Deeper issues in fictional stories

[Yora]

It recently occured to me that fictional works with great stories always seem to have a deeper purpose behind them and are about something. Not directly alegories, in which a clear massage is packed into fiction, which often gets quite preachy, but where the core of the story is not the people and places that are in it, but certain problems the characters face and by the end of the story they come to a descision about it.

Classic example would be Lord of the Rings, which is widely regarded as dealing with the issue of Plurality and peaceful coexistence versus uniform obedience. Which is not really a problem to us today, but was a very different thing 100 years ago when the author started to reflect on the european siociety of that period.
Or The Hobbit, in which Bilbo is torn between his life of safety and pleasures, and learning to stand up for himself and take some risks. Or to quote Zombieland "time to nut up or shut up". (Which is also about the same issue.)

Not ever fictional story has such a deeper level. But I would argue that those stories are never good. There's cool and funny scenes, but it doesn't make a good story.
Even the second and third Star Wars movies are about Luke coming to terms with his screwed up family history. All the action and spaceships only set the stage for that story, they are not the reason for the story. The prequels lack such a deeper level and even if there are some good things to say about them, a gripping story is not among them.

Could be just me, who loves Sci-Fi and Fantasy, but gets bored by fight scenes and explosions, so I might have a special taste in what makes a good story to me. But maybe not, and that actually is what makes a story gripping and memorable.

[Kindablue]

So what you're saying is that deepness in fiction makes fiction deeper? I don't know if I can agree with that at all. More seriously, any piece of art that can be considered to be meaningful can be applied to real life and its problems; trying to understand that is why criticism-with-a-capital-C exists. I'd consider a piece of art being good or bad to be more nebulous to that, though, distilling to "did you like it?"

[nazgulnine]

So what you're saying is that deepness in fiction makes fiction deeper? I don't know if I can agree with that at all. More seriously, any piece of art that can be considered to be meaningful can be applied to real life and its problems; trying to understand that is why criticism-with-a-capital-C exists. I'd consider a piece of art being good or bad to be more nebulous to that, though, distilling to "did you like it?"

No, what he's saying is that a character's internal growth makes a story not necessarily "deeper," but more memorable. Yora's alluding to the moments in fiction when you read/watch a character's inner/outer struggle with the various forces around them, you feel more for that character, and why those particular scenes correlate to the popularity of those pieces.