Characters portrayals : Why so much people misses the point ?

[SolInvictus]

I have noticed a tendancy, all over the internet, to create a narrative and delivering a version of those characters far from the source material.

Generally speaking, Youtubers, battleboarders, sole wikis, tend to make-up explanations like calcs or scaling that kills the setting and inevitably give a very personal interpretation of those characters, not intended by the authors.

Which are, in your opinion, the most obvious examples ?

 

[Avernus]

The most obvious example to me would be how the pro-Star Wars side in the old Star Wars/Star Trek fanwar went to absurd lengths to inflate Star Wars firepower. Not just to the point that it contradicted what you saw on the screen but to the point it became a plot hole if you took it seriously.

 

[SolInvictus]

The most obvious example to me would be how the pro-Star Wars side in the old Star Wars/Star Trek fanwar went to absurd lengths to inflate Star Wars firepower. Not just to the point that it contradicted what you saw on the screen but to the point it became a plot hole if you took it seriously.

Click to shrink...

Is there examples I can read ?

 

[Rancorious]

Attributing lightning/lightspeed feats to street-level characters who dodge lasers and are threatened by bows is a good example of this.

 

[Kei]

Squall Leonhart from Final Fantasy VIII is constantly being misinterpreted. It's not really the internet doing so, however, and more the studio that developed the original game in the first place.

I realize that the inherent structure of spin-offs and crossovers requires a lot of condensing of character arcs, a spread of personality types across its cast, and an emphasis on specific traits, but Squall's continued depiction in other materials as this cool, professional loner is directly antithetical to his actual character arc, which is that Squall has deep abandonment issues from his childhood, and that his "lone wolf" personality is not only a self-damaging mimicry of what a literal child thinks an adult is like (keeping in mind that Squall is one of the few actually underage protagonists in the franchise), but also something that basically none of his more well-adjusted friends actually take seriously, and they constantly tease him for it.

 

[Evilchumlee]

The most obvious example to me would be how the pro-Star Wars side in the old Star Wars/Star Trek fanwar went to absurd lengths to inflate Star Wars firepower. Not just to the point that it contradicted what you saw on the screen but to the point it became a plot hole if you took it seriously.

Click to shrink...

And then the resulting comeback from the Star Trek side, playing the "The Die Is Cast" card for Trek biggatons.

I like both very much, but prefer Star Trek. Still, I always despised using "calcs" when debating, and instead preferred to by the spirit of what we see, which very much appears to be at least rough parity in terms of firepower. I think it's infinitely more interesting to compare HOW the ships are armed, tactics, etc. over trying to do calculations for onscreen visuals which have absolute zero consistency in either. Like, an Imperial Star Destroyer would likely outclass a Galaxy-Class in single combat, just given how heavily armed the ISD is compared to the GCS.

It's at least understandable WHY. People tend to tribalize over everything. It's what we do. "I like this, therefore it's the best".

I don't have SPECIFIC examples, but the "Modern Military Defeats EVERYTHING" crowd I find to be the most annoying. I don't mind stories where the modern military does end up defeating everything... they can be fun... I very much enjoy SG-1.... but it's super annoying when it's like "Future sci-fi battle was stupid because a single SAW would have ended the battle immediately." You do have to account for dramatic effect, but I always operate under the notion that the people in-universe know more than I do about it. I might be able to look and say "Why did they do x thing?" and I might not be able to answer it. BUT... given we are suspending disbelief and this universe is "real", there IS a reason. Might not be apparent to use, but there is a reason.

 

[SolInvictus]

The view about Toons in battleboards is quite awful too, look at those thread with Bugs Bunny, Popeye and others.
The posters betrays the abilities of the characters and their narrative purpose to make them more than they are.

 

[yrsillar]

And then the resulting comeback from the Star Trek side, playing the "The Die Is Cast" card for Trek biggatons.

I like both very much, but prefer Star Trek. Still, I always despised using "calcs" when debating, and instead preferred to by the spirit of what we see, which very much appears to be at least rough parity in terms of firepower. I think it's infinitely more interesting to compare HOW the ships are armed, tactics, etc. over trying to do calculations for onscreen visuals which have absolute zero consistency in either. Like, an Imperial Star Destroyer would likely outclass a Galaxy-Class in single combat, just given how heavily armed the ISD is compared to the GCS.

It's at least understandable WHY. People tend to tribalize over everything. It's what we do. "I like this, therefore it's the best".

I don't have SPECIFIC examples, but the "Modern Military Defeats EVERYTHING" crowd I find to be the most annoying. I don't mind stories where the modern military does end up defeating everything... they can be fun... I very much enjoy SG-1.... but it's super annoying when it's like "Future sci-fi battle was stupid because a single SAW would have ended the battle immediately." You do have to account for dramatic effect, but I always operate under the notion that the people in-universe know more than I do about it. I might be able to look and say "Why did they do x thing?" and I might not be able to answer it. BUT... given we are suspending disbelief and this universe is "real", there IS a reason. Might not be apparent to use, but there is a reason.

Click to shrink...

Yes, I think if you're not willing to extend the basic trust that people in the universe are not universally mouthbreathing morons, you're not really engaging with the setting in good faith. So if you think you see some tremendously easy way to break the entire world/power system in half, you should assume there is a reason they don't do it.

Of course the Isekai boom has kind of codified the opposite attitude into their canons in a lot of cases. It makes it very difficult for me to enjoy a story that does this.