If you’ve ever wondered whether theme and meaningful stakes actually make a difference in the screenplays you write and the movies you make, I invite you to try this side-by-side movie comparison I accidentally streamed my way into this week.
How it happened
I had intended to analyze the movie Gremlins for you all today. Hey, it’ll be a fun, seasonal movie to talk about, I thought.
It’s a movie that has some nostalgia appeal, and maybe my expectations were too high? I thought Gremlins would be amazing.
What I found is that there wasn’t much to talk about. Not in the particular way I was hoping to discuss it, which is to say I was looking at story and what screenwriting craft insights we might be able to pull from it.
Yes, the movie did a great job of exploiting its primary entertainment hook – the creatures, in both the mogwai and gremlin forms. A+ on that front, Gremlins. (And I think that accounts for most of the movie’s success.)
But there was something lacking in the story. And since I had also recently watched Shaun of the Dead, I couldn’t help but compare the two.
The side-by-side
Watching movies is the fun stuff you get to claim is “work” and “research” when you’re a screenwriter. 
So, if you’re looking for a couple of movies to watch, maybe you’ll add this double feature to your queue and try this side-by-side comparison for yourself.
My observations
With both Gremlins and Shaun of the Dead fresh in my mind, I realized these two movies have a lot in common.
They’re both comedy-horror mashups. They both involve creatures terrorizing a town. Heroes who fight the creatures alongside their love interests and family members.
Yet story-wise, Shaun of the Dead holds up much better. (So far, that is. I grant you that Gremlins is nearly 40 years old, while Shaun is only 20. We’ll have to give Shaun 20 more years to see if opinions change.)
But at this point, Shaun of the Dead is a story that stands the test of time, while Gremlins now seems quite thin.
So what’s the difference? What does Shaun of the Dead have that Gremlins doesn’t?
It comes down to meaning
Shaun of the Dead is a story built on a cohesive theme. The protagonist’s arc is rooted in that theme. And the story stakes include a strong internal/emotional aspect.
Protagonist Shaun grows from his experience. And we can see how and why the relationships at stake in the story truly matter to him.
This gives the story resonance and meaning. Gremlins has only the creature appeal to rely on.
If you watch Gremlins, you’ll notice that the protagonist, Billy, doesn’t have a real emotional journey. There’s no lesson, no takeaway message, no character realization or transformation.
Gremlins manages to hit the plot beats. But there’s nothing to show us why achieving the goal and protecting the stakes matters to the protagonist, or what it all means to him.
You might think building a character arc (and theme) into a light, silly genre movie is unnecessary, even contrived. But I think if you watch both of these movies what you’ll see is that building a movie on a meaningful experience for the protagonist gives even the silliest movie staying power.
It gives the story heart, which makes it an emotional and resonant experience for the audience. Which is the whole point, really.
Caveats
Now, to be fair – I’m talking about better stories, not more successful movies. Gremlins was the third-highest-grossing film of 1984; Shaun of the Dead was 136th in its year of release. Gremlins made $12M opening weekend, Shaun made $3.3M.
True, Gremlins had a PG rating and Shaun was rated R, which likely made a difference in the box office. In addition to a bunch of other factors, to be sure. But I think it’s clear that Gremlins is the more successful movie if you’re looking at the numbers alone.
So do you have to write a meaningful movie to have a successful movie? Apparently not.
Then why should you care? Why even bother to think about theme or character arc or meaningful stakes?
What meaning can do for your screenplay (and you)
Many writers feel intimidated by theme, by trying to say something profound or meaningful with their stories. So they skip it. They think if they’re writing a movie that’s just fun genre entertainment, it doesn’t need to also convey meaning.
However…
A little meaning makes any movie (or screenplay) more satisfying.
A meaningful movie will hold up better over time. It will affect people differently than a movie that’s based solely in spectacle.
And if you’re a screenwriter looking to create a career for yourself… affecting people matters. Because a script that can engage and move a reader emotionally will be a better writing sample to represent what you can deliver if someone hires you.
But I’d love to hear your thoughts. If you try the double feature, let me know if you agree. Which movie do you prefer, and why?