FOUR ACT STRUCTUREComplications Ensue
Complications Ensue:
The Crafty Screenwriting, TV and Game Writing Blog


April 2004

May 2004

June 2004

July 2004

August 2004

September 2004

October 2004

November 2004

December 2004

January 2005

February 2005

March 2005

April 2005

May 2005

June 2005

July 2005

August 2005

September 2005

October 2005

November 2005

December 2005

January 2006

February 2006

March 2006

April 2006

May 2006

June 2006

July 2006

August 2006

September 2006

October 2006

November 2006

December 2006

January 2007

February 2007

March 2007

April 2007

May 2007

June 2007

July 2007

August 2007

September 2007

October 2007

November 2007

December 2007

January 2008

February 2008

March 2008

April 2008

May 2008

June 2008

July 2008

August 2008

September 2008

October 2008

November 2008

December 2008

January 2009

February 2009

March 2009

April 2009

May 2009

June 2009

July 2009

August 2009

September 2009

October 2009

November 2009

December 2009

January 2010

February 2010

March 2010

April 2010

May 2010

June 2010

July 2010

August 2010

September 2010

October 2010

November 2010

December 2010

January 2011

February 2011

March 2011

April 2011

May 2011

June 2011

July 2011

August 2011

September 2011

October 2011

November 2011

December 2011

January 2012

February 2012

March 2012

April 2012

May 2012

June 2012

July 2012

August 2012

September 2012

October 2012

November 2012

December 2012

January 2013

February 2013

March 2013

April 2013

May 2013

June 2013

July 2013

August 2013

September 2013

October 2013

November 2013

December 2013

January 2014

February 2014

March 2014

April 2014

May 2014

June 2014

July 2014

August 2014

September 2014

October 2014

November 2014

December 2014

January 2015

February 2015

March 2015

April 2015

May 2015

June 2015

August 2015

September 2015

October 2015

November 2015

December 2015

January 2016

February 2016

March 2016

April 2016

May 2016

June 2016

July 2016

August 2016

September 2016

October 2016

November 2016

December 2016

January 2017

February 2017

March 2017

May 2017

June 2017

July 2017

August 2017

September 2017

October 2017

November 2017

December 2017

January 2018

March 2018

April 2018

June 2018

July 2018

October 2018

November 2018

December 2018

January 2019

February 2019

November 2019

February 2020

March 2020

April 2020

May 2020

August 2020

September 2020

October 2020

December 2020

January 2021

February 2021

March 2021

May 2021

June 2021

November 2021

December 2021

January 2022

February 2022


Tuesday, May 24, 2005

John Rogers has a very thoughtful post about your favorite subject, Three Act Structure, and he makes an interesting distinction between story and plot.

However, whether or not three act structure is a useful tool, most veteran writers like, er, John, are not using Three Act Structure. They've got a 25 page Act One, a 50 page Act Two, and a 25 page Act Three. And there's a big turning point right in the middle of Act Two where, as DJ McC says, it becomes a "different movie."

Well, hell. If you have a big turning point -- what in TV would surely be an act out -- in the middle of your second act, don't you have, in fact, two acts???

So aren't you really writing Four Act Structure?

UPDATE: Well yeah, Paul, my problem is with the label. I also object when a political movement that tramples on traditional constitutional protections, gets into optional wars and racks up huge debts calls itself "conservative." Having the wrong label on things is misleading. Why are we calling something a marmoset when it's clearly a bat?


Um, no.

If you look at the classic three act structure, act two is supposed to have a big turning point. IIRC, act two should contain two plot points.

Maybe what you've read or "learned" as three-act structure is not?

Or maybe your real problem is with the labels. If you want to call it something other than a three-act structure, Alex, go ahead.

You're like a pitbull with a stranger's leg on this thing, man! :)

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:18 PM  

yeah, but as I pointed out, the three act structure doesn't refer to plot, it refers to story. No matter how you build the midpoint up, it's still doing the sam JOB as all the other ocmplications in the second act.

I think the trick is that the definition of "Act" is too fluid for this type of precise discussion. Quite specifically, I believe an "act" in television refers to a distinctly different thing than an "act" in film. When I write a television show, I still write it in three-act structure, I just break the plot into four "acts" as they're traditionally called. IN theater the context is different.

Regardless, as long as it gets people to examine how they break story and plot, that's a good thing.

By Blogger Unknown, at 6:27 PM  

I agree with Rogers. Structure is important. Fluid is key. But the paramount thing is interesting, I have had the pleasure of writing with Rogers and he blows me away on a continuing bases…. not by his structure but by his writing. Stop being plumbers (I would have used carpenters but…. a more impressive person did that …who wrote a better script…. However the third act needs work)… just write…. Structure has to be your last worry. If not then you are the idiot network person I have to listen note from. Eugene O’Neil was all about third act brakes on page 23.

Yes, there is a structure, a template, but if that is what you care about go back to selling cars or become a producer and pretend to know what you are talking about.

By Blogger DJ, at 1:25 AM  

My "Um, no" was in reference to Alex sasking "Aren't we really writing a four act structure?"

It is not 4 acts.

TV is (when done right) a three-act structure. Acts 2 & 3 (of TV "4 acts") serve as the second act.

And to what DJ said... absolutely! I know so many studio execs who read like 20 pages of Sid Field's book or something and since they know nothing about real writing/real story telling, they go and on about structure.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:14 PM  

I always figured, the whole three-act-structure is just a way of saying that a story has a beginning, where we are told what the story will be about, a middle, where we encounter all the good stuff that makes the story interesting and worthwhile to follow, and an end, where we are told, well, how it all ends. And since there usually is some sort of "tent pole" event in the middle of the second act that's mainly there to keep up the suspense and to re-invigorate our interest after we're halfway through the story, it neatly adds to the "plot points" leading into and out of the second act. Alltogether these break the story into four segments of roughly the same length thus enabling commercial breaks at regular intervalls, with each segment ending on a suspenseful moment to keep the audience from changing stations. So the "three-act-structure" talks about beginning, middle and end of the story, while the "four-act-structure" of ways to include commerical breaks where they least dirscupt the story.

By Blogger Orvil Pym, at 4:15 AM  

Post a Comment

Back to Complications Ensue main blog page.

This page is powered by Blogger.