| [BACK]
Not a problem. I personal enjoy moves that are heavy on dialogue, especially if it's clever and smart, i.e. David Mamet at his best and certainly Quentin Tarantino.
But I also a enjoy films, especially shorts that have minimal dialogue and rely almost entirely on images to tell the story.
However, we're living in the early days of Hollywood when there were only silent movies. And remember that once the "talkies" arrived the silent movies remained silent forever.
Your very visual film should have enough dialogue to help carry the story. I've seen many student films in which there was very little dialogue. Some of them worked. And some didn't. The ones that did relied on the great use of sound. And editing. And, oh yeah, a compelling story.
I've read screenplays in which the first few pages were nothing but description. Endless words describing what we're looking at. For a short practice film that you're going to finance, OK. Do it. But don't get into the habit of writing full length screenplays where the visual supercedes the verbal. If you want someone else to buy your script they might not be as excited by all your stage directions as you are.
So, for a short film, make it as visual as you choose (and make sure you have a good story to tell), but when you move up to a feature, I recommend having more dialogue.
|
