"Save the cat! Goes to the movies" reviews

OK, I'm reading it, and I'll be giving a running commentary over the days. Thanks again, Scoopicman. :)

It's a great book and quite a page-turner, but I'm having some issues.

First of all, the late screenwriter, Blake Snyder, says there are only so many structures, and, as I've said before, I know of this argument. But that argument cannot be falsified, because, anytime someone comes out with a new twist or new plotline, Snyder can say it fits into one of the previous structures.

And I'm having problems with his various plot structures. The first one, Monster in the House (MITH), talks of how the characters deal with the well, monster. He says that a MITH movie must have a monster (fair enough) which is in a house. He defines "house" as an enclosed space which can be "a family unit, an entire town, or 'the world.'" Well, again, if an enclosed space can be as big as the world, then that's not a meaningful statement, is it?

He also refers to "The War of the Worlds" as unsatisfying. Ummm, that book by H.G. Wells is one of the greatest novels of English literature, and the first move, released in 1953, was a success, and so was the remake by Spielberg in 2005. And anyone who has read up on science fiction would know that the novel was an allegory on the international situation, where the British were going around beating up on natives, so Wells wanted his readers to know what it was like to have a superior military power do the same to them.

******​

I flipped ahead, to the story of the "Fool Triumphant", which involves a fool or underdog who wins the day. He says that such a story must have a "Jealous insider", someone who knows the true potential of the fool and who wants to trip that fool up. Snyder gives as an example, the movie "Amadeus", where Antonio Salieri realizes how wonderful Mozart really was and tried to stop him from attaining greatness. He also mentions the Pink Panther series, where Chief Inspector Dreyfuss hates Clouseau and wants to get rid of him.

Amadeus is a good movie, but I'm a fan of the Pink Panter movies, and Dreyfuss was NEVER jealous of Clouseau. In fact, Dreyfuss hates Clouseau because Clouseau was a fool.

Far more important are the underdog movies that don't have the jealous insider - Rocky and the Karate Kid are obvious examples. The TV series, Columbo, would be another, though those are TV movies as opposed to theatrical releases.

******​

I don't want to be too critical, and I am learning, but I will take the information with the proverbial grain of salt.
 
I loved this book A LOT even though I disagreed with many of his opinions, because after all, a lot of it is just opinion.

I actually read the book cover to cover, and then a few days later went on to write a feature screenplay throwing out about half of his advice, then I went into production on that film :)

I don't think anyone should read only one screenwriting book and follow it religiously, but rather use it as a tool in your arsenal to pull from along with many other books you may have read.

I just liked that this book was easy to read, comical at times, and easy to understand!
 
Last edited:
First time I read that book, I boarded out my story then wrote a 95 page script in 4 days that did well in a few contests.

Go watch some of the videos of screenwriting professors being interviewed... these guys talk for over an hour and really tell you nothing.

While yes, there are some guidelines for everything you do in film, the overall idea that "if it works, it works" is the only one that matters.
 
I don't want to be too critical, and I am learning, but I will take the information with the proverbial grain of salt.

Absolutely. Blake has opinions and he tries to pidgeonhole a lot of things. This doesn't always work, but.... it is cool that someone took what is common to a lot of movies, so you can see the structure. You can use this info as a format for your own writing, or - you can use it as a reference, so you can twist audiences expectations into something else.

BTW, Save the Cat! Goes to the Movies is the 2nd of three books. I feel that I've gotten some good points of view on story structure from these books.


storybooks.jpg
 
Thanks, Scoopicman and Tokenwhiteboy. :)

I know of Joseph Campbell, of course, and I've made references to Syd Fields, who I believe passed away recently. I've never heard of Robert McKee, though, so I'll give his book a try.

But don't forget the purpose of literature is often allegory, as in a commentary on the times. Star Trek was famous for that, especially in the old series. And that is also something to keep in mind.
 
OK, I'm reading it, and I'll be giving a running commentary over the days. Thanks again, Scoopicman. :)

Amadeus is a good movie, but I'm a fan of the Pink Panter movies, and Dreyfuss was NEVER jealous of Clouseau. In fact, Dreyfuss hates Clouseau because Clouseau was a fool.

Dreyfuss is absolutely a "jealous insider." I think you may be confusing envy with jealousy.
Jealousy is the fear someone will take away something from you. Dreyfuss is a strictly conventional
law enforcement officer. When Clouseau bumbles his way to success, that undermines Dreyfuss'
core belief of how detective work should be conducted and shakes his reality. Dreyfuss is driven to
insanity because he is only apparently the only one who sees Clouseau for the idiot he is.

The most important aspect of the Dreyfuss character is that he provides opposition to Clouseau.
Ostensibly, one would think Dreyfuss would be happy that Clouseau is catching the bad guys no
matter how it is done. Thus, Dreyfuss needs a motivation to oppose Clouseau, and that motivation
is that Clouseau shatters his belief system.

Pauli is the jealous insider in Rocky.
 
The AFM web page has this article on screenwriting, which refers to Joseph Campbell's monomyth as well as "Save the cat". I've given my critique before, and it still stands.

BTW, 2001: A Space Odyssey does not fit any of the monomyths, does it? Or The Exorcist? Or The Omen? Or Jaws?
 
Back
Top