Well known directors associated with the genre (No particular order):

• Alfred Hitchcock: (The Birds, Psycho, Vertigo and more)
• Stanley Kubrick (The Shining, Full Metal Jacket, Clockwork Orange, 2001 Space Odyssey and more)
• Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill, Inglorious Basterds, From Dusk Till Dawn and more)
• Christopher Nolan (Inception, Interstellar, The Dark Knight)
• M.Night Shyamalan (Sixth Sense, Signs and more)
• The Coen brothers (Fargo, The Big Lebowski)

Locations and characters:

The location of which a thriller film is set heavily depends on the genre, i.e, horror, action, adventure, fantasy, superhero, sci-fi etc. The setting of the film should match the genre or the subjects involved, for example, a superhero film like Spiderman or the Dark Knight are primarily set in a large cityscape whereas sci-fi films like 2001 Space Odyssey, The Martian or any of the Star Trek and Star Wars films are primarily set in Space or other planets.

Of course, there are exceptions to this rule in that not all sci-fi films are set in space as the actual definition of sci-fi states that it is based on speculative fiction, often dealing with futuristic science and technology. An example is in Terminator films which deal with robotics, technology/time travel.

The overall point of location is for the audience to pinpoint with ease, what the genre is and what conventions are expected and part of it is using the correct character archetypes depending on the genre and the location.

Characters that belong in their genre:

Sci-fi: The Terminator, Kirk/Spock, Alien/Predator

Horror: Freddy Krueger, Jason Vorhees, Chucky, Ghostface

Action/Adventure: Indiana Jones, Rambo, James Bond, Ethan Hunt (Mission Impossible)

Superhero: Spiderman, Batman, The Avengers, etc

Fantasy: Harry Potter, Gandalf, Frodo Baggins, etc

In many thrillers, and films in general, have a main set of characters who are important to the story. They are usually heroes of some sort, a western would typically have a cowboy as the hero, an action thriller may have a James Bond type character. The heroes are called "heroes" for a reason, as they are the characters who the audience believes is the one to "save the day". The hero is essential in a thriller film. I would argue that the characters, especially the main protagonist, or hero is the one to make the decisions, and therefore effects the way the story goes.





This is why I think character development is key, even more so than the plot as the characters are what shapes it. A film could be made with the most original story ever shown in cinema, but if that film has bland, generic, one-dimensional characters, that amazing story will feel much weaker and wasted as the characters aren't developed enough to effect the story.

Plot:

In most thriller films, the plot is centralised to a certain conflict with intense situations, grave consequences and emotional involvement. Several genres have these all of these characteristics, such as horror, action, adventure, fantasy and more. Sub-genres include gangster films, war films, crime films and zombie films. The main meat of a thriller film is often introduced in the first five to ten running minutes as the point of a thriller film is to be “thrilling” and to captivate the audience’s attention by introducing the film in an exciting opening sequence.

When thinking about the title sequence, good films will try to avoid giving too much of the plot away in the title sequence as it may spoil the viewer's experience as the movie will have become predictable since the movie failed to keep some plot points under wraps. Many would counter argue that the opening title sequence of the film should be used to give some sense of narrative to the audience as it may engage with them more. This is often the case for films based on someone's life or a true story, as exemplified by films such as Eddie The Eagle. This film's title sequences shows parts of the life of the main character, thus mirroring the developments the character needs to go through throughout the rest of the movie.

In recent years, film makers have come to realise how much money a film can make for them and their company and will churn out film after film. These films will contain overly recycled stories and clichéd characters who the audience doesn't care about. An example of this strategy in film making is the series of young adult films based on novels. These are film series such as the Hunger Games films, the Divergent films and the Maze Runner films. What these films have in common is that they abide by several overused conventions in young adult films, such as there may be a love triangle or other romantic subplot involved, a rebellion against an evil government, a teenage cast, female protagonists who's names end with "iss" (Katniss, Hunger Games) (Triss, Divergent), the list goes on. There is a reason they reuse these plots and other elements, and that is that they sell big and they work, especially with the case of the Hunger Games. The sequel, Hunger Games: Catching Fire, grossed $865,011,746 at the box office worldwide, a significant improvement over the original film which grossed $694,394,724 worldwide. Even though Mockingjay part 1 and 2 had their box office grosses decrease since Catching Fire and the reviews for the last two films have only been slightly above average, they were still massively profitable, both grossed around the $650,000,000 to $750,000,000 range. 

However, despite these impressive box office scores, personally, I feel that how a film does at the box office does not determine how good a movie is for me and that the best films are typically the ones that don't have a primary focus on making profit, resulting in great films with different ideas, new ways of doing things are more enjoyable to watch and is clear that their goal with making a film is ultimately to MAKE A GOOD FILM. After watching the Hunger Games films are severely lacking in creativity, having the first sequel (Catching Fire) be very much the same as the original film except with a heavier emphasis on the theme of rebellion. As for the last two films, the fact that it's split unnecessarily into two parts, suggests that they're drawn to make films for extra money.