Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
I would remove the Adaptational Wimp entry. Batman does lose several fights across the films, but it's always because the odds are ridiculously stacked against him:
- vs Robin: Batman spends the climax of the film destroying dozens of undead assassins. By the time the main Talon confronts him, he is obviously injured and exhausted. No comment on the Robin fight, since the entry itself explains why he lost that one.
- Bad Blood: Batman defeats almost every villain at the start of the film, and only ends up kidnapped because he is forced to shift his attention and save Batwoman. He spends the brunt of the film being tortured and brainwashed, so it's obvious he is in no condition to keep fighting when he finally breaks out of Talia's control.
- Hush: Batman spends literally the entire film being psychologically tortured, and now has to fight an abnormally powerful foe who can shrug off all of his blows and retaliate in kind. Throughout the fight, he constantly gets distracted by his girlfriend, who is hanging for her life, and by the arena self-destructing; while Hush was only focusing on the battle itself.
The Adaptational Wimp and its sister have been misused quite a lot, especially in Dragon Ball folders. The trope went from "this character is less capable in canon" to "let's point out how his power level is somewhat lesser".
As Tanta said, delete the entry. It's clearly a misuse.
To win, you need to adapt, and to adapt, you need to be able to laugh away all the restraints. Everything holding you back.
Yes, Adaptational Wimp seems like misuse. And whoever put it there seems aware of the fact, as they tried to weasel-word it by adding ”downplayed”. Yeah, right, downplayed to the point of not being an example :)
Edited by GnomeTitan
Vote for removal as well. There is a lot of justifying edits in the example and anything that starts with downplayed before going on how the character is not as awesome, badass etc as another version seems questionable.
In general, I think that this is misuse of Downplayed Trope. If a trope is so downplayed (in some sense) that it's no longer an example, then it's just Not an Example. For example, you can't call a somewhat evil jerkass a "downplayed Complete Monster".
Edited by GnomeTitan
Okay, so what do we do about Dork Age?
Tom King's run is recent, right? I think Dork Age requires a time limit or something.
To win, you need to adapt, and to adapt, you need to be able to laugh away all the restraints. Everything holding you back.
^ It should, but I don't know if it's been decided. It's a trope long due for TRS.
Stories don't tell us monsters exist; we knew that already. They show us that monsters can be trademarked and milked for years.
Our favorite Dark Knight never seems to stay away from controversy for too long, and this time, it's two-fold.
First, Batman's folder in the DCAMU: Justice League character page has Adaptational Wimp, which says: "Downplayed. This incarnation of Batman is still a good fighter and he has his moments like getting the upper hand over Green Lanterns in the Justice League movies. But in his own films, aside from being able to defeat Deathstroke, himself an even worse Adaptational Wimp, in Son of Batman, he tends to get the short end of the stick in his titular films. In Batman Vs Robin he spent most of his fights taking a beating from various Talons, Robin, and the main Talon, while his comics counterpart was able to defeat Talon even after being famished and dehydrated for days. He also spends much of Bad Blood being captured and playing the role of Badass in Distress so he can be saved by the Bat-family. And in Hush, while he did much better in fights, he still wasn't able to defeat the eponymous villain on his own in the end and required the help of Catwoman to do so, whereas his comic books counterpart was able to beat The Riddler when he had been similarly physically enhanced by Venom during the Knightfall story. Justified with Damian. In Apokolips War, a brainwashed Batman reveals that the only reason Damian won is because he let him, and during their last fight he proves to his son that the latter is no match for him."
Adaptational Wimp has been frequently misused over these past few years, but the trope's definition is: "when their usefulness, agency, and contribution to the plot is significantly reduced. It is not this trope when the character "only" easily defeated twenty Mooks instead of a hundred; it's when the character struggled to take down even one. Realize too, that this may be intentional and in a long-running series may have the character take a level in badass to provide Character Development and align them better with the original version."
Then, the Dork Age entry in the YMMV page of Batman (Rebirth) was deleted and added yet again, because apparently, a consensus hasn't been reached about whether or not Tom King's run can be considered a Dork Age. Dork Age, much like Adaptational Wimp, has seen its fair share of misuses, but an entry in a long-running franchise can be a Dork Age if it qualities for any of the following criteria: 1. It has to be a critical and financial disappointment
2. Any changes it brought to the series must be undone by later installments
3. Whenever it's referenced by other entries, it has to be done in a negative manner.
So, what do you say?
Edited by MasterHero