As you were. Didn't mean to add any pressure.  

In the reviews I started out doing, I make mention (if not already) of what Urban Legend it represents.

Good on you DJS. I think I've made note of a couple too.

Just a shout out to anyone - I'm not in the race this time around so won't get through all of these and can't vote, but if anyone wants theirs read and reviewed, feel free to PM me.

There nothing quite like waking up the morning after the scripts have been released to discover just folk think of your script....sigh.

There's no competition(challenge ) quite like it.

Nice to take part though.

Now, back to reading. Time to get my JEFF glasses on  

Quoted from Reef Dreamer There nothing quite like waking up the morning after the scripts have been released to discover just folk think of your script....sigh. There's no competition(challenge ) quite like it. Nice to take part though. Now, back to reading. Time to get my JEFF glasses on

HUH?  What you talkin', bout Willis?  

Some scripts had their scene header in bold font. The whole format appearance didn't feel like something Final Draft will print out. What software are they using? I know you can also bold scene header in FD, but I want to know about the other one.

Quoted from Reef Dreamer There nothing quite like waking up the morning after the scripts have been released to discover just folk think of your script....sigh.

Chuckle-out-loud, yeah.
I'm kinda dumbfounded by some of the aspects provided on my submission's reviews.
I'm wondering what short they were reading.

Quoted from realxwriter Some scripts had their scene header in bold font... What software are they using? I know you can also bold scene header in FD, but I want to know about the other one.

Celtx has an option to make bold slug lines/headers.

Quoted from realxwriter Some scripts had their scene header in bold font. The whole format appearance didn't feel like something Final Draft will print out. What software are they using? I know you can also bold scene header in FD, but I want to know about the other one.

You can bold your Slugs in any screenwriting software, I would imagine.

Quoted from realxwriter Some scripts had their scene header in bold font. The whole format appearance didn't feel like something Final Draft will print out. What software are they using? I know you can also bold scene header in FD, but I want to know about the other one.

As Sly and the family Stone once said, 'Different Strokes for different folks..."
I'm none too crazy about the bold header movement but over the last few years it has grown in popularity. I myself am not a huge fan of it - but it is my understanding that it is an option when writing. Is it 'necessary'? No. But not being necessary in this case does not automatically mean it's wrong. Bold headers, as long as they have the INT/EXT. PLACE - TIME or subhead location are still headers and the least of a script's possible problems. I myself won't mention it in a review unless the writer does not have consistency (i.e. if the headers start out boldface, then are unbolded on page X and back to bold on the next and so on.) Some folks may or may not share my views on the matter.

As noted, most screenwriting programs allow you to boldface any text.

Thanks guys. I know that you can boldface them in any editor, but I was wondering about the one that does par default.

Quoted from realxwriter Thanks guys. I know that you can boldface them in any editor, but I was wondering about the one that does par default.

It shouldn't be by default, as it's not industry standard.

Quoted from realxwriter Thanks guys. I know that you can boldface them in any editor, but I was wondering about the one that does par default.

Trelby has bold scene headings from the default settings, but only when writing. Once exported to PDF they revert to normal unless the PDF settings about the scene headings are changed so that they will always be bold. I'm sure this can be done on any decent software out there.

I'm a big bold scene headings supporter, can't exactly pinpoint why, they just make a script look more appealing and break up the Courier monotony. Bit easier to keep track of scenes, too.

Quoted from RayW Chuckle-out-loud, yeah. I'm kinda dumbfounded by some of the aspects provided on my submission's reviews. I'm wondering what short they were reading.

Now, now. You don't wanna be giving feedback on feedback. It makes you look as if you are getting defensive. There is no point rejecting or even criticizing other people opinion on your work. The only people you argue with are the ones who has influence on your script. A director, a producer, an actor... etc. But other people's opinions have to be always welcomed, because there is no point arguing. It would only stop them from reviewing your other work. Nobody likes to be talked back to when he's volunteering his own time to read your stuff and write you his thoughts about it.

Treat them like drinks you found in the desert. You don't wanna picky with that, do you?

Only my humble opinion of course. I hope I didn't just open a can of worms.

I think I've finished. I don't take them in order... so I'll have a run through to make sure I didn't miss any. Quality was quite low this time around, I feel. Three or four considers.

I didn't enjoy any of the scripts in this OWC, to be perfectly honest.

The quality of the writing was almost universally high, but none of the scripts worked for me. It would be a Pass on all.

I've felt like an absolute Grinch during this OWC. Almost every review has been the same. There's only one script I came across that worked at all...and that's only because it stuck religiously to the original urban legend.

In choosing my topic, I'd already read all the legends. Reading them again,  just extended and often weakened, wasn't much fun. The challenge was a good one, but it essentially encouraged everyone to merely plagiarise already existing tales.  All the decent stuff came from the quality of the legends. All the additions failed, imho.