Daily Dialogue — June 9, 2015

Robert McKee: [Audience applause] OK, thank-you, thank-you. We have a long three days ahead. Years from now you’ll be standing around in a posh cocktail party congratulating yourself on how you spent an entire weekend locked in a room with an asshole from Hollywood for your art.
Charlie Kaufman: [voice-over] I am pathetic, I am a loser…
Robert McKee: So what is the substance of writing?
Charlie Kaufman: [voice-over] I have failed, I am panicked. I’ve sold out, I am worthless, I… What the fuck am I doing here? What the fuck am I doing here? Fuck. It is my weakness, my ultimate lack of conviction that brings me here. Easy answers, rules to shortcut yourself to success. And here I am because my jaunt into the abyss brought me nothing…well, isn’t that just a risk one takes for attempting something new? I should leave here right now. I’ll start over. I need to face this project head on and…
Robert McKee: …and God help you if you use voice-over in your work, my friends. God help you. That’s flaccid, sloppy writing. Any idiot can write voice-over narration to explain the thoughts of a character.

— Adaptation. (2002), screenplay by Charlie Kaufman and Donald Kaufman, book by Susan Orlean

The Daily Dialogue theme for the week: Voice-Over Narration. Today’s suggestion by James Schramm.

Trivia: In his renowned screenwriters seminars, Robert McKee now makes note that he is not against the use of voice-over narration, “despite what Charlie Kaufman says.” His point is voice-over narration must add to the story, not describe what’s already being seen on the screen, otherwise there’s no reason for it.

Dialogue On Dialogue: Commentary by James: “A brilliant movie filled with voice-over that perfectly conveys the inner thoughts of every person who has ever tried to write a screenplay.”

Comment Archive