James at 2011-03-10 14:43:07:

<3 this article.

Couldn't agree more. V.O. when used well is incredible.

On a side note:

FORREST GUMP frequently uses V.O. in the textbook definition worst possible way to use V.O. and it works.

It often repeats things we are seeing onscreen. Tells us what we already know. Often pre-empts dialogue, and tells us how the main character feels about the situation --

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsyYvFgdb5c

This also has examples of time ellipsis.

You can't tell me this movie would be better without V.O. Because it wouldn't.

James at 2011-03-10 14:51:29:

Here's Zemeckis toying around with the V.O. technique he uses heavily in FORREST GUMP in DEATH BECOMES HER

starts @ ~2:45

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ga6GaKn6eCs&feature=related

My favorite bit is @ 3:35 when the V.O. says what Bruce Willis should say and then we literally see and hear him same the exact line.

Forrest Gump uses the same technique of repetition to even better effect.

FIGHT CLUB is a great example of V.O. as well using a totally different technique -- the unreliable narrator.

Thom2 at 2011-03-10 15:36:33:

I believe when a script is written where the writer has been bullied so much to not use any VO, they don't. Instead they write after page to so the reader can understand the core of the story, while this could have been done with a few lines of VO exposition.
If the script is sold and handed of to another writer for rewrites, the producer says, "Let's cut those scenes and use a VO, it'll be cheaper."

James at 2011-03-10 17:21:10:

@Thom -- I think you're dead on. And I actually think it's that practice that gave VO its bad rap in the first place.

Phil at 2011-03-10 17:56:33:

My favorite is Princess Bride. Peter Falk is masterful! (Does that word mean what I think it means?)

Scott at 2011-03-10 18:01:03:

The bigger point I make with my students is two-fold: They should be aware of the 'prejudice' against voiceover narration (as well as flashbacks) and why (basically studio execs and producers think they're signs of sloppy writing).

Once a writer knows that, they should then feel free to do whatever they hell they want: AS LONG AS IT SERVES THE STORY!

But as noted in the OP, if a writer wants to use V.O. narration or flashbacks for that matter, they should think things through carefully to make sure they are going down that path to improve the story, not simply because it makes their task easier.

That's my two cents!

Iain Coleman at 2011-03-10 18:28:37:

My go-to example of great VO narration is Casino. The VOs are well-written and advance the story - but the real trick is that they straddle the cut between one scene and another, That gives them an energy, and lets them power the story along rather than merely commenting on it.