• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

ENTIRELY Dialogue Driven

M

MadMan

Is it sane to write a film that is entirely dialogue driven and there are only about three different places in the entire film?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Really the only way to find out if it works is to write it and read it, and if it isn't something you think people will want to watch then it probably isn't. That said I'm sure it is possible to make a film that is just dialog but HAS to be extremely engaging, considering most films are 50/50 split between action and dialog.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If the dialogue is GREAT, then potentially a smallish niche audience will like it (see "My Dinner with Andre"). If the dialogue is even only above average then 80% of the audience will be asleep in half an hour.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I like films like this except the for "debatey" dialog, like in Clerks. Yes, I know some people love this style, but they are already into debating the topics, like Star Wars, etc.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'll second Indietalk's comment re: debatey dialog. It feels like so much space filler most of the time. And I think Directorik hit the nail on the head by mentioning "STORY driven."

Robert Altman's "Short Cuts" is a huge film but the action is contained in just a few key moments. Everything else is dialog. And it's all riveting. This is one of those films where when it comes on at 4:00 in the morning I may as well call in sick to work the next day. Listen to Jack Lemmon tell his tale of ancient infidelity and you can't look away.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If I remember correctly Alfred Hitchcocks "Rope", which is mostly dialog driven, takes place entirely in one room. It is also, ostensibly, one continuous shot; the camera would pass behind some ones back (to black) at the end of a reel of film and then pick up at the same spot with the next reel and continue the motion to foster the illusion of real time. All of the shots are four to ten minutes long.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Alcove Audio said:
If I remember correctly Alfred Hitchcocks "Rope", which is mostly dialog driven, takes place entirely in one room. It is also, ostensibly, one continuous shot; the camera would pass behind some ones back (to black) at the end of a reel of film and then pick up at the same spot with the next reel and continue the motion to foster the illusion of real time. All of the shots are four to ten minutes long.
Click to expand...

I was going to mention ROPE very specifically. The story and characters had better be amazingly compelling or else you'll lose the audience.

Another reality is that if the characters aren't really pretty or famous, that's a huge strike against the movie too. The current (2009) climate for audiences is very much for pretty and/or famous. The market for no name star movies has died and gone away. One that is entirely dialog driven and in only 3 locations runs a serious financial risk, nonetheless an artistic challenge.

Hitchcock knew the business well enough to know that he hinged the fiscal success of ROPE and it's risky one location idea on casting Jimmy Stewart....

It is a "movie business" and a lot of people forget the second word in that phrase.



A feature like TAPE from Richard Linklater (shot in DV with Uma Thurman, Robert Sean Leonard, and Ethan Hawke) knew this and stacked the name stars heavily in their favor. It takes place entirely in a hotel room, but staring at famous people makes it somewhat less risky both financially and with the investment of the audience caring.

Even Bob Odenkrik's feature (also shot DV) MELVIN GOES TO DINNER, based on a play used the technique of flashbacks and introductions outside the restaurant to "open the film up" and keep it visually interesting and not entirely locked to the single location. It still had cameos from JACK BLACK and DAVID CROSS to help the star power.

As long as either your investment is minimal and this is a practice, then I say go for it. If you're putting in a lot of money, then know the risk of not using that money on star power.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well, I guess it's probably obvious to you now that it's not insane in the least. If the story and dialog are strong enough, or rather, if you think they are, then there's no reason why you can't at least try.

Go for five or ten pages and see how it's working.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You can go dialog driven...of course. Look at the theater...

A few things that are a must:

* great actors
* great script

If you don't have both of these, you are screwed. You have to have actors that can keep the audience entangled for the entire duration. They must be experienced, and understand what is required of them. Not only will it raise up the production to where it should be in that department, but you'll also save a lot of time not having to deal with actors that can't remember their lines, or came to set without a clue what they want to bring to their character. If they know what they want, have several strong choices prepared, and know all their lines, you are going to save a headache or three.

Also, you'll need a strong script. If it's weak, boring, not paced well, etc...it won't hold water and the attention of the audience will leak out all over the place.

But hey...you can do it. Godspeed.

Make sure you hold auditions until you find the right cast...don't skimp, and don't think 'ah it's OK this is indie level...' Consider your acting bar to be at the level of any good film.

PS. I LOVE the movie TAPE. In the hotel room...all three awesome actors, great story...ah man, my dream job as an actor.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
You may want to take a look at the movie "AMERICAN BUFFALO" with Dustin Hoffman and Dennis Franz.

This David Mamet play was adopted to film with a cast of three and one location.

It's totally dialog driven.

You decide
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top