Movie Outline Screenwriting Blog

Yep, they can make it – and they can break it!  In one fell swoop you have to tie-up any loose ends and satisfy an audience’s expectation.  Not an easy task, right?  Absolutely not.  In fact, as a working screenwriter I have found writing a satisfying ending to be one of the hardest parts of the creative writing process.

Don’t get me wrong, I can write endings.  I can write all types of endings.  Endings with a final climactic showdown between the hero and villain.  Endings with a witty line that leaves the audience with a smile.  Endings with a sad yet uplifting tone.  I can write endings in my sleep.. but that doesn’t mean they are always going to be the best ending for the story.  Perfection is hard to attain.  We all try to create the perfect scene, the perfect witty banter, the perfect character arc and the perfect ending, but linking all of this together is complicated.  We have to fulfill expectations on so many levels and at the same time make it original and entertaining.

And things get even more difficult when you’re trying to please a producer, director and development executive because everybody has their own ideas of what needs to transpire in the closing moments of your movie.. which by that point is technically “their” movie or optimistically “our” movie.  The best advice is to keep it real and inevitable.  Don’t just tag on a twist you haven’t set up.  An ending needs to evolve naturally.  To be organic.

If you can create an a) original ending that b) entertains but more crucially c) resolves the central character’s journey, d) hints at the theme and e) either makes you laugh, cry or leaves you wanting more then you are onto a winner.  The feeling an audience needs to walk out of the movie theater with is one of “satisfaction”.  Sure, they may argue about who killed who, what that blue ornament on the mantelpiece represented, and why the director filmed it in Seattle rather than London, but ultimately they need to feel intellectually content with the resolution that was presented to them.

I hate movies that either give us a predictable ending (lazy screenwriting and filmmaking) or shove a truck load of exposition down our throats just to explain the plot.  If it’s that complicated then the writer has made some poor decisions somewhere down the line.  If you need to telegraph to the audience that the hero or heroine has changed, through dialogue or a clunky visual device, then that’s equally as irritating.

The best endings just “feel right” when you write them and watch them.  They may sometimes surprise you, not necessarily out of an intentional creative choice by the writer, but by the script itself which by the end of the story should have a life of its own.  Like putting that final piece of the puzzle into place and then stepping back to take it all in for the first time, an effective ending completes the picture.  And endings, like that final piece, should never need to be forced into position.. they should just slip into place as if they were always destined to be there.

Unless you are writing an ensemble movie like Robert Altman’s Short Cuts you will typically focus your story on a central character’s journey and the obstacles thrown in his or her way.  The mistake many first-time screenwriters make is getting side-tracked by supporting characters and their own evolving character arcs.

Now, I need to preface this advice with a caveat since I have previously discussed how helpful it can be to create fully-developed secondary characters and their own lives outside of the central storyline and Protagonist.  And by creating their “own lives” I don’t necessarily mean we need to see those lives but it’s important for the writer to know about them and to have explored them in order for your secondary characters’ dialogue and actions to ring true when they interact with the central character.  I still stand by this but advise you to tread carefully so you do not inadvertently turn the spotlight onto your supporting character so much so that they outshine the hero/heroine of the piece.

You must remember whose point of view the movie story is being told from.  Who are we as readers or an audience meant to identify with. If you have been following your main character for twenty straight scenes in a row and then cut to a secondary character – say, his best friend – then you need to be sure this diversion is justified within the context of the overarching story otherwise it will detract from your central plot and be redundant.  If in this example the best friend makes a phone call about the hero or discovers something about the main plot that puts him and the hero in danger then that’s fine, but if the scene simply shows the best friend going on a date with someone that has absolutely no connection with the hero or plot and never will then lose it.

The same issue can arise when a writer focuses too much attention on the villain of the story.  Yes, the Antagonist plays an important role and should never be considered as secondary since they balance the good with the bad, provide conflict, obstacles, fear, tension and keep everything ticking along toward a climax, but you can also go over the top with their scene stealing and story-hogging so as to pull focus from the hero or heroine.  If we as an audience are supposed to empathize with the plight of the hero then we must go on the journey with them and walk in their shoes.  That is crucial.  Anything that deviates us from that journey or dilutes the connection with the hero is a negative factor and must be cut or reworked.

When we think of a hero in a movie we immediately assume we are talking about the central character otherwise known as the Protagonist, but many stories conceal a multitude of heroes, often unsung, in secondary, supporting roles that are just as important to the narrative and Protagonist’s psychological development and physical journey.

Think of Obi-Wan Kenobi in the original “Star Wars”. He is a hero in his own right because he allows himself to be slain by Darth Vader in order to push Luke Skywalker toward the next stage in his journey. Without this sacrifice Luke would depend on his mentor to see him through the final conflict instead of believing in his own inner strength.  And that is the key to a good hero.  Someone who sacrifices their own needs – or indeed life – for the sake of the greater good.

When constructing a story, writers typically focus on the central plot and central character, and this normally results in villains and secondary characters entering the stage simply to support what has already been established.  This can inevitably lead to two-dimensional characters that become sounding boards or vessels for exposition, and a central storyline that makes sense but is unfulfilling to an audience.

Instead, try introducing well-defined, three-dimensional characters with their own lives and stories outside of the main plot and then weave these secondary stories around the central storyline, and design some of the Protagonist’s story choices around the secondary characters.  This may not always work and you should obviously never lose focus of the principle story and character but the process will open your mind to new avenues and hopefully create a more rounded and engaging narrative.

Treat every character as a hero, even the villains.  That’s right, villains are heroes of their own stories.  When we think of Alan Rickman’s enigmatic villain Hans Gruber in “Die Hard” we see a guy who wants to steal money and kill whoever gets in his way.  But perhaps there is more to his story than we know?  Perhaps the screenwriter explored a complex backstory for Gruber that never made it to the big screen – because it was unnecessary for an audience and would more than likely be overly expositional – but knowing about Gruber’s childhood and experiences may have helped shape the part.

I am sure that Alan Rickman didn’t just read the role as a villain and that was that.  Like all good actors, especially those who believe in “the method”, he may have tried to find a spark of humanity in Gruber, something he could use to justify Gruber’s actions.  Maybe Gruber’s father used to work for a big conglomerate like the Nakatomi Corporation and that they fired him and it lead to the break up and suicide of his father.  Gruber would of course never reveal this to his accomplices but for him, the heist meant more than money.  It was revenge and closure.  A salute to his father.

By understanding that EVERYONE in a movie has a story to tell and a life beyond the bounds of the movie screen and pages of a screenplay we can begin to view each role, from hero to grumpy waitress with only three lines, with the respect they deserve.  The truth is, that grumpy waitress is the way she is because her boss is a jerk, she has no love life and is working three jobs so she can afford to look after her sick mother.  She is the epitome of the “selfless hero” – but we’ll never know.

So what is a character arc, you ask?  Sounds complicated.  Well, it doesn’t have to be, although a complicated character arc may be just what your screenplay needs. A character arc could also be described as a journey that a person goes on during the course of your movie, or the development in their personality they experience or the evolution of an aspect of their persona – such as emotional, physical or psychological.  All of the above are valid character arcs that could help to engage an audience.

Why does a character need an arc?  Well, it may be intentional that your protagonist (hero or heroine) doesn’t, and if so, that’s fine, so long as it is clear that is the case and that the rest of the story and theme support this choice.  But more often than not a film will lose an audience if the lead character does not go on some kind of transformational journey.

Think of Luke Skywalker in the first Star Wars movie and also in the complete franchise.  He starts off as a naive farm boy with foolish hopes of exploring the solar system. He struggles with authority and even the notion of responsibility and “The Force”. But as the story progresses, obstacles are thrown in his way which he must summon up an inner strength he did not know he had in order to overcome, and by the end of the movie he is living his dream, fighting villains and saving a Princess.  That’s his arc.  That’s his journey.  Without it the movie wouldn’t have been so engaging.

And what’s more, he’s not the only one in the story with an arc – and that’s a key point.  When writing a script, don’t make the mistake of focusing all of your attention on the hero’s arc.  Sometimes it is equally as important to plan an arc for the antagonist (villain) and supporting characters so that they too read as three-dimensional, real-life characters that have their own lives outside of the movie we see and that they are not simply there to support the hero in his quest.

To sum up: if you want your audience to truly identify with your protagonist then create a complex journey for them to take. Everybody has hopes, fears, dreams and flaws.  Make sure your central character has too.  What is their goal?  Is it emotional or physical?  What do they really want? How will they change throughout the story?  What obstacles force them to change?  Ask yourself these important questions as the narrative progresses so that each key event of the story not only serves the plot but is intrinsically linked to the overall “theme” and your central character arc.