Is a Hopper a Complete Monster?
There seems to be an ongoing debate as to whether or not Hopper is a Complete Monster. As I don't want an Edit-War, I figured we should all discuss it here.
The big counterargument against him is his having made his mother a promise not to kill Molt on her deathbead. There is one small problem though: at a later point in the movie he is on the verge of attacking Molt when he suggests they not return to Ant-Island. The only reason he desists is because Molt says it wasn't his idea. That to me shows an inability to maintain the promise he had made to his mother previously. And the fact that he cannot even maintain a promise made to his mother on her deathbed doesn't exactly speak highly of him. If anyone disagrees, feel free to comment below.
That is one, ONE briefly mentioned positive trait that barely qualifies due to the above reasons, and more. Oh yes, and for the promise itself? "I swear I won't kill my own brother." If you actually have to promise that, that doesn't say good things about you. He's a clean cut Monster... again, why I never removed the category. THE DREADED ONE AWAKENS 05:34, March 29, 2014 (UTC)
It's not about whether the promise speaks highly of him, it's about him loving his mother, as a Complete Monster never feels even a smidgen of love for anyone. His reasoning for keeping the promise is basically "I'm doing this for our mother, NOT you". As for him almost attacking Molt later in the film... that still doesn't indicate not caring about his mother. All it means is that he hates Molt.
That's not specified. It could just be that he made a promise...but then was later shown to be on the verge of breaking it.
As for a CM having no positive traits, that depends entirely on what you consider positive traits to be. Joker's funny. Palpatine is clever. Sauron looks cool. Are these positive traits? Because they're all considered CMs either way. Honestly to me Hopper is one because he couldn't even maintain a promise he made to his mother on her death bed. Overseer80 (talk) 16:39, March 30, 2014 (UTC)
In this case, positive traits generally mean redeeming, sympathetic, or humanizing traits. Joker, Palpatine, and Sauron have aspects that make them interesting or cool, but they are still pure evil.
As for Hopper nearly breaking his promise, he constantly has to be reminded of it, and stops. Hopper got pissed off but Molt said "Remember Ma" and that stopped him. When he tries attacks to Molt later in the film, Molt doesn't mention the promise so it's not shown if Hopper stopped caring about the promise. If for instance Molt said "You promised mom!" and Hopper kept attacking anyway, then maybe he'd be a CM. But Hopper is never shown to stop caring about the promise. Bentonfill (talk) 19:31, March 30, 2014 (UTC)
Except he does though. Again, he advances threateningly on Molt and only ceases when Molt says that the idea of not going back to Ant Island wasn't his. So to me it seemed like he stopped caring and in light of there being no evidence to suggest that he did still care, that's the stance I'm sticking with. Overseer80 (talk) 00:40, March 31, 2014 (UTC)
Well, if the writers wanted him to be completely unsympathetic, they probably wouldn't have included that scene...and there wasn'y anything stopping him from killing Molt (as his mother was now deceased). 12:28 July 10, 2014 Pigletisbacon
I feel that's a speculation without evidence. I could just as easily say they portrayed him as someone who couldn't even maintain a promise he made to his mother on her death-bed, which would thus make him look worse, not better. It's also possible that he did maintain the promise for a time but ultimately failed, as the later scene showed. So again, he can't even maintain a promise he made to his mother on her death-bed. It's also unclear how long their mother has been dead and he has had to keep the promise. Overseer80 (talk) 23:59, July 10, 2014 (UTC)
Hopper hardly ever mentioned his mother in the film itself. Who's to say that he wasn't forced into making the promise with his mother? There's also the fact that he almost broke that promise, thus showing that he didn't love his mom as much as people are letting on. email@example.com (talk) 04:35, July 22, 2014 (UTC)Robinsonbecky
He was simply going to punch Molt for suggesting such a thing. Pigletisbacon August 4, 2014 18:12
I would vote yes to Hopper him along with Syndrome and Lotso are the only Pixar villains whose actions come across as purely evil with no redeeming features. Lets see to start he runs the ant colony like a ruthless dictator, steals so much food the colony faces starvation and death, beats up Flik to solidify his rule over the colony, and plots on murdering the queen. By the standards of the story, Yes to Hopper.Xmike920 (talk) 14:30, August 31, 2014 (UTC)Xmike920Xmike920 (talk) 14:30, August 31, 2014 (UTC) 10:29, August 31, 2014 (UTC)Xmike920
Hopefully this helps explain things:
Two years later and the category gets taken down due to what folks on TV Tropes have said. Two objections here:
1. I will concede that Hopper keeping to his promise to his dying mother is honorable of him - it's his one honorable trait he showcases. The thing is that some Complete Monsters have had and do have their own versions of honor, justice, reasonability and pragmaticism. This doesn't actually disqualify them so long as their semi-decent qualities don't mitigate their villainy in the grand scheme of things. With Hopper, he keeps his Exact Words and doesn't kill his brother, but still thinks nothing of physically and emotionally abusing Molt just as he does his other henchmen and his ant servants. He keeps his oath to the letter but doesn't keep it in spirit because, in his own words, his brother is someone he would gladly kill were he not bound to his promise.
2. In his second scene, he does to two of his minions what he very well could have done to Molt had Molt not told him that asking him to back off from oppressing the ants for food was their idea and not his. He ends up not killing Molt because Molt wasn't guilty of anything but following a request from other grasshoppers, which again shows some sense of fairness and leniency on his part, but the point is that it also proved that he had his limits and if Molt had been truly, fully guilty of something he considered an offense, he'd forsake his promise to his mom and have him killed.
Whether or not he objectively is a CM is debatable, but he is for me since his mitigating factors are nowhere near mitigating enough to detract from his vicious brand of cruelty and villainy. DocColress (talk) 19:18, July 8, 2016 (UTC)
Hopper being a CM like DocColress sttes above me is totally up for debate. However by the films standards he fits the heinous standard fairly well, here are a few of his actions
1. Enslaving Ants against their will to produce mass food quantities not even caring whether the colony starves to death as a result.
2. Trying to feed a young princess (Dot) alive to his vicious lieutenant Thumper simply out of sadistic pleasure
3. Murdering 3 members of his own Grasshopper Gang after they point out they do not need the food, and Hopper is doing this simply to keep the ants in line.
4. Despite promising to not hurt the Ants after his demands have been met, he walks back on his bargain and plans to kill her, in order to take over the ant colony by force.
5. After Flik tries to reason with him, he has Thumper violently beat him to a pulp, and later tries to crush the hero to death with his foot.
6. Finally this is the most controversial moment and the main argument against Hopper being a CM, He has kept a promise to his mother while she was on her deathbed not to kill his brother Molt, however although it might seem redeeming at first, I personally feel that it is just a slight honerable trait for a certain time, like previous Admins have said before it does not really to mitagate Hopper's other actions, at the end of the film shortly before his demise he appears to get ready to break that promise and Kill Molt in a rage, having lost all sanity.
Above all Hopper is a very tough choice but if you would ask me I would say he just barely makes it. Complete Monsters can have a very slight sense of pragmatism or honor, even while being throughly vile or irredemible. I am not doing this to argue with anyone, I am just doing this to get it off my chest, thanks.Xmike920 (talk) 00:41, March 9, 2017 (UTC)Xmike920Xmike920 (talk) 00:41, March 9, 2017 (UTC)
Which one is he?
He was willing to give the ants another chance after they failed miserably...though he did make them double the amount of food to compensate. Pigletisbacon
Similarities with other villains
He has similarities with Kron from Dinosaur and Norvirus Raccoon.
Evan Opedal 01:55, February 3, 2017 (UTC)
In the personality section for Hopper, whoever created the page or worked on it forgot to mention that he's ruthless and violent, and cunning, and that he sees mercy and compassion as weaknesses, and uses fear to maintain control over his gang and the ant colony.
Hopper Can be Pure evil
No, as Hopper does have at least one redeeming trait: being honorable, which is clearly shown as he kept the promise he made on his mother's death bed that he wouldn't kill his brother, Molt. He says to Molt at one point in the film, “I swear! If I hadn't promised Mother on her death bed that I wouldn't kill you, I would have KILLED you!” He never killed Molt, and thus kept his promise he made. Misry6 17:19, June 25, 2018 (UTC)
Yes, but he never planned to redeem in his life.--Big Show spanks Stacy 12:33, June 27, 2018 (UTC)User:The Big Show 2