For those of you who don't know, that's when a character(s) looks directly at the camera and/or directly addresses the audience. They've done it in just about every kind of movie you can think of, at least once. Everything from Annie Hall to Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. Fight Club would be the most popular example, I suppose.

Anyway, I've been debating whether or not to use it in a script. I'm not asking for advice. Rather I was thinking about it and just thought it'd make for an interesting discussion. I think just about any traditional screenwriting book would tell you flat out not to do it. However I think there's gutsier writers around here who wouldn't completely rule it out. What makes it work? What makes it not work? Does it have to tie into some sort of message or demand for audience interaction (e.g. Funny Games) or can it just be used to spice up the narrative? I don't think either Annie Hall or Fight Club had to incorporate it to make the stories work but would these films really be the same if they hadn't?

Just a couple questions to get the ball rolling. I'd be curious to hear people's thoughts on the subject. Personally, I don't think a film has to be Funny Games to break the forth wall. I think neither Annie Hall nor Fight Club ever asks for the audience's participation. The writers/filmmakers just opted for a different way of telling the story. I don't think it's something that can work all the time though (or even half the time) and I think a key component in making it work is humor.

Thoughts?

Wesley's been doing that forever in his series Better Days. He's even done it in Molly Dolly and other scripts as well.

Personally, that's a part that I love about it. In other words, it doesn't bother me at all.

Ferris Bueller used it to great effect. I think it was key to the character and storytelling in that movie.

Gary

As mentioned, I do it a lot and in pretty much everything because I'd rather "wink" (literally) at the reader instead of taking myself too seriously.

Someone commented on this very subject and said it "Takes them out of the story" and it all boils down to taste.

If they make "Deadpool" based on the comics he will break the wall a lot and Ryan Reynolds is perfect for that type of role and he said he was "Born to play Deadpool" and I agree.

Comics do it all the time and people love reading them.

I'm all for it not just because I use it but because it's enjoyable in movies, comics, tv whatever the medium.

There's an overlooked and underviewed film called 'The Second Coming' by Russell T Davies and Adrian Sherwood who use this technique effectively. I suggest you seek it out. Especially as Chris Ecclestone is playing Jesus as he uses it.

Quoted from James McClung For those of you who don't know, that's when a character(s) looks directly at the camera and/or directly addresses the audience. They've done it in just about every kind of movie you can think of, at least once. Everything from Annie Hall to Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. Fight Club would be the most popular example, I suppose. Anyway, I've been debating whether or not to use it in a script. I'm not asking for advice. Rather I was thinking about it and just thought it'd make for an interesting discussion. I think just about any traditional screenwriting book would tell you flat out not to do it. However I think there's gutsier writers around here who wouldn't completely rule it out. What makes it work? What makes it not work? Does it have to tie into some sort of message or demand for audience interaction (e.g. Funny Games) or can it just be used to spice up the narrative? I don't think either Annie Hall or Fight Club had to incorporate it to make the stories work but would these films really be the same if they hadn't? Just a couple questions to get the ball rolling. I'd be curious to hear people's thoughts on the subject. Personally, I don't think a film has to be Funny Games to break the forth wall. I think neither Annie Hall nor Fight Club ever asks for the audience's participation. The writers/filmmakers just opted for a different way of telling the story. I don't think it's something that can work all the time though (or even half the time) and I think a key component in making it work is humor. Thoughts?

I did this in the S.S. Craven Killer Game. It was fun.

Personally, I love it. It puts me in touch with the writer, that's the way I feel about it. And I like to get in touch with people; so it feels reciprocal. I acknowledge their presence, and they, mine. Feels good.

Sandra El

There was one called The Great Brain Robbery that was done during the "starring SimplyScripters" period around here by Martin Lancaster that has one of the more hilarious wall-breaking incidents that was done for the reader's benefit: http://www.simplyscripts.com/scripts/TheGreatBrainRobbery.pdf

Martin gets carried away in his description of Phil (Dogglebe), and Phil calls in on it in the dialogue. Martin apologizes in the description.

Breaking the fourth wall is usually only done for two reasons: because the character is narrating or for comic relief.

The one that popped into my head right off was in The Empire Strikes Back when C-3PO is chasing after everyone when the Hoth Base is under attack. They run into the hanger with the Millenium Falcon and the door closes C-3PO out. He turns to the camera and says "How typical" before the door opens back up and Han Solo pulls him through.

Was that a moment necessary for the plot? Absolutely not, but somehow, it worked. It worked right then and right there by that character. I doubt any other character could have pulled it off. We got a little moment to ourselves to chuckle, and it was not something that permeated the film throughout because The Empire Strikes Back isn't a comedy.

That's probably the singular best comic example I have of the 4th wall break where it works perfectly in a single moment and isn't overdone in a movie where it almost doesn't make sense to have it.

I don't like it at all. I think it ruins the movie.

Stuff like blood spluttering onto the camera lense to people talking directly into the camera annoys me...

I have done lots of this with Tanis, in the Soul Shadows series.

Partly in response to the ongoing debates against the use of "we" and so forth -- though I never employ the dreaded "we see" -- and partly out of curiousity to play with such a device.

I think it can easily be overdone -- and Tanis is probably nearing the end of her lifespan -- having gone on much longer than I originally intended -- but I would argue there is nothing inherently wrong with using this device.

Like most things, whether it is well-done or intrusive is likely some combination of personal tastes and the skills of the writer.

I am not sure I would employ this device for a pro submission -- but these boards are a perfect place for practicing various techniques to see how they fly.

Tanis has met with varying degrees of success -- she has her haters haha -- but it has been fun to work with something like that, and I can see no real reason not to at least give it a try.  

Like Tommy said, I'm personally against this.  It's very cheesy, to say the least.  In a comedy, done the right way, and by the right character, it's OK, but for me, it does pull me out of the illusion, which is the world the movie created.

While I've seen it done right in several classics (most of them mentioned above), 9 times out of 10 I hate it.

Indie filmmakers LOVE to do this.  I can't even count the number of times I've seen it at a film festival.  The story will be going normally - it'll be something like a guy and a girl sitting down to dinner - the girl leaves, and then the guy slings his arm over the chair, turns to us and starts talking, "Ok, so the thing about women is..."   AHHH!!!  I can't f****** stand it!!!!

I don't like it when characters talk to me, and if they do, they better be damn charismatic like John Cusack in "High Fidelity".  Thing is, most people aren't John Cusack, so they should stay away from the fourth wall.

It is cheesy, but I agree, when used correctly (if there is such a thing), it's brilliant.

One of the only uses of it I've ever like, was in the Death Proof segment of Grindhouse (or just Grindhouse, internationally).

Kurt Russell watches the car leave and faces right into the camera and just smiles. He's so happy and it's just awesome.

But, overall, I don't like it.

Crank 2 has a great moment where Chelios turns to the camera and flips the bird.  

Also Funny Games breaks the fourth wall several times and the effect is great.

Funny Games was terrible!  Huge disappointment, IMO.  I had heard so many good things about the original, and the remake I saw, was...well...terrible.

I did not like the use of the "the wall' at all.

I will just echo the general feeling and say I love it when it is done right, although how to do it right I have got no idea.

I think there is a lot of luck involved, sometimes things just work and yet nobody can explain how.

Very recently it was done in 500 Days of Summer, right at the very end of the film the lead character turns and winks at the camera - in my mind this worked perfectly.

For some reason I have it in my head that Robert Downey Junior has done the same thing in a movie before, maybe Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, and with him I imagine it is the "John Cusack" effect. I mean, it is Robert Downey Junior - who is gonna complain about him winking at us?

Dressel is probably on to something there, maybe it is entirely down to our feelings/opinion of the the actor.