"No Recent Examples Please" cleanup

I don’t see a particular need to be stricter when we currently only have two content content creators listed at all. And under the rules Spoony could be cut given his latest video came out two weeks ago. That would only leave Fred, and that’s only because he’s the rare successful Youtuber who stopped uploading (last video on his channel was 7 years ago). This is kind of why I’m seeking the exception, as I otherwise see Cinemasins as a strong candidate.

Ironically I've argued against Fred in the past; the channel has always been very divisive, and it's never been clear if the niche is "the target audience of children" or "the internet at large".

But that's for the CBH thread.

For what’s it’s worth, Cinema Sins still has a sizable number of subscribers and Patreon supporters, so I don’t know if they’ve become unpopular enough to count.

Yeah, this is more of a CBH question, but while I'm not opposed to the exception on principle, I don't know whether the Cinema Sins derision is generally held or just opinion myopia. (This isn't said to deter. It literally means "I don't know")

The strongest evidence that it’s condemned is by a cursory look at their popular videos, which is overwhelmingly videos over 5 years ago with the peak being 31 million. Meanwhile their newest ones are mostly lucky to break 500k with a handful breaking 1 million when it’s a really popular movie. That their popularity has seen a massive decline is unambiguously clear, and likely attributable in part to the backlash that happened around that time.

And I brought it to this thread because it’s where we can discuss the possibility of creating an exception to the No Recent Examples Please rules.

Edited by DDRMASTERM on Apr 20th 2023 at 11:34:04 AM

That being said, there’s a difference between being outright hated and not being popular. I recall it having quite a few detractors even back in its heyday, but I don’t know if it’s former fans outright hate it now or have just lost interest.

As an aside, I think one of the contributing factors toward its decline in popularity was due to Th3Birdman, but I think even he said he was a fan of their videos.

I admit, I may be somewhat biased since I watched Cinema Sins quite a bit back in the day and still occasionally watch their videos if it’s on a movie I’m interested in. That being said while I have seen plenty of people criticize Cinema Sins, I’ve seen some other people still be fans, so I don’t know if the people who dislike it are the overwhelming majority.

Edited by costanton11 on Apr 20th 2023 at 2:16:33 PM

A quick question - Role Reprise has the time gap defined this way on the trope page:

WesternAnimation.What If 2021 (Aug-Oct 2021) has Role Reprise examples for various actors from the live action Marvel Cinematic Universe films. My read of the exception in the rule above is that:

• It's still a valid five year gap between live-action appearances if you do voice acting during that time
• However, if you do voice acting less than five years after your last live-action appearance as the same character, the voice role itself (E.g. the What If…? (2021) series) is not a valid Role Reprise example.

Is that correct? If so, there are some misunderstandings/misuse examples we should cut...

Thanks!

To me, it reads as though voice-only roles have the five-year rule rendered void for them, not that the rule applies to them. Hence, I think most of those additions are still valid.

Relatedly, I also asked a while back about the validity of a Soft Reboot applying as a different adaptation that allows the five-year rule to be waived, but never got a proper response back. I would like some clarification, because I'd really like to know whether Wilson Fisk and Matt Murdock are valid examples since their reappearances in the proper MCU at large seem to be a different adaptation from their appearances on the Netflix show.

Edited by MatthewWayne on Apr 26th 2023 at 10:45:23 AM

My read on that is that returning in any of the first three scenarios listed on the page (i.e. within the same Long Runner work, same continuity but different work, Alternate Continuity) qualifies provided it meets the five year absence rule.

(Neither Fisk nor Daredevil is a Public Domain Character or Historical Domain Character, so the fourth scenario listed doesn't apply)

The Soft Reboot is either same continuity or Alternate Continuity. Either way, that requires a five year gap - Daredevil ended in Oct 2018, Hawkeye was Nov 2021 and She-Hulk late 2022. So, unfortunately, I don't think either actor meets the five year rule for a valid example.

Edited by Mrph1 on Apr 26th 2023 at 7:31:49 PM

But it it says on the page that it's valid as a Role Reprise for an Alternate Continuity or it's been five years since we've seen the main character. The or indicates that the five-year waiting period doesn't apply for an adaptation regarding an Alternate Continuity, which the Soft Reboot falls under here.

I think it's unclear wording, to be honest. I read "in a different adaptation" as meaning the same as the "unrelated production" in the final bullet scenario, but I might well be wrong.

Likewise, we've got different interpretations of the voice actor element.

(My take on it is basically that if the trope's all about coming back to the role after a gap, playing the same role in a different work within the same Shared Universe just a week after the first role ends shouldn't qualify. And nor should immediately voicing the same character a month later in a Lego video game or cartoon)

Whatever the consensus decides on this thread, I reckon we ought to take it to Trope Description Improvement Drive and get some clear, unambiguous wording on the trope page (and on No Recent Examples, Please!) once we're done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Apr 26th 2023 at 8:01:23 PM

For me, I generally agree with the Shared Universe aspect of things, and in general the five-year requirement should apply in those instances. But if it's a different adaptation and/or Alternate Continuity, such as in a Lego game or a What If style cartoon, I'd say that the five-year requirement doesn't need to apply, since it's not set in stone whether the original actor will portray themselves in that kind of adaptation or not.

Question about this:

• WTH, Casting Agency?: (1 week): To prevent entries made before people could react to the actor's performance in the work.

I'm still finding prerelease examples so does the 1 week refer to the castings announcement , we get samples of their acting in the work, or the full works release? (If the last than other items state release in their entries?)

EndOfAnAge.Real Life

• No Time to Die (2021) was the final Bond film:
  • To star Daniel Craig.
  • To be released during the reign of Queen Elizabeth II, who would pass away in September 2022, thus making this the last time Bond was serving on "Her" Majesty's Secret Service.

These seem at odds with 5 year wait. These objective enough to be valid? If so how/should the wait policy be amended to allow such?

If it's reaction to their performance, it can't be the announcement.

Personally, I'd go with a week from release (which would mean release of first instalment they feature in, if it's episodic) - judging them based on a trailer seems unfair, and opens a can of worms for scenarios where they aren't in the first trailer, or aren't speaking more than one word etc.

(It's always going to be a grey area for episodic works, as you could just have them in the background for the first couple of episodes - but it feels like the least worst option)

There's been discussion on the Real Life section clean up thread about getting rid of recent real life examples for Witch Hunt. The prevailing opinion over there is that a 50 year cutoff is sufficient to prevent modern political controversy, but obviously any actual decision would have to be made here.

Like someone in that thread said, I would definitely prefer a cutoff rather than a cut, and with a date that allows references to McCarthyism, because of how many modern fictional examples allude to it. So 50 years works fine.

50 years from whatever's acknowledged as the end of the witch hunt, then? Just to guard against long-running events in some parts of the world.

Agreed on it being 50 years after the hunt ended. A lot of the examples currently there concern ongoing conflicts and social issues, so that eliminates that whole mess.

Any more views on the Role Reprise phrasing a few posts back?

I'm still unconvinced that it should apply if someone's returning to the same non-public domain franchise to play the same character without a gap. Even if the actor's switching media or playing an Alternate Universe / Alternate Continuity version.

Why not? The general idea regarding Role Reprise is that it has to be noteworthy enough to count.

Having a five-year gap for stuff within the same continuity is fair, but if someone returns to a role they played in an Alternate Continuity that nobody thought they would return to, that seems noteworthy, and worthy of making the gap void in those instances.

But it's still not really a 'return' without some sort of significant time gap, is it?

If I play Bob in live action this week and Alternate Bob for animation next week, is that really a notable return?

My intention when writing the rule was that the voice role would not count as an example, but would not prevent a subsequent live-action return from counting.

For example: live action 2011 > voice 2014 (not a reprise, 3 years since 2011) > live action 2017 (is a reprise, 6 years since 2011 because 2014 is ignored).

Edited by bwburke94 on May 1st 2023 at 3:00:43 PM

So more or less as I interpreted it back here. And a voice role after a complete 5+ year absence (including voice acting) might still count as an example?

What was the original intention on Alternate Continuity?

Edited by Mrph1 on May 1st 2023 at 8:06:42 PM

Yes, a voice role after a five-year absence would still count as an example.

Edited by bwburke94 on May 1st 2023 at 3:08:46 PM

But what happens if you reprise your role in voice acting five years after playing the role, and then reprise it in live-action less than five years later?

And yeah, I echo the Alternate Continuity question, since this is the thing I've been asking since day 1.