6 Things Great Screenwriters Know About Dialogue

Writing dialogue is one of the most difficult aspects of screenwriting. When it's good, it's almost invisible, but when it's bad... it's impossible to ignore. So, what are some of the factors screenwriters can focus on to take their dialogue to the next level?

Glenn Gers has spent 25 years writing for film and television, with credits including Fracture and Mad Money , as well as work on TV.

In a recent conversation with Film Courage, Gers broke down his approach to dialogue. His six pieces of advice help us understand the key factors that determine whether dialogue is effective or ineffective. All six principles work together, so you should definitely know these.

Check out the conversation here.

• YouTube www.youtube.com

Dialogue Is Action

When characters speak, they shouldn't just be conveying information.

"People don't talk to each other without some intention," Gers said.

Hopefully, your character is trying to accomplish something specific with the person they're talking to, and that comes through their words.

Whether someone's ordering a coffee or watching the Super Bowl with family and friends, they're pursuing an objective through their words—trying to impress, to deflect, to insult, to charm.

As you're writing, don't ask yourself, "What does the audience need to know?" Ask, "What is this character trying to make happen right now?"

The range of possible actions through dialogue is infinite. A character might be stalling for time, which is itself an action. Refusing to answer a question directly is an action too.

Think of Ryan Gosling’s Driver in Drive. When someone asks what he does, he says simply, "I drive."

It's the truth, but he's doing a lot with these two words. This response deflects deeper questioning, maintains mystery, defines him by function rather than personality, and establishes boundaries.

Understanding this can transform how you approach every exchange.

Stop Using Dialogue for Exposition Dumps

The biggest trap writers fall into is treating dialogue as a delivery system for exposition.

Gers offered an example of two people who are both aware that their uncle is arriving at the train station. One shouldn't turn to the other and announce, "I'm going to the train station to pick up our uncle because he lost his business."

The other person already knows this. The line exists solely for the audience's benefit, which makes it feel unnatural and stilted.

I was watching the new Dave Bautista movie, The Wrecking Crew , recently. It was made for streaming, so it potentially has to follow some odd rules about exposition in dialogue, but it felt incredibly awkward at points.

The number of times Jason Momoa said he was a cop on an Oklahoma reservation was fairly ridiculous, especially since he was saying it to people who already knew this fact about him. It just didn't make sense.

You can probably recognize when your exposition goes too far. The fix isn't too complicated. You can either create another character who doesn't know this information and needs to be told, or you find a way to let it emerge through conflict or emotional need. Then you get information embedded in a realistic exchange.

The Wrecking Crew Credit: Prime Video

Use Subtext

We rarely say exactly what we mean in real life. It usually takes a big emotional moment for you to talk about something that gives you a lot of complicated feelings.

And that's subtext, baby. If you want to learn more about it, check out five of our favorite examples from these amazing film scenes.

Subtext creates engagement. Viewers read between the lines and connect the dots. And it's more realistic. Subtext makes audiences active participants in interpreting character motivation.

As you write, you need to know what your character actually wants or fears, then figure out how they'd talk around it rather than stating it directly.

Arrive at that true meaning or motivation, then figure out how different personality types would talk around something.

Be On-the-Nose at Key Moments

Screenwriters are taught that on-the-nose dialogue is bad writing. A lot of times, you can point to it when you read exposition dumps or a lack of subtext in dialogue. Is a character spelling plot details, feelings, or motivations out in a way no real person would? That's on-the-nose.

But Gers said, "On-the-nose is not bad. You just got to know when to use it."

In reality, sometimes at the end of a tense discussion or fight, you do feel like you can't take it anymore, and you just come out and say the thing you're actually angry about.

Consider Marriage Story , when Adam Driver's character finally blows up and says, "Every day I wake up, and I hope you're dead!"

Whoa, buddy. A little on-the-nose, right? But it's a powerful emotional end to a big, blow-up argument.

Or even __The Banshees of Inisherin , when Colm tells Pádraic,****"I just don't like you no more." It's played absurdly and for dark comedic effect, so the on-the-nose line works, but it's also what the whole allegorical film is about. Everyone has to deal with the fallout of one character saying what they mean.

An on-the-nose moment can become a turning point. It's the climax of all that careful maneuvering and avoidance.

The key is earning that moment through all the restraint that came before.

• YouTube www.youtube.com

Let Audiences Read Your Characters

We spend our whole lives trying to interpret the people around us, even those we know intimately. Gers said that good storytelling recognizes this and gives audiences space to do that interpretive work themselves.

"Audiences don't actually like to sit back and be told everything," Gers said. "Audiences like to put it together for themselves."

Your job involves figuring out which pieces to give them and in what order.

Gers specifically mentions the opening of The Social Network as an example. It's two people sitting at a table, just talking. But a tremendous amount happens in this scene.

Mark Zuckerberg talks at his girlfriend Erica about clubs, SAT scores, and the number of geniuses in China. He's trying to impress her, assert his intelligence, and win an argument he doesn't realize he's already lost.

Erica keeps trying to find the thread, to understand what he's actually saying. We're in her shoes, working to decode this.

This applies even when screen time is compressed. Yes, movies usually don't have the luxury of a novel's length and internal monologues, but that doesn't mean you should panic and jam everything into surface-level dialogue. The compression actually makes the interpretive space more valuable, not less.

Give viewers enough to work with while trusting them to fill in gaps.

"Show Don't Tell" Applies to Dialogue, Too

The phrase "show, don't tell" often gets misunderstood as "use visuals instead of words." But Gers says that talking can be showing, as long as characters are trying to do something through their dialogue rather than explaining things to an audience they theoretically don't know exists.

Take 12 Angry Men or Glengarry Glen Ross —these are films built almost entirely on people talking. In those films, dialogue serves a dramatic purpose rather than an expository function. Dialogue, and voice, and cadence, and word choice show us who each character is.

Characters should speak to affect each other, not to inform an unseen audience. When someone talks, they're taking action in their reality. We, as viewers, observe and interpret that action. That's what makes talking feel alive on screen instead of dull.