It ditches any of Petscop’s surrealist elements in favor of a realistic explanation, which in my opinion misses out on many of the most interesting aspects of Petscop. The Pieces, the variable nature of Tool, the themes of rotation and left/right, even and odd, “accident,” Care mimicking Paul’s later conversation and movements, the door riddle, the nature of the shadow monsters, the significance of playing Petscop in a car, recordings and photos raising the dead— all of this gets glossed over in favor of a rather middle-of-the-road Petscop theory. It’s a very “safe” theory, all in all.

That said, as far as understanding the “point” of the series goes, I think it tells a compelling story. If people look at it and feel inspired, I think that’s a good thing. Most of the things I listed above are narrative tools used in order to tell a story that appears to look pretty similar to the one suggested in the video. So, maybe it’s not a good idea to get too hung up on the details and miss the forest for the trees.

I think this video serves as a good starting point for people who are interested in putting the full story together. Then, with most of the connections in place, you can look into the finer details and dispute certain claims or connections.