FANDOM


  • So, I have been contributing to the forum for a few years, I think. As such, there were some candidates that I actually ended up hating, or at the very least disliking. I don't regret proposing these examples, but of course, I didn't feel that they either weren't written well, or they were just hateable assholes.

    1) Chris Cleek: Yes, I know I brought him up several times already, but I really, really hated this character. I felt that he was poorly executed. Okay, so you have a seemingly affable county lawyer who turns out to be a perverted individual who kidnaps a feral woman and tortures her under the guise of civilizing her. I don't really like characters that are written as nice only to then have them turn out to be fifty shades of screwed up. Sure, it can work if executed well, but in the case of Cleek, no. That, and you're never given a believable explanation as to why Cleek is like this. I know I keep bringing her up, but I still think Ruth is better written, because you're actually given time to see her descend into madness, and she does have somewhat of a reason for her treatment of Meg, though it's inexcusable as I had explained before. Lastly, he leaves his own son to die at the hands of the Woman, and then trying to beg for his life.

    2) Witch Queen: I disliked her, because she has no character besides her wishing to commit genocide on the human race. The film that she appeared in was pretty bad as well. Heck, I forgot most of the plot of the film. Actually, she does have character, but it just mostly consists of "Kill All Humans."

    3) Andy Evans: This will hopefully be the last time that I mention him, but I just really hated him as a character. He was a sadistic asshole who took delight in terrorizing Melinda, and he even tried to rape her again out of spite because his reputation was destroyed. The fact that he was heavily indicated to be a serial rapist makes it even worse. However, unlike Cleek, it was already established that Evans had the tendency of trying to get girls to have sex with him, so the twist that he had raped Melinda at the party actually works. It also helps that Melinda was written as being traumatized by the incident.

    4) The Alice Killer: The Alice Killings is actually written more as a mystery story rather than a Creepypasta. Yes, I understand that most creepypastas are filled with mindless blood and gore for the sake of being edgy, but the Alice Killer is significant in that he's relatively tame in comparison to the other more well-known Creepypasta antagonists. However, I didn't feel as ensnared in the Alice Killer, because he hardly ever appears, except for a split second in which he appears with a moving garbage bag in his hand. Besides the fact that he's a nihilistic serial killer who thinks he's liberating people through death, I found him mostly uninteresting to read about.

    I'm sure that I had a few more, but I can't think of any at the top of my head. How about you?

      Loading editor
    • I've got a few bad villains and one proposal proper that I'm disappointed of...

      1. Josh (Megan Is Missing): Yeah, my first proposal, but with new views on torture porn as well as the fact that Megan is Missing was an absolutely terrible movie, I think I could have done a little better. Josh as a character really exists as nothing more than to hammer down a message in the most sickening ways possible.

      2. Kesslee: Tank Girl was also an abominable movie. Kesslee wasn't a good villain, either; he was a bland, generic corporate executive who I can't remember in the slightest. Malcolm McDowell was okay in the role, I guess, but I find myself comparing Kesslee to Sir August DeWynter. The 1998 Avengers was a sloppy movie as well, but at least Sean Connery was a ton of fun as Wynter, especially given how it's essentially a former Bond playing a Bond villain. Kesslee had none of Wynter's charm or ham and ultimately only dragged down Tank Girl further.

      3. Sedessa: Not much I can say about her except that she suffers from the same problems as Kesslee; she's bland, underdeveloped, and forgettable. She also has a hideous design.

      And as for the proposal proper that I regret... the Iron-Masked Marauder. I think people accept Pokemon candidates way too easily, and I think part of the reason is that people generally see Pokemon as a "lighter" franchise. This is ignoring the existence of things like Cipher, Lavender Town, the fact that nearly every major villain from the fourth generation onwards has been an Omnicidal Maniac, and the fact that there are no less than eight characters listed as Monsters. Pokemon's not as light-hearted as people take it for.

      I've long stopped seeing the Marauder as anything close to this trope - same deal with Dr. Yung. I admit I was extremely skepitcal that he'd be voted up at all, and it was more to prove something to a user on this wiki, but he was voted up without any pain and I think I basically just went from there. He's not someone I believe counts and I may or may not argue for his removal some time in the future.

        Loading editor
    • Remember, the anime series and the games have a different heinous standard; it's not that no one was ignoring the darkness of the original series, but I feel that thge Iron-Masked Marauder was voted up under the heinous standard for the anime series. So, I feel that you shouldn't be concerned.

      On one candidate I was disappointed on, I'd say that Satan from Touched by an Angel is mine. For one, I wasn't proposing him; I was asking the forum if anyone watched the show. But apparently, he got voted up anyway. Seriously, did anyone read before I went over his actions?

        Loading editor
    • Also, what do you do with some pages that while you personally don't think they qualify as CMs, yet they do at least technically meet all of the criteria?

        Loading editor
    • Keep in mind the heinous standard for the anime isn't exactly the lowest, either; it's still beholden to two omnicidal maniacs on its own. The Marauder still also has J, Yung, Giovanni, and Kodai to compete with heinousness-wise.

        Loading editor
    • That is true; I just feel that it isn't something to dwell upon.

        Loading editor
    • It's something I can't help.

        Loading editor
    • About the Iron-masked Marauder? I don't feel that you should get worked up on it is all; if you could figure out anything against him qualifying, then by all means you could explain your reasoning on the forum. What I mean is if there's any new evidence that can be used to disqualify him, like explaining how he competes with the other villains in the anime series, especially in regards to omnicidal maniacs, J, Kodai, etc.

        Loading editor
    • The Marauder has Mind Rape of many Pokémon on his rapsheet, severe child abuse (crushing Ash's finger, and then attempting to have the brainwashed Celebi kill Ash and Sammy), torture and the endangerment of several Pokémon by unleashing Celebi's power on a populated forest, putting several of the Pokémon in danger.

      He seems heinous enough to me.

        Loading editor
    • OK, so I will hopefully watch the 1989 theatrical version of The Phantom of the Opera qualifies. Usually, the Phantom is a tragic character with a deformity; in the 1989 interpretation of the character, however, the Phantom was a serial killer who had made a deal with the Devil which entailed that everyone would love his music. However, as the Devil pointed out, they wouldn't love him, so he disfigures his face. The Phantom's modus operandi is sewing the skin of his victims to his face to compensate for his disfigurement.

      Now, a few mitigating factors that I can see so far has to do with him getting his face disfigured by Satan; while you can argue that it is a legitimate Freudian excuse, it's made clear that Erik knew what he was getting himself into when he was about to make the deal. So, it comes off as being his own fault for his disfigurement. That, and it doesn't excuse him skinning his victims and then sewing their skin onto himself in the slightest. His relationship with Christine also seemed to be one of obsession; he even kidnaps her when he finds out that she was to be engaged.

      Overall, from what it sounds so far, this version of the Phantom is more evil and bloodthirsty than his usual incarnations. The film itself has little to nothing to do with the original book; rather, it was made to cash in on the slasher craze at the time.

        Loading editor
    • Right, then.

        Loading editor
    • Alright, I'm done with watching the film, and I had done the effort post.

        Loading editor
    • Voted. How was the film?

        Loading editor
    • Well, I liked Robert's performance as the Phantom as well as Jill Schoelen as Christine. The film obviously tries to cash in on the slasher trade, which was dying at the time; besides that, I did like the film, even though it had little to nothing to do with the original novel or theatrical adaptation.

        Loading editor
    • I see, then.

        Loading editor
    • Of course.

        Loading editor
    • So, I had forgotten to mention that there was one moment in which Erik cries a single tear upon seeing Christine's performance; while this would indicate some emotional response from Destler, this was later invalidated by him trying to rape Day out of anger of being disobeyed. How much does his freudian excuse hold water? While yes, you could say that he kills out of necessity, there are several murders in which he does either out of pleasure, or because people inconvenience him. That, and as I mentioned before, his obsession with Christine isn't mitigating.

        Loading editor
    • Freudian Excuse... don't think it holds up. The single tear scene means nothing if it's clear Destler doesn't actually care for Christine in a redeeming way.

        Loading editor
    • Alright. What I had forgotten about this scene was that shortly after this scene, Erik seduces a prostitute, and pays her to let him call her Christine. If anything, that scene from earlier only seemed to further Destler's obsession with Christine. While the scene does convey human emotion, this is nullified when he pays a prostitute into allowing him to call her Christine. That proves that Destler only views Christine as an object.

        Loading editor
    • You're not offended about this version of the Phantom possibly counting at this point? What I mean is, are you uncomfortable with this version getting voted up since the Phantom is typically portrayed as a tragic figure?

        Loading editor
    • Not at all. I heard the '89 version of the Phantom was supposed to be a lot more heinous than the others. I just thought there had been some prior discusssion and that's why he'd stayed off for that long, to be frank.

        Loading editor
    • I see; so, I had watched Batman v. Superman, and I could honestly say that it was okay. It wasn't good, it wasn't bad, just average at best. I felt that the plot for the film wasn't well-written, and there are a few things in the film that might require you to have an excessive knowledge of DC Comics to get. The film relies on action to move its plot along, but the action itself falls for the same mistake that Man of Steel did, and it leads to massive collateral damage, likely resulting in the deaths of billions of people. One in particular revolves a bombing at the Capitol, which results in the deaths of millions of people.

      The film was also dark for the sake of being dark. Batman probably gets the worst of it; not only does Batman kill criminals in this film, but he also brands them. Superman, in turn, is shown killing an African terrorist who was holding Lois (who is utterly useless in the film). Man of Steel was already polarizing in that it resorts to having Superman snap General Zod's neck, and I honestly don't like the darker and edgier Superman.

      Lex was portrayed by Jesse Eisenberg, and I felt that he didn't do Luthor justice. For one, Lex is depicted as the uppity, energetic owner of Lex Corps, who's out to kill Superman due to his personal dislike of supers (or something; I forgot what his motivation was). Lex was annoying, always in your face...he's more like Willy Wonka if Wonka owned Lex Corps. While he does have a few good moments, like with having Superman bend to his will when his mother was being held hostage, I just felt annoyed by him. Sure, you could say that he was behaving like that to mask his true nature, he's just doing it too well.

        Loading editor
    • Billions of people?

      So who exactly am I supposed to be rooting for, then?

      Well, you've confirmed my dread about the "darker and edgier" bullcrap, then. I'm not going to see it.

        Loading editor
    • I'll just say this : DC wants Superman to be loved again but are doing more to destroy him than all the critics combined, Batman can survive in dark and edgey scenarios because originally Batman was a pretty dark concept (as much as comics can ever be).

      Superman was always meant to be a bit silly but inspiring, the fact they are making him dark and anti-heroic shows how little they care for his character and his fan-base.. if Superman fans wanted a brutal anti-hero that was taken seriously they wouldn't be Superman fans.. they'd be Punisher fans or similar..

      if DC just accepted some people like silly superhero concepts (hence why Superman was popular in the past) over the gritty BS then maybe they'd not need to complain about not getting the sales they hoped for.

      DC has plenty of anti-heroes if they want dark films, no need to drag Superman and his ilk along.. they were never designed for the role DC is putting them in these days.

        Loading editor
    • Actually I got one part wrong; this Lex was actually the son of Lex Luthor, though that doesn't mean that he's likable.

        Loading editor
    • A final thing on the Phantom; the reason that Erik gave for skinning Joseph alive was that he nearly killed Christine with a falling sandbag; however, he also added that he blamed him for the incident. The other scene involves him murdering the opera critic for giving Christine a negative review on her role as Margeurite. Before this scene, Erik was sleeping with a prostitute, whom he paid her to let him call her Christine. Does his later killing of Harrison come off as hollow, considering the fact that he had no qualms with sleeping with prostitutes? Keep in mind, this was before he found out about her fiance.

        Loading editor
    • I'd think so.

        Loading editor
    • Also, have you ever seen the Coffin Joe films?

        Loading editor
    • I have not.

        Loading editor
    • I see; essentially, they're a trilogy of Brazilian horror films pertaining to the titular Coffin Joe, an undertaker whose main goal is to find the perfect wife to have a bloodline through. He resorts to violent acts in order to achieve this goal. So far, I am currently watching the first film in the trilogy: it is called At Midnight I'll Take Your Soul.

        Loading editor
    • Right, then.

        Loading editor
    • To describe Joe, or Ze do Caixo, he hates religion with a passion, viewing himself as stronger than the other characters in the village. He constantly disregards the institutional guidelines of the church; for example, he eats meat on Holy Friday, which is against the guidelines, among other things, but he also has a streak of being an incredibly violent person. For example, he worms himself into a poker game, and he cuts off a man's fingers with a broken wine bottle when the man refused to give him his money.

      As I mentioned, one of his main goals is to have a bloodline to continue his legacy. However, his wife was unable to have children, so he murders her by tying her up and then letting a venomous spider bite her. Once this is done, he plays the part as the mourning husband, and tries to make his friend Antonio's fiancee his perfect wife. He bludgeons Antonio, and then drowns him in the bathtub.

      As for any mitigating factors, there doesn't seem to be anything too major at this point. During the scene in which he cuts off the man's fingers with the wine bottle, he claims that he would pay off the man's doctor bills, but he says it in a way that suggests that he was joking, and that he was trying to put on the facade of being a good man. Another possible mitigating factor is that he stops a father from hitting his son, saying that he shouldn't because he was his bloodline. To me, it doesn't sound mitigating, because Joe only wants a son so that his legacy could go on. By the way that he talks to that man about his son, he seems to suggest that the only purpose for the son is to continue his father's bloodline. Thus, I don't know if this could be considered mitigating.

        Loading editor
    • Right. Sounds like an interesting candidate, thus far.

        Loading editor
    • I'm somewhat getting a Captain Vidal vibe from him.

        Loading editor
    • But what is your thoughts on the possible mitigating factors so far? Especially in regards to the last one, because it seems more that he thinks the only purpose for a son is to continue the legacy of the father.

        Loading editor
    • I don't really see them as mitigating. As you said, the latter only seems meant to continue to legacy of his father.

        Loading editor
    • Alright, so I had finished watching At Midnight, I'll Take Your Soul; so far, there aren't any major mitigating factors yet. However, the sequel This Night, I'll Possess Your Corpse, has another potential mitigating factor in the form of him saving a boy from getting hit by a motorcycle. Now, unlike the first film, which I passed him stopping the man from abusing his son as his firm belief in continuing a bloodline, I would say that that this was another example of him only viewing children as being an extension of the bloodline. However, I'll watch the rest of the film tomorrow to determine how valid this scene is.

        Loading editor
    • That sounds a little concerning.

        Loading editor
    • To be honest, I dropped him after watvhing that scene again.

        Loading editor
    • Is there any later scene in the movie that reveals it as hollow?

        Loading editor
    • Well, I'll watch the rest possibly tomorrow, but I don't know how it will be worked out to make it hollow. Frankly, Joe is probably one of the first candidates that I'm genuinely conflicted on. Sure, I had candidates like Evans or Destler that I was unsure on, but they either had the benefit of not having any scenes where they had legitimate mitigating factors, or they had potential humanizing moments that were undone towards the climax of the film.

      Joe, in this film at least, states that children are precious; while I would argue that it's because he views children as the continuation of a bloodline, I can't say that that's clearly the case with him rescuing the boy.

        Loading editor
    • Right, then.

      On a similar subject, the reason why I haven't proposed the Tokyo Tribe candidates is because I'm conflicted on them too. Skunk I think I've decided isn't a candidate and wasn't intended as one anyways, because while he's heinous enough in the long run, there are just too many scenes that I feel he's just not being taken seriously enough. Jadakins I'm still meaning to propose, though.

        Loading editor
    • I see.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, Jadakins might make the mark more.

      There were a few candidates that I did, at least, like, though, first there were a few that I was indifferent on.

      1) Jaapie Botha: Say that you had a childhood bully who made your life a living hell. Now say that that bully ascended to a position of power. That's Botha in a nutshell. He is a fanatic Afrikaner who despised PK for his English heritage, mostly due to an event known as the Boer War. Botha treated PK like crap while he was attending a boarding school on a daily basis, which culminates in him attempting to sacrifice him to Adolf Hitler. Later on, he becomes the right-hand man of Colonel Breyton, and leads a massacre as a means of killing PK amd Gideon. Now, I had already explained that the film is vastly different from the book that it was based on, most certainly in regards to the Apartheid. The book does mention the Apartheid, but it was never the focus; really, there are so many differences between both mediums, that it's best that I don't waste your time by mentioning all of them. Botha is a sadistic bastard who not only practically tortures PK for a majority of his childhood, but he also mocks PK over the death of his love interest, beats Gideon severely with a whip, leads an attack that kills several Africans, and even beats a boxing promoter to near death, and still desired to even when he had PK right where he wanted him. While I have my issues with the film, they're really just nitpicks; I'd recommend watching the film, as well as reading the original book, though there aren't any potential candidates.

      2) Nihilus: First things first, I'm not really religious; sure, I do go to church, but I'm starting to kind of lean towards the idea of questioning what I'm being taught. I never mention religion in my talks; honestly, it's one subject that I try to keep distant from myself, though it's not because I hate religion, it's just that I'm starting to question the legitamecy of religion. Now, before you ask, I still firmly believe that Nero is too inconsistent to be considered; sure, he has a few moments where he's truly heinous, like with ordering Ben's crucifixion and even attending it, but he's also a manchild with delusions of grandeur. Nihilus is your typical brutish Roman who thinks lowly on everyone else, and ultimately refuses repentance. I don't know, wouldn't it be more interesting if Nihilus repented and became a Christian? Or, better yet, what if he started to question Nero's supposed godhood, which makes him conflicted?

        Loading editor
    • For Botha, I might just end up watching the film eventually. What I've heard does intrigue me.

      As for Nihilus, I ended up watching a bit of The Story Keepers out of curiosity of Nihilus' role. I'll concede he is brutal enough to be a Monster, although the character itself I think falls pretty flat. Your problems with Nero are my problems with Skunk; they've got moments of genuine cruelty, but they're intermixed with moments of borderline silliness that ultimately makes them impossible to consistently take seriously. Compare Jadakins, who is never once played for any sort of laughs and is the most feared and despised character in the plot (even Buppa has his occasional moments of ineptitude despite his own massive cruelty) and ultimately I don't think I'm going to go ahead with proposing Skunk.

      On religion? All I can really say is that I'm a pretty straight atheist. I was raised to be skeptical from an early age and I've never once had any reason to question that.

        Loading editor
    • If by flat, you mean as in a flat character?

        Loading editor
    • That is correct.

        Loading editor
    • But, yeah, I'm mostly starting to question what I'm being taught, because there really aren't any outside sources to support the claims in the Bible. For example, King Herod was attributed with the Massacre of the Innocents, but it's peculiar that it's only mentioned in Matthew; or, there's also the fact that Jesus himself shares several similarities with other deities in myth.

      Another thing that I somewhat disagree with regards the LGBT community. For example, I find nothing wrong with same-sex marriage; I believe that they have the right to be married, but of course, the Bible cites homosexuality as being wrong. Here's the thing, though; the Bible was written by man. Sure, you could argue that it was divinely inspired, but it was still ultimately written by man. Who's to say that a few personal hatreds weren't applied to the Bible when it was first being penned? What's worse is that my dad was trying to guilt trip me into changing my mindset, by saying that it would badly effect my grandmother if she found out how I felt on the issue. And then you have someone like Kim Davis who's regarded as a hero to some, because she was standing by her religious beliefs. No, no, no, she is a homophobe who felt uncomfortable that her precious beliefs were being challenged. I'm tired of people using their religion to justify being prejudiced instead of thinking for themselves. That is all that I have to say on that matter.

        Loading editor
    • The other candidates that I was indifferent on were the pedophile teachers Yoshihito Kanamori & Nafumi Shintani from Higanbana No Saku Yoru Ni. As I had mentioned with Kanamori, he came at a time when the heinous standard wasn't too high, almost nonexistent. He performs supplementary lessons on Marie, as in he molests her and films it on a daily basis, and ultimately strangles her to death when she threatened to tell someone. Shintani is a prolific child molester who makes a habit out of torturing young boys, and then painting their tortured bodies, claiming that she loves the corruption of the innocent. She's essentially a Japanese version of Mark Jefferson. As for how many boys she had tortured, it's never explicitly clear, though what is known that she was doing this for a very long time (would she be a serial rapist if that's the case)?  Unlike Kanamori, she didn't purposefully intend on murdering Yuuki; she, of course, doesn't feel remorse for it. Rather, she considers Yuuki an idiot for not letting her have her way.

      As for whether or not I'd recommend the visual novel series, I'd say no. The series is dark, perhaps darker than When They Cry, and When the Seagulls Cry. For one, the Yokai eat the souls of people who were at the school at night; the way in which they hunt for souls is that they get their victim to kill themselves. However, it's never made explicitly clear how many people died at the hands of a Yokai. That, and the Yokai are depicted as possessing Blue and Orange Morality, meaning that they must eat souls to survive. In addition to this, there are a few instances of a Yokai befriending humans. For example, Higanbana does have somewhat of a good relationship with Marie (though she did say that she would've eaten her soul had she failed the test to become Mesomeso), she also befriended a blind boy at some point, and the reason as to why Renoir wanted to be the one to eat Shintani's soul was because he was offended that she didn't feel remorse for accidentally killing Yuuki. That, and Higanbana herself has done a few things that make her a very extreme anti-hero; I don't even want to start with what she did tyo a boy who made a hobby out of killing rabbits. Why doesn't the school do any background checks on these teachers is beyond me.

        Loading editor
    • Someone I proposed for cm and really hated was Carlo Ruzzi. What an abusive ass who stands out in a world full of murderers.

        Loading editor
    • Religion is just something that's never mattered to me period. I've never had any experiences that would make me question otherwise and my upbringing means I have no reason to believe in a higher power.

      For the pedophile teachers and background checks, it frank surprises me why villainous teachers like them and, say, Mark Jefferson and Yashiro Gaku exist in the first place with such dubious backgrounds and characters.

        Loading editor
    • That's true.

        Loading editor
    • For my candidates that I did like to an extent:

      1) Aunt Ruth Chandler: Mostly, this is due to Blanche Baker's portrayal of Ruth in the film. At first, Ruth was one of my least favorite proposals (mostly because I was still practicing with typing up effort posts, and I could've given a more in-depth explanation to her character), but I found her to be one of my favorites, especially when compared to Cleek. I mean, seriously, The Woman came out in 2006, while The Girl Next Door was published back in 1986, and yet I was unimpressed by Ketchum's more current book. Back to what I mentioned earlier, Baker does a very good job at playing an utterly despicable woman. One of the reasons as to why I disliked Cleek was because of the whole "nice guy turns out to be screwed up," cliche; with, Ruth, however, I actually did buy her descent into madness. I just thought that she was actually somewhat complex. While the film/book is about a young girl being tortured by her aunt and her children, it is also about David mourning over the fact that he didn't do anything to save Meg, and when he tried to do something, it was too late. After all, what could he do? He was a kid, who would've believed him? What's somewhat funny is that most of the readers actually hated David more than Ruth, citing him as not doing anything for Meg when she was still alive, to the point that you could argue that they were draco in leather pantsing Ruth.

      2) The Phantom: So, I was somewhat hesitant on proposing Erik, because I know that it sounds kind of ridiculous to think that a version of the Phantom could qualify for the trope. Would it be crazy to say that I decided to proposed 1989!Erik after watching the Nostalgia Critic review The Phantom of the Opera? Well, he actually didn't cover the 1989 horror film, but I digress. This Erik is less the Phantom and more Freddy Krueger in the way he behaves. He's charismatic, yet murderous, and he would stop at nothing to make Christine his. Now, as I mentioned there was the scene regarding him crying a single tear when he watches Christine perform his music, but this scene doesn't mean much, since he sleeps with a prostitute shortly after the performance, among other things. That scene could be interpreted any way; in this case, the single tear only seems to accentuate his obsession with the young woman. The film very obviously tries to cash in on the slasher craze, but despite that, I did actually enjoy watching it.

        Loading editor
    • Right. I'd have to say the proposals I'm most proud of are King Boo and Bill Cipher, and to a certain extent Canaletto as well.

        Loading editor
    • True, true. Anyway, I also noticed something called Rosenkreuzstilette UnOfficial AfterStory which cites Iris Sepperin as a Jerkass Woobie; is that canon to the original game?

        Loading editor
    • That's apparently been brought up dozens of time before and never resolved. Looking into it, I don't think it is canon. "Unofficial" in itself is a tip-off.

        Loading editor
    • I see; how opionated is it to say that a film has no point? Say that you have a film like Cannibal Holocaust, which actually criticizes human brutality, with the Human Centipede trilogy which exists only to incite shock value? Or say The Woman that is also about the dysfunctional nature of the Cleek family as well as Peggy's pregnancy besides the book being about Cleek kidnapping a feral woman and torturing her? When can you say that a film has enough of a point to it in order for a candidate to be considered?

        Loading editor
    • If the film actually has a genuine message to say, like Cannibal Holocaust or Megan is Missing? That's where we can say that the film is at least trying to be something other than shlock-shock. Granted, it might not work, but there's more effort being put into it rather than just torture for the sake of torture. Megan is Missing technically doesn't even enter torture porn territory until the very end, so there's an actual movie there before Josh takes center stage.

        Loading editor
    • personally here's how I see it, if a film has a story (however silly and/or ineffective) that is beyond just "torture and kill random people" it is not torture-porn.. even insanely gory stuff like Evil Dead (original) had characters and lore beyond just the gross stuff..

      stuff like Hostel, Human Centipede and the Tortured? they are made primarily to try and get to the torture / death as soon as possible and don't care about making remotely likeable / relatable characters and their villains are always 2-dimensional CM rip-offs that are designed just to be "pure evil" but lack the CM trait of actually having *some* motive (however twisted).


      signs of a torture-porn versus a "gore" movie:

      1) lack of real character development, main characters are always young and stupid - always portrayed as either unrealistically "nice" or utter dickbags.. their sole role in the film is to be butchered.

      2) absolute disregard for any moral message at all, will never have a remotely happy ending and be so absorbing in gore it leaves most people with a sour taste as evil is never punished and good exists just to be destroyed.. the villain ALWAYS wins

      3) said villain(s) have no redeeming values whatsoever, lack any real motive and exist purely to enact the often sexualized fantasies of the film writers - they are often seen as CMs but can not really count because the writers make them so utterly vile they may as well be "made of evil" since they literally exist (as stated before) to shock the audience.

      4) almost always tries to go waaaaaaaaaaaaaay too far into exploitation territory, unlike true exploitation it isn't done to challenge society or norms it is just done to seem "edgey" : expect pedophilia, necrophilia, bestiality, "would kill a child" and sadomaschoism as norm.. just to make the media complain and thus gain attention (like a shock troll online)

        Loading editor
    • Okay, so I'm really, really thinking of dropping Joe even though I still have a few hours of the movie to go. In regards to the scene that I mentioned earlier of him rescuing the boy from nearly getting killed in a motorcycle collision, not only that, but he also comforted the boy by playing a little music box. As for whether or not this is made hollow, it does reignite his obsession with trying to find the perfect wife to have the perfect bloodline through, so after this, he kidnaps six women and puts them through sadistic trials; the one who endures all of the trials is to become his potential wife. He places tarantulas into their bedroom, and this frightens the women, barring Marcia. The other women are then killed through the use of venomous snakes, and Marcia helplessly watches as Joe attempts to have sex with her.  And then he discovers that one of the women that he had murdered was pregnant (though, of course not with his child), and he's horrified that he had killed a child, though he later tries to convince himself that what he's doing isn't wrong.

      Thus far, there's no indication of a freudian excuse, though I did read on the Coffin Joe Wiki saying that he was bullied by his peers because his parents had owned a funeral home, and he had fallen in love with a childhood friend, and was wanting to marry her, but unfortunately he was sent to fight in a war. When she didn't hear back from him due to the letters never being sent to her, she marries the mayor due to the difficulties of that time. When Joe returned to Sara, he discovered her with the mayor, and he kills them both. He isn't found guilty  for the crime, as it was believed to be the result of shell shock, but he went from being a sweet, kindhearted man, to becoming bitter, and gaining a hatred for religion. Of course, does this justify the mass murders, rapes, and random acts of violence that he commits on the Brazilian villagers?

      I still don't know what his true feeling on children is; while he seems to have a soft spot for children, even to the point of putting his life in harm's way to save a child from near death, he continually states that his bloodline will be superior to all others, meaning that his child would be the perfect child. He also states that children are precious, but he hates that they would grow up into being as he put it "stupid fanatics." That, and there's the fact that he was horrified about accidentally killing a child, though he seems to get over it quickly by saying that he wasn't at fault (I am at 41:02 on the video at the moment; it's seriously a long movie).

      As for any other possible mitigating factors, there aren't any to major, sans the two I mentioned. He has a henchman this time around in Bruno, a disfigured, hunchbacked man. He shows no affection for Bruno, though there was one point in the film that he offers one of the women to Bruno (for sexual purposes, of course) when he remembered that his birthday was coming up. However, this isn't portrayed as a redeeming factor; pretty much, Joe says "Oh, it's your birthday, right, Bruno?" and he lets him choose one of the women to have relations with. Bruno accidentally ends up snapping the woman's neck.

      Overall, I'm really, really thinking of just dropping Joe as much as I hate to say that. Should I even bother trying to watch the final film?

        Loading editor
    • Eh... To be honest, I'd drop him.

        Loading editor
    • That sucks; I literally had taken notes on him.

        Loading editor
    • That's happened to me with a few candidates, Dr. Greed and Buppa the most major of them.

        Loading editor
    • Of course; it's not all too bad, though. As for any other antagonists from the series, there was that witch in the third film, but she is eclipsed by Joe, who at that point had dozens of deaths on his hands as well as torture and raping of women. Oh, and a little "wonderful" fact is that the bastard actually succeeds in his goals as he had gotten a few women pregnant before getting killed. Happy ending right there.

        Loading editor
    • How pleasant.

        Loading editor
    • OK, so I have a few problems with Expanded Universe!Luthor, mostly because of the massive collatoral damage that had occurred in Man of Steel; in Batman v. Superman, Lex stages a bombing in the Capitol killing millions, and then creates Doomsday as an attempt of having it kill Superman. However, I can't say that he didn't know that Doomsday could potentially kill other people, as he did remember the collateral damage that occurred in the previous film, so he's certainly not stupid. However, it's debatable on whether or not he merely crosses the MEH, though I would say that threatening to have Martha Kent be burned alive and ultimately creating Doomsday catapults him a few tiers above the MEH; it's just that Zod killed more people when he tried to recreate Krypton on Earth, and there is the chance of Darkseid himself coming at some point by judging Luthor's words.

      There's also the fact that he also has Batman to compete with; to be honest, I think that Batman does more than him. Not only does he kill criminals, but he also has the habit of branding them with his bat-symbol, which marks them for death if they were to be sent to prison. Therefore, Batman also indirectly kills criminals by branding them. I'm pretty certain that he had been doing this for years.

      Luthor does have somewhat of a freudian excuse in the form of his father being abusive towards him, but that's not enough to justify anything he does. In addition to this, he is really, really annoying. He is comedic, but he does aslo have a few moments where he is serious, an example being when he held Mrs. Kent hostage, and when he had Superman under his thumb. If anything, he might be a "wait and see case."

        Loading editor
    • I've little opinion on Luthor since I haven't and will not see the movie he's in. His excuse doesn't hold any water. It's a matter of heinousness; he doesn't qualify at the moment, but let's wait and see, as you said. I am, however, quite interested to see if Darkseid might be a contender in the far future.

        Loading editor
    • Possibly, given that Darkseid had been consistently depicted as a monster. Hopefully, they won't fuck up his character.

        Loading editor
    • Aye to that.

        Loading editor
    • Can consistency be bad? What I mean is, that you have villains like the Joker for example who's consistently portrayed as a CM, well, except for a few cases, so why would it be absurd to say that any version of Luthor could potentially count? Is it because it would "destroy" his character? I kind of noticed this when I proposed 1989!Erik; while I did get mostly upvotes regarding him, there was one downvote that really didn't give an explanation as to why the user had downvoted him. And then after that, they were acting hesitant as to thinking that any version of the Phantom could qualify. I understand that the Phantom of the Opera is consistently played as a sympathetic figure, but I don't understand why having this one deviation would send a few over the edge. Especially since this interpretation of the Phantom is vastly different from the other incarnations.

      Also, does Bellwether have a mental illness? I would watch the film for myself, but I don't want to anymore.

        Loading editor
    • Consistency for a character as long-running and iconic, as, say, the Phantom... A change of the character of that degree will always turn some heads. We can't always have a character remain 100% the same, though, if you ask me.

      I wouldn't say so. She's more just bigoted and ambitious.

        Loading editor
    • I see; hype was what killed the film for me. On the subject of talking animals, does Dag really qualify? I know that I proposed him once, but I'm starting to have second thoughts on him.

        Loading editor
    • I'd say he does. I don't really see where the "doing this for food" arguments come from; he clearly gets a kick out of threatening and killing those who don't deserve it, he's a needlessly sadistic asshole, and his actions are heinous enough.

        Loading editor
    • True, but it's a movie that seems a little too ridiculous to take seriously.

        Loading editor
    • ACW said it best; we have a candidate from Rainbow Brite. He's a keeper.

        Loading editor
    • Have you ever watched The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor? Does the Dragon Emperor qualify there? I hadn't personally watched The Mummy films myself, so I'm uncertain on this.

        Loading editor
    • I have, but it's been years and I don't recall the Emperor counting.

        Loading editor
    • I see; are all CMs sociopaths, or is being a sociopath not enough, since they have to be heinous by the standards of the story as well?

        Loading editor
    • I think for the most general use of the term, yes, being a CM requires being a socio, or more correctly a psychopath.

        Loading editor
    • Well, you're either born a psychopath, or you become one through a traumatic experience. But, anyway, why is it that being a sociopath or a serial killer don't automatically guarantee that the villain is a CM; is it, because they still need to meet the heinous standard of the work? Does the CM trope overlap with the Sociopath one? Most sociopaths are played for sympathy, like Flowey, for example. He was originally Asriel, and he was brought back without the use of a soul, meaning that he literally can't feel love.

        Loading editor
    • Being devoid of all empathy usually clears the "no redeeming qualities" bit, but there are still other potentially mitigating factors that could discount a sociopath that don't fall under "altruistic qualities." CM and Sociopath do have some overlap but being a sociopath is not a guarantee of being a CM.

        Loading editor
    • I see; so, now I am having second thoughts regarding Film!Ruth. She does do a few things for her children that seem to suggest that she cares for them like taking them to the carnival, giving them beer and cigarettes, and the big one being that she whips Susan as to punish Meg for slapping one of her sons. However, the only problem is that she manipulates her children through the later parts of the film, treating them like henchmen more than anything else, and then she doesn't let Donny have sex with the defenseless Meg, claiming that it was incest never mind the fact that she allowed one of her other sons to have a go with her. Is it still correct to say that she doesn't love her children? The book version of her has a more clear opinion on her sons (namely that they reminded her of her deadbeat husband), but does Film!Ruth still qualify? Considering how she treats her children later, does that mean that she either stopped loving them, or did she ever did? After all, she wasn't with her kids when she took them to the carnival, and they are scared of her as evidenced by them talking on taking a look at Meg who was still tied up at the time. Or am I just overanalyzing things?

      Also, why is it that several people Draco in Leather Pants her, and demonize David? Sure, she still has her fair share of haters, but many readers had clung onto the idea that Ruth was a tragic figure, because of her slowly losing her mind.

        Loading editor
    • Also, how much are Alan Yates' Crew played for tragedy? I was talking with EvilLap regarding them.

        Loading editor
    • Not much. The only one with any real redeeming qualities, I'd think, is Faye; the rest are about as assholish as Yates and their deaths are quite karmic.

        Loading editor
    • I see.

        Loading editor
    • I'm not overthinking on some of my previous proposals, am I?

        Loading editor
    • You're entitled to think about them as much as you want.

        Loading editor
    • I see: what was your take on those moments that I mentioned with Film!Ruth?

        Loading editor
    • I'm quite sure she's just a manipulative bitch. She was already judged to not love them a while back, wasn't she?

        Loading editor
    • Yes.

        Loading editor
    • Wait, so if Faye's somewhat sympathetic, what is the reason? I hadn't actually watched Cannibal Holocaust (don't plan to); I just assumed that none of the crewmembers were tragic, because they willingly chose to assist Yates in his crazy scheme, they committed rape and murder on the natives as well as slaughtered several animals, etc. I just felt that they were almost getting the "Draco in Leather Pants" treatment which is pushing it. I mean Yates had his fair share of the DILP treatment as did Stegman on this very site (I would say that most of the users were trying to troll, albeit badly, but they seemed to legitimately think that those two could do no wrong). I just assumed that they were not to be pitied once the natives started to massacre them, but I guess that's just me.

      I was also noticing your Earth Negative Reference sheet; what is it about? I never actually asked what you were writing, though I was very curious.

        Loading editor
    • Faye's actually got some level of a conscience. She expresses some level in disgust at what the filmmakers are doing and doesn't take direct part in some of their more horrible acts. Ultimately, though, she's still a part of it, and that's what leads to the cannibals killing her. She's just a lot less worse for actually showing some moral standard. Still an awful human being for letting it happen, but still.

      As for the Earth Negavtive sheet, that's basically what I'm intending as a sort of reference sheet for a planned series of mine (the first book, The City of Never, is in a complete first draft) which I call the "Earth Negative" universe. It's essentially a sort of alternate Earth with several elements of Lovecraftian fiction mixed in.

        Loading editor
    • I see; very interesting.

        Loading editor
    • What does your company take me for.

        Loading editor
    • @Austin: I've got a few villains I've specifically written to be Complete Monsters (and other characters, naturally) if you're ever interested in hearing about them or other parts of the universe.

      @Silent: Pardon?

        Loading editor
    • Sure, I'd love to.

        Loading editor
    • Right. Now, or a later time?

        Loading editor
    • I don't mind you discussing them now.

        Loading editor
    • Right. I suppose I’ll go a little bit into the context of the universe first. My apologies for the wall of text; there’s a lot to talk about and you’re free to read this at your own pace.

      Earth Negative is an alternate version of Earth created as an experiment by the malicious god Ix Nagoth. It originated as a planet beholden to several races that existed without any form of strife or conflict. The most prominent of these races was the Seers, a race of genderless, chalk-white humanoids defined by their ability to cast avatars of themselves into mind-space (the mental plane) from real-space (the physical space) by connecting their minds to the Remeditary (which is a sort of semi-plane that exists as a link between real-space and mind-space). Earth Negative was protected by the god-like Daydreamers, until one of them decided to create a series of artificial Seers to better harness the powers of the Remeditary. One of the artificial Seers ended up too powerful, and as a result created an imbalance in the Remeditary which spread a wave of destruction through both real-space and mind-space, wiping out everything on Earth Negative. Devastated, the Daydreamers left and regressed the catastrophic artificial Seer to their weakest form.

      Eventually, from that Seer’s proto-form, life essentially started anew from microscopic cells that birthed from the Seer and evolved into life as we know it today. Humans are the imperfect descendants of the Seers in that sense; they’re physically alike and have the requisite intelligence but they lack their connection with the Remeditary and they know conflict that was otherwise strange to the Seers. Some humans, however, have small parts of the Seer within them. If that part is awakened (either by another Seer or a remaining artifact of the Seers) they’ll be able to tap into the Remeditary and essentially become half-Seers. Earth Negative is different from Earth in many small but noticeable ways; some events in history turned out much differently (the events surrounding Martin Luther King Jr’s assassination were much, much different, for starters), some places that don’t exist in reality exist there (Onolo and St. Howard’s, respectively a Mexican island village and a small Canadian town), and some individuals were never born to begin with. The most prominent difference is that, as it was created by outerworldly forces and is influenced by the Remeditary (probably one of the strongest forces in my extended canon), Earth Negative is compatible with outer-dimensional energies and other worlds entirely. The most prominent of these other worlds is the City, an eldritch world of beings of which the world has never seen before, but it also draws something far, far worse; the Dark Divinities, a race of incomprehensible and often malicious gods who take interest in Earth Negative due to the odd energies there. Think the Great Old Ones and the Outer Gods, respectively.

      For the two villains… the main antagonist of the universe at large is Ix Nagoth, but the most recurring threat is a woman known as Lucia. Lucia’s an ex-Daydreamer who fell from her divine status before life was wiped out on Earth Negative the first time around, and following that, she converted to the worship of a sealed Dark Divinity known as Draynak (whom I’ve been bouncing back and forth on whether or not it’s a CM itself) and sought to free it so that it would be capable of enslaving all existence – known in-universe as the Cosma (and as the Teraverse in the extended canon) – to its will. Lucia’s been active in both the City and Earth Negative for thousands of years, forming the beings of the City into a cult by introducing them to human ideals and having them draw a vast outer-dimensional being known simply as “It” to them by convincing them that if they do so, they’ll reach nirvana. On Earth Negative, she uses various avatars (another parallel to the Cthulhu Mythos; she’s the stand-in for Nyarlathotep) to manipulate humans and find a host for Draynak, taking potential candidates and putting them through horrendous physical, mental, and sexual torture to prepare their bodies. Until The City of Never, none of this works and Lucia’s left with hundreds of candidates who die due to what she does to them. Her ultimate goal is to have Draynak freed, entered into a host body, and allow it to assimilate “It” so it can start devouring even stronger beings until it eventually becomes the strongest being in reality.

      Lucia gets up to a lot of nasty stuff in the first two stories (Nevermore and The City of Never) alone. For most of her role, she’s disguised as “the Shadows’ Consultant.” She convinces the City to invade Earth and gruesomely butcher the residents of St. Howard’s and later Onolo to provide opportunities for her to search those villages for candidates, then has the identity of any of those who survived completely erased; convinces a man named Hansel Brighterson to willingly go into the City, then stranding him in there for seven years and nearly driving him insane as a result; torments the Vade family for hundreds of years, forcing them to pay tribute to her via a book known as the Memorycatcher, before she takes the granddaughter of the current holder of the Memorycatcher (Christian Vade) into the City as a candidate; and has full knowledge that drawing It into the City means drawing it through Earth first, which will obliterate both the City and Earth’s dimension and all within.

      In the plot proper, she goes on a killing spree to amuse herself, willingly attempts to kill (and in the case of Zyra Nyson, the thirteen-year old protagonist of Nevermore and in actuality the artificial Seer that wiped out the world so long ago, mentally traumatize and attempt to rape) children several times over, and kills a lot of named characters in the series (and not in pretty ways, either; she prefers simply jamming knives into people but she scores two characters by ripping them in half). Probably her worst atrocity is when she actually gets her hands on a working candidate (Crystal Hopper, who’s the daughter of The City of Never’s protagonist Daniel) and her infant brother Mark. Lucia puts them both through horrible, horrible torture in the form of their father to break them, mutates and abominates their bodies, and eventually has a series of eldritch leeches sexually penetrate Crystal, burrow into her, and impregnate her with something that will leave her as compatible for Draynak. When Mark turns out to be a failure, Lucia abominates him into a twisted, hulking monstrosity that endures ungodly pain every moment of its existence. Daniel is later forced to put Mark down with a shotgun blast, and Lucia proceeds to stoically mock Daniel about what she’s done to his children before forcing him to painfully link to the Remeditary under the threat of his other daughter's life, completely breaking him as a result. She’s an absolute bitch, to put things mildly.

      The other main Monster in Earth Negative is a man known as Welter Faye. Now, while Lucia’s a cold-hearted bitch with zero likable traits whatsoever, Faye’s the character I like to have a lot of fun with. He’s a despicable bastard, but he’s more or less the Joker in this regard. He’s the former pupil of crime lord Malcolm Graves, who’s the head of the Order of Inverse, which is a criminal empire spreading countries that’s responsible for just about every crime in the book, a lot of which Faye oversees.

      On his own time, Faye mutated a disease into a flesh-eating virus which he then released onto an African village; was responsible for shooting up the wedding of gay activist Theodore Andrews, and then resurrecting him as an undead wight; leading the Cold Hive experiment, which was taking an Engineer (which isn’t a TF2 class, despite the name, but rather a member of a race of docile, ape-like beings which live in seclusion, away from humanity’s eyes) and led torturous experiments on it until it broke and went savage; and permitted what became known as the Izowa Disaster in his youth, which was the four-day massacre of over 3,000 African-Americans in the wake of Martin Luther King Jr.’s death. In The City of Never, Faye was one of many people who ultimately had their identity erased following the attack on St. Howard’s, leading him to become obsessed with the City. He spends most of his time as a research assistant to Christian Vade, but when the City attacks, Faye’s quick to desert and try to take advantage of the situation, tying up a dozen or so people and trying to have them killed by the City’s creatures. That fails, and Faye ultimately ends up in a circumstance where he’s beholding the unsealing of Draynak. Faye instantly pledges himself to it and humbly suggests that it not merely conquer existence, but shape the whole of the Cosma into a singularity of chaos and anarchy while leaving him alive to carry it out.

      Faye’s nasty, but he’s also a very energetic man. Most of what he does he does with a constant smile, giggles, and a temperament about as excitable as that of a kid on Christmas. He’s personable with everyone he meets and he holds no resent for anyone, always remaining friendly, beaming, and giddy no matter what the circumstance. The problem is that Faye doesn’t actually care about anyone. He’d give a lollipop to a child, then jam a knife into their neck to see the transition from joy to pain. He’s a man of obsession and random whims who seeks nothing less than “the ultimate chaos.” But he’s a right loony bastard, and he’s a lot of fun to write because more often than not his dialogue’s exuberant and comical.

        Loading editor
    • I should also mention the two have pages on VFW; Lucia's is mostly incomplete but Faye's is up to date.

        Loading editor
    • Ah; so that's why Faye sounded so familiar.

        Loading editor
    • Quite. I didn't actually realize him and Holocaust's character shared a name until recently.

        Loading editor
    • I see; all in all, very interesting.

        Loading editor
    • Thank you. Any specific comments?

        Loading editor
    • Well, how long were you working on this project?

        Loading editor
    • I started it in November of 2014. The initial thing was The City of Never, and I wrote that as I went along. As the mythology developed, so did the rest of the universe, and I later retroactively added a few prior products to the eventual thing. I finished the first draft of The City of Never on the second-to-last day of last March.

        Loading editor
    • I see.

        Loading editor
    • OK, I had seen the remake of Disney's The Jungle Book. Shere Khan is definitely more evil in this version than in the original film, though I don't know if he catapults into Complete Monsterdom. For one, Shere Khan murders Mowgli's father years before the start of the film, and he murders Akela, the chief of the wolf pack, when he learned that Mowgli was on his way to the human village. He then establishes himself as the illegitimate leader of the pack, thus becoming even more hellbent on killing Mowgli. He also mocks Mowgli about him murdering his father, saying that he wasn't going to let Mowgli grow up, as well as rubbing it in his face about how he murdered Akela. That, and he tried to turn Raksha's (a female Indian wolf who is the adoptive mother of Mowgli) pups against her by trying to indoctrinate them into thinking that Mowgli was evil, and that their mother was a fool for raising him as her own. That, and he subtly hints that he would kill her children if she ever tried to revolt, as evidenced by him placing his paw in front of one of her pups, before letting it leave.

      Now, as for the heinous standard, Khan sets it. No other animal expresses as much hatred towards humans like he does. The other antagonists don't come near to the atrocities that Khan had performed. Kaa (who's a female in this version) only tries to eat Mowgli like her cartoon counterpart (though she's far from comedic), and King Louie (who is a Gigantopithecus, as well as being more threatening than humorous) who is the absolute ruler over the monkeys with aspirations for acquiring the "red flower" so that he could use it to conquer the jungle. He comes off more as being a jungle crime lord. As for a freudian excuse, Khan received a blind eye when he tried to kill Mowgli's father, thus explaining why he's terrified of fire, or as they put it, the red flower. However, Mowgli's father only burned Shere Khan's face in order to defend himself and his son. Really, Shere Khan just comes out of nowhere, only to find himself on the receiving end of a torch. Really, there's no one to blame but Khan himself. While he tries to say that he wants to kill Mowgli, stating that it's for the good of the jungle, it's made clear that he's simply power hungry, as evidenced by him immediately making himself the ruler of the wolves after murdering Akela. Actually, he constantly violates the jungle law, knowing that no one would even consider stopping him out of fear. He also kills animals out of fun and/or sport, than simply for food. In addition to this, he is sadistic. Not only does he sadistically mocks Mowgli on the deaths of his father and Akela by his hands, but he relishes in the idea of devouring Mowgli; not just kill him, he wants to destroy him. While I was watching the film, I was actually reminded a great bit by Koba. Pretty much, 2016!Shere Khan is Disney's answer to Koba.

      There was some interpretation on Khan saying that he most likely hates humans considering how endangered tigers were in India, but this is more a suggestion as to why he is an absolute xenophobe than anything else. There isn't anything in the film to suggest that this interpretation is true.

        Loading editor
    • I'm going to wait until a little later to read that, as I'll be seeing the movie... tomorrow, perhaps. I'll reply when I'm ready.

        Loading editor
    • Oh, I apologize; anyway, Clown-Face was going to be the one to promise him, I was just giving my points.

        Loading editor
    • Right. I've seen the movie, and I'm doubtful Khan counts. He's a nasty contender but the worst thing he does is threaten to put everyone who goes against him "under his teeth." The problem is, Khan doesn't act on that threat even when he has a good chance and decides to simply go for Mowgli and only attacks people who attacks him. Without that, he's left with two murders, a few more attempted ones, and some threats. That stuff about him "killing for fun" is offscreen villainy. I can see someone flagging him as a Monster but I personally believe he falls a little short of baseline heinousness.

        Loading editor
    • Of course; I was explaining that to Clown-Face while we were going over the film in a message.

        Loading editor
    • Right. Does he think Khan counts?

        Loading editor
    • What? I'm not talking him out of doing the effort post on 2016!Khan, I was mentioning the few factors that might disqualify him.

        Loading editor
    • I never said you were. I'm asking if Clown-Face thinks Khan counts, because I believe he went forwards with Kai's effortpost even believing he didn't count.

        Loading editor
    • Well, he's actually neutral regarding Khan, much like when he proposed Bellwether; pretty much, he was doing the effort post because SOMEONE would probably try to propose him later.

        Loading editor
    • How is the movie overall

        Loading editor
    • For a remake, it was surprisingly good. The remake provides new material, and it has several great action scenes. However, I felt that the songs were unnecessary, mostly due to them not being built up. additionally, I felt that the actors were unfit with performing the songs, though that's a minor nitpick.

        Loading editor
    • I felt it was quite good. It reinvigorated the original story in a way that's quite engaging. I personally loved the songs, the visuals were fantastic, and I thought the voice actors (as well as the child actor who played Mowgli) were excellent. With that said, I will admit I'm not really a fan of Baloo's characterization, the plot was somewhat predictable, and some of the characters could have used more depth.

        Loading editor
    • I'm actually Clown-Face on TV Tropes.

      Anyways, I think the movie is very good, and I also think Mowgli and Shere Khan are better in this new version, as well. Mowgli seemed more proactive and Shere Khan had more screen-time to establish a personality.

        Loading editor
    • I felt that Baloo was a prick in the film, to be honest. Sure, he does end up becoming a good friend, but that doesn't excuse lying to Mowgli about hibernating, when he knew full well that bears do not hibernate in the jungle. I just honestly thought the songs were horrible, especially Louie's song. I just think that they only added the songs so as to remind people of the nostalgia that they had for the original film.

      What I did like, however, was that they didn't end the film with Mowgli seeing some random Indian girl at the man village and then going to live with her. I mean, I just thought that it was a little forced; it was established that Mowgli wanted to stay in the jungle, but all that it takes to sway him is to show him a pretty girl. I am aware that Disney films back then tended to believe in love at first sight, but I do not believe that bullcrap.

        Loading editor
    • I honestly felt way too much that Baloo was... well, taking advantage of Mowgli. Bagheera sums it up when he calls him a con artist. You could easily say that he warmed up to him genuinely at some point but that character development was... pretty much entirely offscreen. Maybe it could have been remedied if Baloo was introduced earlier in the film instead of halfway through, and Baloo's never called out on lying to Mowgli.

      As for the songs... I'll respectfully disagree, especially on Louie's song. It's not playing on my nostalgia because I have no nostalgic memories of it; I've only ever seen chunks of the original film. Never in full.

        Loading editor
    • Let's just agree to disagree.

        Loading editor
    • Sounds good.

        Loading editor
    • I knew casting walken was a bad idea.

        Loading editor
    • Anyway, I had been reading a bit on Faye, and I have to say that he's a very interesting villain.

        Loading editor
    • I'll have to thank you for that. Personally, I consider him among my better villains in that his motivation stems a little outside of just "ambition."

        Loading editor
    • I see.

        Loading editor
    • I'll probably have to start creating a few more pages, anyhow; there are numerous characters of mine I'd like to write out in detail.

        Loading editor
    • Of course.

        Loading editor
    • On a somewhat similar note, should we divide Shou Tucker, meaning have his manga incarnation be its own article?

        Loading editor
    • Eh... To be fair, I wouldn't bother. 2003!Tucker and manga/Brotherhood!Tucker are different but not radically enough to warrant a split.

        Loading editor
    • Very well; I personally am somewhat split on Tucker; while mutating his own family members into a chimera is heinous, there seemed to be other antagonists that did worse in the series. The reason as to why I hadn't commented on him was because I had never watched the FMA series, mostly out of disinterest and little time.

      I don't know; I just see this as a MEH crossing, and that's usually not enough to make the antagonist a CM. How severe does a MEH have to be in order to determine if that makes the villain heinous by the standards of the story? I mean, there's Steele (who I somewhat didn't think qualified; I just provided the write up) who sabotaged his team, despite having the knowledge that several children would die if the medicine wasn't delivered in time. Besides that, he just comes off as your typical douchebag. But then you have someone like Tarkin who destroys Alderaan (he might've done some other things, but I'm not too savvy on the franchise), and Charles Cooper (a villain from a FNAF fanfic that I proposed) who murdered the five children, and then fixed them into the unfinished animatronics, all for greed. What makes them crossing the MEH extremely heinous, whereas someone like Steele, or Tucker who cross the MEH come off as irredeemable but not quite the way to CM?

        Loading editor
    • That, and I decided to add a few of my antagonists to the Villains Fanon Wiki.

        Loading editor
    • I'm... eh, split on Tucker. What he does is ungodly vile, I'll give him that, and it's a crime unique to the setting, but he's got little else on his hands and I'm still not sure if he measures up to the truly heinous.

      I'll check them out.

        Loading editor
    • Does it depend on the work as to how a MEH crossing is severe enough to make the villain a monster? What I mean is, you have Cooper who crossed it by murdering children, and then using them to complete his animatronics. The only plus is that he is actually the only villainous character in the fanfic. The boss is somewhat corrupt, in that he was more concerned about making money than the fact that there were children missing in his restaurant, but he doesn't do anything villainous. Does having other antagonists in a work determine how severe the MEH is? Like Tucker, his crime is unique, but you have other antagonists who had started war, or have the same resources as he does, and they do more with them.

        Loading editor
    • I'd say that yes, the setting of the work and the heinous standard matters because the competition will always be different. Cooper easily counts because his single crossing sets the standard. If one were to believe Steele counts, it's a similar deal with him because he's by and large the only active major villain in Balto. With a larger setting like FMA, it becomes harder to count with a single crossing given the abundance of villains and the wide variety of atrocities being committed. Point is, the more villains there are in a setting and the crueler they all are, it becomes harder and harder to bypass the standard set with a single act. That single act will have be A. unique to the setting and B. nasty even by the standards of the other villains. One could still convincingly argue Tucker fits these guidelines, and that's why I've gone from believing he doesn't count to being neutral over his qualification.

        Loading editor
    • I see.

        Loading editor
    • Also, I apologize if I interrupted with one of your previous threads with Love Robin.

        Loading editor
    • Not at all.

        Loading editor
    • Oh, okay. Why isn't it bad that I interrupted, though?

        Loading editor
    • Keep in mind that the articles that I had typed up on the fanon wiki, aren't complete as of yet. But there were some that I was iffy on them being CMs.

        Loading editor
    • I've read through them; they're interesting, thus far. Who are the villains you're concerned about being Monsters?

      As for it not being bad you interrupted? It wasn't really much of an interruption period. I'd like more than one admin to talk to Love Robin as well; she's got great ideas for this wiki and I'm not quite sure I can be much the only input to them. I'm quite considering promoting her to become an admin herself, actually; controversy or no she's more than earned it at this point.

        Loading editor
    • I see; she does have some great ideas, like with the Manual style, but I wasn't agreeing with her in regards to fan interpretations/Complete Monster, where's there little to no room for alternative interpretation (I mean, for Bill, there was the idea that he was wanting to merge the Nightmare Realm with the human realm so that he could have a better place for him and his fellow monsters. However in the actual show, you learn that Bill put his own dimension through an apocalyptic event, and only wants to use the Earth as a new playground). People who debate on whether a villain is a CM or not usually ignore the mitigating factors that the villain has. If there's an article with a category that contradicts what a CM is, then it shouldn't be added. Pretty much if there's nothing in the show to support their interpretation of the villain, then it can not be used. I'm just wondering if the whole ?Manual Style" would actually be helpful; it just seems like a personal preference than anything else.

      That, and I felt that having Word of God for the articles was really pushing it, at least for me. Again, I have nothing against her; if you feel that she should be an admin that would be fine by me, though I'm somewhat hesitant on that. I apologize for not being too willing to have another admin, since besides you and myself, there's Jester, Dragoon, Pendragon (though he seldomly comes to visit every now and then), Misery (haven't seen her in a while), etc. I'm afraid that it might get a little saturated, with all of the admins on board. That, and of course I learned my lesson in regards to making Scottish-Terrier an admin without informing anyone else.

      As for those concerns pertaining to my antagonists, I don't necessarily have doubts regarding some of them as monsters. Schwarze, despite being a princess and having everything handed to her, saw torture as an outlet for her boredom (the reason as to why her sister didn't execute her was because of the whole "blood" concept), whereas Uriel was simply a hedonistic man who longed to turn the world on its head. With Savage, he doesn't exactly have a freudian excuse. He thought that his parents loved his sister more than himself, though that's proven as incorrect, and he only became jealous of Eve, mostly because she was more powerful than him, and because she was next in line to become queen. I guess you can argue that he has somewhat of a freudian excuse, but it doesn't really justify him becoming a satanic-like figure (who actually takes the names Satan and Lucifer; in this world, he created evil as a human concept).

      Dennis was abused by his father who beat him, forced him into buying him and his friends alcohol, forced him to wear women's clothing, etc. But then he became a serial killer after accidentally killing his daughter, and upon execution, Savage grants him near godlike powers. On him, I was a bit iffy; there's nothing in the present that casts him as sympathetic, but his backstory was unpleasant.

        Loading editor
    • Essentially, SOC takes place in 2017. The first part of the story concerns Matthew, an aspiring robotician, who encounters an alien, named Gertrude, while he was conducting research in the woods. Gertrude is a Herpelian (a play on herpetology and reptilian), who is a lizard humanoid that was sent to Earth to conduct research into the resources of the planet (Gertrude's home planet had diminishing resources, so the Queen sends out several troopers to investigate the resources of other planets; little did Gertrude know, the Queen was intending on draining the Earth of its resources. She is a well-intentioned extremist). Gertrude has the ability to shapeshift, a trait that was passed down from the founder of the race, and when she accidentally kills the Queen's son, the Queen changes her plans to destroy the Earth. To make things short, Gertrude wins and becomes queen by default. According to Herpelian law, if a competitor to the monarchy had more forms than their opponent, then they would get the crown. However, if a Herpelian were to beat their opponent in a fight, this also paved the way for them being king and/or queen. Since Gertrude had beaten the Queen in a fight, she gets the monarchy by default.

        Loading editor
    • I can understand why you might be a little hesitant on promoting Love Robin. Even before going ahead with it, I'd still like the opinion of Magma and Jester at the least and likely Misery and Pendragon before I go ahead with a sysop promotion.

      For Savage, I'd read through his article and he's nasty; his excuse doesn't really disqualify anything. For Dennis, if, say, he regrets killing his daughter in any matter, that'd be disqualifying.

      Interesting.

        Loading editor
    • Nah, he doesn't regret it; really, him murdering his daughter served as a catalyst for his later killings.

      Thanks. Anyway, after that, Schwarze is introduced. At this point, she was the most feared assassin in the universe, having the blood of millions of races on her hands. Her objective was to conquer the Earth for the Ossmians, though she doesn't really have any loyalty to them, or any of her employers in that regard. Schwarze apears as being something like a mixture of a spider and a clown robotic hybrid (she looks like this, because of her accident), so she's somewhat laughed off as a threat, at least until she destroys a building with her ship, in a means of proving her point. Now, with Schwarze, she is comedic, but the type of "humor" that she performs is actually only funny for her; really, she commits acts of violence that she deems as funny. Another thing was Schwarze is actually somewhat of a take that to Disney Princesses, at least when she was younger. The formula for a Disney princess being that they have everything that they could want, but they wanted more; Schwarze had everything that you could ask for when she was a princess, but she decided to fill that void inside of her by kidnapping and torturing young Weavers.

        Loading editor
    • not to be rude but you're probably best asking Misery over Pendragon, he's a nice guy but a super-volatile admin.. also in regards to getting yet more admins you should really ask the community as a whole.. after the community has its say let the admins debate then pass the final "draft" to the beauracrats for their final say on the matter (just as certain parties can "veto" moves in a government).

        Loading editor
    • I see.

        Loading editor
    • 1) all veterans are equal, I don't care if they are liked or how they are percieved.. as long as they don't violate our wiki's rules or wikia's ToS.

      2) we have enough admins as it is, if we prompt every great user to an admin position it will end in anarchy (organized anarchy but anarchy nonetheless) - especially as there are users that have worked on the wiki for years and never gained admin powers, they feel a bit left out when we promote new users when they have done a lot of work as well.

      3) the wiki still has to work on a proper means to get new admins, our current means of doing so is  a bit arbitary (any veteran can make someone an admin, if they wished).. the idea of a community vote followed by an admin debate is something we should look into.

        Loading editor
    • Queen Misery wrote:
      1) all veterans are equal, I don't care if they are liked or how they are percieved.. as long as they don't violate our wiki's rules or wikia's ToS.

      2) we have enough admins as it is, if we prompt every great user to an admin position it will end in anarchy (organized anarchy but anarchy nonetheless) - especially as there are users that have worked on the wiki for years and never gained admin powers, they feel a bit left out when we promote new users when they have done a lot of work as well.

      3) the wiki still has to work on a proper means to get new admins, our current means of doing so is  a bit arbitary (any veteran can make someone an admin, if they wished).. the idea of a community vote followed by an admin debate is something we should look into.

      Queen Missouri.

        Loading editor
    • what does a state in America have to do with anything I just said?

        Loading editor
    • Anyway, Schwarze gets killed during her first attempt at conquering Earth. She then goes to pretend to be  an imaginary friend to a little girl, and possesses her.

        Loading editor
    • I see. As a spirit, I take it?

        Loading editor
    • Yes; she uses the girl to contact her home planet, and convinces her sisters to invade Earth, saying that they would receive unlimited resources for their planet if they made her a body in return. Essentially, she bribes her older sister, Ivy, into arriving to Earth so that she could get revenge. After that, Schwarze appears a few more times, committing crimes such as poisoning a town's water supply, among other things.

      One antagonist that I had forgotten to mention was HANA. HANA (Hyper-intelligent Assistance Nursing Android) is an android that was created by Matthew in the future. You see, Matthew was raised by a robotic maid; this inspired him to create a line of nursing bots, with HANA being the first of a planned line of robots (another thing to note are that robots are somewhat akin to second rate citizens in this world, as are aliens). He sends her to look after elderly citizens at a nursing home, but she becomes rather controlling of them. She would forcefully stuff their medicine down their throats, or prohibited social contact with their peers. Eventually, Matthew tried to shut her down, but she rebels and hacks into a high prolific computer system, thus causing technology to rebel against the humans. She becomes the dictator of the Earth after erasing 1/4 of the world's population in a global genocide. She then forcefully roboticized the survivors into being perpetually loyal to her; if they were to rebel, she would set off a bomb that was implanted inside of them. In addition, she had created several drones that she can pass her brain to, so to speak. There was one instance in which she was getting overly attached to one of her drones; she removed her unit that allows her to have empathy in response. One android in particular is named Alice who she was extremely hostile towards to the point that she nearly murders her when she turned on her. To say that HANA is a bad mother is an understatement. Fortunately, Alice gets adopted by Matthew and his husband, Timon (who is a humanoid alien known as a Tangelomite). Matthew later creates her two sibings, one named Harry, and the other, LUANNA.

        Loading editor
    • Schwarze sounds nasty. For HANA, I'm getting a sort of Nurse Ratched if she were Skynet feel from her? Skynet in the least. How exactly does a nursing droid become so vile? 

      I've been comparing Lucia to some other villains and I have to say I've actually noticed some eerily striking similarities between her and Cinder Fall (especially striking to me because Lucia wasn't revealed as a female and the servant to the Greater Scope Villain until the last chapter, and that was written only a few weeks after Cinder Fall was approved as a CM). I've also noticed some somewhat vague similarities between Uriel and an Earth Negative villain of mine (Polarius).

        Loading editor
    • Well, it's explained that HANA is the way she is because of an error that occurred during her creation; don't know if that's a freudian excuse or not. Who's Cinder Fall, and what had Polarius done?

        Loading editor
    • Cinder Fall is the villain for a good portion of RWBY, if you recall. Now, I don't nor plan to watch RWBY, but I've done some research on the character and she lines up with Lucia pretty well. Barring out the whole "fire magic" thing, they're both stoic women with a token for manipulation (and, for that matter, killing important characters) who serve a mostly-inactive bigger force (Salem for Cinder, Draynak for Lucia) while remaining as the Big Bad until said bigger force is introduced. Cinder's a little more emotive than Lucia and a bit more talkative (Lucia's detached to the point where she's essentially completely empty) but the two are quite similar now that I think about it.

      Polarius (or Malcolm Graves)... He's the leader of the Order of Inverse (the criminal empire Faye used to be a part of). Now, physically, he's an ordinary human and what he does differs a little from Uriel, but it's primarily motivation that strikes me as both seem to be chaos-loving anarchists who want to basically create a world without rules so everyone is equal (for Polarius, he plans to accomplish this by demolishing all forms of government world-wide). In personality and goals, at least, they seem a little similar; the differences start to come in that Polarius actually does believe he's doing a better thing and falls more in line with a delusional Well-Intentioned Extremist. He's easily heinous enough to be a Monster (he's also a very prejudiced bastard on top of being an anarchist) but a Freudian Excuse and numerous human qualities keep him off the trope.

        Loading editor
    • I see.

        Loading editor
    • Interesting little coincidences, there.

        Loading editor
    • Of course; what disgusted you when you were reading Savage's article? I'm curious.

        Loading editor
    • Nothing particularly disgusted me, per say, but the little thing about him having Nymph bear him dozens of children - outside of her consent - strikes me as probably the most heinous thing he's done.

      But truly his most evil crime was engaging in an argument about ties. Bow ties? The dastard.

        Loading editor
    • I see.

        Loading editor
    • Anyway, with the Enlightened Ones, it originally started off as  an organization with the purpose of getting rid of a tyrannical form of government. However, after that threat was ended, Uriel takes over, and now the organization funds terrorism, the sex trade, drug trade, etc. They influence events that happen throughout the universe, namely through subliminal messages. In order for one to become a member, they have to take a ritual in which they would completely throw away their original lives. Either that, or the organization would forcefully brainwash new recruiters. They're pretty much the Illuminati on an intergalactic level.

      Uriel also set a cult around himself in which he usually urges his followers into killing themselves for his cause, or he would have a harem of women to himself for gratification. Essentially, he's the Antichrist in the sense of the word.

        Loading editor
    • I see. I think I more or less originally intended the Order of Inverse to be a sort of Illuminati group itself - kind of like the Enlightened Ones - but it evolved into a straighter criminal organization that just happened to be quite influential.

        Loading editor
    • Very interesting.

        Loading editor
    • I should ask, out of curiosity, if there are any other fictional settings/stories you've come up with.

        Loading editor
    • Well, one consists of cryptids. One cryptid in particular is the Popobawa. I had always been somewhat fascinated with cryptids and other creatures, so I was putting things together for a story about cryptids.

        Loading editor
    • I see. Any title or summary for it?

        Loading editor
    • The story's about a man, named Brandon, who tries to find weird oddities in order to become famous. The cryptids and other creatures try to hide themselves away from humanity, because of a law that gave cryptids limited encounters with humans. They were not to hunt humans as a food source, nor could they kill them out of prejudice. Popobawa is the main antagonist; the Popobawa is a demonic creature from the Tanzania island of Pemba; the first sign of a Popobawa attack is the smell of sulfur. The Popobawa is known to attack people in the middle of the night, and it would nearly crush them to death, not for food or anything like that, but for sadism.

        Loading editor
    • I see.

        Loading editor
    • However, the laws tend to be lenient towards cryptids/monsters that require human flesh. For example, sirens are to only limit their diet of humans to one human during their feeding frenzies.

        Loading editor
    • Very interesting.

        Loading editor
    • Thanks.

        Loading editor
    • Quite welcome.

        Loading editor
    • With Schwarze, I forgot to mention, but she is comedic, though in a way that doesn't detract from her villainy. How do you go about making a vilain's whose comedic antics go hand in hand with their crimes?

        Loading editor
    • If they have a sense of humor or they're comedic, make sure that their funny moments serve to punctuate their villainy. It might draw a laugh from the audience, but in-universe, what they consider funny is only so to them. A joke from that character also shouldn't make us take them any less seriously. 

        Loading editor
    • Schwarze's humor lies in her brutalizing her targets, and making jokes about it. For example, there was one instance in which a crime lord tasked Schwarze into taking out a target, and when he was discrediting her powers, Schwarze makes a joke about slicing the crime lord's arm off. It's not played for laughs; rather, the crime lord and his henchmen were horrified by Schwarze's callousness.

        Loading editor
    • Welp, I suppose that means that's a sense of humor that only serves to make her more abhorrent than if she didn't have it.

      I've got two Earth Negative Monsters with some hints of comedy in them (although it's quite downplayed, as Earth Negative by nature is a very bleak setting), and those would be Faye and Whir. Whir's the typical "crack a sick joke while torturing someone." His sense of humor is twisted, is offensive and insulting to everyone, and frequently crosses the line twice. Faye's comedic moments come either from how ludicrously giddy he can be in the face of the City or some deliberate jokes of his own. The thing with Faye, however... once he actually starts being actively malicious, the humor completely evaporates from him.

        Loading editor
    • I might just take that comedic side of Schwarze out. Anyway, that's interesting.

        Loading editor
    • So, while it's easy to say that Schwarze, Dennis, and Savage are monsters, I am somewhat unsure on HANA. As I had mentioned, she does have somewhat of a Freudian excuse, that being that there was a slight malfunction when she was being created. The problem there is she develops a mind of her own then. All robots in this setting have sentience, but HANA develops full sentience rather prematurely.

        Loading editor
    • Well, you are free to write around the excuse if you feel it's mitigating enough.

      I suppose sooner or later I should speak my own concerns about Draynak (although they might not last, given how I'm putting The City of Never's ending through a possible rewrite).

        Loading editor
    • Such as?

        Loading editor
    • I suppose I should elaborate a little on Draynak in order to properly go over potential mitigating qualities.

      Draynak is the master of Lucia, a Dark Divinity, and a malicious god sealed in the City eons ago under enigmatic circumstances. Draynak's basically the definition of narcissism; it lives by assimilating stronger beings into itself as to ascend form. It's got an ego large enough to believe that the whole of reality should revolve around it, and seeks to assimilate enough into itself to become the strongest being in existence and remold reality to its will and destroy all resistance. From its seal, Draynak has Lucia engineer a variety of atrocities for the purpose of unsealing it, having her torture hundreds of young, Seer-blooded humans/half-humans on Earth, and having her draw IT through the City and Earth – again fully knowing it'll destroy each – so it can assimilate It into itself. Personally, before it's unsealed, Draynak is responsible for subliminally implanting knowledge of the City and the Remeditary in the Irish professor Hansel Brighterson, causing him to develop an obsession with it which culminates in Lucia trapping him in the City. At the crux of Lucia's plan, Crystal Hopper, tortured, mutilated, raped and impregnated with something that will make her compatible to become Draynak's host. One thing leads to another, and Draynak is freed from its seal by Lucia, infesting Crystal and killing her in the process.

      Draynak doesn't waste any time in soaking in its own pride. It proudly boasts it's been responsible for everything that led up to this point, takes Faye's mad devotion to it with glee, and announces its intent to take over all reality. Ultimately, it doesn't get that far; Michael, Daniel, and Eliza pursue it to a sort of unbuilt corner of reality, which culminates in Draynak being enraged, a quick fight ensuing, and Daniel giving his life to force himself into Draynak's mind. Daniel forces Draynak to create a portal into the Nexus-flow, and the raw energies of space sunder through Draynak's weak form and destroy it.

      Now, Draynak's heinous enough. Its goal to remake reality is based entirely off of its own selfish need for power and self-indulgence, and it's more than happy to oversee Lucia's atrocities and destroy everything that doesn't pledge themselves to it. The problem is... Draynak's affable. Really affable if it's not provoked. It seems to maintain a fairly cordial relationship with Lucia (even lightheartedly teasing her), outright rewards Faye for his devotion and promises him power after it is done ascending, and, by all accounts, it's sincerely grateful to even its unwilling pawns. Draynak affectionately refers to Hansel as his “little messenger” and seems more than ready to grant him whatever he wants, even despite the fact Hansel is nothing but horrified what he's been made out to do. Finally, Draynak orders all its pawns spared and their worlds to remain intact as a sort of thanks for their service, even though they've all defied it.

      Sounds like an instant disqualifier, right? The problem with that, though, is that, during the final confrontation with Michael and Draynak, Michael wastes no time in analyzing Draynak's behavior. He realizes it ultimately considers nothing but itself ultimately irrelevant and states that Draynak likely only behaves the way it does to win more worship, and if those things should ever stop worshiping it, Draynak will destroy them without question. Michael believes that Draynak only extends this care to whatever is useful to it, so this may in fact be a rather thick form of pragmatic villainy and nothing else. To compound this point, after Michael delivers one two many blows to its ego, Draynak snaps and decides to destroy him, as well as Earth's universe, stating that “there is no place for rebels in my perfect universe.” There's not much onscreen evidence Draynak actually doesn't care about Lucia or Faye, but there's nothing explicitly invalidating Michael's theories. The story doesn't really lean one way or the other.

      Any thoughts on that?

        Loading editor
    • Affable or faux affably evil? I'm reading Draynak's description, and it seems to lean more towards him being the latter.

        Loading editor
    • From everything it says, genuine affable, but from everything Michael says, a really convincing faux affable. I'm tied, to be honest

        Loading editor
    • I see.

        Loading editor
    • From what I've provided, do you lean in any particular direction as to whether or not Draynak might be a Monster?

        Loading editor
    • I lean more to the idea that Draynak is a monster, to be honest.

        Loading editor
    • Right. Well, heaven knows how long that'll stay as is, because if I do decide to set in place a rewritten ending, the one I have in mind changes Draynak's characterization to the point where it doesn't count.

        Loading editor
    • I see.

        Loading editor
    • What does Lucia and Faye have to gain from working with Draynak? Also, are you familiar with Eternal Sonata?

        Loading editor
    • Lucia's motivations are something of a mystery, but it's hinted that she's been pushed to freeing Draynak by something of an extreme. She's stated to feel nothing but utter hatred for all that live. Faye, on the other hand, seeks to take advantage of Draynak's power; as mentioned, he's absolutely obessed with chaos and the eldritch things of the City and he states that he his goal in life is to find nothing less than the "ultimate chaos." Draynak, in his mind, is capable of granting exactly what he wants, and by winning himself in Draynak's favor he believes he's able to convince Draynak to twist the Cosma into something ideal for Faye while leaving Faye alive to enjoy it.

      I have not heard of it.

        Loading editor
    • So it's not anything mitigating on Lucia's part?

        Loading editor
    • That would be a no. The "extreme" in question is enigmatic, Lucia is deliberately silent about her motivations, and it's flat-out stated nothing she's done can be excused in any regard.

        Loading editor
    • I see.

        Loading editor
    • Should I go ahead and block that user I mentioned earlier, because it could be possible that Lady Satsuki's evading bans by making multiple accounts?

        Loading editor
    • I've left them a message with the appropriate warning. If they don't respond by tomorrow, I'll take it upon myself to permablock them.

        Loading editor
    • AustinDR wrote: 2) Nihilus: First things first, I'm not really religious; sure, I do go to church, but I'm starting to kind of lean towards the idea of questioning what I'm being taught. I never mention religion in my talks; honestly, it's one subject that I try to keep distant from myself, though it's not because I hate religion, it's just that I'm starting to question the legitamecy of religion. Now, before you ask, I still firmly believe that Nero is too inconsistent to be considered; sure, he has a few moments where he's truly heinous, like with ordering Ben's crucifixion and even attending it, but he's also a manchild with delusions of grandeur. Nihilus is your typical brutish Roman who thinks lowly on everyone else, and ultimately refuses repentance. I don't know, wouldn't it be more interesting if Nihilus repented and became a Christian? Or, better yet, what if he started to question Nero's supposed godhood, which makes him conflicted?

      I'd say that if Nero isn't allowed, Nihilus shouldn't be either. Nero's directly responsible for most of his crimes, which makes him just as bad if not worse.

        Loading editor
    • But, yeah, I did have another story that I actually ended up scrapping for reasons that I'll discuss in a minute. It was about a couple of puppets that were brought to life via magic, and they lived in a boarding house with a woman, named Kimberly. The story's main conflict was with an evil empire known as the Pure Witches. Essentially, the Pure Witches were witches who were supposedly pureblooded, whose goal is to purge the world of other magical races and non-magical as well. The villain was a witch known as Opium, who was the absolute queen over the Pure Witches. She had usurped her brother years ago, because he was actually revealed to be a trashie, which is a witch who had a non-witch in their lineage. She was hoping to mate with her younger brother so that she could have a lineage of Pure-blooded witches.

      So, I have this friend who I mentioned earlier who was wanting to create video games as a career. We decided to role play the story that I had been developing, but he started to make several changes to my original story to the point that it lost its original purpose. For example, the Pure Witches were supposed to be the chief threats of the story, but he kept changing my original idea to the point that they were really minor obstacles. It was my fault that I let him change my story, but I ultimately decided to scrap it. I don't know if I'll try to revisit it.

        Loading editor
    • I've ever so occasionally run into similar problems with a few group projects I've held with some of my peers, primarily a rather big roleplay hosted a year or so back which ended up kind of spiraling out of control. To be fair, we've gotten back on track and a few of them are going to adapt it as a webcomic, this time under much better regulation and co-creation.

        Loading editor
    • I see; interesting.

        Loading editor
    • One of the main ideas that was going into the making of the story was that the Pure Witches appear to children and grant them wishes, only if they agreed to sell sign a contract which ensured their devoution to the Witch Queen. The children are forcibly trained into becoming child soldiers for the Queen; despite them being made to be loyal, Opium tends to bat an eye when they're killed or injured. Besides child soldiers, children are converted into cows, meaning that they were harvested of their life forces in order to fuel the Pure Witches' powers. The end result is the child becoming a lifeless husk. One Pure Witch in particular was named Carrot, who appears as a seemingly cute witch, but in reality is the worst type of person that you could imagine. Not only does she not have any regrets with making contracts with children and sending them to terrible fates, she simply views them as cow, stating that what she does is no different to what a butcher does to a cow.

      The Pure Witch Empire seemingly looked pleasant, but in reality, its subjects were heavily suppressed as they were being continually sweeped in order to see if there were any inferiors in the midst. That, and most families believe in the purity of blood so much, that they resort to incest in order to keep the bloodline sacred. The resulting offsprings end up being monstrous abominations with either limbs and eyes missing, or their entire abdomen missing. As such, these inbred witches are locked away, and they are fed the rebels to the cause.

        Loading editor
    • I see. Very interesting.

        Loading editor
    • Thanks.

        Loading editor
    • I should ask if you plan on adapting any of these ideas into publishable format (so a book, a movie/screenplay, a fanfic, or what have you)?

        Loading editor
    • Hopefully as a book, or fanfic.

        Loading editor
    • Wonderful. Any initial drafts, or is it just planning at this stage?

        Loading editor
    • So far just planning at this stage; I do have a general idea of what I want to write about, but I don't know how to start.

        Loading editor
    • Always a bit of a fret. If need be, I'm always here to help on matters like those.

        Loading editor
    • Thanks.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.