Домашнее задание: пишем логлайн

[Евгения Теплова]

Сообщение от Скай

Мне бы хотелось все-таки прочитать тот текст в оригинале. И неплохо бы еще с именно теми вопросами, которые задавала сценаристу Евгения... чтобы контекст понимать.
Я пока особых противоречий не вижу.

Их и нет
Eugene,
I agree with you! Those who say that Phil's goal throughout the film was
to escape need to watch the movie again. His goals shifted and adjusted
as HE changed. We see him looking for escape through the first half of
the repetition, first from Punxsutawney (blizzard) and then from life
itself (suicides). But when the suicides don't work he turns his
attention to "Now what?" His goals shift to figuring out ways to live.
He has even given up on his earlier goal of getting Rita to love him, and
in fact it is only after he has given up seeking any goal that he both
escapes (a very Buddhist idea) and gets the girl (a very Hollywood idea).
The audience feels throughout the movie this unspoken goal of escape and
there is a dramatic tension in our curiosity of how all of this will end,
but that is not Phil's goal.
So, does he have a single goal through the movie? Hm. He's trying to
figure out what to do with himself on any given day. Every day he's
searching for some pursuit that will give his life purpose and meaning -
he needs to do SOMETHING - but even so it was usually not approached by
Phil as a "goal"; he was just reacting to his situation.
Somehow by having Phil pursue a series of goals combined with the
audience's expectation of resolution added up to compelling drama and a
well unified movie. But to say that every successful screenplay must have
the hero pursuing one single goal is perhaps an oversimplification.
That doesn't mean that their solution is wrong for YOUR screenplay.
Perhaps there is a general feeling that your central conflict changes
mid-stream and I agree that this can suck the dramatic energy from your
s***y. That could be true in your case. I can't say from way over here.
Very often criticism we writers get is limited to the "rules" that our
critics have read in screenwriting books, and as a writer I know that no
rule fits all. Even the purveyors of these "rules" tend to back-peddle
and call them "guidelines", knowing that there is no such thing as a rule
in art. But if people are finding rules to attack you with it's usually a
sign that there really is a problem with the screenplay. I mean, if they
loved it would they care? Their solution may be useless, but it usually
pays to believe that there is a problem.
Only you can decide whether to stick to your guns and assert that the
movie would work as written, and you may be right. But as you know
filmmaking is a collaborative business and you will need to convince
somebody. In the meantime it's usually a good idea to start the next
screenplay, keep moving, learn what you can along the way, and try very
hard to get lucky.
Thanks for checking in with me, Eugene. This is an interesting issue and
for all of the questions I have gotten over the years I think this is a
first. I hope this helps, and I wish you the best of luck in your writing!
--Danny