To V.O. or Not to V.O.

4093351035_fb167e7411_o“…God help you if you use voice-over in your work, my friends. God help you. That’s flaccid, sloppy writing. Any idiot can write a voice-over narration to explain the thoughts of a character.” – Adaptation

Recently, a friend contacted me in regard to a script he was writing. He wanted to know if  he should use voiceover as a tool of information dissemination.

V.O. is an interesting topic. Most writers, when you mention it, rail against it as the character of Robert McKee does in the above quote from Adaptation. They scream the phrase “Lazy writing!” like an angry fishwife.

… and yet, if they had studied with McKee, as opposed to embracing the rant of a fictionalization of the man, they would realize that this quote does not accurately reflect McKee’s opinion of this tool. McKee does not mind voiceover – if it is used well. He also has said that his persona in Adaptation is “a fucking saint” compared to the real man, but I digress. Many screenwriters are not aware of when voiceover usually becomes part of the script. With a few exceptions (the works of Alexander Payne come to mind), V.O. is added in during post.

I happen to like really well-used V.O. I think of it as simply one more object in the screenwriter’s toolkit. When used well, it is glorious. When not, it is an abysmal failure.

Bladerunner. Sadly, one of the most egregious uses of V.O. ever. The constant narrative is condescending to the audience, as it is used to inform us of what we are seeing on the screen, over and over again. It’s disrespectful; it treats the audience as if we are too dumb to “get” what is happening. TG for Ridley Scott’s director’s cut. That, my friends, is a work of art.

The Shawshank Redemption. Flip the coin, and you will experience one of the best uses of V.O. ever, and it’s not just because the voice is Morgan Freeman – although that certainly helps. I still can’t quite put my finger on it, but something about the use of V.O. in this film adds many subtle layers of nostalgia, melancholy… and hope. But, before you run off and start adding V.O. into your period piece, please remember that Shawshank’s V.O. was added in post, after a test screening did not come off as well as the studio execs had hoped. They took a gamble – and their bet paid off.

daves_total_insanity_sauce_hotSo… if you are wanting to use V.O, consider not using it; instead, write the script without it. If, in rewrites, your vision is not clear, then perhaps it is time to go back to your board, and take a long and hard look at your story beats. Put your V.O. to the side… and try, try again to write without it. If, at the end of the day, there is absolutely no other way to tell it, then use it. But treat it like insanity sauce. Use it sparingly. A little goes a long way.

Now, go write.

HRH, Princess Scribe

P.S. – many thanks to the people at Screenwriting Spark for the shout out today!


About princessscribe

Screenwriter. Creator of things. I love tacos. "Midlife on Fire" Volumes 1 & 2 now available at
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to To V.O. or Not to V.O.

  1. Eva Said says:

    I agree with you! I think V.O is a doubled-aged sword and first time writers will use this too often thus standing out as newbies. Why do I say this? Because the first script I ever wrote had v.o and once I reread it I realized that if I had shown more instead of telling the script could have done better. Much better! Maybe this is just a case of everything-is-better-with-voiceover syndrome.


    • I don’t mind it at all if it’s used well. With ITF, we laid the VO bookends in after post; we just felt that it might enhance the story, but it was not designed that way. But OOOOOFFFF …. BLADERUNNER. WTF?


      • Eva Said says:

        Maybe v.o was envision to be a key part of the movie ( a game changer perhaps?) but in reality it could’ve be done without it.


      • There are some films that benefit from it – Shawshank, and Raising Arizona was pointed out. Double Indemnity, a fabulous use. It’s like a scalpel; it must be used well.


  2. The fear of being called “flaccid” would keep me away from VO, haha!


  3. Totally. VO is just a tool You can fix a flat tire with a jack wrench or you can use it to hit someone upside the head. How to use it effectively is the challenge.


  4. Anyone who questions the necessity for VO is probably an idiot…forgive meee


  5. says:

    Of course, if it is necessary….but to question the need for it?….gimme a break


  6. cynosurer says:

    I’m shocked the PrincessScribe didn’t reference The Princess Bride


  7. I like how the new show Defiant uses VOice Over in the Pilot. It is a really cool show with apparently a GAME affiliated with it – Sci fi. It opens with one of the characters talking about a dream they had to help the audience understand that the show is an earth in the future. Very well done use.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s