What makes for a successful two-character play?

As many of you know, I'm a writer- and I recently tried my hand at writing a play with only two characters. It's very dialogue-driven and I worry that such a piece screams "bored audience."

So for comparative purposes, what elements make a two-character play work best?

---

Thanks Jarethan- I'm going to PM you.

---

And if there were any sort of "formula" they'd all be successful. It makes no difference how many are in the cast.

---

Completely. There is a huge difference between a two person show versus shows with large casts. I immediately thought of Plaza Suite when I saw this thread. I think the audience has to immediately care about the characters, the direction has to be excellent, the story needs to be intriguing, and the acting has to be top notch. In huge musicals, one of those elements can just be average, and people won't care. And of course when you cast celebrities, people will just want to be in the same room with them. Not realistic for most writers of course, but it helps ticket sales.

I think a two person show follows the same rules as any play. The characters need to be intriguing and draw the audience in (they need not be likable necessarily). The story needs conflict and a precipitating incident that takes the audience and characters in a different direction. Dialogue is music which is why workshopping a play is so important. It needs to be carefully chosen, sharp, smart and effective. It needs to be efficient.

It surprises me how many plays get produced on Broadway that are poorly written-no conflict, no “flip”. Just lots of banal dialogue. Audiences rarely connect to a play without conflict and many dislike plays where the character remains in the same place they started. It surprises me how many plays are written where the protagonist remains in stasis.

I loved The Sound Inside but it’s a rare bird. Many playwrights find talking to the audience as a cheat, as I do. I feel it cuts corners and lessens the work of the playwright to show rather than explain. It’s less muscular and gives the actor less subtext to use their skills to communicate.

---

Happy to share that I did catch a performance of I DO, I DO with Mary Martin & Robert Preston - SRO

A STEADY RAIN was gripping, tense and occasionally humorous - made more so with the portrayals from Hugh Jackman and Daniel Craig, from Keith Huff's dramatic tale of two rogue cops.

Updated On: 1/7/20 at 08:04 PM

Two interesting characters, one interesting conflict and something to say.... preferably something we haven't seen said the same way before.

Bettyboy72 said: "I think a two person show follows the same rules as any play. The characters need to be intriguing and draw the audience in (they need not be likable necessarily). The story needs conflict and a precipitating incident that takes the audience and characters in a different direction. Dialogue is music which is why workshopping a play is so important. It needs to be carefully chosen, sharp, smart and effective. It needs to be efficient.

It surprises me how many plays get produced on Broadway that are poorly written-no conflict, no “flip”. Just lots of banal dialogue. Audiences rarely connect to a play without conflict and many dislike plays where the character remains in the same place they started. It surprises me how many plays are written where the protagonist remains in stasis.

I loved The Sound Inside but it’s a rare bird. Many playwrights find talking to the audience as a cheat, as I do. I feel it cuts corners and lessens the work of the playwright to show rather than explain. It’s less muscular and gives the actor less subtext to use their skills to communicate."

Very well said, I must say. Two strong characters who experience conflict and change in some way IS action in a two-character play. If the dialogue is well-written and multi-leveled, with strong actors saying it, that can be all the action needed for a great theatrical piece. I agree with Bettyboy72 about characters talking to the audience being a cheat. I'd rather see the characters in action rather than have one tell me all about it because there's less tension in the telling. It's a problem I have with most of Sondheim's later shows, where characters often sing their songs/thoughts to the audience rather than to one another and do an awful lot of explaining.