Breaking up dialogue?

[Trauma Surgery Writer]

I’ve always though that I should keep the action lines to a minimum. A writer told me I needed to break up my dialogue with action. He gave me advice and an example. I’ve bracketed his examples. I’d be grateful for feedback on this problem. Thanks, TSW

How I wrote the scene first.

JOHN
Well, I don't have call this weekend. How about dinner? I'll bet we've got a lot in common.

They stop in front of the ER door.

KICK
I can tell already we've got one thing in common.

JOHN
Yes?

KICK
John, do you like getting sweaty with girls?

JOHN
Yeah...sure...

KICK
So do I.

JOHN
Uh, this is not a workout kind of a thing?

KICK
No.

JOHN
This is an...Ellen Degeneres kind of a thing.

KICK
The word you're *****footing around is lesbian.

JOHN
Right.

KICK
John, for a man of science and medicine, you are about as articulate as a plaster lawn elf.

JOHN
And you, Dr. Callahan, even covered in blood and gore, radiate power, grace and beauty, like Woman Eternal.

Kick steps back and holds out her hand.

KICK
Good rally. Now that we understand each other, let's be friends.

His advice and an example."This is an area that really needs attention. You have some exceptionally long passages of dialogue with no action to break them up. The result is known in the film business as "talking heads." This is acceptable if you're writing a novel, but not a screenplay. Movies are all about action on the big screen. Peoples lives and stories are played out not only with words but also with their actions. There's a saying among actors, "Acting is nothing more than reacting." Remember that when you write dialogue. Good dialogue should never run more than four or five lines without some action description to break it up. People do things, experience feelings, as they talk. Give your characters something to do. Have them stand up, sit down, walk to the window, open a book, pour a cup of coffee, light a cigarette, pace the floor, laugh, cry, anything that works with the scene. Here is a scene that's long on dialogue and has no action. I've added action to break it up and make it more acceptable for the screen."

JOHN
Well, I don't have call this weekend. How about dinner? I'll bet we've got a lot in common.

They stop in front of the ER door.

KICK
I can tell already we've got one thing in common.

JOHN
Yes?

KICK
John, do you like getting sweaty with girls?

(John smiles and pulls Kick close to him.)

JOHN
Yeah...sure...

KICK
So do I.

(John steps back from Kick.)

JOHN
Uh, this is not a workout kind of a thing?

KICK
No.

(John looks back at the statue and searches for the right words.)

JOHN
This is an...Ellen Degeneres kind of a thing.

(Kick smiles coyly.)

KICK
The word you're *****footing around is lesbian.

(John hesitates for a second. He looks around as if he would like to escape.)

JOHN
Right.

KICK
John, for a man of science and medicine, you are about as articulate as a plaster lawn elf.

(John regains his composure and smiles.)

JOHN
And you, Dr. Callahan, even covered in blood and gore, radiate power, grace and beauty, like Woman Eternal.
Kick steps back and holds out her hand.

[whistlelock]

Yeah, what you're talking about is a fine line thing. Too much of it and they'll tell you that you're directing from the page and too little, well you know what happens when you have too little.

What you always have to ask when it comes to every bit of dialogue and action is: Does it serve the story? Will this bit, right here, reveal character, move the scene, and advance the plot? If it's no to one of those, then don't put it in.

I try to think of it as: put in enough that even an idiot will know what's going on when they read it but leave out enough so those idiots feel they can contribute to tell that story.

It's also a question of writing style, I think. In the case of my last screenplay, a few reviewers told me to cut back the action lines in some places. It took away from the dialogue. The movement of the characters took something away from the dynamics of the scene. Those readers all felt it would be improved to make it a talking heads scene.

Which kinda messes with me. so it may be a question of 'how interesting is your dialogue?'

Which also doesn't really help here.

So, I think someone once told me: "For every three spots of dialogue, put in one action line."

does that help?

[Trauma Surgery Writer]

Thanks, Joe. One action line for every three spots of dialogue is not a bad idea. My first screenplays were over kill in the other direction. For me, prose techniques are hard to shake. TSW

[Writer1]

TSW...I read your first passage and then compared it to the second one. The first is MUCH better because it DOESN'T have all those unneccessary actions...let the actors figure out how to move. Your page wasn't filled with "black" nor with long-winded speeches....it was filled with short bursts of dialogue and on-screen would last less than 20 seconds.

Are you sure your friend was tallking about this particular short scene? If so, although his intentions may be good, he's wrong.

[Deus Ex Machine]

While I agree with the spirit of the advice given to you I disagree with it's application. Film is indeed a visual medium and a drama is from the root Dran which means "To do" not to say or to speak, but to do. There is a reason why society judges a man by his actions not his words, because we as a species place greater emphasis on what people do which is why drama also places this emphasis on action over words. I'm not saying a drama can't and shouldn't have great dialogue, but it should posses great images that tell your story just as well or better than your dialogue does.

One bit of advice I got in film school was to think of your film as a silent movie. Someone should be able to watch your film with the sound off and be able to follow it just as well as they can with t he sound on. If you are dependent on dialogue to tell your story you are not telling a very dramatic (in the true sense of the word) story.

Now to your example. I don't find anything in the added "business" that tells your story. Ideally you should be able to remove sections of dialogue and express those beats in the actions of your characters.

Action is not arbitrary and we do not include every twitch and gesture a character makes, we only include those actions which themselves reveal something about the character as they react to the conflict and in turn advances the story. That is the kind of action you need to incorporate into your story, not arbitrary irrelevant "business" for the sake of breaking of dialogue to serve some arbitrary idea of what a script should look like.

Don't worry about what the page looks like, worry about how the story is told and allow function and content to dictate form, not the other way around.

HTH

[Trauma Surgery Writer]

The first set of dialogue was how I wrote the scene. The second was his graphic example. He did the same thing with another scene. He thought the script was slow in spots because of the dialogue. This was the first example he used as a graphic illustration. Thanks for the input Writer1, TSW

[Trauma Surgery Writer]

HTH wrote, "..worry about how the story is told and allow function and content to dictate form, not the other way around." Story is always my main concern. However, my writing skills, such as they are, are geared primarily for prose. I have much to learn about screenwriting.

The postscript to the example above was, “ The scene goes on from here and needs more action. I hope you get what I’m driving at from these two examples. The action I’ve added may not fit the scene as you see it, I’m sure you can make it more meaningful. Go through your script and give the characters something to do while they’re speaking. Make them react to the situation physically as well as verbally. This doesn’t mean you can’t have rapid dialogue. The actors will handle the physical reaction as they deliver the dialogue.”

Thanks for your help, HTM. TSW

[OkeyDokey]

Deus nailed it, as usual. The spirit of your friend's advice is right, but some of his suggested "improvements" go too far in the opposite directions.

Breaking up "back and forth" dialogue is always a good idea, but the actions you use must advance the story.

"Smiling coyly," "hesitating" and "regaining his composure" are all acting directions. You don't need them in your screenplay. You need actions that help communicate your story.

"Smiling" in particular is one that I've had to learn to get rid of in my own writing. I tend to use it as a cheat for a "beat," but I'm slowly learning to avoid the impulse. :)

"John pulls Kick close" and "John steps back" are better because tell the story visually (I would suggest having Kick step back, not John).

As with most screenwriting advice, you'll learn to find the middle ground that works best for you.

Good luck!

[pantalone]

Avoid arbitrariness at all costs. Also avoid alliteration. The actions should speak as much as the words. Which is what Deus said.

In your case, if you want to break up dialog, simply for the sake of breaking it up, then perhaps a quick line about Kick opening a door for a hot nurse. (Actually, hot is redundant when talking about nurses. And teachers.)

With the death of Marlon Brando, there has been some talk of some of his actions in films, his brilliance - namely putting gum on the rail and wearing the girls glove.

What film is it? Kramer v Kramer where the father tries to make breakfast? That is story telling action. Kevin Spacey and his remote controlled car are far better than any purely arbitrary action. In the "my daughter, my sister" scene in Chinatown, it is when the action (slapping) stops that says more than any dialog.

[TwoBrad Bradley]

I think the problem is due to a misunderstanding of what your writer told you, "Good dialogue should never run more than four or five lines without some action description to break it up." And based of the writer's suggestions, I don't think the writer clearly understands either.

It's not about the number of exchanges of dialogue between characters. It's about the number of words (lines) said by one character at one time. For the most part people in real life and in movies don't talk in large chunks.

Large chunks of dialogue can be broken up with action or by another character talking.

Or, I like to see if I can give some of one character's words to the other character. Consider (if this was a bit of dialogue that needed to be broken up):

Your dialogue:

JOHN
Well, I don't have call this weekend. How about dinner? I'll bet we've got a lot in common.

Consider this approach:

JOHN
Well, I don't have call this weekend. How about dinner?

KICK
I bet you're thinking we've got a lot in common.

Think about ACTION as how it breaks up the scene. Every scene should have a beginning, middle and end. The "reversal" points between these sections is a good place to insert action.

Also, reversals (or even slight changes of direction) can be identified within a scene section or a large block of dialogue. Consider inserting ACTION at these points.

Effective use of ACTION can be a (subconscious?) clue to the reader/actor that a change is coming.

[Trauma Surgery Writer]

"Smiling" in particular is one that I've had to learn to get rid of in my own writing. I tend to use it as a cheat for a "beat," but I'm slowly learning to avoid the impulse"

OkeyDokey, ouch, ouch, ouch! That is going to be a hard one to internalize. TSW

[Trauma Surgery Writer]

(Actually, hot is redundant when talking about nurses….)

Pantalone, your advice to Writer_For_Life on, Guy survives gunshot to the head was superb. Your comments on my problem are splendid. But hot is redundant when talking about nurses? My observations have confirmed Darwin Theory. Young hotties are quickly taken out of the gene pool by marriage minded doctors, and the poor, lumpy beasts that are left end up on Green Pease’s endanger species list. Perhaps you were being ironic? TSW

[NikeeGoddess]

first of all, you should never put action lines in (parentheticals) - they are only used under the CHARACTER NAME right before the dialogue and should be significant; not telling the actor where to look or scratch his nose; like the samples you have.

use parantheticals to clarify what may be confusing to the reader.... ie - a statement that is made with sarcasm; or words whispered to only one character when there are several present; or maybe a wink (non-verbal communication)

YOU WRITE:
They stop in front of the ER door.
if they must stop at the ER door than you can make the action come to them.....
ie - the doors open and close and the pressure on the sensor is activated under their feet; they're pushed aside by EMTs rushes a patient on a gurney; a man with a hatched lodged in his head walks non-chalantly through the door; etc....

[Deus Ex Machine]

Brackets were added by the poster to help identify the suggested lines and their placement.

[pantalone]

Young hotties are quickly taken out of the gene pool by marriage minded doctors, and the poor, lumpy beasts that are left end up on Green Pease’s endanger species list. Perhaps you were being ironic?

More likely my methodology is suspect. I live near a university that churns out nurses, dentists, doctors, veterenarians; all those wonderful multi-colored scrubs parading past my balconey daily. I stay away from a doctor's place of business as a general rule. So my encounters with nurses are mostly limited to Happy Hour.

[NiteScribe]

Action should be narrative not decorative. If all two characters do is walk and talk, it only needs one short action line stating that they are walking. The rest should only be dialogue. That said, only one action line in most scenes with the rest being dialogue is not a script, it's a play. Scripts are visual, but their actions should always advance plot. Less really is more because it keeps the focus clear. Just my two cents but I hope that it helps.

[ComicBent]

Trauma,

I am back after a few days and did not have time to read through all the answers to your question. I saw that Deus replied. He is always right on target, so he has probably already covered this. Just let me chime in late here.

Your friend told you wrong. The real concern here is that you have your characters stop in one spot and carry on a long conversation, and that is not good (though this principle is a generality and not an absolute truth).

What he did in rewriting your scene was to make it worse with all the frivolous "direction" that I hate to see in a script, like directions to "smile" or "frown" or something like that. Also, do not put parentheses around action unless it is a short line directly below the CHARACTER name.

[incrediculous]

This sounds like a Chasing Amy story. If you look at Kevin Smith's script, you'll find page after page of uninterrupted dialogue.

However, you will note that he makes certain to frame the dialogue in an interresting setting. The discourse may take place while throwing darts in a bar, swinging in a park, or playing skiball in an arcade.

Even so, I've heard people accuse Smith of not writing visually.