Screenplay Structure - The Three Act Onion
Generally speaking, most screenwriting classes, books and teachers will tell you that all (successful) screenplays are written in Three Act Structure, where Act I (the set up) is 25-30 pages long, Act II (conflict) is 45-60 pages long, and Act III (resolution) is 25-30 pages long, with the shorter page lengths for a 90 minute movie and the longer page lengths for a 120 minute movie.
The origin of Three Act Structure came from the early days of film where studios would analyze the films that did well and those that didn't, eventually deducing that audiences responded better to films that fell into this one-quarter, one-half, one-quarter format.
I'm not going to tell you any differently.
I've seen many articles about screenplay structures that are alternatives to Three Act, but in my opinion, they're all just a Three Act skeleton in different skin.
"Memento," told backwards, follows Three Act Structure.
"Pulp Fiction," told disjointedly, follows Three Act Structure.
Not only does Three Act Structure work, but what I'm going to tell you today is that you should use more of it.
I'm going to suggest that you apply Three Act Structure to your overall script, to each act, within each act there are "sequences," within the sequences are "parts," within the parts there are "scenes," within the scenes there are "beats," and even within the beats there are the sub-atomic particles of story-telling, "words.
" I call this layering the Three Act Onion.
What is Three Act Structure, anyway? Essentially, all we're saying is that a movie should have a beginning a middle and an end.
So, if a beginning, middle and end apply to the overall script, shouldn't the concept of setup-conflict-resolution apply throughout? It does.
Let's start with Act I.
For ease of numbers, we'll say we're working on a 120 minute drama and Act I is 30 pages long.
That's a lot of white space on your monitor, 30 pages.
And it's a lot of screen time.
We want to fill it up meaningfully, in a way that grips our audience, pulls them in and doesn't let them go.
Just like your overall script, divide your Act I into three sequences, Act 1a (Setup), 1b (Conflict) and 1c (Resolution).
You have a little leeway here in page count.
You could do an 7-8 page 1a, 15 page 1b, and 7-8 page 1c, or three 10 page segments.
We're looking for a compelling skeleton but not one with rigidity.
Let's compare this initial idea to many screenwriting texts that recommend the "Inciting Incident" coming in the first 7-10 pages or so of a script.
What does that mean? It means the beginning of Act I is a setup, establishing location and character, but around page 7-10 we want to see the story introduced.
Such a notion falls specifically within the Three Act Onion, but instead of calling it an "Inciting Incident," I'm just saying it's the break between Act 1a and 1b.
Where the "Inciting Incident" idea falls short and the Three Act Onion succeeds is the rest of Act 1, because just like in an overall script when the audience is waiting for "something to happen" toward 90 minutes into the film that launches them toward resolution, so too will they be feeling a similar need for redirection two-thirds to three-quarters through Act I.
Let's see how this applies in a real movie by taking a look at the Academy Award winning screenplay by Ted Tally, "Silence of the Lambs.
" Act 1a introduces Clarice Starling as an FBI agent in training summoned to Jack Crawford's office where he tells her about the serial killer called Buffalo Bill and instructs her, as a training exercise, to go interview Dr.
Hannibal Lecter to see if she can convince him to give some insights into Bill.
All of that takes about 10 minutes.
Act 1a.
Act 1b sees Clarice going to the psychiatric institute, meeting first with Lecter's psychiatrist, then with Lecter, and right around 20 minutes into the film she leaves, with a little hint from Lecter to pursue.
End of Act 1b.
In Act 1c we watch Clarice solve Lecter's clue which sends her to the storage facility where she finds another body, proving to Crawford that she is capable enough to be a full part of the investigation, the complete resolution of Act 1.
Act II of "Silence of the Lambs" then follows Clarice on the investigation into Buffalo Bill, but we're not going there.
We're going to continue to breakdown Act I.
Let's go back to Act 1a and break our sequence down into parts.
The first part of Act 1a is Clarice jogging on the skills track in the woods.
It's the title sequence but it's also a story sequence, ending with another agent telling her the boss wants to see her.
This film happens to have one character and one scene in the first part.
Your script may have six scenes in the first part, introducing several different characters, or three scenes with one character, or whatever.
The idea is to have the first one-quarter to one-third of Act 1a be a set up (beginning) of the first Sequence the same way the first Sequence is a setup for the Act and the first Act is a setup for the movie.
After the agent tells Clarice to go to Crawford's office, we are into the second part of Act 1a, the "conflict" of the sequence, where Clarice walks nervously through the halls and into Crawford's office where she sees photos and clippings of the Buffalo Bill killings.
Crawford enters and tells her about the case and Lecter, segueing into the third part of the first sequence, when he tells her to go visit Lecter, adding the final warning of how cunning and dangerous he is.
This is the final "part" of the first "sequence" of Act I.
Act 1b falls into the same "beginning-middle-end" structure.
In part one, the setup, Clarice talks to Dr.
Chilton who doesn't want her there.
In part two, the conflict, she goes down to the basement to see Lecter who is standoffish and distant, then for the "resolution" of part two, he changes and lets her in, offering to look at her notes and send her off with a clue.
Act 1c, part one: Clarice does research to figure out Lecter's clue.
Part two: She finds the storage facility, creeping around in the darkness, frightened, and finds a severed head.
Part three: She goes back to Lecter and learns that the victim was Bill's first and that he was a patient of Lecter's.
Of course, there are other scenes in Act I.
Clarice's flashbacks to her childhood, classroom scenes, etc.
, and those are the added dressing that makes a great screenplay really stand out, but the concept of the Three Act Onion holds tightly together.
If you were to go through the movie in Acts II and III you'll see a similar pattern, and the same would hold true if you were to break the "parts" down even further.
Each scene of a great script will be made of "beats," a beginning, middle and end to the scene (the first Clarice / Lecter scene is a particularly great example of how the scene has beats, the beats have beats, even the dialogue has beats.
) Overall, the idea is to take the concept of Three Act Structure, a beginning (setup), middle (conflict) and end (resolution) and ask yourself if it is holding consistently true throughout your script on a macro and a micro level.
If you find an area where it's not, that might be a good place to look at for improvement.
It's one thing to have a great story to tell, but telling it in a way that is compelling is the craft of the screenwriter.
On a closing note, over the course of my filmmaking career I've often been asked my opinion of different screenwriting programs.
I've used many of the products on the market, from Movie Magic to Final Draft, and find that each offers a unique set of tools and functions.
Final Draft I like very much when going into production on a script, as it has many features that interface with budgeting and scheduling software.
However, when I speak to beginning screenwriters, many express that they don't need all the functions of Final Draft and other production level programs, and ask if there is a more affordable program that offers the basic screenwriting functions at a lower price.
For those of you who fall into his category, I like "Writing Screenplays.
" It is an add-in program for use with Microsoft Word (Mac and Windows) that converts the word processor you probably already own into a screenwriting program for only about $50.
For more information, see the link in the resource box below.
The origin of Three Act Structure came from the early days of film where studios would analyze the films that did well and those that didn't, eventually deducing that audiences responded better to films that fell into this one-quarter, one-half, one-quarter format.
I'm not going to tell you any differently.
I've seen many articles about screenplay structures that are alternatives to Three Act, but in my opinion, they're all just a Three Act skeleton in different skin.
"Memento," told backwards, follows Three Act Structure.
"Pulp Fiction," told disjointedly, follows Three Act Structure.
Not only does Three Act Structure work, but what I'm going to tell you today is that you should use more of it.
I'm going to suggest that you apply Three Act Structure to your overall script, to each act, within each act there are "sequences," within the sequences are "parts," within the parts there are "scenes," within the scenes there are "beats," and even within the beats there are the sub-atomic particles of story-telling, "words.
" I call this layering the Three Act Onion.
What is Three Act Structure, anyway? Essentially, all we're saying is that a movie should have a beginning a middle and an end.
So, if a beginning, middle and end apply to the overall script, shouldn't the concept of setup-conflict-resolution apply throughout? It does.
Let's start with Act I.
For ease of numbers, we'll say we're working on a 120 minute drama and Act I is 30 pages long.
That's a lot of white space on your monitor, 30 pages.
And it's a lot of screen time.
We want to fill it up meaningfully, in a way that grips our audience, pulls them in and doesn't let them go.
Just like your overall script, divide your Act I into three sequences, Act 1a (Setup), 1b (Conflict) and 1c (Resolution).
You have a little leeway here in page count.
You could do an 7-8 page 1a, 15 page 1b, and 7-8 page 1c, or three 10 page segments.
We're looking for a compelling skeleton but not one with rigidity.
Let's compare this initial idea to many screenwriting texts that recommend the "Inciting Incident" coming in the first 7-10 pages or so of a script.
What does that mean? It means the beginning of Act I is a setup, establishing location and character, but around page 7-10 we want to see the story introduced.
Such a notion falls specifically within the Three Act Onion, but instead of calling it an "Inciting Incident," I'm just saying it's the break between Act 1a and 1b.
Where the "Inciting Incident" idea falls short and the Three Act Onion succeeds is the rest of Act 1, because just like in an overall script when the audience is waiting for "something to happen" toward 90 minutes into the film that launches them toward resolution, so too will they be feeling a similar need for redirection two-thirds to three-quarters through Act I.
Let's see how this applies in a real movie by taking a look at the Academy Award winning screenplay by Ted Tally, "Silence of the Lambs.
" Act 1a introduces Clarice Starling as an FBI agent in training summoned to Jack Crawford's office where he tells her about the serial killer called Buffalo Bill and instructs her, as a training exercise, to go interview Dr.
Hannibal Lecter to see if she can convince him to give some insights into Bill.
All of that takes about 10 minutes.
Act 1a.
Act 1b sees Clarice going to the psychiatric institute, meeting first with Lecter's psychiatrist, then with Lecter, and right around 20 minutes into the film she leaves, with a little hint from Lecter to pursue.
End of Act 1b.
In Act 1c we watch Clarice solve Lecter's clue which sends her to the storage facility where she finds another body, proving to Crawford that she is capable enough to be a full part of the investigation, the complete resolution of Act 1.
Act II of "Silence of the Lambs" then follows Clarice on the investigation into Buffalo Bill, but we're not going there.
We're going to continue to breakdown Act I.
Let's go back to Act 1a and break our sequence down into parts.
The first part of Act 1a is Clarice jogging on the skills track in the woods.
It's the title sequence but it's also a story sequence, ending with another agent telling her the boss wants to see her.
This film happens to have one character and one scene in the first part.
Your script may have six scenes in the first part, introducing several different characters, or three scenes with one character, or whatever.
The idea is to have the first one-quarter to one-third of Act 1a be a set up (beginning) of the first Sequence the same way the first Sequence is a setup for the Act and the first Act is a setup for the movie.
After the agent tells Clarice to go to Crawford's office, we are into the second part of Act 1a, the "conflict" of the sequence, where Clarice walks nervously through the halls and into Crawford's office where she sees photos and clippings of the Buffalo Bill killings.
Crawford enters and tells her about the case and Lecter, segueing into the third part of the first sequence, when he tells her to go visit Lecter, adding the final warning of how cunning and dangerous he is.
This is the final "part" of the first "sequence" of Act I.
Act 1b falls into the same "beginning-middle-end" structure.
In part one, the setup, Clarice talks to Dr.
Chilton who doesn't want her there.
In part two, the conflict, she goes down to the basement to see Lecter who is standoffish and distant, then for the "resolution" of part two, he changes and lets her in, offering to look at her notes and send her off with a clue.
Act 1c, part one: Clarice does research to figure out Lecter's clue.
Part two: She finds the storage facility, creeping around in the darkness, frightened, and finds a severed head.
Part three: She goes back to Lecter and learns that the victim was Bill's first and that he was a patient of Lecter's.
Of course, there are other scenes in Act I.
Clarice's flashbacks to her childhood, classroom scenes, etc.
, and those are the added dressing that makes a great screenplay really stand out, but the concept of the Three Act Onion holds tightly together.
If you were to go through the movie in Acts II and III you'll see a similar pattern, and the same would hold true if you were to break the "parts" down even further.
Each scene of a great script will be made of "beats," a beginning, middle and end to the scene (the first Clarice / Lecter scene is a particularly great example of how the scene has beats, the beats have beats, even the dialogue has beats.
) Overall, the idea is to take the concept of Three Act Structure, a beginning (setup), middle (conflict) and end (resolution) and ask yourself if it is holding consistently true throughout your script on a macro and a micro level.
If you find an area where it's not, that might be a good place to look at for improvement.
It's one thing to have a great story to tell, but telling it in a way that is compelling is the craft of the screenwriter.
On a closing note, over the course of my filmmaking career I've often been asked my opinion of different screenwriting programs.
I've used many of the products on the market, from Movie Magic to Final Draft, and find that each offers a unique set of tools and functions.
Final Draft I like very much when going into production on a script, as it has many features that interface with budgeting and scheduling software.
However, when I speak to beginning screenwriters, many express that they don't need all the functions of Final Draft and other production level programs, and ask if there is a more affordable program that offers the basic screenwriting functions at a lower price.
For those of you who fall into his category, I like "Writing Screenplays.
" It is an add-in program for use with Microsoft Word (Mac and Windows) that converts the word processor you probably already own into a screenwriting program for only about $50.
For more information, see the link in the resource box below.
