I say "only if absolutely necessary", i.e., if it's absolutely necessary info to understand the plot or to understand/justify a MAIN character's motivations pertaining directly to the plot. Otherwise, to me it usually comes across as the writer/filmmaker being self-indulgent at the expense of Story.

Backstory is way overrated.

I once had a discussion with Blake Snyder about this, and I'm of the same mindset. You do as much research and development of a backstory as you need, in order to be able to find your character's voice. If you know how your character would react (i.e. actions, words) in any scenario, you're good to go.

Sometimes that means developing an elaborate backstory, sometimes it doesn't.

And as far as delving into backstory in the movie itself goes... it better be to reveal something critical to the story at hand, and move the plot forward.

Time for the voice of dissent.

"Backstory" is the reason I write. I don't want just a bunch of faceless characters parading across my work, I need to get to know these people... probably more for ME than for the audience.

I write to come to some sort of understanding about the world we inhabit and 'backstory,' I feel, is the only way I can get arrive at any sort of epiphany, however fleeting it may be.

Now, this doesn't mean I'm going to do a 100 page novel on each character and setting but I don't have a problem going a little over and above.... it's not a waste. If you've made your decision to build a world, then you should have no issue in LIVING within the confines of that world for as long as it takes.

A story without ample backstory, for me, is spineless and ultimately the final product is lacking vitality and life.

But, of course, I could be completely off the mark on this... :D

The problem with backstory is that it often seems that it gets explained for no reason. It seems that if any character doesn't fit precisely into the mould of an smack-in-the-middle average person, they need some kind of 'backstory' to explain it.

Someone is crankier than usual? Give 'em a backstory to explain it!
Someone has a driving ambition? Give 'em a backstory to explain it!
Someone doesn't like vanilla ice-cream? That requires a backstory.

It ends up taking the complexity and flavor out of life. It basically implies that everyone would be identical unless there was some reason to be different.

From the point of view of me in the audience - if the backstory doesn't explain something that I'm burning to know AT THAT MOMENT then remove it.

Mac

Unnecessary. See: Darth Vader / Anakin Skywalker.

Backstory can be good... in limited amounts.

But I've also seen WAY too many writers get completely carried away with backstory.

I do know of some individuals who write HUGE amounts of backstory for all of their characters... and then write their scripts (or novels).

What inevitably happens is that their script (or novel) turns out to be a pile of garbage that doesn't make sense. And when you try to point this out, they say, "But that's all in the backstory! I have eleventy billion pages of it that you haven't read!"

And that's the problem right there.

Well is this a person of character???

I agree that it needs to be limited. Unless you're writing for LOST. But even still, these shows will use a certain amount of judgment on how much backstory characters get. some quick and shallow, some very deep. It definitely depends if you want the reader to care about the person. there needs to be some quality back story.

One example that I read about in the past was in the remake of Planet of the Apes, Mark Walhberg had an impressively flat character who only wanted one thing, to go home. Thinking back, i dont remember any intimate backstory for him. And I remember not carrying for him much either.

So i say, too much back story can be overkill, but none can be forgettable.

I think writing reams of backstory is completely ridiculous. I heard that Ang Lee would practically write novels of his character's past lives. I don't see the relevance in knowing what kind of cereal the character ate at six years old unless it directly impacts why the person behaves the way they do now.

I'll take a page out of your book (blog) Scott --

http://www.gointothestory.com/2009/07/screeenwriting-101-dennis-lehane.html

Especially this one:

FORGET THE PAST: “What your characters did before today is irrelevant. Flashbacks tend to be an alarm bell that your story isn’t working. If you want to see a great example of character in action, go rent THE VERDICT with Paul Newman. You know almost nothing about his character’s past.”

Film is dialog and images. Backstory means nothing when the character has to decide whether or not to throw himself out the window after the heroine (Dark Knight).


I just made a post on my blog about how to get around backstory by defining the type of dialog the character uses: Denanding, Sarcastic, Inhibiting, etc.

The interaction between characters is what viewers go to see. Not whether the character had a " " childhood.

As I commented in the GITS Club under Jonathan's post:

I think the importance of back-story depends on the TYPE OF STORY that's being told, and to a lesser degree the genre. IF the story hinges around a quest, or is a horror story, like "Night of the Living Dead;" there's no time for back story when you're running for your life.

I think character backstory is VERY IMPORTANT. It leads to deeper more interesting characters on the screen.

I don't think it's overrated at all, and I think ALL WRITERS should give some time and consideration as to who the characters in their stories really are, as in life a person's past shapes how they view problems in their life. Why should this not be true in the movies too?

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

I don't know where I fall in this argument. I can say, though, that I once did quite a bit of background work on a character and ended up with a biography rather than a person.

I've read writers like Tarrantino and Michael Mann are really into backstory. Then again, I remember an instructor in college telling me Shakespeare probably wasn't.

Ultimately it may depend on the writer - and the story.

I write backstory. Backstory helps me develop the script, because I can determine what decisions and paths my main characters will take based on their histories. Since real life is the same(we usually make decisions based on past experiences), I love using it.

However, I don't think it's necessary. It's just what works for me.

Character Backstory is relevant to:

1) The kind of movie you are writing. An Action/Thriller has little room for this, except in relation to the plot. A Drama has much room for this in order to fuel plot.

2) The individual writer and how best he can "create" the character on the page. There are many writers that base their characters on types as they go AND their are the Salingers (RIP) who clearly know their characters in a very intimate way and have designed them as such.

I think that the writer has to know/feel comfortable enough to write their character in any given situation. This doesn't mean pages and pages of backstory, but it might depending on what you want to accomplish.

Being someone that has mostly directed before trying out writing, I can say that the meticulous and exacting decisions that go into the craft of directing are typically overlooked by both audiences and critics, but are still a very important part of the creation process for making a movie.

Similar to this, I think the actual building/writing of a great character is something that no one reading the script should really pay attention to. But the reality of the character, their actions and dialogue, should just "work" and carry the story along--Whatever That Takes To Make Happen.