Perception often leads to deception; how one sees the world of story shapes their understanding of it, granting them all sorts of interpretations that may or may not be accurate. As with Christopher Nolan’s dark treatise on dueling magicians, unveiling what is really going on within a story can lead to an emotional catharsis for writers themselves; leading them to even greater expressions of meaningful fiction.

Stories are a decidedly human adventure and thus are prone to the inaccuracies and preconceptions prevalent within the minds of those who experience them. It is with that in mind that I confess an error in my original evaluation of Toy Story 3. If context creates meaning, then it also can be seen as the source for any miscalculations in the judgment of a story’s ultimate message.

There are two ways to adapt a favorite novel or short story for the silver screen — the right way and the wrong way. The first requires a comprehensive understanding of the original source material. The second only needs an ambivalence towards the mechanism behind what makes great stories great.

Identifying the problem within a screenplay is one thing, offering up a viable workable solution is another. The key is honoring the work that is already there. Healing a false moment, like resolving the differences between two characters, should come as a natural progression of events and inflict the least amount of damage in the process.

A complete story combines character, plot, theme and genre into a delicious concert of meaning that both satisfies and fulfills the appetites of avid moviegoers everywhere. If just one bit is slightly off, it can make all the difference between a film destined for the 5$ bin and one destined for the halls of the timeless classics. Toy Story 3 may defy that convention.

Not every Hero is created the same. While on the surface they may appear to be interchangeable passengers on the same transformational “journey”, the truth is that deep down, they carry their own unique set of circumstances and issues that differentiate themselves from each other. Stories are complicated yet sophisticated beasts, they deserve as much then in our understanding of them.

Overwhelmingly, fans of historical war drama prefer the original Band of Brothers series over this year’s offering, The Pacific. Taking a closer look at how both series were structured, it becomes clear why many had a difficult time staying with the Marines for all ten episodes.

While the complaints concerning Avatar’s resemblance to Dances with Wolves and Pocahontas are abundant and well covered, there is one aspect of this story that is not covered in as much detail, and that is the problem with the Main Character, Jake Sully. A well-written Main Character is the key to bringing an audience into a story. Screw it up and you risk losing emotional involvement.

Avatar is an easy target for the online generation of YouTube haters. But what isn’t as well understood are the similarities between this latest Cameron sci-fi monstrosity and its doppelganger from the mid-70s, Star Wars. Those same detractors may have reason to pause if they took the time to fully appreciate what both films were trying to accomplish.

Finding meaning in the events that unfold in our lives is the responsibility of every screenwriter. Communicating that meaning with clarity and precision is the responsibility of effective story structure. Combine the two together and you elevate a simple biopic into something meaningful and lasting.

A beautifully well-structured story that effortlessly communicates a deeply meaningful argument about the issues facing the modern worker, Up In The Air is easily the best story of 2009. By analyzing why this film works so well, we can see how one can combine character, plot, theme and genre into a work of lasting value.

An examination of the sci-fi psychological thriller Moon and the missed opportunities for story greatness. While the film raises interesting questions, it fails to compose the complete argument necessary to provide us with meaningful answers.

A in-depth examination of the thematic issues raised by the blockbuster comedy of 2009. The author fully acknowledges the sad irony of analyzing a film in this much detail when it could just as easily be interpreted as a vehicle for penis jokes.

The biggest comedy of the year also happens to be, from a story structure standpoint, one of the most interestingly constructed films. Humor is definitely the focus here, but it is the thematic issues that make the film feel fresh.

With in-depth film analysis comes the opportunity for mistakes or oversights. While the original analysis for Children of Men was both insightful and illuminating, it did contain some misinterpretations of key portions of the story’s structure. With time (and a little help from some friends) comes perspective and hopefully a better understanding of what makes a great story great.

There are some films that are so subtle in the area of character development that it can be difficult to determine exactly what is being said. In the case of The Wrestler, there was a fine line regarding Randy’s emotional growth and where he ended up. For accuracy to prevail, it becomes necessary not to confuse the world of the real with the world of the story.

A detailed look at the thought process I went into while analyzing I Am Legend.

The alternate version on DVD was FAR superior to the theatrical release. This article explains exactly why.

The latest trailer for Pixar’s 2008 summer release has all the parts that make up a great story.

Approaching the analysis of a story using the Dramatica software.

An in-depth look at the story structure behind a successful romantic comedy.

It’s not an easy thing adapting a short story into a workable screenplay. Frank Darabont proves as much in his latest attempt at bringing Stephen King to the silver screen.

An obvious candidate for an Impact Character if there ever was one.

A visual look at the structure behind this classic film.

An argument as to why the film was not as successful as it probably could have been.

Mind-mapping the structure behind stories.

Visually awesome…but missing something very important in terms of story.

Key portions of the story’s structure were left out, thus leaving us with a film that was not as emotionally compelling as it could have been.

While weaving two stories into one piece can be done, it can lead to a fidgeting audience.

A mishmash of different stories causes this film to live up to the confusing nature of its Biblical namesake.

The “You and I” moment present in what I consider to be the greatest series ever on television.

Why the story limit is so important.

There’s more to this film than hearty laughs.

Sharing the personal throughline across different characters.

A very detailed look at the story structure behind one of the X-Files’ greatest episodes.

Using Dramatica to analyze this Dr. Seuss classic.

David Milch explains the relationship at the heart of this majestic series.

Stories become meaningless when both principal characters change the way they see the world.

Using the Dramatica theory of story to identify the holes present in this classic film.

A detailed examination of the structural bones behind this classic film.

The trailer for First Snow seems to base much of its appeal on the thematic issues explored in the story.

How to determine whether or not your Main Character has changed their essential nature or remained steadfast.

An in-depth look into this hard-boiled thriller.

Many have commented that while they found the film highly entertaining, they felt cheated at the end. I would agree with them.

Explanations for why the film was probably not as successful as it could have been.

Different cultures emphasize different throughlines in a story.

How a movie poster reveals the story structure of a film.

Different cultures emphasize different parts of a story.

A detailed analysis of the story structure behind this romantic comedy.

First impressions from the group analysis for this film.

My first in-depth analysis and still one of my favorites.

The Main Character is the most important viewpoint into a story’s problems because it is the most personal.

Plot leaks of WALL-E reveal a well-developed story.

Disappointing first analysis of a film.

A recap of the group analysis of this film.

A review of what I consider to be the greatest show on television.

As much as I love Will Ferrell, I can’t stand bad story structure.

It’s not necessarily the romantic one.

Wow. What a disappointment.

Identifying an error in the way the story was structured.

Not as good as I had hoped.

Have you ever been watching a film that just makes you go, “When will this ever end?!” There’s a way to fix that.

One of my first attempts at analysis finds me writing about the Vince Vaughn/Jennifer Aniston romantic comedy “the break-up.”

There are good trailers and then there are bad trailers. The best trailers compel you to go to the theater. And as always, the most compelling ones incorporate Dramatica concepts.

Can a 3-minute trailer lay the foundation for a Grand Argument Story? I think if a movie wants to draw an audience into the theater it has to. And the Sam Mendes film, Jarhead, does just that.

I didn’t love it as much as I wanted to.

My very very first attempt at an in-depth analysis.