I'm the Protagonist of My Own Blog

...and Life!

Today I feel like talking about screenwriting terminology, and in particular two terms which get thrown around a lot and are sometimes misused, or at least only vaguely understood: Protagonist and Antagonist.

Please keep in mind, before we go any further, that I'm far from an expert on screenwriting, and anything said here should be taken as the sleepless ramblings of an amateur, filtered through various things he's read and notes he's made on things he's enjoyed.

It should also be noted that this sort of thing is generally not to be worried about by the typical audience member. This blog is pedantic by nature.

To put it simply, the Protagonist is the person the story is about. Which is to say, their decisions and actions inform the course of the story. The protagonist wants things. The protagonist should somehow grow or change throughout the course of the story, or else the whole thing tends to feel like a waste of everyone's time. This person (or talking dog, or car, or whatever) is almost always the Main Character. Almost always, but not always. This is a distinction made difficult because the whole idea of a Main Character can be a little bit muddy; a good example is Pirates of the Caribbean (screenplay by Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio). Jack Sparrow is arguably the Main Character (he gets the coolest entrance, the funniest lines, and his head is all over the posters), but from a writing standpoint Elisabeth Swann is the protagonist. Its her actions which propel the story forward, and Sparrow simply adds colour.

More often than not, though, the protagonist is easy to identify. Their name is sometimes even the title of the film (Superman, Donnie Darko, Mr Nanny).

Things can also get tricky in films with large ensembles, but you can usually find a protagonist if you dig deep enough into the heart of the story.. The Royal Tenenbaums (Wes Anderson and Owen Wilson) is a film with a large ensemble cast, but there's a character whose decision making drives the narrative (Hint: It's Richie). Watchmen (David Hayter and Alex Tse) is a tricky one, although I would argue that the tag team of Rorschach and Nite Owl act as a sort of dual protagonist.

In television, the distinction becomes even less clear. There are certainly shows which identify the protagonist and place them front and centre; these are usually also marked by that person's name being the title of the show (House, Monk, Buffy the Vampire Slayer), but in television one also quite often finds shows built around large ensembles of characters.

This is why, in television more than films, we find protagonists which are groups of people with a common goal (the senior staff at the White House, the survivors of Oceanic Flight 815). But even then, the writers will tend to place a certain character front and centre for a given episode (Lost and Skins are both shows which do this explicitly), or for a given story arc (The last two seasons of The West Wing were clearly all about Josh).

Antagonists become a little trickier to identify. Basically, they're the character who, through their actions, forces the protagonist to act. The clearest example of this is that of the villain in an action-adventure story; Lex Luthor is threatening lives with his despicable plan, therefore Superman must act to stop him.

Sometimes it's a little less clear than that; Willy Wonka is the protagonist in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, as his desire for a surrogate family drives the story, and Charlie is the antagonist, as his questions force Wonka's flashbacks and drive the changes in Wonka (that's not my example. That comes straight from the screenwriter, John August, at http://johnaugust.com/archives/2005/whats-the-difference-between-hero-main-character-and-protagonist)

Now, about how this level of analysis is useful (and this is something I just recently learned):

Figuring out who your story is about will help you figure out what it's about.

I was working on a TV pilot script recently, and had to go through a process of streamlining (a nice way of saying "making it shorter"). As I went through it, I realised that everything that wasn't involving my protagonist should be the first stuff to go. His emotional arc drove the story, and the questions that he's forced to ask himself form the main themes of the script; so, I changed anything that was focusing on other characters when we really should've stuck with him. Once I identified this basic need in the script, a lot of decisions became much easier.

Another project I've been working on recently is a romantic comedy, in the form of a short webseries. The gist is the same as every romantic comedy you've ever seen; guy meets girl, they can't quite get it together. The risk we ran, though, is that we have 6 main characters (the guy and girl both have 2 friends who also feature prominently in the story). And sometimes these other characters threatened to steal the spotlight. Which is fine, in small doses, but ultimately the show feels more focused if we keep the romantic story as a central spine. So, having clearly identified the protagonist (The Guy- he wants something [the girl] and must change to win her) and the antagonist (The Girl. She is elusive and mysterious, which forces The Guy to man the fuck up) we can keep the show feeling tighter, more focused, and more on target.

And so, once again, being pedantic (and somewhat long winded) helps us all become better writers in the end!

Yay!

I'm going to bed now. It's one in the morning and I have work tomorrow.