Complete Monster criteria and Disney villains

and I have realized something, I don't really like any villain as much as I have a love/hate relationship with them. for example, I know Jafar is hammy and may actually be amused by him. but at the same time, I despise him for what he does. same with Medusa.

edited 22nd Oct '11 5:18:03 PM by brony99

So?

I'm saying that I never find a villain truly likable unless he/she is meant to be sympathetic from the start.

Remember, though, there's a lot of room for middle ground between likeable and CM.

Anyway, anyone else want to pitch in on Medusa in particular?

I don't know much of Medusa. Care to elaborate?

A poor man's Cruella De Vil with Prince John traits. Lost her temper very easily, and the worst part about her on-screen villainy was her Child Abuse orientation. Even so, her mistreatement of Penny was a tool for a goal instead of the goal itself.

She's certainly despicable, and she comes close, IMHO closer than Jafar from a psychological viewpoint, but I don't think she takes the full jump from 'Monster' to 'Complete Monster'.

edited 23rd Oct '11 12:36:37 PM by NapoleonDeCheese

Okay, so far those familiar with Medusa seem to agree that she does not qualify as a CM. And so, I've sent an edit request.

EDITED IN: Now, onto Sykes. While he does seem to be one of the more obvious examples, it might help to go over reasons for ambiguity just to make extra sure. His on-screen cruelty is mostly towards Fagin, who is also a criminal, and is implied to owe a lot of money he repeatedly fails to pay back. This isn't to say it justifies Sykes' cruelty, but it seems to make it closer to defensible than if he did it to a non-criminal, as if Sykes had some sort of Knight Templarish role. There's also Sykes' kidnapping of Jenny, wherein he ties Jenny to a chair, and chases Fagin's vehicle by limo when Fagin tries to free Jenny, but Sykes at least doesn't seem to be as cruel to Jenny as he was to Fagin.

For what it's worth, here's a vid of him from the same source as brought us the previous villains' vids:

edited 23rd Oct '11 6:10:04 PM by HiddenFacedMatt

Bill Sykes? He's ugly as sin, that's for sure.

Sykes? Definitely a CM, though somehow likeable...

and I don't like the distinction between "monster" and "Complete Monster". isn't the former the invoked form of the trope? like another character calls the CM a monster.

"Monster" means villain, in this case. Happy?

I don't know because the other characters probably aren't going to actually say COMPLETE Monster.

Right, because most characters always talk using TV Tropes terms anyway.

Well, TV Tropes terms are usually based off of either old state/theater terms or terms used by characters in works. I mean, that's why we have so many Trope Namers.

You expressed displeasure with the usage in this thread; I explained the usage in this thread. Whether or not it's used in the story is irrelevant to the way it's being used here.

Yeah, but even so, the fact a character tells another one "You MONSTER!" doesn't mean that character is a Complete Monster by itself, and who ever says "You Complete Monster!"?

This.

edited 24th Oct '11 10:56:12 AM by NapoleonDeCheese

A character saying You Monster! to another character (or even a character calling themselves a monster) does not make the character in question a Complete Monster.

Case in point- not sure if it's still there in some form, but I remember having to go and correct the identification of the Operative (a Noble Demon Anti-Villain) from Serenity as a Complete Monster- the guy calls himself a monster, but he is certainly not a Complete Monster.

Airacnid from Transformers Prime was called a monster by June. and Airacnid is undeniable a Complete Monster.

And your point is?

There are examples of Complete Monster characters called You Monster!, but just because a character is called You Monster! doesn't mean they are a Complete Monster.

I know but it seems like a lot of them are.

I forget, did we ever come to a decision on Scar? He's higher up on the list than McLeach and Sykes right now, but I don't think we actually reviewed him properly.

(Facepalm)

Scar is an interesting case, because most of what he did counts for CM status, but then again, most of the things he did were for power instead of for the sake of evil itself. He was a lousy ruler, but a lot of it seemed to come more from incompetence than an outright desire to screw over his subjects.

And still, he apparently was kinda-sorta good enough to keep some followers on his name during the sequel.

edited 24th Oct '11 3:54:13 PM by NapoleonDeCheese

He was also pretty consistently played for laughs and has IMO a pretty decent excuse, being the weak "runt of the litter".

I'd say no as well, since in the beginning, he lacks the menace that a CM needs to have, and most of the damage he did after killing Mufasa was through incompetence, not malice (well, the malice was there, but the damage was largely through him not being a competent ruler).

For what it's worth, though, here's a video of him from the same source we've been using:

As you can see, he's certainly irredeemable, but he doesn't have the same depravity and menace of, say, Sykes.

edited 24th Oct '11 4:40:53 PM by tropetown

Scar seems more Evilly Affable, he has few redeeming aspects, and a lot of enthasis is put into what an evil bastard he is when played seriously, killing Mufasa, Mind Raping Simba and striking his mother just for good measure, but overall he's two much of a comical weasel to be considered a demonic Complete Monster.

Perhaps Shere Khan, who many believe is Scar's inspiration should be discussed next.

edited 24th Oct '11 4:44:08 PM by Psi001