Does Brian Cohen have much of an arc in Monty Python's Life of Brian? He just rattles through the movie being acted upon, all the while saying he's not the Messiah, until he's crucified. Still a great film.

It's more of a test of character than about change in character. Can Guido pitted against most evil regime in history protect his son?

Obviously, the stakes are incredibly high in almost every scene, with one wrong move leading to terrible consequences.

I agree with The Unknown Lyricist. A similar situation happens in The Pursuit of Happyness (sic). The MC believes in his future course even when the world falls apart around him. We admire him most because he doesn't change in spite of a situation that would have caused many of us to give up.

I disagree with the notion that the characters have to change in a film. There needs to be change, but if it's not in their character, then it's in their situation. Like Pursuit of Happyness is a great example. Will Smith goes through so much, but at the end he gets the position with Dean Witter. Or "My Cousin Vinny" - Vinny hasn't necessarily changed, but his life sure has. Same with Al Pacino in "The Insider", the Dude in Lebowski, and many many more.

As I've noted elsewhere, a Protagonist does not need to change for a movie to work. Sometimes they are change agents (they don't change but change others), sometimes their resistance to change is a key dynamic of the story. But then I think we'd all have to admit that Protagonist metamorphosis is a predominant theme in movies, and the simple fact that in most movies a Protagonist does goes through some sort of transformation.

It's worth another look. Someone recently raised the distinction with me of "change" and "growth." I think I'll post something on that soon.

Marty in Back to the Future has no character arc, as does Forrest in Forrest Gump. But - to agree with Scott - they affect change in others.

I think the key to a successful narrative isn't so much "does the protagonist change?" but"does the viewer change" meaning that so long as the viewer responds with a feeling that they have learned or grown (however subtle) by becoming invested in the movie, then the protagonist doesn't necessarily have to.

However, *something* has to change, whether its the protag or the world around him.

As Venice said, Marty has no arc in the first BTTF, but then does have one in 2 and 3 (overcoming name calling).

James Bond has no arc. Nor does Indiana Jones (in Raiders and Temple anyway, maybe he does in Last Crusade). Sherlock Holmes is always the same.

The thing is, with all these famous characters, we like them the way they are. We don't want them to change. Can you imagine if James Bond had an arc in every film? Who would he be by now? Not James Bond.

@MagicWizard: That's a good point. Some characters we like in part because they don't change. Every time we go to see an Indiana Jones movie, we want to see our action-adventure hero doing what they do best. Also true to the genre: It's escapist fare, not something to ponder a character's subtle psychological dynamics.