Hey ed209,
I really enjoyed this movie. A total masterclass on acting. I’ve seen it a couple of times, but it’s been a year or two since I’ve seen it, so I could be way off on things.
If_ there is a storyform here, it’s going to be very lightly illustrated outside of the OS. I’d be hard pressed to even suggest RS possibilities.
Things I agree with you on:
Linear thinker – since you won’t give me the leads, I’ll give you a cut. Since that w-on’t work, I’ll steal the leads, etc.
Given the fact that everyone in the movie is a man, and I’ve never met a woman who has this movie in their top 10,000, I’d say this is probably a given.
Spacetime (there is a time limit involved to make sales but it seems more like a lack of options that drives events)
Agree here, there’s no timelock in play. I think Blake gives them one week to save their jobs and the story ends the following day?
Failure/Bad (obvious)
Pretty sure I’m with you here. It isn’t a triumph.
Things I’m not sure about:
Decision driver (the decision to fire anyone who doesn’t make the board)
Actions happen, decisions are made.
Deciding to fire everyone is a decision, but we are not privy to it. Stealing the leads is not deliberated. Shelly accidentally outing himself isn’t a deliberation, but a boneheaded slip-up while he’s mocking Williamson.
OS Domain: Psychology / Being
Roma was the only guy who was really shown as a slippery, manipulative salesman type and the only one who had it bite him in any way. (When Williamson accidentally outs his lie in front of the client.)
Everyone else just seemed beaten down by the job and desperate. No one manipulates Williamson out of the leads for example, they’re just stolen. My feeling was David Mamet wasn’t exploring manipulating people as a source of conflict in the OS. I do remember a lot of dick-measuring screaming matches, bad attitudes and personality clashes.
And, even though this is not a true argument, 9/10 stories that are, or in this case originate, as plays are OS Mind.
MC Domain: Shelly
He’s an interesting choice. One thing is that the fact that he stole the leads is concealed from the audience for the entire story, which seems at odds with sharing his perspective.
You mention Williamson or Roma as possible ICs, and they both seem like be-ers to me. Williamson is a human punching bag, he just absorbs abuse. Roma threatens, seduce or lies. to get his way.
Change, Stop – Shelly does change insomuch as he is a broken man by the end.
I think being broken is a judgment Bad thing. Change has to be a fundamental shift in paradigm. This seems like an argument for steadfast. (Assuming Shelly is indeed the MC)
Problem of Accurate/Non-Accurate (for both OS/MC)
Thinking back to the conflicts in the movie I remember things like
- The leads are weak.
- You’re weak.
- Cheating (stealing the new leads to win the contest).
- The old couple you sold the house to are actually crazy people who just like some company.
- Opening your mouth before you know what the shot is.
These all seem like more like Non-Accurate.
Since the concern quad is top-right
Which begs the question, if this is a failure story, and the consequence is what’s emphasized, how is Doing the consequence of what happens in the story? Seems like the consequence is going to prison, or ending up as a sad drunk in a bar saying “I used to be in sales, it’s a tough racket”.
Hope that helps spark some ideas for you.
I’d have to catch the movie somewhere again before I’d be able to offer any more suggestions.
P.S. Robocop is a great movie, and you’re a great person for choosing that username.
