Introduction
Two men ride in a car, chatting about seemingly mundane topics. A trip to Amsterdam, what a cheeseburger is called in Paris. Not exactly what two hitmen would generally be shown discussing for a prolonged period of time. Only after a debate on foot massages, when they’re standing outside the target’s door, does Jules Winnfield turn to Vince Vega and say, “Let’s get into character.”
The brilliance of the dialogue in Pulp Fiction is one of the reasons the film has reached its place in pop culture. It is only after this long, enjoyable conversation does anything that seems related to an actual plot start to happen. Written by Tarantino, the speaking parts don’t do much to develop the story directly, and the major criticism of the film is that it is about nothing and that there is no plot to speak of. But it is magnificently stylish and entertaining.
Dialogue, defined by script-master Robert McKee as “Any words said by any character to anyone”, can be implemented by writers and filmmakers in a variety of ways, some more nuanced and artful, with others serving as shortcuts for narrative development. Here are some common uses of dialogue that are variably successful, with examples of films and shows that exhibit the different uses.
Use 1: EXPOSITION
“This is Katana. She’s got my back. She can cut all of you in half with one sword stroke, just like mowing the lawn. I would advise not getting killed by her. Her sword traps the souls of its victims.”
Gee, thanks, Rick Flag. One thing Suicide Squad doesn’t suffer from is your lack of specificity.
This line exemplifies the worst of the “exposition dump”, a writing plague commonly infecting super-hero and sci-fi movies. Often, the easiest way to bring audiences up to speed on what’s going on when situations/concepts are confusing or significant background in the material is needed is to have a character blurt out the pertinent information. This is a technique passable in comic books, but not so much in film. It’s especially disappointing given that film is a primarily visual medium, and there are clever ways to establish situations otherwise. A commonly used example is Raiders of the Lost Ark, where Indiana Jones’s characteristics are established by efforts (an ultimate failure) to steal an artifact; his mission for the film is established when he and Marcus Brody decipher Nazi communications. The exposition is worked into the plot mechanics it, making it seem natural.
Even “good” movies often rely on exposition through dialogue. Christopher Nolan makes some very intricate, complex films. Yet, he often relies on extended exposition dumps to explain the primary concepts of his work. Both Inception and Interstellar are guilty of what I term the “Nolan walk and talk”: both have scenes where the characters walk between different locations and the technicalities of the high concept sci-fi world/process are explained (Leonardo Dicaprio filling in Ellen Page on the art of breaking into dreams, and Michael Caine telling Matthew McConaughey about his space mission). It’s almost as if Nolan is trying to make the exposition more active by having it delivered through motion. A similar scene occurs in Kong: Skull Island, where it appears that the perfect time to explain how a secret organization is seeking out long forgotten monsters has to happen after the characters have decided to start trekking towards their salvation: having this scene delivered around the campfire instead would have made it appear as inert as it actually is.
The Nolan walk and talk in Inception
Other films deliver exposition through voice over, which is still dialogue. This feature can be lazy: however, it can also be stylistic, channeling the black-and-white noir films where the practice originated. Looper needs its world explained through Joseph Gordon Levitt’s narration, but it works to an extent because of the homage it pays, and (SPOILER) the ultimate realization that the protagonist is dead as he narrates his life.
Voice over exposition can also be comedic, like in Hot Fuzz, where Martin Freeman’s Sergeant recounts police officer Nicholas Angel’s outstanding record, featuring, amongst other accomplishments, certifications in “advanced cycling.” Definitely bolstered by the trademark editing of all Edgar Wright films, the exposition then moves smoothly into the actual scene of the Sergeant telling Officer Angel that he is being moved to the country…because he is making everyone else look bad. The dialogue serves as an introduction to the character while getting viewers into the absurdist mindset of the film and setting up the conflict. The specific details of Angel’s career are not necessary for an understanding of Hot Fuzz, so the ones shown are obviously being mobilized for comedic and stylistic purpose.
Use 2: DELIVERING THE MESSAGE
“I’m drawn across the universe to someone I haven’t seen in a decade, who I know is probably dead. Love is the one thing we’re capable of perceiving that transcends dimensions of time and space. Maybe we should trust that, even if we can’t understand it.”
This quote from Brand, played by Anne Hathaway in Nolan’s Interstellar, was likely the most polarizing portion of the heady sci-fi epic. Deconstructing massive water-planets, dimensions behind bookshelves, and the end of Earth into a simplistic, moralistic message is not something that pleased many sci-fi connoisseurs. The fact that it was delivered so frankly, simply by a character sitting in the space shuttle, added to the clumsiness of the moment.
I call this “Delivering the Message.” Movies are usually about something, but don’t reveal their themes in the same way. They don’t always use dialogue to do this: a film like Lanthimos’s The Lobster portrays its satirical view of the modern concepts of relationships through absurd scenarios more than dialogue specifically linked to the concept. Films that have to have a character spell out what they are about can seem on-the-nose and lazy, similar to exposition delivered through dialogue.
Many comedies and animated movies may fall into this hole, with a character owning up to his/her mistakes at the conclusion of the film to show that they have developed. Owen Wilson’s plea to Rachel McAdams at the conclusion of Wedding Crashers is one such example: though the situation is dramatically heightened because it happens in front of a lot of people at a wedding, it’s still completely verbal.
However, dialogue can sometimes be effective in this situation, especially when it gives an actor a chance to monologue through to the main point. A recent example comes at the conclusion of Call Me By Your Name, where James Ivory’s Oscar winning script requires Michael Stuhlbarg’s Professor Perlman to give a speech to his son on the possible impact of his ended romantic experience on his life and the importance of feeling. It’s a moment that is largely touching and fulfilling, and doesn’t come off feeling cheesy at all.
Use 3: CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT/ESTABLISHMENT
“You talkin’ to me? You talkin’ to me? You talkin’ to me? Then who the hell else are you talking… you talking to me? Well I’m the only one here. Who the fuck do you think you’re talking to? Oh yeah? OK.”
The famous conversation Travis Bickle carries out with his hypothetical nemesis in Taxi Driver is more than just entertaining: it gives us a look into Bickle’s unstable mind, his tics, even his lack of self-confidence. It’s one of the most iconic scenes in American cinema, and it relies on a character talking to himself in the mirror. How a character talks and what they say (and what they don’t) is one of the best ways to get audiences acquainted and invested.
There’s many ways that dialogue can develop or establish traits in a film’s characters. In Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, there’s a knife fight that happens near the beginning of the film when a member of the gang challenges Butch’s leadership. Butch’s blustering and circular talking reveal his cunning; his back and forth with Sundance show their relationship; and the carrying out of the fight with some verbal trickery shows a crooked streak.
In Soderbergh’s The Informant, character develops differently. Matt Damon’s Mark Whitacre is fast talking and self-righteous, even in the ever present voice over. His thoughts seem to drift randomly as he speaks out seemingly mundane observations or facts. By the end of the movie, however, it’s obvious that Whitacre’s speech and musings are all mannerisms stemming from his deception. His rapid fire, seemingly random lines of dialogue show his misdirection and confidence that he is going to succeed. In the end, nothing that Whitacre has said can be taken for face value; the whole narrative is cast in doubt, as he has been serving as his own narrator.
My personal favorite use of dialogue to establish character comes from the various incarnations of Fargo, first as a Coen Brothers’ film and more recently as Noah Hawley’s excellent series. Whether it’s William H. Macy and Martin Freeman as bumbling domestic criminals or Frances McDormand and Allison Tolman as simple, competent, and morally unconfused law enforcers, the way in which they speak is highly indicative of their position in the good vs. evil narrative (“Aw, jeez…”). I have compiled a few clips of Martin Freeman as Lester Nygaard from the first season of the FX show. The script shows viewers how insecure and agitated Lester gets: a very bad combination when he has to pretend he is innocent of killing his wife and deal with some ruthless criminals.
Use 4: CHARACTER RELATIONSHIPS/INTERACTIONS
“So you never wanted a regular type life?”
“What the fuck is that? Barbecues and ballgames?”
“Yeah.”
DeNiro and Pacino share the screen for an iconic moment
The diner conversation from Heat is a monumental moment. Two all time greats face-off, without weapons, just sitting across from each other and talking. Thus, the implications of the scene are somewhat “meta”: this is not just Pacino’s Lt. Hanna and DeNiro’s McCauley facing off, but two peers going at it within their medium. The way that we get to see this showdown: dialogue. And what we learn is that, these men, these enemies…they’re not so different after all. They might be on different sides of the law, but they have more than a few things in common.
Dialogue offers a way to display inter-character relationships that cannot be accomplished in a purely visual manner…because people often communicate through speech. Conversation gives two actors a chance to show the relationship between characters, depending on how they play off one another. Linklater’s entire Before trilogy is probably one of the best examples to showcase dialogue between the two characters because the films essentially consist entirely of conversations between Jesse and Celine (Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy). The films are so beloved because of how well these conversations capture the evolving relationship between these two very real characters.
That’s all very sweet, but there’s often nothing better than seeing enemies or foils go at each other. The tension generated in a situation where he simple presence of a set of nemeses creates crackling and is transformed into dialogue can lead to thrilling, satisfying results. In the best Bond films, there’s always a moment where the indestructible spy must exchange some verbal thrusts. Whether it’s Connery and Goldfinger (“No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die”) or Daniel Craig sharing a homoerotic moment with Bardem’s Silva, these meetings offer a time for witty, snappy dialogue that escalates the tension. Pretty much all of Tarantino’s films contain some really great face-offs (see the video at the bottom for a few).
The right type of dialogue can show any range of interaction: disinterest, antagonism, love, etc.. A film like Coffee and Cigarettes goes through a whole range of possible relationships, showing everything from strained sibling bonds to enamorment with strangers. Speech is a major factor in portraying these situations.
Use 5: FOR THE JOY OF IT
“Are you okay?”
“Peachy, Kate. The world’s my oyster, except for the fact that I just rammed a wooden stake in my brother’s heart because he turned into a vampire, even though I don’t believe in vampires. Aside from that unfortunate business, everything’s hunky-dory.”
George is about to have a really bad night.
That gem, uttered by George Clooney’s Seth in Robert Rodriguez’s From Dusk Till Dawn, does not come off as high art. It’s campy, ridiculous…and utterly perfect for the film it’s in. It doesn’t do a ton for the plot, or for character, but it adds to the film stylistically.
And that’s what dialogue is meant to do, sometimes. Comedies are funny because of what characters say: part of the success behind movies like The Big Lebowski and Mean Girls is that they are so quotable. Superhero movies are goofy and enjoyable with ridiculous lines. One of the reasons Thor: Ragnarok was such an improvement over its predecessors was that it left out the moralizing about responsibility and had Cate Blanchett chewing up scenery and saying “I am not a queen, or a monster. I am the Goddess of Death!” I mean Thor is…um…an alien-god-superhero who flies around with a hammer? He can use at least a little bit of levity.
It’s not that these instances of dialogue are completely unmotivated, but they allow for flexibility and style. Sure, they can serve a function as well, but it’s ok to have witty exchanges just because they’re witty, as long as they’re not overdone.
Conclusion
Actively considering the work dialogue is accomplishing within a script can greatly improve writing. When characters speak without a reason, it might be a sign that they just don’t need to be there. The above five categories are not the only ones which dialogue can fall into, but represent a few of its major uses. Moreover, the categories aren’t mutually exclusive: some dialogue accomplishes a lot of work within a few lines While I may represent some categories (like exposition) rather negatively, there is a time and a place for each of these, as long as one does not get too lazy.
To tie things together, here’s a compilation of the five uses of dialogue gathered from Tarantino movies. You’ll notice that, indeed, many of these scenes can fall into more than one category. Even with his level of stylization, there’s a lot of ground covered in many of these clips.
These are also not the sole considerations when it comes to writing dialogue. Outside of context, there are other technical and craft implications which must be considered. Writing gets better the more you do it, so experiment with how you use dialogue and how you write it. Enjoy!
Sources:
McKee, Robert. Dialogue: The Art of Verbal Action for Page, Stage, and Screen. Hachette Book Group, 2016.
Snyder, Blake. Save the Cat: The Last Book on Screenwriting You’ll Ever Need. Michael Wiese Productions, 2013.
Referenced Films/Shows:
Pulp Fiction, Suicide Squad, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Interstellar, Inception, Kong: Skull Island, Looper, Hot Fuzz, The Lobster, Wedding Crashers, Call Me By Your Name, Taxi Driver, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Informant!, Heat, Fargo (film), Fargo (TV show), Before Sunrise, Goldfinger, Skyfall, Coffee and Cigarettes, From Dusk Till Dawn, The Big Lebowski, Mean Girls, Thor: Ragnarok, Inglourious Basterds, Jackie Brown, Kill Bill: Volume 2, Reservoir Dogs
CMA SENIOR SEMINAR 2018 