Subpages cleanup: Complete Monster

Keep Joffrey.

Why so serious?

@68074: I don't see it that way. I see it as Joffrey, from his point of view, being happy that he's finally found someone who he can form a genuine connection with since he's too psychotic to forge a meaningful relationship with anyone else. I'd be lying if I said I didn't understand why some people theorize he may have turned on Margery eventually, but there's no evidence in the show that it was an inevitability. Unlike with Sansa, he did seem to trust Margaery, facing his fears at her encouragement, and made a genuine effort to be nice to her. Again, it's more than Ramsay "You-Know-What-I-Do-To-People-Who-Bore-Me" Snow ever did for Myranda.

edited 19th Sep '16 6:32:47 PM by OccasionalExister

Ramsay and Myranda had been together for years. Joff is nice to Margaery for far less time and is implied to be a ticking time bomb there. I don't think it different than Myranda and Ramsay's shared love of cruelty...Margaery's just playing to him there.

I'm....unsure on Joffrey. I don't watch Game of Thrones (Am planning on starting the books soon, though), but honestly, what Lighty is saying makes me lean more toward keeping him. From what I know of Joffrey, the little monster is frankly incapable of anything but aping human emotions. So he hangs out with a girl and treats her well enough. Ok, but is there ANY indication that he wouldn't have disposed of her the SECOND she stopped being of some use to him and/or entertaining him, as Ramsay did with Myranda?

I mean, he's nice to her, sure, but we've seen what Joffrey eventually does to people he's nice to before. Is there any MAJOR indication that wouldn't have happened here?

And as for his father, if he truly doesn't show any other scenes of care following his dad's death bar standing up to Tywin, which could be explained as an attempt to humiliate Tywin.....I don't see it as redeeming (Ala Quentin Turnbull).

Count me for keeping Show!Joffrey for the moment.

Anywho, I've a new candidate from my favorite Mangaka, Naoki Urasawa.

What's the work?

Pluto is an alternate world/retelling of the Greatest Robot on Earth arc of the Astro Boy manga.

In this world, robots are so advanced, that they are basically people. They have emotions, they have rights, and they can get married and adopt and all that good stuff.

The only thing they can't do (Unless they are REALLY provoked) is kill a human being.

Who is he?

Dr. Roosevelt is the true Big Bad and The Man Behind the Man of both The Heavy, Dr. Abullah, and the President of Thracia.

He is a machine, much like most of the cast, however unlike most robots, his body is....an immobile teddy bear. He's creepier than he sounds.

What has he done?

Roosevelt, serving as the personal advisor for the President of Thracia, convinces him to frame the country of Persia for developing robots of mass destruction, and as such, Roosevelt and the President order a full-on invasion of Persia, leading to the slaughter of millions of robots on both sides (Remember, robots are basically humans in this story, so this is treated no different than innocent people being killed).

Roosevelt and the President also organized airstrikes against Persia that wiped out hundreds of innocent humans as well, with one notable instance being the bombing of a children's school.

Now, following Persia's annihilation, a man named Dr Abullah, who died during one of the airstrikes, created a robot with his hatred against Thracia for their war crimes implanted in it, and this robot, taking the name of Abullah, creates a robot named Pluto that he uses to hunt down and ruthlessly execute all 7 of the strongest of Thracia's robots as revenge.

Roosevelt...somehow....knew this scenario would happen, and has manipulated events to ensure Pluto succeeds in killing these 7 robots, all Woobies who greatly regret their crimes in the Thracia-Persia war, and often, many innocents are caught in Pluto's crossfire, including children.

Following this, Roosevelt ensures that an Anti-Proton Bomb created by Abullah gets planted in the middle of Thracia without resistance, and it is revealed that Abullah plans to use said bomb to create a massive explosion that will first destroy Thracia and it's millions of innocents, then cover the Earth with ash and chemicals that will kill at least 90% of the human race.

Roosevelt is fully aware of this plan and manipulates events to ensure that this goes according to plan, and when the President learns too late of the bomb, Roosevekt happily taunts him about it, stating that he was always just his pawn and that he'll "give" the President whatever is left of humanity to be their "leader".

Atom/Astro Boy and a now-good guy Pluto work together and stop Abullah's plan, with both Pluto and Abullah dying in the process.

Meanwhile, Roosevelt, unaware of his plans being thwarted, continues to taunt the President of his idiocy and his own superiority, however, Brau, a criminal robot who doesn't take too kindly to Roosevelt's scheme, shows up. Roosevelt happily watches as Brau seems to kill the President, however Brau quickly turns his attention to Roosevelt, and impales the teddy bear while Roosevelt tries vainly to save his own skin (Fur? Metal? Hmmmmm...)

Freudian Excuse or other mitigating factors?

None. Robots in this world are fully capable of love, sorrow, and kindness, but in the same instant, are capable of hate and egomania, so yes Roosevelt has moral agency. He's a megalomaniac with a superiority-complex that outright states that everthing except himself is either a failure, foolish, or dead.

No redeeming features either. He treats the President as his pawn, and has no care for any other robots, fully knowing his invasion of Persia will obliterate millions of innocent robots, and fully backing Abullah's plan to kill the 7 strongest, and arguable most moral, robots on the planet.

Heinousness?

Is ultimately the root of all evil in the story.

It's....never explained HOW he knew Abullah would go on a Roaring Rampage of Revenge, or how he ensured Abullah's attempted omnicide would come close to succeeding as it did, but it's stated that he did, and I think that's enough.

Overall, he manipulated the President into ordering an invasion on Persia, leading to the massacre of millions of innocent robots and hundreds of humans, he manipulated Abullah into using Pluto to kill 7 innocent robots, and he fully backed and enabled Abullah's plan to wipe out 90% of the human race so that he could rule over what was left of humanity and robot kind.

Final Verdict?

I'd say he's a Keeper. The fact that the "how" he commits some of his crimes is never elaborated on is a mite odd, but otherwise, he still commits them all, solely for the purpose of wiping out 90% of humanity so he can rule over the remains.

edited 19th Sep '16 7:05:23 PM by Ravok

WHAT A WONDERFUL DAY!

Discussion whether or not to cut D'arby, discussion on whether or not to cut Joffrey... Well, I'll just throw in Cook- Cook while we're at it.

Now I know that it can get annoying to bring it up again after consensus was to keep him, but a lot of those reasons don't make much sense to me. I don't want this to be my equivalent of abridged Frieza, I'm just pointing out my thoughts from the previous Cook- Cook discussion.

Anyway, for those who don't know, Cook- Cook is a Fallout villain on the CM page who I believed should be cut because he seemed to care about his pet two headed cow, Queenie. One of the responses to this was that he doesn't care about Queenie, it's just a game mechanic for him to get angry at her death.

First, Cook Cook is specifically designed to go insane and attack everything in sight after Queenie dies, something very few Fallout characters do if you kill something useful to them. A character specifically gives you a tip that killing Queenie would piss him of and drive him in a rage. So it's pretty clear that it's not only gameplay mechanic, it's part of his character. He flat out says he'll burn the whole world in honor of Queenie if she's killed.

Next was that it was purley pragmatic. That argument I can't see as remotely valid. Ignoring how he goes insane over Queenie dying, it's specifically noted that he has plenty of other Brahmin. The ones that aren't Queenie get restocked if they're killed. Cook Cook kills his Brahmin that aren't Queenie for fun. There's no pragmatic reason for why he would treat Queenie well if his other Brahmin, which can do everything Queenie does get killed by Cook Cook for his enjoyment.

Finally, there was the argument that he has sexual relations with his cow. I originally argued that the dialogue that implied that was cut, but go back on it now since its still part of his character. But still, it's only that Implications. Even a character who spied on Cook Cook for weeks never says anything about Cook Cook having sex with Queenie.

And honestly, even if he did have sex with his cow, compare it with other people he raped, who either got tortured or killed by him. Nowhere is it implied that he treated Queenie badly like other people he had sex with.

Cook Cook is fucked up. No argument there. But it seems pretty clear that he cares about Queenie. I hate to reopen this discussion, and will drop it if he gets denied again, but I'm saying that Cook- Cook shouldn't be a CM. He cares about somebody else, going against one of the most important requirements to be a CM.

We actually went through this argument with Cook Cook...I reiterate my belief that being angry you lost your bestiality sex toy is not redeeming whatsoever. And arguing Joffrey is not a reason to reopen a separate closed character

Yes for Roosevelet

edited 19th Sep '16 7:12:41 PM by Lightysnake

Roosevelt.

I actually was thinking about reopening Cook Cook for a while. Probably during thanksgiving or Christmas break. Just decided to speed things up after seeing proposals to cut two other C Ms.

He has plenty of sex toys who he abuses and kills. The sex with Queenie is implied, never confirmed, and he wants to burn the world to avenge her.

Dr. Roosevelt

Dr Roosevelt; sounds like another entry for the seriously bizarre qualifiers category.

I don't feel like making the effort now, but there's probably a couple of modifications I'll want to make to Hellebore's writeup, Lighty.

You need a reason to reopen discussion on Cook Cook And "there are arguments to cut entirely different guys" is not what I'd qualify as a reason there.

Njr: No worry at all, happy to have the input.

Dr. Roosevelt.

I can understand cutting Joffrey, especially with the information we've gotten. But as I said before, cutting a pyromaniac and Serial Rapist because he may or may not have cared about a brahmin is stretching it too far for me to be comfortable with.

I write stories and shiz. You can read them here.

Um...You did notice my arguments for why I believed the reasons he was kept don't hold water, right Lighty? I had a reason for reopening Cook Cook. The two other CM thing just made me decide to do it earlier.

Yeah, I can understand that. But him caring for the Brahmin thing is fairly clear.

edited 19th Sep '16 7:39:17 PM by Awesomekid42

Roosevelt.

Why so serious?

I saw them. They were also discussed last time.

Not entirely . My main argument last time was that the implications shouldn't be taken since they were cut from the final product, with your main response being that it's still part of his character. Now I agree with you on that, but still have reasons for why to cut him

Also, I don't think the whole, the biggest reason he's kept is because of implications thing, was brought up last time.

edited 19th Sep '16 7:53:52 PM by Awesomekid42

We seriously re-evaluating a version of Joffrey? I really don't see any reason he doesn't count in either medium. Prior to becoming king, he had a single sympathetic quality in that he wanted love, especially from Robert, but never got it, was never shown it, and thus could never give it to others, and him mourning Robert's death was sincere. After ascending the throne however, he lost any and all tiny redeeming qualities he had - even in Jack Gleeson's own words, he gets "far worse" from there.

As for his interactions with Margaery, keep in mind that Joffrey, a grade A psychopath or sociopath, can display love and kindness and as others have pointed out it's about as sincere as Amon Goeth's displays of friendship and humanity. We know how he's really like and those good qualities just aren't really there. He wants to act kind and loving because he wants to be given love and kindness. He doesn't really care about the other person he seemingly cares for - it's all about how he benefits.

So cutting Joffrey. His love for Robert and sadness over his death happened before he became a true CM, and his affection towards Margaery does nothing to mitigate his villainy and lead him down a better path of redemptive acts - it's only an illusion of mitigation that Joffrey puts up to garner love.

edited 19th Sep '16 7:59:14 PM by ANewMan

Roosevelt

Can't decide on Joffrey. Count me as an abstain.

Cut Cook-Cook, since I don't count cut dialogue as canon, so all the evidence indicates that he loves Queenie. However, I must say, cutting a Serial Rapist pyromaniac for loving a mutant cow has got to be the strangest vote I've done.

Roosevelt looks like a

What's the tally on D'Arby? I can go for another round of arguments.

edited 19th Sep '16 8:55:53 PM by DrPsyche

When I brought up Joffrey, I actually had information that I believed hadn't been brought up before (standing up to Tywin on Robert's behalf, the omission of the scene where he dismisses Robert's death in the books, and a more in-depth look at his and Margery's relationship). There's been absolutely no new evidence brought up for Cook-Cook. It's the exact same argument that was used about a month ago when the majority of voters decided to keep him.

Eleven cut seven keep I think for D'arby.

From what I saw, the majority of the people voted to keep him because of possible implications that he had sex with Queenie, which I personally don't think makes sense since having sex with the cow doesn't mean he only thinks of her as a sex toy.

And I just realized that I'm defending bestiality.

edited 19th Sep '16 9:36:20 PM by Awesomekid42

Keep Joffrey.

Also, Rampage 3 is out. I'll be watching it, and then providing info on whether we can keep or cut Bill. My friend saw it before me, and from what he's told me about it, we'll have to cut him. But I don't wanna make any decisions until I see it for myself.

for keeping Show!Joffrey. Even Jack Gleeson himself has stated that he has no redeeming qualities, and we all know that Gleeson was just too damn good to portray him.

I will once again note that this is an attitude I really object to. Yes, we really are reevalutating him because Exister raised some points that had not been previously discussed. It is a perfectly legitimate discussion to be having, and I don't like the fact that people are trying to delegitimize the process with comments like that.

Feel free to disagree. Feel free to vote against—as a majority seem to be—but don't give that as a reason. Honestly the more I see reactions along the lines of "it's a version of Joffrey, we can't cut him," the more convinced I become that Exister was right to raise the issue, and that the character is a cut.

Again, not an argument. I could dig up comments from any number of authors and actors on their characters and how evil they are, but it would not matter. To hear James Marsters tell it his version of Brainiac isn't even evil—but he's still on the list.

---

In any case, I'll again echo what Exister said. Joff comes off as genuinely glad to have found someone who shares his interests. It's not merely that's he's nice to her, it's that he does things he does not want to do in an effort to make her happy, including showing himself to the people of King's Landing—stereotyped by he and his mother previously as the mob that nearly killed him—at her insistence.

Joffrey is not the kind of guy to put someone else's wants ahead of his own. Yet in that scene, he does it. He lets her talk him into doing something he has no reason to want to do, and for somebody as psychopathic as he is that's an enormous thing.

edited 19th Sep '16 9:25:31 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

You've got an uphill battle with Joffrey it seems. Qualifier or not, the guy's just so memetically evil that you'll inevitably meet resistance. I'm still mulling it over for now, though kudos to Jack Gleeson he has a performance rivaling Imelda Staunton as somebody so hatable that it's amazing to watch.

edited 19th Sep '16 9:34:45 PM by DrPsyche