ELHAM EHSAS

writer / director



films
about
stills
press
rushes











representation
lark




︎  ︎


Content vs. Intent
a plot twist




The three-act structure is everywhere in storytelling and film. 

Yes it works and it can often compel you, but sometimes it can get in the way. Not in the sense of ruining a film, but can stop it from being a great piece of visionary art. 

Following a formula is never a good idea and especially so when it comes to something as ethereal as story and narrative. I write this fully aware that only a few posts ago, I praised the three-act structure.

But that’s because the three-act structure provides a tried-and-tested road to a good film.  

Like all things in life, if you want to make a great film... you gotta wander off the beaten path. And that is why it’s scary. 

No one knows why good stories compel or what definitively makes a good story. But as humans, we are rational and want to quantify so that we can use the formula efficiently in a one-size-fits-all package that the studios will bet on. 

That’s not how story works. 

This is where the difference between content and intent comes in.

Content is the stuff that happens—the scenes, the actions, the dialogue. Intent is the heart of it—why it happens, what it’s trying to say, or the feeling it’s trying to leave behind.

Where content is the pen that writes the poem, intent is the soul behind the poet and we have to be careful that we don’t lose that.

Great stories and storytellers are often driven by what the story needs, whether that’s capturing a vibe, making people think, or just doing something totally unexpected.

In the end, a story doesn’t need to follow a formula to connect with people, it just needs to feel real.

[If you are interested in investigating this premise further, I highly recommend reading this essay by Franz Rodenkirchen]