Sophia showed her direction of Mia' story. Philippe critiqued the lack of clarity around who the story is about. Is it the mother? Is it the father? Is it the whole family? It was unclear. He worked with Sara to play her character with fear and beauty (in the first version we lacked the fear we needed). And he advised her to cut the four Aussies (I was one of them) singing Waltzing Matilda loudly. Instead - just have one - with four "we see too much the idea."
He also spoke about how important it is for us to care about the protagonist. "We have to love somebody." He said this was Sacha Baron Cohen's mistake with Bruno - we didn't love him - so the film wasn't fantastic. But we loved Borat - and so the film was a hit.
~
Andre presented a draft of his film script of Tim's story. It was the first film script we've had, and as it involved a lot of descriptions of images and scenes without dialogue (such as long walks through the outback) we had to listen in a different way - trying to follow with our imagination.
Andre was proposing to jump between 1978 and 2007, scene by scene, but the jumps were a bit too quick and thus confusing for the audience. Philippe talked about how it's important to get the rhythm of the images and the rhythm of the scenes right. There was also the issue of mystery at the beginning of his script. For the first few ten minutes or so, who is who in the story is a mystery. Philippe said it's okay to play the mystery game, but it can't be too fast, or for too long. I suppose if it's the right pace, and it's not dragged out forever, then an audience is happy to go along with the story even if they are missing details.
~
Mike read a script from Mia's story set in an immigration office in Australia. It was a way to include more of Australia in his story, which is otherwise set in Chile. It was a good scene - with humour and punch.
~
I hopped up at the end of class and presented the changes I'd made on Sunday to my opening song. At the start of class I'd told myself not to get up as my work would be better illustrated if I had the piano accompaniment and an actor who'd had some direction. But I decided to read what I had done anyway as I didn't want to work on something that wasn't ready to be worked on yet.
Before I started, Philippe warned me that people are sick of my 'boy scout' song. I actually thought he was a real dick today. He's being biased because he's heard the song too many times now and he's sick of it (but I'm asking the class to pretend they haven't heard it before, which I think is perfectly reasonable). And he is letting his personal distaste for Musical Theatre get in the way of what I'm trying to do. Maybe that's harsh. But it really felt like he's not listening to what I want to do. I'm not getting a fair chance. And to make jokes about my work - a negative disclaimer - before I present, just screws what I'm about to do. The audience are listening with biased ears too. It's different when he warns you about your track record of being bad as an actor about to perform. In that situation you can change. You can react. But as a writer, with a pre-written text, all I can do is read what I've done!
Anyway. I sang a new intro I'd written. I sang the first verse and chorus (which is pretty much the same as before...another joke from Philippe) then read the new direct-to-audience text I'd written. I asked if it works. Philippe said he didn't like it - but it could. But he veered off again talking about how he wants to see Steph grow and change. How New Zealand should be longer. And I fought against him and said that's not the story I want to tell. I want to tell NZ as a prelude to the story of Steph meeting her father for the first time. Because meeting her father is what interests me as a writer.
He also said he didn't like how I had lines about Steph finding herself and breaking free:
But now is the time, A time just for me,
To find my true self, and be finally free
So tell the pilot to fly as fast as he can,
And tell the other side of the world to get ready, here I come, to New Zealand!
...It's underlining the point, and he'd rather see it than hear about it. And I understand that. But I said this is musical theatre. In this form characters sing about their issues...and they figure it out by singing!
I don't want to show her growing up in several NZ scenes. I want to do it in one song. And I think that is possible.
And then he asked me what my plan is for the whole story (which he hasn't done for others - perhaps he's pushing me harder because it'll be good for me) and I spoke said that after NZ she returns to Canada and meets her father, and once her relationship with her father becomes great, her relationship with her mother starts to deteriorate - specifically with alcoholism. And he said what I'm doing is effectively telling three stories in my play. When really I should be telling one. Too many stories. He said a second story can eat the first one. And that's dangerous. I can see that they are different stories:
- Steph discovers herself in NZ
- Steph meets her father
- Steph loses then rediscovers her mother
But I don't see that as a problem. I see them as all leading into each other. Steph finds herself - which leads her to want to meet her father - and Steph meeting her father leads her mother into alcoholism which Steph then naturally has to deal with.
But I'm new at writing, and stubborn, and cocky, so I'm probably (undoubtedly) wrong! I'm making things more complicated than they need to be. Keep it simple Guy.
Afterwards I had a grumpy beer and a cookie and sat down and tried to dissect what I'm trying to do, and I made a few realisations. Basically, Steph shouldn't be singing about "Going to New Zealand" - she should be singing about what the song is really about. And that's either about wanting to find herself (if I try and do all of NZ in one song), or about wanting to get away from life in Canada (if I tell NZ as a bigger story). So now I'm trying to make the decision of which way I want to go. I feel like in a way I've already done a lot of work on a fuller NZ story so maybe I should go in this direction. Although it's not really what I want to do - it's what Philippe would do...so I dunno. It is going to be much harder to fit NZ into one song, but I'd like to try it. I might have a go at both.
I feel like time is running out and it's not going to be possible to do all the writing I'd like to do by Friday (actually earlier as I need to work with actors too), mostly because I won't be at school tomorrow as tomorrow is the day my girlfriend arrives (!!!) but as Philippe said to me after class when I expressed this worry to him, this kind of crisis is what powers writers to sit down and bust out a new script all in one night.
We'll see. I'm just trying to take the pressure off myself to present something incredible on the last day of school, and instead just keep on learning and testing and trying and failing. Right now, it's the process, not the product, that matters.
~
Oh! And I got some AMAZING news this morning! I found out my application to the New Zealand France Friendship Fund was successful! So that has taken a huge weight off my shoulder. Financially a second year at Gaulier is totally possible now. How lucky am I? Fantastique!
I'm so happy I think I'm going to hang upside down...!
No comments:
Post a Comment