mcity: (omg onoz)
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WearingTheCape

You know, the one I started to write in 2001? With teenage superheroes, a world where superheroes are common licensed, and can merchandise their likenesses, a deep and complex plot and likeable, Whedonesque bantery characters, and so on and so forth, spanning three books?

Yeah, the basic world here is almost identical. The actual characters, and plot, IDK.

The worst part is that it's seems like a really good series, it's dirt cheap on Kindle, and I'd like to read it, except I don't want to appear to be ripping off the series more than I already would be. Then again, many of my ideas aren't particularly original. I just do what Scott Adams recommends; crib from a lot of people better than you and file off the serial numbers. If you use humor, you can call it a parody.
mcity: (Default)
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DesignatedVillain
In Starfox 64, Andross gets banished to a desert wasteland for doing science in a way the Cornerian military didn't like. He then assembles a multi-ethnic coalition to try and defeat the primarily Dog run Cornerian Hegemony over Lylat. General Pepper even has giant posters of HIMSELF in Corneria City. When his forces are overrun by Andross, General Pepper's last resort is to hire mercenaries to defeat Andross. And of course, those Mercenaries are OUR HEROES, and Andross is a horrific villain, despite never having his "crimes" specifically mentioned.
  • Well, it is implied that he killed Fox's father.
  • He got banished to Venom for creating an explosion that destroyed a large portion of Corneria City, in spite of Pepper's orders to stop his experiments. What you play in the game is him just about to ''conquer the entire system'' until Star Fox drives him back.
I'd like to point out that Andross is clearly said to have killed a tonne of people in his twisted experiments in both the Japanese and US versions of the game's manual.
mcity: (Default)
Someone on my deviantWatch just made a post saying that Olivia from SVU is a stronger female character than Beckett from Castle, who is apparently a Mary Sue.

Okay, it is kind of interesting to look at Beckett in isolation, compared to the way she was "designed"; as Castle's counterpart and Love Interest, and he for her. Both characters are intended to complement each other. Beckett doling out little tidbits actually reinforces her emotional isolation, especially in comparison to how Castle will cheerfully talk about details of his personal life, or accidentally let personal details slip. Beckett is a lot more strategic in her small talk (and yes, I speak from experience). As for her heels, she's a fashion-conscious detective, and we all have our vices. Detectives don't actually do that much running.

She has been used as a distraction, but she's an attractive women and knows it. The team has no problem using Castle in exactly the same fashion. "Hey, famous playboy good-looking writer, go over there and distract people!" Most of the time, IIRC, Kate is the one who decides to be a distraction, and on one occasion her sexy act saved Castle's life. And most importantly, she's the head of a three-man detective team, and had a deeper backstory than the title character of the show. The show plays fast and loose with "realism" in the first place; just ask someone with relevant knowledge about the steampunk episode.

The funny thing is that they really like every other female character on the show, but somehow missed the point of the female lead. If they're doing such a good job on everyone else, maybe you're just misreading the character. I mean, TVTropes can't find anything really objectionable about the show. TVTropes.

Speaking of which; yes, the female characters on Everybody Hates Chris tend to be irritating jerks. Just like the male characters.
mcity: (exclamation mark)
Our boy specifically thinks he does not want to marry women X and Y, while he is sneaking into a quick wedding with woman Z.

X and Y were willing to share, since the planet allows polygamy, but he did not want to be shared, since he felt that for all their good company in the bedroom, either or both would be the domineering type of woman his mother is before long, and more than he could bear. He has been dodging their offer of marriage for two years.

And Z is the girl next door type, and he both loves her and wants to help out her dad.

Due to a series of circumstances, X and Y show up, and our hero is forced by social and political pressure--from two Emperors, no less--to marry all three women. Z seemed to have no problem with it, but absolutely no one saw fit to consult our boy, even while they were negotiating right in front of him.

So he walks in expecting to marry one woman (whom he loves), and ends up marrying three women, two of whom he explicitly did not want to marry.

I know he's the whipping boy of the canon, but that's Not Okay.

And to think, this fanfic series was going so well up until now, then you just ran full tilt into what TVTropes calls Unfortunate Implications.

Do you know why people like the Wooster books? Because we know Wodehouse is never going to let Bertie end up in a loveless marriage. If he ever did end up getting hitched, we would be reading less along the lines of a light-hearted comedy of manners, and more along the lines of those critically-acclaimed Oscar-nominated movies where everyone is miserable but played by really good actors.

Hang on, I think I'm onto something here. All I have to do is call it a "deconstruction".

Srsly?
-Jonathan
mcity: (Default)
You know the standard-issue cast of the Hapless Everyman, the Experienced Traveller, and the Girl. Basically, Arthur Dent, Ford Prefect, and every female lead from an Urban Fantasy Book Ever. So they are walking around back allies, and encounter a zombie. Ford-knockoff tells Dent not to call the zombie "undead", because he doesn't like it.

Naturally, during the ensuing conversation, Dent calls the zombie an "undead", to which he snippily responds by declaring he's "living challenged", and Ford tries to smooth things over. Y'know, standard Terry Pratchett scenario.

No, wait, he tries to kill them.

Seriously. He gets so pissed off at the "insult" that he immediately tries to hunt them down, and they barely manage to get away, at which point he goes to their house and lies in wait. They come home, get guns, and wait for it to get dark. You know how you know stuff in dreams you don't know in reality? The dream actually informs me, watching all this, that their guns can see. They evolved a symbiotic relationship; in exchange for protection, they linked up with their nervous system and provided better vision range.

This turns out to be absolutely useless as crazy undead guy slaughters Ford, then Dent, then Girl, in the blink of an eye.

So, yeah. This would be one of the darker Gaiman books. Something TVTropes would label a Deconstruction. Not the Discworld type, the "rocks fall, everyone dies" type.
mcity: (nolan north - }:I)
>almost all of them are shipping fics, even the ones not in the shipping section
>almost all of them are slashfics

So, Christopher Nolan created a deep and thought-provoking universe that's just ripe for RPGs and AUs and (according to him) video games, and the Internet uses it mostly to write smut.
mcity: (Default)
You complain about commercials where parents lie to their kids to get them to eat helthy food being some sort of Unfortunate Implication, and say that said commercials are actually advising parents not to teach their kids to eat healthy.

Leaving aside the usual tactic of extrapolating from a depiction of a single event to a statement about everything, ever:

Have you ever seen a child?

Or better yet, have you ever been a child?

Going to eat a bacon sammich
Jonn
mcity: (Default)


TVTropes has this on the "Unfortunate Implications: Ads" page.

I'm not sure how it's an "implication" when "she's stalking him" is the premise of both the commercial and the very dark joke, but I guess you know best, TVTropes.
mcity: (Default)
http://mcity.livejournal.com/226076.html

I posted it on TVTropes "Strawman Has a Point" page, and someone responded saying that the point of the strip is to show how the XKCD char. is White-Knighting. Problem is, it's an ad hominem defense; you can't attack their stance, so you just attack their motivations.

I deleted the response, and the person added it right back. Now I'm off to explain what I just explained on the Ad Hominem page. See how they like that.
mcity: (Default)
I just read something on TVTropes' recap page for Doctor Who's "The Doctor's Wife" episode about how River's ability to fly the TARDIS smoothly when the Doctor can't
is subtly similar to a triad romantic/sexual relationship, with a bisexual woman noting that she may love the rough work of a man, but sometimes a woman's tenderness to treat her just right.
GO OUTSIDE
mcity: (Default)
>click on a highly-recommended story
>click on first chapter
>realize that there is a complete absence of any commas
>close tab

Mothers, don't let your sons grow up to be sons of English teachers.
mcity: (Default)
The movie Cars is all about a famous American racer being captured, half-starved and enslaved by a small, desert town till he develops extreme Stockholm Syndrome. Oh, and they're all cars.
Oh TVTropes. Never change.
mcity: (LOGIC)


Just a cute ad about how school can promote individuality, right? Wrong.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UnfortunateImplications/Advertising

A Target commercial begins with triplet girls who are attired in school uniforms eating breakfast and going off to school. Then throughout the school day their outfits morph until they exit the school in brightly colored outfits of the same style but different colors. The unfortunate implication from this commercial, due to the expressions used throughout the day and the song playing throughout the commercial, is that every child who attends a school where school uniforms are worn is a cookie-cutter conformist and the only way to show your individuality is to wear "regular" clothing, even though every child coming out of the school is wearing similar styles of "regular" clothing. There is also a second, possible unfortunate implication in that it says the only way to express one's individual spirit is through outward appearances, disregarding anything internal.
I'm just surprised they didn't manage to find an excuse to use the word "heteronormative" or "paradigm".

And if you can look closely at the ad, the school doesn't actually wear uniforms. Those are just three identically dressed triplets.
mcity: (Beyond Good and Evil 2)
I was reading a fanfic that was a post-apocalyptic version of a long-running cartoon franchise. The males of the team were dead, and before the females took on a town full of vampires, they took off their clothes and washed with holy water. Then they had sex, washed again, and got to work.

In other words, they took of their clothes for no real reason, then had sex for no real reason, then fought bloodsuckers. And then the non-POV girl dies(TVTropes, NSFW).

If you really wanted to be Darker and Edgier, you would've made the POV character have unprofessed feelings for the other girl, including peeking while they had their bath, and catching the other one staring a few times before that. Then when N-POV dies, she confesses her feeling with her last breath, and then POV, (for what would have been the second time in the story, I think) cries. Or N-POV has been keeping a journal with her feelings in it, and POV takes the key off her corpse. Y'know, make it tragic. Whedon it up a little.

I know the idea of the dry, stripped-down narrative tone is to show that POV is repressing her emotions, but there's maybe one paragraph of foreshadowing before the sex scene, and it borders on a Big Lipped Femslash Moment(TVTropes).

It reminds me of that fanfic I mentioned earlier when the one character's primary character trait was that she was a lesbian. That one was a good premise with decent writing sunk by intrusive Fan Mypoia, whereas this one had a good premise, good writing, and one out-of-place moment.
mcity: (omg onoz)
Someone put my last fanfic up on TVTropes' "Fanfic Recs: Iron Man" page. So ''that's'' where the hundreds of hits came from.
mcity: (LOGIC)
There's a webcomic based around some Moderately Specific pornography. I read the Clean version of the comic, but occasionally dip over into the Adult version, since the Clean version often omits certain events from the plot entirely. The Adult readers get both their version and the Clean one. Anyway, the main character was nearly raped.

The man character's a guy.

He is stunned, abducted, tied to a bed, gagged, and bought to an erection (which the comic makes very clear is against his will) by a very, very messed up girl who has feelings for him. She can't bring herself to do it, so when the lead's girlfriend and his (female) friend burst in, the not-rapist jumps out the window to escape. The friend tries to say it's probably not what it looks like, when the girlfriend slaps him and declares they're through.

We then find out that the not-rapist has been abused-in pretty much every way possible-by her father, which has been hinted at through the comic.

According to TVTropes, the fans hate the girlfriend now.

Basically, she saw the not-rapist straddling the lead, understandably jumped to a conclusion, and acted based on that conclusion. Please note that as of the breakup panel, the lead still had the gag in his mouth. Please note that the TVTropes page lists the last part as the comic playing the ol' "Men can't be Raped" trope straight. If a character believes a false trope is true, that's not the comic playing it straight; it means the character is simply wrong. And frankly, it's not an unreasonable mistake. It seems vaguely misogynistic for the fans to hate the girlfriend.

And then I remembered that the comic in question is done by a guy with a carryover readership from his other pornographic works, which did objectify women, and...yeah. Suddenly the fans' reaction makes a lot more sense.
mcity: (Default)
I understand that you spent a lot of time adding tropes for [livejournal.com profile] ursulav's Black Dogs. In fact, you claim to have been the only editor for the page until I came along. I cannot confirm that, as the page history seems to have been wiped by a glitch, which is why I assumed all the tropes on the page that are clearly not in my copy of my book were added by a troll.

Recently, you PMed me to inform me that you were pissed that I had deleted all your hard work, and that the tropes were from a first draft of the second Black Dogs book originally on Vernon's Elfwood page, since taken down. I check the book's entry, and lo and behold you've added not only some of the tropes from the sequel, but a partial summary.

Here's the thing; you are wrong.

One of the hardest things for any person to accept is the idea of sunk costs. Not only did my reply PM explain to you why adding tropes from a first draft--which all of my Google-fu cannot determine actually existed, BTW--is a terrible idea, it also pointed out that things frequently change between versions, and TVTropes doesn't use tropes from leaks unless the series or work has officially been cancelled, leaving the leaks the only material left. Your little disclaimer about how the book would be the same "barring massive rewrites" does not count for anything, as books occasionally undergo, guess what, massive rewrites. In addition, you never indicated whether the tropes were from the original book, or the leaked draft, spoiling people if the final does hew close to the leak.

I'm not going to delete the tropes again, since it would just lead to an edit war. But I wish you would understand that it was a bad idea to add them in the first place.

-Jonn
mcity: (Default)
On the one hand, I wanted to see the movie. On the other, I'll probably just end up watching the bootleg in four months when my brother brings it home. Might as well gorge myself on spoilers now.
mcity: (omg onoz)
Just because The Princess and the Frog has voodoo in it does not mean it actually glorifies it. In fact, the primary voodoo-using-guy is the main villain, and the ultimate consequence of his actions is that he's dragged into Hell after all his deals and schemes catch up with him. Yes, he dealt with familiar spirits, but this is clearly portrayed as a Bad Thing. Also, the average American kid isn't going to be able to walk down Main Street, into a shop, and get their Hoo-Doo on.

-Jonn
Dear LoTR fandom,

There is an analysis page for the series on TVTropes. Does it have anything about the themes of responsibility and duty in the series, or the Messianic archetype Frodo represents? Nope, it's about how Frodo and Sam were totally in love, y'all, no matter what Tolkien himself said. Not that their relationship isn't slashy, but don't you have anything more substantial than two short passages from a series that clocks in at over 1000 pages, both of which can be explained away in about five seconds by someone without slash goggles on?

This is why we can' have nice things.

-Jonn
mcity: (Default)

Morningwood - Best of Me

WITH


Morningwood - Best of Me (Daisy of Love Promo)

I actually prefer the DoL version. On the one hand, it's got Daisy. On the other, it does not have GRATUITOUS BISEXUALS LOL(tvtropes).

October 2012

S M T W T F S
  12 3456
78910111213
14151617181920
21 2223242526 27
28293031   

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 22nd, 2017 02:52 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios