YMMV Agents Of SHIELD Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics

04:47:29 PM Apr 7th 2018
edited by ablackraptor
The Unintentionally Unsympathetic entry regarding Daisy's reaction to Fitz torturing her I feel needs to be trimmed, for a few reasons.

Firstly, she's reacting to being *tortured*. She was given invasive and painful surgery against her will, yet her reaction is to just not trust a man who openly admits isn't remotely ashamed of what he did at her expense. That gives a very big reason for her to act like a hardass.

Secondly, her reaction isn't that extreme. The worst she does is blast him into a wall (which, contrary to how its described, happened before the Armour Piercing Statement; she did it because he dismissed his actions as being because he 'didn't have a choice' while ignoring her consent), when again, this is in reaction to him doing far worse to her.

Otherwise, she's just being unsympathetic to him, which again, is hardly an unfair reaction (he himself repeatedly says he doesn't feel any guilt over what he did, so why she shouldn't be disgusted is baffling) and, as noted by the entry itself, is intentional on the writer's part that she's acting on anger; her ''actual' response to the APS noted is to storm out of the room without a word, indicating we're meant to recognise that she's not got her head straight.

Essentially, this comes off as a massive case of Ron the Death Eater treatment being tossed at Daisy because she has the gal to be mad at Fitz for what he did, even though she's got plenty of reason to be and is, as said, actually being quite restrained with it.

I also feel like its giving Fitz a massive case of Draco in Leather Pants treatment, but I think that going into that would make this post way lengthier. Point being, this entry is loaded with Ron the Death Eater treatment and should be removed, or at least moved to Ron the Death Eater or Broken Base.

Not to mention the natter included saying how she's a Designated Hero and following her would alienate the fanbase. Except...this isn't really a big reaction I've seen. Just checking through the fandom I'm seeing, at best, a split between those who sympathise with Fitz and those who sympathise with Daisy (definitely with a harder lean towards supporting Daisy, and even the pro-Fitz stuff is saying that Daisy isn't wrong to be mad either and note that its a complicated situation). It seems like a minor opinion being pushed.

09:19:51 AM Apr 12th 2018
edited by TheFellMind
At the same time, Fitz's surgery on Daisy, while painful and extreme, was motivated by a serious belief in I Did What I Had to Do on his part, influenced further by an Evil Counterpart whose life Fitz experienced in its totality (albeit largely offscreen). And it was done to reverse the invasive procedure performed by the Kree (also offscreen) that gave Daisy the Restraining Bolt in the first place — and that Daisy's powers were the only known way to control the Gravitonium to seal the Rift that was continuously spawning lethal fear-manifestations and threatening an Earth-Shattering Kaboom. And Daisy refused to go through the surgery simply based on other people's Unreliable Narrator assertions that her powers caused the Earth's prophesied destruction, for which there is no solid proof.

And for all that, Fitz gets treated by Daisy and her fanbase as the purveyor of simple Cold-Blooded Torture and the crosser of the Moral Event Horizon. Like you said, it's a complicated situation overall.
02:20:21 PM Apr 14th 2018
I'll agree its a complicated situation and he is getting some unfair treatment (this isn't anything new, though; I've seen people try to blame him for the Framework and what the Doctor did there, never mind the people who called him racist for butting heads with Trip), *but* I feel that the above assertion is crossing into Draco in Leather Pants level of justification.

He is mentally ill, no question there, but what he did was wrong, and it was far from the only course of action. I mean, for starters, ignoring that the Rift being the cause of the Bad Future is a wild guess on their part, Fitz is smart, he knows how to hack technology and he (via the Doctor's framework studies) knows how to artificially recreate Inhuman powers. Tearing out the implant, which they established beforehand could kill her, was a shitty plan and the only reason he thought it was right is because the Doctor is a sadist with no respect for Inhumans.

By all means he is getting RTDE treatment, with people downplaying the fact he's essentially still partially brainwashed by Aida, but let's not forget that too while saying he was right to do what he did, which a lot of people do.

I would say putting entries for both categories for Fitz would be a smart solution, since as said, it is complicated and both sides are trying to downplay the other.
06:11:00 PM Oct 20th 2016
edited by irishpride412
In my view, the Author's Saving Throw and They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot entries about the Secret Warriors need work, due to being a Double Subversion. Yo-Yo was the only new member added in season 3B, the team only worked together for one episode in 3B, and by Season 4 - with Lincoln dead, Joey Put on a Bus, and Daisy leaving and becoming a solo vigilante - the team's further away from becoming a permanent reality than ever.
05:02:49 PM May 18th 2016
  • Romantic Plot Tumor: A major problem in Season 3 with Coulson and Rosalind and Daisy and Lincoln. Coulson and Rosalind were just getting to know each before Ward kills her. Coulson reacts like he's lost his soul mate even though he barely knew the woman, and it drives him to personally and brutally kill Ward. With Daisy and Lincoln, Lincoln was only with S.H.I.E.L.D. because of Daisy, but they never had a chance to act on their feelings before Lincoln sacrifices himself to save the world from Hive in the finale. This hurts Daisy so much that she leaves S.H.I.E.L.D. and becomes a vigilante.

I think this entry should either be cleaned up or scrapped. Romantic Plot Tumor, per its Laconic, is a "A romantic sub-plot that swallows and derails the main story", not a 'romantic plot that is seen as under-developed', as the entry seems to point.

Coulson/Price could be seen as derailing the plot as Price's death lead the 'lets kill Ward' plotline to get hyjacked so Coulson could do it when other characters like May and Bobbi already had reason to do it, but it didn't change the plot anymore than Ward/Kara did, or Fitz/Simmons has, or Bobbi/Hunter someone else complained about bellow. Lincoln/Daisy though? The entry just isn't true. Ignoring the fact that it didn't derail the plot at all (Lincoln was, at his core, just Daisy's love interest who had enough depth to avoid being a Shallow Love Interest), but they did act on their feelings (they kissed multiple times and had sex), and while his sacrifice did hurt Daisy, it was on top of her already present depression and self-loathing following being freed from Hive's control, her guilt for what she did during that time, and the fact she was trying to kill herself before Lincoln stopped her. Her leaving SHIELD wasn't just about Lincoln; his death didn't help, but it wasn't the only reason she would want to up and quit. Tl;dr, neither coupling was tumor enough to count; some may not like them, but that alone doesn't make them this.
05:44:56 AM May 19th 2016
That would be textbook Strangled by the Red String.

"THEY LOVE EACH OTHER BECAUSE THE PLOT SAYS SO" especially when there isn't enough buildup. Please move.
02:46:25 PM May 20th 2016
I wouldn't say it counts as Strangled by the Red String either. Coulson/Price didn't instantly get together, it took them several episodes of flirting and spy stuff before they became a thing. Lincoln/Daisy meanwhile had basis in their attraction-they both supported one-another when the other needed it-and avoided just being instantly serious as they spent most of their screentime together casually flirting and developing their relationship. It didn't even get to 'love' until around the time she was brainwashed.
07:31:26 AM May 23rd 2016
02:35:23 PM Jan 3rd 2016
  • They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character: Ward in Season 3. Following the end of season 2 he's taking control of Hydra and rebuilding it into a dangerous meritocracy and strengthening its Evil Counterpart nature to SHIELD. However, in the end he's (despite his development including growing into a leader and vowing to never be a pawn again) manipulated by Gideon Mallick into following his plot. Ultimately, he's killed anti-climactically by Coulson in the midseason finale and now his body is simply a vessel for 'It'. It's hard not to feel that - after being such a major part of the series since the beginning and being built-up as the Archenemy for most of the main characters - that he was short-changed and should have stayed on as the Big Bad.

I maintain that this was a valid point and should be allowed to be re-added to the YMMV page
02:42:03 PM Jan 3rd 2016
I removed it because nobody complained about it elsewhere. Hell, from what I have heard, people are glad that Ward is dead now, with no feelings that he was wasted. This seems to be a personal opinion, which is not allowed under YMMV. It's about general audience reactions, not yours. In the conversations about it on Ask The Tropers, the mods agree with me about YMMV.
03:15:26 PM Jan 3rd 2016
Perhaps the issue is that it should be posted under They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot. Their personal feelings on the character aside, I think a lot of people would agree that Ward's storyline seems to have been pretty hastily re-written in order to serve the Malick/'It' plot.
03:18:28 PM Jan 3rd 2016
If it was, then there would actually be people complaining about that. You say "think", but that's you believing that people would share that opinion, which is not enough.
09:08:26 PM Jan 3rd 2016
Keep it off the page. Nothing about Ward or his role in the plot was a waste. He was starting to get rather played out honestly.
12:51:20 AM Jan 12th 2016
edited by Tyrathius
I agree with the original poster. Ward has both fans and haters. Haters were happy. Fans weren't.

But even in the former case, while the haters are happy he's gone, they don't necessarily feel his arc was satisfactory.
07:34:55 PM Nov 10th 2015
"Hunter, particularly in Season 3. When introduced he was well-liked for being a snarky British badass and getting quite a bit of development rather quickly, though he had some haters due to being an obvious stand-in for Hawkeye in concerns to his relationship with Mockingbird, but was overall well-liked due to his loyalty to Coulson and surprising friendship with most of the team. In Season 3 though, he Took a Level in Dumbass and in Jerk Ass, nearly arms HYDRA with a large arsenal and nearly gets Andrew killed, encourages Fitz to leave an innocent man to die and vents his frustrations during a mission with Mack and Daisy, acting as The Load the whole time. Now, he's a lot harder to like." Isn't that the definition of The Scrappy?
02:12:15 PM Oct 14th 2015
Skimming through the page, I can't seem to find anything about... well, let me just call them British Guy and Blonde Girl. They're so boring that I can't even remember their names. It seems like all they ever do is break up, get back together, break up again and slow down every episode talking about their relationship issues. Am I the only one who thinks this?
07:47:28 AM Oct 15th 2015
Yes, you are. And you clearly have not been paying attention to episodes where both of them do a hell of a lot more than that.
08:06:44 PM Oct 30th 2014
edited by
Two points I'm wondering about the spoilers.

Firstly, do we need to spoiler-tag HYDRA, and any reference to them? I mean, their presence is a shock, but its also basically an entire Walking Spoiler if you want to talk about the second season. It makes it super difficult to bring them up in the many tropes relating to them.

Secondly, what about Bobbi/Hunter's marriage? Its not really played up as a big twist or anything, and given the fact they're both going to have a big presence in this season I'd assume it'd be difficult to not mention that they're married, especially as there's a lot of fan reaction tropes relating to it.
12:04:46 PM Jun 4th 2014
  • Triplett also gets a bit of this. Not only is he the only major character who hasn't yet been thoroughly crapped on by life, but he's also a borderline example of The Ace, being capable of holding his own in combat against Ward and holding his own in science-talk against Fitz-Simmons. And they made him a direct descendant of a major character from Captain America: The First Avenger.

Point By Point

1.) Triplett has only been in a handful of episodes. There hasn't been time yet to give him a sympathetic background story. You could argue that the fact that his S.O. turned out to be the Clairvoyant and killed three of his teammates may count.

2.) Triplett is hardly super special for being able to hold his own against Ward. They're both agents who are at around the same security level. You might make an argument if it was Melinda May. Besides, Ward can speak six languages. Triplett can be a capable agent and smart at the same time. He's not shown as more capable at science than Fitz Simmons.
05:30:13 PM Jun 7th 2014
Yeah, keep this off the page. Triplett is not a Creator's Pet by any stretch of the imagination.
08:11:29 AM Apr 23rd 2014
Re: Shocking Swerve and Ward's defection -

I actually had the opposite reaction; if Ward didn't turn out to be bad, I would have had serious Fridge Logic about Thomas Nash. If Nash was a catatonic decoy all along, how else was that plan supposed to work? I can buy that Ward would get overemotional and kill him, but not necessarily that Garrett is that sure that he would do so without a direct order.
07:35:56 AM Mar 13th 2014
You all knew this was coming. Skye's status as a Creator's Pet and The Scrappy.

  • The Scrappy: Skye. Being the Audience Surrogate and Na´ve Newcomer to the team is always a difficult position to be in (especially since audiences had been aware of S.H.I.E.L.D. for years). But audiences didn't take kindly to Skye, with some claiming the actress came across as amateurish, others think she takes screen time away from the actual agents. Her increasing importance to the show's plot isn't doing her any favors.

  • Creator's Pet: Skye. She is first introduced as an anarchist hacker, living in a van but still managing to look like a supermodel. She is recruited into S.H.I.E.L.D. by Agent Coulson who insists on her value to the team. She is quickly sent into the field. She has a secret past that some members of the audience don't care about. Later still it's revealed that she's an 0-8-4, making her integral to the series' Myth Arc. The creators of the show seem to love her, while some have little patience for the amount of focus that she gets.

I'm bring this here to prevent an Edit War. Ichigo Montoya is under the impression that Skye is a Base Breaker, not The Scrappy. Thus he keeps shortening both entrys for some reason. Is Skye is a Base Breaker, she cannot be a Cretors Pet, so lets get underway.

  • Hated by fans: If she is a Base Breaker, then no. As a Scrappy, yes.
  • Loved (or worshipped) by the writers: Even Ichigo Montoya seems to admit this, as he leaves it alone in the description.
  • Put into big scenes for no reason: True
  • Talked up by the other characters: True.

If Skye fails point 1. We have to delete her from Creator's Pet. Is she liked enough to be a Base Breaker?

P.S. the details are necessary Ichigo Montoya. That's what keeps these tropes from being Zero Context Examples.
08:30:38 AM Mar 13th 2014
I think part of the issue is how ill-defined The Scrappy and Base Breaker are. The Scrappy itself specifically says that a character can be a Scrappy even if there are people who don't dislike them or sympathize with them.

Personally, I think she's got enough of a hatedom to qualify for a Creator's Pet. Even if she does have fans, there's at the very least a very loud portion of the fandom who dislikes her, which makes her fit the Creator's Pet cycle very well (Creator's Pet is, at its core, about a feedback/response loop where creators try to push an unpopular character more which just makes them more unpopular, which is exactly what has happened with Skye).
11:41:07 AM Mar 13th 2014
I think the Scrappy or Creator's Pet entries rely on exaggerating and twisting her actual role (i.e., the only time she's "talked up" in a "What would Skye do?" sense has to do with hacking, which is the exact reason she's on the Bus in the first place). Oh, and heaven forbid one of the main characters be central to the show's myth arc.
10:44:53 AM Jun 5th 2014
Plus, in that particular instance, she had been shot and her chances of survival were grim. It would make sense that her teammates would want to honor her by completing the mission in a way that does her justice. They're not asking "What would Skye do?" because they think Skye's awesome; they're pissed that they're teammate was shot and want to avenge their friend.
07:04:51 PM Feb 24th 2014
Am I the only one noticing this entire YMMV page turning into Complaining About Shows You Don't Like?
11:31:55 PM Feb 24th 2014
Eh, not worse than in any other YMMV page.
09:15:04 AM Dec 26th 2013
Do NOT add any Complete Monster examples without first getting the cleanup thread's okay.
08:57:24 AM Nov 5th 2013
Fan Dumb / Hate Dumb entry comes off as Complaining About People Not Liking the show.
10:03:26 AM Nov 5th 2013
edited by
Eh, I don't think so. The first entry at least is fine; the point of this show is a Lower-Deck Episode so complaining it doesn't have enough heroes is silly since that's the entire premise. Though the second is... I dunno about that. That could sort of go.
10:26:54 AM Nov 5th 2013
I think it does come across as complaining in that it is (perhaps unintentionally) a strawman characterization of complains.

Critics (myself included) are pointing to the fact that the show isn't drawing on all of the SHIELD agents existing in the comics as well as the fact that there are a fair amount of "lower level" heroes and villains, some of which interact with SHIELD or become SHIELD members.

So, the criticism is really more that "the show feels like a Dolled-Up Installment that Whedon placed in the MCU following his success with The Avengers". I don't think anyone necessarily expects members of the film's Avengers team to show up, nor do people really have a problem that the main cast don't have superpowers.

As a corrolary to the Dolled-Up Installment thing, its also that while the show didn't need to use SHIELD members from the comics, if they were going to have a bunch of Canon Foreigners, they could have created a much more diverse and interesting bunch.
12:18:39 PM Nov 5th 2013
edited by
I personally think they do have a diverse and interesting bunch, without going the route of Five-Token Band. Hell, we have two older people, and two UK people who actually aren't Fake UK people. We have scientists that specifically are scientists and not really super-ninjas-with-a-side-of-science. We have a Non-Action Guy who is still considered valuable and not crapped on for being Non Action.

I sometimes get this vibe that because the show is actually gender-neutral and age-mixed, people have to find something to still complain about.

I'm also thinking they may be a bit reluctant to use some of the pre-existing heroes and Agents too much because it then restricts the possibilities for their future movie appearances if any.
12:37:04 PM Nov 5th 2013
edited by
I don't see what whether or not they're interesting characters has to do with the entry.

But I do agree that them being Canon Foreigners is sort of the point of this show and complaining about it is a bit Hate Dumb. As AD says, it's likely done by Marvel to keep characters free for movies, plus it gives the show more freedom for characters to develop. If they had a canon character, they'd either A: stick with the comics incarnation and be accused of being predictable or B: change the characterization and be accused of ruining the character. I don't necessarily like the characters, but I definitely like the fact they went with Canon Foreigners. It was a smart choice.

... that said, why is Fan Dumb even part of this entry? The context is pure Hate Dumb and has nothing to do with Fan Dumb.
06:12:11 PM Nov 12th 2013
People like to conflate the two nowadays for simplicity.
06:50:08 PM Nov 12th 2013
Well, I changed to just Hate Dumb when I restored a bunch of examples that were cut without a valid reason.
12:11:56 PM Oct 29th 2013
Regarding the pulled Unfortunate Implications:
  • Unfortunate Implications:
    • Although the Whedon team gave Mike in-story reasons for his anger: an uncaring foreman and the Centipede fraying his sanity, he still came off as an Angry Black Man who needed to be shot to be taken down. Racialicious speaks on it here.
    • In 5 episodes there have been 3 black hostile characters (two of which have sympathetic motivations, but still do some pretty bad things), one Latina and one Asian, with only two white villains so far. Also, the on the fence character of ambiguous loyalties and motivations is mixed race. Generally when a POC shows up, they're if not a villain than at least an opponent.
    • Since the only way new characters can exist on the show in its current format is mainly via introducing opponents or antagonists, then it's either have some antagonists happen to be non-white or then people complain about getting almost nothing but white characters. Especially since as noted, two of them were specifically sympathetic (and one of those roles even was originally intended for a white actor). Especially, we've also had white antagonists (the Extremis doctor, Quinn, Hall, the Englishman) and non-white allies (Agent Quan, and Agent Sitwell in a future episode.) Someone reading racism into the show ironically actually making a non-racist effort to give non-white actors roles within its narrative framework does not make for actual unfortunate implications.

I think the basic points should still be on the page. I know the show has certainly gotten criticism due to the main cast being quite white, and the fact that, as a whole, the ratio of good minorities to antagonistic minorities has not been good. That said, at only five episodes in, there's room for it to change, but I think it's worth noting for now.
12:43:36 PM Oct 29th 2013
It still needs a citation, though, per the rules of Unfortunate Implications.
01:16:42 PM Oct 29th 2013
Only for going on the UI Main Page. It can go on works' YMMV pages without a citation. That said, it shouldn't be too hard to google something up. At the moment I'm thinking this rewrite:

01:39:55 PM Oct 29th 2013
I don't see anything that says that only applies to it going on the UI main page. If anything, it should be just as important for the citations to be needed on a work's page.
02:16:36 PM Oct 29th 2013
Larkman is correct on Unfortunate Implications only needing citations on it's own mage page, not the various YMMV pages. However I agree with this tropes pulling entirely.
02:18:35 PM Oct 29th 2013
Where does it say that? The UI page only says "no example may be added without proof that it's not just one person thinking" without specifying further.
03:00:44 PM Oct 29th 2013
It came up during a recent forum thread (can't remember the title). I was definitely under the impression that all UI entries need citations, and that it made more sense that way, but it's less clear now.
03:13:41 PM Oct 29th 2013
Doesn't that kind of imply that the trope on the page is different than the trope on the YMMV works pages?

Cuz seriously, the biggest problem with UI is that people use it to whine or complain, and not needing the citation just enables that. The citation is really the only thing separating UI from rampant complaining.
03:41:53 PM Oct 29th 2013
edited by
I agree. UI really gets turned to a dumping ground for people to express their dislike for the show.

It's on the UI discussion page. Doesn't make any sense, but those are the rules. Not much we can do about it. Honestly, it seems backwards to me. I'd want citations for examples put on a work's YMMV page, since that's the page every fan of the show will be seeing, whereas the UI page itself is something that you'd only see if, you know, you're looking for UI.

Anyway, potential citations: http://showratings.tv/articles/marvels-agents-of-shield-episode-5-girl-in-the-flower-dress-review/, http://www.teenlibrariantoolbox.com/2013/10/agents-of-shield-shielding-you-from-poc.html, http://princessvsperil.com/2013/10/11/agents-of-predictable/, http://www.therainbowhub.com/agents-of-shield-1-5-girl-in-the-flower-dress-review/.
04:54:29 PM Oct 29th 2013
07:44:36 PM Oct 29th 2013
edited by
So... are people cool if I readd this following example? I mean, at this point we've got citations, we know that they're implications that different people have gotten from the show, and I think it's worth documenting. I don't want to risk seeming like I'm edit warring, though:

Also thinking of adding this bullet point. I think it's fairly interesting, though Skye doesn't really fit the Asian and Nerdy stereotype as a whole, and May is a fanfavorite.
11:23:31 PM Oct 29th 2013
I'd like for it to stay off. The show's still in it's first season. After it's done we'll look at how many people of different races end up antagonistic as opposed to how many non whites are heroic. With the seemingly skewed numbers, there's no basis for for actual unfortunate implications.
09:17:36 AM Oct 30th 2013
It's an Audience Reaction and we've got several sources cited that all have noticed it so we know it's not just one person who noticed it. Even if the show balances out, that doesn't change the fact that there was an audience reaction to the current racial balance.
10:10:32 AM Oct 30th 2013
I say add it. It's YMMV and it's not factually inaccurate. Though don't add the bit with Skye and May. It's a superhero-ish government agent show... pretty much everyone in The Team is going to either be a badass at combat or a genius. Just because there happens to be two Asian stereotypes associated with that, it's not like that's significant. Plus, I'm not sure Skye counts as Asian. Her actress is half-Asian, but it's not like she's visibly obviously Asian (she could certainly pass for white) and without more knowledge of her family, she might just be presented as a white girl. Also, that's the first and only time I've heard that complaint so I think it's just one yahoo's opinion.
11:29:28 AM Oct 30th 2013
In fact, I had no idea whatsoever that Skye's actress had any Asian ancestry until I looked at this discussion.
11:37:05 AM Oct 30th 2013
Yeah, I would agree that the Asian-stereotype idea is really a stretch, especially (or at least) with Skye.
11:56:47 AM Oct 30th 2013
Alright, I was just floating that one out there since I noticed it in one of the sites I saw looking for citations for the primary point. I honestly didn't make the connection until I saw that site, but it is pretty tenuous.

Any more input on the main one?
01:25:36 PM Oct 30th 2013
If we absolutely must, it looks alright to me.

(That said, my personal opinion is that UI is such a magnet for whining and bashing that it shouldn't be anywhere on the wiki, but that's a discussion for another place.)
08:41:52 AM Oct 31st 2013
edited by
Didn't realize a discussion was going on, sorry. I stand by my assertion that the show is actually making an effort to put in non-white actors and the nature of the show just means most roles available are antagonists, there have been as many white antagonists as non-white ones, there have been non-white allies too, at least one of the antagonist roles was originally meant for a white actor, and two of the roles were set up to be very, very sympathetic, and three had the crew going out of their way to try to save the antagonist. A few people seeing offense where there obviously is none intended—especially when looking at context—does not make actual Unfortunate Implications.
09:22:00 AM Oct 31st 2013
You should reread the UI page. It specifically says that people seeing offense where none was intended is the trope. That's why it's unfortunate implications. "They didn't mean to" doesn't disqualify it from the trope.

From the page:
"Keep in mind that Unfortunate Implications are unintentional."

"Even when authors are being careful with story elements, it is impossible for one or a couple of creators to really consider every perspective of the audience and just how certain tropes can be construed as troublesome."
10:42:09 AM Oct 31st 2013
edited by
Thing is, it's one thing where even when you look at the context there's something genuinely worth finding unfortunate.

But when you entire reasoning boils down to "some of the non-whites are villains", then it's a worthless entry. That's not Unfortunate Implications unless you think only white people can be villains.

I mean, I could even buy if you could say "all of the antagonists have been non-white", but it's been about half and half at most.
11:48:21 AM Oct 31st 2013
The reasoning is "a disproportionate number of the relatively few non-white characters are antagonistic." Thus far, a single episode did not have the primary threat be non-white. Since this is a page for audience reactions, it's worth noting that, well, the audience has reacted. It's not an isolated case where someone noticed it.
01:19:58 PM Oct 31st 2013
Sorry, I'm just not seeing it. Literally only the Commandante is a non-white that's a full-blown villain the entire episode. Everyone else is set up to be sympathetic and not actually a genuine threat to the team, or the team at least tries to take them in non-violently; there's absolutely zero indication, even unintentional, of "Non-whites are horrible people who must be killed by the whiteys". When there was room in the narrative for allies, we've had one white (Agent Mack) and one non-white (Agent Quan) and technically Amador is an ally (note how she merely moves to disable the team's van, and helps the desk clerk lady and the one time she aims to actually kill one of the team members it's the team's non-white). We've had as many if not more white antagonists.

IMHO those people's sole reasoning is "OMG, a non-white was a villain, the show is racist!!!111!"

Nor is it remotely remarkable that only one member of a team is non-white, as that's extremely common.

So it's like, I'm not seeing the issues here. The only way to avert the matter would be to never have any non-white new characters at all except for the occasional Agent, at which point the SJ Ws would be complaining that was racist.

I'm sorry, but, like I said, there needs to be some legitimate actual implications of unfortunateness to be included, IMHO. Otherwise, if we use "at least a single SJW squinted and saw something offensive" as the criteria, we'd have to list just about every single story in creation on the page.
01:26:03 PM Oct 31st 2013
Sounds like your issue isn't with the example, but with the trope itself. Which really is broken, I admit.
01:57:18 PM Oct 31st 2013
edited by
I have no idea, TBH. I can definitely understand the overall concept, where an author didn't intend a given bad thing but it still comes off as dodgy.

I feel like there has to be some... reasonable criteria, though. "Half the antagonists are non-white on a show where the only room for new characters is mainly as villains, and meanwhile half the few ally slots available have also been non-white" is like... well, like I said, I'm not seeing the issue. Out of ten named antagonists on our character page, four have been non-white (five? Not sure how to categorize Raina). Out of 2 named allies, one has been white, one's been non-white. Out of the named people who've been killed, two were white, two were non-white. Where is the issue, seriously?
06:59:23 PM Oct 19th 2013

Second time this has been added. Is there any validity to it?
07:14:10 PM Oct 19th 2013
I'm not seeing any. It's a Whedon show. The dialogue is clever. If someone has more specific examples, that might be useful, but as is it's barely more than a Zero-Context Example. There's not enough context to know what the person is really talking about.
07:41:31 PM Oct 19th 2013
I do rather agree that Cliché Storm fits, but I don't get the context they added.

Like you said, it's a Whedon show. The man LOVES his cliches, if only so he can lampshade them to death and back. Or subvert them to hell and back, but there's been surprisingly little of that so far.
03:46:18 PM Sep 27th 2013
How is the fan-reaction about Skye? Everyone I know immediately disliked her, but I don't have my thumb on the pulse of the fan community so I'm hesitant to add The Scrappy.

I figured I'd ask to see if this was a general consensus of just us.
03:47:51 PM Sep 27th 2013
I thought she looked awful in the trailers, but she didn't grate so much in the actual pilot.
04:59:11 PM Sep 27th 2013
Tumblr seems sort of 50-50, at least. Kind of this weird thing where people seem to love and hate her for the exact same traits/reasons. Ward seems to have more of the consensus on finding him flat/boring/cliche.
04:59:51 PM Sep 27th 2013
There's been only one episode so far. Give it time.
09:56:44 PM Sep 27th 2013
Don't even bother adding something like that until at least the second episode.
07:01:10 PM Oct 9th 2013
So... three episodes in. My feelings haven't changed any, and I do know for certain that at least a decent portion of the fans dislike her.

Any thoughts?
12:50:33 PM Oct 10th 2013
Someone just added her to Base Breaker. That's good enough for now.
01:13:16 PM Oct 10th 2013
Works for me.

Although someone should clarify why she's a Base Breaker, asis it just sounds like The Scrappy (in other words, mention what the two bases are). Based on Arkady's post I assume that some people like her, but I honestly cannot say why.
Collapse/Expand Topics