Logline, Synopsis, 3-Act Ideas
With my idea asserted, a few tasks face me before I can realistically write my actual script: namely the introduction of a logline, plot synopsis, the use of a 3-act structure in relation to my story and the conception of what I want my film to do: the reasons and ambitions behind my thoughts.
Logline: A DISTURBED YOUNG ADULT FINDS HIMSELF INEXPLICABLY DRAWN TO THE DISTANT CRY OF A WAILING CHICKEN.
This seemed to offer enough intrigue and a taste of the surrealist aspect of my story; enough basic substance of plot to offset the lack of distinguishable ambition. At the very least it's distinctive enough in my view to make the reader think through it again, if only subconsciously.
Plot Synopsis: A young man begrudgingly wakes to the muffled sound of wailing chickens in distress. He resists at first, but when the noise becomes louder he cannot help but be drawn from his bed outside, to investigate the noise. He trawls through the garden, before confronting a chicken coop at the end of a lawn. He investigates, to no avail. Just as he is about to leave, something catches his eye: the horrific sight of a recently decapitated chicken, bleeding fresh. He staggers but has little time to recoil before the killer reveals himself - a spectre: dark suit, featureless white face, deep red bloodstain around the mouth. They both freeze as the lines between predator and prey are blurred. Both scarper - the boy terrified and stumbling, the spectre with the scuttle of a spider. End.
Essentially the act of writing up my dream was simple enough. Where some attention had to be given was in trying to visualise and make tangible the sequence of events, connecting one event to the other in as best way as possible; here I was able to draw my own lines of how surreal I wanted my narrative to be - I found myself satisfied with an intriguing chain of events, linked enough to provide a through-line of 'story', but knew there wasn't to be anything traditionally satisfying about the ending. In that much I resolved to allow the audience to conjure their own interpretation, ambiguity made interesting.
3-Act Emphasis: Obviously the nature of my story means that it doesn't follow a strictly traditional progression - this does not, however, make it useless to try and apply narrative theories to the effect of judging and maybe even altering the course of my story for added effect and quality; without, of course, detracting from the organic nature of my original dream, the purity of which is integral to the ambitions behind my project.
If we take the bedroom 'scene' to be the first act, it figures well that the second act should be the journey to the coop - the revelation of the chicken as the trigger to the final section - and the shock and confrontation as a climactic third act. Thesis - antithesis - synthesis (as an interpretation of the three-act method), similarly works up until the the third section of that analogy, wherein the purposeful lack of conclusion offsets the seeds of intrigue planted in the first, then cultivated in the second acts. I find these comparisons somewhat comforting, given that they seem to suggest the framework for a well-told story is in place - but I cannot stress enough that this is not the strict intention of what I'm trying to create; capitalising on a structure to create drama is one thing, just as long as it doesn't sacrifice the integrity of my nightmarish idea. The semblance to a three-act structure is neat, but more importantly it is true to the subconcious story of the orignal dream - to obsess over pacing the acts into strict thirds or anything further would be detractive and artificial.
Logline: A DISTURBED YOUNG ADULT FINDS HIMSELF INEXPLICABLY DRAWN TO THE DISTANT CRY OF A WAILING CHICKEN.
This seemed to offer enough intrigue and a taste of the surrealist aspect of my story; enough basic substance of plot to offset the lack of distinguishable ambition. At the very least it's distinctive enough in my view to make the reader think through it again, if only subconsciously.
Plot Synopsis: A young man begrudgingly wakes to the muffled sound of wailing chickens in distress. He resists at first, but when the noise becomes louder he cannot help but be drawn from his bed outside, to investigate the noise. He trawls through the garden, before confronting a chicken coop at the end of a lawn. He investigates, to no avail. Just as he is about to leave, something catches his eye: the horrific sight of a recently decapitated chicken, bleeding fresh. He staggers but has little time to recoil before the killer reveals himself - a spectre: dark suit, featureless white face, deep red bloodstain around the mouth. They both freeze as the lines between predator and prey are blurred. Both scarper - the boy terrified and stumbling, the spectre with the scuttle of a spider. End.
Essentially the act of writing up my dream was simple enough. Where some attention had to be given was in trying to visualise and make tangible the sequence of events, connecting one event to the other in as best way as possible; here I was able to draw my own lines of how surreal I wanted my narrative to be - I found myself satisfied with an intriguing chain of events, linked enough to provide a through-line of 'story', but knew there wasn't to be anything traditionally satisfying about the ending. In that much I resolved to allow the audience to conjure their own interpretation, ambiguity made interesting.
3-Act Emphasis: Obviously the nature of my story means that it doesn't follow a strictly traditional progression - this does not, however, make it useless to try and apply narrative theories to the effect of judging and maybe even altering the course of my story for added effect and quality; without, of course, detracting from the organic nature of my original dream, the purity of which is integral to the ambitions behind my project.
If we take the bedroom 'scene' to be the first act, it figures well that the second act should be the journey to the coop - the revelation of the chicken as the trigger to the final section - and the shock and confrontation as a climactic third act. Thesis - antithesis - synthesis (as an interpretation of the three-act method), similarly works up until the the third section of that analogy, wherein the purposeful lack of conclusion offsets the seeds of intrigue planted in the first, then cultivated in the second acts. I find these comparisons somewhat comforting, given that they seem to suggest the framework for a well-told story is in place - but I cannot stress enough that this is not the strict intention of what I'm trying to create; capitalising on a structure to create drama is one thing, just as long as it doesn't sacrifice the integrity of my nightmarish idea. The semblance to a three-act structure is neat, but more importantly it is true to the subconcious story of the orignal dream - to obsess over pacing the acts into strict thirds or anything further would be detractive and artificial.
Comments
Post a Comment