My first attempt at analysis finds me writing about the Vince Vaughn/Jennifer Aniston romantic comedy “the break-up.”
First off, let me apologize for the writing. It may seem stifled and incoherent at times and that’s because I am waaaay out of practice. There was a time when I would write for an hour in the morning every day except Sunday. I loved it. The words just flowed out and I felt like what I was typing was what was in my head.
But now, especially that last sentence, I feel like I’m trudging through a ravine of molassess as I try to put words to blog. So forgive me here in the beginning, it should get better as it goes along.
A lot of what follows may seem as if it rambles, but I thought it would be interesting to see the sort of thought process that goes on when using Dramatica as a tool for analysis.
So I thought I’d try my hand at some analysis. I usually hit the theaters on Wednesday night, so I’ll try and do a review, from a Dramatica perspective, on Thursdays. We’ll see how long it lasts…
the break-up
(spoilers ahead!)
I have to say right off the bat, that I enjoyed this movie. Probably because I was set up to be really disappointed in it. Many people told me how depressing it was, how the ending was a big downer, and how unlikable Vince Vaughn was.
I thought he was great.
But let me try to stick to looking at the story through the Dramatica lens.
Throughlines and Importance
The Main and Impact Character’s Relationship (the Subjective Story) seems to be the focal point for the movie. It’s even the centerpiece of the one-sheet above. Well told and often well-acted, the director used up a significant portion of screentime to display their slowly dissolving relationship.
There may be a bit too much of it though - too much of a focus on the “War of the Roses”-like struggle - that takes away from some of the other throughlines.
Next up in level of importance would be the Objective Story. By the way, at User’s Group Meetings and elsewhere, I’m often wrong in identifying throughlines, so I could be way off on this. That being said, to me, it seemed as if “Changing Gary’s Nature” could be the title of the throughline. (Dramatica fans will instantly see my prejudice in regards to where I think the main focus of concern is for the story.)
Brooke (Jennifer Anniston) is the Protagonist - you know, now that I think about it, the film does have a very Tragic feeling to it. There is a sense that there was some Failure at the end of the story - as if the goal had not been met. But, Gary’s Nature does change at the end, so I’m way off in my Objective Story throughline.
I think that the Objective Story Goal has to do with them reconciling their relationship - “Getting Back Together” - that doesn’t happen - so there is a Story Outcome of Failure.
Third and fourth throughline of importance are the Main Character and Impact Character. They seem pretty even handed - but, for my tastes, there doesn’t seem to be enough Main Character moments. We certainly are made to feel like we’re in Brooke’s shoes, being assaulted and insulted by Gary’s thoughtlessness. But I felt like there wasn’t enough there for me to connect to.
Overall the film is very familiar (too familiar for some of my married friends!) so there is some sort of inherent connection there. But when it comes to storytelling, I think more of a developed Main Character throughline would’ve been in order.
Downer Endings
Many feel unresolved by the ending. I actually like the open-endedness of the story - the “bittersweet” feeling. As mentioned before, I think the Story Outcome was a Failure, but I think the Main Character’s Judgment, how Brooke is left at the end of the story, is Good.
She seems to have shed a lot of the angst she felt towards Gary - she would’ve been willing to make room for his pool table and when they meet again on the street, she’s vibrant and pleasantly at ease around him.
Perhaps most would’ve liked them to get back together - but it is nice to see a major Summer romantic comedy like this take the chance at disappointing their audience.

1 response so far ↓
1 Chris Huntley // Jun 15, 2006 at 3:21 pm
Good analysis and I think your take on the ending is spot on.
I’ll add one more bit and that is a few comments about Story Reception. I don’t think the bittersweet (redemptive) ending necessarily is a turnoff to audiences. I think the marketing dept. misled the audience into thinking “The Break-up” is a comedy. It’s not. It’s marginally a dramedy. The trailers make it look like a date movie–NOT. Well, it can be a date movie if you know what you’re in for. 90% of the material for the trailer is in the first third to half of the film. The second half is pretty unfunny.
So, were they right in marketing it the way they did? If they make money I guess so. It’s hard to say if audiences would go to it if there was more truth in advertising. Personally, I didn’t like being “fooled.” The marketeers did the same thing with “The Weather Man” (even more unfunny) and it just pissed me off–even though I think it is a good film with a very strong story structure.
– Chris
Leave a Comment