Not always. A character can be unimportant to the core story and still be deep.
Prominent characters are important characters that stand out from everyone else...because they have more development. You can certainly have deep characters that are barely in the movie but that is rare.
I'm not that interested in whether it's rare or not but whether is possible. And it is.
They don't usually stand out at the end of the movie because they are overshadowed by characters who had more time to develop.
Still they have a whole opportunity and poossibility of being three-dimentional.
Plus JJJ and Flash really aren't that deep of characters compared to their counterparts with more screen time like Aunt May or Norman Osborne.
They arer not or they haven't been?
Because Flash Thompson can be a one-dimentional high school bully's caricature or that man who went to Vietman back in the 1970's and be more than what he originally was. And you don't have to actually show his whole ordeal to have a good actor playing those things inside him and a good writer putting just the necessary to convey that. It's all about not simplifying to the max.
JJJ is only a paper menace until he does something about it and creates a villain.
That's simplifying. Any editor is more than that. And the comic's character might be grumpy but also has his inner demons as to why he does feel compelled to attack Spiderman.
You don't have to make it the central character to give him development and depth.
It would be the same thing as the Joker only robbing mob banks the entire movie. He became much more interesting when he stepped his game up.
Or when he's terribly well-written and acted.
There was certainly a lack of Alfred. He was barely in the movie.
Wait. Weren't you the one saying "nobody was whining about the lack of Alfred in TDK"? And now.. you're kinda doing it?
Nobody complained about lack of Alfred simplyu because there wasn't any lack of Alfred. He didn't have the most screentime but he was a rich character so he was memorable.
The graphic novel that TDK was based off of isn't light and fun and then again neither really is most of Batman's other iterations so why would Alfred be comic relief? Spider-Man and Batman are not even close to being the same thing. I am tired of people calling for Spider-Man to be more like TDK. It is lame and it is annoying. If you want to watch TDK, go watch TDK. If you want Spider-Man to be more like TDK, get a degree in computer technology and replace Batman with Spider-Man and Joker with Green Goblin then watch until you heart can't stand it anymore. Spider-Man is light and fun. Batman is dark and brooding. There are few moments in all of the Spidey mythos that are dark, tense, and gritty. In Batman, those adjectives are a dime a dozen.
Firsty of all, I'm not saying Spiderman should be like TDK. It's just that, being such a great superhero movie, TDK shows perfectly how a side character doesn't have to be a caricature or lack of deopth because he's just a "minor" character.
Once again, comic books' Jameson has much more to offer than what Raimi gave us. And once again, it's not a matter of screentime.
Darkness or TDK have not the monopoly of deep complex characters. You can have a light-hearted movie with deep characters in it. Light-hearted shouldn't be a sinonym with shallow, one-dimentional or anything of the like.