December eighteenth, twenty twenty four, allegedly according to that thing we call a calendar. This is indeed the Ocelli effect. You are the listener there. Of course, most of you catch this via the podcast, but we are live here on a let's see, what is it? Wednesday, Wednesday, Weldnesday, middle of a week, humpdays. Some people say, okay, anyway, it is what it is. It's Wednesday, and that's what it was, and the week that was and all that
good stuff. Look, I've got veteran journalists with me, Albert Lanier. Now I say veteran journalist semi retired at one point, maybe retired completely at another point, but blogging, going out, writing new stuff, going out on substack. I think no, wait, he was on medium. Maybe he was on substack. Also
he had a YouTube channel. He did a lot of stuff anyway, a lot of different writing Albert Lanier did, and examinations of writing, and a couple of times we even touched on the film industry and stuff like that on the show. And gotta say, though, he's got something
a little different this time. Maybe it's not journalism, or maybe it's the art of journalism via that which you can create through another medium, which is indeed film, the visual, audio and other immersive experience that comes along with creating a film. Oh and they write stuff for that too, folks. Just saying. And I don't just watch documentaries all the time. I do watch other types of movies as well. But anyway, Albert Lanier, how you doing? First of all? And secondly,
what is going on? Are we looking for new territory to conquer? Is that what's going on?
Oh? Hi, Chuck, how are you in terms of new territory to conquer? I wasn't looking for the new territory. It seems like the new territory is found me. So what happened? Was this a little bit of a long story here. So I was supposed to go to a film festival in Vegas a couple of months ago. I have a you know, I guess I should even backtrack from that to set that up. I have gone into
podcasting to an extent. I have a podcast called Final Cut, just part of what I'm here to promote as well as well as my as well as what I'm going to state next but or later on. So I have a podcast called Final Cut, which has been around since June of twenty twenty four, June of twenty twenty four. And that, of course is an accompaniment. It's a companion piece to Final Cut newsletter. That's a newsletter on Substack, which is a film newsletter.
Okay, and.
It is a is my return to writing about films because I used to be a film critic for about two thousand and two to twenty ten, I was covering film festivals as a journalist and as a film critic also for about about fifteen years in general, complete and it so so covering.
You were covering films and festivals for films in Hawaii in the early ten hours, Okay, I was, yeah, you know what, I vaguely remember that you wrote a couple of pieces that were critic Oh I'm sorry, But the thing is, I vaguely remember that you had written some critiques of films. But I thought that was just, you know, a general part of what you might have done. I mean, a journalist is a journalist, so whatever you're reporting on
your reportcon But that's interesting. I didn't realize you were also following around film festivals or that you know that you can dedicate yourself to something like that, because I don't usually think of Hawaii for film.
Actually, you know, well, you know, there are a number of TV shows that were shot here that we're shot and done here. Everybody knows Hawaii Vo and mang up Yi and all that. Sure, it's a small film community year because you get a modest amount of films that come every year. They always want to make They always want more productions to come to Hawaii, right, or work for the crews that are here, more work for the filmmakers. And of course you have local filmmakers here in Hawaii.
It's not a hub like I think you're in Georgia, right, if I'm not mistaken.
Yeah, see, I I was just gonna say, it's certainly not like the entertainment industry that's been built here in Georgia, not just in Atlanta, but throughout the state. They've actually, you know, gone through a time period here where they attracted a lot of productions, you know, everything from The Walking Dead to the Turner Universe to you know, the cartoons that made in Georgia. Cartoons and everything that has been produced here in Georgia. I mean, Georgia by itself
competes with the entire country of Canada. When it comes to you know, the film industry. Right, So again I just don't think of why. It doesn't mean it doesn't exist there. I just don't think of it.
Yeah, well again you have to understand. I was covering film festivals there, so Hawaii Film Festival, Hawaii International Film Festivals, and a couple of other film festivals there, and I ended up becoming a film critic. Like I said, when it was about thirty two, and I was online film critic upuntil I was forty, and I was covering film festivals before that as a journalist. I had been on your show previously that I talked about how I learned about filmmaking. When I was a kid. I did a
course the library, and I had learned basic filmmaking techniques. Essentially, I learned filmmaking. I was twelve at thirteen years old, right, But I came out of that course in that class without you know, I didn't have a video camera. I didn't have a film camera. So without a video in a film camera, I couldn't really become a filmmaker. And what I wound up doing was going to film festivals, first when I was fifteen and then when I was seventeen.
I was with the film festivals prior to becoming a journalist in nineteen ninety four. I did from about the time I was seventeen at the time I was twenty three. So that was sort of like my grad school if my class in the library was my undergrad the class, you know, going to the festival, meeting filmmakers and watching movies and learning there was kind of like grad school. And I used to say film school if I call
it grad school. So when I became a journalist in ninety four, I started covering film festivals and I did that up until I was about forty. And so I say all this because I want to I want people to understand that I have a background. I have a certain kind of background in regards to film, so I'm not just someone who's a film fan. Really, I was never really a pure film buff. Like even when I was a young kid, I wasn't really into films other than oh that looks good, let's go watch that, or
wanting to see movies. Okay, see, I wasn't into movies per se. It wasn't until I was twelve or thirteen and I took the course of the library.
So you weren't engaged in.
A bad into filmmaking.
Okay, you weren't into filmmaking. And you also weren't engaged in any particular type of fandom where you know, you were just a fan of say, air genre or something like that. You didn't do that. You just kind of you want to be entertained once in a while, and a film was a good idea and it was a good thing to cover and you could enjoy a film or two. I get it right and fine. And the Final Cut, by the way, is that available just pretty much where any podcast is available. The Final Cut?
Yeah, Final Cut is available on Spotify. You can check out the first season. Hopefully there'll be a second. First season is ten episodes. So it's very easy because, strangely enough, it's a combination of interviews. I interview a screenwriter, indie screenwriter who's a friend of mine, and also an actress slash filmmaker who's also his new friend of mine, so I interview both of them. I also read their audio versions of some of my reviews and some of my esseys.
So it's pretty easy. I mean, I have to admit some of the episodes are easy because it's like eight nine minutes, so because I'm reading you know, uh, you know, reading my articles. So that's the reason I did it. I never wanted to be a podcast, totally shouldn't have mind that, but I am a podcast.
It seems like everybody, it seems like everybody ends up making a podcast at this point to this video. And the funny thing is that when I started podcasting, because I'm kind of a podcast veteran at this point, it uh, there there were no seasons, there were there weren't none
of these plans. People just did what they did and you know, they had theme music or whatever, and that was about it, right, and you know, so okay, anyway back to it though, because those things are available, and that's on Spotify, and again there's there's a substance and on substat.
You can go to for final Cut, you can go to I don't say it at the end of the program, of course, but right now I want to mention that Final Cut can be found at Alanier dot substat dot com. That's Alanier dot subsect dot com and also on Spotify.
Great, and I'll put the links to both of those in the show notes for you guys, so you can scroll down to the show notes on this podcast and go ahead and click on them and go check out Albert's work there, mister Lanier's work there. Anyways, back to it, though, So we got this going, and uh, this is of interest, But what what is happening here? I mean, now you're getting into the inner workings though it's not just film review, although you're you're doing some film review.
I mean, what, what's a little bit Yeah, okay, there's a retro review section and I did that reluctantly. I didn't want to review movies again, but I'm open to being a film critic again. People want, you know, a reviewer if the if the price is right, you know.
Look, totally totally understand, but we need some honest film reviewers here because I mean, I'm seeing some awful crap already. I mean I'm looking at previews of Gladiator two and one. What the hell happened?
You know? Well, let me just basically speak to that where I get to it, because I'm not here to talk about film reviewing and film sure critics, but I stopped being a reviewer and a critic in twenty ten while I was about forty and recently what I found out when I came back to writing about film this year with Final Cut. It's what's occurred with all of these YouTube reviewers and movie talkers and all of these people. You have a bunch of young and dumb people. And
that makes out harsh. I don't care I'm being harsh. You have a bunch of young and dumb people who know nothing about movies, who know absolutely nothing about filmmaking, and who are basically a number of them are paid minions from the major studios. They're basically bought and sold by the majors to essentially be kind of human billboards or human ads, or human basically human radio ads. That seems like a contradiction, but basically they're just walking advertisements
or sitting advertisements for movies. They're not real reviewers, right, And some of them don't even want to be called critics that goodness, because.
They're not well, but they're not.
They're basically completely workless and useless people in regards to the film industry. And it's a it's a demonstration of what's occurred. It's a deterioration in the standards of looking at movies. Well, unfortunately, that's occurred.
Okay, but they're not useless to the industry, mister Linear, There's no.
No, They're useful. They're useful idiots to the industry.
Exactly. Okay, that's all you were saying. They're useless to the industry because.
They're useful liss to everyone else, right, they're useful to the industry. They're useful idiots to the industry.
Well, let me let me see if I can describe what it is that I've seen and and see if if you and I are seeing the same thing, because I recognize that what has happened here with some of these YouTube people is they get a little bit of traction as sort of like a superfan. You know, the guy who's got the all the merch behind him, who's got shelves and shelves of the action figures or whatever it is that's attached to a particular grouping of movies or a universe of movies or whatever, and they're a
superman on YouTube and they get an audience going. And the next thing, you know, is they get cooperation from the product that they're buying that they are a super fan from, and that's what they really are. They become that walking billboard, Like you said, almost you have to picture the guy walking around with the sandwich board advertising that product, because that's all he's doing is advertising the product, because he's a superman of the product. And that's all
there is. It's not a critique, it's not informative. He's just a twenty minute or fifteen minute as for the film. Really and oh, by the way, they stack more ads into it. And when they have a new part of the universe that comes out, or they have a new television show that's an offshoot. Star Wars is probably the
best example of this. I mean, the only way you can keep track of whatever Apple is releasing next in the Star Wars universe, right, or Disney is in Disney I mean to say, the only way to keep track of what Disney's gonna pump out next out of that you know, ridiculous Star Wars factory is to keep track of the super fans. Because if you start watching a guy now, or if you start watching him six months from now, they're going to insert the new commercials in there.
And that's all it is is a vehicle for the commercials and for the product itself. It's like product placement within the product.
Okay, right, Yeah, Well, like what they've done, I think you explain that very effectively. What they've done is somebody who used to be a contributor to the film website in a cool news and like I said, I was a reviewer on that site for that site for about eight years. What they've done is the studios have colonized the online film world. So what they've done is they are able to take the people on YouTube, the individual units,
so to speak, and they can co opt them. And so they're co opting all these online entities, all these online channels, all these online shows, and they're co opting them. And they're basically either giving them flights to premieres where they can sit down with stars of the film or do stand up meaning stand up interviews with stars of the film, or giving them merch or giving them or
outright paying them. And so what they've done is colonize and co opt and completely emotivate the online world into the studio. I call it a new studio system, not the old studio system. But that's what they done exactly. So that's why you have these fools like Chris Stuckman, and you have the critical drinker. You have these personalities who are waste of spaces. Well, and here's something like
Chris Duckman has said he didn't want to do negative reviews. Well, no reviewer, no filk critic in their right mind whatever announce that to you would never say that. But this is because these people don't really want to be reviewers. Those two don't want to be reviewers. They want to
be filmmakers. They're working on films as we speak. So they don't want to cut off the pipeline to where they can get their products distributed or possibly get their products distributed, whether it's the majors or whether it's any of the other mini mini majors or minor companies in the Hollywoo constellation and in the film industry here. Well, so yes, that's what you got to understand about these people.
Well, yeah, you're correct about all that, except I got another question here which is a big point of interest in my mind. And look, you and I both kind of appreciate Star Trek, right, and I gotta say, if you look at that universe, okay of stuff online, they have that completely locked down where you know, look, they have their merch that's coming out, they have new TV shows.
Paramount as a streaming service, feeds them some guests for their podcast, right the stars of the shows, feeds them a couple other things, does pay them a little bit, does send them some free merch. They'll send them Star Trek uniform shirts so they can wear them in their videos. And they got a very low paying guy working constantly to create content which does nothing but sell their products, not just the online streaming service, but also the toys
and the collectibles and the conventions and everything. So and all it takes is give them a little bit of access that maybe Entertainment Tonight used to have. Okay, now, does anybody watch that show any.
In regards to the fandom, like the fantastic Star Trek fan, it's very different. Like those aren't reviewers, they're not critics, they're not trying to be most of them are not trying to be film professionals. I could say this is somebody who is the Star Trek certified Star Trek fans and has been to a Star Trek invention and has also been book to my local comic con and also
an anime con. I can tell you that it's different with fans it's different with people who are just playing fans, not people who are trying to be filmmakers, not people who call themselves film reviewers, try to be filmmakers or directors or producers or anything like that. When you're talking about absolute, straightforward fans of Star Wars Star Trek, doesn't
really matter what. It's very different if the studios want to give them access, the studios want to help them out with merch or all that kind of stuff, I'm all for that. Well, but because those people aren't trying to impact movies, they're not They're not the problem. Fans are never the problem, Okay, Okay, The fans who think and try to become film critics and reviewers and filmmakers that are the problem.
I think you might have missed out probably either, Okay, I think you might have missed out on something here, Okay, because there is a whole universe of Star Trek people that make Star Trek movies independent Star Treks.
True.
Right, again, I.
Don't look, I don't have a problem with that.
Oh no, I'm I'm bringing it up just to say that at the end of the day, all that stuff is is some online content that the majority is not even paid for by the studio that is doing what serving to sell their products. I'm not saying that. I'm not saying that the fans don't have an honest love for the you know, for the genre, for the you know, for the films, for the characters, for the universe. I'm
not saying that. All I'm saying is that at the end of the day, that has now been turned into an industry in and of itself that is there to do what make more money for the big boys, you know, is still Paramount is going to make its money off of these guys and these fan films that they used to be so afraid if they made them that they would take away from the big films or whatever. They're not afraid of that anymore. They're now using it as a stepping stone. I mean, I even saw the other day.
I remembered that one of these independent fan films even gotten Michelle Nichols before she died to appear in one of their films, and you know, they were totally thrilled just because they got to meet Michelle Nichols. But the idea is though, that that that bolstered the star Trek cannon, that added to it, right, that became something else. I mean, and it doesn't even have to appear on IMDb and
anything else. And these guys put their own money into these projects and everything else because they're into the fandom so much. But they've figured out a way now to not just sell these people junk or you know, or sell them merch. They figured out a way to get them to sell their own merch for stuff, pay them for it, and pay for their own stuff while they're making it independently, and just create giant ads, you know.
Because now that I'm not really surprised with like that aspect doesn't really surprise. Like I said, I've been to conventions, yeah, of course, so I see it. It doesn't bother me. I'm not an unrealistic person, I said. I was a film critic for a reviewer for eight years. Yeah, and I've been around filmmakers. I've been around I've met a couple of people in the studios. So I'm not someone who has a sort of that maybe like these fans and has the purest kind of view or an unrealistic view.
My room is realistic. The problem that I have is you don't have the kind of quality reviewers and critics, or very few of them that you had before.
Oh, figure, that's the problem. I'm I'm just trying to recognize the ever shifting sands of what's going on in the media universe, right, And that's always important is to recognize that. Look, you know, if this happened twenty years ago, this is the way it would have went down. If it happened forty years ago, it would have not happened,
you know, et cetera. You know, in the days when nobody had access to video cameras at all, it was difficult to make a ten minute film, right, But today that's nothing, and you can throw it up and you could put it on YouTube and a million people could see it within twenty four hours, depending on if you get a little traction, right. So, I mean, it's just it's a different world, is all I'm saying, right, And I'm just pointing.
Out I think we all agree on that. So that's not the problem. Yeah, no, not the different world, But the differences that have occurred are negative and have horrible repercussions. Right, And the lack of quality reviewing in terms of film reviews and movie reviews and criticism, that's an issue, but that's a longer issue, and I've got to get to the reason that I'm here. As interesting as this conversation is, no vacinating as it is, they got to get to
the reason that it is. I've allowed myself to get off tracked.
Sorry, let's get okay, So let's get into it. Let's get into the real reason why you're here. What is it that's important about the quality reviews and all that? Go ahead, tell us about it. I'm listening.
Well, well, I'm here to talk about my screenwriting, my new strangely enough, my new screenwriting structure, which is called dual story structure. Okay, and dual story structure is basically two basic story structures that are intended in the writing of screenplays. So I've unexpectedly, completely unexpectedly fow myself dealing with screenplays, and I have to be brutally honest. I will admit this, which audius, that I'm not a screenwriter, nor am I a TV writer'. I'm a journalist and
a former film critic and reviewer. I make no pretensions to being a part of the industry or anything like that.
Okay, So tell me why you're involved with screenwriting.
Then, well, it really was an idea that came to me when I was watching a I was watching one of my favorite channels on YouTube and it was it's one I like, I think, guess I could say it James Whale Bake Sale and you have celebrities and filmmakers talk about movie and I was thinking about something that I had responded to on x or Twitter where I go on filming bed, and I had basically I had responded to something someone had said about Psycho, the movie
Psycho and the Marion Crane character, and it got me thinking about story because I was saying, oh, yeah, when she took the money in Psycho, she was able. It made her go on the run and she was able to go off to the hotel, and that was a good way to get her to the Bates Motel. And that got me thinking, and then I thought about a screenplay that I had. Actually, I thought about this student film festival that I had covered years ago when I was a journalist, and one of the events that I
was at was Coton Park. You know that I sat in on was a screenwriting course taught by a guy called Ty Holler of the Vancouver Fhild group, and I learned about screenwriting through that course, even though I wasn't there to learn about screenwriting. And when I thought about those two, then I started thinking about what became dual story structure. So it really stemmed from thinking about those two aspects.
Okay, you know, and I always thought about the Marion Crane character and the money as being, you know, a convenient plot device in order to make you know, massage her into a place where she's going to go to an out of the way hotel, you know, not not the typical holiday in if you will, or you know, a circle Eate motel or whatever whatever they would have
had at that time. I don't know, but either way, you know, it gave her a reason to maybe search out that out of the way sort of you know, independent hotel which used to exist, right, And I was thinking, you know that that makes perfect sense. But it's just I think of it as a device, right, It's the excuse to put a character, to put a situation in motion. And that's you know, that's just the way things are. You have your setup when it comes to a film.
Right here, we're going to introduce you to the characters in a way. They might do it through exposition. They might do it through a situation where you get to know the character. You know, where she says at some point she's married, she's not married. You learn that, does she have kids, where is she going, what is she doing? So on and so forth, and oh, now there's a bit of a problem. So therefore, now we have an excuse for where we're going to set up next. And that's,
you know, part of everything. There's always that set up, right. You go into the movie, and now you're going to go into another world, whether it's you know, part of the universe that you personally exist in, or it's another one. They have to establish things. So they do that, okay, and this is always part of you know, any film pretty much that's decent usually, right, I mean, there are some unusual story structures, but okay, so you're thinking about this and go ahead continue, all right.
So that was the sort of inciting incident to use screenwriting language for how this came about, because I thought about so basically, dual story structure deals with two story structures in regards to writing the script. Now, the thing that I note about a dual story structure, and there's an introductory essay which can be found at my substack. It is. It's called dual story structure, a method for screenwriting, and it can be found at al it could be
found at Alineer dot substack dot com. Okay, in any event, basically, what dual story structure is again, it's a two pronged structure which really be used for any kind of a script, any kind of a story in regards to film. Right now, the controversy for this besides the fact that I a person who is not a screenwriter and TV writers come up with the story structure, the other aspect that might be controversial is I believe that you can use this story structure also to write TV scripts. So it's not
just film, it's also TV. But the two aspects are basically this. There's what I call PRS problem reaction solution. The second structure that structure PRS problem reaction solution is structure A structure B is what I call SAAR, which is situation action resolution. So those are the two star story structures. Because not all films would fall within the range of problem reaction solution or situation action resolution, right, So one might be one, another might be the other.
So dual story structure. That's that title or the name of this. So let me just define these two structures so that people have an understanding of it. The first structure structure A we start with problem. And what a problem is is it is a predicament that I'll use the term individuals instead of characters most people in screenwriting. I'm not a screenwriting instructor teacher, so I try to
use stuff that's not necessarily pure jargon. A problem is a predicament that the individuals in the story or in the film face. Okay, so that's the definition of the problem, A situation that the characters that that's what it's popularly known as, that the individuals in the story must face.
No, I've heard something. Yeah, I've heard somebody else describe this as conflict and confrontation and then resolution. You know in that it sounds very similar, right right?
It could be. But like I said, this is just my structure. This is my way of doing it. But there are many different kinds of screenplay ideas out there. There are many different kinds of approaches. What I'm dealing here with with dual story structure is at the screenplay level and at the story level. So what this is used is to help write the screenplay, like a basic schematic in helping you to write the screenplay. Like, it
doesn't write it. You know, it's not a program. You don't insert dual story structure into your computer and it writes the script for you. Nothing will write the script for you, right, So what it is is a structure that you can that helps you with the screenplay, that helps you write the screenplay. Right. So you mentioned conflict. Conflict would be a part of the problem, but it's also a part of the overall story. Because there are many different there may be more than one conflict. Right.
You could have an essential conflict, which is what it's about. But when it comes to movies, what you have is a p in this structure. What you have is the problem, and the problem is the predicament.
There may be conflicts that ensue.
As a result of the predicament or problem, but it's not simply conflict. Right. Conflict is a part of films, but it isn't Like I said, I'm sure different screenplay instructors and different screenwriters have their own way of explaining and doing things. Right, Like I said, this is my structure.
So the problem we start.
Out with in this structure is a predicament. Okay, that's the predicalment.
Gotcha. Now, one could say sometimes that when you know you're talking about the parallel or the duel, occasionally what happens is they cross over into one another. Right, let's go back to Psycho. You got the Marion Crane story where she's left, she's absconded with the money. Now she's in the side of the way hotel, she's creeped out. She meets Norman Bates. Well, he's got a whole thing going on, and his whole thing, right is about you know, mo, my mother's up there, and we don't know it yet.
We learn later obviously what really that means and everything. But my mother's up there. Oh she's a problem. I'm trying to run the hotel, you know. Oh, this place is run down, it's not very busy. You know. His whole thing is going on a little more boring than somebody absconding with a payroll, but still, right, it's two different stories going on in the same world, and they're about to connect.
Here's what I would argue about Psycho. Psycho. I would argue, basically, switches protagonist because if you look at the Marian Crane individual, she is the protagonist of the film. She's the main character. But what happens in Psycho she gets killed off in the first What happened in the film is Norman Bates
thus becomes the protagonist. Right, So when she came to that hotel, he was essentially like a supporting player, but now he becomes after she dies, he becomes the protagonist because we're seeing the film if not necessary, we'll not necessary through his eyes. But he is the focal point of the movie, even though the Crane character is important because her sister Lila's looking for her, right, I would
argue that they switch protagonists. That's one of the tricks of that movie, and that's why I think it's one of the more effective screen you know, screen story screenplays in regards to horror movies or that sort of when that was the proto slasher movie, right.
And at the time, extremely unique, extremely unique because Janet Lee, who was you know, put out there as a star of the movie, right, is dead within a few minutes, So you know your your main protagonist. Hey, this person's here now. Usually that means you're going to follow them through the story. Nope, she's gone, So now hey, here's the other protagonist. The dual story doesn't last long in Psycho.
I guess right, Well, well, it depends on how you wish to see that. You could you could see Psycho as a problem reaction solution film, or you could see it as a situation action and resolution film. Really depends on which one you want to use it for. But I'm looking at it more in terms of the overall the overall. Looking at it from the protagonist point of view, it really becomes a movie where the protagonist or switch, you go from one protagonist to another, and that's why
it's tricky. Psycho is a tricky movie because its switches protagonists. In my view, it's wwitch's main characters.
And then the next thing that happens is now you're following a police investigation which is now in conflict with the Norman Bates story, which is its own arc. So now they've eliminated one and replaced it with another.
You'd say, yeah, so, okay, we have the problem, and I'm going to cite I'll use my essay in examples in the essay to illustrate both both prs and seer.
So we have the problem, which is a predicament that the characters a individual have to face, or have to deal with, or have to get out of. Right, then you have the reaction, and the reaction would be defined as the emotions, feelings, and efforts, meaning it's an emotions, feelings about their predicament, and efforts to get out of this predicament. So the resolution would technically be let mean sorry, the reaction would be most of the movie. So we
go back. We have the problem, which is a predicament that the individuals must face or they are stuck in. Then we have the reaction, which is not only the emotions, feelings, and aspects that these individuals go through as a result of this predicament, but their efforts to get out of the predicament. And then we get to the last part, which is solution, and solution is a way out of
the predicament. This solution can come from the individuals meaning the characters or meaning basically internal, or it can be external, it can come from some force outside of those characters. So that's what's So that's the basic rundown of what problem, reaction solution is. Right, structure a of dual story structure. So let's go on to structure B, which is situation action resolution. Let us define situations. Situation is any kind of event or activity that the individuals are involved with.
So right away we're seeing this is very different from problem reaction solution. Right. Problem is a predicament, it's an issue. It's something that serves as not just the stumbling block, but a series of stumbling blocks, a series of obstacles, a series of aspects that they have to wrestle with or forced to wrestle with. Right, A situation is any event or activity that the characters are involved with or deal with. Right, So a situation could be anything. Right.
In television, what do they call comedies situation comedy because the situation may vary. A show like Mash is one situation and a show like Seinfeld is another. So situation. Now that's different because I'm not talking about television. That's a whole different dual story structure. I mean, it's the same dual story structure of problem reaction solution and situation action resolution, but it's a different kind of approach that I have to take to explaining that. So maybe I'll
come back one of these days and do that. But anyway, we have the situation right. It's any event or activity that the individuals are involved with or find themselves dealing with in some way. Could be anything, right, it's not as specific. It could be specific, but it's not as specific. So actions is we're moving to action. Action is literally physical demonstrable activity. Somebody does something physically. It could also be possibly emotional or intellectual or mental, but it's something
the character does. So depth finds is something an individual or character does. Normally it would be physical activity like action, right and action that is taken right, but it could be other things. It could be intellectual, could be emotional, could be right sure, something the individual does. Definition of actions. Resolution is the conclusion to an end to whatever activity,
whatever event, whatever, the individuals have been involved with. Okay, And what's tricky about a resolution is a resolution could not necessarily resolve something, So you could have a cliffhanger, or you could have an end of the movie that doesn't quote unquote solve anything. But it is a resolution because it is the end of the movie and it's an end at that point to what the individuals aka characters are involved with.
Okay, Now does this differ a little bit when you're
dealing with a singular, contained presentation like a movie. Does it differ when you say, do it with a TV series where a story arc might develop over the course of ten, fifteen, twenty episodes even like you know, for instance, one of my favorite shows was The Sopranos, and you know, you had a sort of overall story arc over the course of the season, but each individual show also had individual things that may or may not have come to a resolution by the end of that one hour race,
So you had little stops along the way, ultimately building up to what you hoped was a resolution at the end of the season, you know, something like that. Is that different in any way or is it just stretched out longer?
Well, yeah, so let me just briefly because I think that's a very good question, because I did say that both situation action resolution and problem reactions and problem as our situation action resolution and problem reaction solution apply to television too, to be used in television. In television, it's basically in two ways. Number one would be the pilot of the show, the opening the pilot of the show that would have that would be its own SAAR or it's PRS right to use the synemas to use the
technoms that so both synonyms really so the initials. So you would do either one of those structures, structure A or structure B. Structure A being PRS problem reaction solution, structure B being solution I'm sorry, situation action resolution. You would use the structure for the pilot and then individual episodes. So it would be kind of so every episode you can use depending on the kind of show you're doing, whether it's SAAR or whether it's PRS, you would do
that for every episode that you write. So every episode. So if you've got I don't know how many episode shows are these days, it varies from show to show. Say you got fifteen.
Episodes, right your network. Look at it this way. Your network shows run like twenty something episodes still in a.
Lot of day normally normally be twenty two. It used to be twenty six years ago, it used to be over thirty years ago.
Well, absolutely, sometimes you have thirty five. But now there are streaming shows that only say run ten or twelve episodes for twelve.
Fifteen, So let's use let's get in between there and say fifteen, right, So for all fifteen seasons of season one of let's just call it.
Shuck.
I know there's a show called Chuck, but let's call this new show Chuck.
Sure, why not?
Why not? Right? Another Chuck, different one? So fifteen seasons of Chuck.
Right, we would use.
Either one of those structures structure A or B problem reaction solution or situation action resolution for every episode of that show to write the scripts that could be used for everyone. So you do use it for the pilot, and you use it for every episode, and that would be how whereas with a film, you're just using it on a draft by draft basis. Right, So you're writing a film, you know, depending on how many drafts you use, or how many drafts you write, or how much a
production would use, you would do it for every draft. Right, you use it for every draft. I mean, once you get from draft to draft to draft, you probably wouldn't need to use use it as much in terms of the structure of it would be more like shorthand. So what you would do you could also probably uses for outline and for treatments too, especially in television. Again, what
this is is a basic story structure. So I don't want to stress this before you use something like a dual story structure, and I hope this is the case. You should already know screenwriting. In other words, you should know what a protagonist antagonist is, what a climax is, what a denial mom or is climax or danium mog, what an inciting incident is. You should know all of these.
You should know basic screenwriting before you attempt to actually write a script and use dual action structure, because you can't learn if you don't know what three acts structure is. Yes, dual dual story structure does fit within the confines of three acts structure, but this is not three acts structure. Three act structure is three act structure. You don't know what an act one, at two or act three is. If you don't understand that, if you're going to be lost using.
This, yeah, well this will get confusing because if you try and run an ABC three plots, okay, you try and run your ABC plots your your main story, then there's a subplot to that story and then a sort of extra background story to it. I mean that gets very complicated, especially if you're going to apply a dual story structure to each one of those three plot lines. I mean that's very complex and quite fussy.
Well, again, this is very basic. So this is like a basic exoskeleton and basic narrative exoskeleton that you use to help write the screenplay. That's it.
Okay.
It doesn't write it for you. It doesn't provide anything beyond a basic framework. That's what's intended for. That's why I say it's basic story structure.
Right.
Did you got to come up with a character, You have to come up with the plot points, you have to come up with you know where the arc is going to be, whether it's a film or in the TV scripts, You're going to have to come up with all that stuff. And all it does is provide you with that structure, that three column what I call it three columns. It matches up with three act structure. Right, Okay, so let's take a look at structure. A problem at one, reaction at two solution Act three.
Now, where in this do you fit establishment? Where? Look? In order to understand what's going on here, you're going to have to know who the players are. Right. In order to establish a protagonist, you got to get to know that protagonist. This is this person, this is who they are, this is what they're about, this is the world they live in. Right, Where do you do that in this structure?
So that's where you helped flesh it out. So let's sort of begin to put this into action. Okay, let's put this national, right, sure, so let me use the examples that are used in my essay again to be found at Alaneer dot substack dot com called dual story structure.
Right, and it's also advertised it's also advertised on your Instagram, by the way, but go ahead, yeah.
That's correct. It's also on my instagram. Right, It's found on my instagram, which is writer al lanear and also found at on my substack. Right, So let's use the example. Like I said, I'll use both examples from my answers. Let's look at Jaws, the movie Jaws. So we start out with Jaws, right. The problem. Now, when you're using this structure, I would assume that you already as a writer, have some characters. Right.
Well, okay, so what you're saying is, before we get to the problem, you've got to establish here's the town, here's the beach, here's here's the cops, and the power structure which they you.
Have to have an idea, some basic ideas, right, So you have this concept of Okay, you know, you have this idea, you have the idea, Well, Jaws is based on a novel by Peter Benchlein, but let's imagine that Jaws was an original idea. So you had this idea about this this town that has been the subject of shark attacks. Right, So we start out, you know, and you have some ideas for the characters. That's when you
start to begin to use the dual story structure. You can't use it in the absence of characters or an idea, some ideas about the plot. You have to have some basic concepts about what your story might be at what you're looking to do. This is not going to create a story for.
You if you're doing some basic if.
You're doing, going to create it for you in structure.
Unless you're doing a very unconventional sort of storytelling where you don't bother to establish the characters. You just you know, let them pass by, you do sort of drive bys on them, and they establish a universe as a collective something like that. That's why you have situation actually, right, because you can establish a situation without all that other stuff. Okay, go ahead, Yeah, So yep, Jaws.
Okay, let's let's look at the problem in Jaws. What's the problem that there that there is a small.
Town, beach town. They need the revenue, there's people there, they're trying to enjoy. The problem is dangerous and why is it dangerous?
Right? Sure, you're getting to see. What you're beginning to do is flash things out. I'm starting out from the very beginning.
All right.
So there's a small beach town that's the subject of attacks. Right, let's get a little bit a little bit more specific, not too specific, but a little bit more specific. There's a East coast town that has been impacted by a wave of shark attacks on squars. Okay, that's the problem, that's the problem. Okay. So what you do from that point is this, because you've already thought about the characters, you've already begun to think about the perfect the basic
aspects of plot. Okay, so you extrapolate from that point the problem. Now, often screenwriting books here to cliche what happens next? What I stress is what happened? Not simply what happens next, but what happened? That's the question that screenwriters need to answer the script. You have to answer what happened, because when you're dealing with people at studios, they're gonna say, Okay, what happened here? You know, why does this character do this? If you get that far,
why does that happen? Certainly, if you're gonna pitch sometimes they're gonna ask questions. But even if they if you have a draft, if you have something written, they look at the script they go, Okay, why does what happened here? Or what happens here? So you have to solve the problem of and you have to answer the question of what happened. So we look at this problem. Okay, let's flesh it out more, right, we get from that point. Okay,
it's an East coast town. Oh right, it's a town called Amite, and it's like a Cape Cod Martha's Vineyard type town. Okay, you're talking about specific East coast like Massachusetts area that that area. Okay, And they've got a shark to deck, so that's impacting them. Yeah, a couple of swimmers have been having killed.
For me, the problem, the problem actually is not the shark attack. Primarily, the problem is that they have to have this beach open Okay, that's what the deal is.
First, Well, that gets to the resolution.
See, now, guess what you're doing. You're thinking about the story. You're doing what you're you're you're looking at the.
Aspects of the plot, and you're beginning to put things together. You begin to analyze. Okay, now this issue is this. So we get to the reaction, and the reaction is that the town's amity we now call this ambity. The town's police chief wants to go after the shark, but gets but but gets static or gets runs into opposition from town, from the town mayor and town officials. Okay, so that gets it to the point that you mentioned. Okay, we've got a police chief Brody I believe his name
was in the movie. So he's he's looking at this and going this isn't good. People are dying. You've got a couple of people dying. This is terrible. The shark has got to be killed at the very least dealt with, right, right. They also brings in a marine I think it was a marine biologist or a scientist. Richard Dreyfus play by Richard Dreyfus. He's brought in to take a look at
this situation. But the mayor was played by Murray Hamilton, is concerned because it's summertime and that's tourist season and he wants the beach kept up. See what we're doing is we're extrapolating, right, We're looking at this aspect and we're filling in things we're working on.
Okay, he's rushing to resolve it ahead of it actually being resolved because of that conflict with we need to keep the beach open for the business, otherwise we're gonna have problems here. That's what's going on right right.
So he's concerned about tourism because the tourism part of the life blood of Amity. That's what they need, how they make the money. It's the important part of the vital part of the town's economy, and he doesn't want that economy ruin. That's why he said at one point in the movie, he says, this will be open I think in July or whatever. You can't do it. But eventually Brody gets to say, so to go out there and deal with the shark, but only what happens with
the solution. What happens with the solution. We get to the solution, the shark is destroyed. Right, Yeah, shark is destroyed. But in the solution, you have to think about what happens. So how does the shark get destroyed? How does the shark get killed? Well, you know that Brody plus the scientist plus a local boat hunter and played by Robert Shaw, goes out there to deal with the shark.
Yeah, the krusty boat captain and the marine biologist who knows everything, but is it really a hard guy that can you know, do things really well with his hand. And eventually what happens is they wind up kicking that tank into the shark's mouth, right and trying to blow them up. Right, So see what you're doing.
See what you're doing. Okay, you're beginning to fill in the details. Okay, So we've moved from problem with the shark in the town the problem which is the shark a shark in an East Coast town, right, shark attacks in an East Coast town, to the reaction, which is the police chief wants to deal with a shark attack but is met with opposition by the mayor and local.
Officials, which is the conflict between the sheriff and the local officials, but also a conflict because they're sticking people in the water at a time when if they just pull them out of the water, problem is solved that way too.
So you know, that's where conflicts. As you mentioned conflict earlier, that's where conflict comes in. Okay, because see where conflict is a part of You know, again, I don't use conflict as part of the structure. Conflict is a part of the movie. So conflict can be anywhere in the movie, but it's not a part of the structure, right, I don't explicitly say conflict because conflict will be in the movie. Well,
you create the conflict. The problem leads to the concept multiple What we're doing is precisely how I you know, recisely what the structure is intended to do. In regard to screenwriting. You're coming up with the details, you're coming up with the plot points, you're coming up with the aspects of this. Now, granted we're talking about a movie that's already been out and it was a huge hit, But see how this is working. See the point of the structure again. The point of the structure is not
to give you all the answers. It's to allow you to fill in the details. You look at this this way, you examine that, Okay, Okay, my character will that it gets you to think critically in the formation and shaping of the script, right, that's part of what duel story structures exactly. Okay, So all right, so you reacted to it. It was right on the dot, is right on the money. That's precisely what I want. That's what I want writers to do. They want I want to be able to I want them to be able.
To do that excellently.
Well, right, we're talking about a movie that's been out for years.
Yeah, absolutely, absolutely, Look, and I'm glad that we got to do this because you know, look, at least we show them exactly what it is you're trying to go after here in regards to what it is you're demonstrating there on sub sack. And just for the record, I mean that came out in nineteen seventy five, Jaws, and I think I saw it as a little kid. Maybe I was four or five when I first saw it. Years old anyway, old movie for sure, and it's very interesting.
There's lots of different conflicts in it and all that. But you know, we've gone through this a while and thinking to myself. I think people should go over and check out the work over at at your substack and also the podcast right, which both are under the same name, The Final Cut, Am I correct?
Right? That's right? So Final Cut is my newslater. It's on al Nier dot substack dot com. Also the podcast can be found at substack Alanier dot substack dot com.
And on Spotify and oh Spotify.
Don't want to listen to my podcast on substack, you can go to Spotify listener no problems.
So you can get the Final Cut through Spotify as a podcast, and you can also go over to substack and read it. Like I said, he's also on Twitter x whatever and uh Instagram and all that and yeah, follow it. This is an interesting thing ultimately, Where are you going with this though? Are you gonna wind up
doing various aspects of film and stuff like that? Is that going to become the thing now for a while, because it seems like over the past few years you've been leaning into maybe I should get back into critiquing films retro reviews. Is this where we're going, Albert Lanier, the film writer, Is that where we're going?
Well, it seems like it is, you know, I'm Strangely enough, I'm working on another podcast right now, which is about sports.
Okay, just get me busy.
But yeah, that's what's been the movement before Momentum. So I went back with Final Cut the newsletter to writing about movies and I've enjoyed that. But I'm also did the podcast as a promotional vehicle and also as a companion piece to the newsletter. And at this point this is unexpected. I didn't really expect to do create a story structure. I'm the last person I would ever think of to create a screenwriting story structure or a couple of structures. So this game as a surprise to me.
And really the reality with this was the reason that I came out with this was I was supposed to actually go to a film festival in Las Vegas this past October. A friend of mine who's interviewed for Final Cut, that I interviewed on my Final Cut podcast and also on my newsletter. So what happened was that I wasn't able to do it because I've been working on this other podcast that I'm doing. But I told her, well,
you know, because she does workshops as well. I said, I'll do a workshop I'll come out and try to do a workshop. And so when I came up with ascons of the dual story structure, I thought, all, this will work for a workshop. I can do this as a workshop. So what this is intended to be. This is intended to be actually taught as a workshop or a seminar, and that's really what's intended to I reluctantly kind of wrote the intro essay to this because I
felt you got to write something. Because you're dealing with writing here, you might as well get it down on text form, and that's what I did. So I'm looking to do this either at film festivals or possibly and or possibly at comic cons. I think comic cons would be interesting convened to be interesting because I think you have a potential audience of people who might be interested in making movies, right, you know, So I'm interested. I'm open to doing it at comic cons. I'm open to
doing it at film festivals. I'm also open to doing it as a standalone seminar and stand alone workshop no matter where, so in a hotel or wherever it would be set up so people are interested entities film festivals, comic cons, or I don't know what it would be. Groups or other people are interested, they can contact me at my email which is at Impurious Reader. Sorry, it's imperious reader at gmail dot com. That's I M. P E r IOE you as R E A D E R at Gmail. Serious Leader at Gmail.
There you go, and sometime in the next couple weeks, a couple months, I don't know, probably in twenty twenty five, we'll bring you back and talk about what else is going on and who knows, maybe discuss that sports podcast coming up next. You know, I produce a couple of podcasts and such outside of my own and yeah, I mean, let's let's keep track of this as it goes, let me know where it's going. I mean, so this filmmaking, the creation of this stuff is always of interest to me.
So I'll give you, guys all the links in with the show notes for Albert Lnier's work on substack on Spotify. The podcast is there, and you know, we'll catch up again real soon. So until next time, guys, I'm merely ocelli.
All of you, Oh Shelley dot com. Do you like history? Real history that you were never taught in schools? Why the Vietnam War Nuclear Bombs in Nation Building in Southeast Asia by author Mike Swanson, with new documentation never seen before that'll open your eyes to events that led up to this Why the Vietnam War Nuclear Bombs in Nation Building in Southeast Asia nineteen forty five through nineteen sixty one. Get your copy today at Amazon dot Com. Why the Vietnam War by author Mike Swanson.
The dot Com Radio Network.
The War State by Michael Swanson explains the great national transformation that took place and put the Kennedy presidency in the context of the times and reveals never before published information about the Cuban missile crisis. President Kennedy would not have been assassinated if he had been president two hundred years ago. His assassination took place in the context of the Cold War and the rise of the national security state.
Before World War Two, the United States was a continental republic. In the decade that followed, it became an imperial superpower. Generals such as Curtis LeMay not only wanted to invade Cuba, but knew that there were short range missiles on the island armed with nuclear warheads that they could not destroy because they were on mobile launchers. Their invasion could have led to a Third World War, and they wanted to
go to war anyway. The War State by Michael Swanson reveals why, and we'll show you what President Kennedy was up against. For more information the War State dot Com.
Go ahead, cal it, I'm litersted.
In the truth about the Day assassination.
Right, Well, what do you want to know?
Judy Baker's wild claim Oswald girlfriends he knew? Ruby and Barry answer weapons?
Really, I imagine I could claim I have four wheels. It doesn't make me a wagon, but okay, on the building.
And trying to prevent the murder of John Kennedy.
Come on now has a real effort on the Davey assassination booth into reclaimed. Go to Amazon dot com enter Judith Baker in her own words. You'll get the results for a day digital copy of a book where Walt Brown utilizes her own words and the known evidence in the case to get at well a different perspective. Let's say you can get Judith Barry Baker in her own words from the author himself, signed if you request it by contacting doctor Brown at k I A S JFK
at aol dot com. It's a fun book and it actually dissects the many many fantastic claims Judith very Baker in her own words.
Yo, yovis Doug Campbell, host of the Dallas Action podcast presented by Wall Street Window. And you are listening to the o'chill effect revelation through conversation to use.
Expressed by callers, tools or anyone else who happens to get on the er or Jelly dot com not necessarily reflect us little Jelly dot com or ll and we are not responsible. We're getting stupidity which might ensue.
Thank you, uncle. Do you remember that time when Benjamin Fulford said that an Asian secret society was going to dispatch ninja's to take down the Illuminati.
Oh that's interesting, yeah in the platoon?
Yeah did that ever work out too good?
No?
It didn't, did it didn't? But here on Ocelli dot com Radio network, things work out a bit better, don't.
They much better? Much?
I mean it is clear and understanding about the programs. The programs much clear, getting live people into it. They really have a good conversation going much better, much better scene.
I say, forget Benjamin Fulford and his ninches and listen to the Ocelli dot Com radio network.
I agree it's straight to the point, straight talk, and I like that idea com.
Nat Lata s Papa.
Revelation through conversation.
Nuclear holocaust.
You know what uranium is right?
I think on nuclear weapons and other things like lots of you.
Know what uranium is right?
Barred things things are done with uranium, including some bad things nuclear holocaust.
You know what uranium is right? I've been Nuclear Holocaust.
Nuclear Holocaust. You know what uranium is right?
They thinks all nuclear weapons and other things like lots.
Of you know what uranium is right?
There are things things are done with uranium, leading some barred things nuclear Holocaust, Nuclear Holo Holocaust, Nuclear Holocaust, Nuclear Holocaust, Nuclear hall.
Unter Biden is the talk of the town this week, being a central character in the ongoing Ukraine Russia war plot that has spanned now for over a decade, and after impeachments, laptop scandals, a fucked election, more impeachments, and then a war, the man behind the many Eminems gets to walk free of anything that can be used against them.