I�ll just chime with my favourite Stephen King quote about writing:

It is the story...not he who tells it

Now I�m off to add some extra wrylies, orphans and shit to the time travel feature I�m working on. May even delete FADE IN just for fun. Hang on, I�m gonna open with a wrylie!!

But not an
orphan
They get used quite alot

(BLACK STUFF GRADUALLY DISSIPATES)

INT. BFD CONFERENCE - MID MORNING POSSIBLY 11:17AM MAYBE CLOSER TO 11:18
JEFF, ANDREW and DAVE whack their slugs on a table 😬😬  A fourth slug sits on the table but it’s so long and unwieldy it’s owner STEVIE is (O.S) 😂

Quoted from Dreamscale But 4th, and most importantly to me, there is an actual reason why I have ALWAYS spelled it this way.  "a lot" isn't "a" word...it's 2.  "a lot" has another completely different meaning, as used in such a line as, "Warren sits down outside a lot.", as referring to you sitting next to a "lot".  But, do you see the dual meaning of the line I wrote?  It could mean 2 completely different things, as the other would be that Warren sits down outside a great deal of times. You get me, brother?

Priceless.

The only possible time alot would be confused with a lot with a mysterious double meaning ( and even this is a stretch) is when the specific thing Warren would be sitting on is a effing lot.  

So that's where you landed on this? You misspell it to create double meaning??

Would it be:

"I love you a lot - or

"I love you alot - or

"I love you allot (like there is a specific allocation of love) - or

"I love you Alot (could be the person's name)

Quoted from Dreamscale They're PRO writers, Warren.  They can do whatever they please.  Many of them are wrong "alot"!!!

How would one know that they didn't do the exact same thing when they were amateur writers?????

Quoted from stevie I�ll just chime with my favourite Stephen King quote about writing: It is the story...not he who tells it Now I�m off to add some extra wrylies, orphans and shit to the time travel feature I�m working on. May even delete FADE IN just for fun. Hang on, I�m gonna open with a wrylie!! But not an orphan They get used quite alot (BLACK STUFF GRADUALLY DISSIPATES) INT. BFD CONFERENCE - MID MORNING POSSIBLY 11:17AM MAYBE CLOSER TO 11:18 Jeff, Andrew and Dave whack their slugs on a table 😬😬

Funny

Quoted from Warren And what I was saying is that they are pointless to bring up because it is comparable to the big fish I almost caught.

I disagree completely, but again, it's something that shouldn't matter, either way.

You asked why in the world should anyone listen to little old me, and I gave my reasons why.

Quoted from Warren We will always disagree on this, there is no cap if you can effectively use something, and it’s easy to draw the conclusion that it would not be effective to use tons of wrylies, but you are not the authority that decides that line. Yes you can have an opinion on it, but you deliver your reviews as fact not opinion.

Well, here, you shoot yourself in the old proverbial foot, as Libby brought up.

There is obviously a cap to using action wrylies (if that's the 1 issue you're referring to here).  You and Dave could use them is every single dialogue block!  Don't you get that?  Unless you have 2 (or more characters) sitting there, standing there, while conversing, you could forego action/description lines (for meaningless unnecessary detail, and use your beloved action wrylies.  You could also include meaningful detail, and again, just forego the line.

Don't you get that?  Imagine how it would look and read!  Wait...until the next OWC...I'll show you how it will look and read!  

Quoted from Warren This gave me a really good belly laugh, thanks for that "Third, if you look it up under "a lot" on wiki, you see that certain folk believe it will at some time become "acceptable", as right now, it's considered to be "nonstandard"." Certain folk also believe that you can use wrylies, asides, orphans, but their opinions mean nothing for some reason. I don’t know the folks at wiki, but I do know some pretty awesome writers on SS. It is grammatically incorrect, period.

Yes, it is grammatically incorrect to use "alot" in any business, professional, student report, essay, or even article in a publication.  It's not an issue in posts.  It's not an issue in dialogue.  If you come across this in an action/description line, by all means, bring it up.

Quoted from Warren "But 4th, and most importantly to me, there is an actual reason why I have ALWAYS spelled it this way.  "a lot" isn't "a" word...it's 2.  "a lot" has another completely different meaning, as used in such a line as, "Warren sits down outside a lot.", as referring to you sitting next to a "lot".  But, do you see the dual meaning of the line I wrote?  It could mean 2 completely different things, as the other would be that Warren sits down outside a great deal of times." This is pure comedy gold, I'm sitting here with the biggest grin. This has literately never confused anyone ever in the history of the world. If this was a situation in your script it would be more than one sentence that would give the scene perspective. I also never said a lot was a word, you are the only person that believes it can make one word. You are now making up your own rules.

I'm not sure how or why you would say this.  If something means completely 2 different things, how could it not confuse you?  And how or why are you now saying you never said "a lot" was a word?  It's used as a word, no?  It's understood as a word.  But that understanding can be confused very easily in so many ways because the 2nd "word" is also a noun....it's a thing.

Quoted from Warren I think the bigger issue is that you can’t be wrong, you can’t back down, this is proven in the Fade to White thread where you literately defend every choice you made even when several people point out the same thing.

No, that's completely wrong again.  Of course I'll always defend my choices and be clear why that choice was made, but I totally listened to certain peeps and I cut so many pages of meaning less banter, added parts to up the tension, etc.  Dude, trust me on this (although you never will), I have absolutely no problem saying I'm sorry, or I was wrong.  I do it "alot", actually...and I learn from it...and I try not to do whatever it was that was wrong.

I've posted several analogies on this thread, and 1 had to do with getting from point A to point B.  If the way I'm taking, which I'm taking because from my experience, I believe it's the best way, isn't actually the best, I'll take the new way and when I see it's indeed faster/easier, that's my new way!

Quoted from Warren You have such a hard line that if you tell someone something they "can take it to the bank", but you will literally never take anyone else’s opinion, not even great writers on this site.

Again, completely untrue.  When I'm wrong, I admit, thank whoever found the mistake, and correct it.

You're actually the epitome of what you just accused me of.  Completely and literally!

You're a good writer, Warren.  We all know that and acknowledge that.  That doesn't mean you don't make mistakes.  Actually, you make a ton of mistakes in every script you write.  Peeps don't seem to realize that, though, and that's a great thing for you.

When you're called out, you can't for the life of you agree to the mistake. And, my friend, is going to be your downfall...or maybe your Achilles's Heal.

Quoted from Zack So... Rules don't matter? Fuck it. I'm taking my pants off AND I refuse to use apostrophes from this point forward. I shall also cap and underline character names ALL of the time. And never again will I start a script with Fade In. Pants are off people. The pants. Are off.

I don’t think anyone is specifically saying this. There are conventions to screenwriting, how far you are willing to push the envelope is up to you. If whatever you are doing is clarifying or enhancing your story you should do it, such as wrylies, asides, and an orphan that finishes a damn good line of action. It is not a convention to underline a character name, you are more than welcome to not use FADE IN and it will change your story in no way what so ever.

This is a very extreme way to look at a very simple issue and you haven’t made much of a valid point, in my opinion.

I know you and Jeff are buddies, but I can honestly say there are better writing mentors to look to.

Quoted from Dreamscale You're a good writer, Warren.  We all know that and acknowledge that.  That doesn't mean you don't make mistakes.  Actually, you make a ton of mistakes in every script you write.  Peeps don't seem to realize that, though, and that's a great thing for you.

Since you are among the elite that notices these mistakes, have you ever considered writing a book, an ebook maybe? On the topic of the most common pitfalls of screenwriting. The rules of screenwriting.

I do not mean this sarcastically. I'm for real. I would like to see the rules you live by codified. Or is there a book by someone else that you follow?

Again, I'm really asking.

Quoted from Dreamscale There is obviously a cap to using action wrylies (if that's the 1 issue you're referring to here).  You and Dave could use them is every single dialogue block!  Don't you get that?  Unless you have 2 (or more characters) sitting there, standing there, while conversing, you could forego action/description lines (for meaningless unnecessary detail, and use your beloved action wrylies.  You could also include meaningful detail, and again, just forego the line. Don't you get that?  Imagine how it would look and read!  Wait...until the next OWC...I'll show you how it will look and read!

Yes - we are obviously advocating for the elimination of action blocks and replacing them with wrylies.

It's an inane argument to suggest because some advocates the use of something in some instances (or in are case, arguing that it is not wrong to use them) they are advocating it must be done in all instances.

Quoted Text I'm not sure how or why you would say this.  If something means completely 2 different things, how could it not confuse you?  And how or why are you now saying you never said "a lot" was a word?  It's used as a word, no?  It's understood as a word.  But that understanding can be confused very easily in so many ways because the 2nd "word" is also a noun....it's a thing.

Dave rolls over.

"A lot" is not a word. It is not understood as a word. It is never confused when spelled "a lot" because lot is a noun. I am never confused by "a lot."  

Maybe I will start using :

abunch (bunch is a thing too)
aboatload (although boatload not really a noun)
etc.

Would a bridge between a group of islands in the ocean have atoll?

Asking for a friend...

Quoted from stevie Would a bridge between a group of islands in the ocean have atoll? Asking for a friend...

Not sure.

Yes - it would be atoll road.

Quoted from Demento Since you are among the elite that notices these mistakes, have you ever considered writing a book, an ebook maybe? On the topic of the most common pitfalls of screenwriting. The rules of screenwriting. I do not mean this sarcastically. I'm for real. I would like to see the rules you live by codified. Or is there a book by someone else that you follow? Again, I'm really asking.

HA!!!    

I should...I could...but I doubt anyone would read it, other than the super fine folks on SS.

Man, listen, I just try and help peeps.  Whenever I can, in all walks of life.  You guys and gals don't know me personally, but I'm not talking BS.

If anyone doesn't find my critique valid, my advice solid, by all means, blow it off as the ravings of a crazy idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about.

Quoted from Dreamscale I disagree completely, but again, it's something that shouldn't matter, either way. You asked why in the world should anyone listen to little old me, and I gave my reasons why.

These are not real reasons, only ones you somehow believe are valid.

Quoted from Dreamscale Well, here, you shoot yourself in the old proverbial foot, as Libby brought up. There is obviously a cap to using action wrylies (if that's the 1 issue you're referring to here).  You and Dave could use them is every single dialogue block!  Don't you get that?  Unless you have 2 (or more characters) sitting there, standing there, while conversing, you could forego action/description lines (for meaningless unnecessary detail, and use your beloved action wrylies.  You could also include meaningful detail, and again, just forego the line.

I stand by my point, I said you can use too many, I noted that you are not the authority on what that number is. If used effectively it is okay. I don’t think you could use a million effectively. There is obviously a limit, that limit is decided by the effectiveness of their use not by you.

Quoted from Dreamscale Don't you get that?  Imagine how it would look and read!  Wait...until the next OWC...I'll show you how it will look and read!

So now you're already setting us up for your next OWC piss-take script. How about you write something decent instead and show us all how it’s done?

Quoted from Dreamscale Yes, it is grammatically incorrect to use "alot" in any business, professional, student report, essay, or even article in a publication.  It's not an issue in posts.  It's not an issue in dialogue.  If you come across this in an action/description line, by all means, bring it up.

The issue is that alot is not a word and it is not used effectively if you decided to use it as alot. You don’t get to decide how the English language works. Sure you get to decide how to use it, which is just plain incorrect, but you don’t get to decide how it works.

And again it’s an issue because it goes against everything to preach, you actively don’t address the actual issue and focus on points and ideas that have little to no relevance to the argument.

Quoted from Dreamscale I'm not sure how or why you would say this.  If something means completely 2 different things, how could it not confuse you?  And how or why are you now saying you never said "a lot" was a word?  It's used as a word, no?  It's understood as a word.  But that understanding can be confused very easily in so many ways because the 2nd "word" is also a noun....it's a thing.

I guess it doesn’t confuse me because I'm not an idiot (before anyone gets into an uproar, I'm not calling Jeff an idiot, we are both expressing our views), I am however calling anyone that would be confused by this a down right idiot.

Quoted from Dreamscale No, that's completely wrong again.  Of course I'll always defend my choices and be clear why that choice was made, but I totally listened to certain peeps and I cut so many pages of meaning less banter, added parts to up the tension, etc.  Dude, trust me on this (although you never will), I have absolutely no problem saying I'm sorry, or I was wrong.  I do it "alot", actually...and I learn from it...and I try not to do whatever it was that was wrong.

It is hard to trust you on this because I have never seen you concede a point. The 'a lot' one would be any easy one to do because it is LITERALY wrong, but you won’t even do that.

Quoted from Dreamscale I've posted several analogies on this thread, and 1 had to do with getting from point A to point B.  If the way I'm taking, which I'm taking because from my experience, I believe it's the best way, isn't actually the best, I'll take the new way and when I see it's indeed faster/easier, that's my new way!

Again, never seen this happen.

Quoted from Dreamscale Again, completely untrue.  When I'm wrong, I admit, thank whoever found the mistake, and correct it.

When?

Quoted from Dreamscale You're actually the epitome of what you just accused me of.  Completely and literally! You're a good writer, Warren.  We all know that and acknowledge that.  That doesn't mean you don't make mistakes.  Actually, you make a ton of mistakes in every script you write.  Peeps don't seem to realize that, though, and that's a great thing for you. When you're called out, you can't for the life of you agree to the mistake. And, my friend, is going to be your downfall...or maybe your Achilles's Heal.

Sure I'll take the vailed insult.

I know I make mistakes and I take the notes and better my writing, on every script I write. That is just complete BS. I don’t even know how or why you can say that. I don’t think there is one script I’ve posted on SS where I haven’t listened to and taken the advice of other writers. This statement honestly blows my mind.

Quoted from Warren This is a very extreme way to look at a very simple issue and you haven�t made much of a valid point, in my opinion. I know you and Jeff are buddies, but I can honestly say there are better writing mentors to look to.

Extreme? I'm not even wearing my nipple-tassels yet!

Obviously, I was being sarcastic with my post. Except for the "pants off" part. Dead serious there.

Yeah, I like Jeff. He uses his own free time to read my terrible screenplays and give me sound advice. I appreciate everyone's advice. I don't blindly follow that advice, but I do always consider it. If someone takes their free time to read something I barfed out, then the least I can do is consider what they are saying.

I actually agree with some of what you and Dave have been saying. Story and character are more important than proper format. There's nothing wrong with putting your own flavor on your writing. In fact, I believe you should strive to do so.

I also agree with a lot of what Jeff's been saying. Rules are there for a reason. You can still have your own voice and follow the rules. You can bend the rules sure, but you shouldn't flat out disregard them.

Jeff, over the millions of years you and I have both been here, you have reviewed more scripts, especially features, than anyone else that I can recall. You definitely have a lot to  offer as far as helping people. IMO though, your delivery could need some tweaking. As writers, we appreciate feedback, but sometimes if the feedback is harsh it can really crush a writer's spirit. Or at least the will and energy to want to implement your advice in a rewrite. I know you're a big teddy bear or a fluffy badger, whichever you prefer, why not show some of that softer side when giving your feedback? Your feedback is valid, just served like a blow to the head with a frying pan sometimes.

Quoted from Grandma Bear Jeff, over the millions of years you and I have both been here, you have reviewed more scripts, especially features, than anyone else that I can recall.

Let's be honest, he has reviewed the first two pages of 99% of the features he's opened here.

This is why I want his book. So others can read it, learn and he can reach at least page 10 before he checks out.

What's great about Jeff is that he's a real stickler for rules and use of language in scripts. Like the biggest one here. It really irritates him and he's very pedantic. So, it gives off the impression that he's a sophisticated man. But when you read his movie reviews, you see that he really loves nudity in movies, he really loves it when women show their breasts. Like really. This is super important to him, he always points it out. He's a fan of gore, not just regular gore, like super gore. This is a man that gave a glowing review to I Spit On Your Grave 2 (yes, I remember). I find it all so fascinating.