the thread about Blast of Silence – a low-budget noir film noted for its use of narration – crystallized this idea I had about a thread on narration.
Generally, I’m against narration in films. I’ve tried to minimize the use of it in radio plays and the like, because it seems to me that, in most cases, you ought to be able to tell the story in dialogue and action. If you have to resort to voice-over narration, it’s evidence that you failed in that. (Although, I will admit, there are cases where the narration is needed, and, done properly, is an excellent addition or counterpoint to the action. See Blast of Silence, and the below.)
Better without the narration:
Bladerunner – probably the poster child for this. I know there are people who actually like it, but they’re apparently in the minority. Harrison Ford’s (arguably very deliberately) monotonic narration doesn’t really add anything to the story that you don’t see. I, like many, prefer the narration-less “Director’s Cut”.
2010: The Year we Make Contact. Kubrick’s 2001 had no narration, Hyams’ 2010 did. That’s not the only difference between the films, but it’s the one that hits you in the face right away. If it was removed, 2010 would have some of the sense of mystery and seriousness that the original had.
Metamorphosis/Winds of Change – a Fantasia-like blend of rock music and animation telling the Greek myths. It really didn’t need Peter Ustinov’s voice-over; it was originally intended to be without narration, and shoulda stayed that way.
Cases where narration helped:
A Clockwork Orange – After the narration-less 2001, Kubrick followed up with this one narrated in the futuristic lingo by Alex (Malcolm McDowell), a definitely untrustworthy narrator.
Barry Lyndon – Kubrick’s next film, based on William Makepeace Thackeray’s novel, featured voice over by Michael Hordern, with dry wit that really made it work better.
Any other thoughts?