The ‘character versus plot’ debate in scriptwriting
iView Author: ScriptLarva (New Delhi, India)
Email: turn360degree [at] hotmail [dot] com
The ‘character versus plot’ debate in scriptwriting
(Warning: spoilers for Dev.D, Race, Swades)
A lot has been said about this. But I thought I should add some points.
Basically the debate is whether development of a story starts from a set of interesting characters or an interesting plot thread. The question may sound absurd or irrelevent. As long as one develops a story, what does it matter whether you start from a character or a plot twist? But it does matter to the final product. And I think that remembering from where you started will help to improve the script.
For example consider Dev.D. From where did it start? Creative process most probably started on imagining Dev and Paro and Chandra as contemporary individuals with the newer sensibilities. Then comes this notion of Devdas as this irritating, self serving, defiant character (As I said earlier in my blog, the creative turning point of the script). Every thing picks up from there, from the characters. And where does that end? Changing the plot of the source material. Because when the characters change, what they bring about to happen also should make sense. Even Devdas drinking just only because of Paro doesn’t make sense any more. Because the new Dev is too self absorbed to do that. He has better reasons to drink. For this generation dying by drinking is not heroic. And wallowing in self pity is not heroic. And understandably the latter half of the story shifts away from paro. Here is an example of characters directly influencing the plot. But I personally feel that the end didn’t do justice to the consistency of his character.
Race is an example for a story starting from the plot and the whole story getting undermined due to lack of development of the characters. It is very obvious what the intention of the writers were, while writing the script- deliver a twist every 10 minutes. They deliver ‘reversals’ very frequently, completely undoing the previously established situation everytime. In the beginning of the story, you have two brothers who will die for each other. Then one guy turns out to be after the money- he is planning to kill the elder brother. He is full of bitterness since childhood! If he was, he did a good job of hiding it for so many years.
And then there is a girl whom elder brother likes. Elder son sacrifices her in the typical Bollywood fashion for his brother who also likes her. And after 10 minutes, it appears that she is after the money. But again after sometime you realise that she may not be that bad. She has confided in elder brother. Again after 10 minutes or so, she pushes off the elder brother from a roof top. But later we know that…Phew! I am not even going to start about the other female lead who in the beginning seems to be a meek dependable secretary secretly adoring the elder brother.
Here the problem is obvious. None of the characters are believable. When you develop a character in a script, you develop it through presenting some enduring attributes and stable temperament. The character cannot change every 10 minutes. Because the single most important thing in developing protagonists is that audience should be able to develop an cognitive and emotional identification with him/her.
Race has a complicated plot that keeps everyone guessing. But that itself is not enough to hold audience interest. Your characters have to be believable at some basic level. That is the lesson from ‘Race.’ Don’t serve the plot at the cost of your characters.
But there are movies that started off from the plot but still handles the issue of characters in a balanced way. Take ‘A Wednesday’ for example. Basically it is plot oriented. The script depends on the manipulation of events. The sudden twists and turns. But it does not come at the cost of underdeveloping or distorting the characters. The ‘aam aadmi’ and the efficient police officers are well developed and presented without harming the pace of the story. There are no major inconsistencies except may be the speech by Naseeruddhin Shah at the end. The question is, whether such an cold, efficient ‘action speaks louder than words’ person would take great pains to explain what he is doing, to the police (of all people). If he tried to explain it to the terrorists or the mass media it would have made more sense. During that speech, he appears like a narcissist who is too self indulgent. But anyway the appropriateness of that speech is debatable.
Lagaan and Chakde India are two other examples where writing starts from a piece of interesting plot and then successfully comes full circle in developing the characters.
What happens when you have some interesting characters with identifiable dilemmas but at the stage of fixing them in a plot, you are dead midway? I think that is what happened with Swades. Everything goes well in the first 1 hour. You have established many interesting characters. You have established the basic issue. But by that time audience know how this movie is going to end. Shahrukh is going to stay. Now the reason we still sit through movies even after guessing the end is to see how the end is going to be executed. The problem with the script is that there is not enough power in the events by which the last one hour is effected. By power I don’t mean that it should have been better if Shahrukh Khan saved the village from some Gabbar Singh in the end. Actually its great that the writer resisted the temptation to do something like that. But the stream of events fail to impart a cathartic peak in the end. And that is a failure in the plot development. An interesting theme and an interesting story are entirely different things.
The same problem of interesting characters failing to translate into an interesting plot is seen in many later Ram Gopal Varma movies. Consider ‘Road.’ The couple on wheels. The psycho stranger. The character conflicts. Everything is interesting. But this much character material is not worth more than 1 hour. What happens next? All combinations of possibilities are to be tried. The psycho running off with the girl. The girl running off from the psycho. The boy running after the psycho. The psycho running after both of them. But as Hemingway said, motion is not action. At least one or two reversals could have been tried in the second half.
Same problem recurs in RGV’s later don movies. The elderly patriarch of a don and a reluctant son are definitely interesting. Lets assume that they are original. But in the back drop of the underworld, how many times can you get away in the name of plot with bumping offs, betrayals and mask like faces giving and receiving death threats?
Overall it appears that what is important is not whether you start from character or plot, but whether you give due importance to the other part during the development process. From that paradigm, to be conscious regarding how you started developing your story can be helpful. It may help one to make sure the other elements are not neglected. So the debate should not be for precedence of character or plot but for their balance.
Tags: Debate, Screenwriting
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
@Scriptlarva…good one..
God is in the details…If any plot , character or event is explored to its detail and the focus with which the scriptwriter holds on to the story line or characters varying moods..then definitely lot of loose ends can be avoided…
The example of ‘Race’ is lazy writing in Follywood…where Follywood scripwriters easily get off the hook of indifferent audience…
And by detail and focus, I dont mean complexity, detail can be simple as well, as in ‘Lagaan’ or extremely complex as in ‘Hazaaron Khwahishein Aisi’…
Swades, I feel was a very good attempt, but it required a genius to touch your heart with the unseen tether that linked Kavery amma , the soil and SRK’s character…but Gowariker is no genius..
Road again was a lost opportunity. I donot agree that it was 1 hour material, probably what RGV ended up with was not worth even half hour…Just imagine, Spielberg shooting ‘Duel’ with just two characters, one of them we dont even get to see till the end, and keeping us on the edge of the seat…
If we view ‘Duel’ over and over again, one comes to realize, how the master, that he was, has utilized optimally, various departments of film making…There are exceptional long shots, fast chase sequences, and there are couple of intriguiging scenes, one at the bar , where we along with the lead character search of the truck driver, and another, when we see the truck driver (the truck, rather) help out school children whose bus is stuck off the road…Spielbergs plays as much with us, as with the lead character, and tries to convey, clearly that, the truck driver does not want to hurt anyone but the lead character, and also wants to do it through a ‘Duel’…a treatise on how to focus on theme and detail your script…later on while filming utilize visuals, and other production elements to convey your script effectively…
Wonderful, solid analysis. PFC should publish more like these.
Another recent imbalance in this classic “character vs plot” was noticed in “Maharathi” which started off well as a thriller but moved on to be a comical dang-along in the later part; character inconsistency bowing down to plot “twists” (!) I guess. :P
Please, keep writing! :-)
Good writeup, I wonder why people run behind scriptwriting so much while making films? They further ones moves away form shooting what s(he) writes in the same manner the only one on can get some cinema going.
good article man! Keep em’ coming!
@Ram V
‘detail can be simple as well, as in ‘Lagaan’ or extremely complex as in ‘Hazaaron Khwahishein Aisi’…’
I agree. Actually when you think of it, Lagaan is a example of good detailing without becoming unnecessarily complex.
@idle-labour
I have not seen Maharathi. But the case appears to be the same from what you have written.
@Rambhul & Ravptor
Thanks for the good words.
nice write-up
] have remained the same for last 50 yrs. wats diff? the packaging, the setting moved from bengal to punjab etc
.
char vs plot is an age old issue, probably from when plays were being made. but cinematic viewing requires more than just char and plot. its the ’saleability’ tat matters. wats the USP of the movie? ‘race’ has all those twist ‘n’ turns and all the songs only to make it visually apealing, plot be damned
.
coming to devD, wat was the need for a new-gen devD? and how can devD be made genX stuff? basically, the chars of dev, paro and chanda[not chandra
.
lagaan and sholay are the finest examples of plot and character balancing act. the character is there bcos plot requires it, the plot seems more believable bcos of the characters
.
movies, these days, just have characters. pick a wacko, pick a maniac, pick a guy with some eccentricity and weave the story around it. or pick a handful of such characters and build ur plot
.
the reverse also happens when a nice plot is picked up and twisted around, characters are added for packaging etc
wonderful article! looking fwd to more such articles!!
Somehow felt article was biased.
I think Ramu bashing has become norm in PFC.
Example of Character vs. Plot:
.
Characters driving the Plot:
JOHNY GADDAR, WEDNESDAY
.
Plot driving the Characters:
RACE, EK KHILADI EK HASEENA
.
Character-Plot Balance:
LAGAAN, CHAK-DE
.
What do you think?
Well analysed..thanks larva
character always overpowers the plot …. though u can always prove me wrong but before doing that just think of all ur fav movies ….
Hi scriptlarva,
Great that you have taken this issue for it’s among the bedrock parameters for any scriptwriter. And you are absolutely right to say that no matter which one you picked to start the process, you must not neglect the other one while moving ahead and ending the journey.
Personally, I would go with plot. I think, Plot is an outside-in (pro-audience) viewpoint while Chracters is an inside-out (pro-craftsmen) one. The fundamental attributes of a character and to keep them consistent is a writerly quest; it’s more of a hidden, internal process. What it must push ultimately, is the story.
The only guys I’ve ever seen talking about characters regarding a movie are industry people. Common people don’t understand characters at all (They may remember the known/famous ones, but they surely don’t understand anything more about them). In marketing/advertising focus groups, there’s an inevitable question about fixing the personality of a brand/product by putting up similes with known real or reel life characters. You get to hear so much bunkum on this point that it becomes silly beyond measure. It shows, that it’s more a technical/internal/craft issue than otherwise.
Personally I will pick ‘A lost alien develops a beautiful friendship with a kid before finding his way back’ over ‘There’s this uncompt, uncouth khaini loving bad-ass dacoit unlike anyone you’ve seen before’.
Refreshing take on old issue.. good to bring it up ! Its so true that a script writer cann’t give instruments to characters which kills the plot nor the plot can be on some unimaginable base which cann’t support its character.
Please do write more..
@ crazyrals
I think ’saleability’ is an extraneous issue. Race at least had an intriguing plot. And again I dont want to get into a discussion regarding which of these elements translates into box office success. Character and plot are just some of the major ones among the infinite ingredients. Again packaging helps. But it cannot make a ‘zero substance’ movie a superhit.
Regarding character of Dev.D I beg to differ. Atleast character of dev is definitely different from the previous devs.
@ Cinemausher
If you feel my comments about Road and Sarkar series are biased, please ignore that paragraph about RGV. But my basic argument stands(unbiased).
@ Mehernosh
I think ‘A wednesday’ is somewhere between ‘plot driven’ and ‘balanced.’
@ Shatik
This are some of my favourite but plot driven movies-
Seven, Usual suspects, Sixth sense, Mission impossible 1, Ab thak chappan, The fugitive, The Thomas Crown affair…
@ Inca
‘Plot is an outside-in (pro-audience) viewpoint while Chracters is an inside-out (pro-craftsmen) one.’- You have made a valid point there. Its true. But it doesnt mean that the audience is not influenced by characters. Summarising a movie in terms of plot is less abstract and more easier than talking about interesting characters for people.
For audience role of characters in influencing their opinion about a movie is more subconscious. Munna Bhai and his local thugs are still interesting even if he goes to moon instead of America. But at first glance, a person may not realise that he is not really excited about ‘going to America’ but about ‘Munna bhai.’
Regarding the pitches that you gave in the end, what if the second one was one among these-
‘An obsessive compulsive misanthropic writer develops an attraction to a carefree single mother waitress’
or
‘A delinquent gifted adolescent faces off with a bereaving psychiatrist’
or
‘A lonely female FBI agent must extract clues to a killer from a cunning, manipulative mental asylum inpatient’
@ SrapManic, Shantanu, Sourav
Thanks. Will definitely write more.
Interesting plot only go half way in making a good movie. If the human characters dont prop it up, an interesting plot is just that – an interesting plot. If the character is created with the right amount of spark, audience will follow that character loyally into unseen territories, right upto the alley where the screen writer has planned a ‘peekaboo’ in the climax or in the midway ‘twist’ phase. If the characters are haphazardly shown, then the audience lose the interest and even interesting plot twists pass by without drawing attention.
I have always thought of establishing characters, directly and subtly to simultaneously establish a point of view – with more than one character – there should be more than one point of view – this helps in creating antagonists not as suit wearing villains with Ray Ban, but as guys who are trapped in their evil and makes audience ‘predict’ and expect a certain flow of events around that characters POV. The script writer can then introduce plot twists and surprises by breaking the ‘expected flow’ that is going on in the minds of the audience. I guess this is what they discuss as ‘red herrings’ in the script and ‘twists in the tale’. Classic case is ‘Sixth Sense’ – If the POV is not tied to the character of the Dr. that Bruce Williams plays, then the film is just like the french film Bogus – if you tie the POV, then it is a ride where even the mild drama in some scenes will have us panting for breath. ScriptLarva – Awesome writeup – just the nitpicking would be in chosing ‘Race’ as a case study for character vs plot – Apart from that yours has been a very sensible and nicely written post.
Scriptlarva,
There’s no denying the value of interesting, strong, impactful characters. But then, they should be utilised to outline an interesting, strong, impactful plot. As the viewer’s empathy with the finer shades of characters alone is subconscious at best it’s not a big, overt pull for him.
It’s only us who have the skill to see a character in vaccum, not the audience. The audience needs a milieu, a setting, an atmosphere.
But yes, the ability to invent interesting characters and keep them consistent through every single scenario in the film is a litmus for writerly skills.
As for the log lines in the end, yes I agree. They are interesting.
@scriptlarva[cmnt#16]:why do u think ’saleability’ is extraneous? i definitely feel that its integral part of the char and plot. reason being that, chars and plots have been twisted for wider appeal. there have been situations when aspiring writers approach producer/director with their script and then they have been asked to change the plot and character.
.
saleability is extraneous only in an ideal world
.
zero substance movies becoming superhits! think again, there are tons of them
sorry…was referring to cmnt#14 and not cmnt#16
@ VP Jaiganesh
Thanks. And regarding using Race we learn more from poorly executed scripts than good scripts. And any way, one will have to admit that a lot of work has gone to the writing of Race though the final product has been a little patchy.
@ Inca
I agree with your arguments in general. Though I would give more credit to characters.
@ crazyrals
What I meant by extraneous is that it is not an integral quality/part of a script. One can have a script with good saleability or zero saleability but not a script with zero characters or absent plot. Saleability is a defining quality rather than a element of a script.
But you are right when you say that quality of character and plot are influenced by the saleability. Sometimes when characters or plot is too innovative, it may become less saleable. That may be reason why our commercial scripts cannot progress beyond a certain quality.
Real challenge is overcoming this hurdle.
The zero substance movie is a very subjective definition. So any discussion on that is going to be circular.
Plot driven movies are there …. but in these movies too characters are what the viewer remembers …. Mission impossible — remembered for TOM CRUISE …. Ab tak Chappan — Nana Patekar (daya nayak) ….
I m not saying that character is more important or plot is more important but from viewers/audeiences POV the character has to be good …. u cant neglect it …. plot at times forms shape with the characterisation, u dnt have to specially think what interesting events can i include ….. for eg – say devd, when a character is decided reality itself gives u certain events which u dnt have to fabricate.
I dnt disagree with u …. watever u r sayin is true …. keep enlightening us.
my 2 cents. the more you debate about this, the more we get nowhere…whats important is that we continue to write… regardless of charecter or plot… whichever comes first. write on!!
Most relevant piece for Indian cinema scriptlarva. There have been no discussions before on this topic and no has analyzed it the way you have. Very nice!
You said people in Race were not believable. But isnt that the “requirement” in a thriller. True it had too many twists. Should have been simpler.
For Swades, dont you think the main plot was about the guy coming back to his roots and taking charge for his country (men)! You are right about many movies wherein people just wait up to see how it ends, though they have an idea! Here, people didnt know what the hero would do to uplift or where the story will move. Its only when he decides to build the hydropower project, that we know. But from then on the story moves pretty quickly.
You doubt “Wednesday”. It would not have been a plot or a movie itself if Naseer has to say that speech to a terrorist. You just cannot do that, simply because a terrorist will not listen. Naseer brought out the flaws in the system and frustrations that a common man carries. I personally find it a perfect movie.
You are right about Road. Motion is not action. But Sarkar movies were great! Dont you think!
Chak De was a prime example of story moving forward and characters being unravelled!
@ Scriptlarva:
Good post and discussion. Was surprised to see no mention of Gulaal which probably is the most recent examples of Characters dominating the plot, yet making a strong mark on (albeit selective) viewers mind. Would love to know your analysis on that.
@14- Usual suspects is plot based, but that plot is based on the character. It’s one of the most satisfying movies where till the end you don’t know whether the characters or the plot , is more interesting.
*
I don’t have a formal education in filmmaking but just an observation on characters on watching various movies. Is it necessary that ‘characters’ necessarily need to be human? Nature, weather, Music have been experimented with various Directors as major characters in their films(hoping your post is not confined to Bollywood only).
Example-
Kurosowa used wind, fog, sounds of wind and visuals of rain as major character ( Throne of Blood, Rosomon, Seven Samurai, Yojimbo etc)
Eric Vali used the mountains and the terrain of Nepal while telling a poignant story. The viewer is at awe with the ‘settings’ which is the strongest character of the movie as it dominates and drives all other ‘human’ characters. We have a glimpse of the same in ‘ Kabul Express’ too. Similarly Ray used Kanchenjungha as a backdrop to deal with complex interwoven characters within a multi-layered plot . Ray is again famous of using Music as a prominent memorable character. In contemporary movies Anurag Kashyap uses music intelligently.
*
Correct me if I am wrong but, the discussion mainly holds good for on original scripts or it can be extended to adapted screenplays too? Which category would Slumdog Millionaire fall- plot oriented? In that case is’nt it too challenging for a scriptwriter to pick up a plot and try to make it character oriented?
“Never confuse motion with action.” Was also said by Benjamin Franklin.
I think Delhi-6 was a movie with wide range of characters whose actions contribute to drive the movie forward. The movie was collage of the events in the life of the characters which makes the plot of the movie.
@ Shatik
In those movies that I mentioned, you may be remembering the stars who acted, but the characters cannot be said to be multidimensional or complex. We have seen the smart spy with all the right qualities and the rugged police officer many times before.
True when you say that plot at times determines the characterisation.
@ Magik
You are right that writing is the important thing. But I was not trying to establish the precedence of character or plot. In one line what I am saying is that, being aware from where you are starting the development of your story helps you to decide where to end the development.
@ Vinay
In thrillers, some times the characters surprise you by showing that they are not what they were established to be. But in race, as you said, problem was of too many.
In Swades, the problem is not whether he just stays back or takes charge. The flaw was that the stakes were not big enough for a climax with emotional satisfaction. Such a big stake was not established beforehand in the plot.
For ‘A wednesday’ I was not saying that Naseer should have been talking to a terrorist. But when Naseer was giving the lecture about the common man to the police, it doesnt serve any purpose(except educate the audience),and it was not consistent with his character. He appeared like a narcissist who was enjoying his own importance. But until the last 10 minutes, earlier he was ‘doer not talker’ kind of person.
Sarkar movies were well directed but didnt have original scripts according to me. Thats not only because of the ‘Godfather.’
@ ~uh~
I didnt include Gulaal as I wanted to include DevD because in DevD the change in plot caused by characters is more visible due to the previous reference movies. I didnt want to include two Kashyap movies and be called a pro Kashyap-peer basher. Already I am accused of being biased against RGV because I didnt like Road and Sarkar scripts.
Yeah the environment can become characters. But the execution of that is more an art of director than the scriptwriter.
Yeah adapted screenplays will also come under this. Usually in novels, characters will be more well developed than plots. When adapting, one will have to zero in on a single stream plot and remove the rest. It can be tough.
SDM rests more on characters according to me. And also the ability of the writer to switch between narratives effortlessly.
@ Jahanpanah
I think Delhi6 gave too much attention to characters at the cost of the plot.
@ Scriplarva (25)- Come on man. Don’t let few silly comments refrain you from expressing your mind.
RGV and AK are both very conspicuous in their works and hence it is natural to drag them into a discussion on contemporary Hindi films. I am personally a RGV fan but I do express whenhe sucks .
Nice Write-up
RGV’s concept/plots are usually good. I think he needs to “dwell” on it more, before shooting. Then he can do more justice to the characters and the plot. It seems to me that, he is on some kind of marathon race in movie making!
I don’t know if Race is worth discussing at all (but its true that to learn we need bad examples!)
I think Shekhar Kapoor’s Masoom was totally based on plot. There was no need to “invent” character shades there, all were identifiable to a average common man. Where as in Mr. India, definitely characters stands out, and it is more memorable for characters (e.g. Mogambho)
Delhi 6 picks characters from various starta of the society, and examine’s their reaction to the given issue (kala bandhar). I like all the three movies here.
Plot becomes more interesting because of the characters, the change they go through, and the journey they take. Ultimately, a viewer connects to the reactions of the characters. Plot in movies can be larger than life, but the emotion/reactions of the characters remain the same. Plot will “end” in the movie, but the transformation of the characters, will stay with the viewers.
Read any Ayn Rand novel, watch any martin scorsese movie and youll understand the balance between the plot n character.
But ya strong plots( esp sci-fi short stories based dont necessarily require a lot of depth in the character to be exposed, it can be left subtle)
And strong characters dont necessarily need plots, most quentin tarantino plots seem like james hadley chase novels with non contradicting characters. e.g. True Romance
But look at masters like Martin Scorsese, Taxi Driver n Gangs of New York, There is not a plot or character in either of them that seems wasted.
And if you go into literature,imagine Ayn Rands masterpiece Fountainhead, its perfect when it comes to characters full of depth n plots driven around them. If you make a new age Fountainhead with realistic people of today,you wouldnt be surprised if Howard Roark ends up with a girl of fierce loyalty,instead of dominique francon, the kinds that exist in Tarantino movies and steven mallory would be a major character in todays reality instead of just a blip.
But then there exist movie directors like Jim Jarmusch too.
Scriptlarve- I can’t beleive people are talking Ayn Rand and Jim Jarmusch when Bollywood biggies are getting away with Big Steals like Lagaan -right under everyone’s Noje.
There is a Hollywood film named THE AIR UP THERE.( *ing Kevin Bacon) He plays an american Doctor in exile in a godforsaken village in Africa. Now, not only does the doc teach the starving-naked natives how to play basketball, he manages to script a win off a 3 pointer on the stroke of the bell in the climax. No points for guessing what is at stake there> the landed property for the Entire-Village.
Funny how they managed to remake Lagaan in 1994.
But who’s to blame when the likes of RGV pay a lump sum of 50k to screenplay writers?