Chernobyl pilot

In the aftermath of the Chernobyl disaster, a scientist's testimony unveils the chilling truth behind the catastrophic event and its devastating human cost.

See other logline suggestions

Overview

Poster
Unique Selling Point

This screenplay stands out for its intense focus on the human experience amidst a historical catastrophe, blending factual events with deep emotional and ethical questions. It appeals to audiences interested in both historical accuracy and character-driven storytelling, making it a compelling piece that resonates with contemporary themes of truth and accountability.

AI Verdict & Suggestions

Ratings are subjective. So you get different engines' ratings to compare.

Hover over verdict cards for Executive Summaries

Gemini
 Highly Recommend
Claude
 Consider
GPT4
 Highly Recommend
Key Takeaways
For the Writer:
The script is powerful in scope and tone, but its emotional impact will deepen if key characters — especially Dyatlov and a handful of secondary figures — are given sharper interior beats. Add a few compact private moments that reveal Dyatlov's doubt or regret (small, concrete gestures or a brief memory/flash of consequence) and give civilians and minor players one or two distinct reactions that make them feel real. At the same time, tighten transitions between the reactor action and the bunker/bureaucracy and simplify dense technical dialogue so the audience never loses the emotional through-line. These surgical adjustments will amplify audience empathy and make the moral stakes land harder without changing the structure you already have working.
For Executives:
This is a high-quality, prestige-ready pilot with clear market appeal — historical weight, strong central performances, and a unique narrative voice. The primary risk to broad commercial uptake is not quality but accessibility: moments of opaque technical jargon and underdeveloped secondary characters can reduce audience engagement and retention. A modest rewrite focused on clarifying technical exposition and deepening 2–4 character arcs (Dyatlov plus select secondary figures) will materially increase emotional resonance and make the series easier to sell to both critics and mainstream streaming audiences with minimal budgetary impact.
Story Facts

Genres: Drama, Thriller, Historical

Setting: 1986-1988, during and after the Chernobyl disaster, Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant and surrounding areas, including Pripyat, Moscow, and various locations in the Soviet Union

Themes: Systemic Failure and Suppression of Truth, Individual Responsibility vs. Systemic Pressure, The Corrosive Nature of Lies and the Power of Truth, Human Resilience and Courage in the Face of Disaster

Conflict & Stakes: The struggle for truth and justice in the aftermath of the Chernobyl disaster, with personal and societal consequences at stake.

Mood: Tense and foreboding, with moments of despair and urgency.

Standout Features:

  • Unique Hook: The real-life events surrounding the Chernobyl disaster provide a gripping backdrop that captivates audiences.
  • Major Twist: The gradual revelation of the extent of the disaster and the failures of those in charge creates a shocking narrative arc.
  • Innovative Ideas: The screenplay explores the psychological and emotional impacts of a nuclear disaster on individuals and society.
  • Distinctive Settings: The contrast between the serene life in Pripyat and the chaos of the nuclear disaster highlights the tragedy of the event.

Comparable Scripts: Chernobyl (TV Miniseries), The Lives of Others (Film), The Constant Gardener (Novel/Film), The Trial (Play by Franz Kafka), Silkwood (Film), The Handmaid's Tale (Novel/TV Series), The Road (Novel/Film), The Insider (Film), The Fountainhead (Novel)

Script Level Analysis

This section delivers a top-level assessment of the screenplay’s strengths and weaknesses — covering overall quality (P/C/R/HR), character development, emotional impact, thematic depth, narrative inconsistencies, and the story’s core philosophical conflict. It helps identify what’s resonating, what needs refinement, and how the script aligns with professional standards.

Screenplay Insights

Breaks down your script along various categories.

Overall Score: 7.64
You have a powerful, character-driven take on Chernobyl with vivid moments and strong thematic bones (truth, responsibility). The single biggest creative win would be to tighten the focus: reduce the number of active POVs to the core 3–4 players (Legasov, Dyatlov, a firefighter like Vasily, and one trainee/secondary to humanize the loss), deepen the inner life and concrete stakes of those characters (especially Toptunov and Legasov), and clarify motivations in the control-room and bunker scenes. Use small, specific beats — a short flashback, a private line of dialogue, or a silent visual motif (e.g., a cigarette, a burned dosimeter) — to convey backstory and moral conflict rather than heavy exposition. Finally, slow and extend a few key emotional beats (moments of realization, the choice to lie/speak) so the audience can breathe into the stakes and feel the consequences.
Story Critique

Big-picture feedback on the story’s clarity, stakes, cohesion, and engagement.

This script has powerful material—intimate perspectives inside a large catastrophe—but it currently spreads emotional energy across too many characters and technical set-pieces. The quickest way to strengthen it is to narrow the focus to a tight ensemble (3–4 protagonists), deepen their emotional arcs (give Legasov and Dyatlov clearer internal conflicts and stakes), and tie the opening cassette thematically to the central choice the protagonist must make. Rework pacing to alternate quieter character moments with high-stakes action, and consider an epilogue or a single, concentrated final scene that shows the long-term human cost rather than a broad visual coda.
Characters

Explores the depth, clarity, and arc of the main and supporting characters.

The character analyses show strong, thematically rich antagonists (Dyatlov, Bryukhanov) and sympathetic supporting figures (Akimov, Sitnikov), but several characters risk feeling one-note or static. To improve the script, deepen key characters through short, specific humanizing beats: private moments of doubt, flashbacks or micro-scenes that reveal formative experiences, and choices that clearly show alternatives they could have taken. Tighten distinct voices (technical vs. bureaucratic vs. frightened) so dialogue differentiates characters more sharply. Finally, give mid-tier characters (Akimov, Sitnikov) clearer agency in pivotal scenes so their actions move the plot and underscore the film’s theme of systemic failure vs. individual responsibility.
Emotional Analysis

Breaks down the emotional journey of the audience across the script.

The script powerfully conveys the catastrophe's scale but relies heavily on bleak, event-driven sequences that don’t always translate into emotional investment. Prioritize strengthening character empathy: give key players (Dyatlov, Bryukhanov, Sitnikov, Legasov, Vasily, Lyudmilla) brief but telling pre-disaster beats or micro-flashbacks and sprinkle small humanizing moments (tenderness, dark humor, camaraderie) into the aftermath. This will diversify the emotional palette, prevent audience fatigue, and make the high-stakes scenes hit harder because we care about who’s suffering. Also tighten pacing by alternating intense set pieces with quieter reflective beats where characters process fear, regret, or hope—this contrast will amplify the drama without adding runtime.
Goals and Philosophical Conflict

Evaluates character motivations, obstacles, and sources of tension throughout the plot.

The analysis shows your strongest engine is the philosophical conflict—truth versus deception—driving both the protagonist’s inner journey and the external crisis. To improve the script, tighten and dramatize the protagonist’s throughline: make their pursuit of truth an active set of choices (not just realizations), increase visible costs for lying/inaction, and stage clearer turning points where internal guilt and external accountability collide. Lean into specific scenes that force moral decisions and show consequences (relationships, reputation, physical danger) so the theme resonates emotionally rather than didactically.
Themes

Analysis of the themes of the screenplay and how well they’re expressed.

Sharpen the script's throughline by making the systemic failure and suppression of truth the dramatic spine: let scenes and character choices clearly trace how bureaucracy, fear, and protocol produce the disaster and then compound it through cover-up. Tighten Legasov's personal arc so his recorded testimony functions as both emotional anchor and structural device — reveal his moral cost in stages rather than in exposition dumps. Cut or repurpose moments that diffuse focus (scenes that are atmospheric but don't advance the theme or character stakes) and make confrontations and decisions that expose institutional lies more immediate and consequential.
Logic & Inconsistencies

Highlights any contradictions, plot holes, or logic gaps that may confuse viewers.

The script’s dramatic stakes are strong, but its credibility is undermined by flat, expository dialogue, caricatured authority figures, and a few abrupt technical reveals. Tighten character arcs (especially Dyatlov and Akimov) by showing internal conflict rather than repeating slogans; humanize the Committee’s shift so it feels earned; and replace info-dumps with scenes that reveal facts through action, sound design, and subtext. Cut repetitive references to radiation and the ‘control tank’ and build to the reactor-core reveal more organically so the audience discovers the truth with the characters.

Scene Analysis

All of your scenes analyzed individually and compared, so you can zero in on what to improve.

Scene-Level Percentile Chart
Hover over the graph to see more details about each score.
Go to Scene Analysis

Other Analyses

This section looks at the extra spark — your story’s voice, style, world, and the moments that really stick. These insights might not change the bones of the script, but they can make it more original, more immersive, and way more memorable. It’s where things get fun, weird, and wonderfully you.

Unique Voice

Assesses the distinctiveness and personality of the writer's voice.

Your atmospheric, show-not-tell voice is the project's strongest asset — it creates immersive tension and cinematic moments (Scene 4 is a great example). To sharpen the script, preserve that restraint while adding a few explicit anchors: clearly signpost timeline jumps, highlight the protagonist's emotional throughline in key scenes, and occasionally allow brief, specific exposition to orient the audience. These small clarifications will keep your minimalist approach from becoming opaque and will make the suspense pay off more reliably.
Writer's Craft

Analyzes the writing to help the writer be aware of their skill and improve.

You have strong, cinematic scenes and a clear feel for tension and stakes. The biggest lift is structural: tighten scene-level beats and overall pacing so each scene has a single, defensible objective, escalating conflict, and a clear turning point. Pair that with surgical dialogue edits—cut exposition, let subtext carry weight, and use conflict to reveal character motives. Practical steps: map act and scene beats, ensure every scene changes the relationship or information state, and study a few high‑quality drama screenplays plus McKee/Save the Cat-style frameworks to translate instincts into repeatable structure.
Memorable Lines

Spotlights standout dialogue lines with emotional or thematic power.

The selected memorable lines already crystallize the episode's central conflict—truth versus concealment—and provide strong emotional beats (the philosophical opening, domestic false reassurance, the technical disbelief, and the accusatory demand). To strengthen the script, use those lines as thematic anchors: tighten their placement, make them callbacks across acts, and ensure each line belongs unmistakably to a distinct voice (philosophical, intimate, technical, accusatory). Trim any surrounding on-the-nose exposition so the lines land with more weight; consider reassigning or slightly rewording lines if they currently feel redundant or indistinct between characters.
Tropes
Highlights common or genre-specific tropes found in the script.
World Building

Evaluates the depth, consistency, and immersion of the story's world.

The world-building is vivid and historically convincing, but the screenplay should more consistently use those details to drive character choices and emotional stakes. Tighten scenes that linger on spectacle without advancing a protagonist’s through-line (especially Legasov’s), translate technical exposition into physical, sensory beats, and clarify time jumps. Make every environmental or cultural detail reveal character motivation or escalate conflict so the scale of the disaster stays anchored in personal consequence.
Correlations

Identifies patterns in scene scores.

Your script has a powerful, consistent tone and a strong plot/central concept, but the emotional payoff is uneven — scenes with lower Emotional Impact drag the overall arc. The single most effective lever is dialogue: scenes with thin or functional dialogue correlate with weaker emotional resonance. Tighten and deepen dialogue (more subtext, specific sensory detail, and micro-conflicts) in the weaker scenes (e.g., 8, 28) and insert a few tonal contrasts (quiet, reflective beats around scenes 1–2 or after major set pieces) so the tension has room to breathe. Also consider adding one or two clearer character-change beats in the second half to raise stakes and audience investment without altering the core structure.
Loglines
Presents logline variations based on theme, genre, and hook.