From Idea to Script to Sale
True Stories 9: 80s—Raging Bull
Biopics have often been the subject of true story films. In fact, the first true story films ever made were biopics, so it’s a genre that’s rather timeless.
And nearly everyone thinks their life or the life of a relative is worth a film. It is inevitable that when you tell a stranger you’re a screenwriter, pretty much the first thing they’ll say is, “Have I got a story for you,” and they will then proceed to tell you about their great grandmother who escaped German-occupied France in WWII by hiking over the Pyrenees. [True story: when I’m on a plane, traveling alone, I’ll tell the person next to me I’m a librarian—because if I say ‘screenwriter’ I’ll spend the trip hearing their life story.]
In many ways, every life is a story to be told. But a life that ‘means a movie’—a common expression in the business—is on another level. And if someone’s a famous figure in politics, media, innovation or sports—today or historically—there’s a possibility that their life could make a film.
Why? Because it’s all about name recognition. Would an audience go to see a film about a boxer who’s pretty much a shit in real life and never quite made it in the ring? Probably not. But the same fighter who won the world championship—but was a shit in life—an interesting character to base a film around.
And that’s what Raging Bull [1980], by Paul Schrader and Mardik Martin, is all about. Take a look at the trailer for the film: https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=EzC77uK4vHk
So what’s the appeal? Critics went nuts for this film when it came out, and it is still often included on lists of the best films ever made. It has been called a beautiful film about violence. And therein lies a clue—that juxtaposition of ‘violence’ and ‘beautiful’—which, to most people would seem an impossible combination.
But I think what the film attempts to do is get under the skin of this violent guy, Jake La Motta, and try to figure him out. Sure, he’s in a violent sport, but how does that effect the rest of his life? While some boxers might be able to fight in the ring and be a puppy dog in their home life, that’s not the case with Jake—and he ends up destroying his marriage AND his career because he can’t leave his violence inside the ring.
It’s interesting to look at how the film might come across today. My guess is that Jake’s abusive behavior to his wife would make him such an unappealing character that the film wouldn’t fly. So if you’re thinking about centering a film around a famous person, ask yourself if their behavior is worth a film in the era we’re living in.
I do want to come back, though, to the idea that the center of your film doesn’t have to be likeable, but he/she does have to be interesting enough for us to care about them. On some level, we have to care.
Next week, a special blog, then on August 13th we’ll meet a character who’s easy to care about in Out of Africa.
Copyright © Diane Lake
31Jul22
Email
Diane a question to Diane@DianeLake.com