In Story, McKee expands on the concepts he teaches in his $450 seminars (considered a must by industry insiders), providing readers with the most comprehensive, integrated explanation of the craft of writing for the screen. No one better understands how all the elements of a screenplay fit together, and no one is better qualified to explain the "magic" of story construction and the relationship between structure and character than Robert McKee.

That said, Story by Robert McKee is the cream of the crop. The book is beautifully written, tremendously insightful. I have gleaned more from this book than any of the others. Anyone with a pen and paper or typewriter can write a screenplay. For those who wish to create a masterwork with feeling characters in compelling situations, this book is a must read. It explains the why and the how, and reveals what we as screenwriters struggle toward: a good story, well told. My only gripe was that I didn't want it to end. So I have started reading it again. My work is decidedly better thanks to Robert McKee's book. Now I fear that any books I read from this point will pale in comparison. I hope that I find another gem, and am proven wrong, but to save others from this fate, I urge you to read this book last!


The Penultimate Guide to Writing Excellent Screenplays   August 3, 2002
 79 out of 94 found this review helpful

If you've ever wondered "Why aren't films very good these days?", you're not alone. Most of us have noticed that most movies being released are predictable, dull, and just plain boring. It doesn't matter that the films are packed with chase scenes and explosions -- we've seen it all before. Robert McKee is a visionary intent on bringing fresh creativity to movies in his classic reference book on screenwriting, STORY. He writes in the introduction to this book, "But my hope for you goes beyond competence and skill. I'm starved for great films. Over the last two decades I've seen good films and a few very good films, but rarely, rarely a film of staggering power and beauty." He adds, "I've wriitten STORY to empower your command of the craft, to free you to express an original vision of life, to lift your talent beyond convention to create films of distinctive substance, structure, and style."

If you're a screenwriter or novelist, STORY is not a mere nicety, but is an absolute must! There simply isn't any better guide to writing excellent screenplays -- and this one covers every genre and structure. McKee is a master at the craft of coaching writers, and he excels at helping writers discover their own unique strengths and weaknesses. McKee is brilliant at explaining something so basic yet fundamental as the difference between mood and emotion in a scene -- and ideas so subtle as getting the beats just right in a given scene. McKee's passion for excellence and enthusiasm are contagious, and inspire me to make my writing the best it can be.

I find myself so riveted to STORY that I feel adrenaline racing through my when I read this masterpiece. There simply aren't enough superlatives to describe how essential this book is. STORY is the penultimate guide to writing excellent screenplays, because the only thing that is more "the last word" than this book is the attainment of perfect enlightenment. Do yourself a huge favor and read this awesome book!


Wish I liked it as much as the others did   December 18, 1999
 59 out of 76 found this review helpful

I'm a professional writer and thought I had found a gold mine with this book. I should say that I'm a playwright, not a screenwriter, and that may affect my opinion. But it's hard for me to imagine a more formulaic approach than that given by Robert McKee here. Though McKee acknowledges that cinematic masterpieces often break with convention, he spends hundreds of pages laying out rules for exactly how a film should be structured, exactly where various plot points should occur, exactly where they should be resolved. He even tells you how to construct sentences! At times he also gives advice I question; for instance, he says to avoid such directions as WE HEAR, WE SEE, and SMASH CUT, all of which I've seen in professionally produced teleplays. As the book went on I found myself thinking of exceptions to the rules put forward by McKee. I can't think of a more smothering experience than trying to create a screenplay using these mountains of rules.

In my view, McKee focuses on structure at the expense of content and substance. *What* the writer is saying seems less important to him than *how* he or she is saying it. If I wanted an exhaustive reference on how to structure a screenplay so that it will be exactly what Hollywood is used to seeing, this might be a book I'd turn to. But I was hoping for something more inspired.

I'm not including my name because I've seen how a couple of other reviewers were pounced on when they criticized this book. I *will* try some of the other books they mention.


Take it with a grain of salt   January 30, 2005
 53 out of 79 found this review helpful

McKee's claim to fame rests on how many successful filmmakers once sat in his course. The assumption is that being in his course caused them to be successful. Was it? Probably successful filmmakers sit in on a lot of courses. Everybody can use one more good idea. Did they learn their craft from McKee? Be wary of assuming they did.

First of all, understand that this book, large as it is, covers only the basics of screenwriting. You may not want to read it first, but do not consider it the last book you'll ever need to read. The book deals with "Structure and Setting", "Structure and Genre," "Structure and Character," "Structure and Meaning," "The Substance of Story," the inciting incident, act design, scene design, scene analysis, composition, crisis, climax, resolution, "the principle of antagonism", exposition, problems and solutions, character.

"Structure is a selection of events from the characters' life stories..." (p.33). "A story event creates meaningful change in the life situation of a character..." (p.33) "Story values are universal qualities of human experience..." (p.34) "To plot means to navigate through the dangerous terrain of story and when confronted by a dozen branching possibilities to choose the correct path." (p.43) And so it goes. Such truisms make the book read like Spinoza, except that Spinoza distinguished between theorems and postulates, and all of McKee's propositions are postulated. McKee then jumps from these bland truism to discuss movies that most people would have mixed feelings about (at best). He assures us that these movies exhibit the desirable properties he is talking about, and the vagueness with which his truisms are stated make this sleight of hand possible. But none of this is helpful to the would-be screenwriter.

Second, the book, throughout, is based on the assumption that you (meaning everyone) agree with McKee on his value judgments of movies. If you were less than thrilled with some of the movies he cites, you should be wary of the advice he gives. His value prejudices are usually subtle but are sometimes blatant. For example, he cites "Tender Mercies" as an example of plot (p.43-44). This movie did appeal to some viewers (though not to others), but whatever its appeals, plot is not one of its strong points. More generally, he cites every movie that attained any degree of fame as a successful example-though he does not tell us in what way they were successful or how many viewers regarded them as such. So, we have "Un Chien Andalou", "Last Year at Marienbad," "Paris, Texas", etc. as exemplary films.

One reason people read this book is to find out how the people who run the film industry currently think. But the book may not be as au courant as one might think. McKee says that "writers rush to their typewriters" (p.15). No writer has rushed to a typewriter in over 20 years.

Also, some of McKee's tastes are one-sided. For example: "Comedy is at heart an angry, antisocial art." (page 360). Well, for some people it is. You might call these films, "ill-humored comedy". But there are many other comedies that are not angry, nasty and hostile. Are these comedies therefore bad?

By not recognizing audience differences, McKee can be dogmatic about how to write a screenplay (and he is). His main support for his value judgments is in the movie examples he cites. But if you were less than thrilled with some of these movies, you'll have to take his advice with a grain of salt.
Still, there is a lot of basic information that few could quarrel with. If you are a beginning screenwriter, you could well invest in this book. You need to read a number of books anyway, so that the tastes of one author are counter by others.


Let's be objective   October 15, 2001
 52 out of 64 found this review helpful

Having taken Mr. McKee's course, and read the book, I give him only three stars here primarily because he writes in a way that will frustrate most beginners (I've seen this) and convince the gullible that he is the master of the story universe.

In fact, what he has here is fine, workable material. But it is presented more clearly elsewhere. I suspect he writes in such a prolix style to foster the impression that he sees what other do not. This, of course, is good marketing.

With regard to the oft mentioned Syd Field, he was there first, and with Chris Vogler you have stuff that is of equal or greater value, especially for the beginner.

I sold screenplays before I took McKee's course, and have written fiction bestsellers afterward. Of all the books I've read on the craft, his was the least accessible. I think I really only learned one thing from his course that I use (it is a good thing, don't get me wrong, but stands alone).

If you're an experienced writer, you might find something of value. If you're just getting started, I'd be very wary. Hollywood is filled with McKee acolytes. Be an original instead.