Thozmp
Gets my kicks above the waistline, Sunshine.
Why, one could even write it about one side eating their toast butter side up and the other butter side down, and it would have the same relevancy.
Cliches you can't stand
- Thread starter Mithras
- Start date
Comrade Future
Man from Zeerust
- Location
- USSR
- Pronouns
- He/His/Him
But I agree here - American culture is very limited. But at one time they dreamed of harmoniously developed people.
Well, my complaint about this trope is that it only criticizes the vices of the church. Very few people try to show the shortcomings of the Religious view of the world, and the conclusions that follow from it. But in fact, it is enough to just carefully read Lovecraft, for example.
Personally, I prefer more or less clear boundaries between good and evil. Although this is not necessarily related to the ideologies of the parties.
- Location
- Tennessee
The bad guy getting up after the hero assumes they are dead.
I hate this bullshit, because it happens every time that the hero least expects it.
The bad guy gets stabbed in the stomach? Well, he lays there for 5 minutes, gets up, points a gun, and shoots ya because you assumed they are dead.
You ran over the bad guy with a car and he lands on his head? Well, he lays there for 5 minutes, wakes up, grabs his gun, and takes a shot at ya while he is still hurt on the ground.
You and the bad guy stand on top of a building on fire and the building collapses and somehow you survive, see the bad guy halfway crushed under a collection of heavy shit and you walk away? You better fucking believe the bad guy wakes up, and tries to kill you again.
I hate it, I really hate it. That's why I always liked the cliche of the good guy having to check to make sure the bad guy is actually dead, even by shooting the bad guy multiple times, like that scene in pacific rim 1 where the alien monster gets shot like 5 times.
I hate this bullshit, because it happens every time that the hero least expects it.
The bad guy gets stabbed in the stomach? Well, he lays there for 5 minutes, gets up, points a gun, and shoots ya because you assumed they are dead.
You ran over the bad guy with a car and he lands on his head? Well, he lays there for 5 minutes, wakes up, grabs his gun, and takes a shot at ya while he is still hurt on the ground.
You and the bad guy stand on top of a building on fire and the building collapses and somehow you survive, see the bad guy halfway crushed under a collection of heavy shit and you walk away? You better fucking believe the bad guy wakes up, and tries to kill you again.
I hate it, I really hate it. That's why I always liked the cliche of the good guy having to check to make sure the bad guy is actually dead, even by shooting the bad guy multiple times, like that scene in pacific rim 1 where the alien monster gets shot like 5 times.
- Location
- Elsewhere
What annoys me is when the characters and the narrative act like the bad guy is unkillable without anywhere near earning it.
"Look, one time this guy shot him with a gun..."
"What happened?"
"He missed. So obviously he can't be killed!"
Even if he is unkillable, that's just a reason to look into quick-setting concrete.
"Look, one time this guy shot him with a gun..."
"What happened?"
"He missed. So obviously he can't be killed!"
Even if he is unkillable, that's just a reason to look into quick-setting concrete.
Last edited:
Captain Orsai
Davion Heavy Guards Captain
That is rather depressingly common. I suppose that's why I find one notable aversion of it proper funny. Specifically, in the otherwise mostly forgettable slasher flick Cherry Falls, when the standard, "the villain is apparently dead, but then then revives to threat the hero one last time", onto the scene arrives Deputy Mina, who promptly mag-dumps both pistols she's carrying into the murdering fuckhead concerned.
Voikirium
SV's Estalia Guy
- Location
- Ruritania Illinois
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Because when I think of people with a coherent, cognizant, well-tempered view of the world mister "nervous breakdown because there's Welsh in my family tree" comes to mind.
And which shortcomings are those, huh? Thinking black people ought to be treated as people?
Queshire
Wants a pink flamingo for their lawn.
- Pronouns
- They/Them
Well I'd say that the more relevant part is why gods would be comprehensible to humans and why they would care about humans.
Voikirium
SV's Estalia Guy
- Location
- Ruritania Illinois
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Why shouldn't they be, why wouldn't they?
Thozmp
Gets my kicks above the waistline, Sunshine.
I guess the question would be, are these gods responsible for humans (making them or something)? Or did the gods and humans stumble upon each other?
Creator or gods of humans I would expect that, if not comprehensible to humans, they would at least have some investment in humans enough to care. (Unless it's in the sense of "make drone army to kill my enemies" or the like).
Comrade Future
Man from Zeerust
- Location
- USSR
- Pronouns
- He/His/Him
Pre-Adamites. Just pre-Adamites. And that's the tip of the iceberg. But again, this criticism still doesn't get to the heart of the matter.
Look around - if there was a caring and kind god, there would be no Famine in Ethiopia, no Permian Extinction, and even no death at all. There is Evil in the world, and suffering caused by things that man cannot control. And this is the main problem with most religions. Christianity claims that God is absolute good and does not think evil - but where does Evil come from? Why is the Universe not structured according to the principles of the greatest good? One of the answers of theodoceia is because of the free will of people. But is it really free? And how does this relate to the locust invasion? In some (for example, in Judaism), God contains both good and evil. But then how can we rely on him? In others, God behaves like a tyrant and a murderer. Therefore, if the Creator exists, then he is either evil - or insane. All of Lovecraft's mythology is a logical conclusion to attempts to reconcile theism with our reality.
- Location
- Russia
I do have to say that there is one other option.
The option that the Creator is not, in fact, perfect and all-knowing, and that most of history is him screwing up and then trying to fix it in some way or another.
Comrade Future
Man from Zeerust
- Location
- USSR
- Pronouns
- He/His/Him
Well, from the point of view of Christianity, for example, this will sound blasphemous (seriously - in the history of Philosophy we touched on Catholic and Orthodox theologies (in the short course in religious studies there was a seminar on Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism, if I remember correctly)). And in my opinion, the creator is not doing a good job.
- Location
- Russia
You say it would sound blasphemous, but there are some schools of philosophy that claim that God isn't even sentient, that he's merely the total sum of everything in existence or, alternatively, the base, perfect pattern from which everything deviated.
Philosophy class taught me that theology was a damn great deal more bizarre and headcanony than we usually think.
Voikirium
SV's Estalia Guy
- Location
- Ruritania Illinois
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Yes, one mid schlock-horror writer from the 1930s managed to defeat all religion and all theism, truly I am slain.
Comrade Future
Man from Zeerust
- Location
- USSR
- Pronouns
- He/His/Him
And it's true. I remember we had a seminar somehow connected with modern Orthodoxy. And I spent 10 minutes arguing with the teacher about the teaching of one Orthodox priest, who claimed that hell is inside the soul of a person and after death he is not subject to punishment. The problem is that at the Fifth Ecumenical Council the Church approved as a dogma the teaching about hell, posthumous retribution, and eternal torment.
P.S. - but in the case of God as a "perfect pattern" Lovecraft has Azathoth. Instead of the ideal Neoplatonic Nous (Mind), we have something formless and unreasonable.
King Washington
Semi-Depressed Lurker
- Location
- Indiana
My hyper-specific pet peeve:
Naming your female vampire character "Carmilla" despite said character having absolutely nothing to do with there supposed name sake. Usually either a generic seductress, literally just being Elizabeth Báthory, or whatever the fuck the Castlevania anime was doing.
It's to the point where the Carmilla Web Series is arguably has one of the more accurate iterations of the character, somehow
Naming your female vampire character "Carmilla" despite said character having absolutely nothing to do with there supposed name sake. Usually either a generic seductress, literally just being Elizabeth Báthory, or whatever the fuck the Castlevania anime was doing.
It's to the point where the Carmilla Web Series is arguably has one of the more accurate iterations of the character, somehow
Voikirium
SV's Estalia Guy
- Location
- Ruritania Illinois
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Actually @Comrade Future I apologize, it has been a rough couple of months but that doesn't justify swinging at you.
- Location
- Georgia, US
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I mean, it's weird you put this as its own category. Nocturne is a very straightforward example of the "literally just being Elizabeth Bathory" category you mentioned.
TBH I'm not sure why you'd mention it, they didn't call her Carmilla. She was just the historical figure but made a vampire.
King Washington
Semi-Depressed Lurker
- Location
- Indiana
The "literally just being Elizabeth Bathory" thing was more reference to Vampire Hunter D and Fate franchise. I'm aware Castlevania has them as separate characters.
- Location
- Elsewhere
Here's a recent thing I've noticed that bugs me.
Beastmen in collars.
Not as a slave thing, or a fetish thing, just a fashion statement.
The Isekai character is walking through the fantasy city and sees an elf with pointy ears and a bow, a dwarf with a beard and an axe, and a catgirl with a tail and a collar.
Not even a choker.
A big leather collar with a bell.
The thing is, it's relatively simple to come up with reasons why elves and dwarves might have bows and axes beyond genre conventions.
Dogs don't like collars.
Cats really don't like collars.
If they had thumbs, you could bet those collars would be coming off.
So it comes across as excessively superficial.
Like the author isn't even going to pretend these are people.
Beastmen in collars.
Not as a slave thing, or a fetish thing, just a fashion statement.
The Isekai character is walking through the fantasy city and sees an elf with pointy ears and a bow, a dwarf with a beard and an axe, and a catgirl with a tail and a collar.
Not even a choker.
A big leather collar with a bell.
The thing is, it's relatively simple to come up with reasons why elves and dwarves might have bows and axes beyond genre conventions.
Dogs don't like collars.
Cats really don't like collars.
If they had thumbs, you could bet those collars would be coming off.
So it comes across as excessively superficial.
Like the author isn't even going to pretend these are people.
- Location
- Elsewhere
It would fit the setting if the character was a slave, but I've seen several cases where the character is apparently free.
Like a high-ranking adventurer, or a student, or a tribe chief.
And they're just wearing the collar.
So rather than being ownership in-setting, it comes across as the author/artist saying "this is a one-dimensional character and I wanted them to look this way without thinking about it."
Like a high-ranking adventurer, or a student, or a tribe chief.
And they're just wearing the collar.
So rather than being ownership in-setting, it comes across as the author/artist saying "this is a one-dimensional character and I wanted them to look this way without thinking about it."
- Location
- Omniverse #1345
I mean... fashion can be really, really, really, really weird. And yes, 4 reallys were needed in that statement, and probably are not enough.
it being as common as it is is silly, but actual, real world, humans will wear a collar entirely of their own free will. An actual one. So yeah, it happens, as odd as it is.