Select from one of the readings, up to but not including Week 5, and briefly describe two points that you have taken from it. Points that excite you, something that was completely new to you.

I wanted to explore two of the theories proposed in the reading.

Propp argued that it was possible to group characters and actions into:
○ eight character roles (or ‘spheres of action’ as he called them, to indicate how inseparable are character and action
○ thirty-one functions (such as ‘a prohibition or ban is imposed on the hero’)

— what I think is that yes, there are elements that are inherent in each story, such as character roles and functions. But I think what makes a story great is how creative a writer uses these elements, not whether or not it conforms to those structural elements. I watched Brokeback Mountain after reading about how its an important film about Love, to people gay or straight; and I was blown away by everything about it. I’d just read Save The Cat by Blake Snyder and I was trying to see if in Brokeback Mountain, Snyder’s  theory-that in every film, 15 beats exist that move the story and characters along-could exist in an Academy Award winning film. It did. And what made Brokeback Mountain so beautiful was the way it approached those fifteen beats–the characters had so much power over the story, and it was incredible to watch them exercise it in certain situations (where they were free to in Brokeback Mountain), and to abandon it in others (where in the community they were held back). I like it when the decisions of characters move the story along, rather than events and passive reactions– the final scene was so elegantly done, given the circumstances of the characters, and how their decisions ultimately affected those 15 beats inherent in the story. What was so clever I thought was how in the end, after the film’s climax, Ennis finally found intuition, and he could apply his feelings by making himself accountable to Jack’s ideas, which he always shared, but refused to wholeheartedly acknowledge. It should’ve won Best Picture too.
• Todorov argued that all stories begin with an ‘equilibrium’ where any potentially opposing forces are ‘in balance’- this is disrupted by some event, setting in train a series of other events, to close with a second, but different equilibrium or status quo

I think the equilibrium fluctuates throughout the story; things are never perfect for the hero, and he or she is always trying to make something perfect–its why we’re interested in a character, why we are on their journey with them, because we ourselves can sense our own disenchantment, and I guess we’re looking to be inspired– we want to see an example of someone surviving a conflict, one that might be relevant to us, such as Love or Honour or Success… I think film really is escapism; a place where we can distract ourselves and immerse ourselves in a story of self-discovery, of someone else maintaining or discovering an equilibrium… I think Ennis finds a new status quo in the end when he accepts his fear, and whats so sad is that he’ll never have it like he could’ve because of the way he resisted that fear–the way he resisted Jack; and still we somehow have gratitude for Ennis, because he discovers something about himself, and we got to see how. I just think the way the film builds towards so many emotional ideas in Ennis was so incredible… Its a great story, relevant to anyone who gives the film a chance