Special:Badtitle/NS90:Talk:Complete Monster/Western Animation/Examples that should remain here.


 * Norman Osborn - He has no truly redeeming qualities (not even his love for Harry, which is all about the expectations that Harry has to live up to and being an abusive dick to him when he fails to), is by far the most heinous villain on the show in terms of his crimes, has less of a Freudian Excuse than other versions of the character, is detested by other characters in both identities, and it's made note of how unapologetic and unrepentant he is for his actions. While the Goblin can be Laughably Evil at points, his villainy was always treated dead seriously.


 * Megabyte - The entry states that he wasn't an example at the start of the show, but after being un-merged from Gigabyte, he chose to pull a Griffith and throw away all redeeming qualities purely because he wanted more power to dominate with. Afterwards he very easily passes all of the criteria for qualifying.


 * Verminous Skumm, Zarm, and the Hitler Expy - All three villains are presented in a way that gives them no mitigating redeeming features and their actions are the most heinous by the standards of the show. Skumm in particular is purely loathsome, being responsible for exploiting terminal illness in order to spread a Hate Plague, supplying explosives to feuding gangs that risked killing an entire population, and selling kids Mind Rape drugs, the latter crime leading to one of the show's few on-screen deaths, the victim being a loved one of one of the main characters.


 * The Wizards Of The Black Circle - They're not a large group, but just four people. Four people who showcase no redeeming qualities and whose actions are the darkest and most heinous by the standards of the setting and narrative. As such, they hit off the criteria and qualify for the trope.


 * Steele - He showed no redeeming qualities to start with, went beyond being a Jerkass bully when he actually fought to kill Balto rather than relinquish control of his sled team, and then crossed the line into this trope when he tried to ensure the team would get lost and dead in the wilderness, which means not only killing his own comrades, but being entirely culpable for the deaths of all the sick children who needed the medicine that the team would deliver back. And Steele knew how many lives he was condemning to die and in fact exploited this angle to play up himself as a tragic Failure Hero and garner sympathy from the other dogs! Naturally his Freudian Excuse is nonexistent, he has no remorse for anything he does, and everyone ends up despising him in the end.


 * Injurin' Joe - While the live action incarnation of Injun Joe from Tom and Huck is even more heinous, Injurin' Joe's entry states he's more vicious than the Injun Joe of the novel, which he is. The work's tone turns dark whenever he's around, he showcases no redeeming qualities or mitigating factors, does everything out of selfishness and greed, and his actions are alarmingly brutal for a kids' film villain, namely how he his rap sheet includes violent on-screen murders with his bare hands.


 * Lee Jordan - He passes the heinous standard in being the most ruthless criminal on the show with the resources he gets to work with, having no good justification for his choice to pursue a life of crime, no redeeming qualities, and the revulsion of other characters, the main antagonist herself included. He's also the only villain who attempts to do characters harm with the deliberate intent of doing harm, and even attempting murder.


 * Tong Fo - He's an apathetic and sadistic psychopath who is Faux Affably Evil but still very cruel and deranged. Of all the villains on the show, his actions are the vilest and most heinous in whatever scale he decides to operate in, and he commits them for no good reason other than it amuses him. He has no mitigating factors, no remorse for his crimes, and his villainy is taken seriously by others. The one point of contention is that he might have loved his felon grandfather and that could be part of a Freudian Excuse, but the scene where this comes up shows Tong Fo viewing his grandfather as a pedestal or gold standard he feels he has to live up to based purely on rap sheets of crimes. If this doesn't take him towards any redemptive measures and instead makes him a worse criminal, than it's not truly a redeeming feature.


 * Rumpelstiltskin - Unlike Lord Farquaad or Prince Charming, he's a Laughably Evil character whose actual villainy is played seriously, and unlike the Fairy Godmother, he has a large rap sheet of crimes and no mitigating factors. Actions such as deceiving people into erasing themselves from existence, becoming a tyrannical despot who imposes an ogre genocide campaign, killing one of his own minions on-screen, enslaving his subjects, exploiting loopholes so that he can kill Fiona and the other ogres even when Shrek asks him not to, and torturing and eventually executing Shrek make him by far the most heinous villain by the standards of this animated comedy series - so much so that he's the only one who gets left alive at the end because killing him would be letting him off easy. He's called at least a borderline case because he might not be seen as a full fledged example (he treats his goose Fifi well enough, though she's more just a commodity and pet for him than an actual friend) but he's as close to being one as it could get in these films. Word of God even states it was deliberate to make him a villain who might make us laugh but we also just really, really hate and want to see stopped at all costs.


 * Gallaxhar - Despite being Laughably Evil, his actions are played completely seriously and he has no redeeming qualities at all, making him sufficiently heinous enough by the film's standards to qualify.


 * Lord Barkis Bittern - He's a mild but valid example of The Bluebeard in an animated family film, has no redeeming qualities or Freudian Excuse, is motivated entirely by greed, is single-handedly responsible for three main characters' misery, is seen as a horrific and hateful figure by both the narrative and other characters, and shows no regret for his crimes. His actions, while few, are sufficiently heinous by the work's standards, as he's deemed so bad, he's given both death and a Fate Worse Than Death!


 * Archibald Snatcher - At first he seems like a comedic buffoon villain and keeps his Laughably Evil quirks as the film progresses, but when the truth about what he's done and what he's working towards comes out, the laughs become fewer and he becomes a truly vile Knight of Cerebus for the film. He's like a Deconstruction of a comedic cartoon bad guy and shows just how horrifying the lengths he'd go to in order to get rid of his enemies and achieve his goal can be. His justification for wanting to be a White Hat is insufficient when put against his actions, and being vulnerable and pitiful deep down is not the same as a true redeeming quality since it only fuels his ruthlessness rather than mitigate it. His crimes are sufficiently heinous, he shows no remorse for them, he cares about no one but himself and treats others like crap, his villainy is played seriously within the narrative and by the standards of other characters, and he gives a Redemption Rejection that actually ends up killing him.


 * Messina - In contrast to El Supremo, her villainy is played fairly seriously, with an on-screen body count, attempted body count, tyranny and violence with magic, and attempts at torture or serious harm to other characters. She's given no redeeming qualities, no Freudian Excuse or mitigating factors, and is viewed as a fearsome and loathsome villain within the narrative of the work.


 * Nero - While Nihilus' crimes are more heinous, Nero is the one who lets him off his proverbial leash whenever he so chooses. He also shows no redeeming qualities, has no good relationship with others, has no justification or excuse for his villainy other than his A God Am I beliefs, never regrets his crimes, and is positioned in the narrative as being truly heinous by the work's standards.


 * Tirek (G4) - While not as dark as his G1 counterpart, he is the only villain in the series with no disqualifying factors or mitigating features to his character - no redeeming qualities, no moral agency issues, no Freudian Excuse or justification for his evildoing, no Affably Evil or even Laughably Evil demeanor, and no conceivable redemption. In his backstory he actually had a brother who cared for him and was offered a chance for redemption and friendship with the ponies of Equestria, but he chose to reject friendship as a concept and keep on hurting others for power instead. (A tie-in comic also revealed that he was a power-hungry sociopath from a young age and might have even done away with his own father.) His actions are the most sufficiently heinous of the show's villains since not only does he want to enslave all of Equestria after draining it of it's magic (which Celestia confirms will cause the place to die), but his magic-sucking assault of ponies counts as a personal violation of their very beings, as close to "power rape" as it can get. He's also still notably violent, just check out his and Twilight's big fight. And he's truly heinous by the show's standards since he firmly, deliberately, and unrepentantly stands against the central message of friendship, is said to be among the most evil beings in Equestria, and is reviled by every other character, even Discord.


 * Grune - He's the only villain aside from Mumm-Ra who hits off the criteria. His treachery, violent atrocities, and attempted homicides are heinous by the standards of the work and it's narrative, he's feared and hated by other characters (even his former friend, Panthro), shows no redeeming features or remorse for his actions, is as heinous as he can be with his resources and is always wanting more power, has much culpability in Mumm-Ra's actions since he revived him to start with, and he has zero excuse for his villainy since he was hailed as a hero and in a position of honor and prestige prior to betraying the cats - he simply wasn't satisfied by what he had and felt he needed even more power. And that power-lust still fuels him to attempt to be The Starscream to Mumm-Ra later on, showing that there's truly no one he won't backstab in order to claim the power he craves.


 * Victor Falco/The Rat King - Within the scale he occupies, he manages to cause as much devastation, damage, and life endangerment with his resources as Shredder and the Krang do, and he also goes the extra mile of adding in mental torture as well. His vile Mad Scientist experiments and attempts to break Shifu and the Turtles' family in any possible way makes him truly heinous by the standards of the work. And he doesn't actually love his rats - he views them as his subjects that he can endanger and dispose of if he sees fit. There's nothing redeeming in his character and he has no remorse for his crimes against other living creatures.