Third in a series on Todd Field's breakthrough screenplay TAR, which deploys Hemingway's "Theory of Omission" to compel multiple viewings. Today we talk about the strange opening of the film.
hashtag#screenwriting 040925
Screenwriting : What Is the Iceberg Theory Cinematic Aesthetic? Part 3 by Yusuf Toropov
Other topics in Screenwriting:
Check out Trending Discussions
Register / Log In
2 people like this
You said the openings in TAR don’t have setups, Yusuf Toropov. That’s a unique way to start a movie and even though the openings don’t have setups, it sounds like the audience can understand what’s going on in the scenes. Even if scripts and movies don’t have setups, the audience still needs to understand what’s going on.
2 people like this
I'd argue that they do EVENTUALLY come to understand what's going on in the scenes, but these three openings serve notice that they need to engage and ask questions, rather than passively accept exposition and such-like. I'll be expanding on this in episode 4. A similar thing happens in Hemingway's BIG TWO-HEARTED RIVER ... it's likely that a reader only figures out about halfway through that the story is about what we would today call PTSD and back then was called "shell shock"
1 person likes this
"It sounds like the audience can understand what’s going on in the scenes." Sorry, I meant it sounds like what's shown in those opening scenes aren't shown in a confusing way, Yusuf Toropov. Even if scripts and movies don’t have setups, the audience still needs to understand what’s going on/not be lost. The audience might not understand the story yet, but they're not confused by what they're seeing on the screen.
2 people like this
Here is page one of Todd Field's BREAKTHROUHGH screenplay -- but it's so small I'm also going to post it on its own in this lounge,