Screenwriting : Choices between night, continuous or same time by Chahla Garrett

Formatting questions are easily answered if you KNOW their purpose. Formatting is blueprint information for the production. In this case, the purpose of NIGHT and DAY is for production lighting. This is most important if the scene is an exterior because we cannot control natural lighting. If the scene is inside then it doesn't really matter if it's day or night. They don't need to know if a scene is CONTINUOUS or the SAME as the last scene because scenes are not shot linear like your story. Continuous and Same are also redundant for the reader and not necessary at all. NIGHT and DAY is all you need.

Thank you for your help. I appreciate it.

"SAME TIME" and "CONTINUOUS" are both acceptable. When the script is broken down for production those will be changed to "NIGHT" or "DAY". I prefer to use "NIGHT" or "DAY" for the reason Lisa mentions.

Thank you for your help. I've changed all the scene headers back to night.

same time and continuous should not be in your screenplay. i agree 100% with what lisa wrote. if you need to convey that there is a montage sequence using intercutting to show simultaneous action in different spaces, then create a slugline that reads MONTAGE - (name the sequence)... put it in brackets. you don't need day or night, int. or ext.... they will follow from the previous slug that introduces the montage sequence. then you describe the action that is being intercut. when the montage is over do another slug line... MONTAGE - name of sequence in caps again and add 'ENDS', the whole thing in brackets again. if the montage really does start somewhere totally different or is a different time of day... then you can create a slug line under the montage slug to establish that. in the text you provided... just drop the three sluglines at the beginning.. just use the first. they are all part of the same diegetic space. EXT. JENNY'S BUILDING - NIGHT Jenny stops at the front of her building, and walks up to the main door. Across the road, a man watches Jenny open the door with a key. He waits and then crosses the street, heading toward her building. At the front door, the man stops and pretends to look for his keys. A young couple exit the building and as they hold the door open for him, he politely walks in. INT. JENNY'S BATHROOM - NIGHT Jenny is in her bathroom drawing a bath. The tub is full and she turns off the taps. INT. APARTMENT HALLWAY - NIGHT The man who is following Jenny exits the elevator at the floor to her apartment. He walks up to the front door of Jenny's apartment. ...just a suggestion of how to save space while still conveying all the relevant info.

Thank you for your help.

Hi, Thank you for your help, I appreciate it. I've heard that some readers don't look at scene headers; that's the reason I've been re-describing the locations, again. I'd rather not. As far as INT./EXT. I thought that EXT. refers exclusively to an outdoor setting, so, then INT./EXT. JENNY'S APARTMENT BUILDING/HALLWAY - NIGHT is correct? Generally I use INT./EXT. when a character goes through one location to another(interior to exterior or vice versa.) I also use it for vehicles, since there's a lot of intercutting that can occur, by the film crew, and editors. Any other ways to use them?

Sorry, I forgot to put down The intercutting between two different locations, at the same time. Beside these three INT./EXT. uses, do you know of any other?

hate to sound rude but i have never seen the "INT./EXT." slash hybrid designation... it is counter-intuitive to how a screenplay will then be segmented for the producer and director during pre-production (i.e. the shooting script). if you could show me a script that uses that designation, it would be helpful... perhaps it is used, but i've never seen it. also, the claim that most readers are "wannabe screenwriters" is throwing me a bit. what does that mean exactly? what readers are you referring to? finally, when Mr. Guardino created this - "A man across the street watches Jenny enter her building. He pretends to look for his keys. A young couple exits the building across the street and holds the door open for him" - it seems completely incoherent to me. am i the only one who sees that!? again, i hate to be rude... but you are shitting on people for being ignorant of screenplay form, but then you demonstrate that your own revisions of someone else's script are totally confusing... it's actually giving me a headache. just looking at your revisions... this is no sense of continuity and no coherent spatiotemporal construction for the diegesis. i am not trying to pick on you... but you are giving bad advice to someone who came here for help. i know this comment seems inflammatory, but i just want you to consider that you are perhaps not giving sound or suitable advice... at least not this time.

Hi, INT.EXT. are very useful, when a character moves from one location to another in one continuous movement. For example, from the inside of a building to the outside or vice versa. As far as their use for vehicles is concerned, I use them if there is an action scene, which requires switching back and forth between the outside and the inside of the vehicle. I write once INT./EXT; The director will choose to do interior or exterior shots of the vehicle.

advice, not advise... which is just another item that makes me doubt your qualifications for giving advice to writers (and an ironic one at that). you also have a mean streak that underlines the comments that I have noticed you making on this forum. maybe you are having a bad week... that's why i tried to excuse my observations so that you didn't misconstrue them as a personal attack. my experience with forum regs is that they have time to be on the forum because they aren't busy being professionals. now sometimes the forum reg uses the forum to learn and share because they are not pro, but others use the forum as a disavowal of their lack and overcompensate by providing "expert" advice that just is not that at all. as i said, i wasn't trying to pick on you... but these are my observations. and to Chahla... if nothing happens in the car, why would you need INT./EXT.? instead at the end of the previous scene you would write that the driver enters the car and heads out toward the next location and then you would slugline for the arrival location scene... as i mentioned on your other post... you don't need a slugline for something with no dramatic action nor do you need a slugline for your interpretations of how the script would be represented as a film. it is actually a rookie mistake for screenwriters to include in the script features that are for the director to determine. in addition, it can give a producer qualms about the screenwriter being a control freak... which is never good.

i think my comment was reasonable... maybe you should ask someone you know what they think

No coherent spatiotemporal construction for the diegesis? Who says that? I think Dan's comments were pretty correct, and he is a professional who does this for a living - not someone who just graduated from film school. So, he's usually worth listening to. I've seen EXT/INT plenty of times in professional scripts and use it myself. It's a shorthand for when a scene maybe starts with a shot of outside a car (for example) but then the real action of the scene occurs inside (or vice versa). As long as it's not used egregiously, it's perfectly acceptable.

and i am not a grammar nazi at all... in fact as you can see I use a short form online that is definitely not a demonstration of proper punctuation. that being said, it is 'advice' that you give... not 'advise'. i just can't appreciate how you are a "pro" writer after someone points out a basic English mistake and you defiantly repeat it. and "i honestly think you need some help" is the most pitiful, passive-aggressive retort that there is online. i was making legitimate points about your rhetoric in this forum and that it needs to be toned down and that you need to speak less like an authority if you are really planning on helping people (which I am sure you are capable of doing in some capacity). your comments that I have noticed on this forum give the impression that you are some kind of expert, but they are not well-informed. i am loathe to sit by and watch people take your advice because you present it as if it were factual or well-researched. in fact, i read the beginning of one of your scripts... the one with the detective and forensic psychologist. the dialogue is on-the-nose and not well-researched at all. by all means, use this forum and give advice but qualify that advice as suggestions based on what has worked for you and stop presenting it as something more than that. that is my suggestion to you.. and yes, this is now a personal attack and I don't care to continue it, but you can go ahead and have the last word.

lol @danny. well i did tell him to find support... for what it's worth diegesis is everything for how the screenwriter conceives the logic of their story... so you can scoff at me leaning toward intellectualism sooner than the business of film, but it doesn't change the century-long importance of understanding diegesis if you are a scenarist. it isn't my big idea... it is how screenwriting is taught by real professionals in university and at college (i have some experience with both) also... he is a professional? have you read his work? the term is very loose then. we can keep going... you will not ever convince me of his expertise after I have read his actual work

also... i don't care! he can run around telling whoever he wants, whatever he wants. i just felt it responsible to shed some light at this forum on how his information is not well-researched... it is basically purely opinion-based. bad advice for good writers from bad writers is the worst. and to back up that bad advice from a bad writer based on some minor accolades from hustling an unrefined craft on a bloated third-tier of an important industry is just abhorrent to me. yes, you've loosened my tongue - more than i would have wished... and i think i will step away from this discussion now. just make suggestions when you aren't really an expert... if you go back and wonder what incited some much wrath from me... it was the "wannabe screenwriters" comment... getting paid a pittance for a script that will never have wide distribution or never even get produced does not make you a professional writer. it makes you a Happy Gilmore of screenwriting... and they are pretty common.

why would you remove it if it sold and that is all that matters to you? and why make a decision based on the actions of someone who you do not care about? and there is an obvious typo on page 1 xD

you're an idiot

Or you two could just get a room, kiss and make up. ;)

like a Hollyweird ending.

i'm game