Nate,

How 'bout you and me agree to disagree on priorities?

I am sincerely sorry you feel duped by your own notions of "at first you came across like you already were well on your way down that path based on your comments"
Because when I read REACH FOR THE STARS (http://www.simplyscripts.com/scripts/reachforthestars.pdf ) and read:

>> Barbara waves goodbye, cup of coffee in hand. <<
on PDF 10 and wonder "Does he mean she's sloshing coffee all over or holding coffee in the other hand?"

... or...

            CHARLES
  Rory fits my programs third type of
  child. He may not be smart,...
... on PDF 14 and notice "my programs third type" is possessive, so it should have an apostrophe: program's, - strangely - I just post simple corrections, sans vitriolic vagaries.

>> Barbara waves goodbye, cup of coffee in hand. <<
The coffee hand is waving or the other hand is holding the coffee?

... and...

>>             CHARLES
  Rory fits my programs third type of... <<
"Programs" is possessive: program's

THESE legit corrections are WHY you thought I had "come across like you already were well on your way down that path based on your comments".

Pick one: Either my corrections and suggestions are wrong - or - they are right.
No sane person can have it both ways at the same time.
None of this "If you're a made man it's correct - but - if you're a nube it's wrong" rubbish.
That's a BS position to hold onto.


"Which basically ended up being a waste of peoples time."
Wrong.

"Barbara waves goodbye, cup of coffee in hand." is NOT clear.

"... my programs third type... " IS possessive and requires an apostrophe.

And should I state "You can probably ditch the REDNECK BOY swearing at REDNECK DAD over the ATV scene" it's just an opinion. Consider it. Creative differences. Gopherit.

And when I state to Bert "#4 - Yeah. I see the problem you've stated. Fixing one will fix the other. Got it: Make YODER a guilty older son or cousin living with the YODERs long ago that started the crop fire while illicitly smoking behind the barn."  don't come busting my b@lls with this "it felt like you didn't have the overall understanding of the medium to being making the suggestions you were."

Or when I state to Pia "Pg 4 I would exploit that "alone time" in the elevator to all sorts of suggestive, debaucherous depths mentioned above. " and she replies "Good idea!" I really don't want to hear Monday morning quarterbacking "it felt like you didn't have the overall understanding of the medium to being making the suggestions you were."

Pick one: Either my corrections and suggestions are wrong - or - they are right.

Is that your "main point"?
Did I miss something else?

Please don't offer me any more weak-tea, 500 word, say-nothing "bury the hatchet" drivel.
Don't like me. Fine.
But if I'm right - then I'm right.
I'll still read your material and likely still comment. Objectively. (Even though you're mean.)

Can we agree on the following terms?
If I need to correct a slug: show me. Don't gripe that it's wrong.
If I need a comma: show me. Don't gripe that it's not there.
If I need to edit or alter something: show me. Don't gripe that it sux.

Thank you.

Ray


Addendum: "Yeah", I guess I could say I'm equally frustrated with how you've stated your position. I'm sorry. I'll get over it.

Quoted from CindyLKeller I think your problem with this script is that you have too many things going on in it. Too many different stories you're trying to tell at the same time... It's all jumbled together. We're not following any ONE character. I don't think you need to show him on the mountain top or at war either. Either he or someone else could just mention it briefly, and our imagination could fill the rest in. Good luck if you do a rewrite

Howdy, Cindy

Thank you for your great trepidation at reviewing the two re-do pages and commenting on the whole.

Understood about the main character aspect.

Will try a suggestion by another character next time.

Uh... No! No rewrites.
This was a silly little experiment that has turned into a [expletive] nightmare.
I'd just as soon flame-thrower the whole thing and move right along.
I wrote a director's production script instead of a reader's script.
Any semblance of a story was strangled to death in too much "prose".
Got it.
Proper flashback format?
Got it, too.

I hope to not scorch anyones eyes with such too many more times.
My fear has now become "Too much brevity, Ray. Not enough description, Ray."

                             RAY
                   (hangs head down)
                            Ugh!


Ray

So, some strange things going on here in this thread, and while I usually prefer something a bit more substantial, here is what I got looking over your two pages -- though there is little more to do than nitpick

First, one would staple a sheet of paper onto a telephone pole.

Then you introduce 5 characters in rapid succession, though we really use only two of them.  I am assuming Don and Staff Sergeant Moon are one and the same, and if so, would encourage you to introduce him as such.

I had no problem with the flashbacks.  There are several ways to do them, but (to me) clarity is what trumps everything else, and if I am not confused, I do not give them a second thought.  I was not confused.

You seem to have an interesting enough roster of characters, but if you lack enthusiasm for them, abandoning them now is probably the right thing to do.

I did glance over the longer story.  Wordy, sure, but not egregiously so.  It kind of played out like one of those jokes where you tell a long, disconnected story that only comes together in the end as some kind of horrible pun once all the pieces are in place.

Probably works better on the page than it would on the screen.  "Chaney", for example, is never referred to by name, so few if any would make the connection.

The two pages are an improvement over the original, which is probably the main thing you were looking for, and I can confirm that.  I am sure I am not the only one curious as to what you bring to the table with your next work.