DZ-129: Steadfast Character Arcs - Agents of Change

I have been thinking while you talk, Mel. Surprising.
Thank you for talking for five minutes. It gave me a lot of time to ponder my own thoughts.
Hi, I'm Mel Killingsworth.
I'm Stu Willis.
And I'm Chas Fisher.
And welcome to Draft Zero, a podcast where three Australian filmmakers,
try to work out what makes great characters not arc.
Thank you Stu because today we are indeed studying the the steadfast or resilient
character and I'm putting arc in quote marks because the idea is that they don't arc,
and we're looking at the films Moana, Apollo 13 and The Dressmaker and this is
to try and answer the question that we've been asking ourselves I think since
like episode five or six of this podcast of like,
do your characters need to have internal change to tell a satisfying story so
we're doing this first in the series of character arc explorations to go what
is the dramatic effect of choosing for your characters to not change,
but then we're going to go into, we're going to do an exploration of what we
are terming positive change for the characters.
And we're going to go into negative change for the characters.
Those are going to be separate episodes along this series.
We might have a what the fuck episode with, you know, possibly documentaries
or the Green Knight and things like that.
And one of the things that our primer episode, last episode,
which we were trying to understand, what do we even mean? How do we measure
this? All these other things.
One of the ideas that came from that, for me, that is interesting is to third
possible, well, fourth, fifth
category, who knows, another episode will be to explore films where the.
The film, the character might have a positive character change,
but the film tells the audience that this is a negative thing in some way and
vice versa, where the characters might have a negative change for their own
experience of it or by external metrics.
But the film is telling us that this is a positive thing.
And I'm not sure if Mel was across that because that mind bomb was kind of happening
to me over the discord whilst you was telling me to shut up.
It's basically Mel has her quadrant.
She has a diagram. Remind us of your main diagram.
Essentially, the diagram looks like positive and negative. Do they change?
Do they remain steadfast for better or for worse? But then you can look at any
of those quadrants and add a different dimension in terms of does the film say
that they think that? So really, that's eight. You start squaring things off, you know, et cetera.
Yeah. It becomes three-dimensional.
Yeah. And it's very visually helpful. And I think it's a lot of fun to sort
of debate where certain characters would land on this.
You know, like I might put one really far to the right and you might put them,
you know, partway through the middle and some of it's relative you know if you're
if you're talking about Tony Montana like,
is that relative to all characters in all film who change or is it just you know,
him at the beginning of Scarface versus him at the end etc.
And one of the things I noticed, well, I think Stu possibly noticed at first
in this homework is that while all these characters are very steadfast,
very resilient in the face of change, their internal value system does not seem to change,
much from the beginning to the end of the film.
They are all positive. The film, I think, well, Mel, I think,
has got some debate over The Dressmaker, the final film that we'll be discussing.
But it would be interesting perhaps another future episode might also be steadfast
or resiliently negative characters characters who are in the face of all opportunity determined,
to do the wrong thing and those might it inherently sounds comedic so that that's a possible.
We have nearly 128 episodes of me just refusing to.
Change for the worst so So.
I think we've got enough.
Yeah. But before we dive into our zero context future learnings or Moana,
whichever happens first, Stu, you said you had a little bit of sort of mind
bombs as well from the primary episode that you wanted to get out.
Well, even though we talked for two hours, well, the episode is two hours and
the recording was a lot longer. There's two things I think we didn't really cover.
The first one, which seems really basic, that we've talked about before,
is the fundamental question of what is a character.
And I know he's a little bit of a persona non grata in writing now,
but I really like David Mamet's definition of a character being habitual action.
That's his interpretation of Aristotle, that all a character is is habitual action.
And therefore, I think, therefore, when I think it's about talking about a character
change, you're talking about a character's habits changing, right?
And therefore, you know, and the other derivation of that is that that means
the film has to do enough setup to understand what a character's habit is.
And then it needs enough payoff to understand that it wasn't just a one-off
thing that they did, but it's actually.
It's going to stick.
It's going to stick.
Yeah.
Right? that it's not just enough to kiss the girl or the boy or the cat at the
end of the film, that you might actually need to have a-
The three genders.
Yeah.
My cat's sitting on my laptop at the moment looking unhappy that I'm speaking so loud.
The other thing which is a little bit more complex is we talked about punishment
and reward, which we kind of distill down to maybe there's a version of that
that we can think of in terms of the emotional event of people coming together or further away.
But I do think there's a quadrant to this. And so I'm going to bring up,
and this is an idea that I did get from Emma, I love bragging about on the podcast,
I'm still in that stage of the marriage, of the honeymoon period,
this idea of operant conditioning.
And I'm going to use the psychological terms as I understand them,
which are possibly wrong, but I think we're going to translate them into screenwriting.
So the idea of it is that there's reinforcement and punishment.
We'll start with punishment.
There's two forms of punishment. And the idea of punishment is to decrease behavior.
So positive punishment is adding a noxious stimulus, right? So you do something
to someone in order them to decrease behavior.
Negative punishment is removing some stimulus in order to discourage a behavior. See ya.
On the other side, you've got positive reinforcement, which is adding stimulus
to encourage correct behavior, giving a treat, for example, a little treat.
And you get negative reinforcement, which has got two versions.
But essentially, one of them is like avoidance, that you allow them to avoid the negative outcomes.
Or the other version is you get to remove something that causes them distress, right? Right.
So that's basically that you've got additive and subtractive is the terms that
I'm suggesting that we use so they don't get confused with negative or positive.
Do you give them a reward or you take something away? And I'm just going to
ground this into the conversation around Leia because you actually put your finger on it, Chas.
And I'm like, what reward does Leia get? And you're like, well,
what do you give to a princess?
And the answer is she gets to be free and is restored to being the princess.
So, her reward is the removal of the- Torture. Of the torture.
And the captivity.
And the captivity and the loss of her status. So, that is a- and the medal is
a positive reward for Luke.
And so, I think that's a good example because I think it would be really interesting,
particularly once we get into The Dressmaker when we get there.
Because I think of some of what makes it feel like a steadfast,
and I think we'll have some interesting conversations about whether I was actually
right in suggesting it's a steadfast movie.
Is around the fact that I think there may be stuff in there that's kind of like negative reward.
You know, that learning about the past is actually freeing you from the burden of not knowing.
Or you could see that, depending on how you want to do it, you could see that
as a positive reward. You now know. But they're the interesting questions.
And I think as we go through Moana, Apollo 13, and then The Dressmaker,
I think it'll be kind of useful.
And it's going to be particularly useful in the context of negative arcs, I think.
You know, what is the – because what we might be seeing is a positive – like
they may – it's the classic, they just get money. So, therefore,
they're encouraged to continue that behavior.
And then what we're actually seeing is the – a certain kind of negative – a
removal of something else. Anyway.
Mm-hmm.
All right. Zero context learnings. Stu, do you want to go first this time?
I think there is a emotional difference between a additive reward and a subtractive reward.
Because it's subtractive, it's going to feel more like it's a loss, right? In a way.
Yeah.
We'll get into that. And I think there is a difference between a positive punishment
and a negative punishment.
Yeah.
Emotionally.
What does Mel from the future learn?
My no context learning is weebles wobble, but they don't fall down.
And that's what makes them steadfast.
Very nice. And this is my key takeaway from this is that,
steadfast can be hugely emotional, but then you need to fill it with lots of
emotional events and fill it with characters or worlds that are changed by the
steadfast character moving through them.
Oh and I've got I've got one more learning if Chas knows he's not editing the
episode he just lets it go a lot more wild.
So the trick is you need to tell him he's editing it whether or not he actually is.
We were hugely intentional we just had a lot to say,
And just a gentle reminder that the questions we identified in the primer episode
to ask of these films, we may not do it, but I'm just putting them here in case it's helpful.
Did the public enter each of these stories with an expectation that their characters will change?
When or how did the story teach us to expect the characters to change, if not?
And Mel had a funny comment in the Discord that even baby Moana was steadfast.
Did the character yes you are correct um,
did the characters change was
it experiential change or an internal value change how is that dramatized,
is the character aware that they changed how do they feel about that does that
even matter how does the film want the audience to feel about the change if
that's different to the character's perception how what what has the film done to pull that off,
how does the story world punish or reward the transformation or to use Stu's
new language how does the story world add or subtract from the transformation,
what are the values explored by the arc how does this relate to the theme,
how is contrast versus affinity or unity portrayed through the characters actions
or journey and we also were using terms like order disorder and inertia,
and finally this one might be where we start because it's the easiest one to,
state what is the emotional event created between the character and the audience
as a result of the journey that we've just seen does the character end up more
intimate or distant from the audience so.
Speaking of journeys shall we.
Jump into Moana.
For generations, this peaceful island has been home to our families.
But beyond our reef, a great danger is coming.
Legend tells of a hero who will journey to find the demigod Maui.
And together, they will save us all.
Maui? Shapeshifter? The demigod of the wind and sea?
I am a... Hero of Men. What? It's actually Maui shapeshifter,
demigod of the wind and sea, Hero of Men.
I interrupted from the top, Hero of Men. Go.
I'm not going on a mission with some little girl. This is my canoe,
and you will journey to different...
I did not see that coming. The ocean is a friend of mine.
First, we've got to go through a whole ocean of bad.
Kakamora. Kaka-what? They're kinda cute.
Just to give the traditional enormous list of credited writers for an animated
movie, we are in fact doing the 2016 animated version of Moana, not the impending,
horrifying looking film, live action version.
I shouldn't prejudge. Maybe it's good, but the trailer was not inspiring.
So, Moana, the screenplay is credited to Jared Bush, with story credits to Ron
Clements, John Musker, and Chris Williams, who are all directors of the film,
and Don Hall, also a director, as well as by Pamela Ribon, Aaron Kandell, and Jordan Kandell.
Kandell, not Kandell. Both of those last two.
Sorry, Aaron and Jordan, for butchering your name. Okay, who would like to summarize this film?
Just quickly before I summarize, I'm so glad we picked Moana because we were
looking for an example of hero's journey that was steadfast.
And this film is like so hero's journey.
Okay. So Moana is set in ancient Polynesia. There is a daughter, the titular Moana.
She's what, like 10? The daughter of the village chief. and she's chosen by
the ocean to go and find the Maui.
The heart of Te Fiti. Oh, no, restore the heart.
Yeah, she has to restore the heart of Te Fiti, which is basically the darkness,
very much like NeverEnding Story.
I think it's pretty clear to an adult audience. It's kind of reading it as some
kind of active volcano and they need to restore the heart to this mountain and...
And in order to do that, she needs to set off on a journey to find Maui,
a classic kind of trickster character who will help, who actually is the one
that stole the heart of Te Fiti. And along that way, they'll have mini adventures.
The important part of that in terms of the structure is she's chosen early when she's young.
She really wants to leave the island. The village is kind of enclosed by a reef,
and her father won't let them go beyond the reef, but she really wants to go.
When it's time for her to start learning how to be ruler, she still wants to leave.
Her dad's, I guess, training her up. I wasn't going to say he's like Regent.
And then the darkness finally reaches the village, and she takes it on herself
to leave the island, go on the quest to find Maui, and return the heart to Te Fiti.
That was probably a better version of the summary.
I can choose which one I use.
Okay. So, what are, like, you know, in terms of defining, I guess, the patterns,
the very first song is actually, I mean, it might not be the first, but it's early on.
It's the dad singing to Moana saying, and the introductory line to it is,
you must learn where you're meant to be.
But the idea is for him, that means on the island.
Moana, it's time you knew The village of Motunui is all you need,
Moana, stay on the ground now Our people will need a chief And there you are
There comes a day When you're gonna look around And realise happiness is where you,
are And And Moana's.
I can't remember what John August keeps calling the song, the I want song.
Yeah, it's the I want song.
Is the, you know, the ocean is calling to her.
And like you said, Stu, the ocean
is calling to her before there's even a mission to restore the heart.
I mean, the whole film does open with the grandmother telling the story.
So we understand there is a mission at the beginning. But baby Moana is just
being called to the ocean.
She's not being called to restore the heart of Te Fiti.
She's toddling out to the ocean and interacting with it and like, oh, I want to go to there.
Yeah.
I mean, question, has anyone ever met a toddler that is not really steadfast and stubborn?
Once they get an idea in their head?
They are, I want machines.
But they don't always keep that idea until they're 10 years old.
Yeah. But this is a great example because often we're like, as storytellers,
I'm glad we're doing this episode because it gets it out the way.
That there doesn't, Moana's values, I guess, are challenged in that the escalating
external states, going back to our episode on secrets and clues and narrative
velocity, Moana is being pulled.
She's not being pushed. She wants to do this, right?
She's doing this in the face of what everyone else around her other than her
grandmother are telling her to do.
She is doing this and And because she's being pulled, the external states have
to consistently escalate to challenge her resolve and her resilience and her steadfastness.
And I don't know if it's burying the lead or if this is a really clear example
through this lens, but there's only one point in the entire film where she doubts
her resolve to give the heart.
Back to Te Fiti to go on this mission.
And it is the low point of the whole film. Like she found Maui.
She convinces him to go on the mission with him. They go to the realm of monsters.
He gets his hook. There's assaults by coconuts on the way.
He gets his mojo back and they finally get to the island and they fight the lava monster, Tamatoa.
And because Moana is so steadfast, this is the bit that I found interesting.
It's Moana's steadfastness that leads to the low point, right?
She is not listening to what Maui is saying.
And because she's not listening, he uses his hook to defend himself from the lava monster.
And his hook almost breaks and because his identity is so tied up with his hook,
he leaves and that is the Moana feels unable to continue but I find it,
so interesting that it is her steadfastness like her,
resolve her refusal to listen to anyone that led to the low point that led to
the downfall and she goes,
you know, I'm not the right person.
Take the heart back, Ocean. Choose someone else.
I'm not the right person.
You have to choose someone else.
Choose someone else. Please.
And then within about 45 seconds, she's actually gone back to saying, you know what?
I am Moana. And the ocean calls to me and I was right all along.
And I'm just going to do it myself without the demigod.
I am Moana of Motunui. Aboard my boat, I will sail across the sea and restore the heart of Te Fiti.
I find it interesting. Like, in the reprise of her I Want song is the,
at the moment of doubt, the ocean calls me, come what may, I know the way, I am Moana.
I just found it interesting that they had her steadfastness be the reason why
the mission almost fails.
And her character response to that situation is to go, ah, fuck it. I was right all along.
It's the world that's wrong. I'm just going to keep going.
But I think we'll find that in a lot of steadfast episodes. Because I think
a lot of people, like, if you are going to be, first of all,
I don't think that if you never have any doubts.
And you never sort of falter. You're a psychopath. You're not steadfast, right?
If you have a character who is steadfast, obviously there's doubting and there's
wobbling and that's part of what makes it interesting.
But also that also tripping you up, that stubbornness, that determination,
that steadfastness being the
thing that trips you up, like the dramatic irony there is really juicy.
And I think you will end up getting that in a lot of steadfast examples that we find.
So, I think just to define how I think of steadfast, it's the person who's in
a way resilience and stubbornness affects others, right?
So, that's their steadfast in the belief. The example, if you Google it,
it's the most common example and it's actually where I first heard of this terminology
is in the Hunger Games because Katniss' belief changes others, right?
It's not that she changes her belief, her belief is able to change others.
And there are other stories that do that.
And I think this is a good example, right? Her belief is A, that they should
be ocean voyaging, right?
B, that Maui is the person to do it. And C, that something needs to be done.
So there's a whole series of beliefs that she has. And I think doubt is important
in terms of the emotional effect of resilience.
Because the answer is you're not being really resilient and if nothing is challenging you.
You're a psychopath. which she almost is in this film if it weren't for that moment of doubt.
Big call no I do think I think that if you never,
are going to question your own capabilities if you're never going to question
your own rightness if you're never going to question your own moral like position
then you are I mean I'm sure that the dictionary that like we can argue about
sociopath versus psychopath whatever but you are one.
Of them is a real term the other one is made up yes like all terms but.
Yes, and a lot of things that we're talking about with fictional characters,
there's a lot of the made-up application of like, are we going to make this
person a psychopath? Yeah, of course. So, I think I finished my thought. Ta-da.
So, here's the interesting thing. Because we talk about this in terms of arcs,
and it's like, oh, it feels like we can kind of skip over it really quickly and go, ta-da.
She doesn't really change. There's a moment of doubt. She is rewarded to use
the hero's journey terminology. She gets the elixir, returns to her village, and saves the village.
Because particularly to me, my main understanding of the Hero of a Thousand
Faces is it's someone leaving the village, going to the external world and returning to their village.
Changed, but with, possibly changed, but with the ways to change them.
And there is a version of that that is kind of darker, like Frodo in Lord of the Rings.
Like he, you know, sits out from the Shire, saves the world.
Saves the Shire itself, which is kind of made clearer in the books than in a movie, right?
And then comes back, but he's also fundamentally changed by his experience of saving people.
Saving the shot. That is not the case for Moana, right? So, does she have decisions?
And how is this steadfast? I mean, maybe I've just explained how it's dramatized,
but I think the points of doubt are actually really important,
perhaps, for this to work, right?
Like, you need the contrast, and we can say that she just believes it's going
to work, and then it gets there.
But in terms of if you're going to write this kind of story,
okay how do you plot it in such a way that it maintain maintains your interest,
and is emotionally affecting because no surprises I was crying through most of this yeah.
I think you need internal and external challenges and I think the external challenges
should be both friendly and non-friendly which you get in Moana like you need
a multitude of challenges to,
not just prove the steadfastness but to show it in in a dynamic and interesting
way and you get that in this you have the fact that her,
right at the start her dad's like no you're not going to do this right and then
she goes off and she finds a frenemy,
frenemy yeah she finds a frenemy who also challenges her ability to do that and then she finds,
giant crab that is like aha you know and then she finds a You have a range of different,
friends, frenemies, and enemies who challenge it, and that keeps it interesting
and shows the resilience and steadfastness while also keeping it dynamic.
There was one other main moment of doubt in my head that I can remember,
which is when to get into the realm of monsters, you have to jump down a seemingly bottomless pit.
Yep.
And Maui jumps down.
Easy for a demigod to say.
And I don't think expects her to, yeah. And he doesn't expect her to jump.
And she summons her courage. She has to summon her courage to remain steadfast and resilient.
So circumstances then, you might say also challenged by like circumstances.
It's also really worth noting that we're talking about the protagonist here,
because even in these summaries, it's really clear that Maui undergoes massive positive changes.
Huge change.
He goes from being a powerless captive on a desert island to being,
not just having his full power restored, but also,
to be liberated from what I think Tamatoa in song says to him, like, you crave the
affirmation of these mortals, like you're trying to replace the love that you
had, that you lost from being rejected by your parents.
Whom amongst us etc.
I wasn't born a demigod I had human parents they uh they took one look and and
decided they did not want me,
they threw me into the sea like I was nothing,
Somehow, I was found by the gods. They gave me the hook.
And so Maui overcomes that as well.
So he's not just restored to his glory that he was previous to the whole journey,
but he's in fact, you know, totally improved. And Moana's father.
And he goes through fear. He goes through, I don't want to. He goes through, I can't.
Like, he absolutely has to change and overcome a lot, but it's a massive arc for him.
And at every point,
that this character's doubting, Maui is doubting. And one of the delightful
things about the movie is he's got these elaborate living tattoos,
and on his living tattoos is a tattoo of himself that kind of acts as his conscience.
It's like the Maui that he wants
to be. So, you know, he's telling him off when he's abandoning Moana.
So good.
Yeah.
I'm just imagining my cat tattoo on my forearm If it was animated It would just be.
Like Meow feed me Meow.
Feed me Scratching you all the time.
Yep But in terms of the reward Like that Moana's elixir brings back She doesn't
just save the village from the darkness Because she does that They can now stay on the island,
There's going to be fish There's going to be food The darkness is gone She inspires
them to once again be voyagers,
Away.
Away We set a course to find A brand new island everywhere we roam Away,
away And she learns the skills to do this by traveling with Maui.
And I think this helped me understand the Luke Skywalker journey of,
well, he's learning the force, right? Like, he's changing.
And I think coming back to the punishment, reward, additive,
subtractive thing, is that by adding, the reward is gaining skills.
Skills aren't necessarily character change. They can become character change.
Anakin and Luke and all those things.
In the first film, they gain these powers, right? And then having the powers.
Gain or discover. I think the force actually kind of complicates it.
Okay, you know what? Actually, we don't need my Star Wars nerdery here.
I understand your point. Continue.
Yeah, either way, I think the films present it as a reward for,
in this case, Moana being steadfast, but leaving home.
But it's something that clearly her as I once on and her as a toddler was like,
I want to leave home. But they have to do the conflict with home.
Same with Luke, right? They want you to feel that it's a character that's torn away.
The difference is, Luke, they kind of have to kill his parents.
Parental figures. Justice for Aunt Beru.
Parental figures. They were more parents than Padme and Anakin ever were.
A bit harsh on poor Padme.
She did come to die, so hardly her fault.
Yeah, just chose to stop living.
There's nothing wrong with her.
Anyway so I I'm just saying that there's I see that as skills that she's then
able to spread and I think other films may see powers and stuff as character
change yeah here I think it's treated as her as reward for her being steadfast,
right and the thing is as soon as she actually tries the funny thing is,
as soon as anyone tries to knock her off the journey right whether it's Maui
or her the ocean literally picks her up and puts her back on the ship yeah right and I'm like Oh God.
Yeah. I mean, at least they hang the hat of how temperamental the ocean is.
Cause it's like, why didn't you just take us here?
Yeah. You know, why didn't you whoosh her?
Why didn't you wish the stone yourself to the heart of Te Fiti?
If the ocean's so smart, why didn't it just take the heart back to Te Fiti itself? Or bring me my hook?
The ocean's straight up kooky dooks.
But I'm sure it's not wrong about you. You're the chosen one.
Because it needed her, because the ultimate, the real goal was for her to learn
the skills of how to be a wayfarer.
And take her people on the seas again. And even Maui says that that's what the
ocean's really after, right? Is that sense of connectedness.
Oh, just watching the film through this lens, I did laugh a couple of times
at how overt, like this is a Disney animated film, but like,
you know, come what may, I know the way I am Moana.
And then at the end, Maui, I laughed because Maui has to learn what Moana knows
from birth, which he says, hook no hook I'm Maui right that's one of his last lines he has to learn,
he has a positive fundamental character value change as a result from hanging out with with Moana.
And it's beautiful I'm.
Sorry about your hook well hook no hook I'm Maui.
But yeah, I do think it's important that we don't conflate upskilling with change,
because you don't have a character change just because you gain a new skill.
You have a character change because there's sort of a fundamental shift in how
you see the world, how you interact with the world, who you are,
the decisions that you're going to make.
Yeah. And I know we're getting abstracted from on this, but we've talked about
many times about tactics, people, characters choosing the tactics based on things
that they think they do well, what they're afraid of.
And also what's within their capability, what's within their resources.
So if you gain new skills, right, that may change what options are open to you
as a character, which is part of what TV is able to explore, given,
its length is characters grappling with whatever changes in their skills and their tactics.
Well, I mean, I'm thinking of The Shield, but I mean, that's so,
you know, we talked about it many episodes ago in TV pilots,
But that is absolutely, you know, it's a tragedy.
It's about a character learning just how far, oh, I can keep on going further
and further and further. And I will rely on violence more and more.
So, in terms of Moana and emotional events. So, I think, one,
the doubt's important. I think the trickster character is really important.
I think you probably, I mean, we've already talked about it being the low point.
You know, I think a lot of these structural stuff still works even though she is steadfast, right?
And in fact, part of it is that she believed that she needed Maui to confront
Te Fiti and she decides to go alone with it, right, is kind of not.
Character change, but it is kind of like an evolution. Her recognition of Te
Fiti and the heart literally being, what's the name of the darkness? Te Kā?
Te Kā.
Yeah, Te Kā. Within that, but I think in terms of the emotional event,
from her perspective, right, she has gone through a change in that I think she's
moved from, she's got a perception of who she wants to be, which is,
I want to be on the ocean and travel.
And at the beginning of the film, she is far from that. And at the end of the
film, she has literally moved there.
So there is an emotional event for her with her sense of self and identity.
There is an emotional event with the village and particularly her father as
the manifestation of the village, which is you shouldn't leave.
You will let us down. This isn't going to work. And she literally departs from
her father, right? And then comes together. So there is an emotional closure,
an emotional event there in relationship to the village, but particularly her father.
How do we think that emotional event tracks for the audience and how do we feel
closer to her or further away?
I mean, part of it, you know, spending an hour and a half with a character that
we love that's funny and maybe resilient in itself is enough to make us go,
you know, I'm on their side because we love underdogs and we dig for it.
That brings us closer. But is there anything else in the filmmaking and the
screenwriting and the storytelling that brings us closer to her?
In terms of an emotional event.
Well, the grandmother character, for sure.
Yep.
And the way that the grandmother character fosters her belief at first,
and then there's obviously a lot of sadness when her grandmother passes,
but then her grandmother comes back both as a,
entity of her own, like as a representation of her inner self, but then also literally,
as a sort of reincarnated Stingray version.
And so you see that like emotional arc of I am given the strength to do these
things from you and I'm able to do it without you.
And then through that, I come to a place where I recognize you in my life and
you and everything around me and the way that you've enabled me to interact
with, you know, my father and the village and the ocean and et cetera.
And I think that is an incredibly strong emotional event.
And I think we've said it already, but, you know, the fact that she rubs off
on Maui, and then the big thing for me is she doesn't just solve the mission.
She doesn't just save the village.
She then inspires change in her people as well.
He wanted, like, and fulfills her father's dream. He wanted her to be the chief.
She is the chief. She's just the chief exploring rather than the chief on the island. Yeah.
And you're right to draw like the big distinction, I think, between learning
things, upskilling, experiencing things, and fundamental value change.
Because we've just said, I don't think even when she is confronted with the
fact that who she is has almost led to the downfall of the entire mission, she still doubles down.
Yeah. And she's not running away.
No.
She isn't leaving the village because she hates them. She's leaving them because
she loves them and wants to save them.
It calls me.
Yeah, exactly. And I mean, it is playing with that tension between,
as we talked about in the previous episode, between independence and dependence,
like the complex relationship between them.
Where I'm getting to, because I think this will help us with Apollo 13 and The
Dressmaker, this is where I'm beginning to go and how I will look at arcs in my own story.
I think positive, negative, and steadfast are really useful on categories.
But I think if I was going to go, what makes this work story-wise and keeps
compelled is that it has emotional events regardless.
And I think Apollo 13 has emotional events between the characters.
If anything, the only thing that changes is the relationship between characters.
I don't think they change the world. They don't come back and be like, we found water on Mars.
You know, it's kind of, and maybe that's true of all survival stories,
or maybe they don't, they're just compelling because the external stakes are so high.
High, but I think Ron Howard, like the other exact, it was a bunch of,
I wanted to do Willow and then I'm like, oh, 13 Lives.
And I'm like, fuck, Ron Howard's just like the goat of steadfast stories.
And maybe it's because he's an, and now I'm like, maybe it's because he's an
actor and he understands how we can ground it in emotion.
As opposed to just spectacle. Anyway, that's me trying to transition out of
Moana into Apollo 13, unless there's anything we think we can wrap up in this discussion.
Do we want to go through the questions or have we covered them all?
Yes. I think that's a great idea. Let's do the – yeah, because I actually do
have one question, which I think is more useful for the others,
but I'll add when – if there is a change, when does it happen?
And I think the emotional event can be part of it Because I kind of do think
there is a emotional event in Apollo 13. I just think it happens at the beginning of the third act.
They kind of resolve any change and then that allows them to complete the plot, you know.
And I think Moana is somewhat, what's that laughing?
I love that you're just trying to jump the gun on your learnings for the next
thing in the wrap-up of Moana, that's all.
You know how this podcast works, Mel.
Good Lord. I haven't even introduced the film yet. Yep, yep,
yep. Uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh.
I'm just saying this is what I've – this is what talking about Moana has led
me to think about, and then maybe at the end of Apollo 13 I'll be like, that was all wrong.
Now, these first two questions are kind of interrelated, but I think the first
one's harder to answer than the second.
So, the first two questions are, do we as the audience enter this story with
an expectation that there will be a character arc?
And when or how does the film teach us to expect a character arc?
Because the first one is kind of like potentially related to genre,
potentially related to trailers or what you're thinking going in or who the filmmaker is.
I think it's for this in particular, the Disney princess kind of,
it's not even, I mean, obviously it's like a sub, sub, sub genre, you know.
So obviously you have genre, you know, adventure. Sure. You also have genre
Disney, and I know it's not quote unquote Disney, you know, the broad category of Disney princess.
Daughter of the chief.
Yeah.
It's like a running joke in the film that she says, I'm not a princess.
I actually think that a lot of Disney princess stories, not all,
but a lot of Disney princess stories are steadfast and have another character
who changes significantly.
And I, again, not all. And then you also have Disney princesses like Jasmine,
who are really a tertiary character in the story. And, you know,
yes, sure, she's steadfast, but also does she have much of a choice?
But I think a lot of them are. But there still is going to be.
Are you about to challenge Jasmine being a Disney princess?
No, I'm wondering if Willow is a Disney princess.
I would say that Willow is two Disney princesses. And if you watch the TV show.
Oh, I'd love to watch the TV show if I could still watch it.
I mean, it does, as a matter of fact, turn out that there is literally no legal
way to do it for the foreseeable future. Yes. Anyway.
Did they take it off Disney Plus?
Oh, it only lasted less than a year. How dare they have queer and interracial?
No, no, but why did they take it down?
Genuinely?
Yeah.
Because it is very queer and interracial and progressive in like a very passive way.
It's so worth they had to put it to sleep.
I didn't realize it had been taken down.
And when I say also it is queer and has interracial relationships is what I
should say. And I think they genuinely had an issue with that.
So, when did Moana or how did Moana teach us to expect or to tell us what the
journey the character was going to go on?
I mean, we've already spoken about how in the opening story,
it tells us what the mission is going to be. Restore the heart to Te Fiti.
And it tells us who Moana's character is. Because all these story panels fall
down. All the kids are freaking out and she's not scared.
It's the best. Oh, my God. A tiny little baby toddler Moana the whole time is
excited and then they start getting scared and then they get more scared and she gets more excited.
And then all of a sudden they like and there's one on the side who literally
just kind of like falls over just like pratfalls and she's like,
but I actually think it teaches you in that first like 15 minutes to expect
her to be steadfast because both both through story narrative and through song
and also through visuals because you see like, you know, toddler Moana.
Running to the ocean in the same direction. And then you see five-year-old Moana running to the ocean.
And then you see 10 years. She continually over 10 years has expressed the same
desire, the same determination, the same, I do think we should go out there.
I do think there's something better. I do think that we should explore.
And so I think it actually teaches you. And obviously it helps that there's
montages and there's music and that there's all these pretty colors going everywhere.
But I think that the first 15 minutes does tell you to sort of expect that.
Agreed. Did the characters change? We've talked about this. Was it experiential
change or internal value change? How is that dramatized? We've discussed all
of that. But to Stu's question, I'm putting it in here.
If there is a change, when does it happen?
So are you talking about Maui or Moana here?
I think that's an interesting question. I would say Moana is given the opportunity
to change at the end of the second act, the break into the third,
right? The low point for her is, do I turn around and give up?
Do I accept? That is a change for her that she does not take. And with Maui.
And does not set.
I would say with Maui, he's got a similar thing, which is when he's,
his hook's damaged. He's like, well, I'm not going to rescue my magic hook.
Right. And then he literally puts his hook on the hook.
When he, you know, when he tries to stop Tekah, right.
And then he breaks the hook. But that is like a moment of change for him.
It's him going, I'm going to risk this thing that I considered most valuable.
So that is definitely like a dramatization of a choice coming back to our final
choices episode for him.
And him showing up at the last minute is like Han Solo.
Absolutely. Yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Reluctant hero. Fine. I'm going to come and save the day.
Be really cool doing it.
But he has dramatized moments of change throughout the whole story. We meet him.
Yes.
And he is arrogant to the point where, you know, the You're Welcome song is
just so brilliant. He expects gratitude from all humans and is confronted by
Moana saying, you are not my hero. Right?
He then abandons her on the island.
Yeah.
And it's only when the ocean forces her upon him that he then jumps off the
boat he's like all right I'm out,
and the ocean puts him back on and you know keeps throwing the heart at him
even though he's scared of it now he's forced on this mission at this point
there's no escape for him but,
he he has to get his hook back from Tekah he gets his hook back but he cannot
use his powers because he lacks the self-confidence.
We then have a training montage, a Rocky training montage, where he regains his self-confidence.
We then have him abandoning the mission when there's a risk of him losing his hook.
And then the final dramatized change where he's willing to give up his hook
to be Maui. He doesn't need his hook to be demigod of the wind and sky.
So there's lots of dramatized changes and confrontations for Maui throughout.
But to your point, Stu, or sorry, just for Moana, right at the end of the film,
she's like, come with me, we're going to need a master voyager.
And he says to her, they already have one. So I think she.
Does have- That's when I get a mosh.
Well, because that goes to the next question, is the character aware that they changed?
They're not really, they're not aware of the skills that they,
Like Moana is not aware of what she's capable of.
She's always resilient. Like the internal values aren't changed,
but she needs to be told by Maui that she can lead her people off into the ocean.
Hmm.
So, how does the film want you to feel about that change?
Emotion.
Happy.
Yeah, but positive. Like, we're pretty, there's, this is only,
I think, an important question where I think the film is trying to tell us something,
make the audience feel differently to the characters in relation to their journey.
I do think you're changing your feelings with Maui, right? In the same way, like,
I'm just going to it now, which is that Maui is similar to Han Solo and Mad
Madigan, which is, you know.
We just hung up on Star Wars and Willow now.
Yeah, because there are other versions of this that we talked about doing for Hero's Journey.
So, I'm just using Moana as a way to kind of condense these models,
which is all three of them, those characters are kind of forced on the mission
at the beginning, right?
And then they all have choices where they could choose to leave,
but come back because of the resilience of the hero character.
Or sometimes they do choose to leave. Like they actively leave and then it's
like they get halfway down the road. We don't necessarily see that,
right? Because it's going to be a surprise. They get halfway down the road and
go, all right, all right, and turn around and come flying in to save the day.
That's what they all three of them do. That is my point. Maui,
Han Solo, Mad Mardigan. and they all actively leave the quest that they were forced on.
And then often off screen, they have the moment where they decide to come back
because it's the influence of the main character. So I'm just kind of recognizing that beat.
We've seen the beat. I'm sure there's earlier examples.
But I think it's a good dramatization of the effect of the main character's
resilience on those around them.
And it does tie to the kind of Michael Arndt ending, you know.
Mm-hmm. How does the story world subtract or add to the, I've got punish or
reward the transformation?
I mean, we've already said she rescues the island, her people become voyagers once more. Maui.
Gained self-esteem.
So we'll have to see what happens in Moana 2. Maybe she learns she falls to the dark side.
Oh, man.
Doesn't matter. Does not count. They only made it because this was like the
fourth most successful Disney movie in history.
I've got here what values are
explored by the arc. How does this relate to theme? I mean, it is like...
I don't know if I can summarize it, but the themes of Moana appear to be like,
do we fear the unknown or do we embrace it?
If I were to articulate it that way. Is there, I mean, there are probably other
values, definitely Maui's is not, he's not a reflection of that. It's interesting.
I was rewatching, I was just skipping through Moana because I know it so well.
I've watched it hundreds of times. I was just skipping through key character
beats last night and the kids and Anna all asked me separately to re-watch the Tamatoa song, Shiny.
And it was only then that I realized there's a line in there where he said,
like, you know, if your granny lied, who you are on the inside doesn't matter, right?
I'm like, oh my God, even the stupid crab song is thematically a counter argument
where Moana's storyline, everything is about who you are on the inside is the most important thing.
And that's definitely for Maui as well.
All right, this is for you, Stu, because I'm not sure how to answer it.
How is contrast portrayed throughout the characters?
I mean, you have actually talked about it. It's doubt is the moments of contrast.
There is literal contrast from moving from the island to ocean,
back to the island, right?
Back to the ocean again.
Back to the ocean again. But, yeah, it's the sense of doubt,
right, and the ways her, yeah, I would say that's the main thing.
And what is the emotional event created between the character and the audience
as a result of the journey? What did you feel, Stu, when you were emotional?
In terms of like the binary for Judith, is like more intimate or distant?
Oh, I definitely feel more intimate with the character, but I'm trying to work
out if there was anything.
I asked earlier, is there anything story-wise or filmmaking-wise that affects
that? But I think the music does a lot of heavy lifting.
All right Mel you have once told me that uh you are aware of every single major
space disaster in the U.S.
Space program have I yes I mean I believe that I told you that I just do not
remember telling you that Apollo 13 we're transitioning into Apollo.
13 Apollo 13 flight controllers give me a go no go for launch you know that
easter vacation trip we had planned for on Acapulco
procedures nope control go fight there might be a slight change in destination really,
maybe say the moon,
this is the crew of the Apollo 13 wishing everyone back on earth a pleasant evening,
Uh, Houston, we have a problem. We got a wicked shimmy up here.
Houston, we are venting something out into space. It's definitely a gas of some
sort. It's like the heart rates are skyrocketing. The Apollo 13 spacecraft is
apparently losing breathing oxygen. The emergency has ruled out any chance of
a lunar landing. Why are so many people here?
Something broke on your daddy's spaceship. I have a request from the news people.
Take it up with my husband.
He'll be home on Friday. It's likely I've lost a radio contact.
Econ, what's your data telling you? It's reading a quadruple failure.
That can't happen. It's got to be instrumentation. The ship's bleeding to death.
This rake, we're going to skip right out of the atmosphere, and we're never
going to get back. We're looking at less than 15 minutes of life support in
the Odyssey. We never lost an American in space. We're sure as hell not going
to lose one on my watch. Odyssey, do you read me?
Into Apollo 13, which is a docudrama directed by Ron Howard,
written by William Broyles Jr.
And Al Reinert. And Al Reinert is an interesting writer because he directed the
documentary about this actual event.
So this is all based on, and several pieces of the film are direct recreations
of footage from the Apollo 13 disaster.
So they're all real people in this film. And it stars Tom Hanks,
Kevin Bacon, Bill Paxton, Gary Sinise, Ed Harris, and Kathleen Quinlan.
And yes, and it is incredibly steadfast.
Mm-hmm.
I do think like if we'll just this isn't important, but it was interesting that
Ron Howard is very insistent, like a lot of people think he lifted bits from the documentary
to reuse because he recreated certain scenes so closely, especially like the
close ups of like the hose coils and them walking and stuff like that from the
documentary that people thought he used some shots.
And he said, no, every single shot in this movie is something that they shot
specifically for the narrative fiction or docudrama or whatever,
Apollo 13, which I think is a lot of fun.
Well, for those listeners who may not have seen the film, do you want to tell
us the actual plot events of the docudrama?
Yeah. So basically, the Americans land on the moon and plan to return to the
moon several more times. And there's a group of three astronauts who get bumped
up and say, you're going to go to the moon now.
You're going to leave in six months and go. And so they sort of ramp up their training and get ready.
And then one of them gets exposed to measles and can't go.
And so that means that they have to bump up one of the backups.
So these three men get on the shuttle, they go up, they're in space,
and then a freak event occurs,
where their engine is busted.
I know I'm not using the technical terms because it's not really important for this.
You can watch the movie and they go into great technical detail.
And then there is a...
Concerted effort, both from people on the ground and from the astronaut who
was left behind, played by Gary Sinise, and by, of course, the three men then in the
land, which is essentially the three of them have to go from the main part of
the ship into the tiny little shuttle that's only meant for two people because
it's not meant to be used and try to figure out,
can we safely get back to Earth?
Yeah. I mean, so there's a whole lot of technical challenges.
It's like, can we survive up in space while they're figuring out how to get
us back to earth can we turn the ship back on and then even if we've turned
it can turn it back on in what order even after all that has the ship been so
irreparably damaged that we're gonna burn to
crispy raisins on re-entry.
Yep and it's essentially it's a two and a half hour film and there is a little
bit of lead up in terms of you're meeting all the characters and you're learning
how the spaceship works And I didn't look at the time stamps,
but this is a two and a half hour film.
And a great deal of that time is just watching them problem solve in what feels
like real time. It is stretched over three days.
But some of the problems that they're talking about, like, so literally,
for example, the two part, the main ship that is busted and they cannot use
and the land which they are in have been.
Different the have one of them has a circular air filter and the other has square
air filters and they are running out of air and they have to the people on the ground,
have to figure out how to literally make a square peg fit in a round hole with
only you know here's some hose here's some duct tape here's a plastic bag and some pliers yeah go,
you know and it is it's riveting but a lot of it is spent in problem solving.
Yeah I mean it's very similar idea to the the martian I mean,
we've got all these characters. We've also got the family members back on Earth of the crew.
We've got different elements of the command.
We've got Houston employees. Yeah, command center.
Like Houston, but trying to solve different problems at different times and then the crew as well.
And I guess this is a point about disaster movies, but I am amazed at how,
a film like this can be so riveting and so emotionally satisfying with not a
single character going through any kind of fundamental internal values change.
I mean, we did an entire episode on how do you make something engrossing when
you know how it turns out? Because this is everyone. I mean,
I guess, to my point, as an American, I know how this turned out.
Maybe you didn't. I don't know the first time you watched it.
But we know how it ends. And yet it is still...
Intense and riveting we know how it ends and nobody changes and yet it is engrossing so.
Stu I think you had a good observation I'm not sure whether to steal it or
to give it to tee you up but that the only thing you have left when none of
these characters are having their value systems even challenged right they're all like,
we're gonna go to the moon and then when that becomes not possible it's like
we're gonna get back to earth everyone is working towards,
the same thing.
No one's ever like, should we just roll over and die now?
Or should we just let them float off into space?
Like there's never even, there's moments of doubt as to whether they can solve the problem.
But not what the underlying values of any of these characters.
There's one tiny thing where because Ken Mattingly, the character,
Sinise's character was on the crew originally, they thought he might have measles.
He was bumped from the crew and replaced with Sweet and Kevin Bacon playing Jack Swigert.
And Jim Lovell, the Tom Hanks character, there was like a lack of trust there.
And by the end, he gets into the pilot seat and then realizes he's in the wrong
seat and gives it back to Jack.
Just stole my observation.
Just re-edit it, do a voiceover, do a pickup, it's fine.
You had a better, broader observation that hopefully there are more examples
of, which is the only thing to keep people riveted in this story is then the
emotional events. What is left?
That is the primary emotional arc of the second act, right, is the relationship
between Jack and Jim, right?
So when the original pilot is kind of put on sick leave, Kevin Bacon's character,
Jack, is promoted from the backup team to be the prime team.
And the others don't trust him because they're a tight-knit team.
It's a strong term. I think they obviously they're trusting him enough to go
up into space with him, but I think they certainly don't prefer him.
And they don't there's the chemistry isn't there that they haven't developed
that sort of shorthand with each other and that comfort. They're not comfortable with him.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's kind of unsaid that or like tacit that either
you go up with Jack or you're not going up at all.
Oh, I think it's I think it's pretty much set up.
You want to break up my crew two days before the launch?
When we can predict each other's moves, when we can read the tone of each other's voices.
Ken Mattingly will be getting seriously ill precisely when you and Haise will
be ascending from the lunar surface to rendezvous with him. Jim,
that's a lousy time for a fever.
Now, look, Jack Swigert has been out of the loop for weeks. He's fully qualified to fly this mission.
He's a fine pilot, but when was the last time he was in a simulator?
I'm sorry, Jim, I understand how you feel. Now, we can do one of two things here.
We can either scrub Mattingly and go with Swigert, Or we can bump all three
of you to a later mission.
I've trained for the Fra Mauro Highlands. And this is flight surgeon horseshit, Deke.
Jim, if you hold out for Ken, you will not be on Apollo 13.
It's your decision.
It's pretty explicit. And then later, Jim, when he has to tell Ken that he can't
go, says it was his call, which is interesting, taking that responsibility.
You sure about this, Jim? I mean, why don't I go upstairs and talk to Deke?
I'm sure we can work this out.
This was my call. Must have been a tough one.
Look, I don't have the measles.
I'm not going to get the measles.
The point is, like, they are distant.
Yes.
They are distant, right? And part of the differences of values,
as the show pitches it, is that when we first meet Jim, he's,
with his family and his wife at his house, and so are the other astronauts except
Jack, Kevin Bacon's character, who's been pretty explicit with a guest there, right?
So the fact that Jack is a bachelor and they hang the hat on it is a point of
difference between the others.
I don't think it's explicit, but the whole thing is Jim wants to go back to
home, his wife, his family, all those things is a big drive, right?
But that Jack not being a family man is, and probably in the context of the
1950s, is actually probably enough to keep them distance.
So the second act is them coming together.
The low point and I'm pretty sure it's the low point is when jack
fred which is the little paxton character and jim all have a kind of argument
between us the tensions are rising that they're losing their shit which is something
that's actually pretty rare for astronauts,
and then they hang and then they go it's the carbon dioxide but it's enough
for them to kind of justify airing their,
dirty laundry listen.
Listen listen they gave us too much delta v they had us burned too long.
At this rate, we're going to skip right out of the atmosphere and we're never going to get back.
What are you talking about? How did you figure that? I can add.
Jack, they've got half the PhDs on the planet working on this thing.
Houston says they're right on the money. And what if they had made a mistake,
all right, and there was no way to reverse it? Do you think they would tell us?
There's no reason for them to tell us. What do you mean they're not going to
tell us? That's bullshit. All right, there's a thousand things that have to
happen in order. We are on number eight.
You're talking about number 692. And in the meantime, I'm trying to tell you
we're coming in too fast. I think they know it, and I think that's why we don't
have a goddamn re-entry plan. That's duly noted. Thank you, Jack.
Ow! God damn it! Hey! This piece of shit's gonna get you home.
All right. That's because that's the only thing we got left, Jack.
What are you saying, Fred? I think you know what I'm saying. Now, wait a minute.
All I did was stir those tanks. What was that gauge reading before you hit the
switch? You don't tell me how to fly the damn CM, all right?
You don't even know, do you? They do a job, they ask me to stir the damn tanks,
and I stir the tanks! Jack, stop kicking yourself in the ass.
This is not my fault! No one is saying it is.
If I'm in the left-hand seat, when the call comes up, I stir the tanks.
Yeah, well, tell him that. I just asked you what the gauge is reading.
And you don't know! All right, look, we're not doing this, gentlemen, we are not
going to do this, we're not going to go bouncing off the walls for 10 minutes
because we're just going to end up right back here with the same problems trying
to figure out how to stay alive,
and then after they build a contraption that literally puts a square peg.
Into a round hole and the CO2 levels go down.
Deacon, the CO2 level has dropped to nine and it is still falling,
yes, good job, that is good to hear, Aquarius.
And then it's resolved and then that relationship is brought together and then it's dramatized so,
but I just want to because I'm saying that's the relationship arc of the second
one the relationship the emotional arc or the emotional event of the first act
from I'm saying is Jim's wife right who,
Marilyn is her name.
And Marilyn is basically like, I'm not going to go to the launch.
I've been to enough of them. And then she turns up.
It's just a wobble the same as Moana has a wobble.
Yeah.
Nonetheless, I think it's a wobble, but I think it's presented as a plot or
a character question for the audience. Will she go?
And it's not a wobble because it's not just in a scene. It's like at least 15
minutes before we get the answer to that question of whether she's turning up.
Sure, but that's just because of how they portray time. You know what I mean?
No, but I think that's important. It's a conscious choice in structuring this
to, in the absence of change, they're having to create little bits of character
arcs, which are all about characters further apart, characters coming together.
Right I still like they do make the point that she's been to four of them and
she's emotionally overwhelmed by the fact that they've moved this up she has
three children that they're having issues with that she's having to take care of etc,
and so like I think the fact that she's been to the first four and shows up
to the fifth one even though she has a wobble is saying that she is steadfast
right like yes they create tension with it yeah but I don't think that it's a positive arc But.
I'm not saying it's a, arc is the wrong word. I'm saying there's an emotional,
there's an emotional event there.
That I totally agree with.
I'm saying that this film is structured. So let me rephrase.
I think this film is more structured around emotional events than it is around character arcs.
And that's what makes up for the fact that there's no actual change.
And there are some characters like Ed Harris, right? Who's obviously like failure
is not an option, blah, blah, blah, blah.
But the other people around him kind of move in and away from him.
They're presented a problem. Like, there's a lot of plot questions,
right? Which are not arcs, but not emotional events. But they are like,
can you solve this thing? And the answer is yes.
But I think some of these definitely have-
kind of portrayed as emotional events. Even the relationship between Ken,
which is the Gary Sinise.
Yes.
Ken Mattingly.
Gary Sinise. Yeah. And what's the name of the guy, the NASA guy who worries
about the power? I can't remember the name of that character.
Consumables manager, Sy Liebergot. I've got the Wikipedia. I did not pull that out of my ass.
What a great title.
His character is the journey or the moment that stayed with me the most from,
repeat watchings of the film because,
these characters, it's really well established at the beginning,
all they fucking care about is getting on the moon, right?
Like these astronauts that's all they care about and at the last minute his like the day before,
his or days before his Ken's dream is snatched away from him,
and Sy goes and wakes him up and from a drunken bender where he's depressed
so there is a very huge external event a trauma that happens to Ken's character and he you know,
sinks into his depression but the moment they need him,
he is there right he,
gets up gets dressed starts working the problem and the problem being they have
only 10 amps of power and they need to start up the the Odyssey for re-entry into earth and And he,
the one nod, the one bit of sort of grumpiness he allows himself is he,
when he shows up, when he's talking to Jim,
when he's giving the instructions to Apollo 13 as to how to fire the ship back
up, my memory is, like, he says he still doesn't have the flu.
Oh, he doesn't have the measles.
Like, doesn't have a temperature, right? Like, the measles aren't coming on. Okay.
Yeah, we read you, Ken.
Are the flowers blooming in Houston? That's a negative, Jim.
I don't have the measles.
Yeah, yeah.
So, and look, but I think this is what's interesting. What we're talking about
here is he kind of weirdly has an emotional event that he moves from being distant.
He's literally kicked out of NASA.
He's on the outside.
Takes his phone off the hook, like doesn't want to connect. Yep.
And then ends up being in the control room on the phone with him as they're landing.
He literally starts from further away and comes together. That is an emotional
event in the language that we've used with the Judith question.
And so I'm like, I understand that. There's not really, as you say,
there's a wobble when he kind of wallows in depression. But that is actually
still resolved fairly quickly.
But what it does is it's setting up the pattern, this move towards him getting
closer to NASA and the crew, like, you know.
I mean, watching this film just makes me want to re-listen to our episodes on
raising different kinds of stakes where we were analyzing these films where
you know the plot outcome and how does it raise.
And you've identified they've managed to raise emotional stakes without having any fundamental arc.
And I think portraying people in incredible circumstances, there's this human
curiosity of how would I react? How are you going to react? Obviously,
there's also a literal puzzle, right, with figure out how to fit these filters
together and you're going, how are they going to do that?
But there's emotionally, they're not able to sleep. This is,
you know, life or death. They're transmitting live to their family and,
you know, the news anchors are dramatizing it, right? And his wife sitting there
trying to talk to the kids.
How would I respond in these extraordinary circumstances? And that,
yes, there's emotional events, but there's also emotional tension.
The emotional event we're talking specifically in the Judith Weston thing is
that's when that changes, right? And we're kind of talking about the tension
or the movement towards change. And so maybe emotional tension is a good way of thinking about that.
I just find it really, I'm finding it really useful because I'm like,
okay, this is not quite plotting, but it gives me some structure.
Like I understand kind of what's driving a little bit of the emotion of the, of the first act.
And I'm understanding the, the second act. And I can even see how Fred,
uh, Ken's journey starts earlier and that leads us right until splashdown, right?
Cause that it's a plot question, which is, well, Ken work it out in time for them to be able to land.
But there's also, is, is that journey towards, is, is that journey towards being
closer, being brought close to the, the, the crew that he's been kicked out
of that helps kind of us feel. feel like there's some movement there.
Yeah.
Certainly for him to feel like there's some movement there.
Definitely. I mean-
We deliberately chose a disaster film because they're almost inherent,
because they have such large external stakes,
they almost always require some form of steadfast arc.
It's like, at what point do we give up? Do we keep trying to live or not?
Some characters in these films do self-sacrifice.
Some are, you know, the external trauma does bring about character change,
but that's usually in films where the disaster's at the kind of beginning.
I think a lot of disaster films are a pause, like War of the Worlds,
for example, right? The entire thing is having a positive character,
having a massive change and positive character arc.
Because I think a lot of the time we want to see how people...
Are forced into a situation where they have to change.
Either to survive.
Or for their children or whatever whereas yeah I think a lot of other disaster
films they they do remain steadfast but I think a lot of them create this positive
arc or you know negative arc and then you die uh in a lot of cases.
Yeah Stu and I we've done it on the podcast and and it's a film that we really
love we did it in antagonist versus nature antagonist with the gray right and
that is just a bunch of men trying to not get eaten by wolves and eventually
they all get eaten by wolves until the last one is also going to get eaten by
a wolf but it ends positively because he's still fighting,
right that is he's steadfast throughout the whole thing he doesn't for someone who was,
contemplating suicide at the
beginning of the film this traumatic experience even though he might die,
will bring that sort of positive change and then the flip side of that we which we've also done is the,
the robert redford sailing one all is lost is that what the title was yep where
it's a guy just like continually trying to survive and then for hours of movie
and then the last minute of the movie is him giving up and just going to sink into the ocean
and die and then he's rescued,
so The whole film is like, what does it take to make Robert Redford give up on life?
This is what it took, and now we'll save him.
Well, some people have argued that that was kind of like a dream.
So, here's the interesting thing with Apollo 13, because we've talked about
the emotional event in Moana between the characters and themselves.
There's like a change in relationship with yourself.
Any of these characters have a change in relationship with himself?
Does Jim feel like he's moving closer to his sense of identity?
If anything, he just feels like he's accepting that he's never going to go to the moon.
And I don't even know if he does accept that. Like, I don't believe that Jim
Lovell, as a person, stopped wanting to go to the moon despite this experience.
I mean, did Jim Lovell go on more missions after this? I'm now going to go to the moon.
He did not.
Yeah.
The title cards that pop up at the end of the film, I think that was his last,
I believe that was his last mission. I believe the only person,
I might be misremembering the title card drawing.
I think Jack Swigert did, but I don't think anyone else did.
I might be misremembering. But no, Jim Lovell never went to the moon.
And I think there's a difference, there's an interesting distinction between
would he ever stop wanting it? Absolutely not.
But would he finally accept that it's not going to happen? Those are two very different things.
Yeah.
I think you can accept that it's not going to happen and embrace the yearning
and say, okay, and yet that's out of my reach.
But yeah, I think his whole thing coming with,
you know, the tensions with his family and the tensions with like at some point
you attempting to do this despite like literally freak accidents and almost
dying in space and being like the first,
you know, Apollo mission to ever lose members, etc.
Is going to tear you and your family apart.
Like at some point, there has to be, I think he comes to that understanding.
As a character, I don't know about as a person, but I think what the film is
dramatizing is that he comes to that understanding that this was his last shot,
if he wants to maintain his family situation.
Yeah, and maybe that is a very, very slight arc for him.
It's acceptance. And it's also, he could have gone to the moon, right, on this mission.
Yeah.
And so he has to accept that this was his last shot.
Well, you know, his wife kind of wants him to stop risking his life to get to the moon, right?
And so by the end of it, has he moved to that position where he's going to stop
risking his life trying to get to the moon?
And it's not just risking his life. It's risking his life. It's canceling the
family vacations. It's not being there for his children who are coming of age.
It's all of those things.
Yes. So maybe there is a very, very slight...
Acceptance, yeah.
Change in values. Yeah.
I think he's realized that the clock has run out.
I'm going to stop at nothing until I get to the moon at the beginning of the,
film to accepting that there may be more important things in his life than getting to the moon.
And this is a change if it happens. It happens really freaking late.
And does it even happen? The fact that we're kind of debating it,
I don't think the film is trying to make it a point.
It's kind of done in the title card.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I mean, and we're inferring it from a title card.
They're not- Yeah, he's forced into it, essentially.
He doesn't have a moment with his wife where he says, I'm never going up there again. You're my moon.
The three words every wife longs to hear.
I mean, maybe that's a useful point for us to go into the questions for Apollo 13. All right.
Yeah.
This is an interesting one. Does the audience enter the story with an expectation
that there will be change?
I think given the audience knows, is likely to know the plot of what they're
going into in relation to Apollo 13, I think they will expect some kind of change.
Character change. Yeah. Or more of a steadfast story where it's like they defy
all odds, you know, like a steadfast in their belief that they can survive and they do it, right?
I agree. I do think you come in there.
The audience knows there's going to be trauma.
So much trauma.
So how does the film teach us to expect the characters to change?
You guys have watched it more recently than I have. What does the setup do to
tell us about these characters?
I think it I mean, especially for Jim, I think it tells you like this guy is
he says what he means and he does what he says. And he's very straight arrow
and he's not going to change. And that is positive.
Like, it demonstrates that with, you know, his interaction. His wife knows exactly,
like, the moment he announces, by the way, she knows exactly what he's going
to do because that is who he is and that is what is always done.
And I think it demonstrates that they are very, you know, they have one,
exactly like Moana. They have one goal. Hers is the sea. Theirs is the moon.
And they are going to reach that goal. Ta-da! Uh, and I think,
I think it sets you up for that in the first, you know, again,
sort of 20 minutes, which cover several weeks of time.
I think there's a bit of dad core to it.
A bit?
Just a tiny hint.
The most dad core movie to ever dad core.
No, that's taken. Uh, I, I'm, I'm sure there's dad core before taken,
but to me it's the prototypical.
At least there's more, there are literally more women speaking roles in taken than in this movie.
Uh, yeah. Yeah. Women can't go to space. How do they pee?
How many tampons did they send in space with the first female astronauts?
It's just like three years worth or something.
Yeah, insane. Also, there's a very technical answer to that,
but we're not going into that.
Yeah. All right. So, in Taken, the whole thing is his wife and his daughter
and stuff, They don't respect him, okay, in the first act of the film.
And then the whole second act of the film is about him doing the thing,
and then they come to go, oh, you're actually awesome.
It's arc of awesome stuff, right? And in some ways, I don't think this, again, turns it up to 11.
It's doing a lot of little stuff, this film, I think, rather than one big thing,
is that the family does seem, you know, disinterested in going.
Even his daughter doesn't want to go, right? And, and, and then once he's,
his life's under threat, then they give a shit.
America starts to give a shit when they're under, under, under immediate threat.
And the subtext may be that it was always dangerous. We got pretty,
we just got pretty good at it.
And so people stopped caring. Right.
And so I think that's a thread of it. And in terms of the setup,
their family's kind of disconnect from what he's doing is important.
Because I think if there is an arc, it is that.
I just think the fact that it's basically an arc that is the flip happens in
the end credits, basically, shows how disinterested they are in it.
Yeah. I think that's fair because,
you know, what the film is teaching us about the arc is perhaps just the amount
of time in that first act that is spent with Marilyn and Jim in that relationship is, yeah.
So, did the characters change? Was it experiential change or internal value change?
How is that dramatized? well we've discussed that we don't think there's much,
values or internal change but there that that there's lots of emotional events a lots of I mean,
there's no characters that are not more intimate with each other at the end
of the film than at the beginning is that fair to say,
so there are some that during the first act become more distant like Ken is
ejected from NASA, Jim and Marilyn are, you know, struggling with his decision to go
so then these they're I feel like all the relationships are made more intimate,
if there is a change when does it happen well we've just discussed that if there
is a change it happens in the title card but after the movie is ended is the
character aware that they've changed we don't know because we don't see them experience it.
How does the film want you to feel about that change I don't think the film
gives a shit about the internal value changes.
None of this, like, this is a five-star movie for me, which I'm finding fascinating
that this whole aspect of storytelling is seemingly compensated for by using other tools.
I find that very interesting.
I mean, you could argue that there is a change for Jim when they basically get
to the moon and he goes, I just want to go home.
Right? That there is a version that for someone who is so adamant from running
away from home that roughly in the middle of the film, I don't have it up,
goes, like, his biggest emotional need is to just go home.
Yeah, but because the other option is to die in space and kill his crew.
Like there's no.
You could go to the moon or you could go home and like there's more risk it is.
Yeah yeah obviously he wants.
That but the alternative is you know vacuum death.
We'll probably excerpt that little speech and see how the audience feels about it,
how does the story world punish or reward being steadfast they live well everyone
succeeds in their objective by not allowing failure to be an option,
and.
It works because Ed Harris says it god damn.
It yeah what are the values explored by the arc how does this relate to the
theme I think this is an interesting question for this film like what does you know,
it's very similar to my to both The Martian and- Actually, The Martian and Hail
Mary are very interesting-
comparisons because in some ways they're very similar stories but in one there's
a steadfast arc and one there is a very significant positive arc and it changes
the the feeling of the story.
Yeah because one of them has a big rock to talk to and the other one.
Doesn't speaking.
Of character journeys and rocks.
But I'm just saying there is a significant emotional different emotional effect
in seeing a steadfast arc in this it's not like the martian is more ostensibly I feel about and and,
Project Hail Mary as well is like talking about the success of science in 95 I guess
we weren't doubting science as much so it's not trying to overtly posit science
as an answer to anything it's more I don't know what what is that what are the.
I would argue that the theme of this film is American exceptionalism, right?
And look, but also not quite. I walk that back because they're very clear early
on that people died literally on the launch pad, right? Horribly.
And in some ways, this is the journey towards this being successful.
I mean, that's what I say. I feel like there's lots of little things going on
because in some ways, this is one of the final missions to space before we decided
it was all getting too risky, but I say it's American exceptionalism.
But I wonder if that's colored by modern readings.
I think it's less American exceptionalism as an overall thing,
and it is the individual...
Yeah, because when the main team finds out that they're being bumped up from
Apollo 14 mission to Apollo 13 and they go and practice in the simulator,
they get it right, but they barely get it right.
And they come out and the backup team's going into practice and Jim's like,
actually, not Jim, sorry, Ken's like, you know what, I need to go again.
I need to get it really right and not just barely right.
And they turn around and they're like, all right, we're going back in.
And then again, later when they're up there and Ken comes back and they're saying,
oh, you know, you get in the simulator and try to figure out what's happening
so that we can get it down to, you know, 10 amps.
And he's like, OK, give me a flashlight and a hand. He's like,
no, only exactly what they have there.
I'm going to do it exactly right. I need to get this perfect.
And the exceptionalism is on an individual level. If you are doing something
as big as going to the moon, you have to do it exactly right.
Close enough is not good enough. And that's why they get back.
That's why they live is because they treated it that way from the beginning.
Anything, failure is not an option, is only possible when humans are exceptional.
Yeah, it's funny because I've known a few people to have worked with Ron Howard
and I'm curious what he's like.
And everyone says he's lovely. Like, he's lovely, he's really friendly,
he knows people's names.
And he's not a hard-ass, but there's just something about him that just means,
like, he's a bit of a perfectionist.
And he just lifts everyone up or drags everyone up to these sets of perfectionism
that they just want to do it right because it's Ron Howard.
And I feel like in some ways you're talking about exactly that,
the kind of people that are like, this just has to be done properly.
I mean, they have to do it properly because otherwise they will die.
Stakes are really high, unlike a podcast.
So, how is contrast versus affinity portrayed through the journey?
I mean, the contrast to affinity, I mean, I think on an aesthetic level,
they do an incredible job of
the movement with light, when they get colder and colder in the darkness.
Like, there is a real visual story in that.
In terms of the contrast and affinity, I would have to break it down,
but I do think there's probably some stuff in the visual language they use around
the characters and how they shoot them.
I think that's probably in there, but I can't think of it now. Good question, though.
I mean, to me, it's interesting. If we're talking about exploring the themes
of failure versus exceptionalism, the fact is that they did fail.
There is a deep exploration of, you know, it was a mechanical failure.
All these, you know, all these superminds.
And it was a very standard operation that almost ruined this whole life.
It was stirring of an oxygen tank led to it exploding.
I mean, almost all the major space failures have been from small things like
that, like a piece of foam coming off during the launch and,
you know, stirring the oxygen tank.
And then, you know, there's no way to guarantee safety, only your response to it.
And they do set up, again, like Jim and Marilyn's relationship is all about,
like, she has that dream, her fear.
The film opens with them all seeing the moon landing and seeing the triumph,
the outcome that these other people want and are aiming for. I don't know.
There is I feel like it's possibly the contrast and affinity in this film is
only being played out through plotting where it's,
superbly well micro plotted both at a scene level but also like questions like
something's gone wrong what is it that's gone wrong how do we live all right
how do we keep them alive while we're trying to figure out this other problem how do we get the,
filters working all right how do we power it up all these uh,
very clever micro questions and I think it's going the the contrast is there
is a problem working the problem finding a solution and then there's another
problem again so it is moving the other words that you used is order disorder and inertia,
and it's probably in the inertia moments where a lot of the emotional events
are when they're either trying to work the problem or they're sitting waiting for the solution.
It's not only when they get all tetchy with each other. I feel like that's the
plot not advancing, so they kind of need to have a little bit of tension there.
But again, I feel like it's structurally important because it kind of allows
there to be the setup for the –,
the moving together of Jim and Jack.
Yeah. So what is the emotional event created between the characters and us as
the audience as a result of the journey?
I mean, I think I feel closer to them. I mean, I saw Bill Paxton flow up.
Very human response.
Yeah. So this last question is kind of like almost any film,
a film would have to work really hard if you've sat with it,
with the characters over a period of time and not feel more intimate with them.
It would be quite a deliberate choice. And maybe we'll find more of that when
we're doing negative arcs and also like the conflict ones where the arcs are
different to what the film wants you to feel.
Okay. We ready for the dressmaker?
Born ready.
Mm-hmm.
Is that Myrtle Dunnage you grew up?
You got old. Myrtle Dunnage is back. Haven't seen her since she was a kid.
I wonder how she turned out.
She's back!
Mum, I need to remember the truth. They say that she killed a boy.
So where did you go from here? I worked here for London. Milan.
Paris. As a designer. I reckon you came home for one of two things. Revenge or me.
You can transform people.
That's very powerful. Use it.
Gertrude Pratt, the dance is Saturday night. I could make you something.
A dress can't change anything. Watch and learn Gert, watch and learn.
I can make you the most striking girl in the room. Take your clothes off.
A murderer and a lesbian.
I think Tilly understands my particular body shape. She certainly does.
Go on, make them their dresses. Make them think they're classy. They'll still hate you.
She murdered him. She's cursed. They'll never forgive me. Why didn't you tell me?
You could be married in this suit. Snapped up by some eligible spinster or hag. Trousers off too? Yes.
Okay. So, The Dressmaker is an Australian film, which was released in 2015.
It's co-written and directed by Jocelyn Moorhouse.
Also written with PJ Hogan based on the book I think by Rosalie Ham and it
is set somewhat delightfully in a,
regional Australian town in 1926 and the inciting incident is the return of
Myrtle Dunnage back to this town,
and it turns out that Myrtle was held responsible,
by the town,
for the death of.
A young boy, Stuart, when she was a girl.
When she was 10 years old, a boy died. His name was Stuart.
He was the son of the leader, the mayor, and everyone in the town blamed Myrtle for this death.
She was sent away. Her mother is an only child. She was called,
labeled as a bastard by people in the town.
And she returns having lived all around the world Like Paris and Milan and London,
And is an incredibly talented dressmaker And as she returns,
she returns to care for her mother Who's living in squalor and potentially has
some kind of dementia And,
So she comes, returns to Dungatar to care for her mother, but her presence in
the town starts changing and challenging preconceived ideas.
And it culminates in Myrtle, she falls in love, and her love played by Liam
Hemsworth, his name's Teddy, I think, and he dies.
And someone literally says, I think it's Myrtle's mother says,
Teddy died trying to prove that his love was stronger than the town's hate for Myrtle.
It was you lot killed Teddy. He died trying to prove his love for her was stronger than your hate.
Anyone had died trying to prove that?
So it's pretty overt in the language there.
Nothing about this film is subtle. It's complimentary.
Drape the film yeah the film culminates in Myrtle being back on the train on
which she came but the town is burning down she has burnt the town down and,
Sue suggested this as steadfast I almost at the low point of the film sent Sue
a message saying this is not a steadfast film this is a positive arc.
I think it's a steadfast film. I still do.
And then it is at that lowest point that the story world punishes her so dramatically
that it reinforces and puts her back into the mental position that she was at
the beginning of the film.
Namely, there's a running story about her or the commentary about her being cursed.
She believes that she's cursed because not only did Stuart die she reveals at
some point that she's lost a child in the intervening years and she is,
comes back to Dungatar. And this is going to be really important for me in discussing
this film, is that when Myrtle comes back, and I want to ask you guys this,
I want to talk about what Myrtle's plan is.
Because I think in the absence of her saying a really overt plan or what her
objectives in coming back to Dungatar is what,
in a weird kind of way, also reinforces that it's closer to a steadfast film
I'm going to disagree with you mel because I think in the final voiceover where
the final voiceover is her saying I'm no longer cursed
it is hard to think of.
That's not the final voiceover the final line of the film is you never met the
rubbish which echoes which.
Is yes the fine it's the final voiceover.
She's steadfast because her first line of the film is, I'm back,
you bastards, and her last line is, you never met the rubbish.
She thinks the exact same thing about them that she thought at the beginning,
and she was there to take out the trash, and she took out the trash.
Fire someplace? Yes. Down the town. Burning off rubbish, were they?
Looks like they overdid it.
I don't think she's there to take out the trash. And this is why I somewhat
disagree with you. All right.
So when Myrtle arrives in Dungatar...
And point of order, real quick, I'm going to call her Tilly.
And I think that that is a point that the film also makes. That she constantly,
a lot of the townspeople call her Myrtle, and she continually tries to insist they call her Tilly.
Teddy is the first person who, as soon as she corrects him, he adjusts and he
always calls her that. But like, so Tilly and Myrtle interchangeable as characters.
Let's call her Tilly. Yes. played by Kate Winslet like to be clear I think this
is a really wonderful film that I hadn't seen before this week so thank you Stu for
for choosing it but in order to establish the character pattern and whether
there's an arc I want to talk about where Tilly is when she arrives at the beginning of the film,
what do you guys think Tilly's objectives are you're absolutely correct that
she stands and looks out at the town and says I'm back you bastards.
I'm back You bastards.
But do you think, Mel, in terms of Steadfast, that her objective in arriving
back at the town is to burn it to the ground and take bloody revenge?
I think her objectives are essentially twofold. Her objective is she's there
to take care of her mother, and that is explicitly stated.
Yeah.
I don't know why you've come to this hole. There's nothing here. I came because...
I need you to remember me, Mom. Mom? I need you to remember so I can remember. Remember what?
Being my daughter.
That too. Fat chance.
And that she does. She does that until her mother passes away and she's taking
care of her until the end. And like their relationship shifts a little,
but I think that's more to do with her mother. But she's there to take care of her mother.
And in doing so, she wants to give a giant middle finger to the town because
she has no choice but to interact with them because her mother's not about to go anywhere.
But she wants to show them, look at what I've managed to make of myself. Fuck you.
And so those are essentially her two objectives.
I am going to disagree with you.
I want to jump in here. And look, I don't want to weigh us down in a semantic
debate, but I think we're here.
But have you heard this podcast before?
There was something in your phrasing around like oh it's the absence of a goal
or her goal that establishes whether it's steadfast and look it could be but for me it's the,
part of the model of steadfast is that you don't change you change the world
around you and I think on a very like it's the squint test that's exactly what happens with Tilly I.
Mean on a very literal level as.
Well yeah yeah like like we can get into the detail of it and we should
but I'm like I've got no other framework of thinking of steadfast other than
like the it's the rock that pushes through softer rock uh,
you know and they you know it's it's not the water it's the hard thing that
makes other things change um and.
Yet again I must tragically inform you that Stu and I are in complete agreement.
So and I I just don't want to be like too specific about it because like,
I mean we can and we can start categorizing them we can and we can start categorizing
them there are people that have written like these are the 22 character arcs
that you can play this is a corruption but blah blah blah and if that is helpful great
but we're not spending if it's 22 episodes would be literally here for three
years going through every version of character arcs so let's not do that.
I think for me as well I very much I very much see this as a fairy tale I mean
it is a fairy tale it's a fairy tale and she is a fairy tale character who is sort of,
not that no fairy tale characters can have positive or negative arcs.
But I think a lot of fairytale characters, the point is the story around them
and how the world and how they deal with the magical things that come into their
life. And I think that's very much what she is as a type.
Yes. Yeah. I mean, I'm going to come, I'm going to be very clear on how Tilly
enters the story, because as I was watching it,
Through this lens, I kept coming back and wondering what Tilly's plan was.
And there is a point early on where Teddy says to her, what are you here for?
Are you here for bloody revenge? Right?
The characters and the film are seeding that she has come back to get revenge.
I've decided you didn't come home to help us win the grand final.
I reckon you came home for one of two things.
Bloody revenge or me.
Just so you know, both aren't out of the question.
Where I disagree with you, Mel, is yes, she's come back to look after her mother.
That I agree with. And I think in that relationship, she is steadfast.
They definitely have an emotional event where throughout the story,
they come together, right?
Partly because Tilly gets a lot more new information, but it doesn't change
who she is. It just gives her a lot of new information.
Yeah, but Tilly basically starts out with her mother, Molly,
with her mother not even recognizing who she is or acknowledging that she ever had a daughter.
Yeah, it's a bit debatable how much she recognizes her versus how much she's faking, but yes.
For sure. But that's where it starts out. And by the end of it,
they are mother and daughter united and loving, right?
Tilly achieves that by being steadfast. She only is there for her mother,
no matter how much her mother tries to push her away, no matter how much her
mother insults her, no matter what the town is doing, Tilly is, I'm back, you bastards.
No matter what you think of me, I'm going to look after my mother,
right? To my mind, that's how Tilly is steadfast.
But in terms of what Tilly wants to achieve for herself is she asked her mother
in that first scene at the night when she's arrived,
is that why I'm cursed am I a murderer so Tilly actually has a mystery to solve
because she can't remember as a 10 year old girl whether she is responsible
for Stewart's death or not.
Did I commit a murder,
what,
am I a murderer is that why I'm cursed you don't remember for committing a murder, no.
It's not something you're likely to forget. I know.
What if you are a murderer?
I wouldn't be in the least surprised.
And that is actually resolved before the low point of the film.
She figures out that she is not a murderer, that Stuart was a complete dumb
fuck who ran head on into a wall and broke his own neck.
Classic.
So...
That, to me, were her two objectives. She didn't want bloody murder.
She did not want to change the town.
She did not give a fuck what happened to the town. She was going to be steadfast in not caring.
No, she didn't want to change the town. But I think that the best revenge is
a life well lived. And she wanted revenge in showing that. And her method of
getting revenge changed.
Yeah, that's a good distinction.
So I might agree with you then that she has three objectives. because I think I will.
Yes, she had the mystery to solve as well. So three objectives.
But I also think she wanted revenge. It was the method that changed of getting it.
But I want to track Tilly's relationship to herself, right? She comes in saying, am I cursed?
I have lost a child. My own mother doesn't recognize me. I don't know if I'm
a murderer or not, right?
In relation to that, she learns that she's not a murderer she,
the most of her internal character journey is dramatized by whether she lets Teddy,
love her and whether she will reciprocate that love or not she kisses him and
then rejects him saying I'm cursed ultimately gives in shags his beautiful brains out,
they end up on top of a silo and,
he is saying to her, unless you say I'm not cursed,
I'm going to jump into this silo, which we've already established he jumps into it before.
It's like a, uh, a dare.
And sadly, Teddy jumps into the silo.
She's refusing to say that she's not cursed. He jumps into the silo and she
then says, screams out loud, I'm not cursed. Are you happy, Teddy? I'm not cursed.
Please,
Teddy don't no no no no no I am no longer cursed please don't Teddy inside okay,
Teddy,
It's very funny. Teddy?
All right, I'll say it. Teddy. I,
am no longer cur- I am no longer cursed! There is no curse. Teddy.
Teddy?
Teddy?
Teddy? Teddy?
Somebody help me. Teddy.
Teddy. Help me, somebody. Teddy.
But what has happened is Teddy didn't know that there was sorghum in the silo,
not wheat, and he drowns and dies.
And thus, when she was screaming out, I'm not cursed, I was thinking of texting
Stu, this is clearly a positive arc. She goes from thinking,
I'm cursed, I'm not cursed. And then.
She's kind of doing it under duress as well, but yes.
And then I'm like, oh, Stu was right because this story punishes her for even
thinking that she's not cursed. Immediately.
Right? With the worst possible thing that happens on screen.
Probably, I don't know, don't want to weigh up whether losing a child was worse
for her than losing Teddy.
We don't see her losing the child. It's just mentioned that it happens off screen.
Um but immediately and she falls into depression and what's interesting there
is that that's when her mum becomes active and her mum says I have a plan to do to,
get revenge on all these people Molly is the one who wants revenge and Molly
is the one who sets it up she signs up,
Tilly to be the dressmaker for the competing town Molly overdoses the local
her old friend in town with weed so that the chemist dies.
All of those things are just escalating something that Tilly had already tried.
Tilly had already been giving the weed-laced brownies. Tilly had already been
doing the costumes as an attempt to do that. It just hadn't succeeded yet.
But she was not trying to get revenge with those things.
She was, just the revenge of a life well-lived.
Sure.
Like, yeah.
And this is where I think there is change because in that final act,
Tilly changes, you might be correct in the semantic distinction of,
she changes her method of trying to achieve revenge, right? So maybe you're correct on that.
Yeah, I think it's a method and an escalation because it didn't work before.
But I feel that as she's leaving, there is a line in voiceover that we'll excerpt
saying, I'm no longer cursed.
Tilly Dunnage. Bitch!
They're very good.
Is no longer cursed.
As the person who just did the excerpt, two things to note.
One, it may be a little bit hard to understand what's going on because Tilly
says this line as part of a montage where we're intercutting with the Gilbert
and Sullivan musical Mikado, Mikado?
Mikado or Mikado?
And the second thing is it's not voiceover at all she's saying it as a line
of dialogue and I would actually argue it's a form of addressing the audience,
she almost looks down the barrel of the camera as she says it so take of that what you will.
So I think there is, the film tells us, and maybe it wasn't in,
maybe it wasn't dramatized, maybe because.
Because she got rid of the town.
Sure. But that was not her objective coming into the film.
Coming into the film was, I'm going to live a life well lived.
The end of the film is, I burnt this place to the ground and I'm fucking happy
and I'm liberated. How is that not.
Yeah, I still think her objective is revenge. And it's just she tried it for
a while and she couldn't find it. And so her mother gave her a new route, a new escalated way.
I think this is an example of a negative reward or, to be more precise,
a subtractive reward in two ways.
And also there's a subtractive finding.
One, she is unburdened of the belief that she killed Stewart, right?
That is removed for her. That's not a gain. The gain should have been Teddy, but that is taken away.
Removing the town itself and the impact on the town is a negative reward.
It is taking away the ghosts of her past, right? Whether it's her mother,
the town, the belief that she was a murderer, right? That is why we're feeling
that she's liberated because she is losing the chains.
And so, you could argue that- and I'm okay for you to argue that there is character
change. I think the reason it feels steadfast is because she's not gaining something
as much as she's having things taken away for her. In the same way that,
Leia's- Leia, like, no longer being confined doesn't quite feel the same as getting a medal.
And I think these are just subtle things, right? Like, we know positive reward is good-
But positive punishment isn't.
And I think you're also correct that what we're talking about here is a real
difference between dramatization.
What are the actions we see Tilly taking as against what she is saying in dialogue
and thirdly in voiceover?
Because I don't think those three things are aligned. So, Mel,
I think you're correctly focusing on what are the actions that Tilly is doing,
and the choices that she's making.
And those seem to be the same choices throughout the entire film.
If she was presented with those choices would likely make them again, like continually.
So from that point of view, I think you're right that she is steadfast in her
decision making and that represents a value change.
It was just that tracking of the curse line and maybe because it's done in voiceover,
and that she feels that she has taken out the trash, that she is a different
person at the end of the film for,
not carrying the guilt of Stuart's death.
Not needing to care for her mother, having resolved her relationship with her mother.
And then I would have agreed that it was steadfast if it wasn't for that freaking
voiceover. And maybe that was
a decision they made right late in post-production to change something.
Something's not clear. We should ask Stu, who I'm sure is listening to this podcast right now.
Oh my God.
I worked with Jocelyn, so I'll just email her.
Yeah. I will say something. Okay.
So, and I want to sidebar for a second, go off on a tangent,
but I do think it's related to Steadfast overall.
And that is that I'd seen this film before a few times, and I'd never until
this time through noticed how strong of a correlation there is between this
film and Grey Gardens. Now, by that, I mean the documentary.
I have not seen, actually, they're in narrative fiction.
But- Not Melbourne in winter.
Grey Gardens is, I think, the relationship of Molly and
Tilly- Especially in the first meeting, especially in the way their house is
represented, especially in literally some of the shots of the house and some
of the, well, like when she's putting her mother into the bath and all these sorts of things.
I'm just looking at the poster now.
Incredibly. Oh yeah. Literally some shots of the house from the exterior as
well. And, and that, uh, the tree of mirrors. And when he goes out there and
you've got all the like gnarly sort of foliage around it. I'm like,
this is a very intentional, homage is too strong of a word, but reference to Grey Gardens.
And Grey Gardens is really interesting because it's a documentary where the
characters are steadfast.
And the documentary asks you, is that for good or not?
And it kind of doesn't answer it. Now, I think there have been a lot of people
throughout the years that have argued, you know, maybe they should have,
the documentary maker should have done X or the documentary.
That's, I mean, it's become its own cultural thing. But if you simply watch the documentary...
It is, these are two characters who are steadfast, do not change.
They are sure some of their actions change when forced to interact further with
the outside world via the documentary, sort of the Heisenberg principle.
You can't observe something without changing it, right?
But they are steadfast. And seeing how these two characters are very clearly modeled.
When they start interacting with each other first is super fascinating.
And I think very intentional as well.
And a commentary on people's,
need to give themselves, to build themselves this psychic safety network and remain,
intently, I mean, for lack of a better word, steadfast within it as a sort of
protection mechanism for better or worse.
And sometimes it's both in different ways, but it is a protective mechanism.
And if you haven't seen Grey Gardens, I think it's a really fascinating watch.
And I think of all the documentaries that we could think of,
I think it would probably actually be the best sample of this if we had picked
a documentary to do for this episode.
Anyway, end of tangent.
I mean, it might be a good example for the conflict one where there's,
you know, what is the film, is the film saying something different to what the
characters are talking about? Yeah.
I mean, I think this is related, but I have been thinking while you talk, Mel, surprising.
Thank you for listening. Yeah.
I haven't seen Grey Gardens, so when we do it.
Thank you for talking for five minutes. It gave me a lot of time to ponder my own thoughts.
God, all you're just trying to do is come up with opening lines.
Mel.
You've got him drunk. You've got him drunk on your Meg 2 emission.
So, you know, we're talking about the relationships between people,
but also relationships between people and their past and their environment, right?
And the way that the town represents the past. And I'm saying that because,
of course, it does. Like, we are products of our environment.
Our environment includes our past, and our environment includes our social context, right?
And I do think that connects to the emotional events characters have with themselves, right?
Like, them beginning to learn the truth of themselves.
They move, like, I think there's journey, not just between toward,
like we're using distance and we've been using distance and intimacy as the
spectrum, but there is a movement from like a lie to truth in this, right?
People learning the truth, learning the, you know, revealing the truth of who they are.
So, like Horatio, the Hugo Weaving character, Farrat, like,
you know, his journey to kind of like deciding no longer to be cop after saying,
I'm a transvestite, etc., you know, that he's a cross-dresser.
He's a movement to truth, but he's punished in this world, right?
So, there's these movements between lies to truth and truth to lies that are
rewarded or punished within this quite complex social system.
And I wish I'd spent more time thinking about that before we started recording
this episode, because I think there's a lot in that with how the society works
in here, because it's very much got a bit of a pack mentality.
Well the like let's there's definite similarities to,
these other films from the steadfast arc perspective like if I'm saying there
is a change it is in an internal change for Tilly it is in voiceover in the
last minutes of the film and that's,
contrary potentially to what's been dramatized her.
Actual last line in the film.
What and I really I really appreciate mel the distinction between a change in
tactics versus a change in values or intent but it is it is why I'm asking the
question what do we think her intent was at the beginning of the film because I think,
that that you know what was the pattern but Tilly very much changes the world her,
the the town of Dungatar by her saying I'm gonna,
my revenge is gonna be a life well lived by bringing beauty to this very bitter
town everyone in this town when she arrives is bitter including her mother with
the possible exception of Teddy and his and his brother Barney,
And so, by Tilly bringing beauty into this film, I was really,
the thing that I most enjoyed out of the arcs in the film was the Sarah Snook character,
Gert, who is kind of looked down upon for being, you know, a frumpy,
unmarried young woman who's never going to attract the returning wealthy young
man, William, to the town.
And Tilly makes her address and makes her beautiful and makes her address just
in exchange for information.
Did you tell Stewart where I was that day in the schoolyard that Stewart came and accosted me?
And Gertrude is beautiful. She wins the man.
She becomes Team Tilly.
When the town tries to react to how Tilly is bringing beauty and rejuvenation
to the town the mayor hires another dressmaker to try and put Tilly out of business
but the other dressmaker is like very frumpy,
and conservative and no one likes her dresses like Gertrude chooses Tilly like
literally runs through the town wearing a frumpy dress gets into Tilly's house
takes it off and comes out wearing another stunning ball gown.
But as soon, what was.
Fascinating- This should have gotten more nominations for costume design.
I just want to put that out there. Continue.
And it's so wonderful. But then Gertrude becomes, rebrands herself as Trudy.
And once again, to your point, Mel, about the pack mentality,
she once again turns on Tilly and is very subtle and very gentle.
You just kind of realize, oh-
Gertrude is not grateful at all. Gertrude is not on Tilly's side at all.
She will do what benefits her. And as soon as being on Tilly's side puts her
at odds with the town and the pack mentality, Trudy chooses the town.
Like they again they blame her not just for Stewart's death but then Teddy's
death and they're all talking about Tilly and they say it would it would go
a long way if you designed our costumes for the Eisteddfod,
you know they're emotionally blackmailing Tilly so I was fascinated by that you know,
Tilly is changing the world around her you so you mentioned the Hugo Weaving
character Sergeant Farrat, Sergeant Farrat goes from he was the one who sent
drove Tilly off to boarding school when she was 10 years old Pixar like,
is the first person we meet other than Tilly in the town.
Is that Dior.
Yeah and he does immediately you know he's he's playing delightful Hugo Weaving
this is almost a character sequel to Priscilla um,
he not just in cross-dressing but just like his he's gentle and he's kind and he's loving,
but he was afraid of the town right and fearful for himself and Tilly's bringing
a beauty into his life allows gives him the confidence to essentially sacrifice
his life at the altar of beauty and for Tilly,
So, Tilly's steadfastness and her initial tactic for revenge,
be beautiful, show this town what they're missing, does change the town and
all the characters around her.
Yeah, or I am going back now to the intimacy and distance with your perception of yourself.
Other than the ghost of her past, I feel like Tilly is closer to her,
she's more intimate with her
perception of herself, other than believing that she might be a killer.
She represents a certain kind of freedom, and that's what she's bringing to
the town, to the point where she realizes the only way she can liberate the town is to burn it down.
Um right but but it is in some ways about liberation and liberation in in this
context is is being true to yourself and also maybe letting go of the things that don't allow that,
right you know it's not just like believe in yourself it's like well sometimes
you get rid of got to cut out cut out the toxic people in your life,
yeah which you know after 12 years I would think you would have done that or
jazz but you haven't you're steadfast um,
Are.
You talking about yourself or are you talking about my mother?
I think your mother's known you for more than 12 years.
Does your mother listen to this podcast? Because mine does. Because she loves
me with emotions and expresses them.
Then I think we know the answer. To whose mothers do not listen to this podcast.
I mean, in fact, we picked the dressmaker because my mum, she didn't make us,
but we watched it at Christmas with my family and it was on her DVD.
As God and Donald McAlpine intended.
It's an excellent movie. And I think if there is a character change,
it is very subtle and right near the end of the movie.
And otherwise there was a massive shift that the story world punished it was
almost like the opposite to Moana where,
she's gone through like Moana is steadfastly like called to the ocean whereas
Tilly is steadfastly I'm cursed and the low point for Tilly was I'm not cursed oh fuck my,
love of my life just died thank you world.
And I think yeah because we do have like a steadfast for the better,
steadfast for the worst. And I would argue that if in the quadrant,
I would probably put this very steadfast, but slightly to the side of for the worst.
But there is lots of change.
There's lots of change around, absolutely. Around her, yeah, for the town, et cetera.
I think we're distinguishing between her values and how she sees herself as
opposed to how she treats other people around her.
Yes, how she treats other people, the relationship with her mother, all those things. Yep.
Yeah, she is well-intentioned, she is kind, she endorses beauty and freedom and truth.
Well-intentioned isn't. Well.
She comes back to the town saying, I'm gonna look after my mother that the town
has almost neglected to the point of death and I'm gonna do it in spite of the
fact that you hate me and I also hate myself.
Hate myself is a strong word, but I'm referring to myself as cursed.
So, I think it's interesting because the tools that the filmmakers are using
are not 100% aligned is why you and I have slightly different tastes.
But it is, even I'm like, this film is mostly steadfast, mostly following these other models.
It's only mostly steadfast.
I mean, you could just see another way of pitching it is agent of change, right?
Yeah.
It's the steadfast character is the agent of change, which means that Apollo
13 wouldn't quite be steadfast. It would just be flat.
I don't think they're the agent of change, but I certainly think Moana is the
agent of change. And I think even particularly this kind of story where it's
like fish out of water story that, you know, it's Elf.
So Ferris Bueller's Day Off, Ferris does not change. It's Paul. Is it Alan?
Cameron.
Is that Cameron?
Sure. Also, to be fair, it happens over the course of like 12 hours.
Yeah.
How much change do you really expect?
I think there are lots of films that we'll find in positive and negative.
It's true. That is the point, yes. But I think that you can't prove that that
change is lasting in 12 hours, though.
Like, you can, you know, you flash forward or you have something,
but, you know, are they just going to revert to their old ways when they wake
up tomorrow? and, you know, don't want to go to school.
Any more observations before we dive into the questions?
Ask the questions.
I mean, I think we've talked about specific things because it is a very episodic
film, I think probably because of the nature of the book. It holds together
well, but it's very sequence-driven.
And I think you could actually feel that probably a lot of those sequences have
a degree of an emotional event or emotional tension to them.
Oh, there's, this film is, it's not, it doesn't meet the Stephen Cleary definition
of melodrama, but it is certainly melodramatic and is, it's a,
it's a delightful, moving.
It's way funnier than I expected when I saw it.
Yeah. The performances are great. And,
you know, it has almost, it's not quite, but it almost has a Jeunet feel to it, like,
an Amelie sort of, it's bordering on magic realism in some ways that where it's
so heightened to the point that it's,
almost leaving a reality.
And the character that's the most heightened is the hunchbacked chemist.
He runs himself to death it is a fairy tale.
Yeah yeah for.
Sure like it is explicitly a fairy tale like he can't stop running and they
demonstrate that at the beginning like he can't stop himself once someone else
gets him going and that is how he dies which is like the most fairy tale,
ending possible it's great.
He falls into his own dam and there is just that hilarious shot after he dies,
of his hump still sticking out of the dam and Hugo Weaving, Sergeant Farrat character,
just looking at the hump sticking out of the dam.
But he was like a truly fairytale villain.
Like he was- Absolutely. He would withhold medications from all of his patients,
including his own wife, as well as Tilly's mother.
Tilly's mother is dying and he refused to grant her pain relief because why
waste the medicine when she's dying?
Like a truly awful character whose up and came,
as a direct result of I'm not sure if it was planned by Molly but Molly was
certainly in her we're taking revenge and burning this whole place down,
mode it does make me wonder that if Molly hadn't just died because the plot
said she should die like she literally just walks and into the street and dies,
the that you know would Molly would Molly have burnt the the town down I think
that was her plan to destroy everyone,
so that's another reason why I'm still not sure about it being uh steadfast
on steadfast or not because I'm not yeah 100 sure what what Tilly's plan was coming into the,
Film. Okay.
To look fabulous. And she succeeded.
Is the reason you keep enriching her?
A murderer and a lesbian?
This is going back to your point at the very beginning. What is the pattern that's established?
Yeah, I think you're just picking up on it because you've seen her take.
There's an action that's happened off screen, which is that she's choosing to
return home, but you know that there's a decision that's happened.
And so therefore you're desperate to understand what that decision was.
Or the meaning behind the decision.
And what her end objective is.
Like, is her end objective, it's very different if she's like,
I'm going to care for my mother and I will just sit here in this horrible town,
being beautiful and caring for my mother until my mother is dead.
Is that her plan? Which is very different from I'm going to come and sit here
being beautiful, caring for my mother until this town gets up and come, right?
And because- And I just think that idea of her method of getting revenge changes,
but the fact that she goes, I'm back, you bastards, after lighting a cigarette
is literally lighting something on fire. It's just very telling.
I wrote that line down as I was watching it, and I've come back saying,
what's her plan? Is it revenge or is it just to hold her space?
Her stated objective is to find out if she's a murderer.
So, yeah, she's got three. Yeah.
Which, as we've said, resolves earlier.
So, it resolves at the end of the second act. And as you've talked about,
that feels like it's a reward. It's a negative reward. And then that comes into a punishment.
Yeah. So. Okay.
Did this film teach us to expect Tilly to change in the beginning?
Maybe not super well, since we are debating that very point.
It certainly opens very clearly with I'm Back, You Bastards. So I think it does
set us up for a steadfast arc.
I think it does, but you don't think it does.
I mean, I was going to say she's there to fuck shit up, which is the same as
being an agent of change, right? Right.
Again, I'm not sure that that's her objective. Like if her, if her mom wasn't
there, would she have come back to Dungatar?
No, but because she was forced to come back, she still had a plan,
which makes her remain steadfast.
Sure. Anyway, this is, these are like the film could have made it clear.
The film is, as you said, Mel, is really not subtle about certain things, right?
I'm back, you bastards. and that line that Molly says like he died to prove
to her that love his love was stronger than your hate like this is film that's not subtle trying.
To prove and then failing yeah fuck.
Yeah and this is a film where she comes in and asks in the first five minutes
is that the reason I'm cursed am I a murderer mom you know like.
Also a film which like holds on a shot of.
Kate Winslet.
Bending over shaking her.
Ass and then shows.
A bunch of AFL players crashing into each.
Other and falling to the ground no subtlety found complimentary so,
why was it why I'm interested because it feels almost deliberate like maybe
it's not maybe it's intuitive this is a very emotionally driven film,
but it feels like.
Very fairytale logic.
Yeah yeah um so I think how this This film set us up to expect a steadfast,
arc. I think that's fair. I don't think this film set us up to expect Tilly to change.
No, I would say if anything, I'm feeling like, gee, yeah, the town's going to learn to love her.
And it kind of subverts that in many ways. But I feel like it's one of those,
you know, the outsider, you know, the city slicker returns home to the small
town and either they fall in love with a local and decide to stay,
which happens, or, you know, the town,
you know falls in love with them I expected it to be a lot more quote positive than it is it.
Kind of sets you up to expect that rom-com mark and subverts.
It and I think a lot of people got.
Upset by that which I.
Love yeah I think this is a dark I think this is a dark fairy tale it's like
one of those you think it's a fairy tale but it all yeah I.
Mean come back to this but fairy tales used to not have morals it's like the
kid got eaten the end yeah.
Because the world is cold and harsh.
That's a moral.
It's a lesson, but there's nothing you can do about it. So that's not a moral.
Don't make me look up the definition of moral.
The Webster's Dictionary defines morals as...
Talk about habitual actions.
Steadfast in his pedantry. Did the characters change? Was it experiential change
or internal value change? How is that dramatized? I mean, we've already discussed ad nauseum.
We're not, like, we are on the fence about this because of, I think,
of the dramatization issue. But, Stu, have I, for the receipts purposes,
have I brought you closer to there is a small change in Tilly's character? Is there a positive arc?
Yeah, but, yes, I do. I think, but I just think it feels like steadfast because,
it's a subtractive reward.
Okay.
As in, she has to be removed. The shackles that have held her back,
right, have been removed. Mum, the town, all that, the ghost of her baths have been taken away.
So, I do think she has changed. I don't think she, like, maybe her values haven't
changed or whatever, but we feel that she's free now.
I think that's a really interesting distinction of we've got two steadfast characters
in Moana and Tilly, And one has,
additive rewards and the other has subtractive rewards and that's changing how
we're feeling about that character journey.
Yeah, it's pretty interesting. And I think that changes. Like,
I think we feel closer to- I think we still feel close to them, right?
But I think the- yeah. As I said, this stuff's complex.
Is the character aware that they changed? I'm not sure.
I mean, if the change happens, it's on the train on the way out with the town
in flames, similar to Apollo 13.
I don't think the film wants to dwell or wants to dramatize or discuss that
change, other than the compulsion to put in a bit of voiceover before the final line of the film, Mel.
How does the film want you to feel about that change? So, you said that it feels positive for Tilly?
I think the reason that we're kind of bouncing on it is this is actually an
early example of a conflicted film I think I think we do feel that she's free,
uh but I feel like she's I also think we feel like she's lost things yeah so
I think there's some complexity emotional complexity there.
I I think so but I think most of the things she's lost are not because of her
steadfastness or that they're simply because,
you know life happened to her while that was like her mother dying had nothing
to do with whether she was steadfast or not, etc. It is conflicting.
But I don't necessarily think that most of those conflicting emotions are a
result of her arc, if that makes sense.
And I think there is a difference between conflicting where the film is actively
working to make us feel differently and where the film is not interested in,
determining which way we feel about it.
Which is like I feel like this and Apollo 13 are similar in that way where it's
like it's not important to us for your emotional experience for you to know,
whether for you to feel whether this is positive or negative.
I feel like her taking it, it's badass. Like just like my town's in flames.
I set it on fire. Oh, yes, it looks like they're having a fire.
Like just it is her walking away.
Quite literally and look delightful doing it. Why not? Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Yeah. I think there's a whole lot of filmmaking, like aesthetics and performances
saying that this is a positive change for,
the audience is supposed to feel positively about the fact that Tilly has lost
her lover, lost her mother and is burning her childhood town to the ground.
We are supposed to feel that she is coming out of this in a good space.
In a better place than she went in. I don't think it's aspirational the way
I think the first two were
the first two are very aspirational you should want to be like Moana look at
these guys like they survived because they were this this is not aspirational but it is like,
I she she made she learned about you know she she solved the mystery of herself
she reconciled with her mother she made the best out of what she could she got
some revenge on some people who deserved it
even though even people who hadn't necessarily done anything to her but people
who'd done awful awful things in that sort of fairytale way got their got their up and scummed uh,
So, yeah, I think you are supposed to feel positive, but like the situation
is brutal, just like fairy tales.
Yeah. How does the story world punish or reward the transformation?
We've spoken about one very particular moment, but I think it is what makes
this film surprising, subversive, powerful in a different way.
What makes it like Teddy dying, I think, is the moment that makes this film,
special in a way. It's impact on the story.
That it's willing to go there, yeah.
He was age-inappropriate. He's like 15 years younger, so.
I mean, yeah.
There was a lot of that, like, you know, that Sarah Snook and Kate Winslet were
supposed to have been the same age at school or, you know, close enough in age.
Like, these schools in the regional town would have had all year levels.
Also, and we can cut this out, but they tried to cast several other men who
were much more age appropriate and none of them wanted to because Kate Winslet
was top billed and because they weren't going to get equal billing.
She is the lead and they a lot of the men who were age appropriate that they
tried to cast wouldn't do it unless they got equal billing.
And Liam Hemsworth would take it because you shouldn't get equal billing.
You are not equal character. But they said that originally a lot of the people
they were looking at casting were more age appropriate.
And I think he's great. And I actually quite like the.
And he is great in it. And also Kate Winslet is a motherfucking superstar.
You should be so lucky as to get to play her love interest. Like,
go fuck yourself. Anyway.
Yes, I think he's delightful in it as, you know, the fourth Hemsworth brother.
And Sarah Snook, former Draft Zero guest. If you didn't realize,
we did an episode with Sarah Snook as a guest before.
She can now listen to it on an updated website.
I don't know if he's.
Well, I'm saying that I should get out there. I should just improve the audio.
Well, also, a friend of the podcast, Mark Leonard Winter, is also in the film.
Two people I went to high school with. Anyway, it's a great film.
What are the values explored by Tilly's steadfast arc?
She's steadfast in beauty, like in valuing beauty and bringing it and sharing it with anyone.
She never holds her gift of beauty hostage or ransom.
She does trade it for information, but it feels like she would have given it to Gertie.
I think beauty might represent something else deeper, but I can't quite put my finger on it.
Oh, it is. There is like that sort of libertine, like, it's almost Moulin Rouge,
you know, like truth, beauty, freedom, love.
Like, but there is definitely all these other characters in the town ugly.
Like they've cast people or made them look unpleasant.
They're very bitter. They're angry. They're repressed. Yes, they'll have mental health issues.
Like she brings like they're literally monochromatic and she brings color in
terms of going to contrast versus affinity.
But I think also there like to get back to that original question,
I think there's an idea of she is only she chooses to visit vengeance on people who deserve it.
Right. But she could let them have turned her into somebody like it is so clear
that the people who stay in this town become horrible to people, to each other.
Like one of the first instances, right, right. We see this husband and wife
and we see him perpetuating sexual assault on her in a way that makes it quite
clear that he is just this is a matter of practice.
And a lot of people in the film have clearly become so soured on their own humanity
that they will hurt other people simply for the sake of it.
And she, even the vengeance at the end, right, it is made very clear that the
people who are dying, it's because they were horrible and they deserve it.
I'm not just going to hurt people for the sheer pleasure of it,
you know? And so I do think that the narrative makes that clear.
I mean, as much as we're saying it's fairy tale and it's funny and there are,
lots of those kind of elements to it, within 10 minutes there's a rape, right?
I mean, there's a lot of fairy tales that begin with that.
Oh, for sure. I'm just saying this film, we were going to watch it with the
kids and Anna's like, hold on. I think there was,
one guy just raping his wife every night. Maybe we should think about whether
we show this to the kids or not.
So, anyway.
Are there any other values that we think are explored? I mean,
love versus hate at a very broad level, but the fact that it yells that out
at us is, you know, Tilly does love.
I don't think, like, Tilly, yes, I'm back, you bastards, but I don't think she
hates the town or her weapon, her tactic is to bring love and kindness and gentleness.
Well, you don't do what she's done for her mother to that extent,
and even the way she allows herself to sort of go with Teddy without that capacity.
As someone who's had to learn about themselves, myself, I'll stop talking about
myself in the third person, I've had to learn that gentleness and kindness are two different things.
I always thought I was unkind.
I now see in myself that I think I am a very kind person, but I'm really not gentle.
So I think Tilly is the same. I think she has a, a almost infinite well of giving in her.
We never come up against the point where she's going to stop giving.
Like she washes Teddy's body with his mother.
But she's blunt and harsh about it even like bathing her mother right like that
is that is an act of love but man she's like wrestling and saying you stink
get in the bathtub she's doing it in a yeah not gentle way but she's doing it as a kindness.
And her and her the beauty that she's bringing it is aggressive beauty and confrontational
beauty and the film posits it that way so there's lots of contrast and affinity
played throughout this film,
But what is the emotional event created between Tilly's steadfast journey and
the audience? We've kind of touched on this already.
I do think we feel closer to her, right? Like, we learn the truth of who he
is. I think her abrasiveness, while fun, keeps her distant. I think the experience
does bring us closer to her.
I think the film ends, like, again, it ends in a close shot with her.
So I do think the emotional event is that we are brought closer to her,
but in some of the other language, you know, the gain in the loss,
we gain an understanding for her.
Like the fact is learning backstory and truth is a gain for an audience.
You know, it is an emotional event. Yeah.
Cool.
Good.
Let's wrap up so I can go to bed so that I can get up early so I can get shit
done so I can watch the Suckaroos.
Yeah.
Yeah. All right.
So what have been your key learnings from this exercise?
A, if your characters are not going to arc, if they are going to remain steadfast,
then creating multiple smaller emotional events is really important to keep
the story dynamic. And that's mostly something I picked up from Stu. You're welcome.
I was going to steal Stu's observation there as well.
Right. And the way that they do that, especially creating secondary and tertiary characters who do arc.
I mean, they don't all. Apollo 13 doesn't really, but Moana does this in a massive
way. You have a secondary character that you don't spend a lot of time with
until, I don't know, half an hour into the film.
Major arc, you care for him and he undergoes these massive changes.
And so, which both is interesting in and of itself and serves a contrast with
Moana's steadfastness. And I think both of those are very effective.
Oh man. That's a really good key learning. I think you stole most of mine,
that if you are going to do a steadfast arc,
you need the effect of that character on the world and that can be emotional.
Like all three of these films are hugely emotional experiences despite not having,
like despite being a steadfast arc. And I think they do that through Stu's observation
that they have lots of emotional events in there.
And the other one that I'm going
to steal from you, Mel, is that steadfast doesn't mean they don't doubt.
And in fact, you kind of need those moments of doubt.
And then how the story world punishes or rewards those moments of doubt actually
reinforce your themes of the film is what we've seen.
So, I think a learning, we were discussing stuff because it was going on,
a learning for me is I like the idea of emotional tension that Mel,
as a way of thinking about emotional events over time because it implies that there's a setup for it.
And I'm just like, there's a really interesting idea of being able to think
of emotional events as taking place over time and as a kind of a structural
thing that is, it's related to character questions, but,
I like it as being like just an emotional version of a character question.
Yeah. So I will just sit with that because I think we might see it in some more
arc films, but I'd be curious to kind of look at other films in that context
as like sequence-based emotional events. It's kind of an interesting idea.
Thank you, both of you, for this mammoth recording. Almost an hour per film.
You guys, we chose Good Homework, finally. Please, this...
This episode as with all others brought to you by our amazing patrons who voted,
if you want to vote the next episode in the series is going to be positive arcs
we'll put out a poll on the Patreon,
so that you can also vote for what our examples are going to be we're pretty
much a lock I'm going to confess it's going to be a vote for the third film
because I think we're pretty much a lock for Barbie and,
All of Us Strangers which I,
may not force myself to re-watch I may have to read,
but thanks in particular,
thanks in particular to our top tier patrons Crob, Dese, Sandra, Jesse, Randy, Paolo
Thomas, Jen, Malay, Alexandra,
and Natalie and Lily thank you so much you guys you are awesome and thanks to you Mel and Stu,
you.
Are also awesome.
Oh bless I hope you all feel like arguing with either Stu or myself about anything
on this episode or anything in general and you can find many ways of getting in touch with us
at our website at draft hyphen zero dot com at the website you also find the
show notes for this and all our other episodes as well as links to
support us and spread the word for free via a rating and review on Apple Podcasts.
Very important for spreading the word. Or if you think that what we do here
is worth a dollar or preferably more than a dollar, then you can also find links
to our Patreon page to support us getting these episodes to you quicker.
Thanks. And thanks for listening. ```