ON-THE-NOSE dialogue...
max70 said:
Filmjumper, what exactly do you mean, when you say the dialogue is to much on the nose? I'm not quite sure what it means.
Dialogue that is ON-THE-NOSE is when the characters are saying EXACTLY what is on their minds instead of using SUBTEXT. Subtext is the underlying truth of the dialogue that is spoken...
For example...
Take a scene in a bar where a guy and a girl are talking to each other... Flirting. What would normally happen is all the smalltalk, right? However, the SUBTEXT of the smalltalk is that somebody wants (normally the guy) to get into somebody else's pants... The guy will use the best of his clever banter to impress the girl but what is he REALLY SAYING? He's saying, "I think you are beautiful, I think you're hot, I want to do you!"
Dialogue that uses SUBTEXT is much more interesting than talking heads telling us exactly what they think...
Having said that...
There will be times that a character needs to say exactly what they mean... i.e., children characters and supporting characters that say, have a specific function or job i.e., a cop. A cop is definitely going to say, "Turn around and put your hands behind your head."
Your main characters need to use lots of subtext in their dialogue to make the dialogue, scene, and screenplay much more interesting... As a rule, your protagonist and antagonist are always using subtext rather than on-the-nose dialogue unless they they need something specific from a character. But take for instance, the movie, DIE HARD...
At one point, Hans says to McClane, "Give me my detonators!" Of course he means that but what's underneath? Underneath is much more interesting... i.e., "You son-of-a-bitch! If I catch you, you're so friggin' dead! You're totally screwing my plan up, Asshole!"
Actors also use subtext... In fact, an actor often changes dialogue so that he or she can find the subtext within the dialogue... I've seen actors look at dialogue and not want to use it because it was so ON-THE-NOSE... They change it so the true meaning of the dialogue still comes through but it comes through with a combination of dialogue and acting INSTEAD of actually saying what they mean.
Think about your average, every day conversations...
Of course some people say exactly what's on their mind but those would make boring characters in a screenplay... I would rather have those characters in my screenplay that use words to manipulate people and situations... They are much more memorable and entertaining.
Let me use another actual example from the script everyone is reading for the Screenplay Club here on IndieTalk... O Brother Where Art Thou?
EVERETT
Mind if we join you, ol' timer?
OLD MAN
Join me, my sons.
The three men clamber aboard and the old man resumes pumping.
The three men exchange glances; Delmar waves a clanking hand before the old man's milky eyes. No reaction.
DELMAR
You work for the railroad, grandpa?
OLD MAN
I work for no man.
PETE
Got a name, do ya?
OLD MAN
I have no name.
EVERETT
Well, that right there may be why
you've had difficulty finding gainful
employment. Ya see, in the mart of
competitive commerce, the -
OLD MAN
You seek a great fortune, you three
who are now in chains...
The men fall silent.
...And you will find a fortune -
though it will not be the fortune you
seek...
--Okay, the OLD MAN says, "I work for no man" and "I have no name" but is that what he really means? Or, does he mean he's different from the rest of us? Special? A prophet.
He could have just said, "I am a prophet." --But that would be so dull and boring, right?
Even Everett says, "Well, that right there may be why you've had difficulty finding gainful employment. Ya see, in the mart of competitive commerce, the -" --but what is HE really saying?
He's really saying, "You can't get a job without a name or working for a man." --But that too would be too boring and ON-THE-NOSE.
I hope that makes it clear but if anyone would like to discuss it further, maybe a new thread would be in order...
filmy