Indicating (CONT'D) in (V.O.)

[DavidK]

Originally Posted by TwoBrad Bradley

I know it is "common" to use (CONT'D) when a single character's dialogue is broken by action.

But why is that important? ... in a spec script?

It's not important in a spec script - the writer can use it or not, whatever they prefer. I didn't want anyone to infer it was important, I just commented on how it is used.

It's also wrong to think of these things as "rules". Rather, these things are conventions, and the industry has certain expectations whereby the writer's work is expected to generally follow the conventions. But within that expectation there's a lot of flexibility, which is why it's pointless to allow these discussions to degenerate into a debate about what is and isn't a rule.

However, there are things which are not rules, i.e. they are not obligatory, but simply a matter of correct usage. Whether or not the writer uses them is a matter of choice, but if they are used, there's a right and a wrong way to use them.

Like I said, read a bunch of scripts from the last decade and you'll see different examples of how these things are used.

[DavidK]

Originally Posted by MJ Scribe

Thanks if anyone knows whether I should worry about it...

You definitely shouldn't worry about it. Different production companies have different preferences for how they like a production script presented although they are generally very similar. Sometimes it's down to the discretion of the line producer for the project. It varies. If you sell your spec script, the prodco will take care of the business of converting it into a production script and all you need to worry about is seeing the fee deposited into your bank account.

[DavidK]

Originally Posted by ComicBent

I cannot see any logic that obligates (CONT'D), after an (O.S.) speech, when the character now appears on screen. However, I don't think anybody will really care.

The "logic" for these things has to do with script breakdowns and preparation for production. For example often an actor receives pages which contain only their dialogue and when they learn their lines they want to know which lines are part of a continuous passage, for example delivering part of a passage off-screen and the next part on camera.

It also has "logic" for other aspects of production involving the script supervisor and ADR and audio post-production. So, for technical purposes there are specific reasons for the way these different annotations are presented in a production script.

Whether or not a writer chooses to include any of them in a spec script is discretionary - these days a cleaner, less cluttered look is more common but they are not a deal-breaker. The reader usually ignores this stuff and is looking for originality, engaging story and voice.

[MJ Scribe]

Originally Posted by DavidK

...If you sell your spec script, the prodco will take care of the business of converting it into a production script and all you need to worry about is seeing the fee deposited into your bank account.

emphasis added.

Thank you DavidK, that was precisely the clarity on the issue I was looking for. Matter resolved for me.

[rdlln]

Thank you everyone. Very helpful.

[JeffLowell]

The "logic" for these things has to do with script breakdowns and preparation for production. For example often an actor receives pages which contain only their dialogue and when they learn their lines they want to know which lines are part of a continuous passage, for example delivering part of a passage off-screen and the next part on camera.

I've never seen this. Is this advertising or something else?

[Why One]

Originally Posted by rdlln

I know that when you break up a character's dialogue with action you should use (CONT'D) when the dialogue resumes. How does this look if it's a character speaking off screen or in voice over?

MAN (V.O.) (CONT'D)

? At least that's how I'd do it. And I think that's how screenwriting software like Final Draft auto-formats it.

[DavidK]

I've never seen this. Is this advertising or something else?

Yes and in some TV productions actors are given complete pages and a set with their lines only.

[JeffLowell]

In scripted television? What would be the purpose of giving an actor pages with only his lines?

(And actually, what would be the purpose in advertising?)

[Manchester]

I think back in the late 50s, Woody Allen did that with a script he wrote and directed for an ad for Breck shampoo.