The Purpose of Conflict

in screenwriting books and classes we're told that conflict is an extremely important element of storytelling but it's rarely explained why this is the case we're told that conflict drives a story and keeps an audience engaged but why is conflict actually important what is its purpose in a story today I want to examine these questions and lay out how conflict should be approached when writing a screenplay let's begin first I want to quickly define conflict conflict is a struggle between opposing forces this struggle is what makes up the events of a story as a character tries to reach a goal something is stopping them and they must figure out how to overcome the obstacle another way to think about it is that conflict is the problems that exist and the attempts to solve those problems so a story's plot is simply the character trying to solve the problems in front of them and if the character solves enough problems they get to the end there are two main types of conflict that most screenwriting books and classes focus on external conflict and internal conflict external conflict deals with the obstacles the character faces in the external world usually this has to do with the character's goal the character wants something in the world but there are forces stopping them from getting it in the Lord of the Rings Frodo wants to get the ring to Mordor but there's an army of Orcs in the way in Sicario kate wants to capture the heads of the cartel but they are well hidden and well-funded and snowpiercer curtis wants to get to the front of the Train but there's a small army standing in his way the internal conflict has to do with the internal choices the character must make and the emotional attachments the character has for Frodo he struggles on whether or not to keep the ring for himself he also struggles with his friendship with Sam as the ring begins to tear them away from each other for Kate she struggles with the legality and morality of what it takes to take down the cartel for Curtis he struggles with the sacrifices he must make regarding the people he cares about most bad stories have these two types of conflict if you look at any movie it will likely have an external conflict the character must overcome and there will be some sort of love interest or other relational tie that causes internal conflict and inner joy PSA's that have to be made by the main character but once the character gets the job gets the money and gets the love of their life many times we get to the end and ask why did I watch that what was the point of the story when you get to the end of a film or screenplay and you have this kind of so what feeling that's usually because the story didn't really have anything to say thinking about conflict as simply external and internal is the wrong way to look at stories to understand why these elements of conflict don't actually help us write great stories we need to answer an important question what is the purpose of story if we can understand the purpose of stories then we can understand why conflict is such a major part of a great story in his book story Robert McKee writes story is metaphor for life and to be alive is to be in seemingly perpetual conflict what McKee is saying is that stories exist to show us examples of possible ways to live or to raise questions about how to live stories may entertain inform or persuade but ultimately stories exist to show us how to live life how others live life or to examine deep questions about life when creating deep conflict in a story it's not about creating large-scale action sequences or perfectly written dialogue there's a deeper more important purpose for conflict McKee writes if I could send a telegram to the film producers of the world it would be these three words meaning produces emotion Michael Arndt writer of Little Miss Sunshine Toy Story 3 and other stories says when you're talking about meaning you're talking about the values that are embedded in your story so when you talk about values you're talking about guides to life how you live your life what you think is worth living for or what you think is worth doing what you think is not worth doing so in a weird way stories are really sort of guides to how you live your life if stories are about competing values then they're about competing visions of how you should really live your life the purpose of story is to give you an understanding of a possible way to live life great stories give us a way to learn about life by looking at characters and using them to examine our own lives characters in a great story aren't just in conflict because they want to get the job or save the world they are in conflict because of conflicting values or beliefs and this brings us to the most important type of conflict remember McKee's quote meaning produces emotion there is one type of conflict that sits above the external and internal conflict the philosophical or moral conflict like human beings characters move through their worlds with their own sets of values and worldviews the world in which characters live challenges their values in different ways this is what creates moral conflict other characters believe different things about how to live as these different characters hold on to their differing worldviews they are placed into conflict in his book of the anatomy of story John Truby writes great storytelling isn't just conflict between characters its conflict between characters and their values external and internal conflict are just extensions of the philosophical conflict characters struggle against other characters who hold different worldviews which creates the external conflict characters struggle with what they believe and how their beliefs impact other people which creates the internal conflict the Lord of the Rings trilogy focuses around the struggle between the values of good versus the values of evil the philosophical conflict in the film is focused around whether or not good is worth fighting for even against overwhelming odds this good versus evil struggle may seem simplistic but it is one of the most fundamental philosophical struggles in story the Lord of the Rings didn't resonate with so many people simply because of the battle scenes and depth of the story world although that definite he helped the story really resonates because of the moral conflict that takes place the destruction of the Ring is a philosophical triumph of good over evil not simply an external task to be completed Sicario is a film that centers around morality and justice where the Lord of the Rings says this is how you should live Sicario only shows the philosophical struggle without having an answer to who's right Sicario focuses on the struggle between the values of traditional morality and the rule of law versus doing whatever it takes to crush evil not only that but the film focuses on the values of personal justice and whether or not someone has the right to work outside of the law to avenge their loved ones Sicario asks questions like do the ends justify the means should we abandon traditional rules to defeat greater evils and should people be allowed to take justice into their own hands snowpiercer deals with the values of the collective versus the values of the individual the film also deals with continuing to believe in a corrupt system or abandoning the system for what could be a better future snowpiercer brings up questions like should individuals sacrifice for the collective should we abandon a flawed system for a possible better future or should we simply accept the status quo this philosophical struggle between different systems of values is what truly engages us for the different characters their external goals and internal conflicts come out of their personal belief systems rather than being arbitrarily created to serve the plot but how do these films actually wrestle with these different ideas and worldviews they do it by giving different characters different world views or value systems that place them in conflict with the other characters when a story uses different characters to stand as different points of view in a philosophical conflict meaning in depth is given to the story and to each scene I won't be looking at every single character in each of these stories just enough to give an understanding of the way that these stories use a web of characters to create philosophical conflict in the Lord of the Rings Frodo and Aragorn are in the middle of the character web in this fight against good and evil Frodo constantly struggles between what he must do and the evil that he carries with him at all times Sam stands as the beacon of hope he encourages Frodo and always believes good can win Smeagol stands as a character who has become poisoned by his time in darkness he is in constant flux between desiring to be good and his addiction to evil as much as he tries to escape it he is obsessed with the evil of the ring Gandalf is a traditional mentor figure in the story the real purpose of a mentor character isn't to tell the main character how to complete their external objective it is to show the main character the value system that the mentor character believes in and off believes and fighting for good against all odds and he leads Frodo in this belief Sauron is the ultimate force of antagonism and the symbol of pure evil Saruman believes that good cannot always triumph over evil and that you must accept the world as it is he tries to convince Gandalf of this point of view but fails however he does show that even those who are very wise can fall into darkness Aragorn struggles in a similar way to Frodo as he fights in the different battles for middle-earth one of the most compelling philosophical conflicts of the characters surrounding Aragorn is with Arwen and Elrond while Aragorn and Arwen want to be together Elrond shows them what he believes is the truth our own makes the audience consider what could happen after the fight for good is one is the fight for good even worth it if death and loneliness sit on the other side these philosophical questions are what make this story so powerful and loved by so many there are many other characters in this story that are great examples of Phyllis conflict like Boromir Denethor and Galadriel just to name a few and all of their conflicts revolve around the struggle between good and evil and Sicario Kate macer sits in the middle of the character web she believes in the rule of law and doing everything aboveboard she is a moral person and follows legal structures her partner Reggie believes the same thing and as Kate dives into the morally grey struggle at the us-mexico border Reggie tries to keep her from falling into this grey world just don't keep us in the dark Matt is a character who has fully embraced the grey morality of this world yet also believes he is fighting for ultimate good he believes the ends justify the means and to take down monsters who don't follow rules you must also abandon some of the rules you follow Matt believes in being pragmatic and understanding that the world doesn't always fit into a legal system made by people who are thousands of miles away Alejandro has also embraced the grey morality but he isn't like Matt he only fights for himself and for revenge Alejandro isn't concerned with drugs or who controls what city he wants justice for his family and he believes that justice comes by killing the man who murdered them the story allows the audience to draw their own conclusions about who may be right do you think the people who sent you any different oh do you think we learned it from these different points of view create the conflict between these characters as they go after the cartel in snowpiercer Kurtis sits at the middle of the character web Kurtis has a good heart and wants to lead his people to freedom where they can be well fed and taken care of Kurtis believes in the system of the Train he doesn't consider leaving it or stopping it only controlling it we control the engine we control the world Wilfred is the main force of antagonism he is the symbol of the oppressive system that Kurtis lives within but Wilfred is also a pragmatist he is someone who depending on your point of view may be completely right in his belief that every person must stay in their proper position for the system to work the front and the tail supposed to walk together edgar is curtis's devoted follower as Kurtis continues his revolution he must make decisions between saving those he is trying to help and getting to the front of the Train Edgar's loyalty and ultimately his death pressures Kurtis into questioning why he is trying to reach the front of the train in the first place Gilliam is similar to Gandalf at least on the surface he is the mentor figure to Kurtis however in the end it is revealed that Gilliam and Wilfred were working together that wasn't what Gilliam and I had in our plan what making Wilford seem even more correct Kurtis was simply following the system by revolting for the system to continue Gilliam and Wilford both believed that those at the bottom and those at the top must play their roles namgoong is the character who breaks the system entirely believing that the only way to overthrow the leaders of a corrupt system is to destroy the system altogether Yona and timmy survived and stan is the possibility of a new future after the current system is destroyed I realize I didn't go through every single character in every single one of these films that was partly for time and partly because that's not the point while the more peripheral characters have less of an impact on the philosophical conflict they still stand as a point of conflict that challenges or affirms what the main characters believe the characters in these films don't just exist to make the world more interesting and they don't simply exist to be allies or to simply create roadblocks for the main character their purpose in the story is deeper than that each of the characters push the other characters and the audience deeper into the philosophical conflict at the core of the story the philosophical conflict at the center is what gives the story its meaning the characters internal struggles and external plot may be interesting but it is only engaging because of the deeper conflict happening on the philosophical level writing teachers might tell you that you need conflict in every scene and while you do need conflict in your scenes this type of advice is missing the point of how stories actually work and what makes them great sure scenes need conflict but what kind a story filled with simple external conflict in every scene will be unengaging all of the external and internal conflict exists under the umbrella of the ultimate conflict which is the philosophical or moral conflict you might ask doesn't this cause stories to be preachy or bash you over the head with a worldview no bad writing causes preachy films all great films quote-unquote preach at you in the sense that they deal with philosophical conflict you just may not realize it at the time write stories with deep meaning find the meaning in the deep conflict between differing philosophies and worldviews that is the purpose of story and that is the purpose of conflict hi I hope you liked the video if you're a screenwriter looking to brainstorm ideas share and receive feedback and learn about the writing process along with other writers then you should join the writers room on Facebook link is in the description below in the next video I'll be covering how to actually create conflict for your story after you've understood these principles thanks for watching [Music]

Channel: Tyler Mowery

Views: 93,356

Rating: 4.9754949 out of 5

Keywords: film analysis, movie review, tyler mowery, nerdwriter, lessons from the screenplay, every frame a painting, screenwriting, script breakdown, writing, workshop, writing course, teach screenwriting, oscar best screenplay, film school, the purpose of conflict, snowpiercer, sicario, lord of the rings, michael arndt, syd field, robert mckee, conflict, philosophical conflict, masterclass, scene conflict, story conflict

Id: 59_Ho1GTUk4

Length: 17min 48sec (1068 seconds)

Published: Fri May 24 2019