Does the presence of an antagonist make a movie/series/novel more captivating?

[12karen]

If yes why

If no why

Updates

+1 y

A protagonist is the main point-of-view character, while the antagonist is the opposing force who stands in the way of the protagonist's goals. The protagonist is often the hero of the story, while the antagonist is usually the villain.
a person who actively opposes or is hostile to someone or something; an adversary.

[GuyAnswersGirls123]

I sometimes started to wonder after watching Game of Thrones. There were many times in the show where I didn't know which side to root for since I was rooting for both.

Who is the protag and who is the antag? It wasn't clear to me, especially as a fan of Team Lannister (with the exception of Joffrey, he sucked and was clearly considered an antag).

So there was this one battle (Battle of the Goldroad) in particular with Danaerys' army on one side and Lannisters and Taryls on the other and it was one of the most exciting battles I ever saw on TV because I was rooting for both sides! I never thought that was possible so it's like I don't want either to win and don't want either to lose.

That was so interesting and really made me wonder if we need clearly defined protags and antags to engage audiences. Maybe all we need is conflict.

[GuyAnswersGirls123]

There was also this cartoon I loved as a boy called Hokuto No Ken, and it was a kids' show and had clearly defined protags and antags. Yet I started to wonder about GoT if it might have been more interesting if the show/narration didn't take sides this way.

The main protag is Kenshiro (Ken). He's an empathetic leader who protects the innocent and driven by compassion.
https://youtu.be/VVexQ-yQyIo

Then one of the main antags is Raoh. He's a ruthless leader driven by conquest and order.
https://youtu.be/Zf5n2amAdjU

Yet I think the show would have been more interesting if they didn't clearly define Ken and Raoh as protag and antag, because Ken's empathetic style of leadership actually raises questions as to how practical it would be to bring order to a post-apocalyptic world. Empathy doesn't scale so well; it's useful for leading a small group of people, not entire nations.

Raoh is far more ruthless but not a man without principles. He's a conqueror but he brings order and stability to the areas he conquers and protects them with an iron fist. The show portrayed him as an antag and sympathetic villain but I think it could have been far more thought-provoking if they just showed him as another person trying to bring order and peace to a world without any.

[GuyAnswersGirls123]

[*] Yet I started to wonder [after] GoT if it might have been more interesting if the show/narration didn't take sides this way.

[GuyAnswersGirls123]

In response to the update, for literature I think we can shift POVs with POV characters as in ASOIAF ranging from Jaime Lannister to Daenerys to Cersei Lannister to Asha Greyjoy to Arya Stark to Samwell Tarly to Brienne to Jon Snow to Davos Seaworth. Many of these characters end up fighting against each other so it's not so clear who is protag and who is antag, who is supposed hero and who is supposed villain.

[Telekinetic-Potato]

The presence of an antagonist doesn't in of itself make the story more captivating. It's the quality of the resistance the main character must overcome.

The obsticle must be spectacular and theatrical, relatable even if only by allegory or poingent and philosophical.

Most of the best stories are more about the main character overcoming themselves.

[FreyaRed]

Yes, usually antagonist would gain more empathy than protagonists, especially if the antagonist is evil, focused and successful. Sympathy for antagonist is something people in media try to avoid, that's why antagonists are often ridiculous in lot of children series there are no antagonists anymore.

[laly520]

yes

deeper plot

[Still-alive]

Definitely. its pretty difficult to make a compelling movie without it. it represents a good foil to the main protagonist. we are on their journey with them but being presented with an opposing force makes it feel more rewarding.

[OddBeMe]

Of course. Always need conflict. Even the antagonist is a storm or a grizzly bear.

[NathanDavis]

it makes the movie.. for sure

[TallAnon]

No story without conflict