Against Cleverness: The Problem With Aaron Sorkin's Dialogue

Подписаться 18 тыс.

Просмотров 33 тыс.

50% 1

Check out my Patron here! Infinite thanks to those who've already pledged. / onehandclap
Aaron Sorkin and The Social Network and the problem with his characters and and Aaron Sorkin, oh my! Hot n heavy 'sode this month. Even Justin Timberlake makes an appearance!
Back at it again and this time we're moving on to movies. This idea actually sprung from a vague memory of a friend and I watching the film, V for Vendetta, and feeling uncomfortable with all the clever quips from the sexual predators right before she meets V. Cleverness can do wonders for a movie in certain moments, but I often see script writers throwing it in at any odd moment without regard to the situation, scene, or character, mostly just because it's, well, clever. Puns and analogies and repartee certainly have a place in the film world, but I hate to think that this kind of dialogue could ever take over the film world. So, with that in mind, I decided to make a video to show how cleverness can leave a viewer wanting. And who better to pick apart than The King of Clever, Aaron Sorkin. I decided to focus on The Social Network since I've seen multiple video essays on how good the dialogue is in that film, and I wanted to offer a counterpoint. I would have reached back to the West Wing more, but that's before my time, so I decided to stick to what I know. Anyway, hope you enjoy.
As always, the best way to help with the channel (if you’re interested) is to Like, Subscribe, Comment, Share with Friends, Post on Facebook, Tweet, and Reddit. Especially sharing on fb and twitter and reddit. I really appreciate all the help and support I’ve gotten so far. Without the fans, where would I be?
Much love,
Michael
P.S. Remix (for the computers): This video is about the social network and Aaeon Sorkin and his dialogue and cleverness and his screenwriting. I like a few good dialogue examples from Kenneth Lonergan because it’s important to show the other side. Is there a difference between Aaron Sorkin clever and Aaron Sorkin Cleverness? I don’t know. The important thing is that this is a video essay on Sorkin dialogue and what’s wrong with it.
All this is for educational purposes only. I don’t own any of this content.

Опубликовано:

21 янв 2018

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 247

@OneHandClap 6 лет назад

share share share if you wanna help out my channel. love to all the fans who encourage and inspire me to keep making these things. y'all have no idea how much i appreciate it. also, if you're interested, my twitter: @iwshicldluvumor

@Beepbeepoutoftheway 3 года назад

Every Aaron Sorkin character gets to say what Aaron Sorkin wishes he would have said, but didn't think of til he was in the car

@savvysearch 3 года назад

This needs more upvotes.

@jqyhlmnp 2 года назад

@@savvysearch you need more upvotes

@oliverford5367 Год назад

That's better to watch though than realistic dialogue with ums and ers and likes!

@thatguynamedskyy6756 Год назад

It's pretty common writing advice to do just that

@thraxus6661 6 лет назад

I think this sums up my problems with most marvel movies also. The characters always have some witty or funny retort or moment in the middle of what could, and mostly should, be a large character development or just climax in the movie.

@nng525 6 лет назад

Dustin Frazier yeah, but that's great in superhero movie. You don't need to much drama in thouse. Even though they often manage to bring up (i don't remember the propper verb for this sentence :D) a lot of emotions, not only "huh, funny" ones.

@OneHandClap 6 лет назад

yes exactly! that's honestly my problem with most blockbuster movies. they seem to think the only way to keep the audience engaged is to make us chuckle every once in a while instead of making the characters richer and more complex. appreciate the comment, dustin

@citrinestone 6 лет назад

Dustin Frazier Waaaaaay back when the 1st avengers came out, I went to see it even though I wasn't big into superhero movies because it was so highly acclaimed. I had seen Thor though, so something bothered me slightly about the tone. It wasn't until some line like, "he's a villain but he's my brother/[insert comeback]/well...hes adopted" that I was like...ah. there's no emotionality attached to the only bit of canon I'm familiar with, but at least I got a quick laugh

@girl4eversweet 5 лет назад

Thank you! I honestly can't watch them exactly because of this and I can't help it

@pcon36 5 лет назад

You pretty much just described Dr. Strange.

@TheGreenerItGets 6 лет назад

This is the exact problem I noticed when I used to write. It was like spewing my own brand of wit and sarcasm over everything. I would start thinking, "this character wouldn't talk like that, that's just me."

@jeffk1722 5 лет назад

I noticed this issue in the dialogue but gave it a pass, as I assumed maybe The Social Network and Steve Jobs are simply about a group of much wittier people than me. Glad I'm not the only one who noticed that about the dialogue.

@mskidi 4 года назад

@@jeffk1722 When Jobs was working for Atari, he used to get into arguments with his colleagues and he would call them "dumb shits". Talk about a regular Mark Twain there

@sofiaarango3484 4 года назад

You're unironically a better writer than Sorkin for realizing that fact

@xouyxee9833 4 года назад

@@sofiaarango3484 I wouldn't say that this guy is a better writer simply for being more self-aware. Andy Sorkin is a well-established script-writer that has been lauded for his talents. He isn't perfect but he's pretty damn good.

@sofiaarango3484 4 года назад

@@xouyxee9833 Maybe this guy isn't a better writer just for being self aware but sorkin is not a good writer at all, he's trash

@PatrickHogan 6 лет назад

Social Network’s soundtrack *still* gives me chills.

@zeroclout6306 6 лет назад

Patrick Hogan That's because Trent is more skilled a musician than Sorkin is a writer.

@mikemartin5749 5 лет назад

Check out Ken Burn's Vietnam series. Same composers.

@MikeDiastavrone3 6 лет назад

I think part of what makes Sorkin's style work for The Social Network are the environments the film is taking place in: Harvard and the tech world. Both are very elitist, populated by younger people who grew up in a media environment where cynical, sarcastic humor and off-hand references were the height of cleverness (think The Simpsons or Seinfeld). Not only does it make some sense for them to talk like that, but their ironic detachment from everything and narcissistic self-indulgence is part and parcel for the film's biggest overall point about how the people who've inspired a technological revolution through social media meant to connect everyone through a screen seem totally incapable of connecting with one another face-to-face. Now, I do think you have a point that Sorkin's style has its issues and with different stories it becomes a lot more apparent. For example, the emphasis on witty dialogue in Steve Jobs makes it hard for me to really connect that much with the climaxes of the second and third acts where some key relationships between characters are at their most tense and supposed to have real emotional weight but up to that point all I've seen is everyone just say clever stuff to each other.

@mskidi 4 года назад

Nobody talks like that, including and especially people that supposedily belong in the elite. Them especially are trained, from as early as they start to speak, to take their time with arguments, so they can make logical propositions (this last thing is so hilariously paramount to them, that most arguments will veer off to semantics), and of course, most of the time, they are by nature shy and reserved and awkward with confrontation. Only stand up comedians in roasts might resemble something like Sorkins' dialogue, and even that is doubtfull.

@sablesoul 4 года назад

@@mskidi Can't say I agree with that at all. You can hear it all the time on podcasts, the way people discuss anything on Twitter, pretty much any discussion among coastal elite. It's all dripping in irony and detachment.

@skermani 4 года назад

@@mskidi Realism is overrated. Nobody talks like Hamlet either.

@mskidi 4 года назад

@@skermani Nobody talks like Hamlet in Shakespeares' plays, except for Hamlet. Everybody talks like Sorkin in Sorkins' dialogue.

@skermani 4 года назад

@@mskidi Your initial comment was "nobody talks like that," to which I responded. This is a separate argument, and while I think there is something to your point here, there are subtle differences between characters in Sorkin's work. And the argument can be made that while not everyone speaks quite like Hamlet, everyone in Shakespeare speaks beautifully and too beautifully to be realistic.

@cinemascore-along 4 года назад

I won't deny that Aaron Sorkin has crafted a truly unique and intriguing dialogue writing style, and it's great when its done well. My main problem with it is that. due to its difficulty and sophistication, it becomes incredibly constraining as the type of stories it can tell, and how effective it can be. There are a couple of key reasons why I think his dialogue works in his films and TV shows 1. It's being performed by very talented actors. This kind of goes with out saying, but the fact is that no matter how good a line or conversation is on paper, if the person saying doesn't do a good job of it, it won't work. Luckily he manages to get Oscar-caliber actors like Martin Sheen, Jessie Eisenberg, Jeff Daniels and Jack Nicholson pull it off (and even they have all admitted that it was incredibly difficult) 2. His characters are always highly intelligent people. When you're writing about Politicians, Harvard Students, Professional Gamblers and the founders of Apple, it's much easier for the audience to accept that this overly-written witty dialogue might actually be something you could hear come out of their mouths. This is why a lot of films I see where the writer is obviously trying to capture or imitate that style of dialogue fail to pull it off in a convincing manner. I can't tell you how many student films I've seen with similar dialogue being performed by inexperienced actors playing relatively ordinary characters, and they all make me roll my eyes at how much it doesn't work.

@oliverford5367 Год назад

It worked for the Social Network which is about very smart but emotionally stunted people. But it didn't work for Studio 60, a Sorkin failure, because it's too serious for a comedy

@LM-le6zz 5 лет назад

This is SO insightful! I am not a Sorkin fan, I find him preachy, pretentious, and one note (although I really liked the social network when it came out as well). This video articulated exactly the issues I have with him in a way I never could. Super well reasoned and fair. Awesome work!

@Moovieboy 6 лет назад

I definitely concur. I recall a "Social Network" BTS video where Fincher was telling Sorkin there was a moment where it didn't need the usual Sorkin rhythmic banter... I also have similar thoughts with shows like "Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt." At first, while watching it I thought, "Oh, that's clever... okay, that's clever too..." and it became, "Ok, so now EVERYTHING you say is going to be clever." It does start to get in the way.

@bunburyist_online 6 лет назад

Sure, but his style and substance is what draws people to him. I love the witty banter, and don't feel removed from the story at all. But I was raised on theatre where screenwriters like Aaron came from. To suggest that the writing is imperfect because it doesn't deliver the correct sense of realism is to suggest that Shakespeare is anything less than brilliant, and impressionism is a subpar form of art. His use of iambic pentameter, and almost musical tonality to language is what has me in the front of the line when he releases something new. I also really enjoy other styles of writing to, and loved Manchester By The Sea for its raw dialogue. Each to their own. I dont want to watch a Sorkin film where he walks me through the real world, I want him to take me for a stroll through his.

@Nobody-fb7ni 4 года назад

Exactly Sorkin doesn’t try to be real either. And that gives it a very unique voice.

@louiesalmon3932 6 лет назад

I'm still a sucker for Sorkin's dialogue, but there is definitely something strange about scenes with quip-heavy dialogue. I think all he needs is for the quips to come to a sudden stop during emotional moments. That would work really well to emphasize how serious those moments are.

@bbbbbbbbssssssttttttttttt 6 лет назад

Louie Salmon just speaking for social network here, i party see the quips as sorkins way of showing that these highly driven people won’t let anyone get in the way of them becoming successful, to me the lack of emotion in the final scene shows how crazy motivated, driven and tunnel visioned you have to be to accomplish something like zuckerberg did

@DrummerDucky 6 лет назад

If you look at the movies that inspired Sorkin, you get both the quips AND skillful pacing + proper characterization. Sorkin somehow never fully understood the masters, and just got stuck at the "writing funnies" phase; he would strongly benefit from having other writers adjusting his scripts extensively.

@OneHandClap 6 лет назад

totally agree. i still got a kick out of watching the social network while i was researching this video (hence the disclaimers). but yeah, i think he just needs to figure out what moments are the best to employ them as opposed to writing as many as he can think of. thanks for the comment, louie

@DarrenSemotiuk 6 лет назад

Years ago "Dawson's Creek" suffered from (and eventually became formulaic due to) the same kind of "everybody is equally witty" dialog -- and those characters were supposed to be highschoolers. SEE ALSO: Buffy/Angel.

@bubblegirl9854 2 года назад

In mollys game he does it really well

@yuvibitter 6 лет назад

There's also the issue in shows like newsroom, where he uses clever dialogue to disguise simplistic narratives, clichés and repetitive tropes that showcases unimaginative and uninspired storytelling. I'm harsher than you are but once I saw that in Sorkin's work I can't unsee it anymore

@MrPhotoman75 6 лет назад

Thank you. I have always admired Sorkin's rapid-fire dialogue in The West Wing and some of his other work. But there has been a creeping uneasiness that I could not quite put my finger on but that I felt was something holding back the true potential of the storytelling. Your video articulates this perfectly.

@OneHandClap 6 лет назад

thanks so much! so glad realize i'm not crazy thinking about all this stuff. and by the way, look out tomorrow for a new video, curious what you think, MrPhotoman

@kiokiui 6 лет назад

Yes! I love this video!! I ABSOLUTELY agree that we're sacrificing emotion for a quick laugh. I've been thinking about this for years and someone FINALLY put it into words! Thank you so much! Keep up the great work!!

@KillerFox9000 6 лет назад

despite the name of this channel I clapped at the end of this video with both my hands very well done dude, loved the pacing and structure, and I'm really looking forward to more videos from you, if I had money to support you on Patreon I would

@vancouverrob 5 лет назад

Great essay. Very insightful of you. Well done.

@fartin3652 6 лет назад

another one. keep up the good work man. ur doing something great here.

@jdog783 4 года назад

This is an incredibly fair and valid argument, but I would chalk it up mostly to a preference in style. Sorkin has said many times that his characters, and thus story-worlds, are quixotic -- not intended to mimic the real world, like a more realist writer (Lonergan) strives for. Personally I love the cleverness and for me, that Prada line only heightened the impact of Saverin's sadness.

@shameer_khan24 5 лет назад

Great video👏👏👏The manchester by the sea scene at the end is just gold😍

@Asparaesque 6 лет назад

Brilliant video, as always.

@uchidaoginome 2 года назад

I hated The Social Network. My wife and I couldn't get past the first 20 minutes. We loved the West Wing but bailed after the first 4 seasons and we could never figure out why we lost the taste for it. You hit it on the head. All of the principals were just too smart, too clever! Every exchange of dialogue ends on a too-perfect zinger. That's a great talent, don't get me wrong, but it dresses attention to itself. If love to see something by him with this cleverness dialed back a bit.

@lloydrobert6182 5 лет назад

Thanks for sorting out and articulating some of the things we feel. Where we doubt our own width of knowledge on the subject. You bring out the sense of "aaaaahhh, at last!"

@krombopulos_michael 6 лет назад

This is the first one I disagree with, especially on the scene near the end of the Social Network. That line doesn't sound that witty to me, or like some zinger, sounds more like a character who is genuinely furious venting about stuff that had been bothering him for a long time. I do agree that Manchester By the Sea was fantastic though and like that it's getting some love.

@adam973 5 лет назад

Really well done: keep it up!

@lordcrispen 6 лет назад

I wonder what the best way to get RU-vid to start picking up your channel's vids and posting them as related videos on Nerdwriter and things like CinemaSins or something. Keep making this quality content. You'll get there. I share this with as many people as I can every time you post a new vid.

@OneHandClap 6 лет назад

wow you have no idea how much i appreciate this comment. it's a tough youtube world for small/new channels like mine and it can be discouraging when there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason as to why some videos blow up and others don't. but fans like you who are willing to share my stuff with friends are the main way we can gain some momentum and reach more people. so thank you. really. i'm sure none of this'll be a problem when we're at 100k subs :)

@danelmore6553 6 лет назад

To be fair; Nerdwriter has a knack for making some of the most artful youtube posts I have ever seen, but Sins is pretty much drivel. Extremely entertaining drivel, do not misunderstand me. Just saying; that is a pretty massive cross-section of content in terms of agenda. If you managed to be "related vids" to both of those...I think you might break the internet. However, if one tried to be similar to both, I think the result would be a failure to approach the success of either. If I am totally honest, you do come off more like Sins, and less like Nerdwriter in this particular vid. The thing about Nerdwriter is that even when he is being critical of something, he never sounds superior. In my opinion, you did start to feel quite heavy-handed (especially around 6:30), in your attempt to sell your point. That line wasn't witty, at all, and I think one would only find it so if one is looking to validate a particular thesis like this. There is a difference in articulate and witty. I do not like being told what reaction I am meant to have at a line or scene. Especially when I know I did not "chuckle" there. It is a little bit condescending to the viewer, on top of the fact you are already essentially making the claim "I understand dialogue writing better than one of the most acclaimed dialogue writers in modern cinema." I am not trying to say your essay is horrible, and I like your work or I would not bother. This is just honest, objective feed-back on what my experience was.

@DarrenSemotiuk 6 лет назад

AGREED! It's like I wish the algorithm could chime in "hey NerdWriter fan, want something a little less heavy and yet somehow also rather uniquely deep? Check out OHC!"

@mattneal5257 4 года назад

I cannot like this enough. So well done and spot on

@christopherstewart3998 6 лет назад

In my opinion, the problem isn't as much the cleverness itself but rather Sorkin's attempts to make his scripts seem deeper or more dramatic than they are. Tarantino has this bouncy, pulpy dialogue but it works because it fits his style perfectly. Sorkin's dialogue works well in procedural dramas like the West Wing, where the quick wit can carry the drama cause that's secondary in the enjoyment of each episode. The story is a vehicle for Sorkinism rather than dialogue being a vehicle for character development (in the Newsroom theres only like one instance of actual character development, and yet its an enjoyable, entertaining, if masturbatory, show nonetheless). I think there's a reason his best scripts imo are the Social Network and Steve Jobs, because both these films contain what can only be described as Sorkinesque characters in Jobs and Zuckerberg. Their own, and everyones else's, cleverness acts - unintentionally - to disconnect the audience from true emotionality (like Zuckerberg and Jobs themselves). Take away this unintentional element, and you just get a truly shallow story - fit for TV or a plot-driven court room drama like A Few Good Men, but try and jam this style into a character study and you're left with 120 pages wet with Sorkin's wank.

@dixoncreates1131 3 года назад

Great video. That 10 seconds of Manchester by the Sea at the end literally made me cry... ffs

@christopherbarber5283 6 лет назад

i think this is a really important analysis. well done

@John_Jim 2 года назад

I googled "unrealistically fast paced dialogue" when I watched The Newsroom just to see if I was onto something and a Reddit thread with this video came up. I managed two episodes of it. I simply can't keep up. It's ridiculous.

@downthehollow8699 6 лет назад

Never thought of it this way... On side note can we get some movie titles in the description? I haven't seen some of these but they look good.

@maxnobel2044 6 лет назад

As some have already stated, the quips are an integrated part of the character's milieu that allow everyone to communicate more cleverly and clearly than they would in real life while modulating their emotional lives and realities within that verbal space. There's definitely a theatrical element (seeing Garfield most recently in Angels in America made that all the more clear in the flip flop scene) and I think part of the key is that we come to understand throughout the film the mode through which his character expresses and relates himself to the people around him, heightened like everything else to get as fast and close as possible to the narrative and thematic truth of the matter, and we know in that scene, for however clever it might be, exactly what that flip flop line means.

@moses_roses 6 лет назад

Glad I clicked immediately, let's see what's for dinner! Love your work btw

@moses_roses 6 лет назад

Ate good

@YungM.D. 4 года назад

Steve Jobs and Social Network are partially saved simply due to how strong Danny Boyle and David Fincher are as directors

@closeoutentertainment 5 лет назад

I am so glad you compared him to Kenneth Lonergan. I find that a lot of playwrights rely heavily on dialogue in their screenplays. To me, Lonergan is an amazing exception. What do you think?

@LorenzoDoesntExist 2 года назад

I feel like this is a hub for people confused by his dialogue and why he's so acclaimed to all agree on these criticisms, but real life people don't have random quirks that make them stand out. Real people seem very similar to each other, but if you notice the subtle differences in Sorkin's characters, you realize how unique and layered they actually are. It's fair enough for this guy to have his opinions, but it's also fair for me to consider them awful arguments. The number of times he uses circular reasoning to justify his points is ridiculous. Do yourself a favour and try to get into Sorkin's work with an open mind. Don't just dismiss it because you found some video essay on RU-vid that's your echo chamber.

@abstractclass5043 6 лет назад

I've always had some beef with Sorkin movies but never knew how to express it properly, THIS IS IT. Everyone sounds the same, there's no depth, or a lacking depth. You've knocked it out of the park again, keep up the awesome vids.

@atthebridge 5 лет назад

For Sorkin you could read Tarantino. But it's a problem that goes way back. Most people live dull lives. And even those that don't normally speak dull dialogue. Cliches are cliches for a reason (another cliche!), most people use them. But employ them often in a novel or a film and your audience will start to feel cheated or just bored. Art has to aim for a heightened reality, where there is both a basic credibility and a reason for total strangers to take an interest in the lives and events being depicted, and it's never easy to get the tone exactly right.

@johnahabig 6 лет назад

why the Coen Brothers are the best screenwriters

@bien.mp4 3 года назад

Thank you!

@kimberlysommers2124 7 месяцев назад

I just found this video and you are sooo on target and describe what I don't like about Aaron Sorkin perfectly.

@timwindy7777 6 лет назад

I’ve always struggled to articulate what about Sorkin’s writing throws me off as a viewer, that takes me out of the viewing experience, and I think you really touch on it here. When I attempt to recall a film with a Sorkin screenplay, it’s usually the jokes and witty repartee that come to mind first. I can usually recall the plot for the most part, but like you suggest, his characterization is too often sacrificed to make way for his own clever remarks. And that scene from Manchester by the Sea just rips me apart. Really great work. Thank you.

@SantoshAiyar 4 года назад

I'm an Aaron Sorkin devotee. A pilgrim in his temple of writing. But i must admit...you freaking nailed a point i never thought existed. Awesome analysis - well thought through, exquisitely crafted explanation, and the references to make your point - Bullseye. Kudos man! Still, like u kept repeating yourself....Sorkin brand is great fun and in spite of this wisdom it won't stop me from devouring his past and future works, having said that, what i'm trying to say is...in the most roundabout way possible....i see your point. And i agree. Cheers.

@alexgerling3686 5 лет назад

Really lined this video, it's opened my eyes more sorkin is my favorite writer at the moment bht I completley understand what you are saying, thanks for the upload. I'm wouldn't class myself as a writer I want to be and this will help with my development to create my own style

@briancrawford8751 10 месяцев назад

If you want to be a writer, you might start with using more punctuation. Run-on sentences are a no-no.

@FrostDriveX 4 года назад

I've never enjoyed movies because the cleverness is over the top and I don't even understand what characters are talking about half the time. Thank you for making this point, and video!!

@n8590 6 лет назад

Great video. I agree, Sorkins writing misses that emotional punch but... that, "fuck you flip flops" scene hits me hard every time I see it, and nothing is lost for me. The performance, the music, Timberlakes pestering, annoying voice, I'm in it!! Not to say that a writer shouldn't write a holistic script, but in some instances, through the directors point of view, the script should be seen as a skeleton to be built up upon. And I think Fincher and the team allowed enough wit into the cut, if only to highlight how annoying Timberlake was. How cold and calculated a lot of them were in that world. And how cold and calculated people are in the worlds Sorkin chooses to tackle, such as The West Wing, Steve Jobs, The Newsroom and so on... These aren't intimate Bergmanian family dramas. As long as the director 'directs' the film towards an emotional crescendo, perhaps lurking beneath the surface, the constant shows of wit will be justified as they often are in my opinion. Or am I talking shit haha?

@UltimateKyuubiFox 5 лет назад

To me what works about the final confrontation between Savrin and Zuckerberg is that Savrin's quip is laced with condescension. He's taking the attitude that Mark thrives off of and punching him in the face with it. Mark is always flippant and never takes anything seriously and for the first time in the story someone is genuinely furious with him AND speaks in the language he understands, all to call him pretentious and snippy. It's real. I've done it. Plenty of people have. I actually find that moment to be the most effective usage of quippy dialogue in an emotional scene that doesn't detract from the emotion. That's what that character would do, and the scene carries onward with all of the passion and weight. He just BULLDOZES through it like a lightning bolt, it's insane. That's anger and control in synchrony and it totally works for me.

@Mic-Mak 6 лет назад

Your argument is compelling and I think I agree with you when it comes to Sorkin. Perhaps it’s a dosage issue and Sorkin uses wit too much. I stopped watching the Newsroom after Season 2 because none of the characters felt real. On the other hand I am a huge fan of David E. Kelley who is another notorious witty writer. Boston Legal is my favorite TV show and I love rewatching it every year partly because of the dialogue. But also because of the characters and the stories. I am invested in the stories and what they have to say about the world we live in. Granted Boston Legal is a comedy drama but even in his strictly drama shows like The Practice of which Boston Legal is a spin-off, Kelley was effecting in making us care about the story and the characters. I was emotionally invested. Personally, in general I am a huge admirer of wit which is why I am a huge quote collector. One of my favorite examples of compelling wit in drama is the opening & ending narration by Rod Serling in the Twilight Zone TV series.

@dylanmurray9973 6 лет назад

With the social network I think the cleverness kind of worked bc all of the people were highly educated Harvard students, so them making those comments was what they were actually thinking.

@BenFromCanada 6 лет назад

Man, I have to disagree. It's not inconsistent, it's style and depth in writing. I don't hear Aaron Sorkin's quips and think "Oh this is a joke," I see an author's voice. I would argue the consistency you're looking for is in the world he creates. Yes, his world isn't a place where people talk like regular humans, but it's a very engaging one full of momentum and intrinsic beauty. I haven't ever laughed at Eduardo's "fuck you flip flops" line, I've always viewed it as uncomfortable. In Aaron's world, this is how someone communicates betrayal. I think that shows leagues more interesting artistic integrity than you're giving it credit for. He's aware of what he's doing.

@OneHandClap 6 лет назад

hooray for dissent. as always, thank you for offering a critical opinion in the comments. that's what it's all about. who knows, maybe my perspective isn't always the best one. or maybe it's too limited ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ anyway here's my response to the points you raise: I think we actually mostly agree. Your point about his world not being a "place where people talk like regular humans" but instead a place with a consistent "author's voice" is more or less what i meant about the cast being a multi-headed vehicle for his lines. I totally get why you'd put this consistent in a positive light, because as I said, I did enjoy a lot about the social network here im just trying to show how ~over~using cleverness in the wrong moments can cause issues in an otherwise good script, either taking the viewer emotionally out of a scene or messing with unique and consistent character development. The thing about my use of the word "consistency" too is that I'm really just referring to how he botched Woz's character in Steve Jobs (a specific example of the character development issues). I otherwise think his characters do maintain a consistently Sorkin-esque voice. So again, I think we mostly agree. anyway, that's probably already too long a response, but thanks again for offering your opinion

@scottmyers3512 5 лет назад

Agree - the violation isn't the use of cleverness, it is the use of it as a lone tactic. In doing so, for me at least, it distracts rather than creates an authentic connection with what is on-screen. The tone becomes almost condescending to the viewer as opposed to engaging as, say, Coen brothers or Tarantino writing.

@paxwallacejazz 5 лет назад

Yeah like Christopher Fry or Shakespeare . Anyway good point.

@dreezy5254 5 лет назад

Only a year late with this reply! Great video and I agree, even though I still love The Social Network. To your point about Sorkin's characters all sounding the same I would say the same thing about Tarantino. His films set in the modern day have characters who are all frothing at the mouth with pop culture references and his characters would all rather say 100 words than 5. Don't get me wrong RD, PF and JB are all great but everything post that is like Tarantino is trying to play pop culture bingo. His influence is unquestionable but for me his recent films have grated with their self satisfaction. But then again he was never going for realism!

@emmetdalton3199 3 года назад

Wozniak’s remark in the garage (‘computers aren’t supposed to have human flaws...’) could easily be something he had been meaning to say to Jobs for a long time. Also, just because he isn’t always quick on the draw doesn’t mean he never is. Two separate occasions that have nothing to do with each other aren’t enough to establish consistency or inconsistency.

@alphaalpacapack 6 лет назад

Man this is brilliant.

@17R3W 4 года назад

The woz line makes sense. Of the two Steve's, Woz is the smarter, more technical one. It makes perfect sense that when it comes to people (a crowd) he would stumble, but when it comes to machines, he would be witty. I know many people like this in real life.

@linisbaden2551 5 лет назад

great video

@saiashwin26 5 лет назад

Great video essay, I love The Social Network, might be my 3rd or 4th favorite Fincher movie, but the problems you point out are true but because it is so expertly directed you dont notice it right away because you are already sucked into that world.The funny lines popping up in emotional moments is truer in other sorkin movies/tv shows as i thought social network maintained a consistency and wit throughout because of how fincher staged the scene we only chuckle when its appropriate, for example in the eduardo throwing a rage scene, i never chuckled at sean parker's comments as it only added to the misery of eduardo and we were invested in his character but scenes like sorkin asking mark the sound he was making was supposed to be funny.

@powerfuless 4 года назад

It's not just cleverness it's smugness. So many of the "buttons" on Sorkin's scenes are a clever put-down where one person "wins" which is meant to prompt the audience to say "oooh no she didn't!" It's a dramaturgy of dominance.

@gaius_diem 6 лет назад

I understood. Shit. Great video, man. The last scene was a punch in the gut.

@YoavMoran 6 лет назад

I can't be agreeing with you more. Emotion is sacrificed to cleverness in these scenes, and it reminds me where this kind of thing happens also in real life. I know people that the most important thing for them is to be witty - and it's hard to reach through this wall to them. This is what I feel when I see all these oh-so-witty people on screen - frustration. Kudos for the observation, man.

@ThomasFlight 6 лет назад

Hey Michael, this is a great video. You perfectly illustrate what I think holds Sorkin back from being (maybe) the greatest of all time. What you're saying is especially true about his character's sounding similar, I don't know if you've watched The Newsroom, but the show has that problem big time... but... I loved that show. So it's weird. I think it's a subtle adjustment, because the heighten, stylish dialogue is a tool that often gets forget in film, but that when deployed can produce an amazing movie (My Girl Friday). I would say leave The Social Network 99% alone but drop the wit in the 1% of more serious moments. Unrelated but I hate that Steve Jobs movie.

@ThomasFlight 6 лет назад

Also, it kinda reminds me of peoples complaints about some of the newer Marvel movies having "too many jokes" because on one hand, I get it. On the other hand... the jokes are funny. So I'm torn.

@OneHandClap 6 лет назад

Hey wow thanks for checking out the video. I'm a big fan. I totally with your agree with your comment, and though I talk about how I really enjoy Sorkin and The Social Network specifically, my ambivalence on this topic doesn't fully come through in the video. Definitely agree on the 1% 99% concept (though maybe I'm at 2% haha). Anyway, thanks again for watching and leaving a note. Always appreciate the video essay community. p.s. though I know no one's really watching this video anymore, for any of my fans reading this, go check out Thomas Flight's channel!

@ThomasFlight 6 лет назад

Hey thanks! Definitely keep up the good work. Hope to see more from you soon!

@GizmoMaltese 4 года назад

This has always bothered me about Sorkin. It's also true in Woody Allen movies and Tarantino movies. The most difficult thing to do is to write dialogue that doesn't sound like some version of you.

@andrewschell6536 4 года назад

I think you have confused unique and consistent with a specific style of writing, his movies are more personality deprivation tank while you live in that environment of people. It's like you are forgetting that when you are watching a comedy it's not... normal for spaceships full of aliens jump in suddenly to highjack a pure comedy. That would be more dark comedy Simon Pegg style of a movie. This is how Sorkin does it, just how Christopher Nolan uses many of the same actors because he is able to mold the actor as cinematographic clay figures in multiple roles. It's Sorkin's style to make movies this way, just a modern master at work who is highly characteristic... just like Hitchcock. Just remember that he is well known because he creates these amazing works of cinema and people go see them, they win awards.

@michaelmacias8 3 года назад

What works and what doesn’t work is relative.

@MulderFoxy 5 лет назад

I agree with you in part, the exception to this being the west wing. If you notice the brand and nuance of wit for each character, it's kind if unique, and when they all come together its a bonding mechanism. I guess it all stems from Sorkins incessant need to edify the viewer and incorporate the classical plays and drama that are otherwise out of the average readers reach and interest. But i agree with you that the homogeneity of the bon mots chip away at the emotional depth of characters. Its almost like he's deliberately trying to set up a scene or an arc just around the esoteric idea, just in a grandly dramatic way. The Bible and Don Quixote being two most prominent running themes. Great observation dude

@kielanellis117 3 года назад

It's an interesting point, but like I've seen several other commenters say, this implies that realism is the only valid form of writing. Lot's of very famous writers draft dialogue and plot in odd, specific, clever, or even measured ways, like Shakespeare, or Cormac McCarthy, or in my opinion, the Cohen Brothers. Characters in those writings often sound very similar, but it's the quips, cleverness, measure and cadence of their writing that draws people to their style. All it requires is that the writing style is consistent and that the setting of their story fits their style, which I believe Sorkin always makes sure to do. Sorkin's style would feel very out of place in a film like Manchester by the Sea, or any personal family drama for example, which is probably why he doesn't write them, and instead choses to focus on the worlds of technology, law, and news, all of which already have verbose incomprehensible banter baked into their foundation.

@YourLoyalDeserter 3 года назад

It works when you're writing the heightened characters that Sorkin is writing about in Social Network and West Wing, and that sameness to the dialogue actually works in the shows favor in West Wing, as it's what makes that troupe of characters unique. It makes the bond between them feel stronger.

@michaelcorcoran8768 2 года назад

It might work when you're writing for the president of the United States, but not some quasi Dan Rather character or cable media pundit. All the resume pushing, and braggadocia was absurd coming from a legacy media organization.

@YourLoyalDeserter 2 года назад

@@michaelcorcoran8768 Totally disagree, the staff are as smart as the president in that show, and they’re all crazed workaholics who are wired all the time. I also think it kind of works like a musical. Like, no, nobody goes around randomly singing and dancing, but it doesn’t matter. No, people don’t talk like sorkin characters, but the music of the dialogue is beautiful

@v-22 3 года назад

Your video is underrated and, I'm sorry to say, going over people's heads. Maybe that's how Sorkin feels like

@AshPragasam 3 года назад

Damn this video is more accurate now he's directing his own stuff. The Chicago 7 was essentially actors trading Sorkin quips past each other for 2 hours

@DarrenSemotiuk 6 лет назад

As a huge Sorkin fan, I REALLY appreciate the justified analysis you risked sharing in this video -- which obviously comes from a place of love/appreciation for Sorkin, not easy surface hate like some might be coming from.

@OneHandClap 6 лет назад

thank you! I feel like so many people just saw the baseline fact that I was being critical and dismissed a lot of the points I'd tried to make. Definitely coming from a place of love. Nice to see your comment :)

@randallmay6345 3 года назад

There are a few problems I find with this video. 1. I actually know people who talk like a Sorkin character. They're smarter than most, and remember the most abstract of facts. They talk fast, and they can string a thought from why water is wet to why there is war in the middle-east. 2. His characters do have distinct voices. I often watch parodies of his writing and I can quickly identify by the phrasing which of Sorkin's characters would have said a given line. A great demonstration of this is the Seth Meyer's parody of a Sorkin walk and talk. As soon as they started speaking I was assigning lines to West Wing characters. Toby had a distinct voice from CJ who had a distinct voice from Josh who had a distinct voice from Leo..etc..etc ..etc 3. Movies are primarily made 2 ways, action driven or dialogue driven. Sorkin isn't writing Rambo, cars aren't exploding, aliens aren't invading, and no one is wearing a cape and flying through the sky. When the world is in danger in Sorkin's world the premise is grounded in reality, and billionaires are sitting in office and talking and not wearing a tin suit flying through the air and fighting aliens from alternate dimensions. The real problem other writers have with Sorkin is they can't write the quick wips or fit obscure facts into a coherent thought. Everybody who watched this video understood the 14 trout or 1 big fish analogy, but I guarantee that none of them could come up with it on their own. Sorkin specializes in taking complex theories and breaking them down into a ologies that the average person can understand. Although his characters have an average IQ of 140, he writes dialogue that doesn't pander buy doesn't require PhD in English lit to understand.

@Awgolas 5 лет назад

Aaron Sorkin isn't trying to pretend that these characters are actually able to speak with superhuman levels of verbal intelligence, he's developing an aesthetic dialogue. I think there are cases in which his cleverness detracts from the story (oftentimes this happened in The Newsroom), in my opinion The Social Network isn't a great example of that, especially since a lot of the witty dialogue is at least grounded in court transcripts. Software folk tend to try to be overly witty.

@TheinterfaceTvSeries 3 года назад

In my humble opinion, we need more cleverness in dialogue to combat the banality I hear in so many films these days. So many modern filmmakers are caught up in making their characters sound realistic when reality, quite often, isn't that interesting. We've lost that sense of style in cinematic dialogue that separated film from life. Sorkin, in a sense, is a throwback to the days of Billy Wilder.

@GrimReader 2 года назад

West Wing thing completely dismantled Sorkin’s failures so well

@thomastv914 6 лет назад

With AS we get to be blown away by trying to keep up with the impressive content and inhuman pace of the dialogue. And before you can even digest and fully appreciate one line, the next one will leave you dumbstruck. That is fascinating and very addictive. You are barely being able to keep up, still it leaves you feeling smarter for catching most of the wittyness. Also his shows and movies for that same reason are well worthy of a rewatch, as you get to relive those wow moments, and even marvel at some details and twists that you missed the first (few) times. Only a few writers can do this, which is why you get addicted to AS. When you are that caught up by the dialogue, I think it is ok that the character development is sometimes missing. It a well worth trade-off.

@tomyates2551 3 года назад

I love his movies. I hope he keeps doing what he does. That said, the point in this video is not without merit but it chooses the wrong target. The best example of Sorkin’s worst trait (making every character too similar) is actually to be found in The Newsroom.

@wes6571 4 года назад

Good video. Just that you know, Sorkin, himself has said that he is aware of the way all of his characters speak the same way. I guess that’s just his style.

@yourtalentexpert 5 лет назад

Some screenplays are heavy on certain aspects (Roma, First Reformed). I think you have a valid point. Sorkin’s universe is always an over-intelligent and witty. Shamaylan will always give you twists on top of twists. Personally, IRL where we discard intelligence, I enjoy the eacapism of his screenplay. When I want a multi-emotional rollercoaster, I’ll go elsewhere - to a Jenkins or even Nolan, honestly. Lonergan and Cuaron are giving you certain types of characters. Elite intellectuals they are not. Josh Singer is cut from this same cloth with Spotlight and The Post. You could take any writer and find something they don’t deliver on. Everyone has their style.

@sofiaarango3484 4 года назад

Sorkin is not that smart tho, it's all a facade, a trembling facade covered in nervous sweat

@rossprohaska6263 3 года назад

While I don’t disagree with what you are pointing out there is one thing that needs to also be dug deeper into within his style. He writes like musicians play music. There is a beat, and in fact a meter about what words go where. This is his “style” compared to structure. Led Zeppelin doesn’t sound like the Doors. Metallica doesn’t sound like Backstreet Boys. That’s because they have their own style within a musical scale and how they choose to play their own music using the exact same eight notes as others. Sorkin understands this fundamentally at its core of what he writes, and that is why it might sound the same. It’s music, and thats the type of music he is playing within the words put into script.

@EPSTomcat11 6 лет назад

Overusing anything is usually bad, unless the point is to overuse it :)

@whoiswillo 6 лет назад

I won't go into too much detail here, but I think you're asking the wrong questions and looking at things the wrong way, and in doing so completely misunderstanding Sorkin's purpose and point in his writing. First off, Sorkin writes in a hyperrealistic way, meaning that his scripts are not intended to be taken as realistic. Sorkin uses dialogue--and quips--the same way other writers would use physical space or other keys to tell you who is winning the scene in question. First off, Sorkin often compares his dialogue to a musical, with a specific rhythm and flow that--again--is intentionally not realistic. He writes about hyper-intelligent people because it helps make it more palpable that the characters would talk in this manner and have quips on the ready. A quip will generally disrupt the rhythm of a Sorkin speech as it is often used as an accent or flourish to end a scene or a conversation. Several of the examples you used from Steve Jobs do this because that's how the characters deal with Steve Jobs and put him back in his place and usually remind him of his failures. One of the major themes of Steve Jobs is how Jobs doesn't want to be boxed in by other people, but that's also the only way he is ever held in check. Which is why John Sculley, the one character in the whole movie who never quips is also the one character in the movie that can't contain Steve in any way. The quips on Sports Night and The West Wing were smart people showing they were smart to other smart people, and it was sort of a reinforcement mechanism, the same way you would reference movies or repeat lines from a television show with your friends. It was how they showed one another they were in the club--and it was to show that they were on the same wavelength. I'm not saying Sorkin doesn't have his flaws, he does. But I think this video does a disservice to him through over-generalization and a deep-seeded lack of effort into trying to figure out what the author was trying to do and why, and instead assuming the worst about their intents.

@brixan... 23 дня назад

Sorkin writes intelligent characters, usually behind the scenes in high places (Harvard tech startup, the White House, Apple conference, etc.). And his writing is all about dialogue. No explosions, no blood. Just psychological warfare. It's the right setting and the right "style" of story.

@TunaBagels 6 лет назад

5:01 I think this clip gave me secondhand burns.

@Shoosmita 3 года назад

This makes sense

@stephenlayland2889 5 лет назад

The characters in A Few Good Men were distinct, sharply drawn and closely engaged. The characters in The West Wing were distinct, sharply drawn and closely engaged. The characters in Molly's Game were distinct, sharply drawn and closely engaged. The characters in The Social Network were sharply drawn and closely engaged. But they were all supernally smart, ambitious and cynical kids. Of COURSE they all sound the same. There are two more elements missing from your analysis. First, your screen credits. Second, your name. "OneHandClap" is clever -- too clever. Writing.Com/authors/runoffscribe

@harrygarden5976 Год назад

It's really clear that Sorkin is in the same league with Joss Whedon in terms of the subject

@jaredclancy 3 года назад

what a specious dialogue. 'the dialogue is smart so everyone is saying the same thing'

@everafter2611 3 года назад

I think it's great

@OleFranky 5 лет назад

Great video and I agree. AND I'm a fan of Sorkinisms. I think David Mamet has a similar "problem." Although I enjoy these writers' "problems" a lot.

@Ahmed-bk1gc 4 года назад

Sure, but it's a movie for a reason.Sorkin himself acknowledged this and said that it's meant not to be real. The only writer with somewhat of an enjoyable realistic dialogue is Noha Baumbach( I hope I spelled his name right). It doesn't take away from anything , for a matter of a fact it adds to the characters and show you how smart they are, and we all love smart characters don't we? Edit: If you think the only good thing about sorkin is his dialogue then you really didn't understand the meaning of his movies.

@alexman378 3 года назад

Eduardo's comeback in the end doesn't come off as forced though, many people do that when they're heated up and someone tries to belittle them for something they have little control over.

@2011Savagee 5 лет назад

Thanks! I actually like sorkins style, but i also always find the characters too sober and quick-witted to show real human reactions. The dialogues are winger driven by emotions than by wise beat-exchanges

@crazypo0d0g 6 лет назад

Wow this basically showed me why I didn't really feel like I saw an amazing movie when I watched the social network. I thought it was a good movie just not incredibly memorable one. My emotions didn't resonate with it

@chiokeford1782 6 лет назад

i wish i could give extra likes on your videos

@OneHandClap 6 лет назад

appreciate the comment. hate to be so promotion-y, but sharing the link on facebook, twitter, or reddit is kinda like giving it 100 likes. that's most of what the algorithm looks for when it's deciding whether or not the video is gonna blow up

@FencingMessiah 2 года назад

this is less a problem of wittiness and more a problem of one type of wittiness. Even clever people are clever in different ways. Its why i respect the coen brothers dialogue. In millers crossing there are many savvy characters but they rarely sound the same

@wmski 6 лет назад

"As Shades more sweetly recommend the Light, So modest Plainness sets off sprightly Wit: For Works may have more Wit than does 'em good, As bodies perish through excess of Blood." From Alexander Popes' Essay on Criticism, 1711, a worthwhile, insightful read. www.eighteenthcenturypoetry.org/works/o3675-w0010.shtml

@kerelberel 5 лет назад

Lots of hollywood movies and tv shows have this. It's annoying and unreal. Especially Westworld had to have this with all their snarky frowning characters.

@johncfoster7949 6 лет назад

Good point. Tarantino does this too. Every character is Quentin Tarantino. I still like his films but that is what is holding him back.

@dannystevens2911 3 года назад

To be fair, most people at Harvard talk in convoluted "witty" verbal phrases and jabs, it's kinda their thing

@zzzzzzmc 5 лет назад

Really interesting take on Sorkin. This is a bit of nitpicking, but saying his witty dialog dates all the way back to West Wing does a disservice to Sports Night!

@jimreily7538 3 года назад

Great video. I always enjoy more realistic characterisation in films. Manchester by the Sea exemplifies this. I enjoy alot of Sorkin's work, but watching Sorkin films is sort of like watching action movies - you're just waiting for the cool lines. In the majority of dialogue in the majority of Sorkin works, whether it's the West Wing, or the Social Network, or anything before or since, few if any of the characters speak as if they're real, normal humans. I know lots of people who've worked on political campaigns (mainly at the Congressional level), I know even more people who work in Silicon Valley. They are very intelligent people. Some are quiet introverts. Some are talkative. But even the smartest people I know, including a guy who clerked with a former SC Justice, worked on political campaigns and now runs an analytics company in Silicon Valley, whose breadth of knowledge was vast, never communicated with me, or others, using anything close to the witty, stylised repartee that is probably the defining feature of Sorkin's dialogue. No person I've met speaks that way, and I personally find it distracting. His characters are always a little too over the top. President Bartlett is brilliant to the point of being a genius. His press secretary is the quirky, sometimes clumsy, but still very sharp witted. God characters all fit into these definable categories. They're often quite stock. That sense that you're waiting for the cool line, definitely is a distraction. Manchester by the Sea, or, say The Wind That Shakes The Barley, or Beasts of No Nation, or almost any Ken Loach film, are excellent because the characters communicate using the words, the argot, the mannerisms that not only hold true for them, as characters, but for the time setting, and situation. Hence they are more realistic characters, and the films feel realistic. You're not waiting to celebrate the perfectly crafted witty response. You're watching a story unfold. They are immersive and engaging, and not contrived. For me, the West Wing is entertaining, but a guilty pleasure. A Ken Loach film is, or a film like Manchester by the Sea, is gripping. That's how I feel. Too notch analysis.