Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I was wondering what style of film/TV programmes people preferred in terms of the number of characters in the story. I quite enjoy large ensemble casts where everyone has a role to play and its less about one person. However, my wife finds lots of characters confusing and prefers it when the writers keep things simple.

I've given three options in the poll...

1. The large ensemble cast with no obvious lead role. The obvious example here is Lord of the Rings, where even relatively minor characters like Faramir have a clear character arc. Game of Thrones takes things to extremes and gives nearly everyone who appears on screen a key role to play.

2. A few key characters with a large supporting cast. This is Star Wars basically, with the story focusing on the main troika of Han, Luke and Leia, but with a wide range of vivid supporting characters in the background. Harry Potter also adopted this model to some extent and although it's Harry Potter's story, Ron and Hermione are usually tagging along as well.

3. A single lead role with supporting characters limited to romantic interest, side kick, villain etc. This is when one person dominates the story, normally in superhero films, but also stuff like Indiana Jones and James Bond. There are a few characters for him/her to bounce off (or sleep with), but it's mainly about him/her.

The operative word here is "prefer" as you can of course enjoy stories of all three varieties, but I want to know which approach you're most drawn to.

I prefer option 1: sometimes a single character having all the focus on them can get really boring, and you need a little extra spice to keep the story interesting. Since Lord of the Rings is on of my favourite stories, I could be a tad bit biased. Despite this, a movie that only has a single lead role is also entertaining, though unless the film is really good (e.g. James Bond), this can be fairly dull and you need something new to keep your attention.

I mostly prefer a blend of 1 and 2

I prefer 2 but I am a fan of 1. As a writer though I feel that 1 is a very difficult narrative to pull off for multiple reasons. Even when attempting it it's very easy for my favorite characters to constantly take center stage resulting in number 1 becoming number 2. EDIT: TV series can handle that a bit better I think cause they have more time, but films are often forced to focus on a small band of key players do to time constraints.

It's not the number of characters that matters it's the skill of the writing, direction, visuals, acting, residual message, etc that matters.

I'm with Cheesecat - I don't usually consider the number of players in a production. That being said, I do think it's possible to create so many characters it becomes unwieldy, and impossible to connect with them - I think Game of Thrones is walking the line with this, and the book version may have fallen off the wrong side of it about 2 books ago.

Mostly 2.
Core cast of 6-7 mains. Everything else is support.

AGoT bores me to tears - too many characters and no desire to invest in any of them - not that it matters if you do actually start to invest in any of the characters, because that character will get killed off anyway.

 Cheesecat wrote:
It's not the number of characters that matters it's the skill of the writing, direction, visuals, acting, residual message, etc that matters.

This.

I love Fight Club, and it's really only about 1(2?) person(people?). I also love things like Game of Thrones where there are tons of characters. If the story is done well I don't really think much about the number of characters.

 chromedog wrote:
Mostly 2.
Core cast of 6-7 mains. Everything else is support.

AGoT bores me to tears - too many characters and no desire to invest in any of them - not that it matters if you do actually start to invest in any of the characters, because that character will get killed off anyway.

If you haven't invested in Jamie, Arya or Tyrion by now I simply don't know what to say to you.

I don't like films or books with too many characters because I can't remember them all.

A core cast of Characters that develop over a series is the way to go for me. 'The Borgias', 'Grimm' and 'Once Upon A Time' have all held me rapt over the past 6 months or so, 'The Borgias' especially so. As long as its written and produced well it's a winner for me.
The other bonus being a strong supporting cast. All these things and it's generally a good watch

Suitably intrigued by results.

I have a vague theory that people identify more with stories that have a wide range of characters as they tend to be more human/flawed and not so omnipotent.

one and two