Romantic Screenplays 101 Read Free Page B

to them, all for the sake of engaging the reader / audience in the experience. Think of historical renderings, police procedurals or James Bond movies. Yes, characters can cause events to happen, but the events themselves are the focus of the story. A romance is about the people, not the events they move through.
    2. Predictable structure of meeting, misunderstanding, separation, commitment
    Several of the UCLA Film Department faculty often quote: “No one wants to see the story of the-happy-people-in-the-happy-village.” In a romance that translates to 1) introducing the characters to establish the attraction, 2) creating an opposition which can be either external or internal but plays off character history and personality and sets them at odds, 3) pushing the couple apart despite the attraction with the implication that they are overwhelmed by circumstance to make the relationship work, then 4) forcing them back together with the realization that satisfaction in life can only be achieved with this mate.
    It doesn’t matter that this structure is predictable! That is the required expectation of the genre or category. If this structure is violated in a supposed romantic screenplay, it is reduced to being merely a love or lust story like SOMERSBY or THE BRIDGES OF MADISON COUNTY. A successful chick-flick romance ends with the couple living together into the happily ever after. Knowing that will be the ending means the audience wants to know how the characters overcome the misunderstanding and separation to get to that commitment.
    Some people have a difficult time grasping what separation means in the couple’s experience. Separation has to be an element that threatens the relationship. It is a torn-asunder wrenching that discomfits the audience and hurts the two parties . . . even if only for a moment. That threat creates the angst however it is played. Think of SOMEWHERE IN TIME, OUT OF AFRICA, AN AFFAIR TO REMEMBER and on and on. The audience has to care as much as the two lovers. What moment creates the greatest angst of never seeing one another again for your two people? Answer that and you have your moment of separation.
    3. Consistent expression of emotional impact and angst . . . This element of romance in screenplays takes quite a bit of work because the screenwriter cannot describe every nuance. That interpretation is the realm of the actor and the director. So, you must carefully write dialogue that demonstrates the emotions and angst of the characters without being melodramatic or maudlin.
    Every speech must be absolutely essential to moving the story forward, yet not explain everything. Explaining is called on-the-nose. It is a blatant telling rather than showing. If story progression can be accomplished by the narrative’s action, that will create the preferable “movie, not a talkie.” Is that contradictory to the importance of dialogue? No. Your economy of dialogue in each and every speech must use words that depict character mindset and purpose with word choices and phrasing unique to this character’s history, education, training. Angry speeches are not verbose or detailed whereas seductive speeches are slow and sensually suggestive. Males tend to speak succinctly, whereas females explain the setup to get to their point (unless they are trying to be secretive and manipulative). Fear produces tentative questions or statements. Demands are abrupt and confrontational. Education may have sublimated regional or cultural class idioms (like favored obscenities), but intense anxiety can pop them out of a character’s mouth.
    Actors (and their agents) will highlight just one character’s dialogue throughout a script. That practice has a two-fold purpose: 1) So they can practice the speeches and see if they connect with the part and 2) to evaluate how many scenes or how much of the story they appear in (which will translate to the amount they expect to be paid for the part). As a screenwriter, you need to be