They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot Cleanup

It sort of does. There's no running thread, but several entries to describe historical events as if they were stories. I would say that one should count as an in-universe example.

Ukrainian Red Cross

Ah okay, if the entry can be reworded to note that the authors treat world history as a narrative and saw the war as a missed narrative opportunity that was set up, then I could see it counting as IU.

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

@mightymewtron

I see. Then how is TWAPGP different than Aborted Arc or What Happened to the Mouse?? (My impression was AA and WHTTM didn't count as the plots were used, but seen as poorly handled do to lacking resolution.)

The "plot elements" are what I meant by "hypothetical plot". If they are present but not used as a plot, is that not crossing into the fan idea for a plot line as opposed to an underused plot? If not what is that line? (Could have been included without changing/contradicting the existing plot?)

Thought: maybe "They Wasted A Perfectly Good Sub-plot" or "Wasted As A Sup-plot" is a more accurate name? It would filter out complaints about the main plots and better convey the plots have to be able to fit into the actual work.

I would think that strictly speaking, talking about missed opportunities regarding a plot element is just as much "crossing into the fan idea for a plot line" whether you're talking about the main plot or a sub-plot. Hence the proposal back in the TRS thread to stick this in Darth.

Ehhhhh... Sort of.

I'm the one who first proposed moving this to one of the subwikis, but as a much broader and less restrictive version of it.

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

The line is that there are often entries where people just focus on what they'd do with the concept and not the actual content of the work. "Bob gets a magical horse, but we never get to see him actually ride it" would be valid to me, but "Bob gets a magical horse when a magical unicorn would have been much cooler and given us more lore insight" is just fan wank.

Basically if fans see something and could reasonably assume it would have been a new story, regardless of importance, and then it doesn't really come back, I think it's valid. For example, if two characters start a friendship in one episode that doesn't ever come up again.

Since when was the problem that people complained about main plots instead of subplots? Main plots and subplots both attract speculative wish-fulfillment misuse.

Edited by mightymewtron on Apr 28th 2022 at 1:02:19 PM

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

This is a good example how muddy that plot/sub-plot line can get (YMMV.RWBY):

• Much of the narrative surrounding the Faunus and the racism they face is heavily pushed to the backburner during Volumes 6 and 7, with the entire White Fang having seemingly disintegrated after the Battle of Haven due to Adam's downfall and having no mentions in Volume 7 (which is set in Atlas, one of the most hostile nations to Faunus in the setting). While this is likely due to Miles admitting the writers felt it overly ambitious for the series (alongside it being one of the most often criticized plots in the entire series), that the reaction from the crew has been to reduce it to background dialogue was seen as a wasted chance to at least try to redeem the plot.
• In Volume 6, Oscar finally has enough of the abuse RWBY, Qrow and JNR have laid on him due to being Ozpin's vessel and sneaks away into the city of Argus. Oscar vanishes for an episode and comes back with new clothes, having gotten over his issues offscreen. That this was skipped over while Jaune got an extended scene to mourn Pyrrha was a particular point of contention for critics of Volume 6.

The White Fang plot-line was both a sub-plot and part of the main plot. It was a sub-plot in that it was formed out of the back-story of a main character (Blake), who defected from the White Fang in one of the show's prequel trailers. They're Fantastic Terrorists who started off as a peaceful equal rights organisation fighting Faunus Fantastic Racism, but transformed over time into a terrorist organisation. This was due to the leader of the Vale branch, Adam who was the partner Blake abandons in the prequel trailer: he's her Psycho Ex-Boyfriend to boot. But the Big Bad (Salem) recruits him and the organisation to help carry out the show's main plot (the destruction of the elite academies that train people to hunt the monsters on their Death World).

It was a terribly criticised storyline because the concepts it was trying to tackle (racism, equal rights) were too big for the show's budget. Plus, the main villain (Adam) had back story ties to another main character (Weiss). That's barely mentioned in the show, and only really revealed at the moment of his death (he was branded on the face like cattle with the logo of Weiss's family's company). It's also wrapped up as a part of the show before reaching the one region of the world that's most relevant (Weiss's home kingdom, the home of her family's company, and the place where Adam was abused and branded).

It had a lot of airtime and did contribute to a lot of character development for two main characters (Blake and Yang), but at the same time never achieved its potential (either for plot or Adam's character), badly handled the racism issues, and did absolutely nothing with the Weiss connection. The writers even acknowledged that they didn't think through the scale of this idea and it was too ambitious for them to handle properly.

So, how on earth would this be recorded as a valid entry? The current entry is just complaining that the plot ended before some people wanted, which is just complaining misuse. It is clearly a valid Audience Reaction that is worth capturing with a good write-up. But, given the dilemma over what TWAPGP really is, does it fit under that or something else? Would it be a main plot or a sub-plot, or is the distinction artificial?

The other example I listed is less complicated. It's very much main plot, but there is a sub-plot going on with the character (Oscar) facing Loss of Identity, and the Big Good that is Sharing a Body with him has an awful lot of baggage that really hits the kid (sometimes literally) in Volume 6. But, the focus isn't on him. It's on closing the Death Seeker storyline Jaune's had. So, the focus is on Jaune's reaction to the news, his treatment of Oscar (who then disappears) and then the emotional work-through Jaune goes through while searching for the missing Oscar. When he comes out the other side, everyone finds Oscar... who dealt with his own issues off-screen. However, what people wanted was to follow Oscar's emotional wrestling, (sometimes instead of Jaune's, sometimes in addition), given the importance of his issues to the main plot. Again, his personal storyline and the main plot are very blurred together and the distinction in this case may also be arbitrary. It doesn't seem to be a genuine TWAPGP example (complaining they didn't get what they wanted), but it might be something else.

I know these are just two examples from the same work, but I could find this issue in other works as well. I think the main plot/sub-plot idea is too artificial for this kind of AR item. I do think we need at least some of the structures that were mentioned in this post, although I'm in two minds about the idea of excluding point 2: external factors can be a reason for why a plot is introduced but then not utilised (or not utilised to its full potential). In a number of works that I can think of, that actually seems to be a very common factor... but I suppose the argument here is that we may be entering objective troping territory rather than AR (for example, an underutilised character or plot due to point 2 could just be an Executive Meddling entry instead).

The more I think about this (and the sister one), the more I find myself agreeing with nrjxll in thinking this isn't something unique... it's much more likely to fall under existing AR or even certain objective tropes, leaving things that are more likely to just be complaining to fall under these.

Edited to add: Apologies, this ended up being longer than I planned.

Edited by Wyldchyld on Apr 29th 2022 at 11:38:39 AM

If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.

Those entries read as critical but not complaining — the tone sounds pretty objective and descriptive. I don't know if this is really misuse since it describes why an interesting idea from the show was cut short in the eyes of many fans.

I don't see how the second entry is misuse at all because something being done offscreen rather than explored onscreen is still underplaying an element of the plot.

I think this is being overcomplicated a bit.

The subjective aspect to me is the part people seem to be against, which is disappointment, and frankly I would rather push some of the comparable tropes into YMMV (namely What Happened to the Mouse? which so often reads as the fans noticing something the writers dropped seemingly unintentionally, or something fans wanted to happen) than merge this into something objective.

Edited by mightymewtron on Apr 29th 2022 at 4:54:04 AM

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

To me the subjective part isn't a problem so much as I'm just having trouble identifying where it is, probably because the other tropes are objective.

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Thinking for an exercise to bring up They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot from Bleach, since I'm currently working on rewriting some stuff in that area anyway.

I think the 4th bullet has Speculative Troping and 6th+7th partially go into "but what if", but overall these sound like "major reveals that the series never mentions again".

Edited by Amonimus on Apr 29th 2022 at 12:07:13 PM

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup

That's pretty much my understanding - a good example is one that directly and logically flows from the content of the work, without introducing anything new.

Both entries frame their context in a misleading way; that's the problem:

• The racism entry uses "pushed to the backburner" to imply that the racism storyline is still unfolding, when it was unambiguously completed at the end of Volume 5 (confirmed again at the beginning of Volume 6). The titular team spending most of Volume 6 in the wilderness would have made any racism storyline impossible anyway, and one loose end (the at-large terrorist) was completed at the end of Volume 6 to complete the character arcs of the two main characters he was connected. Like I said, there is definitely a valid AR to be had about how Faunus racism and the terrorist leader were handled in the show, but pretending the storyline hasn't finished to complain that the post-storyline plots weren't the ones they wanted to see isn't the way to do it.
• Regarding the Oscar storyline, it's an anti-Jaune spin on the storyline that actually occurred (dealing with the Awful Truth the titular team learns earlier in the volume while in the wilderness). Is there a valid example to be had here? Absolutely. But the current entry needs a rewrite to explain that the issue is that a cliffhanger set up the idea that both Team JNPR and Oscar would be explored, only for us to discover that it's solely about Team JNPR and Oscar is being off-screened.

I'm not suggesting the entries be removed. I'm suggesting they're bad quality and need to be rewritten. My other point was your take-away message: that trying to split between main plots and sub-plots solely for the purpose of TWAPGP unnecessarily overcomplicates something that shouldn't be that complicated. Like WarJay, I also struggle with the YMMV vs objective troping relationship we have here... although I don't know how I feel about the idea of loosening it up if it goes to Darth.

---

My thoughts on the Bleach examples:

Edited by Wyldchyld on Apr 30th 2022 at 5:29:09 AM

If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.

So you'd say Hisagi is Aborted Arc rather than Wasted?

Ukrainian Red Cross

Does that actually discount it from being TWAPGP? TWAPGP doesn't need to imply the writers are doing a bad job (I know the title implies it but it's an outdated title either way). The fan discontent with an Aborted Arc is the focus and it still shows up here. There's no rule that meta issues prevent something from counting as TWAPGP.

Edited by mightymewtron on May 1st 2022 at 12:28:36 PM

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

This does come down to what the difference between AA and TWAPGP actually is.

Is TWAPGP just the fan reaction? I don't think so, based on the fact that the Sky High example looks reasonable, and was even identified as a good example in the TRS thread.

---

OK, so for those who haven't seen it, Sky High is set in a superhero school called Sky High. Will, the protagonist, is the son of the two greatest superheroes on Earth, but he himself has no superpowers at all. This gets him put in the school's sidekick track.

For about the first third of the movie, everyone dismisses Will's heroic potential due to his lack of superpowers (because apparently nobody in the creative team had ever heard of Batman). It's clearly setting up a message about how heroism is defined by one's morality, conviction, and willingness to do the right thing when it matters, and not by what one is actually capable of. To this end, it really looks like Will is going to be a Badass Normal who saves the day with intelligence, tenacity, and ingenuity... until he suddenly gets both his parents' powersets, essentially becoming Superboy.

---

Now, this isn't an Aborted Arc, because the writers always intended Will to be Superman rather than Batman; it's not like they set up a plot about him and then forgot about it. However, it does appear to fit in TWAPGP, because at least some people (myself included) feel that Will being the school Batman would have been a much more interesting movie, fit better with the themes, and kept him an underdog, which would have made his victories all the more impressive.

Based on this, TWAPGP is clearly a fan reaction, but I do think it covers a broader range than just dissatisfaction with an Aborted Arc.

Ukrainian Red Cross

Yeah, you captured my feelings exactly. And that example seems valid because, even though the writers didn't intend the arc to go that way, the initial writing suggests something that the audience assumes would be a more interesting movie. It's not pure wish fulfillment (i.e. "this is what I'd do with the most basic premise") so much as it's dashed expectations (i.e. "I was more interested when the plot was going in this direction" or "This element appeared only briefly but could have fit nicely into the greater plot").

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

Speaking of Aborted Arc, how can you tell without official conformation if it was meant to be a big thing with resolution as opposed to an ultimately unimportant detail fans just latched onto? That's seems needed to tell the difference between Aborted Arc (which I believe disqualifies TWAPGP as the plot was used but poorly) and What Happened to the Mouse? (intended to be unresolved as too minor to warrant such) or TWAPGP. Is What Happened to the Mouse? or Writer Cop Out similarly disqualified from TWAPGP because they're used but in a way that fans find unsatisfactory or can/does WHTTM count if it's something they think should have been a full plot?

So for my question here. TWAPGP requires it be something that could have been included from what was set up from the story without disrupting or contradicting the rest of the existing story or its intent (at least if runtime were no object). Thus "it should have done this instead" examples are misuse as fanfic ideas or complaints about handling as opposed to unused ideas?

So should Fan-Preferred Cut Content be exempt from TWAPGP as by definition it was never in the final product to be wasted?

Edited by Ferot_Dreadnaught on May 1st 2022 at 6:07:39 AM

The thing about Sky High is that being a Badass Normal superhero is never presented as an option. The one non-powered character who does something badass is revealed to have gotten superpowers at the end of the film. The only reason fans would assume that the film is setting up a "Will becomes Batman" storyline is because of their knowledge of superhero tropes.

It's complicated. The school and all the adult superheroes treat Will like he can never be a hero and relegate him to the sidekick course, which he ends up accepting and trying to do his best at alongside his ragtag new friend group. So the movie could've very well been setting it up for him to be the hero without gaining powers, because the aesop was still "anyone can be a hero". At the same time, you're right that there was never a moment where Will was like "I'm gonna be a superhero without powers so take that". It's not quite like, say, My Hero Academia, where Midoriya did attempt to be a powerless hero until All Might shattered that goal.

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Ideally, I would merge AA and WHTTM (or just cut the latter because it feels like an even bigger complaint magnet), but not every AA qualifies for TWAPGP (some arcs may be cut short without fans wanting them continued), and not every TWAPGP qualifies for AA (not every interesting plot element is intended to be a story arc, despite the importance that people have been projecting onto main plot vs subplot).

That's how I see it. To put it into simple terms: if you could watch the work and expect that particular plot element to be relevant based on what you know about the genre or the work so far, even if you keep watching and see that it does not go that way, then it would often count as an example. But if it's just something you wrote into the work based on what you'd do with the basic concept, then I don't think it would count.

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

The other thing is that a "Will becomes Batman" storyline wouldn't simply be a matter of allocating more time to him training as a sidekick. It would require a major plot point (him getting superpowers) to not happen. That's why I don't really consider it an example of TWAPGP. To me it feels like "I wish this were different".

Edited by RustBeard on May 1st 2022 at 7:01:06 AM

I want to bring up two examples from the YMMV page of My Hero Academia.

• More than a few fans have stated they wished that Midoriya had never gained powers and that the series was about him becoming a hero despite his lack of a Quirk. Horikoshi stated that this was indeed the original plan for the manga, but it was scrapped because it would be too unrealistic for him to keep fighting enemies with increasingly outlandish and overpowered Quirks, which All Might explains to him at the beginning of the manga.
• The Paranormal Liberation War Arc would have been a potentially good opportunity to show a student dying in the line of duty as a way of underscoring the dangers of hero work. Despite that, while several students are injured and Midnight, a teacher at U.A. is among the dead, all the students make it out of the war alive.

The problem with the first is that it's just wanting an entirely different plot from what the series actually is. Izuku isn't a hero like say, Batman, this is just what the story of the series is. And the narrative doesn't tease this idea so it's not even an idea the series itself contains.

As for the second point I think it similarly suffers from the "I want a different story" issue. And technically this is asking for a redundant thing. The series already underscore the actual dangers of hero work. Heroes in the series have died before, there's a guy who's literally called the "Hero Killer" and other Villains have similarly killed heroes. Even discounting actual death the series presents even the top pros as having been maimed or injured in the line of duty. This idea is already iterated in the narrative, the example even brings up how there's heroes among the dead.

So overall I think these two examples are examples of misuse. Any thoughts about this?

\#2 does look like it's just a fanfic idea.

\#1... hmm. It does sound like that was the original intention, but it was later abandoned.

That and Sky High do bring up an issue that this trope pretty much is about people wanting completely different plots. If this trope is going to stay, then where do we draw the line? I think the spirit of the trope is that the story seems to be going in one direction, only to then go in a different, less interesting direction. This would cover Will and Izuka apparently being set up as badass normals only to get superpowers after all, but exclude the lack of students dying.

Yes, obviously, "more interesting" is subjective. Nobody is suggesting this trope is objective.

Edited by VampireBuddha on May 2nd 2022 at 6:54:04 PM

Ukrainian Red Cross

I think people are shying away from the reality that this is an item about fans disagreeing with the work's direction, and that's okay, as long as the examples don't have a bitchy tone.

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

Bringing up the following exampkes from Friends:

• The Mike/Phoebe/David arc, which could have given a much longer story with Phoebe genuinely torn between the two. Instead it's passed off in one episode (and not even the finale). This plot is introduced, developed and concluded, and is therefore not wasted
• The whole Chandler/Kathy arc. While early on it is shown that the two have a lot in common and clearly have strong feelings for each other, once she breaks up with Joey and he tells them he's okay with the relationship, things go downhill. For the rest of their relationship, Kathy is mostly only mentioned with her only appearing in two more episodes, neither of which she plays a very large role. It all ends when Chandler accuses her of cheating on him, only for her to go and do just that. A lot of fans weren't pleased with this and thought it was too obvious of a way to end Kathy's storyline. Complaining that the plot didn't go the way fans wanted
• Chandler's strained relationship with his parents and his background had a lot of good material, especially his mother who was a famous, erotic writer and his teen years at boarding school. However his backstory was never delved into much and his parents only appeared in 2 episodes. And even when Chandler was forced to confront his strained relationship with his father in Season 7, the focus was entirely on Chandler's embarrassment with his father's sexuality, which is not treated particularly seriously and leads to many jokes that appear rather homophobic and transphobic in retrospect. Meanwhile, the Parental Neglect and borderline abuse Chandler suffered during his childhood, which likely would have made for better drama, is not even mentioned. More complaining that the plot didn't go a certain way
• Lisa Kudrow got in a lot of good acting with Phoebe's real family, but as soon as the father appeared (with a scene that ended with Phoebe still being uncomfortable around him) in season five they dropped the plot and any more chances to work through her past issues. Similarly, her biological mother only showed up in three episodes before disappearing entirely, with the suggestion that Phoebe is spending time with her offscreen. This one can be kept
• In early season six (when characters were starting to be flanderized), Monica asked Chandler once if he was scared of her and actually sounded concerned. While understandable that they didn't want more drama after Ross/Rachel, it could have least been a cue to dial the Control Freak personality back. Complaining
• Ben stops appearing before Emma is born and the viewers never get to see how having a half-sister will affect Ben's relationship with his father. Just a Plot Hole due to Ben being Put on a Bus
• Considering how the three Green daughters are played by Jennifer Aniston, Reese Witherspoon, and Christina Applegate, it's actually somewhat surprising that there was never at least one time in the series where all three are on screen together for some sort of family bonding episode. Though there supposed is a good reason for this: Jennifer Aniston and Reese Witherspoon may have had a lot of tension on set, though that was ultimately debunked by both actresses. Looks like a fanfic idea + Speculative Troping
• In "TOW The Ultimate Fighting Championship", Monica and the guys are explaining UFC to Rachel and Phoebe. I have no idea what this is talking about
  Monica: It's like wrestling.
  Phoebe: (intrigued) Oh!
  Monica: But without the costumes.
  Phoebe: (disappointed) Oh.
• The show never did anything with the "Phoebe-as-closet-wrestling-fan" idea.(Odd, given the show's New York City setting and that the Monday Night Wars were big during the same time, and how NBC owns the USA Network, which airs WWE Raw.) That said, they did a very good job with the "Friend-who-acts-more-sophisticated-than-she-really-is" card in "TOW The Embryos," where it was revealed that while Rachel says her favorite movie is the Oscar-winning Dangerous Liaisons, her actual favorite movie is the low comedy Weekend at Bernie's. Again, what is this one even talking about?
• Season 3's episode, "The One With Frank Jr," showed that Joey had a knack for carpentry and house construction, such as constructing an entertainment unit for his apartment, or retiling Monica's bathroom floor. This could have been a way to fit in a side-job for Joey to make up for his struggles throughout the series at becoming an actor, yet it's never brought up again. Except the episode shows Joey is incredibly incompetent as a carpenter, thus making this plot not viable
• Some view it as a missed opportunity that the show didn't play around with the idea of Chandler getting himself stuck in Yemen just to avoid Janice. Not one scene, or even a brief moment, of his adventure in Yemen. The most you get is a later reference when Janice believes that Chandler is still in Yemen during the episode that she dated Ross. Okay, I guess

Any opinions?

Edited by TantaMonty on May 3rd 2022 at 8:52:43 AM