The Diner: Post Ten (Scene Two)

(I just noticed that my blog hates the screenplay formatting I’ve been doing. I’ve already been manually re-aligning dialogue to center. I’ll see if I can work out the rest of the issues by the next post.)

This second scene needs to give us a much deeper, more nuanced look at Liam. It has to strike a balance between hinting at his past, showing some of his home life, and reinforcing his work. I’m introducing his wife here, and hopefully making the audience like and care about her in just a few minutes.

It also has to bridge the gap between his work and the diner, so that as the scene ends, we’re about ready to start the main part of the screenplay. And it can’t clock in at much over five minutes.

Let’s see how I do!



A small, welcoming front office, empty of patients for the lunch hour. BIANCA, a receptionist in her mid-twenties, sits behind the desk, reading a book. Liam enters from a door leading to the patient rooms.


Ted make it out ok?


Yeah. His son picked him up. He was growling the whole time that you made him walk the bars twice.


Sounds like him. What did his son say?


That you should have made him walk them ten times.


So I’m not going to get sued for doing my job too well.


That’s usually what people get sued for, but not this time. You got lucky. Just try to be a bit less awesome next time.


I’ll try!


Liam checks the time on his phone. C.U. on phone shows 11:49.



My next appointment isn’t until like 1:30?


Taking a long lunch?


You know how it is. Make a few calls, have a smoke, have a drink. Suddenly the whole lunch hour is gone!


You don’t smoke.


I might.


And you don’t drink.


Liam’s phone rings, and he checks it. C.U. reveals a picture of a smiling woman in her mid-thirties and the name PAIGE.



And I don’t talk on the phone?


With a laugh, Liam turns to leave, answering the phone.



Tell her I said hi!

Liam waves bye, raising his phone as he steps out…




…onto a crowded sidewalk. A lot of traffic, tall buildings, one-way streets. It could be any U.S. city. Liam starts walking as if he’s traveled the route a thousand times. Several times along the way, we see flashes of someone in a blue jacket in the background.



Bianca says hi.


Hi, back! You out to lunch yet?


Yeah. She’ll have to wait to get her ‘hi, back’. How’s your day, gorgeous?


Pretty good. Today was the Skype conference. So of course, Colin got bored with his cartoon time–


Bored? With cartoons?


That’s what I thought! And he decided to come over and see what Mommy was doing.


Luckily he’s as charming as I am.


More! Everyone thought he was adorable. But still…


It’s about time to start looking for daycare for him?


I don’t know. I’d love to actually get work done. And we haven’t both had a night away in months.


My mom keeps offering!


Yes. Yes, she does.


(beat) Still, we don’t want him to start calling us by our first names. Mom and Dad has such a ring to it.


Yes! We’ll talk about it later. Speaking of having a night away, it’s Thursday. Are you still doing movie night with Ron?

Liam’s smile slips. His voice stays casual.



Did he call you about me missing last week?


No, I just wondered.


I think I’m going to stay home from now on. Spend more time with you and Colin.


Are you sure?


Yeah. He can come over and we’ll watch something on Netflix if he gets lonely. Don’t worry, you can keep your Saturdays!


Oh, I know I can keep my Saturdays.


I mean, I’d hate for you to miss book club. Or is that wine club?


Paige laughs.



It’s mind-your-own-business club.


I don’t think I’d like that club.


It’s a lot of fun. You should try it. (beat) How was your morning?


Not bad. I’ve got a patient who doesn’t do his stretches and then complains he’s not getting better.


Isn’t that every patient?


Not all of them are a pain in the ass like this one. I don’t think he wants to get better.


That’s a leap.


Who’s the physical therapist?


All right! So what makes you think that?


This guy is no stranger to exercise. Other than his leg, I bet he could outrun me. And he doesn’t strike me as lacking in discipline, either. If he set his mind to it, he’d be walking around already, pain or no, weakness or no.


Sounds as stubborn as you are.




I said, why wouldn’t he want to get better?


Nice save. His leg got mangled in a car accident. He was in the driver’s seat, his wife was in the passenger’s.


Oh no.




Was it his fault?


I don’t think it matters. He blames himself.


He’s been assigned a trauma counselor, right? Is he talking to them?


Knowing him, he’s convinced them that he’s over this little speedbump. Hell, he probably tells himself he is.


And that leaves you.

Liam crosses one last street. Suzie’s Bar & Grill looks like it’s being eaten by the larger businesses on either side. Its parking lot is half-full, a mustang rubbing up against motorcycles and rusted-out pick-ups. On a sign: Home to the World-Famous Bar-B-Burger.





You’re not Spider-Man, you know. Swinging around saving everyone.


I always thought Superman was cooler.


You were wrong. Look, if you’re sure about this, tell someone. Make sure it gets back to the psychiatrist. But it’s not your job to fix his brain.


I’ll just tell them my wife sent me.


What was that?


I said, you’re right.


Nice save!


No, you’re right. My job is to fix his leg.


My sweet man.


I know, total sweetheart! Worried about this poor guy with a dead wife.


I was being serious! Some guys just go to work, punch in, punch out, go home. You care about people. That’s why I love you.


Just one reason?




I love you.


I love you!


I’m here. Talk to you when I get home.


See you then! Have a good day.


You, too. Bye.

Liam ends the call, but he doesn’t go inside. Instead, he checks his messages. A C.U. reveals an already-read message from RON, from 8:30 a.m.



Meeting tonight? Call me.


Liam calls Ron, looking as if it’s the last thing he wants to do.



Sorry! I meant to have everything until he gets into the diner as one post, but this topped five pages and reached a pretty natural stopping point. I have a good idea of what’s coming next, so hopefully I’ll have the next part done within the week.

A few things you might have noticed.

I have Liam talk to his wife about a patient. According to what I found, as long as they don’t provide identifying information, a healthcare professional can talk about a case. I tried to avoid him giving away information without it being an awkward conversation.

You might also notice that the Diner is no longer a diner. Talking with a friend, I decided that a Bar & Grill would fit better thematically (and allow for a plot point later!). The Diner was such a snappy name, too. I’m keeping it for the project name, even though it’s obsolete.

The person in a blue jacket? I wonder who that could be.

The Diner: Post Nine (Scene One)

Now that I’m actually going to start the screenplay, the form of these posts are going to be a bit weird. I think I’m going to have each post start with my intended purposes for the next few pages of screenplay, followed by a first draft, and ending with my thoughts on what I succeeded/failed at in that draft.

This is going to be a first draft. Unpolished, full of plot holes and contrivances despite my best efforts. I’m likely to state what I plan on doing and then immediately fail. But hopefully this will give you some idea of what my process is like.

I don’t have time to do the hours of research I might need. So you’ll see some vague language and even some flat-out errors that I would correct in later drafts. For instance, just to start us off, I’m aping screenplay format as seen in some of my favorite dialogue-heavy scripts (The Dark Knight, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, anything by Tarantino), but I don’t actually know much about the format and will probably get an absurd amount wrong.

Things I need to accomplish in the first five or so pages: Introduce the main character. Establish his job. Try to hint at the past he hides. Establish the tone.

That just might be manageable, but I’ve spent my whole career getting good at communicating exposition through narrative. Only having prose is going to make things tricky. I guess we’ll find out how well I do!




TED, silver-haired and gnarled, struggles across parallel bars, favoring his brace-covered left leg. About two-thirds across, duct tape makes a mark on the floor. LIAM stands just beyond the tape. Liam is what you’d expect: fit, khakis, polo, tennis shoes, neat hair, shaved face. The wrinkles in his clothes, bags under his eyes, and grey sprinkled into his dark hair show at the first close-up.


If I have to do this one more time…


You know when you can quit.


Once I think of a good place to hide your body.


You’d have to catch me to kill me.


Are you making fun of the cripple? You suck at your job.


I’m offering motivation. Your leg’s dragging; let’s keep it up.


(Short of breath)



You’re almost to me. Get this far, and we’ll call it a day.


A SIDE-ON CAMERA ANGLE – Ted is barely halfway to the line and Liam.


You moved the line, didn’t you? Cheater.


Ted’s hand SLIPS and he stumbles forward a step, lands hard on his left leg. Liam rushes forward and catches him before he can fall.



How many times do I have to tell you not to come in drunk?


Didn’t even get to the “touch your nose” part. I might do better with the alphabet, though.


Liam helps Ted to the end of the bars, helps turn him, helps him sit in the wheelchair waiting for him. Liam sits in a nearby chair.



What’s going on, Ted? You’re doing the stretches at home, right?


All twenty of them, five times a day.


So you might have missed a few?


What’s the point?


Well, some of them are to keep the flexibility up, and others–


What’s the damn point? I’m never going to get out of this chair. I’m not even getting better anymore.


Ted indicates the tape on the floor.



You might not.



Why would you tell me that? Even if it’s true? Especially if it’s true? Aren’t you supposed to keep me hopeful–that I’ll be playing tennis in six months? The hell is wrong with you?


It’s not my job to lie to you. Maybe you’ll never recover. Maybe this is the farthest you’ll ever walk again.


Liam gestures to the parallel bars.



If you quit, you know EXACTLY what’s in your future. You don’t have to wonder. That makes it really easy to quit. That’s why I can’t give you hope. You have to decide if you’re willing to risk it.


If I quit I’d never have to see you again.


Like I said, quitting is easy. Are we done for the day?



No. Wheel me back around.


Liam smiles.



How did I do?

I feel I established most of what I needed to in the first scene. Who our main character is, what his job is, what the tone is. We see him convince someone to hang on to hope, touching on some of our themes. I establish that we’re going to touch on some serious matters, and that this story is going to be character-driven. But I put banter in as a way of lightening the mood, something I’m going to try to do to some degree throughout the piece.

On the other hand, I didn’t quite manage some things. I didn’t hint at his past other than some visual cues that he might not be as perfect as he seems. I’ll have to work in the first real clues in the next scene or two. In addition, Liam’s monologue is a bit heavy-handed. After a few passes, that’s the best I’ve got for now. Obvious, but it does what we need for the characters.

How do you think I did?

Next part will be a bit longer, unpacking the rest of the starting state for Liam. There’s a lot more we need to do before we get to the diner!

The Diner: Post Eight (Outline)

The last part was all about the ending. This part is developing an outline to get there effectively.

I’m going to use 7-Point Story Structure. Here’s a link to an article explaining it wonderfully:


Liam is a physical therapist, currently helping someone who’s nearly given up hope for recovery. In the process of encouraging the patient, he sidesteps questions about his past. He goes out to lunch.


Teresa sits down on the other side of the table. She flashes a gun and says she’ll kill Liam at the end of the lunch hour. 12:00


After establishing this isn’t mistaken identity, Teresa starts small talk. She takes his phone after an ill-made attempt to call for help. 12:10 p.m.


Teresa’s questions get more personal. He starts to suspect red herring. He has a chance to grab the gun, but chickens out. He sends a message somehow; waiter knows he’s hostage. 12:30


The cook and waiter try to stop Teresa, and she takes them hostage as well. ( The cook had a gun behind the counter. Teresa shoots the cook non-fatally; the gun falls not far out of Liam’s reach.) The rest of the diner evacuates. Teresa also shoots down red herring. She lets/makes Liam call his family and say goodbye. 12:55


Teresa reveals why she’s doing this. Mystery resolved. He grieves with her. He starts talking about memories with her loved one, and she breaks down. She grows angry. She insists it’s his fault. (However, him empathizing with her, confronting the past, makes her unable to hate him; she can’t kill him.) Time’s up. 1:00 p.m.


Teresa takes waiter hostage, makes Liam pick up cook’s gun. Liam kills Teresa to save the waiter. Changed by this experience, he goes back to make peace with his past.

This is just an initial outline, and it’s likely to change. But for right now, it’s enough of a foundation to start on. That means that the next part will be starting the actual screenplay! The first few pages (the first scene, in particular) is next.

Do you have any questions about the outline? What do you think about how it’s shaping up so far?

The Diner: Post Seven (Brainstorming the Ending)

Okay, I lied. I realized that figuring out a solid ending is going to take a post all its own. This is the place for it, so that we can outline backward from the end.

Let’s start at the end, as is proper. What does the climax to look like? What do I want the hero’s end state to look like?

Ugh. You know what? I’m tired of dancing around the main character not having a name. So I’m going to jump to Google, and search popular baby names around the time that he would have been born. Scrolling halfway down, I find Liam. There are a couple of actors with the name, but it’s not something I see in fiction much, so why not? I’d like to pretend my process is more complex, but that will do for now. Similarly, let’s call our villain Teresa.

There are really only four answers to this multiple choice question. A) Liam dies. B) Teresa dies. C) Both die. Or D) Neither die.

I’m telling a story revolving around a mystery between two characters. If both characters involved die, the mystery didn’t matter. So C is out. I put serious thought into saving them both, but I feel that I’d be breaking a core promise of the premise if no one died at the end of the lunch hour. Option D is out.

Now we have to ask: What tells the better story? A, or B? A, or B? Sorry, couldn’t resist. I think option B is much more traditional. Predictable, even. Hero lives, villain dies. It might still be seen as breaking the promise to the audience. But to be honest, I feel that our characters and themes demand option B. If Teresa lives, then what? Are we adapting a Cormac McCarthy story, where the meaninglessness and the lack of resolution is the point?

Teresa’s entire character is built around having no future left. What would happen if she lived through the lunch hour? I suspect that she’d commit suicide off-screen rather than be taken in by police. I’m not that nihilistic. I’d rather fall into saccharine than be needlessly bleak. And besides, that means that choosing option A is also choosing option C.

Liam also has the potential for meaningful character growth. He’s the one that can take away something from this incident.

Teresa dies, then. But how?

She could kill herself when she realizes that she doesn’t hate Liam anymore. Her hatred was all that gave her something to live for, and we’ve established that it’s likely she will ultimately self-destruct. But that strips away all agency from Liam. Liam has gone through the whole movie to get here. As the main character, his actions should determine where this ends.

Liam kills Teresa.

There are a couple of problems with that. First, Liam is unarmed while Teresa has him at gunpoint for the entire movie. We can write around that; he got her gun, he hid a knife, etc. But the core problem is, why? He could kill her to defend himself. But we’ve established throughout the entire story that he’s trying to save her, to save them both. It might be within his character to kill her in a selfish bid to save himself–depending on whether you believe people are capable of real change–but that would mean that he’s rejected the entire point of what’s happening and turns the story back to pointlessness.

Here’s where setting comes in. If Liam is a regular, then we’ve gotten small talk between him and employees at the diner at the very beginning of the movie. Assuming that the hostage situation isn’t revealed for a while, we get to know at least the waiter through a few more interactions. Teresa could take said waiter hostage (side note: If the waiter is a hostage for the climax, let’s make him a guy to shake up a stale plot element), and force Liam to choose.

This does a few things. Some good, some bad.

First, the bad. If handled poorly, it can feel like a cop out. Sure, make the villain cross a moral line she hadn’t been willing to for the rest of the movie, all so we won’t feel too bad about the hero killing her. So we have to establish that she’s willing to do this at some point. Or maybe make it clear to the audience (but not to Liam) that she’s bluffing.

Now, the good. Liam has been running in the name of self-preservation for the entire story. He’s just learned that his inaction might have cost two lives, and set these whole events into motion. Liam taking action could be the culmination of his entire character arc, and could realistically lead him to being a better person at the end of the film than at the beginning.

If we make the waiter young, teens/early twenties, in college or something, this last choice could represent both of the important choices made throughout the film. The kid is potential. You know, children are the future.

Sorry. I think I threw up in my mouth a little. Liam kills Teresa to save the waiter. It’s tragic, everyone cries, but Liam walks away changed for the better. Maybe even get a denouement where he checks to see if his druggie friend way back when actually died and tries to make amends. He’s fully accepted his past, and can truly move on, instead of only pretending to.

Now that we have the ending, the next part can start to build an outline. Sorry for pushing it back one post. I know that outlining is almost as interesting as showing your math.

The Diner: Post Six (The Red Herring)

Last post, we solved the mystery!

Technically, we invented the solution of the mystery, so that we can start working backward. But solving the mystery sounds cooler.

In this post, we’re going to choose the red herring that keeps the mystery from being too easy for the reader (and hero) to solve.

But first, what is a red herring? According to, a red herring is: “something intended to divert attention from the real problem or matter at hand; a misleading clue.” These are smoke and mirrors that keep the audience focused on the wrong thing. These allow us to surprise even the savvy viewer.

Typically there are a number of these false trails in a story. We can have a handful of quickly–discarded suspicions acting as red herrings in the first act, the first logical assumptions that the main character might leap to. However, because of the nature of our mystery, we need a strong distraction. This is why we’re going to dedicate an entire post to red herrings.

First, the small misdirections. What might be the first suspicions of our character when a gun is shoved in his face? He might think that this is a joke, that the gun is fake. Then he will likely suspect that the woman sitting across from him is a lunatic, and that this might be entirely random. The woman’s demeanor will probably dispel both of these thoughts.

What next? Maybe he’ll think she’s scaring him so that he’ll give her money, and is only making it clear that she is willing to kill him so that he won’t make a scene. Knowing our villain, the suggestion that she’s just after money may anger her. In any case, she will make it abundantly clear that this isn’t the case.

Will he think that she has the wrong guy? She can correct him about that quickly.

It’s only after dismissing these that the character will start looking in what seems to be the right direction.

Keep in mind, this is the answer that we want the audience to believe we’re leading to for the majority of the movie. In order to make our red herring work, we will need its resolution to be almost as compelling as the true answer. It will be under many of the same constraints. It can’t be a misunderstanding, and it can’t make our hero monstrous. It can’t be something so prominent in the character’s mind that it’s the first answer he would jump to–but at the same time, it has to be something he’d suspect before the true answer. It also has to reveal something significant about the character. The revelation of this event must also lead to real character development, and will change the way that the main characters interact.

We also need to take the real reveal into consideration. Because the real answer deals with his job, let’s make the red herring concern something in his personal life.

What does our character’s home life look like?

He’s a guy in his mid-thirties, he’s had this job for a good five years and probably spent six or seven years in college before that. I want him to have friends and family, possibly even be married and have a kid or two. This is a man who still has his whole life ahead of him.

To be honest, right now our guy is pretty boring. He’s too perfect. I’ve attributed nothing but positive qualities to him, in an effort to make him sympathetic despite what we might discover about him later. But now it’s time to start putting in some flaws, some room for him to grow over the course of the story. This red herring is a good place to do that.

If the red herring is going to have meaning and power, then it needs to be something central to the character, something that defines who he is today. The decisions he’s made in his life have been a result of this event.

Because the real reveal is settled very much around who the character currently is and takes place relatively recently, I should balance that out. Let’s set the red herring many years ago, and let’s present that version of the character as the furthest thing from what he is today.

The current version of the character has a career, an education, a support system, and hope for the future. He helps people for a living. What’s the furthest thing from that? Jobless, ignorant, alone, lost. Hurting people without regard for anyone but himself.

Our hero was an addict.

Like suicide, addiction is a serious issue that is all-too-often used for cheap emotional punch by writers. Millions of people suffer from it; I can’t imagine many families don’t have someone that struggles with it. I know my own family has. However, like suicide, addiction not only fills the needs of the plot, but it can drive character development and help explore the themes of the movie from a different angle. It feels like it fits and it feels like I can say something worthwhile by featuring it in this story.

For now, the needs of the plot. Why does this fit?

We can set this long ago, before he became a physical therapist, before he even went to college. It can be a turning point in the character’s life, something that remains meaningful even after it’s revealed that it’s not the key to the entire plot. Because it can happen years ago, the specific event that serves as the red herring can be unclear until the moment that this backstory is revealed. And it’s easy to believe that an addict may have done something that got someone killed.

Where he’s at now can stand in stark contrast to where he once was. Who he is now becomes an achievement, and the strength of the character becomes something to admire because it feels earned. But at the same time, it can start to suggest character conflicts that bring this character to life.

Can you hold a position in a medical field if it comes out that you were an addict? Is this character hiding his past, hiding from it? Is he, then, defined by his past every bit as much as the villain? Is learning to accept and move on the lesson he learns from this story? Might this be his arc?

Perhaps he did hurt someone as an addict in his late teens/early twenties. Whether meaning to or not, he might have been responsible for the loss of a life. The guilt of this moment could have driven him from his addiction, could have motivated him to get his life back on track. Having hurt someone in the past, it may have become the force that pushed him into helping people for a living.

To take it a step further, what if he made the mistake that constitutes the true answer to the mystery because of this part of his past? What if him wanting to blend in made him unwilling to stand up for the patient? Him being defined by his past is what set this entire plot into motion. This idea helps to make the red herring feel natural and allows the plot to maintain cohesion, rather than feeling as if we only introduced this to trick the audience.

I like this. The main character now has a weight of history behind him, something to hide, and a character flaw, all in one. But what one event could have changed his life so drastically?

It’s not murder. It wouldn’t take him a half hour of discussion to suspect that was the problem, and even years later, it would be hard to forget. He didn’t actively cause the end of someone’s life. Much like the real answer, he let someone die through inaction.

This character is increasingly defined by fear. It would fit with his character to have run away from a problem rather than helping. The first thing that comes to mind is that one of his addict friends overdosed. In a panic, instead of helping, he ran. Instead of reporting it to save his friend, he saved himself from possible repercussions, told himself that his friend survived, but never wanted to know for sure.

I feel this manages a fine balance. He did something terrible. Something that changes his life forever. But it’s not something that immediately makes us lose all sympathy for him. And because he never knows for sure that the person died, he doesn’t carry the full weight of it. He thinks he’s moved on from it, even though we can see that it still shapes many of his thoughts and actions.

With any luck, this slowly-revealed backstory will be flashy enough to distract the audience while I sprinkle hints at the truth throughout the story. Either way, I think these work well together, and all help with character and theme as well as plot.

Both of these resonate through who this character is, and he hasn’t really moved on from either. The events of the movie, should he survive them, will teach him to accept his mistakes and their consequences, and allow him to move on.

Now that we have some idea of the characters, mystery, and setting, it’s time to work on plot. My next few posts will be building an outline.


The Diner: Post Five (Detailing Character Job and Mystery)

Last post, I decided that the protagonist would be a man in his thirties and the antagonist would be a middle-aged or older woman. I also decided that the mystery would revolve around the villain blaming the hero for the death of a friend or family member. In this post I’ll decide the hero’s job, how that will tie into the mystery, and figure out how and why the hero is being blamed for this death.

This is the real work, my friends.

Let’s start with his job. Whether the reveal involves the hero’s job or whether that is used as a red herring in some form, I want him to have a career with relatively high stakes. One where it would be believable that a life might be lost due to him not doing his job correctly.

Both doctor and lawyer are out. I’ve seen those too many times in a revenge plot. Let’s throw out law enforcement, as well, and any position involved in emergency medical care. This still leaves about ten thousand jobs on the table. And anything from construction worker to stock broker could potentially be indirectly responsible for loss of life.

There’s too many jobs to choose from, so I’m going to pick somewhat arbitrarily.

Let’s circle back to something in care taking. If we set the first scene at his work, making it meaningful and giving him a chance to show empathy for others instantly encourages the viewer to like him and care about what happens to him.

Now let’s apply some characteristics we’ve chosen for him. He’s forward-looking, hopeful. Determined. Empathetic. What in the field of care taking and/or secondary medical aid would particularly benefit from these traits?

Physical therapy? It’s a little close to doctor, but it’s also two steps removed from E.R. surgeon. I feel like it’s different enough, personally. Let’s see where it goes.

Physical therapy isn’t the first thing you think of when you think “high stakes”. No pulse-pounding music is going to play as the lead makes a snap life-or-death decision. But there are plenty of ways for it to go wrong. And the results could change a person’s life forever.

On top of that, any physical therapy scenes I’ve ever encountered always focused on the patient, with the therapist being either the love interest or a bit part. It would be interesting to see this from the other side. Small differences like these are always a plus in my book.

Since this is a first draft, let’s go with this. We can always change it later.

How does this job tie into the mystery? How could someone suffer a loss so extreme due to physical therapy?

Here’s where just a bit of quick research will come in handy. I put in “Most common mistakes physical therapists make” (or something similar), and I got this link as the top result:

Let’s take a look and see if a common mistake could do serious damage.

Several of these are good for our purposes, actually. None of them by themselves would work–they mostly seem to be small mistakes, things that overlap in the system might account for–but imagine our protagonist was new to the job. Preoccupied with other things or nervous to the point of making simple errors. He might break a few of these.

For instance, he might miss that critical piece of information because he’s not listening to the patient as closely as he should. That costs crucial time. When he finally starts to suspect something is wrong, he lacks the confidence to fight the specialist on it. He just obeys orders, until something big happens that forces others to see the truth. By then, too much damage has to be done. The patient has to go back in for major surgery, or suffers an injury that leaves them crippled.

Three minutes of research, and I know that it’s perfectly possible for newbie mistakes to permanently damage someone.

But even if the person loses the ability to walk, would that drive a family member to kill? And making this mistake would be memorable on the part of the hero. How much time would have needed to pass for this to be buried and half-forgotten? Years? Five, maybe ten? Why would someone wait that long to seek revenge on the person responsible?

That leads me to what I’ve suspected would be a possible resolution to this mystery for a while now.

The death in question may be the result of suicide.

Here’s my disclaimer: Suicide is an incredibly heavy topic. It’s not something to throw around lightly. If I use suicide as the reason the villain is seeking revenge against the hero, I can’t be cheap about it. This can’t just be for shock value. I have to be willing to explore the real causes and real fallout of a family member or a friend committing suicide.

Let’s talk about why this fits, both the plot and the theme as I’ve introduced so far, and try to decide if this is an issue I want to touch on in my screenplay.

First, the theme. The main character is defined as being forward-thinking and hopeful. That’s to contrast the villain, who is defined by what’s happened, always looking backward. Hope is the single, key difference between them. It’s hope that the main character would have to bring to the villain to save his own life, and possibly hers. Because of this, the heart of the conflict being a result of the actions of a person who HAS no hope, and the villain blaming the hero for taking all hope away from both herself and her loved one, has the potential for real meaning.

Now the plot. We need a gap of time between the main character’s fatal mistake and the villain cornering him at the diner. We need time for it to fade from the hero’s mind, or perhaps for him to be unaware of the full effects of that mistake. The patient committing suicide several months or a few years after the hero made the mistake serves both these purposes.

Last, I’ve been toying with the idea of the villain blaming the hero in order to displace responsibility she might feel for the loved one’s death. Suicide leaves a wound on family and friends. Everyone who cared about that person is consumed by the question, What could I have done? They at once feel personally responsible and want to find some single cause to alleviate that sense of responsibility.

As I have it built right now, suicide fits as the resolution to this plot, the reveal that explains the villain’s actions. It fits the themes and the plot and the characterization we already have in place. More than that, it feels real to me. It feels like a story that needs to be told.

However, because of all this, I’m demanding something of myself. This is not going to be a red herring. This is the true reveal at the end. This is what we’re building backward from.

That means that next post is finding the false trail that keeps this from being discovered for the first two-thirds of the movie.

The Diner: Post Four (Brainstorming Character and Mystery)

In the last part, I looked at my setting, and decided that a diner still works wonderfully for this story.

In this part, we get down to the real work of prewriting: Brainstorming the characters and the mystery.

First, what I don’t want in regards to the mystery.

I don’t want this to be without reason. This isn’t going to be a story about a lunatic who’s picked the hero at random. It’s not going to be a case of mistaken identity, or a misunderstanding that gets resolved. This is going to be a real conflict that can’t easily be solved through talking.

I don’t want this to be a case of everyone knowing the answer to the mystery except the viewer. The character whose life is being threatened must legitimately not know why the antagonist is doing this. However, I refuse to use a cheap ploy like amnesia to explain why the character doesn’t know.

I don’t want the main character to be a medical professional who’s failed to save a family member of the villain. I don’t want the main character to be either a prosecutor or defense lawyer who the villain holds responsible for taking someone away from them. No drunk drivers that killed a kid. All of these have been done to death.

I don’t want this to turn into some spy/political thriller. The reasons for what’s happening are personal, and between the main characters.

And last, I don’t want the reveal to completely ruin sympathy for the protagonist. We should never be rooting for the villain to kill the hero. However, I want the reveal to be significant enough that, combined with their interactions throughout the story, it makes the villain at least partially sympathetic, as well. A reasonable person driven to unconscionable actions, not a monster at heart.

The way I see it, there are two main motivations for the villain to want the hero dead. Either the villain holds the hero responsible for some irretrievable loss, or the hero is somehow standing in the way of the villain achieving/acquiring something. Because the most likely outcome of holding someone hostage and murdering them in a diner is either death or imprisonment, I don’t see why the villain would use these means to remove the hero as an obstacle. We’ll roll with the assumption that the villain is holding the hero accountable, and doesn’t care about the consequences.

The kinds of losses that would drive someone to this extreme are few. Loss of job, loss of marriage, loss of family/friend/significant other. Loss of marriage is something that would be unlikely, given the earlier stipulation that the hero can’t know what they did. Loss of job could work, but only an unstable mind would turn to violence in retaliation of that, and sitting down to have lunch and conversation with the victim doesn’t read as a naturally unstable mind. Either of these also feel petty as a reveal in a story where the stakes start so high. Loss of life it is, then.

This is about as far as we can go in building the mystery without having characters. So let’s switch over.

I see the villain as being older than the hero. Smart and determined, but beaten down by life. I feel that works well–the life experience of an older villain here makes our hero feel more like an underdog. So let’s start with how old or hero would be.

I wouldn’t be looking for a hero that’s middle-aged or older. The older I made the hero, the less of a shock it feels like to have a secret in their past that might lead here. But I also wouldn’t want it to be a teenager or a college student. This is someone who has a career, who is settled into a routine, and who has a past. Someone in their mid-thirties, then? And the villain could be anywhere from middle-aged to retired.

The genders don’t matter, so let’s have one of them female. An older male villain and a young female hero would work, but I’m already picturing Anthony Hopkins in the villain’s shoes. Let’s turn away from that by reversing the genders. An older woman and a younger man.

This is a movie that will mostly consist of dialogue between the two. Like most movies carried by few characters, how they interact will be vital.

I see the villain as a woman who talks freely about things that have nothing to do with the current situation. She is in power, and so she can steer the conversation. She covers up whatever hurt it is that drove her to this by faking easy conversation about anything else. She could be cold, focused on the end-goal. But then why would she choose to sit and talk, rather than killing the hero as soon as she gets an opening?

I have a half-formed idea that she might be blaming him for the death in order to cover up her own feelings of guilt. I have no idea how or why at the moment, but that would be an interesting turn to help supply much-needed complexity, and sympathy, to the character.

Our villain is coming from a position of strength and authority. Our hero needs to be proactive and resourceful. We’re not looking for someone who accepts his own death or starts begging for his life. This is someone who is determined to either turn the tables or to convince the villain not to kill him. She has given him an hour to escape. He has to make the most out of his time.

He has family and friends to come home to, a purpose in life, hopes for the future. He is in contrast to her. He is looking forward, while she is consumed by the past. If we stated this  theme, it would be too obvious, but there may be a place for it in the character development if not the dialogue.

Let’s run with that. Let’s make the hero sincere, earnest, if not quite idealistic or naive. He believes in things and has hope. So maybe he starts from a position of trying to talk the villain down, and tries to escape or call for help only once that initial effort fails?

So we know generally what we’re aiming for with the mystery, and we’re getting a feel for who our characters are. Next post, we’ll delve into details. What is the hero’s job? Will that factor into the reveal or serve as a red herring? What is the reveal? We’ll get all that pinned down.