Screenwriter of the Week- Body Heat
Breaking my own rule this week by talking about a writer/director
but, like a lot of writer/directors, Lawrence Kasdan started as a
writer, still writes without directing and is probably best known
as a writer. Body Heat (on this Wednesday BBC1 11.55pm) was
Kasdan's first and probably best film as a director, it's one of
the most successful modernisations of film noir and a great film
but it does rather suffer in comparison to some of Kasdan's films
as a screenwriter because they include some of the most successful
films of all time. Kasdan's first credit as a screenwriter was The
Empire Strikes Back which he took over after the death of Leigh
Brackett (incidentally a writer of classic film noir who wrote
almost exclusively for Howard Hawks and was one of the most
prominent female screenwriters of her generation). How he managed
to get that gig as his first credited job is a longer story than I
really have space for, plus it's not the Empire script, good though
it is, that I wanted to talk about. Whenever I want to use an
example of perfect film structure there is one film I always go
straight to; The Raiders of the Lost Ark. You don't have to like
the film (although I can't think of one good reason why you
wouldn't!), but it hits the beats of the classic three act
structure with a precision you can set your watch by. The plot,
protagonist and antagonist, and imperative are introduced by the 20
minute mark, the characters and situation build to a mid point
twist then things spiral out of control as we head for the big
climax. And more than that, think about the way the character of
Indy is introduced; the opening set piece is a tight ten minutes,
for the first five Indy can do no wrong, his whip never misses, he
out smarts every booby trap. Then, on the five minute point, Indy
switches the idol for the bag of sand and everything goes to hell,
for the next five minutes he can do no right and only gets away
with his life through luck. That's the character of Indiana Jones
in a nutshell, he's a hero but not a superman, a hero you can
believe in and identify with. To make that point using structure
and do it so that no one watching notices (unless they're an anal
film-obsessive with a stopwatch like me) is simply brilliant. I'm
not going to pretend that Steven Spielberg had nothing to do with
this, that would be ridiculous, but it's still a very fine piece of
writing. I've no doubt that part of the reason that Kasdan wrote in
this highly structured, textbook way is that he had not been doing
it long, and when you start it's best to stick to the rules. But
another reason is that he is a fan of Kurosawa, another very
structured writer. He was working with Lucas and Spieberg, two film
buffs who revered older movies where structure was king. And of
course the most important reason; it works. It worked in the
thirties and it works today. Nobody is saying that you can't play
with the structure, Hitchcock did it brilliantly, but it's best to
learn how to use that structure first. And to keep in mind above
all else; structure works. It just does.


2 Comments
It's definitely true that good films seem to follow a formula, much the same as successful novels do! An author usually has sole responsibility for their work, so w/d's should produce good films (I should think). Also, I think sequels work better when using the same w/d?
That's interesting about Hitchcock. I suppose he was a genius, so got away with breaking the rules? Similar to talented writers who can bend the rules without too much trouble! They just know their stuff.
I bought Ghost Train with Arthur Askey the other day, as part of my 'teach myself how to structure a script' experience! I watched it years ago and was petrified! It wasn't as scary this time around...
Click here to sign up now.