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.
Ask the Tropers is for:
- • General questions about the wiki, how it works, and how to do things.
- • Reports of problems with wiki articles, or requests for help with wiki articles.
- • Reports of misbehavior or abuse by other tropers.
Ask the Tropers is not for:
- • Help identifying a trope. See TropeFinder.
- • Help identifying a work. See MediaFinder.
- • Asking if a trope example is valid. See the Trope Talk forum.
- • Proposing new tropes. See TropeLaunchPad.
- • Making bug reports. See QueryBugs.
- • Asking for new wiki features. See QueryWishlist.
- • Chatting with other tropers. See our forums.
- • Reporting problems with advertisements. See this forum topic.
- • Reporting issues on the forums. Send a Holler instead.
Ask the Tropers:
openLevel 9, really? Film
I noticed on the Mohs Scale of Violence Hardness page that Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is at level 9, because of "what appears to be brief unsimulated footage of an actual chicken being decapitated during the psychedelic boat trip scene. " I get that "Use of footage of real-world graphic violence" ranks high on the scale, but you can't tell me WILLY WONKA is at the same level of violence as Begotten, Event Horizon, or The Human Centipede. I think it should be lowered a lot.
Edited by HaydenM2001openGrown Ups Film
How exactly do I do redirects? I’m trying to make a page for Grown Up 2 with Adam Sandler but it takes me to the first film’s page. Here’s what I did here: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.FilmsOfThe2010sFranchises&page=10#edit39700222
openSecond opinion on YMMV entry for "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" Film
Hi all. This definitely isn't a huge deal—but if it's alright, I was hoping to get a second opinion on an entry that I added to the YMMV page for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice a few months back.
In June of last year, I added an entry for They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot that reads as follows:
- As Bob Chipman notes, the titular showdown between Batman and Superman makes surprisingly little use of both characters' unique abilities and skills, and largely fails to utilize the elements that would theoretically make the matchup interesting to watch. Superman is partially depowered by kryptonite gas shortly after the fight begins, leaving him without most of his trademark abilities (other than Super-Strength), while Batman relies more on his strength-enhancing suit of powered armor than on his signature stealth, cunning, and gadgetry. As a result, the climax becomes a mostly generic fistfight between two slightly stronger-than-average men—and apart from the costumes, it could easily be the climax of any mundane action movie.
Shortly afterward, my entry was removed by another user with the following justification:
- "First,Superman is deliberately limiting his powers as to avoid hurting Batman ("Stand down! If I wanted it, you´d be dead already!"). Second, Batman actively exploits that restraint by using Kryptonite weapons. Third, why are taking a random guy in the Internet seriously?"
With respect to the other user: I wasn't pointing out a plot hole, I was pointing out a potential criticism of the filmmakers' creative decisions. My point wasn't that the fight between Batman and Superman doesn't make sense from an in-universe perspective; my point was that the filmmakers chose to stage the fight in a way that made it less interesting and entertaining for the audience than it could have been, which is why I think it was a fitting example of They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot. And I briefly cited a professional film critic (who also made that criticism of the film) to show that I wasn't the only person who felt that way.
Normally, I'd take this up with the person who deleted that entry, but they're evidently no longer active on the site. Does anyone else have any input on whether that was an appropriate contribution?
Edited by PaygeTheNightMothopenGrown Ups Film
How exactly do I do redirects? I’m trying to make a page for Grown Up 2 with Adam Sandler but it takes me to the first film’s page. Here’s what I did here: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.FilmsOfThe2010sFranchises&page=10#edit39700222
openThe Lion King Film
Between WesternAnimation.The Lion King 1994, Theatre.The Lion King, and WesternAnimation.The Lion King 2019, why is the page for the 1997 Broadway musical the one without a year, even though the stage version doesn't mark the original telling?
resolved Want to avoid an Edit War Film
On the SignatureLine.Live Action Film on January 8th there were a bunch of cuts to examples for both the MCU and the Raimi trilogy. I thought they were in general good ones as the stated reason of them being less unique if there are too many was good. but I disagreed on cutting Natasha's last words, I did think it fit the trope and I posted on the Discussion page for that trope about a week ago but haven't gotten any responses. So I decided to go here.
resolved Unindexed movie Film
Was blindly searching specific movie's title to see whether there's a page on it or not, and found this page. Was unsure where to report it, so reported here.
It's in not exactly good state, having several images forming long vertical line (way longer than the rest of the page combined), questionable examples list, and no indexing.
The page was created almost a year ago, but was never fixed. I don't know whether it's even salvageable in its current state or not.
resolved Internet Backdraft/Marvel Cinematic Universe has a stupid entry Film
On Marvel Cinematic Universe there's this entry:
- A theory has been springing up that Marvel are sabotaging the X-Men and Fantastic Four franchises in order to weaken Fox's success with their films, noting their reduced presence in the comicsnote which isn't true; the X-Men are currently one of the biggest lines they're producing, with more spin-offs than ever, Wolverine and Deadpool dying note which is no different than any other 'big shocking deaths', and is being used to launch several miniseries attracting tons of publicity to the X-Men line as it is, the Fantastic Four comic being cancellednote which has been underselling for a while, and while not the worst seller, it's still been pretty bad and doesn't have the cult following that their other books have, lack of merchandise produced for X-Men: Days of Future Pastnote which wasn't true; there weren't any children's toys produced, which is largely down to licensing issues; they still sold Hot Toys collectibles for them though, are still selling toys for the franchise in general, and sold toys for the film before that, their reduced appearances in recent animated seriesnote ignoring that Wolverine did get an animated movie and has appeared in their other cartoons, and a memo apparently sent out asking for artists to not send them Fantastic Four artworknote the validity of this memo is questionable at best. The theory itself makes little sense, but hasn't stopped people buying into it, including Rob Liefeld note Liefeld's creations are tied with Fox's licenses, so of course he'd be on their side over this.
- Disney's acquisition of Fox. Beyond the "Yay, X-Men and the Fantastic Four can be in the MCU!" cheering, fans were concerned about how Disney continued to acquire a huge amount of popular IPs to the point of becoming a near monopoly.
The first one is iffy in its own right, but the second bullet is my concern today. A couple of things:
1. This isn't about the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it's about Disney. The only connection the MCU really has to this is that Marvel Studios, the guys who oversee it, are owned by Disney. Unless the entry is alleging that Disney spent $71.3 billion acquiring the Fox film assets primarily to get the film rights to the X-Men and Fantastic Four franchises, in which case... yeah, I totally believe that. TOTALLY.
2. In all seriousness, Disney didn't do this because they thought Marvel Studios needed two more franchises. They did it because they want to bulk up their collective film library in preparation for going into the streaming market. Remember, Disney+ launches later this year, and Disney wants to leverage their majority control of Hulu to push for an international release around the same time, with the stated goal of being a place to put their adult-leaning content. That's why this happened.
3. For the record, this entry is heavily biased, mentioning the backlash to the decision to greenlight the acquisition while dismissing ANY praise or excitement as just people being excited for certain franchises; call me crazy but I don't think it's as bad as this entry makes it out to be.
4. This is a minor complaint compared to the preceding three, but it's also an example of bad indentation. It's got nothing to do with the preceding entry other than that they both involve Fox. I mean, seriously?
Look, my vote is to just delete it, but I wanted to at least make sure I consulted the community to see if that's the only workable solution, because I get the feeling that SOMEONE is going to want to talk about it on the wiki SOMEWHERE and it's worth figuring out where, if anywhere, is an appropriate place to do so.
Edited by MinisterOfSinisteropenI Thought That’s What He Said Film
I’m desperate to find out which trope this example is connected to:
“Hunter S. Thompson once said to me, ‘Bruce my boy, the movie business is a cruel and shallow money trench, where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs.’ Then he added, “There’s also a negative side.’”
- Bruce Willis, What Just Happened (2008)
openpossibly fetish mining troper with scat porn entry Film
a guy named Tropers/opal6561 just added an entry about scat porn to Live-Action Films (N-Z), describing it while also saying he wouldn't.
i'm worried that this guy is putting his fetish out while pretending he isn't. is there something that needs to be done?
openPassion of the Christ as Splatter Horror Film
I added Splatter Horror as part of the description to The Passion of the Christ because it's on the Splatter Horror page
Then, Lightysnake reverted my edit claiming it was "vandalism"
To avoid an edit war, I'll bring it here.
My addition was valid. Besides the fact that I'm essentially crosswicking Splatter Horror to the page because the SH page already listed The Passion as an example, the film is objectively a horror film and definitely a Splatter Horror film.
Mel Gibson very clearly made it to shock and terrify the audience by showing how gory, painful, and horrific the end of Jesus' life was.
It is a horror film so I don't see how what I did was vandalism.
Edited by AudioSpeaks2openuncommenting ZCE Film
On Almighty Thor, ~Raygunguy uncommented several ZCEs and PCEs despite a note saying to add context. It's not an edit war and I sent ZCE and "ignored comment" notifiers, but I figured it was worth flagging this up to the mods: looking through their history, they have a bit of a problem with not adding sufficient context.
resolved Trope where everyone in a scene is played by the same actor? Film
You'll see this trope in a variety of shows and movies, oftentimes in a cutaway or a dream sequence. Essentially itll be every person in a scene is played by the same actor, often times itll be a bunch of cuts to people walking down the street, kids on bikes, a mailman handing out letters, a firefighter or police office, but all of them have the same actors face. Sometimes itll show a baby with the actors face, and that will normally startle the protagonist the most.
What is the name of this trope?
openPotential Edit War Film
So I may have found a potential edit war in Star Wars – Count Dooku:
- President Word Salad added Inadequate Inheritor to this page.
- I deleted it and moved it to another page because it was more fitting in that page.
- Then 4 months later President Word Salad re-added it with shorter and different phrasing.
Is this an edit war?
Edited by MaxyGregoryyyyopenChicken Run: Dawn of the Nugget spoilers Film
Someone removed the spoiler tags regarding Mrs. Tweedy's presence in the film on the grounds that their appearance wasn't kept secret and was revealed in the trailers and such. Is the removal correct here?
resolved CreatorKiller entry on The Book of Henry Film
The trivia page for The Book of Henry has a Creator Killer entry for Collin Trevorrow. This had been added before in the past, first about his involvement on Episode 9 of the new Star Wars trilogy and then expanded with speculation about the Jurassic World trilogy. The final entry red as such:
- Creator Killer: The critical disparaging of this film, alongside Colin Trevorrow's allegedly egotistical behavior on the set of this film and Jurassic World, have been credited as what led to him and Lucasfilm mutually going their separate ways during The Rise of Skywalker. The critical reception of Jurassic World Dominion (which, as of this writing, has the lowest score in the franchise's history) hasn't been able to redeem him.
Which I deleted citing that I felt people were jumping the gun on how damaged Trevorrow's carreer was. Yes, Dominion has a middling reviews, but it still did an absurd amount of money at the box office in spite of the negative reception among critics and even some longtime fans.
Since then the entry has been re-added rewritten to be just about the speculation surrounding Episode 9 again.
- Creator Killer: Some suspect the failure of this film and its negative reception may have cost Trevorrow the chance to direct the third film in the Star Wars sequel trilogy, which he was originally lined up to helm before Lucasfilm gave it to J. J. Abrams instead.
My question is aint Trevorrow's future as a creator still up in the air, making the entry still speculatory? Trevorrow is seemingly still attached to the Jurassic franchise going forward, serving as executive executive producer the way Spielberg did before him after The Lost World.
Anyone has any input on this particular case? I'd rather not do anything since I could potentially edit war by editing without input from other tropers.
Edited by MrSeykeropenPan's Labyrinth description Film
The main page for Pan's Labyrinth has a paragraph that seems better fitted for the trivia page, if anything. It was originally even more melodramatic by giving a "trigger warning" about how disturbing the film is, but currently reads:
Do you think this should be moved somewhere else or just cut? It's also a misuse of R-Rated Opening since the opening scene of the film isn't unusually violent or disturbing.
Edited by Javertshark13resolved the hyphen in Jean-Luc Godard Film
I started making the Jean-Jacques Annaud page. While linking to it I have been typing some heavy [[ Creator / Jean Jacques Annaud Jean-Jacques Annaud ]] syntax.
However I just noticed that when you link to Jean-Luc Godard the hyphen in Jean-Luc appears naturally. It also appears in the pages's title.
How can I do the same for Jean-Jacques Annaud?
Edited by gropcbfresolved Any other instances of this trope? (Songs in the key of panic) Film
I don't know if this is really the same thing but I'm looking for examples of music speeding up... usually when something malfunctions or there's a situation where something goes wrong/becomes more intense. Like when the remote for the tickle belt gets destroyed in spongebob or when smithers tries to destroy robotic richard simmons but that makes it end up going berserk in the simpsons. Not like an orchestral score increasing in tempo, I'm talking diagetic/non-diagetic music's pitch and tempo (speed) increasing that isn't part of the actual song.
I know moments pages are spoilers off, but what if they contain spoilers for a different film? For example, Die Another Day contains spoilers for three other James Bond films.