r/TopCharacterTropes • • 17h ago

Hated Tropes (Hated)changing somenthing to be more "progressive" ends up being a bad thing

Now to be clear,i am not one of these "anti-woke" losers that complain some people exist,and i am also not the type to complain about changing somenthing in a new version or adaptation,however there are cases where it did ended up being a bad idea.

-In the anime of Cowboy Bebop there is the character Gren,despite being short lived the character is very memorable specially thanks to his tragic story.Basically his story was that he was a soldier from the titan war who was a great friend with Vicious(the main bad guy)after the war he was emprisioned thanks to Vicious who testified against him and he was forced to take a experimental drug that caused him hormonal problems,giving him a feminine appearence and even breasts.

In the Netflix live action,for some reasons they decided Gren was going to be non-binary,which wouldn't be a problem(some people believe he was gay in the anime)if it wasn't for the fact that they also removed all the nuances and complexities that made the character memorable and interesting,instead of a tragic war veteran that was betrayed and had his body changed against his will,Gren is just kinda there.

-The original Rugrats cartoon had the couple Betty and Howard,Betty was a big and masculine woman while Howard was a smaller and nervous man,it was a genuine interesting relationship that stood out from the other couples who were the standard straight couple.

In the new series however they replaced Howard with a woman named Trish,two things,first off why?What was the problem with having a woman being the stronger in a straight relationship?Second why does Hollywood seem to think that every tomboy or masculine woman is a lesbian?

Overall not the worst thing but it is jarring that they had a gender reverse roled that was progressive and decided that wasn't enough.

-Oh man,this one pisses me off the most so i am gonna have to break it down

So back in the late 80s and 90s there was this anime called Saint Seiya also knows as Knights of the zodiac,it tells the story of knights who fight for the Goddess Athena to protect earth,being divided in the golden,silver and bronze knights,the anime was a huge hit in latin america and Europe and while it floped in the US it still has a loyal fanbase.

Being a fan myself i can't recommend it enough,now granted the story does have a fair share of flaws,and that's because the author was honestly just making stuff up as he went along(also a lot of side characters are poorly used or even forgotten about)still it is a great story you should check out

But then a couple of years back Netflix got the rights and decided to a 3D reboot,in this reboot they decided to make the story more "american" to try to bring more american viewers,now i could go on and on a big rant about how that was a bad idea and the execution was so terrible that it made me want to strangle someone but this post is about one specific change.

So Saint Seiya has five main characters,those are Pegasus Seiya,Dragon Shiryu,Cygnus Hyoga,Phoenix Ikki and finally Andromeda Shun.

While the other four characters were the standard masculine and brute male characters who were always ready to throw punches,Shun was smaller,more sensitive and even feminine looking,a pacifist who didn't liked fighting,but don't mistake that for weakness because Shun was loyal to his friends and was extremely powerful.

Then Netflix decided to change Shun into a girl named Shaun.

So wait,you have a male character who goes against every male stereotype and you turn him into just another generic female character?

When asked about it,the showrunner Eugene Son said he made that change because there was no girl in the group and having a all boys group wouldn't be acceptable nowadays

First off that's not true because Athena was also part of the main cast,yeah she wasn't the fighting type but she still helped quite a lot in the story even saving the knights on several occasions,second if you wanted to add a girl to the main group why not use Marin or Shaina?Hell,if you were going to change the story anyway why not turn Seiya sister into a knight?

Thankfully this monstrosity was cancelled(so much for trying to bring more fans)

7.7k Upvotes

2.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

436

u/Ok_Somewhere1236 14h ago

Cheery Littlebottom: The Watch vs. Discworld

I think most fans of the Discworld books could spend hours talking about everything wrong with the live-action adaptation, The Watch. From the unnecessary attempts to "modernize" books that arguably needed no modernization in the first place, to the bizarre decision to mash together elements from ten different novels into a single season, there is plenty to criticize.

But if I had to point to the single biggest missed opportunity, it would be what they did to Cheery Littlebottom's character. In the books, Cheery is a female dwarf, and her character arc, developed across multiple novels, explores just how deeply patriarchal and restrictive dwarven society and culture are.

Dwarven culture is so overwhelmingly masculine that dwarves traditionally use male pronouns for everyone, including females. Femininity is practically taboo, and anything considered insufficiently masculine is treated with suspicion or outright hostility. And that's what makes Cheery's story so fascinating.

Cheery is a female dwarf who simply wants to be feminine. She wants to wear feminine clothes, use female pronouns, express herself openly, and be recognized as a woman. That might sound like a relatively simple desire, but within the context of dwarven society, it's practically revolutionary.

What makes her character so unique is that you can interpret her story as both a feminist narrative and a transgender allegory.

From a cultural perspective, Cheery has essentially been raised and socialized as male her entire life. She has been expected to dress, behave, and present herself according to strictly masculine standards, regardless of her biological sex. Her decision to embrace femininity is therefore not just a personal choice but a rejection of the gender identity and social role imposed upon her by her culture. At the same time, her story is also about women's rights, challenging a society that refuses to acknowledge femininity as something legitimate or worthy of respect.

And one of my favorite details from the books is how Cheery finds inspiration in human drag queens. The idea that if human men can dress and present themselves as women, why shouldn't she, an actual female dwarf, be allowed to do the same?

It's such a wonderful little piece of worldbuilding because it shows how something ordinary or familiar in one culture can become a revolutionary idea in another.

Cheery's character arc manages to explore feminism, gender identity, self-expression, cultural expectations, and social change simultaneously, without reducing any of those themes to a simple lecture.

And the best part is that her development takes time. She struggles, experiments, discovers herself, gains confidence, and gradually challenges the expectations of the society she grew up in. It's a genuinely beautiful story, made even better by how naturally Terry Pratchett integrates it into the world of Discworld.

And then the television adaptation comes along and decides to make Cheery a human trans woman who is already openly presenting as herself from the very beginning. And that's where I think the writers completely missed the point.

They didn't just change the character's appearance or background. They removed the entire context that made her story so meaningful in the first place.

Gone is the uniquely dwarven struggle against enforced masculinity. Gone is the gradual exploration of femininity in a society that barely acknowledges its existence. Gone is the process of self-discovery, the cultural rebellion, and the fascinating intersection between feminism and transgender themes. Instead, the show essentially skips straight to the destination, without giving us the journey that made reaching that destination so powerful.

And I'm sorry, but that just feels incredibly cheap.

The irony is that, in their attempt to make the character more explicitly progressive and modern, the writers discarded one of the most original and nuanced explorations of gender identity and women's liberation already present in the source material. And I want to be very clear here: this is not a criticism of the actor/actress, nor is it a criticism of transgender people or transgender representation.

My criticism is directed entirely at the writers and their adaptation choices.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with having a transgender character. But when you're adapting a character whose original story already offers such a rich and thoughtful exploration of gender, skipping the journey just feels like such a loss.

197

u/Tylendal 14h ago

Then there's also Lady Sybil Ramkin. They had her portrayed by a black actress, which is perfectly fine. The problem is that they made her a generic action hero. Lady Sybil Ramkin is supposed to be an overweight noble Lady, who is no-nonsense, and very rugged due to being too rich to really bother with appearances, and mostly wants to spend her time focusing on the care and husbandry of swamp dragons. She's an important and powerful character, but her power is soft power, who she knows, what she knows, and her knack for diplomacy. Taking a heavy, socially important character who leverages soft power, and replacing her with a generic action hero makes any other changes they make ring hollow, since they've already killed some of the representation within the character.

115

u/Ok_Somewhere1236 13h ago edited 13h ago

Yes, Sybil was actually my second biggest issue with the show.

As far as I remember, the books never explicitly establish her race, or at least I can't recall any particular description of her skin tone. But what the books are very clear about is that Sybil is an absolute bear of a woman.

She's supposed to be extremely tall, probably around 6'3" or even taller, broad, heavyset, and physically very strong. She's an imposing woman, both in size and personality. And then the show casts a skinny actress to play her.

But the physical appearance is only part of my problem with the adaptation. What really bothers me is how they changed her personality and character. One of my favorite things about Sybil is that she could practically rule Ankh-Morpork if she wanted to.

She's one of the wealthiest people in the city, incredibly intelligent, highly educated, socially influential, and remarkably competent in a dozen different areas. She has the money, connections, intelligence, and skills to become one of the most powerful people in the city. But she simply doesn't want to.

Sybil is one of the best examples of "spoiled but not rotten" I've ever seen in fiction.

She was born into extraordinary wealth and privilege, but instead of becoming arrogant, selfish, or obsessed with power, she's a genuinely kind, generous, and down-to-earth person.

All she really wants is to be a good wife, help people through charity, and spend her free time taking care of her beloved dragons at her sanctuary. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

That's part of what makes her such a wonderful character: she has the ability to be almost anything she wants, and she chooses a relatively simple, domestic life because that's what makes her happy.

She doesn't need some tragic backstory to explain her personality, either. As far as we know, Sybil doesn't have some deep childhood trauma driving her actions. Her father was not killed by the assassin guilt; for what I know, he died after drinking something like twenty bottles of whisky and deciding to challenge a bull to a one-on-one, head-to-head fight. The man was described as an absolute crazy beast.

She doesn't live in a mansion filled with elaborate traps, either. Well, she eventually does have some security measures, but those come from Vimes after they get married.

Sybil is a fantastic example of both body positivity and the idea that a woman can be incredibly strong and capable without needing to be an action hero. ( i love how she is the only person in the whole city who calls Veterinari by his first name, the most feared man in the whole city and she talks to him like he is her little brother)

27

u/Zanshi 11h ago

I didn't even know that the show existed a few minutes ago, and now I hate it. Just wow. How was it even possible to bastardise two beloved Discworld characters like that? Terry Pratchett must be turning in his grave

16

u/Ok_Somewhere1236 11h ago

they do it to many other characters; you really don't want to see what they did to Vetinari.

but Cherry and Sybil are the worst cases if you ask me

5

u/Gerblinoe 7h ago

At least with Vetinari we got Charles Dance in the 2 movies. Is it just Charles Dance yes doing Charles Dance? Yes but it worked really well

8

u/ElderberryJunior470 11h ago

Terry Pratchett writes such great characters I don't think most adaptations are capable of matching his work. Hog father did okay

12

u/Tylendal 9h ago

Hogfather was definitely the best, but I enjoyed Going Postal as well. They changed quite a bit to help it fit the format, and while they did stumble here and there, they ultimately stuck to the spirit quite well. Plus, it gave us Charles Dance as Vetinari, which was just an amazing performance. Never quite understood how "Don't let me detain you" could be described as sounding so threatening, especially since the narration was always very careful to point out that it was said in an unthreatening way, until I heard Charles Dance say it.

6

u/katamuro 10h ago

Going Postal was pretty good too

4

u/Zanshi 11h ago

Then I'd rather get no adaptation than a bad one

3

u/ElderberryJunior470 10h ago

That's where I'm at now, i get the limitations of film/tv shows but the show runners usually clearly can't understand the source material. And worse, one of the better adaptations was a joint project with a sexual abuser/rapist so now that's cancelled and also tainted. 

3

u/atomfullerene 5h ago

I liked Soul Music. Sure, it wasn't the fanciest animation, but I thought they did a good job with the music and story.

4

u/katamuro 10h ago

they bastardised every character, at least as far as the trailer I saw. I couldn't watch the show itself because the trailer already was enough. It's honestly one of the most impressive shows that managed to somehow get everything wrong.

2

u/Tylendal 9h ago

From what I've heard, it's not even all that bad of a show, in a vacuum. Just be happy it's not another Howl's Moving Castle situation. An absolute garbage-fire of an adaptation, rightfully appreciated for its own merits to a degree that it completely eclipses the original.

2

u/katamuro 6h ago

I suspect the people making it had already a script and the idea for their own particular fantasy world but didn't get the funding, then they attached the Discworld to it, renamed the characters and got funding because "discworld is popular" and apparently no one who had read the books had read the script.

6

u/Draffut 10h ago

Gwendolyn Christie in a fat suit for Sybil!

Nikolaj might be old and grizzled enough for a Vimes

Charles Dance already played Vetinari and did an Excellent job...

Let's get the band back together!

1

u/Jason207 1h ago

I've always pictured Hannah Waddingham as Sybil. I don't actually think she needs to be overweight, she just needs to be imposing, and I think Hannah really pulls that off well.

Nikolaj for Vimes though, fucking love that

4

u/pooey_canoe 10h ago

I've never heard of this show but both your examples sound almost insultingly terrible. The Guards series was always my favourite and pTerry has such a nuanced grasp on human nature, so to throw it all away for what you described.. it's so bad it almost feels like ironic meta commentary

3

u/Sathrowaway112 5h ago

The amount of fan pushback was extraordinary. Especially considering it's the Discworld fandom we're talking about who's probably one of the more relaxed fandoms out there.

3

u/Ae3qe27u 12h ago

Oh dear. What did they do to her personality in the show?

11

u/Ok_Somewhere1236 11h ago

In the show, they give her a completely different backstory. Her family was supposedly murdered by assassins when she was a child, so she grows up hating Ankh-Morpork's guild system.

As a result, she's portrayed as this hardened survivalist, constantly prepared for a fight, with a house full of traps and security measures. She's also played by a relatively slim actress, completely abandoning Sybil's famously large and imposing physical appearance.

10

u/Overall_Gap_5766 11h ago

To be fair her house is full of traps and security measures in the books.

After Sam moves in.

4

u/Ok_Somewhere1236 11h ago

I mentioned that in one of my other comments, but the point is that in the show the whole Trap thing is her idea is part of her personality, while in the books its come from Vimes after they got married.

5

u/Ae3qe27u 10h ago

That.... wow. What a way to change a kindhearted philanthropic character. Thank you for responding.

3

u/nitrokitty 8h ago

It's so blatantly obvious that the show runners only had the most shallow of knowledge of the source material. It was Sam who put up all the traps.

1

u/Disastrous-Entity-46 5h ago

okay, heres my one thing: i get sybil. i get vimes. i never felt sybil and vimes had any chemistry as characters. and i think that it would be even more difficult to portray on screen. 

and i dont know how well sybils introduction would also translate to screen. yes, she grows into her own character. i but in guards guards,  shes rich, slightly eccentric, and knows dragons. i really get making her more active. i dont think the necessarily did this in the best way possible, but i think sybil,  on screen, needs to do more than what she was in the book. especially to try to sell us why she and vimes get together. 

now having more of those moments of "oh, right, my family does own all your property and i forgot, deary me" or her weilding her social circles to aid vimes would have worked.... but the plot of guards guards didnt have space for that.  idk. i see why they did it. i dont think it worked right, but i dony know what i would have changed. 

(actually, i probably would have changed by pickingna different book. feet of clay feels like it would have been better. more a traditional mystery. characters know each other and that lets them like, everything can just.

 feel like thats how the world works)

3

u/Ok_Somewhere1236 3h ago

i think Vimes and Sybil are not supose to have chemistry, the point is that they never fall in love with each other like teenagers, in the books they are very much " well he/she is not that bad, and i am not getting any young, maybe we can give it a try"

the whole relationship is very slow until the 5th elephant

1

u/atomfullerene 5h ago

>She doesn't live in a mansion filled with elaborate traps, either. 

I mean, given all the swamp dragons, traps would be a little bit redundant