Hi, I'm Michael. This is Lessons from the Screenplay.
I consider American Beauty to be a perfect movie. As close as any movie can get to perfect, anyway.
It's a great example of a character drama that's gripping, funny, and profoundly moving.
Since so much of the film is character-centric, I want to talk about their design, and how
screenwriter Alan Ball uses dialogue to reveal their personalities.
And finally, I want to briefly touch on how close American Beauty came to being a very
different movie.
Let’s look closer at the screenplay for American Beauty.
All Characters Are Variations of the Theme
I'm going to begin with a quote from John Truby’s “Anatomy of Story.”
“The single biggest mistake writers make when creating characters is that they think
of the hero and all other characters as separate individuals…The result is not only a weak
hero but also cardboard opponents and minor characters who are even weaker.”
In a good story, the characters aren’t selected at random. They each add something to the
story and demonstrate an aspect of the theme.
Let’s look at the characters in American Beauty to see why.
The protagonist, Lester, is on a journey of re-awakening. As he says in the beginning
of the film:
“In less than a year, I’ll be dead. And in a way, I’m dead already.”
He’s tired of putting on a show for the sake of appearances, and he is trying to find
his true self.
Now let's examine all the other characters. We’ll see they're also on a journey to find
their true selves, and each embody a different aspect of appearances in our society.
Carolyn defines her self worth based entirely on how successful she appears.
As Lester points out:
“This isn’t life! This is just stuff. And it’s become more important to you than
living. Well, honey, that’s just nuts.”
On her journey to find her true self she’s searching in the wrong places and looking
for quick fixes.
Jane is surrounded by people who think that image determines your worth.
“Jane, honey, are you trying to look unattractive?”
“There’s nothing worse in life than being ordinary.”
On her journey, Jane begins looking in the wrong place, but finds someone who allows
her to see how special she already is.
Colonel Fitts is so terrified of his true self that he locks it away, aggressively putting
forth an appearance that is counter to his real nature.
And Ricky has already found his true self and completed the journey. He uses his video
camera to see through the appearances people put on, to see the beauty that is underneath.
On Lester’s journey, he bumps into all these characters and gets glimpses of how to live.
“I think you just became my personal hero.”
If you think about it, all this should be really obvious.
If you're making a movie about a thing, why include characters who have no relation to that thing?
Who have no opinion about it? Who aren't struggling with it?
This kind of character web is one way to show your theme to the audience.
Now that we’ve seen how the characters all compliment each other on their journeys, let’s
look at how screenwrtier Alan Ball uses dialogue to reveal details about those characters.
Let’s start by writing a scene.
A bad version of a scene from early in American Beauty. And then compare it to the actual
script to see what the differences are.
First let’s describe our goals.
Number one: establish what a normal dinner is like in the Burnham household.
And number two: let the audience know Jane’s parents have been ignoring her, especially
Lester. We want them to be motivated to take a more active interest in her.
Let’s begin.
Interior, dining room, night.
JANE: I want us to change the music that we listen to at dinner all the time.
CAROLYN: No. I do all of the cooking, so I choose the music.
LESTER: Well, I’d like to talk about my terrible day at work. I’ve been assigned
a task I hate, and your mother didn’t agree with me, so Jane I want you to take my side.
No. We haven’t talked in several months, so I’m really upset at you.
Jane stands.
I really wish you would take a more active interest in me.
And scene!
So obviously, this is terrible. Tommy Wiseau terrible. But why?
The characters are just saying what they want. There is no consideration of the power dynamics,
of their insecurities. There’s no subtext.
And the way they speak is so generic, we get no insight into their personalities.
So let’s look at the actual scene as written, and break it down line-by-line.
“Mom, do we always have to listen to this elevator music?”
This lets us know four things. Jane hates this kind of music, wants to change the music
they listen to, her mother has the power, and her use of “always” implies this is
a typical dinner with the Burnhams.
“No. No, we don’t. As soon as you’ve prepared a nutritious yet savory meal that
I’m about to eat, you can listen to whatever you like.”
Carolyn doesn’t just refuse Jane, she does it in a way that reveals her personality.
She's passive aggressive and clearly feels underappreciated.
Now Lester wants to complain about work and for Jane to take his side. But he doesn’t
say this directly, instead:
“So Janie, how was school?”
“It was okay.”*
Note this parenthetical. Her suspicion implies he doesn’t ask this very often. She detects
an ulterior motive.
“Just okay?”
“No, dad. It was spectacular.”
After weakly attempting to ask about her day, Lester launches into complaining.
"Well, you want to know how things went at my job today?"
Now the stakes are raised and the conflict builds.
“You couldn’t possibly care less, could you?”
“Well, what do you expect? You can’t all of a sudden be my best friend, just because
you had a bad day.”
“I mean, hello. You’ve barely even spoken to me for months.”
She is direct, firm, and and throws the truth of their situation back at him.
And in doing so reveals the exposition that is also intended for the audience.
Alan Ball consistently writes dialogue that feels natural within the world of the film.
It has layers of subtext when appropriate, and reveals the psychology of the characters.
“I'm so proud of you! You know, I watched you very closely — you didn’t screw up once!”
The last thing I want to very briefly touch on is the role of intentionality in filmmaking.
Director Sam Mendes said, “The movie you see is not the movie I thought I was shooting…
I thought I was making a much more whimsical, comic story, kaleidoscopic, almost like a
Coen brothers movie…
And what I found in the cutting room was a much more emotional, haunting animal than
I had imagined.”
What does it mean if a creator thinks they’re making one movie, but ends up making another movie?
A better movie?
I would love to examine all of this more, but, there just isn’t enough time.
I wanted to talk about some of the screenplay’s flaws.
I wanted to reveal what is in the twenty-seven pages of script that Sam Mendes cut out of
the final movie, and how they change the whole nature of the film.
But, all of that just couldn’t fit into one video.
So I decided to make two!
And I’ll be back next week with part two of American Beauty.
Hey guys, Michael here, thank you very, very much for watching this video on American Beauty.
I'm really, really enjoying making these videos. I love it and I would love to keep doing it.
But to do so, I need your help.
So if you're enjoying these videos, please considering supporting this channel on Patreon.
The link is right below me.
And please like, and share, and subscribe!
And I will be back next week with part two of American Beauty.