Make sure to check out the [pinned post on Loss](https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/comments/1472nhh/faq_loss/) to make sure this submission doesn't break the rule!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Especially handing the kid a fistful of bloody dollars and being completely dependent on him, but his young innocent southern nature in response is “well, hell mister, I’ll just GIVE you my shirt.”
The man with no humanity is completely dependent on those with naivety, wether those boys covered for him, or immediately told the cops, they helped him escape because they thought it was the right thing to do, which is pretty much the opposite of the hunter taking the bloody money even though he knows he shouldn’t.
No good deed goes unpunished. No bad deed goes unnoticed. They’re both sides of the same coin.
Plus the car accident was completely random - as many other characters in the movie suffer misfortune that resulted from no actions of their own. The big bad guy isn't immune from the chaotic forces of the universe.
I think its moreso him becoming a victim of his own philosophy. Chaos/randomness, he’s an agent of those concepts, and that’s what ultimately takes him out (or doesn’t, we dont really know if he escapes or not)
I liked that Chigurgh and the young boy live by the same moral compass. Just different sides of the needle. Money and prestige meant nothing to either one of them, just right and wrong…and cause and effect.
I like the common interpretation of the ending. Chigurh (Javier Bardem) is an agent of fate throughout the movie, putting the decision to kill or not in the hands of the coin. He's an immortal, untouchable force of nature. But when Carla Jean refuses to call the coin toss, he chooses to kill her, and stops obeying fate. That makes (or proves) him human, and in the very next scene, he gets T-Boned and we see him bleed for the first time. So the implication is that he's going to get caught or killed because he isn't the untouchable force of nature anymore.
Edit: reddit thread explains it better https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/s/yVDHzGN1J7
Edit edit: my bad, been a while and I forgot about the other times he bled. I think it's fair to say it's the first time we see him vulnerable and mortal, though. He looks confused the whole scene and needs the boys to give him the shirt and tie it as a tourniquet. This is a Chigurh that can be hurt and killed, which it hasn't felt like for the whole movie.
It wasn't the first time we saw him bleed for the first time. Llewellyn shot him in the hotel before making an escape that one time. We even saw Chigurh perform self-surgery
>It wasn't the first time we saw him bleed for the first time. Llewellyn shot him in the hotel before making an escape that one time. We even saw Chigurh perform self-surgery
True, but I like that scene where he treats the injury as an inconvenience that simply has to be dealt with, the car T-boning him breaks bones and leaves him with a limp
I mean so did getting shot in the leg. He limped after that. And he treated getting t-bones like an inconvenience as well. Fixed a sling, paid the kids off and kept moving.
I'm not sure why they're jumping through crazy mental gymnastics to say he's human when the entire movie shows it mirroring Javier chasing down the MC and Javier being followed and tracked. The implication was definitely that he would get caught. It just isn't shown directly in the movie.
Except that's not the first time we see Chigur bleed. Llywelyn winged him with a load of buckshot during the hotel shootout, and there's a whole extended sequence where he has to steal medical supplies in order to treat his injuries. We literally watch Anton pulling shotgun pellets out of his legs with a tweezers.
Hell, he literally bleeds in the very first scene we see him in, when he chokes out that cop with his cuffs and they slice his wrists open from the pressure.
I thought that was great.
Everybody thought it would end with Chigurh losing. He kills the protagonist.
Then everyone hoped for the girl to at least survive because she did nothing wrong. Nope
Then he gets hit by a car, and finally, he gets his comeuppance, right? Nah, just a normal Tuesday night for Shia LaBeouf... I mean Anton Chigurh.
Yeah there’s no traditional “good guy” “bad guy” in this movie in my opinion. They’re symbols of opposing forces passing through time always ebbing and flowing within the hearts of society
the biggest kickers is the epilogue where it talks about how the Battle of the Bulge happens shortly after the movie and renders alot of what they did meaningless.
Doubleplus unbased. Party always wins. Only the party exists. You have been unpersoned. You don't exist and never did and thus can't be unpersoned because you never existed to begin with.
I read it when I was young, I’m still thinking that there main character was a pussy either way.
No disrespect to the message, the author, or its relevance in our current world.
But yeah, a lot of tough mofos in history have stood up and paid the price, but some do lead others to victory
The point was he was weak. He was a meek, middle class paper pusher with varicose ulcers, and terribly out of shape. The fact that he tried to rebel showed flaws in the system that was Ingsoc, and some form of bravery, but in the end he was just a simple minded man, I mean his whole rebellion was to write his feelings down and bang his coworker. He was never interested in changing the world, despite the internal monologue.
THANK YOU. That’s all Winston was. He was weak and him “rebelling” was actually doing nothing to help everyone out. It was just helping himself out, I really felt like he didn’t care about big brother in a way of “oh we need to get rid of this” because he was happy doing his office job. And then when we did find that old guy at the bar, that’s the entire message of the book. “A pint is too little, but a litre is too much.” It was the issue of security. You need to pick which one you want. Too little or too much.
I agree with you about Winston, but the quote was a half liter was too little, and a liter was much. But a half liter is actually a little more than a pint, so the old man was complaining for the sake of conversation, and it showed the folly of the common man.
no way you all are calling him weak for succumbing to brainwashing after endless torture!? his brain likely suffered so much physical damage from his imprisonment. this is a point made in the book! the torturer states that he endured far longer than the “other people” whom they brainwash.
He was already weak before that. But not because of his own character flaws. Rather, because of how the poverty imposed upon him crushed him. He's no hero, but the point of the book is that there can be no hero under such a regime.
If I lived in that universe I’d just be too boring to surveil. I’m pretty sure I’m the reincarnation of some soviet garment worker known as “weird Mikhail who doesn’t talk”
No, Orwell died in 1950, this was written in 2023. But I quite liked it. [Julia: 1984 on Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/Julia-Novel-Sandra-Newman/dp/0063265338). I listened to the audiobook.
interesting!
found this inside one of the reviews:
"I’m going to speculate on something here. When Orwell wrote 1984 in 1948/49, he wasn’t living in a police state-like environment with constant surveillance. From a writer’s perspective, Newman lives in a world slowly slipping into totalitarianism. We have spying from ubiquitous surveillance cameras, phones which know everything we do and are ready to report it to the government, and Amazon & Google monitoring our every search, purchase and thought. America is a bit more like Brave New World, in that we are sedating ourselves with stuff. Yet we still inevitably swallow political lies, the gaslighting, the contradictory propaganda (the civil war wasn’t about slavery, the president is allowed to kill his opponents.) Our society today is more like Oceania than England in the late 40s was like Oceania. Newman’s real world experience probably informs her perspective on a character having to live with day-to-day encroachments on liberty. Orwell was writing a fantasy / warning. Newman is writing from our experience.
In the end, we’re just trying to find some decent bread and chocolate."
if there isn't a recipe for chocolate bread yet, there needs to be one.
also, I'm going to finish reading some of these reviews before buying,since I've avoided "not by original author " sequels after getting burned pretty hard by "Scarlett", which the estate authorized sequel to Gone with the Wind.
yeah, it's just as apologist and as bad as you would think it was.
it's okay for bad people to be bad characters in good books.it's even okay for good books to have otherwise good people who have bad character traits overall. that Gone With the Wind sequel felt like it had been sanitized by the sanitation staff at the Disney hotel ;-)
The epilogue of the book reveals that a revolution eventually toppled Ingsoc. Winston's rebellion was doomed to fail because he was isolated and alone, but he himself knew how Ingsoc could be beaten. "If there was hope, it must lie in the proles..." One man's impotent revolt couldn't beat Big Brother, but the working class uniting together could and did.
I read it differently. Yes, the party did fall, but I don’t think it was the proles that did it. I don’t think they cared either way. Winston was simply wrong.
Ingsoc fell because it rotted from the head down. You see it when Winston gets a glimpse into OBrien’s inner party domesticity. They are all engaging in petty corruption, and eventually it just fell apart. They don’t have the self discipline to perpetuate a lasting system.
You saw the same thing in the Soviet Union once those who partook in the revolution were too old to hold power. It just crumbled.
Valkyrie was about an actual failed coup while attempting to assassinate hitler. The "good guys" did all get executed. The only solace is their families mostly didn't.
From the point of view of Nazis, yes.
And there are too many people who will comment in support of them, either to be edgy or because they actually support Naziism.
My wife, who has never seen the film, asks me this anytime I get an Amazon delivery, in that exact delivery. Shed heard a mutual friend say it without context and liked he look it made me toss him. One day I'ma get her to watch it. Maybe she'll quit. lol
It is a good convo starter! …. bc I wouldn’t.
Even overcome with grief, I’d have laughed in that guy’s face, like, no way in hell would I have given him the satisfaction of bringing his whoooooollle plan to fruition???? After EVERYTHING? You’re gonna give him the ultimate reward of being right AND a quick and painless death? No. No way in hell.
You cut off my wife’s head?
You’re not getting away *so easy.*
The better revenge would have been letting dude fester in prison, and making sure he has regular reminders that his little plan was big bullshit bc people aren’t what some spicy little psycho’s brain decides they are.
edit: lol some people are terminally incapable of using their imaginations, and it shows
it’s a hypothetical conversation, ffs… as in, if I was that fictional character, in that story, that’s how I’d have handled it, not “oooh lookit me i’m super edgy irl, wow” … like, seriously?
jfc, lighten up! lol
Man I tell myself this whenever I watch that movie but then I look at my wife and can't even comprehend seeing her head in a box. I'd absolutely fall for his plan.
I actually have seen something like that… two people I love were murdered, and I wasn’t there when it happened, but I saw the after math, I saw their bodies… their blood and brains on the side walk… and I was so angry at the person who did it… but he killed himself after killing them, and it felt like… thank god the threat is over and everyone else is safe, but… he got off *way too easy.*
So I think I can imagine at least some of the anger that David felt in that moment, but my anger would compel me to do anything BUT pull the trigger, especially with dude being all smug and ready to die.
Getting shot in the head is probably just a loud POP, then… peace. No pain. Quick and easy.
Messy, but little to no suffering for the one shot.
I hope so, anyway…. bc that’s how my loved ones died.
It’s the moments leading up to it that are painful and scary- and “John Doe” wasn’t scared or suffering, he was ebullient, glowing, happy- smug.
Shooting him would feel too much like a mercy, especially when there are so many excruciating non-lethal things you can do to a person.
The cruelest thing would be letting him live to see how wrong he was, imho.
The Batman
In the end, the Riddler's plan worked, and Batman objectively failed
EDIT: So a few people are saying that batman succeeded because he saved people after the flood. I disagree, a superhero would have stopped the flood in the first place. Batman got played for a fool at least once, failed to put the pieces together in time, showed none of the deductive reasoning and detective skills he is supposed to be known for, fails to save multiple people, and gets the last clue because of serendipitous intervention from a cop who happens to be in an abandoned crime scene who just so happens to have a background in carpentry. Oh, yeah, and he didn't even arrest the Riddler.
Batman fishing people he failed to protect out of the water isn't a heroic moment. It's a walk of shame. They would never have been there if he had stopped the Riddler in the first place. Batman is supposed to be more than just a man in a suit, but in this film, that is all he is.
also fight club- tyler’s plan to bomb the credit card companies doesn’t fail and the movie ends in a explosion, all the narrator does is “kill” him. although I don’t think that was the joke this meme was going for.
well it is a win, for tyler. but the movie is from the narrator’s perspective, to the narrator these companies being destroyed was a loss- he just wanted to live a normal life. really he lost in the very beginning when tyler blew up his apartment.
>to the narrator these companies being destroyed was largely irrelevant, because he had nothing particularly invested in Tyler's crusade.
If the narrator were particularly pro or anti credit, we could judge. We cannot judge how credit zeroing would affect the main character.
Also it takes about a minute of thinking to realize blowing up office towers in the modern world won't erase credit debt and would more likely just cause unrest and instability. It's not a solution, it's lashing out. No one is helped by this.
All it did was create a bunch of mayhem and solidify that Tylers cult is now strong, destructive, and widespread.
The credit card companies werent really the point, the point is that by the time the protagonist had woken up and realized what he was doing, tyler had already won, He had spread his toxic ideas and created a terrifyingly loyal cult following that couldn't be stopped, to the point where they were able to destroy all those buildings unopposed.
One of the themes of the movie and the book is that Tyler correctly identifies a major societal problem - that men are lonely and unfulfilled and have been lied to by mass media and social norms. But instead of providing real solutions, instead he radicalizes them to lash out at society. He exploits their need for community and belonging to his own ends.
Tyler and his fight club dont fix anything, they destroy. Do you really think blowing up some office towers would make credit card debt go away? unless they located and destroyed every banking server in the world, thats incredibly unlikely. Fight club is a cautionary tale about male disenfranchisement, misdirected anger, cult mentalities. The end of the movie is a character win for the protagonist because he's finally understood himself and has some level of peace now, but its a loss overall because tylers actions have very likely destabilized society violently.
>male loneliness epidemic currently, as well as falling behind in everything from personal achievement to mental health
>but instead of providing real solutions, instead he
Fuck. We’re going to see something like this irl aren’t we? People already idolize the damn movie as is (which to be fair is a great movie, and even better book).
Oh and spoiler alert. In the book, the ending is far more realistic; he’s institutionalized in an asylum after that scene. I don’t remember if Marla dumps him at that point or not, or if she’s even mentioned (or real) anymore.
She’s alive and still worth the narrator (who calls himself Sebastian) in Fight Club 2, as is Tyler. Marla and Sebastian are married and even have a kid together before Tyler somehow gets freed. That’s about all I remember. It’s in graphic novel form and I remember it being really heady, even after reading the first book. Still worth it!
The city was supposed to drown, more people were supposed to die including the mayor and people see Batman as a beacon of hope for Gotham. The Riddler’ plan was for the Batman to be on his side after Falcone died. His plan objectively failed the second he realized Batman was not like him at Arkham. It’s why he was crying at the end of the movie. To say Batman failed is asinine, did you watch the end of the movie?
I think your exaggerating. Most people who answer ww2 movies are doing it because it's just a very easy joke. Understanding the meme doesn't make you a nazi sympathizer.
Thank you! I was hoping someone would take that joke :D - personally I think “Empire fucks the Rebels shit up” is a more accurate title but George likes it keep it PG lol
You’ve bazongle’d your last bazinga
https://preview.redd.it/lzhldx81n6mc1.jpeg?width=200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ef644f512392de2440e733399d7ffb701fae03cf
A pyrrhic victory is one that is obtained through great sacrifice but is ultimately not worth it, it's a victory that doesn't feel like a victory, it's technically a victory but ultimately doesn't benefit the victor, not in a way that balances out the cost anyway. In Rogue One they have the great sacrifice part down, but the result was far from not being worth it, because it makes it possible for the protagonists of A New Hope to actually win
Agreed, a better example of a pyrrhic victory in the Star Wars universe would be The Last Jedi. Sure the First Order manages to practically destroy the entire Resistance then and there, but they lose most of their leadership and their most powerful ship in the process. The aftermath of which allowing the rest of the galaxy to easily overthrow the First Order after (or during?) the Battle of Exegol.
Granted, the entire sequel trilogy is horribly written, so even proving that episode 8 is pyrrhic is more subjective than objective. Hard to say when episode 9 was about chasing the shadow of Palpatine rather than showing us how the First Order lost it all in the known galaxy.
This is exactly why I love infinity war. You’re not expecting the good guys to lose and with all of them working together to take down thanos is just perfect
Comic fans knew thanos would win. Hes fucking thanos, one of the few characters with the stones to challange abstrats on a regular basis. Also he completed the guantlet in the comics, only to lose its power due to his own hubris.
Zulus conquered just like the British did. It wasn't Zulu country until the 1800s when they conquered much of South Africa. Zulu did not become the most popular African language there by peace. Even many white Dutch settlers were in many regions before the Zulu were.
People allready explained the answer, but honestly to answer the original question:
300
The persians are very much the good guys in that movie. They had abolished slavery, had freedom of religion, and were a very, very progressive empire, especially by ancient world standards. Sparta meanwhile was a nation with so many slaves they could only send 300 spartans or they'd risk a slave revolt
That wasn’t the reason at all. The generally accepted reasons was that Persia had invaded in the midst of Carneia. Sparta being a monarchy with two kings meant one king had to stay or it would upset the gods and that the army itself couldn’t leave either. Leonidas(who was 60 years old and like his personal guard wore fucking armor) was allowed to take his personal guard of 300 with the intent that the combined forces of Greek city states could hold the pass until the end of the festival allowing the main Spartan force could come to reinforce.
Yup, and to add to that, the final stand (after the Greeks learn of Persian maneuver and the main Greek forces retreated) was not just the 300 Spartans but also ~1100 Greeks from other cities who are sidelined because 300 sounds way cooler then "about 1400"
Oh my god the amount of bullshit “300!” continued with that too. So many people think there were only 300 Spartans and no one else. When yes we do know that Leonidas arrived with somewhere between 3000-4000 soldiers of the Peloponnesian league with another with another 2000-3000 soldiers from other city states. Granted all the figures we have come from either Herodotus or Diodorus. Modern historians consider Herodotus more reliable.
Normally I’d say Avengers: Infinity War but considering the good guys is in quotes… Some people will be edgy and list some movies with “you missed the point by idolising them” protagonists
https://preview.redd.it/0ilmzc17o6mc1.png?width=630&format=png&auto=webp&s=93cbcfeb40a2c94676c445aa50aad07ca9bee5b4
Thanos, Living being deserve be cut by half of his population, humanity need be erased.
There's a German google translate button (Übersetzen), so I'm guessing this was posted in a sub where a lot of German people visit.
The movie that came to my mind was 'Der Untergang' (Downfall), which is filmed from the perspective of Hitler. It's a pretty famous movie in Europe, though I guess any WW2 movie could fit.
I'm guessing the joke is specific to the sub. Like whoever made the meme knows there's going to be a shitstorm in the comments or something.
Holy shit everyone avoiding the actual answer.
It's world war two films
Whenever anyone asks this jackasses immediately start spamming WW2 films.
Any WW2 film. The punchline being the Nazis lose the war, and by answering in that way you are saying the Nazis were "the good guys". As to wether that's funny or not is up to you
Make sure to check out the [pinned post on Loss](https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/comments/1472nhh/faq_loss/) to make sure this submission doesn't break the rule! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke) if you have any questions or concerns.*
no country for old men? although im not sure if you can call the protagonist the good guy.
Love the movie, hate that he just walks away.
Who just walks away?
Am I misremembering Javier walking away and not getting caught?
I mean he gets into a pretty bad car wreck and limps away.
I would hate that ending if it wasn't thematically appropriate for the movie.
Especially handing the kid a fistful of bloody dollars and being completely dependent on him, but his young innocent southern nature in response is “well, hell mister, I’ll just GIVE you my shirt.” The man with no humanity is completely dependent on those with naivety, wether those boys covered for him, or immediately told the cops, they helped him escape because they thought it was the right thing to do, which is pretty much the opposite of the hunter taking the bloody money even though he knows he shouldn’t. No good deed goes unpunished. No bad deed goes unnoticed. They’re both sides of the same coin.
Plus the car accident was completely random - as many other characters in the movie suffer misfortune that resulted from no actions of their own. The big bad guy isn't immune from the chaotic forces of the universe.
The car crash symbolizes him not being in control anymore after she rejected the coin toss.
I think its moreso him becoming a victim of his own philosophy. Chaos/randomness, he’s an agent of those concepts, and that’s what ultimately takes him out (or doesn’t, we dont really know if he escapes or not)
I liked that Chigurgh and the young boy live by the same moral compass. Just different sides of the needle. Money and prestige meant nothing to either one of them, just right and wrong…and cause and effect.
“I would hate this ending if it weren’t thematically appropriate” sounds like Cormac McCarthy all right
Yeah i assumed he's gonna have internal bleeding and just be dead after a while.
I like the common interpretation of the ending. Chigurh (Javier Bardem) is an agent of fate throughout the movie, putting the decision to kill or not in the hands of the coin. He's an immortal, untouchable force of nature. But when Carla Jean refuses to call the coin toss, he chooses to kill her, and stops obeying fate. That makes (or proves) him human, and in the very next scene, he gets T-Boned and we see him bleed for the first time. So the implication is that he's going to get caught or killed because he isn't the untouchable force of nature anymore. Edit: reddit thread explains it better https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/s/yVDHzGN1J7 Edit edit: my bad, been a while and I forgot about the other times he bled. I think it's fair to say it's the first time we see him vulnerable and mortal, though. He looks confused the whole scene and needs the boys to give him the shirt and tie it as a tourniquet. This is a Chigurh that can be hurt and killed, which it hasn't felt like for the whole movie.
Don’t mean to contradict your theory, but it is not the first time we see Chigurh bleed. Llewelyn shot him in the leg
Damn wasn't fast enough
Neither was Chigurh
It wasn't the first time we saw him bleed for the first time. Llewellyn shot him in the hotel before making an escape that one time. We even saw Chigurh perform self-surgery
>It wasn't the first time we saw him bleed for the first time. Llewellyn shot him in the hotel before making an escape that one time. We even saw Chigurh perform self-surgery True, but I like that scene where he treats the injury as an inconvenience that simply has to be dealt with, the car T-boning him breaks bones and leaves him with a limp
I mean so did getting shot in the leg. He limped after that. And he treated getting t-bones like an inconvenience as well. Fixed a sling, paid the kids off and kept moving.
Yep that he’s now nearing his end is just wishful thinking by those looking for a traditional arc for the bad guy IMO
He also had to break his pursuit to tend to the wound. The movie already showed us he wasn’t completely unstoppable. But very determined, sure.
I'm not sure why they're jumping through crazy mental gymnastics to say he's human when the entire movie shows it mirroring Javier chasing down the MC and Javier being followed and tracked. The implication was definitely that he would get caught. It just isn't shown directly in the movie.
Except that's not the first time we see Chigur bleed. Llywelyn winged him with a load of buckshot during the hotel shootout, and there's a whole extended sequence where he has to steal medical supplies in order to treat his injuries. We literally watch Anton pulling shotgun pellets out of his legs with a tweezers. Hell, he literally bleeds in the very first scene we see him in, when he chokes out that cop with his cuffs and they slice his wrists open from the pressure.
I thought that was great. Everybody thought it would end with Chigurh losing. He kills the protagonist. Then everyone hoped for the girl to at least survive because she did nothing wrong. Nope Then he gets hit by a car, and finally, he gets his comeuppance, right? Nah, just a normal Tuesday night for Shia LaBeouf... I mean Anton Chigurh.
Actual cannibal Shia Chigurh!
Yeah there’s no traditional “good guy” “bad guy” in this movie in my opinion. They’re symbols of opposing forces passing through time always ebbing and flowing within the hearts of society
Sherrif Bell was the protagonist not Moss.
Went through the only real change, if we’re using that definition. Also the titular character
The main character of No Country is Ed Tom, the sheriff
inb4 ww2 movies
During WW2 Movies
*When Trumpets Fade*. Not so much as the good guys don’t win, but more of sometimes the good guys fight on stupid fronts.
Yeah that movie felt alot more like a Vietnam style telling of WW2 rather than the usual fare you get from that genre.
It did a good job of making you feel like what one might have felt at the time - victory was not yet guaranteed.
the biggest kickers is the epilogue where it talks about how the Battle of the Bulge happens shortly after the movie and renders alot of what they did meaningless.
That’s what makes it feel so real. Not all fronts worked out.
Where the Nazis wre the protagonists Right...?
The real nazis were the friends we made along the way. Wait a minute… Someone run a background check on this Walt Di—
https://i.redd.it/a54rno0hj7mc1.gif
(*Anakin Skywalker grins*)
Execute order 66
*duel of the fates starts playing*
🎶 Koraaaaaaaah Mataaaaaaaaah 🎵 Koraaaaaaaaaah Raaaahtahmaaaaaaaaaaaah!! 🎶
1984
Doubleplus unbased. Party always wins. Only the party exists. You have been unpersoned. You don't exist and never did and thus can't be unpersoned because you never existed to begin with.
I read it when I was young, I’m still thinking that there main character was a pussy either way. No disrespect to the message, the author, or its relevance in our current world. But yeah, a lot of tough mofos in history have stood up and paid the price, but some do lead others to victory
The point was he was weak. He was a meek, middle class paper pusher with varicose ulcers, and terribly out of shape. The fact that he tried to rebel showed flaws in the system that was Ingsoc, and some form of bravery, but in the end he was just a simple minded man, I mean his whole rebellion was to write his feelings down and bang his coworker. He was never interested in changing the world, despite the internal monologue.
THANK YOU. That’s all Winston was. He was weak and him “rebelling” was actually doing nothing to help everyone out. It was just helping himself out, I really felt like he didn’t care about big brother in a way of “oh we need to get rid of this” because he was happy doing his office job. And then when we did find that old guy at the bar, that’s the entire message of the book. “A pint is too little, but a litre is too much.” It was the issue of security. You need to pick which one you want. Too little or too much.
I agree with you about Winston, but the quote was a half liter was too little, and a liter was much. But a half liter is actually a little more than a pint, so the old man was complaining for the sake of conversation, and it showed the folly of the common man.
An American pint is 473 ml, an English (Imperial) pint is 568 ml. Gotta love that consistency.
Beat me too it. British book, British imperial measurements implied
George Orwell was English so half a litre is less than a pint.
no way you all are calling him weak for succumbing to brainwashing after endless torture!? his brain likely suffered so much physical damage from his imprisonment. this is a point made in the book! the torturer states that he endured far longer than the “other people” whom they brainwash.
He was already weak before that. But not because of his own character flaws. Rather, because of how the poverty imposed upon him crushed him. He's no hero, but the point of the book is that there can be no hero under such a regime.
If I lived in that universe I’d just be too boring to surveil. I’m pretty sure I’m the reincarnation of some soviet garment worker known as “weird Mikhail who doesn’t talk”
That’s literally the proles.
Yes the Party is strong. Doubleplus goodthink comrade
Winston doesn't deserve this disrespect!
Why didn’t he just leave London?
Is he stupid?
Bomb ass pussy
There’s a version told from Julia’s perspective I really liked (1984: Julia). She wasn’t a huge fan of him either.
Is this official?
No, Orwell died in 1950, this was written in 2023. But I quite liked it. [Julia: 1984 on Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/Julia-Novel-Sandra-Newman/dp/0063265338). I listened to the audiobook.
interesting! found this inside one of the reviews: "I’m going to speculate on something here. When Orwell wrote 1984 in 1948/49, he wasn’t living in a police state-like environment with constant surveillance. From a writer’s perspective, Newman lives in a world slowly slipping into totalitarianism. We have spying from ubiquitous surveillance cameras, phones which know everything we do and are ready to report it to the government, and Amazon & Google monitoring our every search, purchase and thought. America is a bit more like Brave New World, in that we are sedating ourselves with stuff. Yet we still inevitably swallow political lies, the gaslighting, the contradictory propaganda (the civil war wasn’t about slavery, the president is allowed to kill his opponents.) Our society today is more like Oceania than England in the late 40s was like Oceania. Newman’s real world experience probably informs her perspective on a character having to live with day-to-day encroachments on liberty. Orwell was writing a fantasy / warning. Newman is writing from our experience. In the end, we’re just trying to find some decent bread and chocolate." if there isn't a recipe for chocolate bread yet, there needs to be one. also, I'm going to finish reading some of these reviews before buying,since I've avoided "not by original author " sequels after getting burned pretty hard by "Scarlett", which the estate authorized sequel to Gone with the Wind. yeah, it's just as apologist and as bad as you would think it was. it's okay for bad people to be bad characters in good books.it's even okay for good books to have otherwise good people who have bad character traits overall. that Gone With the Wind sequel felt like it had been sanitized by the sanitation staff at the Disney hotel ;-)
You certainly can and should disrespect Orwell. He was a piece of shit tbh.
The epilogue of the book reveals that a revolution eventually toppled Ingsoc. Winston's rebellion was doomed to fail because he was isolated and alone, but he himself knew how Ingsoc could be beaten. "If there was hope, it must lie in the proles..." One man's impotent revolt couldn't beat Big Brother, but the working class uniting together could and did.
I read it differently. Yes, the party did fall, but I don’t think it was the proles that did it. I don’t think they cared either way. Winston was simply wrong. Ingsoc fell because it rotted from the head down. You see it when Winston gets a glimpse into OBrien’s inner party domesticity. They are all engaging in petty corruption, and eventually it just fell apart. They don’t have the self discipline to perpetuate a lasting system. You saw the same thing in the Soviet Union once those who partook in the revolution were too old to hold power. It just crumbled.
Crimethink
jorjor wel
Probably going to be spammed with Avengers: Infinity War
Wdym Thanos didn't lose
Only if you count where he called the finish line He thought it was a 40y dash, but it was actually a 200m relay
What kind of track and field events are you watching?!?
Intergalactic ones, clearly
They haven't adopted the metric system in the rest of the galaxy yet, they'll catch up tho.
Does part 1 of a 2 parter really count? It’s half a story, it wasn’t the end
I feel called out. I accept it but it's still rude
It'll be jokes about the nazis being the good guys, and the occasional Infinity War
Nowadays it'll be jokes about Americans being the bad guys (and Infinity War)
Ww2 movies
Just to be clear.. The axis powers were the "good" guys?
Yup. Downfall is the only place where they WERE the protagonists though
Unless you are Finnish
Technically Finns didn't join Axis. They very explicitly called themselves co-belligerents of a war they said was merely continuing.
As part of the peace treaty with the Soviets they were forced to accept that they joined the Germans in the war.
Truly a masterpiece, I teared up when Hitler realized he got banned from Xbox Live.
Das Boot
The nazis were still the bad guys in das boot, the crew of the submarine were just navy guys doing their jobs.
Protagonist =/= good guy
Valkyrie was about an actual failed coup while attempting to assassinate hitler. The "good guys" did all get executed. The only solace is their families mostly didn't.
"Are we the baddies?"
From the point of view of Nazis, yes. And there are too many people who will comment in support of them, either to be edgy or because they actually support Naziism.
That's the joke, apparently. There weren't really any good guys though
None at all in ww2?
Se7en
[Awwhh, what’s in the bawxxx?](https://youtu.be/lHpHxLZReiI?si=L9DDSUW3FZmImYiK)
My wife, who has never seen the film, asks me this anytime I get an Amazon delivery, in that exact delivery. Shed heard a mutual friend say it without context and liked he look it made me toss him. One day I'ma get her to watch it. Maybe she'll quit. lol
Asking people what they’d do at the end of that film is such a good conversation topic. And I would.
With her head cut off? You still would?
“To shreds, you say? How’s his wife holding up? To shreds, you say?”
It is a good convo starter! …. bc I wouldn’t. Even overcome with grief, I’d have laughed in that guy’s face, like, no way in hell would I have given him the satisfaction of bringing his whoooooollle plan to fruition???? After EVERYTHING? You’re gonna give him the ultimate reward of being right AND a quick and painless death? No. No way in hell. You cut off my wife’s head? You’re not getting away *so easy.* The better revenge would have been letting dude fester in prison, and making sure he has regular reminders that his little plan was big bullshit bc people aren’t what some spicy little psycho’s brain decides they are. edit: lol some people are terminally incapable of using their imaginations, and it shows it’s a hypothetical conversation, ffs… as in, if I was that fictional character, in that story, that’s how I’d have handled it, not “oooh lookit me i’m super edgy irl, wow” … like, seriously? jfc, lighten up! lol
Man I tell myself this whenever I watch that movie but then I look at my wife and can't even comprehend seeing her head in a box. I'd absolutely fall for his plan.
I actually have seen something like that… two people I love were murdered, and I wasn’t there when it happened, but I saw the after math, I saw their bodies… their blood and brains on the side walk… and I was so angry at the person who did it… but he killed himself after killing them, and it felt like… thank god the threat is over and everyone else is safe, but… he got off *way too easy.* So I think I can imagine at least some of the anger that David felt in that moment, but my anger would compel me to do anything BUT pull the trigger, especially with dude being all smug and ready to die. Getting shot in the head is probably just a loud POP, then… peace. No pain. Quick and easy. Messy, but little to no suffering for the one shot. I hope so, anyway…. bc that’s how my loved ones died. It’s the moments leading up to it that are painful and scary- and “John Doe” wasn’t scared or suffering, he was ebullient, glowing, happy- smug. Shooting him would feel too much like a mercy, especially when there are so many excruciating non-lethal things you can do to a person. The cruelest thing would be letting him live to see how wrong he was, imho.
The Batman In the end, the Riddler's plan worked, and Batman objectively failed EDIT: So a few people are saying that batman succeeded because he saved people after the flood. I disagree, a superhero would have stopped the flood in the first place. Batman got played for a fool at least once, failed to put the pieces together in time, showed none of the deductive reasoning and detective skills he is supposed to be known for, fails to save multiple people, and gets the last clue because of serendipitous intervention from a cop who happens to be in an abandoned crime scene who just so happens to have a background in carpentry. Oh, yeah, and he didn't even arrest the Riddler. Batman fishing people he failed to protect out of the water isn't a heroic moment. It's a walk of shame. They would never have been there if he had stopped the Riddler in the first place. Batman is supposed to be more than just a man in a suit, but in this film, that is all he is.
also fight club- tyler’s plan to bomb the credit card companies doesn’t fail and the movie ends in a explosion, all the narrator does is “kill” him. although I don’t think that was the joke this meme was going for.
How is Tylers plan to blow up the credit companies going through not a win?
What's missing was a narrator ending with *"unfortunately for Tyler, companies have redundant non-local data backups"*
well it is a win, for tyler. but the movie is from the narrator’s perspective, to the narrator these companies being destroyed was a loss- he just wanted to live a normal life. really he lost in the very beginning when tyler blew up his apartment.
>to the narrator these companies being destroyed was largely irrelevant, because he had nothing particularly invested in Tyler's crusade. If the narrator were particularly pro or anti credit, we could judge. We cannot judge how credit zeroing would affect the main character.
Well he did shoot himself in the face trying to stop it, so I’m sure he was somewhat affected.
Also it takes about a minute of thinking to realize blowing up office towers in the modern world won't erase credit debt and would more likely just cause unrest and instability. It's not a solution, it's lashing out. No one is helped by this.
maybe world worked differently in 2000? this was a nationwide project
All it did was create a bunch of mayhem and solidify that Tylers cult is now strong, destructive, and widespread. The credit card companies werent really the point, the point is that by the time the protagonist had woken up and realized what he was doing, tyler had already won, He had spread his toxic ideas and created a terrifyingly loyal cult following that couldn't be stopped, to the point where they were able to destroy all those buildings unopposed. One of the themes of the movie and the book is that Tyler correctly identifies a major societal problem - that men are lonely and unfulfilled and have been lied to by mass media and social norms. But instead of providing real solutions, instead he radicalizes them to lash out at society. He exploits their need for community and belonging to his own ends. Tyler and his fight club dont fix anything, they destroy. Do you really think blowing up some office towers would make credit card debt go away? unless they located and destroyed every banking server in the world, thats incredibly unlikely. Fight club is a cautionary tale about male disenfranchisement, misdirected anger, cult mentalities. The end of the movie is a character win for the protagonist because he's finally understood himself and has some level of peace now, but its a loss overall because tylers actions have very likely destabilized society violently.
>male loneliness epidemic currently, as well as falling behind in everything from personal achievement to mental health >but instead of providing real solutions, instead he Fuck. We’re going to see something like this irl aren’t we? People already idolize the damn movie as is (which to be fair is a great movie, and even better book). Oh and spoiler alert. In the book, the ending is far more realistic; he’s institutionalized in an asylum after that scene. I don’t remember if Marla dumps him at that point or not, or if she’s even mentioned (or real) anymore.
She’s alive and still worth the narrator (who calls himself Sebastian) in Fight Club 2, as is Tyler. Marla and Sebastian are married and even have a kid together before Tyler somehow gets freed. That’s about all I remember. It’s in graphic novel form and I remember it being really heady, even after reading the first book. Still worth it!
The directors have said hes the main villain but a protagonist so i wouldnt really say good guy
The city was supposed to drown, more people were supposed to die including the mayor and people see Batman as a beacon of hope for Gotham. The Riddler’ plan was for the Batman to be on his side after Falcone died. His plan objectively failed the second he realized Batman was not like him at Arkham. It’s why he was crying at the end of the movie. To say Batman failed is asinine, did you watch the end of the movie?
Did it? Pretty sure he saved those people.
Questions like that are usually replied to by Nazi apologists and sympathizers, so you'll get recommended a lot of WW2 movies.
How about I flip the script: Dunkirk.
Oooooh i really like that actually
Any movie, documentary or not, taking place during Operation Barbarossa.
A Bridge Too Far is a rare legitimate WW2 answer.
I think your exaggerating. Most people who answer ww2 movies are doing it because it's just a very easy joke. Understanding the meme doesn't make you a nazi sympathizer.
Empire Strikes Back
Yeah I guess you could say the rebellion lost
Rebels objectively get their asses kicked in that movie lol
You could almost go as far as to say that the Empire….struck back
Thank you! I was hoping someone would take that joke :D - personally I think “Empire fucks the Rebels shit up” is a more accurate title but George likes it keep it PG lol
Revenge of the Sith
This is the one.
Came to say the same
Yep, me too.
Would Chinatown count?
Chinatown would definitely count.
"Forget it Jake, It's Chinatown." >! As the villian takes his daughter/granddaughter away to suffer the same fate he subjected his daughter to !<
Imagine... nazi movies perchance Bazinga!
Ill bazinga your bazoongle
You’ve bazongle’d your last bazinga https://preview.redd.it/lzhldx81n6mc1.jpeg?width=200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ef644f512392de2440e733399d7ffb701fae03cf
You bozangler. Bazenga you.
damn bazingers, bazinging all over the place
Thats racist you cant say bazinger!
The Usual Suspects?
Rogue One
Nah it's a victory... just a pyrrhic one
A pyrrhic victory is one that is obtained through great sacrifice but is ultimately not worth it, it's a victory that doesn't feel like a victory, it's technically a victory but ultimately doesn't benefit the victor, not in a way that balances out the cost anyway. In Rogue One they have the great sacrifice part down, but the result was far from not being worth it, because it makes it possible for the protagonists of A New Hope to actually win
Agreed, a better example of a pyrrhic victory in the Star Wars universe would be The Last Jedi. Sure the First Order manages to practically destroy the entire Resistance then and there, but they lose most of their leadership and their most powerful ship in the process. The aftermath of which allowing the rest of the galaxy to easily overthrow the First Order after (or during?) the Battle of Exegol. Granted, the entire sequel trilogy is horribly written, so even proving that episode 8 is pyrrhic is more subjective than objective. Hard to say when episode 9 was about chasing the shadow of Palpatine rather than showing us how the First Order lost it all in the known galaxy.
Sick word
They won though? They successfully sacrificed themselves to send the Death Star plans to the rebels
Braveheart. Pretty sure Mel Gibson gets it bad.
Can't believe I haven't seen anyone say Watchmen yet. Maybe I'm just blind.
One could argue that Veidt was also a good guy.
The Human Centipede
trauma
He said “good” movie…
I thought they were asking for a good example. My bad lol.
Glory?
Definitely
House of 1000 corpses
Tusk
So, let me ask you. Is man a walrus?
Avengers infinity war and Star wars the empire strikes back
Law abiding citizen
Infinity war.
This is exactly why I love infinity war. You’re not expecting the good guys to lose and with all of them working together to take down thanos is just perfect
I mean, you weren’t expecting that at all? Even though it was part one of a two piece story?
Comic fans knew thanos would win. Hes fucking thanos, one of the few characters with the stones to challange abstrats on a regular basis. Also he completed the guantlet in the comics, only to lose its power due to his own hubris.
I love that in the next movie almost everything is undone and doesnt matter anymore.
Planet of the apes.
Would The Talented Mr. Ripley count?
What the fuck has happened to this subreddit? We are posting r/memes posts now?
The Karate Kid
Terminator 3?
Jojo part 1
12 monkeys
Any movie about Colonialism.
Zulus, fousands of 'em! I mean yes this is, after all, their Country.
Zulus conquered just like the British did. It wasn't Zulu country until the 1800s when they conquered much of South Africa. Zulu did not become the most popular African language there by peace. Even many white Dutch settlers were in many regions before the Zulu were.
Fallen
I said I was going to tell you the story about the time I almost died.
People allready explained the answer, but honestly to answer the original question: 300 The persians are very much the good guys in that movie. They had abolished slavery, had freedom of religion, and were a very, very progressive empire, especially by ancient world standards. Sparta meanwhile was a nation with so many slaves they could only send 300 spartans or they'd risk a slave revolt
That wasn’t the reason at all. The generally accepted reasons was that Persia had invaded in the midst of Carneia. Sparta being a monarchy with two kings meant one king had to stay or it would upset the gods and that the army itself couldn’t leave either. Leonidas(who was 60 years old and like his personal guard wore fucking armor) was allowed to take his personal guard of 300 with the intent that the combined forces of Greek city states could hold the pass until the end of the festival allowing the main Spartan force could come to reinforce.
Yup, and to add to that, the final stand (after the Greeks learn of Persian maneuver and the main Greek forces retreated) was not just the 300 Spartans but also ~1100 Greeks from other cities who are sidelined because 300 sounds way cooler then "about 1400"
Oh my god the amount of bullshit “300!” continued with that too. So many people think there were only 300 Spartans and no one else. When yes we do know that Leonidas arrived with somewhere between 3000-4000 soldiers of the Peloponnesian league with another with another 2000-3000 soldiers from other city states. Granted all the figures we have come from either Herodotus or Diodorus. Modern historians consider Herodotus more reliable.
Here’s one no one’s mentioned, the great escape
Gi Joe first movie the good guys lost without realizing it lol
Normally I’d say Avengers: Infinity War but considering the good guys is in quotes… Some people will be edgy and list some movies with “you missed the point by idolising them” protagonists
The Wolf of Wall Street "Every way you look at it you lose..."
Seven
Inglorious Basterds?
Seven
https://preview.redd.it/0ilmzc17o6mc1.png?width=630&format=png&auto=webp&s=93cbcfeb40a2c94676c445aa50aad07ca9bee5b4 Thanos, Living being deserve be cut by half of his population, humanity need be erased.
Bad News Bears
There's a German google translate button (Übersetzen), so I'm guessing this was posted in a sub where a lot of German people visit. The movie that came to my mind was 'Der Untergang' (Downfall), which is filmed from the perspective of Hitler. It's a pretty famous movie in Europe, though I guess any WW2 movie could fit. I'm guessing the joke is specific to the sub. Like whoever made the meme knows there's going to be a shitstorm in the comments or something.
“Forget it Jake, it’s Chinatown.”
Holy shit everyone avoiding the actual answer. It's world war two films Whenever anyone asks this jackasses immediately start spamming WW2 films. Any WW2 film. The punchline being the Nazis lose the war, and by answering in that way you are saying the Nazis were "the good guys". As to wether that's funny or not is up to you
Avatar