ADLERIAN ANALYSIS
Part Five of this book focuses on the theories of Alfred Adler. In Chapter 12, Adler’s theory of the inferiority complex is explained as a potent means of character motivation, especially in movies with child heroes. The “child hero formula” is drawn out in detail, specifying the unique motivations, goals, conflicts, and obstacles faced by the child hero in films by Disney and other movie studios. The rivalry relationship is a universal theme in movies, as it is rife with psychological symbolism and conflict. In Chapter 13, Adler’s theory of sibling rivalry is explained as a basic template for rivalry themes in all stories and films. And in Chapter 14, Adler’s theory of “life styles” is presented as a model for both character development and psychological conflict between characters.
EXISTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Rollo May was a pioneering scholar and psychoanalyst who successfully merged the concepts of existential philosophy with the principles and practice of psychoanalysis. May’s theories explore the most basic neurotic conflict… the existential anxiety that arises from the fundamental questions: “Who am I?” “Why do I exist?” “What is my purpose?” and “What is the meaning of life?” Chapter 15 interprets Rollo May’s theories of existential conflict and his stage model of self-consciousness into a cogent model of motivation and character development that you can use in your script.
Rollo May labeled the late 20th Century, “The Age of Narcissism,” referring to the narcissistic quality of modern American heroes and the apparent loss of traditional values in American culture. Chapter l6 explores the modern narcissistic archetypes provided to us by our contemporary mythmaker – Hollywood – and the screenwriters and filmmakers of the 20th and 21st Centuries. This final chapter breaks down the elements of common screen character types, revealing them as archetypes for the age of narcissism and explaining their unique challenges, conflicts, and motivations.
WHO CAN USE THIS BOOK
This book is intended primarily for screenwriters, though it provides insights and theories that will be of interest to all filmmakers, as well as psychoanalysts, film analysts, and more generally – all students of psychology and/or film, and anyone with more than just a passing interest in these areas. If you are a screenwriter, this book may be useful to you at any stage of script development. If you don’t even have an idea for a script, this book may turn you on to the classical themes and characters from mythology, drama, and film, and inspire you with an idea or story. If you have an idea for a script, this book will be of great use in helping you with plot structure, creating essential elements of conflict in your characters, and setting up the path of character development for your protagonists. If you are “in full career” of your writing journey, this book may serve as both a guide and inspiration. The fruitful world of psychoanalytic and mythological theory provides a boundless supply of ideas for character and plot. And if you are finishing, revising, or rewriting your script, this book may help you to work out some of the bugs in your script by finding the weak points in the plot or character development. It also may help you figure out why certain parts of your script don’t work, and even give you direction for revamping the script so that it does work.
HOW TO USE THIS BOOK
The usefulness of this book is completely dependent upon your needs as a reader and as a writer. The chapters on Freud provide the basics of internal psychological conflict, a topic that is addressed and developed throughout this book. If you feel that your script lacks a strong or engaging sense of conflict, then the different interpretations of psychological conflict in this book may give you the inspiration you need. The second major leitmotif in this book is character development. The chapters on Erikson and Jung focus on the different psychological elements of character development, providing two very different yet complementary approaches to creating fully developed film characters.
The chapters on the Hero’s Journey and Heroine’s Journey focus more on form, providing plot points and development schemes for the traditional hero and heroine story structures. If you feel that you need help with structure, these chapters may help you immensely, though I suggest that you read the chapters on Freud and Jung first, as the book is designed to provide a progression of ideas that build upon each other. Finally, the chapters on Adler and May focus on alternative psychoanalytic models for story structure, character development, psychological motivation, and conflict. There are no other books that provide Adlerian or existential models for screenwriting.
Whether you are reading this book to gain specific help or insight, or whether you just wish to increase your palette of knowledge for screenwriting or filmmaking, there is an abundance of ideas in this book for you to consider. The brilliant theories of the scholars covered in this book are a consummate source of wisdom and guidance. While learning about these theories, you may find that a flood of new ideas for movies and screenplays will come upon you. You may find yourself brainstorming a plethora of different symbols and unconscious figures, either for the script you are writing, the film you are making, or the movie you happen to be watching in the theater or on television. Leave yourself open to this flow of unconscious images and ideas. The greatest thing this book can offer you is an entrance into your own unconscious mind, because this is the place where fantasies, dreams, and movies are born.
PART ONE
Sigmund Freud
Chapter One
THE OEDIPAL COMPLEX
The central theory in Freudian analysis is his conception of the Oedipal complex, which is drawn from the myth of Oedipus. Within this seminal paradigm lies the groundwork for many of Freud’s greatest ideas, such as his structural model of the psyche, drive theory, castration anxiety, and a host of other theories. Oedipal themes are ubiquitous in movies because they portray the two most basic elements of character development: the integration of moral wisdom and the formation of a mature romantic relationship. As you write your script, many different elements of plot and character development will arise, but the core issues in the story rarely diverge significantly from these two elements. Whatever happens in the film, the main character is generally aiming at some kind of moral victory, or the character is trying to win over the heart of the person he loves. Many movie plots contain both of these elements. A thorough understanding of the Oedipal complex is an essential base for any writer who wishes to tell a story that addresses these fundamental psychological issues of character development.
The Oedipal complex could be interpreted on either a literal or figurative level. In Freud’s “psychosexual” perspective, the infant boy desires sexual union with his mother. Freud was outspoken in his theory of “infantile sexuality” – the belief that babies and small children have raging sexual desires, just like adults. According to this view, suckling at the breast, hugging, bathing, kissing, and every other intimate act shared by the infant and his mother are inherently sexual experiences. A less literal interpretation sees the Oedipal complex as a metaphor for the son’s desire for his mother’s love and affection, rather than a desire for sexual union. A comprehensive understanding of Freud’s theory requires an inclusive approach that understands the son’s desire for mother as a need for love and affection that may be sexually charged, as well. Eventually, the son will grow into a young man and his desires for love and sex will be projected onto another woman. Hence, the resolution of the Oedipal complex is a key element in the formation of romantic relationships.
THE ELEGTRA COMPLEX
Freud’s ideas have been broadly criticized for being “androcentric,” (focusing solely on male viewpoints and perspectives). Freud himself was unapologetic about his tendency to explain intrinsically male issues as universal psychological issues. Even though his clinical work was almost exclusively dedicated to analysis with female patients, Freud admitted: “Despite my 30 years of research… I have not been able to answer the great question that has never been answered: What does a woman want?” Certainly, the Oedipal complex is an example of Freud’s andro
centrism. Nevertheless, Freudian revisionists have adopted the “Electra complex” as a female counterpart to the Oedipal complex, in which the infant daughter develops a passionate desire for her father.
EROS & THANATOS
The son’s conflicted desire for his mother is only one side of the Oedipal coin. The son inevitably realizes that his father is a rival for his mother’s love and attention, and that this rival is infinitely more powerful than he is. This rivalry results in feelings of aggression and hostility toward the father. Like Oedipus, who killed his father Laius and married his mother Jocasta, the son wishes he could destroy his rival for his mother’s love, so he could have her all to himself. According to Freud, the boy’s divergent feelings toward his parents (love for mother and aggression toward father), reflect the two basic primal drives – Eros and Thanatos. In keeping with the mythological theme of the Oedipal complex, Eros and Thanatos are mythological figures, as well. As the attendant of his mother, Aphrodite, Eros was a god of love and sex, providing the Greek root to the word “erotic.” As the son of Nyx, the Greek goddess of night, Thanatos was the personification of death. In Freudian theory, Eros represents the drives that create and foster life (love and sex), while Thanatos represents the drives toward death (hate and aggression). Within Eros and Thanatos are the great dramatic devices that will add spice to any film. If you mix love, hate, sex, and violence with the classical themes of internal conflict, jealousy, and rivalry, you have all the ingredients for an exciting plot.
NEUROTIC CONFLICT AS AN OBSTACLE TO LOVE
In writing your script, it is important to remember that the core of the Oedipal complex is neurotic conflict. As the child grows, he realizes that sexual desire for his mother is socially inappropriate due to the universal “incest taboo.” The boy represses his desire for mother, creating an internal conflict within his character. In movies, this internal neurotic conflict is usually represented by an external obstacle that blocks a character from his object of love and desire.
Almost every script includes some kind of love interest. In romance movies, the love interest is the central plot; but even in other genres, a film may feel empty or lacking if there is no love interest. A movie without love lacks “heart.” Since the parent/child relationship represents the primary love relationship in a person’s life, the Oedipal complex is intrinsically symbolic of every romance, and the resolution of the Oedipal complex has an extremely significant impact on every subsequent love relationship in a person’s life. A comprehensive understanding of Oedipal themes is every writer’s touchstone for creating psychologically resonant love stories.
OEDIPAL RIVALRY
Just as the son sees his father as a rival for his mother’s love, film characters often face a rival for their love interest. In The Graduate (1967), Ben (Dustin Hoffman) gains Mr. Robinson (Murray Hamilton) as a rival, when he gets involved in an affair with Mrs. Robinson (Anne Bancroft). Later on, the rivalry reappears on a different level, when Ben falls in love with Mr. Robinson’s daughter, Elaine (Katherine Ross), and he tries to run away with her against Mr. Robinson’s wishes. First, Ben is a rival for the love of Mr. Robinson’s wife, and then he becomes a rival for the love of his daughter. Typically, the rivalry theme is not as overtly Oedipal as the rivalry between Ben and Mr. Robinson. In Gone With the Wind (1939), Scarlet (Vivien Leigh) experiences a more straightforward rivalry with Melanie (Olivia de Havilland) over the love of Ashley (Leslie Howard).
The rivalry theme is not limited to romantic plot lines. Movie characters often face rivals in their various goals and objectives. In Jerry Maguire (2000), Jerry (Tom Cruise) is forced out of his agency by Bob (Jay Mohr), his obnoxious rival. In sports movies such as Rocky (1976) and The Karate Kid (1984), the main character is driven throughout the film by a desire to best his formidable rival. Even the horse, Seabiscuit (2003), is driven to succeed by his infamous rivalry with “War Admiral,” a bigger, younger, and stronger horse with far better breeding and training. In Tin Cup, Roy (Kevin Gostner) is competing against his rival (Don Johnson) for both his primary goal (victory in the golf tournament), and the heart of his love interest (Rene Russo). This double whammy approach to rivalry themes is a typical device in scripts that want to build high levels of conflict between the hero and his rival. In the end, the hero can claim victory over his rival by winning both the championship, and the love of the beautiful maiden.
FORBIDDEN FRUIT
Some movies depict a somewhat literal version of the Oedipal complex, in which a boy actually wants to have sex with his mother. In Spanking the Monkey (1994) a young son is seduced by his middle-aged mother into an illicit incestuous affair. And in Tadpole (2002), a high school boy desires a sexual relationship with his stepmother. But more often than not, the mother complex is displaced onto an unrelated mother figure. In The Graduate, Ben is seduced by an older woman who is his mother’s close friend, Mrs. Robinson. And in Harold and Maude (1971), Harold (Bud Cort) enters a sexual relationship with Maude (Ruth Gordon), a woman 60 years his senior. In all of these cases, the heroes seem to impart a sense of emotional neediness and immaturity. They are little boys in men’s bodies, who are looking for a mother figure to take care of their emotional needs, and an enticing woman to satisfy their sexual desires.
A key element in all of these love stories is the forbidden fruit factor. Just as the opposite sex parent is forbidden to the child as an object of sexual desire, sex with the older woman is a figurative violation of cultural taboos. The forbidden fruit factor is an extremely common element in love stories. Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, the most famous love story ever told, is about two teens falling in love, even though marriage between them is forbidden by their feuding families, the Montagues and Capulets. When writing a love story with a forbidden fruit element, keep in mind that these stories typically resolve in tragedy.
Forbidden Fruit: The title characters (Bud Cort and Ruth Gordon) consummate their love in Harold and Maude (1971)
Romeo and Juliet commit suicide. Oedipus, when realizing that he married his mother, gouges his own eyes out, and Jocasta commits suicide. Ben and Mrs. Robinson’s relationship in The Graduate ends with the two hating each other, and Harold and Maude’s relationship ends with Maude committing suicide. While the ever popular “love conquers all” denouement tends to work in plots with external obstacles to love, the forbidden fruit plot line almost always ends in tragedy, because the internal conflict is born out of the illicit nature of the relationship itself. In order for the conflict to be resolved, the romantic relationship must end or transform itself into something else.
ADULTERY
The most common application of the forbidden fruit theme is seen in the adultery plot. This conflict is even stronger when the love object is married to a close friend. The adultery theme is figuratively Oedipal, because it replays the same basic emotions. The character desires someone who is morally and socially taboo. The character is also thrust into rivalry with the love object’s spouse, just as the son is pitted into rivalry against his father. The adultery plot line is somewhat tricky to resolve, because while audiences tend to sympathize with the forbidden fruit theme, they also respect the sanctity of marriage. But your character can have his cake and eat it, too (he can win the girl while avoiding massive punishment), if it is established that his rival is undeserving of the love object. In Titanic (1997), the audience is pleased when Jack (Leonardo DiCaprio) wins over Rose’s (Kate Winslet) heart, because her fiancé (Billy Zane) is a mean and insensitive snob. Similarly, in Ocean’s Eleven (2001), it’s okay for Danny (George Clooney) to steal Tess (Julia Roberts) away from her fiancé (Andy Garcia), because he is clearly a controlling, manipulative, and rich jerk, who is not nearly as cool as Danny. When the rival is established as a bad guy or loser, the love story can end in triumph for the main character.
It is difficult to write a triumphant love story when the rival is not established as a bad guy. In Unfaithful (2002), Connie (Diane Lane) indulges in a passionate
adulterous affair, even though her husband Edward (Richard Gere) is an attractive, loving, and all-around nice guy. Connie’s conflict is doubly troubling, because on top of breaking a taboo, she is hurting the man she loves. The tables are turned in this film, as Edward discovers the relationship and finds himself in the precarious position of being a rival for his own wife’s love. Now Edward is Oedipus, driven by love and desire to seize Jocasta, and driven by hatred and rage to kill Laius. The twin passions of Eros and Thanatos overpower Edward and he kills Connie’s lover. While the adultery and subsequent murder function well in the story, the absence of punishment for Connie constitutes a hole in the plot. Screenwriters must be aware that the primal Oedipal themes (love, hate, sex, and violence), need little justification because they are self-explanatory. However, the more subtle themes of punishment and retribution need to be carefully structured and woven into the plot. Unfaithful was set up as a tragedy, but the filmmakers backed out in the end. They were probably afraid to punish the heroine of the film too harshly, since she was the character that viewers identified with. Nevertheless, sophisticated audiences are subconsciously aware of the dramatic structure of tragedies, and they know when a film cheats them out of an emotional wallop in the end.
Psychology for Screenwriters Page 2
