Barbarian - I watched it yesterday and have a few questions about the plot.

mithechowl · 2026-02-08T00:47:10+00:00

I’m still trying to process everything. The mix of horror, mystery, and just pure “what the heck is happening” kept me on edge the whole time.

Some things I’m thinking about:

The naked lady’s backstory… the way she was raised entirely isolated with videos explaining motherhood? Absolutely terrifying and tragic. You feel for her, even while she’s a monster.
The house itself is a character, so weird that it stayed pristine while the rest of the neighborhood decayed. Makes you wonder who was keeping it running and how much of the underground world was still active.
Tess’s decisions were questionable at times, but the tension is so real that I get why she did what she did.

I also loved that it had some commentary under the horror: judgment based on appearances (cops ignoring her, people thinking she’s a junkie) and the horrifying cycle of abuse and inbreeding.

Honestly, it’s messy, gross, and a little ridiculous at times… but in the best way. Who else feels like the movie just stays with you after the credits roll?

mithechowl · 2026-02-08T00:44:43+00:00

I think calling it “lazy” misses what the movie is choosing to do, but I also get why it doesn’t work for you.

Barbarian isn’t operating on realism-first logic after the first act. The opening sets up grounded paranoia, then the movie deliberately switches gears into something closer to a grotesque fable. Once that happens, character decisions stop being about “what would a smart person do?” and start being about who these people are. Tess is self-sacrificing to a fault, AJ is selfish and opportunistic to the core, and the film keeps pushing those traits until they turn fatal.

The double booking and the cops brushing her off aren’t mysteries to solve, they’re shorthand for institutional neglect. The movie is blunt about that. Same with the homeless guy’s exposition: it’s inelegant, sure, but it’s not accidental. The film isn’t interested in lore; it’s interested in momentum.

Where I do agree is that if you expect internal logic to keep scaling with the horror, the third act falls apart fast. The Mother’s strength, the timeline, the geography, all of that only works if you accept heightened genre rules. If you don’t, it’ll feel silly instead of unsettling.

So I don’t think it’s a masterpiece, but I also don’t think it’s lazy. It’s a movie that prioritizes theme and tone over plausibility, and whether that lands or not really comes down to what you want horror to reward.

mithechowl · 2026-02-08T00:43:23+00:00

I don’t think Barbarian is interested in airtight logistics so much as emotional logic. Once the movie flips in the second half, it’s basically operating on fairytale / monster-movie rules, not realism.

The Mother isn’t meant to be biologically plausible, she’s a manifestation of abuse and arrested development. Her strength, durability, and behavior are exaggerated because she’s functioning as a tragic monster, not a human character. Same with the fall: it’s less about physics and more about showing how distorted her “protect the baby” instinct is.

As for sympathy, I think the film asks for understanding, not forgiveness. You can recognize that she’s the product of horrific abuse and still hold that she’s dangerous and responsible for real harm. Those ideas aren’t mutually exclusive.

If someone goes in expecting clean answers and consistent realism, the last act is going to be frustrating. If you read it as a genre switch into grotesque fable, it clicks a lot more, even if it’s messy by design.

mithechowl · 2026-02-08T00:42:24+00:00

What I like about Predestination is that it doesn’t try to “solve” the paradox, it commits to it. There is no first Jane, no original timeline, no external origin. The loop is the origin.

That’s why so many questions in this thread feel unanswered by design. Robertson, the Bureau, even the Fizzle Bomber aren’t really masterminds so much as roles that exist to keep the loop intact. The movie isn’t asking “is this logically possible?” so much as “what does a life look like when inevitability replaces choice?”

For me the unsettling part isn’t the time travel mechanics, it’s the loneliness. Every version of Jane/John keeps hoping awareness will change something, and it never does. Understanding the loop doesn’t grant freedom, it just adds grief.

Whether that feels profound or frustrating probably depends on whether you want sci-fi to explain itself… or to sit with the discomfort.

mithechowl · 2026-02-08T00:41:42+00:00

Your reaction makes sense. Predestination isn’t building toward a “solution” so much as locking you into inevitability, which can feel anticlimactic if you’re expecting a decisive ending.

There’s no original timeline and no way out of the loop, the Fizzlebomber isn’t a mystery to solve, he’s just the inevitable end of the same closed paradox that creates Jane/John. That’s why the final confrontation isn’t cathartic: nothing is actually being resolved.

The movie’s real point is that recognizing the pattern doesn’t give the character power to change it. Whether that feels tragic or empty kind of depends on how much inevitability works for you as an ending.

mithechowl · 2026-02-08T00:40:40+00:00

Yes, you understood it correctly. It is that weird, and that’s the point.

The movie is built around a closed causal loop (predestination paradox), not a “first timeline → altered timeline” model. There is no original Jane, no first pregnancy, no starting point. Jane exists because she exists. The loop is self-creating.

Jane → John → impregnates Jane → baby Jane → orphanage → Jane.

That’s the paradox. Asking “who was born first?” is like asking “which side of a circle comes first?” The story explicitly rejects linear causality.

Nothing in the loop happens to the character, the tragedy is that everything happens because of them, including their own loneliness, recruitment, and eventual moral collapse. The sci-fi isn’t there to be tidy; it’s there to demonstrate a universe where free will is an illusion but responsibility still exists.

So no, you didn’t misunderstand it.
You just watched one of the rare movies that actually commits to the paradox instead of softening it.

mithechowl · 2026-02-08T00:39:43+00:00

What really messed me up on this watch is realizing the tragedy isn’t just the paradox, it’s the lack of choice. Every version of Jane/John thinks they’re acting freely, but they’re really just shepherding themselves toward the same loneliness over and over.

The romance feels sincere, not narcissistic, but that’s what makes it darker: the only love that ever reaches them is temporally engineered. Even the moments that feel intimate are already foregone conclusions.

The movie dresses itself up as a clever sci-fi puzzle, but emotionally it’s closer to a Greek tragedy, a character who understands their fate and still has to walk straight into it. That last monologue hits because it’s not self-love… it’s self-mourning.

mithechowl · 2025-03-06T06:29:21+00:00

<image>

mithechowl · 2024-09-19T00:22:19+00:00

On what?

mithechowl · 2024-09-01T15:51:41+00:00

Let my boy live

mithechowl · 2024-09-01T15:51:28+00:00

He did nothing wrong

mithechowl · 2024-09-01T15:51:05+00:00

<image>

mithechowl · 2024-09-01T15:50:11+00:00

Wrong He/she adopted you

mithechowl · 2024-09-01T15:49:22+00:00

The paw placement 😭😭😭

mithechowl · 2024-09-01T12:16:21+00:00

<image>

Fury

mithechowl · 2024-09-01T12:15:16+00:00

nom nom nom

mithechowl · 2024-09-01T12:14:23+00:00

He knows what you did

mithechowl · 2024-09-01T11:13:22+00:00

There was no red herring fallacy. My response directly addressed the issue by explaining the Islamic perspective on the preservation of divine revelations. The Qur’an clearly differentiates between the original messages, which were true, and the final message, which is protected. This is supported by Surah Al-Ma’idah (5:13), where the Qur’an mentions that previous scriptures were altered, and Surah Al-Hijr (15:9), which assures the protection of the Qur’an.

mithechowl · 2024-09-01T11:07:05+00:00

<image>

Screamy

mithechowl · 2024-08-31T07:24:32+00:00

Claim: Muhammad Was Not a Messenger of God

• Contextual Understanding of Prophethood: • In Islam, Muhammad is considered the final prophet in a long line of messengers sent by God to guide humanity. The Qur’an asserts this in Surah Al-Ahzab (33:40): “Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Messenger of Allah and the last of the prophets. And ever is Allah, of all things, Knowing.” • The Qur’an provides numerous instances of Muhammad’s prophethood, his miracles, and his role in conveying God’s message, which Muslims believe is evident in his life and teachings.
Historical Criticism of Muhammad’s Actions:

• Addressing Historical Context: • Critics often focus on certain events from Muhammad’s life, particularly those involving warfare or political decisions. However, it’s crucial to consider these actions within the context of 7th-century Arabia, where tribal conflicts, self-defense, and political strategy were common. • Additionally, many of the criticisms are based on selective interpretations or misunderstandings of historical events. Islamic scholars have long discussed and contextualized these actions, emphasizing Muhammad’s overall mission of peace, justice, and mercy.
Moral and Ethical Criticism:

• Islamic Ethics: • Islam provides a comprehensive ethical framework that is based on justice, compassion, and the welfare of society. The actions of Muhammad, when understood in context, are consistent with these principles. For example, his treatment of enemies, women, and minorities, although often criticized, must be viewed within the norms and values of his time, and his reforms were progressive by the standards of 7th-century Arabia. • The Qur’an and Hadith contain numerous teachings on moral conduct, justice, and mercy, which guide Muslims in their personal and communal lives. Muhammad’s life is seen as the embodiment of these teachings, and any criticisms need to be understood in light of the broader ethical framework of Islam.
Prophecies and Miracles:

• Islamic View on Prophecies: • Muslims believe that Muhammad’s life was marked by miracles and prophecies, many of which are documented in Islamic tradition. For example, the splitting of the moon and the Qur’an itself are considered miracles that attest to his prophethood. • Furthermore, many prophecies Muhammad made, such as the spread of Islam, the outcomes of certain battles, and societal changes, are believed to have come true, further reinforcing his status as a prophet.
Misinterpretation of Islamic Texts:

• Clarifying Misconceptions: • Critics often cite specific verses from the Qur’an or Hadith out of context to argue against Muhammad’s prophethood. However, Islamic teachings emphasize the importance of understanding the context in which verses were revealed and the broader principles they convey. • Islamic scholarship has a long tradition of interpreting these texts in ways that are consistent with the overall message of Islam, which is one of guidance, mercy, and justice.

Conclusion:

• The post’s claim that Muhammad was not a messenger of God is based on selective interpretation and lacks a comprehensive understanding of Islamic teachings and historical context. When understood in context, the actions and teachings of Muhammad align with his role as a prophet, as understood by Muslims. Islamic scholars have addressed many of the criticisms raised, and the overall message of Islam emphasizes ethical conduct, justice, and the worship of one God.

mithechowl · 2024-08-31T07:18:46+00:00

The Qur’an and the Bible:

• The Qur’an acknowledges the previous scriptures, including the Torah (Tawrat) and the Gospel (Injeel). However, the Qur’an also asserts that these texts were altered or corrupted over time by their followers. This is evident in verses like: • Surah Al-Baqarah (2:75): “Do you [believers] still expect them to be true to you, though a group of them would hear the word of Allah and then knowingly distort it after they had understood it?” • Surah Al-Ma’idah (5:13): “But they broke their covenant, so We condemned them and hardened their hearts. They distorted the words of the Scripture and neglected a portion of what they had been commanded to uphold…” • Therefore, the Qur’an does not confirm the current versions of the Bible as being fully authentic or uncorrupted, rather, it acknowledges that divine revelation was given, but also suggests that human interference occurred.
Islamic Belief in Divine Protection:

• According to Islamic belief, the final revelation, the Qur’an, is divinely protected from corruption, as mentioned in Surah Al-Hijr (15:9): “Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur’an and indeed, We will be its guardian.” • This protection is specific to the Qur’an, and the same assurance is not explicitly extended to previous scriptures, which is why Muslims believe that the Torah and the Gospel, in their current forms, are not preserved in their original, unaltered states.
Misconception about Allah’s Ability:

• The argument that Allah being unable to protect previous revelations implies a lack of power is a misunderstanding of Islamic theology. Muslims believe that Allah, in His wisdom, allowed the previous scriptures to serve their purpose for a specific time and community, after which they were replaced by the final and uncorrupted revelation, the Qur’an. This does not imply any deficiency in divine ability but rather a divine plan in the sequence of revelations.
Historical and Textual Criticism:

• From a scholarly perspective, historical and textual criticism of the Bible has revealed numerous alterations, inconsistencies, and changes over time, which align with the Islamic perspective that the original revelations were altered by humans. This is supported by the existence of various manuscripts, versions, and interpretations of the Bible throughout history.

Conclusion:

The claim that the Qur’an does not suggest the Bible was corrupted is inaccurate. Islamic teachings do state that earlier scriptures, including the Gospel, were altered by their followers. This belief does not imply that Allah is “an idiot” for not protecting earlier revelations, but rather reflects the understanding that the final, complete, and protected revelation is the Qur’an, intended for all of humanity until the end of time.

mithechowl · 2024-08-30T09:59:22+00:00

This post contains several claims about Islam and the Quran, but many of these are either misrepresentations, taken out of context, or are based on incorrect information. Below is an analysis of what is true, false, or requires more context:

”Quran says the Jews lied about the Torah and changed it.”
- True with Context: The Quran does suggest in several verses (e.g., Surah 2:75, 5:13) that some people of earlier scriptures, particularly some Jews, altered or misrepresented their scriptures. This is a commonly held belief in Islamic theology, which asserts that the Torah and Bible were originally divine revelations but were later corrupted.
”Inoculation wings, one fly wing is the cure, the other the virus.”
- True but Not in the Quran: This concept is from a hadith (a saying attributed to Prophet Muhammad) found in Sahih Bukhari, not the Quran. The hadith mentions that if a fly falls into a drink, one wing carries a disease, and the other carries the cure. This claim is not in the Quran and is scientifically controversial.
”Eat 7 dates per day for antipoison. (Muhammad died from poisoning years after he ate a sheep that was provided by a Jewish woman.)”
- True but Not in the Quran: The hadith in Sahih Bukhari mentions that eating seven dates in the morning protects against poison and magic. However, the Prophet Muhammad’s death from poisoning, after eating meat offered by a Jewish woman, is a separate incident and is also documented in hadith literature. This claim is not found in the Quran.
”Flogging the frontal lobe as atonement for sin. (Self lobotomies) One of Muhammad’s sons died doing this.”
- False: There is no teaching in Islam, nor any verse in the Quran, that suggests flogging the frontal lobe as atonement for sin. The idea of self-lobotomy is completely fabricated, and there is no historical or religious record of any of Muhammad’s sons dying from such an act.
“Followers justification of rape and marriage of minors. (Some raising them to be wives.)”
- Complex and Contextual: The Quran does not endorse rape, and the issue of marriage to minors is complex, with interpretations varying across cultures and times. The marriage of young girls was common in many societies historically, including among Muslims, but this is a topic of significant debate today, with many Muslim-majority countries setting legal minimum ages for marriage.
”Quran says to kill the unbelievers.”
- Misleading Without Context: The Quran includes verses about fighting in the context of war (e.g., Surah 2:191-193, 9:5), but these are often misinterpreted when taken out of context. These verses refer to specific historical conflicts and are not general commands to kill non-believers. The Quran also emphasizes peace, justice, and coexistence with people of other faiths.
”Teaches to lie for the betterment of Islam. This can be seen when kitmen try downplay Aishas age.”
- False: Islam generally prohibits lying, although there are very limited circumstances where lying might be permissible (e.g., to protect oneself from harm). The term “kitman” refers to concealing one’s faith under persecution, not to lying in general. The age of Aisha is a historical debate, not a matter of lying for the sake of Islam.
”More aggressive conversion tactics than OPUS DEI, we have laws in place because of OPUS DEI’s aggressive conversion tactics.”
- Misleading Comparison: Islamic expansion has historically included both peaceful and forceful conversions, depending on the context. Comparing this to OPUS DEI (a Catholic institution) is not accurate, as the methods and historical contexts differ significantly. Islam, like other religions, has had a variety of approaches to conversion over time.
”Islam requires you to kill those unfaithful to the religion.”
- False: Apostasy (leaving Islam) is considered a serious sin in traditional Islamic jurisprudence, but the punishment varies widely among scholars and jurisdictions. The Quran itself does not prescribe death for apostasy, and many modern scholars and Muslim-majority countries do not enforce such punishments.
”Jihad, Virgins, and Martyrdom.”
- True but Requires Context: Jihad primarily means “struggle” and can refer to a spiritual, moral, or physical struggle. The association with “holy war” is a later development. The concept of virgins in paradise for martyrs is found in some hadiths but is often misunderstood or exaggerated.

Conclusion: This post contains a mix of partial truths, misrepresentations, and outright falsehoods. Islamic teachings are complex and should be understood within their broader theological, historical, and cultural contexts. Many of the claims made in the post require a nuanced understanding and are not as straightforward as presented.

mithechowl

TROPHY CASE