Condemned by History is a problem trope for many reasons. It leads to edit warring and confusion over what qualifies. In this thread we'll look for bad examples, and look for feedback. Here are the guidelines for this trope:
- The franchise has to be truly popular and loved at first. Things that are So Bad, It's Horrible don't count.
- Simply losing popularity isn't enough. We need to see an actual backlash, with liking it being considered bizarre. Otherwise, every not-so-famous film or concluded television series would be here.
Let's go!
Edited by GastonRabbit on Mar 16th 2024 at 4:23:01 AM
And his condemnation in the modern day has less to do with people reevaluating his music and more to do with his litany of controversies.
We've been getting a lot of "Does this thing count? People used to love it but then the creator got into controversy and now everyone hates it!" examples lately. I think we may need to add a rule or disclaimer about how something's reputation being tainted by controversies unrelated to the work isn't a qualifier. CBH and OBC are separate tropes for a reason.
Edited by SpongeBat1 on Sep 24th 2024 at 6:35:11 AM
Came for the tropes, stayed for the cleanup.For R. Kelly to be Condemned by History, his actual music would need to be reevaluated—and to a significant degree, not just knee-jerk reactions in response to his conviction and imprisonment.
Would Happy Feet count? It was pretty popular back in 2006 and won the Oscar for Best Animated Feature, but overtime opinion on the film seems to have shifted towards the negative and is now seen as one of the worst Best Animated Feature winners.
Both Ratatouille and The Simpsons Movie were making fun of it less than a year later so I'd wager it was always divisive.
- Rugrats was once celebrated as a quintessential 90s Nicktoon, known for its groundbreaking representation, subversion of gender norms, and mature storytelling, exemplified by arcs like the Chuckle's Mom saga. Though it experienced a decline in popularity during the 2000s, many recognized it as a precursor to numerous 2010s cartoons, with creators like Alex Hirsch citing it as an influence. Animation pioneers Arlene Klasky and Gabor Csupo established a significant legacy with the series. The show permeated popular culture, referenced on platforms like Saturday Night Live, and often featured in celebrity fashion and music. Its resurgence was solidified between 2015 and 2017 with buzz surrounding a reboot and a 25th anniversary celebration, which included Klasky's first public appearance in years, a voice cast reunion, and a new line of comic books. In 2018, the reboot announcement generated widespread excitement among fans, especially with the involvement of Paul Germain. However, a shift occurred in 2019 after Brian Robbins took over Nickelodeon. Viewers began critiquing the network's nostalgia reliance, particularly following the cancellations of shows like Glitch Techs and Rise of the TMNT, leading to a backlash against the Rugrats reboot. Adding to the discontent, internet critics like Saberspark highlighted behind-the-scenes tensions, casting Klasky in a negative light, while Mr. Enter discussed the show's decline. Fans expressed disappointment over narrative pacing and claimed the series had not aged well. What didn't help was that nostalgia for edgier gag driven shows (which were also one of the reasons for the franchise's initial demise in the 2000s) emerged the same year, stealing Rugrats' spotlight. When the reboot finally aired, it sparked controversy due to its CGI approach and significant character alterations, including the reimagining of Susie and Betty, the latter of which fans perceived as insincere pandering rather than a continuation of the original's progressive values. By 2024, the reboot was removed from Paramount+, eliciting a lackluster response, and a new video game drew minimal excitement. Klasky's retirement announcement was also met with indifference. In retrospect, many view the liking the show as an Old Shame attributing its temporary resurgence to the stagnation of the two other top Nicktoons in the early 2010s.
This reads like backlash against the creators and reboot as opposed to the original work being re-evaluated, given it doesn't explain what about it is now seen as bad.
The resurgence in popularity being condemned sound more like the decline part of Popularity Polynomial, correct?
![]()
Nuke that entry as I'm sure the original Rugrats series is still popular and respected enough that it doesn't in any way qualify for the trope, even if it isn't as popular as it used to be.
The reason there's any backlash against the new Rugrats is because the original is still revered, so yeah definitely not an example.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.Late, but the Rugrats entry can go. I still see a fair bit of nostalgia for it — I remember Pan-Pizza of RebelTaxi doing a positive retrospective on it, and I feel like I still see it pop up as a piece of nostalgia for The '90s. Furthermore, the entry doesn't do a good job of explaining why people don't like the original series anymore — only saying "fans expressed disappointment over narrative pacing and claimed the series had not aged well" and claiming "nostalgia for edgier gag driven shows" supposedly killed it. The entry can go.
Edited by themayorofsimpleton on Oct 1st 2024 at 7:08:37 AM
Works That Require Cleanup of Complaining | Troper WallThis was just added.
- Released in 2009, "The Hangover" emerged as a monumental commercial triumph, amassing a staggering $247 million globally and claiming the title of the highest-grossing R-rated comedy in the United States, surpassing the long-standing record held by Beverly Hills Cop. The film's quotable lines became a cultural phenomenon, echoing in everyday conversations, while its success paved the way for a wave of imitators and propelled the careers of its leading actors to new heights. Despite the tepid reception of "Due Date", the momentum of The Hangover remained largely unscathed, leading to the swift greenlighting of a sequel. However, by the time "The Hangover Part II" hit theaters in 2011, the franchise began to show signs of strain. Although it garnered a dedicated fanbase and outperformed its predecessor at the box office, critics lambasted it for being a mere rehash of the original's formula. The once-vibrant buzz surrounding the series began to wane, as audiences shifted their attention to "Film/Ted", which soon claimed the title of the most talked-about comedy. The release of a third installment in 2013 was met with both dismal critical reviews and disappointing box office returns, effectively signaling the end of the franchise's reign. Many former fans, who once reveled in the antics of the original films, found themselves moving on, leaving The Hangover a relic of its former glory. Moreover, public sentiment towards the first film has soured, with many criticizing its humor as homophobic, transphobic, and racist—elements that feel outdated and have not aged well. Additionally, Mike Tyson's significant role in the films adds to their controversial legacy. Today, these movies are primarily recognized as relics of their time, having launched the careers of Bradley Cooper, Zach Galifianakis, and Ed Helms, who have since moved on to more successful projects and have shown little interest in pursuing a sequel.
I don't think it counts as CBH.
I think the consensus is that The Hangover is a good comedy whose sequels were unwarranted.
This example was probably added because of a certain movie by a certain director
Image Pickin' Backlog![]()
The Hangover is a pretty good comedy that’s never had any major backlash, besides from the late 2000s Cringe Comedy jokes. Yeah, they are relics, but they’re still widely liked.
If what Paperfly said is true, then this is just stealth complaining about that film. Cut it regardless, because The Hangover is still pretty liked to this day.
Eh, good enough.This was recently added to Kimba the White Lion, and it seems to be talking less about the series itself and more about the Lion King controversy.
- Condemned by History: After Adam Johnston of YourMovieSucks.org made his two-and-a-half-hour video chronicling the history of Kimba and its similarities (or lack thereof) to The Lion King, pretty much everyone who seriously accused the latter of ripping off Kimba has been viewed in much less favorable light. As it turns out, many of them either never even watched Kimba and thus made a lot of incorrect assumptions about its plot and characters based on superficial similarities to The Lion King and/or parroted erroneous word of mouth
, whiles others did watch it but treated the aforementioned superficial similarities as proof enough that TLK was a rip-off, along with displaying a fair bit of Confirmation Bias (by often citing incidental and narratively insignificant shots/moments from across the franchise and likening them to pivotal story beats from TLK, like an Animal Stampede from one episode or any miscellaneous cliff battle), and in a few cases, some used Kimba as a blunt instrument to slander Disney and The Lion King. To a lesser extent, the franchise itself got hit with this due to YMS highlighting a fair bit of Narm and Values Dissonance from its earlier installments.
It seems like a stretch to call a comparison "condemned". Discredited Meme / Common Knowledge, maybe?
Even if we did allow comparisons, I highly doubt one video from a YouTuber would single-handledly end all debate about the Simba/Kimba stuff. Cut
Works That Require Cleanup of Complaining | Troper Wall

He was always criticised to some degree.