TODAY'S NUGGET: Turning Point (1977) - Delivering an Emotionally Satisfying End of Character Arc

[Quick Summary: A former dancer faces her decision to give up ballet, after her daughter joins a NYC company that features her (the mother's) former competitor.]

This week's script was a huge pop cultural sensation when it was released.* 

Perhaps one of the reasons is how the writer delivered emotionally satisfying endings, for both mother and daughter separately.

For example, in the scene below:
- Emilia, the daughter who has just joined this NYC company, has been dating Yuri, a very talented fellow dancer. 
- She's been wrapped up in him, thinking they're a couple.
- However, he's been seeing other women without telling her.
- This hits her hard, but it matures her. 
- How does the writer show the triumphant end of her character arc? Through her changed behavior. 
- Notice how she is no longer swayed by every emotion and  keeps it professional ("better give me more support").
- Also note that the fruits of the maturity are not just in private, but also in public ("she smiles -> but not for him -> it's a performer's smile").

INT. MISKOFF THEATRE - UNDER THE STAGE - NIGHT

...She starts to pull away, but he, holding her, makes her dance and then lifts her up in the air just as Wayne lifted Deedee. He smiles up at her.

YURI (coaxing): Emilia...?

She looks down at him. He is very handsome, very appealing. She inclines down just a little, then stops. Cool, confident:

EMILIA: You better give me more support tomorrow night.

He adjusts their position.

CLOSE SHOT - EMILIA

Now she smiles. But not for him. It is a performer's smile, a ballerina smile. Her head goes up, her back arches gracefully and as her hands and arms reach up, her whole body shoots up through the ceiling.

INT. STAGE  - MINSKOFF THEATRE

And there she is, on stage, in full costume and makeup, dancing with Yuri and dancing magnificently. They are perfect together -- as partners on stage. They finish spectacularly and applause breaks like a cloudburst.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I really liked the description "her whole body shoots up through the ceiling" because it's not only how the character felt, but also how I felt going through the arc with the character. 

Turning Point (1977) 
by Arthur Laurents

*Also, it garnered 11 Oscar nominations, including ones for actors Anne Bancroft, Shirley MacLaine, Mikhail Baryshnikov, and writer Arthur Laurents (his only nomination).

TODAY'S NUGGET: The Way We Were (1973) - When You Need to Beef Up the Guy's Part; Pollack's 1st Rule in a Love Story

[Quick Summary: After WWII, an idealistic political activist and a super-popular society guy try to navigate being a couple despite their opposite temperaments.]

TWO THOUGHTS :

1) BEING REWRITTEN.  This was the situation here:

- Writer Arthur Laurents wrote the role of Katie for Barbra Streisand.
- According to director Sydney Pollack (here), Laurents was so committed to Katie's story that the love interest, Hubbell, was not as strong a character.
- Thus, Robert Redford wouldn't sign on.  Streisand wrote about it (here): 

Bob was concerned that the script was so focused on Katie that Hubbell's character was underdeveloped. (He was right.) Bob asked Sydney, 'Who is this guy? He's just an object...He doesn't want anything. What does this guy want?' In Bob's opinion, he was 'shallow and one dimensional. Not very real.' ' A pin-up girl in revers,' as Sydney put it."

[She told Pollack], "Give him anything he wants."

Write more scenes to strengthen his character. Make it equal....So Sydney hired two excellent writers, David Rayfiel and Alvin Sargent, to beef up Bob's part and go deeper, beneath that golden-boy exterior. And I told Ray to pay him whatever he wanted. But Bob's answer was still no. I was heartbroken.

In other words, it's sometimes necessary to get another (more objective) writer(s).

2) POLLACK'S FIRST RULE IN A LOVE STORY.  All the above goes to why the original draft didn't work.  Pollack put it well (here):

Never make one character attractive at the expense of the other. You have to bring the character up but not at a partner's expense.

Note in this re-written scene below:
- This is a more balanced meeting of equals, who both upend expectations.
- Katie and Hubbell were in a college writing class together.
- She wanted to be a writer, but isn't as good as he was. Writing comes easily to him, but he can't share it with his friends.
- This was a chance meeting at an outdoor restaurand their first real conversation.

MED. SHOT - KATIE

She makes for the curb, trying to sneak off into the darkness. But softly comes:

HUBBELL'S VOICE: Have a beer?

FULL SHOT - KATIE AND HUBBELL

She stops dead and turns to him. He grins.

HUBBELL (continuing): It's a celebration.

KATIE: Team team team.

HUBBELL: Wrong.

KATIE: Your crew won.

HUBBELL: Oh well, we always win. That's easy.

KATIE: That's right, everything's easy, I forgot. (pause) Listen, I'm sorry but I've...well, I've let the months slide by without telling I...I really loved your story. You're a good writer and...

HUBBELL: Thanks, Katie.

KATIE: ...I'll see ya. I've got to get to work.

She starts off.

HUBBELL: Hey, Katie? I sold one.

KATIE (turning): Huh?

HUBBELL: I sold a story.

KATIE (softly): Jesus. Oh boy, Hubbell. Congratulations.

Hubbell holds out a stein of beer.

HUBBELL: Drink.

She hesitates. Then takes it, holds it up.

KATIE: To your first novel.

HUBBELL: Hey. Not so fast.

KATIE: Why not!

HUBBELL: Okay. Why not. You say so. 

KATIE: I say so.

They clink steins and drink. Then he looks at her. They smile.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I'd never considered "bringing a character up" to the level of the other character in a love story.

This is especially eye-opening in light of the several crossed out, rewritten pages in this draft, where the Hubbell role is not as well written as Katie's role.

The Way We Were (1973)(A.S. draft, 7/21/23)
by Arthur Laurents, Alvin Sargent(uncredited)

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: Ninotchka (1939) - Breaking Up a Couple with "The Lubitsch Touch"

[Quick Summary: When a Russian bureaucrat goes to Paris to sell seized jewels, she falls for a guy who represents all she stands against.]

I first encountered German director Ernst Lubitsch in a story about writer-director Billy Wilder posting a sign in his office, "What would Lubitsch do?"

Who was this revered director? And what exactly was his famous "Lubitsch touch"?

After reading this quote by Samson Raphaelson (who wrote 9 films with Lubitsch), I think this "touch" is more about his approach:

 ...I never caught Lubitsch ever thinking in terms of a formula; that is, he wouldn't say, "How can ve use a door in this scene?"...He would face the problem and say, "Vat do ve do here? How do ve lick dis? How do ve say it vit style? How do ve say it different? How do ve say it different and good? Different and true?" but he was also one of the few great practitioners who was not a victim of his own inventions and of his own style. In The Smiling Lieutenant, for instance, he used a minimum of dialogue and only at the high moments - this was soon after talking pictures came in, still using the rich resources of silent invention, so that the dialogue would become the cream, the peak of a scene. (my underlines)

Today's script is one of Lubitsch's top 3 favorites and most often cited.  

It is a prime example of: 1) doing a breakup differently; and 2) holding off on dialogue until the high point.

In the scene below:
- Ninotchka has come to Paris to sell the jewels of the former Grand Duchess Swana, who now resides in exile in Paris.
- Ninotchka falls for Leon.
- Swana is Leon's ex-girlfriend and is suing for her jewels back. 
- Meanwhile, someone stole the jewels back for Swana.
- After Swana bleakly states the reality of the situation, notice how this breakup is different.  Ninotchka and Leon are matter-of-fact and holding back emotions.
- I love how previously Ninotchka would not drink champagne nor ask for a funny story, and now she does, i.e., she's changed.
- The dialogue peaks when Leon expresses he will never be the same (see below):

INTERIOR, SMART NIGHT CLUB

...SWANA (rubbing it in): It is unfortunate that you have so few more days in Paris. (she turns to Leon) Be sure and redouble your efforts so that madame can take some pleasant memories when she returns to Moscow. (she rises, Leon rising too) Good night. (Ninotchka nods without answering. To Leon) Good night, Leon.

LEON (coldly): Good night, Swana.

Swana leaves the table. Leon sits again. The mood of the two has been changed by the problem of their separation, which has been brought before them. They sit in silence for a moment. Ninotchka speaks first. 

NINOTCHKA: Now I think I need a glass of champagne. 

Leon fills their glasses. They drink. Then Leon takes Ninotchka's hand.

NINOTCHKA (trying to break the mood): Quickly, please...tell me one of your funny stories.

LEON: A funny story?

NINOTCHKA: You never finished the one about the two Scotchmen with the names.

LEON: Well, there were two Scotchmen. One was named McIntosh and one was named McGillicuddy. They met on the street.

He stops.

NINOTCHKA: Go on.

LEON: No, darling. I'll tell you another story, a much better one. (with deep sincerity) The only thing that will be over on Thursday is the lawsuit. There will be no Thursday for us. Not next week or any week. We won't let it happen. I'll tear it out of the calendar. Is that a good story? ["Tear the calendar out" is a beautiful image. What a different way to say he'll never forget her.]

NINOTCHKA (touched): Wonderful -- if one could believe it.

LEON: You must, darling.

NINOTCHKA (lifting her glass): To the loveliest story I ever heard.

They drink. The orchestra starts a number.

NINOTCHKA (afraid of where the conversation may lead): Shall we dance?

They both start toward the dance floor.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This breakup is so poignant because it's got deep emotional truth that's so graceful, elegant, and amusing too.

The more I read about Lubitsch's work ethic, the more I realize that "how do we say it different?" takes a whole hell of a lot of work.

Ninotchka (1939)(shooting draft)
by Charles Brackett & Billy Wilder and Walter Reisch
Based on the original story by Melchior Lengyel

TODAY'S NUGGET: Love in the Afternoon (1957) - If You're Having Trouble Writing a Romantic Chemistry, It Starts With...

[Quick Summary: The daughter of a detective falls for the playboy that her father is shadowing.]

Q: When creating romantic chemistry, "start with the status quo,"* right?
A; Yes.  It is "what is missing" from the protagonist's life. 

Q: So "what is missing" = the antagonist. 
A: Not exactly.  

Q: Ok, if it's not "getting the guy," then what is it?
A: It is what the protagonist is missing emotionally, which the antagonist may point out or helps her realize. 

Q: What does status quo look like on the page?
A: There's a good example in today's script. 

The writers took their time laying out Ariane's inner and out life.**  She's curious, smart, but feels excluded.

So when she and the playboy hit it off later, we understand why she's so taken by him.  She's included in on a grand adventure, which fills that emotional need.

In this scene from the first ten minutes: 
- We see that Ariane yearns for adventure, love. She is lonely.
- We want to root for her.  She's considerate about her Papa, persistent, curious.
- Note also how humor is used to establish the fun tone, especially Ariane's parting line.

THE OFFICE

Ariane puts the cello aside, gets up, comes into the office. Chavasse has opened the briefcase, and taken out the camera.

ARIANE: I'm worried about you, Papa. You've been working every night.

CHAVASSE: It's my busiest season.

ARIANE: You need a rest, Papa.

CHAVASSE: Thank you, darling, but in my profession -- it's like being a doctor. I have to be on call night and day. A good doctor can never rest -- not until the patient is out of bed.

ARIANE: I never thought of it that way.

CHAVASSE:You shouldn't think of it at all!

ARIANE: Sorry, Papa.

CHAVASSE: How are things at the Conservatory?

ARIANE: So-so. We're rehearsing.

CHAVASSE: Rehearsing what?

ARIANE: A symphony. Haydn's 88th. You see -- I always tell you what I'm doing. But you never tell me what you're doing.

CHAVASSE: That's because I love you. And because I want to protect you from these sordid matters I have to deal with. Now go back to your cello.

ARIANE: Yes, Papa. Wouldn't you like some breakfast?

CHAVASSE: Later. I have some work to do in the darkroom. I'm expecting a client.

He has taken the roll of film out of the camera, now crosses to the door of the darkroom, opens it.

ARIANE: When Mama was alive, I'm sure you discussed your work with her.

CHAVASSE: Your Mama was a married woman.

ARIANE (with affection): I'm so glad.

She goes back to her room.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I often worry about taking too long to establish the status quo.  However, this script showed me I should take my time for a great pay off later.

Love in the Afternoon (1957)
by Billy Wilder and I.A.L. Diamond
Based on the novel by Claude Anet

*For more explanation and examples, see Ch. 7 "Structuring Conflict" in Writing the Romantic Comedy (2020, 20th anniversary edition), by Billy Mernit (here).

**I found it interesting to see that it took the writers 36 PAGES before the girl and guy meet in person! Though to be fair, she learns about his situation through her dad and sees his photo early on.

TODAY'S NUGGET: Stalag 17 (1953) - How to Avoid "Stagey" Adaptation of a Single Location Play

[Quick Summary: When two American soldiers are killed in an escape from a German POW camp, the soldiers suspect a mole in their barracks.]

Though plays are often set in a single location, it can seem stagey on film, i.e., artificial, claustrophobic, or simply boring for lack of movement.

So how did writer-director Billy Wilder avoid staginess in this famous film? 

1) THE STORY LENDS ITSELF TO CLOSE QUARTERS.  He chose this story which IS all about the claustrophobia and boredom of barracks.

2) CLOSE QUARTERS = PRESSURE. The soldiers need each other to survive.

This becomes even more apparent when they wrongly identifies one of their own as the traitor/mole. Suddenly, the barracks become a pressure cooker.

3) EXPANDING WHEN NECESSARY.  Wilder wisely added several outdoor scenes to give the audience room to breathe from the cramped indoor shots.

4) FRAMING.  I was very impressed by Wilder's use of the screen and space. Nearly every inch of the frame is stuffed with faces or some action.* 

So why didn't it feel stale or too busy?  He made sure there was constant movement: friction and action, people coming and going in and out of doors.

A good example is the scene below.  Note:
- This is an early scene which introduces all the characters. 
- Examine how there's constant movement between and among the characters. It feels less like the limits of a stage, and more like good use of a cramped space.

THE FAR END OF THE BARRACK

This is the strategic spot of the story. In the five tiers of bunks live our major characters.

In the upper bunk lies HOFFY. Little fellow. Plenty of authority. The Barrack Chief. His eyes are wide open. He is studying his wristwatch, the phosphorescent numerals shining in the dark.

In the other bunks lie the others, wide awake, tense:

DUKE, big bellyacher.

TRIZ, six-foot-three, ninety-eight pounds.

PRICE, the barrack Security Chief. Quiet, touch of class.

MANFREDI, no cover, fully dressed.

HARRY, bug-eyed, cocky.

BLONDIE, fair-skinned, boyish.

JOHNSON, fully dressed like Manfredi. Scared.

SEFTON, casual. In his mouth a cold cigar butt.

Hoffy again. Still staring at the wristwatch. This is the moment. He lifts the metal dogtags off his chest and jiggles them. This is the signal.

Duke instantly slides out of the bunk, grabs up his blanket and moves toward the window. A searchlight beam sweeps across. Duke goes flush on the ground. The light passes on. Duke gets up again and starts hanging the blanket over the window.

Now the others go into action, silently, efficiently. Except for Manfredi and Johnson they are all in long winter underwear, some in slacks and socks.

As for Sefton, he is lying in his bunk just watching them.

Blondie hangs a blanket over the window. Triz swings one over the clothesline to shield off their end of the barrack.

Hoffy and Price light a couple of handmade lamps: margarine in tin cans with the wick stuck inside.

Manfredi and Johnson are putting on their leather jackets.

Harry tries to awaken STOSH in the bunk above him. The wooden boards around Stosh's bunk are plastered with Betty Grable cheesecake. Harry pokes him. Stosh does not respond. Harry interlocks his fingers, puts them close to Stosh's ears and cracks them in a SHARP SALVO. Stosh opens his eyes, dazed. Harry pats Stosh's cheek.

HARRY (in a whisper): Get up, Animal! Betty Grable's on the phone!

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: If the play-to-be-adapted is in a single location, why? Pressure? Can it benefit a film? Or is expansion necessary to get that same effect?

Stalag 17 (1953)(shooting draft)
by Billy Wilder and Edwin Blum
Based on a play by Donald Bevan and Edmund Trzcinski

*My favorite scene is where there are guys planning at a table in the foreground, and "guilty" Sefton in the background.  There are bunks to the left and right, so the men's faces are essentially lined up in a column, filling the screen from top to bottom.

TODAY'S NUGGET: The Wicker Man (1973) - Why "Recognizably Strange" is Effective Horror Behavior

[Quick Summary: After receiving an anonymous letter about the disappearance of a missing child, a by-the-book policeman arrives on a remote island to investigate.]

Q: What makes this odd film stand out? Why is there a cult like fan following?
A: It's a proper horror film, i.e., properly unsettling and weird.

Q: Horror films explore what we fear.  What is the fear here?
A: Something is very wrong when no one (except for the protagonist) is concerned about a missing child on a remote island.

Q: How did the writer make such a weird story, well, weird?
A: One of the keys was what one critic called, "recognizably strange" things. 

The script starts off with the typical straight-laced policeman. I recognize this character and how he'd respond in situations.  I identify with his reasoning. 

Then odd "recognizably strange" things start to happen to him, yet no one (but him) is alarmed.  They're just 15% or so off of normal. Just enough to dismiss him....

For example, in the scene below:
- Mrs. Morrison has just denied to Sgt. Howie that her older daughter is missing.
- She exits, leaving Howie with the her younger daughter Myrtle.
- We are unsettled by Mrs. Morrison's matter of fact reaction --> now add Myrtle's.
- Note how no one is trying very hard to convince Howie.  In fact, the indifference is frightening and infuriating to a by-the-book cop.

INT. PARLOUR OF SWEET SHOP - DAY

...We now see that the child is doing a drawing of a hare with huge ears and whiskers which she is copying from a copper mould that has plainly been used to make the chocolate hares. She looks up and hands Howie a dropping paint brush.

MYRTLE: Here you are. You can fillin the ears in grey.

Neat, clean Sergeant Howie is horrified to find his hand suddenly sticky with paint, and quickly takes the paint rag to clean himself. Carefully he selects a clean brush and starts on the ears.

HOWIE: Myrtle, do you know Rowan?

MYRTLE: Of course.

Howie is startled by the answer.

HOWIE: You do?

MYRTLE: Course I do, silly.

HOWIE: Where is she now?

MYRTLE: In the fields. She runs and plays all day.

HOWIE: Will she be back for tea?

MYRTLE (laughing uproariously): Tea? She doesn't have tea.

HOWIE: Why not? Doesn't she like it?

She stops laughing abruptly and stares at him contemptuously.

MYRTLE: Hares don't have tea, silly.

HOWIE: Hares!

MYRTLE: She's a hare. Rowan's a hare. She has a lovely time.

Howie sits thunderstruck. The door to the shop opens and Mrs. Morrison re-appears....

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I liked how the script lulled me in with recognizable behavior --> becomes "recognizably strange" --> bizarre frightening behavior.  

This gradual slide was very believable!

The Wicker Man (1973)
by Anthony Shaffer

TODAY'S NUGGET: Blackboard Jungle (1955) - How to Involve the Audience (2 +2)

[Quick Summary: A new English teacher at an inner city school is faced with unruly students and jaded faculty.] 

Early in my writing journey, I heard a lot of things about writing that I did not understand.  Several came from Billy Wilder's 10 rules. For example:

- The more subtle and elegant you are in hiding your plot points, the better you are as a writer.

- A tip from Lubitsch: Let the audience add up two plus two. They'll love you forever.

But how does one DO that? No one could tell me. I despaired.  (And by the way, the ONLY way I've learned is to read.*)

What does that LOOK LIKE?  Let's look at today's script, a deserving Oscar winner.

In the scene below:
- This is a 1950s, tough inner city school with students out for trouble.
- Lois Hammond, a fellow new teacher, is going to give Rick (protagonist) a lift home. 
- This scene sets up a connection between Lois and Rick, which someone will take advantage of later (plot point: team building hidden in a shared battle zone).
- Notice the shoes early + single shoe later = trouble (2 +2).
- Notice how you lean in when you spot 1st clue --> see 2nd clue --> what happened to Lois? This very fine writing is great suspense.

INT. STAIRCASE

...LOIS HAMMOND

She adjusts her second stocking. She starts down stairs. Her black-and-white pumps clack hollowly on stairway.

SECOND FLOOR CORRIDOR - RICK

He quickly approaches elevator. He pushes button. The elevator rises carrying half-a-dozen teachers. Among them are Josh Edwards and Jim Murdock. Their voices drift of of cage.

JOSH EDWARDS: Why -- they didn't even know their multiplication tables.

MURDOCK: 'Course not. All they can multiply is themselves. (general laughter)

JOSH EDWARDS: How are they ever graduated?

MURDOCK: Graduated? They got to be 18 and they're thrown out to make room for more of the same kind.

Rick watches elevator ascend. He decides to use stairway, starts down on the run.

STAIRWAY - SHOOTING DOWN

Rick descends. The stairway is deserted except for him.

FIRST FLOOR - FOOT OF STAIRS

Rick comes down. he stops. He looks down corridor for Lois Hammond.

CORRIDOR - RICK'S VIEWPOINT

It is empty, shadowy.

CLOSE - RICK

He looks in other direction toward exit. Lois Hammond is not waiting. He hesitates, shrugs, starts toward exit. MOVE with him. He passes the closed library doors. He stops, turns, looks down.

CLOSE - FLOOR 

Near library doors lies a black-and-white woman's pump. Rick leans in and picks it up.

CLOSE - RICK

He looks at shoe in puzzlement. He goes back several steps to the library doors. He looks thru glass portion of doors. 

Thru doors, at far side, between two walls of books, can dimly be seen two struggling figures.

Rick pushes at the doors. They are locked. He rattles doorknobs. They won't budge.

Holding the shoe by the sole, he smashes the glass with the high heel. He reaches in and opens door. He enters quickly.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: It's often trial and error to figure out exactly what info to give an audience.  In this case, the shoe was perfect, as it spiked our curiosity.

Blackboard Jungle (1955)(final draft, 8/10/54)
by Richard Brooks
Based on the novel by Evan Hunter

*Early in my journey, I heard "to write, you need to read."  

"Yeah, yeah, so what?" I thought, smugly to myself. "I already read a lot." 

What I did not realize is:

a) How MUCH I had to read.  It took me a few years for me to realize I wasn't reading enough scripts, then several more years to up my intake of a wider range of novels, plays, everything I could get my hands on.  

b) My job as a writer depends on reading. From the start, it was obvious to me that I needed to read to educate myself. 

However, it took me a long time to understand that a large part of my value as a writer is to have fresh, new IDEAS for the rest of the team.  I will only find those ideas by reading.

TODAY'S NUGGET: No Time to Die (2021) - Upending Expectations with a Character with a Different Energy

[Quick Summary: After Bond leaves MI5, he's drawn back in by the disappearance of a scientist who has stolen "Heracles" that leads to a very personal connection.]

BAD NEWS: I simply did not connect with this film, despite an abundance of top tier writers, beautiful cinematography, locations, action stunts, and actors.

If I had to boil it down, I'd say the story was not fun or as suspenseful as others. With reliance on tech, there was no need for Bond to figure his way out of a corner.

GOOD NEWS: However, there was one fun bit that I did enjoy: Paloma and the Cuba scenario.

First, she's a new agent who is not polished and does not make perfect decisions.  She's competent, yet she's still learning on the job and isn't afraid to admit it. 

Second, she brought a different energy that was very welcome. She is impatient, eager to get on with things, and we like her all the better for it.

Third, the Cuba scene became more entertaining because I didn't know what to expect from this character. She upends Bond's expectations.

In the scene below, we see the difference she makes: 

INT. WINE CELLAR - SANTIAGO BUILDING - NIGHT

Paloma stops at a wine cellar. She takes out a key, nerves still have her shaking as she unlocks the door.

BOND: This your room?

PALOMA (clearly it's not): It's a wine cellar. Okay, come here.

She starts undoing his shirt.

BOND: Don't you think we ought to get to know each other just a little before we...

PALOMA: Oh! No, no, no, no. I'm sorry.

She steps back, unrolls a suit bag she had stowed. It's a tuxedo. He smiles.

BOND: Alright.

PALOMA: You do it.

BOND: Do you min... (signals for her to turn around)

She turns her back. Bond starts to undress.

BOND (CONT'D): This is going to go brilliantly.

PALOMA: I know. (smiling) I've done three weeks training.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Paloma has a very different energy than most agents in this series.  She's not jaded or smooth or experienced, and that's fun to watch.

No Time to Die (2021)(undated)
by Neal Purvis & Robert Wade and Cary Joji Fukunaga and Phoebe Waller-Bridge
Story by Neal Purvis & Robert Wade and Cary Joji Fukunaga

TODAY'S NUGGET: Spectre (2015) - When in Need of High Flying Action, Walk on a Wall

[Quick Summary: A message from the past sends Bond after an organization called SPECTRE, which has ties to his past.]

I've been reading Bond scripts because I want to figure out why some turn into good films and some do not.* 

For me, Spectre was very confusing, and somewhat boring.  

I think was because the story itself lacked ingenuity, despite a beautiful looking script. Going into Bond's past makes sense, but it wasn't enough.

(That must have been a terrible frustration to the creative team.  After all, what is still unexplored after 23 films of over-the-top adventures?)

I will cite my favorite scene below.  It combines the characteristic of the character (cleverly resourceful at getting to the rooftop) and high flying action that fans love.

INT. HOTEL ROOM - LATE DAY

...With her back to Bond, Estrella takes a sip of her drink, crawls onto the bed, and turns to see him opening the window:

ESTRELLA: But...where are you going?

BOND: To check out the view.

And we follow him OUT OF THE WINDOW.

EXT. HOTEL/ROOFTOP - LATE DAY

Dangerously high up, he jumps...

Lands on a rooftop.

He keeps low, walking coolly along the very edge of the roof, the street clearly visible below...In the distance we can see the crowded square. The drums more distant now...

He reaches his destination, and stops. Looks across the way at some apartments. Day of the Dead FLOATS and STILT-WALKERS passing between...Now he ducks behind a low wall on the rooftop.

Takes out his Walther PPK, and an additional piece of equipment. Clips the piece onto the hand grip of the gun with a satisfying clunk. Inserts the earpiece.

Bond now tests his gear - raises the gun, points it down into the crowd.

We wee a faint laser beam emanating from beneath the barrel.

A laser microphone.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I really liked how clever Bond was getting to the rooftop because it actively required him to utilize his skills, and was not merely coincidence.

Spectre (2015)(shooting script, 10/17/14)
by John Logan, Neal Purvis & Robert Wade

*So far, this is my running list of things I've learned about Bond scripts:

1) Though they may borrow something from the novels or short stories, there is no formula.  The writers essentially start from scratch, which is tough to replicate.

2) These films are intrinsically weird, outlandish, fanciful, and/or outrageous, but they have an internal logic that fans seem to like in varying degrees.

3) The films often follow (but not always) the scripts.  Even when they follow the script, it does not guarantee a good film.

4) Some scripts are horrible to read, but turn out good films. Other scripts are beautiful on the page, but turn out bad films.