• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

character Is it possible to write a compelling story with just one character?

I had a discussion with one of my friends. He seems to believe that there is no way to tell a true, compelling story with just one character. He says, there needs to be another person to interact with. Another person to bounce things off. When he means one character, he means one character. In Castaway, Wilson serves as a secondary character even though he's an inanimate object.
(So, that doesn't count).


I tried taking a shot at it and I'm finding this exercise difficult. What do you think? Is it possible to write a compelling story with just one character?
 
Secret Honor and All is Lost are really good, contrasting examples of how you can do a one character feature successfully.

All is Lost is a better example than Castaway. Castaway's first and last acts included many people interacting with the protagonist.

A feature length story is very difficult to pull of with just one human being though. But it can be done.

Buried doesn't really count, but it's close! (The character interacts with people on the phone.)
 
In Castaway, Wilson serves as a secondary character even though he's an inanimate object.
(So, that doesn't count).
Interesting challenge.

So you're saying that as soon as the character interacts with
anything it doesn't count?

"127 Hours"? Would that not count because he sends messages
to his family via a video recorder?

Just recently I saw "The Human Voice": A woman in a room
having a breakdown. Ingrid Bergman. Made for TV and only 50
minutes. and she is talking to her husband on the phone (who
we never hear) so I guess that doesn't count.

I have heard of but never seen "Yaadein". I love the premise but
it might count. I gotta see this one someday.

What about "Moon"? Would that count?

I'm sure "Silent Running" wouldn't count because although there
is only one character he does interact with the robots. But it's a
great one character film.

I think the one character needs to interact with something to hold
interest.
 
I think directorik brings up a really important point in storytelling on film: "character" can be different than a human actor:
Weather can be a "character:" Perfect Storm?
A house can be a "character:" The submarine in Das Boot?
Computers can be a "character:" The Matrix?

Sounds challenging indeed, but I think a one-character movie can work if it is written at a high level with other "characters" (for your one character) to interact with. A narrator can serve this function. Someone at the other end of a phone, but you never see. A star (like Tom Hanks) from whom you know what to expect and perhaps act as a surrogate "character" in the audience.

When a film works well, there's more going on than what one character says or does.

My two cents, Toxoiid...
 
I've just watched "Thanatomorphose". Other than a few supporting characters, with no more than a couple of minutes screen time each, the only character is the lead female, walking around her home, naked and rotting.

Not sure if I'd describe it as "compelling", and, to be quite frank, it wasn't the most technically sound movie, but it certainly weaves an interesting tale featuring just one character. It's gotten a few good reviews, too (along with plenty of bad ones!).
 
I think that just because a character talks to an inanimate object, that doesn't mean that object is now a character. They are just there to give a lonely character a reason to talk.

And yes, it's possible to write a great story with one character. Only very hard.
 
i think it is definitely possible to shoot and bring something compelling with just one character..every person has their physical self and an inner self..the voice that sways our decisions and action so you can tell a story thru that way..
 
Back
Top