Hey guys,

Thanks for all your input.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films It's not really necessary. If you have established that it is NIGHT and then you simply change scene, it will be presumed that it is still the same time until the point that you change it to DAY again.

That's exactly how I feel. I did that in one of my script but a reviewer pointed out that my slugs didn't have time of day (even though the opening slug did), so I got unsure about that.

Quoted from dogglebe I remember reading a script, here, where a character left his bedroom and walked through several room before leaving his house.  All the sluglines (and spaces around them) took up about three quarters of a page of paper. Completely unnecessary.

I totally agree with you, Phil. However, the way I see it, that would mainly work with INT. shots.

Quoted from Grandma Bear Write a kick ass story.

Oh, I will!!

Quoted from sniper Hey guys, Thanks for all your input. That's exactly how I feel. I did that in one of my script but a reviewer pointed out that my slugs didn't have time of day (even though the opening slug did), so I got unsure about that. I totally agree with you, Phil. However, the way I see it, that would mainly work with INT. shots. Oh, I will!!

Let us help you edit and revise it and then give us a teensy tinesy reference of some sort and we'll be happy.

Lots of good vibrations at ya!!!

Sandra

Hey guys, again I'm choosing to revive an old thread rather than start a new, probably uneccessary and short-lived one.

I'm back to writing my first feature, and actually am making some pretty good progress with it. I have a quick question about the distinction between SERIES OF SHOTS and MONTAGE. I have three bits of the script that will use either of these devices, depending on which is appropriate. Two of them I've written - one near the opening of the story, and one near the end (I've written the beginning and end am now filling in the middle - weird, huh?). Rather than try and describe them and get into a whole theoretical debate, I'm just going to paste them in here and ask you which would be more appropriate.

Both of them are compressed journeys characters take across London. Both are SERIES OF SHOTS...for now.

Sequence One:

- Charlie puts his Tube ticket into the barrier. It doesn't work. He tries again. It doesn't work. A TFL STAFF MEMBER comes over to help him out.

- Sam and Charlie stand on a Tube platform.

- Sam and Charlie stand in a crowded, swaying Tube carriage. Sam glances sideways at Charlie, who looks glum.

- Sam and Charlie ascend on an elevator.

Sequence Two:

- Charlie closes the door to Maria's house. He walks away, turning once to look back as he keeps walking.

- A Tube train pulls into a quiet platform. Its door open, and Charlie boards.

- Charlie walks up to Sam's house, puts the key in the lock.

- Charlie closes the front door, glances around the quiet, empty hallway.

- In Sam's bedroom, Charlie finishes packing his suitcase. He puts the lid down, begins to zip it up.

- Charlie exits through the front door, locks it, and puts the keys through the letterbox. He grabs the suitcase handle and heads off down the street.

- Charlie sits in a quiet Tube carriage, his suitcase in the adjacent seat. He stares straight ahead, in a world of his own.

The section in the middle - where one character (Maria) shows another (Charlie) round her favourite bits of London - feels like it would be more appropriate as a montage. I haven't written it yet, so we'll see. But the two above are more 'series of shots' type material...yes? Or am I way off?

Basically, are the two above sequences best put as

A) SERIES OF SHOTS
or
B) MONTAGE

Cheers guys. I really want to finish this!

Hello Johnny,

Michael Cornetto once elaborated that a montage is usually used as a "time passage" device. For instance, a child growing up-- showing the relevant parts you want to show. It might be "how a criminal became a criminal", with relevant moments depicted. In this way, the action is drawn with a kind of connectivity to prove one point.

One way "Series of Shots" is used is to tell a story within the greater story. It has dramatic action and/or resolution.

Sandra

So...my sequences should be montages? Or is the passage of time they are depicted too short?

Quoted from JonnyBoy So...my sequences should be montages? Or is the passage of time they are depicted too short?

There's a fine point here that I think needs to be discerned. In the case of your above examples, it would seem to me that they are more "series of shots". The reason why, is because they seem to exist to "move" the character along in time and place, but they're not necessarily to serve some "grand idea".

Right now, it seems to me that a montage is more of a "grand notion". Like a wedding sequence montage. Or a "touring Paris" montage. That's the way I'm thinking of it, but I could be wrong.

For instance, I haven't read the script, but in the last Bourne movies, it would seem to me that you've got a lot of "series of shots" that help us to identify "where" we are and move from place to place with the character, but they're not all "la-te-da this is "the mood and feeling" type with a definite context.

Wait and see back for some more responses on this because I know it can be confusing.

Sandra

I think the difference between MONTAGE and SERIES OF SHOTS is:

as said before MONTAGE is to tell a short cuts of a story. (i.e. the "Ain't No Sunshine" sequence in Notting Hill)

SERIES OF SHOTS can be at ramdom. A bit of this, a bit of that, a little bit of this... with no evident pattern.

Michel

I'd say the first sequence is fine, it makes sense as it is.
As for the second one as long as you've scenes in Sam's house, bedroom etc before this sequence then it should be fine too.
Hope that makes sense.

Okay, another question now. Rather than getting involved in the big, sweeping, theoretical arguments, I think I'm just gonna stick to asking specific questions I don't know the answers to.

Do we like bold, under-lined sluglines? I mean as a community, are you against them, or are they an okay personal choice?

Because a lot of professional scripts seem to have them, and I actually think they look good and work really well - help to highlight the beginning of a new scene, give a bit a visual variety. I also remember Rob used them on his latest script (Escape from the Killing Fields), and I think they worked pretty well there.

I'm trying out the first few pages of an action/horror/comedy script - finished exams, had a good idea and thought I'd try it out, also practising writing action sequences - and think they look good. My question, I suppose is this: if I were to use them in a script, would you comment on them? And if so, why? I understand that 'we sees', camera direction etc. can be accused of taking the reader out the story, but what's the problem with bold, underlined sluglines?

Cheers.

I can imagine people here being bothered by bold slugslines.  But I don't think the industry batters an eyelid to them as I've seen them quite a number of times in specs by newbies.  But then again, I can't speak for the industry.

Quoted from JonnyBoy Do we like bold, under-lined sluglines? I mean as a community, are you against them, or are they an okay personal choice? Because a lot of professional scripts seem to have them, and I actually think they look good and work really well - help to highlight the beginning of a new scene, give a bit a visual variety. I also remember Rob used them on his latest script (Escape from the Killing Fields), and I think they worked pretty well there.

It's definitely a matter a taste but I personally think the bold/underlined slugs more clearly separate the different scenes. Plus, a few of the pro scripts I've read lately also uses the bold/underlined slugs (that's actually what inspired me to use them). I would not comment on them either way.

I have not read this entire thread, so this may be covered already, but what is the difference between a master scene heading and a slugline?

Those are the same, Steven.

Thank you.