[Marq]

Originally Posted by santeethrash

on the other hand Mark Romanek did an awesome job on donnie darko he focused on donnie throughout the movie but you also had an idea what the rest of the characters situations were. i just don’t think that drew Barrymore belonged in that movie though but that’s neither here nor there. I just hope that he didnt waste all his good ideas on donnie darko and cant wait for another Mark Romanek film in hopes it will prove he didn’t.

Mark Romanek had no involvement in Donnie Darko.

The definitions of character development as a concept have been pretty good so far. What I'm interested in is exactly how much it is actually needed. Certain films require it (like, say, Malcolm X) or use it perfectly (like Pulp Fiction or Taxi Driver or The Godfather), while others exists brilliantly without it, or a minimal amount of it. Oftentimes, the filmmaker will even go out of his/her way to NOT provide prior context to the character, allowing the audience to accept them for who they are and how they're behaving. A movie like Lost in Translation barely mentions anything about Bob and Charlotte's "origins" but manages beautifully to have them develop as the film progresses. Even without knowing anything about their past, we rationalize their present and future.

Even more extreme, is the complete ignoring of character development. Last year Gus Van Sant released two films, Gerry and Elephant. Both never had the camera leave the primary characters, but the story never bothers to present any background for them. In Gerry, we don't even know the only two characters real names, but we find ourselves immersed in how they handle themselves and are fascinated by what's in store for them. While Pulp Fiction brilliantly used non-expository dialogue to have us relate to the characters and develop them, in Gerry they barely even speak, and yet despite this lack of development, the film works both as an experiment and as an argument against needing any character development (though it's certainly an exception to the rule).

Similarly, in Elephant Van Sant presents his characters without any motivation or direction, but instead choses to present them strictly as a documentary might (without the interviews or voice-overs). The audience is just a casual viewer to how the characters are behaving. Considering the film deals with such tragic and powerful violence, the viewer feels all the more uneasy when watching the violence occur since there have been no easy answers or context or development provided to explain why the characters are behaving as such.
Such instances go to show that while character development is usually an essential element to quality cinema, experimenting with how it is done, or even minimizing its role, can result in truly original film experiences.