TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Subpages cleanup: Complete Monster

Go To

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:

     Previous Post 
Complete Monster Cleanup Thread

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. "[tup] 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

LogoP Party Crasher from the Land of Deep Blue Since: May, 2013 Relationship Status: You can be my wingman any time
Party Crasher
#25451: May 16th 2014 at 3:37:04 AM

[up] GOT isn't big on flashbacks either. We will, however, hear him admit it. So perhaps that disqualifies it from being Offscreen Villainy.

edited 16th May '14 3:37:40 AM by LogoP

It is sometimes an appropriate response to reality to go insane.
nrjxll Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Not war
#25452: May 16th 2014 at 3:55:19 AM

I'm strongly leaning now towards voting down show!Gregor, because I think the show has characters where their heinousness hasn't really been toned down for the screen (Ramsay Bolton, for one). So by that standard I don't think he cuts it.

Also, if "The Viper and the Mountain" refers to the scene it sounds like (and they don't change anything from the books) he's going to die soon, so we'll have all the information we're going to one way or another.

LogoP Party Crasher from the Land of Deep Blue Since: May, 2013 Relationship Status: You can be my wingman any time
Party Crasher
#25453: May 16th 2014 at 4:04:13 AM

Gregor aside, can we move Karl and Craster to the Edit Locked Request thread? It's been a few weeks already. Assuming there's nothing else to discuss, of course.

It is sometimes an appropriate response to reality to go insane.
ACW from Arlington, VA (near Washington, D.C.) Since: Jul, 2009
OccasionalExister Since: Jul, 2012
#25455: May 16th 2014 at 4:35:05 AM

Nah, Book!Karl, or Clubfoot Karl, is a much more minor character who participated in the mutiny. Karl in the show is a Composite Character of several of the mutineers. Also, the whole "kill the mutineers" subplot wasn't in the books. It was created especially for the show.

Larkmarn Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Hello, I love you
#25456: May 16th 2014 at 5:46:17 AM

So the writeup for Craster I found on the YMMV.Game Of Thrones page is pretty weak... is this what we want to go with?

  • Craster. The man fully embraces the absence of laws Beyond the Wall and freely acts as horrible as humanly possible. He brainwashes, enslaves, and rapes his daughters so that they can produce new daughters for him to brainwash, enslave, and rape. If they bear him sons, he gives them up to the White Walkers. Worst of all, his usefulness to the Night's Watch means that they have to accept whatever he does or lose a critical ally.

edited 16th May '14 5:53:10 AM by Larkmarn

Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
bobg Since: Nov, 2012
#25457: May 16th 2014 at 9:10:07 AM

I was wondering, when I read the Wolf Creek prequels several months from now, should we consider a possibility of removing Mik if he is made sympathetic in them? We have already ignored Scar,s and Judge Doom,s backstories. From what I have rad from reviews, they do indeed give Mick a Freudian Excuse, (him witnising the murder of his sister and being abused by his father has a child) but it plays with the idea of nature vs nurture and leaves it debatable if he would have been a killer anyway.

Personally, even though I have not read them yet, I think that even with such a backstory, his actions in the films still make him too evil to sympathise with. But I wanted your oppinons if we should bother checking them out in the first place.

jjj
TVRulezAgain Since: Sep, 2011
#25458: May 16th 2014 at 10:48:57 AM

With backstories from supplemental works, it all depends on the canonicity of the work in question. I'll give two contrasting examples:

In Scar's case, his backstory came from a series of books that was never officially declared canon. It wasn't written by Disney, but by authors who got Disney's permission to make spinoff books. Plus the books contradict the movies by giving Simba a son, when he had a daughter in the movies. So Scar's backstory can be ignored.

Conversely, the tie-in comics to the Batman: Arkham Series, such as Arkham Unhinged or Arkham City: End Game, can be considered because the authors were working with Rocksteady to craft the stories.

So, if we were to consider the prequel novels to Wolf Creek, we would first need evidence of them being canon.

OccasionalExister Since: Jul, 2012
#25459: May 16th 2014 at 1:26:13 PM

@25453: Thank you for commenting on the Tamara Pierce examples. I believe Roger and Skinner count. I'm still on the fence about Vinson since it sounds like he only has one attempt onscreen. Imajane may count but I'd vote down on Rubinyan for having an ambiguous possible friendship. Don't suppose Imajane and Rubinyan care about each other in anyway, do they? In the meantime, I'll cut the group examples from YMMV.Tortall Universe.

edited 16th May '14 1:34:42 PM by OccasionalExister

eowynjedi Since: Jun, 2009
#25460: May 16th 2014 at 1:48:44 PM

Yeah, Vinson is tricky because we do see what he did, just long after it happened. And it's pretty obvious that the only reason he confesses is because he's being magically compelled to and he just wants to stop getting beaten up.

Imajane is pissed when she finds (fake) evidence of Rubinyan having an affair, but her response is to beat the crap out of the "other woman" and throw heavy objects at her husband so I wouldn't call that caring, and I don't recall any kind of affection shown between them. It's highly unlikely that they married for love since Arranged Marriage is the norm in the setting.

bobg Since: Nov, 2012
#25461: May 16th 2014 at 1:50:37 PM

[up][up][up] Well, from what I read online, the novels are written by the director of the two films.

edited 16th May '14 1:50:58 PM by bobg

jjj
Morgenthaler Since: Feb, 2016
#25462: May 16th 2014 at 2:02:05 PM

Here's another candidate whom I think might fit: Freddy Krueger / The Entity from Wes Craven's New Nightmare. This is NOT mainstream Freddy Krueger, who has already been extensively discussed and written-up a while ago. New Nightmare is an entirely seperate continuity and the Real-World Episode of the franchise.

In this story Freddy Krueger is actually just the latest form of an ancient, shapeshifting demon-like entity who has been roaming the Earth for thousands of years to "destroy innocence" (I suppose Niarlatotep might have been one inspiration for this incarnation) but can be contained inside a work of fiction and found the role of Freddy fun. He plans to escape into the outside world to continue his evil elsewhere. He targets Heather Langenkamp (Nancy's actress from the original) because he's angry that she defeated him back then and considers her his nemesis, even though she's just a normal mother. He targets her friends and family purely to hurt her, murders her husband in his car, tries to kill Heather herself several times, kills her babysitter by slaughtering her in front of her son Dylan, and kidnaps Dylan to his ancient temple to stage a showdown with Nancy before he tries to eat her son alive.

His bodycount is smaller than mainstream Freddy due to his comparatively limited screentime, but since this is a different continuity there is no relative heinous standard to consider (he's the only villain in this movie) and it's explicitly made clear that he pretty much was Freddy Krueger, as he inhabited the role for many years (whether that would add to his tally is another matter, however. It's never quite clear if the "movie world" that Freddy is trying to escape from is some alternate dimension or something more metaphysical). Unlike Freddy, who started out as a human, it is closer to an Eldritch Abomination, but there's no evidence to suggest it does not understand human morality. He apparently spread misery throughout human history, liked being Freddy, chose to remain in that form afterwards and destroys Heather's life and kills people entirely for fun. He's played entirely straight and I think he's heinous enough on his own to qualify in his verse.

Also, can I get a response on Paul Sarone (Anaconda)? Only Lightysnake has commented on him so far.

edited 16th May '14 2:05:24 PM by Morgenthaler

You've got roaming bands of armed, aggressive, tyrannical plumbers coming to your door, saying "Use our service, or else!"
OccasionalExister Since: Jul, 2012
#25463: May 16th 2014 at 2:25:08 PM

I'm unsure about this new Freddy Krueger since he's an actual monster instead of a man who was evil enough to become one on his own, and he doesn't sound particularly heinous for a horror movie villain. Not sure about Sarone either, he struck me as evil just not Complete Monster levels of evil.

Since there's five yes votes for Carver and one nay, I think he can be listed. I can provide a write-up tonight if that's okay with everyone.

edited 16th May '14 2:39:32 PM by OccasionalExister

bobg Since: Nov, 2012
#25464: May 16th 2014 at 2:37:00 PM

[up][up] Oh yeah[tup] The fact that he's played completely straight probly makes him even worse than the real Freddy.

edited 16th May '14 2:38:51 PM by bobg

jjj
VeryMelon Since: Jul, 2011 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#25465: May 16th 2014 at 2:48:17 PM

Please do the write-up for William Carver Exitster

LogoP Party Crasher from the Land of Deep Blue Since: May, 2013 Relationship Status: You can be my wingman any time
Party Crasher
#25466: May 16th 2014 at 3:05:55 PM

RE: Freddy/The Entity.

Having seen the movie, i'm unsure about this. Mostly because it's implied that it is a demon Made of Evil, unlike the actual Freddy, who was human. This messes up the morality factor.

edited 16th May '14 3:06:13 PM by LogoP

It is sometimes an appropriate response to reality to go insane.
OccasionalExister Since: Jul, 2012
#25467: May 16th 2014 at 3:18:02 PM

Alright, here's the Carver write-up. Warning major unmarked spoilers for The Walking Dead Season Two

edited 16th May '14 3:20:42 PM by OccasionalExister

Morgenthaler Since: Feb, 2016
#25468: May 16th 2014 at 3:26:23 PM

[up] Good write-up on Carver.

I'm not sure if "not evil enough for a horror villain" is entirely compelling as an argument. I've sometimes seen the idea of a seperate standard for horror works suggested around this thread, but I think that sort of defeats the purpose of a general heinous bar which is supposed to apply to all fiction. Simply put, Horror is one of the likeliest genres to feature a Complete Monster because its purpose, after all, is to horrify the audience and a very evil character can be one way to achieve that (CM is even indexed under Horror Tropes). By contrast, something like a comedy or a romance would have a hard time including such a character without making some serious use of Vile Villain, Saccharine Show.

Moral agency is another thing as it was never human, but there's nothing to suggest that it has no choice in doing what it does, anymore than IT or Nyarly. In fact, they point out that it kept Freddy's form simply because it likes the shape of a child-murdering serial killer.

Sarone passes in my mind because he tries to feed a bunch of innocents to a giant snake solely for profit and clearly doesn't give a crap about anyone but himself (it's revealed later on that they were all to be slowly used as bait for his hunt from the start). He personally strangles a woman to death after he manipulated her boyfriend into getting himself killed, ties up two people and showers them with monkey blood to set up a trap in the animal's feeding grounds (mocking their deaths by noting the dusty remains of human bones on the floor) and lets the boyfriend be eaten when the snake attacks him because he can't profit off of a dead animal. He seems to cross enough lines to be sufficiently heinous.

edited 17th May '14 1:34:48 AM by Morgenthaler

You've got roaming bands of armed, aggressive, tyrannical plumbers coming to your door, saying "Use our service, or else!"
VeryMelon Since: Jul, 2011 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#25470: May 16th 2014 at 3:44:58 PM

Good Carver. And we should keep Mick Taylor.

Morgenthaler, can you do the writeup for Abbadon?

sanfranman91 Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: Shipping fictional characters
#25471: May 16th 2014 at 10:09:21 PM

@ 25479: Well done on the writeup for Carver. cool

Also, Craster's entry needs to be rewritten and I'm going to say [tdown] on NewNightmare!Freddy due to lack of moral agency as an actual monster.

Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#25472: May 16th 2014 at 10:24:42 PM

Here's a new Craster and Rikkako Oryo

  • Craster is a particularly nasty Wildling who resides beyond the Wall, making his living as an ally to the Night's Watch by providing them with supplies, shelter and info. Craster delights in antagonizing them, however, hiding behind the fact he's necessary to them to avoid reprisal. What makes Craster sickening is how he rules his self-given kingdom: Craster routinely marries any daughters he has when they come of age, beating and raping his many wives and daughter-wives. If they bear him sons, Craster sacrifices them by leaving them out for the White Walkers. Craster threatens violence on those he can't simply cow into submission and relishes the lack of law beyond the Wall to simply do whatever he wants, even having the audacity to claim he is a "Godly man" when criticized.

  • Rikako Oryo is one of Shogo Makishima's side projects: an always placid, pale, dark haired girl who relishes Shakespeare's plays when they depict human cruelty and suffering, Rikako has an obsession with creating art by drugging her fellow female student and murdering them. In order to mimic her father's artworks, which Rikako enjoyed even if she had nothing but contempt for the man himself, Rikako dissects the girls and arranges the corpses into scenes to mirror the portraits. In addition to this, Rikako is a rapist who rapes her female victims after drugging them. With no feeling but to savor her art as much as possible and create a countless number of masterpieces, Rikako is among the worst of Makishima's pupils.

edited 17th May '14 4:53:44 PM by Lightysnake

sanfranman91 Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: Shipping fictional characters
#25473: May 16th 2014 at 10:38:21 PM

The new entry for Craster looks pretty good now. [tup]

Rikako's entry needs a bit of grammatical tweaking (an instead of a in the first sentence for example), but otherwise looks nice as well.

Morgenthaler Since: Feb, 2016
#25474: May 17th 2014 at 1:06:43 AM

I have to ask: where is it indicated that NewNightmare!Freddy has no moral agency? There's a scene halfway through the movie where Wes Craven info-drops everything about it. He clearly says that the evil shape-shifting entity has decided to cross over from films into reality to cause more destruction, that he only kept Freddy's form because he liked it, and its entire motivation is apparently "the murder of innocence", so it clearly understands concepts like innocence and guilt and good and evil. All its kills are overly drawn-out and sadistic (rewatching it, he also kills two more people at the start who turn up dead later).

Being an Eldritch Abomination isn't an instant disqualifier. If it understands human morality but plain doesn't care and has the free will to do, go and be whatever and wherever it wants through time and space but decides to just kill people in this age, why should that disqualify it anymore than it would Nyarlathotep (who is the embodied will of a host of incomprehensible gods and has been evil since primordial times), Pennywise/IT (who was malicious for as long as it and the Turtle existed), or even Apep from Egyptian mythology?

Re: Abaddon: Sure, Lightysnake. I think I'll wait before the season finale has aired, though. Should only be a few days.

edited 17th May '14 1:39:21 AM by Morgenthaler

You've got roaming bands of armed, aggressive, tyrannical plumbers coming to your door, saying "Use our service, or else!"
Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#25475: May 17th 2014 at 1:40:26 AM

Understanding human morality doesn't mean much, the same way that an atheist can understand the moral system of orthodox Christians yet won't share the same beliefs as to the morality of premarital sex to use an awkward example.

I'd also argue that Eldritch Abomination type characters couldn't have a comparable moral agency due to by nature existing on such a fundamentally different sense of being that human morality would be incompatible.

edited 17th May '14 1:53:07 AM by Shaoken


Total posts: 326,048
Top