I like to start off this part of analysis by identifying four major plot points: The Opening, end of Act One, end of Act Two, the Final Struggle. So here’s my take on the 68 pages shooting script: The Opening: PP. 1-5 which establishes location (space), key characters (Stone, Matt, Shariff), and the task they're involved in (repairing a telescope). Act One end: PP. 17-20 in which Stone is untethered from Explorer and sent hurtling into space alone. Act Two end: PP. 50-53 wherein Stone converses with the Inuit man and shuts off the oxygen, preparing to die. Final Struggle: PP. 63-67 in which the pod reenters the Earth's atmosphere, lands in a lake, and Stone has to escape the sinking pod, then swim to the surface of the lake. Lots of intriguing dynamics in sorting out plot points in Gravity. First off, whatever numeric scheme you or I may be working with (mine is largely internal at this point) will likely not match up a script 68 pages long. For example, those paradigms out there asserting that the 'break into Act Two' happens between 25-27? You could look at Matt and Stone making it back to Explorer as an act break, but (A) it doesn't feel like one and (B) that makes for a truncated second act. Next point: Any of these categories we use like plot points are finally artificial ones. Stories are organic - or at least should be experienced that way by a script reader or movie audience. However we can use them as tools for analysis and story development. Why do I think the end of Act One is when Stone gets sent hurtling out into space? In my view, the end of Act One is where everything is set up, we know in effect where the story is headed. The news of the debris from Houston is, I think, the Call To Adventure, literally, "Here it comes!" The assault of the space debris follows soon thereafter which is part of the plot point, but the real immersion into the New World -- the post-catastrophe experience -- is when Stone becomes disconnected from Explorer. Hurtling through space, alone and discombobulated, is her jarring transition from Old World to New World. It sets the tone for the rest of the story in that ultimately, Stone will have to survive on her own. Again we shouldn't get hung up on distinctions like this as there's no right or wrong. This is especially true for a story like Gravity where one event happens directly after another in compressed time. The Opening, End of Act Two, and The Ending are all pretty clear, from the perspective of script analysis. The only gray area is End of Act One. For me, that apex of that plot point happens when Stone detaches. That's when the gravity -- pun intended -- of the situation gets driven home to us in a dramatic, gut-wrenching way. Check out the action here, specifically 01:25 of the clip. I've seen the movie. I've read the scripts. I know what's coming. But even now watching the clip, my stomach sinks when I see Stone sent off into space. Those are my thoughts on the four primary plot points. How about you? And what other plot points do you see in the shooting script? I welcome and look forward to your comments!

Hey Scott- I'm jumping ahead myself and going off topic. From an internal standpoint, I felt like I knew where Sandra Bullock's journey was headed when George Clooney says in the first Act - and then I think a few times later, "you've got to learn to let go." To me, that's her simple emotional journey that informs the whole story. I guess two movies last year had "let it go" as their inner engine ;)

Key Plot Points: The inciting incident - When Houston informs the astronauts of the impending debris field and the subsequent call to abort the mission. Break into Act two - When Ryan breaks loose and is cast away into space on her own. She literally is flung into her journey towards resurecttion. The Midpoint - Ryan and Matt are separated again. This time for good. She suffers a defeat, is at a low point and must find the strength to continue. Black moment/Break into act three - At her lowest ebb Ryan gives up and shuts off the oxygen in the pod. Ready to die. Finale - Renewed, she fights to get back to earth. The pod lands back on earth. She emerges from the lake reborn.

My take on critical plot points: Opening : Establish location, characters, roles. And expectations (Ryan: “When we touch down tomorrow, I’m buying all you guys a round of drinks.”) And plant ironic premonition: (Matt: “I have a bad feeling about this mission”.) [About the last 2, I hope to say more.] Inciting Incident: Houston informs them that high-tech caca has hit the fan and is headed their way. Cross the Threshold into Act 2: Stone must detach in order to survive. Strategy: Matt: hopscotch over to the Chinese space station, use the re-entry pod. MidPoint: Matt must cut loose so that one of them may live; he sacrifices his life to save hers. She’s on her own. All is Lost: Ryan believes her predicament is hopeless; she will die. Subjective epiphany: Ryan finally accepts her child's death -- and regroups her will to fight to live. (Which enables the...) Objective epiphany: What Matt said: use the landing thrusters to navigate over to the Chinese space station.. Do or Die: Brave the crossing of the re-entry threshold, get back to earth in the Chinese pod. Some randomized thoughts on Strategy: The plot path between the start of Act 2 and the mid-point still seems to be (in my study of the literature) terra incognita, vaguely chartered in terms of what could or should happen, certainly vaguely described : It’s the time for “fun and games” , for the delivering on the “promise of the premise”, for initiating the “B” story. It seems to me whatever else is going on in the 1st half of Act 2, particularly in action genre films, it’s a time when the protagonist develops a strategy for achieving the objective goal, a specific means towards the desired end. Initially it may be general, incomplete, maybe even the wrong strategy. No matter: the protagonist has the luxury of some time, a margin for error, to develop a winning strategy. But in “Gravity”, by the start of Act 2, the stakes, the jeopardy, the urgency have gone from idle to past the red line (to use the analogy of a tachometer). Ryan and Matt don’t have the luxury of drifting along in space wondering what to do next. There is no time, there is no margin for error. They will die in minutes. They need a survival strategy NOW. It's not enough to say they want to live -- of course they do! But how? Matt has a 'how', a Strategy: hopscotch over to the Chinese space station, use their re-entry pod. And it occurs to me that the Strategy can do double duty: Scott mentioned in an earlier post that it helps if early on a story points out to a script the direction the story is going. (Not whether the character will get there or how, of course.) It seems to me, that mission is accomplished with the Strategy in "Gravity". It gives a specific answer to the question "where is the story going?" It's going to the Chinese space station, the last hope for Ryan to get out of space -- and the story -- alive. fwiw.

I pretty much agree with the major plot points highlighted above. To me, the script revolves around six main sequences (or plot points): the debris unsettling the astronauts from their mission, Ryan spiraling out into space, Matt's death, Ryan's attempted suicide, Ryan's arrival at the Chinese station and Ryan's landing on Earth. Obviously there are smaller sequences and plot points in between but I think these essentially mark the beginning and end of the most crucial points in the film. One question for Matt and Pgronk -- Perhaps I'm being a bit pedantic, but isn't the Inciting Incident the arrival of debris? I see the orders from Houston as the Call to Adventure, which Ryan so dutifully ignores (in typical protag fashion) and as a result suffers the consequences. I guess it doesn't really matter but traditionally protagonists tend to ignore the initial Call and therefore pay the price upon the arrival of the Inciting Incident. Who knows? Just trying to stimulate conversation...

Michelle, you're leading us toward Thursday's discussion on themes, but I am absolutely in agreement with you. In fact, I did a 7-part series analyzing the 'small story' of Gravity, what I call the Themeline, essentially the psychological journey Stone experienced, and I made precisely this point. You can read Part 3 here Part 4 here, and Part 5 here -- the most relevant posts to your point. We can get much more into this on Thursday, but clearly the filmmakers had this theme of Stone dealing with the tragedy of her daughter's death and the importance of her "letting go" at the emotional center of the story. Thanks for that observation, Michelle!

Matt, we concur. Those plot points function as the backbone of the story's structure.

Kalen: Pragmatically speaking, what is the difference between the Call and the Inciting Incident? Seems to me the terms are often conflated. I have my own definitions -- but this movie seems to be an exception to them. (And after all, no definition or rule is chiseled in stone.) ___________________________ Another randomized thought: the use of dramatic dilemma in "Gravity". It seems to me that the word "dilemma" is used as if it's so obvious it doesn't need to be defined. But the way it is misused in talking plot and character makes me believe it does need to be clearly defined. So, if I may be pedantic: A dilemma is not just a difficult problem, it is a special kind of of difficult problem. A dilemma is where a character is trapped between two choices. Either both choices are EQUALLY desireable. Or both are EQUALLY undesirable. The protagonist can only choose ONE. And he MUST choose between the two -- there are no other choices, no way out of choosing the only 2 available. So a dilemma is a "damned-if-(s)he-does, damned-if-(s)he-doesn't" moment and that is the moment forced upon Ryan when Matt tells her (p35) that she must untether him: "You have to let me go, or we both die." It's an impossible decision for Ryan to make, so it's up to Matt to resolve the dilemma. He unclips the tether, sacrifices his own life for her sake. That's the particular nature of that plot point; it involves a genuine dilemma, the hardest decision a human can make. It's what makes Matt not just a nice guy, a jocular companion, but a hero in his own right.

Paul, excellent analysis. Again I love seeing all the different language systems writers use. As analytical tools, they're all pretty helpful. I especially like what you did for Gravity with these three passages in Stone's metamorphosis:

All is Lost: Ryan believes her predicament is hopeless; she will die. Subjective epiphany: Ryan finally accepts her child’s death — and regroups her will to fight to live. (Which enables the…) Objective epiphany: What Matt said: use the landing thrusters to navigate over to the Chinese space station..

One way I like to look at movies is through an existential lens. That is, fundamentally a movie is about [most often] a Protagonist determining their very nature, who they are. That is why the Protagonist-Nemesis relationship is so critical, often confronting the P with the very real possibility they will be annihilated. Faced with the prospect of death or failure to attain their goal raises existential questions. Which is why that All Is Lost reversal at the end of Act Two is so important: Does the Protagonist accept defeat, return home, a place that is admittedly an inauthentic existence, but a place they know and can limp through life there. Or do they defy the odds, embrace what they have learned about their Inner Self / True Nature / Core Essence, and go forward? It is an existential question. This is what Stone faces. At first, she shuts off the oxygen. She has accepted defeat. She is turning away from her goal (getting back to Earth), probably in the belief she will reunite with her daughter in the After Life. In my language system, she is On The Defensive. Per Shawshank, this is her "Get buys dying" stage. Then 'Matt' shows up. It isn't Matt, of course, but rather a projection of her own True Nature in the form of Matt, that part of her which has emerged through her adventure in the form of courage, guile and persistence. Where she has displayed that in the External World pretty much up to this point through her actions, here what 'Matt' calls Stone to do is display her courage, guile and persistence in relation to HER OWN FEELING STATE. 'Matt' says to her:

But still, it’s a matter of what you do now. If you decide to go, then you gotta just get on with it. Sit back, enjoy the ride. You gotta plant both your feet on the ground and start livin’ life.

Per Shawshank, this is the "Get busy living" stage. And per your language system, this is her Subjective Epiphany. Based on that, she makes her existential choice: Who am I? I am not a woman who is prepared to die, I am going to accept the fact of my daughter's death and I am going to live. That, as you note, is the emotional springboard for her to emerge into her Objective Epiphany. Those pages, 49-59, that is where Stone's existential choice plays out. It has its own beginning, middle and end. It has two sets of voices speaking to her -- The Inuit guy, like a voice from Heaven, offering her a way to transition to death, and Matt, offering her a way to fight that temptation and claim life. Again: Get busy living or get busy dying. It ends with her making the choice and acting on it. This is stepping all over our discussion on Thursday, but I'm an instinctual writer and it just feels right to get into the content here. Anyhow thanks for that, Paul. Spawned some really interesting ideas in my head, a more nuanced understanding for me of what transpires in that critical sequence.

Kalen, you make a valid point about Stone's 'refusal of the call' to use Campbell's language. It's a bit nuanced as the typical take on the Hero's Journey is there is a clear call to adventure which the Hero refuses. Here Stone doesn't hear the call from Houston as a call to adventure, but rather an annoyance as she tries obsessively to finish her work. Yet it is do, in part, to her stubbornness she and Matt get into as much trouble as they do, at least that's her take on it. Re Call To Adventure vs. Inciting Incident vs. [my lingo] The Hook: To me, they're all interchangeable. There is the establishment of the Ordinary World (in the case of Gravity, while it does involve the remarkable setting of outer space, the actual work is akin to fixing a leaky faucet, mundane stuff), then SOMETHING HAPPENS. A major plot point that shifts the narrative in a different direction. The call from Houston is, in my view, the midpoint of the first act, a clarion call that shit is about to hit the fan, but then the shit actually DOES hit the fan. If I had to guess, the filmmakers probably thought about it like this. Establish them in space. Do some backstory re characters. 1st call from Houston to set up the danger. That buys us time for more character backstory. 2nd call: Here it comes. And we are into action. So call to adventure or not, that first call is probably more important just to set into motion the space junk. Finally, we need to remind ourselves: Stories are organic. We all bring whatever sense we have about how narrative works, but the needs of the story ALWAYS need to be able to trump paradigms, theories, formulas, etc.

>>To me, they’re all interchangeable That's the way I see it , too. IMHO: "Call to Adventure" is a misnomer in this film. It's not a "Call". It's a "Command"! It's a frightening fiat! In the classical scheme of the Hero's Adventure, the protagonist has the option of bailing out; he can refuse the call -- and, thus, never cross the threshold into the adventure. The characters in "Gravity" don't have that option. The adventure is forced upon them.

That's a great point, Paul, about the genuine dilemma Stone confronts on 35. And it sets up beautifully the later payoff: When 'Matt' shows up and lays out another genuine dilemma for Stone [53-56]: You can either let yourself die or you can confront the tragic past [daughter's death] and your own fear about trying to pull off the impossible [guide the Chinese pod back to Earth], likely to be incinerated. Thus the fact that the real Matt showed the heroism to untether himself and save Stone's life serves as a bridge for 'Matt,' an expression of Stone's own courage, to emerge so she can untether herself from the choice to die and the imprisonment of her tragic past.

>>> lays out another genuine dilemma for Stone [53-56] Good call. My reading of most movies is that the dilemma is what the protagonist dodges throughout the story until the "All is Lost" moment forces him--or her--to confront it. All the escape routes have been closed, the protagonist MUST choose or finally fail -- which in Ryan's case means death. (And making the right choice doesn't guarantee success -- it just created the possibility.)

Scott, those posts are so insightful. Thanks for providing the links. I never knew the featurette of the flip of side of the convo with Antiqaag (sp?) existed. Fascinating, haunting and beautiful.

Except that, classic myths, stories and yes, fairy tales, all concern following the call. None really have the option to reject the call. If they do reject, there is no story. Unless maybe it's a re-run of Seinfeld:) Anyway, I think frequently the call is the inciting moment. And in Gravity I think the call from Houston is literally the call. They can handle debris from inside the ship. It's her compulsion to not let go which makes her ignore the call and sets in motion her story.

Of course, if they don't answer the call, there is no story. But, nonetheless, I think that in most cases, they do have the choice of refusing the call. That what makes the character compelling: that they opt in when they could have opted out. The paramount question for me in mythology and in movies is WHY do they answer the call? What's the psychological hook, the emotional need that motivates them to respond proactively, to voluntarily choose the path of adventure. However, I think Gravity is an exception to the general paradigm. Ryan has no choice. Like John F. Kennedy said when he was asked how he became a war hero (through the PT109 I 1943): "It was involuntary. They sank my boat." As to the dramatic significance of her hesitation to respond to the alarm, I see it differently. Perhaps a topic for later discussion.

This discussion speaks to the endless variety of ways we can shape narrative. Take this idea that there is a Call. Sometimes there's a choice involved. Sometimes the Protagonist resists going along with the adventure, per Campbell's 'reluctant hero'. Sometimes they leap into the journey. Then there are times where there is no choice. Take the movie Lucy. She gets yanked into the adventure totally against her will. And when she DOES have a choice, it's after she's been implanted with the blue stuff and decides to go on the offensive. Everybody is free to adopt and adapt whatever theory they learn however they want. IMHO they are tools, not rules. They should inform and inspire our story-crafting process, not restrict our options per some preset form. Not saying that's what's in play in this thread, just a reminder on my own behalf as it's something I continually confront in my own writing.