Woah...this is really mind blowing..not only in movies but in real life when people talk overly practical they come off as obnoxious sometimes...thank you for this
It is also true that when people talk overly analytically they sometimes come off as obnoxious, especially when the analysis is not about something of practical importance. Often in real life as in movies, TV shows, plays, and books, the best dialogue is an analytical conversation about some practical topic, such as a conversation about what the participants in the conversation think and/or feel about some event in the past, present, or future, for example.
@@Novastar.SaberCombat In addition to gaps in intelligence per se, there also can be gaps in types of intelligence such as a conversation between a highly intelligent engineer and a non-technical person with high emotional intelligence. In this case, they both may be speaking English, but they really don't speak each other's language.
I'm a writer I got a a hole boss that says thank you but in the way is sarcasm clock out for me thank you. See that's a ass whooping then the shift managers think that's the path to leadership. They repeat this sarcasm in almost every text.can you take the trash out for me thank you. When you reverse it they pull you aside and say you're being insubordinate why because you caught their shade.i once told them an empty can rattles the most and was suspended for a week. Don't like the taste don't do it we're all grown here as long as we're doing our jobs don't try to high camp because nobody owns nothing we're all representing the company and owners.until you own this bitch change your tone
This is a nice formulation. My fiction writing teacher had said, 'good dialogue needs to either advance the plot or reveal character' but then those concepts still remain mysterious to many as to how you accomplish that. This helps define and orient the differences.
Practical dialogue is typically used to advance plot, with analytical dialogue revealing character. But I think the very best dialogue does this in reverse - practical dialogue that reveals who a character is, and analytical dialogue that becomes a key event in the plot.
If the movie needs you to know that a certain character is greedy, then you write dialogue with that purpose; and if the movie needs you to know that a certain character is going to board a plane tomorrow, then you write the dialogue with that purpose.
Tarantino once said something fascinating (I'm paraphrasing): Create your characters as if they were real people in the real world, and make them speak as they would in real life. Don't make them pawns for your story.
This perfectly describes my daily challenge with relationships. 99% of the time people only want to speak superficially, i.e., practically. Whereas I prefer speaking analytically 80% - 90% of the time. I don’t just want to know what you said or did on your vacation. I want to know why you did it, what you learned from it, and how the experience changed you or altered your perception of the world. I’m looking for a connection, something that gives me a reason to emotionally share your experience with you. If you simply tell me what you did, you’re not giving me anything I can connect to, especially if I’ve never traveled. I have no way to relate to your experience to myself or to gain something from it so that I can feel grateful to you for! Why should I care? What relevance is your experience to me? It was your experience alone. to which all I can say is, "Congratulations." This is NOT me being selfish! Although 99% of people think it is. If I cannot make a connection between what happened to you on your vacation and myself I cannot use your experience to create a new connection between us, which is what relationships are supposed to be about. Mutual connections. Shared values. I am a person seeking a connection with you. I don’t want to simply hear what you are saying. I want to have a reason to make your experience mine. Which is how relationships are made and strengthened. Lacking these new connections is how old relationships wither and die. That is NOT selfish.😢 I am attempting to expand with my mind and my heart the range of experiences we share by looking for reasons to join you in your experiences. THAT is friendship. At least, that’s what friendship is to an Aspergian like me.
@@davineuskens21 Unfortunately, at least 95% of the time practical and instrumental people have no answer to an analytical question. It never occurs to them, for example, that they might have actually learned something or grown as a result of their experience. They don’t seem to see the world in that way. Perhaps these are the people who just enjoy an action adventure movie with no real point beyond catching the McGuffin.
Oh, I see. Yea, I have experience with these people too. I used to ask my mom stuff that I consider normal, and she'd be like "there you go again with your difficult questions 🙄" It's very frustrating. @@terrifictomm
@@Daniel_Bx Your projection skills are off the chain! Hilarious! “…people hate it when others nerd out because it makes them feel inadequate in their own lack of effort, excellence generates jealousy so we just put everyone down so no one ever feels bad. [Yes, you do.] Dumbest culture ever if you ask me, it's not hard to be humble or to genuinely appreciate passion.” [And yet you fail do spectacularly at it.] I’m so glad you understand me! Now turn that mirror on yourself.
@@CrazyMazapanIt helps to be able to guide people towards questions and the more analytical modes now that I can put a name to the thing that I find frustrating.
You set a new bar to what means make a film analysis. Really, I have never seeen anyone apply rethoric, figures of speech, and psychology to analyze screenplays. And your videos about what makes a good directors are also a mine of gold. Thanks you for making videos.
This analysis is absolutely brilliant. Your videos should be viewed in all film schools. I'm better equipped to enjoy films after a deep dive into film analysis.
@@piggypoo Yes! I've found it very helpful to research/discuss people before attempting to discuss their ideas. That way I get a better understanding of why they think what they think (if they think anything - some people don't). Saying that, Eleanor Roosevelt would probably have found me a small minded bore (for not agreeing with her idea of what makes an idea valuable).
Oh my word. I just realized something about myself. I had a roommate several years ago who I adore, and am still good friends with, but every time she would tell a story, I would space out at the beginning. I had to get her to repeat a bunch of stuff after the punch line. Every. Single. Time. Even though I knew from experience that her stories were almost always hilarious. Now I know it's because she's a practical conversationalist and I'm analytical. We were only friends because we ended up thrown together in various situations, and it took me a long time to connect with her. She would start her stories with a progression of events with seemingly no direction or analysis, so I would feel like she was reciting a catalog and unintentionally tune out. Thanks for the self-discovery!
Novelist James Hynes made a point which stuck with me: (paraphrased) _If you read the Watergate Transcripts you'll marvel at how even the President is incapable of having an interesting conversation._ The upshot being that 'realistic dialogue' has no place in fiction. Stylistically I like the overly-dramatised practical dialogue in Walter Hill movies like The Warriors (1979) or The Driver (1978), whereas how much I like analytical dialogue depends entirely on the quality of the dialogue, as you say it's a matter of content. I'd never considered it before watching this so a 'thought provoking' essay (as usual).
ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN is a pretty good example of how analytical dialogue can work and be dramatic despite being boring on many occasions. The air traffic controller scene in CLOSE ENCOUNTERS ot3K is 90% "shop talk" and yet it's captivating without dumbing down the language. Like I argued in my own post, exposition is an art form, like a Swiss watch and when it's done right, it's magnificent but oh my holy fucking god does it require skilled hands to pull off and you just don't find a whole lot of skilled technicians in this new generation of filmmakers, although...a handful of them with their own followings (Eggars, Aster, etc.) are starting to demonstrate that.
This topic makes me think of two observations by Hannah Arendt: 1. On the nazi war criminal Eichmann (how banal and incapable of self-reflection / analysis; only talking practicalities) he came across, basically an (in her native German language:) "Hans Wurst" (= Johnny Sausage = figuratively: a plain dumb person; either an useful idiot, or an awkward fool who considers himself to be smart but behaves cringeworthily). 2. On German intellectuals who for some reason or other sympathized with the Nazis: The problem with them was that they came up with just too much that they could think about Hitler, instead of just perceiving what he was, and failing to take what he said and did at face value: A brutish, uncouth, uneducated, opportunistic, ruthless, antisemitic simpleton with an instinct for and will to power.
If story is the anthropomorphism of philosophies and ideologies, then it follows that the conflict of those things, the subjective, not the objective, is what the piece is really about. What a great point you have made. You are right. I won't look at dialogue the same.
'Practical' vs 'Analytical' is not a binary either. Observations about reality may be 'practical', but the act of choosing specific details to point out - that's already 'analytical', and a decent writer can use that extensively. "A very small man can cast a very large shadow" for example.
@@Bigdogiswolfing 🤣 I suggest you watch the video again. He is far more eloquent at articulating a simple concept that guides a character's motivation with dialogue.
Very good breakdown on dialogue...lol just kidding, this is beyond incredible. Absolutely spot on, i'm more of an analytical person since i'm an introvert so i dnt have much experiences on many things and even the stuff i have experience in, i find so hard sharing. idk my experiences feel very personal, i am only comfortable sharing them with verry close friends and family and not even all of it lool. inception is really great example cause i'm the sorta person who loves details about things i find interesting, i love reading manuals for technical devices and things i have no interest in operating. i'm a tutorial/breakdown/history junkie on youtube too lool...i absoluely loved GoT for talking about historic events and stuff like that and in inception, them yapping on about the technicalities of that world is absolute music to my ears. i absolutely love that nolan paid great attention to revealing the practical details of that world and making that an important cinematic feature in a cinematically intriguing manner, something that has literally never been done before in that way before, imo. which is what makes movies like inception and memento so incredibly special to me, i mean truly truly one of a kind, they really do not get the writing cred they deserve because there is a dogmatic view that great writing has to skew more towards the analytical for it to be considered "great". i love the analytical stuff too but there is no way i'll consider the dialogue on inception as being kinda subpar because it didnt reveal character by having the characters be more emotionally analytical. Non analytical stuff can be high art too and inception and memento being considered amongst the greatest cinematic contributions of all time proves this without a shadow of a doubt to me.
Absolutely brilliant! Thank you. May I suggest you insert the credits in real time e.g. down in the left corner reading like "Movie title / Director / Year". The well know ones I could identify of course but some not and maybe I'd like to watch them. This kind of service would be highly appreciated. Keep up the good job.
There's a lot of overlap between this and the Myers-Briggs personality indicator dichotomy between intuition (N) and sensation (S). Interestingly enough, this aspect is arguably its main distinction from the Big Five personality traits - the most reputable personality taxonomy in academic circles. On a personal note, my two favorite examples of an analytical person clashing with a practical one are Gus McCrae and Woodrow Call, from Lonesome Dove, the best Western ever made; and Rustin Cole and Martin Hart, from the first season of True Detective.
Yes! MBTI was the major inspiration for the dichotomy. I didn’t say it in the video for pacing reasons but mentioned it in the description. I also adore Gus and Call from Lonesome Dove.
I have realized this in my writing experimentations, but you are one of very few on this website that have articulated this as concisely and _practically._
Exposition is an art form; when it's done right, it's a thing of beauty, but holy shit when it's done wrong, it's insufferable. I think the major problem is the Setting Constriction. movies are assemblages of scenes where things happen. But in real life, "scenes" can last hours on unrelated topics with no resolution until several "scenes" later and often with not the same people present. Having to constrict time & place to single locations hamper the dialogue's ability to be both clumsy and organic.
This is often what makes modern stories a bit shit, particularly something like Nu Doctor Who or something like it (whatever genre) where they will just literally "info dump" a stack of plot points in a matter of seconds to keep the audience up to date, rather than just *show* the character behaviour which will tell you exactly. There are a million movies that do this, but I can't reference any of them right now, but I will point to the Doctor Who story Pyramids of Mars from the mid 70's as an example. We get bits of dialogue telling us how bad Sutekh is but not that much. But we travel into a potential future to see what he's done and there's NOTHING LEFT. And when we meet him he's so viciously powerful that he demonstrates it and you're just like, holy fuck. It's not the Marvel Scale Of Big Special Effects, it's the execution and mainly vocal performance, (massive so called "shout out" to voice actors cos Gabriel Woolfe is bringing it with NOTHING other than voice and makes one of the most terrifying enemies the Doctor has ever faced.) Sutekh just controls people like mind controlling flies. Once you see the often infallible Tom Baker kneel to Sutekh - a guy by the way that's in fucking prison - you're like omg is the Dr actually going to win this one? Contrast that with almost any scene in Nu Who where we have overblown sequences of rapidly paced dialogue delivered a million miles an hour to try and make up for the fact that they haven't spent any time developing the character we're all supposed to be afraid of. They build up to Sutekh, by giving him small snippets of scenes, like a horror movie. Tom briefly tells us a bit of backstory, but doesn't go on too much. We're impressed cos Sutekh can control the Doctor, can stop a fucking explosion simply with his mind, and the terrifying prospect that he just finds death "good," and that he appears completely and utterly unstoppable, never mind that the actor *almost never leaves the chair the entire story.*
@@artemisvega8940 I watch a lot of reaction videos and what I notice is that modern viewers are either really good or really bad at deciphering visual clues when they watch 20th Century films. They'll notice them and use their pre-programmed analysis of tropes, but when it comes to inferring meaning from small character traits, they often miss them entirely...or have no idea what they mean. Subtlety and nuance go over their heads or confuse them generally speaking.
Those are not modern viewers in general though, reaction channels aren't aimed towards everyone and even creators tends to be of similar kind of folks as the viewers are. It's really wrong assumption to take selected and heavily segregated group and make assumptions towards overall audience. Anyone who isn't into that kind of content will bump off it really quickly and you can easily find very polarized opinions about those channels. Although I can admit that this kind of viewers is really big group to consider as well. That's actually part of the issue, older movies were aimed at different part of population compared to more modern stuff. Or rather older movies that aged well, there were bad old movies too after all but no one talk about them even if they got some traction during their releases just to be forgotten afterwards.
Good explanation for why The Sopranos is the best TV show ever made. Therapy scenes give Tony a chance to have analytical dialogues even though almost all his normal day-to-day interactions would be practical. Genius.
Re: the practical/analytical binary. - Thinking about this while listening to my friends talking, I wonder: wouldn't "joking" be a distinct category? When my friends are joking around, they often frame their speech in a practical mode, but they are being ironic, so it's not really practical, but it's not exactly analytical either in that they are not so much expressing thoughts, opinions, or feelings, but just trying to get a laugh. - What do you think?
First, the practical. I have watched two of your videos. Now, the analytical. I can't express how much I am enjoying your content. It is top quality. Did you go to film school? I love the medium as much as anyone I have met (small sample) but you have an understanding that is clearly above and beyond. Your blocking vid was amazing as well btw. Just wanted to give you a deserved compliment. I hope you continue with this topic as long as you want and when it's doe I wish you the best on whatever project you pursue. Have a great day!
Summed it up perfectly. Finally found a video essay channel with an IQ. I like to throw on the critical drinker for background noise or movie updates but he gives such a plain take on everything. I have no doubt he understands writing a bit, but moviewise is the first channel I’ve seen that consistently brings new ideas to me. Absolutely well done!
@@HellHappens the word "video essay" on RUclips got to be associated with such bland, numb or outright idiotic content that it's a real shocker to actually see something good for a change. Shame he's not getting the views he deserves
You move towards a much more intimate connection with someone in real life when you shift from purely practical language to analytical language, sharing opinions. I think this is why moments of Crisis or surprises can often build intimacy a lot more quickly than would usually happen because your opinions come to the forefront.
I do love this channel from that beautiful accent to the booming voice but the dry humour gets me every time. Dude I would so love to sink a few jars with you one day!
Your video brought to mind one of the classic examples of the hilarious comedy produced by an almost purely practical speaker and a nearly purely analytical speaker being in a relationship, namely the characters of David Puddy and Elaine Benes in the TV series Seinfeld. Here is a wonderful example of their dialogue: Elaine: Do you believe in God? David Puddy: Yeah... Elaine: Is it a problem for you that I'm not religious? David Puddy: No. Elaine: Why not? David Puddy: I'm not the one going to hell.
ur essays are so good. youre like the movie buff version of Adamsomething. and another thing, its like a film school or things that should be taught in film school
Examples of Dialogue Styles Realism (Practical): Example: "Did you see the fireworks last night? They were loud." This straightforward approach effectively conveys the message without embellishment. Analytical: Example: "You saw the fireworks last night when they went off, exploding into a brilliant display. The particles and debris sparkled momentarily before fading away. They were so loud, I think I might have gotten tinnitus from all those light explosions." This version adds layers of detail, encouraging deeper thought about the experience. Cartoony (Practical): Example: "Did you see the fireworks last night? They were loud-BOOM! BOP! BANG! The bright, shiny colors-blue, green, and yellow-were soaring across the sky!" This playful language engages the audience with exaggerated sounds and vibrant imagery. Cartoony (Analytical): Example: "Did you see those fireworks last night? They were so loud, bursting in the sky like a thousand tiny suns! They shot straight up, swirling like a tornado before bursting into a shower of brilliant colors-blue, green, and yellow-lighting up the night!" This style elaborates on the visuals and actions, painting a vivid picture that enhances the experience. Middle Ground: Example: "Did you see the fireworks last night? They were incredibly loud, exploding in the sky with bright colors like blue, green, and yellow. The bursts shot straight up before swirling and popping, lighting up the entire night. I can still hear the echoes in my ears!" This combines elements of practicality, analysis, and a touch of cartoony flair, ensuring the dialogue remains engaging without being overwhelming.
Interesting. Chuck Palahniuk talked about this exact same thing in fiction writing; he it called "Big Voice" and "Little Voice". In "Consider This", his non-fiction book/ memoir, Palahniuk gives a lot if in-depth writing advice, including setting the narrative tone. What he calls "Little Voice" is the character or story speaking purely in facts and actions, while the "Big Voice" is the narrator portentiously expressing his inner monologue/feelings/world view. Neat how you both noticed the same thing and covered it.
Stories and poems used to be the same thing, very long ago, in the times of oral traditions; and both of these were better before they were unnaturally divided. Poems are better when they have an interesting subject, such as a story, and stories are better when they have poetic devices such as motifs and metaphors. This hints at what good dialogue really is.
THank you for getting to one of the issues of Inception. people consider that movie a masterpiece but I felt it was dry with a few okay set pieces. A better film about dream worlds was "What Dreams May Come" with Robin Williams. It had the same sense of dreams revealing our personality and secrets, but all with imaginative dream world set pieces, not set pieces that were so realistic like ours. And the plot was more engaging due to the characters.
That has become my main criticism for most of Nolan's movies. Most of his characters aren't interesting on their own. He is much too focused on having a clever plot than having great characters.
00:38 "there are only two types of dialog" Are there though? What about questions and commands? Do imperative and interrogative sentences not count as dialog? Great video btw, it's just something I noticed you forgot about in the video.
Dialog is always the toughest part of my writing. My main goal is just that it not be boring. If two or more people are talking to each other it should be to achieve a goal, so the dialog should work towards that goal but without being boring or obvious. And if it's an exposition heavy scene that you can not do without, try to do it while something else far more interesting is happening; that way the audience receives the information while being captivated by the interesting thing, aka the "Pope in the pool" method.
im not a writer so im pretty new to all this dialog stuff and how it works, conversation where using analytical. showing the characters feelings and thoughts, and then being practical, talking about something thats techincally pointless like messaging womens feets, take away the bordem?
Fascinating, how divisive Inception is... :) To me, the movie is the greatest und most entertaining exposition dump movie ever. :) Because yes, exposition can be done right.
What you said from 5:50 to 6:04 i couldn't stop laughing 😆😆😆 Your accent makes it so much better. Great video 👌 it really changed the way i think of dialogue now
Don't get misleaded by the sleeping pills voice. ;)... The content is amazing !!!! Congrats. Precious and rare movie analysis to be prescribed ( not the sleeping pills though ).
The Video is great! I am learning a little more with each video (Thank you for your work and researches) :)) But i wanted to know wich movie is it at 3:25?
Thank you for enjoying the channel! And that movie is Woody Allen's "Love and Death" (1975), which is also at 10:09. That's the funniest film ever made and quite likely the film I use the most in my videos.
The superiority of analytic over practical is misguide. In taken after Liam Niasson thwarts an attack on the starlet he tells he drink some orange to help with the shock. This establish he is a professional and caring. It is much harder to show character through practical dialogue, cause practicalities tend to be quite universal (or close).
You know - I was really looking forward to this, but found your whole rap annoying to start with... But then I got into it, and found myself enjoying. Now I'm glad I watched the whole damn thing. I think I'll be watching more of your stuff in the future!
Fascinating lens to review Ahsoka through. Too much practical plot-development dialogue, leaving us knowing little or nothing about the characters and caring even less.
HA!, if you turn right at Eton college chapel, then take a left (there is only one Left before you leave Eton) you'll end up going in a big circle and ending up back on Eton high street. If you don't turn left, then you will get to Dorney common. and even then, it's only 2 miles and you will have exited the far end of the common. Thank you for reading my fact-based dullard dialogue
The only thematic dialogues I remember from Game of Thrones are 1) Cersei talking to Ned about the Game of Thrones itself, and 2) Littlefinger talking to Varys about chaos being a ladder. Well, and the thing about a king who has to say “I am the king”, I guess.
The most shocking thing about "Inception" was Dicaprio's thumb at the end. That's got to be the weirdest, longest, curliest, most alien thumb ever attached to a human hand. DiCaprio is, just generally, a freak.
4:59 Actually I‘m guessing that this is probably representative of Game of Thrones in later Seasons. At least I‘d be surprised if dialogue was this over-practical in the early seasons. Same goes for the books.
Game of Thrones deserves a little bit more credit- "someday my father will kill me" is a supposition, an important characterization of his subjective reality.
I actually said to people who were complaining about the show (once it didn't have Martin's dialogue to draw from) that television writers have conditioned themselves to follow screenwriting 101 advice; never have characters just come out and say what they think. (Subtext.) But characters in early seasons of Game of Thrones, via George RR Martin's dialogue gave direct thoughts and opinions about everything literally all of the time. I genuinely think that people didn't like those last two seasons, mostly because they are rushed. But also, all the things people complained that those characters "wouldn't do" are things they absolutely would do, but normally those characters would've explained their reasoning better, or sometimes at all. It's kind of hand-holdy to me, that people actually needed that to understand these characters after so much time, on the one hand. On the other, the characters were so good at cleverly explaining themselves for so long, it's no wonder it would feel out of character the very *minute* they stopped doing that no matter what behaviors they next engaged in.
I’m really upset. I never categorized the way I sometimes talk like this, and now I feel like I’ve been let in on a joke about myself that everyone else got but me until now.
A bit too generalised. Also, how someone talks about facts, situations, is a big part of the whole character. 'Once Upon a time there was a village, there was a boy who stole from the wealthy'. Now how someone says this dialogue will reveal their feelings, value judgments, morality and other estimations about what the boy did. The point is subtext is everywhere. Btw, great videos sir!
Dialog in ANY film is always the bane of any writer. You have to give each voice its own personality and style. You can't have two characters that are carbon copies of each other else you can't tell who's speaking. Then the dialog choices themselves...how best to speak to one another. Are they speaking TO one another or AT one another? Are they simply filling runtime with useless exposition? Are they putting things too on-the-nose because they think they were more clever than the audience and they need things explained? Does the rhythm of the exchange sound fluid and organic or does it seem contrived, and used only to push a narrative forward? Are they saying 50 words when 10-12 will suffice as easy? Are they telling instead of showing? Are they speaking about something that the audience already knows and was led on to previously? Does the dialog hold any new information or feeling? This is why dialog is so complicated in any film. There are so many facets and nuances to consider. The best bet is to make sure that you speak only when needed, that you say what needs to be said and not much else, and that it sounds organic and not contrived. Ask yourself, "Would two or more people actually speak like this to each other in the real world?" and if the answer is no, then change it or find some other way to get a point across. Especially frustrating is when writers pen their characters to speak so highbrow and use words that no human being uses in real world speak just so they can come off as clever, smart, or whatnot. There are some pompous people who use the Dictionary word of the week yes, but not all the time. Humans are very uncomplicated when it comes to speech - they want to say as much as possible with as few words as possible, and those words are as simple as possible. Brevity and being succinct is how humans interact with each other.
![Megan Thee Stallion - Roc Steady (feat. Flo Milli) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HozPPyqW0dY/mqdefault.jpg)
Woah...this is really mind blowing..not only in movies but in real life when people talk overly practical they come off as obnoxious sometimes...thank you for this
Intelligence gaps between two individuals can REALLY F up conversations. 😂 One person might as well be speaking Aramaic.
It is also true that when people talk overly analytically they sometimes come off as obnoxious, especially when the analysis is not about something of practical importance.
Often in real life as in movies, TV shows, plays, and books, the best dialogue is an analytical conversation about some practical topic, such as a conversation about what the participants in the conversation think and/or feel about some event in the past, present, or future, for example.
@@Novastar.SaberCombat In addition to gaps in intelligence per se, there also can be gaps in types of intelligence such as a conversation between a highly intelligent engineer and a non-technical person with high emotional intelligence. In this case, they both may be speaking English, but they really don't speak each other's language.
I'm a writer I got a a hole boss that says thank you but in the way is sarcasm clock out for me thank you. See that's a ass whooping then the shift managers think that's the path to leadership. They repeat this sarcasm in almost every text.can you take the trash out for me thank you. When you reverse it they pull you aside and say you're being insubordinate why because you caught their shade.i once told them an empty can rattles the most and was suspended for a week. Don't like the taste don't do it we're all grown here as long as we're doing our jobs don't try to high camp because nobody owns nothing we're all representing the company and owners.until you own this bitch change your tone
@@luminiferous1960 Emotional intelligence? You mean "social skills"?
This is a nice formulation. My fiction writing teacher had said, 'good dialogue needs to either advance the plot or reveal character' but then those concepts still remain mysterious to many as to how you accomplish that. This helps define and orient the differences.
Practical dialogue is typically used to advance plot, with analytical dialogue revealing character. But I think the very best dialogue does this in reverse - practical dialogue that reveals who a character is, and analytical dialogue that becomes a key event in the plot.
@@jeremysmith9480 I like that and your point reveals that these are intersecting concepts rather than different formulations for the same thing!
If the movie needs you to know that a certain character is greedy, then you write dialogue with that purpose; and if the movie needs you to know that a certain character is going to board a plane tomorrow, then you write the dialogue with that purpose.
Tarantino once said something fascinating (I'm paraphrasing): Create your characters as if they were real people in the real world, and make them speak as they would in real life. Don't make them pawns for your story.
This perfectly describes my daily challenge with relationships.
99% of the time people only want to speak superficially, i.e., practically. Whereas I prefer speaking analytically 80% - 90% of the time.
I don’t just want to know what you said or did on your vacation. I want to know why you did it, what you learned from it, and how the experience changed you or altered your perception of the world. I’m looking for a connection, something that gives me a reason to emotionally share your experience with you.
If you simply tell me what you did, you’re not giving me anything I can connect to, especially if I’ve never traveled. I have no way to relate to your experience to myself or to gain something from it so that I can feel grateful to you for!
Why should I care? What relevance is your experience to me? It was your experience alone. to which all I can say is, "Congratulations."
This is NOT me being selfish! Although 99% of people think it is. If I cannot make a connection between what happened to you on your vacation and myself I cannot use your experience to create a new connection between us, which is what relationships are supposed to be about. Mutual connections. Shared values.
I am a person seeking a connection with you. I don’t want to simply hear what you are saying. I want to have a reason to make your experience mine. Which is how relationships are made and strengthened. Lacking these new connections is how old relationships wither and die.
That is NOT selfish.😢
I am attempting to expand with my mind and my heart the range of experiences we share by looking for reasons to join you in your experiences.
THAT is friendship.
At least, that’s what friendship is to an Aspergian like me.
i understand what you're saying, I'm very similar. I've learned that I dont need to wait for them to say what I wanna hear, I can just ask them
@@davineuskens21
Unfortunately, at least 95% of the time practical and instrumental people have no answer to an analytical question. It never occurs to them, for example, that they might have actually learned something or grown as a result of their experience. They don’t seem to see the world in that way.
Perhaps these are the people who just enjoy an action adventure movie with no real point beyond catching the McGuffin.
Oh, I see. Yea, I have experience with these people too. I used to ask my mom stuff that I consider normal, and she'd be like "there you go again with your difficult questions 🙄" It's very frustrating. @@terrifictomm
@@Daniel_Bx
Your projection skills are off the chain! Hilarious!
“…people hate it when others nerd out because it makes them feel inadequate in their own lack of effort, excellence generates jealousy so we just put everyone down so no one ever feels bad.
[Yes, you do.]
Dumbest culture ever if you ask me, it's not hard to be humble or to genuinely appreciate passion.” [And yet you fail do spectacularly at it.]
I’m so glad you understand me!
Now turn that mirror on yourself.
This video is actually insane, not just for movies but for life. You've definitely gained a dedicated subscriber and viewer in me.
Thank you for putting this so neatly into words. It's not just in media, it's when speaking with people as well that the frustration exists.
I now realise why I'm sometimes bored to death
@@CrazyMazapanIt helps to be able to guide people towards questions and the more analytical modes now that I can put a name to the thing that I find frustrating.
Since last week I've been binging your channel and...
I'm speechless. Speechless by quality and freshness of your points. Really, amazing work
Same
You set a new bar to what means make a film analysis. Really, I have never seeen anyone apply rethoric, figures of speech, and psychology to analyze screenplays. And your videos about what makes a good directors are also a mine of gold.
Thanks you for making videos.
This analysis is absolutely brilliant. Your videos should be viewed in all film schools. I'm better equipped to enjoy films after a deep dive into film analysis.
Eleanor Roosevelt: "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people."
What about discussing Eleanor Roosevelt?
@@piggypoo Yes! I've found it very helpful to research/discuss people before attempting to discuss their ideas. That way I get a better understanding of why they think what they think (if they think anything - some people don't). Saying that, Eleanor Roosevelt would probably have found me a small minded bore (for not agreeing with her idea of what makes an idea valuable).
She prolly shoulda paid more attention to the gossip.
Oh my word. I just realized something about myself. I had a roommate several years ago who I adore, and am still good friends with, but every time she would tell a story, I would space out at the beginning. I had to get her to repeat a bunch of stuff after the punch line. Every. Single. Time. Even though I knew from experience that her stories were almost always hilarious. Now I know it's because she's a practical conversationalist and I'm analytical. We were only friends because we ended up thrown together in various situations, and it took me a long time to connect with her. She would start her stories with a progression of events with seemingly no direction or analysis, so I would feel like she was reciting a catalog and unintentionally tune out. Thanks for the self-discovery!
Novelist James Hynes made a point which stuck with me: (paraphrased) _If you read the Watergate Transcripts you'll marvel at how even the President is incapable of having an interesting conversation._ The upshot being that 'realistic dialogue' has no place in fiction. Stylistically I like the overly-dramatised practical dialogue in Walter Hill movies like The Warriors (1979) or The Driver (1978), whereas how much I like analytical dialogue depends entirely on the quality of the dialogue, as you say it's a matter of content. I'd never considered it before watching this so a 'thought provoking' essay (as usual).
13:10? 13:30? Which directors???
@@TentacleseRex I don't know and @Moviewise won't be notified of a reply to my comment 😅
@@TentacleseRex Jean-Pierre Melville and Éric Rohmer.
ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN is a pretty good example of how analytical dialogue can work and be dramatic despite being boring on many occasions. The air traffic controller scene in CLOSE ENCOUNTERS ot3K is 90% "shop talk" and yet it's captivating without dumbing down the language.
Like I argued in my own post, exposition is an art form, like a Swiss watch and when it's done right, it's magnificent but oh my holy fucking god does it require skilled hands to pull off and you just don't find a whole lot of skilled technicians in this new generation of filmmakers, although...a handful of them with their own followings (Eggars, Aster, etc.) are starting to demonstrate that.
This topic makes me think of two observations by Hannah Arendt:
1.
On the nazi war criminal Eichmann (how banal and incapable of self-reflection / analysis; only talking practicalities) he came across, basically an (in her native German language:) "Hans Wurst" (= Johnny Sausage = figuratively: a plain dumb person; either an useful idiot, or an awkward fool who considers himself to be smart but behaves cringeworthily).
2.
On German intellectuals who for some reason or other sympathized with the Nazis: The problem with them was that they came up with just too much that they could think about Hitler, instead of just perceiving what he was, and failing to take what he said and did at face value: A brutish, uncouth, uneducated, opportunistic, ruthless, antisemitic simpleton with an instinct for and will to power.
If story is the anthropomorphism of philosophies and ideologies, then it follows that the conflict of those things, the subjective, not the objective, is what the piece is really about. What a great point you have made. You are right. I won't look at dialogue the same.
You're the only RUclipsr that makes me laugh out loud multiple times per video, consistently.
Sometimes it's just the perfectly chosen clip.
'Practical' vs 'Analytical' is not a binary either.
Observations about reality may be 'practical', but the act of choosing specific details to point out - that's already 'analytical', and a decent writer can use that extensively.
"A very small man can cast a very large shadow" for example.
Your example is a metaphor, which is not practical but 100% analytical
@@fmac6441
Example is a literally true practical observation that is used as a metaphor.
He did say it's a spectrum.
Bollocks. It IS binary. That’s the point.
I just discovered this channel and I have to say, you deserve way more subs
Kick Ass, this simple elegant framing just unlocked so much for me that has been somewhat instinctual.
Thank you.
Can you explain
@@Bigdogiswolfing
Would you like a practical exposition of my understanding or an analytical deconstruction of the possibilities?
@@BuckJolicoeur both if possible
@@Bigdogiswolfing
🤣 I suggest you watch the video again. He is far more eloquent at articulating a simple concept that guides a character's motivation with dialogue.
@@BuckJolicoeur come on i want to hear your explanation
An excellent 15 minutes, superbly well spent. Thank you!
I'm sure this channel will blow up one day. Some really good content.
I know CineRanter. A fantastic Channel, as well.
Very good breakdown on dialogue...lol just kidding, this is beyond incredible. Absolutely spot on, i'm more of an analytical person since i'm an introvert so i dnt have much experiences on many things and even the stuff i have experience in, i find so hard sharing. idk my experiences feel very personal, i am only comfortable sharing them with verry close friends and family and not even all of it lool.
inception is really great example cause i'm the sorta person who loves details about things i find interesting, i love reading manuals for technical devices and things i have no interest in operating. i'm a tutorial/breakdown/history junkie on youtube too lool...i absoluely loved GoT for talking about historic events and stuff like that and in inception, them yapping on about the technicalities of that world is absolute music to my ears.
i absolutely love that nolan paid great attention to revealing the practical details of that world and making that an important cinematic feature in a cinematically intriguing manner, something that has literally never been done before in that way before, imo.
which is what makes movies like inception and memento so incredibly special to me, i mean truly truly one of a kind, they really do not get the writing cred they deserve because there is a dogmatic view that great writing has to skew more towards the analytical for it to be considered "great". i love the analytical stuff too but there is no way i'll consider the dialogue on inception as being kinda subpar because it didnt reveal character by having the characters be more emotionally analytical. Non analytical stuff can be high art too and inception and memento being considered amongst the greatest cinematic contributions of all time proves this without a shadow of a doubt to me.
Absolutely brilliant! Thank you. May I suggest you insert the credits in real time e.g. down in the left corner reading like "Movie title / Director / Year". The well know ones I could identify of course but some not and maybe I'd like to watch them. This kind of service would be highly appreciated. Keep up the good job.
There's a lot of overlap between this and the Myers-Briggs personality indicator dichotomy between intuition (N) and sensation (S). Interestingly enough, this aspect is arguably its main distinction from the Big Five personality traits - the most reputable personality taxonomy in academic circles.
On a personal note, my two favorite examples of an analytical person clashing with a practical one are Gus McCrae and Woodrow Call, from Lonesome Dove, the best Western ever made; and Rustin Cole and Martin Hart, from the first season of True Detective.
Yes! MBTI was the major inspiration for the dichotomy. I didn’t say it in the video for pacing reasons but mentioned it in the description. I also adore Gus and Call from Lonesome Dove.
I have realized this in my writing experimentations, but you are one of very few on this website that have articulated this as concisely and _practically._
These videos are going to help me write an excellent script. I'm certain of it. Thank you.
Exposition is an art form; when it's done right, it's a thing of beauty, but holy shit when it's done wrong, it's insufferable. I think the major problem is the Setting Constriction. movies are assemblages of scenes where things happen. But in real life, "scenes" can last hours on unrelated topics with no resolution until several "scenes" later and often with not the same people present. Having to constrict time & place to single locations hamper the dialogue's ability to be both clumsy and organic.
This is often what makes modern stories a bit shit, particularly something like Nu Doctor Who or something like it (whatever genre) where they will just literally "info dump" a stack of plot points in a matter of seconds to keep the audience up to date, rather than just *show* the character behaviour which will tell you exactly. There are a million movies that do this, but I can't reference any of them right now, but I will point to the Doctor Who story Pyramids of Mars from the mid 70's as an example. We get bits of dialogue telling us how bad Sutekh is but not that much. But we travel into a potential future to see what he's done and there's NOTHING LEFT. And when we meet him he's so viciously powerful that he demonstrates it and you're just like, holy fuck. It's not the Marvel Scale Of Big Special Effects, it's the execution and mainly vocal performance, (massive so called "shout out" to voice actors cos Gabriel Woolfe is bringing it with NOTHING other than voice and makes one of the most terrifying enemies the Doctor has ever faced.) Sutekh just controls people like mind controlling flies. Once you see the often infallible Tom Baker kneel to Sutekh - a guy by the way that's in fucking prison - you're like omg is the Dr actually going to win this one? Contrast that with almost any scene in Nu Who where we have overblown sequences of rapidly paced dialogue delivered a million miles an hour to try and make up for the fact that they haven't spent any time developing the character we're all supposed to be afraid of. They build up to Sutekh, by giving him small snippets of scenes, like a horror movie. Tom briefly tells us a bit of backstory, but doesn't go on too much. We're impressed cos Sutekh can control the Doctor, can stop a fucking explosion simply with his mind, and the terrifying prospect that he just finds death "good," and that he appears completely and utterly unstoppable, never mind that the actor *almost never leaves the chair the entire story.*
@@artemisvega8940 I watch a lot of reaction videos and what I notice is that modern viewers are either really good or really bad at deciphering visual clues when they watch 20th Century films. They'll notice them and use their pre-programmed analysis of tropes, but when it comes to inferring meaning from small character traits, they often miss them entirely...or have no idea what they mean. Subtlety and nuance go over their heads or confuse them generally speaking.
Those are not modern viewers in general though, reaction channels aren't aimed towards everyone and even creators tends to be of similar kind of folks as the viewers are.
It's really wrong assumption to take selected and heavily segregated group and make assumptions towards overall audience. Anyone who isn't into that kind of content will bump off it really quickly and you can easily find very polarized opinions about those channels. Although I can admit that this kind of viewers is really big group to consider as well. That's actually part of the issue, older movies were aimed at different part of population compared to more modern stuff. Or rather older movies that aged well, there were bad old movies too after all but no one talk about them even if they got some traction during their releases just to be forgotten afterwards.
Good explanation for why The Sopranos is the best TV show ever made. Therapy scenes give Tony a chance to have analytical dialogues even though almost all his normal day-to-day interactions would be practical. Genius.
you're right; this video has actually changed the way I now see dialogue. Impressive! Thank you
Re: the practical/analytical binary.
- Thinking about this while listening to my friends talking, I wonder: wouldn't "joking" be a distinct category? When my friends are joking around, they often frame their speech in a practical mode, but they are being ironic, so it's not really practical, but it's not exactly analytical either in that they are not so much expressing thoughts, opinions, or feelings, but just trying to get a laugh.
- What do you think?
First, the practical. I have watched two of your videos. Now, the analytical. I can't express how much I am enjoying your content. It is top quality. Did you go to film school? I love the medium as much as anyone I have met (small sample) but you have an understanding that is clearly above and beyond. Your blocking vid was amazing as well btw. Just wanted to give you a deserved compliment. I hope you continue with this topic as long as you want and when it's doe I wish you the best on whatever project you pursue. Have a great day!
Summed it up perfectly. Finally found a video essay channel with an IQ. I like to throw on the critical drinker for background noise or movie updates but he gives such a plain take on everything. I have no doubt he understands writing a bit, but moviewise is the first channel I’ve seen that consistently brings new ideas to me. Absolutely well done!
@@HellHappens the word "video essay" on RUclips got to be associated with such bland, numb or outright idiotic content that it's a real shocker to actually see something good for a change. Shame he's not getting the views he deserves
@@czwarty7878 he’s not getting the views YET. Moviewise is one of the best channels to actually learn more about cinema he’ll carve out his niche
You are phenomenal (practical). You are phenomenal (analytical).
I am so happy to have found this channel. So many movies today are so bad and I cant even articualte how. Thanks so saying something I could not.
You move towards a much more intimate connection with someone in real life when you shift from purely practical language to analytical language, sharing opinions. I think this is why moments of Crisis or surprises can often build intimacy a lot more quickly than would usually happen because your opinions come to the forefront.
I do love this channel from that beautiful accent to the booming voice but the dry humour gets me every time. Dude I would so love to sink a few jars with you one day!
love your commitment you’re a pro!
Great video and examples. I learned a lot about how to better my own dialogue.
Your video brought to mind one of the classic examples of the hilarious comedy produced by an almost purely practical speaker and a nearly purely analytical speaker being in a relationship, namely the characters of David Puddy and Elaine Benes in the TV series Seinfeld.
Here is a wonderful example of their dialogue:
Elaine: Do you believe in God?
David Puddy: Yeah...
Elaine: Is it a problem for you that I'm not religious?
David Puddy: No.
Elaine: Why not?
David Puddy: I'm not the one going to hell.
This went really over my head the first time, but it felt important so i watched it again and took notes and now my mind is blown
ur essays are so good. youre like the movie buff version of Adamsomething. and another thing, its like a film school or things that should be taught in film school
My man, your voice is channelling Yul Brynner, Ten Commandments style. Epic!
Examples of Dialogue Styles
Realism (Practical):
Example: "Did you see the fireworks last night? They were loud."
This straightforward approach effectively conveys the message without embellishment.
Analytical:
Example: "You saw the fireworks last night when they went off, exploding into a brilliant display. The particles and debris sparkled momentarily before fading away. They were so loud, I think I might have gotten tinnitus from all those light explosions."
This version adds layers of detail, encouraging deeper thought about the experience.
Cartoony (Practical):
Example: "Did you see the fireworks last night? They were loud-BOOM! BOP! BANG! The bright, shiny colors-blue, green, and yellow-were soaring across the sky!"
This playful language engages the audience with exaggerated sounds and vibrant imagery.
Cartoony (Analytical):
Example: "Did you see those fireworks last night? They were so loud, bursting in the sky like a thousand tiny suns! They shot straight up, swirling like a tornado before bursting into a shower of brilliant colors-blue, green, and yellow-lighting up the night!"
This style elaborates on the visuals and actions, painting a vivid picture that enhances the experience.
Middle Ground:
Example: "Did you see the fireworks last night? They were incredibly loud, exploding in the sky with bright colors like blue, green, and yellow. The bursts shot straight up before swirling and popping, lighting up the entire night. I can still hear the echoes in my ears!"
This combines elements of practicality, analysis, and a touch of cartoony flair, ensuring the dialogue remains engaging without being overwhelming.
God bless you! brilliant mind, brilliant channel - keep it going!
Oh my God, I think you've just blown my mind 🤯
Interesting. Chuck Palahniuk talked about this exact same thing in fiction writing; he it called "Big Voice" and "Little Voice". In "Consider This", his non-fiction book/ memoir, Palahniuk gives a lot if in-depth writing advice, including setting the narrative tone. What he calls "Little Voice" is the character or story speaking purely in facts and actions, while the "Big Voice" is the narrator portentiously expressing his inner monologue/feelings/world view. Neat how you both noticed the same thing and covered it.
Stories and poems used to be the same thing, very long ago, in the times of oral traditions; and both of these were better before they were unnaturally divided. Poems are better when they have an interesting subject, such as a story, and stories are better when they have poetic devices such as motifs and metaphors. This hints at what good dialogue really is.
THank you for getting to one of the issues of Inception.
people consider that movie a masterpiece but I felt it was dry with a few okay set pieces.
A better film about dream worlds was "What Dreams May Come" with Robin Williams. It had the same sense of dreams revealing our personality and secrets, but all with imaginative dream world set pieces, not set pieces that were so realistic like ours. And the plot was more engaging due to the characters.
That has become my main criticism for most of Nolan's movies. Most of his characters aren't interesting on their own. He is much too focused on having a clever plot than having great characters.
Your videos are really great...nobody taught us these in film school....thank you 🙏
Love your channel!
Thank you for this frame of insight.
Wow, this is brilliant! Thank you so much!
It would be great if you included the list of clips you used in this video
Thank you for this mind-expanding video. So well put together as well! 🙏
In Anakin’s defense, SAND people tortured and murdered his Mother…
But that happened after he said all that.
@@VicenteTorresAliasVits He was having nightmare Force visions prior…
LMAO! I never saw that Anakin Skywalker clip with the sand discussion. I can't believe that's real movie dialog.
There is plenty more of that kind of dialogue in the movie. I couldn't believe my ears.
00:38 "there are only two types of dialog"
Are there though? What about questions and commands? Do imperative and interrogative sentences not count as dialog? Great video btw, it's just something I noticed you forgot about in the video.
Excellent video, thank you :)
Dialog is always the toughest part of my writing. My main goal is just that it not be boring. If two or more people are talking to each other it should be to achieve a goal, so the dialog should work towards that goal but without being boring or obvious. And if it's an exposition heavy scene that you can not do without, try to do it while something else far more interesting is happening; that way the audience receives the information while being captivated by the interesting thing, aka the "Pope in the pool" method.
im not a writer so im pretty new to all this dialog stuff and how it works, conversation where using analytical. showing the characters feelings and thoughts, and then being practical, talking about something thats techincally pointless like messaging womens feets, take away the bordem?
Great vid! 🎉
Fascinating, how divisive Inception is... :)
To me, the movie is the greatest und most entertaining exposition dump movie ever. :)
Because yes, exposition can be done right.
Great video, really appreciate work went into. Well done
Thanks man, that was a lot of help.
What you said from 5:50 to 6:04 i couldn't stop laughing 😆😆😆
Your accent makes it so much better.
Great video 👌 it really changed the way i think of dialogue now
Great, cogent video. We all leveled up.
Objectivity vs subjectivity
Fact vs opinion
Report vs editorial
Don't get misleaded by the sleeping pills voice. ;)... The content is amazing !!!! Congrats. Precious and rare movie analysis to be prescribed ( not the sleeping pills though ).
Thanks. This video is right on time!
In Russia, practical dialog write you.
Another masterwork 👏
thank you dude....wonderful video!
The Video is great! I am learning a little more with each video (Thank you for your work and researches) :))
But i wanted to know wich movie is it at 3:25?
Thank you for enjoying the channel! And that movie is Woody Allen's "Love and Death" (1975), which is also at 10:09. That's the funniest film ever made and quite likely the film I use the most in my videos.
I highly recommend watching Scent of a Woman. Specifically the scene where Al Pacino represents the main character in the school
Laboriously stated, but... well-stated. 💪😎✌️
The superiority of analytic over practical is misguide. In taken after Liam Niasson thwarts an attack on the starlet he tells he drink some orange to help with the shock. This establish he is a professional and caring. It is much harder to show character through practical dialogue, cause practicalities tend to be quite universal (or close).
He talks about it not being a hard and fast rule in the video and gives his own examples that break the rule too.
Dude what an amazing video. Utterly hilarious too. Those edit and music choices were so funny.
You know - I was really looking forward to this, but found your whole rap annoying to start with... But then I got into it, and found myself enjoying. Now I'm glad I watched the whole damn thing. I think I'll be watching more of your stuff in the future!
This was awesome. Maybe we all fall somewhere into that spectrum as people too
This is the most useful video I ever seen
I was waiting for you to mention Nolan, but I guess the GoT part pretty much covered it!
Like how this doesn't have a million views???
Fascinating lens to review Ahsoka through. Too much practical plot-development dialogue, leaving us knowing little or nothing about the characters and caring even less.
HA!, if you turn right at Eton college chapel, then take a left (there is only one Left before you leave Eton) you'll end up going in a big circle and ending up back on Eton high street. If you don't turn left, then you will get to Dorney common. and even then, it's only 2 miles and you will have exited the far end of the common.
Thank you for reading my fact-based dullard dialogue
The only thematic dialogues I remember from Game of Thrones are 1) Cersei talking to Ned about the Game of Thrones itself, and 2) Littlefinger talking to Varys about chaos being a ladder. Well, and the thing about a king who has to say “I am the king”, I guess.
woah, dude, how did i not know about your channel all this while. ..
I watched this video. It's about dialogue. I learned a lot and I'll write for Disney one day.
The most shocking thing about "Inception" was Dicaprio's thumb at the end. That's got to be the weirdest, longest, curliest, most alien thumb ever attached to a human hand. DiCaprio is, just generally, a freak.
I went into this thinking it was going to suck.
I love it. everything's beautiful now, like butter in a frying pan
4:59 Actually I‘m guessing that this is probably representative of Game of Thrones in later Seasons. At least I‘d be surprised if dialogue was this over-practical in the early seasons. Same goes for the books.
Game of Thrones deserves a little bit more credit- "someday my father will kill me" is a supposition, an important characterization of his subjective reality.
I actually said to people who were complaining about the show (once it didn't have Martin's dialogue to draw from) that television writers have conditioned themselves to follow screenwriting 101 advice; never have characters just come out and say what they think. (Subtext.) But characters in early seasons of Game of Thrones, via George RR Martin's dialogue gave direct thoughts and opinions about everything literally all of the time. I genuinely think that people didn't like those last two seasons, mostly because they are rushed. But also, all the things people complained that those characters "wouldn't do" are things they absolutely would do, but normally those characters would've explained their reasoning better, or sometimes at all.
It's kind of hand-holdy to me, that people actually needed that to understand these characters after so much time, on the one hand. On the other, the characters were so good at cleverly explaining themselves for so long, it's no wonder it would feel out of character the very *minute* they stopped doing that no matter what behaviors they next engaged in.
@@futurestoryteller When you don't have a plan, it's impossible to write your characters to be anticipating events.
I’m really upset. I never categorized the way I sometimes talk like this, and now I feel like I’ve been let in on a joke about myself that everyone else got but me until now.
13:06 What ever happened to Gary Cooper? The strong silent type
Thats crazy I was just watching that episode of friends today laughing a bit too hard at ross
Joke’s on you, Moviewise, I only hear dialogue through the upper folds of my seventh throat-pouch. You only hear dialogue with your ears.
Everything okay at home?
@@Moviewise Other than my sense of humor, yes.
A bit too generalised. Also, how someone talks about facts, situations, is a big part of the whole character. 'Once Upon a time there was a village, there was a boy who stole from the wealthy'. Now how someone says this dialogue will reveal their feelings, value judgments, morality and other estimations about what the boy did. The point is subtext is everywhere. Btw, great videos sir!
You just earned a sub
I think you just explained why I don’t necessarily appreciate Michael Mann’s dialogue
That was great.
A cascade of analytical would be nolan's batman trilogy
This is gold...
What's the movie at 2:02? (Or an actor's name and I can search from that.) Thanks.
That’s Green Book
@@Moviewise Thank you. Never heard of it but the two scenes in the video have me interested.
Dude. This is The Channel.
Amazing
Dialog in ANY film is always the bane of any writer. You have to give each voice its own personality and style. You can't have two characters that are carbon copies of each other else you can't tell who's speaking. Then the dialog choices themselves...how best to speak to one another. Are they speaking TO one another or AT one another? Are they simply filling runtime with useless exposition? Are they putting things too on-the-nose because they think they were more clever than the audience and they need things explained? Does the rhythm of the exchange sound fluid and organic or does it seem contrived, and used only to push a narrative forward? Are they saying 50 words when 10-12 will suffice as easy? Are they telling instead of showing? Are they speaking about something that the audience already knows and was led on to previously? Does the dialog hold any new information or feeling?
This is why dialog is so complicated in any film. There are so many facets and nuances to consider. The best bet is to make sure that you speak only when needed, that you say what needs to be said and not much else, and that it sounds organic and not contrived. Ask yourself, "Would two or more people actually speak like this to each other in the real world?" and if the answer is no, then change it or find some other way to get a point across. Especially frustrating is when writers pen their characters to speak so highbrow and use words that no human being uses in real world speak just so they can come off as clever, smart, or whatnot. There are some pompous people who use the Dictionary word of the week yes, but not all the time. Humans are very uncomplicated when it comes to speech - they want to say as much as possible with as few words as possible, and those words are as simple as possible. Brevity and being succinct is how humans interact with each other.