Character archetypes

When I posted this analysis of a scene from Casablanca, my use of character archetypes sparked some interesting feedback, people wanting to hear more. Without going into my whole rap involving Joseph Campbell and Carl Jung, let’s see if I can bottom line this as it relates to screenwriting.

First off, William Goldman famously said, “Screenplays are structure.” Set aside novels, short stories, graphic novels or comic books, a screenplay is a unique literary form in that it is a blueprint specifically for the ‘construction’ of a movie. Therefore, one principle I teach students is:

“Plot = Structure”

Anyone who has studied 3-act structure or any of the screenplay paradigms courtesy of Syd Field, John Truby, or other screenwriting ‘gurus’ would likely accept that tenet. I think there is a concomitant principle re characters and screenplays:

“Character = Function”

If a screenplay is unique as a blueprint to make a movie, then I would argue that it is also unique in that the characters create a psychological ‘map’ of the story, each character playing a core narrative function — which leads us to the subject of archetypes.

Simply put, an archetype is a model of a person or personality. Generally, it’s possible to assess the characters in a screenplay and ‘assign’ an archetype to them. There are literally hundreds of archetypes in stories and literature, but I contend there are five primary character archetypes that appear in most movies:

Protagonist

Nemesis (antagonist)

Attractor (romance)

Mentor (wisdom)

Trickster

At first blush, you may think these are artificial categories; however, I contend that they are natural extensions from a story’s central character: the Protagonist. How? By asking seven basic questions tied directly to the Protagonist:

* Who is the story’s Protagonist?
The first, most basic question of any story.

* What does the Protagonist want?
This is the Protagonist’s External World goal and is tied to the plot’s end point.

* What does the Protagonist need?
This is the Protagonist’s Internal World goal and is tied to their transformation end point.

* Who is trying to keep the Protagonist from their goal?
This is the story’s Nemesis who functions in opposition to the Protagonist.

* Who is connected to the Protagonist’s emotional growth?
This is the story’s Attractor who functions in connection with the Protagonist’s ‘heart.’

* Who is connected to the Protagonist’s intellectual growth?
This is the story’s Mentor who functions in connection with the Protagonist’s ‘head.’

* Who tests the Protagonist to deepen the P’s ‘heart’ and ‘heart’ transformation?
This is the story’s Trickster who functions sometimes as P’s ally, sometimes as P’s enemy.

These five are the primary character archetypes, present in most movies, and they function as integral parts, both in the plot and in the Protagonist’s psychological journey, what can be called the ‘transformation arc.’

Now there are a lot of caveats — no, not every movie has all these character archetypes; and variations — instead of ‘head,’ how about left-brain, instead of ‘heart,’ how about right-brain. But even a cursory look at some of the most popular movies of all time suggests there’s something of value here:

It’s A Wonderful Life

P — George Bailey
N — Mr. Potter
A — Mary Bailey
M — Clarence the angel
T — Uncle Billy

Witness

P — John Book
N — Chief Paul Schaeffer
A — Rachel Lapp
M — Eli Lapp
T — Samuel Lapp

The Silence of the Lambs

P — Clarice Starling
N — Buffalo Bill
A — Jack Crawford / Catherine Martin
M — Hannibal Lecter
T — Dr. Frederick Chilton

The Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl

P — Will Turner
N — Barbossa
A — Elizabeth Swann
M — Pirate lore
T — Jack Sparrow

[Note: Per Pirates of the Caribbean, I know that Elliott & Rossio say that Elizabeth is the protagonist, but in my view, Will is the P for two big reasons: (A) It’s his goal that provides the spine for the A-plot — wanting to rescue Elizabeth; (B) Will is the character who goes through the most dynamic transformation — from solid member of the working class to a pirate embracing his buccaneer ‘blood.’]

Working with these archetypes can actually make for some interesting movie analysis. For example, in Juno, the P is Juno MacGuff and A is Paulie Bleeker — that seems very clear. I would suggest that T is Mark Loring (Jason Bateman), the seemingly wonderfully cool (to Juno) dude who is married to Vanessa Loring (Jennifer Garner), but turns out to be a total creep (starts out an ‘ally,’ turns out to be an ‘enemy.’) This is a great use of a Trickster character because it ties directly into Juno’s problem at the beginning of the movie: she’s too cool, hung up on portraying an image of hipness to the world, and she has to overcome that bifurcated self (that’s why she’s both attracted to and turned off by Paulie). With Mark Loring, she learns a tough lesson, contributing to Juno redefining the very concept of ‘cool.’

The Mentor function, I think, is covered in part by Vanessa, who is deeply and genuinely in touch with her emotional self, represented in her powerful desire to have a baby. There’s that great moment in the mall, where Juno bumps into Vanessa, and Vaness bends down to feel Juno’s pregnant belly. The simple power of that very human moment actually shuts Juno up (for once) — and she allows herself to feel Vanessa’s true pure emotion. The other Mentor function is provided by the baby as it grows within Juno, a grounding and centering force, pulling Juno from her tendency to live in the airy world of cool ideas and lingo, and force her down to ‘earth.’ Both Vanessa and the baby provide ‘wisdom’ to Juno, allowing her to accept her ‘normal’ teen self and ultimately Paulie.

And who’s the Nemesis? Let’s go back to those key Protagonist questions. What does Juno want? To have a relationship with Paulie Bleeker. And what does she need? To accept that she’s a teenager, not a thirty year-old smart ass. What is standing in her way, opposing her? Her uber-cool self-image, the persona she has developed as a coping mechanism to control, even suppress her ‘normal’ feelings.

See! Fun with character archetypes and movie analysis!

Okay, clearly this post has spun out of control and we’ve only just scratched the surface. Again, this group of archetypes may not work for every story or movie, but I think these ideas are worth considering, if only because they offer a different way of coming at story development: as opposed to the ‘traditional’ linear / 3-act structure / plot point approach, this represents a ‘vertical’ character-first approach, using archetypes to dig more deeply into the characters, so they can lead the writer into and through the story.

Comment Archive