V.O. or N-O?

The advice is clear - watch as many movies as you can, read as many screenplays as you can, and whatever you do, never ever use voiceovers in your screenplay unless you absolutely have to, and if you do, do so sparingly and at your own peril. Fair enough. Ten movies and three screenplays later, I'm wondering where this advice comes from as EVERY one of the films and screenplays I saw or read uses voiceovers - in some cases, to a great extent (and with great effect).

So, is the advice as such because voice overs are used so much already? Is it intended strictly for unsold newbies? I'll pose this question to my instructor when I start my screenwriting course in the very near future. Meanwhile, I've included TWO voice overs in my virgin spec script. It would just seem more interesting to watch the actions of a character while hearing another character talk about him, rather than staring at a guy sitting behind a desk speaking the same dialogue. And the end of Act III seems a natural fit for a thought-provoking voice over over a series of shots that show where the various players in our story are after the climax. And, before you say it, no - I'm not talking about one of those tired voice over tactics like "Billy Bob went back to shoein' horses" over a shot of Billy Bob shoeing horses.

So, until I hear a valid reason to the contrary, the V.O. stays.

**Update** Okay, this is precisely why I'm taking a class. What I perceived as a voice over isn't a voice over per se, but a cutaway. So, uh, nebbermide.