During the investigation of recent hollers in the Complete Monster thread, it's become apparent to the staff that an insular, unfriendly culture has evolved in the Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard threads that is causing problems.
Specific issues include:
- Overzealous hollers on tropers who come into the threads without being familiar with all the rules and traditions of the tropes. And when they are familiar with said rules and traditions, they get accused (with little evidence) of being ban evaders.
- A few tropers in the thread habitually engage in snotty, impolite mini-modding. There are also regular complaints about excessive, offtopic "socializing" posts.
- Many many thread regulars barely post/edit anywhere else, making the threads look like they are divorced from the rest of TV Tropes.
- Following that, there are often complaints about the threads and their regulars violating wiki rules, such as on indexing, crosswicking, example context and example categorization. Some folks are working on resolving the issues, but...
- Often moderator action against thread regulars leads to a lot of participants suddenly showing up in the moderation threads to protest and speak on their behalf, like a clique.
It is not a super high level problem, but it has been going on for years and we cannot ignore it any longer. There will be a thread in Wiki Talk
to discuss the problem; in the meantime there is a moratorium on further Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard example discussion until we have gotten this sorted out.
Update: The new threads have been made and can be found here:
Please see the Frequently Asked Questions and Common Requests List before suggesting any new entries for this trope.
IMPORTANT: To avoid a holler to the mods, please see here for the earliest date a work can be discussed, (usually two weeks from the US release), as well as who's reserved discussion.
When voting, you must specify the candidate(s). No blanket votes (i.e. "![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/thumbs_up_emote.png "[thumb up]"){kind=small}
to everyone I missed").
No plagiarism: It's fair to source things, but an effortpost must be your own work and not lifted wholesale from another source.
We don't care what other sites think about a character being a Complete Monster. We judge this trope by our own criteria. Repeatedly attempting to bring up other sites will earn a suspension.
What is the Work
Here you briefly describe the work in question and explain any important setting details. Don't assume that everyone is familiar with the work in question.
Who is the Candidate and What have they Done?
This will be the main portion of the Effort Post. Here you list all of the crimes committed by the candidate. For candidates with longer rap sheets, keep the list to their most important and heinous crimes, we don't need to hear about every time they decide to do something minor or petty.
Do they have any Mitigating Factors or Freudian Excuse?
Here you discuss any potential redeeming or sympathetic features the character has, the character's Freudian Excuse if they have one, as well as any other potential mitigating factors like Offscreen Villainy or questions of moral agency. Try to present these as objectively as possible by presenting any evidence that may support or refute the mitigating factors.
Do they meet the Heinousness Standard?
Here you compare the actions of the Candidate to other character actions in the story in order to determine if they stand out or not. Remember that all characters, not just other villains, contribute to the Heinousness Standard
Final Verdict?
Simply state whether or not you think the character counts or not.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 31st 2023 at 4:14:10 AM
Ok, I need to say no to Clinch. He kills like 3 people and it's a comedy. Of course he's a nasty prick, it's a parody of Westerns. But he does give me an idea
Actually, you know what? Here's an effortpost
Who Is He And What Does He Do?
Headley Lamarr is a greedy State Attorney General and tycoon who wishes to buy up the property he can to create a railroad for profit. Problem? The town of Rock Ridge is in the way. Lamarr decides to deal with it the old fashioned way: By sending armed thugs to brutally beat and intimidate the townsfolks. One of the earliest scenes in the film is Lamarr's thugs pummeling an old lady in a heartless display of cruelty.
Lamarr then persuades the townsfolk to elect a recently spared black convict as their sheriff, with the gambit that he will be lynched by the racists amongst the townsfolk, allowing Lamarr to step in with the law and take over the town.
Lamarr's plan fails, and in a fury, he opts to simply destroy the town himself and kill all the inhabitants, recruiting Klansmen only too happy to kill some innocent people, outlaw bandits and other stereotypical bad guys. At the audition, Lamarr murders one of his own men for no real reason and then sends the rest to do what they do best, expecting every man, woman and child in the town to be killed before he faces the sheriff in a duel personally.
Lamarr has no excuse beyond greed and is played straight. No excuse, nothing. Keeper?
edited 5th Mar '15 7:33:37 AM by Lightysnake
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
Tyk: Fair enough on the first thing, but if one's "only" crime is killing 200+ innocents, that would seem to me to be enough.
Lighty, sure, if he's played seriously, no reason NOT to give a ![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Thumbs_up_emoticon_3268.png "[thumb up]"){kind=small}
. And it's HEDLEY 
![[down]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_down.png "[down]"){kind=icon}
I'm aware, but...hell, look at Machete and The Expendables.
edited 5th Mar '15 7:43:54 AM by ACW
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts
I'm making a point, hold off on it. And Machete and The Expendables aren't comparable
edited 5th Mar '15 8:47:02 AM by Lightysnake
So, is Ryan Gaerity a possible keeper or not ?
![[tdown]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Thumbs_down_emoticon_3571.png "[thumb down]"){kind=small}
No on Clinch.
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
From here? Let's see: kills a cellmate who he promised to take, killing all the coworkers, killing the dog, trying to kill the wife and kid? I'll give a ; the part with the uncle doesn't seem to be disqualifying enough (though I've not seen the movie).
Your friendly neighborhood stank goblin
for Headley (Hadley...Hedley?) Lamarr.
@ACW: That's true. But then again, I've seen villains who have done far worse than Colonel Stuart, and they've been cut either for being too generic, for being a mook just following orders, for being Made of Evil, for being a Well-Intentioned Extremist, for being a Woobie, Destroyer of Worlds, or for having several Pet the Dog moments. ...The last one may be stretching it a bit, but you get what I'm saying. I'm still a no on him. If there were signs in the movie of him being a Bad Boss (other than when he almost killed a mook for failing him), then sure, I'd agree with you.
Now to give my two cents on the whole Anime!Light debate. I'm slowly beginning to lean towards a for him, and here's why. From what I remembered (and correct me if I'm wrong), he never shows remorse for what he does. Ever. At least, not until the very end where he's screaming where's Misa and Takada, and by that point, he crossed the Moral Event Horizon so many times that many people just didn't give a shit that he was about to die. He killed Raye Pender and other FBI agents without any sign of regret. Then he goes on to kill his now widowed fiancée and then proceeds to gloat in her face when she's about to go kill herself. Same thing with L: he just smirks at the man as he dies in his arms.
Light just comes off as being The Chessmaster, to the point where he's nothing more than a man playing an actual game of chess, treating human beings like mere things that he has to defeat or maneuver around in order to beat his opponent. And when he finally says "Checkmate," all he does is gloat about it and rub it in his opponent's face. He may (or may not be) a Well-Intentioned Extremist, but he's also a Sociopath and has the makings of being a CM.
edited 5th Mar '15 10:33:39 AM by Tyk5919
I write stories and shiz. You can read them here.
Re Clinch Leatherwood: No. It's a parody and he only kills three people. Plus, why is it that I severely doubt that Seth MacFarlane depicted Clinch marrying a nine-year-old with any degree of seriousness or horror?
Re Hedley Lamar: HA!
edited 5th Mar '15 11:12:07 AM by OccasionalExister
Lighty: About Lamar -![[lol]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/lol2v12_4863.png "[lol]"){kind=small}
But in all seriousness, Tyk5919 , is A Million Ways To Die In The West a strait story that's filled with Seth's humor like Ted, or is it an over the top all out parody much like Blazing Saddels ? Because from what I've seen in trailers it looks like the former, so Clinch might have a shot.
Also if an affectionate parody can have CM, I might just bring up Ike Sloan.
edited 5th Mar '15 11:30:30 AM by Beast
"It's like...a cliff, and if I do it, I'm just gonna...fall." "I think we're already falling."
Your friendly neighborhood stank goblin
I haven't seen A Million Ways to Die in the West to be honest. Because reasons. And stuff. >__<
Again, another one of those films I'd have to see for myself whenever I have time for it. But Death Note anime and all that jazz...
I write stories and shiz. You can read them here.
"O_O". Whoops. Sorry about that, I thought it was you who brought Clinch up. It was Larkmarn I was talking too. My heads been all backwards lately.
You know what, here is an effort post on the killer:
Who is he and what has he done?
He is an unnamed man who murdered at least 5 (possibly as many as 11) children, and hid their bodies in the animatronics at Freddy Fazbear'a pizaria. He got away while the police arrested the wrong person (it's unclear if it was a Frame-Up, but even if it wasn't, he still allowed an innocent man to be wrongfully convicted rather than turning himself in, and used this turn of events to get away with his crime). After Fazbear closed down for good, he returned to the scene to destroy the evidence. By destroying the animatronics, he unknowingly freed the ghosts of the children he murdered, who sought revenge on him. He tried to hide in the Springtrap animatronic, but the animatronic crushed him like an iron maiden. His ghost remained in the animatronic, and he ended up like his victims. Throughout the third game, he tries to kill the player, but the animatronic is destroyed in the end by a fire, so his ghost presumably is freed from the Springtap suit and sent to Hell.
Does he meet the standards of the setting and the baseline standard?
Yes to both. Killing at least 5 children, and letting an innocent man get convicted of his crime is enough for the baseline standard. While the children became serial killers themselves after their deaths, at least they did not kill children.
Migrating Factors?
This is where it gets tricky. We never actually see him kill the children, but in the final death minigame in the third game, we see him confronted by the ghosts of the children he murdered. We do not actually see the innocent man get convicted, but we are told in a newspaper clipping that the perpetrator was arrested. The fact that the killer was actually killed after Fazbear's closed for good, clearly means they arrested the wrong person, and he allowed the innocent man to have his life ruined so he could get away with his killings. I think the ghosts and newspaper clippings are sufficant evidence of his actions. There is another problem though: We never see the killer himself, only a graphic depiction of him in the death minigames (where he is portrayed as a purple man), and while the minigames are likely strong enough evidence of his actions, the fact remains that we never learn much about him or see or hear him speak. We have let in some other characters with no lines (heck, we just did Niklas) but they mostly had backstories and clear personalities. The only things we know about the killers personality is that he must have been sadistic, as he almost always has a Slasher Smile, and that he is clever enough to leave no evidence (he returned to the scene to destroy it). He also seemed rather cowardly, given the way he acts when confronted by the ghosts. In the end, while clearly a monster, we no very little about him. On the other hand, we did let in the killer from Squidwards Suicide, who we also never even saw and knew nothing about. Edit: His actions of trying to kill the player may not be his fault, as we do not know why the children became killers after their deaths, so their moral agency (and by extension his) are in question. His other deeds are already enough though, so this is moot.
edited 5th Mar '15 2:33:05 PM by bobg
jjj
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
What's the work?
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
Hmmm...tricky, but I'll lean a tentative .
You could also argue that the murderer was in total control of his actions, as the way to distract him is to play audio clips of the Balloon Boy from the second game.
Then again, these games always raise more questions than they give answers. About the only thing set in stone is that you really don't want to get caught.
If everyone were normal, the world would be a dull place. Like reality television.
No to the killer from Five Nights at Freddy's. He doesn't speak, we know nothing about his personality, his moral agency as a ghost is questionable, and if all the kids are Serial Killers as well, he's not much more heinous.
Lizzid people!
That, and the animatronics are heavily implied to have butchered several security guards over the years.
Actually, he is much worse. At least the ghosts of the kids he killed didn't murder children. Again, we let in the Serial Killer from Squidwards Suicide despite not ever even seeing him, much less hearing him speak, what is different here?
edited 5th Mar '15 4:04:35 PM by bobg
jjj
Still unsure of the killer. Again it's only hinted that the ghost children have a hire bodycount, but we only know they kill the phone guy, the killer, and if we're unlucky, us.
"It's like...a cliff, and if I do it, I'm just gonna...fall." "I think we're already falling."
Lizzid people!
He was a snuff filmer and he was actually shown murdering a child. He was also a very demented individual.
edited 5th Mar '15 4:08:14 PM by AustinDR
If that's the case, then personally I think he shouldn't have been added either.
edited 5th Mar '15 4:07:44 PM by OccasionalExister
To be fair, the only reason the animatronics are murdering anyone is because they have the ghosts of murdered children in them, that the murderer killed. Its heavily implied that the animatronics murder securtiy guards, because the killer was a security guard and they associate all the security guards at Freddy's with the killer. They are the ghosts of children afterall, they do not have the same thought process an adult would have. Frankly the killer is somewhat responsible for animatronics actions, if he had not killed the children in the first place, nothing would be happening at Freddy's.
Also I will say yes to Pascoe, Lamarr and say no to Clinch.
edited 5th Mar '15 4:14:57 PM by Overlord
I think the death minigames are amicable as onscreen villainy, the problem is we learn very little about the killer himself motives/name/personality. For now I'm abstaining.
edited 5th Mar '15 6:28:59 AM by Beast
"It's like...a cliff, and if I do it, I'm just gonna...fall." "I think we're already falling."