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. "![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/thumbs_up_emote.png "[thumb up]"){kind=small}
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
A couple days ago, I proposed David Banner from the 2003 film Hulk as a possible candidate for inclusion, but later admitted that he likely did not fully meet the threshold for a complete monster because he had genuine love for his wife, and expressed remorse for having killed her (albeit accidentally). Had it not been for that one brief moment of introspection roughly halfway into the movie, there is little doubt in my mind that he would have made the cut.
However, there is another character from that same movie who I think ought to be mentioned - Major Glenn Talbot. This iteration of a recurring antagonist from the comic book series has absolutely no redeeming qualities to speak of. At first he seems like an overbearing, pushy guy who gives the two primary protagonists (Bruce and Betty) two options - either quit their current job and work under his firm, or face a hostile takeover. After Bruce transforms into the Hulk, he is sent by General Ross to place him under custody. Talbot viciously assaults Bruce upon entering his house, slams him into a table, strangles him to the ground, and punches him in the face. Why does he do this? It is blatantly obvious that force completely unwarranted in this situation. Angered, Bruce turns into the Hulk and severely injures him.
The next time you see Talbot, he shows up as Bruce is in custody. Talbot doesn't even make any attempt at give off the pretense of good intentions - he wants to make Bruce angry so he can cut off a piece of the Hulk, sell it, and make a fortune. His method? Tasering the poor guy into a corner, of course! Talbot gives Bruce a bunch of electrical shocks while bragging about a win-win scenario for himself: either Bruce turns into the creature, is killed and has an autopsy performed for genetic samples, or Talbot gets to "mop the floor with [him]" and might just "accidentally break [his] neck." When it's clear that Bruce is not turning green, Talbot knocks him out cold with a single punch in the face. Bruce is then suspended in water within a giant test tube and forcibly made angry through convulsions of some sort to the brain (I don't know the science behind it, if there is any). The Hulk comes out, smashes through the container, and runs loose inside the research facility. Talbot dispatches the non-lethal containment team to restrain it and orders a lockdown of the entire compound, despite General Ross ordering an immediate evacuation of the base. By doing these things, he knowingly puts several people at great risk just so he could get a sample of the creature. When Talbot is unsuccessful, he makes a genuine attempt on Bruce's life with a grenade - but it bounces off the Hulk's skin and he winds up getting himself killed in the ensuing explosion.
Although not the main antagonist, Talbot is a truly horrible person. He expresses no remorse for any of his actions, has no problem endangering the livelihood of those around him to satisfy his own selfish desires, and has shown himself to take sadistic pleasure in inflicting suffering unto others (specifically Bruce). I think he warrants consideration.
edited 13th Aug '14 6:07:52 PM by Kurtis
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Talbot fails the heinous standard. The only person he actually hurts is Bruce—which falls under generic villainy—and he's so far behind David Banner and The Hulk itself in terms of damage done that he might as well not even be in the film.
RE: Godzilla
The problem with that Gigan image is that it isn't clear from the picture that he's hurting somebody who can't fight back. I know what's going on, and so will others in this thread, but not everyone who sees the page will.
edited 13th Aug '14 5:56:56 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
I can't find a good picture online, but I know Carnage absorbed the life energy of several people during his appearance on the 90s animated show, surely there must a good picture of him doing that, that would be suitable.
Also if we want to give a quote to the Marvel Animation page, I know Apocalypse always had some good quotes in the old X-Men cartoon.
Here is some potential quotes:
1. Apocalypse: I will purge the Earth of these benighted humans!
2. Apocalypse: I cannot be touched, I can't be harmed! Watch me and tremble! For I bring the purity of oblivion to your world!
3. Baron Mordo: Do you dare go back on your word?!
Carnage: To heck with my word man. I'm going to bring this back. I can't wait to see what horrors Dormammu is going to commit when he gets here!
4. J. Jonah Jameson: How can one man hold the entire NYPD at Bay?!
Joseph Robertson: Jonah, Kasady is not a man, he's a monster. He's done things even the Post won't print.
Also I don't know if this is too soon, but is Batman: Assault on Arkham in continuity with the main Arkham Series? If so we can just add Joker's crimes in that movie to the Arkham Verse Joker's entry.
edited 13th Aug '14 6:24:56 PM by TheOverlord
Understandably, it's hard finding an appropriate image from a Kaiju film.
Yes, Batman: Assault on Arkham is in continuity.
edited 13th Aug '14 6:22:15 PM by VeryMelon
Lizzid people!
You can't just put the image in the post like that. You have to put it around some words.
Lizzid people!
No need to apologize.
I saw the Monster.A Song Of Ice And Fire page image, and it looked like it needed some cropping. Is this
◊ better.
The page image for for Monster.A Song Of Ice And Fire is generally ill suited due to how it's framed. Maybe something like these?
And what's a good image for Monster.Live-Action TV?
edited 13th Aug '14 10:17:52 PM by despoa
@Ambar - That's actually why I was hesitant to nominate Talbot, and something I had originally intended to point out when posting here. I think most people would agree that the atrocities committed by David Banner are decidedly more heinous than those of any other villain in the movie; however, he was ruled out because of the love he held for his wife. The Hulk monster obviously isn't eligible for CM status because he doesn't really have moral agency; when Bruce is in this form, he's basically a mindless force of destruction.
I figured it was still worth mentioning Talbot because he doesn't have any redeeming features and does do some really bad things, most of which are arbitrary. But by the standards of the story, I suppose he doesn't quite fulfill the threshold for a complete monster.
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
We already voted on the Ice and Fire monster image (though, the cropping might work).
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts
@ Kurtis: To qualify as a Complete Monster, a character needs to have committed both (some of) the worst crimes in the story (multiple victims with things like murder, rape, torture or genocide), and lack all redeeming traits. You can have without the other. If they do a lot of heinous things but have redeeming traits, they're what we call "99% monsters"; conversely, if they have no redeeming traits but don't do a lot of heinous stuff they're probably just a Jerkass. It's happened more often than once that characters in a work cancel each other out because they each fail on one front. Talbot is in the latter group—a classic Hate Sink example who is outshined by everyone else and could be removed from the film entirely without significantly altering the story.
You've got roaming bands of armed, aggressive, tyrannical plumbers coming to your door, saying "Use our service, or else!"
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
A prime example of the above: Jeff from Family Guy. Utter bastard, no redeeming qualities...but his actions aren't as bad as other characters', who fail due to Played for Laughs or other redeeming qualities.
![[nja]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/user_ninja_2074.png "[nja]"){kind=small}
Does anyone have a problem with me submitting these?
edited 14th Aug '14 8:05:08 AM by ACW
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts
A total has-been.
It wasn't even just that his actions weren't as bad as others, it was that his actions (domestic violence and attempted murder), that were played for drama in that episode, were the exact same as actions that had been played for laughs in previous episodes when other characters did them. That showed that Family Guy didn't really have any standards against what his actions constituted. One cannot be heinous by the standards of the story if the story has virtually no standards - that's why most comedy "examples" fail to qualify.
edited 14th Aug '14 9:08:44 AM by AnewMan
In regard to Guardians of the Galaxy, I think there were a few people who did not participate in that discussion because they had not seen the movie when it was being had (I only saw it two days ago). I do not think it is fair to declare it completely closed. I am not sure any conversation about a movie monster should be closed before the home video comes out, frankly.
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
Well, THAT'S pushing it a bit.
Let. Ronon. Die.
We have waited that long in the past! I am pretty sure we were discussing Wreck It Ralph until it was released on DVD. And there were only a few pages of discussion, I do not understand why you guys are acting like this is the second coming of Discord. A lot of the people discussing it only saw the movie once, several had not seen it, I do not understand why you are pushing so hard to never talk about it again.
We didn't wait until Wreck-it Ralph was released on DVD, we waited until Shaoken could see it because he lives in Austrailia.
Lizzid people!
And besides, the Wreck-It Ralph example is pretty much a closed case already.
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
Can I swap these? I'm guessing ![[tdown]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Thumbs_down_emoticon_3571.png "[thumb down]"){kind=small}
to merging.
Lizzid people!
@Morganthaler - I'm aware of that, having learned the "standards of the story" clause from an earlier nomination where I proposed Mad Jack from Heavy Rain. I didn't think it'd be a bad idea to bring up the characters from Hulk. I was also considering a couple nominations from Midnight Express.
edited 13th Aug '14 5:39:09 PM by Camberf