Character Driven Or Plot Driven?

[Banshee]

Warning: the following is full of generalisations...

 

So, I was thinking today. There are shows/books that are pretty much plot driven. As in, things happen to characters, who pretty much are secondary to the plot. Can't think of an example off the top of my head right now but I'm knackered, so bear with me There are shows/books that are pretty much character driven, where the plot is there to allow us to see the characters in different lights . For example, Lost. And there are books/shows that are a wise combination of both, such as Harry Potter, or Dresden Files, where at times, characters trump plot, or vice versa, but both are important.

 

Obviously that nice balance between the two makes for a tighter story, in most cases. But, if you have to choose plot-driven (with blank/undeveloped characters) or character-driven (with little/slow moving plot), what do you prefer?

 

I'm going to go with character-driven... Probably because my writing is character-based and I enjoy stories that give me insight into the characters.

[Undead Medic]

For me it largely depends on what mood I'm in. I tend to find character driven shows require more concentration on average than those which are centred purely around plot. Plus the fact that character driven shows tend to unfold more slowly. So if I'm in a cerebral mood I go for something more character focused, and if I'm in a "Mindless escapism" mood, I tend to go for the more plot-driven stuff.

[aely]

I think I marginally prefer character driven stuff, but ideally I like a mix!

[T.o.b.y]

Character driven, by all means!

[Carol the Dabbler]

I think I'm more tolerant of plot-driven stories when I'm reading (perhaps because I can supply my own characters), whereas on tv or in movies, I prefer character-driven.

 

Banshee, if you're still looking for an example of plot-driven television, you couldn't do any better than the original (circa-1970) Mission: Impossible.  (I haven't seen the more recent version, so cannot say anything about that one.)

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

I like a good mix. I like a ripping good story with a good plot with characters I can care about. This goes for books, tv and movies.

[miltk]

every show i like, i like because of the characters. television success hinges on the audience caring about what happens to the characters, and tuning in week after week. there does come a point, however, if i feel the series is leading me aimlessly, then i tune out.

 

dexter is one such series. i love the characters but i felt the writers started throwing in bad scripts to keep the series going. that's when i tuned out. "the killing" is all character driven and i loved it. "breaking bad" was both, a great plot driven by characters that had a course to sail and steered straight. "the office"(british) is all character driven. for those who don't know, "barney miller" was imo the best written comedy series ever, and was totally character driven with no witty repartee no punch lines,,,just pure comedy relying on normal character interaction.

 

if a series has no character i like, then i generally hate it or hate the actors for lack of charisma. "falling skies" lasted 2 episodes with me. and i only watched 2 to see if it would get better...it didn't. characters i didn't like played by actors who are boring, and one stupid plotline.

 

i don't know if it's possible for a show to survive without well written characters with good actors to bring them out.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I'm curious what you mean by "characters I like" -- do you mean:
 
1. Characters that you like as characters (i.e., you find them interesting and/or well written/acted), or
 
2. Characters that you like as people (i.e., you'd enjoy actually knowing them)?
 
I would personally put Sherlock in category 1 (though he's growing on me) and John in category 2 (though he certainly qualifies for 1 as well).
 
I can enjoy the occasional plot-driven show if it's very well done (like the aforementioned Mission: Impossible), and having interesting characters certainly helps.  But for me to actually love a show, there has to be at least one character that I really care about as a person.  That's why I could never get into Seinfeld (though I did enjoy the monologs).

[miltk]

/>

I'm curious what you mean by "characters I like" -- do you mean:

 

1. Characters that you like as characters (i.e., you find them interesting and/or well written/acted), or

 

2. Characters that you like as people (i.e., you'd enjoy actually knowing them)?

 

I would personally put Sherlock in category 1 (though he's growing on me) and John in category 2 (though he certainly qualifies for 1 as well).

 

I can enjoy the occasional plot-driven show if it's very well done (like the aforementioned Mission: Impossible), and having interesting characters certainly helps. But for me to actually love a show, there has to be at least one character that I really care about as a person. That's why I could never get into Seinfeld (though I did enjoy the monologs).

I mostly mean 2. but 1 and 2 give you a well rounded well thought out personality. "castle" IMO is #2 and i can't get enough. #1, IMO requires a more objective observational response. #2 is more visceral.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I agree -- I enjoy interesting, well-written, well-acted characters, but unless I can feel some kind of rapport (so to speak) with them, I don't so much care about them.  My most favoritest characters are the #2's who are also #1's.

 

[T.o.b.y]

As for "Sherlock", I found this quote from Steven Moffat (interview with The Guardian) quite interesting:

 

"It is not a detective show. It is a show about a detective … It is a show that celebrates a clever man."

 

That sounds a lot more character- than plot-based to me -  and sums up nicely why I like the show so much.

 

[miltk]

the seed for a show starts with the concept. but from there it's a marriage between writer and actor stirred by the director. 

 

the writers have a story(that's the plot-driven part),,,but when you get the perfect acting chemistry like cumberbatch and freeman, it sparks all kinds of ideas for the writers to build on. the dialogue becomes more nuanced. every great show has it. the story is the drawing, the acting chemistry provides the color.