This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
Space Paranoid 42: The current page picture from Prince of Persia 2008 is a great example, but a HUGE spoiler, and being the picture, it can't really be hidden. Does anyone think that the picture might be inappropriate to show because of this?
Meta4: Whoever launched the ykttw launched it as Calling The Hero Out, not as this, so... What the Hell, Hero?? Anyway, here's the YKTTW thread
.
Duckluck: So what's this page about, exactly? The examples are sort of all over the map.
Earnest: Eh, I changed my mind about the title midway through writing it. Sorry about forgetting to move the YKTTW. Anyhoo, the trope is basically: Hero does something evil/a villain would do, and it's not handwaved, retconned, or ignored. So the hero either feels guilt over it and tries to atone, is called on it by friends/civilians, or (while knowing what he did is wrong) doesn't care and is thus moving towards being an Anti-Hero or outright villain.
If it's vague, feel free to re-write it. The article assumed familiarity with Moral Dissonance, and is in fact a reaction against people using it to refer to situations where the hero/his posse notice they're doing evil, when in fact no one notices but us the viewers.
Meta4: The name change is no big deal. I was just wondering what happened.
J Random User: I'm not sure the Dominic Deegan example actually counts because Dominic had nothing at all to do with Amelia's death.
Oracle Hunter: Maybe, but Celesto had a point about Szark. His comment hits home much truer when you take into account the fact that Mookie himself used a Retcon to make Amelia's actions just a front, and then later showed Luna showing not a twinge of regret that her sister was brutally murdered instead of being arrested, and perhaps given a "second chance." Consider Celesto's new appearance in the "Oracle Hunter" Arc and his pointed attacks on Dom's Moral Dissonance. No, that certainly fits the trope.
Nerdorama: We may want to replace the Conversation In The Main Page with a somewhat altered version of the original entry, though. Take out the "innocent" bit and point out that Amelia was a positive social reformer as well as being a greedy murdering bitch, which was Celesto's point. Also, there probably should be a secondary entry for Pam calling Our Hero (and friends) out after the ridiculousness that was the Snowsong Arc.
Earnest: Likewise, since the FFT example is here and in Moral Dissonance, I'd like to ask where it fits better. Do his friends tell Marche to screw off for his jerkytude?
Raposa: Marche does get confronted several times, most notably by his brother. Whether or not you think he's being a jerk or realistic really depends on how you view the game.
Lale: Actually, Titus Andronicus kills the son of the queen he's just captured. I can't remember her name, but her other two sons are the ones who gang rape Andronicus' daughter... and kill her fiancee, I think. It's a play of one ugly revenge scene after another- it's hard to keep track.
Cassius Titus kills his own son as well. It's a crazy scene. Mutius is his son, Alarbus his Tamora's son - both fail to survive 1.1.
Question for comics fans: would the "One More Day"/"Brand New Day" Spider-Man event count as a "What the Hell Hero" instance—for the simple fact that "with great power comes great responsibility" doesn't quite jibe with "sure, I'll make a deal with the (equivalent) devil"? My only stumbling block is that there's no one to say, "What The Hell?", because thanks to the almighty retcon, no one, not even Spidey himself, remembers that he dealt with Mephisto.
Earnest: I've not read it, but at most/worst, it's either Moral Dissonance or Character Derailment. Now, if Spidey actively knew and chastised himself for making the deal before he forgot, it's probably also What the Hell, Hero?.
Caswin: Considering that, as the entry itself half-acknowledges, the entire point of the Star Trek Voyager example was to portray the "Tuvix" situation and resolution as morally ambiguous (rather than an outright wrong action by Janeway), does it really count here? It doesn't feel right.
Caswin: Okay, it looks like either I or the original writer had the idea a bit off, but anyway, it's changed now.
Mark Z: Three distinct tropes: (1) the "hero" who goes around kicking puppies. This is well-covered by Anti-Hero and Designated Hero. (2) The moment when a previously "clean" hero kicks a puppy for whatever reason. This is covered by Moral Dissonance, Jumping Off the Slippery Slope, Darker and Edgier, etc. (3) The scene where a character calls the hero on his puppy-kicking, which is this trope. Examples should pertain to that scene. Irrelevant examples have been removed.
Large Blunt Object: It's not "that scene", it's the general trope of readers/other characters noticing their hero kicking the dog, and there are specific examples for many of the series you removed, zealot.
Mark Z: Let's talk about them, then.
- Happens so much on Lost the moral high ground is a zero-sum game. Fails to identify the hero, the caller-out, the morally ambiguous action, or anything else.
- Jack Bauer of 24 surely qualifies. As a morally ambiguous hero, yes. Does anyone get in his face about it?
- Likewise, all characters with any amount of power or leadership in the new Battlestar Galactica have a metric ton of questionable, if not outright Jerk Ass decisions they are frequently called on and grief over. Fails to identify, etc.
- Spider-Man frequently grieves over his responsibility in the death of his uncle, giving rise to one of the lynch-pins of his heroic motivation: Guilt. Doesn't apply, as that happened before he was a hero.
- Wolverine himself is mottled with shades of grey. He struggles with his own berserker rage. Nobody calls him on it, though.
- The protagonist from Terry Goodkind's Sword Of Truth series manages this in just every book after the first four or so, despite long, long passages by the writer explaining why said course of excessive action is the only way. No calling-out is mentioned. Instead, the author apparently defends the puppy-kicking.
- The main character in John Ringo's Paladin of Shadows series ... Again, nobody calls him out.
- In Fate Stay Night, the protagonist's dream ... Again...
- This would apply to Warhammer 40000 if it actually had any real heroes in the first place. In other words, it doesn't apply.
Bob: I agree with Mark Z. This is supposed to be about when characters in the show call the hero out for acting like a Jerkass. It's not supposed to be Complaining About Moral Dissonance You Don't Like.
Rebochan: I may be poking a hornet's nest here, but Marche does not recripple his brother or kill his best friend's mother, so I took those out of the entry. Also, said "validity" of a solution is based entirely on a very strange interpretation of the plot that requires actually ignoring plot points in the game that contradict the assertion. I edited the entry accordingly. Furthermore, the trope is about other characters in the game saying something, not about whether you personally believe Marche is evil incarnate.
Bob: Cutting one of the quotes for being to long and an not-really-an-example-but-someone-added-anyway-it-anyway-because-they-didn't-read-the-article-and-thought-this-was-Moral-Dissonance. Also added a disclaimer to keep more erroneous posts out.
Roslin: You know, I remember when President Adar sent the Marines into Aerilon. Fifteen people died. In public, of course, he had to say all the usual things. He was sure of what he'd done, he made the right choice... he stayed the course. But he knew it was a mistake. And he kept the names of the dead in his desk drawer. He said that it was imperative for a leader... to remember and learn from the mistakes... even if they can't admit to them publicly.
Apollo: You think we made a mistake?
Roslin: I don't know. I don't have a desk drawer yet, but I have a pocket.
- Link in Link's Awakening definitely fulfills this trope. He essentially kills off an entire civilization just so he can go home. He is repeatedly called out on this by the monsters, all the way until the end of the game when he is told that his actions are going to destroy their entire world. The best you can hope for any of its inhabitants is that one of them *might* be a sea gull at the end.
Jefepato: Shouldn't the Tales Of The Abyss one be a subversion? Explanation: Luke had a mental age of seven, and Van had spent all seven years of Luke's life setting himself up as a trusted mentor. A Jerkass he may be, but Luke wasn't responsible for what happened in any meaningful sense, and everyone calling him out should have known it.
Sapphire: An interesting trope. When I was reading some of, or just about, the various original Doctor Who novels in the late 1990s, I noticed this occasionally came up in the books (even just reading the plot synopses of some, like Love and War). Frankly it was stuff like this that turned me off the books - I felt more sorry for the Doctor than anything. He saves the universe countless times, makes horrible choices, and now all he gets is grief. (Good thing I bailed on the new series when I did, reading the season 3-4 examples.) Does sympathy for a what-the-hell-hero make me a bad person?
Earnest: I wouldn't say so. On the one hand, this is a form of Character Development. The hero is forced to make tough decisions, or cope with mistakes. On the other, this can be a form of Characted Derailment or jerkification at times that doesn't really suit the character, even if they do acknowledge the wrongdoing. It's only natural to empathize.
Ophicius: The Doctor Who Davros example has been moved to Not So Different as it's a villain doing the calling out.
Bob: Examples like this is why the Not Self Explanatory article was made.
VAD: Since he didn't get called out, shouldn't the Xander examples be moved to Moral Dissonance? And besides, the whole long looks a lot like it's just {{Complaining About Characters You Don't Like}}.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here until we get more certainty that this is this trope.
- In Gunnerkrigg Court, Reynardine's reply is more surprise than accusation when he sees the photo of Antimony's parents and realizes that Annie stole it. But the effect is the same.
- Reynardine being who he is, this editor read his reaction as admiration more than surprise.
Medinoc: According to what Tom said, I think it is. I'm putting it back.
Austin: Though an example of the trope, I think the poster who put in the Supernatural example was just a little too ethusiastic about it. Sam and Dean are in a war, with the fate of humanity hanging in the balance. Ruby's untrustworthy, but has helped them before, and they need all the help they can get. They have perfectly valid reasons for not killing her. There's also no evidence that Ruby's gone through bodies just for fun.
Meta Four: Any objections to giving this article a punctuated title: What The Hell, Hero? I think it would make the intent of the article a bit clearer. Of course, I'd make the unpunctuated What the Hell, Hero? redirect to the new title.
Earnest: I say go for it. This is one title that definitely needs use of the punctuated markup.
Joie De Combat: Trimmed the quotes; no trope needs four, and the Doctor Who and Biblical quotes weren't really as effective in evoking the trope as the other two.
Jason: I don't know about those Justice League examples. Luthor did have a villainous motive in mind, and there could have only been worse things possible if Superman had decided to trust Lex. Andthe satellite can be rotated making it effective against all sorts of alien invasions or meteors. I don't think there's anything wrong with their actions there.
Gattsuru: The satellite still was fired at Earth targets (and not far from three populated cities), and the mere fact that it can point 'down' is a little scary. It is still useful, and even arguably necessary, but so are the Star Trek Deep Space Nine examples. The part where people call them out on it, to the point of it driving Cadmus' and being cited regularly by Waller, make it an excellent example. I'm not sure what the generator would have done without Superman blowing up the 'gift'.
- * The Patriot Act. That is all.
Kriegsmesser: I actually came back to this page to remove it, and switch to something older (which I will still do). Sorry about that. Also, changed the Laconic to be less vague.
Zeke: Removed the Real Life section for being (a) stupid and (b) not remotely illustrative of the trope. All the examples were about America and none had the defining attribute: someone expressing the what-the-hell-hero sentiment. A hundred years later doesn't count. (Naturally, the Iraq war was in there too — real subtle and reasonable listing it together with slavery, relocation, and internment.) Good Real Life examples are possible, but they need to be famous not just for the questionable decision but for the criticism from an ally.
Bob: Cutting stupid whining not even remotely close to what the trope is about and a Justifying Edit response to said whining.
- Several times during Kingdom Hearts 2, Sora is confronted with Organization XIII members who demand to know why allowing them to finish their plan and become human isn't an option. Xemnas practically begs the heroes to allow him to do so, and accuses them of being uncaring bigots, at a point in the game where it seems like no harm could come from granting his request. Such accusations are invariably brushed aside, even at the end, with little more than "you're Nobodies, your opinions don't count".
- Ignoring the shiny leather pants the Organization as a whole wear, Sora is understandably pissed off at them going about their goal of getting their own hearts back by repeatedly attempting to kill him or innocent people, turning hundreds of people into heartless, including individuals Sora is close to, endangering all the worlds, and generally being horrible sociopaths that will do anything, up to and including mass murder (or heart-stealing, anyway, although Luxord had very real guns pointed at Port Royal) just so that THEY can go back to being humans. Sora's brushing Xemnas off was actually a Shut Up, Hannibal! delivered to the bastard who wasn't even that concerned with his own heart; Xemnas expressed several A God Am I sentiments throughout the endgame, and Sora knew full well Xemnas was just trying to paint himself as the victim at that point. After a group tries to kill you and everyone you care about more than 12 times, you don't tend to be very sympathetic to their goals. The Nobodies knew what they were doing to the worlds was wrong, and didn't care.
Joie De Combat: Trimmed examples which didn't actually include characters calling out heroes for their behavior as per the trope.
Doctor Nemesis: Trimmed a bit of Order Of The Stick-related Thread Mode, reproduced here:
- In The Order of the Stick, Vaarsuvius the mage has just crisped the evil noble who had been plaguing the party, just because it was more convenient than enduring another trial. To make things worse, V had no idea who he/she was killing or what if anything they'd done to merit execution, disintegrating Kubota solely based on the time-consuming nature of a trial and the fact that Elan had tied him up. Elan, normally a Spoony Bard, calls V on it in a manner that shows his growth as a character.
- And now V is on the receiving end of an another lecture about hir Deal with the Devil. While hir spouse is right to call Vaarsuvius out on hir reasons for doing this, unfortunately, hir argument fails to convince Vaarsuvius to see the error of hir ways.
- What "error of hir ways"? V's reasons for accepting the power aside, he/she still has crucial things to do with that power, like saving the world. Your Mileage May Vary, of course, but to many people Kyrie comes off vaguely unsympathetic in that scene because he/she flat out refused to listen to a single word Vaarsuvius was saying when the latter tried to explain that he/she couldn't give up the power yet.
- But V didn't make that deal to have the power to save the world, s/he took it to have the power to save hir family from the black dragon.
- V didn't even do that. As the evil triumvirate explained, V had a far less glamorous, more personally painful option in humiliating hirself before friend, foe, and family. Instead, V willingly and knowingly chose a path involving temporary damnation and culminating — so far! — in genocide. See here for all the dirt. V's concerned about V's family, of course, but it's ultimately V's all about pride.
- I don't think so. V remarks that hir entire life's work to achieve ultimate arcane power is worthless if it cannot protect hir family, suggesting V never considered supreme power more important than Kyrie as s/he claims V does, and the trio's "alternate scheme" has got to be the stupidest alternative imaginable. A Deal with the Devil IS an unpleasant prospect, but the idea that your alternative MIGHT stop the black dragon from binding the children's souls, but probably not from killing Kyrie and the kids is far more unpleasant, as that basically means that V would have to willingly allow hirself and hir entire family to die just to keep hir soul safe. V's decisions may not have been very heroic, but they are extremely pragmatic, since the Azurites would be starving in the sea, V's family would be dead or worse, and the Order would not be fully reunited had V NOT gained ultimate power through the soul splice and decided to try and use it to save the world. Yes, V is obsessed with not failing again, but saying that all this has been about some stupid ego trip is trivializing a LOT of factors going into V's decision-making.
- And now V is on the receiving end of an another lecture
Freezer: Clipped This:
- Recently in Las Lindas, Rachael spelled out to Mora what an unapreciative bitch she had been lately.
Peteman: Could the Light Warriors of Eight Bit Theater be counted when they get called out? The story makes no pretense that they are not among the worst villains of the series.
—-
JAF1970: The Prince Of Persia pick is You Should Know This By Now, since the freakin' expansion explicitly discusses this in the description text. : Okay, posted the only non-spoiler "What the Hell, Hero?" I could think of - since it appears in the freakin' trailer...
Peteman:Wait, was Kirk called on that?
JAF1970: Yep. Spock gives him a grave look as if Kirk just went insane, forcing Kirk to collect himself and change the subject. The entire film is Kirk trying to overcome his prejudice. He learns a Valuable Lesson at the end.
Oh, and Kirk got called out by William Shatner, who was so disturbed by the character's action that he had Meyer reshoot the scene with Kirk being more reasonable. Meyer used the original cut. When the actor playing the character thinks he went over the line....
Peteman: Then you should have Spock in that scene. And William Shatner cannot call out a character as part of a What the Hell, Hero?, because William Shatner is not a character in the series, and What the Hell, Hero? is exclusively about having characters in the series react negatively to the bad behaviour of the so called good guys. I don't think there is a good scene that isn't spoileriffic or would need extensive explaining unless there are speech bubbles (like Sarda telling the Light Warriors in Eight Bit Theater they are all horrific monsters that need to die for the good of everyone, or Commander Hayes of Star Control chewing you out for selling your crew to the Druuge)
Caption: Sarda shows us how it's done.
JAF1970: It's a cutaway to Spock. It's a great example that isn't spoilerrific - leave it at that.
Peteman: I disagree that the picture is a good example. All it is is Kirk looking at the camera looking peeved. They say to avoid Just A Face And A Caption, which the Kirk image was. Hell, I'm a fan of Star Trek, and I couldn't see how it was relevant (I now know it was referring to, but still a better What the Hell, Hero? would be everyone's reaction to Kirk, given the What the Hell, Hero? is about reactions).
Raekuul: I feel tempted to pothole part of the Sai sub-example in the Naruto examples to Dogged Nice Guy. Does anyone object to me doing this?
Peteman: Who is calling out who in the following?
- Later in that same battle the slaughter of Hinamori by Hitsugaya, Soi Fon, Shunsui and Shinji. To be fair though they were all under the illusionary effects of Aizen's Kyōka Suigetsu. Special blame should go to Ichigo for not calling the group out on it since he's the only one not under Kyōka Suigetsu's effects. Nice going everyone!
Joeyjojo: One thing this been bothering me, the text seems to say that if the hero is never called out on his actions then it's automatic Moral Dissonance. Do the viewers really need a character to come along and say "this is wrong" for them? Moral Ambiguity isn't that rare an idea is it?
Peteman: Maybe Moral Dissonance should be expanded to accommodate that. But I've seen enough people use this trope as an excuse to bitch about their distaste for the actions of the characters without actually anyone calling them out that I oppose expanding it to include moral ambiguity.
