Unintentionally Unsympathetic and Unintentionally Sympathetic Cleanup

I'm super iffy about this entry from YMMV.The Incredibles:

• Unintentionally Unsympathetic: Mirage. While she's shown to have standards like not wanting children to be killed when Helen's plane is targeted by a missile, she still had no problems with being an accomplice to and assisting in many murders (via leading superheroes to the island to be killed). Hell, one of the superheroes she lead to be killed on the island was Gazerbeam, who Bob knew personally. Not only that but she also lied to Bob about everything. All of these actions make her a rather smug hypocrite because when she finally decides to work against Syndrome, it's only after her own life was at risk. Unfortunately, unlike Syndrome and his men (who were all killed), she never suffered any consequences for her actions nor does the film address them and she's Easily Forgiven in the end.

I say "iffy" because she had already saved Syndrome's life before this point and he just brushed her off, which this entry doesn't mention. I think this is less her being a selfish hypocrite and more her realizing Syndrome obviously doesn't want her help anymore than he just wants to mindlessly torture the Parrs.

I still don't think she counts as this. It being risky when she has zero other options doesn't make her unsympathetic. Plus I fail to see how "I don't want to be forced to marry a guy" can be unsympathetic in any context regardless of the Kingdom being threatened.

I say cut. She is not meant to be sympathetic in the stuff she does but rather just when Syndrome shows he's willing to let her die.

Edited by Bullman on Sep 13th 2023 at 10:19:43 AM

Yeah, I still think the Peach entry should be cut.

RE: Smoker 130

I think Grimes was meant to be a Jerkass Woobie, but feel free to write up an Unintentionally Sympathetic entry for something.

I found this on the YMMV.Peter Pan And Wendy page:

• Unintentionally Unsympathetic:
  • The fact that Peter Pan is more of an Adaptational Jerkass in this movie has caused a number of viewers to find him unlikable, with some even considering his treatment of his one-time best friend James Hook, particularly banishing him from the lost boys and chopping off his hand for leaving Neverland to try and find his mother, to be crossing the Moral Event Horizon and making him, at best a Sociopathic Hero or worse a Designated Hero. To be fair, Peter was pretty much a Sociopathic Hero in the books doing things like switching sides in the middle of battle to make it more exciting.
  • Likewise, the new characterization of Wendy has met with some criticism. Railing against her parents for trying to give her the advantage of an education (which would allow her a greater chance at independence she so desperately craves) has caused some to deem her as bratty and ungrateful. Also in contrast to her previous characterisation as a Parental Substitute she now seems to be less maternal and far more aggressive, quick to anger and even arrogant. A scene that is repeatedly referenced in this discussion is one of her blaming her siblings for an accident that was mostly her fault, and then shrugging off their resulting What the Hell, Hero? moment by saying "Every Man for himself".

Now I have never seen this movie and while the second seems like fine personally, nothing about the first screams meant to be sympathized with. Anyone here more familiar with the movie?

Two characters were added as Unsympathetic from Pokémon Scarlet and Violet. Carmine probably counts, but I'm iffy on Kieran, particularly the Unintentionally part.

Kieran falls into this too. The game wants us to pity him and sympathize with him, and we do…at first. Unfortunately, Kieran starts gradually getting worse as the story goes on, especially when he starts to antagonize the player more and more, and his initial meek demeanor turns to legitimate resentment and selfishness. Kieran becomes increasingly jealous of the protagonist due to their battle prowess and out of petty jealousy, he later tries to take Ogerpon for himself after it chooses the player character instead of him, despite having done basically nothing to bond with it, treating it as a prize to be won rather than a sentient being with legitimate feelings. When he loses, he becomes dangerously fixated on surpassing the protagonist, and he also challenges them to several unnecessary battles too. To further drive the point, he even ends up stealing Ogerpon’s mask and running off with it, despite the fact that, since he was eavesdropping on the earlier conversation between his grandfather, Carmine and the player, he should know that they were actually trying to help Ogerpon by fixing its mask and were planning to give it back to Ogerpon, and he should also know that his grandfather is the only one who can fix the mask, so stealing it would accomplish nothing. Plus, it makes him no better than the "Loyal" Three, since he basically did the same thing that they did to Ogerpon long ago: he stole its mask for selfish reasons. Speaking of which, he also ends up indirectly being responsible for the "Loyal" Three coming back to life and trying to get revenge on Ogerpon, because he unintentionally awakens them when he challenges the player to a battle on their resting place. So, by stealing the mask, he not only prevented the one person capable of fixing it from actually doing so, which would’ve left Ogerpon sad and defenseless, he also ended up endangering Ogerpon by accidentally awakening his enemies. Admittedly, Kieran has every right to be upset at the player, Carmine and his grandfather for lying to him, but what he did in retaliation ended up making things worse for everyone, especially Ogerpon, the pokemon he claims to care about so much. And the cherry on top of the cake is that the game doesn’t really give us a choice about lying to him, yet it seemingly tries to blame us and make us feel bad about what it forced us to do, so the conflict feels kind of cheap and forced.

Thing his, the character's very last shot paints them in a deliberately very sinister light.

So, this is a dispute to ElBuenCuate's claim about Marge Simpson in regards to Two Cars in Every Garage and Three Eyes on Every Fish, namely that the trope was just "Marge complaining". In particular, they incorrectly claim that Homer forced her to play hostess to Mr. Burns, when he did nothing of the sort: When she said she didn't want to, Homer got down on his knees and begged her to do it. Prior to that, he did abruptly tell her that Burns was coming over for dinner, but what choice did Homer have? He couldn't just say no and walk away, something he very bluntly told Marge when she first berated him for supporting Burns; and she never counters this argument. At no point does she consider the possibility that Homer is simply trying to protect the family's livelihood. As for the sabotage, I won't condemn her for ruining the campaign, but she very much did cower when Burns threw a tantrum, expressly telling Homer to "make them stop", when she should have attempted to do it herself. Finally, her comforting words to Homer in the aftermath are utterly hollow: Burns could simply fire Homer out of spite, meaning he won't have the money to afford seconds on dessert, a bed to snuggle on, or a television to watch football games. Bottom line: Marge put her family's livelihood in danger, was unsympathetic towards her husband when he explained why he was supporting Mr. Burns, and when the full consequences of her actions came down on her, she pushed someone else in the way. So, with all that in mind, why was she removed? How is this "complaining"?

I won't re-insert it without permission, but I hope you will all consider it. At the very least, I labeled her as a base-breaking character, and will consider that enough if y'all would prefer the original not be restored.

Edited by Pyromania101 on Sep 17th 2023 at 10:41:29 AM

I still don't think it counts. Because forcing a dinner on her after she said no is still forcing her. I don't really think"she asked her husband to tell his abusive boss to stop being scary when she could have herself" doesn't really work either. Because again she is in a situation she didn't want to be in and Burns is a much more powerful man, so most people would ask the person whose idea it was to deal with it. The whole thing about the last words is speculative at best because none of that comes close to happening.

Edited by Bullman on Sep 17th 2023 at 2:09:52 PM

Again, Homer did not force her into it, and the dinner itself wasn't his idea, either. Burns' advisors fingered Homer as the one to have dinner with as a publicity stunt, and Homer could not say no to him. He didn't want to be in the situation, either, but he knew that trying to get out of it would leave his family destitute. He went along with it because he didn't have a choice—something he made abundantly clear from the get-go—and Marge telling Homer to clean up a mess she made was cowardly. Heck, by your definition, wouldn't that make her worse? She was willing to sabotage his campaign, directly and on live TV, but when he reacts the way one would expect, she loses her nerve.

Where are you getting the idea that Homer forced Marge to play hostess? I very clearly explained why that wasn't the case. Mr. Burns forced Homer to accept his "request" to have dinner with his family, and Homer begged Marge to play along.

Edited by Pyromania101 on Sep 17th 2023 at 12:28:37 PM

Again. She said no and he went ahead and did it anyways without her consent. Then told her when it was to late to say no again. That is the definition of forced. It doesn't matter how you try to play it. He forced her and saying he was forced to doesn't change that. It also doesn't make her unsympathetic it just means they are both forced.

Either let's wait for more opinions.

Edited by Bullman on Sep 17th 2023 at 2:42:30 PM

Bzzzt! Wrong! Homer did not "do it anyway". He begged her to go along, and she conceded. That isn't forced. And when did he tell her when it was too late to object again? Do you mean when Burns' campaign team was coaching everybody, or when she got out of bed and he persuaded her to come back? That second one, she did so on her own, after the words he said gave her an idea. As for the first, it was too late to do anything, and Homer was just trying to ensure he could keep providing for his family. Maybe if Marge had shown a little sympathy for her husband's plight instead of treating him like a traitor and enemy, I would back off.

Had he ordered or threatened her, or just ignored/deliberately misinterpreted her words, then it would be forced. My big problem here is that you keep slapping a label onto Homer that he objectively does not deserve. Where does Homer force her into it? How is begging on your hands and knees the same as forcing? If you can come up with some way that these two things are synonymous, I'll back off.

Edited by Pyromania101 on Sep 17th 2023 at 12:48:19 PM

I am sorry but I don't see how anything you said makes her unsympathetic.

That is my last point as I don't think there is anything left to say.

Edited by Bullman on Sep 17th 2023 at 2:49:43 PM

Agree to disagree and wait for others, I guess (like you said). As stated from the beginning, if the concensus is against restoring it, I'll be content with simply labeling her as a Base-Breaking Character, though I should probably label Homer as one, too, in the interest of fairness.

Edited by Pyromania101 on Sep 17th 2023 at 12:53:11 PM

Edit: Nevermind you edited that out.

Edited by Bullman on Sep 17th 2023 at 2:53:46 PM

EDIT: Whoops, just saw your edit.

Edited by Pyromania101 on Sep 17th 2023 at 12:55:24 PM

From The 100 Girlfriends Who Really, Really, Really, Really, Really Love You:

• Unintentionally Unsympathetic: Kurumi's solo date in Chapter 44 paints a black mark on Rentarou and Hahari, mostly because instead of Rentarou talking things over with Kurumi to figure out a way to satisfy her French kiss craving that works for everyone, he avoids that conversation altogether by having Hahari serve as his Body Double and take her first French kiss. He also has Hahari randomly choose a girlfriend to do this to blindfolded (necessitating the narrator to specify that the victim was Hakari) so that none of them can say they weren’t Frenched first.

So besides the Frank Grimes discussion, in the Harry Potter thread, posters are discussing the treatment of Tom Riddle Sr.

As has been pointed out here, neither Harry Potter nor Dumbledore seem to sympathize much with Tom Riddle Sr.

Additionally, it was also talked about that whilst the story frequently describes Tom Riddle as a Jerkass, to the point that no one attended his funeral, Tom Riddle's actions were Poke the Poodle at best.

The worst Riddle did was laugh at a man, whom was actually a disguised wizard, wearing a striped swimsuit over a frock coat and spats.

There's also this article on Wizarding World, formerly Pottermore, a Rowling endorsed fansite, that seemingly insinuates Voldemort's "evil" was inherited from his father.

The Article

• Her dying wish that the baby should resemble his father was granted. She couldn't have known that the second Tom Riddle would go on to inherit his father's callousness, too.

Edited by Monsund on Sep 17th 2023 at 8:57:32 AM

I mean, I guess it's fine even I personally disagree.

Though shouldn't we base the entry on the information in the original text and not some info from an endorsed fansite that could probably just be another one of Rowling's post-story additions?

In either case, let's just not bring Merope back as Unintentionally Unsympathetic, because this very thread agreed she doesn't count.

Edited by AudioSpeaks2 on Sep 17th 2023 at 5:17:22 PM

My post is on whether or not, Tom Riddle Sr. was intended to be sympathetic or not. Merope isn't being discussed.

Do we know whom wrote that article? Rowling was very involved with Pottermore and owned it according to what I've read.

Edited by Monsund on Sep 17th 2023 at 10:25:54 AM

The author of the article isn't stated. I'm assuming it's either Rowling herself, a devoted fan, or her editor.

I searched up how canon the site is and several say that info from it is in fact canon.

Still, I think the entry should only really focus on text and lines from the book and not bring up the "callousness" line that was from the article.

The text itself from books like Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire says stuff like:

• Nobody wasted their breath pretending to feel very sad about the Riddles, for they had been most unpopular. Elderly Mr. and Mrs. Riddle had been rich, snobbish, and rude, and their grown-up son, Tom, had been, if anything, worse.

As has been mentioned, Tom Riddle Sr. comes off as mildly snobbish at the very worst in his one appearance, even without taking the class difference in Britain at the time. Its not as if he bad mouths Merope either, he just says her brother isn't "right in the head" for his violent behavior.

Many fans have also started theorizing that Riddle's later offscreen bitterness could've been the result of being raped, having his reputation destroyed, losing his fiancee, and spending the rest of his life unable to tell anyone about his trauma without being committed to a Bedlam House.

Edited by Monsund on Sep 17th 2023 at 10:44:13 AM

I mean, the thing about the Goblet of Fire passage is that, at the time, we didn't really get to know Riddle Sr yet and Rowling probably hadn't gotten his actual personality down until he finally appeared in HBP.

Edited by AudioSpeaks2 on Sep 17th 2023 at 5:52:22 PM

That's actually probably not the case; Rowling had a lot of details ironed out long in advance.

And plus, the way the Riddles being snobbish, rude, and callous appear to be written from the pov of the the commonfolk/non-Riddle muggles' subjective opinions.

For all we know, the Riddles are just a bunch of decent rich folk, mischaracterized as assholes by the town.

The one time we meet a Riddle other than Voldemort in person (HBP), and he seems like a fairly reasonable guy.

Edited by AudioSpeaks2 on Sep 17th 2023 at 5:57:45 PM

Sorry for inserting myself into a different discussion, but Tom Riddle Sr.'s character folder on this page describes him sympathetically, with both Harry and Dumbledore noting that he didn't deserve what he got and had every right and reason to get the hell away from a rapist. Though, having reread the chapter, I didn't see anything like that.

Edited by Pyromania101 on Sep 17th 2023 at 11:19:14 AM