How To Handle This Trope: Big Lipped Alligator Moment

^ If the examples were to get large enough, maybe it would be possible to split BLAM up by media, and place a disclaimer on the anime page that you may think something is a BLAM because the scene is lost in translation to western viewers. In other words, it makes sense and context in Japan.

I think that would be a good general disclaimer with Foreign media in general. Sometimes what looks like a BLAM is just a cultural convention.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick

No one said that the New Years dreams are BLAM. Even if someone wouldn't get that showing New Years dreams is meaningful, you just said that it is referenced in a later scene. (And IIRC they also refer to them next morning). Also, they are obviously shown as dreams, starting with sleeping faces and ending with waking up.

Let me put it this way: Which is the odd one out?

• The girls can't stop Osaka's hiccups
• Sasaki is repeatedly bitten by a cat
• Chiyo-chan describes her daily routine
• Osaka is shown as she is having a weird dream.
• At school, Sasaki sees weird Imagine Spot version of the the previously discussed subject.
• The girls are walking in the park, then the park suddenly turns into Fluffy Cloud Heaven, but instead of noticing it, they are just laughing and running around. The End.

The latter breaks the show's own logic. It is supposed to be set in a realistic Japanese city, and if it would turn into an Imagine Spot or dream, it would be usually set up as such earlier in the story, and they are based on the previously discussed subjects.

The same for Calvin And Hobbes. There is a certain pattern of Calvin imagining Hobbes as real, and imagining various typical childish fantasies, like the adventures of Spaceman Spiff, or the time traveller, or the Calvinosaurus, but these are nothing more than that: Playful childish fantasies. Usually you can also connect them to the real world, it's a running gag that the last panel reveals exactly what real life phenomena was he imagining as these.

A random thought that he is "turning planet-sized, and falling off Earth" is less like these, and more like a strange phobia.

Hmm... that makes me wonder if we should flush the examples, and then start over, requiring each to explain the context of the work, to make it clear that the moment doesn't fit.

I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.

It's easy: Calvin and Hobbes contains nothing that could be construed as a BLAM. It's part of the fundamental premise of the strip that Calvin's imagination can (and does) run away with him. They make perfect sense from his own perspective. A true BLAM must be inconsolable with the surrounding events.

That wouldn't accomplish anything. The problem is not with people forgetting to read the description and missing out a vital part, but that we interpret it differently.

For example the people who put up the discussed examples, didn't do it because they just forgot that a BLAM scene must be outstandingly weird, and thought "I will just mention this perfectly ordinary Calvin And Hobbes scene". But they actually considered these scenes notably weird, compared to their context.

The premise of the comic still isn't that "nonsensical random shit happens", it is "seeing the world through childish fantasies". Turning into a planet for no reason whatsoever is an example of the former, not the latter.

And I don't really think that there is such a work that can't have BLAM at all. Even if something's premise would be "random shit happens", it could be varied by random shit not happening, for example with a Widget Series that has a serious drama episode with original characters: that would be a BLAM Episode

edited 16th Jan '11 6:20:19 AM by EternalSeptember

On the Cloud Nine part of Azumanga... that one isnt even brought up in the series's entry... (which I always viewed it as symbolism because the whole ep is about a day in chiyo's life from her point of view and playing with her friends and dog in the park like little kids really put her on Cloud Nine.)

Still in a show that is made up of 5 minute shorts based on a Yonkoma there will be stuff that isn't referenced again.. it is just part of the series. The knife thing was referenced again but not directly when they talk about how Osaka isn't a morning person and Yukari says "that one really scary part" (IIRC), and the "one life one meeting" chapter at the end of it they dropped the idea because they realized it was silly.

And the whole thing about ketchup isnt really this trope.

(Cloud Nine's pothole really didn't lead to where I was thinking it would lead)

edited 16th Jan '11 7:11:42 AM by Raso

Sparkling and glittering! Jan-Ken-Pon!

It's been a while since you've hung out with small children hasn't it September? Pretending weird stuff like they're turning giant and things happen because of it is par for course as it goes for childish fantasies. It's not a BLAM. It's the same thing that happens in most of the other strips.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick

We were talking about the wicks that were listed on the first page. This one indeed seems to be more objectively incorrect.

Word of God itself stated that this sort of story was "just weird for weirdness's sake", so he stopped doing it.

Anyways, I will stop arguing that these two were correct. Apparently I am in the minority, but none of us could find any objective argument, we are just repeating "It was weirder than the rest of the series", vs. "No, it was just as weird". YMMV.

As I said in the previous post, even if you insist that these are not examples, they are not the result of someone misunderstanding the description, but from applying it in a way that only the minority finds appropriate.

Though probably I shouldn't be too vocal about this, as I don't want the page to get a banner.

edited 16th Jan '11 7:52:08 AM by EternalSeptember

It should have some kind of banner though on if its this, symbolic, or a cultural thing and it can be YMMV on if its the first two because a lot of people do not get symbolism or cultural things and throw it into BLAM.

edited 16th Jan '11 8:00:56 AM by Raso

Sparkling and glittering! Jan-Ken-Pon!

If we get too caught up in individual examples then nothing will be done about the trope. We establish a definition, then work on the clean-up. Individual examples can be discussed elsewhere.

Here is a loosely proposed rewrite, I'm going to go with the YMMV export option:

A Non Sequitur is a bit or line of dialogue that is intentionally out of place, usually designed to ellicit a comedic reaction. They have no actual bearing on the plot, although they are staples of characters who are part of their own little world like a Cloud Cuckoolander or The Ditz.

From there we find the Big-Lipped Alligator Moment, or BLAM (an appropriate term in itself, as they tend to show up with all the subtlety of a shotgun blast) is a very bizzare scene in an otherwise normal story that veers off into the surreal or strange. Upon exiting that scene, the plot continues on like it never happened.

There are three precise criteria for measuring a Big Lipped Alligator Moment:

1. Sudden Insertion-
   • The plot comes to a halt as the scene takes its spot in the running time. There can't be any Foreshadowing and it can't take a logical place in the plot (ie, coming across a trap while Storming the Castle is not random, but expected.)
2. Strange in Context-
   • The fictional setting, characters and narrative devices have to be at odds with the scene. In that regard, Worldbuilding moments, strange characters and a surreal story structure that can explain its origin are exempt from this trope. For instance, All Just a Dream gives a good reason as using the trope tends to go hand-in-hand with the surreal.
3. Lack of Relevance-
   • If you were to trim all inconsequential scenes, a 3 hour movie would become 30 minutes long. What is meant by this is related to the sudden insertion, upon leaving this scene the plot can suddenly start up again. Compare the Wacky Wayside Tribe.

Note that even The Nostalgia Critic and The Nostalgia Chick have had to post supplimentary videos on this topic, as people believed that anything strange and never mentioned again is a BLAM. Unless something is vitally plot important (like a Chekhov's Gun), even important scenes are rarely mentioned later on in a film (This makes sense, considering you don't want a story to be telling you something you already knew 10 minutes ago).

Being merely inconsequential or strange is not enough. All three criteria have to be met. A good rule of thumb should be that even the characters involved tend to realize how strange it is. If they don't, then something has to be outrageously different from an audience perspective to count. Because of this, what one viewer sees as a BLAM another might see as a reasonably quirky moment. Again, everything must be viewed in the context of everything else, missing half a movie might make result in a normal scene becoming confusing.

edited 17th Jan '11 7:31:59 PM by KJMackley

The first half of that is good, the second....ehhh....

Firstly, I'd do the headers for the three rules in the same language it was originally framed by the Chick.

The last two paragraphs read awkwardly to me and sound way too preachy. Perhaps something more like:

All of these criteria have to be met for something to be a BLAM.

(the explanation of the trope's origin from the current article). Since it's codification and subsequent documentation on this wiki, the Chick and the Critic have added clarifications via other videos (link them here). A big one is the emphasis on BLAM being a moment amid whatever passes for normal in the movie: for whole episodes and longer works of mind-boggling wierdness, we have BLAM Episode. (Continue with explanation of clarifications.)

(Insert above discussed disclaimer about foreign works. Insert list of tropes to not confuse with, such as Wacky Background Event and such.)

I don't like the wording of this second point.

As I already said, everything can be called a word-building moment. If there would be a scene in Titanic, with the fleet of Odysseus sailing near the ship while fighting some monster, anyone could argue that James Cameron chose to put it in there for a reason, so it must have a symbolic purpose, or at least it is intentionally used for making the story more surreal.

Also, I don't like how you singled out All Just a Dream as not an example: true, that even if a dream isn't prophetic foreshadowing, it can have a place in the plot, like if it shows how the character experienced past events or what are his fears, hopes, etc.

But randomly showing a dream, that's content isn't even implied by it's context, can be a Blam moment.

We shold keep focusing on how such a scene is literally strange in its context:

1. Strange in Context-
   • The event must be unexpected not just by Real Life logic, but by the show's own set of standards. For example, in a comedy that commonly uses Cutaway Gag humor, a scene doesn't count as BLAM just because it's yet another Cutaway Gag. Similarly, in a dramatic movie that uses surreal symbolism, a scene doesn't count as BLAM for being surreal. On the other hand, a random Cutaway Gag in a drama can feel out of place.

edited 18th Jan '11 2:04:15 AM by EternalSeptember

It was asked earlier why the Troper Namer didn't apply, and to this I say because the musical number was part of the Chekhov's Gun. The whole point is to introduce an alligator who will be integral to the film's climax who absolutely loves Charlie's ability to hit the high notes. It's a musical sequence because the alligator's love of music is vital to how Charlie can (accidentally) summon him. Like it or not, the whole scene is loading a Chekhov's Gun, regardless of how out-of-place it initially seems.

To be honest, I don't think a poorly thought out meme by an internet comedian was a very good thing to base a trope around.

The gator itself was NOT the trope namer moment. The musical number that came with it was the moment.

I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.

The musical number is part of the Chekhov's Gun, though. Without it, the climax wouldn't make much sense since it drives home just how much King Gator loves Charlie now.

Right, but for the wrong reasons. It didn't drive it home, since she was already gushing over him before the number. But then again, since his howl did make a form of singing, she thought "That Reminds Me of a Song".

I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.

I say we refine it to be moment in work that has no connection what happened before, could optionaly cause both characters and viewer say "What the f**k just happened?" and have no revelance to plot. As in, you could take the moment out of the movie and there wouldn't be any damage done.

For example, War song sequence from Sam & Max: Abe Lincoln must die! You can take whole thing off and nothing would change. It makes no sense even to characters and only way it's aknowledged is that both Sam and Max agreed not do it again.

I think context is the key here. Nothing before event indicated it would happen and whole scene just doesn't fit general style. However, if scene happens, makes no sense whatsoever and only much later (as in All Dogs Goto Heaven, altouhg I haven't seen movie for long time) it suddenly has effect on plot. King Gator appears, sings, disappears. Only much later he reappears, does soemthing and... disappears.

So what happens is is that he appears, sings over the top musical moment and disappears only to serve his duty near end of the movie. So basicly, unless you know that this guy will have effect on plot much later, it's BLAM. Comes out of nowhere, makes you go "wtf?" and has no effect. It has no context prior it's appearence.

We shouldn't define it as musical, because then a lot of stuff would need to go and it would greatly restrict this trope.

In the Mexican show El Chavo Del Ocho, there was a very literal one which probably was supposed to be an stand-alone bumper but ended being one due probably to bad editing: An episode, in the middle of the last third, have an inserted scene out of nowhere where the characters are in a completely different setting and talking about a campaign done in 1973 at Mexico to improve the Country's image (which was an actual current event at the time that has no relation to the episode itself), then the episode resumes an the credits show quickly later. The fact that many people over Latin America don't even know what they were talking about makes it even worse. In some syndication packages, that scene is simply deleted and it don't even look as if there's something missing.

A Dexters Laboratory episode has an scene that at the beginning where the titular character is doing drawings while doing an unintelligibly noise and using a stopwatch. That is indeed weird and never mentioned again, yet I asked the storyboarder the reason of that scene and said that he was supposed to be doing and storyboard of the episode itself, yet there was 'no reason' to put it at all besides it was funny. There are a lot of random non sequiturs ocurring on shows that may be justified as "rule of funny/cool/whatever" and are currently used as such on the site, so it may indicate that a BLAM is 'neither of those' or misunderstood due to a cultural thing and probably makes the trope subjective.

On the other hand; I believe that there's a clear distinction between this and the Gainax Ending trope: The Gainax Ending is an actual Mind Screw that affects the episode resolution, and a BLAM is just something out of place without any relevance to the resolution itself or story arc for that matter, even if happens at the very end.

We aren't going to get anywhere with debating individual examples or how valuable the trope is. The fact remains that the trope exists, it has an obscene amount of wicks, it has brough a lot of people to the wiki and the name is integral to its popularity. We have three options (actually only two because the third really isn't an option):

• Leave it alone and let it overgrow
• Refine it into something useful
• Delete it outright

Here's another draft of the description:

A Non Sequitur is a bit or line of dialogue that is intentionally out of place, usually designed to ellicit a comedic reaction. They have no actual bearing on the plot, although they are staples of characters who are part of their own little world like a Cloud Cuckoolander or The Ditz.

Springboarding from there we find the Big-Lipped Alligator Moment, or BLAM (an appropriate term in itself, as they tend to show up with all the subtlety of a shotgun blast) is a very bizzare scene in an otherwise normal story that veers off into the surreal or strange. Upon exiting that scene, the plot continues on like it never happened.

There are three precise criteria for measuring a Big Lipped Alligator Moment:

1. Appears out of Nowhere-
   • The plot comes to a halt as the scene takes its spot in the running time. There can't be any Foreshadowing and it can't take a logical place in the plot (ie, coming across a trap while Storming the Castle is not random, but expected.)
2. Strange in Context-
   • The fictional setting, characters and narrative devices have to be at odds with the scene. In that regard, Worldbuilding moments, strange personalities and a surreal story structure that can explain its origin are exempt from this trope. For instance, All Just a Dream gives a good reason as using the trope tends to go hand-in-hand with the surreal (Although for some genres and franchises using All Just a Dream itself may qualify).
3. Never Mentioned Again-
   • Now even important scenes are rarely mentioned later on in a film, the reason is you don't want a story to be telling you something you already knew 10 minutes ago. What this means is that upon leaving this scene the plot can suddenly start up again. Compare the Wacky Wayside Tribe.

Being merely inconsequential or strange is not enough. All three criteria have to be met. If a scene is considered "borderline" it is likely not an example.

The Trope Namer is All Dogs Go To Heaven, coined by The Nostalgia Chick and The Nostalgia Critic in their review of Ferngully while commenting on another example. In the trope naming scene (in a movie that mostly deals with talking dogs, the afterlife and mafia undertones, somewhat strange itself) a big lipped, Cajun talking, bone through the nose alligator takes a liking to the main character Charlie and forces him to sing a duet "Let's Make Music Together." While the alligator goes on to have a role in the plot later on, Charlie is noticeable very confused over the whole song.

The Nostalgia Critic and The Nostalgia Chick have had to post supplimentary videos on this topic, due to confusion on what does and does not count. One is that it is a moment, not a subplot or entire episode (For that we have BLAM Episode). And they emphasized that it has to go against what is considered normal.

edited 28th Jan '11 10:35:25 PM by KJMackley

Sounds good to me. Clear definition, that makes distinction between "Sudden event" and "Out-of-no-where-what-the-fudge-just-happened-let-us-never-talk-about-this" moment.

If it means we can get that banner off, I'm all for it.

Regulated fun - the best kind! I don't make the rules, just enforce them with an iron fist.

The trope may be renamed BLAM Moment, as in Big Lipped Alligator Musical Moment, standing intentionally as an Artifact Title.

But we didn't coin the term, so if we use the acronym as is then people will assume the predefined meaning (making "BLAM Moment" redundant in the same fashion as "ATM Machine"). And besides, only the Trope Namer is a Musical Moment.

edited 29th Jan '11 10:16:27 AM by Stratadrake

An Ear Worm is like a Rickroll: It is never going to give you up.

Just to clarify, I'm going with the idea that we are shuffling this to YMMV. However "objective" some examples may be, we are simply going to be having constant arguments across the wiki on individual examples. And passing the rewritten description just to get a banner off it is just a bad idea. Let's work on this until we come to a consensus or at least are ready for a crowner. The best thing we can do is make sure people are familiar with the related tropes.

Here's another possible paragraph for the description:

Context and the nature of the situation matters immensely in comparison to the sliding scale of realism used by the story in question. This trope can be objectively observed but because of the dissonance between the audience and the characters (the audience doesn't live in the exact same world, so what is strange to the audience might be commonplace for the characters) this often ends up as a debatable topic. Even the trope namer has been subject to debate.

Compare these other tropes and consider whether an example would better fit there:

• Non Sequitur: A line of dialogue that doesn't follow the regular or normal conversation.
• Non Sequitur, *Thud*: A line of dialogue spoken by a character just before they go unconscious.
• Manatee Gag: A throwaway joke that has a framing device of a character reminiscing of an unrelated past story or an Imagine Spot.
• Gainax Ending: A similarly bizzare Mind Screw ends up being the resolution to the plot!
• Disney Acid Sequence: A surreal scene that may or may not have plot relevanace, because of that (when there is no relevance) there tends to be overlap.