|
I saw that and pictured Chun Li stopping in the middle of a fight to weigh the pros and cons of firing more Kikokens, while Ryu or somebody is about to unleash a 123-hit combo. And I love the passage about the "internal smirk." Is it like that joke that sometimes turns up in TV and movies where a character's narrating, another character responds, and the narrator realizes he's been speaking out loud the whole time? "Why are you smirking at me?" "Crap, you can see it?"
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
Antivehicular posted:Lights up on Chun Li, looking serious and dignified, seated in an airy and flower-arrangement-filled living room. "Hi, I'm Chun Li." Subtitle: CHUN LI (Street Fighter, Street Fighter II) "Fighting opponents is easy for me, but when I was diagnosed with breast cancer, I learned that fighting sickness was hard. I'm here to talk to you today about breast cancer awareness and what you can do to help in your community..."
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:71 down, 49929 to go. Goddammit, Cancer PSAs By Fighting Game Characters Are The Ties That Bind Us is going to be a hit on Smashwords!
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 22:31
|
|
|
Some more RP stuff. The RP forum is incredible.quote:So May was a kind of coach to the... Pokémon in their fighting tournaments, I realized, more of a Mickey and Rocky relationship than some kind of slave driver. quote:May's about to sink into the carpet when she sees Sixes grinning. It's the grin that saves her from feeling guilty, for now. A lot's changed about Sixes' face in the past year, but the grin is a real constant. It reminds her that no matter how much she's been wrong about Sixes in the past, or how much she needs her help now, or how much of a hypocrite she is because of all this, the Trope-tan is still kind of a massive bitch. quote:And with that the blue haired loli marched off to mount a guard on the front of the mansion And then they sing an anime song: quote:-Champloo gets deep into his cooking, mixing bowls, pouring pans, and doing martial arts backflips over the counter with ease. He soon begins singing as the last pan enters the oven.-
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 22:43
|
|
|
So I decided to see what tropers had to say about the US shutdown, and this caught my eye: ...Is anyone surprised by this? Anyone at all?   It’s almost redundant to put a  here, isn’t it? "Slimdown". So he's a Fox News fan too. Why is it that there’s such an overlap between militaristic sci-fi and right-wing weirdoes? Maybe the final version of Endless Conflict will have a mustache-twirling, cackling villain boasting about his diabolical scheme to create an affordable healthcare system, before being gunned down by some sort of Anime Reagan.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 22:54
|
|
|
I think that being a militaristic right-wing guy makes you more likely to want to write scifi with that ideological bent. I don't mean they do it on purpose, either, but your ideology tends to seep into your works whether intentionally or no.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 23:00
|
|
|
Asgerd posted:Why is it that there’s such an overlap between militaristic sci-fi and right-wing weirdoes? Maybe the final version of Endless Conflict will have a mustache-twirling, cackling villain boasting about his diabolical scheme to create an affordable healthcare system, before being gunned down by some sort of Anime Reagan. Because they can wank over justified military might and dire circumstances? Also they are massive dorks so of course they want to write sci-fi. You can't have marines in fantasy settings so do sci-fi marines instead. I was going to make some comment about how it's ironic to see the anime avatar next to lovely right-wing politics until I remembered, no, that's not ironic, that's exactly what I'd expect. "The young, poor and uninsured" who vote Republican is 
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 23:04
|
|
|
I forgot Major "Eye'm the cutest!" Tom.  Worst word to hear ever. Worse than "cummies".
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 23:10
|
|
|
Well most of the states where Republicans have a deathgrip are the poorest shitholes in the country, if I recall, so while ironic as hell (and definitely people voting against their own interests) it's hardly a surprise. Besides, this is the worthless fuckup who wants to kill everything not American and thinks Russia will invade through Alaska any minute now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 23:11
|
|
|
ETA: ^^ That's correct. ^^ With the possible exception of Texas, AKA the American Saudi Arabia. See also Red State Socialism. Asgerd posted:Why is it that there’s such an overlap between militaristic sci-fi and right-wing weirdoes? Maybe the final version of Endless Conflict will have a mustache-twirling, cackling villain boasting about his diabolical scheme to create an affordable healthcare system, before being gunned down by some sort of Anime Reagan. darthbob88 fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Oct 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 23:30
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Worst word to hear ever. Worse than "cummies".
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 23:32
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:I actually think that this is a fundamental problem with NaNoWriMo. As much as I appreciate the sentiment, I think it teaches the wrong lessons. What the poo poo is a nanowrimo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 23:49
|
|
|
National Novel Writing Month. It's an excuse to write about 50,000 words without having to worry about anything you'd expect someone to usually worry about when writing things, like editting. Or quality. Most people just call it November though. Lotus Aura fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Oct 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:What the poo poo is a nanowrimo. It's when a bunch of lovely writers want to write 50k words by the end of the month. To be clear there is no other goal. It's just a wordcount contest, so you have people posting 'how can I pad my wordcount to get to my daily quota?!' and other terrible, terrible, things. Despite what people will say this isn't an exercise in improving as writers, this is a dick waving "I WROTE FIFTY THOUSAND WORDS" thing where the question 'were any of them any good?' is met with 'I wrote fifty thousand of them though'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 23:53
|
|
|
Flesnolk posted:Besides, this is the worthless fuckup who wants to kill everything not American and thinks Russia will invade through Alaska any minute now. Using a giant railway bridge, wasn't it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 00:02
|
|
|
Asgerd posted:Why is it that there’s such an overlap between militaristic sci-fi and right-wing weirdoes? Maybe the final version of Endless Conflict will have a mustache-twirling, cackling villain boasting about his diabolical scheme to create an affordable healthcare system, before being gunned down by some sort of Anime Reagan. This has been done by Patron Saint of the Right Ayn Rand. You're supposed to think Dagny is the loving hero in that scene. And as far as I've seen the overlap comes from the fact that sci-fi lets you invent the justification for your prejudices. Say I want to write a story where the Mexicans take over the US and it leads to there being no jobs. And a literal death panel where if saving you isn't considered prudent a government agent shoots you on the spot. And feminism has lead to massive population decline. Sci-fi's inventive nature lets me create this dystopia to prove my point. And when you call me out for having lovely opinions and being a bigot I can say "Hey, man, that's just how things work in that universe. It's a fantasy so why are you mad?" in an attempt to obfuscate the fact that I invented that world for the sole purpose of venting my hypothetical prejudices. You don't see progressives do it too but it's not really a thing. Probably because if I want to write about an upper class conspiracy to tank the vote along race lines I can just base my story within the last 10 years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 01:11
|
|
|
I've heard that fantasy authors are generally more liberal while science-fiction writers tend to be more conservative, but I've not seen any particular evidence for either assertion myself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 01:46
|
|
|
Metal Loaf posted:I've heard that fantasy authors are generally more liberal while science-fiction writers tend to be more conservative, but I've not seen any particular evidence for either assertion myself. J.K. Rowling is a committed socialist, if that helps.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 01:48
|
|
|
I wouldn't say that's entirely true, and indeed much of New Wave sci fi was unabashedly, hugely liberal. (And some fantasy is hugely conservative; hi there, Robert Asprin!) Sci fi definitely tends to attract people with weird political views, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 01:59
|
|
|
Metal Loaf posted:I've heard that fantasy authors are generally more liberal while science-fiction writers tend to be more conservative, but I've not seen any particular evidence for either assertion myself. Not always. Charles Stross is a science fiction writer who is incredibly scathing of right-wing politics and a lot of his futures envision a more free and open society, to the point where he has some far-future stuff where energy-to-matter machines have eliminated want and also most forms of government on Earth. Terry Goodkind, a fantasy author, is also a raging objectivist and in his "Sword of Truth" series of books, he has the protagonist butcher a bunch of pacifist protesters who were "armed only with their hatred for moral clarity." There's also a part with an evil chicken, but the less said about that the better. Honestly it might be a case where the fantasy authors (with some exceptions, like Goodkind) can hide their conservative leanings more easily when they're writing about kings and wars. But from my experience, most authors in general tend to be kind of liberal in their outlook.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 02:05
|
|
|
Dragonatrix posted:National Novel Writing Month. It's an excuse to write about 50,000 words without having to worry about anything you'd expect someone to usually worry about when writing things, like editting. Or quality. Way back in the day I remember some users trying to organize December as the month where you edit your manuscripts. It didn't last. I bet only like, 3 people in the entire project even look back at their manuscript when November is over. Guess they're all just Brilliant but Lazy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 02:05
|
|
|
Razorwired posted:And as far as I've seen the overlap comes from the fact that sci-fi lets you invent the justification for your prejudices. Say I want to write a story where the Mexicans take over the US and it leads to there being no jobs. And a literal death panel where if saving you isn't considered prudent a government agent shoots you on the spot. And feminism has lead to massive population decline. Sci-fi's inventive nature lets me create this dystopia to prove my point. And when you call me out for having lovely opinions and being a bigot I can say "Hey, man, that's just how things work in that universe. It's a fantasy so why are you mad?" in an attempt to obfuscate the fact that I invented that world for the sole purpose of venting my hypothetical prejudices. TVTropes in general has a really, really hard time accepting the concept that fictional works were created by people for reasons, not naturally-occurring worlds that we just can't judge, maaaan. I know it came up a lot during the discussions of various garbage pedophile stuff, where the "she's really 8000 years old" or whatever defense got thrown around a ton without anyone acknowledging the fact that someone wrote and designed the character, and hmm, why would someone make their 8000-year-old kitsune succubus love interest character look like a 7-year-old?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 02:08
|
|
|
Antivehicular posted:TVTropes in general has a really, really hard time accepting the concept that fictional works were created by people for reasons, not naturally-occurring worlds that we just can't judge, maaaan. This is a problem they inherited from Wikipedia, although it manifests differently there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 02:31
|
|
|
It's weirder than just the idea that a fictional work is a world divorced from the author. They've got a whole fuckload of tropes about authors. Author Existence Failure (when an author dies), Creator Breakdown (when an author's personal troubles affect their work), Writer On Board (when a writer changes established traits to make a point), et cetera. The most telling, though, is Word of God. It's their name for when an author/creator says something to be taken as canon. As an easy example, J. K. Rowling's reveal that Dumbledore was gay was Word of God. To them, writers are like gods, separate from but lording power over the worlds they create. Djeser fucked around with this message at 02:54 on Oct 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 02:51
|
|
|
It's what makes people like Orson Scott Card so hard to defend. Ender's Game might be a decent science fiction book, but the man himself is abhorrent, and the more you know about his political and religious views, the more it colors his writing. The less you know about Card, the easier it is to like his books. But hear about his homophobia or creepy political views, and it becomes harder to accept certain things in his stories.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 02:54
|
|
|
The impression that TV Tropes gives is that all fiction, if not all reality, is constructed from tropes like Lego blocks; that when Chekov puts a gun above a fireplace, it's not because he might do something with it later or because he doesn't want the audience to think "Where'd he get that gun?" It's because he had an extra Chekov's Gun lying around and decided to snap it on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 03:44
|
|
|
Djeser posted:It's weirder than just the idea that a fictional work is a world divorced from the author. They've got a whole fuckload of tropes about authors. Author Existence Failure (when an author dies), Creator Breakdown (when an author's personal troubles affect their work), Writer On Board (when a writer changes established traits to make a point), et cetera. The most telling, though, is Word of God. It's their name for when an author/creator says something to be taken as canon. As an easy example, J. K. Rowling's reveal that Dumbledore was gay was Word of God. Now I'm sure that's true for the worst tropers, but I think you're over-exaggerating. When I used to read the site before I knew about the forums, those pages about authors were mostly a collection of trivia and fun behind-the-scenes stuff in one convenient location. Kinda like a director's commentary on a DVD, it was kinda insightful for when you want to learn a little more about the story you just watched. It's the same thing with the Word of God page. The Word of God page exists because it's still trivia about stories, but with a bit more impact. The example you gave of J.K. Rowling saying that Dumbledore was gay is pretty interesting to me as a person who's read the Harry Potter books because there's hardly anything in the books to imply that, but apparently J.K. Rowling was writing that character with that fact in mind. I know you really want to dig into tropers very hard, but you really shouldn't be so surprised that pages about background info for stories exists. Despite what Fast Eddy says, the site is still treated by the majority of users as a trivia site.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 03:46
|
|
|
EagerSleeper posted:I know you really want to dig into tropers very hard, but you really shouldn't be so surprised that pages about background info for stories exists. Despite what Fast Eddy says, the site is still treated by the majority of users as a trivia site. A trivia site where said trivia is very rarely attributed or sourced. So a useless trivia site where anyone can put any dumb misquote or tossed-around fallacy as fact. Also, organization of said trivia is so haphazard and confusing that you'd have to be in on troper lingo and in-jokes to navigate it. Those users are better off going to imdb for trivia, let's be honest.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 04:24
|
|
|
There's a lot of unsourced and blatantly untrue stuff in articles that are nigh-impossible to get removed because of the way the site works. The site isn't even good for that sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 04:29
|
|
|
Antivehicular posted:TVTropes in general has a really, really hard time accepting the concept that fictional works were created by people for reasons, not naturally-occurring worlds that we just can't judge, maaaan. I know it came up a lot during the discussions of various garbage pedophile stuff, where the "she's really 8000 years old" or whatever defense got thrown around a ton without anyone acknowledging the fact that someone wrote and designed the character, and hmm, why would someone make their 8000-year-old kitsune succubus love interest character look like a 7-year-old? Well, death of the author is a valid way to look at works, though not everyone accepts it -- but that's different from saying that a loli character is ok because they're really 8000 and who would ever question that. In fact, it'd be the opposite, since the author would probably defend the work and give that explanation, and you'd ignore that to examine the work and its hosed up sexuality.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 04:37
|
|
|
Jay O posted:A trivia site where said trivia is very rarely attributed or sourced. So a useless trivia site where anyone can put any dumb misquote or tossed-around fallacy as fact. Also, organization of said trivia is so haphazard and confusing that you'd have to be in on troper lingo and in-jokes to navigate it. Oh hey, Jay O. Didnt realize you had an account here. Like your video series. Anywho, like everything else on the site, the trivia is subject to the "no such thing as notability" clause, which gives the users free reign to add whatever they like without backing anything up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 04:38
|
|
|
Fuego Fish posted:Not always. Charles Stross is a science fiction writer who is incredibly scathing of right-wing politics and a lot of his futures envision a more free and open society, to the point where he has some far-future stuff where energy-to-matter machines have eliminated want and also most forms of government on Earth. Oh, yeah, no doubt about it. Perhaps it might be more accurate to suggest that military SF writers are probably more conservative (David Weber, John Ringo, maybe Eric Flint) but, again, I can't really comment because I've not actually read any of their stuff (started The Lord of the Isles once, which is Drake's fantasy series, but couldn't really get into to it). Anyway, no need to derail it into sci-fi/fantasty author chat, is there?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 11:33
|
|
|
crowfeathers posted:Well, death of the author is a valid way to look at works, though not everyone accepts it -- but that's different from saying that a loli character is ok because they're really 8000 and who would ever question that. In fact, it'd be the opposite, since the author would probably defend the work and give that explanation, and you'd ignore that to examine the work and its hosed up sexuality. Yeah, to emphasize, I'm not talking about Death of the Author here -- I'm not talking about disregarding the creator, I'm talking about acting as if fictional works aren't even created, that all fiction is a lens on a naturally-occurring real world that can only be observed. Some of these guys defend their interest in those goddamn millennia-old prepubescents in the same way that a sane person might defend dating a young-looking twentysomething, as if the characters were real people with feelings that deserve consideration, and I believe I'm using technical literary-analysis terminology when I say that that poo poo be cray.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 11:42
|
|
|
This might be  and it's not paedophilia or anything but I have time and people were just talking about this.What I generally don't like about their love of "Word of God" is that to a lot of Tropers, it seems to nullify any legitimate discussion or criticism you might have about something. An example I remember from the previous thread relates to Night of the Living Dead (which I can't find now and I can say that the main Word of God page isn't really very interesting to boot): the ending to the film involves the needless shooting of a black man, an action which George A. Romero apparently denied being a direct comment on racism (there are frequent anecdotes repeated by fans stating that the black character in question played by Duane Jones wasn't written as black, etc.). This was stated on TV Tropes with the sort of  you'd expect attached, without any sort of discussion as to why people would come to this conclusion in the first place. Night of the Living Dead is about society in free-fall, people being unwilling to cooperate with one another because of their pride and prejudices, even at a time when they all need each other's help. Regardless of what "the author" might say (the author being a particularly tricky concept when it comes to cinema, even for a low-scale project like Living Dead), reaching the initial reading is entirely feasible.Wikipedia posted:While George Romero denies he hired Duane Jones simply because he was black, reviewer Mark Deming notes that "the grim fate of Duane Jones, the sole heroic figure and only African-American, had added resonance with the assassinations of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X fresh in the minds of most Americans".[6][69] Stein adds, "In this first-ever subversive horror movie, the resourceful black hero survives the zombies only to be killed by a redneck posse".[67] The deaths of Ben, Barbra and the supporting cast offered audiences an uncomfortable, nihilistic glimpse unusual for the genre.[70] Those dumb critics!! There was also a lot of talk related to The Dark Knight Rises in this category. Is the film left-wing or right-wing? It's a sticky debate and there are decent points on both sides, albeit amidst some truly awful ones (in brief I'd likely say that the themes of vigilantism and slightly satirical images veer in a more conservative direction but I haven't studied the film in-depth at all). TV Tropes' verdict seems to be that we're all idiots because the authors say otherwise, with some good old Wiki-editing-styled inconsistencies. TV Tropes posted:What Do You Mean, It's Not Political?: This helps demonstrate how difficult it is to discuss cinema in terms of authorship. While proper academics and critics are very aware of this, I somehow doubt academic resource TV Tropes is. Again, I'm irritated at all the smugness lingering here, directed at people reading into clear prompts in the film. Yes, there are interventions made on A Tale of Two Cities and aspects of The French Revolution (it's been said before, but I like how a historical period is treated as though it were fiction), but like any work it is primarily a product of its own time, which is why the references go off in that direction and a feeling of disillusionment towards capitalism definitely existed before the Occupy movement. You're not necessarily "a dumb liberal/conservative" for interpreting these ideas in a work of fiction - even if it is a superhero movie that the Internet feels the need to "defend" from both leaky and legitimate criticism at every possibility - you're merely indulging in a classic human pastime of thinking about stuff. What's so bad about that? It might seem like a hyperbole when people here say that TV Tropes sucks all the life out of fiction with all its dry categorisation, apoliticisation and disdain for any sort of criticism... but it's definitely there and I feel like it's a problem when it walks around all high and mighty as one big guidebook to the complex, often subjective, workings of art.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 13:21
|
|
|
Because for the most part people in that discussion don't want to think or discuss. They just want to say "HAH the bad guy was a Republican/Democrat, that showed em ". They don't want to discuss and think about the ramifications of actions, the idea that the bad guy could have valid points, or the good guy being flawed even if he does something you agree with. They just wanna go "Heh, showed those OWS/Republican idiots." Also it was super obvious it was based on A Tale of Two Cities, there were loving citizen courts and the takeover of nobles' homes and poo poo, that's not a thing that happened in any American protest, that's from the French Revolution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
Lots of revolutions and movements have used French revolutionary rhetoric, and I remember at the time thinking it was "obviously" about the Occupy movement because of the things the villain said and did -- and it really pissed me off, actually. Of course, since the movie was made before the movement took off I was probably wrong  but there's definitely plenty of popular movements incorporated into that film and basically made out to be a lie. Sorry, I mean Word of God nothing questionable here. One of the first things you learn in film studies classes is that you can't just cite the author of a work not just because he might be subconsciously influenced by current events but also because sometimes people just lie.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 16:06
|
|
|
By that exact same token if we reduce OWS down to 'poor people mad about rich people' then yea I guess it works but so does literally every revolution ever?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 16:21
|
|
|
A lot of the confusion may also be because David Goyer is an overt fascist and tends to cram tons of unpleasant authoritarian/right-wing ideology into everything he writes. See also Man of Steel where immigrants are literally portrayed as an invading army who kill the earth with their very presence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 22:07
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:A lot of the confusion may also be because David Goyer is an overt fascist and tends to cram tons of unpleasant authoritarian/right-wing ideology into everything he writes. Surely not everything; I don't think there was any of that in JSA (then again, I can't for the life of me suss out what he actually contributed to that series, since it seems like Robinson and then Johns did most of the actual writing and came up with most of the ideas).
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2013 00:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
Oxxidation posted:A lot of the confusion may also be because David Goyer is an overt fascist and tends to cram tons of unpleasant authoritarian/right-wing ideology into everything he writes. It takes a lot of mental gymnastics to get that message from the movie man. Also you may not understand what 'overt fascism' is?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2013 00:50
|
|