XPost: rec.arts.sf.written   
   From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   Alan Baker  wrote:   
   >On 2020-04-29 3:29 p.m., Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>Alan Baker  wrote:   
   >>>On 2020-04-29 9:14 a.m., Paul S Person wrote:   
      
   >>>>>. . .   
      
   >>>>IIRC, Ring Lardner was given the script credit for /M*A*S*H/ --   
   >>>>despite the fact that the actual dialog was mostly, if not entirely,   
   >>>>ad-libbed by the actors.   
      
   >>>>I'm not saying any script from Ring Lardner could be a bad script, but   
   >>>>if the actors ignore it and make up their own dialog, what does it   
   >>>>matter?   
      
   >>>You're going to have to provide a little support for your claim that the   
   >>>"dialog was mostly, if not entirely, ad-libbed by the actors."   
      
   >>It's a fairly common feature of Robert Altman films. He was always going   
   >>for natural performances.   
      
   >And I'm sure there was a goodly amount of ad libbing...   
      
   >...but "mostly, if not entirely"?   
      
   >No.   
      
   Why not? Scripts are a lot of stage directions and descriptions. The   
   dialogue could have included key lines required to move the plot along,   
   otherwise broad outlines of what needed to be accomplished in the scene.   
      
   The IMDb trivia quotes Tom Skerritt saying 80% ad libbed. Of course,   
   IMDb never bothers to cite interviews, articles, and histories the bits   
   of trivia are clipped from, so who knows. It did comment that some of   
   the actors Altman hired were from improv.   
      
   A lot of the more memorable bits of dialogue, like "finest kind"   
   repeated throughout, were from the novel.   
      
   I'd love to see what directions were in the shooting script and how much   
   actual dialogue there was.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)