Saving Mr Banks Analysis

analysis
#63

So, I read this movie as a Failure/Good ending as well.

Though, if the Goal is Conceiving, which I’m inclined to agree upon (even though I’m still not sure I agree with Start**), then the Consequence is Learning… Would that be a Consequence of learning the reality of who and what Mary Poppins actually is? (ooh, I like that.)

Also, it would not surprise me to find that she is Linear, especially since a question she seems to have been wrestling with was “If I sign, I may lose what she means to me; if I don’t sign, I will definitely lose my house.”***

**@Greg and @mlucas You’re cases are compelling, but I’m still having trouble with an arrangement of MC in Universe and IC in Mind, though I could maybe see it as possible…

*** (winces) eeyoh boy… that sounds like Present-ing…

1 Like
#64

So this is one of those areas I couldn’t find a way to be happy with. Even leaving Dramatica terms out of it, I couldn’t tell you what the consequences are. If stop, the consequences are already in play-gathering the experience of working with her? If start, they come into play if the goal fails-she…doesn’t enjoy the experience of watching the movie? That doesn’t seem right.

The only consequence I can think of would be that they don’t get to make the movie if she doesn’t sign. But that brings in what I’m saying would be other throughlines, and I’d have to change everything up for that to work—which is fine, but I can’t figure out a way to make that work and to make the changes that would have to be made work.

I really don’t know about this one. Guess I’ll have to think about it some more.

1 Like
#65

But if the goal is to understand what Poppins means/make an adaptation/get the rights, or anything regarding adaptating Mary Poppins, then surely it has to be a success? It depends entirely on who you believe is the protagonist, I suppose (I see it as Walt – who is constantly pushing for the rights/music/casting, etc.), but objectively I see it as a success. The rights are gained, the movie is made, they understand what Poppins means, etc.

If it’s to make an adaptation she likes (I’m not sure on that), even that could be argued as success. From the screenplay:

Pamela however has tears coursing down her face. Her shoulders heave as she tries desperately not to sob out loud but people are noticing, looking at her.

Disney leans forward, placing a hand on her shoulder. She reaches up and grips it tightly, unable to speak.

WALT
It’s all right, Mrs Travers. It’s alright. Mr Banks is going to be all right. I promise.

Pamela nods in gratitude, but cannot contain her sobs. It’s all pouring from her now, in one immense catharsis.

PAMELA

No, no. It’s just that-- I can’t, I can’t abide cartoons!

We stay on her face as we bring up the final song of the film: Let’s Go Fly A Kite. The audience around her are smiling, laughing, singing along. Pamela, the tears, silent now, still pouring down her cheeks as she slowly begins to mouth along with the lyrics.

I read that line about the cartoons as Pam’s way of shielding herself from what she would call ‘sentimentality’ – that she actually was moved by the movie, but just couldn’t bring herself to give Disney that satisfaction of being right.

She’s not screaming from the rooftops that she loved the movie, but it’s pretty clear that she appreciated it on some level – whether she wanted to or not. Otherwise, why would she be singing along?

1 Like
#66

I view all of that as a Judgement of Good, not an Outcome of Success.

If the goal were only to make the movie, then I’d agree. However, ignoring Dramatica terms entirely, I saw a movie where the goal of the story was much more than just making a movie. It was about getting approval, working together. Making something that everyone can agree on. (Oh my, that sounds like Physics…)

I didn’t feel like she approved the movie in regard to Mary Poppins, but did like how it effectively saved here dad. I’ll admit, though, that it did feel like a win for Walt.

Back to Dramatica: If Walt is the Protagonistic Pursue player, then I think we could mark it as a Success. However, I’d need a good reason as to why this felt more Failure/Good than Success/Good. High Costs, maybe, but something still seems off with our analysis overall, still… (Don’t know what, though)

1 Like
#67

I’m can’t find a good way of saying it. Maybe it would work better to say the goal is to get her to be excited about the film. I don’t think they ever do that-as illustrated by her reply when her lawyer asks if she wants to sale the rights to the new book she’s writing at the end. They never get on the same page as far as how they think.

If the goal were about making the movie, that would be a Physics thing, I’d think. And maybe that is the goal, and we’re wrong about OS Psych? Could be like the Cars thread, too, where I just can’t see the bigger picture, I guess.

1 Like
#68

But then Walt’s motivation as protagonist would be that he’s pursuing Pamela’s excitement about the possible movie, right? Or he’s pursuing her enthusiasm or something like that? I could see that argument to an extent, but you mentioned something higher in the thread that has just came right back to me.

In his first meeting with Pam, he’s pretty clear in where he’s coming from: he’s been pursuing a possible Walt Disney-produced Mary Poppins movie for 20 years based on a promise he made to his daughters (I think it was you, @Greg, that mentioned this as possibly being his IC drive). Reading it back, it seems like a really clear sign of his motivation as Protagonist. And Pamela’s reluctance throughout is fairly clear (avoiding cartoons; no butchering the character; absolutely no songs; no Dick Van Dyke, etc. Generally: “Any of Walt’s ideas? Absolutely not!”).

But if the OS is all about the adaptation (which, surely, it has to be in some form – it’s the only thing that ties all of the characters together in the Present Day) then isn’t it a given that the goal has to be something to do with making the movie?

The climax of the story comes with Walt going to London to appeal directly to Pam, right? He’s exhausted all other options: he’s pursued her for 20 years (no response, until financial difficulties); he’s tried to charm her with a studio tour (rejected); had a personal, if overly-friendly, meeting (not good); offered her free goodies and sugary snacks (dismissed); he’s tried to bend to her whims, hoping for a compromise (almost destroyed the movie in doing so); he’s tried to charm her with a trip to Disneyland (unimpressed), etc. The final option is to go to her and appeal to her directly with his own story, without the charm and without the showmanship – just a fellow creative who has clung to a beloved character all his life. I think we all agree on that? Please correct me if not.

So if that direct approach is the final option, and if that is what brings about the Success or Failure of the goal, what else could the goal be but to make the movie as Walt has long intended? Because right after that scene where she hands over the rights, we move into the premiere. The rights have been gained; the movie has been made (to Walt’s desires); Pam secures herself an invite to the premiere after being left off the list; everyone loves the movie; Pam cries (maybe hates the penguins – I will concede that’s left ambiguous); comes to terms with her past and sings along.

Even if you ignore those last three illustrations (or consider them as illustrations of the MC judgement), it seems positive overall in terms of the outcome of the objective story – Walt got what he wanted, how he wanted it. What the goal is, I don’t know. I think it’s very possible it could be in Physics, but I’m almost certain it’s to do with making the movie in some form (likely ‘making the Walt Disney version of Mary Poppins’) – and, in that respect, it feels very much like a Success outcome.

1 Like
#69

I’ll agree he got what he wanted, but I don’t agree that it was how he wanted it. Throughout the movie, Walt is certainly acting in service of getting the movie made, but overall I don’t think that’s enough. I think it’s too specific a goal, like going for the Piston Cup was too specific for Cars. (Edit: Then again, see my argument below…)

In the very same quote you provide, I mention “Making something that everyone can agree on.” Altogether, I still don’t believe that the goal was entirely met, but that may be a symptom of being unable to lock anything down without knowing for certain if there is an Influence Character, or if there is an IC, what perspective they actually hold.

I would say that OS is related to the adaptation, but I’m not sure that I can agree that it was about the adaptation. If you’re looking for the subtext of the movie, I’d argue that the goal therein would be to create the movie without intervention from Mrs. Travers, but I still don’t think that’s right, either…

However, if we go strict and determine where the OS story starts, where we “get on the merry-go-round”, as Jim so recently put it, then I would say that would be the scene with the agent talking with Mrs. Travers and convincing her to go to California. The story feels finalized, then, when the premiere is finished.

Per that purely logical explanation, which appears to follow along with your line of thinking, it definitely seems a Success ending. What bothers me about that is how much of a Failure/Good ending it felt…

In any case, in these arguments, I’m strongly considering that this is actually a Desire movie, a lower-left case, which would be horribly, annoyingly pedestrian, but seems more than likely at this point…

OS in Physics (Obtaining - the rights, the movie), MC in Mind (Subconscious - love for her father)
IC in Universe (The Present - living in the present), RS in Psychology (Becoming - developing friendship)

Getting the rights would be the Goal, while the Concern would be about finishing the movie.

This would mark a Growth of Start and Outcome of Success. I’d argue for Decision for Work (Driver) as even though Mrs. Travers goes against the grain, she actually keeps the plot flowing. My argument that she is a Be-er is as previously. I’d be inclined to agree with the idea of a Linear Problem-Solving Style.

I’d even go so far as to say the thematics of the MC Throughline would deal with Closure, or a lack thereof, while the influence is quite noticeable in how Open Walt attempts to keep his environment, sickeningly from Mrs. Travers’s perspective: Mrs. Travers/Mr. Disney vs Pam/Walt.

I’m rather convinced that Mrs. Travers has a Changed Resolve, considering she never would have even considered signing her rights away up front, and she actually both considers and does it at the end.

I see the thematics at play in the OS much more along the lines of Attitude vs Approach, then anything of Self-Interest vs Morality. Now, given the previous choices in this post, that would force the Problem to be under Approach. Thus, we would have an MC and OS shared problem of either Consider or Reconsider.

From those choices, we would get a Focus/Direction pair of Logic and Feeling for the OS and for the IC, and a Focus/Direction pair of Pursuit and Avoid for Mrs. Travers.

Now I’m doing this without the Dramatica application at the moment, but I would seriously love it if plugging in this Storyform produces a Focus of Pursue, and a Direction of Avoid for Mrs. Travers, and especially love it if it produces a Focus of Feeling and Direction of Logic for Disney.

(Edit: I was able to enter things into the Dramatica software.) Interestingly I found this happens:

Given an OS/MC Problem of Consideration with the other above:

  • IC Focus = Logic and IC Direction = Feeling
  • MC Focus = Avoid and MC Direction = Pursue

Given an OS/MC Problem of Reconsideration with the other choices:

  • IC Focus = Feeling and IC Direction = Logic
  • MC Focus = Pursue and MC Direction = Avoid

As such, I would now argue for the Problem of Reconsideration.

In shorter terms, I am now arguing for the full storyform posted below after the thoughtful discussion that has happened in this thread thus far:

  • MC Resolve - Changed
  • MC Growth - Start
  • MC Approach - Be-er
  • MC PSS - Linear
  • Story Driver - Decision
  • Story Limit - Optionlock
  • Story Outcome - Success
  • Story Judgement - Good
  • OS Domain - Physics
  • OS Concern - Obtaining
  • OS Issue - Approach
  • OS Problem - Reconsider (was previously Consider)

This Storyform would ignore anything involving the memories, for the most part, and view the story as only involving the making of the Mary Poppins movie. The memories would then have another Storyform, likely different from this one.

1 Like
#70

Yes, Walt has been pursuing the production of aMary Poppins movie. But I don’t see how that goal has created conflict for anyone else unless the argument is that pursuing the creation of the movie is why Degradi and the songwriters are stuck dealing with Pamela. If that’s the argument, then I think that would make it an Obtaining goal, or at least a Physics goal, and then I’d be totally lost on how the rest of the storyform would work-which is fine, i could just be that wrong. But that’s why I say I think that’s an IC thing, because I only see that as something Walt is dealing with. Otherwise, to say that was his motivation as protagonist would be using IC throughline info for the OS throughline.

It does seem a bit odd to suggest that the end product of a movie isnt the goal, but I just don’t see how that works as a goal in an OS Psych story in which everyone’s concern seems to be getting approval from a difficult Travers

.

Looking at it another way. IF we were to agree that this was an OS story of Psychology, then we would agree that it’s a Desire story. Desire means “the motivation to change one’s situation or circumstances”. Personally, I think this sounds much more like what Degradi and the songwriters are dealing with than “the innate capacity to do or be” (def of Ability in place of Physics). In general, the OS is about the problem of having this extremely difficult person holding everyone back and how they are trying to change that.

Then if we look at the Concern level as Plot, Plot is the larger events that happen in the story. If we look at Conceiving as occupying the area of Thought under Desire (Psych), then we’d be saying that the larger events of the story revolve around “the process of considering” as it relates to the changing of one’s situation or circumstances. And again, personally, I feel this rings true to what we see in the movie as time and again they show Pamela their work in order for her to consider whether she approves. And each time, she tells them no, tells them to change, tells them to not use red, demands to have it her way, demands that one of them leave the room–all of which are various forms of conflict.

And then keep in mind that the problem isn’t gone even after they get her to sign the rights and make the movie. They still have the situation or circumstance of having Pamela being difficult. And they show their work to her in the form of a the finished movie. And yes she sings along and such and we see that everyone feels the effort was worth it (an emotional judgment of Good) but we also see that, despite enjoying it at some level she verbally disapproves of what they’ve done (a purely logistic, non-emotional Outcome of failure). Even after getting the movie rights, they still fail to get Pamela’s approval.

Welp, that’s about as strong of a case as i feel I can make, but it feels like we’re getting further away from agreement rather than closer. I still feel there’s a storyform here, but maybe coming to agreement on what it is is meant for another time.

2 Likes
#71

See, now what Greg posted is the movie that I actually saw. (And to be honest, other than the Elements and possible Theme of Closure, I don’t really like most of the rest of my post above.)

2 Likes
#72

I"ll add to my post above: In terms of source of conflict, every theme under Conceiving feels amazingly powerful in this movie as a reason no one can quite get along. (At least, I thought they were, anyway.)

2 Likes
#73

All of this is kind of the problem I have, and I think it’s the same issue that I had with Mary Poppins Returns (and likely Mary Poppins). Certain things feel very clear, and we can agree on the broadest specifics, but making them all fit together into a coherent storyform just doesn’t seem to hold up. I think the fact that we’re all arguing for different interpretations of things like the Outcome doesn’t necessarily bode well for a fully-coherent storyform.

I’m not trying to be difficult as much as challenge your ideas and my own, and as I’m outnumbered on this, I’ll happily step back rather than continue to go over the same issues. I’m just seeing things differently, and I haven’t yet heard the argument that will pull me off my typical path of stubbornness.

Oh, no. I’m the P.L. Travers of this thread…

2 Likes
#74

A different way of thinking about it, then:

  1. Start ___________, and you can ___________.
  2. Stop __________, and you can ___________.
  3. Keep focusing on ___________, and you can ___________.
  4. Keep moving toward ___________, and you can ___________.
  5. Peace of mind awaits those who start ___________, even if it means ____________.
  6. Peace of mind awaits those who stop __________, even if it means ____________.
  7. Peace of mind awaits those who keep focusing on ___________, even if it means __________.
  8. Peace of mind awaits those who keep moving toward ___________, even if it means __________.
  9. Address ___________ by balancing ___________ with your ____________.
  10. Shifting your __________ to __________ raises your frequency, opening up to address your ____________ with others.

An aside: Now, I’ve seen someone conflate the phrasing of “Peace of mind” as representing the Story Goal before, but that’s not how those those phrasings work. The “Peace of mind” phrases represent a Failure and focus on the Consequences of that. (I say this to prevent myself from making the same mistake, as I may very well do so at the moment.)

To me, 1 and 3 don’t match this movie at all. It’s possible that 2 does, but I felt like 5 or 6 more closely match what was said by the story. Maybe 10, but I can’t see 9 working here. Continuing on, 4 is possible but less likely to match the message of this movie. I also would strike out 7; however, 8 sounds darn close to me.

That is, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10 are the plausible messages coming from this movie, but I think we can strike out number 4 as well. As it just doesn’t sound right for this movie. That leaves the following:

  • Stop _________, and you can ___________.
  • Peace of mind awaits those who start __________, even if it means ____________.
  • Peace of mind awaits those who stop __________, even if it means
  • Peace of mind awaits those who keep focusing on ___________, even if means ____________.
  • Peace of mind awaits those who keep moving toward ___________, even if it means ___________.
  • Shifting your _________ to _________ raise your frequency, opening up to address your __________ with others.

Not intentionally, but after striking out the ones that feel don’t match the message I heard from this movie, I find there is only one here that represents Success. Out of all of them, there are two that ring true to me as the possible message of this movie:

Peace of mind awaits those who start ____________, even if it means _____________.
Peace of mind awaits those who keep moving toward _____________, even if it means ___________.

The first sounds closer to me than the second, especially if I fill it out with the message I heard: Peace of mind awaits those who start accepting the current circumstances, even if it means letting a movie come to fruition without full approval.

That would result in a Changed, Start, Failure, Good… (And I was arguing for a Stop story… Actually this still doesn’t feel strong enough to me, but it feels a lot closer than anything we’ve had yet.)

Maybe: Stop focusing strictly on reality and you can protect a legacy?
Better Yet: Stop denying frivolity and you can protect a father’s legacy.
(Interestingly enough, that would be a Changed, Stop, Success, Good story, and darn it sounds close.)

2 Likes
#75

As an extremely linear problem solver, I find things work best for me when I divide everything up into various size chunks and keep them separated-like when I try to keep Walt’s pursuit of the movie out of the OS-but then it is difficult to go back pull all those chunks together into a working 4-dimensional that all seems to work at once. I think part of the difficulty is maybe at least partially due to the size of mind constant, but I can see how it would be easier for a holistic PSer to see. Still, though it’s been said to not be a viable method, I’m convinced my brand of linear approach to this can get you to a fully functioning 4-d storyform and can maybe even make parts of it easier.

At least for my part, blame me on not doing something right rather than the storyform.

Nor am I trying to be difficult. I just am without even trying :smile:. And I like being challenged, so no problem.

Back to growth, I’ve decided I probably can’t offer evidence for or against either by pointing to anything specific in the story. So I’ll step back on that. [quote=“jhay, post:73, topic:2454”]
I’ll happily step back rather than continue to go over the same issues
[/quote]

I’ll try to as well. So where else can we go? Anywhere?

2 Likes
#76

Just because, here’s the storyform I’ve come to. Not saying this is definitely what it is, but it’s closest I feel I can get.

image.png728×400 10.3 KB

1 Like
#77

Peace of mind awaits those who start accepting the current circumstances, even if it means learning your character can shine brightest in someone else’s hands?

2 Likes
#78

That’s darn close, but it still feels a bit askew. I’m too tired to think of a way to make it better right now, though.

1 Like
#79

Sorry I’m so late to the party! I had a few things I wanted to add.

For a while, I was stuck with figuring out the MC Domain, but then I noticed what Greg mentioned earlier:

I think that my problem was that I was mixing up the source of conflict versus conflict itself (like I always do :laughing:), but this cleared it up for me. Her money drying up, the threat of losing her home, and having to go to California is all conflict itself. Sounds like Mind causing Universe conflict!

Interestingly enough, if Pam’s throughline is in Mind and has a Problem of Rejection/Non-acceptance, then the IC Issue is Repulsion. Not only does this bring to my mind how she is repulsed by Walt’s empire, but Walt (and the empire) reflects her own repulsiveness back to her. This is like how the IC’s in The Lego Batman Movie reflect back to Batman the sense of worthlessness (IC Issue of Worth) that he inflicted upon them. To put it in @jhull’s words:

“Batman makes the people around him feel worthless, and it is not until he sees that reflected back to him in the Phantom Zone, that he begins to understand. Alfred’s feelings of worthlessness in reaction to those insensitive comments impact Batman, influencing the hero to change. Barbara’s sense of inadequacy at Batman’s denial of her appeal for teamwork and the Joker’s tears at being told Batman “You mean nothing to me” add to this impact. Even footage of Batman using Robin’s enthusiasm to coerce the little guy into risking his life, and then refusing to give the boy anything resembling a modicum of care, indicate feelings of worthlessness for poor old Dick. This is the function of an Influence Character: to act as a mirror for the Main Character to recognize their personal issues.”

Yeah, Growth is very tricky without already knowing most of the storyform (Inside Out being a rare exception), so I’m not at all surprised we can’t pin that down yet.

I really like how this sounds. It reminds me of How to Train Your Dragon, with its positive consequence.

What do you guys think?

1 Like
#80

At this point, every time I try to put MC in Universe, I find a way to make it work and every time I try to put MC in Mind I find a way to make it work. But whichever way I go, I only feel like i’m About 75% of the way there.

The reason I keep going back to MC Universe/IC Mind is because I like the arrangement of those Elements the most. There may be other Elements that start to look like they would work better as Problem or Focus or Direction, but I keep getting stuck at the Solution.

Walt gives his speech, then we see Pamela sitting at the table across from Mickey pondering it. Then she says “enough” and signs the papers. Signing the papers works in my mind as a process of Acceptance. I have a hard time seeing any other process in that. I could say that she is Producing, or Evaluation-ing, or Reaction-ing, but I have a hard time seeing anything other than Acceptance playing out in the movie without feeling like I’m adding something there that wasn’t in the movie.

That said, I think I can come up with Proaction and Reaction as Pamela’s Focus and Direction. I don’t know that I could come up with anything for Induction or Deduction. So there absolutely may be something else going on, but I wouldn’t be able to see it until I had it pointed out and explained…probably several times and in several different ways :smile:

#81

Good catch, I had forgotten to look at the MC Focus and Direction. Warning: lots of spitballing ahead! Reaction sounds great for Pamela’s Direction (how she reacts to everyone around her), but what do you think would be strong illustrations for her Focus of Proaction?

One illustration of Induction is generalizing, and one of Deduction is narrowing. For the former, I think of “all animation is lowbrow,” and for the latter, her general sense of “I need this to be this exact way, no other way.” Some of this could be elsewhere though. There’s also “using a process of elimination” as an illustration for Deduction, which could include shooting down all the ideas from DaGradi and the Sherman Brothers.

Note: The generalizing gist is mentioned in this Narrative First article, while the other two (narrowing and using a process of elimination) are in Subtext.

#82

Out of curiosity, which part of the premise feels askew to you? Is it the Resolve part, the Crucial Element part, or the Consequence part?