Recent use of voice-over

Rainy Night · Apr 24, 2007

I tend to dislike voice-over. I know it’s frowned on in spec scripts and every time that I watch a movie that is heavily into voice-overs I cringe. That said, I recently saw two films that where I thought voice-over was rightly used. The films were Stranger Than Fiction and Notes on a Scandal.

Stranger Than Fiction, was I believe, a spec script and Notes on a Scandal an adaptation… correct me if I’m wrong.

Comments... ?

billythrilly7th · Apr 24, 2007

Goodfellas and Father of the Bride I and II.

Both excellent uses of voice-overs.

I say use them if you want.

I say don't follow these "rules" like no flashbacks or use of voice-overs, etc.

It's all baloney. IMO.

-XL- · Apr 24, 2007

It's not that voice over is frowned upon, it's that bad voice over is frowned upon. And most often in pre-pro scripts it's used for the wrong reasons.

Go with the only real rule: do whatever works best.

McDuff · Apr 24, 2007

Adaptation and Fight Club are also examples of the correct use of VO.

NikeeGoddess · Apr 24, 2007

another one: jack nicholson in About Schmidt
notice: the best use of voice overs is when the protag is a lonely being with no window character/no one to talk to, no friends whatsoever. this is the best way for us to find out what's going thru his (usu. wacked) mind. like travis bickle in Taxi Driver.

Bmwhtly · Apr 25, 2007

The voice over in Notes on a Scandal wasn't as esoteric as it was in, say, Croupier or Fight Club.
In Notes, as I remember, the voice over is Dame Dench writing in her diaries. So the argument could be made that it was dialogue between writer and diary.

However, there are enough examples of VO being used to great effect (see Fight Club, Croupier, Sin City, V for Vendetta) to allow you to throw that rule out.
Do it if it works, but don't use it to avoid real writing.

Or, at least, that's the way I see it.

Hillgate · Apr 25, 2007

Morgan Freeman in 'Million Dollar Baby', BB Thornton in 'Bad Santa' (used best - beginning and end). Voiceover is often telling us what we should be shown, I think. I agree with Billy who said ignore all the rules. If it adds something, an inner monologue that drives the action but doesn't follow it, then run with it. The trouble with a bad v.o. is it's so in your face: you're inside the film's head and a headache is amongst the worst type of aches you can get...

Likewise flashbacks: don't tell a whole story in them but then sometimes that IS the whole story eg Memento so take the rules and put them in a little basket by your desk. All you need to know is when you're breaking them and why, just in case some clever producer happens to ask you, and then you'll have your answers ready!

scripter1 · Apr 25, 2007

I liked the VO

in all of the films mentioned. Thought they worked just fine.
Would like to add in Shawshank Redemtion as great working VO.

Can't stand the VO in most of the newbie scripts I read.
Mainly because they are NARRATORS.
Here is a hint, if your VO goes something even CLOSE to this : I'm Jack. This is my story. This is my house. This is my town. I got shot the other day and.....
etc, etc, etc
your VO isn't gonna work.

Inkdaub · Apr 25, 2007

billythrilly7th said:
I say use them if you want.

I say don't follow these "rules" like no flashbacks or use of voice-overs, etc.

It's all baloney. IMO.

I have to give you a rep point for this.

scottVee · Apr 26, 2007

Hi. I agree with the frowning over "bad voice overs." Though sometimes even a bad voice over can be funny, like at the start of "The Lonely Guy," that old Steve Martin flick.

xhouseboy · Apr 26, 2007

scripter1 said:
Here is a hint, if your VO goes something even CLOSE to this : I'm Jack. This is my story. This is my house. This is my town. I got shot the other day and.....
etc, etc, etc
your VO isn't gonna work.

Good job you weren't a decision maker on Sunset Boulevard or Desperate Housewives...

nielsty · Apr 26, 2007

Nicholsen's voice over in the beginning of The Departed worked fine for me.

dpaterso · Apr 26, 2007

Sure, we can all name a dozen films or TV series where voiceover worked just great. Especially when there's talent delivering the dialogue.

But I'm not sure what that proves.

That newbie spec writers shouldn't be advised to take it easy with the voiceovers and try writing the sequence visually instead?

And sure, it's a do-whatever-you-prefer choice. Go on, write 'em, have fun. Cool beans.

But tell me: was there ever an instance where a voiceover become a memorable scene in a film? "Ooh, that voiceover, it sent shivers down my spine, the dialogue was simply amazing, it was the best part of the film, don'tcha think?"

Come to think of it, who won the Academy Award for Best Voice Over in 2006? You do remember, don't you? What? You're kidding me! It's the highlight of the awards ceremony! Everybody talks about the Voice Over! Why, it's pivotal to the film! The story couldn't possibly have worked without the Voice Over!

-Derek

Rainy Night · Apr 26, 2007

I once read a script on Zoetrope that was entirely VO. I was bored after the first page and couldn't imagine watching it if it'd gotten produced.

Plot Device · Apr 26, 2007

Really uneven and possibly dumb use of voice-over: "Sleeping With the Enemy." The film neither began nor ended with voice-over. So it seemed like a straight visual narrative. And then, midway through (around the beginning of Act 2), we hear Julia Roberts do a voice-over where she says to us: "That was the day I died." .

I think "The Italian Job" (remake) did the same thing: didn't open with voice-over, but suddenly, in Act 2, they injected an odd piece midway through out of nowhere. And I also think it didn't end with voice-over either. So it was very herky-jerky. My feeling is that voice-over needs to be consistent throughout.

dpaterso · Apr 26, 2007

Hmm, I'm not so sure that Sleeping With The Enemy is an example of poor or uneven V.O. usage. Spoiler alert! This sequence marked a pivotal change, the V.O. married with flashbacks of her learning to swim allowed us to learn that Laura had been secretly preparing for her escape for some time. But this wasn't just plain info dump/exposition -- this was an unexpected repainting of her weak (until that moment) character, a startling revelation. The audience was left thinking, "Good grief, she actually planned this crazy stunt, and had the nerve to go through with it." Hindsight leads me to believe it's actually an excellent piece of writing, executed well.

-Derek

Plot Device · Apr 26, 2007

dpaterso said:
Hmm, I'm not so sure that Sleeping With The Enemy is an example of poor or uneven V.O. usage. Spoiler alert! This sequence marked a pivotal change, the V.O. married with flashbacks of her learning to swim allowed us to learn that Laura had been secretly preparing for her escape for some time. But this wasn't just plain info dump/exposition -- this was an unexpected repainting of her weak (until that moment) character, a startling revelation. The audience was left thinking, "Good grief, she actually planned this crazy stunt, and had the nerve to go through with it." Hindsight leads me to believe it's actually an excellent piece of writing, executed well.

-Derek

I guess I found it kinda ... sloppy. Like changing main protags midway through a script, they changed narrative styles mid-way through.

Maryn · May 1, 2007

I notice badly done voiceover in The Pursuit of Happyness. It felt like they were trimming for length and decided to just tell parts of it.

Yuck. Write it leaner, write it shorter, arrive later and leave earlier, and shut the hell up with narration that's anything short of terrific.

Maryn, crotchety

Bmwhtly · May 1, 2007

Maryn said:
I notice badly done voiceover in The Pursuit of Happyness. It felt like they were trimming for length and decided to just tell parts of it.

That's what they did with one of the Many cuts of Blade Runner. Missing from the directors cut since everyone from Harrison Ford down thought it sucked.

dpaterso · May 1, 2007

I wrote a paragraph of V.O. dialogue yesterday and was up all night angsting over it. I took it out, put it back in, took it out... hell of a dilemma. Never fear, I shall be strong.

-Derek

dgl · May 1, 2007

There's nothing wrong with V.O. I love great V.O. Whether in television (My Name is Earl) or in films (Father of the Bride). I played with it last week -- put it in, took it out, put it back in (boy, that sounded dirty). In the end I left it out because it read too much like a hard-boiled detective script, when all I wanted was noir. But I'd never hesitate to use it because I thought some "reader" might think me an amateur.

Oh, hi by the way. Just came over from DD. Didn't know this place existed. Good to see so many familiar names.

dpaterso · May 2, 2007

Hey dgl, good to see you here. Interesting distinction between noir and hard-boiled, which has helped make up my mind as regards whether to keep or dump the V.O.

-Derek

Plot Device · May 2, 2007

Of course, Morgan Freeman can take ANY voice over, no matter how badly written, and turn it into solid gold.

j/k

Hollow · May 2, 2007

I think Voice-Overs were done pretty well in Smokin' Aces.

Rainy Night · May 2, 2007

I didn't like Smokin' Aces... maybe I was expecting too much... I wanted it to be much more like a Layer Cake.

The best part of Smoking Aces was that Afflec got shot right away... that guy bugs me.

Recent use of voice-over

INFJ

Yes, I'm back.

On location

Article Queen

wrapped in plastic

In the Yellow Woods

I write my own stunts

Also in our Discord and IRC chat channels

INFJ

A woman said to write like a man.

Also in our Discord and IRC chat channels

A woman said to write like a man.

I Tried

Yes, I'm back.

Also in our Discord and IRC chat channels

Also in our Discord and IRC chat channels

A woman said to write like a man.

INFJ