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
I think the thing that negates Lotso's backstory, though, is that he's used this backstory as a means to segregate an entire day care's toys to his whims, attempt to kill the protagonist toys in a furnace, shoved them into a trash compactor, and brainwashed Buzz Lightyear, all with no remorse for his actions. People are allowed to have issues, but Lotso obviously took it too far.
As for Hopper, I think it's important to mention that, though he states he wouldn't kill Molt on his mother's deathbed, that is implied to be literally the ONLY thing keeping him from killing Molt. He's not fond of Molt in any sense and abuses him regularly - just doesn't kill him. What a nice brother.
I'd say both are C Ms. In the greater Pixar canon, no other villain can even remotely come close to their level of horrifying violence, and while Pixar characters have had some wonderful Freudian Excuses for their behaviors that work (see: Jessie in Toy Story 2), Lotso's only serves to highlight his descent into evil, not to try and redeem him in anyone's eyes.
The WORST thing about Lotso is that he left people who saved his life to die! I don't think that even his backstory explains this. While Hopper is certainly a better candidate for the trope, Lotso is also an example.
God I forgot about that one. It's been a while since I watched TS 3. Yeah, this is a pretty decent example of someone who happens to have a Freudian Excuse going off the deep end anyways.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Personally I've always found abandoment issues of any sort to be a pretty weak Freudian Excuse anyway. Lotso's whole character pretty much boils down to "if I can't be loved none of you can either" which makes any sympathy for him very hard to conjure.
I actually have more issues with Hopper's inclusion. Everyone seems ready to assume that he only obeys his mother's dying wish out of tradition, but we're not told that. If this is really a case of Even Bad Men Love Their Mamas than he doesn't belong on the page.
edited 6th Jul '12 3:07:27 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
OK, got a rough draft for our Sarrano entry.
- General Victor Sarrano, Big Bad of Bulletstorm. A gleefully unrepentant sadist who veers between amusement and arousal as he sends special-forces assassins after civilian critics, hands out death sentences to his own men for not being imaginatively brutal enough, and will backstab anyone who crosses his path if there's the slightest chance that it might benefit him. The fact that he's a racist, sexist misanthrope who delights in being as obnoxious as possible to everyone he meets merely illustrates his sheer attention to detail in keeping himself devoid of redeeming qualities.
I agree, honestly. But even without taking that into account, I'd say leaving the toys to die goes way beyond any justification of his Freudian Excuse. Remember, the Complete Monster can have one, it just needs to be insufficient next to their crimes.
As for Hopper, he's a nasty guy, but we have no reason not to take what he says about his mother at face value (i.e. none of this tradition stuff). When your best quality is that you won't murder your own brother, you're not exactly sainthood material, but you're not a Complete Monster either.
edited 6th Jul '12 4:25:53 PM by nrjxll
Azor Ahai
Sounds pretty good/concise. Re Blackbeard, I think he is a good example. I know this isn't the trope's specification, but for me, it is a very good sign of a valid example when other villains in-universe find a character abhorrent, and it's striking how much the movie emphasizes how Jack and Barbossa are saints compared to Blackbeard (and Jack basically becomes more of a clear good guy largely because he doesn't want to be like Blackbeard).
Also, don't mind waiting, but I wondered if I had the go ahead to address those literature examples I was contesting. Mrs. Norris and the Marquis of Steyne seem like very clear noes to me, since both are comedic jerkass characters (especially the former. The Marquis is more along the lines of a villain who hasn't done anything all that heinous).
As was noted by others, Valmont of Dangerous Liaisons is a clear no, although Merteuil is a harder case, so I guess I would leave her for the time being.
edited 6th Jul '12 4:25:19 PM by Jordan
Hodor
I added your entry to the Sandbox.
Jordan, what would you say about Lotso?
edited 6th Jul '12 4:52:27 PM by Krystoff
Azor Ahai
Never seen the movie, so can't comment.
Hodor
@ 1480 I always thought that Hopper's case might be Even Bad Men Love Their Mamas case. I kind of doubt that he should be here; yeah he is horrible bastard but still, one redeeming quality = cut the villain. Besides, he still did not kill his brother. A CM would do it long time ago in my opinion. I think that if the creators intention would be to make Hopper a CM, they would either not include his brother at all, or would make the movie very dark and show Hopper killing Molt.
edited 6th Jul '12 5:01:52 PM by Krystoff
Star Child
I saw the movie and I'd say that his evil dickeshness negates his back-story, there is only so far you can milk something until people realize that what ever happened to you does not give you the right to hurt/kill/torture people.
Also got a problem with Starscream of Transformers Prime.
Warning large amount of examples incoming!
Megatron and Starscream established themselves as holders of this trope very early into the series: Megatron's zombie army pushed him beyond the edge. And then, even later into Season 1, when he nearly killed Raf with Dark Energon, then boasted about it in front of the Autobots. He didn't quite think that through. That one was so bad that Optimus Prime revolved to, and quite nearly did, murder Megatron for his many crimes.
Starscream shows his monster credentials when he's torturing Agent Fowler for information by electrocuting him. Although, technically, Fowler didn't tell him what he wanted, Starscream still enjoyed the Cold-Blooded Torture he was dishing out. This interpretation of the character (usually a harmless Smug Snake) is easily one of the most frightening characters in the show.
Not to mention his cold-hearted murder of Cliffjumper. And then, when he's confronted by Cliff's partner, Arcee, instead of trying to calm the situation, he gloats about it even though doing so almost got him killed. While he's definitely a Dirty Coward (panicking when he thinks Arcee is about to kill him), the brutal beatdown that he gives her afterwards and the gloating sadism that he displays whenever he thinks he's in the control of the situation definitely earn him a place here.
Starscream's gotten a little iffy recently; while he is an evil spawn of a glitch, he's shown he isn't without a sense of gratitude when he stumbles upon a webbed-up Arcee and frees her.
The last part definalty makes him either a cut or a stay, depending on the argument. Personally I'm not sure, because as of late he has been taking the slippery slope of unintentional sympathetic villain. And even now that he has the apex armor he has been sown doing nothing particularly Complete monstery.
On the other hand he has done a lot of evil stuff as well, and the murder of Cliffjumper is taken REALLY seriously by everyone in the show, especially Arcee. And of coarse he takes an awful lot of pride in attacking and killing people.
Could go either way
edited 6th Jul '12 5:11:26 PM by Lunarcat
All our wishes can come true
Please, patience. We will discuss your examples later. Lets talk about Lotso and Hopper first. One villain at a time please.
Avatar by Leafsnake
On that note, did we ever finish discussing Scar? As for Hopper and Lotso, I think they're both CM's, but the argument is being made for Hopper not being a CM and having one good quality (I've heard arguments for keeping Lotso, but not very many against). Hopper is still a cruel grasshopper, and he threatens, and intimidates the ants. I don't know how to take his moment with molt, some argue it as part of tradition, others as signs of affection. Events will play out as they will.
I believe Scar has been ruled out.
Avatar by Leafsnake
If Scar's been axed, then someone should remove him from the YMMV page of Lion King
Think of the mooks!
@1481 That's a really good entry - concise, hits all the major points, doesn't abuse any tags... I have nothing to add to that.
Let's see... who haven't I commented on...
Hopper - We have Even Bad Men Love Their Mamas, plus he keeps his word. That's two minor virtues - enough for me to vote no on him.
Do we need to go back over and actually count the number of folks who voted one way or another? Things are starting to get lost in the number of people from both sides stating the same things over and over about the same examples. I think Jordan and I are the only ones who even weighed in on the examples that they proposed from Literature (I voted no on all of them).
edited 6th Jul '12 6:47:07 PM by 32_Footsteps
Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.
Also worth noting—he keeps his word in every sense of it. If Hopper wanted to get rid of Molt but had promised his mother that he wouldn't, he could still send him out to do something dangerous and get him killed that way, keeping his word, and still ridding himself of the problem. He doesn't, so either he believes in obeying the spirit of his promise as well as the letter, or he has an actual soft spot for his brother.
EDIT: Counting votes is a good idea, but we should also make sure to examine the arguments. If all the votes for keeping a character boil down to "no I hate him/her," there's not much point in keeping him/her is there?
edited 6th Jul '12 8:09:11 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
@1481, personally I'd like if if there was a little bit more about specific examples there about Sarrano's acts. It's still vague, just a lot less now
Anyway, quick voting;
Lotso - Abstain
Hopper - Vote against
Avatar by Leafsnake
I'm voting to Keep Lotso. Hopper: there are some pretty good arguments for cutting, but the question is; do they counterbalance all of his bad qualities (Violent, mobster, bully), many say that they bring him short of CM status, and I'm still on the fence, but I'm willing to lean more towards cutting him.
Removing someone from the CM list doesn't entail negating all of their bad qualities—just proving that they have some good ones. Hopper seems to have some, and should most likely be cut.
Avatar by Leafsnake
I'm aware of that, that's why I said that they bring him just short of CM status. However, having good qualities isn't the only thing that gets one removed from the list, if they fail to meet the qualities of heinousness, or aren't evil enough, they get cut.
I always thought Hopper counted as a Complete Monster. I mean, his very first scene involves him threatening to have a little girl killed by a feral member of his gang for no real reason except he's angry. He later kills three members of his own gang because they brought up the fact that they didn't need to be exorting food from the ants and it would just be more pragmatic to stay where they are. He then plans on killing the queen to send the ants a message. Hopper's motivations seem to stem mainly from rather large hatred of ants or from a sadist personality. By Pixar movie standards his actions are pretty heinous, no Freudian Excuse is given, and every other character fears him. In the end, I'm just not sure an ambiguous throwaway line is enough to disqualify someone from the trope.
EDIT: Sorry, fixed the potholes.
edited 6th Jul '12 11:45:07 PM by OccasionalExister
To be honest, the potholing strongly inclines me to disregard all that.
Avatar by Leafsnake
That is a sound argument for keeping him, I feel it covers many of the reasons why he was considered for the trope. The point that seems to be the course for debate is treated as a throwaway, which is a valid interpretation. Kudos
If we're on Lotso, although I haven't sat down and watched Toy Story 3, working in a movie theatre meant I saw bit's and pieces of it and I saw a bit about Lotso's backstory which for me would give him a Feurdian Excuse in that he has abandonment issues. That's just my opinion though.