I haven’t seen or read the Dr. Strangelove script since 2011, so I won’t challenge the plot points. The first thing that jumped out at me when I saw Yorke’s 3-D Roadmap of Change was how could this apply to tragedy or stories with a theme where humans are doomed to repeat their mistakes? Adding the moral and consequence cleared that up for me.
What I like about Yorke’s 3-D Roadmap of Change is that it helps to create character arcs and it can fit into other structures (Spiral structure, Wheel structure, Episodic structure with an arc, etc.) But it still seems formulaic and whereas it might work for many Hollywood movies, it might not work for all literature. However, I haven’t seriously tried to fit it into an epic novel. Have you?
I love thinking about structure, but the best piece of advice I ever read about structure was “use reveals and get 3 act structure out of your head.” Someone wrote a book about it, but I can’t remember who, nor could I find the book I was looking for. But what it came down to is that thinking about reveals (plot reveals, character-specific revelations, other characters discover previous plot reveals, etc.,) frees up the writer and results in plots that aren’t formulaic, but still intriguing. I’m curious to know your thoughts and if you can think of specific plot points as reveals with Dr. Strangelove?
Another thing I always look for is if the internal, external, and thematic questions all get answered in one scene during the climax. Do you think this happens during Total mastery? Major Kong manages to open the damaged doors and rides the bomb in this iconic scene. Or during the Consquence? “The Doomsday device goes off, followed by a multitude of nuclear explosions to the iconic WWII song “We’ll Meet Again” by Vera Lynn (1943)” does this.
And how important is it to have the internal, external, and thematic questions all answered in one scene during the climax?
Thanks, Nolan for the detailed response. One could argue that all stories follow the same pattern on an abstract level. A "formula" based on how we process information, and how language works. Prototype Semantics examines that, e.g. I say "bird" and give you 30 seconds to write down the first words that pop into your mind, some of these words will be the same wherever you come from, no matter your background, education or what language you speak.
John Yorke's 5 acts can be folded into 3 acts (or 7), which would still be a hero's journey, and you can apply that to any work. Structure is what helps you create the "poe-etic" effect as Poe wrote in his letters (he was referring to "The Purloined Letter") and he regarded structure as most important, far more so than plot.
The first reveal I would say is when Mandrake finds the radio, at this point the audience and Mandrake knows what's really going on. Then again, since it is satire, we know from the get-go. Still as a plot device, the radio is a reveal from Mandrake's POV.
Internal need / External want and fatal flaw can be looked at on various levels, the individual characters, or humanity as a whole, with the fatalistic perspective that even after all doomsday devices go off, we'll keep repeating the same mistakes, a warning, clad in satire. Thematically this is present throughout the movie and the climax and ending only reiterate and fortify the message, from bickering and hostility to cooperation and problem-solving and once solved back to the "old ways".
I haven’t seen or read the Dr. Strangelove script since 2011, so I won’t challenge the plot points. The first thing that jumped out at me when I saw Yorke’s 3-D Roadmap of Change was how could this apply to tragedy or stories with a theme where humans are doomed to repeat their mistakes? Adding the moral and consequence cleared that up for me.
What I like about Yorke’s 3-D Roadmap of Change is that it helps to create character arcs and it can fit into other structures (Spiral structure, Wheel structure, Episodic structure with an arc, etc.) But it still seems formulaic and whereas it might work for many Hollywood movies, it might not work for all literature. However, I haven’t seriously tried to fit it into an epic novel. Have you?
I love thinking about structure, but the best piece of advice I ever read about structure was “use reveals and get 3 act structure out of your head.” Someone wrote a book about it, but I can’t remember who, nor could I find the book I was looking for. But what it came down to is that thinking about reveals (plot reveals, character-specific revelations, other characters discover previous plot reveals, etc.,) frees up the writer and results in plots that aren’t formulaic, but still intriguing. I’m curious to know your thoughts and if you can think of specific plot points as reveals with Dr. Strangelove?
Another thing I always look for is if the internal, external, and thematic questions all get answered in one scene during the climax. Do you think this happens during Total mastery? Major Kong manages to open the damaged doors and rides the bomb in this iconic scene. Or during the Consquence? “The Doomsday device goes off, followed by a multitude of nuclear explosions to the iconic WWII song “We’ll Meet Again” by Vera Lynn (1943)” does this.
And how important is it to have the internal, external, and thematic questions all answered in one scene during the climax?
Thanks, Nolan for the detailed response. One could argue that all stories follow the same pattern on an abstract level. A "formula" based on how we process information, and how language works. Prototype Semantics examines that, e.g. I say "bird" and give you 30 seconds to write down the first words that pop into your mind, some of these words will be the same wherever you come from, no matter your background, education or what language you speak.
John Yorke's 5 acts can be folded into 3 acts (or 7), which would still be a hero's journey, and you can apply that to any work. Structure is what helps you create the "poe-etic" effect as Poe wrote in his letters (he was referring to "The Purloined Letter") and he regarded structure as most important, far more so than plot.
The first reveal I would say is when Mandrake finds the radio, at this point the audience and Mandrake knows what's really going on. Then again, since it is satire, we know from the get-go. Still as a plot device, the radio is a reveal from Mandrake's POV.
Internal need / External want and fatal flaw can be looked at on various levels, the individual characters, or humanity as a whole, with the fatalistic perspective that even after all doomsday devices go off, we'll keep repeating the same mistakes, a warning, clad in satire. Thematically this is present throughout the movie and the climax and ending only reiterate and fortify the message, from bickering and hostility to cooperation and problem-solving and once solved back to the "old ways".