Last time we discussed CHARACTER CONSISTENCY by looking at LUKE SKYWALKER in Star Wars and Logan in Logan. Those are single films though. How do we handle characters and worlds that span a TV series or cinematic universe?
CHARACTER CONSISTENCY must be maintained even though themes within a series or film franchises can and should change. Keeping our protagonist CONSISTENT but presenting a new theme can be difficult and can have an impact on our characters. I believe this is why most trilogies often rehash the first installment.
TV series have ‘Series Bibles’ that codify the basics of a character and then a writer’s room vets the consistency throughout the series. What about maintaining consistency across films with different writers, producers and so forth.
Is it even important? Can a character have one main attribute in one film or episode and have a different one at the forefront in another film or episode?
The short answer is yes! The long answer is that a character must remain true to their original self. Additional films can explore new parts of their persona, but the character’s baseline must be present. Let’s look at LOGAN.
Character Consistency of The Wolverine.
By the time Logan was released, the main character of Logan was rather fleshed out. He had developed through years of comic books, TV series, and movies. In the X-men films, Logan stays true to himself through all nine films. Some of the films were bad, but overall, he maintains his ‘slash first and ask questions later’ attitude.
The plus here is that the same actor played Logan throughout all the films. So, even if the writing was bad, the actor could at least interject his take on the character through his acting.
When Logan appears in the movie Logan, he feels like the same character we’ve gotten to know over the years. But what’s more important here is that the writer still introduces the character at the beginning, re-iterating Logan’s main attributes. Logan’s CHARACTER CONSISTENCY must be established before moving on.
We don’t need to know that Logan started in the first movie, X-Men, earning money in barroom cage fights. We also don’t need to know how he got his adamantium claws. Or the rest of his backstory from previous movies to understand his physical struggles in Logan. We just need to see the Logan we are familiar with.
How did the writer connect Logan to previous movies?
The writer of Logan merely shows us Logan’s physical state and his attitude. We know he’s an experienced warrior by how he calmly responds to the thugs. We get that he has a fighting spirit when he drops the nice guy routine and kills the thugs. And we understand the impact of the adamantium on his body as he seethes in pain after the fight.
We learn everything we need to know about Logan in the first five minutes. For those who are fans of the X-Men, Logan is familiar. For those who are unfamiliar with his background, they have everything they need to continue.
By minute ten, the writer has established a connection to the previous films. He can now introduce a new theme in Logan’s story. The theme of legacy. And with this theme, some new attributes.
In the previous movies, we get to know Logan’s loyalty to his friends, but in Logan, we learn about Logan’s love for his friends. The lesson here is this. When we cross into another installment, we must establish the character we know before we introduce another or deeper attribute.
Consistency in the character of Luke Skywalker.
In THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, Luke is still the optimistic farm boy who we met in STAR WARS. The author makes this pitch to the audience when Luke’s Taun-Taun trembles with fear in minute two. Luke remains positive yet acknowledges the animal’s sensibility.
Then Luke’s world is literally smacked in the face.
When Luke lands on Dagobah, he is, again, optimistic, though slightly on edge. He wants to get out and explore. To find this great warrior named YODA. But we sense that something bothers him. When things begin to go south for him, he starts to lose morale.
Luke’s naivete and optimistic character was well established in the previous movie AND at the beginning of this one. As a result, the audience has buy-in. Which is why The Empire Strikes Back is so good.
In this installment of Luke’s story, the author needs to show Luke’s growth in the Force. He must show Luke’s baseline, then beat him down, then build him back up. Kind of like boot camp.
How the writer made The Empire Strikes Back so good.
Although Luke is staunchly optimistic about life, he begins to question the world around him. He’s confronted with the stark reality that things aren’t always as they seem. He must develop his conscientiousness.
Most sequels tend to rehash the first movie. But this is where this writer departed from the script, by using Luke’s main character attribute from the first movie against him.
In Star Wars, Luke’s optimism saved the galaxy. But in The Empire Strikes Back, his optimism is the very thing holding him back from growing further. Luke needs to learn how to see beyond his peachy world view.
Yoda’s training attacks Luke’s optimism. Luke says he’s not afraid, YODA gives him a reason to be afraid. Luke becomes pessimistic when it’s time to lift his X-Wing out of the swamp. Yoda shows Luke that his pessimism is not the answer either.
Luke finally relents in defeat, at which point he sees a vision of his friends dying. His optimism returns, but he has a new found respect for the dangers which lurk in the shadows.
The main spine of The Empire Strikes Back is Luke’s desire to know his father. The writer’s vehicle for getting Luke to the climax is by challenging his optimism.
In the epic climax of the movie, Luke loses his hand and finds out DARTH VADER is his father. As Luke ponders the jump down the garbage chute, we see that Luke has lost this fight. His optimism can’t save him this time. He needs to finish his training.
Inconsistency in the Star Wars Sequel Trilogy.
The Sequel Trilogy of the Star Wars franchise is a great example of consistency gone awry. I’ve been discussing the character of Luke Skywalker, but right now I want to take a break from him. Here’s the reason why.
Luke has virtually no screen time in THE FORCE AWAKENS, so there isn’t much I can say about him there. Even more, though, the consistency issues of Luke’s character in THE LAST JEDI have been beaten to death not only by the fans but also by Mark Hamill himself.
I think it’s safe to say, Luke’s consistency issues have been well covered. So, let’s talk about Leia and Poe.
When we meet LEIA in The Force Awakens, we get the sense that it is, in fact, Leia. She’s the same, but different. I’d say more mature. She seems to be carrying the baggage of a full life.
In the very first scene of the movie, the writer sets the tone that the new character, Poe, is Leia’s go-to guy. She has sent him on a special mission to retrieve a map which leads to Luke because she could only trust Poe.
The initial description of Poe in the script is that he has ‘charisma.’ When the audience sees Poe’s charisma on screen and how he refers to Leia and his duty to her, we get the sense that he is extremely loyal to her. And she, no doubt, enjoys that loyalty which makes Poe likable.
When Poe introduces Finn to Leia later in the movie, he interrupts a conversation she is having. She doesn’t seem to care though. She stops everything and focuses on Poe and who he has with him. Poe is clearly someone Leia holds in high regard.
How do the characters of Leia and Poe fall apart in The Last Jedi?
From the moment Leia and Poe appear on the screen in The Last Jedi, they aren’t on good terms. Conflict is usually good, but this conflict is a problem. The time difference between the two movies is as close as just a couple of days.
Leia is grumpy and perpetually irritated with Poe, which is not only different from the previous movie; it’s nowhere reminiscent of Leia’s demeanor in the other movies. She’s always been sarcastic and witty. She’s never been grumpy and irritated!
Leia, all of a sudden, doesn’t trust Poe with his battle plans either. Just days before, Poe was leading the planning session for the attack on Starkiller Base. Now he’s striking out. From their first scene together until the end of the movie, she is unhappy with him. What happened?
The writer failed to present the character’s the audience was familiar with from The Force Awakens. That’s what happened. As we saw with Logan and The Empire Strikes Back, the main characters the audience ‘knew’ were presented up front. This established credibility with the audience.
I dislike The Last Jedi and believe, even with more consistency, it still would have failed to stick its landing. However, the movie may have been better received by fans had the writer established credible characters in ACT I.
Final Thoughts.
When using established characters in a franchise, it’s paramount we present their known attributes before adding or expanding their personas. Demeanor, attitudes towards other characters, and world view are all aspects of a character which must be immediately re-established.
It’s tempting to push the easy button and go straight to the character YOU want to write. It’s also selfish and arrogant. As writers, we have to develop a rapport with our audience. We have to earn their trust. There is also the potential for great storytelling by turning a character’s strength in one movie to their weakness in another.