TODAY'S NUGGET: Mumford (1999) - Another Example of When a Character Doesn't Change

[Quick Summary: The new, helpful psychologist in town hides a secret.]

Mumford is an excellent psychologist.

He listens more than he speaks, and people flock to him.

In fact, they're so occupied that it slips by that Mumford has a secret....

...so Mumford doesn't really change for 50 pages
...AND it's still interesting.

How does Kasdan do that without an arc in the first hour?! 

I've encountered a lack of a character arc before (here and here), but still am not sure how it works.

However, this script did give me one clue:

Mumford has engaging reactions.

ex. "LATER. The bar crowd has thinned. both Mumford and Skip have had a few. In fact, Mumford is now carefully pouring them each another drink from a bottle of Glensomething on the table.

MUMFOR: You want me...to be...your friend.

Skip beams. Mumford leans forward in the same confidential way Skip did before; he indicates that Skip should lean in too.  Mumford is almost whispering --

MUMFORD: But that's not what's really going on... (Skip is excited)...What's really going on is...you have some problems and you want some therapy, but you feel it could be very bad for Panda Modem stock if word got out that you were having head problems.

Skip confirms that's it.

MUMFORD: Can I ask you a personal question?

SKIP: Of course! That's exactly what I want.

MUMFORD: Have you thought about getting a wife?"

I so enjoyed Mumford's reactions (and his mysterious secret) that I was ok without the usual character arc that I am used to.  Weird. 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Again, not for amateurs. But boy, it works.

Mumford (1999)
by Lawrence Kasdan

TODAY'S NUGGET: Hard Times (1975) - I Can't Explain It

[Quick Summary: Chaney, an uncommon street fighter, temporarily partners up with Speed, a hustler hunted by loan sharks.]

**WARNING TO NEW WRITERS: Read about 50 scripts before you read this one.**

Once in very long while, I read a script that is a rare exception to a rule, and I can't explain why it works. 

This is one of them.

My general rule: The protagonist is the character whose arc changes the most.  

I've had writers ask, "Does the character HAVE to change? Why can't he/she remain the same from beginning to end?"

I usually reply, "Because it's boring.  Watching a character change and learn is interesting."

ex. Bertha (protagonist) begins as a self-absorbed lawyer.  Devious Debbi (antagonist) is the opposing counsel and pushes Bertha to grow.  At the end, Bertha lets someone else take the credit (transforms from selfish to generous).  

Here, however, the writer Walter Hill does not follow the rule.

Chaney does not really change from beginning to the end (in fact, everyone else changes more), AND HE IS STILL INTERESTING.

Why does it work here?

I don't know for sure.

All I know is that the protagonist is mysterious, sympathetic, and keeps us guessing what his next step will be. 

All without any big internal change or emotional arc.

That's really hard to do.

One in a million.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: If you can write a mysterious, sympathetic, what-will-he-do-next character without an emotional arc, you clearly don't need my blog.

For the remaining 99% of us writers, I highly recommend an emotional arc.

Hard Times (1975)
Written and directed by Walter Hill