Is basically a glorified troper tales.: Celebrity Resemblance

Basically, just "Limit to In-Universe story occurrences and characters".

What I will say again, however, is that this should include both (1) characters in a work who are supposed to resemble Real Life celebrities and (2) characters in a work who resemble fictional celebrities within the story.

The entire trope should be a subtrope of Identical Stranger.

edited 20th Jan '12 5:55:41 PM by SeanMurrayI

"(1) characters in a work who are supposed to resemble Real Life celebrities and (2) characters in a work who resemble fictional celebrities within the story."

If you mean the resemblee can be either real life or fictional, then yes. That would apply.

"The entire trope should be a subtrope of Identical Stranger."

No. "Resemblance" in this trope name is there for a reason. It can mean just kind of looking like a celebrity. This way it could cover instances where someone could say "If you turn your head this way, you look like X".

We could try to limit this to works that actually mention how a character looks like a real life celebrity. That way, it would be more like a trope, since it can be used intentionally. But, there are just very, very few examples.

edited 21st Jan '12 4:16:57 PM by ThatHuman

There's that bit in Ocean's Somethingorother where Julia Roberts's character pretends to be Julia Roberts, and... and...

edited 21st Jan '12 4:50:41 PM by rodneyAnonymous

Oceans Twelve, and she tries to pull a con on Bruce Willis. And there are a lot of examples of character comparing themselves or other people to celebrities.

edited 21st Jan '12 5:02:43 PM by shimaspawn

How should this trope be handled in live-action works?

The same way it's handled anywhere else. If the character is said In-Universe to resemble a celebrity, it's this trope.

In-universe only seems to work.

So, are we going to just limit this to in-universe examples? Seems like there might be a trope somewhere. Or at least, things that occur in fiction, instead of random observations of people's faces.

Well there seems to be far more support for doing this than against. Would that be consensus enough to not need a crowner, or should I make a crowner just in case?

I think a crowner would be better, if only for the sake of formal legitimacy. There's strong support, but it's not unanimous.

Crowner made.

I think it's more that those against are expecting to be shouted down.

Well nothing stopping them from voting.

Can we call the crowner now?

~4 days. Clear consensus. Calling crowner.

Yep in-universe only is a good idea.

So what's the next step to take? Should we put the page through a round of YKTTW?

We don't need to run it back through YKTTW unless it doesn't have at least three in-universe examples... And it's got quite a few in-universe or in-work examples. All that's needed is to clear out the cruft and Natter and personal opinions, clean the wicks, and note on the description that examples are to be limited to lampshadings and in-work.

Should this be moved to special efforts then?

And if you want, I can make a sandbox for the trope definition.

Plus, should we just outright remove the current picture, as it doesn't show the trope at all?

Actually, what should be the parameters of this trope? Should it include any time a character comments that another one looks like a celebrity, or should it require people having trouble telling the difference?

I tried my hand at cleaning up the wicks to fit the in-universe requirement and I edited the trope's description to reflect that. I generally tried to leave only the examples in which a resemblance was specifically mentioned in a work or a work creator mentioned either casting or creating a character based on a celebrity's appearance. I may have been a bit overly tolerant or too quick to cut examples though, so it would probably be a good idea to check my work here.

edited 18th Feb '12 11:49:25 AM by LouieW