Follow-Up: Getting Through Act Two -- The Sequence Approach

In our last Open Forum, we had this comment from Eve Montana:

What if you have a plethora of ideas, but remain unable to write the second act for any of them? that's my problem and it's frustrating.

I have my ending. I have my beginning on NUMEROUS scripts. THat pesky second act is what chokes me. I even have the theme and everything. I just get stuck on an idea for so long and then I decide to move on to the next project.

I've read all the books. Syd Field. Lajos Egri. How to Write your MOvie in 21 days. Everything.

Seriously, there are 4 features ideas that I have, characters and all and I have nothing to show for it. A post talking about this would be lovely.

That led to this post soliciting advice and opinions from GITS readers. And respond you did with a wide array of ideas, many of them in line with what I would have said. Let me zero in one response in particular today, then add one more take later on the subject of working through Act Two and, indeed, on how to approach story structure in general.

In comments, High Dweller suggested this tact:

THE SEQUENCE APPROACH.

It's a gold mine. Especially for those of us that look at Act II as if it were a vast, chaotic ocean.

But with the Sequence Approach, at least for me, you've got some kind of map with which you can cross that vast ocean a little bit at a time.

This approach cuts a 120 page screenplay into 8 15-page sections. So your Act I and Act III have two 15 page sections each and your vast ocean of Act II has 4 in itself. And each 15 pages has its own conflict and resolution.

I love this approach. It allows you to ignore the fact that you're sitting down to write a daunting 95-115 page screenplay, and simply focus on writing a short 15 pages at a time.

If you haven't already... Try it! Seriously, it's the best method I've ever used. Literally a gold mine.

The sequence approach has certainly become quite popular in the last five-10 years , although it's been kicking around for some time. We have discussed it here via an interview with screenwriter Ryan Condal and elsewhere, but for those who haven't followed that discussion, here is some background.

The sequence approach is generally acknowledged to have been developed by Frank Daniel. Per Wikipedia:

The sequence approach to screenwriting, sometimes known as "eight-sequence structure", is a system developed by Frank Daniel, while he was the head of the Graduate Screenwriting Program at USC. It is based, in part on the fact that, in the early days of cinema, technical matters forced screenwriters to divide their stories into sequences, each the length of a reel (about ten minutes).^[11]

The sequence approach mimics that early style. The story is broken up into eight 10-15 minute sequences. The sequences serve as "mini-movies", each with their own compressed three-act structure. The first two sequences combine to form the film's first act. The next four create the film's second act. The final two sequences complete the resolution and dénouement of the story. Each sequence's resolution creates the situation which sets up the next sequence.

To my knowledge, there are two books on screenwriting based upon this approach. The first is "Screenwriting: The Sequence Approach" by Paul Joseph Gulino:

The great challenge in writing a feature-length screenplay is sustaining audience involvement from page one through 120. Screenwriting: The Sequence Approach explores an often-overlooked tool that can be key in solving this problem. A screenplay can be understood as being built of sequences of about fifteen pages each, and by focusing on solving the dramatic aspects of each of these sequences in detail, a writer can more easily conquer the challenges posed by the script as a whole.

The sequence approach has its foundation in early Hollywood cinema (until the 1950s, most screenplays were formatted with sequences explicitly identified), and has been rediscovered and used effectively at such film schools as the University of Southern California, Columbia University and Chapman University. This concise, fascinating book exposes a wide audiences to the approach for the first time, introducing the concept then providing a sequence analysis of eleven significant feature films made between 1940 and 2000: The Shop Around the Corner, Double Indemnity, Nights of Cabiria, North by Northwest, Lawrence of Arabia, The Graduate, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Toy Story, Air Force One, Being John Malkovich, and The Fellowship of the Ring.

Paul has some authority re both screenwriting and the sequence approach, specifically per the latter in that he studied with Daniel:

Paul taught screenwriting at the University of Southern California for five years, and since 1998 has served as head of the screenwriting program at Chapman University in Orange, California. In addition, he has been a star speaker at the annual Screenwriting Expo in Los Angeles. He studied screenwriting with Milos Forman, Samson Raphaelson, and Frank Daniel at Columbia University.

The other book is "Million Dollar Screenwriting" by Chris Soth:

EVERY REEL IS A MOVIE IN ITSELF... A "MINI-MOVIE!"

With its own unique role in the story, what's the pattern they follow? How do 8 Mini-Movies work together to tell a 2-hour story? The Mini-Movie Method is a way of sequencing your story that is specifically designed for movies, tailored to movies, unique to movies, because The Mini-Movie Method was CREATED for movies. The Mini-Movie Method is not available in any other book, tape or seminar. Learn the secret of Mini-Movies and you'll never go back to 3-Act Structure again!

Soth is a produced screenwriter and of particular interest here, I would assume is the fact that he has written and sold spec scripts, and apparently has "multiple projects in development at major Hollywood studios."

By chance, I had flagged this article by Soth "The Lost Language of Story" posted on 9/28/09. In it, Soth takes on 3-act structure:

What if instead of beginning, middle, end there were eight distinct steps, and even better, a unifying tension that got you from one point to the next in each of these sequences? And, once added together, these steps comprised the ebb and flow of story, the pattern that will help you not with one, not with two, not with specific genres and story types, but with every story, every time? The universal template of story, but worked out in more and more helpful detail.

If I told you that you would never be more than 10 to 15 pages away from a major plot beat or story-turning point again, would that stop you from getting lost in the middle? If you could tame the monster of Act Two by first breaking it into three or four little pieces, if I said you don’t have to write an entire massive screenplay, but just 6 to 8 small chapters, would that change your life as a writer forever?

Could you be a filmmaker then?

Okay, so per the original question from Eve, there is this fact about a story's Act Two: It is typically twice as long as a first act, anywhere from 45-60 pages depending upon the script. The sheer weight of that many pages can be a heavy burden psychologically. As Soth suggests, "If you could tame the monster of Act Two by first breaking it into three or four little pieces," that would almost assuredly make the task at least seem more manageable and less daunting. So for some writers, and hopefully Eve, the sequence approach could be a helpful means of breaking through any Act Two trauma.

Hopefully by tomorrow, I'll add another point to the discussion, arguing for a more character-based approach to story structure.

Let me also say that at some point soon, I want to take up the seeming bad rap advocates of the sequence approach have toward 3-Act Structure - and I'll use that as an opportunity to analyze the sequence approach as well.

But staying on point, are there others of you who use the sequence approach?