I think it's about the label Parody being almost, but not quite inappropriate/appropriate, (because the creator confused "parody of X" with "X but with jokes added") But yeah, should be ymmv.
Wizzard
There's a lot of examples I'm not sure about — Prince of Thieves has funny moments, sure, but it never once seems to be mocking the idea of Robin Hood — but Spinal Tap? Like, it can't decide if it's ... a real documentary or not??
Hide / Show Replies
yeah, you're not alone. like, quite a few of them cite parody shows for having serious bits/arcs, as if parody must be funny throughout to qualify as such. not all parody is even humorous.
i would suggest reexamining this trope entirely.
Edited by oogenesis
I'm having a hard time understanding the opening paragraph. For example, a parody of action films will, inevitably, have to have some action sequences of its own. If it didn't, it wouldn't be so much of a parody as it would be a public mocking of the genre.
It would? How would it be that? What does the writer of this passage have in mind? A movie that has no action sequences is neither a parody nor a "public mocking"—it is simply a non-action movie.
I can't help but wonder if this is a subjective trope. Some might debate as to whether or not a work is intentionally parodical, and if it can even be considered as such the creator outright claims it to be (Which they might do so after it gains that reputation; just look at The Room). The main reason I started thinking about this was the Max Payne page, and whether or not the third game in the series is still a parody, a satire or another beast entirely.
Bottom line, I'd like to open some discussion on changing the YMMV status of this trope.
- Teen Titans Trouble In Tokyo did an exellent job portraying real life Japan in the eyes of the creators of the Teen Titans Animated Series. What makes this a true indecisive parody is that every book written in the fictional Tokyo, Japan are all about gum. One brand has a funny & stupid/idiotic name, also with no particular flavor ever mentioned: "Super Twinkle Donkey Gum"
Elihu: What really kills me is that it's so easy to just say, "It's supposed to be a _______" without having any internal indication of that whatsoever. Anytime someone enjoys a movie/song/show/whatever and doesn't seem to want admit that it's a guilty pleasure, they just throw the old excuse out. Just as bad is the supplement "(actor) doing (something funny) should be your first clue," as if ACTORS can't ever ACT outside of typecast roles without being a hilarious self-parody. The worst part is that any creator can just Retcon their critical (lukewarm or massive) failure by going to their first interview and saying "Oh yeah! That was totally a parody!" and fanboys will eat it up without a second thought.
(whew) Sorry. I just know that this is the only page where I can legitimately share this opinion.
How is this not a YMMV trope? It's about an analysis and interpretation of a work from the audience's point of view, rather than an actual trope used in a work. Unless somehow, the movie deliberately switches between parody and seriousness? Because this just seems like this trope is about interpreting a parody as taking itself too seriously.
(Procrastinating) Hide / Show Replies