The '60s TV cartoon Rocket Robin Hood did a surreal episode called Dementia 5 where Robin and Little John meet a supervillain from another dimension. Later, all the scenes where Robin and Little John appear were redraw with Spiderman and became Revolt in the Fifth Dimension, an episode of the Spiderman series. The villain, Infinata, even refers to Spiderman as they/them because he replaced two Rocket Robin Hood characters and animated cartoons don’t draw themselves.
Magnum had one, where they all pretended Higgins owned the estate, and TC was his personal chopper pilot, to impress his Sandhurst alums (the ones that caused the paralysis of a classmate, via a prank, but Higgins took the blame and got sent down and ended up a Sgt major instead)
Wait, wasn’t it revealed at the end of the series that Higgins was actually Robin Masters, and thus was the actual owner of the estate the whole time? That’s some pretty deep cover.
Sounds like The Ransom of Red Chief from over 100 yrs ago.
Waaaay back when I was in college and had a regular babysitting gig with a little boy who had the TV Guide memorized, I was subjected to multiple episodes where the main characters were in a plane and the pilot was suddenly incapacitated, so they had to land the plane. I seem to recall even The Incredible Hulk got to sit in the cockpit in one episode. I don’t recall other specific episodes, but it felt like every show that kid loved had that plot.
Woops!
I’m off to tv tropes. Hopefully i can report back with a real example of my parrot story.
Well…
That’s one of those polarizing arguments for fans, like is Deckard a replicant or not.
It was actually that particular episode that started the whole “Is Higgins really Robin Masters” thing. In season 8 they really went to town on it, to the point Higgins admitted it. But one of the final lines of the final episode was “Magnum, you remember when I said I was Robin masters? I lied.”
If Higgins is actually Robin Masters, the series makes no sense. “Mad Dogs and Englishmen” has Higgins resign, and one time we see him dictating his resignation when only he and we the audience can see. Why would he do that, create a resignation for himself, to himself? Especially as in that episode, he didn’t resign, and was actually on assignment for MI6.
There were episodes with attempts on Robin’s life, where we see him in danger. How much you going to pay someone to be a target for the “tradition” of a writer living a lifestyle? Plus Robin inconveniences Higgins and the estate on many occasions, including losing the estate in a wager. Would Higgins-as-Robin really put up with that?
But more to the point, Robin hired Magnum, to the eternal consternation of Higgins. If Higgy were actually Robin, he could have Robin “fire” Magnum any time.
The show got a little wonky at the end. Even more than Higgins being Robin was the “arc” where they show started to imply that Higgins never did all those things he says. I don’t know why Bellisario decided to dump on his own character.
The website for this is called TV Tropes:
This is not strictly about just these things on television. It makes note of such things across various media - animation, movies, games, comics, novels, etc. But, while we’re doing this, let me mention two television shows in the 1980s that used the same joke:
Soap:
Brothers:
Essentially the same joke. I think it’s in Season 1, Episode 1, if a reference to it I found online is correct. It’s the line “Mickey Mouse’s dog was gay?”.
Perry Mason had an episode where a parrot said, “Helen, give me that gun. Don’t shoot!”
During the inquest, the District Attorney (not Hamilton Burger – this happens in a fairly rural area) insists that the parrot’s utterance be included in the record. Perry claims the right to cross-examine the parrot, and proves it is not as was presumed the pet of the victim. The parrot was trained to say the bit about the gun as part of the alibi created by the actual murderer.
Robin Masters was severed. Higgins was his innie.
Seems like the COP shows have a basic structure of 3 targets: ‘A’ guy who obviously did it; ‘B’ guy who could have done it; ‘C’ guy who couldn’t possibly have done it. It’s always a murder. Robbery, scam and kidnapping are old hat.
So between the first 2 commercial breaks it’s proving that A did it. Next two segments, we discover that B did it after all. And in the final 2 segments it was really C.
Add a change of venue, costume and ethnicity and maybe a famous person or event for focus. Throw in a love interest, parental memory (the father thing) or novel pet and you are all set for next week.
Oh yeah, for TV streaming, gratuitous use of the word ‘fuck’ and at least one gratuitous sex scene are required.
That really brought down the Animaniacs revival.
HBO used to have a thing where everyone of their shows had to have a topless woman SOMEWHERE, it even popped up randomly in Band of Brothers
Then as the years went on the mandate because “Okay now we have to show men’s penises to make it fair” so then they had to shoehorn in male nudity in Chernobyl of all things even though it didn’t happen in real life.
It isn’t that he couldn’t be, it is just that the theme of the film/book makes no sense if he is. The theme is that the replicants are just as human as Decard. And if you are gonna make a Bladerunner replicant, why not give it semi-super powers like the replicants had?
Yeah, the Director thought so, but P.K. Dick did not.
I don’t think you are crazy if you are in the Deckard is a replicant camp mind you, the film (especially the last Directors cut) seems to indicate that, but then, what is the theme? Robots hunting Robots?
You’ll be back? In a minimum of a day and a half…
TV Tropes is the rabbit hole with rabbit holes inside of rabid rabbits inside of whole holes.