Needs Help: Oscar Bait

THANK YOU.

It was getting old having someone keep the thread going by asserting repeatedly there was a problem without proof so I'm glad this is clocked for a deadline now.

I personally don't see anything wrong but a minor rewrite to better clarify the trope couldn't hurt and I don't think we would need a crowner or anything to do that, just if someone has the time sandbox it and let's see.

Heh. I guess You Have 48 Hours is a trope.

Didn't have time to really dive into this so just getting some basic stuff out there before the deadline (which I am kind of annoyed by since it came up without a PM to me or even just a Deadlock Clock... Though that is on me for not keeping better track of my topic). So the problems with the trope are kind of in aggregate... there's a lot of little things that are worrisome to me.

• Complaining:
  • Okay, in the description alone you've got a not-so-subtle implication that Oscar Bait is bad and referring to making an Oscar Bait movie as "Oscarbation" (a term I've never heard elsewhere). In fact, the description outright says an Oscar Bait-y movie is bad ("And they don’t even always win Oscars, perhaps because the Academy can actually tell the difference between a good, honest movie and an Oscar Bait attempt, and partly because sometimes they respect the general public’s opinion of a movie and will try to reflect that"). Examples tend to reflect that.
• Audience Reaction: Something I noticed in the wicks that I didnt expect
  • Works may use this to sneak Award Snub into a work page.
  • Fandom Rivalry: They may also use it to take potshots at another work. This isn't technically a Flame War since its generally one-sided (and most of the affected pages don't see much traffic, anyway). Still bad.
• Speculation: As-written, the page is requiring speculation on tropers' parts.
  • From the description: "As such, studios and producers try to engineer a film so that it can win an Oscar rather than be good in its own right." This is directly contrary to assertions that this is about "certain recurring Oscar Bait-y elements."
  • From the examples header: "Films (or otherwise) that come across as particularly obvious in their ambitions:"
• Equality: The page is highly irregular for many reasons:
  • Much of the "definition" comes after the description, in a folder. That's just something I've never seen elsewhere.
• Wicks: Just listing what they are. Which is all over the place.
  • Aamir Khan: Explicitly an Audience Reaction.
  • All He Ever Wanted: This is an entry on a YMMV page. For a fanfic. With the context being "tearjerker that falls flat." No matter what the trope is, this is misuse.
  • A Beautiful Mind: Correct.
  • Absent-Minded Professor: Same example, used as a derisive link. Correct, though.
  • Academy Awards: Back to the speculation, it's "the Oscars are dominated by showy films designed solely to win awards, something that has been dubbed "Oscar Bait"." Which is technically correct, but kind of the problem.
  • Acclaimed Flop: I'm honestly not sure here, it's just calling another movie Oscar Bait, leading to the Fandom Rivalry bullet above.
  • Ace Combat 5: The Unsung War: Misuse for Award-Bait Song. Which is kind of impressive.
  • Actionized Sequel: Fine.
  • Adam Westing: Great example of a spoof.
  • Quotes.Adaptation Decay: Pothole that honestly, I'm not sure about.
  • A Free Soul: Unless Oscar Bait just means "dramatic," misuse. Especially since (according to our own Oscar Bait page) this predates the trope of Oscar Bait.
  • Altered States: Pothole for "Christmas-season rush" which seems suspect, but technically not misuse because that is part of this trope?
  • Funny.American Dad: Spoof.
  • Film.American Gangster: Technically correct, but problematic because the entirely of the example is talking about the awards it didn't get, emphasizing the YMMV of it.
  • YMMV.American Sniper: Manages to be misuse, since the trope as-written is about works, not people.
  • A Mighty Heart: Like American Gangster, it's 100% talking about the awards it didn't get. It's just Award Snub on the main page.

edited 16th Mar '17 2:40:19 PM by Larkmarn

None of the spoof examples are incorrect since we include a folder on the trope page for parodies of award bait.

I also don't see any issues with your list of wicks aside from the couple cases of misuse like the one getting mixed up with Award-Bait Song

I also don't see that much that can't be fixed by cutting the misuse on some pages wicked to it.

Also, once again: snark/criticism does not equal complaining.

edited 16th Mar '17 4:23:27 PM by shoboni

Thank you. Ok, this might be a starting point. The wick check might be light (as I remember, guideline of sqrt(wicks) or 50, whichever is greater), but it's a place to start.

You pointed out four kinds of misuse: Treated as YMMV, used to discuss Award Snub, being a spoof, and complaining. I didn't include mistaking for Award-Bait Song because that's just poor troping, not a sign of misuse.

• Treated as Ymmv. Unless it's listed as a main entry on the Ymmv page, that's does not mean it's being misused as Ymmv. However, the other examples like "people consider x to be Oscar Bait" might be misuse.
• Used to discuss Award Snub. This would only be misuse if the main entry for Oscar Bait is a ZCE.
• Being a spoof. That is not misuse. Parodied Trope is a valid way to Play with a trope.
• "Complaining"/being Derisive. Snark does not equal complaining. Talking about reaching for an oscar is not complaining.

Description:

• Yes, the description does have a negative implication right now. It is not inherently complaining, but it does have a negative tinge. I don't like "Oscarbation" either, but a quick google search does show other sources that use it. So it exists outside the wiki. While I wouldn't mind doing a polish, it does need some more proof that this is leading to A LOT of complaining and negative examples.

Other points:

• I agree, the page format is wonky. I don't know what to do about the tactics folders, I feel like a lot of them are redundant to the description. However, they also expand on the concept by painting a picture how it happens that isn't necessary in the main description.
• I'm not seeing how it requires speculation on the tropers part? Most tropes don't require clear Wordof God to exist.

This is a good start, but given the age, inbounds, and wicks, it needs a more in-depth wick check for major action (I'll leave confirming the appropriate level of evidence to the Mods). I agree that some misuse already exists, but they don't appear to show the trope is broken.

edited 16th Mar '17 4:41:54 PM by pokedude10

Sorry if that was unclear, yes, the spoof examples are a good thing. That was my original intention back in my first post so it didn't occur to me to explain further here, but I can't expect, you guys to follow my... Admittedly random train of thought.

You keep pointing out that criticism isn't complaining, which is true... But there isn't criticism there. It's mostly complaining. Mod willing, I'll do a more thorough wick check later, but discarding all complaining as "criticism" is nonsensical.

edited 16th Mar '17 5:34:07 PM by Larkmarn

I don't think all complaining is just criticism. Criticism, positive or negative implication, has a point. Complaining has no point beyond "x is bad" or "I don't like it."

I didn't mean to say count anything that sounds like complaining as criticism, just to take a close eye at something that seems negative. I think we just didn't want everything that has a negative implication to be counted as complaining. I really didn't expand on that, sorry.

I won't second guess your wick-check, I just wanted to see some nuance between snark, complaining, and criticism.

edited 16th Mar '17 7:34:10 PM by pokedude10

Reasonable. I suppose I put it like this: if there's a genuine point or it seems like it's trying to be constructive, that's one thing. If it comes off as whining... Well, I'm not going to give that the benefit of the doubt.

But you're right, there is nuance.

edited 16th Mar '17 8:45:22 PM by Larkmarn

Constructive criticism doesn't have to hold your hand, it can merely point out potential problems like handling sensitive subject matter poorly.

So then if saying "this kind of work is inherently worse" is criticism and not complaining, what ''is'' complaining?

Anyhoo, give me a week. I'll get a better look into this, thanks for your time.

edited 17th Mar '17 6:00:54 AM by Larkmarn

"This kind of work is inherently worse" could be criticism, if it's part of a larger statement. As a stand-alone statement, it's complaining.

• Complaining: "I don't like this.", "That sucks." "What a waste of time", "I want my two hours back." There's nothing there except the dislike.

• Criticism: "The plot was confusing." "I didn't care about the characters." "The dialogue was really dumb." are all criticism on a very basic level. There's something more than just "Blergh," there's a "why".

edited 17th Mar '17 6:13:55 AM by Madrugada

So, for reasons beyond my comprehension TVT keeps giving my computer a BSOD. Given that, there is no way I can do a wick check. So if this gets closed down, I'll keep it in mind and use it as a springboard for a later TRS topic.

Are we about ready to call this one as no action?

It's been 48 hours since the last post and things had slowed to a crawl even before that

edited 25th Mar '17 4:36:29 PM by shoboni

I'll do a wick check now in order to distract myself for an hour from my current existential crisis.

Based on:

WRONG

Complaining

Audience Reaction

Speculation

FINE

Parody

brb

edited 25th Mar '17 4:42:49 PM by WaterBlap

Complaining is iffy because there's been a lot of "all criticism is complaining" happening in this discussion thus far." S

Calling things speculation is also a loaded one that borders on calling for Word of God only.

So that one bears discussing.

edited 25th Mar '17 5:12:45 PM by shoboni

Presentation and tone is important to distinguish the two, and when I was looking over wicks for a (abandoned) wick check I noticed an underlying layer of venom in some example writeups.

Also, I don't think a normal trope is an appropriate outlet to provide criticism; that's for reviews and YMMV.

edited 25th Mar '17 5:39:18 PM by Karxrida

"Speculation" for me included "This should have won," "This big time," and when the example gives the sales of the work. For example, "it didn't hit American theatres until December, and it bombed there," and then the example says "December is a very tough time in America for any film that isn't either Christmasy, a planned late-year blockbuster, or Oscar Bait." How does this have to do with the applicability of the trope from the content of the trope? It is (most likely) trivia, and Not A Trope.

"Complaining" for me included examples like "the backlash became all but impossible to ignore when The Dark Knight failed to even get a nomination for Best Picture at the 81st Academy Awards." This is not criticism of the work, but of the Academy Awards — ergo, complaining.

Added percentages for "good" examples because of the high proportion of parody examples.

• Good or Good-ish: 43.1% (22/51)
  • Good / link: 2
  • Good: 20 (39.2%)
    • Parody: 11 (55% of good examples)
    • In-Universe: 4 (20% of good examples)
    • In the description / compare / contrast: 3 (15% of good examples)
    • Actual Example: 2 (10% of good examples)
• Misue Issues 50.9% (26/51)
  • Award-Bait Song: 1
  • Award Snub: 2
  • Fandom Rivalry: 1
  • Speculation: 7 (13.7%)
  • Speculation / Good: 2
  • Complain: 7 (13.7%)
  • Complaining / ZCE / Speculation: 1
  • misuse: 5
• Neutral-ish 5.9% (3/51)
  • ZCE: 2
  • n/a: 1

edited 25th Mar '17 6:23:30 PM by WaterBlap

Water Blap, thank you for doing the wick check. While I think your net for "complaining / speculation" was a bit wide, overall, I think it shows clear issues.

It looks like a good chunk of the wicks are using Oscar Bait to describe either the award show, how a movie didn't win, the history of the director, release date, etc. People also seem to be potholing it to refer to the Oscars overall. Our original point that Oscar Bait focuses on the work (topic, subject, tone, etc), does not seem to hold up in usage.

I'm going to stew on this tonight, it's been a long day. There are definitely some issues now that there's concrete evidence. If anyone wants to take a look or make some edits, I'll leave a pointer to Sandbox.Oscar Bait where I was drafting to clarify the core description. Personally, I don't think the inherent trope is negative, complaining, or Ymmv, but given the misuse I'm not sure what to do with it right now.

edited 25th Mar '17 8:58:56 PM by pokedude10

I cast a wide net for that because it seemed that the discussion of what was complaining and what was speculation was (unintentionally) stalling the wick check. I included the quotations in part because I know that the people who were taking part of that discussion would want to see what I thought was "complaining" and what was "speculation."

My criteria for "good" was any of the following:

• The content of the example was a spoof or parody.
  • e.g. The work (or episode as in the Married... with Children example) is a spoof or a gag on this concept ("For your Emmy consideration.")
  • e.g. The work features a spoof or gag on this concept, even though it isn't the entirety of the work (Tropic Thunder).
• The example was an In-Universe example.
• The wick came from a pothole in the trope's description, or the "Compare and contrast" section of the trope.
• The wick came from an actual example where all three of the following apply:

1. The work is the focus of the example.
2. The work is described with context that explains the applicability of the trope, and the trope is not shoehorned or justified.
3. Any criticism concerning the applicability of this trope directly explains something about the work. That is, the example is internally confined and does not make a statement about the Academy or other outside influences on the work as though this were a Trivia article.

I would like to clarify that the only two examples that were "Actual Examples" were for The Soloist.

That still seems like an overly broad net for complaining for me because criticism of the awards shows is STILL criticism.

Ok, that's fair. I think I still disagree about your net for speculation and complaining, but I understand your reasoning and many of the marked examples look more like trivia or complaining than about the work itself. I agree with you on both points. Now that that's out of the way, let's get to work on how to fix it.

Honestly, at this point given the usage, this might almost work better as ymmv or trivia. Maybe just a simple rename might help divert the issues. Again, I'll stew on it tonight.

Eh, except criticizing the award show is not the same as criticizing the work. If this was defined as "works which were made to win oscars," then criticizing the award show doesn't really say much about the work. Sure, it could be part of the example if there is already good context about the work, but examples which only say a work did/didn't/should/shouldn't win are not criticizing the right object.

edited 25th Mar '17 10:08:48 PM by pokedude10

Basically I agree with . Because at that point, the example is no longer about the work. It is a poorly written example for some other reason — e.g. not explaining how this trope applies to this work.

The nuance between "criticism" and "complaint" is unneeded for why such an example is bad.