Jump to content
Banner by ~ Ice Princess Silky

This current generation of MLP does not have a Complete Monster


SaburoDaimando

Recommended Posts

A Complete Monster, according to TV Tropes, is a villain with no redeeming qualities.  All the negative qualifications of this villain, with none of the positives.  A completely terrible being that evokes fear, revulsion and hatred from other characters, and are completely devoid of altruistic qualities.

Examples of Complete Monsters include:

Tirek from the G1 My Little Pony special: Rescue at Midnight Castle(His G4 variation is nowhere near as horrible as his G1 counterpart)

EMperor Sheev Palpaine from the Star Wars franchise(Grand Moff Tarkin is also a proud example of being a Complete Monster as well)

Judge Claude Frollo of The Hunchback of Notre Dame and Scar from the Lion King(to serve as my only Disney examples)

There are only a few Megatrons who exhibit this trope.  But the Megatron from Beast Wars revels in it.

And of course, Frieza from Dragon Ball Z.  

 

But if anything, the current generation of My Little Pony does not show any signs of a true Complete Monster.  Equestria Girls doesn't truly have a complete monster ether(Abacus Cinch was more like Lady Tremaine from Cinderella).  Even the movie villains had no signs of being Complete Monster.    The closest we got was

 

Queen Chrysalis in "To Where and Back Again."  During that episode, she took glee in treating Starlight Glimmer like a rag doll, and actually came close to killing Thorax. On top of which, she purposely starves her subjects for her own gain.

 

And on that note, do you think that Complete Monsters should belong in My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, or any future variations of My Little Pony?  Or is it too much for the audience to handle: A Villain with no redeeming features in a franchise where redemption is apart of its message.

Edited by SaburoDaimando
  • Brohoof 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SaburoDaimando said:

A Complete Monster, according to TV Tropes, is a villain with no redeeming qualities.  All the negative qualifications of this villain, with none of the positives.  A completely terrible being that evokes fear, revulsion and hatred from other characters, and are completely devoid of altruistic qualities.

Examples of Complete Monsters include:

Tirek from the G1 My Little Pony special: Rescue at Midnight Castle(His G4 variation is nowhere near as horrible as his G1 counterpart)

EMperor Sheev Palpaine from the Star Wars franchise(Grand Moff Tarkin is also a proud example of being a Complete Monster as well)

Judge Claude Frollo of The Hunchback of Notre Dame and Scar from the Lion King(to serve as my only Disney examples)

There are only a few Megatrons who exhibit this trope.  But the Megatron from Beast Wars revels in it.

And of course, Frieza from Dragon Ball Z.  

 

But if anything, the current generation of My Little Pony does not show any signs of a true Complete Monster.  Equestria Girls doesn't truly have a complete monster ether(Abacus Cinch was more like Lady Tremaine from Cinderella).  Even the movie villains had no signs of being Complete Monster.    The closest we got was

  Reveal hidden contents

Queen Chrysalis in "To Where and Back Again."  During that episode, she took glee in treating Starlight Glimmer like a rag doll, and actually came close to killing Thorax. On top of which, she purposely starves her subjects for her own gain.

 

And on that note, do you think that Complete Monsters should belong in My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, or any future variations of My Little Pony?  Or is it too much for the audience to handle: A Villain with no redeeming features in a franchise where redemption is apart of its message.

Some fans seem to want these kind of villains. Don't see why.

  • Brohoof 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about King Sombra? The only Character he seems to have is being evil. And that was it. No change. And everybody had fear for him. Unless i already forgot a detail.

I dont think this Show needs a complete evil character, apart from, according to my opinion, already having one anyway, i dont get much appeal from it. I like it more if Characters change, thats more interesting for me. If the Character was just evil all the time, i would always be the same, unless they kill the Character off, not really something you need, in a Show for Kids.

  • Brohoof 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, heavens-champion said:

Some fans seem to want these kind of villains. Don't see why.

Because the fear they instill is exciting. And there’s a lofty satisfaction in seeing complete monster characters get their teeth kicked in at the end.

  • Brohoof 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, heavens-champion said:

Some fans seem to want these kind of villains. Don't see why.

They are intriguing, that why classic Disney always has better villains compare to their current ones, they are the great physical obstacles for our protagonist :D Many people complained about reformations of the show nowadays, it's nice to see something for change.

17 minutes ago, SaburoDaimando said:

Even the movie villains had no signs of being Complete Monster.

He might not be the most horrible villain but he is the only villain who received the most gruesome death of the entire show while trying to catch our off-guard protagonist (He like Gaston in Beauty & The Beast, not very threatening villain, but receive the gruesome death). Complete Monster + A Disney Death is the best combination:fluttershy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a good thing there aren't any villains like these in MLP G4 (aside from Sombra). "Complete Monnsters" are a totally shit trope that is used as an excuse to not fully develop a character into anything other than just "bad." It's much better to have a villain with an actual character.

  • Brohoof 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Lambdadelta said:

They are intriguing, that why classic Disney always has better villains compare to their current ones, they are the great physical obstacles for our protagonist

I think you underestimate some of the current Disney villains.

Hans from Frozen was a sociopath that was completely willing to lie to everyone and let the main character slowly freeze to death while he went off to emotionally break her sister and then try to slice through her with a Nordic sword.

And Mother Gothel? That lady is scum personified. Steals an infant for her healing properties, systematically emotionally abuses said infant for 18 years in and attempt to both make her subservient and absolutely terrified of the world outside. Sets things up so the girl thinks that her boyfriend lied to her while said boyfriend gets executed. And then when he doesn’t die that way, she stabs the guy and tries to drag the tied up 18 year old girl away to God knows where so they’ll never be found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Leave a Whisper said:

Wouldn't Sombra be considered one? Or at the least the closest thing to it?

He could be, but people forget about him because we didn’t get a lot of him. Also, we don’t know HOW he became evil. Comics don’t count because not everyone reads those.

Backstory counts for a lot when deciding if a character is a Complete Monster archetype. Because you can easily decide, “Yeah they’re evil, but I can understand why.” if they have a sympathetic enough backstory.

However, THAT can be overridden if the evil character then pulls a “Moral Event Horizon”. It’s another trope in which a character pulls a stunt SO inexcusable, that nothing is going make them redeemable afterwards. That can pull them right back to “Complete Monster” status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. Because a total monster is both dated and unrealistic. Your pretty much asking for a character to be born evil. And that's a cop out. There are always reasons why someone is the way they are. And elaborating on that will inevitably garner some pity from the guidance. 

You're pretty much asking MLP to have a one dimensional antagonist. And we've moved far past that. Heck, that's kind of the jist behind the S7 finale. The pillars and the mane 6 believe Stygian was an irredeemable monster, yet Twi and Starlight proved otherwise. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best villains are always the ones that are slightly morally ambiguous, who genuinely believe that what they are doing is for the greater good instead of being "mwa-ha-ha, evil!"

If you look at Watchmen, Ozymandias fails the complete monster test but is all the better for it because on some level you know that his objective, although monstrous, is intended to improve the world, and he feels he has to go through with it even though he hates himself for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Lore Finder said:

Would current tirek count? Or does the comic series negate this.

Even without the current comic, Tirek isn't as much of a monster as his G1 counterpart.  If anything, he didn't threaten to behead anyone, especially the current Spike.

And judging by the recent leak, it seems that unlike his G1 counterpart, Tirek is most likely to reform

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tirek, sombra, and the pony of shadows were pretty close.

Tire k only had is own interests in mind and would destroy anyone who got in his way, he cares for no one and only wanted power

sounds was a power and dark king who wanted to enslave his people to use them to go to war with the world

The shadow (not stygian) was only interested in erasing all light from the universe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ShadOBabe said:

He could be, but people forget about him because we didn’t get a lot of him. Also, we don’t know HOW he became evil. Comics don’t count because not everyone reads those.

Backstory counts for a lot when deciding if a character is a Complete Monster archetype. Because you can easily decide, “Yeah they’re evil, but I can understand why.” if they have a sympathetic enough backstory.

However, THAT can be overridden if the evil character then pulls a “Moral Event Horizon”. It’s another trope in which a character pulls a stunt SO inexcusable, that nothing is going make them redeemable afterwards. That can pull them right back to “Complete Monster” status.

 

 That goes for a lot of cartoon villains tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally don't think Tirek or Chrysalis have any redeeming qualities, and although I've heard the comics make him more complicated, Sombra also seems pretty irredemable in the show. 

I think characters with sympathetic backstories or understandable motivations allow for more complex storytelling, but you can have a clearly evil character without reducing them to "evil just because," and episodes like "The Return of Harmony" and "To Where and Back Again" thrive on how gleefully sinister their antagonists are.

You seem to want a more explicit threat of violence, though, and I just don't think that suits this incarnation of the show. The best adventure episodes revolve around these ponies working as a team to solve problems, even though they also tend to have a lot of goofy squabbling and character banter which, again, can be driven by a looming threat. Including a greater threat of violence, though, might undercut the lighthearted vibe somewhat, and I'm not sure what it adds to the show's specific appeal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Join the herd!

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...