I tried to find out how a typical dialogue is constructed so I watched an episode of Two and A Half Men, more conscious then ever beofre... It seems to be setup and insult, the whole time. Is this correct? Action and reaction, with the laugh on the insult/reaction part. Or is there more to it?
André
In U.S sitcoms especially, I suppose that is true.
I think US is put down the other character and UK is put down themselves?
Leevil beat me to it. What you describe is more typically US style, but there are exceptions to every rule. If you're looking at the UK market you might do well to focus on a range of recent UK sitcoms, some of which are set-up/joke style and some of which aren't. Popular successes like Vicar of Dibley, My Family ad Not Going Out, and critical successes like Peep Show or Black Books would be worth a look.
The rule of dialogue is that every line has to be furthering the story,it can't just be conversation
Quote: bushbaby @ April 15 2008, 12:43 AM BSTThe rule of dialogue is that every line has to be furthering the story,it can't just be conversation
Not necessarily furthering the story - but yes, it has to have a purpose.
That rule about every line of dialogue pushing the story forward is oft-repeated bollocks I think. Yes, the general gist of the conversation should be always driving the plot but a conversation where every word is integral to the narrative would get dull very quickly.
I don't think that every dialogue is moving the story forward. Watching lot's of sitcoms, Mostly American, there are funny lines that have nothing to do with the big story line. They are also there just to keep the laughs going.
'That rule about every line of dialogue pushing the story forward is oft-repeated bollocks I think'
I sort of agree it's just half the story. It should further the plot, reveal character, set up a joke, deliver the joke or just be just funny in itself.
Same in Drama it just doesn't have to have the funny bit.
Unless unintentionally and it's DOctor Who.
I think each scene has to bring the story on one 'notch' but wouldn't agree entirely about dialogue. Red Dwarf had a lot of insults that didn't necessarily bring the story on each time but they were true to the characters.
But never had a sitcom commissioned so maybe I'm wrong!
Dan
I've always thought every line needs a point - but, ironically, sometimes not having a point is the point. Because sometimes the script needs to breath. The trick is, I suppose, is to avoid those lines being random.
I don't think it's bollocks.
You can't just stick a joke in that is random and nothing to do with the story. The jokes/quips should be part of what is going on
... or at least character-driven?
Dan
Quote: swerytd @ April 15 2008, 12:14 PM BST... or at least character-driven?
Dan
Absolutely if a character's raison d'etre is to say random silliness outside of the plot for the episode fair enough. I remember the gerbils in The Young Ones. The really thick one in Two Pints. The rules are there to analyse/deconstruct mainstream comedy I guess. The idea that there are rules that have to be followed in comedy is inherantly ridiculous. However there are rules/ templates/matrixes/paradigms whatever you want to call them that a work has to follow to a large extent to fit into a 'genre' or sub-genre, that's all.
It's difficult to explain but perhaps those who think it doesn't matter could put up an example or two of which sitcoms don't bother about the rules of dialogue.
Quote: bushbaby @ April 15 2008, 12:23 PM BSTIt's difficult to explain but perhaps those who think it doesn't matter could put up an example or two of which sitcoms don't bother about the rules of dialogue.
Off the top of my head I'd say Royle Family, Family Guy and Seinfeld. Possibly others. In all of them there'll be random bits of conversations and oddball jokes not directly related to the plot.
Quote: bushbaby @ April 15 2008, 11:46 AM BSTI don't think it's bollocks.
You can't just stick a joke in that is random and nothing to do with the story. The jokes/quips should be part of what is going on
Family Guy's screwed then...
I can see where you're coming from, but I do think it's more important that every joke is derived from character, rather than plot. Not least because there has to be something funny going on before the plot arrives.
Of course, you've got the further problem of jokes as 'jokes' anyway. Because for my money, the humour is usually characters reacting to the situation rather than actual 'jokes' (which is I suspect what you're suggesting).
I think therefore that it's important that the humour comes from the characters interacting with the situation (which is distinct and different from 'the plot').
(Though I would add we're in a slightly confused area here - your initial post was about dialogue, not jokes. Now I remain convinced that dialogue doesn't have to further the plot).