Thanks for noticing :-). Now, i watched the movie a couple of time, and i'll do so again. Which of them do you see as more likely to be upvoted? And did you like this movie more than "Grave of the Fireflies", less, or just as much?
Probably Dr. Boycott. I love The Plague Dogs and I like it more than Grave of the Fireflies. I also created a page of A.R.S.E. on the Evil Wiki and I added its experimental victims. One thing that bothered me at first is the off-screen dialogue with the humans, so I couldn't distinguish between the whitecoats. At first, I thought the younger scientist with the brown hair was Boycott, because he looked more sinister, but I realized that he was given a ride back to the research station by Lynn Driver and was referred to as Powell, so the older scientist with the glasses is Boycott. Also, the movie Padak kind of reminds me of this film. Do you plan on reading the book for The Plague Dogs in order to find out more about Boycott and Goodner?
1. Because Rowf and Snitter are more equipped to reality and the overall tone is less depressing. I can relate to you on that one. I'm still not sure about my own preference though. I'll have to think harder.
2. I think the good people did it on purpose. They wanted to confuse us by portraying the whitecoats as a collective, losing their human image due to their abuse of animals and lack of genuine care for mankind.
3. The novel is unavailable in my country. Is there an audiobook on YouTube?
The book is more mature than the film and has more horrific experiments. The saddest thing is that these experiments happened in real-life, including the Pit of Despair experiment. The list of experiments can be found on the article of A.R.S.E on the Evil Wiki: https://evil.fandom.com/wiki/A.R.S.E..
1. Thanks for the links. I'll check it out soon. Are you saying that Boycott and Goodner are even worse in the books than in the movie? Man :-(. Talk about holocaust subtext.
2. Sad indeed. And pointless. What did Harry Harlow want to achieve, other than sick pleasure? Is isolating young monkeys and check out which fake mother will they choose can be count as an experiment? I mean, all they found out was that young monkeys prefer soft and cuddly mothers over the wire fences and hard mothers. I'm not sure it takes an experiment to know that.
Yes, they are even worse in the book. The experiments depicted in the film are more brutal than pointless. Boycott's experiments in the book are especially pointless and you can check out their information on TV Tropes if you want. If there is a movie that's completely like the book, it would probably be rated R than PG-13. It's also revealed that the sister of Snitter's master is the one who was responsible for selling Snitter to the whitecoats in the first place. What a horrible person. I asked Jester of chaos about her and she got deleted, because he thought that she was just a jerk.
I've checked TV Tropes, but for some reason, TV Tropes didn't list them as pure evil. I know TV Tropes are wrong in many things, but you would expect that a so called wisdom of the crowd site would know that a nazi and an animal abuser from the pointless and heartless kind are complete psychopath. At least one of them is.
It's probably because they see them as heartless incompetents. Also, it's revealed that Snitter was sold to the whitecoats, because of his master's sister. What a horrible person. The whitecoats, Digby Driver, the politicians and Annie Mossity are the real jerks in the story, while the farmers, shopkeepers and other citizens are decent people. Stephen Powell the good scientist is also a tragic character who only got assigned to the research station by accident and only took part in inhumane experimentation on animals for his sick and dying daughter.
One of the reasons why most of the humans in the film are barely or not shown is that they shouldn't be sympathized with for anything. Since Boycott is mostly off-screen, it's hard to determine his motives, but we can look into the book and also see the other experiments.
Hi! I hope you're doing well. If you have the time, would you mind reading and voting on the recent PE Proposal I did for Ares from Wrath of the Titans here? As you probably know, I don't usually prefer to actively ask others to do this since I'd prefer if they do so out of their own interest, but voting's been really slow on this one, and I don't want to feel like the time and effort I put into it is barely amounting to anything. Plus, while I'm very detail-oriented, this is probably one of my shorter and more concise ones to date, so it probably won't take you very long. If you really don't feel like it, I won't pressure you further, but I have to at least try asking.
Guess who's back from the break baby!? Anyways, I've seen it and yeah wow... Unless if I'm missing something, I'm saying yes. I think the starvation part is the unique thing that puts him over for this category even if you compared him to the likes of Milady de Winter... That and how he psychologically torments his family so yeah...
Good to see you :-). Chances are Milady de Winter is terrified of this guy, even in her more villainous versions.
And now, after Louis is formally acknowledged as a PE, my next proposals will probably be Dean Karny (he's worse than Madoff), Slagar the Cruel (formality post for the most evil villain of his universe) and Ebenezer Laoughton (formality post for someone who's quite possibly thr insperation for Nolan-verse's Scarecrow. Dean is on his way to be proposed. Which of the formality posts would you recommend to do first?
I've been contributing to the Pure Evil Wiki. Someone added William Carver and Badger. I've just added Jocelyn. So only Thomas Richards and Joan are left.
Here's the thing, I've created the Jocelyn page on here without putting an info box. Knowing how valuable the info boxes are on that Wiki, do you think you can add an info box with her crimes, goals, etc.?
If he had more screen time, I would've said yes. But the one time we see Crawford is when he's reanimated as a walker. That's my one issue, not enough screen time. While his ways to run a community in a post apocalyptic world are awful, when the protagonists enter Crawford, there's no living human there, and Crawford is overrun by walkers with no living human in sight. The one time you see Crawford is during the climax as a walker when he (or tries to, depending on your choice) pulls Ben Paul to fall to his death.
Again, my main issue is the screen time. With his atrocious ways of running his community and sentencing sick people and children to death, he would be a keeper if we saw more of him.
The results of his actions are stretching well beyond the time he did it, and also well beyond anything the other TellTale Games villains did. Unlike most zombies, Crawford stayed himself even as a zombie. All he cared about was killing Ben, not to mention moving in order to ring the bell because he figured out that people will enter his ruined community, and wanted them dead for his Darwinist vision. Thanks for highlighting the issues though.
Thanks :-). I'll let you know if and when i'll do it. But before Crawford, there are some other PE proposals i'm gonna do, one of them will be dedicated to Dean Karny. This guy was Madoff before Madoff, but arguably worse. I don't know when did Madoff become a bad person, but Dean, at least in his cinematic version, was antisocial since 3rd grade. I mean, a 3rd grader burning an arcade for unspecific reason and frame someone's cousin. And it didn't get better from there. When he grew up, he and a couple of other boys (among them was his so called best friend Joe Hunt) came up with infamous Fonzie scheme known as "Billionaire Boys Club". The other boys did it for money. Dean did it both for his inflated ego and for funding his cocaine addiction. In simple words, this guy bought drugs with other people's money in ways that bankrupted many of his con victims. When your friend have a girlfriend, you won't get a kick on her. Neither do I. But Dean hated Joe for dating with her. To make things worse, this girl was the cousin of Dean's fall guy. It takes seeing the movie to realize how many times he harassed and antagonized her. He even kissed violently in the climax. There's also the part that he murdered the sick father of one of the other boys because the latter refused to help them with firearms deals. Strangled the poor man in cold blood with a freaking belt. I just know he was up to no good when he came to Joe's house in the middle of the night. There's a great chance that he was planning on killing his former friend. We might never know, but it fits the type. And finally, he became the main witness in his friends' trial without looking back.
If he's up here, I'll take a good look. There's a good chance I will vote yes, because of your ability to provide quite a statement. Your statement on keeping DOR-15 made me concede with your valid reasoning.
I also have ideas for future formality posts: Slagar the Cruel (the way i see it, he's the most evil "Redwall" villain, worse even than Tsarmina Greeneyes) and Ebenezer Laughton (possibly the insperation for Nolan-verse Scarecrow, except he's worse). Both were psychopaths even as children, and neither of them got better from there. Which of them do you recommed to propose first?
After Beth, i might propose Dale as a formality post. I just love both of them, and their superior nobility even in this screwed-up situation just highlight that Shane and Dawn are shitheads. I wish the Governor was open to hear what Beth and Dale had to teach him.
1. For the games, it's Delta, since I find him the most sympathetic. In the book, BioShock: Rapture, it's Bill McDonagh, the only sane guy in Rapture who genuinely cared for the city. All of BioShock's protagonists are pretty likable in general.
2. Fontaine and Comstock eclipse Lamb in terms of heinousness in my opinion. One took advantage of a city's populace and then ran said city into the dirt for his own gain, while the other is a genocidal Messiah-wannabe who wanted to mold his own daughter into a successor so she could descend Columbia on the world below and unleash Hell. Lamb probably squeezes out a few more crimes than Stanley, but at the same time, Stanley makes the most out of his fairly limited resources with blatant disregard for life in comparison to his own and I always felt he was even more of a selfish weasel than Lamb.
3. I'm not really familiar with Scream to have an opinion. Only BioShock related thing I can see being comparable to Scream is the fact that the series has two serial killers (J.S. Steinman and Sander Cohen).
1. McDonagh sounds similar to Benjamin Lockwood :-). As a JP enthusiastic, i'm very happy to hear that. Jack and Elizabeth are likeable too, but the fact Booker is an incarnation of Comstock kinda downplays him in my eyes.
2. Comstock was indeed a horrible piece of work, but he's not repulsing me as much as Sofia, and definitely not gives me the creeps the way Atlas does. Also, if I got you correctly, the reason Poole might've been a bigger hate sink than Sofia is for the same reason Slagar the Cruel is a bigger hate sink than Ungatt Trunn and Cluny the Scourge. Something like that?
3. Interesting concept :-). I had two original ideas:
Sidney gets caught in Rapture's decay and fighting Atlas and Jill. Jill becomes one of Atlas' prime soldiers due to her being one of the most dangerous splicers. Unlike most splicers, Jill kept her consciousness to the letter, and therefore is pure evil just like in the canon. Chances are Atlas would electrocute her to death, and that she'll get back at him with the last of her strengths.
Sofia becomes a serial killer in order to get even with Andrew Ryan after the latter cut her funding, becoming hooked up with killing people for getting more money for her experiment, like how a splicer is hooked up with killing people for drugs they might or might not have. Eventually she took too much from her own poison, as lamp-shaded by Sidney. Sofia will rely on her sniping skills and give Sidney a run for her money despite being in a grievous physical disadvantage, but will eventually be killed by a big daddy/Cotton Weary lookalike.
4. You seemed rather upset from me listing Roose Bolton as a scapegoat. While I don't think it's a reason to get angry, I feel your frustration, and won't challenge your edit. The way I see it, even orchestrating the red wedding doesn't mean he deserved to be murdered by his son. People can be murdered by their own son/daughter and not being scapegoats only if they were abusing parents, like Tywin (blaming Tyrion at the death of his own mother, and therefore hating him for being born, is childish). Roose was actually a good father, at least in GOT standards. While he did have a major part in the red wedding, the true mastermind was Tywin. His idea, his orders.