Using improv in an entire film

[laurenvictoria]

is it a good idea? i know you would have to have actors really good at improv.
Are there any features that have done this?
i dont plan on doing this anytime soon, i'm just curious on peoples opinions.

 

[mad_hatter]

A lot of "This Is Spinal Tap" and "Best In Show" were improvised, in much the same way as "Curb Your Enthusiasm". Of course, Blair Witch was 95% improvised by the cast.

What got me though, a hell of a lot of what you see in "Monsters" was improv. Gareth Edwards didn't take a full script on many days, just an outline, They drove around, found some good scenery and shot their film. They ended up with over 100 hours of footage, which was supposedly a nightmare for the editor.

 

[CHamburger]

Curb you enthusiasm is lots of improv. They're given the outline to a scene or episode and work it out with a read through til they get the desired effect. If I were to do an improv movie which to be honest, I've thought about in the past, I'd do it first in a read through with the outline you've written then deviate from there. Kind of like how Jay-z writes his music. He freestyles on teh mic finding teh best lines and verses then writes those down into a real produceable song.

 

[Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC]

It depends on the actors' skill level. Some actors can't say the same lines twice in 2 takes, which beccomes a nightmare to edit. Others have photographic memories.

Introductory dialogue should be very close to the scriipt whan an actor introduces a character with dialogue to the story. Too much deviation, or the change of a key word can mess up the whole moment of introducing the character. If someone is introducing a soldier and keeps using the wrong rank of the soldier, that is trouble.

 

[Murdock]

I can't believe noone has mentioned these guys: Cheech and Chong!! It wasn't until their 3rd or 4th film that they had an actual script. Their first couple movies were general scene outlines and that was it. Pretty funny stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25TXzPuje7I

 

[Half/Nelson]

yea a feature that included improv scenes was Blue Valentine, with Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams. Really good movie def in my top ten movies

 

[Cracker Funk]

Okay, first of all, let's agree on our vocabulary.

When you use the acting technique known as "improv", you are "improvising", not necessarily "improving"!!!

Hell no, I wouldn't even consider shooting a movie with all improv. Horrible idea. Will result in absolute disaster.

Every good movie (of any considerable length) stands on a solid foundation of a little thing we call "screenplay". The importance of this cannot be exaggerated.

If your actors/actresses are working from a screenplay, and they change a few words here and there, maybe add something, remove something (with director's approval), that's not necessarily "improv". That's called acting. Most of it happens during rehearsal, but some of it happens, organically, with cameras rolling, and those little improvised moments can be so great.

But to do an entire movie improvised? My God, no!

It is one thing, for an actor/actress to improvise a single line, in the midst of a scene that is strongly written. It is another thing, altogether, to improvise an entire scene! I've done it. It has worked for me. It has also failed, horribly, for me. And on every occasion, it was incredibly difficult, and time-consuming, to edit.

Make an entire movie that way? Jesus Christ, no!

 

[SinEater]

Okay, first of all, let's agree on our vocabulary.

When you use the acting technique known as "improv", you are "improvising", not necessarily "improving"!!!

Hell no, I wouldn't even consider shooting a movie with all improv. Horrible idea. Will result in absolute disaster.

Every good movie (of any considerable length) stands on a solid foundation of a little thing we call "screenplay". The importance of this cannot be exaggerated.

If your actors/actresses are working from a screenplay, and they change a few words here and there, maybe add something, remove something (with director's approval), that's not necessarily "improv". That's called acting. Most of it happens during rehearsal, but some of it happens, organically, with cameras rolling, and those little improvised moments can be so great.

But to do an entire movie improvised? My God, no!

It is one thing, for an actor/actress to improvise a single line, in the midst of a scene that is strongly written. It is another thing, altogether, to improvise an entire scene! I've done it. It has worked for me. It has also failed, horribly, for me. And on every occasion, it was incredibly difficult, and time-consuming, to edit.

Make an entire movie that way? Jesus Christ, no!

+1

 

[brianluce]

Okay, first of all, let's agree on our vocabulary.

When you use the acting technique known as "improv", you are "improvising", not necessarily "improving"!!!

Hell no, I wouldn't even consider shooting a movie with all improv. Horrible idea. Will result in absolute disaster.

Every good movie (of any considerable length) stands on a solid foundation of a little thing we call "screenplay". The importance of this cannot be exaggerated.

If your actors/actresses are working from a screenplay, and they change a few words here and there, maybe add something, remove something (with director's approval), that's not necessarily "improv". That's called acting. Most of it happens during rehearsal, but some of it happens, organically, with cameras rolling, and those little improvised moments can be so great.

But to do an entire movie improvised? My God, no!

It is one thing, for an actor/actress to improvise a single line, in the midst of a scene that is strongly written. It is another thing, altogether, to improvise an entire scene! I've done it. It has worked for me. It has also failed, horribly, for me. And on every occasion, it was incredibly difficult, and time-consuming, to edit.

Make an entire movie that way? Jesus Christ, no!

I'm guessing but perhaps to pull it off you need actors specifically trained in improv. It works in Curb Your Enthusiasm, that's for sure.

 

[Cracker Funk]

I'm guessing but perhaps to pull it off you need actors specifically trained in improv. It works in Curb Your Enthusiasm, that's for sure.

Oops, looks like I made the mistake of posting a comment, without reading all prior comments.

"Waiting for Guffman" and "Best in Show" are excellent examples of entire movies that are improvised. My comments were directed more towards traditional narrative, not mockumentaries.

I have a very difficult time believing, however, that "Curb Your Enthusiasm" uses even close to the same methodology employed by Christopher Guest. All you have to do is watch them, and to me, it seems very obvious that one of them is true improv, and the other is something else.

I'd be willing to bet that some of the actors I've worked with are better trained, and more experienced, in improv than most of the special guests that appear regularly on "Curb Your Enthusiasm". In fact, does Larry David have any formal training in improv?

According to official reports, "Curb Your Enthusiasm" is "largely improvised". What does that even mean? So, Larry David brings nothing more than outlines. But how detailed are those outlines? And how many times do they work out the kinks, in rehearsal, before rolling cameras? And please don't tell me that they're shooting off-the-cuff, with absolutely no rehearsal (because they're obviously not).

Obviously, whatever they're doing works. I love that show. So, if you can mimic what they're doing, call it whatever you want to call it. It may have elements of improv, and it may be only loosely-defined, but it's another beast, altogether, when your actors are going completely off-the-cuff, without rehearsals (and the latter is what my comments above were directed at).

 

[DangerDigital]

is it a good idea? i know you would have to have actors really good at improv.
Are there any features that have done this?
i dont plan on doing this anytime soon, i'm just curious on peoples opinions.

I think Will Ferrell improvs every second of his life. Seems to work well for him.


I think it just comes down to the actor and what works best for them. If the actor can visualize your image of the film as well as you can, they will perform well with improv. That type of communication between actor and director is rare though, so if you find that, you're lucky.

A lot of actors will have to be told what to do, which improv is ill advised.

I'm totally making all of this up as I type it. lol.

Anyway, one thing I saw Robert Downy and Ben Stiller do in tropic thunder was what was called "full mags" where they set up the scene, and let the camera roll until it ran out of film. They had general lines as a baseline, and they would repeat it over and over back to back, but each time add a little, take away a little or say it differently... so on. A lot of it was improv. So for 10 minutes they fired off these lines back and forth in rapid fire and said them in every possible combination possible until the film ran out. It gave them a lot to work with in post, and they ended up with the funniest lines to cut together for maximum hilariosity.

I'm sure there are a lot of other good improv techniques. Some of the best stuff in improvd, but they need something to work on as a base otherwise you get a lot of confusing crap as the actors are writing the script off the top of their heads on camera.

 

[Cracker Funk]

Some of the best stuff in improvd, but they need something to work on as a base otherwise you get a lot of confusing crap as the actors are writing the script off the top of their heads on camera.

Exactly. That "something" they work on as a base is a strong screenplay. Some rare exceptions have been listed in this thread. But in my opinion, unless you're making a mockumentary, you'd better have a very strong screenplay in place.

 

[drc]

is it a good idea? i know you would have to have actors really good at improv.
Are there any features that have done this?
i dont plan on doing this anytime soon, i'm just curious on peoples opinions.

You should check out Larry David. He's the creator of Seinfeld and Curb Your Enthusiasm. CYE is pretty much completely improvised with each actor just getting a story and scene outline. The show is one of the most critically acclaimed shows on television. He has a lot of interviews where he explains his approach to improvisation and why it makes entertainment for realistic and natural.

 

[SinEater]

People keep mentioning Curb Your Enthusiasm. I'm a big fan of the show, but it would fail as a two hour film. Film and a half hour serialized show are completely different formats.

 

[brianluce]

You should check out Larry David. He's the creator of Seinfeld and Curb Your Enthusiasm. CYE is pretty much completely improvised with each actor just getting a story and scene outline. .

I've heard the opposite, that the episodes are carefully crafted and that they just improvise the dialog. Then they've got some of the most gifted improv comics in Hollywood performing.

 

[drc]

According to official reports, "Curb Your Enthusiasm" is "largely improvised". What does that even mean? So, Larry David brings nothing more than outlines. But how detailed are those outlines? And how many times do they work out the kinks, in rehearsal, before rolling cameras? And please don't tell me that they're shooting off-the-cuff, with absolutely no rehearsal (because they're obviously not).

In an interview with him and Ricky Gervais (on youtube) he reads one of his outlines. It says what the scene is about..the scenes place in the story and what they say. Not the words but the topic. (example: "Larry and Richard Lewis argue about Cha-Cha monitoring Larry's bathroom habits.")

One of the best scenes in Curb by the way. Here's the hilarious clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q--grI2hWFc

 

[swolff13]

The mumblecore movement used a lot of improv, and that gave it very mixed feedback. Some people thought it added an interesting and natural spin, but others thought that it took away from the storytelling aspect in some way or another.

Its not quite improv, but attempting to capture actors in a somewhat-natural state is something that people are trying out as well. I couldn't tell you which film it was, but the director chose to have two child actors barge in on Brad Pitt during a scene where he's fighting with his wife. Pitt didn't know it was coming, and whatever followed was pretty close to a natural reaction of a parent dealing with the kids. Of course, it can and would fail at points, but it's an interesting idea to play around with.

 

[Cracker Funk]

In an interview with him and Ricky Gervais (on youtube) he reads one of his outlines. It says what the scene is about..the scenes place in the story and what they say. Not the words but the topic. (example: "Larry and Richard Lewis argue about Cha-Cha monitoring Larry's bathroom habits.")

One of the best scenes in Curb by the way. Here's the hilarious clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q--grI2hWFc

Truly, I love the show. They're obviously doing something right. However, what is the one thing that is constant, in nearly every scene? Larry David. He writes the outlines. He is the star. He has acted out (or envisioned) every scene in his head, a million times, because that's what writers do. Obviously, I'm not all that familiar with the inner-workings of the show, but I do think that this is not your average "improv", as compared to something like "Waiting for Guffman". I really think we're talking about two entirely different things. Cheers.

 

[Productionspaceguy]

My first thought was SECRETS & LIES by Mike Leigh in 1996 was improvised (to the best of my recollection). John Casavettes utilized heavy improvisation in his films with Gena Rowlands and Peter Falk, if I remember well, too.

IMHO, improvisation is best used by a director that has a complete & unshakeable comprehension of screenplay structure, and a full grasp of the actors' need for the Stanislavskian pursuit of objectives. It can be a nightmare in post unless you've mapped out your coverage very carefully.

 

[SinEater]

Truly, I love the show. They're obviously doing something right. However, what is the one thing that is constant, in nearly every scene? Larry David. He writes the outlines. He is the star. He has acted out (or envisioned) every scene in his head, a million times, because that's what writers do. Obviously, I'm not all that familiar with the inner-workings of the show, but I do think that this is not your average "improv", as compared to something like "Waiting for Guffman". I really think we're talking about two entirely different things. Cheers.

You said it far better than I could.

 

[DangerDigital]

yeah, I think all the improv'd movies and shows that are successful are successful because the actors involved are genius level comedians and a lot of times are also the writers of the film. They have the idea in their head of what its supposed to be.


like if you took "who's line is it anyway" and put in 3 random audience members and a hobo from a few blocks down the street, they would most likely produce garbage. Except the hobo, he would probably be hilarious.