I’ve been thinking about the difference between story and plot when it comes to screenwriting. And, if I’m honest, I sometimes use those words interchangeably. I tink this comes from learning about script structure so I often end up conflating the two. But they are different. And I don’t just mean in the spelling.
If we are talking about Western/Hollywood films, and that’s then only type I can talk about really, I would say that story is the single most important element of a great screenplay.
Everything should come from story. Theme, characters, dialogue, and later all the visuals come from story.
I define story in the context of a screenplay as what the screenplay or film is about. For example, in Star Wars: A New Hope the story is about the family that we create. The plot is what happens, or how the story is told. The events.
If story is about what the screenplay is about could a screenplay succeed with a strong plot but a weak story? Or is a strong story always necessary for a successful screenplay?
I think story is still important. Although, I hope it’s rare for a film to succeed with a weak story. And we would need to look at how we’re defining success (box office, reviews, audience reactions, or all of the above).
For example, one of my favorite films growing up was Enter the Dragon. It’s essentially a weak James Bond-style story with a splash of revenge. But it was how the story was told that made it work. Most Western audiences hadn’t seen a martial arts film, let alone one that was closer to realism and grittier than most kung-fu films coming out at the time.
I guess this makes it sound like execution can elevate a weak story, therefore, story isn’t always the most important element.
But I think story is still important.
Going back to Enter the Dragon, the acting was average as was the cinematography. What helped it was the plot and, perhaps, the untimely death of its star. Would it have been as big had Bruce Lee lived? Maybe, maybe not. But how much better would Enter the Dragon have been if the story was better and less cliched? The scenes between the fight scenes were ok.
Let’s look at comedy. The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad! The first 45-ish minutes are wall to wall jokes. And then it feels like it runs out of steam and the story has to take over. Similar thing happened with Airplane! an earlier movie that had even more jokes per minute. That wasn’t enough to sustain it for its running time, so story had to take over.
You definitely need story, if you’re writing comedy. I used to run into that issue when I first started as a teenager. I was trying to write from joke to joke, without story. Even with The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad! I cited earlier, Nordberg is shot by drug dealers and Frank and Ed need to solve that crime.
Western action movies begin with a story. Even though spectacle takes over. For example, Mission: Impossible 1 is about avenging the found family we lose. Whereas the last Mission: Impossible movies (Dead Reckoning and Final Reckoning) were about loss. I only vaguely remember the plot because the stunts took precedent.
What this has made me realize, and I still don’t have firm conclusions really, is that I need to make sure I’m clear about the difference between story and plot in my own scripts and films. Especially with comedy.
My conclusions haven’t full formed yet. So I may end up coming back to the post at some point in the future and editing it.
