The voiceover - When is it too much? Page 2

Have used it in one screenplay (heavily too, but this was a very specific request) and once in a pilot. Both were neo-noir ideas and were conscious borrows from the genre's use of the technique for two different reasons. One for comic effect, the other was traditional but with our own twist.

I loved the technique when I first started writing but now tend to shy away from it. The industry goes in cycles. Sometimes VO is in, other times it's out. Sometimes, when handled well, it is stunningly good - Sin City. Other times it feels like an intrusion.

I'm using voice over in something I have in development at the moment. I'm learning to try and make sure it adds to the comedy, and tells us things we didn't know, rather than always just stating the obvious.

Quote: Leevil @ December 16 2008, 12:52 PM GMT

Well said Stotty. I don't understand how having another layer to the show, creating extra room for even more(!) gags is considered lazy.

View original

Because the other layer is intrusive to me - obviously not for you, and I totally respect that. As a writer, I know it's a hell of a lot more difficult to set up gags through action and dialogue than it is to take this easier voiceover route, "So Gob did this, and Michael didn't know, so his mother was angry"... very efficient, but clumsy - to me. The organic growth of a setup and payoff within the action is harder, meaning there are less gags for sure, but the quality of the payoff is on a higher level.

Having said this, my 19 year old son assures me that I am full of shit on this, and that I need to revisit the show, which I will. Incidently, AD is almost universally popular throughout the College/Uni community here in the USA.... gives you hope I guess.

I think it can work quite well when it's used to segue or to get over character thoughts type stuff that would be hard to do otherwise - Scrubs and My Name Is Earl are good examples of that.

I've seen a few things where it is over-used and is just there to get a lot of explanation out of the way in a slightly lazy fashion, which for me breaks the 'show-don't-tell' rule.

But there are definitely some British things which use it well. The ones which spring immediately to mind are Bleak Expectations and The Inbetweeners.

Quote: Afinkawan @ December 18 2008, 9:20 AM GMT

I've seen a few things where it is over-used and is just there to get a lot of explanation out of the way in a slightly lazy fashion, which for me breaks the 'show-don't-tell' rule.

View original

Agreed. Exposition is a big no-no and if you're using a voiceover to explain what's happening all the time, you're on dangerous ground.

I agree with Afinkawande - like most things in writing, it's good if done well (I'd include Arrested Development and My Name in Earl in these) and bad if done badly or overused.

What I hate is when it's used at the start or end of shows to say how all the different plots were on the same theme. Invariably either:
1) it is spurious at best - I really like Heroes, but the voiceover at the start and end is absolute drivel and a complete waste of broadcast time.
2) it adds nothing whatsoever to the show, except seemingly to show what clever writers they have, in case the viewers were just not bright enough to get the nuanaces.

In fact, most probably start as 2 and become 1 over time...