I love this movie and one of the reasons is how good the script is. So many smart choices in terms of plot with a boatload of setups and payoffs, all of which add to the story's humor along with tons of great dialogue.
One point to start the conversation here, when I interviewed Tess Morris, we discussed a critical decision she made about when to reveal that Nancy is NOT really Jack's intended date. Here is that excerpt:
Scott: Yeah, let’s talk about that, because that’s a really interesting choice. It sounds like you grew up on ’80s movies.
Tess: Yes.
Scott: I came into the business in the ’80s. Reading the script when she makes that reveal, who she is, I was thinking, “Well, if this is an ’80s comedy, they would have sustained that all the way to the end of Act Two.” And that would have been the big revelation and the All Is Lost moment.
But this comes out much earlier in your script. You’ve talked about that. I was just curious, what was your thought process in making that choice so that she makes that revelation around 40 or 45.
Tess: Yeah. I suppose you’re building up towards your midpoint, and ours is obviously when they bump into his ex. But when I wrote the first draft, I wrote it in a much more conventional way. I was holding onto her reveal of not being his date, holding onto it for as long as possible…
It was only around about the second or third personal draft that I did that I was like, “What am I doing? She’s got to tell him much earlier,” because that’s when the fun really begins. [laughs]
That’s when you can really go for it. Also, when you’re writing… I remember getting to the scene, and thinking… but what if he’s furious at her?” That’s really fun. You know? Like you were talking about, in the ’80s movie structure, it would be your end of Act Two, and he’d be devastated and he’d storm off and he’d make the wrong decisions.
Meanwhile, bringing that forward meant that you had a much meatier Act Two, which is obviously always nice! I don’t know. Just, again, another sort of unlocking moment for me where I realized I could suddenly do a lot more with the film and that they were actually then finally being themselves. Then, when they start to like each other, they’re liking each other as themselves, which is a obviously a much stronger emotion to witness, and gives us a much better end of Act Two turning point.
Scott: That’s a really good point. That may zero in on why I had some antipathy toward romantic comedies. If they, taking the ’80s approach, had lived this illusion for the middle of the story, and then the revelation happened at the end of Act Two, would I buy that they would have enough time in that final act to get their thing together?
They haven’t really been dealing with each other in a genuine way; whereas, in your story, that choice you made, a credible choice, it seems to me, is they do get a chance to see each other. There’s a whole sequence where he’s just basically furious at her, and then she gets angry at him. So they get to see themselves at their worst, in a way.
Tess: Exactly.
The 80s mentality might be summed up like, "If you give up her real identity too early, where will you go after that." What Tess did was turn that conventional thinking on its head and say, "I'm going to embrace the idea of advancing the revelation precisely BECAUSE it makes for a more interesting story, allowing Nancy and Jack to see each other at their worst.
In the end, that makes their affection for each other come across as much more genuine and grounded.
For that part of my interview with Tess, you can go
here.
What are your thoughts on Man Up? Read the script. Watch the movie. Trust me, you'll enjoy it. And if you study it, as a writer you'll learn something from it.