Another book sketch.

I finally gave in and watched Pirates of the Carribean. I think I’m the last person on earth to see this film. It was obviously very entertaining. I found myself analyzing the way the film was written. They say you need conflict in every scene to drive the story forward and sometimes I’m astounded by how effectively this is employed. There is a disagreement between characters in every scene in this film – even where it makes absolutely no sense. But, almost magically, the viewer doesn’t care, because the conflict satisfies a basic story-telling need.

One of the most hilarious examples of this was when the Keira Knightley character was kidnapped by the pirates of the Black Pearl (I’m not good with names). Our hero (Orlando Bloom Guy) rushes to Keira’s father to petition him for a boat with which to rescue her. The father outright rejects the request.

Her father!

Sure, the man is characterized as a coward, but it’s preposterous that he wouldn’t give a boat to help find his daughter. But how boring would the scene have been if the father had said, “Yes, of course, Orlando Bloom Guy, how big of a boat would you like?”

I notice also that shows like Heroes and Lost employ this technique to the point of absurdity. Characters will completely change their goals from one scene to the next to satisfy the story’s need for conflict. No explanation is given or required because the viewer demands conflict in order to remain interested. Removing conflict – no matter how ridiculous – would mean putting the viewer to sleep.