Follow TV Tropes

Ask The Tropers

Go To

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.

Ask the Tropers:

Trope Related Question:

Make Private (For security bugs or stuff only for moderators)

18th Feb, 2020 05:03:19 PM

It really should be, It seems like some variant of Fan Dumb to me.

18th Feb, 2020 05:31:53 PM

Okay, so Iíll be honest, I was also surprised to find this trope in other ymmv sections, but as long as it is, Iíll defend what I wrote.

First off, every criticism I listed is a criticism Iíve personally seen. The fact that someone else hasnít doesnít mean that it doesnít exist, it just means that person isnít on the same platform or in the same community where that criticism was discussed. There are tons of viewpoints and criticisms Iíve read about on here that I hadnít seen before, despite being in the fandom for the media I was reading about.

Second, I donít agree that there was a retcon to the timeline and youíre actually the first person Iíve seen claim that there was (which is why I didnít say that). The fact that we all assumed the tesseract was at S.H.I.E.L.D. the whole time doesnít mean we were ever told that, and Iíve always thought the movie supported the idea that Mar-Vell had it because she was working with S.H.I.E.L.D. That said, even if it was a retcon, that point would still stand because Homecoming directly contradicted what Civil War said about when Iron Man took place.

The third point is basically the same as the second. I said ďusing memories to establish backstoryĒ because that is the criticism Iíve heard, and it does apply to at least three other movies in the MCU. If I had seen people discuss why the flashbacks in Guardians of the Galaxy (1 or 2) or Civil War were better executed than the ones in Captain Marvel, I wouldnít have put it on there.

Edited by beyondthesea
18th Feb, 2020 06:06:47 PM

To address the points on the page, going by the discussions I've seen

  • It isn't that people dislike the 90s soundtrack, in fact aside from "I'm Just A Girl", I don't see people say much about the soundtrack at all. What I do see is people disliking how over-saturated the 90s references were, like Carol crashing into a blockbuster, shootin a True Lies poster, and then heading over to a Radio Shack.
  • "Wasting a climactic moment in favor of a joke" is more that people feel Carol should have had a proper final battle with Yon-Rogg and it would have been more fitting for the plot with how the film opened on them sparring. And I've no idea what Gamora and Nebula scene it is references.
  • Aside from filling in how the Tesseract was involved in the movie events, the film also showed how Nick Fury got his eye in a scene that doesn't really line up with his comment about how it happened in Winter Soldier. Carol giving Fury the pager to call her when he needs her raises the question of why he didn't use it in past crises, most prominently the Chitauri invasion (and just to toss it out there, a very common criticism for Phase 2 was "why don't any of the Avengers call each other for help?"). Factor in also that Carol was the namesake for the Avenger Initiative, and the criticism I see is that the film tries hard to present Carol as an integral part of the MCU's history, when she's never even been mentioned before. There is also the matter of SHIELD (or at least Nick Fury, but once he became Director, same difference) seeing alien races back in the 90s, but Fury's talk of Thor's arrival in the Avengers implied that his film was humanity's first contact, so that part is a retcon.
  • It's not merely that Captain Marvel has flashbacks, its that it has prolonged, rapidfire flashbacks that are poorly edited and used to clumsily dump Carol's backstory and character on us by showing flashes of her life without much context behind what we're seeing. And this happens at least two times that I can recall (when the Skrulls are reading her mind, and when she regains her memories). These flashbacks are also our primary source for backstory and character, so they get criticized is an extension of the criticism that Carol isn't a well-written character.
  • I've actually seen people praise Talos as a good villain. Yon-Rogg, yeah. But then, by this point in Phase 3, we had established a good string of strongly written villains, so Yon-Rogg being a dull villain was more noticeable.
  • I've flat never seen anyone say anything negative about Captain Marvel involving the military.
  • While Ronan's basic appearance is the same, he lacks the warpaint on his face and armor he had in Guardians. You could use any number of Hand Waves to explain why he has them in Got G and not here, but I don't recall a given explanation, and even so it makes him look like a very different character.

Edited by DrakeClawfang
18th Feb, 2020 06:06:47 PM

He has a good point, and when your character has amnesia, adding backstory as memories re-emerge is a perfectly valid example of this trope. I donít even understand why heís being considered critical.

18th Feb, 2020 06:08:30 PM

Also, the winter soldier line still stands. ďThe last time I trusted someone (a cute kitty cat) I lost an eyeĒ

18th Feb, 2020 06:17:54 PM

In the Winter Soldier, Fury says that as a comeback to Captain America when Cap is upset about being deceived about the point of his mission and arguing Fury should trust him. The line paints Fury as having been betrayed in the past by someone close to him and that's why he's so paranoid and untrusting now, and factors into his character being all-around dark and shifty.

With Captain Marvel's depiction of this, Fury's line is now said in the context of him lying about his eye injury just so he can give a quippy comeback and win an argument.

His line is technically true in terms of Exact Words, but it is not true in terms of what the intended spirit behind them was.

Edited by DrakeClawfang
19th Feb, 2020 08:36:28 AM

Okay, fine. We'll go point by point.

  • No, it's that people accused the movie of copying Guardians of the Galaxy for having a period soundtrack. I meant what I said. I've seen the criticisms of "I'm Just a Girl" in particular and the abundance of nineties references, and while I don't agree with them, I didn't mention them here because they don't apply to this trope.
  • Carol didn't fight Yon-Rogg because realizing that she didn't have to prove anything to him and the the Kree were only preventing her from using her powers so she wouldn't be to powerful was her entire character arc. At the beginning of the movie, she's weakening herself so that he stands a chance of beating her, and by the end of the movie, she's learned that there's no reason for her to do that. It's meant to draw a contrast. The Gamora and Nebula scene is a scene during the climax of Guardians of the Galaxy where Nebula gets between the guardians and the power stone and it looks like she and Gamora are going to have a big confrontation, and then Gamora just shoots her instead. It's exactly the same scene, but instead of being a symbol of growth, it was actually just a joke. If you're going to straight up admit to not remembering the scene I'm comparing it to, how can you make arguments about it not being a valid comparison?
  • I'll admit that the review I was referencing made a much bigger deal out of the tesseract than Nick Fury's eye, so I wasn't really thinking about that when I wrote that point. The eye thing was closer to a retcon than what happens with the tesseract, but that doesn't make much difference to be honest, because I can think of at least three bigger retcons in the MCU that no one seems to have a problem with (one of them being the aforementioned retcon in Spider-Man: Homecoming), so the point still stands. The "why didn't he call Carol?" thing was explained in the movie. The entire reason for the Avengers Initiative was so he wouldn't have to rely on Carol every time Earth was in danger. What would have been the point of that if he was just going to call her anyway? It's made pretty clear in The Avengers that he was very invested in proving that the Avengers Initiative would work. But even if it was a retcon, you could make a similar argument about the sorcerers after Doctor Strange revealed that they've existed as part of a worldwide network this whole time, so if you really want it addressed on the page, I'm prepared to do that.
  • I wish I had seen that articulated in any of the criticism I've read. I still don't agree that it's a worse use of flashbacks than Civil War, where they're basically used to tell us brand new significant information about a character we've already known for eight years just to make the conflict between him and Steve make sense, but that's at least a better explanation than "I didn't like the flashbacks."
  • That might be a better example of Franchise Original Sin. I'm fine with moving it there.
  • I'll repeat myself. The fact that you didn't personally see something happen doesn't mean it didn't happen, and it's not a good argument. This particular criticism went around tumblr in the weeks right before the movie came out.
  • You're really going to nitpick based on whether he has two black lines down his face. Ronan has always looked like Lee Pace in blue face paint. Captain Marvel takes place twenty years before Guardians of the Galaxy. The fact that he's not wearing the same war paint isn't a plot hole. I didn't say anything about his armor, nor did the review I was referencing.

Edited by beyondthesea
19th Feb, 2020 09:11:36 AM

Hypocritical Fandom is when another works fandom makes criticisms of another work/fandom that also applies to theirs. From it's page

"A loyal fanbase is the motherlode of any writer or producer of fiction. But it has side effects. One of them is the tendency of a given fandom to bash another. But this is more than just Fandom Rivalry."

"Fans of a given work have a unique ability to recognize all the failings of a rival franchise, and yet completely miss that their favorite franchise is guilty of many of the same shortcomings. This also works the other way around: Sometimes fans will hold up a work as a masterpiece, and miss the fact that many of their favorite franchise's qualities are also present in the works they despise."

The addition are objective misuse, cutting.

Will see how widespread the misuse is soon, see if it's worth making Flame Bait or something. Given it has less than 130 links, that the correct usage isn't apparently well known, and it's tempting a tempting target for complaining...

Edited by Ferot_Dreadnaught
19th Feb, 2020 11:17:58 AM

Given how many walls of text we're getting here, would this be better suited to the discussion page?

19th Feb, 2020 11:58:39 AM

No because the issue (trope misuse) is bigger than this one movie (and has been resolved for that).

With under 130 wicks, is it worth taking to TRS (which already has a backlog)? Or should we just go through them and delete misuse to see if that clears things up?

19th Feb, 2020 01:33:38 PM


You seem to be taking some of my rebuttals as my personal opinions, but as I prefaced, I was giving counterarguments from what I had seen said of the film. I had not seen the opinions you brought up anywhere else that I was skeptical of them, and echoed what I have seen others say to explain why I felt so. I didn't care about the 90s references, I didn't care about Fury not calling in Carol earlier (Superman Stays Out of Gotham is just something you have to go with), and I don't feel strongly about what Ronan looked like, if Talos and/or Yon-Rogg were good villains, or that Carol and Yon-Rogg did not have a "proper" final battle. It is because I don't feel strongly about these things but was dubious of your entry otherwise that I brought it here for others to weigh in instead of just removing them myself. I do not know why you felt the need to start getting snarky and defensive in your arguments, but it is unnecessary.

@Ferot Dreadnaught

imo Hypocritical Fandom being declared Flame Bait would not be a bad move. It invites contentious discussions like this, either because fans of a work see their hypocrisy being noted and feel the need to defend and explain why it isn't hypocrisy, or when someone accuses the fanbase of being hypocritical in their opinions, which is just criticizing the fanbase itself and not commentating on the work in question in a relevant manner. I think Fandom Rivalry and Franchise Original Sin cover fandom conflicts external and internal better, and without using a potentially loaded word like "hypocrite".

19th Feb, 2020 01:35:29 PM

TRS would be fine, but I'd love if we hold off on making a thread until the backlog clears, because there are a ton of yet-to-be-opened thread that have been waiting for months, so let's focus on closing some open threads before anything else, please?

19th Feb, 2020 02:56:45 PM

I agree that this trope doesn't really comment on the work, is better covered by other tropes, and is probably best suited to be flame bait.

@Drake Clawfang, You accused me of making up criticism multiple times and tried to tell me that what I saw with my own two eyes didn't happen just because it wasn't the same as what you saw, and you ignored me when I pointed out that the internet is a big place and you don't see everything that happens there in favor of continuing to accuse me of those things. I got snarky and defensive because you weren't listening when my tone was calm and reasonable.

Happy troping, everyone!

19th Feb, 2020 09:18:02 PM

" You accused me of making up criticism multiple times and tried to tell me that what I saw with my own two eyes didn't happen just because it wasn't the same as what you saw" - I accused you of nothing, I pointed out that the criticisms you had seen were ones I had not seen. I never said you were making things up or that the things you saw didn't happen, I am saying that the things you saw, I did not see. Instead I explained the ones I had seen, in the process sometimes explaining that one point you had made was part of a bigger criticism I have seen people make, or just noting I had not seen this criticism before.

As to how you responded to some of my points:

  • "If you're going to straight up admit to not remembering the scene I'm comparing it to, how can you make arguments about it not being a valid comparison?" - Aside from being unnecessarily rude, I never said it wasn't a valid comparison, I just said I didn't know which scene you meant.
  • "You're really going to nitpick based on whether he has two black lines down his face." - No, I am objectively explaining the manner in which his make-up is different between the two films. I don't care what he looked like, my personally I found the difference in voice more distracting, but that's on Lee Pace and not the make-up department.

As for "ignoring you", no. I didn't. You posted in this topic covering three points of criticism, and I responded in kind by directly addressing each point you had written on the page. "the internet is a big place and you don't see everything that happens there". This is an obvious, objective fact. I never said otherwise. I'm not sure what sort of acknowledgement a statement like that requires or what kind you were expecting.

In summary, you were very rude in your response, you complained about me holding opinions that I made clear were not my own, you put words in my mouth that I never said myself or in quoting another, and you claimed I "ignored" what you said because I didn't respond to it even though what you said was not a statement that required a response.

Using a calm, reasonable tone, is a good idea. If you intent to continue this conversation, please do that.

Edited by DrakeClawfang
20th Feb, 2020 12:23:17 PM

Is it worth removing other misuses of Hypocritical Fandom? Similar cleanups of Genre Savvy and Hype Backlash have largely eliminated misuse (down to what would likely exist even if it was fixed through TRS). Or do we want to save examples as a case for taking this to TRS?

21st Feb, 2020 05:58:06 AM

I'd take it to TRS and save the examples for now.

15th Mar, 2020 12:07:25 PM

Posted a TRS. It's open now.

Only 13 out of 50 (26%) are valid or have some valid examples. This is definitely a widespread misuse.

Edited by Ferot_Dreadnaught

How well does it match the trope?

Example of:


Media sources: