Allied with the actor

Here we go further examining the writers potential alliance with the actor.

Actors will often have a sense of the well-proportioned scene. It can both be a intellectual or primary, bodily sense of drama's structure. But most of all, actors are worth listening to as a scriptwriter because they will be living with your fictional work, taking responsibility for it, investing it with their own bodies and minds. They'll sense when lines doesn't work, are surplus or go in a wrong direction.

Of course, sometimes an actor can have problems with a line or element which is difficult for them personally. It might provoke a fear in them, often unconsciously, and so they will try to argue rationally, objectively why the line or element is bad. If you sense this is the case, be happy, because it is a great opportunity to strengthen the alliance with the actor. If you can explore the actors objection to the element and reach a satisfying resolution without antagonizing him or her, you'll have expanded your mutual trust.

One of my main tools to exploring differences of opinion, both in relation to actors, but also when working with writers/directors/producers, is to focus on asking questions and establishing a mutual agreement on the primary logic and mechanics of a script/scene. Its a bit Socratic, but without the didactic approach. The key is to allow for the possibility that you are wrong, even when you damn sure you're absolutely right.

In such conversations I listen a lot after what I call 'hidden gems'. Because often hidden in an objection, no matter how rational or irrational, you can find an unknown treasure. An experience, an emotion, a story or a moment which can bring a new aspect to the script.

Actors are the writer's best ally, alone for the reason that they have the most to win by making you better, by helping you to succeed - and many of the understand how to be truly collaborative.

The courage

"Courage is being scared to death... and saddling up anyway" - John Wayne

The word courage has its root in the latin word for heart; cor. Courage flows from the beating heart, that wants to live in spite of fear. David Mamet argues that the most important thing the actor brings to the character is their own courage. This will give the character life; a real, living heart, so to speak, to the otherwise artificial and non-existent person.

The actor's primary virtue has always been courage. The simple act of standing in front of an audience demands courage in itself, even if you by disposition crave it and are driven to do it. One of the best pieces of advice I ever received was to connect with actors, if I wanted to write drama. As a writer, you might think you are the brain, but without the heart you are worth nothing.

After my return to Denmark, I attend more theatre performances and I meet more actors. Two of the recent performances I saw reminded me of the importance of courage. One was a grotesque, semi-spex version of Chaplin's The Gold Rush put on stage to buffoon the makers own desire to be political correct. The whole performance breathes with courage; it hides nothing, uses all the most simple, old tricks, never tries to be clever, and that is why it works so well. The courage of the performers convince. The other performance I saw was cleverly made, well-designed and full of new tricks, but in the directing and in some of the crucial parts, it lacked courage. It never left the stage. It was impressive, but without heart.

The same goes for writing and designing drama. Better to have courage than to be clever and perfect. Practice the discipline of sensing if your impulses are controlled by fear or inspired by courage and desire. I have a bunch of tricks and questions I treat myself to in the process. Like:

"What is the worst thing that could happen now?"

"- for the character?"

"- for me as a writer?"

"What is the worst possible idea I can come up with to solve this problem?"

- I leave the script and take a walk, while trying to sense and answer to: "What do I really, really want, no, not just want, but desire, crave? What can I imagine that will give me a kick?"

As writers, we have the time to reflect and ponder, so what I really admire about the courage of actors, is that they do it on stage in real time - they follow their impulses even when they know it might lead the performance astray from the planned (that is; when they do it, and not when they are just playing safe). Both in acting and writing, its the true moments of courage, where someone let go of all that is safe and well-known and take those steps into uncertainty, those are the moments, which truly touches us as an audience.

Your First Feature Film

You are not an established writer/director. You are looking to make your break-through or just to get that first feature film financed and produced. Here are some thoughts on how to make that script.

Keep it simple. One novel provocative idea. Strong characters.

Keep it simple.
This is key for several reasons. You want to minimize your budget. Makes it easier to get the project financed and produced. Failing finding a producer, you might even be able to produce it yourself. Keeping it simple also let you focus on maximizing your strengths instead of trying to accomplish everything. Example: Instead of wasting your energy on directing many different actors/characters, you can focus on a few, strengthening their performance and the audiences relation to those characters. Simplicity is not the opposite of complexity in this context. Complexity in the sense of a fascinating, inexhaustible art-work comes from simple ideas connecting to create complexity. By working under the rule of simplicity, limiting your number of location, actors, plot-lines and so on, you will be forced to make meaningful connections between the elements you have - creating complexity.

One novel, provocative idea.
The criteria for your basic idea of your script should be novelty and provocation. The novelty can take many forms. It can be the world of the drama is a world we have never (or rarely) seen portrayed in film. It can be the way you shape your drama. It can be a basic conflict we have never seen before, or at least not seen treated like you plan to do. The provocation is required for your script and film to break through the carpet bombing of film projects and releases. You need to stand out. What is provocation? Basically to question in any way a well-established truth.

Strong Characters!
In a low-budget film you can't have all the expensive stuff that attracts people to film. Instead you can utilize the one fundamental thing we also love about drama - the characters. They are not expensive. But they demand all of your creativity, logic and sense of drama. Pour all your energy into them - making them stand out, being unforgettable. The kind of characters you wish you knew in real life, or in your dreams (if that's the kind of film you are planning), or that you yourself was one of them. Really, push yourself on this aspect. And it's not only about writing great dialogue for them. Its about their conflicts (external and internal), how they deal with them, their courage, their strength and weaknesses.

A sample of breakthrough films that have these characteristics. Find more yourself.

• Sex, Lies and Videotapes
Small ensemble cast. Good actors. Main character has a huge problem - he can't commit to a relationship. The novelty is that he deals with this by questioning convention and videotaping peoples most intimate, private stories. In doing so he stirs up status quo of their lives. By shaking up their world, finally somebody emerges to shake up his world. The provocation: Questioning the existence of love. A romantic lead who is everything he is not supposed to be.

• Reservoir Dogs
Ensemble cast. Few locations. Main character is thrown into the dangerous task of infiltrating a criminal gang - posing for one of them. The novelty is that this is not a film about a detective solving a crime. This is the crime-film as an existential metaphor regarding identity. The main character bonds with a father figure among the criminals, and when they are all lying dead or dying, he realizes the futility of all his aspirations - the bond between him and the criminal was what he cared most about. Added novelty: voluminous, imaginative dialogue. The provocation in this film is the blurring of black and white - ex: Our mixed enjoyment/vehemence at the torture of a police officer.

• Festen (The Celebration)
Ensemble cast. One location. Main character has a huge problem - he can't continue his life because of his father's abuse of him and his sister in the past. The novelty is two-fold: This was one of the first Dogma-films shot on DV. It was one of the first 'mainstream' films to talk about incest. This is also more or less its provocation, but its provocation has a deeper level. We are led to believe our main character's intention is to expose his father (get justice) and in the end of the film he succeeds - but he is not really happy about it. The main character's true intention is to find reconciliation with his father, to gain a real bond between them - and this is truly provoking as the gut-reaction towards incest-perpetrators are pretty much to castrate them (socially and physically). This film actually ends up siding with both the victim and the perpetrator.

WHAT’S IN A NAME?

The principle of character

“The strictest observation of the rules (of composition) cannot outweigh the tinniest fault made in the characters” – G. E. Lessing.

The defining aspect of a character is the will. This means everything can be a character as long as it has a will it can act upon. Remember we are talking construction here. Of course the background, the feelings, the profession, the relations and the psychology of a character can be extremely important – but in terms of construction all we really need is the will. What the character wants, what its intentions are in any given scene. How you go about ‘finding’ or inventing your characters are entirely up to you. But when you get down to constructing your script, you must be clear about what the basic will of the character is. This is the will, the intention that will guide the characters’ actions throughout the script. Romeo wants love – everything he does in Romeo and Juliet is done out of this basic will to find love. Even when he kills Tybalt, he does so beset by rage out of love for his best friend Mercutio, newly slain by Tybalt.

The complementary aspect of 'want' is 'need', which is a way of expressing an internal conflict or dynamic in the character. We may want something, but often what we really need differs from that. Romeo wants personal love, but maybe his need is to find the compassion that his world seems to lack. If you look at the incidents in the play, which sends Romeo on his tragic course, they might arise from lack of compassion. He kills Tybalt, which gets him expelled from Verona. For Romeo this seems almost like the end of the world, because it means separation from his personal love, and only the priest's compassionate words, which are able to encompass a broader view on the situation, persuade Romeo to leave for Mantua and bide his time. But when confusion muddles the intricate and dangerous plan to reunite Romeo and Juliet - who are being kept apart because of the lack of compassion from the parents - Romeo finally succumbs, feeling mortally wounded by the apparent loss of Juliet, exactly because what he wants is his personal love and he is not able to balance that with a compassion, which extends beyond his own personal interest, he chooses to take his own life.

Another aspect of character is what I call – a little simplistic – the heroic quality. Romeo has faith in love. Batman is resourceful. Chaplin’s vagabond never gives up. Pacino’s Michael Corleone understands the danger of the mafia-game. The knight in Bergmann’s The 7th Seal is self-sacrificing. All great characters have one fundamental quality, which makes them able to strive for they want in their world. It may or may not be enough to get them what they want. This depends on the world and their weakness.

The heroic weakness is the last main aspect of character. This is the Achilles’ heel of the hero. Romeo has doubts about love. Batman carries a personal tragedy, the loss of his parents. Chaplin’s vagabond is poor and without means. Michael Corleone has a blind love for his father or psychological speaking a father-complex. The knight doubts the meaning of life after his sacrifices in the holy crusade seems pointless. As much as the heroes will struggle with the world, they will also struggle with their weakness.

You can create a drama where you only operate with the will of the character, but adding the other two aspects and linking them together in a simple meaningful triangle, you create a dynamic which will steer the drama, and give rise to the unfolding of conflicts and their resolutions. You will probably add other characteristics to your characters, but you have to stay focused on these three. In every major conflict and turning point of the drama, it has to be this trinity, which is at play. The construction questions will every time be: What opposes what the character wants, how will the he apply his heroic quality to overcome it and how will the weakness go against him?