Q: What is the difference between 'rising action' and 'mid-point'?
Think of action as complications; additional problems to deal with.
The story begins with the "Normal World", the hero is fine and stable in their normal world. Perhaps there is a minor problem to deal with, but it is normal.
This is how we learn about our hero, and like that person, and get some idea of how they think.
Inciting Incident: The hero has an unusual problem. This is a complication. The hero tries to resolve this problem quickly, but fails. The problem is more complicated than they thought.
They may try again, but whatever they do, the problem gets worse. In fact, by the end of act I, the problem is so bad, their "normal world" is disrupted, they cannot carry on as they were. They must leave their normal world (either literally or metaphorically) in order to pursue a resolution to this problem.
In fact, the problem compounds and gets worse and more complicated, all the way to the story midpoint. The hero, due to their bad assumptions and mistakes, utterly fails in an attempt to solve the problem. Completely.
They have misunderstood the threat, or under-estimated it. Perhaps they were betrayed by somebody they thought was an ally.
But then, after licking their wounds and mourning their losses, they rise back up. They understand how things work now. (or think they do).
This is the essence of a hero: They get kicked, cut, blown up, shot, beaten, but no matter how bad their ass gets kicked, they get back up. The essence of a fictional hero is that they would rather die than lose. And you need need to prove that in your story. Hurt them! (This is why beginner "wish fulfillment" stories fail; their heroes never lose, never face any adversity, self-doubt, or despair.)
Q: How would one make 'climax' and 'falling action' work?
The term "falling action", in the second half, refers to simplification. After the midpoint defeat, we stop adding complications, and start resolving them. Basically, we are tying up all the open questions.
The midpoint corrects a major misunderstanding, and that misunderstanding was the cause of the hero's big loss. There can be others. Most stories have multiple plot threads, romance, mystery, secrets to be exposed perhaps.
Scene by scene, we want to resolve the complications we introduced in the first half, without introducing more. In fact, there can be a kind of domino effect: The resolution of question 3 explains something that helps explain question 4. For example, Mary was never in love with Evil John, the secret is Mary and Evil John are siblings and nobody knew that except them. That is why she saved him. But if Mary and Evil John are siblings, then Mary is actually the daughter of ...
In the third act, nearly all mysteries are resolved. Our hero, beaten and broken, now knows enough, even if they are not sure of that. But, true to hero demands, they will make one last do or die attempt. And this time, they prevail.
Following that is the "denoument", which is basically, the "new world", for the hero. They may return home, or if that is impossible, take their place in the new normal for them.
Luke becomes a real Jedi. In Die Hard, John McClane (Bruce Willis) defeats the terrorist and saves his wife, with whom he is rejoined. (Die Hard is a good example of the best kind of hero: They kick the livin' sh*t out of John McClane!) Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) completes the Impossible Mission.
In the movie "RED" (Retired and Extremely Dangerous), the bad guys are dead, the mystery solved, and Frank Moses (Bruce Willis) and Sarah Ross (Mary-Louise Parker) are together in romance.
Note the movie opens with Frank making excuses to talk with Sarah on the phone, there is a clear unrequited attraction between them: so the final scenes of the movie resolve Frank's 'problem' of unrequited romantic interest we saw in the very first scenes. And this is an example of a "New Normal" for both of them.
It is much easier to identify the 3 acts in movies, because they are time constrained. But the principles apply to novels, and even series.
