ST Worst line in The Force Awakens

Seriously.... do you see yourself as the arbiter of all TFA feedback??? Why do you see it as your role to respond to every post that has something negative to say about the film? You are not changing anyone's opinion. If anything you are strengthening opinion. This thread is really to elicit ones views on the worst bits of dialogue (why don't you create a thread re. the best bits of dialogue and I'll happily contribute to that too?) and shouldn't be used for you to disagree with everyone's comments... IMHO.

 

20 pages of a thread that's little over a month old seems popular enough to me. Why try and contest it? You don't have to agree with it, but why pretend people don't have an opinion on it? Why do you feel you need to defend it?

 

The problem with a thread like this is that the people who dislike the film are so, so, determined to hang their dislike on something tangible that literally anything brought up as a negative gets assimilated into an arbitrary case for the prosecution of the film; theres no true discussion here. It doesn't matter why someone thinks a line is bad, whether the reasoning is arbitrary or well founded, all that matters is building a case by sheer weight of numbers of examples for why the film has BAD DIALOGUE.

I still firmly believe that there aren't really any TFA "gushers" as such, it's just that those of us who took the film on its merits are having to counter some way OTT reactions to even be able to have conversations about what has been a very well received film generally. People who like the film such as JabbatheHumanBeing post here, as I do, partly because some measured analysis would actually make this a more interesting thread; of course there are bad lines in the film. But "bad lines" aren't completely objective; there are lines mentioned here that demonstrably work, that move the story on economically and that set tone really well.
"I was talking to myself" for example; that should be picked up by everyone as a prime example of a good line - it builds character, the tone shows that why the stakes are high, this is adventure and not bleak drama or sci fi horror, and it nicely contrasts with the visual image of a stormtrooper

Edit; I'm not saying people don't have an opinion on it. I'm saying that a twenty page thread doesn't neccesarily mean that there's twenty pages worth of interesting points raised.

 

It's 20 pages of opinion. No one can scientifically work out with test tube, pencil and pad what makes something demonstrably good or bad. I've already suggested that someone should start a 'best lines of dialogue' thread (if it doesn't already exist)... and I'd contribute to that too. That's the best way to approach this... and I'd be stating the same thing if, on a 'best lines of dialogue thread' someone was telling you that you were wrong for quoting your favourite lines of dialogue.

 

No one is saying anyone is wrong for having a personal dislike of any given line. What is wrong is compiling all these personal bugbears into some kind of definitive list of "bad lines" rather than seeming to have any awareness that it's simply a list of lines from the film, which some people have an issue with.

I mean, you could start a thread with "worst scenes" and you'd get to a point where every scene in the film got mentioned. And that's fine; but to then act as if a straight faced run down as if one person's opinion makes it so is ridiculous.

 

Jabba, i'm not sure you understand the meaning of the word "cynical".

And to be perfectly honest, nearly everything about TFA IS cynical. A script-by-committee/focus group/studio built primarily upon catering to/pandering/manipulating the audience's sentimentality and nostalgia... at the expense of developing a wholly unique, risk-taking, creative, passionate, authentic, novel script is the very definition of cynical.

 

The most ironic post I've ever read on these boards. Are you not aware of how incredibly cynical your post is?

I don't care if you dislike the film. But if you can't detect the heart and passion at its core, then I'm afraid it is you that doesn't understand the meaning of cynicism, not me.

 

Speak for yourself. I've had plenty of conversations with people here which have resulted in opinions being changed, including my own. Not everyone responds to a broadening of perspectives by digging their heels in.

 

It's a misnomer and a poor argument to simply use the starting point of Disney owning Star Wars as a way of arguing that the entire production is cynical. We're there elements of nostalgia? Of course. Did these elements go too far in places? Quite possibly. Was the nostalgia the result of cigar chomping bean counters stamping out any and all creativity and innovation in favour of making the most diluted product possible? No, and it's ridiculous to imply that that's the case.

Similar to the level of scrutiny applied to plot holes, there is no film that could be expected to stand up to the level of scrutiny given to each word spoken as this film has done. Unless you're seriously suggesting that some executive came in and said "we're gonna need a trash compactor call back here", then you have to accept that to some degree, the film was made by people attempting (whatever your opinion of the film) to make a good film. There is love that went into this.

 

Clint, Finn's "I was talking to myself" line is a perfect microcosm of the eye-roll inducing, contrived, self-aware dialogue prevalent in TFA. Of all the lines listed, I can't believe you picked this specific line to defend. To the untrained ear it's harmless, "cute" I suppose. However, to the keen, nuanced viewer, this type of dialogue will shatter the 4th wall and induce an uncontrollable, literally painful eye-roll. Here's the problem. It's a contrived joke. From Finn's point of view, he wants to make a funny to break the tension. Or something. So instead of THINKING to himself "stay calm", he literally says aloud (under his breath) "stay calm", so that Poe may respond. And Poe does with "i am", exactly as Finn was hoping, to which he can casually say "i was talking to myself". Bravo, writers, bravo. The issue is that this joke (the punch line) does not work unless Poe responds! Even worse, he has to respond with that and only that response! Think about it. If Poe doesn't respond with anything to Finn's "stay calm", the "joke" goes nowhere. And if Poe responds with basically anything other than "i am calm", the joke still does not go anywhere. They just keep on walking and Finn feels like a nincompoop. Only if Poe Dameron responds with "i am", can Finn use the punch line "i was talking to myself". Geez, it's almost as if..... Finn had access to the script and knew how Poe would respond! Or he can read minds and/or see the future! Magic! *sigh* Thus, ergo, in conclusion... it is an entirely contrived, forced line of dialogue masquerading as a "joke". The joke/punch line only works if the 2nd party responds to the setup with one specific answer (which is extremely improbable). Which again, the 1st party would have no way of knowing or assuming that said 2nd party would respond with that exact line.

Thanks a lot, Finn. For recklessly OBLITERATING THE 4TH WALL.

A similar example of this type of self-aware, 4th wall destroying schtick occurs in the similarly contrived and forced, The Dark Knight. The "magic trick/pencil to the eye" scene with the joker. Joker says "you want to see a magic trick?". Cue random dude getting up at that exact moment and approaches the Joker, to which the joker (far too easily) slams him face down into the table. "it's gone...." Huzzah! Worked perfectly. However, imagine any other scenario in which that guy DOES NOT GET UP. "Do you want to see a magic trick?" *jams pencil into table* *beat* nobody moves. Joker: "errrrr......someone stand up and approach me please? I need a volunteer?". LAME. The joker had convenient foresight knowing that some goon would stand up at that exact moment and approach him (not to mention being so easily physically manipulated by the lanky/weak Joker). So many scenarios in which that can't play out and literally only 1 scenario in which he can make his punch line. The definition of "contrivance". So while the masses yuck it up and applaud like seals, the keen, discerning viewer sits there like wtf? that's dumb.

I am The Crimson King.

And this is my court.

 

"to the keen, nuanced viewer"


I'm perceptive enough a viewer and reader to know that I'm not going to engage with people who display such a superiority complex.

 

Also; the film may be "nuanced", the viewer perceives nuance. If you're going to attempt to patronise, it's best to not make mistakes like that.

 

One man's superiority complex is another man's inferiority complex...

-Winston Churchill

 

King_Crimson said: ↑

Jabba, i'm not sure you understand the meaning of the word "cynical".

And to be perfectly honest, nearly everything about TFA IS cynical. A script-by-committee/focus group/studio built primarily upon catering to/pandering/manipulating the audience's sentimentality and nostalgia... at the expense of developing a wholly unique, risk-taking, creative, passionate, authentic, novel script is the very definition of cynical.​

Jabba said: "The most ironic post I've ever read on these boards. Are you not aware of how incredibly cynical your post is?

I don't care if you dislike the film. But if you can't detect the heart and passion at its core, then I'm afraid it is you that doesn't understand the meaning of cynicism, not me."



Yeah... it appears that you don't have a proper understanding of the term "ironic" either.

 

Not to mention that in King_Crimson's spasm of superiority, he misuses the word "nuanced."

I believe, King_Crimson, that you meant to describe "a viewer who appreciates nuance," not a "nuanced viewer." I mean, what is a nuanced viewer? Someone with complicated cheekbones that watches films?

You really do not understand why cynically declaring TFA cynical, on all counts, is ironic? Brush up on your English comprehension, and then perhaps you'll have some ground to hurl insults from.

You may also want to look up the word "hubris." I believe the OED entry includes "using a Winston Churchill quote to justify one's arrogance" as an example of that characteristic in action.

 

Excellent logic there.

Post 1: "I am better than you"
Response: "I'm not interested in talking to people who assert their superiority over others"
post 2: "here's a quote I'm going to misuse to imply that you are saying that you are worse than me!"

 

"Not to mention that in the King_Crimson's spasm of superiority, he misuses the word "nuanced."

I believe, @King_Crimson, that you meant to describe "a viewer who appreciates nuance," not a "nuanced viewer." I mean, what is a nuanced viewer? Someone with complicated cheekbones that watches films?"

Yup, a NUANCED VIEWER. I'm stickin' to it. Worded it that way for efficiency. For pacing. Readability. Look how clunky "a viewer who appreciates nuance" is, in the context of the rest of that sentence. You know exactly what I meant. I'll take that as a victory, since instead of retorting my argument, you pulled the nitpicky grammar police card.

You'll have to step up your game if you want to knock the Crimson King out of His court.

 

Inappropriate. Here's your warning.

 

I generally find good English to be easier to read than misused words. The description "a nuanced viewer" does not in anyway describe a viewer who appreciates nuance; it describes a viewer who contains nuance. The only way "nuance" could be used in that context would be if you had a verb "to nuance", meaning to train someone in understanding nuance, after which they become "nuanced".
you didn't mention nuance or lack thereof in your post. You used "nuanced" as a synonym for "film literate" or "cultured"

But, y'know. Carry on.

 

Ah, we have a troll. Bye.

 

I am sure this is mere coincidence, but your avatar looks very much like...a troll.

 

Jabba said: "You really do not understand why cynically declaring TFA cynical, on all counts, is ironic? Brush up on your English comprehension, and then perhaps you'll have some ground to hurl insults from."

No. Please explain how me acknowledging the cynical foundation upon which TFA emerged is somehow ironic.

 

Because, of course, your assessment of the film was, itself, so hyperbolically cynical. I might also add the adjective "hypocritical" to describe your offering. A cynic accusing another of cynicism

 

"I am sure this is mere coincidence, but your avatar looks very much like...a troll."

And right on cue, here come the ad-hom's. "troll". I refuse to engage in with someone who uses that term. That also goes for "hater".

*sigh* buncha philistines 'round here...

And in addition to being a far more nuanced individual in regards to film viewing... apparently my musical tastes are vastly superior/nuanced as well.

Flame. There's your ban.

 

"Because, of course, your assessment of the film was, itself, so hyperbolically cynical"

...or just realistic.

You say potato I say tomato.