A Stepford Smiler is in no way shape or form required to be evil for one.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. DickRight, but a Stepford Smiler CAN be evil. So to what extent does a villain's affability have to be a mask before they are considered a Stepford Smiler?
Well… in my opinion, here's a good litmus test: You have a villain acting like a fairly nice person in a situation where you wouldn't except them to. If this comes across as creepy or pathetic, you have an evil Stepford Smiler. If it makes you doubt whether they're really so bad, or is clearly not an act, you have Affably Evil.
Being mostly unrelated tropes, I wouldn't say they are actually mutually exclusive, but I also think a fusion of two would be more of a 'affable underneath the Stepford Smiler mask' kind of thing rather than 'villain wearing an affable mask'. I'm unsure of what exactly the latter would be, though.
edited 13th Nov '10 1:36:27 PM by Gilphon
So basically: a Stepford Smiler is faking it while a Affably Evil one is not?
I always though the Stepford Smiler hid trauma while Affably Evil hid,well, evil.
(If any more of my thread get spin-offs; I might go mad with power)
edited 13th Nov '10 6:21:00 PM by AnOtherT
Affably Evil frequently isn't hiding evil though, it's quite clear - they're just...nice...about it. You can smile politely while calmly shooting someone over and over again, then reloading and keeping on going, after all.
edited 16th Nov '10 10:30:34 AM by CaissasDeathAngel
My name is Addy. Please call me that instead of my username.Again, to what extent does it have to be a mask to stop being Affably Evil and start being Stepford Smiler?
If it's a mask at all, it's not Affably Evil. But, of course, the mere act of having a mask does not necessarily make you a Stepford Smiler.
I've been wondering where Gideon from Scott Pilgrim Vs The World would fit here. He acts nice and pleasant most of the time, but from the way he says it you know he's being completely insincere. It's not like he's trying to hide what a Jerkass he is, though; it's that being condescendingly nice to people who hate his guts infuriates them even more than if he was openly belligerant.
No, the 'niceness' is not supposed to piss people off.
Affably Evil - The Mayor in Buffy - Cheerfully and happily looks forwards to his Ascension, in which thousands of people will die as he becomes a Physical God meets Cosmic Horror. Joyfully bumps people off. Is always affable, because it's his nature. Is also evil, because of what he intends to do.
Stepford Smiler - the robot stepdad/mum's boyfriend, again from Buffy. His cheerfulness is used to hide the fact that he is deeply warped, this side of his personality only coming out in certain situations.
Stepford Smiler has a mask, i.e. a false personality. Affably Evil might lie, but they don't wear a mask - they just happen to lie.
If there is a reveal that they're evil, the Stepford Smiler will suddenly either snap or simply slowly drop the act. The Affably Evil character will carry on acting the same way.
Of course, this makes the original Stepford wives leaning more towards AE than SS, but...eh. Maybe I've got the tropes wrong then.
I wouldn't consider Gideon to be either trope. The niceness is too obviously an act for him to be Affably Evil, and he's far too 'smug asshole' to be considered a Stepford Smiler. I'd consider him a Smug Snake.
That's another thing, can a Smug Snake be Affably Evil? The two themes sound so contradictory, with one being so contemptuous and the other being so courteous. An example that comes to mind for me is Batman Begins, where Crane's poisoning of Falcone was arguably a CMOA, even though the former caused a LOT more destruction than the latter.
And yet, Ratigan has been perceived as both.
![]()
That was a Crowning Moment Of Awesome? Personally, I thought that was a pretty nasty case of Kick the Dog.
Again, I perceived it as a CMOA (it was KTD as well, of course) because Crane was so polite up until then that watching him finally put that smug asshole Falcone in his place
felt refreshing.
i don't think so. the key thing about Affably Evil characters is that they're genuinely nice/polite— they just so happen to be evil as well. they don't have an ulterior motive behind their smiles and polite demeanor. Smug Snakes are not nice at all, they just smile and act polite in order to make themselves seem better than you.
I'm not sure if a Smug Snake even acts nice, so much as smiles out of contempt, whereas the Affably Evil smile out of respect.
But the point about acting nice vs. genuinely being nice leads us back to the distinction between Affably Evil and Stepford Smiler. If Ratigan's polite tone was really just a mask for his "inner raging beast" as The Nostalgia Critic put it, then wouldn't that make him more along the lines of the 3rd variety of Stepford Smiler, rather than just plain Affably Evil?

"They're not the Stepford Smiler — their affability is a genuine part of their personality, not a mask." - Affably Evil
At what point do we distinguish between an Affably Evil villain and a Stepford Smiler? What about Ratigan, who is regarded as being Affably Evil, but whose polite personality is used to, as Nostalgia Critic put it, "hide his inner raging beast?"
edited 13th Nov '10 12:46:39 PM by neoYTPism