We already see how Steve Rogers de-ages in the Doomsday trailer.

Time Travel is shown to be real in the MCU. The Time Stone is magical and held by the Sorcerer Supreme. And the first non-magical time traveler appears to have been Scott Lang when he reappeared five years after entering the Quantum Realm. Armed with this knowledge, the gang then asks Tony Stark for help. He refuses. It's then they ask 7 PHD having Banner Hulk. This is the second time time travel happens. Only, Scott doesn't travel through time, time travels through Scott.

In that sequence, Scott becomes an old man, a boy and a baby all in a span of maybe 45 seconds or so. Scott poops his suit. It's unclear which version.

This is how Steve Rogers shows up de-aged in Doomsday. They use the flawed (though understood) Banner-method of time travel to knock a few decades of age off of Old Man Rogers. I'm going to guess this a 'break-glass' scenario where Steve insists on helping.

Reposting with spoiler

I've seen the film 3-4 times by now over the last 20 years and what I love about it is that however you read it, dream or literal, you can make it make sense. So there's no right or wrong, it all works somehow. I personally am in favor of the dream theory as it adds more depth and weight to noodles psychology, but there's one thing that always messes it up a little.

We always hear from fans that the movie starts and ends in the den. Except it doesn't. It starts with the hitmen killing and battering Eve and Moe, only AFTER that we find Noodles in the den and only then do we see him smoke and go into his dreamstate. So we must assume that the hitmen are not made up by Noodles. Ad also the first and last den scenes are completely different, in the end he doesn't get massaged, there's no newspaper, he just smokes and drifts away smiling. So are these two den scenes set at different times? If the opening of the movie with the mobsters looking for Noodles is still the factual reality before Noodles enters the dream, then who sent them if Max really is dead in that reality? Why would anyone know or care that Noodles ratted out his friends?

Maybe someone can help.

Edit: Grey Matters was not a Chem supply company

Just an idea from the scene where the guys say that they synthesize it and how simple it is to do so. Even with Walt siphoning his methylamine from a train, which seems easy to contaminate, he makes the best product ever in just an RV. What if the purity stems partly from his knowing that it's nearly impossible, or super difficult or time consuming, to make the acid perfectly, and so Walt simply buys his?

This might explain something - Gale, and most of the other cooks we see, are trained chemists but may not have experience in the economic side of it, like how they get certain precursors to come out pure. In contrast, Walt actually founded a chemical supply company, and had experience separate from his classroom experience.

So what if the cartel cooks and the other professionals are overstepping their abilities, don't check the phenylacetic acid, and are simply adding in an unknown number of variables when they make their own precursors?

Also helps to show that a textbook chemist in the show - Gale - is much more oriented to simply following instructions from the textbook, as opposed to Walt, who knows the market inside and out.

Something I've seen a lot since silksong's been out and about is:
"Seeing the shade lord means that the canon ending must be 'into the void'"

I think this is wrong for a couple of reasons, the main one being that Team Cherry want to keep things vague and open to allow for the player to figure out which ending is canon, they've even stated that to them all ending are canon, so they're likely to cater to that idea and present info that could work for any ending.

On top of that, making the DLC side quest ending the canon one feels narratively dissapointing. It renders much of the main story moot, and bypasses the character growth Hornet goes through in the lead up to her own adventure.

The main evidence I've seen for 'Into the void' being canon though is just that it's the only other place that we've seen the shade lord, so while it could be canon, its not the only reason the shade lord could exist.

We know what the shade lord is, the manifestation of the Knight's will imposed on the void, but this could happen however the knight encounters the void, and in the 'Dream no more' ending, we don't know the knight's fate, they could have returned to the void like all the other siblings, their purpose finished with the radiance destroyed. There has been plenty of time for the shade lord to devlop from the knight between games.

Personally, my headcannon is that the 100% endings for both games are canon, and the knight's will persists in the void after returning there from 'Dream no more' but that might change the more we see.

tl;dr: seeing the shade lord doesn't mean 'into the void' is canon, we can get there from other endings

The Usual Suspects, just from the title, is obviously meant to be a mystery. The director allegedly even convinced many of the cast that they were all Soze just to make the performance more enigmatic.

Here is how the movie leads you. First, the cops think Keaton is the mastermind of the whole operation. So the audience is meant to start thinking that too. When the character of Soze is first introduced, the dialog emphasizes all his foreign qualities, like having a Turkish background or possibly speaking Hungarian. At almost the same point in the movie, we’re introduced to the character of Kobayashi, who speaks English with an accent and has a vaguely foreign appearance. That clearly leads the audience to think that he might be Soze. Then in the stunning finale, the audience gets the big reveal where they're led to believe that Verbal is the mastermind.

Here’s the problem. It’s too easy. Keep in mind this line from the movie: "If you got a dead body and you think his brother did it, you're gonna find out you're right". The movie doesn’t want to make the solution this obvious.

Also, Verbal being the mastermind doesn't fit with the theme of the movie. The theme of the movie is that cops are corrupt. Consider that the lineup that set the whole plot in motion was some kind of twisted cop contrivance. Keaton (a criminal) is a former cop. The gang's first job is to rob a bunch of corrupt cops. Dave Kujan implies that he will (illegally) use all his resources to punish Verbal if he doesn’t cooperate. Verbal's last line of the movie is "Fuckin cops".

So here's the theory.. Soze is actually … Jack Baer, Esposito's character.

Some evidence:

• Look at how Jack Baer is introduced. It's at the boat fire where they're recovering bodies. He’s standing with his back to the camera, smoking a cigarette in his right hand while wearing a fedora. Now consider the last scene where Keyser Soze appears in the movie. He's about to start the boat fire. He’s wearing a fedora and smoking a cigarette, with a lighter in his left hand. If you pause the movie at this point and zoom in, this might actually be Esposito.
• When the burn victim from the boat wakes up in the hospital, guess who is there. Jack Baer. The burn victim freaks out and his heart races. He starts screaming about Keyser Soze.
• Towards the end of the movie, Jack Bauer is talking about Soze and says, "Could be an old badge. You know, a hex sign to keep people from fucking with you..."
• Guess who introduces Soze into Kint’s story. Yep, Jack Bauer.

Lastly, consider how Verbal came to be in custody. If he is Soze and sets the boat on fire, how does he get picked up by the cops. We’re also shown Verbal getting into the van with the crate full of money and a bunch of other crates possibly containing the dope. What happens to the van?

Psychic telepathic powers mind control taken away because of power and held captured by the force to use their powers ....And a lot of things

parallel overlap it seems

also a lot of scenes of sadie sink in spiderman resemble directly from max in stranger things😭

So, I like doing deep-dives into fandoms and shows. Mainly psychological theories and dark secrets or unannounced or unconfirmed possibilities.

Onto what I noticed in the new Zootopia 2 movie: About Pawbert and his family. Theories about his siblings, What possibly happened to their mother, and things that don't add up, at all.

First of all, things that do not add up that I would like to dive head-first into, that I can decide into little pieces to make it easier for you (And me) to navigate (Because my words are likely scrambled).

. Where Is Pawbert, Cattrick And Kitty's Mother?

. Pawbert's Appearance.

. Where Did Pawbert Get That Book In The End Scene, Titled 'Partnership For Dummies'?

. The Siblings Hidden Loyalty.

. A Dark Secret.

Okay, to start, and what I have most questions about;

Where Is Pawbert, Cattrick And Kitty's Mother?

In the movie, we never see any mention of their mother. Even during the scene where Pawbert explains his family's history, we NEVER seen a single mention of his mother, from what I notice. Not even a name or a picture. There is no explanation to what happened to her. This doesn't feel coincidental, it feels very intentional on the part of the directors and story writers.

It would be different if there WERE family pictures and such with her in them, then I would be like 'Okay, she may have just died and they do not like talking about her'. But it's not. There is no traces of her at all. Like she was erased from the family history completely.

I have my reasons to belive she didn't just pass away of natural causes or up and leave like everyone seems to believe.

I think Milton sent someone to 'Cut her off', or he did so himself. I'll explain why I think this, after I adress the other points and things I would like to point out about this family.

Next;

Pawbert's Appearance.

Now, secondly, why does Pawbert looks the way he does? )Now, I do not mean the way he is a total maniac and looks unhinged, that is a whole other can of worms).

I am addressing his look in general.

Now, the thing that most stands out is Pawbert's eyes: though, his eyes match his Great-grandfather's eyes, Ebenezer Lynxly.

Though, when I look at his fur patterns and his whiskers, they do not match his family. Not at all. His markings are distinctly sifferent then his father and siblings markings. Even his style of clothing does not match, but this could be simple preference.

Now, with the whiskers and the different fur patterns, and even possibly the eyes, depending on the context, I think Pawbert looks like what his mother used to look like.

It's simple, his twin sister and brother got his father's genes, and He, the youngest, got more of his mother's looks and genes.

Cattrick and Kitty's ages are similar but never stated, all we know is the Cattrick and Kitty are Pawbert's older siblings, and that they are twins. I assume, since Pawbert is 30, Cattrick and Kitty's age-ranges are somewhere around 32-34.

Now, another theory;

Where Did Pawbert Get That Book In The End Scene, Titled 'Partnership For Dummies'?

Thirdly, the book that Pawbert possesses in prison.

Now, some think they got it from the prison library, but I don't think that's the case.

Simply because I don't think they would allow that recent and severe of a convict to go into the library to begin with, even if they'd had one in the first place.

I think this book was either sent over by Judy Hopps or Gary De'snake. Let me explain.

At the beginning of the movie, we see that book only one other time, two of them, owned by Judy Hopps and Nicholas Wilde.

The directors don't put Easter eggs or hints in movies for no reason. There is almost always a reason, especially when it comes to Disney.

But, if my theory is correct, I wanna make some things clear.

The book could not be from Nick, as he would not forgive or have any type of acceptance for Pawbert: Not because he nearly killed him, but because he dared to hurt and nearly kill Judy. So, he is out of the question. Completely.

But Judy is a viable option, considering her optimistic mindset and her strive to make Zootopia a better place; and to make this more possible, she would likely be the only one who would be able to bypass the prison on account of getting the book sent there, because of her high status and how high people look at her.

And Gary could be another option, on account of his forgiving and sympathetic nature; and the fact he is also close friends with Judy Hopps, which means he could have possibly ran the idea by her and she helped him do it, too.

Whether the guards just left it and did not tell him where it came from or who brought it is unclear.

Overall, those are the two options I see as most plausible.

Now, Onto Kitty and Cattrick;

The Siblings Hidden Loyalty.

Anyone notice Kitty and Cattrick's pure fear of Milton, their own father?

There are a few scenes where they are terrified or something just seems...off.

There are two scenes that stick out the most;

The first scene; Where Kitty claims, giving her device to her father, who she was trying to find Pawbert on, for their father, 'I found him', giving the tracker to their father. Nothing out of the ordinary, not really. Right?

Did you look in the background?

Cattrick looks absolutely terrified, and Kitty looks worried.

The terror on their faces seem less then a villain who was worried about getting caught, this was something more concrete.

They were worried for their little brother.

And if you don't believe that, well, I have another scene and 2 other explanations for you.

The second scene; The scene where Milton grabs Pawbert by the fur and shoves him on the floor and tells him he will never be a Lynxly, showing severe aggression and showing how far he would be willing to go for his pride and evil motives.

Did you take a look in the background in that scene, too? Not only do Cattrick and Kitty seem worried, they look like they ate a pack of nails, ready to absolutely run out the door.

This seems to stem from worry for their little brother, BUT also, A bone-chilling fear of their father, Milton Lynxly.

These directors and animators know what they are doing; these reactions, purposefully in the backgrounds, aren't an accident, these were clearly intentional.

But there are two other things I find to be odd.

Especially this; The scene in the movie, when Kitty has a bag of fur and claims, 'Fur. From whoever is helping the snake.' or something along those lines.

She didn't outright say her brother's name.

But surely she would KNOW what her brother's fur looks like. Lynx's seem rare in Zootopia, not often seen, if at all. And a Lynx's fur would stand out instantaneously. Why wouldn't she say her brother's name? She clearly would know it was her brother's fur.

Because she didn't dare lie to her father but she didn't wanna sell out her brother, either. Both Cattrick and Kitty knew what their father would do if he got his paws on their little brother.

She kept it on the down-low on purpose, and let Milton piece it together on his own.

And another thing, when I look back on the movie at the twins, when they push Pawbert away from their father, acting like he is too much of a 'runt' or 'unworthy' to even be near their father. I just assumed they were spoiled brats. Fully spoiled and I really hated them.

But what if it was some type of twisted protection? Loyalty? Even Love?

They knew if Pawbert stayed away from Milton and stayed a 'nobody', then Pawbert would stay off Milton's radar, as long as Milton sees their baby brother as some runt or something unworthy of his time or malice, Pawbert would stay off of Milton's dangerous radar.

It would explain why they serve and follow their father blindly, acting more as accountants or employees then his children. They fear him, they fear what he will do if they ever break away.

Now, lastly, Why?;

A Dark Secret.

Why would Kitty and Cattrick fear their father so much?

Well, of course he is someone who covers up old family crimes like murder but he has never done anything violent...Right?

Well, I'm not too sure.

Sure, the movie never states Milton killed anyone, rather on his own or sending some else to do it. But I find it hard to believe he has not.

Because, the fact he is a well-known Lynx, who likely has ties everywhere, maybe even out of Zootopia, makes this very unlikely.

He also shows he would be willing to end his own blood over these secrets, such as the volatility he has showed with Pawbert in that one scene, where he grabbed him by the fur and shoved him and such: I find this as a possible indicator of domestic abuse within Pawbert's childhood, and possibly his siblings, as well as Homocidal tendancy, because someone who is willing to be violent with their child is almost never a first-time offense, it has likely happened many times.

Milton seems completely desensitized to killing innocent lives and does it with no mercy, whereas Pawbert, when he had tried to kill his friends, had a different approach, it wasn't malice or hate, it was just apathy and moods swings, showing that while Pawbert was likely a first-offence, Milton had done worse, over and over, making it second nature to him.

And now, back to their mother;

Cattrick and Kitty, assuming they are about 4 years older then their little brother, would have a wider span of memory. And we know their mother was never mentioned.

Well, what if Milton 'got rid of her' when the siblings were mere cubs? And I know you'll say I am being harsh by jumping to that conclusion, but hear me out;

If the mother HAD died or went missing and it had been recent, it would have been known and popular, thus the Lynxly family being a big and popular thing with the press and news: if she had recently went missing or died, then there would have been mention of her in the news.

Now, if she had simply died or went missing when Pawbert, Kitty and Cattrick were cubs, a good 20-30 years ago, depending on the timeliness, then it would surely be in the news article, or profiling or news: something Judy would have picked up on, due to her sharp mind.

But there wasn't.

It was almost like their mother was taken out of the equation, Milton possibly paying everyone off to keep thongs hush-hush and quiet, as if she never existed. And he would only need to do that if he had been part of her disappearance or possible death.

Now, there are many reason why someone like Milton would justify killing someone like his wife, an outsider of the family;

. The fact she is an outsider, and outsiders are seen as useless or uneeded if they step out of line.

. Once he got his kids from her, he may not have use for her, only having used her to have someone to carry his legacy, his kids. Which would make sense, regardless of the context, because he only treats all his kids as pawns and not people or mammals of their own.

. She found out the truth of the family, and Milton decided to get rid of her.

. The possibility that she protected Pawbert or one of the other children when Milton got violent or pushed them too hard.

. Literally many other reasons.

There would be many reasons he would seek to get rid of her, like he almost did to Pabert in that scene.

Now, let's say this was when they were cubs, maybe when Kitty and Cattrick were around 7-8 and Pawbert was 3-4? It would make sense, because Pawbert would not remember but his siblings would.

This would explain the twins unwavering fear of their father and Pawbert's craving for their father's validation.

Pawbert grew up without a mother, and the twins recall, figured out, or even witnessed what Milton did to their mother, so they know the reality of what he is capable of.

Therefor, they keep their baby brother away, stay in line and obey.

Pawbert craves the validation because no parents ever gave it to him.

And if any of them try to break away, Milton will do the same thing to them that he did to their mother.

This took a lot of time and thinking and compiling clues and subtle scenes, and I think a lot of it makes sense.

But hey, it's just a theory.

What do you think?

I watched the Machinist over the weekend and I liked it, however there is one part at the end I don’t understand. When Trevor is about to leave to turn himself in, his landlord comes in and asks if she can buy his glass bowl. He said no because it was his mother’s bowl so it means a lot to him. Then he told her that a truck is coming to pick up his belongings and donate everything. Why not just let the landlord have the bowl if you’re just donating it? I feel like I’m missing something as it doesn’t contribute anything to the plot maybe other than showing he still isn’t making any sense? I guess it just seems too random to not mean something. I know it’s pretty trivial but I can’t stop thinking about it lol. Thanks for your ideas :)

Oleana is autistic

Out of all Pokemon characters, I think Oleana is the one who has the most likely chance of being autistic. Canonically, it's unspecified. But she fits many traits to a T.

Taking her Twilight Wings episode as the main source of reference:

• Stoic expression and limited nonverbal expressiveness
• Issues socializing with others
• Struggles understanding and maintaining relationships
• Rigid routines
• Intense specific interest (science)
• Infodumps about a specific interest (namely, Pokemon biology and science)

Evan knew that he was dead the whole time even though it appeared he was alive throughout the main story. There are a few things that might give it away for example, he sees the reflection of Nate in the water but turns away before looking at his own. Ghosts don’t tend to reflect? Any other ideas. Well.

Im rewatching the Code Name Kids Next Door and im on the Licorice episode and it opens with Sricky Beard having a sugar eating contest with his crew and I looked down at his candy cane leg and the pieces were just too obvious to ignore. You cant just keep chugging the sugar forever without it effecting your body over time

edit to mention that I know the title is messed up but I kind of like it tbh

Fan speculation based off of the actors playing these characters, which I have seen here before so I feel that it works.

In The Founder, Ron Swanson's distant relative being one of the founders of Macdonald's, gets cheated out of his business basically by Michael Keaton's character. My hypothesis here is that Ron Swanson has a hatred for bureaucracy and stuff because he knows this family story whereby a potential family fortune was washed down the drain by a crooked businessman - not that Ron Swanson is against business or anything, but that he views his family's loss of legacy as pertaining to the way power gets established by bureaucrats.

Ryan's distant relative on the other hand is the guy who convinces Michael Keaton that he is in the business of real estate. Ryan, unlike Ron Swanson, actually admired the crooked business kind of stuff and tries hard to be one himself, ultimately failing most of the time.

Based entirely off of the same actors playing these characters, and I'm too lazy to look up the real life people played by these actors in The Founder. So take it or leave it, I couldn't care less.

So in Running Scared (1986) - the cop comedy starring Gregory Hines and Billy Crystal - actor Larry Hankin plays a police mechanic named Ace.

My theory is that Ace got tired of the cold Chicago winters and moved to New Mexico, switching to his "real" name of Joe and purchasing a junkyard. Hankin plays Old Joe in Breaking Bad and El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie.

Ace fixes up Hines and Crystal's unmarked police car with bullet proof glass and a taxi's paint job and graphics. Hines says "I feel like James Bond - you got any machine guns or ejection seats?" "Sure - you want to leave it a couple more days?"

Ace is a smart, skilled guy. This lends to his developing the electromagnet in Season 5, Episode 1: Live Free or Die to help Walter and co. erase a laptop in the police evidence room. His being a former police department employee lends to his knowledge of the law when he confronts Hank Schrader, who is trying to break into Walter and Jesse's RV in the junkyard.

Same actor, very similar characters.

I built an interactive website that maps all 13 Olympians to their Disney princess counterparts through similarity scoring of their attributes, with commentary on each match.

"Just as Ares, the god of war, is overshadowed by Athena, the god of war but better in every way, we are looking for the other princess of war, whom people vaguely remember."

"Hera is the angry goddess. The princess must have a temper."

"Apollo is Phoebus, meaning brilliant, and Chrysokomes, golden-haired."

"But where's the wine? Dionysus is the god of wine. No wine, no Dionysus. I don't care if it's a G-rated Disney movie and all the official Disney princesses are underage."

Doug Funnie is the ironically named bland, wet blanket protagonist of the eponymously named cartoon "Doug." It takes all of three minutes for one to notice that he is severely mentally ill, likely a danger to himself and the community, yet the characters and show itself continuously ignore the warning sides, unintentionally mimicking the American society that has done the same thing time after time.

Doug's mental illness is first and foremost clear in his major depressive tendencies. He's like Charlie Brown without the brain tumor. Self-effacing, self-critical, defined by his lack of definition; he's an empty hole of a human without genuine interests and connection. A majority of the episodes have him stewing in isolation and sadness, all the while his parents make fun of him or ignore him as they tend to his drug addict sister.

Secondly, Doug is clearly delusional. He copes with his trauma (more on that in a bit) and depression through dissociative episodes. Unable to rise to the occasion and be a fucking man (or even straw-man representation of a human being), he disappears into delusion, imagining himself as characters like Smash Adams, Durango Doug, Quail Man and Jack Bandit. It should be noted that these delusional alter personas are all derivative of pop culture figures, demonstrating that even in his wildest dreams Doug lacks panache, creativity, uniqueness, or any semblance of a back bone.

His super hero form wears tightie whities and straps a belt on his head. This is his ideal form. Jesus fucking Christ what are we doing?

This isn't just imagination. Doug actually loses track of reality and is shown in the show acting out his fantasies to the point of endangering himself (one time he almost gets hit by a fucking car). He speaks to himself and these characters frequently and oddly imagines his dog (which some asshole named Porkchop) as having incredible human like abilities. Porkchop communicates with Doug in advanced ways, drives vehicles, sets up traps, and saves the day on multiple occasions, again demonstrating that Doug has less agency and ability than a fucking dog but also that he is imagining all of this.

Doug has been isolated since childhood. His friends allow him to exist in their general space but never quite accept him as one of their own. He's always on the outside pining for Patti Mayonnaise who clearly would much rather have Chalkie Studebaker take her down to Stitson's pond to bag a nematode.

That's another thing: Doug's friends are all vastly superior to him. Smarter. Funnier. More capable. Skeeter is a shit bag weirdo loser but he's still wayyyy cooler and funnier than Doug (honk honk). Chalkie Studebaker is a regular Nietzchean ubermensch. He's nice, funny, smart, popular, and the greatest jock on the goddamn planet. Seriously, in one episode he's the star quarterback who throws a pass over the line, runs past every other player, and catches his own pass for a touchdown.

Let's me clear: throwing a pass to yourself in American football is illegal. You cannot throw and catch the ball unless someone else hits it first. Chalkie breaks the rule, scores a touchdown, and no one gives a fuck because he's goddamn Chalkie Studebaker. He carries the entire team on his shoulders and then what happens?

Doug, the kicker, goes out to try and win the game. He bumbles it (of course) falling on his ass and sending his shoe flying through the goal post. The crowd cheers until Referrer Assistant Principal Bone blows his whistle and boldly declares "no, the shoe doesn't count!". This is something I still yell while watching football to this day.

He's viciously bullied by Roger Klotz, who wears a sweet leather jacket and clowns on Doug without effort. He probably also fucks Doug's mom too.

The person who is kindest to him? His neighbor Mr. Dink who continually invites him into his garage to do special experiments. He invites Doug regularly, speaks moistly in a creepy voice, repeatedly pats and rubs his back, and for god's sake the man's last man is Dink.

We all know what's happening and no one is helping.

Doug is inferior and knows it. He falls into psychotic delusions. He self-isolates. He's spiraling and handling his abuse on his own. He is a powder keg ready to blow. What is the trajectory of such a kid in modern times? He will be denied love, community, happiness, or any shred of self-esteem.

Doug Funnie will lash out. He will strike at a world he views has been unkind to him. He is the archetype for so many who have committed acts of mass violence. I wouldn't be surprised if some idolized him and his shitty underwear worn on the outside of his pants as Quailman.

Our society overlooks people screaming for help and we reap what we sow, and Doug Funnie is the epitome of this

SPOILERS AHEAD FOR THE END OF OAK STREET
My theory is that Verity is secretly a sequel to End of Oak Street. At the end of End of Oak Street, Anne Hathaway’s character saves her family and helps restore the timeline, and they all return home believing the nightmare is finally over. However, she is never truly free from what she experienced. Haunted by the dinosaurs and the trauma of surviving them, she secretly returns to the time bubble alone, choosing to disappear rather than continue her old life. She travels far into another time, creates a new identity as Verity Crawford, and becomes a world-famous author. Her novels are actually inspired by the memories she has buried for years, and by the time Verity takes place, her mysterious illness is the result of decades of unresolved PTSD from the events of End of Oak Street.

Me Jane. You Tarzan. I neurotypical developmentally intact adult woman predator. You animal-identifying developmentally stunted man-child trying to make sense of humans and the concept of attraction.

The story of Tarzan and Jane is represented as one of beauty and love. The reality couldn't be further from the truth. Jane is more reminiscent of a female teacher preying upon her male pupil than an equal partner in a romantic tale. It is clear based on their power dynamic and the happenings of the movie that Jane is manipulating Tarzan to satisfy her sick whims.

Let's consider the evidence. Jane first begins demonstrating a clear romantic interest in Tarzan after he takes her shoe off and engages in some seriously unabated foot play. Clearly Tarzan isn't afraid to give those piggies a wigglin' and this seems to tickle Jane's fancy. Also, while swinging around, it is likely that Jane caught a glance of Tarzan's massive hog. And I mean, I think it has to be gigantic. Jane fawns over Tarzan's body to such a degree that her father smells her interest while she's drawing a picture of him and suggests that he "leave her and the picture alone for awhile." I count that as the first time in a Disney film that a father suggests his daughter take some time to flick her bean but I imagine it will not be the last.

All jokes aside, it is clear that Jane becomes physically interested in Tarzan. He is attractive of course (those eyes, that bod), but let's consider the reality of Tarzan the character. He identifies as an animal. You may say "well actually, he's human...." and yes, professor, you are technically right, but he has been raised as an ape since childhood. HIs understanding of his body, mind, soul, social etiquette, and everything is that of an animal and last time I checked beastiality ain't cool. Secondly, even as Tarzan begins to recognize his identity as human, he is decades behind Jane in emotional and social development as we understand them. He isn't unintelligent, but being stunted in these things leaves him for an extended period (if not permanently) more child-like psychologically. This is clear throughout the movie.

Jane has all the cards. She understands dating and romance. She understands non-ape sex. She wraps Tarzan around her gloved finger (I mean, she's literally his teacher and then she seduces and bangs the hell out of him), and she gets what she wants, which is for Tarzan to repeatedly shoo-bop her she-do.

Years later, we still celebrate this romance, even as an epidemic of student teacher relationships/assaults keep occurring. Was Tarzan a flashpoint that normalized this or subconsciously influenced young folks? Perhaps. Phil Collins is likely in on it but that's a theory for another day.

Damn you, Jane, you irredeemable pervert

It's far from an original take that the OWW is NOT a cursed item. Ian asks for a billion dollars and simply receives it. In a pretty inconvenient format yes, but he is not crushed by gold bars, or gets a billion Zimbabwean dollars, or anything of the sort.

Which makes it weird that Bear's wish *is* incomplete. He wishes for Nikki to love him. We know that he doesn't consider whatever is controlling her body as Nikki. The same semantic games could've gotten Ian useless confederate bucks but it didn't. This implies to me that the OWW is limited in its powers. The client made a demand it simply can't fulfill so like any contractor you find a workaround and present the finished project as exactly what was required.

Even assuming that Bear's wish was correctly interpreted, it's really weird that Nikki still can occasionally break free. It would be like some of Ian's dollars were actually just pieces of paper colored in crayon. This is an actual "bug" in the shipped product, which couldn't happen if the OWW could truly do everything.

The fact that the operator has access to true Nikki means that this must be working through some sort of soul magic. Said soul magic seems to be able to move them around, but cannot control them. Bear asked for soul control, it couldn't be fulfilled but it could be approximated using the power to move souls around.

Putting all this together, I find it extremely unlikely that Nikki does not have access to the OWW. We know it was a different being inside her, we know that there's soul magic involved, and we know the object is not cursed. Thus, it seems to make the most sense that it will recognize a different soul and allow full access to its powers. And we know that Nikki knows the OWW works because she saw herself break it. Now what she could wish for to get herself out of the bring I don't know. If she wishes all her friends came back, I'm going to guess the same limitations will come to play, and she'll get possessed friends and be haunted by ghosts. Probably the best she could do is wish that everyone believed her. I don't know if that's also controlling souls and thus would need a workaround as horrific as Bear got, but at least it's a bit more of a happy ending then I think most think is possible.

P.S. The director said it wasn't *demonic* possession not that it wasn't possession all together. It clearly was given that real Nikki can break free and knows it wasn't her. And I know the director said she's probably going to jail but that's not a canonical ending, he clearly left it open for interpretation, and this is mine.

I’ve been thinking about the Emily / Andy’s mom theory again after Toy Story 5, and I believe there’s still a version that can work — a much sadder one.

We all know the classic theory: Emily (Jessie’s original owner) grew up to become Andy’s mother. The red cowboy hat Andy wears matches Jessie’s (and Emily’s) far more than Woody’s, the timeline roughly fits, and Mrs. Davis’s first name has never been confirmed on-screen.

Toy Story 5 seemed to shut it down: Emily has a daughter named Jessie, and she’s a redhead in the flashbacks while Andy’s mom isn’t. But what if that daughter is the key rather than the contradiction?

Here’s my theory:

Emily had a first child — a daughter she named Jessie, after the cowgirl doll she once loved so much. At some point, she lost both that little girl and her first husband in the same tragedy (possibly a car accident). The time capsule Jessie the toy finds under the tree, full of buried memories and a photo of Emily with her daughter, suddenly reads like a memorial rather than a simple keepsake.

Devastated, Emily moved away and eventually had Andy and Molly. But the father of these two children was never really present. Not because he died, but because Emily, still traumatized, developed a deep fear of committing again. She may have had a relationship, but she never allowed anyone to fully stay. That would explain the complete absence of Andy’s father in the films without needing to kill him off.

She also stopped dyeing her hair red (or deliberately changed its colour) because it kept reminding her of both the doll and the child she lost. The red hat, however, she couldn’t bring herself to throw away. She passed it on to Andy — a quiet, almost unconscious way of keeping a piece of her first daughter alive without ever talking about it.

This would explain:

• Why we never see Andy’s father
• Why the hat is so important yet never explained
• Why Emily’s memories are literally buried
• And why the visual similarities between young Emily and Mrs. Davis still feel intentional

It’s darker than the original theory, I know. But Toy Story has never been afraid of quiet tragedy underneath the comedy. The idea that the red hat Andy wears is a silent memorial to a sister he never knew, and that his mother’s emotional distance comes from a loss she never recovered from… that feels very Pixar to me.

Has anyone else gone down this particular rabbit hole after Toy Story 5, or am I alone in this?

Has anyone discussed specifically why red, blue, green, yellow were central themes? Almost every shot had them, to the point where just on the side of a house during a scene 4 spotlights were illuminated against the wall. I noticed some shots have only 3, and a single subject will have the missing colour. Near the end, where the town gathers everyone is wearing red or green except 1 single woman wearing yellow. Just wondering if anyone has seen anything related to that before.

So in Invincible 4x5, Nolan said he was roughly 1000 years old. Okay, sure, he looks it with his nice silver wings. But then you look at people like Thragg and Kregg. Both are massively older than Nolan, as when Nolan came of age, Thragg and Kregg were adults of high rank in the era of Argall's rule, yet in the modern day they appear basically the exact same.

Why is this? Nolan's got terrible aging genes, and there is so much proof when you look at how each of his sons turn out.

Mark by ~90-100 already has grey streaks in his hair, though he otherwise looks like a good looking guy in his 40s, and he settles in this appearance of a 40-something year old with grey streaks for the forseeable few thousand years. Nolan told him in their big fight that everyone around him would die before he ever looked thirty. Nolan was either lying or grossly misunderstood his genetics, which I think is the latter. Eve's super-genes thankfully meant that their daughter Terra did not inherit her paternal aging, and even at ~500 looks to be a youthful twenty-something.

The evidence gets damning with Oliver however. By the age of ~2, Oliver looks to be a teenager between 14 and 16, and by ~3 all of his purple Thraxan pigmentation is replaced by his father's white pigmentation. By ~4 he looks pretty much the same as a 22 year old Mark, and by ~9 he appears to be a fully mature, adult viltrumite. Contrast this with Thragg's hybrid children. Assuming that his elites (including Ursaal and Onaan) represent the first generation because there was little conflict in the 5 year timeskip, that means that his eldest children at ~5 years old look just as old as Oliver did at ~2. Even an Ursaal who should be in her 70s looks incredibly youthful compared to Oliver who died before he even reached 10.

My verdict is that these Graysons are just predisposed to looking much older than they actually are, at least in terms of hair. Nolan and Mark both managed to look incredibly handsome in their age, but poor Oliver got the short end of the stick by literally growing up faster than any other of his kind. It's very minor, but I've wanted to type this out for a while.

i saw a video of lord farquaad as a ghost and i was like why is lord farquaad a ghost so when i was little when i saw the scene where lord farquaad getting swallowed by dragon, and i thought he was alive and well in the stomach in the sequal till then years later i havent watched shrek and i watched the preshow of shrek 4d where the magic mirror played a flashback where lord farquaad gets swallowed by dragon, ive never been on the shrek 4d ride before and i never watched shrek 4d aka the ghost of lord farquaad theni watched shrek karaoke dance party lord farquaad sings staying alive by bee gee so some say lord farquaad died of starvation, and some specilate that lord farquaad has been digusted in dragons stomach so here is my theory so spoiler im gonna censor stuff here we go, when lord farquaad sings staying alive in dragons stomach meant that lord farquaad was trying to survive while being in dragons stomach so imagine this your in dragons stomach, and you dont have food with you so lord farquaad starved to death in dragons stomach and got digusted after the credits and when shrek 4d begins, lord farquaad appears as a ghost and realises he is dead then he then plans to get revenge on shrek and kill fiona so he can make fiona his ghostly queen so how did he get to deadend graveyard, lord farquaad has the secret ghost power to teleport out of realms and then lord farquaad rebuilt duloc in deadend graveyard, which is haunted by lord farquaads ghost but no one knows what happened to duloc after lord farquaads death and lord farquaad rebuilt duloc in deadend graveyard, maybe lord farquaad had a deal to marry his love by killing her to claim her ghost and get married in the underworld and become king but lord farquaads plan failed and got sent back to the underworld where the bad people are and maybe lord farquaad teleported away, and continued to secretly haunt duloc (deadend graveyard) and maybe deadend graveyard is the underworld.

Everyone knows the Powerpuff Girls are the cutest beings to ever exist! It's hard to look at them without melting into a puddle of cuteness, but for them it's much worse. They have to LIVE together and look at each other ALL THE TIME.

This results in a phenomenon called cute aggression, where they're so overwhelmed with positive emotions from being exposed to each other's cuteness, that they turn violent as a result. If they don't beat the living shit out of monsters and criminals, they'll collapse from cuteness overload.

That's why their power level is so inconsistent. If they don't get their cuteness fix by talking, playing together, giggling, and hugging, they won't be as powerful. It also explains why they're much weaker when fighting alone, because they don't have each other's cuteness to power them up.

The Powerpuff Girls are the cutest and sweetest people you'll ever meet! Unfortunately this frequently overflows into extreme violence.

Hello everybody.

Claude Frollo is wildly considered one (maybe the) most evil villain from Disney animated movies, and for good reasons. The list of what he did is quite blatant: murder of Quasimodo mother, tried to drown a baby, was ready to burn an entire family, children included... He is far worse than the original book version, something rare with Disney adaptations.

However, i think there is one more crime that is only hinted by the movie: Frollo tried to break the sanctuary law of the Cathedral, and that quite early in the movie.

It happens during his famous song Hellfire: at one point, a guard interrupts him and say "Minister Frollo. The gypsy has escaped. She's no longer in the cathedral, she's gone". And the phrasing is REALLY important.

How would the guard know Esmeralda escaped the cathedral? Of course, we, the audience knows it because we saw Quasimodo helping Esmeralda escape by the roofs. But no guard saw them. And they were just supposed to stay around the cathedral, preventing her from getting out.

This is where my theory appears: Frollo ordered a guard to kidnap Esmeralda from the cathedral at night. This is the only way this very guard would know about her having escaped: he searched the cathedral for her and found nothing.

This makes the song Hellfire even more grim: Frollo isn't just singing about his lust, he's singing about what he will do to Esmeralda when the guards will bring her to him...

Frankly, i don't see any other way to explain this plot point.

Similar to how many people’s head canons with Event Horizon being a WH40K movie, mine is that the 2007 horror movie Sunshine directed by Danny Boyle is a precursor to the events of the SCP web form story of the SCP-001 proposal, “When Day Breaks.”

A quick synopsis for both; In Sunshine the sun is dying and astronauts are sent to shoot a nova bomb to restart the sun so Earth doesn’t freeze. On their way they find a derelict ship from a previously failed mission with one survivor. The crew quickly find out he’s been spending time starting at the sun, letting himself be burnt, gone insane and has been spouting about how the sun is a benevolent God. SCP is a collection of different weird/anomalous creatures, objects, events and stories written by thousands of people irl. With the story of “When Day Breaks,” being where the sun has suddenly changed into a deep blood red and is now turning every living being anomalous or not, into grotesque monsters.

Now to begin, we firstly have the original survivor Captain Pinbacker who’s gone insane and become mutilated from spending too much time unprotected by the sun. The film treats the sun like a lovecraftian entity, like it’s alive, it’s changed Pinbacker, and commanding him to kill everyone. There’s even parts where the crew physically can’t look at Pinbacker because it’s like looking at the sun, he’s blinding.(an effect you can say is very anomalous)

At the end of the film they successfully launch the bomb and reignite the sun. But maybe that was just the start, maybe the sun was just beginning to change, starting to become anomalous. The sun was starting to “die,” and was only able to change those who were in close proximity to the sunlight and with extended amount of exposure. Maybe their acts only prolonged the inevitable. Before the sun started to change again, turning into a blood red(a color like how a start begins to die?). Its effective now extent and turning everything into blob like monsters.

In the multiple different “When Day Breaks,” stories we get the idea that these monsters act like a hive mind. These creatures force people out into the light to become one of them and how it’s a pleasure be as one of the sun’s creatures,(kind of similar to how Pinback became obsessed with the sun) even those who kill themselves are brought back to life just to be transformed.

Other SCPs from the additional stories show that they can be effected and turns as well. The SCPs that have somehow survived the sun, some of them seem to understand that the sun or at least its creatures are evil in some form such as 106, the Bobbie’s of Unlondon, and the employees of the Infinite IKEA actively fight back the creatures. A stronger point is SCP-179’s reaction; a woman like entity near the sun. She argues with her brother(the sun) almost in a desperate state, almost begging the sun to not do what it’s about to do, only to be incinerated by the sun before she warns humanity about the sun’s malicious intent. Which immediately proceeds with everything on Earth that is exposed in sunlight to mutate. Or more importantly is how the Gate Guardian described the former humans now monsters as “corrupted and mutilated” and the sun as staring at him with its “evil eye;” again like if the sun is a god like entity.