--- title: 'Writing Characters Without Character Arcs' source: 'https://youtube.com/watch?v=ot02hMJ6Hkk' video_id: 'ot02hMJ6Hkk' date: 2026-09-20 duration_sec: 565 channel: 'Just Write' --- # Writing Characters Without Character Arcs > Source: [Writing Characters Without Character Arcs](https://youtube.com/watch?v=ot02hMJ6Hkk) ## Summary This video explores the concept of the 'flat arc' in storytelling, where the main character does not undergo a personal change, using examples like Paddington, The Hunger Games, Back to the Future, and Gladiator. The narrator explains how these stories remain compelling through the protagonist's unwavering belief in a truth, their opposition to a flawed society, and the character arcs of supporting characters who are transformed by the hero's influence. ### Key Points - **Paddington 2's Record** [00:00] — Paddington 2 achieved a 100% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes after nearly 200 reviews, more than any other film to hit that milestone, despite the main character lacking a traditional character arc. - **Three Types of Character Arcs** [01:10] — K.M. Weiland's book 'Creating Character Arcs' outlines three journeys: positive change, negative change, and flat arc. The video focuses on the flat arc and its features. - **The Lie the Character Believes** [01:30] — In positive change stories, the protagonist starts with a false belief (the 'lie') that causes problems, and the story arc is about embracing a new truth. Example: Joy in Inside Out learns the value of sadness. - **Flat Arc Characters Believe a Truth** [02:32] — Flat arc protagonists begin with a specific truth they hold throughout the story. Examples: Paddington believes in finding good in people, Katniss believes the government is evil, Maximus believes Rome should be a republic. - **Society at Odds** [04:13] — Flat arc protagonists are placed in a society that is fundamentally at odds with their beliefs. Paddington faces unfriendly strangers, Katniss is disgusted by the Capitol's excess, and Maximus opposes a corrupt Rome. - **Supporting Characters Change** [05:21] — The most essential part of the flat arc is that supporting characters undergo arcs, often as a direct result of the protagonist's influence. Examples: Mr. Brown becomes accepting, Knuckles becomes kind, Proximo becomes selfless. - **The Impact Character** [07:11] — Weiland calls the character who catalyzes the protagonist's change the 'impact character.' In flat arc stories, the film is actually about the impact character, not the one who changes. - **Why Flat Arcs Matter** [07:56] — Flat arc stories reassure us that we can change the world without sacrificing our beliefs, offering a counterpoint to the common narrative that we must change ourselves. ### Conclusion Flat arc stories are a valid and powerful storytelling tradition, particularly effective for rebel or politically-minded characters. They demonstrate that a protagonist's unwavering belief can inspire change in others and the world, offering a different kind of satisfaction than traditional character growth. ## Transcript I don't put a lot of thought in Rotten Tomatoes scores, but I do think it's impressive that last year, Paddington 2, a movie about a lovable bear living in London trying to buy his mother a birthday present, broke a pretty substantial record. The film has a 100% fresh rating after nearly 200 reviews, more than any other film to hit that milestone. Its predecessor underperformed with a nearly 98% rating. Have you no heart, Jeffrey McNabb? Suffice it to say, both movies are as close as you can get to universal acclaim, and they manage this despite the fact that they break the first rule most writers will learn, that being that the main character must have a character arc. From the moment he is introduced to the final shot of the sequel, Paddington is kind, compassionate, and earnest. He always looks for the best in people, and he does not change at all. Is that a problem? Is the movie somehow lesser because the main character lacks an arc? Of course not. But it did make me want to know, why does not having a character arc work for this movie, and what kinds of stories are actually better because the main character never changes? In her book, Creating Character Arcs, K.M. Ryland looks at three kinds of character journeys. The positive change, the negative change, and the flat arc. Today I want to look at three features of the flat arc, how it handles theme, setting, and supporting characters, to figure out why these stories are still compelling. But to understand the flat arc, I need to talk briefly about the more common character arc, the positive change, and an element of these kinds of stories Wylan calls the lie the character believes. The most common format for a story is that you start with a character who believes a lie about themselves or about the world. In Inside Out, for instance, Joy believes that the only emotion that is valuable is, well, Joy. This causes her to act in a patronizing way towards the other characters, especially sadness, and it's her belief in this lie that nearly causes the destruction of her entire world. The story acts as a crucible to change the main character's belief in their lie, and their arc is about embracing a new truth. The theme of the story is visible in the difference between the two Joy learns the value of sadness in Inside Out and that the theme of the movie I recommend checking out Michael Tucker video about Logan and Children of Men over on Lessons from the Screenplay for a more in analysis of the lie the character believes The difference with a flat arc is that the character begins the story believing in a specific truth. Paddington believes you can always find the good in people. Katniss Everdeen in The Hunger Games is willing to risk her life for her family and believes that the government is evil. In Back to the Future, Marty McFly believes that you should stand up for yourself against bullies. In Gladiator, Maximus believes that Rome should be a republic and that it is a light in a dark world. My favorite example of this comes from the grossly underappreciated 2009 comedy starring Jay Baruchow, The Trotsky, which is about a high school student who thinks he is the reincarnation of Marxist revolutionary, Leon Trotsky, and to leave a movement to create a student union at his high school. My own wife is bringing a picnic for Stalin over here, who wants to destroy my business. I have nothing but content for Stalin, as you well know. None of these characters have character arcs. They begin and end the story in different places, but when it comes to their fundamental beliefs, they remain unchanged. For instance, a key line in Gladiator is when Commodus sums up Maximus' tumultuous life. The General became a slave. A slave who became a gladiator. A gladiator who defies the master. A frightened story. Despite his position in society constantly changing, Maximus is still the same person at heart. The themes of these stories are often more overt than in positive change stories because the protagonist believes in the theme from the start. This is in contrast to the story world surrounding the main character. The protagonists of flat arc stories will find themselves stuck in a society that they are fundamentally at odds with. That's because while they don't believe the lie, almost everyone around them does. Paddington finds himself in opposition with people who are unfriendly and distrustful of strangers. Katniss is disgusted by the excess and injustices of the capital. Thank you What possible difference can I make? In the end, they never give up on trying to reform the world around them. And this leads us to the most essential part of the flat arc, the supporting characters. You see, while the main characters don't change, the supporting characters do. This is what actually made me notice this in the Paddington movies in the first place, because a ridiculous number of characters surrounding Paddington have character arcs, and all of them are explicitly the result of Paddington's angelic influence. In the first film, Mr. Brown becomes more accepting of strangers, and by the second film, Paddington has made his neighborhood a much happier place. Even when he is sent to prison, he transforms his surroundings into a paradise, making every single person there a better, kinder version of themselves, especially the abrasive prison chef, Knuckles. In the other movies we're looking at, the protagonist's efforts are evident in how they change the story world. Katniss inspires people to rise up against the government, Maximus inspires people to rise up against the government, and in The Trotsky, Jake Baruchel inspires students to take politics seriously. God, I love that movie. But their influence is also evident in how they change key supporting characters who are typically allies. For instance, Maximus' moral integrity changes the amoral profiteer Proximo into a man willing to die for a cause. Do you think you're becoming a good man? Katniss's actions caused Effie, among others, to realize the mistakes of the government. And Marty Teekus' father had a stand-up for himself in 1955, which radically transforms Marty's 1985 reality for the better. And it's the fact that the supporting characters have character arcs that satisfies our need as an audience to witness some kind of change during the story. Now, if you're thinking of writing this kind of story, it really isn all that different from the positive change arc that we used to The only thing that changed is the perspective Most stories have a character who does not change their opinion when it comes to the central truth versus lie of the story These are often the mentor figures, but it can be any kind of character. What matters is that they are the catalyst that changes the protagonist's mind. They're the reason a protagonist has a character arc. Weiland calls them the impact character. The difference is that in movies like Paddington's Hunger Games Back to the Future, Gladiator, and the Trotsky, the films are actually about the impact character. You could easily rewrite them to be about the characters who have arcs instead. So the general advice of your character needs a character arc is sound for a certain kind of story, but there is a whole other tradition of storytelling out there where the characters do not change that can be just as compelling. It seems to work particularly well for characters who are politically minded, characters who are rebels. And these kinds of stories are important. One of the reasons we enjoy stories is that they reassure us that we can change. But movies with flat arcs assure us of something else, that we can change the world around us without sacrificing our beliefs. These are stories about good people, inspirational heroes who spend their lives spreading a positive message in the hopes of radically transforming the people around them and the world at large for the better. So, yeah, in conclusion, that's how you should write a Superman movie. Now, while these characters don't have arcs, they are still constantly trying to learn new skills. And if you're trying to up your skill level at writing or in other creative fields, then I recommend doing so with Skillshare. Skillshare is an online learning community with over 20,000 classes to choose from in design, photography, video editing, creative writing, and more. Try the course by Simon Van Boy on building a writing habit if you're having trouble committing to a story, and sign up for the premier membership to get access to all of Skillshare's classes. I want to thank Skillshare for sponsoring this episode, and if you want to join the millions of students already on the platform, you can get two months free by going to this link in the description. Thanks for watching this video, and a big thank you to my patrons for supporting this channel. Go to patreon.com slash justwrite if you want to pitch in a buck a video to help keep me going. Keep writing, everyone.