An excerpt from my script review for Warfare which will be available 05/12/25:
4.) Dialogue and Description
Can you write an interesting story without any dialogue?
It’s not until page 12 before we have our first spoken word of dialogue.
The argument could be made for “yes” to above question, because this script did so.
What it did well was the idea of clear images while also being description heavy.
There were a lot of great visuals in this…
From the IED explosion and it’s aftermath, which is the life and death catalyst for two of the soldiers to the visual of Sam’s mangled leg because of it, and the pain of it being touched.
(This last one implements both description and dialogue.)
Here’s a good example from page 83:
JOHN absorbing what he’s being told to do.
JOHN is twenty-one years old, in combat with overwhelming
enemy forces, surrounded by blood and horrifically injured
comrades – and he’s being asked to impersonate a colonel.
John’s a trained soldier who knows that if he lies he’s in a shit ton of trouble, but at the same time if he doesn’t lie it means two of his fellow soldiers are going to die.
Although a bit “wordy” these two entries of description help an actor know how John is going to work through this moral dilemma onscreen.
Another from page 90:
… as he is carried, SAM’S pants are slipping
down. And as they slip, RAY has to grab more material.
Meaning that SAM is soon naked from his waist to his knees.
The lack of dignity, while being shot at, is a strange
combination. It’s dissonant. If they’re about to be killed,
it feels it shouldn’t be this way.
Here they’re evacuating the decimated home, and while being shot at, Sam’s pants are in such tatters that the soldiers carrying him can’t keep them up.
And the script had a lot of similar examples like the two above.
However, this script started off with a lot of “unfilmables” meaning the information we’re reading won’t necessarily translate to the screen, and sometimes that’s okay.
For instance page 3:
They are entering an enemy stronghold – this section of
RAMADI has been so dangerous to enter that the US military
fully withdrew from area three months ago.
How do you “show” that the US hasn’t been there for three months in a film? You can’t, but the important point of this entry is to display the danger these soldiers are willingly walking into.
So on unfilmables, keep them limited and get to the important parts, which this script did, because shortly after…
Page 4:
As a group, OP-1 moves silently up the driveway.
Four of the soldiers keep their focus ahead – at the house.
The others cover all surrounding angles: rooftops,
overlooking windows, their rear.
The four leading soldiers stack up by front door.
A beat.
A go-sign from the lead soldier – lifting the barrel of his
gun, then dipping it.
We “see” all of that play out in our heads, which is important and expertly done.
Contrary to last week’s review of Final Destination, this week’s script did an excellent job of properly breaking up the description and instead of using five line block after five line block we were given “mentally digestible” chunks that worked, and worked well.
On the dialogue, my one word of caution in a project like this is sounding too technical.
You certainly want it to sound authentic, but at the same time understand that most of the audience will be unfamiliar with military jargon.
A lost audience leads to an unhappy audience.
Want EARLY access to our videos, uploads, and movie/script reviews? Members get them FIRST! Follow this link to our Discussion Forum.
