Definition unclear: Gainax Ending

Nakama was also simply wrong, so there's still that little speed bump.

Wait... so we should keep a shitty, too-narrow, medium specific, unintelligible, opaque, confusing name because its not wrong, despite it being a shitty, too-narrow, medium specific, unintelligible, opaque, confusing name?

No, I was just pointing out a detail you forgot that seems to have played a rather critical part in renaming nakama(for good or for ill). I'm not really attached to the name.

Nakama was just wrong and not what the trope means.

If this was called Kubrick Ending or something, akin to Kubrick Stare which isn't getting rename but is just as crappy of a trope name... because it's working, I bet you wouldn't have a problem with it or be so belligerent about it.

Find misuse and stuff then I would support a rename not just I don't like the name. Redirects though could help IMO.

edited 5th Oct '11 10:28:37 AM by Raso

I laugh at your implication that Gainax is anywhere near as well known as Stanley Kubrick.

, Let's please leave Fan Myopia out of this discussion. Nobody benefits from a "which is more well-known" argument. Let's just focus on the matter at hand.

Never heard of him till that page. I have only seen one of his movies, only seen one gainex series too and the former did not use their trope. So it's all the same to me.

I personally hate this trope with a passion (seriously pull something like this and it makes me hate the whatever especially if it's a Downer Ending.) but need something more than "I don't like that name" because of the fact this trope is getting used a lot has a lot of wicks and examples for this kind of concept.

edited 5th Oct '11 12:12:24 PM by Raso

Okay. Granted, I don't think of staring when I think of Kubrick films anyway so my position had issues anyway.

Still, Gainax Ending is often used to mean two different things, which seems like a valid rename reason to me. I seem to recall the previous thread saying they would remove the part about 'this happens because the studio ran out of money' but it doesn't appear to have happened. Since that part is still there, this trope even refers to two different things in its description.

Thus, I call for a rename, or a split if you prefer. Mind Screw Ending or something along those lines and No Budget Ending or something for the other. Gainax Ending appears to refer to both at the moment.

There we go, that's a reason for rename or split! Anyone want to do a wick check on that? It's covered a bit in the description but not really in the examples.

Edit: Trippy Finale Syndrome? Hmm that one is a bit too broad but it defines Gainex Ending differently on it's page.

edited 5th Oct '11 12:14:19 PM by Raso

I really hate that people went and re-added the "this might occur because the studio ran out of money" bit.

Ah, is that what it is? I didn't check the edit history.

Still, I recommend a split and neither trope keeping the current name since it refers to both.

I've never seen this used—either in examples or off the wiki—as "the studio ran out of money." If any reasons are given (they usually aren't), its generally "the writer went off his meds."

That's somebody soapboxing or bitching most likely. I'll see if I can dig up the edit I made to it.

Okay, so I left that in apparently. If you scroll through the expanded history to late December, you'll see where me and Willbyr were tightening description.

Supporting a rename. I just didn't check this thread until now because I thought there was no way a rename was being discussed...

I don't think that "ending that's trippy or ending where the studio ran out of money" is legit, but "ending that's trippy, possibly because the studio ran out of money" is fine.

Why would a trippy ending not be a trope? I can see how the other might be trivia, but...

edited 6th Oct '11 11:25:23 AM by Arha

I think @66 means that a trope shouldn't be "an ending that's either trippy or due to budget issues." Instead, there should be two tropes, one for a trippy ending and one for an ending forced by budget issues.

Hm, well, it's phrased in a way that makes it sound like it should be one trope, which I also disagree with. Budget Issue Ending might be surreal due to the money issues, but it probably wasn't intended to be strange. There can be overlap, of course, such as with NGE. So far as I know, the ending was trippy because they ran out of money and because of who wrote it in the first place.

I meant that it shouldn't be one trope. Troubled Production is occasionally a reason for a Gainax Ending (eg, "you ran out of ink, didn't you, ya bastards?"), but Gainax Ending should not be "ending caused by a Troubled Production".

NO on No Budget Ending, since there are creators who want a Gainax Ending. Look at Gainax after they gained popularity, for example: they upheld their reputation of their infamous endings by giving more ridiculous endings. Puella Magi Madoka Magica is also another popular example of an intentional Gainax Ending.

Mind Screw Ending just sounds extremely vague, since even Trippy Finale Syndrome can also apply for a Mind Screw. So NO on that name as well.

IMHO, the original name is perfectly fine. I see no reason for changing the name of a well-attractive trope, other than (what seems to be) "I don't know that word/company/whateveritis, and I demand a change."

edited 6th Oct '11 11:02:22 PM by totlmstr

No Budget Ending was only proposed as a trope that would be split off, you know.

Should we get a crowner for this with options of split, rename and simply remove the bad paragraph?

Remove it. If someone wants to turn it into a page, they're welcome to.

Agreed.

Okay. Then simply a rename crowner, or do we think there is insufficient evidence to warrant one?