No one sees films quite the way Field does. An engineer’s report on film construction and the view of an original thinker...
The master teacher of screenplay writing charts his Alger-like rise in the film world and reveals himself to be a true Hollywood character.
The story begins at Field’s mother’s deathbed, where Field is beseeched to become a “professional person.” He tries dental school but ends up reading for a play directed by Jean Renoir, who sends him to the film program at UCLA. There, surrounded by students like Coppola, he watches Citizen Kane and begins developing his structural film analysis. Later, at Wolper Productions and Cinemobile Systems, he researches movie history and reads thousands of scripts in an attempt to determine how movies work. Eventually, while soaking in a hot tub, pondering Three Days of the Condor, he defines a screenplay’s dramatic structure: “a linear arrangement of related incidents, episodes or events leading to dramatic resolution.” To help a foundering screenwriting class, Field watches Chinatown and Manhattan and devises the idea of a “middle point” in Act II that turns a screenplay into two manageable 60-page units of dramatic action. More lessons follow—on bookends, flashbacks, and the whammo, which Field intuits while trying to explain the script of Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore. In addition, there are descriptions of the business—pitches, briefs, producers who don’t read—and always enlightening friendships, like “hanging out with [Sam] Peckinpah while he was writing The Wild Bunch.” Field never takes himself or his writing too seriously. He reveals his early failings at teaching, and although he quotes Fitzgerald, he allows his writing to remain resolutely informal: “Discipline had always been a biggie for me.” He is serious about movies, however—moved whenever he sees a good film “to take it apart and see how and why it works.”
No one sees films quite the way Field does. An engineer’s report on film construction and the view of an original thinker worth appreciating.Pub Date: Oct. 9, 2001
ISBN: 0-440-50849-5
Page Count: 384
Publisher: Dell
Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Aug. 1, 2001
Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis...
Privately published by Strunk of Cornell in 1918 and revised by his student E. B. White in 1959, that "little book" is back again with more White updatings.
Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis (whoops — "A bankrupt expression") a unique guide (which means "without like or equal").Pub Date: May 15, 1972
ISBN: 0205632645
Page Count: 105
Publisher: Macmillan
Review Posted Online: Oct. 28, 2011
Kirkus Reviews Issue: May 1, 1972
This is not the Nutcracker sweet, as passed on by Tchaikovsky and Marius Petipa. No, this is the original Hoffmann tale of 1816, in which the froth of Christmas revelry occasionally parts to let the dark underside of childhood fantasies and fears peek through. The boundaries between dream and reality fade, just as Godfather Drosselmeier, the Nutcracker's creator, is seen as alternately sinister and jolly. And Italian artist Roberto Innocenti gives an errily realistic air to Marie's dreams, in richly detailed illustrations touched by a mysterious light. A beautiful version of this classic tale, which will captivate adults and children alike. (Nutcracker; $35.00; Oct. 28, 1996; 136 pp.; 0-15-100227-4)
Pub Date: Oct. 28, 1996
ISBN: 0-15-100227-4
Page Count: 136
Publisher: Harcourt
Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Aug. 15, 1996
BOOK REVIEW
BOOK REVIEW
© Copyright 2025 Kirkus Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Follow
Popular in this Genre
We can’t wait for you to join Kirkus!
It’s free and takes less than 10 seconds!
Already have an account? Log in.
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
Welcome Back!
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
