I'm a believer in the the three act model (introduction/complication/resolution); it provides a general framework for thinking about the arc of the story. It is also general enough to cover the vast majority of stories and writing styles. I don't think this nine act model is nearly as general, but it has certain interesting features.

One of those interesting features is that it provides guidance with a problem I've frequently seen in unpublished manuscripts: a jarring transition from an attempt at a very action packed opening to exposition and backstory. A more detailed but still somewhat generic outline might help some authors address this problem.

Roughly speaking their acts 0-4 correspond to the standard Act 1; their acts 5 - 6 corresponds to the standard Act 2; their acts 7 and 8 corresponds to standard Act 3. The main problem I see with this breakdown (as they've timed it for the movies) is that it leads to an Act 1 that is too long for most written stories: roughly 40% of the MS.

If you wanted to try this out, their model posits an approximate 110 minute movie. I'd take the minute count as roughly the percent of the MS, then half their acts 0-4. Then I'd stretch out their Acts 4-7 to take up the slack. That'd give you a kind of budget in which standard Act 1 would take up 20% of the story, Act 2 50%, and Act 3 30%.

The only caution I'd have is with Act 0, which might turn into a prologue; I hear agents are down on prologues, although plenty novels do get published with them.
 

I'd also recommend (if you haven't read it) "The War of Art" by Steven Pressfield of "Gates of Fire" fame. I read it in a few hours, and it has many truths toward beating writer's block and developing "professional" habits. He also has an addendum called "Do the Work" out.