I'd like to respectfully offer a counter-argument:

I find it very distracting when reading a screenplay WITHOUT (CONT'D)'s where action breaks a character's dialogue.

And I would think this is something that readers are so used to that when you don't use it, you make the readers job a little harder.

Because (CONT'D)s are something that are used for a necessary reason.... unlike the usage of CUT TO's where we can just assume that we've "cut to" a new scene because there's a new scene heading.

But in regard to the usage of (CONT'D)s... if you have a character's dialogue broken by action and DON'T use it... it can become distracting.

Example:

ALISON WONDERLAND
It's not like we're following a white rabbit down an impossibly long hole.

Alison checks her watch and flicks open her lighter, the end of her cigarette blazing to life.

ALISON WONDERLAND
We're simply throwing the rabbit down the hole and waiting for it to hit bottom. Now hop-to, bunnies.
________________________

For me (and I believe this extends to readers as well), I've come to follow the natural rhythm of a scene. And if the scene's rhythm is for Alison Wonderland to speak and then for her partner White Rabbit to respond and this goes on for 2 1/2 pages, I assume that if I don't see a (CONT'D) then it's the next characters chance to speak. And at times I'll get confused without the help of (CONT'D)s to show me that the same person is "continuing" with their thought.

Anyone feel the same?

It think CONT'Ds are necessary and used for a specific reason... for actors AND readers. Not just for the former.

@THD: Of course, a writer can choose for whatever reason they want to use or not use (CONT'D) as a character extension - it's a minor thing, as I noted in my post, that likely won't have much impact on a reader, one way or the other.

That said, I just checked the two Academy Award winning scripts from last year -- The Hurt Locker and Precious -- and neither screenwriter used (CONT'D) to indicate continuous dialogue 'interrupted' by scene description.

For what that's worth.

I'll update the post and ask professional script readers what their take is.

Just speaking for myself, it doesn't make a difference to me either way. It's neither an annoyance nor an enhancement either way. I think I end up ignoring CONT'D when it's there and I don't miss it when it's gone.

I see High Dweller's point, but the fact is, in order for me to notice that CONT'D is missing, i have to have read the full Dialogue Tag that would have preceeded it.

(In other words, if the CONT'D was supposed to tip me off not to automatically assume that the second line was White Rabbit's, I'd have to read "Alyson Wonderland" first before seeing or noting the absense of a CONT'D. So I'd know even before I get there if the line is continued or is a new speaker.)

Keep the cont'ds. Actors like cont'ds which is more important than how the page looks. It also helps your AD in trying to split scenes and wrap out actors.

Check the Oscar nominees this year and all the specs sold so far. You're going to see nothing but cont'ds.

@Archie: Not to beat a dead horse (or a mole hill), as noted both Precious and The Hurt Locker -- the Academy Award winners for 2009 -- did not use (CONT'D).

CONT'D use increases with ever EARLY MID AFTERNOON. If I need your CONT'D as a reader, then your dialogue most likely is not engaging enough, distinct for each speaker or logical. But it might help to put ALMOST EVENING or ONE HOUR LATER in your sluglines to make me just not care.

And if the actors really care, it can be added later. Plus you might just get paid too much money to add them into the script in a whole 45 minutes of work.

Great discussion going on here - love it! Personally, I use (CONT'D) but sometimes forget all about it, so the key is to be consistant at least!

Personally I'd get rid of them alltogether but I can see their use in terms of production. They also waste inc when you're printing pages out though!!!

I get distracted the first time I see them in a script, and then I ignore them.

Personally though, I'm with Scott. At the spec stage, they're just not necessary in this day and age, and take up additional white space.

I wrote more on the subject here:

http://scriptwrecked.com/2009/12/12/discontinue-contd/

In a situation where you have plenty of action, several paragraphs, in between the dialogue it looks kind of ridiculous to see the Cont'd after it.

http://johnaugust.com/archives/2010/contd-vs-continuous

john august had something very interesting to say about this too. helped me. have a look.

@Scott - Both Precious and The Hurt Locker use cont'd. Precious uses it exclusively in V.O. while THL uses it throughout.

How about this statistic? Of the 97 scripts on the 2009 Black List only 5 scripts don't use cont'd.

Use cont'd. It's supposed to be there. It's defaulted to ON in every screenwriting software package for a reason.

@Archie: The PDFs I have of Precious and Hurt Locker do not use (CONT'D). [I also checked (500) Days of Summer which also does not use them].

Perhaps the copies I have are 'selling' scripts, not 'shooting' scripts - the latter for which I've already noted it is advisable to use (CONT'D) for the actors' benefit.

As stated, it's your choice: Use (CONT'D) or don't. If you want to be on the safe side, use it. If you want to be a rebellious scamp such as myself, don't.

I now considered this issue closed. Onto (hopefully) bigger and more important matters!

Be still the great gods of Screenwriting Format! As it was handed down, upon the ancient tablets the writing edict for all to adhere to, so mote it be done!!!!

Format, and DO NOT deviate from these rules... under any circumstances lest your work shall be immediately rendered unsellable, and you shall be laughed out of the insiders club and regarded as a mere phony, a fake, an irrefutable... dare we all mutter... HACK!!! You have used Continues.... and thus, any deviation of anything less shall guarantee immediate and perpetual flogging in the hateful hades for Hacks!!!

Ok ok.

Whatever. Do WHATEVER you like, but increasingly here is what I do in my own screenwriting, and as a script reader -- I appreciate and try to protect the very real estate which is the BLANK PAGE.

The less ink, the better. We are dealing with a medium that is entirely about minimalism. The least necessary to convey the intended message. Hence, no continues for me. I don't use them.

I know the great god August recently posted that we should, but I disagree, and feel if it is at all necessary save it for the shooting script. If the actor doesn't have the wherewithal to deduce he's being asked to continue his speeches uninterrupted, and the director in all his infinite wisdom can't infer otherwise, I would suggest putting them in.

But, now? Why? When you are printing your script for purposes of rewriting, does this not save you ink produce a cleaner copy?

Yes, many of the professionals do it... as they are still communicating through a process they have grown accustomed to; however, screenwriting format is much a vocabulary of the times... and it changes with the sway not unlike jargon.

We've finally done away with the redundant CUT TO's...

Sorry to say, as this new generation comes to power... in our ADD/ADHD driven marketplace (have you met PRODUCERS??? The very people who get your scripts into the hands of someone willing to buy it -- have you met them?) While this is a gross over-generalization, many, and I mean MANY are clinically diagnosed as ADD/ADHD and need all the assistance writers can give them so that they do what it is you need them to do: EASILY READ YOUR SCRIPT.

Hence. Give them a white page. With little bits of black magic ink for them to easily, and with rapidity, consume.

I dare say when this new generation comes to power... this debate of using Cont's will no longer send us desperately clutching our guns and religion, as we shall seek to entirely simplify THE READING EXPERIENCE.

-- End 'o Rant.

After reading John August's post on the subject, I learned that screenwriting programs include CONT'D automatically (I use MSWord). If you've ever actually talked to and dealt with the designers of some of these screenplay writing programs, you'd doubt taking them seriously as knowing much about writing. Seriously, don't trust comes automatically in these computer programs.

Coverage Ink sez: Always turn off automatic character continueds. It's in our Style Guide. It adds more unnecessary black to the page. Get rid of it. www.coverageink.com

Mole hill vs ant hill: a matter of perspective. To a mole, his hill is small, cozy, no great shakes. To an ant, his hill is a fortress encompassing his entire clan.