TODAY'S NUGGET: The Temptations of Doctor Antonio (1962; part of the Boccaccio '70 anthology) - When Hypocrisy is Revealed in a Satire

[Quick Summary: Outraged Dr. Mazzuolo tries to get a provocative billboard of a woman removed, but is shocked when the billboard woman literally speaks to him.]

In this short film, Dr. Mazzuolo lives a "very moral" life and has definite ideas of how women should behave and dress. 

When a billboard goes up with a provocative woman drinking milk, Dr. Mazzuolo is outraged.  He causes a loud commotion to get it taken down. 

The satire is his obsession over a paper billboard and the over-the-top lengths he'll go to get rid of it.  It's hypocritical because his motives are not particularly virtuous. 

This is best seen in the scene below:   
- Dr. Mazzuolo has gotten the billboard woman covered up with a covering, but the rain has brought it down.
- Anita, the gigantic billboard woman, comes to life and speaks to Mazzuolo.
- Her sheer size is so exaggerated vs. Mazzuolo.  It's a good visual of how he feels; of her vs. him; of one man trying to fight against a larger idea. 
- I really liked the irony of this scene too. Anita's unexpected reaction to Mazzuolo's verbal abuse (shower of tears) brings home to me that he could deal with the billboard woman as an idea but had difficulty dealing with a real woman.

 E.U.R. quarter. Night.

... He laughs once more, harshly and somewhat hysterically. His laughter is suddenly echoed by Anita's, which explodes unexpectedly, bloodcurdling despite her cordial tone. Mazzuolo shudders in horror.

MAZZUOLO (with mixed aggressiveness and terror): What's so funny? ...

ANITA: You laughed, so I laughed too. What's the matter, can't I even laugh? I have a cheerful disposition, you know ...

To overcome his terror, Mazzuolo now explodes in violent abuse, all a-tremor with sanctimonious indignation.

MAZZUOLO: No! ... I can laugh. Not you? Your laugh is cynical or irresponsible! ... You haven't any right to laugh at decent people! You think it's so easy to be decent and pure? It's much easier to be licentious, like you are! For shame! ... Do you have any idea of the ruinous effect you have on people? on the family? on Society? ... Ah, you're just taking the sun, eh? ... Enjoying the scenery? ... You liar! ... I'll shout it right to your face: liar, hypocrite, corrupter of morals! ... You're sowing ruin and scandal! ... If so many decent people go wrong ... if there's so much evil in this world of ours, so wanting in faith and hope, it's your fault! ...

An enormous tear plunges down from on high, forming a little puddle on the ground beside Mazzuolo. Then another, and another. Sidestepping to avoid them, Mazzuolo goes on, his face flushed with wrath.

MAZZUOLO: ... You're crying? ... Cry, cry, it'll do you good! ... I'm glad I made you cry! ... At last I've been able to confront you face to face ... give you a moral whipping ... Weep, weep! 

He opens his umbrella as the huge tears continue to shower down around him. 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I liked that the writers didn't try to soften the hypocrisy and make Dr. Mazzuolo more likeable. Satire requires that characters are unrepentant as they go hard after what they want in order to lampoon them.

The Temptations of Doctor Antonio (1962) 
by Federico Fellini & Ennio Flaiano & Tullio Pinelli

TODAY'S NUGGET: A Hard Day's Night (1964) - The Importance of Giving Non-Actor Protagonists (The Beatles) Something Interesting to Do (Character)

[Quick Summary: The Beatles try to keep themselves - and Paul's grandfather - out of trouble while getting ready for a tv performance.}

What kind of script works for super-duper famous musicians who aren't actors? 

Today's script tackles that task, as it was written for the four Beatles as they hit their stride in 1964.* (And it must've worked well, as it's an Oscar nominated script!) 

I think the trick of this script was that:
-  It gave each of the four guys something to do. Each one has his own mini-story within the larger story.
- The guys poke fun at their fame and don't take themselves seriously.
- It doesn't require the musicians to be actors.
- It puts the guys in quirky situations that the average guy would also find amusing.

For example, in the scene below: 
- George is looking for Ringo and goes into a building across from the theater labeled "Canteen and Executive Office."
- Simon, the executive, doesn't know who George is or that he's famous. 
- Simon thinks George is an actor who is giving his opinion on clothes for teenagers.
- The irony is that Simon dismisses George's opinions as irrelevant, though George actually could have a lot of sway over Simon's customers.

INTERIOR OFFICE 

...A Collection of shirts is produced and GEORGE looks at them. While he is doing this SIMON briefs him.

SIMON: You'll like these. You really "dig" them. They're "fab" and all the other pimply hyperboles.

GEORGE: I wouldn't be seen dead in them. They're dead grotty.

SIMON: Grotty?

GEORGE: Yeah, grotesque.

SIMON (to Secretary): Make a note of that word and give it to Susan. I think it's rather touching really. Here's this kid trying to give me his utterly valueless opinion when I know for a fact within four weeks he'll be suffering from a violent inferiority complex and loss of status if he isn't wearing one of these nasty things. Of course they're grotty, you wretched nit, that's why they were designed but that's what you'll want.

GEORGE: But I won't.

SIMON: You can be replaced you know, chicky baby.

GEORGE: I don't care.

SIMON: And that pose is out too, Sunny Jim. The new thing is to care passionately, and be right wing. Anyway, you wont' meet Susan if you don't cooperate. 

GEORGE: And who's this Susan when she's at home?

SIMON (playing his ace): Only Susan Compey, our resident teenager. You'll have to love her. She's your symbol.

GEORGE: Oh, you mean that posh bird who gets everything wrong?

SIMON: I beg your pardon?

GEORGE: Oh, yes, the lads frequently gather round the T.V. set to watch her for a giggle. Once we even all sat down and wrote these letters saying how gear she was and all that rubbish.

SIMON: She's a trend setter. It's her profession!

GEORGE: She's a drag. A well-known drag. We turn the sound down on her and say rude things.

SIMON: Get him out of here!!

GEORGE (genuinely surprised): Have I said something amiss? 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This script showed me that one interesting thing you can do for non-actors is to put them into situations where they have to react as average people, not famous people.

A Hard Day's Night (1964) 
by Alun Owen

*A short time line to give you context:
- 1960: The Beatles started as a group.
- February, 1964: They appear on The Ed Sullivan Show in the U.S. 
- March -April, 1964: This film was shot.
- July, 1964: This film premiered.

 

TODAY'S NUGGET: Full Moon (Unproduced) - What A "Very British Sense of Humor" Looks Like on the Page

[Quick Summary: After a fictional young New Yorker flies to the UK for adventure, he becomes a minder to over-the-top Keith Moon, drummer of The Who band.]

What characterizes British humor?  Here's part of an essay from British comedian Ricky Gervais that was helpful to me: 

I would say that Americans are more “down the line.” They don’t hide their hopes and fears. They applaud ambition and openly reward success. Brits are more comfortable with life’s losers. We embrace the underdog until it’s no longer the underdog. We like to bring authority down a peg or two. Just for the hell of it. Americans say, “have a nice day” whether they mean it or not. Brits are terrified to say this. We tell ourselves it’s because we don’t want to sound insincere but I think it might be for the opposite reason. We don’t want to celebrate anything too soon. Failure and disappointment lurk around every corner. This is due to our upbringing. Americans are brought up to believe they can be the next president of the United States. Brits are told, “It won’t happen for you.” 

Today's script (unproduced) is written by the UK writing team of Dick Clement & Ian la Frenais,* who are best known for their trademark British sense of humor.** 

It's a good example of British humor around one of "life's losers." Keith Moon is ultra famous, but  brings self-destructive anarchy wherever he goes. 

In the scenes below:
- Dougal is the protagonist of the film, and Moon's minder/assistant.
- Moon has a house in Malibu next door to the actor Steve McQueen.
- Moon has become such a nuisance that McQueen built a fence between them.
- Moon is upset that McQueen would want a fence.
-  He decides to "bring authority down a peg or two, just for the hell of it." 
- The irony is that: 1) because Moon insists on a life of continual excess, booze, drugs, and partying that he's lost touch with normal social customs; 2) what Moon wants is connection with McQueen, but his actions isolate himself even more.

 

EXT. MCQUEEN HOUSE   POOLSIDE   DAY

A Hispanic Maid walks from the house with a tray containing a beer and a club sandwich. The fence is finished between the two properties and there's SILENCE except for seagulls and surf. There's a figure lying in a lounger by the side of the pool. We can't see a face as it's concealed by a script called 'The Towering Inferno'. 

EXT. MOONIE'S HOUSE   YARD   DAY

Moonie is astride a vintage British Triumph motorcycle, still wearing the German uniform. 

As we CUT WIDE we reveal that a ramp has been erected leading straight toward his neighbor's fence.

Moonie puts the bike in gear, makes a wide circle, then throttles back and heads it toward the ramp.

EXT. MCQUEEN'S HOUSE   POOLSIDE   DAY

From McQueen's POV we see the motor cycle fly into view, just clearing the top of the fence. in SLOW MOTION it sails through the air, accompanied by the main theme from 'The Great Escape.'. 

It completes its triumphant arc, landing in the swimming pool with a roar and a hiss of bubbling water and oil. There's a pause before Moonie's grinning face breaks the surface.

MOONIE: The Great Escape, Steve, one of your finest.

INT. MOONIE'S HOUSE    KTICHEN    DAY

Dougal gets himself a beer from the ice box. Moonie sits at the kitchen table, rolling himself a joint. He's in shorts and a Hawaiian shirt.

MOONIE: I thought he'd be amused. I was paying homage to the prick! I thought we'd crack a few Coors and talk motorbikes. There's nothing to eat in the house, where have you been? [The irony is that Moonie is offended that McQueen didn't think the stunt was funny. Also, the concerns of an average person - the cost, the embarrassment - doesn't seem to faze him.]

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I felt the bittersweetness of the British irony.  I empathized with what Moon wanted (connection) yet abhorred his actions (destructive).

Full Moon (unproduced)(1/31/97, 3rd draft)
by Dick Clement & Ian la Frenais 

* You may not know the names, but you've probably seen their tv/film work (full list here). 

**The story goes that their trademark British humor was so well regarded that they were brought in to punch up the humor on The Rock (1996) before actor Sean Connery would sign on:

Instead, they [Clement and la Frenais] needed to go in and add more humour, and to make the character of John Mason more British. If anything, more Bond. The lack of Britishness had been one of Connery’s key objections to the original screenplay, and it needed addressing. They got to work, and they concentrated on fleshing the character of Mason out. One example contribution is a conversation at the end of the film’s second act, where Connery’s Mason explains, “I was special services. Military intelligence. They taught me to be a killer. In retrospect, I’d sooner have been a poet or a farmer. Which I consider infinitely more honourable professions.” 

2026 OSCARS: Blue Moon (2025) - This is NOT the Payoff Speech You Expect (Creating an Ironic, Emotionally Satisfying Ending)

[Quick Summary: Lorenz Hart, formerly of the famous Rodgers-Hart duo, struggles with alcoholism and regret on the opening night of the new Rodgers-Hammerstein musical, "Oklahoma!".]

THREE THOUGHTS: 

1) THE PROCESS. In several recent interviews, actor Ethan Hawke spoke about director Richard Linklater's process with the script.*  The most interesting tidbits:

1) "Linklater is very patient." It's taken 10 years to get the script right.
2) Hawke said he knew this was a very small target they were aiming for. 
3) Each time they'd get a draft, Linklater would call it "another layer of paint."

2) THE SCRIPT. I think this patience and persistence paid off.  It's a very tight script (only 85 pgs.), happens all in one night, and mostly in one location.  

It's also a wonderful character piece on how Hart often got in his own way. 

3) PAYOFF THAT PAYS OFF. I imagine getting Hart right was very hard: 

- He was short, overlooked, and full of contradictions (ex. self-destructive and smart; gay, but hopelessly in love with a woman).
- He was both the biggest and smallest person in the room.
- Hawke said that Hart kept talking, talking, talking because he wouldn't be noticed if he stopped. 

What does the writer do with a character who won't shut up? Here, it was fascinating to see the unexpected irony that the writer used in the structure.

To be more specific, the writer allowed Hart to talk, talk, talk for 3/4th of the script, then the woman he loves shuts him up in the last 1/4th with a brilliant monologue.

For example, in the scene below:
- Hart is in love with Elizabeth, who is 20 yrs. younger.
- Hart hasn't told her how he feels about her.
- She's still at Yale and stuck on Cooper, a friend's boyfriend and a junior at Yale.
- She thinks of Hart as a confidante, but doesn't ask much from him except to listen.
- He knows he's gay, but feels seen by her. It's the closest thing to love for him.
- At the party for "Oklahoma!," they go into a closet to have some privacy.
- She tells him about her humiliating 20th birthday with her crush, Cooper.
- On her birthday, they tried to have sex, but Cooper was too drunk and nervous. 
- A week later, Cooper asked her to dinner. They meet at his fraternity.
- This is one of Hart's most important scenes, and it's all in his reaction.
- Note that he's been talking all this time, self-absorbed -- until this moment when SHE becomes more important.
- Also, this is only part of Elizabeth's speech.  I'd highly recommend you read it in its entirety. It's a high wire act.  One of the best of deeply felt, exposing speeches for a female character.  

INT. SARDI'S BAR - ENTRANCE AREA - CONTINUOUS

...COAT ROOM AREA

ELIZABETH: In spades. I mean, it's suddenly pouring. We're practically tearing each other's clothes off. There is no conversation. And this time there is no difficulty. Not the first time. Not the second time.

HART: Stop.

ELIZABETH: He says to me, "Happy belated birthday, Elizabeth," and, you want to hear the unbelievable ending to this sordid little story That was the last time I saw him. That was November - over four months ago. I was absolutely sure he'd call. If only to have sex again, right? No. Never. I thought he'd write. No. So I call him, of course. He couldn't get off the phone fast enough.  So I wrote to him a four-page typed letter. Single-spaced. No response....

I tell myself it was like a fever dream, you know? And, maybe, the fever finally broke. And it all sounds sane and sensible, but, you know something, if he called me right now, right this very second, I'd drop everything in my life and drive three hours, drive thirty hours just to spend one more night with him. What is the matter with me, Larry? 

HART: Why would you drive thirty hours to see someone who treated you like that?

ELIZABETH: Because I'm in love with him?

HART: ...You are?

ELIZABETH: It's illogical. Obsessional. Pathetic. And this is not the first time this has happened to me. It keeps happening to me. I feel like I can't see people clearly. 

She struggles to take a deep breath. He takes out his pocket handkerchief and hands it to her. 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This payoff ending was emotionally satisfying because:
- The first 3/4 of the script (Hart talking) builds up to this last 1/4 (Hart silenced).
- This speech delivers a comeuppance to Hart in an unusual way.
-  I expected him to talk over her. Hart's silence thwarted my expectations.
- Hart shows us how he was his own worst enemy, and the structure mimics it.

Blue Moon (2025)(1/9/25 conformed script)
by Robert Kaplow
Inspired by the letters of Lorenz Hart and Elizabeth Weiland 

* For example: here, here, and here.  

TODAY'S NUGGET: This Land is Mine (1943) - "I Don't Love You" Moment That's Really "I've Never Seen You Before" (Aha! Moments in Subtext)

[Quick Summary: In WWII, a cowardly school teacher, who lives with his domineering mother in a German occupied town, is tempted to join the Resistance.]

This script takes awhile to get to the point.

It's due to a rather intricate set up and the close connections between characters:
- Albert Lory, the timid protagonist, and Louise Martin his neighbor, are grade school teachers.
- Albert has a secret crush on Louise, but lives with his overbearing mother.
- Their principal and mentor is Prof. Sorel.
- Louise is engaged to George Lambert, who works in the railroad terminal office.
- A member of the underground Resistance has been plaguing the town with bombs.

However, it's worth the wait.  I liked how it delivers an emotional punch, often through nuanced subtext, such as this aha! realization in the scene below:
- The police have just jailed Prof. Sorel as the suspected bomber.
- Louise now goes to see George, who speaks against the bomber.
- The secret bomber is actually Paul, Louise's brother.  He works at the railroad switch tower under George.
- I liked that Louise is working out her confused feelings for George in real time. ex. She admits her confusion to George ("Maybe I'm still in love with you.")
- This conversation about the bomber has brought Louise to an aha! revelation emotionally, i.e., she sees that she and George do not think alike.
- Notice the button on the scene (last few lines), which:
a) shows how far apart they are emotionally; and
b) is ironic, as Paul is the bomber that George has just been dissing.

INTERIOR GEORGE LAMBERT'S OFFICE - AT FRIGHT TERMINAL - DAY

...[Paul] leads [Louise] over to his chair and she sinks into it, glad to be weak for a change and have someone to comfort her. He takes his handkerchief and dries her eyes.

GEORGE (continued)(as to a child, tenderly): There now, is that better?

LOUISE: George, I'm frightened. I'm scared to death. Life is getting horrible. I don't know what to do. I need you.

GEORGE: Of course you need me, darling. That's what I'm here for. I love you.

As she relaxes, comforted:

GEORGE (continued): I know all about Sorel. They also took that fellow that runs the store across the street from you - Lorraine, and eight other men. One of them worked here in the yard. (petting her comfortingly) But nothing can happen for a week. If they find the man who threw the bomb they'll all be released.

LOUISE (half out of her mind): But that's just it. You don't understand. The man who threw the bomb -- Oh, George, I'm in an awful situation.

GEORGE (comfortingly): I know, dear, I know. The man who threw the bomb is a criminal.

Louise draws back and looks up at him as if she couldn't have heard right but in his indignation he doesn't notice it.

GEORGE (continued): If he has a spark of courage he'll come forward and admit his guilt - save innocent men.

LOUISE (staring at him): You really think he's a criminal?

GEORGE (righteously): Look Louise, all fo us hate this Occupation. I stood up to Major von Keller and told him to his face I didn't like it. But we have to face facts: They have the power. If one of us wants to resist, and get killed, that's foolish but courageous. He takes the risk and punishment himself. But the man who secretly resists, with acts of sabotage, is a coward; he escapes and innocent people die.

LOUISE (staring at him): You believe that?

GEORGE: It's obvious, darling.

LOUISE (looking at him strangely): You mean everyone who resists the enemy should give himself up, George?

GEORGE: I think so.

LOUISE: Then there is no more resistance.

GEORGE: Then we'd have peace. Wouldn't we be better off? Our duty now is to keep alive. To exist. What becomes of a nation if its citizens all die? Do you want to die? Do I want to die?

LOUISE (quietly; looks at him as if she had never seen him before): I saw them take Professor Sorel. He's not afraid to die.

She gets up and looks out the window, suddenly a million miles from him.

GEORGE: But he's old. We're young. Life means everything to us.

LOUISE (looking out at the switch tower): I know young men who aren't afraid to die. [She means her brother Paul.]

GEORGE (goes to her): Nothing is worth the sacrifice of your life, Louise. We have everything ahead of us - love, marriage, children --

LOUISE (turns on him): No, George.

He looks at her blankly as she takes off the ring and drops it on his desk.

LOUISE (continued): I was in love with you. Maybe I'm still in love with you. But I begin to feel as if I'd never looked at you before. This is the first time you've been frank with me. My mind's confused -- I haven't the right answer yet for the things you've said, but I feel -- I know you're wrong.

Her eyes widen as the door swings open and Paul walks in, his usual gay self.

PAUL: Hello, folks. (grins) I don't know how you do it, George. I can't get my girl to come down here and visit me.

Louise walks straight past him and exits. He looks after her curiously, then at the discomfited George.

PAUL (continued): Hey, what's the matter?

GEORGE (trying to cover up, hiding the ring in his hand): Oh, she's just upset. She'll get over it. You know women.

PAUL (laughs): I sure don't.

FADE OUT

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: The subtext here works because:
- George and Louise fundamentally have opposing views on the Resistance.
- George is missing information (doesn't know the secret about Paul).
- This moment comes at a crucial turning point (there are stakes).

In addition, I also liked how the subtext is also about other things: the bomber (surface); Prof. Sorel; young vs. old; the line of sacrifice; vulnerability; need; status.

This Land is Mine (1943)(anthology with only the script)
This Land is Mine (1943)(script + introduction)*
by Dudley Nichols

*This is a stand-alone publication includes the script plus an introduction with interesting details about where this film falls in history, the RKO studio, the director Renoir, and star Charles Laughton.

TODAY'S NUGGET: The Front (1976) - Using the Physical Space Well to Setup-Payoff a Joke

 [Quick Summary: After agreeing to act as a front for a blacklisted writer, Howard becomes famous and falls in love with a script editor who thinks he's a real writer.]

Have you heard of this black comedy? I hadn't, but was curious because it stars Woody Allen in a film he neither wrote nor directed.

Writer Walter Bernstein, who was blacklisted himself, satirizes the system that ruined lives (and is questionable if it had any anti-communism effect). 

Bernstein, a funny writer, really shines when getting the physicality of the joke right for the audience, i.e., using the physical space to setup and payoff a joke.

One of the best examples of this kind of setup-payoff (below) is nearly invisible: 
- Sussman, the producer, has asked Howard for an immediate rewrite.
- Howard frantically calls Alfred, the writer that Howard is pretending to be.
- Howard is a prisoner in his office, under watchful eyes, until Alfred rushes him a draft.
- Note that this is all done in shots, without dialogue.
- Also, note that Bernstein is so clear about the scene that he leaves out verbs in the narrative (last full paragraph).

INT. THE CORRIDOR - DAY

Florence walking along. She pauses before the door to Howard's office, then hesitates and decides not to disturb him. She looks at her watch and walks on.

INT. THE OFFICE - DAY

Howard at the window.  He sees what he has been looking for.

EXT. THE STREET - DAY

A taxi parked at the curb, window open, Alfred inside. He hands an envelope out to Howard on the street.

INT. THE CORRIDOR - DAY

The fire door opens a crack and Howard's eye surveys the scene. The coast is clear and he comes out, having made the climb up again. Carrying the envelope, he staggers into Sussman's office. [The word "staggered" made me laugh because it conveys so much irony.]

INT. SUSSMAN'S OFFICE - DAY

Sussman behind his desk, holding the script in his hands. Florence there. Howard in a chair, panting. Sussman indicates his condition to Florence. [ The meaning is clear, so no verbs are necessary, except for the last sentence.]

SUSSMAN: That's how we treat talent. Sometimes I'm ashamed.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED:  What is so great about this joke is the setup is all physical and non-verbal, topped off by the last punch line (payoff). 

The Front (1976)(8/13/75 revised)
by Walter Bernstein

2024 OSCARS: Poor Things (2023) - Showing His Disconnect with Her

[Quick Summary: Bella, a child's brain transplanted into the body of her mother, learns at a rapid pace as she leaves home to explore the world.]

This is definitely Bella's story (Emma Stone).  She has tremendous arc.

However, I found the Duncan character (Mark Ruffalo) more interesting.  He is a man used to getting his way, and cannot cope with this woman outgrowing him.

One of the first scenes to show this disconnect is the scene below.  I really liked how Duncan is trying to undermine Bella's growing confidence in the subtext.  

What makes it funnier is that she has no idea he is jabbing at her and does not respond in a way we'd expect:

INT. DINING ROOM - DAY

A flambe crepe suzette, a women's hair on fire. Duncan stares at Bella who ignores it, she is drawing a postcard to Baxter. Her floating at sea, a bird sitting on her chest pushing her under. [A woman on fire in a communal dining area is unexpected and funny.]

DUNCAN: There is a woman on fire. Look. [He makes a bid for her attention.]

She continues drawing. [She ignores the woman on fire, which is amusing. She ignores him, which is our first non-verbal sign. Maybe she didn't hear him?]

DUNCAN (CONT'D): I know you are mad, forgive me my kidnapping you, but it was for love. A romantic jape. Don't be such a cunt about it.

She looks at him. [Ok, she did hear him. She may not understand the meaning of "cunt," but she does seem to understand kidnapping is not love, nor for her benefit. They're not on the same page, and the disconnect is widening.]

BELLA: I want a drink.

DUNCAN: Of course darling. The ship is fun, a world to explore. I love you. Do you love me? [He's not listening to her. She doesn't know how to address what's going on yet. They are operating on two different levels. Even if they cannot can see the misunderstanding, we can, and it's humorous too.]

BELLA: Describe the elements I should be looking for within myself to be sure.

DUNCAN: You just feel it or not! [He's getting impatient, but has no idea why. He doesn't know there's an infant brain inside of her, literally. In subtext, he assumes she's being dense, and expects her to behave like an adult, but she cannot. I like the irony here.]

BELLA: So it is no evidence base as God would say. And so how judge it empirically?

DUNCAN: What the fuck are you talking about? Who are you? You don't know what bananas are, you've never heard of chess, and yet you know what empirically means! [He's getting more upset that she makes no sense, though he is not either.]

BELLA: Bella needs a drink. Said twice now. [She may not know what he's talking about, but she does know he's not listening.] 

DUNCAN: I have never felt anything like this. Is this true for you? [He continues to press, even though she can't give him the response he wants.]

BELLA: ...I suppose empirically it is. Oh I am out of ink. [She is literally out of ink, and of words. This was really smart. I also liked that it is a line puts a button on the scene. She has no subtext, and is speaking of ink.]

DUNCAN: Then you shall have ink my love. [Duncan seems to think their agreement re:ink also means they're on the same page about the two of them.]

He gets up and heads across the room.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I liked that we see the disconnect in the non-verbals, and also subtext (what characters believe, but not being said). 

We also think it's amusing because the audience can see what the characters can't.  

Ex. Duncan is insisting Bella behave a certain way without understanding where she is coming from, nor her lack of psychological development.

Poor Things (2023)(final, Dec., 2023)
by Tony McNamara
Based on the novel by Alasdair Gray

2024 OSCARS: American Fiction (2023) - What Happens After the Satire's Punchline?

[Quick Summary: While he faces family issues, a frustrated black writer writes a book that's meant to be insulting, but it becomes a best-seller, much to his dismay.]

I think one of the hardest parts of satires is not losing that edgy irony.

I hate it when a script has a great scene with a zinger punchline, but then it dies.  Why couldn't the writer couldn't sustain the momentum? What happened?  

Many times, the script will simply plateau, instead of continuing to build. 

ex. Perhaps the writers were so happy with a joke that they keep going back to that same well, trying to keep cashing in on that one great scene. 

I liked this script because it never resting too long on a punchline. It also never allowed the protagonist to get too comfortable, so the tension continues to build.

For example, in the scene below:

- Carl is the head of the Literary Award committee.
- He is oblivious to the veiled insult Monk delivers ("I'm honored you'd choose me...") If it ended there, that would just be a great punch line.
- However, the writer turns the tables on Monk and plays to his weakness: "you can judge other writers like they judged you."
- This last bit of conflict is what makes the scene fresh and unpredictable.  We want to know what will happen next.

INT. CARL BRUNT'S OFFICE - SAME TIME

...MONK: Every writer knows the Literary Award, Carl. Especially those of us who haven't won it.

Carl laughs a little.

CARL: Well, that's related to why I'm calling. Like many American institutions, mine was recently rattled by the notion that our lack of diversity has led to a blindspot in our work. So we're kind of trying to remedy that and, to that end, I was wondering how you might feel about being a judge for this year's award.

Monk pauses his browsing for a moment.

MONK: Um, let me say first say, Carl, that I'm honored you'd choose me out of all the black writers you could go to for fear of being called racist.

CARL (oblivious): Yeah, you're very welcome.

MONK: But I think this sounds like a lot of work.

CARL: Yeah, I can't deny that. I mean, you're going to have to read dozens of books. We could offer you a modest stipend.

MONK: Even so, I'm not sure.

CARL: OK. One other crass perk I reference when people are on the fence is that this will allow you the opportunity to literally judge other writers for once, rather than just figuratively.

Monk considers this for a moment.

MONK: Alright. I'm in.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Beware of resting on a punchline too long. Satires particularly do well with a conflict after the punchline. 

Perhaps one reason for this is that an audience feels good after a punchline, and will want another jolt. They'll feel let down unless there's another upswing of emotion, and conflict can deliver that.

American Fiction (2023)
by Cord Jefferson
Based on the novel "Erasure," by Percival Everett

2024 OSCARS: The Holdovers (2023) - When a Juxtaposed Sound Is Ironic

[Quick Summary: A cranky teacher, a grieving cook, and sullen student stay at a 1970s boarding school over Christmas break.]

I liked this script much more than I thought.

I think it's due to the unexpected combinations of humor and humanity.

I particularly liked the scene below in which Mary, the cook, pours out her heart. It's especially poignant because of the two moments of irony (see comments): 

INT. KITCHEN STAFF COMMON ROOM - CONTINUOUS

...MARY: I took this job when Curtis was little, so he could get a good education. You know, he flourished here.

PAUL: He was a great kid. I had him one semester. Very insightful.

MARY: Uh-huh. He hated you. He said you were a real asshole.

PAUL: Well, like I said, sharp kid. Insightful. [This is one of my favorite ironic lines. She was blunt, and he appreciated the truth.]

MARY: He had his heart set on Swarthmore, and he had the grades, but I didn't have the money. Even with financial aid it wasn't enough. So when he got called up, no student deferment, off he went. You know what he said to me? He said: "Hey ma, look at the upside. When I get discharged, I can go to college on the GI Bill." College. (keeping it together) And here we are. With my Curtis in the cold ground, and those boys safe and warm in their beds. It's like you said. "Life is like a henhouse ladder." That's right -- I can hear everything you're saying from the kitchen. Especially that little Kountze kid. Crown prince of all the little assholes.

Silence, which is broken by APPLAUSE from the studio audience. [This juxtaposed sound afterwards is so wonderfully ironic. It's an audible contrast to what she's just said (mourning vs. happy). Also, it encapsulated my visceral reaction to her words: bittersweet, funny.]

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This is a sharply observed story about coping with sadness, which might've been too depressing, if not for its unusual ways to insert irony.

The Holdovers (2023)(undated)
by David Hemington

TODAY'S NUGGET: The Fortune Cookie (1966) - How to Do Irony Right

[Quick Summary: After a crooked lawyer convinced his brother-in-law to fake an injury, the latter has qualms.]

Though this isn't the strongest Wilder-Diamond script, I did like the crooked lawyer, Willie, who is the quintessential example of an ironic character.

Let's see how his actions and words are the opposite of what he means:

INT. GINGRICH OFFICE - DAY

Willie has the phone to his ear, but is covering the mouthpiece with his hand.

WILLIE (to tailor): I'd like to have a matching tie and handkerchief - nothing flashy - maybe something like this.

He opens his coat to reveal the lining - blue polka dots on a white ground. [He actually wants something flashy.]

WILLIE (into phone): Sorry, You were saying? 

INT. O'BRIEN'S OFFICE - DAY

O'BRIEN (into phone): In return for a release from all future claims, we are willing to compensate your client with a lump sum - say, two thousand dollars. Fair enough?

INT. GINGRICH OFFICE - DAY

WILLIE (into phone): It may be fair - but it's not enough. I had a slightly different figure in mind - say, five hundred thousand? [He knows $500k is not fair for a fake injury.]

INT. O'BRIEN'S OFFICE - DAY

O'BRIEN (into phone): Five hundred thousand? (a reaction from the other partners) You're being grotesque! (boiling over) Let me tell you something, Gingrich - as one member of the Bar to another - if indeed you are a member of the Bar - 

INT. GINGRICH OFFICE - DAY

The tailor is removing Willie's coat, and as he talks, Willie switches the phone from one hand to the other, to accommodate him. [He's showing that he's more interested in his suit than the negotiation.]

WILLIE: Look, Mr. O'Brien, I don't want to be unreasonable. You say two thousand - I say five hundred thousand - tell you what - let's split it down the middle. [His reasonable 'split down the middle' IS unreasonable because it greatly favors his side.]

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This character is shameless and swings for the fences with gusto.  It reminds me to let all the flaws hang out.  

Don't be so subtle the reader can't see how the actions and meaning are opposite each other.

The Fortune Cookie (1966)
by Billy Wilder & I.A.L. Diamond

TODAY'S NUGGET: Crime of the Century (1996; TV movie) - When Exposition + Confrontation is All Done IN CHARACTER

[Quick Summary: In 1932, after the Lindbergh baby was ransomed (and then killed), the police pinpoint a carpenter with the money, but was he the kidnapper?]

GOOD SIGN #1: I lost track of time when I read this script.

GOOD SIGN #2: It upended my expectations - it begins with the police officer cleaning out his desk ("I was right"), but then we're shown why he was wrong.

Playwright, novelist, documentarian, screenwriter William Nicholson understands character.*  He also understands structure, which is why the script is so good.

For example, the scene below:
- This is not only exposition and confrontation, but it is all done IN CHARACTER. 
- Dr. Condon is a boaster, who is convinced Hauptmann is guilty.
- Parker, a detective, confronts him with contrary testimony.
- Now caught in a lie, Dr. Condon blusters his way through a response.
- Note Dr. Condon begins with exposition of what happened that night. It is interesting because it's true to his boasting character (contradicted few lines later).

INT. BAR - NIGHT

Dr. John Condon, orange blossom in hand, is telling his tale a fascinated audience of FELLOW DRINKERS. After many a telling, he has honed his story into quite a performance.

Parker enters while he speaks, and gets himself a drink, and listens.

CONDON: The cemetery's dark. Hauptmann is nervous, I can tell. I lead him to a bench. "Don't be afraid", I tell him. "We're alone." He gets calmer.  "Have you got the money?", he says. I way, "Wait, wait. Tell me your name." I'm playing for time, I want to get him talking, you understand. Give himself away somehow. He says, "Call me John." "Well John", I say, "Did you ever think of your own mother?" He's silent for a moment. Then, very low, "Yes", he says, and a tear comes into his eye. "Would I burn", he says, "if the baby's dead?"

This is greeted with a satisfying gasp from his appreciative audience.

LATER -

Dr. Condon is seated at a corner table with Parker, having accepted his offer of a drink.

CONDON: It's a tragic tale, a tragic tale, but perhaps some good can come out of it. I want no more children snatched from their cribs.

PARKER: Would you like to take a look at this, Dr. Condon?

CONDON: What is it?

PARKER: It's a copy of your interview with the police in the Bronx, shortly after Hauptmann's arrest.

Condon waves it away.

CONDON: So much heartbreak. We must look forward, not back.

PARKER: Perhaps you've forgotten what you said back then. You were unable to identify Hauptmann as the man you met in the cemetery. You were then warned that you yourself were under suspicion, as a possible accessory to the crime.

CONDON: I don't recall.

PARKER: Later you changed your evidence and identified Hauptmann, in court, as the man you met in the cemetery. Was that new testimony given under pressure, Dr. Condon?

CONDON: You mean, did I lie?

PARKER: I'm just trying to establish why you changed your evidence.

Condon's reply builds up into a spectacular display of outraged innocence. As his voice grows ever louder, all eyes in the bar are drawn to the little group in the corner.

CONDON: No sir, I did not lie. Who are you to walk in here and call me a liar? I offered my services to Colonel Lindbergh with no hope of reward. I have given thousands of hours of my life, and I am an old man, sir, there is little enough of my life left, thousands of hours, for the sake of justice, and my country, and yes, for that little murdered angel, and you come in here and accuse me of lying?

WHAT I'VE LEARNED:  The structure of this scene (exposition, then confrontation) is wonderful.  

However, I noticed it was not really the dialogue, but the character (Condon's reaction) that was so riveting. 

Crime of the Century (1996; TV movie)(10/4/95, revised)
by William Nicholson
Based on the book, "The Airman and the Carpenter," by Ludovic Kennedy

*According to IMDB, actress Debra Winger won an Oscar nomination for Shadowlands (1993). She praised Nicholson's script to New York Times by calling it "the most literate script I've ever read. I was sad every day that I wouldn't ever say those lines again."

TODAY'S NUGGET: Year of the Dragon (1985) - Showing Respect, With Irony

[Quick Summary: A blunt, newly promoted police captain vows to clear Chinatown of the Asian mafia who is importing heroin.]

TWO RANDOM THOUGHTS:

1) A VERY BLUNT SCRIPT. Stan is a good, but unpopular, cop, who bulldozes anything blocking his mission to wipe out the Asian mafia. 

He takes life like a linebacker - hit, move on, hit, move on.   He feels things, but there is little contemplation.  He is blunt, with little finesse.

This script mimics this:  It is mostly action - hit, move on, hit, move on. It is also lonely and sad.  Everyone else suffers the consequences of Stan's workaholism.

2) SHOWING RESPECT.  There have been many criticisms about this film.

However, I liked one scene in particular because:
- It gives us a rare moment to breathe.
- It simultaneously is credible for this culture (showing respect for one's elders) AND shows irony.

Previous to the scene below:
- Uncle Yung was the mafia leader.  Tai was hungry to be leader.
- Uncle Yung's restaurant was just ransacked by thugs.
- Uncle Yung does not know that Tai secretly hired these thugs.
- At the mafia meeting, Tai unseated Uncle Yung.

Notice how Tai is "smoothing Uncle's exit" with a show of respect, yet it is still ironic (we know Tai is responsible, but Yung does not):

ex.  "INT. SHANGHAI PALACE - DAY

A half dozen PLASTERERS fill in bullet holes on the wall.  Yung is having a cup of tea. two dozen workmen -- PAINTERS, ELECTRICIANS, GLAZIERS are at work already putting the restaurant back in shape.

Joey Tai is sitting with Harry Yung.

A WAITER pours tea for them. Yung's dark-spectacled wife circles in the background.

They sip tea. Pause.

TAI: When will you be able to reopen for business?

YUNG: There is much to do as you can see.

TAI: Yes. It was gracious of you to serve me tea. (stands up) I must go.

Yung stands. The ceremony is brief and private. Tai hands over a red envelop, fat as a small pillow and full of money, with both hands. Yung does not open it.

But gives a sign it has been accepted. If there is pain there is no sign of it on his face. Nothing shows. The transition of power in Chinatown is complete.

As Tai walk out of the restaurant, Yung's wife joins him. Looking at Joey Tai, she mutters in Chinese, which we subtitle.

YUNG'S WIFE: In the presence of your enemy, hide your broken arms in your sleeve."

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: It's ok to hide facts from the characters, but not the audience. I think this is why the irony works here.

Year of the Dragon (1985)(final draft, 9/4/84)
by Oliver Stone and Michael Cimino
Based on the novel by Robert Daley

TODAY'S NUGGET: Mother (1996) - Irony; Very Small Things; Entrenched

[Quick Summary: As an experiment, John, a twice divorced 40 y.o. man moves back in with his mother Beatrice to find out what is the root of his problems with women.]

Why is this script funny?

Because it made me chuckle a lot? Yes.

Because it was clever and multi-layered? Yes.

But mostly, I think it was the way it skewered family dynamics that are so, so familiar.  These characters are entrenched in their positions over very small things.

ex. "INT. SAFEWAY MARKET - DAY

...They stop at the jellies. There's Smucker's, Welch's, and all the standard brands. Then there's one luxury brand for $10.95. It's wrapped up in tissue paper and has a ribbon on it. John takes that. Beatrice almost has a heart attack.

BEATRICE: Oh, don't buy that.

JOHN: Why?

BEATRICE: Because that's a waste of money. You can get a whole jar here for $2.50. Why do you want to spend $10.95? [Arguing about...jelly = Very small things.]

JOHN: Cause this looks like good jelly and thank God we can afford it. Let's experience this together.

BEATRICE: I don't want this experience. You're fooled by these names and all that fancy wrapping. [She's convinced he's being taken.]

JOHN: I'm not fooled by anything. This is not what the experiment's about. It's not about being fooled. It's about splurging. See, I realized something. I think you treat yourself very cheaply, and I think that therefore you have instilled that into me. [He's convinced that she's seeing things narrowly.]

BEATRICE: Honey, I don't treat myself cheaply at all. I lived through a Depression. You didn't.

JOHN: Things aren't so great right now.

BEATRICE: Well it's not like it was in the thirties. You don't have to wait in line to buy bread.

John looks to his left. There's a huge line over by the bakery. The camera sees it. No one says anything. [Irony!]"

WHAT I'VE LEARNED:  I liked how the script poked fun at familiar situations using irony, very small things, and deep commitment to one's position.

Mother (1996)(final draft, June 1995)
by Albert Brooks and Monica Johnson

TODAY'S NUGGET: Strip Search (2004) - Hypocrisy; Visual Irony

[Quick Summary: Several stories, in 2 parts.  After 9/11, the same line of questioning is used for 2 interrogations in 2 countries.  One is "acceptable," the other is not.]

This script made me uncomfortable, and it should.

If I had to summarize the theme, it would be "Hypocrisy: You can dish it out, but you can't take it."

In one story, the writer uses parallel situations in the US and in China: 

- When the US gov't questions and humiliates a character born in another country, it seems acceptable.

- But when China questions and humiliates a US character - with the exact same questions, tone, actions, etc. - it is unacceptable.

This is not a "feel good" or (apparently) popular film. But it is thought provoking.

(I wonder if it would have been different if it was a satire?)

I found that mere juxtaposition of the same dialogue for the US scenes and then the China scenes allows the audience to put 2+2 = Hypocrisy.

Also, the writer then added this scene as a summary of our attitude today. Note the visual irony of the last line:

ex. "EXT. BATTERY PARK/MANHATTAN - DAY

MCGRATH buys hot dog from VENDOR, as JOHN SCANLON, newspaper reporter, calls to him.

SCANLON: Yo, Ned --

MCGRATH turns, sees SCANLON, groans.

SCANLON (cont.): I hear you fellows made a bust today, arrested some terrorist.

MCGRATH: Who told you that?

SCANLON: I never reveal my sources. This terrorist --

MCGRATH (bites into hot dog): I don't know what you're talking about

SCANLON: Ned, come on --

MCGRATH: We haven't arrested anyone, that's the truth.

SCANLON: Are you holding anyone? Questioning anyone? Sticking a hot poker up some poor towel-head's ass?

MCGRATH (eats): No comment.

SCANLON: At least give me the schmuck's name --

MCGRATH: No comment. (eats) You know the way these "schmucks" manipulate the judicial system -- and the media -- to their advantage.

SCANLON: My editor's been biting off my dick. Tell me something --

MCGRATH: You give me your source, I'll see what I can do.

SCANLON shakes his head, frustrated.

SCANLON: Ned, come on, this is me. We've always helped each other out. I spin for you, you spin for me. Remember in Kazakhstan --

MCGRATH (finishes hot dog): Ancient history, pal, back before the flood.

MCGRATH tosses napkin into trash can, goes. On SCANLON, looking up at where the World Trade Center used to be...

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I need to be more aware of how the juxtaposition of scenes (A, B, C) build on one another (A+B+C) to equal (= D) what I want the audience to conclude.

Strip Search (2004)(final draft; dated April 24, 2003)*
by Tom Fontana

*This was a tv movie on HBO, directed by Sidney Lumet.

TODAY'S NUGGET: The Great McGinty (1940) - How to Convey a "Message" Using Irony

[Quick Summary: A bum who becomes a corrupt governor learns his lessons too late.]

The Great McGinty has a message about danger in politics.

Boring, right?

Actually, no. 

The script's irony is so entertaining that I hardly realized there was a message.

ex. McGinty votes for a candidate in exchange for $2/vote.

1 - A predictable setup = We think we know where it's going.

"THE POLITICIAN IN THE TOOL HOUSE

He stands, watch in hand, talking indignantly to the cop outside.

POLITICIAN: Well, I ain't goin' to wait here all night...I got a right to eat, ain't I? The guy's had time to vote ten times! I'm goin' to eat. If you see him, you tell him I got somethin' better to do than...

McGINTY'S VOICE: Than what? ...."

2 - The payoff is exaggerated. Who expected five tickets?

"McGinty comes in, reaches into his right pants pocket and chucks five tickets on the table.

POLITICIAN (counting them with his hand): From the time you took anybody's think...."

3 - The 2nd payoff is hugely exaggerated.  This results in the opposite of what we expected (irony).

From his left pants pocket McGinty throws ten more tickets on the table. This stops the Politician right in the middle of his sentence. He watches goggle-eyed as McGinty throws ten more from his right coat pocket. He watches stupefied as McGinty extracts another ten from his left coat pocket.

POLITICIAN (in an awe-struck voice): Is that all?

McGINTY: Wait a minute. (He pulls two more tickets from his breast pocket) That's it.

POLITICIAN (muttering to himself as he counts the tickets): Thirty-five, thirty-six, thirty-seven...sixty-four bucks!

McGINTY: Seventy-four bucks."

4 - The message? People will find ways around the system. 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: For an ironic twist, exaggerate, then exaggerate even bigger. 

The Great McGinty (1940)
by Preston Sturges

TODAY'S NUGGET: The Power & the Glory (1933) - Getting What You (Don't) Want, i.e., Irony

[Quick summary: A railroad baron's happiest and saddest moments are told in flashback.]

I feel dumb.  When I feel dumb, I read.
 
I felt dumb recently when someone praised writer/director Preston Sturges (1898-1959).  I knew so little.  Exactly why was he so great?

So begins my education of Sturges with this early script.

It is impressive.*

I particularly liked how Sturges uses irony to punch home a point.

Here's how he built one scene:

1 - The stakes are set up clearly.

Eve, the mistress, gives lovesick Tom an ultimatum.

[To have Eve, Tom must discard Sally.]

2 - The protagonist faces a decision, and a complication.

Sally, the wife, tells Tom that she wants to reconnect with a trip to Europe together. Tom confesses he's in love with Eve.

Guilty, he foreswears Eve, and agrees to go to Europe.

Sally abruptly tells him to go with Eve, have fun, and live it up.

She says, "I hope she makes you happier than I did," and walks out.

[Sally is a roadblock for Tom.  We expect her to fight for their marriage, but she does the unexpected and makes it so easy for him.]

3 - The protagonist "got what he wished for"...but the grass isn't as green as he thought.  

Sally commits suicide.

[It is ironic because Tom got what he wanted (Eve) and not what he wanted (guilt). The irony in #3 underscores his bad decision in #1. ]

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Tom chose Eve, confident that she was the better outcome, but she wasn't.  That's irony.

The Power & the Glory (1933)
by Preston Sturges

*A few striking facts about this script:

- It was Preston Sturges' first original spec.
- It was shot without changes.
- It launched him as a serious screenwriter (despite poor box office).
- It convinced him to become a director (he didn't direct this one).
- Its "fractured narrative" and constant voice over was revolutionary.
- It heavily influenced Citizen Kane.