Appropriate Narration?

Connor Burke · Jul 3, 2011

I have now been developing and planning a feature-length screenplay for a good three or four months and I have just started to write it.

I have been debating over using narration for a few days now. I have read books like "The Screenwriter's Workbook" and "Story" which urge not to use narration in a film unless it's done correctly.

I wanted to use this narration to introduce the characters in a straightforward fashion, much like the introduction of 'The Royal Tenenbaums,' but I also want to make my narrator a character like 'the stranger' in 'The Big Lebowski'. These are just both scenarios where v.o. was used and it inspired me.

The film that I am writing is about a suburban family where many of the events take place at their home. The characters are introduced by an agoraphobic writer that refuses to leave his home; he watches the family in the house across the street from him through the gaps in his blinds of his upstairs window. This is supposed to hint at the fact that he is writing a novel about the dysfunctional family that resides across from the street from him. I also want the little bits of narration to be read like an audiobook would sound, I want it to sound the way a person would read something out loud.

I am beating myself up over actually doing this though, because this is my first screenplay, and it is a spec script; I'm a first-time writer and I intend to approach "important" people with this script one day, I do not know if I am taking too big of a risk by doing something that technically doesn't abide to the standards of screenwriting.

If anyone could help me out and tell me what you think I should do that would be great. Thanks!

DirtyPicturesTV · Jul 3, 2011

I have mixed feelings about narration. It's tricky to do well, and screenwriting books wisely warn against it for a few reasons.

Firstly, you risk repeating information we can already get visually. It's stupid for a narrator to describe somebody as fat when we can see that they are overweight. So narration needs to give us information not readily available from the images. But you should never feel constrained to tell the truth via narrators -- unreliable narrators can be excellent when done well. (See Terence Malick's "Days of Heaven" for a great unreliable narrator, as the VO contrasts the onscreen action and she misremembers the past.)

Secondly, narration runs the risk of being a lazy way to deliver exposition. Nothing's worse than having a narrator explain events or motivations, or tell us about events that happened off-screen as a way to avoid actually showing the scene. Also, narration is NOT a substitute for subtext, though many writers mistake it for exactly that.

Contrast the studio release of "Blade Runner" for how to completely mishandle narration and ruin a film (since it was tacked on, and was authored by a third writer who had nothing to do with any version of the script), with "Sunset Boulevard," which sets the standard for excellent noir narration. The former seeks to explain that which does not need explaining, the latter sets an ironic tone, foreshadows problems to come, and gives us insight into the main character's dilemma.

In short, I believe that narration should give us new information not available via any other means or method.

FantasySciFi · Jul 3, 2011

Connor Burke said:
The film that I am writing is about a suburban family where many of the events take place at their home. The characters are introduced by an agoraphobic writer that refuses to leave his home; he watches the family in the house across the street from him through the gaps in his blinds of his upstairs window. This is supposed to hint at the fact that he is writing a novel about the dysfunctional family that resides across from the street from him. I also want the little bits of narration to be read like an audiobook would sound, I want it to sound the way a person would read something out loud.

I am beating myself up over actually doing this though, because this is my first screenplay, and it is a spec script; I'm a first-time writer and I intend to approach "important" people with this script one day, I do not know if I am taking too big of a risk by doing something that technically doesn't abide to the standards of screenwriting.

If anyone could help me out and tell me what you think I should do that would be great. Thanks!

In the situation you describe, I think narration could be used effectively in combination with dialogue and flashes on the family. Especially since such a limited/wrong perception of the characters from someone confined to his house could be played off with the actual events and family dynamics.

It sounds that you've read and are aware of the risks. On the other hand, screenwriting is about telling a solid story. It's best not to second guess yourself until you have your story finished, then you can go back and get critical feedback. Sometimes it's about taking risks. Don't play it too safe, too early. Know that "rules" are guidelines. Don't go too crazy, but don't lose your voice in the process. I always think of the first write as a story draft. So I have the solid details worked out.

The first version is almost never what ends up being produced. Usually not even the first movie. Usually the third script, if you're lucky. Then later you go back, pull out the first one, seeing it with new more experienced eyes. Then it gets the major overhaul and is produced. Just get it out and down, realizing it will need lots of reworking. Especially if it's your first. Since you're aware that you need to use narration sparingly, you're a step ahead.

What you want to avoid is using the narration to tell the story. If you use it, as you mentioned, to describe the author's initial observations/perception of his neighbors which can be counterpointed visually with the reality, it could balance out. Just don't use the narration to expose all of the author's thoughts. Then you trip over into exposition; show us how he feels about the neighbors. Don't tell the audience he disapproves of the teenage son, show us through his actions--calling the police, etc. How do you make an agoraphobic individual dynamic? That's your challenge. You want his character to grow throughout. Especially as you expose the dysfunctions of his own family. While some of the observations might be insightful, I would make sure the narration is mostly off and very short comments with observable actions introducing us to the real family characters and dynamics. Perhaps his attachment leads him to step outside of himself on behalf of a family member or he's forced to interact. Now you are challenging his world.

Write it then go back, evaluate it and get feedback. Until it's written, it's all idle speculation. It could work quite well with your screenplay. Don't beat yourself up before the fact. Have fun and write well!

JoshL · Jul 3, 2011

Watching "The Virgin Suicides", the narration totally adds to the story. Watching "Arrested Development", the narration provides a post-modern medium awareness that adds an edge that the story otherwise would not have. Narration==bad is as outdated as narration==good. Depends on the mood that you want to set. You can write it more intense, you can write it to add to the humor. Either way, good writing is the key!

Jack Lynt · Jul 4, 2011

I agree that you shouldn't let fear of the rule/guidline prevent you from giving it a try if it feels right for your story. Just...approach it with respect like you would fire or electricity.

It's clearly in the way that you use it, as has been expressed above. It can be lazy, and bad and annoying, and it can be great.

Some great movies that used narration to great effect, to my mind, include Little Big Man, Out of Africa, Adaptation, and Kill Bill. My guess is that the world would be a little poorer for it, if those creators had been too afraid to use it.

Your screenplay won't be pouring out of you in perfection, polished, finished, and ready to sell at the first draft. As Fantasy wrote, go ahead and write it. You're probably going to be rewriting it a whole lot, in any case. That's writing. In Tales from the Script, we hear successful screenplay writers talking about rewriting their scripts many dozens of times. The point is that you can go with it, see how it turns out, get feedback, and if it doesn't work, remove it, rework it. =)

Connor Burke · Jul 11, 2011

Thanks guys for all of the help, I really appreciate it!

I'm going to take everyone's advice and write the first draft with the narration, it just feels like the right thing to do.

tblaquiere · Jul 11, 2011

FantasySciFi said:
In the situation you describe, I think narration could be used effectively in combination with dialogue and flashes on the family. Especially since such a limited/wrong perception of the characters from someone confined to his house could be played off with the actual events and family dynamics.

It sounds that you've read and are aware of the risks. On the other hand, screenwriting is about telling a solid story. It's best not to second guess yourself until you have your story finished, then you can go back and get critical feedback. Sometimes it's about taking risks. Don't play it too safe, too early. Know that "rules" are guidelines. Don't go too crazy, but don't lose your voice in the process. I always think of the first write as a story draft. So I have the solid details worked out.

The first version is almost never what ends up being produced. Usually not even the first movie. Usually the third script, if you're lucky. Then later you go back, pull out the first one, seeing it with new more experienced eyes. Then it gets the major overhaul and is produced. Just get it out and down, realizing it will need lots of reworking. Especially if it's your first. Since you're aware that you need to use narration sparingly, you're a step ahead.

What you want to avoid is using the narration to tell the story. If you use it, as you mentioned, to describe the author's initial observations/perception of his neighbors which can be counterpointed visually with the reality, it could balance out. Just don't use the narration to expose all of the author's thoughts. Then you trip over into exposition; show us how he feels about the neighbors. Don't tell the audience he disapproves of the teenage son, show us through his actions--calling the police, etc. How do you make an agoraphobic individual dynamic? That's your challenge. You want his character to grow throughout. Especially as you expose the dysfunctions of his own family. While some of the observations might be insightful, I would make sure the narration is mostly off and very short comments with observable actions introducing us to the real family characters and dynamics. Perhaps his attachment leads him to step outside of himself on behalf of a family member or he's forced to interact. Now you are challenging his world.

Write it then go back, evaluate it and get feedback. Until it's written, it's all idle speculation. It could work quite well with your screenplay. Don't beat yourself up before the fact. Have fun and write well!

I agree completely with the above! Every script that I have written has numerous drafts and I often do not end up with what I originally planned. Many times it is difficult to know if something works until after you try it. The wonderful thing about writing is that you can experiment without any great consequences because you can always revise. If this is your first script my best suggestion is to write, write, write. Do not sweat the details! The hardest thing for many to do is complete a script, and that is usually because they get too wrapped up in the details, fear failure, and end up bored. Boredom kills projects.

arrodiii · Jul 11, 2011

I'm a huge Woody Allen fan and I would hate it if he left out the narration in some of his films - it gives it a quirkiness that expect from him as well as provides a quick recap of what has happened to the his characters since we last saw them. I say go for it - this is creativity at its best and I think that you shouldn't limit yourself in telling your story the way you envision it.

harmonica44 · Jul 11, 2011

DirtyPicturesTV said:
I have mixed feelings about narration. It's tricky to do well, and screenwriting books wisely warn against it for a few reasons.

Firstly, you risk repeating information we can already get visually. It's stupid for a narrator to describe somebody as fat when we can see that they are overweight. So narration needs to give us information not readily available from the images. But you should never feel constrained to tell the truth via narrators -- unreliable narrators can be excellent when done well. (See Terence Malick's "Days of Heaven" for a great unreliable narrator, as the VO contrasts the onscreen action and she misremembers the past.)

Secondly, narration runs the risk of being a lazy way to deliver exposition. Nothing's worse than having a narrator explain events or motivations, or tell us about events that happened off-screen as a way to avoid actually showing the scene. Also, narration is NOT a substitute for subtext, though many writers mistake it for exactly that.

Contrast the studio release of "Blade Runner" for how to completely mishandle narration and ruin a film (since it was tacked on, and was authored by a third writer who had nothing to do with any version of the script), with "Sunset Boulevard," which sets the standard for excellent noir narration. The former seeks to explain that which does not need explaining, the latter sets an ironic tone, foreshadows problems to come, and gives us insight into the main character's dilemma.

In short, I believe that narration should give us new information not available via any other means or method.

I agree, some movies, give away too much in narration, and don't the viewer figure out things for themselves. This is true in some film noir movies, but some still manage to narrate well.