Tips for Creating the Supporting Characters Your Protagonist Needs

by Naomi Write + Co. in character, screenwriting, theme

With all of the possibilities open to you, how do you decide which supporting characters your story needs?

This question came up in a consultation recently, and I thought the discussion around it could be useful to share.

There’s a flipside to this question, too. You might have already discovered the supporting characters your plot needs (your cop protagonist needs a partner, for example), but there’s still something missing. Maybe people who read your draft comment that they don’t really get what the story is about, or – more likely – they might say they felt a little bored, either by the supporting characters themselves, or because they don’t feel fully emotionally engaged by the script.

But there is a tool or guideline you can use to address all of these questions: make sure all of your supporting characters are contributing to the screenplay’s “one conversation about one thing.”

What “one thing” is your screenplay talking about?

That “one thing” is really the big thematic idea that permeates the story. The protagonist’s character arc reflects that big thematic idea in some way, contributing to the conversation. The supporting characters and their roles in pushing the protagonist along that character arc contribute to the conversation too.

You can use that conversation to generate ideas for supporting characters, as a set of parameters to help you choose from all of the options available to you, and you can use that conversation as a way to shape the supporting characters you know your story needs so that they feel organically connected to the meaning of the story, not just the plot.

And yes, maybe you remember I’ve written about this before (a couple times). But the session I had with the writer client from the top of this article brought up a couple new points I thought could to be added to what we’ve discussed before:

1. 1. 1. Supporting characters don’t all have to fit into one of the four categories I described in this article, and
      2. A supporting character’s function doesn’t have to feel obvious or on-the-nose in order to be effective.

Let’s take these one at a time and use one of my favorite movies in recent memory as our example: CODA, written and directed by Sian Heder, based on the French-Belgian film La Famille Bélier.

SPOILERS BELOW!

(Even though it’s a bit off-topic for today, I think it’s worth noting what a simple story CODA is. It’s about a girl who is torn between going off to college and staying with her family. So simple! But it’s the specificity of the character, the situation, the place – everything – that makes the story feel rich and complex and real. And because of that, we connect with it. In the specificity the story becomes more universal.)

Theme, character arc, subtext – it’s all about “one thing”

What’s useful to look at in CODA right now, for today’s discussion, is the protagonist’s arc, which carries the thematic idea of the story. Because that will help us figure out what “one conversation” this story is having, which will make it easier to see how the supporting characters contribute to that.

So, the situation: Ruby Rossi (17) is the hearing daughter of deaf parents Jackie and Frank. Rose has a brother, Leo (early 20’s), who is also deaf and still lives at home. It’s a tight-knit family, and they rely on Ruby to be their interpreter and go-between to the hearing world.

And the character arc: In the movie we see Ruby go from being a girl who feels like her family and their dependency on her is an unfair burden, to realizing that she needs them as much as they need her – but that doesn’t mean she has to sacrifice her life – her voice – for theirs. They love each other, and they all want what’s best for each other, which is what makes the story so beautifully complex and moving.

(If you’d like to read the script, you can download a copy here.)

Alright, back to today’s discussion points:

1. Supporting characters don’t all have to fit into one of the four categories I described.

It’s true. The four categories I outlined were meant to give you a lens to see your supporting characters through that would make sure they felt truly woven into the tapestry of your story. But it’s not a rule or a must-do.

As a reminder, the categories I outlined previously were:

1. 1. 1. A New Worldview
      2. Faith in Self
      3. Cautionary Tale
      4. Aspirational Model

And we want to think about these functions in relation to the story’s “one conversation.” If we look at CODA:

• The choir director character, Mr. V., has a “Faith in Self” function. He helps Ruby see, accept, and honor her singing ability and dream, even though her family doesn’t understand or connect with it.
• Love interest Miles represents something Ruby desires (both a romance with him, and a “normal” teenage experience), so he falls into the “Aspirational Model” category. Ruby’s interactions with Miles primarily help build up that side of the conflict, the “putting herself first” side.
• And Ruby’s family – Jackie, Frank, and Leo – all combine to help Ruby achieve a “New Worldview.” Eve though they weigh in on the other side of the conflict, the “loyalty to her family” side, the interactions Ruby has with each of them help push her toward her eventual key realization: that her love for them doesn’t need to hold her back, and it’s their love and support that allows her to chase her dreams.

So that’s pretty much our central cast of characters. If you look at each supporting character’s relationship and interactions with Ruby, I think you can see the steps along the arc of change that they help Ruby take.

But Ruby also has a best friend, Gertie, who has a romantic storyline with Leo. Does Gertie push Ruby along her arc of change as well? Not in a way that I can remember enough to identify.

So: not every character in your story must be jammed into one category or another. The trick is to figure out what your story needs:

• How much pressure do you need to apply to your protagonist to get them to change?
• Which characters can most effectively create that pressure, and how will they do it?

2. A supporting character’s function doesn’t have to feel obvious or on-the-nose.

If you look at our CODA example again, the supporting characters aren’t directly telling Ruby how or what to change. They may not even know it or be able to articulate it themselves. The pressure they put on her comes through the characters living out their distinct individual points of view and experiences.

This is why I think it’s a good idea to think about the four function categories at the beginning of your process, when you’re designing the cast of characters. That way you can create the characters who have a function at their core, but that’s not all they are. You can develop the characters so that backstory and characterization is informed by the function but it all feels organic and under the surface – embedded in who they are.

Let your characters add to the conversation

Good screenplays feel cohesive, like all of the parts contribute to “one conversation about one thing.” With that in mind, we can think about supporting characters as part of the same conversation.

Supporting characters often help push the protagonist along their arc of change or transformation. That transformation speaks to the theme of the story, which is – essentially – the “conversation” that the story is having. That’s one basic way supporting characters contribute to the conversation and add to the overall sense of cohesiveness. They’re very much a part of this story, not off randomly telling some other story.

My challenge to you: Look at your screenplay or a favorite movie and see if the supporting characters help the protagonist move along his arc. Do they fit into one of the four categories? If not, how do they contribute to the story?