What's Happening

Troperville

Tools

collapse/expand topics back to YMMV/AgentsOfSHIELD

 

VeryMelon
topic
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.
Larkmarn
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).
MrDeath
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.
ManicOppressive
topic
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?
SeptimusHeap
11:31:55 PM Feb 24th 2014
Eh, not worse than in any other YMMV page.
VeryMelon
topic
09:15:04 AM Dec 26th 2013
Do NOT add any Complete Monster examples without first getting the cleanup thread's okay.
Lionheart0
topic
08:57:24 AM Nov 5th 2013
Fan Dumb / Hate Dumb entry comes off as Complaining About People Not Liking the show.
Larkmarn
10:03:26 AM Nov 5th 2013
edited by 156.33.241.7
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.
Hodor
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.
ArkadyDarell
12:18:39 PM Nov 5th 2013
edited by 74.67.22.81
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.
Larkmarn
12:37:04 PM Nov 5th 2013
edited by 156.33.241.7
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.
VeryMelon
06:12:11 PM Nov 12th 2013
People like to conflate the two nowadays for simplicity.
Larkmarn
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.
Larkmarn
topic
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.
MrDeath
12:43:36 PM Oct 29th 2013
It still needs a citation, though, per the rules of Unfortunate Implications.
Larkmarn
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:

MrDeath
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.
VeryMelon
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.
MrDeath
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.
Discar
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.
MrDeath
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.
Larkmarn
03:41:53 PM Oct 29th 2013
edited by 108.48.88.58
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/.
Discar
04:54:29 PM Oct 29th 2013
Larkmarn
07:44:36 PM Oct 29th 2013
edited by 108.48.88.58
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.
VeryMelon
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.
Larkmarn
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.
DashSpendar
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.
MrDeath
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.
Hodor
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.
Larkmarn
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?
MrDeath
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.)
ArkadyDarell
08:41:52 AM Oct 31st 2013
edited by 8.20.178.254
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.
MrDeath
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."
ArkadyDarell
10:42:09 AM Oct 31st 2013
edited by 74.67.22.81
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.
Larkmarn
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.
ArkadyDarell
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.
Larkmarn
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.
ArkadyDarell
01:57:18 PM Oct 31st 2013
edited by 74.67.22.81
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?
VeryMelon
topic
06:59:23 PM Oct 19th 2013

Second time this has been added. Is there any validity to it?
Discar
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.
Larkmarn
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.
Larkmarn
topic
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.
urutapu
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.
ArkadyDarell
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.
Tuckerscreator
04:59:51 PM Sep 27th 2013
There's been only one episode so far. Give it time.
VeryMelon
09:56:44 PM Sep 27th 2013
Don't even bother adding something like that until at least the second episode.
Larkmarn
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?
VeryMelon
12:50:33 PM Oct 10th 2013
Someone just added her to Base Breaker. That's good enough for now.
Larkmarn
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.
back to YMMV/AgentsOfSHIELD

TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy