Some Dialogue just pulls me out...

Jon Starr

Jon Starr

Veteran
I'm not sure if I'm the only one, but does anyone else find it frustrating when they hear dialogue in a movie or a TV show that is obviously needed, but also obviously placed and unrealistic?

Take CSI for example. They are all experienced scientists and cops, with degrees coming out of the wahooha. However despite this, they still explain to each other how they do their work.

"Oh, using the so and so technique I see."
"Yes. Using the bullets velocity I'm able to find where the projectile hit the subject."
"Yeah I know. And then you use the sight to figure out the direction so that the finger prints can be lifted with the yardi hardi gel"
"exactly"

Rather than:

"Oh, using the so and so technique I see."
"Yup"

 And then there are phone calls. They have a one way convo that seems to repeat questions even though you wouldn't do that in real life.

"Yes honey I let the cat out. No honey I'm not constipated. I know honey, I'll pick up the kids."
Rather than:

"Yes Honey. No. I know, I'll pick them up."

 Or how about the fact that they use someone's name over and over and over again.

"Hi steve."
"Hi Sandy."
"How are you doing, Steve?"
"I'm doing fine Sandy."
"That's good Steve."
"I know Sandy."

I mean in almost all cases, unless it's a hello, I won't use someone's name in the sentence for a convo.


I know this dialogue is needed for the audience to let them know the name of the character, or understand what's going on, but doesn't it just frustrate you and pull you out of the film/tv show? Or is it just me?
 
Mastering subtext is one of the most difficult parts of writing screenplays. Doing it in 4 12 minute acts is even tougher. Conversations like the ones you describe are a rather tedious task. They have to make it seem as natural as possible and still let the viwer in on what's going on.

Real conversations are like this:

"You get it?"

"Yeah"

"Cool"

But without the details of the backstory and some visual cues we have no idea what that means. SOmetimes the format demands you cut some corners. I'm not saying that it can't be improved upon, or that I disagree with you though.

It's kind of like unmotivated hairlights. Yeah, it isn't like real life, but it's part of the deal.
 
A lot of times it's the producers that come in and demand those kinds of additions to the writing because they're afraid the audience is too dumb to get it otherwise
 
i dont ever think ive been Into a CSI show to be pulled out by its horriblness. William Petersen rules, not in that show though.

lol
 
I'm watching CSI right now ... and yeah, they do use poor subtext a lot.

However the one absolutely worst thing that a character can say on CSI - or any show/film for that matter - is while looking at a security camera video: "Can you zoom in and enhance that please?"


- Mikko ... wants a 4K security camera with wavelet-compression recording to VHS tape.
 
And to be fair; to a degree they do, and it's not *that* bad (one of my favorite shows actually) it's understandable that it's necessary, and if you are watching in a group, it's fun to spell it out amongst your selves with the characters.

- Mikko
 
Jon Starr said:
And then there are phone calls. They have a one way convo that seems to repeat questions even though you wouldn't do that in real life.
Click to expand...

What gets me about phone calls in tv and film is not what they do say but what they dont. They never say, "bye". The conversation always trails off to a fairly final point until somebody just hangs up.

"I cant believe you told Bob"
"I'm sorry it slipped"
"But now thats going to ruin my reputation."
*click*
END OF SCENE.
 
rlm7189 said:
What gets me about phone calls in tv and film is not what they do say but what they dont. They never say, "bye". The conversation always trails off to a fairly final point until somebody just hangs up.

"I cant believe you told Bob"
"I'm sorry it slipped"
"But now thats going to ruin my reputation."
*click*
END OF SCENE.
Click to expand...

Well it gives a nice dramatic ending. ;)

That's true. I never noticed that. I suppose it's because saying "bye" can slow down a conversation?
 
mikkowilson said:
However the one absolutely worst thing that a character can say on CSI - or any show/film for that matter - is while looking at a security camera video: "Can you zoom in and enhance that please?"


- Mikko ... wants a 4K security camera with wavelet-compression recording to VHS tape.
Click to expand...

oh man, i hate that! they do it on just about every crime show and it drives me nuts.
 
mikkowilson said:
I'm watching CSI right now ... and yeah, they do use poor subtext a lot.

However the one absolutely worst thing that a character can say on CSI - or any show/film for that matter - is while looking at a security camera video: "Can you zoom in and enhance that please?"


- Mikko ... wants a 4K security camera with wavelet-compression recording to VHS tape.
Click to expand...

I hate that too. I always thought it was possible to do that with a "really high tech computer" until I got into film/video (aka the public is easily manipulated).

Worse than that though was in the movie Johnny English. I believe they tried to pass off a camera taking a picture of a man and then scanning it for a 3d image. The image was then processed into a perfect representation of the man's head in three dimensions. It was then turned into a perfect mask...

...all from a still picture and completely automated.
 
bballplaya283 said:
mikkowilson said:
However the one absolutely worst thing that a character can say on CSI - or any show/film for that matter - is while looking at a security camera video: "Can you zoom in and enhance that please?"


- Mikko ... wants a 4K security camera with wavelet-compression recording to VHS tape.
Click to expand...

I hate that too. I always thought it was possible to do that with a "really high tech computer" until I got into film/video (aka the public is easily manipulated).

Worse than that though was in the movie Johnny English. I believe they tried to pass off a camera taking a picture of a man and then scanning it for a 3d image. The image was then processed into a perfect representation of the man's head in three dimensions. It was then turned into a perfect mask...

...all from a still picture and completely automated.
Click to expand...

I also hate that. My graphics/intermedia teacher went on a rant about it recently.

It's some video camera bought from a thrift store with a resolution of 20 pixels by 20 pixels, yet they can zoom in and clear up. They can figure ou the killer by zooming in on the hub cap of the car, then off the shine of a womans lip stick to see the killer attacking his victim.
 
Like most long-lived shows, it isn't necessarily the dialogue that brings people back, but the premise combined with the relationships. I recently explained this to a writer that was trying to write a sitcom.

In a movie, character development usually occurs in the context of the plot. In a series, plot usually develops in the context of the characters. The relationships are what bring us back, and our knowledge and understanding of them is what sets our expectations about how they will or won't react to a given plot point.

We forgive the overexplanation in something like CSI because of the setting. It's always a conundrum to know how much to explain to the audience. I don't envy episodic writers.
 
True enough. Let's face it, anyone who knows anything about investigative police work knows that the show is ridiculous in that regard. Not that the science isn't sound, but the convenience of the evidence, and the way they connect the dots without hesitation when there are a million other possibilities is laughable.

But it's fun and we care about the characters. That's why we come back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top