Can Jeff or anyone else recommend a trustworthy, up-to-date format site that deals with how to write slugs correctly?

Related question regarding the use of "continuous":
I have a script in which several short scenes cut back and forth (one interior, one exterior). They are happening roughly at the same time. I've used "continuous" with each because it's the only way I know to show this without clogging up the pages with "intercuts" or whatever.

Last, to Jeff: When you have time, I'd appreciate another look at my revised slugs in "Conversion." When you commented  on the original version, I believe you said "WTF" three or four times when you saw my slug-writing. "Some of the poorest I've seen," I remember you said.

I've tried to upgrade them and would appreciate feedback. Even if it's more WTFs!


Henry

There's not a correct way when it comes to slugs being utilized.

Inside/Outside, Location, Time of Day.

You can be descriptive "INT. LUXURIOUS STUDIO APARTMENT - DAY" or you can be bare "INT. STUDIO APARTMENT - DAY".  It's really that simple.

"CONTINUOUS", I'd not worry about it.  If it's a "chase scene" or something, which I'm guessing it could be, then it's relatively simple to write one without even using slugs at all.  Just keep the action "EXT." and still write things that happen "INT.", such as "DRIVER floors it", no need to show him stomping the gas pedal as the car's gonna go faster anyway.

Some people do get a little picky when it comes to how things are written on the page, everyone is different and one person's "guideline" isn't another person's "rule".

Funny, as I've been thinking about starting up a thread on Slugs.

As I say so often, Slugs can be your best friends and say so much about what you're writing about and even you as a writer.  And, on the reverse side, they can say very little to nothing, which will also reflect on you as a writer.

IMO, there's 2 ways to look at this, right off the bat...

Are you writing about specific places, or are you writing generically?

I think many write generically, thinking their script will have a better chance of being picked up and filmed, as it can be set and shot anywhere.  I also think many write generically because they haven't put the time in to even think about the details.

I also beleive the more detailed you are (and that includes planning things out in your head long before you start writing), the "better" your script (and story) will actually be.

So, I always stress detail...detail that makes sense, in general and within your story.

I think things are more acceptable in shorts than in features, but I also beleive that you should always have that feature mindset, so why write to a different standard in a short?  Always give it your all.

You know how many times I've started reading a script and see the opening Slug of, "EXT. FIELD - NIGHT"?  I don't either, because there's now way to keep track of a number that high.  It seems like every 4th or 5th script!  Or how about this one, "EXT. HOUSE - NIGHT"?  Really?  is that really the way you want to start your script?  Do you think anyone is going to be impressed with that?

Providing detail in Slugs, first of all, does exactly that - provides detail, and it doesn't take any extra lines - it's basically free of charge.  It also shows that you've thought this thing through - you know where it's taking place, you know the name of a building, a bar, a restaurant, etc., you know your character's last names, you know detail of your setting...basically, it means you've done your homework, you've spent time on your planning, and your readers can trust you (hopefully).

I don't know about any sites that will show you "correct" formatting of Slugs, but I also don't think you need one.  Slugs should be very simple, and they are, once you truly understand them...more on that in a later post.

As for CONTINUOUS as your time element in a Slug, I'm all for it, as long as it's accurate.  I've seen peeps use "SAME TIME" and "CONCURRENT", but IMO, there's no reason to use something that is nonstandard and could throw peeps off while reading.

The reality is that many examples of "CONTINUOUS" are incorrectly used, as some time has passed.  Using CONTINUOUS is basically the writer telling the reader that he hasn't missed anything at all from 1 scene to the next, or, it's happening at the same time in a different place.

Mini Slugs are really just like full Slugs, except the INT/EXT is assumed to be the same as the last Slug, and the time element is left off, because it's assumed to be CONTINUOUS.  It's incorrect to use a Mini when the time element is not CONTINUOUS.

I hope more peeps  comment here, as it's a great subject.

Quoted from Stumpzian Last, to Jeff: When you have time, I'd appreciate another look at my revised slugs in "Conversion." When you commented  on the original version, I believe you said "WTF" three or four times when you saw my slug-writing. "Some of the poorest I've seen," I remember you said. I've tried to upgrade them and would appreciate feedback. Even if it's more WTFs!Henry

I'll give it a look, Henry.

Jeff, Thanks for your response. Very helpful.

Quoted from Dreamscale The reality is that many examples of "CONTINUOUS" are incorrectly used, as some time has passed.

OK -- what if some time has passed, but inconsequential time in terms of the flow?

For example, the conversation in one scene has progressed a bit when you come back to it. In other words, I don't want to end at one point and pick up at exactly the same spot where it ended.

I'm using Continuous there. Would you?

Quoted from Stumpzian I'm using Continuous there. Would you?

No, because it's not continuous...things have happened since we were last there...things were said that we missed.

Depending on how long has passed, I'd use either "MOMENTS LATER" or "LATER".

CONTINUOUS is one of the most misused time references. Jeff is right.

I don't know how many times I've read a character do something in one scene and then we go to another scene with a different character and place and the writer uses CONTINUOUS. It might take place at the same time, but it's not a CONTINUOUS!  

Here's another example:

Scene #1 -- people talking.
Scene  #2 -- somebody doing something at the same time
Scene #3 -- back to  people talking

For #2, I'd use Continuous (because it's not Moments Later)
For #3, I'd use Moments Later (because it is)

Quoted from Dreamscale Providing detail in Slugs, first of all, does exactly that - provides detail, and it doesn't take any extra lines - it's basically free of charge.  It also shows that you've thought this thing through - you know where it's taking place, you know the name of a building, a bar, a restaurant, etc., you know your character's last names, you know detail of your setting...basically, it means you've done your homework, you've spent time on your planning, and your readers can trust you (hopefully).

Along those lines Dreamscale, let me ask your opinion on the two options below. It involves a car - specifically a convertible, travelling down a street in Los Angeles. The scene involves activity withing and outside the car. The first option is as I have it written now. The second is a revision based on what I think you're recommending.

OPTION 1

INT/EXT. CONVERTIBLE - TRAVELING - DAY

EMILY STANTON (35), attractive, short blonde hair, drives down a downtown Los Angeles street while she sings along with a love song playing on the radio.

She arrives at a stop light, looks to her right and sees a

COFFEE SHOP - OUTDOOR SEATING

A YOUNG MAN hands a bouquet of roses to a YOUNG WOMAN.
YOUNG WOMAN

OPTION 2

INT/EXT. CONVERTIBLE TRAVELING ON DOWNTOWN L.A. STREET - DAY

EMILY STANTON (35), attractive, short blonde hair, drives  while she sings along with a love song playing on the radio. She arrives at a stop light, looks to her right and sees a

COFFEE SHOP - OUTDOOR SEATING

A YOUNG MAN hands a bouquet of roses to a YOUNG WOMAN.


Was this the gist of your point (i.e., more detail the scene heading)?

Henry, IMO, it really comes down to the script specifics, in the example you gave.

The key is to offer as much credible info as you can in your Slugs, while also making it as easy as possible for your readers to follow.

When you completely shift to a new scene, unless it's critical to the script's timeline, you don't want to use such specific time elements (CONTINUOUS, MOMENTS LATER, etc), as it can actually be confusing...but then again, if you do have several scenes playing out concurrantly, you definitely need your readers to be aware that time and timing will come into play.

And I'll add this, simply my own opinion, chances are that if time and timing does not and will not come into play, if you do have concurrent scenes going back and forth, you've probably made a mistake in what you're choosing to show, or the timing itself doesn't matter.

Also, keep in mind that many things are understood and assumed in a script/movie and you don't want to or need to "waste" your readers' and your viewers' time.  Things like opening and closing doors, entering places with nothing "waiting" for them on the other side, starting a car, etc.  If someone walks to their car, chances are pretty good that they're going to get into their car, do whatever they do to get ready to drive, start their car, and drive off...so...you show your character walking to the car, and then your next scene will be him driving or even arriving wherever he is going, as no one wants to see all these other dull, assumed actions taking place.  But, then again, there are times and even reasons why you may want to show these mundane actions, but only do it when you have a reason to.

Dave, you're probably going to want to kill me after reading this, but here's my response.

First of all, I am very against using INT/EXT, as I feel it's lazy writing. It's really the opposite extreme of trying to direct in your writing.

Secondly, 1 of my many Pet Peeves is when peeps use EXT CAR as their Slug.  Is the location ever really "EXT CAR"?  The only times I can think of would be if you're showing something happening on a car, outside, like 2 insects fighting on thehood of a car.  The car is not the scene location, it's simply something in the scene, in whatever location it happens to be in  Does that make sense?

When you have someone driving a car, you have 2 options - showing what's going on inside the car, or showing the car driving along, but as the car drives, it's actually in a location somewhere, which is what the Slug hould actually be.

EXAMPLE...

EXT. HIGHWAY 550 - NIGHT

A dark, snowy two lane road snakes back and forth through snow covered trees.

A single car on the road comes into view. It's a four door white Jeep.

INT. JEEP - CONTINUOUS

Danny drives while Carlie rides shotgun.

BLAH BLAH BLAH..............

Now, in your example, you have several things going on at once, but it sounds like the key is that Emily sees certain things outside her car as she drives.  There are numerous ways to shoot this, and it's not going to be your choice, so IMO, the clean, easy, simple way is to write this with 2 different Slugs - kind of like I did - 1 showing the car driving, and the other, showing Emily inside.  Once inside, she'll look out and see...whatever...but you can write this inside the car still, as that wil show both Emily looking at it, and whatever she's looking at.  You just have to clarify by saying something like, "Emily looks to her right and sees Jason Voorhees behead a hot college coed.  She turns to her left, sees Michael Myers stab a scantily clad young hottie..."

That way, it's completely clear to your readers and the Director has the choice of filming this any way he chooses...but...whichever way he does choose will not effect the story 1 bit.

Make sense?

Jeff -- I understand your points.

In my example above, a character has sneaked away from the group to do something. For dramatic purposes, I'm shifting back and forth. What's being said by the group, and what he's doing, are important (none of the dull stuff you cited). Hence, my choices noted above for scenes 1, 2, and 3.

I know it's hard to evaluate without seeing the real thing, BUT -- let's stipulate that I have made the correct decisions about using concurrent scenes. Are the uses of Continuous and Moments Later correct in your view?

Henry

Quoted from Stumpzian In my example above, a character has sneaked away from the group to do something. For dramatic purposes, I'm shifting back and forth. What's being said by the group, and what he's doing, are important (none of the dull stuff you cited). Hence, my choices noted above for scenes 1, 2, and 3. I know it's hard to evaluate without seeing the real thing, BUT -- let's stipulate that I have made the correct decisions about using concurrent scenes. Are the uses of Continuous and Moments Later correct in your view?Henry

Yes, I'd agree with you, assuming that in the "MOMENTS LATER" scene, we have missed what was being said, while we were away with the 1 character, and also assuming that no time was lost when that 1 character snuck away.

BUT, I'd also say this...it's unlikely no time was lost when the 1 character snuck away, unless we're literally following him as he leaves.  It's very possible they're both MOMENTS LATER scenes, but hard to say unless you showed me exactly how you write it.

Quoted from Dreamscale BUT, I'd also say this...it's unlikely no time was lost when the 1 character snuck away, unless we're literally following him as he leaves.  It's very possible they're both MOMENTS LATER scenes, but hard to say unless you showed me exactly how you write it.

OK, based on that, to be EXACT about it, I'd say Moments Later for all. (My use  of Continous was to get across the idea of simultaneous activities, even if they are not PRECISELY simultaneous.)

In the end, the choice ( Moments Later or Continuous) is info for the movie-maker, not the average reader.

Thanks.

Quoted from Stumpzian OK, based on that, to be EXACT about it, I'd say Moments Later for all. (My use  of Continous was to get across the idea of simultaneous activities, even if they are not PRECISELY simultaneous.) In the end, the choice ( Moments Later or Continuous) is info for the movie-maker, not the average reader. Thanks.

Well...the "movie maker" won't be able to show this unless a SUPER is used saying, "AT THE SAME TIME" or whatever...so, I wouldn't quite agree with that.

As long as what you used "appears" to be correct...or could be correct, and it's easy to follow, you're golden.

It can get tricky when time does come into play and it makes a difference when different scenes are playing out, but when filmed, it's much easier to follow what the intention is, and if you decide to leave a scene for dramatic reasons, make sure you return to exactly where you are (continuous), or else, your readers will assume things have happened in the time we've been away.

Quoted from Dreamscale Dave, you're probably going to want to kill me after reading this, but here's my response. First of all, I am very against using INT/EXT, as I feel it's lazy writing. It's really the opposite extreme of trying to direct in your writing. Secondly, 1 of my many Pet Peeves is when peeps use EXT CAR as their Slug.  Is the location ever really "EXT CAR"?  The only times I can think of would be if you're showing something happening on a car, outside, like 2 insects fighting on thehood of a car.  The car is not the scene location, it's simply something in the scene, in whatever location it happens to be in  Does that make sense? When you have someone driving a car, you have 2 options - showing what's going on inside the car, or showing the car driving along, but as the car drives, it's actually in a location somewhere, which is what the Slug hould actually be. EXAMPLE... EXT. HIGHWAY 550 - NIGHT A dark, snowy two lane road snakes back and forth through snow covered trees. A single car on the road comes into view. It's a four door white Jeep. INT. JEEP - CONTINUOUS Danny drives while Carlie rides shotgun. BLAH BLAH BLAH.............. Now, in your example, you have several things going on at once, but it sounds like the key is that Emily sees certain things outside her car as she drives.  There are numerous ways to shoot this, and it's not going to be your choice, so IMO, the clean, easy, simple way is to write this with 2 different Slugs - kind of like I did - 1 showing the car driving, and the other, showing Emily inside.  Once inside, she'll look out and see...whatever...but you can write this inside the car still, as that wil show both Emily looking at it, and whatever she's looking at.  You just have to clarify by saying something like, "Emily looks to her right and sees Jason Voorhees behead a hot college coed.  She turns to her left, sees Michael Myers stab a scantily clad young hottie..." That way, it's completely clear to your readers and the Director has the choice of filming this any way he chooses...but...whichever way he does choose will not effect the story 1 bit. Make sense?

Would never want to kill you - unless I was writing a horror script of course  

First - on the use of EXT/INT:

I used that approach because several sources I have researched indicated you can not use a secondary scene heading (in the example I posted, the secondary scene heading was COFFEE SHOP - OUTDOOR SEATING) if you are changing from INT. to EXT (or vice versa). They recommended that if you want to use a secondary scene heading in these instances the master scene heading should be INT/EXT.

Now, back to the future. The way I originally had the scene structure was something akin to:

INT. CONVERTIBLE TRAVELING DOWN CITY STREET (LOS ANGELES) - DAY

EMILY, attractive (35) with short blonde drives as she softly sings a love song playing on the car radio.

She arrives at a stop light, looks out the passenger window and sees a YOUNG WOMAN angrily tossing a bouquet of roses at a YOUNG MAN.  

YOUNG WOMAN

You expect me to forgive you for
cheating on me because you gave me
roses?

YOUNG MAN
It was just the one time. I swear I
won't do it again.

YOUNG WOMAN
It was my sister!

Emily quickly turns away and hits the button to raise the
convertible's roof.

The feedback I got on the above was that I at point Emily looks at the YOUNG MAN/WOMAN the shot changed and I needed to tell the reader where the YOUNG MAN/WOMAN were. Hence the use of the secondary scene heading (COFFEE SHOP - OUTDOOR SEATING) and the INT/EXT master scene heading because the action with Emily was inside her car and the action with the couple was outside the car.

Anyway, I understand your recommendation, you think it should be something akin to:

EXT. DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES STREET - DAY

A business district with plenty of traffic. Tall buildings abound. A convertible, top down, comes into view.

INT. CONVERTIBLE - CONTINUOUS

EMILY STANTON (35), attractive, short blonde hair, sings along with a love song playing on the radio.

She arrives at a stop light, looks to her right and sees a YOUNG WOMAN angrily tossing a bouquet of roses at a YOUNG MAN.  

YOUNG WOMAN

You expect me to forgive you for
cheating on me because you gave me
roses?

YOUNG MAN
It was just the one time. I swear I
won't do it again.

YOUNG WOMAN
It was my sister!

Emily quickly turns away and hits the button to raise the
convertible's roof.......

Is this the approach you are recommending? Note: I like it - just not sure that I'm not violating another rule by not having a secondary scene heading for where the YOUNG/MAN woman are.

Sorry to be thick headed about this. I am sure it most be simpler than I am making it.

Quoted from Dreamscale As long as what you used "appears" to be correct...or could be correct, and it's easy to follow, you're golden.

And that's where I am in this particular example. Thanks!

Dave, your example brings a few 'sticky grey areas" into the equation.

Check this out...

First of all, when you have a convertible, you're in a grey area, because, in theory, INT means inside something and EXT means you're outside - it really has to do with lighting for the shot...what's required for an INT shot or an EXT shot, as well as your available options for where and how to film it.

Secondly, and not completely correct, is the writer's assumption, and recommendation of where the camera is going to be to film this shot or scene. Know what I'm saying?

If you're in a "standard" vehicle, the shot is going to be from inside the vehicle, filming what's inside the vehicle.  In an "open" convertable, everything inside the vehicle is also in view if you film outsdie the vehicle....even a camera attached to the door or anywhere for that matter.

The fact that you want dialogue from the city street to come into play...and not just some passing dialogue, but an actual little mini scene between 2 peeps outside the convertible, makes it even more difficult.  It's a tough scene to film and get right, and it's also a tough scene to break down on how to write it "correctly".  It will come down to the Director's choice, and IMO, it will be several shots all put together - it's unlikely it will be filmed in 1 take from 1 camera.

In your example and based on what you're saying, it sounds like whoever critiqued you was thinking that you had to or wanted to show Emily's POV, without using a POV.  Understand?  When you change scenes here to the EXT STREET scene, it's as if Emily is watching this take place.

But, you can also show this exact same thing from within Emily's car, as long as it's clear...as in you say something like "Emily watches outside on the street...whatever, as a chick kicks a guy in the balls...".

You're right about "MASTER SCENE HEADINGS".  They're basicallly the Full Slug we're in, and if you change it, you can't use a Mini, as it's likely it's a brand new shot requiring a brand new setup and very possibly different requirements to make the shot work.

But again, as I said earlier, and I really mean this - if it's easy to follow and makes sense, no big deal.  I'll preface this last comment by adding, "as long as you understand what you're doing and why you're doing it".

Tough one, here, but hopefully what I said does make sense to you.  It could go several ways and each could be "correct", or at least not "incorrect", but there are also several ways that would be incorrect.

Anyone else want to jump in and give their view?

Thanks again Dreamscale - yes, the POV issue was what was raised by an earlier review and I think it is a very valid comment. You are right in that it is very confusing as I seem to have introduced many moving parts into this scene. I am going with the following (below) for now and make corrections later.

EXT. DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES STREET - DAY

A business district with plenty of traffic. Tall buildings abound. A convertible, top down, comes into view.

INT. CONVERTIBLE - CONTINUOUS

EMILY STANTON (35), attractive, short blonde hair, sings along with a love song playing on the radio. She arrives at a stop light, looks to her right and sees a

COFFEE SHOP - OUTDOOR SEATING

A YOUNG MAN hands a bouquet of roses to a YOUNG WOMAN.

YOUNG WOMAN
You expect me to forgive you for cheating on me because you gave me roses?

YOUNG MAN
It was just the one time. I swear I won't do it again.
The young woman stands and angrily tosses the bouquet back into the young man's chest.

YOUNG WOMAN
It was my sister!
The young woman spins and turns her back to the young man,  

YOUNG WOMAN (CONT’D)
What are you staring at, bitch?

CONVERTIBLE
Emily quickly turns away and hits a button on her dashboard. The convertible's roof slowly arches towards the front windshield..

You're INT. for the vehicle even if your hood's down as you've specified the hood's down.

Second example only misses the POV, which is needed to avoid confusion. The POV can be descriptive, but the description is contained within the estabishing shot, so you're good there.

The 'camera' in effect does not change location from the car as the action is passenger side, so is viable - audible and visible - from the camera's (Emily's) current location. POV suffices.

OK, as written, no big deal, but let's all understand that there are still "issues" with the way you're choosing to write it...because...

You start with a Master heading that's EXT of this Downtown street.  Then you go to an INT scene in the convertible, and then, you go with a Mini that's both EXT and you decide to give it a new more exact heading, "COFFEE SHOP - OUTDOOR SEATING", which IMO, isn't remotely necessary, and then...back to another Mini, which is INT...inside the convertible.  Not correct, striclty speaking.

You really shouldn't use Mini's to go from INT to EXT scenes, as INT and EXT, again, are used for lighting and what's needed between the 2 different scenes.  As written, this is several shots, each of which is a complete setup.  That could be how it's done, but there is a much simpler way.

One more thing to bring up, which may bring in some more peeps' feedback...

When you write "Emily Sees", or even "Emily hears", what you're inferring is a shot of Emily's face, and then what it is she hears or sees.  But, assuming Emily is right there, which she is, it's understood, unless she's deaf or blind, that she'll see and hear this stuff, just like we will.  Thus, it's usually unecessary, unless you really want to show her seeing and/or hearing, for dramatic purposes....usually used in horror movies to show emtion.  If we don't need to really see her seeing or hearing, skip those usually wasted words.

Word out...  

Quoted from Dreamscale OK, as written, no big deal, but let's all understand that there are still "issues" with the way you're choosing to write it...because... You start with a Master heading that's EXT of this Downtown street.  Then you go to an INT scene in the convertible, and then, you go with a Mini that's both EXT and you decide to give it a new more exact heading, "COFFEE SHOP - OUTDOOR SEATING", which IMO, isn't remotely necessary, and then...back to another Mini, which is INT...inside the convertible.  Not correct, striclty speaking. You really shouldn't use Mini's to go from INT to EXT scenes, as INT and EXT, again, are used for lighting and what's needed between the 2 different scenes.  As written, this is several shots, each of which is a complete setup.  That could be how it's done, but there is a much simpler way. One more thing to bring up, which may bring in some more peeps' feedback... When you write "Emily Sees", or even "Emily hears", what you're inferring is a shot of Emily's face, and then what it is she hears or sees.  But, assuming Emily is right there, which she is, it's understood, unless she's deaf or blind, that she'll see and hear this stuff, just like we will.  Thus, it's usually unecessary, unless you really want to show her seeing and/or hearing, for dramatic purposes....usually used in horror movies to show emtion.  If we don't need to really see her seeing or hearing, skip those usually wasted words. Word out...

Thanks Dream - you will find that one of my gifts is that every time I fix a mistake - I create a new one to replace it  

Quoted from eldave1 Thanks Dream - you will find that one of my gifts is that every time I fix a mistake - I create a new one to replace it

You and I both, bro.     Good stuff.

I hope you know what I say is what I truly believe in and try to practice.  No one gets it right 100% of the time...well,,,maybe Stevie in his short 80's denim shorts, but that's hard to compete with.  

So many things can be done so many different ways...and IMO, the key is to do them in a way that doesn't send up any red flags, and once you have your readers' attention and respect, it's all gravy from there on out.

Key is, don't fuck up on your first page...EVER!  If you can go errorless or close with your first 10, you're pretty much golden.

Thanks much - appreciate the guidance

Quoted from Dreamscale "..,and then, you go with a Mini that's both EXT and you decide to give it a new more exact heading, "COFFEE SHOP - OUTDOOR SEATING", which IMO, isn't remotely necessary..."

But, up to this point, the reader/viewer didn't know where the exchange Emily sees was taking place. Doesn't he need this heading? In some form?

Most of my locations, if not all, from my recent short have been switched out for something else. Even outdoor locations have become indoor locations. I originally had a gang in a park, now they are a gang in a pub.

As with eldave's scene... it could be that when it comes time to film, she simply walks down the street... or she could see all of that on the way from the car park to her office.

Quoted from Forgive You're INT. for the vehicle even if your hood's down as you've specified the hood's down. Second example only misses the POV, which is needed to avoid confusion. The POV can be descriptive, but the description is contained within the estabishing shot, so you're good there. The 'camera' in effect does not change location from the car as the action is passenger side, so is viable - audible and visible - from the camera's (Emily's) current location. POV suffices.

So, you're saying this?

EXT. DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES STREET - DAY

A business district with plenty of traffic. Tall buildings abound. A convertible, top down, comes into view.

INT. CONVERTIBLE - CONTINUOUS

EMILY STANTON (35), attractive, short blonde hair, sings along with a love song playing on the radio. She arrives at a stop light and looks to her right.  

EMILY POV

a coffee shop with outdoor seating. A YOUNG MAN hands a bouquet of roses to a YOUNG WOMAN.

YOUNG WOMAN
You expect me to forgive you for cheating on me because you gave me roses?

YOUNG MAN
It was just the one time. I swear I won't do it again.
The young woman stands and angrily tosses the bouquet back into the young man's chest.

YOUNG WOMAN
It was my sister!
The young woman spins and turns her back to the young man,  

YOUNG WOMAN (CONT’D)
What are you staring at, b****?

CONVERTIBLE
Emily quickly turns away and hits a button on her dashboard. The convertible's roof slowly arches towards the front windshield.

Quoted from DustinBowcot Most of my locations, if not all, from my recent short have been switched out for something else. Even outdoor locations have become indoor locations. I originally had a gang in a park, now they are a gang in a pub. As with eldave's scene... it could be that when it comes time to film, she simply walks down the street... or she could see all of that on the way from the car park to her office.

Interesting thought. It could be that when a scene becomes too complicated to write, in some  cases it is the scene that should simplified. I'll look at that angle.

Dustin - on a side note: On this journey to enhance formatting, I read several screenplays. One of them was "Repercussions." There was a lot of good stuff there. Anyway, I jotted down some story notes as I read it. I don't know if you are still working on that project or not. If you are and are interested in the notes, I can type them up and send them to you.

Dave, you can write the scene as you did here, without even using the POV.

You can also write it without using the Slug CONVERTIBLE, as the Convertible will be part of...or in...the master Slug - EXT DOWNTOWN STREET.  And, since it's a Convertible, you cna film /show whatever you want, without actually being "INT" - or inside the COnvertible.

You also don't need to reset your scene with the coffee shop place, as it isn't important and it's also going to be within and part of the master Slug.

Finally, IMO, what throws this scene off is the dialogue between the man and woman - first of all, it isn't needed, and secondly, it's insanely cheesy and cliche.  If you really want dialogue, just have Emily catch 1 line from either - the rest is already assumed and again, unimportant overall.

Does that help?

Interrupting for a random thought:

I was curious about the slugs for "Birdman," nominated for Best Screenplay, because (if I have this right)  it appears to be (but isn't)  all one take.

So I peeked -- it's posted on SS -- and read only far enough  to answer my question: If the movie appears to be one take, without delineated scenes, would the script have any slugs at all?

The answer, as you might guess, is Yes. The slugs looks normal ( pending a read from Jeff, of course).

Quoted from Dreamscale Dave, you can write the scene as you did here, without even using the POV. You can also write it without using the Slug CONVERTIBLE, as the Convertible will be part of...or in...the master Slug - EXT DOWNTOWN STREET.  And, since it's a Convertible, you cna film /show whatever you want, without actually being "INT" - or inside the COnvertible. You also don't need to reset your scene with the coffee shop place, as it isn't important and it's also going to be within and part of the master Slug. Finally, IMO, what throws this scene off is the dialogue between the man and woman - first of all, it isn't needed, and secondly, it's insanely cheesy and cliche.  If you really want dialogue, just have Emily catch 1 line from either - the rest is already assumed and again, unimportant overall. Does that help?

I will consider it - thanks much for your help on this.

Quoted from eldave1 Interesting thought. It could be that when a scene becomes too complicated to write, in some  cases it is the scene that should simplified. I'll look at that angle. Dustin - on a side note: On this journey to enhance formatting, I read several screenplays. One of them was "Repercussions." There was a lot of good stuff there. Anyway, I jotted down some story notes as I read it. I don't know if you are still working on that project or not. If you are and are interested in the notes, I can type them up and send them to you.

That was my first attempt at a real script and the one I practised on to perfect the craft. I write a little differently now.

I'm actually in negotiations to sell it as we speak... if you've made notes I'll certainly look at them though, but if you have to go out of your way then I wouldn't want to put you out.

Congrats on the sell - sent it you ala your message box - was not much work - I had already made the notes as I read it

Quoted from Dreamscale Dave, you can write the scene as you did here, without even using the POV. You can also write it without using the Slug CONVERTIBLE, as the Convertible will be part of...or in...the master Slug - EXT DOWNTOWN STREET.  And, since it's a Convertible, you cna film /show whatever you want, without actually being "INT" - or inside the COnvertible. You also don't need to reset your scene with the coffee shop place, as it isn't important and it's also going to be within and part of the master Slug. Finally, IMO, what throws this scene off is the dialogue between the man and woman - first of all, it isn't needed, and secondly, it's insanely cheesy and cliche.  If you really want dialogue, just have Emily catch 1 line from either - the rest is already assumed and again, unimportant overall. Does that help?

Does this work better?
INT. CAR TRAVELING DOWN L.A CITY STREET - DAY

EMILY STANTON (35), attractive, short blonde hair, sings along with a love song playing on the radio.                      

She arrives at a stop light, looks to her right and sees a YOUNG WOMAN remove a ring from her finger and angrily throw it at YOUNG MAN.

Emily drives forward. She sings the love song much softer now.

She looks to her left and sees a middle aged couple sitting on a bus stop bench. They ignore each other as they wait. Emily stops singing and now merely hums the love song.

The light changes, Emily drives forward and stops at a crosswalk.  A family walks in front of Emily's car. The husband, several steps ahead of the wife and children turns back and waves angrily at his wife and kids to hurry up.

Quoted from eldave1 Does this work better? INT. CAR TRAVELING DOWN L.A CITY STREET - DAY

No, No and No. INT. CAR - DAY. Please leave it at that. Describe the travelling car in your narrative.

I've had this argument with Jeff and other likes on SS before. for some reason, my Final Draft software urges me to use CONTINUOUS at the end of my slugs.

I have no idea how to use it properly, so I just don't. I've always thought it means a tracking shot, i.e...

INT. HOUSE - DAY

Jim tries to grab her arm. She pulls away from him, storms outside.

EXT. FRONT YARD - CONTINUOUS

Jim catches up with her. She turns and spits in his face.

To me, you're telling the director how to direct. Most likely He or She will piss upon it.
EXT. FRONT YARD - DAY works just as well.

Just stick with that and I highly doubt anyone will complain.

James

Quoted from jwent6688 EXT. FRONT YARD - DAY works just as well.

What about dropping DAY there? Because there's clearly no change.

Quoted from Stumpzian What about dropping DAY there? Because there's clearly no change.

Best to keep it as DAY. Only time not to use that is when the scene is set in SPACE.

Dustin -- thanks.

Here is my rationale. If you have a bunch of consecutive scenes that are clearly DAY, why keep repeating?

I started out doing it exactly the way you say but somewhere along the line changed. Either somebody said, "Don't keep repeating DAY!!!" or I just decided myself.


Henry

Quoted from Stumpzian Dustin -- thanks. Here is my rationale. If you have a bunch of consecutive scenes that are clearly DAY, why keep repeating? I started out doing it exactly the way you say but somewhere along the line changed. Either somebody said, "Don't keep repeating DAY!!!" or I just decided myself. Henry

It can be confusing to read. The question will be that perhaps the writer has forgotten to add it. The reader won't find out till they read the scene.

IMO of course. It probably won't make the difference with a script read and resultant sale, but it might. Makes it easier for everybody to read... director, DP. The DP will need to make a shot list and it would help if they didn't have any questions. What may be obvious to you, may not be to everyone involved. Save giving people a headache and just write it in, mate.

Makes sense. Thanks.

Dave, I agree with Cleveland about your Slug in your example.

I am against using "traveling" as part of the Slug, and I'm even more against using something like, "TRAVELING DOWN L.A. CITY STREET".

Maybe you should write a horror script and name a character Jeff, so you can kill me and get it over with.  

I always stress detail, but I also always say there's a fine line, and this crosses it.

Maybe this will help...

Another thing I always stress is always being consistent with your Slugs - 100% consistent.  If you think about this and really take it to heart, it may actually help you determine what's too little and what's too much.

Consider a setting...a Slug that will be used numerous times in your script.  Now think about a similar setting that will also be used over and over and think about what sets them apart and what works for using them again and again.

If you have 2 houses that will be used repeatedly, obviously, you can't just use "HOUSE" - but, whether or not you have multiple houses, you never should be so generic anyway.

EMILY'S HOUSE, JOHNSON HOUSE, MOUNTAIN MANSION, etc - these all work and set your scene perfectly (unless for some reason you have numerous houses owned by Emily, the Johnson's, and/or numerous mountain mansions that don't have actual ownership by anyone we know).

What about cars?  CORVETTE, LEXUS, EMILY'S CONVERTIBLE, etc. - these all work and set your scene perfectly (unless for some reason you have numeruos Corvettes, Lexus', and Emily owns more than 1 convertible).

No matter where these cars drive, the above Slugs work, and that's exactly where you are (I'm talking about INT scenes right now).

But, if you add "TRAVELING DOWN L.A. CITY STREET", or the like, evey time you want an INT shot in the car, you have to use a different Slug, assuming it's in a different location.

You'll have - "EMILY'S CONVERTIBLE - TRAVELING DOWN L.A. CITY STREET", "EMILY'S COVERTIBLE TRAVELING ON ONE LANE COUNTY ROAD", "EMILY'S CONVERTIBLE - STOPPED AT BRIDGE OVERPASS", "EMILY'S CONVERTIBLE - SITTING IN CROWDED L.A. MALL PARKING LOT".

Can you imagine using all these?  Can you imagine reading them in a script?  I can't and don't want to.

Set the scene with a good solid detailed Slug, but don't go overboard.  Then, "really" set the scene with your opening passage, so we know exatly where we are, what it looks like who's there, etc.

Does that help?

Cleveland, in your example, using CONTINUOUS is incorrect, as time has elapsed from the first scene to the next one.  It's not CONTINUOUS.

And again, as I've said many times, you can lose the continuous aspect...and probably should...when you have assumed actions taking place from scene to scene.

Example...

Mike drives up in his driveway.  Shuts off car.  Grabs briefcase, gets out of car. Walks up to front door, Opens door.  Walks inside. Closes door.  Looks around front hall.  Sets briefcase down. Takes off toupee.

MIKE

Honey, I'm home!

Much better to simply show Mike driving up his driveway, and then "cutting" to inside the house, removing his toupee and telling his wife, he's home.

Henry, unless you're using a Mini SLug, you want to and need to use a Full Slug, including a time element.  Why?  Just because that's the way it is and what readers are accustomed to seeing.  As Dustin correctly points out, you don't want your reader thinking or even wondering if you made a mistake by omitting the time element.

100% consistency, if at all possible.

Quoted from Dreamscale Henry, unless you're using a Mini SLug, you want to and need to use a Full Slug, including a time element.  Why?  Just because that's the way it is and what readers are accustomed to seeing.  As Dustin correctly points out, you don't want your reader thinking or even wondering if you made a mistake by omitting the time element. 100% consistency, if at all possible.

I guess I was thinking mini slugs, as in:

EXT. FRONT YARD - DAY

STREET

SIDEWALK

That is, dropping the EXT. and TIME element in each mini, and returning to full slug only when you change to INT. or another time period.

Quoted from Stumpzian I guess I was thinking mini slugs, as in: EXT. FRONT YARD - DAY STREET SIDEWALK That is, dropping the EXT. and TIME element in each mini, and returning to full slug only when you change to INT. or another time period.

But why would you want to do that?

Using Full Slugs doesn't take up any extra space. They don't take any extra time to read, as the reader's eye and mind is trained to see what it's used to seeing in a script.  And finally, your screenwriting software will que you to use both INT/EXT and a time element, meaning, it doesn't take you any extra time as the writer, either.

I just don't understand why peeps are so against using Full Slugs, but then again, I don't understand lots of things in the world.  

I've dropped minis completely from my writing... aside from the very, very rare, LATER.

I think it's since getting involved more on the film side I see how it makes things less confusing for everybody later down the line if the full slugs are used. When looking at a script from a technical standpoint, it often helps just to have all the info there without having to backtrack to remember where they are.

Quoted from Dreamscale Cleveland, in your example, using CONTINUOUS is incorrect, as time has elapsed from the first scene to the next one.  It's not CONTINUOUS.

I highly doubt my example is anymore incorrect than most people using it in the first place. I said a tracking shot, as if it was integral to the story to follow the actor from inside to outside the house. No time passes. It's continuous.

But, I agree with you on full slugs. I would prefer writers just use them and don't try to get too fancy. It doesn't take up anymore lines in your script.

James

INT. DAVE'S STUDY - DAY

Dave (60) and incredibly handsome hurls his coffee mug at the screen of his desktop computer.

                               DAVE
             Those fucking slugs. I hate them. I will
             fucking kill all of them.

Dave's wife, LAURA (21) with the face of a beauty queen and the body of a porn star enters the study.  

                               LAURA
               Who are they?

                              DAVE
                They?

                               LAURA
                The slugs you're yelling at.

                               DAVE
                They're not people. They're scene headings.
                And I fucking hate them. They are torturing
                me.

                              LAURA
                 Come to bed, baby. I'll make you forget about
                 Those slugs.

                              DAVE
                 I can't. I wouldn't be able to sleep with these
                 slugs on my mind.
                    
Laura gives Dave a nibble on the neck.

                             LAURA
                 Baby, I wasn't thinking about sleeping.        

                            DAVE
                 No, damn it. Not till I take care of all
                 these God forsaken slugs. I hope they burn
                 in hell!

Laura exits.            

INT. DAVE'S BEDROOM - DAY

Laura collapses on the bed, sobbing.

                            LAURA  
                   My husband's lost his mind. I bet it
                   was that bastard Jeff. He's going down.

========================================================
Thanks to you all for chiming in. It is amazing how many different sources view this topic (e.g., from the use of INT/EXT, MINI SLUGS, DESCRIPTION IN SLUGS, etc. Most of what is said on this site makes sense.

Jeff - got your points - thanks - the consistency in the use of the scene headings throughout makes perfect sense. So - and I promise - my last question on this. Is this okay:

INT. EMILY'S CAR - DAY

EMILY STANTON (35), attractive, short blonde hair, sings along with a love song playing on the radio as she drives on a busy street in downtown Los Angeles.  

She arrives at a stop light, looks to her right and sees a young woman remove a ring from her finger and angrily throw it at young man.

Emily drives forward. She sings the love song much softer now.

P.S. I am not sold on the non-use of mini slugs (at least as I understand them). To me, this:

INT. - DAVE'S HOUSE - KITCHEN - NIGHT

Dave is at the kitchen table typing on a laptop computer. The doorbell CHIMES. Dave  scampers to the

FRONT DOOR

And opens it.  His neighbor rushes in.


Flows a lot better than this:

INT. - DAVE'S HOUSE - KITCHEN - NIGHT

Dave is at the kitchen table typing on a laptop computer. The doorbell CHIMES. Dave  scampers out

INT. DAVE'S HOUSE - FRONT DOOR - NIGHT

Dave opens the door.  His neighbor rushes in.

  Funny stuff.

Dave, your example is not correct, IMO, as you have this as an INT scene.  Emily "drives forward" is definitely not an INT shot.

If you really want to write this as an INT scene, every time you write something that takes place "outside" that scene, you'll have to label as "outside"...or the like.

For instance, if you have INT CAR, you CAN write, "Emily hits the brakes", or "Emily floors it", because those are definitely actions that Emily is doing inside the car.  But, you can't write things like this, "the car slows down and stops", or "the car peels out, speeds away", as these are actions that are not happening inside the car.

Make sense?

Your 2nd example is also incorrect.  But wait a sec...in theory, your example is correct, as using Mini Slugs the way you did is correct.  But, "FRONT DOOR" is not a proper Slug, and every time I see it, I can't help but laugh.  You're never going to have action taking place at the front door, or any door, for that matter. It would be front hall or entryway, or something.  I've seen entire scenes play out incorrectly in the FRONT DOOR.

In a way, it's like using EXT CAR, and unless we're got little bugs or miniture peeps on the car, or maybe some hilarious fight sequence in which 2 guys fight on a car and stay on the car the entire fight, EXT CAR just doesn't work as a Slug...just like FRONT DOOR doesn't either.

I disagree, Jeff.

INT or EXT are just where the camera are.

You can have an INT of the car where we see the car going forwards through the windscreen.

In the above example, it's evident that he wants to stay in the car with the girl...this is to create a sense of POV..ie to attach us to this particular character.

He doesn't want to break that and go outside which would distance us from the character.

Quoted from Dreamscale   Funny stuff. Dave, your example is not correct, IMO, as you have this as an INT scene.  Emily "drives forward" is definitely not an INT shot. If you really want to write this as an INT scene, every time you write something that takes place "outside" that scene, you'll have to label as "outside"...or the like. For instance, if you have INT CAR, you CAN write, "Emily hits the brakes", or "Emily floors it", because those are definitely actions that Emily is doing inside the car.  But, you can't write things like this, "the car slows down and stops", or "the car peels out, speeds away", as these are actions that are not happening inside the car. Make sense? Your 2nd example is also incorrect.  But wait a sec...in theory, your example is correct, as using Mini Slugs the way you did is correct.  But, "FRONT DOOR" is not a proper Slug, and every time I see it, I can't help but laugh.  You're never going to have action taking place at the front door, or any door, for that matter. It would be front hall or entryway, or something.  I've seen entire scenes play out incorrectly in the FRONT DOOR. In a way, it's like using EXT CAR, and unless we're got little bugs or miniture peeps on the car, or maybe some hilarious fight sequence in which 2 guys fight on a car and stay on the car the entire fight, EXT CAR just doesn't work as a Slug...just like FRONT DOOR doesn't either.

Got the "Door" thing - thanks.

Not sure about the "car" thing. Originally I had handled this is INT/EXT - CAR is in my view that is what is actually happening. There is action happening inside and outside the car. The INT/EXT also allowed me to use mini-slugs for the different POVs (since POV's are apparently frowned on as well). E.g., I had it written as.

INT/EXT. CAR - DAY

Emily drives........looks to her right and sees

BUS STOP BENCH

But in this thread was told mini-slugs were kaput as well. - sigh  

If I am understanding you correctly, the only way to write this is:

INT. EMILY'S CAR - DAY

EMILY STANTON (35), attractive, short blonde hair, sings along with a love song playing on the radio as she drives on a busy street in downtown Los Angeles.  She arrives at a stop light and looks to her right.

EXT. SIDEWALK - DAY

A young woman remove a ring from her finger and angrily throw it at young man.

INT. EMILY'S CAR - DAY

Emily drives forward. She sings the love song much softer now.
She looks to her left.

EXT. BUS STOP BENCH - DAY

A middle aged couple sit on a bus stop bench. They ignore each other as they wait.

INT. EMILY'S CAR - DAY

Emily stops singing and now merely hums the love song.
The light changes, Emily drives forward and stops.

EXT. CROSSWALK - DAY

A family walks in front of Emily's car. The husband, several steps ahead of the wife and children turns back and waves angrily at his wife and kids to hurry up.

INT. EMILY'S CAR - DAY

Emily stops humming and turns off the radio and then drives on.

That seems a lot choppier to me - less flow. Couldn't just all be resolved by making the master scene heading INT/EXT - CAR - DAY. ??? i.e., isn't it worth committing the int/ext sin to avoid chopping this up?

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films I disagree, Jeff. INT or EXT are just where the camera are. You can have an INT of the car where we see the car going forwards through the windscreen. In the above example, it's evident that he wants to stay in the car with the girl...this is to create a sense of POV..ie to attach us to this particular character. He doesn't want to break that and go outside which would distance us from the character.

Not really, Rick.  Many make this mistake, thinking that INT or EXT means where the camera is...and in a shooting script, this may hold true, but this isn't a shooting script.  And, it's not the writer's decision where to set the camera or how to set up and shoot the shot.

A Spec script merely sets each scene and action.  How it's filmed is the Director's choice.

This is a mistake so many make and don't understand why it's a mistake.

Using INT/EXT is, in a way, the opposite, as it tells the readers to make up the scene on their own, and thus, the writer's voice is completely lost.  IMO, it's lazy writing.

Dave, your last example is to me, is once again an example of over writing and over describing.  All those little details aren't necessary.

I understand you see it this way, and maybe it's the way it would actually be shot, but in a Spec script, it's just not not necessary.  It's also overcomplicated with so much going on at the same time.  It's so many different shots, with so little overall effect.

Finally, to me, it's so cliche.  Assuming this is the very beginning of your script, it's like hitting your readers over the head with a hammer of what's to follow.  I mean, seriously, after reading this opening, I already knnow EXACTLY what's to follow.

As written, yes, it's much too choppy this way.

Does that make sense?  I don't know, man.  I'm trying...

Quoted from Dreamscale Dave, your last example is to me, is once again an example of over writing and over describing.  All those little details aren't necessary. I understand you see it this way, and maybe it's the way it would actually be shot, but in a Spec script, it's just not not necessary.  It's also overcomplicated with so much going on at the same time.  It's so many different shots, with so little overall effect. Finally, to me, it's so cliche.  Assuming this is the very beginning of your script, it's like hitting your readers over the head with a hammer of what's to follow.  I mean, seriously, after reading this opening, I already knnow EXACTLY what's to follow. As written, yes, it's much too choppy this way. Does that make sense?  I don't know, man.  I'm trying...

Again, sincere thanks for the continued input, Jeff. But, no this one doesn't make sense.

The question is how to use slugs for this particular set of activities in a scene involving a car traveling down a road with the driver noticing things that are happening outside.  The recommendation to delete the specific activities because you find them unnecessary or cliched  doesn't relate to the core question. Yes, I suppose one could write:

INT. CAR - DAY

Emily drives down a L.A. street

NEXT SCENE

Of course at this time, Emily driving down a street is now kind of irrelevant, so I could just delete it entirely. My problem is that I would be no closer to understanding how to format a scene of this nature - my original quest. So here is my favor request:

Just for shits and giggles, assume that every action sequence (e.g., Emily driving, the young couple, the bus stop bench, etc) are absolutely critical for the story.   How would you specifically write it? i.e., what are the slugs for this sequence.

EMILY STANTON (35), attractive, short blonde hair, sings along with a love song playing on the radio as she drives on a busy street in downtown Los Angeles.  

Emily arrives at a stop light, looks to her right and sees a young woman remove a ring from her finger and angrily throw it at young man.

Emily sings the love song much softer now.

Emily looks to her left and sees a middle aged couple sitting on a bus stop bench. They ignore each other as they wait.

Emily stops singing and now merely hums the love song.

The light changes, Emily drives forward and stops at a crosswalk.  

A family walks in front of Emily's car. The husband, several steps ahead of the wife and children turns back and waves angrily at his wife and kids to hurry up.

Emily stops humming and turns off the radio and then drives on.

I know it may be a bit of an ass-ache, put if you could show me the slugs for this particular sequence, that would go along ways towards helping me learn this art/science. Apparently I am just not getting it. Thanks in advance.

Quoted from Dreamscale Not really, Rick.  Many make this mistake, thinking that INT or EXT means where the camera is...and in a shooting script, this may hold true, but this isn't a shooting script.  And, it's not the writer's decision where to set the camera or how to set up and shoot the shot. A Spec script merely sets each scene and action.  How it's filmed is the Director's choice. This is a mistake so many make and don't understand why it's a mistake. Using INT/EXT is, in a way, the opposite, as it tells the readers to make up the scene on their own, and thus, the writer's voice is completely lost.  IMO, it's lazy writing. Dave, your last example is to me, is once again an example of over writing and over describing.  All those little details aren't necessary. I understand you see it this way, and maybe it's the way it would actually be shot, but in a Spec script, it's just not not necessary.  It's also overcomplicated with so much going on at the same time.  It's so many different shots, with so little overall effect. Finally, to me, it's so cliche.  Assuming this is the very beginning of your script, it's like hitting your readers over the head with a hammer of what's to follow.  I mean, seriously, after reading this opening, I already knnow EXACTLY what's to follow. As written, yes, it's much too choppy this way. Does that make sense?  I don't know, man.  I'm trying...

I don't understand this fascination with worrying about "directing the shots". It's unavoidable.

If you go EXT to show the car driving forwards, you are directing the shot just the same as if you stay in the INT of the car...the writer HAS to put the camera somewhere...or there would be no slugs at all.


It's impossible to write a script and not direct the shots.

If you describe a field of soldiers...it's a wide shot.


If you describe someone's eye...it's an Extreme Close up.

Whatever you describe has an equivalent shot size.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films INT or EXT are just where the camera are.

This is correct, and the only guideline needed to know how to do the slugs for the above example, in my opinion.

I’ve tried to stay out of this til now cause I imagine my opinion’s in the minority. There’s a lot of good points, particularly about trying to make the rest of production’s life easier, but a couple things of my own…

Quoted from Dreamscale you CAN write, "Emily hits the brakes", or "Emily floors it", because those are definitely actions that Emily is doing inside the car.

My problem with this solution is it infers a shot of Emily’s foot. But this is the opening to a romantic comedy, not Fast and Furious, why would you want a shot of what her foot is doing? Looking at Emily from the waist up, it’s pretty clear that the only thing that will happen in the image to infer her driving is that the world outside of her car will start sliding past the window. But once again, why would you write, “The world slides past her window.” This isn’t Inception and that sounds weird. We could clarify with, “The world slides past her window as the car drives on.” Then we can eliminate unnecessary and obvious detail by shortening it to, “The car drives on.”

I don’t understand why it’s improper to trust the reader to draw what would have to be obvious conclusions for anyone who’s ever been in a car. If it’s not actually confusing and you can see exactly what the shot would look like in your head, why belabor it further. Anything you do will just make it messier and less clear.

I actually use INT/EXT when there’s a lot of intercutting between them. You think this is hard? Write a car chase where one of the occupants is giving CPR in the backseat. I think of it as more efficient than lazy. If over-directing on the page is a concern, then I would think INT/EXT would be preferable to constant intercutting. Wouldn’t the director want you to just write the scene and plan it how he envisions it rather than have you constantly pushing his vision inside and outside of the car?

This is one of those cases where (for me) what’s easiest to write is also what’s easiest to read. That last example Dave wrote… I don’t want to read it that way any more than he wants to write it that way. Assuming all those elements are needed, it’s the epitome of over-directing and unnecessary information. To me, the core of the scene is contained between those slugs and the headings are just repetitive nonsense that’s breaking it up.

Now formatting for production is the one part of this that gives me pause. But in this case the entire scene would be contained on a single page. Would it really be that hard to break up?

And finally a link, because who doesn't like links?  

http://johnaugust.com/2003/int-and-ext

Quoted from EWall433 I’ve tried to stay out of this til now cause I imagine my opinion’s in the minority. There’s a lot of good points, particularly about trying to make the rest of production’s life easier, but a couple things of my own… My problem with this solution is it infers a shot of Emily’s foot. But this is the opening to a romantic comedy, not Fast and Furious, why would you want a shot of what her foot is doing? Looking at Emily from the waist up, it’s pretty clear that the only thing that will happen in the image to infer her driving is that the world outside of her car will start sliding past the window. But once again, why would you write, “The world slides past her window.” This isn’t Inception and that sounds weird. We could clarify with, “The world slides past her window as the car drives on.” Then we can eliminate unnecessary and obvious detail by shortening it to, “The car drives on.” I don’t understand why it’s improper to trust the reader to draw what would have to be obvious conclusions for anyone who’s ever been in a car. If it’s not actually confusing and you can see exactly what the shot would look like in your head, why belabor it further. Anything you do will just make it messier and less clear. I actually use INT/EXT when there’s a lot of intercutting between them. You think this is hard? Write a car chase where one of the occupants is giving CPR in the backseat. I think of it as more efficient than lazy. If over-directing on the page is a concern, then I would think INT/EXT would be preferable to constant intercutting. Wouldn’t the director want you to just write the scene and plan it how he envisions it rather than have you constantly pushing his vision inside and outside of the car? This is one of those cases where (for me) what’s easiest to write is also what’s easiest to read. That last example Dave wrote… I don’t want to read it that way any more than he wants to write it that way. Assuming all those elements are needed, it’s the epitome of over-directing and unnecessary information. To me, the core of the scene is contained between those slugs and the headings are just repetitive nonsense that’s breaking it up. Now formatting for production is the one part of this that gives me pause. But in this case the entire scene would be contained on a single page. Would it really be that hard to break up? And finally a link, because who doesn't like links?   http://johnaugust.com/2003/int-and-ext

Thanks for the link. I think I am going back to the future. Originally I had this:

INT/EXT. EMILY'S CAR - DAY (DRIVING)

EMILY STANTON (35), attractive, short blonde hair, sings along with a love song playing on the radio as she drives on a busy street in downtown Los Angeles.  

She arrives at a stop light, looks to her right and sees a young woman remove a ring from her finger and angrily throw it at young man. Emily sings the love song much softer now.

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH

Then was told that INT/EXT is a no-no. Also - told no action should be in the slug (e.g., driving or traveling) Think I'm just going to disagree (besides, my brain has become mush over this) - I think INT/EXT perfectly describes what is going on and the slug should have the action (driving) since that really describes the setting.

I've never seen action in a slug before...I definnitely don't think that's necessary!

Quoted from eldave1 Again, sincere thanks for the continued input, Jeff. But, no this one doesn't make sense. The question is how to use slugs for this particular set of activities in a scene involving a car traveling down a road with the driver noticing things that are happening outside.  The recommendation to delete the specific activities because you find them unnecessary or cliched  doesn't relate to the core question.

I'll try and hit these responses 1 at a time, as I think it will be clearer.

Dave, I apologize, as I tend to sometimes say things that i assume will be understood a certain way, while writing something that may seem like I'm saying something else.

My intent was not to tell that you should delete "all" these various actions taking place on the street.  My point was that showing all these actions was overkill, IMO, as well as cliche and heavy handed.

I also didn't mean to veer off the core discussion.

My point was merely that the way you "want" this to play out, adds to the confusion and grey matter, in formatting.

I will look at exactly what you want to write and I will offer my recommendation...after I address the other posts first.

Cool?

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films I don't understand this fascination with worrying about "directing the shots". It's unavoidable.

Rick, I think you're missing the point here.  Let me try and explain what I'm referring to with your examples below...

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films If you go EXT to show the car driving forwards, you are directing the shot just the same as if you stay in the INT of the car...the writer HAS to put the camera somewhere...or there would be no slugs at all.

To show what the car looks like, what kind of car it is, etc, you need an EXT shot of it.

To show who's in the car, or what they're doing, how they're configured, you need an INT shot.

Once this is established, you can return to either shot at any time, and your readers and viewers will be onboard.  This is screenwriting 101.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films It's impossible to write a script and not direct the shots.

And when you do this properly, it's proper screenwriting.  But, when you attempt to show something from a different angle, or a different view, you are directing the shot and it's unecessary, often incorrectly written, and very often confusing.

Sure, Directors often decide to use complex shots to film something that could be filmed very simply, but as Spec writers, that is not our job, and it only muddies the water.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films If you describe a field of soldiers...it's a wide shot. If you describe someone's eye...it's an Extreme Close up. Whatever you describe has an equivalent shot size.

Agreed, assuming we're looking at this at its most simplistic.

That's not to say that the battlefield won't be filmed from above, from a bird's eye view, aka Oliver Stone's Alexander.  And, is there really any reason to actually have the bird there?  How about Ridley Scott's Exodus: Gods and Kings, where we have beautiful sweeping ariel shots of the city?

Each scene, if written on spec, would be very simple, and should not include how the scene will be filmed.

EWall, my examples you quoted were not meant to be used in Dave's script.  They were merely trying to show the very logical difference in an INT and an EXT scene, and what would make sense within each.

I mean, seriously...your post discusses readers making obvious assumptions, and I agree with that point, but when you read a line like,

"The car speeds away.", the obvious assumption is that we're watching the car speed away, which is an EXT shot...correct?

If you read a line like, "John hits the brakes.", you're not visualling an EXT shot of the car coming to a stop - you're picturing an INT shot of John hitting the brake(s), whether or not you literally see a CU of his foot on the actual brake pedal.  You may visualize his upper half and how it reacts as he applies the brakes...correct?

Does that make sense or not?

Quoted from Dreamscale I'll try and hit these responses 1 at a time, as I think it will be clearer. Dave, I apologize, as I tend to sometimes say things that i assume will be understood a certain way, while writing something that may seem like I'm saying something else. My intent was not to tell that you should delete "all" these various actions taking place on the street.  My point was that showing all these actions was overkill, IMO, as well as cliche and heavy handed. I also didn't mean to veer off the core discussion. My point was merely that the way you "want" this to play out, adds to the confusion and grey matter, in formatting. I will look at exactly what you want to write and I will offer my recommendation...after I address the other posts first. Cool?

very cool

Quoted from Dreamscale make sense or not?

Not quite yet.

Quoted from Dreamscale "The car speeds away.", the obvious assumption is that we're watching the car speed away, which is an EXT shot...correct?

Not if I’ve framed it as an INT shot. Then you’d imagine the sound of the engine and the images accelerating past the window, which I believe would be obvious visual cues as to what the car was doing, whether you see its EXT or not. I mean technically, you still see the car (from inside) and you see enough to know what it's doing.

Quoted from Dreamscale If you read a line like, "John hits the brakes.", you're not visualizing an EXT shot of the car coming to a stop - you're picturing an INT shot of John hitting the brake(s), whether or not you literally see a CU of his foot on the actual brake pedal.  You may visualize his upper half and how it reacts as he applies the brakes...correct?

This part kind of seems like a double standard. So when I write, “The car speeds away.” that has to be a literal shot of a car speeding away and we aren’t allowed to infer it from visual cues. But when you write, “John hits the brakes.” that doesn't have to be a literal shot of John’s foot hitting the brakes and we are allowed to infer it from visual cues? They seem too similar to me.

Also, imagine a scene where a character is tied up in the backseat of a car. They are alone and can only see tree tops through the window. All of a sudden, the car starts moving. Is it rolling down hill? Is being pushed? Pulled? They don’t know and, for dramatic purposes, the audience isn’t allowed to look outside either. How would we describe the mysterious motion of the car without eventually saying plainly, so there could be no mistake about it, “The car is moving.”

I do understand a lot of what you’re saying, I just think it’s fair to speak of what a car is doing from within the vehicle. If you say, “EXT. The car drives along the road”, I’ll picture an EXT shot of a car moving down the road. If you say, “INT. The car drives along the road”, I’ll simply picture an INT shot of that exact same event.

EWall...is it Eric?  I forgot, sorry.

Tough crowd here for sure.  Damn...

OK, so let's try this again...

In your example(s), you are correct, as well as technically correct.  But, I still think you're missing my point and I'm not sure if I'm just not being clear or you are trying to find ways around what I'm trying to get across.

Let's forget screenwriting for a second and concentrate on writing...or even communicating.  Let's focus on the visual representation you get in your head when you read or hear the following...

"The car speeds ahead."

Commmon sense would say that the vast majority of peeps would envision some sort of EXT view of a car driving forward.  This is simply due to the subject of the sentence being car and the verb being speeds.  One would normally "see" the subject doing the action.

Can we agree on this?

Now, in screenwriting, Slugs help us visualize the shots, because they tell us where we are in terms of a setting and whether or not we're inside or outside.  And again, your examples are correct and there are also many, many other examples of how one can manipulate a shot or scene, using POV from a certain thing or perspective, or simply where one decides to set the camera for a desired effect.

We still cool?

2 points I want to make about this...

1)  Every time a writer decides to change/manipulate a shot from what would be considered "standard" or "normal", they are going above and beyond what a standard spec script is.

This is not to say there aren't times and examples of when this is acceptable, a smart move, or important to the script.  The problem is, that very often, writers mess this up, or don't realize exactly what they're doing or showing...or why, which is my 2nd point.

And Eric, 1 final thing.  You said it wasn't fair of me to use the examples I did, as the line, "John hits the brakes." infers that we actually see him stepping on the brake pedal.  I disagree with this, as the intent is that yes, John is actually stepping on the brake pedal, but is that the shot that would be important to see?  Or would it be better to show his facial reaction as he's doing this?  Check this out...

Ever seen a horror movie where someone or something steps on someone's head and crushes it?  How often do we actually see the end result or the actual crushing of the head?  Sometimes, sure, but more often we won't actually see this take place, as the shot will be above the actual violence, but we'll get a sound that makes us completely aware of what just happened.  Sure, you could take 4, 5 lines to describe exactly what "we see", or you could write exactly what happens and let the Director make the decision.  Now, if you go into any detail of what the crushing looks like, etc, you're then definitely inferring that you intend us to see this take place, but without the detail, it doesn't really matter whether or not we actually see the deed take place.

In closing, I want to say that I'm not trying to be difficult.  I'm not trying to be a total stickler.  I' m just trying to help peeps understand various aspects of writing, which will actually help in getting their visions across to the masses.

We all "see" things in our heads and want others to share those visions.  We're all coming from different levels of expertise and knowledge, and IMO, hearing different ideas and beliefs helps.

Peace out.

Yeah, it's Eric. I’ll try to keep this short, because it does seem silly to spend so much time on something so small

First off, I'm not just trying to find a way around. Actually when I'm in a debate, I spend most of my time trying to figure out where I'm wrong. There's no point in wasting everyone's time just so I can look stupid. I just genuinely don't see the need to be so particular in this case.

I agree that my first instinct in a INT. CAR shot is to describe what the driver is doing to make the car move. ‘Emily hits the gas’ isn’t necessarily a shot of her foot. But I also think there are many ways that a car can move that aren’t attributable to the driver. A lot of times simply taking one’s foot off the brake will allow the car to creep forward. So there are times where it’s going to be impossible or convoluted to describe what a car is doing solely through the driver’s interaction with it.

“The car speeds away.”

I agree that, taken in a vacuum, the first image I think of is an exterior shot. But that would be the same for many sentences taken out of context. For me it comes down to two questions. Is the subject (the car) in the frame? And can we tell what it’s doing? The answer is yes to both.

Actually, looking back at the conversation, I realize the line you originally took issue with was, “Emily drives forward.” If Emily can act on the brakes without us seeing the brakes, I certainly think she can act on the car in general without us needing a specific shot of the car.

Anyway, this is just my view. I realize it's not the only one.

Have a good one, man.

I'd like opinions on this question about a specific slug.

A car is the setting for a few early scenes. Let's say a 1946 Ford station wagon. The make and model year are important because of how the car looks and the part it plays.

I don't want to tell the make and year by having a character say it. So I want to put it in the slug:

INT. 1946 FORD STATION WAGON -- DAY

Sound OK?

Yes that's fine. I do that even when it isn't important sometimes as it helps distinguish different cars rather than writing EMILY'S CAR for example. So long as it is clear, it doesn't matter.

I've just reread all 64 posts on this thread. Took my time. Tried to understand what people were saying.

I have to say I understand MUCH BETTER than before. Earlier, the back and forth on certain things got on my nerves (all the "yes, but..." stuff, etc).

But the second time through, I have a much better grasp of what's right and wrong.

Thanks to all. Henry

Quoted from Stumpzian I'd like opinions on this question about a specific slug. A car is the setting for a few early scenes. Let's say a 1946 Ford station wagon. The make and model year are important because of how the car looks and the part it plays. I don't want to tell the make and year by having a character say it. So I want to put it in the slug: INT. 1946 FORD STATION WAGON -- DAYSound OK?

I'm going to say no, simply because of how yuo rbought this up - this will be the setting for "a few" early scenes, meaning, you'll have this Slug several times.

Is this the kind of Slug you want your readers to read over and over?  I don't think so.  I'd give the year in an action/description line.  As for "Ford Station Wagon", well, it's a mouthfull, but if it really is important, I guess you need to get that across somehow.  I was going to suggest just using "STATIO WAGON", but there are manufacturers other than Ford who make Station Wagons...or did at least.

I'll tell ya...you guys bring up the hardest examples to work with!!!  

I'll put year and make  in the action/description and go with INT. STATION WAGON - DAY  ( my original)

I was trying out more detailed slug  based on your earlier post  about using model names in slugs -- Lexus, Corvette, etc.

You're right -- the slug is used three or four times, so "1946 Ford Station Wagon" would wear out its welcome pretty fast.

Of course, somebody may have another opinion.

I agree with that Slug.  Also, IMO, Station Wagon is a detailed Slug...or at least, "detailed enough".  

Thanks, Dustin.

Thanks, Jeff.

Dave, I haven't forgotten about you.  In fact, I've been looking over this entire thread, as well as reading the first 10 or so of your script, in which much of this thread revolves around.

Obviously, I don't have much going on today.  

I wish there was a simple answer here, but IMO, there's not.  You and others may disagree and some or all of you may think I'm nuts, but here are my thoughts...

Looks to me like you want your script to be set in L.A., or somewhere near L.A., right?  That's what you should do - start off by setting this properly.  You can use a SUPER, or you can just say so in your opening action/description lines.  Start it with an/some EXt shots of downtown, since that's where Emily's office is.  Starting off in her car isn't a strong way to intro her or this script.

Reading your opening 10, I gather that it's Friday morning and Emily is on her way to work.  Why do I say it's Friday morning? Well, because after work, Lauren comes over and drops off little Madelyn to spend the night.  Now, whether Lauren and Emily are actually sisters, doesn't matter right now, but I'll assume they are. I'll also assume that Lauren is single and has plans for the night.  Most professional peeps wouldn't be leaving for the night unless it's a weekend, cuz most professional peeps have reponsibilities during the business week.

So, why does any of this matter, or why in the world would I be saying this shit?

Well, because if what I'm assuming is correct, it doesn't make any sense to me why some dude would be giving his girl flowers on a street corner on a Friday morning in public after cheating on her, and this is the first time they've spoken since this happened, and opening on this scene just doesn't fly.

So check this out and see what you think...

After you intro the area, go right to Emily's office, and establish who she is - a Marriage Counselor.  From there, go into your next scene with Sam and Nancy, but cut it back a bit.  Overall, this is a nice scene, but it just runs too long, with too much dialogue and too much unecessary detail.

By doing this, you've set the stage, so to speak.  Have Emily say out loud to herself or her secretary, maybe that she's had enough and is leaving early for the day/weekend.

Then, you can go back to your actual opening on the street, as Emily is driving home, and it will all make alot more sense now that we've seen what Emily has gone through today, or maybe goes through all the time.

This way, writing out the scene on the street will be alot easier, because Emily is already intro'd, and the location is already established.  It will also make more sense now for your man and woman flower scene to take place - maybe they're supposed to meet for lunch and the woman just found out that the guy had cheated on her - the point being having the flower scene take place first thing in the morning is hard to beleive...for me, at least.

From there, go as you have in your script.

Now, how would I write it?  After thinking long and hard, I realized I have a somewhat similar scene in 1 of my scripts, so I checked it out.  I used individual Slugs for inside the car and outside on the street...and...it doesn't look bad at all, nor does it take upt a bunch of extra space.  But, in my scene, it's not a convertible, and it's night, and it's dumping snow, so I really had no choice.  With yours, you still do have a choice, as you can write it all as EXT. VINE STREET - DAY (or whatever street they're on).

I'd recommend having a brief scene of Emily in her parking garage, getting into her Convertible, so we will know that's her car, and again, once these facts are established, writing the next scene gets alot easier.

EXT. VINE STREET - DAY

Emily pulls out of the garage, into traffic.  She sings along to a love song, playing on the radio.

She looks to her right, where a YOUNG MAN hands a bouquet of flowers to a YOUNG WOMAN.

The woman angrily thows them back into his chest.

     WOMAN
     You Bastard!  You cheated with my sister?

Emily turns away, a look of sadness on her face.  She continues singing, but much softer now.

The Convertible moves slowly forward in the traffic, stopping again a few yards ahead.

Emily looks to her left, where a MIDDLE AGED COUPLE sits on a bench, completely ignoring each other.

She stops singing and merely hums along with the song now.

In front of her, a FAMILY walks through the intersection.  The HUSBAND walks several steps ahead of his WIFE and CHILDREN.  He turns back, angrily waves at them to hurry up.

Emily shakes her head, stops humming, and turns off the radio.

Blah, Blah, Blah

That's my advice, take it, leave it, flush it down the toilet.  If nothing else, hope it makes sense and helps you gong forward.

Take care.




  

Quoted Text Obviously, I don't have much going on today.

You must be a slug  

Quoted Text Looks to me like you want your script to be set in L.A., or somewhere near L.A., right?  That's what you should do - start off by setting this properly.  You can use a SUPER, or you can just say so in your opening action/description lines.  Start it with an/some EXt shots of downtown, since that's where Emily's office is.  Starting off in her car isn't a strong way to intro her or this scrip

t.

Yes, the main setting is L.A. I have to mull over (digest) your suggestion here. Originally I had something like:

EXT. GRAND AVE, DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES - DAY

Tall buildings abound. The street is congested with morning traffic. Pedestrians fill the blah, blah.

And then I thought - be brief - no need to describe because Downtown LA is iconic enough for the reader to already get the setting? (e.g., like NEW YORK TIME SQUARE, NEW ORLEANS - FRENCH QUARTER, LAS VEGAS - THE STRIP, etc.)  that it was unnecessary to add the detail.

Quoted Text Reading your opening 10, I gather that it's Friday morning and Emily is on her way to work.  Why do I say it's Friday morning? Well, because after work, Lauren comes over and drops off little Madelyn to spend the night.  Now, whether Lauren and Emily are actually sisters, doesn't matter right now, but I'll assume they are. I'll also assume that Lauren is single and has plans for the night.  Most professional peeps wouldn't be leaving for the night unless it's a weekend, cuz most professional peeps have reponsibilities during the business week. So, why does any of this matter, or why in the world would I be saying this s***? Well, because if what I'm assuming is correct, it doesn't make any sense to me why some dude would be giving his girl flowers on a street corner on a Friday morning in public after cheating on her, and this is the first time they've spoken since this happened, and opening on this scene just doesn't fly.

Lauren is not single. She's married. She dropped off the kid with Emily because she is going to a business dinner with her husband, Tom. Lauren is not a professional. She's a stay at home Mom.

In terms of it being Friday - is the required assumption that the next scene is that night? i.e., if I have SCENE ONE - DAY and the next scene is SCENE TWO - NIGHT is it assumed that is has to be that night? I had never really though of it that way. I thought that it just had to be a night that followed that day whether it was one, two or three nights later.  

Quoted Text Well, because if what I'm assuming is correct, it doesn't make any sense to me why some dude would be giving his girl flowers on a street corner on a Friday morning in public after cheating on her, and this is the first time they've spoken since this happened, and opening on this scene just doesn't fly.

Well, first - he would be giving her flowers on a Friday morning if he cheated on her on a Thursday night. And, I'm still lost as to why this has to be Friday morning. Again, I wasn't aware of the specific implied sequencing in the slugs. For example - the next time Emily is in her office - does that have to be specifically a Monday? Is the next night scene Monday night and the next day scene Tuesday? I'm a little lost.

Quoted Text So check this out and see what you think... After you intro the area, go right to Emily's office, and establish who she is - a Marriage Counselor.  From there, go into your next scene with Sam and Nancy, but cut it back a bit.  Overall, this is a nice scene, but it just runs too long, with too much dialogue and too much unecessary detail. By doing this, you've set the stage, so to speak.  Have Emily say out loud to herself or her secretary, maybe that she's had enough and is leaving early for the day/weekend. Then, you can go back to your actual opening on the street, as Emily is driving home, and it will all make alot more sense now that we've seen what Emily has gone through today, or maybe goes through all the time. This way, writing out the scene on the street will be alot easier, because Emily is already intro'd, and the location is already established.  It will also make more sense now for your man and woman flower scene to take place - maybe they're supposed to meet for lunch and the woman just found out that the guy had cheated on her - the point being having the flower scene take place first thing in the morning is hard to beleive...for me, at least.

A very interesting approach - I'll think about it. I'm happy with the dialogue in the scene. I'm going to keep that as is.

Quoted Text EXT. VINE STREET - DAY Emily pulls out of the garage, into traffic.  She sings along to a love song, playing on the radio. She looks to her right, where a YOUNG MAN hands a bouquet of flowers to a YOUNG WOMAN. The woman angrily thows them back into his chest.      WOMAN      You Bastard!  You cheated with my sister? Emily turns away, a look of sadness on her face.  She continues singing, but much softer now. The Convertible moves slowly forward in the traffic, stopping again a few yards ahead. Emily looks to her left, where a MIDDLE AGED COUPLE sits on a bench, completely ignoring each other. She stops singing and merely hums along with the song now. In front of her, a FAMILY walks through the intersection.  The HUSBAND walks several steps ahead of his WIFE and CHILDREN.  He turns back, angrily waves at them to hurry up. Emily shakes her head, stops humming, and turns off the radio. Blah, Blah, Blah That's my advice, take it, leave it, flush it down the toilet.  If nothing else, hope it makes sense and helps you gong forward. Take care.

Very helpful dude. I can use this approach either way (e.g., whether I keep the script in the current sequence or change as you suggested.

Really appreciate the time you took on this - you're a champ. Thanks


  

Well Dave, you know what hapens when one "assumes"!    

But, when reading a script or watching a movie, one has to make assumptions because there's limited time to tell the story.

My asumption(s) were based on the fact that you spent your first 5 pages detailing Emily's day, and the next scene is at her house at night, so my assumption is that it's a continuation of that same day.  Does it have to be?  No...definitely not, but if it's not, you're basically saying nothing of interest happened since then...and since nothing of huge interest even happened in those first 5 pages, I just have to assume it's the same day, or I have to wonder why you chose to detail that period of time.

No big deal, either way.

As for the dude who cheated on his wife or girlfriend, again, maybe my bad, but I just can't picture a guy cheating with the sister of his significant other, and then meeting her on a busy street corner and giving her flowers for the Hell of it.  Does it necessarily have to be morning?  No. Does it have to be Friday?  No.  I guess Emily could work whenever she wants to...or maybe she was just getting back from lunch, but again, for me, assuming is something I think is key, but maybe I'm just a whacko....no...I am a whacko.  

Take care, bro.  Best of luck with this.  

Thanks, friend. I really do appreciate all the effort you put in this. Give me a holler if you want something read sometime - I suck at format - but I have a pretty good eye for story. Cheers.