Movie Analysis: “Inside Out” — Takeaways
Another in our bi-weekly series in which we analyze movies currently in release. Why? To quote the writing mantra I coined over 5 years ago: Watch movies. Read scripts. Write pages. You will note which one comes first. Here are my reflections from that post about the importance of watching movies:
To be a good screenwriter, you need to have a broad exposure to the world of film. Every movie you see is a potential reference point for your writing, everything from story concepts you generate to characters you develop to scenes you construct. Moreover people who work in the movie business constantly reference existing movies when discussing stories you write; it’s a shorthand way of getting across what they mean or envision.
But most importantly, you need to watch movies in order to ‘get’ how movie stories work. If you immerse yourself in the world of film, it’s like a Gestalt experience where you begin to grasp intuitively scene composition, story structure, character functions, dialogue and subtext, transitions and pacing, and so on.
Let me add this: It’s important to see movies as they get released so that you stay on top of the business. Decisions get made in Hollywood in large part depending upon how movies perform, so watching movies as they come out puts you in the same head space as reps, producers, execs, and buyers.
This week’s movie: Inside Out, screenplay by Meg LeFauve & Josh Cooley and Pete Docter, story by Pete Docter & Ronaldo Del Carmen, additional dialogue by Amy Poehler & Bill Hader.
Our schedule for discussion this week:
Monday: General Comments
Tuesday: Plot
Wednesday: Characters
Thursday: Themes
Friday: Takeaways
For those of you who have not seen the movie, do not click MORE as we will be trafficking in major spoilers. If you have seen Inside Out, I invite you to join me in breaking down and analyzing the movie.
I’m surprised at the reactions to this movie here on the blog. First, that more people didn’t chime in, especially those who are fans of the film. Second, that those who did post comments didn’t really connect with the story.
To me, it’s one of the finest movies of the year and the best Pixar movie since Up. Furthermore, I think it will strong consideration for Best Original Screenplay come award season.
Several of the critiques about Inside Out, both by GITS commenters and Paul Gulino in his article here were about story logic. Yes, these are legitimate concerns. However as I have argued in the past, there is something that can in most movies trump rational logic — and that is emotional logic.
Steven Spielberg gets this. J.J. Abrams gets this. Pixar gets this. As well as plenty of other filmmakers.
If a movie can grab a viewer on a deep emotional level, the narrative can stretch the boundaries of rational logic to a considerable degree.
Why? Because the viewer cares more about what’s going on in the psychological domain of the story than the physical realm.
In my Pixar and the Craft of Storytelling class, we learn how the filmmakers there are attuned to certain narrative instincts, and one of them is working with emotional subject matter which is universal to wide swaths of people.
In Inside Out, there are several of these emotional dynamics in place:
* Riley being moved against her will: Who hasn’t experienced a disjunctive relocation in their lives, the pain of separating from the Old Place, the anxiety of what the New Place will bring?
* Riley’s parents constraining her feelings: Who doesn’t have childhood memories of hurt and confusion over how our parents acted?
* Joy: Who doesn’t want to experience joy in their lives?
* Sadness: Who hasn’t experienced sadness?
* Anger, Disgust, Fear: Ditto.
* Riley running away: Who hasn’t had moments where they wanted to escape a situation, either physically or through some sort of psychological ploy, or actively did run away?
* Desire to be part of a loving and understanding family: Who wouldn’t have some sort of emotional stakes in tracking the arc of Riley with her parents, wanting them to reunite and with a new level of understanding?
Inside Out has connected with a wide audience, officially crossing over the $500M box office mark worldwide and on target to break $600M, making it one of the most successful Pixar movies of all time. This despite the fact children 6–8 years old and under might not ‘get’ the movie. Why has it found a big audience? Many reasons, one of them being the universality of emotional themes.
And that is my first takeaway from Inside Out: Look for themes and dynamics in my stories which can create an emotional resonance with a script reader, then hopefully a movie audience.
How about you? What takeaways do you have from Inside Out?