@The_Ravenclaw again i wasn’t saying heroes should go around killing all the time.
i’m just saying that to “snoop to thier level”(BTW i think you mean stoop) is a flawed argument because killing an “innocent” civilian and killing a psychotic mass murderer are hardly the same thing.
the argument is particularly flawed when you consider that by that logic:beating up a criminal(which batman does constantly)who was beating up a civilian would be stooping to their level.
how many people die/get hurt in comics/shows/movies because the hero doesn’t want to get their hands dirty? should batman kill thugs and average bank robbers? no. of course not,but people like joker,two-face and black mask, should be taken down permanently.
1 Like
I tend to find it more frustrating when it’s something I agree with. It’s less about having a theme I disagree with, but more a matter of not executing it well within the narrative. It seems to pop out off nowhere and punch me in the mouth, or it slowly builds from miles away until it gently slaps you in the face.
1 Like
Exactly! It would be almost improbable for movies to have little to no romance
so at the very least it be different to see something OTHER than a M/F ;/
im that bored of seeing it that small and probably somewhat insignificant changes to some will at least give me some small level of satisfaction 
Hence~ My little escape here to COG
Long live the Imperium! Long live the Emperor!
1 Like
Whoo, tvtropes!
I like tropes/cliches if they are being made fun of. I mean, obviously every kind of plot (almost) has been done before. I like when a commonly done plot is shifted to a less-commonly done plot. Even though they’ve both been done before, you can juxtapose and satirize other cliches.
So, like in the show Firefly, it’s a Sci-Fi cowboy-Western with all of the standard cowboy/western tropes, but also a group of Sci-Fi tropes. Combining them together is awesome, and while other books and movies have done it (Star Wars) Firefly’s comedic tone really sets it apart. See Jaynestown.
Cliches that make me cringe:
- over-acting/emotionalizing in the style of Japanese anime.
- Annoying voices.
- John Malkovich speech.
- heroes relying solely on their wit
- skinny people being really strong (without supernatural explanation)
@AdamGoodTime Haha “Asian with a Katana” so true
@CitizenShawn I’m curious. Why do you dislike it when the heroes go about using brain over brawn? I’ve always enjoyed it. In fact, I feel like it is a breath of fresh air when faced with all the usual ‘punch it until it dies’ heroes that you often see.
Actually, let me add the “powered by willpower” cliche here. There are exceptions, like Gurren Lagann, but it is an immediate red flag when I hear that a protagonist’s power is fueled by emotion/willpower. It almost guarantees that the fights will be won via heroic resolve more often than not. I’m okay with it in small doses, especially in visual media, but it quickly gets old if the character just beats any baddy with the power of rage…then promptly forgives the bad guy once beaten. (fairytail)
Gurren Lagann as an exception? Why? Egregious example, I’d have thought…
@Havenstone Mainly because I think Gurren Lagann is meant to be over the top. It is one of those things where it breaks the rules so horribly that it becomes good again. Well, that’s its goal anyways. I mean, how else are we gonna get giant robots the size of super-clusters to fight each other?
-
Giant robots, I don’t get the appeal. I think it’s mainly when animated because I enjoyed the CoG Mecha game.
-
Overpowered protagonists. Struggle maketh the hero and all that. And as that chap in Dragon Age says. It’s your enemies that define you so if your enemies are weak what does that make you.
-
Bonding over dead parents. Why do the hero’s parents always have to be dead? That’s one of the things I like about Legend of Korra, her parents are around and her dad is even chief and helps her out sometimes.
2 Likes
Orphan protagonist. Nuff said.
Overpowered protagonists, particularly those with no significant flaws or weaknesses, who can regularly steamroller their way through their opponents with little effort and/or fear of failure. For me, such a protagonist tends to destroy any sense of tension in dangerous situations and severely hampers my ability to relate to their character.
A protagonist who is highly powerful and/or is highly skilled in a number of fields is fine in my book so long as they have their limits, and are shown to rely on means other than purely their own skill and power, e.g utilizing their allies, using strategy to turn circumstances in their favour, even (occasionally) just getting lucky.
I also agree with Aesop saves the day from @From_Beginnings, idealism by itself won’t win battles, and the protagonists shouldn’t always win simply by virtue of “being right”, at least not without having to pay a heavy price for victory if the odds are heavily stacked against them. This is more often the case in real life and makes the setting a lot more believable for me, I tend to enjoy the Pyrrhic Victory trope for this reason.
There’s one I can think of that really annoys me. The “Damsel in Distress” cliche used to be done to death, but now it’s been pretty much swept under the carpet and replaced by the far more irritating “Warrior Woman in a chain mail bikini who has to be a total bitch for no apparent reason” cliche.
I’m fine with seeing female characters that know how to fight, but for whatever reason, fictional women that can take care of themselves aren’t allowed to have a likable bone in their body. I’m talking about that female character who always pops up in fantasy games and films who’ll go, “I don’t need no man to protect me! I’m a strong, independent woman and I can look after myself!” … But then she gets attacked by a bunch of bandits or something and it turns out she does need a man to protect her after all. So, in jumps the hero and fights off all the bad guys to rescue her. After the battle’s over, he’ll kindly hold out his hand to help her up. Instead of saying thank you, the woman will get mad at the hero, push him away and yell, “I could’ve handled it myself!” … Of course she’ll always hook up with the guy in the end, but she’s still a bitch.
4 Likes
@Briar_Rose
lolololol. Yeah, those are painful.
All of the above for me – then again, any trope can be used poorly until it becomes a cliche. I think the general rule is “write smart.” If it’s been done before, consider how you can change it into something fresh.
By the way, this stuck out for me: @CitizenShawn, since when is “John Malkovich speech” a cliche? Are you saying you don’t like the actor? Not judging you or anything, I’m just bemused.
Now wait a second, what if it were to make us squirm with joy? Would that be accepted on this thread? Because that would be just the perfect thing to confuse every other person who enters the thread after me
yes Damsel in distress is pretty darn LAME :c
i particularly hate the screaming types omg if I had the money, so many of my tv’s would have large cracks in them, probably due to a remote thrown at it
thankfully, im able to restrain myself and change the channel
But yea screamers omg…girls are NOT that weak, hell i get just as irritated at girls irl who scream over small stuff or go hysterical! D:
please stop giving girls bad rep for being mindless hysterical screaming banshee princesses! Ugh
1 Like
@Xhandas_Antonidas, you only say that because you haven’t gotten a chance to rescue a damsel in distress.
1 Like
It is easy and often fun to hate on cliches/tropes, but probably a more useful activity is to try to understand them. Most exist for at good reason, besides an author’s laziness. If you figure out why writers keep turning to them, you may be able to use what’s good about them without incorporating what makes them annoying.
2 Likes