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

MONEYMONEY Since: Nov, 2011
#676: Mar 23rd 2012 at 5:17:34 AM

[up] Wait, than how did you lock Video games page if you are not a mod??

Also, as I said, I think that all the Disney live-action villains should go on film page. Pirates Of The Caribbean and Who Framed Roger Rabbit were not made by Disney either. Pirates were produced by Jerry Bruckeimer and only distributed by Disney, while Roger Rabbit was made by Touchstone pictures.

edited 23rd Mar '12 5:20:16 AM by MONEYMONEY

32_Footsteps Think of the mooks! from Just north of Arkham Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
Think of the mooks!
#677: Mar 23rd 2012 at 5:39:03 AM

I say we cut Hadley. He, to me, shows the difference between being a sadistic sociopath and being a Complete Monster. We see him through a prism of prisoner experiences only - yes, he's brutal, but he's brutal to a collection of thieves and murderers. Arguments over Pay Evil unto Evil are appropriate in this case, and the movie hints that he's actually a reasonable man, if a bit of a hardass, outside of his job as a prison guard.

It strikes me as someone trying to apply Protagonist-Centered Morality on The Shawshank Redemption. Hadley was brutish, hateful, and near homicidal on the protagonists of the film, yes. But that alone does not make one a Complete Monster.

edited 23rd Mar '12 5:40:46 AM by 32_Footsteps

Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.
Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#678: Mar 23rd 2012 at 3:35:15 PM

[up][up]I didn't lock it, I was the one who requested a lock.

And those aren't comparable situations at all; Pirates was based off a ride created by Disney, so it is Disney's IP (and it was featured in Kingdom Hearts 2, so that officially makes it Disney), that means it goes on the Disney page. WFRR I'm not too sure on, but again it was a mod's decision that all Disney examples go on the Disney page, so arguing about it here is pointless.

[up]He's a bastard, but the YMMV page has him as "may or may not" so I say cut him.

MONEYMONEY Since: Nov, 2011
#679: Mar 23rd 2012 at 3:46:34 PM

[up] Okay, I removed Hadley from the list.

edited 23rd Mar '12 3:50:33 PM by MONEYMONEY

MONEYMONEY Since: Nov, 2011
#680: Mar 24th 2012 at 8:42:40 AM

On a Disney page, I also saw an example that should be REMOVED (in my opinion). It is Princess Mombi from Return To Oz.

  • Princess Mombi somehow manages to outdo the Wicked Witch of the West in sheer unpleasantness: let's start with the asking price for helping the Nome King- the heads of several beautiful women. Mombi keeps these heads, still alive and still conscious, in a hall of cabinets; every so often, she'll "slip into something more comfortable" by swapping heads. And when Dorothy arrived in the Emerald City, Mombi had her imprisoned, fully intending to keep her there until she reached adulthood just so she could have a fully-mature head to add to her "collection."

While this certainly makes her the most evil villain in the whole film, this is not enough to make her a Complete Monster. When I watched the movie, I did not really feel revulsion from her. For me, her actions are like very standard villainy. Do you agree that she should be removed?? Compare her to other villains of the list on Disney.

edited 24th Mar '12 8:43:25 AM by MONEYMONEY

32_Footsteps Think of the mooks! from Just north of Arkham Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
Think of the mooks!
#681: Mar 24th 2012 at 10:35:36 AM

Well, Mombi does make me feel revulsion, but that's due to Body Horror and And I Must Scream issues, not any deep-seated loathing.

That said, on the face of it, she does seem to qualify. Unrepentantly evil, always treated seriously, nobody feels that she deserves sympathy... she might not be quite so loathsome as others, but she does hit all the qualifications.

Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.
MONEYMONEY Since: Nov, 2011
#682: Mar 24th 2012 at 10:42:26 AM

Well, I don't quite think so. She is pretty damn evil, and she certainly is not sympathetic, but villains can be really nasty, and still not be C Ms. She is absolutely not played seriously enough. Nome King did not fear her at all. Rather, she was the one who feared him, and he was certainly not a CM; he had too much Pet the Dog moments

SomeNewGuy Since: Jun, 2009
#683: Mar 24th 2012 at 5:26:07 PM

Got something I think should be added to Relius' entry:

  • Relius's monstrosity is turned Up To Eleven in Extend, where he is given what is easily the single most horrific atrocity in the entire series via Makoto's bad ending. To make a long and traumatizing story short, he captures her and subjects her to the single most brutal, horrific Mind Rape in the series thus far, easily outdoing even Terumi's treatment of Noel. He mentally destroys Makoto from the inside out, effectively turning her into an Empty Shell to use for his own purposes, but he purposely leaves her self aware so she can only watch as Relius uses her body for his own ends. And he does this without the slightest hint of emotion. At least Terumi is entertaining in his own twisted way. There is nothing funny or charming about anything Relius does.

MONEYMONEY Since: Nov, 2011
#684: Mar 25th 2012 at 9:15:00 AM

People, this is very important. When there was a discussion on a Disney page, people wanted to remove Scar. I was against it, but now I watched The Lion King again, and I changed my mind. I don't think he meets the second criteria. While he killed his own brother, he still... well he still is not played seriously enough throughout the film. Can we request to remove him from the list??

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#685: Mar 25th 2012 at 9:17:03 AM

If you can muster more consensus than the change of your opinion, yes.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Jordan Azor Ahai from Westeros Since: Jan, 2001
Azor Ahai
#686: Mar 25th 2012 at 10:14:29 AM

I've never thought he really qualified. He's played for laughs to a significant extent and he has a reasonable reason for holding a grudge, and the land becoming barren under his rule is a sign of incompetence/use of the Fisher King trope, not deliberate malice.

Hodor
MONEYMONEY Since: Nov, 2011
#687: Mar 25th 2012 at 4:53:17 PM

Anyone else who supports to take off Scar?? I hope so, because I want to make a request for his deletion.

32_Footsteps Think of the mooks! from Just north of Arkham Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
Think of the mooks!
#688: Mar 26th 2012 at 12:14:06 PM

Re: Mombi - I don't think that the Complete Monster needs to be universally feared. They just need to be universally reviled, and fear can be one manifestation of it. Similarly, the description says absolutely nothing about whether or not they fear anyone else (after all, it's relatively frequent that a CM isn't the Big Bad, and there are plenty of others that know just where they rank on the in-series power scale). To be quite honest, I don't think that there's a single thing to disqualify Mombi. Keep in mind that it is a YMMV trope - as long as there aren't any qualities that specificially disqualify her, I think it's acceptable to include her as long as she does meet the qualifications.

Re: Relius - First off, we need to stop using Up To Eleven for these entries. I'm half-tempted to propose nuking Up To Eleven completely, although that's a whole different repair issue. Let's stop being so hyperbolic (it's part of the reason that Complete Monster has long been so problematic).

Second, you realize that it isn't even the first time Relius has done that action? It's the third - and the first two times on his wife and daughter are already listed. Plus, given the Timey-Wimey Ball that is the Blaz Blue universe, it's heavily suggested that said ending is just one particular shunt of the splintered timeline and not the one for the series' future. In short, Relius has enough info from what's definite already in canon that we don't need to bloat it further, particularly something I could sum up in a few words - He also mind rapes Makoto to become an Empty Shell in her bad ending.

Remember - we don't need to include every qualifying act. We need to show enough, not show everything.

EDIT: Re: Scar - I don't think one person's changing of the mind counts as very important. Eh, I'll leave other people to decide on the Disney animated canon. Just watching all the debates on that previously was a headache; I'll let others voice their opinions on that.

edited 26th Mar '12 12:17:35 PM by 32_Footsteps

Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.
TriggerLoaded from Canada, eh? (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Healthy, deeply-felt respect for this here Shotgun
#689: Mar 26th 2012 at 12:34:58 PM

I say get rid of Scar. Agreed that he isn't a Complete Monster, just a violent opportunistic jerkass.

Don't take life too seriously. It's only a temporary situation.
Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#690: Mar 27th 2012 at 6:36:59 PM

For Scar, he murdered his own brother with a smile on his face as he did it, he tried to kill his nephew several times, tricked him into thinking that he was responsible for his own father's death, and is utterly unrependent for what he's done. He didn't even do anything as king, he was in it just to call himself king.

I say that he qualifies; unrepentent, played seriously in-universe, is henious by the standards of the story, has no chance of redemption.

I don't suppose someone wants to bring up a link to the old arguement for scar?

MONEYMONEY Since: Nov, 2011
#691: Mar 29th 2012 at 6:45:13 AM

[up] Well he is worse than an average Disney villain, but he is funny in some moments, so I would say he is more more Faux Affably Evil.

edited 29th Mar '12 6:45:27 AM by MONEYMONEY

32_Footsteps Think of the mooks! from Just north of Arkham Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
Think of the mooks!
#692: Mar 29th 2012 at 7:49:06 AM

Funny is not an automatic disqualifier - The Joker is an example. He has to be treated as horrible In-Universe, not that we can't find him entertaining outside of his world.

The issue of being funny is always the one that I think causes the most problems for this trope. I think it gets carried too far in many directions - either that the funny can't be one, or people are too willing to cover up the humor in order to shoehorn their favorite example in.

It really comes down to the part about always being treated seriously in the work itself. Laughing along with their jokes in canon can be excused for the following reasons:

  1. The one laughing doesn't know how bad the CM is.
  2. The one laughing is also a CM.
  3. The one laughing feels guilty about laughing with the CM.
  4. The one laughing is doing so because they're afraid of the reaction the CM will get if laughter doesn't follow.

Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.
MONEYMONEY Since: Nov, 2011
#693: Mar 29th 2012 at 8:30:43 AM

[up] true, but the Joker, is funny, but still serious, while Scar is not taken seriously in some moments. To be honest, he is kind of sympathetic. Besides, he does it all for power, rather than For the Evulz.

32_Footsteps Think of the mooks! from Just north of Arkham Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
Think of the mooks!
#694: Mar 29th 2012 at 8:44:33 AM

First, having a motive beyond For the Evulz does not disqualify anyone from being a Complete Monster. Their motive has to simply be completely unsympathetic. If the motive is gaining power for the sake of gaining power, that counts. If he was gaining power to do something else (like because he believed his way would provide prosperity for the largest portion of the population), then it wouldn't (and we'd instead be placing him under Well-Intentioned Extremist or the like).

Second, it's not a question of the characters treating the would-be Complete Monster seriously, it's the story. Basically, the question isn't whether or not the characters are treating the potential monster as serious - it's whether they should be.

One example for a completely non-controversial example would be Kefka of Final Fantasy VI. He's treated as a sick joke by several characters for a good chunk of the first half of the game. This is despite the fact that, depending on your point of view, he starts the game by crossing the Moral Event Horizon (the dialogue is a bit muddy, so it's not necessarily clear if that's the actual crossing point or if you have to wait until the poisoning of Doma to officially declare it, but it's really a moot point). However, given that he pulls off a masterful betrayal that results in him literally becoming a god, it's clear that he really should have been treated much more seriously earlier than he was.

Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.
MONEYMONEY Since: Nov, 2011
#695: Apr 1st 2012 at 9:50:50 AM

Okay, so what are we now talking about?

MagBas Mag Bas from In my house Since: Jun, 2009
#696: Apr 1st 2012 at 10:01:09 AM

This example, listed in the Yu Gi Oh GX YMMV page, is a legitimate example?: "Hell Kaiser in Season 2. Despite the show's attempts to say otherwise, it becomes clear that, in his current mindset, Hell Kaiser spares no one. He is cold, ruthless, and sadistic - regardless of who his opponents are - and enjoys seeing others suffer, even if it is his brother he is torturing. Sadly, in season 3, the writers completely forgot how vile he had become, and tried to show him as a sympathetic Spirited Competitor, ignoring that he had already crossed the Moral Event Horizon in the eyes of many."

Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#697: Apr 1st 2012 at 3:54:13 PM

No, cut it. If the writer's are trying to make him sympathetic, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that his CM-ness might be exagarated by those tropers. It's not like we haven't seen that happen.

MagBas Mag Bas from In my house Since: Jun, 2009
pawsplay Since: Jan, 2001
#699: Apr 3rd 2012 at 12:06:16 AM

I think Scar qualifies; he is kind of the Iago of the piece. In the end, even his own thugs turn on him, and he is in every way deserving of what he gets. He is unlike many of the examples in that he is not a complete psychopath, but he is just evilly aligned at his core. He made a decision to be bad. His Moral Event Horizon is probably ancient history, and Mufasa probably never even knew it happened.

Mombi should qualify. She's pathetic, but stealing people's heads is sick serial killer stuff.

Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#700: Apr 3rd 2012 at 12:59:40 AM

Subjecting innocent people to a fate worse than death (there is no way being kept alive as a head is anything but this)? Yeah, that's a CM act.


Total posts: 326,048
Top