Originally Posted by finalact4
...but the (con't) goes beside the character's name, not below it, so it doesn't actually add a line. at least in Final Draft.
Correct, beside it, but I was talking about the parenthetical
, which in my example would replace a separate line of description followed by a second character descriptor with its (CONT'D), and all the vertical white spaces between.
But yeah, I don't like the look of (CONT'D)s though I still use them in my scripts. I don't use FD, but my concern would be during pagination or heavy editing. If we don't use (CONT'D), then you can confuse things if there's a dialogue and a description, at the bottom of one page, then the same speaker on the top of the next page. A (CONT'D) really works there.
Thus, I'm consistent, and use this structure - though I do try to eliminate their need via Wrylies, without overdoing them, to save space.
Here's something, though: For my first few years, I was UBER consistent, and even used (CONT'D) across scenes. So, if "Bob" spoke at the end of one scene, and he kept right on going (whether a CONTINUOUS scene or much later), I used to use (CONT'D) beside his character indicator. But not now; scenes are often not even shot on the same day, even continuous ones, so the (CONT'D) look really ugly there. Thus:
INT. HOUSE/LIVING ROOM - DAY
Well that was a hell of a thing.
EXT. HOUSE - DAY
Bob exits the front door.
Yeah, a hell of a thing.
I wouldn't use (CONT'D) in the second scene, and I had to go through all my older scripts to get rid of them where I did.