stories with no visible end goal for hero

Randall_Oelerich

Randall_Oelerich

Veteran
'Arena stories' = stories with no visible end goal for hero (in contrast to e.g. masculine mode stories of the knight who seeks to rescue the princess from the tower, as in Cellular, Taken, etc). Came across this this morning re-reading Hauge's book on writing screenplays that sell. I had not heard of this before (other than bad stories that are meant to be masculine mode but that lack the clear visible end goal for the hero), I find it interesting. In arena stories, the hero is dropped into a world (not a literal arena, but could be) with obstacles to overcome, to survive one by one until the end of the story. Hurt Locker is used as the example, and Hurt Locker beat out Avatar for best picture, best original screenplay; in Hurt Locker, there was a pseudo end goal created by the reminder to the audience of when the tour of duty was over, so that the hero just had to survive until that tour of military duty of bomb defusion and eluding snipers was complete (Hauge's words).

Probably best (at least for me) to stick with masculine mode stories of a hero with a clear visible end goal to resolve by the end of the story, but it just shows that a story need not have such a clear hero's end goal to be successful-- however to sell as a spec it might (or not?) be best to stick with the clear end goal type stories. I just find the notion of arena stories interesting.

I would think many slasher horror stories fall in the arena story category, where a hero finds her/himself in the middle of a world of pain, friends getting killed off, hunted, trying to survive, the story being over when the nemesis is killed or seemingly killed and the hero returns to their ordinary world. Although in many horror movies the end goal is to kill the monster (Alien, Jaws).
 
sounds interesting. Personally I write from the unconscious - I find I get more original stuff. All these paradigms are in us all anyway - my 2 cents.
 
Well, most films have an exterior goal and and interior goal. While the protag is usually aware of the exterior goal, they're rarely aware of the interior one related to the theme or emotional premise (the change that must take place in them in order for them to arc). Exterior goal: plot; interior goal: character. I don't think it's always necessary to have a clear exterior goal, especially for a character piece. But then, I also don't always think it's necessary for the protag to arc. It really depends on the film, but McKee's right: master the archetypal form first.
 
Old School - Man vs. Man, Man vs. Nature, Man vs. Self.

You're talking about Man vs. Nature, where "Nature" is the Protagonaist's situation. Most disaster movies are "arena"/ Man vs. Nature movies. So is Full Metal Jacket.
The best stories have all three kinds of conflict. it's even better if you can find all three in every scene.
 
Interesting, I never looked at Hurt Locker that way. Many great movies for me, are just stories- I never think "goal", "mission", "objective"... Jeremy Renner's character seems to enjoy or have an obsession with his military duty, so the goal or "pseudo end goal" gets tricky. I think Taxi Driver is a tricky one as well.
 
Some Japanese movies are like that. They begin in the middle, end in the middle, and you really don't know what they're about. It's probably a cultural thing.

Forest Gump comes to mind. No real plot, or end goal I guess, just a forward progression and the events that happen to the main character.
 
Randall_Oelerich said:
'Arena stories' = stories with no visible end goal for hero (in contrast to e.g. masculine mode stories of the knight who seeks to rescue the princess from the tower, as in Cellular, Taken, etc). Came across this this morning re-reading Hauge's book on writing screenplays that sell. I had not heard of this before (other than bad stories that are meant to be masculine mode but that lack the clear visible end goal for the hero), I find it interesting. In arena stories, the hero is dropped into a world (not a literal arena, but could be) with obstacles to overcome, to survive one by one until the end of the story. Hurt Locker is used as the example, and Hurt Locker beat out Avatar for best picture, best original screenplay; in Hurt Locker, there was a pseudo end goal created by the reminder to the audience of when the tour of duty was over, so that the hero just had to survive until that tour of military duty of bomb defusion and eluding snipers was complete (Hauge's words).

Probably best (at least for me) to stick with masculine mode stories of a hero with a clear visible end goal to resolve by the end of the story, but it just shows that a story need not have such a clear hero's end goal to be successful-- however to sell as a spec it might (or not?) be best to stick with the clear end goal type stories. I just find the notion of arena stories interesting.

I would think many slasher horror stories fall in the arena story category, where a hero finds her/himself in the middle of a world of pain, friends getting killed off, hunted, trying to survive, the story being over when the nemesis is killed or seemingly killed and the hero returns to their ordinary world. Although in many horror movies the end goal is to kill the monster (Alien, Jaws).
Click to expand...

The difference is tactical. You a) dangle the carrot at the beginning or b) don't and just watch the hero go about getting one in the end.

Hurt Locker is just plain ol' hero's journey and there's definitely a carrot at the end. I would write a long post as to how it's standard hero's journey, but it's already been done here along with all the other Academy Award Winners http://www.clickok.co.uk/Screenwriting-Academy-Award-Winners.html
 
Carla said:
The difference is tactical. You a) dangle the carrot at the beginning or b) don't and just watch the hero go about getting one in the end. Hurt Locker is just plain ol' hero's journey and there's definitely a carrot at the end. I would write a long post as to how it's standard hero's journey, but it's already been done here along with all the other Academy Award Winners http://www.clickok.co.uk/Screenwriting-Academy-Award-Winners.html
Click to expand...

Ah, Kal Bashir, I bought his 500+ Hero's Journey over priced (imho) PDF a couple of years ago, but I degress... So if you look on that page at your link to Bashir's analyses, he compares Hurt Locker to Dances with Wolves (as he has done with e.g. Harry Potter v. Star Wars); but I don't really see any locked in visible goal to achieve by the end of the story, in either Dances with Wolves, or Hurt Locker. No 'lock in'. Thus both arena stories.
 
The first thing I thought about in regards to films that don't have a defined goal in visible sight were films like 'I am Legend' and 'Cast Away'... those are movies where, for the most part, there isn't a plot but survival. No end game. Just live to tomorrow.
 
Maybe people hunger for stories because all these short cut theories aren't sufficient to explain the world to us. All analogies break down at a certain point. All comparisons have to be shoe-horned. Good stories are sufficiently complex to defy simplistic reduction to a pet formula. It isn't science after all, but art.

A lot of "biz" people dislike and shy away from the word art, while probably just as many embrace it. But that's what it is. The only question is it disposable garbage art, or something that stands a chance of enduring.
 
Randall_Oelerich said:
Ah, Kal Bashir, I bought his 500+ Hero's Journey over priced (imho) PDF a couple of years ago, but I degress... So if you look on that page at your link to Bashir's analyses, he compares Hurt Locker to Dances with Wolves (as he has done with e.g. Harry Potter v. Star Wars); but I don't really see any locked in visible goal to achieve by the end of the story, in either Dances with Wolves, or Hurt Locker. No 'lock in'. Thus both arena stories.
Click to expand...

The locked in visible goal doesn't always have to be KILL THE TERMINATOR. The locked in visible goal (if you want to call it that) is sometimes just the problems you're trying to solve. With Hurt Locker, you've got Will who has problems with his girl and Sanborn who doesn't want kids. Those problems are resolved. In Dances With Wolves, you've got John who starts off with nothing to live for and then has lots to live for. I'm massively simplifying.

If you're looking for visibles, look at the girls in those stories. Both Will and John walk off with their brides/princesses, which is just like Aragorn/Sam marrying Arwen/Rosie in LOTR. Now you've got Will (Hurt Locker) leaving his bride and going back to Iraq, but that's just the same as Frodo leaving the Shire at the end of LOTR3 when all is done (more to it, but not relevant here).

I would take bullets for Kal Bashir. He's taught me how to extend the idea/premise/theme into a script. He's basically taught me how to outline and plot. And a lot of that comes from seeing how these stories link together. Priceless.

I think the arena vs masculine mode distinction is off-target. If you look at the stories, I mean really look at them, the distinction is not there. And then if it was, there would be a more accurate way to describe it. But if the distinction helps you, then it's all good.
 
Last edited:
Picasso painted beautiful realistic paintings before delving into Cubism. He didn't create cubism because he couldn't paint realistically. He painted Cubism because he COULD paint realistically.

It's ok not to follow any formula, not to have a story goal. But you should do it on purpose, not because you simply don't understand what a story goal is.

Make a conscious decision that your story has no story goal for the protagonist. Don't just forget to give your protagonist a story goal. There is a difference and it's obvious to the audience.
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
The first thing I thought about in regards to films that don't have a defined goal in visible sight were films like 'I am Legend' and 'Cast Away'... those are movies where, for the most part, there isn't a plot but survival. No end game. Just live to tomorrow.
Click to expand...

If my memory serves me, pretty much a clear defined goal in those stories.

CAST AWAY - get off the island.
I AM LEGEND - kill the zombies

If my memory serves me, they're pretty much the same story. Hanks is trapped on the island and Will Smith is trapped in the house (at least that was what OMEGA MAN was - the original with Charlton Heston).
 
Carla said:
... The locked in visible goal (if you want to call it that) is sometimes just the problems you're trying to solve. ...In Dances With Wolves, you've got John who starts off with nothing to live for and then has lots to live for.....
Click to expand...

But that (Dunbar seeking a reason to live) is not really a visible goal; almost all how-to books/gurus teach that the hero needs a visible goal for the viewer to see (on the screen, visually-- because screenplays are about cinema) resolved by the end of the story. The rescue of someone kidnapped (Taken, Ransom, The Princess Bride, Star Wars, etc), killing a monster/antagonist (Jaws), escaping from some situation and making it to safety (Defiance, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, etc), getting from A to B (Hidalgo, Journey to the Center of the Earth, road trip movies)-- those are stories with clear locked in visible goals for the audience to identify with and root for and see the hero achieving.; and that makes for good movies. Maybe the lack of a locked in visible goal is why all the major studios passed on Dances with Wolves, but of course the film ended up being quite visually compelling and intriguing, perhaps more so for the showing of an interesting world to the viewer, giving the viewer an emotional experience (the only real goal of a story, most easily achieved with classic establishing of a visible goal countered by visible obstacles).
 
Last edited:
Randall_Oelerich said:
...Maybe the lack of a locked in visible goal is why all the major studios passed on Dances with Wolves....
Click to expand...

Making a sweeping generalization (which may not be far off target), I think all the major studios pass on any story where the goal is not [lets say at least kinda] clear by page 20 (or pick a number around thereabouts).

I think by visible you mean obvious. I'm thinking Annie Hall, The Artist...where the goal may not be so overtly obvious at first but it's there. What i'm trying to say is that I don't think we're talking different story types. I think we're bouncing around the semantics of visibility and expression.
 
Carla said:
If my memory serves me, pretty much a clear defined goal in those stories.

CAST AWAY - get off the island.
I AM LEGEND - kill the zombies

If my memory serves me, they're pretty much the same story. Hanks is trapped on the island and Will Smith is trapped in the house (at least that was what OMEGA MAN was - the original with Charlton Heston).
Click to expand...

Is his goal really to kill zombies? Seems that is a never ending and impossible task. His goal is to simply survive and even he doesn't know really what that requires except to play it day by day. Seems like no end goal or plot except the obvious. When the only thing left is to simply not die, when there is a lack of any other motivation, I think that is clearly no visible end goal.

If those films don't count, I don't know what else does. Unless you had a film like I am Legend and the character is so apathetic he just lays down on the ground and lets the zombies/vampires eat him. LOL.

Trying to 'stay alive' is simply a built in desire in our DNA. It's not really a goal or plot. I like to think that movies have plots which require choices. When things are reduced to survival and nothing more, it can be entertaining, but it is without plot.

Hold any person underwater and watch them struggle to surface... that is gut instinct to survive in a shorter time window. If that were a film, the characters visible end goal would be to breathe. What is the other option? Drown. Seems there isn't a choice, and when there isn't a choice there isn't a real plot.

What made Cast Away a bore and a bad film in my opinion, is because he did what all of us would do. There weren't any big choices he had to make that would change the plot. The plot, if you call it that, was to get off the island. No duh. A stranded dog would have had the same end desire and goal. The dog would likely not live as long, considering it has less intelligence, but none the less, it goes to show that when characters don't have real choices to make and are simply 'rolling in the break', the power of story is weakened.
 
Carla said:
...I think by visible you mean obvious. ....
Click to expand...

I mean visible in the literal sense-- watching a film (or writing the screenplay) we need to see (visibly) on the screen the goal resolved, whether that is landing a death blow to the antagonist, bringing a kidnapped victim home to safety (Taken), killing the monster (Rogue), seeing the shiny gold treasure after a quest to find it (Fool's Gold), seeing the goal resolved visually / cinematically, because film is a visual medium.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top