Why does there need to be a main protagonist?

Why does there need to be a main protagonist?

Attached: PhantomMenace.jpg (455x679, 58.39K)

because the guy on the internet said so, duh

There doesn't

Attached: 1501321995403.jpg (960x652, 125.61K)

It's a bit easier to structure a story around, it's why even anthology films have a "wraparound" in place to set up the stories or a character interwoven. If you're just jumping off to random places or people, your audience is going to get confused.

Bump

You have less than 2 hours to tell a story. If you have 5 main characters the plot gets muddied

George Lucas made American Graffiti and thousands of other films have done an ensemble cast before.

There doesn't. But, it was a bad movie so the idea of it being a lot more focused on a single character is one way it could have potentially been improved.

The movie mostly follows Qui-Gon so he's the closest thing to one anyway.

Because this is how humans make stories, you need someone to relate to, someone to follow and care about in a fictional story, someone who drives the plot forward, who changes, who makes decisions that affect both the character personally and the story. Stories are emotional, they are meant to invoke feelings and resonate with you. Otherwise it's just a dry collection of events that leaves you completely unaffected, bored, and is generally a waste of time.

There is no one to care for in The Phantom Menace, there is a collection of bland, soulless, monotone, robotic characters going through motions. They all equally divert attention from one another, without allowing the viewer to get to know any of them really close, or get attached to them. None of them act human, it's all stiffed and detached. When Qui-Gon dies, no one cares. You are "supposed" to care, because you know from the original movies that Jedi are the good guys, and this one is Alec Guinness's master.

This is a very reductive take on storytelling. This feels like some basic bitch shit. It isn't a necessity. You can emphathise with characters or find them interesting without the need to like them. Seems weird you can't seperate that.

If you watch The Godfather or a show like Sopranos, you can find their stories interesting or even relate to what characters are going through but do you necessarily need to like them? And even if you like parts of them or things they do, the characters still do a bunch of awful shit so do you need to like them overall? Both that movie and show are considered classics.

It feels like you have a narrow perception of what storytelling needs.

Name three good films that don't have main protagonists.

>MUH STAH WARZ
Fuck off normies.

Attached: not-this-shit-again.jpg (600x337, 134.44K)

>Why does the origin story of Darth Vader have a main character?

Nice strawman. I never said you have to like them. Where did I say it? I said you have to be able to relate to them, care for them. The characters have to be interesting, charismatic, relatable, they have to be there, changing and being affected by the decisions they make, having goals you can understand, working to achieve them. Tony is the protagonist of The Sopranos. You can relate to him, because he is facing many problems every single one of us is facing every day, and you can care for him, despite him doing awful shit. There aren't clearly good or bad guys in The Sopranos, because there aren't really good or bad guys in real life. That's not how life works. Anyone who wants you to believe in clear cut good and evil is a moron, and his narrative is used to dehumanize someone and manipulate you into doing someone's bidding. The Sopranos is smart, it is for adults. Star Wars is not. Star Wars is shit for children with clear cut black and white morality. It's a fairy tale. But the OT managed to make it fun and relatable, it was more real, it had soul and humanity, real emotions. But with the PT, George Lucas decided to make it some retarded knock-off of a stage play, detached, formal, emotionless and soulless, with every single character being a soulless automaton, who don't act anything like human beings, who are dealing with unrelatable, convoluted, contrived problems. But George Lucas isn't that good of a writer to pull off a stage play. All of his characters are just going through the motions, point A to point B, in order to fulfill Lucas' retarded story he had in mind. It's boring. It's tedious. It's a waste of time. No one cares for it, which is why those movies failed. And for something that is a movie for children, it's completely asinine.
>It feels like you have a narrow perception of what storytelling needs.
It feels like you are fucking retarded.

American Graffiti. Which George Lucas directed.

The entire point of Watchmen is that you aren't supposed to relate to any of the characters, retard.

Attached: William_Myerson_Watchmen_0001.jpg (360x360, 29.93K)

only infants believe that you need to "relate" to characters in order to enjoy a particular work. you only need to recognize a competent exploration of the human condition regardless if the characters are good or evil

This

>you need someone to relate to
Ah yes, modern hollywood conventions are actually the only way to tell a story

>Anyone who wants you to believe in clear cut good and evil is a moron
You're just making excuses for yourself being a dick
get stronger or stop talking