Writers using flashy words for the sake of it?

[RealJasonBourne]

Example:

Collins' LAPD SEDAN bounces madly down a barely-existent dirt road

Why use the words "bounces madly"? That literally has nothing to do with driving down a forest road. In the show there was no "bouncing madly", it was just a car driving.

So what if this guy wrote "Collins' LAPD SEDAN heads down a barely-existent dirt road"


Is it necessary to sound like a know-it-all cocky douchebag when writing a professional script?

 

[wilmywood]

I think when writing the descriptions of the scenes it is best to be economical with words. Less is more in screenwriting. The more white coloring on a page the better, so I have heard. You don't want to write elaborate descriptions that are detract from the essence of your story. But I don't think that the example in the beginning of this thread is overboard. It seems like it is okay.

 

[Editor]

"Madly" is NOT flashy, but TRASHY!!!

I find that my comment here is, itself, a reflection on the paucity of quality in writing amongst the American population. For "bouncing madly" is NOT flashy, but trashy. "Madly" is simply a clumsy, overused word which indicates poor diction skills. Any decent writer should be able to call upon a whole range of better synomyms.

 

[Editor]

One trait that will, at the very least, have one's screenplay dropped into File 13 at the corner of a reader's desk is TEDIUM. When one reads a scene on its own, it may not be apparent to a writer, but when one spends two hours wading through "Peter walks in... Jon walks over... Joe walks around it... Peter walks out..." it really, REALLY wears one down. It is a standard classic issue that is intensively hammered home inschools across England...

DO NOT KEEP REPEATING THE SAME WORD, USE A VARIETY.

Having "Peter strolls in... Jon strides over... Joe stumbles around it... Peter storms out..." is far easier on a reader's concentration.

In short, what is the point of boring your reader with tedium if you expect him to recommend his employers spend the sort of cash producing it that would feed the population of Somalia for a week?

 

[Editor]

Thanks.

The reason I got so paranoid with marches is because I was attempting my first script and after reading a few other scripts I noticed I subconsciously used the word "marches" for mine. I wrote "The army marches towards them".

I was worried my script might seem cliche or paint-by-numbers style.

Actually, it might still seem cliche. Whilst an army might have to march, in other contexts, a froceful bipedal advance by a character could use a better range of words, like STRUT or STRIDE... which, inded, might convey a more colourful action than MARCH.

 

[cheeseandachallenge]

edit: nevermind, misread.

 

[Wolverine237]

The words a writer uses are based not only around their own personal style and individuality, but also written to invoke emotion from the reader/audience as well as stay true to a consistent tone within a screenplay.

For me personally, individuality is key to great writing and key to great films. If we make a sweeping policy within the writing community to "tone down" writing then we may be at risk of losing originality within our art.

Good luck writing and happy filmmaking!

 

[Jack Lynt]

This sentence is probably the definition of irony

Pfffff! It took me a few moments to figure out what the heck you were talking about. But when I saw it, I got a good laugh. Thank you for that. I needed one of those. You really cut me up, man. =P

I agree with everyone else. I think it's very nicely, emotively written. It's not flashy. It's effective.