Complications Ensue:
The Crafty Screenwriting, TV and Game Writing Blog


April 2004

May 2004

June 2004

July 2004

August 2004

September 2004

October 2004

November 2004

December 2004

January 2005

February 2005

March 2005

April 2005

May 2005

June 2005

July 2005

August 2005

September 2005

October 2005

November 2005

December 2005

January 2006

February 2006

March 2006

April 2006

May 2006

June 2006

July 2006

August 2006

September 2006

October 2006

November 2006

December 2006

January 2007

February 2007

March 2007

April 2007

May 2007

June 2007

July 2007

August 2007

September 2007

October 2007

November 2007

December 2007

January 2008

February 2008

March 2008

April 2008

May 2008

June 2008

July 2008

August 2008

September 2008

October 2008

November 2008

December 2008

January 2009

February 2009

March 2009

April 2009

May 2009

June 2009

July 2009

August 2009

September 2009

October 2009

November 2009

December 2009

January 2010

February 2010

March 2010

April 2010

May 2010

June 2010

July 2010

August 2010

September 2010

October 2010

November 2010

December 2010

January 2011

February 2011

March 2011

April 2011

May 2011

June 2011

July 2011

August 2011

September 2011

October 2011

November 2011

December 2011

January 2012

February 2012

March 2012

April 2012

May 2012

June 2012

July 2012

August 2012

September 2012

October 2012

November 2012

December 2012

January 2013

February 2013

March 2013

April 2013

May 2013

June 2013

July 2013

August 2013

September 2013

October 2013

November 2013

December 2013

January 2014

February 2014

March 2014

April 2014

May 2014

June 2014

July 2014

August 2014

September 2014

October 2014

November 2014

December 2014

January 2015

February 2015

March 2015

April 2015

May 2015

June 2015

August 2015

September 2015

October 2015

November 2015

December 2015

January 2016

February 2016

March 2016

April 2016

May 2016

June 2016

July 2016

August 2016

September 2016

October 2016

November 2016

December 2016

January 2017

February 2017

March 2017

May 2017

June 2017

July 2017

August 2017

September 2017

October 2017

November 2017

December 2017

January 2018

March 2018

April 2018

June 2018

July 2018

October 2018

November 2018

December 2018

January 2019

February 2019

November 2019

February 2020

March 2020

April 2020

May 2020

August 2020

September 2020

October 2020

December 2020

January 2021

February 2021

March 2021

May 2021

June 2021

November 2021

December 2021

January 2022

February 2022

August 2022

September 2022

November 2022

February 2023

March 2023

April 2023

May 2023

July 2023

September 2023

November 2023

January 2024

February 2024

June 2024


Wednesday, August 17, 2005

I like to write terse dialog. When it actually gets to the screen as written, I've noticed it plays really well. If you take out all the times characters say "Well" and "look" and "listen," the actors have to put all the emotion into the line itself, which makes for really effective scenes. I try to trim everything down so that every sentence says something new.

I also try to make my dialog skip ahead a bit. When people talk, they don't play catch, they play tennis. They don't acknowledge what the other person said and then respond, they just respond. There's a leap between Joe's line and Jane's line. People head each other off, they see where the conversation is going and they respond to that rather than to what's just been said. (This gets us into trouble in real life, but dialog isn't supposed to be more well adjusted than real life, it's supposed to be dramatic.)

The problem with this kind of dialog is it's hard to read. You have to read it actively, putting the emotion of the moment into every line. Otherwise it reads a little flat and choppy.

It's a conundrum. If it's your show, you can write how you like and insist the actors work with the lines they have. If it's not, you have to find a way of selling the lines on the page, or hope you're dealing with readers who are willing to invest the lines with heart and soul and not just skim them.

Obviously this is no excuse for actually writing flat and choppy dialog. You had better make sure your lines are so distinctive that any good actor can find the heart and soul in them. You'd better make sure the logical leaps are there to find.

I find I'm backing off from the notion that you shouldn't use parentheticals. I often put scene moments in the action, rather than the parentheticals, because if it's that important, it deserves its own line. But there's such a thing as being too Puritanical in your dialog. If you don't direct the actors at all on the page, readers may not get where the scene is going. And if the actors hate your scene directions, they can always cross them out later.

One of the most fun experiences I've had on shows is hearing actors read the lines out loud for the first time. Sometimes you can arrange meetings, sometimes you have to wait for the audition tapes, sometimes you have to wait for dailies. You doubt a scene until you hear it read out loud. If it works, you get a little thrill: yes! Beautiful!


I know of many writers who feel the way you do, Alex. They keep their writing tight, and every line must advance the conversation to a quick, logical conclusion or it's deleted.

Then there are my actor friends who sometimes feel that, because of this somewhat restrictive writing style, the subtle quirks and nuances of their character get lost -- and they absolutely HATE direction in parentheses, telling them how to say their lines.

I read lots of scripts and I'll admit that, for the sake of time, I sometimes skim, and this usually ends up causing me some confusion because, if I skip past one or two lines of dialogue, I suddenly find myself missing a key plot point and I have to flip back through pages trying to find out what the hell I missed -- which ends up wasting more time than if I had just read it thoroughly to begin with.

By Blogger Kelly J. Crawford, at 12:51 PM  

This is interesting info, Alex.

Do you sometimes feel like you have two screenplays to write? Two styles? The one to get you funding (simpler, more conventional, easier to read in a short time) and the one you'd actually want a director and actors to work from?

By Blogger Martine, at 2:07 PM  

I'd reiterate the underused tactic of putting scene takes into the action line rather than parentheticals. Parentheticals feel, for many actors, like you;re shoving them about the scene, while a pith scene-tone phrase in the action set the mood and lets them find the way to do the line that both works for them and stays true to your intent.

By Blogger Unknown, at 2:03 PM  

Hi, Alex... I work in British TV, where writers tend to be solitary pieceworkers rather than team members. My current pet hate is the producer who gives you notes that require you to load more and more information into the dialogue.

"How did they get to the room?"

"I don't know... the stairs. Or they took the elevator."

"Someone needs to say that."

"Why does someone need to say it?"

"Because otherwise people will be wondering how they got to the room."

"No, they won't."

"I'm telling you, they will."

After three or four drafts, by which time your scene is carrying a ton of exposition that you've sweated to put into speakable form, they tell you that the actors are complaining that your dialogue lacks spontaneity so they're having it rewritten. Almost always by some office junior who's handy, hungry, and cheap... and does a terrible job.

By Blogger Stephen Gallagher, at 3:50 PM  

Post a Comment

Back to Complications Ensue main blog page.

This page is powered by Blogger.