Lost in Translation - Breakdown

Hmm.
This was an interesting challenge put forth, that just highlighted what I've been starting to understand even more clearly. I've been looking at lots of movies and stories that were close to the type of story I had in my head - strong actions, hint of horror and fear, dramatic speeches and so on. But does this structure I've been talking about apply to other type of stories.

I really didn't know. My initial guess was yes, because the "3/4 act structure" is all about putting forward a story in a way that reinforces the main points its trying to tell. So, it theoretically should apply equally to romance or comedy or whatever.

So, here was the challenge. Lost in Translation. Not intimidating at all, no. <sigh>. This is a real favorite of mine, and I've watched it dozens of times. I love the feelings it evokes, especially as a person who has lived in a number of different countries where I didn't speak the native language, and have traveled to places where I couldn't even read street signs! So yes, trying to peek under the hood and tear this apart was a slightly frightening proposition.

Before we sat down to watch this film, I looked up a number of reviews, and my heart skipped another beat. They were full of terms like 'fragile', 'anti-hollywood' 'goes out of its way to avoid clichés'. I really thought that this would be very hard to analyse.

The first question is, of course, what the heck is this movie about? What is the core conflict that drives this movie. D and I sat and watched this movie all the way through, each of us trying to read the meaning behind the actions of the characters and cinematography. It was a weird feeling doing free-association while watching a movie, especially when we were both mentioning people and places that were very personal to both of us.

Then it hit us, pretty much at the end of the film, this is a film about a very specific emotion - the longing to be understood. - I'm sure there is a lovely word in gaelic or german or some foreign language that sums this up nicely, but it is a real emotion that I know a lot of people feel. The feeling that you cant communicate because no one understands the meaning behind your words, the search for someone, anyone, who can really understand who you are. Its not the same as being loved, but there is that same feeling of connection. So the internal conflict is this search for being understood, and the external conflict is, to me, the transience of the meeting, the ticking clock which tears them apart.

Knowing the core theme of the story, the theory dictates that there should be 3 major points at 1/4, 1/2, and 3/4 of the way through. For a movie of 100 minutes, I straight away clicked on some different points on the playback bad :)

1st Plot point - end of act 1 at about 25 minutes.

Here we expected something related to connection. Our two main characters should somehow make a connection that will drive the rest of the film, we should get a feeling for what is really at stake in the whole film. So, what do we see at the 25 minute mark? We are in the last moments of that cheesy lounge singer scene!
Voila - This is the scene where Bob and Charlotte first really meet. The make a connection over the shared feeling of "how cheesy is this singer" by just looking at each other through a crowded bar, when everyone else around them seems so disconnected and they feel lonely. Charlotte chooses to send over the drink, and we see the touching scene of Bob in the elevator, checking out his own smile.
This obviously sets up the question: will they be able to find happiness together? Unlike a romance or a comedy, coppola didn't try to make this scene cute, or special. It was just a momentary glimpse of having someone else understand, and then the pair go their separate ways, still not having shared a single word. But this changed the movie, from showing two lonely people in a foreign country, into one where these two people are trying to see how can they connect with each other.

Midpoint - middle of act two at about 50 minutes.

OK, so the first plot point was pretty much spot on, how does the midpoint go? I am expecting something game-changing - Its the karaoke scene with the songs by Bob and Charlotte full of very strong subtext!
Bingo - real game changer here. Here our two characters move away from talking and sharing anecdotes to actually talking about their relationship - through the lyrics of songs and lots of meaningful looks. Go back about 30 seconds to see Charlotte singing "I'm gonna make you see" by the Pretenders. Now if this isn't full of meaning, I don't know what is :) "I'm going to make you notice me,.. no one here like me... I'm special, I gotta have some of your attention". Then the response of Bob: "More than this, there is nothing" (More than this by Roxy Music) but sung with great regret. All ending with the iconic scene of Charlott and Bob in the corridor outside, tired, with Charlotte's head on his shoulder.
Here is question really changes, from "can anyone understand me?" to "Can something come from this?" Neither of the characters is directly confronting the question, but its clear that both of them, despite marriages and other commitments, are flirting with the fantasy of "can something happen here? Could this be the start of something?" Again, not necessarily romance, but now the cards are on the table, and some hard decisions need to be made soon.

2nd Plot point - end of act 2 at about 75 minutes.

So we've got our story setup. Two people, looking for a connection, someone to understand them. They have found each other, and now the question they are asking is "Can we somehow keep this situation going? Can this moment last? So I would expect something at this point that addresses this question in a big way. Well, the exact moment of 1:15:00 is Charlotte wondering through some old Japanese places, but the very next scene a minute later is the one I was hoping for. So still, pretty spot on!
Bob makes a decision! He purposely skips out on his work (the 2 million dollar spot he's being paid for) and runs away, calling the japanese show saying "I would love to change my plans and stay." All the while looking at a note he received from Charlotte. He decided he wants to stay and try to make something more of this nebulous relationship with Charlotte!


This was a great little exercise. It has convinced me, more than anything else so far, that a good story, a well told and moving story, will actually make use of this structure in a reasonably clear and straightforward manner. AS long as the story is crystal clear on the theme and conflict it is trying to portray, then this very old structure will really help.

Samurai Breakdown

So, Alexandra put up some more challenges to look at the movies we listed and break them down. She talks about the "3 act" and "8 sequences" that are most movies are made up of. So I spent a quite enjoyable (but tiring) few days watching lots of movies. North by Northwest, Aliens, Centurion, The Last Samurai, Wreck it Ralph, and you know what - she's right.

I spent a lot of time going through these movies, working out what the theme, plot, characters were. Watching for the sequence and act breaks, and the big setpieces. My wife even got to the point where she told me "If I wanted the director's commentary, I'd watch the special features...". I got a little obsessive I think :/

So which movies do I think are most similar to my story?
What's my story? Good question. But lets start with the one story that sings to me the most: The Last Samurai

The tagline I wrote for it was: "A veteran of the US civil war is hired to destroy the last samurai, but after he comes to embrace their culture he still needs to stop the modernized army that now seeks his death as well". But now I think that might be a little off.

Anyway Lets look at the "8 sequences" that so many people talk about…

Sequence 1: 

Status Quo and Kickoff Setpiece.

Here we see meet Captain Algren - the "All American Hero", who is drunk, depressed, and deeply cynical. 

The first setpiece is easy to spot - the Dinner/Job Offer. Algren is playing the rude, money-grubbing lout, and the Japanese are disgusted by it, but we learn what the movie is thematically about: The Emperor wants to modernize Japan, but is having trouble with rebels. "Civilization vs Savages".

Sequence 2/Act 1: 

No going back.

Algren in Japan, learning about the Samurai and Katsumoto, and training the Imperial Army to use guns. The clarifies the core theme - it’s the Modern Capitalists (civilization) vs the Honorable Traditionalists (savages)

This setpiece is pretty great. Terrifying war cries and horns echoing through the misty forest, the unready Imperial army breaking apart. Algren going hand to hand with the Samurai, and getting captured by Katsumoto. The kicker is the beheading/suicide of the Imperial General who refused to fight against Katsumoto as it was "dishonorable".

Sequence 3: 

Get over it.

Algren is a "civilized" man, and he needs to lose his habits before he can come to appreciate the Japanese ways. Alcohol withdrawal, rudeness, stubborn attitude.

The setpiece here is great, where he literally has to have the stubbornness beaten out of him by Ujio, a samurai who is offended at the outsider holding even a practice sword. We have the townsfolk, children and the "love interest" all watching on. He's left beaten senseless, lying in the mud, being rained on, and everyone turns away.

Sequence 4/Midpoint: 

Becoming one of them.

From his all time low, the only way is up, and now Algren is open to learn, and learn he does. We are given a couple of montages, and some great scenes of Algren learning to be Japanese, but they are unsure of him and treat him "like a stray dog".

But this is another obvious setpiece, when Katsumoto is attacked by ninja. Algren finally starts to show his true colors, and leaps to the defense of his caretakers, and even risks his life to save Katsumoto. The expressions are priceless as everyone involved realizes, Algren has changed sides.

Sequence 5: 

Up the stakes!

Katsumoto heads to Tokyo to meet with the Emperor, and Algren is brought along and released. But we see how much he really has changed - and how dangerous the Imperial army has become.

The setpiece is a lovely meeting with Omura (the Capitalist Bad Guy) who has a lovely meeting with Algren, offering to take him back on as the new military general of the Imperial Army. There is a second conversation going on, implied by their choice of words - Is Algren still one of them, or has he been seduced by Katsumoto? The final line of Omura to his sidekick clinches it "If he goes near Katsumoto, kill him!"

Sequence 6/Act 2: 

Commit.

There is lots of very obvious losses for the Samurai here. Laws passed against them, harassment, and Katsumot imprisoned. The Capitalists have won, and they just need to round up and kill the stragglers.

The setpiece is spectacular here, 3 scenes which build up the tension where Algren goes to rescue Katsumoto. The climax is 4 minutes of Samurai vs Soldiers where Algren leads the escape out of Tokyo, but Katsumoto's son needs to sacrifice himself to give time for the others to escape.

Sequence 7: 

More Tension!!

Here the Samurai retreat back to the town, and make preparations for battle. "Gotta have a montage", smiths making swords, soldiers arming up, etc. There is an undertone of sadness though with lots of "final farewell" images thrown in.

The setpiece here was a bit of a hard one to pick, as there are two really moving scenes one after another, but it’s the first one that really strikes me. We get to see a very symbolic act - the wife of the man he killed all the way back when he was captured, the woman who has cared for him and seen him change from the disgusting foreigner into a person worthy of respect - she brings Algren into the room where the red armor is standing - and tells him "If you wear it, you will honor us". This is shot in a very intimate way where the woman dresses Algren in layers of protection - almost composed like a sex scene.

Sequence 8/Act 3: 

Resolution.

Heck, this whole part is just one long battle scene (with a coda with the Emperor at the end). The battle is great, with a too and fro, and rising tension which seems to climax in the Samurai driving back the regiments and being left, victorious, over a field of dead bodies, but Algren points out - they will just bring up two more regiments. We can't win again."

Which leads to the quite moving setpiece. Katsumoto leads the surviving samurai in a suicidal charge against the Imperial Army and their howitzers and machine guns. Of course, the Samurai are cut down, but even though Katsumoto "looses" and commits seppuku on the field amidst his dead companions, he "wins" the battle for the soul of Japan, as the Imperial soldiers stop firing and everyone (except Omura) kneels down before Katsumoto. 

Review: Microscope RPG

...and now for something completely different!

Over the last year and a bit, I've joined a bunch of my mates for a weekly run of the roleplaying game "Exalted". It has been an epic tale of tragic mistakes, sacrifices, and hard won victories. But we finally reached a spot in the tale that prompted a break, and even though we felt invested in the characters, we decided that it was time for something different.

But that is the real question - how can we continue the magic? Well, we identified the things that allowed us to keep the game's story going for so long, and took a look at what other genres they would work in. Eventually coming to the conclusion that if we wanted something different, then lets go as far from Epic magical heroes in medieval land as we could… A science fiction story of people struggling to make a living. So we were looking at the "BSG" and "Firefly" end of the spectrum now. But here is another problem for a bunch of gaming geeks - not all of us have the same depth of knowledge about these stories, and creating our own might get problematic if we keep bumping our heads against 'canon'. So time to roll our own!

So enters the game of Microscope - a fractal game of epic histories. This seems tailor made to create our own setting. But to be honest I approached this with some measure of trepidation. While reading the rules spiked my interest, there seemed to be way to much scope for crazy shenanigans to make everything go off the rails and ruin the fun of everyone. And even worse, it was scaled for 2-4 players, and we would have 6-10 (depending on who showed up on the day).

Thankfully, Ben Robbins (author) has setup a great little Microscope community on G+ which was able to answer a whole lot of my questions, and give some suggestions for easing into a session for so many people. The biggest worry that others raised about my group was that the gameplay would slow to a glacial pace with so many interacting. So instead of the basic rules of "Scenes", we used the optional rules for "Dictated Scenes" and allowing the rules for "Push". Overall I think this kept play to a decent speed while keeping everyone interested!

The basics of the game are simple. We co-operatively setup some ground rules on what story's genre rules are, define a start and end point, and then start taking turns making history. Each round a player defines the focus - what is the common thread of all the history in that round. Then every player can add a Period, Event, or Scene. As long as the new thing doesn't contradict established fact, and fits the defined genre, no other player can say no. And these added things can happen at any spot on the timeline.

A bit scary, eh? No one has real creative control! But it worked amazingly well!

I think that one of the key reasons this worked so well was the initial co-operative fiddly bits. And they were fiddly! It took a long time for everyone to get their heads around what they were doing here, as it amounts to defining the "series bible" and theme/genre of the whole game. First up we had to define the "Big Picture". We were all remembering the wonderful movie from last week "Guardians of the Galaxy" and had been talking about Firefly, Farscape, Babylon 5, and other similar sci-fi series. We wanted the feel of a struggling crew flying around space. A sense of exploration and hidden dangers. To have this as an end point we needed something with a suitable scale. The initial scene from Firefly - the ships streaming away from "the earth that was" - inspired a lot of us, which led to us defining our big picture as:

Mankind flees from a dying earth to end up scattered among the stars.

We liked it. Then the game tells us to define our "palette", the elements that we want included or banned from our history. This took a little explaining, as it didn't mean those things were in the game, but was just a list of things that were different from expectation. This perhaps was the biggest time sink as we went around and each person proposed an addition to the list. Each addition needed to be discussed, weighed up, and agreed upon. With seven players sitting around the table this meant a lot of discussions. But while this is a time consuming endeavor that can be easily seen as "not playing the game", I noticed that as we moved further along there was less discussion as each addition seemed to make more and more sense. This list was only brought up a few times to reign in later Events and Scenes, but every time it proved its worth.

The final bit of setup was to define the start and end periods of the game. Our starting period was easy - The Dying Earth, a dark time for humanity. The end period was nearly as easy to come up with as we wanted the travelling widespread feeling common to many science fiction epics - Humanity scattered among the stars. These points serve the important task of focusing our imagination on what lies between. We were not thinking about how, exactly, the earth came to be dying, only that it was and that humanity had to leave. Similarly we were not too concerned about the eventual outcome, but were happy to know that humanity had ended up scattered among the stars.

Then the real magic began to take shape. The game is split into rounds. Each round a player picks a focus, creates a nested pair of things (Period, Event or Scene), then all the other players take turns adding one thing to the timeline, linked by the focus. Sounds pretty simple, and it is. There are only a few things to remember - Don’t contradict anything already established; Use only things allowed by the palette; Stick to the focus; No co-operation!

It’s the last one that pushes this game into awesome territory! When it isn't your turn to add, you can only ask questions or clarifications. You are unable to change what another player put into the timeline if it is valid. Since you cannot contradict anything that comes before or after, there is a strong push to keep your good ideas close to your chest before making the sudden reveal on your turn. It was hilarious to see the expressions on people's faces as they listened to an addition, and suddenly thought of a cool twist or addition that they would use on their own turn. So many times someone would exclaim "oh wow, we should now…" and then bite their tongue. As the turns built up and the story twisted and turned everyone got more and more excited and colorful in their descriptions.

On the Sunday we played, we were only stopped because we had forgotten a charger for the laptop being used to skype in our distant players. But everyone was so charged up that we set another session for the very next day after work.

Final Thoughts

This is less of a game, and more of a co-operative storytelling game. But because you can jump around to any point in the timeline, at any moment, makes the reasons 'why' change from moment to moment. No one person can drive the story in any particular way, but everyone is able to create or destroy story elements that change the course of the story.

This is a great way to spend some afternoons with friends who share a love of stories. You will come up with a tale to rival any movie or novel or tv show, and you will want to come back to it again and again.

Best $10 I've spent for a long time :)