Annihilation and Decoding Metaphor 

W reference

@@RozWBrazel I haven't watched more than a few episodes of Parks & Rec, but this sounds like a Ron Swanson quote.

😂 I love that you obviously hate irony too.

@@yahoodotcom5321 I do not. But the irony of the quote is so obvious, that I couldn't help but see it. Hence my sarcastic comment about hate of irony when the OP is anything but.

Remember the reason that quote is funny is bc Moby Dick is a metaphor.

Close: the real annihilation was the friends we BECAME

*HAH* Loser! Jokes on you, I don't _have_ any friends!

The real meaning of annihilation was inside us all along.

Close enough.

Storing the incorporeal essence of every living human inside a giant supernatural robot, letting the Earth get destroyed, then using one tortured boy as the lever to reincorporate every human back into reality.

Pretty much the human condition in a sentence.

My Daughters are asleep in the other room. I dont want to think about this quote lol

Am I the only one who thinks this quote is where Dan's analysis falls down a little? Pain isn't immortal. "Time heals all wounds." "This too shall pass."

Those are nice sentiments but having been alive for some time now I find them to be generally untrue. They imply that the pain we experience ceases and suddenly it is as if it was never present. Pain provokes a response to change. This movie for me was about that moment when such a change is profound enough to effectively be called annihilation. We don't always recognize it in real time but often realize later that we are not who we were before. There is a terror in that realization, at least for me.

@@ravecrab hahaha, he's not referring to individual pain but our collective and constant state of suffering as in, humanity as a whole. Even if your particular situation improves, another will eventually emerge to take its place

there still could be a sequel lol, the movie is an adaptation of the first book of a trilogy, probably won't happen though

I mean, he sold me with Butler

@@cameronclaypool9133 with the way this movie ended? no fucking way lmao

@@andrewblain5202 I read the first book but I've yet to read the other two, but from what I understand they are not direct sequels. They just all take place in the "Southern Reach". But also, the point of the movie was the message. I don't quite see what a sequel would do.

@@russkiishpion8892 The books are definitely a complete 3-part story. Each is quite distinct in tone and approach, but each picks up where the prior left off.

And the video is literally just someone poorly summarizing what happened, but not INTERPRETING it. (i know I'm replying to a year old comment..)

Good lord....those "analysis" videos up front were nauseating.... Simpletons explaining complexity to simpletons. I loved the movie...and it lead me to read the trilogy of books, which is.....let's just say, NOT obvious. And that's the point. There's some deep stuff going on in the books....and it left me very frustrated and confused at times. But then I couldn't stop thinking about it...and kept reading. And then....I finally finally "got" it. It all made sense. But I can't tell you what it was that I got it. I know it. But I somehow can't communicate it to anyone else. And the fact a few books could do that to me....is pretty damn cool. I actually think the movie does an excellent job of distilling the flavor of the books. Mostly the first one of course....but it was able to visually show the mental world of the text very well.

@@thomasmaagaard They’re literally just for people who don’t want to watch the movie.

@@avedic I relate to this.. Even though I might know what something is about and might 'get it', i usually find it hard to put into words and explain to others.. I would love to know what some professionals like psychologists would say about it. I struggle with this with general things as well. I truly believe that I get it and am able to think about it on a deeper level, but find it very hard to convey these thoughts to others with words.. Makes me think if I'm just pretending and using a fake mental image of understanding and trying to convince myself I understand when in reality I really don't understand it.. It is quite frustrating

@@WhiteKnuckleRide512 I don't think that's usually the case. A lot of videos about movies (e.g. the much derided CinemaSins ones) are mostly watched by people who haven't seen the movies the videos are talking about. However, Ending Explained videos are specifically for people who watched a movie, didn't get it, and are now looking for someone else to explain it to them.

Hey, that was me in high school and now I can't get enough of this type of analysis. People can change :), thankfully.

@@Zarex10101 hell yeah dude, rock on

@@Happy00Fangirl My issue in high school is that we were tested on interpretations as if they were fact.

@@LimabeanStudios Yes. I have always enjoyed this kind of analysis, but it can be so subjective. For example, I remember going over "Waiting for Godot" in high school and it was given a completely religious interpretation. Then I watched Philosophy Tube explain how it is almost a stage version of the Myth of Sisyphus and I was like "Oh... OH!" I know I would have gotten a horrid grade if I had not regurgitated what my teacher had told us in class, but it remains the least satisfying interpretation of the work that I have heard. The problem is when you get a class/teacher that does so bad that you are left with an eternally bad taste in your mouth--that leads to the anti-intellectualism as mentioned in this video.

I wish we wouldn't write as much as we do in my Literature classes - I have a hard time processing what the teacher is saying since I also have to keep up with her (she barely leaves people enough time to catch up) and my fingers sometimes hurt by the end of class.

Plus, most of the movie you are fed scenes of cells dividing. The refraction and flow of the water on the glass is the only time it looks like two cells meeting and joining together as one. Also happens to be right before she reunites with Kane at the end.

But the aliens...

😂

Wait people really don't know that water does that? How do they not see that every time they drink from a glass? I literally just sloshed my water bottle around and the water moved like that Also I noticed a theme of surfaces refracting light over people who came back from the shimmer. At the beginning with Kane's glass and the plastic tarp we see him through when he gets sick, and then at the end with Lena. I thought that was interesting

Excuse me, but Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs told me that water DOES in fact have DNA. Are you telling me that a children's movie is scientifically inaccurate?

That's amazing. What did you say in the comment?

@@APaleDot "(In referance to the first part of the video) There are *many* different types of ways to digest and explore a film. To suggest that there has to be an artistic exploration of a film is kind of... restricting. At least in my opinion. If the plot is engaging and the events are exciting enough, people will be drawn to the questions the set of events pose. I get that this movie is dense in metaphor and symbolism and all that good sfuff. BUT, to suggest that *deciding* not to focus on that particular aspect of the movie is somehow a worse apprach to digesting it... I dunno... It just rubs me the wrong way. I posit that the immense interest in the plot by other movie reveiwers isn't always a rejection of other more "intelectual" analyses of the given media, but rather exactly as it appears on the surface. A reveiw of the engaging plot. Which in my opinion is no lessar than a deeper dive. They're two different types of anlyses and should be treated as such. Also I really want another 50 shades reveiw, get on that Dan."

@@Black_pearl_adrift and yet I still see some truth in your original opinion

Yeah. 100% I'm vibing that with you.

What does your opinion look like now?

My favorite part is that it's Oorah that Marines say and not the very clearly pronounced Hoorah with an H that's in the trailer.

Next time I get truly bored, I'm going to have to google what Swoffard made of the sequel.

I had to google "jarhead 2" and watch the trailer because I thought maybe this was some elaborate skit that Dan put together as a joke. lmao unbelievable...

funniest part. didn't even think it was real.

deliciousjammusic Just wait until you see Jarhead 3: The Siege

Amazing line

Blood. Blood. Blood. Blood.

"I fear the subtext is rapidly becoming - text"

@@bengoodwin2988 and bits of sick

You and he were... buddies, weren't you?

It do be like that sometimes.

The Critical Drinker's Annihilation video got recommended to me after I watched Dan's video. I would love to see Dan's reaction to that video, his head might explode.

Superior asshat.

​@@robertshay8609 something something women bad *burp*

@@robertshay8609 Is it crazy that I like this channel AND Critical Drinker at the same time?

Same. I was so disappointed with the commentary I found, I basically tucked the movie away in a corner of my mind and stopped thinking about it, because I didn't want to further damage that feeling I had when I watched. And so I completely denied myself that very engagement, and I just watched this video like a real-time puzzle "oooh, that's right, THAT'S what I saw! I didn't even realize! But it's no wonder it resonated with me so much... ^.^;

So much this. Dan is one of the handful of youtubers that plucked out my obsession with "objective" thematic analysis and helped me enjoy art a lot more.

I think I'm right there with you. Logged into my gmail just to leave, I believe, my first youtube reply here just to acknowledge it and log it somehow as a point of clarity and a-ha in my life. I've *enjoyed* ambiguous endings previously, but struggled to explain the appeal to others who didn't quite catch on. The single sentence from Dan gave me chills. Like, that's it. Ding. Anyway, thanks for putting that into your own words too here.

Out of curiosity, what was the show? I know all too well the void that I feel when a favorite tv show ends

@@khazz33 twas actually a fiction podcast lol, the magnus archives

chcuc Let me explain is ok at times and downright terrible sometimes

Though oddly enough accidentally accurate. Like if their eyes indicate this new codependency forged in their shared trauma their kid probably ain't growing up free of that baggage.

Why?

On the, uh, diegetic level, it IS a reasonable assumption -- but as Dan so brilliantly points out, that isn't what the the movie was "about."

Meanwhile, showing a scene from months and months ago in movie time as if it adds credence, because showing the actual ending wouldnt be supportive enough that theyre gonna 'bone

That's pretentious bullshit is what it is. Your "pain" is not immortal, just as neither the "everything we live for" is. That statement is as deep as a 14 year old who has cutting problems.

@@Sartoris69 What's your deal?

@@Sartoris69 I completely disagree. My life is basically just one trauma after another with moments of happiness sprinkles in there. My pain from those experiences never leave me while I don't even remember a third of the good times or the things that caused the happiness died. The things that make me keep going die while I will have to cope with my traumas forever. I will never be cured and act like a version of myself without trauma. That is impossible. I will always have to treat and cope with my anxiety, depression, and PTSD. Everything I love and cherish will die or fade awag while my pain lives on inside of me forever.

@@Sartoris69 then you missed the entire point, which makes you sound like a 16 year old who thinks being cynical, mean, and rejecting philosophy makes you smart and rational. This isn't even controversial. "Pain" and trauma change you. They can stick to you far longer than any regular or even joyful event can. Abused people can become like their abusers against their will. It's as old as the stories about revenge and rage consuming you. About the cyclical nature of violence. About how not letting go will only posion you. Have you ever felt the horror of having lashed out in anger because of your pain, only to realise that you've hurt innocent people around you?

@@sitabita262 well then what do you live for? THAT is still with you and will be with you forever (actually no cuz ur not gonna live forever anyways so your pain is not gonna live forever either)

When I was younger I had reoccurring nightmares of a thing, a monster, chasing me. In my dreams I would run in various ways knowing I couldn't really escape. For a decade I had this thing in my dreams. I went to a dream interpreter who said I was running from parts of myself. In a time filled with therapy and soul searching I had the dream again. I instinctively started to run. But then I thought I shouldn't run. The thing will eventually catch up to me anyway. I should accept it. In the woods, among bare trees and fallen leaves, the thing came. It ripped me apart with claws and teeth. But I wasn't scared. It didn't hurt. I was happy. I was relieved. I was fulfilled. I woke up and haven't had the dream of the thing chasing me again. And I don't think it's because I let the dream thing get me. I think it's because in my waking life I had finally learned to accept and embrace the parts of myself that I didn't like. Metaphor is a powerful thing to us humans. It's alarming how much I related to this movie. But then I think it universally applies to the human experience... It's your relationship to the metaphor that determines how much you take from it.

I think what you've described here is the exact cultural war that lives all over our modern world. Some people openly embrace change as growth while others reject it as surrender. The way we value and approach uncomfortable realities says everything about who we are. Look at the pandemic - half of us said I'll go with the flow and do what I'm told is safe, while the other half of us fought even the slightest adjustment every step of the way as to appear strong and independent in the face of adversity. The right response is probably somewhere in between the two, with my personal leaning being more towards transformation than resistance. But rapid, unskeptical assimilation is a huge danger as well. I think it's very impressive that you were able to have this realization about yourself.

I love Josie. I think i'd die like her. I hope I will. As someone with severe, chronic (probably incurable) pain, I hope that when the time comes, I'll be calm & at peace with my decision. Each month, my pain grows and so too does the depression that accompanies it. It destroys whomever you thought you were, you can't work, can't leave the house, can't even talk about it because it increases the pain. Sometimes, even breathing is hell. Yet still, even now, id prefer the pain to the severe depression (& body dysmorphia) I had from age 15-25. Despite how much closer I am to death, I still want to live & I know I have worth, though I recognise it may be untenable at some point. I no longer fear death as I once did. I couldn't imagine dying without scars.

Came here to say I feel the exact same way. The scene struck me as incredibly beautiful and exactly how I would want to die if I got a choice. Not so much for the fate of any of the rest of the cast

Watching this movie and particularly that scene for the first time in theaters was a surreal experience. I relate to this comment.

But it wasn't the only part of Sheppard that survived - their memory of her did too. Her empathy, thoughtfulness & courage. She may have died screaming, but that isn't how I remember her. They say people die twice: first, when your heart stops beating and second, when someone utters or thinks your name for the last time.

@@uncletyrone Thanks, though I don't read books, I'll look it up for a summary.

@@skullsaintdead Not to mention it is very very strongly implied that the white deer mother and child the surviving members see is a kind of reincarnation of Sheppard and her child.

@@chrisbarnett5303 Interesting, never thought of that, thanks!

I just watched the movie, as it was on RU-vid Movies, the other day, and hadn't thought about it much, but as soon as I saw this video, I knew I had to watch it. I recognize time and time again that I am a very literal person, and that nuance is lost on me, and I'm grateful that people like Dan take the time to help in cases like these. I'm not very media literate, and I worry about the problem of assuming "the blue curtains represent depression", if you know what I mean.

That was my favorite part too.

Yeah, but do the aliens fu-

I see your Annihilation and I raise you one Neon Genesis Evangelion

oh so "Being Alive" from Company?

@@belegl.7721 i call your neon genesis with one roadside picnic

"all the people trying to decide what 'really happened' at the end of Inception, when the point was that it didn't matter whether it was real or not" Whether it mattered to the character is one thing. Whether it is real or not is an unknown, and by that virtue alone matters. Mysteries exist to be explained. Problems exist to be solve. Questions exist to be answered. The unknown exists to be made known.

Inception's main thing is that you're not allowed to know whether a scene is a dream or reality. Characters come out of nowhere and are where they need to be; scenes in the film just start from anywhere - just like a dream. This means that the spinning top, loaded dice, and any of the character's totems are irrelevant, since the ambiguity begins from the first scene, not just the ending! Ambiguity is the language of Inception!

​@@jliller There is no correct answer to this question because it a question about the "facts" of a fictional plot. It was deliberately made ambiguous by the creator. The fictional world of Inception does not exist apart from the movie, so if the movie itself doesn't answer a question then the answer does not exist. You can make up an answer for yourself but that "solves" nothing.

@@jliller That only applies to real life. For instance, the whole plot of The Turn of the Screw (book) is purposefully made ambiguous by the unreliable narrator created by the author. The author wrote the book so it's impossible to know whether the ghosts exist or not. There IS no right answer, because the ambiguity is the goal, so as to expand the story's possibility of generating meaning. Same with Inception. You can't solve a mystery when there is no mystery to be solved, when it was created ambiguous.

And here I thought the top was running for so long that it meant that it was a dream. Have you ever known a top to spin for that long?

Now we need a sequel to "all quiet on the western front" with the same treatment lmao, im sure someone can convince one of the suit to fund it.

GentleBaguette And then the closing chapter in the trilogy. Annihilation nation

Or, Alien Anihalation.

Or #3 Annihalation At a Later Time, In Comparison to the First Two Movies

Annihilate HARDER

lostintechnicolor Then Annhialation FASTER. Then Annhialation STRONGER.

I think they're just people who only see metaphor in movies as a direct reference. Not ragging on them, I've been heavy into films since my early teens and it took me until my 30s to make those kinds of reads on movies. Especially on existential subjects. As, in my opinion, you can understand those concepts as a younger person, but you don't really fear them until you're closer to them.

Honestly, I don't think it's on them. It's on the viewers. You can't explain the success of CinemaSins by excusing their process of making videos. People watch this shallow bullshit because they're more easily entertained by the shallow bullshit than by deeper, interesting, and well supported readings. Why? If I were to guess, it's because that's how the internet works. They offer bite-size bits of amusement that are entertaining now, and forgotten tomorrow, just like your twitter feed, reddit browsing, and memes. Sitting down to actually think about how a piece of media affected you, ain't nobody got time for that. And if that's what sells, then sell it.

A lot of youtube "criticism" seems to completely dissolve into plot discussion and it's a plague. Positive videos are nothing but explanations (which at its deepest are an analogy). Negative videos are nothing but plothole nitpicking. Anything about politics dissolves into thermian arguments. The big issue is that when this will blow up, films will react to it, and movies will get terrible because of it.

Yeah, I always got the vibe from sites like Looper and WatchMojo that they were more concerned about meeting a deadline and getting clicks than making quality content. The individuals don't have much of an excuse unless they're just trying to garner clicks themselves. By the way, I love your video on Moral Orel.

​@@PauLtus_B I think it just comes from the fact that anyone can post video's about any topic and while that is in principal a wonderful thing, it also means that there is no vetting people for basic knowledge let alone any level of expertise. There is also the fact that many movies do lend themselves well to more surface level analysis and people try to apply the same formula to every film they talk about.

My life keeps finding ways back to Undertale, I swear.

@@littlefieryone2825 Same. Can't say i'm complaining tho ! 😊

NGL, seeing "It's me." was chilling.

Ffs, it’s not that good of a game. It’s a pretty good game, sure.

​@WhiteKnuckleRide512 who asked you? 🤔

I know right? You'd think that the message and themes of the pointlessness of war would be remembered but... Yeah. They weren't. At all. CUZ GUNS!!!

I didn’t even know there was one sequel. I wish I didn’t know.

Keith Ballard Next you where going to tell me you did not need to know there are Scorpion King sequels.

I didn't even know there was ONE sequel.... ugggh....

Get me off this planet

I learnt the same lession too late in my life, but you know what? Just being able to open oneself to new ideas and let them change you makes you a Jedi in terms of intelligence. Lots of people are and remain closed to that. We are still going to get "wrong" or miss many metaphores but that's not the main point. It doesn't matter if we get them wrong, the point is to be open to them.

you should read the book the movie is based on. its very different in many ways, and it might be a fun and interesting exercise for you to see familiar events echoed and changed. also, in my opinion, its just a really good book. the start of a trilogy thats good beginning to end.

I love reading this comment on this video cuz it demonstrates exactly both what the movie and Dan are saying. Watching the thing, taking in what it says, applying it to the way you absorb media, and changing the way you see things. Like--- that's literally it, man. :) Nothing to be embarrassed about at all. ;)

This demonstrates why I hate that "lol the color of the curtains!!" English class meme. Not because I think it's bad that some people don't want that from the media they consume. But because I think a lot of people shy away from thematic interpretations of their own or works that encourage them make their own conclusions because they have a fear that they'll do it wrong or that they're not smart enough and "will mess it up" somehow. And I feel like that meme is saying "you are as dumb as you think, don't even try, just laugh at the people who tried before you" It's like "don't try laugh at people who try"

Same. Thank you for your comment. I lost my partner and everything changed in so many layers and ways I hadn't expected . The film is beautiful and weird and amazing but it touched me so deeply and I couldn't put my finger on why either. Much love internet stranger, your comment meant something to me

Agreed, I lost my sister to suicide, and it's almost like the world I live in is a SPLIT version of the one I used to. As if I have to experience it all over again and relearn things I already knew. I like new things, am excited by different things, have different impressions and values in life. Its inexplicable, but this movie actually does a good job of explaining it from a science fiction perspective believe it or not.

I wasn't close to my father growing up. But things changed after my freshman year and he saw i was cutting myself. He became one of my biggest supporters. After he had a stroke and basically died, I starting using his "-isms", stuff he used to say, phrases. I wear one of his belts now. I want to learn about the things he loved. I wish I could have appreciated them, appreciated him, sooner.

My mom got cancer while my marriage was falling apart. In the course of one month, literally everything in my life was unrecognizable. I became unrecognizable in the face of the trauma. I took a long time to "come back", but even then I was very changed. Grief is powerful, and being changed by it isn't an indicator of weakness, it's a signal of being human.

@@lockekappa500 I am so, so sorry you lost your sister. I lost my brother to suicide. I already see that I can never re-become the person I was before his death, all I can do is change the way I need to keep my soul alive. sending love, stranger.

The books made _way less sense._ They were more like "The Rapture as Scripted by an Eco-Terrorist" than anything as metaphorical as this movie.

You'll probably love Polygon's own deconstruction of the Hero's Journey monomyth courtesy of Brian David Gilbert. Search for "Unraveled Kingdom Hearts"

Ironically, I feel like too many people miss the point of the Hero with a Thousand Faces - and all of Campbell’s work. He’s not trying to “flatten” culture, but draw lines of similarities between wildly different cultures (and, since he was writing in the 40s and 50s, in a SERIOUSLY separatist America) to demonstrate that there are core concepts in human nature, psychology, and spirituality that are universal, regardless of the superficial differences. In other words, people who call it oversimplified are doing the same as the “solve the ending” crowd.

@@romxxii okay it’s a funny video but calling it a deconstruction is just pretentious.

What problem do you have with Hero with a Thousand Faces? I feel like its a more or less perfect and, at the time, groundbreaking deconstruction of a specific type of story.

@@phastinemoon I think hero with a thousand faces does it, but goes a little too far if that makes sense. If it's a looser framework, then I'd perfectly agree, but it seems like he's trying to apply too much to his framework.

That’s because art is open to interpretation. It shouldn’t be spoon fed to us. If that’s what it means to you then that’s what it means to YOU. Doesn’t mean you’re wrong.

José Diaz Yes but not all interpretations are equal. Some are based more on the text/subtext of the work than others. While there is no way to definitively say which interpretation is right, there is nothing wrong with seeking out someone who may have better understanding of the text then you do. Thats how I found this video and I’m very grateful for it.

You're not alone though as of late there's many many video essays I've found on this exact point, if you have the ability to see deeper into things past surface value you can easily see the true meanings. And I doubt Ari aster would make a shallow film about a spooky demon

When it comes to interpretations, like everyone has their own, and not one is necessarily right/wrong. Reminds me of that Robert Frost poem, think it had to do with walking in the snowy woods or something. But everyone was trying to find it's "hidden" meaning, saying it meant one thing or another. When Frost was asked what was it's meaning. He said that there was no hidden meaning. It's just a poem about walking in the snowy woods. Take that as you will but I always found that kinda funny.

Search for Ryan Hollinger. He makes analysis on horror films and is one of the few horror fans who actually takes the time to interpret movies as more than "monster A kills person B with C skills, cool right?"

Yeah, the NGE video is great. I've run into too many people that don't understand NGE beyond a surface level and I get frustrated like Dan is here in regards to others and Annihilation.

OST Talk can you elaborate on that ?

@@restingsadface People tend to see evangelion as just a cool story about a boy destroying the world robots. Nobody seems to see how Shinji is a deconstruction-at his core-of toxic ideas of self loathing that can ruin the world around us and isolate us from people who genuinely care about or want to get close to us. There are many other ways to interpret Eva than this, but this I feel is the interpretation that most people tend to ignore. To be fair, a lot of that ignorance has to do with people getting caught up in the religious symbolism and focusing on the Christ allegory and rapture story.

@@assuming9735 *actually ending the series on an episode of character exploration that explicitly talks about how human interaction shapes us and teaches us about ourselves. * "Oh wow, cool robots!"

Probably because if they accepted the explicit point of the show - that avoiding pain and personal growth for a life of obsession and fantasy will destroy you - it would require self-reflection for the anime fandom as a whole.

It's been a long time since I saw this movie, and this review suddenly showed up in my replies. Do you think the reviewers that don't understand, in a way mirror the people interviewing Lena?

"failed to read the literal events... there are no duplicates" what is the thing that is "taking on the properties of" Kane? the thing that came out of the core, replicated Kane's appearance, watched Kane immolate himself, and then came back alone in his place? if your contention is that the literal events are showing that pre existing matter is just taking on aspects of other pre existing matter, like a tree acting like a deer - what pre existing matter is taking on Kane?

"there is no aliens or duplicates in the movie" - what a dumb comment. The film literally explicitly shows you that it's alien. It literally explicitly shows you duplication. And it might as well be a new kind of radiation? You obviously have no understanding of what radiation is or does, like absolutely zero.

@@AexisRai I don't know how the original commenter meant it but the video frames it as 'the being' were already a part of every person in the shimmer. The shimmer just allows it to seep out and recollect in its own form. I'm not as strong at analysis as Folding Ideas but I hope I have some not too fan-fictiony thoughts. I think the point is pretty much about the continious experience of self contrasting with accepting a past self as the same person or not. Maybe Ship of Theseus applied to your own psyche or physical body. Maybe the new Kane are the parts of kane that were left in Lena or others in the shimmer being given a form again while one form of kane died. A theme from different media I like is how we aren't just the story we tell ourselves but the collective impressions we left on others. Like the burden/experience with the tattoo transfered to Lena maybe a part of Kane transfered in and out of her as well. There are many creatures/flora absorbed into the shimmer already amalgamating but societal conciousness also contains amalgamations of monster stories, 'devils' and other personifications of things that should be feared. So instead of seeing it as an alien lifeform impersonating humanoid or other lifeforms its our shared ideas of fear taking metaphyiscal shape in the special threshold and reflecting everyones trauma in themselves back at them.

​@@jnbsp3512i dont remember if it was in the movie, but in the book lena's/ biologist's husband calls her "ghost bird" because she 'disappears' so much, and eventually the biologist and ghost bird become two similar but distinct characters when exposed to the shimmer. i think youre totally right that it allows our borders to change-either by melting away or solidifying completely. what separates our selves from the world, and what keeps that self a single cohesive unit, can change.

who tha heck has a steam profile picture? you cool mang

Same. I showed it to my best friend and all she could say was “I really didn’t understand that.” It was disappointing to say the least.

​@@njribto be fair, both statements are reasonable. It is weird and also kind of esoteric. That's not necessarily a bad thing though. I also missed basically all of this when I watched it but I still thoroughly enjoyed it, even knowing there was a lot I was missing.

Yeah, some people just cannot consume art lol

​@@EmeraldLavigneOr, they have different art they can consume. Hey everyone, I found the elitist that wants to define how to consume media!!!

I was going to say that same thing. I felt like that was the movie at it's most blunt, hitting the viewer over the head with the fact that our self-destruction doesn't have some deep purpose, it simply happens and changes us, and we still have to face what it creates. Like cancer. It's pretty much the film dropping its thesis statement.

It is amazing how tightknit youtube really is.

So weird seeing this

i subscribed to this channel because of this.

Dear @Philosophy Tube I cannot take you seriously as an intellectual if you continue your support of antifa and their actions.

@@calebl6609 lol.

Thanks for sharing man!

Thanks for your comment, I wanted to say that reading this gave me the most vivid feeling of sonder that ive ever felt.

If you enjoy that theme, I highly recommend the book.

That scene stuck with me because of her last words, transcribed from my memory: "Imagine being afraid and in pain, and those are the only parts of you to survive. I wouldn't like that, not at all." Going with the themes talked about in this video, this might be analogous to great trauma, "annihilating" most of you, only leaving a damaged part of you, that in the worst case will affect and hurt others around you, like when the rest of the group realised the bear absorbed part of the killed woman. In that context, her surrender could be an opt out by literal suicide, or metaphorical for using her life to instead leave something beautiful behind. That way, she chooses to avoid not only the trauma, but to also avoid having that trauma and pain refracted and spread.

I see Lena's journey as the best, if not ideal, outcome for confronting pain and trauma. You accept it for what it is, but *then* work through it. With Josie when she surrendered, I would argue that maybe surrender can be beautiful, but only if you are willing to continue on with the next step of working through it. Josie only surrendered, and then it consumed and ultimately defined everything that she was.

france be like:

If you look at death and rebirth simply as CHANGES, they can be beautiful indeed. Surrender to change instead of resisting it. We're all constantly changing through our experiences and it's just the way life/nature works :)

Luan Something Neither did I, it is great detail, but I can’t help but feel that this thematic subtlety does the film a disservice. I'll be honest, I enjoyed the film and enjoyed talking about is meaning with a friend, but I missed a lot of this detail that could've been more informative for me as a viewer. Without wanting to hate on the film, the expectation the film has of people's ability to pick up subtle film language does encourage the misreadings that this video fairly criticizes.

I noticed it, but never on Anya. It's funny, because spotting that detail made me feel real clever, like yes movie I see your obvious telegraphing of a bog-standard sci-fi horror "twist" ending - right up until I saw this video and realised I had completely failed to spot everything the movie was actually telegraphing.

@@RichardMinkley I see your point, but I think it's good that a film this challenging got made. I'll be the first to say, I didn't get *any* of the metaphor when I watched Annihilation. But in reading up on it I now have a better understanding of storytelling as a whole. It can be upsetting to feel out of your depth, but if you never are then you won't grow. I think as I've grown older I find myself less and less willing to give films more than one watch. Annihilation really demands you think about it and maybe rewatch it to pick up on small details and callbacks. And it's one of the most thought-provoking things I've seen in a long time. Also it didn't test well and as a result didn't get a cinema release outside of US, Canada and China. So we might not get something this subtle again for a long time.

I noticed it.

Richard Minkley saying a movie does a disservice to itself by assuming its audience its people interested and intelligent enough to pick on the details it’s like saying that studying is a waste of time.

@@KickinRadTopHat Dan (& art critics) morphed us by injecting a piece of themselves into us

@@KickinRadTopHat Dan's problem is that art can be interpreted on many levels. The people he berates aren't wrong because they interpret it as a science fiction horror story. That's what it is ffs. The themes he sees in it are there for him but there are different themes that the film maker ignored from the novels that the film was adapted from. So which themes are from the author and which from the film maker and why are those themes any more valid than the themes the movie goers saw in the film? If the films sole concern was the transformation journey of a cancer patient a documentary would have been a better vehicle. That theme may be there but it is first and foremost a commercial piece of mass entertainment and to pretend that it's more than that primarily is not to understand how important it is to have a good story. The brothers Karamazov has large themes too but it's first a work of fiction not a metaphor. Dan isn't overthinking it but he is being overly judgemental about those who just want to see a good horror movie. Dracula had a lot of themes in it but it's also a good story. The people who see this as a good story are just as right as Dan is. I. Fact I think the author would be glad to see that the story is itself compellinh

Being science-oriented is exactly the paradigm from which one should analyze art. You just have to think of things like a statistician.

@@baronvonbeandip I doubt there is a single way to analyze art that is more correct than any other. Art says to you whatever you think it says to you whether the artist intended that or not. That said I'd be interested to learn how one analyzes the Mona Lisa statistically.

@@jlrinc1420 The people he berates are wrong because they ignore a fundemental aspect of the movie and reduce everything down to the most literal interpretation. It is bad critique.

"The fight becomes not how to make it through the pain but how to make it through the pain being a person we still want to be." That's a wonderful way of phrasing a very personal experience, thank you.

Your comment moved me. I guess like the film, every interaction we have shapes us and reforms us in some way.

This was a darkly beautiful comment, & even kind of recontextualized that part of this video (a video which recontextualized a movie 😅) I also have 2 neurological pain disorders, & I don't know if it's affected me the same way. Maybe it's because my 1st condition means that I've been in a significant amount of pain every second of every day for over a decade, & have by necessity forgotten what it was like to be a child whose pain was entirely emotional. I didn't just change because of pain; I literally grew from a teenager into an adult. & while I would give anything to undo the spinal cord injury that disabled me, I'm also a better, stronger, happier person now than I was at 16. I've always had a really strong sense of self, even as a small child, & it feels like the pain takes things away from me externally more than internally. But maybe I just haven't considered how losing those external physical abilities/experiences/social life affects me as a person. I wish I could talk to you about it. You seem incredibly insightful, & there are aspects of pain disorders that even the kindest outsiders can never fully empathize with. You'll probably never read this comment, but I'm @Lailette_Art on Twitter if you ever want to talk about pain with someone else who feels it.

Dalaila Rose - Ha! I read your comment! The internet surprises us all yet again. I don’t do the twitting, so I can’t find you there. But I’m sure we can find a way to connect. Though keep your expectations low, I have little energy for those closest to me let alone for internet strangers no matter how endearing. I think perhaps a difference between us is that my condition, though it was always present at a low background level, only came on so strong I could no longer ignore it and pretend everything was fine in my early 30s....a couple of years after I had married. I had a bevy of close friends and active hobbies and insane side adventures (summer fun with a fake blood slip and slide, anyone?). I loved my job. I was fit and all was well with my world until it wasn’t. And eventually nothing was. My daughter was very young as my condition worsened. That was a terrible situation, and is heartbreaking near daily still. I am not the wife, mother, friend, woman, human I wanted - still want - to be and I don’t know if I ever will be able to be her - to be ME again. Sometimes I have a good day and for an hour or two I feel a glimmer of the real me twinkle at me from somewhere deep inside, too buried to shake off the dirt and show myself. But mostly I don’t even feel the me I was and was becoming inside of myself anymore. But I keep up hope. I need that hope. I really effing liked me. This person is kinda crap. I’m fortunate to have a husband that remains by my side. Most men would have divorced their wives with what I have put him through. Not just the fear and torment, but our savings is gone, retirement gone, all hope of travel gone, all ability to look toward a future gone bc nothing in my world has any stability. My condition has such range from sorta half a person to little more than a breathing potato that we can’t even plan for the weekend. I can rarely leave the house. I am a very lucky woman he stays by my side and finds a way to continue to love me through all of this. Well shit. I didn’t mean to ramble so damned much. I think I was trying to point out my situation is complex and more than just pain. That plus the life stage it hit at may have created an interesting difference in my pain experience vs your pain experience. I’m open to finding a way to chat if you are wanting to, though be patient w my frequent disappearing acts....it comes w my situation.

K Killjoy this may be an odd comparison, and I by no means what to trivialise your chronic pain experience. But it reminds me so much of my mental health struggles. Feeling like you’re losing yourself. Not liking who you’ve become. Feeling powerless to do what you once took for granted. Having good days and bad. I cannot even imagine on top of this struggle having the physical pain on top of everything. Thank you for the moving comment, I hope you have more good days

They may not be the same Lindsay Ellis and Dan Olsen, but they are *A* Lindsay Ellis and Dan Olsen

Yeah, but do they fu-

This comment thread is on point. Bravo, everyone, bravo!

“Are you Dan?” “...I don’t think so...are you...Lindsay?”

Welp guess I ship this now.

I don’t know if you know, but Dan actually has a video (from back his puppet days) that’s about The End of Evangelion and how it’s Anno’s reaction to backlash to the finale.

@@AaronAnaya Really? Wow, I didn't know... I'm gonna look it up now. Thank you!

@@kemp10 I can't believe you only made this comment five hours ago on a comment that's two months old. Bad behaviour on a comment forum to leave such a reply so long after the original comment.

@@RobertJW I haven't actually seen that etiquette on RU-vid at all. This just isn't a forum after all. I see comment gaps spanning months and months, sometimes years, all the time. Notifications are cheap and quick to pass. There is no 'top of the forum' here. There is no bumping.

Hey so thank you for sharing your perspective as it’s one I haven’t thought of before! If I may, I’d love to share my own perspective on this. I do not have cancer as far as I know. My father died of cancer when I was very young, and recently my mom was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer as well. To me, themes like this have helped me work through the trauma of feeling helpless as those who were meant to care for me have been slowly consumed by their own bodies and I was powerless to do anything about it while always fearing it’ll return in me or those I love (and then seeing it return in my mom). For me personally, being able to think of my personal trauma with cancer in abstract ways helps me grapple with the existential horror I’ve experienced with it. I can’t imagine the visceral pain and horror of experiencing cancer though, and I can understand being frustrated when seeing it as a narrative device. Idk. And if someone who hasn’t suffered that tragedy tries to portray it, yeah it can be frustrating, but it can also help me think about it from a new perspective when I’m stuck? Hopefully this makes sense, I realize it was kinda rambly lol

@@RobertJW If you think of RU-vid like a forum, I feel sorry for you. Edit: Also, if you comment back, I'll never read it. I don't even know where you see notifications. You speak into the void and then walk away. That is RU-vid comments.

@@RobertJW I've come eight months later to join the tiny chorus of voices disagreeing with you.

I can see someone getting one of those countertop bells to hit whenever that happens when it gets annoying enough for the other party, you can go "oh we weren't doing a Cinema Sins episode?"

Nyx Fears nyx fears!!!

time to rewatch annihilation and sob at one of the best and last great scifi stories of this century. how much no money did it make again?

well, the studio made money, the real question is: was it worth it for netflix? i hope so.

Hey girl!

it...came out last year. unless you’re talking about the subject of his introduction

Yes! I was thinking this too - I was shocked that it wasn't brought up around the 15min mark when he was talking about cancerous cells living forever. Such a good bread crumb in the movie (I happened to have just finished the book before watching Annihilation).

Dan knows how to do an ending.

but do they fucc tho?

Me too. Me too.

It's actually a reference to a specific youtuber (maybe two, only one of which I'm aware of) who has also produced a video on the film in a way that doesn't pay much attention to the metaphorical aspects. I still quite enjoy his videos, though, so I'll leave him anon.

I need someone on RU-vid to explain that ending.

Same here, saw the movie and loved it, bought the books and loved em even more!

Michael Meinberg it could be scarier... it could be CinemaSins I say before I saw Dan actually use a CinemaSins clip

It's nothing to be ashamed of if you aren't great with metaphor, I'm not usually good myself either, just don't ignore it or deliberately go out of your way to pretend it doesn't exist. I love this channel, renegade cut, kylekallgrenbhh (though he sadly rarely uploads anymore), and various other video essayists for helping me understand metaphors and messages in media I would otherwise miss or completely ignore the media itself. Also, note that any discussion about metaphor is almost always open-ended and, so long as you have a compelling reason, you are free to disagree or even outright reject someone else's interpretation.

Same

The problem with metaphors is that unskilled folks can use them as well and completely undermine their own effectiveness. It takes good art to successfully land a metaphor.

I agree wholeheartedly. I usually reach out for analysis videos to handhold me through the metaphors that I miss, especially when I 'feel' there is something there that I just can't connect myself. It's satisfying to get that confirmation "Yes, there was something here."

Everyone starts out with film as a pure literalist. Criticism, the engagement and argument of a critic as opposed to observing negative things - is a learned skill not an inherent trait. All the best critics were once someone in the audience who suddenly caught onto the actual meaning behind literal words. We all start noticing things that are bad as we see enough in a medium to develop our bar of quality, then begin to formulate ideas of what makes something good, then notice the trends and dynamics at work. There you can sit comfortably, absorb concepts and tools casually from watching/reading the essays of more developed critics, or go whole-hog and take a formal course of study. The only way to fail at media literacy is to refuse to learn - it's very easy to sit there making safe nitpicks and ironic digs CinemaSins style without the burden of having to make any positive claims, but you'll never grow from that position.

if i recall, Cj The X talks a little bit in their “The Dialectics of Rick and Morty” video and about Campbell’s actual utility versus how it’s often misused by media critics

Speaking of, I highly recommend CinemaWins to anyone looking for a much more positive take on the formula.

@@elise3323 I've seen a few videos that specifically call out CinemaSins, but they are certainly in the minority. The issue at play is that most people find thinking to be an inconvenience, so "entertainment" aimed at the lowest common denominator will always attract a sizeable audience. As is often attributed to George Carlin: "If viewers had discretion, most television shows would not be on the air."

@@elise3323 a lot of these "critics" barely understand the plot of the movies they watch, let alone the concept of themes. They're too pre-occupied with trying to come up with a recurring catchphrase to compete with the "Scene does not contain a lap dance *DING*" of the RU-vid world.

@@someguynamedrob581 Oh Georgin Carlin. Sometimes insightful, sometimes complains about the "newfangled" term pasta. At least, I think.

WTFPr0m This really hits different now

@@cosmicmist2020 Agreed 2020 is the no no one is rolling a 20 year.

Dungeons and Dragons is my memento mori.

Sounds like you're trying to be one with the foliage, bro.

Individualism is not a myth, and collectivism is not the truth... It is so weird that you kind of also ignore some of the themes here... You are still you, you aren't the collective, you are an individual, but you are also shaped by your environment... You sound like a hippie that semi-understood something relatively shallow and then used that misunderstanding to be like "we are like all connected in the universe man"

@@SioxerNikita it was a simple surface level reading, lol

@@laurafrakinroslin Even a surface level reading would not give "Individualism is a myth", comment still stands

dude thinks individualism is individuality and wants to give us a lesson

I'm literally checking movies out for the simple reason of hearing and seeing how they approach story lines. If a story line makes sense for me, no matter how mad the acting and visuals are, I can watch it from beginning to end. But give me a movie with a poor story line or incoherent plot elements - I find it quite a chore to finish said movie.

I relate a lot to not being able to pick movies (or any part of art) apart, in general :v but especially here. I saw this video in my feed, decided I should probably watch the movie first, didn’t get anything beside the plot and came back here hoping for an explanation : D which is why I don’t agree with “wilfully ignorant” part, because that ending was the only thing I felt I had figured out (which is to say I took the “shimmer lives on” route) and turns out - I did not, at all :v and I really hope I’m not alone. But then I don’t get modern art (makes me quite angry) and well, art at all, so maybe it’s just me and my (quite autistic) brain :v I’m just glad explain-me-a-piece-of-media youtube/blogs are a thing, bc otherwise I’d be missing out on so much context...

Agreed! Stalker is all over the place in this movie, from the entire setup to individual shots (the shot of the water with the fish-things was perhaps the most reminiscent of Tarkovsky). But thematically, the movies are explorations of very different topics. I feel Stalker is not so much an exploration of desire itself, but how one's faith (or lack thereof) shapes the way desire manifests and is accepted or denied. The Stalker himself is the image of a man who doubts his own faith, but who cannot bring himself to face his own doubts for fear of accepting that one's life has been meaningless. This is why he takes others to the room, but never sets foot inside it himself: he relies in the belief of others to justify his own existence. Thus, when the professor tries to destroy the room the Stalker breaks down, as the professor in his efforts to abolish faith becomes a personal enemy, the one who would bring an end to his life. Yeah, Stalker might be one of my favorite movies ever.

Wow so its actually kinda similar to Man From Earth. Never noticed that before.

A friend was convinced that the ending of Inception was an "obvious setup for a sequel". I didn't even know where to start.

the idea that he could still be dreaming is a question asked but never answered - it's incepted in the viewers mind, made to change the way you thought about the movie the entire time so it's super appropriate

I get that whether it's a dream or not no longer matters to Cobb. To me, however, the visual language of that scene says that it should matter to us, the audience. That's because we don't just catch a glimpse of the spinning totem and follow Cobb to his kids; we let Cobb do his thing and stay with the totem. What i get from this is that the final shot engages the viewer directly by asking whether it's a dream or not.

Oh yeah, this one is easily in his top 5 IMO

i find this video interesting and i come back and watch it often but i like his others alot more, after thinking alot i think the thing that rubs off on me in this video is how mean and rude he is, even with all his qualifications. with his grift videos he tends to be incredibly kind to the people and how you can fall into holes like this but just because people see something else in this film he acts quite a bit differently! this video is quite a unique video of his and i find it quite interesting and it has depth i feel needs more unravelling (i.e. i actually have to watch this film to get the full context) im just not sure i like it too much

They went at it like Barbie and Kent.

@@Quast You must mean "alien" Barbie and "alien" Kent (no relation to Kal-El), right? ;)

thank you for the comment Jesus Christ

and he sounded american too and the film is american, english people like to read E as I so it's very odd indeed. The author of the book, Jeff VanderMeer, is also american and I assume he likes to read E as I as well. It's a mistery bigger than the shimmer. XD

Emma C ... Cynical Me would say that they're mispronouncing because they never saw the actual movie and are just reading a script ...

That's an spanish pronounciation and the youtuber from that clip is latino.... it's completely normal that even if the name is american he may say it in his accent or pronounced in spanish

@@edenp3268 I mean, maybe? I can't speak for other people, but personally, I try to replicate the sound I hear, regardless of mine or their origin.

That’s because these channels are just ad revenue making machines, he probably didn’t even see the movie but read about it and made a video.

Great comment!

What? This is such a dumb comment. The only reason that things here can turn into other things, is because the earth isn't a closed system. Actually the laws of physics dictate that over time everything MUST become disordered and the same. This is what entropy is. Eventually the universe will become more and more unchanging, until eventually it's just a sparse void where no area can be determined from any other area. It can't turn into anything new, it's an impossibility to reverse. Matter and energy equivalence will remain the same - but it's structure will be so disordered that there cannot be life, eventually you won't even be able to create chemical reactions, because these require gradients. And gradients require order. Maybe something cannot become nothing (although that's not even clear - black holes might do this, there's zero evidence for Hawking radiation or similar mechanisms), but that doesn't mean that something can become anything. Quite the contrary, eventually it must all be equal to nothing in terms of function.

@@lost4468yt You have a lot to learn.

@@nothingineternityterms Thanks for such an insightful comment. Instead of actually replying to my points just imply you know better.

@@lost4468yt Cosmological entropy is, like a lot of cosmological phenomena, slow. _Really_ slow. It's such an incredibly, *unfathomably* long-lasting process that it's *_meaningless_* to humans like you or me, because even our great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchildren, if humanity's still around by then, will *still* not be observing the effects of entropy on a cosmological scale. Heck, even on the scale of our singular star system, entropy is marching on at a fraction of a fraction of a snail's pace. If you take into consideration the _meaninglessness_ of the inevitability of entropy (which is as factual as Hawking radiation) when accounting for the human experience, then it becomes pretty clear why the first law of thermodynamics is *so* much more relevant to that commenter, who commented on an analysis of a cinematic statement of the _human experience,_ yes?

ignoring the metaphor makes them feel smart because it gets them talking about all the science they research on google for 20 minutes and all those Vsauce Michael here videos where they learned more than at school or something. r/iamverysmart

So Sans was meant as a commentary on a fandom phenomenon that swallowed him whole anyway? Huh. That is wrapped in so many levels of meta that I have a headache now. Thanks.

@@KookiesNolly And if you're MauLer, spending 5+ hours obsessing over literal meaning and canon while deliberately ignoring or dismissing theme or metaphor and insulting those who bring it up makes you a giga-brained human supercomputer.

I'm very late to this comment, but this is essentially the message of homestuck, the webcomic that toby fox wrote music for in the past. It's not about the literal events of the comic but what they represent and how the reader affects the story.

bruh i feel this hard in the context of undertale fandom specifically. not just in the way the audience and fandom treat sans (although that's a big and annoying deal), but in the way the audience and fandom treat "chara." "chara" is a proxy for the player to interact with the game world from our side of the fourth wall. that's it. this is explicit in the game's text, from the fact that you literally name them at the start of the game ("chara" is not their name. their name is YOUR name. it's you.) to their meta-referential monologue at the end of a genocide run. the interaction of a player from outside the gameworld with the gameworld is actually the single thing that makes the narrative of undertale coherent. literally, without a player, undertale has no story. but that doesn't stop people from projecting their weird fan-speculatory personalities, backstories and motivations on both frisk and "chara," who are basically like collective original characters at this point. & i think people who are into these characters in a fandom way benefit from superimposing a literal, less symbolic narrative onto these characters, because a literal narrative lends itself better to fandom interaction and derivative/transformative content (fanfiction and other fan media). i don't think that's an incorrect or bad way to interact with these characters _in_ the context of fandom. the problem is (again driving back to the point of the video) when you let these very literal interpretations not only color but supersede your critical analysis.

I think you nailed it. I find plenty of comments around anything artsy where people look down upon the people that doesn't really enjoy the artsy. It makes them snobs and elitists, looking down upon the common man as a dirty underling, brcause they have learned how to consume the higher art (and funnily enough often the same people that sees metaphors and themes where there is none, actually over analyzing, and often gets it wrong, and talks about super subjectivity of art) Personally I prefer a much more grounded story not built on metaphors to be decoded, but I can appreciate the art when I see some of it. I appreciate noticing continuity details, character building itself, the grounded story that makes sense (at least in that self-contained world), which is something heavily metaphorical stories doesn't really have the liberty to do.

And notably, for a lot of people it's a jump to something undefined. You can reasonably make an interpretation on how a zombie virus works from a fictional biology standpoint, backing that up with logic and the text. You can also interpret it as a metaphor for consumerism, but at that point you're drawing conclusions from abstract meanings of symbols. The meaning may well be there, but the analysis is a lot less grounded - there is no longer a "truth" in the text you can rely on as your start point and end point, only symbols and how you interpret them. That's not *wrong*, but it can certainly be too uncertain for some folk. Also, a lot of people didn't see the metaphor in Annihilation or many other works simply because they never saw something that would indicate to them it's a metaphor. They saw a story presented as a literal retelling of fantastical events and just took it as what it was presented as.

@@SioxerNikita I have never seen these comments you speak of, nor met one of these "snobs" or "elitists" out in the real world. What is more often the case is people getting mad at so-called "artsy" media for existing and not being easily consumable, and people who find meaning in "artsy" work justifiably getting defensive. 99% of the time the notion of the "snob" or "elitist" is just a projection arising from the insecurity of those encountering anything outside of their interests.

@@CharlotteSWeb-oh7ou I see it plenty, people who listen to certain types of music thinks of their genre as enlightened and looking down upon people who likes pop, for example. That is very common. Quite a few in the art community directly looks down on people who enjoy AI art... Quite a few viewers of art also look down upon people who don't really care about art. If you don't see it, then you haven't been around such communities

@@Przemko27Z The zombie to consumerism comparison is great. This is what in my comment point out as seeing metaphors that aren't there. There is no meaningful reason to try and read a metaphor into it, because metaphorical works have to be built up around it being able to be interpreted that way.

This brought me back to how the Homestuck fandom had this exact same problem (among others). Which hurts especially bad because it didn't fucking relent in beating you over the head with how it's a story about stories.

If you talk to one of the secret NPCs, he'll say something along the lines of "they say Dr. Gaster created the Core, but one day he fell into his creation and disappeared." There are several theories based around the idea that 'his creation' is a seperate invention, but anyone with basic reading comprehension would realize that those two sentences are referring to the same thing. There is nothing that implies the NPC is talking about 2 seperate events. It annoys me so much.

@@kevinm5940 Embarassingly, it took me a few reads to realise the point that was being challenged was that "the Core" and "his creation" were the things that were separate. I thought you meant that "created the Core" and "fell into his creation" were the same event- because the former thing is so damn obvious that it didn't even occur to me anyone would assume otherwise.

To be fair, half the joke of Undertale is also that it very much literalises stuff that is normally non-diegetic. Namely, saving and loading as a game feature. A large part of the thesis is wrapped up in the fact that Frisk is operating on the same level the player is: They, too, can save and reload, go back and try something different. And one of Undertale's core questions is "what kind of monstrous asshole would willingly kill all their friends just to see what happens"? Which is a major part of the theme: How far are you willing to go just to get 100% completion? Which, in turn, ties into another level of "what would you do in a world where your actions no longer have consequence?" There's also other themes like the concept of determination, and growing past bias. It's easy to resort to violence when dealing with something new and intimidating, but it's an unfulfilling cycle: kindness and mercy will give us the opportunity to learn, grow, change and build bridges with each other. This theme applies to Undyne's racism towards humans, Flowey's "kill or be killed" view of the world, even, to go into metaphor via mechanics, the player themselves on a genocide run, which is all about treating Undertale like a typical kill-all-the-monsters RPG rather than a unique experience, even when it deliberately ceases to even be fun anymore.

I don't think that is all on meatheads. It also falls on the director and editors, who are arguably meatheads.

Scarface, too.

@@TheSugarRayYeah, I've definitely heard arguments that while Fight Club blatantly isn't intending to endorse Durden, the way the film presents Durden makes him too seductive and fails to really convince the audience he's bad.

Rorschach is also similar in that aspect (not even Zack Snyder got that)

@@MrAristocrates if you weren't seduced by tyler durden, the movie would have been a failure. It's explicitly about being a gay, working class guy in the 90's.

It was SO BAD with inception! Dream or reality!?!?! When the WHOLE POINT was that it didn't *matter* because he didn't *care* any longer. Ahhhhhh!

the power of looove XD 🎵🎵🎵

Kyle Kallgren has a great metatexual analysis of Inception, I thoroughly recommend it.

HANDS UP IF YOU THOUGHT LOST IN TRANSLATION WAS ACTUALLY A PRETTY DECENT MOVIE

And then you end up with fascust undertones

from the perspective of a slav, we share many commonalities in how catholicism affected our cultures. its a sort of unspoken common knowledge that slavic mysticism endured and fused with catholicism almost everywhere that wasnt a major metropolitan area. it was literally called basically doublethink - having a "double faith" even though the two contradict each other. native beliefs can endure in strange and tenacious ways.

It's 2018 and you are only cool if you watch movies to nitpick the plot looking for anything and everything you can call a plothole so you can show how smart you are.

It should come as no surprise to you that people tend to gravitate towards the literal and to "solve the plot like a puzzle" when they're presented with an ambiguous ending seeing as people have been doing that shit since The Shining, which closed on a shot of Jack Torrance in a photograph from the 1920s, or the fact that people kept trying to deduce whether Cobb's spinner totem did topple over in the end of Inception, after the credits started rolling.

I think having a very personal experience with a movie is harder to relate outside of friends and family. I have watched certain things at just the right time and had a really unique watching experience but it's not something easily replicated when sharing. Coming across something completely cold is different to your hyping/warning someone about it before recommending. I used to be on the animation festival circuit and meet and talk to directors and crew and get to know them more and the context of their films, then watch the work bad or good and get a lot more from that experience.

Natalie Rogers A video about how much a movie personally affected one person would never get the amount of views that matter sadly.

@@vivena9 Regarding how poorly some movies are written these days, it doesn't take a genius to find plot holes (or lack of coherency for that matter) any more? ;) :P

Todd C Dw I know what you mean, I’m always like that :)

dude me neither. i didn’t even think the movie was good until i saw analysis like this

I think that the problem isn't "being smart" per se, the problem is that the regular viewer isn't trained to view and analize a movie the same way a lot of film students are.

@@TheBigYC good point

TheBigYC I just graduated from NYU and I still didn't get it lol. But I think it was because I got too caught up in the fantasy and mystery of the Shimmer.