|
|
Post by tonyg on Sept 22, 2019 8:56:48 GMT
I wanted to start such thread from a very long time as a response to those who declared the dialogue in PT as its weakest part, abysmal, cringy etc. Here I must say first that I consider the cinema as complex art: if the sound, picture, pace and wording fit one to another then the movie as a whole works. So the dialogue would work if it corresponds to the other elements of the movie. Respectively for me the good dialogue should first fit in. If it doesn’t, no matter that the verbatim is genius, it doesn't matter, it doesn't fit in. This is the most important quality as it defines and sometimes reduces the others (as originality, complexity, so on). This is the most underestimated quality in almost every critic I heard of the dialogue of PT. First let's remember that Lucas is visual director. I think this is obvious, but let's give as example the finale of ROTS where he last line said is by C3P0 in the Alderaan ship and there is so much that happens after that, but is shown without a word. The visual style is not an excuse for bad dialogue, is an explanation what is the role of the dialogue in his movies (not only PT). I short, the dialogue is the last mean: it fulfills the picture and if something is said then it can be shown with the visuals. In short, this is the opposite of Woody Allen's case where the visuals are just a background for the conversation which is the real movie. Sometimes in movies with more visual style even the music fulfills the role of the dialogue as it shows the emotions of the characters. But if the dialogue plays such role then it should be very intense. If something is said and it cannot be shown otherwise it should be intense and concentrated in the same time. Is the style of the westerns and moreover the Italian westerns (of which Lucas is big fan). The communication between the characters sometimes happens only with the eyes or some gestures and they say it all. And when they talk, is short and intense. Classic scene form Clint Eastwood Pale Rider where the protagonist says his gratitude and surprise with 2 words (Long walk). Is all that is has to be said and the other is shown in this scene or can be understood in the context of what happened before and that's it. Long walk. www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQuKXGOoqUc (around 3:15) If there is larger dialogue in the western, is crucial dramatic moment and respectively the dialogue is more than dramatic, I would say sometimes is melodramatic. It happens in crucial emotional moments (in Pale Rider there are such moments as the mother begins to ask who is the preacher and who he really was). Or if the dialogue is larger it explains something that is important but cannot be understood easily in the context (on the same movie when the landlord explains why the arriving of the preacher is better for the people, respectively worse for them). Many people define Star Wars as western in space, even Lucas made such references. I think this is most obvious in the dialogue which is completely in this western type style. Of course the wording itself is different, but the style of speaking is the same. Is short and concentrated:" I have a bad feeling about this" says it all. With few words the dialogue shows the emotional condition of the character; it alludes what could happen and also expresses the disagreement/discontent of the character of what is happening. There are many examples like this which is popular to call one-liners but they fit in the style of the movies. Again the are larger dialogue in a crucial moments when there is something important to be said. Great example is the conversation between Obi Wan and Luke in ROTJ where Obi Wan confirms that Anakin is Darth Vader and that Luke has a sister. This density is somehow lost in the sequel trilogy which leads to that the dialogue looks strange as practically it is more "normal". The problem is again the same: does the dialogue fit in or not. Here the normal style of speaking would be indeed out of space. Now here we should explain what is the difference between the dialogue in PT and OT if the western style is still present? I see some but I think the most important here is the wording which is much more archaic than in OT. And it should be that way. the prequel trilogy shows the golden past of the galaxy far away and the dialogue should be more retro. It looks like the dialogue of Pride and prejudices to us because the dialogue shows (as the visuals) that this happened in other times (more civilized time when the way of speaking was more sophisticated). The dialogue continues to be relatively short (while generally larger than (OT) but the words that are said are much more sophisticated. here can be made the obvious reference between Darcy's proposal in Pride and prejudice and Anakin confession of feelings in AOTC> www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF3ueHjUc3k (Mr. Darcy explanation of his strong feelings) www.youtube.com/watch?v=buyflmtHcHc (Anakin in AOTC. I don't like the clip title but I couldn't find another) Of course, in Pride and prejudice much more words are said but the tension and the sophistication of the dialogue are the same. In PT Lucas somehow managed to stay close to the western style but retranslated it in older times, the knight times. In these times some things just need to be said but again are said i this dense overly dramatic style as in the old novels. I should said that in OT this style is shown but only Vader, the Emperor and occasionally Leia speak that way. After all, if the older generation who is practically from that time then it should the normal way of speaking of the old times. This means that Lucas made one more strong connection between the 2 trilogies through the dialogue. Of course, there are too much to be discussed here but these are the most crucial elements for me. |
|
|
|
Post by tonyg on Jan 11, 2020 10:36:04 GMT
Another characteristic of the way of speaking in PT (the old ways if we can say so) is that the dialogue couldn't not be direct. I mean when they speak about some subject, the words are chosen to "circulate" around the topic so the sentences should be presented in more elegant way. Here comes the sophistication that makes many viewers to complain that "no one's speak that way, not anymore" . Of course no one speak that way, it was never intended to be like this. Even Anakin who go straight to the point in his words and for that reason frequently produces awkward situations in the sophisticated republic society use words and phrases that look archaic and strange from today point of view. Some would say that the dialogue is too theatrical especially in PT. Of course it is, it is a space opera as other define it. It should sound theatrical. If it doesn't, it paradoxically becomes unnatural.
|
|
|
|
Post by Moonshield on Apr 19, 2020 7:54:50 GMT
Lucas cannot write dialogues:
"May the Force be with you." - 8th Greatest Movie Quote of All Time (ANH) "No. I am your father." (TESB) "Good, good." (ROTJ) "Be brave, and don't look back. Don't look back." (TPM) "I call it aggressive negotiations." (AOTC) "So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause." (ROTS)
|
|
|
|
Post by Moonshield on Apr 29, 2020 16:54:24 GMT
DEMONS AND ANGELS
(scenes analysis)
 
It is interesting to compare two love scenes on the terrace from two movies: «The Devil's Advocate» and «Attack of the Clones».
At first, let's look who are our heroes. Kevin Lomax and Christabella Andreoli from «The Devil's Advocate» seem to be humans at first sight, but we know that actually they are demons. Anakin Skywalker and Padme Amidala from «Attack of the Clones» are their complete opposites.
In the movie Padme is a senator, but her essence is obvious: Padme is an angel. She is very beautiful, calm, kind and pure. It's no accident Anakin in «The Phantom Menace» asked her: «Are you an angel?»
Anakin himself is an angel too — he lives in the temple, uses the light side of the Force, almost doesn't communicate with women. And he is an idealist.
In this way, we have demons and angels — the mirror couples. Notice also that the scene from «The Devil's Advocate» takes place at night (probably at midnight) and the scene from «Attack of the Clones» takes place at midday. «Demons» Kevin and Christabella drink. Christabella also smokes. «Angels» Anakin and Padme don't do that — it's even hard to imagine.
What can their dialogues look like? At first, let's consider the scene from «The Devil's Advocate».
Christabella begins first — she waited Kevin.
«Do you have this view?» — she asks.
«Sorry?» — it's obviously, Kevin waited the question. But he pretends that he didn't.
«From your terrace, do you have this view?» — she flatters. Looks like she supposes that he is rich and powerful.
«Not exactly. No terrace and I'm about... 12 floors down. What about you?»
«No, I live downtown. This is a... family building.»
This is a surprise. Looks like: «You're less powerful than I thought, but I am too.»
«Sounds like fun.» — Kevin says. — «Downtown, I mean. I'm just getting to know the city.»
«Is it everything you expected?»
«More.»
Very simple words: he likes her world. We shall mention this later.
«Are you alone?» — Christabella asks.
She teases him openly. Right away, like thunder. Or like a typical demon.
«You mean, tonight?»
He doesn't mind. Like a typical demon, too. And he knows that she can see his ring, but doesn't care.
«Is your wife a jealous woman, Mr. Lomax?»
Pure seduction. Kevin likes it very much, but he has to pretend that he isn't interested not to look like a simpleton.
«Oh, dear, I'm going to scare you away.» — Christabella isn't frightened that she can «scare him away», i.e. she lies.
«No. No, really... I'm fine.» — Kevin doesn't care of his wife. The whole scene is already a deceit.
«Yeah?» — Christabella triumphs.
«I'm fine.»
«Bet you like to be on top. Don't you?»
She knows that it cannot occur (at least right now), but continues to tease him.
«Excuse me?»
«Of the situation. You prefer to be on top, right?»
«Depends of the view.» — Kevin answers, though he is married and his wife is not far from him right now. He doesn't care of her again.
Then John Milton (the Satan) approaches and the scene ends. We can see that it is based on lies. This looks very realistic for demons.
Now let's consider the dialogue of Anakin and Padme. Notice: Padme also begins first. But she talks about herself and doesn't ask him any question. She also isn't trying to tease or seduce him, she is romantic. And this looks good for an angel-like person.
«We used to come here for school retreat. We would swim to that island every day. I love the water. We used to lie out on the sand and let the sun dry us... and try to guess the names of the birds singing.»
Padme forgets that Anakin was a slave in his childhood and hurts him. He lived on a desert planet with its sandstorms. Anakin answers and says words, which witness that he is forthright.
«I don't like sand. It's coarse, and rough, and irritating... And it gets everywhere.»
Like Padme, he forgets that Naboo is not Tatooine. Unlike Christabella, he is actually frightened that he can hurt Padme, though his words are sincere. Right away he says another words:
«Not like here. Here, everything is soft... and smooth.»
He loves Padme's homeworld. His words have the same meaning as Kevin's words. Anakin's words are truth: Padme's homeworld is a great place.
Then he touches her. Notice: at first, he touches her hand. He doesn't want to offend her. She turns to him. Her look is a bit enchanted: she has already understood that he loves her and she is interested what is he going to do.
At first Anakin smiles a bit, like a Tatooine boy who is caught while drawing in the hallway on the wallpaper. But then he stops smiling: he doesn't want to turn this into a joke. Also, he is afraid: his feelings are real.
He isn't trying to trick or seduce her. Only truth, only sincerity can pave him the way to her. He is soft: what if she doesn't want?
But she doesn't mind. He kisses her.
«No. I shouldn't have done that.» — Padme says. Like him, she is forthright, but soft: she explains her act to him.
«I'm sorry.» — Anakin doesn't triumph, though he's just kissed the former queen and one of the most beautiful woman in the galaxy. He looks like: «What have I done? Have I offended her?» And it looks good. The end of the scene. As we can see, the whole scene of «angels» is based on truth, they cannot deceive each other.
What's the conclusion? We have two well-made mirror scenes. Taylor Hackford and George Lucas thought in a similar way and could draw good portraits of characters. Black and white.
|
|
|
|
Post by tpf1138 on Sept 10, 2020 12:46:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on Sept 14, 2020 11:20:42 GMT
I think what I don't get is why each screenwriter has to be held to a certain homogenized standard style, and if someone deviates from that style and has a unique voice, which is obviously working on many levels, his approach takes on discriptors such as botched, wooden, clunky, etc. Can't Lucas' style just be Lucas' style? Cant it be appreciated for what it is, what it does and how it fits into the larger whole? If he'd tried to fit into the the standard mold he wouldn't be true to himself and SW wouldn't be SW. Lucas went to great lengths to avoid the Hollywood system of focus groups, Philistine producers, and mass conformity, etc. He's always held true to his individual vision and capabilities. To frown upon and judge those because they don't meet the status quo expectations seems more like a misstep on the user end, to me. And to turn around and use that perception as justification and ammunition to tear something down because it's different is an even greater misstep. I'm glad Lucas and his colleagues don't take themselves too seriously and are self-aware of things to the point of using these descriptors themselves. But again, I think the strife arises when the fans do take things too seriously and use the creator's humility as a weapon against him. All because they didn't get what they thought they wanted. Many people define Star Wars as western in space, even Lucas made such references. I think this is most obvious in the dialogue which is completely in this western type style. Of course the wording itself is different, but the style of speaking is the same. Yes, and for the prequels both Lucas and the actors have said many times that the dialogue was quite intentionally inspired by 1930s film. Which itself was a carryover from stage plays and opera. Is it so hard to sit back and soak in how a director chooses to paint his images, with a sense of at least nuetral appreciation, rather than immediate judgment? Even in this age of instant gratification, are we really expecting modern method acting in a tragic space opera fairytale about morals, friendship and family? I feel the fact that SW, particularly the PT for the most part, steps outside of time (a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away) in many ways including dialogue is what makes up such a big part of it's charm and appeal. I can't imagine it any other way nor would I wouldn't want it any other way. |
|
|
|
Post by Somny on Sept 14, 2020 15:13:01 GMT
I, for one, absolutely love the dialogue of the PT! It's so formal, archetypal and, at times, deliciously ironic. It also generally helps to convey the exact right tone and subtext in a refreshingly lucid way. Nothing is faint or obscured.
Some examples:
*I feel like subtext can be very close to irony but I suppose the difference is in not being as playful, inventive or knowing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on Sept 15, 2020 13:40:13 GMT
Not only have Mark, Carrie and Harrison commented on George's dialogue in such ways as not feeling spontaneous, but I just watched two interview clips with Alec Guiness talking about recieving the script for ANH and reading it, thinking:
"I didn't think the dialogue was very good but it held me from page to page."
And
"It seemed the dialogue was pretty ropey, but I had to go on turning the page. That's an essential, you gotta know what's gonna happen next or what's going to be said next."
Which backs up what is said in the above video; George's dialogue may seem "bad" but it draws you in and sticks with you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Somny on Sept 15, 2020 18:40:56 GMT
As with so much in franchises, the writing can also be one of those aspects that get better with every successive entry. I think that's the case with the OT. Not to diminish ANH but I find ROTJ a lot sharper in this regard and, as discussed in "The First Prequel" thread, reflective of the ultimate and prevailing MO Lucas unleashed in the PT. He definitely found his groove.
|
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on Sept 16, 2020 0:20:27 GMT
What's interesting to note is ESB and RotJ had additional writers, whereas ANH was all Lucas.
Now look at the PT and only AotC had additional help with Jonothan Hales.
I would love to know which lines are the more heavily Hales lines.
I've always said TPM and AotC are the purest forms of Star Wars, and perhaps some of that has to do with how much TPM, for example, resonates when held up with ANH. And a lot of that has to do with the strictly Lucasian script. Because what I usually actually say is TPM and AotC are the purest forms of SW/Lucas filmmaking.
|
|
|
|
Post by Somny on Sept 16, 2020 0:48:26 GMT
While other writers surely pulled major writing duty on TESB and ROTJ, I have no doubt that those script drafts, as J.W. Rinzler has repeatedly suggested, were all filtered through the Flanneled One and heavily so. I believe the collaborative writing process on these films work in much the same way as the particularly rigorous conceptual art process does. Constant iterations amid constant guidance.
I see TPM and AOTC in a similar light and I love the idea of identifying the most pure, undistilled of Star Wars. The golden goose!
|
|
|
|
Post by tpf1138 on Sept 16, 2020 23:35:12 GMT
Dialogue in Star Wars is essentially like the chorus in a piece of orchestral music. Like the choir heard in Duel of the Fates, the tonal quality of the chosen words, and the clarity with which they are expressed, is what's important. For Lucas the literary quality of the words, or how closely they might approximate the way people actually speak to each other is largely irrelevant next to the clarity of the accent they provide to the graphics. When he made American Graffiti it clearly mattered to him that the dialogue have a certain naturalism to it, because he wanted the kids in that movie to sound like ordinary kids. But, even there it was the tones that mattered to him more than the actual words. There is purpose and meaning in the speech certainly, but it mattered most that it SOUND natural, not that it sound clever or literate. In THX the dialogue is mostly utilitarian, often free floating, and in some cases cut and pasted from Newsweek articles and political speeches. It's there that we can see Lucas's approach to dialogue in its purist form, operating primarily as a sound effect with the very definite intent of conveying information or contributing to the creation of tone.
In Star Wars the dialogue, as has been stated ad nauseum by many, including Lucas himself, is patterned after the old space adventure serials. Flash Gordon, Buck Rogers etc. It shifts between the trilogies. The original three movies were more relaxed, comedic, the prequel movies more formal, precise. Of course, we can discern that same formality in the verbiage of the Imperials heard in the original trilogy, which makes sense seeing as that's essentially who our protagonists from the prequel trilogy are.
|
|
|
|
Post by Moonshield on Sept 19, 2020 15:32:44 GMT
PART I. GEORGE LUCAS' DIALOGUE TECHNIQUEPeople often say that Lucas “cannot write dialogues”. If you ask them why, they'll say something like: “I don't like sand” or “they don't flow very well”. This is strange, to say the least - the phrase “I don't like sand” follows Padme's phrase “We used to lie on the sand...” and points on Anakin's childhood; it is taken from Lucas's biography, because when he filmed “Star Wars” in 1976, the sand was one of his problems: “it's coarse, rough and irritating... and it gets everywhere." Dialogues in different movies don't sound like in real life - when Paddy Chayefsky wrote his “Network”, studio bosses said to him: “There is too much foul language.” Opinions of different people are often biased, and it is too hard to find any difference between objectivity and subjectivity. Moreover, ever rule in filmmaking isn't a panacea, it can be applied in a good or bad way. But does objective quality of dialogues exist? Yes, it does, and here are basic techniques: 22 essential screenwriting tipswww.studiobinder.com/blog/6-essential-screenwriting-tips-for-writing-better-movie-dialogue/But how to use these screenwriting tips correctly? For example, look at rule #2 - “show, don't tell”. One of examples of using this rule are “great lines after the kill”: This rule was used many times, but also there are a lot of cases, when characters don't say anything after the kill. For example, the Bride in “Kill Bill” doesn't say anything killing O-Ren Ishii or Vernita Green. Also, Obi-Wan doesn't say anything killing Darth Maul. Max Payne doesn't say anything killing Nicole Horne. Why? Because vengeance has too much emotions, the character cannot say anything like “die, motherfucker, die!!” - it isn't need. Phrases “after the kill” are used to highlight action, if it hasn't too much emotions. All of it is technique. Only knowing basic rules of dialogue writing isn't enough - you need talent to feel where you should use them and where you shouldn't. But this validation shows that Lucas used rule #2 correctly - only in the Episode III. Let's consider his other dialogues. #1 Gather useful research (write about what you know)1. Lucas studied anthropology and uses Christian mythology as archetype for his story. 2. He was a racer and writes about the pod race. 3. He had three children (in 1994) and writes about a boy and a girl. 4. He is an owner of a big company and writes about the Trade Federation.
#2 Show, don't tell (highlight actions)“I don't care what universe you're from. That's gotta hurt!” “Everything's overheated!” Also, the screen of the Anakin's pod is a good example of visual storytelling.
#3 Use an outsider for exposition (first act - the exposition)“These Federation types are cowards. The negotiations will be short.” (Instead of: “I think the negotiations will be short.”)
#4 Write between the lines (hide the truth)“The queen will not approve.” “Queen doesn't need to know.” “Well, I don't approve.” #5 Develop a complete character“I shall do what I must, Obi-Wan.” #6 Give characters a unique voice Qui-Gon: “father” “Don't touch anything.” “Your mother's right.” Anakin: “youthful maximalism” “Are you an angel?” “No one can kill a Jedi.” #5 & #6 (one of the best examples of Amidala's character development) “Now, viceroy, you're going to have to go back to the senate and explain all this.” Do other writers use these techniques? Yes, they do. Quentin Tarantino in his “Kill Bill” also gives his characters unique voices. For instance, Bride's voice is very different from Vernita Green's. Bride's voice is sharp as a knife, Vernita panics a bit - she constantly uses the word “bitch” and foul-mouthed.
#7. Avoid redundancyWe even don't know the name of Anakin's mother. Quentin Tarantino also doesn't reveal the Bride's name during the whole first part of “Kill Bill”.
#8 Stretch important information“Perhaps I killed the Jedi and took it from him?" “Clouded this boy's future is." #9 Show us the interesting stuff“Master! Destroyers!” “The Sith has been extinct for a millennium."
#10 Logical conflict is good“The boy is dangerous. They all sense it. Why can't you?” “His fate is uncertain. He's not dangerous.” Here we cannot say that dialogues don't frow very well - we can compare them with other great dialogue from the “Predator” - moreover, from the other dialogue with the same rule about the logical conflict (!) “I woke up. Why don't you?” By the way, this phrase (Predator) wasn't in the screenplay, it was changed later. #11 Interrupt other conversations (to stretch important information)“Wesa got a grand army. Dat's why you no liken us, mesa thinks.” “Your Highness?” #12 Take advantage of every role (Last appearence)“Take him.” “Train him.” #6 & #12“I think you can kiss your trade franchise good bye.”
#13 Don't be a basic bard“You're bantha fooder!” (Also, voiced in alien's language).
#14 Tell us more through narration“The communication disrumption can mean only one thing - invasion.” “It sounds like bait to establish a connection trace." #5 & #14“Since I was very little, 3, I think, my mom and I was sold to Gardulla the Hutt. But she lost us betting on the podracers...” #15 Make your actors happy“We are brave, Your Highness.” “He knows nothing of greed.”
#5 & #15“Thank you, Ambassador. But my place is with my people.”
#16 Make your speech count“Honorable representatives of the Republic. I come to you under the gravest of circumstances. The Naboo system has been invaded by the droid armies...” #17 Stay consistent (tone changes)“You're slave?” “I'm a person, and my name is Anakin.”
#18 Foreshadowing & Call Backs“Qui-Gon told me to stay in this cockpit, so that's what I'm gonna do.” “After her! This one's a decoy!” #6 & # 18“The negotiations were short.” #14 & #18"Gambling. Everything here revolves around betting on those awful races.”
#5 & #6 & #18“I am Queen Amidala.”
#19 Relationships“What will happen to me now?" “You will be a Jedi, I promise.” #5 & #19“Qui-Gon, sir, I don't want to be a problem." “You won't be, Ani." #20 Inner rhymes (additional) Example from ROTJ: “Everything that has transpired has done so according to my design.” Examples from TPM: “He's catching Sebulba! - Inkabunga!" “That little human being is out of his mind! They're side by side!” Inner rhymes are used in many great movies: “I'm offering my protection to this lady.” (Stagecoach) So Lucas's dialogues are very technical - it is wrong to say that he cannot write dialogues.
|
|
|
|
Post by Moonshield on Sept 21, 2020 8:55:44 GMT
PART II. HOW LUCAS ENHANCED HIS DIALOGUES
"If you can cut inside the speech, you're really cutting most effectively.
It's purifying, it's refining. Making it precise. Precision is one of the basic elements of poetry."- Paddy Chayefsky When Francis Ford Coppola taught Lucas how to write, he said: “Don't reread. Rewrite.” Lucas always followed the advice. For example, TPM screenplay was finished on the 6 June 1997, but in this video Lucas says that he finished the last draft a day before shooting (25 June 1997), so it's not the last draft (and it is confirmed in “The Cinema of George Lucas” by Marcus Hearn). As pointed in the “Making of the Revenge of the Sith”, Lucas's basic method to enhance his screenplay is rewriting, re-shooting, in the film editing and sound editing. He used these standard methods in all his 6 Star Wars movies. Basic mistakes, which Lucas tried to avoid, were: unnecessary adverbs, repeats, character names and redundant information. We know that Lucas used a lot of subtle screenwriting tips in his movies, but what if he did a lot of flaws? writersrelief.com/2015/05/07/dialogue-technique-dos-donts/We shall use rules from “Writer's relief”. Remember “give each speaker a subtle unique voice” from the first part? Yes, it is very important. But it is another story. Most rules are related to books and narrative voice ("she moaned" instead of “she said gloomily”), but adverbs are often redundant information, that's why we can define our first rule: 1. Don't use adverbs - they kill your dialogues. The most famous dialogue, which is killed by an adverb, is the dialogue from “The Rise of Skywalker" by Poe Dameron - “Somehow, Palpatine returned.”
2. Don't use repeats - they kill your dialogues. An obvious rule from school - almost always repeats contain excess information. The most famous dialogue killed by repeat from the same movie you all know. 3. Don't use character names - they kill your dialogues. Kasdan likes to kill his dialogues using character names - when Finn repeats Rey's name, for example. Additional rules by Paddy Chayefsky: gointothestory.blcklst.com/how-they-write-a-script-paddy-chayefsky-2912eee0e9f74. Cut out the wisdom.
5. Cut out adjectives.
All these rules shouldn't be understood literally. If you really delete all adjectives (or all adverbs) from the screenplay, your dialogues will be not simply “wooden”, but very bad. For example, “All about Eve” has a memorable quote “It's going to be a bumpy night”. “The Wizard of Oz” contains “I'll get you, my pretty, and your little dog too!” Even the screenplay, which is called “the greatest screenplay ever” by the Writers Guild - Casablanca - contains: “I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship” (by the way, this quote is used by the amazing writer Sam Lake in “Max Payne”). Adverbs and adjectives have similar functions, that's why writers delete them. Writers simply pay special attention to adverbs, and Chayefsky pays special attention to adjectives, because it can be redundant information.
Read Chayefsky's “Network” screenplay (you can find its scan on “Screenplays and Scripts” website). You'll see that literally on first pages it contains wisdom and adjectives ("...he says - you're a young man - you got your whole life ahead of you...") Paddy contradicts himself? No, he's just knows how to apply his rules. If wisdom can improve your dialogue, it should be there, and adjectives too.
If we read Lucas's screenplays and watch his movies, we'll see that he often deleted all this things and avoided literally an ocean of flaws, which can kill all his dialogues. By the way, do you remember “give each speaker a subtle unique voice” from the first part? Yes, it is very important.
If you read all three screenplays of the prequel trilogy, you'll see that Lucas deleted a lot of character names. For instance, TPM (page 41):
“...Obi-Wan, you're sure there isn't anything of value left on board?”
Almost the whole Anakin/Jira dialogue (page 44) was removed. 3 character names are deleted and we don't know Jira's name (because it is a redundant information). The dialogue contains only one name (Ani) to be polite. Also, in the phrase “Gracious, my bones are aching...” the word is removed. Moreover, “gracious” is an adjective.
Here is an example of deleted adverb (page 51):
“Pod racing. Greed can be a powerful ally... if it's used properly.”
Adverbs can be used to improve the dialogue. For example: “He was skinned alive!” (Predator) or “Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn” (Gone with the Wind). But they should be used carefully and fit to the situation. Lucas can do that:
“I actually saved the pod... mostly.” This adverb (the first is necessary) improved the dialogue. Because Lucas knows how children behave themselves - he has three (now four).
At all, adverbs are the most complex thing in dialogue writing. Even Quentin Tarantino sometimes has minor problems with them, and Lucas, too. But mostly they can handle this. Here is a subtle example how Lucas deleted unneccessary adverb from Amidala's speech (page 100):
“Our two great societies have always lived in peace... until now. The Trade Federation has destroyed...”
Another good example, how Lucas enhanced his dialogue, when he deleted a subtle bad repeat (page 2):
“I have a bad feeling about this.”
“I don't feel sense anything.”
People often says “Empire is great because of Kasdan”, but it is wrong. At all, media constantly brainwashes people about Lucas's writing (and directing). Actually, in TESB we can found great examples of Lucas's dialogue writing and dialogue editing. Here is the part of the script:
“He said you killed him.”
“I am your father.”
“That's impossible.”
“It's not true.”
“Join me.”
“There's no escape.”
“No!!”
Almost all Lucas's phrases were used in the movie with small changes. Look at these changes. To make the dialogue better, Lucas connected Vader's phrase with Luke's phrase:
“No. I am your father.”
Another two very technical examples of dialogue editing with deleted adverbs:
“Search your feelings, you already know it to be true.”
“Don't make me destroy you here.” (All Vader's phrases were checked by Lucas in sound editing.)
Sometimes he enhanced Kasdan's dialogues (pages 118-119, both names are removed):
“Luke, you must not go.”
“This is a dangerous time for you, Luke.”
Did Lucas cut out any redundant wisdom from his dialogues? Yes, he did. For example, in the Attack of the Clones on the page 7 the only wisdom in dialogue is contained in Yoda's phrase, which is deleted:
“Too little about yourself you worry, Senator, and too much about politics...”
On the same page we can see how he cuts inside the speech:
“Do it for me, M'Lady, please. I will rest easier. We had a big scare today. The thought of losing you is unbearable.”
Removed adverbs (pages 11, 14 and 16):
“Anakin' you're focusing on the negative again.”
“Now, let's check the security here.”
“I don't know why I'm dreaming about her now.”
“He just doesn't understand.”
Removed adjectives:
“If you'd spent as much time working on your saber skills as you do on your wit, young Padawan, you would rival master Yoda as a swordsman.” (page 16)
“Easy... official Jedi business, go back to your drinks.” (Page 23)
“An interesting puzzle.” (Page 48)
“Most interesting.” (Page 48)
“We felt the Jedi would be a perfect choice...” (Page 59)
“You're so bad!” (Page 58)
The word “really” usually is a parasite word. In the whole movie it is used only six (!) times. Moreover, half of them are Anakin's words, working for his “arrogant” trait (two of them are used in jokes). On page 16 you can find how Lucas removed a phrase with this word, which is repeated in Anakin's dialogue:
“...you know I had to get a really gonzo color..."
You know, dialogues in the AOTC are really technical.
Apart from deleting a lot of names and phrases with adverbs and adjectives (Chayefsky's rule!), which can kill all dialogues, for example: "You have been moody lately" (page 87), Lucas has done some very subtle dialogue changes. For example, he deleted this repeat (page 73):
“I don't know... I don't know what to say.”
Page 108:
“You old fool. The oppression of Sith will never return.” Small phrase “you old fool” can kill Master Windu's unique voice (it is “official”: he calls Anakin as “Skywalker”), but this phrase (with adjective!) is deleted.
Or this deleted repeat, which can kill the whole dialogue (page 168):
“Who?”
Finally, let's see how Quentin Tarantino enhances his dialogues. If you read his screenplay, you'll see, that like Lucas (and Coppola), Quentin rewrites his screenplays, removing redundant information, adverbs, repeats, etc. Here is a very good example. At your service, page 74.
“Very funny. Your instrument is quite impressive.” “Very funny” is deleted, because it can kill O-Ren's unique voice and dialogue. Quentin's skill of dialogue editing is as impressive as Bride's instrument. And his technique is very similar to Lucas's.
Maybe Lucas was very great in dialogue editing?
Sources
The Phantom Menace screenplay
The Empire Strikes Back screenplay
Attack of the Clones screenplay
Revenge of the Sith screenplay
Kill Bill screenplay |
|
|
|
Post by Moonshield on Sept 23, 2020 11:39:28 GMT
PART III. UNIQUE VOICES AND INNER RHYMES IN TPM
“It's like a chess set. You have a certain set of main characters, you have secondary characters, you have sidekicks, you have villains and you have henchmen. And you kind of move these around to figure out how the story is gonna play itself out.”
- George Lucas
"You're the brains behind this operation. But these are people you've created. If they want to make a left turn, make the left with them. See where the story takes you. Be okay taking those chances."
- Paul Thomas Anderson
Dialogue writing, like every other aspect of the movie, should work for storytelling.
“The Phantom Menace” has a screenplay, which tells a story about several characters. Every character may have good development or bad development. Their development depends on their actions, importance for the plot and other techniques.
One of these techniques is unique voices. They are very important and mentioned in both articles ("22 essential screenwriting tips" and "Writer's relief") about the dialogue writing. Unique voices are in connection with character's personality, traits and occupation. When the screenplay has several characters, unique voices can make your characters memorable.
Many technical writers like Dudley Nichols, Ben Hecht, George Lucas or Quentin Tarantino can use unique voices with great skill.
“Stagecoach” (1939) has 9 characters, but they are all memorable. Because in the technical screenplay by Dudley Nichols (with some ideas of Ben Hecht) they all act and affect the plot: Dallas, Ringo Kid, drunken doctor, an officer's pregnant wife (Lucy Mallory), Hatfield and others. They all have unique voices. I can't consider all voices, but look at these phrases, which are said by Dallas and Lucy Mallory.
Dallas and Lucy are both brave, forthright, honest and strong, but Dallas's voice is painful and daring. The Law and Order League offended her and expelled from the city, because she was forced to be a saloon girl (12.50): “What are you trying to do, scare somebody? They got me in here, now let 'em try to put me out!”
Lucy's voice are simply brave, noble and honest (13.00):
“My husband is with his troops in Dry Fork. If he's in danger, I want to be with him."
Both phrases are pronounced very fast. This can be recognized in Leia's first dialogue (when she confronts Vader) and Padme's dialogue from AOTC:
“When they hear you've attacked a diplomatic...”
“I don't like this idea of hiding.” Four dialogues are combined with similar acting/directing style. Both Lucas' phrases and Dallas' phrase also contain inner rhymes.
Though all four dialogues look like a machine gun, they look graceful. Not bad, right? Lucas always used inner rhymes. In the screenplay of “A New Hope” Vader's phrase sounds: “Don't play games with me, Your Highness”. Later Lucas changed it and used an inner rhyme:
“Don't act so surprised, Your Highness.”
Hatfield is a gambler, he is risking his life for a lady, he is a maximalist (it reminds someone...) and his first phrases are:
“Like an angel in the jungle... a very wild jungle."
“You don't understand, cowboy. You've never seen an angel.”
Hatfield first condemns Doc Boon for his alcoholism, because he is an only doctor for Lucy Mallory:
"A fine member of the medical profession. Drunken beast!” (43.10)
Later, when Lucy Mallory is going to give birth, Hatfield rampages:
“Isn't that drunken swine sober yet!!” (43.55)
“The Phantom Menace” is a great example of unique voices. 7 protagonists/allies, including even two minor characters (!!), each of which has unique voice - they are all memorable.
Qui-Gon and Padme Amidala
Qui-Gon and Padme has many similar traits. Though Padme is only 14, they are both wise, calm, strong and brave, though Qui-Gon is more sophisticated. Both try to use diplomacy and conviction, communicating with other characters:
“There's something else behind this, Your Highness.” - Qui-Gon
“The battle is a diversion.” - Padme
Qui-Gon's unique trait is his compassion, which even applies to gungans:
“There is a possibility, with this diversion, many gungans will be killed.”
Combined with his age, this trait is expressed in an interesting way - he looks like a father to other characters: Anakin, Jar Jar Binks and even Obi-Wan. He always talks with them, trying to give them some good lessons.
Another unique trait of Qui-Gon is that his only true leader is the Force, not even the Jedi Council, that's why he confronts them:
“Finding him was the will of the Force.”
“He is the chosen one. You must see it.”
“I shall do what I must, Obi-Wan.”
He can convince Amidala:
“My feelings tell me they will destroy you.”
Amidala can be die-hard and fearless, when her people are in danger (almost all her scenes prove that):
“My fate will be no different than that of our people.”
Lucas can make her dialogue graceful with inner rhymes:
#5 & #20
“I pray you will bring sanity and compassion back to the senate.”
Apart from this, her other two unique traits as Padme are both highlighted in the movie: “Queen Amidala is young and naive” and “She's curious about the planet.” These traits are reflected in her unique voice:
“I don't fully understand, this is a strange place to me.”
“You're slave?”
Anakin. Anakin's youthful maximalism is clear.
“I'm the only human who can do it.”
“I came back here and freed all the slaves.”
Anakin's personality and dialogues is very similar to Hatfield's (Stagecoach). He is an idealist and takes part in survival races, risking his life. Also, both can give their life for a lady (Padme Amidala/Lucy Mallory). Hatfield even has no exposition, but he is extremely memorable, like Anakin. Both act, make decisions, have unique voices and similar unique traits.
In the dialogue with Yoda, apart from Anakin's unique voice, you also can see a connection.
“What has that got to do with anything?”
“Everything!”
Quentin Tarantino's manner of dialogue writing sometimes looks similar to Lucas's (they're both like westerns):
“I'm a pilot, you know...” - Anakin to Padme
“Yes, I guess.” - Anakin to Shmi
“You know, for a second there, yeah, I did.” - The Bride to O-Ren
Qui-Gon's relationships with Anakin is very interesting. It contains one of the most technical dialogue in the whole saga.
“You're a Jedi Knight, aren't you?”
Qui-Gon isn't trying to deny anything or to hide from him, but Anakin must be responsible for his words:
#6 & #19
“What makes you think that?”
Anakin explains, but Qui-Gon gives him another lesson, stretching important information:
#6 & #8
“Perhaps I killed the Jedi and took it from him?”
#6
“I don't think so. No one can kill a Jedi.”
Do you know why the next Qui-Gon's phrase is thrilling? Because right before this Lucas created a simple scene, which makes suspense: a very dangerous enemy - Darth Maul goes to Tatooine to hunt the Queen. Darth Sidious says: “They will be no match for you.” (Suspense is when the spectator knows more than the characters in the movie). That's why the phrase contains subtext. The whole phrase is a combination of techniques.
#4 & #6 & #8
“I wish that were so.”
Obi-Wan. His unique trait is his humour, clear or hidden.
“The negotiations were short.”
“If they find us, they will crush us, grind us into tiny pieces and blast us into oblivion.”
“If you would just follow the code, you would be on the council."
Shmi Skywalker's unique trait is in her relationship with Anakin. She doesn't want him to leave her, but understands that cannot hold him in slavery. Let him better to crash on races trying to break free than to live without any hope. And when Anakin is free, she can let him go: it is the main thing in the whole saga.
“I die every time Watto makes you do it.”
“Ani, bedtime!”
“He knows nothing of greed.”
“He deserves better than a slave's life.”
“It's time for you to let go.”
Even minor characters has unique voices, which make them memorable. Here's Watto's phrase, when he talks about the republic credits, which are already mentioned (Watto is derisive and arrogant):
#6 & #18
“How can you do this? Not on the republic credits, I think.”
Or Captain Panaka's phrases, which reminds Leia's phrases from “A New Hope”, because they're both tough. Also, Panaka is very devoted to the queen.
#6 & #10 (logical conflict)
“You can't take Her Royal Highness here, the Hutts are gangsters.” Panaka himself looks like a gangster with golden heart on queen's service.
If you can recognize the character by his phrase, it means that an author's technique of dialogue writing is very impressive. Here are five such phrases.
“The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent.”
“I can't beleive there's still slavery in the galaxy."
“I can help. I can fix anything.”
“Why do I sense we've picked up another pathetic life-form?”
“Now, be brave, and don't look back. Don't look back.”
The first phrase is Qui-Gon's ("father"), the second is Padme's ("naive"), the third is Anakin's ("anything"), the fourth is Obi-Wan's (humour), and the last phrase belongs to Shmi. This last phrase is one of the most memorable phrases in the whole saga: “don't look back” will be Anakin's (and Vader's) problem during all six movies (#4). These are Shmi's last words in the movie (#12) and highlight of her relationship with Anakin (#19). Such combination witnesses that Lucas is a very technical dialogue writer.
#4 & #6 & #12 & #19
“Now, be brave, and don't look back. Don't look back.”
Of course, Lucas didn't think: "Here I should combine this, this and this..." or something. He knows ancient motives of relationships between the mother and the son. "White Fang" by Jack London contains the same motive (more harsh) - chapter 14 "Famine":
"She was without value to him. He had learned to get along without her. Her meaning was forgotten. There was no place for her in his scheme of things, as there was no place for him in hers."
Lucas enhanced his phrase using a repeat. Repeats can kill the dialogue, but if it used correctly, it can improve them. It's an example how an exception of the basic rule can enhance your dialogue. Vader's last words also contain repeat (which is clearly added by Lucas - there is no this repeat in the screenplay). Padme's last words contain repeat, Qui-Gon's last words contain repeat, too. It works, because every time a character says something very important. All of it is technique.
Quentin Tarantino's “Kill Bill” is also a very good example of the movie with unique voices. Unlike the Bride, who has emotions (you can recall how she shouted at Buck, for example), O-Ren is more official and emotionless. (This her trait is a bit similar to Amidala, when she hides behind the makeup.) O-Ren is the only totally ruthless Viper (unlike Budd, Elle Driver, Vernita, Bill or the Bride herself). Bride's voice isn't cold, O-Ren's is extremely cold, she is ruthless even to herself - actually, she is the strongest enemy for the Bride.
“Where is it made?”
#3 & #6
“Swords however never get tired. I hope you've saved your energy."
#6 & #18
“I apologize for ridiculing you earlier.”
As you see, Tarantino's dialogues are technical. And when O-Ren says her last words - “That really is Hattori Hanzo's sword” - she is still emotionless and this is a callback (#6 & #12 & #18).
Even Sofie Fatale has unique voice. Like other servants, she is pathetic, cowardly and throws insults to the Bride.
That's how it works.
Anderson's quote
Return of the Jedi screenplay |
|
|
|
Post by Moonshield on Dec 4, 2020 13:31:06 GMT
PART IV. A GRACEFUL LOVE STORY
"Don't write what you think people want to read.
Find your voice and write about what's in your heart."
- Quentin Tarantino
“There's no way to write without writing from yourself.”
- George Lucas
Love stories are one of the most complex thing in writing.
Firstly, it is extremely individual.
Secondly, you cannot write anything new. Love stories exist since times of Ancient Sumer. The first love story ever written (of those that have survived) - “The Love Song of Shu-Sin” - is 4000 years old.
Also, we know very well only our own stories. That's why people write love stories from themselves since the times of Petrarca and Dante.
Four levels of writing: www.lynda.com/Writing-tutorials/rocket-science-writing/721926/745166-4.htmlIn the movies these levels can be differ. Let's consider them in this way: 1) story, 2) screenplay structure, 3) scenes, 4) dialogues. Dialogues are the least important part, but important. 1. Story. Basis. 2. Screenplay structure is three-act - typical for Star Wars. 3. Scenes. The soul of the movie. 4. Dialogues. Dialogues should work for scenes.
Story
How can the story of Skywalker parents look like? Of course, it should be poetic, old-fashioned - it is impossible to imagine modern manners in the story of the former slave and the former queen. But it should contain something familiar. Poetic, but not too poetic and a bit realistic. “You know, I think it's important to keep balance in things” - said Thomas Angelo, the main character of the great game “Mafia”.
Yeah, balance. That's the right word.
We can read about Dante and Beatrice - real love story of the great poet and his beloved. Dante has fallen in love with Beatrice - he first met her when he was only nine. According to the autobiographic “La Vita Nuova", Beatrice and Dante met only twice during their lives... it reminds something, doesn't it?
So, it turns out that Lucas was so great that he could find a very poetic and even realistic basis for his story? Yes, Padme and Anakin have met two times (before the love story) - when Anakin was almost 10 (!) and when he was 20. The Chosen One's feelings are very strong - he couldn't get her out of his head.
Their love story itself is sincere. When Anakin behaves himself like a Sith, Padme cannot bear that: “It makes me feel uncomfortable.” When he acts like a Jedi - “Don't be afraid” - she declares that she loves him. You see, how dialogues match the situation.
“With womankind, the less we love them, the easier they become to charm.” - A. Pushkin ("Eugene Onegin").
Screenplay structure
Attack of the Clones has a very clear three-act structure with one feature: it has three-act structure for the basic story of the clone wars and for the love story. Inciting incident - Obi-Wan goes to catch the murderer, Anakin and Padme go to Naboo; rising action - Kamino, Naboo fields; first culminations - Anakin's love confession, battle with Jango Fett (who turns out to be very strong); crisis - Anakin's first big trauma, Obi-Wan's failure; second culmination - Padme's love confession, reunion; falling action - battle on Geonosis. Both stories are parallel.
Scenes
Soul of the movie. Acting and changing tones.
As was said earlier, the whole love story is based on sincerity.
True love - the only way to tell this story - is always based on sincerity. Both, a man and a woman, must be ready to sacrifice everything for each other. Lies isn't allowed. The slightest insult or ridicule - and all will be ruined.
Different love stories of different people - but if it is true love, it is always based on sincerity.
The scene with Dallas and Ringo Kid from “Stagecoach” (Lucas like westerns, by the way) is based on sincerity. Ringo is a guy with law problems, Dallas is a saloon girl. But they both act like angels during the whole movie: Dallas takes care about a new-born child of an officer's wife Lucy Mallory, Ringo helps to protect they all from apaches and confronts murderers, who killed his father and brother. When Ringo talks to Dallas about his feelings, he openly talks about his trauma. Moreover, Ringo looks... awkward. It reminds something... Dallas talks about her trauma, too:
“I lost mine when I was a kid... there was a massacre in the Superstition Mountains.”
Ringo, talking about his home:
“It's a nice place. A real nice place. Trees... grass... water... a cabin half-built...”
Of course, all of it reminds the scene of Anakin and Padme on Naboo, when he kissed her first time. It is important that right tones were used in the right situation. Neither Anakin nor Padme tries to deceive or seduce each other, because true love cannot be mixed with that. Padme talks about the nature: “I love the water. We used to lie on the sand when the sun dry us...” Anakin talks about his unhappy childhood as a slave - “I don't like sand...” with subtext; his phrase connected with Padme's.
We can compare these scenes with a “mirror” - a scene with Kevin Lomax and Christabella Andreoli from “The Devil's Advocate”. Unlike Dallas, Ringo, Anakin and Padme, who act like angels, they act like demons - and they really are demons - a son and a daughter of John Milton (Satan). The scene of Anakin and Padme is based on sincerity, the scene of Kevin and Christabella is based on deception. This “mirror” witnesses that all three scenes are made in the right way, because different directors and writers thought in the right way. By the way, saloon girl as a saint (Dallas) is a common motive in different cultures - European, US, Russian or others.
When Anakin in Naboo fields talks that the dictatorship can be useful, he acts like Vader. Padme, who loves him, notices that and looks at him, scared. This is her unique trait: she cannot bare lies, or when her beloved acts like a Sith (a sort of lies). In the Episode III this trait is highlighted again: when Anakin tries to deceive her, pretending that he is happy - “Nothing. I remember when I gave this to you” - Padme says painfully: “How long is it to take for us to be honest with each other?”
In the other scene Anakin declares his love to Padme. He isn't afraid to look awkward, sacrificing his pride for Padme. His feelings are so strong that it is painful to hold them, that's why he says: “You are in my very soul, tormenting me.” and “If you suffer as much as I, please, tell me.” When he sacrifices his feelings for her, it is a very high stake - Padme's honour is not empty words for him. And that's why he can be redeemed in VI, because only that people can be redeemed, who once lived.
When Anakin talks about killed sand people, he knows that he has done the wrong thing. Padme knows it too, but, as the wise woman, she knows that she cannot judge him. Sand people were cruel from the very beginning - they shooted at 10-year-old Anakin, when he took part in the Pod Race, they killed 26 people and tortured his mother to death. “Let him shoot his troubles himself.” That's why she says: “To be angry is to be human.”
There is a short story “Hop-Frog” by Edgar Allan Poe - about an ugly jester, whose beloved Trippetta was heavily insulted by the king. Hop-Frog burned alive eight people after that: the king and his 7 ministers, who accepted the humiliation, which is a far more harsh story than Anakin's. And Trippetta didn't judge Hop-Frog or even think that he is wrong.
“The eight corpses swung in their chains, a fetid, blackened, hideous, and indistinguishable mess.”
Dialogues
We already saw several dialogues - they are technical. Many dialogues are based on subtext. Silent love confession from the lake scene is excellent. Vader's shadow is excellent. What about other dialogues? They are technical, too. When Anakin confesses that he loves Padme, he says: “You are in my very soul, tormenting me.” This is great, because true love is pain, always. A very great writer Mikhail Bulgakov in his most famous book “Master and Margarita” wrote in the same way - to show the true love through pain:
“Don't cry, Margot, don't torment me.”
When Padme declares her love, she says:
"I'm not afraid to die.
I've been dying a little bit each day since you came back into my life."
This subtext, which is revealed in her next phrase, is great. Love subtext often contains something about death. We can remember similar subtext, when Max Payne hiddenly declares his love to Mona: “Without Mona's help I'd be a dead man. Suddenly, for the first time in I don't know how long, I realized, I didn't wish to be dead.” Subtext is different - Padme means that her love hurts her, Max means that his love makes sense in his painful life, but both subtexts are related to death.
To flow very well, dialogues should contain inner rhythm and inner rhymes. We already saw inner rhymes "I've been dying... my life", but inner rhythm also exists. When Anakin meditates and Padme notices him, he says:
"Your pre-sence is soo-thing."
An amphibrach. Looks like poetry:
"Your look is like sunlight, your presence is soothing."
So, it turns out that the love story was graceful?
|
|
|
|
Post by Moonshield on Dec 17, 2020 9:47:02 GMT
PART V. WHICH DIALOGUES FLOW VERY WELL?
Dialogues have a style. Different styles are used in different movies. It's important to feel which style you should use in which movie. Every style can be realized good or not; every rule has exceptions.
It's not a secret that “Attack of the Clones” is made in old-fashioned 1930s style. We already saw that in the Part IV, comparing AOTC and Stagecoach. But there are phrases, which can be used in every movie with every style.
Such phrases can be used by different people in different times: nowadays or 100 years ago, by aristocrats or gangsters.
In this part, to verify our methods, we shall use one of the best games in existence, which is well-known by its great dialogues - “Vampire: the Masquerade - Bloodlines”.
Its dialogues can be a standard of “unique voice” technique: there are very much unique voices. LaCroix, Jack, Beckett, Jeanette, Andrei the Tzimisce, Bertram Tung, Nines, Skelter, Damsel, Pisha, Isaac Abrams, VV, Mercurio, Rosa, Mitnick, Gary Golden, Imalia and many others. Some unique voices are equivalent to other characters with similar personality and traits: for example, Strauss' voice is equivalent to Beckett and Therese's voice is equivalent to LaCroix.
Dialogues of Bloodlines contain phrases, which can be used everywhere. For example, in the beginning, when Jack teaches the main hero how to survive, and says that the Sabbat vampire is very green, the hero asks:
“What makes you think that?”
Later, talking with one of thin-bloods, Copper, the hero asks him:
“What are you talking about?”
In the second part of the game, in Downtown, Strauss says about Nines:
“He could be a powerful ally...”
“Well, that's not fair!” - cries Jeanette, complaining that her sister treatens her as a freak.
After the scout mission, LaCroix asks the main hero:
“What did you see?”
Of course, it reminds Anakin's phrase “What did you say?” from the Episode III.
There are not too many phrases like that in the movie, but enough to make dialogues more familiar to every people.
By the way, slang doesn't look good almost always. It can look good in the movies like Deadpool, but not in the Attack of the Clones, with its style. TPM, AOTC and ROTS has another style and another manners of talking.
But “universal” phrases are a very little part of the movie. What about the rest? How to make it flow very well?
Here I should say more about the inner rhymes. They are very important, and mostly, they can help to make dialogues, which flow very well. If you play “Bloodlines”, you'll see that inner rhymes and rhythm are one of the main technique to make dialogues in this game, which flow very well.
“My name is Beckett. I haven't been following you per se...” (Beckett)
“Tell me, young one, have you by chance seen or felt anything strange since your Embrace?” (Beckett)
“Goodnight, young one. And be careful, you're very likely being hunted by the Sabbat.” (Beckett)
“What do we have here? Another scrumptious young plaything straight out of life and into my club?” (Jeanette)
“What all suede kittens do - on hands and knees, you lap up the milk of me.” (Jeanette)
“Take this knife. Give the paintings in the gallery a good slashing.” (Jeanette)
“I'm just a lonely, little girl on a rainy day. Know any games we can play?” (Jeanette)
“The Sabbat... geez you are green.” (Bertram Tung)
“But the Sabbat... they're also brainless and reckless; they have a life expectancy of a vampire fruit fly.” (Bertram Tung)
“Yes I can. Just tell me when you're ready...” (Bertram Tung)
“They got you too? I've got no excuse! A Nosferatu getting caught by a bunch of humans...” (Barabus)
"Sorry, baby, I'll explain everything later.” (Mike Durbin)
“Gee, that's original.” (Gary Golden)
“Comfort... is a custom.” (Andrei)
“Oh, yes... the ”tape". Merely a test." (Andrei)
“Ah! You see the truth of things, don't you, child of Malkav. Blessed with your beastly visions, you are shown that the Sabbat are the only true heirs to the legacy of our dark father.” (Andrei)
“To gouge out the eyes of the Camarilla. The sewers are clogged with my creations. I will kill or drive the Nosferatu from their pestilent nests. Without the sewer rats to guide them, the Camarilla will be blind to the Sabbat's designs.”
Such wide palette of inner rhymes can enhance unique voices or even draw different tones in dialogue. In last phrases, Andrei's voice is more soft in the beginning and more enraged in the end. When he says about his personality, he shows only his lazy superiority, he is differ than when he shows his beast, like other Sabbat vampires. By the way, he can remind about the Emperor with his iconic phrase: “Everything that has transpired has done so accoring to my design.”
Pisha's dialogues can contain philosophy of death, because she has to eat flesh, not only to drink blood, as she herself says.
"Drinking blood to sustain your death, you're damned, yes? What if, besides the blood of the living, you have to eat pounds of their flesh to maintain this thin facade of life - what would you call it? Twice damned?"
"The thin facade of life" is a little jewel to me.
Sometimes inner rhymes can be very clear:
“That party back there, with the guy in the suit and the Magilla Gorilla - the assholes that put your sire to death? That's the Camarilla.” (Jack)
“There's my locker, sucker!” (Gangster)
The “party” about what Jack's talking, is the court, and LaCroix's speech also full of inner rhymes:
“We are here because the laws that bind our society...”
Inner rhymes can be used even in extremely brutal movies, like “Predator”:
“You are ugly motherfucker.”
By the way, we can recall a bad dialogue from the other “Predator”, which looks like a parody: “Beautiful motherfucker.”
No technique, no rhymes, wrong tones.
So, you can see that inner rhymes are used to draw the light tones or the dark tones. Let's see how George Lucas used them in the Attack of the Clones. Inner rhymes can highlight Anakin's humour:
“Oh, you know, Master, I couldn't find a speeder that I really like, with an open cockpit and right speed capabilities..."
It can highlight his feelings:
“So have you. Grown more beautiful, I mean.”
Sometimes it's clear:
“I'd much rather dream about Padme."
Or in his micro-speech:
“Easier. Jedi business, go back to your drinks.”
To highlight tones, Lucas and Hales use rhyme at the end of the line.
“Come to your senses! What do you think Padme would do was she in your position?” (Obi-Wan)
“She would do her duty.” (Anakin answers)
“I don't like this idea of hiding.” (Padme)
By the way, the same sound was used to highlight similar tones three times - Padme's anger, the Emperor's anger and Andrei's anger.
Here is another inner rhyme:
“Your mother's dead, son. Accept it.”
Simple dramatic phrase.
“Pack your things. We're leaving.” (Jango Fett)
Lucas didn't use rhymes as much as in Bloodlines. This is his handwriting: no one technique draws attention to itself. For him, the movies are complex art. But, by every method of analyze, his dialogues flow very well. Anyway, his main technique in his dialogues is the subtext, which, mostly, hits more than rhymes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on Mar 13, 2021 16:41:18 GMT
So Uncivilized has new one. More about storytelling through directing and editing than dialogue but I thought it would fit nicely here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Somny on Mar 14, 2021 0:31:18 GMT
So Uncivilized has new one. More about storytelling through directing and editing than dialogue but I thought it would fit nicely here.
Great video! Thanks so much for posting, Subtext Mining ! It reminds me of Dave Filoni's presentation at a past Celebration where he talked at-length and in-depth about the storytelling principles Lucas instilled in him and the rest of the team on TCW. Some of the same key ideas are touched upon in the So Uncivilized video.
|
|
|
|
Post by Moonshield on Mar 28, 2021 4:40:41 GMT
PART VI. WHY KASDAN CANNOT WRITE DIALOGUES
"Learning to make films is very easy.
Learning what to make films about is very hard."- George Lucas Alright, dialogues in the AOTC and TPM are technical, so what? What if every other movie is written like that and all the story is wasted? Firstly, every other great movie is written like that, but it means that Lucas's dialogues are among great dialogues, not among “usual” dialogues, mediocre dialogues or bad dialogues. Great movies contain great dialogues, in all other movies dialogues are worse. Secondly, even the great movie can contain dialogues, which are less interesting (though the movie itself is better). In general, dialogues in the PT are more technical than in ANH. Though ANH contains enough jewels like “I felt the great disturbance in the Force...” and others. For example, dialogues in “The Chronicles of Narnia” are less interesting than in TPM (because there are no unique voices and other tricks), though both movies are about kids. Dialogues in “The Terminator” are less interesting than in TPM, too, though the movie itself is better (possibly). Dialogues in “The Predator” are equal to TPM. Internet propaganda spreads the concept “Star Wars without Lucas”, you know: TESB and ROTJ have the best dialogues, because Lucas wasn't involved, Star Wars were great because of Kasdan, the perfect realization, etc. All of it is garbage. Firstly, the whole movie is based on Lucas's 2nd draft. Secondly, dialogues in TESB and ROTJ are objectively worse than in I-IV episodes. Unlike TPM with its unique voices (character traits), AOTC with its foreshadowing and ROTS with its subtext (for the intrigue), TESB doesn't contain interesting tricks at all. For example, in TPM Obi-Wan roasts everyone, but in TESB all characters (except Luke) roast each other (even Vader). The ridiculous attempt to create unique voice for Lando by one line “You look absolutely beautiful” is a failure, because this line is not need. The whole love story of Han and Leia can be described by one phrase “Han teases Leia”. Conflict dialogues look forced and worse than logical conflicts in TPM. Luke's phrase “And sacrifice Han and Leia?” instead of something like “I cannot do that” is another example of the bad dialogue (it is called “on-the-nose” dialogue). Imagine the dialogue between Padme and Obi-Wan in III, when he says “I must find him”, and she answers: “No! I love him!” instead of “I can't”. Two dialogues “You don't have to do this to impress me” and “You love me because I'm a scoundrel” kill all the intrigue. The most important quote “I am your father” belongs to Lucas. And the whole myth about Kasdan as “the greatest Star Wars writer” goes to hell. Moreover, he makes mistakes, which can be made by aspiring writers. Even in his 5th draft of TESB he didn't remove Luke's name from his dialogue: “Luke, you must not go. There is a dangerous time for you, Luke” (they were removed by Lucas). He makes the same mistakes in the ROTJ. Do you remember Yoda's speech in the ROTJ, in which he repeats Luke's name five (!!) times? Don't use character names - they kill your dialogues! The speech itself is written pretty bad and contains just a set of phrases, which aren't connected with each other. Though, Lucas was still overseeing the production and fixed flaws which he could. For instance, he added the repeat “You were right” in Vader's dying words (there is no that repeat in the screenplay). But he was very tired and couldn't avoid all flaws. For example, he could make Luke's dialogue with Vader better - instead of “The Emperor hasn't driven it from you fully” he could write “The Emperor hasn't driven it from you” or even more sharp “The Emperor hasn't destroyed it”. Don't use adverbs - they kill your dialogues! And all these flaws happened when Kasdan wrote with Lucas. When he writes without Lucas... Aside from that the whole plot of TFA just doesn't make any sense (the whole story is how to find Luke Skywalker; Luke wanted to hide, but someone has made a map; somehow the map is splitted; the First Order has a weapon 30 times more powerful that the Empire; the whole galaxy far far away doesn't give a shit about all of this; the First Order kidnaps children and still nobody cares... I have no words. Hunger Games, where all districts don't care about their children? Idiocracy? Not to mention the plagiarism. Alright, whatever...) and serious screenwriting flaws (Starkiller appears near to the end of the movie right before it was blown up, Poe is absent half of the movie), the character development in the movie is bad. For example, Finn. In the first half of the movie he is a dramatic character: refuses to shoot locals, saves Poe (for no reason - Poe killed his friend). Now the question: why in the second half of the movie he is a comic? For what have you decided to mix sugar and salt? Kylo Ren was ridiculous since the middle of the film. About Rey everything is already said. Poor Daisy. Finn's dialogues ("RRRREEEEYYYY!!!") are so dumb that it's hard to believe that someone has written that. In the dialogue after landing on the Starkiller base Solo himself points at the stupidity 2 times in a row. Moreover, the style “That's not how the Force works” looks like the internet slang. Several minutes later he has another stupid dialogue “I'm in charge, Phasma", which is repeated three (!) times. Don't use repeats - they kill your dialogues! Also, he deceived Rebels, trying to save Rey, though earlier he wanted to leave her... whatever. The dialogue itself reminds nothing except Jay and Silent Bob with its “I am the master of the ... !" Shortly, the whole movie looks like a bad comedy or parody. For what have you turned a good character into an idiot? Stupid dialogues are common in TFA. Do you remember an important moment, when Maz Kanata gives a lightsaber to Rey? “A good question... for another time.” Looks like Kasdan has never heard about interruptions, the subtext or simple explanations. “Pirates of the Caribbean” has two examples of correct dialogues. When Jack Sparrow asked Elisabeth Swan about her medallion, they were interrupted. When Will Turner asks Gibbs about Jack's escape, Jack gives a simple explanation (maybe it is a fiction, but he has it). That's how writers solve this problem, stretching important information. For some reason, Lucas knows about them, we can recall the bounty hunter in the AOTC: “It was a bounty hunter called...” and then the phrase was interrupted. As they say, Lucas cannot write dialogues... And, eventually, look at this shame. «Well, I ain't using it! FN, huh? Finn! I'm gonna call you Finn! That all right?» «Finn. Yeah, Finn! I like that!» «I'm Poe. Poe Dameron.» «Good to meet you, Poe!» «Good to meet you too, Finn!» A manual “How to kill your dialogue by character names” from Lawrence Kasdan. Names of characters are used 8 (!!) times in 5 phrases, and nobody removed a single name! That's why Poe and Finn look like stupid children, not like soldiers. If you think that Kasdan doesn't make these mistakes in his other screenplays, you're wrong. Because even his AA nominated screenplay “The Grand Canyon” contains the same mistake: www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/g/grand-canyon-script-transcript-kasdan.html“Mack, look around you.” (...) “Good night, Mack.” “Good night, Vanessa.” Again, the same two lines with a repeat and character names, which create “childish” effect. Even more ridiculous to compare all of this with Lucas. In the beginning, the dialogue of Padme and Anakin during their first meeting looked like that: Padme: “I'm glad I met you..." Anakin: “Anakin.” Padme: “Anakin.” Anakin: “Anakin Skywalker.” Padme: “Padme Naberrie.” In the movie it looks like: “I'm glad I've met you, Anakin.” “I was glad to meet you too!” Padme's name isn't used at all. That's why 10-year-old Anakin and 14-year-old Padme look more mature than Poe and Finn. Because Lucas doesn't kill his dialogues by character names. “Precision is one of the basic elements of poetry”. And it doesn't mean that character names cannot be used at all. A meaningful reason to use first names to grab attention, as pointed in Writer's relief. “Chewie, we're home.” But Kasdan often uses character names, when they're not need: «Careful, Ren.» «I'm Rey.» — «Rey» (2 times in a row) «C'mon BB-8.» — «BB-8, get off me». Lucas's dialogue: «Are you all right?» «Uh-huh». «We'd better get back to the forward command centre.» «No. No. Gather what troops you can. We've got to get to that hangar. Get a transport. Hurry!» No character names, an adverb is necessary, Padme makes a decision. Again, Kasdan's dialogues. Character names... «FINN!» - «REY!» - «FINN! Finn!» «No! Rey! No, no, no, no... REY!!!» «Poe. Poe Dameron.» ("Bond. James Bond.") «Han's right»... «Han, how?» «Rey... Rey... Rey... Rey...» …repeats... «All right. All right». «Bring it down. Bring it down.» «Same jacket.» — «No, new jacket.» ...talking aloud... «OK, stay calm, stay calm... I'm talking to myself.» …and, of course, excess adverbs: « Actually... the droid's not for sale». «Listen carefully. You do exactly as I say». «The droid's got a map that leads straight to Luke Skywalker!» The last Kasdan's screenplay is even more ridiculous. While dialogues in TFA are just bad, it seems that dialogues for «Solo» were written by guppies: «I'm gonna be a pilot» is repeated 5 or 6 times. Lucas was great in writing characters, techniques and dialogue editing, Kasdan doesn't know how to make the dialogue interesting at all and makes bloopers, which use to be made by aspiring writers. Shortly, Star Wars were great only because of Lucas.
|
|
