| Author |
 Topic  |
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
 Posted - 02/13/2007 : 14:18:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
(1) Could you please stop talking for her and let her answer?
Honestly, I think I've said all I intend to about your messages, except that it's all about options.
Go in peace.
|
 |
|
|
BaftaBaby
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 14:43:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
Well, I guess I was really concentrating on plot.
Warning - mild but potential spoiler for Hard Candy in this post
Special Features vary, but my point was many of them discuss plot and reveal twists. I probably didn't make that explicit in my post. I was just wondering whether that counted for your 'experiment'.
I watched the Hard Candy SF before watching the film. The SF are very explicit about the plot. But knowing the plot only made me appreciate more all the other aspects of the film I mentioned before (acting, design etc) and I was enthralled nevertheless. This film is one where knowing the plot can potentially take away the enjoyment of the ride you are taken on in the film. Because the teenage character seems vulnerable at many points you could not predict how it will turn out nor can you guess how cleverly she has plotted everything out. There is only one major clue, where the girl is seen on the roof of the house. If you don't know how the film ends you can only say 'uh?'. But when you know the ending you know why she is there. It's a simple thing that is very clever. The journey leading you there is absolutely gripping anyway. In a badly made film the only thing stopping you from turning off or walking out is because you don't know how it ends and you just have to see it through.
In that simpler way of knowing a plot that you seem to be talking about - I was told the twist in the Sixth Sense before I saw the film. Just the twist, nothing else. I was a bit annoyed (considering the hype made it all a big game and even the movie shows didn't hint at it). I didn't see the film until a couple of years after it was out. But when I watched the film I was looking intently for all the clues and found it fascinating. So rather than having to watch it a second time to see those clues, I was enjoying it as it went along and going 'wow, that's clever'. So I have actually experienced the simple form of knowing a key plot twist without the indepth information provided by SF. I have also watched films where I know 'who-dunnit'. I then proceed to watch how the story takes you to that character's door. But really, can you dissociate any of this from the actors' performances? Aren't they 'acting out' the plot? Aren't the design and direction servicing the plot?
I would regard all these experiences as gaining an appreciation of 'How the story is told'. So maybe I misunderstand what you mean by 'plot'?
I'm a short story writer and appreciate the difference between that medium and film. I also have a literary background and I am fascinated by adaptations. Good adaptations don't make you think about what is not in the film because the two things should stand alone as different art forms. The two versions of Conrad's The Secret Agent (Hitchcock's Sabotage 1936 and the 1996 version) both take from the book but are very different from each other in how they develop the plot. Neither replace the experience of reading the novel.
I wrote a short story about an experience in Europe which I tell people about all the time. The story only retold one part of the whole ordeal, but all my friends knew how it was going to end. The biggest compliment to me was that they loved the short story because of the way I told it in the written form. With writing you can only rely on words. In a film the writing is visualised.
Having said all that  like R o � k G o 7 f (I have to copy and past that bugger ) I also love seeing movies I know nothing about. In this day and age of mass entertainment media and paparazzi frenzy that is a hard thing to achieve. Amazingly I managed it with Transamerica (not sure what part of the outback I was in when the frenzy was on). Marvellous film experience.
Hi Shiv
Yeah, I missed that the SF dealt with the mechanics of the plot, so yeah, of course that counts. And, yes, you seem to have understood the basic difference between story and plot, which I'm sure has been helped by your creation of fiction. [I LOVE the short story genre and am also in the midst of writing a collection -- it's such a liberating form, don't you think? Are you published?!!! We should be told!]
Anyway, back to da moovies! Sounds like you're well on the way to developing a deeper appreciation of the craft of filmmaking. Which is not to say, as you found with Transamerica, that you can't also have an experience of a punter when you choose.
The transcendence comes a little way down the line. Once you've developed a knowledge of what's called 'the language of film' you begin to piece together all the story elements that contribute to moving the plot from point to point to the end. This is why eventually experiencenced critics don't necessarily have to know the plot because they can 'read the signs.' I've often been in preview screenings full of critics and in unison we've been able to chorus lines of dialogue before the character speaks them. Of course, it's far easier to read the Hollywood signs [pun!] and genre signs.
Plots are a story-telling tool, like camera angles, choice of negative-development technique [e.g. grainy, desaturated], editing rhythms, etc etc. Plot twists are usually aimed at punters for sales and marketing. Usually, I said!
One of the reasons I've always been so fascinated by filmmaking is that it's one of the most group-creative of the arts, and such an exemplar of the serial nature of each contribution. Each finished stage of the process becomes the blueprint for the next stage. i.e. The Script - which may have taken years to write becomes a final draft. But it's only the beginning for the director, who then involves department heads to produce a concept that will lead to a realization in celluloid. The actors come into it at a very late stage [unless they're also producing, or have big star influence about their own parts]. Then all the shot footage becomes the ingredients for the editor and sound-editor and post-production team which may or may not include sfx.
It's exhilarating! And, Shiv, I'd say you have many many happy hours of viewing ahead 
If you would like to take the Critic's Challenge and report back I'd be happy to have a look at your experiences. I don't suppose you need suggestions, but I'm happy to provide some 
|
Edited by - BaftaBaby on 02/13/2007 14:44:56 |
|
|
|
Shiv 
"What a Wonderful World"
|
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 14:58:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
If you would like to take the Critic's Challenge and report back I'd be happy to have a look at your experiences. I don't suppose you need suggestions, but I'm happy to provide some
Yes, suggestions would be appreciated. It may take some time to get back to you, as my way of seeing movies (in the absence of a cinema and a good video store) is by a postal service, and I can't always get the films that quickly. Something challenging perhaps? Also, can you recommend any good online reviewers or film analysis sites that would help to explain the critics' experiences and skills? |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 15:45:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
Honestly, I think I've said all I intend to about your messages, except that it's all about options.
That's fine; I just didn't need Whippersnapper to interpret your messages for me. And the only reason why I listed any of those points was because I was so angry about my options for one film now being limited.
So, you don't want to do my reverse challenge then? |
|
|
|
BiggerBoat 
"Pass me the harpoon"
|
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 15:50:29
|
I think I've developed this method of film watching as a natural progression as I've gotten older. Whereas my younger years were full of unexpected joys (or disappointments) at catching films I'd never heard of before - normally on TV - as my taste has become more discerning, I've become more likely to thoroughly research a film before I go to see it. I find that when I now go to the cinema with a group of friends, I am inevitably the best informed on the plot. That said, when one of the friends asks, "What's this all about then?", I will only give a brief overview without revealing too much of the plot? Why? Because I think that a lot of people like to give themselves over to the film and approach it with a completely open mind, and who am I to ruin it for them?
Of course there are counter-effects to this. Quite often I've not gone to see a film because of the reviews it has received, only to see it at a later date and enjoy it. I guess there's no accounting for taste.
I'm very interested in these six plots though, I'd never heard of that before. As a mere film lover, as opposed to your lifetime of involvement Baffy, I'm in no position (and nor is anyone else ) to tell you that this couldn't possibly be true, but it has stirred my interest and I'm going to do some further reading. Give me two weeks and then get that six plot thread going! |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 16:00:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
As a mere film lover, as opposed to your lifetime of involvement Baffy, I'm in no position (and nor is anyone else) to tell you that this couldn't possibly be true
I assume that the six-plot thing was not meant to be restricted to films, since virtually all literature can (however well or badly) be transferred to film. Therefore, one does not need to be a film expert to comment on this position. I think in Nineteen Eighty-Four six may be mentioned as the number of pulp fiction plots that are recycled for the proles, so it's a notion that's definitely been around in literary circles for some time. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 16:27:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
(1) Could you please stop talking for her and let her answer?
(2) I don't buy into this six-plot idea at all, as I have already mentioned: just restating it does not help your argument in the least. It seems a pointless over-simplification to me. The plot isn't just whatever rudimentary core of the plot you find convenient for 'proving' the six-plot point: it is the whole detailed sequence of events.
(3) No, B.B. has not restricted what she has said to spoilers at all: she has been talking about plots generally.
(4) I don't give a fuck that you do not mind spoilers, but to then give one as an example is outrageous. I am not forcing you to be ignorant of spoilers: you should not force me to know them.
(5) I am perfectly aware that B.B. is presenting her point of view to those who may not agree: you do not need to provide a running commentary. Similarly, I am just presenting mine back.
1. Utterly stupid point. My answering in no way prevents Baffy answering you herself if she wants to. This is not a verbal conversation restricted by only one person being able to talk at a time. If I want to answer I'll answer, particularly answering a point made in a response by you to me.
2. So you said but many people do. All taxonomy has its uses and its pitfalls, but many people find this a useful way to examine and indeed write a story.
3. My discernment, which may well be off the wall, and I am very happy to stand corrected on the point, is that spoilers is at least a catalyst for this thread.
4. Your bad language does not upset me in the least - please feel free to swear at me as much as you like if you are incapable of controlling your feelings in a civilised way. And if you are ignorant enough to have never taken the trouble to have seen "The Third Man", often voted the greatest British film ever made, and finding out plot details bothers you, then stay away from websites where people discuss film.
If you weren't so ignorant you would realise that given Orson Welles was heavily billed as the star of the film, and his character was supposed to have died before the film started in shady, contradictory and disputed circumstances, anyone with half a brain would be very aware his character was probably not really dead at all.
The idea that people should not discuss plots from films released 60 years ago because you haven't got round to seeing it yet is self-indulgence par excellence.
|
|
|
|
BiggerBoat
"Pass me the harpoon"
|
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 19:50:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
As a mere film lover, as opposed to your lifetime of involvement Baffy, I'm in no position (and nor is anyone else) to tell you that this couldn't possibly be true
I assume that the six-plot thing was not meant to be restricted to films, since virtually all literature can (however well or badly) be transferred to film. Therefore, one does not need to be a film expert to comment on this position. I think in Nineteen Eighty-Four six may be mentioned as the number of pulp fiction plots that are recycled for the proles, so it's a notion that's definitely been around in literary circles for some time.
Yeah, well, I know who I have more respect for. It's all very well having (many, many) opinions based on assumptions and conjecture Sal, but that doesn't mean you have the right to shoot things down with your acerbic barbs because they don't fit in with your own personal ideology. I like to learn things from people with infinitely more experience than me, rather than try to outdo them. If you loosened up a bit you might learn a thing or two from Baffy, not least the manner in which she gracefully declined to enter into one of the online dogfights you seem so fond of.
 By the way, this means nothing if the preceding comments are rude and dismissive. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 21:48:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
1. Utterly stupid point. My answering in no way prevents Baffy answering you herself if she wants to. This is not a verbal conversation restricted by only one person being able to talk at a time. If I want to answer I'll answer, particularly answering a point made in a response by you to me.
I had no problem with you joining it - just that you seemed to be making a point of interpreting what she said rather than just wording it as being what you yourself thought.
quote:
2. So you said but many people do. All taxonomy has its uses and its pitfalls, but many people find this a useful way to examine and indeed write a story.
This was just that you had not expanded on the concept at all; you had just repeated it. I imagine that there are supporting arguments, but you did not give any.
quote:
3. My discernment, which may well be off the wall, and I am very happy to stand corrected on the point, is that spoilers is at least a catalyst for this thread.
It easily may have been something in her mind, but you presented it (I've just checked) as being the essence of her point. Since she was talking all-encompassingly, and most films cannot have spoilers, I did not think it was reasonable to present her as having been that specific.
quote:
4. Your bad language does not upset me in the least - please feel free to swear at me as much as you like if you are incapable of controlling your feelings in a civilised way.
I don't object to swearing in any informal context so I am glad that you agree about that. I am perfectly capable of not swearing, and indeed rarely do, but there was no reason for me to hide my feelings when you had imposed your viewpoint on (i.e. not just stated it to) me so rudely. I do not mind you making your viewpoint however forcefully you like, but not in terms of without warning affecting my experience outside the site (i.e. of that film when I see it). I am glad that you were not upset since that was not my intention and it had not occurred to me that you might be.
quote:
And if you are ignorant enough to have never taken the trouble to have seen "The Third Man", often voted the greatest British film ever made, and finding out plot details bothers you, then stay away from websites where people discuss film.
These are two ridiculous points. By what age do people have to have seen all classic films? That makes the rest of one's viewing life rather empty, relying on only the good new films coming out! Secondly, even on the I.M.D.B., avoiding spoilers is the correct etiquette, and that is a much more expansive site than this one. I avoid threads titled with films I haven't seen, and I avoid spoilers whenever people highlight them. It is reasonable not to expect spoilers in contexts where there is not the slightest need to give them. (Your point was perfectly clear without an example.) This thread is about the pros and cons of knowing plot points. Unless everyone had posted identical views, it is quite obvious that some people reading it would favour not knowing.
quote:
If you weren't so ignorant you would realise that given Orson Welles was heavily billed as the star of the film, and his character was supposed to have died before the film started in shady, contradictory and disputed circumstances, anyone with half a brain would be very aware his character was probably not really dead at all.
Of course I knew that Orson Welles was the star, but why would I know details of his character? I have always tried to avoid reading about films that I haven't yet seen.
quote:
The idea that people should not discuss plots from films released 60 years ago because you haven't got round to seeing it yet is self-indulgence par excellence.
But you think this because you do not mind knowing such points yourself. Therefore, for any film you haven't seen, it doesn't matter to you. It is worse self-indulgence to think that others should be the same. I am not saying that others should avoid reading plot points like I do - just that they should avoid springing them on me. Further, you were not discussing the plot of the film - you just mentioned it. It was in no way necessary to your point, and the thread in general is not concerned with specifics of plots - conversely, it is in the abstract. |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 02/13/2007 23:15:59 |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 22:01:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
If you loosened up a bit you might learn a thing or two from Baffy, not least the manner in which she gracefully declined to enter into one of the online dogfights you seem so fond of.
But she stated the six-plot thing as a fact. ("After all, in story-telling terms there are only about half-a-dozen or so plots.") Given that this whole thread revolves around how much plot can affect things, that was not reasonable. I get into these arguments because people are always making these sort of sweeping statements around here without offering any basis for them. Contrary to what you state, the things that I say are based on actual evidence (or on querying the lack of someone else's evidence). I am certain that B.B. knows more about films than I do, but this comes down to logic and definitions. Therefore, I see no reason to defer to such a sweeping statement (i.e. dismissing plot as if this is a given fact) when my position is that plot is as important to me as anything else. I am perfectly content to accept that plot is not important to her, but not on the basis that there are only six of them. I agree that it would not be a disaster if one always knew which of six very broad categories of plot a film came under (though it would still sometimes be a shame), but this does not equate to knowing its plot. |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 02/13/2007 22:05:40 |
|
|
|
BaftaBaby
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 23:59:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
If you would like to take the Critic's Challenge and report back I'd be happy to have a look at your experiences. I don't suppose you need suggestions, but I'm happy to provide some
Yes, suggestions would be appreciated. It may take some time to get back to you, as my way of seeing movies (in the absence of a cinema and a good video store) is by a postal service, and I can't always get the films that quickly. Something challenging perhaps? Also, can you recommend any good online reviewers or film analysis sites that would help to explain the critics' experiences and skills?
Okay, I'll have a wee think-ette. But, since I don't know what films you may/may not have seen, it would help if you could post a list of say 5-10 you're thinking of seeing and/or a genre which you normally like to see without any prior knowledge. Deal?
As for online reviewers, I really rate Roger Ebert, though I don't always agree with him. Philip French is usually interesting - via The Guardian online. Screen It! Spoilers usually gives comprehensive albeit fairly ploddy synopses and, if you dig down, it does also provide a qualitative analysis which may be interesting for comparison. I usually rate Mark Kermode whose Radio 5Live film reviews are archived on the BBC site -- though sometimes he says stuff I want to strangle him for 
Online critic stuff:
Very basic - http://www.ehow.com/how_17257_become-film-critic.html
Academic - http://faculty.uwb.edu/mgoldberg/students/readafilm.htm
Wikipedia on one of the GREAT critics of all time -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Agee
Have fun!
|
|
|
|
BiggerBoat
"Pass me the harpoon"
|
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 00:02:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
If you loosened up a bit you might learn a thing or two from Baffy, not least the manner in which she gracefully declined to enter into one of the online dogfights you seem so fond of.
But she stated the six-plot thing as a fact. ("After all, in story-telling terms there are only about half-a-dozen or so plots.") Given that this whole thread revolves around how much plot can affect things, that was not reasonable. I get into these arguments because people are always making these sort of sweeping statements around here without offering any basis for them. Contrary to what you state, the things that I say are based on actual evidence (or on querying the lack of someone else's evidence). I am certain that B.B. knows more about films than I do, but this comes down to logic and definitions. Therefore, I see no reason to defer to such a sweeping statement (i.e. dismissing plot as if this is a given fact) when my position is that plot is as important to me as anything else. I am perfectly content to accept that plot is not important to her, but not on the basis that there are only six of them. I agree that it would not be a disaster if one always knew which of six very broad categories of plot a film came under (though it would still sometimes be a shame), but this does not equate to knowing its plot.
Seriously Sal, if you love this site so much, why do you try to ruin it? So many decent threads turn into a swamp of pedantry with you dominating the boards and picking apart every tiny detail. It's dull and no one wants to read it. You said in a thread recently that you get lonely because no one else shares your views. Have you ever considered the possibility that it's not everyone else who is wrong??
I know I've asked some questions but I really don't want an answer from you, I'm just trying to encourage you to develop some kind of internal filter and stop being quite so tiresome. |
|
|
|
BiggerBoat
"Pass me the harpoon"
|
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 00:21:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
As for online reviewers, I really rate Roger Ebert, though I don't always agree with him. Philip French is usually interesting - via The Guardian online. Screen It! Spoilers usually gives comprehensive albeit fairly ploddy synopses and, if you dig down, it does also provide a qualitative analysis which may be interesting for comparison. I usually rate Mark Kermode whose Radio 5Live film reviews are archived on the BBC site -- though sometimes he says stuff I want to strangle him for
Very similar to me, I like both Philip French and Peter Bradshaw on the Guardian site and Mark Kermode is great - I tend to listen to his reviews when I'm in the bath. He can be very opinionated but he does it in such a funny way that you can't help but like him.
Never really looked at the Roger Ebert site but I'll have to check it out. I tend to use Metacritic when I want a quick idea on how good a movie/book/album is. They take an average score of different critics which I find is a fairly good indicator. |
|
|
|
Shiv
"What a Wonderful World"
|
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 00:39:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
Okay, I'll have a wee think-ette. But, since I don't know what films you may/may not have seen, it would help if you could post a list of say 5-10 you're thinking of seeing and/or a genre which you normally like to see without any prior knowledge. Deal?
Um, yes, of course it would be hard for you to suggest titles!
Okay, I've had a think. What about one of the following?
Gosford Park
Silkwood
City of God
Colour Me Kubrick
Far From Heaven
Eyes Wide Shut
These are reasonably recent movies that I have a vague notion about, but have intentionally stayed away from reading reviews of and watching the pundits talk about. My normal preference would be to come to these fresh - wanting to experience them without the publicity that seemed to surround them or the actors in them. So I offer them as a sacrifice!
Thanks for the other info |
|
|
|
BaftaBaby
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 01:11:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
I think I've developed this method of film watching as a natural progression as I've gotten older. Whereas my younger years were full of unexpected joys (or disappointments) at catching films I'd never heard of before - normally on TV - as my taste has become more discerning, I've become more likely to thoroughly research a film before I go to see it. I find that when I now go to the cinema with a group of friends, I am inevitably the best informed on the plot. That said, when one of the friends asks, "What's this all about then?", I will only give a brief overview without revealing too much of the plot? Why? Because I think that a lot of people like to give themselves over to the film and approach it with a completely open mind, and who am I to ruin it for them?
Of course there are counter-effects to this. Quite often I've not gone to see a film because of the reviews it has received, only to see it at a later date and enjoy it. I guess there's no accounting for taste.
I'm very interested in these six plots though, I'd never heard of that before. As a mere film lover, as opposed to your lifetime of involvement Baffy, I'm in no position (and nor is anyone else) to tell you that this couldn't possibly be true, but it has stirred my interest and I'm going to do some further reading. Give me two weeks and then get that six plot thread going!
Thanks for the kind words BBoat! Sounds like you're becoming a very wise film-goer indeed!
Re: those pesky plots -- well, the number is misleading. The real point is that our species has been telling each other stories for as long as we had language. Over the thousands of years and the refinement of the story-telling arts standard or archetypical plots developed [also archetypal characters]. These flowered from tales/poems/songs of hunting and gathering, joy of birth, sadness at loss. They codified into myth and other spiritually sanctioned oral tales. Gradually the tales weren't merely narrated, they were acted out. One of the earliest -- and still to my mind one of the most fascinating -- exponents of theatre arose in ancient Egypt. Here's what happened: the audience would meet at a pre-arranged spot outside of town. It was usually a spot reputed to be the very location of such and such a miraculous event. When the people got there, the actors re-created the story on location. Then they all had some food and trekked to the next story-place on their tour and continued this narrative trek for three days! In medieval times, of course, the Christian version produced The Mystery Plays.
My point is that by the time films came along storytelling was a practiced artform indeed. As far as I can tell [and it only SEEMS as though I've seen every film ever made - actually I keep embarrassing myself at how many films I haven't yet seen!] - as far as I can tell, the effect of all the amazing technological advances which cinema has achieved have certainly helped filmmakers in how to tell their tales, but they haven't done much for what those tales are quintessentially.
Even literary masters of plot twists like Poe, de Maupassant, O'Henry ... if you read enough you can sort of guess where the story's going. But even if you can't, if the focus of a story IS the twist [a la terrible authors like Jeffrey Archer], chances are the story ain't much cop, gov, know what I mean, squire? nudge nudge wink wink kinda thing.
Okay, intro over. Here are some basic plot lists:
The six standard plot archetypes:
Man versus Man
Man versus Society
Man versus Self
Man versus Nature
Man versus Supernatural
Man versus The Machine
Others claim 20 kick-offs for stories:
1. Quest
2. Adventure
3. Pursuit
4. Rescue
5. Escape
6. Revenge
7. The Riddle
8. Rivalry
9. Underdog
10. Temptation
11. Metamorphosis
12. Transformation
13. Maturation
14. Love
15. Forbidden Love
16. Sacrifice
17. Discovery
18. Wretched Existence
19. Ascension
20. Descension
Insightful Georges Polti writing in the 18th century came up with The Thirty-Six Dramatic Situations:
01. SUPPLICATION
(The dynamic elements technically necessary are: a Persecutor; a Suppliant; and a Power in authority, whose decision is doubtful)
A.
(1) Fugitives Imploring the Powerful for Help Against Their Enemies
(2) Assistance Implored for the Performance of a Pious Duty Which Has Been Forbidden
(3) Appeals for a Refuge in Which to Die
B.
(1) Hospitality Besought by the Shipwrecked
(2) Charity Entreated by Those Cast Off by Their Own People, Whom They Have Disgraced
(3) Expiation: The Seeking of Pardon, Healing or Deliverance
(4) The Surrender of a Corpse, or of a Relic, Solicited
C.
(1) Supplication of the Powerful for Those Dear to the Suppliant
(2) Supplication to a Relative in Behalf of Another Relative
(3) Supplication to a Mother's Lover, in Her Behalf
02. DELIVERANCE
(Elements: an Unfortunate, a Threatener, a Rescuer)
A.
(1) Appearance of a Rescuer to the Condemned
B.
(1) A Parent Replaced Upon a Throne by His Children
(2) Rescue by Friends, or by Strangers Grateful for Benefits Or Hospitality
03. CRIME Pursued by Vengeance
(Elements: an Avenger and a Criminal)
A.
(1) The Avenging of a Slain Parent or Ancestor
(2) The Avenging of a Slain Child or Descendant
(3) Vengeance for a Child Dishonored
(4) The Avenging of a Slain Wife or Husband
(5) Vengeance for the Dishonor, or Attempted Dishonoring, of a Wife
(6) Vengeance for a Mistress Slain
(7) Vengeance for a Slain or Injured Friend
(8) Vengeance for a Sister Seduced
B.
(1) Vengeance for Intentional Injury or Spoliation
(2) Vengeance for Having Been Despoiled During Absence
(3) Revenge for an Attempted Slaying
(4) Revenge for a False Accusation
(5) Vengeance for Violation
(6) Vengeance for Having Been Robbed of One's Own
(7) Revenge Upon a Whole Sex for a Deception by One
C.
(1) Professional Pursuit of Criminals
04. VENGEANCE Taken For Kindred Upon Kindred
(Elements: Avenging Kinsman; Guilty Kinsman; Remembrance of the Victim, a Relative of Both)
A.
(1) A Father's Death Avenged Upon a Mother
(2) A Mother's Death Avenged Upon a Father
B.
(1) A Brother's Death Avenged Upon a Son
C.
(1) A Father's Death Avenged Upon a Husband
D.
(1) A Husband's Death Avenged Upon a Father
05. PURSUIT
(Elements: Punishment and Fugitive)
A.
(1) Fugitives from Justice Pursued for Brigandage, Political Offenses, Etc.
B.
(1) Pursued for a Fault of Love
C.
(1) A Hero Struggling Against a Power
D.
(1) A Pseudo-Madman Struggling Against an Iago-Like Alienist
06. DISASTER
(Elements: a Vanquished Power; a Victorious Enemy or a Messenger)
A.
(1) Defeat Suffered
(2) A Fatherland Destroyed
(3) The Fall of Humanity
(4) A Natural Catastrophe
B.
(1) A Monarch Overthrown
C.
(1) Ingratitude Suffered
(2) The Suffering of Unjust Punishment or Enmity
(3) An Outrage Suffered
D.
(1) Abandonment by a Lover or a Husband
(2) Children Lost by Their Parents
07. FALLING PREY To Cruelty Or Misfortune
(Elements: an Unfortunate; a Master or a Misfortune)
A.
(1) The Innocent Made the Victim of Ambitious Intrigue
B.
(1) The Innocent Despoiled by Those Who Should Protect
C.
(1) The Powerful Dispossessed and Wretched
(2) A Favorite or an Intimate Finds Himself Forgotten
D.
(1) The Unfortunate Robbed of Their Only Hope
08. REVOLT
(Elements: Tyrant and Conspirator)
A.
(1) A Conspiracy Chiefly of One Individual
(2) A Conspiracy of Several
B.
(1) Revolt of One Individual, Who Influences and Involves Others
(2) A Revolt of Many
09. DARING Enterprise
(Elements: a Bold Leader; an Object; an Adversary)
A.
(1) Preparations For War
B.
(1) War
(2) A Combat
C.
(1) Carrying Off a Desired Person or Object
(2) Recapture of a Desired Object
D.
(1) Adventurous Expeditions
(2) Adventure Undertaken for the Purpose of Obtaining a Beloved Woman
10. ABDUCTION
(Elements: the Abductor; the Abducted; the Guardian)
A.
(1) Abduction of an Unwilling Woman
B.
(1) Abduction of a Consenting Woman
C.
(1) Recapture of the Woman Without the Slaying of the Abductor
(2) The Same Case, with the Slaying of the Ravisher
D.
(1) Rescue of a Captive Friend
(2) Of a Child
(3) Of a Soul in Captivity to Error
11. THE ENIGMA
(Elements: Interrogator, Seeker and Problem)
A.
(1) Search for a Person Who Must Be Found on Pain of Death
B.
(1) A Riddle To Be Solved on Pain of Death
(2) The Same Case, in Which the Riddle is Proposed by the Coveted Woman
C.
(1) Temptations Offered With the Object of Discovering His Name
(2) Temptations Offered With the Object of Ascertaining the Sex
(3) Tests for the Purpose of Ascertaining the Mental Condition
12. OBTAINING
(Elements: a Solicitor and an Adversary Who is Refusing, or an Arbitrator and Opposing Parties)
A.
(1) Efforts to Obtain an Object by Ruse or Force
B.
(1) Endeavor by Means of Persuasive Eloquence Alone
C.
(1) Eloquence With an Arbitrator
13. ENMITY Of Kinsmen
(Elements: a Malevolent Kinsman; a Hatred or Reciprocally Hating Kinsman)
A.
(1) Hatred of Brothers -- One Brother Hated by Several
(2) Reciprocal Hatred
(3) Hatred Between Relatives for Reasons of Self-Interest
B.
(1) Hatred of Father and Son -- Of the Son for the Father
(2) Mutual Hatred
(3) Hatred of Daughter for Father
C.
(1) Hatred of Grandfather for Grandson
D.
(1) Hatred of Father-in-law for Son-in-law
E.
(1) Hatred of Mother-in-law for Daughter-in-law
F.
(1) Infanticide
14. RIVALRY Of Kinsmen
(Elements: the Preferred Kinsman; the Rejected Kinsman; the Object)
A.
(1) Malicious Rivalry of a Brother
(2) Malicious Rivalry of Two Brothers
(3) Rivalry of Two Brothers, With Adultery on the Part of One
(4) Rivalry of Sisters
B.
(1) Rivalry of Father and Son, for an Unmarried Woman
(2) Rivalry of Father and Son, for a Married Woman
(3) Case Similar to the Two Foregoing, But in Which the Object is Already the Wife of the Father
(4) Rivalry of Mother and Daughter
C.
(1) Rivalry of Cousins
D.
(1) Rivalry of Friends
15. MURDEROUS Adultery
(Elements: Two Adulterers; a Betrayed Husband or Wife)
A.
(1) The Slaying of a Husband by, or for, a Paramour
(2) The Slaying of a Trusting Lover
B.
(1) Slaying of a Wife for a Paramour, and in Self-Interest
16. MADNESS
(Elements: Madman and Victim)
A.
(1) Kinsmen Slain in Madness
(2) Lover Slain in Madness
(3) Slaying or Injuring of a Person not Hated
B.
(1) Disgrace Brought Upon Oneself Through Madness
C.
(1) Loss of Loved Ones Brought About by Madness
D.
(1) Madness Brought on by Fear of Hereditary Insanity
17. FATAL Imprudence
(Elements: The Imprudent; the Victim or the Object Lost)
A.
(1) Imprudence the Cause of One's Own Misfortune
(2) Imprudence the Cause of One's Own Dishonor
B.
(1) Curiosity the Cause of One's Own Misfortune
(2) Loss of the Possession of a Loved One, Through Curiosity
C.
(1) Curiosity the Cause of Death or Misfortune to Others
(2) Imprudence the Cause of a Relative's Death
(3) Imprudence the Cause of a Lover's Death
(4) Credulity the Cause of Kinsmen's Deaths
18. INVOLUNTARY Crimes Of Love
(Elements: the Lover, the Beloved; the Revealer)
A.
(1) Discovery that One Has Married One's Mother
(2) Discovery that One Has Had a Sister as Mistress
B.
(1) Discovery that One Has Married One's Sister
(2) The Same Case, in Which the Crime Has Been Villainously Planned by a Third Person
(3) Being Upon the Point of Taking a Sister, Unknowingly, as Mistress
C.
(1) Being Upon the Point of Violating, Unknowingly, a Daughter
D.
(1) Being Upon the Point of Committing an Adultery Unknowingly
(2) Adultery Committed Unknowingly
19. SLAYING of a Kinsman Unrecognized
(Elements: the Slayer, the Unrecognized Victim)
A.
(1) Being Upon the Point of Slaying a Daughter Unknowingly, by Command of a Divinity or an Oracle
(2) Through Political Necessity
(3) Through a Rivalry in Love
(4) Through Hatred of the Lover of the Unrecognized Daughter
B.
(1) Being Upon the Point of Killing a Son Unknowingly
(2) The Same Case, Strengthened by Machiavellian Instigations
C.
(1) Being Upon the Point of Slaying a Brother Unknowingly
D.
(1) Slaying of a Mother Unrecognized
E.
(1) A Father Slain Unknowingly, Through Machiavellian Advice
F.
(1) A Grandfather Slain Unknowingly, in Vengeance and Through Instigation
G.
(1) Involuntary Killing of a Loved Woman
(2) Being Upon the Point of Killing a Lover Unrecognized
(3) Failure to Rescue an Unrecognized Son
20. SELF-Sacrificing For An Ideal
(Elements: the Hero; the Ideal; the 'Creditor' or the Person or Thing Sacrificed)
A.
(1) Sacrifice of Life for the Sake of One's Word
(2) Life Sacrifice for the Success of One's People
(3) Life Sacrificed in Filial Piety
(4) Life Sacrificed for the Sake of One's Faith
B.
(1) Both Love and Life Sacrificed for One's Faith, or a Cause
(2) Love Sacrificed to the Interests of State
C.
(1) Sacrifice of Well-Being to Duty
D.
(1) The Ideal of 'Honor' Sacrificed to the Ideal of 'Faith'
21. SELF-Sacrifice For Kindred
(Elements: the Hero; the Kinsman; the 'Creditor' or the Person or Thing Sacrificed)
A.
(1) Life Sacrificed for that of a Relative or a Loved One
(2) Life Sacrificed for the Happiness of a Relative or a Loved One
B.
(1) Ambition Sacrificed for the Happiness of a Parent
(2) Ambition Sacrificed for the Life of a Parent
C.
(1) Love Sacrificed for the Sake of a Parent's Life
(2) For the Happiness of One's Child
(3) The Same Sacrifice as 2, But Caused by Unjust Laws
D.
(1) Life and Honor Sacrificed for the Life of a Parent or Loved One
(2) Modesty Sacrificed for the Life of a Relative or a Loved One
22. ALL Sacrificed For A Passion
(Elements: the Lover, the Object of the Fatal Passion; the Person or Thing Sacrificed)
A.
(1) Religious Vows of Chastity Broken for a Passion
(2) Respect for a Priest Destroyed
(3) A Future Ruined by Passion
(4) Power Ruined by Passion
(5) Ruin of Mind, Health, and Life
(6) Ruin of Fortunes, Lives, and Honors
B.
(1) Temptations Destroying the Sense of Duty, of Piety, etc.
C.
(1) Destruction of Honor, Fortune, and Life by Erotic Vice
(2) The Same Effect Produced by Any Other Vice
23. NECESSITY Of Sacrificing Love Ones
(Elements: the Hero; the Beloved Victim; the Necessity for the Sacrifice)
A.
(1) Necessity for Sacrificing a Daughter in the Public Interest
(2) Duty of Sacrificing Her in Fulfillment of a Vow to God
(3) Duty of Sacrificing Benefactors or Loved Ones to One's Faith
B.
(1) Duty of Sacrificing One's Child, Unknown to Others, Under the Pressure of Necessity
(2) Duty of Sacrificing, Under the Same Circumstances, One's Father or Husband
(3) Duty of Sacrificing a Son-in-law for the Public Good
(4) Duty of Contending with a Brother-in-Law for the Public Good
(5) Duty of Contending with a Friend
24. RIVALRY Of Superior And Inferior
(Elements: the Superior Rival; the Inferior Rival; the Object)
A.
(1) Masculine Rivalries; of a Mortal and an Immortal
(2) Of a Magician and an Ordinary Man
(3) Of Conqueror and Conquered
(4) Of a King and a Noble
(5) Of a Powerful Person and an Upstart
(6) Of Rich and Poor
(7) Of an Honored Man and a Suspected One
(8) Rivalry of Two Who are Almost Equal
(9) Of the Two Successive Husbands of a Divorcee
B.
(1) Feminine Rivalries; Of a Sorceress and an Ordinary Woman
(2) Of Victor and Prisoner
(3) Of Queen and Subject
(4) Of Lady and Servant
(5) Rivalry Between Memory or an Ideal (That of a Superior Woman) and a Vassal of Her Own
C.
(1) Double Rivalry (A loves B, who loves C, who loves D)
25. ADULTERY
(Elements: a Deceived Husband or Wife; Two Adulterers)
A.
(1) A Mistress Betrayed, For a Young Woman
(2) For a Young Wife
B.
(1) A Wife Betrayed, For a Slave Who Does Not Love in Return
(2) For Debauchery
(3) For a Married Woman
(4) With the Intention of Bigamy
(5) For a Young Girl, who Does Not Love in Return
(6) A Wife Envied by a Young Girl Who is in Love With Her Husband
(7) By a Courtesan
C.
(1) An Antagonistic Husband Sacrificed for a Congenial Lover
(2) A Husband, Believed to be Lost, Forgotten for a Rival
(3) A Commonplace Husband Sacrificed for a Sympathetic Lover
(4) A Good Husband Betrayed for an Inferior Rival
(5) For a Grotesque Rival
(6) For a Commonplace Rival, By a Perverse Wife
(7) For a Rival Less Handsome, But Useful
D.
(1) Vengeance of a Deceived Husband
(2) Jealousy Sacrificed for the Sake of a Cause
(3) Husband Persecuted by a Rejected Rival
26. CRIMES Of Love
(Elements: The Lover, the Beloved)
A.
(1) A Mother in Love with Her Son
(2) A Daughter in Love with her Father
(3) Violation of a Daughter by a Father
B.
(1) A Woman Enamored of Her Stepson
(2) A Woman and Her Stepson Enamored of Each Other
(3) A Woman Being the Mistress, at the Same Time, of a Father and Son, Both of Whom Accept the Situation
C.
(1) A Man Becomes the Lover of his Sister-in-Law
(2) A Brother and Sister in Love with Each Other
D.
(1) A Man Enamored of Another Man, Who Yields
E.
(1) A Woman Enamored of a Beast
27. DISCOVERY Of The Dishonor Of A Loved One
(Elements: the Discoverer; the Guilty One)
A.
(1) Discovery of a Mother's Shame
(2) Discovery of a Father's Shame
(3) Discovery of a Daughter's Dishonor
B.
(1) Discovery of Dishonor in the Family of One's Fiancee
(2) Discovery than One's Wife Has Been Violated Before Marriage, Or Since the Marriage
(3) That She Has Previously Committed a Fault
(4) Discovery that One's Wife Has Formerly Been a Prostitute
(5) Discovery that One's Mistress, Formerly a Prostitute, Has Returned to Her Old Life
(6) Discovery that One's Lover is a Scoundrel, or that One's Mistress is a Woman of Bad Character
(7) The Same Discovery Concerning One's Wife
C.
(1) Duty of Punishing a Son Who is a Traitor to Country
(2) Duty of Punishing a Son Condemned Under a Law Which the Father Has Made
(3) Duty of Punishing One's Mother to Avenge One's Father
28. OBSTACLES To Love
(Elements: Two Lovers, an Obstacle)
A.
(1) Marriage Prevented by Inequality of Rank
(2) Inequality of Fortune an Impediment to Marriage
B.
(1) Marriage Prevented by Enemies and Contingent Obstacles
C.
(1) Marriage Forbidden on Account of the Young Woman's Previous Betrothal to Another
D.
(1) A Free Union Impeded by the Opposition of Relatives
E.
(1) By the Incompatibility of Temper of the Lovers
29. AN ENEMY Loved
(Elements: The Beloved Enemy; the Lover; the Hater)
A.
(1) The Loved One Hated by Kinsmen of the Lover
(2) The Lover Pursued by the Brothers of His Beloved
(3) The Lover Hated by the Family of His Beloved
(4) The Beloved is an Enemy of the Party of the Woman Who Loves Him
B.
(1) The Beloved is the Slayer of a Kinsman of the Woman Who Loves Him
30. AMBITION
(Elements: an Ambitious Person; a Thing Coveted; an Adversary)
A.
(1) Ambition Watched and Guarded Against by a Kinsman, or By a Person Under Obligation
B.
(1) Rebellious Ambition
C.
(1) Ambition and Covetousness Heaping Crime Upon Crime
31. CONFLICT With A God
(Elements: a Mortal, an Immortal)
A.
(1) Struggle Against a Deity
(2) Strife with the Believers in a God
B.
(1) Controversy with a Deity
(2) Punishment for Contempt of a God
(3) Punishment for Pride Before a God
32. MISTAKEN Jealousy
(Elements: the Jealous One; the Object of Whose Possession He is Jealous; the Supposed Accomplice; the Cause or the Author of the Mistake)
A.
(1) The Mistake Originates in the Suspicious Mind of the Jealous One
(2) Mistaken Jealousy Aroused by Fatal Chance
(3) Mistaken Jealousy of a Love Which is Purely Platonic
(4) Baseless Jealousy Aroused by Malicious Rumors
B.
(1) Jealousy Suggested by a Traitor Who is Moved by Hatred, or Self-Interest
C.
(1) Reciprocal Jealousy Suggested to Husband and Wife by a Rival
33. ERRONEOUS Judgment
(Elements: The Mistaken One; the Victim of the Mistake; the Cause or Author of the Mistake; the Guilty Person)
A.
(1) False Suspicion Where Faith is Necessary
(2) False Suspicion of a Mistress
(3) False Suspicion Aroused by a Misunderstood Attitude of a Loved One
B.
(1) False Suspicions Drawn Upon Oneself to Save a Friend
(2) They Fall Upon the Innocent
(3) The Same Case as 2, but in Which the Innocent had a Guilty Intention, or Believes Himself Guilty
(4) A Witness to the Crime, in the Interest of a Loved One, Lets Accusation Fall Upon the Innocent
C.
(1) The Accusation is Allowed to Fall Upon an Enemy
(2) The Error is Provoked by an Enemy
D.
(1) False Suspicion Thrown by the Real Culprit Upon One of His Enemies
(2) Thrown by the Real Culprit Upon the Second Victim Against Whom He Has Plotted From the Beginning
34. REMORSE
(Elements: the Culprit; the Victim or the Sin; the Interrogator)
A.
(1) Remorse for an Unknown Crime
(2) Remorse for a Parricide
(3) Remorse for an Assassination
B.
(1) Remorse for a Fault of Love
(2) Remorse for an Adultery
35. RECOVERY Of A Lost One
(The Seeker; the One Found)
A.
(1) A Child Stolen
B.
(1) Unjust Imprisonment
C.
(1) A Child Searches to Discover His Father
36. LOSS Of Loved Ones
(A Kinsman Slain; a Kinsman Spectator; an Executioner)
A.
(1) Witnessing the Slaying of Kinsmen While Powerless to Prevent It
(2) Helping to Bring Misfortune Upon One's People Through Professional Secrecy
B.
(1) Divining the Death of a Loved One
C.
(1) Learning of the Death of a Kinsman or Ally, and Lapsing into Despair
And there are film theories that reduce plots, either dramatic or comic, to:
1. Boy Meets Girl, Boy Loses Girl, Boy Gets Girl [or any gender combo]
2. A Stranger/Alien Rides/Lands In/to Town - adventures ensue
3. Something/one precious is captured/stolen and is/isn't recovered
4. The beloved is in mortal danger/terminally ill and is/isn't saved
5. The hero/ine is transported/evicted/banished to another town/world/time - adventures ensue
6. The hero/ine undergoes a personality/physical change resulting from an accident/illness/curse/possession/reversal of fortune and does/doesn't become reconciled with those s/he lost along the way
7. Total destruction threatens the house/airplane/town/country/planet/solar system and is/isn't averted
8. The hero/ine discovers/uncovers/witnesses injustice and wrecks revenge
9. Someone perfectly ordinary becomes extraordinary by his/her deeds or misdeeds
And there are probably a few more. But NOT MANY!!!
I'm sure we can all think of films for each of these. The main thing is that plot is what happens [he does that, then she does this, then they go here, then he comes back, blah blah] whereas story is how it happens and is an amalgam of all the storytelling elements. It's story that makes it possible for a limited amount of plots to bloom into the gazillions of narrative tales that are our collective artistic heritage. And it's why we can recognize human tales whether or not we speak the language or where we live.
Even the most mechanistic of sci-fi or fantasy characters need to relate to the human condition for them to have any lasting impact on readers/viewers. There aren't that many films with no people interacting and elucidating the human condition: and that includes animated animals, alien threats, and robots.
I'm going to shut up now
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Who'll Take the Critic's Challenge?
