About the As Good As It Gets example: I think it fits very well and should be put back.
I removed it because it specifically said "vulnerable" rather than attractive, and the scene was not done in that way because of any nudity taboo. There is zero doubt that if the producer and director had wished to include a nude scene in that movie, they could have. So, all you have left is wet clothing. It doesn't seem like a fanservice scene to me.
Do we have a Romantic Rain page? There are a couple examples that describe the absence of fanservice but try to justify themselves by saying a love scene follows. Do we have a Splashing Fun page or something? The Friends theme song is listed as an example - those are attractive people, sure, but there's no fanservice there.
A Wizard boy
The As Good As It Gets example still doesn't work even loosely because, as a trope of dramatic convention, there can't be in-universe version without a work-within-a-work.
Umm... the As Good As It Gets example was pretty clearly fanservice, just like the Spiderman scene.
edited 10th Oct '13 5:29:10 AM by Sackett
Then add it back. I just think it's a very different scene, prancing around in the rain being all erotic and one-true-love-y and fanservice-y, versus getting wet, being embarrassed, covering up, character development-y, not necessarily pushing any community standards with the audience. I just don't think a movie where Jack's character goes around spewing such misogyny is one where they used a wet shirt for fanservice instead of nudity because they wanted to get crap past the radar. If it's an example, it's not a very good one. I, personally, would not feel inclined to watch that movie or even that clip because I thought it was a good way to get some wet clingy clothes action.
That's actually why I was interested in splitting off the Bollywood examples as their own trope. Not because they're a different medium or market but because they're the only ones where it'a bout getting crap past the radar. As far as I know, there's no Western example where the work is barred from, say, showing the woman in her underwear, and they get around it by wetting her shirt - they could show other types of fanservice, but they just choose this particular one.
It doesn't have to be prison time censorship. Movie rating standards count, as do cultural standards. For instance, you could show a wet sari scene on daytime TV, but not nudity.
I still can't see the need for one trope dealing with wet saris, and another trope dealing with different kinds of wet clothing for fanservice. Wet clothing is wet clothing. Call it Wet Clothing Fanservice, or a catchier name if someone can think of it. Include in the introduction that it's a popular method of fanservice in Bollywood with saris.
You are of Bajor.
I disagree, since as previously stated wet saris have a specific purpose of Getting Crap Past the Radar in a particular film industry. My concern is more along the lines of the practicality of getting enough Bollywood work pages that use the trope that having a separate page is worthwhile.
Wet Fanservice is Wet Fanservice. "Wet Sari Scene" is just Wet Fanservice in Bollywood. The Same but More Specific. As you yourself note, confining Wet Sari Scene to Bollywood means it's going to be very hard to come up with enough examples to justify the trope. And if you use Wet Sari Scene for all kinds of Wet Fanservice, then Wet Sari Scene isn't a good name for the trope. I just added an example of Wet Sari Scene from My Man Godfrey to that movie's page. Carole Lombard wasn't wearing a sari. A good idea would be a note saying that Wet Fanservice, or whatever we choose to call it, is frequently scene in Bollywood cinema due to censorship rules that prevent other kinds of Fanservice, as in fact The Hays Code prevented other kinds of Fanservice back when William Powell turned a shower on Carole Lombard.
edited 27th Nov '13 6:16:13 AM by gallium
I count six Bollywood examples just in the film section alone. I think that is enough for it's own subtrope.
I think medium-specific tropes are encouraged. I'm for making the Sari Scene a sub-trope.
We have six bollywood examples and Wet sari scene is already a pre-existing term. It's small but that seems good enough for its own page.
You are of Bajor.
With that few examples my preference would be to make it an Internal Subtrope.
No matter what is decided on Wet Sari Scene, I think the trope name should avoid including the term Fanservice. Fanservice is the most common motivation, but it need not necessarily be the only such. Fanservice is also very much a subjective thing for the fan. (Amusing thing: in what is probably one of the most famous soaking wet scene of all, Anita Ekberg in La Dolce Vita, her upper body clothing isn't all that wet and even if it was it couldn't make Ekberg's figure more noticeable.)
If it's just the example count then it might as well be it's own page since that's going to eventually happen when it gets more examples. This is a fanservice trope. I can't think of a meaningful reason to have a character's cloths get wet other than fanservice.
So why is Wet Sari Scene a bad name for it? Most people will need to take a short look at the page to understand it completely, but that's how most tropes work. Is there really a need to switch to an overly specific and overly boring name?
So is it time for a rename vote?
Alternative Titles: Wet Sari Scene
9th Mar '14 7:29:43 PM