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
That one seems more The Hedonist, plus it has Shakespeare's Purple Prose.
So, I've got a fun little Die Hard ripoff:
What's the work?
Icebreaker is a 2000 film that is...not very good. But has a combo that has likely never been repeated under the sun: it stars Sean Astin as the action hero, has Stacy Keach as his would-be father in law and the villain, Carl Greig, is an evil terrorist out to carve his legacy upon the world....and Greig is played by none other than Bruce Campbell.
Who is Greig?
a man of...questionable origin and no hair, Greig is a terrorist with alegacy of evil and murder behind him, who wants to...I don't actually know, because the one time he explains it, it doesn't make any sense at all. Look, I saw this film with Rifftrax, it made it bearable. The problem is? Greig is dying of an unspecified illness and wants to leave a mark on his last ever birthday....so he had a plane hijacked with weapons-grade nuclear weapons. His intention is to nuke a city, being the most successful terrorist ever with a video explaining his reasons...issue is, someone got an attack of conscience and the plane crashed at the Killington Ski Resort where hero Matt Foster is with his beloved, trying to explain to her dad about their marriage....when Greig arrives and takes over.
Oh, and did I mention the man Greig blames for losing the plane? Greig interrogates him by having him hang on to the edge of a helicopter HIGH into the air, before stomping on his hands to send him plummeting to his death as he doesn't forgive him...upon taking over, well...our hero Matt is free and Greig takes over the ski resort, executing a hostage. His longtime FBI nemesis Bill Langley arrives to warn the others at the resort. (Ripptrax makes the lovely joke that also arriving is his CIA counterpart Bob Quantico)...so, Greig is intending on recovering the nuke and bombing a city before his life expires, kills a bunch of law enforcement, threatens to murder the hostages, holds a standoff and demands that if the FBI arrive? The hostages will be slaughtered, before things break up and Matt steadily eliminates the villains. The FBI are blown up in a helicopter because Die Hard ripoff and this film is committed to treading those waters.
In the end, Greig manages to lose most of his inner circle, but decides to nuke the ski resort, and himself with it as a "happy birthday, Greig!" ...only to be blown up by Stacy Keach with a rocket launcher.
Mitigating issues?
Easily over the HS with lots of deaths, trying to murder all the hostages, nuking the place, trying to nuke a city as plan A, no issues by there. The other matter is mitigating issues...Greig talks a good game at charm and charisma, but...his motives are genuinely inscrutable. He leaves a videotape to "explain why I did this" but really, it's just about leaving his mark...he makes this speech that makes no sense about anything, and...well, no care for his men. He clearly intends to leave a few to be nuked, and when a few others decide they're leaving, he just screams at them to get lost, too busy trying to get the nuke going.
Conclusion?
A yes to Greig.
![]()
The way the scene plays out is the men are around him, Greig is barely standing as he's trying tog et the nuke. The one minion says "I'm going to leave now" and Greig just screams at him and the others to get lost if they won't help him.
There's no pet the dog here. He's dead on his feet and has no way to punish them for disobeying.
![]()
![]()
![]()
I would agree it isn't really a Pet the Dog moment but it seemed way too ambiguous for me to discount it as a prevention.

This is the one that was proposed earlier
I personally prefer this one.
Edited by papyru30 on Apr 2nd 2021 at 1:11:30 PM