Captain Phillips is the kind of edge-of-your-seat action thriller that Hollywood does better than anyone else, which is why it’s one of the best American films of the year. If you’re looking for depth of character or complex themes, this is not your movie. But it can teach screenwriters a lot about how to please the mass audience, the single most important skill in mainstream movies.
Captain Phillips comes from the increasingly popular genre of memoir-true story. Like Argo last year, this film structures real events so that the story is more dramatic than most of the fiction films it’s competing against. This is no small achievement.
The screenplay by Billy Ray, based on the book “A Captain’s Duty: Somali Pirates, Navy Seals, And Dangerous Days At Sea” by Richard Phillips and Stephan Talty, is a textbook example of how to combine the action and memoir forms to get the best out of both. Not surprisingly, director Paul Greengrass of Bourne Supremacy, Bourne Ultimatum and United 93 is getting all the attention, partly because of the auteur theory. But it’s also because people erroneously believe that a true story is already “written,” it just has to be filmed. And there’s no doubt Greengrass does a great job. But the real key to the success of Captain Phillips is the incredibly tight script.
The memoir-true story genre appears to be the easiest of all forms because all you have to do is list events. But events and plot are not the same thing, not by a long shot. In fact, memoir-true story is in many ways more difficult to plot than fiction, precisely because the writer is restricted by those very events. If you want to achieve a basic truth, you have to remain faithful to what happened. But real events don’t normally have a natural dramatic build. So you’re caught in a terrific bind.
This is why the memoir genre in a Hollywood movie almost never stands on its own. Writers combine it with other genres, typically detective and thriller, to give it form, build and punch.
The restriction of real events dictates a number of techniques the writer must know to be successful (see the Memoir-True Story Class for details). For example, memoir puts even more emphasis than fiction on the story frame, which is where you start and where you stop. Do you go wide, to show an entire life, or do you go narrow, to find that one moment that defined everything? Also, one of the first steps a good writer takes when writing a memoir is to figure out the battle scene. This gives you the greatest conflict and most natural dramatic endpoint toward which every other event in your story can focus.
In this, original memoir writers Richard Phillips and Stephan Talty and screenwriter Billy Ray were fortunate. Their true-life story not only had a real battle, it was as good a battle as you can get. Yes, it was a big conflict. But the battle also pulled in huge international forces that made the stakes much higher. Even more importantly, it was intensely personal, a mano-a-mano fight to the death within the tight space of an enclosed lifeboat.
With the battle scene clear, screenwriter Billy Ray faced the key decision of the entire writing process: whether to do this memoir primarily as an action story or as a thriller. The primary genre determines the structure of the story, and if you make the wrong decision you will most likely ruin the premise.
Action and thriller often go together in Hollywood films, because they both put the hero in extreme danger. But the biggest difference between them is in how they handle the opposition. The key question in the thriller is about who the real opponent is. Is the suspect guilty or innocent? The key question in the action story is about how to defeat the opponent.
Writing Captain Phillips as a thriller would have meant hiding the real opponent, and bringing in a bigger, deadlier opponent after the hero has defeated his initial enemy. While this would have given the story some real advantages, there were a couple of reasons why this was not the way to go. First, the events did not lend themselves to this method of plotting. Second, the writer could not provide the opponent with as much detail, and so would have made him more of an evil cartoon.
By making this an action memoir, Ray set up a crosscut structure leading to a vortex point. Two essentially equal characters come into increasing conflict in a progressively smaller space ending in some kind of explosion. And that’s exactly what Captain Phillips is.
This structure creates a pressure cooker effect on the audience that, if done properly, will leave their nerves as ripped up as the hero’s. It also allows the writer to make the opponents human beings instead of the typical foreign villain. When Captain Phillips says to his main opponent, Muse, “There’s got to be something other than being a fisherman or kidnapping people,” Muse replies, “Maybe in America, Irish, maybe in America.”
Every genre decision you make also has its costs. Notice that going the action route inevitably hurts the plot. Unlike thrillers that hide much of the opposition, thus giving the writer plenty of reveals, action stories usually display the powers of the opponent right up front. Muse isn’t going to surprise the Captain or the audience with what he can do. (I was surprised, however, by how badly the cargo ship was defended).
Without a lot of reveals, the action story relies on intense punch-counterpunch in the middle of the story to create its plot. The action story is like a great fight, with two equal boxers going toe to toe in a twelve round slugfest. And the main technique is pressure. You put it on, release it for a moment and then you put it back on with even greater pressure than before.
Ray works these techniques of the action genre to perfection. Every story event brings the Captain and Muse closer together. Every story event represents an increase in tactical expertise. Every story event puts the Captain under progressively greater pressure all the way to the final moment. This stuff is beautifully directed and edited. But the individual events and the sequential building of those events is in the script.
I can’t finish this breakdown without commenting on the final scene, which has one of the most unique and powerful examples of great acting that I can remember. Everyone knows that Captain Phillips survives his ordeal, but if you want to avoid learning the details of the last scene, stop reading NOW.
Obviously, actors don’t get any better than Tom Hanks. But the question is: why is he able to knock it out of the park in this one scene? The first part of the answer is that, once again, it’s in the script. And I don’t mean the lines the writer gives him to say, which are little more than a few groans and cries as he tells the ship doctor how he’s feeling. No, what sets it up is the structure of the entire script leading up to this one moment.
This brilliantly constructed story has been an ever-tightening vice that not only puts the hero under intense pressure, but the audience as well. When that pressure is suddenly released on this man, and on us, I defy anyone in the theater not to shed a tear. Actors typically thank the director for helping them achieve a great performance. They should be kissing the hand of the writer.
But there’s another reason this is such an amazing scene, and it has to do with the contrasting acting styles of the two actors within it. One of them is Tom Hanks, a gifted and highly-trained actor who can express a torrent of deeply-felt emotion. But what kicked this scene into the stratosphere is that he is playing opposite a real-life Navy corpsman, played by Danielle Albert (IMDB). She’s not acting here. She is talking to him and caring for him as she would if he were the real Captain Phillips. She’s a professional, a military doctor. Her tone is flat. She’s clearly trying to help a man who came this close to dying. But she knows that to do that she has to remain calm.
It’s the contrast with Albert’s flat, “realistic” delivery that allows Hanks’ pain and fear and release to reach into the very heart and soul of the audience. All the doors of every person in that theater get blown down at once. And it feels great.
If you’ve got a good personal story to tell, by all means look at the memoir-true story form to show you how to shape it. But don’t be fooled. It’s very difficult to make your story dramatic and unique from everyone else’s experience. That’s where adding one or two other genres makes all the difference in the world.
Well written and clear. Thank you for the insights!!
A very well articulated analysis. However, are you aware of the lawsuit brought by the crew members against Captain Phillips? If their allegations are true, would that change any of your opinion? How true must a story saying that is “based on a true story” be? If Captain Phillips is not a hero, but a villain, does that not destroy the core of the script and film?
Here is a link to an article about the lawsuit:
//nypost.com/2013/10/13/crew-members-deny-captain-phillips-heroism/
I did not know she was a real-life military doctor. Thank you for providing us with that information. Unbelievable film. Also thank you for explaining why action genre fits this story better than thriller genre.
This is a beautiful analysis of a film that knocked my eyeballs out. Sometimes you can appreciate a film more for understanding it better. Here we have that explanation that brings the film into a special, and much appreciated, new focus.
This movie has nothing to do with what realy happend. That is why it floped. People know it is a cheap propaganda.
A movie not showing what really happened doesn’t stop it from being a success and filmmakers aren’t interested in propaganda, they want to tell a good story. If that story isn’t the truth, who cares? Movies aren’t the news. Movies are movies.
For me, what hit the most in that final scene was the repeat of the line “everything will be okay”. When Muse told this to Captain Phillips during the ordeal we knew it was false, we knew this couldn’t end well if Phillips believed it. But when the doctor said it in the final line of the story, we knew it had true meaning, it was the final release of pressure.
Great film, and great analysis John.
Pingback: Tom Hanks’ Capt. Phillips: I Gasped! | Stunning Guidance
Thank you for the insights and clarity- very much appreciated. Does anyone know where to find a download of the “Captain Phillips” script? Thanx!
Just to clarify one point – John referred to Ms. Albert as both as a corpsman and a military doctor. The former is correct. As a petty officer (which is an enlisted grade), she would be an IDC – an Independent Duty Corpsman. Although not an MD, she would be a highly trained individual, and would be referred to as “the doc” by the ship’s personnel, because she’s in charge of all things medical aboard the ship. She would have communication capabilities with shore-based MDs should anything arise beyond her expertise.
I agree with your review and couldn’t wait to see what you had to say about the ending which by the way ,blew me away. You have so much knowledge to share I’ve only just discovered you and am so happy I have. Looking forward to learning as much as I can as an inspiring writer thank you for all your imparting wisdom. It’s an answer to prayer.
“They should be kissing the hand of the writer.” I have often wondered why IMDB doesn’t credit the writer in the section under the actor below Real Life Quotes where selected on-screen quotes are listed. Yes, the actor uttered these great lines and the director advised him how to deliver them, but the writer was the source of the material.
I agree. All the conflicts sum up towards this unforgettable ending. But here, the experiences of filmmakers were crucial because the whole last scene was improvised. Therefore, the most important scene and what seems to us as the only possible one had unfortunately not been anticipated by the writer. Mind me, I’m not saying he didn’t do a great job.
Regards,
Martin
You are absolutely right she is a corpsman, an HM2 (Hospitalman 2nd class). I think the confusion comes because in the Navy it is tradition to call the ship’s corpsman “Doc” or the “ship’s Doc”.
I really cherish John´s wisdoms and his storytelling advices.
Yet – on this one, I really have to disagree.
The problem with “Captain Phillips” is, that it is a blatant propaganda commercial for the US Navy and of course – the american (democratic?) way…..
That is already enough said. Yet: the film still has another task: To hide a false flag operation and manifest a version of events in the heads of the viewers that just did not happen. To glorify american citizenship and their military – and demonize the rugged third world thugs that are all terrorists and not to be trusted. The film basically thwarts the truth. Read it up. Read what the real crew has to say.
It is like “Argo” and “Zero Dark Thirty”: these films are not only sponsored by the intelligence services and the military – they are made to advertise their actions and justify them in hindsight. Or present a version of events, that is just simply wrong like the killing of Bin Laden. Pure fiction. Theatre play.
So: all the dramatic and directorial or thespian virtues in this film are indeed vices.
On a pure cinematic level it is a film to enjoy, because it´s really gripping and powerful.
But:
The better it´s done, the more effective the propaganda. The more realistic the
staging and acting, the easier you can trap the audience and make them root for the propagandist´s
cause. I f….ing hate this!
( I am a German. I know what I am talking about. Propagand-movies – that was our specialty some time ago. Watch “Jud Süss”, watch “Der ewige Jude”, watch “Kolberg” – and you´ll learn the tactics of propaganda films. By the way: also watch “Casablanca” and “The Sea Hawk” (uncut version) and you´ll have some other excellent examples for very effective propaganda. And many others. )
Mastering the tools of storytelling for the wrong cause is despicable – no matter how well it´s done.
Firstly, Tom hanks floors me everytime, whatever he does is brilliant, and john truby is the master of glean, pointing out things I thought I had only spotted, but the navy couldn’t make an add that depicts their sharp shooters , blowing the brains out of some poor guy trying to make a living off the west coast of somalia.and as phillips said, WE ALL HAVE BOSSES.
But for entertainment purposes it hits all the beats required to carry the film foreward, I’m sure that sometimes art meets life,, but do we have to tippy toe around a script because it looks too much like an add for the navy, and looks too close to the government line.
I mean, how many times was the name WILSON used by hanks in CASTAWAY, it does not have a THE in front of it, because he wasn’t THE castaway but he had been CAST AWAY by those who loved him, it is a huge add for WILSON sports gear, very clever, but in reality, if you had to talk to a soccer ball, I reckon one would repeat it a lot ,if there were no body else to speak to. don’t know how much money changed hands but it was a huge add, just the same, he was grappling with familiar names of home, like the excitement when a shit house washed up, BAKERSFIELD he yells, familiar to him, and we all felt good about it, we felt happy for the protagonist.
I am sure there are some very nice and happy people living on the west coast of somalia, but phillips sailed into the wrong waters for the right reasons, lots of movie’s could be called propaganda.
And don’t forget they all live and die by the gun and threats everyday, but tell me a better way of resolving the situation other than turning someone’s head into a melon with a 4 inch hole at the back, I’m all ears, if the critics were a little bit correct, then all the coke cans and machines would have to be edited out of so many movie’s.