Tips for making 2 people sitting down interesting

C

c.g._eads

Veteran
I have a few scenes in my film where it's just two people sitting down at a table across from each other talking. Everybody does. How do you keep these scenes interesting? What tips can you give so that they don't look amateurish. I was watching this scene here from another member:

http://www.jamescarveronline.com/video/the_hit/scene3.html

...(who stated that this is his first time, so I'm sure he'd like some feedback too) and I was reminded just how bad these scenes can go. I mean you can talk about the lighting, which isn't great, but I don't think that's the main reason this scene doesn't work. They're not right up against a wall - a mistake a lot of first timers make. You do cut into coverage - a lot of first-timers don't. The sound isn't great. I think that hurts it. But what else is keeping this from feeling like a real movie scene? Is it just the acting?

Thanks,
C.G.
 
I would find a movie with a similar scene, and use it as a guide. Maybe a few close ups, couple of extreme close ups, shot of the guys from the top, maybe a tapping finger, typing something on keyboard, writhing something down, etc..
 
I think a lot of it is going to depend on the feel you want to get. I am going to go off the example you put up in your post.

I think there should have been tighter shots. You want emotion then get in there. I also think it would have played off better if it was shot handheld and at a lower angle. Especially the guy on the right who is trying to take control (I see a lot of his forehead). I don't want to be looking down at him I want to be looking up because he has the more powerful character. It wouldn't hurt to have more cuts in it as well. Build up some of the tension a little. And if you have to budget then get that wide camera on a dolly or something. I think static shots can kill a lot of emotion, especially when they are that wide.

And the lighting is bad!
 
Last edited:
wow, that's the exact advice i gave. Maybe i know more than I think i do. what about lighting? Composition? What if this was two friends reminiscing instead of talking about murder? Now it doesn't warrant so much going in close. What do I do now?
 
What immediately stood out to me was that it was shot very wide angle and from a high camera position. To me those are classic mistakes of amatuer filmmakers (mistakes I have made many a time).

Even for medium and wide shots, back the camera up and zoom in so you don't get the super-wide barrell distorted quality to it.

The camera should really be level and down at the level of the characters.

Always go a little tighter than your instincts tell you, get right in there. DV doesn't hold up well in wide shots, but looks great tight.

I didn't see any real close-ups or over-the-shoudler shots that would be typical of a Hollywood film.

Many directors would have done this on a dolly a lot of the time, just a very slow creeping dolly to give some dimension to the scene, and at the right time a dolly in to emphasise an emotion.
 
..and then have them explode.

Sorry couldn't resist. Ignore me. (Michael Bay humor)
 
Check out 'Fight Club' there is a long conversation between Ed Norton and Brad Pitt. Look at the way it is cut along with the shot selection.
 
I agree with a lot of the above, an extra tip I can give, don't use zooms, it looks amateuristic. And if you get the feeling your scene really goes dead, let your characters do something besides just sitting, have one walking around, have him look for a sigaret...
 
Tips for making 2 people sitting down interesting

That's just it

There isn't anything remotely interesting about 2 people sitting down.

Script script script

don't use zooms, it looks amateuristic.
Click to expand...

I hear this fable often

The zoom in/out has every place in film langauge as the static shot. Munich and The Departed are full of Zoom in/outs. Someone call Steve and Marty and tell that shite looks amatuer.

-

Tell us a bit about the script ? Or scene and maybe we can help
 
when i was at a youth conference last year they showed a video interview. and here is what they did. they had him sitting in this big room with like a kind of industrial background. just like dirty painted kind of walls and stuff. but here was the difference. every so often they would cut to like a shoot way behiend the camera showing the lighting and mic etc. and it would zoom in and out focus would go all over the place. also they would cut to like a candel or some books with the same effects. they cut aways also had grain added. i thought that it looked really cool. just my 2 cents.

Jacob
 
Sad Max said:
Can't.

Restraining order, and all.
Click to expand...

:D


All things being equal; good story, good plot ...

I have been preferring shooting from below the eyeline; it brings an intimacy to a conversation.

But what if we want to feel removed ? Scorsese sits on De Niro and Liotta forever as he does a slow dollypush no one even realizes is happening; De Palma and Tarantino like keeping us at a distance at times often during conversations; leaving us out in the hallway to watch the dialogue

-

Context

-

As far as that example goes; ouch. That person does know the tripod is adjustable doesn't he ?

:evil:
 
Twenty-something "finding yourself" movie, a la Garden State.

Scene: David, the main character, has just shown up on his friend, Mark's steps, who he hasn't seen for seven years. We cut to the two inside, at the breakfast table. Mark, a little bit wacky, is eating Raisan Bran. There are a lot of awkward pauses because David hasn't made any attempt to contact Mark during that time.

I wanted them sitting because I wanted them to have to look at each other. Or (in David's case) avoid looking at each other. Kind of like a little standoff.

Now the problem with movies like these, is they can take themselves too seriously and these moments (especially with two people sitting opposite each other) can be boring as hell. But that doesn't mean I can speed through the scene. I still have to give it the weight it deserves.

Oh hell, I'll just give you the scene. Here it is:


INT. APARTMENT . BREAKFAST TABLE . DAY

A small table. Fishbowl in the middle. Mark is eating cereal on our right. David is on the left. Mark takes a sip of beer from a bottle.

MARK
(looks up)
Five years. Five ****ing years. Can you believe it? No. Me neither. Time sure does fly. I hate that phrase by the way. Don’t you hate that phrase?

DAVID
Yeah.

MARK
Me too.
(beat)
But time sure does fly.
(beat)
I’m never drinking again.

He takes another sip of beer. Mark notices David eyeing his cereal.

MARK
Oh **** I’m sorry, did you want some cereal? Cause I don’t have any clean bowls but what I usually do if it’s the last one is I just pour the milk right in the box, you know cause it’s like... it’ll drip some but I don’t mind so... go ahead.

He slides the milk forward, shakes the box.

MARK
Seriously.

DAVID
(smiling)
It’s all right.

Mark shrugs and takes another bite. David looks around.

DAVID
Where’s Trey?

Mark stops smiling.

MARK
Trey doesn’t live here anymore. He uh... left town.

DAVID
Left town? I thought he was writing.

MARK
Trey hasn’t written in years, Pose. You’d probably know that if you called every once in awhile.

Beat. Awkward silence between the two.

MARK
It was good. He wasn’t happy.

Beat. David looks around. On the walls are photographs Mark has taken of himself.

DAVID
How ‘bout you? How’s the photography coming?

MARK
(shrugs)
Whatever.
(beat)
**** me, man. I want to know about you. What the hell are you doing in California?

DAVID
(deep pause)
You remember Anna right?

Mark chews a little SLOWER.

MARK
Of course. She broke up with you, what, seven years ago?

DAVID
Six and a half.

David takes a deep breath and begins to nod his head nervously.

DAVID
I came here to find her.

MARK
(hesitates)
You came here to find Anna?
(stumped)
Why?

David says the line with such confidence he almost sounds proud.

DAVID
Because I’m still in love with her.

Mark starts COUGHING HYSTERICALLY. David reaches for him.

DAVID
Are you okay? Are you okay?

MARK
(between coughs)
Yeah. I’m fine. Fine.

After a moment in which David seriously considers calling an ambulance, Mark clears his throat.

MARK
Okay, now let’s try that again. You drove 3000 miles to find a girl you haven’t seen in seven years?

DAVID
Six and a half. She lives in San Francisco. I’ve got her address and everything. I just figured I’d drop by and surprise you guys first.

Mark offers a horrified stare.

DAVID
Surprise.
 
You know what I like about it is that each character has something to play with: beer bottle and eatign cereal. With good actors, it could be interesting. I can see the opening shot as a Napolean Dynamite-esque iconic square-framed shot from the side with the guys at opposite ends of the table. After that, close-ups from one ow two angles and drop back to a medium shot when you need to swtich to a differnt beat.

Yeh, but it would be interesting for the beer guy to get up at some point, possibly out of frustration, and go lean up against a sink or counter, so you can switch up to a new 180 degree line and get some new angles.
 
John_Hudson said:
The zoom in/out has every place in film langauge as the static shot. Munich and The Departed are full of Zoom in/outs. Someone call Steve and Marty and tell that shi*e looks amatuer.
Click to expand...

They do, but they use it in a totally different way, they either use real quick short zooms, or they just dolly in... In the scene in this thread there is a zoom that does really look amateur. I would just suggest that as long as you dont know how to use a zoom, just dont...
 
Joshua Provost said:
I can see the opening shot as a Napolean Dynamite-esque iconic square-framed shot from the side with the guys at opposite ends of the table.
Click to expand...

That's what I was thinking. However, done in the wrong way, it can just look plain boring (see the original movie I linked to in this post). That's what I'm afraid of. I guess I'm not quite sure how to pull off this shot (it seems simple, but I don't think it is).
 
Requiem for A Dream has a pretty good one on one conversation at a table (the one between the son and mom). I think it's a dolly and/or jib shot on each character.

But the dialogue you have isn't that uninteresting to warrant anything drastic. You could simply cut to closeups to the cereal box being shook, sipping of the beer bottle, photographs on the wall, a hand to the mouth as he coughs up a storm, etc. You could even pan along the photographs while they talk.

To me, this conversation will only be boring if you only do a two shot and that's it. Any thing else and I'd be interested but do too much and it might distract from the conversation.
 
Fredric said:
They do, but they use it in a totally different way, they either use real quick short zooms, or they just dolly in... In the scene in this thread there is a zoom that does really look amateur. I would just suggest that as long as you dont know how to use a zoom, just dont...
Click to expand...

Ummmmmmmmmmmm

No.

They use slow zooms like their going out of style; Scorsese, Spielberg (Munich), De Palma, Tarantino are all frequent users of the slow zoom.

I'd suggest before using any camera shot or technique; one has motivation for using it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top