History Headscratchers / LiarLiar

12th Aug '17 2:40:09 PM valleyghost
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* Why was Fletcher forced to insult his coworkers about their physical imperfections, since none of the questions they asked after Max's wish came true called for that kind of answer (What's up, Fletcher? Your cholesterol, fatty!)?

to:

* Why was Fletcher forced to insult his coworkers about their physical imperfections, since none of the questions they asked after Max's wish came true called for that kind of answer (What's up, Fletcher? Your cholesterol, fatty!)?fatty!)?

* Fletcher might not be having a great day, but surely he hasn't slipped into the Seventh Layer of Hell [[spoiler: or did Fletcher just lie?]]
30th May '17 12:00:34 PM huntdaddy
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The curse is not about the question of is/not (objective truth), but Fletcher's perception of the truth. Like the above troper said, if Fletcher believes something is true, he can say it, even if it's not an objective truth. Compare with the prostate exchange with the judge. While the truth might be otherwise, Fletcher probably honestly believes that there could be some truth to the claim that holding it in for too long can damage the prostate. He can therefore repeat this belief to the judge.

to:

** The curse is not about the question of is/not (objective truth), but Fletcher's perception of the truth. Like the above troper said, if Fletcher believes something is true, he can say it, even if it's not an objective truth. Compare with the prostate exchange with the judge. While the truth might be otherwise, Fletcher probably honestly believes that there could be some truth to the claim that holding it in for too long can damage the prostate. He can therefore repeat this belief to the judge.judge.

* Why was Fletcher forced to insult his coworkers about their physical imperfections, since none of the questions they asked after Max's wish came true called for that kind of answer (What's up, Fletcher? Your cholesterol, fatty!)?
9th May '17 11:36:04 AM Miracle@StOlaf
Is there an issue? Send a Message


*** While I agree that the idea of a naturalistic explanation for the events in ''Liar Liar'' is silly, I disagree with Ebert's interpretation of ''Film/BeingThere''. That movie was definitely pondering the line between truth and illusion, and so a rational explanation for the bizarre final scene does have some basis in terms of the movie's themes.

to:

*** While I agree that the idea of a naturalistic explanation for the events in ''Liar Liar'' is silly, I disagree with Ebert's interpretation of ''Film/BeingThere''. That movie was definitely pondering the line between truth and illusion, and so a rational explanation for the bizarre final scene does have some basis in terms of the movie's themes.
themes (To wit: there being something just underwater that Chance is walking on would essentially mean the viewer is making the ''exact'' same mistake that other characters have made throughout the movie, in assuming Chance is far more gifted and brilliant than he really is).
4th Nov '16 12:33:24 PM MrDeath
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** That kind of thing would force a retrial -- and it would probably ruin his career to have a mental breakdown in the middle of a case that his boss is watching.
4th Nov '16 12:22:51 AM Chrono_Ryono
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Wouldn't it have been easier to just admit, in no uncertain terms, that he did it to himself? Surely the judge wouldn't let such an unstable man continue to serve as counsel.

to:

** Wouldn't it have been easier to just admit, in no uncertain terms, admit that he did it to himself? Surely the The judge wouldn't let such an unstable man continue would assume some kind of mental breakdown and dismiss him from serving as counsel. Then, the following day, he would be able to serve as counsel.talk/lie his way out of the consequences.
4th Nov '16 12:19:45 AM Chrono_Ryono
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** Wouldn't it have been easier to just admit, in no uncertain terms, that he did it to himself? Surely the judge wouldn't let such an unstable man continue to serve as counsel.
13th Oct '16 8:47:27 AM Peteman
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

*** I think they're considered common-law husband and wife given how long they've been together.
13th Oct '16 8:35:36 AM marbehraglaim
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

**** While I agree that the idea of a naturalistic explanation for the events in ''Liar Liar'' is silly, I disagree with Ebert's interpretation of ''Film/BeingThere''. That movie was definitely pondering the line between truth and illusion, and so a rational explanation for the bizarre final scene does have some basis in terms of the movie's themes.
3rd Jul '16 12:48:06 AM Nixterman
Is there an issue? Send a Message


*** Given that the movie is pretty heavy-handed on using the letter of the law to subvert the spirit of the law, maybe the curse gives Fletcher a little wiggling room if he's using minor amounts of deception to ultimately reveal the truth. In essence, it'd be stepping a wee bit out of the letter of the truth in order to reveal the full truth.



** He was wrong, not knowingly lying. The prohibition is against him saying something he knows is a lie. It's not that he has to tell the absolute truth.

to:

** He was wrong, not knowingly lying. The prohibition is against him saying something he knows is a lie. It's not that he has to tell the absolute truth.truth.
** The curse is not about the question of is/not (objective truth), but Fletcher's perception of the truth. Like the above troper said, if Fletcher believes something is true, he can say it, even if it's not an objective truth. Compare with the prostate exchange with the judge. While the truth might be otherwise, Fletcher probably honestly believes that there could be some truth to the claim that holding it in for too long can damage the prostate. He can therefore repeat this belief to the judge.
30th Jun '16 8:21:53 AM MrDeath
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* Right before the "pen soliloquy", Fletcher says, "You can beat this. It's just a matter of [[HeroicWillpower willpower]]." [[LogicBomb Then he puts lie to these words by completely and utterly failing to tell a simple lie about the color of the pen]]. Can somebody please explain this?

to:

* Right before the "pen soliloquy", Fletcher says, "You can beat this. It's just a matter of [[HeroicWillpower willpower]]." [[LogicBomb Then he puts lie to these words by completely and utterly failing to tell a simple lie about the color of the pen]]. Can somebody please explain this?this?
** He was wrong, not knowingly lying. The prohibition is against him saying something he knows is a lie. It's not that he has to tell the absolute truth.
This list shows the last 10 events of 87. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Headscratchers.LiarLiar