Suggestion: Company Cross References

Edited by Louey on Feb 11th 2021 at 8:19:35 AM

Textbook JAFAAC and doesn't make clear that both works are from the same company, which is part and parcel of the trope.

The whole point of this is that either a reference or object from a franchise appears in another franchise by the same company.

The Mask was released by New Line Cinema while Clarence was produced by Cartoon Network; both of which are owned by WarnerMedia.

Yes. But to someone who has not seen those shows, it just looks like a guy holding a mask.

I think this needs an image similar to the one on Production Foreshadowing; you have something in one work that shows up in another and the company logo and years confirm that one is a reference to the other. But how to illustrate Company Cross References without Production Throwback... (maybe we can repurpose that Nintendog◊ in a collage?)

Edited by Synchronicity on Feb 11th 2021 at 10:33:50 AM

Yeah, good point, so I decided to make this image a suggestion for Production Throwback.

Vote here.

...It's still Just a Face and a Caption for that page. There is nothing in that image to suggest the mask is a reference to something else.

All taken care of.

Better, but there still needs to be an indicator (either in the images themselves, in text added to the images, or in the caption) that shows these works are owned by the same company and it's not just an ordinary Shout-Out.

How about this?

I think this would work best as a family tree-like chart: have WarnerMedia at the top, have it diverge into New Line Cinema and Cartoon Network, then have lines running down from each to the appropriate images (The Mask for New Line Cinema, Clarence for Cartoon Network).

Edited by jandn2014 on Feb 11th 2021 at 12:39:41 PM

Curious, what would your image text suggestion be?

Having the company logo present helps.

Edited by Drope on Feb 11th 2021 at 11:18:32 AM

But how can you tell that the top one isn't fanart?

If anything it looks more like a spin-off title than a reference.

It's clearly a reference. I'm more concerned with the different image sizes and the Mario part being obviously artifacted.

Edited by Karxrida on Feb 11th 2021 at 9:24:48 AM

I mean, I guess? It has a logo and all that and as pointed out there's no evidence this reference came from Nintendo themselves, but to me it could also almost pass for box art. Maybe that's just me, but it's the first thing that came to mind. Granted, that's because I don't know the context of where this reference came from or why it exists. Obviously I know this isn't a game, but it could pass as one to the unaware.

Edited by WarJay77 on Feb 11th 2021 at 12:32:17 PM

It's not fanart. It's a piece of official merchandise.

???

That's just a Shout-Out.

Although, it's pretty hard to picture this without it being a Shout-Out anyway. Even the example I gave is one.

Edited by Drope on Feb 11th 2021 at 10:22:32 AM

I mean, isn't this a subtrope of Shout-Out? If it's not, it should be.

It basically is Shout-Out but kept in the family.

Again, at least something like the image on Production Foreshadowing. Ideally a company indicator is there for both works, even if we have to edit it in or put it in the caption.

WarnerMedia owns so much stuff that it feels weird to count The Mask as part of the same "company" as Clarence. They're not really part of the same studio or anything, just the same conglomerate. Does this trope even include something that broad? It's not Conglomerate Cross References and I don't know if every reference to a Disney film in a Fox movie or vice versa should suddenly count now.

What about something combined with the old page pic on Video Game.Nintendogs? (Like box art of a Mario DS game and an image of Luigi, then box art of Nintendogs and an image of this dog, so you can see both are released by Nintendo.)

EDIT: Oh I didn't see that Sync suggested the Nintendog. Let me try that collage...

Edited by mightymewtron on Feb 11th 2021 at 1:38:02 PM