Subpages cleanup: Complete Monster

You're missing how 40K metaphysics work. The Chaos Gods are powered by emotion. The stronger the emotion, the more nourishment they get, which is why they will go out of their way to turn love into self-destructive obsession, righteous fury into murderous rage, and hope or ambition into megalomaniacal avarice. Chaos Gods in charge of a positive emotion, therefore, are even worse, because their entire purpose in life is to pervert something good into something hideous.

That said, there's a grey area involved - they are made of these emotions, and so have to do what they do in order to survive. Existence in the Warp is pretty much a zero-sum game, and if you don't protect your metaphysical turf and put up a strong front, something bigger and nastier eats you and gains your power.

I also agree, Clu should be taken out, and Doom should be included.

Same, in case it wasn't clear from earlier. Clu is not an independent moral agent; he's a program. He can't qualify by definition.

I may not be up on 40K physics, but gods in settings generally are made up in part of their portfolios. I actually assumed as such... which means I was right about Tzeentch and hope, which would be a good disqualifier for this.

I'm not totally sure we want to have "totally subject to their programming" as a reason to disqualify someone. If so, then we're going to end up disqualifying any person who was raised to act and behave like a Complete Monster - it's because they were effectively programmed to act that way, right? Besides being a specious argument, it's also unnecessary in this case - regardless of whether it's by choice or by programming, Clu does want to improve the mainframe and create a utopia. That's a noble sentiment that happens to be carried out too far. That alone is enough to disqualify a character.

I just worry because, by arguing for programming as a lack of will, we're starting to head into the debate over whether morality is based in the core of a being or if it's merely programmed by societal (primarily parental) influences. That alone is a headache that I'd rather avoid, particularly since that's a debate that goes on outside of fiction that isn't about to be solved anytime soon.

In the case in point, Clu is a program. While there may be some question as to whether programs are capable of exercising independent moral judgement, the TRON-verse makes a clear distinction between users — i.e., people — and programs in terms of What Measure Is a Non-Human?.

You can argue nature versus nurture all you want, but clinical insanity and/or impaired judgement (e.g., Mind Control) are typical exclusions for CM. Humans, absent defects of some sort, are moral agents and are able to make moral choices. Without that capability, there is no potential to be a Complete Monster. It's the same issue with the Aliens from that franchise. They aren't capable of choosing not to be what they are.

If Clu had been brainwashed, I would've argued for his inclusion, simply because their is the potential for morality there. Clu is literally lines of code in the form of Jeff Bridges. He is a literal program - there is no nature vs. nurture to debate here, because his entire morality system is "delete imperfections", which is the vaguest morality system ever, hence why he goes so off the rails with it.

To elaborate, in my opinion it is impossible to be a Complete Monster without the capability of choosing to be otherwise. You can't be one by accident, or by indelible programming, or via Mind Control, unless you escape from that programming/control and choose to keep being just as evil as you were under it.

In short, CM status requires moral agency. Without it, you're just doing what you're programmed to do.

edited 24th Jul '12 11:10:15 AM by Fighteer

So what about Master Control Program from the original Tron? Does he also fail to qualify?

I may not be up on 40K physics, but gods in settings generally are made up in part of their portfolios. I actually assumed as such... which means I was right about Tzeentch and hope, which would be a good disqualifier for this.

Its more that he's derived from hope, and serves as a corruptive force on a positive emotion by encouraging its magnification to dangerous extremes. He's not responsible for the existence of hope as a concept (though, as the god of egomania, he'd probably claim he was) - rather, the existence of hope as a concept is responsible for him.

It seems clear to me that in the original TRON, the MCP was an advanced AI that slipped its bonds. I'm ambivalent about its qualifications for CM — it's not firmly established in the narrative whether any programs, the MCP included, have free will, or if they are just extensions of their creators' personalities and desires. If we are assigning such things, it certainly had quite a Freudian Excuse. Dillinger was just as power hungry as the MCP was, but the MCP took it to its logical extreme. Much like Clu did in the second film.

Within the context of the original movie, it's not clear to me that the MCP is intended to be viewed as monstrous. It certainly wouldn't come to mind if I had to think of Complete Monsters in film.

edited 24th Jul '12 11:23:26 AM by Fighteer

So, you mean he doesn't count? Good, because I already requested to cut him because his actions are not as deplorable as Clu's. and he is also a program. But from what you say, you imply that Dillinger might count. Does he?

No, Dillinger doesn't count either. His fatal flaws are greed and pride, but at no point does he do anything beyond your typical Corrupt Corporate Executive. Remember that a CM cannot be guilty by proxy; he has to do the evil deeds himself or at least order them done. He didn't tell the MCP to enslave and torture the other programs; it's implied that none of the users (except Flynn of course) have any idea that their programs are conscious beings inside a virtual universe.

Dillinger acts out of selfish, greedy motives and in the end is revealed as a coward. It is unlikely that he could kill or torture someone in the real world even if he wanted to. He's pathetic, not cacklingly evil.

Not every work has to have a Complete Monster as its villain.

edited 24th Jul '12 11:27:35 AM by Fighteer

Couldn't agree more. MCP has luckily been cut too.

So I want to ask about three more villains

Negaduck from Darkwing Duck - to me, all he does is standard villainy.

Lord Shen from Kung Fu Panda 2 - isn't he too much of a Jerkass Woobie?

Rumpelstilskin from Shrek 4 - What did he commit ON-SCREEN?

They are all on the CM page. Do we keep them?

edited 24th Jul '12 11:34:11 AM by Krystoff

MCP, by the same grounds as Clu, should be D Qed, and Dillinger doesn't count. And in case it gets brought up, Dillinger's son in TRON: Legacy is just a hypercompetent Jerkass being manipulated by something he believes to be his father but is implied to be the MCP.

Haven't seen much Duck Dodgers, but the ones I've seen with Negaduck have been pretty standard fair, not particularly heinous (but, I'm not a good judge there).

Shen, it's debatable to whether or not he is a Jerkass Woobie. He did release the Soothslayer, and never harmed her, and that alone should disqualify him, as he is no longer a Complete Monster.

edited 24th Jul '12 12:04:44 PM by DrPsyche

Trust me, nobody likes getting into semantic debates over hair-splitting topics more than a linguist who worked as a debater and a critic - like me. That said, I also know the right spot for discussing the practical difference between "derived from hope" and "partly made of hope" - and for the purposes of the Complete Monster thread, said spot is in my private message box.

Now, with the distraction safely away from the thread at large, the thread at large to discuss.

My worry is that the TRON universe is already edging closer towards the humanization of artificial intelligences, which is why I'm reticent in regards to simply marking up their desires and will as simply manifestations of the users' will. It edges closer and closer to an annoying and hair-splitting debate... and one that I think is completely unnecessary when there are already much less controversial reasons to disqualify all of the TRON examples.

I bring this up mostly because the hair-splitting precident does start deciding precident, and I think this particular example is a poor one upon which to set it. It'd be one thing if we were trying to discuss why WOPR of War Games should be disqualified - that one gives a much clearer example (though admittedly, it's even further into the "there are other good reasons to disqualify it" camp). To be quite frank, I don't think I do accept this argument in regards to TRON - I think it opens the door to basically DQ all artificial intelligences, and I don't think it's so clear cut.

Dr. Psyche? Negaduck wasn't in Duck Dodgers, he was in Darkwing Duck. Disney ducks, not Warner Bros. ducks. I gave my opinion on him back in @1620.

I would actually need to see arguments on Shen and Rumplestiltskin.

32_Footsteps, the question devolves ultimately into whether the work treats its artificial intelligences as people — as moral agents. Works like TRON straddle the line, of course, but in the end it's a question of whether we are expected to believe that Clu / MCP / WOPR are acting according to built-in directives or their own volition.

And you also correctly point out that they have to qualify in other ways as Complete Monsters, which they don't.

• Lord Shen, the evil Peacock Emperor from Kung Fu Panda 2. He crosses the Moral Event Horizon in the backstory, murdering an entire village full of peaceful civilians in an attempt to eradicate the species prophesied to defeat him. He's basically Judge Claude Frollo with tail feathers, and he only gets worse from there. By the time he murders his own second-in-command for refusing to fire on his own people, he's become arguably the most monstrous villain to ever appear in a Dreamworks film. Unlike Tai Lung from the first movie, he is completely devoid of any redeeming characteristics. Unless you go by the official site's All There Inthe Manual, in which he does have a somewhat redeeming backstory (that also explains some of his canon acts).

This is the description of Shen

• Rumpelstiltskin from Shrek Forever After. Unlike the other villains, he is a stop-at-nothing psychopath who kills one of his mooks for no reason, and is implied to be responsible for hundreds of deaths. Additionally, there is his Ogre Genocide scheme

edited 24th Jul '12 1:03:24 PM by Krystoff

Hey I just got back from watching the Dark Knight Rises and I have to chime in on the whole "does Bane and Talia qualify thing:

I personally think they don't. While they cross the Moral Event Horizon in their actions and in their goals to an extent they have a degree of sympathy given their Woobie, Destroyer of Worlds mentality. And there's the whole filial love thing going on....................

As for Chaos Gods, they act because they want to survive. If they do not do what they do they are destroyed by even worse entities. Things in the Warp arguably function on a level that is different from ours.

@Krystoff: That entry on Shen seems awfully like it's trying to pimp itself. It uses lots of buzzwords but it fails Show, Don't Tell. As written it should be cut as it offers no useful details.

Actually, we see all he does in the flashback. And killing The Dragon, is ON-screen.

Then the entry needs to describe his actions, not merely claim that they were heinous. I mean, look at this: "He's basically Judge Claude Frollo with tail feathers, and he only gets worse from there." This is meaningless drivel. It offers nothing useful, only someone's assertion that, "Yes, this guy really is that bad."

edited 24th Jul '12 1:39:22 PM by Fighteer

Okay, so lets have a consensus first, and than rewrite it.

@1966 aw shoot, I meant darwing duck, I just confused the names (Alliterative ducks). I know Darkwing Duck sparingly, and from what I've seen, Negaduck doesn't qualify.

edited 24th Jul '12 2:39:58 PM by DrPsyche

Judge Doom has my vote for yes, Clu and Negaduck have my votes for no. With Clu it's in regards to his Well-Intentioned Extremist goals rather than his being a program. I'm leaning more towards 32's views that programs/robots/what-have-yous can be individuals capable of choice, rather than just machines. I haven't seen the first Tron, but the sequel shows quite a few programs acting more "human" than you would usually attribute to programs.

Lord Shen also has my vote against. On-screen he kills Master Thundering Rhino, kills his Dragon (who the supplementary materials also suggest to be his oldest and most loyal friend), fires upon his own men when they're in his way, attempted to commit genoicide of the pandas, and attempts to conquer all of China. Despite all this the movie still gives him a lot of Cryforthe Devil moments. Shen is more a Tragic Villain; the movie frequently points out that he's a deeply unhappy person, but his attempts to achieve happiness through evil actions only leave him feeling more and more miserable.

Shen appears to have genuinely loved his parents and wanted their approval. Also, while he doesn't treat the Soothsayer with overt kindness, he never harms her despite her frequently angering him and even lets her go free without any selfish motive behind it. Even Po pities and forgives him in the end, and beseeches Shen to let go of his anger. Shen refuses but his final fight with Po strongly suggests that Shen has become a Death Seeker who's crossed the Despair Event Horizon now that his plans have been ruined.

edited 24th Jul '12 6:23:12 PM by OccasionalExister