About Using Public Domain Characters

After watching this video on YouTube about Robin Hood and King Arthur (and why there’s no good modern movie about either of them), I started thinking about public domain characters (PDC from here on). Unlike modern characters, characters written during the last 50 to 70 years (depending on the laws of your country), writing about PDCs doesn’t get you into trouble. It’s not just about writing fan fiction. You are free to use those characters, because nobody still holds the rights and that means nobody can stop you from writing about them.

Because of this, Hollywood and the TV studios make a lot of use of PDCs. They’re a cheap resource, since there’s no rights to pay for and nobody who will tell you when you’re doing them wrong. Well, the latter probably isn’t right - the audience will tell you when you’re doing them wrong. And that is, in essence, the content of the video I linked to above. The art of using a character in a new setting or of telling a different kind of story with them is to know their roots, their core. You need to understand the basics of their story, the essentials which you can’t take away. Sherlock Holmes, who has been done excellently for a long time and in a lot of different ways, right up to “House M.D.,” is The Detective. As long as you have him solve complicated cases (even if they’re medical cases), you will do his character justice. Give him a chronicler and assistant, no matter whether or not the name is Watson, and it will work. “Elementary” gender-switched two main characters from the source material with Joan Watson and Jaime Moriarty, but the series still is true to Sherlock Holmes as he was originally conceived. The same goes for other current versions of him, such as the BBC series “Sherlock” (which is less inventive with the characters, but also puts him into a modern setting) or the two movies with Robert Downy Jr. in the lead. There are many versions of Sherlock Holmes, but they all share the core of the great, if sometimes arrogant and insufferable, detective.

Yet, the last good version of King Arthur was made in 1981 (“Excalibur”) and the last good version of Robin Hood was made in 1991 (“King of Thieves”). ‘Good’ in this case means successful. Since then, all versions have more or less flopped. Why? Because they didn’t keep true to the core. This goes, of course, only for the movie versions - there were some good TV series based on the material in the 2000s. One reason for it might be the ‘dark and gritty’ trend which has been around since the 2000s and is still around today. And, of course, the whole ‘origin movie’ craze as well.

Now, you might wonder, what is the problem with ‘dark and gritty?’ Isn’t more realism always good? Actually, no. The main problem with ‘dark and gritty’ is not the trend as a such, but the stories they try to apply it to.

Robin Hood is, at its core, a hopeful story. The story about a group of men (the Merry Men, no less) who withstand evil authority and stand for those who can’t fight for themselves. Robin Hood isn’t just a thief - he’s a thief who steals from the rich (who, in the middle ages, very well might have gotten rich by stealing from the poor) and gives to the poor. Robin Hood is the man who stands by the true king of England, Richard Lionheart, and not by his evil brother John. He opposes the evil Sheriff of Nottingham (who was never portrayed better than by Alan Rickman in “Prince of Thieves” - proof me wrong) and defends the populace from abuse. That is, in a nutshell, who Robin Hood is. You can transport him forward in time just as easily as Sherlock Holmes, if you want to. But you need to make him the same kind of person. A heist movie would be a good choice for Robin Hood - have him gather a band of specialists (aka the Merry Men) and take money or other things from a corrupt politician (Prince John in modern guise) and his head of security (the Sheriff of Nottingham). Voila, you’ve made a modern Robin Hood.

King Arthur is an ideal king who rules over a peaceful, united England with the help of his knights, all of whom are virtuous and kind. That is the core of King Arthur - together with a huge junk of mythology and magic. Not just Merlin, although he plays a big role, but so much more. The Sword in the Stone which legitimizes the formerly unknown and officially common boy as the new king. The Lady of the Lake who gives him Excalibur, the sword which will lead him from victory to victory and will protect him from harm (well, the sheath will). His half-sister Morgan Le Fay who opposes him with magic and deceit - going so far as to deceive him so she can have his son Mordred, the man who is destined to destroy the perfect kingdom. The nymph Nemain who lures Merlin from Arthur’s side and robs the king of his most important advisor. The priestesses of Avalon who come and take Arthur away at the end of his life - with the promise that he will be back when England needs him. All of this is not a core for a dark and gritty and realistic story. Mordred joining the Round Table is when things start to go wrong and he is the one who will mortally wound his own father - but there will be no kingdom left for him to inherit. If you want dark and gritty, the last part of the story will provide it, but you can’t start out that way. You need the brightness and hope of Camelot first. If you want to make a different version of it, why not transport them to the far future? Arthur rules a galaxy or at least a sun system. His knights keep the peace and the law and quite some magic can, in this setting, be replaced with technology. After all, all technology which is advanced far enough can’t be distinguished from magic any longer. And, despite what some people might think, the story of King Arthur also is a great chance to bring in diversity.

The core is the problem with many modern retellings. Or, rather, that the creators didn’t think enough about the core of a PDC they wanted to bring back. I’m currently working on a story about Fantomas, another PDC. His core is the ruthless criminal mastermind who can look like every person he wants to and makes good use of that ability in his deeds. It’s easy to push him into modern times, even though he first turned up in 1910. The German Dr. Mabuse is a similar character, although he relies on hypnotism instead of masquerades (and, maybe, I’ll give him a chance one day, too).

Characters in public domain are free for the taking and, like fan fiction of still-owned properties, they can be used at will. But to use them well means to look at the original stories and identify the core of those stories before you write your own. Then you can create all kinds of interesting media with them.