0
Usenet Posted 21 years ago
Screenwriting

Big bang opening or a bit of mystery?

I'd be interested in the general opinion on this:
A movie project which I might be getting involved with features a central character somewhat damaged by an horrific incident in his past. This incident, if shown, would be spectacular, bloody, fast-moving and exciting.

The movie could begin in one of two ways:
By showing the incident and its impact on Our Hero, then cutting forward to portray him as a semi-recovered but still somewhat broken man.

By starting in the present with Our Hero's state of mind and body unexplained, and allowing the reason to emerge later.

Option one has impact, and allows us to see Our Hero fully-functioning and being heroic before the axe falls; option two gives the central character a bit of initial mystery. In either case, the incidents of the movie (inevitably) help him to recover and get back to something like his old self. Given that the piece as a whole would be a sort of dark-mystery-character-exploration (someone else involved described it off-the-cuff as "a sort of Victorian-era Seven") which opening would you prefer to see? I know which I favour, and how I'll handle it if the project actually happens, but I'm happy to be swayed and I'd be grateful for any other views.
Thanks in advance,
Bert
www.bertcoules.co.uk
  

Top answer

[nq:1]The movie could begin in one of two ways: By showing the incident and its impact on Our Hero, then ... [/nq] Not a good survey, from what you say the former would be the choice but the second approach could be better overall if there is an actual opening that grabs the audience. -Sam

  • [nq:1]The movie could begin in one of two ways: By showing the incident and its impact on Our Hero, then ...
  • [/nq] Not a good survey, from what you say the former would be the choice but the second approach could be better overall if there is an actual opening that grabs the audience.
  • -Sam
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

41 Answers
0
[nq:1]The movie could begin in one of two ways: By showing the incident and its impact on Our Hero, then ... starting in the present with Our Hero's state of mind and body unexplained, and allowing the reason to emerge later.[/nq]
Not a good survey, from what you say the former would be the choice but the second approach could be better overall if there is an actual opening that grabs the audi
0
[nq:1]...but the second approach could be better overall if there is an actual opening that grabs the audience.[/nq]
You mean if the low-key opening was still intriguing and engaging? Yes, it
could be.
This raises a wider question: even in this day and age, when its initial exposure in the cinema is only a tiny part of a film's life, does a movie's
opening have to be as immediately
0
[nq:1]I'd be interested in the general opinion on this: A movie project which I might be getting involved with features ... happens, but I'm happy to be swayed and I'd be grateful for any other views. Thanks in advance, Bert www.bertcoules.co.uk[/nq]
Very tough call on an excellent question. I don't think there is *an* answer. I think I favour option two. "Here's a broken man. Why is he broken
0
[nq:2]...but the second approach could be better overall if there is an actual opening that grabs the audience.[/nq]
[nq:1]You mean if the low-key opening was still intriguing and engaging? Yes, it could be. This raises a wider question: ... a film's life, does a movie's opening have to be as immediately grabbing as a TV show's, do you think?[/nq]
No.
TV has to get them in the first 30
0
[nq:1]Very tough call on an excellent question.[/nq]
Why, thank you.
[nq:1]I think I favour option two. "Here's a broken man. Why is he broken?" is more interesting than "Wow, look at that steam engine crash..." and a linear progression from here.[/nq]
An excellent answer. Thanks again. It does seem to me that the slow unfolding of the hero's past is potentially more dramatic even than
0
[nq:1]TV has to get them in the first 30-60 seconds. Film can breathe for a while after the cork is removed.[/nq]
Nice analogy. But what about when the film gets shown on TV?

Bert
www.bertcoules.co.uk
0
[nq:2]TV has to get them in the first 30-60 seconds. Film can breathe for a while after the cork is removed.[/nq]
[nq:1]Nice analogy. But what about when the film gets shown on TV?[/nq]
Don't worry about it it will have already established its reputation (for good or for ill) and will be a known quantity.

"A talent for drama is not a talent for writing,
but is an ability to ar
0
Well there are* ways of having it both ways. Maybe you don't show the whole explosion in the opening credits, but you can show something apparently unrelated but riveting big tension, big grabby stuff, that is shrouded in mystery... and then your story starts with your broken man... and it's only an hour later that you connect the dots to the climax... Can't think of an example off the top of m
0
[nq:1]...it will have already established its reputation (for good or for ill) and will be a known quantity.[/nq]
Good point.
Bert
www.bertcoules.co.uk
0
MC,
Thanks for another good suggestion, though your comment,
[nq:1]...I've seen it many, many times...[/nq]
gave me a moment's pause. Ah, the endless struggle to be original...

Bert
www.bertcoules.co.uk

Related Questions