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. " 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
2017! IT
HUGE to 2017!IT.
Pennywise
Never thought I say this but..............Easy to 2017 version of It!!!! I guess that Bill Skaarsgard could match nicely if he plays the Joker for future DC Comic movies
"Making screw-ups and mistakes was I ever really good at. Because everything I touch went to hell."Playing some Catch up:
To It, Xander, Wall Street, Ivan. Reynolds, Tatsuzou. Brant, Payne, Rott, Devlon, Manic Jake, Mc Farland and Crom.
To Carruthers and Rural.
I have a bit of taste question, I did an effort post on a TV movie version of Ted Bundy a year ago and I think a few people had a problem with it. I have found another TV movie about John Wayne Gacy (Canadian-American co production apparently) that aired on Fox back in 1992, does anyone think proposing him would be in bad taste?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Catch_a_Killer
I have been reading the star Trek "A iIme to Kill and A Time to Heal" and it seems like Kinchawn may not count, because while he was planning on sacrificing his family for selfish political reasons, he told himself he would mourn their deaths and their deaths would haunt him forever.
I may read some other Marvel novels (these from the mid 2000s, they have no connection with the 90s novels) and propose some villains from these novels.
Also I got 6 yes votes for Skull Duggery, if anyone else wants to vote, go ahead, but here is the write up for him :
- Wild West C.O.W.-Boys of Moo Mesa: Despite only appearing in 2 episodes, Skull Duggery is one of the vilest villains to appear in the show. Skull Duggery was originally a old miner who staked a silver claim and was too greedy to share it with anyone. He died in a cave in, but his ghost continued to haunt the mine. Marshall Moo's Kid Sidekick, Cody Calf and 2 other kids go to the mine to look for the silver. Skull Duggery catches them, traps them in a mine shaft and fills it with water, attempting to drown the children. Marshall Moo saves the kids and causes another cave in, sealing Skull Duggery in his mine. However Skull Duggery escapes a year later. Obsessed with revenge against Marshall Moo, Skull Duggery recruits 2 other ghosts to help him. Skull Duggery plans to use a magic spell that rapidly ages everything, people and buildings alike, to destroy Cowtown.
edited 22nd Sep '17 10:24:33 PM by Overlord
Man, got a lot to catch up on. One immediate thing, though:
...Except that was basically a bunch of self-praising BS, because he never mentions or thinks of them again, to the point where we don't actually know whether or not they were even killed in the Klingon attack. It seems like more a way to make him an even bigger asshole than to portray a redeeming quality.
Fair enough, I was just being cautious, I spoke with some people via PM and some people thought it may be disqualifying.
I think its good to set what is an actual redeeming quality and one argue Kinchawn was lying to himself or coming with justifications for his evil actions.
edited 22nd Sep '17 10:36:36 PM by Overlord
YES to Pennywise. Was anyone really expecting otherwise?
BTW, I hope nobody minds, but when requesting the removal of the King films, I also had them change "With rare exception, the actual monsters of his works..." to "With rare exception, the actual monsters of his Shared Universe..."
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts@ It: . It is one of those rare cases of a literal monster also being a figurative monster
So while I'm going to switch to a to the 2017 Pennywise, I finally found my copy of my book, and it said this about It (the book version) when she senses her children being killed:
No! It wailed, lurching from side to side, feeling Its life-force running from a hundred wounds, none of them mortal in itself, but each a song of pain, each slowing It One of Its legs hung by a single living twist of meat. One of Its eyes was blind. It sensed a terrible rupture inside, the result of whatever poison one of the hated men-boys had managed to shoot down Its throat.
Not that this affects the 2017 movie version, but might be something to consider since the book version is also currently listed as a Complete Monster.
I stand by my previous line.
Given the Eldritch Abomination of IT, it's likewise possible they function as extensions of the Spider, who is eternal. Its feelings on that are completely unexplored and it seems to be more preoccupied with its impending demise than anything.
For 2017 Pennywise/IT. Good on ya coming back Scraggle. Shame there'll never be a Stephen King Shared Universe... the Kingiverse.
As for Coldsteel, I brought that up a few months back. No, Coldsteel never counted, and the entry mostly points out that he's evil in a supposedly good clan. And while yes, Iago/Coldsteel is the only one of the Wyvern clan to have been completely unsympathetic, he fails the heinous standard by a long shot. He's manipulative and tries to spark a fight between Coldstone/Othello and his lover and Goliath. Then he possesses Brooklyn and keeps doing the manipulation thing, then he fights the London Clan as part of a deal with Xanatos. He never exceeded the villainy of most other villains. Even Oldcastle outdoes him and Oldcastle only had a few comic issues to his name, not like Coldsteel's recurring presence.
edited 23rd Sep '17 1:39:55 AM by DrPsyche
to 2017 IT/Pennywise. Frankly I had no doubts about it.
to 2017 Pennywise. Never any doubt.
It. You guys miss me? I haven't been on in a while.
edited 23rd Sep '17 8:23:13 AM by UtterKoala
Pretty obvious to 2017's Pennywise. Not sure how he wouldn't qualify given the book's version was also a CM and that the 2017 film is more faithful to the source.
Together, we are one.Nickelwise the Jiggying Clownperson. I also think 2017!IT should have its own separate writeup.
"No running in the halls!"It. Similar to Walter back in The Dark Tower, this one comes as no surprise.
Been a while since I've been here
pennywise
But that's not really a suprise now is it?
for Pennywise.
So, seems the vast majority is in approval of 2017!IT getting a separate writeup. Happy to do so. I'll write him up with my batch hopefully later today.
you even have him as your profile picture, what a creepy clown
Considering we accept villains from Dark Souls I don't think All There in the Manual is considered off screen.
edited 22nd Sep '17 6:03:33 PM by ReynTime250