There's nothing worse than when you climax too early (double entendre alert!) and your screenplay story fizzles. Or worse yet, to have no climax at all. In any case, the folks at Scriptapalooza sent me these words o' wisdom from Robert McKee, screenwriting maven:
"The Climax of your last act is your last great imaginative leap. Without it, you have no story.
Of all the turning points you will experience in your quest as a writer, one stands out on the road map toward true meaning: the Climax. Without your Climax, you have no story.
In Aristotle's words, an ending must be both "Inevitable and unexpected." Unexpected in the sense that as your Inciting Incident occurred, anything and everything as a writer seemed possible. Inevitable in that at Climax, as you look back through your journey, it should seem that the route you chose was the only path. It need not be full of noise and violence,
In storytelling, meaning produces emotion. Not money, not awards, not movie stars or lush photography.
This is your journey. You are writer and protagonist. You must both chart and ultimately walk your course. Choose one that has meaning.
What say you? Does your typical story climax have meaning?
As one Exec simply put it, "In Act One our hero goes up a tree. Act Two people throw rocks at them. Act Three they come down from the tree."
Another helpful tenet is to "gallop to the end," i.e. from about midpoint on the script needs to move quickly to the climax/resolution.
yep, Billy Wilder is credited with inventing the 3-act film structure for American movies. I wonder how pioneers - Ben Hecht, Wilder, Orsen Welles, Kurosawa, Chayefsky wrote their scripts? Did they invent pie charts, speak to Gurus? Nope. They just typed their scripts, learn from failure and kept on going.
When talking about action movies. That's a lot of "falling action'". In the "Mission Impossible"movies there always is rising action/tension/stakes up to the last five minutes. Other genres I'm not sure. For a romance I would rather talk about a 'satisfactory ending' than a 'climax'.
Also the bumping road Kay talks about is interesting. Paul Ruven wrote a book in whitch he explains that in many movies only at the 5th attempt the hero solves his problem/gets what he wants. Each plan is more daring/risky and the stakes get bigger. At the point erything seems lost, the hero's the last, most daring plan is put into action.
Kay: The picture was merely for window dressing and probably more applicable to novels. I just pulled it online because I like pics with my posts. It's not associated with the McKee quotes.
Billy Wilder credits Lubitsch as his guru. All those writers crafted stories a long time ago. Much different today.
1 person likes this
MaxXxy:
Or how did cavemen tell their stories around the campfire without understanding plot points or the mid-point finale? Thank God Homer figured out by the he crafted the ILIAD.
My resolution is only one page after the climax, then the script ends. I was actually back and forth between scrapping that and just ending right after the climax.
1 person likes this
Hmmm...I always tend to just have the climax jump out at me while writing. I'll plan a build up to the climax, but then while nearing it in the script it just speaks to me. I try to not only just give a big climax but make it something that's unexpected, that'll stick with the audience. Admittedly I shy away from rules and structure a bit and let my writing run wild, then refine.
Little blue pill
I start writing only when I now where the climax is and I'd have thought all climax has meaning. Imagine having no climax! isn't that the point?
Agree with your second sentence, Kay, but not the first (at least when it comes to spec scripts). Take Charlie Kaufman, for example: https://gointothestory.blcklst.com/how-they-write-a-script-charlie-kaufm...