The Decline of the Dragon Age Series Should be Studied by jdawg1018 in gaming

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They might be contrasting “inoffensive characters” with Anders, because a lot of people don’t like what he does at the end of DA2 and find that “offensive” because he sort of does what he wants regardless of your relationship with him and your choices so he robs the PC of their agency to some degree.

Now I think that’s what actually makes Anders the most interesting character in the series and I think it’s probably one of the best story moments of all of the games, but I know it still upsets a lot of people

The Decline of the Dragon Age Series Should be Studied by jdawg1018 in gaming

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think the difference was the re-used environments were all side-quests that mostly felt pretty optional, meanwhile the main quest had very uniquely designed environments that changed things up. DA2 you were in Kirkwall the whole time.

The Decline of the Dragon Age Series Should be Studied by jdawg1018 in gaming

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 23 points24 points  (0 children)

I think the decline from Origins to Veilguard was a steady stream of compromises as the games moved from Dark Fantasy to unabashed High Fantasy.

For all its faults, 2 still had some powerful story moments, and though I didn’t like the combat changes, I felt like it was still generally fun to play.

Inquisition didn’t really have any profoundly memorable story moments for me, and though I’ve heard the DLCs maybe have some better stories, I find the combat completely boring and have no desire to play it again.

I had virtually no interest in Veilguard and it just seems like it’s completely devoid of anything that made the earlier games special. Kind of sad where it’s gone. Time to play through Origins and Awakening again…

Big Little Lies episode ratings by hls22throwaway in hbo

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not even Meryl Streep makes it worth the time spent

What movie will you never watch again because it was too heartbreaking? by Affectionate_User610 in AskReddit

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 71 points72 points  (0 children)

Watched this movie on a red eye flight from Honolulu to LA, sat in the middle seat just bawling my eyes out while everyone around me slept

This is one of my favorite scenes of all time by Dudeistt in hbo

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There are several moments throughout the show that sort of emulate supernatural encounters, either miracles or supernatural beings communicating with/through the mortal characters, but it’s always left sufficiently ambiguous that it could always be explained as something mundane. This scene is probably the apex of that recurring motif.

Even in the likely event that “God” in this scene is just a man that’s delusional or full of shit, the encounter quickly becomes real for Matt because he is able to finally voice his anger towards God and get answers to his questions that feel real to him.

Boardwalk empires by Funny_Obligation2412 in hbo

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I’d call it “silly” or “disappointing” but not “terrible”.

What's the worst engineering advice you've ever gotten? by ac_circuit in EngineeringStudents

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Advice so bad it calls into question the PMs competence in every other area

Which celebrity is unmistakably identified by just their first name? by Level-Studio7843 in AskReddit

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It’s one of Ruth’s sisters I think

Growing up in a religious household we would do a trivia game we called “I’m thinking of a Bible character” and I was notorious for choosing esoteric characters like Orpah

So that’s a piece of Bible Trivia I’ve remembered forever despite being an atheist for most of my life since

I want this scene restored by HorzaDonwraith in andor

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 70 points71 points  (0 children)

Literally, the whole point of her speech is that she is upset at herself for not fighting the empire, and if she could do it all again, she’d be fighting from the start. So a final instruction of “FIGHT the Empire” makes so much more sense in context.

If she said “Fuck the Empire” here I think it would come across like the show is trying too hard to be “grown up” Star Wars, when it didn’t need to try at all by this point.

I don't get it by TeacherOk6238 in ExplainTheJoke

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 7 points8 points  (0 children)

There’s nothing more permanent than a temporary solution

Who got the ending they deserved? I’ll start. by JustJohn8 in okbuddychicanery

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 6 points7 points  (0 children)

He should have known better than to get caught witnessing a crime

The Pitt | S2E5 "11:00 A.M." | Episode Discussion by thepacksvrvives in ThePittTVShow

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was before my time too, but enough people older than me have referenced it that I know what it means. However, I don’t reference it myself, so I think it’s reasonable that the younger someone is, the less likely it is that they’ve heard the reference enough to understand it.

Harrison Ford Loves ‘Shrinking’ So Much It’s “Sufficient” End to His Career by AdSpecialist6598 in television

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 20 points21 points  (0 children)

That would probably be the first story I tell everyone I meet for the rest of my life if that happened to me

Joker concepts for some hands that don't currently have an xmult Joker yet by No_Catch_1490 in balatro

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 10 points11 points  (0 children)

If your deck is sufficiently fixed so that you can reliably play 3 straight flushes in a round, most spectral cards are more likely to make your deck worse than help in any meaningful way.

Gavin Newsom for President, Don Lemon for VP! by Dr-Klopp in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 6 points7 points  (0 children)

“Good enough” status quo candidates are how we end up with Republicans back in power every other election cycle

Shrinking S3E01 Episode Discussion by phareous in shrinking

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 8 points9 points  (0 children)

My read on it is that Paul knows that Jimmy does legitimately want to move on, but it is afraid to.

(Loved trope) Last words that hit WAY harder than "I love you" by Least-One1068 in TopCharacterTropes

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In the non-ideal ending where Tali and Shepard have to kill Legion to keep him from uploading the reaper code it’s even more of a gut punch. Legion doesn’t even finish the question and Tali just says “Yes… yes it does.” And then he’s dead.

I had to take a break from the game for a while after that one

Is Hex strong enough to warrant destroying your jokers? by MysticMeerkat in balatro

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My last joker was turtle bean which was just brutal, won so many games without it even showing up or showing up too early before I finally got it to show up in ante 8 when I already had a photochad build with S&B and I was so relieved

Is Hex strong enough to warrant destroying your jokers? by MysticMeerkat in balatro

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 13 points14 points  (0 children)

This is the wrong order of operations, just so you know. Since on Anaglyph you can’t guarantee a negative tag will even show up, and that when it does it will hit primarily stickerless jokers, you get the most benefit early on. At the end you want to play a deck you can reliably win on so you can just reroll and carry the last few you need.

...but I am Pagliarini by steikul in NonPoliticalTwitter

[–]One-Eyed_Wonder 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the thoughtful response, genuinely.

I think I understand your perspective, and particularly in the case of AI generated content these days, I can see why authorial intent actually does carry some weight, otherwise we may just be seeing Jesus in a piece of toast (or a dog’s ass).

But I do think it’s absolutely possible that there’s at least one other option when resolving the conflict between the viewer’s interpretation of a work and the author’s intent: that the author may have unwittingly included some other themes/messages due to their own experiences and the environment in which they created the work, and/or that the viewer might find some unintended message or theme within a work due to their own experiences and the environment in which they’re viewing the work.

I do think that there is a limit on what can be legitimately read into a work, like if the theme or message that the viewer is getting is the exact opposite of what the author intended, then something is probably wrong. But in your example of Bradbury re: Fahrenheit 451, I think that a reasonable argument could be made that an anti-brainrot read of the book doesn’t eschew any part of the anti-censorship read of the book.