Subpages cleanup: Complete Monster

As far as I'm aware, the only other thing that was referenced would be Darkseid's death, but Grant Morrison wrote a different version, Mary Marvel's Face–Heel Turn was ignored in favour of Final Crisis having her possessed (since that was what Grant Morrison told them would happen in Final Crisis, but they ignored the mind control part and had her turn evil of her own will, twice.), Harley Quinn and Holly's adventures together were never referenced again, same with Jason Todd's trek with the others, same with the whole deal with The Atom.

A couple of examples I'll weigh in on:

Squealer: Weak keep. He's basically Napoleon's lapdog (err, pig), true, but he's just so smug and self-important that it's pretty clear he enjoys doing the horrible things Napoleon tells him to.

Superboy-Prime: Strong chop. His issues of Blackest Night made him quite sympathetic.

Alex Luthor: Toughie. They let his creator, Marv Wolfman, go back and do a oneshot that gave him a Freudian Excuse, but this only happened after he'd done all his evil stuff.

edited 25th Dec '12 10:32:16 PM by HamburgerTime

On the Alex Luthor example, if they took the time to give him an excuse, it would count even if it happened after.

edited 25th Dec '12 10:51:14 PM by Shaoken

Disagree that made prime sympathetic. It comes off as a best throwing a tantrum. Prime blames everyone else for his decisions and whines how they 'make' him do things. Noboy 'made' him murder his girlfriend. And right after he's back to being an evil prick

I'm looking at The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion:

• Countess Alessia Caro: Cut. She's horrible, but it's offscreen villainy. We only see her torture chamber, not the act or the victims.
• Kurdan gro-Dragol: This one counts. He lures people in a secret fort and locks them there so his clients (psychopaths who like hunting living people) can play a hunting game to kill them. When you win the game, he kills the guy who is with you and tells you he has no intentions of letting you live because he has more customers to serve.
• Francois Motierre: Cut. He sacrificed his mother to survive, but it's both offscreen and he fails the heinous standard.
• The Dark Brotherhood peeps: Cut. All of their deeds are offscreen.

I haven't gotten far enough to know about Umaril and Mannimarco.

I did recall seeing the section on The Elder Scrolls being discussed quite a while ago, of which we only counted Mankar Camoran for Oblivion. Mannimarco is also allowed to stay, but he's covered under Daggerfall. I suppose this too can remain.

edited 26th Dec '12 7:11:41 AM by EarlOfSandvich

@6103 Well, I suppose the wiki is about all fiction; not necessarily good fiction. To be, the character sounds more like a cardboard cutout rather than a well-written example. I'm leaning no, but I'm not totally convinced yet.

@6104 I think I need someone to give a blow-by-blow as to what they're doing with Superboy-Prime. From what I know, he qualifies. But I don't follow DC closely; I think I just need more info.

@6106 The titular Killer Klowns From Outer Space are a group, receive no characterization, and are completely Played for Laughs.

I could have sworn that I mentioned Mrs. Deagle from Gremlins before, but I can't find where. Anyhow, she definitely doesn't even come close to being heinous enough, cut.

It would have helped if you named which specific post you meant (found it; @4976). I agreed with all of your suggestions in @5136 (you did make them while I was basically on Thanksgiving vacation).

For Squealer of Animal Farm - He was merely an enabler for Napoleon and a gargantuan brown-noser. He wasn't even capable of being monstrous without someone like Napoleon leading him, so I would vote cut.

@6112 I admit that the Slashers can't equal the power or the capability of some of the others, but they certainly could equal the depravity... but the fact that there are plenty that depraved is what keeps me from making a conclusion.

For specific examples, you'd have to give me time. While my life is finally starting to slow down a bit due to some obligations finally coming to a close, I still would need time to dig things up (I know that I can dig up some Changeling The Lost examples - even accounting for Blue-and-Orange Morality, some of the True Fae are just outright sociopaths).

Also, one thing that probably should be considered with all role-playing characters - much of what is done is backstory. There are some cases (like some of the Darklords in Ravenloft) where they delve into the backstory deeply so as to bring it forward. I'm still tracking down the Slashers book; I don't know for certain if that's happening here.

To be fair, Trigon is more than "this setting's Satan." He is actively trying to take over. Of course, you need more than that, too. Still, there's a reason my vote is to cut until someone can show otherwise (AKA, if you have a good argument, I'm not objecting to Trigon being brought up again).

Hrm... to be honest, unless I'm missing some incarnation, every writer has had at least one small spark of positive character in Lex Luthor... or, at the very least, doesn't have him go as far as some of the other examples that we've included (hey, there, Darkseid!). Given that I'm least solid on Golden Age Lex, I'm still open on him, but I feel pretty confident about voting for a total cut for any version of Lex after that point (especially Silver Age Lex - dude really loved his sister, after all).

Yes, this includes 52 Lex Luthor, for the reasons given in @6117

@6113 Well, Dr. Destiny doesn't show up in any substance beyond volume 1, so you're up on everything you need to know about The Sandman to comment on him. I'm not so sure that he loved his mother - he begged her for help, yes, but he didn't seem to care about her either way beyond what she might be able to do for him. He never expresses any actual regret - just fear of reprisal for what he did. I'm not seeing anything positive in him whatsoever.

For the Usagi Yojimbo examples... to be honest, I'd need a more solid write-up before I could vote on them.

@6117 I'm fully aware of just how modular the game is and how it offers to treat supernaturals - like I said, I am playing it and I have read the book (proud member of The Union, ready to do surprise home inspections to take care of Leech problems). Among other things, I don't think it's been credibly set forth that they're even that terrible compared to some of the things in the base book (like The Cheiron Group), let alone how bad things get elsewhere.

We've been at this for a while, so I'm going to cut you a bit of slack, but I'm not too fond of people asking me if I really did read their piece. I might skim because of the sheer amount of work I try to do in the thread, but yes, I do try to read every post. So yes, I did see what you said about The Baroness. I may have been short, but I'm not convinced that they showed enough to have her qualify.

Oh, I know Andrei wouldn't count in the tabletop game, which is why I asked for more detail, because I was treating the game distinctly. I'm fine with his inclusion, then.

For Alrik... First, seriously, Dragon Age called it "The Tranquil Solution"? That makes me feel uncomfortable just reading it... the Nazi parallels are a little too closely invoked for my tastes, and that speaks to bad writing for me.

But other than convincing me to not play any of the Dragon Age games, is he shown at least attempting to do this to a mage? If so, I'm fine with his inclusion.

@6118 Yeah, it's not called the World Of Darkness' because it's a happy place. You should see just how horrifying things can get in some of the splats - the one for fomori in Werewolf The Apocalypse'' was some of the most concentrated cases of monstrosity/Nausea Fuel you could find. Rather than derail the thread, I'll just invite the morbidly curious to PM me for some of the details. Anyhow, since the game doesn't bother with Paths of Enlightenment (it's possible that he would have gotten a cut vote if the Path of Death and the Soul or Path of Metamorphosis was involved), I will vote for Andrei.

@6121 Beyond just being a rumor even in-canon, we already voted on SCP Foundation entries. Easy cut (also, because we already voted, unilateral action is warranted in such an occasion).

@6125 The locked pages are proof that we have come a far way in doing the work on this trope. And yes, thankfully, it's been a long time since we've heard choruses of people calling for a cut... for that matter, it's been a long time since we heard a call for an Example Sectionectomy (which was something I did legitimately fear would happen with Complete Monster for the first 9 months I did work on the cleanup).

@6130 Hmm... seems like The Elder Scrolls has only been brought up piecemeal. I think, rather than just pick at one particular part of it, that we should just hammer at the page once and for all. That said, I'm not familiar with the games at all (beyond silly things you can do with the engine, like the staircase of paintbrushes). Can anyone give a full rundown?

A couple of Harry Potter examples I'd like to look at. Umbridge, Greyback, and movie!Barty definitely fit, and the Carrows probably would too if any of their villainy was actually on-page, but I'm not entirely sold on Voldemort or Bellatrix. For Voldemort, this may just be my own interpretation of the text, but there was the implication that children conceived under a Love Potion always turn out sociopathic (and as such he'd arguably fail the "created to be evil" clause) and by the end of the last book the narrative seemed to treat him as more an object of pity than revulsion. As for Bellatrix, she actually seems to have one person she cares about in a non-creepy way and that's her sister, Narcissa.

@6133 From the FAQ:

If you do so, you will note that we already had a huge discussion over all of the Harry Potter examples. Please review those before bringing up any further characters to discuss.

edited 26th Dec '12 10:42:00 AM by 32_Footsteps

Sorry.

@6130: I think all of those characters were once on the Elder Scrolls Complete Monster page at some point, and have all since been cut. Regardless, I'll second all of that except for Kurdan, who has definitely been cut (see: @3486) for not being heinous enough and having a low on-screen kill count.

I can also do a more complete write up of trigon and superboy prime when I return if nobody minds. The usagi yojimbo examples as well

Itchy is listed on The Itchy & Scratchy Show. What.

I actually wanted to present a potential CM for the Film section: Queen Ravenna from Snow White & the Huntsman. Using the three requirements:

• The character is truly heinous by the standards of the story, which makes no attempt to present the character in any positive way - fits for Ravenna. She is shown onscreen murdering the old king in order to ascend the throne, playing on his grief over the loss of his wife/her own Hair of Gold appearance to do so; she also is shown sucking the very life essence out of a young prisoner of her kingdom, to continue possessing a youthful appearance (and later, after a severe attack where she ages rapidly, is shown in a room full of dead beautiful young women, looking immaculate and youthful again - might count as Offscreen Villainy). If you count the murders/crimes she's authorized or have been committed for her, there is even more blood on her hands: by the end of the first segment of the film, she's pretty much slaughtered the old king's army, with only three or four shown characters able to escape her wrath. (Again, this is shown, not in great gory detail, but certainly depicted; this is also not during any sort of war-time.) Her presence as ruler of the land blights it and has turned it into a dead world.

• The character's terribleness is played seriously at all times, evoking fear, revulsion and hatred from the other characters in the story - potentially. She is the obvious villain, is treated as a blight to the very earth in the film (which withers and rots away once she ascends the throne), and is widely feared, if not despised, by anyone not in her court. The Huntsman only sides with her because Ravenna states she can bring back his dead wife if he does. She does have an army and a really creepy right-hand brother who are loyal to her, but I'm not sure if that's enough to discount her.

• They are completely devoid of altruistic qualities. They show no regret for their crimes - definitely true. If she keeps her beauty and her kingdom, it was worth it for her.

There's one or two potential things I can see being problematic with her, however:

• She is implied to be somewhat... nuts. However, the implication is incredibly brief. Basically, Ravenna's mirror is a magical talisman that produces a liquid image of a cloaked figure, who tells her who is the fairest of all in the land/tells her Snow White is fairest. Or so it is presented in the film, until her brother Finn watches her speaking to thin air while apparently speaking to the cloaked figure, and we see it from Finn's POV. This does not seem to affect her judgment in the slightest, and she definitely seems aware of what she's doing when she murders the king and takes over the kingdom.

• She does have a Motive Rant:" I was ruined by a king like you once. I replaced his queen. An old woman. And in time I too would have been replaced. Men use women. They ruin us and when they are finished with us they toss us to the dogs like scraps." The weird thing about this Motive Rant is that it has literally nothing to do with the rest of the film or Ravenna's motives for what she does later on. I can't figure out if it counts as a Freudian Excuse because of that. Ravenna is certainly desperate to keep her youth - something implied by this rant - but she is never shown trying to impress a man, or so much as mentions this king again. The sequence depicting her youth is explicitly a mirrored version of Snow White's birth, and not a Freudian Excuse in the slightest - again, this king isn't even present.

edited 26th Dec '12 12:08:27 PM by LargoQuagmire

@6138 I'm more than a little perturbed that Itchy & Scratchy has a trope page. That said, given that it's so blatantly Played for Laughs somewhere between parody and Black Comedy, easy cut.

@6139 Okay, to go over the points in order:

• Heinousness: She fits, although I wouldn't mention anything about the room full of dead girls. That's where we start getting into hairsplitting over onscreen versus offscreen villainy. And when you have enough confirmed crimes to qualify without that instance, you make a stronger entry by only citing the sure items.
• Disliked in-story: That works - loyalty inspired solely by fear, revulsion, and bribery (regardless of whether she can, or plans to, make good on said bribes) is par for the course.
• Devoid of altruism: Sounds about right.

On the points against:

• Insanity: Well, it depends on how they slice it, I suppose. Maybe, due to her magic, she's the only one who can see the figure in the mirror. Slightly related, maybe said figure in the mirror can only address one person at a time. Beyond that, though, there's a difference between "being insane" and "lacking moral capacity." There are plenty of cases in history, let alone fiction, where sanity was clearly lacking; and, yet, the individual still had a grasp between right and wrong. I don't see any reason to doubt that is the case here.
• Motive Rant: The presence of one, of course, is not necessarily indicative that the character doesn't qualify. I do think that the disconnect between what is said versus the actual situation makes this more of a Hannibal Lecture that the character doesn't believe in (alternately, this also sounds like an Anvilicious Author Filibuster that someone chose to put in just the wrong place; a rant like that would make much more sense in Dangerous Liaisons). So I'm inclined to discount this as being unsupported by the work itself.

So I would qualify her, although I'd be careful how the entry was worded.

In flashback we see Ravenna being kidnapped by men on horseback, as her entire town is put to the sword. It's very heavily implied that she was carried off to be raped, and that only the beauty spell placed on her let her survive while the rest of the town died. As a result, she's obsessed with staying young and beautiful because she associates it with not being dead.

There's also the fact that when her brother dies, Ravenna appears to be in physical pain. The two of them are very (if creepily) devoted to each other and it appears to go both ways.

I have to vote against Ravenna. Between the Rape as Backstory, very real mental instability, and relationship with Finn I can't see her qualifying.

RE: Hunter

There's nothing the Cheiron Group does that matches the actions of the slashers. Yes they put pieces of dead monsters inside of Hunters. But there's nothing to indicate that's an involuntary procedure. As noted in several of the books, Cheiron may have sinister motives, but it may also be just another monster-hunting conspiracy with the best of intentions. The option to make them totally evil is present, but so is the option to make them totally good (or as good as WOD gets anyway). In contrast, the depravity unleashed by the slashers or Salvatore (who is from the corebook) is cannonically that bad, with no option to change it.

Counting votes, we have enough to get Captain Hook, The Driver, and Salvatore onto the page. John Smith does not have enough, so I'll leave him alone until further votes/discussion come in.

RE: Luthor. No matter how bad he gets, Luthor is not the man who springs to mind when I think Superman's Rogues Gallery and CM. That's Brainiac, with Mongul, Darkseid, Neutron, and some versions of Zod not far behind. Ultimately, Luthor is, I think, too relatable and human for the trope, especially when contrasted against his competition.

edited 26th Dec '12 1:45:48 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

Goddamn it, I need details like Rape as Backstory. This is very important, as this can color the deeds from there on out. Poor form, Largo, to let that one slip to the wayside.

Basically, when you hit issues like rape, we start getting into issues about the cycle of abuse, just how much culpability one has when that much psychological damage happens early, and so on... I prefer to err on the side of caution... I'll flip my vote to cut.

I will try to locate a copy of the materials in question regarding Hunter The Vigil; based on my experience, the examples themselves will be quick reads when I do. That said, I still feel that nobody has given solid reason as to why they should be counted distinct from the World Of Darkness as a whole.

Anyhow, a couple new entries to consider, from YMMV.Falling Down:

• Complete Monster: The vile Neo-Nazi is perhaps the only truly villainous person in the film. This is a guy who brags about owning a used canister of Zyklon-B and threatens to rape Bill. He is the only person Bill intentionally kills and he really had it coming.
  • The Mexican gangbangers. First they order Bill to get lost just because he sat on a random piece of concrete and then try to force him to pay when he tries to reason with them and comply to their wishes, only to run away like cowards when he fights back. Later, they try to pull a drive-by on him only to hit everyone else, wounding and likely killing people, except for him. To see Bill toy around with the last living gang member as he lies wounded after the car-crash with his own gun is just so satisfying.

I'm rather fond of this movie and its very nuanced look into different types of villainy. So to hit the two examples:

The neo-Nazi: First off, we will be clear that he is an unmitigated Jerkass. Shown to be homophobic (the page's assertions that said neo-Nazi is also gay are suppositions, albeit ones strongly hinted at in the movie, so Boomerang Bigot is a reasonable trope to discuss in this case), racist, and only willing to support Foster's rampage when he thinks that Foster is also unrepentantly racist (mind you, they do strongly suggest earlier that Foster is racist, just not to the same extreme), I admit that the neo-Nazi has no redeeming features. The guy, as noted, does indeed brag about owning a used canister of Zyklon-B.

That said, it's unclear whether or not he really is threatening to rape Foster (I always viewed it as getting ready to torture Foster, but I admit the rape suggestion is valid), and that's literally the only qualifying action that he attempts to do. It is a pivotal scene in the movie, but it comes across more as the final "slippery slope" moment, after which Foster is no longer able to stop from, well, Falling Down. I think that the neo-Nazi is bad, but he simply doesn't do enough on-screen (and certainly not any worse than the suggestions about what Foster himself will do) to justify including him.

Mexican gangbangers: Well, first and foremost, as we've noted before, no groups.

That said, we do get enough from the leader of said gangbangers to potentially list him. However, the only act that's really all that bad is the attempted drive-by. We are talking about a movie where the main character, an Anti-Villain at best and a Villain Protagonist for sure, shoots a rocket launcher at a construction site (and construction workers, even though they do try to haul ass out of there) for being rude - essentially the reason the gangbangers' leader attacked Foster. And Foster does more actions besides. Basically, the deeds are overshadowed by the main character - the leader of the gang and his underlings are just not heinous comparatively.

TL;DR version - I want to cut the whole entry. Thoughts?

That argument for cutting those examples from Falling Down seems good to me. I'd support it.

To be fair to Largo, the Rape as Backstory thing in Snow White And The Huntsman is implied, not shown. Blink for a minute and you'll miss it.

When the movie first came out, there was an attempt to list Ravenna on the YMMV page. The same person who listed her, also put her brother, Finn down as one, while listing Ravenna as Woobie, Destroyer of Worlds. I axed it at the time for not understanding the trope (you cannot claim somebody is both), and I stand by that decision. Ravenna and Finn are both monstrous (her crimes are listed above by Largo; Finn's a kidnapper, rapist, mass-murderer, and sexual sadist) but they care about each other, and have a godawful backstory. From what we're shown, Ravenna's mother blessed/damned her with perfect beauty, not only so she could survive the massacre of their village, but so that she could then act as an instrument of revenge. Finn, who escaped the massacre, later tracked her down, and swore to be totally loyal in order to make up for not saving her the first time.

They're beyond f-ed up, but they aren't this trope.

edited 26th Dec '12 3:01:13 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

^^ chainsaw those Falling Down entries, I'd say.

On the Ser Alrik example, we don't see him forcing someone to go through the rite of tranquility, but we have proof he did it to two people (one of the templars killed for the first case had a note questioning why Alrik had the man made tranquil) and he makes it clear to his would-be victim that he is going to make her tranquil, so I'd count it as a Gory Discretion Shot since we never see what the rite of tranqulity involves beyond the use of lyrium. However he did loudly state his intent to force her to go through the rite, that he was stopped from going through it doesn't change the fact he was going to do it.

EDIT: Here are some things to add to the never again list:

• Fallout 3 - Werner. Cut for failing the henious standard. The idea that he would kill a baby is purely conjecture lacking in-game evidence.
• Fallout: New Vegas - Dermot and Saint James. Cut for Offscreen Villainy and failing the henious standard in relation to Cook Cook, whom they express disgust over his henious actions.

And we can add Fallout, Grand Theft Auto, Fable to the pages cleaned. I know I'm still trying to get people going through DC And Vertigo to add it to the list, but we only need to go over four examples on the Halo to add it to the cleaned up page (and more improtantly lock it with great prejudice.

• Police Commissioner Kinsler. He's only found in the games audio files, but they are real-time recordings that keep all of his evil deeds documented. He tries to rape Sadie several times, and to try and catch her the second time he threatens to open fire on a crowd of people to get her to come out. He sabotages the cities efforts to fight the Covenant by ordering that the city's AI shut off, because the AI would try and stop him from raping Sadie. He also murders Sadie's father by activating the fire supression system in the room he was in, although we only see his body in the main game. An easy keep, just need to re-write the example.
• Prophet of Truth, whose article is terrible. His main henious act would be ordering the genocide of humanity for the great journey, even though the books reveal that he knew for a fact that the Great Journey was a lie. The rest of the article is just horribly written; mocking Johnson? Killing someone on the other side of the war? I should have cleaned this up a long time ago, but he might get cut.
• Haka, from Halo Legends. His crime is forcing the current Arbiter's best friend to murder the Arbiter's friend, horribly beating said friend offscreen, all to destroy the current Arbiter so he could replace him for personal power. Possibly cut.
• The Master Builder, a.k.a. Faber. Horribly racist, built the Halos so his race could be in charge, tested it on a race that rebelled becaucse the Forerunners were losing to the flood, and his first thought to learning that the Halos would preserve life was that he could throw them to the flood after.
• The Diadect in Halo4. Easy cut, he believes he's doing the right thing for the Forerunner race, and there's a lot of talk about ther being two diadects, insanity, and a whole heap of issues to deal with.

And if two of those examples are cut we can axe the entire page and put them on the main Video Game page.

edited 26th Dec '12 7:06:56 PM by Shaoken

On the never-again list, you can add Salt-Upon-Wounds, with something like "his massacre of New Canaan happened offscreen, and before Honest Hearts took place. His onscreen appearances amounted to threatening violence, which can be averted via skill check, or awaiting execution."

edited 26th Dec '12 6:34:50 PM by EarlOfSandvich

Yeah, to be honest, I didn't read it as Rape as Backstory, I read it as "your mom's a total nutjob". I honestly didn't see the horses and the focus of the scene is definitely not the ravagement of her village. Wasn't trying to slip a fast one by you there, I just honestly didn't read it like that.

Okay, I've searched the thread, and most people have voted to cut The Fairly OddParents! examples. If no one objects, I'll cut them.

So far Mrs. Deagle from Gremlins has 3 votes against.

Also, I suggest cutting Dracula from the Literature page. The loss of his wife Elisabeta was what drove him to reject God and curse the living, so he's a case of Even Evil Has Loved Ones.

Fable isn't fully cleaned up yet. I contested Lucien as an example due to his being a WellIntentionedExtremist and a WoobieDestroyerOfWorlds and 32 Footsteps and Occaisonal Exister concured. To the best of my knowledge, no one contested Lucien's removal. Lucien is still on the page though.

edited 26th Dec '12 7:33:36 PM by lrrose

Let's take a look on Ace Attorney, should we?

Someone: Flamemario, that page was deleted recently.

Yeah, I know, let's take a look at Ace Attorney's YMMV.

• Redd White: Cut.
• Manfred von Karma: Well his Complete Monster entry just seems to prove he's a Manipulative Bastard. At least he didn't treat her daughter just like how Bansai did to his son. Cut.
• Damon Grant: That was already cut, isn't it?
• Juan Corrida: He failed how heinous he was. Not to mention that his deed are all offscreen. Cut.
• Furio Tigre: Here's another words for you. CUT. He doesn't seems to be heinous by the story standard.

There are a bunch of other Ace Attorney murders that I have no clue what should I say.