Screenwriting: The Sequence Approach

The premise of this book is that big films are made up of little films called sequences, each lasting 8 to 15 minutes. Each sequence consists of three parts: setup/beginning/situation, development/rising action/complication, and partial resolution. Each partial resolution creates anticipation as it “opens up new issues, which in turn become the subject of subsequent sequences.”The book explores the following four tools used to build anticipation and or tension:- Telegraphing/Pointing/Advertising: Common examples are appointments and deadlines as well as preparations (ex: packing a suitcase). This also serves the important function of helping orient the audience as to where they are in the journey.- Dangling cause: Expressions of intent in which the effect is not felt until later. Common examples include warnings, treats, statements of hopes or fears, and predictions.- Dramatic irony: Occurs when the audience knows more than one (or more) of the characters and is waiting to see what happens when the truth is revealed. Can create suspense or comedy.- Dramatic tension: Occurs when neither the audience nor the characters know how a problem will be resolved.Other useful tips:- “Coincidences that hurt a protagonist tend to work in drama, and are viewed suspiciously if they help.”- “… it must seem as though what the movie is what happens despite what the characters want or expect.”- “Human nature being what it is, chances are the man will do the easiest thing first, and only if that fails will he try a more difficult course of action.” Often characters have no other choice, or a choice between the lesser of two evils.- Try to “smuggle” exposition (background information the audience needs to know) as a subtext of underlying action (arguments where people attack and defend, persuasion, seduction, reassurance) and NOT as an explanation- Create believability through foreshadowing (which the author refers to as the use of motifs that are later paid-off)- Audiences occasionally need “recapitulation scenes” to review important information they may have missed that sets up future action- Character arc = In the face of major challenge, the protagonist must give up her (known) want to obtain her (unknown) true need. Only then will she realize the fundamental truth that is the theme of the story.- Subplots have three main functions: (a) plot function – to help or hinder the protagonist, (b) thematic function – to show variations on the theme by presenting alternative ways of solving problems, and (c) structural function – to retard/delay the main plot and thereby intensify itA typical film has 8 sequences (2 in Act I, 4 in Act II, and 2 in Act III) serving the following function:I. Act Ia. Sequence A- Open with an exterior long shot or interior close up to orient the audience.- Hook the audience immediately by rousing curiosity with a puzzle- Give a sense of what the protagonist’s life would be like if the events that led to the story had not interfered. This includes the “rules of the world” so that the audience knows what is possible, what to hope for, and what to be afraid of.- End with an instability that forces the protagonist to respond to an inciting incidentb. Sequence B- Whatever solution the protagonist tries to solve the inciting incident from Sequence A should lead to an even bigger problem that frames the dramatic question that shapes the rest of the filmII. Act IIa. Sequence C- First attempt to solve the problem that arose at the end of Sequence B- Note that you can either (a) solve the problem but in the process create a new, bigger problem, or (b) make the old problem even worse- Here, the protagonist often switches from reluctant hero to driven hero (or vice-versa)b. Sequence D- Offer a glimpse of the actual resolution of the dramatic question or its mirror opposite. The protagonist may be able to choose freedom, but does not do so for an important reason.c. Sequence E- Opportunity to introduce new characters and/or subplotsd. Sequence F- Often a low point, but could also be a significant reframing of the main tensionIII. Act IIIa. Sequence G- Increasingly high stakes, often at a frenzied pace leading to an all hope is lost momentb. Sequence H- Final resolution often triggered by a major twist- All instability must be conclusively settled and all subplots must be closed. This is the “and they lived happily ever after” part. (Or, unhappily ever after).

It's been a little while since I went slightly crazy and started buying screenwriting books machine-gun style. I'm much calmer, thanks.The point is, I've done a bit of reading bout screenwriting. I started with Field and graduated to McKee. Branching out, I discovered some gems (like  Teach Yourself Screenwriting  and  Writing a Great Movie: Key Tools for Successful Screenwriting ) but most stuck close to the so-called paradigm of three acts. One, by the way, that I agree with although I may not stubbornly call it "three acts". According to Truby (who vehemently poo-poos the three acts structure), Aristotle--claimed as the father of the three acts--actually said nothing about three acts, only about a story having three parts: a beginning, a middle, and an end.The problem for a writer who sticks to the three acts like a limpet mine is one of approach. Looking at the long journey ahead (starting with that cold, empty page), attempting to jam a story into Field's page breaks, turning points, act breaks and so on is daunting enough. A simpler way could certainly help.Gulino returns to a now-forgotten method of writing a screenplay using sequences. Frank Daniel's teachings from the 1980s are the linchpin of this approach and even that goes back to the technical limitations of early (very early) screenwriting for early movies. Back then, every reel lasted 10-15 minutes after which they had to be replaced. This hard limit naturally forced writers to break their stories into 10-15 minute chunks, each one complete with a beginning, a middle, and an end.Of course, with time and technological advancements, this limitation disappeared but Frank Daniel realized that continuing to write in this way made a lot of sense. It enabled handling the story in manageable chunks. No more the long line of plot disappearing in the unseen distance, but writing a short 15-minute film that would fit within the longer film is less of a problem.I really like this idea. It makes sense and it's easy without being simplistic. Gulino has written this book based completely on this idea and it's a success. After the first chapter, which covers the history of the sequence approach, he expands on the approach by showing examples of how some good movies can be broken into sequences. He begins the discourse with analyzing one of my favorite movies, Toy Story.Supposedly, the movies he analyzes are arranged chronologically. He begins with Toy Story because he really, really likes the movie. I can't fault him on that one. He does go quite far back though and analyzes some obscure (at least to me) movies that I'm having a hard time finding on video. In reality, that slight negative isn't important. What's important is that he proves his point, over and again.The sequence approach is a valid one and while the casual reader would think Gulino is advocating a radical departure from the venerable three-act structure, he really isn't. In the first introductory chapter, Gulino asserts that sequences actually fit very nicely into the paradigm: 2 sequences in the first act, 4 in the second, and two in the third. Nice.In summary, this is a good book to have as a reference. Not every movie will fit nor can every story be written by slavish observation of the sequence approach. No matter, for most stories, writing is greatly aided by this method.Five well-earned stars.

So the guy sets out his store: that all movies are underpinned and structured by 8 fifteen minute sequences as per the olden days of projector reels and their changeovers – these changeovers structuring the narrative into sections: well timed breaks for the change of reels.But then he offers, as his first example, Toy Story. Which he breaks down into sequences of: 14 mins, 6 mins, 9 mins, 10 mins, 10 mins, 11 mins, 8 mins, 9 mins. I’m not sure maths is one of the guy’s strong points. His logic and argument structures are a bit incoherent too, as in : ‘the resolution of the main tension of a movie is what characterizes the end of the second act’ (p12) - an unusual proposition, most analyses I’ve read put the resolution of a movie in Act III, as Gulino himself then does on p18: ‘the eighth and final sequence almost invariably contains the resolution of a picture.’ Some elaboration is required here as to what resolutions he’s talking about, especially if he wants to challenge orthodoxy. I often get the vague feeling he’s contradicting himself and not quite got it sorted in his own mind. And so far as sequencing is concerned, by page 18 he’s already undermining the case he made in his opening pitch, page 3. So the book’s a bit frustrating and I’m wondering where his supervisor was. However…Although the analyses of movies Gulino undertakes never quite fit into the original cans he’s proposing for them, the book as a whole makes a strong case for understanding and writing movies in terms of sequences. He patiently breaks down the movies he examines into manageable chunks. His section by section synopses are useful. You can see the bricks of a movie being laid down. His sequencing is clear and fits. There are minor quibbles along the way – is it an ‘accident’ when Woody drives the radio controlled car at Buzz Lightyear and knocks him out the window? I viewed this as murderous intent, from which Woody never quite redeems himself! And why doesn’t Gulino mention how hokey the opening sequence of Air Force One is? But, overall, the repeatedly drilled example he gives of thinking of screenwriting in terms of sequences - each with their own minor drama; a beginning, a middle and an end for us to be carried through - is salutary. The bulk of the book is this analysis of chosen movies in sequential terms. Sure you can do this watching a movie broken into chapters on a DVD’s menu but Gulino helps elaborate the micro structure and objectives of those sequences both in themselves and as part of the rising action in the larger structure of the movie. Sequences are fundamental to movie writing and movie making but also to the spans of our attention in movie watching. Films are written, produced and watched in manageable sequences. The exact temporal length of these sequences is not really the issue.

Excellent breakdown of a crucial and lesser known screenwriting theory - breaking films down into approximately 8 to 10 sequences, built around dramatic unity or protagonist goal. This is much more manageable than the slightly unwieldy three act structure, providing many more points of reference.The theory is light - it's not a complex theory - and assumes the reader is familiar with screenwriting basics. But the real strength here are the many analytical breakdowns of famous and diverse feature films - from Toy Story, to Air Force One and Lawrence of Arabia - analysis from a wide range of work.Struggling with second acts, structure and plotting? This is a great help, well written.

Well written and mercifully short

Recommended for anyone writing a screenplay that doesn't happily fit the standard Hollywood/"Save the Cat" model. Gulino uses a number of complex films as examples, including: 'Being John Malkovich', 'Double Indemnity', 'Lawrence of Arabia' and 'Nights of Cabiria'.

I'm currently writing an essay for my MA in Screenwriting on the history and evolution of the Inciting Incident so this history of the evolution of the three and five act structure is absolutely essential reading. It's dense but never too academic. Check out the photo of Mr Gulino on the back. Dude...