Do you prefer plot or character-driven TV shows?

[Wesley]

I prefer character-driven shows. Even if a show's plot is bad, I'll still watch it as long as the characters are likable and complex.

[Gunpowder]

I'd like to say plot, but I watch so many cartoons that have no plot at all... Let me put it this way: if a show has great characters but little to no plot, then those better be some DAMN interesting characters. But in order to give them any real development, it (usually) takes some kind of plot to go along with it. That could be something as simple as a love triangle.

On the other hand, a show can't rely on plot alone and be good; it needs a worthwhile recurring cast to intertwine with that plot and MAKE it good. Plus, let's be honest, people judge shows based on the faces in it. Never just the plot itself.

Think I'll go with characters, since a show can exist without a plot but not without those. This thread has me wondering if show producers work on story or individuals first... I'd like to think it's simultaneous, since that's the way I do it. It's probably more like, "Hmmm. I really like this OC I've made...what kind of world can I put him in for his existence to make sense?" Or something. :lol:

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Characters. But they have to grow and develop, not just be stagnant.

[Whatswiththeheadbands?]

A good mixture of both is usually the best.

[Cure]

A good mixture of both is usually the best.

Yeah. There's good of both and awful of both, but the best is when they're both done well. Like The Last Airbender.

[Wesley]

A good mixture of both is usually the best.

Agreed. I think shows like Dollhouse and Buffy get the right balance.

[Powder]

I'm a slice of life guy, overall, so I guess I prefer character stuff more. To me, an overarching story can take away re-watch value. I like when a show is very accessible, in that you could watch episodes 23 & 47 in succession without missing anything or being confused.

[snake]

Mixture. Cure mentioned ATLA, which is a great example.

[*NormalGamer*]

A good mixture of both is usually the best.

This I agree with; they are 'both' vital to TV shows, comics, and films depending on how fleshed out the characters are. Diversity is key.

[Leo656]

I'll also say "a mixture", but I do think for TV, the characters are more Important because the plots are all mostly the same. So it takes a strong set of characters to make you disregard the fact that you've seen this all before.

It's nice to have good in Both, for sure, but I think a show with weak story and good characters can last a while, while a show with weak characters and good stories has to work a lot harder to be successful. If that makes sense.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I'll also say "a mixture", but I do think for TV, the characters are more Important because the plots are all mostly the same. So it takes a strong set of characters to make you disregard the fact that you've seen this all before.

It's nice to have good in Both, for sure, but I think a show with weak story and good characters can last a while, while a show with weak characters and good stories has to work a lot harder to be successful. If that makes sense.

Makes sense to me. Strong characters can carry weaker plots, but strong plots rarely succeed in weak characters. That's why actors and actresses are so important.

[Prowler]

I'll also say "a mixture", but I do think for TV, the characters are more Important because the plots are all mostly the same. So it takes a strong set of characters to make you disregard the fact that you've seen this all before.

It's nice to have good in Both, for sure, but I think a show with weak story and good characters can last a while, while a show with weak characters and good stories has to work a lot harder to be successful. If that makes sense.
I'm kinda with you on this one. A great example of a show with no plot at all and with amazing characters is Seinfeld. The Fred Wolf TMNT cartoon also didn't have the strongest plot but the characters made it worth watching it.

Uninteresting characters that you cannot empathize with or relate to are a sign of bad writing and characterization.

[Leo656]

Yeah, it's why with movies, horror movies and comedies have to work double-time to win me over. The plots are all the same so the characters are what's going to keep me invested, and a lot of times, the characters in those movies only exist to serve the cookie-cutter plot. I find it hard to watch a movie or TV show where I plain hate every character involved, regardless of what it is. :lol:

[Prowler]

Yeah, it's why with movies, horror movies and comedies have to work double-time to win me over. The plots are all the same so the characters are what's going to keep me invested, and a lot of times, the characters in those movies only exist to serve the cookie-cutter plot. I find it hard to watch a movie or TV show where I plain hate every character involved, regardless of what it is. :lol:
I wouldn't say "hate", since that's a very strong word, but uninteresting characters are the main reason why I've never been able to get into crime investigation shows such as CSI and every damn hospital show except for House and Clerks.

When it comes to video games, I find it hard to like Tekken because I find most characters uninteresting, unlike Street Fighter or Mortal Kombat ones.

Movies usually don't last more than a couple of hours, so it takes a very talented script writer to be able to put together the best of both worlds in a flick.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

I'll also say "a mixture", but I do think for TV, the characters are more Important because the plots are all mostly the same. So it takes a strong set of characters to make you disregard the fact that you've seen this all before.

It's nice to have good in Both, for sure, but I think a show with weak story and good characters can last a while, while a show with weak characters and good stories has to work a lot harder to be successful. If that makes sense.

Makes sense to me. Strong characters can carry weaker plots, but strong plots rarely succeed in weak characters. That's why actors and actresses are so important.


Ditto to both of these.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I think the best recent example of a great show is CW's The Flash.

Even the weak episodes had two things to carry it and make me desperate for the next episode:

#1) Awesome characters like Barry, Joe, Caitlin, Cisco, Eddie, Dr. Wells, and NOT Iris

#2) An ongoing season-long narrative that built like a mother. Seriously, every episode where I was starting to think "This was kinduva meh episode" Eobard Thawne shows up in the end and does something insane like vibrate his hand through a journalist's chest or sneak back into Star Labs. :tlol:

[Wesley]

I'm kinda with you on this one. A great example of a show with no plot at all and with amazing characters is Seinfeld. The Fred Wolf TMNT cartoon also didn't have the strongest plot but the characters made it worth watching it.

Uninteresting characters that you cannot empathize with or relate to are a sign of bad writing and characterization.

I agree. Shows like Revenge, 2 Broke Girls and Charmed don't have a strong plot either, but I think the characters make them worth watching most of the time.

A great recent example of shows with a good plot and strong characters is Person of Interest.

[Leofan26]

I prefer both, if I had to choose one over the other I'd say characters. I really have to like the characters in order to get into the show, even if just one. For example, Kim Possible series I disliked Kim Possible character but Ron who was her sidekick was my favorite than I ended up slowly warming up them all, even Kim during season four.

[ProactiveMan]

I can enjoy something with no plot, and good characters a lot more than the reverse. Ideally I'd like both though.