Why This is Good

In talking about creating character sympathy, there are rules, techniques and devices we can use, but there are also simple, intuitive ways to create a likable, sympathetic hero. But there is also a very practical, intuitive way to create sympathetic heroes that will captivate and engage your audience.

Think about your closest friends. What about them makes you like them? What drew you to them initially, when you first met? Some friends were set-ups from your childhood-your parent’s friends, cousins, kids in the same class and school. You may have become your friend just because of proximity. There are other friends that you probably met as an adult-through work, through other friends, in college. What attracted you to them? What made these people stand out, regardless of how you met, and kept you in touch? What about them made you want to nurture and sustain a friendship? Having things in common is good, but you have things in common with a lot of people that you don’t become or stay friends with. You’ll maintain relationships with your friends because they are likable. Think about why.

Write down the names of your five closest friends. Next to each name, write where or how you met them. Then describe your first impression of them. Did you like them when you first met or did your connection grow slowly? If you did like them right away, what was it about them that was attractive? Was it the way they spoke, the passion they had for a certain subject or cause? Was it because they seemed powerful, didn’t care what others thought and broke the rules, encouraging you to push the limits? Was it because they were funny? Think about why you liked them enough to want to keep spending time with them.

After the initial meeting, what was your second impression? What did you think the next time you saw them? What made you decide to continue pursuing the friendship instead of letting it go, like you have with other people you have met? Did they say something you really agreed with? Were they so nice to the waiter when you had lunch that you knew they were a genuinely sweet person you wanted to get to know? As in dating, when you meet friends, you decide whether or not you want to continue being their friend based on behaviors you observe and how they make you feel.

Next think about why you have remained friends with each person. Were there times where you drifted apart? What brought you back together? Often times we lose touch with friends or family and are brought closer after a tragedy.  As with a character in a story, you may have worried about your friend or felt they were in jeopardy and been compelled to reconnect because of that. If you’ve been friends with someone consistently for a long time, think about why they have stayed a constant in your life, while other people have come in and out. Why do you admire them and want to spend time with them? These qualities are the types of traits you can instill in your characters and most importantly, in your hero. Even if your hero is unlikeable, or not that nice of a person, there needs to be something seductive about them that makes the audience interested in them, makes them want to spend time with them the same way you want to spend time with your friends.

What was good:

The wallpaper-I know that sounds odd but see the movie and you’ll know exactly what I mean. The film is set in 1976 and the décor and clothes make the 70s look a lot more chic than they really were. The visuals throughout were quite stunning, and the intense patterns of the wallpaper framed the actors and added to the uncomfortable tension.

James Marsden-I think James Marsden is adorable, and the poor guy always plays the boyfriend of the leading lady who is really in love with someone else (see The Notebook, X-Men, and Superman Returns). I was excited to see him in a leading role, and I think he proved he’s leading man material, finally.

The story-Much of the story worked well, there were constant twists, turns, scares, and surprises. Going in we all knew the intriguing Twilight Zone worthy premise-press the button and get a million dollars, but someone you don’t know will die (incidentally this story was used in a Twilight Zone episode in 1986).  The ever unfolding story behind this weird experiment went places I did not expect or predict, and kept me guessing until the end. It also made me want to read the short story on which the film was based, as I’m sure it’s even better. The story was a little big for two hours, and might have worked better as a mini-series, but overall I give the writer credit for asking a question in each scene, and following each answer with another question leading down another bizarre path.

What wasn’t so good:

The dialogue-it was clunky, repetitive, and often on-the-nose. Cheesy and melodramatic, the story would have benefited from less of it, and a rewrite to take out all of the first draft lines that read like a bad play.

The complexity of the story-I’m all for a challenging, engaging, multifaceted story, and this certainly was one. But, as I said, it was a bit too big to be contained in two hours. The twists and turns sometimes went way too far, taking us in a direction that seemed important, only to end up meaning nothing, or remain unexplained. It hinted at grander, more exciting ideas (sequels, perhaps?) that it failed to address.

There were subplots that didn’t need to be there that bogged down the thrill and the pacing, and there were levels of corruption and conspiracy that were never fully explained. A suspense thriller is necessarily complex, but it needs to be streamlined enough to keep us engaged in the forward momentum of the main story, and not distracted by subplots and unexplained details and phenomena that leave us asking what that was all about, rather than focusing on the main story.

And while a million dollars is still a lot of money and was even more so in 1976, I found it hard to believe that this well-dressed couple residing in a beautiful home (please, that designer wallpaper is not cheap!) in a quaint suburb were so hard up that they would really be tempted to kill someone for money. (Spoiler Alert) The biggest monetary woe presented in the film was that the fancy private academy at which Cameron Diaz’s character worked would no longer allow their son to attend for free. Life is rough. Given that her husband drove a beautiful brand new Corvette Stingray to his job as a rocket scientist at NASA, I wasn’t too worried about them being out on the streets had they decided to forego the million dollars. Of course, that was part of the gimmick, that we humans are so awful we would sacrifice our fellow man just to have an easier time for ourselves. It just made me resent the characters, whereas if I had truly believed they were going to lose their house, or needed some sort of life-saving operation, I would have understood their choice.

The acting-Okay I know I said I liked James Marsden, and he did well with what he was given, but it wasn’t awesome. I can see why Allie, Jean Grey, and Lois Lane all had the hots for someone else. He was a little flat.  Cameron was a bit too weepy eyed and had the same facial expression throughout the whole film. Though I was also happy to see that she’s back to her voluptuous, natural-looking state. I personally prefer the curvy Cameron of The Mask to the emaciated teenage boy look she thought was attractive a few years back.

A big part of the plot hinged on how deeply this couple loved their son. And I knew they did because they were his parents and because they said so. But I didn’t feel this love, it wasn’t authentic. Nor was their love for each other. They had no chemistry, and a sad lack of sexual tension. They seemed to have an admiration, and a brother-sister fondness for one another, and like their love for their son, their love for each other was rooted in the fact that it was written in the script and to be expected, not because they really felt it.

Overall, I would say this film was good. I was literally on the edge of my seat throughout most of it, and intrigued enough that I may go see it again. If nothing else, it accomplished what all films should-it elicited an emotional response in its viewers-I wasn’t the only one who jumped out of my seat in shock at least once. Definitely worth seeing, but if you’re also facing hardships like having to take your son out of private school in these tough economic times, maybe wait until it comes out on dvd.

Creating sympathy for your hero is an essential part of successful screenwriting. This is something many writers overlook in their quest to create a great flawed hero who can go through an arc. But in order for the audience to enjoy the movie, they need to empathize with the character-relate to them, understand them and care about watching them take the two hour journey that will be the movie.

The same things that make you like or dislike a person in real life will make your audience like or dislike your hero. There are some specific devices you can utilize to make your audience empathize with your hero. It’s important that you employ one of these techniques within the first ten pages, or your reader will lose interest in your hero, and therefore your film. And luckily, some of these can still work if your hero has to start out flawed in order for your story to work.

Undeserved Misfortune-the key here is undeserved. Something bad that isn’t their fault. If they are running late for work because they stopped to help a little old lady with a flat tire, and they get fired. If it is their fault, it’s not undeserved misfortune. If they are running late for work because they stopped to get a coffee because they had a horrible hangover from partying too hard the night before and they get fired. That is their fault and therefore not sympathetic. In Fight Club, Edward Norton’s apartment explodes. In no way is this his fault, so we feel sorry for him.

They are in jeopardy-we care about people we are worried about, and will want to continue watching to make sure they are going to be okay. Jamal in Slumdog Millionaire, Harry Potter in all of his movies, Frodo and the other hobbits in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. We know something bad is going to happen to them, so we are compelled to not only care about them, but to watch and see if they will be okay.

Liked by others-showing that people are liked by others by showing them around their friends, often at a birthday part, especially a surprise party, or showing that they are popular at work or school. Oskar Schindler in Schindler’s List is shown at a party, schmoozing up a storm, he’s the toast of the town. Because others like him, we feel we can like him too. He must be a good guy.

Kind to animals- Obscure but true. Characters who are kind to animals are perceived as heroic, likeable characters. If they are kind to other less fortunate creatures that also will make them likeable. A lot of movies show the hero giving money to a charity, a homeless person, or volunteering. We all know that is the right thing to do and therefore we instantly like those we see doing this and will want to keep watching them.

Good at what they do- Most people wish they had more power, and therefore admire people with power. James Bond movies use this exclusively to make you like James Bond. He has tons of power and he is good at what he does. Often times this is one of the first things you see in the beginning of a movie, the hero at work, making deals, helping people, making money, finding the bad guy, etc. Show that they are good at what they do and they have power, and we will like them. This is a great technique to use when your character is kind of a jerk and is going to learn something during the course of the film.

In As Good as it Gets, Jack Nicholson’s character Melvin is almost entirely unlikeable, save for the fact that he is good at what he does.

In Collateral, Jamie Foxx wasn’t just a cab driver, but he was the best cab driver ever. He was meticulous about keeping the cab clean, and he knew the best routes and had a very good sense of how long it took to get everywhere. We respected him also because he embodied the next trait.

They have grand aspirations-He was a cab driver, but he dreamed of owning his own business. In Jerry Maguire, Jerry noticed the problems in the world and dreamed of bringing some integrity back to his corrupt business. We like this.

See the problems in the world/want to fix it- your hero will be likeable if he sees the problems in the world and wants to fix them. In Jerry Maguire, Jerry embodies three of these qualities-he is good at what he does, he sees problems and wants to fix them, and he has a big dream. As discussed in yesterday’s post, Baby in Dirty Dancing can’t wait to join the Peace Corps and make the world a better place. She goes out of her way to help Penny and help others.

Funny-Everyone would like to be funny, and everyone likes to be around funny people. Giving your hero a sense of humor makes them seem down to earth, easy to get along with, and just downright entertaining and fun to be around and watch. Juno, in Juno was instantly likeable because of her wit and humor. Even if it’s not a comedy, they can have a strong sense of wit and irony that makes them appear funny, and smarter than the average idiot, it makes them special. We like that.

Unselfish- Referring back to the undeserved misfortune example. Our hero that helped the old lady with the flat tire even though he knew it was going to make him late and get fired was acting unselfishly. Showing your character is unselfish is a great way to make the audience like them. Will Smith’s character in Seven Pounds gives up time, money, and his own organs in order to help others.