Dialogue - getting under someone's skin

Today we'll have a look at how one character can awake negative emotions in another (and, consequently, in the audience).

In the class we'll also analyse the principles of Schopenhauer's "Eristic Dialectic" and see how we can use them to our advantage.


1. The Picnic (TROPFEST winner 2007)



Pay attention especially to the opening scene in which Lily is being introduced to the group.



2. Teasing and taunting.

Such exchange is the body and soul of each revenge film. The villain is teasing the hapless protagonist. It usually happens at the end of Act 2.

Rob Roy (1995)

Cunningham raped Rob's wife and has taken Rob prisoner.

Archibald Cunningham: What did you do with that bag of guts Killearn? Vex me not, McGregor, or I shall have you dragged a while. And I am a man of my word.

Robert Roy MacGregor: You're a thief, a murderer and a violator of women.

Archibald Cunningham: Aah... I had hoped you'd come to me long since on that score.

Robert Roy MacGregor: If I had known earlier you would have been dead sooner.

Archibald Cunningham: I will tell you something, to take with you. Your wife was far sweeter forced than many are willing. And truth put to it, I think not all of her objected...



3. Egging on.

We've already had this scene but it's so good we can watch it again. The Joker needs the guard to approach him. He does it by merely talking.

Dialogue - playing cat and mouse

Before we start:

1. Make a list of 3 best/most memorable film conversations. Don't put down what critics say, this list should be very personal.
2. Make a list of 3 writers/directors who make "talkie movies" - films in which characters talk rather than act or dialogue is particularly memorable.


THE GRADUATE (1967) - "Mrs. Robinson, if you don't mind my saying so, this conversation is getting a little strange."



Directed by Mike Nichols, screenplay by Buck Henry
Script link: The Graduate


HANNAH AND HER SISTERS (1986)

e.e. cummings

somewhere i have never travelled, gladly beyond
any experience,your eyes have their silence:
in your most frail gesture are things which enclose me,
or which i cannot touch because they are too near

your slightest look will easily unclose me
though i have closed myself as fingers,
you open always petal by petal myself as Spring opens
(touching skilfully,mysteriously)her first rose

or if your wish be to close me, i and
my life will shut very beautifully ,suddenly,
as when the heart of this flower imagines
the snow carefully everywhere descending;
nothing which we are to perceive in this world equals
the power of your intense fragility:whose texture
compels me with the color of its countries,
rendering death and forever with each breathing

(i do not know what it is about you that closes
and opens;only something in me understands
the voice of your eyes is deeper than all roses)
nobody,not even the rain,has such small hands

Written/directed by Woody Allen
Script link: Hannah and her sisters

Dialogue - "walking the minefield"

1. Fresh, authentic dialogue is... NOT saying what we mean.

If your characters say flat out what they are thinking the dialogue becomes too predictable and reader senses that you're feeding him exposition. It's on the nose.

People love mystery, they love sensing what is going on, their minds need a challenge, a chance to do some intellectual work deducing the characters' true agendas.

This requires real art. And since we usually learn the best when we are (cough*stealing from*cough) looking up to professionals, let's have a look at dialogue decomposition done by Scott Myers. This month he is looking into ways of saying "I love you" without actually uttering these words.

HIGH FIDELITY



JERRY MAGUIRE



10 THINGS I HATE ABOUT YOU




2. Sometimes you may be using great language, but the very problem is that you basically have a group of people sitting round a table and talking.

To remedy that make sure that there is some conflict involved. Someone doesn't want to be there. Someone is lying and is sweating bullets that others may call the bluff. Someone realises that if he says one word too many, the listener will blow. You get the idea ;-)

Watch this "poker game from hell" scene from Training Day (2001):



Script link: Training Day (David Ayer, 1999 draft)

*

Questions on Tick-Tock - part 2

1. THREE ACT STRUCTURE

- Where do the acts begin and end?
- What is the inciting moment (transition from Act 1 [exposition] to Act 2 [action])?
- What is the function of the "singing to the muzak" scene?
- What is the function of the "disarming training bomb" scene?
- How is the information about Crosby's condition fed to the reader?

2. TRANSITIONS AND EDITING

Can you visualise what the following would look like on screen?

- bridge



- transition










3. LOOKING FOR MEANINGFUL VILLAIN

The main problem with this script is how late James in introduced. All we know about him for the bulk of the story is the following:





and later this:




And then we learn that he has been behind the explosions. Why? He is kind enough to explain:



It doesn't work because we need to give the reader/audience exposition on:
- why he is doing it
- how he managed to do it
- how Crosby got caught in the events

Here it is done in the most unimaginable way possible - dialogue or rather his monologue which offers the explanation.

To make matters worse his motive is cliched and rather boring. Instead of an extremist terrorist doing it because of his radical beliefs or a psycho on a revenge mission, we have a boring stalker with mental problems. Too tame.

And on top of that the audience learns the truth too late and doesn't have enough time to grow to hate the villain. We don't have any feelings for him, so we don't really care.


YOUR TASK: Think of one of the following alternatives:

1) James IS the villain, but he's introduced earlier. All the exposition about him needs to be planted throughout the script, and ideally by showing, not telling.

This can be your inspiration:

ONE OF THE BEST SCENES YOU CAN WRITE
One might argue that the most memorable scene in Die Hard is when Hans pretends to be a hostage. Part of the reason we love this scene so much is because it’s such a clever move by our villain. But this is actually a setup for a scene that works almost every time you use it in a screenplay: We the audience know something that our main character doesn’t - that he’s in danger - and there’s nothing we can do to help him. The tension this creates in a scene – the helplessness we feel - works on an audience almost every time, so if you have the opportunity to use it, do so. Just make sure we like your hero. Obviously, if we don’t, we won’t be too worried when he’s seconds away from getting a bullet in the chest.

Here Carson is talking about a situation when the reader is omniscient. Could work in Tick Tock, but you have to remember that it cannot diminish in any way the character journey of Crosby - so we can't have such scene too early in the script.

2) James is not the villain; or he is, but he's not the MASTERMIND behind the bombs.

Remember this bit?



Maybe something could be done with this mysterious character? Revenge is a good motive. And it is more plausible that he would know enough about Claire's job to prepare this complex plan.

3. Or we could go for the most risky (and ambitious) option in which Crosby IS the bomber...


*

Tick-Tock revisited. Homework...

...or rather a few more aspects of this script I'd like you to think about.

1. Character defining moment - at which point (if at all) did you develop an emotional link to a given character? What was the thing that she/he did or said that awoke some emotions in you: pity, sympathy, admiration, understanding?

The underlying question is: has any of the characters become a compelling, "human", three-dimensional person for you, why and when?

2. "Casting game"

Imagine that you are the producer of this film.
- Who of contemporary actors and actresses would you cast in it? In which parts?
- Who would you choose to direct and why?

*

Questions on Tick-Tock

*

Here is a rough checklist of points we'll be discussing.

1. CHARACTERS:

- Who is the protagonist? Are you sure?
- What archetypes do the characters represent?
- Character arc - is there any? (hint: in action films the main focus is on plot, not character development)
- Character dynamic - how do they interact? What relationship do they have at the beginning? How does that change? When?


2. PLOT:

- What is the "high concept" (the original angle) of the script?
- What is the main driving force (the main goal for the character(s))?
- What is the "ticking clock" element? In other words - what threat is looming if the main character(s) fail to achieve the goal?


3. EXECUTION:

- Suspension of disbelief - was there anything you thought was implausible (or too unlikely to happen)?
- Plot holes - was there anything that didn't quite make sense? Were any "rules of the universe" broken at any point?
- Character consistency - was there any action/line of dialogue that seemed "out of character"?


4. STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES:

- What did you like about the script? What did you find lame?


5. "MONEY SHOTS"

- Were there any spectacular action pieces that would definitely be shown in a trailer for the film? Which sequence did you find the most visually impressive (if any)?
- Were there any "holy s***! moments" that would appeal to the audience but which would spoil the film if put in a trailer?


*

Welcome to the new semester!

Just two really quick updates:

1. We'll have classes on Thursdays again.

2. Please remember to read Tick-Tock (link in previous post) - we'll be analysing the script in detail and I'm counting on your active participation. Tomorrow I'll post some topics you may want to take notes about, so watch this space.