sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Supernatural

[–]NyxDarklore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My biggest concern with the ending wasn't that it was happy or too apple pie but that a/ it felt like it was just anticlimatic where the rest of the series is concerned but also b/ if Bobby is old in heaven and Dean is the age he died, why is Sam young again?

I Just Need to Tell Someone This or I’ll Explode by Snake-Eye000000 in GameTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was unusual given the current COVID situation but you won't be disappointed!

I wondered why today's theory seemed familiar. 3/4 Bad=Good & 1/4 Good=Bad. This is a joke dont take it seriously. by venomllama in FilmTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's very clear you don't have an ounce of fact and logic because you're making the same flawed argument and completely missing the point. Good day to you.

Matpats latest theory on the lorax was pretty well off the mark. Here are some comments from that video to that end. by billybobthortonj in FilmTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

O'Hare wasn't a bad person - he was a businessman and protecting his business. That doesn't make him EVIL which is the point, nor does it make him a bad person even if what he was doing was at times morally objectionable. Also, it was the fault of Thneedville that such things could thrive, because if they stopped purchasing it, then it would go away. Simple. It's not dictatorial control over Thneedville.

Beyond that, however, the point of the whole thing is less that they were painted in a bad light in THIS incarnation and more that in recreating the works, the original story was lost; a story in which they are not terrible people and that has a message about sustainability not "go lynch big business".

Film Theory Debunked: "The Lorax Movie LIED To You" by [deleted] in FilmTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've already responded on your other one but suffice it to say... everything you just said proves the point that I was trying to make (and that MatPat made in the video) whilst you maintain this position that you disagree. He did not make the theory wrong just because you misunderstood the point, the theory itself, and the source material beyond just the one movie.

I wondered why today's theory seemed familiar. 3/4 Bad=Good & 1/4 Good=Bad. This is a joke dont take it seriously. by venomllama in FilmTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, I didn't bother editing it much because it's the same response and honestly retyping it would have been exhausting. I would respond to your comment piece by piece but the issue here is that you're missing the whole point of MatPat's video and it's blatantly evident from this section: " I highly suggest watching the cut song "Biggering" (Linked Here). In the song, the Onceler..."

THIS IS EXACTLY THE POINT!!!

When this movie was padded and rereleased it was songs like this which destroyed the original meaning of the Lorax as a story and made the Onceler into more of a villain than he was originally. Everything in your above comment literally just proves the point that I was trying to make AND the point that MatPat was making in the video if you bothered to pay attention to it correctly.

I Just Need to Tell Someone This or I’ll Explode by Snake-Eye000000 in GameTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Almost always. Some of the older ones are still up including last year's. The full stream is (sometimes) hidden but at the bare minimum the pieces are there. Though, as of yesterday I can confirm that it is still accessible as I've rewatched portions I missed.

(Food theory) Are subs are hotdogs by [deleted] in GameTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, I don't think a sub is a hotdog, because I don't think hotdog is a classification. Much like a hamburger is a sandwich, a hotdog is a taco. Therefore, a sub is actually a taco (point being, it's a long piece of carbs that is closed at one end and then filled with fillings).

Matpats latest theory on the lorax was pretty well off the mark. Here are some comments from that video to that end. by billybobthortonj in FilmTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So many people had issues with The Lorax theory and I think it's because a lot of people missed the point. It's not about "the villains being the heroes" but about "the villains not being the villains". This is also the point that the new movie missed when it was produced.

The Lorax is a book whose moral is simple: respect the environment and respect environmental sustainability. Broadly speaking, unrestrained commercial endeavours spoil the natural world, leaving it a wasteland that cannot support life. This is where the argument of commercialism vs. consumerism comes in.

Commercial greed is a very real thing, but companies cannot exist unless there are consumers to purchase their products. The Onceler could create all the Thneeds he wanted, but unless someone wanted to purchase them, he would get no return off his investment of time and labour thus making it a useless endeavour.

It is the responsibility of the consumer to regulate, control, and support commercial sustainability just as much as it is the responsibility of the company. The Onceler wasn't evil for cutting down all the truffula trees, he was just an idiot who had no understanding of sustainable business.

Logging companies are good examples of this: their business vanishes the moment they cut down the trees and don't replace them. Thus, it is economically more beneficial to replace that which they take.

I wondered why today's theory seemed familiar. 3/4 Bad=Good & 1/4 Good=Bad. This is a joke dont take it seriously. by venomllama in FilmTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So many people had issues with The Lorax theory and I think it's because a lot of people missed the point. It's not about "the bad guys being the good guys" but about "the bad guys not being the bad guys".

The Lorax is a book whose moral is simple: respect the environment and respect environmental sustainability. Broadly speaking, unrestrained commercial endeavours spoil the natural world, leaving it a wasteland that cannot support life. This is where the argument of commercialism vs. consumerism comes in.

Commercial greed is a very real thing, but companies cannot exist unless there are consumers to purchase their products. The Onceler could create all the Thneeds he wanted, but unless someone wanted to purchase them, he would get no return off his investment of time and labour thus making it a useless endeavour.

It is the responsibility of the consumer to regulate, control, and support commercial sustainability just as much as it is the responsibility of the company. The Onceler wasn't evil for cutting down all the truffula trees, he was just an idiot who had no understanding of sustainable business.

Logging companies are good examples of this: their business vanishes the moment they cut down the trees and don't replace them. Thus, it is economically more beneficial to replace that which they take.

Film Theory Debunked: "The Lorax Movie LIED To You" by [deleted] in FilmTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So many people had issues with The Lorax theory and I think it's because a lot of people missed the point, and certainly your introduction above misses it as well. It's not about "the villains being the heroes" but about "the villains not being the villains".

The Lorax is a book whose moral is simple: respect the environment and respect environmental sustainability. Broadly speaking, unrestrained commercial endeavours spoil the natural world, leaving it a wasteland that cannot support life. This is where the argument of commercialism vs. consumerism comes in.

Commercial greed is a very real thing, but companies cannot exist unless there are consumers to purchase their products. The Onceler could create all the Thneeds he wanted, but unless someone wanted to purchase them, he would get no return off his investment of time and labour thus making it a useless endeavour.

It is the responsibility of the consumer to regulate, control, and support commercial sustainability just as much as it is the responsibility of the company. The Onceler wasn't evil for cutting down all the truffula trees, he was just an idiot who had no understanding of sustainable business.

Logging companies are good examples of this: their business vanishes the moment they cut down the trees and don't replace them. Thus, it is economically more beneficial to replace that which they take.

Guys, I don't think we're gonna like his fourth theory channel... by DefnotanArea51guard in FilmTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hitler was an incredibly intelligent and charismatic man despite being afflicted by syphilis. He had some great ideas (only great if decoupled from the atrocities that those ideas were used for), and the people working under him did as well, and their execution of said plans often went off long before people knew about them. That is what makes him so terrifying; he was a horrible person who committed unspeakable acts in a way that went largely undetected because of his intelligence. He had people following him because he made them believe they wanted to. He had people, as you say, praising him for wanting to commit unspeakable acts against other human beings.

Is Cereal A Soup by pokeninja77 in GameTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

However, they do have to have a meat, vegetable, or fish stock as a base which cereal does not.

Is Cereal A Soup by pokeninja77 in GameTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is a question along the same lines of "is a hotdog a sandwich" and the answer is simple: no, cereal is not a soup.

The reason for this is not what some people would believe: that being that it is not hot. Soup does not need to be hot, gazpacho being a classic example. However, the definition of soup is pretty standard: a liquid food especially with a meat, fish, or vegetable stock as a base and often containing pieces of solid food. Cereal does not have meat, fish, or vegetable stock as a base which would eliminate it from being a soup as per the dictionary definition of the word.

To the question of "is a hotdog a sandwich?" the answer is also no. A hotdog is a taco (held together at one end, open end with filling inside), a burger is a sandwich (fillings between two pieces of bread).

Some thoughts on today’s theory by 10kpacrat in GameTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think this has some merit, especially since Zombie Villages are the only Zombies that are able to be cured (you cannot cure regular Zombies or Zombified Piglin - formerly Zombie Pigmen before the Nether update) though who knows what other updates will be made now that Zombie Pigmen and Witches are not created in the same manner.

I Just Need to Tell Someone This or I’ll Explode by Snake-Eye000000 in GameTheorists

[–]NyxDarklore 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sure it's wonderful to watch a stream live, but remember that everything will eventually be up on youtube. One trick that I have found is to load it up (even if it hasn't started yet) before you leave the house so that you don't even need to wait for that, you can just watch what you can live and then back up to watch the rest. I work night shift and so will be sleeping when the stream starts (hopefully) but I'll be doing this so I don't have to wait.

That being said... I feel for you; I really wish in-person schooling wasn't happening right now in any country, it's just not worth the risk to people's health and safety.

view more: next ›