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. "
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
For When They Cry
I thinkthe orphanage head shows up in a flahsback in the anime. If that's the case keep. But Teppei and Rin are a cut.
Nomura...the Hinamizawa Disaster is a disaster that wipes the town of Hinamizawa off the map via poisoning.
So in regards to a Marvel Animation sub page:
We got Carnage and Herbert Landon for Spider-Man: The Animated Series, Dark Aegis for Iron Man The Animated Series and X-Men The Animated Series has Graydon Creed, Apocalypse and possibly Sabretooth.
Are those all the examples? Does anyone have any problem with any of these examples?
edited 11th Nov '13 3:49:55 PM by TheOverlord
I am wondering how far we set the heinous standard on the X-Men the animated series, for a kids cartoon, there were a lot of destructive psychopaths in that series. Some villains were tonned down, Shadow King and Red Skull in that cartoon were not C Ms and Sinister was given some minor sympathetic moments in his flashback episode, but other villains seem as close to the comics as they could get them.
He is more of a Captain America villain, so when he guest stars in X-Men and Spider-Man cartoons, he never got the chance to anything besides generic villainy.
I mean two other guys who might in the X-Men cartoon are Omega Red and Fabian Cortez, mainly because they both tried to start a nuclear holocaust in two separate episode. Omega Red is a Stalinist psychopath who planned on turning on Soviet handlers as soon as he got the chance to become the iron fisted ruler of a new USSR and later gains control over a Soviet nuclear sub and plans to launch nukes at the 15 biggest cities in the world in order to sow chaos that would allow him to seize power later.
Cortez was a scheming power mad bigot, who betrayed Magneto, tried to murder him and used his death as an excuse to launch an attack on the Earth, ultimately resulting him launching a ton of nuclear weapons at the Earth, that Magneto stopped in the nick of time, when it turned out he wasn't dead. Cortez also later tried to sacrifice Jubilee to Apocalypse, until Jubilee escaped and Apocalypse took Cortez as a sacrifice instead.
Its always good to set the heinous standard somewhere, when you have a real race to the bottom in regards to a number of the villains.
edited 11th Nov '13 4:24:14 PM by TheOverlord
That cartoon had its moments, it tried to be as close to the comics within the limits of Sat morning censorship, although censorship was less strict in the early 90s rather then the mid 90s, so Batman and X-Men tended to be darker then the Spider-Man cartoon and X-Men and Batman just have darker subject matter. There was some Mood Whiplash in that series, serious episodes could be followed by Mojo appearing, hamming it up and being ridiculous for an entire episode or have some silly story where Jubilee told fairy tales for an entire episode.
Not to mention there are a lot of sympathetic and generic villains in that series to counteract the evil ones. Magneto was really sympathetic in that series, Mystique had her sympathetic moments, Dr. Trask was a far more sympathetic take on an anti mutant bigot than Creed was, considering he tried to sacrifice his life to stop the Sentinels when they went out of control. Then you had one shot villains who were just petty thugs or generic villains.
Cortez likely wasn't as bad as his comic book counterpart, but still was a pretty bad guy, as I noted above.
edited 11th Nov '13 4:42:42 PM by TheOverlord
May I add the following to Sandbox.Anime And Manga Monsters?
- The Baccano entries
- The Bakugan entries
- Tenzen Yakushiji from Basilisk
- Chaka from Black Lagoon
- Largo from Bubblegum Crisis
- The Yagyu Ninja Scrolls entries
I don't think that Omega Red or Fabian Cortez sound as bad as the guys we've already put up. Sabretooth sounds worse.
@ACW
Not even so much that the Skull didn't get enough characterisation, as they decided to play up his manipulative skills and planning over his monstrousness. In the two or three episodes that he appeared in, the Red Skull outmanouvered the Kingpin, created an unstoppable superweapon, and took Captain America down with him. He established himself as a genuine Magnificent Bastard, and a pretty cool villain, just not a Complete Monster. Which makes sense, because his brand of villainy would not have translated well into the heavily censored Spider-Man show. You can keep Carnage's monstrosity by making him a Mad Bomber instead of a Serial Killer. You can't have the Skull plot genocide and make it anything other than what it is. So instead they made him menacing by making him really competent.
"Have no fear, Chameleon. The Red Skull, anticipates everything."
edited 11th Nov '13 4:53:22 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
@despoa sure, but that can be really hard to pull off. It seems pretty rare. Anyway Red Skull in those cartoons was never a CM, he never did anything heinous in either cartoon to count.
@Ambar Sonof Deshar, fair enough, I defer to your judgment on this matter, maybe we should stick to the 6 villains we have now for the Marvel animation sub page.
Also would anyone mind if I cut Hacker from the Canadian Bacon YMMV page?
By his actions it seems like he could count...although probably Played for Laughs.
@despoa
Theoretically possible, but in practise it's almost never done right. You cited The Joker, but he's rarely both. Sometimes he's written as an MB, sometimes a CM, but rarely both at once (and no I don't think the version from TDK qualifies as both. The plot helps him way too much). There are rare exceptions like Johan Liebert, or Beast Wars Megatron, but they are few and far between.
@ACW
In his first appearance Cletus Kassady (Carnage's alter ego) is in a standoff with the police, and planning to level an entire city block with explosives (it's implied he's done it before). In that way they were able to keep the notion that this was a very bad guy who was fully prepared to kill hundreds of people, without having to go into the gory details they would have if he'd been a Serial Killer. It was actually a pretty effective way of keeping the heinousness while cutting back on the graphic details, and is a change I don't really mind.
Conversely, if you want to keep the Red Skull as a CM, it's a lot harder. You just can't show most of his worst crimes in a kid's show. So instead they made him a Dangerously Genre-Savvy Magnificent Bastard, keeping the appropriate air of menace, while toning down the horror; he's scary not because of what he does, but because he's just that good at it. I know a lot of people didn't like the heavy censorship in that show, but I think that in that particular case (and the case of Carnage) it didn't hurt the show, as we still got an appropriately threatening villain out of it.
edited 11th Nov '13 5:30:01 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
Going to do a little writeup on Hades from Kid Icarus Uprising.
Who is he?
Hades is the Big Bad and final boss of Kid Icarus Uprising. He is the lord of the underworld and unlike most portrayals of Hades, he's more of a sociopathic sadist. He's the main driving force behind the plot.
What does he do?
At first it appears he's doing his job, by collecting souls and taking them to the underworld, until you realize that not all souls go to the underworld. In fact, the majority of souls are either devoured by Hades or sent into oblivion.
Does his actions meet the heinous standard of the game:
Indeed they do. First he sends his army to fight the humans, which kills many people and gives people a hatred of the gods. He then starts another war amongst the humans and kills even more people. He mercilessly blames Pit and Palutena for the casualties of the war and trolls most of the characters. The worst actions by other characters is dropping a nuke on the world done by a Knight Templar goddess of nature and that's about it. No one else banishes humans to oblivion, or manipulates and eats souls.
Does he have a Freudian Excuse to mitigate his actions?
None at all. Hades laughs at the idea of being redeemed. He DOES at one point join up with the heroes but only for pragmatic reasons, as the threat affects him as well. His only humanizing quality is that he's somewhat Laughably Evil, but he has a disturbing sense of humor.
This is the one time where Hades isn't the least evil of the Jerkass Gods.

RE Loki, it struck me as interesting that some reviewers actually asked Hiddelston and I believe Alan Taylor as well about the different characterization of Loki across the three films.
Basically, he's a Shakspearean Tragic Villain in Brannagh's; a Laughably Evil psychopathic Butt-Monkey in Whedon's, and an Affably Evil Trickster Archetype in Taylor's.
I personally think version one and three are fairly consistent with each other and Whedon's version was sort of Character Derailment, that is handwaved as the result of a Sanity Slippage.
I think Loki does genuinely care for Thor and for Frigga (I read that she has more scenes in the first film, but they were cut), but that doesn't contradict the fact that he's constantly scheming depending on whatever seems most in his interest.
edited 11th Nov '13 12:56:16 PM by Hodor
Edit, edit, edit, edit the wiki