May 13, 2008
Raj Dore
Dear Raj,
Attached
please find my adaptation analysis for your stories, THE CELEBRITY and PARADISE
LOST AND PARADISE REGAINED.
I thank you
for two enjoyable reads, and commend you on your ability to tell an interesting
story. When I have some spare time I
intend to read the other stories in your book as well.
If after
reading the attached notes, you have any questions, do not hesitate to write.
Sincerely,
Lynne
Pembroke
May 13,
2008
Titles
PARADISE LOST AND PARADISE REGAINED
Form
Novel and
Short Story
Author
Submitted
by
Author
Contact
Logline
THE CELEBRITY
PARADISE LOST AND PARADISE REGAINED
Similar Properties
A
preliminary search of recently sold screenplays and motion pictures currently
in pre-production, production or post production found nothing similar to
either of these stories.
THE
CELEBRITY could be adapted to screenplay form, but there would be some
challenges.
1) Length
It is not
unusual that the length of a novel is something of a barrier to direct
adaptation. Usually there’s too much
story, but in the case of THE CELEBRITY, it’s a case of too little story. Screenplays in this genre typically run 100
to 110 pages, and each page of a screenplay averages out to a minute of running
time. The problem is that screen stories
are expected to be more tightly structured than novels or a short story.
Usually we have one major through-line and a couple of related subplots, and
that’s it. It would be expected that in
adapting THE CELEBRITY to screenplay form, we would cut everything that’s “off
the spine” of the main story. Were we to
do so here we would come up short for the screenplay form. I’ll explain this further a bit later when we
look more specifically at screenplay structure.
If
more length is needed and would help, I would like to take some of the
anecdotes from ‘Coming to
2) Voice
THE
CELEBRITY is told in the first person from Rohit Sharma’s point of view. In a screenplay we are not privy to a
player’s inner thoughts, feelings, etc., and thus other devices would be
required to reveal back-story, Rohit’s thoughts, observations, suspicions,
etc. Additional dialogue, with a
character acting as a sounding board, is one technique, but in the best
adaptations the writer finds a way to create scenes that provide needed
exposition in a visual way.
‘Back-story’
is what I may call flashback. This is being done in any number of movies. Inner
thoughts in many movies are depicted as a dialogue with one self or pages from
his own diaries. In fact the back-stories, thoughts, feelings and observations
could be revealed as a dialogue between Rohit and Archana as they are driving, just like in the book.
3) Story
Structure
Strong
screenplays almost always have ONE central dramatic question that serves as the
story’s through-line. The dramatic
question posed must be of sufficient importance to create a strong “need to
know the answer” in the mind of the reader. (And eventually in the mind of a movie
audience.) It must be capable of sustaining viewer interest for several hours.
It is the
reader’s (and later the audience’s) desire to know how that question will be
answered that keeps them tuned in and interested.
Examples
screenplay story through-lines:
Will
Dorothy find her way home? (THE
WIZARD OF OZ)
Will
Rocky prove himself when he meets Apollo Creed? (ROCKY)
Will
Frodo be able to return “the one ring” to Mordor, or will the Dark Lord,
Sauron, gain possession of it and use its power to enslave the world? (THE LORD OF THE RINGS)
Even in
“character driven” stories such as DRIVING MISS DAISY there is a strong though
line or central dramatic question.
Notice that
in each instance, the question is posed very early in the story and answered
very late in the story.
THE
CELEBRITY is in essence a love story.
Love stories all have pretty much the same through-line. The structure of such stories is built upon
the question:
Will the two
parties be able to handle the things keeping them apart and thus come together
and establish a lasting relationship?
In
the case of THE CELEBRITY, the barriers to a relationship between Rohit and
Archana include the fact that he is married and she is a celebrity
As
I mentioned earlier, it’s expected in screenplay form that every line of action
and dialog be “on the spine” of the story.
In practice his means that in the case of THE CELEBRITY, once the story
is setup, every line should deal with the question of whether or not Rohit and
Archana will succeed in establishing a relationship. That portion of the novel after they meet,
which deals with Rohit’s back-story is entirely “off the spine”. While such wanderings may work in a leisurely
paced novel, in screenplay form it would bring the story to a screeching
halt. I’m sure you’ve heard people
complain after seeing a motion picture that it was “too slow.” The perceived speed of a movie is strictly a
function of the rate at which new information that moves the story forward on
its through-lines revealed to the audience.
Subplots,
the little stories within the major story, pose lesser dramatic questions,
often involving the fate of characters in supporting roles. For example, we have Dorothy’s traveling
companions in THE WIZARD OF OZ:
Will
the Cowardly Lion find his courage?
Will the Tin Man
get a heart?
Will the
scarecrow get a brain?
The
above questions are those posed by THE WIZARD OF OZ subplots.
We
have several subplots present in THE CELEBRITY.
The strongest subplot deals with Rohit’s relationship with his
wife. It asks the simple question, Will the marriage last?
Although
not as well developed as the “wife” subplot there’s also a subplot centered
upon Rohit’s career and his relationship with his boss, Don.
I never considered that the writings should fall exactly
into the kind of grooves you have described. Now that you are mentioning the
kind of structure you are looking for, I could analyze my story in those terms.
The main ‘spine’ of the story is Rohit’s
life, his emotions and foibles as he goes through his cross cultural
experiences. This is a character with whom a majority of south-Asian viewers
will relate extremely well. Rohit hails from a well
to do upper-middle class family in
One sub-plot is the character of Wing Commander Dhillon and his family. How from a normal decent fellow he becomes
corrupt and amasses wealth. His wife is another domineering Amazon who tramples
her daughters’ lives by super imposing her will. Seema
is torn between her love for her cousin and the domineering mother on one side
and a marriage that she is caught in, on the other.
The other sub-plot is Archana who
is a simple girl from an ordinary family thrown into the glitter and glamour of
beauty queen and movie star. In spite of her celebrity there is that little
girl in her that is trying hard to escape from the cage of harsh world, looking
for true understanding, love and an ordinary life of a girl next door. She is
also torn in the conflict between two kinds of lives that she desires – one of
a celebrity and the other of an ordinary girl.
I purposely did not want to end the story with Rohit settling down with Archana
in
‘The dramatic question’ of the story, as you have asked is,
the dilemma of Rohit to make a choice between 3
things: First to keep his own self respect and ego; second keeping his marriage
with a kid intact; and finally his romance with the Celebrity. This is a choice
he only makes in the end. The choice being to keep his own self-respect and ego
intact, while leaving the two women to come to terms with him on his conditions
– like Frank Sinatra would say ‘I did it MY way….’ He was a self made man and
hates being rattled around.
There was a movie called ‘
In
my opinion the best approach for adapting THE CELEBRITY to screenplay form
would involve:
1)
Presenting needed back-story currently in the middle of the novel, up front,
but keep it to the essentials such as the arranged marriage, and the
difficulties with the marriage early on.
Yes. Taking in a chronological order is one way to do it.
But flashbacks in movies are quite common. Most of Rohit’s
‘back-story’ is as he narrates to Archana while
driving and on her asking him where was he from in
2)
Once the back-story is complete, jump forward in time to what is now the
beginning of the novel. We could do that. But if you
use it as a flash back, it would be better since very early on you would have
introduced the conundrum of Archana’s appearance and
kept the audience interested.
3)
Expand both of the subplots mentioned earlier. Yes.
But the subplots are like I mentioned earlier: 1. Wing Commander Dhillon and his family; 2. Archana
Roy and her life story; 3. the main line of Rohit and
his family story including his dad, brother, and his life in the college
including the encounter with Anita Singh etc.
4)
Extend the story, perhaps to include a happy reunion for the couple when Rohit
takes the job in
That would be a cliché but may work. (Did Audrey Hepburn the
princess marry Gregory Peck the journalist and raise a family in ‘Roman
Holiday’?)
5)
The story may play better on the big screen if, for dramatic purposes, we add
several scenes to the story where the relationship between Rohit and Archana is
strained and tested.
This is provided Rohit and Archana intend to marry, raise kids and ‘live happily ever
after’ being mundane.
But that is not the choice Rohit
makes. He prefers to just have an affair with her on the side.
Nor is that what Archana wants,
she prefers to keep her celebrity status and glamorous life intact while having
a romantic affair with Rohit on the side.
6)
Unlike a novel in which we tell our story in words, a screen story must be told
in sights and sounds only. That’s all we
can capture on film. In THE CELEBRITY,
because it’s written in the first person, much of it is not filmable. That is, we can’t film Rohit’s thoughts,
feelings, etc. Thus to present needed
information in the film version, we may need to introduce a new character to
the story, a confidant, if you will. By
this device needed information that was communicated directly to the reader via
Rohit’s thoughts in the novel could be communicated via conversation, which we
can film.
We don’t need to introduce a new character. Archana is that character and Rohit
can use her as the ‘confidant’ to communicate those thoughts.
7)
There is no one-size-fits-all paradigm for screen story structure, but what
follows is typical. I present it here,
to give you further insight into screenplay form.
ACT 1: (The
beginning. Setup, About 25 pages)
In which
the central dramatic question is set up and posed.
1) Introduces the protagonist and build
empathy for him.
We meet
Rohit learn enough about his life that we can relate to him. It’s important that the audience “connects”
with our protagonist so that they have somebody to root for.
2) Introduces a change in the status
quo that upsets the equilibrium of the protagonist’s life.
In the
beginning, the status quo of Rohit’s life is a marriage, but it’s not a happy
one. When he meets Archanna he gets a
glimpse at what his life could be like, and perhaps realized that he’s been
living a life of self-abnegation.
3) Introduces an Antagonist or other
forces that will oppose the protagonist.
Here we
become familiar with what’s in Rohit and Archanna’s way.
4)
Presents the resulting decision made by the protagonist.
Rohit
decides to maintain a relationship with Archanna, at least on some level.
4) A plan to achieve the goal, and
action.
Here’s
where we need to begin expanding the story, and making Rohit a more proactive
character. As written he’s too much a
passenger on the train of life, and for screen story purposes, we need him to
be the driver.
ACT 2: (The
middle. Barriers and Complications. About 50 pages)
In which
the central dramatic question is exploited.
1) The
protagonist struggles to overcome the obstacles between himself and his goal.
2) As
attempts fail, and as more and more obstacles are introduced, things look
bleaker and bleaker.
3) Often
times not only does the protagonist fail, but also in failing causes the
predicament to become even more severe. (A reversal)
4) Sometimes
a fumbled effort or new, hard-won knowledge causes the central question to be
dramatically changed. (A plot twist)
5) A
subplot or two are introduced and played out.
These subplots usually involve lesser dramatic questions that deal with
issues about or between characters.
Subplots
would need to be further developed to flesh out our act 2.
6) At
the end of act 2 we move into “the darkest hour,” in which it appears that all
is lost.
I’m sure
you can see the challenges that would be involved in act 2. It’s fully half of our total running time,
but in the book we jump pretty much directly from act 1 to act 3.
ACT 3: (The
conclusion. Resolution. About 25 pages)
In which
the central dramatic question is answered.
In act 3
the hero and his allies either:
1)
Rises
to the occasion and achieves his goal.
(An “up” ending – most common)
2)
Fails
to rise to the occasion and succumbs.
(A “down” ending - The chances for survival of a screenplay that
sports a “down” ending are about as good as those of the proverbial “snowball
in hell.”)
3)
Rises
to the occasion and achieves the goal, but in the process something else is
lost. (A “bittersweet” ending – some of the most memorable stories ever told
have bittersweet endings)
In THE
CELEBRITY, we’re looking at a bittersweet ending. Rohit’s marriage fails, but he gains a
lasting relationship with Archanna.
The
problem you are having is because you are considering the relationship of Rohit and Archana as the main
theme.
The
main theme is the character of Rohit and his life. He
comes from a fairly well off upper middle class family in
In
the end, in all probability he continues to be married to the wench and also
continues having an affair on the side. That is the ‘bitter-sweet’ ending like
it happens in real world all the time. We could chasten this part, if
necessary.
If
you look at it this way, it has all the elements you have mentioned in your
framework. To add more meat to the story, I could use some parts of ‘Coming to
PARADISE
LOST AND PARADISE REGAINED would be difficult if not impossible to adapt to
screenplay form. It’s more a historical account of a family living through good
times and bad times, than a dramatic story.
This is not to say, it’s not a good read.
It lacks
elements essential to screenplay form, most notably a proactive
protagonist. There is no through-line to
speak of. Events unfold, and characters
react to those events. This is not
untypical of true accounts. Real life
seldom plays out in the tightly structured way required for a viable screen
story.
There is
the possibility that the story could be rewritten from the father’s point of
view as more of a dramatic story, but that would be a very different story, and
even then, considerable embellishment would be needed.
(I will get back to you on
this later)
Conclusions
For the reasons stated earlier, I don’t see PARADISE LOST AND PARADISE REGAINED as a
story that lends itself well to screenplay form.
(I will get back to you on this later)
The
CELEBRITY could be adapted to screenplay form, but realize that to be sold to a
major studio and subsequently get made, a screen story must be strong enough
and marketable enough to convince financiers to invest tens of millions of
dollars. Characters must be intriguing enough to attract the attention and
interest of stars. The story must show such promise that producers, directors,
and other creative talent are willing to spend years of their lives bringing
the project to fruition. I don’t feel a
screenplay adaptation of THE CELEBRITY could meet those tough criteria. On the other hand, because THE CELEBRITY, the
motion picture, could be filmed on a relatively modest budget, perhaps the
screenplay might find a home in the independent market.
I
really do not care at this stage what kind of people could be made interested –
independent or otherwise. I think there must also be small and modest budget
films made in the traditional ‘major’ studios.
I’m not
very familiar with the motion picture industry in India, but my gut feeling is
that this story might hold a particular appeal to Indian audiences. In essence they could vicariously experience
moving to America, developing a relationship with a beautiful celebrity, etc. And obviously they would be able to relate to
conflicts that occur when tradition and the modern ways collide.
YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. I COULDN’T AGREE WITH YOU MORE.
If you’re
interested in having one of my writers adapt THE CELEBRITY to screenplay form,
let me know and I’ll send you a formal proposal.
Wishing you
every success,
Lynne
Pembroke
