Unclear Description: Those Two Guys

As trying to fix Those Two Bad Guys and differentiate it from Those Two Guys, we found out that Those Two Guys itself is rather vaguely defined - it is unclear which traits determine a character duo as Those Two Guys. The description mentions:

• "Usually in a school setting".
• Provide commentary similarly to a mundane Greek Chorus (which may or may not be snarky).
• They are friends of the protagonist.
• They are ordinary (i.e. less powerful) compared to the protagonist.
• They either have very distinctly contrasting personalities and appearance, or are near-identical.
• They'll often have their own B-plot, which is more humorous than the main plot.

What the description does not mention, but examples often do, is that they are "inseparable", "always together", or something along these lines. However, the trope is also something of a ZCE magnet, often just listing two names.

The trope has 6177 wicks (plus 447 for Those Two Girls). I checked 31 random ones.

Verdict: Out of 31 wicks, 20 are completely ZCE (plus two are also listed as Those Two Bad Guys or Five-Man Band). From the remaining 11, 5 mentions they're close friends or always together, 4 mention that they are secondary/supporting characters in some way, 2 mention that they're friends or helpers of the protagonist (and 1 mentions that they hate the protagonist), 1 mentions contrasting appearances, 1 mentions identical personalities and 1 mentions that they provide commentary. None of them mention a school setting or that they're less powerful than the protagonist.

Edited by Snicka on Feb 26th 2020 at 1:56:07 PM

Opening, as it does coincide with another TRS project. Wick check is passable (we'd prefer 50 as opposed to the number you chose).

she/her | TRS needs your help! | Contributor of Trope Report

So I thought I knew what this trope was, right? I was gonna sit down and explain what it is. And then in trying to do that, I realized it's...really vague and nonsensical?

It's like... "Two characters who are always hanging out, and aren't main characters, and aren't even in every episode, and don't really affect the plot, but they're there, and sometimes they're kinda snarky, and the most noteworthy thing about them is that they're always together."

Is that...actually a thing? Like seriously- I can't think of any examples of this. I can think of the basic "two friends who always pop up together in the work", but this seems both too specific and too vague.

It feels like another one of those things where we're trying to search for the specific pattern we created, rather than are just documenting a pattern that already exists. This is happening so often, we may need to make an Administrivia page about it. It's kind of interesting actually.

Edited by WarJay77 on Feb 29th 2020 at 12:30:08 PM

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Re: The last paragraph of your post:

What about putting something about that on Administrivia.People Sit On Chairs? "Tropes" that describe patterns that aren't really there would probably count as a specific type of Chairs, since Chairs refers to things that occur incidentally, as opposed to conventions the creators intentionally put there.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Mar 1st 2020 at 2:41:03 PM

Patiently awaiting the release of Paper Luigi and the Marvelous Compass.

Maybe, though my concern is less "troping random patterns" (which is absolutely still a valid issue ofc) but more "creating patterns and then trying to fit specific works into those patterns whether they actually exist or not." In other words, the same issue that happened to Five Bad Band and Evil Albino and stuff.

That's what I think is going on here. I think TVT created this pattern, and is trying to convince people it exists.

Edited by WarJay77 on Mar 1st 2020 at 3:43:29 PM

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Secondary / supporting Comic Relief character duos who always appear together are a thing that appear in all sorts of works. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern from Hamlet, Pippin and Merry from The Lord of the Rings, Fred and George from Harry Potter, Timon and Pumbaa from The Lion King, Terk and Tantor from Tarzan, etc. What these characters have in common is that:

• They're best friends who are inseparable (and are unhappy when they're separated);
• They're not the protagonists;
• They provide Comic Relief (in the form of snarky commentary or slapstick comedy).

Edited by Snicka on Mar 1st 2020 at 12:52:44 PM

Hey! There's a concept that works.

As for the whole correlation-without-causation thing, that is something I'd love to crack down on. I feel like this problem is also why Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard went into such mayhem; they're concepts that we created and thus don't exist in the wild. To put it another way^note influenced by this Wikipedia page...

For the purposes of troping, we should assume that an infinite number of monkeys are on a typewriter each writing works that will use certain tropes that we can then list. Let the chips fall where they may; don't dump them on the floor.

Contains 20% less fat than the leading value brand!

Yes, that's a thing, but this current idea feels a lot more narrow and non-existent as a result.

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Then the trope should be retooled into this concept rather than the mess / ZCE magnet that it is now.

I always thought the "two-man comic relief Greek Chorus" concept described above was what the trope was getting at, but it is pretty heavily misused.

I'll support a retool/cleanup.

Yeah, this is what I always thought the trope was about, and I second this action.

"It's just a show; I should really just relax"

Agreed

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Is the name "Those Two Guys" okay? Or shall we have something more clear (e.g. Comedic Sidekick Duo)?

It might be a little unclear, yeah.

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

I'm a'ight with it. The phrasing and almost dismissive tone do convey "comedic duo of side characters".

I'm up for something more clear.

Contains 20% less fat than the leading value brand!

FYI Those Two Guys has 6176 wicks, so renaming is going to be quite the pain. The name is kind of borderline for me - I agree with points for and against, but this pushes me over to recommend against a rename.

"It's just a show; I should really just relax"

The high number of wicks is indeed a good reason not to rename it (in my experience, cleaning up 500 wicks takes forever, and this is more than 10 times the amount).

In that case the only thing we need to do is change the Description to adjust it to a more clear definition. So which are the defining characteristics of the trope, and which are incidental?

• Inseparable duo?
• Not the main characters?
• Comic relief?
• Friends with the protagonist?
• Have a B-plot?
• Provide commentary, Greek Chorus style?

If this gets cleaned up, Sandbox.Bumbling Henchmen Duo (what we're planning to replace Those Two Bad Guys with) will be sort-of a villainous counterpart to this (inseparable duo, secondary characters, comic relief - the main difference is that they are sidekicks to the villain rather than the hero).

Edited by Snicka on Mar 5th 2020 at 12:15:11 PM

Not necessarily. We'd still need to troll through the wicks to find things that no longer fit the definition (or never fit); changing the meaning of the trope doesn't stop at the description.

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Bump? Did my pointing out of the work we'll need to do kill the vibe?

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

I'd say

• Inseparable duo?
• Not the main characters?
• Provide commentary, Greek Chorus style?

are the three key parts of the trope. So we should rewrite the description to reflect that.

"It's just a show; I should really just relax"

Idk why people are having a hard time defining this.

Three primary traits define Those Two Guys/Girls

1. There are two of them

2. They provide commentary on the events of the work (usually in universe, instead of breaking the 4th wall like a traditional greek chorus)

3. They have little relevance to the actual plot

All else is supplemental.

Edited by Gotgunpowder on Apr 21st 2020 at 5:00:03 AM

Suspended for literally no reason lol

What about examples like Miguel and Tulio, then? They are relevant to the plot - in fact, they are the main characters - but according to Word of God, the whole idea behind them is that what if the comic relief duo, instead of being side characters, are the focus of the movie.

The work is a Buddy Picture, which by definition stars a comic pair, but they are not Those Two Guys (or at least not a straight example; I'm still unsure on how much authorial intent can weigh into examples).

Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard are not things this wiki created. What this wiki did was rename "Pure Hatred" (a character designed to be as hated by the audience as possible, Hate Sink but more, to Complete Monster, which is generally described as a villain without redeeming qualities, or maybe a merciless butcher.

What we did is take an existing term, magnificent bastard, an enemy that one has strong admiration for, which would fall under Worthy Opponent, maybe even Friendly Enemy here, and applied that line of thinking to the audience rather than between the opponents themselves.

But just because TV Tropes Will Ruin Your Vocabulary doesn't mean it invented those terms, just like The Dragon in common vernacular is what we call Our Dragons Are Different...okay I'm getting to my point now. Does anyone actually know if "those two guys" is a preexisting term? I have never personally heard or read it anywhere but here, but if it is a preexisting term that we are indeed using wrong then I do think it should be changed, high wik count be damned. We can work together to purge it from the web.

If it's not a preexisting term we are trampling, then by all means I see no problem with the page as is. Two minor characters in a friendly relationship with a main character whose narrative purpose is to provide commentary. Why is that so hard to understand? Overly narrow, eh perhaps, but pretty straight forward nonetheless. If we can find thirteen cross wikable examples of such then it's a valid trope page, as much as that might annoy some people(myself included).

Edited by IndirectActiveTransport on May 7th 2020 at 8:15:29 AM