One of the best things I’ve ever done for myself as a writer was get involved in a writing group. My group rarely told me what I wanted to hear. Normally the feedback was, “more CONFLICT.” It wasn’t until recently that I discovered what I was doing loosely doing to satisfy my group is actually something John Truby calls FOUR-CORNER OPPOSITION.
In his book, The Anatomy of Story, Truby says, “a simplistic opposition between two characters kills any chance at depth, complexity, or the reality of human life in your story. For that, you need a web of oppositions. … Think of each of the characters – hero and three opponents – as taking a corner of the box, meaning that each is as different from the others as possible.”
Comparative Analysis.
For today’s comparison, I’m going to continue with our movies from my previous post (STAR WARS, LOGAN, THE LAST JEDI, and just a little from my scripts for ANBAR and RIVERINE); however, I’m going to pull a lot from a movie which has a very clear FOUR-CORNER OPPOSITION setup.
BATMAN BEGINS.
In BATMAN BEGINS there are three (3) opponents to BATMAN/BRUCE WAYNE. They are RAS AL GUL, SCARECROW and FALCONE. Each represents a phase in BATMAN’s development. While Batman is altruistic; Ras al Ghul is altruistic but twisted. While Batman is unselfish, Falcone is selfish. While Batman is humane, Scarecrow is inhumane.
Truby notes these four characters need to oppose each other, like real life. In BATMAN BEGINS Scarecrow and Falcone are at odds with each other over Gotham. Falcone thinks he’s using Ras Al Ghul to win his battle for the city. And Ras Al Gul believes he’s been given a moral directive to end crime with crime. All of this bothers Batman, who believes the means is just as important as the end.
Christopher Nolan and fundamentals.
Christopher Nolan is by far one of the best storytellers in the business. Batman Begins was a fantastic movie. What is not apparent while watching the movie, is how easily Nolan segregates the conflict and Batman’s corresponding development in parallel with the movie’s structure. A beginner’s writing class couldn’t make it easier.
Four ACTS, a template to FOUR-CORNER OPPOSITION
Some of you may be saying, “but stories have THREE ACTS not four or five or more.” We’ll get to that in later posts. Right now, think of ACT II in a THREE ACT structure being split in half with the mid-point giving birth to TWO distinct acts. Let’s take a look.
YouTuber JUST WRITE breaks down Batman’s character development and plot movement like so.
“Act I is about Bruce and what he believes.
Act II is about Falcone and that terrorizing the people of Gotham for personal gain is wrong.
Act III is about Scarecrow and that terrorizing criminals for your own pleasure is wrong
Act IV is about Ras al Ghul and that terrorizing the innocent people of Gotham, even for noble reasons, is wrong.”
As you can see, FOUR-CORNER OPPOSITION is a great way to go deep with your story. But it needs to be done with precision. We can’t be lazy.
To help us figure this out, Truby defines FIVE rules for establishing FOUR-CORNER OPPOSITION.
Rule #1.
RULE: Each opponent should use a different way of attacking the hero’s weakness.
I used the example of BATMAN BEGINS because it’s very clear what the FOUR-CORNER OPPOSITION is. All three opponents are villains, which makes the conflict clear. This isn’t always the case though. often the two minor opponents can be on the PROTAGONIST’s side.
In STAR WARS, the THREE opponents to Luke are OBI-WAN KENOBI, HAN SOLO, and DARTH VADER.
Yes, OBI-WAN is an opponent. Of sorts! OBI-WAN attacks Luke’s belief that he will never leave Tatooine.
HAN SOLO attacks Luke’s optimism and faith in the Force.
DARTH VADER indirectly (they actually never meet face to face) attacks Luke’s development and competence in using the Force.
In LOGAN, the THREE opponents to Logan are CHARLES, LAURA, and PIERCE.
CHARLES attacks Logan’s belief that ‘life sucks and his legacy is really just a bunch of dead friends.’
LAURA attacks Logan’s belief that ‘he can’t love someone because they’ll just die.’
PIERCE attacks Logan’s failing body.
What happens when Rule #1 is not followed.
THE LAST JEDI is a great example of what bad looks like when it comes to many elements of storytelling. As discussed in my previous post with respect to characters, the movie just doesn’t have a clear delineation of whose story it is. Let’s look at FOUR-CORNER OPPOSITION from the perspective of Luke as the Protagonist as if this was the LOGAN story for LUKE SKYWALKER. The THREE OPPONENTS would be REY, SNOKE and KYLO REN.
At the beginning of the movie, REY has the most interaction with Luke. She should be the one testing his character to show us, the audience, what Luke is made of at that particular moment in time. And then she needs to push him to the first plot point which ignites Luke’s journey towards the climax.
It’s hard to decide, but I think REY attacks Luke’s belief that 1) the galaxy does not want him, or 2) that the Jedi must die, or 3) that Kylo Ren is his fault. Because this conflict is not clear, the story stumbles on Ach-to.
SNOKE attacks Luke’s desire to stay hidden. This is certainly eluded to, but it’s really a stretch. The Snoke-Luke opposition is almost non-existent, though some would say it exists through Kylo Ren.
Finally, KYLO REN attacks Luke’s power as a Jedi.
If I was in the writer’s room and was handed this script, here is the conflict I would bring to the front.
REY attacks Luke’s belief that it’s not his time to return.
SNOKE attacks Luke’s belief that the Jedi are more powerful than the Sith.
KYLO REN attacks Luke’s love for his sister, LEIA.
Rule #2.
John Truby’s second rule in developing FOUR-CORNER OPPOSITION is
Rule: place each character in conflict, not only with the hero but also with every other character.
Truby says, “Not only do you place your hero in conflict with three characters instead of one, but you can also put the opponents in conflict with each other. The result is intense conflict and a dense plot.”
In STAR WARS, OBI-WAN has conflict with Luke, Han, and Vader himself.
HAN has conflict with Luke, Obi-wan, Vader’s minions (Stormtroopers), Leia and just about everyone he comes across.
VADER has conflict with Tarkin, the Imperial generals, Obi-wan, Leia, and Luke.
In LOGAN, CHARLES has conflict with Logan, his own failing body, and his slow loss of control over his powers.
LAURA has conflict with Logan, Pierce, the Reavers and pretty much everyone she comes in contact with that pisses her off.
PIERCE has conflict with Logan, Laura, and Caliban
In these movies, the conflict between all these characters is consistent throughout.
What happens when Rule #2 is not followed.
In THE LAST JEDI, REY has conflict with Luke, Kylo and in the throne room with Snoke.
KYLO has conflict with Rey, Leia, Snoke and then at the end with Luke. One could argue Kylo’s conflict with Luke was throughout the story, but I would argue otherwise. For example, the scenes of them telling their sides of the story to Rey isn’t conflict, it’s just “he said, she said” arguing. It was more Judge Judy than Star Wars.
The most palpable conflict, or emotional development, is the one between LEIA and KYLO. If I were to determine who the story is about by the intensity of the conflict and overall character development; I would put my money on LEIA as the protagonist and KYLO as the antagonist, with LEIA standing firm and KYLO developing.
SNOKE has conflict with Kylo and Hux.
LEIA has conflict with Poe, but not Kylo. Yes, I just said the conflict between Kylo and LEIA was ‘palpable.’ The problem here is that LEIA shows her sense of loss for Ben in the scenes that focus on their relationship, but the writer didn’t have her interact WITH him in ways which would develop that conflict. Ultimately, putting LEIA in a coma undermined this entire line of conflict. It had so much potential up until that point too.
Rule #3.
Rule: Put the values of all four characters in conflict.
Yesssss!!!!!!! I like it! I like it a lot!
Truby says, “Look for the positive and negative versions of the same value.”
In STAR WARS, LUKE values others and the good in them. HAN SOLO values himself. He’s in it for the money others will give him.
OBI-WAN values prudence, discipline and responsibility with the power one has, to do good. In contrast, DARTH VADER values the power of the Force and his idea of what good is, and TARKIN values the power of the Empire and its idea of what good is.
It’s amazing at how good these movies are. The central lesson I’ve learned over and over again by studying them is that simplicity beats complexity at its own game every time!
In LOGAN the values are just a tad more complex, not much though, but the thing I really like about them is they center around the theme of LEGACY. LOGAN values what he has lost. CHARLES values what he has at the moment because of what he has lost. LAURA values Logan. And PIERCE values each of these characters as objects of fascination.
FOUR-CORNER OPPOSITION falls apart when values don’t match.
In THE LAST JEDI, I found it difficult to really hammer down mutual or competing values.
LUKE values nothing, he’s apathetic almost. But ‘nothing’ is not a value one can make a story about. Unless it’s moving from nothing to something, which one could try to make an argument for here, but it’s a weak development at best.
I think REY values family. Sort of. Her story is so wishy-washy in this movie. She goes from wanting to convince Luke to return, to getting training, to training herself, to finding herself, back to training, then to turning Kylo Ren to the Light Side, then to herself. This is one of the reasons why the movie got so much kickback. The audience felt they were being led on a wild goose chase to find Rey’s values.
KYLO REN values freedom from his pain and the power needed to attain said freedom. SNOKE values his own power and the power he has over Kylo and Hux. Particularly Hux though, which is odd because proper FOUR-CORNER OPPOSITION would force Snoke to be more against Kylo.
The conflict is weak because all the characters have values and motivations that don’t oppose the other character’s values. Or they don’t have the ability or interest to take action. An example is the weakness of General Hux in this movie. He just doesn’t seem to have a role at all except to be the butt of everyone’s jokes and a punching bag. He never gets a win.
Bad guys aren’t formidable unless they can prove it.
Rule #4.
Rule: Push the characters to the corners.
Truby says, “In other words, make each Character as different as possible from the other three.”
In STAR WARS, LUKE is young, optimistic and enthralled with everything going on in front of him. Nothing he comes across is uninteresting to him. HAN, on the other hand, is experienced, jaded and cynical about life in the galaxy. Whereas everything catches LUKE’s eye, HAN is not impressed.
OBI-WAN is wise, old and over it. Whereas LUKE is naïve and HAN is cynical, OBI-WAN is the consummate professional even beyond death.
LEIA is wise, young and into it. Whereas OBI-WAN has finished his mission, LEIA is just starting. Whereas LUKE is naïve, LEIA has street smarts.
CHEWBACCA is the selflessly loyal sidekick to HAN’s selfish hero.
DARTH VADER is wise, experienced and professional. Whereas LUKE is naïve and enthralled, VADER knows the galaxy and everything in it. It does not impress him or underwhelm him, it just is and that’s why he’s so good at being evil.
TARKIN is wise, old, and into it. Where VADER wants to stop LUKE, TARKIN just wants to destroy everything with his new weapon.
When Rule #4 is not followed.
THE LAST JEDI set itself up for failure from the get-go on this one. The conflict between the characters is disjointed and disconnected. It becomes really hard to push the characters to the corners because their values and desires aren’t similar enough to need said pushing.
Finn and Rose want to find a hacker. Poe wants to overthrow Holdo. Leia wants to save Ben. Luke wants to be left alone. Rey wants to bring Luke Back, then she wants to turn Kylo. Hux wants to toy with the Resistance. Snoke wants to own Kylo. It’s a mess of character landscape.
The reason Truby says to push the characters to the corners is because we previously followed his rule to make all the character’s desires and values similar. When similarity happens properly, the characters are like magnets and will naturally start to cling to each other. So, we need to separate them and draw out their differences so the audience can see why the antagonist is evil. It’s because their idea of freedom is slightly off, but the protagonist’s idea of freedom is spot on.
Rule #5.
Rule: Extend the FOUR-CORNER pattern to every level of the story.
Truby says, “Once you’ve determined the basic FOUR-CORNER OPPOSITION, consider extending the pattern to other levels of the story.”
In STAR WARS, one set of opposition is between LUKE, HAN, OBI-WAN, and LEIA.
Another is DARTH VADER, TARKIN, LEIA, and the GENERALS.
Another is LUKE, OBI-WAN, DARTH VADER, and the Action.
Everywhere you step in the Star Wars plotline, there is conflict. Luke wants to leave the farm, but his Uncle needs him to stay. His Aunt thinks its time for him to explore the galaxy. Because Luke has been sheltered his whole life, he doesn’t understand Obi-Wan’s hesitations and cautions about life in space. Luke’s naivety leads to an altercation in Mos Eisley. It leads to a lot of things.
In LOGAN, one set of OPPOSITION is between LOGAN, CHARLES, CALIBAN, and The World.
Another is LOGAN, LAURA, PEIRCE, and the REAVERS.
Another is LOGAN, CHARLES, WILL MUNSON, and the FARMERS
Conclusion
Ultimately, conflict is the catalyst which forces the characters to discuss things, take action against other characters and move the plot forward towards a meaningful conclusion. A story where everyone agrees isn’t very interesting.