Misused: Defiant To The End

Looking through the examples, many of them are just instances where characters are defiant in their last moments. But I don't think that's enough.

Obviously, when someone is going out in a blaze of glory, they're going to give their enemy the finger while they do it. Why wouldn't they? They have nothing to lose if they're going to die anyway. They might as well get a last "screw you" in. The same goes for a fight that the hero has at least a good chance of surviving.

But when the hero is helpless before the villian, the defiance is meaningful. It shows that the hero values his pride (or morals or whatever) more than the possibility of mercy. The real 'point' of this trope is that choice - the hero choosing defiance over mercy. If there's no choice, this really doesn't apply.

To that end, I think a lot of the examples need to be taken down.

edited 31st Mar '12 10:28:18 AM by David7204

So if I understand you correctly, you want to exclude cases where the protagonist is about to be killed immediately following a more-or-less fair fight, and limit it to cases where the protagonist is in captivity?

The name is pre-existing and describes the trope as it is being used, not as it is defined on the trope page. It is certainly more poignant if the hero dies unceremoniously after being defeated but the term is about someone performing their last act in an way to prove that they didn't leave in a whimper, whether it be a Heroic Sacrifice or a Shut Up, Hannibal!.

Clocking due to lack of activity.

Locking.