Long dialog or sound bite: how long is too long?

[FJ and G]

I'm 4/5ths done w/2nd draft of screenplay and feel uneasy about one or two places where the dialog goes a page long. Elsewhere, the dialog averages just a couple lines.

The reason the dialog is so long in those two spots is because the characters are relating stories around the campfire. If, after I cut and chop all I can, and the scene is crucial to the story (at least I think it is) but is a page long is that acceptable?

[Writer1]

Not recommended, but it's okay...however, it better be damn important to the story!

[writerscut]

Monologues are not the best thing to tackle...many new writer's attempt to use them, but fail. Try to see if their is another way, however, if there is none, and the monologue is critical to the story use it...if you like writing long dialogue try your hand at a play, where that type of speech writing is more acceptable, for now, with your screenplays, try to keep it to two lines a pop. Good luck...

[dpaterso]

Your character must be relating an incredibly interesting story.

Which makes me think that if the story's so interesting, then maybe this is the screenplay you ought to have written instead. Get out of that one!

You break it up with actions, right? I mean, it isn't a solid block of dialogue that stretches from the top of the page to the bottom of the page? If I turned the page and saw that, I'd think your printer had malfunctioned.

-Derek
-----------------------My Web Page - naked women, bestial sex, and whopping big lies. (http://hometown.aol.co.uk/DPaterson57)

[maestrowork]

A character may be telling a long story (campfire) but you probably don't want to have him just sit there and tell a minute long story (1-page)... It's very rare that you see a person talking for so long in one shot (possibly a close-up). I mean it could happen -- there are some classic monologues in film history. But nowadays it can become very boring (depending on your genre -- if it's a heavy drama, it could work).

Have him do something, walk around, or break it up with other people's reaction... e.g.

CAPTAIN
The old woman said to me, cut off
your finger or you won't eat...

The soliders lean in, their eyes wide with anticipation.

CAPTAIN (Cont'd)
I sat there, without making a sound,
and I slipped my hand into my pocket
and feel around for the sharp object...

The campfire crackles as the Captain smokes his pipe before
continuing.

CAPTAIN (Cont'd)
All the while, my face remained calm with
a smile. The old man placed her thumb in
the liquid, and said, yummy, scorpion soup.
I bet you're really hungry. She told me
to hurry up and cut off my finger...


I agree though, if the story is SO interesting, make it into a flashback scene. Put us "inside" the story instead of just staring at a talking head.

[NikeeGoddess]

2 Academy Award/nominated examples of long storytelling in flicks:
1 - The Straight Story where Richard Farnsworth tells about shooting one of his own by mistake during WWII
2 - Silence of the Lambs was a lot of storytelling but, it was so intriguing that no one noticed. in fact it was so good that when Starling was telling about why she ran away from the farm and carrying/trying to save that lamb that the director cut the flashback scenes...she told the story that well that we could see the scene without seeing it.

write on!

[scripter1]

basically you have two choices.

First do what Maestro said and break up the lines with actions.
What are we seeing on the screen?
What else is going on and happening while the story is being told?
Like he said, if the story is really THAT interesting people will be paying attention. How do they react to what they hear?
Also, WHY is he telling the story?
Is there vital info contained in the story? Clues we need to have in order to understand future scenes?

An Example.
Pirates of the Caribbean has two segments of storytelling.
One where Barbosa tells Elizabeth about the gold and the curse. What happens while Barbosa talks?
Elizabeth is skeptical at first. "I hardly believe in monsters."
Then she slips the knife into her lap.
Next she listens intently as the story gets more involved. Barbosa moves around the cabin, he plays with the coin, he leans over Elizabeth.
The monkey chatters.
Tension builds.
"And the blood to be repaid?"
'That's why there's no sense to be killing you. Yet."
And she reacts.

The other one is where Mr. Gibbs tells Will a version of how Jack got off the island using sea turtles.
We see Will react to the story, and we see Gibbs really get into telling the story.

In both scenes the STORY was really, really interesting. The first gives us the info we need to know about the curse, how it works, why the Pirates are the only ones affected. The second story reveals to us that NOBODY knows how Jack got off that island. We learn later on that it was very simple. The legendary pirate had a not so legendary moment.
It was a set up for a character moment later on.

What Nikee mentioned is also present in both scenes. The storytelling was done so well we don't need to see VISUALS of what happened.

Keep in mind though that the writing was there first and the acting came after. . You don't know that an actor will be able to pull of a storytelling scene until it happens. The flashback scene in Silence of the Lambs was only cut AFTER Jodie Foster proved she could carry that scene.

The second option is to visualize the story. Show us the events just as you would in a flashback.
If you want to maintain the campfire tale setting then you can use VO. Or you can just write the story scenes normally with the new characters having their own dialog.

Try not have lines of dialog run over five lines. It looks overwhelming on the page. Actors don't just say lines.
They ACT. They DO things.
And they also want space to breath.
The longer the dialog the more chances there are to stumble over words and get your tongue twisted up.

Oh, one more thing. 1 minute is a long time.
Nobody wants to watch someone on screen going :lol :lol :lol
(in case you're confused that emoticon is also used for blah, blah, blah or yak yak yak.)

[FJ and G]

Thanks for your informative replies (most, anyway). I'm still digesting them.

Will try and edit it down or rewrite the scene. As alluded to, there occasionally are scenes in films where characters speak longer than a 3 second sound bite. I'm sure you can conjure some examples. But, being a first-timer, I will try to make the script look like a script so the reader doesn't throw a hissy fit.

Secondly, while the flashback visuals would be an interesting technique, I'm told by some "authoritarians" that flashbacks should generally be avoided. Ray Frensham's "Teach Yourself Screenwriting," is one of several who advised this.

[scripter1]

Avoiding flashbacks is one of those arbitrary rules.

Flashback is a literary tool. Used effectively they can improve the impact of a story.

However, they are hard to do right and many writers use them way, way, WAY too often to plug plot holes. Instead of viewing them as a specialized tool they consider flashbacks to be the duct tape of storytelling.

Write your scene several different ways and then get some feedback on each one.

In your situation FIRST consider the full impact of your fireside story. Just how vital is this story to your whole movie?
If it's not that great then push yourself to come up with scenes that are better.
IF it is VITAL, then play around with different ways of presenting it.

[joecalabre]

There's an old saying.
"Bad actors want a lot of lines, good ones want to say very little."

If your soldier is giving a great story let him tell it, but have him say less than the whole story.

Let the audiences imagination work a little. After all, where does Shakespeare describe Juliet except for her age?

I am put to mind of a prison movie (I think Escape from Alcatraz) where an inmate asks another about his childhood. The inmate stares the guy right in the eye and says "short." That gives so much imagery and imagination that a one page story of him telling his childhood woes would probably not have had as much impact.

As for other academy films that have speeches, the were'nt written by newbies like us...

That is all.

[writerscut]

Film is a visual medium...show, don't tell...Instead of having a character give a monologue on something, show it happening. Keep this in mind...as I said before, if long dialogue is your thing, like mine, try playwriting...come visit the newly re-instated Playwriting board! As always...good luck...

[maestrowork]

Well, yes and no... a good actor with a great monologue/dialogue can be riveting in the film medium.

There's a scene in "Castaway" for example (which, ironically, is a film with no much "dialogue") where Tom Hanks' character has a long monologue talking about how he felt. It's one long shot and I personally think that scene was perfect. Very touching and emotional -- I believe he used that scene for his "Academy Award" pitch.

[writerscut]

Yes, but that's rare...another poster mentioned the Silence of the Lambs. Both of these films were written by established screenwriters, masters of the craft who knew what they were going...that's why they are so riveting. These writers had experience, something a humble newbie does not, so it is best to just stay away until you are more established...

[scripter1]

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

The monologues worked because they were a vital part of the story and the writers understood and met the needs of that story. They had nailed the characters down and knew the best way to have them deliver the lines for maximum impact.
And who knows how many times the scripts were rewritten. I'm pretty darn sure the pro's brainstorm and may even write out several different ways of presenting the story. To use flashback or not, monologue or not, action or dialog, linear or non linear. They storyboard and change things until they know they've got it just right.

Just because someone is a newbie writer doesn't mean they shouldn't try a variety of things. You don't really get anywhere writing the exact same thing over and over.
You'll never fly if you don't stretch your wings.

Write the monologue. If it works, great. If it doesn't then change it. Use flashback. If they work fine. If not, change it.

That's what rewrites are for.

Yeah, there is a lot to be said for experience. The pros know what works because they've written stuff that DIDN'T work.
NOBODY starts out a pro. Shane Black was once a beginner writer. So was Tarentino, Ted and Terry, Goldman, who ever.
No matter who they knew or how they broke in, at some point they wrote a rough draft of their very first script.
I think it would be seriously enlightening for all us newbie writers to take a look at some of those drafts.

I imajine though that most of the pro's never want those drafts to see the light of day. :p

Studios are looking for GREAT scripts.
A newbie will NEVER break in with the same old drivel.
If a writer isn't going to even try and shake things up a little then what is the point?

[writerscut]

If it works, yes, but a monologue is a hard thing to write...and so I feel that one should hold off until they are more experienced. (See sticky thread at top of board: COMMON BEGINNER MISTAKES)

[scripter1]

Yep, they are hard and 95% of the ones written will stink.
heck, some written by pro's even stink.
I was begging Orlando to put Brad and myself out of our misery during the final scenes of Troy.
Achilles just wouldn't shut up!!!!!!

My point is, a newbie writer will NEVER learn to use the tools of the trade effectively if they shy away from them.
Use them, learn them, rework them.
Get some feedback, try again.
It could also be helpful to create practice scripts or shorts.
Focus on one element of storytelling.
Work on effective flashbacks, visual writing, strong dialog, monologues, etc.
You should have tons of ideas floating around in your head, this is a way to start exploring them and seeing what you can do with them without becoming attached to the writing.

Also it's a way of dealing with problems. Get the non-working stuff out of your head. Okay, fine, I wrote it, it doesn't work, so I toss it and move on.

There is a group of newbie writers who SHOULD be told
NO Flashbacks!
NO monologues!
It's the ones who write three or four flashbacks in every script.
Monologues in every script.
They need to be FORCED into other ways of thinking by believing there is a rule.

[NikeeGoddess]

If it works, yes, but a monologue is a hard thing to write...and so I feel that one should hold off until they are more experienced.
i agree - nothing ventured, nothing gained
and practice makes perfect
to practice writing like an amatuer is a mistake
you should attempt to write like a professional
guidelines are good but, nothing is written in stone
never say never

those examples above with monologues from great screenplays are for study. if you can study them; why they work and why yours doesn't then you can learn a lot. it may be a lesson to cut yours out completely or it may be a lesson on how to make yours work.

write on!

write on!