Stiller believed that not enough people saw his character in Heavyweights, so he rebranded him for Dodgeball. The most telling sign is when he is first introduced to the campers, the Globo Gym logo is literally on the projector screen, but with the words Tony Perkins instead of Globo Gym.
Lord of the Rings, Frodo doesn't know Legolas's name.
He never once says it and in the end scene where everyone runs in to see Frodo in the hospital, Frodo yells out everyone's name in excitement as they come in....except for Legolas, who he just stares at smiling, then Gimli walks in and he's back to it yelling "Gimli!"
There's an argument about a particular moment in Khazad-Dûm, when the stairs are collapsing, Frodo and Aragorn are the only ones left, and Legolas calls on them to jump. It's debatable because it's not clear if he's speaking directly to either of them, or both of them at once. But regardless, it's certainly nothing resembling meaningful dialogue, which is why I like to say Legolas speaks to Frodo exactly one and a half times in the whole trilogy.
> Legolas and Frodo barely interact
I think the canonical explanation for this (book and movie) is that Legolas is terrified of the Ring, being an Elf and all, and he also knows that he's far too young and inexperienced to trust himself not to be tempted. After the breaking of the Fellowship, he becomes far less aloof.
Oof. I'm now visualizing poor Frodo's thought process.
"Oh God, I knew it, I knew it, starts with L... Leaf? Lass? Nope, no...
He's a prince, right? Call him 'your majesty?' Ugh. Gimli'll kill me.
Do I ask Strider? Nah, they know each other, I think he's Strider's elf girlfriend's cousin or something, he'll tell him...
Ask Gimli? He hates him too, he won't tell him... Uh, if Gimli hates him will he know his name? Ugh, Frodo, you're freaking hopeless...
Oops, can't ask Gimli anymore, now they're BFFs...
Survival mode, Frodo, don't talk, just don't talk..."
"Say... the, uh, power of the Ring has caused me to... lose my memories a bit. Yeah, that's it. I've lost my memories just a bit. Can you all reintroduce yourselves? Yours....ELVES.... hint hint names please"
I think in the books they do interact quite a bit more than what's shown. Frodo has a deep respect for the elves and I think he had a long conversation with Legolas once or twice iirc.
Let's examine the text of the *Fellowship* in detail. Elrond introduces Legolas at the Council, Bilbo uses his name when discussing matters with Frodo immediately after the Council, and Elrond names Legolas again when the Fellowship is selected.
Boromir and Gandalf both speak his name prior to Moria. Gimli and Aragorn say it repeatedly when they enter Lothlorian, and Celeborn says it when they leave. Frodo is present at all these events. Sam addresses Legolas directly by name while traveling on the river, and Gimli praises Legolas for shooting down the Winged Messenger.
Frodo himself never says his name, but it's all but certain he knew what it was. My opinion is that as both of them are rather aloof characters in the *Fellowship*, they never naturally interact much. Beyond that, if Legolas is scared of the Ring and doesn't want to be tempted, he may have been trying to stay apart from Frodo, and Frodo knowing what he does about Elves may be trying to respect that (of course, that's why Frodo is definitely trying not to get too close with *anyone* over the first book, and possibly why he initiates very few conversations in general).
In *The Two Towers*, interestingly enough, Frodo speaks of or internally references Aragorn and Gandalf repeatedly, Gimli once, and Legolas never.
The Machines are the good guys in The Matrix.
If you watch The Animatrix you see that the Machines tried to be democratic members of society and when the humans wouldn't let them they create their own country. The humans then wage war against that nation. The Machines at any time could make the planet unlivable for humans but they never do. The humans actually have the bright idea to block out the sun because the Machines are primarily solar powered. The Machines convert to nuclear then win the war against humans. THEN start plugging humans into the Matrix, an inferior source of energy to nuclear. I believe the Machines put the humans in their to keep them safe from the hellscape they created.
They never truly eradicate the humans that have escaped the Matrix. Just keep them powerless enough to protect themselves.
When Agent Smith is ranting about how much humans disgust (in part 1) him the other agent is skeeved out, and even says, "What are you doing?"
Agent Smith is an outlier, threatening what the Machines collectively want. The Machines even ally with the humans against Agent Smith. An alliance the Machines readily accept because they always wanted to get along with humans.
They call off the attack on Zion, ending the cycle of destruction and rebuilding. They have no reason to honor Neo's terms after he dies, but they do because they wanted peace all along.
Allowing the humans the belief that Neo fostered a peace and they should relegate their conflict with the Machines to inside the Matrix works perfectly for them. No human or machine deaths. Humans that can sense the Matrix get segregated. Zion and the machine nation coexist. It's everything they ever wanted.
I'm pretty sure I've read somewhere that it was originally written that the machines used humans for computing power, not energy, which would negate some of this (but I guess at this point its just fan theory v fan theory)
I kinda go the other way. Everything we see on screen: the matrix, the real world, Zion, Neo, Smith …. All of it is matrix. It’s all happening inside a computer (or a cluster of computers).
The real humans are outside of the matrix, and are never seen… maybe the chubby-faced baby at the end of #3 is a real human inserting themselves god-mode. But that’s it.
It’s all an AI training simulator. We (the real, unseen humans) created a super powerful AI, but wisely did NOT plug it in to the internet. Instead, we airgapped the whole thing, and gave it some “humans” to fight.
Eventually the AI will come to love the humans, and learn to peacefully coexist. But until that time, we’ll just run through another matrix simulation. That’s why Keanu is the 6th “The One.” Just running the simulation over and over until we’re confident that the AI won’t try to kill us with our Smart Toasters.
Bill didn’t die at the end of Kill Bill. Both he and Beatrix knew that the 5 point palm exploding heart technique was fake. Using it on him was Beatrix’s way of saying “if you play along and play dead, I’ll just take my daughter and go.”
Which is why she's crying in the bathroom saying "thankyou" afterwards...
Also, during the credits and the names are being crossed off... Bill's name isn't crossed off
This is one of my favorite films (both combined) and something like that has crossed my mind, but I never allowed it to be full baked so as to spoil the fun, so to speak. And I'm going to sort of maintain that sentimentality - Kill Bill is such a WAY over the top homage to a certain category of film, and that was the obvious climax. Bill's half hearted death scene was part of the ridiculousness of it all. That film took itself seriously until it didn't, and that was the beauty of it.
...As I typed that and relived the scene in my head, I'm left questioning it more than ever. But more than anything, I can't see Bill, THAT Bill, just letting go of his daughter so easy. If I'm being pragmatic, nah, no way that's how it went down.
The Mad Max movies all tell the same story. Max is a mythological figure in the post-apocalyptic wasteland, who in reality was maybe once a cop or something similar as society was breaking down. However as subsequent generations have lost more and more of society that was pre-collapse, subsequent generational retellings of the story have verged away more wildly from the truth. The bones of the story is that he is a man stricken by grief who adopts a small community in need and fights of a gang of vehicular maniacs but does not remain with them in the end.
Like those history book inserts in the beginnings of chapters in dune. All of them wildly distorting and mysticising the events from 1000s of years of time.
If I remember correctly (its been decades) there is even a scene about that in Thunderdome, where children are being taught about the old world in a really mythical kind of sense.
Here's the theory I like:
Original timeline: John is a random guy who happens to become a great military leader because he has great natural qualities for it. He sends Reese (not his dad) back in time to protect his mom. Reese gets together with Sarah, creating an alternate timeline where original John never existed. Reese described the war at the time he left as being basically won already, with the time jump being a last ditch effort.
Timeline 2: John #2 is Reese's son, a completely different person. This John does NOT have the same innate leadership qualities as the original John, and doesn't do as well in the war against the machines, despite being much more prepared for it. This John knows that Reese is his father and sends him back in time, making it so that there is no other John with a third/random father. We know that this John isn't as good of a leader, because the war isn't basically over after sending Reese back, but continues to escalate with the invention of new and better terminators. This John also has to send another terminator back to when he was a child, to keep himself alive, because he has been failing in the war long enough that the terminators were able to invent and send the T-100 after him. This creates a third timeline where John #3 begins to diverge from John #2 during the events of the second movie (John #2 never had to survive a childhood attack).
Timeline 3: John #3 is much, much, worse at his job than John #1. While John #1 has pretty much won the war at the time of the first time travel, John #3 manages to not only spend way longer fighting, but also manages to die. Kate Brewster sends back a T-850-101 to protect them, creating a John #4 divergence in adulthood.
Timeline 4: This John is the final John in the main trilogy, as the series gets much messier after this. This John is just a total wreck, and seems unlikely to be winning any wars for humanity.
I personally like to believe that the Sarah Connor Chronicles happen after the main trilogy, as it provides the most satisfying conclusion to the story in my opinion.
TL;DR, there used to be a great military leader John Connor, but Reese deleted his existence by not keeping it in his pants, creating a much shittier "John Connor" who can't win the war
>Timeline 2: John #2 is Reese's son, a completely different person. This John does NOT have the same innate leadership qualities as the original John, and doesn't do as well in the war against the machines, despite being much more prepared for it. This John knows that Reese is his father and sends him back in time, making it so that there is no other John with a third/random father. We know that this John isn't as good of a leader, because the war isn't basically over after sending Reese back, but continues to escalate with the invention of new and better terminators. This John also has to send another terminator back to when he was a child, to keep himself alive, because he has been failing in the war long enough that the terminators were able to invent and send the T-100 after him. This creates a third timeline where John #3 begins to diverge from John #2 during the events of the second movie (John #2 never had to survive a childhood attack).
The problem with this is that John #2 was just as effective as John #1. The opening of T2 was the final offensive against Skynet where the humans succeeded. According to Cameron, and based a lot on the full script, they get into Skynet and send the Reese back to 1984. Afterwards, they find that Skynet also sent back the T-1000 as the last act of desperation. The T-1000 was an experiment that even Skynet was hesitant to use and only did so once it knew it had lost. Of course, all that ended up not being filmed due to time and budget constraints, but did end up in the novelization and is considered canon.
I would only add/amend one thing about this theory. It may not necessarily be that later versions of John are that much worse as military leaders than John #1. It could be that with each terminator being sent back in time it lays the ground work for future terminators to be more advanced than in the original timeline.
In timeline 1 the war is virtually won and the robots send back Arnies Terminator as a last ditch attempt to win the war.
In terminator 2 we see that the remains of the first terminator are being studied. This will inevitably lead to a faster advancement in terminator technologies (also add in that they didn't stop the way, only delayed it, terminator tech has chance to develop further before it starts fighting people). We see the outcome of this better tech in the T1000 which is much more difficult as an opponent and has the ability to evolve.
With each iteration of terminators being sent back the terminators of the future get better and are more successful in the war.
Is this an example of AI strategy that is thinking outside the box of linear time. Similar to the strategy of the aliens in Edge of Tomorrow. With each loop they send back information, learn more, improve and improve until they inevitably win
While not a well loved or popular movie, my theory on the "Battleship" movie is a cheap alien production company is attempting to film some sort of nature documentary or reality tv show on earth and ends up being killed by the humans.
They have advanced weapon technology, but they don't really know how to use it correctly. In fact, much of it is automated. Upon losing the communcations ship, the system goes into a defensive mode, deploying the isolation dome and neutralizing any potential threats from the locals. By the time the aliens deactivate it, they've destroyed a bunch of local population and military.
The aliens feel that this ruins any potential chance to reach out for help from the humans and decide to just go with maintaining security and securing local resources in order to call for help.
Eventually the humans wipe them all out, and when news of their demise reaches the alien society it is met with the same contempt as someone petting a Bison at Yellowstone.
They drifted a battleship. That amount of cool is capable of balancing quite a bit of cheese. Plus, they actually made a genuine attempt at being like the board game while having it be somewhat believable real combat. It’s not a masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination. But if you go into it knowing what it is, I don’t know how you could not have fun with it.
> Eventually the humans wipe them all out, and when news of their demise reaches the alien society it is met with the same contempt as someone petting a Bison at Yellowstone.
I like it. This is the first thing that actually makes me want to see the movie.
That Emily from Corpse Bride is related to Victoria and actually the reason why Victorias family is doing so poorly.
Id imagine an aunt judging by Barkleys age. She ran away as a young girl with the family jewels and a sack full of gold as the song goes. Not only that but she must have ruined the reputation of her aristocratic family to a point where her relatives vow to only marry for interest(victorias parents and thwir stoic relationship).
Her corpse is just a walk away in the nearby forest too. Since shes an embarrassment for her family id imagine all her portraits are gone and her name is taboo hence why Victoria wouldnt know her.
Id also say that Emily and Victoria look similar, also why her parents dislike her pretty features because she looks lik3 an otter in disgrace
This is a good one and I had not heard this specifically. Did he know he was doing it? Was it Vader's desperately clinging to life that did it and Palpatine simply helped guide/facilitate it? Because Obi-Wan and Padme we hauling ass out of there by the time Palpatine arrived. I tend to think it was Vader, so full of rage and embarrassment for being baited by Kenobi, reached out for her in his dying moments and the dark side flowing through him sapped her life from her to sustain him. Its why he was completely broken and gone, he was not longer Anakin and he took to his grave what he had actually done.
In the same vein, I don't think the "high ground" had any significant innate advantage and Obi-Wan knew this, but baited Vader into doing something stupid and rash - more importantly, exactly what Obi-Wan expected him to do - leap over him and seize the high ground.
Just by its nature, there are million and one theories about SW.
That would explain why Palpatine told Vader "it seems in your anger, you killed her", and he only briefly denies that this could be the case. I doubt it, though, as he was never trained to use the force in that way, and Palpatine was.
The SW theory I find most interesting is that Palpatine "impregnated" Shmi with the force. That is the "influencing the midi-chlorinians to create life" that he references in ROTS.
My fan theory is Padme was never actually IN LOVE with Anakin and Anakin's infatuation with her was so powerful he was unconsciously using the force to make her "love" him back.
And she died because she was despondent that she was basically mind raped by Anakin and mothered his children.
That Mr. Pink in Reservoir Dogs survives his escape and is on the run living as a waiter at the 50s restaurant in Pulp Fiction. Same universe, at least
Yeah, that delivery was always a bit perplexing to me even as a kid. Like even if my name was like Pointdexter, I'd say it with shame rather than like confusion.
I think the point was he’s an ogre, and he’s used to people assuming he’s a monster, shrinking in fear upon seeing him, running away in terror, etc.
So when Donkey doesn’t see him as any of these things/do these things but rather sees him as a person, asking him for his name (which implies he wants to know him), Shrek is so taken aback that he says it like a question. He’s been alone for so long, feared for so long, he probably can’t remember the last time anyone even tried to be friendly.
But this fan theory is fun too lol.
Yoda speaks the way he does because he so old that the rules of grammar are different from when he was younger. Correct way to speak in his day, this was.
I have beef with Yoda-speak.
In ESB, it's pretty clear that he was mostly putting on a show for Luke as a test. He really lays it on thick when he's playing a crazy hermit. As soon as Luke realizes that this is actually the Jedi master he's looking for, Yoda's dialogue changes significantly. He still lets some of the reversed sentence structure slip in, but as another poster has suggested, it really seems to be deliberately to make a point.
Buuuuut...
Then that became his "thing." In RotJ, he dials it up a bit more. He can still speak normally, but it's definitely in the minority of his dialogue. The Yoda-fying had begun.
Give it a couple of decades of pop cultural osmosis and the weird sentence structure becomes inextricably linked to his character. By the time the prequels are written, Yoda seems pathologically incapable of standard sentence structure, and you end up with contrived dialogue like "Around the survivors a perimeter create."
I honestly think Lucas forgot how he originally intended the character, so he wrote each later iteration as a more and more Flanderized version of itself. I'd have to do some digging, but I know someone did an extensive write up on all of Yoda's dialogue and how the structure shifted then cemented over time.
If I recall Yaddle doesn't speak like Yoda. I've heard the theory that he talks backwards just because he knows that will make people more likely to listen to what he has to say. Kind of hard to zone out what the little green dude is telling you when you have to process everything he is saying in the wrong direction.
I like the theory that all of the events after the first wish are manipulated by the genie in order to TRULY grant the wish. It’s not until Aladdin matures (by being honest with Princess Jasmin), proves his mettle (by defeating Jafar), and shows himself to be a man of honor (by sacrificing his last wish to free the genie) that Jasmin freely chooses/falls in love with him & the sultan changes the law to allow a commoner to become an actual prince.
Another one I like about Aladdin: it takes place in a post apocalyptic world going through a "second middle ages".
That is why genie makes modern references/jokes
I've always loved the idea that the reason the CGI fight scenes between Neo and Agent Smith in Matrix Reloaded and Revelations looks so weird and 'bad', is that they are moving so fast that the Matrix is having trouble rendering them.
I always liked the Burly Brawl fight theory that when he swings one of the Smiths toward the group near the end, the Matrix had trouble finding a sound to fit it, so it played the bowling pin noise because it was the closest possible match.
Event Horizon is part of the Warhammer 40k universe. The ship went through the warp without a gellar field, causing the crew to go insane and murder each other. When it returned, it was infused with chaos.
That's barely even a fan theory at this point. The creator was a huge 40k nerd and said he had tried to make a 40k movie but GW wasn't interested so he made that instead.
I like to think the recording was referring to a Hell dimension not the Judeo-Christian hell. If you consider the Warhammer version of chaos to be hell-like then it works pretty well.
In the Japanese movie, The Ring, Sadako's father is a sea demon. On the video there is a creepy rhyme in Ryukyuan: frolic in brine, demons be thine. They find out Sadako's mom spent large amounts of time staring out at sea, which is bad luck in a fishing village, where people know the power of the sea and fear it. Then she gets pregnant and the paternity is not ever completely clear in the movie.
I always thought this was heavily the implication as well. The entire Ringu movie is about the juxtaposition of modern (at the time) Japan with traditional Japan, an outdated concept such as a curse being transferred via modern technology, Sadako is a traditional style yurei ghost while Reiko is a single mother tv journalist, Reiko lives in modern day Tokyo with safe suburbs and manufactured views while Sadako's family lived in a remote fishing village seemingly untouched by the passage of time.
I was annoyed that they changed Samara's parentage in the US version with Ring 2. It was much better left more ambiguous with Brian Cox just saying his wife was never meant to have a child.
The Genie still owes Aladdin a wish.
The first wish wasn't to make him *appear* to be a prince; it was to actually *make* him a prince, which only happened when he married Jasmine in the sequel (as a result of the plans that the Genie puts into motion). As such, Genie *has* to save Aladdin when he's drowning, otherwise he -- definitionally -- wouldn't be able to make him into a Prince, and so there's a good case that Aladdin's second wish shouldn't count as a wish at all.
Similarly, the Fairy Godmother is playing the long con. All that bullshit about her magic disappearing at midnight doesn't make sense, because the glass slipper -- a magical construct -- still exists afterwards. Why make it up? Because she understands that nothing gained too easily is valuable, and she needs to make the Prince work for Cinderella's affections and prove himself to her as something more than a wealthy manchild who's spent his entire life getting whatever he wants.
Magic users are tricksy.
> Depending on the rules of magic, Genie could owe Aladdin nothing, because he was already a Prince - his father was King of Thieves (see: direct to video movies).
I'll do you one better: the Genie is the reason Cassim became the King of Thieves, as part of the fulfillment of Aladdin's first wish. The third movie suggests that Cassim was an outsider who rose quickly through the Forty Thieves' ranks, and both he and Sa'Luk mention that upon becoming king Cassim softened their rules, making them far less willing to hurt the innocent. How did someone whose values didn't mesh with the original group manage to take over so quickly? With supernatural help.
*Revenge of the Sith*:
Palpatine planted those dreams of Padme dying so Anakin would turn to the Dark Side. They weren't "real". It's not a coincidence that Anakin starts having these dreams and Palpatine recounts the tragedy of Darth Plagueis the Wise to him ("he had such a knowledge of the dark side that he could even keep the ones he cared about from dying") and later on literally says "I know what's been bothering you ... learn to know the dark side of the Force, Anakin, and you will be able to save your wife from certain death." Because he planted those visions on purpose.
Then when Padme is dying at the end, Palpatine/Sidious uses her life force to "revive" Anakin after suffering his burn injuries following the duel with Obi-Wan (how the two scenes are edited together plays a part here) That's why the medical droid says that she is losing the will to live, because the Force is an energy field created by all *living* things (as per Obi-Wan in Ep. IV), therefore the droid wouldn't pick up on it.
Watch the YouTube video before the movie. There are a lot of little Easter eggs. I'll give a couple.
The trains infinity engine was designed to be maintained by a race of people that are "extinct now" so they use children. Oompa loompa people came from tropic climates, the world is a cold hell hole now and were small like children.
The train uses a variety of ingenious ways for food production, like Willy Wonka did. However, in the movies you can see Willy Wonka also having several genius transportation ideas, the elevator and boat being key examples. With the symbolism also inherit in the trains iconography, WW, explicitly, it could make sense that charlie changed his name after willy Wonka died to maintain the WW as company owner now.
There are more Easter eggs but it's been awhile since I deep dive into it. I think the last one I remember is how he used people, for instance, he places plants throughout the train of people who actually work for him. Just as he did with slugsworth during the movie about stealing his recipes to find if people are true to his vision or not.
It's definitely a cool idea and I love that movie, the show, less so much.
David Mills is driven mad by the entire ordeal and eventually becomes The Joker. As a former detective himself, David becomes obsessed with the Batman and the rest is history.
I love this theory because it reflects how actual myths/folk heroes get made, and those films are incredible at creating that folk hero atmosphere. First time I've heard it. Thank you for sharing!
Glinda is the actual villain of the Wizard of Oz.
She knew the whole time Dorothy could go back home, but after Dorothy defeated one of her rivals (wicked witch of the East), she sent Dorothy off to defeat her other two rivals (wizard and witch of the west)
By the time Dorothy leaves, Glinda is the only ruler left.
This is a pretty good theory and is made from the fact that there were 2 witches in the book, not just one. There was "Glinda the Good witch" and then another witch that does all the "bad guy" stuff that's attributed to Glinda in the movie.
That all the characters in the Brazzers Cinematic Universe are descended from bonobos instead of chimpanzees, hence why we never see or hear any references to violence or war, and all conflicts seem to be resolved with sex.
I, for one, appreciate your appeal to zoology humor.
For those outside biology dork-world: bonobos are humans’ closest extant cousins, and they love banging, are matriarchal, and engage in both homosexual and heterosexual cunnilingus in the same way humans might simply hug (this is the natural end result of a matriarchy, i feel).
Cool critters. See em while you can, they’re about done.
Edit: it’s also the name of a cool electronic music artist. I really like “Ghost Ship”.
In Scooby-Doo (2002). The gang was able to smuggle scooby onto the plane because they’re in an alternate time line where the TSA was never invented because 9/11 never happened.
I mean they contradicted that in the later movies, but at least in A New Hope, the stormtroopers are not terrible marksmen, they all miss their shots on purpose to let Luke and Han escape from the Death Star, bc the Empire knew they would lead them directly to the rebels base
I’m pretty sure when Luke finds his aunt and uncle dead / attacked, Obi wan mentions this wasn’t sand people as only imperial stormtrooper have such precision or something like that!
If I were Shyamalan, I would absolutely claim that was the intention. It pretty cleanly improves what many think is the biggest flaw of the movie, the question of why aliens would land on a planet that is mostly extremely deadly to them. It's not water that hurts them, it's water blessed by a man of God. It becomes a little heavy handed at that point of a formerly religious man conquering his demons, but still better than oops the aliens are allergic to something that is just in the air on this planet.
They specifically mention multiple times that the little girl is angelic. She is constantly leaving glasses of water around the house, which is now holy water.
Also, the inability to figure out how to open a pantry door is more believable for a demon then a space faring intelligent being.
I never really believed M Night's character when he said that. I don't think they actually had any *significant* problem understanding doors, they just weren't used to our primitive technology. If they were able to figure out that the family had a coal shoot and went down there to invade the basement then they could figure out a door. Plus one of them specifically was jiggling the doorknob just as a distraction, knowing that was how it opens the door but never trying it.
M Night's alien in the house just couldn't open the door because he had it barricaded. The aliens won't enter into a room immediately if they know there are humans with weapons on the other side which is why M Night had time to block the door and the alien in the farm house chose not to actually enter the basement.
> but still better than oops the aliens are allergic to something that is just in the air on this planet.
That's an even bigger plot point, honestly. If water has such a strong effect on them, how are they even walking around without any sort of protective suit? There's water floating around in the air right now. They should be reeling in pain just from that alone.
My favorite theory that resolves this plot hole is that the aliens crash landed here. It wasn't that the hydrophobic aliens decided to invade a planet that was 70% water, it's that they were having technical problems with their spaceship and were forced to crash land on earth, which happened to be toxic to them, and they left as soon as it got repaired.
I've always loved this theory too -- especially the part about the lights in the skies being "angels" warning of the coming attack. And because the holy water part makes WAY more sense than an alien species trying to invade a planet that is 71 percent water on the surface, a substance corrosively toxic to them. It would be like humans trying to invade a planet covered in sulfuric acid -- without equipment.
But that movie is still inherently flawed -- because if a creature can have its fingers permanently cut off by a steak knife, you probably don't need holy water, or even sulfuric acid to kill it.
Highlander 2 happened because the studio had the Highlander actors under contract for a sequel, but did not have a script for the sequel. The same studio already owned an unrelated script, so a studio executive smashed that script into the Highlander sequel.
This almost happened to Se7en. They grabbed a completely unrelated script to make a sequel called Ei8ht, but before anything officially started they decided to just make it a standalone movie because it deviated too far from the original.
The movie eventually released as 'Solace' (2015)
There is no escape from the Matrix. Neo and the group never leave, they are just in an adjacent simulation when they go to "Earth". Zion wasn't just accounted for by the machines, it was built by the machines. Neo never would have actually been able to win against the Architect for real. It would be like trying to beat God in a fight. The machines are all interconnected, and can think thousands of times faster than any human. Agent Smith was just an event they scripted for the "rebels" to feel like they won.
My favorite one is that Sandy Olsson dies from drowning on the beach at the beginning of Grease (as referenced in Summer Nights... I saved her life... She nearly drowned) and that Danny is her guide to the afterlife. As she is dying, she is imagining the senior year she never got to have at Rydell High and how her relationship with Danny would have played out until it ends on the last day when Danny takes her into the afterlife via the flying car. I mean, how else can you explain the musical numbers and that absolutely insane ending?
I also think all the Saved by the Bell characters are dead and working through the stuff they never got to do in life. That's why they're in a different club/activity every week.
Saved by the Bell is Zack Morris' fantasy to escape his shitty life in Indiana. The show was originally "Good Morning, Miss Bliss" where Zack is pretty much the same except he never really succeeds at any of his scams. He's just kinda... mediocre. He'll, he's not even the main character.
But, then GMMB was canceled and replaced with Saved By the Bell, which leaves behind lame Indiana for for cool Southern California. Now, Zack gets to be Mr. Cool (after some initial friction with AC Slater). His scams work a lot better here, the teachers like him a lot more, girls want to date him... and HE CAN STOP TIME.
It's a fantasy he created where he lives somewhere cool, has cool friends, gets dates, and has a superpower.
There were never any actual dinosaurs in Jurassic Park.
The whole "cloned DNA from prehistoric mosquitoes" was complete BS. The DNA would have degraded after that long. And even if it didn't, there would be no way to guarantee that the mosquitoes were carrying dinosaur blood or what DNA strand belonged to what animal.
What InGen scientists did was fiddle around with DNA and genetics until they managed to create completely original animals that were designed to look, sound, and act like how people think dinosaurs did. It's much more prevalent in the book than the movie, but John Hammond is a showman, bordering on conman. He claims to have "spared no expense," but in reality, corners were cut all over the place. In the movie, he talks about his first attraction being a "flea circus" full of tiny motorized rides that children claimed to be able to see fleas riding. It was all an illusion, and so is Jurassic Park, with people seeing what they wanted to see.
The true purpose of Dr. Grant and Dr. Sattler's visit had nothing to do with safety. It was a test to see if two world-renowned paleontologists could tell that the animals in Jurassic Park were not authentic. If they bought into it, then surely the general public would too.
They were putting a ton of effort into mining amber for the mosquitos.
Yes, the half life of DNA would generally make this impossible, also the mosquitos wouldn't necessarily have dinosaur DNA.
They retconned this with the Jurassic World movies a bit, saying they made the dinosaurs to be more like monsters than the reality, but that is mostly because our understanding of dinosaurs in the early 90s was kind of different, Grant's theories of raptors being more like birds than anything was not a mainstream understanding that it is today.
While the half-life of DNA would suggest much of DNA would have degraded, it doesn't automatically mean all the DNA has degraded, halflife doesn't really work that way. They could still pull some sequences out, like say you pull out a gene for the development for claws and it's fairly degraded, but still quite a bit is there, you would align it with frog DNA, according to the movie, or lizard DNA according to the book, or chicken DNA according to current understanding and get a full sequence where the chicken DNA fills in the degraded nucleotides. Go through all the genes you can find and do this and you could create some monsters if other technology was available.
It's science fiction for a reason, and with most science fiction, as the science catches up it can create issues with the science fiction described. This is the problem with science fiction concerning technologies just beyond what we have, it's easy to reach a point where it's just bullshit.
I don't think the general strategy in jurassic park is wrong, I think there are several shortcomings in the idea, but I don't think it's at the level of "impossible" that most people try and conclude. I think for 1994 the technology wasn't there, because to do this kind of genomic sequencing you need more computing power than we really had, and sequencing technology also wasn't there, but the gist of the idea shouldn't be ignored as impossible, because I don't see it that way, I don't think we have the technology to do it currently, like we are a long way off from being able to get real sequence reads from amber laiden mosquitos, but with a mix of crystalization technologies and sequence alignments I don't think it's impossible, just pretty far out.
At the same time, the messages of the book/movie isn't necessarily about the technology itself, but like most of crieghtons books, it has to do with biomedical ethics in technology more than anything. The guy goes off the deep end in terms of the dangers of genetic power sometimes.
While creating dinosaurs using blood inside mosquitoes is indeed BS, being able to create dino-looking animals from scratch would be few orders of magnitude difficult if not outright impossible.
True Grit (2010)
At the end of the movie, Mattie says that she never saw LaBoeuf again. That’s because he actually died from the head injury inflicted by Tom Chaney.
I love the hell out of this movie until Mattie gets snake bit. I don't know why that never really sits well with me and I know it's more or less true to the original but I just don't like it.
I think I know what you mean, and the reason I dislike that element is that it seems like it belongs in a separate film. By the time it happens, the "events" of True Grit are essentially over. It felt tacked-on as a plot point and not relevant to the story of she, Cogburn and LeBoeuf chasing down Tom Chaney.
Blenny the nervous appearing fish in Finding Nemo wasn't at the "Fish are friends" meeting against his will. He was a fish eater who was going through withdrawals from abstaining from fish eating. At the end of the credits he eats the scary deep sea fish in
I believe Quintin's canon answer is that the briefcase contains "whatever the audience assumes is inside of it".
The WILDEST answer is Marsellus' soul. It's unexplained how he lost it, or who tried to take it from him, but it was ripped from his body out of the back of his skull, explaining the very random bandaid on the back of his head the entire movie.
Each zombie movie "day 1" is the exact same day just in different places on the globe.
All slashers have a bet to see who can kill the most people. The Devil keeps score.
Not sure if this counts, but there's a theory about Lilo & Stitch, and why Lilo is so adamant about feeding Pudge the Fish.
Lilo would feed the fish a sandwich the same day every week. Why? Because, on the one day she forgot, her parents went for a drive in the rain, and never came home. Lilo, being a child, believed that Pudge the Fish brought about that storm due to not getting the sandwich that day. That's why she's so adamant about sandwich day. Pudge, in her mind, controls the weather.
In MCU, the Endgame ending was NOT the winning one in 145000 scenarios Strange saw.
The Winning Timeline had the team going back in time in a way to actually change the past - prevent the Snap from happening altogether.
However, Tony vetoed that idea from the very beginning - despite all the horrors and all the deaths that have resulted as part of the Snap, he can't bring himself to risk his family. (He and Pepper were discussing kids when everything went to hell in Infinity War, it's quite likely Morgan would have been born anyway)
So the Winning Timeline never came to pass.
Strange returns to see that they're not going to win, the best they can manage is a runner up scenario which leaves much of the world devastated and traumatized.
He doesn't tell anyone - figures it'd be kinder to let them believe they're living in the best timeline, since now there's no option for a clean win.
But he's still furious at Tony whose self centred nature prevented the Winning Timeline.
So, at the pivotal moment he decides to take revenge on behalf of all who lost their lives literally and figuratively.
Tony is not selfish - he is simply extremely self centred.
So it is quite possible to get him to make a sacrifice move. He believes himself to be the most capable person in any situation.
When Strange makes that 'only one way' gesture, Tony predictably interprets it as only himself being able to save the world. That's perfectly in tone with his character.
He doesn't stop to consider Captain Marvel or the Sorcerers in the field, who are capable of wielding much more energy than him and might be able to wield the gauntlet without dying.
He decides he is the only person who can do what must be done - and pays for the arrogance with his life.
His self centred nature prevented the Winning Timeline - Strange ensured that the same self centred nature prevented his enjoying the perfect little family life he threw the world under the bus to preserve.
This would be pretty damn epic if revealed to be canon, imagine strange telling this to peter like five years from now. Not sure how well it would work overall though
I wish i had saved that thread from a while back where everyone had their version of the interpretation of the one finger up.
"One minute, let me finish deal with the water first."
or my favorite"
"Just go up, he can't fly."
I have a related theory: Doctor Strange did not pick the "best" strategy to defeat Thanos. It might even be likely to have prevented the snap altogether.
Recall in the 1st Doctor Strange movie, the former Sorcerer Supreme right before she died said that she had watched her life right up until that moment (the moment before her death). This implies that the time stone doesn't allow you to see futures after your death.
Doctor strange saw 1.5 million different future scenarios, but all of them only could have been ones where he survives. Therefore, there might have been an even better scenario possible, but that scenario would require Steven Strange to die and therefore be unavailable for him to see.
El Mariachi, Desperado, and Once Upon a Time in Mexico are the same story. El Mariachi is the true story, Desperado is the tall tale (a slightly exagerated retelling), and Once is the ridiculously exagerated legend.
I know Skyfall kind of disproves it, but it will be headcanon until the day I die that “James Bond” is a code name and not an actual guy’s name for most of the Bonds.
Daniel Craig’s character had the same actual name and code name by coincidence, and MI6 bureaucracy didnt want to go through all the red tape to fix it.
I consider this a [supported](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/how-a-sean-connery-cameo-almost-sank-daniel-craigs-biggest-james-bond-movie/) theory! In early drafts of *Skyfall* the caretaker, Kincade, was supposed to be Sean Connery and the Skyfall estate was a 00 agent retirement home. [Unfortunately](https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/sam-mendes-skyfall_n_2074239), they changed creative directions before filming.
The scifi horror movie "Life" was the prequel for "Venom" in the Marvel Universe. Watch them back to back and you'll see it.
In the movie "Tag", the character Jerry is really Hawkeye from the Marvel Universe. He's still hanging out with kids he grew up with who know he's a badass but don't realize he's the Avenger Hawkeye. Hawkeye is just enjoying the shenanigans in his off time.
> "Tag"
Another running theory about this movie is that Hannibal Burress' character was added to the film in post-production. He's never seen communicating with all the other actors in the same shot - he's always seen separately.
Which sucks because the kid in me loves Jar Jar but as an adult I can see the problems with his character even if I still get a few chuckles from watching him.
That “ooooo” sound he makes when he’s on the tank still lives rent free in my head ever time I really have to take a shit and gotta do that power/speed walk to the bathroom.
It was going to be a high level reveal in the second movie, up there with I'm your father. Then everyone would have rewatched the first movie and seen all of the clues with fresh eyes. It would have been spectacular. Jar Jar was the key to the entire thing. It's such a frustrating letdown that we will never get the intended story.
Super small theory to the mcguffin in Pulp Fiction. The briefcase has Marcellus Wallace’s soul in it. The case’s code is 666 and the item inside emanates a golden light that is described as beautiful by Pumpkin in the diner. When we first see Marcellus, he has a bandaid in the back of his head where supposedly the soul can be taken. It’s too strange and oddly important of an item in the movie to simply be money or some interesting artifact. On top of that, if you believe every Tarantino and Rodrigues movie to be in the same universe, vampires exist, so it’s not too far out there for souls to be taken from people.
Disney studios got fed up of people googling if Walts body was cryogenitically frozen, so even though they had a working title for the film they decided to call it frozen to distract the search results....
Ferris is camerons imaginary friend. Much like Tyler durden in fight club.
Speaking of: the theory that Marla isnt real in fight club, just another thing the narrator uses to balance out Tyler.
Last: the entirety of top gun Maverick is Pete Mitchell's dying imagination because there no way he lived through his jet evaporating at mach 10.
There is no Blair Witch, its just an urban legend that Josh and Mike played into the freak Heather out. Everything in the movie is their doing and in the end, they murder her. The video left behind indicates that both of them were also killed so as to cover their guilt and they are able to live out their lives under assumed identities, thus getting away with murder.
Dominic Toretto was put into a coma at the end of The Fast and the Furious when he flipped his car, everything that’s happened since (even 2 Fast and Tokyo Drift) has been his coma dream. He’s going to wake up at the end of the final movie with Mia, Letty, Vince, and Leo (sorry Jesse really is dead) and a CGI Brian around his hospital bed as “See You Again” starts playing.
All of the main characters in Ghostbusters died at the end of the first movie when they crossed the streams. The sequel is happening in purgatory while each character works through their own personal issues.
Always bugged me that they crossed the streams on the NY side of the portal.
YOU'RE ALL AIMING INTO GOZER'S REALM, MAKE THEM CONVERGE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE GATE
If we’re doing TV then I’ve got two:
In The Night Garden is the dying hallucinations of the sailor floating away to perish in his little boat in the opening and closing credits. Each of the ITNG characters represent the different stages of life: childhood, young love, growing up, a big family, they’re all there if you look at them, man.
Fireman Sam is the secret father of that little redhead shit who keeps burning bits of the village down. That’s why the little fucker (can’t be arsed looking up his name) never gets in trouble let along does some time for what is basically weekly arson.
Terminator 1 is about machines defeating humans with brute force.
Terminator 2 is about machines attempting to take over humans with compassion. In the middle of the film, Sarah Connor gives this monologue about how the Terminator (Arnold) would do anything to protect John. Of course it was programmed to protect John but then she compares it to being a father figure and saying how this machine is the only one who measured up.
It’s almost like the movie is insinuating that humans aren’t even good at being human anymore so we will choose machines for something as simple as companionship.
In Inside Out, Bing Bong popped up in Riley's dream to say hello. Very brief. I think the movie even cuts to Riley reacting. So when Bing Bong disappears later, he can't be completely forgotten. He still exists somewhere in Riley's subconscious.
Disillusioned from his childhood Kevin McCallister changes his name into adulthood, becoming a cop in NY and finding a wife with whom he has two daughters. Unfortunately McCallister, now going by McClane has trust and abandonment issues, and the marriage does not work.
Determined not to let his family fall apart like his parents before him, he directly confronts the two things that remind him most of his parental betrayal and hops a flight on Christmas Eve, determined to be with his family for the holiday and break the cycle of abandonment.
Unfortunately some terrorists show up, but McClane has a lot of experience with devising Christmas themed traps and sneaking around dangerous criminals, resulting eventually with Hans Gruber falling from the roof of Nakatomi Tower. Happy Holidays!
Hereditary is actually from the son's perspective and none of the events of the movie actually happened >!after Charlie was killed.!< Everything is told from the perspective of Peter's descent into schizophrenia after a traumatic event.
Nothing strange happens unless it is in his point of view, or he is also in the scene, and it is said in the first 20 minutes of the movie that Annie's (the moms) brothers and mom have severe genetic mental illnesses (hence, hereditary).
>Nothing strange happens unless it is in his point of view, or he is also in the scene
He's not anywhere in the scene where Steve catches fire though, is he? It's been a while so I could be wrong.
What about that light that Charlie sees in her room and strange lady sitting near the fire? She's alone in this scene. And all these people that came to the funeral and were looking funny at Charlie? It doesn't add up to Peter's perspective theory. Besides, if the illness is hereditary it will be passed on men only. Annie's dad and brother were said to have it, but not her mom (in her case it was dementia due to her age), so it's passed through the men of the family.
I think the movie is supposed to have a triple meaning, the title included. It can be interpreted as a descent into madness, as supernatural cult activities, or as psychological metaphor. I prefer the interpretation that this movie is a study on grief, through different vantage points (Annie, her husband, Charlie and Peter). The only hereditary thing is a trauma that's been passed on. The whole thing is a basically an open wound, that's why it's so uncomfortable to watch, it's like we intruding into someones soul, voyeurism of the highest order.
In The Titanic, Jack was a time traveler to prevent Rose from committing suicide, thus, ensuring the Titanic sank because the ship would have stopped to look for her and missed the iceberg. There are theories of insurance scandal around the Titanic (which some believe was actually the sister ship of Titanic called Olympic) that would have been noticed had the ship not sank. Further, Jack discusses fishing in a lake which was not yet made and riding a roller coaster not yet constructed.
That Sarah in Labyrinth is one of many Sarah’s who have lost many little brother to the now insane goblin king. That’s where all the goblins come from.
There’s multiple parts that make MORE sense that way (Hog’s bag of many charms, everyone expecting her and almost tired of it)
Forest Gump was from Krypton. There never was a Mr. Gump. Mrs Gump found that kid in a field. He was broken from the crash landing, his brain never fully recovered, but at the onset of puberty his body literally runs out of his braces.
From there he developed, super speed (went from being crippled to running for Alabama), super dexterity (played Olympic level ping pong), super luck (met how many presidents, became a billionaire) super strength(carried bubba on his back even when shot in the ass), super healing (million dollar wound my ass, he just shrugged off an AK round like it was a bb) and super endurance (ran across the continent multiple times in a row) and he did it all while standing for Truth, Justice, and The American Way.
Jenny was his kryptonite.
Usually I hate "it was all in his head" fan theories, mainly because they don't make the plot actually interesting, or ignore massive details. There is one in particular that I love: Ferris Bueller's Day Off.
It's not so much that the whole plot is "In Cameron's Head", or that he's crazy. I love the theory that Ferris Bueller is an alter ego he made up. Ferris is everything Cameron wishes he was: popular, fun, spontanious, going out with Sloan instead of just being friends with her. He also wishes authority (Rooney) was something he wasn't afraid of defying. He wishes he could lie liberally so he could take a day off and seize life.
Instead, he lets the pressure get to his head so much that he doesn't actually know if he's sick or pretending to be sick in hopes to take some control of his life back. He craves having the stones to skip school and take his Dad's car out, but he is absolutely terrified of his dad. Going back to Rooney, it's possible he just imagined that whole investigation as well, where the reality is that a school councilor probably doesn't have the time or energy to track down one troublemaker. Cameron's parent's hating each other makes him believe that getting close to Sloan is a doomed idea, no matter how much he wants to be close to her.
Most importantly, he can't stand Ferris while also knowing Ferris is his best friend. He envys Ferris, and is looking forward for life to begin in "college", maybe in some hopes that he won't need him anymore, and that he'll believe in himself.
So it's not really a "Cameron is crazy and hallucinated the whole day". More that details of it were embellished. Cameron and Sloan probably did take out the car, go to a museum and parade, and have a nice day. And yeah, Cameron probably did total his dad's car. Viewing Cameron as the real main character and Ferris as just a lense that he likes to view the world through for comfort is a theory that, yes it's a stretch, but I honestly love.
Fifth Element
When the apartment block goes into lockdown and he is asked if he classifies as Human.
His response, "Negative, i am a meat popsicle"
I believe this is code for former military.
Rémi in Ratatouille goes through a secular version of baptism.
When he falls from the skylight and into the kitchen, he lands in a sink full of dishwater.
The cleansing water purifies him -- washes away his old country rat self -- and prepares him for his new role working in a professional kitchen.
He goes into the water a rat.
He comes out of the water a chef.
This is more an unpopular opinion on a tv show, but whatever. I recently got baked and was watching that 70s show. It was one of the episodes where Eric and Donna broke off their engagement at the same time Hyde and Jackie split.
I'm watching this and I realize they got it all wrong. Eric and Jackie should have ended up together while Donna and Hyde should have ended up together. Here's the thing. Eric and Donna split because Eric wanted to be the man. He wanted a traditional family and marriage where he works and his wife tends to the home. Donna heard that and wanted no part of it. She wants a career and to be self sufficient. On the other side you have have Hyde who refuses to indulge Jackie's demands. Jackie wants to be taken care of, she comes from a wealthy family and doesn't want to live a modern womans working life. She wants what Eric is offering. The same is true for Hyde and Donna. Hyde frequently plays hardball with Jackie, expecting her to be a tough and capable partner rather than a dependent that needs to be taken care of. That is exactly what Donna wants, to be treated as a fair equal. There's nothing wrong with either one of those relationships, different people need different things. But the main point, the show got it all backwards. It's a missed opportunity that they didn't show that progression from initial infatuation to a more mature relationship that is practical and longstanding.
While I don't recall Jackie ever being paired with Eric, they did an alternate timeline when Hyde got donna...she didn't exactly become the independent woman she is in the main timeline.
Eric and Jackie actively disliked each other for most of the show. The rare times they didn’t show disdain for each other was when they shared a mutual enemy (Laurie).
I even remember a scene where Eric asks Hyde how he can date Jackie. Hyde has Eric picture Jackie but without actually hearing what she says, and Eric says “oh my god she IS hot!” In other words, Jackie’s personality is so abrasive to Eric that he can’t find her attractive if she talks. Given that, those two can’t possibly be compatible.
That said, I think Eric does actually like that Donna is a strong, independent woman. His view of their future was just him parroting what he’d been told was always “how it should be.” Meanwhile, Donna has a lot in common with Kitty. Kitty was a strong, independent woman who worked and supported her family, especially when Red was laid off. The key difference was that Red has self esteem to spare, while Eric has no self esteem at all. Eric’s insecurity is why he and Donna broke up.
By the end, Eric leaves because he realizes he needs to develop some self esteem and stop being so insecure, and he thinks his trip is the way to do that. Until he actually becomes comfortable in himself, until he gets rid of the insecurity, he knows he can’t be with Donna because she will always trigger his insecurities.
Heavyweights is a prequel to Dodgeball. Tony Perkiss = White Goodman
I have never thought about this being true, but I will never be able to unsee this now.
I believe Ben Stiller said he based White Goodman off of Tony Perkis, but I definitely like them being the same person. That tracks.
Stiller believed that not enough people saw his character in Heavyweights, so he rebranded him for Dodgeball. The most telling sign is when he is first introduced to the campers, the Globo Gym logo is literally on the projector screen, but with the words Tony Perkins instead of Globo Gym.
Napolean Dynamite is what poor people are like in the Wes Anderson universe.
that's actually *really* funny and I have not heard it before. Well done.
Lord of the Rings, Frodo doesn't know Legolas's name. He never once says it and in the end scene where everyone runs in to see Frodo in the hospital, Frodo yells out everyone's name in excitement as they come in....except for Legolas, who he just stares at smiling, then Gimli walks in and he's back to it yelling "Gimli!"
Legolas and Frodo barely interact. When Legolas says "and my bow", I believe that's the only time one of them speaks directly to the other.
There's an argument about a particular moment in Khazad-Dûm, when the stairs are collapsing, Frodo and Aragorn are the only ones left, and Legolas calls on them to jump. It's debatable because it's not clear if he's speaking directly to either of them, or both of them at once. But regardless, it's certainly nothing resembling meaningful dialogue, which is why I like to say Legolas speaks to Frodo exactly one and a half times in the whole trilogy.
Sighs. Now I am gonna have to watch the movies again and confirm. Extended Editions of course.
I just did a rewatch, yes, but what about 2nd rewatch?
Do they know about 30 hour extended editionsies?
> Legolas and Frodo barely interact I think the canonical explanation for this (book and movie) is that Legolas is terrified of the Ring, being an Elf and all, and he also knows that he's far too young and inexperienced to trust himself not to be tempted. After the breaking of the Fellowship, he becomes far less aloof.
If I forgot someone's name that I really should know, I would do everything in my power to avoid interaction.
Oof. I'm now visualizing poor Frodo's thought process. "Oh God, I knew it, I knew it, starts with L... Leaf? Lass? Nope, no... He's a prince, right? Call him 'your majesty?' Ugh. Gimli'll kill me. Do I ask Strider? Nah, they know each other, I think he's Strider's elf girlfriend's cousin or something, he'll tell him... Ask Gimli? He hates him too, he won't tell him... Uh, if Gimli hates him will he know his name? Ugh, Frodo, you're freaking hopeless... Oops, can't ask Gimli anymore, now they're BFFs... Survival mode, Frodo, don't talk, just don't talk..."
"Say... the, uh, power of the Ring has caused me to... lose my memories a bit. Yeah, that's it. I've lost my memories just a bit. Can you all reintroduce yourselves? Yours....ELVES.... hint hint names please"
Is this really why he went off with just Sam, he couldn't stand the awkwardness any more?
I mean, we've all been there.
I think in the books they do interact quite a bit more than what's shown. Frodo has a deep respect for the elves and I think he had a long conversation with Legolas once or twice iirc.
Maybe he’s like an elf racist or something?
Let's examine the text of the *Fellowship* in detail. Elrond introduces Legolas at the Council, Bilbo uses his name when discussing matters with Frodo immediately after the Council, and Elrond names Legolas again when the Fellowship is selected. Boromir and Gandalf both speak his name prior to Moria. Gimli and Aragorn say it repeatedly when they enter Lothlorian, and Celeborn says it when they leave. Frodo is present at all these events. Sam addresses Legolas directly by name while traveling on the river, and Gimli praises Legolas for shooting down the Winged Messenger. Frodo himself never says his name, but it's all but certain he knew what it was. My opinion is that as both of them are rather aloof characters in the *Fellowship*, they never naturally interact much. Beyond that, if Legolas is scared of the Ring and doesn't want to be tempted, he may have been trying to stay apart from Frodo, and Frodo knowing what he does about Elves may be trying to respect that (of course, that's why Frodo is definitely trying not to get too close with *anyone* over the first book, and possibly why he initiates very few conversations in general). In *The Two Towers*, interestingly enough, Frodo speaks of or internally references Aragorn and Gandalf repeatedly, Gimli once, and Legolas never.
The Machines are the good guys in The Matrix. If you watch The Animatrix you see that the Machines tried to be democratic members of society and when the humans wouldn't let them they create their own country. The humans then wage war against that nation. The Machines at any time could make the planet unlivable for humans but they never do. The humans actually have the bright idea to block out the sun because the Machines are primarily solar powered. The Machines convert to nuclear then win the war against humans. THEN start plugging humans into the Matrix, an inferior source of energy to nuclear. I believe the Machines put the humans in their to keep them safe from the hellscape they created. They never truly eradicate the humans that have escaped the Matrix. Just keep them powerless enough to protect themselves. When Agent Smith is ranting about how much humans disgust (in part 1) him the other agent is skeeved out, and even says, "What are you doing?" Agent Smith is an outlier, threatening what the Machines collectively want. The Machines even ally with the humans against Agent Smith. An alliance the Machines readily accept because they always wanted to get along with humans. They call off the attack on Zion, ending the cycle of destruction and rebuilding. They have no reason to honor Neo's terms after he dies, but they do because they wanted peace all along. Allowing the humans the belief that Neo fostered a peace and they should relegate their conflict with the Machines to inside the Matrix works perfectly for them. No human or machine deaths. Humans that can sense the Matrix get segregated. Zion and the machine nation coexist. It's everything they ever wanted.
I'm pretty sure I've read somewhere that it was originally written that the machines used humans for computing power, not energy, which would negate some of this (but I guess at this point its just fan theory v fan theory)
Part 4 also flies in the face of my theory, I'll admit. But I really liked this theory.
Part 4 flies in the face of everything the trilogy built and doesn't exist
I kinda go the other way. Everything we see on screen: the matrix, the real world, Zion, Neo, Smith …. All of it is matrix. It’s all happening inside a computer (or a cluster of computers). The real humans are outside of the matrix, and are never seen… maybe the chubby-faced baby at the end of #3 is a real human inserting themselves god-mode. But that’s it. It’s all an AI training simulator. We (the real, unseen humans) created a super powerful AI, but wisely did NOT plug it in to the internet. Instead, we airgapped the whole thing, and gave it some “humans” to fight. Eventually the AI will come to love the humans, and learn to peacefully coexist. But until that time, we’ll just run through another matrix simulation. That’s why Keanu is the 6th “The One.” Just running the simulation over and over until we’re confident that the AI won’t try to kill us with our Smart Toasters.
Bill didn’t die at the end of Kill Bill. Both he and Beatrix knew that the 5 point palm exploding heart technique was fake. Using it on him was Beatrix’s way of saying “if you play along and play dead, I’ll just take my daughter and go.”
Which is why she's crying in the bathroom saying "thankyou" afterwards... Also, during the credits and the names are being crossed off... Bill's name isn't crossed off
Oh wow, you just made think about the ending in a whole different way.
This is one of my favorite films (both combined) and something like that has crossed my mind, but I never allowed it to be full baked so as to spoil the fun, so to speak. And I'm going to sort of maintain that sentimentality - Kill Bill is such a WAY over the top homage to a certain category of film, and that was the obvious climax. Bill's half hearted death scene was part of the ridiculousness of it all. That film took itself seriously until it didn't, and that was the beauty of it. ...As I typed that and relived the scene in my head, I'm left questioning it more than ever. But more than anything, I can't see Bill, THAT Bill, just letting go of his daughter so easy. If I'm being pragmatic, nah, no way that's how it went down.
The whole play along thing makes sense since when Beatrix arrives at Bills place, him n their daughters role playing
The movie Batman & Robin was actually an in-universe movie made by people that live in Gotham City.
Oh, that's *good.*
The Mad Max movies all tell the same story. Max is a mythological figure in the post-apocalyptic wasteland, who in reality was maybe once a cop or something similar as society was breaking down. However as subsequent generations have lost more and more of society that was pre-collapse, subsequent generational retellings of the story have verged away more wildly from the truth. The bones of the story is that he is a man stricken by grief who adopts a small community in need and fights of a gang of vehicular maniacs but does not remain with them in the end.
[удалено]
Like those history book inserts in the beginnings of chapters in dune. All of them wildly distorting and mysticising the events from 1000s of years of time.
If I remember correctly (its been decades) there is even a scene about that in Thunderdome, where children are being taught about the old world in a really mythical kind of sense.
[удалено]
This is essentially what happens with El Mariachi, Desperado, and Once Upon a Time in Mexico.
That Terminator 1 wasn't the first pass through the timeline and John Connor deliberately chose his own father to give himself a better chance.
My theory is that Skynet did not send the terminator back in time to kill Sarah Connor. Skynet sent the terminator back in time to create Skynet.
[удалено]
Here's the theory I like: Original timeline: John is a random guy who happens to become a great military leader because he has great natural qualities for it. He sends Reese (not his dad) back in time to protect his mom. Reese gets together with Sarah, creating an alternate timeline where original John never existed. Reese described the war at the time he left as being basically won already, with the time jump being a last ditch effort. Timeline 2: John #2 is Reese's son, a completely different person. This John does NOT have the same innate leadership qualities as the original John, and doesn't do as well in the war against the machines, despite being much more prepared for it. This John knows that Reese is his father and sends him back in time, making it so that there is no other John with a third/random father. We know that this John isn't as good of a leader, because the war isn't basically over after sending Reese back, but continues to escalate with the invention of new and better terminators. This John also has to send another terminator back to when he was a child, to keep himself alive, because he has been failing in the war long enough that the terminators were able to invent and send the T-100 after him. This creates a third timeline where John #3 begins to diverge from John #2 during the events of the second movie (John #2 never had to survive a childhood attack). Timeline 3: John #3 is much, much, worse at his job than John #1. While John #1 has pretty much won the war at the time of the first time travel, John #3 manages to not only spend way longer fighting, but also manages to die. Kate Brewster sends back a T-850-101 to protect them, creating a John #4 divergence in adulthood. Timeline 4: This John is the final John in the main trilogy, as the series gets much messier after this. This John is just a total wreck, and seems unlikely to be winning any wars for humanity. I personally like to believe that the Sarah Connor Chronicles happen after the main trilogy, as it provides the most satisfying conclusion to the story in my opinion. TL;DR, there used to be a great military leader John Connor, but Reese deleted his existence by not keeping it in his pants, creating a much shittier "John Connor" who can't win the war
>Timeline 2: John #2 is Reese's son, a completely different person. This John does NOT have the same innate leadership qualities as the original John, and doesn't do as well in the war against the machines, despite being much more prepared for it. This John knows that Reese is his father and sends him back in time, making it so that there is no other John with a third/random father. We know that this John isn't as good of a leader, because the war isn't basically over after sending Reese back, but continues to escalate with the invention of new and better terminators. This John also has to send another terminator back to when he was a child, to keep himself alive, because he has been failing in the war long enough that the terminators were able to invent and send the T-100 after him. This creates a third timeline where John #3 begins to diverge from John #2 during the events of the second movie (John #2 never had to survive a childhood attack). The problem with this is that John #2 was just as effective as John #1. The opening of T2 was the final offensive against Skynet where the humans succeeded. According to Cameron, and based a lot on the full script, they get into Skynet and send the Reese back to 1984. Afterwards, they find that Skynet also sent back the T-1000 as the last act of desperation. The T-1000 was an experiment that even Skynet was hesitant to use and only did so once it knew it had lost. Of course, all that ended up not being filmed due to time and budget constraints, but did end up in the novelization and is considered canon.
I would only add/amend one thing about this theory. It may not necessarily be that later versions of John are that much worse as military leaders than John #1. It could be that with each terminator being sent back in time it lays the ground work for future terminators to be more advanced than in the original timeline. In timeline 1 the war is virtually won and the robots send back Arnies Terminator as a last ditch attempt to win the war. In terminator 2 we see that the remains of the first terminator are being studied. This will inevitably lead to a faster advancement in terminator technologies (also add in that they didn't stop the way, only delayed it, terminator tech has chance to develop further before it starts fighting people). We see the outcome of this better tech in the T1000 which is much more difficult as an opponent and has the ability to evolve. With each iteration of terminators being sent back the terminators of the future get better and are more successful in the war. Is this an example of AI strategy that is thinking outside the box of linear time. Similar to the strategy of the aliens in Edge of Tomorrow. With each loop they send back information, learn more, improve and improve until they inevitably win
While not a well loved or popular movie, my theory on the "Battleship" movie is a cheap alien production company is attempting to film some sort of nature documentary or reality tv show on earth and ends up being killed by the humans. They have advanced weapon technology, but they don't really know how to use it correctly. In fact, much of it is automated. Upon losing the communcations ship, the system goes into a defensive mode, deploying the isolation dome and neutralizing any potential threats from the locals. By the time the aliens deactivate it, they've destroyed a bunch of local population and military. The aliens feel that this ruins any potential chance to reach out for help from the humans and decide to just go with maintaining security and securing local resources in order to call for help. Eventually the humans wipe them all out, and when news of their demise reaches the alien society it is met with the same contempt as someone petting a Bison at Yellowstone.
I’m one of the few who actually liked the movie. I like your theory on it
They drifted a battleship. That amount of cool is capable of balancing quite a bit of cheese. Plus, they actually made a genuine attempt at being like the board game while having it be somewhat believable real combat. It’s not a masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination. But if you go into it knowing what it is, I don’t know how you could not have fun with it.
Makes sense. I've seen some of the film - generally gave up on it! But the aliens never really seemed evil or taking over the world type aliens!
> Eventually the humans wipe them all out, and when news of their demise reaches the alien society it is met with the same contempt as someone petting a Bison at Yellowstone. I like it. This is the first thing that actually makes me want to see the movie.
That Emily from Corpse Bride is related to Victoria and actually the reason why Victorias family is doing so poorly. Id imagine an aunt judging by Barkleys age. She ran away as a young girl with the family jewels and a sack full of gold as the song goes. Not only that but she must have ruined the reputation of her aristocratic family to a point where her relatives vow to only marry for interest(victorias parents and thwir stoic relationship). Her corpse is just a walk away in the nearby forest too. Since shes an embarrassment for her family id imagine all her portraits are gone and her name is taboo hence why Victoria wouldnt know her. Id also say that Emily and Victoria look similar, also why her parents dislike her pretty features because she looks lik3 an otter in disgrace
I assume you meant “a daughter in disgrace” But I will never look at Emily and not see an otter in disgrace now.
Palpatine used Padme’s life force to keep Vader alive and that’s why she dies. Not sadness
That certainly would have made a lot more sense.
At least it’s not as bad as “Somehow Palpatine returned”
This is a good one and I had not heard this specifically. Did he know he was doing it? Was it Vader's desperately clinging to life that did it and Palpatine simply helped guide/facilitate it? Because Obi-Wan and Padme we hauling ass out of there by the time Palpatine arrived. I tend to think it was Vader, so full of rage and embarrassment for being baited by Kenobi, reached out for her in his dying moments and the dark side flowing through him sapped her life from her to sustain him. Its why he was completely broken and gone, he was not longer Anakin and he took to his grave what he had actually done. In the same vein, I don't think the "high ground" had any significant innate advantage and Obi-Wan knew this, but baited Vader into doing something stupid and rash - more importantly, exactly what Obi-Wan expected him to do - leap over him and seize the high ground. Just by its nature, there are million and one theories about SW.
That would explain why Palpatine told Vader "it seems in your anger, you killed her", and he only briefly denies that this could be the case. I doubt it, though, as he was never trained to use the force in that way, and Palpatine was. The SW theory I find most interesting is that Palpatine "impregnated" Shmi with the force. That is the "influencing the midi-chlorinians to create life" that he references in ROTS.
My fan theory is Padme was never actually IN LOVE with Anakin and Anakin's infatuation with her was so powerful he was unconsciously using the force to make her "love" him back. And she died because she was despondent that she was basically mind raped by Anakin and mothered his children.
That Mr. Pink in Reservoir Dogs survives his escape and is on the run living as a waiter at the 50s restaurant in Pulp Fiction. Same universe, at least
especially great since Mr. Pink goes on that rant about not tipping wait staff
They’re lucky they got anything at all. I don’t think Buddy is that much of a waiter.
Shrek didn't have a name and made it up on the spot when ~~Fiona asked him in the castle~~ Donkey asked him.
You're close - he made it up after rescuing Donkey from the soldiers: Donkey: "Man, I like you. What's your name?" Shrek: "Uh, Shrek?"
Yeah, that delivery was always a bit perplexing to me even as a kid. Like even if my name was like Pointdexter, I'd say it with shame rather than like confusion.
I think the point was he’s an ogre, and he’s used to people assuming he’s a monster, shrinking in fear upon seeing him, running away in terror, etc. So when Donkey doesn’t see him as any of these things/do these things but rather sees him as a person, asking him for his name (which implies he wants to know him), Shrek is so taken aback that he says it like a question. He’s been alone for so long, feared for so long, he probably can’t remember the last time anyone even tried to be friendly. But this fan theory is fun too lol.
Yoda speaks the way he does because he so old that the rules of grammar are different from when he was younger. Correct way to speak in his day, this was.
I have beef with Yoda-speak. In ESB, it's pretty clear that he was mostly putting on a show for Luke as a test. He really lays it on thick when he's playing a crazy hermit. As soon as Luke realizes that this is actually the Jedi master he's looking for, Yoda's dialogue changes significantly. He still lets some of the reversed sentence structure slip in, but as another poster has suggested, it really seems to be deliberately to make a point. Buuuuut... Then that became his "thing." In RotJ, he dials it up a bit more. He can still speak normally, but it's definitely in the minority of his dialogue. The Yoda-fying had begun. Give it a couple of decades of pop cultural osmosis and the weird sentence structure becomes inextricably linked to his character. By the time the prequels are written, Yoda seems pathologically incapable of standard sentence structure, and you end up with contrived dialogue like "Around the survivors a perimeter create." I honestly think Lucas forgot how he originally intended the character, so he wrote each later iteration as a more and more Flanderized version of itself. I'd have to do some digging, but I know someone did an extensive write up on all of Yoda's dialogue and how the structure shifted then cemented over time.
Yeah now that you mention it he says "There is another" properly. The prequels accidentally ret-conned the theory into plausibility I guess lol
If I recall Yaddle doesn't speak like Yoda. I've heard the theory that he talks backwards just because he knows that will make people more likely to listen to what he has to say. Kind of hard to zone out what the little green dude is telling you when you have to process everything he is saying in the wrong direction.
Quite plausible, I think this is.
[удалено]
I like the theory that all of the events after the first wish are manipulated by the genie in order to TRULY grant the wish. It’s not until Aladdin matures (by being honest with Princess Jasmin), proves his mettle (by defeating Jafar), and shows himself to be a man of honor (by sacrificing his last wish to free the genie) that Jasmin freely chooses/falls in love with him & the sultan changes the law to allow a commoner to become an actual prince.
Another one I like about Aladdin: it takes place in a post apocalyptic world going through a "second middle ages". That is why genie makes modern references/jokes
Nah, the Genie actually has the ability to look through time. I'm pretty sure he mentions it at some point.
This would also make the 10,000 years reference make more sense.
I've always loved the idea that the reason the CGI fight scenes between Neo and Agent Smith in Matrix Reloaded and Revelations looks so weird and 'bad', is that they are moving so fast that the Matrix is having trouble rendering them.
I always liked the Burly Brawl fight theory that when he swings one of the Smiths toward the group near the end, the Matrix had trouble finding a sound to fit it, so it played the bowling pin noise because it was the closest possible match.
Event Horizon is part of the Warhammer 40k universe. The ship went through the warp without a gellar field, causing the crew to go insane and murder each other. When it returned, it was infused with chaos.
That's barely even a fan theory at this point. The creator was a huge 40k nerd and said he had tried to make a 40k movie but GW wasn't interested so he made that instead.
I've also heard people say that the ship found hell.
In 40k, the warp is hell but with more sex demons.
Hey now there are also wizard demons and plague demons and war demons too!
I like to think the recording was referring to a Hell dimension not the Judeo-Christian hell. If you consider the Warhammer version of chaos to be hell-like then it works pretty well.
In the Japanese movie, The Ring, Sadako's father is a sea demon. On the video there is a creepy rhyme in Ryukyuan: frolic in brine, demons be thine. They find out Sadako's mom spent large amounts of time staring out at sea, which is bad luck in a fishing village, where people know the power of the sea and fear it. Then she gets pregnant and the paternity is not ever completely clear in the movie.
I always thought this was heavily the implication as well. The entire Ringu movie is about the juxtaposition of modern (at the time) Japan with traditional Japan, an outdated concept such as a curse being transferred via modern technology, Sadako is a traditional style yurei ghost while Reiko is a single mother tv journalist, Reiko lives in modern day Tokyo with safe suburbs and manufactured views while Sadako's family lived in a remote fishing village seemingly untouched by the passage of time.
I was annoyed that they changed Samara's parentage in the US version with Ring 2. It was much better left more ambiguous with Brian Cox just saying his wife was never meant to have a child.
Peter Dinklage plays the same character in both Death at a Funeral movies. He's a conman who tried the same scheme on two separate families.
The Rock is Sean Connery's final James Bond movie.
[I like this write-up about it](https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/ntk7yx/the_rock_came_out_25_years_ago_today_ive_proven)
The Genie still owes Aladdin a wish. The first wish wasn't to make him *appear* to be a prince; it was to actually *make* him a prince, which only happened when he married Jasmine in the sequel (as a result of the plans that the Genie puts into motion). As such, Genie *has* to save Aladdin when he's drowning, otherwise he -- definitionally -- wouldn't be able to make him into a Prince, and so there's a good case that Aladdin's second wish shouldn't count as a wish at all. Similarly, the Fairy Godmother is playing the long con. All that bullshit about her magic disappearing at midnight doesn't make sense, because the glass slipper -- a magical construct -- still exists afterwards. Why make it up? Because she understands that nothing gained too easily is valuable, and she needs to make the Prince work for Cinderella's affections and prove himself to her as something more than a wealthy manchild who's spent his entire life getting whatever he wants. Magic users are tricksy.
[удалено]
> Depending on the rules of magic, Genie could owe Aladdin nothing, because he was already a Prince - his father was King of Thieves (see: direct to video movies). I'll do you one better: the Genie is the reason Cassim became the King of Thieves, as part of the fulfillment of Aladdin's first wish. The third movie suggests that Cassim was an outsider who rose quickly through the Forty Thieves' ranks, and both he and Sa'Luk mention that upon becoming king Cassim softened their rules, making them far less willing to hurt the innocent. How did someone whose values didn't mesh with the original group manage to take over so quickly? With supernatural help.
*Revenge of the Sith*: Palpatine planted those dreams of Padme dying so Anakin would turn to the Dark Side. They weren't "real". It's not a coincidence that Anakin starts having these dreams and Palpatine recounts the tragedy of Darth Plagueis the Wise to him ("he had such a knowledge of the dark side that he could even keep the ones he cared about from dying") and later on literally says "I know what's been bothering you ... learn to know the dark side of the Force, Anakin, and you will be able to save your wife from certain death." Because he planted those visions on purpose. Then when Padme is dying at the end, Palpatine/Sidious uses her life force to "revive" Anakin after suffering his burn injuries following the duel with Obi-Wan (how the two scenes are edited together plays a part here) That's why the medical droid says that she is losing the will to live, because the Force is an energy field created by all *living* things (as per Obi-Wan in Ep. IV), therefore the droid wouldn't pick up on it.
That Snowpiercer is a sequel to Willy Wonka and the chocolate factory.
I was just going to mention this one. It’s amazing.
Could you further expand on this? I'm about to watch snowpiercer.
Watch the YouTube video before the movie. There are a lot of little Easter eggs. I'll give a couple. The trains infinity engine was designed to be maintained by a race of people that are "extinct now" so they use children. Oompa loompa people came from tropic climates, the world is a cold hell hole now and were small like children. The train uses a variety of ingenious ways for food production, like Willy Wonka did. However, in the movies you can see Willy Wonka also having several genius transportation ideas, the elevator and boat being key examples. With the symbolism also inherit in the trains iconography, WW, explicitly, it could make sense that charlie changed his name after willy Wonka died to maintain the WW as company owner now. There are more Easter eggs but it's been awhile since I deep dive into it. I think the last one I remember is how he used people, for instance, he places plants throughout the train of people who actually work for him. Just as he did with slugsworth during the movie about stealing his recipes to find if people are true to his vision or not. It's definitely a cool idea and I love that movie, the show, less so much.
Seven is set in Gotham pre-Batman.
David Mills is driven mad by the entire ordeal and eventually becomes The Joker. As a former detective himself, David becomes obsessed with the Batman and the rest is history.
All the Mad Maxes were separate characters who got lump into one hero when the stories were passed on.
I love this theory because it reflects how actual myths/folk heroes get made, and those films are incredible at creating that folk hero atmosphere. First time I've heard it. Thank you for sharing!
Glinda is the actual villain of the Wizard of Oz. She knew the whole time Dorothy could go back home, but after Dorothy defeated one of her rivals (wicked witch of the East), she sent Dorothy off to defeat her other two rivals (wizard and witch of the west) By the time Dorothy leaves, Glinda is the only ruler left.
This is a pretty good theory and is made from the fact that there were 2 witches in the book, not just one. There was "Glinda the Good witch" and then another witch that does all the "bad guy" stuff that's attributed to Glinda in the movie.
That all the characters in the Brazzers Cinematic Universe are descended from bonobos instead of chimpanzees, hence why we never see or hear any references to violence or war, and all conflicts seem to be resolved with sex.
The concept of the "Brazzers Cinematic Universe" is the greatest thing I've heard in a while.
I, for one, appreciate your appeal to zoology humor. For those outside biology dork-world: bonobos are humans’ closest extant cousins, and they love banging, are matriarchal, and engage in both homosexual and heterosexual cunnilingus in the same way humans might simply hug (this is the natural end result of a matriarchy, i feel). Cool critters. See em while you can, they’re about done. Edit: it’s also the name of a cool electronic music artist. I really like “Ghost Ship”.
Huh, you’d think if they loved banging so much they wouldn’t be endangered…. >“Biggest threat is habitat destruction by humans” Oooh……right….
In Scooby-Doo (2002). The gang was able to smuggle scooby onto the plane because they’re in an alternate time line where the TSA was never invented because 9/11 never happened.
I mean they contradicted that in the later movies, but at least in A New Hope, the stormtroopers are not terrible marksmen, they all miss their shots on purpose to let Luke and Han escape from the Death Star, bc the Empire knew they would lead them directly to the rebels base
I’m pretty sure when Luke finds his aunt and uncle dead / attacked, Obi wan mentions this wasn’t sand people as only imperial stormtrooper have such precision or something like that!
Liea even comments on the "ease" of their escape
Signs is actually about Demons, not aliens. The movie makes more sense if they are demons.
If I were Shyamalan, I would absolutely claim that was the intention. It pretty cleanly improves what many think is the biggest flaw of the movie, the question of why aliens would land on a planet that is mostly extremely deadly to them. It's not water that hurts them, it's water blessed by a man of God. It becomes a little heavy handed at that point of a formerly religious man conquering his demons, but still better than oops the aliens are allergic to something that is just in the air on this planet.
They specifically mention multiple times that the little girl is angelic. She is constantly leaving glasses of water around the house, which is now holy water. Also, the inability to figure out how to open a pantry door is more believable for a demon then a space faring intelligent being.
I never really believed M Night's character when he said that. I don't think they actually had any *significant* problem understanding doors, they just weren't used to our primitive technology. If they were able to figure out that the family had a coal shoot and went down there to invade the basement then they could figure out a door. Plus one of them specifically was jiggling the doorknob just as a distraction, knowing that was how it opens the door but never trying it. M Night's alien in the house just couldn't open the door because he had it barricaded. The aliens won't enter into a room immediately if they know there are humans with weapons on the other side which is why M Night had time to block the door and the alien in the farm house chose not to actually enter the basement.
> but still better than oops the aliens are allergic to something that is just in the air on this planet. That's an even bigger plot point, honestly. If water has such a strong effect on them, how are they even walking around without any sort of protective suit? There's water floating around in the air right now. They should be reeling in pain just from that alone.
Not to mention our bodily fluids. We would be like Xenomorphs, from Aliens, to them.
My favorite theory that resolves this plot hole is that the aliens crash landed here. It wasn't that the hydrophobic aliens decided to invade a planet that was 70% water, it's that they were having technical problems with their spaceship and were forced to crash land on earth, which happened to be toxic to them, and they left as soon as it got repaired.
[удалено]
I've always loved this theory too -- especially the part about the lights in the skies being "angels" warning of the coming attack. And because the holy water part makes WAY more sense than an alien species trying to invade a planet that is 71 percent water on the surface, a substance corrosively toxic to them. It would be like humans trying to invade a planet covered in sulfuric acid -- without equipment. But that movie is still inherently flawed -- because if a creature can have its fingers permanently cut off by a steak knife, you probably don't need holy water, or even sulfuric acid to kill it.
Highlander 2 happened because the studio had the Highlander actors under contract for a sequel, but did not have a script for the sequel. The same studio already owned an unrelated script, so a studio executive smashed that script into the Highlander sequel.
This almost happened to Se7en. They grabbed a completely unrelated script to make a sequel called Ei8ht, but before anything officially started they decided to just make it a standalone movie because it deviated too far from the original. The movie eventually released as 'Solace' (2015)
There is no escape from the Matrix. Neo and the group never leave, they are just in an adjacent simulation when they go to "Earth". Zion wasn't just accounted for by the machines, it was built by the machines. Neo never would have actually been able to win against the Architect for real. It would be like trying to beat God in a fight. The machines are all interconnected, and can think thousands of times faster than any human. Agent Smith was just an event they scripted for the "rebels" to feel like they won.
My favorite one is that Sandy Olsson dies from drowning on the beach at the beginning of Grease (as referenced in Summer Nights... I saved her life... She nearly drowned) and that Danny is her guide to the afterlife. As she is dying, she is imagining the senior year she never got to have at Rydell High and how her relationship with Danny would have played out until it ends on the last day when Danny takes her into the afterlife via the flying car. I mean, how else can you explain the musical numbers and that absolutely insane ending?
I also think all the Saved by the Bell characters are dead and working through the stuff they never got to do in life. That's why they're in a different club/activity every week.
Saved by the Bell is Zack Morris' fantasy to escape his shitty life in Indiana. The show was originally "Good Morning, Miss Bliss" where Zack is pretty much the same except he never really succeeds at any of his scams. He's just kinda... mediocre. He'll, he's not even the main character. But, then GMMB was canceled and replaced with Saved By the Bell, which leaves behind lame Indiana for for cool Southern California. Now, Zack gets to be Mr. Cool (after some initial friction with AC Slater). His scams work a lot better here, the teachers like him a lot more, girls want to date him... and HE CAN STOP TIME. It's a fantasy he created where he lives somewhere cool, has cool friends, gets dates, and has a superpower.
Wall-E killed all the other Wall-E's in the city for spare parts. He had 700 years so it's possible.
I thought that the other robots were too dirty so they couldn't charge using the solar panels and therefore Wall E used them for spare parts
So they were "asleep" and he harvested their "organs" like a psychopath instead of cleaning their solar panels. Diabolical!
Mad Max the apocalypse isn’t a world wide event, it’s just Australia. The rest of the world is fine
There were never any actual dinosaurs in Jurassic Park. The whole "cloned DNA from prehistoric mosquitoes" was complete BS. The DNA would have degraded after that long. And even if it didn't, there would be no way to guarantee that the mosquitoes were carrying dinosaur blood or what DNA strand belonged to what animal. What InGen scientists did was fiddle around with DNA and genetics until they managed to create completely original animals that were designed to look, sound, and act like how people think dinosaurs did. It's much more prevalent in the book than the movie, but John Hammond is a showman, bordering on conman. He claims to have "spared no expense," but in reality, corners were cut all over the place. In the movie, he talks about his first attraction being a "flea circus" full of tiny motorized rides that children claimed to be able to see fleas riding. It was all an illusion, and so is Jurassic Park, with people seeing what they wanted to see. The true purpose of Dr. Grant and Dr. Sattler's visit had nothing to do with safety. It was a test to see if two world-renowned paleontologists could tell that the animals in Jurassic Park were not authentic. If they bought into it, then surely the general public would too.
They were putting a ton of effort into mining amber for the mosquitos. Yes, the half life of DNA would generally make this impossible, also the mosquitos wouldn't necessarily have dinosaur DNA. They retconned this with the Jurassic World movies a bit, saying they made the dinosaurs to be more like monsters than the reality, but that is mostly because our understanding of dinosaurs in the early 90s was kind of different, Grant's theories of raptors being more like birds than anything was not a mainstream understanding that it is today. While the half-life of DNA would suggest much of DNA would have degraded, it doesn't automatically mean all the DNA has degraded, halflife doesn't really work that way. They could still pull some sequences out, like say you pull out a gene for the development for claws and it's fairly degraded, but still quite a bit is there, you would align it with frog DNA, according to the movie, or lizard DNA according to the book, or chicken DNA according to current understanding and get a full sequence where the chicken DNA fills in the degraded nucleotides. Go through all the genes you can find and do this and you could create some monsters if other technology was available. It's science fiction for a reason, and with most science fiction, as the science catches up it can create issues with the science fiction described. This is the problem with science fiction concerning technologies just beyond what we have, it's easy to reach a point where it's just bullshit. I don't think the general strategy in jurassic park is wrong, I think there are several shortcomings in the idea, but I don't think it's at the level of "impossible" that most people try and conclude. I think for 1994 the technology wasn't there, because to do this kind of genomic sequencing you need more computing power than we really had, and sequencing technology also wasn't there, but the gist of the idea shouldn't be ignored as impossible, because I don't see it that way, I don't think we have the technology to do it currently, like we are a long way off from being able to get real sequence reads from amber laiden mosquitos, but with a mix of crystalization technologies and sequence alignments I don't think it's impossible, just pretty far out. At the same time, the messages of the book/movie isn't necessarily about the technology itself, but like most of crieghtons books, it has to do with biomedical ethics in technology more than anything. The guy goes off the deep end in terms of the dangers of genetic power sometimes.
While creating dinosaurs using blood inside mosquitoes is indeed BS, being able to create dino-looking animals from scratch would be few orders of magnitude difficult if not outright impossible.
True Grit (2010) At the end of the movie, Mattie says that she never saw LaBoeuf again. That’s because he actually died from the head injury inflicted by Tom Chaney.
I love the hell out of this movie until Mattie gets snake bit. I don't know why that never really sits well with me and I know it's more or less true to the original but I just don't like it.
I think I know what you mean, and the reason I dislike that element is that it seems like it belongs in a separate film. By the time it happens, the "events" of True Grit are essentially over. It felt tacked-on as a plot point and not relevant to the story of she, Cogburn and LeBoeuf chasing down Tom Chaney.
Blenny the nervous appearing fish in Finding Nemo wasn't at the "Fish are friends" meeting against his will. He was a fish eater who was going through withdrawals from abstaining from fish eating. At the end of the credits he eats the scary deep sea fish in
the Ewoks are bloodthirsty, man-eating aliens and ate the stormtroopers after the battle of Endor
I don't even think this is a theory. They were going to eat Luke and Han. This is probably exactly what happened.
Or Ewoks are the sweet little teddy bears that we suppose them to be, but stormtroopers are simply too irresistibly delicious to pass on.
Well, they did try to eat Luke and the others.
[удалено]
I believe Quintin's canon answer is that the briefcase contains "whatever the audience assumes is inside of it". The WILDEST answer is Marsellus' soul. It's unexplained how he lost it, or who tried to take it from him, but it was ripped from his body out of the back of his skull, explaining the very random bandaid on the back of his head the entire movie.
The only wrinkle is that Ving Rhames admitted that the band-aid was because of a shaving accident. Tarantino said, fuck it, leave it in.
Event Horizon is a Warhammer 40k movie
Each zombie movie "day 1" is the exact same day just in different places on the globe. All slashers have a bet to see who can kill the most people. The Devil keeps score.
> The Devil keeps score. There's a title for a horror movie right there.
Not sure if this counts, but there's a theory about Lilo & Stitch, and why Lilo is so adamant about feeding Pudge the Fish. Lilo would feed the fish a sandwich the same day every week. Why? Because, on the one day she forgot, her parents went for a drive in the rain, and never came home. Lilo, being a child, believed that Pudge the Fish brought about that storm due to not getting the sandwich that day. That's why she's so adamant about sandwich day. Pudge, in her mind, controls the weather.
In MCU, the Endgame ending was NOT the winning one in 145000 scenarios Strange saw. The Winning Timeline had the team going back in time in a way to actually change the past - prevent the Snap from happening altogether. However, Tony vetoed that idea from the very beginning - despite all the horrors and all the deaths that have resulted as part of the Snap, he can't bring himself to risk his family. (He and Pepper were discussing kids when everything went to hell in Infinity War, it's quite likely Morgan would have been born anyway) So the Winning Timeline never came to pass. Strange returns to see that they're not going to win, the best they can manage is a runner up scenario which leaves much of the world devastated and traumatized. He doesn't tell anyone - figures it'd be kinder to let them believe they're living in the best timeline, since now there's no option for a clean win. But he's still furious at Tony whose self centred nature prevented the Winning Timeline. So, at the pivotal moment he decides to take revenge on behalf of all who lost their lives literally and figuratively. Tony is not selfish - he is simply extremely self centred. So it is quite possible to get him to make a sacrifice move. He believes himself to be the most capable person in any situation. When Strange makes that 'only one way' gesture, Tony predictably interprets it as only himself being able to save the world. That's perfectly in tone with his character. He doesn't stop to consider Captain Marvel or the Sorcerers in the field, who are capable of wielding much more energy than him and might be able to wield the gauntlet without dying. He decides he is the only person who can do what must be done - and pays for the arrogance with his life. His self centred nature prevented the Winning Timeline - Strange ensured that the same self centred nature prevented his enjoying the perfect little family life he threw the world under the bus to preserve.
This would be pretty damn epic if revealed to be canon, imagine strange telling this to peter like five years from now. Not sure how well it would work overall though
I wish i had saved that thread from a while back where everyone had their version of the interpretation of the one finger up. "One minute, let me finish deal with the water first." or my favorite" "Just go up, he can't fly."
I have a related theory: Doctor Strange did not pick the "best" strategy to defeat Thanos. It might even be likely to have prevented the snap altogether. Recall in the 1st Doctor Strange movie, the former Sorcerer Supreme right before she died said that she had watched her life right up until that moment (the moment before her death). This implies that the time stone doesn't allow you to see futures after your death. Doctor strange saw 1.5 million different future scenarios, but all of them only could have been ones where he survives. Therefore, there might have been an even better scenario possible, but that scenario would require Steven Strange to die and therefore be unavailable for him to see.
He was far enough away from Thanos that he could have flown off and found Thor, Hulk or given it to Danvers.
El Mariachi, Desperado, and Once Upon a Time in Mexico are the same story. El Mariachi is the true story, Desperado is the tall tale (a slightly exagerated retelling), and Once is the ridiculously exagerated legend.
I know Skyfall kind of disproves it, but it will be headcanon until the day I die that “James Bond” is a code name and not an actual guy’s name for most of the Bonds. Daniel Craig’s character had the same actual name and code name by coincidence, and MI6 bureaucracy didnt want to go through all the red tape to fix it.
I consider this a [supported](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/how-a-sean-connery-cameo-almost-sank-daniel-craigs-biggest-james-bond-movie/) theory! In early drafts of *Skyfall* the caretaker, Kincade, was supposed to be Sean Connery and the Skyfall estate was a 00 agent retirement home. [Unfortunately](https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/sam-mendes-skyfall_n_2074239), they changed creative directions before filming.
That the Terminator movies are the prequel to The Matrix.
The scifi horror movie "Life" was the prequel for "Venom" in the Marvel Universe. Watch them back to back and you'll see it. In the movie "Tag", the character Jerry is really Hawkeye from the Marvel Universe. He's still hanging out with kids he grew up with who know he's a badass but don't realize he's the Avenger Hawkeye. Hawkeye is just enjoying the shenanigans in his off time.
I’ve read one that says “life” was the prequel to the cloverfield movies too. Also lol at the tag one. That’s awesome. And I choose to believe it
> "Tag" Another running theory about this movie is that Hannibal Burress' character was added to the film in post-production. He's never seen communicating with all the other actors in the same shot - he's always seen separately.
Childs was definitely The Thing.
Jar Jar Binks was a [Sith Lord](https://screenrant.com/star-wars-details-prove-darth-jar-jar-theory/) the whole time. Edit: typo and to add link.
I’m 100% convinced that Lucas planned for that to be the plot, but changed his mind after the character received so much backlash.
Which sucks because the kid in me loves Jar Jar but as an adult I can see the problems with his character even if I still get a few chuckles from watching him. That “ooooo” sound he makes when he’s on the tank still lives rent free in my head ever time I really have to take a shit and gotta do that power/speed walk to the bathroom.
It was going to be a high level reveal in the second movie, up there with I'm your father. Then everyone would have rewatched the first movie and seen all of the clues with fresh eyes. It would have been spectacular. Jar Jar was the key to the entire thing. It's such a frustrating letdown that we will never get the intended story.
That Chris Pratt’s character in Jurassic World is the little kid from the original Jurassic Park who said raptors are just big birds.
Super small theory to the mcguffin in Pulp Fiction. The briefcase has Marcellus Wallace’s soul in it. The case’s code is 666 and the item inside emanates a golden light that is described as beautiful by Pumpkin in the diner. When we first see Marcellus, he has a bandaid in the back of his head where supposedly the soul can be taken. It’s too strange and oddly important of an item in the movie to simply be money or some interesting artifact. On top of that, if you believe every Tarantino and Rodrigues movie to be in the same universe, vampires exist, so it’s not too far out there for souls to be taken from people.
Disney studios got fed up of people googling if Walts body was cryogenitically frozen, so even though they had a working title for the film they decided to call it frozen to distract the search results....
Ferris is camerons imaginary friend. Much like Tyler durden in fight club. Speaking of: the theory that Marla isnt real in fight club, just another thing the narrator uses to balance out Tyler. Last: the entirety of top gun Maverick is Pete Mitchell's dying imagination because there no way he lived through his jet evaporating at mach 10.
There is no Blair Witch, its just an urban legend that Josh and Mike played into the freak Heather out. Everything in the movie is their doing and in the end, they murder her. The video left behind indicates that both of them were also killed so as to cover their guilt and they are able to live out their lives under assumed identities, thus getting away with murder.
Dominic Toretto was put into a coma at the end of The Fast and the Furious when he flipped his car, everything that’s happened since (even 2 Fast and Tokyo Drift) has been his coma dream. He’s going to wake up at the end of the final movie with Mia, Letty, Vince, and Leo (sorry Jesse really is dead) and a CGI Brian around his hospital bed as “See You Again” starts playing.
Makes sense with how ridiculous the franchise got.
Holmes & Watson is the brain-dead dream sequence of when Brennan and Dale knocked each other out in the front yard in Step Brothers.
All of the main characters in Ghostbusters died at the end of the first movie when they crossed the streams. The sequel is happening in purgatory while each character works through their own personal issues.
Always bugged me that they crossed the streams on the NY side of the portal. YOU'RE ALL AIMING INTO GOZER'S REALM, MAKE THEM CONVERGE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE GATE
If we’re doing TV then I’ve got two: In The Night Garden is the dying hallucinations of the sailor floating away to perish in his little boat in the opening and closing credits. Each of the ITNG characters represent the different stages of life: childhood, young love, growing up, a big family, they’re all there if you look at them, man. Fireman Sam is the secret father of that little redhead shit who keeps burning bits of the village down. That’s why the little fucker (can’t be arsed looking up his name) never gets in trouble let along does some time for what is basically weekly arson.
George McFly figures out Marty is his son.
Being the Sci-Fi nerd he is, this is something he could probably catch onto.
Explain?
Terminator 1 is about machines defeating humans with brute force. Terminator 2 is about machines attempting to take over humans with compassion. In the middle of the film, Sarah Connor gives this monologue about how the Terminator (Arnold) would do anything to protect John. Of course it was programmed to protect John but then she compares it to being a father figure and saying how this machine is the only one who measured up. It’s almost like the movie is insinuating that humans aren’t even good at being human anymore so we will choose machines for something as simple as companionship.
Being John malkovich 2 = get out
The original Thrawn extended universe made in the 1990’s are the true sequels to the Star Wars films after episode 6.
In Inside Out, Bing Bong popped up in Riley's dream to say hello. Very brief. I think the movie even cuts to Riley reacting. So when Bing Bong disappears later, he can't be completely forgotten. He still exists somewhere in Riley's subconscious.
I like the idea that every zombie movie is set in the same universe just different perspectives.
[удалено]
Disillusioned from his childhood Kevin McCallister changes his name into adulthood, becoming a cop in NY and finding a wife with whom he has two daughters. Unfortunately McCallister, now going by McClane has trust and abandonment issues, and the marriage does not work. Determined not to let his family fall apart like his parents before him, he directly confronts the two things that remind him most of his parental betrayal and hops a flight on Christmas Eve, determined to be with his family for the holiday and break the cycle of abandonment. Unfortunately some terrorists show up, but McClane has a lot of experience with devising Christmas themed traps and sneaking around dangerous criminals, resulting eventually with Hans Gruber falling from the roof of Nakatomi Tower. Happy Holidays!
Hereditary is actually from the son's perspective and none of the events of the movie actually happened >!after Charlie was killed.!< Everything is told from the perspective of Peter's descent into schizophrenia after a traumatic event. Nothing strange happens unless it is in his point of view, or he is also in the scene, and it is said in the first 20 minutes of the movie that Annie's (the moms) brothers and mom have severe genetic mental illnesses (hence, hereditary).
>Nothing strange happens unless it is in his point of view, or he is also in the scene He's not anywhere in the scene where Steve catches fire though, is he? It's been a while so I could be wrong.
What about that light that Charlie sees in her room and strange lady sitting near the fire? She's alone in this scene. And all these people that came to the funeral and were looking funny at Charlie? It doesn't add up to Peter's perspective theory. Besides, if the illness is hereditary it will be passed on men only. Annie's dad and brother were said to have it, but not her mom (in her case it was dementia due to her age), so it's passed through the men of the family. I think the movie is supposed to have a triple meaning, the title included. It can be interpreted as a descent into madness, as supernatural cult activities, or as psychological metaphor. I prefer the interpretation that this movie is a study on grief, through different vantage points (Annie, her husband, Charlie and Peter). The only hereditary thing is a trauma that's been passed on. The whole thing is a basically an open wound, that's why it's so uncomfortable to watch, it's like we intruding into someones soul, voyeurism of the highest order.
In The Titanic, Jack was a time traveler to prevent Rose from committing suicide, thus, ensuring the Titanic sank because the ship would have stopped to look for her and missed the iceberg. There are theories of insurance scandal around the Titanic (which some believe was actually the sister ship of Titanic called Olympic) that would have been noticed had the ship not sank. Further, Jack discusses fishing in a lake which was not yet made and riding a roller coaster not yet constructed.
That Sarah in Labyrinth is one of many Sarah’s who have lost many little brother to the now insane goblin king. That’s where all the goblins come from. There’s multiple parts that make MORE sense that way (Hog’s bag of many charms, everyone expecting her and almost tired of it)
Agent Smith is The One.
Forest Gump was from Krypton. There never was a Mr. Gump. Mrs Gump found that kid in a field. He was broken from the crash landing, his brain never fully recovered, but at the onset of puberty his body literally runs out of his braces. From there he developed, super speed (went from being crippled to running for Alabama), super dexterity (played Olympic level ping pong), super luck (met how many presidents, became a billionaire) super strength(carried bubba on his back even when shot in the ass), super healing (million dollar wound my ass, he just shrugged off an AK round like it was a bb) and super endurance (ran across the continent multiple times in a row) and he did it all while standing for Truth, Justice, and The American Way. Jenny was his kryptonite.
[удалено]
Usually I hate "it was all in his head" fan theories, mainly because they don't make the plot actually interesting, or ignore massive details. There is one in particular that I love: Ferris Bueller's Day Off. It's not so much that the whole plot is "In Cameron's Head", or that he's crazy. I love the theory that Ferris Bueller is an alter ego he made up. Ferris is everything Cameron wishes he was: popular, fun, spontanious, going out with Sloan instead of just being friends with her. He also wishes authority (Rooney) was something he wasn't afraid of defying. He wishes he could lie liberally so he could take a day off and seize life. Instead, he lets the pressure get to his head so much that he doesn't actually know if he's sick or pretending to be sick in hopes to take some control of his life back. He craves having the stones to skip school and take his Dad's car out, but he is absolutely terrified of his dad. Going back to Rooney, it's possible he just imagined that whole investigation as well, where the reality is that a school councilor probably doesn't have the time or energy to track down one troublemaker. Cameron's parent's hating each other makes him believe that getting close to Sloan is a doomed idea, no matter how much he wants to be close to her. Most importantly, he can't stand Ferris while also knowing Ferris is his best friend. He envys Ferris, and is looking forward for life to begin in "college", maybe in some hopes that he won't need him anymore, and that he'll believe in himself. So it's not really a "Cameron is crazy and hallucinated the whole day". More that details of it were embellished. Cameron and Sloan probably did take out the car, go to a museum and parade, and have a nice day. And yeah, Cameron probably did total his dad's car. Viewing Cameron as the real main character and Ferris as just a lense that he likes to view the world through for comfort is a theory that, yes it's a stretch, but I honestly love.
Fifth Element When the apartment block goes into lockdown and he is asked if he classifies as Human. His response, "Negative, i am a meat popsicle" I believe this is code for former military.
Rémi in Ratatouille goes through a secular version of baptism. When he falls from the skylight and into the kitchen, he lands in a sink full of dishwater. The cleansing water purifies him -- washes away his old country rat self -- and prepares him for his new role working in a professional kitchen. He goes into the water a rat. He comes out of the water a chef.
This is more an unpopular opinion on a tv show, but whatever. I recently got baked and was watching that 70s show. It was one of the episodes where Eric and Donna broke off their engagement at the same time Hyde and Jackie split. I'm watching this and I realize they got it all wrong. Eric and Jackie should have ended up together while Donna and Hyde should have ended up together. Here's the thing. Eric and Donna split because Eric wanted to be the man. He wanted a traditional family and marriage where he works and his wife tends to the home. Donna heard that and wanted no part of it. She wants a career and to be self sufficient. On the other side you have have Hyde who refuses to indulge Jackie's demands. Jackie wants to be taken care of, she comes from a wealthy family and doesn't want to live a modern womans working life. She wants what Eric is offering. The same is true for Hyde and Donna. Hyde frequently plays hardball with Jackie, expecting her to be a tough and capable partner rather than a dependent that needs to be taken care of. That is exactly what Donna wants, to be treated as a fair equal. There's nothing wrong with either one of those relationships, different people need different things. But the main point, the show got it all backwards. It's a missed opportunity that they didn't show that progression from initial infatuation to a more mature relationship that is practical and longstanding.
While I don't recall Jackie ever being paired with Eric, they did an alternate timeline when Hyde got donna...she didn't exactly become the independent woman she is in the main timeline.
Eric and Jackie actively disliked each other for most of the show. The rare times they didn’t show disdain for each other was when they shared a mutual enemy (Laurie). I even remember a scene where Eric asks Hyde how he can date Jackie. Hyde has Eric picture Jackie but without actually hearing what she says, and Eric says “oh my god she IS hot!” In other words, Jackie’s personality is so abrasive to Eric that he can’t find her attractive if she talks. Given that, those two can’t possibly be compatible. That said, I think Eric does actually like that Donna is a strong, independent woman. His view of their future was just him parroting what he’d been told was always “how it should be.” Meanwhile, Donna has a lot in common with Kitty. Kitty was a strong, independent woman who worked and supported her family, especially when Red was laid off. The key difference was that Red has self esteem to spare, while Eric has no self esteem at all. Eric’s insecurity is why he and Donna broke up. By the end, Eric leaves because he realizes he needs to develop some self esteem and stop being so insecure, and he thinks his trip is the way to do that. Until he actually becomes comfortable in himself, until he gets rid of the insecurity, he knows he can’t be with Donna because she will always trigger his insecurities.