TODAY'S NUGGET: The Bourne Identity (2002) - In the Suspense Genre, Danger = Possibility of Failure

[Quick Summary: A man waking up with amnesia realizes that he's an assassin.] 

What is the difference between:
a) the Suspense genre and 
b) regular suspense that is found in all stories?

According to one Hitchcock quote, the Suspense genre is marked by danger, and I always find interesting in HOW various writers include it.  

For instance, writer Tony Gilroy brought fresh life to the tired suspense genre in the Bourne adaptations by making the audience feel the danger to the protagonist.

The scene below is from a first draft:
- The "Professor" is chasing Bourne and Marie. 
- Notice how your eye keeps moving because the stakes are high and there's a real possibility of failure. 
- Also notice that the tension lies in the maybes: Maybe Bourne will get caught and we'll never get answers. Or Marie will die and he'll lose connection to the world.

THE METRO PLATFORM

The PROFESSOR lands on the other side -- both racing down the platform -- PROFESSOR tearing up the wall behind them and -- HERE COMES  A TRAIN -- on BOURNE and MARIE's side -- traveling the opposite way -- temporary refuge.  Not for long -- there's no way out on this end of the platform. They skid to a halt -- just as --

THE TRAIN DOORS OPEN -- STARTLED STRAPHANGERS  stare at BOURNE and MARIE as they stop onto the platform -- take off running.

THE PROFESSOR has to turn his bike around. He's quick -- but it gives BOURNE and MARIE a two second head start.

BOURNE and MARIE almost at the other end of the platform -- gunfire ripping up the windows behind them. Gonna go for the steps -- be here come --

THE ANGRY COPS -- remember them? -- the ones who took the ride down the steps -- they're firing now and --

BOURNE and MARIE turn back -- the PROFESSOR is firing and there is only one option -- 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED:  What undergirds danger is the possibility of failure, which requires the push-pull of tension. 

I also think this story's frame work lends itself to suspense because it's the ultimate life or death situation, survival of the fittest. 

The Bourne Identity (2002)(9/20/00 Paris draft)
by Tony Gilroy and William Blake Herron
Based on the novel by Robert Ludlum 

TODAY'S NUGGET: Proof of Life (2000) - One Way to Express Jeopardy (Hope-Fear-Hope-Fear)

[Quick Summary: In South America, an American wife hires a negotiator to arrange for the release of her husband, an engineer who was kidnapped.]

Q: How do you make the audience feel for the protagonist in an action thriller?
A: Danger and personal stakes are well worn tropes.

Q: But I have a dangerous situation in my script and it doesn't work. Why?
A: Perhaps there isn't enough jeopardy, i.e., the possibility that the protagonist could lose.

Q: Could you give me a good example of this see-sawing feeling?
A: I think Tony Gilroy scripts do a great job of making the audience feel they're constantly on the back foot and never assured of success.

For example, today's script stacks the deck against us:
- It is set in a foreign location where language and culture are barriers.  
- A crime (kidnapping) has occurred to Alice's husband, a civil engineer.   
- Alice has no experience with terrorists.
- Her only hope is Terry is a hardened, experienced negotiator, who at one point, walks away from helping her.
- A more specific example is the scene below, which happens early in the script to start us realizing that  the margin of error is very thin in Terry's job.
- Here, Terry has just made the trade for the hostage, Lenoir.
- Notice how the hope-fear-hope-fear that doesn't let the reader off the hook easily.
- Also notice that how this scene establishes Terry's ability and credibility.

 

TERRY'S JEEP -- THE LOCAL DRIVER -- stuck in the mud -- panic making it worse - -just finding traction as TRACER ROUNDS tear into him and --

THE TWO CHECHEN TANKS searching for targets --

TERRY still coming -- waving a sidearm at THE CHOPPER PILOT -- "don't move!" -- dragging LENOIR in under the rotors -- [We are hoping Terry will succeed.]

A RUSSIAN JEEP EXPLODING behind them and --

INSIDE THE CHOPPER  -- total chaos -- LENOIR scrambling in -- THE PILOT SCREAMING IN SLAVIC -- he's freaking out -- pulling up already -- too soon because -- [Fear: Oh no! Don't go!]

TERRY hasn't cleared the threshold -- tossed back -- head slammed against the door as he falls -- rocked -- grabbing at the doorframe -- hanging there! -- nothing but instinct keeping him from falling and -- [Hope: He's hanging in there.]

THE GROUND pulling away and --

LENOIR reaching for TERRY -- trying -- but THE PILOT -- there's something wrong -- something new -- no time -- suddenly he's jerking the stick and --

THE CHOPPER spilling sharply to one side and --

TERRY falling -- falling into the cockpit and -- [Fear: Oh noooo!]

WHOOOOOSK! -- AN ANTI-TANK ROCKET -- a blur -- already on them -- already past -- they've been hit! -- creased -- A LANDING SKID torn away from the undercarriage! -- the helicopter tilting -- overreacting -- stalling -- for a moment it looks like they're beating it in and -- 

THE PILOT fighting to keep it up -- CURSING AND SPUTTERING IN SLOVAK -- LENOIR rolling on the floor in pain -- his bandaged hand crushed in the turbulence and --  [Lots more fear.  This will not end well.]

FINALLY TO

TERRY pulling himself into a window seat. He's dazed. Looking down as the earth begins to pull away. As the chopper starts to level off.   [Whew! Hope.  Leveling off is good.]

TERRY wiping at the blood from a deep cut above his eye. Wiping it away so he can see. Trying to get a grip. To focus. Something. 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: For that gut wrenching feeling, discomfort and the possibility of not succeeding must reign.

Proof of Life (2000)(7/6/99 draft)
by Tony Gilroy 

TODAY'S NUGGETS: Armaggedon (1998) - Why THIS Guy?

[Quick Summary: A team of drillers are recruited to help stop an asteroid that threatens the earth.]

This story is preposterous, i.e., that a driller would end up as an astronaut.

So why THIS guy?  Why does Harry, an oil driller, need to be the protagonist?

I liked that this script is clear why: Harry is the only guy who knows how to operate the equipment, which will be required to blow up the asteroid.

The writers did a nice job of explaining this through introducing some conflict (we are now learning NASA had stolen Harry's prototype):

INT. NASA/HALLWAY -- ONE MINUTE LATER

Harry and Grace -- both in shock -- walk downstairs behind Truman, Quincy and A SMALL MILITARY ESCORT.

TRUMAN: We want to land on the asteroid, drill a hole, drop in some nukes, take off and detonate, having the pieces slide past us. Except we have an equipment problem.

QUINCY: The drilling unit is part of a lunar project we've been working on for the past three years. The recent discovery of water on the moon wa--

A DOOR. TWO ARMED GUARDS open up and step aside --

INT. NASA R&D HANGAR -- SAME TIME       OMITTED

TECHNICIANS standing beside a huge gurney. Stretched across, A LARGE ROBOTIC DRILLING ARM -- complex machinery and gears and Teflon cables. Harry's jaw tightening as he circles the thing. Harry is in shock -- .

QUINCY (nervously): You may recognize the rig...

HARRY (utterly confused): It's tough not to recognize something you spent five years designing --

QUINCY: Yes, we were planning on sending this to the moon and--

HARRY: What, you got a key to the Patent Office?

TRUMAN: Basically. You see, that's why you're here.

HARRY: What I see, is that you ripped me off and now I'm pissed.

QUINCY: We prefer the term borrowed...But actually, ostensibly, the boundaries of patent laws only apply to Earth, not outer space.

TRUMAN: Shut up, Ron.

HARRY: Are you kidding me?! I got dragged into this because you "borrowed from me" and by the say did a shit job of putting it together?

TRUMAN: So what's wrong with it? You said we'd done a bad job putting it together.  

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Introducing conflict is one way to sneak in exposition without it feeling like an information dump.

Armaggedon (1998)(8/14/97 draft)
by Jonathan Hensleigh, rev. by Tony Gilroy and JJ Abrams

TODAY'S NUGGET: The Devil's Advocate (1997) - A Great Writer is Inventive in Getting the Audience into the Character

[Quick Summary: A defense lawyer makes a deal with the devil to defend him.]

I think what sets a good writer apart from a great writer is inventiveness.  

I particularly look for unusual visual (which is often called "cinematic") ways into characters that we've not seen before. 

For example, this script presents who the Milton character is in one startling image: 

INT. CATHOLIC CHURCH - DAY

Milton down below. Lowering a single finger into the holy water. Instantly -- it's boiling and we --

                                         HARD CUT TO; 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I think this image is quite inventive because it's arresting and also makes me more curious about what's the character will do next. 

The Devil's Advocate (1997)(1/18/97 shooting script)
by Jonathan Lemkin and Tony Gilroy
Based on the novel by Andrew Neiderman
 

TODAY'S NUGGET: Cutting Edge (1992) - A Strong Voice + Economy of Writing (Clarity, Pacing, What the Characters Want)

[Quick Summary: When a female skater loses her skating partner, she and a hockey player team up as a doubles pair for the next Olympics.]

Q: What is "voice"?
A: "Voice" can be defined as "how a writer tells a story that is unique to him/her." 

Q: Is voice truly evident on the page? That is, that a particular writer wrote a script?
A:  Sometimes.  It's not just a point of view, but HOW the writer leads you through the story.

Q: What is a good example of a strong voice?
A: One of the strongest voices I've seen is writer Tony Gilroy, whose scripts I'll be posting about in the upcoming weeks (both original and rewrite jobs).*

Q: What is it about Gilroy's voice that is so evident? 
A: I think one would hire Gilroy because you like the way he tells a story. I like the way he balances tone in the dramas and action thrillers that he's known for. 

He has distinct brisk pacing, a way of getting into the story fast, and sustaining suspense, all while being very clear about what the characters want.  

Today's script is an unusual one: 
- It's Gilroy's first produced film credit as a writer.
- It is also sort of a sports/romance/action story to boot.
- Though this is a younger Gilroy script, it has all his trademark pacing and clarity.

In the scene below: 
- It is the1988 Calgary Olympics.
- There is a simplicity of two athletes of very different temperaments on a collision course.
- We are clear what each wants: to win.
- Note the economy of writing.  In a very few words, we feel the urgency of the moment, yet the Doug and Kate's mutual annoyance of encountering an obstacle.  

INT. THE BOWELS OF THE SADDLEDOME

An empty passageway. DOUG is lost. Sweating. Cursing. Charging blindly ahead. From above, the MUFFLED ROAR of the crowd. If he could claw his way up to the ice he'd do it.

                                                                           CUT TO:

A DIFFERENT PASSAGEWAY

KATE striding ahead -- rounding a corner  and -- SMACK! -- right into DOUG -- a head-on collision and it's no contest -- KATE sent flying on her ass --.

DOUG (barely stopping): -- Does this go up to the ice?

KATE stares at him, incredulous. "THE STAR SPANGLED BANNER" begins to play in the distance.

DOUG: Is this the way to the ice?

KATE (still sitting there): Why you barbarian jerk -- is that all you have to say?

Screw this, DOUG is already several steps away and moving. 

KATE: Where were you raised, in a barnyard?

DOUG stops mid-stride. This kind of shit demands at least a moment of his time.

DOUG: Honey, where I'm from we stand for the National Anthem.

Now he's gone. 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED:  I was impressed by how much takes place in such little space on the page.  It takes a lot of drafts to hone a script to get it into this shape. 

The Cutting Edge (1992)(4/15/90 draft)
by Tony Gilroy 

*Interestingly enough, the only other writer who had this strong of a voice (i.e., I could spot his invisible fingerprints on the page) is the legendary writer,  William Goldman, who was one of Gilroy's mentors. 

TODAY'S NUGGET: Sherlock Holmes (2009) - Why "Vari-Speed" Tells Us About Character

[Quick Summary: Holmes and sidekick Dr. Watson are on the trail of an enemy that wants to destroy England.

I wasn't surprised that this script was tailored to its director Guy Ritchie, who favors cinematic techniques like swish pans, slow motion, etc.

I was surprised to see how the writers included these techniques on the page, ex. "vari-speed" in the scene below. 

I think it works because it shows the speed of Holmes' thoughts. In other words, "vari-speed" is about character, not just a cool technique. 

INT. CATHEDRAL CRYPTS - ENTRANCE - NIGHT 

 ...We see Holmes' eyes from the shadows, as he lowers his jacket and thinks through his plan of attack.

HOLMES (V.O.): Head cocked to the left, partial deafness in right ear. FIrst point of attack.

PRE-VISUALIZATION IN VARI-SPEED

FOCUS ON the spot behind the man's right ear, just at the top of the jaw -- the most vulnerable point. Holmes launches a hammer blow, and we ramp from 24 fps to 00 fps (ULTRA SLOW MOTIONS) as he makes contact. The man's head is thrown back as he spins round.

HOLMES (V.O.): Then throat, paralyze vocal chords, stop screaming.

BACK TO 24 fps. The man's mouth opens to cry out. we RAMP BACK UP TO 400 fps as his Adam's Apple is struck with a precision karate chop, strangling his scream.

HOLMES (V.O.): Stink of alcohol, heavy drinker -- knuckles to liver.

BACK TO 24 fps, RAMPING TO 400 fps as a devastating knuckle-punch to the liver doubles up the bowler-hatted thug and crumples him to his knees.

SECOND-TIME ACTION - SUPER FAST REPEAT OF ABOVE

Holmes flashes out of the shadows, moving so fast that we can barely see what he's doing.

THWACK! Hammer blow to ear.
CRACK! Karate chop to throat.
WHAP! Knuckle punch to liver.

BACK TO NORMAL MOTION as the man crumples to the ground, Holmes takes his bowler hat from his head and flips it onto his own in one super fast move.

Holmes drags the battered man into the shadows, lifts his lantern and proceeds down the spiral staircase. 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Beware using a cool technique without linking it to character. One works. The other will come off flat.

Sherlock Holmes (2009)(9/29/08 draft)
by Michael Robert Johnson and Anthony Peckham and Simon Kinberg

Story by Lionel Wigram and Michael Robert Johnson

TODAY'S NUGGET: Spartacus (1960) - "What is Going on in Each Scene? What's the Most Interesting Way to Play It?"

[Quick Summary: In ancient Rome, Spartacus leads of revolt of gladiatorial slaves in a fight for freedom.]

THREE INTERESTING THINGS ABOUT THIS FILM: 

1) After Paths of Glory (1957), star Kirk Douglas teamed up again with director Stanley Kubrick on Spartacus (1960), one of the most expensive films of its time. 

2) Writer Dalton Trumbo did not like how the POV was rewritten because it shrunk his larger scale to a smaller scale (his"Two Conflicting POV" report here). 

3) Director Stanley Kubrick observed:

The making of any film, whatever the historical setting or the size of the sets, has to be approached in much the same way. You have to figure out what is going on in each scene and whats the most interesting way to play it. With Spartacus, whether a scene had hundreds of people in the background or whether it was against a wall, I thought of everything first as if there was nothing back there. Once it was rehearsed, we worked out the background.  (my bolding)

A good example of this is the death of a gladitorial slave, in the scene below:
- Marcus Crassus is a general and politician who is hungry for power.
- Crassus is with his friend Glabrus, who is getting married to Claudia.  
- They have come to the gladitorial school to purchase a private gladitorial fight, in honor of the upcoming wedding. 
- Batiatus is the owner of the gladiator school.
- Slaves were often paired off to fight each other, sometimes to the death.  
- Here, Spartacus and Draba are paired up. 
- Draba has a trident and net. He subdues Spartacus, then spares him.  
- Draba heads for the those that purchased him, as vengeance. 
- What is going on in this scene? It explains what is at stake for slaves if they do not resist and revolt. It also shows how unyielding Crassus is.
- What is the most interesting way to play it? Draba's death is very dramatic and involves the bad guy, Crassus.  In the background, the guards' actions emphasize the main action.

FULL SHOT - FIELD AND GALLERY

Draba has reached the fence. There a guard tries to intercept him. Draba skewers him and flings his body away as if scattering trash. He climbs the fence, lunges upward into the gallery and toward the box. Other guards are not closing in from all directions. As Draba leaps toward the box, the first guard gets within throwing distance. He hurls his heavy pilum at Draba. The eighteen inches of steel imbeds itself in the gladiator's ebony body, but still he plunges upward, his trident in position to throw, his eyes on his deadly enemies in the box. A second pilum finds its mark, but already Draba has groped his way almost to the box, the spears dragging from the body.

FLASH SHOT - ARENA - SPARTACUS

stupefied, staring, just extricating himself from the net.  

FLASH SHOT - THE BOX

Batiatus hides behind it. Glabrus leaps in alarm to his feet. Crassus moves not a muscle. Chill as steel, utterly fascinated by the possibilities, he watches the approach of Draba. Claudia, trying to get out o the box, stumbles, falls and SCREAMS.

ANOTHER ANGLE - INCLUDING BOX AND DRABA

Guards rushing UP on him in b.g. Draba, the two spears still sticking in his back, makes a final lunge. His hands grasp the edge of the box. His eyes glare up at the occupants, fierce and horrible and lost. Crassus, in the meanwhile, has slowly risen. Calmly, he slips a tiny bejeweled dagger from his belt. And then, as Draba's great arms reach out to seize him, he bends forward between those terrible arms (exactly as a bullfighter risks life by bending forward between the horns for the death thrust) and deftly inserts the knife into Draba's spinal cord just above the shoulder-line. Even before the knife is withdrawn, Draba is dead. The effect is instantaneous (again as in a bullfight when a member of the corrida severs the spinal counterpart of a wounded and dying bull.) The great African, like his counterpart the bull, curls convulsively into the birth position his head forward between his arms, his knees drawn upward -- but he was dead before the reflex action of death was made visible.  

WHAT I'VE LEARNED:  I realized that I often skip the importance of nailing "What's going on in each scene?" because I'm more worried about "What's the most interesting way to play it?"

Spartacus (1960)(1/16/59 final draft, revised)
by Dalton Trumbo
Based on the novel by Howard Fast
 

TODAY'S NUGGET: The Paths of Glory (1957) - A Villain's "I'm Not Sorry at All" Final Speech

[Quick Summary: During a court martial, a French colonel defends his regiment over refusing to shoot at fellow French officers in a suicide mission that was ordered by a General.]

Every villain doesn't think he's a villain.  He thinks he's justified for what he's done.

This script does a great job of exploring how a villain thinks, and ends in a great summation speech at the end (below).

In this scene:
- Gen. Rousseau called for the suicide mission.
- Col. Dax is a lawyer who was drafted into the war.
- The "guilty" regiment was ordered to choose a few soldiers to be punished for the whole regiment. They were to be shot with a firing squad.
- After the soldiers were absolved, Rousseau and Dax walk together.
- Note how Rousseau's musings show that he's thoughtful, but not particularly moral. He rationalizes away what he has done.  

EXT. VARIOUS ANGLES - PARADE GROUND

...They walk along in a friendly silence.

GEN. ROUSSEAU (expansively): Which one of us was on the side of the angels, I wonder.

COL. DAX: I'm not sure I follow you, sir.

GEN. ROUSSEAU: Well, take, for instance, the case of the early Christians. What was it, perhaps more than anything else, that strengthened and solidified them? -- persecution, wouldn't you say? The cruelest kind of injustice. Tyranny gave birth to the Manga Carta. Callousness and indifference to human welfare brought about the French Republic. And so on through History. It may be that progress comes really through a kind of challenge. And who is to say that if those men had been shot today, that it wouldn't have been a step towards the end of a certain kind of despotism in the army?

COL. DAX: General, you have a very strange theory there. I am not at all sure that I agree with you. 

GEN. ROUSSEAU: I'm not at all sure I agree with myself. You know, perhaps when they say man is a rational animal, what they really mean is that he has a limitless ability to rationalize, to make excuses for himself, to feel self-righteous no matter what he does. I don't know why I'm rambling on like this. Probably because there's nothing left for me to do but talk. You know, Colonel, I am undoubtedly a very wicked man - but I don't feel wicked inside. Though, I suppose that's  a prerequisite for being labeled truly wicked. 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I thought these last two lines were particularly chilling because Rousseau is rational yet has lost a moral center. 

The Paths of Glory (1957)(undated draft)
by Stanley Kubrick and Jim Thompson 

TODAY'S NUGGET: Mindhunters (2004) - How to Make an Information Dump More Interesting to Watch (Clarity of Purpose)

[Quick Summary: After a group of FBI trainees are dropped off on a deserted island for a weekend training exercise, one of them starts killing them off, one by one.]

I thought this script did a great job of bringing the audience into the psychological game that's being played.  How did the writers do it?

They had to find a way to quickly get into the minds of the trainees, explain how they think (essentially an information dump), yet maintain a brisk pacing. 

The writers knew that the most traditional and efficient way to do this is through interviews of the trainees.  Their new addition here was using new technology.  

For example, in the scene below: 
- Harris, the FBI trainer, has brought the trainees to an isolated island for training.
- Someone has a beef with all of them. Weird things start to happen.
- Sara, one of the trainees, goes looking for information and finds a laptop with her fellow trainees' initial interviews.  
- Notice that this is an information dump, but a necessary and efficient one. 
- The interview is a tried-and-true technique, but the writers used a more modern tool here to do so (the laptop). 
- Also, Sara is seeking clues, so the interviews feel more like answers to her questions vs. telling the audience information. 

INT. THE DORM ROOMS -- MOMENTS LATER

...Sara's eyes SWING to the LAPTOP on J.D's bed.

THE SCREEN

is filled with STAR-BURSTS - a SCREEN-SAVER program.

She presses the command button. The computer comes to life.

ON THE SCREEN -- J.D. APPEARS ON VIDEO TAPE

In the middle of an INTERVIEW.

J.D. (on tape): ...If there's one thing I've learned working for the Bureau, there's always a cause and effect. Even in the sickest criminal mind.

HARRIS (V.O.)(on tape): But do you want to crawl into that kind of mind?

ANGLE THE GROUP

as they stare at the laptop - dumbfounded.

J.D. (on tape): Do I want to? No. But will I? Yes.

ANGLE THE LAPTOP -- AS THE SCREEN

turns to SNOW

and ANOTHER INTERVIEW blinks on.

BOBBY (on tape): I'd be walking, just minding my own business, and a squad car would pull over. I used to carry a photo ID just to prove I lived in the neighborhood.

HARRIS (V.O.): Why Behavioral Science?

BOBBY (on tape): You're the best...

TIGHT ON BOBBY

BOBBY: That's my psych-eval interview...

ANGLE THE LAPTOP --

SNOW again...

ANOTHER INTERVIEW blinks on.

NICOLE (on tape): I was 11 years-old. I came home from school and mom was unconscious . The police took him away. It's the first time I remember feeling safe. We never heard from dad again...

ANOTHER ANGLE - LUCAS

LUCAS (on tape): I left medical school to join the Bureau because I thought I could be more effective on the front lines. (beat) What can I say? I'm an adrenaline junkie.

ANGLE - RAMON 

RAMON (on tape): Once I got a taste of homicide, there was no turning back. There's not a helluva lot more satisfying than seeing a killer brought to justice.

ANGLE - VINCE

VINCE (on tape): I was that kid. The one who knew everything there is to know about serial killers. I've always wanted to be a mindhunter. The accident hasn't changed that.

ANGLE - SARA

SARA (on tape): Her killer sent me letters from different mailing services for a year after we found the body. Told me everything he did to her. (beat) Every single thing.

TIGHT ON SARA

flushing crimson...

AND THE SCREEN FREEZES. 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I didn't particularly notice the information dump about other characters here because the scene had real clarity of purpose.  

That is, Sara was seeking answers, so watching her register new information was more interesting to watch than if I was told it.

Also, the laptop was cool updated tech to use in a film, but it didn't replace knowing the fundamentals of drama (re: how to convey information through interviews).

Mindhunters (2004)(12/17/00 revised draft)
by Wayne Kramer, revisions by Kevin Brodbin, Kario Salem

2026 OSCARS: Train Dreams (2025) - When Someone Becomes Important to You (Combination of Voice Over + Action)

[Quick Summary: The life of beauty and heartache of Robert Grainier, a logger and railroad worker.]

Q: What's this film about?
A: It's a quiet story about beauty of the world and the passage of time.  It's got a mood and atmosphere to it that's reflective, like a tone poem. 

Q: That sounds boring. What makes it so special to be nominated?
A: The writing sneaks up on you, and fits perfectly with a protagonist who doesn't say a whole lot, but feels things deeply and simply. 

For example, in the scene below:
- Robert lost his family early in life and was raised by foster parents.
- He experienced a lot of things, but has remained uninvolved and unconnected emotionally.
- Things changed when he meets his wife, Gladys.
- Suddenly something makes connection worthwhile and it changes him.
- This scene below is the first time he notices her, a moment of seismic importance.
- He is someone who is unused to communicating.
- Notice how the writers honed the writing to bring out the truthfulness of the moment, yet its simplicity.  They chose to use voice over + drop of the gaze, in order to give the latter more meaning. 

INT. METHODIST CHURCH - YEARS LATER

Grainier is in his early 30's, looking like a stray animal. Singing along to the hymns. It's a small church. Not more than two dozen in the congregation.

NARRATOR (V.O.): He felt that nothing much attracted his interest, until, that is, he met Gladys Olding.

He watches GLADYS, singing in the choir. Her voice stands apart to him.

But when she looks at him, he's too shy to hold her gaze. He looks down to his choir book. 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I'm not a huge fan of voice over, but here, it's used well.  

It gives context to the drop of the gaze, i.e., Robert is shy, yet really wants to connect, which is unusual for him.     

Train Dreams (2025)(undated)
by Clint Bentley & Greg Kwedar
Based on the book by Denis Johnson