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

AnewMan A total has-been. Since: Apr, 2013 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A total has-been.
#11626: Apr 17th 2013 at 5:04:44 PM

Spectacular version was voted down. Use the search function.

For those of us who don't want to do that, mind telling why he was voted down?

Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#11627: Apr 17th 2013 at 5:06:50 PM

Generally a lot of us don't like rehashing arguments. It's considered good etiquette to check the old conversations. But otherwise, insufficient heinousness in a general time. I supported his inclusion, so I disagree, but there ya go

bobg Since: Nov, 2012
#11628: Apr 17th 2013 at 5:14:00 PM

[up][up][up] The Creeper just has to eat, like anything else. It does not have to slowly torture it's victims to death and make tapistries out of there skin. The Creeper is a monster with unexplaned origins who goes into hybernation for 13 years before emerging to kill. Unlike most mute movie monsters though, The creeper is very smart, and at times shows humanistic qualities, like whistling the song jeepers creepers. The Creeper drives a truck, carries torure tools, and makes tapistries out of his victims skin, so I would say he's quite aware. So what if a character is not human? all that matters is moral agency, and while he does eat because he has to, he clearly enjoys it, and gives one heck of a Slasher Smile.

edited 17th Apr '13 5:14:37 PM by bobg

jjj
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#11629: Apr 17th 2013 at 5:17:30 PM

Yeah, the Creeper goes WELL above and beyond the actions of a predator. It constructs a tapestry where it skins its victims (Some still alive) and adds them to it in macabre poses and lets them linger in agony after it takes what it wants. It also kills other people who it doesn't even want to eat solely because they inconvenience it. It's also fully capable of speech and sentient thought.

Also, nothing indicates it has to eat. It's described as 'getting' to.

bobg Since: Nov, 2012
#11630: Apr 17th 2013 at 5:20:33 PM

[up] While the creeper is a silent character, two deleted scenes (one from each film) had him speaking for the first time, showing that he is indeed capible of speech, so maybe he can talk but simply does not choose to.

jjj
AnewMan A total has-been. Since: Apr, 2013 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A total has-been.
#11631: Apr 17th 2013 at 5:27:06 PM

But otherwise, insufficient heinousness in a general time. I supported his inclusion, so I disagree, but there ya go

Wait...the man who set up his own drugged up son by injuring said son's leg and putting him in the Goblin costume, virtually ruined Mark Allan's life through his manipulations, and put the entire city in danger by rigging it with explosives just to kill one Spider-Man...was considered insufficiently heinous? Even when there's no other villain on that show who really competes with him in the heinous department? just bugs me

And here I thought it was widely agreed upon that Osborn was a Complete Monster in this show. Oh wait...

edited 17th Apr '13 5:29:05 PM by AnewMan

bobg Since: Nov, 2012
#11632: Apr 17th 2013 at 5:33:53 PM

[up] Sounds like a keeper to me.

As for why king candy and Ghetes were deemed not heinouss enough and added to the never again list... I have not seen them( I did get wreck it ralph for my birthday but have yet to watch it).

jjj
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#11633: Apr 17th 2013 at 5:36:50 PM

By all means, Anew, make the argument again. If I'd remembered most of that stuff, I'd have said it. That stuff makes it MUCH easier to argue he's a CM, and the fact you have info we didn't bring up?

bobg Since: Nov, 2012
#11634: Apr 17th 2013 at 5:53:11 PM

So... Did we ever make a decison on Rourke? And can somone try to request the edit for Krug at the locked pages?

As for osborn, I agree with light, bring everything to the table for us anew.

jjj
HamburgerTime Since: Apr, 2010
#11635: Apr 17th 2013 at 5:54:44 PM

[up] Rourke seemed to be a unanimous keep. I think we had only one 'against' for Turpin as well, due to Hodor changing his vote. Probably safe to write them up.

AnewMan A total has-been. Since: Apr, 2013 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A total has-been.
#11636: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:06:38 PM

[up][up][up][up] I wasn't meaning to imply anything there. Just noting that sometimes villains who were previously widely agreed upon as being Complete Monster can be given the boot if they don't meet the wiki's standards for the criterium.

By all means, Anew, make the argument again. If I'd remembered most of that stuff, I'd have said it. That stuff makes it MUCH easier to argue he's a CM, and the fact you have info we didn't bring up?

Oh, I have info for ALOT of "failed" contenders (including the aforementioned Ghetsis and Turbo) that no one brought up. evil grin

My argument stands that Osborn was at the top of the heinous spectrum in The Spectacular Spider Man, but that might not be enough to qualify him though. Maybe if he'd only have thrown Gwen Stacy off a bridge... wild mass guess

edited 17th Apr '13 9:08:42 PM by AnewMan

DocSharp Since: Jun, 2011
#11637: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:08:06 PM

The bit about Syndrome "only managing to kill himself" should probably be removed from his entry on the never again list. It's a pretty bad reason to exclude him, seeing as how he did at least attempt to kill Mr. Incredible's family at one point (A complete monster doesn't need to succeed, after all). He still doesn't count, but it's best not include something that doesn't actually exclude a character as a reason.

SophiaLonesoul Since: Apr, 2012
#11638: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:13:07 PM

[up][up] Please use the search function to make sure that your information on previously discussed characters is new. Especially for extensively debated characters like Ghetsis and Turbo.

Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#11639: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:13:31 PM

Turbo is a different matter and I'd advise you to not bring him up. He's a nasty jerk, but a CM and we went through way too many arguments on him

AnewMan A total has-been. Since: Apr, 2013 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A total has-been.
#11640: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:17:19 PM

[up][up][up] I agree with that. He did kill a ton of supers (though that can't qualify him due to it being offscreen), and his intent to have Bob's family shot down and killed was made perfectly clear. If the intent is clear, success or failure is irrelevent when judging a villain.

[up][up] I thought we weren't supposed to actually "discuss" Ghetsis and Turbo again seeing as they'd been settled.

[up] I saw those arguments, and there seemed to be more FOR his inclusion than against it. He was ultimately disqualified because his intentions during his most heinous moments were rather unclear.

Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#11641: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:22:32 PM

That and without it, he's just a nasty jerk and his agency is questionable after being eaten.

Turbo is one we do not want to discuss again. It's a different tier to Osborn.

AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#11642: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:26:56 PM

@Anew Man

The fact that the fandom widely agrees on a character being the worst around does not make them CM material. Fandoms often latch onto characters to hate due to things like Protagonist-Centred Morality or the like. This is why we have the never again list. It's for people who insist on trying to get such characters put on the list.

On that note, I'll do my best to channel Footsteps, Shaoken, and Fighteer all at once: trying to kill the heroes does not make you a CM. It makes you a villain. Please bear that in mind when discussing any examples.

We are not discussing Ghestis, Turbo, Syndrome, Yakone, Discord, or god forbid, Katejina Loos, ever again. Spectacular Spider-Man Osborn isn't on the list, so discussion on him can be held, but let me give you some advice: demanding an explanation for why the character was cut while refusing to use the search function will not do you any favours.

Anyway, before we get into further discussion of settled examples, if I could get some more thoughts on the examples I posted here? So far I don't have enough votes to do much.

RE: The Creeper

My issue here isn't that he likes what he does but that he's a goddamn demon. Moral agency becomes questionable when dealing with entities that may be Made of Evil, and since The Creeper doesn't talk, there is no way to find out if he was made that way or chose to be that way. In the absence of evidence that it has a choice, I usually say cut.

edited 17th Apr '13 6:36:49 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#11643: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:35:56 PM

I reiterate we need to know how Doji 'cares' about Ryuga...Reiji sounds like a cut.

Cut the Shinigami King.

Cut ANY examples from Battle Royale that isn't Kiriyama in the film and the program director from the book/manga

Keep in mind the Creeper isn't confirmed as a demon. We have no idea what it is. If it ever has origins revealed, I think that can cut it, but for now, it should stand as its own with having agency.

bobg Since: Nov, 2012
#11644: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:40:54 PM

[up] Yeah I always saw him as a mere monster. A monster with no backstory, origin, or motives, but a monster nonetheless. We don't know if it's a demon, an alien, a gargoyle, or who knows. The Creeper was never given a backstory.

They said the third film would reveal his origins, but it's stuck in developmant hell, and theres no telling when or if it will ever be made.

edited 17th Apr '13 6:47:36 PM by bobg

jjj
AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#11645: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:45:58 PM

Looking over the Beyblade wiki, it seems that Doji's defining trait is actually his Undying Loyalty to Ryuga. They eventually fall out, but that's triggered by Ryuga betraying Doji, not the other way around. Here's the link in case anybody cares. I've got to say that I'm not really impressed by the list of crimes, either. I can think of plenty of villains from shows with similar demographics (Yu-Gi-Oh, anyone?) who have much better rapsheets. It should also be noted that he always seems to be in a subservient position: first to Ryuga, then to Pluto.

[up]Hence my issues with judging him by human moral standards. It's clearly got the supernatural involved somehow. For all we know, the damn thing is compelled to torture and murder the way that it does. We have no evidence for moral agency, and in that case I say cut.

edited 17th Apr '13 6:48:19 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

bobg Since: Nov, 2012
#11646: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:50:26 PM

[up] I thought Alternate Character Interpritation was not supposed to be considered when discussing a cm? Or is that just for the keep side?

jjj
SophiaLonesoul Since: Apr, 2012
#11647: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:54:30 PM

@ 11642 Both the Bayblade examples should go. Doji is said to care for someone in the post itself and Reiji isn't as bad as Doji.

As for the Batale Royal examples: There is not enough information on Kazushi Niida and Toshinori Oda to make a solid case for inclusion. They should be cut until the point when more information is provided. The Manga version of Kazuo Kiriyama should be cut on account of lacking moral agency.

As for the Death note example since the character doesn't appear at all it is an easy cut.

On the Complete Monster page for Criminal minds there is an example that I don't think qualifies. The Unsub's grandmother from in "Profiling 101" was previously discussed but a consensus was not reached. Unless I have missed something there were four votes (including mine) against and only two for.

My reasoning for why she doesn't count is:

-In a show full of serial killers, rapists and tortures she abuses two people. She isn't even the worst child abuser on the show -> see Anita Roycewood

-Since it is mentioned in the current entry that she is "she's a helpless invalid in a hospice" it is unlikely that any of the abuse happens onscreen.

Thoughts?

edited 17th Apr '13 6:55:47 PM by SophiaLonesoul

AnewMan A total has-been. Since: Apr, 2013 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A total has-been.
#11648: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:54:49 PM

he's just a nasty jerk and his agency is questionable after being eaten

I don't think "just a nasty jerk" quite describes him after all he did, but with the being eaten by a cy-bug thing: there's no proof for it being the cy-bug or Turbo's moral agency that was in control at the time. Again, way too vague. Which is part of why he was dropped.

The fact that the fandom widely agrees on a character being the worst around does not make them CM material. Fandoms often latch onto characters to hate due to things like Protagonist Centred Morality or the like. This is why we have the never again list. It's for people who insist on trying to get such characters put on the list.

It's not about fandom agreeing a character is the worst around. It's about them agreeing on their status as a Complete Monster specifically. I know a guy who's a super huge fan of The Spectacular Spider Man, of Greg Weisman's work in general, of Spider Man in general, and of Norman Osborn, and he specifically called Osborn a Complete Monster. At the time, I'd assumed it was the common agreement since Osborn was on the CM page.

Though I have personally wondered what exactly does make CM material these days? CM used to be a subjective trope, right? And it's still on YMMV pages. Aren't those all about opinions and interpretations of characters. Is there really such thing as an "official, objective, factual Complete Monster?" just bugs me

trying to kill the heroes does not make you a CM.

When did I argue that it did?

We are not discussing Ghestis, Turbo, Syndrome, Yakone, Discord, or god forbid, Katejina Loos, ever again.

Well at least most of those characters got fair trials. If Osborn is to be raised again, let's hope the same for him.

edited 17th Apr '13 7:02:40 PM by AnewMan

HamburgerTime Since: Apr, 2010
#11649: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:55:30 PM

[up][up] I added her; the abuse is shown, in a flashback.

SophiaLonesoul Since: Apr, 2012
#11650: Apr 17th 2013 at 6:58:54 PM

[up] Good to know but I still don't think that she meets the heinousness standard. It is pretty darn high in Criminal Minds given the show's material.

EDIT: [up][up] Just because somebody has called a character a complete monster does not mean that they are using the same criteria as this wiki uses. For what the wiki's criteria are for CM please consult the FAQ. There is a link at the top of the page.

edited 17th Apr '13 7:14:18 PM by SophiaLonesoul


Total posts: 326,048
Top