What is story structure?

Now that we have a basis for a story, we will consider the idea of “story structure.” It refers to the process of
organising the story and constructing the screenplay’s plot.

Story structure is concerned with the order and timing of the events that take place in the film, so, it’s
concerned with the flow of information – who knows what, and when – and the pace and rhythm of that
flow. As audience, we only think about this when something goes wrong: a story begins to drag, or maybe
we miss something important. Otherwise, the structure disappears into the story background.

Screenwriters, however, spend a lot of time thinking about structure. It’s a very important part of
screenwriting and the subject of many books and courses. In fact, American screenwriter William Goldman
famously remarked that, “Movies are structure and that’s all they are. The quality of writing – which is
crucial in almost every other form of literature – is not what makes a screenplay work.” i Novelist John
Irving, who won an Oscar for adapting his own work, The Cider House Rules, goes even further: “There is
no (literary) language in a screenplay. (For me, dialogue doesn’t count as language.) What passes for
language in a screenplay is rudimentary, like the directions for assembling a complicated children’s toy. The
only aesthetic is to be clear… A screenplay, as a piece of writing, is merely the scaffolding for a building
someone else is going to build… However many months I spend writing a screenplay, I never feel as if I’ve
been writing at all. I’ve been constructing a story…” ii

We’re taken by the idea of constructing the story, because it brings with it a sense of craft and
purposefulness. Yet it goes nowhere without the characters. The structure sets in motion the character action,
which, in turn, creates more story. Structure helps the audience to become absorbed or immersed in the
story, the source of its great emotional impact. We empathise with the lead character: his/her wants become
our wants; their risks become our risks; their rewards our rewards. The visual storytelling tools of cinema
are very, very powerful, which link with our empathy to make for a deeply moving audience experience.

The character-driven Three Act Structure remains the most common approach, as it delivers the most
immersive experience. Other forms may actually work to limit the immersion in order to emphasise themes
or elements of the story.

The next step will look at Three Act Structure, and we’ll follow that with a look at alternative story
structures.
 The Three Act Structure
This article will focus on the format that’s most commonly seen in contemporary movies, the causal,
character-driven “Three Act Structure”. While modern films don’t have intervals or ‘real’ acts, the model
refers to a particular way of organising a story’s Beginning, Middle and End.

George Abbott, the theatre and film director-producer, reduced the structure to this: “In the first act, your
hero gets stuck in a tree. In the second act, you throw stones at him. In the third act, you get him out of the
tree.” Most film stories still work the same way: Somebody - our Hero - Wants Something - to get out of the
tree - And Has Trouble Getting It - but people are throwing rocks at him…

The first act usually lasts twenty to thirty minutes and has the task of setting up the story. It’s all about our
‘Somebody’ and the ‘Wants Something’. The act introduces most of the basic story elements - setting,
period, genre, characters, themes, conflicts – and more important, it introduces us to the protagonist, or lead
character. In most cases, we’ll meet this person in his or her own world, only to soon see them jolted into
action. It may be the opportunity of a lifetime – to climb a mountain, woo the person of his/her dreams, start
a social network – or it may be a dilemma – escape an advancing army, reverse failing A-levels, or tend a
dying spouse. This choice will send the character in pursuit of a clearly identified goal that will ask the
‘story question’ - the “What’s this about?” - that defines the story and drives the rest of the action.

The second act usually lasts for half of the movie, up to an hour, and it’s all about the ‘Has Trouble Getting
It’. We follow the protagonist in pursuit of the goal, only to see them thwarted by obstacles at every turn.
The effort to overcome these challenges and setbacks will force the character into new situations, ask
important questions and forge new relationships. It usually ends with the failure of the original plan of
action, and often leaves the character lower than at the start of the story.

The third act takes the movie’s final half hour to resolve the story. In most cases, the character has learned
from the struggles in the second act, so a changed person will gather their strength for a final confrontation
that will answer the story questions and bring the story to a close. It may be a battle with a dragon or a race
to stop a wedding. Either way, it will force a conclusion and establish a new, if only temporary, balance in
this story world.

This approach hasn’t changed greatly from that of Aristotle’s Poetics, written close to 2,500 years ago.

The Three Act Structure will be the ‘scaffolding’ that John Irving mentions, but the story’s dimensionality
will flow from the character changes, subplots and revelations that are produced by this story movement.

In recent decades, we’ve seen greater emphasis on the personal growth of the lead character, sometimes
called ‘Conversion Narrative’ or ‘Restorative Three-Act Structure’. In this format, the development arc of
the protagonist is tied closely to the arc of the story action. Some writers liken it to the ‘Hero’s Journey’
described in mythologist Joseph Campbell’s influential work, The Hero With A Thousand Faces. Others go
on to describe a protagonist that must begin the story with a flaw, a defect or ‘psychic wound’ that needs to
be corrected, healed, or redeemed before the story can end. This narrative structure can be a very satisfying
aspect of many stories, providing the great emotional catharsis that Aristotle described so long ago.

While this approach can be effective in many films, it can be burdensome or clunky in others. And some
film franchises would be ruined if the lead character conquers his or her inner demons. (Are we interested in
the Hulk if he learns to control his temper?) At any rate, it’s important to match the type and degree of
character development to the style and content of the story.

In the next step our panel will discus their thoughts about the Three Act Structure, then we will move on to
look at alternatives to the Three Act Structure.

Michael Lengsfield
 Panel thoughts on the Three Act Structure
[Michael] What we're going to do next is look in more detail at three-act structure. Alright let's start
Christabelle does a great job with the first act. [Christabelle] Well, what's the job of the first act? I guess the
first act's got quite a lot to do. The first act has to introduce your protagonist or your protagonists, if it's
about, if it's an ensemble piece, or if it's a buddy movie, but most likely you're going to have one main
character who you're going to need to get to know at the very beginning. And you need to get to know them
in their status quo, before the story starts happening, as such.

0:32Skip to 0 minutes and 32 secondsAnd I think it's really helpful to introduce your main character with an
action, with something - a choice or decision which establishes who they are before the story gets going. I
don't know what you think about that. Oh sorry, and you're also introducing, of course, the world of the
character, where they operate. What are the rules of this world? How do they ... what goes on in the world,
in general? And then you'll have your inciting incident or a call to action. These terms are really, maybe
silly, but they're important because they're the moment at which the character realises that there is something
that they need to pursue and that's what generates the story - going.

1:06Skip to 1 minute and 6 secondsAnd then usually there's a climax at the end of Act One where the
character has

1:11Skip to 1 minute and 11 secondsto make a decision: are they in or out? Are they going to go for this
goal or are they going to step out and not take this course. I've another thing about one as well, which I don't
know whether this applies to all films but I think that often what a filmmaker or a screenwriter is doing the
beginning of the film is telling the audience how to watch this particular film. [Molly] Yeah, explaining the
language of the film. [Christabelle] Exactly. What sort of degree of sensitivity is going to be required here?

1:31Skip to 1 minute and 31 secondsIs it a bang bang, action movie, like a Bond-style start, or is it a very
quiet, subtle, gentle start like a Kiarostami movie, in which you are going to have to be attentive to the
minutiae. [Michael] I think that's great. That last statement is wonderful. [Christabelle] Thank you so much
[Michael] Yeah, teaching us how to watch a film. And all of the things you mentioned before, I think, do
that. It tells us who the film is about, who's going to be important in this; what the story world is like. And
then the moment we

2:00Skip to 2 minutes and 0 secondsdiscussed earlier: where where do you start the film? It's starting for a
reason. The why today? question, because something happens that disrupts the balance of life, and this this
character makes a decision as to how they're going to react to it and that's going to give us our story. I like
that ... [Molly] So then when we've moved into Act Two then, which is the longest act, it's the middle of the
film. It's half a movie. So as soon as we moved into Act Two, we know then - we know what the character's
journey is. We know what they're trying to do. We know their wants, and we might be beginning to
understand their need.

2:37Skip to 2 minutes and 37 secondsAnd then so throughout Act Two we're going to see them trying to get
it and we're gonna see them constantly failing. And then there's probably, in technical terms, there's probably
lots of sort of, moments where things are supposed to happen on certain pages that is not how I write, so I
don't know but you can probably tell us what those rules are. [Christabelle] No. I don't agree with that either.
[Michael] I'd like to just jump in and say this general format, is kind of the dominant way to do it but really,
I think we're really against the idea of writing to meet this template. [Tom] We don't want it to be too
prescriptive.

3:08Skip to 3 minutes and 8 seconds[Michael] Right, this the structure is there to help your story find a
shape but don't write a story to match the structure. [Christabelle] Well, Molly's just said it brilliantly. The
character, they don't succeed so then they have to make further and further attempts to get what they want,
and that will inevitably ratchet up the tension for the viewer and that can happen in all sorts of different
ways. [Michael] Yeah. what we'd like to do is construct a story in which that happens naturally. I think
usually, by the end of the Second Act, things have become desperate. [Molly] Yeah, so something's going to
have had to have happened.

3:37Skip to 3 minutes and 37 secondsWe're going to have to tick over into a new place, into Act Three.
[Tom] Sure, we reach a crisis of some kind. It's going to depend - the level of dramatic tension, the stakes
are going to be dependent on genre but I think the Third Act is where we, the audience, find out whether the
character - the protagonists get what they want; they don't get want but they need, or perhaps neither, again
it's sort of depending on the creative intent, the style, genre, tone. But this is the resolution. This is going to
be the denouement. This is how you end, how you leave us. What your - what the audience is going to walk
out with.

4:15Skip to 4 minutes and 15 seconds[Molly] And there's going to be a new equilibrium at the end. It's
going to be ... [Tom] Absolutely. [Molly] Even, if that's only - we see that in five minutes of the character's
life, or just a moment. we get this sense that there's going to be - things have changed, things are different,
and even if that's a subtle shift. [Tom] Or they haven't changed and that was the point, that they couldn't
change, or they almost changed but didn't. [Molly] Yeah - did it too late.

4:35Skip to 4 minutes and 35 seconds[Michael] And then, in most cases, the character's internal
development is kind of, yoked to this arc of development, and the character will change along the way and at
a certain point the character will realise, you know, that they're changing. The audience is usually aware of
this before the character but at a certain point the character begins to realise the changes - their priorities
change; this may create more internal conflict and there, in the in the in the final act, before the resolution,
often we'll see the character come to some sort of realisation. And it could be, in this scheme, this could be
redemption, it could be a rebirth of some sort.

5:18Skip to 5 minutes and 18 seconds[Tom] It could be a regression - it could be a moral epiphany, it could
be anything. [Michael] It's a real change that is really apparent to the character and that will enable them to
change what they've been doing, and the strategy will change, and they'll be able to to take a a different hand
- to take control of this story, take it into the climax. [Christabelle] Or the character doesn't even become
aware of it but we the audience do, so we experience the catharsis even if they don't. I think that's important
to say, isn't it? Because there are genres in which the character is really not very self-aware or
psychologically insightful. [Michael] Yeah.

5:48Skip to 5 minutes and 48 secondsAnd I think this is, just to wrap this up, I think this is an approach - a
story approach that we see time and time and time again. [Christabelle] It works. It's human. [Molly] It's
satisfying to us because its about cause and effect, and it's about a concentrated version of the journey that
we are all on in our lives, and it's about being a wish fulfilment and us being able to, kind of, explore things
in this in this short way. [Michael] Yeah. [Tom] It's about giving life, giving narrative shapes that we just
don't have in real life. [Michael] And I think there is a lot of wish-fulfilment in there, this is - we wish life
had these ...

6:24Skip to 6 minutes and 24 seconds[Tom] Architecture ... [Michael] Yeah. This architecture was filled
with these epiphanies.