Blow me away with special effects (Star Wars 1,2,3), dazzle me with a great character (Napoleon Dynamite - seriously), or wow me with great scenery (Seven Years in Tibet), but if you don’t have a story to tell me, quit wasting my time!
Sounds like a pompous line from someone who thinks he knows something, but it’s not and I don’t. All I know is I like getting wrapped up in a story more than I care about tricks you can do as a moviemaker (Michael Bay, anyone? - Transformers not withstanding).
I’m stuck in the Minnesota film scene which isn’t exactly as hot as Adrian Peterson, so I don’t know the trends of independent movies coming from LA, NY, or Toronto, but what I’ve noticed in the many screenplays I’ve read and movies in which I’ve been involved up here is that few people care to take the time to make sure they have a story to tell (and their sentences are too long - ha). The story doesn’t have to be profound; it doesn’t have to be provocative; it doesn’t have to change the world. But, for the love of Hitchcock, it needs to exist!
Am I in the minority here? Am I the only one who hated Clerks because it had absolutely no story? Am I bound for failure because I care more about story than special effects and innovative directing? Did I get this topic posted in time to get six free issues of Moviemaker? :)
The post (er, novella as it turns out) has become almost rantish (making up words is fun). I hope the majority of up and comers reading this agree with me that story is THE most important part of any movie. It has to be.
Oh, one last thing, I understand my assessment of all referenced movies in this post are opinions and not facts, but I’m curious to know if my opinions are consistent with the minority or majority.

