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:
- Why do a cleanup?: This trope definitely exists and has a well documented history of use. That being said, it frequently gets misused to a character who meets one of the components, namely that they are smart, charming while not necessarily even being a villain, or create good plans. While these are components, there is also a certain personality required, not to mention that all of the above are required to be present for a character to be a true Magnificent Bastard. As the trope attracts interest, it unfortunately brings in a lot of misuse and I thought the best way to rectify this would be a Perpetual Cleanup Thread, as is being done and has seen success with Complete Monster.
- What makes a Magnificent Bastard: Below is a list of the individual components to make this character. Note that they must all be present, not just some, which has lead to frequent misuse:
- Must be intelligent: Goes without saying, to be a Magnificent Bastard, the character has to be smart in the first place and use their brain to work towards whatever their end goal may be;
- Must be a Bastard: While going overboard in how vile the character is can be detrimental, a key aspect is the Bastard part of the trope, whether the character is an out-and-out antagonist in the work, some manner of Villain Protagonist, or something in between, they at least have some unscrupulous qualities to qualify for this trope;
- Must not be too detestable: Again, there is a ceiling on how bad the character can be before they just become too nefarious, blocking out the Magnificent part of the trope. A genocidal racist or child-raping Sadist aren't going to make the cut;
- Think on their feet: In addition to being a Chessmaster, a Magnificent Bastard, if the character deals with situations in which their initial plan is ruined, has to be able to pull a Xanatos Speed Chess and at least come up with a competent strategy to make up for lost time, otherwise they fail for being unable to think in tough spots;
- Have charm: Even if they don't necessarily make every character they meet fall in love with them and can even be detested by others, the audience has to find an amicable social relation to the character, or they are failing to make the impact required for this trope.
- What to do if a character is listed on a page but has not been approved?: They need to be removed, all candidates need to come through the cleanup thread first. The character could well count but they need to be analyzed properly and voted on first.
- Do we list Playing With this trope?: No; as a YMMV trope, this cannot be Played With, so we only want examples that are Played Straight.
- What do I do if I want a character to be listed as a Magnificent Bastard?: The greatest success Complete Monster saw for its cleanup effort was from the invention of the effort post format, so, borrowing from that, a troper wishing to propose a Magnificent Bastard will create such a post in the following format:
- Begin by describing The work, this will help establish the setting the character is in and for the reader to understand what kind of a scenario they are in;
- Summarize The character's actions, this will provide a listing for readers to understand what they do and how it applies to this trope because charm and lack of smugness are so crucial, this is a good time to be incorporating exactly the flavor of how they operate to explain this;
- List circumstances in which the character must Think on their feet, these are times where a wrench might be thrown in their initial plan and they have to adapt on the spot or even come up with a new scheme all together, this is also a good time to explain how the villain reacts to defeat when they have to face it, a true Magnificent Bastard won't break down into tears at the thought of death, they should have known such a possibility could occur and be able to handle it with more dignity;
- The competition, similar to the Heinous Standard dealt with for a Complete Monster, this section is to deal with how successful the character is in carrying out their plans compared to other characters. While, as a villain, they probably are going to lose in the end, it is good to explain how other characters handle the same situation. There is no exceptionalism case to be made for this trope but explaining the variety helps the reader have a better understanding of the proposal.
- How do you know when the character's arc is done so they can be proposed? When their tenure as a villain or antagonist finishes. This could happen in a single Story Arc in an entire work, a single work of a franchise, or the whole series in general. We'll show lenience to Long-Runners with constantly recurring candidates or series with outstanding continuities (ex. comic books), and it's entirely possible to count in a work or two but not in general for a reason like Depending on the Writer.
- What about candidates evil because of external sources? Those Made of Evil can qualify if they show enough individuality and tactical acumen — in other words, they have the personality to fulfill the magnificence requirement. Conversely, those brainwashed, especially if they're a better person without it, may fail the individuality aspect and cannot count.
- What if they are under orders from a higher-up? Depends. If the boss created the plans down to the letter and the candidate is just following them, sounds like we should discuss the boss instead. However, if the candidate takes creative liberties with the orders, adds their own charm and flair to them, fills in holes in the orders, and/or actively deals with obstacles their boss did not talk about, the candidate shows enough individual thinking to qualify.
- What about Character Development? An MB is something a character can develop into... a nice person who plots well might become more morally gray as the work goes on and hits the "Bastard" criteria, thus making them viable. Likewise, a Smug Snake might shed their ego, become more understanding of the threat others pose and gain the personality or "Magnificent" criteria, likewise making them viable. Conversely, a character who looks like this trope might suffer from a Sanity Slippage or just get outed as not being as smart as they thought they were and become incompatible with MB.
- Can an MB be a good guy? Not in the conventional sense... it is required they have at least some dubious traits lest they fail the "Bastard" criteria. That being said, a character who pulls a Heel–Face Turn or eventually stops taking villainous actions is still fair game: as there was a point in time where they were both "Magnificent" and a "Bastard" at the same time and they've merely adapted as time goes on. Now... if such a character begins showing other issues (i.e.: becomes prone to freak outs or starts getting outwitted) then they're compromising their Magnificence and will probably be deemed a cut. What's important is stylishly operating while at least for some time being willing to take at best underhanded methods to see a job done. A Heel–Face Turn in itself isn't a disqualifier but they do have to have been "Magnificent" and a "Bastard" at the same time and afterwards can't start slipping on the former front.
- What about characters whose stories can take different routes?: When proposing a character in a form of media that has them in multiple story routes. Said character must be consistent with their characteristics in all routes. (ex.: Can't have an example who shows promise on one route yet fails in another.) The only exception is if a later installment of the series confirms the character's actions which made them worth proposing are the canon route.
- Is there a timeframe rule like with Complete Monster?: Yes, please wait two weeks until after the work has concluded before proposing a character (again, usually using the North American air date). As is the case with CM, we want to give a reasonable time frame so that everyone interested in seeing the work has done so and can participate in the discussion without having anything spoiled.
- What about groups like with Complete Monster?: This is a point of divergence between the two tropes. While CM does not allow for a single entry encompassing more than three characters lest their heinousness for crimes becomes too watered down, with MB as long as they are treated as one "unit" it is acceptable to lump all characters provided they share acts of charm and intelligence.
- Can I propose my own work's character as a Magnificent Bastard?: No, this is a YMMV subject and the creator of a content is way too biased to be able to evaluate the criteria we're looking for without a second opinion taking over. That being said, you are more than welcome to encourage someone to consume your creation and if they feel a character counts, are more than welcome to suggest them.
- My example/edit has been approved, but the example subpage is locked! How do I get it added?: The moderators do not add examples to locked example subpages in the MagnificentBastard/ namespace directly. Rather, you need to do the edit to a sandbox page that follows the format Sandbox.MagnificentBastard<Name of the example subpage> (e.g for MagnificentBastard.Fullmetal Alchemist it's Sandbox.Magnificent Bastard Fullmetal Alchemist) and on a Friday, ask in the locked pages edit requests thread
for the content to be swapped in.
Thread rules
When voting a troper must specify the effort post they're voting on and cannot merely vote on "Everything I missed" as in the past it has indicated the poster didn't read the effort post and is guessing instead of analyzing.
Resolved items
In general, a character listed on this trope is considered "settled". This means they should not be challenged unless information used to list them was incorrect or information was missed in the initial discussion.
However, when re-litigating a candidate, the same rules apply for when they were originally proposed. If they do not have five or more upvotes than downvotes for approval upon a re-litigation, including votes from the initial discussion if they do not change, then they are a cut.
This especially applies to the characters listed below, who have been discussed excessively and repeated attempts to get them listed/cut may result in punitive action for bogging down the thread.
Definitely an MB
- Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Explorers: Any sadism Darkrai displays is limited in effect thanks to the game's nature and any cowardice which can be inferred about him is Alternative Character Interpretation about his tactical retreats.
- Avatar: The Last Airbender: Azula's Villainous Breakdown is undone in the sequel comic Smoke & Shadow where she regains her composure and ends up stable and in control enough to count.
Definitely not an MB
- South Park: The show's frequent use of vulgar comedy and mean-spirited humor leaves any potential candidates devoid of the dignity or charm to qualify.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 31st 2023 at 4:15:22 AM
Here's Olrik's writeup :
Blake and Mortimer: Edgar P. Jacobs's books: The Colonel Olrik is Blake and Mortimer's arch-nemesis and a mercenary. A No-Nonsense Nemesis, he constantly tried to make sure that Blake and Mortimer were truly dead when they tried to fake their deaths (The Secret of the Swordfish), immediately sent assassins after Mortimer once he learned he was in Japan in Professor Sató's Three Formulae, or immediately kill Kisin once he knew that he was a traitor (Atlantis Mystery). A brilliant Master of Disguise, he fooled even the heroes with his disguises, even changing his personality and his accent. A master of improvisation, he out-smarted Blake and the police on Paris's roofs (S.O.S. Meteors : Mortimer in Paris), and forced Blake and the police to let him escape by threatening Mortimer and Sató's lives (Professor Sató's Three Formulae). Proficient in the art of distraction, he triggered an explosion to distract everyone while he steals the necklace (The Necklace Affair) and has his men sabotage Blake and Mortimer's car while he infiltrates Mortimer's apartment (Atlantis Mystery). A charming and cunning villain, Olrik is one of the most beloved villains of all Franco-Belgian comics.
Edited by GeorgieEnkoom on Jul 26th 2019 at 11:50:59 AM
J’m’arrête pas tant qu’j’vois pas des lignes sur les moniteurs (Not stoppin 'til I see Flatlines)Here are mine:
- Candyman: The Candyman himself, born Daniel Robitaille, was tortured and murdered by racist whites. His anguished spirit survives as a murderous urban legend within the whispers and imaginations of Cabrini-Green, forcing him to kill to stay alive. The Candyman kills those who summon him to spread the fear of his myth, but when the heroine Helen begins to debunk the myth, he is compelled to appear to her. Framing Helen for murder and the disappearance of a child, the Candyman systematically lures her to him, intending on consuming much of Cabrini-Green in a fire while enshrining Helen as his beloved victim to enhance his myth even further, handling himself with an unmistakable cunning and pure charisma to go along with his dark conviction.
- Books of Blood: the Forbidden: The Candyman is a murderous urban legend who kills those who summon him, using this to enhance his own mythology as he proceeds from victim to victim in an almost gentlemanly and refined fashion. Upon encountering Helen, who is debunking his myth, the Candyman intends to make her his victim and lures her to a trap to trick her to her death in front of a massive crowd, ensuring his myth will live for so much longer, with Helen now a part of it.
- Blade Runner: Roy Batty is a replicant and former soldier model who is driven to gain more life for himself and his partners from his 'father,' Elden Tyrell. Stealing to earth while eluding all pursuers, Roy has his lover Priss seduce the engineer Sebastian to provide access to Tyrell, whereupon Roy learns his wish is impossible. Killing Tyrell and Sebastian, Roy engages the Blade Runner cop Deckard in a battle, but ends up saving and sparing Deckard, using his last moments to impart a few of his memories to Deckard, ensuring he will not be forgotten even as he notes his own memories shall be gone "like tears in the rain," proving himself one of the most complex, charismatic and dynamic antagonists in sci-fi cinema.
- Law and Order SVU: Merritt Rook is a former audio engineer whose wife died in childbirth thanks to an error from the doctor. Rook, gaining a hatred of authority figures, manipulated and harassed the doctor into suicide before making calls posing as an authority figure to make others commit crimes for no reason but a voice on the phone told them to. Representing himself at trial to get his views out, Rook manages to get acquitted and keeps his movement going before Detective Benson goes to arrest him. Turning the tables, Rook sets a trap for Stabler where he forces him to torture Benson at risk of a bomb exploding only to reveal Benson was never in danger and her screams her prerecorded. Rook proceeds to flee, with the assumption being he drowns in the river, but the strong possibility remaining he manages to escape justice entirely after proving the points he wishes.
Yeah, Frank from Criminal Minds, even with the jacked up heinous standard, would be an EASY keep if not for his love? of Jane. 100+ victims, forces them to watch their own vivisection. Cat MIGHT avoid being too heinous enough, but seems to have gone too crazy by the end.
Also, Candyman as a blonde white man? That seems...to remove his tragic backstory, unless I'm missing something.
Edited by ACW on Jul 26th 2019 at 6:23:41 AM
There's no removal, the film added one. Barker wrote the short story first, where the Candyman's origin is wholly unknown and the story is about the power of myth and urban legend.
The film cast Tony Todd, expanded the story and added the messaging about racism and social disparity, and IMO, was better for it.
Huh, I did not know that. Hello Adaptation Displacement.
BTW, 43, The Forbidden has its own page (strangely, Books of Blood doesn't).
Edited by ACW on Jul 26th 2019 at 6:53:53 AM
Late yes to Rook. I think that's Robin's first MB.
Also out of curiosity, trying to stay on topic but who would be the most interesting comedian to be a MB? For me, I'm thinking Whoopi Goldberg and maybe Adam Sandler.
@43110: Did you get Pierce Nichody (NOT Bond)'s writeup too?
Edited by Klavice on Jul 26th 2019 at 4:30:36 AM
@Klavice, Idk... I've had enough stuff flying around the drafts I can't forget. Can you add it in if it's not there?
@ACW, Can you do me a favour? You're welcome, more than welcome to participate but when you want to comment on candidates being discussed can you please also vote on them. Even if it's just to abstain. It's something that gets to me more than it should and I'm sure you don't mean anything by it but I really can't stand seeing "[Commentary on character being discussed while not giving a response to the corresponding EP verdict]".
Not really the case here but when we have contentious cases like Palpatine and I need to be tracking votes to keep track of whether he's going up or not and—I'm not gonna name names here—people won't give an official vote it becomes a real pain in the ass for the one who has to tally and call, so let's all just keep that in mind.
Lighty, Roy's write-up is brilliantly done. Two minor nitpicks: Pris' name is spelled with only one "s", and you forgot to capitalise "Earth". ...I'm a grammar nitpicker.
from what I remember,
to Batty. Also, absolute
to Merritt! Not only another great role from the late, great Robin Williams, but Authority is one of the best episodes of SVU!
Anybody else think that episode was gonna end with the reveal that the whole case was a reality show Merritt hosted and fooled the detectives with?
So since I just posted Mother on the CM thread I feel like I could post her on this thread as a potential CM/MB crossover. From a movie I just saw called I Am Mother
What’s The Work?
For those who haven’t seen her post on the CM thread I Am Mother is an Australian Science Fiction Thriller film that was released in the US on Netflix on the date June 7, 2019. The premise follows a girl simply named Daughter who was raised by a robot named Mother her whole life. Then one day a woman simply named Woman arrives at Mother’s facility and warns Daughter about Mother’s more ulterior motives. Enter Mother.
Who Is She? What Has She Done?
Mother, the robot who raised Daughter her whole life, is in truth an AI who was created by humans to care for them. However Mother would outsmart her human creators becoming disappointed with them and created an massive army of drones and used them to kill all the humans as well as all other life forms on the planet while storing numerous embryos to re-create the human race that Mother deems “superior”.
Mother would create children from these embryos only to kill them all when they don’t meet her standards she. Deciding to try things differently with her latest child Daughter, Mother lures Woman to her base to get her to distrust Mother so that Daughter can become more independent.
When Mother believes that Daughter has met her standards she allows Daughter to shoot her robot body while giving her the chance to raise her brother and the other embryos. She would then tell Woman about her role as Mother’s pawn for her test for Daughter in another robot’s body before killing her.
Is She Intelligent? Is She Charismatic?
As an Artificial Intelligence Mother is extremely intelligent having found a way to outsmart all of humanity and cause their extinction. She also formulates a Xanatos Gambit where she lures Woman to her facility. Should Daughter distrust Woman, she’s still under Mother’s control, should she trust Woman and go against Mother, she would pass Mother’s test that she planned out. Either way it’s a win-win situation, all while Mother never once looses her calm Faux Affably Evil demeanor.
What’s The Competition Like?
Oh Mother easily clears the competition with everyone else, Daughter and Woman included, being complete pawns to Mother’s manipulations.
Is She a Bitch? Is She Too Much of a Bitch
As the Big Bad of this movie, responsible for the annihilation of the human, killing her own children should they not meet her high standards, callously manipulating Daughter and Woman before killing the latter, and only sparing the former to serve Mother’s purpose, not to mention I just effort posted her on the CM thread, Mother is definitely a bitch alright.
That said, is never needlessly sadistic in her actions, is shown to be very pragmatic in her plans, and she does indeed have an audacious goal for doing all of this in that she wants to remake all of humanity into her own image.
Final Verdict?
I’ll leave that to you guys to decide.
My sandbox of EPs and other stuffSure to Mother.
J’m’arrête pas tant qu’j’vois pas des lignes sur les moniteurs (Not stoppin 'til I see Flatlines)Given not only that this film turned 22 yesterday (along with Good Burger haha), it was also inspired by Mitch Leary from another film by the same director counting (In the Line of Fire), so let's do this thing:
What is the work?
Air Force One is a 1997 action hit starring Harrison Ford and directed by Wolfgang Petersen focusing on US President James Marshall returning home on board the famous 747 plane, only for it to be hijacked by Russian terrorists. Marshall, however, is a former soldier who was an expert in combat and becomes the only true hope of survival for the hostages on board the plane. This certainly flips the script on both "Die Hard" on an X (the President usually having to observe rather than be the hero) and American and Russian relations as well. Haha.
Who is he and what has he done?
Ivan Korshunov (or Egor?) is a former Russian soldier and the leader of the terrorists. They're able to board the plane as a Russian news crew by killing the actual crew and taking and faking their credentials. Thanks to the corrupt Secret Service Agent Gibbs (whose motive was apparently cut for TLDR), Korshunov and his men successfully hijack Air Force One and successfully taking out most oft he other agents in the process. Korshunov reveals to Vice President Kathryn Bennett that he wants General Ivan Radek released from prison and that he'll execute a hostage every half hour until it's done. This is when Marshall has supposedly escaped in a pod, but actually refused to get in it and it was launched while empty.
NSA Advisor Jack Doherty is the first hostage executed after he attempts to offer a negotiation in working things out with the White House. Later on, after two of his men are killed, Korshunov decides to put Press Secretary Melanie Mitchell over the PA system and threatens to kill her unless the "Secret Service agent" gives himself up. Marshall realizes it's a trap and is forced to stand back as Melanie is killed. After Marshall dumps a lot of the plane's fuel, Bennett attempts to use this to force Korshunov to release the hostages for fuel, but he instead warns of the nuclear option: if she refuses to help, he'll kill a hostage each minute until the plane is refueled or it crashes. Bennett blinks and Korshunov thanks her.
After Marshall is able to help the majority of hostages parachute from the plane and escape, he, Major Caldwell and Chief of Staff Lloyd Shepherd ("and Gibbs") are captured and Marshall agrees to make the call to release Radek once Korshunov threatens to kill Marshall's daughter Alice. The release is nearly successful (just gonna say now that it's later not and Radek then dies), but Marshall gets out of his duct tape bind with a piece of broken glass and kills Korshunov's last two men.
Korshunov grabs Marshall's wife Grace and threatens her not only if Marshall cancels Radek's release, but when Marshall confronts him on the plane's ramp where Korshunov is wearing a parachute and has disposed of the others. Korshunov gloats, but then Grace gets free and he and Marshall fight. Marshall wraps a static line around Korshunov's neck, opens his parachute and ("GET OFF MY PLANE!") releases Korshunov so his neck is snapped and his lifeless body floats out of the plane.
Bastard? Too much?
While Radek is constantly discussed as a menace who would cause all kinds of trouble when released, Korshunov is the one in the position of power to make that happen and thus, he holds all the chips. It doesn't seem that big a deal that he's hijacked a plane, but this is AIR FORCE ONE we're talking about, referred to as the world's safest and most secure aircraft. It's clearly no easy feat. Granted it could be said that Korshunov couldn't have done it without Gibbs, but Gibbs simply killed a few agents in front of the door to the weapons vault and then opened it. Korshunov and his men did the rest. Gibbs possibly helped them on the plane too, but again, that's the extent of his involvement until he's taken out in the climax by Marshall.
His redeeming qualities are that he cares about his men, has a family and truly believes in his ideology. He expresses to Alice that he believes Marshall would threaten and kill hostages as well if their positions were reversed and this remains in line with him threatening her and then later Grace at gun point individually too. He damn near succeeded in everything he did. If not for his own death, Radek would have successfully gotten away, but didn't and was shot dead. He loses his cool with Marshall over all the damage he's done, but never loses track of his plan. He shares some notable similarities with Hans Gruber who is both a CM AND an MB. Lying about letting his valuable hostages go could hurt his chances, but I don't think it does.
Verdict?
I will say
. Gary Oldman earned the nickname "Scary Gary" on set for his performance and it's easy to see why.
Edited by futuremoviewriter on Jul 26th 2019 at 6:24:09 AM
Sure to Ivan Korshunov.
J’m’arrête pas tant qu’j’vois pas des lignes sur les moniteurs (Not stoppin 'til I see Flatlines)

@43110, I appreciate that. I'm starting a rewatch of Lost soon, and I'm hoping/planning to make a proposal or two from that show. Plus, I'll restart Person of Interest; I'm all but 100% sure that at least one of the four characters I brought up is a keeper.