Subpages cleanup: Complete Monster

So, permission to cut Jeff?

EDIT: Oh, and Lighty, HE is NOT Played for Laughs.

edited 1st Aug '13 10:33:14 AM by ACW

Cut for BOTH Commodus amd Talia. While Commodus could qualify, you have to compare him to the standards of that time, and his crimes onscreen is—kills his father, kills Maximus family and these actions were not out of the blue for their time, Moral Event Horizon yes, but not really CM material in that view.

As noted before, Joffrey is even worse because he commits a heinous action every time he has the chance, I don't read the books but that seems to be the idea on the show. Commodus does apparently have a 0% Approval Rating but it all seems to be Offscreen Villainy here.

Talia would be heavily Depending on the Writer and don't be surprised if DC steps in here and resets everything.

As for Vorster, I have read about the book on Wikipedia through I have never read it before and he does seem like a qualifier from what I remember.

edited 1st Aug '13 11:47:21 AM by xie323

He pretty much sets the heinousness standard for Batman villains, so when any new one is proposed as an example, he's the go-to comparison to make.

I know, but I meant whenever someone brings up something like "but Joker did show redeeming qualities at this point" or "X should not be disqualified by having these traits because Joker could get a pass despite having them." Makes me want to look at the Joker's entire history and single out exactly which incarnations of him are truly Complete Monsters. Because the character might just be too insane to solidly qualify as one.

So you're basically saying that the one thing that puts him into CM territory is being a dick to the hero.

After the fact that he had done the thing he was describing. He made it happen, and now he was gloating about it. If those were lies, then he was just being a dick and trying to get a rise out of Maximus. But what reason do we have to doubt that he gave his family as cruel and painful and degrading a death as he described?

Oh that is such bullshit I honestly do feel insulted by it.

I wasn't arguing that Joff was not a Complete Monster, nor that both he and Commodus were. I was arguing why "he's pitiful and did everything for his father's approval" is not at all a disqualifyer. Joff, as we know, got worse after his father died, making his excuses and wanting for acceptance to be inadequate next to his behavior. By contrast Commodus murdered his father, but according to some people here, didn't go far enough afterwards.

One of the requirements we've identified is "as evil as they can be with what they have." It's designed so that people like The Joker can be listed alongside universe-wide threats like Darkseid; The Joker hasn't hit the same heniousness level as the latter, but that is purely because he doesn't have the ability to and by every given indication if he did have that level of power he would match that level.

The thing is that I don't feel a consistency about that here. Some villains we axed were as evil and heinous as they could be with what they had, but go axed for other reasons, some even being "they exist in a universe where a bigger potatoes villain exists."

You know it's almost as if you haven't even bothered keeping up with the thread you're so far off the mark. Even if tomorrow we put a blanket ban on new examples period the amount of examples we've approved is nowhere close to "near extinct."

It's not that the trope examples are close to extinct NOW. I meant that it sometimes seemed to be what people were going for in this thread, even though that's not the intended purpose. I mean, when you have people jumping over any small shred of evidence that could disqualify Captain Vidal or Amon Goeth from the trope, it seems like people just want as few keepers as possible.

Thanks for calling me simple-minded, A New Man! That totally makes me want to reevaluate my vote for Commodus! In the future, try not to be so jerkish about things.

Were you the one who said the thing about gladiators? If so then I apologize. If not, then it wasn't about you.

This is inventing an entirely new standard. It's something we've never done before. We take the work as individual.

I could say something else here, but instead I'll say that this is a valid point. We don't want to start invent new criteria and standards just to make the trope even harder to qualify for. It's fine enough as is.

Please think that this is a trope for serial killers, rapists and world destroyers.

I don't see why we have to generalize the trope to such Moral Event Horizon crossing. I'm sure there are a few monsters who don't do any of that stuff, but still manage to cause pain through being irredeemably evil people who make conscious choices to do wrong.

Stacked up against murderers, rapists, and omnicidal maniacs, someone who merely abuses his brother cannot be a CM. It's a matter of perspective.

Ed Edd And Eddy has no murderers, rapists, and omnicidal maniacs, though. Eddy's brother, however, is the only genuinely evil and abusive sociopath in the series, and he hits all major criteria in the small amount of time he has on-screen. It's disgusting in general and heinous by the series' standards.

@Austin DR: I was not arguing that Eddy's brother was not a Complete Monster. Only that he was one for reasons that Jeff lacked, not just because he was a Knight of Cerebus.

edited 1st Aug '13 12:17:42 PM by ANewMan

I know that, but examples like Vidal or Goeth are as clear examples of said HIGHLY exclusive trope as you could find. And yet there were people willing to jump all over the slightest hint of a redeeming quality they could find just to declare them not examples, though thankfully these people were outvoted on the matter. But all the same, I think some people misinterpret this trope as "Chaotic Evil Stupid Evil villains without a hint of anything realistic who go over the Moral Event Horizon for no reason other than For the Evulz", which is very generalizing.

edited 1st Aug '13 12:21:06 PM by ANewMan

Cut for BOTH Commodus amd Talia. While Commodus could qualify, you have to compare him to the standards of that time, and his crimes onscreen is—kills his father, kills Maximus family and these actions were not out of the blue for their time, Moral Event Horizon yes, but not really CM material in that view.

I'm noticing a trend in this thread. Like I said, the problem with creating new standards. Since when have we decided to look at the standards of the time as opposed to how the work presents it? Fiction can do two things: The first is presenting a work that relies on Deliberate Values Dissonance where characters don't act any differently than they should. THAT is when we should judge them by the standard of the time. then, there are works which take the setting perhaps without the historical knowledge and impose future or anachronistic values to it. Gladiator is the latter.

This isn't a Roman history film, it's a historical drama that takes enormous liberties with history and presents the culture in an extremely different way. there is nothing, NOTHING to imply there has ever been a worse Emperor than Commodus. I challenge you to show me one scene in these films that indicates this. Should we start eliminating Amon Goeth because 'all he does is kill Concentration Camp victims' which every Nazi of the time in his position did? Captain Vidal perhaps, because torturing and killing people should be expected from fascists and he's living in a time where the Nazis exist who did what he did and more?

In essence, it's inventing a new standard as opposed to looking at the work. It's historical fiction, not a historical portrayal.

Furthermore? Yes, his actions would be quite out of line for the times, if only that Maximus's family were Roman citizens and crucifixion was a death reserved for the lowest of criminals. The Roman empire didn't exactly look kindly on incest or rape to citizens, so Commodus blackmailing his sister into sex with him with pain of her son's death would be seen as remarkably evil and the film displays it as such.

As noted before, Joffrey is even worse because he commits a heinous action every time he has the chance, I don't read the books but that seems to be the idea on the show. Commodus does apparently have a 0% Approval Rating but it all seems to be Offscreen Villainy here.

No, he quite clearly blackmails his sister onscreen and Maximus's family's corpses are shown after the soldiers kill them. His father's murder is onscreen as well. Oh, and Joffrey exists in the same world as Mad King Aerys, Maegor the Cruel, Aegon the Unworthy, Slaver's Bay's rulers and the Others. Shall we chop him too if we have to compare all of them?

As for Vorster, I have read about the book on Wikipedia through I have never read it before and he does seem like a qualifier from what I remember.

Honest question: using the standards you just used for Commodus, how and why should he count?

Here's another example. In a film like, let's say Kingdom Of Heaven we have characters openly preaching peace and religious tolerance in such views that would've gotten you in a heap of trouble if you actually said them in those days. Should we impose the values the film fictionally sets or the value of real life? If not the former, what's the point of fiction? I don't see how Gladiator should be taken to be judged so much by the time's own standards when it gives us people who openly preach a Republican message which nobody of the time thought was a reality. The movie also leaves out the fact that Commodus ruled for 13 not so bad years and was succeeded as Emperor by a man named Pertinax

Like I said: Give Commodus's crimes to King Rick of Happybonia...actually just consider this: King Rick lusts after his sister. He blackmails her into sleeping with him (which is rape) by threatening the life of her only son. Is King Rick a CM? I think most of us would agree he is. That hits our criteria on its own.

So why isn't Emperor Commodus of Rome?

edited 1st Aug '13 12:51:13 PM by Lightysnake

Also, Shakoen:

Him to be as evil as he can be given the means he has avaliabe which...he really doesn't. He kills the hero's family and rapes his sister. Henious, but the man is in charge of the largest empire at the time.

I feel, as Morgenthaler said, you're misusing the 'heinous as they can be.' We use those to differentiate between people in different positions. Do we give rapists and murderers a pass because "hey, at least they ain't targeting children?" The point Ambar uses is Ribbons Almark and Ali al-Saachez who have vastly different levels of power, authority and influence Ali is as bad as he can be in his role. Whether Commodus could crucify infants (and he can't. Roman Emperors didn't have this absolute authority, and didn't ever since the Julio-Claudian line died. An Emperor who tried was gonna be looking at his organs on the end of a sword in short order) is irrelevant to the simple questions of "is he heinous by the story standards"

One; Word Of God means nothing in this thread, so Word of Dante means even less. Two; Joffrey becomes King of comparable power to Comm, but unlike Comm he takes every chance he can to be as absolutely vile as possible. A slightly drunk guy about to die in a duel on your birthday for your amusement? Have your guards force wine down his throat until he drowns in it. Being told that killing him on your birthday means a year of bad fortune? Stop for the day and have him killed tomorrow. Uncle pays for two prosititues as a late birthday present? Force one to mutilate the other for your enjoyment, and later use the first prostitute as target practice. Etc. etc. etc.

Very unlike Commodus, Joffrey is an absolute monarch. He doesn't have a Republic, he doesn't really have issues with the history the Roman Empire did (which established the throne was fair grabs to whoever wanted it. Robert's Rebellion was a very special case in Westeros and Robert was related to the Targaryens besides. Most of the other wars were very minor uprisings or civil wars between Targaryen claimants. And when do we classify these things? The argument has been that Commodus basically saying "I fuck you or your son dies" is heinous as you get on its own. Does he need to invoke Jus Prima Noctis on the empire for this to be heinous enough?

Comm did some truly henious things, but he wasn't screaming Kill Them All to every little problem or being liberal with his slaughters.

Neither was Emperor Palpatine who could have gone on a bender and ordered the Death to star blasting random inhabitant planets at will. I don't really think this is a fair point unless Gladiator presents us with other Emperors who went balls to the wall nuts and did just that. You acknowledge right here: Commodus did truly heinous things. why isn't that enough?

One of the requirements we've identified is "as evil as they can be with what they have." It's designed so that people like The Joker can be listed alongside universe-wide threats like Darkseid; The Joker hasn't hit the same heniousness level as the latter, but that is purely because he doesn't have the ability to and by every given indication if he did have that level of power he would match that level.

In this case, Commodus doesn't have to be as we don't have to put him a relative scale to anyone in the film.

We have cut Game Of Thrones and A Song of Ice and Fire characters purely because they weren't standouts compared to others around them. It's accepted here that a rapist serial torturer baby murderer is a Complete Monster in a setting of normal people, and is not in a setting of rapist serial torturer baby murderers.

There aren't serial sister-rapers and family murderers in Gladiator though. and then there are issues like Joffrey stacking up to Aerys (whose end plan was Burn Them All, and Joffrey never even conceived of a level of murder on that scale), or other evil Kings in Westerosi history.

In short for Commodus; as an emperor he doesn't seem to be doing that bad of a job and the average Roman was no worse under him than his father, and to keep using the Game Of Thrones comparison Commodus doesn't use nearly as much power for heniouness as Joffrey does, and Joffrey has the disadvantage of having to compete with plenty of rapists, torturers and pyschopaths.

And? We don't see that the average galactic citizen is doing badly under Palpatine, or the common Westerosi citizen is doing badly under Joffrey. In fact, it's a point held out in the series that to most people, the problem of "who's the king" is entirely irrelevant.

Disagreed is not gramatically correct in that context. In that story he's the worst, that is not the only standard he has to hit in order to qualify. He's evil, but there is a laundry list of acts he has the power to do that we could look at and say "he's outdone himself in evil." A real complete monster, like the description says, has hit a level of such heniousness that really, adding one more henious deed is like giving Bill Gates one more dollar; so insignificant to the overall status it's not even worth noticing.

Now you're inventing a new criteria. That's not how the 'relative' heinousness standard works. You admit: Commodus is the worst in story and heinous by the standards. So inform me: why isn't a guy who has a woman and little boy tortured and crucified, murders his father, and then tries to rape his sister by threatening her son's life not 'generally' heinous? Because he's not running into the streets, hacking down random people and ordering his men to end them? Not only would this get him deposed within hours, it's a new criteria that goes against what we've had to this point. Because Joffrey and Palpatine could do a whole ton worse with the power they have.

edited 1st Aug '13 1:57:07 PM by Lightysnake

As one of the posters that was earlier uncertain about Commodus, I agree with the above posters that the actual arguments against him qualifying are not all that convincing nor logical. I think this might be the inverse of those cases where a villain really feels like a Complete Monster but has to be reluctantly taken off the article (e.g. the 99% monster thing); Commodus probably should be listed even if it "feels" off.

So tentative vote yes on Commodus.

edited 1st Aug '13 3:29:42 PM by Crowley

I got one yes vote, not counting me, on the two Blue Bloods CM nominations back here. What's the usual threshold before I can request them in the locked pages thread?

on Commodus based on Lightysnake's argument a few comments up.

edited 1st Aug '13 3:39:50 PM by StarSword

let me say yes on Blue Bloods as well, I'm sorry I missed those. Give a bit more time and if nobody else opposes them, add away.

One other issue I want to bring up is the whole 'Commodus isn't making peoples' lives worse" thing in that this isn't a mitigating or redeeming factor. Rome is not an Empire that could be easily affected by one psychopathic ruler in cruelties unless he let that carry over to like the legends of Caligula say (sending the Legions on pointless crusades and making them fight the sea). The Senate is still a lawful body, and has a great deal of influence.

Finally, there's another major issue: Commodus wants to be admired and loved and worshipped as his dad was. This is more for egotistical reasons, though, with his "I'm so great, you have to see it"as the film portrays him as a narcissist. There are two types like this. The "I want my people to love me as I love them" and the kind who get the ego trip and rush from the love of the crowd. In Commodus's case, it's a way of sticking it to his dad, and satisfying his ego. When his standards aren't met, he immediately freaks out. the scene with his sister is classic of this sort of abuse. When he doesn't get what he wants, he resorts to violence and threats. so the "he doesn't really brutalize the people" shouldn't be a factor in his favor.

edited 1st Aug '13 4:27:23 PM by Lightysnake

For those Blue Bloods examples, Yuri Denko doesn't sound as bad as Dick Reed. The latter seems like a pretty clear fit, although we could leave out the rather puerile pothole in his name and the spoilered description of his demise (which isn't really relevant).

On Edd and Eddy, did we even seen enough of Eddy's Brother for him to count? I don't recall.

He was seen in the last few minutes of the finale movie, in which he did nothing but physically and psychologically abuse his own little brother For the Evulz, boast about how he's always done so, knock Double D aside when he tried to stand up to him, and earn the hatred of literally every character present. In his short amount of time he filled all basic criteria for the trope and was portrayed as being truly heinous by Ed Edd And Eddy standards (literally since everyone, even the freaking Kanker sisters, were repulsed by his actions) with no redeeming qualities present. His voice actor helped sell the effect, voicing him alot more subdued and menacing than the rest of the characters. And he was not Played for Laughs. I recall 32 Footsteps talking about this before: he watched the scene with Eddy's brother and concurred that nothing about it was remotely funny at all. The character and his actions was just pure cruelty from start to finish.

edited 1st Aug '13 6:38:45 PM by ANewMan

He was apparently the subject of a movie.

But he only showed up at the very end. The Eds were trying to go find him for help in bailing them out of trouble from all the other kids, but it ended up that Eddy's brother was the biggest bully ever and the other kids stood up for the Eds against him.

@14968 About Joffrey existing in the same universe as other Ax-Crazy kings—all these kings were dead by the time Joffrey came to power. If one of them were living in the same time as Joffrey, than there may be a debate on this. But they don't so that is not a good argument there.

As for Amon Goeth and Vorster, I think it should be agreed upon that genocide is really, really heinous and is normally a factor in favor of inclusion.

edited 1st Aug '13 6:46:06 PM by xie323

And all the other Emperors are dead by Commodus's time, so your point kind of destroys itself.

And rape by blackmail is really heinous and a point for inclusion, so what precisely is your point? It's blatant hypocrisy to complain about Commodus like that and then support Vorster and Goeth who live in a world with much worse dictators and like minded Nazi psychopaths.

edited 1st Aug '13 6:54:03 PM by Lightysnake

@14980

I was not arguing for or against Commodus there, just clarifying some stuff.

and we see King Aerys in flashbacks, so it's still a moot point.

I'd like if you read my posts in response to yours as well. There hasn't been any real strong argument in favor of excluding him thus far that doesn't rely on inventing new criteria.

There's a problem with this entry on the Anime & Manga page:

• It was suspected since his very first appearences that Mykage Towano from Aquarion Evol was bad news, and this impression turned out to be absolutely right. Sure, it was clear that he was never of Altair's side, and was just pursuing his own interests... and then, in Episode 13, he crossed the Moral Event Horizon (or, at least, got a pretty big Kick the Dog moment) by killing his Anti-Villain subordinate Jin right when he was about to have an Heel–Face Turn, in front of the girl who loved him no less. And then Mykage even had the gall to perform an eulogy for Jin in front of the inhabitants of Altair, in order to better manipulate them to his will. With the series coming to a close, he's now pulling out all the stops, and it's clear that there's no low he would not sink to in order to get his hands on the original Aquarion and have his revenge on Amata and Kagura - for the "heinous crime" of being the two halves of the Winged Hound Pollon (It Makes Sense in Context). It was not bad enough that he manipulated Zessica when she was at her most vulnerable in order to make her his pawn and pull a Grand Theft Me on her, but in Episode 24, he went as far as murder Alicia just to gain a momentary distraction, and then mind control Kagura, the resident Jerkass Woobie, into killing his own father Izumo (another Anti-Villain). In fact, Mykage is an example of this being a Justified Trope, as he turns out to be the incarnation of the hatred harboring within Touma (the Big Bad of the previous series, so it makes sense that he's pretty much Made of Evil.

A Justified Trope?!

Cut that bit.

There's a bigger problem than the Justified Trope line: that much spoilering also makes the entry pretty much useless, as per Handling Spoilers (even before Fast Eddie's recent change to the policy).

I don't know the work, though, so I've no idea what spoilering to change.

@14976: I'm not completely certain that meets the "baseline heinousness" standard.

edited 1st Aug '13 8:23:54 PM by StarSword

So I got hit by some nostalgia and found the Yu-Gi-Oh! Forever page to do some reminiscing, then I got to the YMMV page and found some complete monster examples.

• Complete Monster: Several prominent examples abound in Forever:
  • Abel Drake. He mind-raped Miriam and Malachi when they were small children and made them join his Lightbearer cult, and this was after murdering their mother before their eyes. Then years later, he forced Jillian to mentally relive her sister’s gang-rape and suicide before stealing her soul afterwards.
  • Bryce Zabel. He had no qualms about implanting a mind-control chip into four-year-old Seta’s brain stem without his knowledge or consent as part of an attempted Xanatos Gambit to take over Kaiba Corporation for himself and get revenge on Seto in the process.
    • In relation to the above, Gozaburo had sanctioned the creation of the chip for just such a purpose. And then he willfully and knowingly brainwashes his own grandson with the power of that same chip years later, then holds an entire stadium of innocents hostage with the threat to kill ANYONE who wouldn’t bow down to him; not to mention the Sadistic Choice he forces Yugo to face at Tokyo Dome.

I think Abel Drake and Gozaburo would count, not sure about Bryce.