I've decided to start a cleanup thread for Narm, since it seems to attract a lot of misuse and complaining. Like I said in my ATT post
, "some misuse is easy to catch (e.g. saying a joke is Narm when Narm by definition can't be a joke), a lot of examples fall into grey areas that seem like misuse but it's hard to tell. Like nitpicks that at first glance seem to be valid examples, but feel like stretches the more you think about them."
I think one of the main reasons for misuse is that most people aren't clear on what Narm actually is. To my understanding, it's when a scene is intended to be dramatic, but comes off as cheesy/funny unintentionally. But going by the page description, it's kind of vague what actually qualifies something as Narm. At the top, it says "Narm is a moment that is supposed to be serious, but due to either over-sappiness, poor execution, excessive Melodrama, or the sheer absurdity of the situation, the drama is lost to the point of surpassing "cheesy" and becoming unintentionally funny." But then later on in the same page, it gives a much more vague definition:
Most often, Narm is misused to mean "anything I personally don't think worked," whether or not it was intended as dramatic or comes off as funny. And when a work is high-profile enough, hoo boy, pretty much every scene is Narm to somebody. You can look at the Narm subpages for Doctor Who, Star Wars, and Game of Thrones and find tons of examples of people nitpicking the tiniest of details in a scene and blowing whatever it is out of proportion.
Another problem is that since it's such a subjective trope, it's not clear if there's supposed to be any sort of in-fandom consensus on the example in-question, or if every example is valid under the "it's called YMMV for a reason" excuse, even if the only person who thinks the example is Narm is the troper who adds it in.
I think it needs to be clearer whether nitpicks are valid examples of Narm, especially since nitpicking overlaps so often with barely-disguised complaining. The most frequent offenders for Narm entries I see are complaining, nitpicking, adding jokes, and ZeroContextExamples. I'm going to use Venom (2018) as an example, with my comments in bold:
- The scene of Eddie freaking out on the medical table is presented as the teaser's Money-Making Shot. It... doesn't quite work as intended, which isn't helped by it being sped up, making it look like a parody.
- The final trailer features a more complete version of the clip showing Venom's face "shutter" over Eddie. Whether or not this works or if it looks like a cheap special effect depends on who you ask.
- What makes the freakout even more narmful is that Eddie's screams are different screams playing on top of each other. The actual film lacks this strange effect. This example seems fine to me, but falls into the "The trailer is Narmy but the finished product isn't" doublespeak.
- The leaked trailer revealed some pretty terrible lines (“The guy you work for is an evil person.”). Tom Hardy's horrible New York...ish(?) accent isn't doing the delivery any favors either. And it really does not help that his voice cracks on the reading of "evil person". Thankfully, that line is not in the film proper. Do we keep examples that are purely in the trailers? Also an example of "thing falls flat" instead of "thing is funny."
- Hardy's line reading of "You're not real, you are just in my head." sounds like he's suffering from Elmuh Fudd Syndwome. At worst, he sounds like Adam Sandler's signature Manchild babbling. However there's some speculation that, based on the context of the scene and Eddie's stumbling movements, he's actually drunk, or perhaps even overdosed on medication (considering he was seen taking a bunch of pills, thinking he's sick). That and it could be a case of Reality Ensues, as it's unlikely anyone would keep the mental clarity to speak normally as an alien parasite is slowly bonding with their body. Natter. Goes back and forth between snarky complaints and defending the moment. Also nitpicking.
- Movie trailers cutting quotes out of context to form a new sentence is nothing new, but the editing on the line "you will only hurt bad people" is particularly poor, and it's very easy to hear that the line has been cut together out of separate pieces of dialogue. Not really a dramatic thing, so I don't think it counts as Narm. And it definitely isn't funny, it just falls flat.
- How Jenny Slate's character pronounces "symbiote" note . Plus, her giving firm, equal stress to all three syllables like she's speaking some foreign language. Luckily, this was cut from the theatrical release. Nitpicking and not funny.
- The shot of Eddie crashing straight through a half-fallen tree in the forest that he could just as easily have ducked under comes across as more comedic than cool, as if they just needed an additional gratuitous shot of something breaking. Especially if your mind goes to Victor from Wet Hot American Summer and his inexplicable refusal to jump over anything. It really does not help that the evil bad-guy vehicle chasing him looks like a slightly modified golf cart. The context for this one in the movie is that Venom is taking control of his body and forcing him to blindly flee through the woods to escape the Life Foundation. Context makes it not-Narm. Cut?
- Although it may look better in the context of the full scene, Eddie flying 50 feet into the air on his motorcycle off a slightly steep hill seems to rather severely break the laws of physics. Clearly written before the movie came out. Cut?
- The Jump Scare (on both sides of the fourth wall) where Venom suddenly shouts Eddie's name as he brushed his teeth would have been much more scary if not for the fact that the latter Screams Like a Little Girl. There's also the fact that he somehow throws himself backwards so hard that he crashes into the bathroom wall. Intended as comedic, so it isn't Narm.
- Remember how creepy and awesome that shot from the second trailer of the symbiote forming around Eddie's face in order to eat a guy was? In the third trailer, the potential Nightmare Fuel of that moment is significantly undercut by Venom slobbering all over the man's face with its tongue in an amusingly over-the-top manner. One is reminded of the scene with Patrick licking the yellow popsicle, or perhaps "This is the taste of a liar".... This seems pretty in-character for Venom. I'm not sure with this one.
- The guy who Carlton Drake subjects to Orifice Invasion in the third trailer would have been disturbing, if not for the victim's bland expression. Moment that falls flat; not funny. Cut.
- The symbiote's Venom-face forming on the end of Eddie's arm to talk to him strongly resembles a deranged hand puppet rather than a vicious alien parasite. There's also the fact that they can communicate telepathically, making that sequence unnecessary. Seems fine.
- Venom's violent threats to his enemies are this if they're not aggressively tasteless Black Comedy. His threat to mutilate a man until he's "like a turd on the wind" is particularly groan-inducing, especially coming after a genuinely frightening threat. How It Should Have Ended was even driven by this to make a video on just the trailer for the very first time, in which he mangles a bunch of other sayings. Pretty sure they are intended as comedy, so it's not Narm. Cut.
- The animation of the yellow symbiote just looks like mozzarella cheese come to life. Nitpick. Also... inaccurate? It's more of a mucus yellow.
- After Venom heals Eddie's broken legs, he flatly states "My legs! They were broken... and now they're not broken..."
- "My leg!" Seems fine to me.
- "HOSPITAL!!!! (extremely long pause) Now!" Zero-Context Example.
- Eddie and Anne quite casually discussing cannibalism as one of the symbiote's favorite activities. It's something that would probably sincerely shock and disgust the average person and likely require therapy, and yet it's bandied about like it's a pretty normal occurrence. These kinds of entries are tricky to me. They seem valid at first glance, but there's something off about them. I don't think this one counts if the work itself is treating the moment lightly.
- Any menace from Cletus Kasady is completely undercut by Woody Harrelson's truly ridiculous wig. A common comparison is that it causes him to look like a live-action Sideshow Bob, or a make-up-less Pennywise. Uses complainy word-choice. Otherwise fine.
- Kasady promising that there will be "carnage" after he gets out is so on-the-nose that it feels like it's straight out of a parody. First off, that's not an example of Anvilicious. Secondly, this verges on a nitpick to me. I'm not sure. It's not really funny, just lame.
- The final trade of words between Venom and Riot before the final battle is nothing but total Ham-to-Ham Combat - that and the two symbiotes happen to be Perpetual Smilers, which just gives off the feeling that they don't really give that much of a damn about their goals.
- Towards the end of the film, it's revealed that Venom used to be something of a loser on his home planet, like Eddie. This is his entire reason for wanting to save the Earth. Moment played as a joke, so it isn't Narm.
- Despite angrily forcing Eddie to spit out cooked meats because they're no longer living animals, the symbiote develops a taste for tater tots, and it practically demands that Eddie buy some during a conversation in the ending. The director admitted in an interview that the writers just thought it was funny and put it in the script. It unfortunately invites comparisons to a similar tots-focused scene in Napoleon Dynamite as a result. Entry admits it's a joke. So it isn't Narm.
- Drake having bonded with Riot is treated as a huge shocking twist going into the final battle... except for the fact that the audience was already well aware of it and saw the whole process. It feels very much like a consequence of Executive Meddling to give Riot more screentime. Another tricky example. Seems to fall under "scene doesn't work" instead of "scene is funny."
- Right after Eddie is separated from the symbiote, a rather obvious ADR overdub replaces the intended "fuck you" with the much less vicious "we're done". Not really funny, just falls flat.
- Eddie's "DRAKE! STOP!" sounds less like he's in pain and more like a little kid telling his Big Brother Bully to stop giving him a wedgie. Nitpicking. Most people wouldn't even pay this sequence any mind.
Another issue with Narm is the distinction between moments that are unintentionally funny on their own, and moments that are only unintentionally funny after Memetic Mutation or similar feat. Does the latter truly count as Narm? Because you can make the case that everything that has ever been made can fall under that.
Edited by MisterApes-a-lot on Mar 31st 2019 at 7:06:31 AM
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
It's been brought up why the examples dont count, and since you added them originally, your "counter argument" seems to boil down to "yeah huh."
As pointed out, the majority of the examples arent Narm, they're just complaints.
Majority, yes. Not all of them. And to dismiss my counterarguments as "yeah huh" is blatantly disingenuous and disrespectful.
If anything, your response is "yeah, whatever".
I thought YMMV was supposed to be a matter of opinion? Feels like I can't post these simply because you disagree.
Angry babby
All of the reasons given to cut things are because of misuse, not disagreement. If you can rewrite any of them to explain that yes, they were meant to be serious, and yes, they ended up being funny instead (not just bad, but laughable), then we might be able to keep them.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
yes, that was my point.
You haven't really added anything new that wasn't clear in your original examples.
If you want to go against a clear consensus, you have to have a persuasive argument that actually adds to what you've said before.
For what its worth I wasnt even involved in the original decision to cut them.
Edited by ArthurEld on Dec 7th 2023 at 6:59:00 AM
"Thing falls flat" isn't Narm either, it has to actually be funny. Not *laughable*, funny. Moreover, it needs to be a specific moment, not just a general thing.
We really need to find a way to make this clear to tropers. Na Rm is about dramatic moments that come across as hilarious. NOT a "this didnt work" list.
Discord: Waido X 255#1372 If you cant contact me on TV Tropes do it here.
Can shapeshift (probably)
I feel like these examples from F9 need to be discussed:
- The death of Jack Toretto in the opening, via flashback, is such an over-the-top crash that it ruins the genuine feeling of trauma it's supposed to have. Not seeing how it's unintentionally funny, especially since over-the-top crashes are pretty in-line with the franchise's usual stunts.
- Otto's reference to Star Wars is funny at first, when he throws in the occurrence about X-wings and Chewbacca to his goons, but as he keeps on and on with the references, with Cipher eventually joining in, the gag stops flowing and instead becomes hard to take seriously for how tacked on it feels. Comedy that stops being funny isn't what narm is.
- Otto's delusions about being "the good guy" are too ridiculous to be believable. Normally, when an over-the-top evil character expresses such a delusion, it would be framed as Black Comedy, but Otto's insistance on this point seems to be a genuine attempt at depicting him as delusional and egotistical. Instead, it just comes off as accidentally Black Comedy. Might be correct? Honestly not sure.
- The Retraux Universal Logo Joke — even putting aside the Comcast byline, it uses the 1990 version of the logo (introduced for the studio's 75th birthday), but with the 1997 Jerry Goldsmith fanfare, instead of the 1990 logo's James Horner theme; further, in 1989, Universal was still using this logo (which had no standard theme), so why they didn't simply use that logo (or a recreation thereof) is somewhat baffling. It's just complaining about not getting an old logo exactly right.
She / Her
- Your reasoning behind why it doesn't count sounds valid to me.
- Same as the first one. Plus, it sounds like complaining to me. I can imagine that it might count as Overused Running Gag if there's in-universe acknowledgement, though.
- I don't think it's an example because Narm involves one moment so that sounds too general to me.
- I agree it's just complaining.
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
Is there anything worth saving on Narm.Black Jewels? It seems to just be ripping the entire work apart.
Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
What an oddly formatted page. No, I don't think there's anything worth saving there.
Found this in Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire:
- The intro of the game shows May along Torchic, one of the favourite starters in the whole series; the Ensemble Dark Horse Flygon; Manectric, often considered one of the best pokemon of the generation... And Volbeat, a very weak Pokemon which sticks out like a sore thumb among the powerful creatures alongside her.
I just don't see the unintentional hilarity. Seems more like a player complaining that one of the characters that shows up in the intro isn't as popular as the other ones.
And it's not like the metagame ever played a part when it comes to choosing which Pokémon gets the spotlight. Both Manectric and Pikachu are awful competitively.
Edited by TantaMonty on Dec 11th 2023 at 4:53:32 AM
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
I doubt they're talking about the meta. Volbeat is useless even for a playthrough. Still a bad example though
Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Fine. I'll explain why some of The Suicide Squad stuff belongs on the Narm page.
The sequence with Flagg getting stabbed through the heart is meant to be tragic, because he's the only truly heroic member on the team and yet the sudden shot of his heart comes out of nowhere, like WHAT? And it's funny because I'm thinking okay, I'm pretty sure the wound he got was fatal, I didn't need to see this.
The scene with the starfish minions attacking the squad feels tacky because they don't feel like a real threat. They just grab at Bloodsport and they can't even hold him down even when there are six of them. And last I checked, Bloodsport didn't have super strength so it's laughable at how ineffective they are.
Bloodsport conjuring up this BFG only for it to have no effect on Starro is silly because he is literally shooting EVERYWHERE BUT THE GIANT EYE. And given that we just saw him split a bullet down the middle, it's hard to believe his aim is that poor.
Them screaming Starro's words: "THIS CITY IS MINE" also makes Starro less sympathetic since he sounds like any other Galactic Conqueror, and his final words about him being content seeing the stars feels off. Like, he was just acting like he wanted domination a moment ago, and then suddenly regains his senses while dying? Admittely, this could make it Narm Charm but I'll let you decide that.
And finally, if something isn't funny but is still bad, shouldn't there be a category for that on YMMV? For example, something tries too hard to be funny?
Edited by 309216364 on Dec 12th 2023 at 2:56:59 AM
We very deliberately dont have a "I dont find this joke funny" item.
Because that would be the YMMV equivalent of People Sit On Chairs.
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
And these complainy YMMV tropes are only really kept around by being grandfather'd in. We don't want to invite bashing.
Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Very Spooky
On Flagg getting stabbed: the movie is already plenty campy, and that moment is simply an expression of that. While his death is presented in a tragic light, something can very much be both sad and darkly comedic at the same time; hence Bathos.
The rest are, quite frankly, nitpicks. Narm is for things that are intended to come off as dramatic, but are instead funny. While it's tempting to use it to express complaints—I've felt that way in the past—we need to stick to the definition, because otherwise it becomes nothing more than a useless complaining magnet.
back lol
Yeah, TSS was not a movie made with lots of serious drama in mind.
It would be like saying the dance off at the end of Guardians of the Galaxy is Narm, when it's actually intended to be an incongruously comedic moment. Even if someone doesn't like that moment, that doesn't automatically make it Narm.
Between these poor examples and the ones someobody pointed out a few pages back for Godzilla v. Kong (also put up by 309), it seems like you're desperate to find a page, YMMV or otherwise, that makes it ok for you to vent your complaints about a work.
That's really not what this wiki is for.
It's not venting and it disgusts me that you would make such assumptions. I genuinely found these moments to be ridiculous. I'd been off this site for nearly four years, and I really missed being able to add new material.
If I find Godzilla's actions to funny when they're not supposed to be, is that a problem? Personally, I'm beginning to think that if Narm needs so much policing, it should be taken off altogether.
Him being so light is silly to look at, and so whenever he moves fast, it's so supposed to be dramatic because it shows how angry he is, but it doesn't change the fact that he's a really heavy lizard defying the laws of gravity, compared to 2014, when he still felt grounded in reality.
As for Flagg, I strongly disagree. The heart didn't feel like Bathos. Now his last words: "Peacemaker... what a joke", that's definitely Bathos. But the organ shot comes out of nowhere, and there's no shot like that ever again.
I've seen how Narm is used on films I like but I haven't outright removed them. Instead, I've transferred them to Narm Charm because I recognize the inherent silliness while still finding value. And I should point out that for the longest time, people were using Narm as a way of perpetuating one of the ugliest Tropes this site had: Idiot Plot.
Edited by 309216364 on Dec 12th 2023 at 8:29:21 AM
...Phenomenal
Yes, the trope has lots of misuse for the sake of complaining. But that doesn't mean we actually want more of that. If you can point towards specific instances of people using Narm as a substitute for Idiot Plot, then the thread can handle them, but that's not an argument for letting your own complain-y examples slide. The whole point of this cleanup is to ensure less misuse, not allow for more just because other people did it too.
Precisely.
Narm, like other YMMV, needs a "lot of policing" because of rampant misuse. Because YMMV items have been areas where tropers feel they can get away with inserting complaints and bashing.
That's an argument for making the item easier to understand in its focus, and enforcing standards in how it's used.
I was under the impression that Narm Charm was under scrutiny, although I guess it either stalled out or I'm making that up. Either way, I don't like Narm Charm for the same reason Some Anvils Need to Be Dropped got cut; having a "YMMV, but done well" just turns the host one (Anvilicious / Narm) from what could be a perfectly neutral item into a complaint magnet.
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
Narm Charm is one I've never really gotten, because it really is just "Narm but Good".
Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Yeah, it's a bit weird. Essentially, it means a bit of drama is executed poorly...but the audience doesn't mind.
There might be something there, but it also falls very close to simply "bit of drama is executed well."
Okay, sorry, I may have misread your post before. My b.
Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness