Hi, I'm Michael.
  This is Lessons from the Screenplay.
  Since my first video, the most requested screenplay  has been The Social Network.
  So I decided to make it a reward for my next  Patreon goal,
  and in December I passed that goal.
  So I'd like to start by saying a very big  thank you to my Patreon supporters for making
  this video, and this channel, possible.
  And I guess I shouldn't be surprised that  The Social Network has been the most-requested
  screenplay.
  Because I think it's safe to say that the  most famous screenwriter working today is
  Aaron Sorkin.
  While he's a great screenwriter, I don't think  he's famous because he's great.
  I think he's famous because his style is noticeable.
  His rapid-fire, quick-witted dialogue is hard  to miss—for better or worse.
  And not many writers have a style so distinct  it earns them a cameo-slash-parody on 30 Rock.
  "Do I know you?"
  "You know my work.
  Walk with me."
  But this is not to say that he is all flash  and no substance.
  Rather that he uses flash to distract the  audience so they don't notice when the substance
  is hitting them.
  So today I want to break down the function  of his style.
  To see how he uses non-linear structure to  frame what the story is about.
  And examine the critical role that collaboration  played in the creation of The Social Network.
  "He's 25 minutes late."
  "He founded Napster when he was 19.
  He can be late."
  "He's not a god."
  "Then what is he?"
  "He's 25 minutes late."
  Sorkin loves writing dialogue, and he's often  said that he thinks of it as music.
  "My parents starting taking me to see plays  from a very young age."
  "Even though I didn't understand the story,  I didn't understand what was happening on
  stage, I loved the sound of dialogue."
  "It sounded like music to me and I wanted  to imitate that sound."
  Sorkin's dialogue is famous for being snappy,  repetitive, and clever.
  But what is all of this actually accomplishing?
  I want to start by looking at his use of overlapping  dialogue.
  Sorkin uses overlapping dialogue to dictate  the energy and rhythm of a scene.
  For example, in this scene, Mark has an outburst  during a deposition.
  This begins when Divya's line is interrupted  by Mark.
  "He had 42 days to study our system and get  out ahead."
  "Do you seen any of your code on Facebook?"
  Then, Sorkin has the two lawyers interject,  trying to calm him.
  "Sy, could you--"
  "Mark--"
  This forces the energy of the scene to increase,  because now Mark has to overpower them.
  "Did I use any of your code?"
  Which, in turn, allows Divya to respond with  increased intensity.
  "You stole our whole goddam idea!"
  "Fellas."
  This confrontation continues until it climaxes  with Mark's line:
  "You know you really don't need a forensic  team to get to the bottom of this."
  "If you guys were the inventors of Facebook  you'd have invented Facebook."
  By having the characters interrupt and talk  over each other Sorkin increases the drama
  and energy of the scene in a way that feels  organic.
  Another key feature of Sorkin dialogue is  the misunderstanding.
  "This must be hard."
  Often in Sorkin scenes, the characters aren't  on the same page.
  "Who are you?"
  "I'm Marylin Delpy, I introduced myself—"
  "I mean what do you do?"
  The primary function of this technique is  to tease out exposition in a way that feels
  natural.
  "I'm a second year associate at the firm.
  My boss wanted me to sit in on the deposition phase."
  But it can also make the scene more engaging.
  By giving characters different trains of thoughts,  it challenges the audience to keep up and
  draws them in to the story world.
  Nowhere is this more clear than The Social  Network's now-classic opening scene.
  So let's track the characters' trains  of thought and examine how Sorkin uses misunderstandings
  to propel the scene forward.
  It begins, as many Sorkin scenes do, with  a statistic.
  "Did you know there are more people with genius IQs living in China than there are people
  of any kind living in the United States?"
  Erica immediately becomes preoccupied with  the China statistic.
  - "That can't possibly be true."  - "It is."
  "What would account for that?"
  "Well, first, an awful lot of people live  in China.
  But here's my question:"
  However, Mark brought all this up to get to  what he is preoccupied with.
  "How do you distinguish yourself in a population  of people who all got 1600 on their SAT's?"
  But Erica still thinks they're talking about  China.
  "I didn't know they take SAT's in China."
  "They don't. I wasn't talking about China anymore, I  was talking about me."
  Now Erica focuses on Mark and the SATs,
  but he's still trying to discuss ways of distinguishing himself.
  - "You got 1600?"  - "Yes."
  I could sing in an a Capella group, but I  can't sing."
  "Does that mean you actually got nothing wrong?"
  "I could row crew or invent a 25 dollar PC."
  The Mark train keeps on rolling and he ignores  her question.
  So Erica gives up on her focus and meets Mark  where she knows he's headed.
  "Or you could get into a final club."
  "Or I get into a final club."
  This is one page of dialogue into the film,  and in trying to keep up, we may not realize
  what we've learned so far.
  We know Mark's motivation—he wants to distinguish  himself.
  We know that he got 1600 on the SATs, and  we know his current desire is to get into
  a final club.
  We also see that Erica is polite, patient,  and impressed by getting 1600 on the SATs—
  something that will come into play later in the scene.
  By wrapping all this exposition in misunderstandings,  it seems to naturally flow from their conversation.
  But the misunderstandings are also used to establish Mark's character
  as someone who has trouble communicating with others.
  Let's look at a few more lines to see how  these misunderstandings inform Mark's character.
  "You know, from a woman's perspective, sometimes  not singing in an a Capella group is a good thing."
  "This is serious."
  "On the other hand I do like guys who row  crew."
  Erica is referencing these previous lines,  and by trying to bring some levity into the
  conversation, says something that Mark misinterprets.
  The fact that he's hurt by this is signaled  by an interruption to the rhythm,
  the parenthetical of "beat."
  "Well I can't do that."
  "I was kidding!"
  "Yes, I got nothing wrong on the test."
  After taking a blow to his ego, Mark then  finally answers Erica's question from nine
  lines ago about how good he is at the SATs.
  Then...
  "Have you ever tried?"
  "I'm trying right now."
  "To row crew?"
  "To get into a final club."
  "To row crew? No. Are you, like-whatever-delusional?"
  She's asking about rowing crew, he's talking  about final clubs,
  so she's confused, so he's confused, and finally we arrive at:
  "Maybe, it's just sometimes you say two things  at once and I'm not sure which one I'm
  supposed to be aiming at."
  By this point, the audience can sympathize  with Erica.
  We've witnessed first-hand how difficult it  is to have a conversation with Mark,
  and how fragile his ego is.
  And this is just page two.
  There are seven more pages of misunderstandings.
  What's impressive about this scene, is that  even if you don't follow every beat of the
  conversation, you still understand what happens.
  And Sorkin makes sure to punctuate it with  the point that hits Mark the hardest.
  "But you're going to go through life thinking  that girls don't like you because you're
  a nerd."
  "And I want you to know, from the bottom of  my heart, that that won't be true."
  "It'll be because you're an asshole."
  Sorkin's dialogue is essentially a kind of  misdirection.
  We, the audience, are so caught up trying  to follow what the characters are saying that
  don't notice all the information being delivered  to us.
  But it's not just the dialogue that is doing  several things at once.
  It's also the structure.
  Sorkin began his career as a playwright, so  it makes sense that most of his early works
  follow a very linear structure.
  But with The West Wing—which I should mention  is my favorite tv show of all time
  —he started to embrace film's non-linear capabilities.
  Some of the best episodes make great use of  flashbacks.
  His comfort with non-linear storytelling is  very apparent in The Social Network
  For the first twenty-two pages, the script  moves linearly, then jumps forward in time
  to Eduardo's deposition.
  These flash-forward scenes allows the lawyers  to supply exposition.
  "Gretchen, they're best friends."
  "Not anymore."
  As well as ask the characters directly about  how they were feeling at the time of the events.
  "Would you say that Mark was excited about  this meeting?"
  "Yes."
  "Very."
  This lets Sorkin frame scenes in different  contexts.
  For example, when the characters meet Sean  Parker, we don't just watch them meet Sean Parker.
  We get to hear Eduardo's thoughts on the meeting.
  "A psychiatrist would say that he was paranoid."
  "They'll hire private detectives who'll follow  you day and night."
  And because Mark is sitting five feet away  in the deposition room, we also get to see
  how he reacts to Eduardo's story.
  But perhaps most importantly, this non-linear  structure re-frames the dramatic question
  of the entire film.
  Because it's based on a true story, we know  that Facebook eventually becomes a success.
  And in the first 26 pages we learn that Mark  ends up getting sued by Eduardo,
  the Winklevoss twins, and Divya.
  "Your best friend is suing you for $600 million  dollars."
  "I didn't know that, tell me more."
  So the dramatic question isn't "what will  happen?" but instead "how will it happen?"
  Sorkin is signaling to the audience what the  story is really about.
  Not a company, but a friendship.
  And the structure allows us to see this friendship  be destroyed, while also watching the characters
  reflect on these events years later.
  "I was your only friend.
  You had one friend."
  There is one last point I want to touch on.
  Aaron Sorkin is clearly a talented writer,  but while many of his scripts have been turned
  into acclaimed films and shows, many have  not.
  "The West Wing, A Few Good Men, The Social  Network."
  "Studio 60?"
  "Shut up."
  In an attempt to partially address this, and  because The Social Network is such a good
  example, I want to talk about the importance  of collaboration.
  When David Fincher was first announced as  the director of The Social Network,
  it was a bit of a surprise.
  Even Sorkin said:
  "You know, at first glance it's a strange  marriage of director and material."
  "David is most known for being peerless as  a visual director,
  and I write people talking in rooms."
  But I think there are two key things Fincher  brought to the table that are necessary when
  producing an Aaron Sorkin screenplay.
  First, it appears that Fincher pushed for  some script edits.
  "David was so focused on finding what was  behind each word in the script
  and why it was there."
  In some cases, it appears that Fincher even  de-Sorkin'd parts of the script.
  "Feel entitled to this.
  It's our time."
  "I love it that he says, 'this is our time,  and I know what I'm f***king talking about.'"
  "Put those two things together, but let's  not have the 'this is our time' three times."
  "It announces it as a thesis.
  You know what I mean?"
  I think this is a hallmark of a good collaboration.
  To quote a line from The West Wing:
  "The president likes smart people who disagree  with him."
  You should try to work with people who are  talented and aren't afraid to challenge
  your work in search of the best possible version.
  The second thing Fincher brought to the table  was the ability to make Sorkin's words cinematic.
  In The West Wing, this was accomplished using  long steadicam shots through well-designed
  and beautifully-lit sets.
  This created momentum and made sure the visuals  were always changing.
  The famous walk-and-talk.
  The Social Network achieves the same things,  but in a different way.
  Fincher avoids the walk-and-talk in favor  of his own style:
  Rapid, relentless cutting between impeccably-composed  shots.
  A great example is the scene where Mark is  being asked about leading on the Winklevoss
  twins, and his attention wanders elsewhere.
  "It's raining."
  "I'm sorry?"
  "It just started raining."
  This scene is two pages long and almost exclusively  dialogue.
  "Mr. Zuckerberg, do I have your full attention?"
  "No."
  When translated to film, there are 16 separate  camera angles and 33 cuts.
  The last element of collaboration I want to  mention is, of course, the performances.
  Sorkin dialogue is difficult to perform.
  Not just because it's fast, but because  of the aforementioned multiple trains of thought
  happening at any given time.
  Not only that, but Sorkin also writes a lot  of what he calls "verbal hiccups."
  "I tend to write little hiccups into the language,  like at the beginning of that speech."
  "It begins: I, you know.
  And then he speaks."
  "I've...you know."
  "Dash-dashes and dot-dots."
  "Most actors have a lot of trouble with that  and Jesse is able to take those verbal hiccups
  and casualize them."
  "Make them seem organic."
  "Sorkin dialogue is hard."
  If the actors can't make this stylized writing  seem natural, it doesn't work.
  As a writer, you only have so much control  over all of this.
  But I still think it's important to remember  how collaborative filmmaking is.
  That the most successful people aren't just  talented, they're experts at surrounding themselves
  with people as talented or more so than them.
  I think the collaboration between Fincher  and Sorkin is a match made in heaven.
  Sorkin engages the audience with rapid-fire,  multi-layered dialogue, ideally telling them
  a story without them even noticing.
  And Fincher's filmmaking does the same thing,  but with stunning visuals and relentless editing.
  Together, their styles immerse us in the world  of The Social Network.
  "Hey guys!"
  "I just want to say thank you again everyone  who supports me on Patreon."
  "I really enjoyed having this celebratory  video to look forward to, so I think for my
  next goal I will do the next-most-requested  screenplay, which is Pulp Fiction."
  "I have a lot of fun things planned for this  year so be sure to subscribe."
  "And finally, thank you for watching."
     
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét