I'm working on a  short script set in a men's refuge/shelter. It is intended for a five page competition (not movie poet)  so i don't have many pages to play with.

For now the location is called the New Hope Men's Shelter. The name is in my slugs, but doesn't appear anywhere in the script as the name of the property.

My first reaction was to add it in somewhere, say a shot of the outside sign, BUT then I thought this is a short, I need the space.

In essence my opinion is that the producer would resolve this and it's not required in the script.

Whilst I would appreciate people's thoughts on this specific question, it goes a bit wider in terms of what you can assume the producer will compensate for, or resolve.

Thoughts.

If the name of the place doesn't play a part in the story, the slug should just read:

INT.  MEN'S SHELTER - DAY


Phil

That was quick!

Thanks for the feedback, seems rather obvious now.

I have to disagree with Phil wholeheartedly on this.

I am a big believer in adding in any and all originality/creativity you can, wherever and whenever you can.  It gives your script so much more authenticity...makes it so much more memorable and unique.  And the real beauty?  It doesn't cost you any extra space.

Now, back to your question...do you need to include somewhere in your script the name of an establishment, or does it do to just show it in a Slug?

Well, you'll often see people write a line like , "...with a sign reading New Men's Hope Shelter..."...and there's nothing wrong with that...at all.

But, by just using the actual name in an action/description line, you are inferring that the name of the place will be seen.

Also, if you're already inside the establishment (as in you're not even showing an EXT view/establishing type shot), just using the name in the Slug is fine, and you wouldn't want to repeat it again in your action/description lines, as it's already established where you are, based on your Slug.

Thanks jeff, appreciated.

I understand you two don't always agree, but i do appreciate both sides of the debate. You both put so much into this site it's not a surprise that differences arise.

Whilst i am just starting out, it is already clear to me that at some stage we all have to make a decision on what we think is best for our script, maybe against conventional wisdom/tradition. If that is the case then we have to be sure it is reasonable to do so and helps the reader. I must look up past threads on unfilmables.

Standing back for a second, it seems to me there must always be a reason for including something in a script. This is on the basis that you should be allowed to make some assumptions,  such as the property has electricity or they are wearing underwear (ok depends on the script!) which you don't have to spell out. So when would you mention detail?

For example, if a scene is at a hospital, can you leave it at that and let the producer put together his shots, or is it better to mention sirens, flashing lights, patients in wheelchairs etc to give it an atmosphere? Maybe part of this is how long they will stay there and how important that scene is. If a character is fearful of a treatment then the surrounding elements could play with their mind. if they were meeting a friend who works there and then leaving, less so.

In short does the detail add to the story, the character emotion and help the read. Those are the things i need to reflect on with each scene.

i'm rambling now so will leave it at that.

cheers

Whatever path you choose... Be it one of the above or another; be consistent.   It's easy to do in a 5 page script, but as the scripts get longer, you will run into trouble with consistency if you don't know "your" style.

Quoted from Reef Dreamer For example, if a scene is at a hospital, can you leave it at that and let the producer put together his shots, or is it better to mention sirens, flashing lights, patients in wheelchairs etc to give it an atmosphere?

It depends on your script, your tone, and your story.

Does your scene demand flashing lights and wailing sirens for proper urgency -- or perhaps the quiet gloom of a waiting room?

You should be playing the scenes in your head, and then you type what you see.

Balt is 100% correct, and what he just said is something I say over and over again...especially about Slugs.

Be consistent.  Be 100% consistent.  And do whatever it is you're doing (chose) for a reason.  That reason shouldn't be that someone told you to, or some guru or website listed it.  If something makes sense or more sense, than do it.

Cheers folks.

Keep in mind that, when writing a spec script, you should keep everything bare-bones.  Is the name of the shelter important?  Will you be referring to several shelters?  If not, then just go with 'shelter.'

Going back to Bryson's recent script, Leona's Master Plan.  Bryson referred to character as Vince 'the Prince.'  Did the nickname bear and relevence to the story?   Was it referred to in the story?  No, on both counts.  Then why bring it up?  The same applies here.

If the name of the shelter bares no relevance, then why waste space describing it.  It sounds silly, talking space like this, but referring to Saint Anthony's Men's Shelter as opposed to shelter could result in orphans in your script.


Phil

Not that I want to argue with Phil, but again, I totally disagree with this last set of comments.

First of all, comparing Bryson's use of a nickname that never comes into play with the name of an actual establishment, has absolutely nothing to do with what we're discussing here.

Secondly, we're talking about a few extra words, assuming we're talking about an action/description line, and ZERO extra space if it's simply used in the Slug line.

And finally, to assume or even state that by using these extra words, an orphan (or as Phil so eloquently put, "orphans", which obviously isn't remotely possible) would occur, is, again, ludicrous.

If you want to use as generic as possible Slugs and descriptions, be my guest, but you're not doing yourself any favors in any way.  It's kind of like not naming your characters, and hopefully we agree that's not a good thing.  

It's pretty much a matter of taste.  But as a guideline, here's a quote from "How Not to Write a Screenplay", by Denny Martin Flinn:

"Screenplays can benefit from locale...naming a restaurant (for instance) is all right, really.   But there is no point in naming a specific site and describing the whole place.  INT. LUTECE RESTAURANT - NIGHT or INT. RESTAURANT - NIGHT would be more than enough."

Seems like old Denny Martin Flinn is completely contradicting himself here, huh?

If "it's alright, really", then what's with the next line, which says exactly the opposite...and we're talking about naming a restaurant in both examples?

That's quite humorous actually, Janet, as I literally knew you'd chime in.  

If I've learned one thing writing screenplays the last 10 years of my life -- It's to never listen to anything Denny Martin Flinn has to say.  As an analyst once said:

"failed screenwriters don't make their living writing screenplays -- They make their living writing books about how you should write a screenplay.  Does that sound like sound advice?"

And I agree with her 100%.

She got the book from the library, so it was no money from her pocket.

Everyone has their own opinions regarding books.  You take them all with a grain of salt.  You just need to find what all these books have in common and work from there.


Phil