Subverted. Also; cool.

Or...what if it worked like a Bait And Switch scenario: the car speeds through at breakneck pace, cut to men holding a sheet of glass, then back to the car with the driver looking panicked, then you see a close-up of a glass surface shattering, but then it turns out that was just a rock breaking a nearby window. It then pans out to show the car right in front of the sheet of glass...and then it phases through!

The trope is again subverted. However, another trope comes into play and there's probably an entry that describes the close-up you mentioned. Too lazy to check it out right now.

Sounds like a Cut Apart used to subvert the Sheet Of Glass, followed by a second subversion (not a Double Subversion) of the Sheet Of Glass :)

Doesn't an example have to be an actual subversion with intent or is it just literally, "every time an expectation is built up in the slightest and then have that expectation dashed?" Just because you start out a piece of art to go in an angle of, say, violence then change somewhere to an angle of peace doesn't make it a subverted trope, does it?

For an example of what brought this to mind look at the comic -> Watchmen example. Veidt is setup to be a good (gay? I never got that impression myself...) guy but he's really a bad guy... how is this some amazing "subverted trope" and not just part of the story? There is no law in art that everything must be exactly what it says on the tin.

Are all mystery novels giant super novas of subverted tropes? (I mean, more so than they are!)

Speaking of the Watchmen example, I moved it to film, because the description given just doesn't apply to the comic. Simply put, the possibility that Veidt might be gay is not given much attention in the comic, and certainly no one suggests that Veidt might not be a good fighter as a result. Rorschach, the only person who comments that Veidt might be gay also says that he can't imagine a more dangerous opponent.

Frankly, the Watchmen example is a bad one from what I remember of the movie, but I'll leave it to someone who's more familiar to make the final cut. From what I can tell, it's simply Not A Subversion - if it's a requirement that Ambiguously Gay folks are bad at fighting, then it's averted, and if it's not a requirement, then his fighting ability has no effect on the trope at all (subverting it or otherwise).

That's Not A Subversion. It's either an example of the trope being played straight, or a Double Subversion of said trope.