It’s YOU to the story.
It’s ME to the story.
The inequity of your story is the dissonance between the viewer and the sculpture.
From one perspective (I) - that inequity looks like a square.
From the other perspective (You) - that inequity looks like a circle.
Your story is the experience of walking around the sculpture.
Notwithstanding Jim’s AWESOME clip, I think you’re at the point now @didomachiatto where you need to take a step back and see how simple it is by looking at examples.
Can you see how Obi-Wan is “You” in Star Wars (1977) while Luke is “I”?
Ditto with Morpheus and Neo in the Matrix, Westley and Buttercup in The Princess Bride, etc. etc. with whatever stories you feel you could grasp best.
If the terms “You” and “I” don’t jive, then use impact/influence and personal struggle.
I agree with you 100% Greg, however just wanted to point out that you could (and probably this would just happen naturally) still show IC story points in a scene from the IC’s POV. So while showing thoughts is a storytelling technique, the conflicts shown by thoughts might point at items like IC Issue or Problem or Focus etc. Which are part of the structure.
No wonder I had so much trouble understanding relationship perspective, it’s a crazy rhomboid/spring shape!
!!! Is this the IC? Embracing the Physics means has changed because of the IC! @mlucas ! Your writing it like this really helps!!
So if my IC is Mind, but my MC is Steadfast, would that be (for failure/good):
Julie rejects the Mind pushing her toward Instinct (subconscious) enabling her to succeed in spite of the failure Costs of Being.
Thanks, I’ll take a look at that.
What’s really weird is that I’ve come back to the point I was at several weeks ago, realizing I was doing what I was supposed to all along. Something threw my rhythm off and self-doubt started. I especially like @mlucas’s advice:[quote=“mlucas, post:22, topic:2616”]
I think you’re at the point now @didomachiatto where you need to take a step back and see how simple it is by looking at examples.
Can you see how Obi-Wan is “You” in Star Wars (1977) while Luke is “I”?
Ditto with Morpheus and Neo in the Matrix, Westley and Buttercup in The Princess Bride
[/quote]
Thanks, everyone.
Right, the idea is that the Changed character adopts the Steadfast character’s perspective. It’s usually easy to see Domain (which is where Be-er to Do-er and vice versa comes in), and sometimes you can see the alternate Concern and even Issue / Problem in the newly adopted perspective.
I’m very late and have nothing to add to the main thread, but as someone who’s been very ‘I still don’t think Home Alone is in mind and I cannot be convinced that it is’ since that first analysis thread, this ultra-simple explanation (and everyone else’s comments) has just suddenly made everything click!
Lesson learned: do not doubt the story experts. 
Well @jhay it looks like @jhull is making a case that the official analysis of this movie is wrong, so maybe you should trust yourself more after all!
Now all I need is for @glennbecker to convince everyone that the official analysis of Silence of the Lambs is wrong and I’ll have to go back and edit a bunch of old posts…
Sounds like he’s moved closer to where I was initially! When I rewatched it for the contextual subgenres, it felt NOTHING like the other mind movies and yours was the only argument that made any sense to me (though I still wasn’t totally onboard), so I am somewhat glad to have that confirmed.
Lesson learned: doubt the story experts! (just kidding) 
As long as you provide the right amount of Investigation, I’m willing to Re-evaluate any storyform. 
Let’s just not make a big Production out of it…
This post was another reason I was inspired to take another look at Home Alone. And there is a precedent for this kind of thing. The official storyform for Terminator changed. As did Sixth Sense. And Reservoir Dogs. And Toy Story.
The more we understand what is going on, the more accurately we can assign these storyforms and apply the Dramatica theory of story.
All this to say I appreciate the Tests (yes, a Silence of the Lambs reference ). I’d rather the trust was based in truth and depth of understanding, rather than label.
It’s still coming.
Might want to check out The Babadook again too if you have time. 
Just a reminder. I do not work for the US Census.