I'm new here so I thought I'd just drop a note first rather than start editing and screw it up (esp. spoilers).
The fourth Final Destination movie ("The Final Destination", lol) features a movie theater within the mall; behind the screen are all things on Earth that go BOOM, and the movie on-screen features a ticking bomb... that just happens to tick down to zero as the explosion kicks off!
Anyone daring enough to brave it through, and find out the name of the movie playing at the mall? (EDIT: It was "Love Lays Dying". I found it at a Wiki just for the Final Destination series.) It was intentionally played up as a stinker that was going to be the "it" movie for the whole first weekend. Lots of trope-fodder there!
Edited by TheLastWordSword
How does that new movie demonstrate a Show Within A Show?
Hide / Show Replies
Simple. The video about making the video, and thus it fulfills the first and third variants listed. Hell, the producer comes | | <-that close to spelling it out for the viewer before the host cuts in with "let's just half-ass it."
I liked it.
Edited by Wackd Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
Oh, okay. I get it. I guess it was all lost on me since the Show Within A Show never really came to fruition. Or at least we never got to see it.
Anyway it would have made more sense if Show Within A Show wasn't the first episode. Or if there was a Show Within A Show we could actually see, instead of just talk about one.
Meh. I think this trope was the best to start with, since it sets up the concept of the series. YMMV.
Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
So is it a show about talking about tropes, or is it a show about creating a vlog about talking about tropes? If this weren't the first episode it would be more clear, I think.
For the record, I think I liked it, but I'd like to see more to be sure, because I'm still not sure I know what the deal was.
The Show Within A Show is the final take of the vlog—“Shows within shows are… really confusing.” We do see it… it just really, really sucks. We also see a few failed takes for the show. The shakycam is the show outside the show, the tripod is the show within.
Anyway, Type 1 does not require the Show Within A Show to be seen. Throughout the run of 30 Rock only a few minutes of TGS have been shown.
This trope was picked because it’s the concept of the series. The concept allows us to simultaneously comment on and demonstrate the tropes.
If you like it, great. If not, then PM me. I’m happy to take constructive criticism. I can’t go back in and alter this video for a variety of reasons, but I can consider your thoughts in the future. I can’t please everybody, but I’ll try to do right by Tv Tropes.
Alright, I think I've just hit the bullseye. You're saying future episodes are also going to feature a Show Within A Show, right? Echo Chamber is a webshow about an aspiring vlogger who wants to create a TV Tropes vlog but must conform to the demands of the Administrator? ...Also there just happens to be a friend with a camera following him around to catch all of the pre-Show Within A Show production...?
Also I'm sensing that this is largely my misunderstanding and not something many people are unclear about, so feel free to disregard my concerns.
Edited by Grenadier
That was our intention, yes.
Don't apologize for your interpretation. I believe in Death of the Author, so I don't exactly plan on disregarding anyone's concerns. No worries.
I'm wondering if Cowboy Bebop should be moved from type 2 to type 3, since the S Wa S in question is used by the writers to give the audience plot information (rather than have the characters recite exposition every episode). The cast react to the show as they watch it and information broadcast on the S Wa S sets the plot in motion for some episodes as well as partially in the film.
Would "Battlecruiser Vengeance" from the Star Trek Expanded Universe — Think Klingon Space Opera holovid series — be eligible for category 4?
The image on this page adds nothing but confusion for me. Some people seem to think that everyone here are familiar with manga/anime. If this is really the case, that's fine - but if not, I suggest we stop relying so heavily on illustrations from those genres.
Hide / Show Replies
Buddy, just take a look at the forums' Image Picking topic. :P
But if you can think of a better image, feel free to replace it. The current one isn't very helpful, I agree.
[1] This facsimile operated in part by synAC.
From the archive: Rob Mandeville: Do we need a sub-page to deal with animated characters that are used as actors in multiple shows? For examples, take Veggietales (they don't make new veggies for biblical characters: the same cucumber played Nebbu K. Nezzer and King Xerxes), the Muppets (for instance, in Muppet Treasure Island, they use Kermit as the Captain and Sam the Eagle as Mr. Arrow), or Looney Tunes (Yosemite Sam, a "cowboy", has been both a British knight and an Arabian). It's not quite Show Within A Show, because many of these shows don't even reveal the outer "frame" story. It's more like a reusable virtual actor.
The first thing most iPad owners will buy after receiving their iPad is a new iPad case to protect it.<a href="http://www.leather-ipad-case.com
">leather ipad case</a>
Linking to a past Trope Repair Shop thread that dealt with this page: Needs Help
, started by JewelyJ on Jan 7th 2016 at 10:16:24 PM
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman