Breaking the rules: omitting slug lines

[Jijenji]

I would appreciate feedback on this idea for my current script:

The Climax of the film is a long scene, maybe 5-10 pages.
It starts in a building, then moves out into the streets.
At that point, it splits into two different scenes.
I'm going to use an intercut here.

Both "scenes" flow through the streets of a city,
but then one moves into a building, and the main action of the other
moves into a building as well.

Since it's the climax of the film and very fast paced,
I think it would be wise to omit those two INT. slug lines.
Keep the pace flowing, not slow the read down.

What do you guys think?

 

[directorik]

If you will be directing and producing you can write it any way you
want. You don't need to use an "intercut" and you should use a new
slugline for each scene change. The climax of your finished product
will be very fast paced, the screenplay needs to be understood as a
screenplay.

 

[2001 Productions]

I almost always omit the INT/EXT and DAY/NIGHT part of the slug when dealing with continuous action. If there is a time change or non-contiguous location jump then I put them in. For example, I might do something like:

John rushes through the doorway into the

ADJACENT ROOM.

It is empty.

IN THE OPPOSITE BUILDING,

Sam is still looking for the shooter. He finds a spent cartridge on the floor, still warm.

He glances out the window, making eye contact with

JOHN

across the street.

Don't know if this addresses your question or not. Again, all of this assumes you have already established INT/EXT or DAY/NIGHT for the scene. If either changes, include them in the slug.

Of course, this is by no means a rule, only my own style (to forestall any controversy).

 

[Jijenji]

Yes. That is what I'm describing more or less.
Continuous action.

I'm not worried about the finished product. I'm worried about the read.
The read should be smooth, fast paced.
Stopping right in the middle to read INT/EXT. and scene description twice...eh.

But I want to hear all points of view.

With regards to the intercut, how else could you write it?
The two scenes occur at the same time.
It would not work to write one scene and then the other.

My understanding with intercuts is that once I have a slug for the two scenes,
I can just go back and forth between them without typing the slugline over and over again.
But I have not used it before, so it's possible that I'm mistaken.

 

[2001 Productions]

Personally, I think the only time I've ever used the word INTERCUT in a script is during a phone call sequence.

 

[Jijenji]

Personally, I think the only time I've ever used the word INTERCUT in a script is during a phone call sequence.

Well, my two main characters are in a crowd that empties into the streets.
They are part of the crowd, but during the course of the action they flee elsewhere.

Both scenes, the riot, and where my protagonists go, are important and need to be resolved.
So simply cutting one of them would not work.

Also, it would not work to write one scene and then the other.
Per the story and logic, they occur at the same time.

If I go back and forth half a dozen times or whatever,
I would be writing the same slug lines over and over again.

 

[2001 Productions]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it wouldn't work. Just that I've never personally done it.

 

[directorik]

I'm wondering if it would be more clear to write:

INT. HOSPITAL BUILDING - DAY

John rushes through the doorway into the adjacent room.

It is empty.

INT. COURTHOUSE - JURY ROOM - DAY

Sam is still looking for the shooter. He finds a spent cartridge on the floor, still warm.

He glances out the window, making eye contact with John across the street.

INT. HOSPITAL BUILDING - DAY

John shakes his head.

INT. COURTHOUSE - JURY ROOM - DAY

Sam hears a noise behind him. Turns, gun aimed.

INT. HOSPITAL BUILDING - DAY

John watches as Sam fires off three shots and disappears from view.

To me, that reads better than "IN THE OPPOSITE BUILDING" and
it will make it easier (and more clear) when doing a breakdown. It
tells the story but doesn't place the camera or set up shots.

When I'm reading a script I can kind of gloss over sluglines. I see them,
but I don't need to really read each one as I quickly read an action
sequence. When I see something like "IN THE OPPOSITE BUILDING"
it breaks the flow of the read. I pause for a moment to remind myself
what the opposite building is.

I feel the same way about that Syd Field method of setting up closeups
and other camera shots to break up the action lines.

 

[Jijenji]

But would you notice it if the slug line isn't there?

Say you have tons of action going on in the streets and then
the writer just casually slips in that they storm into the hospital or wherever.

Would a reader even notice it?

 

[2001 Productions]

When I see something like "IN THE OPPOSITE BUILDING"
it breaks the flow of the read. I pause for a moment to remind myself
what the opposite building is.

You are correct that such a pseudo-slugline would not make sense out-of-context (which it is in my example above). The presumption is that the OPPOSITE BUILDING would have already been established by a previous slugline and description. Probably my example wasn't very clear.

You are also correct that an experienced reader skims over slugs - I do, too - so it doesn't really break up the action too much to write it the way you did. Maybe I'm just lazy. My manager has never called me on it, though.

 

[VPTurner]

I almost always omit the INT/EXT and DAY/NIGHT part of the slug when dealing with continuous action. If there is a time change or non-contiguous location jump then I put them in. For example, I might do something like:

John rushes through the doorway into the

ADJACENT ROOM.

It is empty.

IN THE OPPOSITE BUILDING,

Sam is still looking for the shooter. He finds a spent cartridge on the floor, still warm.

He glances out the window, making eye contact with

JOHN

across the street.

Don't know if this addresses your question or not. Again, all of this assumes you have already established INT/EXT or DAY/NIGHT for the scene. If either changes, include them in the slug.

Of course, this is by no means a rule, only my own style (to forestall any controversy).

I am all ears on this because this is exactly how I wrote the climatic action sequence in my first screenplay and planned to continue its use. I picked up the technique from a couple of produced spec scripts.

 

[directorik]

But would you notice it if the slug line isn't there?

Say you have tons of action going on in the streets and then
the writer just casually slips in that they storm into the hospital or wherever.

Would a reader even notice it?

I would. And I do.

If there is an action scene going on in the street and then a
casual mention of the action going into a hospital it might take
me a line or two to process it. Then I stop reading and go back to
find the casual mention. I don't like to stop reading and go back
to figure out what happened.

When I read a script I am in a very different head space than when
I'm reading a novel. I only see the sluglines on a sub-conscience
level. Reading 20 to 30 scripts a week for years does that to you.
As a professional, one of the the things I look for is the ease of
the read. My bosses are so used to reading what many of you say is
breaking up the action that they read the way I do - they barely
notice the sluglines. But they notice if they aren't there.

I know I do.

2001, I did take into consideration the context of THE OPPOSITE
BUILDING. My thought was, at one time that "opposite building" was
called THE COURTHOUSE. So when I'm reading I subconsciously skip
over the slugline "THE COURTHOUSE". But if I read THE OPPOSITE
BUILDING it would make me slow down to remind myself which
building is the opposite. If I read "INT. COURTHOUSE - DAY" I would
skip over it and just read the action.

To me, your method - the Syd Field method - breaks up the action
much more than putting in a new slugline each time.

Then there is the production consideration. Even when reading a
spec, readers, agents, producers and directors are thinking about
the production-worthiness of the script. Doing a breakdown on a
script where "THE OPPOSITE BUILDING" is used instead of a slugline
or the location is casually slipped in in the action line causes problems.

Just so there is no confusion, I am in no way suggesting a script
written in your way cannot sell or that one written in my way
will. It is my opinion, based on my experience as a paid reader
that the standards are an easier read for those who read 20/30
scripts a week. As always, write the script using the method
you feel gets your story across in the best way.

 

[Jijenji]

Thanks Rik, I appreciate your perspective.

Perhaps there is a middle ground, a creative way to write the sequence,
including the sluglines, but subtle words and ways that will keep the flow moving.

I will think about it some more.

 

[Jijenji]

By the way, this brings up another thought (although a bit off-topic).

There seems to be a contradiction with screenwriting/reading
the longer one has been around the biz.

Someone new might read an entire script, while those who have to read many,
most of them not very good, just kind of skim over the read.

This discussion made me think about something I heard when I first started:
"Producers/Executives only read the dialogue in the script anyway".
I'm sure that is a case-by-case basis, but might be the rule of thumb.

The problem? Screenwriting is about moving pictures, not talking pictures.
When one writes as little dialogue as possible, only that which cannot be shown with action,
how can a reader pick up on the story by only reading the conversations?

/off-topic

 

[2001 Productions]

2001, I did take into consideration the context of THE OPPOSITE BUILDING. My thought was, at one time that "opposite building" was called THE COURTHOUSE. So when I'm reading I subconsciously skip over the slugline "THE COURTHOUSE". But if I read THE OPPOSITE BUILDING it would make me slow down to remind myself which building is the opposite. If I read "INT. COURTHOUSE - DAY" I wouldskip over it and just read the action.

When did it become a courthouse? I think I missed that part somewhere . Had I known it was a courthouse I definitely would have written IN THE COURTHOUSE instead of IN THE OPPOSITE BUILDING because you're right, it is more specific, which is a good thing. Mine was only intended as a purely generic example.

To me, your method - the Syd Field method - breaks up the action much more than putting in a new slugline each time.

Is it the Syd Field method? I've never read him. I just picked it up from reading a gazillion screenplays over the past 30 years. That particular style appealed to me, so I adopted it.

Doing a breakdown on a script where "THE OPPOSITE BUILDING" is used instead of a slugline or the location is casually slipped in in the action line causes problems.

Again, the "OPPOSITE BUILDING" thing was probably a poor choice on my part to use as an example.

I only have my own experiences by which to judge, but my PM's and AD's never voiced any concerns when creating breakdowns for my films. As you know, scene numbers are added when the shooting script is locked, which is very much a subjective process, at least in my experience. Those numbers are then used to create the breakdowns, rather than the just the slug lines. If an AD or PM only numbers a script via the slug lines, then yes, I could certainly see that creating problems.

It is my opinion, based on my experience as a paid reader
that the standards are an easier read for those who read 20/30 scripts a week.

I totally respect your opinion and experience. It's clear to me that you know your stuff and your opinions carry a lot of weight.

Having said that, so far my scripts have passed muster with my manager, in addition to the readers, development execs and production partners at many of the largest prodcos in H'wood, and have been taken to 4 different studios by several of them. So far, nobody's complained (though, it's true, nobody's optioned one yet...hmm... ).

 

[directorik]

Jijenji,

When a script isn’t very good, readers will skim. There is no
reason to fully read every, single line when it’s clear from the
first 20/30 pages it’s poorly written or not a shootable script.
Readers have 5 to 8 more scripts to cover that day. I understand
that all writers wish this weren’t the case and many feel it’s
unfair, but even readers are human and want to finish up their
work so they can go home. But for the most part readers do read
the entire script. We have to write detailed coverage. What I
mean is I tend to skim over those sluglines; the once many people
think breaks up the action.

In my experience most producers/executives very often only read
the dialogue. That’s why I always suggest writers follow the standards
and not stress over making their action lines visually exciting, complex
and nuanced. Just write what happens.

Frankly, something like an action scene doesn’t really tell much
about the story. The dialogue is what propels a story. No matter
how many Germans Indiana Jones punched on that truck or how
cool that finished scene was, the story wouldn’t have changed if
he had fought two germans on that truck instead of four. The story
was, he jumped on the truck “Truck. What truck?” and made it
to the end. In a spec script, from an unproduced writer, the
producer/executive is very likely to just skim over those three
pages, reading the dialogue, to get to the next scene where the
story continues.

When did it become a courthouse? I think I missed that part somewhere . Had I known it was a courthouse I definitely would have written IN THE COURTHOUSE instead of IN THE OPPOSITE BUILDING because you're right, it is more specific, which is a good thing. Mine was only intended as a purely generic example.

Sorry about the misunderstanding. I thought we were talking about
a purely generic example, too. I added to the generic example with
my own generic example.

So if you are saying that you would never write “THE OPPOSITE
BUILDING”, then we have no misunderstanding. If in the example you
posted you would write what that building is, then I have no other
example of a different way to write it.

Is it the Syd Field method? I've never read him. I just picked it up from reading a gazillion screenplays over the past 30 years. That particular style appealed to me, so I adopted it.

Yes it is. You haven’t read him but all the scripts you have read
using that method are using the Syd Field method. That’s when a
writer indicates shots and camera placement without using the word
“camera” but places each shot on a separate line, in caps, like you
do in your example.

I only have my own experiences by which to judge, but my PM's and AD's never voiced any concerns when creating breakdowns for my films. As you know, scene numbers are added when the shooting script is locked, which is very much a subjective process, at least in my experience. Those numbers are then used to create the breakdowns, rather than the just the slug lines. If an AD or PM only numbers a script via the slug lines, then yes, I could certainly see that creating problems.

Which is why I added my final paragraph. We are talking only my
personal opinion. My personal opinion is just that. It means
nothing at all to your manager, the readers who have covered your
scripts, your AD’s or UPM’s or the development exec’s and
production partners at the Hollywood prodCo’s.

The chances are no one will ever complain. Many, many writers use the
Syd Field style you are using. This is my personal opinion and
nothing more.

 

[Jijenji]

When a script isn’t very good, readers will skim. There is no
reason to fully read every, single line when it’s clear from the
first 20/30 pages it’s poorly written or not a shootable script.
Readers have 5 to 8 more scripts to cover that day. I understand
that all writers wish this weren’t the case and many feel it’s
unfair, but even readers are human and want to finish up their
work so they can go home. But for the most part readers do read
the entire script. We have to write detailed coverage. What I
mean is I tend to skim over those sluglines; the once many people
think breaks up the action.

Yes, I understand this and agree. If the script isn't any good, it should be skimmed over.
If it's bad in the first 20/30 pages, it's not going to get better later on.

I can picture the writer saying "no you have to read it gets better"
when we all know that it doesn't.

In my experience most producers/executives very often only read
the dialogue.

Frankly, something like an action scene doesn’t really tell much
about the story. The dialogue is what propels a story. No matter
how many Germans Indiana Jones punched on that truck or how
cool that finished scene was, the story wouldn’t have changed if
he had fought two germans on that truck instead of four. The story
was, he jumped on the truck “Truck. What truck?” and made it
to the end. In a spec script, from an unproduced writer, the
producer/executive is very likely to just skim over those three
pages, reading the dialogue, to get to the next scene where the
story continues.

This is what I was getting at.
I'm going to use a very basic example here.

A character says "I love you" to another character.
or
They actually do an action that shows this.

I'd say the first one is useless...the second one is screenwriting.

I think you're right that action sequences don't tell anything about the story,
when they are written to simply entertain.

However, there are all kinds of action sequences where an action will tell something important.

If your character comes upon a burning bus, and only has time to save one kid,
does he save the white one or the black one closer to him?

If there's an earthquake, and he needs food for his family, does he break into
a store and steal from it?

And what about when a character dies off? Nobody is going to write in dialogue:
"Oh my god Johnny is dead".

Just throwing some examples out there.

 

[directorik]

I’m not suggesting that none of the action lines are ever read.
I’m saying that very often after a producer/exec has read the
coverage they will skim over much of the action and read the
dialogue. Remember two things; they have read the coverage
so they already know the story and they have read thousands
of scripts. Skimming doesn't mean they do not read it.

They will not be making their final decision from a quick first read.
If they love the coverage, skim through the script (reading the
dialogue and skimming the rest) and they feel there is something
there they are willing to put time and money into, they will carefully
read the entire script.

And then immediately hire another writer to fix it....

 

[Jijenji]

LOL. Wonderful.

All the more reason for someone to make their own films.

 

[backlash]

For me it depends who is your audience on the script. With all the cut INT. part you are doing the editing before the story really flows. You might realize that after filming the cuts can go in different places to make the film flow.

From the directors view it might be easier to have the 2 parallel scenes described separately to be planned properly.
To describe the story you can break the rule, but if you do lots of cuts it will be really hard to understand and visualise it from the words anyway.