Along
with “An Innocent Abroad” and “A Small Man/Woman Rises,” the
Taking on the Mantle story type is found more often in mainstream
cinema than any other, appearing in films in every style or genre,
ranging from Schinder’s
List
to Iron Man.
To introduce it briefly, a Taking on the Mantle story begins with a
protagonist who is capable of being a hero, yet is unwilling to take
on that role due to a collection of selfish or self-destructive
traits. For years, the protagonist has used these traits to
voluntarily close him or herself off from the physical and emotional
needs of other human beings, resulting in a lonely, self-protected
little world. The protagonist’s life is then invaded by a problem
that forces him or her to step outside of this selfish world and
realize the damage his/her negative traits cause him/herself and
others. This creates and ethical dilemma. The protagonist can either
turn a blind eye to those in need and fall back into his or her old
ways, or the protagonist can abandon these traits and become a hero.
A “mantle” is the long, flowing cape usually associated with
superheroes. So, in this story type, the protagonist must choose to
either put on the clothes of a hero, or remain in those of a heel.
Looking closer, the Taking on the Mantle story type can be further
divided into two distinct subtypes:
a. Crisis of Character
b. Crisis of Conscience
In Crisis of Character, the protagonist begins the story with a
warped, ego-centric consideration of right and wrong. The protagonist
acts as if he or she is the center of the universe, and is unwilling
to show any regard for the persons around them unless they can
benefit from the situation.
In
Crisis of Conscience, the protagonist does
begin the story with an honest sense of right and wrong. However, the
protagonist chooses to ignore it. Instead, the character willingly
turns a blind eye towards evil or injustice, even becoming complicit
in its execution, based upon justifications the character creates to
convince him or herself that it is best to stay quiet and play along
with this evil.
Crisis of Character and Crisis of Conscience take different paths to
transform their protagonists. Though seen less often, we will
investigate the Crisis of Conscience first. (Why? Frankly, I am
currently working on a story in this subtype, so at the moment I have
put much more work into it.)
The Crisis of Conscience Subtype
We
will use three films as models: On
the Waterfront
(1954), Casablanca
(1942), and Michael
Clayton
(2007).
Please keep in mind as you read on that story types and subtypes
provide only generalized patterns of plot and character. They are not
hard formulas that must be followed in exacting detail. In all three
of our study films, there exists one or two elements that skew
slightly to the left or right of the established pattern. These
deviations do not invalidate the points made here, but merely show
their flexibility. As I have said over and over, the rules of
structure must adapt to the needs of the individual story, not the
other way around.
The MAJOR PLAYERS
The Protagonist
The Protagonist of a Crisis of Conscience begins the story living in
a world of self-imposed neutrality. He (or she) may have been
optimistic in the past, but an event outside of his control has
shattered his dreams and stained his outlook on the world. Though the
protagonist may dislike the place fate has put him, the protagonist
resigns himself to the notion that it is best to simply carry out the
role he has been given. The character no longer has great ambitions.
He just wants to survive.
Rick Blaine of Casablanca (Humphrey Bogart) was once an
idealist fighting against the fascist cause. That is, until his heart
was broken, causing him to become coarse and withdrawn, unwilling to
care for anyone but himself. Terry Malloy of On the Waterfront
(Marlon Brando) was once a promising prizefighter. That is, until mob
creep Johnny Friendly told him to take a dive in his biggest fight.
His dream shattered, Terry can see no other role in life than one of
Friendly’s two-bit flunkies. The eponymous Michael Clayton (George
Clooney) is the self-titled “janitor” of a powerful law firm.
Though the job has given him status and money, he has grown sick of
bending the law for morally ambiguous clients. At one time he planned
to escape this life by opening his own restaurant, only to have his
dream fall apart thanks to his drug-addicted brother, leaving him
with a six-figure debt.
If one follows the
Nine Character Alignments, Rick, Terry, and
Michael all begin as True Neutral in their alignment, and then later
transition into Neutral Good. However, a Crisis of Conscience
protagonist can also work just as well as a Lawful Neutral who
transitions into Lawful Good, or even a Chaotic Neutral who becomes
Chaotic Good.
The Force of Darkness
The Force of Darkness character is the most pervasive influence in
the protagonist’s life. Though the Protagonist may recognize that
the Force of Darkness’s actions are evil or unjust, when the Force
of Darkness asks the Protagonist to jump, the Protagonist asks how
high. This is because the Protagonist feels he or she is subservient
to the Force of Darkness, either due to a sense of familial loyalty
(Johnny Friendly is an uncle-figure whom Terry has known since a
boy), a sense of duty (the uNorth company – embodied by the
corporate sociopath Karen Crowder (Tilda Swinton) – has paid
Michael’s firm millions to do their dirty work), or a sense of
obedience to the law (Rick Blaine’s world is ruled by a Nazi puppet
regime – represented by Major Strasser – which Rick feels he
must cooperate with for his own survival). Unlike a more traditional
protagonist-antagonist relationship, in a Crisis of Conscience, the
Protagonist and Force of Darkness begin the story on the same side.
The Force is even on friendly terms with the Protagonist and trusts
the Protagonist to do whatever it commands.
The Outside Relationship Character
As the name suggests, the Outside Relationship is a character (or
characters) who exists either on the fringes of the Protagonist’s
relationship with the Force of Darkness, or completely outside of it.
In contrast to the Force of Darkness, the Outside Relationship
represents morality, goodness, innocence, or justice. This character
functions as a magnet to draw the protagonist away from the darkness
and onto a righteous path by appealing the protagonist’s sense of
decency. Usually this occurs by asking the protagonist for help; help
that runs in complete opposition to the Force of Darkness.
In
Casablanca, this character is Ilsa Lund (Ingrid Bergman),
who begs Rick to defy Major Strasser so she and her fugitive husband
may escape. In
Waterfront, this is Edie (Eva Marie Saint), the
love interest who compels Terry to atone for his role in the death of
her brother. This relationship need not be romantic, however. In
Michael Clayton this character is Arthur Edens (Tom
Wilkinson), the lawyer gone rogue who asks Michael to help him
destroy uNorth for the sake of everything good in the world. Father
Barry (Karl Malden) exists as a secondary Outside Relationship in
Waterfront. Here is one of those little deviations. While a
single outside relationship character will usually do the job,
Waterfront gives Terry’s conscience a double shot with two
characters who compel him with two different angles on the same
argument.
The Neutral Facilitator
The fourth and final essential Crisis of Conscience character behaves
as what the “Hero’s Journey” archetype would call a shadow
character. The Neutral Facilitator usually acts as an intermediary
or messenger between the Protagonist and the Force of Darkness.
Neither clearly good nor evil, it is often difficult to tell exactly
where the Neutral Facilitator’s loyalty lies. Casablanca’s
Captain Renault (Claude Rains) is a classic example. Renault is both
Rick’s friend and foe. He kowtows to Strasser at one moment, and
openly undermines him the next. Renualt “blows with the wind,”
and does not reveal his true sentiments until the story’s very end.
Michael’s boss Marty Bach (Sydney Pollack) fills this role in
Clayton. Terry’s brother Charley (Rod Steiger) does so in
Waterfront.
The function of the Neutral Facilitator is twofold. First, the character
acts as a neutral party whom the protagonist can use as a sounding
board as he struggles with his moral tug-of-war. Second and more
importantly, the Neutral Facilitator brings the protagonist tasks and
challenges designed to lead the protagonist deeper into the story
situation. Marty orders Michael Clayton to track down and control
Arthur. Charley tells Terry to spy on the Father Barry’s meeting,
which leads Terry to become further involved with Edie. Renault is a
central catalyst in Rick’s ordeal with the stolen letters of
transit. Why is this necessary? When a protagonist starts a film as
aloof and closed-off as those found in Crisis of Conscience stories,
he or she does not feel very motivated to take any kind of action on
his or her own. The protagonist would rather ignore the situation
than get involved. Therefore, it is necessary for someone or
something to push the protagonist into the situation until the time
comes when the protagonist’s conscience comes takes hold and the
protagonist feels the urge to act on his or her own.
The COURSE of the PLOT
Act 1
The story begins with the Protagonist given a small task, either by
the Neutral Facilitator, the Force of Darkness, or both in cooperation.
Terry is asked to take part in the events which lead to the killing
of Edie’s brother. Renault asks Rick not to interfere with the
arrest of Ugarte. Michael Clayton is sent upstate to clean up a messy
hit-and-run. In carrying out this task, the Protagonist demonstrates
that he is aligned with the Force of Darkness and is willing to
participate in the Force’s morally ambiguous activities.
His loyalty established, the protagonist is then presented with a
larger, more important mission. Terry is asked to spy on Father
Barry’s meeting. Rick is asked to cooperate with Strasser’s
efforts to against fugitive Victor Lazlo. Michael is sent to salvage
a meltdown that has emerged in their case with uNorth. This mission
puts the protagonist into direct contact with the Outside
Relationship character. Terry helps Edie escape the violence that
follows the meeting. Rick discovers that Lazlo is traveling with
Isla. Michael must babysit Arthur Edens after Arthur’s psychotic
breakdown.
Though the protagonist would prefer to complete this mission without
becoming emotionally involved, something compels the protagonist,
willingly or unwillingly, to extend his involvement with the Outside
Relationship. Terry feels attracted to Edie and convinces her to see
him again. Rick cannot bring himself to ignore Ilsa’s presence in
Casablanca. Arthur escapes Michael’s watch. This event pushes the
protagonist past a Point of No Return, involving him fully in the
story situation. This becomes the End of 1
st Act Turning
Point.
Act 2A
As the interactions between the Protagonist and Outside Relationship
character advance, the Outside Relationship begins to openly
challenge the Protagonist’s ethics and behavior. He or she
questions the reasons for the Protagonist’s allegiance to the Force
of Darkness and then asks the Protagonist for help. However, the
Outside Relationship’s request would mean open defiance of the
Force of Darkness. Edie asks Terry to come clean about her brother’s
murder. Isla begs Rick to help her and Lazlo escape. Arthur asks
Michael to help him bring down uNorth.
Though the Protagonist refuses this request, the Outside Relationship
succeeds at planting a dilemma in the Protagonist’s mind.
The Protagonist is now finds himself at the center of two
diametrically opposed lines of conflict: a conflict between
the Protagonist and Outside Relationship over what the Outside
Relationship wants him to do, versus a conflict between Protagonist
and Force of Darkness over what it wants him to do. The “crisis of
conscience” has fully formed.
As Act 2A advances, events cause this dilemma to grows more and more
difficult for the Protagonist to handle. Before long, the Force of
Darkness takes notice. The Force of Darkness begins to wonder whether
the Protagonist remains truly loyal to its side, often giving the
Protagonist warnings or threats, either directly or through the
Neutral Facilitator.
The scales of this dilemma begin to tip at the Mid-2nd Act
Turning Point. The Force of Darkness commits an action so morally
reprehensible that the Protagonist feels he can no longer continue
looking the other way. Johnny Friendly kills a second innocent
dockworker. Major Strasser cracks down on Rick and makes a veiled
promise kill Lazlo. Karen Crowder has Arthur murdered with a faked
suicide. All it takes now is a little nudge from the Outside
Relationship before the Protagonist decides he must turn on the Force
of Darkness. At the Midpoint, the Protagonist takes the leap from
reactive to proactive, from a slave to duty to a person of ethics,
from flunkie to hero.
Act 2B
The protagonist begins Act 2B
finally ready to take his first decisive actions against the Force of
Darkness. Terry finally talks to the Waterfront Commission. Michael
investigates the circumstances of Arthur’s death. Rick launches a
plan to bluff his way past Strasser and Renault in order to get Ilsa
and Lazlo to safety.
The Force of Darkness realizes what
is happening and does not like it. It offers the Protagonist an
ultimatum: either back off and get in line or be destroyed. Once
again, the Neutral Facilitator character is often the messenger. This
occurs in Waterfront
in the classic scene between Terry and Charley in the back of the
cab. This is the scene in Clayton
when Marty tells Michael to forget about the entire situation and let
uNorth resolve the situation.
The Protagonist refuses this
ultimatum, and thus signs his own death warrant. The Force of
Darkness sees no other option than to destroy the Protagonist. Karen
Crowder has her goons put a bomb in Michael’s car. Johnny Friendly
kills Terry’s brother and then tries to run Terry down. Though the
Protagonist survives, he is overcome by a second significant change
to his character. This is no longer just an ethical situation. It is
a personal one. The Protagonist is convinced that the only remaining
solution is to bring the Force of Darkness to its knees, and as Terry
puts it, “take it out on their skulls.”
(It should be noted that Casablanca
skips the last two plot points. This is because, surprisingly,
Casablanca’s
Act 2B is only one story sequence long. In fact, the film’s entire
structural second half lasts only twenty minutes! Casablanca
is an example of a film that succeeds despite having imperfect
structure. I plan to write an article on this in the coming months.)
Act 3
In Act 3, the Protagonist launches
a final plan to destroy the Force of Darkness and achieve justice for
the Outside Relationship. Terry gets his revenge on Johnny Friendly,
first politically by testifying against him in court, and then
personally through a face-to-face confrontation. Rick ensures that
Lazlo and Ilsa escape Casablanca by turning the tables on Renault and
shooting Major Strasser. Michael scams a confession out of Karen
Crowder that brings uNorth to its doom.
It is important to notice that in
these final moments the Protagonist completes his full and total
transformation from absolutely selfish to absolutely self-less. In
order to do what it right, the Protagonist willingly sacrifices
everything he has valued in the past. Terry gives up all of his
privileges and becomes a pariah. Rick abandons his life of wealth and
influence to become a wanted criminal of the Third Reich. Michael
turns on his business, meaning he will likely lose his job and
everything that comes with it. In order to take on the mantle of a
hero, the Protagonist must wipe himself clean and start over from
scratch. This makes the end bittersweet. However, all is not lost. By
giving up his shallow, material comforts, the Protagonist gains
something more valuable: the love and respect of those who still have
decency in their hearts; whether it be the dockworkers, Renault,
Michael’s policeman brother, or anyone else who still believes in
goodness and justice.
Okay, you may say, there indeed
seems to be a pattern here. But these three films all exist in a
similar vein. They are all straight drama combined with elements of
romance or thriller. But what about something in another genre? What
about something completely different?
Who
Framed Roger Rabbit?
Okay, here is something completely
different. On the surface, Disney’s 1988 family comedy/detective
noir mash-up seems to have little in common with Waterfront,
Casablanca, or Clayton
(except perhaps the prevalence of suits and fedoras). However, Who
Framed Roger Rabbit? is
also a Crisis of Conscience that follows the same pattern.
Rabbit’s
Protagonist is Eddie Valiant (Bob Hoskins), a once happy-go-lucky
private eye grown bitter and angry after his brother was murdered by
a “toon.” Eddie now sees the world as dirty, ugly, unjust place.
He has become self-centered, withdrawn, and most importantly, bigoted
against toons.
This
seems to make Eddie the perfect pawn for the story’s Force of
Darkness, Judge Doom (Christopher Lloyd). Doom is a demented
sociopath who wishes to use the law to crush Toontown under an iron
claw. Though Eddie recognizes that Doom is a twisted character, Doom
represents the law, much like Major Strasser in Casablanca.
For a man in Eddie’s position, it is wisest for him to keep his
mouth shut and play along.
Eddie’s
story begins when he is hired for a minor task by cartoon studio head
R.K. Maroon. Working as Doom’s proxy, Maroon asks Eddie to take
incriminating photos of millionaire Marvin Acme with the wife of his
star actor Roger Rabbit. Eddie does the task, proving his willingness
to take part in morally ambiguous behavior. Unfortunately, this
photos result in the murder of Marvin Acme, and Roger Rabbit is
accused of the crime. Playing off Eddie’s bigotry for toons, Judge
Doom requests a bigger task – to assist him in Roger’s capture
and punishment.
Only
Roger is innocent. He becomes the Outside Relationship character when
he approaches Eddie and begs for his help. As typical in this
subtype, Eddie wants nothing to do with Roger. However, Eddie is
forced to extend the relationship with Roger when the two end up
handcuffed together and Eddie must hide Roger from Doom’s flunkies.
Now
Eddie faces a dilemma. Put his neck on the line for Roger or play it
safe and let the chips fall where they may? Doom senses Eddie’s
wavering commitment to the law and tries to intimidate him through
various means. Only Doom takes things too far when he tries to
execute Roger without trial at the story’s Midpoint. Eddie decides
to openly defy the Force of Darkness by saving Roger. With this
action, Eddie finally chooses to take willful action to put things
right. Eddie begins his own investigation of Acme’s murder so Roger
may be saved and justice done.
This
leads Doom to conclude he must destroy Eddie. Eddie receives his
first warning when Doom shoots at him in an alley. Eddie doesn’t
quit, leading Doom to kidnap Eddie at the End of 2nd
Act Turning Point, intent on killing him.
Though
Who Framed Roger
Rabbit
has all the earmarks of a Crisis of Conscience subtype, it is not a
perfect example of the subtype as are On
the Waterfront
or Michael
Clayton.
This is mostly the result of Roger
Rabbit’s
attempts to fulfill the needs of a family comedy, while at the same
time follow the formula of a detective noir, while still using the
plot pattern of a Crisis of Conscience. With all these diverse
ingredients, some will inevitably be incompatible. First off, Roger
Rabbit
executes the functions of the Neutral Facilitator in a very clumsy
manner. As the film begins, the Neutral Facilitator seems to be R.K.
Maroon. However, Maroon almost disappears after the first act. The
Neutral Facilitator’s shadow character qualities are denied to Maroon,
and instead given to Jessica Rabbit. Jessica does partially fulfill
the role of Neutral Facilitator for the remainder of the film, but she
is also forced to pull double-duty as a noir femme fatale – two
roles that are not necessarily complimentary. Because of this role
confusion, Jessica Rabbit’s character is the least developed of the
main cast and her scenes tend to inhibit the story rather than push
it forward.
The
second major flaw comes in the film’s third act. Even as a kid, I
felt that the last twenty minutes of Roger
Rabbit
never lived up to the rest of the film. Now I know why. Rather than
stick with the Crisis of Conscience story pattern, Roger
Rabbit’s
creators chose to end the film with a rather uninspired and
unoriginal heroic rescue sequence. I guess the creators felt a family
adventure demanded a big action finish leading up to a 100% feel-good
resolution, yet it seems the film does not end as well as it should
have. As I have observed before on story types, the films that have
the most success with their audiences are time and again those that
stick the closed to the principles of their story types. Diverge too
much from type, or include elements that do not belong, and the end
product will be weakened.
Coming Up: Part II, Crisis of
Character
