Improvised Dialogue?

[cameronproductions]

Hi all!

Ok so I've got a question on improvised, ad-lib dialogue in with respect to screenplay writing.

I want some scenes improvised, both actions and dialogue, while some 'key' scenes will be more or less totally scripted. There is a reason for doing this, I'm not just being idle. The vast majority will be filmed in the style of a documentary - so I want to keep the bulk 'unscripted' and natural. I appreciate you can still make a scripted film appear natural, but for now, this is the route I want to take - and the actors are happy and comfortable to do things this way - they all have a good ability and are confident improvisers, which of course is essential!

I'm just looking for any ideas, or perhaps experiences people have of this kind of situation? I imagine, 20% will be scripted - although for the remaining 80% there are points, quotes, actions which are included in the screenplay and are vital to the forward movement and the discipline of the plot. I want the actors to express there own emotions and have the freedom to interact with eachother, as the plot develops.

I'm very happy with this approach, as it is the most suitable way, in my opinion, of getting the end result that I want. But I'd love to hear peoples views - bad and good - with this kind of approach

Cheers!

 

[directorik]

Fair enough, small changes, I have let pass, but mostly because of time constraints. The process of the actor creating the character, including their input on dialogue is pre-production. On set I don't have time for experimentation.

I think the only place we had a misunderstanding is in
terminology. When I said there is always improvising I did not
mean experimenting. I, too, shoot fast and do not have time to let
actors experiment on set. But an improvised line here and there or
a change of phrase to make the actor more comfortable or even a
mistake is something I encourage when working with actors on set.
When I said that on every set dialogue is improvised - no exceptions,
I did not mean all directors allow actors to experiment with their
character or dialogue on set.

To further Riks point, surely allowing (even encouraging) your cast to be spontaneous with there lines, emotions, how they really feel in that characters situation on set is beneficial to the production?

Quite obviously I agree with this. I have had amazing moments on
my sets when an actor - in the moment improvises a line not written
in the script. I encourage my actors to do that.

As we have all pointed out, to do a movie with a lot of improvised
dialogue not only do you need a very skilled director but very skilled
actors. And a good script with a solid foundation will help a little...

 

[Flicker Pictures]

So you know, I wasn't trying to start a head-to-head clash of ideologies when I quoted you guys. It was more to point out the diversity in directing styles and approaches and how vastly different we all can tackle the process, but how are all aiming for the same result: believable characters, truthful storytelling, and capturing genuine reactions and deliveries. Nothing right or wrong, just different. It's what makes these forums and filmmaking great!

 

[cameronproductions]

Nothing right or wrong, just different. It's what makes these forums and filmmaking great!

It is really such a great tool, having this forum. Although I'm new to it, and relatively new to filmmaking in general, its clear how passionate and knowledgeable people are here, its ideal for bouncing ideas around and getting really important feedback.

Keep up the great work, and thanks again for all the input. I'll be sure to keep those interested how things develop over the coming months!!

All the best

Nick

 

[directorik]

So you know, I wasn't trying to start a head-to-head clash of ideologies when I quoted you guys.

And just so you know, there has been no head-to-head clash of ideologies
on this thread. Just filmmakers discussing.

 

[NickClapper]

Not sure if you understand what I am saying, or if I've explained it clear enough

Yep, that's my fault. I read this thread yesterday but only got round to replying today.

What I will say is that I would stand by my recommendation. I'm still not 100% clear how you're going to write the screenplay but. Would urge you to write it in it's totality, send it to the actors and then, along with your actors, discuss which scenes are going to be improvised during rehearsals. The screenwriter's job is to tell the actors and crew the story, the actors and crew's job is to tell the audience that story.

I think this is the difference between the heralded examples of improvised scenes that you and other people have quoted and a filmmaking mentality like mumblecore where it's totality unscripted- but also deliberately meandering, organic and, some would say, pointless.

 

[cameronproductions]

What I will say is that I would stand by my recommendation. I'm still not 100% clear how you're going to write the screenplay but. Would urge you to write it in it's totality, send it to the actors and then, along with your actors, discuss which scenes are going to be improvised during rehearsals. The screenwriter's job is to tell the actors and crew the story, the actors and crew's job is to tell the audience that story.

Thanks for the pointers - its all appreciated!

Cheers

 

[Jamster]

"Why not do the improvising during a long rehearsal period? That way the actors can still write their parts so they 'work' 'emotionally' but you can walk away with actual written dialog to make your shoot easier."

This is what I was going to suggest - Mike Leigh rehearses 'improv' for weeks and writes his script from said interactions...

I gotta try that one day!

 

[AudioPostExpert]

I realise this thread is long dead but as this area is called Pro Tips & Techniques and for the benefit of anyone becoming a Premiere member and looking over old threads, there is a serious consideration which has barely been touched upon.

I've worked on a couple of indie films which relied on a significant amount of on set improvised dialogue and in both cases they turned into nightmares because of this. These films were to be entered into international film festivals, where audio standards/expectations are much higher than for films distributed on youtube, which is why I had been hired. Due to them having a considerable amount of improvised dialogue, the words or phrases I needed to replace either occurred in a different place in each alt take, which took a great amount of additional time to find or frequently, didn't occur in another take at all which still took a great deal of time to discover. Not only did this dramatically increase the time/cost of the dialogue editing but also massively increased the requirement for ADR. Both films ended up having to have about 60% or so of the dialogue ADR'ed instead of the 10%-20% they could have got away with if each alt take had contained the same dialogue. So, not only was there as significant extra cost for the dialogue editing but there was also a significant cost for all this additional ADR and if that wasn't bad enough, the quality of performance of ADR is always weaker than the original performance. In both cases, despite a great deal of additional time and money, the dialogue ended up being rather dull and lifeless, completely defeating the original intention of creating more spontaneity and engaging/believable characters through the use of improvised dialogue. They would both have ended up being much better (and far cheaper) films had they been fully scripted.

I'm not suggesting that improv should always be avoided, it can be a great filmmaking tool but you've got to appreciate the consequences and avoid the pitfalls. If you're going to have some measure of improvised dialogue in your film then you're going to need a very good Production Sound Mixer/Boom Operator with high quality equipment and to carefully design your sets for the optimal recording of the dialogue, that's if you want improvised dialogue to add to your film rather than detract from it!

G