If A Writer Can't Answer THIS Question, They Don't Know What The Story Is About - Naomi Beaty

[@aldo]

I really like how Naomi talks and explains about screenwriting, I've already read her books and now I'm watching the interviews, hugs to her and the Film Courage crew.

[@filmcourage]

Cheers Aldo!

[@indiefilmandmusic]

I agree. I did a few consults with her and she is top notch. So knowledgable and incredibly helpful.

[@Zhohan-]

That's some of the best writing advice I've seen from this channel yet.

[@filmcourage]

Thanks for watching Zhohan!

[@danieljones3490]

This is storytelling 101. These Film Courage videos are so much more valuable: 1) kzbin.info/www/bejne/bpLTo4SOq7yFjrc This Is How 99% Of Screenwriters Write A Story - Jill Chamberlain 2) kzbin.info/www/bejne/r5qpYoutp5mgnNU This Is What Confuses Screenwriters The Most - Jill Chamberlain

[@waynesanders1406]

She very simply described the Eric Edson video. I watched that video with him, then went and watched another video of him teaching at UCLA, then I bought his book Story Structure. Probably the single greatest book I've read on screen writing which isn't saying much, but I know I landed on a book worth its weight in gold.

[@MuffinEnjoyer]

What I love in Back to the Future for example is that the question is will Marty get home. But when the answer gets answered there is room for more. Marty got back home but it's not his home.

[@scottlarock7924]

This got me writing tonight. Thank you.

[@filmcourage]

Go get ‘em Scott

[@FAKKER_rap]

I have no idea why "dramatic question" is asking a completely non dramatic themes. "Will Clarice catch maniac" its not a dramatic, it external goal. A logline basically. Dramatic question must ask an internal question what hero wants and what he needs or what methods he using imo

[@robertomartell4860]

We on the same page

[@thomasfairfax4956]

The meaning of the "dramatic question" is exactly that. The external goal. What the hero wants -- it's just turned into a question. It's what drives your entire story. Game of Thrones, for example, is about the external wants of each character and how those wants oppose one another. Ned Stark wants to find out who killed Jon Arryn and who tried to kill his son = Will Ned Stark find out who killed Jon Arryn and attempted to kill his son? Danny wants to take back the Iron Throne = Will Danny find a way to take back the Iron Throne? The simpler the dramatic question the better. It keeps the story focused. It keeps the characters focused. In mysteries the question is almost always the same: will the detective character find the killer? The same with romances: will the man/woman get together with the person they want? The hero's internal need isn't the dramatic question.

[@G360LIVE]

@@thomasfairfax4956 The only problem I see with your answer is this... Dramatic question: Will the detective find the killer? Audience: Why should I care? Do you see what I'm getting at here? There has to be something relatable to the audience. If not, then you're not hooking your audience. Your dramatic question isn't about focusing the story; it's about inspiring the writer (you) to dig deeper into what is driving the story and how the audience relates to it. So, the dramatic question has to be more than simply what generally happens in the story. What happens in the story serves the dramatic question, but it's not the dramatic question itself.

[@thomasfairfax4956]

@@G360LIVE Sure, I know what you're getting at, but I'm just saying that if you took a creative writing course or went to film school to learn screen writing, they will use the term "dramatic question" and that's what they literally mean: Will the detective find the killer? Will the spy get away or will the intelligence service catch him first (basic thriller set up)? Will Katnis survive the hunger games? Will Frodo be able to destroy the ring? And so on. Getting the audience to care is a separate issue from the dramatic question. And so is hooking the audience. And it's really important to have a simple, single sentence dramatic question. I was a first reader at a publishing house for several years, and 9 out of 10 manuscripts didn't have a clear external dramatic question that summed up the main conflict of the novel. These manuscripts get an instant rejection. The same goes for screenplays.

[@Ruylopez778]

I prefer this definition: OPEN ENDING - INCEPTION, the audience decides if the outcome was 'A' or 'B', but they know what 'A' and 'B' entail, and what that means for the character. They choose their preferred answer from a series of probable outcomes, even if more than two are possible. Was Cobb awake or still in a dream? Or even further, was Cobb in a dream for the whole story and the real target? AMBIGUOUS ENDING - 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, can intentionally be interpreted multiple different ways, without a clear suggestion of what happens next or why.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

In an IP I've made normally the central question is simple and even overt and that is "How will the heroes win?" It is never "Will the the heroes win?" as they almost always do but the base of the text is showing them going though the steps they need to win. Which I think is more entertaning then the heroes jorney and other things you've seen before even if you know the outcome.

[@phattjohnson]

Sounds great for a Saturday morning cartoon! But when the stakes aren't high (i.e. the heroes ALWAYS win), interest in the story wanes..

[@Alexindiegamedev]

I really like how Naomi talks and her advice is very helpful for my own story writing.

[@fujoshirants9609]

I feel like the central dramatic question for Forrest Gump has to do with his mother's wish for him to live a normal life. And at the end we realise that yes he did. So the question was answered satisfactorily. I also few like some slice of life movies have vague questions because we are so entertained by the shenanigans of the characters that we don't really think of which direction the story is going in, until we get to the end and realise that no question was asked by the audience. There is an Indian movie that kept coming to mind when I was listening to this lady. There is no real dramatic question because the antics of the characters are entertainment enough. We are fine with hitching a ride with them even if we don't where they, and consequently we are going. The movie is called Dil chahtha Hai, and when one of the actors, Akshay Khanna, was asked to explain the story, he found it difficult and eventually said it is a slice of life movie. I don't blame him for being confused by the wayward script. I would be too.

[@HarryVoyager]

I've seen that movie. I think the fundamental question of it is "what is mature love?" All of them, the guys and the girls, are essentially navigating that from various angles and starting points. And it takes them until the end of the movie for all of them to finally get there.

[@jordanhenshaw]

When writing a tragedy, the answer to the central dramatic question cannot be the end. Because tragedy portrays a character failing to change in order to get what they want, you MUST show someone else change as a result of the story in a later scene. And then you end the story as quickly as possible.

[@paulonius42]

In a tragedy, the central dramatic question is usually whether the hero will overcome their flaw. The answer to that question is the end of the story, whether the answer is positive or negative, though in tragedy it's usually negative.

[@jordanhenshaw]

@@paulonius42 Well the fact that it's a negative is exactly what makes a tragedy a tragedy... If the hero does overcome their flaw, then it's not much of a tragedy, is it?

[@jordanhenshaw]

Titanic is an interesting case. So it’s a tragedy because Jack dies, right? Jack can’t overcome his flaw that is his love for Rose. His love for Rose is the direct cause of his death. But then we have the ending where, as a direct result of the tragedy that is Jack’s story, Rose goes out and becomes a free woman unshackled from the burden of her class. At first it doesn’t seem like it fits the rule, but it does.

[@jozseflaszlo7445]

So, would it be safe to say that in any work of art, every character has their story and there can be multiple dramatic questions that get answered for each? And by categorizing stories one simply cannot narrow down a "genre" of a story unless they want to generalize for some reason, a reason which would be to answer a question about market types and not questions about the story's characters because it would spoil the art work itself at that point. Correct?

[@Ruylopez778]

I'd argue a story can do whatever it wants, as long as it works. As for Titanic, doesn't Jack sacrifice himself to save Rose? That's a selfless act that embodies compassion and romance. I don't think Jack loving Rose is 'his flaw', though I haven't seen that movie in a long time. I think a 'flaw' would be something within that character that hurts other people, not just themselves. So it could be Jack's own arrogance, greed, jealousy, entitlement etc that creates problems for Rose and other characters. If Titanic is about class struggle, Jack's 'flaw' is likely tied into that. As for Rose, it's purely fate they she happens to be on the Titanic, and we might conclude that Jack allows her to express a more rebellious side, but she inherently seems like a rebellious person. Isn't she intending to throw herself off the boat, anyway? I don't think Titanic is a good fit for your theory.

[@jonathangriffin8060]

I have written a screenplay that deals with a young boy with schizophrenia who sees a lot of death and faces an equal number of hardships throughout his life. The big question for the screenplay's story could be the age-old question: Why do bad things happen to good people?" In my opinion, leaving a movie ambiguous and ending the screenplay with the central character asking an essential question at the end should suggest that the viewers should look into their own lives. If it relates to the film they are watching, ask themselves the same question the main character asks.

[@johnstrawb3521]

@Jonathan Griffin I wouldn't, my friend. We've all asked ourselves that question, so I suggest you show us the singular opinion YOUR character has arrived at by the end of your film. Ambiguity is something we all lived with when we walked into the cinema to watch your screenplay come to life. You have to add something meaningful, something powerful to that ambiguity, and that will require a committed point of view (but not necessarily a definitive answer).

[@jonathangriffin8060]

@@johnstrawb3521 I forgot to mention that the screenplay has a twist at the end. The main character does learn something near the end, but at a high cost and he learns it a little too late.

[@uglystupidloser]

i feel like thats more like a theme or allegory. for instance, the pursuit of happiness COULD be asking that... but the more immediate question is "will he be able to get a job and provide a better life for his son?" the conflict and stakes are a little more tangible, and its easier to provide a resolution for the audience. but its really up to you. how you want to set the tone. what message you want to say. what moments you think should be visualized on the screen.

[@jonathangriffin8060]

@@uglystupidloser The main character in the screenplay is in conflict with a girl he had a crush on, and his love for her went unanswered and messed with his mental health even more after he witnessed so many forms of death before the current situation. So, he kidnaps the girl and forces the girl to be a witness to his own death, which he plans to commit at midnight and as time goes forward, they have a heated debate on who has it worse in life. During that, the girl's parents and the local police get involved as well as a hostage negotiator who all join forces to save the girl and the main characters from their dark fate. I don't want to give away too much, but there is a lot of conflict in the overall story in the screenplay, and all concerns the audience may have is answered in the report if it is filmed...but there is a twist ending, which is spoken by a news anchor's voiceover.

[@Lammy4ever7]

I'm amazed no one's bringing up the archetypal example: "...Rosebud..."

[@chilidogcats]

Silence of the Lambs? The CDQ is not "Will Clarise catch the killer"? It's, "Will a young female FBI trainee survive to become a real agent, in a male dominated world, when she's used as bait to catch a serial killer". This is what makes Silence of the Lambs unique and original. Go back and watch the film. You'll see Johnathan Demme brilliantly set up scene after scene using images of Clarise surrounded by bigger men. Men who hold power over her. What happens at the end of the film? She uses all her skills and training to catch the killer all by herself. Clarise graduates and is congratulated by Lecter who helped her survive and overcome her inner character flaws. He saw her potential to grow and change, so he helped her solve the crime. It's a remarkable, memorable character driven journey.

[@JGrittles]

Is anyone else's brain whispering "Star Wars" to you when listening to this? I know I know - beating a dead horse. I get it.... bu still!

[@murrynathan]

Chris Gore’s brain is!

[@shanicefelix5674]

What happens when the central dramatic question is answered? Naomi Beaty: ...Roll the end credits (A non exact quote lol)

[@RSProduxx]

Even if you don´t fully anwer it in your story, you should still know the answer is what I´d say Audience will probably "feel" it if you decide to let it open because you can´t find that answer yourself.

[@osw330904]

Love naomi

[@Felix-z2r]

Well explained

[@ryanwitt6861]

As a writer myself I have struggled with this in movies and television for, realistically, seven years now; how important are endings to stories? My personal opinion is that endings are vital because they unconsciously teach us nothing lasts forever. But if you look at a lot of tent pole movies and television today, it seems like writers and filmmakers are intentionally leaving out endings. Why do you think that is and is it important?

[@kilenmultop4445]

What's the central dramatic question for Mulholland Drive?

[@filmcourage]

Anyone?

[@uglystupidloser]

diane gets her lover murdered, and that is a point of no return, right? the audience is mostly watching diane dream after that, and the movie itself is resolved when she kills herself. so based off the broadest lens to view the movie, you COULD say that the central dramatic question is "how does diane deal with the action of assassinating her former lover?" and that central dramatic question is probably eclipsed by several other questions: can diane remake herself with a fresh start in hollywood? even when she encounters betrayal, exploitation, and corruption? which things in this movie are even supposed to be real? what is the dream reality even supposed to mean to diane? what are the visual cues that the director has chosen to give the audience? ... but it seems like mulholland drive is more like a pinball machine, where the story bounces off all these questions. the audience is supposed to get lost and disorientated in the maze that is the layers of the movie. the layers of dianes actual reality, the sleaziness of hollywood, dianes dream reality filled with her interpretation, the scavengers checklist of visual cues left by the director, and the audiences confusion. and, in the end, maybe diane isnt the protagonist. the audience is. the audience is not sure how to digest and interpret what they are seeing, so they try to make their own way through the hazy fog of mulholland drive. and it would make them feel like they are navigating the reality that is placed in front of them by the movie. so maybe the central dramatic question actually is: can you get out of the rat maze of corruption and guilt, when you are made to feel as lost as the main character, diane? but idk. ive never seen the movie.

[@BigOleMatty]

when the question is answered the is only over if it isn't called The Lord of the Rings The Return of the King because buckle up you still got 40 minutes my friends lmao!

[@wilpuriarts5895]

The movie kind of feels like it has many endings, but in the book the end is natural continuation. It’s a story of four hobbits and it ends when their journey ends.

[@YEDxFILMS]

This explains why the last 30 mins of the Batman felt pointless. It was entertaining and action packed but it felt flat because Riddler had already won by that point. It just kind of felt like Riddler spent so much time trying to expose things only to try and drown everyone lol

[@dope8878]

The last 30 minutes are the whole point. Batman is inspiring people the wrong way, he has to become a symbol of hope (saving the people from the electrified water and spending the night till dawn rescuing people) rather than a symbol of vengeance. It’s kind of the the entire thematic point of the movie wrapped up

[@Ruylopez778]

That would depend on what you think the dramatic question is. Going by the internal monologue of Batman - the dramatic question is something like him asking himself, 'After 2 years of this, is Gotham getting better or worse? Am I making a difference?' So the dramatic question is; Should Batman give up fighting crime? And judging by the number of characters who seem disillusioned, or the corrupt police dept calling Batman a vigilante, or Alfred questioning if Bruce should be doing more about his parents' legacy, that would seem to be what the movie is exploring. As Real says, 'People are afraid to stand up and do the right thing'. And the answer is, he shouldn't give up, but he should change his tactics.

[@uglystupidloser]

@@dope8878 i think the movie itself is kind of a mess. if there was a subplot of batman becoming a symbol of hope underneath defeating the riddler, its not set up in a way that provides tension or even personal stakes. so if a good amount of the audience is like YED and feels like the last 30 minutes dragged for them, then the director probably didnt set it up in a way that made the audience feel like that is an important issue to be resolved. it could be interesting if it was a climax of defeating the riddler, and then another climax of character growth where he redeems himself or something. but idk. if this WASNT batman, would you feel the same? or maybe feel as protective over a piece of media that you like? if this WASNT batman and had maybe more than a decade of emotional attachment to the character and idea of him, would you be sitting there as credits rolled going "yeah... it was ok." because, for me, i love batman, and the other superheroes... but i was shaking my head at the story of the entire movie. so maybe its me. maybe im the problem. but if i could rewrite that film... oh, boy. it would be a cleaver in my hand. not a scalpel.

[@dope8878]

@@uglystupidloser the entire movie Batman is asking himself whether he is enough and whether being vengeance is going to actually help Gotham or himself. By using vengeance, the riddler wins. That last 30 minutes is integral to resolving the opening monologue of the movie. I don’t really think you should separate this movie from the character or the history of Batman. It wasn’t made in a vacuum and doesn’t need to put into one. This movie survives off of the strengths of those that came before it just as every Batman comic survives off of the strength of Sherlock Holmes stories. It’s okay if it wasn’t your cup of tea

[@techjdu]

Which movies did she write?

[@Spoeism]

Why would you pick an example that you can barely remember?

[@gpgill]

First

[@paulonius42]

Wow, what an accomplishment, you must feel so proud.

[@RoverIAC]

Jai, I for one recognize your greatness and applaud you on this auspicious occasion.

[@gpgill]

@@RoverIAC 🙏🏼

[@gpgill]

@@paulonius42 🙏🏼

[@spacecatboy2962]

well that was nothingness

[@chandrahmmouleb9611]

My life is fuckn up ! Just save me please understand

[@sauerbratt3756]

lucky man who put that ring on her finger

[@emilymartin5418]

creep