This is a pretty specific question as far as questions go.

In a script I'm working on the character is a ventriloquist and I am writing parts of her "act" but I am not sure how you write the character names for dialogue.

Character
It's rainy out.

Dummy
You can say that again.

Would it be like that or would you use the characters name and add a parenthetical that says (Dummy's Name) then his dialogue and so on.

I think the first way sounds right but I have also had someone tell me that using a completely different name for a voice coming from the same character is confusing.

I think the first way is right too, Wesly. If you did it any other way, then it'd be confusing.

~Zack~

If it's a ventriloquist doing an act, then why would the dummy qualify as a completely different character? I'd go with the second one, simply because the character is still talking, they're just pretending to be the dummy as well:

CHARACTER
It's rainy out.
(in dummy's voice)
You can say that again.

I suppose it doesn't really matter. Either way doesn't seem incorrect or confusing to me, but it's really up to you.


Matt.

I agree with Chism. Putting it as another character makes it complicated. Unless if it is a living dummy.

Gabe

Yes, living dummies are another matter. That would require them to have separate passages of dialogue. Write it the first way, you might get readers assuming that the dummy is alive, when it's not. Especially if it's a horror/supernatural type script.


Matt.

Quoted Text Especially if it's a horror/supernatural type script.

It is not even close to those genres. It falls under the drama, documentary, adventure buddy film action genre that doesn't exist yet.

I do see the logic in using parentheticals to convey the fact that it is a dummy but wouldn't using (In dummy's voice) quite a few times get annoying to read?

This wasn't going to be a couple lines out of the act, it was going to be quite a bit more.

maybe the easy fix is to use...

CHARACTER
It's rainy out.
(in dummy's voice)
You can say that again.

Then have the character or dummy do something like laugh, look at someone in the audience etc. etc. so that it breaks up just enough so that it doesn't turn into one large blob in the middle of a page.

That sounds a lot better than what I probably would have ended up doing. Thanks for the quick and insightful responses.

I would think if the dummy had its own qualities and is essentially another character in the story, he should have his own voice in the script. I think it would be more confusing to have the parentheticals.

I'd make the dummy a separate character, as a ventriliquist does that during his act.



Phil

Just to echo Phil here, without doubt the dummy would be treated as a character in themselves. Most (if not all) dummies are not extensions of the ventriloquist personality but have their own distinct personality and mannerisms. That is the whole point of this art form is it not? The dummy becomes an alter ego of the master, having a different outlook on life and different opinions and so on, this is what provides the entertainment. So really it would be far too confusing to think of this as just one character.

Imagine you wrote a script about someone with split personality, I imagine the standard way would be to treat each personality as a separate character, because really they are. The dummy would be no different to that.

Quoted from Murphy Imagine you wrote a script about someone with split personality, I imagine the standard way would be to treat each personality as a separate character, because really they are. The dummy would be no different to that.

I'm not sure about this one.  If John had five personalities, I think we would still refer to him as John and any dialogue changes would be in parentheses.

Anyone have a copy of Sybil?



Phil

Quoted from dogglebe I'm not sure about this one.  If John had five personalities, I think we would still refer to him as John and any dialogue changes would be in parentheses. Anyone have a copy of Sybil? Phil

As soon as I wrote my post I started searching for a script that dealt with multiple personalities  but cannot find any. Ones like Fight Club do not really count I guess as we are not supposed to know that until the end.

Maybe you are right Phil, I think if I wrote a script with someone who has two definite personalities I would be tempted to have them as two characters, but just make it clear somehow in the beginning. But this may well not be the correct way.

Maybe it depends how the different personalities are shown on the screen, some movies have portrayed them as two different people which would mean two different characters in the script. 'Adaptation' for instance defines Charlie and Donald as two different characters even though they are both played by Nicolas Cage and Donald clearly only existing in Charlie's head. But again this is more like Fight Club in that it is the writers intention that Charlie and Donald at least appear to be separate people.

But anyway, I would still stand by the original question in that a ventriloquist's dummy would be a separate character.

I've just had a look at 'Psycho'. On that script they have "Mother's Voice" as a seperate character heading. Don't know if that's the best example but it's the only multiple personalty one that I can think of.

Maybe just have a note saying from this point on such-and-such's lines are said by whatshisname but in a different voice and then treat them as two different characters.

I guess decide yourself though.

Quoted Text Maybe you are right Phil, I think if I wrote a script with someone who has two definite personalities I would be tempted to have them as two characters, but just make it clear somehow in the beginning. But this may well not be the correct way.

I think the point of a screenplay is to tell a story, and that mostly, highly descriptive words and explanations are looked upon negatively. For example, Steven King's It has about a three-page description of a character's medicine cabinet. My point: keep it simple.

The only way to make your idea simple to present is to have the dummy a separate character, and yes, distinguish him as an alter ego of the ventriloquist early on in the script. It doesn't need to be made aware to the audience, only the reader:

DUMMY is sitting on MASTER's leg, one of his hands in Master's. Dummy's voice comes from Master, his lips barely moving.
DUMMY
I'm a talking doll.

If the dummy is going to be a character in the film, treat him as such.

http://jokes4all.net/jokes/ventriloquist/jokes.html