Archived Discussion

This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.

That Other 1 Dude: OK, that Bill Waterson is just mean-spirit to really be the page quote, especially since he's condemning all comic books.

Duneflower: Would this be Adam Copeland if he took his WWE persona (Jerkass?) to a gothic extreme? :)
Trogga: How is the Sweeney Todd movie both Darker And Edgier and Lighter and Softer?
Conan-san: Wait, Digimon Tamers was a critical failure? Frountier, I'll give you but Tamers?!
cg12345: I must say, I loved The Dark Knight, but a Darker and Edgier Superman sounds like a Wall Banger in the making.
crapface I'd say the TalesofSymphonia anime is Darker and Edgier do you argee?
Lord TNK: Who removed the "smolder with generic rage." cartoon?
Trouser Wearing Barbarian: Personally, I would've gone with this for the picture, but that Smurfs one is equally hilarious.

Fawriel: I would have gone with the poster for the Alvin & The Chipmunks movie. I was so sure it was a parody of Darker and Edgier when I first saw it. Oh how wrong I was. ... wait, is the Smurfs thing for real?

Andrew: No Just No? More like OH GOD YES!

Nornagest: I'd totally read the Smurfs thing, although mostly for irony value. Does that make me immature?

This trope has nothing to do with Grim Dark. Grim Dark stories can start that way.

Nyktös: What the hell happened to the page?

SenatorJ: Anyone else think the Chzo Mythos qualifies? I mean, the series might've been planned out the way it went, but by the end it's FAR more brutal than the relatively tame 5 Days.

The beginning of season three of Heroes, in which Peter is literally replaced by his future self (who not only dresses exclusively in black, but also has a scar on his face), Claire, the largely upbeat teenage cheerleader, is given a death wish, and Hiro sees a future version of his best friend Ando kill his future self. It also features a bunch of Ax-Crazy, kind of emotionally-thin villains and made Sylar more psychotic than usual. Noah went from being an anti hero to a man willing to threaten to kill an innocent man unless he murdered someone for him. And Arthur, for all his cliched talk of "Saving the World" had the worst motivation on any character in the show, seeming to be just someone who randomly killed people for no lucid reason.

Joeyjojo: so Heroes devolved into Monster of the Week plots and Character Derailment. There is no major sift in tone. Now quality on the other hand...

Rutskarn: Awright, tropespeople, I've a question.

What's the protocol for self-linking?

I've a notion that the posts here and here on my chronicle of dementia, that most nerdy of blogs Chocolate Hammer, are relevant to the interests of this topic. Enough so that I have a similar notion of linking them as deconstructions/parodies. I do this because I'm just that helpful.

Now, this may turn out to not be the case, and I might just be a sniveling little schemer out for the free publicity on his laughably inconsequential blog-type thing.

Plus, it'd be starting down a slippery slope. I'm sure I've got other posts relevant to other topics, and I'd like to remove the temptation for a Rutspam that nobody wants.

What I'm saying is, I'd like to get a consensus from all y'all on this type of behavior. Is it improper to link oneself? Is is improper to link these posts in question? Am I, by my very existence, improper? Insert classic pop-culture question as a form of mocking my established structure here?

I await your decision.

Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Your existence doesn't appear improper. My opinion on this issue right now is, if you want a link to one of your own blogs in the article, propose it in the discussion just like those two above. It may be improper for you to link to yourself, but (if it's relevant) it's okay for other people to link to you....
Etheru: I added something about Ren and Stimpy, do you think that could work.
This page is very one sided, The body paragraph makes it sound like it's allways a bad thing, to the point this might as well be called, Darker And Worse. This page needs to be fixed in this regard, after all Tropes Are Not Bad. Or is there a separate trope for Darker And Better?

Nornagest: It has that slant because it's about adding gratuitous sex and violence to a work in order to attract a more "mature" audience. I shouldn't need to go into detail about why that almost always fails — but it happens, there's a noticeable pattern to how it happens, and so the wiki documents it as a trope.