Scan barcode
A review by davidr
Story: Style, Structure, Substance, and the Principles of Screenwriting by Robert McKee
5.0
I didn't read this book in order to be a good screenwriter. In fact, I have no ambition to write stories for film. Instead, as a film composer, I wanted to improve my understanding of how a story works. I wanted to learn about the arc of a good story, how scenes are constructed, and how characters work in a story. Most important, I wanted to learn how to distinguish a good story from a mediocre one, so that I could choose which films I would enjoy working on.
I was definitely not disappointed. This is a fantastic book about how good stories are written, how good films are made. I highly recommend this book for anyone who wants to understand how films work. There are three modern forms of storytelling; theater, film, and the novel. A story might work well with one of these forms, but probably not all three. Each of these forms has a different point of view, and tells a story in a different way. When we say "the book was better than the movie" (or vice versa), there is a good reason for that. It's not because the filmmaker is less talented than the novelist. It is because what works in a novel is much more difficult to communicate in a movie.
People argue which is more important, plot or character. Robert McKee claims that this is a silly question because they are both the same! But character is not the same as characterization. It makes no sense to say that a story is character-driven. That is because character IS the story. On the other hand, characterization is a necessary aspect what makes the plot believable.
I liked McKee's first commandment for all temporal art: "Thou shalt save the best for last." This makes sense; you want the audience to get up at the end of a story, enthused about what he/she has just experienced.
McKee talks a lot about character. A character must be empathetic. This means that a spectator must be able to feel the way a character feels. But this does not mean that a character should be sympathetic. For example, we should not need to feel sorry for a murderer.
McKee also writes about symbolism in a movie. Symbolism--even lots of it--can be present in a movie. But--and this is a biggie--symbolism should not be readily apparent; it should be subliminal.
What moves an audience? It is a reversal in values. It is a true change in character, especially a revelation.
Should a film have voice-over narration? The answer to this really surprised me. If a story is well-told without any narration--then it should have voice-over narration, as it serves as counterpoint.
The book has plenty of examples from well-known movies. Since the book was published in 1997, it does not include examples from very recent movies--but this doesn't matter, as he takes his examples from movies that movie-lovers should watch!
I was definitely not disappointed. This is a fantastic book about how good stories are written, how good films are made. I highly recommend this book for anyone who wants to understand how films work. There are three modern forms of storytelling; theater, film, and the novel. A story might work well with one of these forms, but probably not all three. Each of these forms has a different point of view, and tells a story in a different way. When we say "the book was better than the movie" (or vice versa), there is a good reason for that. It's not because the filmmaker is less talented than the novelist. It is because what works in a novel is much more difficult to communicate in a movie.
People argue which is more important, plot or character. Robert McKee claims that this is a silly question because they are both the same! But character is not the same as characterization. It makes no sense to say that a story is character-driven. That is because character IS the story. On the other hand, characterization is a necessary aspect what makes the plot believable.
I liked McKee's first commandment for all temporal art: "Thou shalt save the best for last." This makes sense; you want the audience to get up at the end of a story, enthused about what he/she has just experienced.
McKee talks a lot about character. A character must be empathetic. This means that a spectator must be able to feel the way a character feels. But this does not mean that a character should be sympathetic. For example, we should not need to feel sorry for a murderer.
McKee also writes about symbolism in a movie. Symbolism--even lots of it--can be present in a movie. But--and this is a biggie--symbolism should not be readily apparent; it should be subliminal.
What moves an audience? It is a reversal in values. It is a true change in character, especially a revelation.
Should a film have voice-over narration? The answer to this really surprised me. If a story is well-told without any narration--then it should have voice-over narration, as it serves as counterpoint.
The book has plenty of examples from well-known movies. Since the book was published in 1997, it does not include examples from very recent movies--but this doesn't matter, as he takes his examples from movies that movie-lovers should watch!