I think my favorite part is the animal sacrifice set-up when Rham Jas says "You will be surprised what you will be willing to do when the Lamia comes for you." And then two pages later, after Stephanie has been attacked in her bedroom, she gets the knife and goes looking for the cat. "Here kitty-kitty... Here, kitty-kitty-kitty... She moves closer until her face fills the screen. Such a simple description and that shot is such a cliché, but it works brilliantly in this scene and made me laugh out loud. This is a turning point for Stephanie and we can really "see" the look of terror on her face.

Most of the dialogue worked reasonably well for me - was pretty believable both in content and in style/tone. However there were a few instances where I really felt it was being used to deliver information - mainly in the opening pages. Pages 3-4 The exchange between Ellen and Stephanie is so clearly there to deliver backstory - that Stephanie has a boyfriend, that she is having dinner tomorrow with the parents, that the mother doesn't/won't approve of her. I am curious though - if Ellen is written out of the movie, that means that this exchange must be gone then. How did they deliver the info? Page 6 This also doesn't ring true to me - that Stephanie has to tell her boss about "the big corporate loan...". That dialogue is clearly there to give the info to us, not to the boss: STEPHANIE: By the way, I put the paperwork for the McPherson loan on your desk. MR. JACKS: McPherson? STEPHANIE: That big corporate loan I've been trying to set up? It's just preliminary, but... Pages 51-52 I also didn't find it believable that Stepahnie, who is so very conscious that Ray's Mom might not approve of her past and her education, would (in the first seconds that they meet) launch into the details of her farm-girl history. But, for the most part, the dialogue worked for me. The lines were, in general, very short, and the voices seemed authentic to the characters.

The dialogue is definitely the script's weakest point -- it's nothing special, just functional and economical. While you may not get away with that in a rom-com, it works well enough in a horror-comedy like this where the other elements are so strong. In fact, one reason I thought DMTH would be a good choice for analysis is that it spotlights less visible, but no less important aspects of screenwriting craft (and things that I personally need to remember). When many of us think of "good screenwriting," our first thought may be a script with quotable dialogue. But of course, there's more to it than that. Without a well-constructed narrative, our characters, themes and dialogue won't be nearly as effective as they could have been. And from a Hollywood exec's POV, it's probably easier to hire someone to punch up the dialogue than it is hire someone to overhaul the script's story concept or narrative framework.

"Here kitty-kitty" is without a doubt the best line in the script as far as I'm concerned. I laughed out loud at that, and that is rare for me.

Jacqueline, the example you gave on P. 6 is a pet peeve, what I call "The Reader Has To Know Dialogue." That is, the characters within the story universe would never say what they say because they already know the details, so the only reason the characters are saying it is so the reader will know. I hate that. It's one example of the larger issue: Writer's Convenience. That's any moment in a script where what is said or what happens only exists to make the writer's job easier. It is inauthentic and can always be handled in a better way.

Joe, so true. Having served as a judge an numerous WGA credit arbitrations, I can tell you that of the major categories of analysis, dialogue is the least influential one (in contrast to characters, new scenes or sequences, plot elements). That is a reflection of two major things: (1) Screenplays are primarily a visual medium so it is action that dominates the story. (2) Screenplays are essentially about structure, as you noted in your comments. You can always futz around with dialogue. Not so the story structure. Besides for this kind of movie, dialogue is minimally important. Is it better to have good dialogue? Sure. Did the Raimi brothers set out to write bad dialogue? No. But I don't expect to walk away from a horror movie reciting the dialogue. It's the thrills and chills I want to remember.

My pick for memorable dialogue is this: P. 16: I, Sylvia Ganush, beg. On my mother's grave, I beg you. The use of the word "grave" packs quite a bit of subtext and acts as a prophesy of things to come. P. 17: I begged you... and you shame me. From that, you pretty much figure out the situation is going to get out of hand. P. 41: It was what I wanted before you shamed me. Now I want to see you suffer. There's that shame dynamic coming back into play. And this marks a confirmation that Ganush has switched her goals.

Does anyone who also watched the film have any comments or notes on how they handled the dialogue in the final film? Does it look like they hired someone to "punch it up" or is it mostly how it is in this script?

does anyone have the DMTH screenplay pdf they could pass along? the original link no longer works. thx!