DZ-126: Secrets and Clues — Transcript

Mel will have successfully framed one of us for the murder of the other.

And let's be clear, it's not going to be Chaz.

Wait, the victim or the murderer?

Well, you decide.

Hi, I'm Stu Willis.

And I'm Chaz Fisher.

And I'm Mel Killingsworth.

And welcome to Draft Zero, a podcast where three emerging filmmakers try to work out what makes great screenplays work.

And in this episode, we are going to be talking about landmarks, secrets, and hidden. I'm using hidden as like a lot.

Question mark?

Hidden?

Definitely hidden.

I'm going to pitch for the listeners and hopefully ends up as the title, just calling it Secrets and Clues.

And we're going to be talking about the film Wake Up Dead Man by Rian Johnson. We're going to be talking about Side Effect by Scott C. Burns. And we're going to be talking about the pilot coin flip of the sitcom shrinking by, I'm blanking now.

Bill Lawrence and Jason Segel and Brett Goldstein. And I do think we'll probably end up splitting this episode into two, not only because in our pre-chats we were finding a lot of different things and digging them up, but also, like a quail surprise, I have a lot to say, especially about Knives Out.

Every time you add Mel to an episode, you've got to add an hour to its estimated running length.

You're welcome.

Solid quality. It's also probably one hour less that people have to listen to Stu and me. So, time well spent.

So we'll talk, we'll unpack a little bit more about landmark secrets and hidden information, because really that's what we're talking about. The presentation of information to character and how that creates, I'm going to throw another term at you all, narrative velocity for the characters or character velocity is another way that I've heard people talk about it.

But this is a spiritual follow-on from our one shot on everything, everywhere, all at once, where the lens that we took in analyzing that film was how well it does setups, payoffs, and reversals. And we defined setups, payoffs, and reversals as... Particularly payoffs and reversals as just the closing of an information gap. You had raised a question potentially in an audience's mind and you got either a narrative satisfaction or an emotional satisfaction from closing that information gap. And, uh, Stu, I think you, you stolen the observation. I think it was from William Dunn on pointers and plants. So a pointer was a setup that the audience was aware of it was making them ask a question so they knew that they were being set up and then they were going to expect at some point that pointer to point to something and get either a payoff or a reversal to get that dopamine reward a plant is something that is not attracting the audience's attention but it is still a setup so that when you do the, surprise, the payoff, the reversal. It doesn't feel out of place. And the final one that we talked about in that episode, as Stu pitched, I think three different words for this, we were alternating between underpinning and pants. Pointers, plants and pants, or pointers, plants and underpinning. But underpinning is a setup that we have to do, we have to do it as writers, but I feel like it's done a lot more by the other elements of filmmaking, where it's like the stitching of a film where you're not pointing or planting you don't want the audience even aware that it's happened but it's there so that when the payoff or the reversal or the surprise happens, It doesn't feel out of place. And the reason why I'm reiterating that is when Stu pitched doing this topic, I was like, this would be great if we focused not on the effect on the audience, but the effect on the characters as a way to lead into our future series on character journeys. And Stu's like, yeah, I got you. So, Stu, I'm going to handball to you because you've been doing a lot of warden operating.

Wardening.

The equivalent of.

Yeah, equivalent in Dungeon Master. I mean, our podcast, Actual Play podcast, for those who listen to the sneak preview, we've recalled all the other four other episodes. I've just been on show and not edited them, but I have been reading a lot more about game design in the perspective of role-playing games. And I've done interactive fiction before. In fact, I would say my first fan fiction that I ever wrote were a couple of fighting fantasy slash choose-your-own-adventure novels back when I was in primary school. So it comes from, for those in the RPG community, a seminal post called Landmark, Hidden, and Secret. We've completely stolen the title from a blog called DIY and Dragons from an author called Am. And she devises information into three categories, Landmark, Hidden, or Secret. So Landmark information in her terminology is automatic and free. And she's going to be talking about players. And I think what's really interesting to me about thinking the relatively usefulness of theories around game design is players are characters. And so we can reappropriate this when thinking about characters. So players, here landing, mark information the first time without asking. They just get it. And they can be reminded of it freely as they heard it. She then has hiddens as the complete contrast. The hidden information isn't automatic. Players have to learn it and it often isn't free. And this is the idea that I think is actually particularly useful from a writing perspective, is that there is a cost to learning the information. There's another phrase from game design that I like in terms of thrillers, which is information puts players in danger and danger rewards characters with information, right? That's kind of the loop with like thriller game design and I think you could actually use it in all these three films. They learn a piece of information, that information puts them in danger. And then the third category is, for her, uh, is that secret information is the next level that it has no guarantees at all is the opposite of automatic and is always expensive. In other words, it requires a skill check in game design. The way I'm proposing that we talk about it, right. Is that we've got landmark information. The characters are all aware of and the audience, there is secret information, which means that characters know it's there, right? This is my way of thinking about it. So it's slightly different how Anne's talking about it. We know it's there, but we need to do something in order to get the information, right? It's the equivalent of, we know there's a door there and there's a room behind it, but it's got a key and we don't yet have the key. Hidden information is something that is at the time invisible to the characters and that they pay the cost. They earn that information and it is revealed to them. That's my way of, I'm slightly going off her, but for me, hidden and then secret being the next level is kind of, to me it makes more sense if it goes landmark and then secret and then completely hidden, but maybe I'm just confusing things and we can go back to how Anne's talked about it. Mel's giving me a look of like, am I confusing things already?

No, I just think, I think you make actually a lot more sense because you are talking about a strictly visual medium.

Yeah.

Like, whereas RPGs are not. Like, I think that makes absolute sense. I'm just trying to wrap my head around making sure that when I use things, I'll clarify.

Because really what we're talking about is secret is, I know there is something to be learned here, but I have to do something in order to get it. And for a character, hidden information is something we don't even know is something that we can learn, right? About it. And this relates to this other concept, which I mentioned, narrative velocity. And I can't remember the name of the author now.

It will be in the show notes after we've Googled it.

So narrative velocity in the case of game design, and this is related to video game design, particularly, but it relates to RPGs. Narrative velocity is what drives a player character to do something. And when we talk about this in often screenwriting, we talk about activating the character, making the character active. And this article breaks narrative velocity into two forms, push and pull. So a push is a character that is forced to do something. Uh, maybe they're on the run. Maybe they needed to fight for the lights and pool is them choosing. And I think there's an agency thing, which is why I'm using the word choosing. They're choosing to follow the path. And that's really important in game design because it's like, you kind of have to have a bunch of things that work together. So the players decide to go to left or right or anything. Because the thing with, with games, unlike movies is that they're, if the player stops choosing to be active, this is, there's some game designs called idle games that are not quite like this but most games require active participation of the players so therefore you have to be conscious in terms of how you're designing things to create velocity i think that's actually such a really useful idea in terms of thinking about characters i'm plotting what is the velocity of these characters it's not just what are they doing something what is their action it's what direction they're choosing to go um and i think they're related to well what information they have access to. We've talked a lot about exposition and information and all that kind of stuff. But we're talking about how does the landmark, how does the secret give them the, I mean, I guess maybe the hidden is kind of the reversal, right? When hidden is no longer hidden, it's kind of a reversal. Anyway.

Or a surprise.

Or a surprise.

Yeah, which are often the same thing. So, we've done a bit of pre-chat and we deliberately chose a murder mystery to lead with, right, where... Secrets and clues and at what point they're revealed to the characters versus the audience, because narrative point of view is going to be really important here. We had previously covered how the unfurling of this information, pointers and plans, works in relation to the filmmaker's relationship to the audience. And what we're hoping to really focus on is going to be the character's relationship internally with the information. The secrets and clues, and how that can push the plot along basically a more character driven way of looking at your plot because there can definitely be films where the narrative velocity is constantly pushed things keep happening information keeps getting revealed by external sources to the characters that force them into a decision right rather than being rather than pulling them and i'm not saying one's good or one's bad but what i hope that we uncover from this exercise is knowing what is the effect the storytelling effect of choosing one over the other and i'm really quite excited about the examples that we've chosen because while wake up dead man is a murder mystery locked room murder mystery it has as its two lead characters one is a detective and one is not so i think there's within that we'll find really contrasting what is the narrative effect for each of those characters and what is their sort of role in the plot vis-a-vis the information and the secrets and the clues um side effects was my choice there was a chance that this episode was going to get recorded uh without me and um and i threw it out there and we'll hopefully have some lively discussion because I think I enjoy side effects a lot more than Mel and Stu do. And finally, we decided to do. A non-mystery genre and television as well to see what these tools, how they might have a different emotional impact, a different storytelling impact in those different genres.

Yeah. If you're writing something that's not a mystery, how does thinking about secrets and clues from your character's perspective help you create or activate or drive or help you build plot it's like all these things they they're tools or they're just prisms that we can reflect as our mystery aficionado mel can.

We like just we're gonna have like someday someone maybe ai will do a super cut of the stewisms of you saying like denouement and aficionado and like, yeah.

I guess what else uh other than mystery i'll take it i'll take it i like the uh.

I mean it's a It's a sub-genre of noir, right?

Well, noir is a sub-genre of both. Sure, they are sub-genres of each other.

Yeah, okay. But you've actively written mysteries.

I've read a lot of Agatha Christie books, which this film feels very like. In fact, I've read all of the books mentioned in this film.

Whose body? The murders in the room hall. Roger Ackroyd, the murder at the Vicarage. God, this is practically a syllabus for how to commit this crime.

When they mention the list, I'm like, oh, yeah, I know those.

If either Chaz or I die, it's not the other one of us that killed it. It's going to be Mel, just to be clear.

But all of the clues will point towards the other one of you. Yes, absolutely.

Mel will have successfully framed one of us for the murder of the other.

And let's be clear, it's not going to be Chaz.

Wait, the victim or the murderer?

Well, you decide.

The reason I asked Mel is obviously you're being, we're waxing lyrical and laying the information. We are not going to get into that discussion.

Mel is an American, just very early learned that things in this country sometimes mean, 10 years later, I'm still learning phrases and I'm like, wait, that means what now?

Did the landmark, because I sent the articles, right? Like I sent particularly the landmark secret and hidden article to you. Did that kind of like go, oh, yeah, in terms of a mystery thing, like connect the way you have experienced mystery novels and movies? And that's what I'm kind of interested in. Like, how much am I excited? Like, I'm excited about this, how we can apply it to characters and thinking about plotting from a character point of view. And it's about solving, and I'll be clear, this is about us solving some story stuff that Chaz and I are working through now. Just painting a very light mystery for a character to solve.

Mm-hmm.

To help them to be a little bit more active in the first act. But did you like, oh yeah, this connects, or is this kind of new-ish?

No, I think, I mean, it's certainly terminology and like specifically the way it's laid out, especially because a lot of the stuff is in terms of RPG. But in terms of someone who's read, yeah, probably hundreds of, you know, pulpy paperbacks, I would say, oh yeah, they all deal in this in certain ways. There's all this information, and usually they lay a lot of it out for the reader, or the viewer in that case. And then they also tell you which the characters are aware of. And then as you go, sometimes, you know, they'll double back around and be like, actually, this thing meant this. And sometimes as a reader or a viewer, you're screaming like, go behind that door, go behind there, you know. But the characters need to, because there is more of a risk to them, right? Obviously, there's more of a cost. Things play out differently. But I think it's an interesting framework or rubric for looking at, But especially, you know, when you're reverse engineering a mystery, as we kind of are with Wake Up Dead Man, it's a lot more fun to be like, there it is, there it is, there it is, there it is.

And I know I'm like bringing up something else we're going to put in show notes, but there was some stuff about like writing node-based plotting, which is classic kind of flowchart game design stuff, right? Like, I mean, I've done a bunch of that stuff.

Oh, you said node, not, I heard nerd-based plotting.

All game design is inherently. Well, I think I ended up reading a lot more of this from story perspective than character perspective. And I think a lot of that is because I haven't done this in terms of games and I haven't done this in thinking of that. it obviously applies to all of the above.

It's just interesting because the node-based game design stuff actually applies to writing mysteries when the stuff i've read about writing mysteries where it's like doesn't design your web of clues and it's like literally how you design a mystery in game design oh that's cool uh is very similar to how it's like yeah it's the same thing instead of you going from room to room which is when you do like a dungeon crawl in a video game it's like yeah this is the clues that the character you're designing that because you're writing a mystery from the you know it's a active there's a little bit more active participation in a mystery for an audience i mean there's a agatha christie novel i remember which one it centered around bridge and i couldn't work out who the killer was without understanding bridge so i got to the end of the novel and was really frustrated because i was like i don't know bridge this i could have never have worked it out well all the other mystery when i was going through my reading mystery novels phase, like as a tween age or an early teen, I always wanted to try and guess who the killer was. And this one was like, well, fuck you. I never, I will never be able to work this one out. And then other people were like, eh, I don't care. I just want to see how they solve it.

Yeah. Some people are along for the ride or the character commentary or the banter or the, you know, I'd never done that node based and the dungeon crawler thing is quite interesting.

I'm going to try and steer us back into the homework.

Eric, just before we dive in, can we reveal some hidden information and talk about our key learnings? From the future. So I guess the most surprising key learning for me for Wake Up Dead Man was around narrative velocity and connecting the idea of if you learn information that puts you in danger and danger rewards you with information. That's another way about thinking of pushing your characters and pulling your characters or putting another way your characters are pulled towards something and then that puts them into danger which is a another word for pushing them and that you the oscillation between pushing and pull is kind of like my key learning and.

Building on that i don't actually make this observation in the episode it was only listening back from the future that i know that my big breakthrough mentally is that when a character is being pushed, you can have that you know, the danger escalates when they're, they're being pushed and a lot of the stakes can be external, but when they're being pulled, you're going to have to work a lot harder on the stakes because they want the information and there's going to have to be much more cost to that journey. Whereas opposed to when they're being pushed by external events, be they emotionally external or physically external, that escalating danger from learning the information can be much more traditional.

And I have learned that, especially when we're doing pickups, you should not go third because then the other two take your key learnings. I will say, though, like the push-pull thing I really enjoyed listening back to. I think for me, even, and we talked a bit about, right, writing for screen is different than writing for role-playing games because of the visual medium element. And I think for me, the other key learning I really have is the way of considering your clues as you take your clue and you make it secret and you can hide it. And those are three different things. And I think being able to visualize that, like we talked about the painting and this hanging in front of the safe and then the dust that's on the painting and the clue that's in there. I think even just being able to visualize that while writing a mystery story like this was really helpful for me. And I think it's a great methodology, but it's also a really good visualization of that methodology.

You're the only one on stage with the Monsignor at the time of his killing. You're the only one at that church who hated his guts. The spirit really moved him today, huh? So, tell me. What the hell happened? Everyone thinks I did it. I didn't do it. This goes way beyond normal police work. This is Submarine. Makes me sick. These kids painting rocket ships all over his sacred resting place.

So Wake Up Dead Man is Benoit Blanc investigating the murder of a priest. And the murder turns into the resurrection question mark of a priest. And then it turns into the murder of a grounds person. And then it turns into the theft of a priceless jewel. And then it turns into the backstory of a priest. Is he really who he says he is? How far into spoilers are we going to get in this? Which is.

Oh, you know, this is draft zero, Mel. So, so all the way into spoilers.

Yes, but this is a very recent film. This is only come out a couple months ago. So just like, do we want to say who, who, who done it?

Sure. I mean, let's see if it comes up naturally.

Okay.

So all of the Knives Out movies, so this is the third one, starring Benoit Blanc, written, directed by Rian Johnson, all of them have a sort of co-detective, someone that Benoit is bringing along with them.

A very amateur detective, which is its own sort of subgenre.

And I think it's really important in this one that the identifying and describing who Father Judd Duplenticy, is that what his name is? It was very close to duplicity, but also plenty in there. It felt like a very constructed name.

There's almost two here because there is Judd, but there is also, which in the other two has been where it's Geraldine, who's the local police chief, and she's also trying to solve it along. So there really are two.

Ah, yeah. But it's set in a small town. All the suspects are the congregation, the cysts, as Father Judd, I think, calls them at some point, the acolytes of this very small Catholic town. Congregation. And the victim is Monsignor Wicks, I was about to say Father Wicks, played by Josh Brolin, who is a fire and brimstone priest who, as the film unravels, expresses a hatred for his congregation that he is deliberately whittling down with his fire and brimstone. And I just wanted to add that additional context before we dive into the story. I'm just, while I have the microphone, I want to make some observations. Like Locked Room Murder Mysteries, if they play by the rules of fair play, the audience is... Behind the detective, in this case, the Benoit Blanc, right up until Benoit Blanc has his denouement, lays it out.

Behind the discovery, but not the information.

Correct. We are to be given, by the rules of fair play, we should be able to figure it out. We shouldn't have to know the rules of bridge to figure it out.

To be fair, she does lay out all of the rules and then she puts what cards are in everybody's hand in that book, etc.

Oh, you knew what book I was talking about.

Oh, yeah, I've read it. But Bridge is a very complicated game. She lays out all of the rules and has the detective explain how Bridge works.

However- I was 13.

Bridge is also, in my opinion, apologies to my dead grandmother, boring as fuck.

Bridge is a fucking amazing game and you can all shut the fuck up. It's the best card game out there. And the complications in Bridge is not the playing, it's the bidding. Anyway father this this film revels in ideas around like you know as all ryan johnson stuff there's a whole lot of commentary around the you know the cult of personality and charisma and you know polarization and the weaponization of outrage and all these other kind of things and what i find fascinating about this story and I'm going to ask you both a key question. The film has Father Judd, for the first hour, is narrating. So he's literally writing a story down and Benoit is reading it.

But we don't know. Like, it's alluded to, but it's not stated outright at the beginning, that that's what's going.

It is. The opening shot is Benoit reading the paper and cuts to Judd writing it down at the desk.

But we do not know when we are in that opening shot.

No, no. Yeah, we don't know when we are in time.

The script and the movie both hide when we are. It deliberately.

Yeah, exactly.

And one hour in, we catch up to that point. We catch up narratively. And from that point on, as an audience, we are following Benoit and Judd as they experience things.

Just so quickly, I'm watching it now. We do not cut from the letter to Judd at the desk. We go from a close-up on cursive writing, which is hard to read, to Judd punching the other priest.

Sure.

Yeah. And in the script, it says the room is dark. So essentially, I mean, mild swish, we do not know they're in the same room, but because Judd is narrating it, we assume he did write it in the past.

The point being, those two characters, those two detectives, Bernard Blanc and Father Judd, have up until we catch up with them all the information there's no secrets or clues or push and pull from them as characters right they we are just hearing what has happened up until that point.

No that we as the audience aware of there is a secret that judd is keeping which is not revealed until later and maybe even later in the scene i have to remember and it's been about a month since I watched it, but how he ends up confessing to hiding the bottle.

The flask.

Yeah, yeah. The flask. Why'd you do it?

Better question is, why do I think I could lie to you and get away with it? No, no, you didn't lie. I knew you wouldn't. You just didn't say the dishonest part out loud. When I joined the others outside, the police were just arriving. Joined the others outside. So you stayed inside. So you were the only person with unobserved access to the utility closet after the murder, but before the police searched it. Why? Why protect him? I didn't do it to protect Wicks. I did it to save the people who believed in him just a little disillusionment. Oh, bullshit! And in protecting their bubble of belief, you have shielded a killer! Where is that flask?

Right, so he is harboring a secret and they play a big deal of him confessing, oh, I did it, I'm the one. It's kind of annoying fake out, to be honest. It's probably, to me, I liked it the least.

The broad point I'm trying to get to is Judd is the key suspect for this locked room mystery. He's the only one that that was close to monsignor wicks he's the only one who witnessed it and everything gets explained magically how that miracle murder happens by the end but judd because he's the suspect and because he has a kind of love-hate relationship well he hates the parishioners but wants to save them wants to bring them the love of jesus he feels like he's pushed on this journey as a detective and he three times throughout the film declares i'm out right so he is not chasing the information in the same way that bernard is bernard has been brought on by the local sheriff geraldine and bernard is being pulled whereas father judd is being pushed and i that is the only point that i wanted to make about these two broad characters because they it it allows them to interplay with the narrative velocity very well they can choose ryan johnson can choose you know which element who which character he wants to take charge of any given scene based on the emotional effect that he wants to have on the audience the.

Thing in the murder mystery is the characters know whether or not they killed him, right?

Yeah.

So Judd as a character should be acting with the knowledge that he either did or didn't kill Judd. Right. And that is equally true of everyone else.

Yeah.

And that means every other character knows that each, each person has a potential secret. Right. And it's a potential secret. I mean, that's where the suspicion comes from. And that's one of the key aspects of the genre is that we have a cast of characters that we're clearly interested to do that. We are not going to know as suspects, but the other characters will know as suspects as well.

Minor spoilers here. But in this case, as in some murder mysteries, more than one character also knows who else did it. So we do have multiple characters with that secret. Like, they don't just know I didn't. They know, oh, he or she did.

Yeah.

And it's important it's a secret as opposed to it just being hidden because it's about the characters trying to use their skills in order to work out who's done it. Okay. It is not just Blanc and Judd that are doing that. I mean, Martha obviously blames Judd.

Yeah, and then some characters are trying to work out who did it, but other characters are trying to hide who did it, whether it was them or someone else. And we don't know which are actively actually trying to figure it out or only say they're trying to figure out where they're actually trying to hide it. So it does get very sticky.

So, watching this film through the lens of how does the revealing of information, like, So, Stu, when we were laying the foundations for this episode, you asked some really key questions that us as writers can use as narrative tools, right?

Okay.

Stu's face says, I do not remember these questions.

So, you asked, are the characters aware of the secret or not?

Right?

That is a piece of an important narrative choice. when is the information revealed to the character and when does it create danger? What are the particular skills of a character that allowed them to obtain the information? And then what is the cost of learning the information?

Wow. I'm like, they're good questions. I wish I reread them before doing my whole rant at the beginning.

Past Stu is very smart.

Can we just start this whole recording again?

An hour and 15 minutes in can we just yeah scratch that and go again so.

What i found fascinating watching this is the almost the entire first half of this movie is because we're predominantly in father judd's point of view he wants to know who's done it and the first half of this movie is ryan ryan johnson playing by the rules of fair play and he's laying out all the information that will ultimately give us that sweet, sweet payoff.

From an unreliable narrator.

Sure.

That he treats as reliable, which is fun.

Yeah. But I did not feel that other than who killed Monsignor Wickes, Father Judd doesn't actually learn anything, right? There are clues that are seeded, right? The main one being...

Sorry, do you mean in the first half of the film he doesn't learn anything or in the whole...

Yeah, the first half of the film, right?

Okay. Well, right. He can't learn anything because he's recounting it.

Yeah. And this is what I meant about the first half being different because he was recounting it. Because he is telling us the secrets of all these characters. He's saying, here's the doctor. His secret is that his wife and family have left him. Here's Martha. Her secret is that she kind of hates everyone with fire and brimstone. Here's Samson. He's a former alcoholic. It reveals all the characters and their secrets. He's telling it to us. All these characters, from a character perspective, they know all these secrets.

That stuff for the audience is a landmark. That's not a secret.

Yeah, sure.

The only other full-time employee was the groundskeeper, Samson, Sam. It's Monsignor Wicks, who gives me the strength every day to not go back to the bottle. He used to drink too, but he said to me once, if I can stave off that demon, you can. And every day it is a struggle, but I have. I credit him and my sweet Martha. Your sweet Martha. I'd do anything for her. My angel on earth. As far as the church goes, Martha does it all. She keeps the books, manages donations, files everything. Files hat. She launders the vestments, stocks the supplies, feeds wicks, plays the organ. She knew where the bodies were buried but.

Like in for the most of the first half of the film father judd does not learn a new piece of information whether it's like a clue or even what are the kind of questions he should be asking we know retrospectively that benoit is right and this is why i want to ask you guys a key question about when in the story do you think benoit has actually figured it out because that goes to character but before i do the first time that judd actually learns something in the film that he hadn't known before is when the reason for the meeting so i'm going to be quite specific and a little spoilerish for the middle half of the of the movie the middle half the sorry the middle part of me why.

Are we just not spoiling this movie.

Okay. Yeah. All right. We'll spoil it. But previously in Judd's recounting, he said he'd walked in on a meeting of all the suspects and Monsignor Wicks, right?

I have kept this church. I have fortified it with the truth of God and now the betrayal to find my authority and faith and life itself challenged and from inside my own sanctuary.

And then at a certain point one of the suspects his name is Cy Draven says not only do I know am I going to tell you what this big secret was that that meeting was about I have it recorded so it allowed it prompted a an actual flashback so that the um the detectives and the audience at the same time could experience it. And the secret was that Cy is Monsignor Wicks' son.

Actually, I was inquiring, not about Judge Prager Group, but about the shadowy meeting with Wicks that took place in this room on Palm Sunday. What was that meeting actually about? Who wants to go first? I'll tell you. Cy, hey, wait, wait, wait, hold on there, buddy. Hey, no, no, no, no, no. You shut your mouth, you little shit weasel. This isn't your decision. You tell him nothing. Hey, say, Father Jack, I promise you that what we talked about that night has nothing to do with Wicks killing, okay? But it does have to do with things that, if made public, could ruin people in this room. I recorded the whole thing. Just hit play. No! Oh, no, you're not!

And not only that, Monsignor Wicks was going to burn all of his congregation. He was going to reveal all their dirty laundry in amongst the town.

I will give my final service a week from today on Easter Sunday. And then I will close the doors of this sad little church for good. But not before I have destroyed each and every one of you.

All of those secrets that were not secrets to us that were secrets to the town around them, which is why they held them so closely.

Yeah. But that is the first time in the movie that Judd learns a secret. And it's actually volunteered by Psy. He like just comes and tells them. And I've literally got here like, why the fuck is Psy revealing this information? And it turns out they do explain it after the reveal. Psy knows that there's a hidden fortune somewhere. and he wants vernois blanc to find the fortune i.

Mean that's the reason but also he pathologically cannot help himself.

Like he.

Is a i must put every bit of information about myself on the internet to be like it is given a character drive as well.

For sure but what i reveled about this was we were looking through this lens of how can secrets and you've got a detective who's a priest who's boss I guess, whose senior priest in the parish was murdered, whom he hated, whom he's on the internet as saying, I'm going to cut you out like a cancer, right? Who is the chief suspect of the police? He has all these motivations to find it. And from his character's point of view, he only learns a new piece of information halfway into the film, something that he didn't know before, right? And that, to me, was really great because the first half of the film is riveting. It's got narrative drive to it. It's fun. But it's all like the relationship is between the filmmaker and the audience. It's not about in terms of secrets and clues. It's not revealing information to the characters. You're watching them as having lived experiences. Like we as the audience are getting lots of information about them.

Well, in theory, it's also revealing the information to Benoit at the same time as it is to us.

Sure. But he is filing that away. So, when do you two think Benoit figured out that-

Do you actually have an answer to this?

I have a strong opinion as to when I know he's figured it out, and he may have figured it out sooner, like earlier.

So, I'll give you- I wrote it down. I watched the film in theaters a few months ago, whenever it came out in theaters, and I hadn't seen it since, hadn't read the script since. And so when you when you asked me, my knee jerk response was that it came when he and Judd had the it's not about me moment in the storm. And then Benoit has this weird like realization where clearly Judd has said something that like triggered him to go, oh, wait a second. And now, though, rewatching it, I think that it comes much later. But I could not pin. I did not pinpoint watching this time an exact time. I pinpointed when I think he made a decision to follow through because you had a second half of that question, but I could not pinpoint when I thought he I will say this, though. I think he had. So there's there's also something that article that we'll post about that that Stu said about a player can always suspect the existence of secret information, even if their character can't prove it. And I think for a while, Benoit had a suspicion about who did it. And it wasn't like he was searching for evidence to prove it. It was just like, when I find the evidence, I think I can start fitting this together based on what I know about these characters. And I have a moment that he did that. But I couldn't pinpoint a moment.

So... The reason why I'm asking this is because as soon as Bernois figured out the crime, it actually informs his character journey.

Right?

Because his choices then matter or are different depending if he's got it solved or not.

So I think, I guess I will say, I think that he definitively solves it in Nat's basement. But I think he knew, I think he had a very good idea before then, but it wasn't until Nat's basement that he actually had the solid evidence.

Sure. Okay. So we're talking about Dr. Nat.

Nat Sharp. Man, he's to forgive and start living his life and Christ's love should be a launching pad for that. And instead he's just every day getting more and more angry and bitter against his ex-wife against women.

This is why I'm asking the question, because this story, all of the Knives Out stories, while Benoit Blanc is the detective, the character that goes on the emotional journey is always the...

Secondary.

Aaron's detective, yeah.

The Watson.

Yeah, the Dr. Watson, yeah. And so here is the emotional journey of this film belongs to Judd. And when Benoit figures out the murder, it is important to me, from a storytelling point of view, because it impacts how Benoit treats Judd, right? And I think he's definitely got it figured out before. I think you're right, Mel. I think when he's in the basement, he can prove who it is. He knows who it is beforehand because Judd is walking into the police station to confess to a murder that he hasn't committed right father Judd in the story he's been knocked unconscious and he wakes up with his hand on a sickle that has been buried in one of the characters Samson's chest Judd has a history of violence he was a boxer who killed someone in the ring Judd thinks that he has killed Samson and he is walking into the police station to confess to this crime and Benoit ushers him out of the police station to stop him doing that and this is as I said that is the second of three times that Judd is trying to get off the game of trying to solve the crime But the reason why Judd goes along with Benoit at that point is Benoit says... Nat is in danger and I only hope we're not too late. Please take me to Nat's house.

I'm turning myself in. No, you are not. I did it. I killed Samson. I'm guilty. I have to confess. Listen, listen, listen. You're going to tell me exactly what happened. But right now, how do I get to Dr. Nat's house? Dr. Nat? Yes, quickly. I regret my stalling. I only hope we're not too late. Now just get down.

So the only thing that gets Judd to go with Benoit at that point, And this is why I'm going back to character, right? Because I'm sure Ryan could have created this beautiful, elaborate, satisfying mental puzzle box, but... Judd doesn't want to solve the crime. He wants to confess, right? And Benoit wants to solve the crime. And the way he gets Judd to go along with him at that point is to say, Father, sorry, Dr. Nat is in danger. And it turns out Dr. Nat was dead. Dr. Nat had been murdered. But Benoit knew at that point. He wouldn't have known to go to Dr. Nat's house if he hadn't figured it out.

But I saw that as a process of elimination, that he knew Judd hadn't done it.

But.

He had not like that doesn't tell me that he had for sure figured out who had done it he suspected.

I don't think this is super important to this particular thesis and analysis but i don't think benoit as soon as they father judd after they discovered nat's dead body father judd once again says i am going to confess he leaves benoit at the house dr nat's house and he goes to his church summons everyone together and there's the wonderful denouement i.

Think it's pronounced denouement.

Okay thank you i don't think benoit learns anything between those two moments and this is where he's.

Not the main character yeah well.

You're right let.

Me rephrase like he's not the protagonist yeah.

And he's not the point of view character either no i did feel on the second watch watching it through this lens this analysis made me enjoy the film less because i'm like But Benoit could have told Judd right then and there how everything happened.

But he didn't know yet.

What does he learn?

In Nat's basement? A lot.

Sure. But walking out of Nat's basement, right, they walk out together, Judd and Benoit. And Judd says, I'm leaving. I have to confess to this. We'll excerpt it. Right. And Benoit lets him go.

I killed Samson. I have to do this. I have to do it of my own free will or it won't mean anything.

Because, and this is why I think I enjoyed it slightly less, this is like Ryan wanting to have that big denouement moment in the church. And it makes sense for Father Judd to say, I'm going to the church, I'm bringing everyone together, and I'm going to confess in front of everyone. It makes sense from Father Judd's character perspective. Benoit is just like, well, I'm going to let you do this because I want the audience to.

I actually have a different take.

Okay.

I think part of the reason he does it is for Judd. And I think this ties in. But part of the reason he does it is he. And this is on more of a character level. And this is far more of a character and philosophy based mystery than the other two. Right. He Benoit knows what Martha will likely do about this. And in.

It's done. It's done. Yeah.

And in his mind, that is the proper outcome, both on a justice level and on a religious or philosophical level. Because of how death by suicide works within the Catholic Church and within Martha's personal view of religion.

Cosmology, maybe.

Yeah.

I'm going to give Stu a chance to weigh in and be the judge on this in a second, but it made me think Benoit is slightly more of a dick on this, analyzing it through this lens, because he lets Judd walk out at that point. His choice at that point he has all the information he needs to the point where once the everyone's assembled and the police are there and judd's about to confess benoit is like interrupting by playing the organ right.

I think he's still putting pieces together i think he knows the basics and is still trying to mentally work out the details.

Maybe because she confesses certain things but He's leading.

And he fills stuff in, but he's also letting her fill in information.

Mr. Belong, you know the truth. I do, yes. And you made yourself a fool just now. So that you could do this of your own free will. And now you better do it quickly. Thank you. Bless me, Father, for I have said it is the week since my last confession. I told myself it started with pure intent. But the truth is, it started with a lie. Prentice. Prentice.

Sure. But, so on this rewatch, I saw Benoit make an active choice to not say to Father Judd, I know who did it, or I'm pretty sure I know who did it, I'm pretty sure I know how they did it, and I'm pretty sure you didn't kill Samson.

So, coming, this is where I intersect, and they'll be good. Two branches, I'll deal with this branch now. One of the reasons to think about information as landmark, secret, and hidden is we're talking about the levels of visibility, right? How opaque or transparent, depending on how you choose those metaphors, this information is. So if an information is secret, we know that it exists, but we're not sure what that information is. It's hidden in the terminology we're using now. If we know it's, if it's hidden, it can only be retrieved at a cost, right? If it's secret, we need some kind of skill check, right? Either way, the purpose of either of those things is to turn it into kind of a landmark to reveal the information. So I think what Blanc is, he may have suspicions. I'm just going to keep on butchering it. I'm going to try and come up with as many different pronunciations. It's denouement. As possible. It's my version of, my name is Craig Mazin, is going to be just mispronouncing, dinamint. That is the equivalent of his skill check in order to make sure that the information is no longer, he may suspect something is a secret, he may know, but he needs to bring it to light. That is the, it's not an ad ignoresis because it's not about knowledge, but it is gnosis, right? It's the revealing of knowledge. And I think that's what that beat and performance is about, is about both for the audience and for the character, making a go from this is a suspicion of who I know to, oh, I don't actually need to go and this is not going to become an episode of Law and Order. Though I now really would love a Knives Out Law and Order.

I want a Knives Out Muppets first. But I will say that Benoit is also very aware that he's in a mystery film, and a mystery film convention demands that he get everyone in a room and then try to make them confess without spilling the beans too early.

It's about revealing the information. The second branch, which we don't have to do quite immediately, but I think it's going to be a really useful exercise and may help us with the future episodes, is I actually want to talk through the plotting around Judd, right in the context of those three five things that i asked that were really insightful that i can't remember and can't even find on the discord so maybe chas type them out and then deleted my message i'll.

Put them into the zoom chat i type them out um.

I mean like this is good discussion around key moments but in the end if we're plotting right like i mean we're reverse engineering, a mystery that already exists, someone's done the hard work, but in a weird, but like there is a way that you can do this on a, on a, on a board, right? That if I'm trying to apply this, whatever. What does Judd know? And what's really interesting is what we perceive, what we've talked about as character secrets are actually landmarks at the beginning of film, of the film for Judd and the audience in terms of the, you know, alcoholic, fire and brimstone, all those character backstories are effectively landmarks both for the audience and Judd. Because this film is actually, from a narrative point of view, quite complex because the story coming back to our voiceover episode where in time is the voiceover coming from it's coming from the middle of the film so judd the narrator has more information than the judd we're seeing. Experiencing it but it does which actually makes the plotting somewhat more difficult because he's acting on knowledge that without the knowledge that future judd has but it's it's kind of colored for it right and then the interesting thing is related to danger and stakes right because there's these definitely these moments which we've talked about that judd is like i'm out because that's him reacting to danger this is getting too dangerous for him oh we don't have to do that exercise quite immediately but i think kind of going through the key beats of him judd learning everything he can until he can no longer which is basically him coming to confess is that He is no longer capable of solving, you know, taking the hidden and making it a landmark. He can no longer take the hidden and reveal that information and needs Benoit to do his deniment in order to have that process, right?

I've got an answer to one of your questions, but I think it would be good to put it in the context. So interrupt me as we go along.

But anytime. I don't need an excuse.

So Judd has come to be a priest with this parish. He's making observations about all the characters and their relationships. He lays down the gauntlet with Monsignor Wicks.

And it was on Palm Sunday that I finally broke. and then twice in the shower this week doing that thing I told you about where I hold my hand upside down? Five Our Fathers, five Hail Marys. Well, we're at nine months now, Judd. How are you enjoying it here? Are you breaking down some walls? Bless me, Father, for I have sinned. It's been a week since my last confession. I betrayed a fellow priest's privacy. I know that Martha keeps her medical bills filed in the office, so... I went through them. I learned you had a radical prostatectomy five years ago, making you physically incapable of an erection. I can handle whatever this is. For the past nine months, I've seen the way you tend this flock, and I don't like it. You don't like it? No, Monsignor, I don't. You're poisoning this church. And I'll do whatever it takes to save it.

And then Monsignor Wicks is killed. And to me, the first kind of choice that Judd is presented with vis-a-vis the mystery is when Benoit comes and introduces himself. So initially, we all know who Benoit Blanc is. And in that first introduction, and Judd has no idea. And it's revealed that Benoit is...

No, he knows who he is. Oh, oh, oh. So when he knows his name, he knows who he is in pop culture, but he doesn't know who he is when he sees his face.

Correct. Because it's a reveal that Geraldine is- All right.

So I'm going to intersect because we're actually getting into somewhere that I can't believe it's taken us 15 minutes to get to. Hopefully our key learnings flash forward helps explain. What is the difference between a secret and a clue?

I can't.

Is it a useful distinction? And if it is a useful distinction, how do we make the distinction in order for it to be useful?

Yeah. I mean, in a mystery—and I think also let's talk about it specifically within this context, this mystery context.

Yeah, yeah. I think this is where it comes up.

The difference between a secret and a clue is something that at least all of the main characters and the audience know, which is, you know, the facts of the cases, Judd has laid them out. And a secret is something like whodunit. or the fact that Judd messed the things that only one character knows and that the other characters are attempting to figure out. And I think that's a huge difference.

So maybe the secret is the information. The clue is the representation leading you to the information. Like it's the tangible.

It can be. Sometimes a clue is. Go ahead, Jez.

Oh, for me, the clue is a pointer, and then the information is the payoff or the reversal.

But a clue doesn't always lead to the secrets. It may mislead you, or the secret might come out of nowhere. Like, the clue doesn't always lead to the secret, but it always leads to something.

Well, not always. There's one moment.

It could lead to a character action that then ends up going nowhere or is a dead end, but it leads to something happening, or it leads to someone attempting to find out a secret.

So I'm going to use something Mel said that was really smart because all we're doing is telling each other, well.

Past Mel. Yay.

Yeah. Was that you used the analogy of like, oh, there's a painting on a wall. There's a landmark. But then you move the painting and then there's a safe. And then what's hidden. But is that a safe?

The safe has been hidden.

The safe has been hidden. But now it's revealed. And therefore what's in it becomes a secret. Because we don't know what it is, but we know it's available.

It was always a secret, but we never even knew. We didn't always know it was there, but it was always a secret. Some of the characters might have known the safe was there. Clearly, someone had to because they put something inside it at some point. So it was a secret. But we didn't always know it existed.

A clue would be, oh, there's a little bit of dust not there. And it's telling us that there is something there, that this landmark is actually got something behind it. Right. So I'm just using it as a metaphor because I think this stuff's a little bit amorphous. Right. Like we're still finding our way through the language to make it useful. But for me, the clue is like either the relapse.

I think dust as a clue is great because there might be eight pictures in the room. How do you know which one of them is actually meaningful?

Yes. So the clue is, you know, as Chaz says, it's the pointer, right? But it's kind of something from a plot point of view. What is the clue that enable creates that kind of character velocity? So it may indicate, they may know that there is a secret, but it could lead them to what is hidden. It could lead them to finding the key that unlocks the door, right? It's part of the path. I think it is useful, though, thinking about it, because when you're talking about, are they aware of the secret or what's hidden?

Can I use an example from this film, right, that they do so well? So, at a certain point, the murder weapon is a wolf head from a lamp in a bar. And Benoit is in the bar and he's looking at a photo of the bar, within the bar. And what Benoit notices is that there were two lamps and two wolf heads. And that's at a certain point early in the film where he kind of starts to figure out how the murder has been conducted. But none of us, the audience, I mean, I certainly didn't see it the first time around. Most of the audience doesn't see it and neither does Father Judd who looks at the photo and sees that there is a doctor's satchel sitting by the bar. And when Father Judd points at the satchel on the second watch because I was looking for it. I saw Benoit's reaction to that, where Benoit performs, oh no, that's not what I was talking about at all.

Right?

But on my first watch, I missed all of that. So again, Ryan and like, Benoit is picking up on things as a character that are clues that have not been pointers, have not been clues for the audience necessarily, until they're plants for the audience and they're clues for Benoit. So to my mind it all comes back to intention.

Okay so from a writing perspective then what do we call the okay the wolf's head right that is a murder weapon then becomes this significant part of this scene that we don't even quite realize until later was what ben was referring to right what do we call the fact that on the first page of the script while judd is talking he starts talking about wolves and he starts talking about with like what is that in screenwriting it's it's it foreshadowing is it a hint so that's of a clue um yeah.

Foreshadowing i mean it's it's theme it's what i think stew referred to as pants or underpinning.

It makes yep the.

Wolf it makes the film feel like a cohesive whole.

I like underpinning more than theme because i think theme is grace and redemption and all that in this thing.

Yeah yeah but but to me it is there is one so for me i use theme more as a like a philosophical argument.

Yeah yeah and.

The very early philosophical argument is is christ's is following christ about fighting or is it about embracing we.

Need fighters today but to fight the world, not ourselves. A priest is a shepherd. The world is a wolf. No. I don't believe that, Father, respectfully. You start fighting wolves, and before you know it, everyone you don't understand is a wolf. I still got that fighting instinct, and I gave into it today, but Christ came to heal the world, not fight it. I believe that. This, not this, you know?

Inside you, there are two wolves.

Right? Not fists, hugs, right? Like that gets repeated throughout. And the wolves is another metaphor for fists rather than sheep.

So do you think that it is more likely that even subconsciously that some viewers might have picked up on that because, you know, deep in the back of their head, this thing has come up before?

Oh, definitely. That's the whole point. Yeah. This is why it's pants or underpinning or landmarks.

Yeah. So there it is.

Yeah. Underpants? What? Did I not make it? Maybe it should be underpants. It's got to hold everything together.

You were trying to find an alliteration. It had to start with a P or had prominently have a P in it.

Oh, my underpants have a P in it. I've got an old man bladder.

But in terms of like doctor uh sorry father judd's character journey through this in relation to the secrets and and clues is at first father judd goes along with bernois offer to to go and find out who the killer is because he knows.

It's not him.

Well he knows it's not him but i don't think it's about him i think he feels like rage against whoever's done it and wants to find them and that's a good character beat and then the first time he hops off is after this incredible scene in the movie where judd i got really pissed off at this he pulls out a piece of paper at a point where they've exhausted the mystery and says remind me to file this and benoit says file it and he looks so open and And there's a clue in it. And I was just like, fuck, man. Like that totally worked for me on first viewing and second viewing, I'm like, how fucking contrived is that? But.

Remind me to follow this. Follow that. It doesn't make sense. I know. An $80 million fortune. But if Eve's apple is the fortune and it's not a pile of cash in a Swiss account somewhere, what is it? What? They must have misprinted the date on this. It says the crypt opening thing was ordered last Wednesday. I can't be right. Who had pre-ordered burial equipment for a man who isn't dead?

In pursuit of that clue judd offers counseling to a random woman that he calls on the phone and it's this beautiful beautiful performed scene an emotional scene and at the end of it judd is finding the killer is your game finding the killer is not about christ love what finding Being the killer is not why I'm here.

You felt guilt for taking a laugh. And the church, it offered you a place to hide and a clear method to give you a sense of absolution. The guy I killed in the ring, I hated him. I remember, I knew he was in trouble, and I kept going and going until I felt him break. It wasn't an accident. I killed him with hate in my heart. There's no hiding from that. There's no solving it. God didn't hide me or fix me. He loves me when I'm guilty. That's what I should be doing for these people, not this whodunit game. Oh, no, wait a minute.

And at that point, he hops off. He stops looking for clues. And that's when he gets kind of suckered back in by... He gets pushed. Sorry, no. Yes, he gets pushed in terms of narrative velocity by... Monsignor Wick's seemingly coming back from the dead, right? He is no longer pulling at the mystery. He gets pushed back into the resurrection, the mistaken belief that he's killed someone. All these things start happening.

He gets wrongs manned back into it.

Yeah. All these things start happening to Father Judd, not him looking for the mystery.

So, two observations. You said he's not interested in finding the killer, but what he is interested in is confession. And confession is about the revelation of secrets.

Yes.

Right. And it's important in coming back to your observation about the end sequence in church that he takes her last confession, right? The last revelation of the secrets. So they're motivated to deal with the revelation of hidden information. I'm trying to find terminology we haven't used. But he's still partly driven by revelation of information about people revealing.

But in relation to sin and not secrets is really.

Are you talking about Father Judd?

Father Judd.

I would dispute that because I don't think Father Judd's stand for embracing and forgiving Martha, being a vessel for forgiveness and in turn encouraging Martha to forgive, The harlot whore, not even going to explain what that is, but watch the film and you'll understand. He is a vessel for forgiveness. He is not trying to open up a secret. He is trying to get Martha to change. All the information is on the table at that point. Benoit is encouraging the opening up of secrets and the reveal of secrets, but not Father Judd. is my feeling about it. So, Mel, you've written in Zoom chat, and so I'm going to throw to you that you say the denouement is about grace. And I agree with you because Benoit was about to point the finger at Martha, and we've spoiled it. So, Martha, killer. Others are involved. It's elaborate. There's still joy if we've spoiled Wake Up Dead Man. He's about to point the finger at her and he chooses not to because of grace.

Not grace the person grace the because there is of course someone named grace faith hope charity grace you know all the names in this are very explicitly referential to um the bible by the way like all of them and it's he has a quote unquote moment of damascus moment where you know the sun comes through in the cinematography but he chooses in the denouement to have grace because he has seen judd demonstrate it multiple times and for judd's sake he decides to give grace and it ends up giving grace to martha in i think i mean you called him a dick i would say he's just simply um practical pragmatic but knowing that it will allow judd and the community to be able to move forward giving her that grace in a way that it wouldn't if he had publicly denounced her at that moment.

My revelation came from... From Father Judd. His example to have grace. Grace for my enemy. Grace for the broken. Grace for those who deserve it the least. But who need it the most.

I mean, talking about the character journeys, right? Bernard Blanc states early on how much he loves the denouement. We'll excerpt it.

Yep.

I'm incapable of not solving a crime. That moment of checkmate. When I take the stage and unravel my opponent's web. Oh, you'll see. It's fun. Great.

That moment where he unravels it all. And I've mentioned how Benoit Blanc has brought it about, that he can have the theatricality of the denouement. And then when he's about to take it, he confesses in front of the internet, I cannot solve this case, to give Father Judd grace, to give Martha grace, to the point where he gets owned.

And to give Martha specifically an opportunity to get last rites because he sees what's happened to her, that she has already taken the poison. And he knows he does not believe in religion. He does not believe in anything that would be a mortal sin. But he knows Martha believes that death by suicide is a mortal sin. So even though he doesn't believe it, he chooses to respect her in that moment and allow her to get last rites, which would not have happened had he accused her. that she would have been arrested, she would have been taken away.

Sure.

And he also then allows Judd to have that moment and to, I think, re-familiarize himself with how good of a priest he is. And that is a gift to him after his moment of doubt.

But I also believe that this film somewhat, stupendously. The Bernouin Blanc at the beginning of this film would not have offered Martha that option.

No, it's only because of all the things he's seen from Judd.

Yes.

Absolutely, he would not have done this any time before. I think that moment in the storm with Judd was a real turning point for him.

The road to Damascus.

But he certainly would not have done it before at the beginning of the film. Absolutely not. No way.

So, Stu, do you have any other observations from Wake Up Deme?

Well, I come back to my like, this is an incredibly complex film and we've been talking about it for an hour.

Hang in there, listener. I think we have less to say about side effects and shrinking.

Well, I think that like in the end, we're talking about plotting. A basic question is which character coming back to my timeline observation, which Judd are we following in the first hour? Is it the Judd of the voiceover or is it the Judd in the visuals, like the Judd in the past or the Judd in the kind of present time, right? Who is the main character in terms of plotting that you're thinking about?

I genuinely think that you could, and the reliability of him as a narrator is very sticky, especially because of what happens in the very last three minutes where he tells you something you're seeing that's explicitly not true, which is the first time we've really seen that happened. I genuinely think you could do an entire episode on that question you just asked. Like, that is a very thorny, sticky question because of how complicated this is, not even necessarily on a plot, but on a character level.

So on some level, we're like, oh, let's do a murder mystery first. It's the most obvious example of this mystery stuff. But actually, what I come to is it's actually the worst example to go first.

I think even because Knives Out is much more, it's much less a murder mystery. It's less interested in that, that it's interested in a lot of other things. And that's kind of where we got hung up.

Yeah.

Like the complexity is part of the pleasure of the film.

Yeah.

Of course. for this potentially just reading the script we could have done something like sparking cyanide which is like here are eight paper cutouts and a detective who comes in who's also a paper cutout and you know ta-da but.

But i agree with you sue because.

I want to come to the plotting stuff around did they like in the end it's like is secrets and clues and hidden all that stuff useful in terms of motivating character we've talked a lot about what the film is about and key moments but if you think of judd's journey through this film let's just focus on judd can you sit there and maybe the answer is no and we'll find something else with side effects that there's something else driving him you've you've chas you've done a good job of bringing in like the push and the pull but like i mean this is part of the complexity it's a dual protagonist film Right? Like, we can sit there and be, oh, no, a protagonist just takes the first action to the final consequence, and that's Judd. But the main point, you know...

Nah, it's dual protagonist for sure.

But it's like the easiest way to go, it's a dual protagonist story. That they, you know, and then when... Judd runs out of motivation, right? He goes to the end of the line. That's when Bernard, when Blanc comes in, right?

Yeah.

To come in because, but it's like, oh God, actually this is really complex. But the fundamental thing in terms of secrets that motivates the character, like there is actually a simplicity here for Judd, which is. And the audience is online with him. I think our experience of the film, the experience through Judd in the quote-unquote present, the Judd that's giving the narration, is that there is a secret, which is someone killed Wicks. I know it's someone in the congregation, and he knows it's not him. Right. That is what is, but he needs to prove his innocence. That is what is pulling him through everything. What is hidden to him. Right. And is also hidden from the audience is the way in which the murder was done. And, and possibly who the murderer was, we could argue is hidden. Right. We're getting into semantics and then really it's about conceptual stuff. What he's looking for is clues. Right. that help him to unlock the door. He knows that there's a door there to unlock the door or reveal how it's done. And anything that he does gets closer actually does put him in danger. And it works in a murder mystery because the people that are responsible for the murdering want to pin him. So when he learns more information, they want to make it clearer that he's more responsible, right? And that is a very clear kind of structure. So, for all that complexity, it's very clear what his motivation is until he thinks he is responsible for killing- Samson. Samson, right? He has no other- That information is actually hidden from him. He has no way of knowing.

As a broad observation, I would say that murder mysteries, where you're following the super detective, where you're always behind Blanc until Blanc reveals everything. Is much more about the narrative point of view. It's about the setups and payoffs and reversals. It's about the relationship between the storyteller and the audience and less about the mystery is less about the impact on the characters. We've pointed to some big ones. Father Judd regains his faith and Bernard Blanc learns the value of grace. Those are two significant character journeys that they go on, but neither of them, they happen not through the push and pull of the secrets and clues, I would say. Rian Johnson is clearly incredibly clever because he uses these super intricate puzzle box murder mysteries that could be perfectly satisfying on their own and then separately uses that world that he's created to write about something else entirely, whether it's class, immigration, racism. I know what's glass onion about there.

I mean, class and billionaire moguls destroying the world and COVID-ish.

Yeah. And in this one, it's about the value, I think, the value of community, the interplay between charisma and faith. And we've talked about wolves versus sheep or fists versus hugs and all that other stuff.

So, relating it back to what we... Have been talking about like because you made me think at the moment when he sees the risen body the dead man waking up yeah you know what is the what when does they learn information and what danger does it put him in judd literally learns the information of i've seen wicks get out and the danger puts him in is he's a me and he's possibly even learned really what's happened And the danger of Pudzumi is now accused. Like he's got a sickle in his hand.

But those things happen to Father Judd. He is not at that point pursuing information. He's literally walking. At that point, he's walking away from the mystery. He's turned his back on it. He's walking away from this mystery. Something absolutely incredible has happened that he then chases after. He's seen Wicks resurrected and wants to chase after it. And he ends up being punched in the face and waking up to find his hand on a sickle in a dead body.

Yeah. So we're oscillating between push and pull, right? In a way, learning information is pull, danger is push. Right. So you're talking about a way of creating a narrative energy from oscillating between those two.

Yeah.

Right. What is the cost of learning the information is another way of thinking about that. But it ultimately come, like, it's a similar idea. And I think we would see, we see that in side effects. The more that, I was going to say, Judd.

Jude Law.

Judd Law.

Banks.

Dr.

Banks.

The more that Dr. Banks learns, the more the threat rises for him. Every bit of information puts him in danger. And that danger then pushes him to learn more information.

It also gives him leverage, I will argue.

Yeah.

So in some ways, I think what's going to be interesting about side effects is that it's going to be more simple in this analysis than Dead Man.

So much more simple.

But even though it will be much more simple, you will have to wait until next episode to hear about side effects and shrinking. But while we're here and we've just done a straight murder mystery, what are your guys' key learnings from this? Starting with you, Mel. Key learnings from whatever we call the Third Knives Out installment with some combination of waking, walking, dead, and people.

I really enjoyed how it let the characterizations lead how they dealt with the clues and the finding of the clues, etc. It wasn't that every character found it in the same way or reacted the same way or hid their secrets the same way, etc. But they all responded differently based on how we knew who they were, which is different than something like in an Agatha Christie story, right? Where essentially all of the suspects are kind of same, same. And then you have your one other protagonist. Like, I think this movie took great pains to... The way those secrets were hidden, revealed, and discovered were all rooted in the characterization.

I think we came into this looking at how secrets and clues would particularly affect character journeys, reveal character journeys. And I think we went in perhaps thinking about how that would relate to plotting, but we really ended up focusing on what does it mean for the character for when they want to look for, or are forced to look for secrets or information. And. Knives Out is a murder mystery and so it plays much more with the relationship with the audience than necessarily in between the characters. But the idea of narrative velocity, that's the thing that really caught me and I just want to highlight that there's a difference in stakes. I'm not quite sure if I can articulate it, but I'm going to try. That Blanc is being pulled. It is in his character to want to figure out the secret, right? And so for Blanc, the danger has to escalate. And in that key decision right at the end where he decides not to reveal the secret in front of everyone, it speaks volumes about his character. And so whereas for Judd who initially wants to be on the mission because he's a suspect and he kind of hates all the people in his congregation but as he becomes closer to reconnecting with his faith he gets off he doesn't want the secret and so has to be pushed pushed to the extent where he has to witness the resurrection of an evil priest and think genuinely in himself that he has committed murderer of a man that he liked and respected. So, both of them have escalations, right? I was trying to think like one's stakes and one's danger. Maybe they're the same thing. Both of them have to escalate, but that escalation, one is way more internal. One speaks way more about Blanc's journey, that decision right at the end. And I'm only talking about one instance in the entire film. Whereas for Judd, it's that constant pushing. It's kind of like those survival films that we talked about where, you know, it's. The pressure that gets put on characters refusing to change, refusing to engage. And I think that narrative velocity is something that reveals character in two very different ways, particularly as it interacts with stakes.

My takeaway, because I kind of already given my summary, is that we should always take our patrons. All of our patrons who make Drive Zero possible. Especially our top tier patrons, Lily, Alexandre, Malay, Jess, Thomas, Paulo, Randy, Jesse, Sandra, Theos, and Krob. You guys are amazing. And please consider us supporting on Patreon if you like what we do.

I hope you all feel like arguing with either Stu or myself. About anything on this episode or anything in general. And you can find many ways of getting in touch with us at our website at draft-zero.com. At the website, you'll also find the show notes for this and all our other episodes. As well as links to support us and spread the word for free via a rating and review on Apple Podcasts. Very important for spreading the word. Or if you think that what we do here is worth a dollar or preferably more than a dollar, then you can also find links to our Patreon page to support us getting these episodes to you quicker. Thanks. And thanks for listening.