I'll take first crack at this writing exercise by having a go at four major plot points: The Opening: PP. 1-3 intersecting Neimann and Fletcher. Act One end: PP. 27-35 wherein Fletcher mentally and physically assaults Neimann during a band practice. Act Two end: PP. 74-79 in which Neimann assaults Fletcher, destroys his musical gear, drops out of school, then agrees to file an anonymous complaint against Fletcher. Final Struggle: PP. 96-105 wherein Fletcher reveals he knows Neimann is the one who got him [Fletcher] fired, sets up Neimann to fail at the gig, Neimann leaves, comes back, and takes over the gig, showing off his advanced musical chops. Things to note: * The midpoint of Act One and Call To Adventure is also a turn: Neimann is ready to transfer, then Fletcher invites him to play with the Nassau Band (PP. 12-16). * It's a longish first act (35 pages), a shortish second act (40 pages), and a longish third act (30 pages). This reminds us of the fact that arbitrary page counts are bull shit. Write the story the way the story needs to be told. * Act Three has its own interesting structure, slowly building into an optimistic feel, then - bam! The revelation: Fletcher knows it was Neimann, so he's set up Neimann to fail spectacularly and be blackballed from the jazz circuit. From that point on, it's a roller coaster. It will be interesting to break down the structure tomorrow per its sequences. Any other thoughts about the major plot points in Whiplash?

Scott, I'm curious why you don't think that the end of Act One is the scene where Fletcher recruits Neimann from the Nassau band. To me it seems like the perfect transition into Act Two (Neimann's time in the Studio band) in relation to the physical journey. As for Neimann's psychological journey (which I know we'll be covering in a couple of days), I think the transition from Act One to Act Two occurs after that first Studio band practice during Neimann's phone conversation with his father. Neimann realizes that he does NOT want to end up like his father -- he must be great. Just a few thoughts from a long time fan/lurker of the blog. Your thoughts?

Scott, I saw the major plot points the same way, except that for me, the end of Act I was when Andrew went to Fletcher's office to tell him that he would make sure not to disappoint him. As Chazelle notes, "something has changed" with Andrew, and Fletcher takes note of this, breaking into a smile. It's as if Andrew, through the manipulation of Fletcher and the negative example of his own father, has fully committed at this point, and Fletcher essentially realizes "I've got him" (prompting the smile). I saw this as a "lock-in" moment, if you will.

jstak and rob, as I've noted elsewhere, any of this language -- acts, plot points, sequences -- while they are tools we can use to analyze and craft stories, are ultimately artifices. The story itself is organic. So there's no right or wrong either in interpretation or usage. I can see your point and your line of reasoning makes sense. However I like to think that by the end of Act One, the reader should know what the story is and where it's headed, all the major characters and dynamics set up. So as I was going through the scene-by-scene breakdown, it just felt like Neimann's full entrance into the New World was that first head-to-head confrontation with Fletcher. Because NOW I know what the story is: While it was intimated before, their eventual locked in battle mode, here we actually SEE and HEAR it. In my own language system, I call the plotline point at the end of Act One - The Lock. Everything necessary to tell the rest of the story is locked down. That confrontation between Fletcher and Neimann is the capstone on the setup and locks down the trajectory of the rest of the story. But as I say, I can the logic of the interpretation you offered, and it makes sense. If pressed, I could probably be convinced that take is a more apt one and the confrontation scene I've noted above is the first major plot point of Act II (what I call Deconstruction Test). But again, stories are organic. We use these tools to try to understand them and craft our own, but ultimately that's all they are: tools. Important, yes. Prescriptive, no. Thoughts?

HI Scott I am new to this place. I am unable to grasp the portion, where the protagonist goes through the phase of refusal of call or the debate section. You have mentioned the call of adventure portion, but where is the refusal part? Secondly, by the tools of your analysis I agree about the second plot point. But interestingly when I used Blake Snyder Beat sheet, the point where Andrew agrees to be a part of Fletcher's band at JVC studio comes out the plot point. Mid Point (55) - " Because I want to be great " - Andrew to Nicole Bad guys close in (55-75) - From Fletcher bringing in Ryan Connolly to Andrew missing his sticks and finally the crash All is Lost (76A) - Breaks his home video Cd and tears the buddy rich poster Dark night of soul (77 - 83) - The whole drama unfolding with Andrew watching TV and leading a normal life Break into three (89) - Andrew agrees to play as a drummer for Fletcher's band at JVC studio