Agree with Nir Shelter and Dkpough1. ?”Pulp Fiction” jumps around in space and time, but the basic plot elements are there. ?Tarantino did his homework; he knew how to embed dramatic structure in the narrative.

At the start of his career, Picasso ?studied the masters from other eras and painted in rather conventional styles before venturing forth into cubism. ?Vincent van Gogh studied the masters, too. ?And he even took classes in painting— Vincent van Gogh!

Mozart and Beethoven studied musical forms and techniques. ? Not because they were untalented. ?Nor were they taking refuge in a lack of confidence in their own abilities by immersing themselves in musical theory.?

I think it is necessary to study dramatic theory. ?And that includes popular paradigms (like “Save the Cat” and the “Hero’s Journey”). ?Why? ?Because, if for no other reason, the pop paradigms are the ones that producers, directors and money men are going to be familiar with (if they read any books on the craft at all) so you’ve got to be able to pitch your story in terms they understand. ?They’re going to ask about the “all is lost” and “dark night of the soul” beats– those are the very words they are going to use — and you got to be able to answer them using terminology they comprehend.

So studying ?theory and paradirms is necessary — but not sufficient. The trap some fall into is to lock onto 1 paradigm to the exclusion of all others as the Holy Grail, the alpha and omega, the complete and universally applicable formula for screenwriting. ?

And, of course, there is none. ?

But there are some general universal principles that can be abstracted from all the books ?(And I’ve read them all, ?too many, from the silly to the sublime.) ?And those principles should be used as tools, not rules.

IMHO