Saving Mr Banks Analysis

analysis
#43

To me, it’s either in the upper right or lower left, but I’m leaning more toward the upper right based on the MC and IC throughlines:

MC – Progress: Pamela’s worsening financial situation. She’s had to fire her maid, she’s not writing any new books and the money is drying up. I like the issues in this quad too: Fact/Fantasy/Security/Threat feels very much like what she’s going through. This endless push-and-pull between the practicality that she thrives on as an adult, and the fantasy that she once experienced as a child; the threat of the money issues forcing her to possibly destroy the secure and insulated life she’s built for herself.

IC – Preconscious: Mostly held up by her father’s struggles with alcohol, as well as his completely impulsive and imaginative approach to the world (e.g. the scene in the bank where he dramatically – and drunkenly – mocks his boss, only to see his daughter watching). Again, the issues here resonate for me: Travers’ drunkenness worries seemingly everyone but especially his wife (MARGARET: –darling, it’s just that um-- a little concerned–), yet he masquerades confidence that things will work out (TRAVERS: I can endure. I will endure. For the girl’s sake). And while nobody values the power of imagination in this world (hence why he gets fired from the bank for his very imaginative outburst of frustration), Travers (and Walt) see it as a worthwhile way to live (WALT: Life is a harsh sentence to lay down for yourself.)

The issues under the OS concern of Being work pretty well too – The constantly conflicting desires for what the movie should be and Pam’s ability to veto things (as well as the writers’ inability to stop her) creates all manner of issues. There’s also the negative way everyone thinks about her, and it’s ultimately Walt’s knowledge of her father that leads him to get the rights. I think Desire and Ability are far stronger in this quad, but I’m not sure how I’d define the goal of Being. I’d have to think about it.

The RS of Doing is a bit of a weak point. I can see P.L. and Ralph bonding over the driving, and the grass stuff; and you have a little of Walt with the carousel, etc. P.L.'s gradual enlightenment into who Ralph truly is, and his daughter’s condition, brings them together until she literally gives him that list of people who have the same thing – a moment of wisdom intended to assure him that his daughter can do great things. I don’t know where skill would come into play, and you could maybe argue that the entire journey is an experiential one, but it feels a stretch.

1 Like
#44

Cuddling the bear isn’t a change of a approach in the same way a Dramatica Changed character would change. In one scene she is sitting Mickey in a corner and berating him about subtlety. In another scene, she is turning to Mickey for comfort-something I don’t get the idea that she would typically do without some form of outside influence. That’s all I’m suggesting when I say that that scene shows Walt’s influence on her.

In an attempt to try to put my finger on it, I might say that Walt wants to make a film without the stipulation of ‘no red’, but Mrs. Travers doesn’t back down and Walt relents. Seeing Walt budget on what he wants, perhaps we see her budging on her own ideas by turning to Mickey for comfort when she normally wouldn’t. That’s all the influence i’m looking at there.

Now, when you speak of her father saying that money is an illusion, I think you’re saying that that memory influences Mrs Travers to also say that money is an illusion. I’m not trying to argue or be difficult here, merely explaining how I see that scene in a different way. And what I see isn’t a memory influencing her to try something different, but a scene-chronologically out of place-showing us why she is about to claim that money is an illusion and showing us that she had already bought into that long before the current problem.

From that view, Im suggesting that when Mrs Travers firmly suggests that money is an illusion, it’s because in the imbalance between Universe and Mind, she has decided that Mind (her attitude that Mary Poppins is not for sale) is not the problem and doesn’t need to be changed, meaning that Universe is where she places all the blame for her conflict. Because of how she feels about her father, she has justified the view that her Situation is the problem. Money, being an illusion, won’t be able to fix the Universe, so there’s no reason to sale the rights for money.

It might be better to leave the following part off, but I’m speculating that the reason Walt doesn’t seem to have much or any influence on Mrs Travers until that last scene is because Walt spends the first three acts trying to achieve something that will get rid of a problem but fails, making zero progress each time. Only in that fourth act is he able to achieve the thing that will bring the story to an end.

1 Like
#45

So, I know I’m coming late to the party, but I only saw the movie recently. However, after scanning through the Domain selections, I have exactly one question:

If I saw your choices correctly, you’ve made this a Start story.
From the very first scene, I could see nothing but a Stop story.

She needs to stop rejecting every idea thrown her away, stop pushing people away, stop blaming herself, etc. She absolutely had a chip on her shoulder, which is why she was always argumentative.

Like I said, though, I only scanned the thread. If the Domains are creating a Start story, then that should be explained. As, I don’t see how such an arrangement could make sense.

All that being said, with the Stop story, this is the layout that I see:

Objective Story: Psychology
I like the Dysfunction Family motif for the OS. I think you guys covered this extremely well in the posts, now that I’ve gotten a chance to read them. In addition, it carries through both past and present.

Relationship Story: Physics
For the RS, it makes more sense for that to be the relationship between Ginty and Travers in the past, which is finally resolved in the present. (Complemented by the one with Ralph, of course.) Altogether, I think you have it right, though, that it was the activities that brought them closer together, and at times, started to break them apart. Her father drinking, for example, his tantrum at the bank, his encouraging the imagination and joining in with her.

Main Character: Mind
For this to be a Stop story, then, I would have to say that Mrs. Travers angst and personal problems are driven from her Mind. (Litmus Test: If we give her new stuff or resolve her money problems, she’d still have her angst; however, once she signs the papers and lets go, her angst is removed. It’s that letting go that matters for her.) The most telling scene for me was when she threw the pears out the window. That was a clear indication that her problem was something deeper than money, deeper than her current situation.

Influence Character: Universe
This leaves the Influence character throughline as Universe: Disney – His Universe that he has created pushes and presses heavily on Mrs. Travers and forces her to face her demons. He doesn’t even have to try. Being who he is, and having established what he has established is enough. Actually, he even leans into this in the “you and I” moment at the end when he is relating his personal story to her, explaining that his situation isn’t or wasn’t so different from hers.

2 Likes
#46

I think you’re totally right, @Hunter. Funnily enough, I was originally thinking of Pam’s throughline being in Mind (especially since I agree with this story feeling much more like a Stop one than a Start one), but I had convinced myself otherwise (e.g. thinking that Traver’s alcoholism illustrates an IC Domain of Mind rather than the activities resulting from his alcoholism illustrating the RS Domain of Physics). That Litmus Test really helped clarify it for me, not to mention I can’t think of any illustrations that would support a Growth of Start.

And this makes so much sense!

Thanks for sharing, Hunter. What do you think of this arrangement, @Greg and @jhay?

#47

I’m gonna try and figure out how I feel about it as I go.

First off, I could make an argument for her as a start character – which would be in line with what I’ve argued before: she needs to start embracing the childlike imagination she lost. However, that could be phrased another way: she needs to stop being so ‘pragmatic’ about absolutely everything. Illustrating growth is a nightmare.

That said, I also felt she was a stop character from the moment I saw the movie. She’s got a massive chip on her shoulder that she takes out on the world and everyone that encounters her. It’s just that she also feels like she has this weird hole in her heart as a result of her early life. The flashback structure makes it feel kind of like both are valid, which is why I initially believed there were two storyforms. I definitely think the Stop is stronger, however.

I wasn’t totally sold on the ‘Travers’ perspective is her financial difficulties’ idea, but I did come around to that – even if I felt it was undeveloped. But it definitely felt to me that there were endless scenes where the conflict was stemming from her attitudes – the baby on the plane; her attitude to Los Angeles (‘it smells like chlorine’); her insistence on the tea being poured properly**. Despite me arguing whole-heartedly for the Influence in Mind, I will concede defeat on this because she feels FAR more like a Mind character – I just couldn’t find an actual example of her ‘Be-ing’.

@Hunter’s argument on Disney as IC feels more cohesive, but I still just don’t see Walt’s influence as being particularly strong outside of that one scene toward the end. He is definitely an IC (and the one to make her take the leap), but I still think he just picks up that status from her father (with whom there is also a ‘you and I’ moment or two) to bring some resolution to the story.

Despite my arguing to the contrary (and the past few days of debate with @Greg), I agree with this arrangement…

**This is not a story issue, but I have an obligation to point this out on behalf of all/most British people (I will be happy to consider this my P.L. Travers moment): Travers’ insistence that the milk should be poured in before the tea is flat-out wrong. The milk goes in last. I know it’s specifically there to show how she likes things a certain way, but still… :unamused:

1 Like
#48

Hopefully, this helps with that: It’s not Walt himself that is the real IC, though he’s certainly there. Since the IC is actually a perspective, I view it in this movie as what’s been attributed to him, to the “world of Disney” so-to-speak. The stuffed animals in her room, her perceptions of the company, the park, etc… He happens to be the vessel for where that perception is placed, but it’s all sourced from how that Universe of his looks.

In fact, I’d bother to say that it’s the living in (better yet, trying to build) an imaginary world that influences her, which is why I am also willing to admit that, in addition to Disney’s influence, there is some influence from her dad.

I had trouble with this one at first, too, but thinking on it, she seems to represent the quintessential idea of Be-er. I think the Dramatica Comic Book description works best for this movie: Affect oneself to affect the world. I would also argue that Mrs. Travers takes a much more emotional approach, rather than physical, to resolve problems, by default, anyway. (Especially in regard to how she takes on an air of the impossible-to-work-with author in order to get what she wants from the studio, and her appeals to parenthood, etc.)

By the way, I actually feel like there is a sub-story in here somewhere, as well…

2 Likes
#49

I’ve been stuck in a loop on this one now where I could go either way. I’d have to maybe see another level or two deeper to make a decision. Although I am probably leaning more this way. I like some of the Ginty stuff for RS, but not sure I’d want to put it all in there. I still feel like Walt is the main IC, even if he shares some of that role with Papa Travers.

When looking at the plot, I’d think that everyone was dealing with Conceiving. It’s broader than this, but I’ll narrow it down to something like Walt needing to Conceive that Mary Poppins isn’t there to save the children.

Mrs T needs money (it seems to be set up this way, but maybe that’s actually the conflict for her mind problem?) or Mrs T is considering selling the movie rights.

Walt is asking Mrs T to consider selling the rights, or Walt is…presently…present? I don’t know. Maybe it’s that Mrs T is presently in Ca because of him?

Ginty and Travers-not real sure here. Ralph and Mrs T. grow over gathering information about each other.

1 Like
#50

@Greg, I like the idea of focusing on the plot for this movie. So, I’m going to present what I saw the plot as, and then try to arrange it. (To be honest, I’m still kind of iffy with my Domain arrangement, but I can’t help but think it is a Stop story, still…)

  • OS: Figuring out who and what Mary Poppins truly represents.
  • MC: Dealing with the tragedy of a lost father.
  • RS: Appreciating and sharing in one’s struggles. (Ralph’s case, and some of the Dad)
  • IC: Living in a fantasy world or world of imagination.

This layout is tricky. There are two things I could see from it.

  1. OS: Conceiving, MC The Conscious, RS: Learning, IC: The Present
  2. OS: Understanding, MC The Past, RS: Conceptualizing, IC: Memory

In Case #1, Disney would be the main IC, and the Objective story would be about the problem of generating ideas for the Mary Poppins movie. Here, I would have trouble arguing for the other three throughlines, though.

In Case #2, the dad would be the main IC, and the Objective story would be more sourced from the misunderstandings of who and what Mary Poppins is meant to be and represent. The MC would be dealing with the tortuous history of her father’s passing and coming to terms with the fact that it cannot be undone. The Relationship would be shared between Ralph and the dad, in that the growth and disbursement would be in reveling in their illusions or disillusionment of reality, in other words, their imagination and childlike wonder. Finally, the influence would come from the memories of Mrs. Travers’s childhood, and especially what she shared with her dad.**

**I don’t fully like this explanation of the IC, as it doesn’t seem very Dramatica to me. The good news is that it would still allow the You and I scene with Walt to make sense, as it would be the recollection part of the scene that would matter.

In other words, I think I’ve come around to the following:

  • OS in Physics through Understanding
  • MC in Universe through The Past
  • RS in Psychology through Conceptualizing
  • IC in Mind through Memory

It’s not what I was arguing for previously, but it seems to make sense at the Plot level.

However, after all of this, I’m convinced that the IC perspective is virtually non-existent, which is why this story feels like it could be Start or Stop, and why it is so easy to place Mrs. Travers in either Universe or Mind. In fact, I can’t think of any strong conflict emanating from some influence overarching through the story. Though, there could be hand-offs that I’m missing.

If we are searching for Author’s intent, though, considering the title of the movie (Saving Mr. Banks), and the recordings at the end during the credits, I would venture to say that the layout here is probably the most likely story meant to have been told.

2 Likes
#51

That makes more sense to me.

I hadn’t even considered that the goal would be one of those Coco-esque ‘the goal is something they have to realise, not pursue’ type stories. That makes complete sense to me.

The difficulty I have is that I don’t really see the issues beneath top left/bottom right in this story.

That’s definitely a complaint I have, too. I think I mentioned somewhere early in the thread that it doesn’t feel like there’s really anything for the IC to do in the story – there’s no real conflict challenging her, the influence is very gentle to the point of non-existent so it doesn’t feel entirely coherent.

1 Like
#52

You can thank @Greg for that. Having to think upon what the “result” of the story was and what the plot was made it more interesting to try and figure something out about it.

In terms of general feel, I don’t actually like the upper-left, either. The main story doesn’t have that same weighty feel that others with that arrangement have. (Although, I could argue the threads through the memories do.) That arrangement came through plot alone. In terms of theme, though, even if blasé, the lower-left, seems most likely to me.

Though, I’m interested to hear what you and @Greg, and anyone else might have to say in the matter.

1 Like
#53

I think it’s been long enough that a lot of my thoughts on the subject are now overthought, but here are some of them.

Regarding Walt as the IC: Walt and Mrs Travers both own the rights to a fictional character they think of as family. Both have had success with their character. One’s money has dried up because she has quit writing books. The other one continues to have such great success by continuing to build his empire that the other thinks adding bricks to his empire is all he cares about. I don’t think I’m adding too much to story that wasn’t there, and that looks like a strong MC and IC perspective to me.

Forgive me for the following paragraph as I talk my way through some thoughts on perspective now. So, Even if Walt doesn’t feel like he has a strong influence on Mrs T, that doesn’t necessarily mean the IC perspective is weak. Since these are perspectives and not characters, they don’t have to influence one another directly. They need only create an influence within the Storymind. We don’t have to see Mrs Travers directly influenced by Walt. The Storyminds personal perspective (this is NOT Mrs Travers but only a process that Mrs Travers represents as an analogy) process for solving the problem is what needs to be influenced by Walt’s role as IC. It can help to not even think of Mrs Travers as having a role in Walt’s IC throughline. Instead just think of it as Walt has conflict because of what brain function #1 thinks of him.

With that in mind, I think we can see that Walt can still act as a proper IC, even whenTravers isn’t there. For instance. I think Walt tells another character- not Travers- that the mouse is family. That still counts as influence because it allows the Storymind to see that side of Walt even though Travers didn’t.

So only when one of the two perspectives described above sees that the other knows what it’s like, knows that these characters are family, is one of those perspectives able to change to the others approach.

That said, one perspective looks to me like if Travers weren’t losing her house, she wouldn’t have to travel to CA to deal with Disney.

The other perspective looks like if Travers didn’t think Walt were just interested in building his kingdom, he’d be able to secure the rights to make a wonderful movie.

I think the first one looks like Universe, the second like Mind. So I’ve gone back to the original lineup we had. And I feel like there is a change, but I can’t find an element that I’m completely happy with yet. I’d say most of the story looks like it would have to do with Travers rejecting and eventually accepting Walt’s offer.

2 Likes
#54

@Greg, I actually agree with most of that post.

In fact, you’ve managed to describe the exact thought process I went through to arrive at the idea that it is the world of Disney, not necessarily Walt himself, that is the actual influence in the story. It’s also the reason that I like the lower-right corner so much for this story.

  • OS Conceiving - Coming up with appropriate ideas about and for the Mary Poppins movie.
  • MC The Conscious - Painful thoughts brought to consciousness are the source of her actions
  • IC The Present - Walt and those around him focus in and bring about the idea of living in current times. (The dad does this as well, partly)
  • RS Learning - Learning the truth about someone strengthens the budding friendship and tests the father/daughter relationship

I really would like to find a Storyform for this movie, as it was one of the more powerful movies I’ve seen lately.

I feel like there is as well, but the question is wherein lies that change?

I’d argue that Mrs. Travers holds the Changed perspective, and I’d even argue that it is because she stops caring about what others will think about her character and how it may or may not be ruined, and instead switches to effectively living a day-to-day life.

That’s actually even the message that I got from the movie, in completely pedestrian (non-Dramatica) terms:
Live life and be practical, yes, but don’t let yourself be bogged down too much by either practicality or life.

2 Likes
#55

Even with my last post, I still don’t think the IC Perspective is strong enough to pinpoint a Domain selection.

Now, I could be wrong, and I would be happy for you to prove me so. However, because of this feeling, I’m going to bow out of the analysis, especially since I just managed to convince myself that I could argue for a Start story as well.

If you’re interested in what that would be, I’d be putting OS in Physics (Learning) and RS in Psychology (Conceiving).

Thus, for this movie, I’ll leave it up to you guys to decide. Personally, I still feel like there isn’t enough, even though the movie is so powerful. I suspect it feels powerful because it has a strong RS and a strong MC, but both could go in many places.

#56

I agree. I can’t really pin it down to any specific area, it all just feels too… loose. Almost everything feels like an either/or – nothing feels totally coherent.

It’s not holding together as I’d like it to, so I’m starting to think it doesn’t have a complete storyform.

#57

Where are you at, @RailwayAdventurer? What are you thinking?

#58

I’m still willing to argue for a story form on this one. I’ve decided on a set of story engine settings I like, but don’t love. We can keep talking through storypoints one at a time, @RailwayAdventurer, or I can toss all the settings out there at once to discuss.

In the meantime, I’m going to talk through growth and problem solving style and see if I can make any sense of them.

With the arrangement I’ve offered we get a start story, but some of you have mentioned that it feels like a stop story and a chip on the shoulder story. It does seem like Pamela has a chip on her shoulder with the way she deals with others. But when you get down to it, I’m not sure she does. It’s not like she’s going after others to provoke them or prove anything. She’s just trying to be extremely practical to the point that it sometimes appears to be a chip on her shoulder. What I feel with much more strength from this character is that hole in her heart caused by the behavior of and loss of her father, a hole in her heart for family and promises and someone to understand. I can’t back that up other than to say look at all the flashbacks and how they cause her to act in the present. I’m not sure what else to take from that except that she has a hole in her heart.

Another thing that makes it difficult to argue against a stop growth is that right before Pamela signs the rights away, she says ‘enough!’. This seems to say that at least she thinks she’s stopping something. But what has she stopped? She spends the rest of the act just as difficult and practical as ever. But then, what has she started? Best I can come up with, and I wish there had been a line or something I could point to, is that the whole movie she has been refusing to work with others, to give them a chance, to allow them any wiggle room from what she thinks the movie should be. But by saying ‘enough’ and signing the rights, she starts agreeing to let them do the things she didn’t want them to do—-like animate the penguins.

And then for PSS, I’m going to say Linear. She’s very territorial with Mary Poppins-a linear trait. Walt is more about the casual environment with first names and such. When Pamela isn’t invited to the premier, I don’t see her balancing that. Or not for long. Instead, she hops a plan and goes back to Disney’s office and makes him feel as if he must invite her. Strikes me as linear.

When she tells Ralph she’s prefer to be responstible for the rain, she’s essentially telling him they are nothing alike. I believe this is typically the view of the Linear character as Linear problem solvers divide to see the differences whereas Holistics pull together to look for similarities.

And then she looks at things spatially-the way the house looks, the mustaches, etc-and seems to be very logical in her practicality whereas a holistic would see things more temporally and emotionally.

1 Like
#59

I’ve not seen the film so not going to chime in on the analysis (though sounds like it was good and I should try to see it!). Just wanted to point out, one thing I’ve noticed about Start and Stop is that certain elements can sort of camouflage the feel of the Start/Stop.

e.g. Start avoiding feels a lot like stopping. Stop avoiding feels a lot like starting. (This might be why we initially put T’Challa from Black Panther as a Start MC, until Jim corrected us. Simba, also Stop Avoid, is easy to picture as a Start character if you think only of certain scenes or sections of The Lion King instead of its entirety.)

There might be some elements in the lower-right that have this effect as well. Stop Inaction might seem like Start, as might Stop (too little) Proaction. It’s possible that any quad involving elements like Protection, Inaction, Proaction, Reaction, or Nonacceptance might kind of skew your sense of the Start/Stop until you get down to the actual storyform and you understand what the Start/Stop is really saying.

2 Likes
#60

Currently on Netflix. I think it’s great.

On a side note, I assume the next step is to analyze the original Mary Poppins movie.

Yeah, I think something like that works for what I was trying to say. In order to start giving them a chance, it’s probably going to look like she stops fighting against them. But in order to stop fighting against them, she doesn’t have to start giving them a chance. She could just start listening to their ideas without tearing them all down immediately. When considering it in terms of growth, I don’t feel like she grows into a place of not fighting—she is, afterall, still pretty difficult—but I do feel like she grows to a place where she can hand off the character to Disney and his people.

4 Likes
#61

Now that I could get behind.

2 Likes
#62

Hmmm. Looks like I may be going it alone here. Oh well. I think we’re up to Outcome. And that means we also need to look at the Goal and Concern.

When separated from everything else, the OS story is about Disney, Degradi, and the songwriters trying to deal with Pamela’s way of thinking. The goal, i think, is clearly to get her on board the movie making process. With all the complaints about the home, and the mustaches, and the singing and animated penguins, the Disney folks are trying to make their movie while coming up with an idea to get Pamela to like it…or to get Pamela to get the idea that the movie is good…something along those lines. Anyway, no matter how I look at it, I see Conceiving. And even as we see Pamela having good memories of her father, she still tells Disney she’s crying because of the animated penguins. She gives him the rights and lets them make the movie, but I don’t think she ever conceives of this movie as being a good adaptation of her work. I’m thinking Outcome is Failure, Judgment Good.

Thoughts?

2 Likes