Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
Here is fine; there's also an MCU cleanup
to ask.
[editing out the rest of my original response since I misread the query]
Edited by Synchronicity
I'm not sure what the scope of They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot is, but the entry is stating this thing like it's objective when the real objective thing here is that viewers don't agree whether XYZ occurrence had enough hints.
They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot is for plots hinted at by the work but then never utilized. The thing with Wanda did objectively happen, so we can't say it was wasted, fans just wanted to know how it happened... which is a different thing.
We have a cleanup for this trope if you want to ask there.
@Tabs, I don't get that? Surely anything on YMMV is implied to be YMMV by default?
@War Jay 77 Ah, that makes sense. Reading the trope page, I guess it's not an example of that though it feel like a valid point under a different trope? A similar point is made under Fan-Disliked Explanation which fit.
^Asked them. It's been inactive for about a month though.
What I meant is that if an opinion on YMMV is written as fact, and the viewers are not all in agreement, it'll likely get removed or at least ground down. Observe the difference between "This work is phenomenal" v. "This work was widely praised".
Ferot and Jay(-kind of) are saying the entry was problematic because it's misuse of They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot not because it's not a common fan reaction.
FYI, your spoiler-tags aren't working.
I wrote the original entry but while I strongly disagree that there was any real foreshadowing of her Face–Heel Turn, I think the point the entry makes — that it happens offscreen — is already made elsewhere on the page, so I've deleted it for now, so as not to pre-empt discussion.
I do feel like They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot applies here, especially since Michael Waldron has admitted that we were originally supposed to actually see her go bad onscreen until he and Raimi rewrote the story at the last minute; what we missed is not her acting evil but how she turned evil, which we don't see at all (WandaVision was never intended as a Protagonist Journey to Villain, which is why Elizabeth Olsen said she expected Wanda to be part of the ensemble in this movie and didn't know she was the villain until the show was almost finished filming).
But I see the point about the distinction between seeing something happened and seeing how it happened; I just think in this case the process of corruption is a story in itself (and sadly it's offscreen not only for Wanda but for the two evil Stranges).
Edited by gurkle2
It's a story, but not a story the movie even thought to tell, so it just simply can't count under our criteria.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Fair enough, though isn't it inherent in the trope that it's about things they didn't tell? Anyway like I said, the issue is raised elsewhere on the page so it doesn't really matter.
I mean, it ends with her reading the Darkhold. That's generally never a good thing. Like, never.
Further, it ends with Wanda hearing her children cry for help...but her children weren't real in that universe, meaning she is being driven by her desire for a family she never actually had.
That's not "doesn't explain" that's (depending on the person) not a good enough explanation.
And letting that sort of thing pass as TWAPGP is I think a bad precedent because then you can look at basically any movie villain and say "their villainy isn't explained well enough".
There are tropes to be used about Wanda's characterization change not "feeling" right to certain audience members, but it's not this one.
Tropers/Ferot_Dreadnaught removed an entry from Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness : "Wanda's story marks the first time an MCU Avenger has ever done a true Face–Heel Turn, but the change happens almost entirely offscreen between the end of WandaVision and the beginning of this film, except for one 30-second tag scene of her reading the Darkhold and hearing her children's voice"
For the reason "The entire events of Wanda Vision are that plot, showing how the trauma she went thought over the MCU was pushing her to villainy, her children merely being the last impetus that fully pushed her over the line."
Which I don't agree with. At the end of Wanda Vision she's no where near Villainous as she is in Multiverse Of Madness, having just given up her husband and kids for the sake of no longer hurting the people of West View. There's a lot of descent into villiany that happens off screen that could have happened on screen.
I don't think Ferot_dreadnaught is 100% wrong but I think enough people would feel that way for YMMV entry at least.
I've got to ask rather than restore it because don't want to edit war. Hope this is the right place for it?
Edited by dcutter2