What's it called when the bad guy gets eaten?What to do when characters disagree with the plot?How specific should I be when outlining the plot?Can Bridging Conflict Work When the Answer is Known?Making the antagonist a good guy?What's the term used to describe a twist which is badly written because the twist is based on information not yet available to audience?What's the name of the trope that means fae can't cross over unless a human crosses over first?When should the protagonist have a self-revelation?Is the “hero guy saves girl” trope misogynistic?Is it bad writing or bad story telling if first person narrative contains more information than the narrator knows?Can a successful book series let the bad guy win?
How to make a newfile-function opening the new file in a new frame?
When does Fisher's "go get more data" approach make sense?
Video editor for YouTube
Are the errors in this formulation of the simple linear regression model random variables?
Teferi's Time Twist on creature with +1/+1 counter
What do these three diagonal lines that cross through three measures and both staves mean, and what are they called?
Too many spies!
Manually select/unselect lines before forwarding to stdout
Using two linked programs, output ordinal numbers up to n
What are the arguments for California’s nonpartisan blanket (jungle) primaries?
Why did Spider-Man take a detour to Dorset?
Creating a character, is Noble a class or a background?
Draw a line nicely around notes
Why limit to revolvers?
Why is "dark" an adverb in this sentence?
Accidentally deleted python and yum is not working in centos7
Getting fresh water in the middle of hypersaline lake in the Bronze Age
I won USD 50K! Now what should I do with it?
Why does FFmpeg choose 10+20+20 ms instead of an even 16 ms for 60 fps GIF images?
Will it hurt my career to work as a graphic designer in a startup for beauty and skin care?
Is it rude to refer to janitors as 'floor people'?
Why doesn't philosophy have higher standards for its arguments?
What are some symbols representing peasants/oppressed persons fighting back?
Clarification on defining FFT bin sizes
What's it called when the bad guy gets eaten?
What to do when characters disagree with the plot?How specific should I be when outlining the plot?Can Bridging Conflict Work When the Answer is Known?Making the antagonist a good guy?What's the term used to describe a twist which is badly written because the twist is based on information not yet available to audience?What's the name of the trope that means fae can't cross over unless a human crosses over first?When should the protagonist have a self-revelation?Is the “hero guy saves girl” trope misogynistic?Is it bad writing or bad story telling if first person narrative contains more information than the narrator knows?Can a successful book series let the bad guy win?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
Is there a specific name for the plot device in which the story's "Big Bad" has a cunning plan to use some monstrous being to further their diabolical machinations. This may be something summoned from elsewhere, brought back from banishment after earlier issues, or even the creation of magic or mad science. But when it arrives/arises it turns around and destroys the existing Big Bad only to pursue its own campaign of destruction that continues to tie down the same protagonists?
plot tropes antagonist
add a comment |
Is there a specific name for the plot device in which the story's "Big Bad" has a cunning plan to use some monstrous being to further their diabolical machinations. This may be something summoned from elsewhere, brought back from banishment after earlier issues, or even the creation of magic or mad science. But when it arrives/arises it turns around and destroys the existing Big Bad only to pursue its own campaign of destruction that continues to tie down the same protagonists?
plot tropes antagonist
14
I'm fond of the phrase "His karma ran over his dogma."
– Lauren Ipsum
Jul 7 at 12:45
7
Tyranus Escapus Bitus Assus.
– wetcircuit
Jul 7 at 14:20
7
Indi...uuurrrp!...gestion!
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:49
1
What's it called when the bad guy gets deus ex machina-ed? That. Which usually also ends in one: our superheros might not be able to defeat the evil wizard, but they can just melee the random monster to death after it eats him, as always.
– Mazura
Jul 8 at 22:56
add a comment |
Is there a specific name for the plot device in which the story's "Big Bad" has a cunning plan to use some monstrous being to further their diabolical machinations. This may be something summoned from elsewhere, brought back from banishment after earlier issues, or even the creation of magic or mad science. But when it arrives/arises it turns around and destroys the existing Big Bad only to pursue its own campaign of destruction that continues to tie down the same protagonists?
plot tropes antagonist
Is there a specific name for the plot device in which the story's "Big Bad" has a cunning plan to use some monstrous being to further their diabolical machinations. This may be something summoned from elsewhere, brought back from banishment after earlier issues, or even the creation of magic or mad science. But when it arrives/arises it turns around and destroys the existing Big Bad only to pursue its own campaign of destruction that continues to tie down the same protagonists?
plot tropes antagonist
plot tropes antagonist
edited Jul 7 at 17:16
Cyn
26.8k2 gold badges59 silver badges125 bronze badges
26.8k2 gold badges59 silver badges125 bronze badges
asked Jul 7 at 12:44
AshAsh
8,16511 silver badges42 bronze badges
8,16511 silver badges42 bronze badges
14
I'm fond of the phrase "His karma ran over his dogma."
– Lauren Ipsum
Jul 7 at 12:45
7
Tyranus Escapus Bitus Assus.
– wetcircuit
Jul 7 at 14:20
7
Indi...uuurrrp!...gestion!
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:49
1
What's it called when the bad guy gets deus ex machina-ed? That. Which usually also ends in one: our superheros might not be able to defeat the evil wizard, but they can just melee the random monster to death after it eats him, as always.
– Mazura
Jul 8 at 22:56
add a comment |
14
I'm fond of the phrase "His karma ran over his dogma."
– Lauren Ipsum
Jul 7 at 12:45
7
Tyranus Escapus Bitus Assus.
– wetcircuit
Jul 7 at 14:20
7
Indi...uuurrrp!...gestion!
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:49
1
What's it called when the bad guy gets deus ex machina-ed? That. Which usually also ends in one: our superheros might not be able to defeat the evil wizard, but they can just melee the random monster to death after it eats him, as always.
– Mazura
Jul 8 at 22:56
14
14
I'm fond of the phrase "His karma ran over his dogma."
– Lauren Ipsum
Jul 7 at 12:45
I'm fond of the phrase "His karma ran over his dogma."
– Lauren Ipsum
Jul 7 at 12:45
7
7
Tyranus Escapus Bitus Assus.
– wetcircuit
Jul 7 at 14:20
Tyranus Escapus Bitus Assus.
– wetcircuit
Jul 7 at 14:20
7
7
Indi...uuurrrp!...gestion!
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:49
Indi...uuurrrp!...gestion!
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:49
1
1
What's it called when the bad guy gets deus ex machina-ed? That. Which usually also ends in one: our superheros might not be able to defeat the evil wizard, but they can just melee the random monster to death after it eats him, as always.
– Mazura
Jul 8 at 22:56
What's it called when the bad guy gets deus ex machina-ed? That. Which usually also ends in one: our superheros might not be able to defeat the evil wizard, but they can just melee the random monster to death after it eats him, as always.
– Mazura
Jul 8 at 22:56
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Just Desserts
From TV Tropes:
A villain ultimately finds their evil deeds come back to bite them.
Literally—they end up getting eaten.
This does not include a Heroic Sacrifice. But may be subverted with a
minor character being killed and eaten in obvious foreshadowing of
what is going to happen to one of the bads at some point. While Mooks
may be recipients of the Just Desserts, a true Just Dessert is
reserved for those higher up the ladder. If the beast doing the eating
was unleashed by the guy who gets eaten, he's been Hoist by His Own
Petard, making him a Self-Disposing Villain. Bonus points if he made a
practice of feeding people to said beast beforehand.
4
Adding further, it's a subset of being hoist by one's petard.
– Matthew Dave
Jul 7 at 17:54
5
@MatthewDave I realized "just desserts" was the phrase that would work and did a search on it, finding this trope. But I am going out of my way not to go down the rabbit hole of the TV Tropes site, as I'd like to you know leave the house today. But yeah, you're right.
– Cyn
Jul 7 at 17:56
2
"Poetic justice" also applies.
– Ben Voigt
Jul 8 at 2:06
3
Or, if it happens earlier, "Just Hors D'oeuvres", "Just Salads", "Just Soups", "Just Main Courses", etc, etc.
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:51
3
@Baldrickk It's a very subtle pun: "just deserts", the standard English phrase, has one "s", relating to "deserve"; the TVTropes page linked spells it with a double "s", like the food type. So it's explicitly about being eaten, not attacked.
– IMSoP
Jul 8 at 14:40
|
show 7 more comments
On TV Tropes this is called Evil Is Not a Toy:
Sometimes the Sealed Evil in a Can doesn't escape by itself, nor is it released by an Unwitting Pawn, but is deliberately set free by a villain (or hero). Let's call him Bob. Bob usually thinks he can control the sealed evil, or bargain with it, expecting to trade on a certain level of gratitude on its part since he was the one who freed it (or in extreme cases, resurrected it).
This never works.
The Sealed Evil in a Can will inevitably turn on the one who freed it — sometimes sooner, sometimes later. In many cases, it turns out to have no understanding of loyalty or gratitude at all. Bob may end up being killed on the spot, or he may be enslaved by the sealed evil
[...]
In any case, if Bob was the Big Bad before, he was really just a Little Bad; the formerly-sealed evil is the true Big Bad.
There is also Eat The Summoner, which fits very closely to the title of this question:
Alice is a Sealed Evil in a Can. Bob, either because he was promised something like immortality or riches, thinks he can control her, or because he thinks Alice isn't as evil as everyone says she is, tries to free her. After a bit of hard work, and possibly some outmaneuvering of people with more common sense, Bob frees Alice. However, rather than rewarding Bob for his service or even giving him a simple thank you, Alice tosses Bob into her mouth and eats him without a second thought.
7
Found by searching TV Tropes for the phrase "Do not call up that which you cannot put down".
– Oscar Cunningham
Jul 7 at 21:12
I think this is the better answer at this stage.
– Ash
Jul 9 at 18:14
add a comment |
Personally from the little bit of research I've done I feel that this is originally the "Good vs. Evil" troupe but after the mega force or "worser" evil is unleashed who then attempts to destroy the original villain it switches troupes to what's called "Eviler Than Thou". This is what I believe would be the best way to explain it. Here's the article that lead me to believe that this was the best answer: Eviler Than Thou
add a comment |
I think Frankenstein fits this category almost perfectly. In Frankenstein the protagonist had created a creature that backfired on him and ruined his life. That pattern does not take into account that evil aspect as the protagonist wasn't evil. It just describes the pattern of creating something for the sake of personal benefit (be it a good or bad character) that backfires horribly. So maybe we can call it - "The Frankenstein Effect"?
9
I'm not sure what version of Frankenstein you're thinking of, but the protagonist in Mary Shelley's original isn't really a "bad guy" planning "diabolical machinations".
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:16
Yes, I realize the motivation of the protagonist is not evil. that's why it doesn't fit perfectly. But, the main idea is the same, someone creates something that backfires horribly. Does it make sense?
– Oren_C
Jul 7 at 15:19
1
To me, it doesn't really feel like the same trope, without the "hoist by your own petard" element. It's related, but doesn't quite capture the nuance.
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:23
2
To be a good answer, you've got to say why Frankenstein fits this category almost perfectly.
– RonJohn
Jul 8 at 4:44
@RonJohn Thanks, I edited the answer.
– Oren_C
Jul 8 at 7:23
|
show 3 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "166"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fwriting.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f46482%2fwhats-it-called-when-the-bad-guy-gets-eaten%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Just Desserts
From TV Tropes:
A villain ultimately finds their evil deeds come back to bite them.
Literally—they end up getting eaten.
This does not include a Heroic Sacrifice. But may be subverted with a
minor character being killed and eaten in obvious foreshadowing of
what is going to happen to one of the bads at some point. While Mooks
may be recipients of the Just Desserts, a true Just Dessert is
reserved for those higher up the ladder. If the beast doing the eating
was unleashed by the guy who gets eaten, he's been Hoist by His Own
Petard, making him a Self-Disposing Villain. Bonus points if he made a
practice of feeding people to said beast beforehand.
4
Adding further, it's a subset of being hoist by one's petard.
– Matthew Dave
Jul 7 at 17:54
5
@MatthewDave I realized "just desserts" was the phrase that would work and did a search on it, finding this trope. But I am going out of my way not to go down the rabbit hole of the TV Tropes site, as I'd like to you know leave the house today. But yeah, you're right.
– Cyn
Jul 7 at 17:56
2
"Poetic justice" also applies.
– Ben Voigt
Jul 8 at 2:06
3
Or, if it happens earlier, "Just Hors D'oeuvres", "Just Salads", "Just Soups", "Just Main Courses", etc, etc.
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:51
3
@Baldrickk It's a very subtle pun: "just deserts", the standard English phrase, has one "s", relating to "deserve"; the TVTropes page linked spells it with a double "s", like the food type. So it's explicitly about being eaten, not attacked.
– IMSoP
Jul 8 at 14:40
|
show 7 more comments
Just Desserts
From TV Tropes:
A villain ultimately finds their evil deeds come back to bite them.
Literally—they end up getting eaten.
This does not include a Heroic Sacrifice. But may be subverted with a
minor character being killed and eaten in obvious foreshadowing of
what is going to happen to one of the bads at some point. While Mooks
may be recipients of the Just Desserts, a true Just Dessert is
reserved for those higher up the ladder. If the beast doing the eating
was unleashed by the guy who gets eaten, he's been Hoist by His Own
Petard, making him a Self-Disposing Villain. Bonus points if he made a
practice of feeding people to said beast beforehand.
4
Adding further, it's a subset of being hoist by one's petard.
– Matthew Dave
Jul 7 at 17:54
5
@MatthewDave I realized "just desserts" was the phrase that would work and did a search on it, finding this trope. But I am going out of my way not to go down the rabbit hole of the TV Tropes site, as I'd like to you know leave the house today. But yeah, you're right.
– Cyn
Jul 7 at 17:56
2
"Poetic justice" also applies.
– Ben Voigt
Jul 8 at 2:06
3
Or, if it happens earlier, "Just Hors D'oeuvres", "Just Salads", "Just Soups", "Just Main Courses", etc, etc.
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:51
3
@Baldrickk It's a very subtle pun: "just deserts", the standard English phrase, has one "s", relating to "deserve"; the TVTropes page linked spells it with a double "s", like the food type. So it's explicitly about being eaten, not attacked.
– IMSoP
Jul 8 at 14:40
|
show 7 more comments
Just Desserts
From TV Tropes:
A villain ultimately finds their evil deeds come back to bite them.
Literally—they end up getting eaten.
This does not include a Heroic Sacrifice. But may be subverted with a
minor character being killed and eaten in obvious foreshadowing of
what is going to happen to one of the bads at some point. While Mooks
may be recipients of the Just Desserts, a true Just Dessert is
reserved for those higher up the ladder. If the beast doing the eating
was unleashed by the guy who gets eaten, he's been Hoist by His Own
Petard, making him a Self-Disposing Villain. Bonus points if he made a
practice of feeding people to said beast beforehand.
Just Desserts
From TV Tropes:
A villain ultimately finds their evil deeds come back to bite them.
Literally—they end up getting eaten.
This does not include a Heroic Sacrifice. But may be subverted with a
minor character being killed and eaten in obvious foreshadowing of
what is going to happen to one of the bads at some point. While Mooks
may be recipients of the Just Desserts, a true Just Dessert is
reserved for those higher up the ladder. If the beast doing the eating
was unleashed by the guy who gets eaten, he's been Hoist by His Own
Petard, making him a Self-Disposing Villain. Bonus points if he made a
practice of feeding people to said beast beforehand.
answered Jul 7 at 17:48
CynCyn
26.8k2 gold badges59 silver badges125 bronze badges
26.8k2 gold badges59 silver badges125 bronze badges
4
Adding further, it's a subset of being hoist by one's petard.
– Matthew Dave
Jul 7 at 17:54
5
@MatthewDave I realized "just desserts" was the phrase that would work and did a search on it, finding this trope. But I am going out of my way not to go down the rabbit hole of the TV Tropes site, as I'd like to you know leave the house today. But yeah, you're right.
– Cyn
Jul 7 at 17:56
2
"Poetic justice" also applies.
– Ben Voigt
Jul 8 at 2:06
3
Or, if it happens earlier, "Just Hors D'oeuvres", "Just Salads", "Just Soups", "Just Main Courses", etc, etc.
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:51
3
@Baldrickk It's a very subtle pun: "just deserts", the standard English phrase, has one "s", relating to "deserve"; the TVTropes page linked spells it with a double "s", like the food type. So it's explicitly about being eaten, not attacked.
– IMSoP
Jul 8 at 14:40
|
show 7 more comments
4
Adding further, it's a subset of being hoist by one's petard.
– Matthew Dave
Jul 7 at 17:54
5
@MatthewDave I realized "just desserts" was the phrase that would work and did a search on it, finding this trope. But I am going out of my way not to go down the rabbit hole of the TV Tropes site, as I'd like to you know leave the house today. But yeah, you're right.
– Cyn
Jul 7 at 17:56
2
"Poetic justice" also applies.
– Ben Voigt
Jul 8 at 2:06
3
Or, if it happens earlier, "Just Hors D'oeuvres", "Just Salads", "Just Soups", "Just Main Courses", etc, etc.
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:51
3
@Baldrickk It's a very subtle pun: "just deserts", the standard English phrase, has one "s", relating to "deserve"; the TVTropes page linked spells it with a double "s", like the food type. So it's explicitly about being eaten, not attacked.
– IMSoP
Jul 8 at 14:40
4
4
Adding further, it's a subset of being hoist by one's petard.
– Matthew Dave
Jul 7 at 17:54
Adding further, it's a subset of being hoist by one's petard.
– Matthew Dave
Jul 7 at 17:54
5
5
@MatthewDave I realized "just desserts" was the phrase that would work and did a search on it, finding this trope. But I am going out of my way not to go down the rabbit hole of the TV Tropes site, as I'd like to you know leave the house today. But yeah, you're right.
– Cyn
Jul 7 at 17:56
@MatthewDave I realized "just desserts" was the phrase that would work and did a search on it, finding this trope. But I am going out of my way not to go down the rabbit hole of the TV Tropes site, as I'd like to you know leave the house today. But yeah, you're right.
– Cyn
Jul 7 at 17:56
2
2
"Poetic justice" also applies.
– Ben Voigt
Jul 8 at 2:06
"Poetic justice" also applies.
– Ben Voigt
Jul 8 at 2:06
3
3
Or, if it happens earlier, "Just Hors D'oeuvres", "Just Salads", "Just Soups", "Just Main Courses", etc, etc.
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:51
Or, if it happens earlier, "Just Hors D'oeuvres", "Just Salads", "Just Soups", "Just Main Courses", etc, etc.
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:51
3
3
@Baldrickk It's a very subtle pun: "just deserts", the standard English phrase, has one "s", relating to "deserve"; the TVTropes page linked spells it with a double "s", like the food type. So it's explicitly about being eaten, not attacked.
– IMSoP
Jul 8 at 14:40
@Baldrickk It's a very subtle pun: "just deserts", the standard English phrase, has one "s", relating to "deserve"; the TVTropes page linked spells it with a double "s", like the food type. So it's explicitly about being eaten, not attacked.
– IMSoP
Jul 8 at 14:40
|
show 7 more comments
On TV Tropes this is called Evil Is Not a Toy:
Sometimes the Sealed Evil in a Can doesn't escape by itself, nor is it released by an Unwitting Pawn, but is deliberately set free by a villain (or hero). Let's call him Bob. Bob usually thinks he can control the sealed evil, or bargain with it, expecting to trade on a certain level of gratitude on its part since he was the one who freed it (or in extreme cases, resurrected it).
This never works.
The Sealed Evil in a Can will inevitably turn on the one who freed it — sometimes sooner, sometimes later. In many cases, it turns out to have no understanding of loyalty or gratitude at all. Bob may end up being killed on the spot, or he may be enslaved by the sealed evil
[...]
In any case, if Bob was the Big Bad before, he was really just a Little Bad; the formerly-sealed evil is the true Big Bad.
There is also Eat The Summoner, which fits very closely to the title of this question:
Alice is a Sealed Evil in a Can. Bob, either because he was promised something like immortality or riches, thinks he can control her, or because he thinks Alice isn't as evil as everyone says she is, tries to free her. After a bit of hard work, and possibly some outmaneuvering of people with more common sense, Bob frees Alice. However, rather than rewarding Bob for his service or even giving him a simple thank you, Alice tosses Bob into her mouth and eats him without a second thought.
7
Found by searching TV Tropes for the phrase "Do not call up that which you cannot put down".
– Oscar Cunningham
Jul 7 at 21:12
I think this is the better answer at this stage.
– Ash
Jul 9 at 18:14
add a comment |
On TV Tropes this is called Evil Is Not a Toy:
Sometimes the Sealed Evil in a Can doesn't escape by itself, nor is it released by an Unwitting Pawn, but is deliberately set free by a villain (or hero). Let's call him Bob. Bob usually thinks he can control the sealed evil, or bargain with it, expecting to trade on a certain level of gratitude on its part since he was the one who freed it (or in extreme cases, resurrected it).
This never works.
The Sealed Evil in a Can will inevitably turn on the one who freed it — sometimes sooner, sometimes later. In many cases, it turns out to have no understanding of loyalty or gratitude at all. Bob may end up being killed on the spot, or he may be enslaved by the sealed evil
[...]
In any case, if Bob was the Big Bad before, he was really just a Little Bad; the formerly-sealed evil is the true Big Bad.
There is also Eat The Summoner, which fits very closely to the title of this question:
Alice is a Sealed Evil in a Can. Bob, either because he was promised something like immortality or riches, thinks he can control her, or because he thinks Alice isn't as evil as everyone says she is, tries to free her. After a bit of hard work, and possibly some outmaneuvering of people with more common sense, Bob frees Alice. However, rather than rewarding Bob for his service or even giving him a simple thank you, Alice tosses Bob into her mouth and eats him without a second thought.
7
Found by searching TV Tropes for the phrase "Do not call up that which you cannot put down".
– Oscar Cunningham
Jul 7 at 21:12
I think this is the better answer at this stage.
– Ash
Jul 9 at 18:14
add a comment |
On TV Tropes this is called Evil Is Not a Toy:
Sometimes the Sealed Evil in a Can doesn't escape by itself, nor is it released by an Unwitting Pawn, but is deliberately set free by a villain (or hero). Let's call him Bob. Bob usually thinks he can control the sealed evil, or bargain with it, expecting to trade on a certain level of gratitude on its part since he was the one who freed it (or in extreme cases, resurrected it).
This never works.
The Sealed Evil in a Can will inevitably turn on the one who freed it — sometimes sooner, sometimes later. In many cases, it turns out to have no understanding of loyalty or gratitude at all. Bob may end up being killed on the spot, or he may be enslaved by the sealed evil
[...]
In any case, if Bob was the Big Bad before, he was really just a Little Bad; the formerly-sealed evil is the true Big Bad.
There is also Eat The Summoner, which fits very closely to the title of this question:
Alice is a Sealed Evil in a Can. Bob, either because he was promised something like immortality or riches, thinks he can control her, or because he thinks Alice isn't as evil as everyone says she is, tries to free her. After a bit of hard work, and possibly some outmaneuvering of people with more common sense, Bob frees Alice. However, rather than rewarding Bob for his service or even giving him a simple thank you, Alice tosses Bob into her mouth and eats him without a second thought.
On TV Tropes this is called Evil Is Not a Toy:
Sometimes the Sealed Evil in a Can doesn't escape by itself, nor is it released by an Unwitting Pawn, but is deliberately set free by a villain (or hero). Let's call him Bob. Bob usually thinks he can control the sealed evil, or bargain with it, expecting to trade on a certain level of gratitude on its part since he was the one who freed it (or in extreme cases, resurrected it).
This never works.
The Sealed Evil in a Can will inevitably turn on the one who freed it — sometimes sooner, sometimes later. In many cases, it turns out to have no understanding of loyalty or gratitude at all. Bob may end up being killed on the spot, or he may be enslaved by the sealed evil
[...]
In any case, if Bob was the Big Bad before, he was really just a Little Bad; the formerly-sealed evil is the true Big Bad.
There is also Eat The Summoner, which fits very closely to the title of this question:
Alice is a Sealed Evil in a Can. Bob, either because he was promised something like immortality or riches, thinks he can control her, or because he thinks Alice isn't as evil as everyone says she is, tries to free her. After a bit of hard work, and possibly some outmaneuvering of people with more common sense, Bob frees Alice. However, rather than rewarding Bob for his service or even giving him a simple thank you, Alice tosses Bob into her mouth and eats him without a second thought.
edited Jul 7 at 21:41
answered Jul 7 at 21:10
Oscar CunninghamOscar Cunningham
3414 bronze badges
3414 bronze badges
7
Found by searching TV Tropes for the phrase "Do not call up that which you cannot put down".
– Oscar Cunningham
Jul 7 at 21:12
I think this is the better answer at this stage.
– Ash
Jul 9 at 18:14
add a comment |
7
Found by searching TV Tropes for the phrase "Do not call up that which you cannot put down".
– Oscar Cunningham
Jul 7 at 21:12
I think this is the better answer at this stage.
– Ash
Jul 9 at 18:14
7
7
Found by searching TV Tropes for the phrase "Do not call up that which you cannot put down".
– Oscar Cunningham
Jul 7 at 21:12
Found by searching TV Tropes for the phrase "Do not call up that which you cannot put down".
– Oscar Cunningham
Jul 7 at 21:12
I think this is the better answer at this stage.
– Ash
Jul 9 at 18:14
I think this is the better answer at this stage.
– Ash
Jul 9 at 18:14
add a comment |
Personally from the little bit of research I've done I feel that this is originally the "Good vs. Evil" troupe but after the mega force or "worser" evil is unleashed who then attempts to destroy the original villain it switches troupes to what's called "Eviler Than Thou". This is what I believe would be the best way to explain it. Here's the article that lead me to believe that this was the best answer: Eviler Than Thou
add a comment |
Personally from the little bit of research I've done I feel that this is originally the "Good vs. Evil" troupe but after the mega force or "worser" evil is unleashed who then attempts to destroy the original villain it switches troupes to what's called "Eviler Than Thou". This is what I believe would be the best way to explain it. Here's the article that lead me to believe that this was the best answer: Eviler Than Thou
add a comment |
Personally from the little bit of research I've done I feel that this is originally the "Good vs. Evil" troupe but after the mega force or "worser" evil is unleashed who then attempts to destroy the original villain it switches troupes to what's called "Eviler Than Thou". This is what I believe would be the best way to explain it. Here's the article that lead me to believe that this was the best answer: Eviler Than Thou
Personally from the little bit of research I've done I feel that this is originally the "Good vs. Evil" troupe but after the mega force or "worser" evil is unleashed who then attempts to destroy the original villain it switches troupes to what's called "Eviler Than Thou". This is what I believe would be the best way to explain it. Here's the article that lead me to believe that this was the best answer: Eviler Than Thou
answered Jul 7 at 17:38
Tommy R.Tommy R.
266 bronze badges
266 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
I think Frankenstein fits this category almost perfectly. In Frankenstein the protagonist had created a creature that backfired on him and ruined his life. That pattern does not take into account that evil aspect as the protagonist wasn't evil. It just describes the pattern of creating something for the sake of personal benefit (be it a good or bad character) that backfires horribly. So maybe we can call it - "The Frankenstein Effect"?
9
I'm not sure what version of Frankenstein you're thinking of, but the protagonist in Mary Shelley's original isn't really a "bad guy" planning "diabolical machinations".
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:16
Yes, I realize the motivation of the protagonist is not evil. that's why it doesn't fit perfectly. But, the main idea is the same, someone creates something that backfires horribly. Does it make sense?
– Oren_C
Jul 7 at 15:19
1
To me, it doesn't really feel like the same trope, without the "hoist by your own petard" element. It's related, but doesn't quite capture the nuance.
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:23
2
To be a good answer, you've got to say why Frankenstein fits this category almost perfectly.
– RonJohn
Jul 8 at 4:44
@RonJohn Thanks, I edited the answer.
– Oren_C
Jul 8 at 7:23
|
show 3 more comments
I think Frankenstein fits this category almost perfectly. In Frankenstein the protagonist had created a creature that backfired on him and ruined his life. That pattern does not take into account that evil aspect as the protagonist wasn't evil. It just describes the pattern of creating something for the sake of personal benefit (be it a good or bad character) that backfires horribly. So maybe we can call it - "The Frankenstein Effect"?
9
I'm not sure what version of Frankenstein you're thinking of, but the protagonist in Mary Shelley's original isn't really a "bad guy" planning "diabolical machinations".
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:16
Yes, I realize the motivation of the protagonist is not evil. that's why it doesn't fit perfectly. But, the main idea is the same, someone creates something that backfires horribly. Does it make sense?
– Oren_C
Jul 7 at 15:19
1
To me, it doesn't really feel like the same trope, without the "hoist by your own petard" element. It's related, but doesn't quite capture the nuance.
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:23
2
To be a good answer, you've got to say why Frankenstein fits this category almost perfectly.
– RonJohn
Jul 8 at 4:44
@RonJohn Thanks, I edited the answer.
– Oren_C
Jul 8 at 7:23
|
show 3 more comments
I think Frankenstein fits this category almost perfectly. In Frankenstein the protagonist had created a creature that backfired on him and ruined his life. That pattern does not take into account that evil aspect as the protagonist wasn't evil. It just describes the pattern of creating something for the sake of personal benefit (be it a good or bad character) that backfires horribly. So maybe we can call it - "The Frankenstein Effect"?
I think Frankenstein fits this category almost perfectly. In Frankenstein the protagonist had created a creature that backfired on him and ruined his life. That pattern does not take into account that evil aspect as the protagonist wasn't evil. It just describes the pattern of creating something for the sake of personal benefit (be it a good or bad character) that backfires horribly. So maybe we can call it - "The Frankenstein Effect"?
edited Jul 8 at 7:23
answered Jul 7 at 14:55
Oren_COren_C
1,2621 gold badge1 silver badge15 bronze badges
1,2621 gold badge1 silver badge15 bronze badges
9
I'm not sure what version of Frankenstein you're thinking of, but the protagonist in Mary Shelley's original isn't really a "bad guy" planning "diabolical machinations".
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:16
Yes, I realize the motivation of the protagonist is not evil. that's why it doesn't fit perfectly. But, the main idea is the same, someone creates something that backfires horribly. Does it make sense?
– Oren_C
Jul 7 at 15:19
1
To me, it doesn't really feel like the same trope, without the "hoist by your own petard" element. It's related, but doesn't quite capture the nuance.
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:23
2
To be a good answer, you've got to say why Frankenstein fits this category almost perfectly.
– RonJohn
Jul 8 at 4:44
@RonJohn Thanks, I edited the answer.
– Oren_C
Jul 8 at 7:23
|
show 3 more comments
9
I'm not sure what version of Frankenstein you're thinking of, but the protagonist in Mary Shelley's original isn't really a "bad guy" planning "diabolical machinations".
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:16
Yes, I realize the motivation of the protagonist is not evil. that's why it doesn't fit perfectly. But, the main idea is the same, someone creates something that backfires horribly. Does it make sense?
– Oren_C
Jul 7 at 15:19
1
To me, it doesn't really feel like the same trope, without the "hoist by your own petard" element. It's related, but doesn't quite capture the nuance.
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:23
2
To be a good answer, you've got to say why Frankenstein fits this category almost perfectly.
– RonJohn
Jul 8 at 4:44
@RonJohn Thanks, I edited the answer.
– Oren_C
Jul 8 at 7:23
9
9
I'm not sure what version of Frankenstein you're thinking of, but the protagonist in Mary Shelley's original isn't really a "bad guy" planning "diabolical machinations".
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:16
I'm not sure what version of Frankenstein you're thinking of, but the protagonist in Mary Shelley's original isn't really a "bad guy" planning "diabolical machinations".
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:16
Yes, I realize the motivation of the protagonist is not evil. that's why it doesn't fit perfectly. But, the main idea is the same, someone creates something that backfires horribly. Does it make sense?
– Oren_C
Jul 7 at 15:19
Yes, I realize the motivation of the protagonist is not evil. that's why it doesn't fit perfectly. But, the main idea is the same, someone creates something that backfires horribly. Does it make sense?
– Oren_C
Jul 7 at 15:19
1
1
To me, it doesn't really feel like the same trope, without the "hoist by your own petard" element. It's related, but doesn't quite capture the nuance.
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:23
To me, it doesn't really feel like the same trope, without the "hoist by your own petard" element. It's related, but doesn't quite capture the nuance.
– IMSoP
Jul 7 at 15:23
2
2
To be a good answer, you've got to say why Frankenstein fits this category almost perfectly.
– RonJohn
Jul 8 at 4:44
To be a good answer, you've got to say why Frankenstein fits this category almost perfectly.
– RonJohn
Jul 8 at 4:44
@RonJohn Thanks, I edited the answer.
– Oren_C
Jul 8 at 7:23
@RonJohn Thanks, I edited the answer.
– Oren_C
Jul 8 at 7:23
|
show 3 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Writing Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fwriting.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f46482%2fwhats-it-called-when-the-bad-guy-gets-eaten%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
14
I'm fond of the phrase "His karma ran over his dogma."
– Lauren Ipsum
Jul 7 at 12:45
7
Tyranus Escapus Bitus Assus.
– wetcircuit
Jul 7 at 14:20
7
Indi...uuurrrp!...gestion!
– Bob Jarvis
Jul 8 at 3:49
1
What's it called when the bad guy gets deus ex machina-ed? That. Which usually also ends in one: our superheros might not be able to defeat the evil wizard, but they can just melee the random monster to death after it eats him, as always.
– Mazura
Jul 8 at 22:56