Story Structure In 3 Words - Alan Watt [Founder of L.A. Writers' Lab]
Vložit
- čas přidán 19. 05. 2019
- BUY THE BOOK - THE 90 DAY SCREENPLAY: From Concept To Polish
amzn.to/2LBhmUO
BUY THE BOOK - THE 90 DAY NOVEL: Unlock The Story Within
amzn.to/2Vj8Y10
BUY THE BOOK - THE 90 DAY MEMOIR: Tell the Story of Your Life
amzn.to/3U4EjBv
Alan Watt is an LA Times bestselling author and winner of France's Prix Printemps for best foreign novel. He is the writer/director of the feature film, Eddie, Kill the President. which won 4 Best Feature awards at US Film Festivals, and the Filmmaker Visionary award at The Boston Film Festival. He founded L.A. Writers' Lab in 2002 where he teaches his process of marrying the wildness of your imagination to the rigor of story structure in his online 90-Day workshops for novel, memoir and screenplay, to writers around the world. His book, The 90-Day Novel is a national bestseller and was Amazon's #1 book on writing for five months. He has taught his method everywhere from maximum security prisons to Stanford University. His students run the gamut from first-time writers to A-list screenwriters and Pulitzer prize-winning journalists. His motto is, start where you are, trust the process, and let the thrill of creation be your reward.
In this Film Courage video interview LA Writer's Lab founder Alan Watt shares story structure in three words.
ALAN WATT'S WRITING WORKSHOPS
lawriterslab.com
MORE VIDEOS WITH ALAN WATT
bit.ly/2DXA6Yx
CONNECT WITH ALAN WATT
lawriterslab.com
www.imdb.com/name/nm5067037
/ lawriterslab
/ lawriterslab
/ lawriterslab
BECOME A FILM COURAGE MEMBER
/ @filmcourage
CONNECT WITH FILM COURAGE
www.FilmCourage.com
#!/FilmCourage
/ filmcourage
/ filmcourage
/ filmcourage
BUSINESS INQUIRIES
bit.ly/22M0Va2
SUBSCRIBE TO THE FILM COURAGE CZcams CHANNEL
bit.ly/18DPN37
LISTEN TO THE FILM COURAGE PODCAST
/ filmcourage-com
PROMOTE YOUR MOVIE, WEBSERIES, OR PRODUCT ON FILM COURAGE
bit.ly/1nnJkgm
SUPPORT FILM COURAGE
/ filmcourage
Stuff we use:
CAMERA - This is the camera we have used to film 90+% of our interviews (over 200 interviews and counting) It continues to be our workhorse - amzn.to/2u66V1J
LENS - Most people ask us what camera we use, no one ever asks about the lens which filmmakers always tell us is more important. This lens was a big investment for us and one we wish we could have made sooner. Started using this lens at the end of 2013 - amzn.to/2tbtmOq
AUDIO
Rode VideoMic Pro - The Rode mic helps us capture our backup audio. It also helps us sync up our audio in post amzn.to/2t1n2hx
Audio Recorder - If we had to do it all over again, this is probably the first item we would have bought - amzn.to/2tbFlM9
LIGHTS - Although we like to use as much natural light as we can, we often enhance the lighting with this small portable light. We have two of them and they have saved us a number of times - amzn.to/2u5UnHv
COMPUTER - Our favorite computer, we each have one and have used various models since 2010 - amzn.to/2t1M67Z
EDITING - We upgraded our editing suite this year and we’re glad we did! This has improved our workflow and the quality of our work. Having new software also helps when we have a problem, it’s easy to search and find a solution - goo.gl/56LnpM
*These are affiliate links, by using them you can help support this channel.
#writing #screenwriting #writing101 - Krátké a kreslené filmy
![Why 99% Of Stories Are Meaningless - Alan Watt [Founder of L.A. Writers' Lab]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/v4wkx8LBH_s/mqdefault.jpg)
![Why 99% Of Stories Are Meaningless - Alan Watt [Founder of L.A. Writers' Lab]](/img/tr.png)
![Dilemma Is The Source Of A Story - Alan Watt [Founder of L.A. Writers' Lab]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TqG-xP156bg/mqdefault.jpg)
![What Screenwriters Get Wrong About Outlines - Alan Watt [Founder of L.A. Writers' Lab]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/r5KfTjQCD5c/mqdefault.jpg)
![Story Is A Search For Meaning - Alan Watt [Founder of L.A. Writers' Lab]](/img/n.gif)
Watch Alan Watt's full interview here: czcams.com/video/tBR5BCLkHDE/video.html
6:25
Desire
Surrender
Transformation
Thanks!!
legend :) thanks
I feel like I can name quite a few movies that don't have this... I'd like to hear him explain how every KIND of story utilizes these concepts/story beats.
@@anthonynelson6249 It seems to be a reduction of the heroes journey
Thank 💡 you.
I’ve been so frustrated with reading books that deconstruct stories but don’t really help you to work out your own process of building stories. I was beginning to think that it was just me missing some point or something. I am glad I’ve found this advice on here. 🙏❤️
That is exactly the same as me! ♥️
“I have no dog in this race. I’m not dogmatic, at all...”
That made me laugh.
so THAT's what that word means… 😂
Dogmatic = the state of having a dog in a race. It sort of works. I like it.
This guy distills the essentials of storytelling better than anyone I've ever heard.
That "some kind of fight" he's talking about is writers holding onto their process and trying to prove TO THEMSELVES that they haven't been wasting years banging on the door to an empty room, that they're right in what they're doing, but just need to continue doing it. The fear of discovering you've been doing it wrong, and by doing it wrong have learned either nothing or worse purely counterproductive things, that you'll have to start over knowing nothing useful makes them defensive and dogmatic. It never occurs to them that learning what NOT to do is just as important as learning a productive process in providing the ability to identify and avoid missteps. I think it occurs in people who tend toward processes built by other people (as in education), like following recipes. If all you do to learn to cook is follow recipes, you'll never learn to do anything but mimic others. Like learning to play music: at some point, after learning chords and scales, hundreds of hours of hearing notes interact, if you can't tear loose and just jam, you're missing the good stuff. And the crummy, doesn't work stuff. These are the people for whom every project must turn out as a hit song, a prizewinning story, an award winning dish. They don't get that a big part of the fun of creation is just the creation process itself and that the outcome doesn't matter until it's done. The kids who didn't care about outcome, but just had fun with the process of finger painting in kindergarten were the kids that mixed green and purple, who made paintings of nonsensical stuff and loved it, the kids whose painting of a horse looked like a purple firetruck. I Imagine Pablo Picasso was one of these kids. And Stephen King is one of these writers. Truth is in the observation, not the depiction of the observed. Nobody watches Bob Ross because he's secretly Da Vinci.
This is the third interview I've seen of Alan Watt and each one's caused me to respect/like him more.
Desire, Surrender, Transformation. Simple but effective.
Two of my favorite people: Alan Watts and Alan Watt.
Coincidence?!?
I'm sorry, Watt do you mean?
I'm sorry, Watt do you mean?
No, that is not a coincidence, because those are not things that occurred. Coincidence relates to events or state of events. Anyway, there is nothing significant there that they have similar names.
Actually, when he said I don't have a method, with someone bearing a similar name it's almost impossible to imagine that he hasn't looked him up; so saying I don't have a method is such an Alan Watt(s) thing to say; you know? lol
Same! My favourite people for ideas and just general soundness.
I love this guy! There is also the bleak storyline, where the protagonist makes the wrong choice at the end, but it still ties into this way of thinking about story structure. The movie Chappaquiddick did a good job of this. The movie illustrates why the character has flaws and you're hoping for surrender and redemptive action...but...alas...
This is a really good interview. this guy knows what he's talking about.
and really thinking about, a lot of 'bad' stories are 'incomplete' stories. An unimportant or 'filler' moment can be given so much more meaning with context, foreshadowing, irony, etc.
This instructor may be the best of breed of the various story theorists on here --- so far. He is articulate, cerebral, and engaging. Big ideas, on the mark on how writers think and where they get stuck. I personally empathize with his struggle to explain his ideas clearly. It's like he has an Editor in his head challenging him to defend his idea. Kind of like comedian Gaffigan who heckles his own jokes as he goes. Just awesome
I love seeing these videos analyzing story structure. So very helpful
6:30 "Show me any story, you're gonna have a character who wants something; a desire. You're gonna have a character that lets go of meaning they for their goal; surrender. You're gonna have a character that experiences transformation; a shift in perception. Show me a story that doesn't have that and I'll show you a story that doesn't work".
Lou Bloom. Nightcrawler.
Lou has only one goal, to start a video production company and doesn't compromise on his goal. He doesn't experience any transformation, he leaves the screen the same way he appeared on it; except successful. Lou doesn't let go off any meaning pertaining to his goal so this guy is being slightly dogmatic because Dan Gilroy already proved you don't need to tick all those boxes to tell a compelling story.
American History X - the main character initially has no “want”, even if he experiences surrender and transformation. After the transformation, he realizes what he _should_ want.
Good Will Hunting - the main character in initially has no “want”, but experiences surrender and transformation. Actually, every other character in the story either wants something for him, or wants him to want something for himself.
So yeah, I wouldn’t say every story has a main character who goes through a clear “want/desire, surrender and transformation”.
Night crawler did indeed have the 3
He desired a production company
He surrender to the mentality of whatever is takes
He transformed into the person who would do whatever it took to get there
@@bobdhshshxhzvs2314 what scene did he “surrender”? He was never conflicted by doing what it takes. He’s literally looting a site and then takes out a security guard and steals his watch in the first scene.
The three act beat always works for me. I use it as a kind of road map to stay on track. Setup/hook-Confrontation-Resolution. I write short stories so the first two acts are the longest. The third act should move at a faster pace and always have a satisfying outcome. No happy endings for me though; life isn't that perfect.
Straight forward and honest. Thanks for creating and posting. Alan's approach is wonderfully calm, yet reflect great confidence and experience. Clearly a guy to learn from.
One of your best. Thank you!
What he's trying to say about 3-act structure etc. is that it's a product of analysis, not a tool for construction. It's applied to existing stories to understand them, not a rule for how to build one - and this incidentally is why it's absurd when someone asserts that a particular story 'is not in 3 acts' - ALL stories can be understood as 3-act stories, because the concept is a perspective being applied to the object, not its basis. Understanding how existing stories work is beneficial but that's not how you learn to create. The equivalent would be to attempt reverse-engineering without ever studying engineering.
and yet people like the writers of the "girl with the dragoon tatoo"(the movie) say things like abandoning the 3 act structure and writing with 5 act structure instead.
Illuminating, thank you.
Great video! Thanks!!
''Does hearing this perspective help you with your process?'' Absolutely. I understood the meaning of desire as applied to story but his use of the word surrender and his definition of it really cleared up some confusion I had and his definition of transformation was also extremely helpful. It gave me a quantum leap.Thank you so much.
Fantastic. Just fantastic.
Thanks for the tips!
I appreciate the way he describes learning story structure -- it's a relief to break from the very mathematical approach I see most often, which is interesting when studying a film after it's been made but can feel awfully cold and exclusionary when trying to develop a plot.
This guy is the realest
This is excellent. Yes, there are various processes to writing a screenplay and I try to be open to learning something from each teacher’s approach. Alan does an excellent job of distilling this process into some simple yet powerful guidelines.
What a great man!
Good thinking.
I have his 90 day screenplay book. I was unable to write an act 2 for a long time I mean you would have thought I was trying to figure out some crazy Albert Eienstein level, math problem it was so hard for me. I tried to take his screenwriting teleclass 2x as I do not live in L.A., both times were cancelled. I finally learned how to write an act 2 on my own. Altho the book did help a bit, helping to develop my character, I wanted to take his class. b/c during his free intro phone calls the real help seemed to be via his one on one guidance. On the calls he was quite adept and actually sort of lovingly helping students form the "theme," dilemma of their stories. He has this patience and just equanimity I don't think I could have. But despite trying I was unable to take a class with him or his organization. Just bad timing. By the time the class was given again I had taught myself. And not for nothing the thing that really helped me was "acting,' exercises. I am an introvert but audited an acting class with a friend and was amazed at all the stuff they did to unleash imagination and sharpen senses and just learn abt. themselves, etc. I feel writing classes should be more like acting classes. They have acting for writing which I audited one class as well, but it wasn't the same and my character was becoming a caricature during the class so I never continued with it. I dropped out of most writing classes. Of the may 5-8 classes I registered for, I dropped out of 4-6. They were nonsense. One teacher said well ur inciting moment doesn't;t happen on pg. 10. Conforming to some syd field or Robert ackee nonsense which never helped me. I was like wtf. This teacher taught at a prestigious arts school altho granted their continuing ed department. But it was the biggest writing class ever been in. I am assuming b/c of the name altho cont. ed. It was awful. And most writers do not know what they are writing about, it's why they can't get pass page 40. And like I heard Al say many times as well as others when we write we are trying to resolve something within, but in writing classes students are never taught to go inward. I remember being super frustrated after I guess my 2nd draft. Altho I had 90 pages I did not have a story. I had plot. At that time what I believe Al refers dilemma (sp?) others refer to as theme or rather similar. I couldn't figure out my theme to save my life On some whim I got an acting book and did some exercises and found my theme. I am still not a writer who can put my premise/dilemma in a sentence. It all sort of comes out in pieces and bits that eventually adds up and feels true to me. I wish I could afford him for coverage as well but can't.
He was on point
GREAT INTERVIEW 👍 👍👍👌👌😎👏 KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK 👌👌😎😁😀😀
Look forward to sharing more of this interview. Thanks for watching.
desire, surrender, transformation. BRILLIANT!
Dan Reznik Doesn’t apply to all stories, though!
American History X - the main character initially has no “want”, even if he experiences surrender and transformation. After the transformation, he realizes what he _should_ want.
Good Will Hunting - the main character in initially has no “want”, but experiences surrender and transformation. Actually, every other character in the story either wants something for him, or wants him to want something for himself.
So yeah, I wouldn’t say every story has a main character who goes through a clear “want/desire, surrender and transformation”, but it’s a good guide for a traditional good story.😊
A refreshing dazzle of simple brilliance vs. all of the attempts, by the inexhaustible pundits, to baffle with bullshit. SOoooo wish I could take this class!
I find writing a lot helps me try new options. If I write one complete story a day, after 2 weeks, I'm happy to try someone's method of developing a character, b/c I'm tired but committed to doing my 3 or 4 week practice. Also, when I go through scenes I've written with a "checklist," I get tired. So, when I get to the scene that others don't like, but that I was fighting for, I'm happy to see it go.
I recommend starting at 3:43.
Yes.
All stories are agreements and the fulfillment of expectations are paramount. Failure to do so violates the agreement and that is a bad story doomed to rejection.
Beautiful left background. Thinking, what would camera 3ft right look like? Vertical lines in molding penetrating head would be gone. Two movies have lingered with me recently, 'Man from Reno' and "A Fortunate Man'. Neither fit the Hollywood mold. Certainly, the latter could fit Alan's DST model.
Maybe the best FC videos I've ever seen. The plot point approach to the structure has always rubbed me the wrong way. And he's absolutely correct: Story comes down to /transcendence/ - from life to death to rebirth and it doesn't matter when or how that happens.
amazies
Desire, Surrender, Transformation. 6:30
Alan Watt is a prominent writer
Does one character go through all 3?
The 3 acts? I would say yes but that doesn't have to be the protagonist or antagonist... Just one of the lead characters if you have several POV characters
A good insight but Mr Watt should have been able to make it in a less convoluted way, in my opinion.
A thought that I keep reminding myself of is not to look at a structure/story/character issue as a problem, rather, see it as an opportunity. If writing is a combination of head and heart, which is how I look at it, then use one - head or heart - to solve an issue, or create opportunity, for the other.
If "Head" is the technical and "Heart" is the emotional then their should be some fluidity between the two, just as there is in human beings in real life.
As an example: If one character in your story kills another and it isn't working because of the technical (The place in the script where you made it happen, or structure) then you could address that in the following (Emotional) way. Have your two characters argue in that initial scene, then in a later scene they fight, then in a further scene the murder occurs.
This means that you have created an opportunity for yourself as a writer - you now get to write 3 scenes instead of one - and for the story itself - to change the structure. If you had purely seen it as a problem you might well have just removed the initial murder scene altogether, and missed an opportunity!
I hope the above makes sense, it does in my head! :)
My thoughts too on the way he answered the question, although there were great points. Love your 'head' and 'heart' explanation, very useful. I'm stuck on a scene and your tip is my glimmer of hope! 👌
@@camerasade4360 Hi, thanks for the reply. Glad I was able to help in some small way. Good luck with your writing! :)
@@coloaten6682 Thank you!
@@camerasade4360 No worries, I've never been somebody's "Glimmer of hope" before! Now you HAVE to let me know how it works out or the suspense will kill me ;-)
@@coloaten6682haha! Sometimes just a few words makes the most difference. I'd be happy to updste you on the writing :)
This was really helpful. As I was watching I kept thinking about a script I'm working on with a historical backdrop and three primary historical characters -- but also with an ensemble of created characters -- who, I've recently discovered, are starting to drive the story progression! Whoops. But it will still resolve well if I flip-flop everything. I'll let the ensemble drive the action and progression. But then in the third act, I'll bring in from the shadows, the three historical characters who've been controlling the action and events all along. 'Scuse me while I pat myself on the back ...
"Because I have no dog in this race." 1:18 The expressions are "no dog in this FIGHT" or "no HORSE in this race." I would be a little worried if I were paying for classes from a writing expert that mangles this.
What if we studied how process work when it DOESN'T end with Casablanca? Is that how you get Gigli?
"...any character will let go of meaning they made out of their goal: surrender"
Can someone elaborate on that comment and provide some examples from movies?
Thank you
I think this is the "be careful what you wish for," like when you see a character become a monster and lose his friends in pursuit of his goal only to go back and make amends. Happens in rom-coms a lot when they start off doing something mischievous and then feel bad about it or then they *Actually* fall in love
Well, every story has it`s point of surrender. When character realise of his weakness. Let`s take for example the Ant-man. He try to stop villian almost an the end , but he failed. And this was moment of surrender, when you realised than everything is over. And after than character reborn and tried to fight out for exambple or surrender. And this is Transformation
First!!!
gross.
I can't help but wonder if comedies have the same type of rules or if they have no rules at all.
When is a screenwriter apt at being a teacher? Cuz I looked him up on IMDb and he did not do a lot...
for some reason, teachers don't produce much, even the famous ones.
@Film Courage - thank you for providing instruction for moderately poor (I own a laptop) folk. The industry is a big fat liar. This dude (seriously - the name missing an "s"?), stammer and all, is very insightful despite the speaking in Hollywood Tongue (cliches of success) and so I would like to teach him how to sit and speak. "Do you want to keep the stammer?", I would say, and he would search his soul for "definition of character". Dude, use your onboard thesaurus and step away from the Hollywood cliche. Mister Alan Watt: Do you want to lose the stammer? It's only a day away a Griffith Park Seminar Vocal Command unless it rains then were all funked. Kidding, I love rain. "Watch the Hollywood Hills, wash away, wash away-ay-ay-ay-eeah-aay". Be well. Do you serve people "without the proper body parts"?
I don’t understand that “surrender”. What does it mean “let go of the meaning they made out of their goal”?
The goal is very important to the character, and most characters refuse to believe their goal was wrong, or unimportant, or misunderstood. Finally, the character understands this and surrenders (abandons) their old goal. The character realizes what their new, true, proper goal should be.
The Star Wars analogy: When Luke abandons his self-doubt and his dreams of adventure as a space pilot, and instead surrenders to the force (gains self confidence) and is only then able to destroy he enemy.
WanJae42 Thank you.
American History X - the main character initially has no “want”, even if he experiences surrender and transformation. After the transformation, he realizes what he _should_ want.
Good Will Hunting - the main character in initially has no “want”, but experiencing surrender and transformation. Actually, every other character in the story either wants something for him, or wants him to want something for himself.
🤔
N NYC, those three magic words are G.F.Y. 🤣
First let me state, that I really like this guy, this theoretical teacher. But to primary point @ 6:38 I'm going to object. Here's my evidence, in the movie Heat, Robert De Niro (if you agree that he's the "protagonist" rather than Al Pacino) he never "surrenders" his position to achieve his "goal".
There was no "transformation" in his belief; (which was: "You never attach yourself to something that you can't walk away from in 30 minutes flat if you spot the heat around the corner"). Did Heat not "work"?
That's a crime film. The rules are different and the films usually end with the hero's fall as a result of their criminal doings (Goodfellas, the Departed, Heat). His advice is still very good, but genre conventions sometimes dictate how the story plays out.
True, but you could bend it and make it still hold true to what he was saying.
Desire: 'You never attach yourself to something that you can't walk away from in 30 minutes flat if you spot the heat around the corner.'
Surrender: Falling in love, and the possibility of letting go of his 'one rule'
Transformation: Leaving his love and going deeper down the dark hole.
Jesus, Lead with that lol
He’s having a bit of difficulty getting to the point.
He was on point.
NO, HE IS TAKING HIS TIME ELABORATING THE POINT by taking examples and factors of the issue and illustrating them to the degree needed to move forward. That said, this isnt for people who want/need simple answers.
It's a little bit of both. He was having a little trouble pulling it together into a succinct statement of what he meant to say. I think the pointed nature of the question and his not wanting to be offensive made the start difficult.
its nice to compare structure.. i think stories seem to come from innspiration. inspiration is a gift... so they come from a hogher power. and from possibilities... they need to work on many levels..
innovating scripts is tricky.. what does this scene need? structure helps to review the ingrediants..
I had the desire to write a children’s book. I had a germ of an idea and started writing. I let the characters take me on their journey which I found fascinating. New characters popped up when needed. I plowed through excited to see where this was leading because I had no idea. When I concluded my 6000 word story I realized I had the option of ending it or my story made a great first chapter. I continued on sometimes the story wrote itself. I would edit later. Sometimes I’d hit a wall and leave it for 2-5 months...then eureka a solution popped into my head... the process continued. 16 chapter later I have finished the book. But the story is not over book two has legs.
Why doesn't he just say the story and its structure is one thing, but how you go about putting it all on paper in its final form (the process) is something else entirely? Both steps require the best of our creative inner self.
Desire, surrender, transformation. Ya cudda started with that instead of hemming and hawing for seven minutes. How about "hey, kids, when your life is truly an adventure and no one's cliche - not even the Buddhists! - your story writes itself and all you need is a sharpie and a spiral notebook. Two bucks twenty at the Dollar Tree. You are so L.A. cute - just the right twinge of anger.
Mr. Watt, I think reversal is the same as change/transformation/Shift I don't get caught up in the terms, titles, etc .. it's a process not our own, the journey is spiritual for some and learned for others and its never the same , each story breathes its own life, original ideas are conceived, born. Religions are still fighting about the meaning of the bible.. for heaven's sake, this only delays the process and we all know delay is the delay of ideas and can be the death of that story. It can emerge as a different story, but not that original thought. Opposition will come.. great stories are not abstract, are not black and white although the cinematic outcome can be.
What's with the CC being different from the actual interview? It's like a ret-con lol But seriously, someone transcribed the interview (actual transcriber, not machine generated output) and put in other words? What gives? That's being a bit dishonest, that's the point.
Transaction
Ramshackle
Concubine
Saved you 8 minutes
Thank you, you're doing the Lord's work
🙏🙏
love those movies! top 3 all time for sure.
ACT 1, ACT 2, ACT 3, BEGINNING, MIDDLE, END.
But not necessarily the story
Writers, regardless of type, tend to lack six sigma skills. If they used such skills they could overlay already published writing instruction material and identify the best practices and omit useless ideas and information. It's not the structure that's incorrect, its what the structure is. When AI designs structure for an airplane it looks nothing like the planes that fly now. So planes now are inefficient and AI designs an efficient structure. Writers need to implement the same theory and processes.
Umm...might watch this again. You lost me.
vivisection is cutting live beings. dissection is when they are dead. great talk otherwise : )
Too much hemming and hawing.
That's the hazard of extemporaneous interviews. He has probably written his ideas down, and the written form would be more concise.
Structure is not story.
Got to 1:34. Nothing but drivel, so far. Maybe I'll come back.
Start around 3:43.
The film the master uses none of these 3
The Master uses all 3 of these. I’ll happily list them, but I’d like to see you try and do it yourself. I believe you can.
Joaquin Phoenix's film?
The Master:
Desire: Live a life of debauchery
Surrender: He joins the cult and changes.
Transformation: Realises he doesn't need then and then goes his own way.
(Saw it a long time ago, don't remember the whole story, but that's my two pence)
So basically, if you disagree with him, it's okay and let's talk about it. But he more or less already believes he's right so it's a moot point. The typical passive-know-it-all who doesn't want to be seen as a know-it-all.
Meh