Follow TV Tropes

Following

Misused: Opening A Can Of Clones

Go To

To-do list:

  • Rename Opening a Can of Clones to No Permanence No Stakes, redefine as "The audience criticizes and/or loses interest in a story on the grounds that the purported stakes of the conflict are undercut by other story elements in ways that make the stakes appear less consequential (e.g. less severe and/or lasting) than intended", and index as YMMV.
    • Rewrite the description to match the revised definition, then move it to the new name and index as YMMV.
    • Clean up on-page examples.
    • Clean up wicks.

    Original post 
So, this trope has two different problems. First, Opening a Can of Clones is frequently misused for a character creating a bunch of clones of themselves or something similar, despite that not being close to the definition. Second, the actual trope is defined as objective despite describing an Audience Reaction — that being the audience no longer feeling there are actual stakes in a story due to the introduction of elements that can undo any consequences, such as clones, Time Travel, resurrection, or alternate universes.

Opening A Check Of Wicks results:

  • 18/50 (36%) described subjective judgements/audience reactions towards a work.
  • 23/50 (46%) took the "clones" part literally and described it as anything to do with a character having a lot of clones.
  • 9/50 (18%) were ZCEs.

Possible Solutions: This should be YMMV and renamed to something like "No Real Consequences Equals No Stakes" (clunky title, will try to come up with something better).

Wick check:

On this page, we will be doing a wick check for Opening a Can of Clones.

Why? Two reasons. First, Opening A Can Of Clones is frequently misused for a character creating a bunch of clones of themselves or something similar, despite that not being close to the definition. Second, the actual trope is defined as objective despite describing an Audience Reaction — that being the audience no longer feeling there are actual stakes in a story due to the introduction of elements that can undo any consequences, such as clones, Time Travel, resurrection, or alternate universes. As such, this should be YMMV and renamed to something like "No Real Consequences Equals No Stakes" (clunky title, will try to come up with something better).

Wicks checked: 50/50

    open/close all folders 

    Reads as Subjective Judgement (13/50) 
  1. Franchise.Metroid: Characters or creatures believed killed off in previous games commonly reappear as clones, robotic duplicates, X-Parasite doppelgangers, etc. (and in the case of Ridley, all of the above). This makes it almost impossible to truly believe that these characters are gone for good, and when some characters are revealed to survive (for example Kraid in Dread), there is a lot of speculation about whether it's the real character, a clone, or some other type of copy. There are even numerous theories that Samus herself is a clone, particularly following the events of Fusion.
  2. WebAnimation.Overly Sarcastic Productions: Though not mentioned by name, this is a major point of their Detail Diatribe on The Multiverse. It doesn't matter if a writer handles a time-travel or universe-altering plot well the first time; by introducing an in-canon Reset Button, the audience now knows that anything they're invested in can be undone whenever a later writer feels like it, which can be a major blow to their enjoyment of the franchise.
  3. Franchise Original Sin.Terminator: According to Word of God, the Terminator saga was always supposed to take place in a changeable timeline, and it was always supposed to climax with the heroes successfully stopping the birth of Skynet and rewriting history. Unfortunately, budget constraints forced James Cameron to save that spectacular climax for the sequel, with the original instead ending with a Stable Time Loop implying that John Connor's birth and the rise of Skynet were both inevitable. So when the heroes actually did seemingly stop Judgement Day, it made it look like the movies just had inconsistent rules regarding time travel. But it was easy to forgive that, partly because the heroes' victory at Cyberdyne made for a great Grand Finale, and partly because the idea of Kyle and Sarah being destined to conceive humanity's savior made for a great love story—even if those two plot points seemed to contradict each other. Many fans were unhappy when Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines claimed that Judgement Day really was inevitable all along, as not only was that idea not planned from the beginning, it also undid T2's ending. Terminator: Dark Fate also kept the idea of it being inevitable, but ignored all except the first two films. Skynet was never created, so the inevitable Robot War instead came in the form of a new artificial intelligence named Legion. Fans didn't like this twist, either, feeling that repeating the same Bad Future except with new characters didn't make the beloved ending to the second film seem any less pointless. Worse, the constant retconning as a result of the series' reliance on time-travel tropes has shattered almost any and all stakes the films used to have, as it becomes increasingly difficult to care about anything that happens in a story when there is no guarantee that any future plot points will be permanent.
  4. PlayingWith.Cessation Of Existence: Enforced: "If we can't let characters stay dead, we'll be Opening a Can of Clones. Or, worse, we could succumb to The Chris Carter Effect, what with the Big Bad's reincarnations. We need some way for characters to be Killed Off for Real."
  5. Quotes.Expendable Alternate Universe:
    The problem with these alternate universe/divergent timeline tropes that Nomura is obsessed with is that, unless you're a very clever writer [...], it's incredibly easy to make your characters feel like they're not special. It's incredibly easy to make them feel expendable. I think this fatal side effect of these tropes is the core reason why a lot of people hate this ending. For instance, Cloud Strife is no longer the Cloud Strife; he's just a Cloud Strife. I don't care about what happens to this dude because [the game] told me he's an alternate universe doppelganger. I don't care what happens to any of these people now.
  6. Unexpected Reactions to This Index: You've introduced Doppelgangers, and now dramatic scenes have no impact because there's a built-in Reset Button.
  7. YMMV.Original Sin: He's Just Hiding: Not everyone bought that Nick Fury is really dead, based on his use and abuse of Life Model Decoys in the past. These fans take "his" immunity to the secret bomb as evidence that it's not really him. Ultimately, this is proven correct.
  8. YMMV.Star Wars Rebels: The Season 4 episode "A World Between Worlds" is possibly the most divisive episode in the show if not the franchise. People either love the episode for resolving Ahsoka's ambiguous fate, bringing Palpatine in to the show, and expanding the franchise's lore. Detractors however feel that Ahsoka should've died in her fight against Vader, feeling that bringing her back through such a convoluted method turns her into a Creator's Pet. Detractors also feel that bringing time travel into the mythos will lead to the Can of Clones trope and will inevitably result in the franchise's lore rules being broken.
  9. ComicBook.Nick Fury: The LM Ds (Life Model Decoys) make his deaths less than believable.
  10. Quotes.One More Day:
    Stan's synopsis for the Green Goblin had a movie crew, on location, finding an Egyptian-like sarcophagus. Inside was an ancient, mythological demon, the Green Goblin. He naturally came to life. On my own, I changed Stan's mythological demon into a human villain...I rejected Stan's idea...A mythological demon made the whole Peter Parker/Spider-Man world a place where nothing is metaphysically impossible.
    Steve Ditko, co-creator of Spider-Man, (THE COMICS v12 #7 [2001] - "A Mini-History Part 1 -"The Green Goblin"), describing the origins of the Green Goblin and why magical concepts were antithetical to Spider-Man's story.
  11. Crying Wolf: On a similar note, see Opening a Can of Clones for when this situation extends to an author and their audience, where viewers become unable to take the work at face-value because of certain story decisions made by the writer.
  12. Quotes.Story Breaker Power:
    "[Force Healing] is a big plot hole because of the fact that it completely ruins death. There's no tension anymore. Death is a complete joke in this film. This person dies; comes back. This person dies; comes back. So, you do not give a shit when somebody dies! And not only that, but it completely ruins the series for the future. Like, you've got force ghosts that can do stuff [...], lightning strikes [...], and now we've got force healing [so] nobody can fucking die... I don't want to see episode X! I don't want to see XI; I don't want to see XII! ...They have to go away. They have to go back into the past."
    The Angry Joe Show on force healing in The Rise of Skywalker.

    Misuse — Takes the "Clones" Part Literally (23/50) 
  1. Fanfic.Coreline: Alternate Self: Explicitly called "Alternates" or variations of it (like "Walternate", for example), these are the many versions of a Fictional character that have appeared all over the CoreLine universe.
  2. VideoGame.Metal Gear Solid: Snake's brothers, Liquid and Solidus, are first introduced in this storyline. As a minor example, the Genome Soldiers share the same "soldier genes" that were harvested from Big Boss' remains. According to Liquid, this makes them all blood brothers.
  3. Fanfic.Atonement Worm: Several Noelle Clones are prominent characters, including Pandora And Defiant.
  4. Roleplay.Darwins Soldiers:
    • Averted. James Zanasiu has been seen in at least four different forms (regular, anti-matter, Furtopia regular, and AI) but they never interact, and so are easily distinguished.
    • On the other side of the coin, Rudyard Shelton has encountered all three of his doppelgängers (anti-matter, AI, and Keith Bailey but the problem of telling them apart never comes up since there are always superficial differences.
  5. Recap.Rick And Morty S 3 E 9 The AB Cs Of Beth: Ambiguous Clone Ending: Beth's choice at the end of the episode isn't disclosed: did she decide to stay, or did she accept Rick's offer to make a perfect clone of her while she went travelling? The Beth we see again at the end of the episode seems much more cheerful and involved with her children than usual, which could point to a "perfect mom" clone-Beth or a Beth finally at peace with herself and her choices. On top of that, even if she did accept Rick's offer, Beth would also be able to Kill and Replace the clone to return to her old life later on. Rick could very well make another clone in the future, so from this point onward, Beth could switch places with her clones an indeterminate number of times.
  6. Characters.PN 03: Schrödinger's Butterfly: Vanessa discovering a clone of herself in mission 9, discovering the Client is also a clone, and the Client saying memories can be faked calls into question just about everything in the game.
  7. Characters.Adventure Time Princess Bubblegum: What Measure Is a Non-Human?: Considers her subjects expendable, as she can make more. She has prevented Finn from sacrificing himself and allowed a candy subject to do so because of this specifically.
  8. Characters.Urbanus: (Nonkel Fillemon) He died in "De Buljanus-Dreiging" ("The Buljanus Threat"), but was cloned.
  9. Differently Dressed Duplicates: After all, when you're Opening a Can of Clones, clothes may not be duplicated with the extra bodies, or an error in the cloning process could be introduced to help the audience tell the two apart.
  10. Surprisingly Elite Cannon Fodder: * This is the entire premise of Star Wars: Battlefront II, where you play as the 501st Legion, which "has a history of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat."
  11. Webcomic.Darths And Droids: The comics and rants in Episode II note how the movies wasted the potential of having clones and shapeshifters. Later taken advantage of in Episode IV by making the original Han Solo a shapeshifter, allowing Jim's character to get away with impersonating him until Episode V, where, after capturing Jim's character, Boba Fett decides to cut him up and have a transplant of his flesh to restore his own shapeshifting ability.
  12. WesternAnimation.Detentionaire: Most of the teachers at A. Nigma High are clones, as hinted by some of them resembling famous historical figures.
  13. Characters.Monster Rancher Species: (Debuted in Monster Rancher 2) The Metalner that visits the ranch explains that a thousand years prior to the game, their race made clones of themselves and sealed them in Disc Stones, which they then left on our world.
  14. ComicBook.Elvis Shrugged: Along with the 1970s one of Elvis, we later see that the Mad Scientist has created several mini Elvis clones called "Elvii".
  15. PlayingWith.Disney Death: Double Subverted:
    • It turns out that it wasn't Walter who died, but a clone of him that was programmed to believe it was the original. Once he realizes what's going on, he creates a new, non-degenerated clone.
  16. Quotes.Only The Creator Does It Right:
    When 'Thanos Rising' was announced, I wrote: “I will buy it. Partly because I’m curious, partly because I like Jason Aaron’s writing, partly because it seems like the sort of thing that would break my internet silence after less than three months. But, let’s not kid ourselves: this is clearly the broken memories of one of the defective clones of Thanos. Sorry. That doesn’t mean it can’t be good. It just means that if you’re not Jim Starlin, you’re writing about a clone.” I stand by that today.
    Chad Nevett on Thanos Rising
  17. Recap.SCP Foundation SC Ps 2000 To 2499: (SCP-2000) It repopulates the world with clones.
  18. Characters.One Minute Melee Season One: (Dante vs. Ragna the Bloodeedge) The skill-set this Ragna has seems to indicate it's not the original Ragna. He's found by Dante surrounded by three defeated Hakumens, presumably clones as well. Judging from the green, red, and blue lights he absorbed from the defeated Hakumens, he got the copies by beating them.
  19. Characters.Brave New World Pokemon: (Antagonists) Due to how easily he dies, Professor Tarwntulas set up a cloning system whenever he is killed.
  20. Alike and Antithetical Adversaries: One extreme representation of this is to make the villains Not Even Human, rather being a horde of identical robots, insects or clones.
  21. Denser and Wackier: Lois & Clark begins as a sort of office comedy interspliced with Clark's super heroics. Though the main duo stay more or less grounded in domestic reality, their surroundings become more akin to the Silver Age comics, with goofball villains (including Shelley Long, Drew Carey, Sylvia from The Nanny, and culminating in the guy from Night Court sporting a giant latex head and calling himself Dr. Klaus Mensa), time travel, magic, and clones galore.
  22. Story Arc: The King of Fighters:
  23. ComicBook.Marvel A Fresh Start: Clones have always been a long-standing fixture in the Marvel universe but in these new storylines, cloning takes prominence as a plot point.
In Amazing Spider-Man it's been revealed that Kraven forced the High Evolutionary to clone him a large number of times in an attempt to raise a better heir. One of them took his Egomaniac Hunter ideals to the point of murdering all his "brothers" and ends up taking Kraven's place once he dies. Hickman's X-Men run has the mutants devise a way to resurrect their dead by cloning new bodies and uploading the latest backup of their minds into it. Tony Stark learns he really did die in Civil War II and that he's just a mental backup in a reconstructed body. This also applied to Rhodes, who he resurrected by the same means, and his parents, who Arno brought back in the same way when he found out. Natasha Romanoff is alive again after Secret Empire because the Red Room has similar clone backup protocols for all their agents. The telepath in charge of the process was bribed into using the heroic Black Widow's memories instead of one loyal to them.

    Other Misuse (2/50) 
  1. Memes.One Piece: Clone PieceExplanation (spoilers) Misuse for Epileptic Trees
  2. YMMV.A Song Of Ice And Fire: The Faceless Men; just look at the WMG page. This despite the fact that the only use of Actually a Doombot the series has so far pulled off was actually Melisandre's doing. This also seems to be based on an earlier understanding of Faceless Man powers that was jossed in A Dance With Dragons: The Faceless Men keep around faces taken off of corpses and use blood magic to put them on their own faces. While this doesn't necessarily rule out impersonation via glamour, chances are that if a Faceless Man impersonates someone, the person they are impersonating is dead. Despite being "objective", item is used on YMMV page as though it is YMMV. Also misuse for Epileptic Trees.

    Unclear (1/50) 
  1. AudienceAlienatingEnding.Video Games: Final Fantasy:

    ZCEs (12/50) 
  1. VisualNovel.Umineko When They Cry: Given all the Reality Warper and Your Mind Makes It Real-type tropes that are involved, this was kind of inevitable. The red text is supposed to defuse the problem a bit, although a lot of it simply hinges on your trust of Beatrice in general.
  2. Anime.The Big O: Commented out trope name and nothing else
  3. Manga.Battle Angel Alita: The AR series.
  4. YMMV.Bayonetta 3: Play the Game, Skip the Story: While it has some technical issues, on a gameplay front, Bayonetta 3 is regarded to be a great action game that improves upon many of the flaws in Bayonetta 1 and 2, while having a very satisfying and free flowing combat system, as well as some extra variety in the form of Viola. The story on the other hand, has seen a more contested response from fans and critics, with many finding aspects of it, such as the multiverse plot potentially Opening a Can of Clones, the Relationship Upgrade between Bayonetta and Luka, Bayonetta's death at the end, and Viola becoming the next Bayonetta, amongst other aspects, to be underdeveloped and/or unsatisfying.
  5. SanitySlippage.Comic Books: The Transformers (Marvel):
    • Happens to Shockwave in the UK comics, when he learns he dies in the future. Determined to prevent this, he finds Megatron and sets him on Galvatron (well... it's complicated). Then the two start working together. Shockwave, who didn't expect this, just snaps, and kills anyone who approaches him.
  6. ComicBook.The Clone Saga: The Spider-books in general are famous for this trope, but this is the story arc that kicked it into high gear. Peter later uncovers the original clone's scorched remains in the chimney; probably the intention was to throw doubt on Ben's identity and put forward the possibility of both Spider-Men being clones. By this point, though, there were already so many clones running around, the effect was lost and the whole subplot was discarded. Despite all the text, none of it makes clear which of the two uses of the trope it is referring to.
  7. Film.Two Thousand And One A Space Travesty: Trope name and nothing else
  8. Laconic.Infinity Abyss: Thanos gets his own Clone Saga.
  9. ComicBook.Astro City: Commented out trope name and nothing else
  10. Webcomic.Monster Of The Week: Who's the real Samantha?
  11. Red String of Fate: The protagonist (one of them anyway) accidentally discovers this during the events of Kiln People. At the end of the novel, he's dropped his job as a Private Detective and is advertising an agency to link people with their soulmates.
  12. Our Clones Are Identical: Why should anyone care about what happens to these clones?

Edited by GastonRabbit on Apr 26th 2024 at 6:38:48 AM

MasterN Berserk Button: misusing Berserk Button from Florida- I mean Unova Since: Aug, 2016 Relationship Status: Shipping fictional characters
#26: Mar 18th 2024 at 8:03:34 AM

What exactly are these other situations, though? I understand that there can be stakes other than character death, like romantic stakes in a romance story, but I have no idea how the tension of whether a couple will get/stay together can be ruined by resurrection or alternate universes. The whole idea is about death no longer mattering leading to there being no reason to care about the stakes.

One of these days, all of you will accept me as your supreme overlord.
Amonimus the Retromancer from <<|Wiki Talk|>> (Sergeant) Relationship Status: In another castle
the Retromancer
#27: Mar 18th 2024 at 8:24:43 AM

I'd define stakes as a situation where the characers's/plot point's relevance can meet an abrupt end, for example including a disabilating injury, an artifact getting destroyed, a Kid Hero failing a test or getting expelled.

Both tropes involve cases where a major character is risking some permanent failure and potentially being written out of the story or The Bad Guy Wins, but the audience sees that the risk is unlikely because of Anthropic Principle and it turning out to be the case.

Edited by Amonimus on Mar 18th 2024 at 6:28:00 PM

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup
MathsAngelicVersion Ambassador of Eurogames and Touhou Music from Gensokyo Since: Mar, 2013 Relationship Status: Armed with the Power of Love
Ambassador of Eurogames and Touhou Music
#28: Mar 18th 2024 at 8:37:05 AM

ImperialMajestyXO mentioned betrayals, which are hard to take at face value if you know the "traitor" might be a clone. Other examples include a location being destroyed or significantly changed, and a story where you stop caring about Character Development because the previous character development was undone with a Reset Button.

Notably, Opening a Can of Clones also seems to apply when the audience doesn't trust positive changes to stick (even if I don't see a lot of these listed). Like if the Trope Adventures series was intended to end with the heroes successfully eradicating the monsters, but then became a Franchise Zombie that kept coming up with excuses to bring back the monsters. Even if an entry tries to convince you the monsters are totally gone for good this time, you probably don't believe it. (I don't think this is covered by Too Bleak, Stopped Caring — you can enjoy Trope Adventures overall even if you don't buy the "we totally exterminated the monsters this time!" moments.)

Mitochondricat 3 Rats In a Trench Coat Since: Feb, 2023
3 Rats In a Trench Coat
#29: Mar 18th 2024 at 8:59:18 AM

I think a lot of the confusion around this trope is mostly the fault of the absolutely horrible name. The trope as I understand it has almost nothing to do with clones. It’s not Like You Would Really Do It, either - I’d argue it’s the writing equivalent of the boy who cried wolf. Essentially, this trope is that when the story SAYS there will be lasting consequences - good or bad - but keeps pulling stuff like illusions, Time Travel, or New Powers as the Plot Demands to reset the status quo or reset the story, the audience loses investment because there are no stakes. This covers both stuff like “they died but it was just a clone” but also stuff like Serial Escalation and Power Creep, where the story says that “this new power up will change the game” and then undercuts it with a new villain wielding a power-up-proof shield.

I think this should definitely be YMMV, but it shouldn’t be merged with Like You Would Really Do It. I think a lot of the confusion can be fixed with a better name (a lot of the bad wicks were relating to clones). Perhaps something like The Writer Who Cried Consequences or Reset Button Fatigue would work.

Witty witticisms are witty.
Amonimus the Retromancer from <<|Wiki Talk|>> (Sergeant) Relationship Status: In another castle
the Retromancer
#30: Mar 18th 2024 at 9:20:53 AM

So, is it the known existence of an "instant fix of the current bad thing" plot device, or the fact that one was used already? There's some potential in both directions.

Edited by Amonimus on Mar 18th 2024 at 7:21:12 PM

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup
ImperialMajestyXO Since: Nov, 2015
#31: Mar 18th 2024 at 10:33:52 AM

[up] Honestly, that distinction sounds like splitting hairs to me, though I'll admit there might be something I'm missing.

Mitochondricat 3 Rats In a Trench Coat Since: Feb, 2023
3 Rats In a Trench Coat
#32: Mar 18th 2024 at 11:51:08 AM

[up][up] The trope as it is currently seems to cover both. I'm considering if we want to separate them, but everything I can come up with would be messy and have a lot of overlap anyway. I think covering both is fine - since in the first instance the viewer may have seen the broken rule abused in other media, it has a similar enough effect on the audience to the latter that it's not a big deal in my mind.

Witty witticisms are witty.
WarJay77 Big Catch, Sparkle Edition from The Void (Troper Knight) Relationship Status: Armed with the Power of Love
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
#33: Mar 18th 2024 at 11:56:21 AM

I can understand the main reasons why people want to keep this, and I was never that sold on the merge, though the definition still feels "off" to me for reasons I struggle to articulate. Maybe it's just that I have no experience ever seeing this sort of reaction anywhere, so it felt very specific to me.

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
StarSword Captain of USS Bajor from somewhere in deep space Since: Sep, 2011
Captain of USS Bajor
#34: Mar 18th 2024 at 12:05:31 PM

[up]Not surprising, the description is a messy Wall of Text. I'm getting the gist that essentially this is supposed to be an Audience Reaction of the purported stakes of a conflict clashing with the Applied Phlebotinum so that the stakes don't seem as high asintended, but probably at least half the description can be transplanted to an Analysis tab and the rest of it slimmed down considerably.

Edited by StarSword on Mar 18th 2024 at 3:05:59 PM

WarJay77 Big Catch, Sparkle Edition from The Void (Troper Knight) Relationship Status: Armed with the Power of Love
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
#35: Mar 18th 2024 at 12:10:20 PM

I mean, I entirely get what it's trying to be... But even the trimmed down definition feels incredibly niche to me -shrug- But again that's probably my own issue and not the trope's fault.

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
StarSword Captain of USS Bajor from somewhere in deep space Since: Sep, 2011
Captain of USS Bajor
#36: Mar 18th 2024 at 12:45:36 PM

Looking at the wick check, the "correct" use folder is actually not very helpful for determining usage because OP only looked at subjective vs. objective uses rather than what those uses actually were. Take the first four examples listed, potholes and my comments in bold:

  1. Franchise.Metroid: (bulleted example) Characters or creatures believed killed off in previous games commonly reappear as clones, robotic duplicates, X-Parasite doppelgangers, etc. (and in the case of Ridley, all of the above). This makes it almost impossible to truly believe that these characters are gone for good, and when some characters are revealed to survive (for example Kraid in Dread), there is a lot of speculation about whether it's the real character, a clone, or some other type of copy. There are even numerous theories that Samus herself is a clone, particularly following the events of Fusion. Correct
  2. AudienceAlienatingEnding.Video Games: Final Fantasy:
  3. Memes.One Piece: "Clone Piece" (labelnote) Cloning was introduced in the series for some time now but used mainly for nameless goons like the Pacifista and Seraphim. Once Stussy became the first named character to be revealed as a clone, Pandora's Box was also opened as to who was also secretly a clone like Tashigi or Weevil, though most of the speculation was done jokingly. Some even joke that none of the characters seen so far are real and they're actually clones. Misuse for Epileptic Trees
  4. VisualNovel.Umineko When They Cry: (bulleted example) Given all the Reality Warper and Your Mind Makes It Real-type tropes that are involved, this was kind of inevitable. The red text is supposed to defuse the problem a bit, although a lot of it simply hinges on your trust of Beatrice in general. Insufficient context

I think this wick check needs a re-check with greater attention to detail tbf.

Mitochondricat 3 Rats In a Trench Coat Since: Feb, 2023
3 Rats In a Trench Coat
#37: Mar 18th 2024 at 2:49:25 PM

[up][up] I've definitely seen it at least a few times, mostly in webcomics where the author is Writing by the Seat of Your Pants. When you're writing as you go, it's easy to forget that you've pulled the same stunt three times already. If you mostly watch films or TV shows that don't overstay their welcome then you probably won't run into it as often, but it definitely does happen.

Witty witticisms are witty.
Discar Since: Jun, 2009
#38: Mar 18th 2024 at 2:52:58 PM

I think a lot of the confusion around this trope is mostly the fault of the absolutely horrible name. The trope as I understand it has almost nothing to do with clones.

Pretty sure it's because the original concept was using clones to handwave everything. A betrayal? Nah, it was a clone. Someone died? No, it was a clone, or we can just clone him and resurrect him. I guess it's somewhat related to Actually a Doombot in that way.

Still a terrible name, just thought I'd explain.

CompletelyNormalGuy Am I a weirdo? from that rainy city where they throw fish (Oldest One in the Book)
Am I a weirdo?
#39: Mar 18th 2024 at 3:37:29 PM

The place I see this particular audience reaction the most is in discourse around mainstream superhero comics. Specifically, the idea that no one ever dies permanently in Marvel or DC except for Uncle Ben and Thomas and Martha Wayne. When a character dies, a certain segment of the audience isn't shocked about the death, but simply wondering how long it will take for the character to be resurrected.

Bigotry will NEVER be welcome on TV Tropes.
WarJay77 Big Catch, Sparkle Edition from The Void (Troper Knight) Relationship Status: Armed with the Power of Love
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
#40: Mar 18th 2024 at 4:35:02 PM

Isn't that more along the lines of Like You Would Really Do It though? The audience disbelieving that a death will happen / will stick? The page there discusses things like Death Is Cheap alongside the audience not believing a character will die in the first place.

Edited by WarJay77 on Mar 18th 2024 at 7:35:48 AM

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Mitochondricat 3 Rats In a Trench Coat Since: Feb, 2023
3 Rats In a Trench Coat
#41: Mar 18th 2024 at 5:05:00 PM

The way I understand it, Like You Would Really Do It is more about implied threats or stakes that the audience knows have very little chance of actually affecting the story, like a villain threatening to blow up the world in a kid's cartoon. This trope is more about consequences not being very consequential - the thing that was threatened has been followed through, but the author has their finger on the Reset Button. It's two different ways of making stakes feel cheap, so I can see how they seem similar, but they are distinct in my mind.

Witty witticisms are witty.
WarJay77 Big Catch, Sparkle Edition from The Void (Troper Knight) Relationship Status: Armed with the Power of Love
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
#42: Mar 18th 2024 at 5:10:38 PM

The reason I asked is because the description of Like You Would Really Do It does seem to allow for cases like the comic book one, as it dips into consequences a tiny bit when it pertains to death and Death Is Cheap.

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
RandomTroper123 She / Her from I'll let you guess... (Not-So-Newbie) Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
She / Her
#43: Mar 18th 2024 at 7:18:52 PM

[tup]to renaming and making YMMV.

StarSword Captain of USS Bajor from somewhere in deep space Since: Sep, 2011
Captain of USS Bajor
#44: Mar 18th 2024 at 10:32:02 PM

[tdown] to crowner right now. As I mentioned, I don't think the wick check is providing sufficient use information.

JonahtheMann Since: Mar, 2015
#45: Mar 19th 2024 at 7:34:20 AM

I don't know for certain, but this here might help us with finding the proper words for renaming and redefining the trope.

I think CONFLICT is the main reason why audiences engage with media - they want to ROOT FOR the characters and feel the same TENSION and DRAMA which the characters are experiencing. However, in order for the audience to empathize with said characters, whatever happens to them needs to MATTER; the audience needs to CARE whether the heroes win or lose. But in order for the audience to care about that, there needs to be LASTING RAMIFICATIONS to what happens; if the heroes fail, there has to be PERMANENT CONSEQUENCES (or POTENTIAL consequences) to them failing.

This in turn means that there needs to be in-universe rules/limitations dictating what is and is NOT possible (i.e., think: Sanderson's second law of magic: "Costs/weakness/limitations are more interesting than powers"). PERMANENCE is the most rudimentary limitation that ANY story can have - if the heroes fail to stop the villain, they will have to live with the consequences; no second chances.

Opening a Can of Clones seems to be what happens when the author both 1) REMOVES PERMANENCE from the fictional world (e.g., via time-travel, resurrection, potential imposters, etc.) and 2) DOES NOT CLEARLY ARTICULATE what the rules/conditions for permanence/impermanence are. This in turn makes it impossible for the audience to take anything that happens in the story at face-value, because if plot points can be undone and there are no rules explicitly stating what CAN'T be undone, the audience has no choice but to assume that the author can just change ANYTHING at ANY time; with no warning.

In other words: it breaks immersion/Willing Suspension of Disbelief, because rather than feeling invested in the world and whatever the characters are fighting over, the audience is left second-guessing how the WRITER may or may not just change everything later.

Basically: for a story to be immersive, there has to be in-universe rules dictating what can and CANNOT happen, otherwise the audience has no way of telling what's important; why anything the characters are fighting over MATTERS; the stakes/conflict are trivial because everything is wholly dependent on the arbitrary whim of the writer.

How strong your villain is or how desperate your characters' struggles are is irrelevant if the audience suspects that the author can just undo anything bad that happens later (because there are no clear rules saying that the author CAN'T just undo it later).

JonahtheMann Since: Mar, 2015
#46: Mar 19th 2024 at 7:45:46 AM

Perhaps we can think of it like a contract: writers want to tell stories; audiences want to become immersed in fictional worlds.

Thus, the author agrees to establish how the fictional world operates (e.g., what its rules and limitations are), which in turn enables the audience to become immersed in said world and invested in the story.

Opening a Can of Clones, I believe, is when the author fails to establish what the rules and limitations are (or they end up violating/retconning previously-established rules), and so the audience loses immersion/suspension of disbelief because, for all they know, the author has unlimited freedom to just change the entire story (and whatever happens in it) at the drop of a hat.

JonahtheMann Since: Mar, 2015
#47: Mar 19th 2024 at 7:50:16 AM

One podcaster I follow described the problem as: 'Part of art is creating something within a frame; within a restricted set of boundaries. But an artist who is bored of the story they're telling and wants to tell a new story is of the mindset of: "break the boundaries; break the rules." That's common for artists, because artists don't like to be confined; they don't like order and boundaries. They want to do whatever they feel like, but you can't do that because you're dealing with the concrete when your work is being presented to someone else and you're expecting them to withhold disbelief.'

Amonimus the Retromancer from <<|Wiki Talk|>> (Sergeant) Relationship Status: In another castle
the Retromancer
#48: Mar 19th 2024 at 7:58:10 AM

tl;tr version: Consequences are important. Opening a Can of Clones is when the consequences may not exist or are unclear, and the readers lose investment because they will instead await for Deus ex Machina to appear.

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup
NitroIndigo ♀ | Small ripples lead to big waves from West Midlands region, England Since: Jun, 2021 Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
♀ | Small ripples lead to big waves
#49: Mar 19th 2024 at 8:00:41 AM

I just looked at some of the on-page examples. Most of them seemed correct, but most of the ones in the Western Animation folder were written as if this trope was literally about clones. Also, the list of "dos and don'ts" followed by some specific works in the description reminds me of why I got Rational Fic rewritten.

JonahtheMann Since: Mar, 2015
#50: Mar 19th 2024 at 8:11:07 AM

Amonimus: Exactly! That's a perfect summation!

Trope Repair Shop: Opening a Can of Clones
23rd Apr '24 1:31:26 AM

Crown Description:

Consensus was to do the following:
  • Define as "The audience criticizes and/or loses interest in a story on the grounds that the purported stakes of the conflict are undercut by other story elements in ways that make the stakes appear less consequential (e.g. less severe and/or lasting) than intended."
  • Rename .
  • Make YMMV .

What should Opening A Can Of Clones' new name be?

Total posts: 115
Top