Old Complete Monster cleanup thread
Welcome to the Complete Monster proposal thread! This is the thread where new Complete Monster examples are vetted, approved, and written up. If you're looking for the general cleanup thread (for cuts, rewrites, expansions, and the like), please go here
Important: Before suggesting any new examples, please read the Frequently Asked Questions and Common Requests List; if you have any questions, the odds are high they are answered there. Additionally, please check here for the earliest date a work can be discussed (usually two weeks from the U.S. release date) and whether the work has already been reserved by another user.
Here is how the process works:
- If you have a candidate to propose, you can simply come right in and propose them! If the character's run is brief, such as a single issue of a comic book, then a simple summary of their actions and any potential redeeming qualities will be enough; for longer-running candidates, an effortpost (EP) might be helpful for organizing the proposal. An EP is not outright required, but please be mindful that if a post becomes too clunky and unorganized, it can be very hard for other people to follow.
- After the proposal, there will be a 72-hour discussion and voting period, where people may ask questions and vote on the candidate. The number of upvotes must outnumber the downvotes by at least five for the character to be considered "approved".
- Three days after the proposal has been made, if the character has been approved, you may post the writeup (the text to be posted on the trope page itself) on the thread and send it to the drafts page. Your candidate will soon be added to the CM subpage. If the work has a page, you should add your candidate to the relevant YMMV page. Voila! It's that simple!
Outside of this process, we do have a few ground rules:
- To keep the thread moving at a reasonable pace, there are some restrictions on when a proposal can be made. There should only be a maximum of four EPs posted both per page and per hour to ensure that nothing gets lost in the shuffle; additionally, each individual troper should only be proposing or writing up characters from a maximum of three works at a time (from initial proposals to end of their voting period). If your proposal would fall outside of either of these guidelines, we'd like to ask you to please wait until they would fit within; feel free to type them up on an outside document, and then when the time comes, you can just copy, paste, and post!
- No plagiarism of any kind. This is a very serious matter site-wide, as the website could get in actual legal trouble over this; as a result, this can very quickly lead to mod intervention. This can take many different forms:
- Direct plagiarism, i.e. wholesale copying. This is not only the easiest to find, but is also the most likely to warrant quick moderator intervention. To be clear, quoting in some places is perfectly acceptable, but it has to be very clear you're quoting from something else and it cannot be anything longer than a sentence or two - if you're quoting an entire work summary from Wikipedia, no one is going to believe you've actually consumed the work, so even if you cite your source, your candidate will be downvoted anyway.
- Self-plagiarism. Even if you can prove that you wrote the same text in both places, the site itself can't contain any of the duplicated text. If you already wrote something once before, it's not too hard to write it a second time.
- Using another site's work as a template for a proposal. Just because you don't copy and paste something directly doesn't mean it's any harder to detect if you're basing parts or all of your proposal on text someone else wrote. To be clear, this doesn't violate site rules and won't lead to mod intervention, but just like if you directly plagiarize, no one will believe you've consumed the work if you're clearly basing your proposal on something else. This thread largely operates on the honor system, and tweaking someone else's work to pass it off as your own is one of the fastest ways to lose trust.
- Votes must be for specific candidates, meaning no blanket voting (i.e. "yes to everyone I missed").
- If you are the first person to downvote a candidate, please provide an explanation of why when you do so. We're here for discussions above all, and a hit-and-run downvote doesn't facilitate anything.
- If a work is already reserved by another user, please don't comment on the work or any potential characters worth discussion before the discussion date. We know how exciting it is when a work has a keeper that you're waiting to talk about, but it's not fair to the person who reserved the work who is just as excited to lead the discussion to see the discussion getting spoiled before they get to do it. On the other hand, if the reservation only has one name attached, shoot them a PM - they may be down for a collaboration, which will get you in on the fun as well!
- Please keep the thread on-topic. While discussing the trope is fun and we encourage people to enjoy it, questions like "who's your favorite CM" are off-topic and can lead to thumps. That's the kind of question to take to people's PMs if they're willing. Similarly, while we encourage friendliness and familiarity with other users, posts should always have some kind of thread-relevant purpose; for instance, if you want to wish someone a happy birthday, feel free to, but if it's the only thing in the post, it's off-topic and needs something else alongside it. Again, though, while we strive for a friendly atmosphere, this is not Facebook; life updates are fun, but unless they have some kind of impact on your thread participation, please do not bring it here - we have Yack Fest for that.
- Please refrain from asking anything along the lines of "How Did We Miss This One?" In almost every case, the answer is simply "No one thought about it before". This Is a Wiki where everyone has different interests, and the fact that people missed a particular candidate, even one that seems like a textbook example of a trope or a character who is particularly iconic in pop culture, means absolutely nothing. The question is disruptive, has a simple and consistent answer, and provides nothing to any discussion.
- If you are suspended from parts of the website, it is still possible to participate!
- For users who are suspended from editing the wiki, you still have full access to this thread. You can propose candidates and write them up with no issues whatsoever; while you will have to ask someone else to post the entry to the relevant pages once it is done, all write-ups are considered thread-approved - as in, done by consensus - and thus doing so does not violate any rules regarding meatpuppeting.
- If you are suspended from the forums, your participation is limited but not impossible. It is still possible for a forum-suspended user to assist in creating the write-up for a character who has already been approved; as previously mentioned, write-ups are inherently considered a consensus-based edit and thus not tied to any one particular user. However, you can not assist in the proposal of a character; as a proposal is based around the forum rather than the wiki, doing so with a forum suspension qualifies as meatpuppeting.
- Please keep all discussions "in-house".
- What other wikis use for CM equivalents is irrelevant here.
- Please be wary of using other wikis, Fandom or otherwise, as sources of information. They are just as fallible as a site like Wikipedia in regards to accuracy because they can be edited by any user, just as this site can.
- Do not attempt to force a communication with an author in an attempt to gather evidence or settle a debate; besides the fact that this is a YMMV trope and thus author intent has variable weight depending on the circumstance, doing so may cross the line into drama exportation, which is prohibited site-wide.
If you would like to use an EP for your candidate, here's the general format. This format does not have to be followed exactly, but these are the main topics that need to be covered:
What is the work?
This is a brief summary of the work you're going to discuss. We don't need a full plot summary here, just however much we need to understand going into the discussion — it can even be as simple as quoting the summary on the work's page.
Who is the candidate and what have they done?
This is essentially the character's biography — who they are, their story, the crimes they commit, and, preferably (though not required), what happens to the candidate at the end. It does not have to include every single thing they ever do — for some villains, we'd be here all day if that was the case — but it should include the highlights of their journey.
Any redeeming qualities? Freudian Excuse?
This is where any potential redeeming characteristics or tragic backstory should be discussed. Do they have a tragic past? Do they show that Even Evil Has Standards or Even Evil Has Loved Ones? Maybe a Pet the Dog moment or two? This is where these should be discussed in full. Not every potential redeeming moment is a clear-cut disqualifier, but we should hear of any potential issues to ensure the character is discussed in full.
Are they bad enough?
A Complete Monster has to be particularly vile by the standard of the work they appear in. Therefore, you should look at what the character does compared to similar characters in the same work. This takes into account things like:
- Their resource level (a human Serial Killer can't stand up to an alien Omnicidal Maniac, but they can be bad by the standard of other human serial killers)
- The amount of time they have to work with (such as a one-shot character versus long-running antagonists)
- The quantity vs. quality of their crimes compared to others (someone with a lower victim count but far more visceral and personal crimes could be considered as equally bad overall as someone with a higher body count but less horror involved)
Essentially, this section is an analysis of the kinds of villainy shown in the work and an explanation of why this particular character's villainy stands out within it.
Final verdict?
This is where you post your final conclusion on the character in question. You can continue elaborating on your reasons or even just say a simple "yes" or "no"; at this point, we've heard everything we need to hear.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This thread tackles very serious and dark matters on a daily basis. We will be discussing things like murder, rape, torture, human trafficking, crimes against children, and in particularly dark cases, several of these issues at the same time. We keep a lighthearted air, but all candidates carry the general assumption that these are awful individuals committing disgusting crimes. We ask that if you participate, you do so with the requisite seriousness such dark topics require; exclamations of how gross something is, whether serious or sarcastic, are disrespectful to the topics at hand, and if you cannot handle such topics, please do not participate.
And that's everything you need to know. Welcome to the thread!
Edited by Twiddler on Jan 17th 2024 at 5:42:49 AM
A Girl, Just One of Many Kinds
Deepest apologies disregard this argument.
Edited by MermaidEyes15 on Feb 29th 2024 at 10:09:08 AM
Keep Fighting. Keep Loving.
Ultimate Moral Compass
![[tdown]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/thumbs_down_emote.png "[thumb down]"){kind=small}
Leader
Woagh
to The Leader
Edited by DoodSlayer136 on Feb 29th 2024 at 6:57:07 AM
NOISE IS CALLING, PICK UP PHONE
Showtime!
Mermaid, I know you mean well but that's a really fucked up way to talk about coerced sex
Absolute destiny... apeachalypse?
A Girl, Just One of Many Kinds
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Super Sorry that was not what I intended in the slighted. I was more so speaking on the way the comic portray them compared to each other. Not on the ethics of what Negan did whatsoever. Genuinely sorry for how it comes across though, it was not suppose to be like that.
Edited by MermaidEyes15 on Feb 29th 2024 at 10:04:56 AM
Keep Fighting. Keep Loving.
A Girl, Just One of Many Kinds
Again really sorry that was god awful wording my part. Apologies to anyone I upset
Retracted the EP as I see the argument now and don’t think he counts anymore.
Edited by MermaidEyes15 on Feb 29th 2024 at 10:27:57 AM
Keep Fighting. Keep Loving.
Knight Bachelor
Another candidate.
What is the work?
Firefly: The Magnificent Nine is a novel set in the Firefly 'Verse.
Who is Elias Vandal? What did he do?
Elias Vandal is the leader of a group of particularly loathsome bandits calling themselves the Scourers. They have a pretty simple con to make money on the arid world of Thetis. They roll into a town, using their numbers, impressive armaments, and reputation for brutality to convince the townsfolk to sell the head rights to their water wells to the Scourers for the eminently fair fee of zero credits. Then, the Scourers will sell the townspeople's own water back to them for. . . well, definitely more than zero credits.
And this reputation for brutality is well-earned. Vandal says he used to be a Reaver, and while some doubt this claim due to the fantasticalness of it, his behavior and tactics make it rather credible.
Vandal and the male Scourers have needs, and because of Vandal's own preferences, they prefer to take these needs from young women, taking the women too. "Young" in this case meaning at least thirteen years old, up until "the bloom is gone." Most of the girls the Scourers take to their camp never come back, and that they're always on the lookout for new "rut dolls" indicates they use them up pretty quickly.
Vandal makes sure his Scourers know how to be obedient and loyal. If they aren't, he'll educate them, and all the other Scourers, by having the offending person's tongue cut out, eyes gouged out, then flaying them to death.
And if a town musters up the courage to try and stand up to the Scourers, Vandal's got a solution for that, too. Have his Scourers surround the town, making it impossible for anyone to get in or out. Then blow up the well heads. The Scourers bring plenty of water with them, the townspeople have to make due with whatever they have, which isn't much after the Scourers get done smashing cisterns and otherwise making sure there's hardly a drop to drink except for what they have. Then they just sit back and watch as the town slowly dies, from thirst, starvation, suicide, and homicide. One town has already suffered this fate, and over the course of the novel, they start doing it to the town the Serenity crew was whistled up to try and protect.
When Vandal realizes that one of the women who lives in this town is Temperance Jones, the woman who gave him the nasty burn scar on face, he declares that finally having her in his clutches is the best day ever. He proceeds to try and torture her to death, locking her a wooden cage with a hinged collar around her neck, long nails sticking up from the collar towards her neck. So long as Temperance remains on tiptoe, she'll be okay, but no one can stay on tiptoe forever.
Eventually, some half-cocked plans by Jayne and Temperance's daughter Jane, along with Mal, Zoe, and Wash trying to come to their rescue, the townsfolk rallying thanks to this, and the arrival of Inara's friend's private security sees the Scourers stopped. Mal lassos Vandal from Serenity's shuttle, bangs him against a few buildings, then one of Vandal's first Scourers finishes the man off with his own "boomerblade."
Redeeming Qualities? Freudian Excuse?
No on the first. For all that Elias Vandal paints himself a reasonable man, his demands are flatly unreasonable, and he relies on both his personal intimidating reputation and what he can command his Scourers to do to get people to knuckle under to him.
For the second. . . well, Elias tells that Temperance burned his face back when Elias was working as a debt collector for underworld types, and sought out Temperance because of a con she and Jayne ran. Temperance tried to buy him off with her body, then burned him afterward for no good reason. Which might give him an excuse for being a generally repellent person. Temperance says that she accompanied him back to his apartment with the intention of killing him then running off with Jayne before anyone figured out what happened, and as soon as she was in the door Elias jumped her, beat her, and raped her, and she had to flee after burning his face because he was still coming after her and she had no way to put him down. Which would indicate he was just always a generally repellent person. Temperance's account does have the ring of truth to it, but she's less than honest for the bulk of the novel, so it's kind of "he said, she said."
Oh, but he is NOT a Reaver. He admits that before dying, that he lied about it to increase his own mystique and reputation. He's fully aware of his actions, and chooses to do them anyway.
Is he bad enough?
Honestly, being an Ephebophile (implied torture snuff) rapist alone would qualify him in my book for the Firefly 'Verse. Add on everything else, this guy's about as bad as they come.
Verdict?
Why we still talkin' 'bout this?
Edited by ErikModi on Feb 29th 2024 at 10:35:56 AM
Goku Black
![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/thumbs_up_emote.png "[thumb up]"){kind=small}
Vandal
Jogo
Maddox and Vandal
![[down]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_down.png "[down]"){kind=icon}
Edit: sure to Ashley
Edited by jlvs200s on Mar 1st 2024 at 1:01:25 PM
"Stand proud, Sukuna, you are strong." | He/Him
First post here! Happy to get involved even if she isn’t picked.
- What's The Work?**
The Night In Question is the second book in The Agathas series of YA mystery novels. The plot sees high school junior Rebecca Henderson being violently assaulted into a coma at a dance held at a castle, where famous starlet Mona Moody used to live. Protagonists Iris Adams and Alice Oglivie set out to find the culprit and find themselves investigating the conspiracy surrounding the mysterious death of Hollywood starlet Mona Moody decades ago.
- Who is Ashley Henderson? What has she done?**
Ashley Henderson is a classmate of the victim and protagonists, who appeared as a supporting character in the first book before turning heel in this one. Mona Moody's illegitimate great-granddaughter with a single-minded obsession with becoming a famous star herself, manipulates one of the dance's caterers (whose family were evicted by Rebecca's father) to help her in attempting to kill Rebecca, simply for owning a necklace that once belonged to Mona. The duo work together to frame another student named Helen Park for the brutal assault. Ashley's motivations stem from the belief that she is entitled to the fame and fortune that would have come from being publicly known as Mona's descendant. After her accomplice is arrested, she doesn’t spare him a second thought and actively relishes the idea of Helen going to prison for her crimes.
As part of her investigation into her ancestry and Mona's tragic life, Ashley visits an elderly distant relative of Rebecca who served as Mona's doctor. Cruelly taking advantage of the man's dementia, Ashley pretends to be Rebecca and, to avoid potentially being exposed, tampers with his medication, ultimately leading to his death.
In order to silence Rebecca, Ashley disguises herself as a nurse and infiltrates the local hospital where Iris catches her in the act of smothering Rebecca with a pillow. To create a distraction, she tampers with the medications of patients, resulting in at least four elderly patients suffering extreme and life-threatening heart attacks with the fates of those victims being left unclear.
When confronted, Ashley makes attempts on both Iris and Alice's lives (bludgeoning Iris and attempting to run Alice over), before fleeing aboard a yacht with her Stage Mother, who is a knowing accomplice to her crimes (Ashley’s father being abandoned as dead weight due to not fitting in with his family’s fame obsessed world view and being comfortable with the suburban lives). By the end of the book, the two are still at large and the subject of an international manhunt.
- Mitigating features?**
Close-to-none. She has some dialogue where she seems to express a degree of sympathy for her great-grandmother’s tragic life, but it is overruled by the fact Ashley’s actions were committed out of the delusional belief that she is entitled to Mona’s Hollywood legacy and obsession with being a star, which is made clear throughout the novel to be the true motive for her crimes, with her quickly brushing Mona’s plight off to continue discussing her own ambitions.
- Heinous Standard**
The previous book’s killer, Carol Westmacott, committed her murder in a moment of rage, which doesn't measure up to Ashley's carefully planned out scheme. The glee she shows in the prospect of sending Helen to prison is also notable as the reason she was selected to be the fall guy is having gotten a coveted role in a school play over Ashley. Although she only has one confirmed kill under her belt, her attempts to kill several other people (including helpless elderly patients simply for a distraction) and complete lack of remorse makes her take the cake amidst the villains in the series so far, especially as she remains at large by the novel’s end unlike the imprisoned Carol. Her accomplice mother stays off page for most of the novel, only showing up to help Ashley escape, with all the actual crimes being done by Ashley. Alice succinctly notes that Ashley had “always been a scumbag” following the reveal, and it seems clear that she’s right on the money.
- Final Verdict**
Soft yes
Edited by Bozzy on Mar 1st 2024 at 3:16:43 AM
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
Leaning yes on Vandal, but does the story imply he was always repellent, or does it indicate Temperance is lying?
Ashley...unsure.
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts
pronounced 'Scraggle'
Yes to Vandal.
I think yes to Ashley. Murdering sickly old people as a distraction is pretty damn scummy.
Watch for the sign of the Saint — he will be back!
Not the Eye
Vandal and Ashley
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
My thing with Ashley: "She has some dialogue where she seems to express a degree of sympathy for her great-grandmother’s tragic life, but it is overruled by the fact Ashley’s actions were committed out of the delusional belief that she is entitled to Mona’s Hollywood legacy and obsession with being a star, which is made clear throughout the novel to be the true motive for her crimes, with her quickly brushing Mona’s plight off to continue discussing her own ambitions."
Does she have any sympathy for Mona's life at all? Even if it's overruled, and even if it's not her true motive...
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts
I'll give that scene another look when I get home from work in a couple hours and see what she says exactly. It's a small part of the Motive Rant in any case and she starts talking about herself again almost immediately
Edited by Bozzy on Mar 1st 2024 at 4:36:13 AM
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
Please do that, though right now I think I'm leaning yes.
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts
Classy, Refined, Unstable
Vandal
Abstain on Ashley for now until the dialogue gets quoted although welcome to the thread!
Oh, Mr. Kennedy, you entertain me. To show my appreciation, I will help you awaken from your world of clichés.
Knight Bachelor
ACW: This is open to interpretation (if anyone else has read the book, please chime in), but the impression I got when Vandal relates his side of the story is that he's delusional enough to believe he did nothing wrong and Temperance burned him for no reason after they had consensual sex. Temperance doesn't outright lie in the main story (though was a criminal and con-artist in her backstory, and she met Jayne by getting him to beat the tar out of her abusive husband, only for the battered man to state he's not married, and Temperance admits to Jayne he was a partner-in-crime who'd stiffed her, and she gave herself the black eye to support her story). Instead, the crew makes a particular inference, and she elects not to correct that inference until everything's resolved, because it invests the crew more in the fight against Vandal. Spoiler version: That inference is that Temperance's daughter Jane is Jayne's daughter, when she's actually Elias' from the time he raped Temperance. She tries to come clean with Jayne before he starts talking about staying on Thetis to help look after them and get to know his daughter, and does tell him the truth after, and agrees she has to tell Jane herself, at least that Jayne isn't her father. She has no plans to ever tell her Elias was. The description of the difficulty Temperance has in telling Jayne her side of the story regarding Elias leads me to believe she is telling the truth, but there is still the possibility that she's just that good a liar, and there is no incontrovertible proof one way or the other.
I freely admit this might disqualify Vandal, but my opinion is Temperance's version of events is closer to fact than Elias'.
Classy, Refined, Unstable
Shit forgot about this.
- The Mighty Ducks: Lord Dragaunus is the Arch-Enemy of the Ducks and a reptilian foe with only one desire in life — putting every civilisation he sees under his iron rule. Invading Puckworld, Dragaunus has his drones ravage cities and has it's inhabitants enslaved. Making his way to Earth after losing his base on Puckworld, Dragaunus repeatedly orchestrates schemes which would allow him to conquer the planet — with him wanting the destruction of entire cities to cow humanity into submission. Dragaunus is also the benefactor of some villains, providing more trouble for the Ducks — with one instance almost ending with the Duck's suffering a conscious dissection. Dragaunus is also an abusive master to his allies — with him subjecting one to eternal imprisonment in dimensional limbo. In the series finale, Dragaunus attempts to open a dimensional rift to free his species from their interdimensional prison to grant him the opportunity to subject the entire universe to his despotic delusions.
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
Evil Overlord for his name?
That's...interesting about Vandal. I still THINK I lean yes (the whole serial pedophile thing), but cautiously (goodness knows we've had pedophiles removed for less).
Edited by ACW on Mar 1st 2024 at 8:10:22 AM
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts
Classy, Refined, Unstable
Probably the best option.
Not the Eye
Honestly even if his version of story is true, I still have trouble finding him getting scared as coming close to excusing anything he does in present.
Oh and welcome to thread Bozzy.
Edited by EmperorGeode on Mar 1st 2024 at 5:18:18 AM
Goku Black
Nah that doesn't even sound like an fe lol. He got scared so became a pedophile and snuff film maker. What?
"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."
Knight Bachelor
Ephebophile, not pedophile. Thirteen is "old enough" in his book.
NOTE: I'm being facetious.
NOTE THE SECOND: Though it is never firmly established what he considers "too young."
EDIT: Not snuff film maker. He and his gang just carry young women back to their camp to "have fun" with, and it's heavily implied their tastes, and especially Vandal's, run towards the brutal and violent, and the girls get worn out in short order and need to be replaced.
Edited by ErikModi on Mar 1st 2024 at 7:26:31 AM
Negan is a huge hypocrite who claims to despise rapists when he himself lords over a harem of women that are coerced into having sex with him—as a matter of fact, Amber herself eventually becomes one of his "wives".