There Is No Such Thing As An Antagonist - Matthew Kalil

Matthew Kalil is a writer, director, script editor, author and speaker. He has written and co-written over 40 produced episodes of TV and has received various grants, development funding and awards. Matthew’s productions have been screened and broadcast in Canada, Denmark, Morocco, New Zealand, Puerto Rico, Kenya, South Africa, Thailand, the United States and the United Kingdom. Since receiving his MA in Screenwriting, he has been teaching, writing and mentoring students for over 20 years. Matthew has developed a unique system of screenwriting theory that helps beginners as well as established screenwriters get in touch with their creative core. His book, The Three Wells of Screenwriting, published by Michael Wiese productions with a foreword by Christopher Vogler, has been describes as a “breakthrough in the writing craft.” His workshops have touched and inspired thousands of participants and his gentle and insightful script editing guidance has helped many writers realize the stories they were always trying to tell. A charismatic speaker, Matthew has enjoyed presenting many times at the London Screenwriting Festival, the Cape Town International Animation Festival and the University Film and Video Association. Matthew is currently an Assistant Professor at the David Lynch MFA in screenwriting in the USA.

MORE VIDEOS WITH MATTHEW KALIL

CONNECT WITH MATTHEW KALIL

CONNECT WITH THE THREE WELLS OF SCREENWRITING

VIEWERS ALSO WATCHED

PERSONALLY SPONSOR FILM COURAGE

CONNECT WITH FILM COURAGE

SUBSCRIBE TO THE FILM COURAGE YOUTUBE CHANNEL

SUPPORT FILM COURAGE BY BECOMING A MEMBER

SUPPORT FILM COURAGE BY BECOMING A PATRON

LISTEN TO THE FILM COURAGE PODCAST

(Affiliates)

SCRIVENER FREE TRIAL

Stuff we use:

AUDIO

*These are affiliate links, by using them you can help support this channel.

#writing #screenwriting #writer

[filmcourage]

Have you stopped writing a story because you couldn't figure out who the protagonist was?

[williamlavagna]

The "antagonist" is just the main character's hurdle that they have to overcome.

[BeggyBeggBegg]

Wow, this is idea of the villain embodying some rather resented or even rejected aspect of the writer's psyche really resonated with me, played with that idea recently. Sometimes the worst manifestations of the person's egoistic defense mechanisms is dramatized and then assigned to the villain (definitely seen and done that), such as the tendency for some colder villains to reject their emotions and therefore their capacity for vulnerability. Love this guest!!

[mattbessette]

This reminds me of John Truby’s teachings, which encourage a web of opponents rather than limiting the story to one single antagonist

[JoelAdamson]

There should be antagonistic forces in every scene, even if there isn't a single antagonist. However, telling new writers "you don't need an antagonist" is going to get them thinking they don't need any conflict. After a year of struggling they'll discover how awesome it is to have a strong antagonist.

[ratemyactors]

Fascinating concept! I never thought about it this way, but you're right, there is no such thing as an antagonist, only a protagonist's opposing desires. Your breakdown of the three wells of screenwriting is also super insightful. Can't wait to apply these principles to my own writing. Thanks for sharing!

[bostongeis]

The bit about defeating the antagonist through violence is really interesting. Im reminded how the ending of JAWS differs from the book to the film.

We all know the ending to the film, the shark explodes in a very boisterous, very exciting, very violent way.

The shark in the book just dies from its wounds. Its about to attack brody and is inches away, until it stops and sinks into the water, finally succumbing to the beatings it was taken.

Obviously not as explosive and pretty lame on the surface, but apparently it ties into the book’s theme of humanity. Theres an article about it “The Shark Just … Dies” from thedailyjaws that explain it much better. The relevancy to this guys ideas on antagonists is pretty cool

[aaronlinton-chambers]

I totally agree with this writer it’s refreshing to hear a new perspective on this story method.

[DexterMorgan-sdjx]

This guy is a good teacher.

The best example of what he's talking about is the movie "21 grams" (2003), Sean Pean, Naomi Watts and Benicio del Toro, directed by Alejandro González Iñarritu and written by Guillermo Arriaga.

That movie is thrilling and compelling because none of them are good or evil, they just are caught in a very sensitive situation in their lives

[clarkparker]

With the struggle against the antagonistic forces, we learn the leitmotiv of the story. Who pushes the protagonist to evolve? Who entices the protagonist to acquire the skills to succeed? Who forces your protagonist to learn the moral of the story? The antagonist is the entity, that challenges the protagonist to become what they need to be.

[mythologic]

The antagonist is an obstacle to the protagonist's journey of improvement.

[ToniMcGinty]

I've written a movie where the antagonist is the personality traits suffocating the protagonists. And, yes, they're based on my own weaknesses. Sadly, every producer we've seen insists on a generic "bad guy" antagonist.

[trueoutlaw]

Every story has some kind of antagonist, but it's often made to seem as if it has to be a person separate from the protagonist. The title of the video seems a bit misleading, but I get it.

[matthewdeklerk]

Yes there is. If it didnt exist -- physically or conceptually - there wouldn't be a word for it. Writing "advice" like this is so detrimental to learner writers because they think they can simply ignore the fundamentals of narrative. For every modernist/non-antagonist example you can think of there are thousands of pieces which have a classic hero vs villian setup. You think youre helping writers avoid cliche, but youre defanging a vital storytelling tool in their kit.

[BusterDarcy]

The Bikeriders is a good example of a tardy antagonist. He’s also a personification of an idea that is itself the true antagonist of the film and so doesn’t himself play a major role so much as the idea itself does.

[Ruylopez]

It might be helpful for some writers to use Truby's definitions like "opponent" and "ally". They can be combined into "ally/opponent" and "opponent/ally". "Opponent" makes more sense if the main character isn't necessarily heroic, or in the case of romance/friendship, where the other party isn't "antagonistic" per se. Truby encourages the idea of a switch between opponent and ally. Mickey and Paulie could certainly be interpreted as flipping between these definitions in ROCKY, and of course '4 corner opposition', where different characters are shifted to the most extreme corners of the theme, where they have similar ideology/methods but different objectives or vice versa, and the impact of setting/social system.

[apocalypsetedium]

The antagonist is not always the "bad guy." And it's more interesting when they're not the villain. Furiosa in Fury Road is the antagonist to the protagonist, Nux. In the beginning of the film, his outlook is clear: he wants to give his life for Immortan Joe, and go to Valhalla. But Furiosa enters his life, changes his outlook. And he ends up giving his life in DEFIANCE of Immortan Joe. Furiosa's arc happens before the start of the film. In the Godfather, the main relationship is between Kate and Michael.

[talcy]

I try to think less of "who" the antagonist is and more about what the antagonistic force is. That opens it up way beyond the black and white he talks about. I think more about what the source of the conflict is. In The Godfather there are many antagonistic characters but they all represent the world which Michael intitially resists - the antagonistic force in The Godfather, for me, is more about the seductive nature of the violent world they inhabit, code of honour and their own sense of what family is. Michael is doomed from the moment he says to Sonny, "It's not personal. It's strictly business." In Jaws, sure there's a bloody great shark chewing up the bathers, but other major antagonistic forces are the greed and denial of Amity's mayor and businesses, as well as Brody's own sense of not being part of the place he is meant to protect, and his own psychological fear of the water. Not just the shark.

[subramanianramamoorthy]

Nothing goes smooth anywhere and for anybody
So name the debilitating force as, anything, but it needs to be overcome in every stage

[Ruylopez]

In EEAAO, Evelyn triumphs by embracing Waymond's belief system of kindness, no? But it works for that story because the opponent is a version of her daughter and her nihilism and sadness, and what Joy craves is acceptance from her mother, just as her mother craves it from her own father. It's authenticity vs acceptance. The outcome we want is a deeper connection for them, and a deeper connection for Waymond and Evelyn. Yes, westerns use violence and revenge most of the time, but isn't that just a metaphor for taking action and responsibility, not "might makes right"? Isn't that rooted in Greek myth not westerns or Marvel?