Subpages cleanup: Complete Monster

Being Made of Evil, which is suggested heavily, is what makes me think to say "no" on New!Freddy. I wouldn't mind if a second movie came out to explain it better.

That said, the explanation doesn't really show how he has moral agency instead of being made of evil period. Attacking only the innocent alone doesn't show moral agency at all. It just means they know which is which period enough to find a victim.

A better question is why he doesn't attack the non-innocent. I need a full explanation on that. Because the background sounds way too much like a force of nature instead. I'm currently on no unless you can prove he's not just Made of Evil. Without making us watch the movie. Your explanation should be good enough.

Also, what Shaoken said. I'm questioning if those are good enough entries due to a likely "being a force of nature". Also, Deities are often able to completely think for themselves at time. Apep is a poor example of that, however, it does depend on the fictional depiction whether he's Made of Evil(I know that's his domain in general, but that has nothing to do with whether he has moral agency or not in a specific work. Hades is a good example of this. In the Hercules Cartoon he had morals, just few. He's no CM or anything, but he does have them. Another is his Legendary Journeys counterpart. He's nowhere near evil, just kind of a dick at times. Most Gods are like that period. Only Hera came close to being truly evil, and had moral agency too. Before anyone says it, I'm not going to say she's an example due to redeeming herself at the last moment).

I can see the argument, but I do think there needs to be a more thorough debate on how you can determine moral agency with Deities/primordial beings who have existed as forces of evil since time immemorial. Apep for instance was qualified as it appeared in the original mythology despite being basically an embodiment of destruction itself. Besides Pennywise and Nyarlathotep, to use another example, there's the Djinn from Wishmaster who was created by God at the dawn of time, and who was also qualified.

In NewNightmare!Freddy's case it may be just too plain ambiguous. The issue I have is not just that he understands human morality, but goes dimension-hopping to kill people of its own conscious choice after getting bored with the fictional universe he occupied. They also never make a point of him not going after non-innocent people. He never even gets the opportunity, implying that he just doesn't think it's evil enough. Do they ever say that it's evil? It kills people, sure, but is it Evil? They don't go into any detail beyond calling it "an entity" and its ultimate origin is purposely left vague (it's apparently at least as old as Ancient Greece if its temple is anything to go by). It's a question of whether he's evil because he does bad things or does bad things because he is evil, which can be interpreted several ways.

edited 17th May '14 3:17:21 AM by Morgenthaler

Then I say wait for more official information. I can't say either way at this point. The story refuses to say in either case, so I lean straight towards no until we have a better explanation.

for now, then.

The thing about Eldritch abominations is that there are some abominations that have moral agency. For example, Nyarlathotep of Cthulhu Mythos fame is the only Outer God that is depicted as being pure evil. He treats the universe as if it were one giant mouse game. Overall, I disagree that an Eldritch Abomination has a different moral system from humanity, unless they are portrayed as being evil by the author.

edited 17th May '14 6:56:21 AM by AustinDR

Given that it's heavily implied that Entity!Freddy is not only an Eldritch Abomination but also Made of Evil, i'm going to give it a .

Was there ever a decision for Judge Holloway from Silent Hill?

Also, this is on Shadowrun Returns:

• Dr. Holmes a.k.a the Emerald City Ripper. He took over the mental hospital and used it's patients for organ trading and grisly Body Horror experiments, which included making designer sex slaves out of them by constructing a body out of various parts, sticking a head with the desired face on it and overriding the brain with chips.
  • It should be noted that this is relatively tame by Shadowrun standards and could in fact be considered business as usual for many doctors. It also should be pointed out that he is only the first villain you end up putting in the ground. Yes, the Universal Brotherhood is that bad.

Sounds like he's not heinous enough by the standards of the story.

Shadowrun Returns - or at least, the Dead Man's Switch campaign - is a prequel to and adaptation of the tabletop game, and he's being compared to villains from the tabletop game. Within the game, he's over the bar. Keep the entry, cut that line.

edited 17th May '14 4:15:36 PM by KyleJacobs

Ah. Well I also saw this on the character page:

• Freudian Excuse: As one of the first generation of changelings, he was subjected to extensive experimental medical procedures, notably increasing dosages of sedatives which pre-Awakening doctors considered necessary to treat his "aberrant physiology". Decades later, another elven doctor was able to get his hands on him and treat him as a person instead of a test subject, but the damage was done. He spent several months learning to mimic the new doctor's habits and personality, then killed him and assumed his identity.

I'm actually playing that game in another window as I type this. I'll report back when I've seen something on him firsthand.

EDIT: Ok, from what I've found so far, it seems like he was kind of fucked up even as a kid before all the drugs started.

edited 17th May '14 5:30:48 PM by KyleJacobs

Now that we've gotten Psycho Pass mostly done, can we comment on Senguji? I really think he qualifies, but I want more discussion.

I think the Hylden Lord has a net yea of votes as well when the conversation ended. For The Walking Dead comic, I'll vote that Negan's story is ''still going'' so we have to wait more time, as he may yet rid himself of previous redeeming qualities.

However, for Entity Freddy...where is it implied it's made of evil or lacks agency? We need to make sure that's abundantly clear before we say it.

Anyways, I have a proposal now...Senator Corvus played Kiefer Sutherland of all people in the recent film Pompeii (It's Jack Bauer versus Jon Snow!)

Now, in the start of the film, Corvus leads an attack on a Celtic tribe, killing them all except one little boy whose mother he kills personally. the boy survives and is sold into slavery. The hero of the film, Milo (played by Kit Harrington) becomes a gladiator who falls for the top official in Pompeii's daughter who Corvus lusts for. When Corvus finds out, he tries to have Milo killed, but has him lashed when his girlfriend, Cassia consents to Corvus's proposal, Corvus has him lashed.

This isn't redeeming, at ALL, though, as it's made clear Corvus is just playing nice. He has Milo and his friendly rival Atticus chained in the great circus and has them attacked by fighters dressed as Roman soldiers, wanting to recreate his victory over Milo's tribe and kill him in that pantomime. When Cassia tries to withdraw from the engagement, Corvus blackmails her into it by threatening to accuse her family of treason. As he puts it, he doesn't want her as a wife, but "I will break you and you stay broken to crawl or beg as I command!"

At this point, Mt. Vesuvius begins erupting, which allows Milo and Atticus to escape. Corvus murders Cassia's father, who's portrayed as a good guy as well. Corvus also kills civilians blocking his path to escape, while deciding to also abduct Cassia. He also abandons his loyal right-hand Proculus as there's not enough room for him on the chariot.

Also in all, Corvus has zero redeeming qualities and the guy commits multiple horrid crimes. He has no affection for Cassia, viewing her as a prize and object of lust.

Someone already added the Big Bad from Agents of SHIELD as a Complete Monster on its YMMV page. I guess I should delete it, since it's yet to be given the pass by this thread?

edited 17th May '14 5:39:40 PM by speyeker

After getting further in the game, I feel the need to point out that Holmes's designer sex slave bit is arguably Offscreen Villainy - we find a terminal containing his logs in which he semi-gleefully explains the process, and we see the results after his boss fight, but we don't see him actually do it.

edited 17th May '14 5:53:56 PM by KyleJacobs

Technically if we see the results onscreen that would take it out of Offscreen Villainy, like with the Harrenhal massacre mentioned when discussing Gregor.

edited 17th May '14 5:57:49 PM by OccasionalExister

I have a possible example to discuss from Frankenstein: The Shadow of Frankenstein, a tie-in novel to the Universal Frankenstein films, taking place between Bride of Frankenstein and Son of Frankenstein.

The character in question is Jack The Ripper himself. I'll skim through my copy and do an effort post on him.

There's an example I'd like to bring up from CHERUB Series. It is Ralph "The Fuhrer" Donnington. He was added, to the YMMMV page but removed for being zero context.

Who is Ralph Donnington?: Ralph "The Fuhrer" Donnington is a Neo-Nazi in charge of the South Devon chapter of the Brigands M.C biker gang.

What does he do?: He is introduced trying to force his son, Martin, to take part in a boxing match. When Martin spits on a member's patch, The Fuhrer tries to assault and possibly kill him, only stopping when the member appeases him by having Martin fight the much more skilled Dante Scott. The Fuhrer later tries to have the clubhouse torn down for new facilities, and when Dante's father disagrees, he threatens to kill him. When Dante's parents kill one of his thugs, he retaliates not only by killing them but there children too, and would have killed the baby too if Dante hadn't escaped with her. He then sends a gang member to try to bomb the foster home that Dante was staying at. When he finds an undercover cop in his croup he tries to kill him, only stopping when the cops tells him that he does not won't a murder of a cop on his hands. When protagonist James Adams infiltrates his organization as a waiter The Fuhrer plays a sick joke, threatening to kill him for delivering tepid food, but he does pay James for responding well.

Freudian excuse or Redeeming traits?: No, anything good he does is for selfish reasons, such as not killing a cop because the police show them no mercy, and paying James because he found maintaining a cool head in the face of death threats to be a useful trait.

While I'm at it here's a rewrite for Hassam. I might make one for Leonid, but I have not read the books yet.

• Hassam Bin Hassam from The Sleepwalker has habit of selling shoddy parts to airlines, which results in the deaths of nearly 350 people from a large plane crash, for which he had absolutely zero remorse. He would regularly beat his wife son, and house keeper. He abused his son for enjoying Western culture, despite enjoying it himself, and murders his own wife when confronted about his plan. When he finds bugs in his house, he brutally waterboards his housekeeper in the toilet and shoots her in the thigh so she can not get help. When cornered, Hassam holds his own son hostage at knife-point and threatens to kill him if he is not allowed to go free.

edited 17th May '14 8:20:54 PM by randomtroper89

@25484: Good write-ups.

@25486: I suppose I worded my previous objection to New!Freddie poorly. It's less that he's a literal monster, and more that there's an implication he could be Made of Evil, which would rob him of agency.

@25493: I'm also playing the game currently so if I come up with anything relevant I'll bring it up here.

@25497: I agree with adding Senguji. Corvus sounds like he counts too.

@25502: Ralph Donnington sounds like a keeper. Good Hassam entry also.

edited 17th May '14 9:40:45 PM by OccasionalExister

Alright Jack The Ripper

Who is he?

Jack the Ripper. It's about a half-century since his reign of terror, and he's kept himself alive with a potion made from the wombs of his victims. Now the effects of the potion are wearing off, so he's at it again.

What does he do? Well, he continues killing and mutilating several prostitutes. He attacks Mary Blyss, a Hooker with a Heart of Gold, but Frankenstein's Monster, who had befriended Mary, saves her and fights the Ripper off. Jack stabs the Monster during the fight. Later, he cuts up Mary's friend Cyra. When the Monster desperately tries to save her, Jack taunts him about it.

He stabs a man who tries to expose him, and he cuts Mary Blyss, who runs to alert the police but dies from her wounds.

He takes note of the Monster's near-indestructible body and plans to force Frankenstein to create a new body like that for him so he can live forever. He kidnaps Frankenstein's wife Elizabeth and holds her hostage to force Frankenstein to help him. He also cuts of the foot of Frankenstein's best friend and leaves it as a "souvenir" to give Frankenstein a ransom note written in blood.

Any Freudian Excuse, redeeming qualities, or other mitigating factors?

He has a backstory but it isn't a Freudian Excuse. He discovered the cave of Sawney Bean and found a book on black magic and cutting bodies up. It intrigued him so he sought for an immortal life.

Now, when he killed his first victim, a young girl at a hospital, he felt remorse, but afterward he embraced killing in order for the potion to work.

There are a few issues however. For one thing, he claims that if Frankenstein meets his demands, he'll return Elizabeth to safety, though it's not made clear whether or not he would have kept his promise.

Also, after he cuts off Frankenstein's friend's foot, he wraps a belt around his ankle to keep him from bleeding to death. I don't know if that's a Pet the Dog moment or if it's just cause he knows Frankenstein won't help him if he kills his friends.

Heinous by the standards of the story?

By the standards of the Universal Frankenstein series, I'd say so. Frankenstein, the Monster, and Ygor all have redeeming and sympathetic qualities. The only unsympathetic villain is Dr. Pretorious from Bride of Frankenstein and he's your standard evil scientist. Jack the Ripper, however, is a heinous individual.

Verdict? I'd say maybe for him. Unless the aforementioned issues disqualify him.

edited 17th May '14 8:23:21 PM by TVRulezAgain

I'm not trying to argue against his exclusion, but why was Exdeath from Final Fantasy V cut? He certainly meets the heinous standard, threatening to send every part of the world into The Void and kills Galuf among other things. Not to mention his castle is made from the organs of his fallen victims. The only reason I would consider voting against him would be because of Offscreen Villany.

Also on the subject of potential FF monsters, could we add Emperor Gestahl from Final Fantasy VI? He's responsible for most of the events of the game and the only reason I would vote against him is that Kefka is more heinous. Maybe we could also add President Shinra (not Rufus, his predecessor) for blowing up a large chunk of Midgar just to dispose of some terrorists and being responsible for a fair chunk of the game.

Was it moral agency?

Didn't they give Gestahl an Even Evil Has Standards moment?

Gestahl doesn't remotely begin to approach how heinous Kefka is...and Exdeath...wasn't there a lot of moral agency issue as he's the result of a tree having evil sealed into it until it became evil?

for Senator Corvus. Unsure about Jack the Ripper... does he display Pragmatic Villainy or I Lied at other points to get a more clear reading on his character?

@ Austin DR: That's not enough, though. Using the same standards just used for Entity!Freddy, that would only indicate Nyarlathotep is aware enough of human morality to get joy out of sadistically tormenting humanity for millennia. If he's both the physical embodiment of the Outer Gods' will and has been malevolent since his creation, how can he be said to have genuine moral agency? Does he ever make a real moral choice? It seems he's always only been the universe's agent of pure malevolence. Contrast that to someone like Darkseid, who's the embodiment of Tyranny, but makes it clear enough that he's acting entirely of his own will.

@ Occasional Exister: There's a difference between implying that it could be Made of Evil and confirming that, though. It's admittedly a fine line between "it's an evil spirit" and "it's a spirit of evil", but nowhere in the film do they actually identify it as the Avatar of All Evil, just The Entity... which is evil. My point has been that is too vague to assume lack of moral agency when we know nothing of how the Entity came into being, only that it has always acted on malice.

Opinions can differ on how clearly it's presented to make a judgment either way, but it just seems a bit arbitrary that he's disqualified so quickly when that rule has been relaxed for characters with the same vague backgrounds like Nyarlathotep and Pennywise. Or for that matter Majora's Mask, a monster whose ultimate origin is also vague beyond the fact that it once belonged to an ancient tribe (there's a manga of dubious canonicity that claims it came into existence as an evil spirit made from the armor of a primordial beast), yet the demon inhabiting it is the only character from the Zelda series who passed. And Majora has far more implications of being a truly alien Eldritch Abomination with no understanding of conventional morality with dialogue like this:

"Your friends... What kind of... people are they? I wonder... Do these people... think of you... as a friend?"

"Your true face... What kind of... face is it? I wonder... The face under the mask... Is that... your true face?"

"The right thing...what is it? I wonder...if you do the right thing...does it make...everybody...happy?"

"What makes you happy? I wonder...what makes you happy...does it make...others happy, too?"

edited 18th May '14 2:44:28 AM by Morgenthaler

Senator Corvus is an easy for me. I also have no objections regarding Senguji, Ralph Donnington and Film!Jack the Ripper being added.

@ 25502: Awesome entry for Hassam.

edited 18th May '14 3:22:52 AM by sanfranman91

• Ralph "The Fuhrer" Donnington from Brigands M.C is a Neo-Nazi in charge of the South Devon Chapter of the title biker gang. He is introduced trying to assault and possibly kill his son Martin for spitting on a member's patch, only stopping when the member appeases him by having Martin fight the much more skilled Dante Scott. The Fuhrer later threatens to kill Dante's father when he disagrees with his plans to have the clubhouse torn down for new facilities. When Dante's parents kill one of his thugs, he retaliates by killing them and there older two children, and the younger two only live Dante escapes though the window with the baby accidentally injuring her in the process. To eliminate Dante as a witness he sends a gang member to try to bomb the foster home that Dante was staying at. When The Fuhrer finds an undercover cop in his group he takes him to a field to execute him, until the cop tells him that he doesn't want a murder of a officer on his hands. When protagonist James Adams gets a job as a server for the clubhouse, The Fuhrer threatens to kill him for delivering tepid food as a sick joke, and admits he does this with every new server.

Also a slight rewrite for Perseus Friend from Young Bond.

• Dr. Perseus Friend from Young Bond is a cold, cruel man in league with the Third Reich and participating in a scheme to inspire the workers of Britain to revolt against their leaders with a communist front, resulting in the assassination of King George V which would place the Fascism-friendly Edward VIII back on the throne, allying with Hitler's Germany against Russia. When he has Bond and his Love Interest Roan captive, Friend decides to repay Bond for their previous encounters by flaying Bond alive while recording it for later viewing and forcing Roan to watch, just for the amusement that he'll gain.

edited 19th May '14 6:06:55 AM by randomtroper89

Technically it's Book!Jack not Film!Jack.