It could be, or maybe it’s when Sugar Rush resets (and the citizens get their memories back) or when Ralph goes back to his game afterward and continues playing his role as the “bad guy.” Maybe identifying when the story begins would provide insight into when it ends. But when does the inequity begin? When the 30th Anniversary party is held? When Ralph leaves (or decides) to get a medal? When he flies into Sugar Rush?
How about when Turbo took over Sugar Rush? That seems to be what’s behind everyone’s issues with game jumping.
1 Like
Can’t see it. Were we on track?
Not exactly. We figured out that Ralph is a changed, Universe MC ; and Vanellope a steadfast, Mind IC. However we were wrong about the Psychology OS and the Physics RS, it’s the contrary.
The OS goal / concern is Learning, and the OS / MC problem Reduction. It kind of goes with what we were thinking, only we were looking at it the wrong way. The Narrative Argument is, as it stands : “Stop letting people pigeonhole you, and you can show them how to beat the game.” So it still fits with the “you are more than your label” theme, but on the element level : being reduced to your role in the game creates problem both in the OS and for Ralph. Only when the characters will be able to Learn otherwise (Learn how to beat the game) will the inequity be solved ; otherwise it will remain something unconceivable for everyone.
At least that’s my take on it with what has been published.
2 Likes
Well, I was wrong. I was the one pushing for Os Psychology. I don’t get OS physics at all.
Two reasons: Ralph is his own worst enemy–he’s trying too hard to show everyone what he’s capable of doing. His status as a villain is a huge chip in his shoulder.
Secondly, you have a world of video game characters doing whatever they have to in order to avoid being “unplugged”.
2 Likes
Sorry for the late response.
Like Rachel, identifying the OS for analysis isn’t a strong suit for me, so I’m glad that the right storyform has been found. I’m seeing an OS of Physics and a growth of Stop now. Also, Reduction (being pigeonholed) for Ralph’s problem is fantastic.
I’m still trying to figure out illustrations for the RS Concern of Conceiving though. @jhull, do you have any examples?
Also, he’s Wreck-It Ralph! I’m gonna wreck it! (Reduction!)
As far as Conceiving goes in the Relationship - getting the idea that they can work together - the friendship, like hey, we’re really good together!
The Issue of Expediency works great for when he smashes the car…
1 Like
I’ve been studying the storyform, and I have a few conclusions I’d like to share.
Like with our Coco analysis discussion, we originally got the Benchmarks and Concerns mixed up, this time with the former being in the top right corner of the model, and the latter in the bottom right.
For a while, I was wondering about Vanellope’s Concern, until I read the definition for Conscious (Contemplation), namely the part: “when one is fully aware of detrimental consequences and still decides on the poor course of action, there is something wrong with the way one arrives at conclusions.” Ralph thinking that Vanellope is a thief after she takes the medal could be an example, or Vanellope thinking that Ralph “sold her out” after he talked with King Candy.
Vanellope’s drive of Acceptance brings to mind her acceptance of being a real racer, saying that she “feels it in her code,” which drives Ralph up the wall.
An example of the RS Catalyst of Need could be that they need to work together to get what they want (the medal and the chance to race).
@jhull, sorry to ask yet another question about your analysis, but could you elaborate on how the Goal of “Learning How to Beat the Game” causes conflict for everyone in the film? Thanks.
This is the most common mistake. Benchmarks are closer to a subjective appreciation of the structure (from the character’s point of view), so when thinking of what everyone is “concerned” with, people tend to veer towards this Storypoint, rather than the actual Concern of the Throughline from the creator’s point of view.
It’s probably more that she doesn’t care what anyone thinks about her, regardless of the fact that she’s a glitch. That’s how the two of them are alike - they’re both repugnant to others - one externally, and one internally - Ralph’s label and the internal label applied to Vanellope.
Both of these sound great.
For sure…
Learning is super hard as a Concern and Goal – because people tend to think about well, what were they trying to learn? That’s not how it works. It’s not what were they trying to understand, or what were they trying to obtain–it’s how difficult was it to understand, how does obtaining something manifest a resolution…
We tend to think of Learning as a single instance, rather than a process–at least, in terms of a Goal in the Dramatica sense.
So, it’s really more about the experience of playing a video game - imagine that the Authors were trying to write a movie that felt like the experience of a video game, which is, in fact, what they were trying to do. The obstacles and difficulties lie in actually learning how to level up, who to work with, how to past certain “bosses”. It’s the process of learning that is the end Goal they are striving for, comprised of:
Prerequisites: levels, stars, 1ups, people to talk to, cars to build
Strategy: patterns (reminding me of all the patterns for the original Pac-Man game)
Analysis: grading, experience level, who to trust and who not to
Preconditions: why do I have to put up with this annoying little girl - or any other attachment in a videogame (or even the preconditions of your real life impeding)
When you think of Learning from this more holistic standpoint, you start to see how the conflict stemmed from learning how to make it through, how some know-it-alls knew it better than others, and how you ultimately had to teach everyone just had good you were in order to save the day.
2 Likes
Fantastic clarifications and explanations. Thanks again.