Killer DRAMATIC ACTION without the killing!

I wish I knew the answer, but I suspect you have to replace action with mounting suspense and trepidation. Mansions aren't quiet or static even when no one's home. There's noise, movement, changing shadows as the Moon arcs across the sky. This could work on your character's nerves, making her jumpy, then afraid, then inducing a state of panic. Maybe it's all in her mind -- maybe it isn't. But if the audience can put themselves in her shoes and feel as spooked as she does every time a floorboard creaks or a curtain stirs or a door slams somewhere in the distance, they might overlook the fact there's no gunfire or explosions.

-Derek
-> * <- Click on this magic star to be transported to my website. Ruby slippers optional.
________________________________________________
Butch and me have been talking it all over. Wherever the hell Bolivia is, that's where we're off to.

Two loose examples of what I guess you're trying to accomplish might be Turn of the Screw and The Others. Perhaps not exactly a similar genre, but ideal in the sense that both these movies keep you gripped by the old adage 'it's what you don't see that frightens you most.'

If you're telling a good story then I would stay true to it without adding the usual stuff because it might be expected, and is the blue print for formulaic success. There's intelligent viewers out there moaning about the dire lack of stories such as yours - that is without the body count, etc.

It seems to be that the basic flaw might be that while your character discovers a great deal about the mansion owner's dark past, nothing happens. It doesn't have to be dead bodies turning up--like xhouseboy noted, it doesn't even have to be something seen--but you do need more action that the acquisition of knowledge.

Consider the character's fear--baseless or not--that once she uncovers enough gruesome dirt, the mansion owner is going to have to kill her for knowing too much. She could work herself into a terrible state of anxiety and do some stupid, reckless things (ending up locking herself in a windowless room? killing the owner by panicked mistake?) based on her belief that she's in danger.

Maryn, who's not enthusiastic about her idea

Anonymous1: Please don't post the same question simultaneously to several forums at the same time.

It's called 'cross-posting' and is often considered bad net-iquette.

Mac

anonymous1 said:

Popular writing can often utilize murders, guns, cops, criminals, killings and even car chases to boost 'Dramatic action'.

Thing is - this isn't me and so I struggle to find other ways to develop stories and am criticized for strong characters/theme but weak action.

Case in point have a mystery/thriller story where a young woman finds herself temporarily lodged at a mansion but soon discovers clues to the owner's incredible and dark past from various items located around his estate. However there's no dead bodies buried around the place, and no one gets killed or attacked, that wouldn't be true to the story. Yet I suspect it still needs a little something more action wise . . .

Any advice appreciated . .
cheers
/A.

Click to expand...

Kill someone, even if it's offstage. If death isn't true to the story, change the story. A mystery without murder is like a movie without popcorn.

And how dark can his past be if there are no bodies?

Strong action doesn't require guns, explosives, crashing cars or dead bodies. If you really think that way, then I think you're on the wrong path.

Without reading your WIP, it's hard to tell if your action needs more "oomph." Strong action results from strong motivation and desire. The reason why you think your character's actions are lackluster is perhaps they're not the strongest actions these characters should or would take. So the woman is temporary in the mansion... can she leave? When she finds the darkest secrets, what does she do? Does she want to leave? Does she stay? Is something lurking in the background? What's her conflict at that point? Does she just say "oh well" and move on? Or does she do something extraordinary?

Actions are about choices. Let your characters make the strongest choices.

There doesn't have to be any violence, but the threat of some violence could work wonders. Have her discover something which relates to something horrible which happened there before and make the reader believe the same thing might happen to her. That's how you create gripping suspense, which keeps your reader interested.

What are the woman's reactions to discovering the guy's dark past? Hell, why is she on the mansion snooping around in the first place? You could omit the murder, blowing cars (which by the way, is getting waaaaaaay to old) by adding a lot of suspense to the story. And I disagree with Jamesaritchie, there can be a dark past without bodies.

The problem is, people are lacking imagination, so they use the exploding cars, dead bodies and all that stuff over and over again, and I agree that it works most of the time, but people are getting tired of it. If I read a book or look at a movie with blowing cars and the hero narrowly escaping from a guy with a gun, I just roll my eyes and look for something more interesting.

anonymous 1, I really respect what you're trying to do, and if you've got a really good idea for the dark past and everything, then some suspense will do the trick. I wish you the greatest of lucks!!

I merged this thread with one from Novels started by a duplicate post.

DamaNegra said:

The problem is, people are lacking imagination, so they use the exploding cars, dead bodies and all that stuff over and over again, and I agree that it works most of the time, but people are getting tired of it. If I read a book or look at a movie with blowing cars and the hero narrowly escaping from a guy with a gun, I just roll my eyes and look for something more interesting.

Click to expand...

That's a little harsh, don't you think?

Exploding cars, dead bodies, and "all that stuff" aren't necessarily signs of a "lack of imagination," they are devices which serve the plot.

If the plot is one which requires explosions and bodies, then they aren't supplanting creativity, they are serving the plot to move the story forward. They are relevant payoffs to dramatic beats. If they are thrown into a story whose plot conflicts with such elements, then that isn't serving the plot and is a sign of, as you said, lazy or uncreative writing.

However, I think anonymous is misunderstanding what "dramatic action" is. Drama comes from conflict, the interplay between the protagonist's goals and the antagonistic force preventing the successful attainment of those goals. Dramatic action need not be physical. It is merely the intersection of goals and obstacles which drives the story forward.

Take "Misery," for example. Everytime Annie Wilkes and Paul Sheldon are interacting in the room, the dialogue, the emotion, the appalling things (smashing his legs, torturing him, etc.), these are examples of dramatic action. These scenes all both build tension and drive the story forward - as they are the epitome of the clash between Paul Sheldon's goals of escape and survival with Annie Wilkes goals of keeping him there and hurting him until he writes her character back to life.

Anything that drives your story forward with an emotional magnetism which compels the audience to be invested in the story is "dramatic action."

If your story doesn't have enough "action," the answer isn't to arbitrarily throw in elements that have nothing to do with the story (explosions and dead bodies). The answer is to create greater conflict by raising the stakes - creating a bigger clash between goals and obstacles - but do so in a way that organically and logically moves the story forward.

"Misery" is a good example in that, even when there's nothing violent actually going on, the entire dialogue is heavy with threat of same. Suspense, tension, anticipation, keeps the audience's attention.

Likewise if someone opens a drawer and finds a bloody knife, or a gun, or a newspaper clipping that tells of the unsolved murder that took place here 20 years ago... No explosions yet, but interest and curiosity levels are raised.

Birol, thanks.

-Derek
-> * <- Click on this magic star to be transported to my website. Ruby slippers optional.
________________________________________________
It's nothing personal. But in an hour, maybe two, you'll be dead. And moments later, you'll become one of them. You'll endanger your friends, try to kill them, probably succeed. I'm sorry. That's just the way it is.

I agree that some stories do call for using exploding cars and dead bodies, but most of the exploding cars and dead body stories I've read don't need those, yet they use those elements because people like reading them. It's getting too old.

Jamesaritchie said:

Kill someone, even if it's offstage. If death isn't true to the story, change the story. A mystery without murder is like a movie without popcorn.

Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree, James. There are first-rate mysteries based on someone's disappearance, a kidnapping, blackmail, or theft. That's why the term 'murder mystery' exists, to distinguish those mysteries with murders from the others.

Maryn, who prefers a murder or two in her mysteries