Simple plots, complex characters

Some time ago I saw a movie with two cowboys on a quest. Later they remade that same movie with two sailors. The later was more interesting because the characters were.
The story I'm working on now has a quest to stop a laboratory, but I've added a subplot to let the reader know something my MC doesn't.

 

I certainly think that having complex characters and a simple plot definitely CAN work very well - although you probably are going to end up with a slightly more complex plot in that a complex character is going to react to simple impetus in a non-standard way.

Where I think it might got a bit off, as with anything, is if it becomes a rule that one cannot have complex plots (or simple characters, I suppose, but that depends on one's definition of simple). I know my main projects plot would be pretty hard to articulate in one or two sentences - although I guess I could do the primary plot and leave out the subplots - but I'm more of the type that lets character drive plot to a certain degree. So, in my case I have a really simple character concept that leads me to a pretty complex plot - I have a bunch of very different people who all work in the same office and all consistently maintain the status quo until such time as a disruptive character is added to the mix and shakes things up - then I just watch them all scatter like roaches when you turn on a light. The main disruption is pretty simple, but if you play it out naturally, with say nine characters in the original stasis, they're all going to run different directions and form five or so subplots.

So, I think it helps to have a simple concept at the core of a novel - whether that concept is the plot outline is where I might differ a bit. That kind of assumes you're doing all the plotting up front and then holding rigidly to it - which not all of us do.

 

[QUOTE="Iain Aschendale, post: 1571950, member: 68947"

ETA: The Disaster Movie Unholy Trinity (probably others, but I'm tired):

Dante's Peak
The Day After Tomorrow
Volcano

True, two of them are about volcanoes, but swap any character from one to the other and their fates will be identical.[/QUOTE]

I absolutely love watching these movies with a friend of mine who's an Associate Professor working in Environmental Sciences at Rutgers University (technically he's in Animal Sciences, but most of his work has to do with environmental influences and stresses). The science in these movies is so wonky, I just love watching him froth at the mouth screaming THAT'S NO HOW THIS WORKS THAT'S NOT HOW ANY OF THIS WORKS. His all time "favorite" is The Core - I thought he was going to lob his drink through the TV at several points during that one.

 

Oh god, The Core was so far off the scale I had to watch a Sharktopus movie just to remind myself what real science was like again...

 

Though I might have to disagree with you there (sorry, don't hit me!). I find a lot of Stephen King's characters to be brilliant and I really grow attached. He's very good at making them lifelike and flawed while often still getting your sympathy. Roland and his ka tet are super special to me, and there's lots like The Stand and IT where the characters really hold your interest. He does very well I think with writing children. Sometimes his plots are great, other times they're pretty wafer thin. Dreamcatcher is mainly a bad novel, but I liked the characters and that's why I kept reading.

I would argue some of the best literary classics turn their characters into constructs almost to hit home a meaningful idea or concept. They may not be as believable or as real as those I'd find in SK.

 

I guess this is one of those "different strokes for different folks" sort of things.

Personally, I enjoy the thought provoking works better than let's say, Words get in the way by Nan Rositter or the Game of Thrones series.

For example, the film Twelve Monkeys was a brilliantly crafted film. I could frustrate myself trying to imitate Terry Gilliam's work. Same goes for films like Donnie Darko, Interstellar and Memento. Believe me, I love realistic characters with layers in them but I find myself enjoying works that are tough to break down.

I recommend reading the concept for Frances the Mute by The Mars Volta and try to break it down. It's quite entertaining.

 

Conrad does that. I agree about SK. I find his works almost entirely character studies. The Stand. Carrie. All of them, really. Even the minor characters are sharp-edged.

 

I get you now! That's a good simile. It's a balance, it all weaves together to some degree. I do like the straight road with the fiddling most.