Discussion Main / JustEatGilligan

Does anyone else feel like the TRS needs to take a look at this thread? Because there's a lot of stuff on it (all the Batman example besides Joker) that doesn't seem to have anything to do with a character who no one gets rid of causing trouble.

Hide / Show Replies

Should the Magic Knight Rayearth example really exist on this page?

The manga specifically explains why it has to be this way, though it's a spoiler. The manga outright says that nobody from Cephiro can harm the Pillar. There really was no way to avoid getting complete strangers to be taken to Cephiro to fulfill the duty as Magic Knights.

Can subversions of this trope be included in the page, or should they have their own trope page entirely?

Edited by Unnerving_Posterior

Removed the following example:

• Charlotte focuses on kids who receive superhuman abilities from a comet of the same name that passes Earth every 75 years. Some of these superhuman abilities have been known to cause trouble, however it never occurs to any government in the show that they could launch a missile into space and destroy Charlotte as soon as the 75-year period between it's passings is up before it can spread any more comet dust and leave the world with any more troublesome kids with the aforementioned superhuman abilities.

Because there's nothing in the show that says the world's governments are trying to get rid of kids with superhuman abilities at all (in fact, the governments are probably along the many groups that try to exploit the superhuman kids. The only organization in the show that actually wants to stop the onset of superhuman abilities is the secret organization revealed in the later episodes, which probably doesn't have access to space missiles.)

Edited by Korodzik

• Harry Potter:

Somebody wasn't reading the books carefully.

• The whole plot of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (or "Sorcerer's Stone" as it's called in the USA) wouldn't have happened if Dumbledore had just destroyed the stone in the first place like he did at the end. In this case, there was a good reason not to destroy it sooner. It was needed to produce an immortality elixir that its creator, Nicholas Flamel, relied upon to survive. However, after seeing how close Voldemort came to obtaining the stone, Flamel finally agreed to let himself succumb to old age rather than risk letting the stone fall into the wrong hands.

Example itself explains why it's not an example. Destroying stone is death sentence for Nick and his wife, which makes little wonder that Nick and Dumble weren't exacly willing to to this from the start. Only Tom getting close to actually getting it made them reconsider.

• The introduction of Time Travel in the third book, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, presents all kind of difficult questions about why the ability is not used more frequently.

Because it's really f-ing dangerous, because HP universe except Cursed Child operates on Stable Time Loop, because no one had any reason to when they could and becuase when there WERE reasons to time turners were destroyed. Satisfied?

• Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire has the oddest one. Harry gets listed as the fourth competitor in a tournament that has "three wizards" right in its name, wasn't open to students his age, and only allows one student per school (Cedric was already chosen for Hogwarts). Despite being aware of how suspicious this is and how many rules it breaks, the teachers decide to let him compete, because the whims of the Goblet of Fire are the only thing they can agree on. In addition to sabotaging the plot of the book, not letting Harry participate would have delayed or prevented Voldemort's resurrection, and saved Cedric's life. Even if the Goblet really was as magically binding as they claimed it was, he could have just agreed with the other teachers to knowingly violate another rule to get disqualified or even if failing that just say "Cedric is the true representative of Hogwarts so I'm just going to sit on the starting line for each event." There's hardly any shame in doing so since his very presence is basically cheating for the Hogwarts side.

Ok, ill start from the end. They couldn't just let him "sit on the starting line" becuase each task required his physical presence and only ended when all participants completed it. There is no indication that any kind of rule violation would end with participant being disqualified, on the contrary it was stated that whoever was elected by the Gobled has to participate. Voldemort's resurection would indeed be postponed or possibly averted, but here's the thing. Tom played Kansas City Shuffle, with Dumble and while the plan was to bring him back from the dead, everyone thought that the point was to kill Harry and make it look like accident. No one knew that keeping Harry away would keep Tom from getting back. And finally the biggest specialist on Triwizard Tournament rules was under Tom's Mind Control, so he could overrule any attempt of getting Harry out, which he did when he claimed that being thrown out of Goblet is binding magical contract and Harry HAS to participate, whether anyone wants it or not. All everyone could do is do their best to keep him safe.

Someone should clean-up a little the Buffy example, it become a Headscratcher discussion (as normally happens with Buffy's examples in TV Tropes by-the-way)

Putting here to avoid Edit War

• A villainous example occurs in the second to last episode of the first season of Sword Art Online, The Gilded Hero. In that episode, Sugou/Oberon spams his Game Master status by pinning Kirito onto the ground with gravity magic, and then chains up Asuna, and as Kirito tries to get up, he kicks him back onto the ground and impales him with Kirito's own sword, and then decides to change the pain absorber, which once it drops bellow level 3, starts affecting a user's body in the real world. Given that he's in full control of the situation and knows how it works, he could've just turned it off all the way to level 0 for Kirito, basically, to ensuring Kirito will die in both the digital and real worlds, effectively, washing Kirito out of Sugou/Oberon's hair for good. Sugou/Oberon could get away with raping Asuna in front of Kirito, and since Kirito was stabbed in the back, and through his spine, a critical area, couple that with seeing Asuna in pain while being raped, and Kirito dies not only in-game, but also in real life. If that happened, Sugou would've been able to avoid criminal charges since he plans to wipe Asuna's memory of this incident and of her knowing Kirito anyway, and he could get away with forcing her into marrying him, and thus continue experimenting on the other 299 former SAO players with no one to stop him and be in control of the human soul. Instead, being a cocky dastard, he decides to change it to level 8, insisting on gradually decreasing it after he's done assaulting Asuna. Because Kirito isn't completely dead, he gets help from Kayaba's spirit and is lent his system administrator status to take away Sugou's control of the system, including the pain absorber, to which Kirito sets it to level 0 for Oberon, resulting in Sugou suffering some pretty bad phantom injuries in real life, and losing vision in his right eye, and eventually, being arrested in the real world.

While all the facts involved are more all less acurate, and Sugou not killing Kirito immediately seems like Bond Villain Stupidity at first glance, unlike other Blofelds Sugou had every reason to be confident in his plan since he literally controlled the world in which Kirito was trapped. The only reason Kirito won was blatant and literal Deus ex Machina from Kayaba, something Sugou had no way of foreseeing. The problem with this entry is that while action proposed would solve Sugou's problem it was only available to him before the problem even arised, giving him no reason to actually do it, making this case of "stupid for not having precognition abilities", which was already ground for burning down two What An Idiot entries and one Idiot Premise entry.

Hide / Show Replies

• In Arrow, the police can just charge Oliver with the crimes he's committed because he was caught on CCTV knowing exactly where to find his vigilante gear (and no doubt placing it there earlier). But they let him go because the investigator had a personal grudge against him, because apparently there wasn't a second investigator to look over the very definitive evidence, and because a hooded archer showed up when Oliver was under house arrest, which only proves he has an accomplice when you consider the footage they already have.

Put this here for discussion since it seems to be debatable at best to me. Hood had pulled some crazy stunts at the time and was always seen alone, so there being accomplice is unprovable theory, and the tape caught his just grabing a bag with a hood, which seems circumstantial at best. I'm not expert on US law but the guilt have to be proven beyond doubt, and having just that tape for guilt and airtight alibi for at least one of Hood's escapades and zero evidence of existence of an accomplice makes this case tough at best unless prosecutor in charge is Manfred von Karma. Then in a few episodes case seem murkier since cops are less and less wiling to capture the Hood, since some of them think he's doing more good than harm soe they have even less reason to actually eat said Gilligan.

In Episode III, Yoda loses to Palpatine and escapes. He doesn't even think to try again this time teaming up with Obi-Wan to take on the emperor. If they did, they could've ended the story here and now, rather than just have complete faith that Luke and Leia will be the new hope and wait 19-20 years. While it does work out in the end, what if it didn't? The Empire would've continued ruling the galaxy forever!

I cannot comprehend the amount of holes in this example. Should it be deleted?

"Detecting trace amounts of mental activity. Possibly a dead weasel or a cartoon viewer" Hide / Show Replies

I removed the example of killing Damon in The Vampire Diaries. Why? One, because it would have been very hard at that point, since Bonnie hadn't really come into her powers yet and Stefan was much weaker due to not drinking human blood. Two, getting rid of Damon wouldn't have gotten rid of Anna, the vampires inside the tomb, Katherine, Isobel, John Gilbert, the Originals, you get the idea. Remember that a huge amount of the conflict comes from Elena's very existence as a doppelganger. So no, killing Damon is neither a simple solution nor one that would make things much better.

Edited by 98.218.119.25

This trope is usually called "Kill Gilligan," not "Just Eat Gilligan." It refers to inexperienced writers who, if assigned to write an episode of "Gilligan's Island," would kill off Gilligan in an attempt to make it unique and interesting, not realizing the much bigger point that you have to stay within the confines of the Word of God; you don't change the established parameters of the show's story and characters.

Shouldn't it be "Just eat, Gilliagn"? With a comma? "Just eat Gilligan" sounds like your telling somebody to eat Gilligan

Hide / Show Replies

Why Don't You Just Shoot Him? had its examples put in Headscratchers. Either this should be too or Why Don't You Just Shoot Him? should have in-universe examples listed. I personally don't like blatant hypocrisy.

Edited by KinkLink5