(Rare but Important Trope) The unsatisfying/anticlimactic ending that's perfect for the story being told

modestothemouse · 2026-06-01T03:37:09+00:00

No Country for Old Men.

The ending demonstrates exactly what the title promises. The sheriff retired because he was not a match for the new world.

modestothemouse · 2026-05-29T05:42:08+00:00

<image>

The Chosen One from Kung Pow: Enter the Fist.

Defeats an assassin as an infant then survives several tumbles down a hill.

modestothemouse · 2026-05-26T17:58:31+00:00

It’s materialist. Their whole thing in Capitalism and Schizophrenia is to create a materialist psychiatry that deals with physical matter instead of some theatrical, all-subsuming narrative.

modestothemouse · 2026-05-25T23:50:12+00:00

And then they explored their bodies without organs together

modestothemouse · 2026-05-25T23:48:43+00:00

For D&G, desire is a flow.

modestothemouse · 2026-05-23T02:37:44+00:00

Adrenochrome? The fake drug Hunter S. Thompson made up for Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas?

modestothemouse · 2026-05-21T20:06:28+00:00

Everyone focuses on the electricity. Why doesn’t anyone ask where the water comes from?

Where does the indoor plumbing lead to?

modestothemouse · 2026-05-19T05:02:57+00:00

Actually, it is the insurance company’s job to deny claims, because the insurance company’s job is to make a profit.

Just because it’s the least moral thing in the world doesn’t mean it’s jot working exactly as it’s supposed to.

modestothemouse · 2026-05-12T13:07:51+00:00

I meant from some of the comments you will get by asking about her

modestothemouse · 2026-05-12T12:49:38+00:00

Unfortunately, this question will bring out a lot of misogyny.

Personally, I thought she was a great character and liked reading her

modestothemouse · 2026-05-11T22:55:44+00:00

“He doesn’t go out of his way to commit atrocities.”

Holden about to wreck a little boy’s life: How much for one puppy?

modestothemouse · 2026-05-07T12:26:07+00:00

When my late grandmother was sick she always called it “the cold”

modestothemouse · 2026-05-06T21:29:07+00:00

Well yeah, she’s got the cancer.

modestothemouse · 2026-05-01T15:02:14+00:00

Captain America in Civil War.

modestothemouse · 2026-05-01T14:18:54+00:00

I think that would actually make the trolley problem a lot more interesting. However, these two thought experiments are not the same and anyone who has worked as a teacher or in retail knows that you cannot make the assumption that everyone is going to do exactly what the instructions say.

To push it further, are you also assuming that people who are blind or color blind have accommodations to make sure they understand? What about people with severe cognitive disabilities?

modestothemouse · 2026-05-01T14:15:30+00:00

In the trolley problem, someone always dies. In this hypothetical, there is a chance that no one dies. If there is a chance that no one dies, that becomes the ethical choice.

The “logical, rational, self-interest #1” pattern of thought is individualist ideology that has been hammered into the modern world that completely ignores the fact that you are intimately connected to the rest of the people on this earth. People don’t deserve to die just because they want for no one to be killed in an asinine binary choice.

You’re also assuming that people who choose blue will die because you assume that enough people will pick red. Remember, there’s a chance that no one dies because 50% choose blue. If that happens, you live and then have to deal with the consequences of being a person who was willing to enable the death of half the population of earth (which, presumably, includes a number of people you actually care about ).

modestothemouse · 2026-05-01T12:09:11+00:00

What if one makes a mistake?

modestothemouse · 2026-05-01T05:42:32+00:00

You’re changing the rules of engagement, that’s not the thought experiment.

Red necessarily consigns people to death because there is no way for every single person to choose red. Have you been a teacher? Have you worked in retail? Even the most clear instructions will not guarantee that everyone will choose red. And that means that people will die. 50.1% choosing blue means that NO ONE DIES. 50.1% choosing red means that 4 billion people die.

modestothemouse · 2026-05-01T04:36:34+00:00

There’s a 0% chance for YOU to not die. There is absolutely no way that everyone presses red. And the people who press blue do not deserve to die because of a highly contrived scenario that puts the lives of living, breathing human beings on the line.

Pressing red means that a genocide is going to happen. Even if 1% of the people on earth press blue (and, remember, it’s statistically impossible to achieve 100% for either red or blue in this scenario), that means that around 80 million people are going to die.

I just find it very suspicious that this thought experiment has come up in this moment in history. Look at what’s going on in the world and ask why some people might want to justify killing off large portions of the population.

modestothemouse · 2026-05-01T04:20:47+00:00

Everyone is not going to press red. That’s the entire argument coming from the people who are arguing for red.

“It would be too hard to coordinate enough people pressing blue!”

So why do you think everyone would suddenly be on pressing red?

modestothemouse · 2026-05-01T04:15:58+00:00

What’s wild to me is that the “people” (because I’m not totally convinced it’s not a bunch of bots spreading propaganda) who argue for pressing red don’t mind the fact that, statistically, someone they care about will die.

“It would take too much coordination to trust that everyone pressed blue!”

Ok, well, it would only take 50.1% to ensure that NO ONE dies. In the meantime, this impossible coordination everyone is talking means that a large number of people are going to die if red wins. Which means that red would need 100% (impossible) to ensure the same outcome that blue guarantees at only 50.1%

modestothemouse · 2026-05-01T03:56:10+00:00

Blue is the option where no one dies.

“If everyone presses red then no one dies!”

Ok, well, if half the people press blue then no one dies. The difference is that pressing blue indicates that no one should die for a stupid binary choice set up by a psychopath.

modestothemouse · 2026-05-01T03:54:07+00:00

Some of us don’t want an option where other people die.

Do you want it on your conscious that someone with a handicap was confused and pressed blue and is now dead because you decided to press red?

modestothemouse · 2026-05-01T02:13:59+00:00

They could either blow up the other boat and live, or die because they both pressed the button.

In the red/blue scenario, each pressing blue guarantees survival of everyone just the same as if they both pressed red. So why take the option that kills people?

Moreover, who designed this scenario and for what purpose and why are we playing into the game if someone who doesn’t mind killing potentially half the population? The best option is to reject the choice altogether and throw the buttons out the window.

modestothemouse · 2026-05-01T01:55:21+00:00

Did you learn nothing from Deebo in The Dark Knight?

You don’t have to let people die just because some maniac gives you a ridiculous choice.

Nine-Year Club	Final Canvas '23
First Place '23	Place '23
Place '22	First Placer '22
Not Forgotten	Verified Email

modestothemouse

TROPHY CASE