This entry is trivia, which is cool and all, but not a trope. On a work, it goes on the Trivia tab.

Deliberate Flaw Retcon

So your new film is coming out, and you're really proud of it. It's got interesting characters, an original storyline and unusual, stylized visuals. The only problem is, everyone hates it. Critics accuse the characters of being flat and one-dimensional, claim that the visuals are so heavily stylized that it's impossible to tell what's going on and that the pacing of the film is impossibly scattershot and all over the place. So what do you do?

You can acknowledge that the work had its flaws that really could have used a bit of ironing out. Or, you can retroactively claim that the "flaws" in the work were entirely deliberate: they were, in fact, the Intended Audience Reaction. The characters aren't really one-dimensional: they just seem that way because the audience is viewing events from the protagonist's POV. The heavily stylized visuals aren't done for their own sake; they're a way to visually represent that the protagonist is colour-blind (even though this colour-blindness is never actually mentioned in the film itself). And the Pacing Problems aren't unintentional, they're a way to show how boring and monotonous it was to grow up poor (and colour-blind) in 1950s Yorkshire.

Naturally, some will believe you, and some won't.

Essentially, this is any work which, once consumer or critical reaction came back negative, had its failings handwaved by claims that these failings were intentional. These claims can be executed by the creators of the work or by fans of it, as the case may be. The motivation for the supposedly intentional flaws can vary a great deal: some writers will claim that their work was intended as a parody or satire (for that, see Parody Retcon), others that it was meant as a homage to an earlier work. For bizarre and incomprehensible works, some writers will claim that the audience being confused and alienated was the entire point (for whatever reason). There is no end to the variety of excuses a dedicated creator can invent.

Compare Stylistic Suck (which is what people employing this trope often claim to be doing) and Intended Audience Reaction (in this case, the creators intended one reaction but retroactively claim to have had a different one in mind when creating the work). In software and video games, compare Ascended Glitch (which is when an unintended glitch is made a deliberate feature in a later instalment). Parody Retcon is a subtrope (specifically, the claim that the work was meant to be understood as a parody or satire, even though it wasn't). A relative of I Meant to Do That and "Just Joking" Justification. See also Poe's Law, Author's Saving Throw and Irony. Can be related to Indecisive Parody and Indecisive Deconstruction, and sometimes to It's Not Supposed to Win Oscars (which is when artists or fans defend the flaws in a work by accusing the audience of having unreasonably high expectations). Contrast Springtime for Hitler.


  • Most of Tommy Wiseau's excuses for the poor quality of The Room fall under Parody Retcon. However, when asked about the character of Denny, he claimed that Denny's strange, abnormal behaviour was deliberately written in order to indicate that Denny was "retarded, a little bit" (even though none of the characters in the film seem to find his behaviour particularly out of the ordinary) but he failed to tell the actor this, so the performance was confused and instead comes off as an Ambiguous Disorder.
  • Space Mutiny. Cisse Cameron tried to claim it was intentional Stylistic Suck, but nobody's buying it.
  • This article argues that M. Night Shyamalan's decidedly poorly-received film The Happening is a work of genius, the "flaws" being deliberately worked in to subvert the tropes of the B-Movie horror genre.
  • Star Wars had it postulated that the Death Star's thermal exhaust port was just that an architectural flaw. Rogue One then retconned it into this trope, courtesy of Reluctant Mad Scientist Galen Erso, who installed the port in order for the rebels to find and exploit it.

  • Terry Pratchett claims with tongue in cheek that any plot holes or inconsistencies in the level of technology in the Discworld are the result of the History Monks messing with the timeline.
  • Orson Scott Card, in his introduction to Ender's Shadow, says that any differences between that book and Ender's Game are "deliberate, to show the differences in the experiences of the two children." And then lampshades it by saying, "As my programmer friends would say, 'There are no bugs, only features.'"
  • J. R. R. Tolkien was fond of incorporating mistakes into his world. For example, according to Christopher Tolkien, the line on the Hobbit map should have read "Here of old was Thror- King under the Mountain." Because of early hesitation between the names Thror and Thrain, Thror, Thorin's grandfather, was replaced by Thrain, his father, in the quote. Fans pointed out after publication that Thorin's grandfather ruled before his father, and should have been in the quote instead. As a result, Tolkien created a genealogy of Kings under the Mountain, beginning with Thrain I. Thorin's father became Thrain II, and Tolkien added a note explaining this in the foreword.
  • The first few Halo books contained numerous errors in their first editions, notably Halo: The Fall of Reach, which was written in seven weeks from an almost totally cold start. A lot of the errors had to do with how many Spartans had been successfully created or were surviving. Curiously, after 343 Industries took over the Halo franchise, it was announced that these errors only seemed like errors and that "all would be explained in time". The fact that the people saying this had no influence on the errors in the first place has not won over many readers.

  • Alanis Morissette claims that the lack of actual examples of irony in her song "Ironic" was intentionally ironic. How satisfying you find this answer depends on how strict your definition of irony is.

Video Games