Follow TV Tropes
For reference, here is what I've done so far. (I'll be adding more information later, obviously.)
I was thinking about writing analysis on Vampires Are Sex Gods when I read this thread and noticed that Juan Carlos was working on it... but then apparently abandoned, as there is no Analysis page for this trope. It looks really good, so I'd rather not hijack your work without you knowing. So are you still working on it? And if not, can I use parts of your text in my analysis?
I was thinking of writing an essay for Outlast and it's DLC Whistleblower, with a focus of analyzing the story. Within the essay, I wanted to address two questions that kept popping up in my brain during the game:
1. Can this game be considered homophobic?
2. Does this game stigmatize the mentally ill? (Think the trope Insane Equals Violent)
I know both of those questions are pretty loaded, so I'll present the short answers now as follows:
1. The game is very vague about its presentation, so it may be one of those if-you're-looking-for-it kind of themes.
2. No, not if you take a closer look at the game's layout, the documents in game and how the characters interact with each other.
For question 1 I wanted to analyze the antagonists in the game and the threat level that they present to the player character, and whether or not it is in fact homophobia on the part of the developers or just them putting on an extra level of fear for players who are already there.
For question 2 I wanted to point out the different levels in the game, particularly the prison area, since it wouldn't be much of a stretch to guess that a good portion of the violent patients in the game come from there. Also, from the documents the player finds, up until relocation to Mount Massive most of the patients weren't violent to begin with.
Basically I'd like to know if I'm headed in the right direction with this essay or if there are some flaws or confusion in the setup I've presented here. Constructive criticism is welcome.
Posting it here because it's related to this thread's topic.
Sandbox.Analysis Anti Villain is apparently a draft Analysis/ page by ~randomtroper89. Does anybody disagree with launching it?
Okay I don't think quite yet, but where getting here. We still need the remove the examples. Perhaps the more descriptive examples could be moved to the pages, while the zero context should be removed outright.
Also I'm not sure what we should do with the type V examples. I don't think Designated Villain quite fits, because it refers to villains who are treated like evil by the work despite not being so.
So, I made an Analysis page for The Nightmare Before Christmas (here) relating the film to the German Expressionism movement. It's not the most in-depth page, but first things first I want to check that it's appropriate for the site. I had originally thought, well, if I relate it to the tropes the movement used... The end result, however, doesn't actually link much to tropes on the site, just the occasional old work.
I'd make the case, though, that e.g. using set design and lighting to convey a mood, using the visual trappings of another genre, etc. are all fundamentally tropes.
Halo could use some work.
I want to write a semi-analysis of Sponge Bob Square Pants, but there's already something there. Does that mean I'm prevented from writing any else there?
This has come up in the past. My sense is that writing a new Analysis beneath the previous one, under its own header, may make sense.
OK then; it'll take a little while to write but I'll get on it today.
So I want to write an analysis on Shipping in the Arrowverse, similar to the one written about the nickelodeon one. My questions are:
Is this okay? I talk about tropes obviously, but it's also about fandom.
Can I use links as evidence/references?
Is it going to be removed if someone doesn't agree or thinks it's controversial?
Sorry I'm late.
...I think it's fine, if there's something good to be said about it. Controversial stuff doesn't ALWAYS stay in YMMV, as long as you try to keep it neutral and informative rather than persuasive, which sounds like what you're doing.
You're in the clear!
Hello. It’s nice to meet you.
I wrote an analysis (On the morality in Kung Fu Panda film series) of Kung Fu Panda.
Do you think the analysis I wrote is good enough?
Can I add a "Heroic Tropes Outside of White" to the Magic the Gathering analysis page? I have a lot of ideas about that.
Hi, I'm thinking of writing an analysis page for Elemental Rock–Paper–Scissors as I find the page too long. As a start, I'm thinking of transferring the list of elements and what they are strong/weak to the analysis page. On the way, I want to expand on it, giving one element a folder, then a list of elements in bulletin form, write what's their relation and the reason behind it and, finally, list out examples of such relation. I am currently writing a sample on my sandbox page.
[ADDED] To avoid duplicate combinations, I have made everything branches points instead.
Edited by Kindle4Light on Jul 1st 2019 at 1:46:55 PM
Hey, I just stumbled upon Analysis.Fallout and... it's incomplete.
Gender-Blender Name is a wordy mix of examples and explanations. I think the explanations and general examples should be moved to a Useful Notes or Analysis page.
From Teleportation, should this be split off into Analysis?
It seems to be talking more about how the trope is used historically, than anything specific to the trope in general?
With very few exceptions (The Tomorrow People (1973), Stargate SG-1), such devices are capable only of comparatively short-range transport. You still need a Cool Starship to get between stars.
This technology has the potential to short-circuit the drama of a story, so all examples have limitations built in to cause the transporter/teleporter/ disintegrator/whateverator to fail whenever it is needed most. (See: Plot-Sensitive Items, Phlebotinum Breakdown, and Teleporter Accident.)
The ability to accomplish the same thing without technological means also crops up from time to time, either by "magic", or as a kind of superpower. Non-technological teleportation accomplished by psychic power is often called "Jaunting", after Alfred Bester's science fiction classic, The Stars My Destination.
The Star Trek-style turn-you-into-energy-and-back-again transporter is perhaps the single most physically impossible piece of Phlebotinum in all of Science Fiction, for a large number of different reasons, including enormous temperature and data storage requirements, computational time (many times the age of the universe), massive energy output (more energy than is available in the entire universe), and unachievable transmission focusing resolution (all explained by physicist Lawrence Krauss in The Physics of Star Trek). This puts it among the crown jewels of Weird Science.
It also raises some hairy metaphysical questions as well, regarding just what happens to you when you step into the thing, and who exactly emerges at the other end. This issue was explored rather bleakly in the James Patrick Kelly story "Think Like a Dinosaur" (later adapted into an episode of The Outer Limits (1995)). And that's if the process works. See also Twinmaker when used as a teleporter, a teleporter that analyzes the contents of one booth, sends a description to the other, creates a clone there and destroys the original, a.k.a the Sub-Trope, Destructive Teleportation.
Due to the above, teleportation in modern works often works by warping space somehow, or passing through Another Dimension.
Edited by Malady on Feb 4th 2020 at 3:14:42 AM
Are first person perspectives allowed in Analysis? Because the Analysis page for South Park has a lot of it. It's essentially two essays, one comparing the Christmas episodes to each other and the other on Stan and Kyle's friendship. It comes across as somebody posting their own reviews rather than analyzing the show's themes. I'm think this is what the Analysis page is referring to when they say that it's not meant to be "your blog".
Does anyone want to take a look at it and give their feedback?
Edited by chasemaddigan on Feb 26th 2020 at 12:01:54 PM
First Person isn't allowed anywhere, save places like DMOS.
I performed the bare minimum of repair on Fallout by indexing the page and removing "to be continued". Still reads like it's unfinished but it's not so blatantly a violation of "Aim For A Final Draft Appearance".
Looking over the South Park page further, it seems someone also added a rebuttal to one of the sections. Admittedly, it's not in the first-person, but still messy and it leads to the page arguing with itself.
So all things considered, is it okay to cut list this page? I don't see how you can rewrite these sections without starting from scratch.
Yeah, rebuttals definitely aren't allowed on Analysis.
The Analysis page for 300 is kind of unfocused. It's trying to interpret the scene where Leonidas refuses to let Ephialtes fight with the other Spartans, but it doesn't have an actual thesis. The first sub-bullet claims Leonidas was an idiot for letting someone with vital strategic info leave, and tries to claim it might have also been just arrogance. The second sub-bullet claims that Leonidas probably thought someone like Ephialtes would never betray the Spartans if they were willing to fight. The third sub-bullet brings up a Deleted Scene where Ephialtes tries to kill himself, and argues that Leonidas knew he was a Death Seeker who would ruin the strategy behind the Phalanx. And the final sub-bullet is just a snipe about how the Spartans break the Phalanx position throughout the film.
It reads more like a Headscratcher or Alternative Character Interpretation that somebody moved to its own page. Does anyone have any suggestions on what to do with this? Should we move it, or just outright cut the page?
Bunch of Analysis pages that are kinda iffy:
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?