Did “Save the Cat!” Ruin Movies?

[BrokenGlass41]

I recently came across this article, which claims that Blake Snyder’s formula-based screenwriting book basically ruined movies by making them all follow a specific structure.

The author makes some unlikely claims, including that Christopher Nolan wrote The Dark Knight around Snyder’s sheet, which is less than probable, given that Snyder repeatedly trashes Memento. But flaws with the artifice and book aside, how likely does this seem?

I know everyone on here is a movie buff, so this seems like a good place to ask.

[Atomic Salad]

Always save the cat.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Atomic Salad

Always save the cat.

I'm a dog person.

[BerC]

Originally Posted by Batman1980

I'm a dog person.

[BluBonnet]

Cats are fine so long as they're not living together with dogs

[BrokenGlass41]

I have six cats. They’re all evil.

[RossyG]

I think every screenwriter should know about classic story structure (as first noted by Aristotle and then expanded upon by Joseph Campbell, Robert McKee etc). And once they do, they can then deviate from it if need be.

Traditional structures applied to great ideas can give you excellent films like Jaws, Die Hard, Aliens, Star Wars…

But it’ll never get you 2001: A Space Odyssey, Last Year at Marienbad, La Maman et la putain…

[Batman1980]

2001 is dog doody

[Zivouhr]

This is the first I've heard of Save the Cat.
This writer guy has problems with the formula of Save the Cat.

The Big Problem With Save The Cat Is That It Doesn't Apply To Every Genre - Daniel Calvisi - YouTube

[Martoto]

"Save the cat" looks like it might be on its way to being the new "Jump the shark". A flippant phrase coined about some low hanging fruit that will get overused and misused. And soon its users will have confused it with having an actual critique or criticism.

[PinkyCarruthers]

Originally Posted by Atomic Salad

Always save the cat.

Seconded. Always save the cat. Absolutely goddamn right.

I just happened to revisit Alien a few weeks ago. One reason it's one of the greatest movies ever made: the image of a frantic Ripley racing through the claustrophobic innards of a Gothic spaceship hissing steam and other Ridley Scott atmospherics trying to beat the self-destruct countdown . . . while lugging a Kitty Carrier.

Always save the goddamn cat.

[he says as he glances down at his adorably sleeping kitty ]

[HomerThompson]

Eh, saving the cat isn’t always necessary.

[RossyG]

In The Italian Connection, there’s a cute kitten that gets hit and killed in the crossfire during a shootout.

Tarantino said that Seventies films went all the way while Eighties films seemed reserved and timid and that’s an example of it. There’d never have been a cute kitten taking a bullet in Lethal Weapon.

[Steedeel]

Crock of poo.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by HomerThompson

Eh, saving the cat isn’t always necessary.

Bob Mitchum kicked a cat in Scrooged at the height of the conservative eighties.


I struggle to imagine a screenwriter wrestling with the dilemma "Does this script need them to save a cat or to not save a cat?" on a regular basis. Is it considered good screenwriting practice to write a cat in for the sole purpose of saving them? I'm not sure that writing teachers would approve that much of you writing a person if their sole purpose is to be saved (unless that's the entire point of the story, so not a minor side character, like a cat).

[BrokenGlass41]

For me the problem with it is that it discourages individually and “breaking the rules.” Almost every screenwriting book I’ve read does this to some extent (J. Michael Straczynski’s is the only one that doesn’t I can think of at the moment), but Save the Cat pushes it to the point of insanity.

If I wanted to get all allegorical, I could point out that it reminds me of “Eye of the Beholder,” the Twilight Zone episode where there’s a woman who’s undergoing treatment to try to make her fit the beauty standards of everyone else, when in fact she looks perfectly fine (to us) while everyone else looks like pig monsters (to us). You could say Save the Cat encourages a similar thing where every script should be more or less the same and the outliers (like Memento) are discouraged.

I think the problem isn’t that Save the Cat has affected established Hollywood writers that much, I think it’s quote-unquote “dangerous” to aspiring screenwriters who are told to embrace the formula and not to try something different.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by BrokenGlass41

For me the problem with it is that it discourages individually and “breaking the rules.” Almost every screenwriting book I’ve read does this to some extent (J. Michael Straczynski’s is the only one that doesn’t I can think of at the moment), but Save the Cat pushes it to the point of insanity.

If I wanted to get all allegorical, I could point out that it reminds me of “Eye of the Beholder,” the Twilight Zone episode where there’s a woman who’s undergoing treatment to try to make her fit the beauty standards of everyone else, when in fact she looks perfectly fine (to us) while everyone else looks like pig monsters (to us). You could say Save the Cat encourages a similar thing where every script should be more or less the same and the outliers (like Memento) are discouraged.

I think the problem isn’t that Save the Cat has affected established Hollywood writers that much, I think it’s quote-unquote “dangerous” to aspiring screenwriters who are told to embrace the formula and not to try something different.

If you aspire to being a screenwriter, then you should have seen enough movies to know that there really is no formula. All those screenwriting rules books do is recognise and reinforce patterns. The ones that studio execs are responsive to because it's more likely to remind them of something they've seen before and therefore they already have an idea of how to sell it.

[joshsquash729]

I think as long as the writer has a clear grasp of their story and knows how to tell it, it doesn't really matter (at least to me) how they do it. There's absolutely nothing wrong with predictable movies. Sometimes it's nice to feel smart. That said, it's still totally possible for a movie to be ultimately predictable, but still keep you guessing and along for the ride.

On the other hand, I also like not feeling like I know how everything is gonna work out. It's also nice to be led along, putting your faith and trust in a vision, and just going with it. Doesn't always work out, granted, but some of my favorite guilty pleasure movies are the ones that stand out somehow, whether tonally, stylistically, structurally, etc. I don't think there's anything wrong with challenging the audience; heck, a lot of other forms of entertainment do- video games, escape rooms, etc. They ask that you pay attention and apply yourself, knowing that the payoff is coming, even if it's not necessarily what you hoped for.

In short, I don't necessarily think it's "ruined" movies, but I wouldn't disagree if you said it's perhaps caused writers and audiences to get a bit lax with what they give and expect of the other. There's a time and place for any and every kind of art.

[RossyG]

All this assumes that screenwriters write what they want to write and directors film it unchanged.

But we all know the reality is writers hired, fired, replaced, the replacements fired, more rewrites, studio execs giving notes (sometimes useful ones; sometimes of the “Let’s have a giant spider/robot dog/a teen girl under the mask” variety). Scenes are cut or rewritten because the film’s overrunning or the location isn’t working out or because the star insists. And then then they assemble a rough cut and decide they need weeks of reshoots….

[HillSprinter]

Unfortunately it’s studio execs who follow/want formulaic tripe, not the writers.