Do you ever hear friends complain that the film has no story? What a crazy thing to say, you think. Of course it has a story. There was a beginning, middle and end. Hence, the film has a story. End of story. Now stop complaining about something that obviously took a lot of time to complete.
Unfortunately, that old standby isn’t enough. Beginning, middle and end define plot, not story. Story is a bit more complicated. You can have a movie with a lot of moving parts, but still a weak story. That’s what our friends are really saying, by the way. That the film had a weak story rather than none at all. It’s a vernacular term, but still quite intriguing because it helps us understand just what a story actually is.
A story implies a human journey of sorts. Remember, the DARPA study? It revealed that our prehistoric brain redrafted life events into a story format. We see life in terms of human needs, emotional ones, and the interest is in the obstacles that get in the way. That’s our neurological wiring, as far as we know it. Stories have to do with you and me – or whatever resembles that because without an emotional experience with obstacles in the way, there isn’t a story being told.
Hence, a plot is what happens and summing up that plot in human terms is essentially what a story is, which is why people use that old standby: Beginning, middle and end. Good. So, what’s with the weak story comment then?
Well, much fuss has been centered around the new Star Wars movies and, aside from all of the political correctness jabs, a big issue is that the films don’t have a story. In other words, a weak story. And, you know what? They’re right. Compared to the original three, these films have a weak protagonist whose plight didn’t dominate the surrounding narratives in the drama. Rey’s story should have been as prevalent as Luke’s was in the original Stars Wars, but it wasn’t. Therefore, the weak story feel to it.
Take Finn, for instance. His story is about community. Coming from an authoritarian rule – a storm trooper’s life – he’s now trying to fit into a human group. Even more, he’s having trouble learning how to care enough to sacrifice for them. Hence, his story is about discovering the value of being in a community rather than running off whenever he’s asked to make a sacrifice. This narrative is close to Han Solo’s in the original Star Wars.
Great. So, what’s the problem? Finn’s story takes up too much time. Everyone’s else’s does too, because it eats away at Rey’s screen time. She’s the hero of the movie, so her narrative – being abandoned on a planet and looking for her sense of belonging – is more important than anyone else’s story. Instead, the supporting characters’ stories are strong enough to rival hers, and thus make the film look like a collection of stories rather than an overarching one bringing smaller stories together. It’s not enough to have a common goal either. Emotionally, Rey’s story has to be stronger or the audience won’t feel as if the film had a strong story. She needs to bring it all together. It didn’t happen.
Hence, the “The movie didn’t have a story” comment. Or, your friends might say, “It felt like there were a lot of people in it and things happened and a big battle scene in the end. But, what did I just see? What’s the story?” Your friend is saying that there wasn’t a strong emotional core to the film that gave it a sense of narrative unity. But they don’t know story theory so it probably won’t sound like that.
Most likely, the protagonist’s journey didn’t get enough time in the film – screen time – giving the feeling that everyone just saw a collection of stories rather than a prevailing one to identify it.
Weird, huh? It’s all about how the brain works and organizes information. You need more than a beginning, middle and end, trust me. Otherwise, we would all be best-selling writers.
This “no story” feel happens more in action films which stress plot over story. The physical action is what’s important, not the mushy scenes that create drama. However, you might need some mushy scenes to keep the audience interested though. It’s a story after all and you do need enough humanity in it to keep the audience fixated. But, all in all, the emphasis is on action and reaction, not the character’s inner development. A drama, by the way, could get screwed up in the same insofar that the emotional development of the character gets stunted by an overcreative writer trying to fit in too much extraneous detail into the film. That’s why you need to stick to what the story is about, not all of the details of the protagonist’s world.
It’s possible, too, that you may not need a single character to carry the drama either. It could be a single story element as long as it emotionally connects to the audience. This means that in order to get a “story feel” to any film, book or TV show, you need a strong emotional core that can serve as the organizing principle in the viewer’s brain.
Does that sound simplistic? Or convoluted? Maybe so. Perhaps, but if a friend complains about the film not having a story, then check the main character’s story to see if there is enough material there. Specifically, emotional material. Without an emotional core to the film, your brain won’t get the satisfaction it desires from whatever it is they’re viewing.
And if that’s not the case, well then maybe the film just lacks chutzpah. That happens. It’s no one’s fault. Chutzpah takes some luck. Enjoy your movie.
- 975 words of honest analytical thought