dual: theory and application of psychological thrillers in

DUAL: Theory and Application of Psychological Thrillers in Modern Cinema

Adam Bailey

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of Master of Fine Arts in Film and Television at

The Savannah College of Art and Design

© May 2011, Adam Gregory Bailey

The author hereby grants SCAD permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and

electronic thesis copies of document in whole or in part in any medium now known or hereafter

created.

Signature of Author and Date ______________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________/___/___

Annette Haywood Carter (Sign here) (Date here)

Committee Chair

_______________________________________________________________________/___/___

Lubomir Kocka (Sign here) (Date here)

Committee Member

_______________________________________________________________________/___/___

Jonathan Alvord (Sign here) (Date here)

Committee Member

!

!

!!!!!!!!!!!!

!

!


A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Film & Television Department

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the

Degree of Master of Fine Arts

Savannah College of Art and Design

By

Adam Bailey

Savannah Campus, Savannah, Ga.

Submitted May, 2012

Table of Contents

Chapter

1. THESIS ABSTRACT …………………………...……………………………1

2. INTRODUCTION……………….……………………………………………2

The Exploration of the Human Condition

Social Grasp and Public Fascination

Defining the “Why” of a Serial Killer

Comparing Differing Styles within the Genre

DUAL Synopsis

3. FIGHT CLUB…………………………………………………...…………….6

Defining a Compelling Antagonist

Use of the “Love Interest”

The Grand Reveal

4. MR. BROOKS……………………………..………………………………...13

A New Role for the Killer

Creating Non-Passive Protagonists

5. PRIMAL FEAR………………………...……………………………..……..17

Analysis/Compare/Contrast

Protagonist Outside of Split Personality

The Second Twist

6. CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………21

7. BIBILIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………..22

1


Adam Bailey

May, 2011

This thesis is an examination of contemporary mainstream films that deal with the subject

of split personality disorders and how they compare and contrast with the choices I made

directing my thesis film, DUAL. The different conventions of the genre will be inspected

along with the various ways the films differ from each other individually. In addition, it

analyzes the inherent fascination that audiences have with such films as they offer a way

to closely observe such abnormalities from a safe distance behind their screens.

2


Films centering on the psychology of characters of the dangerously insane remain

one of the most prevalent genres in movies today. The exploration of the psychology

surrounding what it takes for one human being to kill another is a timeless source of

material for many classic films. Among the most popular stories are films whose

murderous or otherwise villainous characters are actually part of split personalities. I will

illustrate some of the inspirations and conventions of my thesis film, DUAL by examining

the storytelling techniques employed in such films as Fight Club (1999), Mr. Brooks

(2007), and Primal Fear (1996).

The exploration of the human condition is one of the most pervasive themes in

film. Frequently, this exploration delves into the dark side of our basic humanity.

Specifically, stories about murderous characters are of a particular fascination for

filmmakers and movie-goers alike. In certain films these murderous psychopaths are

eventually revealed to suffer from a multiple personality disorder. Otherwise known as

Dissociative Identity Disorder it is “a severe condition in which two or more distinct

identities, or personality states, are present in—and alternately take control of—an

individual. The person also experiences memory loss that is too extensive to be explained

by ordinary forgetfulness.” 1

These films are able to captivate their audiences by presenting a character who

performs incredibly extreme acts while not being fully responsible for them. The novelty

1 "Dissociative Identity Disorder (Multiple Personality Disorder)." Psychology Today:

Health, Help, Happiness Find a Therapist. Web. 15 Mar. 2012.

<http://www.psychologytoday.com/conditions/dissociative-identity-disorder-

multiple-personality-disorder>.

3

and abnormally of a person with multiple personalities fuels the general fascination of the

viewing audience, keeping their interest constantly piqued for the next chapter in the

story. Film provides an almost “safe haven” of sorts not only to display their cruel acts

but also actively exploring the ‘why’ of the things they do. It is a testament to the staying

power of these movies that they can focus on a subject matter that in pedestrian life

usually repels and disgusts most individuals. People want to put their feet to the fire in

the context of a film: it enables them to indulge their natural curiosity in way that gets

them up close to that darkness in a way that is not only safe, but entertaining.

The staying power for these types of films is derived from humanity’s natural

interest to explore the extremes of the human psyche. Audiences are allowed to get an

intimate look at a person performing acts that the general populace could never imagine

doing. To be able to experience such an extreme perspective that a viewer otherwise

never would explore in their daily lives is one of the biggest reasons we watch films at

all. Director Bruce Evans comments, “There’s something fascinating about the snake.

It’s beautiful in that you know that it is so dangerous and I think it gives us, with a film it

gives us that [feeling] of excitement without having to put ourselves in the actual

situation” 2

An inherently engaging facet of split personality films is the balance of the

characters’ personalities towards their “real world” and their world of murder and other

dark desires. This theme of the balance between our desires and obligations and the

challenge of keeping them from conflicting is an incredibly relatable struggle to anyone

2 Topel, Fred. "Writer/Director Bruce A Evans Talks About Mr Brooks." About.com

Hollywood Movies. Web. 02 Apr. 2012.

<http://movies.about.com/od/mrbrooks/a/mrbrookbe052707.htm>.

4

watching the film. These are themes that every person can relate to in most any walk of

life. While the events portrayed in DUAL are extreme, the idea of one’s own inner

struggle with indulgence vs moderation, pleasure vs obligation, and all else regarding

“good vs bad”, are things that are part of our human condition. The contemporary human

being spends most of their adult lives attempting to achieve the balance of these central

opposing forces. The central conflict nearly always emanates from the dissonance caused

by the characters’ attempts to maintain balance. Most of DUAL was born from this

concept: the wearing of one face whilst hiding another entirely different mask and the

dissonance that the attempt to balance both will naturally cause for the characters

involved.

I graduated with a Bachelor’s of Science in Psychology for my undergraduate

degree. It is of no surprise then that stories dealing with characters of complex psyches

would garner my interest. There are many explanations to examine when a character (or a

person) feels driven to perform acts as vicious as murder. In film, part of the storytelling

is bringing these motivations to light. The ‘why’ as it pertains to their killing nature is

frequently the question that drives the entire film. The characters are examined so as to

expose what it is that makes killing such an essential need of theirs. David Fincher

discusses the pursuit of the “why”:

“But what you’re trying to show in the character is that he has a need. There’s

sensuality to this need and there’s sensuality in this need being fulfilled. So

maybe that’s wrong, but it’s the only way to help talk about it.”3

If the ‘why’ is not in question it then becomes a matter of ‘how’ they are

empowered (or rather enabled) to do the unthinkable things they do. Some films use

3 "Todd Doogan Interviews Director David Fincher." Todd Doogan Interviews Director David Fincher. 11 May 2000. Web. 30 Mar.

2012. <http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/fightclub/fincherinterview.html>.

5

things like multiple personalities as the vehicle for their characters’ heinous actions. This

is a convention that opens up a plethora of new storytelling elements that a director may

employ. Perhaps the most notable and specific element is the addition of a second central

character for which the central character is linked to for the entire film. Instantly an entire

new dynamic is created and the stakes are changed for the central character that is now

being directly tied to another. The two characters are now permanently linked, their

character objectives and needs intertwined. The second character adds to the film an

entirely new on screen persona with which to entice the audience. The intrigue is not

only derived from this new singular personality but with how those two characters

interact. The interplay between the two personalities provides an audience with an

entirely new point of interest. The examination of both separate personalities individually

is engaging but the true intrigue comes from the two personalities mixing it up on screen;

providing rich conflict.

Films that explore multiple personalities do so in various ways in order to serve

the story it is telling. Often times the characters are portrayed by two separate actors to

present a literal on-screen separation of the two personalities. Within this choice are

more variations of the relationship between the two characters. Some films have the two

personalities as antagonizing enemies. Other films have shown the two personalities, as a

sort of tandem working with one another, complementing each other’s character needs in

order to achieve their objectives. In other instances a single actor takes on the task of

embodying both personalities. While some films have the characters fully aware of their

link, others have them completely oblivious to it. When the characters are unaware of

their split personality, the discovery of which is then usually the central driving factor for

6

the film’s plot and structure. Even within that specific convention there are variations.

There are films where the central character is completely unaware that their actions and

decisions draw them closer to the crucial truth; whereas in other movies the character has

some awareness of a truth they need to uncover, even if they do not fully understand why

it is they need to discover it. The implementation of a multiple personality adds a natural

suspense that provides various options for the filmmaker in terms of decisions regarding

both character and story.

DUAL features bits and pieces from these films to present the classic split

personality story in a way that is both original from previous works yet familiar to the

audience. The film opens with a parallel sequence in which the film’s main two

characters, Jacob and Andre, are seen each on separate dates. While Jacob’s night ends

in a bed with his steady girlfriend, Andre’s ends with an added tally to his kill count.

Jacob is on some level aware of Andre’s actions but is unable to do anything to prevent

them, mainly out of fear of Andre.

Fight Club (1999), the David Fincher cult classic, is perhaps the most notable

contemporary film that doles into split personality. Edward Norton plays “The Narrator”

who is experiencing a mid-life crisis- floating through life without feeling or purpose.

His world is forever changed when he meets Tyler Durden, played by Brad Pitt, who

shows the Narrator a lifestyle that could free him from even feeling the need for

direction. The first act of the film establishes two characters’ relationship as that of a

mentor-disciple dynamic with the Narrator the increasingly eager student of Tyler’s

philosophies. As the stakes rise in the second act, the Narrator becomes aware of the

dangers of Tyler and how quickly his life begins to spin out of control in an entirely new

7

direction. Finally in the third act the Narrator makes the character shift to set about

stopping Tyler and his doings. It is this pursuit that brings him to the inevitable a truth

that he and Tyler Durden are actually the same person. After this major reveal of the

film’s central plot point the characters finally arrive at the end of their arcs as adversaries.

The two characters finally duel it out to see if the Narrator can stop Tyler’s final act of

terrorism. 4

Fight Club is the film that I most closely referenced in conceptualizing DUAL.

Perhaps the single most engaging aspect of the film is the dynamic between the Narrator

and Tyler Durden. The audience is treated to rich performances from both Edward

Norton and Brad Pitt. Each character individually has their own engaging aura of screen

presence and rich depth but it is through their interactions that they are brought out for

the audience. As the characters learn about each other, so too of course does the

audience. As the stakes are raised in the storyline for each character, more depths of

characterization are revealed in both their choices and how their relationship dynamic

specifically changes. This allows for elevated performances that not only compliment the

rising action but engage the audience all the more. DUAL seeks to follow the same

precedence. DUAL was written with the main focus on the struggle between two

intricately linked yet antagonizing forces, letting the drama develop through their

characterization. I set out to develop characters with the kind of depth and intricacy that

would require the actors to truly embody the roles. Without the proper amount of

intricacies and subtleties in regards to each of their characters, the dynamic between the

4 Fight Club. Dir. David Fincher. 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, 1999. DVD.

8

characters would be ultimately bland and unbelievable. Each character had to be

individually dynamic in order to ensure that their relationship and interactions would be

all the more compelling to the audience. Tyler Durden’s character is specifically

referenced in the design of Andre- a charismatic degenerate who is eccentrically

unpredictable. The goal in creating Andre was to create a character that audiences hate to

love; the antagonist that the viewer begrudgingly enjoys, perhaps even roots for in some

twisted way. The most crucially important difference between the two characters is Tyler

Durden in his purest form is NOT a serial killer like Andre. Tyler certainly puts little to

no value in human life and is willing to sacrifice some to promote his message in his acts

of terrorism. He is however fundamentally different from Andre in that Andre is a true

killer, motivated to by the pure desire to take life. Tyler’s motivation comes from a

nihilist philosophy while Andre submits himself to complete anarchy and self-

indulgence. Tyler and Andre differ in their specific tastes for destruction but are the

same in regards the fundamental adherence to their basic morose philosophies. Jacob’s

character as a glum introvert is also inspired by Edward Norton’s portrayal of the

Narrator. Jacob and the Narrator however share less commonality in their specific

personalities. The sullen and moody disposition of the Narrator contrasts to the reserved

bashfulness of Jacob though both are seemingly at the mercy of their antagonists’

objective to further pull them into their world.

Fight Club provides a good amount of inspiration for the themes and story of

DUAL. A constant theme throughout Fight Club is Tyler’s persistence to make the

Narrator embrace and adopt Tyler’s way of life. That objective remains constant even

when the Narrator actively seeks to fight against Tyler in the conclusion of the 3rd

act.

9

This is a theme that I made central to DUAL: Andre’s overall objective in the film is to

make Jacob give in to his murderous lifestyle and embrace it as his own. In Fight Club

Tyler Durden coaxes the Narrator into naively embracing Tyler’s philosophies until the

narrator decides the stakes have become too high, ultimately sparking his final turn in his

character arc. By contrast in DUAL Jacob actively attempts to resist Andre’s luring to

mayhem and murder for the entirety of the film. Jacob begins fully aware of Andre’s

dangerous nature whereas Fight Club takes much of the film to build up the Narrator’s

awareness of the hazard of Tyler Durden. For both films the created persona is

attempting to assimilate and otherwise take over the actual persona. In Fight Club the arc

from disciple to nemesis is made once the reveal of their shared identity is made clear to

the audience. Jacob in DUAL does always in fact know of his link to Andre, he musters

the resolve to fight against him upon the reveal of their own shared identity. For both

films the protagonist makes the choice to actively fight against their counterpart upon the

specific plot point revealing their split personalities. The difference is in how the two

protagonists approach their respective antagonists before that reveal: the Narrator with

curiosity and Jacob with severe aversion.

Both films also have a third essential character: the love interest. “Marla”, played

by Helena Bonham Carter is the third main character in Fight Club and is directly

responsible for the advancement of Tyler and the Narrator’s relationship. “Amber” is

Jacob’s girlfriend and the third central character in DUAL. Both Marla and Amber

become caught between their film’s main two characters as the main stake (or prize).

Marla and Amber serve as the object of affection for the protagonist, representing their

perhaps final link to humanity. While they generally serve the films’ plot in similar

10

ways, these similarities do not transfer to the specifics of each of their characters.

Amber’s personality as the nurturing playful girlfriend vastly contrasts to the devious

train-wreck that is Marla. Additionally the protagonists’ attitudes toward the “love

interest” are immensely different during the first two acts of each film. The Narrator

utterly despises Marla throughout much of the film whereas Jacob and Amber’s

relationship begins within the film as loving and cherished. From these starting points

the character arcs between both sets of characters go in wildly opposite directions. Fight

Club slowly but surely brings Marla and the Narrator together while DUAL wedges Jacob

and Amber apart further and further. The separation builds until the end of the film when

they are finally completely severed from each other despite Jacob’s final act of selfless

heroism to ultimately protect her. Both protagonists seek to save their love interests in the

third act of each film. The difference lies in how the protagonists regard her up unto that

point in the film.

The interaction of the love interest connecting with the alternate persona is an

essential element to crafting an engaging split personality story: it innumerably raises the

stakes and conflict for all characters involved. I wanted to be sure to write Amber as an

active character whose actions help to develop the plot. One element I did include with

Amber that is seen with Marla is how both characters have run ins with the alternate

personality in a sexual way. While the audience is lead to believe that Marla and Amber

are engaging with the antagonist it is then revealed that they in fact believed it to be the

protagonist; it is only the audience that is truly deceived in both instances. Despite this

both films’ protagonists end up fighting to save the life of their love interest from the

direct threat posed by the antagonist. Marla and Amber serve as the central motivating

11

factor for the protagonist to make the heroic turn to stand up to the antagonist. Their

connection to the protagonist provides the specific call to action: defeat the antagonist in

order to save the love interest’s life. The third character serves the same central idea for

each film but is gone about in an entirely different way in regards to characterization and

relationship to the other characters.

Perhaps the most specific reference to Fight Club within DUAL is the idea that the

other persona was created to fulfill a need that the central character could not satisfy on

their own. The alternate persona in some way enables the main character to engage in a

lifestyle that they themselves are cannot attain. This fundamentally gives rise to the

power of both Tyler and Andre, both being enabled by the protagonists’ weaknesses to

take more and more liberties thereby raising the stakes and overall conflict. Both films

feature the protagonist actively resisting the antagonist’s way of life in the beginning.

This is something they are compelled to do because of their fundamental character spines.

By remaining true to their character’s central nature they choose to deny the antagonist

and set out to finally somehow defeat him. The concept of the protagonist finally being

able to make the all-important heroic turn is triggered by the legitimized threat of their

other persona once they are truly revealed as the same person. That turn was something I

sought to specifically implement into DUAL; ultimately crafting the entire film for the

central reveal.

One of the most essential aspects of DUAL is the way in which the reveal of the

split personality will be handled. Fight Club is one of the most excellent references for

this specific reveal not only in the stylistic way in which it was done but also how it fits

within the plot and themes of the film. From a story sense, one of the things that worked

12

so well about Fight Club was that the film was not about the central reveal of them as a

split personality. The film did not center around the vital question of if they were the

same person but rather it uses that to advance the plot towards their ultimate conflict.

This was something I sought to emulate: I in no way wanted DUAL to be centered solely

around the reveal of split personality. The script was constructed to have the reveal tie

together the plot and character idiosyncrasies and set up the third act, not conclude it. The

two scenes vastly differ however in regards to who exactly is learning about the split

personality angle for the first time. The Narrator in Fight Club learns about his split

personality at the same time as the audience. In DUAL I reiterate that Jacob is aware of

his connection with Andre, it is only the audience who makes the connection for the first

time. There is no direct POV with Jacob to the audience in contrast with the Narrator’s

shared audience POV in Fight Club. Regardless of what the characters know, the

audience learns this new information for the first time. It is in that sense that the scenes

are alike, in addition to serving as the jumping off point of the protagonist’s final heroic

turn.

Fight Club was centrally inspirational to DUAL in specific regards to the way it

presented split personality with two separate on screen presences. The film’s rich

characterization lays the groundwork to the enthralling relationship between the two main

characters. The plot leads up to the grand reveal of the two separate characters as the

same person to then set up a final conflict as to which personality will gain complete

control. A third essential character serves as the love interest whom gets caught in the

crosshairs between the protagonist and antagonist, ultimately fueling the protagonist’s

final heroic turn. Fight Club contrasts with DUAL’s structure in regards to what is

13

known by the audience before and after the central reveal. While certain character

motivations are similar across the two films, they are expressed differently within their

specifics.

Mr. Brooks (2007), written and directed by Bruce A. Evans, follows the story of

Earl Brooks, played by Kevin Costner. Earl Brooks is a successful businessman with a

loving family. He is in every way a well-adjusted if not admirable member of society

barring one crucial dark secret: he is a serial killer. Mr. Brooks struggles to lead a normal

life while trying to wrestle with his deadly addiction. Marshall, played by William Hurt,

is the on screen embodiment of the voice in Mr. Brooks’ head that wants him to kill.

Marshall is the constant devil over Mr. Brooks’ shoulder that pushes him to indulge in his

love of murder.

Perhaps the single best part of the film is the way in which it handles the portrayal

of a man who is an addict. While Mr. Brooks is not technically a sufferer of multiple

personalities, the audience is lead to feel that way with the use of two separate actors for

each character. Mr. Brooks is constantly at odds with himself trying to balance his

normalized lifestyle and his proclivity for killing. He truly does want it to stop but is

ultimately unable to turn his back on Marshall, who constantly pushes him towards

murder. The dynamic between Mr. Brooks and Marshall constantly shifts: Marshall at

some points is an enabler, other times a mentor, sometimes even a therapist to Mr.

Brooks. The struggle is not found between Mr. Brooks and Marshall but rather in Mr.

Brooks himself, constantly torn between his objections and desires. Mr. Brooks does not

put the two main characters at odds like Fight Club but instead creates a centralized “man

vs. self” conflict. This conflict is set against outside forces that by some development in

14

the plot make Mr. Brooks have to kill in order to protect himself and his family.

Throughout the film the audience feels true empathy for our anti-hero protagonist. This

is because the film effectively creates a dynamic where Mr. Brooks is not always fully in

control of himself, in large part usually due to Marshall’s guidance.5 The film gracefully

and effectively depicts a man struggling with what is a deep seeded addiction. It is that

motif of the movie that gives it legs to stand on throughout.

Mr. Brooks provides a considerable amount of reference material for which I

considered in my creation of DUAL. While Earl Brooks is not a true split personality, the

theme of one mind inhabited by two personas fits the bill for a film relevant to the themes

and plot that I am dealing with for my film. Mr. Brooks has the principal motif of two

separately portrayed characters that occupy one brain space. While it is not a constant

source of drama (as with the other films), both personas are indeed vying to exert their

will. The essential power that Marshall has over Mr. Brooks is the frequent ability he has

to know the protagonist better than he knows himself. He knows the exact ways to

appeal to Mr. Brooks much like Andre knows the exact ways to antagonize Jacob.

Familiarity is the true weapon that the alternate persona has against the protagonist. The

main difference though in how it is expressed in the films between Marshall and Andre is

that Marshall has true caring for Mr. Brooks whereas Andre has nothing but malice for

Jacob. Marshall wants to enable Mr. Brooks to kill almost out of a sense of loyalty while

also guiding and protecting him along the way. Andre wants Jacob to give in to his

lifestyle so that Andre himself can assume control over Jacob in the battle for their mind.

Marshall is more contained to the voice in Mr. Brooks’ head; he does not interact with

5 Mr. Brooks. Dir. Bruce A. Evans. Perf. Kevin Costner and Demi Moore. Metro-

Goldwyn-Mayer, 2007. DVD

15

any other characters but Mr. Brooks. Both however share the essential singular focus on

killing. Beyond that primary objective is where differences arise: Marshall’s secondary

objective wants to protect Mr. Brooks while Andre simply wishes to indulge himself in

other ways when he is not killing, whether it be sex or drugs or whatever other treats.

Both antagonists share the objective to assimilate the protagonist to their way of life but

each go about it very differently. Marshall tempts Mr. Brooks with murder as a way to

satiate Mr. Brooks’ pain whereas Andre approaches Jacob in a far more aggressive

volatile way. Each protagonist (both Jacob and Mr. Brooks) struggle to resist their

alternate persona but Mr. Brooks uses that persona as an ally while Andre is generally

nothing but an antagonist.

Mr. Brooks does an admiral job of establishing Mr. Brooks’ ‘why’ for being a

killer. In the film’s first murder scene (early in the first act) Mr. Brooks is shown having

a pseudo euphoric reaction directly after killing his victims. This was an element that I

found to be essential not only to this film but the killer genre in general. Often in films

about extremist indulgences the audience is not shown what it is about the particular

activity that drives the character to do pursue it so intensely. Getting a look at the ‘why’

of Mr. Brooks’ serial killing resonates with the audience and sets the stage for the rest of

the film. To see how killing pays off for the character makes the rest of the film

believable as we watch his struggle and torment throughout the rest of the movie. It not

only provided a credible backdrop for the rest of the film but was also true to the

specifics of what motivates true serial killers: in this case, to get off on the wave of

euphoria. I personally appreciated this touch not only as an amateur psychologist but

what it made me feel as I watched it: entirely uncomfortable. Mr. Brooks does not kill

16

for some diabolical scheme or far-fetched plot-device, he kills for the pure psychological

need within him. This realism creates an all together more disturbing reaction within the

viewer. That in particular resonated with me as a filmmaker in writing DUAL. In the

opening parallel sequence, Andre slits his victims throat, then cradles her as she dies in

his arms. The audience will watch him go through his own wave of euphoria, savoring

the thrill in every way imaginable. I wanted to have that specific moment in DUAL

where the audience gets that glimpse into the crucial ‘why’ to not only establish it but to

do it in a way that would disturb the audience through their innate sense of humanity.

Mr. Brooks has another interesting aspect about it with how it constructed the

protagonist, Earl Brooks himself. Mr. Brooks struggles both internally and externally in

almost equal capacities. He struggles with himself to finally walk away from his

addiction while struggling against external forces that specifically call for his aptitude for

killing. He is forced to go back to killing by other characters and plot turns while being

simultaneously guided along by Marshall. Between these outside forces and Marshall

inside his own head it would have been very easy for Mr. Brooks to be written and

portrayed as a passive character. If this had happened the film would ultimately not have

worked in any capacity. Similarly, in DUAL Jacob is pushed against by outside forces

either by Andre’s antagonizing or Amber’s expectations of him as a boyfriend. I was

extremely careful with making Jacob a character that is at once steered by the people

around him while also having him make active choices. If handled incorrectly, Jacob’s

character would come across as passive and boring. Mr. Brooks provides an example of

how a protagonist can be so heavily motivated by (pseudo) external forces while still

making bold aggressive choices that leave the audience aligned and engaged.

17

A specific example of this balance is seen in how Mr. Brooks finally handles a

man who knows his secret and attempts to blackmail him if he is not taken on a kill. Mr.

Brooks has no choice but to go along with it. Though he is in a tenuous position he is

able to subtlety manipulate the situation thanks to his substantial experience with killing.

He calls upon this experience to disarm, relocate and finally kill the man, virtually all of

which happening before the blackmailer has a chance to even recognize the danger he is

in. The scene ends with the theme of Mr. Brooks’ careful balance between lack of

control and methodical manipulation- after handing the blackmailer a gun to use to shoot

him, it looks as if Mr. Brooks will allow himself to be killed. Only after the gun

repeatedly does not fire does Mr. Brooks then reveal that he bent the firing pin of the gun

….in case he changed his mind about dying. Mr. Brooks merely gives the man (as well

as the audience) the feeling that they are in control when in fact he retains all of it. Mr.

Brooks goes along with the supposed plan to kill himself by the hands of another person

right up until the last moment; illustrating that in reality he was in control of the situation

the entire time. Instead he makes the active character choice to stay alive on behalf of his

pregnant daughter. Not only is Mr. Brooks’ final character choice and active one but it is

congruent to his other motivations form earlier in the film.

Primal Fear (1996), directed by Gregory Hoblit, is another split personality film

that was a source of inspiration for how DUAL was constructed. The film’s protagonist is

high profile trial lawyer Martin Vail (played by Richard Gere), a seemingly untouchable

private defender at the top of his profession. Vail takes on the trial of a young country

boy who is suddenly and very publicly wanted for the murder of an archbishop. The boy,

Aaron (played by Edward Norton in his breakout role), is a slow talking soft-hearted

18

respectful young man who appears by all accounts incapable of murder yet he was seen

fleeing the scene of the crime as it happened. The film’s main question now centers

around how this seemingly meek country boy could have pulled off such a heinous crime.

Our protagonist’s main objective is to discover what is the missing piece to the puzzle.

That missing piece is revealed to be none other than a split personality within Aaron

which he himself is seemingly fully unaware of. This revelation gives Vail a new

approach to seek the acquittal of his client which he then successfully attains, citing

mental insanity. This leads to the film’s final twist in which Aaron reveals that he in fact

had only been pretending to appear insane, asserting that in fact Aaron was a made up

personality and the murderous “Roy” was in fact who he really was. While the split

personality is realized in a completely different way than in DUAL I wanted to use the

reveals and twists in a similar way. Specifically the use of a second reveal to end the film

on a final twist was something I found to be particularly intriguing.

Primal Fear differs from the previous two films analyzed in a few critical ways.

The split personalities are portrayed by only one actor; crucial for this particular film’s

plot. Additionally, in contrast to both Fight Club ,Mr. Brooks and also DUAL, Primal

Fear is the only film among these whose protagonist is not one of the split personalities

in any way. Rather the audience experiences the film from Vail’s perspective in trying to

decipher the actions of the supposed split personality in Aaron. Primal Fear has far less

surrealism in its storytelling, creating the need for a single actor to play both

personalities; just as someone from an outside perspective would see them. Being that

the audience is placed behind Vail’s perspective, they must perceive Aaron’s “insanity”

in the same way that Vail does: witnessing both embodiments within one person. This of

19

course contrasts a great deal from the other films where the audience is placed directly in

between the split personalities in battle. More so than the other films, the split

personality is more of a plot device than a central theme but it is the way in which it is

used so effectively as a plot device that spoke to my as a filmmaker.

Primal Fear makes use of the conventions of split personality without crafting

the entire film towards the psychological thriller genre conventionally seen with such

stories. The use of split personality is used more so as a plot device but it is done in a

way that is both unexpected yet well thought out. The reveal of the split personality

occurs at the end of the second act. Doing this uses a major twist in the film to set the

stage for the third act, as opposed predicating the entire third act on the reveal. This in

particular was something I sought out to do with DUAL- I did not want the film to center

around the simple reveal of a split personality, I wanted that reveal to be what set the

stage for the final showdown between our main characters. To structure the film in this

way is a far more interesting way to tell the story: the mystery of the first two acts leading

to a shocking truth that then in turn sets up the power struggle of the third act. Telling the

story in such a way provides layers to the audience. Gearing an entire film for a single

twist at the end of a film in my opinion is poor storytelling. A reveal must lead to a

revelation by the character(s), without which it is meaningless.

Primal Fear handles the balance of the primary twist in a satisfying way but then

ends on a second major reveal to end the film. Aaron slips into his murderous

counterpart, Roy, one final time to reveal that he in fact does not suffer from split

personality. He then informs Vail that Aaron was actually the made up identity all along,

20

not Roy. 6 This aspect of the film intrigued me the most. This last twist caught my

attention and got me thinking on how I could end DUAL with a second shocking reveal.

My issue with Primal Fear’s second twist however was that it was self-serving: the entire

film builds to one reveal of a split personality just to simply go back on that saying the

character was lying the entire time. While executed well, I found the idea itself to be

flimsy at best. This taught me another valuable lesson: the twist must not only pay off for

the plot but for the audience as well. Frequently, twists or reveals are seen as cop-outs in

storytelling but I believe that if they are set up in a coherent and compelling way, the

twist itself is almost inconsequential. As storytellers we must always remember that it is

so frequently the lead up to a moment that contains the drama as opposed to the actual

moment itself. That way when the audience comes across the reveal or payoff, the actual

result is inconsequential; the journey itself was the compelling aspect.

Where Primal Fear used a second twist to provide a last taste of conflict to a

seemingly resolved situation, my film remains unresolved until the literal last frame. The

first reveal of DUAL is the fact that the two main characters are split personalities. This

sets up the third act with the essential question “who is going to win?” I used a second

twist reveal to answer this question right up to the very ending of the film, leaving the

viewer with a sudden shock. When films are able to implement a final unveiling to shock

the audience one last time I believe it improves their staying power. It was Primal Fear

that cued me to the impact of such an ending that was not attempted by the other films

referenced. While the realization of the split personality was done all together differently

it was the usage of the plot reveals that helped me structure DUAL in a vivid way.

6 Primal Fear. Dir. Gregory Hoblet. Paramount Pictures, 1996. DVD.

21

Films about split personality will always fascinate audiences. They offer

perspective to a world that most human beings never come into personal contact with.

They provide audiences with stories that satiate a sort of morbid curiosity for darker and

edgier subject matter. Mostly of all though, films dealing with split personality are

usually at their core dealing with themes and issues that each person watching can relate

to. The struggle to balance one’s own “yin and yang” is realized within everyone no

matter the personal stakes. These are themes pervasive to anyone’s situation in any walk

of life. They deal very closely with people’s internal and external conflicts in how they

interact, providing compelling drama for the audience naturally. Fight Club, Mr. Brooks

and Primal Fear are films that each tackle the tale of split personality but do so in

strikingly different ways. DUAL was crafted with all of these films in mind to hone in

what would be the right story telling conventions to use that best would best tell the story.

In the end I believe to have created a film that is both original and unpredictable while

also playing to the familiar conventions of the genre.

22

Bibliography

"Dissociative Identity Disorder (Multiple Personality Disorder)." Psychology Today:

Health, Help, Happiness Find a Therapist. Web. 15 Mar. 2012.

<http://www.psychologytoday.com/conditions/dissociative-identity-disorder-

multiple-personality-disorder>.

Topel, Fred. "Writer/Director Bruce A Evans Talks About Mr Brooks." About.com

Hollywood Movies. Web. 02 Apr. 2012.

<http://movies.about.com/od/mrbrooks/a/mrbrookbe052707.htm>.

"Todd Doogan Interviews Director David Fincher." Todd Doogan Interviews Director

David Fincher. 11 May 2000. Web. 30 Mar. 2012.

<http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/fightclub/fincherinterview.html>.

Fight Club. Dir. David Fincher. 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, 1999. DVD.

Mr. Brooks. Dir. Bruce A. Evans. Perf. Kevin Costner and Demi Moore. Metro-

Goldwyn-Mayer, 2007. DVD

Primal Fear. Dir. Gregory Hoblet. Paramount Pictures, 1996. DVD.

dual: theory and application of psychological thrillers in

Documents