Is it a common thing in Fanfics where the author starts out with a common flanderization of a certain character, but then moves out of it as that character develops more and they get a feel for them?
Hide / Show Replies
Isn't the page image rather ill-fitting because it isn't the same two characters in the two images - the second image is canonically their children?
Hide / Show Replies
Technically speaking, Nintendo has said that only Donkey Kong is the descendent of his arcade counterpart. I haven't heard anything about Mario being the son of the arcade version. I think that part's just a fan theory.
Cranky Kong is Donkey Kong sr. That's canon. The modern DK is DK the third, or possibly Jr. I dunno, it's vague on whether Cranky's the father, or grandfather.
Linking to a past Trope Repair Shop thread that dealt with this page: Belated Backstory VRS Charaterization Marches On
, started by NerdAtComputer on Feb 22nd 2011 at 5:45:19 AM
Linking to a past Trope Repair Shop thread that dealt with this page: Confusion with Character Development?, started by NotSuperman on Jul 23rd 2011 at 8:27:09 PM
Wizzard
Granny Weatherwax in Equal Rites:
- She also gave the impression of having been around the block a few times in her youth, If You Know What I Mean, rather like a mixture of later-book Granny and Nanny. In later books, she is depicted as having been a Chaste Hero all her life.
I don't get that at all. This is her reflecting about how she hasn't given Esk The Talk: "She wondered whether, in her hearts of hearts, she was too embarrassed; she felt like a farrier who could shoe horses, cure them, rear them and judge them, but had only the sketchiest idea about how one rode them."
Edited by DaibhidC Hide / Show Replies
Ah, I forgot that line. (I'm the one who wrote the entry.)
"Been around the block a few times" may be exaggerating, but she still seems to have a far more relaxed attitude towards sex than she does in the other books. She sells impotence cures, for crying out loud! (Not once or twice, but it seems to be a large part of her job description.) Can you imagine Granny doing that in the later books? I certainly can't.
It does not matter who I am. What matters is, who will you become? - motto of Omsk Bird
I don't see why not, except that in later books her reputation is such that no-one would have the nerve to ask her for them. The fact she was a fixture of Mrs Palm's at the time gets referenced in Maskerade. Nanny thinks it's out of character (and expects even explaining what Mrs Palm's is to be an uphill struggle) but the point is, she's wrong; Esme Weatherwax knows all about sex in theory.
Edited by DaibhidC
Removed this example of The Big Bang Theory:
- How about Howard? He went from an inept womanizing nerd with an inability to leave his mothers home and attached to Raj in a fairly questionable fashion to a more independent married man who despite his flaws has moved passed this phase. Of all the characters he has seen some of the most extensive development.
...because, as the last sentence says, this is an example of actual Character Development and not this trope.
Edited by 70.33.253.44
There a bit of problems with some(ok, many) of the examples. There are many example where, yes, the change is big, but there lies reasonable premises on canon, or takes a bit of fridge logic...
Welcome, traveller, welcome to Omsk
Deleted this under Futurama:
- Speaking of, in that first appearance, we see Zapp break down and all but explicitly reveal that he actually knows he's a pathetic incompetent, and all his pompous behavior and abuse of Kif is a way to avoid admitting that to himself. We... never really see this side of Zapp again, and from then on, he seems to be completely oblivious to his own failings and genuinely as self-absorbed and pompous as he acts.
- Granted this was also implied to all be a facade to get Leela into his bed.
- Speaking of, in that first appearance, we see Zapp break down and all but explicitly reveal that he actually knows he's a pathetic incompetent, and all his pompous behavior and abuse of Kif is a way to avoid admitting that to himself. We... never really see this side of Zapp again, and from then on, he seems to be completely oblivious to his own failings and genuinely as self-absorbed and pompous as he acts.
The second point explains why this shouldn't be on here. Also, "implied" is an understatement.
Edited by DoktorvonEurotrash It does not matter who I am. What matters is, who will you become? - motto of Omsk Bird
It's super effective.
- With good reason: John might suspect [Cameron from The Sarah Connor Chronicles is] a Terminator if she was being her real stoic self but other people who don't know about Terminators write her off as having Asperger's or some other psychological malady. When she displays emotions in later episodes, its always a sign that she's not herself.
...sorry, but how does that her excuse her acting perfectly human in the pilot episode?
Hide / Show Replies
If John suspected she was a terminator before she revealed herself to be one, he would not have trusted her and might have even alerted his mother, who would have disappeared along with him. Up until she saved John's life from Cromartie, John had no idea she was a reprogrammed Terminator that was protecting him and given his history with the machines, he would have been right to be extremely paranoid about a Terminator.
Now why Cameron didn't just follow him home and introduce herself right away is something only the writers know. Either way, Cameron was simply not willing to reveal herself until she'd proven without a doubt her loyalty to him.
If Cameron can act perfectly human, though, is there a reason why she stops doing so?
Edited by DaibhidC
Because it would be precisely that; acting. Cameron's stoic personality is her true self. Simulating human emotions would be essentially faking human emotions. She probably does this around people who know she's a terminator to avoid Uncanney Valley-type reactions; her personality makes it easier to remember she's Just a Machine.
As for other people who don't know about terminators, its a matter of necessity; Cameron's not on an "Infiltrator" mission like her evil counterparts and therefore doesn't need to emotionally manipulate people. While it would certainly help in her day to day interactions, she's just not confronted with any scenarios where it would be useful over a pistol to the face.
From my understanding, this trope can only apply when there isn't an explicit reason for a change in character in a work's canon?
Edited by Notsofriendly