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
Mr. Blonde is definitely one of the biggest cases of Baiting The Dog that I've seen. Watching the movie, you get the idea that the man who tortures the cop and kills innocent people for no reason is the real Mr. Blonde. There has to be some selfish reason why he'd help Eddie, right? Like, to move up in the mob or something? I can't imagine that he actually cares for him, or anyone, but is there any actual evidence to support it?
Gotta say, if Exister's description of Mister Blonde (why am I having Perfect Dark flashbacks?) is accurate, then he can't qualify. Going off of what Camberf and Lightysnake have said, it sounds like one of those examples where he really feels like he should qualify, but probably doesn't.
With SSM's vote, I think that we have enough to put up Fouchon from Hard Target, though I would not mind more votes. Will start a write up shortly.
Speaking of film examples, I think this one could be better.
- In The Proposition, Eden Fletcher, the Smug Snake orders not only a brutal massacre of aborigines, but also the fatal flogging of a retarded 14-year old. The 14-year old in question is innocent of the crime (his older brother Arthur did it) and dies from the bloody flogging.
Now, I don't honestly remember when Fletcher orders Aboriginies massacred. Not saying he didn't do it, but I don't remember it. If someone could tell me when that was, I'll work it into the write-up. In the meantime...
- Eden Fletcher, the town's leading citizen, and a Knight Templar par excellence. Enraged by Captain Stanley's decision to turn accused rapist and murderer Charlie Burns loose, Fletcher convinces the townsfolk that Charlie's younger brother Mikey, who is both fourteen and severely handicapped, should be punished in place of Charlie, and their older brother Arthur, who actually did the crime. Fletcher manipulates a mob of townsfolk, including Stanley's wife, Martha, into demanding that Mikey be given one hundred lashes. By forty lashes, Mikey is dying from blood loss, the rest of the townsfolk are turning away in horror, Martha has fainted, and Fletcher is still demanding that the other sixty lashes be meted out. When Stanley refuses, Fletcher has him fired, knowing full well that his actions will bring Arthur Burns down on the town.
How's that sound? By the way, further proof of the antivillain/CM dichotomy? After Arthur Burns was cut from the CM list, somebody listed him—rapist, mass murderer, and psychopath—as an antivillain. I just cut that.
edited 25th Oct '13 9:35:42 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
Excellent rewrite
Cutting Blonde would be a pretty big upset, I must say; he was one of the first examples on the page.
I haven't seen Reservoir Dogs so I wouldn't know if Blonde counts or not. However, since he provides the page quote, I've collected a few possible quotes to use on the off chance that Blonde ends up being cut.
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
Why was Arthur Burns cut again?
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts
On the Mr. Blonde question, while he shows loyalty we don't see exactly why he's loyal. He could have done it out of friendship, it could have been because it gave him more opportunities to do evil things, or he was afraid of his wrath, or because it amused him. So there's no real evidence as to why he never ratted his boss out, so it's not really a disqualifying feature.
ACW: Arthur loves his family. Genuinely and truly loves them.
Arthur is like an animal. His gang (Sammy Stoat, Bob, his brothers) are his blood. He loves them and looks after them, but outside his circle, he has zero empathy for anyone. Raping or killing them is like hitting a wasp for him.
I've also wondered about Blonde's inclusion based on his loyalty to Joe. After mulling it over I think Shaoken's point makes the most sense. There doesn't seem to be enough evidence to confirm Blonde's love for Joe and Eddie, and he completely screws up their plan by going on a shooting spree in the midst of their carefully-planned heist. His onscreen crimes are also purely out of sadism, while White shooting the two cops to bits is simply to make their escape.
Boris is currently at 2 keep, 1 cut, and one unsure, so too early to call.
The entry for Lore on Star Trek: The Next Generation has so much whited-out text as to be useless as an example. It's been 25 years since these episodes came out and his crimes are pretty common knowledge for most people watching that show. Suggested despoilering:
- Data's brother Lore is a thoroughly unsympathetic android who summoned the Crystalline Entity to his creator's colony when the other colonists petitioned Soong to deactivate him out of fear that he would turn on them. It could be argued that he acted in self-defense, but given everything else we see of his true nature it's obvious that he mostly did it for his own sick amusement. He tried to do the same thing to the Enterprise too. He also kills his creator, reprograms his brother to follow his every command, and threatens to set Wesley on fire. And he tried to make the Borg (or at least a certain segment thereof) an even greater threat than they already were.
I picked up some more possible cuts/keeps.
From Antz:
- Complete Monster: General Mandible. He plans to to flood the colony of his own kind, including the Queen of all he views as weak, and only spared his own army of loyalists, not to mention he purposely manipulated a huge part of the army that was loyal to the Queen into a hopeless battle with the termites
- He's even arguably worse than his Disney counterpart Hopper as he doesn't even have anyone he has restraints on killing as seen with Cutter's Heel–Face Turn is met with an attempt to kill him
He's listed on Monster.Western Animation in a two paragraph entry, but it seems he hasn't been discussed yet. The bit about Hopper can go, but I think he qualifies. He sacrifices half his army without a second thought and tries to destroy his entire colony and kill the Queen, all out of a megalomania complex and wanting to kill off the "weak" workers so only his strong soldiers survive.
From Black Hawk Down:
- Complete Monster: Mohammed Farrah Aidid. Though he never appears on-screen, the film portrays militia under his direct command using mass starvation as a tool to amass power. Such conduct places him firmly within this category.
This seems like some odd reversal of Offstage Villainy. The villainy is there, but the villain isn't. I presume characters who don't even show up in the story are disqualified by default.
From The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas:
- Complete Monster: Lieutenant Kotler once beat one Jewish servant to death.
At least in the movie, this guy is given a redeeming trait. He had protected his social democratic father from the Nazis by keeping his father's politics a secret. When his commanders find out, they send him to the Russian front. I suggest cut.
From The Covenant:
- Complete Monster: Chase. He kills for two reasons: fun and power. Neither of these are good reasons.
This is a young warlock who is firmly Drunk on the Dark Side, albeit not to the point of having no moral agency. He manipulates the main character and his friends, wants to cannibalize other warlocks for their power even though there are barely any of them left, puts death spells on their girlfriends, and killed his father and foster parents in his backstory. I think there are enough onscreen crimes to qualify him, so I suggest keep.
From Dog Soldiers:
- Complete Monster: How some view Ryan.
Examples Are Not Arguable. He might not stand out enough. He gets a literal Kick the Dog moment and used the other team as bait to capture a werewolf on his own superior's orders. The (fully conscious) werewolf family members on the other hand devour multiple people alive onscreen. I'm leaning towards cut.
From The Manchurian Candidate:
- Complete Monster: Eleanor Iselin! This woman is a fascist who emotionally (and it's implied, sexually) abuses her own son, destroys his relationships and has him brainwashed to kill all of her husband's political opponents. She also has the only woman he loved killed to prevent him from forming any relationships that would break her power over him.
- Eleanor was sexually abused by her own father so he counts as well.
Problematic. This is actually dealing with three different portrayals of the same character (the book, the 1950s film, and the 2000s film). I don't recall this sexual abuse being part of her characterization in the most recent version, where she also seemed more like a Well-Intentioned Extremist. Any version that includes the father part should be cut, I think.
From Near Dark:
- Complete Monster: Bill Paxton's Severen takes a truly twisted delight in psychologically torturing helpless prey before killing them in a slow, brutally horrific manner. As such, he is the only vampire denied an Alas, Poor Villain death; he just blows up and no-one really cares.
- Jesse isn't really a whole lot better, especially given that he and Severen started the Chicago Fire.
The entire vampire family take part in their killings, and they all get off on toying with their prey. The Chicago Fire is only referred to in passing, hence Offstage Villainy. And each member of the family seems to care for each other to some extent. I suggest cut.
From Panic Room:
- Complete Monster - Raoul is a Trigger-Happy psychopath who is a bit too happy if he has to hurt and/or kill people. He also severely beats Stephen almost to death, having Meg watching him doing it.
I suggest keep. He's more evil and murderous than both his comrades, one of whom is an Anti-Villain and kills him to save the family they're robbing and the other is a wannabe gangster more idiotic than cruel. He doesn't hesitate to kill a women, her husband, and their daughter for hurting him trying to fight him off, and shoots one of his partners just for trying to cut his losses and leave.
edited 19th Oct '13 10:51:55 AM by Morgenthaler
You've got roaming bands of armed, aggressive, tyrannical plumbers coming to your door, saying "Use our service, or else!"
On Black Hawk Down, is there any evidence that the candidate gave order or something?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
I've seen Black Hawk Down, and the movie never draws a hard connection between the Somalian militia's actions and the orders of their boss. I mean, it can be inferred because he's their boss, but that's about it. Actually, I don't recall them doing much starving people onscreen either - they mostly serve as a horde of brutish orcs-in-human-flesh to menace the American soldiers who were stupid enough to enter their nest (Racism? What racism?).
What's precedent ever done for us?
Like as said above...the Somali warlord's actions are mostly inferred. This is an unusual case, and the only precedent is President Clark from Babylon 5, but Clark does appear onscreen and we have clear factual evidence of his evil deeds occurring on his direct orders. The Black Hawk Down example is a clear cut.
Keep Mandible, But the Boy With the Striped Pajamas example, Keep Chase, Cut Severin, Cut Eleanor Iselin, Keep Raul
And for the love of God, Cut Ryan, who in God's name thought he was a good example? Ryan's biggest dick move on his own initiative is killing a dog to prove a point to the hero. Otherwise, using his squads as bait was his superiors' order, and after that, Ryan mainly acts as an asshole until he changes into a werewolf an tries to kill said hero. It's not entirely clear if transforming does much to your mind, as the werewolf family displays clear tactical ability, and Ryan tries to kill Cooper in a way that indicates a level of intelligence, but...
Even then, the werewolf family kills multiple people and keeps the corpses of their kills in their home to butcher for food.. Ryan is far from a standout.
edited 19th Oct '13 12:23:37 PM by Lightysnake
@18040: Been a long time since I saw that movie but reading over Fletcher's entry on the villains wiki, it says he visits Stanley in his house at one point and says, because a gang of Aboriginal Australians have attacked someone, Fletcher orders Stanley to kill all the Aborigines. Apparently this takes place shortly before ordering Mikey flogged.
edited 19th Oct '13 12:31:17 PM by OccasionalExister
![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Thumbs_up_emoticon_3268.png "[thumb up]"){kind=small}
Mr. Blonde
The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans
- Complete Monster: As bad as McDonagh is, his partner Stevie is arguably worse. Sure, McDonagh may lie, cheat, steal, extort, and sexually abuse to get his kicks, but he does have standards and quite a few Pet the Dog moments. Stevie doesn't, and there are several points throughout the movie where McDonagh, who is perpetually high on various controlled substances, has to be the voice of the reason and stop Stevie, who is stone-cold sober, from doing something terrible.
Doesn't name anything Stevie does.
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
Fletcher seems like an asshole. What's his motivation anyway?
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts
@18047: Lore and Kivas Fajo have better entries on Monster.Live Action TV which we can swap out with the current ones on the YMMV.Star Trek The Next Generation page. Agree to keep Chase, Mandible and Raoul and cut the rest.
@18053: Cut Stevie until someone can elaborate on who he is, what he's done and how he's worse than McDonagh.
@18054: Fletcher's just one of those types who believes "civilizing" a "savage" part of the world equates to being as colossal of an asshole as you can possibly be.
Re Mr. Blonde: If it was just the conversation with Eddie and Joe, I'd still be comfortable with Blonde's inclusion. It's the four years he willingly spent in prison that really bothers me. The movie just doesn't provide any ulterior motive why he would sacrifice those years for the Cabot family other than loyalty. It doesn't mention power and influence in their family, fear of retribution, or even hatred of cops as the reasons why he let himself be put away. Let me contrast Blonde with another former questioned example, Bellatrix Lestrange. Lestrange willingly went to Azkaban for Voldemort, however there are less than noble reasons given why she would do that. Just before getting hauled off she said she believed the Dark Lord would return and that she would be rewarded for her loyalty. From what's been established of her character that presumably means more influence in the Death Eaters and a chance to get into Voldy's robes. We ruled out love and loyalty to Voldemort as a person because, again due to what's been established of her character, she doesn't care about him for him, but rather what he represents. Due to his goals, Voldemort is essentially Lestrange's fanatical and genocidal ideals made flesh. I'm comfortable with including her because she gets many scenes throughout the books that support this interpretation of her. However, because there's no evidence that Mr. Blonde is loyal to the Cabot family for self-serving reasons, I think his going to jail for them needs to be taken as it seems, as just a sign of loyalty to people he likes.
edited 19th Oct '13 5:31:21 PM by OccasionalExister
I think there's more than one valid interpretation for Blonde's actions, too...namely, it could just be a whim of his.
Also, there's the 'code' of the underworld. You just don't 'rat'
edited 19th Oct '13 5:58:31 PM by Lightysnake
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I have to echo that. There are a whole heap of reasons why he didn't rat out; fear of the consequences, knowing he'd get a job from them in the future, hatred of the cops, because he thought prison would be a nice vacation, etc. etc. etc.
With Mr Blonde there are no reasons given for why he didn't betray the Cabot family. It could have been out of genuine loyalty, it could be because he didn't have a good enough reason to betray them.
And hell, even if he likes the Cabots doesn't make it a redeeming trait; he could like them because they give him the means to do evil things to other people, or because they do bad things to people, or because one day Eddie told a joke that Blonde found particularly funny.
The problem I have there is we're not given enough information one way or the other. I do like there to be some evidence before I consider a position valid. That said, though.Morgenthaler has a great point.
Namely, that Blonde is the one who wrecks the heist simply because he enjoys killing people. Also, importantly, Eddie and Joe don't seem to know the real Mr. Blonde. Eddie leaves him alone with the Cop over Mr. White's very vocal protests and sure enough Blonde tortures and tries to kill him because...well...For the Evulz and because it's so exciting. It lends credence to his friendliness earlier being a mask since he knows this is utterly counter to what Eddie needs and wants.
This debate reminds me of my own experiences with Tayama, in trying to explore different interpretations of the character's actions. In Tayama's case he's clearly the least redeemable person in the game (even the Archangels care about each other) and motivated mainly by power, but expresses genuine concern for the safety of the city several times. I looked for any way I could spin it that this concern was insincere, and to my deepest regret couldn't think of one.
Re: Stevie: he might be worse than McDonaugh if both had an equal amount of screentime, but McDonaugh is the real Dirty Cop on display here. Stevie wants to let a guy drown rather than ruining his clothes to save him, and wants to kill a drug dealer for his money. McDonaugh rapes suspects, tortures witnesses, steals drugs, plants evidence, and buddies up to the drug dealer to get rich himself before he doesn't need him anymore. McDonaugh gets a lot of Pet the Dog moments as said, and both seem to genuinely think they're doing good by trying to solve the murder case they're on. I suggest cut for Stevie.
You've got roaming bands of armed, aggressive, tyrannical plumbers coming to your door, saying "Use our service, or else!"
.....
Uh...
Well this isn't about suggesting Complete Monster entries and such. However...
I wonder if it's REALLY necessary to remove Complete Monster potholes in the Trope Pantheon pages. It may be a different namespace, but isn't that stuff a place Just for Fun? And even there are some Gods assigned to this trope.
I'm fine with removing potholes. However, is it OK if you guys just skip the Pantheon namespace from the cleanup? If you don't want to, at least I'd like an explanation why the Pantheon shouldn't be exempt from it.
Thank you.
Being Just for Fun does not mean a page is exempted from conventional editing guidelines. Especially not if creating such an exemption would encourage misuse.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
I think the torture and attempted immolation push Blonde over the edge. When the guy is sobbing he has a little kid at home, Blonde stands there with a bored look asking "Are you done?" The only reason he doesn't kill Nash is because Mr. Orange unloads his gun into Blonde
As far as the Cabots go...that's where I'm not sure. Blonde did the time for them, yes, and he does seem to have a friendship going on with Eddie, but given how Blonde acts so...inhuman, I can't be sure if it's genuine.
Need to think on it.
edited 18th Oct '13 5:28:54 PM by Lightysnake