Is this an example?

We would judge Abusive mother by our standards (tropes in fiction standards). If our standards are unclear, then that could be discussed for sure (just not here).

My two cents after reading the entries and replies: she's definitely My Beloved Smother, but whether or not she would actually be classified as abusive by modern standards would still vary based on various psychological/cultural standards.

So I agree with mewtron that we can just save ourselves the trouble and just list My Beloved Smother, which already covers toxic and potentially abusive behaviors.

Another Disney character to contrast this situation with with is Tangled's Mother Gothel, who has a whole song dedicated to her My Beloved Smother-ness, but is also revealed to be undoubtedly abusive by the end of the story.

Edited by Synchronicity on Mar 14th 2022 at 2:34:56 PM

I do think the Alternate Character Interpretation entry is valid, though, since that's about subjective audience interpretations and this seems like a pretty fair one.

Could I get a second opinion on another Turning Red example about the same character under Easily Forgiven?

At the end of the movie, the character is blatantly in the process of paying the obscene cost of damages. It's even acknowledged in the Surprisingly Realistic Outcome on the same page.

Edited by XMenMutant22 on Mar 14th 2022 at 5:40:19 AM

I'd say it's a downplayed example. They still have to raise money to fix the Skydome, but her reputation doesn't seem to be damaged or anything (possibly because people outside the family don't know it's her).

Not too long ago, I added this example to LeFou's section in Characters.Beauty And The Beast:

• Non-Dubbed Grunts: Subverted with Jesse Corti, who provides LeFou's voice in the English and Latin-American Spanish versions. While Corti voiced all of LeFou's dialogue in the Latin-American Spanish dub, some of his grunts and screams are left undubbed.

Is this considered a valid example and if not, should it be removed?

Edited by gjjones on Mar 14th 2022 at 8:44:28 AM

I don't quite get how that is a subversion?

Found this entry in The Once-ler's folder on Characters - The Lorax

• Affably Evil: Although the "affable" and "evil" sides of him are not simultaneous. While genuinely nice before his factory is built, after the several years that pass during How Bad Can I Be, he's about as ill-disposed towards the Lorax as it gets.

My assumption is that Affably Evil refers to a villain who is genuinely polite. However, I assume that when the Once-ler makes his Face–Heel Turn, he isn't truly polite and the entry itself says "Although the "affable" and "evil" sides of him are not simultaneous" so should this entry be cut? Thanks.

Yes, Affably Evil is for a genuinely nice villain. If they are nice, then something happens and they turn not nice, it is not an example of this trope.

On VindicatedByHistory.Web Animation:

• Starship Regulars: Like Galaxy Quest, the show is seen as a Star Trek parody done right. The release of Star Trek: Lower Decks made the web cartoon's strengths stand out more.

I'm only a casual Trek fan, so just going by this example: There's nothing here to indicate that it wasn't well-received before Lower Decks, thus not really being vindicated. If anything it feels like a subtle way to complain about that series.

It really would have had to have been condemned in some way, as written, the example doesn't show that at all.

I would like to get a few more opinions on my last post regarding Monochrome Casting, since it may be a touchy suspect (thanks My Final Edits for answering).

^I agree with removing the bolder paragraph. Monochrome Casting is about the main cast being mostly if not all white so if it doesn't matter if the show has non-white minor characters.

Does this example of Non-Indicative Name count?

• The polar bear is not (as you might think) Ursus arctos (that's the brown bear), but Ursus maritimus. On a similar note, the Arctic as a region is named for the bears (the Ursa constellations), not the other way around.

Thanks, I've edited the entry.

Cut it, that's getting way too esoteric. It reminds me of Common Knowledge, where people keep putting in obscure facts as being "commonly known".

Edited by laserviking42 on Mar 14th 2022 at 1:53:39 PM

Found this in the Anime & Manga subpage of Politically Incorrect Villain and I'm not sure it quite fits the trope.

• This is a major reason why Nina of Code Geass was considered The Scrappy. Despite the fact that it would be safe to assume that some Britannians are racists, she's the only major character to hold such opinions and thus comes across badly. Though she originally doesn't tout any personal supremacy, she's "just" paranoid that any Eleven might be a terrorist. Later, after Princess Euphemia's death she becomes rather unhinged, and starts considering the use of a weapon that's for all thoughts and purposes a nuke against one man. Supplementary material says she once got lost in a Japanese ghetto as a child and something horrible happened to her there, explaining her general fear of Japanese people, but this is never brought up in the show itself.

Now I'll admit that I'm not that familiar with Code Geass but asides from potholing to The Scrappy, was Nina really portrayed as a villain in-universe because if she wasn't, the entry might need to get moved to Politically Incorrect Hero and the entry rewritten. Thoughts? Thanks.

Edit: Just deleted the Affably Evil entry on the Once-ler folder

Edited by spyland2 on Mar 14th 2022 at 11:58:52 AM

Nina Einstein starts a civilian who is openly xenophobic to the hero's country from the get go (starts as paranoid for several reasons, comes up with excuses to be hostile over time), but after a Sanity Slippage threatens to set off a warhead of her own making mid-city just to kill one specific person of her hatered. She gets arrested, but is recruited by the enemy's military to reproduce these, who intentionally enable her Ax-Crazy behaviour. (She gets better.)

Long story short, sounds like a poster child for Politically Incorrect Villain, but the example could use more context and focus.

Edited by Amonimus on Mar 15th 2022 at 10:13:40 PM

Halloween II (1981)

• Adaptation Decay: Although written by the same team, said team was under pressure from Executive Meddling, and the director and Michael Myers actor were different people trying to adapt their own sequel to Carpenter's original masterpiece. In that film, Michael was a mysterious, motiveless, psychopathic, and potentially supernatural murderer. Here he's given a sister and a familial motive.

Does Adaptation Decay apply to sequels in the same medium?

A sequel is not an adaptation. Adaptations are when a work is made in a new medium, like the ever popular comic book to film adaptations that will never die.

So I would say that is not an example.

Does this count as Non-Indicative Name?

• Canada's current one-dollar coin is called the loonie, named for the loon that is on the reverse side. Several years later a two-dollar coin was comissioned, which came to be known as the toonie due to its value (two loonies). Despite the name, there is no "loon" on the Toonie; the reverse side depicts a polar bear.

I say remove it. Even if there's no loons on it, it is still two loonies.

I plan to add this to Trivia.One Piece:

• I Knew It!: Fans were speculating that McKinley Belcher III would portray Arlong in the live-action series before it was officially confirmed in March 2022.

True example?

Edited by gjjones on Mar 15th 2022 at 9:39:54 AM

I think it that needs more meat, without why the theory had any legs to stand on it's just "a (fan?)cast that came true".

And if said legs are just "snooped around Instagram to find [actor] followed [creative]" or "casting rumor that turned out to be real" that's not a fan theory, just people who had their ears to the industry.

Throw It In! has this example, but it doesn't seem like one. Is it something else?

• The Simpsons:
  • The creators accidentally gave two characters the last name "Wiggum": the town's idiotic police chief and one of Lisa's unintelligent classmates. Actually, they're both dumb and kind of chubby...okay, they're father and son now.

Throw It In! is defined as an accident being left in because it fits. The Simpsons creators created two characters with the same surname by accident and decided to make them related later on, so it seems like an example to me.