# WARNING: Discusses sexual violence: Do my villains have to have a tragic backstories?



## ironpony (Dec 4, 2019)

My story is a thriller, with a group of villains going around committing rapes, which the police are trying catch.  I wrote it so their motivation was that they are doing it as revenge cause they have involuntary celibacy and that is why they are doing it, as revenge.

However, a couple of people said this wasn't enough motivation and for them to do this, they have to been raped as well, and one suggested that I should write it so that the villains were gang raped in the army or something like that would help make it a lot more believable.  But I feel that changes a lot around though.  I also don't know if I like the tragic backstory as it's been done to death by now, and can't villains just be villains without a backstory that is much more tragic?  Or do I need the tragic backtstory for this kind of motivation for this kind of crime do you think?


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 4, 2019)

The purpose of a backstory is to achieve some kind of empathy or sympathy. The problem you have is you are picking perhaps the most difficult subset of characters to do this with, for the simple fact they not only sound like total pieces of shit but also ones that most normal people simply don't find justifiable. That makes it difficult, but not impossible.

I say not impossible not because I have a clue how to do this but because of the simple fact that if other writers have been able to create some level of convincing sob story for racists, murderers, etc then there's no _logical _reason why rapists can't get that too. However, just because it's possible doesn't mean it's feasible for you. 

The fact you seem to think 'Involuntary Celibacy' is a legitimate condition analogous to some kind of mental health condition, per your post above, tells me you don't necessarily fully grasp the stakes in play here. Let me spell it out clearly: Almost nobody (rational) accepts that rapists have a reason to rape beyond selfishness and psychopathy. 

 Involuntary celibacy isn't some unfortunate condition one must suffer. The only people who argue that are...involuntary celibates. Assuming your audience is made up of rational, decent, people, your attempts -- however well meant -- to lend legitimacy to the argument that "The poor boy just had to become a rapist because nobody would love him" is going to make most people laugh or vomit or both.

The fact these rapists are in a gang rather undermines the most obvious (and only halfway legitimate) angle I could think of to make them somewhat empathetic: Which is just that they are lonely, sad, desperate people. When you start talking about gangs, you start introducing a sense of community, a sense of energy, a sense of life-beyond-the-basement. That doesn't fit with the pathology of 'poor sad masturbator'. As soon as you start introducing the gang component, you lose the sense that these people are powerless. Powerful people are not, typically, easy to identify with.

So, you have two options: Either really try to shoehorn in the 'tragic backstory'. I have no idea how you would do that in a convincing or original manner. You could have them be raped, however that is itself problematic. The process by which a rape victim becomes a rapist is tenuous. On the other hand, there is some evidence that a lot of sexual criminals were abused in childhood. It's a tired trope but it exists and you could exploit it. It's just boring.

Other option is quit with the charade and just write them as absolute monsters. Still rather boring, still rather unoriginal, but at least you avoid the minefield of looking like you are trying to humanize the inhumane.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 4, 2019)

Oh okay thanks.  And I'm not trying to say that involuntary celibacy as an unfortunate condition either, it was just the motivation.  However, the characters behave in a certain a way, in which I feel it would be tough to change the story, to a different motivation.  But I also feel that when it comes to rapists in other stories, being sexually rejected is the reason for the rape.  In the movie Back to the Future for example, Biff Tannen tries to get Lorraine into bed so to speak, she rejects him, and then he responds by raping her out of revenge cause she rejected him.

This also happens in other movies as well.  In the movie The Accused, which is based on a true story as well, some guys hit on Jodie Foster's character and she flirts back, kind of teasing him.  But then she rejects them.  They hate this rejection, so they rape her as a response.  So rejection has been used before as a motive for rape, so I am wondering if I could use it to, especially since some of some of the directions that the plot has to go in, requires that kind of motivation.  Is it possible for me to use it too for my story, if others have used it?


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 4, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Oh okay thanks.  And I'm not trying to say that involuntary celibacy as an unfortunate condition either, it was just the motivation.  However, the characters behave in a certain a way, in which I feel it would be tough to change the story, to a different motivation.  But I also feel that when it comes to rapists in other stories, being sexually rejected is the reason for the rape.  In the movie Back to the Future for example, Biff Tannen tries to get Lorraine into bed so to speak, she rejects him, and then he responds by raping her out of revenge cause she rejected him.
> 
> This also happens in other movies as well.  In the movie The Accused, which is based on a true story as well, some guys hit on Jodie Foster's character and she flirts back, kind of teasing him.  But then she rejects them.  They hate this rejection, so they rape her as a response.  So rejection has been used before as a motive for rape, so I am wondering if I could use it to, especially since some of some of the directions that the plot has to go in, requires that kind of motivation.  Is it possible for me to use it too for my story, if others have used it?



Which one of those two examples you gave involves a backstory for the rapist(s)?


----------



## ironpony (Dec 4, 2019)

Oh what I am saying is, could I do it like those two examples, where there is no backstory much? I was giving examples, of rapists without backstories and wonder if I could do that for mine.  That's what I meant.


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 4, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Oh what I am saying is, could I do it like those two examples, where there is no backstory much? I was giving examples, of rapists without backstories and wonder if I could do that for mine.  That's what I meant.



So your options are:

- No backstory -- your antagonists resemble the formula used for number of prior antagonists (including the two examples you provided)

- Backstory -- now you're on the pathway to legitimizing rape as a reasonable outlet for *problems*

Sounds like quite the challenge.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 4, 2019)

Well I feel that the whole tragic backstory, works best in some stories, but mine builds towards an ending, where one of the victims seeks revenge on the villains and is successful, so does that ending work as well, if the villains have the tragic backstory?  Like for example, Hamlet wants revenge on his uncle for murdering his father.  But what if their was a backstory, that the father bad already murdered the Uncle's wife, prior?  Would the revenge seem kind of hypocritical then?

Does that make sense, as to how the tragic backstory, might not work so well for mine?


----------



## ArrowInTheBowOfTheLord (Dec 4, 2019)

Skip the tragic backstory, IMO. Shoehorned-in tragic backstory is lazy writing. Having no backstory is a legitimate choice--your villains become archetypes of evil, basically. And that's fine. A lot of my favorite movies/comics/books contain that variety of villain.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 4, 2019)

Oh okay, and I can do that, but a couple of readers I show it to so far, say I need a backstory and motivation, then what am I doing wrong for them to say that?


----------



## andrewclunn (Dec 4, 2019)

Incel identity as justification for rape is lazy.  Don't tell, show.  Humiliation beyond mere rejection in personal instance work better than a label.  If you want to go that route, then go all the way, and have him quote some MGTOW personalities to show rather than claim he's radicalized.  You don't need to give motivations and personify your villain(s), but if you do, then you've got to go all the way.  I've pushed myself to write works representing views that I find abhorrent.  When I share them with someone and their aghast because they assume that I must hold those views, for representing them so favorably (when I'm attempting to speak in the voice of their advocates) then I know I've done it right.  Don't go there unless you're willing to really go there, and if so people should be outraged by it because otherwise you haven't really touched on the true motivations you are aping at.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 4, 2019)

Oh okay, but how would I really go there though?  How is mentioning the motive, not enough?


----------



## KenTR (Dec 4, 2019)

Why do you need a backstory at all? Are these crimes presented as some sort of sociological phenomenon?

I think most people can conjure up a motivation for rape on their own. Serial gang rape is a heavy subject to be playing around with, especially these days. One tiny slip up and you're going to be accused of sensationalizing it. 

Humanizing a villain is fine. But a gang of rapists? You're rubbing your readers noses is some pretty abhorrent behavior, which is different than simply showing it. 

I wouldn't include the incel angle, either. I suspect that in a few years from now, the whole incel thing will have, hopefully, evaporated.


----------



## Sir-KP (Dec 4, 2019)

Some people can be assholes just because they can. Some people can be assholes when they think they are more powerful then the weaker ones.

Bad behavior can start and develop from one's personality that's genetically inherited.

It doesn't have to be post-breaking point turnover.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 4, 2019)

KenTR said:


> Why do you need a backstory at all? Are these crimes presented as some sort of sociological phenomenon?
> 
> I think most people can conjure up a motivation for rape on their own. Serial gang rape is a heavy subject to be playing around with, especially these days. One tiny slip up and you're going to be accused of sensationalizing it.
> 
> ...



Well I didn't actually use the label 'incel', I just said that being rejected all the time was the motivation, but I didn't use the actual incel word.

However, as far as needing a motivation goes, the readers say I need one, but a better one.  So if I don't need one, then why do they think so?


----------



## Foxee (Dec 4, 2019)

Nope.


----------



## Sir-KP (Dec 4, 2019)

ironpony said:


> However, as far as needing a motivation goes, the readers say I need one, but a better one.  So if I don't need one, then why do they think so?



Buddy, they _think _you need one. Here some (me included) _do not think_ you need one. 

We have our reasons and opinions why we think you don't need it. If your readers think you need instead, then you gotta ask them why. lol

At the end of the day, you make the decision after digesting the inputs.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 4, 2019)

Oh okay.  Well as far as the motivation I already have goes, is involuntary celibacy not good enough?  It doesn't require a major backstory I didn't think, but is it enough to rest the crimes on?


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 5, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Oh okay.  Well as far as the motivation I already have goes, is involuntary celibacy not good enough?  It doesn't require a major backstory I didn't think, but is it enough to rest the crimes on?



Involuntary celibacy isn't an answer it's a question. Why are they involuntary celibates?


----------



## Ma'am (Dec 5, 2019)

luckyscars said:


> Involuntary celibacy isn't an answer it's a question. Why are they involuntary celibates?



'Cuz they can't get none.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

luckyscars said:


> Involuntary celibacy isn't an answer it's a question. Why are they involuntary celibates?



Well I wrote it so that it's left up the imagination but a couple of readers said that's not convincing and each member of the group should have their own detailed explained reason?  Is that necessary though, cause I feel like it's hard to put that in.  I mean should I write it so there is a flashback where they all sit and explain to each other there reasons?


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 5, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Well I wrote it so that it's left up the imagination but a couple of readers said that's not convincing and each member of the group should have their own detailed explained reason?  Is that necessary though, cause I feel like it's hard to put that in.  I mean should I write it so there is a flashback where they all sit and explain to each other there reasons?



But WHY ARE THEY? Like, what makes them _involuntary_? Is it a physical defect? Are they tremendously ugly? Do they have constant flatulence? Is it more a social awkwardness or personality defect? Are they Nickelback fans?

I'm not (really) being silly here, it takes quite a lot for somebody to be so overwhelmingly unattractive to so many people with such hopeless permanence that they have to resort to rape to fuel a sexual desire. I know some extremely ugly men who have sex. Not necessarily a lot of sex, but at least occasionally, and it's always consensual. I know zero involuntary celibates. I know plenty of celibates who consider it 'involuntary', but scratch the surface and you find it's bullshit. They're simply unwilling to make a minimal degree of effort and want to blame women for it. Is that who these guys are? 

Forget whether writing backstory is a good idea or not, are you even equipped to do it? Do you have the first clue how to address the basic question of 'why' beyond parroting 'involuntary celibacy', which of course is not an ailment but a symptom, to the extent it's a real thing at all? Do you actually know these characters in any real sense, or are they Just Rapists? 

Of course the other alternative is that they don't *have* to rape but that they *want* to rape, but that makes writing a backstory aimed to make these characters sympathetic pointless, because this whole thing hinges on some idea of compulsion.


----------



## Ultraroel (Dec 5, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Well I wrote it so that it's left up the imagination but a couple of readers said that's not convincing and each member of the group should have their own detailed explained reason?  Is that necessary though, cause I feel like it's hard to put that in.  I mean should I write it so there is a flashback where they all sit and explain to each other there reasons?



Bro, this has been said over and over and over. You don't have to address every issue of your beta readers. Also, I started questioning whether you actually have a group of beta readers who stick to your story for YEARS on end.
When will you start making decisions instead of pretending a group of readers has issue "x".


----------



## KenTR (Dec 5, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Well I didn't actually use the label 'incel', I just said that being rejected all the time was the motivation, but I didn't use the actual incel word.
> 
> However, as far as needing a motivation goes, the readers say I need one, but a better one.  So if I don't need one, then why do they think so?



Everybody experiences their share of rejection but they don't respond to it by assaulting people. Emotional, butthurt villains aren't that threatening. People will think all they need is a hug. 

How well do we know these villains? Do we spend time with them? Do we know their names? If not, their motives are probably less important. If you're presenting them as shadowy figures, a lack of motive might give your story a sense of mystery, which can be easily tweaked to achieve a sense of menace. 

Perhaps your law enforcement characters can put forth their own theories. Let your readers decide. Not everything in the crime solving business is wrapped up in a neat little explanation.


----------



## Theglasshouse (Dec 5, 2019)

Maybe you should study the psychology behind rapists, and sociological makeup. I think I did read of a scandal in a newspaper if you want to research the motivations of the people involved. The below link was published by BBC which covers political scandals. Maybe read on that to make us believe the characters behave the way they do and why they behave a certain way. It's not an easy read. It might offend some. But it is from the BBC which is reputable and doesn't cover disturbing material. But it was and still is a very big scandal that has been covered up. It's somewhat disconcerting because of things they committed. So this is a warning in case anyone doesn't like the newspaper article. (it was a disturbing crime and is not an easy article to read. It should however give you ideas)

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48913377

(warning for content which deals with a real-life scenario that is disturbing). I hope this adds to the discussion.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

luckyscars said:


> But WHY ARE THEY? Like, what makes them _involuntary_? Is it a physical defect? Are they tremendously ugly? Do they have constant flatulence? Is it more a social awkwardness or personality defect? Are they Nickelback fans?
> 
> I'm not (really) being silly here, it takes quite a lot for somebody to be so overwhelmingly unattractive to so many people with such hopeless permanence that they have to resort to rape to fuel a sexual desire. I know some extremely ugly men who have sex. Not necessarily a lot of sex, but at least occasionally, and it's always consensual. I know zero involuntary celibates. I know plenty of celibates who consider it 'involuntary', but scratch the surface and you find it's bullshit. They're simply unwilling to make a minimal degree of effort and want to blame women for it. Is that who these guys are?
> 
> ...



Well I assume it had to be more likely personality defects cause people are less likely to get involved with people of the have personality defects, or physical ones.  But I left it up the imagination.  However, readers do not want things left up the imaginations and want explanation.

But as for using involuntary celibacy and rejection as the cause for rape, that's the motive that used a lot in other fiction, so when other stories, do it are they just being too unrealistic then?


----------



## KenTR (Dec 5, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Well I assume it had to be more likely personality defects cause people are less likely to get involved with people of the have personality defects, or physical ones.



A lot of the time, it's the other way around.



> But as for using involuntary celibacy and rejection as the cause for rape, that's the motive that used a lot in other fiction, so when other stories, do it are they just being too unrealistic then?



They're being lazy and unimaginative and need to limit their internet time.

Why rape, though? Who else is producing this script besides you? What is it trying to say, if anything, about the act of rape? 

To be honest, my friend, if I was financing a film, or even browsing on Netflix and I saw a crime thriller about a gang of rapists, I'd pass. Culturally, it's not the best time to drop something like this on the public.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

Oh okay, it's just I know more ugly people who get sex, compared to ones with personality problems, so I was going by that. But I can make it physical defects if that's better.


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 5, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Well I assume it had to be more likely personality defects cause people are less likely to get involved with people of the have personality defects



What is a personality defect? What does that term mean to you?


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

It means something that is preventing that person from making accomplishments, social or academic.


----------



## KenTR (Dec 5, 2019)

The correct term is personality_ disorder_.

Antisocial personality disorder is closely related with sociopathy.

So make them sociopaths.


----------



## Ma'am (Dec 5, 2019)

Not sure but as far as being an "incel," perhaps arrogance/entitlement is involved. Meaning, they may expect women to see beyond their own lack of the typically desired surface traits and give them a chance but refuse to do the same themselves. In other words, a "two" who won't accept less than an "eight.'"

For ex., I have a friend who signed up for three dating sites but did not get one single date. She is not the cute young thing she once was but she was rejected by many men who were no "better" than she was. I wonder how many of them were angry or disappointed because they "can't get a date."

However, it's quite a leap from that to sexually assaulting random people. Googling something like "motivation for rape" might shed more light on it. But I would expect that a very high percentage of violent criminals did have traumatic upbringings.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

Oh okay, well it's been done before in fiction where not get any is the motivation, so what do those fiction stories do differently?  Also I was told I can sell it, and I just need to create suspension of disbelief better, so the reader will not be asking so many questions, but what I am doing wrong when it comes to creating suspension of disbelief then?

As for motivations, I did look up motivations here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_sexual_violence

One of the motivations was listed that rapists do their crimes to compensate for feelings of inadequacy, so wouldn't that be similar to the motivation I already have?


----------



## BornForBurning (Dec 5, 2019)

ironpony one thought you should absolutely consider is how much time you've actually spent writing vs. how much time you've spent 'researching' and asking for advice. I'll repeat what I've said in the past: no amount of planning, no amount of research, no amount of advice will ever compensate for putting in the real work and just writing. You've got to just grit your teeth and practice, over and over and over again until you _implicitly _understand how to tell a good story. It's often not even a conscious thing. And I've read your stuff, I _know _you aren't a good writer at this point. You are not publishable. We could give you the best advice in the world and it won't do _anything _until you actually understand how to employ it. I've probably started writing nearly 100 short stories at this point. How many have gotten published? One.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

Okay thanks.  I just feel that I keep making the same mistake in all the rewrites and not sure what I am doing wrong.  The character motivations seem to be the biggest problem, but not sure what to do about that.


----------



## KenTR (Dec 5, 2019)

Ma'am said:


> Not sure but as far as being an "incel," perhaps arrogance/entitlement is involved. Meaning, they may expect women to see beyond their own lack of the typically desired surface traits and give them a chance but refuse to do the same themselves. In other words, a "two" who won't accept less than an "eight.'"



Yes. But I also think a large part of it has to do with internet culture. Perhaps one guy had a blog where he coined the term "incel" and that snowballed into an identity, or a movement, or whatever you want to call it. I prefer "train wreck".

Misery loves company. By branding themselves involuntarily celibate, they give themselves license to wallow in it and not take responsibility for having such an attitude.

I looked at an incel forum once. They're very defensive and obviously self-pitying. They call attractive women "Stacys" and attractive men "Chads". All I saw was a lot of complaining. 



ironpony said:


> Oh okay, well it's been done before in fiction where not get any is the motivation, so what do those fiction stories do differently? Also I was told I can sell it, and I just need to create suspension of disbelief better, so the reader will not be asking so many questions, but what I am doing wrong when it comes to creating suspension of disbelief then?



It is my understanding that suspension of disbelief refers to tricking the reader/audience into believing something fantastical or illogical, not filling in plot holes.

I agree with BornForBurning: just write it. Fill in the holes with something, anything. Getting further along could give you a better perspective on the problems you're having. Get out of the sandpit. 

You say you're producing this script. Perhaps you're overly concerning yourself with issues of budget, financing, pre-production etc.. Not good. Your *only* concern right now should be with getting the story down, holes and all.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

Oh okay thanks.  I already have the whole script written, and keep trying to make it better.  But I have it all written, holes and all so far.


----------



## KenTR (Dec 5, 2019)

Why not just move on to a different problem? Forget about the villain's motivation for now and tighten up some dialogue or something. Then, re-read this thread and have another go at it. Lots of good advice here.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

Oh well it's just that the motivation drives a good amount of the dialogue, and when it comes to writing, I was told before to solve all the character problems first, cause that can affect the dialogue, and then dialogue comes last, if that's true?

It also seems from people's feedback that the villain motivation is the biggest problem with the story, so if that's true, I thought maybe I should try solve that first.

One reader keeps insisting that having the group be raped in the army is the best explanation cause it's such an extreme crime that it would set them off to form a revenge group like that, but also, the military training would explain how they are able to successfully pull off such crimes over and over again.  So that backstory serves as a double explanation.  Do you think that reader has a point though, that it's the most believable explanation?


----------



## ArrowInTheBowOfTheLord (Dec 5, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Okay thanks. I just feel that I keep making the same mistake in all the rewrites and not sure what I am doing wrong. The character motivations seem to be the biggest problem, but not sure what to do about that.



I think you're too hung up on this one screenplay. If you keep rewriting it and rewriting it and it still doesn't work, _write something else. _Practice, and improve. And then maybe, if you still care about it, you can go back to it and rewrite it when you've honed your skills. It's not about writing the same thing over and over, it's about writing a lot of stuff. Even doing some simple writing exercises could be helpful, like recreating overheard dialogue or writing a couple character sketches. 

My ratio is similar to BFB's: something like 300 poems written, only 4 published. And when I can't get a poem or story to work? I do something else. And something else. And something else. By that time I might not care about the old idea anymore, so I might not go back to it, but what's important is that I'm practicing.


----------



## KenTR (Dec 5, 2019)

If they were raped in the military, why take it out on innocent women?

Or are they targeting the wives of servicemen? Please say no.

I'm unclear about frequency of men being raped in the military, as are most people, I'd assume. So if it sounds contrived to me, it may to most. I mean, what are the chances? Male rape victims are probably not that open about their experience. I suppose they could meet in some clinic, but that would mean a lot of men were being raped at once, or within a short time frame. Again, contrived. Besides, that's a whole other script there; to use it as a motivation might dilute other aspects of your story.

Generally, people have a pretty good idea of what motivates rape. I don't think they'd want to delve any deeper into it.

How did this gang get together? Do you have a backstory for that? If not, take some time to write one out. The right idea might come as a result.

Lastly, how prominent is their motivation to rape in the story other than to serve as an explanation for the crimes you are portraying? Does it intersect with any other themes? If not, I'd say it's best to keep it as simple as possible.


----------



## BornForBurning (Dec 5, 2019)

> Yes. But I also think a large part of it has to do with internet culture. Perhaps one guy had a blog where he coined the term "incel" and that snowballed into an identity, or a movement, or whatever you want to call it. I prefer "train wreck".


Actually no it was like five guys on some board. Maybe wizardchan, I forget. That's hyperbole. There were more but it really was a tiny, _tiny _number of people. Couple hundred maximum. Than some stupid journalist found out about it, published an article and use of the word exploded. So now we're stuck with a bunch of people using 'incel' like embarrassing /r9k/ nerds and thinking this is some movement in larger society. It's terrible.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

ArrowInTheBowOfTheLord said:


> I think you're too hung up on this one screenplay. If you keep rewriting it and rewriting it and it still doesn't work, _write something else. _Practice, and improve. And then maybe, if you still care about it, you can go back to it and rewrite it when you've honed your skills. It's not about writing the same thing over and over, it's about writing a lot of stuff. Even doing some simple writing exercises could be helpful, like recreating overheard dialogue or writing a couple character sketches.
> 
> My ratio is similar to BFB's: something like 300 poems written, only 4 published. And when I can't get a poem or story to work? I do something else. And something else. And something else. By that time I might not care about the old idea anymore, so I might not go back to it, but what's important is that I'm practicing.



Well I've done that before, where I would write something, then something else, then something else, but it resulted in a lot of half baked scripts, so I wanted to finish one one better, rather than keep moving onto the next thing all the time.  But I also am writing the time travel one that I asked about before on here as well.



KenTR said:


> If they were raped in the military, why take it out on innocent women?
> 
> Or are they targeting the wives of servicemen? Please say no.
> 
> ...



I don't know why they would target women after the experience in the military, I was just asking about the one reader's suggestion, which was that.  I think he meant that maybe the villains feel they lost their masculinity and want revenge to get it back maybe, he meant...

I wrote so they did meet in a therapy clinic since they were going to a clinic because of the anger issues towards society, and that is how they all meet, as it's written now.


----------



## KenTR (Dec 5, 2019)

ironpony said:


> I don't know why they would target women after the experience in the military, I was just asking about the one reader's suggestion, which was that.  I think he meant that maybe the villains feel they lost their masculinity and want revenge to get it back maybe, he meant...
> 
> I wrote so they did meet in a therapy clinic since they were going to a clinic because of the anger issues towards society, and that is how they all meet, as it's written now.



Do some research on the effect of rape on its victims.


----------



## Kyle R (Dec 5, 2019)

I've suggested this before, but here it is again: you should really limit your reader feedback to a _one-time_ thing.

Get feedback once. Make any adjustments as needed (or as you see fit). Then: publish and/or produce your story.

Don't _continually_ seek feedback. All that will do is drag you into a never-ending loop of rewriting, rewriting, rewriting ... which is the loop that you seem to be stuck in now.

Break out of the loop. Be proud of your creative choices. Bring the screenplay home with a knockout ending, and get started on the rest of the production process. :encouragement:


----------



## Theglasshouse (Dec 5, 2019)

My unique take on motivating these movie characters: I say there has to be consequences the villains wanted revenge in the history of the fictional world. Maybe that way you can think of a really compelling motivation for the protagonist and antagonist. You see the example of being kicked out of the army has to have imo long last effects into the past, present, and future, and unless you determine why these feelings affect the antagonist's fortune. I don't see how you will have a compelling antagonist. Because the antagonist must be suffering. These can't be random rape victims. They have to create a situation the characters must try to beat to change their fortune. Think hard, maybe the answer isn't inferiority. But rather some situation where if he rapes these women, he will have gained the upper hand. Maybe he's making a mockery of the police department for instance since they ruined his family's life. You get the idea, there are rippling effects of the past, going into the present and future. There could be a court trial looming into the future, where his family again is in trouble. (sounds like a movie)

I read something in psychology called the punitiveness schema. When you grow up with someone not compassionate you become judging towards others. Criminals and law enforcement has these beliefs or what is called schema. (credit goes to Melinda Curtis for the explanation from her book on characterization for schema)

So what does the character have to gain or to lose by punishing them? Is money on the line? Is someone's life at stake? Brainstorm. It can't be that bad. If you say the police's reputation then I think the policeman might have put away someone in prison. Think hard. It can't be that difficult. It seems you can try something along these lines. It sounds logical to me. I don't know if it makes sense as a way to motivate a character. An emotional wound can motivate. So can schema such as a belief or ego. There's more to it than that.

Just my own theory and opinion. But this book theory is talked about in some books on writing I have read.

It can be intuitive thinking that creates conflict in how to write stories in my case. For example, think badly of any situation, looking for imperfections and maybe you can come up with conflict. By turning a positive statement into a negative statement. It was the world's best museum. It was the world's worst museum.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

> I've suggested this before, but here it is again: you should really limit your reader feedback to a _one-time thing.
> 
> Get feedback once. Make any adjustments as needed (or as you see fit). Then: publish and/or produce your story.
> 
> ...



Oh well the thing is, is that the readers feedback, they will talk about maybe 10 different problems in the plot.  I will then try to fix those problems and show them again, but then those new solutions I tried, also have completely different problems now.  So I felt it was a matter of trial and error for each problem, until you get it right, where everything works, and not one things ruins everything else.



> My unique take on motivating these movie characters: I say there has to be consequences the villains wanted revenge in the history of the fictional world. Maybe that way you can think of a really compelling motivation for the protagonist and antagonist. You see the example of being kicked out of the army has to have imo long last effects into the past, present, and future, and unless you determine why these feelings affect the antagonist's fortune. I don't see how you will have a compelling antagonist. Because the antagonist must be suffering. These can't be random rape victims. They have to create a situation the characters must try to beat to change their fortune. Think hard, maybe the answer isn't inferiority. But rather some situation where if he rapes these women, he will have gained the upper hand. Maybe he's making a mockery of the police department for instance since they ruined his family's life. You get the idea, there are rippling effects of the past, going into the present and future. There could be a court trial looming into the future, where his family again is in trouble. (sounds like a movie)
> 
> I read something in psychology called the punitiveness schema. When you grow up with someone not compassionate you become judging towards others. Criminals and law enforcement has these beliefs or what is called schema. (credit goes to Melinda Curtis for the explanation from her book on characterization for schema)
> 
> ...



Oh okay.  I thought that if I make the victims were random and unrelated that that actually makes the villains stronger though, cause it's more difficult for the police to catch them if the victims have nothing in common in the investigation.  When you say maybe the police might have put someone in prison, what does that have to do with the current crimes at all?

As for the antagonists must be suffering, I thought that constantly being rejected by members of the opposite gender for years and years would be suffering cause it would cause a huge inferiority complex in them, that they would want to get power over, wouldn't it?


----------



## Theglasshouse (Dec 5, 2019)

But the inferiority complex is mental. We need past, present, future events that reinforce the belief he really did feel inferior. Was he crippled? Did he have no job? Does getting revenge mean he'll earn money from the ring leader of the rapes? Is his mother sick? Will this save her?

Mentality is a combination of the past, present and future. The above is just an example of how I would try to incorporate a different plot.

This is more specific and has to do with the movie you are writing.

Why was it important in the past (the emotional scar or psychological scar)? Why is it important now (what's at stake)? What can he do to change his perceived future?(whatever you want to call this motivation)

What events happened in the past? What is happening now? How will it affect the future?

Think of inferiority as characterization but alone it does not mean plot. What's the cause and effect of feeling crippled? That he commits crimes?

This is all hypothetical and made up. It's to think outside the box and to help you write not thinking strictly inferiority is my motivation. But there are no events shown or a history shown. If that makes sense.

Show and don't tell his inferiority.

Crippled would do the trick. I am giving advice. I am not qualified to be a script doctor. I am just showing you a different way of thinking.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

Well it's just the thing is, is that it's not really a character a study, but more of a suspense thriller.  If you watch a movie like Seven or The Silence of the Lambs for example, they do not have an entire backstory on the villains like that.  The police learn of a motivation for why they are doing what they are doing and that's it.  So how come it works in the movies that you do not have to explain an entire origin story for the villains, and the audience is okay with that, but not with mine?  Why is mine a special exception to the rule? If I can figure out why mine is being seen as the exception to the rule, then I could figure out how to handle it properly I think maybe.


----------



## Theglasshouse (Dec 5, 2019)

A crippled person doesn't need a backstory. I think it's helpful to do something similar to that if not that. If the backstory is your concern or the movie becoming a character study. I did say to think outside the box. I recommend it again to think outside the box.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

Oh okay thanks.  Well it's just that a crippled villain is useless as a physical threat, and I thought of it would make it more suspenseful, if I made every member of the group a physical  and very mobile threat.  But maybe they could have something else wrong, like a disfigurement or something?  Or what if I made another one somewhat mentally or socially challenged?


----------



## Theglasshouse (Dec 5, 2019)

That would make sense.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 5, 2019)

Well one reader said that if any of them are mentally challenged, it wouldn't be believable that they could co-conspire to outsmart the police and get away with it though, if that'st true...

So what you are saying is, is that the defects such as a physical disfigurement or a sociological disorder, will help explain why they are involuntarily celibate then, and thus help to explain the villains better?


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 6, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Well it's just the thing is, is that it's not really a character a study, but more of a suspense thriller.  If you watch a movie like Seven or The Silence of the Lambs for example, they do not have an entire backstory on the villains like that.  The police learn of a motivation for why they are doing what they are doing and that's it.  So how come it works in the movies that you do not have to explain an entire origin story for the villains, and the audience is okay with that, but not with mine?  Why is mine a special exception to the rule? If I can figure out why mine is being seen as the exception to the rule, then I could figure out how to handle it properly I think maybe.



Because you're the one starting a thread asking about backstories. If you don't think backstories are important, than why are you asking about one? Oh yeah, because 'people' have told you.

Nobody here is telling you that. So do or don't do, up to you.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 6, 2019)

Oh okay, well I can not listen to the readers who say it is important than and just not have it then.  But as far as a motivation goes, is the involuntary celibacy still not workable, even if they have things like disfigurements or sociological disorders or defects?


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 6, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Oh okay, well I can not listen to the readers who say it is important than and just not have it then.  But as far as a motivation goes, is the involuntary celibacy still not workable, even if they have things like disfigurements or sociological disorders or defects?



I mean, if they're Elephant Man levels of ugly I can just about believe the involuntary celibacy angle, but it would have to be very extreme.

If you wanted and are serious about this you could try this from that very angle: Subvert the Elephant Man/Quasimodo trope, the whole one in which 'beauty comes from within', and have the character(s) be grotesquely deformed from which they suffer huge amounts of (sexual) misery and 'cruel rejection' that leads them to adopt a hellish hatred toward people, especially beautiful women. You can really play up the abuse angle there. Include flashbacks to past events in which they were sexually humiliated by attractive women -- genuinely humiliated, not simply turned down at the night club -- and make the whole thing a commentary of sorts on how young men experience similar levels of social distaste for their bodies as women in real life typically suffer. You then accomplish the motivation issue, the necessary disgust AND can include the social commentary you have frequently mentioned.

I'm not necessarily saying this is necessarily going to be well-received. It's a controversial topic, a minefield (especially today) and you could really screw up the messaging by looking like you are justifying rape (and yes I know you don't want to, but its perception) on the basis of 'having a hard life' which people will automatically find objectionable and rightly so. But I can see it working as the basis for a simple thriller, if you pull it off. Ultimately, rape or not, you want to emphasize less the sexual themes, the angle of 'involuntarily celibate young men raping women', and more the theme of 'a superficial and looks-obsessed society is driving people to the point of misanthropy', which is a legitimate issue and one of interest. Rape could simply be a symptom, an outlet, rather than a major theme. 

I think the more you make this about the issue of rape -- which I get a strong sense you don't really have a huge amount of knowledge about -- the less effective the story will be. Include the rape for shock value, nothing more, and work on the misanthropy, sense of isolation, etc and you might have something that will work.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 6, 2019)

Oh okay, it's just that it's a thriller told mostly from the police side of the investigation so I wanted to keep it as a thriller rather than a character study with backstory and flashbacks.  I need a motive that works of course, but I don't want to have to explore it as a character study though.  As for them being elephant man level deformed, I wanted the police to not be able to find the villains as easily cause they can blend in, to a degree, so I don't want them to be so obviously peculiar, unless of course it can still work and be better...


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 6, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Oh okay, it's just that it's a thriller told mostly from the police side of the investigation so I wanted to keep it as a thriller rather than a character study with backstory and flashbacks.  I need a motive that works of course, but I don't want to have to explore it as a character study though.  As for them being elephant man level deformed, I wanted the police to not be able to find the villains as easily cause they can blend in, to a degree, so I don't want them to be so obviously peculiar, unless of course it can still work and be better...



I didn't say it had to be a character study...


----------



## Theglasshouse (Dec 6, 2019)

What kind of physical deformity? Probably the first thing I thought of was victims of fire accidents, of arson, of any victim of a fire incident. This is better for your convenience as to why they did the crime. It doesn't sound bad. It sounds credible.

 Just by changing the social background information of the characters in the movie you can play to the perceived stereotypes and weaknesses of the characters. Without having to explain their motives by making the characters that would be motivated to say they are inferior maybe. Which would keep the dialogue the same (first scenes of the work you posted).

What I understand by what is a character study is different. It's more elaborate and you don't want to rework it(I don't think suspense thriller falls under character study with a physical defect), with a lot of character development and I know you want to avoid it being rewritten extensively. Then it wouldn't have some of these same problems (saying lines such as because we feel inferior without a motive). If you will it justifies some immoral behavior to readers. The audience makes up its mind and it wouldn't need drastic changes. You are saying I think it would change the genre's label of suspense thriller. I think you won't lose credibility. You probably don't even have to mention how they got burned. It can be light burn marks (accidents happen, or maybe an arsonist's work). The background information can be shallow (and won't cost you maybe extra effort that is taxing. That is if you want to keep the screenplay). It may need no explanation. All it would need is some more description maybe. How characters react to that if needed. If light burn marks, that change the skin's appearance where it got burned. It seems it would not need a drastic rewrite of the first two scenes I read. It would fit the mood and explains the behaviors of the characters.

And as for them having emotional disabilities. It can happen to a lot of people. Seen a series of Turkish drama called innocents with a family disease (schizophrenics). Who can't get into relationships. The entire family had schizophrenia and suffered from hallucinations. (the mother and father passed the genes both with mental disease in the movie) It still is less believable. That's 1% of the population. So its not possible. I can't speak for bi-polar. How much that is of the population I don't know. It doesn't sound practical.

I say the explanation of the fire isn't necessary nor is a scene needed with a person in a fire accident. It may have the comic book feel you are looking for. Especially if you don't go in depth about the accidents of the characters. I think several comic book characters go through that trope of the fire burning part of their face (the batman villains I think in particular).


----------



## Bayview (Dec 6, 2019)

I'm going way back to the first page for this one, but bear with me.



ironpony said:


> In the movie Back to the Future for example, Biff Tannen tries to get Lorraine into bed so to speak, she rejects him, and then he responds by raping her out of revenge cause she rejected him.



You know this didn't happen, don't you? Like, your rape-obsession hasn't grown to the point where you're actually remembering rapes in movies that didn't have rapes?



> In the movie The Accused, which is based on a true story as well, some guys hit on Jodie Foster's character and she flirts back, kind of teasing him.  But then she rejects them.  They hate this rejection, so they rape her as a response.



This is a gross oversimplification. In no normal world is "rape" a logical response to "got turned down". The _trigger_ for the rape in _The Accused _may have been the rejection, but the movie explores so many deeper elements of the crime - misogyny, classism, etc. That's why the victim had to fight so hard for justice... because of all the societal elements that tried to shut her up. (we see this in the victim blaming, slut shaming, etc.). The movie doesn't try to justify or explain the rapists' behaviour in a simplistic cause-and-effect way.

It feels like you're thinking in the same mindset as the rapists in that movie were thinking. It feels like you're trying to make rape a logical response to a certain set of conditions, and it just ISN'T. It's a deviant, violent, _failure of logic_.

Change "rape" to "molesting children" and try to figure out how to explain a gang of deviants running around molesting children. Can you do it? Hopefully not, because hopefully you recognize that molesting children is NOT a logical response to any set of stimuli, ever. There is NO reasonable motivation for molesting children. There is also no reasonable motivation for rape. Let it go.

You've been being told the same thing about this topic on at least two different writing boards for year after year, and you're not hearing it. Why are you paying so much attention to the opinions of the "couple of people" who told you that more backstory was needed and so little attention to everyone else?


----------



## Firemajic (Dec 6, 2019)

Bayview said:


> I'm going way back to the first page for this one, but bear with me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...






](*,)....... THANK YOU...... :applouse::applouse::applouse::applouse::applouse::applouse::applouse::applouse::applouse::applouse::applouse::applouse::applouse:


----------



## Theglasshouse (Dec 6, 2019)

What you say is how a lot of what the population thinks. But if you looked on what rapists had to say on why they rape and psychologists it doesn't fall into one motivation. Some say the act is done for attaining pleasure.

What one of set group of people sees is not obvious. This is the rapist's point of view and the character's point of view (victims).

Psychological reasons, and upbringing can be just as important as empathy. Empathy usually means there is no motive to do something so egregious. I don't know if they think like sociopaths. Which supposedly have no empathy for their victims.

Mind you this is just my point of view. 

Any deplorable act such as rape is an oxymoron when thought when it is the opposite of sympathy.

Even if it gets declined at least he is learning something.

His feedback has all the markings of someone who needs to keep writing to improve.


----------



## Kyle R (Dec 6, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Oh well the thing is, is that the readers feedback, they will talk about maybe 10 different problems in the plot.  I will then try to fix those problems *and show them again*, but then those new solutions I tried, also have completely different problems now.



See, if it were me, I wouldn't show them again. I'd consider their feedback, make any adjustments that I feel need addressing, then be done with the feedback process.

From there on I'd be moving toward the next step in the filming process.

If you keep going back for more feedback, you won't get past this rewriting stage. A quick glance on another forum shows that you've been asking questions about this same story for nearly five years now. That's a long time to be working on a single screenplay.

And I believe one of the reasons it's taking so long is because you keep opening the story up for outside input.

I know how it feels to want to get it _right_ (I struggle with perfectionism, too), but at some point perfectionism becomes more harmful than helpful.

It doesn't always have to be complicated. Find practical solutions that move the process _forward_.

At some point, if you want to get things done, you'll have to say, "Thanks for the feedback! Now I'm going to finish this screenplay and start with the casting/filming process." :encouragement:


----------



## ironpony (Dec 6, 2019)

Theglasshouse said:


> What kind of physical deformity? Probably the first thing I thought of was victims of fire accidents, of arson, of any victim of a fire incident. This is better for your convenience as to why they did the crime. It doesn't sound bad. It sounds credible.
> 
> Just by changing the social background information of the characters in the movie you can play to the perceived stereotypes and weaknesses of the characters. Without having to explain their motives by making the characters that would be motivated to say they are inferior maybe. Which would keep the dialogue the same (first scenes of the work you posted).
> 
> ...



Oh well the reason why I wrote it that way before so the villains say "because we are considered inferior", is because the villains are sending warnings to society, and if they were to specifically tell society each one of their 'defects', the police will just have more clues to chew on then.  So the reason that the villains give a generalized statement like that, is to give less evidence clues.



Bayview said:


> I'm going way back to the first page for this one, but bear with me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No, I don't have an obsession with rapes in movies, I was just thinking of movies I could use an examples, where rejection was the motivation.  I was trying to get into the mindset of those characters, and those characters acted on the crime, after they were triggered by being rejected.


----------



## BornForBurning (Dec 6, 2019)

> Change "rape" to "molesting children" and try to figure out how to explain a gang of deviants running around molesting children. Can you do it? Hopefully not, because hopefully you recognize that molesting children is NOT a logical response to any set of stimuli, ever. There is NO reasonable motivation for molesting children. There is also no reasonable motivation for rape. Let it go.


People still do evil things for _reasons_, though. Otherwise we as writers wouldn't be able to explain why a villain did anything. I mean, logical within whose context? The rapist's? Society's? God's? I'll spitball on the child molester one: it's a statistical fact that being molested as a child makes you far more likely to be a molester as an adult. Same with rape. So you've got someone that's been taught from a very young age to pursue pleasure and intimacy in the completely wrong way. I think that people can have 'good' reasons why and still be wrong. You are right that rape is a breakdown of logic, but so is any evil act. Rape is not special in this regard. My problem with your line of thinking is that it sort of turns rape into an unexplainable force of nature. Evil _action _is always a good thing being pursued the wrong way. Evil is explainable because humans are flawed and it is those same flaws that make it possible for us to engage in morally irrational acts.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 6, 2019)

Well I was told to have the tragic backstory to have the villains be sexually assaulted in their pasts before.  However, when the main character victim gets revenge on the villains in the end, would the revenge not be as satisfying for the readers, if the villains have a tragic backstory though, and are then more empathetic?  And that's another thing, is that the readers didn't like how the villains were too empathetic already, they felt like, so wouldn't giving them a tragic backstory make then more empathetic?


----------



## Bayview (Dec 6, 2019)

BornForBurning said:


> People still do evil things for _reasons_, though. Otherwise we as writers wouldn't be able to explain why a villain did anything. I mean, logical within whose context? The rapist's? Society's? God's? I'll spitball on the child molester one: it's a statistical fact that being molested as a child makes you far more likely to be a molester as an adult. Same with rape. So you've got someone that's been taught from a very young age to pursue pleasure and intimacy in the completely wrong way. I think that people can have 'good' reasons why and still be wrong. You are right that rape is a breakdown of logic, but so is any evil act. Rape is not special in this regard. My problem with your line of thinking is that it sort of turns rape into an unexplainable force of nature. Evil _action _is always a good thing being pursued the wrong way. Evil is explainable because humans are flawed and it is those same flaws that make it possible for us to engage in morally irrational acts.



I think it's the over-simplification that I'm trying to address. I mean, someone who's molested as a child AND who doesn't have loving/wise support afterward AND who has a series of other experiences AND who is exposed to certain media (or whatever other stimuli) AND who goes through a long series of other pre-criminal behaviours without intervention, etc... THAT victim of molestation may grow up to molest other children. The person's experience of molestation as a child was one of many, many factors that led to his/her deviance. (There are loads of people who are molested as children who do not grow up to become molesters themselves, so obviously it's not a simple cause-effect relationship, right? Not stimulus-response)

I can see how you would pull the idea of "rape as an unexplainable act" out of my original post, but really what I'm saying is that it's an act without a SIMPLE explanation. "A gang of rapists who are all rapists because they themselves were raped while in the army" is a gross oversimplification of a really complex situation.


----------



## Bayview (Dec 6, 2019)

ironpony said:


> I was trying to get into the mindset of those characters, and those characters acted on the crime, after they were triggered by being rejected.



Okay, so, leaving _Back to the Future_ aside (since, as previously mentioned, there's no rape), let's look at _The Accused_. What's the mindset of the rapists in that movie? Countless men flirt with women and are then rejected every day. What made THESE men react so violently? It's been a long time since I saw that movie, but as I recall there were bystanders who cheered the men on. So there was a sort of mob mentality. Have you ever done something you later realized was really wrong, just because you got caught up in a crowd? What effect did alcohol have on them? What attitudes did the men have toward women in general? Would they have behaved the same way if the victim had been upper class? Were they ashamed of themselves afterward? If they hadn't been caught, would they have been likely to re-offend, or was this a one-time disaster? etc.

I'm not asking you to answer these questions here, or even saying that these are the right questions you should be asking. I'm just saying that if you're watching these movies to try to understand a mindset, then TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE MINDSET. I mean, "they were rejected so they raped her" is all external. It's not looking at mindsets at all; it's not diving deep and really trying to figure out how they're thinking. What went wrong with these guys? What the hell was in their heads that made them react to a really common situation with such a completely deviant act?


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 6, 2019)

Bayview said:


> Okay, so, leaving _Back to the Future_ aside (since, as previously mentioned, there's no rape),



I didn't challenge this the first time but I feel compelled to now. There is a rape scene in Back to the Future. I vividly remember it (and hunted down a clip to re-watch it just now in case I was totally mis-remembering) and it's there: A girl gets trapped in a car with a boy who pushes her down without consent and is in the process of sexually assaulting her when he gets stopped. To me, that's a rape scene. Sorry. I actually remember watching it at 10 years old and it being my first encounter with sexual assault in fiction, together with the scene from Thelma & Louise (which as far as I recall didn't feature Actual Rape either, it was simply suggested) and how horribly frightening it was. 

Yeah it's not exactly a graphic cut-and-thrust of the kind I imagine featuring heavily in ironpony's writing (it's sort of a kids movie), and I suppose one could take the Brock Turner approach -- that it's not A Real Rape because there's no P-I-V or whatever the medical standard is. I'm honestly not sure what your reasoning is for excluding it so adamantly from the definition of 'rape scene' and would love to learn that reasoning.

But in terms of what matters, in terms of intent, emotional effect, moral compass, etc? Yeah, it definitely fits the definition, in my opinion. So do plenty of other scenes, especially from older movies where values were different. Scenes where men to some extent imposed themselves on women. I'm not going to be hysterical and say that every amorous man/boy pressuring a woman/girl into sex necessarily crosses into rape territory, but plenty came very close. And Back To The Future? That's cut-and-dry. To me. It has all the emotional aspects and a number of the physical ones. I'm not sure what else matters? This isn't a legal debate or even a moral one, it's a writing one. It's _written like _a rape scene. All the aspects involving rape, sans penetration, are definitely present in that scene.

Anyway, that aside, while I agree that it's a bad idea to over-simplify rape, it seems like it could be an equally bad idea to portray it as this hugely complicated thing...at least as writers (as opposed to lawyers or psychiatrists or whatever else). I think we have to realize that our allegiance is not ultimately to the (fictional) rapists, nor the (fictional) rape victims. It's not actually about giving them the fair hearing. All it is about is relating the issue to what we anticipate the reader/audience expects. Their perceptions. It is them whose feelings matter. Whether rape should be written about with simplicity or complexity seems totally dependent on the kind of story. The kind of audience. 

So, on one hand we have a book like _A Clockwork Orange _is a good example of a fantastic novel that uses rape pretty freely throughout its plot, often for quite ludicrous reasons (such as boredom) if for any reason at all, and still manages to be a 'deep' novel that involves some kind of empathy between the audience and the (rapist) main character. In that regard, it could be the perfect example for ironpony to follow if he is as hellbent on involving this subject matter as he seems to be. I could tolerate that sort of thing, if written in an engaging/entertaining manner. There is a place for it...

...but, then again, I was exactly the generation and demographic who A Clockwork Orange was aimed at. A lot of people really hate that book/movie -- presumably in part for the way it seems to trivialize rape and violence generally. On the other hand, something like _A Child Called It _i(a book I really hated and got nothing out of reading) isn't going to work unless it investigates the complex emotions behind the violence and abuse. They are different approaches to roughly the same material. They are both 'well written'. They are also both either horrible or fascinating, depending on the person you ask. You could argue likewise for something like Game Of Thrones which contains lots of ludicrous versions of 'rape' and yet never once breaks the belief of the audience.

So...I don't think the complexity/simplicity of rape (or any moral problem) is itself important. More important is the placement in the story, and the kind of story it is. The important question seems not so much _does the depiction and treatment of rape seem real or morally accurate. _The important question, for me, is _does the depiction and treatment of rape work in this story, with this character. _The really important thing comes down to the question again: _What are we trying to say? _Books that answer this question in a way that is  credible don't seem to have problems no matter how controversial they portray the content. I have literally read books where the protagonist rapes, kills, commits incest, defrauds, lies, and so on and ended up engaged in that character and that story _even though I hated the things they did_. I have also read books where the character does absolutely nothing massively wrong at all and still thought they were a fucking asshole.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 7, 2019)

Bayview said:


> Okay, so, leaving _Back to the Future_ aside (since, as previously mentioned, there's no rape), let's look at _The Accused_. What's the mindset of the rapists in that movie? Countless men flirt with women and are then rejected every day. What made THESE men react so violently? It's been a long time since I saw that movie, but as I recall there were bystanders who cheered the men on. So there was a sort of mob mentality. Have you ever done something you later realized was really wrong, just because you got caught up in a crowd? What effect did alcohol have on them? What attitudes did the men have toward women in general? Would they have behaved the same way if the victim had been upper class? Were they ashamed of themselves afterward? If they hadn't been caught, would they have been likely to re-offend, or was this a one-time disaster? etc.
> 
> I'm not asking you to answer these questions here, or even saying that these are the right questions you should be asking. I'm just saying that if you're watching these movies to try to understand a mindset, then TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE MINDSET. I mean, "they were rejected so they raped her" is all external. It's not looking at mindsets at all; it's not diving deep and really trying to figure out how they're thinking. What went wrong with these guys? What the hell was in their heads that made them react to a really common situation with such a completely deviant act?



Oh well in Back to the Future, I thought it was an attempted rape because the George character came and stopped Biff before he could do the full rape.  So I thought that the rape intention was still there.

As for the whole doing it cause they are rejected being completely external, what I mean is, is that the movies only bother to explain the external.  Other explanations are not needed for the viewer, accept for mine I am told.  I feel that for readers, my script is the exception to the rule, cause readers want a separate internal explanation for every villain in the group, where was with other movies, viewers are able to accept an external explanation for the entire group.  So what is it about mine that is different that requires both an internal and external explanation, when other movies are okay with just explaining external?


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 7, 2019)

ironpony said:


> As for the whole doing it cause they are rejected being completely external, what I mean is, is that the movies only bother to explain the external.  Other explanations are not needed for the viewer, accept for mine I am told.  I feel that for readers, my script is the exception to the rule, cause readers want a separate internal explanation for every villain in the group, where was with other movies, viewers are able to accept an external explanation for the entire group.  So what is it about mine that is different that requires both an internal and external explanation, when other movies are okay with just explaining external?



You're not a special case, if that's what you're getting at.

*brace yourself*

Having read some of your writing I will hazard a guess as to why it is that people are expecting more from you and your work: Your characters are extremely boring. 

We're kind of off-topic here as far as the original question, but since you brought it up I will attempt to help. When I read your screenplay excerpts, I found them readable. I found them readable, like I find daytime soap operas watchable. That is, there was nothing wrong with the dialogue and how it flowed It was polished enough, it wasn't _bad_, but there was nothing there that made me give a chimpanzee's nipple about any of the characters.

This was mentioned in at least one of the critiques I gave you. More importantly, it was a running theme in most of the other critiques you got. Your characters all talked the same. None of them talked like human beings. There were no quirks, no idiosyncrasies, no peculiar turns of phrase or uses of slang or variations in accents indicating these were real-life people from different walks of life drawn together by whatever the situation was. They did not reference their personal lives, at least not in any way that was of interest. They did not crack jokes. They did not dig at each other. They were like cardboard cut-outs with voice-boxes installed. They all talked like you. They all over-explained, reacted with the same indifference to the information. They did not forget to put sugar in their tea or walk out of the bathroom with their fly unzipped. They did not get over-excited. They did not seem to have personal vendettas against each other, nor friendships for that matter. There was no _undercurrent of emotion_. Did character x (can't even remember any of their names - and I just re-looked thirty seconds before this post) have a particular like or dislike for other-character y or thing p? Don't know. Can't remember. Because it simply wasn't there.

All this might sound overly harsh, but if you're serious about understanding why people are not reacting more positively to your work, what you need to focus on IMO is not backstories for rapists but presence of personality. I understand in screenwriting it can be difficult, but understand that -- as you mention -- screen audiences are not looking for internal explanation of character. What they are looking for is _external explanation of character that hints at internal character. _What's the difference? The difference is in the kind of external character you create. Like an iceberg, you don't need to say everything that is internal (or anything, actually) but it needs to come across in other ways. They don't need you to be explaining things left and right but they do need you to develop and know these characters in a way that makes their external behavior (actions and dialogue) reflect an internal self that can then be suggested. Your characters all profoundly lack external character, so there's nothing to base any of that on.

I expect your next question is going to be 'oh okay thanks oh well how do I create good characters then?' if so, please don't bother. It's not something you will learn from a forum. It's something you will learn through going outside, watching people engage in the real world (particularly the kinds of people you are trying to write about in your work) and capturing who they are honestly and consistently as you pour your heart and soul and blood and toil into writing _honestly _as opposed to merely _accurately._


----------



## Bayview (Dec 7, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Oh well in Back to the Future, I thought it was an attempted rape because the George character came and stopped Biff before he could do the full rape.  So I thought that the rape intention was still there.



Yeah, there was unwanted sexual touching. There MAY have been rape if it wasn't interrupted. But it was. Having a rape intention (or possibly rape intention) isn't the same as having a rape.



> As for the whole doing it cause they are rejected being completely external, what I mean is, is that the movies only bother to explain the external.  Other explanations are not needed for the viewer, accept for mine I am told.  I feel that for readers, my script is the exception to the rule, cause readers want a separate internal explanation for every villain in the group, where was with other movies, viewers are able to accept an external explanation for the entire group.  So what is it about mine that is different that requires both an internal and external explanation, when other movies are okay with just explaining external?



I haven't read your story, but as a general rule I think it's a good idea to follow the advice of whomever said writers should trust betas about the problems in their writing, but not trust them about the solutions. So, in this case, it seems as if the betas are saying they don't understand the motivations of your rapists, or maybe saying they find your rapists unbelievable. That's a problem. But the solution is up to you. Including more backstory is just one possibility.

In terms of whether other movies do include internal motivation - the sexual assault in Back to the Future was an incredibly small part of a cartoonish story about a time-travelling teen. Biff was a cartoonish character. The movie is hardly an indepth character study. The Accused, on the other hand, was a much more serious film, and I would say it did explore at least some aspects of the internal motivations of the rapists. The whole film, as I recall it, was essentially an indictment of what we would today call Rape Culture - it wasn't just the rapists who treated the victim horribly, it was the entire criminal justice system, society, etc.

Again, though, I don't think you should trust betas about the way to fix the problems they find in your manuscript. I think you should just trust them that they found problems.


----------



## Bayview (Dec 7, 2019)

luckyscars said:


> I didn't challenge this the first time but I feel compelled to now. There is a rape scene in Back to the Future. I vividly remember it (and hunted down a clip to re-watch it just now in case I was totally mis-remembering) and it's there: A girl gets trapped in a car with a boy who pushes her down without consent and is in the process of sexually assaulting her when he gets stopped. To me, that's a rape scene. Sorry. I actually remember watching it at 10 years old and it being my first encounter with sexual assault in fiction, together with the scene from Thelma & Louise (which as far as I recall didn't feature Actual Rape either, it was simply suggested) and how horribly frightening it was.
> 
> Yeah it's not exactly a graphic cut-and-thrust of the kind I imagine featuring heavily in ironpony's writing (it's sort of a kids movie), and I suppose one could take the Brock Turner approach -- that it's not A Real Rape because there's no P-I-V or whatever the medical standard is. I'm honestly not sure what your reasoning is for excluding it so adamantly from the definition of 'rape scene' and would love to learn that reasoning.



Well, I said it wasn't a rape, not that it wasn't a "rape scene". And I said it wasn't a rape because rape didn't occur. It may have been an attempted rape, but... that's not rape.

And I wouldn't say that I'm all that adamant about that definition - I'm more adamant about thinking that ironpony has some weird ideas about rape, and looking at a kid's movie in which a rape didn't occur in order to learn about cinematic depictions of rape is probably not going to help him rectify those weird ideas.



> So, on one hand we have a book like _A Clockwork Orange _is a good example of a fantastic novel that uses rape pretty freely throughout its plot, often for quite ludicrous reasons (such as boredom) if for any reason at all, and still manages to be a 'deep' novel that involves some kind of empathy between the audience and the (rapist) main character. In that regard, it could be the perfect example for ironpony to follow if he is as hellbent on involving this subject matter as he seems to be. I could tolerate that sort of thing, if written in an engaging/entertaining manner. There is a place for it...



A Clockwork Orange was a surreal, satirical exploration of a totally broken, dystopian, 'ultra-violent' world. It portrayed the rapists as profoundly damaged, completely psychotic, etc. It didn't attempt to explain the gang of rapists with a simplistic backstory.

I agree that we don't always need to see a complex system of explanations for the behaviours of villains in movies. I would say, rather, that we should rarely see _simplistic_ explanations for their behaviours. Having a gang of rapists who all commit rapes because they themselves were gang-raped in the military? It would be better to leave the explanation out entirely than to include such a simplistic one, IMO.


----------



## Kyle R (Dec 7, 2019)

Bayview said:


> I haven't read your story, but as a general rule I think it's a good idea to follow the advice of whomever said writers should trust betas about the problems in their writing, but not trust them about the solutions.



That would be Neil Gaiman:

"Remember: when people tell you something’s wrong or doesn’t work for them, they are almost always right. When they tell you exactly what they think is wrong and how to fix it, they are almost always wrong." :encouragement:



			
				ironpony said:
			
		

> I feel that for readers, my script is the exception to the rule, cause readers want a separate internal explanation for every villain in the group, where was with other movies, viewers are able to accept an external explanation for the entire group. So what is it about mine that is different that requires both an internal and external explanation, when other movies are okay with just explaining external?



Who are these readers? What are their credentials? Do they specialize in your genre? How invested are they in your story? How devoted are they to helping its ultimate success? These are all questions worth considering when weighing their advice.

Also: it's your story. You should ignore any advice that doesn't work for you. If a beta reader suggests something that I don't agree with? I'll thank them, but ignore their suggestion. This is something you should be doing, instead of hand-wringing over every comment that doesn't align with your creative intentions.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 7, 2019)

Oh okay, well even though the villain in Back to the Future was not able to pull of any rape, since he was stopped, I used that as an example, since the motivations were similar to what I had.

The beta readers I have are just regular people I know, in the filmmaking community that I worked with before, who agreed to give me an honest opinion.  Only one of them suggested that they should have been raped in the army, as a backstory.

The rest said they did not know what it should be and they didn't want to make suggestions themselves, cause that would be writing by committee as one of them put it.  So I came up with a few suggestions, but they all felt off to them and something is still not gelling.  For one thing, they feel that this group of villains has to be assigned a label first.  They are not a gang, nor are they a cult so what are they?  I don't know what label they fall under, but I was told I need to establish that first, to make them more believable, if that's true.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Dec 7, 2019)

"I haven't read your story, but as a general rule I think it's a good idea to follow the advice of whomever said writers should trust betas about the problems in their writing, but not trust them about the solutions."

That was me.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Dec 7, 2019)

Pony, this whole plot of yorn just creeps me out.


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 7, 2019)

Bayview said:


> Well, I said it wasn't a rape, not that it wasn't a "rape scene". And I said it wasn't a rape because rape didn't occur. It may have been an attempted rape, but... that's not rape.



Wait, so there's an important distinction _in writing _between a 'rape', an 'attempted rape' and a 'rape scene'? 

I typically find myself agreeing with you, Bayview, but I think you've got this one totally wrong. I assume you wouldn't say 'it's a fight scene but there's no fight' or 'it's a car chase scene but there's no actual car chase - only an attempted car chase' so this is a little bizarre to me. The scene has ALL the themes, emotions and actions of an 'actual rape', to me, minus the fact he gets stopped before he can actually penetrate her with his penis (he may well have already penetrated her with his hands -- it looks like he quite possibly did, and if he did that would absolutely be 'actual rape' per my legal training) so what exactly would be the problem with describing him as raping her? It may not be totally accurate, but neither would it be totally accurate to say -- as you keep saying -- that 'there was no rape', right?

I agree ironpony has some apparent fixation on the subject and that's strange. But we need to avoid querying his motives here. Whether ironpony has weird ideas about rape or not isn't necessarily relevant to whether he can write about it in a way that works in his story.



> A Clockwork Orange was a surreal, satirical exploration of a totally broken, dystopian, 'ultra-violent' world. It portrayed the rapists as profoundly damaged, completely psychotic, etc. It didn't attempt to explain the gang of rapists with a simplistic backstory.
> 
> I agree that we don't always need to see a complex system of explanations for the behaviours of villains in movies. I would say, rather, that we should rarely see _simplistic_ explanations for their behaviours. Having a gang of rapists who all commit rapes because they themselves were gang-raped in the military? It would be better to leave the explanation out entirely than to include such a simplistic one, IMO.



I wasn't so much meaning to comment on the backstory itself being simplistic, more that the manner in which it is addressed, the level of emphasis, the amount of explanation given, can be simplistic/minimalist.

So, I think we probably agree on that. A story can be written simply but address or incorporate complicated motivations, and vice versa. I agree the motivations for people in fictional stories should never be simple. But they can (and, sometimes, should) be presented as such.

I think the kind of story ironpony wants to write would work best as a noir-ish satire, something in the vein of Clockwork Orange and Sin City. Neither of those really required a whole lot of disclosure of motivation. But, since he struggles to write compelling, humorous or otherwise interesting characters anyway (based on what I have read of his work) I think that is the biggest obstacle here. Not the existence or not of backstory or 'motivations', complex or otherwise.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 7, 2019)

Okay I can concentrate on the beta readers advice about what the problems more, more than the solutions if that's good.  However, how does one know what the solutions are then, unless you try to show it to them again after trying to implement solutions, and see if it works?



luckyscars said:


> Wait, so there's an important distinction _in writing _between a 'rape', and 'attempted rape' and a 'rape scene'?
> 
> I typically find myself agreeing with you, Bayview, but I think you've got this one totally wrong. I assume you wouldn't say 'it's a fight scene but there's no fight' or 'it's a car chase scene but there's no actual car chase - only an attempted car chase' so this is a little bizarre to me. The scene has ALL the themes, emotions and actions of an 'actual rape', to me, minus the fact he gets stopped before he can actually penetrate her with his penis (he may well have already done so with his hands -- it looks like he did, and if he did that would absolutely be 'actual rape' per my legal training) so what's the problem with describing him as raping her? It may not be totally accurate, but neither would it be correct to say 'there was no rape', would it?
> 
> ...



Well I thought of making it more satirical, but I was told that by readers that rape is not the subject of the more over the top satirical, or comic-book like stories, and that because of the rape content, my story is set up to be much more realistic, so any satire or comic-book feel is therefore, forced a couple of of them said.


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 7, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Okay I can concentrate on the beta readers advice about what the problems more, more than the solutions if that's good.  However, how does one know what the solutions are then, unless you try to show it to them again after trying to implement solutions, and see if it works?



I already told you the likely problem with your writing and I don't think you read any of it. 




> Well I thought of making it more satirical, but I was told that by readers that rape is not the subject of the more over the top satirical, or comic-book like stories, and that because of the rape content, my story is set up to be much more realistic, so any satire or comic-book feel is therefore, forced a couple of of them said.



See above.


----------



## Sir-KP (Dec 7, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Okay I can concentrate on the beta readers advice about what the problems more, more than the solutions if that's good.  However, how does one know what the solutions are then, unless you try to show it to them again after trying to implement solutions, and see if it works?



Friend, 

I'm sorry if this is a little blunt. This thread have gone up to 8 pages - filled with discussion, suggestion, and tips. You, the writer, are the only one who can process these posts and extract the solution. We don't write your story. You do.

You always say "my readers, my readers"; what is exactly are you trying to meet here? Do we have to find idea that works as the solution to please them? 

People are helping you shaping up the story based on your vision, man. If your readers' feedback are so important, then you should ask them how to fix the part they find wrong and see how that turns out.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 7, 2019)

Oh yes, for sure, I don't want others to come up with ideas for me.  My idea was the getting power and revenge for involuntary celibacy were as the readers did not like it and one suggested making the villains, rape victims in the army, as the most plausible backstory.  So I was wondering if mine worked at all, plus the new suggestion.


----------



## Kyle R (Dec 7, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Oh yes, for sure, I don't want others to come up with ideas for me.  My idea was ... the readers did not like it and one suggested ...



My advice: Ditch these "readers".

Instead, find _one_ reader whose creative opinions you trust more than anyone else's. One.

Not five. Not even two. Just _one_.

That's the reader you need to please, above all else. Whoever that reader may be (a fellow screenwriter, a friend, a loved one, or even yourself), they're the one you need to satisfy.

The problem with multiple readers is that you won't satisfy all of them. They'll all have different preferences and opinions, often in conflict with one another. This is why you've been stuck in this never-ending "but he said, she said ..." whirlpool.

Stephen King talks about this in _On Writing_—the importance of limiting your first readers to a trusted few, and no more than that. I believe he said that his first reader is his wife. She's the one he writes for.

Find that one reader and stick with them. They'll help you form a more cohesive, unified story, because you'll finally have a single target to aim for. :encouragement:


----------



## ironpony (Dec 8, 2019)

Oh okay, well one of the readers I was much closer to than the others, so I valued his opinion more, but I find that the more opinions he gave on all the problems, the more his opinions kept seeming to contradict each other as well possibly.

I can look for someone else, but if I am to trust just one beta reader and only one, what I am looking for that I can trust, if it's just one opinion?

And the reader who is my best friend, is the one who suggested the army tragedy background idea.  My gf is also close and she says she thinks it's fine the way it is, and watches movies for entertainment and wants to be taken on a ride, not have to analyze and break down every story or character detail.  But she's a gf, so maybe she was just being nice.


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 8, 2019)

ironpony said:


> My gf is also close and she says she thinks it's fine the way it is, and watches movies for entertainment and wants to be taken on a ride, not have to analyze and break down every story or character detail.  But she's a gf, so maybe she was just being nice.



I tend to believe women are, in general, better placed to offer feedback on the relative merits of rape/sexual violence scenes as it tends to be an issue that they are more cognizant of than men. If your girlfriend is genuinely accepting of the way you portrayed it, that probably does say quite a lot, although if you think her reaction might not be totally genuine then that obviously invalidates the entire thing. Have you asked her about your portrayals of rape/the rapists specifically?


----------



## ironpony (Dec 8, 2019)

Yeah I asked her. She said she is not a psychological expert and when people are psychos, she cannot be an expert on it, but nevertheless accepts it in the story.

Should I seek out an expert therefore?  I've also noticed that another woman reader, was more receptive to it as well in an earlier draft, so maybe women are possibly more receptive to such a thriller, compared to more male readers perhaps?


----------



## Bayview (Dec 8, 2019)

luckyscars said:


> Wait, so there's an important distinction _in writing _between a 'rape', an 'attempted rape' and a 'rape scene'?
> 
> I typically find myself agreeing with you, Bayview, but I think you've got this one totally wrong. I assume you wouldn't say 'it's a fight scene but there's no fight' or 'it's a car chase scene but there's no actual car chase - only an attempted car chase' so this is a little bizarre to me. The scene has ALL the themes, emotions and actions of an 'actual rape', to me, minus the fact he gets stopped before he can actually penetrate her with his penis (he may well have already penetrated her with his hands -- it looks like he quite possibly did, and if he did that would absolutely be 'actual rape' per my legal training) so what exactly would be the problem with describing him as raping her? It may not be totally accurate, but neither would it be totally accurate to say -- as you keep saying -- that 'there was no rape', right?
> 
> I agree ironpony has some apparent fixation on the subject and that's strange. But we need to avoid querying his motives here. Whether ironpony has weird ideas about rape or not isn't necessarily relevant to whether he can write about it in a way that works in his story.



I think we're getting the thread way off track so I'll respond via DM.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 8, 2019)

andrewclunn said:


> Incel identity as justification for rape is lazy.  Don't tell, show.  Humiliation beyond mere rejection in personal instance work better than a label.  If you want to go that route, then go all the way, and have him quote some MGTOW personalities to show rather than claim he's radicalized.  You don't need to give motivations and personify your villain(s), but if you do, then you've got to go all the way.  I've pushed myself to write works representing views that I find abhorrent.  When I share them with someone and their aghast because they assume that I must hold those views, for representing them so favorably (when I'm attempting to speak in the voice of their advocates) then I know I've done it right.  Don't go there unless you're willing to really go there, and if so people should be outraged by it because otherwise you haven't really touched on the true motivations you are aping at.



Oh okay, but what about screenplays or movies, where they are told mostly from the police's point of view, where they do not show the backstory of the villains, but it's only talked about from a police point of view.  Do those ones go all the way, since they tell and do not show?

As for readers being outraged, that's a problem and they seem to outraged, but outraged to the point where they want an explanation for all this abhorrence.


----------



## Kyle R (Dec 8, 2019)

ironpony said:


> ... if I am to trust just one beta reader and only one, what I am looking for that I can trust . . . ?



That's a question you'll have to answer for yourself, unfortunately! A lot depends on what you're looking for, and who you know.

Still, notice how you mention comments from both your best friend and your girlfriend, and already, just with _two_ responses, you're getting conflicting feedback that has left you confused?

It's yet again more proof that limiting your feedback to one individual would (in my opinion) help the most.

Just my two cents. :encouragement:


----------



## ironpony (Dec 8, 2019)

Oh what I meant was is that some readers are giving conflicting feedback.  The gf and friend, not so much though.


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 9, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Oh what I meant was is that some readers are giving conflicting feedback.  The gf and friend, not so much though.



Is the screenplay actually finished, or are you still writing it?


----------



## ironpony (Dec 9, 2019)

It's finished, I just keep on trying to rewrite and improve it.


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 10, 2019)

ironpony said:


> It's finished, I just keep on trying to rewrite and improve it.



That's strange to me. Usually if something is finished it's really hard to make major changes without disrupting the entire thing. Surely the plot as it stands is dependent on a certain chain of events and a certain group of completed characters. How do you intend on introducing backstories without creating loose threads?

I think you really should bring this to a close, at this point. I understand you want to have it beta'd but, as others have pointed out, you run the risk of having it written by committee (and not necessarily a very well qualified one) and actually losing what you have versus gaining a whole lot.

Why don't you either shop it around some production places or, if you really are worried, have it properly looked at by a consultant, as I suggested in one of your other threads? Somebody with credentials in the industry you can verifyand who wont just tell you what they think but will provide valuable and specific direction. It might cost you some money, but the amount you'll save on time and stress with having to constantly question every little detail would surely be worth it. Shopping it would give you the same end result but with less of a binary yes/no.

Either way, this has to end. And it will. Either by you finally letting go of your neurosis or with your eventual death. Spending this long on a script that is supposedly finished is pointless and bad for you.


----------



## Newman (Dec 10, 2019)

ironpony said:


> My story is a thriller, with a group of villains going around committing rapes, which the police are trying catch.  I wrote it so their motivation was that they are doing it as revenge cause they have involuntary celibacy and that is why they are doing it, as revenge.
> 
> However, a couple of people said this wasn't enough motivation and for them to do this, they have to been raped as well, and one suggested that I should write it so that the villains were gang raped in the army or something like that would help make it a lot more believable.  But I feel that changes a lot around though.  I also don't know if I like the tragic backstory as it's been done to death by now, and can't villains just be villains without a backstory that is much more tragic?  Or *do I need the tragic backtstory for this kind of motivation for this kind of crime do you think?*



Not necessary. E.g. DEATHWISH, DIRTY HARRY and a million others.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 10, 2019)

Yes that what makes it hard to make any changes cause it's already finished.  However, I was told before that it cannot be properly analyzed and critiqued until I finished it first.  So I find myself at a paradox then.  If readers cannot judge it properly to make changes until they read the entire thing, how am I then suppose to make those changes, when it's difficult to pull any of it apart, after finished?


----------



## Foxee (Dec 10, 2019)

In a sense, a work is never really finished because you can always imagine changes to it.

There is a time to crap or get off the pot.

If your gut (not your gf or your best friend or whoever) says that it's reached a good point. Lick some stamps, send an email. take an Uber but get it out there. Time to go.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 10, 2019)

Okay thanks, well my gut tells me that it's time to go for some parts of the story, but others I can change, but some I am not willing to touch anymore and that's that.

But at the same time, I still want it to be good and listen to feedback.  For example I do not want to make any major changes to the plot cause I think the plot has been done to death and should be done.  But I am more willing to change the characters motivations if that is a problem, but not the plot and that has to stay the same.


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 11, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Okay thanks, well my gut tells me that it's time to go for some parts of the story, but others I can change, but some I am not willing to touch anymore and that's that.
> 
> But at the same time, I still want it to be good and listen to feedback.  For example I do not want to make any major changes to the plot cause I think the plot has been done to death and should be done.  But I am more willing to change the characters motivations if that is a problem, but not the plot and that has to stay the same.



You can please some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but you cannot please all of the people all of the time.

Character motivations are not distinct from the plot, they are the plot: No motivation, no character, no plot. You need to call it done the first moment it reaches a point you can live with. Striving for perfection is surviving for impossibility. 

For what it's worth, every time I re-read anything I've written, even if it's finished, even if it's _published, _I always find an itch to change something, to do something 'better'. The main thing to realize is that, as a writer, you will NEVER be completely happy with what you have written, because your impulse is always to do more, to make things bigger and better. You are constantly improving (or should be) so it's only natural to want to revise and reinvent incorporating things you have come to learn further down the line.

But you can't do that forever. The story must be finished, and it always is. The only question is whether you will end the story or the story will end you. Do you really want to still be working on this story in 10, 20, 30, 50 years? Hopefully not. That would be a terrible waste, especially if -- deep breath and whisper -- _it's just not that good of a story. _This is an investment of your time and the investment must never outweigh the pay-off. Spending years or decades on a single novel or screenplay is NEVER a good investment. In all likelihood you will not get rich or successful from this, so for goodness sake don't assume that it will be worth it. 

Just write the damn thing, finish it, submit it, move on.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 11, 2019)

Oh okay, I thought it wasn't even close to good though, aside from perfect, but I suppose I can just keep the plot and motivations the way there are, change the dialogue like some have said and then be done with it and submit it.


----------



## ironpony (Jan 28, 2020)

I was rewriting the dialogue and thinking about what was said before that the dialogue is probably the reasons why the villains are not believable to the readers, but I am thinking if the dialogue is the problem, then wouldn't the readers say that it's the dialogue, and not the villains motivation?


----------



## luckyscars (Jan 28, 2020)

ironpony said:


> I was rewriting the dialogue and thinking about what was said before that the dialogue is probably the reasons why the villains are not believable to the readers, but I am thinking if the dialogue is the problem, then wouldn't the readers say that it's the dialogue, and not the villains motivation?



A lot of readers don't have a clue what doesn't work for them, and in fairness it's not really their job to explain it. It's your job to figure it out.

As somebody who has read excerpt of your work, I can safely say (as I did at the time...) that your dialogue is a problem. All of your characters sound like you do in these threads.

Whether it's your only problem, I don't know & suspect not -- it could well be both poor dialogue AND lack of a credible motive being evident.


----------



## ironpony (Jan 28, 2020)

Okay thanks.  I keep on working to make the dialogue better and hope to improve it.  I was told before not have the characters all speak differently but I'm afraid of going too overboard, since the characters are all from around the same city and all.

As for motivation, I could change the villains motivation but I don't know where to start though.  When you have a premise of a group of villains going around committing these crimes, what motivations could I use, if wanting revenge for involuntary celibacy is not good enough?

I just feel I need to know which ones would be believable so I could choose between the believable ones.


----------



## Newman (Jan 28, 2020)

ironpony said:


> My story is a thriller, with a group of villains going around committing rapes, which the police are trying catch.  I wrote it so their motivation was that they are doing it as revenge cause they have involuntary celibacy and that is why they are doing it, as revenge.
> 
> However, a couple of people said this wasn't enough motivation and for them to do this, they have to been raped as well, and one suggested that I should write it so that the villains were gang raped in the army or something like that would help make it a lot more believable.  But I feel that changes a lot around though.  I also don't know if I like the tragic backstory as it's been done to death by now, and can't villains just be villains without a backstory that is much more tragic?  Or do I need the tragic backtstory for this kind of motivation for this kind of crime do you think?



I disagree, it sounds like enough motivation, but you can always make it more potent. Various methods.


----------



## ironpony (Jan 29, 2020)

Oh okay thanks.  What do you mean by more potent in this context?


----------



## Sir-KP (Jan 29, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> that your dialogue is a problem. All of your characters sound like you do in these threads.



This is one of the things that I fear to read in a feedback...


----------



## ironpony (Jan 29, 2020)

Well it's just I feel if I make the characters different in speech it will be too obvious, when they are all from the same city or around there.  If I give them all very different vernaculars, won't it come off strange, as to why they have such different vernaculars, if they are all suppose to be from the same area?


----------



## InTheThirdPerson (Jan 29, 2020)

ironpony said:


> Well it's just I feel if I make the characters different in speech it will be too obvious, when they are all from the same city or around there.  If I give them all very different vernaculars, won't it come off strange, as to why they have such different vernaculars, if they are all suppose to be from the same area?



Do all of your friends talk in EXACTLY the same way? Next time you're hanging out with a group of friends, pay special attention. I'm sure there will be some shorthand of shared speech patterns (shorthand "inside joke" level of talk between you), but underneath that, you'll probably find that each of your friends has a distinct and unique voice.

Also, there's nothing wrong with giving a character an affectation... just because.  For example, one of my friends is as American, and more specifically midwestern, as they come. However, he has relatives that are Irish and he not-so-secretly wishes he had been raised in an environment that gave him an accent. So he purposefully gives himself a slight Irish inflection, just because he likes it.

As a creative writer, it's your job to find ways to make your characters distinct and unique from one another.


----------



## ironpony (Jan 29, 2020)

Okay sure.  It's strange cause all the characters sound different than me.  I will try to do it without going overboard.


----------

