Subpages cleanup: Complete Monster

So recently I've been watching Oz from beginning to end. Bloody good show, but the reason I mention it here is because we have another Hopper situation with Claire Howell getting a single redeeming trait that disqualifies her.

During a scene early in season 6, entrepeneurs from outside the prison come to Oz to set up businessness inside the prison to use the convicts as a cheap source of labor, including telemarketing and book printing. When this plan is presented to the prison staff during their weekly committee, Howell is angered that a new competitor to the telemarketing office in the nearby town might put them out of business. When she makes a big stink about it, the other guards jokingly ask if she has stock in the company. She replies that she's upset because she has a brother who might lose his job at that company.

I've waited until the season (and the series, being the final season) was over to see if anything contradicted this, but she never mentions any members of her family in any other context. In summation, she gets into a verbal spat out of concern for the livelihood of her brother, indicating that she has genuine concern for at least one person.

Malcolm Coyle and Timmy Kirk, on the other hand, are clear keeps. The former is so vicious that the inmates band together to kill him, and the latter goes so far beyond the pale that Father Mukada goes against his beliefs and considers Kirk's soul irredeemable. The only thing I would change is to switch "sociopathic" for "sadistic" in Coyle's write-up, since he doesn't really fit most of the signs of ASPD.

edited 31st Oct '15 10:56:34 AM by Morgenthaler

Howell

Spiderman Shattered Dimensions: Mysterio is the Big Bad of the game, and is portrayed far more wicked than his Comic-Book counterparts. Failing to steal the Tablet of Order and Chaos due to Spider-Man's interference, Mysterio escapes with one of the now-shattered fragments of the Tablet. Realizing the power of his fragment, Mysterio goes on a rampage, destroying anything in his path. After finding Madame Web's location, Mysterio tortures her, then uses her as a hostage to force Spider-Man to retrieve the rest off the Tablet's fragments for him. Restoring the Tablet to it's original state, Mysterio gains god-like powers, destroys the Multiverse, and plans to remake it in his image.

I also think quote of his is pretty good for the page.

"Power-Beyond that of a god! The walls of reality crumble before me! Yes, a universe to remake In my image! I will devour every dimension until all...is...MYSTERIO!" —>— Mysterio after reassembling the Tablet of Order and Chaos, Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions

edited 31st Oct '15 11:02:14 AM by Ravok

It's been 2 weeks since the Goosebumps film was released, so I plan to talk about it's version of Slappy now. If you don't want this movie spoiled for you then skip this post. Alright? Here goes:

Who is Slappy and what does he do?

Slappy is the antagonist of the Night Of The Living Dummy miniseries, and the Big Bad of the new film. It is likely that Slappy was chosen to be the main villain because he appears in more books than any other Goosebumps character.

In this film, R.L Stine is given a bit of a fictional backstory. In his youth, Stine was bullied for being a coward. To get back at his tormentors, Stine, imagined all the monsters that he would later write about in his books. Stine used the monsters he imagined to make up stories that he would tell his bullies (likely while telling ghost stories during Halloween) to scare them. Eventually, the fear created from these stories somehow brought the monsters to life, so Stine wrote all his books to trap the monsters inside (he tried convincing his creations to be nice and not hurt people, but, despite the affection they felt toward him (as he was their creator and thus, for all intents and purposes, their papa), they refused to behave themselves, so Stine had to seal them away to keep them from hurting people).

In the movie, Slappy is released from his book after the main character Zach and his best friend Champ break into Stine's home under suscpecion that he is abusing his daughter Hannah. Slappy announces that he will have his revenge on his creator, and then releases all the monsters from their books, before burning the books so they can't be trapped again. Slappy and the other monsters proceed to terrorize the town, freezing all the officers at the police station. When Stine and the kids arrive at a school to try and write a new book to seal all the monsters away, Slappy leads the monsters in an attack on the school, intending to kill Stine and the kids and anyone in the school that either gets in their way, or just happens to be unfortunate enough to come across any of the monsters (in other words, Slappy is willing to slaughter an entire high school to get to Stine). An innocent girl named Taylor is almost killed by the werewolf of Fever Swamp. Slappy states that he is having fun and that, after Stine is killed, he and the other monsters will terrorize the world forever. Eventually, Slappy finds Stine writing the new book and breaks his fingers in the typewriter. To keep the people at the high school from being killed, Stine and the kids leave the school. Slappy and the other monsters follow the group to a carnival. Trapping them on a ferris wheel, the monsters try to topple it and kill them. Zach manages to finish the book (as Stine could not due to his fingers having been broken), and, as the monsters are pulled inside, Slappy makes one last attempt on Stine's life, intending to succeed in killing him even if he still gets sucked back in anyway.

Redeeming features or Freudian Excuse?

Slappy may have cared for his creator back in the day, but by the time of the movie, he wants to murder him. Granted, Stine did trap Slappy in a book for years, but that was his own fault. Stine gave the monsters a chance to be good and they refused. It is possible that Slappy cares about his fellow monsters, but this is not shown. We only see Slappy treat the other monsters as minions, with no confirmation that he cares for them. Apart from all of this, Slappy is a person with no redeeming features. Slappy wants to terrorize the world and cause mayhem for fun, and he has no qualms about murdering children or innocent bystanders.

Does he meet the standard?

With the attempted murder of three high school students and one adult man on numerous occasions, and his willingness to slaughter an entire high school, in addition to his releasing an army of monsters unto the world and allowing them to hurt people, he seems worse than his book counterpart, who we agreed qualified.

@ACW not sure if the evil double is in that batch, but if not, here's the YMMV page for the series he's in.

I'd like some more clarification before casting a vote (haven't seen it, anyway), but I am very skeptical that Movie!Slappy qualifies because of the manner in which he was created, which has Made of Evil written all over it. He was written by Author Avatar R.L. Stine to be a monster, he just didn't foresee that Slappy would become autonomous and escape from the books.

edited 31st Oct '15 11:22:17 AM by Morgenthaler

I think Slappy's somewhat meant to be an example of a Tulpa- i. e. an imaginary friend that later developed its own identity.

edited 31st Oct '15 11:28:55 AM by AustinDR

Well, Slappy did have affection for his creator back in the day, which shows that he does have enough free will to be capable of feeling affection if he chooses. Of course that stopped after his creator trapped him in a book.

edited 31st Oct '15 11:25:33 AM by bobg

Is Hyodo forgotten or why isn't he mentioned anymore after my write-up? Just saying.

edited 31st Oct '15 11:36:04 AM by Kookosbanaani

• Hyodo you mean? I'm gonna tweak it and submit it this week.
• PD: Thanks; it's with this batch.
• Ravok: Please add that to the YMMV page.
• Aside from tomorrow's work (Pazuzu and Black Butler), I'm now cutting off the time for this week's batch. Ravok, you're fine. As it is, it'll be about a dozen or so.
• Seems like Claire should go.

edited 31st Oct '15 11:35:08 AM by ACW

Film!Slappy. He wasn't nearly as repulsive and creepy as he was in the books, has moral agency issues and an arguably solid excuse for his actions.

Btw, Morgenthaler, I've seen Oz from beginning to the end too, what do you personally think of Kenny Wangler? Some of his character tropes here say that he has no redeemable qualities and overall slowly develops into a monstrous individual, despite being the youngest inmate in the show. He also admires Coyle for slaughtering the Italian-American family and in Season 3 organizes the deaths of his wife and her lover out of anger and laughs about it. I don't personally think he is a CM, since he has more character development.

edited 31st Oct '15 11:42:21 AM by Kookosbanaani

Not really an issue of character development; how much does he do? Howell's a Serial Rapist, while Coyle and Kirk each kill a baby (among other things). Killing two adults is standard in Oz it seems.

I'm not even comfortable with Coyle being on the list due to how dark that series. Now you're suggesting a much less heinous villain. Easy to him.

^^^ I think Wangler fails on Even Evil Has Standards issues. If I recall he does not really admire Coyle for his crimes (hell, no one did; that's why the necrophile rapist / baby-killer got offed so quickly), he actually has a pretty Squicked reaction to Coyle's boasts. He does want to get payback against the other gangs for killing Coyle, but it's not because he or his fellow gang members liked Coyle at all—killing one of theirs with impunity is just a sign of disrespect.

edited 31st Oct '15 11:49:49 AM by Morgenthaler

Coyle and Kirk are monsters in my opinion, considering the fact that their body counts are higher than most of the inmates, they both have murdered at least one baby, committed the heinous acts purely for fun, arousing disgust at almost everyone.

Have you actually watched the series, it seems you haven't.

edited 31st Oct '15 11:54:19 AM by Kookosbanaani

Hey, Morgen, Exister, any thoughts on Reynard, or anyone else?

I never said Kirk wasn't a Monster. However, I don't see Coyle being at his level of heinousness based off what I've read. He's a nasty piece of work but even killing children isn't out of place for the work. That discussion was already over and done with, he was accepted. I disagree with it but it's just my opinion.

Cut Howell.

I rewatched the animated Doctor Strange movie and I'm not sure if Mordo in that film counts or not. I will do an effort post on him and see what you guys think:

Who is Mordo? What has he done?

Mordo is a student of the Ancient One, the Sorcerer Supreme who works to defend the world from the demon Dormammu. Through out the film, his arrogant and violent nature is making him more reckless and the Ancient One sees he is not suitable to be the Sorcerer Supreme. One scene, Mordo seems to have no problem with sacrificing his allies and allowing for civilian casualties in order to stop some of Dormammu's beasts. When the Ancient One discovers that Dormammu is possessing children, Mordo suggests they kill the children, an option the Ancient One instantly shoots down. After all that, Mordo decides to become Dormammu's servant, so that he will get rewarded after all and so that both Dr. Strange and the ancient One die in the process. Mordo personally kills the Ancient One.

Is he heinious by the standards of the work?

This is the tricky part, Mordo is more present for most of the film, but Dormammu does evil things before allowing Mordo to be his servant. Dormammu possesses children and near the end of the film, some of Dormammu's creatures go on a killing spree in NYC. Dormammu himself seems intent to go on killing spree as well and turn the world into a Hellscape. Dormammu doesn't count because he is a GDV in this film.

Mordo only becomes Dormammu's servant near the end of the film, but he is willing to assist Dormammu's evil plans and in the film had no regard for his allies, civilians and was willing to kill children. Mordo is also far less powerful then Dormammu.

Any Freudian Excuse or other mitigating factors?

Not really, he is a Blood Knight, Knight Templar for the first part of the film and by the time he becomes Dormammu's servant, you see there is no redemption for him.

Verdict?

I am not sure, I guess it depends on whether Mordo does enough compared to Dormammu.

edited 31st Oct '15 11:58:20 AM by Overlord

Wait, has anyone besides Coyle or Kirk killed a baby?

Shirley Bellinger drowned her daughter by driving her car in a lake but was so delusional that she though it was all just an accident. William Cudney murdered the son of a doctor who committed abortion to Cudney's wife, so he would share his sorrow of losing a child. Hank Schillinger kidnaps Beecher's children, chops off his son's hand and murders him afterwards. He does it in the order of his father, Vernon, who wants justice for his son Andrew, whose death Beecher was involved (Andrew was not a child in the series but an inmate among others). Hank is not proud of what he does and even Vern later regrets this and orders Hank to release the daughter instead of murdering her too.

But besides that, those were their only murders. Kirk and Coyle murdered a child among a group of other people, but had no motivations or redeeming qualities to counter them and committed them only For The Evultz.

edited 31st Oct '15 12:09:17 PM by Kookosbanaani

Boy, it really does say something about how dark the work is when even a NEO-NAZI (Vern) had a mitigating factor, doesn't it.
Ah, true enough.

edited 31st Oct '15 12:31:43 PM by ACW

Not particularly. Plenty of Neo-Nazis have people they care about. It's just that they're awful human beings in spite of that.

Unsure on Slappy. Does he have moral agency ? I know one of the characters from Stine's was good, but that's only because said character was good in the original story, like how Slappy was evil in the original story.

edited 31st Oct '15 12:38:41 PM by Beast

Slappy, sounds like he has agency issues.

Mordo. Not bad enough.