Sluglines (a/k/a Scene Headings) are boring to read. Most people skim past them quickly.
And yet they have to be there, in every single scene we write.
They largely exist to tell eventual crew members what they need to know about the scene. In other words, where it happens and is it day or night.
Which is kind of hilarious because most scripts will never be produced, and should really be written for a reader to get them emotionally involved, and to entertain them. Which has to happen in a big way for them to get produced.
And sluglines are anything but emotional or entertaining. They are functional, at best.
But we do need them. And there are several common and understandable errors writers often make with them. So if you want to write better sluglines read on…
Actually maybe I overstated things. Sluglines are also for the reader, because they also need to be able to picture each scene, and that starts with knowing where and when it’s happening.
In a novel you could incorporate this artfully within the prose. In a script you indicate it in this clunky stilted way.
So it’s important to approach it the right way. You don’t want your sluglines to confuse, annoy or distract. You want to get in quickly with the precise relevant information that helps readers orient themselves, and get out.
So here’s what to do and not do:
“INT./EXT.” OR “I/E”
This is a super common one that is often misused.
Sluglines start with telling the reader if we’re inside or outside (INT. for Interior/EXT. for Exterior).
But sometimes in scripts you see both used in the same slugline. Why?
There is one very specific situation where this makes sense. And that’s when a conversation or action is going to go continuously back and forth between an INT. and EXT. in an ongoing way where it would be super distracting to do a new slugline every time it switches.
95% of the time when I see INT./EXT. in a client’s script that’s not the situation.
INT./EXT. or I./E. should never be used just to save time and page space. You wouldn’t write “EXT./INT. ERIK’S APARTMENT BUILDING – DAY” if you’re starting with someone outside the building and then they go inside for a scene. That’s two separate scenes that deserve two separate sluglines. One for EXT. then one for INT.
The reason this is important is that you’re trying to quickly orient the reader with a slugline, so they can picture where they are. When you use both INT. and EXT. you don’t do that. They can’t imagine what they’d be seeing. “Which is it?” they might ask. It makes the slugline seem more technical than it already is (never a good thing). Too much like some weird abbreviated language for the production staff, not a reader.
Here’s a main point to remember. Your sluglines and your scene description are about describing the movie that doesn’t yet exist to the reader. Try to help the reader form an image in their mind, at every moment in the script. INT./EXT. doesn’t do that, because they cancel each other out.
Only mention what’s obvious to the viewer
You want to keep in mind at all times what the audience would already know from what they’ve seen and write with that in mind. And only write what they could clearly see and understand watching the movie. Indicate that to the reader in your sluglines and description, as opposed to giving them information the viewer wouldn’t have.
So if you’re introducing a new location that just looks like a building or a house to the audience, because they haven’t yet learned whose building or house it is, it’s often better to leave off “whose it is” when it’s first mentioned, and only start using that once the audience knows.
For instance, if a character walks up to EXT. ERIK’S APARTMENT BUILDING, but the audience doesn’t know it’s Erik’s building yet (and maybe hasn’t even met Erik so they don’t know who that is), it might be better to just call it EXT. NEW YORK APARTMENT BUILDING, or maybe something slightly more specific like EXT. NEW YORK HIGH-RISE or EXT. BROOKLYN BROWNSTONE.
It’s not the end of the world if you use “Erik’s” the first time. It’s minor in the scheme of things. But what is not minor is writing for the uninitiated reader and only giving them what they’d see, know and understand if they were watching this on screen. That’s the important point.
The more you do that, walking your reader/audience through what you’re presenting in a clear and vivid way that meets them where they’re at, with limited prior exposure to information that you know, the better.
Save description for description
While you can and should add a little color to generic locations like “building” or “house” as in the prior point, writers often go too far with this, and start describing the place too much. Giving details that go too far beyond a quick impression of where we are.
Save those for scene description. Why? Readers tend to skim fast through the sluglines. Don’t slow them down with detail there. Just quickly give them a quick clear image of the place and then you can tell them more about it in the description.
Every room is a new location
A common mistake is to use INT. ERIK’S HOUSE and not specify which room. And then not do a new slugline when moving into a different room.
Think about where exactly the characters are (and where the camera is, usually the same place). INT. ERIK’S HOUSE is too vague. Is it the entry way? The living room? Whatever it is, specify it.
If Erik lives in a studio apartment (i.e. one big room), in theory you could get away with INT. ERIK’S STUDIO APARTMENT but even then, if he’s got a separate bathroom, and you cut to a scene that is INT. ERIK’S BATHROOM, then wouldn’t the prior slugline seem too generic as it would seem to encompass everything, including the bathroom? This is a rare situation, but the main point is this: think in terms of specific rooms.
Leaving off INT./EXT.
Can you ever just say the place without repeating the INT. or EXT. part?
Yes. If it’s obvious and would be too redundant.
If we’re already INT. ERIK’S LIVING ROOM and then cut to INT. ERIK’S BATHROOM you can probably just say ERIK’S BATHROOM or even BATHROOM (especially if we go back and forth and it’s not the first time there). As long as it’s obvious we’re continuing from where we just were and are still inside his apartment.
Same thing if we’re EXT. PARK and you then want to focus on EXT. PLAYGROUND within that park. You can probably just use PLAYGROUND.
Leaving off DAY/NIGHT
The same thing applies here. If we’re obviously in the same basic time frame and the next scene is happening right after the prior one, it can save redundancy to leave off repeating DAY or NIGHT.
But just because it’s obvious to you doesn’t mean it’s obvious to the reader. I would say when in doubt, leave it in.
“CONTINUOUS”
This is even more commonly misused than “INT./EXT.”
Using CONTINUOUS instead of DAY/NIGHT is for one very specific situation that is also pretty rare.
That’s when dialogue/action continues from one room to another (or inside to outside), usually involving characters on the move as they continue to talk, and you want to make it clear to the reader that no time has passed, and they didn’t miss anything.
If a little time HAS passed, that’s where you instead go with:
“MOMENTS LATER”
I use MOMENTS LATER instead of DAY/NIGHT all the time. Opposite to CONTINUOUS, it tells the reader that they did miss something, that some time has passed since the prior scene. But only a little bit of time. Like a couple of minutes or so, at most.
If the time has changed, new slugline!
MOMENTS LATER is so useful because often you want to show multiple actions or moments but not the interstitial time in between.
We’re never supposed to summarize action in a script that would take some time to play out. Instead we’re only describing what’s happening RIGHT NOW in front of the audience’s eyes.
So if what a character is doing is a process that would take time, you can only describe a moment in that process that could believably play out in real time as an audience is watching.
For example: making breakfast. You would never show a character make breakfast from beginning to end. (Well, almost never.) It would be dead boring to watch, and take at least 5-10 minutes of screen time which is A LOT.
But what you might do is show someone cracking eggs into a bowl, tossing the shells, grabbing a fork, and scrambling them.
But how do you portray the complete act of breakfast being made? Well, you cut to a new time in that process that is ERIK’S KITCHEN – MOMENTS LATER when the cooked eggs are sliding onto a plate.
“SERIES OF SHOTS” a/k/a “MONTAGE”
The one time you can avoid separate new sluglines for each time change — and when you need to show a process play out over time (usually days, weeks or even longer) — is if you use SERIES OF SHOTS (or MONTAGE).
But you want to use these sparingly, only when necessary. Making breakfast is probably too trivial and quick to be worth it, but just to continue with that example, you could do:
SERIES OF SHOTS – ERIK MAKES BREAKFAST
Erik cracks three eggs into a bowl.
Erik dumps the bowl of now-scrambled eggs into a hot pan.
Erik slides the cooked eggs onto a plate.
If these actions take place in different locations you’d need to also indicate the location, such as:
SERIES OF SHOTS – ERIK PREPARES BREAKFAST
Erik considers various egg brands in the dairy aisle of a gourmet grocery store.
Erik drives home, glancing proudly at the bag of groceries in his passenger seat.
In his kitchen, Erik cracks an egg into a mixing bowl.
Using a SHOT instead of a new slugline
Sometimes the time and place haven’t changed but you want to indicate a certain character, action, or area of the location momentarily. Or the fact that something is seen from “ERIK’S POV” perhaps.
Most screenwriting software has a “Shot” element which is used for that. It’s in ALL CAPS similar to a slugline but lacks INT./EXT. or DAY/NIGHT.
As such it reads almost more like description and will be considered by readers a little more intentionally than the boring/clunky scene headings themselves. It’s usually only a word or a few words followed by description and possibly dialogue like:
ERIK
Types on his computer.
You would only use this if you’ve previously described other stuff going in the scene that wasn’t that specific or about this, and then wanted to switch attention to this particular thing, this detail.
For instance:
INT. CAFETERIA – DAY
The lunch rush is in full swing. Tables full of employees eat and converse.
ERIK
Types on his computer. Seated alone at a window table.
NOTE: this does not mean using camera directions like “close up” or “zoom in.” Please avoid those as they take the reader out of the story and makes them think about lenses. Remember you’re writing for readers not crew members. (If you’re directing the movie, are already greenlit, and are writing such choices in, then maybe this is for crew members, but that’s a whole other purpose.)
At most you can sometimes get away with “ON ERIK” or even “ANGLE – ERIK” which implies an edit to a new shot a bit more technically than just saying ERIK. (And therefore tends to not be as good.)
INSERTS
This is where we’re so tight on an object that the audience can read specific text on it or other details that would only be evident in an extreme close shot. Here you do have to specify that. Traditionally you would use INSERT – ERIK’S PHONE although you might be able to get away with just ERIK’S PHONE.
You can then describe in quotes exactly the text or detail that should be visible and read by the audience. And keep it brief. Do NOT summarize or explain what it is. Only what the audience, in the moment, would notice and be able to fully read or take in. As in ALL the words of text you expect them to read, and nothing more.
I blogged more about inserts here.
“Empty slugs”
Never cut directly from a slugline to dialogue. Even if you’re returning to a scene you just recently left . Always re-orient the reader with some description of who’s there, what’s going on, and what they’d be seeing, before more dialogue. Even if it’s just some reiteration like:
INT. ERIK’S OFFICE
Erik is still typing.
Remember, readers skim the sluglines. It’s the description that does most of the work in telling them what they’d be looking at. We never want to leave that blank at the top of a scene.
Clear, simple and concise
That’s the bottom line. You want to quickly orient the reader to where and when they are with as much brevity as possible while avoiding being too vague, boring or redundant.
By their nature sluglines ARE vague, boring and redundant, though, with the relentless repeating of INT., EXT., DAY and NIGHT. Don’t make it worse by making what’s between those indicators not direct and understandable to your readers, who are probably in a hurry and relying on you to make reading your script a pleasant, quick and easy to follow experience.
Questions?
Or do you think I got anything wrong or left out something important?
Comment below and I’ll respond.
I actually enjoy writing sluglines. I enjoy the challenge of it, and the power of clarity. They help me focus my scenes.