Noob here. Bit unsure how to write a (complex to me) montage. Please excuse the formatting...It jumped all around when cut and pasted from Final Darft software.  TIA, John

EXT. SAME WAREHOUSE - EARLY EVENING - MONTAGE

1) Davis takes off his coat, lays it on the ground. He begins digging a hole next to the bodies.

2) He finishes the hole. With his foot, Davis pushes the bodies into the hole. He slowly and deliberately throws dirt on their faces.

3) Davis finishes filling the hole and tamps the dirt down with a shovel. He throws weeds and debris over the grave.

4) Unseen by Davis, THREE PEOPLE, timid and emaciated, rise like a mist from behind piles of rubble and debris. They are quietly and patiently watching Davis bury the bodies.

5) Davis puts his coat back on. Using the Sand Iron for a cane, he turns and walks in the direct of darkening skies. He is favoring his left leg.

DAVIS  (V.O.)
Don�t want to leave any fresh meat laying around. That�s how this whole filthy business got started.

EXT. SAME WAREHOUSE - SAME EVENING, A FEW MINUTES LATER

Sensing Davis is no longer a threat, the three figures rush towards the grave.
Their movements are sharp and quick. They reach the grave and fall to their hands and knees.
The three figures are hardly recognizable as humans. They nervously look up and around to make sure no one is watching them.

Without exchanging a word, they begin to claw at the dirt covering the bodies of Bob and Nelda.

FADE OUT.

Try this thread, the scriptwriting FAQ, which (among many other things) links to a discussion of montages and series of shots:

http://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-screenwrite/m-1194903750/

And if you have not tried this link yet, you really should:

http://www.scripttoolbox.com/

Not sure who this guy is -- but he is a member here -- and he has put a great deal of work into what looks like a top-notch resource from the pieces I have read.

As per usual, you will not find a hard-and-fast uniform method.  Use what works best for you, bearing in mind that your ultimate goal above all others should (always) be clarity on the page.

Thanks Bert,

After reviewing the links you posted, it seems the terms MONTAGE and SERIES OF SHOTS are interchangeable.

A MONTAGE would perhaps be more like a flash back of someone's entire life.

A SERIES OF SHOTS would be more like what I have written....Covering a tighter, consecutive series of events happening over a shorter period of time.

As you state, CLARITY is the ultimate goal.

That said, do you find the above SERIES OF SHOTS (with ambient music) easy to follow and understandable?

John

Hi XL.

Not too sure if you even need a series of shots here. A series of shots usually communicates some signifcance between the events portrayed, so:

1) A robber enters a bank
2) Fiddles with the safe
3) Runs outside with the cash.

This also deals effectively with the change in locations. As yours doesn't change locations, then:

Davis takes off his coat ...

With the hole finished, Davis pushes the bodies ...

Davis finishes filling the hole ...

-- Sometimes people just put in a mini-slug, so:

Davis takes off his coat ...

LATER (or SHORT TIME LATER)

With the hole finished, Davis pushes the bodies ...

As long as it's not reasonably possible to be confused, and it reads well, then you should be fine.

Simon

Simon,

So, Just action lines separated by one space will accomplish the same thing...


EXT. SAME WAREHOUSE - MOMENTS LATER

Davis drags the bodies outside.
  
He takes off his coat and digs a grave next to the bodies.

When the hole is finished, Davis uses his foot to push the bodies into the hole.

He slowly and deliberately throws dirt on their faces.

Davis fills the hole and tamps down the dirt. He throws weeds and debris over the grave.

Unseen by Davis, THREE PEOPLE, timid and emaciated, hide behind piles of debris and rubble. They are quietly and patiently watching Davis bury the bodies.

Davis puts on his coat. Using his Sand Iron as a cane, he turns and walks in the direct of darkening skies. He is favoring his left leg.

DAVIS (V.O.)
Don't want to leave any fresh meat laying around. That's how this whole filthy business got started.

EXT. SAME WAREHOUSE - SAME EVENING, MOMENTS LATER

Sensing Davis is no longer a threat, the three figures rush towards the grave.

Their movements are sharp and quick. They reach the grave and fall to their hands and knees.

Hardly recognizable as human being,  they nervously look up and around to make sure no one is watching them.

Without a word, they begin to claw at the dirt covering the bodies of Bob and Nelda.

Yep, more clear and hopefully easier to read and follow.

Thank you,

John

PS

My OCD is acting up today.

John, I read the other thread where Bert originally brought this up.

It's a good point to discuss and Bert is correct, that as it was originally written, it was not technically correct...but...IMO, it's not something that you should lose any sleep over, or overly worry about.

What I'm saying is that, I agree with Simon, that you don't need or want a montage or a series of shots here.  Skipping a line between each little action does imply that we're seeing exactly what you write, and time can pass in between these actions.

It's kind of inferred or understood that certain actions don't need to be "spelled out" completely.

A good example is when you have someone change clothes, get undressed, or get dressed.  None of these are "usually" actions that are accomplished instantly - they can take time, and usually, you won't want or intend the entire "event" to take place onscreen.  You just want it to be clear that this person is getting into new clothes.

BUT, there are also times when maybe you do want the entire action captured on film.  Maybe it's a hot chick and this is a time for some gratuitous nudity. If that is the case, your writing should make this clear, based on the level of detail you use.

You know what I'm saying?

IMO, montages and series of shots usually are accompanied by music, and lack detail (and usually lack dialogue, as well).  A classic is someone trying on multiple outfits, and showing them off to someone waiting outside the dressing room.  Or someone preparing for or getting outfitted for a fight of some kind.

Normally, I'd steer clear of using montages and series of shots unless you really have a reason.

As Bert correctly pointed out, it really comes down to clarity on the writer's part and also trying to avoid directing the shot, unless important or necessary.

Hope that makes sense and helps.

Dreamsscape,

I understand your points. In the revised EXT. SAME WAREHOUSE - MOMENTS LATER, I went with multiple action lines for clarity and easy read..These were my goals, but only a fresh part of eyes (new reader) can be the judge if I was successful or not.

John

Hey XL.

Yeah, I think the multiple action lines read a lot better than the series of shots or a montage.

I'm of the opinion not to have too many technical things in a spec script.  I don't want anything to take the reader out of the story and make them realize that they're reading.  I want them to live through it.

Plus, let's all be honest here:

Has anyone ever come across the word MONTAGE while reading a script and not immediately have 'Eye of the Tiger' pop in their head?

rc1107,

You are correct. Don't clutter the read....The old and time tested, KISS (keep it simple stupid)

I shutter to think of the army it would require to turn my little spec script in a working production....timing the scenes, framing the shots, rewrites to please Johnny Depp (my current favorite for the part of Davis), working in the obligatory breaks to sell toothpaste, cars and laundry soap...Oh, the humanity!

John

Regarding your last post, another piece of advice occurs to me -- something many do not figure out until they are well along their screenwriting path, but which you may be starting to suspect.

That is, nothing you ever write, as Goldilocks would say, will ever be "just right".

I see you taking all your feedback on board and trying to please everyone -- which is commendable in its way -- but you will never please everyone.  I am sure that were he so inclined, Jeff could take his fabled red pen to Casablanca and pronounce it to be "Rubbish!"

Falling into the trap of incessant rewrites is easy to do, and you eventually wind up with something so far removed from your vision you might not even recognize it.  And if a producer does show interest, guess what?  More changes and rewrites -- guaranteed.

You need to get Baby Soup to place you are happy with it and move on.  That is how you will improve.  (That, and reading scripts.) If somebody comes along later and tosses you some feedback you love, incorporate it, but it is also fine to sometimes say, "No thanks, I like what I've got."

Not everyone knows what they are talking about -- and in fact, as the great W. Goldman will tell you, nobody really knows anything.

As always, just saying.  Cheers.

Bert,

I'm coming form 17 years in commerical arts. The emphasis being on the word 'commercial.' I  suspect IF this short was every produced, I might not even recognize it and ask, "Did I write this crap?"

Todate, I've incorporated serveral suggestions which I thought were additive to the story; Your suggestion for a suprise ending and a Swan Song, Come To Jesus Moment for Nelda at the suggestion of Ghostie. Both were excellent suggestions and I shamelessly ran with them....Hope I credited the RIGHT people for those two suggestions.

No, you can't please everyone and I don't intend to try.

I'm done with Baby Soup and will post it after I get it proof read.

Writing Baby Soup has been a great learning experience for me and I couldn't have done it without the help of SS members...

Thanks all,

John

Quoted from bert I am sure that were he so inclined, Jeff could take his fabled red pen to Casablanca and pronounce it to be "Rubbish!"

... and would you blame him? Where's the inciting incident on p.11??? Casawanka, more like.

Quoted from Forgive ... and would you blame him? Where's the inciting incident on p.11??? Casawanka, more like.