Removing complaining, bashing and other negativity from the wiki

I'd say phrase it like this, "Many noted that Peter's in-universe fall from grace is uncomfortably similar to the tragic story of Bobby Driscoll (Peter Pan's original voice actor), as he was one of Disney's most prolific child actors before being kicked to the curb after growing into a pimply adolescent (with Peter Pan being his last major role at the studio) and subsequently suffered from bullying, legal issues and substance abuse, leading to his premature death at the age of 31. All things considered, some found this portrayal to be in poor taste."

Though maybe this should be in the YMMV category?

Edited by AnimationFan767 on May 22nd 2022 at 3:02:21 AM

Thing is, I think that was intentional. It wasn't some sort of thing that the fans noticed where they put it under a microscope. I don't think the audience reactions in the example are nessesary.

Edited by PlasmaPower on May 22nd 2022 at 7:08:43 AM

I highly doubt the people working on the movie even knew about Driscoll's fate and just used Peter as a general embodiment of Former Child Star. That was my read on it before learning about Driscoll's tragic backstory. If they had known, they either wouldn't have used Peter or handled him differently.

Hence why I think this issue is classic YMMV.

Edited by AnimationFan767 on May 22nd 2022 at 3:29:38 AM

Backing up the belief that the use of Peter as the villain seemed unintentional, if DISTURBINGLY similar, and I took it as a commentary on child stars watching before I learned about Bobby.

Edited by AlmightyKingPrawn on May 22nd 2022 at 6:44:41 AM

Just because you guys don't know doesn't mean that they wouldn't have known. It's too close for me to NOT be a coincidence. I think this was just some dark meta commentary about how Disney treated his voice actor.

Maybe if there's an interview about this with the movie's creators about their depiction of Peter, then I'll rest my case.

Edited by PlasmaPower on May 22nd 2022 at 8:19:16 AM

FYI, the whole Chip and Dale/Bobby Driscoll issue is being discussed over on the Unfortunate Implications thread at the moment.

I don't think we need more than one entry describing the matter.

Does This Remind You of Anything? has to be intentional, so if it's seen as an unintentional reference, it doesn't count. Is it just a Former Child Star joke on a surface level?

Yes, if there is no official source verifying that it was in any way a specific reference to Driscoll, then this has to be treated as just YMMV Unfortunate Implication. I very much think it is just a basic Former Child Star thing that accidentally teetered too close to Bobby Driscoll's real-life fate.

Edited by AnimationFan767 on May 23rd 2022 at 1:51:52 AM

Plasma Power, the thing is, coincidences do happen. Common tropes are common tropes, so there are bound to be similarities. I do not subscribe to the mentality of accusing people of having agendas, or plagiarizing, or making specific references or whatever if there is no solid evidence to support that accusation.

Edited by AnimationFan767 on May 23rd 2022 at 3:03:39 AM

Maybe the writers legitimately didn't know and just thought using Peter Pan would be a funny way to do the Former Child Star trope. Maybe they did know, but didn't think the reference would be that disrespectful. Hard to say without asking, and I don't see anyone involved being willing to answer anytime soon.

I highly doubt it's the latter. The movie was clearly made by people who are savvy about modern internet culture, a.k.a the kind of people who would have foreseen this kind of backlash unless they didn't know or remember about Driscoll.

Edited by AnimationFan767 on May 23rd 2022 at 4:13:39 AM

Found this on The Power of Rock's Music sub-page. This is just oozing with snark.

• The band Starship once sang about building a "city from rock and roll". Not sure how that's supposed to work. Can musical notes even be used as the foundation work for a building, let alone a city?

Just cut that last line? It's definitely overanalyzing what's just meant to be a fun "music is awesome" song.

Also the line previous to it is snark as well.

I'd cut the example entirely for being misuse. The song isn't about Magic Music, which is what The Power of Rock is about. It's just a metaphor.

Now, I don't know the threshold for Dethroning Moments, but even then, I feel that this on DethroningMoment.Phantom Strider is a bit too much.

• Magnus Force: I loathe 99% of animation reviewers on the Internet, and Phantom Strider is in my top 5 most despised. I hate the bland laziness of his reviews (if you can call a countdown list a review). I hate the way he delivers his opinions in the most whiney and pretentious manner. I hate the childlike simplicity of his takes and how he clearly only does the bare minimum research most of the time. And I loathe how his "it's just my opinion" statement comes off as half-hearted and is obviously a weak attempt to deflect all criticism of his takes. However, there will always be one moment from him that especially peeves me off, which is when he declared all Canadian animation to be horrible. No, just no. I am absolutely sick and tired of the "Canadian animation bad" mindset. It's based on little more than the nostalgic bitterness of angry manchildren like him who decided they were sick of Johnny Test or Almost Naked Animals or whatever on the network that defined their "precious childhood" and so decided to blame Canada for everything they hate in cartoons and pick apart every little thing about them to make them seem like the worst things ever (although admittedly I despise those shows myself for different reasons). Are you really seriously saying that everything ever done by Nelvana, Mercury Filmworks, and the National Film Board of Canada is bad solely they are from the same country that only partially created Johnny Test?! Are you choosing to ignore countless wonderful Animated Adaptations of kids' books done in Canada solely because of Almost Naked Animals was produced in that exact same country?! Are you seriously declaring about 200 shows made over more than 50 years of history for channels ranging from CBC to YTV (and also many American channels) all shit solely because you hate Mega Babies?! Stop fucking doing this! Is the fact that one of the most successful and popular children's cartoons on right now is Canadian a moot point because of the existence of Johnny Test?! Is the fact that Canada created the first ever All-CGI Cartoon TV series meaningless because Canada also created Mega Babies? Is the fact that shows ranging from The Raccoons to Detentionaire have all received great critical acclaim and developed hugely loyal fanbases worth ignoring solely because people hated Almost Naked Animals? Stop basing your knowledge of Canadian animation entirely on your hatred of Johnny Test and do some actual fucking research for once in your life. I honestly don't understand how or why he and the countless other worthless shits like him, have earned so many subs and are treated as the leading experts on animation when the likes of The Wacky Delhi and Benzie Johnson, reviewers who are actually capable of giving interesting, nuanced, well-researched, and humble reviews created with actual effort exist, or when cartoon podcasts like Toon Talk Weekly and Cartoon Kids provide far more entertaining and insightful discussions of cartoons.

I am particularly concerned by the referral of Strider as a "worthless shit". He's not a fictional character, he's a real person. Throughout my times looking through DMOS there have been many instances of me wanting to put stuff in this thread or in ROCEJ but stopping myself, but this entry is outright volatile.

Edited by AlmightyKingPrawn on May 24th 2022 at 3:56:17 PM

About the C&DRR/Peter Pan issue: I'm pretty sure Driscoll's tragic situation was far less well known than others like Judy Garland's. I knew a lot about child stars that peaked in their fame but faded (or even spiraled) as they got older, but not Driscoll. And I don't think the writers did either.

The fact that it was unintentional makes it further qualify as Unfortunate Implications, doesn't it?

Uh... yeah, what can be done with that example? What exactly is the hostility limit with DMoS entries about creators.

Troping creators outside of their work is absolutely not tolerated on this wiki. I'd remove the personal attacks.

Edited by Albert3105 on May 24th 2022 at 4:39:17 AM

I'll do you one better: who is for throwing out the whole entry in the first place?

Edited by skan123 on May 24th 2022 at 1:39:19 AM

Rude as it is, the anger in the entry is mostly criticizing in-work research bias.

Edited by Albert3105 on May 24th 2022 at 4:42:10 AM

I'd agree with axing it because it's not a DMOS at all, it's a long rant over why they don't like this creator, not a highlighted worst moment.

Edited by Tonwen on May 24th 2022 at 3:42:15 AM

They do specifically point to one moment, the one where he called Canadian animation horrible. But yes cut out personal attacks.

Edited by mightymewtron on May 24th 2022 at 4:43:20 AM

I think the intended DMOS was the statements about Canadian animation. I'd prefer a trimdown.

Edited by Albert3105 on May 24th 2022 at 4:43:10 AM