Character Development or Action
- Thread starter MilesGX
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 18,805
- Reaction score
- 4,600
- Location
- Caledonia
- Website
- derekpaterson.net
Breaking things down into oversimplified "this or that" choices just doesn't get you anything, to my mind it's a pointless question. You'd be better off seeking enlightenment by reading 100 produced screenplays and trying to understand what made them true successes.
-Derek
-Derek
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2005
- Messages
- 1,376
- Reaction score
- 81
- Location
- Stuck in Dell Hell
- Website
- www.rainynightproductions.com
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,203
- Reaction score
- 103
For me it seems to depend on the story and the characters. Sometimes the character just rolls out with the story. Other times I need to take time to work a character out seperately before inserting them into the script to see how they will react.
Maybe we can get a third option on this poll.
Maybe we can get a third option on this poll.
They're the same -- and you still need a lot more to make your screenplay a true success, including a compelling premise and exciting set pieces.
NMS
Personally I think character development comes first followed by a distanct action. But doesn't it all depend on the type of story you're trying to tell to begin with?
I hope Arnold Schwarzeneggar doesn't repel from the terrace and come crashing through my living room window just when I am about to tell my wife that I have cancer and only have a week to live. It wouldn't fit very well for my drama.
Characters are always what draws a person into a story though. Even in Die Hard one of the biggest blockbuster action flicks ever had great characters. John McClain and Hanz Gruber one of the best villains ever were interesting characters with emotion who made the audience watch them.
I think you're first 10-12 pages are to get your story across though, this is what makes the reader keep reading and gets them to your characters. The other 100-105 pages are for character development.
Just my 2¢'s which isn't worth a whole lot!
I hope Arnold Schwarzeneggar doesn't repel from the terrace and come crashing through my living room window just when I am about to tell my wife that I have cancer and only have a week to live. It wouldn't fit very well for my drama.
Characters are always what draws a person into a story though. Even in Die Hard one of the biggest blockbuster action flicks ever had great characters. John McClain and Hanz Gruber one of the best villains ever were interesting characters with emotion who made the audience watch them.
I think you're first 10-12 pages are to get your story across though, this is what makes the reader keep reading and gets them to your characters. The other 100-105 pages are for character development.
Just my 2¢'s which isn't worth a whole lot!
So you still the action and then character development. That is what I am doing in a script I'm writing in a journal.
I have to say it depends by what kind of action you mean - if you mean action like car chases, fight sequences etc. then character comes first always otherwise you end up like Quantum Of Solace which is just chases and fight scenes put together with very little story or character development.
If you're not talking about that kind of action then action and character development are the same thing because the character develops by the action that he or she does or doesn't do.
If you're not talking about that kind of action then action and character development are the same thing because the character develops by the action that he or she does or doesn't do.
Character development would have to come first for me. I find so many action movies numbingly boring. Too many of the characters are interchangeable so bottom line you don't really care who lives or who dies.
For myself, it would have to be equal parts action and character development.
I do agree with Pilote that too much action can make the characters very boring, but on the other hand, no action at all will make the audience less likely to pay attention.
Anybody read "Uncle Vanya"? As peter griffin said: "Throw a pie or something".
To put it simply, the type of story being told does determine the amount of appropriate action the story requires. To try to determine which one is more important is almost impossible.
So therefore, The story needs to remain balanced and thus you create a better story which makes it watchable. And enjoyable.
I do agree with Pilote that too much action can make the characters very boring, but on the other hand, no action at all will make the audience less likely to pay attention.
Anybody read "Uncle Vanya"? As peter griffin said: "Throw a pie or something".
To put it simply, the type of story being told does determine the amount of appropriate action the story requires. To try to determine which one is more important is almost impossible.
So therefore, The story needs to remain balanced and thus you create a better story which makes it watchable. And enjoyable.
It's not "either or" at all.
I prefer both of them, action with resting points, and interesting characters who do more than just fire guns and destroy cars.
I prefer both of them, action with resting points, and interesting characters who do more than just fire guns and destroy cars.
Yah, I would prefer interesting characters too a long with the action. If the characters are steroetype, they would just make me laugh and the story won't be serious, which could ruin it.
They aren't mutually exclusive in any way. Every good film requires a balance. Movies are very visual so action (and I don't mean car chases necessarily) is generally necessary. But action does not always mean vivid action. It can be a change of location or violent verbal interaction. What's important is that your film holds the interest of the audience. The mix of action and character development depends of the situation.
Quite correct meaningless action would not make successful film . we need romance and
all other ingredients. I am sure Titanic would not have been so much a success if there was no romance in it
padma
all other ingredients. I am sure Titanic would not have been so much a success if there was no romance in it
padma
- Status