The Argonauts and Writer/Directors
Grant Marshall
A screenplay and exegesis submitted for the requirements of the Masters of Arts (Research) Degree.
Faculty of Creative Industries Queensland University of Technology
2006
ii
Keywords
Teen adventure film, Screenwriting, Directing, Director’s Commentary, Characters, Narrative, Writer/Directors.
iii
Abstract The Argonauts is a one hundred and ten minute screenplay depicted in the genre of
children’s adventure film, set in the suburbs of Brisbane in the early 1990s. It tells the
story of four friends who embark on adventure in an attempt to save their parents’ shops
from a corporate takeover. The exegesis explores the dual role of the screenwriter/director
and the affect on the screenplay of the shifts in mindset required when these roles are
undertaken by the same person. Screenwriting and directing are explored as two separate
but interlinked disciplines. In this paper I have draw on my experience in these two roles
to discuss their inter-relationship. In order to understand how the two roles of
screenwriting and directing interact, challenge and compliment one another when carried
out by the same person, I analyse the interplay of these roles within the specific areas of
character, narrative and setting in the writing and revision of the screenplay, The
Argonauts.
iv
Table of Contents
Keywords ii Abstract iii Statement of Original Authorship v Acknowledgements vi Screenplay—The Argonauts 1
Exegesis—Writer/Directors 116
Introduction 117 Contextual Review 122 Methodology 126 Case Study: The Argonauts 129 Conclusion 139
Appendix A: Synopsis of the Screenplay 141 Appendix B: Other Characters 147 Bibliography 148 Filmography 151
v
Statement of Original Authorship
The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted for a degree or
diploma at any other higher education institution. To the best of my knowledge and
belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person
except where due reference is made.
Signature:________________________________ Date:____________________________________
vi
Acknowledgements Thanks are due to the academic and general staff of the Creative Industries Faculty at the
Queensland University of Technology. The MA (research) degree format allowed me the
freedom, opportunity and motivation to undertake this project for which I am grateful. In
particular, I would like to thank my supervisor Dr Stuart Glover for his ongoing guidance,
feedback and friendship. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to complete this project
within a supportive network of likeminded screenwriters that challenged my ideas and
provided constructive and thought provoking feedback.
116
Writer/Directors:
An explication of the partially differentiated functions of the writer and the director in the
case of The Argonauts
117
Introduction
Growing up in a relatively new suburb of Logan on the outskirts of Brisbane in the early
1980s, I watched my neighbourhood develop rapidly. Like most children, I spent my
holidays and weekends exploring this new playground with my friends. Shailer Park was
the boom suburb of Logan during this time. The local primary school opened in 1982 and
in its first year close to a thousand children attended. By the time I was in grade five I
knew every back street and bush track short cut that existed. Often the daily walk home
from school would lead to adventures with the children who lived in surrounding streets.
We explored the bushland that was once a lion park and spent all summer carving out
BMX tracks behind the local shops, until the day the bushland was cleared to make way
for a new Myer Megaplex. Our childhood playground was gone. This world is echoed in
my script, The Argonauts.
We were forced to find a new playground and took to the streets. I knew just
about everyone in the neighbourhood and had a safe house on every street for when good
times went bad. Friday after-lunch activities at school included roller-skating at the
Argonaut skating rink. The skating rink was located in a neighbouring suburb near
bushland at the base of a hill that was once part of a gold mine, something the mind of an
eleven year old doesn’t easily forget. Every time the school bus pulled up at the rink I
wondered just what if the mother-lode was hidden just behind the tree line. During the
mid-1980s the school even opened up over the weekends so that we could skate in the
undercover areas under supervision. Even the tuckshop was open. Groups of us would
118
strap on our skates and head off for the school. Most weekends we never made it there
due to the hilly terrain of the suburbs, the distance we had to skate and the injuries we
sustained in the process. Like every school, there were the ‘bullies’. Having planned
social gatherings every weekend, like roller-skating, meant that the bullies knew exactly
where to cause trouble. This is where knowing the neighbourhood back to front came in
handy, along with ‘wax on wax off’ learnt from The Karate Kid.
Like many of my friends, and importantly for my later directing work, I am the
child of the video age. By the time I was ten (1987), like most homes in Australia, my
parents had purchased a VCR. This coincided with the release of Back to the Future.
Having a friend whose parents worked for a video store was a godsend. Back to the
Future was one of the first videos I owned and I watched it almost every day, along with
The Karate Kid and Goonies. While we did go to the cinema—I even saw the Star Wars
Trilogy in 1983 at the drive-in—for the majority of the time television and JVC VCR
were our saviours. This was a time when any great video could be hired for a dollar and
boy did we. Rambo, ET, The Last Starfighter, Gremlins, Explorers, and the Indiana Jones
films topped our rental list. There’s a good chance that if the film had a show bag at the
‘Ekka’, then we were re-enacting it. Like my imaginative friends at the time, I was totally
influenced by these adventure-type movies. Of course this lead to even more inspired
adventures of our own: skating behind cars like Marty McFly (from the Back to the
Future series) and exploring the stormwater tunnels that ran under the school was all in a
day’s play for us Goonies wannabes. I wasn’t alone; if BMX Bandits screened on TV, the
next day the entire student body would ride their bikes to school. It was a time when
public liability was not an issue and the Acting Principal of our school actually
119
encouraged us by setting up what seemed like an enormous BMX track on the steep hill
behind the school so that we could replicate the radical moves we had seen the night
before. Eventually the acting Principal was replaced, but these great summer school days
were something I never forgot. Often, before we set out on any of these real life
adventures we would sit around in our pyjamas and watch a few hours of Rage. The
mantra became, “If the next clip sucks we’ll leave”—whereas these days it is, “If the next
clip sucks I’m going to sleep”. Influenced by these great clips, like Michael Jackson’s
Thriller, I aspired to make music clips that would inspire people like they did me.
Currently I’m working for a production company directing music videos and
commercials.
I drew on my adventurous childhood experiences for inspiration for my script,
The Argonauts. Like the heroes in the films I aspired to, the lead characters are still in
high school. Marty McFly from Back to the Future, Alex Rogan in The Last Starfighter,
Gremlins, Karate Kid, BMX Bandits, and even the older brother in Goonies were all in
their mid to late teens. The heroes in my film are the same age as the characters I wanted
to be like and looked up to. I also set The Argonauts in the early 1990s, as the characters
are a similar age to me at the time. My love of film, specifically adventure films and
music videos, led me to become a filmmaker. I wanted to write a script that would inspire
a twelve year-old kid to put down the game controller and start his own adventure.
This immersion in movies and life in the suburbs had a marked impact on the style and
content of the screenplay. My early interest in movies and videos has provided a strong
basis for my current work as a music video and film director. I came to eat and drink
120
film. Accordingly, The Argonauts, the screenplay component of this thesis, is jointly
informed by this film background as well as growing up in the suburbs. My dual roles in
relation this project have, however, given rise to a dilemma, and therein a research
question. As a screenwriter, the script for The Argonauts reflects my own adventures and
the adventures I absorbed from the movies I watched, as well as the screenplay craft
lessons that I have absorbed. This is not an uncommon mix—such that a screenwriter will
draw from life and screenwriting craft. But at some point I also began to examine this
project as a screen director. And while screenwriting and screen directing obviously share
a common objective and are complementary skills, there are clear differences between
them in their narrative emphasis, notation and aesthetics. As a screen director I not only
drew on my visual memory of my suburban childhood but also the past half a decade of
experience as a screen director.
This exegesis explores these two related but not strictly analogous skill sets and
tasks, and seeks to account for how the project mutates as I move, in mind-set at least,
from screen writer to screen director (and often back again)—and the implications of
these shifts for the project at hand. How does the project change, and what are in the
differences in approaching a children’s or teen adventure film from the relative
perspectives of the screenwriter and the director? How might a director re-think a
screenplay? And perhaps more subtlety, how does a background as a director influence
my starting approach as a screenwriter?
As a writer/director I was always (even during the initial drafts of the screenplay)
concerned with issues fundamental to the overall visual nature of the medium—that is,
things that are the province of the director, such as visual pacing, possible shots, and the
121
overall look of the work. However, later in the project (further along in the drafting
process), as I began to exclusively approach the screenplay from a director’s viewpoint,
certain things changed. A number of factors largely initially sidelined when thinking the
work through as a screenwriter came to the fore in the director’s approach—particularly,
a concern for budget, for mis-en-scene and for the visual language of the story. While as a
screenwriter I was interested in the visual elements, I was more conscious of, and thus
explicitly working in, a textual language. As a director, I became more interested in
visual elements. This required me to rethink scenes in terms of their impact on the screen,
the characters and some elements of the story. I found myself looking for moments of
visual interest and wit rather than verbal flare. Likewise, I called upon a different register
of references. As a screenwriter I was making references to particular verbal catch-
phrases, whereas as a director I began to look for shots that re-imagined the visual from
some of the films I had watched growing up. In some sense, while the line between
writing and directing is arbitrary (particularly so for writer/directors) we can conceive of
them as functions that differ in emphasis and language. An account of the different
functions (as evident in the changes I made to the screenplay as I “came back to it” as a
director) don’t point to a unified theory of direction, but they do hopefully offer some
useful ideas to other directors and writers about how character, story and the look of the
film emerges out of the intermingled (but differing) roles of the screenwriter and director.
In addition, particularly where the writer and director are the same person, the negotiation
and intermingling of these functions might be undertaken either during distinct phases of
“writing” and “directing” or involve a more subtle and constant backwards and forwards
motion between the two phases.
122
Contextual review:
Over the last twenty years there has been a considerable literature developed concerning
the methods of undertaking screenwriting1 and approaches to screen directing2. This
literature documents the broad notions of what is required of the screenwriter in order to
write an effective script, and offer readers the fundamental techniques of directing films.
However, there is a limited literature that deals explicitly with the challenges of writing
with the intent to direct. This literature is primarily derived from interviews with
screenwriters who direct their own screenplays and is often discussed in relation to a
specific film3.
Although there is relatively little information that deals with the dual role of the
writer/director, the literature does, however, provide details of the two crafts that allows
the differences between them to be surmised. In brief, the screenwriting literature focuses
on the main elements of structure, character and the character arc. Robert McKee (1999)
discusses the writer and the art of the story, the elements of story, the principles of story
design and the writer at work. Linda Aronson (2001) also details a similar range of topics.
While the majority of directing literature focuses on the step-by-step process involved
with directing film. Michael Rabinger (2003) and Nicholas Proferes (2001) both look at
screencraft, writing and story development, pre-production, production and
postproduction.
1 For screenwriting see Robert McKee; Linda Aronson; Rachel Ballon; Syd Field; Darsie Bowden; Christopher Riley; Even Schwartz; Pat Silver-Lasky and Mark Axelrod 2 For directing Nicholas Proferes; Michael Rabinger; Ken Russell; Anthony Slide; Mike Goodridge; Renee Harmon and Tom Kingdon; 3 For screenwriting with the intention to direct see accounts by Gerald Peary and George Lucas
123
Screenwriting is frequently described as a structure-based process of storytelling.
The purpose of this structure and its complex elements is to create a story that will keep
an audience captivated (Aronson, 2001: 39). The narrative is often broken down into
three acts. These, in their simplest abstraction, form the beginning, middle and end of the
story. Aronson (2001: 39) suggests this is a “proven method that is likely to transmit the
story well”. This classic three-act structure is punctuated by twists and turns, which lead
to an eventual climax and then resolution (Aronson, 2001: 40). These elements owe, of
course, much to Aristotle’s Poetics and his delineation of the model for the tragedy:
Tragedy is the imitation of an action; and an action implies personal agents, who necessarily possess certain distinctive qualities both of character and thought; for it is by these that we qualify actions themselves, and these—thought and character—are the two natural causes from which actions spring, and on actions again all success or failure depends. Hence, the Plot is the imitation of the action—for by plot I here mean the arrangement of the incidents. By Character I mean that in virtue of which we ascribe certain qualities to the agents. (transl. by Butcher, 2004)
As per Aristotle, the journey of the central character is an essential element of the
screenplay. McKee describes the role of the central character as a single protagonist,
whether man, woman or child (1999: 49) who (generally) dominates screen time and is at
the heart of the story. It is usually recommended that these lead characters have an
internal goal and external goal, which are explored through their on-screen journey. The
external conflict experienced by the central character (or perhaps central characters) is
made apparent though the developments of the main plot, with emphasis on the
character’s struggle with relationships, social situations or “forces in the physical world”
(McKee, 1999: 48-49). The character’s transformation/s during this journey are known as
the character arc. Dona Cooper describes the character arc as the character’s emotional
124
response to the sequence of events that eventuate throughout the plot (1997:16). Cooper
adds that in order to be successful, the character arc needs to be recognised by the
audience through their identification with the character and their recognition of the
transformation (1997:16).
An examination of the companion literature about the role of the director, begins
to differentiate the director’s approach from that of the screenwriter, and to uncover the
directors’ and screenwriters’ different ideas about the script. There is, however, a range
of views as to what constitutes the role of the director. Ron Richards argues that the main
goal of the director is to “capture and control the mind and spirit of the audience. The
director has to give the audience members what they want, even before they know they
want it” (1992: 9). In contrast, Harold Clurman writes that in relationship to the script,
the director’s challenge is to translate the screenwriter’s descriptions into an on screen
multi-faceted cinema-going experience (in Proderes, 2001: 3).
Nicholas Proderes emphasises the importance of the director-writer relationship
and the mutual reliance of these two separate entities (2001: 3). Proderes also applies
these same relationship principles to the instance where the writer and director are the
same person:
Every film begins with a screenplay, ideally a good one. Still, even in very good screenplays, the director’s investigation will uncover flaws as the screenplay is broken up into its smallest parts, even if the director is also the writer. A more intense focus, a more powerful lens, must be brought to the text now. (2001: 3)
In contrast, for Richards, the screenwriter is not involved in the production stages of the
film making process, however their skills and intimate knowledge of the material is often
125
useful during these later stages (1992: 9)4. Rabinger also notes the value of ongoing input
of the screenwriter to the director. Rabinger argues for the importance of the act of
writing as a tool where the mind “contemplates its own workings—and thus wilfully
transcends its own preliminary ideas and decisions” (2003: 149). It is an inbuilt form of
reflective practice. At the same time, Rabinger argues that directors, when directing their
own work, should distance themself from their own script and seek tough external
criticism in order to “gain an objective understanding of their own work” (2003: 146).
Therein, Rabinger suggests, even in the single individual, a divide between the roles of
writer and director. This division, he warns, follows in part from the auto-biographical
influences in much writing, and the need to force a distance from one’s own work in
order to avoid trying to recreate remembered situations that are of the writer’s experience
only. This can be a challenge for the writer/director, as personal experience can be a
major influence and inspiration for the writer.
Although the scholarly literature and industry literature touch briefly on the
subject of the writer/director, it is perhaps DVD commentaries, providing as they do first
hand accounts of the director’s experience of writing and directing a film, that offer the
most comprehensive documentation of the dual role in action. Paul Thomas Anderson in
the DVD audio commentary of Boogie Nights reflects that although he did write the
script for himself, he was conscious of not being selfish and directed the script for an
audience, “I had to make sure I relayed all this stuff that I felt six months ago when
4 For example, as Paul Thomas Anderson notes, in the DVD audio commentary to Boogie Nights, having a personal connection to the script and its content allowed him to make dialogue and other changes on set that would usually require the screenwriter’s approval, skills or knowledge. Anderson was able to take onboard the suggestions made by the actors about their characters, as he knew the characters’ back-stories and breakdowns and had a personal connection to the script. In this respect, the writer as the director is a positive and constructive union.
126
writing it, make sure I communicate it properly […] through directing I found a way to
succeed with an audience.”
Anderson’s approach to writing is personal, and, in its distinct lack of
commentary on budget and industry issues, underlines the limits to most DVD
commentary. Anderson wrote the script in a way that he thought would be best for the
story and to entertain an audience. In the writing or directing process, there was no
attention paid to the length or budget of the film: “It’s going to be long. I’m writing this
movie for myself. I’m not going to write this movie and pretend it’s ever going to get
made” (Anderson, 2000, Boogie Nights, DVD audio commentary). As Rabinger points
out, the budget limits the selection of cast and crew (2003: 11). Aronson also emphasises
the restrictions budgets impose on decisions about locations, actors and the period in
which the film is set when writing a screenplay (2001: 18)5.
Methodology
These resources are instructive in the theories behind the screenwriting and directing
processes and the ways in which these roles inter-relate. But perhaps the best way to
understand how the se two roles interact, challenge and compliment one another when
carried out by the same person, is the practical experience of undertaking the task of
writing and directing my own film. While the latter task of actually making a feature film
5 In the case of my own script, The Argomauts, writing with budget in mind is crucial to there being any chance that the screenplay will ever be produced. Correspondingly, I drew on my experiences of producing to keep the script achievable for local production. However, in reviewing my script, I noticed numerous scenes where my ideas exceeded the limitations of a typical independent budget.
127
is unachievable (here) for funding reasons, the writing of the script and the planning for it
as a director constitutes a method of creative investigation or research.
I bring to this paper my practical expertise as a video director and screenwriter,
and also the language of film studies6. Contemporary film studies has, in the Australian
circumstance, been somewhat subsumed into broader area of media studies and been
somewhat dominated by media studies’ concern for the political and institutional issues.
Here, however, I intend to focus on the more traditional questions raised in film studies,
including the choices I make as a practitioner and their affect on the script, the language
of the film, the representations that make up the components of the film and the way in
which they function together.
The screenplay, The Argonauts, is a one hundred and ten-minute story of four
teens struggling to save their parents’ small shops from becoming just another multiplex.
Set in the early 1990s, the fifteen year olds set off on an adventure that changes their lives
forever. The film deals with risk and the value of working together to achieve a common
goal. In genre terms, the screenplay pays homage to 1980s children and teen adventure
films such as Goonies and The Last Starfighter.
While the screenplay constitutes a form of knowledge, it also provides me with a
creative process to reflect upon. Overall, the screenplay and the accompanying exegesis
form a joint answer to the research task of enunciating and examining some of the
differences in approaching a screenplay as a screenwriter and/or as a director. I intend the
screenplay as both an embodiment and an exemplar of the decisions made. I intend the
reflective essay to provide a framework to examine the process of these decisions. Here,
6 By practical expertise I am referring to my experience in directing and producing short films and narrative driven music videos for Australian audiences.
128
my reflective practice involves an account of my thinking and decision-making processes
in preparing both the original screenplay and then a shooting script. The bulk of the case
study examines how in moving from the role of screenwriter to that of director I would
modify the screenplay.
In this instance, the commentary about The Argonauts is framed around a
synopsis of the script and some character notes, particularly on issues of character
development and scenes elements in Act I. The scene and character profiles are used to
illuminate the ideas I explore about what the task of direction brings to scriptwriting. The
comments, are often, necessarily, piecemeal but are intended to be illustrative of the
central observations are the scriptwriter/director nexus, or how being mindful of the
directorial tasks influences the approach of the writer7.
This exegesis, as an examination and presentation of my own thinking as the
writer and putative director of The Argonauts, acts as an explanation of, or key to, the
work, and as a form of knowledge about creative processes involved in its development.
This exegetical form is well established, particularly among fiction writers in the use of
“prefaces, introductions, forewords, [and] afterwords” (Krauth 2001: 2). For
screenwriters, who are usually developing an intermediate product (that is, the script for a
film or for a television show rather than the final work itself), explanations of the work
more usually take the form of a treatment aimed at producers or investors. These are
selling documents and are correspondingly less discursive that the literary introduction or
preface. They do share, however, an exegetical function of explaining the work to a third
party.
7 An extended synopsis and profiles of minor characters are included in Appendix A and Appendix B.
129
Case Study: The Argonauts
As stated above The Argonauts is the screenplay of a one hundred and ten-minute
children’s adventure feature film. Set in Logan, an outer suburb of Brisbane, it tells the
story of four teens struggling to save their parents’ small shops from becoming just
another multiplex. Set in the early 1990s, the fifteen year olds set off on an adventure that
exposes them to risk and teaches them the value of working together to achieve a
common goal. The story centres around Corey who is dealing with the issues arising from
his parents’ divorce, bullying and falling in love. The style of The Argonauts is
reminiscent of 1980s teen films, such as ET, BMX Bandits and Explorers and features
popular music of the era. The target audience for The Argonauts is pre-teens who aspire
and connect with the characters in the screenplay. The movie would also appeal to an
older generation who grew up in the era the film is set and can identify with the
characters in a retrospective and nostalgic manner.
The protagonist and the use of visual elements in building character
The starting point for The Argonauts were the characters. Corey, Ariel, Steen and Charles
(a.k.a. Chip) comprise the gang who undertake the adventure. Initially, these characters
came out of the narrative structure of the film. I thought about them and their
development in terms of their service of the structural demands of the film—such as how
the character tensions between them drive the group towards their decision to explore
under Old Man Neal’s house.
130
Within this gang the overall protagonist is Corey, a 16-year-old high school
student who is dealing with the issues of popularity and the pressures of finishing year
eleven. Despite being seen as a nerd by his schoolmates, he has an active imagination and
a keen sense of adventure. He is what you would call one of the cool nerds. Corey’s age
and qualities were carefully chosen. As a filmmaker I sought a broad target audience. By
making the lead in this script sixteen, I believe he will be aspirational for younger school
children as well as older teens alike who hopefully will identify with the issues he is
dealing with. This film will hopefully also have some retro-appeal to the thirty-
somethings who would have been Corey’s age at the time the film is set8.
Luckily for Corey, he has grown up with other like-minded children at the local
shopping centre. His parents, like those of the other Argonaut teens, make their livelihood
working at the complex. This loosely supervised playground leads to many small-time
childish adventures and has shaped Corey into the teen he is today. Until now, Corey has
had a carefree and secure life living with his mother, apart from the occasional conflict
with the neighbourhood and schoolyard bullies: all in all an average teen’s life, which is
just fine with him. However, for the greater part of this story, Corey’s strongest desire is
simply to save his mother’s shop from the developers. Caution flies to the wind and in the
course of his adventures, Corey’s heroic side shows itself. Corey comes to understand
that only by being a leader and taking risks will he have a shot at achieving his goals.
8 From a director’s point of view, having the characters in their mid-teens, who are old enough to take direction, is easier from a technical point of view. From my experience in casting younger children for television commercials I have discovered that it is difficult to effectively direct children under sixteen years and it would be hard to find anyone under this age who had the acting ability and disposition to convincingly play the main characters of The Argonauts.
131
Corey is conflicted between staying in his hometown with his friends and family
and accepting a scholarship that will help him realise his potential. He doesn’t want to
end up working in his mum’s store like his older brother. But to make things worse, he’s
falling in love. Although Corey has a strong attachment to his hometown and fights to
save his mother’s shop and his strong friendships, he has a longing for adventure and an
underlying desire to get out of the town and move on to greater things.
Beyond these major character elements driven at a narrative or structural level, the
complexities and subtleties of even the major characters were really developed in my
mind through the inclusion of various visual elements—the director’s mind. Dona Cooper
(1997) discusses the role of heroes, antagonists and secondary characters in fulfilling a
distinct function within the story’s dramatic equation as well as provoking a different
emotional dynamic in the audience. For example, Corey has played saxophone ever since
he was nine and now excels at his chosen instrument (one of the funkier instruments for
1991, even Lisa Simpson plays sax). All the cool instruments like guitar and keyboard
have been done to death in popular films such as Back to the Future. I wanted to make
Corey’s special ability something the older audience would find amusing. With the onset
of grunge, popular 1980s bands that featured saxophone such as INXS and Bruce
Springsteen and the E Street Band all failed to make the transition into the 1990s. With
the arrival of the easy listening stylising of Kenny G. the saxophone was soon considered
a nerd’s instrument. Corey’s musical gifts combined with his academic skills make him a
prime candidate for ‘loner’ status.
132
Setting and the establishment of characters through the use of setting:
Beyond the initial designation of the setting by the writer, the director is almost entirely
responsible for the look of the film and the eventual mise-en-scene. As a writer/director, I
was conscious during in the initial drafting of the screenplay of the possibility of a
shopping centre as a setting. So, while small, independently-owned shopping centres are
becoming harder to find; and they are often nothing more than a mish-mash of shop
fronts and signage, these locations are perfect for filming, as each store is unique,
providing a great visual locale for a film set in the early 1990s. The Argonaut Shopping
Centre in the film is based on a real suburban group of shops by the same name that
existed in Logan in the 1980s. The original Argonaut had a fish and chip shop, an old
bookstore, a pet store, a record bar and an electronics repair store. These locations are
easy to acquire and within the film’s budget. As the locations lend themselves to the era
and feel of the film, art direction can be achieved easily and simply through placement of
signs and brands.
It was also immediately clear that the setting could be used to underpin character.
The effect of the setting on the character is particular explored by Michael Rabinger who
argues that new characters demand their own setting to express what is particular to them
[…] A change of setting will produce changed pressures on characters (2003: 161). While
initially my cast of characters developed out of the narrative structure of the film (and I
conceived of character difference through dialogue), in rethinking the work as a director,
the identity of the individual shops in the centre could support character differentiation.
The shopping centre, and its visual elements, effectively became a way to think-through
133
and develop the complexities and subtleties of the characters. This is evident in the
comparative treatment of the sixteen year-old Ariel and Corey’s mum Sue.
Ariel is an attractive, funky 16 year-old (picture Molly Ringwald in Pretty in
Pink) whose dad works in the Argonaut Shopping Centre Collectable Record store. She is
a diamond in the rough. Besides her ‘out there’ alternative clothes, Ariel could easily be
in the cool group at school, should she ever want to conform and become ‘mainstream’.
Instead, she chooses to remain loyal to her childhood friends. Like all her friends she
works part time in her parents’ shop. This has given her an amazing musical knowledge.
At the moment, she is excited about a brand new style of music that is starting to
appear—Grunge. Ariel’s impulsive nature can often get her into trouble. She has a quick
wit; she has to, if she wants to give it back to the boys who often dish it out. Her shtick is
sarcasm. She is one of the guys and they see her as nothing more, until now. Ariel has
feelings for Corey and their friendship is starting to become awkward. Ariel is switched
on and knows Corey wants to be more than just friends too. The romantic tension
between the two is becoming frustrating for her. She knows that if Corey wasn’t so vague
and had the guts to ask her out, they’d make a great couple. Ariel often takes charge when
the boys start mucking around and can’t make decisions; she feels like she has something
to prove. Ariel gets annoyed at the sometimes-childish behaviour of the guys. Ariel’s
only decision is—could she be with a guy who plays saxophone and not grunge guitar?
For Ariel, the record store works as a great visual locations which underpins her
tough girl and counter-cultural impulses. Such films as High Fidelity and Empire Records
have also used record stores as locations in similar effort to build character profiles9.
9 I my work as a video director numerous bands have asked me if they can shoot their music videos in an old record store. I suspect for much the same reason.
134
More specifically, this location aids me as a director as it sets up Ariel’s music
knowledge and provides a perfect opportunity to communicate many of the pop culture
references, which subtly add to the humour.
In contrast, Sue, who is recently separated but looking after her three children
(Corey, CARLEY (6) and MICHAEL (20)) works full time at the Argonaut Shopping
Centre’s antique store. Sue has started to feel the financial strains that come with been a
single parent. Sue accepts what is thrown at her and is resigned to the belief that she has
no power and cannot fight to save her livelihood. The single mother works well in this
scenario. As in many 1980s children’s adventure films like Spielberg’s ET, Last
Starfighter, Cloak and Dagger and even in Goonies the absence of the father figure is
magnifies the burdens of family and parenting. The later revision of the script endeavour
to make the character of Sue more tense and on edge. For the first two thirds of the script
she seems crazy and is living in denial, believing that her shop will not be taken over. I
want to build on this side of her character, as it will help to increase the stakes on the
success of the teens’ mission. The concretisation of her livelihood into the shop
underlines the scale of the loss. The choice of an antiques store, as say against a record
shop, underlines generation difference, the past and the difficulty of change.
Action and the use of action in building secondary characters
The final element relating to the director’s approach to character that I wish to emphasize
here is the use of visual action in the story of supporting characters in order to increase
the overall visual dynamism of the film. Jean-Pierre Geunes (2000: 17) states that an
135
action scene serves two purposes; the first is the diagetic action which involves the
protagonist and what is happening to them, how much danger they are subjected to and
how everything will turn out, and secondly there is the aesthetic and sensory effect of
action which stimulates the eye in reaction to a rapid progression of multiple edits and
visual imagery. As a director I found my self forever concerned with the overall look of
the work. This had an effect on the narrative and character elements and drafts that I had
previously developed as a screenwriter. This is most evident in the character of STEEN
and the use of BMX action.
Steen is the son of the Argonaut Shopping Centre’s grocer. He sees himself as
nothing more. He knows that once he has finished school he will start working at his
parents’ store full time. Because of this, he has become lazy. Steen doesn’t aspire to
anything greater and his school marks suffer, consequently he was kept back a year.
Steen, who is slightly older than the others (17), has taken it upon himself to be the
group’s protector. He is physically fit and muscular for his age. He could have easily
been the school bully if it wasn’t for his close group of friends, especially Corey, who
keep him on the straight and narrow. Steen is a practical thinker who speaks his mind. He
will often act without thinking of the consequences, to the detriment of his friends.
Steen’s athletic abilities come from stacking pallets in his parent’s fruit and veg shop.
This strength translates well when it comes to riding his BMX. This is Steen’s favourite
past time and if there was a profession for a BMX rider in 1991, then he may have had
something to aspire to.
I took the opportunity to include elements of BMX, because the pastime currently
has a huge following. BMX stunts translate well to the screen as is evident in both
136
extreme sports television and in films such as BMX Bandits. Programs such as Xgames
show spectacular stunts that are covered with the latest film techniques, such as using
ultra-slow motion cameras. As a writer, the BMX is a great tool for the exposition to
unfold through action, to provide action at an appropriate age level, and to demonstrate
Steen’s physical strength (which is important elsewhere in the plot).
Approaching Narrative
As I came to think about the work as a director I found myself greatly interested in the
pace of the story—how quickly it was told, and with what energy. This presented an
obvious tension between character (which might be revealed through exposition rather
than narrative) and narrative itself, which often favours action over character. In re-
working the script as a director I became concerned with narrative compression how then
the pace could be increased without undermining the development of character. I was
alert to this concern partly because of my practice as a music video director. As is
detailed below, I correspondingly sought to deal with narrative elements with greater
brevity than I was initially inclined as a screenwriter.
This brevity is made clear in the opening scenes of the film, which are set during
the day on a Thursday of the school week. COREY, STEEN and ARIEL head off to
school riding their chrome BMX bikes in formation as if heading off to war. Dogs are
barking in the distance and overheard breakfast talk is all part of a typical morning in this
suburban cul de sac. COREY waits impatiently for the arrival of his two best friends.
CHOCK and his gang chase COREY, STEEN and ARIEL on their chrome BMX bikes
137
through the suburban streets on their way to school. It is a typical morning in November
1991.Chock’s gang look extremely threatening with their bad teenage moustaches and
tight black jeans. Chock calls them to, “Get ‘em”. Corey, Steen and Ariel desperately
attempt to loose the pursuing pack. The whir and sliding of BMX bikes can be heard
down the backstreets and through the shortcuts of the neighbourhood. The chase takes the
teens through the town and past Old Man Neal’s dilapidated house and the local library,
where a piece of perforated computer paper reads, “See new World War II display”.
Corey, Steen and Ariel outrun the bullies, only just getting away. They meet up with
CHIP in the school library. Chip wishes he could ride to school too. The bell rings and
they head off to class.
Although this scene is described over eight pages in the script, with quick paced
editing the onscreen time should be no more than three or four minutes. The chase acts as
a device to set up the characters and the suburban surroundings. We see all the locations
where the film will play out: Corey’s house, the library, The Argonaut and even Old Man
Neal’s House. Similarly this sequence introduces all the lead characters. When directing
music videos, I only have three to four minutes to get the entire narrative across to the
audience and in television commercials this time is reduced to only thirty seconds or a
minute. This experience lead me to writing this fast paced sequence as I am confident in
my ability as a director to communicate concisely, in effect applying a director’s
approach to my writing.
In the next sequences Corey and his friends overhear snippets of their parents’
conversations. It seems that the Argonaut Shopping centre, the livelihood of their parents,
is being threatened. The teens resolve to investigate the situation. We find out the
138
Argonaut is going to be sold to developers. As a result Chocks dad has put the rent up so
they will break their contracts early and be forced to move out. It’s a clause in the
contract. In the director’s revision of the script, this information was set up in a more
conventional and visual way instead of relying solely on the overheard phone
conversation.
In a sequence following soon after, an old, scratchy 16mm newsreel plays in the
background, showing troops operating in the local area. The teens cannot concentrate on
the droning monotone voice. They sit pondering the repercussions of loosing the
Argonaut Shopping Centre and the more immediate problem of how to avoid Chock’s
gang tomorrow. The film snaps, the lights turn on and the bell rings. The teacher
approaches Corey about a scholarship opportunity at a well-respected city private school.
He doesn’t tell his friends. The teens’ are forced to walk their vandalised bikes past Old
Man Neal’s spooky looking house on their way to the Argonaut. They discuss the local
rumours and mysterious legends that surround Old Man Neal. They arrive at the
Argonaut late and all run off to help at their parents’ stores.
As director I reworked several of these scenes to be exterior scenes either in the
early morning or late afternoon. This magical time always looks great on film and is
another example of the impact of my directing experience on the writing process. Many
decisions regarding locations and ‘time of day’ were based on my experiences of trying
to make full sun shots in Australia look good.
At home later that night Corey’s mother, Sue, is dealing with the stresses of being
a single parent. She burns the dinner and denies that they will have to move. Corey sits
helplessly, picking at burnt bits of chicken on his plate. I believe the dinner scene is
139
essential. Again Spielberg is model in this. The dinner scene sets up the family dynamics
very well in many of his films such as Jaws, ET, and even Poltergeist. By seeing these
relationships, rather than just having then revealed through exposition, we get a sense of
the family unit and the reality and normality of their everyday life, which could be easily
disrupted by the unfolding events. This scene will also hopefully reinforce that SUE is
starting to loose it and the teens really are forced to take action.
A small detail here borrowed from other films is layering. The TV in the
background is playing the weather report. WE are told that there will soon be a king tide.
Many successful adventure films, such as Back to the Future, are good at layering the set
ups. Most of which aren’t even noticed on the first viewing. Similarly, in the music
videos I direct, I try to layer the background with subtle clues and gags for repeat
viewing. Most of the time these videos are played on high rotation on music programs
and channels like MTV and layering set ups helps to make repeat viewing exciting. This
is a technique I have applied when writing this script, as is evident in this scene.
Conclusion
The clutch of examples listed above underline the importance, and transformational
contribution, of the director to the writer’s initial screenplay. When writing with the
intention to direct, the thinking and decision-making process are influenced by a
mindfulness of the directorial tasks that are to be undertaken later. The director’s
knowledge and foresight address and define components of the screenplay through
practical and aesthetic considerations. In the case of The Argonauts, the impact of the
140
director on the creative process transformed the characters, visual action, setting and
pace of the screenplay—hopefully, all for the better.
141
Appendix A: Synopsis of the Screenplay
INTRO TO THE ARGONAUTS: DAY 1, THURSDAY COREY, STEEN and ARIEL head off to school riding their chrome BMX bikes in formation as if heading off to war. Dogs barking in the distance and overheard breakfast talk is all part of a typical morning in this suburban cul de sac. COREY waits impatiently for the arrival of his two best friends.
CHOCK and his gang chase COREY, STEEN and ARIEL on their chrome BMX bikes through the suburban streets on their way to school. It’s your typical morning in November 1991. They look extremely threatening with their bad teenage moustaches and tight black jeans. Chock: “Get ‘em”.
Corey, Steen and Ariel desperately attempt to loose the pursuing pack. The whir and sliding of BMX bikes can be heard down the backstreets and through the shortcuts of the neighbourhood. The chase takes the teens through the town and past Old Man Neal’s dilapidated house and the local library, where a piece of perforated computer paper reads “See new World War II display”.
Corey, Steen and Ariel outrun the bullies, only just getting away. They meet up with CHIP in the school library. Chip wishes he could ride to school too. The bell rings and they head off to class.
We find out the Argonaut is going to be sold to developers. As a result Chocks dad has put the rent up so they will break their contracts early and be forced to move out. It’s a clause in the contract.
They discuss their plan to avoid Chock’s gang tomorrow. An old, scratchy 16mm newsreel plays in the background, showing troops
operating in the local area. The teens cannot concentrate on the droning monotone voice. They sit pondering the repercussions of loosing the Argonaut Shopping Centre and the more immediate problem of how to avoid Chock’s gang tomorrow. The film snaps, the lights turn on and the bell rings. The teacher approaches Corey about a scholarship opportunity at a well-respected city private school. He doesn’t tell his friends.
The teens’ are forced to walk their vandalised bikes past Old Man Neal’s spooky looking house on their way to the Argonaut. They discuss the local rumours and mysterious legends that surround Old Man Neal. They arrive at the Argonaut late and all run off to help at their parents’ stores. With a little probing, Corey confirms from his older brother that his mum will be evicted from the antique store by the end of the week.
At home later that night Corey’s mother, SUE, is dealing with the stresses of being a single parent. She burns the dinner and denies that they will have to move. Corey sits helplessly, picking at burnt bits of chicken on his plate. The TV in the background is playing the weather report. There will soon be a king tide. Corey doesn’t tell his family about the scholarship. Michael pays out on Corey for not asking Ariel to the End of Year School Dance. DAY 2, FRIDAY Corey, Ariel, Steen and Chip are wasting time playing computer games in their garage hideout behind the Argonaut Shopping Centre. Corey verifies that the news is true and
142
their parents will loose their shops. They realise the ramifications will split up the group as their parents will have to move in search for new work. They ride to school late—hoping to miss Chock. Their plan goes bad. Without notice Chock and his bullies surround them again. Corey is separated from the others. The gang chase after him.
Corey scurries under Old Man Neal’s veranda. The bullies lose him and are too afraid to continue their hunt. Intrigued by the rumours of the old house under which he is hiding, Corey is drawn further into the dark. Guided only by shafts of light shining through the dusty old wooded floorboards, Corey clips his bike pedal on something. BANG. Corey hears distant footsteps above as he picks up the fallen framed local newspaper clipping. The title reads, “Lost US Stockpile: Salvage Attempt Fails…”. Corey is scared off before he can read the entire article. As he runs off he catches a glimpse of something mysterious under large white sheets. He’s hiding something big under there. His nametag from is backpack snags ripping off.
He catches up with the others at school just in time to make the bus for a school excursion. Corey tries to convince the others of his recent discovery, which he believes, given his knowledge of antiques, could be a valuable find. This could be the answer to their prayers; the big chance they need to save the Argonaut. They don’t believe him. Steen, Chip and Ariel are more interested about Corey’s close brush with Old Man Neal.
The bus pulls up at the local library and museum. During the class tour Corey notices a photo in a new display and surreptitiously stays behind to take a closer look. Its all the proof he needs to convince the others that there is an abandoned war bunker right here in their small town. The teens agree to search for the bunker. Chock overhears part of their plan. They steal all the info they can from the library, nearly getting caught; it’s a close call.
Back in their garage hideout, they study the maps and old newspaper, articles trying to determine the bunker’s whereabouts. They start to devise a plan for the retrieval of the loot. The Bunker flooded over 40 years ago. There is going to be a king tide on Saturday. This gives them a chance.
Corey has an opportunity to ask Ariel to the dance. He becomes nervous. She waits giving him plenty of time, but nothing happens. Its another lost chance for the two to admit their feelings for each other.
Corey rides to his mum’s shop. Michael is on a high as he has a date this weekend. Corey helps clean up. He finds a new box of antiques and collectables that were donated that morning. He is shocked to find his nametag from his schoolbag sitting on top. There’s also a map marked with the bunker’s airshaft location. It’s stamped ‘Top Secret’. In the box he finds workshop manuals for various guns and tanks. Dumbfounded, he locks up, taking what he can carry. His brother doesn’t notice.
That night Corey sits at home studding the maps and manuals. He looks out the window. The moon is nearly full now. He pushes away the map to reveal his scholarship application papers.
143
DAY 3, SATURDAY It’s the weekend and behind the Argonaut Corey shows Steen, Ariel and Chip his recent find. The others become apprehensive; it seems something is up. They realise Old man Neal has more to do with this than they first thought. The teens work out the position of the bunker’s airshaft from the map. It leads them to a clearing in the bushes behind the Argonaut. As two figures approach the teens quickly hide. It’s Chock’s dad and a mysterious businessman. The full plan becomes apparent. Once the new freeway is built, the Argonaut Shopping Centre will be torn down to make way for a car park for a new Swedish furniture store.
The teens avoid been spotted and hurry off to find the airshaft. They discover it almost by accident, when the ground falls away, nearly sucking Steen down with it. They take in the large scale of the bunker and its tunnel system. It’s going to be a bigger mission than first thought. They decide to stock up in time for the King tide.
Corey, Steen, Ariel and Chip take off for their parent’s shops and stock up on supplies.
Later that night, Michael notices something is up with Corey. He discovers the scholarship acceptance forms. Michael offers what little advice he can about the scholarship. Before getting ready for his date, Michael more confidently suggests Corey to ask Ariel to the dance before she is snapped up by someone like Steen.
Corey overhears Carly asking their mother, Sue, whether they will have to move. Sue becomes a little upset as the reality and consequences of their situation kicks in. Corey sneaks out, leaving on a recording of himself playing saxophone to cover his absence.
Corey, Ariel, Steen and Chip meet up at Old Man Neal shortcut, check their supplies and head off for the airshaft. One by one they apprehensively disappear into the darkness of the airshaft, not knowing what lies beneath them, or ahead of them.
Back on the surface, Chock and his gang go looking for trouble at the Argonaut. They raid the hideout, discovering the maps and article. Chock figures something’s up. With torches outstretched, Corey and the others explore the dark corridors that seem to stretch for miles. Part of a convey belt collapses making it hard for them to get back. It’s a close call as Chip nearly falls. They press on. After some persistent probing, the others find out about Corey’s scholarship offer.
It starts to get colder. They have to act quickly. The king tide has drained the bunker, leaving a muddy residue that glistens in the torchlight. They find the remnants of a failed rescue party; a skeleton of a donkey with patches fur hanging from its bones, peels away from the muddy wall to reveal human remains. Corey carefully retrieves an old Kodak Brownie camera from amongst the skeletons. The teens begin to freak out. Chip wants to go home.
Sue realises Corey is gone. Like sands through an hourglass, the reel-to-reel tape runs out.
Ariel, Steen and Chip start to question Corey’s leadership. It feels like they have been walking for ages. It all looks the same to them. Corey looses the map and nearly his life as kerosene spills from his lamp, causing an old wooden lift to catch fire. Ariel’s true character shines through as she heroically rescues Corey from an almost certain fiery death. The map is lost. Corey and Ariel hug in relief.
144
Back up top, Michael and his date, Elaine, sneak back into the house. Michael uses all his best lines and they are about to start making out. His mum bursts in with the news that Corey is missing. They head out to look for him. Michael tells his mum about the scholarship.
In the bunker corridors the Argonauts are fed up and want to go home. They see no evidence of valuable antiques and are worried that they could be stuck down there forever. Corey convinces them that this is their only chance. It’s now or never. They question his motivation, considering he will probably take the scholarship and leave anyway. Corey is conflicted in his decision about the scholarship, but he knows he wants to save their friendship and will do anything he can to keep things the same, even if it means continuing alone. He sets out determinedly to prove his point. Inspired, Ariel and Chip follow, Steen tags on reluctantly. They trek further down the mine-like shafts.
Back up top, Michael continues to look for Corey. Elaine tags along. As Michael looks around the Argonaut, he runs into Chock. Both of their suspicions are heightened.
Back in the bunker, the teens decide to split up but shortly find themselves back on the same path. For a moment they think they find gold, but it turns out to be the shining reflection of thousands of red crabs, fools gold. They run for shelter. Water is lapping at their ankles. They run to the end of the passage and into a chamber. Fallen rocks and rumble, it seems it’s the end of the line. Back on ground level, Michael and Elaine investigate the hideout and find it vandalised. Elaine accidentally discovers the library article, and becoming more concerned about what the teens are up to, their search intensifies with a clear direction to there whereabouts.
Corey, Ariel, Steen and Chip stand helplessly looking at the muddy wall barring their way. According to Corey this should be it, the actual bunker. A floating wooden crate catches their attention as it sails past and hits the wall like a hammer hitting a 40-gallon drum. The sound echoes through the chamber. The teens’ eyes light up. This is definitely not the sound of wood hitting a solid rock wall. They pry open what turns out to be a huge aircraft hanger type sliding door to reveal a line of well-preserved tanks and floor to ceiling creates. It’s a race against time to find the valuable items amongst the crates of Spam and grenades. They are conscious of the rising water level now creeping up to their waists.
Michael and Elaine’s first date is going from good to not so great as they scramble through the bush. Tired and dirty, Elaine trips on Corey’s bike.
Steen peels the plastic wax-like coating from a gun. It looks brand new. He snaps the ammunition cartridge into the gun like he has seen ‘Commando’ too many times. Pushed by the flowing water, a tank drifts loose knocking into the stack of crates Steen is perched on. He accidentally fires the gun and shoots Chip in the chest. The lights go out. The gun shot echoes around the chamber. Steen, Corey and Ariel call out for each other. Corey and Ariel find each other and share a moment before Steen’s cries lead them to Chip’s limp body. Steen quickly performs CPR but they realise that Chip is in bad shape. The water is now too deep to stand in, so they scramble aboard a tank. Corey uses the manuals he is carrying to take a crash course and manages to get the tank started. There is no time to go back for the guns or valuables. Corey is torn, but chooses his friend’s health. The guns are only just out of reach. He can see them floating past the tank’s turret
145
window. The water is up to the roof. A decision has to be made. They are forced to use the tank’s cannon to blast through a section of the ceiling that has started to cave in.
Climbing through the hole, they make it safely back to the collapsed conveyor belt. They’ve created a huge shortcut, but Chip is near death. Now the only obstacle is the two-storey gap where the conveyer belt used to be. It’s frustratingly out of their reach. Corey tries in vain to lasso his rope and catch a hold but there is nothing for it to snag on. In his second desperate attempt the rope impossibly pulls tight. Suddenly the rope pulls back, like he’s just caught a fish. Its Michael: “You guys are so busted.” Michael and Elaine pull out the teens and call an ambulance. Their parents are waiting anxiously along with an entourage of police and ambulances. Chip is rushed to get medical attention.
Corey, Steen and Ariel attempt to explain, but explanations fall flat in the seriousness and scale of the situation. They know they’ll be grounded for life. Chocks Dad’s pulls up and warns that everyone must be off the property by the morning or they’ll be trespassing. The sun is starting to glow just below the horizon. Chock and his gang watch on with a rye grin. Elaine asks Michael what they’ll be doing next weekend. She had a great time. DAY 4, SUNDAY The only thing Corey was able to salvage was the old Brownie camera. He rides up to Old Man Neal’s house and cautiously places the camera on the doorstep. He quickly rings the bell and runs back to his bike. The shadowy figure of Old Man Neal opens the door and slowly picks up the camera. Holding it to his ear, he starts to wind the film back. Old Man Neal takes the camera under his house to a small self-built dark room. There are many objects shrouded in dusty off-white sheets. He develops the film. The photos are of himself, his girlfriend and brother some 40 ago. It is obvious that they form part of the failed salvage attempt. Old Man Neal walks out into the light and places a photo of himself and his girlfriend onto a table. In the background we see him ripping down the white sheets. Even though its in soft focus we recognise this shape and have seen it before when Corey was hiding under the house.
As Corey arrives at the Argonaut Shopping Centre, workmen are knocking down the big ‘A’. He helps his mother pack up the store.
Corey, Ariel and Steen clean up the hideout. They pack up the remaining posters and trinkets around the room. They learn that chip will be ok. There is awkwardness between the friends; it’s not goodbye yet, but it sure feels like it. THE NEXT WEEK, THE LAST DAY OF SCHOOL Ariel and Steen wait outside Corey’s house to ride to school together. Nothing. He has been grounded all weekend. Ariel and Steen ride to school. As usual Chock and his gang start to chase them. It’s on again. They catch them on Old Man Neal Street. Steen and Ariel lack their usual vigour and adrenalin without Corey.
Suddenly there is a huge rumble and a tank rolls into view. Chock backs down. The gun turret swings around and points dead towards Chock. There is a moment of silence before the hatch opens and Corey appears.
146
Chock: “You wouldn’t dare.” Another figure pokes his head out holding a Supersoaker, also directed at Chock.
Chip: “Wouldn’t he? They shot me and I’m their friend.” Corey explains to Ariel and Steen that, like them, Old Man Neal, his girlfriend
and brother had tried to salvage the valuables from the bunker. They had also been trapped by the flooding torrent and Old Man Neal had been the only one to escape in the tank, blasting through the original flooded front entrance causing it to crumble behind him. Old Man Neal feels that he is able to let his bunker souvenirs go in light of the retrieval of his precious photographs. The money raised from the war-time antiques may be just enough to save the Argonaut Shopping Centre, and with it the livelihood of the store owners and workers. FINALE, THE SCHOOL DANCE Corey, Ariel, Steen and Chip all go to the end of school dance as heroes. Corey takes Ariel’s hand asks her to dance. But before they can hit the dance floor, Chock and his gang bust in furious at the Argonaut victory and the developers deal gone bad. There is a final confrontation during which Ariel knocks Chock down and out in front of the entire school. The teachers merely turn a blind eye. Ariel, Corey, Steen and Chip go from zeros to heroes. They all realises that the rest of high school is going to be a whole lot easier for him and his friends. Corey now feels he has the confidence to take on the scholarship knowing that he can tackle the unknown. Ariel, Steen and Chip all agree that Corey should go; they want him to be all he can be. Corey jumps on stage and plays the most radical song of 1991 for Ariel… on saxophone. It is both pathetically romantic and heroic. Everybody runs to the dance floor.
147
Appendix B: Other Characters CHARLES (CHIP): Charles (15) is known to his friends as Chip—as in ‘computer chip’. Chip’s dad works at the Argonaut’s electronic shop and as a result Chip has spent much of his childhood playing with computers. He is a computer wiz. Chip looks up to Corey as academic mentor, however most lessons learnt are social ones. He is a nerd, your typical glasses wearing skinny kid with bad dress sense. Chip was taken up a grade at school, as there are no ‘special or gifted’ classes at the small school where the teens are enrolled. Because of this he looks much younger than the others. Chip is everything Steen isn’t; yet somehow they are great friends. It’s like a 90’s version the odd couple. Chip has missed out on many of the fun times and ‘in’ jokes shared by the others, as he is younger and spent his childhood indoors under the watch of his protective parents. Like his hero, Spock, Chip is overly logical and for the most part doesn’t understand sarcasm, which frustrates the others, especially Ariel. (This rag-tag group of teens pull together and play off each other’s strengths and weaknesses to form a strong bond of friendship. Theses four unlikely characters may just be the ones able to work together and fight the relentless takeover bid that will destroy their world as they know it.) CHOCK: Chock is a prat. Chock’s dad owns the Argonaut Shopping Centre. This gives Chock a false sense of superiority over the other teens and has lead him to bullying and bossing them around under the pretence his dad has the power to evict the teens’ parents from the Shopping Centre. This has been an idle threat, up until now. As a result, Chock’s bad attitude and lack of respect has landed him the position of school bully. He chose to ostracise himself from the Argonaut children growing up and has formed a gang of like-minded thugs of who he is the leader. However, for a bully he’s a real daddy’s boy. He doesn’t need to work hard or abide by the rules, as he has his father’s power and money to rely on. CHOCK’S DAD: Chock’s Dad is the real villain. He is a Porsche-driving spineless puppet who has been manipulated by a larger faceless corporation that is making a takeover bid for the Argonaut Shopping Centre where the teen’s parents work. Chock’s Dad bought the Shopping Centre back in the eighties (pre Multiplex and Westfield shopping centres). He soon became tired of running the newsagency and the legitimate hard work that went with it. He handed the every day running over to his daughter NAOMI so he could turn his attention towards looking for a quick way to make a buck. He is Chock’s role model. MICHAEL: Michael is Corey’s older brother. He is content working in his mum’s antiques store. Michael had his opportunity to leave the town and make something of himself. However, he decided to stay and help his mum with the store after his father left. Michael is resented by Corey for not taking advantage of the tertiary opportunities that presented themselves. Michael is a good role model and a supportive brother, however he is more focussed on getting his licence and scoring a girlfriend. OLD MAN NEAL: Very little is known about Old Man Neal. He is a recluse and over the years the rumours have lead the teens to fear him. Filtering fact from fiction, we know
148
that Old Man Neal is a war veteran and the hill and street where he lives is known as ‘the Old Man Neal shortcut’ and ‘Old Man Neal Hill’. He lives in an old run-down, mysterious house that personifies and reinforces Old Man Neal’s reputation.
149
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aronson, L. (2001) Scriptwriting Updated: New and Conventional Ways of Writing for
the Screen, 2nd edition, Sydney: Allen and Unwin
Aristotle translated by S.H. Butcher, referenced January 2006
http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/a/a8/poetics.html, May 2004).
Ballon, R. F. (2005) Blueprint for screenwriting: a complete writer's guide to story
structure and character development, Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cooper, D. (1997) Second Edition, Writing Great Screenplays for Film and TV, New
Jersey: Peterson’s
Field, S. (1994) Screenplay: the foundations of screenwriting. 3rd edition
New York: MJF Books.
Geunes, J (2000) Film Production Theory, Albany: Sate University of New York Press
Goodridge, M. (2002) Directing Boston: Focal Press
Harmon, R. (1997) Film directing—killer style and cutting edge techniques : a step-by-
step guide to making your film, Los Angeles: Lone Eagle Pub
Kingdon, T. (2004) Total directing: integrating camera and performance in film and
television, Los Angeles: Silman-James Press, c2004.
Bowden, D. (2006) Writing for film: the basics of screenwriting, / NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum
Mark, A. (2004) Character and conflict: the cornerstones of screenwriting. Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemann.
McKee, R. (1999) Story, 2nd Edition, London, Methuen
Peary G. (editor) (1998) Quentin Tarantino: Interviews, Mississippi, University Press of
Mississippi
Proderes, N. T. (2001) Film Directing Fundamentals: From Script to Screen, Boston:
Focal Press
Proferes, N. T. (2005) Film directing fundamentals: see your film before shooting, 2nd
edition, Amsterdam: Focal Press.
Rabinger, M. (2003) Directing: Film Techniques and Aesthetics, 3rd edition, Boston:
Focal Press
Richards, R. (1992) A Director’s Method for Film and Television, Boston: Focal Press
150
Riley, C. (2005) The Hollywood standard: the complete and authoritative guide to script
format and style, Studio City, CA: M. Wiese Productions.
Russell, K. (2001) Directing film: the director's art from script to cutting room,
Washington, D.C.: Brassey's
Schwartz, M. (2005) How to write: a screenplay, New York : Continuum.
Silver-Lasky, P. (2004) Screenwriting for the 21st century. London: Batsford.
Slide, A. (1996) Directing: learn from the masters, Lanham: Scarecrow Press,
Write, K. (2005) Screenwriting Is Storytelling: Creating an A-List Screenplay That Sells!,
New York, Penguin.
Filmography
Anderson P.T. (director) 2000. Boogie Nights, [DVD] USA:New Line Cinema
Kennedy, K. and F. Marshall (producers) Spielberg, S (executive producer) Dante, J
(director) 1984. Gremlins [DVD] USA: Warner Bros. Pictures.
Kassar, M and A. Vajna (producers) Kotcheff, T (director) 1982. Rambo First Blood
[DVD] USA: Artisan.
Kennedy, K. and F. Marshall (producers) Zemeckis, R. (writer/directors) 1985. Back To
The Future [DVD]. Australia: Universal.
Donner, R and H. Bernhard (producers) Donner, R (director) 1985. Goonies [DVD]
USA: Warner Bros. Pictures.
Adelson, G. and E, O. Denault (producers) Castle, N (director) 1984. Last Starfighter
[DVD] USA: Universal.
Kazanjian, H and G. Lucas (producers) Spielberg, S (director) 1981. Raiders of the Lost
Ark [DVD] Australia: Paramount.
Allan, C and C.O Erickson (producers) Franklin, R (director) 1984. Cloak & Dagger
[VHS] Australia: Universal.
Kennedy, K. and S. Spielberg (producers) Spielberg, S (director) 1982. E.T. the Extra-
Terrestrial [DVD] USA: Universal.
Lucas, G (director) 1998. American Graffiti, [DVD] USA: Universal.
