I first became aware of Francis Ford Coppola’s prompt book for The Godfather at Scott Myers’ blog Go Into The Story. The book is several inches thick and contains Mario Puzo’s book The Godfather with note after note by Coppola as he details what parts he wants to extract and emphasize in the movie. The prompt book was the foundation for which he wrote the script.
Coppola explains that the prompt book is a tradition carried over from his theater days. (Before Coppola got a master’s in film at UCLA, he received a theater degree from Hofstra University.) Coppola also says he based his prompt book on one that Elia Kazan had done for A Streetcar Named Desire. Kazan has written several books about his life and films including Kazan on Directing and there are many other books that gleam insights from him that I’m sure was an encouragement to Coppola during his own difficult time of getting The Godfather made.
“When I started On the Waterfront, I was what they call unbankable. Nobody would put up money for me because I had had a series of box office failures…. One of my happiest moments was when I got the Academy Award for On the Waterfront.”
Elia Kazan
Kazan: The Master Director Discusses His Films Interviews with Elia Kazan
Jeff Young
In the below video, Coppola discusses part of the process that he went through in writing the script for The Godfather;
“On page 79 of the book we have the actual shooting of the Don. Whenever I felt there was a really important part of the book that was going to be in the movie I would sit there with my ruler and really underline—so this details the shooting. My margin notes are; THE SHOOTING! GREAT DETAIL. The Don is the main character of the movie, so as in Pyscho , we are totally thrown when he is shot. How would Hitchcock design this? Hitchcock was such a master about manipulating information for the audience, usually telling you things so that you were equipped to enjoy what you were seeing —rather than withholding information, he would give you information.”
Francis Ford Coppola
[…] I first became aware of Francis Ford Coppola’s prompt book for The Godfather at Scott Myers’ blog Go Into The Story. The book is several inches thick and it contains Mario Puzo’s book The Godfather with note after note by Coppola as he details the what parts he wants to extract and emphasize in the movie. The prompt […] Original Source… […]
“Hitchcock was such a master about manipulating information for the audience, usually telling you things so that you were equipped to enjoy what you were seeing —rather than withholding information, he would give you information.”
One of the things I find challenging is knowing how much info. to give and how much to withhold so it can creep out slowly. There’s the opinion which recommends to withhold most things unless an audience HAS to be told to understand. How does this advice connect with what Hitchcock is saying? How does he “manipulate information” so he doesn’t have to withhold, but still have reveals? It’s a fine line that I have been struggling with a bit. Any resources you know of that might be helpful? Or…perhaps…a new post of your thoughts about this issue? 🙂
Yeah, that might be its own post. But the simple answer is every film is different. Obviously, Hitchcock withheld key info until the end on “Psycho.” What Coppola says was Hitchcock was usually, “telling you things so that you were equipped to enjoy what you were seeing.” So it’s kind of on a need to know basis. What do you need to tell the audience for them to best enjoy the picture.
A popular example is on William Goldman’s “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” when we see this exchange before a gun fight:
Butch (Paul Newman): “Kid there’s something I ought to tell you. I never shot anybody.”
Sundance (Redford): “One hell of a time to tell me.”
Maximum timing.
On the other hand, in the opening scene of “Touch of Evil” we see a bomb planted in a car at the start which creates suspense since we know something the characters walking around are unaware about.
Every film and every scene is different, but the key thing is to be deliberate in your choices aiming for maximum impact on the audience.
Great examples! I was trying to think of examples of poorly done reveals. Where maybe you didn’t enjoy the movie because you weren’t “equipped to enjoy what you were seeing.” My favorite kinds are when I am told (or shown) something is wrong or “off” yet I don’t know what it is. So I get the uneasiness, but also the thrill of trying to figure it out.
I watch good films over and over again and the experience gets richer and richer. The problem with bad films is they are harder to recall because I only see them once (and sometimes I can’t even finish watching them) and they tend to be forgotton. So coming up with good examples is easier than remembering bad examples.
But I know there have been more than one action movie that I’ve been confused watching and where I usually feel like they are just covering up plot holes with more action. As if the director is saying, “The audience won’t know what’s going on, but they won’t notice (or care) because we have some killer special effects, chase scenes, and explosions.”