After the Big Bang Theory episode where Amy tells Sheldon that Indiana Jones is irrelevant to the story, I was wondering if anyone would be interested in doing one here? Do you agree with these answers to the 12 questions and character roles (to get the analysis started?
EDITED from comments:
MC Resolve: CHANGE
MC Growth:
INDY/BELLOQ: STOPS USING HIS STANDARDS
INDY/RELIGION: STARTS BELIEVING
MC Approach: Do-er
MC ProbSolv: Logical
S.Driver: Action
S.Limit:OPTIONLOCK
S.Outcome: Success
S.Judgement:
INDY/BELLOQ: BAD
INDY/RELIGION: GOOD
O.Domain: Action
O.Concern: Obtaining
O.Issue: Self Interest
O.Problem: Pursuit
MC: Indiana Jones
IC: Belloq
Protagonist: Belloq
Antagonist:Nazis
Guardian: ? THE ARK ??
Contagonist: Monkey, Major Toht (Nazi)
Sidekick: Sallah, Ships captain
Skeptic: ? INDY?
Emotion: Marion
Reason: Indiana Jones
I like everything but the Timelock ā¦ what was it? (EDIT:Just realized you had Steadfast down for Resolve ā¦ itās Change.)
Also note that there are two stories going on in Raiders of the Lost Ark - you have the Indy/Belloq story (What would you do for history?) and the Indy/Arc story (Religion real or hokey-pokey nonsense). In both, Indy Changes but the former is Bad whereas the latter is Good.
The second one essentially ārightsā the Badness of the 2nd (he sacrifices keeping the Arc from the Nazis in order to save his girlfriend ā¦ essentially doing what is wrong for humanity by giving the Arc over to the Nazis).
I suggest Indyās father as Skeptic. Though the father isnāt an on-screen character in the first film, his skepticism of (even condescension toward) Indyās abilities and Indyās approach to many things is clearly felt. In fact, that is one of the main themes developed in the third film (with Sean Connery in the role of father). It is hinted at many times throughout the trilogy.
Isnāt the timelock that they have to find the Ark before the Nazis do? why is it an option lock?
How does Indy change? I donāt see that.
Iām not sure what you mean what would you do for history? My thought would be that the opening scene sets the history ā Belloqās comment that again I take from you what you find.
When I put this into Dramatica, I should use gists? I was looking at the āhow to use Dramaticaā thread from 7 months ago and was totally surprised to see the concept of using the gists instead of the traditional Dramatica vocabulary. Did I interpret that correctly?
Also, I have some forms we use for those who donāt have the software. Do you want these uploaded and if so, where?
In regards to the Timelock, how much time passes? You should be able to define it in a concrete amount of days/hours/minutes etc. The nature of a Timelock is to show the appropriateness of a certain approach given a definite time restraint.
In regards to the Resolve, you can look at both stories:
Story A: the Indy/Belloq argument (āIt would only take a nudge to make you like meā), Indy doesnāt see himself giving up his set of standards to bed with the Nazis like Belloq ā¦ but then he does just that when he decides not to blow them all āback to Godā. Thatās Change/Bad.
Story B: the Indy/Religion argument - which is handed off from Brody to Sallah to the Arc itself. In that story Indy starts out now believing in a lot of āhocus-pocus nonsenseā but then ends up telling Marion to close her eyes (because now he does believe). Thatās Change/Good.
Some works have more than one storyform in them. Youāll see this in massive epics like Lord of the Rings and in longer, more complex films like Jerry Maguire.
Iām assuming youāre new to looking at story through the eyes of Dramatica, in which case you should know that the Dramatica storyform isnāt so much a roadmap for the story you want to write as much as it is a roadmap for the argument you want to make. That is why they refer to a Dramatica story as a Grand Argument Story.
A work can have more than one argument going on and thus, more than one storyform within it. When you look at Raiders of the Lost Ark (which I really wouldnāt if youāre new to the theoryās concepts), you can see there are two separate arguments being made. One ends badly for the Main Character, the other good(ly).
New, yes in understanding and no in time. Iāve read āthe bookā 4-5 times and read most of what was on the old site before this one was started, watched a lot of Melanieās videos, a group of us tried analyzing some stories (followed analyses of Lawrence of Arabia, Toy Story, To Kill a Mockingbird, tried Up) but itās been the blind leading the blind. I have the software (both Mac and Windows), I āget itā enough to have a gut feeling that itās more powerful and includes all other approaches out there, but I donāt get it enough to understand how to apply it in other than having a MC/IC 4 throughlines, and archetypes, or how to apply it to make a compelling argument. Iād really like another āapplicationā exercise? 10. I just finished watching Ida and will attend Tuesday (requested joining G+).
We have a writers critique group here and I understand enough about Dramatica to see that the major problem with all the stories brought to the group is that there is no story goal, no argument and no impact character in most of them. I picked Raiders because it hasnāt been analyzed on the websites, is very well known, seems to be a common āstoryformā in our critique group, because most were familiar with it, and it seems to be typical of what several members want to write (start with what is familiar and of interest).
Got it. Yes if you want to do an analysis of Raiders by all means do. My sense is that it is somehow incomplete. I know the two stories in it, but I think they somehow share the same Overall Story Throughline.
Donāt get me wrong. The movie is awesome. I just donāt know if there is a complete argument being told there (though I could be wrong). The intent was to revive the old serials which in and of themselves were only tales.
You might be right about it being incomplete. I remember sitting at the end of the film, āButā¦?ā There seemed to be something missing, the whacking of the Nazis seeming rushed and slapped together for an end. Maybe Indy 4 became the end for the writer?
Wow. Iām so glad weāre tackling this classic film. Here are some thoughts. Indy would be steadfast and Marion would be change in terms of her relationship to Indy, or something more like opening up. I wonder if Beloq would be the Contagonist because he hinders both Indy and the Nazis. I can see him making the temptation argument with Indy several times. What about the unnamed Nazi with the facial scar? Itās tempting to make him either a sidekick or contagonist, too. Iāll think through this and see if I can figure out the signposts. The Goal would seem to clearly be Obtaining. That makes the Indy-Marion relationship be Changing Oneās Nature. Um, perhaps thatās reflected in them warming up to each other. However, I could see Marion in Situation and more precisely in Progress because Indy has stepped back into her life, and prior to that Indy left her as a young girl (morality aside) and she hasnāt been progressing since being in the Himalayas (or wherever). Is the Goal to obtain the ark or probably is it to stop the re-enactment of the ritual at the climax?
@geoff did you read anything I wrote? It seems like youāre just writing a stream-of-consciousness with no attempt to engage with what has already been discussed here before.
Iām sorry. I didnāt mean it to come off as disconnected. You mentioned two possible stories going on. I could go along with you on two RS through lines: one with Belloq and one with Marion.
(To summarize initial post and changes from subsequent suggestions)
We have 2 OS storyforms with an overall throughline of Find and safeguard the Ark before the Nazis do. If there are two storyforms then are there 2 OS throughlines?
OS Throughline: Situation-Past- Destiny?
MC Throughline: Find Ark and recover it for Government (Activity-Obtaining)
IC Throughline: ?? Find Ark and recover it for Personal Profit (Belloqās) (Psychology/Manipulation-Conceiving (of ways to get it back from Indy?)
Relationship Throughline:? Fixed attitude-Subconscious-Hope (that it will make him rich?)
Iām confused on how to try an analysis with two storyforms. Do you analyze each one separately as if it were the only storyform?
Yes. Thatās how itās done. The above storyform choices seem pretty accurate. I would split them out into separate storyforms and see how they play out. (though Iām guessing both are Stop stories)
