I am fascinated by Harmony Korine's BEACH BUM (2019) because it consistently undermines the basic concept of Blake Snyder's SAVE THE CAT!. The protagonist Moondog (played by Matthew McConaughey) literally rescues a cute kitten in the first scene. Yet he doesn't go through the kind of development Snyder suggests - he doesn't learn a moral lesson nor does he become a "better" person. He's not making the world a better place, and he certainly isn't trying to save it. On the contrary: from the beginning to the end of the film, Moondog remains a guy who always puts his own needs and views above those of his fellow human beings. Even after the accidental death of his wife, which he was responsible for, he doesn't change his mind - if at all, he only feels confirmed in his behavior.
So, by Snyder's logic, viewers should find Moondog quite unlikeable - and quite a few of them certainly do. For me, however, the matter is not so clear; I find the film interesting precisely because of the breaking of the SAVE THE CAT! rules.
Why? Because it makes the film extremely ambivalent. On one hand, Moondog is inconsiderate and lacks empathy. He takes no responsibility for his actions and even accepts that innocent people may come to harm. This gives the film a very dark tone at times. Seen this way, Moondog is a person you definitely don't want to be.
On the other hand, Moondog is a person who never holds grudges or becomes aggressive towards others. He also doesn't want to intentionally harm anyone, but rather tries to make every situation as fun and entertaining as possible. He affirms life and doesn't let anything or anyone spoil his good mood. He is neither jealous nor attached to material goods. And he stays relaxed and confident in every situation; fear is a unknown concept to him. These are all qualities many of us would like to have.
So what about Moondog's potential for identification? It depends on our point of view. Depending on your perspective, you can see Moondog as a sovereign free spirit, an antisocial narcissist, or even an archetypal trickster. We can feel both repelled and attracted to him at the same time. In the end, we have to decide for ourselves whether we find the film hackneyed-cynical, cleverly ironic, or something beyond those two poles. And that's exactly why BEACH BUM is a dramaturgically very elegant film for me, from which the authors among us can learn a lot.
Have any of you seen the film? What do you think?
5 people like this
I haven't seen the movie yet, although it seems really interesting, judging by what you wrote! And I've studied Snyder's book in college as well as other screenwriting books (McKee's, Truby's, and more), and my opinion is that they shouldn't be taken "too" seriously: they're more of a guide, than an actual solution to categorize everything. My favorite is Russin and Downs' one, but still, it makes perfect sense that some movies or tv series do not follow completely their rules/notions/anecdotes!
3 people like this
I haven't seen BEACH BUM, Ulrich Goetz, but from your post it sounds like Moondog is fascinating, which can take the place of a character being likeable and maybe even take the place of a character changing (having a positive character arc).
4 people like this
If I looked at 5000 oil paintings and write down all their commonalities and gave these commonalities labels. Would that mean all oil paintings from now on need to follow my labels and template?
They are a way of looking at writing. That is all.
This post is proof. A film that appears to be new and fresh seems confusing when compared to a volume of previous work.
4 people like this
I think BTTF filmmakers shot half the movie before they decided (and got backing of studio Boss) to fire actor Eric Stolz and replace him with Michael J Fox.
4 people like this
M LaVoie Unless Marty is not the lead character and Doc Brown is. If that is the case, I can see the transformation from obsessed scientist to family man who settles down with a family and finds contentment in that. Having given up science by choosing to stay in the old west, we see that science has found its way back to him when he shows up in a new time machine (the train). We see the effects of Doc's obsession through Marty.
3 people like this
Ulrich Goetz one of the aspects I enjoy about Blake Snyder's work is tangential to the well-known structural format of story beats, it's his breakdown of Genres which he gives specific names and brings some interesting twists to the analysis. (Maybe that was covered in his book Save The Cat Goes To The Movies)
So perhaps Matthew McConaughey (in addition to being such a well-liked actor that it's impossible for many viewers not to find him sympathetic, likable and relatable no matter his transgressions) is bringing his character into one of those genre perspectives which include "The Fool Triumphant" and "Institutionalized," and Snyder's supportive explanations of those genres and why they work might offer perspective in this case where the character seems kind of subversive.
3 people like this
Save The Cat's real contribution is that it teaches the writer that every story requires structure. Doesn't have to be STC's basic/simplified version. Structure is malleable.
With regards to Back to the Future, it's not a requirement that the protagonist change. Look no further than James Bond or Marvel super heroes. Even Ryan Bingham didn't change in UP THE AIR. However, one could make the argument in the examples I cited that "awareness" can be substituted for "change." The characters are now aware of aspects either about themselves or the people around them that they can't unsee.
Great discussion all the way around!
2 people like this
Craig D Griffiths To stick with your painting analogy, if you follow Synder's formula too closely, it becomes like painting by numbers. It might turn out to be something nice, but it will be generic. But I didn't just mean that there are films that contradict Snyder's formula. The interesting thing about BEACH BUM is that this film first simulates Synder's formula and then breaks it. So you can also write superficially like Synder and at the same time - on a deeper level - not do it.
3 people like this
@M LaVoie: That's true, but with BACK TO THE FUTURE you could also argue that Marty doesn't need to change precisely because he's changing the world and the people around him so much - especially his father.
2 people like this
@ Daniel Stuelpnagel: That's an interesting point. I still have the feeling that Snyder probably wouldn't like the film much due to its unconventional nature (considering, for example, that he didn't like Christopher Nolan's MEMENTO). But of course that's speculation and unfortunately we can't ask him anymore.
2 people like this
Do writers here find it odd that professional writers dont pay attention to books/writing theorists? I asked many tv writers if they have Save the cat book, trudy book, mckee book in writers rooms and they all say no.
So what is it? Do pros just figure out storytelling on their own? I'm guessing Execs in charge read theory books, force talent to do their way and thats why so many films with A-List talent turn out average.
3 people like this
Dan MaxXx Personally, I don't believe in a contradiction between theory and practice. Both are mutually dependent, and at the end of the day writing is also a craft that has to be learned. As I said, if you only work according to standard formulas, you will only deliver generic things in the end. On the other hand, we don't reinvent the wheel with our stories, and if we start writing without any knowledge of the tried and tested structures, there is a risk that we will fall far short of our potential. To be able to use the best tools, we need to know that they exist.
5 people like this
As I've mentioned before on other posts, a number of working, paid writers I met while at the studios (from both TV and film) all said to know 'Structure!" They learned it years before I met them so it's baked into their minds. It's instinct to them without realizing it, and they can focus on the creative with things naturally happening.
3 people like this
@ Lindbergh: Makes sense. Once you've learned how to swim, you jump in the water and do your laps without thinking too much about it. At least until something stops working properly.