Hi everyone. I am new to the site. Also new to screenwriting. So I kinda suck. I am dedicated though.
I have a question about the use of parenthesis. Particularly when there is more than one person In a room. Perhaps a chaotic situation when one person is frantically talking to multiple people.
I am still in the first act of first draft but I have found that I am using this situation a lot
ex:
Alan backs away from the bound store clerk. He walks to the large duffel bag sitting on the floor.
Alan heaves the duffel bag over his shoulder. He turns back to the clerk.
                                         Alan
                           I hope it all works out for you gas station man.
                                    (to Chris)
                           Let's get the hell out of here.

Obviously Chris was the other robber in the room.
Is this use of parenthesis acceptable? I've been using it a lot. Should I use more action instead?
I appreciate any and all responses. I really enjoy this site. Very helpful.

I've wondered about this myself at times. It feels to me that if I used it here or there it's not a problem, but if there's going to be a lot of head turning from one to another, then perhaps we should use action lines or notations such as,


Jack/Jill
(to each other)
He's not a real clown?

Jack/Jill
(to The Clown)
You're not a real clown?

The Clown
Yes! I'm a real clown what makes you think I'm not?

From herein, Jack and Jill turn their attentions and dialogue from The Clown back to each other.

Jack/Jill
He's got a gun.

Jack/Jill
You've gotta gun.

The Clown
This? Ha. It's just a prop. See?

He shoots it at the Candy Floss stand.

BANGASMASH!

The Clown
Holy Bazooka!

Jack/Jill
He's a Liar!

Jack/Jill
You're a Liar!

The Clown
No I'm not! I'm a clown with a loaded gun! But how? ...

A different clown shows up behind The Clown, CLOWN 2, looking much the same as him.

*Here, I'm changing the order of who Jack and Jill refer to first; so I'm including parenthesis again.

Jack/Jill
(to The Clown)

You've got an amazing twin who looks like he's angry.

Jack/Jill
Time to run now?

Jack
Ya think?

**It seems to me that however you write it, write it so that it makes for an easy read and not feel too clunky.

Hope this helps,

Sandra

Sam, your use of parentheticals is correct.  So is yours' Sandra.

Just try to keep the use of them to a minimum.


Phil

Hi Sam, just wanted to say how nice it is to see a new member introduce themselves, not be afraid to ask a perfectly sensible question, and also write clearly and articulately! All bodes well for your screenwriting - everyone on here was starting out once..,

For what it's worth, I use wrylies (as parentheticals are also known) in exactly the same way on occasion. It is most certainly 'allowed', and can be a good way to keep the pace of a scene up. As Phil says though, like most writing devices it is best used in moderation.

A general rule to keep in mind when you find yourself questioning your format as you go along: as long as you know why you are using something, and as long as that reason isn't just to cut corners or because 'you think it'll be okay', it should be perfectly acceptable. There are, of course, some formatting rules that are unbreakable (separation of action and dialogue, indication of time and place through slugs, introing of characters). But the rest falls under the label of 'personal discretion'. I say this because it's something probably every writer finds themselves getting caught up in when they're starting out: instead of worrying about every little point, just try to develop a style that feels natural to you, and reads well. The rest...is just stuff, and we'll nudge you in the proper direction if you're wrong.

Good to meet you, and good luck!

Or to say it briefly, wrylies should only be used when the action they describe isn't crystal clear from either the action or the dialogue.

Their largest misuse is in describing emotional responses or placing lines of action (in a novel way) between the character name and dialogue.

Sandra, I think your bit with the Jack and Jill and the Clown is clever, and remarkably clear. Definitely an exception. Normally, I would say it is better to use one dialogue header and use the wryly between the different dialogue directions, but in your case, it works the way you have. Just another example showing that clarity is king over whatever rules one tries to make up.

Quoted from George Willson Their largest misuse is in describing emotional responses or placing lines of action (in a novel way) between the character name and dialogue.

The exception to what George said about emotional responses is when the response is not the normal.

            MOTHER
I made your favorite.  Chocolate cake!

            SON
    (happy)
Hooray!


is wrong because you would expect the son to be happy.


            MOTHER
I made your favorite.  Chocolate cake!

            SON
     (sarcastic)
Hooray!

is correct because the sarcasm isn't expected, given the dialog.


Phil

Quoted from George Willson Or to say it briefly, wrylies should only be used when the action they describe isn't crystal clear from either the action or the dialogue. Their largest misuse is in describing emotional responses or placing lines of action (in a novel way) between the character name and dialogue.

Your clarity here is something to take note of. The use of parenthesis in dialogue, or wrylies as they're called, if forced, are probably the result of inherent problems with storytelling from the standpoint of "explanation" of the story. By that I mean, wrylies, are in fact, blatant explanation and orders one might say. Orders that the actor can probably do without.

They kind of pop out at you when you're reading; they tend to disrupt your feelings with regard to the story and thus, take away suspension of disbelief.

If we feel the need to explain every single small action, (even without wrylies, but in action lines) that would better be left to the imagination of the actor, or the reader, then we might be better considering that there might be a greater problem with the storytelling itself that is just showing on the surface as wrylies.

I don't know if I'm making myself clear in this regard. But say for instance, someone starts getting a rash like eczema or what-have-you. The rash is only resulting from an internal complication regarding the immune system or infection or any number of variables and not the other way around.

If we find ourselves using wrylies too much. We need to ask ourselves why.

Sandra

You might consider writing a draft of the scene without any parentheticals at all.  Do it deliberately to see how the scene flows without the extra direction.  You may find that the scene isn't as confusing as you thought it would be.  You may also find that you prefer alternate exchanges between the characters to get the point across other than dialogue with direct parenthetical direction, such as nonverbal cues or action.