TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Wreck-It Ralph

Go To

InkDagger Since: Jul, 2014
#6726: Dec 8th 2018 at 3:53:16 PM

[up][up]What did it ruin?

Ralph in the first movie didn't want to leave his game. He wanted to be apprecieated for what he did and his issues seemed to stem more from how people treated his role rather than him having to perform the actions of his role. Like, he didn't hate being the game's villain. He hated how everyone treated him for fulfilling that role.

Vanellope wants to leave her game because the day-in-day-out lifestyle was stiffling her growth and she felt unfulfilled. Ralph's problems were communal, while V's are personal.

lalalei2001 Since: Oct, 2009
#6727: Dec 9th 2018 at 6:29:35 PM

I'm just confused as to why Vanellope dropped the president thing and embraced princesshood after the last movie seemed to parody the concept.

The Protomen enhanced my life.
PhysicalStamina ain't nothin' but a party y'all (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Coming soon to theaters
ain't nothin' but a party y'all
#6728: Dec 9th 2018 at 7:09:59 PM

Maybe being a princess involves less work.

Do not spare the feelings of those who would not spare yours.
RhymeBeat True colors from Eastern Standard Since: Aug, 2009 Relationship Status: In Lesbians with you
True colors
#6729: Dec 9th 2018 at 9:31:26 PM

Back in Sugar Rush she mentioned she was the president, she only brought the princess stuff back up when she needed to convince the Disney Princesses that she was one of them.

The Crystal Caverns A bird's gotta sing.
InkDagger Since: Jul, 2014
#6730: Dec 10th 2018 at 12:35:05 AM

It also TOTALLY feels in character for Vanellope to flip-flop on that when its convenient.

ElSquibbonator Since: Oct, 2014
#6731: Dec 10th 2018 at 1:42:38 PM

So I looked at the list of video game cameos in the movie and one thing immediately stuck out to me: why didn't they include a Pokemon reference? It's become the best-selling video game franchise of all time, and the anime even airs on DisneyXD!

Edited by ElSquibbonator on Dec 10th 2018 at 4:42:58 AM

InkDagger Since: Jul, 2014
#6732: Dec 10th 2018 at 2:07:18 PM

If I remember correctly, I think they did reference Pokemon, but no one from it cameoed.

kyun Since: Dec, 2010
#6733: Dec 10th 2018 at 5:09:28 PM

Because Pokemon is owned by Nintendo, who won't let Disney use any of their properties.

In fact, rewatch the sequel. You won't see ANY Nintendo characters appear, or be mentioned!

kyun Since: Dec, 2010
#6734: Dec 10th 2018 at 8:59:55 PM

... what do you think Mr. Litwak's reaction was like when a rare off-the-market game controller from the 90's just up and arrived at the arcade center, from no one, with money he never paid, after he first decided it was too expensive for him to buy and then relented and tried to search for it himself?

KnownUnknown Since: Jan, 2001
#6735: Dec 10th 2018 at 9:53:57 PM

I mean, I'd have assumed something was up the moment I looked at the receipt and saw it was in tens of thousands of dollars. It's one of those things where you just have to assume someone is getting scammed.

KJMackley Since: Jan, 2001
#6736: Dec 11th 2018 at 2:02:54 AM

I did find it odd that he rejected the cost of the replacement piece, which was only listed at 200 dollars. Given it is a vintage game and still relatively popular, such a repair should have been reasonable. There were other bidders, certainly, but he didn't know how big it would go at the time. And being a classic arcade, such items tend to bring in customers even if not the biggest money makers.

Similarly, the super-bidding done by Ralph and Vanellope according to the E-Bay system would only go as high as needed to win against other bidders, not to whatever number they say. That's a major liability issue for E-Bay, something they weeded out early on to protect themselves from litigation involving scammers and backdoor deals (early E-Bay reports had people buying a picture of a PS 2 for near full console price, where the seller was technically truthful about the product but still misleading). And an item like that being bought for such a high price would definitely catch legal attention, with the assumption it is money laundering or drug shipment.

Beatman1 Since: Feb, 2014 Relationship Status: Gone fishin'
#6737: Dec 11th 2018 at 6:43:13 AM

[up]x3 - I’m pretty sure there would be a trail followed for two days before the all clear was given, and at that point, why waste it?

Not to mention arcades these days aren’t the most profitable things. I’m sure once the legalese was handled he’d be fine taking it.

AndrewGPaul Since: Oct, 2009
#6738: Dec 11th 2018 at 7:16:00 AM

[up][up]

If it was only Ralph that bid $2700.01, then they "should" have only had to pay the $275 or whatever, but he and Vanellope were bidding against each other, driving the minimum bid up.

Also, Litwak didn't want to pay $200 for the wheel because that was more than the game brought in in a year (How much does a play of a game cost? Because that means it's only bringing in about a dollar a day). vintage game or not, he's better off selling the cabinet and let the new owner stump up for the wheel if they want. If that happens, even if the game is plugged in, all the characters will end up isolated from their friends at Litwak's mall (I assume that each instance of Ralph, Sonic, etc, is a different person).

kyun Since: Dec, 2010
#6739: Dec 11th 2018 at 9:00:50 AM

Litwak rejected the somewhat reasonable price because, obviously, there would be no story.

And this is where video game characters having the free will to make friends with those from other games comes into question, much like how toys from Toy Story can do the same. They are powerless to humans unless they cleverly find a loop hole they can take advantage of without the human knowing who did it, like they found in this sequel (partly off-camera). What happens if Litwak did throw Sugar Rush away? They need to deal with the idea that life-long friends can disappear at any time. They can potentially go to the internet to, say, find a duplicate of that character in a related site, but will that one act the same way? Is a replacement a good deal to cope with the loss of the previous one? This sequel is written as if there is only ONE copy of a Ralph, or Vanellope, or an Ariel, or a Belle, or an Elsa, or a Groot! In all of the limiteless scape of the internet, there's only ONE of each of these!?

Edited by kyun on Dec 11th 2018 at 9:05:47 AM

blkwhtrbbt The Dragon of the Eastern Sea from Doesn't take orders from Vladimir Putin Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: I'm just a poor boy, nobody loves me
The Dragon of the Eastern Sea
#6740: Dec 11th 2018 at 9:50:27 AM

I like to think of it that there's only one template. It makes sense for the internet; all the USERS go to the SITES, there aren't hundreds of the same site floating around (except for Google Caches).

Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you
KnownUnknown Since: Jan, 2001
#6741: Dec 11th 2018 at 10:15:24 AM

I wonder why they didn’t just make the part that much more expensive. Say the game’s parts are hot with collectors or something, so it’s impossible to get for reasonable rates.

It doesn’t really change anything, beyond the joke of having Ralph and Vanellope pay a ludicrous amount anyway because they have no idea what they’re doing.

kyun Since: Dec, 2010
#6742: Dec 11th 2018 at 12:04:00 PM

  • imagines Al from Toy Story 2 disappointed that he couldn't get the Sugar Rush wheel*

InkDagger Since: Jul, 2014
#6743: Dec 11th 2018 at 1:44:09 PM

[up]x5

I believe one game is shown costing a quarter in the original movie. Though, here's a question, weren't there TWO Sugar Rush Cabinets in the original film? Connected for multiplayer? Wouldn't that just mean that one cabinet is just out of order for a bit?

As for the price, I would assume its just 'Writers cannot do math'. Or maybe the arcade has REALLY slow days during the week, but has lots of kids on weekends? Would that make up the difference?

blkwhtrbbt The Dragon of the Eastern Sea from Doesn't take orders from Vladimir Putin Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: I'm just a poor boy, nobody loves me
The Dragon of the Eastern Sea
#6744: Dec 11th 2018 at 1:56:05 PM

If it's multiplayer, then it's two interfaces to the same game.

Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you
InkDagger Since: Jul, 2014
#6745: Dec 11th 2018 at 11:31:26 PM

Why would one steering wheel ruin that though? I've seen those kind of games and they don't have to be connected in multiplayer.

MsCC93 Since: May, 2012
#6746: Dec 12th 2018 at 4:52:01 PM

I saw this movie. Although I loved it, I think the first one was better. This one came off as "meh" to me.

PhysicalStamina ain't nothin' but a party y'all (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Coming soon to theaters
ain't nothin' but a party y'all
#6747: Dec 12th 2018 at 4:54:07 PM

Wait, you "loved" it, but thought it was "meh"?

Do not spare the feelings of those who would not spare yours.
MsCC93 Since: May, 2012
#6748: Dec 12th 2018 at 5:22:49 PM

Yeah. I should have been more specific. I meant to say I loved the first half of it, but the fact that there was No Antagonist in the second half made that part "meh."

Demetrios Lucky Seven from Des Plaines, Illinois (unfortunately) Since: Oct, 2009 Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
InkDagger Since: Jul, 2014
#6750: Dec 12th 2018 at 6:38:08 PM

Really? I rather enjoyed having No Antagonist. I feel like its opening Disney to the possibility of more complex plots and narratives where they don't have to force a villain in (as much as, yes, Disney, I WANT DISNEY VILLAINS AND THEIR AMAZING SONGS PLZ). I think it shows more maturity, if just I do think Inside Out pulled off the No Antagonist (arguably Hero Antagonist?) aspect better.


Total posts: 6,878
Top