Movie Analysis (Part 2): “The Big Short” — Plot
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: The Big Short which won the 2016 Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay by Charles Randolph and Adam McKay, based on the book by Michael Lewis. You may download the script here.
Our schedule for discussion this week:
Monday: General Comments
Tuesday: Plot
Wednesday: Characters
Thursday: Themes
Friday: Dialogue
Saturday: 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 The Big Short, I invite you to join me in breaking down and analyzing the movie.
We can break down the story structure of The Big Short in three acts:
Act One: Hey, this economic shit is going to go down.
Act Two: No seriously, this financial shit is actually going to go down.
Act Three: Boom. The shit goes down.
What’s most remarkable: The audience knows what’s going to happen, an economic tsunami. Yet this inevitability makes the narrative that much more interesting as we watch the players involved begin to sense the imminent crash and the potential breadth of its impact.
And yet they do nothing to alert potential victims. It’s like they exist in a closed loop of economists, financiers, and profiteers. The people upon whom the system preys exist only as numbers.
To me, this is one of the boldest narrative choices made by Randolph and McKay: They don’t make one move to give us a Hero in this story. Sure, we find the characters compelling, but not one of them does anything remotely heroic.
Joseph Campbell says a hero is someone who sacrifices him/herself for something bigger than themselves. Indeed, one of the most common narrative archetypes is a character moving from Selfish to Selfless.
Not in The Big Short. The whole lot of them is culpable in this crime. In a way, we can look at this as the ultimate Anti-Hero story. And that choice to go with these characters and tell this story echoes the Biblical admonition: “The love of money is the root of all evil.”
But more on the characters tomorrow and themes the next day.
What did you think about The Big Short’s plot? I invite you to comments to join the discussion.
Comment Archive