On-the-Nose Dialogue

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

    Originally posted by maralyn View Post
    Broken leg, stuck in a room, sees something that looks like murder going on across the way...
    He sees a man going out at night. He sees a dog digging a hole. Nothing is graphic enough to suggest murder, so without the dialogue, you don't know what's going on.

    Originally posted by maralyn View Post
    Now, go away, I'm going out to drink something with bubbles and sprinkle white powder around my nostrils. Oh no, that the chillin out thread.
    I thought you were going away. Didn't you say you had to go?

    Anyone who posts as often as you do must have the computer strapped to her chest.

    (Hey, that's some good dialogue there. I'll use it!)...
    "THIMK." - Amomynous

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

      Originally posted by R.D. Wright View Post
      Anyone who posts as often as you do must have the computer strapped to her chest.


      Corona
      I love you, Reyna . . .

      Brown-Balled by the Hollywood Clika

      Latino Heart Project's MEXICAN HEART...ATTACK!
      I ain't no punk b1tch...

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue



        Gotta luv that maralyn-hate.

        It lives in my briefcase, actually.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

          mary went.
          sigpic

          "I'm gonna run ya ragged!"

          "YEE HAWWW!!!"

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

            Originally posted by maralyn View Post
            I didn't say you have to have minimal dialogue. Use as much dialogue as you want.

            Just that the dialogue isn't what's telling the story.

            You can design your dialogue. Like the icing on a cake. Sure some like the cake, others like the icing, but the icing isn't the cake.
            Maralyn, I now believe everything written in the screenplay must convey the story. But don't use dialogue as you want! Use dialogue to advance the story.

            Dialogue isn't just icing on the cake, it's a necessary ingredient in most screenplays. Actions reveal character, but so can dialogue. Actions advance story, but so can dialogue. And dialogue can even accomplish things that actions can't. But use dialogue judiciously.

            Brando was a great actor, and we remember his actions. We also remember certain lines that express emotions and story beyond what his actions could.
            "I coulda been a contender." (or something like that.)

            Just don't use dialogue as a crutch to TELL your story.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

              If you read a lot of scripts, it's common to skim the action and read down the page. It's not out of laziness, really, but a desire to get to the good stuff. There's nothing worse than overwritten description, and that means anything that doesn't advance the story.

              Lots of actors cross out everything except the words when they read a script. And nothing annoys a director faster than description that tells him or her how to shoot something. Let's face it, actors and directors are a large part of the audience we're writing for - and selling to.

              Great dialogue is a thing of beauty, and there are times it rises to art. What a gift to write a speech that even the audience wants to memorize.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

                Well, not only to convey story, that would be too boring. And what about the scene in Jaws, where that woman is holding him up by yapping to him on the beach, while he's straining to see a shark.

                Dialogue isn't used to convey story there, it's getting in the way of the story, causing fear to rise.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

                  Re-watch your favorite films, or the most successful ones. For the most part, both the protagonist and the antagonist will state their goals. Then, sequence by sequence, they'll tell you how they plan to get what they want. Then, scene by scene, they'll say how, and verbally respond to how it went.

                  The whole story exists in the dialogue. Only the how and some of the why exists in the action. That's why skimmers can read the dialogue.

                  Success,

                  InDeep
                  Many men, perhaps even most, are unhappy in their souls. We burn so hard but shed so little light it makes us crazy and sad. - CLIVE BARKER

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

                    Originally posted by InDeep View Post
                    Re-watch your favorite films, or the most successful ones. For the most part, both the protagonist and the antagonist will state their goals. Then, sequence by sequence, they'll tell you how they plan to get what they want. Then, scene by scene, they'll say how, and verbally respond to how it went.

                    The whole story exists in the dialogue. Only the how and some of the why exists in the action. That's why skimmers can read the dialogue.

                    Success,

                    InDeep

                    And then try the following:

                    Check out an action or horror movie, even a comedy with a lot of physical humor, you haven't seen. Play it but don't watch it, only listen to the dialogue and sound track. Then play it again, watching and listening. Is the story the same both ways?


                    Anyway, just finished viewing Separate Tables on Turner Cable, (David Niven, Deborah Kerr, Rita Hayworth, Burt Lancaster) a movie adapted from the play. Takes place in one location, mostly the dining room of an inn, and like the play is mostly dialogue. Here's a case where the dialogue has to carry most of the load. There is a lot of what we would call OTN dialogue. Because of the nature of the film, the dialogue must fill in backstory, etc.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

                      The first round of assessment for entry into film school is to submit a series of 9 images, that tell a story that goes from the general, to the specific, and ends with a twist. No words, just 9 images.

                      Why do you think they do that?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

                        Originally posted by maralyn View Post
                        The first round of assessment for entry into film school is to submit a series of 9 images, that tell a story that goes from the general, to the specific, and ends with a twist. No words, just 9 images.

                        Why do you think they do that?
                        Nobody needs to answer that. We're not in kindergarten here.

                        Maralyn, in another thread somewhere way back, you spoke against absolutism. I suppose you are against it except when it suits you to make an argument. This thread is not about images, it's about the words that come out of the actor's mouths. Like it or not, it's been that way since 1929.

                        On-the-nose dialogue is just the stuff that states too matter-of-factly what happened, what's happening, and what will happen. It doesn't sound natural, because people seldom say exactly what's on their minds. When dialogue is used properly it can tell a story where images cannot, as well as move us emotionally, all in a natural way.

                        You seem to be making the argument that the images are more important than the words. Everyone here but you has acknowledged that they are both important, and depending on the material, one can take precedence over the other. I hate to break it to you, but Shakespeare sucked in the silent days. It was much more beautiful to hear Lawrence Olivier speak those words, as well as see his striking face and movements. A blend of sights, sounds, and spoken words is usually what makes a movie.

                        Isn't it great that the cinema can move us in such a variety of ways? -- And that absolutism is not a factor?


                        (Hope to see some of you at the Expo. -- rd)
                        "THIMK." - Amomynous

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

                          Uhm, they don't do that because they're absolutist morons, they do that because film is widely considered a visual medium.

                          But I didn't say anywhere that you shouldn't use dialogue. Although that seems to be what you're hearing. For some reason.

                          I assume that most people who view these threads are new or developing writers. Generally, without being too absolutist, they write reems and reems of on the nose dialogue, which is at least partially caused by the fact that they neglect to work from a filmic story structure.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

                            I'm glad to see I've once again fostered an atmosphere of informative clarity here on DD. With any luck this will grow to the dimensions of the infamous wryly thread (now a sticky in the FAQ). =]

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

                              Originally posted by wcmartell View Post
                              No - just that the story should be told through the actions of the characters so that the dialogue can be free to be clever and interesting, instead of burdened with carrying the story.
                              .
                              Exactly. If you can get the action to tell your story, you can add more layers with dialogue. That's how I think of it. If you have more than one way to get information out to your audience, why do it with action and dialogue? It's a waste. If you can do it with just action, you are free to let the dialogue then layer your scene(s) and it ends up being much more interesting.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: On-the-Nose Dialogue

                                On-the-nose dialogue is truth.
                                Dialogue as sub-text masks the truth.

                                Action is truth.
                                It is more difficult to mask the truth with action.

                                When telling/showing the truth, if you have a choice, choose action.
                                "I am the story itself; its source, its voice, its music."
                                - Clive Barker, Galilee

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X