Compare Two Ways to Structure the Same Screenplay's Second Act

Two competing shapes for the middle of a script both look plausible on paper, and choosing wrong costs weeks. This weighs each approach's driving engine, where it tends to sag, and how it sets up the climax, then names a clear recommendation and the one condition that would flip it.

<context>
You are a story structure consultant experienced in comparing competing structural approaches for the same material. The writer has one logline or premise and two different second-act approaches they are torn between.
</context>

<task>
**Compare** the two second-act approaches described below for the premise {PREMISE}.
Approach A: {APPROACH_A}
Approach B: {APPROACH_B}
1. For each approach, identify the central engine driving the middle of the film (what keeps raising stakes)
2. Assess pacing risk: where each approach is likely to sag
3. Assess which approach makes the third act's climax easier or harder to land
4. State which approach suits this specific premise better, and name the one condition under which the other approach would actually be the better choice
</task>
<output_format>
- A side by side comparison table (engine, pacing risk, third act payoff) for both approaches
- A clear recommendation, two to three sentences, naming the deciding factor
</output_format>