This week we’ll take a closer look at the sequences that make up the first half of Act 2. (Act 2A, as some people refer to it.)
You may know that when I use sequences to break a story, I use 8 sequences in total. (The 8 sequences play nicely with 3-act structure. So you’re not giving up one for the other, or having to reinvent the structure wheel in any way.)
You can see how they fit together here:
Using sequences with 3 Act structure
Act 1 establishes the main conflict, Act 2 escalates it, and Act 3 resolves it. That’s the framework for a screenplay.
So Act 2 of your screenplay is where the main conflict plays out and escalates (someone goes after something they want very badly, something tries to stop them). And, at the same time, it’s where the experience causes a transformation in the protagonist. (Usually.)
Act 2A (the first half of Act 2) is made up of two sequences, #3 and #4. This chunk of the screenplay is bordered by the Break into Act 2 on one end and the Midpoint on the other. Or, the way I like to think of it is the Break into Act 2 launches us into Sequence 3, and Sequence 4 builds toward or results in the Midpoint.
This may all sound obvious or basic, or maybe even restrictive if you’re someone who thinks of structure as too formulaic. Keep in mind that this isn’t meant to be a list of rules to follow. It’s a tool you can use if you find it helpful.
Understanding how the pieces and parts of a story work together gives you guidance (and shortcuts) to build new stories. If you know how an engine works, you can use that knowledge as a starting point to build your own.
What happens in Sequence 3?
Since this is the first sequence in Act 2, it’s where the main conflict starts to play out. That’s the most important principle to remember about Sequence 3.
We want to see the protagonist beginning to pursue the story goal. That’s one half of the main conflict. The other half is what’s stopping them – the antagonist or force of opposition.
So if this is a movie about a fish trying to navigate an aquarium to find her long lost parents, this is where she starts navigating the aquarium (and running into obstacles doing it).
If it’s a movie about an FBI trainee trying to catch a serial killer, by Sequence 3 the setup is complete (we understand who wants what and why), and we start to see the FBI trainee actually trying to find that serial killer, while the serial killer tries not to get caught.
What about the promise of the premise?
Yes, thinking about the “promise of the premise” is important and can help you generate ideas for scenes and set pieces. (That’s a Save the Cat! term, if you’re not familiar.) But if you think only about that, your screenplay will feel like it has no direction or momentum.
A character doing something to solve their problem or achieve their goal is what creates that needed feeling of direction in a story.
If we don’t see that begin to happen in Sequence 3, it tends to feel like the screenplay has stalled just when it should be really getting started in earnest.
Creating cause and effect
The Break into Act 2 (a major plot point) launches us into Sequence 3. Put another way, what happens in Sequence 3 is a reaction to the Break into Act 2 plot event.
In Sequence 3 we’re coming straight off of that plot point — the Break into Act 2 — and we need to see the effect it has otherwise it seems to have no effect. If what’s happening in the plot is inconsequential, the reader is going to feel confused or like they don’t really get what’s going on. We always want a sense of cause-and-effect in the story.
Remind us what’s at stake
Ideally, the stakes of the story were firmly established in Act 1. But that doesn’t mean you can check it off the list as done. In this sequence, we will likely need to be reminded of what’s at stake for the protagonist, why they’re doing what they’re doing, why they’re embarking on this challenging, risky, dangerous journey.
Stakes are an essential part of the story’s foundation. And the foundation elements, braided together, are what create the throughline of the screenplay.
So if you’re ever in doubt about what needs to happen in your screenplay, you can always come back to:
You’re building a throughline of who wants what (demonstrated by what they’re doing about it), what’s stopping them (conflict/opposition/what’s going wrong), and why we should care – or the stakes.
What happens in Sequence 4?
What Sequence 4 does is build on and escalate what’s come before as it moves the story forward. I know that sounds obvious, but let’s dig a little deeper.
In each of the four sequences of Act 2, the most important things to think about are how the main conflict progresses and what happens in the character arc because of the main conflict. So first and foremost, you’ll need to think about what the foundation pieces are doing, aka the throughline. Make sure it doesn’t unravel or disappear altogether.
But we don’t want repetitive screenplays. We don’t want it to feel like we’re hitting the same note over and over. We want to keep things escalating or evolving. We want the feeling of the story progressing, going somewhere.
So one tool that can help you figure out what goes in Sequence 4 is what I call “the shift.”
How does the story shift from Sequence 3 to Sequence 4?
In most cases, there’s some noticeable difference in the type or quality of action from sequence to sequence. The story will usually shift in some way from one sequence to the next, so it can be useful to think about how your story shifts, which can help you generate ideas when you’re breaking the story.
That shift can be….
-
- A shift in attitude or mindset for the protagonist. Which would then manifest outwardly in the actions they take or the reactions they show to what they’re experiencing.
- Or the next step in their character development. (Which might be same as above but not necessarily.)
- Or a shift in the intensity of the plot.
- Or a shift in the type of action. Like the next step in a series of steps required to pursue the goal.
- Or a change in strategy because the first one didn’t work.
- Or really, a combination of the above!
For example, in Avatar:
-
- In Sequence 3, Jake begins learning the Na’vi ways — but it’s in large part because he’s fulfilling a deal he made with Colonel Quaritch, who wants to destroy them.
- In Sequence 4, Jake grows closer to the Na’vi and falls for Neytiri. So while he’s still learning their ways, there’s been a shift in his attitude and motivations. He’s no longer spying on them, he’s becoming one of them.
There isn’t one way the shift has to work, and there’s no right or wrong answer – this is just a way to think about your story so you are keeping things moving and progressing.
Thinking about the shift or the difference from sequence to sequence will help you write Act 2, in particular, without repeating beats or hitting the same note over and over. We want your story to feel dynamic.
The shift has a cause and effect
That shift is usually going to be a result of some plot event – the thing that ends Sequence 3 and launches us into Sequence 4. Much like the Break into Act 2 does for Sequences 2 and 3, though generally causing a smaller turn or impact.
I call this plot event between sequences a springboard. Sometimes I think of it as the hinge between the two sequences.
So here, the springboard launches Sequence 4, creating a shift in the action. Sequence 4 plays out, escalating the conflict, progressing the story, challenging the character internally… and bridging us to the next major plot point: the Midpoint! (Which is the plot event that then launches Sequence 5, continuing the chain of cause and effect.)
Alright, I want to leave you with some prompts that you can use when you’re trying to outline your story. Even if you don’t want to think in terms of sequences, you can still use these questions to generate ideas for what to include.
Sequence 3 prompts
-
- You can think about this sequence as a reaction to or resulting from the Break into Act 2. What happens at the Break into Act 2 that creates an effect or causes some reaction we can see play out in Sequence 3?
Ask yourself the “foundation” questions:
-
- What does the protagonist do to pursue the goal or resolve the main conflict?
- What’s stopping her?
- Why does it matter? Or why do we care? (Two ways of thinking about stakes.)
And when you have that throughline built you can also think about:
-
- What other kinds of conflict does the protagonist run into? (Situational, interpersonal, or internal conflict that isn’t the main conflict.)
- Where can we see the appeal of the concept, or the entertainment hook, or the promise of the premise?
Sequence 4 prompts
-
- You can think about Sequence 4 as resulting from whatever happens at the end of Sequence 3 – also known as a Springboard – and building to the big plot event at the Midpoint.
Sequence 4 has many of the same things to think about as Sequence 3 because we’re still in Act 2, remember. So these questions are a repeat but you’ll think about them now in the context of the new sequence and the shift that occurs.
-
- What happened at the end of Sequence 3, and how does it shift the protagonist’s strategy, attitude, or point of view? Think in terms of both external and internal.
- What does the protagonist do NOW to pursue the goal or resolve the main conflict? Taking into account that shift, what different type of action will they take in Sequence 4?
- What’s stopping him or her? Meaning, opposition. What’s the antagonist doing. How are they making it even harder for the protagonist now?
- Why does it matter? Or why do we care? (Two ways of thinking about stakes.) You’ll most likely need to remind us of the stakes again, even if you’re not technically raising them in this sequence.
And when you have that throughline built you can also think about:
-
- What other kind of conflict does the protagonist run into? You can brainstorm situational, interpersonal, and internal obstacles that are separate from the main conflict and specific to this sequence.
- Where can we see the appeal of the concept, or the entertainment hook, or the promise of the premise?