Видео

After rewatching FMJ and comparing it to the script, I think looking for a designed mathematical structure in the film is wishful thinking and likely due to chance or assigning extra value to the whatever moment happens to line up with round numbers like 1/5 or 20%. From historical accounts, the film is a mix of following the book (The Short-Timers), collaborations with the cast & crew, and SK's selective taste. Even after meticulous planning, some of the script was written on the day, thrown out, condensed, or a result of the cast's improvisations based on their memory of the book. To me, based on SK's own words, the film is two stories, each with their own independent sequences (each ending with a fade) that built to an ironic climax that questions whether "Professionally trained killers are more or less effective than an untrained but truly motivated killer, even is she is a 12 year old eurasian angel barely 5 feet tall." The story's construction is less about the mathematical equations of conventional structure and more about the intuition of a genius feeling his way through production - adding just enough story information to support the story conclusion and make what follows interesting while being interesting in its own right. The fade outs don't line up with the proposed 10% or 20% (but actually fall at 15%, 24%, 26%, 30%, 36%, 40%) so it feels like it adheres more to its own organic internal logic than to anything standard. Joker is the focal character, but a witness, not a protagonist. Joker is an ally to Pyle in story 1 (who is the tragic protagonist to antagonist-mentor Hartman or maybe it's vice versa where Hartman is the tragic anti-protagonist and Pyle is the antagonist). Joker remains a witness character in story 2, which has no single story protagonist (perhaps it's the entire squad) which is why the second half lacks momentum. It feels like it is a long set-up until Cowboy gets shot, which is the inciting incident for the finale. Until the sniper, there really isn't an antagonist unless you count the faceless enemy or perhaps it is "killers without humanity" on either side. Joker's goal is more apparent in the script - it's to be a writer. He never wanted to be a killer. Loss of humanity due to war is definitely prominent as is constant evaluation of what it means to be a killer. John Wayne references suggest one pole, the “phony tough” marine (“Is it you, John Wayne, or is it me?”) and Mickey Mouse would be the other suggesting childlike innocence. And yes, Joker did mercy kill a girl at the end motivated by empathy and despite not wanting to, previously asking "How can you kill women and children?" In the script we can read his thoughts, "I try to decide what I would want if I were down, half dead, hurting bad, surrounded by my enemies. I look into her eyes, trying to find the answer. She sees me. She recognizes me - I am the one who will end her life. We share a bloody intimacy." Afterwards, SK wanted to change the scripted ended but didn't know what to replace it with. He got the idea from Modine, who thought Joker should commit suicide due to the horror of the images burnt in his memory after returning home. SK toned it down with the Mickey Mouse song (taken from a different part of the script) to suggest a loss of innocence, expressed in the irony of the hellscape they were walking through. Of note, the 2nd half of the film was filmed first, so they probably instinctually included little things in the 1st half that which would echo later in the film. SK has specifically said that his filmmaking focus is on making stand-alone sequences full of vivid moments, clearly illustrated photographic information, and non-sequiturs but less on overall plot or conventional structure. His filmmaking goal was to transcend structure. He stated in Kubrick by Kubrick that he sought mystery to force engagement on the audience by making them fill in the blanks. He didn't want to tell anyone what to think about why he did this or that - preferring to leave it up to interpretation. Legend! Still love your ideas though @equipmentforliving7253

Thank you, I didn't recall it even implying that Patroclus was the lover of Achilles.

I think there's a lot of misunderstanding about theme. Themes aren't moral lessons, they're more like measures. Spider-Man's simply stated theme seems like a moral lesson, until you begin to question if, instead of a rule to live by, it's a prison. Peter spends three movies bouncing back and forth from power/responsibility to powerlessness/freedom. The story reinforces the notion, and then questions it, before swinging back again. It never fully takes one side or the other. It doesn't even offer a balance. It's the swinging back and forth, embracing power and taking on the burdens, and then letting go of power and its weight, that makes up Peter Parker's life. Over the course of the films, he ends up powerless, yet with all the same burdens, and powerful without consequences. That's how to thoroughly explore the theme. It's not just proving some bit of moralizing true.

Some films have five acts, two acts, and in the case of Raiders of the Lost Ark, eight. But what's interesting is that all these movies still fit into the three-act structure as well. It's not a one-or-the-other situation. I think the three-act thing that Aristotle came up with is really just a way of understanding stories. It's not a set of instructions for how to make a story, it's a template for understanding how stories work. If something is missing from a story, chances are, the three act structure template can indicate what it is. I feel like people dismiss it because it doesn't do the job of writing a story for you. Treat it as instructions, and all it will give you is a collection of cliches. That's true of all these models, from Joseph Campbell's hero's journey to Dan Harmon's story circle. A bad writer can follow every step to the letter and still get garbage.

A lot of strange choices all around

And Agamemnon is a great warrior in his own right , within the top 3 warriors of the "greeks"(not called that in the Illiad) to the point Agamemnon, Achilles and one of the Ajax(or was it Odysseus?) draw lots to see who would fight hector. And in the Poem, Hector steals and wears the golden armor of Achilles after defeating the latters impersonator. And hector will go on wearing that armour when "fighting"/running from Achilles in absolute terror. Also in the Iliad it states that Ajax lifted a boulder that no man of Homers time could lift, which I took as implying he was retelling a far older tale but it's debatable. I also want to say Achilles was killed before the Trojan horse but I could be mistaken. Been years since I've read it, and I've only read it once. Many differences to be sure. *I was listening to the video as I typed this, forgive me if what I posted was said in the video lol*

Thanks for your opinion! Have a great day!

@@equipmentforliving7253 You're a phoney, sir!

RUclips looks at me funny when I choose titles that aren't grabby - I agree with you completely. In fact I'd say it's more classical in structure than anything.

Thanks, I appreciate it!

Thanks mate, I'm glad you enjoyed it!

Thank you, it's much appreciated :)

I like Aristotle's point about how you have to be careful not to make your story too long and not to jam in too many turning points.

Haha well it's not awful...

Thanks mate! I'm glad it helped :)

Much appreciated!

Thanks for the heads up! Haha I'd say it truly is a classic, although there's always room for minor improvement here and there :)

Nice! Definitely worth watching Troy if you haven't yet

@@equipmentforliving7253 oh I’ve watched it a million times already, wanted to read the Iliad to get a comparison & I found this video around the same time!

@@TheMMAwelder nice, I hope you enjoyed comparing them as much as I did!

Haha good question... I can't rule it out!!

Those are all very important beats for sure, but I don't think that tracks all the shifts in tone

Kubrick's films are strongly structured in fifths, and he had an analytical mind, so I'd be very surprised if he was not concerned with overall structure!

There's a lot to enjoy for sure! Awesome, thanks for letting us know. I found the fire festival music really entrancing. One of the film's many charms!

Thanks for the feedback - you're welcome, I'm glad you enjoyed it :)

It's more prevalent in the early drafts which were about a general trying to escort a princess to a safe location following the invasion of her planet. That basic idea is dropped from the first film but revived for the sequel which is about a hero (who will later become a general) escorting a princess to a safe location following the invasion of her planet.

Bingo

Thank you man, it means a lot :)

I made it myself for this channel - should I put the music up here as well?

@@equipmentforliving7253 Yeah pls upload the music bro! :)

Haha thank you! I wish I could have liked the movie more, but I'm happy that you did. Cheers again!

Thanks mate, much appreciated :) I'm afraid the channel is currently on hiatus, but there are ~20 past videos here for you to browse through, each breaking down a different movie. I hope you enjoy!

Haha thanks mate, good catch! I wish I could say it was intentional. Sometimes things just work out...

@@equipmentforliving7253 Perhaps your video is an instance of good story structure. How meta.