Screenwriting : Slug Lines - Love 'em or Leave 'em? by David Miller

I stopped using FADE IN, David Miller. It saves space. I switched from FADE OUT to END. I could get rid of END if I wanted. Slug lines are the scene headings.

do you will use Act One etc?

Certainly not discouraged at all and a very concerning comment from anyone giving reviews. I say that as someone who doesn't personally use FADE IN and FADE OUT to bookend a script.

Transitions are generally seen as clutter in a spec, but certainly can add impact when used well, so certainly shouldn't be treated dogmatically.

How a writer choses to open and close is really a taste issue and hurts nobody.

Not sure what any of this has to do with slugs.

Ilanna Mandel I don not.

good to know

I hear so many conflicting views on whether you should use transitions if you're writing the script, I respect that they're up to the director primarily. I'm now of the mind that I'll use FADE IN/FADE OUT if it's traditional to do so even in a spec script, and other transitions I'll hold off on unless I feel it's important (for BoFS, for example, I couldn't not use SMASH CUT TO/BACK TO for certain scenes because I figured it might not be clear what my intentions were without them, since the scenes are connected and the juxtaposition is crucial).

“Cut to” is not necessary because it is understood. For all other transitions, put in when you feel it is important for storytelling purposes. Don’t overthink it.

I believe CJ was indicating that slug lines and transitions are two different things.

Mike's spot on. Don't overthink it.

If you go on the likes of Reddit and Facebook, you'll see people saying you should never use a single transition - that it looks amateurish, that it makes you look like you're trying to be the director, and that you'll anger and offend the director. It's amateurs coming out with this nonsense. They'll be upvoted by other amateurs who want to believe the same.

SMASH CUT is a great example of a transition that screenwriters can use to convey impact, pace, and comic effect. FADE TO BLACK can be another.

Using transitions for every scene does look amateurish, but that's an extreme.

Absolutely nobody in the world that matters cares if you do or don't use FADE IN and FADE OUT.

No director worth their salt is getting their fee fees hurt by one too many transitions. That goes for formatting in general. If there's a good story there, they are going to take it and do what they feel is right with it.

Same goes for producers. They are digging for content.

A lot of this paranoia and subsequent dogma comes from obsessing over readers, and the lowest tier readers (competition readers, low-rent consultants, assistants, etc) are the ones that will come into communities and give away just how judgemental and superficial they are. They have got nothing better to obsess over. The crap they come out with is unbelievable and there's good reason why their entire careers are getting paid $5ph off Craigslist gigs (if they're lucky). They are the ones telling people your bold slug lines matter, that using "we see" is a criminal offence, and that more than four lines of dialogue makes your script unproduceable. They have nothing to do with the industry and next to zero insight.

I use transitions like "FADE TO BLACK" or "DISSOLVE TO" to signal a larger than expected time skip which is pretty much standard from what I've seen and read. Other than that "CUT TO" is understood to before each new slugline.

For TV spec pilots: I don't really care if you use FADE IN / FADE OUT, though it does take up precious page space. CUT TO between scenes is not needed as it's obvious, and also takes up tons of unnecessary space, making your script artificially longer. Act break indicators with page breaks are only needed for a pilot indended for broadcast. But when I'm working with a writer on any pilot we put it in (without the page break) as an internal way to keep track of where we are in the script and be sure we're hitting proper structure, which you need for streaming as well. If you do this as a tool just for yourself, remember to take them out before sending out the script! Some elegant transitions between scenes such as match cut, prelap, smash cut, or just dialogue or action transitions that make scenes flow into each other or juxtapose key scenes are the sign of a sophisticated writer, provided they're done with story intention and not too frequently. But this is a tone thing - some writers have a staccato tone with short scenes and fast pacing that doesn't lend itself to transitions, some writers prefer lingering reactions or button lines to end scenes, some prefer some sort of visual device to transition between storylines / locations / timelines - as long as all this is intentional to give the "reader" the same specific emotional experience your viewer will have. TV is a writer's medium, if you're leaving choices up to a "director," such a person does not exist, or at least often not till long after your pilot is sold.

Also, to CJ Walley 's point, I think pretty much all pros don't care about formatting so long as it's not so bad that we don't understand what you want us to see & feel. When I comment on formatting, it's because it's so bad that the script becomes difficult to read and in some places I literally don't get what the writer is trying to communicate.

From hieroglyphics to modern screenwriting, the purpose of symbols is to convey information. Excess written symbols slow information processing. Not enough symbols, leads to confusion. Are slug lines necessary, or an unnecessary clutter? The answer is a firm "sometimes", and sometimes it takes a friend reading your script to know the answer.