• 0 Mar 23rd, 2017 at 7:07PM
    Film
    On the YMMV page for the 2017 version of Beauty and the Beast, I noticed that there are tropers who keep adding and deleting Designated Villain for Gaston. Reply
  • 1 Mar 21st, 2017 at 10:10AM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 21st Mar, 2017 11:48:11 AM
    On the page Logan I made an edit for a speech and then clicked enter to stop an editing mistake which succeeded with the previews. Someone undid the enter causing that editing mistake again. I don't want to fix this myself because it could be confused with an edit war. Reply

      Fixing markup errors and/or editing mistakes is not something that will trigger an edit warring concern, as long as you explain the fix in the edit reason.
  • 7 Mar 20th, 2017 at 7:07PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 21st Mar, 2017 06:50:12 AM
    How do I add a page for a movie that's not up yet? Reply

      There's really no need for this to be private.

      Please check out this page for how to create a works page.

      For unreleased works, they should start in the Darth Wiki or a Sandbox until enough (non-speculation based) tropes are known to create a page.

      We do not trope speculation.

      If the movie is scheduled to come out, we can have a page for it outside of Sandbox/ or Darth Wiki/. For example Film.Captain Marvel is scheduled to come out in 2019 and Film.Avengers Infinity War is scheduled for 2018. I think it depends on the likelihood that the film won't stay in Development Hell.

      So, we can trope trailers and press releases before the work is released. Just not speculation based on that material.

      Note that both of those pages violate the rule against speculation.

      ^ Specifically, the "Don't Speculate, Don't Prognosticate" rule from How to Write an Example:

      You may have a good reason for assuming the trope will be used in a show eventually, but if you haven't seen the trope in the work, you haven't seen the trope used in the work, whether it's because the creators haven't put it in yet, because they're not going to put it in, or because you haven't actually seen the work in question. If and when you actually see the trope used, add it — but not before. By the same token, don't say "used in pretty much every [genre] work," particularly if you haven't seen literally all of them and can confirm that it's in them.

      Which is exactly why using the Ssndbox is advised.

      Both those pages look to me like they fall under the whole concept that just because a troper thought something was a good idea doesn't mean it was.

      There are other comicbook movie (etc.) pages, by the way, that are listed at least as "upcoming."

      Black Panther, Thor: Ragnarok, Spider-Man: Homecoming, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, The Defenders, The Punisher, Cloak & Dagger, Runaways
  • 1 Mar 16th, 2017 at 5:05PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 16th Mar, 2017 05:46:15 PM
    So what i can remember is there was a big black house, where many different characters lived at, a girl who was always jumping on a trampoline, a timid character who was scared of everything. There was also a skeleton who lived in a shed near the house. I remember it rained a lot and plenty of characters had different personalities. One was always dressed in black and i think she had a black cat. I think this show used to be on cartoon network. I watched it back in 2008/9/10? Maybe earlier. Thanks for the help. Reply
  • 1 Mar 15th, 2017 at 11:11AM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 15th Mar, 2017 11:45:30 AM
    My humble greetings. Im an honours student at UKZN, I am given a topic to research about ..I would like to know that are tropes exactly ....my topic says i should explain criminological theories and "tropes" through a film. what i would like to know is how tropes relate to films ....your response will be highly appreciated Reply

      I think this could be made a thread in Trope Talk Conversations.

      That said, I think the assignment is probably just asking about the literary devices that a particular film uses.
  • 1 Mar 12th, 2017 at 6:06PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 12th Mar, 2017 06:32:44 PM
    I remember this show from the 80s I believe where these kids go up to the attic and find some sunglasses and are taken to a magical land with creatures who wear cool sunglasses. That's about all I can remember. Reply
  • 8 Mar 11th, 2017 at 6:06PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 12th Mar, 2017 01:13:14 PM
    On Interstellar, Winged Cat had moved a non-YMMV trope to the YMMV tab, and in the process named the example after two tropes. The item in question is Reality Is Unrealistic, with Artistic License Biology stacked onto it. I reverted the cross-page edit and removed the double-naming (leaving only Reality Is Unrealistic) because both actions are inappropiate, but the troper added back Artistic License Biology, arguing to me that it's debatable whether one or the other trope applied. I invited them to bring the issue to the Discussion tab, but I need permission to comment-out the example during this period, because having two tropes naming the same example is non-negotiably against the rules (especially when the two tropes are mutually exclusive and trigger a deliberate conflict to the example's validity). Reply

      One trope per entry, see How To Write An E Xample.

      "Do Not Add Multiple Tropes With A Slash/Adding Multiple Tropes With A Slash Is Bad:"

      So go ahead and comment it out. It can be one trope or another, or neither. But can't be both.

      The example is also displayed weirdly and its too long IMO. But I guess that can be hashed out once we figure out which trope it falls under.

      I believe that some time ago, the Artistic License pages were declared to never, ever be used as tropes in and of themselves.

      And a trope is YMMV or it's not.

      I recommend pulling the example to the Discussion page, and point them to the page in the edit reason.

      "But can't be both."

      Sure it can, more than one trope is often going on at the same time in a work. They should be listed as separate examples, though.

      ^ Except the tropes in question (Reality Is Unrealistic and Artistic License Biology) are mutually exclusive. It's either unrealistic but real stuff, or unrealistic and completely fictional.

      ^Honestly, that sounds like the troper(s) couldn't determine if it was real or not, but did know that it was somehow unrealistic. The first subbullet seems to be Reality Is Unrealistic, but the second subbullet seems to be more along the lines of Artistic License Biology (in particular with that last line: "Some find the concept of the world being depopulated by blight to be improbable").

      Can I then comment out the example and bring the issue into the discussion tab myself and explain why in the edit reason? The troper whom I messaged hasn't replied yet.

      About put Reality Is Unrealistic in an ymmv page, this can not be currently ymmv, but their first paragraph is "When exposed to an exaggeration or fabrication about certain real-life occurrences or facts, some people will perceive the fictional account as being more true than any factual account." This is totally based in the vision of the audience about that "looks" realistic.
  • 3 Mar 7th, 2017 at 11:11AM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 7th Mar, 2017 12:27:57 PM
    In the YKTS section, teksolak says he is looking for a movie. 3 sentences in- Im not sure if its just quoting something that someone said in the movie, or if thats just that troper's description of an event in the movie. Reply

      Courtesy link.

      That's... odd. They don't have any edits and only two recent forum posts, so we should probably keep an eye on him.

      It is possible that the offending user is ban evading. We can never rule out that possibility. The lack of prior activity just ups the implication.

      There's no obvious correlation with other accounts, and the IPs are not known proxies. But that doesn't mean he's not a troll/vandal. That YKTS post is pretty awful. Will nuke and suspend.
  • 3 Mar 5th, 2017 at 7:07PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 5th Mar, 2017 10:10:51 PM
    Characters.Star Wars Han Solo is formatted as "Star Wars - Han Solo", in line with the other Star Wars character pages. However, it shares its name with ComicBook.Star Wars Han Solo, which should be formatted as "Star Wars: Han Solo". Is there any way to give the two pages different formatting, or will a differently named page be necessary? Reply

      You'd have to move one.

      I just gave it a WikiWord edit.

      Colons and hyphens aren't put into the URL here; they're applied through custom titles. So one would have to be moved to a retitled page.

      I'd say the character one, since I don't see a logical reason for a character page to specify the work in the titles unless there's a name's the same problem.
  • 0 Mar 2nd, 2017 at 6:06PM
    Film
    I've been moving trope examples from Who Framed Roger Rabbit from the Animated Film and Western Animation sections to the Live-Action Film section since that's what the movie is mainly classified as. But then I ran into the entries for Roger and Jessica in the Western Animation page. Would it make sense to leave them there since they're talking about the characters, who are always animated and have technically been in more primarily-animated works than primarily live-action ones? On the other hand, the entries themselves seem to mostly be focused on their roles in the movie, not the shorts. ...And that's not even bringing up the fact that they both originated in a book, albeit in very different forms that aren't what the writers are talking about.

    Also, there's a Cowboy BeBop at His Computer example here that I'm not sure about, since the actual example portion of it isn't really about the Toon Patrol, but rather people confusing other Disney weasels, presumably in entirely-animated works, for them. Reply
  • 3 Mar 1st, 2017 at 9:09AM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 1st Mar, 2017 11:13:38 AM
    There's a movie that is named after this trope — it's a comedy about a guy who is consistently the foil and the "nice guy" and "wrong choice first" — but there's a word for this kind of character. I can neither remember the word or the name of the movie and it's driving me NUTS. Please help. Thanks. Reply
  • 2 Feb 28th, 2017 at 10:10AM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 1st Mar, 2017 02:28:24 AM
    Go to Chocolate. For some reason, the Film/ and Funny/ pages display normally, but the YMMV and Trivia pages are displaying as CHO Colate.

    Even weirder, when I go to YMMV.Chocolate and click the Film tab, then the Film/ page displays as CHO Colate. Reply

      ...Did someone do an "amusing" custom title?

      Custom title would affect all the pages regardless of how it is accessed - the sub-pages must have been created with weird capitalization in the address bar
  • 2 Feb 28th, 2017 at 2:02PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 28th Feb, 2017 03:20:36 PM
    Occasionally I'll run into a page for a film that lists tropes for both the original and its sequel. I'll use Ghostbusters (1984) for an example, as that page also doubles as page for Ghostbusters II.

    Let's say I want to make a separate page for Ghostbusters II. I'm not able to because Film.Ghostbusters II also serves as a redirect for the original film. Is there a way to get rid of the redirect and make Film.Ghostbusters II a page specifically for the second movie? Reply

      Yes. You have to manually enter the URL to edit the redirect page, though.

      It looks like this: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/wysiwyg_source_editor.php?groupname=<Namespace Goes Here>&title=<Name of Page Goes Here>&load=source (just leave off the "<" and ">") and you should be able to delete the redirect and make an actual page for the sequel.

      For example, if you wanted to edit the Ghostbusters II page, it would look like this: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/wysiwyg_source_editor.php?groupname=Film&title=GhostbustersII&load=source

      I did what you said and it worked. Thanks for the help!
  • 1 Feb 26th, 2017 at 9:09AM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 26th Feb, 2017 02:48:21 PM
    The Silent Movie article has an index of "notable" silent films. This is basically a duplicate of works already listed under Early Films and Films of the 1920s. I think there is value in a list of silent films made after 1929 and the end of the silent era—Chaplin's two features, The Artist, Silent Movie, Guy Maddin movies, whatever—but I'm not sure that rather long list of notable silent films is useful. If a film was made before 1928 as a silent movie, that's People Sit on Chairs. Reply
  • 2 Feb 23rd, 2017 at 10:10AM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 23rd Feb, 2017 03:49:09 PM
    More of a comment than a question— What the site references as a Memograph gag is indeed (no doubt) lost on many younger Fast Times watchers, as suggested... However they are showing in the movie isn't tied to a Memograph, nor were Memographs what students liked to sniff. I've run across this misconception quite a few times over the years.

    The thing students loved to sniff were commonly called "Dittos." They were made from Spirit Masters on a Spirit Duplicator. A sheet of solid purple master material served as the "ink" for the process. A master was typed on or written upon and transferred a reverse image of what one wanted to duplicate was transferred to the blank back half of a pair of hinged pages. The purple source page was removed, then at time of duplication, a (clear) spirit fluid washed across the reversed image on the master (each revolution of the drum on the machine refreshed the fluid) and made the purple material ready to transfer to each copy. The process wet each page lightly with the fast evaporating fluid, but since teachers often duplicated right before class, the pages were often still quite damp from the duplication. Dittos had a very limited number of copies that could be produced, because with every single copy, some of the "ink" was lost and there was no adding more ink. It just faded until useless.

    Memograph is a totally different process using actual ink. It is sort of a mini-printing process without the traditional printing plates. Instead of a plate, a stencil was prepared where the thin plastic membrane was perforated wherever one wanted to type, write or draw. Special tools were required for hand work that would perforate but not tear. Typing was sufficient to perforate as well. Dittos were not really correctable. Stencils for Memographs could be repaired to some degree with special correction fluid. (Nothing to do with conventional typing correction fluid, like liquid paper.)

    While nowhere close to the quality of traditional printing, many more copies were possible with Memograph (as compared to dittos) and masters could even be carefully dried and reused. The entire process of Memograph was more complicated and costly, though results were superior quality to read and lasted much longer. If you want to see a Memograph in a movie, look at Animal House. A stencil, wet with ink, is tossed into the trash. John Belushi's character and his sidekick D-Day (if memory serves) find the stencil in the trash, though it has already been switched (by Omega House?) so they steal the wrong test answers.

    I know that's beyond the scope of a movie review / description, but when one is posting that a bit os lost on young people, it is extra-confusing for the young people to be trying to learn about the wrong process being discussed.

    Having graduated high school right after that movie was released, Fast Times hits very close to home, and remains one of my all time favorite films. Animal House too, for that matter. Reply

      Isn't it spelled "Mimeograph"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimeograph


      Utopian, I'm not sure what you want done. I'm of an age that I well recall the purple handouts, and frankly, they were interchangeably recalled "dittos" and "mimeographs" depending on the teacher.
  • 6 Jan 9th, 2017 at 5:05AM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 23rd Feb, 2017 09:01:10 AM
    Can someone please update the entry on Awesome.Deadpool 2016 with the sin tally before and after the bonus round? I'd like to know how exactly it changed, but I don't want to click the video myself. Reply

      118 and 90. But I'm not sure why that has to be on the page TBH.

      Cinemasins isn't part of Film.Deadpool 2016. Therefore, anything coming from Cinemasins should not go on any of Deadpool's subpages.

      That would go on Cinemasin's own Awesome page, if anywhere, I believe.

      Candi: It's already on their Awesome page dedicated for absolved sins.

      Um, I was the guy that put that particular entry in after reading that entry about Ryan Reynolds crashing the Honest Trailer for the Deadpool film. Thought the absolved sins thing on Everything Wrong With Deadpool would also count...

      Tropes found in derivative works and/or reactions to those works always go on the articles for the derivative works, not the parent work.
  • 2 Feb 16th, 2017 at 5:05PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 16th Feb, 2017 10:32:52 PM
    I made a page for the upcoming Netflix Death Note film a few months ago, under the page title "Death Note (2017)". Apparently the movie is now slated to be released in 2018. Whoopsie. Does anyone know how to change it? Reply

      Cutlist it and recreate it at the proper name.

      See also: How to Move a Page.

      One of the reasons Sandbox.Movie is a good place for unreleased works. :P
  • 1 Feb 16th, 2017 at 11:11AM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 16th Feb, 2017 11:55:51 AM
    So there is this old cartoon about a little guy or maybe an insect who has a friend dog. Nobody else can hear him. He once got trapped in a bubble, he made shows and played every character himself, he lived in a clock I think. It's not popular tho. So maybe someone knows what I'm talking about??? Reply
  • 0 Feb 16th, 2017 at 9:09AM
    Film
    If we're still deleting all of the Creator.Walt Disney Home Video subpages, can someone please help me remove the remaining links to the ones that haven't disappeared yet? Thanks. Reply
  • 16 Feb 8th, 2017 at 2:02PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 12th Feb, 2017 08:03:36 PM
    From time to time I'll watch a foreign film. I've watched a couple of Polish films, including Kanal and Ida and Roman Polanski's debut feature, Knife in the Water.

    Yesterday I glanced at the Polish Media page and observed that The Pianist is on it. This struck me as strange. The Pianist was a Franco-German production with some money kicked in from Poland, but it wasn't "created...for mostly Polish audiences" as the Polish Media index specifies, and most importantly, it isn't in the Polish language. It's in English with some German from the Nazis.

    I would think it was axiomatic that to be listed in any Film or Media index for a particular country, the film must be a product of that country and in that country's language. If you put The Pianist on there you might as well put Schindler's List too.

    But a troper named Jan_z_Michael strongly disagrees with me and has put The Pianist back on the Polish Media page. Rather than get into an edit war I ask for group input. I have invited Jan_z_Michael to come here as well. Reply

      That is rather odd. I would tend to agree that it makes no sense to put an English-language film not produced in Poland in the index of Polish films.

      Ok, found it. Took a while.

      The film was co-produced with Polish National Television and privately-owned Polish movie making company, Heritage Films, I have no idea why jamespolk keeps ignoring that. 2/3 of the cast is made from Polish actors, who among themselves speak lines in Polish, unless Translation Convention goes straight and they switch for English. It's filmed on location, with sizable chunk of the crew being made from Polish technicians.

      In short - it's a typical multi-national co-production.

      I will requote myself from similar case that happend in early 80s, using our PM discussion:

      "And like I was saying - you are making modern "Danton" case out of it. In '83 Polish government denied that the film, almost exclusively done by Polish actors (aside Depardieu as Danton), Polish crew, in Polish sets and by Wajda, one of the most famous Polish directors, is Polish. Suddenly it became French movie. Because it's in French. Never mind it was a film about French Revolution and that was intentional translation convention, suddenly the film ceased to be Polish on a whim.

      Only that they at least had solid reason to play the ball (the film was basically supporting revolutionary atmosphere, while there was martial law in Poland back then and the commie regime barely contained pro-democratic movement), while you are doing something almost identical... just because. Which I don't understand. "

      I don't know where the statement "2/3 of the cast is made from Polish actors" comes from, unless we're talking bit parts and extras. Amongst the main cast only Michal Zebrowski, who played Jurek, was Polish. Most of the rest of the cast was British, with Adrien Brody and Thomas Kretstchmann (sp?) being American and German respectively. The main production companies were Studio Canal and Studio Babelsburg, which are French and German respectively.

      And, once again, the film is not in the Polish language.

      And it doesn't need nor have to be. By your own admission, that film should be British, American or maybe Australian? After all, it's in English. I bet New Zealand, always liked it ever since The Piano , which makes it somewhat related to the case.

      And the main producer was - according to the production data - Heritage Films. Just because they happend to be local company managing sets and locations.

      Really, we can push it back and forth. It's 6:18 in the morning here, can this wait about 4 hours? I'm leaving to work in 12 minutes anyway, should catch up after 10.

      So, anything at all? Over 17 hours have passed.

      Or does it simply mean the case is closed?

      I dont think it is yet. No.

      Gah, this is why trying to categorize everything by nationality is such a mess. It's a constant source of edit wars on The Other Wiki.

      We try to be more informal around here. But that doesn't always help us avoid flamewars. :/

      My inclination would be to say that if more than two countries are involved (the Other Wiki lists four here), it's an international production. But I'm not sure we have that option at the moment.

      Where was the film first shown? The official release was where?

      ^ Location of first release can mean little as it's not uncommon for Hollywood movies to premiere in London or France instead of LA.

      That said, the movie strikes me as a multinational production, and seems to have so many involved in it, I'd not list it as a Polish or French or British or German film.

      I guess one can also cut the difference and list it under Polish Media, German Media, French Media and British Media, but that's some index bloat.

      If it had been made by a Polish film company I'd be OK with it being on the Polish Media list. If Polanski had filled his cast with Polish actors speaking Polish, I'd be OK with it being on the Polish Media list.

      Neither of those criteria are the case here.

      ^^ However, that's the metric we use in pretty much every other medium. I could counter your "exception" by pointing out that advance copies aren't considered a release, or point out that it really is uncommon for a given film to have a red-carpet premiere outside of the home country, and a number of other things. Where was the film first released to the general public?

      I think Xtifr has the best point. But since that's not an option - Ghilz's solution sounds the best of them all. Bloat or not, it solves it.

      @crazysamaritan There is a monstrual difference between each type of medium, saying "but we do that in medium X, why not apply it to medium Y?" solves absolutely nothing.

      But we do that in mediums Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, and X, why not apply it to medium Y? I'm not advocating one medium's metric.

      Wikipedia seems very clear that the first public release was in Poland, and the UK release was six months later (the next year, even). It's a Polish film intended for worldwide release.

      (Note that The Lord of the Rings, a film intended for eventual worldwide release first released in North America and the very next day in New Zealand and was filmed mostly in New Zealand, is indexed under only New Zealand Media.)

      We do have International Coproduction, but that's currently marked as trivia rather than as an index.

      I find value in indexes of films by country, but not if the film really can't be assigned to any one country. I like that we have Polish Media and Japanese Films and the like. But if something like The Pianist is clearly an International Coproduction—French and German people shooting a movie in Poland with British actors speaking in English—maybe it shouldn't go on any nationality index at all. The Pianist is already indexed in five other ways.

      A change in wiki policy should be discussed in a Wiki Talk thread. This discussion has already gone longer than most ATT thread.
  • 2 Feb 9th, 2017 at 12:12AM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 9th Feb, 2017 04:22:01 PM
    how do i look for a Flim Reply
  • 5 Feb 7th, 2017 at 11:11AM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 7th Feb, 2017 04:56:38 PM
    FastFuriousFan has made several edits to the YMMV.The Phantom Menace that are nattery and with mean-sounding edit reasons. Reply

      I've deleted one bit of Natter but have been too lazy to fix or anything else. I sent them a Natter message.

      He should be tapped on the shoulder regardless (that rant of an edit reason...yikes.)

      Let's keep an eye out and see if they respond to the natterfier. Other edits look good.

      Another massive edit rant. All I can say is the dude takes Star Wars pretty seriously.

      Enough is enough. Pulling them.
  • 8 Jan 26th, 2017 at 7:07PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 2nd Feb, 2017 07:38:36 PM
    I've seen Kylo Ren on the HateSink.Live Action Films and the YMMV.The Force Awakens pages which describe him as a loser deconstruction of previous villains, but the same page also says that he was hyped up as a COOL villain and his reception as a loser by the fandom caught the marketers/writers off-guard. So given that I dunno if he should be there, especially since portions of the fandom do find him cool and likable.

    (Similar edits about Darth Vader also say that he's the biggest example of Misaimed Marketing ever.) Reply

      Wait, is this all coming from one person? The bit about "similar edits about Darth Vader" caught my attention.

      ^ Looking through both edit histories, it was Darthrai who added and modified those entries.

      [up [up] It seems to. The Vader entries are on Misaimed Marketing and YMMV.Star Wars,

      Hate Sink is only intentional examples, so if the second example is true, it shouldn't be listed under Hate Sink. (I don't actually know that much about Star Wars, so I don't know what's true. I do know that Kylo Ren is popular, though.)

      I'm not going to take a side here, but I will provide some insight.

      It is true that the marketing presented him as a cool villain and a successor to Darth Vader. But in the film itself, it is presented differently. He is actively trying to be a successor to Darth Vader, but isn't there yet. The film portrays him as whiny and arrogant, and not in a likable way. Nobody in the film likes him except for Snoke and his parents. Poe can't even take him seriously when he confronts him. Kylo Ren's temper tantrums are also not meant to be taken seriously.

      I can't say for certain whether he counts as a Hate Sink, but there is intention to making him a failure at being a Darth Vader Clone.

      Kylo doesn't strike me as a Hate Sink - he's a villain who does some despicable things, and he has an irritating personality, but I think he's meant to at least seem redeemable.

      The main Hate Sink article says it's a "character whose intended role in the story (the role the authors made for him/her) is to be so despicable that the audience wants him or her to fail...", often a secondary antagonist that "is typically found in stories that do not have a natural target for the audience's scorn."

      Without some kind of Word of God, author intent is extremely difficult to determine. I seriously doubt that is true of Kylo Ren, but that's just, like, my opinion, man.

      If I come across a villain who has the Hate Sink trope applied to them, what I would do is compare them to Lady Tremaine from Cinderella, who, for all I know, is one of the most hated characters in fiction and was intended that way.

      Kylo Ren may very well have crossed the Moral Event Horizon, but I don't think he compares to Tremaine, so I do not think he quite makes it to Hate Sink.
  • 1 Feb 1st, 2017 at 2:02PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 2nd Feb, 2017 01:56:02 AM
    The Graduate has the same review accidentally posted twice. Reply
  • 1 Feb 1st, 2017 at 2:02PM
    Film
    Lastest Reply: 1st Feb, 2017 02:30:50 PM
    I was wondering if there is a trope for a joke or reference that doesnt make much sense until alot later. I was looking at the Mallrats page in the Funny section. The original troper (and myself) didnt understand, or even hear, the Junior Masters and Johnson reference by TS. Now thanks to the tv show Masters of Sex - its easy to understand that TS was referencing the Masters and Johnson research team. So another way to ask the question - I have a friend who saw Spaceballs before she saw Empire Strikes back. Once she sees Empire - hopefully, more jokes will make sense. Is there a trope name for that? Reply
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/query.php?type=att&status=all&sort=activity&f=Film