i choose to believe that the background is a real window and that joel just exists in an unmoving, unfeeling, serene plain and is projecting his videos to us
When he says "I don't know about his personality, he seems like a cool little twink man, but he does a lot of things that are wrong, I think." I legitimately couldn't tell if he was talking about the Onceler or MatPat
"dont steal" is such a weird thing for all the characters to tell remy. like, is he supposed to go to the little grocery store for rats and buy things with his rat money??
"Don't steal" is a pretty weird thing to tell anyone, particularly if they're someone who is stealing to satisfy unmet basic needs, as is the case in Ratatouille...
@@cajunking5987 isn’t the point that they were convinced they needed it by ohare essentially if you don’t buy into the restrictive and oppressive system of which there exists no alternative, you go into the “wasteland” and die
@@cajunking5987 okay… and if the film wasn’t a metaphor and was based on science, the boy who turned green from polluted dirty water (from ambiguous chemicals) would be dead from radiation poisoning or in fatal critical condition on an oxy IV because morphine makes the nausea from the radiation poisoning worse…
The original Dr. Seuss book literally says "protect [the tree/forest] from axes that hack." That's pretty clearly advocating environmental activism, not just buying more sustainable products.
The point of “Us” isn’t that nobody could _tell_ the difference, the point is that there *is* no difference except for the circumstances of their upbringing.
@@damjanp7920 I wouldn't be surprised if he made these videos without rewatching the specific content he's talking about. "I watched this movie five years ago! That's good enough to do an depth analysis!"
I always liked Matpats more legistical videos, like where he tries to give a rough estimate of how many people Light Yagami killed In Death Note, or how profitable Pleasure Island would be from Pinocchio.
yeah! i feel like he/his team are definitely less passionated about the more lore-heavy/interpretation focused videos and that translates to downright objectively wrong points like in the us video
@@alexsere3061 Exactly, as a child. He makes children's content. Any mature adult would immediately see through his paper thin logic and wild baseless assumptions.
@@parkercc He doesn't do that anymore? I haven't watched in years. Back in the day, I used to think, "Well yeah, that game theory is dumb and I don't buy it, but it really was just a framing device to talk about physics."
@@jdb7419 and people want fast fashion but we should teach them how bad it is. People don't mind buying a $5 shirt but will think twice about buying a $3 bucket of shrimps because they already know how unreliable that is. We need to keep the same parameters in all the things we consume
@@jdb7419 idk how 2 tell u this but most ppl with morals wouldnt cut down an entire forest just bc ppl want scarves or whatever the fuck. plus it was shown in the film that the Onceler was making propaganda 2 make ppl think the thneeds were 100% ethical
@jasonjungreis203 if Illumination wanted us to understand O'Hare being a big bawd buziness man they would have had the citizens of Thneedville gasping for air outside their homes, or at least struggling outside Thneedville
I think it's more that Mat Pat thinks he's somehow the only one that really understood the message and that even the people making the movie didn't know the message they meant to convey.
I've always been frustrated with "main character of film is bad actually" takes. Because the reasons they give, like showing bad actions that the character took, pretend that the film itself isn't also saying their actions are bad. Like yes the actions are bad, but it doesn't make them a bad person. Also that's why they're in a movie that's teaching them a lesson.
It's interesting, because I feel like Ratatouille supports such an interpretation without really signaling it. Specifically, here, I'm pointing to Linguine. Dude uses the labor of this rat, as well as his expertise, and in return gives him nearly nothing. Certainly not an equitable stake in the money being earned (which, like, Remy's doing more than half the work here, but a 50/50 split would be reasonable). Remy's theft is thus a reasonable response to this behavior. This is not, I would say, a framing that is adopted by the film itself. At the end of the day, I don't think the issue is that, "This character is the bad guy actually," takes are inherently bad. It's that some media analysts, Matpat in particular here, are lazy as hell.
@@eggynack I definitely see your point. I guess what I am upset at, is when people claim the main character is bad, even when they're doing things that the film itself frames as bad. It's definitely more interesting to say that thing that the film frames is a good thing is actually a bad thing, but obviously films can play with this concept and frame bad as good or vice verso for juxtaposition and stuff. Yadayada nuace yada greys
@@eggynack however speaking specifically to ratatouille I think the film does In a way address linguines selfishness in understanding that the rat is getting nothing that's why remy lashes out and steals is because of linguines wrong action. Not that it overly pointed out but that's why you understand where I'm coming from.
Like I have that problem with Troy being evil and sharpay is good video as it misses the whole message of the movies in my opinion which is that the one thing sharpay was trying to do in the first 2 films in sticking to the status quo and trying to force people to keep the same social hierarchy is bad. Saying Sharpay did some nice things and works hard is true as Sharpay is not a one note character. But the films still paint her point of view and constant sabotage of everyone around her to help herself as bad.
"It's the consumer's fault" has been the excuse of big corporations for decades, and a convenient way to avoid their responsibilities. It's playing their game to spread this idea. Being a more conscious consumer is a good start but it will never be enough to tackle pollution and climate issues.
It's also blatantly dishonest because companies aren't honest about what they own. Even if you boycott Kelloggs, you'll still give their parent company money if you buy Pringles.
Tbh I dont think it goes to that deep, hes just taking it from different views, and making fun theories that his viewers requested, its like people making theories that harambe's still alive, its just views and theories, hence the popular quote "But hey, its just a theory, a FILM THEORY."
@@TuesdaysArt It is even more dishonest because companies are not even honest about what they sell, even with law that promote informing the consumer about waht they bought, it can still be really hard to be able to choose adequately within a realistic timeframe, choosing a chicken for the sunday lunch shouldn't need a 20 minute long research on the internet about which brand doesn't destroy our planet. . And it also compeltely dismiss the real world fact that some people are simply too poor to even be able to choose, they can't afford better so they don't buy it.
@AlxH I can see the point in that but it still doesn't change the fact that shoving that short guy from the Onceler off a cliff alongside everyone who could immediately replace him, would either cause huge amounts of suffering or cause a similar company to crop up after a while. Well. Maybe there'd be more regulations on that one, which was gonna be my solution in the first place.
Remy stealing isn't framed as immoral, it's framed as ugly and low class. There's a reason why it's equated from the beginning with eating garbage, in a story about fine dining. Remy's arc isn't a moral one, it's an aesthetic one- he comes from a dirty family and aspires to the refinement of high society. In the beginning, that leads him to disown both his family and their way of life and try to live according to higher aesthetic principles. Then he sees the hypocrisy and ugliness of high society and goes back to his family, giving up those principles in disgust, a choice which, though it involves renouncing his own artistic satisfaction in the immediate term, allows him to later return to the world of high society as a fully developed and grounded artist, capable of swaying at least one archon of sophistication to no longer view him, his family and their ways with disgust or contempt.
matpat: the point of (Us) was that she was replaced and no one could tell the difference me: yeah, i agree with that, because the tethered are human like us and deserve empathy. i dont see what joel meant by bad- matpat: because our society is so shallow we wouldn't even notice if a nice normal person got replaced with soulless evil me: he had us in the first half not gonna lie
I've never even watched the movie but what little I had heard about it, I assumed a point of sympathy towards the tethered, never once thinking some might think of them as the "bad guys"
Especially since the tethered are a metaphor for baseless opression it really comes across like his big US take is "our society is so dumb we don't even know who to subjugate anymore" which... :/
@@nutwit1630 Also the tethered have many nonverbal autistic traits. When the mom is crying and saying she just wants her little girl back, I felt uncomfortable because her behavior isn’t “wrong” it’s just “different”. Yes in actuality the girl is the tethered girl, but the mom doesn’t know that.
Honestly I really hope Matpat is just joking with this stuff because I already kind of felt like he might be a sociopath after his creepy-ass Mario video, and stuff like his lack of empathy for the tethered is kind of freaking me out
Matpat insinuating that the consumer is responsible for a corporate monopoly over an essential resource is one of the most surreal things I have ever seen on this site.
i now understand that i should not want anything, i should live in a cabin and live off of my rich family's money while complaining that everyone else is being a naughty bad bad consumer
I always found it weird when people interpreted "Us" as a film where you were rooting for the bad guy the whole time... Adelaide being a tethered doesn't make her a bad person, and Red being from the surface doesn't automatically make her good. At the end of the day, Adelaide is still a woman fighting to protect her family. I also can't really blame a child for taking the opportunity to escape the underground tunnels at the expense of another.
I decided to rewatch the scene where the twist is revealed and I have to say she really seems like an evil person. At least she was extremely evil before she lost her memories of the underground complex. She chokes out and kidnaps the original kid, chains her to a bed, and then takes her clothes to take over her life. All with an evil gleeful smile. She is enjoying the fact she's hurting this girl. I agree that she is protecting her family in the movie, but it is a consequence of her own incredibly evil decision as a child. The way you describe it it sounds more like she took the kid's place as a last ditch effort to escape, a desperate fearful act that you could at least sympathize with. But it isn't like she apologies to the real daughter. Or just tricks her down to the facility. She attacks her while wearing this creepy smile and chains her to a bed. What if the OG daughter hadn't been able to get free? She'd starved to death, a slow and painful death. So nah neither of them are good people.
You can‘t fault her for it, but if you interpret the movie as being about class politics or marginalization in our society in general, I think the movie sees her as sort of a cautionary tale of a person only concerned with her own individual ascent out of her bad position. Which is a reasonable reading to make imo, given the whole „we‘re middle class, but not as middle class as our white friends, and we struggle in keeping our kids connected to Black culture in a way that isn‘t completely dissonant“ bit from the start of the movie. Her doing what she did resulted in a lot of people dying, so a bunch of people can stand in a row holding hands across America, which is sad.
@@paperbackwriter1111 Yeah which is why I can't see the doppelgangers as not being the bad guys. They just murdered thousands of people and disrupted local emergency services, leading to the deaths of even more people. Did they go to stab babies in their cribs? Probably. I feel no sympathy for them, even if their existence and treatment is very sad. I loose all sympathy when you go on a murder spree just because you've been treated badly.
@@storytellingchampion6438 they‘ve been lied to just as everyone has, believing that their only path to liberty is to „untether“ themselves by killing their opposites, as there would supposedly only be room for one group of them to live a human life. Were slave revolts that killed slavers wrong? Were the Haitians wrong when they killed the French who had enslaved and oppressed them and drove them off the island? I don‘t think so. The tethered believe that their surface counterparts are literally their chains. Them not knowing that this is incorrect is of course tragic, but I don‘t think they‘re the bad guys for acting upon this. EDIT: Also to borrow a line from the video: it‘s odd to apply a human code of morality to people who have been denied being seen as human for their entire existence.
@@storytellingchampion6438 I can think of a few people off the top of my head I would gladly kick off a volcano because of how they treated me. Not saying I think the tethered were justified in what they did, just saying I understand the motive. Also I have no clue if I worded that correctly because I can't speak English properly
From what I remember, it isn't depicted in the movie what happens to those who can't afford bottled air. The thought is horrifying. That makes O'Hare a villain.
Indeed, the question is what qualifies someone to live in the town itself? Do they pay a tax? A fee? Sign over something to O'hare? Does he sell bottled air outside the town?
I’ve always been bothered by how extreme Ratatouille is about its anti-stealing moral as like, the worst thing a person can do. It is really dogmatic about the underclass following every rule of the people who hate them, no matter how absurd or unfair. And this is a movie that has very light-hearted jokes of kidnapping and murder attempts, but a poor person stealing is framed as them becoming the vermin that society sees you as, be damned if you’re starving.
Yeah!! And what also gets me is that, what is the alternative then? Rats paying for food with their hard earned tiny rat dollars??? Ngl i never thought much about it before today but the movie anti-stealing stance is kinda weird lol
the way i like to think about it is that remy is constantly dealing with these two different sides of his identity - his internal desire to be respected as a chef like gusteau, a human, and his love for his entire rat family. remy doesn't NEED to steal from 5 star restaurants, he could just eat garbage like the rest of his family but he thinks they deserve to be treated like the humans, at the end of the day hes super naive and the movie constantly reminds us of that, sometimes in the form of a joke, and others when his dad shows him a window full of rat corpses. he holds himself up to an impossibly high standard, and even when he sticks to those expectations of himself, linguini still kicks him out and accuses him of being egotistical (which, they both are in a way). i think by the end remy gets the best of both worlds, he finds a way to not only feed his family, but to give them gourmet food, the stuff he thinks they deserve and on his own terms. Is it short sighted about stealing? kinda, but i disagree with the premise that its one of the major takeaways in a movie about passion and art and self discovery
And the contradiction this produces is that the movie can serve as an allegory for class mobility within a capitalist system and how it might look. (Watch The Squad’s video on Ratatouille for more.) Like, it clearly empathizes with the plight of Remy and, by extension, Linguini to be a meaningful part of the society they live in, yet it also demonizes the need for survival at any cost like you said. It doesn’t make sense.
@@RobotLover696 The whole point is not that they shouldn't steal, but that they could at least aim to something more, but they think they inherently can't. You can't really show the message without showing that stealing is also bad lmao
@@AvatarBowler it makes,,, sense its just not as fleshed out as it could be. don't get me wrong, i wish for more media that didn't demonize stealing and also i think ratatouille uses a very basic moral quandary to illustrate a more broad point about passion, the pursuit of art, and what it means to respect and cherish your family
Its so weird seeing Matpat blame the consumer for buying air to live instead of the corporations. Kind of reminds me of the whole thing with insulin that's going on in the real world
@@cajunking5987 yeah, maybe in the real world. The movie is literally about an orange fuckin abomination haunting an old man about destroying the world
I went off him after he said the dragons of how to train your dragons don't actually like their humans because lizard brains can't love, when those dragons CLEARLY have cat brains
Oh wow I'm actually upset by that take. One of my teachers had a bearded dragon who'd cling to your shirt and never let go if you let him. If that isn't a form of affection I don't know what is
He literally starts the video by saying how they aren't really behaving like lizards,but pushes that aside and pretends they behave exactly like lizards to reach his dumb conclusion
I respect the way MatPat’s ability to keep up with the way RUclips ticks, but it does lead to some really strange takes. sometimes it feels like he picks the end first almost as a challenge for himself to see if he can prove that wild idea
Reminds me of the Dave Chapelle bit where he says he makes punchlines before making the joke and has to write his way up to it. this would satisfactorily explain the Sans is Ness interpretation tbh
"The onceler isn't bad because he made a product that everyone wanted" the entire point of the thneed is that it is literally a useless nothing item, it's existence is meant to represent consumerism and the products you are convinced that you must have, but don't actually need. Everyone wanted it, but only because they were artificially convinced.
Isn't art is also a useless nothing item??? Like seriously I don't find any reason why majority of people like music, painting, or even books except for just to having fun just like the thneed that everyone wore just to having fun, art is consumerism at it's finest
@@progunjack5556 the thneed isn't art, though, and the onceler didnt make it as art, he literally made it as a product to be sold, to make him rich, and nothing more. that is what makes it useless and nothing. His first attempts to sell it don't even work, so it's not like it had some inherent quality that made people like it.
Folding Ideas once made a video about the "Thermian Argument" How people tend to forget that fictional universes are indeed fictitious and are created by people, who wanted to communicate a very specific story and agenda (Which also means that they can only be as "scientifically acurate" as the author knows, or is willing to put in) It instantly reminded me of MatPat
Yeah back even when i was a kid watching matpat, aside from his fnaf videos id always wonder if any of the game devs had intended anything like this or if he was just grasping at details
25:16 my biggest argument against Matpat’s argument about Morty not being consistent is that he’s 14. I would hardly say that 14 year olds are known for being consistent with their behavior and beliefs, y’know since they’re still in their formative years where they’re learning about the world and who they are
fr besides superficial gratification through unnecessary material goods being unhealthy, it's just not possible to live sustainably while keeping production at that level?? give it a couple generations (at best) and any consumption based utopia is gonna collapse
One thing that bothers me about the Lorax theory is how quickly mattpat is to point at the consumer. It's just like IRL ; where to resolve climate change people need to stop using straws... And like sure, we should stop using plastic straws. But also, it's not because we stop that the climate crisis will be averted. Big companies LOVE to point fingers at US for being bad and consuming badly but they don't like when we're the one calling out their gigantic corporations and shitty actions, and they sure as hell don't wanna change. Mattpat is just doing the same as politicians and giga corporations. It's not their fault, it's ours. And that's not a really good message to send. We shouldn't have to protest and boycott to literally survive for the next 30 years because people decided that money is better and more valuable than any life on earth.
29% of the issue is caused by The People, while 71% is caused by corporations. So even if all of us decided to boycott and live perfectly clean lives it wouldnt even make a massive difference.
The lorax is interesting because if the Oncler had listened to the lorax, he would’ve made more money. In wiping out the Truffula tree, he killed too his business, but a more sustainable practice would’ve ensured long term success.
Yeah I noticed that all his bad takes have a very pro-capitalist, rugged individual, systemic problems don't exist vibe to them. I hereby diagnose mattpat with rich American syndrome. I'm sorry to say that it's terminal.
And you can even see how the straw thing is being solved, COMPANIES switching over to biodegradables due to laws and social pressure, not consumers just quitting straws altogether. It is companies that need to change their practises, not consumers searching for niche, unknown companies with prices that might outweigh the utility of the product.
@@huhthatsinteresting1644 Mat has 100% had a Tumblr which he used, guy was a drama kid after all God I don’t miss 2000s internet “fandom” culture, he was absolutely engaged in plenty of it, and probably thought the Onceler was a badass libertarian going their own way A LGTOW if you will
I know we're talking about the movie, but wasn't that why Seuss never showed the Onceler's face in the book? The idea that that could be literally anybody (even you), even if they might have started out as a humble salesperson, and once they become too powerful, that power (in the Onceler's case, the success of the thneed and the money he made from them) is going to corrupt them, to the point where literally destroying the world doesn't seem like such a problem, so long as they get money out of it?
@@mikejeffries3333 it's partly why I hate modern interpretations of dr Seuss stories. It feels like alot of the miss the point of the message and tries to add into to much backstory for certain characters. Or it tries to add in so much filler to a story that could easily be told in 15 minutes.
For a guy who pieces together entire lore and universes from incredibly minute details and Easter eggs, he tends to get a lot of main plot points wrong
Yeah its almost like he has painted himself into a corner by running three youtube channels and now has to twist the facts of what he is talking about to pump out new videos all the time.
I think matpat's theories are like when your English literature teachers ask you to write an essay on your thesis so you make something up and try to sell it as hard as you could, doesn't matter how wrong it is
That we are deluded into thinking that he could have a monopoly on air... which is exacerbated by insistant marketing and brainwashing. You can't own air. Just like you shouldn't own water or land or people shouldn't be homeless. I think its just an interesting way to look at late game capitalism. That it is trying to capitalize on things you can't by brainwashing people into buying things you can't buy. I mean the Villain is an asshole but he's only one part of the problem. Which is why the movie sucks. Its simplistic villian.
For most of MatPat's one-off videos, it feels like being a contrarian is way more important than talking about a theory that actually works. I'd like to believe it has to do with viewer interaction, but the more I watch, the more I think he is just like that in real life lol. I appreciate that you brought it up.
I think that an easy way to counter act this would be for him to look at his theories more critically and consider the bigger picture + trying to put clear distinctions between his "what if..." type videos and his "what if x happened irl" videos from his "secret lore that nobody has figured out" videos, also pointing out contradictions at the end in a clear and concise manner instead of giving them a footnote or just passing right through it But it's way easier to make a quick 1 million views by just spouting out nonsense that is just crazy and wrong enough to make people believe it, sorta like how a lot of stories in WW wrestling were only there for shock value
I like matpat, I'm subscribed to all of his channels. But yes, he has a lot of garbage takes that drive me insane. I think he's just running out of ideas. Or there is a popular movie but he doesn't really have any theories on it, so he has to force it. There's so many theories and subreddits and internet sleuths nowadays, it's really hard to be original. Either matpat should take a break or just examine already existing theories. Kinda like he did on that "why fellowship shouldn't have flown to Mordor" episode. He built on an existing theory some redditor came up with, while trying to answer the biggest or most obvious plot hole in LOTR. Imagine if he tried to argue how Wormtongue should've been the chosen one who carries The One Ring to Mordor or how Sauron was right actually 😂
I like to imagine that MattPat was in the Onceler fandom back in the day, and unlike most of us never really grew out of his sympathy for that character
This makes sense to me. He's a debate kid who gets stuck having to argue for the obviously wrong side of the debate and he's gonna try his absolute hardest to make the case anyway
Matt has always been the ultimate devil's advocate, he isn't really "stuck" with the role : it's just his personality and something he enjoys doing, and maaany people can't understand that, which is why he gets so much hate
@finixmoon127 who intimidated him into retracting those findings? Patrick et al is widely respected in the community for his discovery of Ness-Sans convergence.
mat feels like such a grifter, someone who isnt a real human being with their own personal moral code and personal beliefs and viewpoints. he just tries to make a case for "the opposite" of a piece of art. it doesn't matter if his analysis is consistent, it constantly feels like he starts with the idea "okay, so good guy is ACTUALLY bad guy/bad guy is ACTUALLY good guy, what evidence can I find to form my own narrative?", instead of just, ya know, just analyzing a piece of art. I'm certain he just found that coming up with "EVERYTHING YOU THOUGHT ABOUT ___ WAS WRONG" type of videos are the most senstional.
@@slightlyoffensivedadjokes the problem is his weekly upload schedule. Theories aren't something you can consistently churn out on a weekly basis with the same level of quality. Some of his theories are genuinely good... and there's sans is ness... the main problem with his channel is that the quality of his content can vary INSANELY.
@@priestofronaldalt also imo mattpat does theories on stupid ass shit sometimes. Like i get diversity in content but its like hes running out of ideas.
@@slightlyoffensivedadjokes what if, get this: matpat has his beliefs but doesn't need to always inject them into his content? You know you're allowed to just make an entertaining video without it being something you actually think, right? If you actually think matpat considers Mario to be a sociopath and the oncelor to be good then you're crazy.
Well at this point we don't even really know, if air is really THAT bad until people have to buy it cans and water bottles, there are literally no trees for decades, pretty sure if the air was that bad they needed to wear oxygen tanks everywhere, they just think they need it
My favorite "film theory" of his is when for Harry Potter he says Nevile could have been the chosen one of the prophecy where he goes through the prophecy says all the things that could make him applicable to be the chosen one and then at the end of the video was like yeah they also said it directly in the book on this page. Which I had known since I read the book and was sitting there the entire time thinking wait a fucking second this isn't a theory they fucking said it in the book.
I think MatPat saying things in an enthusiastically confidently conspiratorial voice makes both mundane and/or wrong things sound exciting and correct. He did one of Hazbin Hotel recently that was just so bad to the point he got names confidently wrong and creators of the show were calling him an idiot
I also want to add the Harry Potter one, in which the whole theory was about how "Neville could have been the chosen one!" and going in-depth on all of the evidence for something like 15 minutes, then finally mentioning at the very end that they literally mentioned that in *both the books and the movies.*
Yeah its the "theory" that turned me off. Its not even something that is kind of hidden in the book, its explicitly talked about, all the evidence is clearly laid out and as far as I remember Harry more than once thinks and wonders about the what if scenario.
@@fruityren It is dangerously disingenuous to pretend that you cannot do both at once, including by accident. All attempts to communicate have implications about the communicator's views. There is no topic so narrow that this does not apply on some level.
these theories remind me so much of when i was in high school scribbling out overdue essays during lunch. sparknotes on my phone, the untouched source material next to me, and all i can do is pick a stance - any stance - and bs my defense well enough for a passing grade. knowing big words and how to use them is a common coverup tactic as well, i see.
I think that's probably very accurate to what's going on. His early content seemed really genuine and interesting. I imagine he had a lot of ideas stored up from years of being a gamer and a nerd, and he went into it not expecting money but just the fun of the craft. Then as time went on, it became his job while he simultaneously started to run out of ideas from his stockpile. Now he's stuck on a schedule with something he might not be fully interested in, and all he can do is try to make a defense well enough within schedule.
yeah, I guess it all makes much more sense if you remember he has to deliver like 10 theories a month between all his channels. Especially with how produced and padded out all of his videos are. Like BJ says at the end of the video, the actual show is a bit of a prop for his bad jokes.
My favorite part about the Lorax movie is that the two villains (who are effectively eco-villains) are so obviously the bad guys not just in the movie, but also because the movie LITERALLY released on earth day. They are meant to be the bad guys not just from the movie but also from the movies RELEASE DATE
If Remy's stealing in Ratatouille is a sign of being the bad guy, then I guess we gotta conclude the story of Les MIserables is about a noble police inspector chasing down an evil thief criminal.
The one really good Film Theorists video is the two-parter about how to survive the Hunger Games. That's what that channel and Game Theorists SHOULD be like: Nerding out over numbers and statistics, teaching a bit of science in an approachable way, but also getting deeper into the actual message of the source material (like how reality shows are a shallow spectacle manipulated by the producers to draw in as many viewers as possible, and the role crafting a compelling character/narrative plays in Katniss' survival). Too bad the other "theories" are mostly just nitpicking, clickbait and terrible hot takes.
When theory's focus is on numbers or science, it tended to turn out pretty good... so most of his videos before...around 2013. His lore/narrative analysis "theories" on the other hand are MUCH better handled by other channels.
Honestly, I like those videos, but I have one big problem with them. They said that everyone from every district has the same base chance of winning, 1/24, when the books explicitly state that it’s not the case. I looked at the articles he cited to defend that point, none of them had anything to do with that, they were just articles related to the Hunger Games.
@@missmorbid1439 but that's mostly due to resource/culture. People in higher districts have access to better food, training and are also the fuckers who want the hunger games. So yeah, in the story is pretty weighted. But this is about YOU as an entirely hypothetical individual, and what traits would be the ones who keep you alive (it also just happens that being in top physical form is hard when you can only eat rats)
I like MatPat theories when science is involved, like using the pixel scale character to measure weight to do wild calculations. Thats the theory that i subscribed to. But when it comes to socio economic theories i dont take too much stock on Mats opinion. He has the same takes as a silicon valley tech bro libertarian.
Yea, I like to go back and watch the sciencey and mathsy ones. I love the rosalina theory and the hook shot breaking links arm :D I’ve liked some of the lore ones but I do miss the science
I mean, guess it's just a view stunt. You see a video like "O'Hare is actually the good guy?!?!?!?!?!? [gone sexual]* video in your feed and then can't help but click to check this nonsense out and all and the worst thing is his theory was absolutely convincing
@@fruityren just because you (not you personally) get death threats doesn't mean that i can't criticize and joke around with you. The world ain't got time to stop just for some depressed guy.
A thing that’s really important to note about the “vote with your wallets” point about the Oncler. He blatantly says “the PR people are lying and the lawyers are denying” in one of his songs. Basically admitting to false advertising and circumventing any regulation there may be. And it’s also implied that he sets up a fake charity to “donate” a portion of proceeds to so anyone that buys a thneed thinks they’re giving some money to charity in that same song. The people think they’re voting for a completely different thing to what they actually are voting for. If he was completely open and honest about it and they still bought it, there’s an argument that both the consumer and the Oncler are to blame but that’s just not the case.
Why aren't there more likes on this? It's a good point to add, proving why even the consumers at the beginning aren't responsible for the Onceler wrecking the ecosystem in the first place.
"MatPat picks an angle and rolls with it, come hell or high water." That's true of pretty much all of his theories. He obviously goes into things with his theory already in mind, and ignores anything that would contest it.
@@GamingintheAM0801 they’re for fun it’s not like he’s trying to patten anything- he’s making content for fucks sake he’s a theater kid who plays video games, i enjoy his theories because i think it’s interesting how you can give something a different look most of his theories aren’t serious and are just done because people request them, he’s not debating his theories he knows they aren’t accurate since the plot is obvious but he still finds a way to look at it differently which i have to respect.
@@fruityren His videos really aren't that clever, dude. It's all stuff any edgy 14-year-old could come up with. His theories come off less as "looking at things differently" and more "being a contrarian because it gets views."
One of the best examples being his one on Salad Fingers where the creator directly stated, he is wrong and MatPat makes another video saying the new video confirmed everything he said.
i feel like ratatouille suffers from the same confusions as zootopia - having animals be both allegorical and literal. these animated childrens' movies also aren't really going for realism (a rat presumably can't control a human being via hair-pulling..) and they should be analyzed like fairy tales
Idk it seems like mid 20's forum posters are the only people "confused" by that. Most people can comprehend when it's allegory and when it's haha silly animal is being animal simultaneously, including most of the literal children who watch these movies.
Yeah the way I see it is that the rat can be interpreted not as a commentary on class but simply as an underdog who is not expected to succeed. It is a kids movie after all, not a deep political commentary. Stealing may help this person in the short term but unless he learns how to be a true chef he won't be repected by the accomplished or human chefs. So in this case, yes, stealing would not be the right move when there are better ways to succeed and help your family
A film theory that kinda pissed me off was the How to Train your Dragon one. It seems MatPat both didn’t really pay attention to details in the movie, and didn’t know about the canon holiday short where Hiccup gives toothless his freedom. Toothless’ connection to Hiccup is by choice, we *see* that many times in the film series, and “Dragons are reptiles and reptiles don’t love you” is kind of moot, considering birds are derived reptiles and can be very social and loving. Who’s to say dragons aren’t an outlier, like dinosaurs?
Reptiles can love people. I don’t know what the fuck he’s talking about. Sure. They are NOT very smart. Admittedly. But they are capable of emotions and feelings, and many of them develop tangibly emotional connections to human beings, stimuli and daily activities in their lives as pets and rescue animals.
I hate those; “The Villain was right all along!” Like, ok they had a point but having a good point doesn’t mean going to extreme, often cruel and evil methods just to accomplish it means the good guys were in the wrong.
@@georgecoconut8164 To be fair, MCU Thanos is characterized as a delusional narcissist. Nothing about him or his motivations are framed favorably. It's more that a few too many movie goers were so clever and high IQed that they missed the point of what they were watching
Did you ever think about how you singlehandedly debased his whole career with this absolute hit piece. He saw this, Matpat, Matthew Patthew, and was like "in two years' time I'm going to retire." His blood, your hands.
I feel MatPats gets facts wrong about games and movies just to have a theory that is contrarian and for views. I remember vividly his For Honor video where he stated that Scandinavia during the viking age was a frozen wasteland where nothing could grow when it's objectively false.
@@Reggie1408 Most people haven't been exposed to decent communist ideas, and the idea of capitalist criticism scares them, fills them with an actual anxiety.
This is EXACTLY why I unsubbed a couple years ago, it almost seems like he doesn't even play the games he talks about with how many things he gets blatantly wrong
Yeah same I learnt a lot of maths and science from him and got fun facts to tell my friends but now I just don't enjoy his content anymore and moved on to ShoddyCast
Also, I think we shouldn't skip over the fact that he made a whole episode about how Thanos was right... That one...That one deffinitely deserves a yikes!
He's also like, "mmm, Scott Cawthon gave Tulsi Gabbard and Ben Carson money too, so he can't be a conservative or a racist. Don't be so upset, LGBTQ+ community!"
how about "Our natural tendencies as people are flawed and the only way to see social improvement is by collectively making a greater effort to make wiser investments."? There's a lot of different ways to look at consumerism, but your interpretation seems to imply that the only way out of a consumeristic nightmare is by stripping the individual of their freedom to choose. I don't buy that. I choose not to.
@@ImperiaGin But the surge of endorphins awarded to the brain by the short term benefit of materialism is human nature. It’s just that humans don’t think very far into the future, because our most important instinct is survival which is a very short-term need. And that need has a synergistic relationship with capitalism. Even if buying a bunch of materialistic crap doesn’t equate at all to survival, the brain still thinks it does
MatPat’s defense of The Oncelor is the same as the one he provides himself in literal song and dance form 🎶How bad can I be, I’m just doing what comes naturally. How bad can I be, I’m just building the economy🎶
"vote with your dollar" is one of the most upsetting takes libertarians make and it's been created and perpetuated mainly by the people and organizations that don't want things to change for the better and perpetuate it because they know it won't work. Voting with your dollar is a Prisoner's Dilemma problem where if you do it and can't count on other people doing the same thing, you are making a much bigger effect on your own life (missing out on a product, which depending on the product could take a lot of commitment) than you are on the world (being one less of thousands to millions of people consuming the product). This means only the people most dedicated, passionate, and strong willed about the issue will do it. However, voting in a system of government does not have this prisoners dilemma. There is no effect on you unless the law you vote for (or the politician you elect votes for) passes which means the effect on the world will be substantial, and in many case you will not even miss out on the product, because the company may still release the product but now following the new law to avoid whatever harmful practice they were participating in. The government and the law's role in avoiding the prisoner's dilemma is the biggest reason the "free market" can not regulate itself, and the prisoner's dilemma is literally Game Theory 101 (the branch of mathematics, not MatPat's channel) which makes the fact that he does not understand this incredibly ironic.
Also you have to account for how many options you actually feasibly have. Some locales simply don’t have the luxury of avoiding certain products. Really, the argument ancaps give for how power wouldn’t be accumulated in their system is that the consumer could simply choose other products, but if one company owns the whole town that’s just silly. They would have to move (which is a big expense) to vote with their wallet?
"Vote with your dollar" is such a bullshit line. Like yeah, if you don't want Big Dairy to start selling BBQ sauce ice cream, then don't buy it. But imagine someone saying "if you don't like slavery, then don't buy them!"
Yeah, it's so stupid even libertarians would've dropped that line if they only had 2 brain cells to rub together and thought about it for 10 seconds. If dollars = votes, than multi-billioners like Bezos or Musk have voting power of many millions of working class americans, and even average middle class american have voting power of hundreds if not thousands of poor people from poverty stricken countries like Haiti, Afghanistan, Syra etc.
The rats stealing is literally for their survival and most of the time(exept the last scene) we see them taking things that humans either didn't want or wouldn't miss.
Yeah, that is in fact Remy's father's whole point; he doesn't see what they do as stealing, because they're taking things that humans have already thrown out
It also ties into the main themes of the movie, one of which is about poverty and the struggle between the elite and the rest of us. One of the main villains is an elitist food critic who is defeated by a food that symbolizes a simple way of life held by the poor.
@@Mathee even legally speaking, if the food has been placed in a dumpster you actually give up your legal rights to it as long as it is in that dumpster. its why dumpster diving is completely legal, long as you do it in public lots
@@phil8910 no you are wrong it changes from state to state and from country to country From what I know in most states the shop owns things in the dupster
Matthew Patrick Game Theory is the kind of guy to see Aladdin give the bread he stole to starving orphan children and think that it's a moral failure of the starving orphan children to eat that stolen bread instead of intuiting that the bread must be stolen and returning it to wherever it was stolen from
I love the idea that MatPat thinks the people can just *not buy air.* It's almost like O'Hare lives off of controlling the whole supply of something that everybody needs.
They can… if they NEEDED to buy air, they would be dead all the time because those little air fans don’t do the job lmao. The atmosphere is obviously full of air, O Hare is selling empty bottles.
@@cajunking5987 He's selling them clean air. Freedom from the smog that envelops the atmosphere. That is what's happening. It's why he wants more smog and no trees. Less smog = cleaner, more breathable air = less money. It's literally a cartoon villain scheme.
Part of what endears us to Remy is that he's struggling with a moral code on a more mundane hierarchy of needs than the rest if the world is holding him to. "Gosh, I really hate stealing, I wish I could be better" while bullets and blades zoom past. It's the same thing that makes Aladdin endearing . Both characters steal under relatively forgivable circumstances from the perspective of the audience, who sees their lives in jeopardy all the time, and the characters are generous when they feel safe enough to behave that way. Just wanted to get that out, 231 days after this video came out lol.
using silly science to back up a silly theory is fun and you can turn your brain off for a minute and enjoy something silly but matpat's apparent lack of media literacy and weird moral rants aren't fun and there's a definite line between those two. i used to watch matpat theories like religiously and videos like these fucked up the way i interpreted stories for a looong while
Fun fact, he just reads the scripts, a lot of those theories were written by someone else, he just “reviews” it for approval before recording the video. But obviously it wasnt always like that so clearly i agree with you. Just thought id add a little something to your comment 😁
What’s worse about the Us critique is that the family *could* tell. There’s this whole bit about how Adelaide has no rhythm vs. the kids and her husband, how she’s neurotic and detached and how that strains her relationships with the family members. Her being a tether was foreshadowed from the FIRST scene in the movie! Also: I’d argue that Us is more explicitly about race than class, with the tethers (who are literally the fuel of the US and necessary for its survival) standing in for Black people, particularly the Black underclass.
I thought Us definitely had themes about race but was meant to be more about class. But like, that's part of the point. You cannot discuss class in the United States without, on some level, also discussing race. The two are just too linked, both historically and currently. So any readings about the themes about class can (and probably should in most cases) be applied to race as well.
wrong, its very much about class, but Jordan understands you cannot have a discussion of class without race in the US (or really, most countries, actually). So saying it is about the black working class and not he white working class seems stupid - or maybe Jordan is a racist who also love oppression Olympics - who knows. You could just as easily say is has nothing to do with race, ut it has black peole as the main characters because hollywood underrepresents POC and Jordan wanted to do something about it because he is in a position to. Or maybe the movie is actually about why chocolate and PeanutButter taste good together.
I mean to me that whole bit just read as normal human behavior I know a good twist is something you have no reason to suspect until it's revelation makes you look at things differently but frankly I don't get the insistence that the difference between the thethers and those they are tethered to is obvious and noticeable when the twist is itself is based in the idea that the tethers to quote Joel are "just like literally exactly like 'US'"
"Vote with your dollar" is such a privileged take. I'd love to be able to afford a $50 shirt that was made by unionized workers in good conditions but the big box sweat shop $10 shirt is what's in my budget. Not to mention things like being in a food desert means that you don't really have a choice even with what products you buy because you need to eat, so of course half of what you buy is going to be wrapped in a thousand layers of plastic and not sustainably sourced. The message of the Lorax wasn't "consumer bad." It was stand up for your rights and needs anyway you can. Vote. Protest. Start a union. Spread awareness. Care
He really do be like “the people of Thneedville are enabling cruelty with their consumption. They should do the noble alternative and *f u c k i n g d i e .*
@@ThePapaja1996 because well off white women (like emma chamberlain) made thrifting “trendy”, thrift stores either jack up their prices on the good items or are completely barren of anything wearable. plus, they still contribute to a lot of waste, considering how much they take in and how much they’re able to put out. under capitalism, there is no ethical consumption, just better ways to reduce harm. for example, good fair takes a shit ton of clothes and puts them in a mystery box and they’re priced pretty well for what they give. and the trend of people up cycling old clothes, a brilliant way to develop ones style and use something they probably wouldn’t have worn otherwise. there’s ups and downs to everything, we just gotta decide what our morals can deal with.
Honestly I think they're the victims of their own success at this point. They've got an insane turnover, and to meet their deadline they need to find an angle - sometimes they botch it.
@@AL-lh2ht 100% true. They kind of just have to make a video, and not all of them are going to be right, and you can poke holes in every single one besides the science ones, and even then you end up with 3ft tall pikman. It’s is just so posed to be a vessel to explain a topic in a fun way, as well as entertain.
I remember watching a video on their creative process, and it seems like they plan the games/films first and then construct a theory during the writing stage
They are not victims, its just lore about fictional worlds, no one should put such big value on being right or wrong about lore that some guy on their jammies was typing out at 3am to finish a deadline, even if those writers can be really good. at the end of the day, they are human, its not real. they are, fictional worlds. the only thing bad film or game theories show us, is that there is a lot of mentally deranged people that put way too much value on ART being right or wrong, instead of being interpretative. Which is how it should be, that's why we have fanboys and fandoms, and people that will idolize anyone, I'm sure a lot in here idolize big joel. Its okay to have big issues with how media is taken. But there is a fundamental difference in matpat being wrong about the lore of a franchise, and big joel, talking about the human person, Matpat, and why he thinks in 1 way or the other and trying to make him seem like a villain. Even if he will point out at the start and say, oh i don't hate you matpat, i kind of respect you then proceeds to again, put more value on fictional worlds, than a real human being and is willing to make a bunch of leaps to defend remy from rattatouille, but wont make any leap to defend why matpat would think in 1 way or the other, i mean if big joel had made any research he would know, game theory film theory, are big and they have writers that write scripts, and matpat doesn't do all. So would have been a good way to start by calling out the channel, instead of the person right? but no, he wants to make it personal. cause he doesn't care about the difference of misinformation about fictional worlds, and real life persons. And also matpat has said plenty times, he doesn't like all his theories, but at the end of the day is about making an alternative story that is entertaining. You can watch one of his videos and NOT take it to heart. Like he can say Mario is mental, and you don't have to stop consuming Mario games, cause that is wrong... You can just take it as a fun little side story that is obviously a leap, even if it isn't, cause who the fuck cares, its FICTION.
I think you hit the nail on the head. I still frequently watch the Theory channels and I haven't seen any that are quite as bad as these recently so, that's something at least. Matpat has also been open about "not always believing every theory he makes," which may or may not be a convenient hand wave, I don't know.
I think the reason Matpat takes these stances is something you can see from watching his live channel’s playthrough of the latest FNAF: he makes a theory as soon as the thought enters his brain, and continues to try to prove it even if it ends up indefensible. His latest theory is so egregiously off that he’s decided to retroactively theorize that *every MC* in the games with a static game over screen was meant to be a robot, not just Gregory.
Sadly it’s not an uncommon phenomena. People often tweak facts to fit a hypothesis rather than the other way around. When he only did Game Theory it was more charming as it at least elevated the discourse of the medium of the bit. Film Analysis is a long extant discipline though
I wonder if he hears Immortan Joe's "don't become addicted to water" spiel in Fury Road and thinks, "that's a good point. Is he secretly the good guy?"
Yeah because consumers are never wrong, its all the big corporations making things, and we just HAVE to consume them, cause i mean, its there... so why not right? Lets not kid ourselves, big corporations are a reflection of the greed and laziness of the population. If it wasnt that way, then we would have to believe that there is just some nefarious bad people at the top of all those companies by cheer fucking luck... But you could swap people all day long at the top, and they would end up in the same please. Increasing profits, fulfilling consumer demand. Im not an apologist of big corporations. But if people weren't so stupid as to want luxury air, maybe there would have not been a demand to monopolize it. and again the only way to stop that from being that way, is from people to wake the fuck up. Not just expect things to change . Obviously the lorax is such a stupid movie, and you can interpret it any way you want, but literally it stands true, if everyone is happy and thriving, what are we complaining about?
@@100billionsubscriberswithn4 No you don't get it. The Sans is Ness guy is actually a bourgeois capitalist pig because he made a dumb cliche theory in one of his weekly episodes. Him using the "The bad guy is actually good" cliche on a movie with a political undertone actually 100% exposes his political views, and the video must be criticized because it is the reason we are in this corporate hellscape.
I liked older matpat, like doing the math on how fast chun li had to spin to do the spinning bird kick. Or even if the thing could be done, or if you’d just die. Like the leap of faith from AC. These newer theories are more boring and just try to analyze movies or games in sometimes weird ways. Or look super deep into lore of video games.
Lore dives work for shit like From Soft, but he does it for a lot of stuff where it seems like he’s pulling it out of his ass. And I say that as someone who still occasionally watches his shit, because he’s still entertaining.
"sure, he didn't wanna grow the tree in the end, but..." BUT? BUT WHAT MATPAT. THAT'S THE WHOLE MOVIE. TREE = GOOD. NO TREE = BAD. IT's LITERALLY THAT SIMPLE IT'S FOR CHILDREN
"people who traffic diamonds who make billions exploiting children are not the villains? The real villain are all those guys who buy their girlfriends engagement rings!"
It's an interesting idea to apply to the war on drugs. The cartels are the bad guys, but as long as they can make insane profits, they will never be defeated.
@@aj7058 profit is the problem but in certain circumstances the best solution is to use other market forces like legalizing drugs. Probably not as applicable to the lorax though
"He takes a stance and runs with it come hell or high water." is exactly the description of his For Honor theories that feigned historical accuracy by stating "facts" that were so holywood film and untrue it hurt.
I’ll never forget when he made a Film Theory where he argued FOR the Empire because the Rebellion dared to waste taxpayer money by destroying the Empire’s planet-destroying space laser.
Mat Pat's take on O'Hare is like saying "Bezos doesn't let his workers have more breaks because so many more people need very important packages shipped faster. I'm thinking of YOOOUU ALL." Sounding very "Fountainhead" on the Lorax Mat Pat.
It's basically Mat seeing everything wrong with Capitalism and thinking "well it couldn't possibly be a flaw in Capitalism, a completely flawless system. Must be all the pool's fault."
@@bennywolfe4357 What MatPat severely overlooks is the reality of manufactured consent that is produced by all great powers. What choice does a person really have when there are few effective checks and balances preventing Amazon from monopolizing markets, exploiting workers, and controlling prices as it has? Amazon is not the cheapest and most accessible option because of purely honest business practice; it has used unchecked cunning and tactics to run smaller businesses into the ground to ensure its monopoly on the commerce delivery market. The same goes for O'Hare and air, except he's even worse because he harms the environment to ensure people need his product. Where is the other option there? You can call it hypocrisy, because it is, but stopping there completely misses the bigger picture that the everyman's wallet does not realistically influence markets, as MatPat would have you believe, because people who have to worry about money often have to compromise for convenience and affordability to get by, even if they would truly prefer to put their money elsewhere.
@@bennywolfe4357 hypocrisy means nothing, a murderer can believe murder is wrong, that doesn’t mean that murder is right. I believe that Amazon is bad I have purchased a couple things from Amazon that doesn’t mean Amazon isn’t bad
If we are going to have a super serious, very literal take on Ratatouille I feel like it would really have to focus on how horrifying the prospect of a world were rats are fully sapient beings but still treated like pest animals is. Like, if rats are people, then maybe instead of focusing on letting one rat cook we should address them being the subject of ongoing genocidal mass murder?
the very existence of exterminators, like, as a profession, has always disturbed me a little within this world. Made all the worse by the fact that Linguine doesn't even seem all that surprised by the fact that the rat he's about to drown is actually basically a tiny hairy human. So do people know about the sentience of rats?
After the take on Lorax, I'm really excited to se his new channel, "Book Theory", where he argues Brave New World sounds like a really nice place to live, actually. Look how everyone seems so happy!
Hey book theory and today we're talking about how the CAPTIOL IN HUNGER GAMES is actually benevolent. You see in the books it is established that each district has a job to do so they have JOBS the capitol is providing Panem with work so they should just accept the living conditions and not rise up, but hey that's just a theory A BOOK THEORY
Hey internet! Welcome to Book theory! Today we’ll be looking at whether Voldemort is a bad guy! I mean, if he has thousands of followers, it means he to be good, right?
@jared4505 If someone is at the point of needing to steal food in order to exist, it's 100% moral to steal food and the blame is on the system who put them in that position
Still stuns me how much of so called fans of Rick and Morty don't understand how much they're told Rick is an objectively dysfunctional character that likes to pretend he's a god and not a human.
@@Kimmie6772 I mean... it's a show that is *exceptionally* sympathetic to that dysfunction. We're constantly told Rick is a narcissistic arsehole, but shown that he is essentially heroic, if deeply cynical towards heroism. He is constantly shown to be correct, his cynicism is constantly validated. Though given Rick is a really transparent self-insert of Dan Harmon none of the above is particularly surprising.
@@paultapping9510 Rick, floating through inter dimensional oblivion with no hope of survival: “oh please, dear god, please god save me, oh sweet dear god save me, please…” Rick, 5 minutes later once he has actually survived: “Yes! F*ck you there is no god!” Dude is clearly a hypocrite. He gets a lot wrong in that show, we even see how when the distractions subside his lifestyle has lead him to suicidal depression.
Let's not forget about how one of his first "film theories" was for Harry Potter and it took him 14 minutes to "prove" something that was literally stated outright in the book.
Matpat should've just stuck to science theories imo. When it comes to the context of the game, he either points out something extremely obvious, or misses the mark in every way possible.
@@toastialian - ... How do you not see the problem? If you're going to make a film theory video about a story... maybe the first thing you could/should do is read the *source material?!* Also I can't be bothered to watch a braindead Film Theory video, what "theory" did he "come up" with?
Thneedville is supposed to represent the First World and the fact that even though everyone appears to be a happy consumer, beyond the flickering neon lights on the Walls there's still a world of desolation and misery.
About the whole "Vote with your dollar" stuff: While the idea of the ecological footprint was an idea of actual ecological thinking people, the "carbon footprint" was mainly popularized by fossil fuel companies to shift the responsibility to the consumer, saying "No, we're not the bad guys, you are". So basically exactly what MatPat says. When he says "It's easy to point at the big buisness guys" he acts like it's not just as easy to point at the consumers and to say "Well, just buy green products". I would say both consumers and capitalists are part of a destructive system, their relation is the problem. But the capitalists have the position of power in this system. Yeah, they need the consumers to buy their products, but a big capitalist has so much possibilities to spread propaganda, false informations and to hide the actual conditions of their products... . Like even if you want to buy the 'better products', you can't actually be sure that those products are that 'green'. And in the end, neither consumer nor capitalist will give actual solutions. 'Consumer' ist just the role you play for the capitalists. Capitalists only care about you as a consumer, not about you as an actual person. But you have to act as a person with everything that is part of you including your role in your community to change things or more: to create systematic solutions.
Not to mention how many big companies are essentially just monopolies. There is no way to consume ethically under capitalism because a desire to maximize profit inevitably leads to unethical behavior. Also, the “ethical” products out there are fucking expensive. When people aren’t being paid enough to make ends meet, being “ethical” is secondary to survival. The majority of people can’t spend $50 on a single shirt.
Yes and it also completely destroys the ability to not buy. Power is not in the wallet it's in the transaction. If you refuse to consume as much as a matter of belief or stance, this removes you from the company's decision making. There will never be a corporation that exists that says, the wallets have spoken: they stopped buying our products so we must stop making them.
The carbon footprint and how people think about it (the fossil fuel propaganda way) is to funny to me. You can just enter your actual information on one of these calculators online and it will make you feel like shit. But then you can enter the information of some perfect being you can imagine that always does whatever it takes to minimize their carbon footprint. And at the end you find out this perfect being would still consume too much carbon. Because of course this person can‘t change our larger way of life that is almost entirely controlled by cooperations. He can‘t control if streets are built or not, he doesn‘t control the electricity production, he doesn‘t control how much plastic is used everywhere. At each step he can only try to minimize his consumption a bit.
Matt Patt is an comedian and entertainer and a centrist. But he does bring up a point on how absurd it is that we are allowing to package resources (Especially water) and how that points to the absurdity of Late Stage Capitalism.I mean the Lorax is a shitty film, he knows it intrinsically, because it has a villain. When it doesn't need a villain. But he is an entertainer and didn't want to end his whacky video on a down note. I mean "voting with your dollar" is about as effective as "eat the rich memes" and hating on the system. I think we have to be aware that its our consumer culture that is ahuge factor. If we buy clean water, we are idiots. And our species should try to at least prioritize getting water to everyone.
I love this vibe you have holding that microphone like it's some kind of sceptre and you're in some throne, residing over the bad takes and passing judgement
Oh good lord, THANK YOU for that Lorax section. Film Theory came out with a Lorax vid ten days after mine dropped, and BOY, I'm tellin' ya...for weeks I was stuck under this endless downpour of comments like, "The point of this film went right over your head! It's the consumer's fault! Go watch the film theory video, you idiot!" I didn't want to come off like I was butthurt, so I kept my mouth shut. It's true that the film puts a lot of the blame on the consumers. But YIKES, as someone who doesn't come from a lot of money, those comments REEEEALLY rubbed me the wrong way. It was Mat's "vote with your wallet" moral that got to me the most. I'm glad you pointed out how corporate leaders like O'Hare CREATE demand. They pull crap like lobby to block public transport initiatives so consumers are forced to buy more gas-based cars. Corporations also out-price or consume the opposition, so that consumers have fewer companies to choose from. And that's not to mention the fact that middle-class America barely exists anymore. Fewer and fewer people have the resources to "vote with their wallets." It's all hand-to-mouth. Even a couple bucks can make a huge difference when you can barely afford food, rent, and meds. Amazon knows that, and that's why they make sure to post lower prices than family-owned businesses. To place the blame on consumers and prop up the corporate leaders as heroes amongst all that...Ugh. Just...thank you. (I appreciated your Ratatouille portion a lot as well!)
Blaming the consumer for a predatory corporate tactics under a functional Monopoly is the financial equivalent of blaming a rape victim by saying, "Look at how you were dressed. What did you think was going to happen?" The whole reason why monopolies are bad is because they completely remove the consumer's ability to "Vote with their wallets". So yes, I feel your pain after watching that video. And frankly Matpat seems to have a disturbing undercurrent of anti-consumer philosophy in his videos in general.
Y’all need to realize that matpa…he doesn’t really put a lot of research into some of his videos? They are kinda click baity so with most things he prefers (probably true thing< crazier and more entertaining thing)
@@EvilSandwich okay you guys are getting a little out of hand. Matt patt, The film theory guy, is not prescribing a corporate agenda. You and the guy who made this video need a Twitter users anonymous meeting and you need it bad.
Dang just got an ad on my own video lol. Sorry about that! I didn’t put them there, universal copyright claimed the video.
I didn’t receive an ad just now so perhaps it’s random.
Big Oof
Uh oh, at least we got to see that sweet Lorax parking lot
Turtle approved
The real villain of the movie is apparently Universal.
i choose to believe that the background is a real window and that joel just exists in an unmoving, unfeeling, serene plain and is projecting his videos to us
And the creepy shadow that's always behind him is just the darkness from our world seeping into his
Biig Jo'ol, Eldritch God of Sweaters
I am not at all convinced a "Joel" truly exists
Don't forget the crushing silence
But thats just a theory,
A Big Joel theory.
When he says "I don't know about his personality, he seems like a cool little twink man, but he does a lot of things that are wrong, I think." I legitimately couldn't tell if he was talking about the Onceler or MatPat
MatPat IS the Onceler.
@@Thor-Orion oh my god
I just read this as he said it, incredible
The same thing happy to me, lol.
@@Thor-Orion it's all connected
"dont steal" is such a weird thing for all the characters to tell remy. like, is he supposed to go to the little grocery store for rats and buy things with his rat money??
maybe he and his rat family should start a rat farm?
@@UnbridledWeeping do they just starve until the first pumpkin grows or what
@@kaitlynm9463 It's simple, really. They can resort to cannibalism. Much better than stealing from a human being!
buy things with rat money that he stole
"Don't steal" is a pretty weird thing to tell anyone, particularly if they're someone who is stealing to satisfy unmet basic needs, as is the case in Ratatouille...
I love how Mat essentially says “you know they didn’t have to buy air” without realizing what he just said
They didn’t have to buy air. If they really did, they’d die when they leave their house.
@@cajunking5987 It's a cartoon set in an extremely fictional environment, you gotta suspend your disbelief a little
@@rowan9146 um no the whole point is O’Hare is running a scam lol
@@cajunking5987 isn’t the point that they were convinced they needed it by ohare essentially if you don’t buy into the restrictive and oppressive system of which there exists no alternative, you go into the “wasteland” and die
@@cajunking5987 okay… and if the film wasn’t a metaphor and was based on science, the boy who turned green from polluted dirty water (from ambiguous chemicals) would be dead from radiation poisoning or in fatal critical condition on an oxy IV because morphine makes the nausea from the radiation poisoning worse…
The original Dr. Seuss book literally says "protect [the tree/forest] from axes that hack." That's pretty clearly advocating environmental activism, not just buying more sustainable products.
No replies till i reply
Is it? I thought it was telling me to buy Mazdas and disposable diapers with pictures of leaves on the box.
@@fly1714 Proof you're living in a simulation
MatPat does say that the movie has a point of its own and it’s about consumerism
Dr. Seuss was also a racist wife abuser, but we're discussing the 2012 movie, not the intentions of its original author
The point of “Us” isn’t that nobody could _tell_ the difference, the point is that there *is* no difference except for the circumstances of their upbringing.
EXACTLY incredibly well said
The gaming community is extremely pro capitalism. It’s not surprising that his rhetoric is the same as r/stocks
so you're saying Us is pokémon the first movie
Yeah thats what I thought about the movies message.
@@BrokenRobot3K: Maybe the fact that you don’t get it is part of the point it’s trying to make. (like The Watchmen or BvS)
the things matpat said about the onceler are basicly the excuses the onceler uses to avoid responsability IN THE MOVIE
maybe he didn't watch the movie lol
@@damjanp7920 I wouldn't be surprised if he made these videos without rewatching the specific content he's talking about. "I watched this movie five years ago! That's good enough to do an depth analysis!"
He's just helping the economy.
"How ba-a-a-ad can I be?
I'm just makin up some game theories!
How ba-a-a-ad can I be?
I'm just defendin' the bourgeoise!"
I always liked Matpats more legistical videos, like where he tries to give a rough estimate of how many people Light Yagami killed In Death Note, or how profitable Pleasure Island would be from Pinocchio.
Yeah his logistic/scientific videos are infinitely better than his lore videos
Bro i know you ain't trynna say logistical lmao
his evaluation of how much minecraft's diamond armor is worth was one of my favs as a child
yeah! i feel like he/his team are definitely less passionated about the more lore-heavy/interpretation focused videos and that translates to downright objectively wrong points like in the us video
@@alexsere3061 Exactly, as a child. He makes children's content. Any mature adult would immediately see through his paper thin logic and wild baseless assumptions.
"This point isn't just silly, it feels like it's attacking the very concept of paying attention to shows"
This is an amazing quote
Indeed it is Helix, indeed it is...
Funny seeing you here, thank you for giving me many, many laughs over the years
Oh shit. Your skate 3 vids are S tier stoned watching.
Oh mah god dude it’s the skate 3 legend himself
I’m kk p
“Media interpretation for kids but not done well” is the greatest way I think I ever heard modern mat pat videos described
Yeah, for kids obviously. (me, in my 40s)
Man, I miss when he used physics and formulas in his videos...
@@parkercc He doesn't do that anymore? I haven't watched in years. Back in the day, I used to think, "Well yeah, that game theory is dumb and I don't buy it, but it really was just a framing device to talk about physics."
honestly the only way to find the charm of OG game theory is in "the science of" series
But it's not media interpretation.
Mat rly said "it's not o'hare's fault the place is a wasteland... " then doesn't even blame the character WHO IS AT FAULT FOR THAT VERY THING
But have you considered that it’s the forest’s fault for being made of stuff that’s worth money?
@@huckthatdish ah those darn trees, why did they have to be so good for making thneeds
He wanted to stop but the people wanted more so he started again, that’s why it’s the peoples fault
@@jdb7419 and people want fast fashion but we should teach them how bad it is. People don't mind buying a $5 shirt but will think twice about buying a $3 bucket of shrimps because they already know how unreliable that is. We need to keep the same parameters in all the things we consume
@@jdb7419 idk how 2 tell u this but most ppl with morals wouldnt cut down an entire forest just bc ppl want scarves or whatever the fuck. plus it was shown in the film that the Onceler was making propaganda 2 make ppl think the thneeds were 100% ethical
I did not think that I would ever see someone miss the point of THE LORAX 😭😭
Except that's what illumination did.
@jasonjungreis203 if Illumination wanted us to understand O'Hare being a big bawd buziness man they would have had the citizens of Thneedville gasping for air outside their homes, or at least struggling outside Thneedville
I think it's more that Mat Pat thinks he's somehow the only one that really understood the message and that even the people making the movie didn't know the message they meant to convey.
@@jasonjungreis203 That was the greatest comeback of the decade and it will take a long time before I find a comeback this perfect in a long time.
@@thechugg4372 Cool
I've always been frustrated with "main character of film is bad actually" takes. Because the reasons they give, like showing bad actions that the character took, pretend that the film itself isn't also saying their actions are bad. Like yes the actions are bad, but it doesn't make them a bad person. Also that's why they're in a movie that's teaching them a lesson.
It's interesting, because I feel like Ratatouille supports such an interpretation without really signaling it. Specifically, here, I'm pointing to Linguine. Dude uses the labor of this rat, as well as his expertise, and in return gives him nearly nothing. Certainly not an equitable stake in the money being earned (which, like, Remy's doing more than half the work here, but a 50/50 split would be reasonable). Remy's theft is thus a reasonable response to this behavior. This is not, I would say, a framing that is adopted by the film itself. At the end of the day, I don't think the issue is that, "This character is the bad guy actually," takes are inherently bad. It's that some media analysts, Matpat in particular here, are lazy as hell.
@@eggynack I definitely see your point. I guess what I am upset at, is when people claim the main character is bad, even when they're doing things that the film itself frames as bad. It's definitely more interesting to say that thing that the film frames is a good thing is actually a bad thing, but obviously films can play with this concept and frame bad as good or vice verso for juxtaposition and stuff. Yadayada nuace yada greys
@@eggynack however speaking specifically to ratatouille I think the film does In a way address linguines selfishness in understanding that the rat is getting nothing that's why remy lashes out and steals is because of linguines wrong action. Not that it overly pointed out but that's why you understand where I'm coming from.
Like I have that problem with Troy being evil and sharpay is good video as it misses the whole message of the movies in my opinion which is that the one thing sharpay was trying to do in the first 2 films in sticking to the status quo and trying to force people to keep the same social hierarchy is bad. Saying Sharpay did some nice things and works hard is true as Sharpay is not a one note character. But the films still paint her point of view and constant sabotage of everyone around her to help herself as bad.
It’s CinemaSins brain at work.
"It's the consumer's fault" has been the excuse of big corporations for decades, and a convenient way to avoid their responsibilities. It's playing their game to spread this idea. Being a more conscious consumer is a good start but it will never be enough to tackle pollution and climate issues.
It's also blatantly dishonest because companies aren't honest about what they own. Even if you boycott Kelloggs, you'll still give their parent company money if you buy Pringles.
Tbh I dont think it goes to that deep, hes just taking it from different views, and making fun theories that his viewers requested, its like people making theories that harambe's still alive, its just views and theories, hence the popular quote "But hey, its just a theory, a FILM THEORY."
You know who was a conscious consumer?
Ted Kaczynzki
@@TuesdaysArt It is even more dishonest because companies are not even honest about what they sell, even with law that promote informing the consumer about waht they bought, it can still be really hard to be able to choose adequately within a realistic timeframe, choosing a chicken for the sunday lunch shouldn't need a 20 minute long research on the internet about which brand doesn't destroy our planet. . And it also compeltely dismiss the real world fact that some people are simply too poor to even be able to choose, they can't afford better so they don't buy it.
@AlxH I can see the point in that but it still doesn't change the fact that shoving that short guy from the Onceler off a cliff alongside everyone who could immediately replace him, would either cause huge amounts of suffering or cause a similar company to crop up after a while. Well. Maybe there'd be more regulations on that one, which was gonna be my solution in the first place.
"This produces a deep contradiction within the ideology of Ratatouille"
this is the most Big Joel quote I have ever heard
Remy stealing isn't framed as immoral, it's framed as ugly and low class. There's a reason why it's equated from the beginning with eating garbage, in a story about fine dining. Remy's arc isn't a moral one, it's an aesthetic one- he comes from a dirty family and aspires to the refinement of high society.
In the beginning, that leads him to disown both his family and their way of life and try to live according to higher aesthetic principles. Then he sees the hypocrisy and ugliness of high society and goes back to his family, giving up those principles in disgust, a choice which, though it involves renouncing his own artistic satisfaction in the immediate term, allows him to later return to the world of high society as a fully developed and grounded artist, capable of swaying at least one archon of sophistication to no longer view him, his family and their ways with disgust or contempt.
They literally make him a rat, a word synonymous with a low class person
Wow well said!
Damn
I just want to let you know that I read your comment with Redeemed Anton Ego's voice.
This is an insanely good read.
matpat: the point of (Us) was that she was replaced and no one could tell the difference
me: yeah, i agree with that, because the tethered are human like us and deserve empathy. i dont see what joel meant by bad-
matpat: because our society is so shallow we wouldn't even notice if a nice normal person got replaced with soulless evil
me: he had us in the first half not gonna lie
Exactly my thought process
I've never even watched the movie but what little I had heard about it, I assumed a point of sympathy towards the tethered, never once thinking some might think of them as the "bad guys"
Especially since the tethered are a metaphor for baseless opression it really comes across like his big US take is "our society is so dumb we don't even know who to subjugate anymore" which... :/
@@nutwit1630 Also the tethered have many nonverbal autistic traits. When the mom is crying and saying she just wants her little girl back, I felt uncomfortable because her behavior isn’t “wrong” it’s just “different”. Yes in actuality the girl is the tethered girl, but the mom doesn’t know that.
Honestly I really hope Matpat is just joking with this stuff because I already kind of felt like he might be a sociopath after his creepy-ass Mario video, and stuff like his lack of empathy for the tethered is kind of freaking me out
Matpat insinuating that the consumer is responsible for a corporate monopoly over an essential resource is one of the most surreal things I have ever seen on this site.
Oh, you think it's WRONG for him to sell air? Just don't buy it then! Checkmate, atheists. My dad is the economy, and his cock is huge!
@@Tanuki-cl7qi My dad works at Capitalism and he can get your dad fired from his job >:)
@@MsSeeingdouble NOOOOOOO
i now understand that i should not want anything, i should live in a cabin and live off of my rich family's money while complaining that everyone else is being a naughty bad bad consumer
@@k.morningstar7983 Oh you like things and enjoy being clothed and sheltered? Lol okay consoomer.
I always found it weird when people interpreted "Us" as a film where you were rooting for the bad guy the whole time... Adelaide being a tethered doesn't make her a bad person, and Red being from the surface doesn't automatically make her good. At the end of the day, Adelaide is still a woman fighting to protect her family. I also can't really blame a child for taking the opportunity to escape the underground tunnels at the expense of another.
I decided to rewatch the scene where the twist is revealed and I have to say she really seems like an evil person. At least she was extremely evil before she lost her memories of the underground complex. She chokes out and kidnaps the original kid, chains her to a bed, and then takes her clothes to take over her life. All with an evil gleeful smile. She is enjoying the fact she's hurting this girl.
I agree that she is protecting her family in the movie, but it is a consequence of her own incredibly evil decision as a child. The way you describe it it sounds more like she took the kid's place as a last ditch effort to escape, a desperate fearful act that you could at least sympathize with.
But it isn't like she apologies to the real daughter. Or just tricks her down to the facility. She attacks her while wearing this creepy smile and chains her to a bed. What if the OG daughter hadn't been able to get free? She'd starved to death, a slow and painful death.
So nah neither of them are good people.
You can‘t fault her for it, but if you interpret the movie as being about class politics or marginalization in our society in general, I think the movie sees her as sort of a cautionary tale of a person only concerned with her own individual ascent out of her bad position. Which is a reasonable reading to make imo, given the whole „we‘re middle class, but not as middle class as our white friends, and we struggle in keeping our kids connected to Black culture in a way that isn‘t completely dissonant“ bit from the start of the movie. Her doing what she did resulted in a lot of people dying, so a bunch of people can stand in a row holding hands across America, which is sad.
@@paperbackwriter1111 Yeah which is why I can't see the doppelgangers as not being the bad guys. They just murdered thousands of people and disrupted local emergency services, leading to the deaths of even more people. Did they go to stab babies in their cribs? Probably. I feel no sympathy for them, even if their existence and treatment is very sad. I loose all sympathy when you go on a murder spree just because you've been treated badly.
@@storytellingchampion6438 they‘ve been lied to just as everyone has, believing that their only path to liberty is to „untether“ themselves by killing their opposites, as there would supposedly only be room for one group of them to live a human life.
Were slave revolts that killed slavers wrong? Were the Haitians wrong when they killed the French who had enslaved and oppressed them and drove them off the island? I don‘t think so. The tethered believe that their surface counterparts are literally their chains. Them not knowing that this is incorrect is of course tragic, but I don‘t think they‘re the bad guys for acting upon this.
EDIT: Also to borrow a line from the video: it‘s odd to apply a human code of morality to people who have been denied being seen as human for their entire existence.
@@storytellingchampion6438 I can think of a few people off the top of my head I would gladly kick off a volcano because of how they treated me. Not saying I think the tethered were justified in what they did, just saying I understand the motive. Also I have no clue if I worded that correctly because I can't speak English properly
From what I remember, it isn't depicted in the movie what happens to those who can't afford bottled air. The thought is horrifying. That makes O'Hare a villain.
We don’t see poor people because they all suffocated
Indeed, the question is what qualifies someone to live in the town itself? Do they pay a tax? A fee? Sign over something to O'hare? Does he sell bottled air outside the town?
Because it's a kids movie.
There are people living outside of the town (such as the Oncelor)
So it’s not like they die immediately
I’ve always been bothered by how extreme Ratatouille is about its anti-stealing moral as like, the worst thing a person can do. It is really dogmatic about the underclass following every rule of the people who hate them, no matter how absurd or unfair. And this is a movie that has very light-hearted jokes of kidnapping and murder attempts, but a poor person stealing is framed as them becoming the vermin that society sees you as, be damned if you’re starving.
Yeah!! And what also gets me is that, what is the alternative then? Rats paying for food with their hard earned tiny rat dollars??? Ngl i never thought much about it before today but the movie anti-stealing stance is kinda weird lol
the way i like to think about it is that remy is constantly dealing with these two different sides of his identity - his internal desire to be respected as a chef like gusteau, a human, and his love for his entire rat family. remy doesn't NEED to steal from 5 star restaurants, he could just eat garbage like the rest of his family but he thinks they deserve to be treated like the humans, at the end of the day hes super naive and the movie constantly reminds us of that, sometimes in the form of a joke, and others when his dad shows him a window full of rat corpses. he holds himself up to an impossibly high standard, and even when he sticks to those expectations of himself, linguini still kicks him out and accuses him of being egotistical (which, they both are in a way). i think by the end remy gets the best of both worlds, he finds a way to not only feed his family, but to give them gourmet food, the stuff he thinks they deserve and on his own terms. Is it short sighted about stealing? kinda, but i disagree with the premise that its one of the major takeaways in a movie about passion and art and self discovery
And the contradiction this produces is that the movie can serve as an allegory for class mobility within a capitalist system and how it might look. (Watch The Squad’s video on Ratatouille for more.)
Like, it clearly empathizes with the plight of Remy and, by extension, Linguini to be a meaningful part of the society they live in, yet it also demonizes the need for survival at any cost like you said. It doesn’t make sense.
@@RobotLover696 The whole point is not that they shouldn't steal, but that they could at least aim to something more, but they think they inherently can't. You can't really show the message without showing that stealing is also bad lmao
@@AvatarBowler it makes,,, sense its just not as fleshed out as it could be. don't get me wrong, i wish for more media that didn't demonize stealing and also i think ratatouille uses a very basic moral quandary to illustrate a more broad point about passion, the pursuit of art, and what it means to respect and cherish your family
joel calling the onceler a “cool little twink man” is the funniest thing i’ve ever witnessed
he's not wrong tho
@@oncreativemode5486 i'm never describing him any other way again
Lmao I thought he was calling Matt that lmao
OMG I thought he was describing MattPatt like thatt lmaooo 🤣
As much as I love Joel's videos, hearing straight people use the term "twink" always gives me bad vibes...
Can’t believe he had the take “Rat stealing food bad” but “Rich man monopolizing air is entrepreneurship and consumer bad”
i mean yeah those two viewpoints are pretty consistent, they both blame the little guy 🐁
I don't know why you expected better from MatPat, communism 2, he always struck me as a bit of a bootlicking lib.
@@MelMelodyWerner O’Hara is such a cartoonish villain that I didn’t expect him to actually try to blame the people buying the air he sells.
@@randomplaceinruralamerica9618 The worst part is that, what are the people in The Lorax supposed to do?? Not buy air and fucking die??
@@ggs27 of course! vote with your wallet otherwise youre the problem
Its so weird seeing Matpat blame the consumer for buying air to live instead of the corporations. Kind of reminds me of the whole thing with insulin that's going on in the real world
They shouldn’t be so dumb to know buying air doesn’t work like that
@@cajunking5987 I feel like a big part of the movie was that the Edna mode looking guy was spreading propaganda to make sure people wouldn’t know that
@@cajunking5987 yeah, maybe in the real world. The movie is literally about an orange fuckin abomination haunting an old man about destroying the world
@@cajunking5987Obviously they were fed lies by O'Hare.
@@cajunking5987dude you’re all over this comment section simping for O’Hare, you alright?
I went off him after he said the dragons of how to train your dragons don't actually like their humans because lizard brains can't love, when those dragons CLEARLY have cat brains
Oh wow I'm actually upset by that take. One of my teachers had a bearded dragon who'd cling to your shirt and never let go if you let him. If that isn't a form of affection I don't know what is
@@TheBonkleFox Oh sure, when the walking handbag material does it, it's affection, but when I do it, it's sexual harrassment.
Also, you know, they're dragons? Like didn't they have a king in the first movie? I don't think normal lizards have kings.
How dare these whimsical creatures of myth not do the thing the wikipedia article said lizards do
He literally starts the video by saying how they aren't really behaving like lizards,but pushes that aside and pretends they behave exactly like lizards to reach his dumb conclusion
I respect the way MatPat’s ability to keep up with the way RUclips ticks, but it does lead to some really strange takes. sometimes it feels like he picks the end first almost as a challenge for himself to see if he can prove that wild idea
Reminds me of the Dave Chapelle bit where he says he makes punchlines before making the joke and has to write his way up to it. this would satisfactorily explain the Sans is Ness interpretation tbh
Matpat is probably the biggest expert on gaming the algorithm in the entire RUclips scene
@@themandownstairs4765 exactly. I wouldn’t tell
him not to do it that was necessarily, but it does lead to a lot more misses than hits.
@@themandownstairs4765 yea but the sans is ness vid is a part of youtube history, its a bad theory but its still gold
Now that does make sense. Like playing a game of Don't Get Me Started.
"The onceler isn't bad because he made a product that everyone wanted" the entire point of the thneed is that it is literally a useless nothing item, it's existence is meant to represent consumerism and the products you are convinced that you must have, but don't actually need. Everyone wanted it, but only because they were artificially convinced.
Yes, exactly!!
Isn't art is also a useless nothing item??? Like seriously I don't find any reason why majority of people like music, painting, or even books except for just to having fun just like the thneed that everyone wore just to having fun, art is consumerism at it's finest
@@progunjack5556 the thneed isn't art, though, and the onceler didnt make it as art, he literally made it as a product to be sold, to make him rich, and nothing more. that is what makes it useless and nothing. His first attempts to sell it don't even work, so it's not like it had some inherent quality that made people like it.
@@progunjack5556 Well art can be educational as well. So it has a similar value to school or parents.
@@progunjack5556 It has been proven that Art can have a positive effect on the brain. a literal nothing-item does not.
Folding Ideas once made a video
about the "Thermian Argument"
How people tend to forget that fictional universes
are indeed fictitious and are created by people, who wanted to
communicate a very specific story and agenda
(Which also means that they can only be as "scientifically acurate" as the author knows,
or is willing to put in)
It instantly reminded me of MatPat
Yeah back even when i was a kid watching matpat, aside from his fnaf videos id always wonder if any of the game devs had intended anything like this or if he was just grasping at details
25:16 my biggest argument against Matpat’s argument about Morty not being consistent is that he’s 14.
I would hardly say that 14 year olds are known for being consistent with their behavior and beliefs, y’know since they’re still in their formative years where they’re learning about the world and who they are
Not to mention, Morty has probably experienced a lot of traumatizing things and that has to have some sort of effect on his development.
Shit I'm 24 and I feel like I change beliefs every other week... Its just a part of being human I general
How many years has Morty been 14? Like 10 years now?
@@HOTD108_ Eight, but you aren't too far off.
Mortys character definitely changes by seasons bases.
Someone using the term: “Consumerist Utopia where everyone is happy” completely un-ironically, seriously did psychic damage to me.
my brain is so obsessed with mother 3 that when i read that the new pork city theme started playing in my head
@@hurri. Mother 3 is surprisingly based
@@hurri. I think mother 3 as a kid for me planted seeds of anti capitalism that never fully formed until a couple of years ago. Pretty sick
Thankfully I'm dark type so I'm immune to psychic damage
fr besides superficial gratification through unnecessary material goods being unhealthy, it's just not possible to live sustainably while keeping production at that level?? give it a couple generations (at best) and any consumption based utopia is gonna collapse
One thing that bothers me about the Lorax theory is how quickly mattpat is to point at the consumer. It's just like IRL ; where to resolve climate change people need to stop using straws... And like sure, we should stop using plastic straws. But also, it's not because we stop that the climate crisis will be averted. Big companies LOVE to point fingers at US for being bad and consuming badly but they don't like when we're the one calling out their gigantic corporations and shitty actions, and they sure as hell don't wanna change.
Mattpat is just doing the same as politicians and giga corporations. It's not their fault, it's ours. And that's not a really good message to send. We shouldn't have to protest and boycott to literally survive for the next 30 years because people decided that money is better and more valuable than any life on earth.
29% of the issue is caused by The People, while 71% is caused by corporations. So even if all of us decided to boycott and live perfectly clean lives it wouldnt even make a massive difference.
The lorax is interesting because if the Oncler had listened to the lorax, he would’ve made more money. In wiping out the Truffula tree, he killed too his business, but a more sustainable practice would’ve ensured long term success.
Yeah I noticed that all his bad takes have a very pro-capitalist, rugged individual, systemic problems don't exist vibe to them. I hereby diagnose mattpat with rich American syndrome. I'm sorry to say that it's terminal.
@@guy-sl3kr Classism is so widespread and yet I feel like it's the one thing no one acknowledges
And you can even see how the straw thing is being solved, COMPANIES switching over to biodegradables due to laws and social pressure, not consumers just quitting straws altogether. It is companies that need to change their practises, not consumers searching for niche, unknown companies with prices that might outweigh the utility of the product.
By mattpat's logic, hired assassins aren't bad people. they're just responding to consumer demand for murder!
I’m sorry! I just can’t fault a hardworking guy with a dream of murdering people for cash as the bad guy!
Hey, if I don't, someone else will
I cant fucking believe that MatPat's take from the lorax is that you should stop buying something that you literally cant live without
Don't buy bottled air, buy trees?
@@bluishwolf it’s a little difficult to buy trees when the only tree in their area was planted near the END of the movie.
@@snomboclaartThe only Truffula tree left. You think that's the only type of tree in the entire world?
@@bluishwolf In that movies universe... probably yes
@@Companion92 If it's the only type of tree left... why don't they just call them "trees" instead of having a species name?
Honestly, the way Matt refers to the Onceler, you'd think he was projecting himself unto him.
A oncler kinnie
@@huhthatsinteresting1644 Mat has 100% had a Tumblr which he used, guy was a drama kid after all
God I don’t miss 2000s internet “fandom” culture, he was absolutely engaged in plenty of it, and probably thought the Onceler was a badass libertarian going their own way
A LGTOW if you will
I know we're talking about the movie, but wasn't that why Seuss never showed the Onceler's face in the book? The idea that that could be literally anybody (even you), even if they might have started out as a humble salesperson, and once they become too powerful, that power (in the Onceler's case, the success of the thneed and the money he made from them) is going to corrupt them, to the point where literally destroying the world doesn't seem like such a problem, so long as they get money out of it?
Honestly I thought the exact same thing. It just seems like he is talking about himself there.
@@mikejeffries3333 it's partly why I hate modern interpretations of dr Seuss stories. It feels like alot of the miss the point of the message and tries to add into to much backstory for certain characters. Or it tries to add in so much filler to a story that could easily be told in 15 minutes.
For a guy who pieces together entire lore and universes from incredibly minute details and Easter eggs, he tends to get a lot of main plot points wrong
This sounds almost identical to the trajectory of Doug Walker
@@garaj1 I've never seen Doug Walker piece together anything even remotely coherent.
That’s probably exactly why he gets obvious shit incorrect, and like someone already pointed out, is exactly like Doug Walker.
Yeah its almost like he has painted himself into a corner by running three youtube channels and now has to twist the facts of what he is talking about to pump out new videos all the time.
@@topleybird2443 don’t compare him to Doug. Doug was never respected or comparably successful as Matpat
I think matpat's theories are like when your English literature teachers ask you to write an essay on your thesis so you make something up and try to sell it as hard as you could, doesn't matter how wrong it is
I love how lil capitalist has a monopoly over oxygen itself and Matt pat basically tries to say “well it’s the consumers fault for wanting to breathe”
I think the point is that he doesn't have a monopoly on air.
That we are deluded into thinking that he could have a monopoly on air... which is exacerbated by insistant marketing and brainwashing. You can't own air. Just like you shouldn't own water or land or people shouldn't be homeless.
I think its just an interesting way to look at late game capitalism. That it is trying to capitalize on things you can't by brainwashing people into buying things you can't buy. I mean the Villain is an asshole but he's only one part of the problem. Which is why the movie sucks. Its simplistic villian.
No, he doesn't try to say that - basically or in any other way.
Yeah those fucking consumer are bad for wanting to live 😡🤬
@@nikitahichoii482 No, they are morons, because they are buying something they don't have to. There is free breathable air available to anyone.
For most of MatPat's one-off videos, it feels like being a contrarian is way more important than talking about a theory that actually works. I'd like to believe it has to do with viewer interaction, but the more I watch, the more I think he is just like that in real life lol. I appreciate that you brought it up.
Ironically enough if someone pointed that out to him he would probably say something along the lines of "vote with your clicks"
I think that an easy way to counter act this would be for him to look at his theories more critically and consider the bigger picture + trying to put clear distinctions between his "what if..." type videos and his "what if x happened irl" videos from his "secret lore that nobody has figured out" videos, also pointing out contradictions at the end in a clear and concise manner instead of giving them a footnote or just passing right through it
But it's way easier to make a quick 1 million views by just spouting out nonsense that is just crazy and wrong enough to make people believe it, sorta like how a lot of stories in WW wrestling were only there for shock value
Take his "x vs x" videos for example. He literally paints himself in one side with little nuance.
@@airplanes_aren.t_real woah! Turns out you can’t fucking taste a liar, no shit Sherlock
I like matpat, I'm subscribed to all of his channels. But yes, he has a lot of garbage takes that drive me insane. I think he's just running out of ideas. Or there is a popular movie but he doesn't really have any theories on it, so he has to force it.
There's so many theories and subreddits and internet sleuths nowadays, it's really hard to be original. Either matpat should take a break or just examine already existing theories. Kinda like he did on that "why fellowship shouldn't have flown to Mordor" episode. He built on an existing theory some redditor came up with, while trying to answer the biggest or most obvious plot hole in LOTR.
Imagine if he tried to argue how Wormtongue should've been the chosen one who carries The One Ring to Mordor or how Sauron was right actually 😂
I like to imagine that MattPat was in the Onceler fandom back in the day, and unlike most of us never really grew out of his sympathy for that character
And he really blames us for him bailing on his own scientific principles in favor of producing clickbait theories? You may have something there.
This makes sense to me. He's a debate kid who gets stuck having to argue for the obviously wrong side of the debate and he's gonna try his absolute hardest to make the case anyway
Matt has always been the ultimate devil's advocate, he isn't really "stuck" with the role : it's just his personality and something he enjoys doing, and maaany people can't understand that, which is why he gets so much hate
@@finixmoon127 I agree. Ive never understood why he gets hated on so much his theories are just supposed to be interesting "what ifs"
@@drew-vt8ws The fact that he had to explain that Sans is Ness wasn't to be taken seriously will always be insane to me
@finixmoon127 who intimidated him into retracting those findings? Patrick et al is widely respected in the community for his discovery of Ness-Sans convergence.
Pure evil
Rats stealing food to survive is wrong, but a guy who cuts down all the trees and steals clean air from everyone, why he is just an entrepreneur.
mat feels like such a grifter, someone who isnt a real human being with their own personal moral code and personal beliefs and viewpoints. he just tries to make a case for "the opposite" of a piece of art. it doesn't matter if his analysis is consistent, it constantly feels like he starts with the idea "okay, so good guy is ACTUALLY bad guy/bad guy is ACTUALLY good guy, what evidence can I find to form my own narrative?", instead of just, ya know, just analyzing a piece of art.
I'm certain he just found that coming up with "EVERYTHING YOU THOUGHT ABOUT ___ WAS WRONG" type of videos are the most senstional.
@@slightlyoffensivedadjokes the problem is his weekly upload schedule. Theories aren't something you can consistently churn out on a weekly basis with the same level of quality. Some of his theories are genuinely good... and there's sans is ness... the main problem with his channel is that the quality of his content can vary INSANELY.
@@priestofronaldalt also imo mattpat does theories on stupid ass shit sometimes. Like i get diversity in content but its like hes running out of ideas.
It's called making entertaining videos. Facts are not all that entertaining. Yeah the oncelor is the bad guy, woohoo, such a fun statement!
@@slightlyoffensivedadjokes what if, get this: matpat has his beliefs but doesn't need to always inject them into his content? You know you're allowed to just make an entertaining video without it being something you actually think, right? If you actually think matpat considers Mario to be a sociopath and the oncelor to be good then you're crazy.
"It's the consumers' faults." What are the residents of Thneedville supposed to do...NOT BUY AIR?!
Well at this point we don't even really know, if air is really THAT bad until people have to buy it cans and water bottles, there are literally no trees for decades, pretty sure if the air was that bad they needed to wear oxygen tanks everywhere, they just think they need it
@@8darchibaldmawuntu198 O'Hare still create forms to convince and coerce people to maintain things as they are. It's not real necessito, it's made up.
@@clintwood731 Well again, theories, different perspectives from different views, its just made up stuff
@@8darchibaldmawuntu198 No, it's show on the film, he made up things to his own profit.
@It is I Dio! Exactly, im just saying that his theories are very unique, like him saying that the air isnt actually needed and ohare is just lying
My favorite "film theory" of his is when for Harry Potter he says Nevile could have been the chosen one of the prophecy where he goes through the prophecy says all the things that could make him applicable to be the chosen one and then at the end of the video was like yeah they also said it directly in the book on this page. Which I had known since I read the book and was sitting there the entire time thinking wait a fucking second this isn't a theory they fucking said it in the book.
It's called "Film Theory", I think it's safe to assume that the theory was based on the film.
@@fastodash5751 I understand where your coming from, but when you look at his recent Fnaf theories on GAME THEORY they are based off of the Fnaf books
I think MatPat saying things in an enthusiastically confidently conspiratorial voice makes both mundane and/or wrong things sound exciting and correct. He did one of Hazbin Hotel recently that was just so bad to the point he got names confidently wrong and creators of the show were calling him an idiot
He admits that was an embarrassing moment for him, film theory was relatively new at the time as well
@@fastodash5751 ummm then why he bring up the fucking book? lmaooo
I also want to add the Harry Potter one, in which the whole theory was about how "Neville could have been the chosen one!" and going in-depth on all of the evidence for something like 15 minutes, then finally mentioning at the very end that they literally mentioned that in *both the books and the movies.*
Yeah its the "theory" that turned me off. Its not even something that is kind of hidden in the book, its explicitly talked about, all the evidence is clearly laid out and as far as I remember Harry more than once thinks and wonders about the what if scenario.
The “onceler isn’t too bad actually” take aged me like a million years
how ba-a-a-ad could he be?
@@zuresei he's just doing what comes naturally
Of course. Everyone knows the real villain is the Greedler.
Protagonist has a flaw: HE’S THE VILLAIN ACTUALLY
Villain has a redeeming quality: HE’S NOT THE VILLAIN
ALSO CAPITALISM IS GOOD
really cutting analysis by Mat here
It certainly does seem to be a point that he tries to make a lot, huh?
@@yaninity Liberals are weird
@@yaninity he’s not making a point he’s having fun-
@@fruityren It is dangerously disingenuous to pretend that you cannot do both at once, including by accident. All attempts to communicate have implications about the communicator's views. There is no topic so narrow that this does not apply on some level.
these theories remind me so much of when i was in high school scribbling out overdue essays during lunch. sparknotes on my phone, the untouched source material next to me, and all i can do is pick a stance - any stance - and bs my defense well enough for a passing grade. knowing big words and how to use them is a common coverup tactic as well, i see.
I think that's probably very accurate to what's going on. His early content seemed really genuine and interesting. I imagine he had a lot of ideas stored up from years of being a gamer and a nerd, and he went into it not expecting money but just the fun of the craft. Then as time went on, it became his job while he simultaneously started to run out of ideas from his stockpile. Now he's stuck on a schedule with something he might not be fully interested in, and all he can do is try to make a defense well enough within schedule.
yeah, I guess it all makes much more sense if you remember he has to deliver like 10 theories a month between all his channels. Especially with how produced and padded out all of his videos are. Like BJ says at the end of the video, the actual show is a bit of a prop for his bad jokes.
My favorite part about the Lorax movie is that the two villains (who are effectively eco-villains) are so obviously the bad guys not just in the movie, but also because the movie LITERALLY released on earth day. They are meant to be the bad guys not just from the movie but also from the movies RELEASE DATE
If Remy's stealing in Ratatouille is a sign of being the bad guy, then I guess we gotta conclude the story of Les MIserables is about a noble police inspector chasing down an evil thief criminal.
How about the fact Remy's is a diseased riden rodents?
@@psycholaw4394 in real life yeah. But in a Pixar world ? Nah.
@@psycholaw4394 CLEARLY you've never befriended the rat king
@@psycholaw4394 we are one we are all. We are living in your walls.
Just because that thief found personal and spiritual redemption doesn't stop him from being an evil bread thief #JavertDidNothingWrong
Matt's worst mistake was talking about the Lorax, he has awakened the beast.
He awoke th3 beast in me in 4th grade when he called mario evil
Well, it's a principal in business, that everybody knows is sound. It says that people with the money, make this ever lovin' world go 'round.
_The Onceler..._
@@ghoulishtoad I mean Mario is a war criminal.
@@kevinwillems8720 Did he bomb the Serbia and started War of Independence?
The one really good Film Theorists video is the two-parter about how to survive the Hunger Games. That's what that channel and Game Theorists SHOULD be like: Nerding out over numbers and statistics, teaching a bit of science in an approachable way, but also getting deeper into the actual message of the source material (like how reality shows are a shallow spectacle manipulated by the producers to draw in as many viewers as possible, and the role crafting a compelling character/narrative plays in Katniss' survival).
Too bad the other "theories" are mostly just nitpicking, clickbait and terrible hot takes.
i also really like the video where he try’s to figure out how many possible combinations you can make in super Mario maker
When theory's focus is on numbers or science, it tended to turn out pretty good... so most of his videos before...around 2013. His lore/narrative analysis "theories" on the other hand are MUCH better handled by other channels.
i remember his old majoras mask theory where he calculated out the moon! that's what i used to like his videos for
Honestly, I like those videos, but I have one big problem with them. They said that everyone from every district has the same base chance of winning, 1/24, when the books explicitly state that it’s not the case. I looked at the articles he cited to defend that point, none of them had anything to do with that, they were just articles related to the Hunger Games.
@@missmorbid1439 but that's mostly due to resource/culture. People in higher districts have access to better food, training and are also the fuckers who want the hunger games.
So yeah, in the story is pretty weighted. But this is about YOU as an entirely hypothetical individual, and what traits would be the ones who keep you alive (it also just happens that being in top physical form is hard when you can only eat rats)
25:57 aged like fine wine with Justin being kicked off Rick and morty
I feel like my timeline pushed me to watch this video again (which I did happily) because of this moment in particular. Algorithm said “oooooooooooh.”
A shame since he didn’t do much weong
@@cajunking5987 bye bye time for you to go
ikr
I like MatPat theories when science is involved, like using the pixel scale character to measure weight to do wild calculations. Thats the theory that i subscribed to. But when it comes to socio economic theories i dont take too much stock on Mats opinion. He has the same takes as a silicon valley tech bro libertarian.
his lore and science theories are pretty nice but i those ones are pretty *strange*
the classic doom guy speed, how rich is scrooge mcduck, value of hte bottle cap: classics
@@volkmardeadguy1557 the scrooge mcduck one is definitely one of my favorites of all time
He acts like a bigwig way too much nowadays. It's all to appeal to his sponsors, he definitely only cares about money
Yea, I like to go back and watch the sciencey and mathsy ones. I love the rosalina theory and the hook shot breaking links arm :D I’ve liked some of the lore ones but I do miss the science
O’Hare is the most cartoonish villain imaginable, literally selling people air to breath, yet people like matpat still defend him like 💀💀💀💀💀💀
It’s a cartoon villian from a kid’s movie and you’re still harassing someone for defending them?
@@fruityren your perception of harassment is a bit twisted I might say
I mean, guess it's just a view stunt. You see a video like "O'Hare is actually the good guy?!?!?!?!?!? [gone sexual]* video in your feed and then can't help but click to check this nonsense out and all
and the worst thing is his theory was absolutely convincing
@@ren.67 you do realize he gets death threats from this stuff right?
@@fruityren just because you (not you personally) get death threats doesn't mean that i can't criticize and joke around with you. The world ain't got time to stop just for some depressed guy.
Joel holds their mic like they're holding a goblet filled with liquid truth
He looks like a ring announcer to me.
I mean, not wrong on both counts.
It's my favorite.
Hell yeah
legit question: so does joel go by neutral pronouns (they) or neutral and masc (they/he)?
A thing that’s really important to note about the “vote with your wallets” point about the Oncler.
He blatantly says “the PR people are lying and the lawyers are denying” in one of his songs. Basically admitting to false advertising and circumventing any regulation there may be. And it’s also implied that he sets up a fake charity to “donate” a portion of proceeds to so anyone that buys a thneed thinks they’re giving some money to charity in that same song.
The people think they’re voting for a completely different thing to what they actually are voting for. If he was completely open and honest about it and they still bought it, there’s an argument that both the consumer and the Oncler are to blame but that’s just not the case.
Why aren't there more likes on this? It's a good point to add, proving why even the consumers at the beginning aren't responsible for the Onceler wrecking the ecosystem in the first place.
The people literally got lied to, walled in, and blocked from leaving and seeing the outside world wtf were the Film Theory writers thinking???
I like that you put "evil morty" in the tags
someone on youtube searchin' for evil morty content, and gets served this
Big Joel === evil morty?
also Thought Slime videos make my life better
I like that you know this.
Your daily reminder that nowhere is safe, from the Eyeball Zone.
Never thought I'd find the eyeball zone in the wild like this
now THAT is an evil-genius move!
"MatPat picks an angle and rolls with it, come hell or high water."
That's true of pretty much all of his theories. He obviously goes into things with his theory already in mind, and ignores anything that would contest it.
Well yeah it’s a theory he’s not trying to debate he’s just making his content and giving a new outlook
@@fruityren Theories still need to be able to hold up to scrutiny, though. A lot of his theories can be debunked pretty easily.
@@GamingintheAM0801 they’re for fun it’s not like he’s trying to patten anything- he’s making content for fucks sake he’s a theater kid who plays video games, i enjoy his theories because i think it’s interesting how you can give something a different look most of his theories aren’t serious and are just done because people request them, he’s not debating his theories he knows they aren’t accurate since the plot is obvious but he still finds a way to look at it differently which i have to respect.
@@fruityren His videos really aren't that clever, dude. It's all stuff any edgy 14-year-old could come up with. His theories come off less as "looking at things differently" and more "being a contrarian because it gets views."
One of the best examples being his one on Salad Fingers where the creator directly stated, he is wrong and MatPat makes another video saying the new video confirmed everything he said.
i feel like ratatouille suffers from the same confusions as zootopia - having animals be both allegorical and literal. these animated childrens' movies also aren't really going for realism (a rat presumably can't control a human being via hair-pulling..) and they should be analyzed like fairy tales
That’s a good way of looking at it
Idk it seems like mid 20's forum posters are the only people "confused" by that.
Most people can comprehend when it's allegory and when it's haha silly animal is being animal simultaneously, including most of the literal children who watch these movies.
Yeah the way I see it is that the rat can be interpreted not as a commentary on class but simply as an underdog who is not expected to succeed. It is a kids movie after all, not a deep political commentary. Stealing may help this person in the short term but unless he learns how to be a true chef he won't be repected by the accomplished or human chefs. So in this case, yes, stealing would not be the right move when there are better ways to succeed and help your family
this comment is wrong. one time a rat snuck up on me and made me dance in front of my friends. i looked like a fool
420th like on ur comment 😊
“Justin, if you ever don’t want to play Morty I can do it” oof this aged perfectly
Film Theory: Is Big Joel REALLY That Big???
The youtuber who calls himself Big Joel, is neither Big, nor Joel
-Voltaire
He's about 10 Joel's tall.
Verily.
Medium Henry confirmed
Conclusion - Joel is big where it counts. 😏
His heart! Get your mind out of the gutter!
A film theory that kinda pissed me off was the How to Train your Dragon one. It seems MatPat both didn’t really pay attention to details in the movie, and didn’t know about the canon holiday short where Hiccup gives toothless his freedom. Toothless’ connection to Hiccup is by choice, we *see* that many times in the film series, and “Dragons are reptiles and reptiles don’t love you” is kind of moot, considering birds are derived reptiles and can be very social and loving. Who’s to say dragons aren’t an outlier, like dinosaurs?
Reptiles can love people. I don’t know what the fuck he’s talking about.
Sure. They are NOT very smart. Admittedly. But they are capable of emotions and feelings, and many of them develop tangibly emotional connections to human beings, stimuli and daily activities in their lives as pets and rescue animals.
birds aren't reptiles, they're dinosaurs
@@scottwhitman9868 And what are dinosaurs, scott?
@@DJPantspis_er not reptiles
@@scottwhitman9868 Wtf are you talking about???
I hate those; “The Villain was right all along!” Like, ok they had a point but having a good point doesn’t mean going to extreme, often cruel and evil methods just to accomplish it means the good guys were in the wrong.
Unironically fuck movie thanos. He is the most pretentious cliche character in all of existence
@@georgecoconut8164 minor spelling mistake
@@georgecoconut8164 yea comics Thanos didn’t make any pretentions for his motives; he made it clear what he wanted and embraces his villainy
True
@@georgecoconut8164 To be fair, MCU Thanos is characterized as a delusional narcissist. Nothing about him or his motivations are framed favorably. It's more that a few too many movie goers were so clever and high IQed that they missed the point of what they were watching
Did you ever think about how you singlehandedly debased his whole career with this absolute hit piece. He saw this, Matpat, Matthew Patthew, and was like "in two years' time I'm going to retire."
His blood, your hands.
I was there that day on the grassy knoll when Big Joel destroyed Matrick Patrick’s career. I will never forget
I feel MatPats gets facts wrong about games and movies just to have a theory that is contrarian and for views. I remember vividly his For Honor video where he stated that Scandinavia during the viking age was a frozen wasteland where nothing could grow when it's objectively false.
That doesn't explain why a lot of his "theories" end up being capitalist apologia
@@Reggie1408 Most people haven't been exposed to decent communist ideas, and the idea of capitalist criticism scares them, fills them with an actual anxiety.
@@Reggie1408 his video about video game addiction was fairly anti capitalist imo. Tho I haven't watched it in ages
This is EXACTLY why I unsubbed a couple years ago, it almost seems like he doesn't even play the games he talks about with how many things he gets blatantly wrong
Lmao the people who stayed behind were PRIMARILY farmers
I preferred it when Mat just did funny math to say "lmao Wario is actually 10 feet tall"
Now he's like "mmmm vote with dollar mmmm"
That's mainly why now i just watch THE SCIENCE!!
Yeah same I learnt a lot of maths and science from him and got fun facts to tell my friends but now I just don't enjoy his content anymore and moved on to ShoddyCast
Also, I think we shouldn't skip over the fact that he made a whole episode about how Thanos was right...
That one...That one deffinitely deserves a yikes!
@@vgarzareyna what's funny is that those videos are from another channel that later merged with his.
He's also like, "mmm, Scott Cawthon gave Tulsi Gabbard and Ben Carson money too, so he can't be a conservative or a racist. Don't be so upset, LGBTQ+ community!"
"Vote with your dollar" is basically saying "consumerism is terrible and broken, we can fix it by consumerism!"
how about "Our natural tendencies as people are flawed and the only way to see social improvement is by collectively making a greater effort to make wiser investments."?
There's a lot of different ways to look at consumerism, but your interpretation seems to imply that the only way out of a consumeristic nightmare is by stripping the individual of their freedom to choose. I don't buy that. I choose not to.
It made me reflexively twitch. I *haaaaate* it.
What about rejecting consumerism instead?
@@Ethan-tn4jc human nature isn't capitalism lol
@@ImperiaGin But the surge of endorphins awarded to the brain by the short term benefit of materialism is human nature. It’s just that humans don’t think very far into the future, because our most important instinct is survival which is a very short-term need. And that need has a synergistic relationship with capitalism. Even if buying a bunch of materialistic crap doesn’t equate at all to survival, the brain still thinks it does
"In fact I kind of respect you" is the most perfectly crafted passive aggressive shade I have ever heard therefore I liked and subscribed.
MatPat’s defense of The Oncelor is the same as the one he provides himself in literal song and dance form
🎶How bad can I be, I’m just doing what comes naturally. How bad can I be, I’m just building the economy🎶
ikr.
underrated comment lol, hadn't even thought of that
"vote with your dollar" is one of the most upsetting takes libertarians make and it's been created and perpetuated mainly by the people and organizations that don't want things to change for the better and perpetuate it because they know it won't work. Voting with your dollar is a Prisoner's Dilemma problem where if you do it and can't count on other people doing the same thing, you are making a much bigger effect on your own life (missing out on a product, which depending on the product could take a lot of commitment) than you are on the world (being one less of thousands to millions of people consuming the product). This means only the people most dedicated, passionate, and strong willed about the issue will do it.
However, voting in a system of government does not have this prisoners dilemma. There is no effect on you unless the law you vote for (or the politician you elect votes for) passes which means the effect on the world will be substantial, and in many case you will not even miss out on the product, because the company may still release the product but now following the new law to avoid whatever harmful practice they were participating in. The government and the law's role in avoiding the prisoner's dilemma is the biggest reason the "free market" can not regulate itself, and the prisoner's dilemma is literally Game Theory 101 (the branch of mathematics, not MatPat's channel) which makes the fact that he does not understand this incredibly ironic.
its also extremely libertarian to not use paragraph breaks
Also you have to account for how many options you actually feasibly have. Some locales simply don’t have the luxury of avoiding certain products. Really, the argument ancaps give for how power wouldn’t be accumulated in their system is that the consumer could simply choose other products, but if one company owns the whole town that’s just silly. They would have to move (which is a big expense) to vote with their wallet?
"Vote with your dollar" is such a bullshit line. Like yeah, if you don't want Big Dairy to start selling BBQ sauce ice cream, then don't buy it. But imagine someone saying "if you don't like slavery, then don't buy them!"
If votes are dollars, then it follows that those with more dollars get more votes, and thus more say. Exactly what those libertarian ideologues want.
Yeah, it's so stupid even libertarians would've dropped that line if they only had 2 brain cells to rub together and thought about it for 10 seconds. If dollars = votes, than multi-billioners like Bezos or Musk have voting power of many millions of working class americans, and even average middle class american have voting power of hundreds if not thousands of poor people from poverty stricken countries like Haiti, Afghanistan, Syra etc.
The rats stealing is literally for their survival and most of the time(exept the last scene) we see them taking things that humans either didn't want or wouldn't miss.
Yeah, that is in fact Remy's father's whole point; he doesn't see what they do as stealing, because they're taking things that humans have already thrown out
It also ties into the main themes of the movie, one of which is about poverty and the struggle between the elite and the rest of us. One of the main villains is an elitist food critic who is defeated by a food that symbolizes a simple way of life held by the poor.
@@Mathee even legally speaking, if the food has been placed in a dumpster you actually give up your legal rights to it as long as it is in that dumpster. its why dumpster diving is completely legal, long as you do it in public lots
@@phil8910 no you are wrong it changes from state to state and from country to country
From what I know in most states the shop owns things in the dupster
@@ambustio9807 yeah I heard this
Matthew Patrick Game Theory is the kind of guy to see Aladdin give the bread he stole to starving orphan children and think that it's a moral failure of the starving orphan children to eat that stolen bread instead of intuiting that the bread must be stolen and returning it to wherever it was stolen from
Yep, typical Democrat.
He probably thinks the solution to pedophilia is for little kids to stop tempting all those nice adults.
Yes👏👏👏
Precisely
Maybe if it was stolen from another poor person. Things aren’t that black and white
@@dyltube6395 youre just sidestepping the point of the comment lmao
The onceler just girlbossed a bit too hard. Can't blame him for that
CRYING
And well… Matpat man failed.
Oh he destroyed an enviorment endangering all humans living there and all the creatures in that enviorment?
He's just misunderstood😒
@@lunarsprinkle6580 He's a literal slay queen. No choice but to stan.
Girlkeep gatelight gasboss
I love the idea that MatPat thinks the people can just *not buy air.* It's almost like O'Hare lives off of controlling the whole supply of something that everybody needs.
If this guy's take is "it's your fault because you won't stop breathing" imagine his take on real life topics
They can… if they NEEDED to buy air, they would be dead all the time because those little air fans don’t do the job lmao. The atmosphere is obviously full of air, O Hare is selling empty bottles.
@@cajunking5987 shut up
Just like how we pay for water irl when we shouldn't have to
@@cajunking5987
He's selling them clean air. Freedom from the smog that envelops the atmosphere. That is what's happening. It's why he wants more smog and no trees. Less smog = cleaner, more breathable air = less money. It's literally a cartoon villain scheme.
Part of what endears us to Remy is that he's struggling with a moral code on a more mundane hierarchy of needs than the rest if the world is holding him to. "Gosh, I really hate stealing, I wish I could be better" while bullets and blades zoom past. It's the same thing that makes Aladdin endearing . Both characters steal under relatively forgivable circumstances from the perspective of the audience, who sees their lives in jeopardy all the time, and the characters are generous when they feel safe enough to behave that way.
Just wanted to get that out, 231 days after this video came out lol.
using silly science to back up a silly theory is fun and you can turn your brain off for a minute and enjoy something silly
but matpat's apparent lack of media literacy and weird moral rants aren't fun and there's a definite line between those two. i used to watch matpat theories like religiously and videos like these fucked up the way i interpreted stories for a looong while
you put exactly how i feel into words ! it all makes sense thank you
Ah, he suffers from the Reading Comprehension Devil
Tbh I kinda relate to the comprehension struggles sometimes lol
Tbh I kinda relate to the comprehension struggles sometimes lol
Fun fact, he just reads the scripts, a lot of those theories were written by someone else, he just “reviews” it for approval before recording the video. But obviously it wasnt always like that so clearly i agree with you. Just thought id add a little something to your comment 😁
What’s worse about the Us critique is that the family *could* tell. There’s this whole bit about how Adelaide has no rhythm vs. the kids and her husband, how she’s neurotic and detached and how that strains her relationships with the family members. Her being a tether was foreshadowed from the FIRST scene in the movie!
Also: I’d argue that Us is more explicitly about race than class, with the tethers (who are literally the fuel of the US and necessary for its survival) standing in for Black people, particularly the Black underclass.
I agree. All of Jordan Peeles movies are about the black experience and racism in America. And I thought Us was definitely about race.
I thought Us definitely had themes about race but was meant to be more about class. But like, that's part of the point. You cannot discuss class in the United States without, on some level, also discussing race. The two are just too linked, both historically and currently. So any readings about the themes about class can (and probably should in most cases) be applied to race as well.
wrong, its very much about class, but Jordan understands you cannot have a discussion of class without race in the US (or really, most countries, actually). So saying it is about the black working class and not he white working class seems stupid - or maybe Jordan is a racist who also love oppression Olympics - who knows.
You could just as easily say is has nothing to do with race, ut it has black peole as the main characters because hollywood underrepresents POC and Jordan wanted to do something about it because he is in a position to.
Or maybe the movie is actually about why chocolate and PeanutButter taste good together.
The family above is black tho. Why can't black filmmakers talk about class?
I mean to me that whole bit just read as normal human behavior I know a good twist is something you have no reason to suspect until it's revelation makes you look at things differently but frankly I don't get the insistence that the difference between the thethers and those they are tethered to is obvious and noticeable when the twist is itself is based in the idea that the tethers to quote Joel are "just like literally exactly like 'US'"
"Vote with your dollar" is such a privileged take. I'd love to be able to afford a $50 shirt that was made by unionized workers in good conditions but the big box sweat shop $10 shirt is what's in my budget. Not to mention things like being in a food desert means that you don't really have a choice even with what products you buy because you need to eat, so of course half of what you buy is going to be wrapped in a thousand layers of plastic and not sustainably sourced. The message of the Lorax wasn't "consumer bad." It was stand up for your rights and needs anyway you can. Vote. Protest. Start a union. Spread awareness. Care
secound hand existed right?
He really do be like “the people of Thneedville are enabling cruelty with their consumption. They should do the noble alternative and *f u c k i n g d i e .*
@@ThePapaja1996 because well off white women (like emma chamberlain) made thrifting “trendy”, thrift stores either jack up their prices on the good items or are completely barren of anything wearable. plus, they still contribute to a lot of waste, considering how much they take in and how much they’re able to put out. under capitalism, there is no ethical consumption, just better ways to reduce harm. for example, good fair takes a shit ton of clothes and puts them in a mystery box and they’re priced pretty well for what they give. and the trend of people up cycling old clothes, a brilliant way to develop ones style and use something they probably wouldn’t have worn otherwise. there’s ups and downs to everything, we just gotta decide what our morals can deal with.
"You criticize society yet you participate in it. Curious! 🤔" -mattpat probably
@@guy-sl3kr bruh that deadass is him tho fr
Honestly I think they're the victims of their own success at this point. They've got an insane turnover, and to meet their deadline they need to find an angle - sometimes they botch it.
Makes sense when considering the amount of videos they have made in a wide range of media and topics.
@@AL-lh2ht 100% true. They kind of just have to make a video, and not all of them are going to be right, and you can poke holes in every single one besides the science ones, and even then you end up with 3ft tall pikman. It’s is just so posed to be a vessel to explain a topic in a fun way, as well as entertain.
I remember watching a video on their creative process, and it seems like they plan the games/films first and then construct a theory during the writing stage
They are not victims, its just lore about fictional worlds, no one should put such big value on being right or wrong about lore that some guy on their jammies was typing out at 3am to finish a deadline, even if those writers can be really good. at the end of the day, they are human, its not real. they are, fictional worlds.
the only thing bad film or game theories show us, is that there is a lot of mentally deranged people that put way too much value on ART being right or wrong, instead of being interpretative. Which is how it should be, that's why we have fanboys and fandoms, and people that will idolize anyone, I'm sure a lot in here idolize big joel. Its okay to have big issues with how media is taken.
But there is a fundamental difference in matpat being wrong about the lore of a franchise, and big joel, talking about the human person, Matpat, and why he thinks in 1 way or the other and trying to make him seem like a villain. Even if he will point out at the start and say, oh i don't hate you matpat, i kind of respect you then proceeds to again, put more value on fictional worlds, than a real human being and is willing to make a bunch of leaps to defend remy from rattatouille, but wont make any leap to defend why matpat would think in 1 way or the other, i mean if big joel had made any research he would know, game theory film theory, are big and they have writers that write scripts, and matpat doesn't do all. So would have been a good way to start by calling out the channel, instead of the person right? but no, he wants to make it personal. cause he doesn't care about the difference of misinformation about fictional worlds, and real life persons.
And also matpat has said plenty times, he doesn't like all his theories, but at the end of the day is about making an alternative story that is entertaining.
You can watch one of his videos and NOT take it to heart. Like he can say Mario is mental, and you don't have to stop consuming Mario games, cause that is wrong... You can just take it as a fun little side story that is obviously a leap, even if it isn't, cause who the fuck cares, its FICTION.
I think you hit the nail on the head. I still frequently watch the Theory channels and I haven't seen any that are quite as bad as these recently so, that's something at least. Matpat has also been open about "not always believing every theory he makes," which may or may not be a convenient hand wave, I don't know.
Matpat made a whole ass movie review to say he thinks company towns are actually great. Wild
which video was that?
I think the reason Matpat takes these stances is something you can see from watching his live channel’s playthrough of the latest FNAF: he makes a theory as soon as the thought enters his brain, and continues to try to prove it even if it ends up indefensible. His latest theory is so egregiously off that he’s decided to retroactively theorize that *every MC* in the games with a static game over screen was meant to be a robot, not just Gregory.
That's kinda the exact opposite of what you're supposed to do when forming a hypothesis
Sadly it’s not an uncommon phenomena. People often tweak facts to fit a hypothesis rather than the other way around. When he only did Game Theory it was more charming as it at least elevated the discourse of the medium of the bit. Film Analysis is a long extant discipline though
@@justtheoneofme159 okay boo hoo he's rich
@@shjilz I don't think this is meant to be a defense of MatPat's shit quality, merely an observation. Perhaps one could even call it.... A theory.
@@SeymourDisapproves A Theory Theory!
Matt blaming consumers for *wanting air* is straight up sad and hilarious simultaneously.
I wonder if he hears Immortan Joe's "don't become addicted to water" spiel in Fury Road and thinks, "that's a good point. Is he secretly the good guy?"
Yeah because consumers are never wrong, its all the big corporations making things, and we just HAVE to consume them, cause i mean, its there... so why not right?
Lets not kid ourselves, big corporations are a reflection of the greed and laziness of the population. If it wasnt that way, then we would have to believe that there is just some nefarious bad people at the top of all those companies by cheer fucking luck... But you could swap people all day long at the top, and they would end up in the same please. Increasing profits, fulfilling consumer demand.
Im not an apologist of big corporations. But if people weren't so stupid as to want luxury air, maybe there would have not been a demand to monopolize it. and again the only way to stop that from being that way, is from people to wake the fuck up. Not just expect things to change . Obviously the lorax is such a stupid movie, and you can interpret it any way you want, but literally it stands true, if everyone is happy and thriving, what are we complaining about?
what late capitalism does to a mf
@ exactly
@ in the end, though, it doesn’t excuse how bad the B plot of the movie was.
"It's easy to blame the guy who cut down all the trees in the world and the guy who sells us literal air."
The reason MattPat always uses animations of himself is because he can’t reliably show his real face with that boot so far down his throat.
@@akorn9943 or because he can’t say it with a straight face.
Come on, he probably just doesn't like showing his face on camera, or can't be bothered to film himself for long periods.
@@100billionsubscriberswithn4 No you don't get it. The Sans is Ness guy is actually a bourgeois capitalist pig because he made a dumb cliche theory in one of his weekly episodes. Him using the "The bad guy is actually good" cliche on a movie with a political undertone actually 100% exposes his political views, and the video must be criticized because it is the reason we are in this corporate hellscape.
I liked older matpat, like doing the math on how fast chun li had to spin to do the spinning bird kick. Or even if the thing could be done, or if you’d just die. Like the leap of faith from AC. These newer theories are more boring and just try to analyze movies or games in sometimes weird ways. Or look super deep into lore of video games.
Lore dives work for shit like From Soft, but he does it for a lot of stuff where it seems like he’s pulling it out of his ass. And I say that as someone who still occasionally watches his shit, because he’s still entertaining.
"sure, he didn't wanna grow the tree in the end, but..." BUT? BUT WHAT MATPAT. THAT'S THE WHOLE MOVIE. TREE = GOOD. NO TREE = BAD. IT's LITERALLY THAT SIMPLE IT'S FOR CHILDREN
i mean
he missed the part where selling air is literally the most stereotypically villainous capitalist thing to do
@@k.morningstar7983 nothing wrong with zillionaires 🥰
/s
"people who traffic diamonds who make billions exploiting children are not the villains? The real villain are all those guys who buy their girlfriends engagement rings!"
Guy will forget marketing exists so he doesn't have to criticize capitalism
@@Guimhj "who controls the means of production? Who cares?"
It's an interesting idea to apply to the war on drugs. The cartels are the bad guys, but as long as they can make insane profits, they will never be defeated.
@@VoltismProductions so you agree? Profit is the problem?
@@aj7058 profit is the problem but in certain circumstances the best solution is to use other market forces like legalizing drugs. Probably not as applicable to the lorax though
"He takes a stance and runs with it come hell or high water." is exactly the description of his For Honor theories that feigned historical accuracy by stating "facts" that were so holywood film and untrue it hurt.
I’ll never forget when he made a Film Theory where he argued FOR the Empire because the Rebellion dared to waste taxpayer money by destroying the Empire’s planet-destroying space laser.
he later said in relation to that video that it was a joke, i think
Mat Pat's take on O'Hare is like saying "Bezos doesn't let his workers have more breaks because so many more people need very important packages shipped faster. I'm thinking of YOOOUU ALL." Sounding very "Fountainhead" on the Lorax Mat Pat.
It's basically Mat seeing everything wrong with Capitalism and thinking "well it couldn't possibly be a flaw in Capitalism, a completely flawless system. Must be all the pool's fault."
Yeah. You could tell he was chuggin' that fountain water in his rhetoric.
You guys are probably supporting bezos by buying from Amazon. That’s what matpats point was. You’re hypocrites.
@@bennywolfe4357 What MatPat severely overlooks is the reality of manufactured consent that is produced by all great powers. What choice does a person really have when there are few effective checks and balances preventing Amazon from monopolizing markets, exploiting workers, and controlling prices as it has? Amazon is not the cheapest and most accessible option because of purely honest business practice; it has used unchecked cunning and tactics to run smaller businesses into the ground to ensure its monopoly on the commerce delivery market. The same goes for O'Hare and air, except he's even worse because he harms the environment to ensure people need his product. Where is the other option there?
You can call it hypocrisy, because it is, but stopping there completely misses the bigger picture that the everyman's wallet does not realistically influence markets, as MatPat would have you believe, because people who have to worry about money often have to compromise for convenience and affordability to get by, even if they would truly prefer to put their money elsewhere.
@@bennywolfe4357 hypocrisy means nothing, a murderer can believe murder is wrong, that doesn’t mean that murder is right. I believe that Amazon is bad I have purchased a couple things from Amazon that doesn’t mean Amazon isn’t bad
If we are going to have a super serious, very literal take on Ratatouille I feel like it would really have to focus on how horrifying the prospect of a world were rats are fully sapient beings but still treated like pest animals is. Like, if rats are people, then maybe instead of focusing on letting one rat cook we should address them being the subject of ongoing genocidal mass murder?
the very existence of exterminators, like, as a profession, has always disturbed me a little within this world. Made all the worse by the fact that Linguine doesn't even seem all that surprised by the fact that the rat he's about to drown is actually basically a tiny hairy human. So do people know about the sentience of rats?
@@fennelcomeaux9663 Chicken run is for me, the epitome of this horrifying concept.
It's basically a human food farm, its basically cannibalism!
After the take on Lorax, I'm really excited to se his new channel, "Book Theory", where he argues Brave New World sounds like a really nice place to live, actually. Look how everyone seems so happy!
That could work in a "comparing it to the present" way
Hey book theory and today we're talking about how the CAPTIOL IN HUNGER GAMES is actually benevolent. You see in the books it is established that each district has a job to do so they have JOBS the capitol is providing Panem with work so they should just accept the living conditions and not rise up, but hey that's just a theory A BOOK THEORY
"Bernard is a nice guy; he's just misunderstood!" says Matpat but unironically.
That leaves me really scared about him realeasing "History Theory".
Hey internet! Welcome to Book theory! Today we’ll be looking at whether Voldemort is a bad guy! I mean, if he has thousands of followers, it means he to be good, right?
It's always important that: if you see somebody stealing food, no you didn't
Why
@jared4505 If someone is at the point of needing to steal food in order to exist, it's 100% moral to steal food and the blame is on the system who put them in that position
Wrong, stealing is bad@@jakedanielsen4512
Its never moral to steal it might be understandable but its still not the right thing to do@@jakedanielsen4512
Definitely correct but I gotta put in the 🤓 face and be like ‘well what if it’s Caviar or Iberico Ham? They don’t need that!’
i think it's so funny how he's baffled by the concept of Rick being a hypocrite as if that's not like
really in-character for him
Maybe it’s a purposeful misinterpretation, because that’s kinda the whole deal with Matpat and the theorist channels
Still stuns me how much of so called fans of Rick and Morty don't understand how much they're told Rick is an objectively dysfunctional character that likes to pretend he's a god and not a human.
@@Kimmie6772 I mean... it's a show that is *exceptionally* sympathetic to that dysfunction. We're constantly told Rick is a narcissistic arsehole, but shown that he is essentially heroic, if deeply cynical towards heroism. He is constantly shown to be correct, his cynicism is constantly validated.
Though given Rick is a really transparent self-insert of Dan Harmon none of the above is particularly surprising.
Ouch, but yeah lmao
@@paultapping9510 Rick, floating through inter dimensional oblivion with no hope of survival:
“oh please, dear god, please god save me, oh sweet dear god save me, please…”
Rick, 5 minutes later once he has actually survived:
“Yes! F*ck you there is no god!”
Dude is clearly a hypocrite. He gets a lot wrong in that show, we even see how when the distractions subside his lifestyle has lead him to suicidal depression.
Let's not forget about how one of his first "film theories" was for Harry Potter and it took him 14 minutes to "prove" something that was literally stated outright in the book.
He literally claimed he didn't know...?
@@toastialian But that doesn’t mean everyone else doesn’t. It’s not a theory; it’s just a fact.
@@eris6676
Yes that actually makes sense
But he literally didn't know, so i don't see the problem
Matpat should've just stuck to science theories imo. When it comes to the context of the game, he either points out something extremely obvious, or misses the mark in every way possible.
@@toastialian - ... How do you not see the problem? If you're going to make a film theory video about a story... maybe the first thing you could/should do is read the *source material?!*
Also I can't be bothered to watch a braindead Film Theory video, what "theory" did he "come up" with?
Thneedville is supposed to represent the First World and the fact that even though everyone appears to be a happy consumer, beyond the flickering neon lights on the Walls there's still a world of desolation and misery.
Ah yes, the underclass being allowed to eat must always be framed as a gift, not a right. How very familiar.
Or breathe air apparently lol
Makes him feel like a boomer lmao
"Always a bigger fish"
About the whole "Vote with your dollar" stuff: While the idea of the ecological footprint was an idea of actual ecological thinking people, the "carbon footprint" was mainly popularized by fossil fuel companies to shift the responsibility to the consumer, saying "No, we're not the bad guys, you are". So basically exactly what MatPat says. When he says "It's easy to point at the big buisness guys" he acts like it's not just as easy to point at the consumers and to say "Well, just buy green products". I would say both consumers and capitalists are part of a destructive system, their relation is the problem. But the capitalists have the position of power in this system. Yeah, they need the consumers to buy their products, but a big capitalist has so much possibilities to spread propaganda, false informations and to hide the actual conditions of their products... . Like even if you want to buy the 'better products', you can't actually be sure that those products are that 'green'. And in the end, neither consumer nor capitalist will give actual solutions. 'Consumer' ist just the role you play for the capitalists. Capitalists only care about you as a consumer, not about you as an actual person. But you have to act as a person with everything that is part of you including your role in your community to change things or more: to create systematic solutions.
Not to mention how many big companies are essentially just monopolies. There is no way to consume ethically under capitalism because a desire to maximize profit inevitably leads to unethical behavior.
Also, the “ethical” products out there are fucking expensive. When people aren’t being paid enough to make ends meet, being “ethical” is secondary to survival. The majority of people can’t spend $50 on a single shirt.
Yes and it also completely destroys the ability to not buy. Power is not in the wallet it's in the transaction. If you refuse to consume as much as a matter of belief or stance, this removes you from the company's decision making. There will never be a corporation that exists that says, the wallets have spoken: they stopped buying our products so we must stop making them.
The carbon footprint and how people think about it (the fossil fuel propaganda way) is to funny to me.
You can just enter your actual information on one of these calculators online and it will make you feel like shit.
But then you can enter the information of some perfect being you can imagine that always does whatever it takes to minimize their carbon footprint.
And at the end you find out this perfect being would still consume too much carbon. Because of course this person can‘t change our larger way of life that is almost entirely controlled by cooperations. He can‘t control if streets are built or not, he doesn‘t control the electricity production, he doesn‘t control how much plastic is used everywhere. At each step he can only try to minimize his consumption a bit.
maaaanufacturing consent
Matt Patt is an comedian and entertainer and a centrist. But he does bring up a point on how absurd it is that we are allowing to package resources (Especially water) and how that points to the absurdity of Late Stage Capitalism.I mean the Lorax is a shitty film, he knows it intrinsically, because it has a villain. When it doesn't need a villain.
But he is an entertainer and didn't want to end his whacky video on a down note. I mean "voting with your dollar" is about as effective as "eat the rich memes" and hating on the system.
I think we have to be aware that its our consumer culture that is ahuge factor. If we buy clean water, we are idiots. And our species should try to at least prioritize getting water to everyone.
I love this vibe you have holding that microphone like it's some kind of sceptre and you're in some throne, residing over the bad takes and passing judgement
Oh good lord, THANK YOU for that Lorax section. Film Theory came out with a Lorax vid ten days after mine dropped, and BOY, I'm tellin' ya...for weeks I was stuck under this endless downpour of comments like, "The point of this film went right over your head! It's the consumer's fault! Go watch the film theory video, you idiot!"
I didn't want to come off like I was butthurt, so I kept my mouth shut. It's true that the film puts a lot of the blame on the consumers. But YIKES, as someone who doesn't come from a lot of money, those comments REEEEALLY rubbed me the wrong way. It was Mat's "vote with your wallet" moral that got to me the most. I'm glad you pointed out how corporate leaders like O'Hare CREATE demand. They pull crap like lobby to block public transport initiatives so consumers are forced to buy more gas-based cars. Corporations also out-price or consume the opposition, so that consumers have fewer companies to choose from. And that's not to mention the fact that middle-class America barely exists anymore. Fewer and fewer people have the resources to "vote with their wallets." It's all hand-to-mouth. Even a couple bucks can make a huge difference when you can barely afford food, rent, and meds. Amazon knows that, and that's why they make sure to post lower prices than family-owned businesses. To place the blame on consumers and prop up the corporate leaders as heroes amongst all that...Ugh. Just...thank you.
(I appreciated your Ratatouille portion a lot as well!)
P.S. Just saw your comment about Universal. RIP. Those guys were RELENTLESS with my video.
Blaming the consumer for a predatory corporate tactics under a functional Monopoly is the financial equivalent of blaming a rape victim by saying, "Look at how you were dressed. What did you think was going to happen?"
The whole reason why monopolies are bad is because they completely remove the consumer's ability to "Vote with their wallets".
So yes, I feel your pain after watching that video.
And frankly Matpat seems to have a disturbing undercurrent of anti-consumer philosophy in his videos in general.
A problem is that people blame capitalism for monopolies, while monopolies are the opposite of capitalism and come from government control.
Y’all need to realize that matpa…he doesn’t really put a lot of research into some of his videos? They are kinda click baity so with most things he prefers (probably true thing< crazier and more entertaining thing)
@@EvilSandwich okay you guys are getting a little out of hand. Matt patt, The film theory guy, is not prescribing a corporate agenda. You and the guy who made this video need a Twitter users anonymous meeting and you need it bad.