I am writing a horror movie and i am going through it and the dialogue (to my opinion) is weak and at time is inorganic. My charactors are moving the story along but there dialogue does not seem "real". How can i rectify this problem.
-
Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.
Bad Dialogue
- Thread starter me-only-me
- Start date
I think authenticity is what you should strive for. What would this character actually say, in this situation?
I’m a massive fan of Tarantino’s work, and Jake is right, if you want to read some great dialogue, take a look at his.
I would, however, say that Tarantino’s dialogue driven scenes don’t suit the horror genre that well (unless, of course, you’re trying to break the mould). Horror is more action based than dialogue. I don’t think the world is ready for a horror film with twenty minute scenes of two people just talking about mundane, everyday stuff.
If your dialogue is driving the story forward, then it’s doing its job. Just try and get yourself into your characters heads. Try to think like them. What would you say if you were in their situation? If you can do that, your dialogue should (hopefully) become more realistic.
I would, however, say that Tarantino’s dialogue driven scenes don’t suit the horror genre that well (unless, of course, you’re trying to break the mould). Horror is more action based than dialogue. I don’t think the world is ready for a horror film with twenty minute scenes of two people just talking about mundane, everyday stuff.
If your dialogue is driving the story forward, then it’s doing its job. Just try and get yourself into your characters heads. Try to think like them. What would you say if you were in their situation? If you can do that, your dialogue should (hopefully) become more realistic.
Authenticity, context, and content. The three ingredients to capturing real, naturalistic dialogue.
Listen to people having conversations. Take into account the context, i.e the nature of the conversation, and finally, context. What they say.
Do this repetitively, and you'll go someway to forging passable, authentic dialogue.
Given the genre, everything is hightened, it's mass hysterity. This changes things.
It's always an interesting, and regular occurence to see characters in similar movies start to recall memories of earlier life (usually after just realising their fate, and accepting it) ofcourse, this is merely some comforting tale that goes someway to clawing at an eventual clarity.
Do i think this is authentic? Not so much, in my opinion. But, again, this crops up. So perhaps i'm wrong?
Horror is a hard genre to tackle, dialogue wise. Action driven or not, it's a tough one.
Action should drive your story, your Characters should just live it. They are participents.
Listen to people having conversations. Take into account the context, i.e the nature of the conversation, and finally, context. What they say.
Do this repetitively, and you'll go someway to forging passable, authentic dialogue.
Given the genre, everything is hightened, it's mass hysterity. This changes things.
It's always an interesting, and regular occurence to see characters in similar movies start to recall memories of earlier life (usually after just realising their fate, and accepting it) ofcourse, this is merely some comforting tale that goes someway to clawing at an eventual clarity.
Do i think this is authentic? Not so much, in my opinion. But, again, this crops up. So perhaps i'm wrong?
Horror is a hard genre to tackle, dialogue wise. Action driven or not, it's a tough one.
Action should drive your story, your Characters should just live it. They are participents.
I'm going to argue against Tarantino. I don't think he's a very good writer and I think he's especially weak with dialogue when one of the key components of good work is distinguishing voices between characters.
It's one of those things where some people can try and try and never get the hang of it whereas some people will nail it first time.
What I would say is this (and you've got plenty of good advice above): not everyone's a writer. If you've got a good story but you can convert that into a screenplay, that's fine. There are plenty of filmmakers who come up with ideas, write up the ideas and then get help in turning that into a screenplay. Writing's a skill that for some reason people think that anyone can do whereas, in reality, there's a lot of work and skill required and, for some people, that's not what they want to do.
I'm sure there are lots of people who'd be willing to help you with it if, in a couple of drafts time, it still didn't feel right.
It's one of those things where some people can try and try and never get the hang of it whereas some people will nail it first time.
What I would say is this (and you've got plenty of good advice above): not everyone's a writer. If you've got a good story but you can convert that into a screenplay, that's fine. There are plenty of filmmakers who come up with ideas, write up the ideas and then get help in turning that into a screenplay. Writing's a skill that for some reason people think that anyone can do whereas, in reality, there's a lot of work and skill required and, for some people, that's not what they want to do.
I'm sure there are lots of people who'd be willing to help you with it if, in a couple of drafts time, it still didn't feel right.
A lot of people would say that one of the most important things about writing good dialog is establishing a clear difference between the "speaking styles" of your characters. I respectfully disagree. This is, perhaps, true if your goal as a writer is to make the scene as realistic as possible - and in such as case, you indeed MUST differentiate between the syntax, diction, and dialect of one character and the others. But I think that most of the time, a conversation between movie characters shouldn't be realistic at all (and if so, it should be used as more of a gimmick or trademark, as in movies like Syriana).
I mean, if you really go out and listen to people talking in the real world, you'll almost constantly hear things that you shouldn't put in a movie (or at least, not as a screenwriter). You'll hear people stuttering, forgetting words, or talking too fast, being confused, bad communicators, losing their line of thought, etc. And in terms of context, people will almost never be talking about something you'd watch a movie about. That's why we don't make movies about them.
My point is: who wants to sit down in a theater to watch 2 hours of normal people with no real conflict in their lives, talking in a completely normal way, just how normal people do outside the theater?
That's why I like Tarantino. He creates a world through dialog. The entire tone of his films (sarcasm, melodrama, humor) are created through talking, often even more than through his cinematography. So unless you're mimicking a documentary, don't RESTRICT yourself by trying to make your dialog too realistic. Use it as a TOOL to create tone, conflict, humor, etc.
In horror movies, there's not often a plentitude of engaging character backstories. We usually see one-dimensional teenagers trapped somewhere, trying to stay alive. You don't have time or audience for big, drawn-out characterizations that would add depth to the film. So use dialog. Maybe an acne ridden teenager wouldn't naturally start opening up about his abusive father and escape from an orphanage when he's being hunted by a psycho in a lake house, but if you can get the audience to suspend their disbelief, then everything that character does now has a significant amount of subtext.
Anywho. My two cents.
I mean, if you really go out and listen to people talking in the real world, you'll almost constantly hear things that you shouldn't put in a movie (or at least, not as a screenwriter). You'll hear people stuttering, forgetting words, or talking too fast, being confused, bad communicators, losing their line of thought, etc. And in terms of context, people will almost never be talking about something you'd watch a movie about. That's why we don't make movies about them.
My point is: who wants to sit down in a theater to watch 2 hours of normal people with no real conflict in their lives, talking in a completely normal way, just how normal people do outside the theater?
That's why I like Tarantino. He creates a world through dialog. The entire tone of his films (sarcasm, melodrama, humor) are created through talking, often even more than through his cinematography. So unless you're mimicking a documentary, don't RESTRICT yourself by trying to make your dialog too realistic. Use it as a TOOL to create tone, conflict, humor, etc.
In horror movies, there's not often a plentitude of engaging character backstories. We usually see one-dimensional teenagers trapped somewhere, trying to stay alive. You don't have time or audience for big, drawn-out characterizations that would add depth to the film. So use dialog. Maybe an acne ridden teenager wouldn't naturally start opening up about his abusive father and escape from an orphanage when he's being hunted by a psycho in a lake house, but if you can get the audience to suspend their disbelief, then everything that character does now has a significant amount of subtext.
Anywho. My two cents.
I have to disagree. Most of the above falls into blatant exposition. Sure, if the story is tainted, perhaps surreal, then yes, distort as you please the delivery or content of any of your characters, but be careful your characters are not becoming microphones for an undeveloped story.
As for your point about underplaying the importance of listening to normal people without any real conflict in their lives. I believe you are underestimating the depth of any character that has ever walked onto a cinema screen. Take "The Godfather" for example, a pristine slice of Italy's underbelly, with the dark and disasterous core, arguebly one of the great pieces of film ever, period.
Sure, it's often action packed, but as much as it is guns and cigars, it's about family, love, tolerance, and the dynamics of the time and profession. It was as much the heated debates at the "Sit downs" as it was a few sweet words over dinner.
Nobody begins a hero. They become a hero.
Alot of a characters depth is suggestive, it's traits that branch out, it's their surroundings that enable the audience to assume, and do so correctly. To form a connection. They don't form a connection with the action. They sympathize, empathize, love and loath the characters, and what they're apart of, and how they're reacting.
I also have to argue on the debate of Tarrintino. He's a great Director. No doubt about it, i'll never argue against his movies.
But his dialogue is a method of its own accord, and it's been copied to high heavens. It works with his movies, it does, it works with his style. It's doable to mimic him, but would i suggest that to a film-maker as something to go by? Not in this instant, no. Certainly pay attention, do so, it's fantastic. But it's overlooking so many basic premises.
I wouldn't suggest employing any such gimmick. Not unless it's new, and revolutionary.
These could be traits of your characters. How is your audience supposed to connect with faceless, two dimensional mannequins commentating over a narrative? How are they to choose their favourites, who to like, who to dislike, if they all speak the same and say nothing we can relate to?
The story is told through action, your characters live it. That's the basis of life, and communication. It can't be brushed aside.
The people shouldn't be talking about your action, they should be LIVING, and REACTING to it. That's how every story evolves.
Tarantino is a good example (at least to me) of someone who writes dialog that enhances the characters who then use that to enhance the story. He also surrounds everything in a good story. I would say that's true of his best work, and there's nothing wrong with looking to that for inspiration in a general sense.
I've never seen it, but I've heard the horror film "Tainted" is a very good, dialog-driven horror film. You could try and dig up a copy of that somewhere.
I've never seen it, but I've heard the horror film "Tainted" is a very good, dialog-driven horror film. You could try and dig up a copy of that somewhere.
In terms of horror movies with good dialog, here are just a few that come to mind for reference:
Alien - basically, truckers in space. real people dealing with a real big problem
Tremors - it's campy horror, but the characters have some really fun things to say
The Descent - this holds up in terms of subtext, backstory, and believability
For me, it's difficult to offer advice or specific suggestions when we don't know what your script is about or what story you are trying to tell. Care to give us a logline or a short synopsis? This might help.
Alien - basically, truckers in space. real people dealing with a real big problem
Tremors - it's campy horror, but the characters have some really fun things to say
The Descent - this holds up in terms of subtext, backstory, and believability
For me, it's difficult to offer advice or specific suggestions when we don't know what your script is about or what story you are trying to tell. Care to give us a logline or a short synopsis? This might help.
I think that it isn't alwasy about realism. After all, it's a movie.
What I like to see, is a natural flow.
A character could be talking about an assassasination attemp by martians on his left ear canal, and, being wildly unrealistic, it can be said naturally using wording and phrasing that your neighbour would use (avoid this, if your neighbour is a guy that likes to dance with a baton on the lawn. It can't end well).
Also, dialogue is a creative resource. Some people say that it should be kept at a minimum, but the moment a viewer is watching a scene, and actually listening to dialogue that has nothing to do with the plot, and enjoying this, is when someone has written good dialogue.
My opinion might, or is biased when talking about certain subjects and directors. Still, I admit that Tarantino is not always a great writer. See, I just finished watching Kill Bill vol. 1, and I did not really enjoyed it, I do not speak Japanese, but the little english dialogue that there is...sucked.
Now, back on track. I think that in a horror movie, carless dialogue could look great. If you had to sick assholes, chopping a girl into pices, surrounded by guts and covered in blood, talking about the last Heat's game...I would watch that.
What I like to see, is a natural flow.
A character could be talking about an assassasination attemp by martians on his left ear canal, and, being wildly unrealistic, it can be said naturally using wording and phrasing that your neighbour would use (avoid this, if your neighbour is a guy that likes to dance with a baton on the lawn. It can't end well).
Also, dialogue is a creative resource. Some people say that it should be kept at a minimum, but the moment a viewer is watching a scene, and actually listening to dialogue that has nothing to do with the plot, and enjoying this, is when someone has written good dialogue.
My opinion might, or is biased when talking about certain subjects and directors. Still, I admit that Tarantino is not always a great writer. See, I just finished watching Kill Bill vol. 1, and I did not really enjoyed it, I do not speak Japanese, but the little english dialogue that there is...sucked.
Now, back on track. I think that in a horror movie, carless dialogue could look great. If you had to sick assholes, chopping a girl into pices, surrounded by guts and covered in blood, talking about the last Heat's game...I would watch that.
I'd also throw out there to resist the tempation to make the film too "talkie". Step one might be to REDUCE the amount of dialogue, and your problem becomes more manageable. Don't tell me, show me. In my last film I thionk there are maybe three or four sentence spoken in the first 6 minutes. That doesn't fit every situation, but another thing to think about.
Dar's survey results seem rather relevant when considering how to craft dialog around a story construct approach:
http://midnightdouble.nfshost.com/kdk12/wordpress/?p=2018
http://midnightdouble.nfshost.com/kdk12/wordpress/?p=2018
Most dialog that doesn't work is dialog about what's happening around the characters, not what's happening to them personally. And that should almost never be a direct conversation about what's happening directly to the character... I don't say "I'm walking" when I'm walking... I do tend to show an inflated ego to cover up self-perceived insufficiencies. Personality mechanisms that react to a situation, but don't necessarily detail them work pretty well and will help show how your characters are dealing with the situation they are in.
I'm on the QT == bad dialog train... same thing with KS. I love their movies, but their dialog only works in the universe they've created (and I personally feel that Smith has a better handle on relevant dialog than Tarantino)...
To sum up, write the story and add the dialog afterwards... that way you know what is happening to your characters and what they're dealing with. This way, all of the personality traits they've been given by you can ring true.
I'm on the QT == bad dialog train... same thing with KS. I love their movies, but their dialog only works in the universe they've created (and I personally feel that Smith has a better handle on relevant dialog than Tarantino)...
To sum up, write the story and add the dialog afterwards... that way you know what is happening to your characters and what they're dealing with. This way, all of the personality traits they've been given by you can ring true.
HOw was that survey done? Was it on a website? Cause if someone called me at home, or stop me in the street to ask if I like gore and blood in moves...I'll probably lie my ass off.
Just FYI: I do not like gore...at least not more than the average.
You might PM him/her.
Shake him down for the methodology and sample numbers.
Figure out an error rate.
FWIW, I don't care for horror much, either. Especially gore & torture porn.
And I don't care for Aronofsky's perverse fascination with insanity as horror, either, re BLACK SWAN, et al.
But I do appreciate an intelligent film no matter the genre.
according to that McKee fellow, Hitchock said something along the lines..
"Once the screenplay is finished, and the dialogue added, you film the movie..."
"Once the screenplay is finished, and the dialogue added, you film the movie..."
First thank you all for the suggestions. But i think my question was to ambiguis (sorry about spelling spell check is my best friend) I am not trying to get 100% realistic dialogue but SOME of my dialogue is so bad that it is not beliveable. The main sceen i am worried about is my first sceen to me it is not fluid it is jump and rushed. I would like to figure out how i can make it more real.
To the person that said a short synopsis may help here it is.
3 People go in to the woods to do an augmutation spell. The spell goes horabliy wrong and they get posesed into killers. There is one women who leads them who is confident and vicious. There is a "fat" man who is strong and direct. There is a skinny guy who is crazy and wierd. They reak havic on a general populice. Well 2 detectives try and cetch these people some of my main chactors try and live.
there is a short synopsis of my movie. So further help will be appeciated in my dialogue problem will be appreciated.
To the person that said a short synopsis may help here it is.
3 People go in to the woods to do an augmutation spell. The spell goes horabliy wrong and they get posesed into killers. There is one women who leads them who is confident and vicious. There is a "fat" man who is strong and direct. There is a skinny guy who is crazy and wierd. They reak havic on a general populice. Well 2 detectives try and cetch these people some of my main chactors try and live.
there is a short synopsis of my movie. So further help will be appeciated in my dialogue problem will be appreciated.
for any real useful specific advice you'll need to post some of the script and dialogue your having problems with.
consider the action...
are the people walking into the woods "comfortable" have they done this before, is it routine to them? Is there any need for the audience to know anything about them BEFORE they become possessed? Do they know each other well? If would not be unrealistic for the people walking in the woods to be completely quiet and not talk at all. Particularly if they are nervous scared etc..
consider the action...
are the people walking into the woods "comfortable" have they done this before, is it routine to them? Is there any need for the audience to know anything about them BEFORE they become possessed? Do they know each other well? If would not be unrealistic for the people walking in the woods to be completely quiet and not talk at all. Particularly if they are nervous scared etc..
yes they are comfortable. They do diffrent spells weekly in this same spot. Just this time they do a spell that is out of there league and did not do there reserch on it. The 3 off them are good friends.