The Rules of Attraction, bit players can do a lot

I'm going to get better about actually writing these blog entries. This one I had about half finished a month ago, and cleaned it up tonight so I could post it.

There are a great many reasons I love Avary's Rules of Attraction. I say Avary because for my purposes here I'm only talking about the film. The voice overs, the out of sequence opening, Sean and Lauren's split screen meeting in the hall, I could go on, but I'm here to talk about a valuable writing tool. The informative side character.

Basically we have three main characters, and so I'd like to point out three other characters that tell us, in a short time, a great deal about our leads.

First Rupert. When we meet Rupert we already know Sean ain't right in the head, but once we see Rupert we can grasp how bat shit Sean really is. He's an ex-military drug dealer who's coked out of his mind 24/7, which makes Rupert dangerous beyond anything else in the film. And what does Sean do in their first meeting? Boldly lies right to Rupert's face. There's a hint of fear in Sean, but that's him acting. He knows Rupert is crazy and Sean is willing to put his own neck on the chopping block to temp Rupert. Sean gets a kick out of it, which we see outright in their later encounter. So by showing us Rupert early on we get a lot of Sean's brazen craziness in the viewers mind without any direct exposition about him.

Lara is a much larger character than Rupert, but is still merely a tool to inform us about Lauren. She's an odd sorta mirror to Lauren, the name is even a shallower version of the more important character. Lauren is controlled, reasonable, intelligent; our first insights into Lara are that she got drunk and slept with the football team and that her understanding of percentages is less than stellar. Though she is great to look at Lara is distasteful, there's nothing to like about her. Lauren has her flaws, but she is genuine in most of her actions. Again in their early scenes together the writer doesn't really have to say much directly about Lauren. The simple juxtaposition to Lara tells us all we need to know and endears the audience to Lauren.

And last, but certainly not least is Richard (or Dick if you prefer). Dick shows up well after we're into Paul's story, but he tells us a lot about Paul that might have seemed odd. Paul is pretty reserved, but his friends are rather flamboyant. He pines for Sean even though he knows Sean is off kilter. And then Dick shows up and we see the prototype that Paul models his pursuits after. Dick is brash and outspoken and could care less what anyone else thinks. He's selfish and self destructive, and while Paul dislikes this he is very much under a spell. And the same draw fuels Paul's longing for Sean. From a writing standpoint that scene with Dick is like a plot key. It makes things fit together in a way we might not have seen before. Plus its an interesting character to throw in and then pull back out, to have a little fun.

You can just create characters to fill space, to give your main players someone to talk to, but you also need to use every last word to inform as best you can. Rupert and Dick are fun to play with, but they aren't window dressing, they're valuable tools that allow the audience to delve deeper into Sean and Paul. And from a 'putting in the work' standpoint these things may not be in a first draft. But when you're into that third draft, and your lead runs into her old high school flame, really squeeze every last ounce of value you can from that character.

Next time, two people talking.

Handmade Tools

Okay, this is my first screen writing post. I'm not Mr. August nor Mr. Myers, but I'm a writer all the same and process matters. I've never had a specific process when I sit down to start a script. I like to mix it up, as it were. Sometimes I'll outline like crazy, sometimes I'll create big dossiers on my characters and just start the script from there, other times I just fill up a notebook with fragmented ideas and then try to fit it together like a puzzle. But they all start from a core idea, and that's where this post comes from.
The core idea here started as a title, that's it. And a question was asked, what kind of movie would that title be attached to? The answer was a crime flick, or more pointedly a lighter crime flick. No Goodfellas, no Animal Kingdom here, but rather a Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. So then, change focus just a tad and Guy Ritchie comes into one's head. Now I don't want to make a Guy Ritchie knock off, I already did that seven years ago. It was a shitty script (occasionally I worry I'm a hack today, but god was I ever a hack back then). But here in my preliminary stages, while I'm building my little world in my head, perhaps something could be gained from dissecting the Ritchie/Vaughn crime film. And so I sat back, looked at them and came up with this.

Couple of notes real quick here.
I've left out Revolver. Personally I didn't think it was that bad, but it's a bit cerebral and no one has seen it, so there.
Second, these 'rules' are just me messing around. They work well for me as a tool to have in my head as I start working on my script. I may choose to use the idea of an Item (or McGuffin as Hitchcock would say), but disregard the rest.

Anyway, lets say these rules were premeditated by the filmmakers. We'll discuss them as if they were real. Sounds like a plan.
The McGuffin is always an important devise. And in these pictures it serves it's purpose, to get the ball rolling. In Snatch, Turkish has no knowledge of the diamond until everything has shaken out, but his ultimate fate is tied to it. That entire 'B' plot is known to everyone save Turkish, and he only winds up with the damn thing cause he couldn't stand the dog squeaking. It's a major theme in these movies, and in crime film in general, the lead's fate is always just beyond his control. Turkish is beholden to just about everyone he deals with. And he's playing catch up until everyone else's hand is played out. Provided he's likable, which the lead always is in these flicks, reaching for the brass ring ideally keeps the audience in their corner.
Speaking of likable characters there's always the Wild Card. Pitt's gypsy boxer is fun, but I'd rather talk about Johnny Quid. Johnny plays two roles, as far as my rules go, he's the Wild Card as well as the Missing Person. Plus the Item is in his possession for a good portion of the film. What Johnny does with himself and the painting has a lot of weight as far as what happens to a number of the other players, but that notion isn't apparent to him, nor does he care. The Wild Card, from a writing standpoint, holds the key to the climax. Johnny pulls Roman and Mickey into the Showdown, and while there tries to out his step-dad as the informant. That the Crew's storyline syncs up with Johnny's at that moment is how a climax is supposed to work. In Snatch the Wild Card was running his own game the whole time, unbeknown to everyone, but in the end it saves the Crew of Turkish and Tommy.

I could go on about each of the rules individually, but you see what I'm aiming at. But when looked at as a whole what do they provide us? The chart isn't an outline exactly, but it is a decent tool in developing an idea. Which is where it all started. So I'm writing a new script, it's a crime flick, with some comedic elements. Already I've put myself inside a sandbox, all I need is the right tools to build what I want. Now these are just four examples in that genre, and one could assume that if you looked at other offerings in this category of film you might be able to match those pictures to these rules. And so here is where I start my brainstorming.
I'll need a lead character, lets give him a crew of confederates, and build those characters up. Right there is a few pages of introductions, familiar banter, idiosyncrasies and we start their plot rolling. Now we need our bad guys, more introductions and them throwing a Deal at the crew and getting our plot up on its legs. It could involve an Item or not, we'll see. Where's the Wild Card come in, does he start out aligned with the Crew or against them? The Outsiders get thrown into the mix, maybe thats the first act turn. Plus you get more character introductions (lets not be crass and call it filler, we need to know who these folks are). Who goes missing, are they important to the Crew or the Big Bad? How does that gum up the Deal? Somebody makes a move that screws up one or all the other players, and we're making our way into the third act. Let's go ahead and resolve the Good Outsiders plot here in the middle of the third act, sorta a false showdown. But of course something didn't go according to plan and we careen toward the actual Showdown. And the Big Bad gets beat, the Crew escape with their skin, and the Wild Card comes out ahead. Yet we need that extra cap, the Fortuitous End, something to make it all worth it for our lead. Which is why we started the damn thing to begin with.

As a writer I love new tools, something I'm sure every craftsman enjoys. Being a writer though, I can make my own tools and it costs me nothing but time. These rules are simply a tool, and if they prove useful great. If not, well I'll put them into my tool box and perhaps they'll be handy in the future. The important thing I would stress here is that creating new tools goes hand in hand with developing new ideas. You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, is a great analogy to creating a story. Also you can't make an omelet without a whisk, or at least a very good omelet. And so I need to create the best whisk possible so that I can make one hell of an omelet.