Anatomy of An Action Adventure Movie
by Bill Johnson

Action adventure movies have long been a staple for movie-goers. They meet a need for thrills. They often stage a dramatic, clear-cut duel between good and evil, with characters audiences are led to identify with. Their action and special effects are often breath-takingly staged. Throw in sub-plots that revolve around adventure, romance, and courage in the face of overwhelming odds, and it's easy to understand why such movies attract audiences.

What follows will be a scene by scene breakdown of the movie Die Hard. The review is intended to help reveal the process by which this particular story was assembled. The underlying principles of storytelling and story movement revealed can be applied to any story, from romantic comedy, children's story to art house film. Every well-told story arises from a foundation of the same story principles: premise, movement, fulfillment, plot, character. By understanding these principles, writers will be better able to write their own well-told stories.

Die Hard opens with a shot of a plane coming in for landing.

This suggests a character on the move. It's a conventional opening used in many stories, but it works because it quickly establishes a sense of movement, physical in this case.

Next we meet John McClane on the plane. By how he grips the seat of the plane as it comes in for a landing, it's clear he's afraid of flying.

The point of this is that we're being told that the purpose of this trip has enough consequence that he would go up in a plane, in spite of his fear.

It's a point made quickly and economically, through an action shown visually. The writer didn't set up a way to somehow tell us the importance of this flight for John McClane, he found a way to SHOW us. Many lines of dialogue, character direction and description can be deleted when a writer learns to trust what can be shown in a scene rather than told or explained.

The passenger next to John tells him he can overcome his fear of flying by walking barefoot on a carpet while clenching his feet.

Much later in the story, John will walk barefoot on carpet strewn with glass and cut his feet. He does this for the same reason that he flies on a plane in spite of his fear of flying. It's what he must do to fulfill something important to him. So even what appears to be an innocent remark echoes in the story.

When John McClane talks to the other passenger, we SEE he's wearing a gun, so it comes out John's a cop.

Again, a visual image creates a movement of character, and of story. We now have a clearer sense of the direction of the story, because of its title, and because John is a cop.

We then see John in the airport, holding a large stuffed bear.

We're being told he's a fish out of water. No dialogue, just an image. But it further develops his character and this fish-out-of-water theme will be a motif thechoeshos through the entire story.

Next we meet the Japanese president of a large, Japanese-owned corporation; Holly, John's wife; and Ellis who works with Holly and, during their introduction, is making a pass at her.

These scenes are natural and unforced, but they set up Ellis as a brash character who will later come to a bad end because of his arrogance. So the movement of his character is established with just a few lines of dialogue.

In Holly's office, we see the picture of the family and John. Now we know the issue of consequence that John would risk flying, and later walk on broken glass: to reunite with Holly and his family.

Holly makes a phone call and talks to a maid. "Has John called home?"

No, he hasn't.

This echoes through the story. It's not just a random event. Because Holly doesn't know John's coming, neither do her office companions, so neither do the terrorists when they arrive.

Holly, turning the family photo with John in it face down, which acts out that she has mixed feelings about John.

The photo being turned down is also significant because it means that later in the story Holly can pass herself off as unmarried to Hans, the head terrorist.

Again, every action in the story has a purpose, not just for the moment it happens, but later in the story.

In the limo bringing John to Holly, Argyle the driver questions John. This, like the plane landing to open the story, is a standard device. Arygle's purpose in the scene is to get John to reveal information. But it's well done, and brief. Note that as John and Argyle talk, they are in physical motion to a destination, the Nakatomi building. So their physical movement has purpose, bringing John and Holly closer together for what we've been led to feel will be a reunion with a great deal at stake.

When John and Argyle arrive at the Nakatomi building, Argyle offers to wait for John, to see if he'll need a ride to a hotel if things don't work out with Holly.

Point to note: Argyle has now become invested in the outcome of the story, and has a reason to stick around. This means that Argyle is not just a device used by the writer to bring out information and then discarded.

John, entering the building, discovers on a directory that Holly uses her maiden name. It's a revelation to him, but it also figures in the story later, that there's no connection to Holly when John's name comes out.

Note, again, that the writer of the script has found a visual way for John to get this information, and his reaction is visual as well as vocal.

Every element that's been brought out has established both a point in a scene, and a purpose for the story as a whole.

John and Holly meet, and it's clear they still have feelings for each other...but whether they will reconcile is unclear.

Brief cut to truck with terrorists, but no development of them or their purpose.

Holly invites John to stay at the house, but John is angry over her using her maiden name, so the old wounds re-erupt.

That's why he had to see her maiden name.

At this point a story question has been clearly raised. Will John and Holly get back together? What might aid, or impede, this reunion?

Next scene, on cue, the terrorists. They will be both the prime obstacles to the reunion, but also the instigators of the reunion coming about.

The story's premise, although it would be too early to identify it yet:

"Courage in the face of adversity leads to growth."

In this case, John will move the story toward its fulfillment by doing what has to be done to save Holly from the terrorists and reunite with her. The opening of this story thus establishes what the story's at stake in this story, whether John and Holly can be reunited, and what must happen to bring that about. That's why it doesn't establish the terrorists until later. They are the obstacles to the story's movement. By having the courage to overcome them, John McClane makes the story's movement visible and concrete.

But it's not just John's courage the story is about, but Holly's as well, and Al the LA cop, who must overcome his own fear in the story's climax. So the story's premise must set out the boundaries for the world of the story and all the characters within that world.

Note, my original premise used the idea of love in the premise. At its heart, in many respects, Die Hard is a love story about the obstacles that John must overcome to reunite with Holly. But a story's premise must provide a foundation for all the story's elements, and a premise about love doesn't quite stretch to include Al, who's an important character in the story.

Other points: The opening scenes of a story are generally where what a story is about is established, especially an action/adventure film. So to understand a story's premise, pay attention to a story's opening scenes, and to the introduction of characters. What they say and what comes out of a scene as their goals. This is where a story's premise first takes shape. Keep in mind, also, that for the reader to desire to internalize a story's movement, a reader/viewer must have a sense that something of consequence is at stake in the story. In Die Hard, the issue of consequence is whether John and Holly will have the courage and strength to be able to overcome what keeps them apart and renew their love. It's an issue of consequence for a viewer, as well, because it's something viewers desire to experience in a fulfilling way, that love can find a way to overcome any and all obstacles in its path.

Once it's clear to a viewer what's at stake in a story, and it's been presented in the form of a question, the viewer can then assign meaning to character actions. This takes character X closer to their goals, this event escalates the drama over the outcome of their goals.

That's why a story's premise must have an issue of consequence at its heart, so a reader desires to internalize the story's movement. Second, it's why every element of the story must be tied into the story's premise, so it creates that purposeful, dramatic movement of the story toward an outcome a reader desires to internalize. The viewer is able to internalize the movement of a movie like Die Hard because in its every action, its characters are true to the story's movement, and move it toward its fulfillment. Just as important, the story fulfills its movement in a way that the story's viewers can experience potent feelings of courage, faith and love, with some well-designed spectacle thrown into the mix for some well-time doses of adrenaline. This makes the action and events and characters of Die Hard story-like, i.e., with purpose, meaning and fulfillment.

In a more subtle story, characters would not necessary boldly proclaim who they are, and their purpose. But their actions, even if subtle and evocative, must still be true to the story's premise and what it presents to be of consequence in the story; and their actions must still have a purpose and meaning a reader/viewer can assign meaning to, and thus be able to internalize the story's journey toward its fulfillment.

Returning to Die Hard, the terrorists invade the building and take hostages.

John, unnoticed, escapes and triggers a fire alarm, which alerts the terrorists that he's in building. They call off the fire department, and send a terrorist to find and kill John.

John gets the drop on the terrorist, who tells John:

"There are rules for policeman."

Story problem for terrorist: John McClane is a rule breaker. He doesn't follow the rules.

John kills the terrorist, and sends his body back to Hans, who has just assured everyone:

"We're in charge."

Story answer: Not when John McClane's in the building.

See how the audience is set up to experience, and appreciate, those particular lines? It's an example of how dialogue has a specific purpose and meaning that ties it into the story's premise and movement.

Because the storyteller knows the direction of the story, they perceive how to set up such lines. So the audience gets to share that insight, and to anticipate what John must do to foil the terrorists. Even to live. Because he must live if he is to reunite with Holly, and prove the story's premise.

The dead terrorist has a brother, Karl, who now has a personal feud with John. So now a sub plot, a back story, has been created. This terrorist will stop at nothing to kill John. But his action also makes him another obstacle to be overcome if John is to reunite with Holly, so his actions also tie into the story's premise.

Using the dead terrorist's radio, John tries to contact the LAPD. They ignore him.

It sets up another sub plot. Even the LAPD are obstacles that John must overcome to save Holly.

Plot issue: note how everything John does to make the situation better actually makes his situation worse.

2nd plot issue, John doesn't know until much later in the story that Holly will die unless he acts. Therefore, early in his confrontation with the terrorists, he's acting more from an internal sense of anger about the situation then concern for Holly. So it's important for the story that John's been presented as the kind of man who would react as he has to the acts of the terrorists.

We're then introduced to a LAPD sergeant, Al. Notice the care given to draw us into his character. Like Argyle, he's not going to be a device used and discarded. He's created so his movement of character will tie directly into the action of the story, and its premise.

With the addition of these two back stories, Al the beat patrolman and his problems, and the brother of the dead terrorist committed to John's death, the drama over the outcome of the main story has escalated. But the back stories serve their purpose of making the story's movement more concrete and visible; by giving the story depth; and by creating characters who comment on the action and ask questions, thus making the story and its movement clear and concrete to the viewers.

Al comes to building, and all hell breaks lose. LAPD finally arrive at the scene. Still, they view John as a useless bystander.

A television reporter heads to the scene to further his career. Note his determination. Characters in a story must act with force and determination if they are to engage our attention.

John talks to Hans on the radio, and a personal animosity is established, which sets up another sub-plot to the story. We're being set up to experience the showdown between John and Hans. We can feel that current in the air of this movie, enjoy and anticipate its arrival.

Holly meets with Hans, the head terrorist. The photo of John is face down on her desk, so she calls herself "Ms. Gennero," her maiden name. This raises a story question: If, or how long, will it be before the terrorists find out that John is Holly's wife?

This again serves to escalate the drama over the story's potential outcome, of how and whether John and Holly will reunite. It's another obstacle.

John comes into possession of some detonators the terrorists must have. They now have a compelling reason to come after him, and not just seal him off in part of the building.

As the story continues, Al talks to John on the radio. This becomes a way for John to offer personal information without it seeming forced.

The news photographer shows up on the scene. He's there to advance his career, but his story purpose is to escalate the tension over the terrorists potentially finding out Holly's ties to John. So even while this man has his own personal motive for wanting to do this "story," his actions are tied into the story's premise and affect the story's movement.

We next see the television man on "tv" at the scene, which Hans has access to. Again, it escalates the drama over this question, when will Hans find out the connection between John and Holly?

Argyle, in the parking garage, also sees on the tv what is happening, and only then realizes he's trapped in the garage and there's no escape.

Police try and force their way into the building, at great loss of life, which would have been worse except for John, who stops the attack.

Ellis now tries to stage manage the crisis, and ends up dead...a situation set up in his opening scene when he comes on to Holly.

John and Al talk about their family life. Again, it shows the consequence of the story, what John is trying to accomplish by reuniting with Holly and his family.

Hans finds out that John is a New York cop, but not his connection to Holly. But it is another escalation of the drama over whether, and when, he'll make that connection, and what will happen to Holly when he does.

The LAPD commander on the scene blames John for the loss of life, even though John argued that no raid be made on the building.

Hans contacts the police and sets up a deadline of two hours for helicopters to be on the roof.

Note, this gives the story time pressure.

Hans to Karl: We must have the detonators.

The FBI, very arrogant, then show up on the scene.

Meanwhile, John surprises Hans on the upper floors of the building. Hans passes himself off as another escapee of the terrorists long enough to be rescued by Karl. When John flees, Hans and Karl shoot out the glass around him...so John's feet are cut. A scene foreshadowed in the opening scene of the movie when the passenger in the plane talked to John about walking barefoot on the carpet.

Hans now has his detonators, but Karl doesn't have what he wants: John dead.

Back on the radio, John asks Al why he's a desk sergeant. Al tells John he killed a 13 year old with a toy gun, and since then, he hasn't been unable to draw his gun.

Feds, meanwhile, cut power to the building...which disables a time lock, and allows Hans into a safe with 640 million dollars in bonds.

It also comes out that FBI plans an armed raid with helicopters...while Hans plans to kill the assembled hostages on the roof and escape in the chaos.

John, on the radio to Al, asks him to tell Holly that "he's sorry" for how he's treated her.

That's been the purpose of his trip. To reunite with Holly. So if this is the only way he can accomplish what he's set out to do, this is what he'll do.

John then wonders, what was Hans doing on the upper floors of the building? He goes upstairs on his bloody, cut feet and finds the roof is wired to blow up just as...

TV man finds out that John is Holly's husband as...

Karl finds John. They get into a wild brawl.

TV man announces on tv who John is, so Hans takes Holly in tow.

Again, it escalates the drama over whether John will survive being beaten by Karl, Holly survive being Hans' hostage. Plot point two. Point where everything seems lost.

Hostages, but not Holly, are sent to roof while FBI nears scene in helicopters.

John seemingly kills Karl, and goes to roof to get Holly and hostages off roof. Holly's not there, but John, knowing the roof is set up for an explosion, forces the hostages off the roof. FBI, thinking John a terrorist, try and kill John, forcing him to jump off roof to save himself.

See what this man who doesn't like heights, as set out in the opening scene of the movie, must do to save himself?

No action in this movie happens without purpose.

Explosion on roof kills FBI men as John, sailing off roof tied to a fire hose, shatters window and gets into building. Then FBI helicopter blows up, almost killing John again.

Note that whatever John does, more trauma and danger overcome him. The action is now at a non-stop pace.

Argyle, in parking garage, sees terrorist who disabled safe.

John, trying to find Holly, only has two bullets for a pistol, and an unloaded shotgun.

Argyle nails terrorist with limo.

John now realizes that this is a robbery...not a terrorist act.

John confronts Hans and another terrorist...and Hans, threatening Holly with a gun, tells John to put down his unloaded shotgun. John complies...while the pistol with two bullets is taped to his back.

Hans raises his gun from Holly's head to shoot John...and is shot and wounded by John, the other terrorist killed.

Hans grabs Holly as he falls out a window. He seems about to take her with him.

Note that even at this point, the drama over whether John will be able to save Holly.

John grabs Holly, and loosens Hans' grip on her.

Hans makes one last attempt to shoot John, then falls to his death.

John and Holly reunite, then leave the building and meet Al. It's a very emotional moment for John and Al. John introduces Holly as "Holly Gennero." Holly: "I'm Holly McClane."

They're reunited.

Suddenly, Karl the terrorist, left hanging and seemingly dead, reappears. He's about to shoot John, when Al shoots Karl. Al thus acts out the fulfillment of his character's movement: that through the action of the story, he can now do his job.

His action also guarantees that John and Holly survive, so his action ties into the story's premise.

Through an act of courage, the last obstacle has been overcome.

Holly decks the tv reporter, and Argyle reappears. John and Holly, in love and reunited, leave with Argyle in the limo.

The premise of the story, that courage in the face of adversity leads to growth, has been proven.

Some notes about story and premise:

In a typical action film, characters can come fairly close to actually stating the story's premise. This is to make the story, its movement and potential fulfillment, clear and easy to follow. It also allows viewers to internalize the story's purpose and movement without too much effort, and enjoy its spectacle. The opening scene of a movie or book is generally where one will be given definite information about the story's purpose and premise. The introduction of characters is also a prime time to perceive a character's premise, and how it ties into the story.

Also, pay attention when another character is introduced in some fashion to ask questions of a primary character. The purpose is almost always to get out story information to the audience.

There's a certain latitude to do this, if it's not intrusive or too obvious.

Note how physical movement is used to give Die Hard a sense of purpose. Characters are always in action, pursuing some goal.

The emotional movement of characters in Die Hard is also laid out clearly and openly. Again, this is so the viewers can easily internalize this story about courage leading to growth being proven by the actions of the story's characters.

Because Die Hard is a story about courage that leads to a rebirth of love, it is something of consequence a viewer desires to internalize. Because the story is true to its movement, a viewer is easily able to stay focused and enjoy the story's spectacle and the drama over its outcome.

While on the surface an action-adventure film might appear to be ONLY about its spectacle and action, it must have that underlying story issue that assigns meaning to character actions and the spectacle, or both will eventually produce boredom.

Senseless, purposeless activity is not the answer. Presenting it at a faster pace doesn't make it more engaging. Actually, it makes it more wearing and boring. This is what happened to Die Hard 3. No particular story was developed, so there was no way to assign meaning to individual character actions. The fact that in Die Hard 3 the robbers/terrorists were after 13 billion dollars, not 640 million, is irrelevant if there's not story to give that number meaning to a viewer.

In an action adventure story, the story itself might be a thread, or, in the case of Die Hard, a steel wire taut through every scene. But this story-like arranging of elements to create drama over the story's outcome must be present to some degree in any story, this sense of something of consequence being resolved by the story's telling, for a viewer to desire to internalize the story and its movement.

To understand the story structure of a movie like Die Hard can be a great aid to helping writers create their own well-told action adventure movies.

©1995 Bill Johnson