In the Video of meet the cast of squid game season 2 we learned about a girl who joined squid game who bumped into his ex in squid game aswell. Maybe they are doing a story about them falling in love to eachother again but eventually die together at the end or decide who dies 1st. This season is gonna make me cry

I've had this little seed of what-if in my mind since S1 and not just because I have watched a whole lot of procedurals where neurodivergent Manic Pixie Dream Consultants slow-burn for badass lady cops but these first six episodes of S2 had just a lot of couple-coding everywhere and I don't just mean them living together or what happened at the two galas in iirc both seasons' 4th episodes; I mean stuff like the season premiere "Subscription For Murder" having them attend the opera (which was also Madame Butterfly, an opera about forbidden love) while sitting in the same seats a couple on a date was sitting in on the night of the murder they're investigating and then in E5 "Elsbeth Flips The Bird" at the poker game they're wearing the same colors/patterns that they wore on that "date" establishing a connection (Kaya's wearing literally the exact shade of blue and Elsbeth's again wearing an outfit with an orange floral pattern). There's also the stuff with the aforementioned cohabitation being treated as a conflict of interest the same way a romantic relationship might (I remember similar mini-arcs with both Booth/Brennan on Bones and Jack/Allison on Eureka) but the kicker was the episode that just aired, the holiday-special-that-doesn't-announce-itself-as-such "Gold, Frankincense And Murder"

In that, the couple-on-the-edge-of-divorce at the center of the murder-of-the-week, Dirk and Deedee Dashers, are kind of set up as a parallel with Elsbeth and Kaya with e.g. the divorce and Deedee's feelings towards Christmas mirroring Elsbeth's Christmas-related heartache over Kaya's impending move-out. Deedee even looks like a younger Elsbeth and after Elsbeth's big Explaining-The-Murder speech to Deedee there was that whole bit about the relationships between people we forge all year making the holidays sparkle or w/e after which Elsbeth and Kaya heart-hands at each other. And then there was couple-coded stuff that wasn't intended to parallel Dirk and Deedee like Kaya surprising Elsbeth with a tree and bringing over all her family Christmas decorations as she's saying stuff about Elsbeth being part of the Blanke family Christmas or Kaya blocking Fire Marshal Sparks from giving Elsbeth his number.

I know yada yada Occam's Razor yada yada TV needs strong same-sex friendships not just romance but I clearly feel (as best as one can judging from a show this new) there's something more here, not just another Rizzoli & Isles but more of a Holmes/Watson House/Wilson thing just on a show so progressive and queer it could turn into text not subtext

The theory I am about to share with you all today was inspired by another Beetlejuice fan theory that u/CapriciousSalmon posted on this sub four years ago. I loved their theory so much that I decided to write my own to add a slightly different take to it.

This theory will also contain minor spoilers for the sequel, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice…

What I am proposing is that the Broadway adaptation of Beetlejuice is not an adaptation of the film that takes place in a separate universe. Instead, it is a fictional, in-universe biopic that recounts the story of Beetlejuice’s experience in the Maitlands’ household during the first movie. Think of it as a Lion King 1½-esc sidequel where the events of the film are retold from Beetlejuice’s perspective.

Being a cunning entrepreneur, >!(having founded his own Bio-Exhorcist company, the one we see him managing in the second film)!<, he needed to create some positive P.R. to change his negative public image. So he put together a company-funded, hagiographical stage show to clear the Netherworld’s perception of him as a deranged, sketchy, and destructive con artist, and frame himself as a misunderstood, boisterous scoundrel with a heart of gold. To paint himself in a more positive light, Beetlejuice hired a conventionally attractive, deceased actor to portray him and wrote this fictional doppelganger as a scummy, but ultimately tragic and heroic figure who learns the true meaning of life from his friendship with a living girl. This means that the Beetlejuice we see in the musical is just a random actor playing (the real) Beetlejuice.

The musical being a fake biopic show explains why Beetlejuice is portrayed in a much more sympathetic light than he is in the original film. He’s doing what film directors occasionally do: “putting himself in front of the camera” so to speak. Alex Brightman’s portrayal of Beetlejuice is just a self-inserting character for the real Beetlejuice to glamorize himself. Or maybe Brightman’s Beetlejuice is the real Beetlejuice disguised as a more attractive version of himself using his shape-shifting powers. After all, we know from the original film that this guy possesses a range of supernatural abilities such as mimicking other people’s voices (like Lydia’s), bringing inanimate objects to life, and transforming into a giant snake. So it’s not out of the realm of possibility that he would be able to make himself look younger and more pleasing for the audience.

Or how about I posit you this: what if every character we see in the musical is a living caricature of their real-life counterpart? What if they are supernatural figments that Beetlejuice created using his unholy powers? In both the original film and the stage show, Beetlejuice has the ability to create things (including life) out of thin air. Examples are a talking beetle, a carton of Minute Maid orange juice, fire, a giant, monstrous doppelgänger of himself, and an ensemble of singing clones. Who’s to say that Lydia, the Maitlands, the Deetzes, Otho, Sky the Girl Scout, and the Beetlejuice portrayed by Alex Brightman are all smoke and mirrors? Or sentient puppets that were conjured up by the real Beetlejuice to perform in front of a live audience?

Unlike the movie, the Maitlands and the Deetzes are portrayed in a very one-dimensional light, like they are caricatures of themselves. Instead of being fully-rounded human beings, Adam and Barbara Maitland are portrayed as bland, schlemiel Gen-Xers from the suburbs. Meanwhile, instead of being a stuck-up, rich couple, Charles Deetz is a stern but ultimately caring father towards Lydia, while Delia is a pompous life coach that Charles hired to help Lydia get over her mother’s death. This is because, to Beetlejuice, they were just annoying and gullible mortals who would easily fall for his antics. The musical does have a running gag where Beetlejuice shits on the Maitlands for being boring, White, middle class, squeaky clean Americans. Why would he continually emphasize their mediocrity? Just something to keep in mind.

This theory also explains why his marriage to Lydia was less icky than in the original film. Beetlejuice justifying his marriage proposal to Lydia as being a green card transaction is his way of trying to frame his actions in a more sympathetic light. He wasn’t a creep who forced a teenage girl to marry him out of carnal lust. No, he was a poor, lonely soul who needed to do it to become a living person and get a taste of life. Classic manipulation to win good favors. The oldest trick in the book.

Not to mention, have you ever noticed how Beetlejuice doesn’t really get punished for his awful behavior towards the Maitlands and Deetzes (bullying, manipulation, sexual harassment, etc)? Sure, Lydia (literally) backstabs him and nearly banishes him from her house, but he doesn’t get eaten by a sandworm like he does in the film. Instead, the show’s ending goes pretty easy on him, even presenting Beetlejuice in a rather flattering light. I mean, look at what transpires after he is killed and resurrected: when Juno shows up to kidnap Lydia, BJ jumps in to protect her, giving an inspiring speech about the joys and challenges of life that he got to experience due to Lydia tricking him. Unfortunately for him, Juno acts like she was moved by his speech before throwing him outside into the desert of Titan. Before Juno is about to kill all of the living in the house, Beetlejuice returns riding on the back of a sandworm before allowing it to eat her. Instead of him being the one to die at the hands of the beast, he gets a “knight in shining armor” moment and saves the day. He isn’t a sexual predator getting his comeuppance. Rather, he comes out on top as the hero of the show (to quote Eddie Perfect, the show’s composer).

After the carnage is over, Beetlejuice gives each character an individual farewell like Dorothy does in The Wizard of Oz (even directly quoting her as he says goodbye to Lydia), making him feel very poetic and inspiring (to directly quote the SpongeBob theorist Alex Bale). This happens right after BJ (supposedly) learns a valuable lesson about life, so of course he would be able to give everyone else a pep talk, right? But wait, things get wilder. After saying his goodbyes, BJ has his clones dramatically carry him over to the door portal before turning to face the audience and quoting Hamlet’s infamous line, “Tell my story,” making his grand exit from the show.

Now, ask yourself this: does this whole sequence feel like something Beetlejuice would write? Like something he would write to convince everyone to kiss his ass? I sure do. Go and watch the original film and one of those online bootleg recordings of the show back-to-back. The musical’s ending literally plays out like pretentious fanfiction, or like BJ is grandstanding in front of the audience.

TLDR: Beetlejuice the Musical is a fictional, hagiographical stage show that Beetlejuice’s PR team created to try and sway the Netherworld’s negative perception of the freelanced Bio-Exorcist after the events of the first film. Think of it as a piece of corporate propaganda created to glamorize a notorious, predatory con artist.

With the recently released "Wicked", I rewatched TWOZ as it was always a favorite of mine growing up, moreso that it was my mother's favorite movie so I grew to love it over the years. My mother never watched the og stage play but when it was released, we took her to the cinemas to watch it. While it wasn't my cup of tea, she loved it, but it also got me thinking. In the OG film, it's implied the entire land of Oz was just a dream so it would seem very unlikely that Dorothy would have thought up the entire backstorys of each individual character. So I rewatched TWOZ and I think that Oz was actually real. I'm sure this rumour has floated around before but here's my insight.

The original movie ends with Dorothy waking up from her dream and realizing that "there's no place like home", but what if Oz was real? In the beginning Dorothy runs away and runs into a Fortune Teller who tells her that Aunty Em is heartbroken and she must return home. I believe that even tho the Fortune Teller was a con artist, he was magical and was the one who summoned the twister that ravaged through Kansas which purposely transported Dorothy the "Oz Dimension" to teach her why she shouldn't run away from her problems. It would only make sense as to why Wicked has the characters well thought out.

Side note: I understand that Wicked is only loosely based off the original books and the 1939 film, but it's still fun to imagine that Oz wasn't just a dream land and that it was a real place just in a different dimension/universe, and it served a purpose.

In events of prison of Azkaban Serious gets out when he sees the picture of the Weasleys and Peter in Egypt. This lead to him going after Peter and Peter escaping and going out to find what’s left of Voldemort. If Serious never escaped, Peter would have never found Voldemort and helped bring him back to life and power.

A lot of theories claim that Zelda and Mario are connected in some sort of way, but I just came across something that may prove this. Hear me out......

In Super Mario 2, Mario defeats Wart to be able to wake from his dream. I know that SM2 is basically Doki Doki Panic, but the main villain is still the same using the Japanese translation Mamu.

In Link's Awakening, Link is trying to wake the Windfish on Koholint Island and meets Mamu to learn the soul song. After waking the Windfish, Link is woken from his dream of the island.

Mamu is dressed exactly the same in both games and both are based in Dream worlds. What is to say that Nintendo has connections to games by a secret dream world and that we may see potential crossovers due to this theory. Maybe the Windfish is the key and could be used in a Mario game at some point. Let me know what you think.

We know that The Witches' Road is a real place in the comics, and since the MCU and the comics are all part of the same multiverse, it wouldn't make sense if a real place in the comics that exists in its own dimension wouldn't also exist in the MCU.

I think that Billy was unaware that Agatha fabricated the idea of The Witches' Road to trick covens into joining her, only to have their powers siphoned by her. Like many magic users, he genuinely believes in The Witches' Road.

And with his mother's Chaos Magic powers, he unknowingly created NOT The Witches' Road itself, but rather, something no one in the MCU has done before... a gateway to the REAL Witches' Road. For some reason, no one in The Witches' Road had been able to create the door that led to The Witches' Road before before Billy, more than likely due to Chaos Magic not being common.

As we know, Chaos Magic can create people, places and things from nothing. It was even able to create two living beings with actual souls!

But why did The Witches' Road seem to be a creation of Billy's mind? Because it was HIS Chaos Magic that created the door that appeared after The Sacred Chant. Notice how it didn't form immediately after The Ballad was performed, but DID form right after Billy and The Coven needed an escape from The Salem Seven? Billy knew The Coven was performing the ritual to bring forth the door leading to The Witches' Road, but he didn't know the full details, so perhaps the door's appearance coincided with his and The Coven's need to escape and NOT the success of performing The Ballad.

And since he created the door to The Witches' Road, it formed itself around HIS desires and what laid in HIS mind. The Road formed around HIM, HIS desires, HIS mind and HIS goals.

We all know that the main theme of the movie Jurassic Park is the hubris of humans in messing with forces beyond our ken. The most explicit way this is presented in the film is of course with the dinosaurs, but if we look underneath the metaphor, we find that the movie is actually a reflection of 90s anxiety surrounding computers.

Proof:

John Hammond is criticized by multiple characters in the film for wielding power he cannot control. They were so busy asking whether they could that they failed to ask if they should. However, John Hammond is just as incapable of controlling computers (on which his whole park critically relies) as he is of controlling the dinosaurs. Hammond finds himself at the mercy of Dennis Nedry, a 90s idea of "computer person" - a fat man with glasses who sits all day in front of incomprehensible walls of text. Do we maybe see something here of Spielberg's own worries? In making Jurassic park he found himself for the first time reliant on emerging digital technology. It turns out in the film that it doesn't take much for that single point of failure to go wrong and absolutely nobody have the know-how to fix it.

The movie climaxes not with a victory over the dinosaurs, but a victory over the computer. I haven't addressed the other big strand in the movie yet, which is children. The children in this movie in many ways represent the very chaos of nature which is at the heart of the theme. Like Nedry, they are not dinosaurs, but they are beyond adult control. They act unpredictably when confronted with the T-rex and endanger the group, they won't do the rational thing of jumping off the fence, and they wander off to find food and get cornered by velociraptors. The chaotic potential of children eventually saves the day, though, because Lex, being the new generation, knows how to use the computers that the adults don't.

The UNIX scene being the thematic climax of the movie makes more sense than it simply being a straight message not to mess with things beyond your control. Hammond has spent the whole movie being humbled in the face of chaotic nature, but Grant has learned a different lesson - life cannot and should not be kept in order. From the moment we meet him, with the helicopter scene, he's a very particular and ordered man who rails against any chaos in the world around him. He would never have kids because they are chaotic - which he hates. He starts with a right respect for nature but needs to learn to embrace not just children, but the mix of chaos and potential which they represent.

Jurassic park ultimately presents a hopeful message alongside its warning. At a time when to many people computers were the realm of a different class or generation of people and seemed scary technology, the movie holds in balance the idea of respecting what you can't control while at the same time not being scared to embrace it. Hammond cannot control the computers, but the children can. Chaos is not just the malicious Nedry, but the unpredictable Lex, too. It should neither be thought controllable, nor shunned for its unpredictability. Embrace the exciting new technology of computers, use them to make your CGI, but don't rely too heavily on what you don't understand.

In the picnic scene on Naboo in Ep. I, she tells Anakin about a boy called Palo that she liked. His description matches exactly the look Anakin would later have: dark curly hair, dreamy eyes, except that Palo is a few years younger than Padme, which was the other way around for her and Anakin. What's even more interesting is that Palo means something like "an event where something burns" in Proto-Finnic, the ancestor of Finnic languages, which connects to the path Anakin will take. So it looks like she didn't have a clear vision like Anakin, but signs from her future that manifested physically instead of appearing in dreams. If only she could have read the signs... but we all know Padme isn't the best at that.

The first night of staying at grandmas lillys (Doris Roberts), Alex (Allen Covert) asks if Sophie who's used to be the tentenant of the room, died in the bed. Grandmas Lilly says "no she fell out of bed and died right here on the floor." Alex goes to sleep and in the morning the clock in the room sets off multiple loud bells and scares Alex out of bed,yelling at the clock until it stopped and fell to the ground. NEXT TO THE BED.

The Grandfather Clock killed Sophie.

Tell me what you think.

Just watched this, I have a wacky fan theory I developed

According to my head canon, I think it exists in the same world as Glass, Unbreakable, and Split. Notice just like the Beast he hates (and presumably hunts) “whole” people. The beast spared Casey because she’d had trauma

Hartnett’s character has super powered ability for heightened awareness, avoiding capture, and the ability to convince and charm people extremely quickly

But it works much more powerfully on men. Notice how the ones who become his best friends immediately are all men. Even his victim is a dude, which is a departure from serial killer tropes.

Women see through him. His wife, his daughter, they know he’s acting weird. The pop star seems almost fully immune. The profiler obviously.

And his mom knew even before he killed people. And when he can’t convince people he quickly devolves to a sort of incompetence.

Like if you've seen really old rangers from like early 00s come back in newer seasons, you might scoff when they lose 40 pounds when they morph, but I have a theory! What if the morphing sequence also changes their bodies into its peak? Like the age they'd be the strongest, fastest etc.

It would also explain why Justin, a kid, way back in Turbo/In Space became "taller" when he morphed.

The only thing that goes against this theory, is the original purple ranger from Dino Charge, who couldn't fight because he was too old/weak. The only thing I can possibly think of is that maybe the Morphing Grid has its limits? But eh solid theory I think otherwise

Since you guys liked the Toy Story theory, here's another Pixar related theory, this time about The Incredibles. More specifically, Syndrome. Of course, we know Syndrome is the villain of The Incredibles. He was rejected by his hero because he did not have superpowers and had animosity towards superheroes because he couldn't be one himself. I have a theory that has two parts.

1. Syndrome is actually Mr. Incredible's son

Syndrome was probably around 8-9 years old before Bob married Helen, so it's possible he was with other women before meeting her and one of them had a child with him. Syndrome's hair color is similar to Dash's as a kid and Jack-Jack's as an adult. He also has freckles like Dash and blue eyes like Mr. Incredible and Dash. When Mr. Incredible apprehends him after he accidentally lets Bomb Voyage escape, he tells the police, "make sure his mom knows what he's been up to." He says mom specifically, not parents, indicating that Syndrome is likely raised by a single mother and he somehow knows this.

This is also probably why Syndrome idolized Mr. Incredible specifically. He saw him as a strong father figure because he himself didn't have one, but didn't realize Mr. Incredible could possibly be his father. He probably didn't annoy other superheroes as much. He wanted to work with Mr. Incredible specifically. You could also argue that maybe that's why only Mr. Incredible could defeat the robot and not other superheroes.

2. If Syndrome is Mr. Incredible's son, why didn't he have superpowers?

Here's the ironic yet sad part. Syndrome DID have superpowers. His power was super intelligence. He was a kid when he built boots that fly for goodness sake. He created a robot that took down powerful superheroes. That's beyond genius level. It's likely that because Syndrome's mother was human (therefore, he's only half-superhero) his powers were not physical. We know kids of two superheroes have physical superpowers but also may not even have them, as was initially thought with Jack-Jack. Because Syndrome's power was not physical and his mother was human, no one thought he could be a super.

It's very likely that had a super paid attention to him and realized how intelligent/good at building things he is, they could have helped him realize he is a super and/or helped him use his skills for good. But because his power was different from the other superheroes, neither him or anyone else thought he was extraordinary, even though he was. Especially not Mr. Incredible.

Tldr; Syndrome is Mr. Incredible's son as they have similar physical traits and Syndrome had super intelligence as a power, but because it was not a physical superpower, no one considered him a true super.

REPOST

This is a very small theory but I think the ghosts only visited Scrooge because they saw that there was some good in him and he could change.

Scrooge seems confused about Bob Cratchit asking for the whole day off so I don’t think it has happened before, this might be to do with Christmas starting to be celebrated more when the book came out.

Why do the Ghosts choose that Christmas of all Christmas’? Because Scrooge did something nice (to do with Christmas).

Racking my brain as to what is happening for so long, I have a feeling as to what it might all be.

I think the poeple currently in town are either descendants or reincarnations of the townspeople before them who may have broken pacts or rules with these creatures.(I'll get more into detail shortly) How did I come to think this? Well, things are pointing towards fairy folklore. Everything from the name of the show, "From," (also a word for "fae") to the opening title "Que Sera" being performed by the band "Pixies." This might be far fetched, I know, but doing a little diving into the folklore, I've noticed a few similarities.

The TV series From captivates audiences with its eerie atmosphere and unsettling mysteries, but could its roots lie in fairy folklore? The show’s themes of entrapment, supernatural rules, and ambiguous beings echo ancient tales of fae encounters. Here’s a breakdown of how From aligns with fairy mythology and how this connection might influence its future storylines:

Entrapment and the “Fairy Realm” In From: The characters are trapped in an inescapable town, with looping roads and an ominous forest that seem designed to prevent their escape.

In Folklore: Fairy realms often trap humans, luring them into enchanted spaces where time and space behave strangely. Fairy rings, for example, can ensnare travelers who step into them.

2. The Creatures and Their Rules

In From: The nocturnal creatures follow specific rules. They can’t enter homes protected by talismans, and they manipulate their victims by mimicking loved ones.

In Folklore: Fairies are bound by rules, often needing permission to enter human spaces. They also use deception, shape-shifting, and emotional manipulation to achieve their goals.

3. Talismans and Protection

In From: The talismans are crucial for survival, protecting homes from the creatures.

In Folklore: Charms like iron, salt, and certain herbs are traditional protections against malevolent fae. The talismans in From reflect this classic idea.

4. The Forest as a Portal

In From: The forest surrounding the town is mysterious and dangerous, potentially holding the key to the creatures’ origin or a way out.

In Folklore: Forests are often gateways to fairy realms. Entering a “fairy ring” or enchanted grove can lead to another world where time flows differently.

5. Shapeshifting and Deception

In From: The creatures mimic loved ones to lure people out of safety, playing on their emotions and memories.

In Folklore: Fairies often assume human forms or mimic voices to manipulate and trick humans. This connection highlights the creatures’ fae-like qualities.

6. Time Distortion

In From: The town seems disconnected from normal time, with no clear indication of how it relates to the outside world.

In Folklore: Time flows differently in fairy realms. A single night with the fae might equal years in the human world, raising questions about what happens to those who leave the town.

7. The Town’s Curse and Forgotten Pact

In From: The town’s origin is shrouded in mystery, but it feels tied to a larger purpose or curse.

In Folklore: Many fairy tales involve curses stemming from broken pacts with supernatural beings. Could the town’s existence be the result of an ancient bargain gone wrong?

Potential Future Storylines Inspired by Folklore

The Forgotten Pact: The survivors discover that the town was built on sacred land tied to the creatures. A broken agreement with these beings could explain their wrath and the survivors’ entrapment. To escape, the group must restore balance, perhaps through a ritual or sacrifice.

The Forest’s Secrets: The forest might contain portals to the creatures’ realm, where the rules of reality shift. Exploring this space could reveal the creatures’ motives and the way to break the town’s curse.

The Shapeshifter’s Game: A new arrival in the town might secretly be a creature in disguise, offering clues about their goals while sowing distrust among the survivors.

Why This Theory Fits

The parallels between From and fairy folklore suggest the show’s mythology could be rooted in these timeless tales. The creatures, their rules, and the town’s eerie, liminal nature all align with traditional fae archetypes. Whether intentional or not, this connection deepens the show’s mystery and offers endless possibilities for future storytelling.

Little things while discovering the names and purposes of these beings, are also just as interesting. Some even replace children to stand in to infiltrate the humans and could be why Victor cannot remember some things before his sister and mother died.

What do you think? Could From be a modern reimagining of fairy folklore?

Before writing this post, I did some research and realized that many years ago people here have shared this theory, which kind of made me relieved that I wasn't the only one. But regardless, here's my take on this:

I think that Peppa Pig is supposed to take place over 100 years after Animal Farm, so Grandpa Pig is probably Napoleon's grandchild.

The pigs are at the top (obviously). Not much has changed from the book in that regard.

There is a clear distinction between the "human" animals that can talk and the "wild" animals that can't. In Animal Farm, at the end, the hierarchy is quite clear, with pigs being at the top and all other animals are the lower class peasants. Over time many animals would meddle with the pigs over generations, leading to these animals having human traits like the pigs. On the other hand, all birds (there was already certain racism towards birds in Animal Farm at the beginning because of the whole "4 legs good, 2 legs bad", and then even though the birds got wings counted as legs, the pigs would go back to the traditional definition later on in Peppa Pig) and other animals would stay "wild" and never convert to "human".

Ms. Rabbit is an interesting case. Her species definitely meddled well with the pigs in the early days, but if you noticed she is completely overworked. She works basically every job available. This is because they are still a lower-middle class and Ms. Rabbit and Mr. Rabbit (who always wears a tie) are doing everything they can to gain more approval from the pigs as they were probably not very fortunate at the beginning.

Then there's Mr. Fox, a merchant. He's kind of an outsider, even though he looks successful. This is because he's always trying to get on everybody's good side to not lower his family's status, and he stays on the outside to stay safe. His species has probably managed to prosper through trade, though the ruling class still keeps them out of reach of political power. Since in Animal Farm there were no foxes in the farm, they could have been "selectively" integrated into society, wild at first, civilized later.

The fact that there are merchants though means that the system gradually went from pure communism to there being some trade, even though it remains extremely controlled by the state. The clearest example I can think of is the fact that the supermarket has no name and there are barely any businesses in place.

The whole Mr. Fox situation makes the situation a whole lot worse for another kind: the zoo animals. They are literally caged, and they aren't "human". They were probably immigrant groups looking for a better life that were deceived and then forced into captivity for the rulers entertainment.

There's also the parrot, Peppa Pig's grandparents' pet. As I said before, there's huge racism against birds, so they kept the parrot as a pet, caged against her will. She's constantly saying exactly what Grandma and Grandpa Pig say to try to gain some status by making the ruling class happy, and then, when she said something that Peppa taught her a while ago instead of what the Grandma wanted her to repeat at that moment, that's a sign of her true nature, which has to show in the end, no matter how much you try to hide it. Peppa and George also mocked the parrot before and laughed at her for being so stupid, and obviously didn't get any consequences as she's not a "human" animal.

The parrot situation also proves something else: It's not that wild animals can't speak, it's just that they're scared. Even though things have smoothed out, they're still scared.

Also, why are there no horses like we see in Animal Farm? They have all been over-worked and over-exploited until they just all died. This is a clear warning for the rabbits...

Oh, and everybody's over cheerful. But are they really happy? Maybe some of the kids are (they don't know what's going on), but I'm pretty sure that if all this is true, the parents are mostly all stressed that one day they may lower the ranks, get their home taken away from them, and become a "wild" animal.

Anyway, I've probably rambled on for WAYYY too long. There are probably other things that I could cover in this post, but honestly, I'd be surprised if you got this far in the first place, so I'm gonna leave it here.

He needs a mechanism to know whether he's going TOO fast, or too slow.

So he edits his mp3s to play at a certain speed, say 30x, because 30x is his ideal speed as to not injure allies, etc.

Then he would run until the music in his ears sound normal, and therefore he is at ideal speed.

Some statements in quotations have been paraphrased from my memory of seeing the film in cinemas a few days ago.

There are a number of typos and run-on sentences as there was a lot explaining, but feel free to seek clarification in the comments.

I have discussed the theme of gender before what I believe is real and what is an illusion to contextualise my theory:

GENDER:
Sister Paxton’s view - mainstream culture ‘controls’ women to make them behave more sexually, against their ‘true’ feelings.

At the beginning of the film, Sister Paxton (I believe the film implies - falsely) projects/assumes that the woman in the porn video is somewhat hopeless and subjugated, saying that the woman “realises she’s just being effed” and that “you could see her shame and the moment that the woman’s soul left her body” in the video. This mindset is revealed again in the way she reacts to the group of teen girls who behave provocatively in front the car at the crossing before they pull down Sister Paxton’s skirt to reveal her ‘magic underwear’.

Mr Reed’s view - Mormonism ‘controls’ women, exploiting them sexually through polygamy (historical context) and sexual repression (modern context). He falsely assumes that Sister Paxton and Sister Barnes have blindly followed their religion without question or analysis.

At the beginning of the film, Mr. Reed discusses the sexual exploitation of women in the founding history of Mormonism. Near the end of the film, Mr Reed has the women in cages, explaining that women who follow Mormonism are only following what they are told to do throughout their lives, not what they truely want to do, saying that the “one true religion is control”.

The film plays on societal stereotypes, particularly demonising typical female traits and rewarding typically male traits: an older British man who quotes philosophers is more of a ‘critical thinker’ than the young women, particularly Sister Paxton being from Utah and coming from a large family, quoting popular culture and communicating with a level of politeness that appears naive. The film gives an audience a sense of ‘whiplash’, beginning with the comments Sister Barnes makes about the holocaust and the inconsistencies with Mr Reed’s theory of a common narrative thread throughout all religions. Sister Barnes also highlights that she has had a near death experience that she did not attribute to the “divine”, showing that she applies her faith critically and with nuance. This is solidified in her comment to Sister Paxton that she [Sister Paxton] must “challenge him [Mr Reed] intellectually”. Sister Paxton later challenges Mr Reed’s simulation theory, and makes nuanced comments about Sister Barnes’ birth control - giving us an insight into the women’s ability to separate faith from “the church”.

Overall, I believe that the film’s message is not about what you believe but how blindly you enforce your perspective onto others, assuming they can’t think critically for themselves - from both a religious and agnostic perspective.

REALITY vs ILLUSION Theory I believe everything is real (with one exception of the old woman/old women- discussed later) until the moment after Sister Barnes has her neck sliced by Mr Reed and Sister Paxton goes to stab Mr Reed in the neck. The way that this moment is filmed makes it difficult to see who has done what and feels significant, like we, as the audience shouldn’t trust what is happening from this point onwards and a new chapter in the film is beginning. Additionally, I believe that Sister Barnes explaining her experience of coming close to death and her brain creating a story is foreshadowing the same thing happening to Sister Paxton. I believe that what actually happened was that:

1. Mr Reed sliced Sister Barnes’ throat.
2. Sister Paxton stabbed Mr Reed in the neck in response.
3. While not shown directly, I believe Mr Reed then stabbed Sister Paxton in the stomach, and everything from this point onwards was a near death experience narrative playing out in her mind until she ‘came to’.
4. I think Sister Paxton then ‘came to’ at the moment Mr Reed was crawling over to ‘finish off’ Sister Paxton.
5. Sister Barnes crawled over and rescued Sister Paxton by killing Mr Reed with the plank of wood with nails on it.
6. Sister Paxton did in fact actually escape, injured.

Justification: Everything that happens after the moment Sister Paxton goes to stab Mr Reed feels filtered strongly through the ideas that are plaguing Sister Paxton’s mind. The first scene talking about what’s unfolding being a simulation and that memories get changed everytime they are accessed feels like her subconscious coming through, telling her that what is happening doesn’t feel quite real. The discussion about the birth control in Sister Barnes’ arm feels like her exploration of porn and sexual expression vs suppression playing out. The discussion of the butterfly dreaming they are a human or the human dreaming they are a butterfly also feels very angled from Sister Paxton’s perspective, as she says earlier that she wants to come back as butterfly.
The issues with the woman coming to life after dying (a plot hole with my theory I explain later) also feels like foreshadowing for Sister Paxton dying and coming to. Additionally, the way the Sister Paxton resolves this confusion about the old woman dying and coming back feels a lot like her brain trying to make sense of an extremely confusing and traumatic situation the way that you would in a dream. I think the movie is implying that after this dream like experience which feels real to Sister Paxton, she has become a prophet, going on to spread what she believes she has experienced but has actually simply dreamed. She sees what she wants to see - the butterfly landing on her hand, proving the divine has saved her, when actually there is no butterfly, it’s just pure luck that she has survived.

I believe there are many clues that everything between the stabbing and ‘coming to’ is only playing out in Sister Paxton’s head. The way that Sister Paxton just ‘knows’ what’s to do and the way the physical world she’s in is so perfectly tied to symbolic meanings, and everything has some significant role or reason feels very dream like. I could expand upon this further but some key moments are the way the house begins to feel kind of like a magical maze, the bike lock and religious symbols on the door, the women in cages, etc. It all appears as a frantic attempt to process so many things in her brain at once.

There are some plot holes with this theory. Minor plot hole- Why was there only one key in Sister Paxton’s pocket, not in Sister Barnes? I’m not sure why, but I do think it’s seems like a stretch that he had time to put her bike lock on the bottom basement door, after removing and hiding their bikes and then put the key back in her pocket- if we are to say it all really happened and none of it was a dram. The bike lock key LITERALLY unlocking the door to the women in cages when everything is revealed feels like too great of a symbolic meaning has been assigned to the physical world for it be real and random unfolding in real life.

Major plot hole- what is going on with the half dead woman/ women if everything beyond reality is a dream? It’s easier to explain away the women in cages near the end as part of Sister Paxton’s near death dream with the timeline of when I think she gets stabbed and ‘comes to’ but what about when both Sisters are alive and see the woman die and come back to life. I’d really like to hear people’s theories for this part as I’m quite stumped on this. The only theory I have for this is that spray that Sister Paxton dreams about in the scene with the women at cages near the end is actually being sprayed into the basement (another influence from her subconscious) and this chemical spray, in addition to it being dark and them being terrified, is causing the Sisters to hallucinate the woman. Mr Reed has a sound system to communicate and he may be guiding them to see what he wants them to see. Her may be dressed as the woman. I don’t know, this part is really tricky to place in reality. It feels like a magic trick but I’m not sure how it works.

I think Mr Reeds ultimate plan/ goal was to shake their faith and then kill them. I’d also be keen to hear what other think his ultimate goal or plan was?

So i rewatched Avengers Infinity War a while ago! Might not have paid attention all these while because there is so much going on in the movie, but this time a question was raised in my mind that How did Heimdall know to send Hulk/Banner to the New York Sanctum in the whole world? So we all know the background that Heimdall with his dying breath sent Hulk to the earth to warn to protect the Infinity Stones that were on the earth. I have two theories, one the most plausible one is Heimdall knew or has seen that Doctor Strange possess the Time Stone. But he didn’t send Hulk to Vision who had the mind stone and was on Earth! Second theory is Heimdall and the ancient one knew each other’s existence at the least. I mean they wouldn’t have teamed up for any fight, but i guess they acknowledged each other’s work in protecting the realm and reality. Heimdall also knew about the capabilities of the wizards! Hence, Heimdall thought that it is fit to send Hulk to the New York sanctum!!

Hi recently I found out an anime who show a character called Fubuki Shirou/Shawn Frost who posses a split personality and I wanted to know if it can be a case of dissociative identity disorder. If anyone knows this anime or would like to do an analysis (I would be extremely happy to receive your analyses) I would be delighted to receive your answers. I am really interested by the portrayal that do the media about this disorder, I watch several work like elfen lied or Split.

If you've ever seen the television series Early Edition, you'll know that the protagonist Gary Hobson receives tomorrow's newspaper today, and that it's usually delivered mysteriously, and also by a mysterious cat, and that Gary has 24 hours to try and change the future that's mentioned in said newspaper.

My own speculation is that the cat is probably a Flerken, similar to Goose from the Captain Marvel (2019) film - so the cat in Early Edition brings the newspaper from within its pocket dimension innards - and the future newspaper part could link up with the TVA somehow as well - as there was a cat featured in the first episode of Loki season one (as seen in the trailer of the series) - it could have been a Flerken disguising itself as a common house cat - so it's possible that a rogue Flerken from the TVA, was delivering future newspapers to Gary Hobson and making miniscule changes to the Sacred Timeline.

First off, if you're anything like me, then you'll have subscribed to the theory that the dastardly and cowardly attack on Buenos Aires perpetrated by the inhuman arachnid menace was simply a false flag setup by the government in order to spur humanity against a perceived existential bug threat (it may still be an attack that was -allowed to happen- but I digress)

The logistics of heaving an asteroid thousands of light years from Klandathu and hitting earth is beyond impractical and verging on impossible, moreover, the time required for an asteroid to make such a journey is far out of scope for the entire span of human history.

So what changed my mind?

Well for starters the director of the film has stated as such, but for the longest time this felt like him low-key admitting his ignorance over the harsh realities of astrophysics...

but it got me thinking...

and noticing...

It's funny, but it was a combination of two small details of the bug homeworld that started this chain of reasoning:

1. every time we see the bug homeworld of Klandathu it is a dry and barren desert with zero water or life other than the bugs.

2. despite there being no water or plant life the bug Homeworld contains a breathable atmosphere that clearly has oxygen, the troopers are running around without any type of suit just breathing up air like it's Earth. (Wink wink)

If we unpack these two attributes it would lead us to a few conclusions- firstly is that the bugs have sucked up every ounce of water on Klandathu, it appears to be their "limiting resource" when determining how many can exist on a planet.(This is also the case in the book used as source material)

But more importantly, it suggests that the bugs have no need for oxygen in order to operate their metabolisms- if they did, they would quickly run out of breathable air without plant life.

This is entirely possible by the way, if the bugs have all the right biological structures they can become their own self contained biosphere that produces its own energy and consumes it. Think about one of those bottled ecosystems; plants make oxygen and fish or sea snails use it and as long as it gets sunlight it just keeps cycling through. Now just put both of those processes into the same organism and suddenly, the bugs need only sunlight in order to energize their metabolism.

This alone means that the bugs now have it within their capabilities, to survive in environments without breathable atmosphere. Truly, if their exoskeletons were strong enough, they have the potential to survive the harsh vacuum of space.

Okok. So they can get up into space, heck they can even survive it. That doesn't mean they can just throw gargantuan rocks several thousand light years- the telemetry requirements alone...

Enter the mantis shrimp (these fuckers are insane btw) a brightly coloured aquatic murder machine. It exists on earth right now. Funnily enough it also has an exoskeleton, but more importantly it is also one of the fastest moving animals on the planet, not because it swims, or runs or flies fast, but because it punches so unbelievably quick; it literally boils the water around it's claw when it strikes. Now imagine a cluster of specialized arachnids that are built with the same functionality, except instead of punching their only goal is to launch themselves off an asteroid in unison to push it with great speed and towards other planets; so long as they push themselves back towards their own planet, they splat, but their water is conserved.

Now if they just launch asteroids and that's that, this changes very little, odds of hitting a planet are near zero. But since the arachnids can survive space, many can stay attached to the asteroid and apply course corrections where necessary. Heck, they might just be shooting out asteroids laced with more "launching bugs" all the time and waiting for observable planets with life to come within sight before they course correct the asteroids into a collision course by pushing sharply off it, propelling it in any direction with their own body mass.

There would need to be a lot of speed. Leveraging gravity sling shots...but there is a differential that can be used far more easily and for way more speed...

If the bugs reside on the inner halo of the galaxy, (oh hey that galactic map we saw in the movie totally showed that) which is counter spinning with our own galactic orbit, there's about 450 km/s of speed right there. Think a roulette wheel, where the near the galactic center is the wheel spinning in one direction and earth and it's solar system are the roulette ball going in the opposite direction. Suddenly, you've got 450 km/s of differential to work with and that's before you'even launched the asteroid. Now you're actually trying to slow down the asteroid so you don't obliterate the planet entirely (want to preserve the water).

The last ingredient for this to be possible is time. And this is the most frightening aspect to all of this. Even at 450km/s we're talking MILLIONS of years of travel time. The bugs have likely been around for a long while; the movie uses the words "home world of Klandathu" which carries the implication that the bugs are on other planets. They've been launching asteroids at habitable planets with water as a precaution. They are trying to make sure that intelligent life doesn't have an opportunity to form and are performing soft resets on ecosystems to make it easier for eventual colonization.

As for bugs ageing, this is also not a concern, Lobsters (oh look another invertebrate with an exoskeleton) have DNA repair enzymes in them, and as such they don't age. So the bugs have a potential biological mechanism for avoiding that too and can stay latched onto the asteroids for millions of years.

Given this information, there are good odds that the bugs are what wiped out the dinosaurs ;)

I also think the bugs are ready to play this game - those giant specialized bugs shooting blue plasma-like projectiles out of their ass? Sure it does wonders against orbiting ships, but it was likely originally designed for fragmenting asteroids that would collide with their planets so they burn up in the atmosphere.

So where does that leave us?

Given the amazing morphology- self contained and self sustaining metabolism, no need for breathing, the extremely diverse range of specialized bug variants, an understanding and mastery of long range telemetry in order to launch asteroids, no ageing and the ability to absorb information from other organisms with complex brains, this is going to be a hard fight for humanity.

My guess is the bugs were genetically engineered a long long time ago in order to survive their progenitor species. Either that, or they absorbed the knowledge of genetic manipulation from another sentient species and have been using it ever since. They have very likely even eradicated several other planets full of life. They've been around for a long long time... And probably wiped out the dinosaurs.

Our one hope is that space pilots don't learn the indepth mechanics of Faster than Light (FTL) travel; if they have, the brain bugs know and there's no telling if they can transmit the information to other colonies and setup counter measures or worse, develop their own FTL travel.

If FTL travel remains a human only advantage we'll likely have to colonize other planets further from the galactic center and learn to eradicate bug planets from long range.

Hope you had as much fun reading this as I did writing it.

So, let me begin by saying I've probably sat down and watched Independence Day like, a hundred times. Its still one of my favorite movies to throw on when I want something to have on in the background. I'm also a huge movie fact nerd, and its a passion of mine. I thought I had everything figured out about this film, until I watched it again a few days ago. It was that raw, punch to the face that left me asking "HOW DID I MISS THIS?!"

Near the beginning of the film at roughly 8-11 minutes in we get a scene of Russel Case's 3 children sitting inside the family RV. Its a classic Winnebago. Specifically a 1967 Winnebago Brave. It has a very distinctive look. Russel's RV features multiple times throughout the film as he makes his drive into the American Deserts along with a fleet of other refugees.

Now one of the stars of the film is actor Bill Pullman. Bill Pullman in Independence Day plays fictional president Thomas J. Whitmore. He also played Lonestar in the Mel Brooks film Spaceballs. In that film a 1986 Winnebago Chieftain 33 was used for the spacecraft the Eagle 5. In a sense, this was Winnebago's "reboot" of the 67 Brave, just repackaged for the 80's.

So Russ, whom was abducted by Aliens years before, and taken into a spaceship where he was (-cough-) experimented on, just so happens to drive around in the same type of RV driven by the fictional Lonestar in Spaceballs.

One could even make the correlation that during the final aerial battle, President Whitmore's callsign was Eagle I, and Lonestar's ship was the Eagle 5. If you want to get even more weird, both Winnebagos were 19 years apart in make. Lonestar, whom would have made the first movie apperance between the two has the Callsign Eagle I. Russel whom appears second between the two has the callsign Eagle 20. 20-1=19.

This post contains spoilers. I suggest you go watch it before reading as it's an experience worth having unspoiled.

|

|

|

Skinamarink is a disturbing horror film which takes place in what I can only describe as a childhood nightmare.

The two siblings (a brother and sister) which are the main characters we follow, are left alone at home and cannot find their mother and father.

The film is a series of long, drawn out scenes with very little dialogue but the few places where this dialogue exists give us some clues.

1. There's a phone call at the beginning of the movie where you hear a voice of who we believe to be the father explaining that the son fell down the stairs and hit his head. While the film doesn't give us any context, I am making the argument that this may be the father covering up for having shoved or hit his son. - Parents who abuse their children will often times blame physical injuries on things like falling or playing sports or other seemingly random activities.
2. There's an underlying theme of abandonment and entrapment throughout the movie. The abandonment aspect is obvious. Two children are seeking their parents but they can't find them no matter how hard they look. The entrapment aspect comes from the fact windows and doors in the house either disappear or seal off completely. The children have no options of escaping. - This obviously plays into two major themes of child abuse. The first being the idea of neglect (whether emotional or literal) and the second being the idea that you feel trapped in a situation, even if there are no literal blocks on the windows and doors around you.
3. There's an underlying theme in the film of being fearful in your own house. Your home is meant to be the place where you feel warm and safe. We dream of the comfort of home when we're away for too long. - In this film, home is a nightmare. The walls hang over you in a suffocating way, hallways are dark and seem infinite, making you feel uneasy about walking through your own home. The place is basically a nightmare you are forced to inhabit. This is how an abuse survivor might view their home with an abuser.
4. Cartoon music plays at various times in the film. It's typically on the TV in the background and it can even be heard during scenes which are disturbing visually. - This (IMO) further plays into the idea of abuse. People who have childhood memories of abuse might connect an innocent thing like music or a cartoon to a memory. The idea that this cartoon music plays out so regularly implies that just as the kids have lost their feeling of safety in the house, they also lost the feeling of safety associated with innocent cartoons.
5. There is a scene in the film where one of the children is called upstairs to their parent's bedroom. When the daughter enters the bedroom, she finds both her father and her mother sitting in the dark on their bed. They're both facing opposite directions and you never directly see their faces. - This scene implies a childhood awareness of a marriage fallout. Young children may not understand the complexities of abusive relationships but they see the obvious signs, like two people who want nothing to do with one another or one parent having extreme anger and hatred for another. This scene feels like a reference to that.
6. In this same scene, the father tells the daughter to look under the bed. When she does this, she doesn't see anything. But when she rises back up, her father is gone and only her mother can be seen sitting on the bed. The mother says "Your father and I love you and your brother very much" there's a pause and a beat of time passes before she then says "I need you to close your eyes." The screen goes black (implying the daughter complies) and when she opens her eyes again, the mother his gone. She turns to a dark hallway where she hears her mother say "someone is here" alongside the sound of bones cracking. The scene ends with a jump scare where a dark hand reaches out from the darkness. - I feel this scene is representative of abuse. The idea that an abusive father or mother may try and distract or shield a child away from the abuse, only for the child to experience one of their parents being abused (the bone crushing sound) or to become a victim themselves (the hand reaching out). The fact that the mother refers to the threat as "someone is here" implies a type of separate abusive personality the father may exhibit. Sometimes he's a husband or dad, sometimes the monster comes out.
7. At this point in the film, the daughter eventually disappears. She shows up one last time in a jump scare having no eyes and no mouth. The voice says "I can do anything. Kaylee didn’t do as she was told. She said she wanted her mom and dad. So I took her mouth away." - The statement of "I can do anything. She didn't do as she was told." is a statement of an abuser. The fact he took away her eyes and mouth is symbolic of how a child in an abusive household may be told "You didn't see anything and you can't tell anyone what you saw." The fact this happened because the child asked for her mom and dad implies that the girl is yearning for the stability of parents but never has the option. In place of a mom or dad is an abuser. The fact the brother sees her eyeless and mouthless may imply how one sibling isn't willing to discuss what both are experiencing.
8. In another scene, the boy begins speaking to a dark entity within the house. While he never directly sees this entity, it tells him to do things. In one disturbing scene, the boy is told to stab himself in the eye with a kitchen knife. He complies. - Self-harm is a coping mechanism many people who have suffered abuse will use. The fact the child feels compelled by an unseen force to harm himself is indicative of an abusive situation. The fact it's an eye of all things further implies the child doesn't want to see the horror of the situation anymore.
9. In another scene, the boy finally decides to try and call 911. The operator asks him what's wrong and where he is and that he needs to be brave. The boy tries to explain his situation but the phone he was using turns into play phone for children. - This ties into the yearning a child might have to seek help but feeling unable to do so. They don't feel they can or they simply fantasize about doing it while never having the nerve to. This mentality is very common in abusive situations.
10. The film culminates into an extremely disturbing sequence where the brother enters into an "upside down" version of the house and reaches a tape recording toy. The words "572 Days" flash which implies the events of the movie have been going on for that long. The scene cuts to a carpet being splattered with blood and screams being heard, this rewinds and repeats multiple times over implying it's a repeating cycle. - This scene here is what I believe indicates the boy is in a coma. He is remembering the trauma of the situation in a dreamlike state and his coma has gone on like this for over a year. He can't escape it. It keeps rewinding like the tape in his recording toy.
11. The scene ends with the boy entering a doorway in a void. As the boy floats through, he asks the voice if he can watch something happy. He receives no answer. Inside of the doorway is a pitch black room with only enough light to show a featureless face looking back at him. The boy asks this featureless face his name two times. The face does not reply. The face then tells him to go back to sleep. The film ends. - The boy is reliving a nightmare over and over and over again inside of a coma. He asks the voice to show him something happy but he can't. There isn't anything happy to show. The featureless face is either a doctor or family member peering down at him at his hospital bed. That is all he can perceive in his coma-like state. He doesn't recognize them and asks their name. The voices don't respond because he isn't actually talking. They simply comfort him and tell him to sleep (which begins the nightmare all over again)

In Warehouse 13, we are told that the supernatural artifacts they collect are the result of powerful emotional events imprinting on normal items. That's why the artifacts have such strong interactions with human emotions and mental states. While every artifact follows its own rules, they are all universally temporarily suppressed by purple "goo", as well as special bags and gloves presumably impregnated with the stuff.

We never get an explanation for the goo. But we know that there is a massive reservoir of it built into and circulated throughout the warehouse to keep the collection relatively calm. And in one episode we see that the "goo-ery" system needs to be flushed periodically. The goo in the flush tank is noticeably darker in color and the characters doing the chore make a point of how bad it smells. A toss off response notes that the changes are what happens to goo after it neutralizes an artifact. The system is also under pressure, and the pressure quickly rises while the work is in progress. The show does not make a connection here, but I noticed that the pressure gauge only started to surge when the characters started having a character-development type conversation about their individual challenges. That is to say, when emotions got strong the goo became pressurized.

So we have a viscous, colorful slime that absorbs energy from emotion-based artifacts; and physically changes from that absorption. And seems to increase in volume (hence the pressure spike) when in close proximity to particularly strong emotions.

That sounds a lot like the slime from Ghostbusters 2. But that slime was pink, not purple.

My theory is that the Warehouse 13 agents showed up in New York shortly after the events of GB2, because an animated Lady Liberty would absolutely be something that would bring them running. It wouldn't take much investigating to find the pink slime and its empathic properties. The possible uses of such a thing to the agent's line of work would be obvious. But not the way we see it in GB2, when it is already charged with emotional energy. If charged slime can make an ordinary toaster dance, what would it do to an artifact already carrying so much emotional baggage that it could summon hurricanes? No, what the Warehouse needs is emotionally neutral slime. So they work on it, find a process that filters the existing emotional energy out of the pink stuff and leaves it like a dead battery. Ready to suck up whatever positive/negative feels an artifact may be carrying without having any possibility of feedback interactions. And that process changes the goo from pink to purple.

This fits poetically too. As the goo would go from a bright, vibrant color to a darker hue to reflect the loss of energy.

There are other threads that could be used to support this being a shared universe, such as the appearance of "artifacts" like Dana's building in GB1, Vigo's portrait in GB2, etc. Anything where the ghost to be busted relates strongly to a particular item or structure, those would fit in perfectly with the rules of Warehouse 13. Or to fit the other way, the warehouse is holding numerous "haunted" artifacts such as Lewis Carol's mirror. Which traps the ghost of the homicidal maniac Alice Liddell, and she will jump at any opportunity to escape by possessing anyone looking at the mirror too long.

Warehouse 13 presents a long history of "warehouse" organizations starting with the original founded by Alexander the Great. Several centuries of shadow-government agents snatching up anything supernatural and hiding it away would go a long way to explaining why nobody in the Ghostbusters universe knows about ghosts when they are so numerous, obvious, and verifiable.

Or to apply that directly to the movies; the warehouse is going to want to collect Gozer's gate after the very public events of GB1. They've already got a full pyramid and a working windmill in the warehouse, so the scale of snagging a whole apartment building isn't the issue. But they do like to keep their work secret, and we see them come up with some pretty lame off the cuff cover stories to explain to civilians why they just saw something impossible. "Mushrooms" that the survivors had for lunch is a running gag. So it would be fully on-brand for the warehouse to start a rumor that it was all a publicity stunt from these weirdo con-men trying to drum up business for their phony busting service. And that's how the entire city of New York decides to forget that literally everybody in town saw ghosts for two days straight, and 20 city blocks were drowned in tons of molten marshmallow. Nope, must have been those damned ghostbusters with their fake laser light show and....um....mushrooms in the water supply! Yeah, that's the ticket!

But that's all secondary. It's really the goo that sticks these two franchises together.

I just finished Smile 2, in which they potrait the monster to have a physical form, an entity rather than a curse.

First, I'll briefly explain 4D concept. The easiest example is the tesseract. In which, the 4th-dimension is inside-outside. And we can further understand this by compare us to lower dimensions. A 3D creatures see in 2D pictures, as in we can only see parts of 3D objects, not its whole. 3D creatures can see all of 2D, include their inside. Same with 2D seeing 1D. So apply this, 4D creatures can see both our inside and outside.

(I suggest watching Flatland, they explain it quite well)

Now, if you look at the Smile's Monster, you'll notice some similarities:

*It has no skin, which I understand as we're seeing the inside of this monster.

*Multiple identical jaws, which is probably multiple 2D images stacking on each other when the creature moves. Additionally, it creates confusion for the audience (recreating how 2D creatures cannot fanthom up-down like us)

*It can enter our mind. Using 4th- dimensional logic, our innermost thought can be also our outermost parts if we flip ourselves inside out.

So what happens is that people who have trauma, have a part of their mind that was kept hidden. Coincidentally, this is also what the monster can access at first. I personally think human naturally always appear 'flipping' to the monster, because they can only create hallucinations from time to time.

Then, our inside slowly become our outside. That's when the monster show up and jump in our skin. It's like how we need to flip out the plastic bag a bit to fit the groceries in.

So yeah, that's that. English isn't my first language, so please excuse the grammar.

There's some level of confusion regarding at what point the villains were plucked from their timelines, but one of the most common theories is that all dead characters appear the moment they learned Peter Parker is Spider-Man.

Now, if we are to assume that this is the case, Norman would have been warped over when he first learned Peter was Spider-Man. That would be the thanksgiving dinner. Clearly Norman was hungry that scene, but he skipped out as soon as he connected two and two together. If this was the moment he was wisked to the MCU, he would have waited all day to gorge himself, only to never actually get to eat anything.

As such, he naturally stuffs donuts down his hoodie at the first opportunity and not long later still says he could go for a burrito. This man was starving.

More evidence that this is the moment Norman was transported was that he never would have gotten the chance to use the "can the Spider-Man come out to play" line or attack Aunt May. As such he naturally did both at the soonest possible chance.

First, let's recap. The last time we see Rudy canonically is at the very beginning of Ice Age 4, when Scrat falls through the dinosaur world on his way to the Earth's core. In the same scene we also see Buck who, just like at the end of the previous film, was "riding" on Rudy. In Ice Age 5, Buck and the dinosaur world appear again, but there is no sign of Rudy. Buck strangely does not mention his old rival and what happened to him.

In Adventures of Buck Wild, only Momma Dino returned (without her children, unfortunately) and again no sign of Rudy. My theory is that he died somewhere between the fourth and fifth films, specifically during that crazy, and dangerous, moment when Scrat runs after the nut while the Earth's core is rolling, which causes abrupt seismic events, such as moving and separating continents.

In Ice Age 5, in the dinosaur world scene, you can see that there are large cracks that split the environment, and there are even more mountains and large rocks scattered around than in Ice Age 3. These geological changes were certainly Scrat's fault when he rolled the core. And what does Rudy have to do with this? What may have happened is that Scrat may have opened a large crack while Rudy was passing by, and distracted while trying to get away from Buck, he didn't see the crack and fell in. Buck managed to save himself, but his old rival didn't.

In Adventures of Buck Wild, in the scene where Ellie, Manny, Sid and Diego are on their way to enter the dinosaur world, they come across a huge skull. This skull caught my attention because it has a crocodile-like shape. And who has, or rather had, a crocodile-like head and was of colossal size? Rudy! He may have died near the entrance to the dinosaur world and, as a sort of "tribute" to him, Buck (with momma's help) placed Rudy's skull at the entrance.

You must be thinking "but this skull has all the front teeth, Rudy was missing one". Yes, but at some point the missing tooth would have been replaced by another, naturally, before death. And this skull could not be that of the "bridge skeleton" from the third film, because that one's skull had a different shape, more similar to that of a T. Rex.

Questions and suggestions welcome! How can I strengthen or disprove this theory.

I believe that Ash from Pokémon is actually a Mew that transformed into a human form and forgot its original form, possibly due to head trauma during a fight with another Pokémon. In multiple Pokédex entries, Pokémon are said to come from unusual humans or human spirits. Thus it is possible that humans could be considered a Pokémon. This means Mew could transform into a kid, Ash. This would explain why Ash never ages, why he has exceptionally strong relationships with many Pokémon, and why legendary Pokemon tend to pop up around him like moths to a flame. Being the ancestor of all of earth’s Pokémon, including legendaries (assumably), they would likely feel more comfortable if they sensed the familiar presence. Further more, only Ash and another Mew were able to calm Mewtwo, possibly do to the similarity felt between them and Ash’s extraordinary abilities to care for his own kind, Pokémon, which Mewtwo had not seen before. Furthermore, the reason we never see his dad is because Ash’s mom adopted him from Professor Oak, who found him or Mew during research. They can’t tell Ash the true story in fear that it might remember its true origin and turn back to Mew. The easiest lie is that his dad is a trainer.

Recently, the r/FanTheories moderators have noticed an uptick in fan theories posts about Smile 2 that contain spoilers, but are not marked as much. As such, all fan theories about Smile 2 must be either marked with a spoiler tag, or the moderators will add a spoiler tag for you, until 2-3 weeks after the film leaves movie theaters. This is to avoid spoiling other users who have yet to see the movie.

In addition to this, we have also noticed an increase in posts that use acronyms, instead of the full name or title of the media. While this may be allowed on other subreddits, like r/CharacterRant, on r/FanTheories, all fan theory or speculation posts must have the full name of the media or IP being discussed in the post title. Example: Jujustu Kaisen instead of "JJK", My Hero Academia/Boku No Hero Academia instead of "MHA/BNHA", Return of the Jedi instead of "ROTJ", etc...this includes animes.

The MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) is also included in order to clarify what the post is about.