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.
Ask the Tropers is for:
- General questions about the wiki, how it works, and how to do things.
- Reports of problems with wiki articles, or requests for help with wiki articles.
- Reports of misbehavior or abuse by other tropers.
Ask the Tropers is not for:
- Help identifying a trope. See TropeFinder.
- Help identifying a work. See MediaFinder.
- Asking if a trope example is valid. See the Trope Talk forum.
- Proposing new tropes. See TropeLaunchPad.
- Making bug reports. See QueryBugs.
- Asking for new wiki features. See QueryWishlist.
- Chatting with other tropers. See our forums.
- Reporting problems with advertisements. See this forum topic.
- Reporting issues on the forums. Send a Holler instead.
Ask the Tropers:
openExcessive spoilering. Film
The page for Self/Less is very heavily spoilered, covering entire examples.
This movie does have twists, sure, but it looks excessive. Is there a standard procedure for such a case?
resolved Work with no tropes found Film
Madras Cafe had no tropes listed when I stumbled upon it via Wiki Walk. I've added one from the trope I found it from but it needs more, I've not seen it myself so I'm in no position to add insight on it, and I don't know where else to bring this up (Needs More Wicks seems to be cases of trope pages needing listing, not works).
openComplaints Magnet? Film
The Critical Research Failure section under Mulan (2020) is getting quite long and nitpicky, in excess of even what the most flexible interpretations of the trope allow. While a lot of people have correctly called the film out for failing to get basic aspects of Chinese culture correct despite advertising itself as more authentic, a lot of these examples come off as less informed criticisms and more an excuse for certain users to kick the film while it's down by parroting criticisms they saw elsewhere, some of which may misunderstand the actual reason for why the mistake was such an issue in the first place, or introduce Critical Research Failure of their own.
This despite scholars of Chinese culture and people of Chinese descent themselves pointing out that these aspects of Chinese culture get subjected to Artistic License within Chinese-created media all the time, and are not as clear-cut or even the worst crimes the film commits.
Edited by AlleyOopopenUnrelated Trope Example Film
So recently I found a bad example in The Glass House like this:
- Financial Abuse: This is basically the plot. The siblings Ruby and Rhett were adopted by Erin and Terry, the best friends of their dead parents... only to be targeted for death so the "new parents" can collect the kids's HUGE inheritance. Not to mention Terry makes passes at Ruby, who's squicked outta her mind. Then, Ruby finds out that both Terry and Erin staged the parents's deaths. She then goes Plucky Girl, attempts to fight back against Terry and protect Rhett, and ultimately kills Terry (Erin had been Driven to Suicide out of guilt a while before). Then, the kids are taken in by their uncle.
open Edit warring over including Deadpool on the MCU franchise page. Film
Alright, I'm not sure if this is the place to post this, but here it goes... There's been some controversy on the Marvel Cinematic Universe franchise page regarding the addition of one untitled Deadpool film, which has been confirmed to be in early development by trades and anyone worth a damn. The problem is that Deadpool co-creator Rob Liefeld has recently stated something to the contrary, and that's spawned a ton of clickbait headlines and the spread of misinformation.
Here's the thing - the only person who says that nothing is happening with a character that brought in $1.5B in global ticket sales is Rob Liefeld, who is not part of the Marvel Studios picture at all. He is not being included in conversations about the next movie in spite of being a consultant on the Fox movies, and he recently shared some fan art of Deadpool killing Mickey Mouse on his social media page, so he is clearly not an impartial source of information here.
Another big problem with his statement is that allegedly, production grids for the next film in the series are out there, seen by a select few (including some industry insiders). Disney CEO Bob Iger also has an image of Deadpool on his Twitter banner, and previously noted that he's open to the idea of there being an R-rated Marvel Studios label for a third Deadpool movie and potentially other films. Marvel are currently in the process of making an omnibus of Deadpool stories from Joe Kelly, who gave the character the personality that fans of the character love. But most importantly, not only have Deadpool 1 and Deadpool 2 writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick officially met with Marvel Studios about the future of the franchise, but Ryan Reynolds, who is the only "FoX-Men" actor likely to make the jump into the MCU, has as well.
This was the original entry on the page before it got reverted:
- Untitled Deadpool film (TBA) note Confirmed by Ryan Reynolds to be in development. Reynolds will be returning as Deadpool, with writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick returning. Emma Watts and Simon Kinberg, who were involved with the previous films, will not be returning. The film will be the first R-rated entry in the MCU, and is expected to be distributed by 20th Century Studios instead of by Disney. Whether or not the film is a complete reboot or a Broad Strokes continuation of the franchise as it was prior to Disney's acquisition of Fox remains to be seen.
I tried relaying some of this information into the commented-out notes of article itself, but a Troper has recently accused me of being "biased" and is threatening to report me for vandalism... In spite of my simple relaying of crucial information like what I've shared above that debunks the speculation that Disney wants nothing to do with Deadpool. I am requesting that the Deadpool entry be reinstated into the article.
Edited by KingClarkopen What's that trope? damage equals worthy of love Film
What is the trope in which an ordinary guy proves his worthiness to an extraordinary girl by taking extraordinary physical risks, and often losing in a fight? It's not "loser gets the girl" because that requires both guys to fight over her, and defeat makes her realize that the winner never really interested her. This is more like the girl does not really know she reciprocates his love, until she sees the amount of physical pain and damage he is willing to absorb in their shared cause. It may be the prelude to the "violently protective girlfriend" but not always. Is there something like the "Steve Trevor Effect" from the Wonder Woman (2016) movie? Except in that, they hook up before he blows himself up, but that causes her to (posthumously) forgive him for their fight. Any ideas? It's not "weakness turns her on" because we are not talking about a character who is congenitally weak in body or personality, but usually he is in some way inferior to her - less educated, less intelligent, less trained, whatever. Often, the guy takes a beating in an attempt to serve her in some way, protection, rescue attempt, something. This usually leads to the moment when the girl realizes that the guy who she has been somehow looking upon as insufficient is suddenly recognized as worthy. Several books do this, including Patrick Ness' "The Knife of Never Letting Go" and Brittany Cavallaro's "Charlotte Holmes" series. Any ideas?
openEdit warring and weird message? Film
So on https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/PatchAdams
, I deleted a Funny moments entry because it was worded awkwardly, lacking in context, and for some reason I mistakenly thought the page already had a "heartwarming" section. HarleyQuinnIsGreat (who I guess entered it in the first place) reverted it back with an added " % % Do not delete the above entry without consulting someone first," and sent the deleting YMMV notifier while telling me not to delete without consulting them. (MOD EDITED TO REMOVE PM TEXT; ADDED SUMMARY INSTEAD)
At this point, I feel like the edit itself isn't really the problem here.
Edited by nombretomadoopenHilarious In Hindsight on the Megamind page, misuse or not? Film
I've noticed that keyblade333 recently deleted the entirety of the Hilarious in Hindsight entry from the Megamind page.
After I talked to them about it, they claimed that it was because of misuse.
I think they're a mixed bag. Things like Jonah Hill's and Will Ferrell's roles in The Lego Movie count, given that Jonah Hill was voicing a character who was heavily inspired by Jimmy Olsen, with the names of two Green Lanterns, only to later voice Green Lantern himself who has an obsession with Superman. Same thing with both Will Ferrell characters having a tendency to mispronounce things and also being parodies of over-the-top supervillains.
Some of the entries really were borderline examples, but that's no reason to delete the entire entry.
Edited by tropineasilyopenWasted plots and characters Film
So, I found these entries in the YMMV page for Wonder Woman (2017).
- They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character:
- In the backstory the Greek Gods (especially Diana's patron goddess Athena) are all dead save for Ares, who by his own admission destroyed them. A common complaint among Wonder Woman fans is that while she is an excellent character herself, her stories generally don't have the same density of Worldbuilding and Rogues Gallery that Batman and Superman have, and that DC rarely does heavy lifting in integrating the richness of Classical Mythology to its superhero lore the way Marvel does with Norse Mythology, and that arbitrarily wiping out the Pantheon, for the sake of simplifying Diana's origin, potentially limited the scope of her stories going forward.
- Some viewers were disappointed more wasn't done with Dr. Poison. For starters, she's a female scientist during World War 1, a period of time where someone such as herself would be looked out with confusion or disdain from her allies. One youtuber
discussed this by pointing out how she acts as the perfect Foil to Diana: Diana had the ability to choose her destiny, while Dr. Poison essentially didn't, but the choice was made to make her a straight up villain in the end and not a Tragic Villain. Others think it may have been more interesting if she was Ares.
- The choice to kill off Ares. Not only is he Wonder Woman's most powerful and iconic villain, but he has so much backstory and potential that lends him to being one of the biggest villains in the DCU. He easily could have been a villain the Justice League could have had to face, and with how small Wonder Woman's Rogues Gallery is, he makes for a good long term villain. Instead he gets killed shortly after appearing, which calls into question now what they can do with Wonder Woman since her first solo-film has her beating a literal God of War.
- They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot: Quite a few people considered it a wasted opportunity that the movie did not stick to the idea that Ares was not behind the war and that the people fighting in it were fighting purely because they wanted to, particularly since it would have provided a great reason for Diana to seclude herself from humanity. This is especially strange given that up until that point in the movie, Diana's entire character arc was about learning how humans are both capable of evil and good, but the choice for Ares to appear throws all of it under the bus. Its such a sore spot for people that many feel it damages the films quality.
Do they really qualify for these tropes or not? I'm asking because sometimes, the inclusion of these tropes in YMMV pages are less "This plot/character wasn't properly developed or explored" and more "I didn't like the way this plot/character was handled."
openChanging "Characters/GodzillaTheGodzillas" as Characters/Godzilla The Character Film
I want to know if it's okay to change Godzilla: The Godzillas as "Godzilla The Character", since while it's a page designed to show multiple versions of the character, the title itself makes it sound like they in the same continuity when there's 10 different versions of the same character while adding other media-related characters.
openFranchiseOriginalSin.StarWars Film
I want to start this by saying that locking or cutting a page should be used for worst-case-scenario pages only.
I've been trying to fix up FranchiseOriginalSin.Star Wars, and I've found that the page has many, many issues regarding the examples listed. It, of course, suffers from Complaining About Shows You Don't Like, as most Star Wars Audience Reaction pages end up like. Now, this in itself is a pretty fixable situation, because it's very similar to Narm.Star Wars, which we successfully cleaned out. Yes, it took months, but it was a satisfying conclusion.
But the Narm page was different, because that had 1-3 sentence examples that resulted in a simple cleanup objective of "remove misuse". It was very simple to fix the page. But with this page? No, my objective was to shorten the examples instead of cutting them. But the more I go into the page, the more I realize that nearly every example is a violation of Complaining About Shows You Don't Like, and it's frustrating. Just like Example Indentation or Zero-Context Examples, complaining is a fair reason to remove a bad example.
So here's the "Ask" part: What should be done with the page? If it's undeniably hard to fix, and just about every example is a heavy violation of policy, what can be done to help? I was thinking of maybe locking it, but it sounds too obstructive. Cutting is also an option if the cleanup proves unmanageable, but it's barely on the table.
So, what does the rest of the wiki think about the page?
openCaptain Marvel Film
Just a heads up, a troper has added a lot of entries for Hypocritical Fandom to Captain Marvel (2019). I'm not taking action myself, but I feel like a lot of the entries are distortions of the context for the film's criticisms (poor use of flashbacks, retcons to the timeline of the series) or bring up criticisms I haven't seen made about the movie (bad villains, use of 90s music, boycotting the military).
Given this film's "controversial" nature, and the controversial nature of the trope itself, would anyone else like to weigh in?
resolved No Title Film
SelfDemonstrating.The Beast Of Yucca Flats appears to be mostly identical to its non-SD page.
Botched attempt to remove the self-demonstration?
openEdit War on Midsommar Film
Recently, I deleted a batch of examples from Midsommar for misuse and/or shoehorning, and rewrote a few others, all with edit reasons given (edit history
).
Soon afterwards, phylos restored several of them
, just as they were before (no changes). They did give an edit reason—-technically; however it amounts to (I paraphrase) "You only deleted these examples because you think they are misuse and/or misrepresenting what is happening in the movie! You can't do that!", plus an invocation of Tropes Are Flexible.
Now how would I go about to resolve this? I don't think phylos has in any way refuted the reasons for which I deleted these examples; but deleting them again would be edit warring.
For some of these examples, the point of contention is that we have a different interpretation of what is even happening in the movie. Hence why I would like to get people who have watched the movie to weigh in. I don't think there is much use in bringing it to the discussion page, because very few tropers ever actually go there. Should I present my case here in ATT? Or should I make a dedicated thread on the forums?
Edit: Since phylos complained that I did not present his argument (while simultaneously declining to defend it himself), I figured I might mention the points of contention. (The following requires you to have seen the movie. For those that haven't, 'spoilers ahead).
- There is a scene in which Christian, who has earlier been given psychedelic drugs by the cultits of Hårga, has sex with a Hårgan girl, Maja (which a Hårgan elder had already tried to persuade him to previously). phylos believes that since Christian was drugged, he was not able to give consent, therefore (and because the Hårgans kind of pestered him to do it) the act was non-consensual, ergo constitutes rape of Christian by Maja. Therefore rape tropes like Double Standard: Rape, Female on Male apply.
- At the end of the movie, the Hårgans request Dani, Christian's girlfriend, to select the last human sacrifice from among all people present. She choses Christian. Because Dani had earlier seen Christian having sex mit Maja (see above) by peeking through a keyhole (and which she obviously experienced as traumatizing), phylos feels certain that Dani choses Christian as a punishment for, or in revenge of, him having cheated on her with Maja. But as (see above) Christian was really raped, he was not cheating on her, Dani watching the scene was a case of Not What It Looks Like, and her dooming him to death is Victim-Blaming.
I could explain why I think phylos' interpretations are distorted, but as phylos has already declined to engage in discussion, I'll just wait whether anyone else wants to voice an opinion.
Edited by LordGroopenHaving a problem with a thing on the Camp page Film
It's this: "Don't expect it to take itself the least bit seriously."
Now, that may apply with Batman (1966), the works of John Waters, and some of the films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (specifically Thor: Ragnarok and The Guardians of the Galaxy films), but with all the books and articles I've read on the subject, I've found that part of the page disingenuous. The Universal Monster Movies and the films of Bette Davis and Joan Crawford are very serious but are regarded as camp due to their melodrama, theatricality, and artifice.
I was wondering if it could be changed to something like "The serious becomes silly while the silly becomes serious. And there's no limit to how over the top something can get."
openSchindler's List as an example of White Man's Burden Film
A while ago Mark2000
added Schindler's List as an example on the trope page of White Man's Burden, which was removed for the entry itself being objectively inaccurate, they also added Mighty Whitey to that film's page and edit warred about it until it was deleted a second time.
Flash forward and LadyEros
has added the example to the White Man's Burden.
Now personally I think the trope doesn't apply, for the reason that The Holocaust was targeting people who were white Europeans too, even if the rhetoric back then portrayed them as sub-human. And also by the editors' logic then any instance when a privileged individual helps an oppressed group would be this trope.
What do you think?
openCommon Knowledge in Man of Steel Film
Five years after its release and Man of Steel still causes controversy in this very website. Troper Tuvok deleted the Common Knowledge entry in the movies YMMV page.
The entry said: "The final fight scene with Zod has garnered this reputation. People generally describe it as the fight destroying the entire city with Clark being responsible for most of the destruction and being completely indifferent to the rest. In reality, most of Metropolis is left completely untouched and the destruction seems worse than it is because of the focus given to it and the fact that the film doesn't hold back from showing how terrifying it is from a civilian perspective. Similarly, Clark is personally responsible for almost none of it as much of it was done by Zod's world engine or Zod himself and Clark did make an effort to lead him into space and even made a point of avoiding buildings when he punched him at one point. As for claims of indifference, he was busy trying to stop Zod to begin with who wasn't exactly an easy opponent."
Tuvok justified the deletion with: "The damage was calculated as quite large and city wide as shown in B v S , as well as the Director addressing it [1]
. Snyder wanted there be consequences for hero interactions. ‘’’I wanted a big consequence to Superman’s arrival on earth. Certainly, Batman v. Superman sort of cashes in all its chips on the ‘why’ of that destruction.’’’ Which would signify the damage was large. It was also calculated by various outlets [2]
Done by the Watson Technical Consulting to assess the cost. So confirmation the destruction was city wide, the main critisim during the fight was Clarke punching through flying through various building with no indication of making an effort to check damage caused. Making out with his girlfriend with the city in waste in the background did not help."
I must protest the deletion because Common Knowledge is about correcting and clarifying details about a story that average viewers might not be aware of and Tuvok's reasoning is about reaffirming something the viewers already know. Yes, there is an estimation to the city's damage but there were parts of the city that were largely untouched during the climax. Yes, Superman's fight with Zod caused damage but Superman attempted to limit the damage by fighting Zod in the sky. As for claims of indifference, Superman was busy fighting Zod, so it's not like he was shown not caring about civillian casualties.
What do you think?
Edited by MasterHeroopen Excessive (?) gushing Film
Awesome.Avengers Endgame features several paragraphs of gushing over the movie breaking every box office record and becoming the highest grossing movie ever. To wit:
- The film's box office performance has been nothing short of astounding:
- Most box office prognosticators were cautiously optimistic that it could break $300 million opening weekend in the US, which would handily break Infinity War's record of $257 million, in and of itself a staggeringly high amount of money. It completely obliterated everyone's expectations by making $357 million, $100 million more than its predecessor. Barring some ridiculous future inflation, it's hard to imagine a future movie breaking the box office record by a 9-figure sum.
- Endgame became the first movie ever to gross one billion (with a "B") dollars in its opening week! $1.2B to be exact, which is almost double what Infinity War did on its opening. This also makes it the second entertainment product to do so, outside of Grand Theft Auto V.note And of course, being a AAA video game which costs $60 rather than just the cost of a movie ticket, GTA V has a massive unfair advantage there. To put simply, it became the highest grossing movie of 2019 and the 18th-highest grossing movie of all time in four days, and it's even more impressive when one takes the film's heavy Continuity Lock-Out into account.
- As of its opening Sunday (28 April 2019), Endgame broke 144 records
.
- It became the highest grossing import movie in China ever in just a week. It hit $500 million there the Thursday after release, blowing past the original record holder The Fate of the Furious's $392 million total haul.
- After just 12 days into its worldwide release, Endgame not only surpassed $2 billion
(becoming the second comic book movie to do so), but also blew past Avengers: Infinity War, The Force Awakens, and James Cameron's Titanic to become the second-highest grossing movie of all time. In turn, this makes the MCU the first franchise to have two $2 billion grossing movies under their belt, unadjusted for inflation.note If you do adjust for inflation, then it's second only to Star Wars, but it's still impressive either way.
- Crossing over with Heartwarming, Cameron himself, a man infamous to MCU fans for his comments about "superhero fatigue", congratulated Marvel Studios
for surpassing Titanic:
@JimCameron: An Iceberg sank the real Titanic. It took the Avengers to sink my Titanic. Everyone here at Lightstorm Entertainment salutes your amazing achievement. You've shown that the movie industry is not only alive and well, it's bigger than ever!
- Crossing over with Heartwarming, Cameron himself, a man infamous to MCU fans for his comments about "superhero fatigue", congratulated Marvel Studios
- In 20 days, it grossed 2.5 billion. The only other film that achieved this was Avatar, and it took 72 days to get to that point.
- Then 89 days after release (July 20th, 2019), Endgame went above and beyond any other record it's broken prior to this point, and officially surpassed Avatar as the highest-grossing movie of all time.note worldwide, not adjusted for inflation, and the first sequel to do so. The last few weeks prior to this achievement were nail-biting, because even with the re-release in theaters it was clear that it'd be a photo finish either way... and yet it happened regardless. In fact, it happened with such perfect timing that Kevin Feige himself got to announce it during the Marvel panel at San Diego Comic Con. You'd swear it was pre-ordained from the heavens to work out this way.
- Once again, Cameron congratulates Marvel Studios for passing Avatar
:
@JimCameron: Oel Ngati Kameie, I see you Marvel. Congratulations to Avengers Endgame becoming the new box office king!
- Once again, Cameron congratulates Marvel Studios for passing Avatar
Do we really need all that info?
openMispelling and lack of context Film
Troper markband added a rather confusing Brought Down to Badass entry in Darth Vader's character section. It reads…
- Downplayed. Before he was critically injured on Mustafar, Vader had the potential to become the strongest Force-user in the galaxy. While in Legends his injuries hobbled his force potential and his strength in the force to were he was stated to only have about 80% of the strength the emperor had, in canon Vader never lost the raw power he had in the force but was unable to use it to it's fullest given the precarious situation of being reliant on machinery to keep himself alive. Basically, Vader couldn't use some force powers like force lightning because they would obviously endanger the cybernetics keeping him alive and he couldn't use his full power because of the stress tolerances of his bionics. The emporer even called Vader's power "unparalleled" in the Dark Lord of the sith comic.
I had to correct it to…
- Downplayed. Before he was critically injured on Mustafar, Vader had the potential to become the most powerful Force-user in the galaxy. Even after, he was still able to use his Force powers and remained an effective Hero Killer and symbol of fear.

What do you call this trope: The unsuspecting character, ofttimes a mafioso, is innocently carrying his groceries out of the store, or into his home, etc and is then ambushed by a gun-wielding assailant. The assault itself is typically off-screen while the camera instead goes into slow-motion, focuses on the groceries (fruit, produce, raw pasta, etc) slowly tumbling and rolling away on the ground, and which might be followed up by a puddle of blood then pooling near the spilled groceries. The music accompanying the slow-motion trope is operatic or classical music coming to a crescendo as this little scene plays out.
Edited by iceberg