How Bad Dialogue Ruined Thor 4

full love and thunder makes a terrible mistake with their

dialogue

just listen to this and let me know if you feel something is wrong. I admire their commitment to each other, it is a beautiful thing, the latter is something I will never have after thousands of years. In life it seems like you don't know who the hell you are. My hope for you is that one day you find something that makes you feel this shit. I have loved before. It didn't work. Either they die or they die horribly. I would leave you with a handwritten letter.

I don't know what's worse, but that's why I keep everyone at a distance. It just sounds wrong, like these two guys don't talk like they're real people. Imagine if you were walking down the street. street and you had two guys chatting like that, you would raise an eyebrow and look at them because something about the way they talk would seem fake and artificial to you. What's really interesting here is how, in theory, this scene should have gone. It was pretty good, the characters have great dynamics. Thor Envy Star-Lord and how he has a group of people that he loves.

Star-Lord feels sorry for Thor and wishes he could have his own family like him, but Thor could never do that. Because so many people he loved died or abandoned him, he can't fall in love again. All those feelings are brilliant in theory. So why doesn't this scene work well? It's because the

dialogue

you just heard is what happens when a writer fails to do it. use subtext and what is subtext simply subtext is what is not explicitly said it is the information that dialogue gives us that is not on the surface level to demonstrate the power of subtext let's rewrite that scene you just heard so the only change is that the subtext now has After being introduced, we start with Salo joking with the rocket and Drax, one of them tells a joke and they all start laughing, we see them having a wonderful time, then we cut to Thor looking at them with a smile that It doesn't reach his eyes and as his laughter gets louder Thor's face strangely becomes sadder He leaves the ship Peter notices his pain so he continues Are you okay?

Peter asks oh yeah well I just needed some fresh air Thor says with a laugh uh Peter gives Thor a long analytical look and the fake happiness on Thor's face starts to crack come back Peter says Rocket and I were about to play a round of Intergalactic Gargle Blaster you are welcome to join oh oh no I wouldn't like to intrude he responds instantly another long silence Peter Looks Thor straight in the eyes and the thought tries to look back at him, but he can't stand the worry on Thor's face. Peter, so look away, this goes on for a while before Peter breaks the tension and gives Thor a friendly punch on the arm saying, stay safe. although you too, he answers the final scene, that exchange is the exact same scene only now all that meaning is buried beneath what the characters are explicitly saying and look how much more authentic the characters feel now that the dialogue isn't exactly Shakespeare .

I'm not. I'm sure I'd like to put my name to it, but get the point across because that's the power of subtext. Any exchange of dialogue is suddenly much more engaging and realistic when you employ subtext correctly, when you analyze how real people speak. in every two sentences and what's quite fascinating about Thor, Love and Thunder is how the device is used a total of about once in the entire movie, over and over again, the information is explicitly told to you, the audience, and my god, does that ruin the dialogue in this movie? Here is another example, don't leave me here, claim my place.

I appreciate that this line sets up a joke about how she got her own belief system wrong. Oh, I hate to tell you, but we are warriors to enter Bali, die in battle. I survived, oh, which is a joke of questionable hilarity like many in this movie, but was that stiff, fake line of dialogue that gave very forced exposition worth setting up this joke, even if that joke was a laugh-out-loud laugh? , fun? I still say no because it's such a rigid line that it makes her feel like a two-dimensional caricature instead of a real person and making matters worse: a Norse warrior forgetting how Valhalla works, that would be like a Christian priest forgetting the object in the that Christ was crucified.

It's not exactly believable that they would forget, but still, if a little subtext had been employed here, if she had simply said, leave me and let me die. The death of a warrior without mentioning Valhalla would suddenly sound much better as a line. and he could still make the joke work along with it, if you really wanted to keep it, why would he even bring it up? They are both from the same culture. She would know that Thor understands what he means here, but if you ask me. By far the worst offender in Thor 4 is the multiple narrative sequences, but the more I reflected on a life with Jane, the more I feared losing that life, and although Jane didn't want to admit it, she was also afraid of losing her. entire section of narration it really is a chore to see what I just played was a short clip of the court that goes on and on several times in this movie explicitly saying out loud everything that was going through their heads at that moment and it is due to movies like this that storytelling in movies has such a bad reputation that I would never say that the movie being narrated is inherently bad, but it's quite interesting how often storytelling feels like an endurance test; sit there and plod along to get to the things that are actually ending up entertaining Thor 4 Falls because of this issue and thought Thor 4 Falls because of this issue and falls four four Falls because of this issue and falls in love hard.

I can't say that line I can't I'm not even going to redo it I can't even say that line Thor four He falls for this problem and falls hard here we go I said it finally uh this is I don't want to say that all storytelling is bad. I can think of a couple of examples that are actually quite good, as they tell compelling, self-contained stories within the narrative, as The Lord of the Rings does this, as does the story of the Three Brothers in Death. Hallows, they're both pretty fun to watch and come to think of it, Naked Gun makes fun of the detective genre by having the protagonist narrate about himself while doing these ridiculous things and makes a big parody out of the problem with the guy.

The narration that Thor uses in Love and Thunder can be shown by simply playing said narration because everything is like that, but under his God body there was still a sad but trying to get out because all the Bots that Thor had used and over the years she couldn't hide the pain he felt inside, she sure is very blunt and on the nose there is no subtext and that is a problem, but the biggest problem here is that there is nothing this narrative tells us that a good writer . I couldn't have told the audience anyway, but without narration, just writing a good dialogue scene with Thor is chatting with cork, maybe and because of how well written the dialogue is, because of all the subtext between the lines , the audience now knows. everything about what happened between the end of the game and now everything about Thor's fear of falling in love again isn't hard to see expository narration ultimately necessary narration in a movie tends to be pretty boring not because it's inherently boring as a device but because narration is often used as a last resort by writers trying to get their point across because they can't think of any other way to do it and that's fair enough, frankly, as if every writer knows what it's like to be in that situation. ;

However, unskilled writers become more routinely desperate. It is enough to resort to narration because they do not have the ability to inject subtext into the story itself like good writers do and also because they are unskilled writers, they cannot write good narration anyway because they do not use the device. in fun ways, like generating great humor and great characterization in Deadpool or telling a really exciting independent story, like the defeat of Sauron or the Three Brothers trying to cheat death in the Harry Potter subtext, is certainly the way more efficient and effective. of delivering exposition that exists in a very short space of time, good writers can convey much more exposition than bad writers using subtext and, better yet, they will do it without you realizing that they have given you exposition.

Let me think of a quick example to demonstrate that let's say we have a man at home and then a woman walks in the door, he says how was work and she snorts through her nose before responding oh, you know, then forces a brief smile that quickly turns into a tired expression. he approaches her concern on her face, but before he can say anything, she asks completely out of nowhere, the plumber finally came today now that dialogue again isn't exactly Shakespeare's right, but only from that brief exchange we can evaluate so much information that It is not explicitly stated that her job is wearing her down and she does so regularly.

We can discern that these two are romantically engaged by the way he cares for her, although that's not exactly subtext, I don't think, but what is subtext is how she randomly asks that. continuation of a question about a plumber to avoid him asking her what's wrong, what does that tell us that she doesn't want to talk about it maybe because she loves him and doesn't want to unload all her garbage on him and it just sours his mood or something Maybe she hates being pitied she hates looking weak potentially hinting at the floor in her character we also know that they are having problems with the plumbing and also that the plumber has stood them up at least once because he uses the word finally, when we ask him if he came, indicating that she is frustrated, we can also discern that this guy didn't go to work today while she did, since he was there to meet the plumber, implying that he is self-employed or sick or on vacation or has another reason. to stay home while she's at work, there were three lines of dialogue in there, only three, but look at how much work those lines are doing, don't just look at the sheer amount of exposition given, look at how those three lines accomplished everything. of this with seemingly so little effort this is not obvious Exposition like this is the reason we are here unobtainium because this little gray rock sells for 20 million a kilo that is the only reason it is subtle Exposition that is what Do the subtext not just make the dialogue feel much more natural, which makes the story feel so rich since every line, every action, has so much meaning behind it.

If you can master subtext, you'll never have to worry about your story becoming blunt and lazy. Exposition like This, after thousands of years of life, it seems like you don't know who the hell you are because not only have you given that exposition between the lines, but you've done it without the viewer even realizing that you've given them the exposition. I've done it very subtly, but I think the main power of subtext is that humans love puzzles and the more subtext you have, the more puzzles the audience has to solve. How many times have you played a game you're in? you're about to solve a problem and then the character calls out a big clue about how to solve it right when you're about to solve it yourself and it frustrates the hell out of you because you would have rather solved the puzzle on your own. is the principle behind the subtext, we love it when we are challenged and we hate it when we are treated like babies and our problems are solved for us Andrew Stanton, the director of Wally and Finding Nemo, but exactly the feeling is perfectly expressed by saying that it confirms it .

Something I really had a hunch about is that the public really wants to work for their food, but they don't want to know they're doing it. That's your job as a Storyteller, is to hide the fact that you're making them work. For their food it is this well-organized absence of information that attracts us. I started to really understand this narrative device when I was traveling with Bob Peterson on Finding Nemo and we would call it the unifying theory of two plus two, getting the audience to express things. together don't give them four, give them two plus two the elements you provide and the order in which you place them is crucial to whether or not you attract the audience, the editors and scriptwriters have known this from the beginning, it is the invisible application that sustains our attention to history.

I honestly think that if you, as a writer, were to write a note on your wool with an impermanent marker, this would be it. This is a great Mantra to remember every time you write a scene, how can I not say something explicitly? presents the audience with clues they can use to figure it all out for themselves when you nail it in every scene throughout your story, that's the mark of a true master of the craft, don't give the audience four, give them the audience. two plus two always takes into account the simple truth that bad writers give us the answers, butgreat writers give us the clues.

I think Thor Love and Thunder would have been a much better movie if Taika White Easy had used that Mantra in his script um like another thing I would like to say is that when I made this video I almost got caught uh basically I was waiting for a package for a gift from Christmas. I missed the delivery and then I got a text from UPS saying I needed to pay a reshipping fee, so I pulled out my card and it was only when I started typing in the numbers that I realized oh oh no, this is definitely a scam, as if by pure cosmic chance I received the message when I was expecting a forwarding. -Delivered by UPS and they almost caught me with it.

The truth is that even if you are very Internet savvy, you can't even catch a thousand fishing methods like they are more sophisticated every day and you never know when the right email arrives at just the right time to surprise you, like Alex's Corner, a of my fellow nebula creators, had her account hacked exactly this way and started posting cryptocurrency scams on her channel. even if you are hypervigilant, that may not be enough and this is why I would like to recommend to you nordvpn, the sponsor of today's video, nordvpn is more than just a VPN, it sure allows you to surf the internet anonymously and break all sorts of regional blocking, which is great, but it also has threat protection that detects fishing links and warns you not to click on them, giving you an extra layer of protection against all those scammers.

Nord also blocks malicious ads and monitors the dark web to alert you if any of your passwords are leaked. It's more than a VPN. It is also a great help for your Internet security. I have used Nord for four years straight. It has been very useful for me. If you want to join me. To strengthen your online security, click my link in the description and get a two-year plan with four additional months free and Best Heart North has a 30-day money back guarantee so you can try it without pressure and if you don't like get a refund no questions asked again click my link in the description and get started with nordvpn today anyway thanks for watching keep writing and we'll see you next time for a closer look.