Is this an example?

Is it Samus Is a Girl if it's not "character is assumed to be a guy", but she has a secret identity that includes pretending to be a guy? Using voice modulation while acting as The Voice, referring to herself as a guy, the characters in the group who do know her identity participate in the deception, and she wears all-concealing armor when she comes in person to join in a fight. Her gender is revealed when she reveals her identity to the rest of the group.

That depends; does the viewer know she's a girl before the reveal?

No.

I'd say it counts as an example.

Reposting from the previous page, so it doesn't get lost:

Are the following examples from Pacific Rim: Uprising being used correctly?:

• Arc Fatigue: Of the Four Lines, All Waiting variety: it's generally considered by both detractors and defenders that Uprising has too many subplots stuffed into its screentime. To compare, the first film focused mainly on the characters learning to work out their personal troubles and function as teams of pilots, as well as the PPDC struggling to keep up against increasingly powerful Kaijus. However, aside from these two basic premises, which include the revamping of the latter with Fusion Dance in Uprising, the sequel runs with the additional plots of a younger character trying to cope with her new life in the pilot cadet school, a seemingly evil MegaCorp building rival Jaegers and leading mysterious attacks, and even an inner human conspiration in favor of the Precursors. It can be safely said that this film carries enough material and ideas to produce more than one installment or even a full-fledged TV series, which takes a revealing new light when one remembers director Steven S. DeKnight had only worked in TV series before having his film debut with Uprising.

• Ass Pull: As awesome as the brutal Mega Kaiju is, Newt's contingency plan for the Jaegers overwhelming whatever Kaiju came through really does come out of nowhere. Sure, it's explained that the Big Bad can allocate resources here and there, but there is zero hint of them anywhere or how exactly they work.

• Critical Research Failure: According to John Boyega, he wanted Gipsy Avenger to have two swords since Gipsy Danger had only one... even though Gipsy Danger did have two blades, but one was bitten off by Raiju before it could be used. Boyega may have been mixing up the two Gipsys subconsciously since unlike Danger, Avenger really only has one sword. Initially.

Dunno, on the first two. but for something to be Critical Research Failure, it has to be

Since I think we can count out the possibility of Film.Pacfic Rim being a part of the standard educational curriculum, we need to look at the 2nd half of that definition.

Since I never actually saw the film, was the number of swords Gipsy Danger had an important plot point in the movie? In other words, if someone saw is once in the theater 5 years ago likely to remember off the top of their head how many there were?

If the answer to that question is anything short of "Absolutely, without a doubt they would", that "example" should go away.

EDIT :

Then we have the small fact that CRF is about the work itself. That example is about someone else commenting on the work. So, even if the example is technically valid it would belong on the page for whatever work the comment was made in and not on the PR:U page.

Edited by Zyffyr on Jul 16th 2018 at 1:34:19 AM

Does Samus Is a Girl cover any instance of "character is presented to audience as male, later revealed as female"?

No. That's Sweet Polly Oliver, usually. Samus Is a Girl is when an action-oriented character is established as heroic or a badass before revealing that she's female. If you think about the original example, no reference is made to Samus' gender whatsoever throughout the game, leaving audiences assuming that she's a man because male is (or was) the assumed default for any action hero. Nor is Samus attempting to disguise her gender, other than to the extent that Power Armor does so naturally.

Edited by Fighteer on Jul 16th 2018 at 6:26:09 AM

Alright, here's an interesting one: if two characters are thought to be separate people in a work, and a fanfic decides to make them the same person with the other name as just an alias or what have you, but the work later reveals that they were the same person all along, is it still Composite Character, or just a funny coincidence?

It's still Composite Character in the fanfic; I don't see why that trope would change because of later context.

I'm on a The Legend of Korra editing kick right now. Korra and Asami are listed in both First Girl Wins and Last Girl Wins, as Asami is the first girl her own age Korra meets, but the last of her potential love interests. But both tropes are listed as unisex, in which the "Girl" in the title actually just means "potential love interest". Doesn't that just make them a straight example of Last Girl Wins?

Yeah, it's not specifically a girl, but about a love interest. Asami's not the first any way you cut it.

On Second Season Downfall, would it still count if it's an one season 24 episode anime with the "second season" being the second half.

The key difference there is that a second part of the first season is pretty much assured outside mid-season cancelling (which is an exception at best), while a second season isn't. The trope is about the later. So no, latter half doesn't count.

It could also qualify as I Knew It!, as the author of this hypothetical fanfic correctly guessed a canon twist.

Does the trope cover cases where the character was attempting to disguise her gender?

My impression was that it was about creating assumption of gender, not outright saying "I am a guy".

That is Sweet Polly Oliver.

Does Sweet Polly Oliver cover the example I described above, where the character is trying to keep her identity secret, and pretending to be a different gender is just part of that?

I'm not sure how many times I can say the same thing.

Just making sure. Thank you.

I was about to add this to a work page but wanted to be sure if it's the right trope:

For The Handmaid's Tale:

• Soft Reboot: Season 2 continues from the original source material, but adds new characters, and undergoes a Time Skip, but doesn't deny the events of the original or take them in Broad Strokes. In essence, it's a quasi-Continuity Reboot maintaining the existing actors.

For Dexter's Laboratory:

• Alternate Continuity: Although never confirmed officially by the creators, some Fanon considers Season 3 and Season 4 due to the amount of Retcons and Retools.
• Ambiguously Human: It's never confirmed In-Universe if Major Glory, a pastiche of Captain America, Uncle Sam (Major Glory's Uncle, whose Names The Same as the DC Comics version) and Val Hallen are human or not, even though they look and act human.
• Soft Reboot: Although Season 3 and Season 4 (both Revival series) retain the core cast of Dexter, Dee Dee, Mom, Dad and Mandark, certain Retcons are made - for example, Dexter's surname Snodgrass revealed in "Dexter Dodgeball" isn't mentioned anymore, Mandark's sister Lalavava is Adapted Out, and The Justice Friends (outside of a brief aural cameo in Season 4 episode D2 and the Season 4 Something Completely Different episode "Dexter's Wacky Races") are Adapted Out completely, plus the animation style is very different.

For Police Camera Action:

• Soft Reboot: From 1997 onwards, the series changed slightly, adding European, U.S. and Canadian police footage alongside British police footage, instead of the footage solely confined to Lower Deck Episodes about Europe, the U.S. and Canada.

If I'm right, a Soft Reboot is a Continuity Reboot that retains existing actors/sets, but may be an Alternate Timeline, Retcon or Retool?

Have I got the right trope for these entries?

I would appreciate it if someone could check if I've got these wrong, and what the major difference is for Soft Reboot and Retool, so I don't make this error.

The Alternate Continuity and Ambiguously Human are pure fan speculation. Cut.

From The Last Jedi

• Artistic License – Physics:
  • The Republic cruiser manages to get just out of effective range of the First Order flagship's weapons, and then the two ships match velocities for a large chunk of the movie, rather than constantly accelerating as they would in Real Life.

This scene would make sense if they matched acceleration. If so, they would be able to keep a constant distance from each other until they ran out of fuel letting them catch up looking from their perspective like it stopped. Was there any dialog from this scene specially mentioning velocity? I only remember mentioning speed and distances which would fall under the acceleration thing.

Edited by Ferot_Dreadnaught on Jul 17th 2018 at 3:05:11 AM

Someone complaining about unrealistic space physics in a Star Wars film? What next, are they going to claim that ghosts aren't real when they watch Ghostbusters? Cut for complete pointlessness.

Also, you're right that if the ships match accelerations, they would indeed remain the same distance from one another over time. Isaac Newton was a clever SOB — look up the concept of inertial and non-inertial reference frames.

Edited by Fighteer on Jul 17th 2018 at 12:35:27 PM

I have a question about this Overshadowed by Controversy entry in She-Ra and the Princesses of Power:

Considering the show hasn't even been released yet, has it been out long enough for the entire show to actually be overshadowed by this "controversy?"

The show was just announced, so it's too early to say it's Overshadowed by Controversy.