Archived Discussion

This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.

Working Title: Villainous Harlequin: From YKTTW

Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: The distinction between Played for Laughs and Played for Drama is respected elsewhere. We have both Crapsack World and World Half Empty, both Chew Toy and The Woobie... Monster Clown is High Octane Nightmare Fuel. Villainous Harlequin is just ordinary, accidental, Nightmare Fuel. Compare Jack Nicholson's Joker to Cesar Romero's.

Bring The Noise: I'm with Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan, although some of the examples have been misfiled.

Rothul: I think the distinction is useful, but the examples need to be sorted better.

Frodo Goofball Co TV: IMHO, A Monster Clown ideally should be a Complete Monster, the whole point of their crimes is to laugh at the tradgedy of others. A Villainous Harlequin should be something of an Anti-Villain, who is at least occasionally closer to an Ineffectual Sympathetic Villain than a civilization - threatening supervillain.

Wascally Wabbit: Cutlisted again, as there is no point nor precedent for spliting a motif based character type based on viewer reaction. Almost all examples are duplicates, pointless subjectivity is introduced and the majority of referances to this trope assume it means 'a villain in a jester/harlequin costume'.

Madrugada And cutting opposed again. There's a thread discussing this trope in the forums. If examples are crossing over, then remove them from which ever one they're a bad example of.