27 Dresses: Arriving at the Storyform

January 31, 2008

There’s an interesting story that lies behind my analysis of the film 27 Dresses and how I managed to come up with that one particular storyform (seen in the link to the left). After seeing it one Saturday night, I met with Chris Huntley and several other Dramatica class members to discuss the film. Some parts of the storyform were obvious to us (Jane was the Main Character, Kevin was the Impact Character) while other parts came up a bit fuzzy (Why exactly did Jane throw her sister under the bus at the engagement party?) The conversation went on for a half an hour before we decided to call it a night. Driving home I rolled around some of the ideas in my head. Beyond those two throughlines, I wasn’t quite sure where anything else lined up. I arrived home a bit frustrated, but managed to let the whole process go as I climbed into bed. Oh well, it’s just a story…

The next morning, as I opened my eyes, the first thought that came to my conscious mind was She’s a Situation character with a Concern of The Future and He’s a Fixed Attitude character. Apparently falling asleep hadn’t stopped my passion for understanding story!!

Identifying Their Issues

Before I had a chance to turn on the software I began to think about the possible issues that the two of them might have. Having worked with Dramatica for over 10 years now I pretty much know the structural chart down to the Issue level and therefore had a pretty good idea of my choices. The first thing that seemed definitely right to me was an Impact Character Issue of Closured. Kevin’s whole thematic impact is to bring an end to this whole charade of weddings. I knew that had to be it.

On the other side I thought that Jane would have an issue of Preconception. Her mother’s death and her consequent assuming of that matronly role had prepared her for a life where she already knew what was expected of her - preconceived notions of what she was to do. However, when I did get around to looking it up in the software the opposing Main Character Issue to Kevin’s Closure was Openness NOT Preconception.

At first this didn’t sit well with me. Bu then I began to reconsider my initial impressions. Jane’s problem is not so much her notion that she should always help people out - she’s quite happy helping everyone out on their big day. Her real problem is her lack of willingness to reevaluate her situation (the Dramatica definition for Openness).

Confident that I had identified the proper thematic issues I dove down further to pick her Main Character Problem. Instantly Consider jumped out at me with Reconsider being the Solution to all her problems. She never considers her own life or how her own actions are affecting her personally. Once she reconsiders being the one everyone can turn to for help, she resolves her own personal problems. I plugged those into the Dramatica Story Engine Settings and was left with 4 possible storyforms.

Using Growth to Determine the Overall Story

So now I just needed to figure out where the Overall Story and Relationship Story Throughlines fell. From experience I knew that most Romantic Comedies or Romantic movies for that matter put the Overall Story in Manipulations and the Relationship Story in Activities. I think the reason for this is obvious - when writing a romantic story you want the two leads engaging in romantic activities, right? Give the audience what they want and all that…

But that wasn’t reason enough to make that choice. Instead I relied on a relationship that exists between the Main Character and Overall Story Throughlines and the Main Character’s Growth. I go into more detail about this relationship here, but suffice it to say that a Main Character with a Growth of Stop will have a Companion Relationship with the Overall Story (Horizontally related) while a Start Main Character will have a Dependent Relationship (Vertically related).

I felt for sure that Jane’s growth required her to Start something. It wasn’t so much that she was actively doing things that she needed to stop; her problem was in what she lacked - namely, the ability to say no. This is like Scrooge in Dickens’ A Christmas Carol; it wasn’t so much that he was actively going out and inflicting his cruel attitude on everyone as it was that he lacked the capacity for compassion. This was how he needed to grow in order to change, and I felt the same dynamic existed in Jane.

So by selecting this the Overall Story fell into Manipulations and the Relationship Story into Activities…which is exactly what I had wanted/predicted. Which brings me to

Following Your Instincts

At this point I still wasn’t sure about the Main Character’s Problem Solving Style and the Outcome of the Objective Story. As mentioned in my original analysis the Objective Story was not as fully developed as the other throughlines and thus wasn’t sure exactly what the right answer would be. As far as her Problem Solving Style goes there were clues that she thought linearly (her filofax) and holistically (her notion that the crockpot they were putting on her sister’s registry list was not just any crockpot, it was the one that she would cook the Christmas turkey in), but again, I wasn’t 100% sure.

I then tried out a trick that I learned from Chris a couple of years back. Before you make any selections, look at the choices that the software offers you. Consider what you think is the right answer for all of them, then select one of the answers. If the other answers fall into place then great! Your natural story instinct and the software have lined up – which is a really good sign that the storyform is the right one.

I wasn’t ready to make any guess at the Problem Solving Style of the Main Character but thought it would be Holistic. As far as the Outcome for the Objective Story…I had a feeling that it was a Failure, but without being able to concretely define what the Objective Story was dealing with I wasn’t ready to make that choice.

So I went down to the bottom of the Story Engine Settings where the pertinent information for the Main Character Throughline is located. There I saw that the Main Character Unique Ability and the Main Character Critical Flaw still had to be chosen.

For 27 Dresses, the choices for Main Character Unique Abilty were either Choice or Preconception. None of those really stood out for me, especially since I wasn’t really sure what the Goal was. However for her Critical Flaw the choices were either Closure or Hope. Now Closure I really liked!

The Main Character Critical Flaw is the item or issue attached to the Main Character that would undermine their ability to bring Success to the Overall Story. Closure sounded perfect for Jane. All along she knew what her sister was really like and could bring an end to it at any time. It just so happens that she waited until the rehearsal dinner, but even so, that Critical Flaw felt great.

I made the selection.

Unfortunately that was still not enough to narrow it down to one storyform! All it did was force the Main Character Unique Ability into Preconception, the other items were still undetermined. Knowing whether or not Preconception worked was impossible without fully understanding it within the right context, so I wasn’t even sure if Closure was right. I had to find another way.

The Power of Plot Progression

3 possible storyforms, 2 questions still left unanswered (Main Character Problem Solving Style and Overall Story Outcome). I headed to the Plot Progression screen:

Interesting. The Impact Character Throughline Plot Progression was the only one that the software was able to predict. I thought that perhaps if I looked into some of the choices available on the other throughlines I might be able to narrow this down. The Main Character Throughline was the most clearly defined, why not start with that one?

For kicks I started at the end of her throughline and was pleased to find that there were only 2 choices for that final signpost: The Past or The Present. It was obvious to me that she was not dealing with anything to do with her past in that final scene on the boat. In fact, she was letting Kevin know that right now, in that very moment, she was starting to fall in love with him. The Present had to be the right answer.

Success!

With that one selection, the entirety of the rest of the plot was filled in, and it felt right. I go into more detail explaining the plot progression for each throughline in my original analysis, but overall if you’ve seen the film you can see that the signposts feel right.

Choosing The Present as the final Main Character Signpost forced the Main Character’s Problem Solving Style to be Linear and the Overall Story Outcome into Failure. Setting the Problem Solving Style to Linear was great for two reasons. One, I think one of the reasons I enjoyed this film so much was because I could empathize with the Main Character ((Male audience members tend to empathize more with Main Characters who work problems out linearly; they tend to only sympathize with those who prefer thinking holistically. Confused? You should be! More about this is explained here.)). And Two, Chris mentioned that he felt she was a Linear Problem Solver. When in doubt, listen to the creator of the theory!

As far as the Overall Story Outcome ending in Failure, that certainly felt right as well. When a story ends in Failure, the Overall Story Consequence is seen. In 27 Dresses the Consequence happens to be Obtaining. Jane’s subterfuge at the rehearsal dinner certainly resulted in an overall sense of loss ((It’s important to understand that Dramatica’s terms can be seen both positively and negatively. In other words Obtaining doesn’t always mean acquiring or achieving something - it can also be seen as losing or failing at something. In this case, the wedding between the sister and the boss fails.)).

With that I had arrived at a single storyform that I felt confident with.

Second Viewings and Analysis

My second viewing the next night cemented my belief that my analysis was correct. Armed with the knowledge of where the throughlines fell I was able to recognize several examples that would eventually end up in my analysis. The only difficult part was writing them down as fast as I could when I got home – before I forgot them all!

It’s not a perfect storyform. The whole sister/jealousy issue that comes up 3/4 through the film seems to come out of nowhere and speaks of a different story altogether; but for the most part, I think this storyform does a very good job of describing what is really going beneath all the flashy dresses and witty banter.

Hopefully this gave you an insight into a different way to work with Dramatica. If you’re at all interested in having constructive criticism like this on your own screenplay or story, feel free to contact me. I’m looking to ramp up my story consulting in the coming year.

Also, let me know if I lost you anywhere in the above explanation by leaving a comment below.