Is this an example?

Maybe Seasonal Baggage fits better. Haven't looked it up in detail.

Check out my fanfiction!

Are the following examples being used correctly?:

Monkeybone:

• Follow the Leader: Followed upon trends started by Who Framed Roger Rabbit and Beetlejuice. The former in how it involved integrating live-action and animated characters together. And the latter concerning being a surrealist black comedy with a prominent stylized underworld setting.

Doctor Who S14 E3 "The Deadly Assassin":

• Unintentional Period Piece: The story contains references to then-contemporary political scandals (such as the line about the Presidential honour's list) that only serious politics anoraks will catch nowadays.

Driving Miss Daisy:

• Seinfeld Is Unfunny: This movie might have won an Academy Award, but as time has gone on it's started to age quite poorly. It's particularly the subject of a lot of criticism in comparison to Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing, which wasn't even nominated for the Best Picture Oscar and went to be a highly regarded film in terms of asking difficult questions about race relations, bigotry and violence, while Driving Miss Daisy...isn't.

Monkeybone - Follow the Leader : I would say no. Follow the Leader situations are generally fairly close in time, not 13 years (2001 for Monkeybone, 1988 for both of the films it is 'following').

Doctor Who - Unintentional Period Piece : Nope. The first line of the trope is

. Since the episode was set on Galifrey it can't qualify.

Driving Miss Daisy - Seinfeld Is Unfunny : Nope. SIU is about what was once seen as groundbreaking/revolutionary seeming passe or hackneyed when watched later, not just something else is now seen as better.

Are these valid examples of Enemy Eats Your Lunch?

(from the description: A classic tactic of psychological warfare. You've just met someone. They don't know what to make of you. They happen to be eating at the time. You take their food. It's a step beyond just invading personal space, and it shows who the alpha dog is. Frequently the victim is too stunned by the audacity of such a move to protest.)

• Pan's Labyrinth offers a post mortem example: The Captain takes killed hares or rabbits after killing an innocent hunter and his son.
• In Game of Thrones, Arya and the Hound slaughter some Frey bannerman seated around a campfire. The Hound sits down and eats their food afterward.

These two are on the page already. Similar one:

• Dexter: Dexter kills a paedophile who was stalking his girlfriend's daughter in his home. While he was dragging his corpse out, he remembers a phone call from his girlfriend who asked him to pick up some milk for the kids. So he steals a carton of milk from his victim's fridge.

I would say that yes, they do count, but the trope description should be tweaked a little for this to be clear. There is nothing about the variant when somebody takes someone else's food after they have killed them, but I think it could be covered under Tropes Are Not Narrow. We could add that this is done to show the character's cavalier attitude to death or scare other people who might have witnessed it.

What do you think? Or should this variant be made into a new sister trope to this one?

edited 13th Aug '17 6:36:04 AM by XFllo

From PlatypusComix.Articles:

• Irony: In "100 More of the World's Greatest Whispers", Peter shared a Whisper from someone who lamented finding nothing good on television, and resorted to the Internet for entertainment. Peter tries to retort with a Long List of acclaimed TV shows. However, the list includes some shows from online platforms (such as Daredevil (2015) and Jessica Jones (2015)) and at least one that ended years ago (Breaking Bad). Additionally, the program he tries to treat as the Most Triumphant Example (Rick and Morty) didn't air any new episodes that year.

If I doubt that Peter intentionally tried to sound ironic, did this still seem worth pointing out?

edited 14th Aug '17 6:47:28 AM by dsneybuf

Are the following examples being used correctly?:

Star Trek Voyager S 5 E 14 Bliss:

• Narm: For some reason the scene where Seven casually stuns B'elanna and two other engineers has them dramatically fall in slow motion.

Spider-Man: Homecoming:

• Broken Aesop: The Captain America PSA for Detention where he says that the only way to be cool is to follow the rules becomes this since within the MCU, Captain America is a fugitive underground for opposing the Sokovia Accords. Likewise, anyone who has seen The First Avenger knows that Captain America became cool precisely by breaking the rules (i.e. trying to get himself recruited despite not meeting the physical requirements, and then exceeding his command to rescue POWs). This is immediately lampshaded by the attending Phys Ed Teacher who recalls he might be a war criminal, but the video is mandatory.

Doctor Who S32 E11 "The God Complex":

• They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot: This episode has a perfect ending for Amy and Rory, with the Doctor realizing that if they keep traveling with him they'll get killed. There's even a beautiful goodbye scene, complete with Rory getting his favorite car as a present and Amy realizing what the Doctor is trying to do for them. It didn't stick, leaving many fans to start feeling Arc Fatigue in regard to the Ponds.
• Too Cool to Live: Rita is intelligent, competent, witty and all-around awesome, to the point that the Doctor jokingly tells Amy she's fired as his companion within a few minutes of meeting her. She is so very doomed. Lampshaded earlier in the episode by Rory.
  Rory: Every time the Doctor gets chummy with someone, I have the urge to inform their next of kin.

Can Disappointing Last Level be applied to a film's story-line?

Re: The Dark Tower (2017)

You fell victim to one of the classic blunders!

No. Disappointing Last Level is explicitly a Video Game only trope, since the factors involved in causing it don't actually exist in other media.

Are these examples being used correctly? (been wick-checking these tropes):

From Aubrey-Maturin:

• Comic-Book Time: O'Brian moved the series into this after a few books when he realized he was quickly running out of Napoleonic War years. O'Brian somehow manages to squeeze what would properly be at least five, perhaps even ten years' worth of action into a period of less than 6 months, roughly spanning June 1813 (the end of The Fortune of War) to November 1813 (the beginning of The Commodore). Time resumes its normal sequence with The Yellow Admiral; the last completed book in the series, ''Blue at the Mizzen", presumably ends in early 1816.

• Frozen in Time: Around book 7, O'Brian realized he was running out of Napoleonic War in which the story could take place, so he put the year 1813 on constant loop for the next 10 books. Fans like to characterize certain actions as taking place in 1812 or 1812a.

From Batman: The Telltale Series:

• Alternate Continuity: Not related to previous versions of the character, Batman is an entirely new rendition of the Batman story. At the very least, Harvey Dent is still a popular politician at the start of the series, Oswald Cobblepot is a childhood friend of Bruce, the Waynes weren't law-abiding, Joe Chill was a hitman hired to gun down the Waynes, and Vicki Vale is the leader of a revolution against the elite of Gotham.

and from Highlander:

• Alternate Continuity: There are at least three — the (first three) films, the TV series (plus spinoffs and sequel movies), and the animated series. These are the broadest possible divisions as each one contains multiple Retcons within themselves.

and from Commandand Conquer Red Alert 2:

• Alternate Continuity: While Red Alert 1 was originally meant to lead into Command & Conquer: Tiberian Dawn, Red Alert 2 and its follow-ups take place in a different timeline (or rather timelines), diverging at an unknown point after the previous game.

Finally, from Big Finish Doctor Who what trope could fit this part of the page:

Although the audios are (and always have been) officially part of the Whoniverse, other Doctor Who media can at times contradict or overwrite the events described here, or even adapt them for the televised continuity. In the early years, Big Finish marked stories taking place in the Doctor Who New Adventures continuity or Doctor Who Magazine continuity as "Side Step" episodes. It soon took on a more holistic approach, and later stories cross over into various other Doctor Who continuities without setting strict boundaries. In the interest of avoiding a dread Continuity Snarl (considering its massive amount of interconnected and yet mutually exclusive stories), Big Finish had long since introduced the concept of the Axis of Time, which allows for different timelines to exist independently of each other. This allows the company to treat all its stories as canon within their own respective timelines and universes, which it happily does, without having to worry about being contradicting (or being contradicted by) other Who media. To cement Big Finish's general canonical status, though, the 2013 TV series minisode "The Night of the Doctor" (written by Steven Moffat) referenced several Big Finish companions by name.

---

Sorry if this is a lot of works and tropes!

edited 14th Aug '17 4:24:02 AM by Merseyuser1

Seems we have lots of questions, and noone too eager to get to the answers. I'll try my hand, but please consider it as an opinion.

1) Re: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13543987200A54420100&page=171#4255

Irony

I think it could be valid example, I don't think the Irony needs to be intentional.

2) Re: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13543987200A54420100&page=171#4256

Narm: It could be a valid example, but the write-up is not ok. It needs to specify why it is funny despite trying to look dramatic, or something like that

Broken Aesop: I guess that might count, but the write-up is really wordy and a bit unclear — to me as someone who is absolutely unfamilar with the work. To sum it up — "don't break rules" aesop is presented by the show, but the aesop is undermined, because that Superhero got his power/position by not following rules. Clear Concise Witty, please :-)

They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot: I would say this one is not used correctly. Sounds like complaining that the characters were not written off the show.

Too Cool to Live: Sounds like that might count, but the example should specify how the character was doomed — when did she die? how soon after she was introduced?

edited 16th Aug '17 10:27:56 AM by XFllo

The 3 Alternate Continuity examples look valid, but the Highlander and C&C examples could stand some information on how the Continuities differ.

Both of the Aubrey-Maturin examples look OK to me.

Webcomic Time and Comic-Book Time do confuse some readers, that's why I asked. I'm doing a major wick-check on both those tropes.

Your point on Alternate Continuities is helpful. I'm not entirely familiar with the source material for some of them so if anyone can clean the pages up I'd appreciate it. (a lot of Alternate Continuity sometimes is just:

• Alternate Continuity: The work is in a separate universe from [example].

I'm trying to avoid Zero Context Examples and doing a major wick-check for Alternate Continuity since that's another trope that seems to confuse some people.

Not sure on the Doctor Who example with Big Finish.

edited 14th Aug '17 3:51:54 PM by Merseyuser1

Is the following example from Girl-Show Ghetto being used correctly:

• Doctor Who amassed a huge fanbase of both genders over 50+ years but its title character — a Humanoid Alien capable of surviving mortal injury via regeneration, whereupon their personality and appearance completely changes — remained a White Male Lead up through his twelfth numbered incarnation. As the revival series put more focus on the lives of the usually-female human companions who travel with him and serve as his Morality Chain, there was often grumbling that these characters were "usurping" the lead role (this was particularly bad with Amy Pond in Series 5-6 and Clara Oswald in Series 7-9). At last in 2017 it was announced that the Thirteenth Doctor would be a woman. Despite the fact that by this point gender-swapped regeneration had been firmly established as canon (with the most popular standalone antagonist, the Master, undergoing one during Twelve's era), a gigantic Internet Backdraft resulted with many, mostly male, fans decrying the prospect of a female Doctor, suggesting that they saw the show as doomed to fall into this trope, all thanks to Political Correctness Gone Mad and "appeasing" progressive fans who had campaigned for a non-White Male Lead for years. Only time will tell (it always does) whether it will or not; her first season launches in 2018

That reads like complaining to me. Or rather, it's about people complaining, rather than the show actually being an example.

Check out my fanfiction!

Would Kazuya Mishima, Jun Kazama, and Ogre count as Sequential Bosses in Tekken 2, Tekken Tag 2, and Tekken 3, respectively?

On that note, if a character in these fighting games is a personal final opponent that replaces that game's Final Boss for a specific character, do they also count as a Final Boss themselves? Example: Jin is the last opponent Kazuya and Hwoarang face in Tekken 4 instead of Heihachi Mishima, who is instead the sub-boss to Jin.

edited 15th Aug '17 6:06:34 PM by jameygamer

I was thinking of this during lunchtime. Does The Canterbury Tales count as an Unintentional Period Piece, as these pilgrims deal with life during The Late Middle Ages as they venture to the tomb of St. Thomas Becket, which the pilgrimages stopped during the Reformation?

ᜇᜎᜈ᜔ᜇᜈ᜔|I DO COMMISSIONS|ᜇᜎᜈ᜔ᜇᜈ᜔

I am not sure about the first question, but Final Boss is merely "Boss Battle is the final challenge of the game." Only because one character is not the "regular" Final Boss not means that he not fits.

edited 16th Aug '17 9:54:16 AM by MagBas

Incidentally, I saw the monk was removed, but I think it still qualifies, so I decided to try rewording its entry. What do you think of this?

• The monk is notorious for this. It attempted to combine the scouting skills of the rogue, but minus the skill points, lockpicking, trap-disarming, and assassination skills that would make this useful, with the melee prowess of the fighter, but with substantially worse attacks and tanking ability, much less ability to use combat maneuvers, and an extremely clunky combat style. It tried to be a mobile skirmisher with high speed and the ability to avoid opportunity attacks, but its actual damage while on the move was terrible, so it ended up being a nuisance at best. It had a number of more esoteric abilities, but they mostly ranged from incidental to flat-out useless, including a 20th-level feature strictly worse than a 1st-level spell. Finally, it attempted to be a Mage Killer, but while it had a number of skills based on surviving certain (but hardly all) spells, it had nothing to actually threaten a remotely intelligent caster, who could simply ignore the monk or toss one of the many spells its defenses couldn't handle at them. It even suffered from Multiple Ability Dependency; it needed good scores in four different stats to function, meaning its abilities across the board suffered. The Character Tiers place the monk in Tier 5, claiming that it can attempt to do a lot of things, but it inevitably kinda sucks at all of them.

The soulknife's entry, similarly, just needs to be reworded to point out that the weapon summoned by its signature feature is significantly worse than the weapons that anyone can just buy.

edited 17th Aug '17 1:01:45 PM by MBG

That trope are you mentioning?

edited 17th Aug '17 7:32:36 PM by MagBas

Does Draco in Leather Pants apply to the interpretation of Elphaba in Wicked? Since she is an unambiguous not-particularly-sympathetic villain in the original who is turned into a sympathetic Anti-Villain

I would say no; Draco in Leather Pants is an Audience Reaction. The Elphaba in Wicked is a different character only loosely based on the Wicked Witch of L. Frank Baum's Wizard of Oz books.

The trope in question is Master of None. The monk example was removed earlier for talking about the monk's poor synergy rather than its poor overall abilities.

Is the following example from Suicide Squad (2016) being used correctly?:

• Vindicated by History: Inverted. In it's initial release, many DC fans aggressively praised it as the best film in the DCEU, despite having a lower Rotten Tomatoes score than both Man Of Steel and Batman V Superman. The usual response to the film's detractors was that the film had bright colors and pop music and jokes, though most of these elements were haphazardly added by the studio after BvS was released. After Wonder Woman (2017) was released a year later, and was praised for including these same elements but doing them "right", many of these fans have admitted that Suicide Squad does indeed pale in comparison.

I think Draco in Leather Pants can be used in universe by a not evil fanboy/girl so wrapped up in looks that they excuse, Fake News! and ignore the bodies they are stepping over to fanboy. And in Imagine Spots they take previous events and give them a Lighter and Softer twist.

However none of that seems to fit that.

edited 18th Aug '17 2:40:14 AM by Memers

That's still just a fighter/rogue. It's a jack of two trades at best.

The soulknife relies on a single weapon. That's narrow, in opposition to the trope.

Check out my fanfiction!