The Expanded Ultimate Story Checklist!

I’m expanding The Ultimate Story Checklist!  

The Checklist came to be when I took all the advice I’d offered up to that point on the blog and rephrased the posts as a series of questions you could ask about your manuscript.  Each question linked back to the original post that inspired it.  Then I later rewrote everything when I turned it into my book, The Secrets of Story.

Later, I kept studying examples and came up with various posts called Rulebook Casefile that backed up my points, and various posts called Straying from the Party Line that seemed to contradict them.  

For the expansion, I’m redoing every entry to use the text from the book, tacking on any Casefiles or SftPLs afterwards, and including a chart of how 30 movies answered that question.  

This expansion is ongoing.  So far, I’ve only done the first three Parts and the rest still link back to the original posts that inspired them.  

If you still want to read the original posts (and the original comments), I’ll leave that version up, too, underneath this one.  

I’ve used this list to evaluate my favorite stories and my own work. The result: my favorite stories all pass and my own work always fall short. This tells me what I’m doing wrong.

The goal is simple: Try to answer yes as often as possible. Of course, every story is unique and no story that I’ve evaluated has answered yes to all 122 questions, nor should it. Check out the Checklist Roadtests over there in the sidebar, to see how lots of great movies did. If you want to try it yourself, a downloadable version of this list as a word document is available here (link fixed!)

(This list is primarily for stand-alone stories such as

screenplays, novels and plays, but don’t worry, there’s a separate “pilot” checklist for the first episode of continuing stories such as TV series, book series, web series, and comics)

PART 1: CONCEPT

The Pitch: Does this concept excite everyone who hears about it?

 Is the one sentence description uniquely appealing?

 Does the concept contain an intriguing ironic contradiction?

 Is this a story anyone can identify with, projected onto a bigger canvas, with higher stakes?

Story Fundamentals: Will this concept generate a strong story?

 Is the concept simple enough to spend more time on character than plot?

 Is there one character that the audience will choose to be their “hero”?

 Does the story follow the progress of the hero’s problem, not the hero’s daily life?

 Does the story present a unique central relationship?

 Is at least one actual human being opposed to what the hero is doing? 

 Does this challenge represent the hero’s greatest hope and/or greatest fear and/or an ironic answer to the hero’s question?

 Does something inside the hero have a particularly volatile reaction to the challenge?

 Does this challenge become something that is not just hard for the hero to do (an obstacle) but hard for the hero to want to do (a conflict)?

 In the end, is the hero the only one who can solve the problem?

 Does the hero permanently transform the situation and vice versa?

The Hook: Will this be marketable and generate word of mouth?
 Does the story satisfy the basic human urges that get people to buy and recommend this genre? 

  Does this story show us at least one image we haven’t seen before (that can be used to promote the final product)?

 Is there at least one “Holy Crap!” scene (to create word of mouth)?

 Does the story contain a surprise that is not obvious from the beginning?

 Is the story marketable without revealing the surprise?

 Is the conflict compelling and ironic both before and after the surprise?

PART 2: CHARACTER

Believe: Do we recognize the hero as a human being?

 Does the hero have a moment of humanity early on? (A funny, or out-of-character, or compassionate, or oddball, or comically vain, or unique-but-universal “I thought I was the only one who did that!” moment?)

 Is the hero defined by ongoing actions and attitudes, not by backstory?

 Does the hero have a well-defined public identity?

 Does that ironically contrast with a hidden interior self?

 Does the hero have a consistent metaphor family (drawn from his or her job, background, or developmental state)?

 Does the hero have a default personality trait?

 Does the hero have a default argument tactic?

 Is the hero’s primary motivation for tackling this challenge strong, simple, and revealed early on?

Care: Do we feel for the hero?

 Does the hero start out with a shortsighted or wrongheaded philosophy (or accept a false piece of advice early on)?

 Does the hero have a false or shortsighted goal in the first half?

 Does the hero have an open fear or anxiety about his or her future as well as a hidden, private fear?

 Is the hero vulnerable, both physically and emotionally?

 Does the hero have one or two untenable great flaws that we empathize with? (but…)

Invest: Can we trust the hero to tackle this challenge?

 …Is that great flaw (ironically) the natural flip-side of a great strength  that we admire?

 Is the hero curious?

 Is the hero generally resourceful?

 Does the hero have general rules for living he or she clings to (either stated or implied)?

 Is the hero surrounded by people who sorely lack his or her most valuable quality?

 …And is the hero willing to let them know that, subtly or directly?

 Is the hero already doing something active when we first meet him or her?

 Does the hero have (or claim) decision-making authority?

 Does the hero use pre-established special skills from his or her past to solve problems (rather than doing what anybody would do)?

PART 3: STRUCTURE (assuming that the story is about the solving of a large problem)

1st Quarter: Is the challenge laid out in the first quarter?

 When the story begins, is the hero becoming increasingly irritated about his or her longstanding social problem (while still in denial about an internal flaw)?

 Does this problem become undeniable due to a social humiliation at the beginning of the story?

 Does the hero discover an intimidating opportunity to fix the problem?

 Does the hero hesitate until the stakes are raised?

 Does the hero commit to pursuing the opportunity by the end of the first quarter?

2nd Quarter: Does the hero try the easy way in the second quarter?

 Does the hero’s pursuit of the opportunity quickly lead to an unforeseen conflict with another person?

 Does the hero try the easy way throughout the second quarter?

 Does the hero (and/or villain) get to have a little fun at this point and get excited about the possibility of success?

 Does the easy way lead to a big crash around the midpoint, resulting in the loss of a safe space and/or sheltering relationship?

3rd Quarter: Does the hero try the hard way in the third quarter?

 Does the hero try the hard way from this point on?

 Does the hero find out who his or her real friends and real enemies are?

 Do the stakes, pace and motivation all escalate at this point?

 Does the hero learn from mistakes in a painful way?

 Does a further setback lead to a spiritual crisis?

4th Quarter: Does the challenge climax in the fourth quarter?

 Does the hero adopt a corrected philosophy after the spiritual crisis?

 After that crisis, does the hero finally commit to pursuing a corrected goal, which still seems far away?

 By the time the final quarter of the story begins, (if not long before) has your hero switched to being proactive, instead of reactive?

 Despite these proactive steps, is the timeline unexpectedly moved up, forcing the hero to improvise for the finale?

 Do all strands of the story and most of the characters come together for the climactic confrontation?

 Does the hero’s inner struggle climax shortly after (or possible at the same time as) his outer struggle?

 Is there an epilogue/ aftermath/ denouement in which the challenge is finally resolved (or succumbed to), and we see how much the hero has changed.

PART 4: SCENEWORK

The Set-Up: Does this scene begin with the essential elements it needs?

 Were tense and/or hopeful (and usually false) expectations for this interaction established beforehand?

 Does the scene eliminate small talk and repeated beats by cutting out the beginning (or possibly even the middle)?

 Is this an intimidating setting that keeps characters active?

 Is one of the scene partners not planning to have this conversation (and quite possibly has something better to do)?

 Is there at least one non-plot element complicating the scene?

 Does the scene establish its own mini-ticking-clock (if only through subconscious anticipation)?

The Conflict: Is this a compelling collision of competing agendas?  

 Does this scene both advance the plot and reveal character through emotional reactions?

 Does the audience have (or develop) a rooting interest in this scene (which may sometimes shift)?

 Are two agendas genuinely clashing (rather than merely two personalities)?

 Does the scene have both a surface conflict and a suppressed conflict (one of which is the primary conflict in this scene)?

 Is the suppressed conflict (which may or may not come to the surface) implied through subtext (and/or called out by the other character)?

 Are the characters cagy (or in denial) about their own feelings?

 Do characters use verbal tricks and traps to get what they want, not just direct confrontation?

 Is there re-blocking, including literal push and pull between the scene partners (often resulting in just one touch)?

 Are objects given or taken, representing larger values?

The Outcome: Does this scene change the story going forward?

 As a result of this scene, does at least one of the scene partners end up doing something that he or she didn’t intend to do when the scene began?

 Does the outcome of the scene ironically reverse (and/or ironically fulfill) the original intention?

 Are previously-asked questions answered?

 Are new questions posed that will be left unanswered for now?

 Does the scene cut out early, on a question (possibly to be answered instantly by the circumstances of the next scene)?

 Is the audience left with a growing hope and/or fear for what might happen next? (Not just in the next scene, but generally)

PART 5: DIALOGUE

Empathetic: Is the dialogue true to human nature?

 Does the writing demonstrate empathy for all of the characters?

 Does each of the characters, including the hero, have a limited perspective?

 Do the characters consciously and unconsciously prioritize their own wants, rather than the wants of others?

 Are the characters resistant to openly admitting their feelings (to others and even to themselves)?

 Do the characters avoid saying things they wouldn’t say (and doing things they wouldn’t do)?

 Do the characters interrupt each other often?

Specific: Is the dialogue specific to this world and each personality?

 Does the dialogue capture the jargon and tradecraft of the profession and/or setting?

 Are there additional characters with distinct metaphor families, default personality traits, and default argument tactics?

Heightened: Is the dialogue more pointed and dynamic than real talk?

 Is the dialogue more concise than real talk?

 Does the dialogue have more personality than real talk?

 Is there a minimum of commas in the dialogue (the lines are not prefaced with Yes, No, Well, Look, or the other character’s name)?

 Do non-professor characters speak without dependent clauses, conditionals, or parallel construction?

 Are the non-3-dimensional characters impartially polarized into head, heart and gut?

Strategic: Are certain dialogue scenes withheld until necessary?

  Does the hero have at least one big “I understand you” moment with a love interest or primary emotional partner?

  Is exposition withheld until the hero and the audience are both demanding to know it?

 Is there one gutpunch scene, where the subtext falls away and the characters really lay into each other?

PART 6: TONE

Genre: Does the story tap into pre-established expectations?

 Is the story limited to one genre (or multiple genres that are merged from the beginning, without introducing a new genre after the first quarter?)

 Is the story limited to one sub-genre (or multiple sub-genres that are compatible with each other, without mixing metaphors)?

 Does the ending satisfy most of the expectations of the genre, and defy a few others?

 Separate from the genre, is a consistent mood (goofy, grim, ‘fairy tale’, etc.) established early and maintained throughout?

Framing: Does the story set, reset, upset and ultimately exceed its own expectations?
 Is there a dramatic question posed early on, which will establish in the audience’s mind which moment will mark the end of the story? 

 Does the story use framing devices to establish genre, mood and expectations?

 Are there characters whose situations prefigure various fates that might await the hero?

 Does foreshadowing create anticipation and suspense (and refocus the audience’s attention on what’s important)?

 Are reversible behaviors used to foreshadow and then confirm change?

 Is the dramatic question answered at the very end of the story?

PART 7: THEME

Difficult: Is the meaning of the story derived from a fundamental moral dilemma?

 Can the overall theme be stated in the form of an irreconcilable good vs. good (or evil vs. evil) dilemma?

 Is a thematic question asked out loud (or clearly implied) in the first half, and left open?

 Do the characters consistently have to choose between goods, or between evils, instead of choosing between good and evil?

Grounded: Do the stakes ring true to the world of the audience?

 Does the story reflect the way the world works?

 Does the story have something authentic to say about this type of setting (Is it based more on observations of this type of setting than ideas about it)?

 Does the story include twinges of real life national pain?

 Are these issues and the overall dilemma addressed in a way that avoids moral hypocrisy?

 Do all of the actions have real consequences?

Subtle: Is the theme interwoven throughout so that it need not be discussed often?

 Do many small details throughout subtly and/or ironically tie into the thematic dilemma?

 Are one or more objects representing larger ideas exchanged throughout the story, growing in meaning each time?

Untidy: Is the dilemma ultimately irresolvable?

 Does the ending tip towards on one side of the thematic dilemma without resolving it entirely?

 Does the story’s outcome ironically contrast with the initial goal?

 In the end, is the plot not entirely tidy (some smaller plot threads left unresolved, some answers left vague)?

 Do the characters refuse (or fail) to synthesize the meaning of the story, forcing the audience to do that?

Whew! So how did your story do? Go check out the Checklist Roadtests to see how some great stories line up.

The Expanded Ultimate Story Checklist: Is there an epilogue/aftermath/denouement in which the challenge is finally resolved (or succumbed to), and we see how much the hero has changed?

Real life is mostly epilogue. The ramifications of our crises linger for years, and we’re never sure if it turned out right. In fiction, we want tidier concluding moments, although not too tidy. 

• In exciting stories like Speed, this is often the moment when the hero and heroine take a breather and confirm that they really do care about each other, which often results in a first kiss. 
• The surviving heroes of The Great Escape get dragged back to prison, content in the knowledge that they’ve caused a huge distraction. 
• Many comedies, like Date Night, wrap up the dilemma (the marriage problems, in this instance) in a quiet scene just after the climax, which is fine. 
• In movies like Rear Window, we see that the underlying dilemma (the different interests of Kelly and Stewart) has not been resolved at all, though the climax brought about a temporary truce. This can work, too.

Rulebook Casefile: Reversible Behavior

An interesting thing I noticed when re-watching Ghostbusters was how muted and subtle the character arc was.  Our hero, Bill Murray, never has a midpoint disaster or a spiritual crisis. He never seems to doubt himself or get humbled.  He seems like the same cocky rogue all the way through…or is he?

He does in fact change quite a bit, and it’s set up very nicely through reversible behavior.  In the very first scene, Murray’s paranormal researcher is sabotaging his own ESP experiment just so that he can hit on the test subject.  He doesn’t truly believe in or care about the supernatural, he’s just using it to get dates.  

This scene is neatly reversed two thirds of the way in, when the new object of Murray’s affections, who has so far resisted his advances, throws herself at him.  He’s very tempted, but instead he forces himself to admit that she’s possessed, and he now values solving her problem more than scoring with her.  It’s not played like a big moment, nor should it be.  By subtly contrasting this scene with the first, the movie allows us to notice the difference for ourselves, whether consciously or subconsciously. 

The 40 Year Old Virgin	YES, he consummates at his wedding.  There’s even a nice moment where he kicks a floor waxer out of their suite, showing his newfound assertiveness.
Alien	YES, she gives a matter-of-fact unapologetic account of blowing up the ship, then goes to sleep with the cat.
An Education	YES. She’s happy at Oxford, with a new boy, pretending that she’s never been to Paris.
The Babadook	YES. It’s half-resolved/half-succumbed-to.  It’s interesting that some behaviors are reversed (She talks about her husband and let’s others do so) but some aren’t, (the basement is still verboten, he son is still violent)
Blazing Saddles	YES. He gives a speech then rides off into the sunset with the Waco Kid.
Blue Velvet	YES. he’s embraced his parent’s idyllic life and possibly married Sandy, but we see the Robin eating the beetle and we have to wonder if he’s crushed or absorbed the evil, which are two different ways of reading that image.
The Bourne Identity	YES. he tells her that he has no ID and smiles.
Bridesmaids	YES. She enjoys the wedding, bonds with Lillian, accepts the cop’s love.
Casablanca	YES. this time he stands up to the Nazis, then he goes off to join a Free French garrison in Braziville with Louis.
Chinatown	YES. There’s just a brief moment after the finale, when he’s told “Forget it, Jake, it’s Chinatown.”
Donnie Brasco	YES.  His family accepts him but he’s disgusted by his medal.
Do the Right Thing	YES. He talks to Sal the next morning.
The Farewell	YES. She returns home to New York, feels overwhelmed, then stops on the street and shouts “Ha!”, which she refused to do before.  We then find out that the grandma is still alive six years later.
The Fighter	YES. Interview, Dicky says, “He put Lowell back on the map.” Micky says “We”.  “Who’s the pride of Lowell now? Right here.” Points at Micky. “I gotta go.”
Frozen	YES. She’s happy in love, able to live outside the castle, and reconciled with her sister.
The Fugitive	YES. Kimble saves Gerard this time. Gerard also has reversible behavior: “Don’t tell anybody.”
Get Out	YES. He rediscovers peace-making and chooses not to choke Rose to death (but Peele points out that he ultimately leaves her to die alone in the road like his mother died).  Rod delivers the moral: “I told you not to go in that house.”  Chris presumably agrees.
Groundhog Day	YES. Succumbed to happily: he says “Let’s live here.”
How to Train Your Dragon	YES. He is accepted by the village and is physically transformed.
In a Lonely Place	YES. he watches her walk away and declares himself dead inside.
Iron Man	YES. He tries again with Pepper, but fails, and then tells the world who he is.
Lady Bird	YES. She goes to church and then calls her mom and leaves a message admitting that she loves Sacramento and her mom.
Raising Arizona	YES. They send gifts to Nathan Jr. as he grows up.  Maybe they’re able to have kids, or maybe that’s just a dream.
Rushmore	YES. he introduces his real father to everyone, and his selection of song “I wish that I knew what I know now, when I was younger,” lets us know that he’s learned.
Selma	YES. Johnson certainly shows how much he’s changed with his “We shall overcome” speech.  Has King changed?  He’s certainly wearier and bruised, and feeling more guilty about the deaths.   We see onscreen graphics telling us what happened to everybody.
The Shining	NO. an ambiguous final scene was cut out, leaving us with a quick cut to black as soon as they get away.
Sideways	YES. He drives north and knocks on her door. There’s no reversible behavior…they could have ended with him drinking merlot to show he’s changed, but that would have been too on the nose (no pun intended.)
The Silence of the Lambs	YES. She says lambs stopped screaming.
Star Wars	YES. He’s now a celebrated hero.
Sunset Boulevard	YES. Earlier in the climax, when he finally has the strength to resist Norma, even when she threatens suicide.

The Expanded Ultimate Story Checklist: Does the hero’s inner struggle climax shortly after (or possibly at the same time as) her outer struggle?

Catharsis only comes about because of crisis. We put off personal change until the last possible moment, at the crux of the crisis or afterward.

The inner conflict should not end too early. Once when a producer was quickly summing up the problems he had with my script, we got to the third act and he said, “It’s very exciting, but after a certain point it all runs downhill.” I asked him to explain, but he couldn’t, since he considered the point self-evident. I thought he was crazy. Was he saying I didn’t have enough conflict? There’s no way: It was an over-the-top, one-man-against-an-army-of-crazies finale. How does that roll downhill?

I think that now, years later, I’ve finally figured out what he was saying. My hero hadn't run out of exterior conflict; my hero had run out of dilemma. He still had a lot of bad guys to be defeated, but he no longer had internal tension caused by those actions.

Once I figured this out, it was an easy fix: I had to send my good guy into the final confrontation still seeking the temptation the bad guy had offered. I had to push the good guy’s final rejection of that temptation as late as possible, right at the heart of the climax. The hero’s dilemma should be exacerbated by the conflict, and vice versa, until the last moment, when the resolution of the dilemma and the resolution of the conflict should happen at about the same time.

• In any movie where it might be all in the hero’s head, the inner struggle and outer struggle automatically end at the same time, such as in The Babadook and Groundhog Day. 
• The hero of How to Train Your Dragon reconciles with his father during the heat of battle. 
• Die Hard is very tidy: Willis wins his wife back by shooting the bad guy dead. 

Note: Sometimes the inner struggle happens early in sports movies. In both Breaking Away and The Fighter, the emotional breakthroughs happen before the hero competes at the end. The real story is over, and the final triumph is essentially a victory lap.

Every hero must complete both an outer journey and an inner journey. These journeys should overlap at certain points, but not the whole time. Sometimes you can create a finale where the hero completes both journeys at the same moment (such as using the force to blow up the Death Star in Star Wars) but not always. Often, the hero must complete them at different times, but it’s good to have the culminations of these journeys both happen near the climax. Sometimes the hero completing the inner journey allows them to compete the outer journey right afterwards. Sometimes completing the outer journey allows them to complete the inner journey in the epilogue.

On first viewing of Get Out, the viewer is not super aware of Chris’s inner journey, though we can tell it’s there: He’s trying to forgive himself for doing nothing when he mother was dying in the street from an accident. We see Missy elicit this information from him while hypnotizing him, and we see him admit his feeling of guilt to Rose later, but then, since the outer journey is so exciting, we don’t really think about the inner journey very much.

But Peele is doing a lot of subtle work to make sure we feel Chris’s inner journey on a subconscious level, even if we don’t think about it. Only when you listen to the DVD commentary is all this work made explicit.

We can’t know this on first viewing, but Chris’s inner journey begins when he hits a deer on the way to see Rose’s parents. He insists on getting out to see if the deer is alright, but finds it dead. He then insists on calling the police, despite the fact that doing so often ends poorly for black men. To Chris, the deer is his mom, and he’s still trying to save her.

Later, when Chris has his bizarre encounter with Georgina, and sees her cry, he suspects that she may be a victim in some way, which also makes him think of his mom.

Later, when Chris is held captive in the basement, there’s a huge buck head on the wall. According to Peele, this represents Chris’s dad. It shouldn’t have been up to Chris to make sure his mom was okay, it should have been up to his dad, who “wasn’t in the picture.” Chris escapes and kills Rose’s dad by stabbing him with the points of the buck’s head. He is not only displacing Rose’s father as the dominant male in the house, he’s replacing his own dad. His mom is the deer and he is the rescuing buck his dad couldn’t be. As Peele says:

• The buck is of course not only a used not only to describe strong black men in the past, but is a symbol, the male version of the doe that he hits.

But Chris still needs to take one more step to resolve his inner journey. When he’s driving away from the house, Georgina, controlled by the grandmother’s mind, runs out to stop him but he accidentally hits her with his car. He then starts to drive away, leaving her limp body in the road behind him. Then he stops. He can’t leave her, even though he knows that the real Georgina is buried deep inside her and may never be able to be rescued. He just can’t leave a black woman dying in the street like his mom died. So he goes back, gets her unconscious body, and puts it in his driver’s seat.

In the end, it doesn’t work. She wakes up, still controlled by the grandma, tries to take over the car, crashes it, and presumably dies in the crash. But still Chris tried, and trying finally allowed him to forgive himself for not trying to save his own mother. As Peele says:

• When he went back for Georgina, he made the only decision that would free his soul.

What’s the point of including an inner journey so subtle that you have to watch the commentary to spot it? The hope is that, even if the audience doesn’t see it, they can feel it. We sense that there’s an elemental power in Chris’s use of the buck head. We sense that something deep is going on inside when he tries to rescue Georgina, even if we’re too caught up in it to think of his mom. “Know More Than You Show” doesn’t just apply to plot, it also applies to theme.

The 40 Year Old Virgin	YES, he flies through the billboard and admits the titular problem at the last possible minute.
Alien	YES. Pretty much.  She has no time to process her decision to break from the company until after she kills the thing.
An Education	YES. It is only after she’s been at Oxford for a while that forgives herself and put the affair in the proper context.
The Babadook	YES. The same moment.
Blazing Saddles	YES. Afterwards, he realizes that he’s got to go ride the west saving others.
Blue Velvet	YES. he comes shooting out of the closet.
The Bourne Identity	YES. he finally figures out who he really is as he confronts the bad guy.
Bridesmaids	YES.
Casablanca	YES. Shortly before, but it’s okay that the final confrontation with Strasser “rolls downhill”.
Chinatown	YES. The same moment.
Donnie Brasco	YES.  basically, it never really ends.  He’s still conflicted, even though it’s over.
Do the Right Thing	YES. The same time.
The Farewell	YES. She finally tells her Nai Nai one piece of truth, that she didn’t get the fellowship.  They bond as much as they can without the truth of the diagnosis coming out.
The Fighter	NO. Quite a bit before.  The last 15 minutes of this movie “roll downhill” a little bit, as Mickey solves his problems out of the ring well before the last fight.
Frozen	YES. At the same time.
The Fugitive	YES. to the degree that he has an inner struggle.  He finally trusts that Gerard trusts him, and his inner journey comes full circle.
Get Out	YES. Chris chooses to try to save Georgina and thus makes his peace with his mom’s death.  He fails to save her, but “saves” Walter just in time for Walter to kill Rose and himself.
Groundhog Day	YES. The same time.
How to Train Your Dragon	YES. He reconciles with his father in the middle of the final battle.
In a Lonely Place	YES. after he is cleared, the real internal crisis comes.
Iron Man	YES. Afterwards, when he finally decides who he is.
Lady Bird	YES. She accepts her name, but then lies about where she’s from at a college party, then drinks herself into oblivion and wakes up at the hospital.
Raising Arizona	YES. after Smalls is dead, they hash out their relationship issues with Nathan Arizona.
Rushmore	NO. it ends earlier, and it ends offscreen.  They want us to believe that he’s buidling up to a school shooting, so they don’t show us that he’s dealt everything and moved on.  We just figure that out when we see the play.
Selma	YES. The victory seems to assure King that he made the right decision in turning back.
The Shining	YES. It never climaxes.  He’s still freaked out at the end.
Sideways	YES. After.
The Silence of the Lambs	YES. Symbolically: girl who’s about to be skinned stops screaming.
Star Wars	YES. He resolves his inner struggle at the final moment in order to succeed.
Sunset Boulevard	Well, shortly before. He finally finds his self-respect, then gets killed.