It seems like in every positive movie review, the reviewer will describe the movie as being "character-driven". I've become dubious about the term because I've found that if a term is used too frequently, it's usually used incorrectly. After reading an article about the Lost finale in which the author denied that the show is character-driven, I started to further question the concept of a character-driven movie, and whether or not the term is synonymous with good cinematic quality.
The idea that only character-driven movies are "good" has been driven into our skulls so exclusively that's it's easy not to question its validity. But calling a movie "character-driven" or "plot-driven" is not a statement about the quality of the movie, it's a statement about its general structure. I'm sure we all know some bad character-driven movies, and conversely, some great plot-driven ones. But things are still a little foggy here. Before we go further, we first need to define the concepts behind character- and plot-driven storylines.
Character-driven: The main character drives the movie's progress and is the focus of the audience's attention. The story may explore the philosophies of the characters, or the characters' idiosyncrasies may "steal the show". (Britton) The characters move the story forward and cause events to happen through their actions. (Schmidt)
Example: Napolean Dynamite and O Brother Where Art Thou. In both cases, the personalities and choices of the main characters dominate their respective movies.
Plot-driven: The events of the storyline drive the movie. The characters do not create situations or events themselves. (Schmidt) The maguffin is the most important aspect of the story and the characters are just along for the ride. It's important to note that just because a story is plot-driven does not necessarily mean that it does not have likable characters that experience some degree of character development. (Britton) But the sequence of events in the storyline is the primary focus of the movie.
Examples: The Indiana Jones movies. This will likely seem like blasphemy to fanboys, but remember that calling a movie "plot-driven" does not mean that it is mediocre. Also remember that a plot-driven movie can have likable characters. Undeniably, Indy is a fun character. But we know very little about his personality and philosophies from the movies, and he reacts to events rather than causes them. Indy dashes from one hair-raising adventure to another in a quest to find the Holy Grail, Lost Ark, or whatever, while his deeper self remains hidden.
A good metric to determine whether a story is character-driven or plot-driven is to ask yourself, what do I remember most about the story? (Britton) In character-driven movies, the characters themselves will be most memorable. Do you remember much about what the movie Napoleon Dynamite was about, or do you primarily remember Napoleon himself? Conversely, do you mostly remember Perseus' personality from the original Clash of the Titans, or his crazy-awesome fight with the Kraken?
Another note that might get the ire of some fanboys: a hero's quest movie is, by definition, not a character-driven movie. What's driving the story in a hero's quest is not the hero but the quest itself. The hero doesn't create the events, he reacts to them. That means that favorites like Lord of the Rings and Star Wars are plot-driven. For example, the most important aspects in Star Wars are the events that happen to Luke on his quest, not his internal reflections. (Consider how little time is spent on Luke's reactions to the deaths of Owen, Beru, and Obi-Wan, compared to the time spent blasting Stormtroopers and TIE Fighters.)
It could be argued that the best stories are those that are actually a good mix of the two concepts: an interesting plot that moves well and features sympathetic characters. (Cloffi) A cinematic example may include Pirates of the Carribean. The events of the zombie pirate invasion are just as important to the movie as the idiosyncratic Jack Sparrow. While the audience might find Jack's personality the most memorable aspect of the movie, he's also reacting to events forced upon him.
I'm sure each of these examples is debatable. That's because movies have a mix of both character and plot and it can be difficult to determine which is the primary force driving the movie's events. I know that we're in the "character-driven box" right now, but plot-driven movies aren't so bad. I don't watch zombie, kaiju, and sci-fi movies for the internal reflections of the characters, after all.
References
- "Plot-Driven Novels vs. Character-Driven Themes" Vickie Britton, suite101.com
- "Plot driven vs. Character driven" D. Lynn Frazier quoting Victoria Lynn Schmidt, writtenwyrdd.typepad.com
- "What Makes a Good Fiction Story - Plot Driven Or Character Driven?" Karen Cloffi, ezinearticles.com
5 comments:
Plot-driven and character-driven writing are two separate, equally valid disciplines, each with its virtues and pitfalls. That's what I was taught in my first college writing course, and that's what I still believe. Plot-driven stories run the risk of being shallow, while character-driven stories sometimes become boring character studies with no important conflict, action, or resolution.
Excellent synopsis, Nate. Breaking down the difference between the two - as you just did - has been on my to-do list for a few months now. I'm thrilled that you've done the work for me! Haha.
My reason for wanting to investigate the two stems not from reading movie reviews, but from recently reading a slew of sci-fi books that are all character driven (or at least try to be) and read like a bleeding-heart liberal's wet dream: The Utopian society where everyone is rich, happy, and a contributing member of society and extremely interested in the welfare of others. :rolleyes: Yeah, right.
Rather than blowing me away with an awesome, creative, fantastic plot-driven storyline, the authors seem more interested in exploring the feelings of their high-tech, super intelligent, and super liberal (read: highly evolved) characters.
I'm tempted to say that character driven sci-fi just doesn't work, but perhaps I'm just reading poorly written character-driven sci-fi. (Judging by multiple reviews on Amazon that agree with me, perhaps that's right.)
Interestingly, I've had much better luck with character-driven fantasy. Two authors that come immediately to mind are George R.R. Martin and Guy Gavriel Kay.
In fact, both those authors actually do an excellent job of blending character- and plot-driven stories, which I agree can make for some of the best story telling.
However, if I had to choose between a heavily character-driven story and a pure plot-driven story, I'd choose plot-driven any day; that is, if the plot is superb and engaging. I'm thinking of the Ghost in the Shell anime/manga and the Sin City comics. As long as the plot is meaty and interesting enough, the characters be damned!
Frustratingly, many manga are extremely character-driven. The rare manga that is plot-driven and well-done is typically awesome.
And now I'm thinking about super hero comics... interestingly, one of my beefs with comics is that they are too plot-driven. I suppose as a whole, they could be considered character-driven, as pieces of the heroes' personalities and feelings are revealed throughout the story arch - but each comic issue itself would be more plot driven. Since I've never been a fan of super hero comics, despite giving them many tries, I guess for me, super hero stories just don't capture my interest.
Awesome, awesome entry Nate. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Soups
This was not at all what I expected to read when I clicked, and I'm really impressed with the insight. You've widened my perspective. Thanks.
Nate,
great article!
I've tried to reply three times, but I wind up in a hundred different tangents.
Short and sweet - as you mentioned in your final paragraph, good and bad are opinions, so no general statement can be made about the quality of character versus plot-driven stories. In the end, it comes down to percentages of opinion. Using Rotten Tomatoes, just because it is easy, I like the Shawshank Redemption - a film of near perfection in all aspects - which 89% of reviewers agree is a good movie. On the other hand, I received enjoyment (although in no way it is good as SR) from the film The Hottie and the Nottie, which only 5% of reviewers gave a good review to.
So there is much room for variation within one person for what their personal level of quality is.
Quick concluding comment: a friend of mine had a movie scale where she rated movies based on her scale of worst-to-best. She swore the worst movie of all time was AI, and the best movie was Road House. I always thought she was crazy.
I think you've touched on the primary reason why the Star Trek movies starring Picard are generally considered to be weaker than the ones starring Kirk.
The Original Series is highly plot-driven; I've been watching through the whole season, and I do a little happy dance any time there's a hint of significant character development. Next Gen is character-driven; the personal struggles and interactions between characters were the basis of so many stories. As you pointed out, there's merit to both, but the Next Gen movies start to falter when they become too plot-driven.
People love the action-packed First Contact, but think of how developed the characters are, and the kind of personal connections that Picard especially has with everything that happens. Compare this with, say, the oft-maligned Nemesis, which gives just enough backstory so the villain isn't just Bland Bad Guy #487, and which drags the characters through a series of events that they simply react to. That's just not Next Gen's style.
Where I'm going with this is that it all comes down to the characters you have and the story you want to tell.
Post a Comment