What's your favorite version of Little Women and why? Comment below and join the discussion! ✍🏼

That’s right burning your book never works.

I absolutely love this! It also serves to show just how close sisters are, because she knew PRECISELY how to hurt her sister, there was no scheming, no contemplation, she went for the SOUL.

The 1994 version of the story also has a really cool juxtaposition of Jo's anger and Amy's regret, which I think is much more realistic and relatable. How often do we do something in anger only to regret it in the aftermath? It also helps that Kirsten Dunst was an actual child playing Amy.

Notice in the BBC version that there are many more pages, and larger pages of the manuscript, giving even more magnitude to Amy’s crime.

As an actress and writer I can argue that the actors' choices impacted a lot of the emotional dynamic in both scenes. I think in the adaptation if some of the actors choices were different it could've changed the emotional dynamic massively even with the limited dialogue. Also the actors choices and the change in atmosphere in the BBC version is what gave it more emotion.

I find this framing really helpful. Catherine Nichols wrote an essay for Jezebel a few years back - "One Weird Trick That Will Make Your Writing Addictive" - in which she argues that good storytelling is like a game of billiards, with the decisions and feelings of each character ricocheting off that of others. She maintains that women are typically better at this emotionally dynamic, up-and-down method of telling stories because they tend to be more attuned to the subtleties of social behavior. That essay changed my whole approach to writing but I've never seen anyone else frame it in those terms, until now.

Little Women is my favorite book. And the 2019 version was my favorite but I will have go watch the BBC Version, thanks for all your help. I am now on my second book.

The second clip brought me to tears. The sisterly love and conflict, the surprise, the subtle shifts in Amy's shame and smugness, are all incredible. I'm so impressed by this. I've never seen the 2017 version, but I have seen the 1990s version and I've seen the Greta Gerwig one, and I hated it compared to the one made in the 90s.

Abbie, you have articulated something that I have felt and been frustrated with in a bad script vs. a good script for YEARS! Thank you for breaking this down and really analyzing it. Excellent video!

A few thoughts to add to your excellent advice, Abbie. While writing my book, I ran into a dilemma early on, where I needed to portray strong emotional reactions; my first attempts resulted in dastardly "purple prose." Researching this further, I realized British films always evoked strong emotions...and I discovered why; they intentionally understate, creating a vast chasm between what is happening vs. what one is feeling. For me, this is the right way to go. Further thoughts: Years back, I attended a writing class given by Robert McKee, author of the book, Story. He spoke of "emotional charges" which are found within scenes. In his estimation--and I've found this to be valid, if there is no change in emotional charge within a scene, there is no scene. He further breaks down scenes into "beats." He was referring to dialogue, whereby each character's response is likened to a beat, and each beat, back and forth between characters, results in that change in emotional charge. Thank you, Abbie, for tutoring me through your videos. I have a long way to go, but the journey is worth it.

Honestly, as one of four sisters (we share some traits and dynamics with the March sisters too so we relate greatly with them) i felt i could connect more with the scene in Gerwig's adaptation than in the BBC series and even the Winona Ryder adaptation at that. It felt less "writey" if i could phrase it so, less formulaic, because arguments in real life between siblings are disjointed and have no formula. My little sister is Amy personified and have screamed and thrown shoes when she felt wronged, while me and my eldest sisters laughed and waved away her dramatic antics cuz it's old news. My oldest sisters has denied me and the youngest the fun of hanging out with them and their cool social friend group and it really hurt. Amy's spiteful and smug face coupled with Jo's wrath and rage followed by a screaming physical altercations is very real and hits close to home. Both of them were petty and immature, and look the most childish and childlike in behaviour in the Gerwig adaptation imo. The BBC one with their fancy poetic prosey words just throw off the whole naturalism of the relationship between the siblings. Like "did u see what she did to me" and "don't look to me for comfort" felt so rehearsed. Then again, i might also be projecting the experiences i have with my sisters onto the scene whichvalso isn't fair i guess

I have to disagree a little...the 2019 fight in my opinion was realistic to people who have sisters or brothers. And sometimes confrontation or fights are so fast and full of anger that doesn't let you to have a "careful and thinking" way of being. I actually believe that the 2019 were sisters instead of the other versions because of the way they speak to each other and the fight was very realistic to people who actually had confrontation with siblings, even tho I have to say that the fight was a little unrealistic because siblings don't have problem tearing you apart. That's why the other version is even less realistic cause the "talk" and the fight is almost polite and classy...real siblings fight don't look like that, they supposed to look childish and even clumsy....that's why 2019 catch me.

Maybe it’s an unpopular opinion, but although the 2019 version isn’t as cinematic and dynamic from a narrative perspective, it kinda feels raw and ugly, like how siblings *would* fight. I’ve got an older and a younger sibling, and that scene felt pretty real for me. A lot of the time, the emotion is festering underneath and explodes in a matter of seconds. Maybe the direction could have been better to convey that, but idk something about that scene just hit for me.

That new intro and format for this type of video is FANTASTIC!!

One is more dramatic while the other feels real, it just about preference.

I loved the analogy with Dynamic Change, the use of emojis for emotional changes and and the scientific explanation in the end.

Absolutely brilliant to bring sound into conveying emotions. You're spot on! Sound is the first sense that gets "plugged in" so to speak. We start hearing before we're born, so it's a very primal way for us to navigate the world. The "circle of talent" for films fully encompasses everything from sound design (such as folly), voice overs, music, etc. All of it goes into this subtle art of pushing emotions in audiences. For instance, the sound of alarms blaring, footsteps running across metal platforms, the creaks and moans of a submarine, the hisses of air in the background, incoherent barking of orders are all done in service to make you feel anxious. The sound alone gives us the impression the sub is in trouble and our tension is heightened by nature of the camera placing us in what we think is a sinking ship. Without those extra sounds, the story doesn't land with the same gravitas. The absence of sound can also be used strategically. Either total silence or being particular about the types of sound. Studio Ghibli films use this technique, but so do non-animated films like Saving Private Ryan. Specifically, the Storm of Beaches of Normandy scene where we even get ringing in our ears and no music and other sounds get muted. This puts us in the perspective of the soldiers themselves and becomes emotionally resonating, something that really sinks in after the battle when the music finally does come in. Great video :DDD

while I definitely agree with the differences you pointed out, being a screenwriter, I find that features are vitally different from miniseries in screen time. bbc had literally more time (even if not much more) to develop certain scenes and sequences, and that is crucial when creating better dynamics. great work though!

This was good and gives me some ideas for my rewrite. The issue I have with Abby's videos is that she uses movies and TV shows for examples rather than showing good writing vs bad writing. If you have issues with dialog, how do you learn to write good dialog from a movie where emotions are communicated visually? Reading and watching are worlds apart and I wish she would focus more on how to create a written scene with this kind of impact.

Why do these always premiere when I’m busy doing something?? 😭😭 so excited to watch it tomorrow night tho

I have quite a few comments on your assessment, some thoughts of my own (as the oldest of three girls, all homeschooled, ages 17, (almost) 15, and 9). This is long. I apologize. I just wanted to fully analyze the video here (can you tell I'm in the middle of a college-level comp class???) The emotional buildup of Gretta's version isn't as good, I will agree. And the BBC argument, especially the latter half, really does strike a chord with the viewer. It puts you on edge emotionally. The first is definitely too fast paced. But I like how the first half of the argument is presented in Greta Gerwig's interpretation. It's been forever since I read the book, so I'm not going to compare it to canon writing. On the topic of Amy being a whiny brat: My sisters fight all the time. Even before they are speaking, they are annoyed with each other over something. (They have their good moments and more neutral moments, but oftentimes the older (14) is bothered by something the younger (9) is doing, and the younger gets defensive and annoyed at being bossed around. As we know from the story, Jo and Amy's prior relationship up to this point hasn't been shown to be fantastic. They're sisters, meaning they're on each other's nerves 24/7. As a result, Amy WON'T expect for Jo to say yes to see the show, therefor she goes to Meg. (Note that even Meg is wanting to say yes, to appease Amy, but she's not fighting on either side.) I can confirm that this is true for my family too. I get along better with my sisters than they do with each other. The concept of this scene, in theory, is actually really good, I think. BUT, the pacing isn't great. Things feel too rushed. There are no pauses. There is no nuisance or subtlety in emotions. As a result, without that "push and pull" of emotions, there is no breathing space. There is no tenseness. I feel like Greta's version is more realistic. As such, it doesn't pack that punch that BBC holds. We've seen this argument a million times between our own siblings. It's nothing new. (Also might I mention, I love Beth's statement of, "I can teach you chords on piano". Such a peacekeeper. And how Amy bites back in anger. When the younger sibling is so angry that they get mad at everyone. Again, an experience I'm familiar with.) The second part escalates too quickly. It's no surprise that Jo assumes the worst, but I feel like her reaction feels forced (decent down the stairs with little to no expression on her face). Her range of emotions isn't as visible. It's very subdued at first. But I DO like the way Amy's character was handled. Though she isn't smug about burning the book, Amy is still bitter. She's still frustrated that things didn't go her way, and that sours the mood of the rest of the family. The BBC version feels a bit more "rose tinted" to begin with. Amy seems like a completely different character, more optimistic and happy. Jo still doesn't want her to tag along, but she's using more reasoning for it. I feel like this version fails at really capturing Jo and Amy's sibling-hate relationship at the beginning, which is why I prefer Gretta's version (in this case). It's less emotion-packed to begin with, but it DOES set up the second half better because Amy so deeply wants to join in. She seems less like an annoying younger sister, which is why Jo's argument is less of "I don't want you to tag along" and more "you can't tag along". Which also makes Amy's comment of "I hate you" feel more dramatic and unwarranted. It doesn't feel like sibling rivalry as much so, and it seems like Jo would have let Amy join along if complications hadn't been there to begin with, such as the seating issue. (There's something about, "you annoy me, go away, don't join me to the movies" that feels so familiar to arguments at my house, so I'm a bit biased in preferring it.) BBC's approach to the second half is definitely better. Jo's realization of what Amy did, to Amy's reaction and shock at Jo being reasonable when she first got home (giving her the chocolates). I don't think that the plot itself (motivations of characters specifically) is better or worse necessarily. Jo in Gretta's version still feels annoyed with Amy's presence, and Amy in Gretta's version still feels like she's in the right. Jo in BBC's version feels like she's already grown from the experience, or at least, cooled off a lot. And Amy in BBC's version is having to process that, while also STILL justifying herself and making herself the victim (so burning the book isn't wrong). Both sides are incredibly plausible in real life. Two different resolutions to arguments. (Jo moving on and forgiving vs Jo returning home and her mood souring as she sees Amy again.) I don't like how Amy takes responsibility RIGHT AWAY for burning the papers. I understand she's proud of herself, but I would like to have seen a little conflict of guilt, like "oh, Jo's sorry and is trying to make up, but I burnt her book" and then with Meg appeasing her, that further guilt that "oh, I got what I wanted, but also I needlessly punished Jo". Emotionally, that could have been fun to see play out. (Granted, the scene might go on for too long. Guess that's what fanfiction's for...) I like the sort of denial Amy has towards burning the book and Jo accusing her in Gretta's version, as it really shows that they both see the worst in each other. But I do feel that the build-up to that argument could have been better handled. That being said, this is my analysis. I like the plot of Gretta's version better, but I like the dialogue, pacing, and acting of the BBC's version. A mix of both would have been nice. But I would happily watch both versions. Each interpretation of the scene is unique and feels like a different story, in a way. Additional note: arguments could look like both examples. My sister's do have other issues regarding handling emotions well (ie. ADHD). Different characters will handle conflict differently, so you must consider their range of emotions, their past experiences with other characters, and how they would most likely react to a situation not going their way.

The 1994 version is my favourite the 90s cinematography always makes me feel warm and homely, and the acting is very heartfelt, and actually having amy be a child makes her actions more forgivable, though that version does make adult Amy very tactless around jo, whereas she got much better and less selfish as an adult in the book good wives there is an entire chapter dedicated to showing Amys selfless, gracious and kind actions when slighted by her rich snobby neighbours that is the reason her aunt invites her to Europe instead of jo.

Speaking of music, I like how in the BBC version, the music cuts out on Jo's slap. Not only was the slap the highest point of escalation for the scene, but the music being used like that had induced a "sucking-the-air-out-of-the-room" feeling, the kind of feeling that comes whenever a line is crossed.

I inadvertently did this in book two of my series (currently writing it)! My character struggles to use his magic, mainly because he's looking for instant gratification, and it doesn't happen (expectation/reality!), and it isn't until nearly three-quarters of the way into the book that it finally works for him. Why? Because he let go of his unrealistic expectations and accepted reality. His epiphany moment happens when he goes back to an old friend (his guitar), where he gets lost in the music. When he stopped thinking about it, stopped trying to force it, stopped wanting it to happen, his magic flows. The scene works, but I didn't know why. I get it now. I could hear him playing his guitar when I wrote it, and I still can hear him playing when I read back through it. So... thanks, Abbie!! :) Now to do this, intentionally, elsewhere in the story!

I agree that the BBC version of this scene is superior. One of the most effective reasons for me is that it never enters into Jo's mind that the book is in danger. She has left it trustingly in the attic, not attempted like Gerwig's Jo to hide it away. Until she sees the charred papers in the housekeeper's hand, BBC Jo could not have fathomed this event and so the betrayal is that much more grievous to her. This is similar to BBC's Amy having an expectation of being included in the theater night but then the unthinkable happening when Jo not only says she can't come but even argues against the reasonable solution provided by Meg. Jo's expectation of safety for her book demonstrates a higher level of betrayal, just as Amy's expectation of inclusion makes the rejection that much more painful. The BBC version also gives the viewer more opportunity to be surprised, as we don't see that Jo is fearful of her manuscript being destroyed. We don't even see the book in this scene until we observe Amy contemplating it in the attic. The hesitancy that Amy exhibits at that moment shows that she knows what she is about to do is clearly wrong, especially because her sister would never imagine it happening. Gerwig's version takes away the opportunity for the viewer to be shocked by Amy's actions because it's something that has already been put into our minds as a possibility when we saw Jo hiding the book.

I liked the 2019 version.... because two of my favorite actor are there... these two give me an emotional roller coaster as soon as they appear on screen. I will definitely try to put these concepts in my writing... but I still have difficulties to balance everything... emotion vs plot, when to go on vs when to take more time to enter in a scene... I'm new to this... and I have to stop thinking I must rewrite everything as soon as Abbie puts on a new video 😅 BTW... that shaked emoji just killed me every time

Fantastic side by side comparison with so many helpful examples! Thank you Abbie!

Hey Abbie! I've been watching your channel for years while simultaneously writing my magnum opus. Every time I get into a creative funk and can't seem to write, all I have to do is watch one of your videos on writing and I'm back to the page. Thanks girl! You're not only a great fellow writer, but an awesome cheerleader for the writing community. I pray for your writing life to be blessed as you have blessed others 🥰

Amazing as always, and I totally see the point for story telling. However, objectively, not as an author, I do appreciate Greta’s version as it feels very realistic of how sister dynamics play out. Having sisters myself I can honestly testify that there are days where our moods do not build up and change a whole ton in a scene because we are already at odds with each other, frustrated and defensive against the whiny.

10:58 this emoji choose had me rolling

I loved this! The way you gave the examples was so well done and I could TOTALLY sense which one carried the emotional dynamics better! You really are a brilliant writer-- all of your stuff is gold and you are the reason I am writing my first novel!

Such an interesting analysis! I had heard from actor interviews that its important to 1) have a build up to a rage for it to feel authentic, as for most people that's how it works 2) choose one moment to cry, otherwise in a movie it'll seem too emotively repetitive. I think these things apply to writing as well, and it was really helpful to break down the expectation/dynamic range to heartbreaking moments for characters. When I've had to emotionally process hard moments and epiphanies myself, that's more what it felt like. I think too tragedy and horror moments (points of no return basically) for characters are often quiet but profound, where they internalize some message and come to an irrevocable decision. I've recently been struggling with a similar pivotal scene for two characters going through a similarly charged scene, and your insights and comparison to music was really illuminating! Thank you!

This is gold Abbie! what an excellent idea to compare the two and show why one is an emotional rollercoaster and the other is not.

I swear you are a mind-reader. Without fail, ever time I'm struggling with something in my writing, YOU MAKE A FREAKING VIDEO!! And they have been lifesavers.😭😭😍😍. I was going to take the time to watch both adaptations ages ago but always put it off. Guess I know what my next binge will be. Thanks so much for the helpful content Abbie!♥️♥️♥️

Please do many more of these comparison videos. Your ability to break down scenes is wonderful. I learned allot from this as I watched both of these films in the past month. A Sense and Sensibility comparison would be awesome as well. You are absolutely beautiful btw. Kind talented, educated and driven. Encourages the rest of us to stay focused and achieve our goals. Thanks for doing what you do!

I think not only the pacing, but also the camera angles. The second ones(BBC) more cinematic and closed-up it gives a more personal and intense feel.

Thank you Abbie! Wonderful advice!! It helps A LOT that you actually show an example of your tips and boy was this a great one❤

Abbie, you always deliver with your videos. Thank you for imparting yet another crucial gem of wisdom in my writing journey ❤

I never noticed this scene's emotional dynamic before. I did watch both versions of BBC's Little Women and Greta Gerwig. Figuring both from this particular scene was interesting and could feel the emotional impact it had. I didn't notice this the first time. So, I many need to watch both for next time to pick up on it. As far as the adaptions to Little Women (which by the way Little Women is my favorite novel and saw all the adaptations. I'm a huge fan) I found that the screenplay depends on whose writing it. I haven't studied Little WOmen in this way or any movie before but I now have the appreciation for it. In the end, because I resonate with the first adaptation with Wyona Ryder and Susan Saradon the 1994 version because of myself growing alongside those actors including Christian Bale and Kirsten Dunst whereas Greta Gerwig's version with Emma Watson and Sairoise Ronan I feel there's a clash between relating to too many different versions that I couldn't settle with. This is why I prefer the original version from that perspective. I believe the writing of the book was fantastic and the directors. stay true to the story made it all worthwhile. The screenwriting on the otherhand in the 1994 version is far more in depth than Grets Gerwig in 2019 but if i had to compare the original to the BBC Little Women I would say the original. This is because Wyona Ryder and Kisten Dunst do a fantastic job of emotional dynamic and potrays the feelings more as they are very different in age. Amy in the 1994 version appears to be younger and still a child compared to Jo who is much older, a woman, and carry more load of the responsibiliites as an older sibling.

Here's my perspective as a writer: The BBC version is superior not because of the range of emotion, but because of the consistency of the emotional throughline. In the Greta version, the emotions are all over the place. The characters swing from one emotion to another with little cause or build-up. (IMO, this is more do to with the actresses' performances than the actual writing. I don't think they were directed well in Greta's version.) In the BBC version, each character's emotional state follows consistent cause-and-effect. Amy's a very emotional character, so she swings from excitement to anger to bitterness to pain. And it makes sense why a character like her would do something extreme as destroying her sister's work. She's an extreme character. Jo is more subtle as a character; she goes from apathy to shame to reconciliation to wrath. Jo is less emotional and thus less concerned with the emotions of others. She doesn't consider how her actions may hurt Amy, but Jo still cares for her sister and tries to make up for it later. And that also makes sense why she got so angry at the end-because Jo couldn't even fathom someone doing that to her. Meg (unlike Jo) is very empathetic and cares a lot for how others feel, so she tries to make everyone happy where she can. She goes from joy to sadness to excitement to dread and then righteous indignation. She's happy to see the show with Jo but sad that Amy can't come; she's excited to have had a good time and plans to make Amy happy later, but when it's revealed what Amy did, Meg no longer cares about Amy's feelings because Amy did something far worse to Jo-thus deserving no sympathy. I've never seen this film, but I definitely wasn't expecting to get unironically invested in the BBC version. If you ask me, I think what makes the BBC version better is that the audience can understand and follow the emotional throughline. In Greta version, everyone's reactions are all over the place and the audience can't latch on to what the characters are feeling because there doesn't seem to be much consistency. Not in their emotions or their characters. While studying, I learned that knowing what is going to happen makes someone enjoy a story more. Basically, the lecturer was arguing in favor of spoilers (heresy, I know). But I think the point is that when you can anticipate what is going to happen in a story, that makes the outcome more pleasurable. And because the audience can more easily follow the emotional throughline of the BBC's version, even though we know that Jo is going to explode on Amy, it makes the climax that much more enjoyable. (This is also kinda shown in this very video. I just watched the scene with Greta's version and felt nothing. But even though I knew what was going to happen, I still enjoyed the BBC's version much more and felt visceral emotions.) Often, this is why I think plot-twists fall flat when there's no narrative build-up. There's little an audience can do to connect with a twist that comes out of nowhere. For example, in Game of Thrones, the Red Wedding works so well not because it comes out of nowhere, but because it makes so much sense in hindsight. Overall, nice video. It got me thinking about a topic I rarely consider when watching movies or reading books, but being aware of it will definitely come in handy in the future. And also, I've got a new movie to add to my watchlist.

While I can see the differences between the scenes, I didn't FEEL the difference OP was describing... until the gift came out, but I don't see how the characters actions leading up to that changed that. Maybe giving a definition for what "emotional dynamic change" means would have helped? I mean... there are changes in the emotions and dynamics in both scenes. Is it just "don't make things happen too suddenly"? Because I feel like that could have been said easier in a lot less time.

What irritated me about the first one (2019) is I never knew why Amy wasn't allowed to go to the theater. I haven't seen the 2017 one. And I was like why would it be a big deal if she went? 😭 I didn't know there would be another showing of the play next week Jo should've said that! Omg! This is why you don't act on impulse. I think people would be more torn about whose side they're on if Jo did something that was on the same level of bad as Amy destroying her novel. I totally understand the feeling of wanting to go somewhere but not being invited or allowed tho. It hurts.

Your videos are so fantastic! ❤ the way you analyze and interpret stories to learn and teach how to craft a great story is pretty spectacular.

Art of The Story talked about this, he said write out a scene without words - just the emotions you want the character to feel. If the same emotion keeps showing up, it means you're slowing down the pace. He used the scene from A Beautiful Minds dinner to show it.

This is one of the best presentations I've seen on the difference between a Good Story and an Outstanding One. Contrasting two versions of the same scene is brilliant and I commend you for not only the clever emoji scale but for distilling the explanation of how each scene attained the level it did - in 3 concise statements. I believe this video addressed both visual and auditory learners on multiple levels and I'd love to see the same technique applied to your other videos. I only wonder if there are enough movies with comparable versions? 😂 BTW as someone with a lifelong hearing deficit who only recently attained "normal" (assisted) hearing levels - I've been amazed at how music and sound are used to manipulate e.g. I find the use of music to influence newscasts and documentaries appalling.

I had my first introduction to Little Women with the Greta Gerwig version and didn't think it was worth all the hype. I actually teared up at the clip of the BBC version, so I'm going to have to give that one a try and maybe find a new favorite!

Wow! Really loved this video, Abbie. This answers so many questions I have about writing scenes with better emotional impact. Thank you!

Abbie, this an outstanding video as this should be input in all writers‘s novels! Keep doing these types of videos! Your an inspiration for all writers!

Thank you! This was extremely helpful, and I can already see how it will drastically improve my novel. One other thing I noticed between the two little women scenes was that the effective one also made effective use of foreshadowing to tie the book burning to that argument, which helps the reader to feel more empathy when she acts out.

This is a wonderful, helpful video. I completely agree that internal conflict isn’t enough to create an enthralling piece. This hits the nail on the head!

I can see how Gerwings works better for a film while the BBC version works better as being true to the book.

I've never watched Little Women, but the second clip from the BBC adaptation made me want to watch it, which says a lot.

Oh goodness! So well done! Thank you so much for taking the time and effort to make this video.

Abbie, this is amazing! You never disappoint. Love the emojis (especially the purple devil - hilarious). As always, you make a complicated subject easy to understand AND implement. Thank you!!

This was a very timely video, as I am preparing to write an emotional scene for my story, but wasn't quite sure how I wanted to choreograph the emotional dance. Now I know what to do and what to avoid! Thank you for this video, Abbie! I love your channel, but you get extra props for this one for the footage of John Williams. 😉

Thank you for more science of story!! I LOVE these videos!😄

This is the most outstanding video I've come across from you in quite some time. It beautifully harkens back to your early videos, delivering eye-opening lessons on writing, which is truly remarkable. It showcases a more advanced approach, highlighting a noticeable elevation in your teaching and video skills. I'm genuinely grateful for this refreshing content. After feeling like valuable insights were often behind paywalls, this video broke that trend for me-I watched it all the way through. Your dedication to this work is appreciated. Thank you!

I love it when you do Cade studies, it really brings out your passionate personality. This was really great and makes me want to see the movie. I’ve been told I’m a lot like Jo

I wish i can download your videos to watch later. You're literally the best author I've met here

Shawn Coyne of Story Grid fame does try to talk about this in his book and some videos - but WOW did you do such a better job of making it clear and fill in the fact of and how to do it throughout the scene rather than just to make sure they start in one place and end in another place - emotionally - and leave the assumption that there must be some bridge or path from A to C.

I love seeing this from a writing perspective, as I learned it from the acting perspective. There’s an acting technique called “tactics and actions.” An actor who uses this technique analyzes their script and asks, “What does my character want from the other character in this scene?” Then breaks down their script and assigns “tactics” for their lines (guilt trip, flatter, bribe, comfort, wound, etc). These tactics are how they try to achieve the goal from the other character. Good acting is an actor having a clear goal, using tactics to get what they want from the other character(s), and reacting honestly to the other actor’s tactics against them - often tactic changes are reactions to the other actors’ tactics. So in scripts where the screenwriter or playwright doesn’t include subtext, it’s an actor’s job with the help of the director to create emotional dynamics.

Amazing video! You illustrated this whole concept in such a creative way!

Was just reading back one of my first drafts and noticed that something was wrong through out some of my scenes. But I couldn't explain what was wrong. You just explained what it was. Thank you!

If people havent seen arcane, i highly recommend it. Episode 3 especially, uses this to devastating effect.

The emojis just made this whole thing 10 times better 😂

This is awesomely helpful! Thank you❤

one of the most important rules as writer. The results of a characters actions MUST exceed their expectations to be good. But SHOULD exceed the audiences, to be great.

Your analysis blew my mind! So helpful!

Thank you! I've read Little Women every year for the past 60 years, and I've seen every adaptation I could find, and the BBC version is my favorite. That scene where John goes to war as the girls sing Land of the Leal is such a powerful interpretation of a single sentence from the book. I can't even type this memory of it without tears.

Thank you so much for your teachings! I appreciate all the hard work you put into your videos. Each one is educational and gives me motivation to keep writing and not to let my setbacks in my writing stop me. Your books are very impactful and give me a readers hangover after I am done reading 😭💗 Thank you for inspiring me and giving the greatest stories! You are my favorite author of all time.

It's so crazy that this video came out right now because I randomly came to this same realization just a couple weeks ago by analyzing episodes of I Love Lucy! It's absolutely true

I’ve watched a lot of videos by you nd many others asswell as read books on writing. I’d have to say this video is a special one for me that helped me understand how to layout my scenes and understand how to structure. Thank you so much

The second one is more cinematic but as a girl with sisters the first one is 100% how it would have gone down.

This technique is brilliant and you used brilliant examples! THANKS FOR THIS!!! ^_^

OMG thank you so much! I guess you just saved my life :) I am fifteen and writing my second book and I have to finish it before march begins. Also I felt that my story wasn´t emotional enough.

The comparison is amazing. I loved the attention to characters emphasis and detail in the BBC version. 😊

I had no idea this version existed. Thanks for introducing me to it!

This actually really helped! Thank you so much for this.

Thank you❤. I am currently working on my story using emotional wound thesaurus and conflict Thesaurus and already creates more depth. It's pretty much what you said, using specific examples. 🎉🎉🎉

Really great comparison showing the emotional dynamics. But justice to the two different approaches the Gerwig version had more to do with characterization and setting up Amy as almost irredeemable. And honestly in the Gerwig version I don't think we ever forgive Amy, but in the novel and the other versions of the novel we do.

I need to watch the 2017 tv series now! Loved this comparison and how you explained it. I'm going to try to apply this to my scenes too ❤

i wasn't even paying much attention while watching this but the 2nd version really did instill some rage within me

Glad you’re back showing the ‘science’ via examples. Those are the thoughts that originally drew me to you. The music concept is definitely discussed regularly on musician channels of crescendo into a climax and decrescendo out. Building that tension, and maybe subverting it or exploding it for the audience. As for writers, it has been talked about on HelloFutureMe’s channel and in his books on writing and worldbuilding. Admittedly, I like the way you describe it better.

Just discovered this channel. What amazing content! Subscribed.

Love the Science of Story series!! Would love to see you comparing the animated and live-action versions of Disney films, if you want to, of course. I think it could be fun!

Never read the book, but I felt like much of the dialogue in Gerwig's film lacked subtext. The characters often said exactly what was on their mind, which felt forced and fake.

This is really helpful! I understood that there needed to be a build up or change but you put it into words perfectly that helps me further understand the importance of this! This will help me a lot when writing next time so I really appreciate it!

Thank you for reminding me that I've been meaning to do a rewatch/first-time-watch of all the various Little Women adaptations that I have seen before and haven't seen yet!!! 💖💖 It's been far too long since I last dipped my toes into the Little Women world, and I need a refresher/rekindling!~ 😊 (Should also do a re-read, too, honestly)

Thanks for another great video! Have you ever watched The Crown? If so, would you consider doing another one of these scene analysis videos with a scene/scenes from that show? I think it has some of the greatest writing committed to television, with great attention to emotional dynamics. The writers of that show really understood how to build up to emotional climaxes.

You are the best!!!! Really. I love watching you. Your advice are so helpful ♡♡♡

The Winona Ryder version is my favorite, but I haven't watched the BBC version. I'll definitely check it out. I tried the Greta version and it was so flat and the acting was wooden, that I couldn't through more than a few scenes. Thanks for the analysis! I always enjoy your insights.

This might be an unpopular opinion but i still prefer the 1994 version of this scene better to a degree (and this is just my opinion judging by those scenes alone, not the entire film): In the 1994 ver, we see amy being whiney and it kinda gives the impression of her being childish just because she didn't get invited to see the play, it escalates to her being so angry she yelled at joe and tried to throw something at her. It shows she is currently very angry and as a response to that anger she burns joe's book, it makes sense on why she did it. She wasn't thinking clearly and was blinded by anger. It also makes even more sense that, since it was established that she can act childish previously, it makes sense as to why she chose to burn her sisters book despite it being over something small as not getting invited to a play. In her mind she doesn't care how much that book means to joe, she just want to make her suffer effectively (it showing the childishness that was shown previously). Her thought process makes sense on why she did it. When joe comes back, she immediatelly suspects amy, which in my opinion is kinda shows how much she knows her sister, no evidence, no nothing, just suspects her cause she knew her sister and how she is. Misguided yes, but realistic. Then they went on a back and fourth "no, i didn't", "yes, you did", "no, i didn't", "yes, you did" then BAM attacks her out of nowhere out of just the assuption her sister took her book and to me it's way more realistic on how siblings behave (imo) and how most sibling spats are, then when both are high on anger and attacking each other amy stops lying and reveals that she did burn joe's book, when before she denied being rensponsible. In the BBC version, i do agree in the whole set up of her being exited then dissapointed that she's not allowed to go that makes the situation have more impact and make us care about it more, but after that she's genuinely upset about not being invited then swore she would make her sister suffer acting like this was the worst thing that could've happened when it's just about not being invited and it's not the angry type of upset when ur judment is clouded and you say mean words that are driven by anger, it's just looks like just being upset (imo, based on the actors face) and it's a little off putting to me cause it wasn't established that she could be this way from the scene. Whereas the other one it is established she could be childish. And then when she tries to burn the book, her movement's are slow and her expression is ...upset but kindof guilty? The problem to me is that while the other scene she's clearly burning the book cause she's misguided by anger (you can see her doing things like closing the drawer abruptly, putting the first page quickly in the fire, clearly showing she's still driven by anger) while in the BBC one, The slowness gives the impression she's thinking through her actions or at least reluctant but still being upset. Especially in the burning scene, near the end of the burning she doesn't look that upset but she still continues to burn the book and it gives me the impression that she knows what she's doing is wrong deep down but she still does it. Over not being invited. It makes her look more petty, and it makes what she did worse. Though i have to agree that the filmaking is better in the BBC. The flames shining on her face contrasted by the dull background, the flip-flopping between the play and joe being happy to amy gloomily burning joe's book. 10/10 😍👏 Then when joe comes back, and in this version she gives her a gift and apologizes for what she did wrong even saying she'll invite her next week but amy is still bitter about not being invited *that day* . Not even looking a bit guilty after she got something nice instead from her sister. Then when the book was revealed to be burnt she looked resentful and not even a bit guilty even though *again* her sister did something nice to her. Then she just admits that she was the one who burnt her book and acts like it was a big deal that she was wronged and this was why she had to make her sister suffer. It makes her seem more sinister just to do this over a small thing. Also she just straight up says she's the one who did it just because joe asked, while in the 1994 version she denies doing it at first but only snapping and revealing the truth after joe attacked her. The 1994 made sense on why she revealed the truth and also it's just SO realistic when the other sibling just denies they did anything wrong until pushed hard enough (figuratively), while the other scene had no reason to other than to make her suffer in her face i guess. But what i think they did do well to me is because the scene made it seem like what amy did was even worse, the payoff of joe's reaction and meg's words after the fight was way more statisfiying and i do agree that it does make the scene more...dramatic. even if the context does make me think that everybody is making such a big deal out of all of this despite it just being a small thing in retrospect (except the book burning, i get why it's a big deal to joe and her reaction is understandable) While on the other scene it felt more like a misguided sisterly spat, more fitting to the problem at hand. Also this is a side rant but i just love how there are just more littke details in the 1994 ver that makes the siblings feel real. Them talking over eachother, responding fast, getting emotional over little things, whining, the other being so done, meg's reaction seeing amy throwing somthing over being upset is more playful, little quips like: "Beth has her piano, and i'm so lonely 😔" "I can teach you chords 😮" "I don't want chords, i want to go 😒" It just makes me feel : ❤❤❤ So basicly: - the 1994 felt more realistic and the motivations make more sense - the BBC one had better tension and filming, but the motivations make less sense (or make amy look worse imo) I think putting them together would make it perfect: Amy has the expectation to go, but then denied, then got her hopes up again, then denied, kinda whines a bit to meg, then denied firmly by joe, (and in here basicly the tone goes slowly from casual to getting serious and the climaks of it being joe's firm denial) then amy snapping angrily and yelling at joe abt making her suffer and running to her room. We get the flip-flopping like in the BBC but this time everytime we cut to amy her movement feel angered, fast, and her face being clearly upset and angry. Then when they come back, things go the same as the BBC, joe's in a better mood, she apologizes, gives amy a present, but this time amy is shocked she got a present from joe, and has a tinge of guilt on her face remembering what she did. We get the reveal the book was burnt from the lady, joe's upset, suspects amy, amy denies it, but joe gets more angry at amy while not beliving her, because of this amy's guilt just dissapears and replaced by anger, as they get more angry amy snaps and tells the truth while yelling, then ensue the fight and aftermath like in the BBC, only this time take out meg's words about "you will not find comfort with me" And there u go :D But this is all just my opinion 😅

Hey Abbie, i need some help with writing motivation & ideas for the "plot" of my story, which i will be making into an animated series. So the story is about wolves in a chaotic world breaking apart due to the "shifts" which are linked to the moon, stars & a character named Hiroshin, the world is devided into 4 regions each with their own wolf tribe, one tribe is made up of shaman wolves, another warriors, another one hunters & the 4th tribe consists of an unorganized group of exiled wolves, the main characters are the "luminal bloodline" a group of wolves with magic powers linked to their respective animal star constellations, their mission is to stop the shifts. I can tell you more if you're interested & describe the main characters of course.

Love the analysis! The use of emojis in scene had me rolling!! XD (definitely want to watch the BBC "Little Women" now!)

Wow, when you were talking about "Expectations vs Reality" I couldn't help but think about everything I went through when I was joining the Army. I specifically joined in order to learn a skilled trade, chose a trade that had a direct correlation in the civilian world, and then prepared myself for basic training by running everyday, conditioning my body to get it used to the severe abdominal cramps afterward, and learning how to do pushups, situps etc. I had never been physically active in my life. When I finally did make it to basic I suffered from extremely severe bronchitis and was vomiting and coughing non-stop the entire time. Despite this, I managed to pass all my PT tests through the sheer power of will. Finally, after all that I make it to my unit and the first thing that happens is that I am not allowed to do machining, and if I try to weld anything I get harrassed terribly by toxic leadership. All I am allowed to do are worthless details while the other soldiers get to actually weld and do machining. You have no idea how devastating this was. There was no happy ending to this. My life should be turned into a movie because it was absolutely insane the bs I had to go through.

you perfectly described how to execute ideas, scenes, stories, in a more interesting way. in other words how to show something. reminds me of dan harmons story circle and kishotenketsu. it constantly subverts expectation. but i feel like theres also an exception to this like when you over do it the story looses its meaning theme wise. so its kind of tricky.

That might be one of your best (at least, most useful to me) videos yet.

Greta Gerwig's version is definitely my favorite adaptation. I've seen plenty of Little Women adaptations for years and read the book because my mom and sister adored it, but every version fell flat. The first time I watched 2019 Little Women, I was starstruck. The characters finally connected. The themes were developed and the arcs were actually consistent and meaningful. It felt like a thousand stories in one. Forever my favorite.

I haven't seen either movies, I don't write, I barely read books... but I love your videos! Keep up the good work!