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
Good.
Now what about the Infinity Blade examples I posted? They're both Offscreen Villainy and Ausar becomes the atoner as Siris. I don't think there is a CM in that series.
Doesn't sound like any of them are qualifiers, no.
@ Medrano writeup: A good bit of it seems to focus on Greene rather than Medrano.
Wulfgar, Cunningham and Chigurh are definite keeps.
I'll touch up Medrano
If you want to keep both of them, we could probably work that; as I said, I haven't seen this one, but it sounds like Greene is plainly dominant and is at least accessory to most of Medrano's worse deeds. Or, phrased as a question: How bad would Medrano be if Greene wasn't there?
edited 19th Sep '13 1:19:02 PM by HamburgerTime
Medrano would be just as bad. The problem is, he mistakes Greene's assistance for Medrano being the dominant of the pair and Greene calmly informs him if Bolivia's President had been cooperative with Quantum, Medrano's coup would never exist.
The big difference is apart from his political ambitions, Medrano is a monster. When Greene finishes with the ultimatum which is a big "do what we want, or we kill you and speak to your successor", Medrano tries to blow off steam by raping his maid. When Camille interrupts, Medrano tries the same on her while gloating about having raped and killed her mother and sister.
I can see keeping Greene, though. At the very least, he's Quantum's agent in the Bolivia affair and his actions like killing Mathis, Agent Fields...
Okay, another batch for the film sandbox:
- Lighty's writeup for The Collector
- Lighty's writeup for Raynald de Chatillon from Kingdom of Heaven
- Wulfgar from Nighthawks
- Anton Chigurh from No Country for Old Men
- Lighty's writeup for Godfrey from Robin Hood
- Archibald Cunningham from Rob Roy
- The Rurouni Kenshin entries
- Malachi from Solomon Kane
Sound good?
Also, I found this on Zodiac:
- Complete Monster: The Zodiac assuming that he and Allen aren't the same person. He tortures and kills random people and flaunts his crimes to the police and media, all for shits and giggles.
- And even if you don't think Allen is the Zodiac, he's still a pedophile.
Umm, I'm confused.
Burn the Zodiac one. He's a serial killer, but his actual identity is unknown and in terms of heinous ness he just kills people.
In the film, however, he is, from what I recall, played as a CM whose only apparently motivation is for the Evulz
Two question about the director folder for Sandbox.Film Monsters.
First of all, can it be sorted by the director last name, not there first name.
Second of all, can I add this:
- From the films of the Coen Brothers:
- Gaear Grimsrud of Fargo is a simply heartless monster who will kill anyone for little reason. Brought in for a simple kidnap and ransom job, Grimsrud demonstrates his cruelty by killing a cop because the man took too long to bribe, and then chases down and kills a couple who witnessed the murder, all without any expression. Grimsrud later loses patience with the kidnapping victim and kills her simply because her crying is getting on his nerves. When he has a dispute with a fellow conspirator over a car, Grimsrud just kills him with an axe and feeds his body into a woodchipper. When he's finally caught by the police, the heroine Marge Gunderson is left stunned how a human being could do the things Grimsrud has done for just 'a little bit of money.'
- Anton Chigurh of No Country for Old Men strangles a cop to death with cuffs; shoots both his employers in cold blood because he wanted the money they were chasing after; shoots a crying, surrendering man hiding in a shower; and has absolutely no qualms about killing innocent people, including a random old man for his car and a motorist that did nothing except pick up the main character. In his most senselessly cruel act, he murders the dead protagonist's wife only to fulfill a pointless promise to him. Some consider Carla Jean's refusal to accept his offer as a Crowning Moment Of Awesome, calling out his bullshit of giving his victims a 50-50 chance. Even knowing Anton Chigurh puts you in mortal danger. Like one line by Carson Wells points out: "Even if you gave him the money, he would still kill you just for...inconveniencing him." The worst thing about him is how he subjects his victims to a bizarre form of Mind Rape and actually convinces them to accept their death. It's easy to see why his partner-in-crime Carson Wells compares him to the Bubonic Plague. He faces no repercussions, which goes chillingly well along with the nature of his character: an unstoppable force of nature personified in human flesh. He does not enjoy these acts, he is just a evil psychopath with utterly no regard for the lives of anyone.
edited 19th Sep '13 5:40:40 PM by randomtroper89
He has a dispute with Grimsrud over a 'car,' not 'card' just a note
Both questions: Go ahead.
Can I add my list of entries?
Absolutely.
Other than cutting the Word Crufty "certainly fits this trope" from the Chiguhr entry, looks okay to me. (Maybe just merge it into the very next sentence, to not leave the name dangling as a sentence fragment.)
All your safe space are belong to TrumpOkay before I add the writeup for Raynald de Chatillon from Kingdom Of Heaven, is it really a good idea to include the line "true to Real Life"?
I'll leave that to those here to decide, but the real Raynald, even in Crusader circles, was known as an utter bastard without anything by way of redeeming features
Also, in the Solomon Kane entry, is Dragon referring to The Dragon?
Yes, that may've been my error
I'd say "no" on mentioning the real Reynard on personal experience. My understanding is you can mention a character was based on a real figure (Napoleon) or associated with infamous real figures within the fiction (Mr. Sinister, Red Skull) but not that they're a fictionalized version of a real person. I tried to add such details to Amon Goeth's entry (and what's more that the fictional version was toned down from the real guy) and it was immediately reverted.
Since I have come late this thread, can I ask which sub sections have been finalized and if a sub section has been finalized, when, if ever, can we add new examples?
The unnamed drug dealers from Breaking Bad were recently readded to the YMMV as was this:
George R.R. Martin calls Walter White worse than any character in A Song of Ice and Fire. Now there's something to strike terror in your heart.
I'm guessing those should be cut.
edited 19th Sep '13 6:02:09 PM by TommyFresh
No subsection is ever truly "finalised". There are sections that we have, to the best of our knowledge, rid of non-examples, and sections which we are still working on. New examples may be proposed at any time, as long as you do it here and properly explain how your candidate qualifies. Also, make sure you search the thread to find out if the example has been discussed before.
Yeah, cut that. Especially since it isn't true. Or did Walt try to make a girl kiss the head of her father's rotting corpse? Or rape a six year old while still wearing full chainmail?
edited 19th Sep '13 6:02:57 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
Okay I cut the drug dealers and Walt from Breaking Bad. Why can't people just wait til the damn shows over before trying to add Walt?!?
edited 19th Sep '13 6:14:27 PM by TommyFresh
Or kill/maim a kid, even. The quote is either total unsourced bullocks or there is a very strange selective memory at play.
Just two more weeks...you know, tossing my money into the pot, I'm going to bet in the end that there aren't going to be a lot of Complete Monster entries added to Breaking Bad. A part of the show's theme of double and ambiguous identities was that sincere altruistic qualities and horrific dark sides can coexist within the same person, and that doesn't fit anywhere in the trope definition of a complete monster.
edited 19th Sep '13 6:19:59 PM by Crowley
A while ago we discussed the Cal Leandros series. While there was still debate about Cherish and Abbagor, no one had any objections to Darkling, Hobgoblin, or Sawney Beane's being listed. Here are potential write-ups for them
How do those look?
edited 19th Sep '13 10:01:14 AM by AmbarSonofDeshar