Please don't list this on a work's page as a trope. Examples can go on the work's YMMV tab.
Fans sometimes blame the wrong people, and thus misblame somebody. Comes in multiple varieties:
Garbage In, Garbage Out
There are actual weaknesses in the original work, which were faithfully translated in an adaptation.
For example, you see an anime or manga with great action sequences and an interesting premise, punctuated by bizarre changes by the translators that cheapen this premise, provide a jarring tone, or even make the plot nonsense. You assume it's fallen victim to a seriousMacekre. So you import the DVD, maybe get a region 2 player if you live outside the region, and put it in... Surprise! It's not a Macekre after all; what you thought was caused by overzealous translators was just a weakness in the original work. And yet, the fans have misblamed the translators, and they're not going to stop anytime soon.
It's less common for audiences nowadays who have access to the original material beforehand.
Writers and those working the grindmill of day-to-day creative production are just trying to do their best making a good show/movie/comic book. Unfortunately, the demands of the executives to try and make it more popular become a kink in the creative flow.
For example, a new story arc emerges that turns the characters inside out, and the fans respond with bile and hatred. Upon exiting that story arc, everything returns to the status quo. Odds are, such major changes are demanded as a method to shake up the series and blindsides you because it was shoehorned into a narrative the writers already had planned out.
"The creator can do no wrong!"
Blaming executive meddling when the author did it on purpose, without any executive mandate, perhaps with good cause, perhaps with poor cause.
The mere existence of meddling executives often gives the impression that they are tyrants, slave driving the humble writer. But even the glorified writers are prone to mistakes and their own issues, which is chronicled with author tract, author appeal, creator breakdown and other tropes.
For example, your favorite character is subject to flanderization and you assume that the executives demanded the supposedly "flatter" personality. But the writer's blog reveals that the change was made because it made writing for the character easier and allowed for more story possibilities.
The ultimate difficulties of the fan dumb, laying down false information and establishing opinion as fact. The information is then spread across the Internet and only information from the source can correct it.
This is an example of when the fan dumb just doesn't fact check. They blame someone who worked on it for an error when they actually didn't even do that much behind it. A very common form of this is when people blame a company that worked on something that was subject to hype backlash, when in reality, the blamed company was merely a financial backer or they didn't have any involvement whatsoever and merely published it.
This is often the underlying cause behind all the other types, and we here are TV Tropes are not immune to it either.
Another small set of cases that might be related are mistranslations. Some fans might accidentally translate something the wrong way and accept it as fact. This may also be the result of rumors.
The "Single Person" Fallacy, that somehow one individual is responsible for the totality of a problem or mistake that cripples a production. Or the entire production as a whole. A common name for this particular fallacy variant is the "Quarterback Syndrome", so called due to the tendency to blame the quarterback for bad plays in a game of American football.
Take any given movie or television series. There happens to be an episode or scene that is just bad. The costuming is ridiculous, the acting is stiff, the dialogue is clichéd, the direction is uninspired and even the lighting looks bad. Yet why is the director/showrunner blamed for it all? Well, each of those things listed are handled by a whole individual team who specialize in that field. The director has a lot of control, but if one of those elements goes sour it isn't just the director/showrunner's fault, and sometimes the director/showrunner is unable to do anything about it due to executive meddling, time/budget constraints, or some other impairment.
A similar fallacy that applies to video games is the "There are no Developers, only Publishers" Fallacy. Despite all the company logos that show when people load up a game, they only seem to see the one of the big company and tend to assume it was all their doing. Even when their input is limited to monetary support and maybe localization. To further confound this, sometimes the #1 targets for this fallacy (Nintendo, Square Enix, Electronic Arts, Ubisoft, Activision) are companies that actually do develop and publish games. There are some rumors that Japanese developers are actually glad in knowing they'll receive no credit for their work, because they'll also receive none of the criticism.
This is often a result of a phenomenon called "Credits Negligence". Admit it. You yourself don't watch most credits in movies, shows, games, etc. Unless that is, they do stuff like add in animation sequences, bloopers, small epilogues, or there's something else at the end. And even then, it's not likely you paid attention to them. Sometimes, they even scroll too fast for you to read them exactly (this happens on Television shows a lot, because they have to fit it all within a timeslot, so many times they only show the major credits and omit a lot). But nevertheless, you sometimes would actually be quite surprised at what one person's role really was in the work if you took the time to read the credits. Most haters typically won't do this, especially for games (this leads to why the "Single Person" Fallacy is often accepted as "fact" and "creditable").
All of that said, many would say that blaming the director for an artistic demerit in a film is completely justified. After all, the director's job is overseeing all artistic decisions, so if he or she lets another person's mistake slip by unchecked, there is some culpability. Hence the popular industry ideology, "When you're the director, everything is your fault" (this is pretty much the same phenomenon wherein the director is also credited for every good thing as well). The problem in these cases is when people fail to acknowledge that the director isn't the only one to blame.
Even we are suspectable to this. Both in this page and other pages on the wiki, you will see us blame a mysterious "executive" for all of a show's problems.
Misblame can be exacerbated when someone willingly takes blame for something not their fault. Among professionals, this can happen for lots of reasons:
The director of a film, or other "auteur", may take blame because they agree with the above belief that "When you're the director, everything is your fault." Even if the problem wasn't fixable or wasn't under their control.
Someone may take blame, because casting blame on another person (even truthfully) may mean never working with that person again, or never working again, period.
Someone may tacitly take blame because they don't want to air dirty laundry.
Someone may take blame out of a genuine desire to protect another person.
There is a tendency of fans for canceled/discontinued works to blame everybody involved in the distribution of bad faith without thinking that there might have been valid reasons. The simple reality is most shows weren't Screwed by the Network, but simply just didn't get either the ratings or the advertising revenue to warrant their cost. Distribution companies don't stay afloat by losing money to appeal to niches, after all. See also Fan Myopia and The Firefly Effect (which is almost a form of fan myopia in itself).
Also in regards to the shows is that no one understands how good it is until much later, which means a too-long delayed Fridge Brilliance can hurt a show without any single person or group being at fault.
Medium issues may also apply in some cases. An anime series without substantial backing isn't going to exceed 12 or 26 episodes (half or a whole television season), and a Western cartoon show will more than likely not exceed 65 (a 13-week syndication cycle).
On the flip side to the above, many can assume that a show was canceled because it was horrible and only horrible at that. While true for some, it's not always the case for other titles. It might have not been promoted well, it was in an unfavorable time slot or even channel, or maybe it was, yes, Screwed by the Network.
Follow the Leader can all too often lead to this, sure there is such a thing as ripoffs of course but you can be surprised how often these claims can be baseless. Many popular franchises that receive "imitations" were quite often not all that original to begin. (namely on how the really popular franchises more often popularize tropes than create them). There have been plenty of times in which the similarities in "ripoffs" to more "popular franchises" can be overly vague at best (such as when characters from one franchise look rather similar to someone from a more popular franchise but their backstories are pretty much different). There are a pretty good number of so-called "ripoffs" in which the only thing they really have in common with the more popular franchise is that they are in the same genre. There have been certain cases in which even the company behind a certain popular franchise thinks so and tries to file a lawsuit against the "rip-off" and loses in the process.
It is also quite common for a set of circumstances to influence more than one person, so you can get a sudden glut of 'x' movies without any of them being rip offs or originals.
It usually takes a lot of people to make a movie/game/series/whatever. We as consumers and viewers usually do not know exactly what goes on while they're making what we're experiencing right now. On top of the fact that not all of us will see the credits, the credits may not show who did what or even leave out someone who was working on it altogether (this often happens with voice actors). Even then, the credits won't tell us who exactly did what, for all we know, an important decision wasn't thought up by the person we're blaming.
Often happens with actors with significant hate dumbs. The actors/actresses will be treated like they are the worst actors ever for taking that part, despite the fact that most of them are at worst mediocre actors who are trying to work with what was written for them.
The transition from traditional to CGI animated films in the 2000s. The people blame companies like Pixar and DreamWorks Animation and the people who work there for making hand-drawn animation a dying art. In reality, as CGI features were becoming more popular as the 21st century dawned, many executives saw CGI as being more profitable that traditional animation, especially as Disney's legendary feature animation department was converted into a CGI house as many traditional animators were laid off. As shown in The Pixar Story, many of the Pixar employees love the hand-drawn Disney films and don't like the flak they're receiving for making them go down the tubes.
Blaming a lot of the really crappy comics during the Silver Age on The Comics Code ignores the fact that most of these stories were just really bad on their own without any censorship.
Speaking of the Silver Age, a lot of people blame Fredric Wertham solely for the creation of the Comics Code, while he is only indirectly responsible for it. He published Seduction of the Innocent which lead to the social panic, which lead to the Code for sure. However, he was actually relatively moderate on the issue — he simply wanted comics to have a rating system, not for any remotely objectionable content to be banned.
The role of Seduction of the Innocent is also often exaggerated. The book came out on 19 April 1954, a mere two days before the Senate Subcommittee hearings on juvenile delinquency (at which Wertham and William Gaines famously testified) began; this led to the adoption of the Comics Code in October of the same year. The crusade against comic-books with alarmist theories about their likely effect on readers had actually started as early as 1940, and it was only in 1948 that Wertham's theories about the subject first came to public notice. Anti-comicbook hysteria was already in full swing before Seduction of the Innocent (public burnings of comic-books started no later than 1948), so if Wertham was one of those who caused it, it was actually through his earlier writings and public statements.
On the subject of the Silver Age, many detractors of modern comics express distaste with formerly goofy, harmless villains now killing people. Even a cursory glance through some Silver Age comics reveals that these villains were always fond of casual murder; the only difference is that now they're occasionally successful at it.
Feminists seem to get a lot of blame for Wonder Woman's depowering in the Bronze Age, however the complete opposite is true. While the decision to depower her was made to make the comic more appealing to feminists and women in general, DC came up with the idea all on their own — in fact it was backlash from the feminists that resulted in her getting repowered.
Also, both her depowering and Storm's are often taken as extremes of sexism regardless of whose order you think it's on. Often ignored is the fact that they were "demoted" to Charles Atlas Superpower-wielding Badass Normals. If you were really depowering a character because you didn't like the idea of strong women, you wouldn't make them Xena-class asskicking machines, which meant that it could have worked in theory. On the other hand, the de-powering period also coincided with her getting beaten up a lot by male villains, which, combined with less restricted content standards, came off as a lot more brutal than they otherwise would, and the idea that Wonder Woman would give up the responsibilities of her position to run a Mod clothing store in New York got dated real fast.
And then there's Wonder Woman's position as the secretary of the original Justice Society of America in All-Star Comics. This is often blamed on sexism, since she's a secretary and didn't go on missions. In fact, it was editorial policy that any character with their own solo book couldn't be a member at all (which is why Superman and Batman weren't included and Flash and Green Lantern got kicked out when All-Flash and Green Lantern started). Wonder Woman was made an exception because of her popularity and having a back-line support position as a secretary was better than similar male heroes who didn't get to be there at all.
Bob Budiansky gets a lot of flak from Transformers fans for horrible writing in the Marvel comic, while Simon Furman is praised as the saviour of the series. They tend to ignore the fact that most of Budiansky's work was praised when it was originally released, and he even got a fan letter from Stan Lee for the "Decepticon Graffiti" story. The majority of Budiansky's work was easily as good as Furman's, but his entire opus was tainted by the burnout he suffered in his last few issues as he tried desperately to keep up with Hasbro's demands. In fact, some of his popular work is occasionally misattributed to Furman for just this reason.
Also, the extent to which the franchise is Budiansky's handiwork is often not understood — the early Marvel guys, him among them, were the people who were handed a bunch of toys and told to make them characters and a universe. Without him, Transformers as you know it never comes to be. If you're a TF fan, you have Bob to thank for way more of the things about the franchise you love than you realize — whichever series or comic happens to be your favorite, because all of them build on that original work to some extent.
One More Day aside, Joe Quesada is apparently solely responsible for every hated story to come out of Marvel offices, during his tenure, he planned them, wrote them, drew them, colored them, lettered them, with no help from anyone, especially the creative team assigned to the book.
Speaking of One More Day, JMS, the writer, has been both misblamed and Mis-Credited in its case. He was first blamed for creating the story until it was known Quesada ordered it — probably wouldn't have happened had he stuck to his guns and refused to have his name on it. When that came out, he was looked on as a hero for leaving the book and standing up against bad Executive Meddling — when in reality he supported the retcon but walked out because Quesada wouldn't let him take it even further and completely rewrite the Marvel Universe's entire history.
And again with One More Day, while the retcon was Quesada's idea, you'll often get the impression hearing fans talking about it that he was the only person at Marvel to even support the idea and browbeat his co-workers into line like an iron-fisted dictator. In reality, numerous creative talent at Marvel were pushing for it, including people much better-regarded in fan eyes than Quesada like Kurt Busiek and Dan Slott. Interestingly enough, this did not include go-to Crisis Crossover guy Brian Michael Bendis, who reportedly tried to sneak a plot development into his Siege storyline that would've tacitly undone One More Day until Quesada caught on.
Ken Penders has been given a lot of his from Sonic the Hedgehog fans, and comes in two flavors: bad stories misattributed to him, and dangling plot threads misexplained as him being a douche. In reality, most fans tend to forget that Ken lost his position as head writer to Karl Bollers for a good chunk of the timeframe most of the misattributed stories come from (in reality written by Bollers himself), and that Executive Meddling was pretty much a staple of the comic ever since issue 50, leading to confusion over whether Ken left the comic voluntarily due to conflicts with this meddling, or if he was fired because of it. Even the favorite accusations of old fans that he turned the Echidnas into a Spotlight-Stealing Squad that dragged down the main comic's quality seems to be off, as he had little choice in the matter, and the Knuckles comic that came from it, despite being Screwed by the Network, is still considered one of the best parts of the comic. Granted, there are bad stories that Ken has done, but not nearly the amount that is attributed to him.
In more recent issues, a number of characters that Penders created have been removed or gone missing while Archie and Penders work out some legal issues over the rights to said characters, causing numerous edits in varying degrees of severity. For all the flak Penders has gotten, Archie's legal team was behind their removal. Technically there wasn't anything wrong in using them, but said legal team didn't want to risk fanning the flames.
Prior to the above mess, fans were quite dismayed about the application of Fantastic Racism towards the AI NICOLE, with many fans saying that Ian's usage of it was too much. Many people seem to have forgotten that Fantastic Racism in the comics was a prevalent feature as the comic left its goofy roots.
Jack Schiff got blamed for injecting sci-fi elements into Batman's stories. In truth, it was editorial director Irwin Donenfeld's fault for having sci-fi be put into the DC output. Schiff recognised that aliens, spaceships, and the like had no place in Batman's detective storylines, and in fact, sci-fi is outside his aptitude as an editor. He argued against the management, but eventually gave in to pressure.
While Geoff Johns had received controversy for turning Bart Allen into Kid Flash, the blame is more accurately shared with Eddie Berganza for that first transition. Johns felt that having Bart mature would develop his character further (although obviously not many fans agreed), while Berganza had wanted Bart to be more of a "brand" character in the title. However, Bart's rapid-aging to become the new Flash was mandated by Berganza and Dan DiDio, a development that Mark Waid expressed disappointment and irritation over, stating that Berganza seemed to be an editor that "hated anything fun" in the DCU. Even with the backstory explained, you'll still see some fans cry foul on Johns for going along with the Kid Flash edict and not quitting the title in protest.
Grant Morrison did not retcon Damian Wayne’s origin as Talia drugging and raping Batman. The graphic novel people usually site as proof of this is Son of the Demon, which was an Elseworlds story and has never been considered canon. Even in that story the issue is a bit murky as Batman had been given drugs by the league earlier in it. (Although Morrison himself says he intended Damian to be a reference to Son of the Demon and "messed up the details, like Batman wasn't drugged when he was having sex". So it's a reference error, but not a continuity error, because the story he was referencing wasn't in continuity until he referenced it, at which point it was only canon to the extent that he referenced it.)
Damian's death was blamed on the New 52 reboot and touted by fans as "Yet another example of how the New 52 is ruining DC's characters." In reality, Morrison had planned Damian's death from the beginning, and had set the plan into motion long before Flashpoint was even announced, which is Hilarious in Hindsight given that for the first few years of his creation, there were quite the amount of fans that were indeed wishing for his death...
A frequent complaint from fans is that DC mistreats the JLI, and that in-universe, that period in Justice League history is unfairly considered a Dork Age. In reality, the perception of the JLI as a blotch on the League's history dates back to the actual series itself, where writers Keith Giffen and J.M. DeMatteis made constant Self-Deprecating jokes about how the team was poorly regarded by other superheroes. The later reunion series, Formerly Known as the Justice League, even had Batman and Captain Marvel looking back on their time with the JLI as an Old Shame.
Well, Captain Marvel, anyways. Batman is noted in the story to be having Fun.
Certain fans of the original Richard Rider version of Nova blame Jeph Loeb for killing him off to replace him with Sam Alexander, who is half-Latino and therefore touted as proof of Rich falling victim to Dying to Be Replaced and Political Correctness Gone Mad. What these accusations usually ignore is that Rider had actually died several years earlier in The Thanos Imperative, well before Sam was created. Jeph Loeb is guilty of a lot of things, but in this case the worst he can be blamed for is not resurrecting Richard.
As a perfect example, someone sent hate mail to Brian Bendis' blog accusing him of hating Richard Rider. Bendis simply reiterated the point that Richard was already dead way before he had been hired to write Guardians of the Galaxy, and that the ones who killed him were Dan Abnett and Andy Lanning.
The same criticisms were leveled at Jaime Reyes, the newest Blue Beetle, several years prior. Some fans complained about Ted Kord (the previous Blue Beetle) supposedly being killed off for the sake of diversity, when in reality, Keith Giffen (considered by most to be Ted's Real Daddy) says it's the exact opposite situation. It had already been decided that Ted would die in the lead-up to Infinite Crisis, and Jaime Reyes was only conceived as a replacement after plans for Ted's death were finalized.
The creators of Avatar: The Last Airbender, Bryan Konietzko and Michael Dante DiMartino were not responsible for the controversial plot details of fan-hated The Promise and The Search graphic novel trilogies (such as the break up of Zuko and Mai in The Promise and Azula running away after suffering another mental breakdown in The Search), in fact they were only involved with the story ideas due to their involvement in sequel series The Legend of Korra, as most of the graphic novel content was actually written by Gene Yang.
Marvel Comics editor-in-chief Axel Alonso was not responsible for relaunching the publisher with Marvel NOW!, it was actually Joe Quesada's idea.
Avengers #200, the infamous issue where Ms. Marvel becomes impregnated and gives birth to her own impregnator before going off to have a "happy ending" with him has four writer credits: writers David Michelinie and Bob Layton, artist George Perez and then-Editor-in-Chief Jim Shooter. Both Mark Gruenwald and David Michelinie have said the issue was a last minute re-write due to similarities to another comic coming out around the same time (specifically Carol was supposed to be impregnated by the Kree's Supreme Intelligence originally; the other comic was a similar plot in What If) and according to Gruenwald Shooter's involvement was essentially the decree that they needed to find a different father. Still despite a book re-written by committee at the last minute Shooter, perhaps because of his infamous reputation, is generally the sole person blamed for that issue.
That misconception seemed to be what the marketing was aiming for (probably figuring that implying Burton's involvement would get more people to see it).
9 suffered from this as well. Tim Burton's name was attached to the movie and people assumed — partly because of the weird animation style, Scenery Gorn, and dark themes — that the whole thing was his. Shane Acker came up with the concept, co-wrote, and directed, while Burton just produced it. Also, people blamed Burton for taking the credit even though he clearly credits himself a producer.
Much of the Hatedom for Planes is aimed at Pixar despite the movie being filmed and animated by DisneyToon Studios.
When it was announced that The Secret Of NIMH would be remade, a lot of people have credited Don Bluth's adaptation of being even more faithful and how this would automatically be less faithful. Yeah sure, Bluth's version does follow the book it was based off of...for the most part. Those who read the books would know that Jenner actually didn't stick around and plot to murder a terrifying Nicodemus and succeed...he actually deserted the rat colony, was overheard of as being electrocuted by a car motor (with other deserters), and Nicodemus actually did not die. On top of the fact that, you know, the film isn't even in theatres yet and, considering very little has been mentioned since the first announcement, may never happen at all.
This would be one thing if this was announced in the 80s. Don Bluth probably didn't know there would be any others, since the movie was made before the two other NIMH books were written.
There's a trend among professional film critics to regard the New Hollywood era as the last true Golden Age of films. This was a period where ambitious young film directors, using the new freedom of the R rating, created Darker and Edgier films that were critically acclaimed box office hits. Many of these critics (perhaps the most prominent was Newsweek critic David Ansen) misblame Steven Spielberg for making Jaws and especially George Lucas for making Star Wars, because this supposedly "ruined" the New Hollywood era, and replaced it with the "inferior" Blockbuster Age of Hollywood. But what actually happened is that most of those young film directors gained so much creative clout (helped along by critics promoting the auteur theory) that they lost the Protection from Editors that was an essential reason why their earlier films were so good. So at the same time Spielberg made Jaws and Lucas made Star Wars, these other young film directors made films that weren't just box office flops, but were even critically panned. So not only do Spielberg and Lucas get misblamed, but the critics who misblame them are targeting two of the only young film directors of the time who managed to avoid the PFE pitfalls at the time and make films that weren't just box office hits, but were also critically acclaimed.
The belief that King Kong vs. Godzilla was edited for the US release to make King Kong win instead of Godzilla. Like Battle of the Planets, it was indeed heavily Macekred, but this wasn't part of it — the movie was one of the earlier ones, before Godzilla became a hero, which meant Godzilla had to lose (though not die) in every movie. Snopes.com confirms. This claim is so prevalent that even resources discussing the movies have mistakenly portrayed it as true.
Legendary Pictures, Warner Bros. and Gareth Edwards were all criticized for "lying" about the second trailer for Godzilla (2014) being released by February 14 of 2014, with accusations of Invisible Advertising being bandied about afterward. Except that none of the people actually involved with the film ever said anything of the sort. The rumor started with some random Lebanese news website, which claimed that the trailer would come on Feb. 7. Then movie news sites and Godzilla fan sites parroted that and then got the date changed to Feb. 14 along the line, and Godzilla fans subsequently got overhyped and then overly disappointed as a result.
There's also the fact that Burton's creative input may have been exaggerated to get the film extra publicity.
The same complaints were alleged at Burton's adaptation of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Most of the complaints were, in fact, not departures from the original book, but actually more faithful to the book than the last movie was. The "changed" lyrics to the Oompa Loompas' musical numbers, for example, are directly lifted from lyrics in the book. One prominent film critic complained that the Burton adaptation chickened out by showing that the bad children survived their ordeals, where the 70s film had stayed "faithful" — but the Burton film was actually being faithful to an identical scene in the book. The only drastic change to the film came towards the end with the subplot about Wonka's father, which is all Burton. The bad kids survived in the 70's movie, too, but a lot of people including that film critic apparently missed that phrase.
Towards the end of Star Trek's most recent run on television, it became popular to blame everything that had ever gone wrong with the franchise on Rick Berman and Brannon Braga. This became most noticeable with the flop of Star Trek: Nemesis, with both being blamed for the screenplay, along with the fact that the film was released in the same week as The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. Braga was completely innocent, and had nothing whatsoever to do with Nemesis (or even the previous film, Star Trek: Insurrection). Berman was arguably responsible to some extent, as he contributed to the storyline and happily gave screenwriter John Logan a no rewrites clause, but the two big things he gets criticised for — the release date and the decision to hire Stuart Baird as director despite Baird knowing nothing about the franchise — were decisions made by Paramount without consulting Berman.
Blaming every last thing about Batman & Robin on director Joel Schumacher is practically standard issue (to the point where his very strong filmography leading up to it is completely dismissed in discussions), but his actual involvement wasn't as great as stated. While the overly goofy tone of the film, gaudy visuals and Bat-Nipples were indeed his fault, he was only loosely involved with writing the film; he helped screenwriter Akiva Goldsman come up with a story outline, then went off to direct A Time to Kill, during which time Goldsman finished the screenplay mostly by himself, albeit with the studio execs demanding the inclusion of Loads and Loads of Characters to help sell more toys. At worst, Schumacher just turned what would have been a very poor film regardless into an even bigger mess.
When it was eventually released, the movie version of The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy met with a lukewarm response. Fans were quick to blame most of the elements that they disliked on Executive Meddling which butchered Douglas Adams' vision... apparently unaware that most of the more contentious material (such as the increased focus on the romance between Arthur and Trillian and the Humma Kavula subplot) were actually put in there by Adams himself.
For that matter, pretty much every Adaptation of Hitchhiker's Guide was criticized for differences from the source material and crying "Adaptation Decay", despite that Adams has actually stated that he wanted the adaptations to be different.
A.I.: Artificial Intelligence was an idea and script created by legendarily cold, clinical director Stanley Kubrick, so when it was picked up after Kubrick's death by his hand-chosen successor, Steven Spielberg, a director notorious for his warm, humanistic and occasionally Narmy disposition, many Kubrick fans immediately wrote it off, and when they say it, blamed everything they saw was a weakness on Spielberg, but most of the things blamed on Spielberg (specifically the robotic talking teddy bear that is David's accompaniment throughout the film) were present in Kubrick's original script, and in fact may have been why Kubrick gave the project to Spielberg prior to his death, saying it was "closer to his sensibilities". The rather controversial After the End ending was also completely planned by Kubrick and not Spielberg.
A lot of Harry Potter fans seem to dislike Michael Gambon as Dumbledore in the films. Some of this stems from comparing him with the late Richard Harris, but the rest seems to point towards "the yelling in Goblet of Fire". More recently, established fans seem to have shifted blame on the yelling scene to the director, though new fans are always around to dig up the old chestnut.
By now, it's pretty much taken as gospel that Steve Kloves is your average foamy-mouthed delusional Harmonian. The idea that he simply thought Harry and Hermione might end up together isn't actually unfounded, as J. K. Rowling mentioned once that "Steve Kloves who has been the script writer, who is enormously insightful on the series and a very good friend, after he read book seven he said to me, 'You know, I thought something was going to happen between Harry and Hermione, and I didn't know whether I wanted it or not.'" On the other hand, this statement clearly indicates that Kloves did not have an actual preference for Harry/Hermione, he just thought it might happen, and much less that he was actively inserting Harry/Hermione moments into the screenplays even after the ship didn't sail.
The 2009 Sherlock Holmes differs greatly from other adaptations, especially the classic, genteel Basil Rathbone or Jeremy Brett interpretations, but one only has to look at the laundry-list of continuity nods on that page to realize that in terms of characterization, the new film is remarkably faithful to Doyle's stories — just in a different direction from previous adaptations.
In the same vein, a common criticism of the 2011 sequel, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, is that it "dumbed down" Sherlock Holmes by largely replacing the mystery and complex deductions with elaborate fight scenes and large-scale action set pieces — essentially turning Holmes into "Victorian James Bond". While it's understandable that people would like to see mystery in a movie about Sherlock Holmes, it should be noted that A Game of Shadows was based (albeit very loosely) on elements of the classic Doyle stories "The Final Problem" and "The Adventure of the Empty House" — both of which were essentially Cloak & Dagger adventure stories, with no central mystery at all.
Hell, if you've read either of those stories, you'll notice that the screenwriters actually took pains to add elements of mystery where there weren't any in the source material. A Game of Shadows has the climactic reveal about the true nature of Moriarty's plans and how Holmes managed to figure them out midway through the movie, while "The Final Problem" just has a long Stern Chase across Europe.
William Shatner is usually blamed for absolutely everything wrong with Star Trek V. While he made mistakes and his original idea was far too big and polarizing to ever truly be filmable (both of which he admits to, repeatedly, in his various books), the final product was actually a result of these being massively compounded by just about everything that could possibly go wrong with a movie, from delays to poor results from hired companies to equipment malfunctionnote not to mention the 1988 Writers' Strike happening smack dab in the middle of a rushed pre-production, resulting in the cutting, alteration, or downgrading of numerous scenes. The majority of this was simply beyond his control, and the fact that he even got the movie made in any coherent form is an accomplishment.
A lot of X-Men fans blame Brett Ratner for every single problem with X-Men: The Last Stand. Others blame the film's original director, Matthew Vaughn, for screwing the film over by quitting right before the start of filming, and still others hold both men equally to blame. In actual fact, while you could make legitimate criticisms about both Ratner's direction and Vaughn's decision to quit, neither of them were responsible for the storyline. That was about 90% the same as the final film well before Vaughn had signed up, and neither director was permitted to make any serious changes to the screenplay (which, despite him giving "family reasons" for his decision to quit, was apparently a major factor in Vaughn leaving the film).
Ironically, many fans actually blame Bryan Singer for everything wrong with The Last Stand. Despite (or perhaps even because of) Singer departing the franchise to direct Superman Returns, and having nothing to do with X3 at all!
While most reviewers managed to avoid falling into the trap of blaming Kevin Smith for the screenplay of Cop Out, which he didn't write, many blamed him for what were felt to be weak action sequences in the movie. In fact, Smith didn't direct any of the major action scenes — David R. Ellis (of Final Destination 2 and 4 fame) was brought in to handle those.
Of course, Smith was still the overall supervisor and the editor of the movie, so he was still responsible for making sure they looked competent.
On the other hand, some critics did think that Smith had written Cop Out, and misblamed him accordingly. Some acknowledged that he hadn't written the screenplay, but said that he should have rewritten it himself and so still deserved blame (which is a slightly more valid viewpoint, though rather naive of how things generally work in Hollywood).
Roger Moore is often blamed for the James Bond franchise's turn to comedy in the '70s. But screenwriter Tom Mankiewicz was brought in specifically to add humorous touches to the last (at the time) Sean Connery movie, Diamonds Are Forever, which is as campy as any Moore flick. The real reason for the shift in tone was the perceived financial failure of the relatively serious On Her Majestys Secret Service, which — while not a big flop as is often believed — was less profitable than previous films in the series.
Fans say the decision to make Greedo shoot first in the "Special Edition" version of A New Hope is proof that George Lucas has completely lost touch with his earlier work. The change may have been to get a PG instead of a PG-13 rating, but Lucas flip-flops a lot.
Portman and both actors who played Anakin had a very poor script to work with.
Michael Bay and the screenwriters of Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen may be guilty of many crimes against art, but they did not, as the Agony Booth review accuses, feel the need to "make up a new character like the Fallen instead of using someone (or something) established like Unicron." The Fallen was a pre-existing character, taken from the comics. (The review was later corrected.)
Meanwhile, Michael Bay suffers type 5 misblame, apparently being singlehandedly responsible for everything one dislikes about the movies, up to and including things like new characters with the names of older characters (a well-established practice in Transformers in general, as a method of maintaining trademarks to avoid repeats of what happened to characters like TrailbreakerTrailcutter).
If Bay's name is in the credits at all, expect people to dump on it and dismiss it as pure garbage before it's even released. Once it is released, they will blame him for any flaws, real or perceived, even if he was only the executive producer (meaning he or his production company footed the bill, but that he likely had no creative input). Some dismissed Black Sails before it aired merely because it came from his production company.
Forget Michael Bay, Shia Labeouf is actually the person personally responsible for everything wrong with Transformers. He's also the responsible for every fault of the fourth Indiana Jones movie.
Michael Bay also often gets blamed for the Transformer who changes into a realistic human. Apparently the people blaming him for this forgot about the Pretenders from back in 1988, which had realistic human coverings, although their robot forms still transformed into vehicles. Beast Wars, however, provides a precedent for transformers having organic alternate modes.
Skids and Mudflap are racist caricatures and that's all Bay's fault. Except for the fact that they're based on the performances of their voice actors, one of whom is black, and are intended to be the robot equivalent of "wiggas" - white boys who act like how they think black people act. They have a rather different characterization in the novel.
Many fans and critics blamed the mediocre response to Iron Man 2 on director Jon Favreau. In reality, the film saw copious amounts of Executive Meddling from Marvel Studios, especially with regard to the elements meant to act as set-up for The Avengers. Favreau had such a bad experience working on the film that he refused to return as the director for Iron Man 3.
Film composers often get the blame and labled with stigma for adapting a piece of classical or contemporary music into their film score. Generally during the editing stages of the film temp music is placed before the score is completed and it's common for directors and exeuctives to "fall in love" with the temp score. And it's usually to rewrite it just enough to slip by rather than pay the extra money to license a work (for non public domain).
There seems to be a lot of hatred towards the Wachowskis for the sequels to The Matrix (including an awful lot of people blaming Lana's sex changefor the quality of the films, despite the fact that she didn't start her reassignment therapy until well after Revolutions had already been released). It should be known, however, that there was quite a bit of Executive Meddling with the sequels; originally the siblings wanted to do a prequel and a sequel, but WB didn't want to make a Matrix movie without Keanu, Fishborne, Moss, etc. Thus the prequel idea got shortened into the Second Renaissance segment of The Animatrix and the sequel idea got dragged out into the two-part mess we know today.
The director of Punisher: War Zone openly lambasted the 2004 movie for having comedic parts such as the popsicle-torture. In fact, that scene was lifted almost directly from the comics (the original The Punisher: War Zone), and Garth Ennis, who greatly helped in raising the Punisher back to popularity in the comics, has mentioned that as his favorite scene from the older comics.
Numerous fans and critics blamed the shifting of John Constantine's nationality and the setting in the Constantine movie on Keanu Reeves, claiming that it was because he couldn't do an English accent (he can, even if not perfectly). However, as confirmed by various people involved, the shift to California was a decision made some time before Reeves was ever approached with the offer.
In 2010, MGM was bashed excessively by internet users (who have been Tainted by the Preview) when their financial problems delayed production of Bond 23 and The Hobbit, not to mention remakes of Red Dawn (2012) and RoboCop (2014). Of course, most of these users are fans of these franchises, who believe MGM stole James Bond from Sonynote who never even owned rights to the franchise except for co-production rights with MGM and The Hobbit from New Line Cinemanote even though MGM owned the original film rights to Tolkien's works since the early 1970s, and that the studio is apparently meddling with these projects. This backlash somehow led to a Yahoo! Answers question asking about it.
It's even older than that. The original 1982 Back to the Future script featured Marty McFly surviving a nuclear blast in a fridge-time machine, in order to return to the present. This was scrapped because it was too expensive to pull off and they didn't want children climbing into fridges and getting stuck. Spielberg was also executive producer of that film.
Lucas also got blamed for making Soviets the main antagonists instead of Nazis like in previous films. In reality, due to the harrowing experience of making Schindlers List, Spielberg felt he could no longer depict Nazis as simply stock villains for Indy to beat, although Harrison Ford's advanced age since the last film also accounted for it.
Perhaps because of the unpopular way in which LOST ended, people dissatisfied or disappointed with the movie Prometheus, which he did a rewrite on, have tended to blame Damon Lindelof for everything wrong with the film — including its vagueness, its lack of xenomorphs, the (in some people's opinion) forced comparison between the Engineers and the Christian God, etc. You name it, Lindelof's to blame. And if it's not Lindelof, it's Fox's fault. Except that Ridley Scott came up with about half of the things that people don't like about the movie.
And Lindelof is now getting blamed for all of the problems on the Troubled Production of World War Z...despite the fact that he was brought in only to do rewrites long after production started and did nothing else (directing, producing, acting) on the film. Could we have a new poster child for this trope?
When the 2010 Robin Hood movie hit theatres the critics were quick to blame their disappointment on the lesser known writers Ethan Reiff and Cyrus Voris, who were credited as authors of the "story". Who else could have bungled it in a movie directed by Ridley Scott, starring Russell Crowe and written by Brian Helgeland, the writer of Mystic River and L.A. Confidential? But in reality Reiff and Voris' original script was a completely different story altogether, Nottingham, that told Robin Hood's story from the Sheriff's point of view. This premise was dismissed from the start by Scott, and after several rewrites there was practically nothing left of the original script (in Reiff and Voris' words, a single sentence of the dialogue they wrote made it into the final film, and was said by a different character).
Whenever a new adaptation of Gulliver's Travels is made, there's a good chance it will involve the scene in which Gulliver puts out a fire in the Lilliputian palace by urinating on it. As such there will always be a reviewer who claims that this is gross, crude humour and that "Jonathan Swift would be rolling in his grave!", presumably unaware that this exact scene (and more even grosser, cruder stuff) actually happened in the book.
After the 2003 live-action version of The Cat in the Hat was released, many filmgoers and even professional critics blamed star Mike Myers for the less than child friendly tone of the film. It was also commonly assumed that he must have rewritten the script and added all the crude jokes himself, because he had screenplay credits on the Waynes World and Austin Powers films. In actual fact, though, Myers had nothing to do with the screenplay, and wasn't even attached to the film for most of its development phase; he agreed to replace the original star, Tim Allen, as part of a legal settlement with Universal after he broke his contract to star in a Sprockets movie.
Many reviews of Paul W.S. Anderson's remake of The Three Musketeers apparently decided that because it was Anderson, any trace of the original Dumas story would be gone. Many of the reviews acted as if the story bore no resemblance to the novel at all. Well, of course some things were changed, including turning Milady into an Action Girl and the addition of airships, but honestly, the overall plot is pretty much exactly what Dumas wrote. All in all, it probably took fewer liberties than the 1993 version. Indeed, it may be the dissimilarity to the 1993 version that caused people to think Anderson's film wasn't faithful; because it wasn't faithful to the significantly altered version they were more familiar with.
People who dislike the newSpider-Manfilms tend to pile all of the hate and blame on Andrew Garfield, despite Garfield merely playing the role and not being responsible for the costume, the writing, the soundtrack, or anything that tends to be hated in particular concerning the film. Even issues people take with the characterization of Spidey tend to be things based more on how Spider-Man is written rather than how he's acted; even his hair (which gets a surprisingly large amount of hate) is at least partially the fault of the stylist for the film rather than him. As he is pretty much seen as the face of the new franchise, every problem with it is blamed on him, regardless of what sense it makes.
And if it's not him, it's the director, even if the series' problems obviously not being all Webb's fault.
Spider-Man fans have blamed Sam Raimi for the critically-divided Spider-Man 3 with the addition of Venom and having Mary Jane Watson becoming the damsel in distress for a third time. However, those ideas were actually Avi Arad's ideas in addition to that Raimi's ideas was to have the Vulture as the secondary villain and Gwen Stacy being the damsel in distress for the final battle, plus Raimi has considered Venom The Scrappy.
Michael Bay tends to receive all of the scorn of the fan base in spite of simply being a Producer for the film. This tends to be par the course for anything Bay is associated with. In a somewhat ironic turn, it turns out that Bay is actually responsible for nixing a lot of bad ideas that others wanted to put in, since he's now fairly aware of how a fanbase will react to changes. But, due to being who he is, he ends up being blamed for a lot of the ideas he was responsible for nixing. Essentially, a lot of the people cursing his name should be thanking him for doing what they wanted!
The "Turtles as aliens" rumours. They were eventually revealed to have never been an official part of the story. The rumour was based on a line which, in context, seemed to indicate that the Ooze, rather than the Turtles, would be alien in origin. A throwaway line confirmed this to still be true.
There was a small debacle when fans of the comic The Books of Magic accused J. K. Rowling of ripping it off. Nobody has confirmed this, and in fact, even Neil Gaiman admitted that neither Rowling or himself were the first people who created a bespectacled young man destined to become a great wizard, or send him to school. But it got worse when a magazine said Gaiman accused Rowling of pinching his idea. Immediately Gaiman defended himself against the person who misblamed him and said, "I did NOT accuse her of that!". He even admits that if anything, they were more inspired by fantasy authors writing Arthurian legends moreso than each other.
Terry Pratchett has likewise had to fend off numerous accusations that he'd ripped off J.K. Rowling with Equal Rites, despite the latter having been written in 1987. When he's pointed this out, some fans have turned around and misblamed him for accusing Rowling of stealing his work! The similarities between them mostly amount to this: there is a school for magic users, someone in the book uses a broomstick to fly. Someone is turned partially or entirely into a pig, goats are mentioned a couple times.
An accusation also leveled at him for the Johnny Maxwell Trilogy (even though the similarities pretty much begin and end with Johnny and Kirsty being similar characters to Harry and Hermione).
One of the complaints about the Wheel of Timeinfamous covers, is that Lan is shown to have a samurai based helmet in the first book, claiming that only the Seanchan have Samurai based helmets. Actually, Lan did have a helmet just like the one on the cover of the book during the Aiel war. It was based off of the one used by the famous Samurai Date Masamune. In fact Lan's helmet was probably the most accurate thing about that cover.
All of the books with "Tom Clancy's" on the cover were, in fact, written by other authors, with pretty much no imput on the contents of said books by Mr. Clancy himself, past laying out the setting for the various series. When people complain about Mr. Clancy's works, however, often those licensed books are cited as examples of the quality of his writing (or, specifically, lack thereof).
Quite a few people blame William Shatner for the fact that his name is plastered all over the cover and marketing of the Star Trek novels that he co-wrote with Garfield Reeves-Stevens and Judith Reeves-Stevens, and accuse him of pushing them to the sidelines for the sake of his ego. Fact of the matter is that writers have little, if any, say in the cover design of their books and the publishers did it because his name carries more weight outside of the Trek Expanded Universe readership than the Reeves-Stevens do.
Richard Knaak of the World of Warcraft Lore does recieve some of this. While the man does certainly have weaknesses in his writing style (Mary Sues for instance) he doesn't exactly go around changing the lore as he sees fit. He does discuss things with the rest of the lore team before hand, and he does have to get their approval before he makes any major change. While he is guilty of at least a few sins, changing the lore because he feels like it isn't one of them.
In the Star Wars Expanded Universe Karen Traviss gets a lot of flak, most notoriously for establishing that the Grand Army Of The Republic constituted a mere three million clones. While this number is ridiculously low for a galactic scale conflict (the Eastern Front in WWII alone had somewhere around 15 million troops), what people failed to take into account was that the basis for the clone troop numbers first appeared in the Attack of the Clones movie novelization, an upper tier canon work that came out in 2002, which told us that the million more well on the way was a million clone warriors and that it would take time to produce more. Traviss was a lesser tier canon author who didn't come around until 2004, meaning that in order for her to be responsible for these numbers, she'd have had to have broken causality. Unfortunately, this created a substantial amount of conflict when other authors missed the higher-canon established figures, and did things like give the Separatists an army in the quintillions. The resulting flame wars were not pretty to say the least.
Live Action TV
The American Power Rangers is often accused of adding unnecessary silly humour. Ironic, since the humour in Power Rangers is usually far less prevalent and far less silly than in the original Super Sentai.
The best way to explain the differences between Power Rangers and Super Sentai is that Rangers stays in the middle whereas Sentai goes to BOTH extremes. Yes, it is less silly and does cut out a lot of the over-the-top cuteness of the Japanese version, but at the same time, because the Moral Guardians seem to be less strict in Japan, they are also allowed to show blood, use guns, and have characters actually die. Oddly enough, each show is Lighter and Softer and Darker and Edgier than the other at the same time.
In recent years, the fact that the original Black and Yellow Rangers were played by an African-American man and an Asian-American woman has received a lot of criticism due to perceived Unfortunate Implications. It should be noted, however, that the actress originally cast as the Yellow Ranger was actually Hispanic (unaired test footage of her still exists), and the Vietnamese-American Thuy Trang was only brought in as a replacement when said actress dropped out of the show. As for the Black Ranger, Walter Jones himself has since explained that he was actually originally cast as the Blue Ranger, but the producers wanted him to switch roles so that the original Sentai footage would line up with the idea that Zach was Jason/Red's best friend; Jones was asked if he was okay with the change, and said "Yes" because he thought the suit was cooler.
Haim Saban often gets blamed or credited (at least with the Saban eras) with anything Power Rangers despite not having much of a hand with it since 1995 and only cutting the checks nowadays. His producing partner, Shuki Levy was apparently far more guilty of Executive Meddling, and even then it only got really out of hand with Turbo: A Power Rangers Movie.
The poorly received third season of the original Star Trek was largely blamed on the showrunner Fred Freiberger. But most of the cast and crew have worked to denounce that idea because of several major reasons. First, Gene Roddenberry had left the writing duties in the third season, he (the creator) only had a minor influence on the show. Second, Gene Roddenberry left because the network promised a juicy Monday night spot, only to renounce it and give them the Friday Night Death Slot. Third, the production budget was always below par for a sci-fi series, and the budget was slashed another 10 percent, which affected the scripts heavily. Freiberger was doing his best on a show that was sinking fast. If anything the main culprits were script editor Arthur Singer and network executive Douglas S. Cramer, the former of whom knew virtually nothing about the show and made little attempt to find out during the season, and the latter of whom apparently vetoed several good story ideas and pushed for the show to have a campier overall tone (one of his demands in particular was having the script for "The Way to Eden" changed to incorporate childish pot shots aimed at his predecessor, Herbert Solow).
In regards to Rick Berman and Brannon Braga's control of the franchise in later years, fans seem to often believe that they had complete control over it even above Paramount Productions. They were actually not immune from any Executive Meddling and were given demands that have compromised the various shows. This shows primarily in the TNG-esque nature of Voyager, which had started off fairly unique unto itself. But with Deep Space Nine underperforming in ratings, Executive Meddling demanded that the more TNG-like Voyager stay with the TNG formula. Those demands largely hurt the morale at the show; Ronald Moore said it was extremely depressing being in the writers room.
Additionally, some seem to be under the delusion that Brannon Braga was the showrunner for the entire run of Voyager, and so lay the blame for the show's quality at his feet. In actual fact, he was only the showrunner on two out of the show's seven seasons — Jeri Taylor was the main showrunner for most of the show's history, and in an odd inversion of the trope, receives virtually no blame from the fans but quite a bit from the other writers who worked on the show. On the other hand, Braga was the showrunner for all but one season of Star Trek: Enterprise, so he has more to answer for on that count.
Doctor Who fans have a tendency to find one particular behind-the-scenes figure — John Nathan-Turner, Michael Grade, Russell T. Davies, etc — and blame absolutely everything they don't like on that figure, regardless of whether they can be reasonably blamed or not.
When Freema Agyeman (Martha Jones) left after the third series of the revived show, some fans insisted she had either been fired or pressured to leave because the producers felt she could not live up to her extremely popular predecessor, Billie Piper (it didn't help that onscreen Martha left the Doctor for this reason.) This was denied by all involved, but it still pops up occasionally as a conspiracy theory in the fandom.
It's possible that she had only signed on for one series. Christopher Eccleston appeared to have left for similar reasons (on top of the hectic shooting schedule); there has been no definitive proof that the 40-something actor left after one series due to being "typecast".
Martha has also fallen victim to a Type 3: her character has received criticism for not being confident enough in herself (particularly in her unrequited feelings for the Doctor), and not being convincing as a professional adult. This seems to be based on a misconception by US viewers about the character's intended age: medical students in Britain start studying at age 18, so Martha could well be a teenager, and cannot be any older than 22 or so. There's no in-story reason for her to be particularly worldly-wise.
The regrettable murder storyline from the second season of Friday Night Lights was such a huge departure from season one's low key, realistic tone that everyone was sure it was all NBC's Executive Meddling trying to get the show's middling ratings up. Turns out, it was entirely the idea of the show's producers. However, NBC really didn't help with all their commercials focusing on the storyline, showing an incredibly misunderstanding of what the show's fans wanted to see.
Or they assumed that the show's fans would be watching anyway, but that promoting the murder storyline would bring in people who had previously not watched much of the show.
Elementary is full of these. First off, despite what some more aggressive Sherlock fans may tell you, Steven Moffat did not invent the idea of a modern Sherlock Holmes adaptation, and the concept had been around for decades (it goes back to the 1940's Universal films with Basil Rathbone, which had Holmes battling Nazi spies). As for the criticism about making Watson Asian, it was not meant to "pander" to minority viewers; the creators are on record saying the part was race-neutral, and Lucy Liu just happened to be the best actress for the job.
Some people have even complained about Sherlock's "fake-sounding" accent. Jonny Lee Miller is actually English, he just doesn't sound like Benedict Cumberbatch. The complaint seems to be due to the misconception that all English people have the same accent, despite the fact that there are just as many variations as one would find in American English.
Every single cast change in Mystery Science Theater 3000 (quite a few, as by the end the entire original cast was gone) was blamed on Jim Mallon, who the fans portrayed as a tyrant imposing his will on everyone else involved with the show. This even happened with the departure of Joel Hodgson, who not only had the same level of creative control as Mallon but created the show in the first place, so no one could make him leave if he didn't want to. There had been some behind the scenes friction between the two men that ultimately led to Joel's departure, but much of this has been blown out of proportion by the fanbase and Joel himself has had to play damage control more than a few times.
Pretty much anything that went wrong with Dollhouse is blamed on Fox, even when Joss Whedon himself takes credit for such things as drastic changes or shooting a new pilot. Granted, it's hard to blame the fans. Fox didcancelFirefly, which was definitely a high-quality show that got screwed by Executive Meddling. But it's like Whedonites have a constant persecution complex up and running — All. The. Time.
Firefly is the perfect example of the above-mentioned phenomenon where a popular show gets cancelled because the "wrong" audience liked it. Quoth the producer: "The initial results – they made the network nervous. The men didn’t respond as strongly as they thought they would, and the women responded more strongly."
Nikki and Paolo are universally despised by most LOST fans for their sudden introduction, questionable relevance to the main plot and the false pretense to "have been here all along". Yet the reason the characters were created in the first place is because fans themselves often asked about the stories of the random extras seen carrying wood or something while main characters were discussing important stuff. They didn't use the actors who had actually been seen in the background earlier in the series because they were extras, and thus couldn't be expected to hold up when moved into more major roles.
My So-Called Life fans tend to blame the show's one-season run on either a) Screwed Bythe Network or b) Claire Danes (who was, it's worth pointing out, all of 16) being a prima donna and refusing to sign for a second season. The producer statements have been ambiguous, but the most likely interpretation is that the network didn't offer a renewal until Claire had other commitments that she didn't want to back out of, and the producers threw up their hands rather than try to negotiate.
Fans of the American version of Big Brother seemed to have blamed that the recent eviction of Jeff was somehow the producer's fault. Sure, Executive Meddling has been the most likely culprit for several game-changing instances, but there was clearly no Executive Meddling, obvious case of misblame there. Why would CBS meddle in a ratings dog? (The viewers literally dropped by half after his eviction.)
George Lucas' hatedom will sometimes blame him for the quality of The Star Wars Holiday Special (see, for example, the final paragraphs of this article). The fact is, Lucas wrote up a basic story outline, and left CBS to finish it while he worked on The Empire Strikes Back. Without Lucas' involvement, the producers rewrote much of the original script, turning it into the 70's-variety-show schlock-fest that we all love to hate. It appears that contractual obligations were the only reason that Lucas allowed the finished product to air.
Not to mention Lucas has gone on record saying that he wants to destroy every copy of the Holiday Special.
Marti Noxon is frequently blamed for absolutely everything fans didn't like about the sixth season of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
In Torchwood: Children of Earth, Ianto's character arc involved him beginning to accept his bisexuality and come out to his family about his relationship with Jack — then he was suddenly and unexpectedly killed off. Many fans were not happy, and blamed Russell T. Davies (despite the fact that he is openly gay and has introduced a variety of LGBT characters on both Torchwood and Doctor Who.) He denied that sexuality had anything to do with it, and insisted Ianto was just "defeated by a greater evil" for plot purposes. Some people then turned their ire towards writer James Moran, who has also stated that there was no malicious intent behind the decision.
The mess between Jay Leno and Conan O Brien was mostly caused by Executive Meddling from NBC, particularly from Jeff Zucker. The court of public opinion has ruled that it's all Leno's fault and that he was trying to horn in on Conan's Tonight Show because he's a selfish slimeball. True, maybe he shouldn't have accepted NBC's offer to move back to 11:35, but basically everything that is attributed to Leno was really done by Zucker. (And the quality of Leno's humor is subjective and is honestly irrelevant to the debate.)
It has also been suggested that Conan was himself complicit in the Executive Meddling that saw Leno leave The Tonight Show and him takeover in the first place.
O'Brien's contract stipulated that he would become the host of the show within a set period of time. Leno never wanted to leave, and any statements to the contrary were required of him by the studio. To rub it in even further, Conan's TBS show now does a third of what Leno does on Tonight in the ratings.
Conan was going to be screwed either way. Leno could've declined, and got himself and his staff fired along with Conan's, or accepted and saved the jobs of all the people working on the Tonight Show.
Heroes fans who blame the scrappiness of certain characters on the actors who portray them.
Poor Dania Ramirez, who played Maya, is probably the all time example of this. Yes, Maya was annoying, but Dania Ramirez did not write or direct the 11,000 scenes in which her character cried, screamed for her brother, and/or acted useless.
Likewise, Mohinder's actor Sendhil Ramamurthy has been incredibly snarky about his own character's permanent possession of the Idiot Ball during some episode commentaries, to the point where it's pretty obvious he only WISHES he had control over the scripts. In fact, Mohinder's storyline would probably get a lot more entertaining if he did.
Alan Alda often gets blamed for a lot of the Strawman Political regarding M*A*S*H. Series creator Larry Gelbart, however, pointed out more than a few times that the series had been greenlit when no one really knew what it was supposed to be, and Alda was the only one really willing to come forward with any ideas.
Arguably Lizzie McGuire qualifies as an inversion of type 1 (not that the show had no flaws, just that it's the successors that had the flaws generally associated with the work) mixed with type 2. It is usually blamed by people (especially on the Internet) for Disney Channel's current batch of low budget Strictly Formula shows with over the top humor, wacky plots, weird premises, and laugh tracks, despite the fact that it really had none of those (Lizzie was supposed to be a normal girl, albeit one with a cartoon avatar, there wasn't a laugh track, and the show didn't look particularly cheap) and wasn't even made by the same production company. This may be because the success of the show that really promoted Disney Channel to the forefront in the young female demographic.
The Bionic Woman reboot in 2007 has had executive meddling or low ratings are usually blamed for the cancellation of the show. But it was the Writer's Strike that halted production. Had it not been for the strike, it's likely the show would have had a full first season at the least.
The Writer's Strike resulted in a lot of problems. Fledgling shows went months without new episodes and lost what momentum they built, and some shows had storylines cut short. It's also the reason why Transformers: Rise of the Fallen was below standards. Michael Bay had to write most of the movie himself or it would have gotten shut down. He even admits that's why the movie sucks.
The Adam WestBatman TV show is often accused of "ruining" the Batman franchise and enforcing the idea that comics are for children, whereas Batman: The Dark Knight Returns and the Tim Burtonmovie are credited with making Batman "serious" again. However, as West is quick to point out, the show was far less ridiculous and campy than most of the Silver AgeBatman comics that were being published at the time.
For years, Yoko Ono's been blamed for causing the break-up of The Beatles, when it's largely clear that internal band tensions (which would be not entirely unreasonable given that the four members of the band had essentially spent almost the entire 1960s pretty much trapped together) and increasingly diverging musical interests and pursuits would have probably done the job sooner or later no matter who John Lennon decided to get romantically involved with. It is fair to say that her increased presence in the studio was annoying to the other three Beatles, recordings having previously been a 'no girlfriends' zone, and by all accounts she didn't exactly make much of an effort to make friends, none of which exactly helped matters; but even they acknowledge that she probably doesn't deserve all the stick that she gets.
Not sure about the others, but it's worth noting that as early as 1971, George Harrison said publicly (on the Dick Cavett show) that Yoko was being misblamed, and that the Beatles broke themselves up. Not that it made much difference...
Honestly, at this point, most people understand that Yoko contributed very little, if anything, to the Beatles' breakup. She does, however, still get blamed for the general weirdness that was her and John Lennon's marriage, despite a ton of evidence that John was at least as odd as she was well before meeting her.
The Beatles also feature an inversion of this trope. Owing to the oft-expressed truism that John Lennon was the 'creative' Beatle and Paul McCartney was the 'fluffy' Beatle, people tend to credit all the 'deep' and 'important' stuff that the Beatles did to Lennon, including Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band. In fact, from about late-1966 onwards McCartney was the creative powerhouse of the Beatles, as he was the one coming up with all the ideas; Lennon, although he certainly wrote some fantastic songs during this time, spend most of the period drifting away from the Beatles and getting deeper into drugs, which in general sapped his creative instincts.
Lots of Gackt and/or Malice Mizer fans tend to treat Gackt's departure from MM as Mana's fault. Public opinion often portrays Mana as a wicked schemer who didn't like Gackt's behavior for some reason, so he began forcing him away from the band and then literally kicked Gackt out. It's usually come from one of Gackts misquotes saying ?I was asked to leave Malice Mizer?. Gackt really meant that Mana asked him whether he still wanted to stay in the band and said that if he didn't nobody would stand on his way. Gacky himself admitted later on that he saw MM as a temporary jump-start project and he always wanted to pursue solo career. He was, in fact, interested in MM because he loved classic music since childhood but he never was into VK, EGL, EGA and other gothic stuff. Mana on the other hand thought that Gackt was the best suitable for MM and the band wouldn't be the same without him. That explains why Mana couldn't find a new vocalist for 2 year until he briefly recruited Klaha who's mannerism and appearance was almost identical to Gackt's. Then he just disbanded Malice Mizer to form Moi Dix Moi which fairly wasn't too much different from MM.
It gets worse from there. Mana's reputation as not just a schemer, but also an arrogant, sadistic and jealous primadonna who can't stand anyone more popular or talented than him, has stuck. He now gets blamed by a significant number of people every time someone he works with leaves or a band on his label splits up. Admittedly, Moi Dix Mois' High Turnover Rate, as well as Mana's stoic and emotionless public image doesn't help, but it really has gone too far. The really sad thing is that half the people who believe it don't even listen to Malice Mizer or Moi Dix Mois, and only think Mana's to blame for everything because everyone else in whichever Jrock community they belong to treats it as fact.
The opposite happened with reactions on La:Sadie's disbanding when almost every time Kisaki was solemnly blamed. Most typical reason is "the band wanted to go major while Kisaki wanted to stay indies". Which doesn't make sense because: 1)There is no clear reason for why an aspiring musician would want to stay indies (major gives a lot more possibilities). 2)And Kisaki was never against becoming major and his later activities kind of prove it. Every band he's been involved ever since was significantly more major than the previous one. Up the last band Phantasmagoria which was a living definition of majorism and him founding his own major record company Undercode Productions. Now he said he's retiring to focus on producing (producing = promoting various indies band to majors; Undercode had done dozen of these already). So the more legit reasons are Kaoru's lead persona and the fact that the band met Toshiya from D+ L on a joint concert and liked him so much, that they "stole" him.
There are reasons an aspiring musician may not want to go Major. The main one being that, while going major does bring more exposure and opportunities, it can also bring a lot of Executive Meddling and loss of creative control, which not every artist wants to have to deal with.
The fact that T. Rex's "Get It On" was released stateside as "Bang a Gong" is often held up as an example of American prudishness, when the truth is almost the exact opposite: there was already a jazz fusion song entitled "Get It On" on the American charts.
Sammy Hagar tends to get flack from former Van Halen fans regarding the group's switch to a Power Ballad sound after he joined. In fact, Eddie Van Halen was already moving in this direction before (and was a considerable factor behind David Lee Roth quitting the band).
Every time Mötley Crüe does something that displeases the fans, there are always three camps placing blame for it on either Vince Neil (for being a prima donna), Nikki Sixx (for being a control freak), or Tommy Lee (for being kind of an idiot). Mick Mars seems to have some kind of mystical immunity to this effect.
There are two different versions of the photo collage on the back cover of the original 1967 vinyl edition of Headquarters by The Monkees: one where the center picture shows the album's producer and a recording engineer, and the other showing the Monkees with facial hair. When new generations of Monkees fans rediscovered the album, they assumed the bearded Monkees pic was the original, but the record label was afraid people would complain about their teen idols no longer being clean-cut, so they substituted it with the other. In fact, it was the other way around: the producer-engineer pic was the original, but the caption mis-identified the engineer, so they replaced it with the bearded Monkees.
Also according to Word Of God, as the band were shifted from a five-piece to a four-piece to a trio, the band were attempting to avoid the fights over writing credits and creative input they were facing with the departures of Peter Gabriel and Steve Hackett by crediting the entire band with all the songs on each album. They credited individual writers by A Trick Of The Tail to deflect accusations that Gabriel was the sole visionary behind the group's music, which led to the inter-group squabbles (Hackett in particular) they tried so hard to avoid. The band decided to come in the studio with no pre-written material and write collectively in the studio. They also discovered that a great deal of magic came with group improvisations, and that by shortening the group compositions they could get more of a variety of styles. They were also, by 1981, equipped with their own recording facility (Fisher Lane Farms), and were interested in reinventing their sound for The Eighties, producing their own music along with engineer Hugh Padgham. What came out of these circumstances was Abacab and the music they came up with since then. The results of having commercial success with their new sound and approach was simply icing on the cake.
On a similar note, Banks is often blamed for the creative conflicts that led to the departure of Gabriel and Hackett, down to excluding Gabriel from the songwriting for The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway and passive-aggressively mixing Hackett out of the band's second live album note It was a Deadpan Snarker quip from Banks that Hackett himself has denied ever actually happened. This of course ignores Gabriel's problems with his wife and daughter around the same time (although he did end up writing the lyrics and overall story of the album) and the fact that the Banks/Collins/Rutherford trio had already gelled into the main creative force in the band. In fact, the band started crediting individual writers for each song in order to escape the notion that Gabriel wrote everything.
Genesis also, by Word Of God, began as a "songwriting collective", then became a band when they could find no one else willing to sing their material. They had tried to write pop songs on their first album, but failed to get success. They moved into a Progressive Rock direction from their second album, Trespass, especially as it was easier for sheltered, upper middle class private school-educated Britons to write fantasy lyrics over love songs, but they occasionally dabbled in their own brand of pop ever since with songs like "I Know What I Like (In Your Wardrobe)", "Counting Out Time" and "Your Own Special Way". They hadn't intended to be strictly progressive rock, but most of their material fell into that style until they learned to write more commercially and gained success from it.
Mike Love is blamed by many Beach Boys fans for the non-release of "Smile" in 1967. While Mike can be hated for a lot of reasons (look up his acceptance speech at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame on behalf of the Beach Boys), this is not solely his fault. It was actually a combination of a royalties lawsuit against Capitol filed by the Beach Boys, Van Dyke Parks leaving, Brian Wilson's mental problems and the beginning of his drug problems, and a lack of support from other members (including Mike).
Liz Phair has gained some infamy in the music industry for "selling out." Despite what some fans choose to believe, it wasn't Liz's fault. Her indie record label Matador Records dumped her onto the major Capitol Records. They wouldn't give her money to record an album unless she worked with mainstream producers and made a pop album. If Matador Records didn't give Liz away, then she most likely would have continued on her indie rock route.
Rebecca's Black's "Friday" was an autotuned single produced on a budget of a few thousand bucks and was posted on Youtube. It soon went viral, mostly from people pointing and laughing, metaphorically speaking. A certain imgboard began to troll her, including death threats and posting her school schedule online. Yet when she went on Good Morning America talking about how hurt she was, a lot of people blamed her parents and the video production company, instead of the people doing the actual trolling. (Compare to the tone of Gawker's own earlierposts, which were much less sympathetic.) Also, she apparently doesn't get to complain because the single is selling very well and she's rich now.
Also, she is perceived as in it for the money or something or doing this on purpose, but actually she's just the one video that got lucky and had enough YouTube views to get famous. YouTube, and in fact Real Life itself is full of girls with decent singing voices who want/ have record deals and film low budget music videos.
Black Flag fans tend to be divided over the more experimental, heavy metal influenced direction the band started heading in after Damaged. Those who don't like this period sometimes blame Henry Rollins for the change (or at least the "heavy metal" aspect of it). While Rollins was the Face of the Band at the time and contributed to the songwriting process, founding member Greg Ginn was still writing most of the band's music, and he was mainly the one behind their change in direction. In fact he said part of the reason Rollins was hired as a singer was because he wasn't solely interested in singing Hardcore Punk songs. That said, Ginn did lament that ever since Rollins joined they had to consistently keep things dark and edgy lyrically.
Everyone knows that the bass on Metallica's ...And Justice for All album is almost non-existant. It's been believed pretty much since the album was released that new bassist Jason Newsted's parts were deliberately buried in the mix by the surviving members as a way of hazing Newsted. However, when Newsted appeared on the first 2013 episode of That Metal Show and that was brought up, he admitted that a lot of the blame actually falls on him. He said that he recorded his parts by himself with no input from anyone else, using the same equipment, bass, and engineers that he used in his former band Flotsam and Jetsam. Also, since he wrote the music in F&J and the guitarists took their cues from him, his bass parts on Justice were too much like a rhythm guitar, and ended up clashing both note-wise and sonically with Hetfield's actual rhythm guitar parts.
Queen are often criticized for their use of synthesizers, sequencers, drum machines, etc. in The Eighties, and de-emphasis of their progressive hard rock elements, after many years of releasing albums with a "No Synths!" disclaimer in the liner notes and adopting a very guitar-centered sound. In reality, Queen never opposed synthesizers and were always open-minded to them, but didn't feel that the synths of the time could produce the sounds they wanted to hear. They also felt they wanted to use Brian May's "guitar orchestra" multitracking techniques more in the studio, and only placed the "no synths" disclaimers after reading one too many comments mistaking Brian's guitar (and the band's general wizardry in the studio) for synthesizers. As Queen wanted to move their sound forward and felt inspired by the technology of the day, they decided to incorporate it into their music while still keeping it in the Queen style.
In general, because of the kayfabe heavy nature of the proceedings, professional wrestling does it best to obfuscate who exactly is to blame for what on and offscreen. It's not entirely the fans' fault if they criticize the on-screen culprit of a worked shoot in a real life writes the plot situation, when the actual people behind the scenes have done their damndest to confuse the issue.
According to TNA owner Dixie Carter, the fans' chants of "Fire Russo!" were misblame, as Vince Russo only had a small part in writing their shows. Disregarding the fact that the shows still had Russo's signature style all over them, this hardly made for a better situation, as it implied that the entire booking team had their collective heads up their asses, rather than just one member.
Vince Russo's booking in general. Even during his disastrous stint as the booker of WCW, a key thing to keep in mind is that, despite the booking meetings being attended by plenty of wrestling veterans and staff, no-one hammered into him just how dumb some of his ideas were. In WCW's case, it was a widespread case of They Just Didn't Care by that point.
One thing Russo is blamed for that he shouldn't is the "Mae Young gives birth to a hand" skit, which took place in early 2000, months after he left the WWF.
For a long time, David Arquette received a large amount of undeserved flak for his winning of the WCW Championship by people thinking that he was the driving force behind the angle. A) He wasn't, B) as a wrestling fan, he knew it was a terrible idea and would've refused to do it had he not been contractually obligated, and C) he donated all of the money he made on the shows to paralyzed wrestler Darren Drozdov and the families of the late Brian Pillman and Owen Hart.
John Cena gets constant flak for being a boring Invincible Hero and his Five Moves of Doom (amongst other things), yet as a performer, he really doesn't get the final say in the matter. Executive meddling is responsible for telling him what moves to do and how he should wrestle his matches.
In fact, Cena said in an interview in the summer of '06 that he wanted to drop out of the Main Event scene after he jobbed to Edge at New Year's Revolution and turn heel to refresh his character. The writers collectively slapped him down and continued to write all of his lines at shows like they had since '03 when he turned face.
Cena's Hate Dumb also tends to hold him exclusively responsible for the companies PG Era. The PG-Era writing was a result of the company wanting to clean up their image after Benoit's Double Murder Suicide and to help with Linda McMahon's attempt at having a political career.
People tend to blame Vince McMahon for everything bad in the WWE; while it is true that he has final say on what goes on TV a lot of the more controversial angles where others were the idea of other people working for the company (for example, the infamous Katie Vick angle was the brainchild of executive producer Kevin Dunn, though Vince has defended it pretty strongly and gladly taken "responsibility" for it in interviews, confusing the issue).
This is especially true for 93-94 at which time Vince had actually taken a leave of absence for legal reasons and the company was being run by Pat Patterson.
A lot of ECW fans blame TNN for what they saw as lower quality shows when it was on that network. Everything on TV was done by Paul Heyman, and though he faced some initial level executive meddling, generally TNN took a "hands-off" approach to the promotion (extending to the promotion and provided budget, the real reason the show got Screwed by the Network). This confusion is not helped by the inclusion of a kayfabe network representative heel whose character attempted to tone down the hardcore style ECW was known for.
Hulk Hogan tends to be blamed for holding people back and not jobbing cleanly, and indeed he has used his pull and fame more than a few times for personal gain or vendettas (like getting WCW to fire color commentator Jesse Ventura). However, he was never a booker and even though he had creative control, he did not decide on the angles that didn't concern him. Management is to blame for most of the mishandling of people like Billy Kidman and Lex Luger.
One particularly egregious example of him being misblamed is for the botched ending of his match against Sting at Starrcade 1997. Several people to this day claim that Hogan bribed Nick Patrick to intentionally count at regular speed, to make Sting look bad when he kicked out when he was supposed to (after "three"). There is no real evidence that Patrick didn't just make a mistake, other than general rumors of Hogan's backstage behaviors.
The reason above can also apply to Triple H starting from 2002 onwards, especially due to his longtime relationship with Stephanie McMahon, holding back smark favorites like Evan Bourne and Shelton Benjamin. Of course, this often avoids factors like "Stone Cold" Steve Austin's retirement from wrestling and The Rock becoming an actor depleting WWE's main event talent until guys like John Cena and Batista were ready. Or that Vince McMahon has always favored not only the larger wrestlers but the ones who can exude the most over-the-top personality even before Triple H was in WWE.
Frankly, Triple H is pretty much the lightning rod for the fans wrath, regardless of whether or not he had anything to do with it. Considering he's married to the head of the WWE's creative department (and, if you believe some of the nastier rumors, closer to Vince than his own son Shane,) he's always accused to steering the company to always benefit himself. Have a favorite wrestler who isn't being pushed? Triple H is holding them back because he's "threatened." Crappy storyline? Triple H is burying someone he doesn't like.
The blame has indeed seemed to have continued on now that he has become WWE's head of talent - which would make sense given that he is officially the one running WWE's shows now, except that word around the company is that Vince still micromanages and meddles in the shows' affairs. It's supposedly gotten to the point that even Triple H is getting frustrated with Vince's meddling - ironic given his reputation for having been a Professional Butt-Kisser for much of his career.
The Montreal Screwjob was such a chaotic situation, and kayfabe and worked shoots have further muddied the issue until a lot of people are badly misinformed about what actually happened. That being said. Triple H was not a major contributor to the Montreal Screwjob, although as Shawn Michaels' buddy he was in on it. He claims to have been the one to give Vince the idea of doing something drastic about Hart and the title; and in a 2012 DVD release, Michaels all but admits HHH planted the seed in his head. WWE has always denied that booker Pat Patterson had any involvement; although he was the one who came up with the sharpshooter spot. Invertedly, Earl Hebner, who was in on the entire thing from close to the beginning, is frequently described as having been unaware of anything until minutes before the match and having been bullied into going along with it against his wishes. Many people use Michaels' autobiography as a source about the Screwjob, but as someone said, the most controversial thing about the autobiography is "whether it belongs in the fiction section".
Bret Hart gets quite a bit of the misblame as well. Contrary to popular belief, he was booked for another month of TV and house shows following Montreal, as well as having permission from WCW head Eric Bischoff to work the next pay-per-view in order to drop the title and finish up business in the WWF. His refusal to drop the title to Michaels was only after Shawn made it clear he wasn't losing to Bret under any circumstances. Stories of him taking the WWF title belt to WCW are equally ludicrous; the two previous incidents of this happening (one with Ric Flair, and one with Madusa) both ended up in nasty lawsuits, and hindsight shows WCW had no plans for the unbeaten WWF champion when he did in fact arrive.
WWE caught a lot of flak for releasing Marty Jannetty just days after signing him in 2006. Jannetty had to go onto his blog and insist WWE was not at fault and had no choice but to let him go after both sides discovered his probation prevented him from meeting their travel demands.
The fall of extremely popular Diva Mickie James in WWE is this. The "Piggie James" feud with Michelle McCool was followed by James dropping the Women's Title two weeks after winning it at Royal Rumble and her subsequent release led to fans immediately accusing WWE of burying a talented wrestler they thought was too fat in favor of a rail-thin blonde who was dating the Undertaker. In a 2010 interview after her release, James revealed that she didn't have a problem with the angle itself.
If Ring of Hell is to be believed, Triple H was responsible for Stone Cold Steve Austin's 2001 heel turn after WrestleMania X-Seven. According to Austin's autobiography, The Stone Cold Truth, Austin wanted to turn heel to refresh his character.
The description for Type 5 of misblamed is also known as "Quarterback Syndrome", because a lot of mistakes (such as a bad play, a poorly executed play, etc) are automatically blamed on the quarterback of American football teams. When really, sometimes it isn't their fault at all.
And if it's not the quarterback, it's usually the head coach. Which is slightly more accurate, usually, but none but the most egotistical of them are in charge of choosing their teams (except in college football, of course).
A good example is when Tennessee Titans back-up quarterback Kerry Collins was hugely blamed for the team's abysmal blunder against the New England Patriots in 2009 (the one with the 59-0 score), though mostly from people who only watched snippets from ESPN, and only spotted his -7 passing yards. For those who actually watched the entire game, it told a different story. Although it's true that Collins didn't play his best, he certainly fared much better than the receivers he threw the ball to. His best passes often resulted in a no gain, yard loss or a drop, or only inched forward with maybe a yard or two gain. Worst of all, Collins tossed the ball to one receiver, who idiotically backpedaled twenty two yards to avoid getting tackled, but failed anyway and resulted in a huge yard lossage. Unfortunately, the ESPN replay didn't note this, so everyone thought Collins caused the suckage when it was multiple factors that caused the horrific loss (like god awful defense and special teams, being a couple others).
Relatedly, it's also fairly common, as you'll see below, that a team's loss will be blamed on a single play, even if there were a dozen or so other bad plays that happened within the same game that contributed to the loss.
One of the bigger cases in point: The 2001 Texas-Oklahoma game, where Texas' loss is put all on Chris Simms throwing a late 4th-quarter interception that Teddy Lehman ran into the end zone for a game-sealing touchdown. What no one remembers: If Nathan Vasher hadn't tried to field a punt on the previous play, the ball would have bounced into the end zone and Texas would have gotten the ball at the 20-yard-line. Instead, Vasher had to fall on the ball and Texas started inside the 5; this allowed OU to blitz, and Simms had no choice but to throw something fast or else get sacked in his own end zone for a safety (2 points for OU and Texas loses the ball) that would have sealed the game anyway.
Of course, it also works the other way. Tim Tebow became the biggest example of Quarterback Syndrome in reverse, getting every single bit of credit for the Denver Broncos 2011 turnaround. When the Broncos defense intercepts the opposing quarterback's pass in his own territory near the end of the game, leading to the Broncos kicker getting an easy game-winning field goal, and everyone says "Tebow does it again!" it's gotten pretty ridiculous.
Fran Tarkenton, a quarterback for the Minnesota Vikings from the '70s, is often known as the "quarterback who lost four Superbowls". Actually, the Vikings first Superbowl loss was with Joe Kapp at the helm. Similarly, John Elway was known as being a quarterback who lost four Superbowls, when the Broncos first loss was with Craig Morton at the helm.
After the Baltimore Ravens won the Superbowl in 2012, quarterback Joe Flacco was signed to the most lucrative contract in football history. He proceeded to have a miserable 2013 (his quarterback rating in the final game of the season against division rivals the Cincinnati Bengals was in the 40s), and some Ravens fans are already calling for the team to cut him. Of course, Flacco's best receiver was traded away in the offseason as were three of his offensive lineman, and his formerly dependable running back Ray Rice averaged 2 yards a carry for the season.
It was because of that contract that the Ravens had to get rid of those other players in order to stay under the salary cap. Of course, that should still place blame mostly on management for offering the contract and not taking into account who they would have to get rid of in exchange and how it would affect the team.
The infamous Mark Sanchez "butt fumble", in which he ran into one of his offensive lineman's rear ends and fumbled the football, happened after fullback Lex Hilliard missed a handoff, and the butt he ran into was Brandon Moore, who was being driven back by defensive lineman Vince Wilfork.
Don't mention Don Denkinger in St. Louis. The former Major League umpire is blamed for the Cardinals losing the 1985 World Series due to his blown call at first base in the ninth inning of Game 6. This ignores that 1) the Cards had a three games to one lead over the Royals and scored only two runs in the last three games, 2) They made three defensive mistakes after the call that all contributed to the loss, and 3) They were more focused on blaming Denkinger than trying to win Game 7, which the Royals won 11-0.
The 1986 World Series would produce its own epic case of misblame, one which has become entrenched in baseball lore. In Game 6 of the series, the New York Mets would come back in extra innings, scoring the winning run of that game when first baseman Bill Buckner made an error and his glove missed a ground ball hit between his legs. The Mets promptly won Game 7 and became champions, prolonging the legendary agony of the Red Sox. Easy case for blaming Buckner, right? Not so much. Those who do conveniently ignore the fact that Boston's bullpen had already blown two leads before the error occurred, with Boston having lost a 3-2 lead in regular innings and a 5-3 lead in the 10th before Buckner's error. The situation in the 10th is particularly notable, since it happened despite the fact that when the Mets rally started they had 2 outs and no baserunners, and just about everyone except the Mets players themselves had conceded defeat (the TV crew had already announced one Red Sox player the player of the game and named another Sox player the World Series MVP, the message board in the Mets stadium briefly displayed a message congratulating the Red Sox on their victory, etc.). Boston relievers then gave up three hits in a row and pitcher Bob Stanley allowed the Mets to tie the game by throwing a wild pitch nowhere near target that let the tying run score and the winning run to move to third base. On top of that, Buckner (who was nearing the end of his long career) had injured knees that should have kept him out of game, except that Boston manager John McNamara insisted on Buckner playing so he could take part in the victory. Last but not least, Buckner had to play the ball far behind first base, and it is highly doubtful that he could have beaten the speedy basrunner Mookie Wilson (who held the Mets team record for stolen bases until 2008) to the bag even if his knees were healthy. And even with the loss, Boston still had Game 7 to work with, where they once again jumped out to an early lead and blew it.
The ESPN Classic series "Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame" was devoted to this, listing some of the most infamous moments in sports and giving reasons why the blame shouldn't solely go to the one person (or group) that took all the heat. Denkinger and Buckner, as described above, are just two incidents the show covered.
College basketball fans, sportswriters and TV commentators all grossly overestimate the importance of the RPI (Ratings Percentage Index) ranking in the NCAA's selection procedure for its annual basketball tournament. Several websites exist solely to replicate the RPI (since the NCAA doesn't release it publicly). Every year there are complaints about teams with a high RPI being left out or teams with a low RPI making the field, all concluding that the RPI is deeply flawed and the NCAA should get rid of it. But the NCAA has always said that the RPI is just meant as a simple table to compare teams early on in the process, and that their decisions ultimately come down to who the team in question beat and who they lost to.
Real Madrid president Florentino Pérez was heavily criticised for paying about 100 million euros to Manchester United for the transfer of a single player, Cristiano Ronaldo, especially because it happened in the middle of the post 2008 worldwide economic crisis. However, the transfer was signed a year before by his predecessor Ramón Calderón, who was betting on Ronaldo's arrival saving his scandal-ridden presidency. He didn't resist the whole year and resigned before it passed. After his election, Pérez found that Calderón's agreement forced the club to either pay the 100 million for Ronaldo or a 30 million penalty for breach of contract and get nothing in return.
Watching ESPN's documentary, Small Potatoes: Who Killed the USFL? the answer to the titular question would seem to be "Donald Trump." While Trump, as owner of the New Jersey Generals, started a bidding war with the NFL over college players (one that most USFL owners didn't have the resources to compete in), the real downfall of the league — the disastrous decision to move from spring to fall and compete directly with the NFL — couldn't have been done without a consensus of owners going along with Trump. Much like the Vince Russo entries above, it's unfair to say he single-handedly destroyed the league. Though Trump doesn't help his own cause by defending everything he did as "the right thing to do" and accepting none of the blame for the USFL's swift and epic collapse.
Losing The World Cup can lead to the fifth case. In Brazil, there are four known scapegoats:
Barbosa, the goalkeeper in 1950 — where they lost the finals to Uruguay in Rio de Janeiro. He's famously quoted as: "The biggest penalty for a crime is 30 years. I'm currently paying 43 for a crime I didn't commit!"
Toninho Cerezo, whose defensive mistake led to Italy's second goal in their 3-2 victory in 1982 (a simple draw would have put Brazil into the semi-finals, but the second goal turned the tide toward Italy).
Zico, who missed a penalty against France in the quarter-finals in 1986. The game ended up 1-1, with an eventual French victory in the penalty shootout.
In 2006, while Zidane was taking a free kick, Roberto Carlos was adjusting his sock. Thierry Henry passed behind him and scored France's victory goal.
Goalkeeper Tommy Salo was blamed for Sweden's 4-3 loss in the quarterfinals against Belarus in the 2002 Olympic hockey tournament. While he can be blamed for the endlessly replayed final goal, the coach pointed out that it wasn't Salo's fault that a Swedish team full of NHL pros only scored three goals (out of 47 shots) on a minor team like Belarus.
The Hillsborough Stadium disaster of 1989, when several Liverpool soccer fans were crushed to death in the standing pens at an FA Cup game (for those who are confused, in those days most soccer stadiums had lower levels with no seats that were enclosed by cage pens). Immediately after the disaster, The Sun published a front page story stating the fans themselves were to blame, intentionally overcrowding the pens and then attacking policemen after the cages broke and they spilled onto the field. It turned out that there was no security to inform and direct fans to the less crowded pens, the police actually prevented ambulances from entering the stadium after the fence broke, and the fans were trying to shuttle the injured out to the ambulances (which the police also prevented). Furthermore, stories about fans attacking police officers attempting to tend to the injured were outright fabrications. The Sun is still boycotted in Liverpool to this day.
For most people, the Buffalo Bills' loss at Super Bowl XXV is summed up with two words: "Wide Right". Here are other reasons the Bills lost to the Giants: the Bills were outcoached by the New York Giants, which had the likes of Bill Belichick and Tom Coughlin (both who would become successful coaches in their own right), the Giants having the longest ball possession time in Super Bowl history (40:33), Belichick's game plan which muzzled the Bills' "K-Gun" no-huddle offense, and as for Scott Norwood, it was a 47-yard field goal on grass, and he was not good at kicking field goals on grass (not to mention, while nowhere near impossible, a 47-yarder no chip shot either).
The baseball version of "Quarterback Syndrome" could be called "A-Rod Syndrome", named for Alex Rodriguez. While Rodriguez is one of the best players in history, he has- with the exception of one year- never done well in the playoffs. As a result, when the New York Yankees are eliminated from the playoffs most of the blame and focus usually falls on Alex Rodriguez. This usually ignores the fact that he is rarely if ever the cause of the failure, but rather part of a wider problem. In 2012, for example, Alex Rodriguez was being benched in the postseason and being blamed for the failure of the Yankees, despite the fact that other players like Robinson Cano and Curtis Granderson weren't hitting well either and that Derek Jeter, the Yankees' most famous postseason hero, had gotten hurt early in the ALCS series.
Similarly, a lower-level focus came on Prince Fielder in that season's World Series, despite the fact that almost the entire Detroit Tiger team was generally anemic at the plate during that series.
New York Giants fans still shudder at the mention of Trey Junkin, who botched a snap for what could have been a game-winning field goal in the 2002 playoffs against the San Francisco 49ers. Many fans inexplicably ignore the fact that Junkin has literally been hired the week before after going into retirement at the end of a very successful career and was very rusty as a result. They also tend to gloss over the fact that the Giants blew a massive 38-14 lead in only a quarter and a half of football, resulting in the second biggest blown lead in NFL history. Then there's the fact that the referees missed a penalty on the final play that should have allowed a re-kick of the field goal and redemption for Junkin. The game apparently haunts Junkin to this day, resulting in the guy misblaming himself for a situation he never should have been in.
While Americans have not taken Association Football as a spectator sport well, they are often blamed for creating the word Soccer, an alternative word for the sport which is a colloquial abbreviation of association (from assoc.). However the word was actually coined by Charles Wreford Brown, an Oxford student (in England) said to have been fond of shortened forms such as "brekkers" for breakfast and "rugger" for rugby football; and back in the day was used by rich folk to distinguish Association Football from Rugby. When the sport arrived in the U.S. in the late 19th century, it was called Association Football (and was surprisingly quite a popular sport at the time) until after World War II; mainly due to the popularity of American Football, and the word Soccer was adopted to differentiate with the two footballs. However since then, soccer's popularity in the US would fall into obscurity until recently, due in thanks to "soccer war" between the country's major league organization and FIFA. This sport's naming has also reigned true in some other countries like Canada, the Caribbean, Australia, South Africa, and New Zealand; who have adopted or invented another football code, either as their "main" football or alongside Association Football. However, the British has since grown to hate this word, and have been hell bent on lambasting the U.S. for it, never minding that the word came from the same place the modern rules of the game were made, the latter fact the British embrace and the former fact the British will often deny.
The NCAA "death penalty" in 1987 is often thought to have killed the Southern Methodist University football team, and is often regarded as an argument against strong NCAA sanctions against any particular team. In reality, when the full extent of the pay-to-play scandal was brought to light, the university itself (and the church bishops overseeing it) decided to de-emphasize its football program (threatening to drop football entirely if need be), imposing extremely tight recruiting restrictions, making the team play in tiny on-campus Ownby Stadium (which the Mustangs hadn't played in since 1947) instead of Texas Stadium or the Cotton Bowl, and severing ties with almost all players and boosters associated with the program in the 1980s, greatly alienating the program's supporters.
Furthermore, many want to directly blame the fallout of the SMU death penalty for causing the breakup of the Southwest Conference. However, the 1984 Supreme Court ruling NCAA vs University of Oklahoma probably played as much if not more of a factor, as it opened the floodgates for college conferences to negotiate their own TV contracts and subsequently start poaching off schools to make themselves look more attractive to networks (which college sports is still dealing with to this day). It's largely suspected that the SWC's biggest schools at Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas were already considering going elsewhere even before the penalties were handed down on SMU.
Baseball player Fred Merkle spent almost his entire professional career being blamed for costing the New York Giants the 1908 National League pennant because he failed to touch second base after a game-winning hit. What most of the fans who blamed him conveniently forgot was at the time the rule requiring runners to touch the next base after a hit was rarely enforced on "walkoff" hits and customarily ignored by veteran players. It was Merkle's misfortune that Cubs player Johnny Evers was a stickler for the rulebook, and that umpire Hank O'Day was willing to enforce it.
Furthermore, many of those who choose to blame Merkle don't know the specific reason Merkle didn't bother touching second base and why he and the Giants didn't expect the rule to be enforced: The fans were pouring out onto the field, and the Giants players were all running for the clubhouse for their own safety. It was because of the fans being on the field that they couldn't continue the game even though nullifying the winning hit/run simply kept the game tied and thus forced it to be replayed at season's end.
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is often blamed for the annual rule changes, especially the recent ones that protect the offensive players. It's the NFL's Competition Committee that determines the rule changes. Though Goodell has been a vocal proponent of many of the changes.
When a college sports team, such as the Oregon Ducks football team, introduces new hi-tech, expensive equipment, uniforms, facilities, etc., people will criticize the university for spending so much money on their athletics rather than academics. The truth is most of the money that funds the teams come from boosters, such as Oregon alum and Nike founder Phil Knight, with the express purpose of it being used that way. In fact, many teams rely solely on booster money and use very little of a university's allotted athletics budget.
NFL legend Jerry Rice took a lot of heat when, during his brief, late-career stint with the Seattle Seahawks, he wore jersey #80 (Which has his entire career). Problem was that #80 had already been retired for Steve Largent (the player Rice surpassed for most of his receiving records). Most assumed Rice big-leagued the Seahawks and asked for #80 and the Seahawks captiulated, rather than make a fuss. According to Largent himself, the Seattle general manager at the time called Largent and told him that Rice wanted #80 and if it would be okay if they un-retired it. After Largent said yes, the GM called Rice and told him Largent wanted him to wear #80.
The "Roving Mauler" Dungeons & Dragons monster gets a lot of "what drug were they on" reactions from its appearance. Said appearance is lifted from the demon Buer◊, who goes all the way back to the 16th century. Really, this just raises the question of what drug were they on in the 16th century?
Head designer Mark Rosewater is often blamed for many things the players hate about Magic: The Gathering, even things that he had nothing to do with. And indeed, even things that have absolutely nothing to do with his department — as the face and voice of the company, he's just the one chosen to announce such things, leading many players to blame him for the decisions he likely had no say it whatsoever... Then again, many other things are entirely his fault.
In his commentary for the TGWTG Brawl, Doug Walker wasn't exactly happy with fan dumb calling him a misogynist for showing a pillow fight between The Nostalgia Chick and Little Miss Gamer, explaining that Lindsay had been the one to come up with it, not him. note He wasn't angry at Lindsay, just the concern trolls. Same went for Noah Antwiler and his commentary for the first "Spooning With Spoony".
Similarly, Lindsay Ellis took some flak for the jokes at the expense of Nella in her show's review of Grease. Lindsay had to clarify that Nella wrote the script herself, and that Nella and her are friends and she would never actually say anything like that.
Saying Disney should have finished The Thief and the Cobbler. Disney had nothing to do with that movie, it was made to be an anti-Disney, and the art style looks nothing like the art style of Disney movies.
Well, since Disney owned Miramax, the company responsible for Thief's Macekre, Roy Disney for a long time was talking about having the Disney animators, many of whom trained with Richard Williams and brought that influence to Aladdin, finish animating Williams' cut of the movie. But then Roy Disney left the company and then died, and Miramax closed and their library appears to have been sold to various other companies, so good luck with that.
Pointing fingers at Nickelodeon for stuff done in the Doug series after it was bought out by Disney.
Blaming Disney for changes to Doug, when most of the original crew was still retained.
Bashing Warner Bros. (or Time Warner) for removing music on YouTube, when it was actually Warner Music Group, a completely separate record company. And neither Warner Bros. nor Time Warner owns WMG anymore. WMG spun off from Time Warner in 2004, and since then, they are owned by private investors, not Time Warner. At least the record company still keeps "Warner" in their name.
Anger at Disney Channel for not making a Kingdom Hearts anime already. Channels aren't responsible for making shows- it is the job of studios to do that.
For LittleKuriboh's Yu-Gi-Oh! The Abridged Series, despite the fact [[Creator/4KidsEntertainment 4Kids]] are the main villains of the 3rd season, fans keep on saying that 4Kids are responsible for banning LittleKuriboh / Card Games FTW. However, they were recently suspended by a Japanese company named Nippon Ad Systems — LittleKuriboh even stated himself that people should stop blaming 4Kids, and 4Kids are still blamed to this day.
Granted it wasn't even the company that banned him, but one of the faulty copyright bots YouTube uses to enforce copyright.
The Nostalgia Critic often ends up blaming movies for elements that originated from the works they were based on. Case in point, the purple suit worn by The Phantom, as well as his nickname "The Ghost Who Walks".
On that note, Rachel and Malcolm are often blamed for things people don't like about the new Nostalgia Critic episodes, even though they have far less creative control than previously and they've said they just show up and get told what to do.
Many people blame Scrappy Doo for ruining Scooby-Doo (specifically, dumping half the original cast, switching to a Two Shorts format, and the franchise's first clumsy attempts to lose the Scooby-Doo Hoax) due to the timing of his introduction. Ironically, Scrappy is what probably saved the show from cancellation way back in 1979. And the success of that new incarnation of Scooby Doo is likely what has kept the franchise going on for some 40 years.
Fans of the original Young Justice comic book attacked the Young Justice cartoon for excluding Wonder Girl while including most of the other Justice League sidekicks. In reality, Wonder Girl was legally barred from appearing in the first season of the show due to rights issues. These same issues had earlier kept the character from appearing on Teen Titans, and Wonder Woman from appearing in Static Shock, Batman Beyond and Smallville. She eventually appeared in the second season.
Many fans blamed Dan DiDio for Wally West's death in the Series Finale of Young Justice (as the character has been declared "toxic" in the New 52 and is currently in Comic Book Limbo), despite the fact that DiDio has nothing to do with DC Animation and the fact that Greg Weisman has stated he planned on killing off Wally as far back as Season 1.
In Futurama, the episode introducing Dwight Conrad was originally scheduled for season 3, but was held back to season 5, despite the fact that the character appears in a number of episodes in between this. Many fans assumed that this was due to the Fox Network's seemingly random scheduling (which resulted in similar continuity errors regarding a few minor characters) but in fact some dialogue needed to be re-recorded and the actor playing Dwight wasn't available at the time. The decision to delay airing was made by the show's producers.
Nickelodeon took a lot of heat for the second half of the third season of Avatar: The Last Airbender taking so long to air that two episode premiered in Canada and another two on DVD. However, this was because production on the finale had been delayed, and Nickelodeon didn't want to air less than half of a season only to have another hiatus right before the end of the series.
Warner Bros.' Histeria has received some undeserved bashing because the people in question think it got Animaniacs and Freakazoid! cancelled. Animaniacs and Freakazoid! (which was canned beforeHisteria! even began production) were actually cancelled because the network was upset that they were more popular among people older than Kids' WB!'s target demographic.
Freakazoid's cancellation is also sometimes blamed on Madman creator Mike Allred, on the grounds that he sued over Freakazoid's similarity to his creation. This is not true. Mike has openly stated that he was unhappy that he didn't receive a credit for his influence, but he never sued — he didn't feel it was worth it.
Sites like Youtube have shown the unaired Pilot Episode of As Told by Ginger, made in 1999 (before the show went live). Apparently people thought this was an attempt to restart the series despite the fact that the animation and designs were still being worked out (Ginger's Perm agrees). Apparently, that wasn't enough of a hint as people said the writers were racist because Miranda was shown as being a brown-haired Caucasian (As opposed to being black in the series). In truth, Miranda was actually animated as white for the pilot...but she was rectonned to be black because of her voice actress, Cree Summers. Also, Blake was made much more sophisticated...he's shown in the pilot as crashing a teenage party in his underwear for kicks.
A very strong example of misblamed ignorance plus the Nostalgia Filter is the 2003 series of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. It was complained at by fans of the '80s version for being an "In Name Only remake of the '80s version", with no Bebop, Rocksteady, Krang, or ultra-silly themes, as well as how it was less faithful to the comics. Lies — The 2003 series is actually more faithful to the comics and the 80s version was the In Name Only adaptation.
The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Adventures comic book series doesn't help matters, since it was based off of the animated series and was probably read more by said complainers. Of course, Eastman and Laird's Mirage Studios didn't produce that book series — it was licensed out to Archie Comics.
People who don't realize there are two English dubs of at least the first three seasons of Winx Club like to slam 4Kids for their horrible "redub" of the series. The "redub" in question was done by a Canadian company and is actually more faithful to the original version than the 4Kids dub is.
On a latter note, 4Kids is sometimes blamed for plot holes they did not create. For example, Beta Academy is mentioned in the original Italian dub.
Now that Nickelodeon owns the show, they're getting lots of criticism for their "changes" (new music, Layla's name to Aisha, etc.). Some of these people thought 4Kids created Winx Club. The truth: Nickelodeon's undoing many of 4Kids's changes to make a more faithful English dub.
Warner Bros. has taken some criticism for making the Tom and Jerrymovie when they actually didn't because they didn't own the characters until three years after the movie's release. It was actually made by Film Roman and distributed by Miramax Films. The only thing Warner Bros. has to do with it is distributing the DVD release.
Most of the hate for Cartoon Network's The Problem Solverz stems from the disproven idea that it was the show that replaced Sym-Bionic Titan. SBT was cancelled because it couldn't secure any merchandising deals, while Problem Solverz had already been in the works for years before said decision was made. For being the most hated cartoon on the Internet, it seems quite a significant portion of people are misinformed.
Tim Burton gets blamed for upstagingcredit on Henry Selick for The Nightmare Before Christmas. Debates rage over who did the most work and will go as far as to insult one or the other. In actuality Burton chose Selick to direct Nightmare so he could direct Batman Returns. Another fact is, directors, actors and even producers, rarely control the billing of a film. Such things are done by the studio marketing department and the executives. The lines get even more blurred when it came to Coraline which advertised as being From the Director of The Nightmare Before Christmas, which is factual as Selick did direct both Nightmare and Coraline. Still Burton gets blamed for upstaging credit for Coraline despite the fact Burton didn't have anything to do with Coraline.
The Superhero Squad Show is sometimes used as an example of the Disney/Marvel merger ruining Marvel forever, but it began production before Disney bought them.
Seth Mac Farlane tends to get misblamed on a lot of things (possibly due to his hatedom claiming that he is everything that's wrong with animation). One notable one is the animation of Butch Hartman. He is automatically blamed for those just because he's friends with the guy despite the fact that he has nothing to do with those projects. Instead, it's Hartman and Fred Seibert (the latter which never seems to get any sort of hate despite being the producer of those shows). And of course, there's the cash grabs and merchandising that the studio does and not him.
Another notable misblaming is MacFarlane being somehow blamed for Futurama being cancelled. The truth is that Family Guy was canceled one full year before Futurama was and MacFarlane wasn't even doing anything with Fox at the time. Also, MacFarlane and Matt Groening happen to be friends in real life so MacFarlane probably would have wanted Futurama to continue. He also had a voice role in the fourth direct-to-DVD Futurama movie.
MacFarlane is also blamed for the the direction that Family Guy went through after the show was un-canceled. MacFarlane is barely involved with the show's scripts and mostly just approves or disapproves ideas. The actual writing comes from the story writers.
Similar to the Futurama example, many King of the Hill fans seem to think MacFarlane was responsible for that show's cancellation, as it was initially replaced by The Cleveland Show. Never mind that King was on the chopping block for 2-3 years prior due to sagging ratings and erratic scheduling, being renewed only due to fan outcry, that it enjoyed a thirteen-year run that many shorter-lived animated shows would kill for, and that several other shows have rotated in and out of its old timeslot.
My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic. No, Lauren Faust is not responsible for everything, good or bad, that has ever happened on the show. She merely came up with the idea and wrote a handful of episodes, reduced herself to a consulting producer for season 2, and hasn't even seen the third season let alone had anything to do with it.
A lot of King of the Hill fans (even on this very wiki) blame Lucky for Luanne becoming more ditzy over the years. Luanne Took a Level in Dumbass years before Lucky showed up.
Many Doug fans claim that "Disney ruined Doug" when they bought the rights to the show. In fact, buying Doug (and slapping their name on it) was the only thing they did to the show. The creator made all the changes himself.
South Park: voice actress April Stewart has been blamed by some sore fans for Mona Marshall not having as many roles, as well as the exit of Eliza Schneider. In actuality, Schneider quit on her own terms in 2003 due to a salary dispute and issues with her union note Around this time, the SAG was advising voice actresses to not accept roles for the show due to its non-union status, or they would risk being blacklisted or having their health coverage stripped. Along with fines, these are among the expected consequences for union actors who take on non-union work.. Stewart herself had to use an alias for her early work in the show until matters could be settled. It's also worth noting that Marshall always had voiced fewer female characters in comparison, as Schneider had handled the majority of the roles after Mary Kay Bergman's death.
Due to old fansites like Beef-Cake and convention advertisements mistaking Mona Marshall as the second voice of Wendy, Schneider herself received some blame and misconception of "usurping" the role. In actuality, she'd always voiced the character and simply modified her take after a while. In comparison, April Stewart would later receive flack for making Wendy sound too old, until it was revealed that it was the creators' own decision to not speed up her voice as much (while Mary Kay Bergman could naturally perform the higher voice, Schneider and Stewart had to have their voices digitally modified).
An in-universe Type 4 example is Played for Laughs in "Night of the Living Homeless", where Kyle tries to come up with an idea with what to do with the homeless, and Cartman's idea was to jump over them with his skateboard. The other boys either thank Kyle for the idea that was obviously Cartman's, or in Stan's case, get baffled by it.
The Simpsons has a serious case of Type 5: Fans who dislike the newer seasons generally say it's all the fault of the showrunner at the time: Mike Scully for Seasons 9-12 (September 1997- May 2001), and Al Jean for 13-present (November 2001-present). Scully and Jean aren't innocent, to be sure, but aren't 100% guilty either.
The showrunner isn't personally involved with every aspect of the show: The writing staff comes up with plot ideas and first drafts of episodes, while the showrunner selects which episodes get made and leads script revisions. The showrunner also isn't all-powerful: the senior production staff can and do interfere with writing and plot ideas.
Scully inherited a show that was already going down: Season 8 was the beginning of the end, with many senior writers and producers heading for the exits, co-showrunners Oakley and Weinstein operated on the assumption that The Simpsons would soon be over note FOX wasn't threatening to cancel the show at the time, but 8 years is a long run for a show like The Simpsons, regardless of quality, and senior staff, Groening included, were dropping hints about the show ending because they wanted the series to go out on a high note., leading them to experiment with new art and plot formats that led to a drop in quality and lack of direction for the show.
The hardcore Scully Hate Dom says he did so much damage that the show couldn't be salvaged when he stepped down as showrunner in mid-2001, but that ignores the changes Al Jean implemented on the show: of the disliked elements from Scully's time as showrunner, many were scrapped immediately while many more disappeared over time - very few of the complaints about episodes in seasons 9-12 can be applied to seasons since then, and vice-versa.
Al Jean also inherited a mostly new writing staff, presided over the retirements of the show's last original writers a few seasons into his time as showrunner, and took over at a time when the series was falling apart, due to both its age and the Denser and Wackier elements introduced during Scully's tenure. 8 seasons was a long time, and 12 was positively record breaking. For obvious reasons, Jean's detractors also ignore his time as showrunner in the third and fourth seasons, generally regarded as two of the series' best.
The voice actors have also run out of steam with recent seasons: Hank Azaria (Moe, Chief Wiggum, Apu) has voiced one-off characters since the show's beginning and admitted in an interview that while he would try to do something new for each of them back in the 1980s and 1990s, he ran out of ideas around Season 10 (August 1998 to May 1999) and can now pull this off only a few times a season, sometimes less.
Matt Groening gets next to none of the blame for the show's decline, but he probably deserves more: Some of the big complaints about the last 15 or so seasons are Flanderization, blunt political commentary, and the show increasingly resembling South Park and Family Guy. Incidentally, these are also some of the main complaints about the Un-Cancelled seasons of Futurama, which has little in common with modern-day Simpsons apart from having Groening at the helm.
Superjail! season 2 received a case of type 5, with Jackson Publick (credited under his actual name Chris McCulloch ) getting the accusation of "usurping" the show from Christy Karacas, as he was put in charge of being the story-editor and having the final call on scripts. If an episode fell flat, a plot twist was done that a fan didn't like, or if there was less violence, it had to be all on him. In actuality, the season 2 format change was something that Christy Karacas and Stephen Warbrick had wanted to do in hope of breaking away from being formulaic and getting to explore the characters' stories more.
Type 2 and Type 3 also come into play, as while there was some degree of meddling in season 2 note mainly having to have the episode "Hot Chick" revised to remove an implication of rape, Mistress Kilda's death having to be toned down in "Lord Stingray Crash Party", some of the moments cited as being the network screwing the creators over (perceived Flanderization, revelations of the Twins and Alice's backstories) were actually things that the creators themselves had decided on (to obviously mixed reception).
There is a lesser extent of type 5 with some of the new writers for season 2 (John J. Miller, Joe Croson, Adam Modiano), as none of them had written for the show before and were perceived as being amateurs or not "getting" it. In actuality, while the script is usually the writer's work, they evolve from boardroom pitches between all the writers and outlines by Karacas, the story editor revising the script over time, and there also being uncredited rewrites. In short, an episode that doesn't perform well doesn't always fall on one person. To contrast with the above situation, the writers and story editor in season 3 seemed to receive less blaming and outrage, perhaps as things had cooled down.
Fans of Kim Possible often cite Phineas and Ferb for the reason that Kim Possible got the axe. Kim Possible ended because the creators wanted to end production on the series.
"Prime killed Animated" is a common complaint of those who preferred the organic traditional animation to the more Movie accurate CGI of Prime. It simply came soon after the cancellation of the show which, while cut down in its prime, ended properly.
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, many people blamed Rugrats for the fact that The Ren & Stimpy Show and Rockos Modern Life were cancelled, when in reality Ren and Stimpy was cancelled because of low ratings after the creator's firing and Rocko's Modern Life was cancelled because Nickelodeon thought that Joe Murray wanted to end his show.
In a strange aversion of this trope, Stephen Hillenburg is thought to be the creative genius of and responsible for everything that the original pre Un-CancelledSponge Bob Square Pants episodes had to offer and many fans of the original series believe that Hillenburg has dropped out of the project. While Stephen Hillenburg was one of the showrunners during the original run, he only co-wrote a few episodes of the first season. Derek Drymon was actually the person most creatively involved in the writing during the early days and the head-writer so chances are is that Derek Drymon is actually the person that brought the majority of his trademark humor to the show (Which can be also seen in it's Spiritual Successor: Adventure Time which Drymon also co-created) and the style of the show changed because of his absence. Stephen Hillenburg never left the show either, but just demoted himself to executive-producer and Paul Tibbitt is more hands on than either Hillenburg or former showrunner Drymon. Not to mention that Stephen Hillenburg vetoes every episode before they air, so chances are that he actually approves of the new style of humor the show has taken since it's revival.
Man of Action, the creators of Ben 10 have been blamed for the fan-dividedBen 10: Omniverse. However, they left the franchise after Ultimate Alien to work on Ultimate Spider-Man, though they still receive a "created by" credit and in actual fact, art director Derrick Wyatt, executive producer Tramm Wigzell, supervising producer Matt Youngberg and now ex-Cartoon Network, Boomerang and Toonami CEO Stuart Snyder are actually responsible for the stylistic change from the Darker and Edgier tone of Alien Force/Ultimate Alien to the Lighter and Softer tone of Omniverse.
To avoid any Flame Bait, a lot of decisions made or proposed for a lot of countries out there are misblamed as being thought up solely by either the Prime Minister, President or whoever is considered the head of the government. Nope... that may have been the case sometimes, but not every time. Granted, this is a very easy thing to happen though, what with how most people won't know everything that happens in their government without actually being there, so most people know of it through the media. But the Media has often misblamed things as being "All the head-guy's fault". The media will have you believe that the prime minister or president does everything by themselves — no mention of senators, governors, legislatures, etc unless they are caught in some scandal.
This also extends with business decisions made by large companies. Once more... how would an average joe customer know what goes on in the secret meetings? For all we know, a decision that customers may not be fond of wasn't the CEO's idea, but a department head's.
A specific example is the American Presidency. The way most people blame the president, you'd assume that the president is some kind of Single-person Dictator or Monarch who gets whatever s/he wants when they're in office. Mention the people who actually come up with acts and, unless they're in the news for something scandalous or are in a major position (Minority party leader, speaker of the house, etc), you'll probably get blank stares.
The Supreme Court outside the state level is also rarely mentioned outside of a few major decisions. Most people often act shocked in the media when nobody can recognize the face of a federal judge, but given how little coverage they get, can you really blame them?
A good example is how President Obama is (and George W. Bush was) blamed for gasoline prices. Besides oil companies being private companies, OPEC is the largest entity impacting oil supplies. If they wanted to increase oil prices, any one of those thirteen countries, of which the U.S. is not one, would simply reduce production. In one instance, the concern that workers in Nigeria were going to go on strike resulted in price increases. No actual change in production occurred, and the workers did not strike; oil prices increased simply because of a possibility.
It's also very common for any party or person succeeding an opponent in politics to put the blame on any issue (that may or may not have started before themselves took office) on their predecessor. President Obama took a self-deprecating stab at the issue during the 2013 White House correspondent's dinner with the "Blame Bush" library◊.
For that matter, add just about anyVocal Minority into this. The Furry Fandom, Anime&Manga fans, Macintosh/PC/Linux users, most comic book fans, the Fandom of video games (Final Fantasy VII and Halo come to mind), the playerbase of any MMOG, fans of any sports, most religious people....One could go on forever, but it's best to just check the article for examples and explanations.
Certain feminist groups have declared the bra or brassiere a "man's invention" or some expectation a man places on them, with some extremists declaring it a man-made torture device. In reality, the brassiere was invented by Mary Phelps (also known as "Caresse Crosby") who isn't a man, and invented it to be an alternative to the much more uncomfortable corset, which is often attributed to...another woman. Catherine de' Medici of France is often attributed to introducing the corset, and making it a symbol of beauty.
A double example, since feminists get blamed for the whole idea of burning bras, when in fact the notion was created by anti-feminists and the practice has never been adopted by feminists. And now there are groups of feminists who have started burning bras as a result of the notion that feminists followed that practice, making the conception true and turning it into a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.
Though it didn't help that Kyle's immediate response to the girl's rape comment was: "And is that the only experience you've had?"
In pretty much anything that's created by a multitude of people, the credits may not correctly identify someone as having any role, and even then, they may not spell out whose idea it was for something that people don't like. This happens in anything, Movies, Games, Software, you name it. Most people don't also know exactly what it's like to create something or how much effort goes into it, but some people subvert this by studying what kinds of technology is used to create their favorite game or the scene in their favorite movie.
Metacritic announced in Spring 2011 that they would be giving scores to game developers, based on an average of the games they worked on. Kotaku's commenters promptly pointed out that it's usually not Model Rigger #263's fault if they end up working on a poor game.
Some history books portray Hernan Cortes and his Spaniard conquistadors as being the sole destroyers of the Aztecs beyond smallpox. Lies — They had massive help from the Tlaxcalans and other Native American tribes who hated the Aztecs and saw the Spaniards as the perfect opportunity to get rid of them. Somewhere around 60,000 Natives joined the Spaniards — there probably were half that number of Spaniards fighting at most. The Tlaxcalans were also treated much better, often being taken on future Spaniard conquests. Higher-class Aztecs were treated virtually the same for awhile after they were conquered, since Cortes actually wanted to maintain the structure of the empire. Also, it was illegal to enslave Indians, just not very well-enforced. A lot of the slaveowners in Latin America went there to bypass the laws.
Apple, Inc. supposedly had only one employee for a long time. His name was Steve Jobs. He was the one who did all of the research and development, made all of the decisions, built all of the products himself, and received all of the criticism, even after death. Never mind that Steve Jobs stepped down as CEO in 2011, years before his death.
Somewhat justified due to the control freak nature of Steve Jobs, who was famously particular and stubborn, going far enough that one of his employees, fed up after numerous rejected designs for the original Mac's calculator, made an application that could be used by Jobs to tailor-make his own design for a calculator, which led to the design that stayed for years, going up to OS 9.
And similar to the above, Microsoft supposedly has only one Employee: Bill Gates. Similar to how people yell at Steve Jobs for glitches/shortcomings with Apple products, any shortcomings/glitches/what have you with a Microsoft product are treated like it is 100% Bill's doing. Xbox 360 red ringed? Bill Gates did it. Zune broke? Bill Gates' fault. Didn't like Halo? Again, Bill Gates. Note that Bill's retirement as CEO has merely slowed the complaints, not stopped them.
Since Bill's retirement, a lot of people just replace his name in complaints with Steve Ballmer's. Some even do this retroactively, assuming that everything bad Microsoft has ever done (including the stuff that led to their big antitrust lawsuit and nearly got the company broken up by the Department of Justice) was really Ballmer's fault, and that the only thing Gates ever did wrong was failing to keep a tight enough leash on him.
Also concerning Apple, in recent years people have been accusing them of mistreating "their" manufacturing workers in China. However, the workers in question are actually employed by Foxconn, a huge electronics company with the likes of Intel, Sony, Microsoft and many others among their clients. Apple are big enough clients that you could hold them responsible to some degree, but they could cease all orders from Foxconn tomorrow and it, sadly, would not change a thing about how their workers are treated. This lead to a rather huge Double Standard...articles criticizing Apple of using Foxconn employees were usually given lots of views and comments. However, fewer articles were written about Foxconn's other clients, and the ones that were were, for the most part, ignored.
Microsoft Windows is often blamed if any glitches or viruses occur on a computer. While true in some occasions, most of the time the problem is due to user error, hardware error, a bug on an installed program (often doing something that the documentation tells it not to do), or an infected file downloaded from the internet. And as for viruses, let's just say that the internet is not always a nice place. Most viruses these days are specifically made for Windows environment for the simple reason that it is the most common system right now, and thus a virus is most likely to infect computers and spread if it is programmed with Windows in mind. It was also the most common OS in many previous years, so there are a lot of very old, very insecure Windows systems still in use that are ripe for infecting (modern Windows systems used by non-technophobes rarely get viruses). This has led to Apple computers getting mis credited as being virus-safe when this is only because no one's creating viruses for Mac OS. This situation is now begining to change as malware writers are turning their attention to macs as well, which often lack the security awareness Windows users have normally built up as a result of this.
This is also starting to bite Android users in the rear too. Android is based on the Linux kernel, and many Linux users will tell you how much more secure it is than Windows. Except there are plenty of malware and malicious apps out there for Android, many of which are only do their dirty deeds because the user agreed that the programs have permission to do so.
Not to mention, some of the problems with Windows Vista at first was actually with the drivers.
In France, most people who have heard of Edouard Pailleron believe that he was a really bad architect who built high schools that were very vulnerable to fire. He was actually a writer, his name was associated with it because the first such high school to burn was named after him.
In the latter years of the 20th century, Intel was blamed a number of prominent failures in their processor and motherboard lines due to errors in the circuitry. What was less well known was that the majority of the errors were introduced by 3rd party manufacturers who incorrectly implemented the specs.
Many web server programs (such as Apache) include a default page in the document root directory. This default page is supposed to be seen by an administrator who is testing a newly-installed server, to verify that it's up and running. Sometimes the default page just says something like "It works!" and nothing else, but in other cases it gives the name of the server program (and in the case the program is from an OS distributor rather than the upstream developer, the name of that operating system) and a URL and/or email address for its developers. This has led to the following recurring situation:
A web server machine has a problem of some kind, so its administrator begins reinstalling the server software from scratch; or alternately, the server hostname's DNS record changes to point to a different server machine, one that currently has only an unmodified new web server installation (with no web content).
Because of the above condition, the "default page" is served to web browsers in place of the content that would normally be on the server machine.
Users try to use the server like they normally do, and unexpectedly see the "default page".
The users, frustrated that the server isn't working, complain to whoever's contact information is on the "default page" (that being the developers of the web server software and/or the developers of the operating system it's running on), demanding that they fix the server installation (which they can't do, because the server machine doesn't belong to them), and sometimes even accusing them of hacking into the server.
At the height of the Wii's popularity, Nintendo was heavily blamed for "allowing" shovelware games to plague the console and how Nintendo should have been more restrictive with the games as they supposedly had done years back with the Nintendo Seal of Quality. In actuality, Nintendo only greenlights games that won't screw up the game console and run well enough without the game crashing from a button press or the like. Most shovelware games fall into this category. The developers of the shoddy games themselves rarely get blamed.
To reiterate, The Seal of Quality has a bit of a Misaimed Fandom. It was never meant to outright block poor-quality games from being on the system. (Ask anyone — the NES had a load of poor games that, in fact, bear the seal, though admittedly, America did not get as severe a deluge of Shovelware as Japan did during the same period.) Yes, they did have quality control, but their definition of "Quality" meant "This game will actually work if you put it in the system", not "this is a good game". Quality control generally tends to be quite subjective in any case.
King George III of England in the USA, both historically and today. Although he was opposed to the idea of American independence, many of the grievances listed against him in the Declaration of Independence were actually the fault of individual government ministers in successive governments. Similarly, comparatively, he was rather moderate for a European monarch of the time. However, "Down with the tyrant George"" is easier to chant than "down with various ministers and the institutional ignorance and indifference to colonial concerns within successive British administrations!" Similarly, the nature of the British constitution would have made it hard for him to intervene anyway. He certainly had flaws in his foreign, colonial, and domestic conduct, but he was less of an Evil Overlord and more of an ineffectual figurehead. Then again, the colonists placing the blame on Parliament would have been a de facto recognition that Westminster had the power to govern them without their representation.
The excesses of the Jacobin government in the French Revolution's 'Reign of Terror' from 1793-4 are often blamed on the Parisian mob of 'sans-culottes' who are portrayed as murderous and bloodthirsty. While there is a lot of Truth in Television to the latter in the early phases of the revolution (e. g. the mass-murders of September 1792) and while sans-culottes often provided the appreciative audience to public executions, this downplays the part played by the usually middle-class political leaders in rousing these mobs and who did not set up the Terror régime to pursue the war against the foreign enemies of the Revolution and to defeat and in many cases physically eliminate their political opponents in France.
Blame for the excesses of the Terror is often placed squarely at the feet of the radical Jacobin party, neglecting the circumstances that brought it about. Namely a war declared by the supposedly moderate Girondins, which extremists such as Marat and Robespierre were virtually alone in opposing. Their incompetence and corruption, and later their sparking of federal insurrection against Paris, are factors which made many people accept that "terror is the order of the day" since France was fighting a war for its very survival. This does not, of course absolve Maximilien Robespierre and co. of their responsibility (suspending their newly created, radical, 1793 Constitution and abrogating the Declaration of Human Rights) but the threats faced by France were very real, and from the lowest depths, the French Revolutionary Army defeated all its enemies and centralized itself despite a blockade by the British intended to starve them and local insurrections supported by foreign powers. People also forget that far from an aberration of the Revolution, the Terror saw several unique measures such as subsidies to artisans and shopkeepers, a price-ceiling for bread prices, the drastic reduction of nobility in the army from 90% to 3%, the opening of the Louvre to the public, the Jardin des Plantes and the abolition of slavery for the first time in any democratic state.
When it comes to kids/young adults and their violent acts of crime, the culprit will always be video games, according to the media. Despite many studies that disprove the theories that kids who are exposed to violent video games over an extended period of time will become violent themselves, news outlets and activist groups will always blame video games as the sole defining factor on why someone went on a shooting spree. Remember, video games can be an influence if someone's mental health is bad, but it is never the cause of violent behavior.
The New Rock & Roll: Not just video games: over the course of decades Moral Guardians have blamed comic strips, rock 'n' roll, heavy metal, punk, television,... for demoralizing youth. And indeed, in virtually all the cases the criminals grew up in a bad background.
In the wake of the Jerry Sandusky child abuse scandal, Joe Paterno was often criticized by the media far more harshly than others allegedly involved in a conspiracy, and even worse than Sandusky himself. As a result, many believe that Joe Paterno willingly allowed child abuse to happen under his nose in the Penn State locker room. The truth is, the Penn State administration did report a similar incident in 1998 and yet DA Ray Gricar declined to press charges. The other incident in 2001 was one of the three count of 45 counts that Sandusky was found not guilty on. The extent of what Paterno knew is unclear but some sources state that he was initially only told of slapping sounds in the shower (with a boy who was later revealed to be 14, not 10) and that same boy actually spoke in defence of Sandusky. At worst, Joe Paterno should have done more, at best, he did what he was supposed to based on the information he was given. This is ignoring the fact that trained child care workers at The Second Mile didn't understand what was going on, and they had far more expertise than a football coach.
Many of these people are the same ones who previously said that Paterno was a figurehead who had no real say in coaching the football program and that his assistant coaches did all the work.
In 2014, the New York City Saint Patrick's Day Parade has been heavily criticized by gay rights activists for not allowing gay groups to display banners (or any gay pride memorabilia) while marching. What they fail to realize is that this ban extends to ALL activist and ideological groups, including groups that most people in the Irish American community actually support such as pro-life activists. (That said, said ban was first put in place in no small part because of gay people attempting to march in the parade since the early 1990s, hence Mr. Smithers' reference to the parade in "Who Shot Mr. Burns? Part II'')