Is this an example?

"Many" fans and gamers are always skeptical if there are changes or controversial content. This is not about that, since then you can count pretty much any work that isn't universally lauded. It's about works were the audience and the critics as a whole reject the work as a flop. And as you say, it's too early to judge success.

I wanted to vet a possible Harsher in Hindsight example, if I could. These "in hindsight" tropes are pretty easy to misuse so I don't want to do so if I can help it.

• When Zoe is introduced in Sleepless Domain, she's being harassed because she attends the school tailored for magical girls who choose to fight monsters at night while being too scared to actually do so herself. Several chapters later, less than a week in-universe, a cousin of Zoe's says she "just got her powers a few weeks ago". This means Zoe was being bullied for not yet being ready to risk her life on a nightly basis when she's only been a magical girl for about a month.

I find that that makes it more understandable why she is afraid, but not that it makes it harsher. It's not like there's some traumatic event (unless gaining powers is a traumatic event in itself, but that's not written in the example, and it would also be expected from all such characters) that serves to make it harsher than what it initially appears to be.

The event that gives them powers isn't traumatic. It's just a dream that most characters find, at worst, creepy, but the contents of the dream and opinions about them vary in-universe. So, by that metric, it doesn't apply.

The only other thing that might add to it enough is that Zoe's in a bit of a Be Careful What You Wish For situation. She wanted to be a magical girl because her sister was a famous one in her time, and Zoe wanted to be strong like her. She ends up caught in that sister's shadow as everyone now expects her to be just as impressive.

We don't get that reveal until a later appearance between the initial bullying and the reveal for when she got her powers, so not sure that's a factor in the trope itself.

edited 8th Jun '18 6:17:41 PM by sgamer82

Reposting from the previous two pages, so it doesn't get lost:

Are the following examples being used correctly?:

From Running the Asylum:

• Ultimate Marvel: When Jonathan Hickman was hired to write The Ultimates, he said this: "I was pretty exited. When I first started at Marvel, one of the gigs I had looked at as a king of homerun job was the Ultimates. I loved how Brian and Mark had started things off - how real and large the world felt - and I always thought there was a logical next step to be taken. So here we are, one small step..."

From Man of Steel (2018):

• So Okay, It's Average: Invoked by comic book shops. Despite Bendis coming to DC, many comic shops are playing it safe by not over-ordering, citing his last Marvel works and the lukewarm reception he had gotten from them.

From Fresh Meat:

• Big-Lipped Alligator Moment: Howard using a hairdryer to dry multiple ducks hung in the kitchen, all whilst trouserless.

I'd call that one legit if thin example, one shoehorned compplaint, and one ZCE.

If anything, I think that knowing that her fear comes from inexperience is reassurance that she'll get over it with time.

Be Careful What You Wish For is if she doesn't actually want it.

I'll drop harsher in hindsight in that case. I wasn't sure enough on it, I'm any case.

I thought Be Careful What You Wish For is when you get precisely what you wanted, but the results weren't what your expected/hoped for. I remember this because I remember either interpreting or seeing discussed how it got misused as something like "get a wish but have it twisted to screw with you", which isn't actually getting what you wished for

She wants to be a magical girl to be stronger, and got that wish, but the reality of it, and the expectations of her, were more than she'd expected

Then again, in close examination, Zoe hasn't hit the stage of wishing she'd never become a magical girl at all, which is the second half of that trope.

edited 9th Jun '18 7:14:20 AM by sgamer82

Does this really count under Bait-and-Switch Lesbians?

• Aoi Hana:
  • The anime combines this with Bait-and-Switch Credits, what with all the romantic imagery involving Fumi and Akira. Sure, Fumi is openly lesbian and seen in an unambiguous relationship with a girl, but that girl is not Akira.
  • The manga almost moved into this territory. Of all the (potential) yuri pairings, it seemed only the one between Hinako (the girls' adult teacher) and her girlfriend Orie would survive the author's penchant for odd plot twists, only for the ending to reveal Fumi and Akira got back together and are in a live-in relationship after graduation.

The anime was Cut Short and Akira is her end-goal love interest in the manga. I don't see how it's bait and switch if the series is an actual Yuri Genre series.

Yeah, it's not bait and switch if there's no actual switching.

• The smash hit Gravity Falls ended after only two seasons after network hopping to Disney XD and being Screwed by the Network. However, ending it early is what Alex Hirsch wanted instead of it eventually (and probably inevitably) becoming a Franchise Zombie, and so was given a proper finale.

Is this an actual Too Good to Last example?

Since the creator wanted to end it and it was given a proper ending, I'd say no.

edited 9th Jun '18 4:09:12 PM by ADrago

They're very well-known in the UK. Even if some people never see one, they know they exist.

Given the habitats of voles, they fall into that weird category that most people know they exist, but most people are also urban dwellers who will never catch a glimpse of them unless they're outdoors enough and/or have fields, a river or canal near their house. It's also had a lot of press over the years because of the invasive American mink threatening its survival.

Yet, despite the fact many people will never see one in the wild, voles cropping up in stories isn't considered odd thanks to the significant role The Wind in the Willows has traditionally held in shaping children's storytelling (where one of the main characters is Ratty, a water vole) — the story has been adapted to multiple formats, and is still going strong as a musical. Ratty is one of the most enduring childhood characters in Britain.

As far as the UK goes, I don't think Seldom-Seen Species applies because water voles may not be as common as cats or dogs in storytelling, but their use in children's literature has become too famous and too enduring for it to be considered unusual either — British wildlife in storytelling is well-established (foxes, badgers, weasels, stoats, moles, toads, etc.) and water voles are the iconic animal (along with the otter) to use for river settings.

For the rest of Europe, other Europeans would need to comment on that, but voles definitely won't be considered out of place or odd in a British story.

edited 9th Jun '18 6:01:55 PM by Wyldchyld

Season 1 of The Amazing Race was a case of Troubled Production, due to multiple filming delays and poor course design.

Are the following examples from Geostorm being used correctly?:

• Narm:
  • The airplane shattering due to the cold temperature looks like something that wouldn't be out of place in an Airplane! movie.
  • The ICSS crewmember who gets sucked into space in the first act. His death comes out of nowhere with no foreshadowing and happens so fast that it becomes unintentionally funny. The poor guy's face at realizing what's happening doesn't help, either.
  • The film's name is pretty silly if you know that the "Geo Storm" is a low-budget compact car that was sold between 1990 to 1993. The filmmakers were unaware of the car when they released the film.
• Snark Bait: The most common reactions to the movie have been how It's Been Done before, from The Day After Tomorrow and 2012 to even Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs.
• So Bad, It's Good: As a poorly received disaster offering, this film quickly made the watch-lists of bad movie fans.

Regarding Gravity Falls and Too Good to Last... I'd say it's an enforced example, since the creator knew of Franchise Zombie and wished to avert that, this ending it while it was still good.

Eh, by that reasoning a lot of things could be examples.

If it was intended to end, then it doesn't fit Too Good to Last. It wasn't cancelled. It got the chance, took it, and ran with it exactly as long as it wanted to.

Those Geostorm examples all seem valid to me.

From YMMV.PokemonLetsGoPikachuAndLetsGoEevee:

• They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot: Interviews have confirmed that the story of these games will largerly hit the same beats as Yellow 's, even though the Generation One plot was ripe for expansion. Seeing how only the first 151 Pokémon will be available, it is likely the Sevii Islands, themselves one of the more appreciated parts of the Gen 3 remakes that was also viewed as having room for extension, will not be adapted.

Is this example being used correctly? I also feel this example is too speculative.

Question about Franchise Original Sin.

Awhile ago, an example was removed from The Last Jedi since it originated in The Force Awakens so was too recent to be "Original". It also was deemed ROCEJ dubious.

How far back does a Sin have to go to count as an example?

There's no hard line, but generally the Sin should originate two or three seasons / installments prior to the one where it becomes an unambiguous problem. Exceptions may be made if the series or franchise has fewer installments but they're considerably separated by a Sequel Gap.

When a Tagline says something that isn't true of the work, does that fit Trailers Always Lie?

Specific example: "Into deep space... where the unexpected is an everyday happening — and an ever-present danger" was the tagline for an Anthology where every story took place on Earth.

edited 12th Jun '18 8:00:05 PM by crazysamaritan

So Tear Jerker is only supposed to be in reaction to events that occurs with the works themselves, and not about out-of-universe circumstances regarding the work. Because if so are these examples from Sonic the Hedgehog (IDW) being misused bare in mind that these were added before the first issue was released:

• Tear Jerker:
  • Even Aaron Webber seemed disappointed that the Archie Comics fell apart the way they did. His refusal to elaborate speaks volumes, as it seems that it was incredibly messy, especially the way Archie has effectively decided to pretend that their Sonic comics never existed once they lost the title. Considering that's 24 years just swept away for the sake of reformation, you can't blame him.
  • It's been confirmed that none of the Archie Sonic-specific characters will return...not even the ones Ian Flynn himself created. So those who were hoping that if nobody else, Ian's characters would return, are completely out of luck.
  • And then there are those who are angry that the comics aren't going to be a carbon copy of the games with some stating that if they aren't going to continue where Archie left off then they could take the opportunity to be even closer to the source material.^note  Though ironically becoming closer to the games got complaints as well in the Post Reboot Archie series since most found the Sonic Unleashed adaptation uninteresting despite the addition of other multiple characters who weren't in the game. Likely for this new installment, the writers are trying to find a middle ground between adaptation and original content.

Yeah those are not Tear Jerkers.