a good night's sleep, knowing that as oppose to him volunteering himself? Why would he feel guilt if another officer is assigned?
As for him driving her home after the interview, as oppose to calling her a cab, I can see what you mean. Is this a plothole?
BitMaestro
Well-known member
No.
Yes.
Read Terry Rossio's column, "You the Expert".
Again, read Terry's column.
Only in that 1) they are pointing out things that you need to setup/justify/earn better. And 2) they are telling you that they are not engaged in your story.
Yes! Very much so.
Is this a documentary or a work of fiction?
1) another way to go, as noted previously, is to make the coincidence work against the protag. i.e. design a character who does not want to be assigned to protect the witness.
2) in a romcom, the "meet cute" (which is essentially what this moment in your script is) is often coincidental.
Because you designed the character to feel that way.
Why are you restricting their motivation for returning to her place to packing a bag?
Oh okay thanks. And yes I can have the coincidence work against him if that's better. I just thought that after her house being attacked, he would feel more inclined to protect as opposed to him not wanting to.
Okay thanks. Why is it bad then, just so I know what's bad about it?
Sorry, I don't understand the question. How is her returning to pack a bag, count as restriction of motivation exactly?
Okay thanks. Why is it bad then, just so I know what's bad about it?
Sorry, I don't understand the question. How is her returning to pack a bag, count as restriction of motivation exactly?
BitMaestro
Well-known member
That would be the more typical reaction, yes. Characters who react atypically (but understandably) are typically more interesting.
Here's the thing, at the most basic level, drama = someone wants something and has trouble getting it. So when coincidence makes it more difficult for your protag to get what s/he wants, it enhances the drama; whereas, when coincidence makes it easier for your protag, it undercuts the drama.
To quote Hitchcock:
"Movies have lost a lot by this new trend towards documentary realism at the sacrifice of fantasy. After all, drama is life with the dull bits cut out."
So just to reiterate: don't worry about realism relative to our real world (unless this is a documentary); only worry about realism/consistency/understandability within the fictional world of your screenplay.
But to answer the specific question you asked here: since you should be cutting out the dull bits of your protag's life, or conversely, only showing us the exciting bits of your protag's life, why do you think the better choice is to have your protag not involved in a big, exciting action set piece? Showing him, for the sake of argument, sitting on the couch watching Netflix when he gets a phone call telling him about the attack is not exactly cutting out the dull bits in comparison.
Since we're already discussing Hitchcock, Google "MacGuffin". 'Packing a bag' is pretty lame, as MacGuffins/motivations go. You can do better.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Yes, and the cardinal sin is being boring. Let's say your character's life depends on getting a million dollars by next week. Then they win the lottery. Sure...it's possible, however unlikely. What have we learned about them or about life? Nothing. Wheres the struggle? Boring.
But sometimes coincidences make things more interesting. Like getting stuck in an elevator with your crush.
One possibility that comes to mind, although it's a familiar scenario, is that he drops her off against her protestations, as he's been ordered to. There's then a lengthy period of cutting back and forth between him calmly getting gas and buying a magazine, and the thugs moving in to attack. She manages to repel them and escape the house. Meanwhile, his spidey sense was tingling and he decided to drive past her house once more on his way home just to cruise by. He shows up just in time to drive over the guy who had her cornered at gunpoint. She hops in and they ride away. She's had a chance to prove her mettle. He saves her but feels guilty about abandoning her in the first place.
A good example is Bruce willis' watch in pulp fiction. It doesn't really matter, but it gives him an emotionally compelling reason to return home at great risk. And they develop it with the Christopher walken scene
Oh okay, well I can write it so he is about to leave her place but then they attack the place and then he is still there to help her escape, if that's better?
Also why is placing the macguffin a bag lame? Wouldn't a person normally place a macguffin in a bag to carry it around better? Why is the macguffin being in a bag lame exactly?
Oh well one idea I had was that in the attack, she calls 911, and then the dispatcher calls officers to the house. While the cop is driving on his way home, the call comes on his radio, and he realizes the address, and realizes that it's her. So that was one idea I had for him to go back and help her.
As for Bruce Willis in Pulp Fiction he had risk for going back, but if Bruce Willis had police protection, with an officer watching him, would the officer just talk him out of it, and not let him go?
ahalpert
Major Contributor
You don't understand what a macguffin is. Macguffin definition: "an object or device in a movie or a book that serves merely as a trigger for the plot"
The macguffin could be anything. It doesn't truly matter what it is. But it serves to motivate the character
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index...s Angus who established,the end of his career.)
The macguffin could be anything. It doesn't truly matter what it is. But it serves to motivate the character
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index...s Angus who established,the end of his career.)
Oh okay. I thought a macguffin is any physical item that used in the plot. Perhaps this isn't a macguffin but she packs an item that I want her to use in the plot later. So what would be the best way for her to get that item, if the cop's first instinct would be to not take her back to her place to pack her things?
But then again the movie 15 Minutes (2001) for example, the cop took a witness home to pack her things, even though she was a witness, so I am not sure if it's a plot hole or not?
Well I could write it so he is assigned to protect her before he takes her home, and then on the way, she talks into it, going against better judgement.Or I could write it so that he takes her home after the interview, but is not assigned, and is just going to drop her off.
But then after he drops her off, he gets a call, and his superior tells him he's been thinking it over and wants him to work overtime to protect her now. Thus he had a reason to take her home, without being talked into making a bad decision if that's better?
Or a third option is, I can write it so that after he takes her home and leaves, her house is attacked by the villains and she calls 911, he hears the call on his radio, realizes it's her place being broken into, and drives back to help save her.
He then feels guilty about leaving her alone at her place, and volunteers for the assignment of protecting her for the night as a result. But after scaring off the villains, he then allows her to pack a bag and they leave then. But she would still have to talk him into it, instead of him taking her to leave right after scaring them off, to be more safe.
Her place would be attacked in the other two options as well, when he takes her home to pack a bag, it's just in the first two she would pack the bag first, and he is already assigned to protect her before the attack, as oppose to getting the 911 call and driving back.
Does one of these three options sound good, or no?
But then again the movie 15 Minutes (2001) for example, the cop took a witness home to pack her things, even though she was a witness, so I am not sure if it's a plot hole or not?
Well I could write it so he is assigned to protect her before he takes her home, and then on the way, she talks into it, going against better judgement.Or I could write it so that he takes her home after the interview, but is not assigned, and is just going to drop her off.
But then after he drops her off, he gets a call, and his superior tells him he's been thinking it over and wants him to work overtime to protect her now. Thus he had a reason to take her home, without being talked into making a bad decision if that's better?
Or a third option is, I can write it so that after he takes her home and leaves, her house is attacked by the villains and she calls 911, he hears the call on his radio, realizes it's her place being broken into, and drives back to help save her.
He then feels guilty about leaving her alone at her place, and volunteers for the assignment of protecting her for the night as a result. But after scaring off the villains, he then allows her to pack a bag and they leave then. But she would still have to talk him into it, instead of him taking her to leave right after scaring them off, to be more safe.
Her place would be attacked in the other two options as well, when he takes her home to pack a bag, it's just in the first two she would pack the bag first, and he is already assigned to protect her before the attack, as oppose to getting the 911 call and driving back.
Does one of these three options sound good, or no?
BitMaestro
Well-known member
And now you're going in circles again; tweaking plot instead of designing a character to fit the plot. At this point, my recommendation to you would be to start over because all of these issues should have been, and would be better, addressed during development; specifically, during the outline phase at the latest, but even earlier would be better. In any case, the script stage is much too late, which is why you're having the issues you're having now.
You didn't Google "MacGuffin", did you? Well, just to recap/clarify before I bow out of the thread, you expressed concern that the cop might not take the witness back to her place to pack a bag. So I asked "Why are you restricting their motivation for returning to her place to packing a bag?", as opposed to something else that would give them a stronger motivation to return to her place (i.e. a MacGuffin) like retrieving the stolen Death Star plans that are on her laptop, or the time-traveling DeLorean parked in her garage, or the last Infinity Stone that she hid in her jewelry box, or whatever else. I said nothing about placing the MacGuffin in a bag. (Although, putting a DeLorean in a bag won't make it any easier to carry around.)
And one last sidenote:
This also supports the "coincidence [that] makes it more difficult for your protag to get what s/he wants, it enhances the drama" thesis because, when someone gets into an elevator, their (immediate, but minor) want/goal is to get to another floor in the building. Getting stuck between floors works against that.
- Status