Subpages cleanup: Complete Monster

to Bavmorda, to The Barrow duo, and, after some consideration, to the Dark Princess. Her other actions don't strike me as terribly heinous, even though Rainbow Brite (I think) is a child, but it's primarily due to that "not giving a damn if I freeze trillions of lives to death."

Also, have Mephisto and Snatcher been decided on? I've got a writeup for the latter and I think Mephisto is an easy keep.

@ Austin DR, the mainvillains of the series were Murky and lurky. A duo that wanted to steal all the color in the world and turn everything grey. Murkwell Dismal (his full name) was the leader and the only one of the two who was actually evil. Lurky was his dimwitted sidekick who always got in the way and foiled everything. Lurky seemed very Affably Evil and Obliviously Evil. Lurky only went with Murkys schemes because he seemed too childish to know better. Lurky actually liked Rainbrow Brite and "all the pretty colors". Murky had a few Not-So-Harmless Villain momants (once even coming close to killing Rainbow Brite) but on the whole, he was only slightly threatning. They were kinda like Harry and Marv. Lurky was completely harmless and served as comic relief, while Murky was a bit more threatning, but only slightly. Needless to say, the dark princess is miles ahead of them.

31185: Yup (and this one's more than slightly long). Also, in this case there are 2 entries, one on the CM page and one on the YMMV page.

to Bavmorda, to The Barrow duo, to the Dark Princess.

Hesitant on Bavmorda (a case could be argued for self-defense; then again, Voldemort could have the same argument, and it seems Bavmorda, just like him, was evil anyway), so I'll abstain for now. The Dark Princess I really don't know. Definitely seems like Vile Villain, Saccharine Show (and Stupid Evil to the max), but...

edited 30th Sep '14 3:25:51 PM by ACW

So far, the votes for the Snatcher were:

• For: You, of course, myself, Lord Xavius, Sanfran, Very Melon, Lightysnake
• Against: Ambar, Occassional Exister, A New Man

But, yeah, I'll give a for Mephisto and the Dark Princess (mostly because she took the diamond planet with the full knowledge that everything in existence would die. That'd be death on a major scale).

edited 30th Sep '14 3:32:56 PM by AustinDR

Has the latest round been submitted at the edit thread yet?

RE: Dark Princess

A series where the previous main villains were named Lurky and Murky? With a heroine named Rainbow Brite? I'm having some serious trouble with this. I'm going to say no on that character.

I'll also note that the bit about a character "raping a hundred babies and then being disqualified because of a redeeming quality" has happened, has in fact happened repeatedly, and is a good thing. There's nothing ironic about a character being cut for those reasons either. The trope is called Complete Monster. Ergo, any villain who is listed on it must have no redeeming qualities. Ergo there is absolutely nothing ironic about cutting characters who possess redeeming qualities, however miniscule those qualities might be. Hell, that's not even a proper use of the word "ironic". It would only be ironic if we cut somebody because of an evil thing they'd done.

RE: Bavmorda

I'm going to have to say no on that one. The whole "villain is out to kill the one prophesied to slay them" is a very old trope, and I always have a degree of sympathy for characters who are operating under it. It looks like almost all of her actions within the film are aimed at saving her own life, and that's a motive I can sympathize with if only slightly.

She sounds like an evil bitch, but not one I'm comfortable with voting up.

RE: Leigh and Gilgwyr

I'll give a solid yes to those.

edited 30th Sep '14 4:52:44 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

Again, Ambar. You're dismissing things far too easily, simply by how it sounds. As long as the villain serves as a force to counter-balance the sugary nature of the premise, which works with Snatcher and apparently here with the Dark Princess, they can count, no matter how sugary the premise is. That's precisely how Tirek was included. We're judging the character, not the look of the show.

Yeah, I agree with Scraggle on this. However, I kind of understand why Ambar's kind of quick to dismiss these candidates. Also, that was G1!Tirek that was included not the most recent one.

edited 30th Sep '14 4:55:07 PM by AustinDR

There are plenty of shows that are too light, period, to have a CM candidate. That's a long-established rule. This sounds like one of those shows to me. While we have had exceptions in the past, most notably G1!Tirek, those were examples wherein the villain was an especial anomaly, whose credentials were solidly established through a lengthy conversation in this thread. I do not feel that has been established here. Looking over what's been said thus far, it appears to me as though her only credentials are being an actual villain, in a show filled with imbeciles.

I don't feel the case for the character qualifying has been strongly enough established. So I will say no. And I will keep saying no until somebody makes a better argument.

edited 30th Sep '14 4:58:53 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

No one's trying to make you change your mind, Ambar. Calm down. And I don't exactly agree with your evaluation on her. She knowingly steals a planet that would essentially lead to the death of trillions. The show doesn't gloss over it in any way, and it's very heinous compared to the other antagonists.

edited 30th Sep '14 5:01:35 PM by AustinDR

Actually Scraggle's pretty clearly trying to get me to change my mind, what with the whole bit on how we're apparently supposed to do things. And that's fine. This is a debate thread, he's entitled to try and change my mind, while I, for my part, am entitled to tell him why that won't be happening anytime soon.

And I am calm. What exactly is it that you think I'm getting upset about?

31194: Not yet. I'll work on that no later than this weekend; I have the posts in my sig so I don't lose track.

You just seem to be pissed off every time you come to the discussion thread, Ambar. Sorry if I said that.

Again, Felix from Red Vs Blue seems to be a good qualifier for Complete Monster. His crimes are helping in the manipulation of the Civil War on Chorus, acting like a psycho when Locus and Control act like they are just doing a job, and his Evil Gloating makes it seem like he enjoys doing all of this. The fact that he's helped get an entire population to nearly kill themselves and get enjoyment out of it seems to make Felix a Complete Monster.

Locus, on the other hand, doesn't seem to qualify as he's way to affable, and Felix's presence makes it seem like he could do a Heel–Face Turn.

The Chairman may qualify as a Complete Monster, but as we don't know his exact motives, we might as well wait.

edited 30th Sep '14 5:08:46 PM by SatoshiBakura

Certainly not my intent. Reading over my recent posts, I can see how my bit about irony might have come off as a little snippy, but I'm very tired of people mocking and/or trying to alter the rules. Also misuse of the word "ironic" is, admittedly, a pet peeve of mine.

It has admittedly been a long, long time since I've watched Red vs Blue, but isn't that a Black Comedy?

edited 30th Sep '14 5:16:16 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

@Ambar It's just that you seem far too quick to dismiss these movies/series without any other prior knowledge of it aside from the fact that it sounds like a lighthearted kid's show.

I'm giving you some clarity; I've ran into some people who can't be swayed and I've learned better than to continue a fruitless argument. I'm just saying perhaps you'd like to add some more depth to your reasoning against these villains rather than just "it sounds like a lighthearted kid's show."

edited 30th Sep '14 5:33:09 PM by Scraggle

It still is sort of a Black Comedy, but Cerebus Syndrome has set in as of Season 6. Anything that Felix does is not played for laughs at all.

Season 11 starts off light, but it gets way darker towards the end. Season 12 is probably the darkest the series has gotten so far. While the comedy is still there, it's mostly focused on how serious the whole war is and the fact that Locus and Felix are controlling it. Again, none of that is played for laughs.

edited 30th Sep '14 5:24:55 PM by SatoshiBakura

It is, with occasional moments of seriousness. But we've gone 11 years without a single CM, so I'm hesitant to believe it can be dark enough to have a CM. Granted, still haven't seen Season 11 or 12.

It looks like we have enough votes for Mephisto. I'll provide a write-up for him, and for Sami Yurl and Balendin shortly. Has anybody submitted Murmandamus and Bai'ji, (as well as the other recent write-ups) to the edit thread yet?

@Scraggle

Couple of things—first off, "it's a light-hearted kid's show" is a strike against it in the first place. Light-hearted material generally doesn't produce characters of this type.

Secondly, as events in this thread have repeatedly borne out, a majority of characters who are suggested from such shows, do not count. Now, you could say I'm biased, but I say that when you see a pattern emerge, you should trust it.

Third, if I don't find bobg—or anybody else's—argument for the character to be convincing, the onus is not on me to change my mind. The onus is on those arguing for the character to make a better case.

To sum it up, am I quick to dismiss characters from this type of show? Yes. Will I continue to be so? Yes. Does that mean I'm not prepared to listen to a good argument? No.

Thought so. I haven't watched it in a very long time, but I would be surprised if it had a candidate.

I'll accept that, but I think I'm going to need a longer write-up in order to vote on the character. Could you provide a full-sized one, with some information on how his actions differ from the previous hijinks?

@ Ambar, the argumant I am trying to make is that she was trying to move a planet, that all the light in the universe must pass through, out of orbit, which would have caused all life in the universe to freeze to death in darkness. Kids show or not, can you give me a reason WHY exactly you do not find that convincing?

Firstly, we don't go by a "general" assumption; shows like this have still produced Monsters. Albeit, it's rare, but it's still happened. Secondly, yes, one might say you're rather biased in that sense, and that's how it's rubbing off on me. On me, though, and I can still respect and listen to what you think. And lastly, once more, that's based on your opinion and we each have our own statement on it; I think the DP could count and you think it couldn't. Respective opinions. I can accept that.

edited 30th Sep '14 5:58:28 PM by Scraggle

Because one of the problems with about half the kids' show examples I've seen is with adult tropers extrapolating things that the target audience would not. She's causing a new Ice Age on Earth? Okay. Eventually the universe will freeze? Okay. But what I'm doubting is that a show called Rainbow Brite, with characters with names like Lurky and Murky, ever actually uses the word "die" or explores the actual real world implications of her actions in any way.

This is not a problem isolated to this particular conversation. It's happened repeatedly, including during one of the many, many MLP discussions. Fact is, show's written for children rarely, if ever, explore the genuine implications of a villain trying to freeze/superheat/whatever the earth/galaxy/universe/whatever. Too often the apparently horrifying plans that tropers bring up here, turn out to be pure Fridge Horror when one of us actually tracks down the episode. That's without, of course, getting into the fact that many, many, many children's programs subscribe to the notion that anything and everything can be forgiven.

Now, if that's not what's happening here, I'm sorry. But until you establish that this isn't a show that subscribes to Harmless Freezing and that the implications you are reading into it are actually present and clearly explored, I can't say yes.

Yes, I'm biased. Just said that. Completely okay with it too. And while kid's shows can indeed have qualifiers—something I've admitted too in every post I've made on the subject—they are so rare, that, I reiterate, I will need to see a damned good argument before I give a yes vote.

And I'm not seeing that argument here. If bobg—or anybody else who has seen the show/episode in question—wants to give a detailed write-up, not only on the character, but on the show and how its morality functions, I will happily read it. And if after that it looks like the character is a genuine CM, I'll happily give the thumbs up.

Kid's shows, in my mind, have a lot going against them when it comes to this trope. The way they are written frequently ignores the implications of a villain's actions, or makes it so that nothing is truly unforgivable. Too often, people have tried to propose villains from shows like this, without taking those details into account. After the nonsense we went through with MLP alone, I cannot, in good conscience, give a yay, to any children's program, without being given full detail on just what kind of show we are dealing with, how the setting's morality works, and just how much detail it gives on the results of a villain's actions. If that makes me overly picky, so be it.

edited 30th Sep '14 6:12:21 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

Yes on Dark Princess. That's definitely heinous enough, and the "settings" don't matter to me in this case. If the settings were relevant to me, she'd be far less dark. Clearly even with the settings they allowed her to go over the top, so it cancels that issue out for me.

Yes to Clown from Spawn. Not sure on anybody else.