Save the Cat

[ShogunRua]

An enlightening article, thanks.

I do take issue with one statement, which has been mindlessly parroted in these articles by people who don't understand a damn thing about movie economics, and is a jumping-off point for further stupidity by the Slate author;

And if the villain of the past few years of movies is the adolescent male for whom it seems all big-Hollywood product is engineered,

Hollywood movies are not engineered for adolescent males. If they were, the picture would likely lose money. Instead, producers look for films that "hit all four quadrants" in industry speak, which means appealing to young women, young men, old men, and old women.

Look at the ratio of males to females for any blockbuster, and it's always very close to 50/50. Something like Titanic might be closer to 60% female, and Fast and Furious 6 might be closer to 60% male, but that's still a very close, equal balance.

It's convenient to blame formulaic, dumbed-down films on those pesky "adolescent males", when "adolescent females" have taste that is equally as shitty (Twilight? The majority of contemporary popular music, which is largely catered towards their tastes?), and older men and women flock to watch the same dreck as well.

[martryn]

Kinda depressing to read. I think I might find this book and finally type up that screenplay that's been bouncing around in my head for the last 14 years or so. Are there any examples of films that don't fit this formula? Django does. Moonrise Kingdom does. I just watched The Conjuring, and it does. Pacific Rim certainly does. This kinda sucks to think about.

[KGB]

The three-act structure has alwasy been meticulously detailed, it isn't a new thing. And Hollywood being an industry it's just logical that there would be a closely followed formula to work with. I don't think Snyder's book it's a game-changer, to me it just sounds like thinly veiled publicity (even though the author of the article criticize the book).
The one thing I wanna point out is that formula does not equal lazy filmmaking. Following a structure hardly limits the creative capacity of the people involved in a film, it's just the rules of the game. The three-act structure has been predominent in Hollywood and wordwide for the past 90 years or so and it has yeilded some of the most gripping films in history. I'm thinking of Coppola's 'The Conversation', which is an extremely formulaic film from a time when Hollywood 'auteurs' were slowly moving out of given formulas, and in my opinion is close to being a masterpiece.

[Ag0stoMesmer]

Thankfully, there are also script consultants at hand just in case anything interesting gets through.

[ShogunRua]

The three-act structure has alwasy been meticulously detailed, it isn't a new thing. And Hollywood being an industry it's just logical that there would be a closely followed formula to work with. I don't think Snyder's book it's a game-changer, to me it just sounds like thinly veiled publicity (even though the author of the article criticize the book).
The one thing I wanna point out is that formula does not equal lazy filmmaking. Following a structure hardly limits the creative capacity of the people involved in a film, it's just the rules of the game. The three-act structure has been predominent in Hollywood and wordwide for the past 90 years or so and it has yeilded some of the most gripping films in history. I'm thinking of Coppola's 'The Conversation', which is an extremely formulaic film from a time when Hollywood 'auteurs' were slowly moving out of given formulas, and in my opinion is close to being a masterpiece.

Have you actually read the article, specifically this link?

This isn't just a "three-act structure", as you put it. Instead, it's an incredibly detailed, formulaic structure within the three-act play that governs what should have happen during every minute of screen time, and in what very specific order.

To use an analogy, it's like you're arguing that films focusing on only the US isn't so bad, when the issue is actually that they're focusing on Boise, Idaho.

That is, the three-act structure is far broader, with more opportunity for creativity and experimentation, than its small subset, the Save the Cat structure.

[KGB]

What I'm saying is that the three-act structure, at least in Hollywood cinema, has already been meticulously pinned down for decades. I haven't seen that link, and I'm seeing some mild differences with the structure I was familiar with, but only very little ones. What this breakdown does is pinning down the moments where the action should move forward, and Hollywood offers many different tropes and situations to do so; the quality of the films doesn't depend so much on the recipe as on the guy mixing the ingredients.
Every now and then an author writes a book claiming to be the most definitive screenwriting manual, but all of these authors are really just changing a few words and writing upon a formula that has been known for decades (film writing books I believe began to thrive in the 70's). Just check any 50's western to see if it doesn't respond to Snyder's formula page by page, save very mild modifications.

[ShogunRua]

I haven't seen that link, and I'm seeing some mild differences with the structure I was familiar with, but only very little ones.

Really? Because three-act films from the 30s to the 90s don't follow the Save the Cat formula at all.

What this breakdown does is pinning down the moments where the action should move forward,

It does far more than that. It details the exact subplots, a specific type of hero's journey, even the type of twists, and in what order and proportion they should all come in. Look, if you enjoy this formulaic structure, that's fine. It's your taste. But be honest about what it is. Call a spade a spade.

Just check any 50's western to see if it doesn't respond to Snyder's formula page by page, save very mild modifications.

I'm no expert on 50's Westerns, having seen precisely zero of them. (I don't count two Looney Tunes shorts)

Neither are you, for that matter, having seen a grand total of 4 films.

I suppose that "50's Western" was just a lazy, random reference to an era and genre type you thought would follow that formula. But thinking of other action titles during the decade, I don't see much basis for your assumption.

Even a decent albeit unexceptional film like "Kansas City Confidential", while following a basic three-act structure, was very different from the Save the Cat formula.