Watching the Apple+ streaming series, Blackbird, with Taron Egerton, Paul Hauser, and Greg Kinnear.
If you can watch only one episode, it would be the first. There is a scene where Kinnear's character sits down with Hauser's psycho character in a blah police interrogation room to discuss what may or may not have happened. The setup to all this completely throws you off guard as to what to expect.
If you imagine the words on the script, then watch what Hauser does with them... it creeped me out. I completely believe this character was sinister, pathetic, and child-like, all at the SAME TIME, and that he is hiding something, but maybe not. It was intense. I actually said, "wow" as I was watching it.
Hauser's every move, the cadence of how he delivers the words, it's friggin' spooky.
Now, as a writer, THAT is what needs to be in my head when writing dialogue! I would love to know if the writer had Hauser in mind for the role, as it's exceptionally good. My question to all of you would be, how do you get "inside" your characters and get that on the page?
I don't have Apple+ which is too bad because it does look like an amazing series that I'd definitely want to watch. The trailer certainly gives me chills. Awesome cast. Well, maybe soon it will be on another streaming service.
Regardless, I did find the pilot pdf online, so here you go.
http://tvwriting.co.uk/tv_scripts/2021/Drama/In_With_the_Devil_1x01_-_Pilot.pdf
It's interesting to note that as creepy as Larry Hall (Hauser) may seem, in the pilot script he's described as meek and shy. It's a writing method I recognize because I've read it many times in really good screenplays and novels that are psychological thrillers. Got a psycho character? Describe them as harmless, then watch the magic happen. The writing of the character simply uses contrast.
I have no idea if this technique can be used for other types of characters or other genres. I, uh, offer no guarantees. But hey, at least I found the pilot pdf.
Hi Clark,
I started out as an actor at age 12 and got to do a LOT of plays and musicals over the years (not so much film). When I started writing about 27 years ago (audio drama at that time) I would "hear" the characters in my head the way I would play them, and sometimes I use other actors for inspiration. For example, I wrote a script that required a sheriff in 1954 Kentucky. I kept hearing Rod Steiger from IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT... so the dialog was lazy, slow, never minced words. The actor who eventually plays the role may have never seen HEAT OF THE NIGHT, but the dialog style gives him a rhythm to work with (I think), and is unique to that character. So far, that method works for me. I never write "Rod Steiger type" in the script; that's just for the voice in my head as I write. Hope this helps! Cheers
I do like the way Faye Dunaway says, "...Stolen four cylinder Ford Coupe..." and her whole intonation as Bonnie Parker. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLC0omm3N98
I could not imagine anyone else as Bonnie.
The zone. Heh. That's what I call it. Other writers use that term. From what Jerry describes, it seems to be the same. When you're in the zone.
One of my favorites in all film history is by the late, great Rutger Hauer in Blade Runner (1984). "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe." It’s iconic. I could quote the whole speech by heart.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QefqJ7YhbWQ
https://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/blade-runner_shooting.html
From the perspective of a writer, that moment is powerful because it uses the ticking bomb concept. So here's Batty, an android, he knows he has about 2 minutes to live. He gives it everything he's got. The director added a layer of subtext. Batty holds a pigeon, when he dies, he lets the pigeon go - the releasing of his life.
Granted, I'm a huge fan of Blade Runner. I could analyze the crap out of every line in that movie. Still, filmmaking is definitely a collaboration. Writers provide what everyone else needs to make a great film. Us writers tend to see a story in pieces, acts, structure, techniques, elements, and then we're left wondering if any of this actually makes any sense. Personally, I find it much better, and I've seen it in the final result, to believe in the zone, 100%. Then others will believe. If they don't, then chances are they're not part of the best collaborate team for you.
It's mind blowing to watch when it's your own words. What great actors do with dialogue is magical. Some writers say we should be able to read our dialogue out loud to check it's okay but I disagree with that. We don't have the talent to do it justice. The voice in our heads is much better.
I also really like Marlon Brando's mumbling in The Godfather and other films.
Great reference, Lily. One of my all time favorite lines as well. Hauer actually came up with those lines himself and it could not have fit better for the moment in the film.
Gary, it's wonderful to meet another fan of the same movie.
"All these moments forgotten, like tears in the rain." Seriously, by heart lol. Fantastic bit of subtle subtext. Sitting in the rain is the only way Batty, as an android, can cry. Okay, I'll stop analyzing.
Something I encourage writers to do, when they start working on productions, is to adopt the mindset where they take creative ownership of the first draft they hand in. Once you're past that part, you're into the trials and tribulations of colaboration. I can assure you that it is utterly heartbreaking when actors start rewriting your words and sadly, more often than not, it's to the detriment of the story as they'll often give little regard to the theme you've tried to weave into the subtext, the poignant references to the core message, and the logic that holds the plot/universe together. There are actors out there that, as a producer and writer, I would actively avoid due to this. There's also a degree of responsibility on the director's part to also defend the script and words chosen before shooting.
I've been relatively lucky but, even on the latest shoot, an actor decided to rephrase a really important scene in a way they thought was better but decimated a lot of carefully constructed story beats. I did not hold back on letting my frustrations known.
There's sometimes a huge technical issue with actors doing this too and that's causing scenes to run on much longer than they are written to be. I work hard to keep scenes tight because indie film is so limited for time and just a bit of "ping-ponging" back and forth can cause a scene to run twice as long as intended.
Thing is, and this is where the cruel twist of irony often gets you, the audience (or at least people close to you) will go on to specifically love the stuff you hate being changed, even though it runs roughshod through years of honed craft.
I'm not against my stuff being changed. In fact, I love to sit with actors and explain that right away. However, I really need to be there to defend the script and have my creative input respected. There's nothing a despise more than productions that take on a culture of "throwing the script away" and totally understand why writers who've experienced that, literally or figuratively, feel hurt by it.
........now you tell me.
-- yep, CJ is 100% correct. Been there, done that.
Deckard is human!
I wrote a character that I thought was a straight forward sort of character. But the actor put a little twist on it. She gave it a sexy twist on the relationship. Something I didn't see, but she did.
Good actors are amazing.