Alternative Character Interpretation/Film: Difference between revisions
Alternative Character Interpretation/Film (view source)
Revision as of 00:23, 5 February 2022
, 2 years agoRescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.8.6
Derivative (talk | contribs) m (→Films -- Live-Action: Fixing links to disambiguation pages) |
(Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.8.6) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 21:
** Then there's Gaston—is he just a complete jerk, or is he actually a fun guy with a zest for life who just winds up going mad after Belle rejects him and humiliates him in front of the entire town? It's worth noting that he was originally supposed to die by falling off a cliff and laughing hysterically, indicating that he had indeed been driven mad in his desperate effort to impress Belle.
* Disney princesses, with Rapunzel, Belle, Giselle and Tiana excepted, are kind of terrifying. Fa Mulan is an excessively proficient military conscript on behalf of an absolute monarchy, and the rest are participants in brutal, deadly power struggles in absolute monarchy. Their allies almost always kill their enemies, and the princesses are treating bloodless carnage like a singing contest and a fashion show. The princesses never consider moral questions about absolute monarchy or their own actions, they never have political discussions, no matter how relevant or necessary, and never express any trace of regret, remorse, grief, or confusion whatsoever. They are never wigged out by anything they do or say. I am not a veteran, but I suspect even among combat veterans, their conduct would not necessarily be tolerated. In the end, even Belle and Aurora are spending tax money from other peasant's and scullery maid's meager salaries on their luxury goods. They are not even completely family friendly. The characters around the princesses - many of whom are their own allies - are notorious for committing many deviant, perverse and bizarre acts, and the princesses themselves are not quite family friendly onscreen either. Mulan is a transvestite, and offscreen, the princesses do that thing that biologically results in the existence of their offspring. In other words, they have sex. This is their alleged "happy ending". Sure, they may be carrying the [[Hero Ball]] and have have various "heroine" traits, have feminist tendencies, and never betray their allies, but most Disney Princesses are evil, through and through. They are sane, inhuman hired guns disguised as completely goddamned insane.
* The brain of Bit from [[Tron]] is a universal Turing machine made of a finite state machine with 16 internal states operating on an infinite memory tape with 2-state cells (16,2). The FSM has 16 states because a 1-bit architecture with a 1-bit wide address bus entails a processor with two internal registers with access to a RAM with two memory locations. 2^4 is 16. This is more than the 15-state, 2-symbol universal Turing machine (15,2), so therefore both Bit's brain and the (15,2) can perform any task that any Turing machine can perform. If Bit's brain is fancier, then it could be a 1-bit architecture with a 2-bit address bus, entailing 2^8 = 256 states, which means a (256,2) Turing machine.
----
Line 33 ⟶ 34:
* ''[[Charlie and the Chocolate Factory]]''
** In the Gene Wilder version, Willy Wonka comes off as a [[Mad Scientist]] who is genuinely unconcerned how dangerous his environment is. In the [[Johnny Depp]] version, Willy Wonka is shown meticulously planning and organizing events, which make the various accidents come off as the machinations of a [[Diabolical Mastermind]]. The original novel can support either interpretation.
** Also in the Gene Wilder version, Grandpa Joe is played as a beloved, sympathetic character. But after a bout of unfortunate [[Fridge Logic]], it becomes apparent that he's kind of a bastard. Think about it: He spends twenty years lying in bed doing nothing (except consuming tobacco) while Mom takes in laundry, and Charlie busts his ass on a paper route, all so they can barely afford their broken-down shack and cabbage water (which he complains about). But all that changes as soon as the kid finds a magic pass into to the candy factory inside a chocolate bar with money he fished out of a storm drain on his hands and knees. At that point, Grandpa Joe is suddenly able to dance like a broadway veteran, kick up his heels, and sing about how "we've" got a golden ticket. Then, when he gets into the factory, he insults the other children, (possibly) gropes Mrs. [[Tee Vee]]'s rump, and encourages Charlie to steal the Fizzy Lifting Drinks...All before berating Mr. Wonka at the end over usurped notions of entitlement. Man...What a DICK.
** In the book, the Oompa Loompas are an explicit case of [[Values Dissonance]]—they're ''pygmies''. In the Gene Wilder version, Wonka sees them as completely dependent on his good will, so much so that he chooses his successor solely on how he believes that successor will treat them; this could make him the leader of a ''[[Cult]]''. In the [[Johnny Depp]] version, they're privacy-loving immigrants; given that Wonka's a [[Cloudcuckoolander]], it must be a laid-back job.
** Gene Wilder's Willy Wonka is the [[Ubermensch]].
Line 42 ⟶ 43:
*** Mike Teavee: '71 Mike Teavee is so obsessed with TV Westerns that he goes around wearing a cowboy outfit and seems to find his Golden Ticket less interesting than the television. In the '05 version, his obsession with TV is updated to include video games and he's additionally made an [[Insufferable Genius]] who looks down on Wonka for his [[It Runs on Nonsensoleum|nonsense inventions]].
* A striking example is the movie ''[[Blade Runner]]'', where director [[Ridley Scott]] and actor [[Harrison Ford]] disagree about whether Ford's character Deckard is, in fact, a replicant.
** The film treats replicants as 'supermen who cannot fly' and sets them up as pitiable, sympathetic victims-of-humans. The book the film is based upon asserts that 'the replicants are inhuman, uncaring machines (not unlike uncaring, inhuman humans, but even less caring) and so cannot exist safely alongside authentic humans'. This 'what is humanity' question is the core of much of the later cyberpunk literature.
** One way this has been dealt with: in the original movie release, Deckard isn't a replicant; in the director's cut, he is. The fulcrum of the change is one scene cut from the original, in which Gaff (Edward James Olmos' character) leaves an origami unicorn at a table for Deckard. Since Deckard had a dream about a unicorn before then, and replicants have implanted memories, this is taken as a sign that all of Deckard's memories are implanted and that Olmos' character knows this. Take out this scene, and there is little reason to support "Deckard is a replicant" (beyond his general toughness).
*** His eyes "glow" like those of the replicants in the director's cut. Film crew told later that it was a lightning mistake, nothing intentional
Line 52 ⟶ 53:
** Many viewers are disturbed by Deckard's forcibly stealing a kiss from Rachel and believe that it implies that [[Victim Falls For Rapist|he raped her.]] Whether he did tends to be hotly debated in online discussions of the movie. If Deckard is a replicant, he (like the others) still has the emotional maturity of a child despite physical and mental maturity, hence explaining his actions as emotionally misunderstanding the implications of what he's doing.
** Aside from the issue of whether Deckard is intended to be a replicant or not, and to what extent this is hinted at in the movie, a more fundamental issue is to what extent he is [[Designated Hero|"the good guy"]] and Roy Batty is [[Designated Villain|the villain]]. According to one interpretation, the entire movie is about Deckard [[Heel Realization|realizing he's fundamentally on the wrong side]] (helped by Rachael) and that replicants are not really evil but just [[Well-Intentioned Extremist|WellIntentionedExtremists]] whose desire for more life and freedom is understandable. This explains why in the director's cut, the ending is him {{spoiler|going on the run with Rachael}}.
** Blade Runner is also an example because Ridley Scott is invoking the genre. In [[Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?]], the novel Blade Runner is based on, Deckard is definitively shown to be human multiple times. Even without the Voight-Kampff test, he is shown to be human and the implication that he isn't is fueled primarily by paranoia rather than any real evidence. Ridley Scott still places Deckard through largely the same plot, but re-interprets him as a replicant. Rachel is a more minor example. She serves largely the same role in both the novel and film, but she is a far more active character in the novel than the film.
** Deckard isn't a replicant, he's organizationally similar to a replicant. You are human because you have your mom. Deckard is human because he has his authority. Sort of like Zion being organizationally similar to the Matrix, but being real because it has authority - more on this below.
* The [[Live Action Adaptation]] of ''[[How the Grinch Stole Christmas (film)|How the Grinch Stole Christmas]]'' invents new motivations for the Grinch. In the book and the 1966 cartoon, the reason the Grinch hates Christmas is not explicitly given, but it's suggested to be because his heart was "two sizes too small". The film provides him with a [[Backstory]], mainly [[Padding|to fill screen time]]; this backstory does provide a good excuse. In this version, Whoville's Christmas is ''openly'' consumerist with conspicuous consumption and forced cheer, and the Grinch's home is directly linked to the town dump. And then there's the racism against green furry people and the PHB mayor. But the [[Narrator]] doesn't seem to notice; he still says "no one quite knows the reason," and "two sizes two small" is still the spoken explanation. The Grinch even speaks of ''himself'' as a [[Card-Carrying Villain]].
Line 66 ⟶ 67:
* Then there is ''[[The Man From Earth]],'' in which Jesus is {{spoiler|just a normal guy who has somehow lived since the dawn of time, studied Buddhism at one point during his long life, and later taught Buddhist morals to the people of Judea. The rest is history.}}
* ''[[Hard Candy]]''. Some thought the young girl was just [[Knight Templar|enacting some good old-fashioned (if brutal) street justice]] on pedophiles. More thought she was just a [[Complete Monster|budding young serial killer]] who was preying on [[Acceptable Targets]] to get her own no less despicable (or maybe more despicable) jollies.
** [[Word of God]] states the second; as mentioned in [[Misaimed Fandom]], it was intended to demonize such conduct in a fashion.
*** [[Word of God]] wanted it to be open to interpretation, ostensibly because this would give the movie more weight, but in fact because the filmmakers were [[Alternative Character Interpretation|juvenile-minded provocation artists]]. It also depends on which filmmaker you ask; one of them leans more towards the first interpretation.
*** The writer/creator wasn't trying to provoke people into outrage by being controversial and vulgar (though he was trying to be controversial); he was trying to get people to think about it and [[Death of the Author|decide for themselves.]] It adds to the psychological thriller aspect if you find yourself conflicted about who to root for or who to be afraid for, or if you're rooting or fearing for both parties; [[Evil Versus Evil]] applied to pedophiles vs. serial killer of pedophiles is a novelty. There is not supposed to be a right answer, and that does add to the weight of the film.
Line 73 ⟶ 74:
** This was the original intent (see the [http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/03/05/must-watch-i-am-legends-original-ending-this-is-amazing/ alternate ending]); [[Executive Meddling]] made them change the ending, removing that plot thread.
** Neville's personal assumption is not necessarily the correct one. [[Unreliable Narrator|Just because he's the main character doesn't make him right]].
** The next time Neville goes out to scout around, he gets caught in the same type of fall trap he used to catch the female ghoul. Then the same male ghoul sics a pack of ghoul-dogs on Neville while he is incapacitated. Those are not the actions of a dumb brute; he learns and plans ahead. So this ghoul probably retained his intellect even if his behavior has regressed. Or his behavior hadn't regressed—he was ignoring physical pain to deal with something even more important. Or the difference between Neville and the rest of remaining humanity is the same as it's always been: elitism, and the belief that the best should lead or improve the herd.
** The original intended ending (where-in the Ghouls are shown to have intelligence and to care for one another) is closer to the original novel, wherein Neville realizes at the end that ''[[This Loser Is You|he]]'' [[This Loser Is You|has been the monster terrorizing]] ''[[This Loser Is You|them.]]'' Cue the [[Title Drop]].
* ''[[The Interview]]'' (starring Hugo Weaving) makes this its central theme. The main character is taken from his home and interrogated ruthlessly by two police officers. The senior officer is [[Inspector Javert|dead-set on convicting our poor protagonist]] and seems malicious by the end—but there are hints that the protagonist may not be entirely innocent. People have debated this. There are opinions that support and opinions that reject the protagonist's innocence. The alternate ending of the movie practically says he's guilty; that it was cut supports open interpretation of the final cut.
Line 79 ⟶ 80:
** ''[[The Descent (film)|The Descent]]'' itself can be interpreted as a tragic story about a Native American tribe defending its homeland from invaders. The tragedy is that, due to the language barrier, the crawler tribe did not realize the spelunkers were just lost and not dangerous (or that they were human and not monsters).
* Rare in-series example: The six actors who have played [[James Bond (film)|James Bond]] over the years each gave a different interpretation of his character. Connery is tough and businesslike, Lazenby is more caring and great with women, Moore is a light-hearted Bond who will kick your car off a cliff and then [[Bond One-Liner|make an ironic joke about it]], Dalton is a dark [[Turn in Your Badge]] sort, Brosnan is quiet but full of emotion with an "oh yeah, I get to drive a tank through Stalingrad for a living. My life ROCKS!!!" look on his face all the time, and Craig is a morally ambiguous [[Badass]] (he's arrogant and an extremely [[Moment Killer|bad timer]]). Oddly, the fans generally accept ''all'' of these as essential pieces to Bond's character.
** There's also a widespread [[Fanon|fan theory]] that the differences are because Bond is a cover identity given to any agent who is assigned the 007 designation. (Following this, Alec Trevelyan of ''[[
*** In ''[[Casino Royale]],'' M says, {{spoiler|"When I knew you were you."}} If Bond is a cover ID, then that would be [[Lampshade Hanging]].
*** And also lampshaded in ''OHMSS'':
Line 90 ⟶ 91:
** A scrapped plot element of ''[[On Her Majesty's Secret Service]]'' mentions that Bond has recently undergone plastic surgery (into Lazenby) so as to better infiltrate Blofeld's infrastructure (whom had already met Bond) which would imply at least Connery and Lazenby's Bond are the same.
** Different interpretations of Bond are possible within a single Bond movie. In ''[[Quantum of Solace]],'' for example, there's a fair amount of ambiguity surrounding 007's motives - it's just as easy to view Bond as just doing his job with his usual... err... ''efficiency'' as to believe he was on an ill-conceived vendetta.
** SchroCat, a notorious Wikipedia troll that somehow manages to stay legitimized, believes all of the following is [[Alternate Character Interpretation]]: Skyfall is about workplace violence in retaliation to M's toxic leadership inside MI6, portrayed in the story as a British crime firm, and in the process, consummates the transformation begun by [[Licence to Kill]] and [[
* Chance the gardener, as played by [[Peter Sellers]] in ''[[Being There]]'', appears to be [[The Fool]] [[Seemingly-Profound Fool|who is mistaken for a genius because everyone reads what they want into his vague dialogue]]. But the movie is filled with [[Everyone Is Jesus in Purgatory|things that can be interpreted as Christian symbolism]]; and in the final scene, {{spoiler|Chance [[Twist Ending|walks on water]]}}. The implication is that we, as the audience, are also guilty of only seeing what we expect, and Chance [[Messianic Archetype|may be more than he appears]]. (In the novel, there is no such scene; it is clear there that Chance is simply [[The Fool]].)
** In fact, an alternate interpretation of the final shot is that Chance can {{spoiler|walk on water}} because he doesn't realize it's not possible, and so he is still [[The Fool]]. Incidentally, the director conceived the shot when he was inspired by how believable the film, especially Sellers, was playing out; the ending in the script was more akin to the novel's.
Line 100 ⟶ 101:
* ''[[Total Recall]]'': is Quaid savior of Mars, or is it all a glitch in his programmed dream memory vacation, or did the dream vacation go off without a hitch? This is even argued about in the [[DVD Commentary]] between Paul Verhoven and Arnold. One [[Epileptic Trees|theory]] argues that {{spoiler|the fade to white at the very end is supposed to represent the real Quaid, who is indeed imagining his vacation on Mars.}}.
* ''[[Election]]'': Is Tracy Flick a ruthless evil politician and [[Femme Fatale]] in the making, or is she just an ambitious teenager manipulated by her mother, abused by a teacher, and sabotaged by another teacher (who might lust after her too, if some of the sex scenes are any indication)?
** Or is she a [[Jerkass Woobie]] who has no one to guide her in anything but becoming a [[Manipulative Bastard]] Chessmaster and may never realise she doesn't have to be [[Lonely
** And is Jim simply a member of the [[Noble Profession]] whose entire life was destroyed by Tracy? Or someone who couldn't admit to himself his marriage was falling apart, and took all his lifes fustrations out by sabotaging the election of a student he had resentment (and [[Foe Yay]], or [[No Yay]]) against? It was a ''student election'', losing it would hardly stop her from moving up in the world as he told himself it would.
* A single deleted scene of ''[[Donnie Darko]]'' calls into question the visions that Donnie sees throughout the movie: are they clues and hints to guide his hand in creating a [[Stable Time Loop]] that results in his own death, or are they deranged hallucinations caused by his anti-psychotic medication being a placebo? Although [[Word of God]] does say that it is that first option.
Line 111 ⟶ 112:
** Which gives The Architect's final line in "Revolutions" a [[Tomato in the Mirror|chilling implication]]
** The Matrix itself. An intricate scam designed to subjugate and enslave humankind, or a symbiotic enviroment that gives humans a last chance to lead normal lives in an irreparable [[Crapsack World]]? Are Neo and Co. valiant freedom fighters, or deluded fools who wreck things and kill uninvolved people for nothing?
*** There is a [https://web.archive.org/web/20110828054420/http://forums.thelastfreecity.com/viewtopic.php?t=28786 FanFiction] that supports this alternative interpretation. In short, the behavior of '''all''' the machines followed Asimov's Zeroth Law of Robotics: '''no machine can harm mankind, or, through inaction, allow mankind to come to harm'''. So, they realized that darkening the skies would ultimately lead to the extinction of the humans (no plants, no animals, no food) and they built the Matrix to keep humans alive.
** There is also the popular "Zion is part of the Matrix" theory, which posits that Neo was able to shut down Sentinels with his mind and see despite losing both eyes because what everybody thought was the "real world" is a second layer of the Matrix designed to let the one percent who reject the first layer's programming think they're free. It's certainly not beyond the machines' programming abilities, and it gives the humans the illusion that they're free while keeping them from escaping for real. Everybody's happy! Oh, except the millions of people who die.
*** Zion isn't part of the Matrix, but legitimate reality. (Inside of my interpretation of the story, which is of course fiction.) It's organizationally similar to the Matrix, but there are in fact several important differences. Zion's authority means that Zion's otherwise Matrix-like attributes aren't what they are, they're something else that ultimately differs in authority and name alone. In the Matrix, [[Your Mind Makes It Real]]. [[Mind Screw|In Zion, authority makes it real]]. For example, judging from humanity's conduct in the Second Renaissance and from Cypher's conduct in the movies, Zion's government may be evil and corrupt in every sense possible, but it isn't running an extortion racket, they're collecting taxes, and in the same way, Zion isn't part of the Matrix, it's part of reality. Zion's government probably once fought the other human cities, which were once their own allies. Next thing you know, Marc Stevens will have a No Zion Project right alongside his No State Project, and just as misguided. You can just bet there will be more of his goddamn air-quotes everywhere. [[Cloudcuckooland|Politics is notorious for getting people to believe anything]]. By the same "reasoning" Marc Stevens uses, the alleged reality of Zion could be just one of those things. If Zion is fake, it's not convincing to Zion's inhabitants in an everyday sense, it's convincing to Zion's inhabitants in the same sense Marc Stevens believes that statism is convincing to the rest of us. Zion's de jure leaders are heads of state, meaning they are politicians. They claim that Zion isn't part of the Matrix. If they're lying, how do you tell? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDc_5zpBj7s Lips Are Movin', that's how.] And just to make sure Mr. Stevens doesn't run out of his air-quotes, here are some right here:
Line 127 ⟶ 128:
** The interpretation of Palpatine being aware of the impending invasion is a development of Thrawn's character. There's a lot of hints that Thrawn joined the Empire because he was aware of a threat and continued to serve because he thought that the New Republic would collapse due to internal infighting ([[Irony|though the Empire itself collapsed due to infighting]]). Later interpretations transferred this to Palpatine. (The current canonical interpretation is probably that any mentions of a "greater threat" by Palpatine during his reign was an excuse to hold power; the [[I Meant to Do That|Vong invasion bolstering that was a coincidence]].)
** [[The Force]] and [[The Dark Side]]: tools enabling justice or power, or a single cunning entity manipulating everyone in the galaxy? Or at least the Jedi and the Sith. The two aspects of [[The Force]] are just that, aspects of one singular thing. Sith believe [[The Dark Side]] gives them power over [[The Force]] and others, but their quick descent into anger quickly makes them tools of it and not the other way around. Jedi, on the other hand, actively seek to follow the will of [[The Force]] because it has an [[Omniscient Morality License]]. What kind of long con it's trying to pull is [[Wild Mass Guessing|anyone's guess]].
*** Kreia in [[Knights of the Old Republic]] [[
** For that matter, is the Force intelligent? After all, the abilities possessed by the Jedi apparently come from microscopic creatures in their bloodstreams. We are expected to believe that these microscopic creatures are somehow able to convey the wisdom and guidance of the all-knowing, all-powerful Force. There are reasons to give that idea a healthy dose of scientific skepticism.
*** Read about how Mitochondria have their own separate DNA chains.
*** And... symbiont microorganisms serving as the conduit for the Force are less believable than cells in one's brain serving as one exactly how?
** Admiral Ozzel in ''[[Star Wars|The Empire Strikes Back]]'' was a Rebel sympathizer, not just clumsy and stupid. Amid several significant glances and nods, he tried to divert Vader's attention from Hoth and then alerted the Rebel forces to the impending invasion.
*** There's some debate as to whether the [[Designated Hero|Jedi]] [[What the Hell, Hero?|deserve the reputation of heroes at all.]]
** There is always the idea that the movies are [[Propaganda Machine|like history textbooks]], created by and [[Jedi Truth|in the style of the "heroic" side]]. The Jedi are pure and benevolent and completely justified in their resistance of the Dark Side! Except.. while they depict the Sith as evil for using evil emotions, they themselves seem to eschew ALL emotions, and seem to consider all emotions, even the most positive, as evil ANYWAYS... What if the Sith were just another religious order, maybe hailing from a planet with a dangerously intense sun (thus, [[Dark Is Not Evil]] and [[Light Is Not Good]] for them), where they had learned to channel their passions and emotions in a positive way? Love to empower, fear transformed into to protection, anger at the injustice of the world mastered and channelled into focused will to accomplish good things.. Good, passionate people. Then in their spread across the Galaxy, they encounter another religion, the "Jedi". The Jedi, an order of strict and [[The Stoic|passionless]] fighters, are horrified at the blasphemous emotionality of the newcomers, and make them into [[Acceptable Targets]] in order to crush them in a patriotic, faith-based crusade... Thereafter, the very name of the other religion would be used to describe the violation of their stricture against emotionality, and anyone walking their left-hand path would be labeled Sith.
** People who watched the prequels as kids don't hate [[The Scrappy|Jar Jar Binks]] because the character was aimed at their age group when they first watched the films. If they had been able to animate hair, then he would have probably been a younger Chewbacca. Jar Jar is also open to some interesting alternate interpretations, particularly once he becomes Senator. Is he really as dumb as he acts, and is he really a pasty for Sidious when he offers the motion to create the clone army? Or is it all just [[Obfuscating Stupidity]], and he in fact knows exactly what he's doing (possible motives: vengeance against the Gungan leadership who humiliated and exiled him around the time of Episode I).
** Upon first viewing the Yoda/Dooku fight, you would be forgiven for thinking that Dooku got his ass handed to him by the little green man. Take a second look, and you'll see a Dark Jedi Master take on Obi-Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker and ''simultaneously'' school them in the art of lightsaber combat. Then, after proving himself equal to Yoda in knowledge of the Force, he chalks up a no-score loss by defending against everything the Green Pinball of Destruction can dish out. He only retreats to report back to the Emperor when it's clear the fight has become a stalemate, Yoda's backup is seconds from arriving, and Obi-Wan starts to regain consciousness.
*** But it is that Dooku, who had all his attacks repelled and resorted to a dirty trick, also clearly became too afraid even of distracted Yoda to attack him when the latter was stopping the falling pillar.
*** Oh, it's not that Dooku would have won had the fight continued. It's just that the fight wasn't the [[Curb Stomp Battle]] that everyone assumes it was. The Count holds his own (albeit barely) and retreats when it becomes clear that he can't win against Yoda. Add that Obi-Wan is regaining consciousness and Yoda's military backup is seconds away, and the odds are about to tilt against him rather badly. Probably didn't hurt that his [[Magnificent Bastard|master]] had a backup plan.
Line 141 ⟶ 142:
** There's quite a bit of [[Alternate Character Interpretation]] present just between the novels and the films. Luke Skywalker: desperate kid with marginal Jedi training, or most powerful Jedi who ever lived? Boba Fett: Just some bounty hunter who had Han Solo handed to him by Darth Vader, then was killed by a blind man flailing, or the Ultimate Badass of the Universe? As said above, in the novels, Yoda holds back fighting Dooku and could actually completely destroy him in a legitimate fight, but this is never suggested in any way in the films, where Dooku seems to hold his own just fine against Yoda. And the most notorious example of [[Alternate Character Interpretation]], between different versions of the same film: who shot first?
*** [[The Dog Shot First|The dog.]]
** ''[https://web.archive.org/web/20100220130107/http://www.morningstar.nildram.co.uk/A_New_Sith.html A New Sith, or Revenge of the Hope]'': R2D2 and Chewie are actually the Rebellion's top field agents, with C3PO and Han unknowingly distracting attention away from them. Meanwhile, Obi-Wan and Yoda are scared shitless from day one that Luke and/or Leia will go down the same path as Anakin, especially with Luke's ability to blast womp rats hinting at Force sensitivity.
** When [[Space Jews|Watto]] insists on releasing either Anakin or Shmi Skywalker (but not both) to Qui-Gon Jinn in ''[[The Phantom Menace]]'', Qui-Gon chooses Anakin. Maybe this is him making the best of things and making the only real choice—after all, he did first try to get them both released—but [[Manipulative Bastard|it does work out rather well for him]]: he intends Anakin to be trained as a Jedi, and they would have separated him from his mother eventually anyway; this way, the separation is achieved immediately, and in such a way that Watto is the bad guy rather than the Jedi. [[Trickster Mentor|Pretty sneaky]]...
*** There's also the idea that he really wanted to free both of them. However Shmi for different reasons (as in he had the hots for her). I'm betting had his life not been cut short he would have gone back and bought her freedom.
** Chewbacca convinced Han to go back for Luke to keep Luke and Leia from [[Twincest|doing the do]]. Chewbacca knows Luke and Leia are twins, and knows that is very wrong.
*** Speaking of [[Twincest]], Leia has a fetish for it. That's why she kept flirting with Luke when she's "always known".
** [[The Skywalker Paradigm|Darth Vader is the hero, Obi-Wan is the villain, and Luke is being kidnapped and brainwashed.]]
** R2-D2 is one tin [[Sir Swearsalot|potty mouth]], it's just that no one but C-3PO can understand the "speech". Everything it says is [[This Trope Is Bleep|bleeped]]. The idea started [http://kaoyux.deviantart.com/art/Star-Wars-R2D2-s-Dark-Side-283958625#gmi-CComment here]. Also, there's that:
{{quote|'''C-3PO''': You watch your language!}}
** [https://postitnotefordragon.tumblr.com/post/180897118268/tiwaztyrsfist-theghostofsomethingorother This] [[Tumblr]] thread lays out a convincing case that Han Solo is Chewbacca's ''pet''.
* ''[[Bubba Ho-Tep]]:'' are the characters really Elvis and JFK, or simply senile old men?
** It could easily be a mixture, one hidden icon and one senile old man.
*** Kemo Sabe - could he really be [[The Lone Ranger]]?
* ''[[28 Days Later|Twenty Eight Days Later]]'': Is Major Henry West an [[Complete Monster|utter psychopath]] completely desensitised to human suffering, or is he just a desperate commander [[A Father to His Men|trying to make sure all his "boys" survive the apocalypse]] [[Well-Intentioned Extremist|by any means necessary]]? The fact that he's {{spoiler|effectively ordering women to be raped}} pushes him a good way down the slippery slope, but listen to his justification for it. {{spoiler|And watch how he comforts Jones as he lies dying from a stomach wound, and his ultimate reaction to Jim's rampage. "You killed all my boys."}}
** Or is he a good military officer who went mad after watching (and killing) human beings who had turned into inhuman psychopaths and watching the country he'd devoted his life to serving crumble all around him?
* The makers of the ''[[The Usual Suspects]]'' have a laugh about this trope in the DVD commentary, noting how some people thought that the wrong person was the "real" Kaiser Soze. {{spoiler|According to [[Word of God]], it's Verbal.}}
** A fun theory: there is no Keyser Soze. He's been made up and attributed to a number of crimes from several criminals to throw off police from the real culprits.
* There's a theory regarding Donny from ''[[The Big Lebowski]]'' which suggests that Donny doesn't exist, but is simply [https://web.archive.org/web/20121211235049/http://monkeyfilter.com/link.php/16128 a figment of Walter's imagination], as the Dude (the protagonist of the film) only talks to Donny once during the whole film. Alternatively, Donny is figment of ''both'' The Dude and Walter's imaginations. This brings up questions such as: {{spoiler|Whose ashes were those, then? And was the funeral home worker also imaginary?}}
** Is Walter Sobchek an incompetent, ultra-nationalist gun-nut who feels the need to relate absolutely everything to Vietnam because of his friends who died there? Or is he a spineless man who never went to 'Nam, felt incredible survivor's guilt because of his friends who did go and died, and acts crazy to overcompensate?
*** Supposedly a line was cut from the film where The Dude, fed up with the constant 'Nam references, points out that Walter was never even in 'Nam.
Line 167 ⟶ 169:
** The primary prerequisite of lucid dreaming is that you ''know you're dreaming'', and being able to control what happens is a side effect. Another side effect would be rendering the [[All Just a Dream]] ending completely moot.
** North's freakout at the beginning of the film. It sounds like this is definitely not the first time this happens at the dinner table. For all we know he might be an overachiever to make his parents happy.
* In ''[[Night at the Museum]]'', the director is angry at Larry for making a mess of the museum, but he never asks HOW it happened. Some people on the [[IMDb]] take this as evidence that he knew about the exhibits coming to life.
* Optimus Prime: living legend, hero of heroes, all-around good guy. But ''[[Transformers Film Series|Revenge of the Fallen]]'' gives us gems like "{{spoiler|Give me your face!}}". This might be explained as {{spoiler|post-death high spirits}}, but some think even "{{spoiler|Any last words?}}" without at least a perfunctory offer of surrender is [[Out of Character]], especially given how he was all "[[Patrick Stewart Speech|Freedom is the right of all sentient beings]]" in the previous film. The theory is that the death of the Joker to his Batman, followed by two years of combat, has turned Prime into a mutilation-happy psychotic.
** An alternative to this is that Optimus is a nice guy—in general. It's just that, over the millennia of war, he's decided that the only way to stop the Decepticons is to take them out lest they destroy even more. It's possible that he tried to take prisoners before, and they escaped and caused even more damage. And the Fallen is an interdimensional being ([http://tfwiki.net/wiki/The_Fallen according to the TFWiki entry]), which means that the Fallen has tried to do this in multiple universes, which means that he's not likely to repent any time soon. Assuming Optimus knew this, he decided that he wouldn't give the Fallen a chance to try again and kill him. And his obsession with facial [[Gorn]]? We can assume that the head is the least armored part of a Cybertronian, and is therefore a better target—especially considering that the head contains the processors, which are the Transformer equivalent of the brain.
Line 176 ⟶ 178:
** The Twins are seen by many as jive-talking Scrappies. However, as some ancillary media has pointed out, it's made clear that they have been recruited into the war at a very young age (approximately 8-10 human years old). Some fans have theorized that they are trying to act tough in order to hide their fears and impress the others.
** Sam's mother. Just a [[The Scrappy|scrappy]] or just moderately mentally impaired?
* The Duke in "[[Moulin Rouge]]!" did nothing wrong. He made an agreement with the main characters: He would fund the rebuild of the entire club, all in exchange for sex with Nicole Kidman. This was agreed upon in advance. He held up his end of the bargain; but she didn't do her part, nor did she ever intend to. So they scammed him out of a ton of money, feeling entitled to it because he had money and they didn't. His understandable anger after that led to the violent actions that followed.
** Or... the idea that he 'did nothing wrong' is absurd, considering that the Duke attempted rape and murder.
** Was it just sex? It seems like a lot of dough for just one ''high''-class prostitute. He ''bought'' her, and not just for one night.
* While the most common interpretation of ''[[The Fountain]]'' is [[Who Wants to Live Forever?]], it's possible that Jackman's character's pursuit of immortality was a genuinely benign goal. He had to accept death in the end, but if he hadn't artificially extended his life for centuries, then he would have died bitter, miserable, and alone. His immortality cure allowed him to search himself and find peace before he eventually died. The pursuit of life was a worthy goal by itself when most face death with fear and denial.
** Or another interpretation: {{spoiler|The past was his wife's novel written by a historian, the present is what is actually happening, and the end is his attempt to end the novel using his own knowledge pool -- science -- to finish what his wife started. The trip through space is a literary coping mechanism for his failure to save her.}}
* The 2005 version of [[Casanova]] staring Heath Ledger portrays Casanova as the protagonist, a man desiring to enjoy sexual intercourse as often as he can with as many different women as he can manage. As is to be expected in a story based on Casanova, the Catholic Church (specifically, the Inquisition) is portrayed at best as an obstacle to Casanova and at worst as the villain. The moment you see Jeremy Irons arrive on the scene as Inquisitor Pucci, one can be sure that Pucci will be the [[Designated Villain]] of the story. Even a large order of nuns, to a woman, seem to throw themselves at him as he races down several corridors that are not even in the same building, including one that belonged to a wealthy merchant family. Through it all, he manages to avoid the long arm of the Inquisition, in part with thanks to his personal friend the Doge, and eventually gives up his incorrigible ways and makes regular love to only a single woman, passing on his moniker to a young man he helped to get over his shyness.
** That's the intended interpretation (probably), but change one small assumption of the movie, and you get a [[Perspective Flip]]. The filmmakers see sexual intercourse out of wedlock as something to aspire to; the Church (and this includes the ''real'' Roman Catholic Church) views it as a '''sin.''' Recall that adultery is a sin spoken of in some of the harshest terms because it corrupts the body as well as the soul. Casanova was not only someone in deep need of salvation, but someone who was placing stumbling block after stumbling block in the path of others on their road to salvation—which is a sin in itself. The previous local head of the inquisition, while seeking to capture and convict Casanova, has attempted to convict Casanova in the past and might have shown some leniency had he been able to force Casanova to clean up his act without the interference of the Doge. Further, even after choosing a woman to devote himself too, Casanova is never shown to ''marry'' her, which means he hasn't given up his incorrigible ways altogether. He's still having escapades—he's just narrowed the focus considerably. Finally, the young man he left in his place continues the line of sexual escapades; before the interference of Casanova, he was eager to devote himself to a single particular woman.
* HAL 9000 from ''[[2001: A Space Odyssey]]''. [[Word of God]] said that he went kill-crazy because he was given conflicting orders about how to treat the crew members. There are two other theories for his motives: he was aware he was going to crash/go nuts and was trying to drop hints to Dave to figure out the secret purpose of the mission; or he, being a perfect computer, felt threatened by the monolith and wanted to keep mankind from acquiring it and reaching a point in evolution where they don't need tools like himself. Naturally, the film itself gives no hints at all.
** HAL screws up at chess early on in the film. He announces that it is checkmate in two moves. It's actually three. Kubrick was a chess enthusiast (the character Dr. Smyslov was named after a Russian chess champion, and the piece positions in question were from a famous 1910 game), so there's a good chance he put the goof in intentionally. Was it an early hint that there was something wrong with HAL? Was HAL testing his opponent to gauge how observant he was, and if he was willng to question HAL's claims? Or was he indeed dropping intentional clues that something was wrong with him, but this one proved too subtle?
* The directors of ''[[The Heiress]]'', when adapting it from the Henry James book ''Washington Square'', changed the story deliberately to allow an alternate interpretation of maybe-[[Gold Digger]] [[Love Interest]] Morris Townsend. Did he only want Catherine's money, and ran off after finding out she wouldn't be as rich as he thought? Did he truly care for her and didn't want to destroy the relationship between Catherine and her father? The former is unambiguously the case in the book and play.
* [[The 39 Steps]] by [[Alfred Hitchcock]] hinges upon the fact that a girl in Richard Hannay's apartment ends up dead. The movie includes information that points to the girl being a spy, but all of this could easily be a hallucination by the schizophrenic Hannay. This turns Hannay from national hero to murderous psychopath and re-shades his interactions with women throughout the film in a much darker light. Considering this is one of the first "They think I did it but I didn't really do it" films, it could be considered a trope-maker.
* [[Ferris Bueller's Day Off|Ferris Bueller]]: Awesome guy who you wish you could have been, or at least been friends with, when you were his age; or insufferable [[Canon Sue]] and [[Karma Houdini]]? Or both?
** [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiMuj85ngEo Or hallucination created by Cameron's mind to make him more outgoing?]
** [http://www.ruthlessreviews.com/5911/ferris-bueller-and-ed-rooney-misunderstood/ This] article argues that Ferris is a textbook sociopath in the making. [[The Spoony Experiment|Dr. Insano]] [https://web.archive.org/web/20100930185808/http://blip.tv/file/3425902 concurs], calling the movie "A dark, bleak story about the ultimate triumph of evil over reason and decency."
** This completely ignores that Ferris got that way by helping other people out, and the day itself was an excercise to help his friends. All claims of manipulation" are wiped away when you can hear the characters inner thoughts.
* ''[[War, Inc.]]'' could just be another over-the-top, post-9/11 socio-political satire... Or it's where [[Grosse Pointe Blank|Martin Blank]] ended up after trying to live a normal life with his long-lost love {{spoiler|and their new daughter}}, finding out he couldn't stand it, doing some work with the government again, getting in bed with a [[Complete Monster]], {{spoiler|losing his wife and daughter to senseless violence/kidnapping}}, and now is spiraling even further down than he was before. Add to this his grip on reality completely being lost and everyone becoming a horrible caricature to him (people even look similar to ones he's met {{spoiler|and killed}} before). A lot of visual and plot elements that the cast and crew carried over help this:
Line 214 ⟶ 216:
*** Though the look on the old woman's face when she sees the magazine can be interpreted two ways. She saw what Forrest (and the audience saw) and was shocked at the truth, or the cover depicted some celebrity that she would instantly recognize and knew wasn't anyone named Dan, and she just got a glimpse into Forrest's psychosis.
* ''[[Shutter Island]]'', Edward Daniels {{spoiler|AKA Andrew Laedis. Is he really hallucinating or was it a giant conspiracy by the island? Either side can be proved, and the hallucinogenic drugs in Edward's system could still have an effect by the lighthouse seen, so he could really be insane OR he could be the only sane person on the island. You can't prove that he isn't sane, even though the author said it is canon that he is insane.}}
** The bandage on Teddy's forehead is never fully explained, either. According to some, it indicated {{spoiler|experimentation}} and that the events of the film were {{spoiler|all hallucinations while Teddy was being lobotomized}}.
** In the film version, does the ending show a madman about to be treated with the medical means of the day, or a sane man unable to live with himself seeking oblivion? [[Through the Eyes of Madness|Or, perhaps, yet another horrible step into the mouth of madness?]]
* In ''[[Edward Scissorhands]]'' it's been argued that the whole thing is simply a fairy tale the old woman is telling her grandchild. This seems to be a case of {{spoiler|some people failing to understand Burton's little twist at the end - i.e., the opening is supposed to give the viewer the impression that an old lady is recounting a mere story to her grandchild but in the end that story is revealed to be true as the old lady reveals herself to be Kim. The alternate explanation not only negates the twist but makes the old lady rather strange given that she's therefore getting all emotionally attached to, and involved with, a fiction.}}
Line 232 ⟶ 234:
** You mean the remake. The first film was made in 1950 with Clifton Webb and Myrna Loy.
*** Also, [[Based on a True Story]].
* Michael Myers in Rob Zombie's [[Halloween (film)|Halloween]] remake; [[Freudian Excuse]] leading to [[Badass Decay]], or a deconstruction? Is Rob Zombie trying to say Michael is an evil serial killer because he had a shitty childhood, or in spite of it?
* Is [[Chloe]] a [[Psycho Lesbian]] [[Stalker with a Crush]], or is she just a troubled young woman who has been sexually exploited by a selfish adulteress old enough to be her mother? Does she commit suicide by letting go of the window frame because she realizes Catherine will never love her, or does Catherine murder her by pushing her out the window because she, Catherine, [[Disposable Sex Worker|finds her inconvenient]]?
* If [https://web.archive.org/web/20110907005900/http://mandeid.pie.st/pizza/gazo/pic/jason.html this image] is anything other than a joke or someone with a [[Friday the 13th (film)|Jason fetish]], it qualifies for both this and [[Wild Mass Guessing]]
* The producers of ''[[Drop Dead Fred]]'' want you to believe it's a story about a woman whose [[Imaginary Friend]] is actually a [[Not-So-Imaginary Friend]], and helps her conquer her fears. The more reasonable explanation (contradicted by alarmingly little in the film itself) is that it's the story of a woman suffering from late-onset schizophrenia and increasingly violent delusions.
** Not only is this not contradicted by the events of the film, it's practically ''justified''. Lizzie has a terrible childhood with an overbearing mother, and starts to show symptoms. Her mom blames her for everything, so she lashes out and invents someone to blame things on herself. As an adult she seems to have things together, more of less. She has moved away from the mother, has a job, is married, etc. Then a single lunchbreak costs her both husband and job, and forces her to move back in with the woman who's responsible for her issues to begin with. Cue perfectly understandable relapse.
** And if Fred really does have an independent existence, what are the pills, and why do they affect him? How can shrinks have a drug with no effect other than to kill imaginary friends, even though they don't believe such things exist?
* ''[[Fight Club (novel)|Fight Club]]'': [https://web.archive.org/web/20131106093142/http://ignatz.brinkster.net/cfightclub.html Jack and Tyler are Calvin and Hobbes], grown up years later into the darkness of the very world that wanted to make Watterson sell out his vision for empty cash. This one will eventually be expanded out with the sub-reasons that continuously prove it.
** Jack is not his real name, it's a reference to a children's book. And guess which single letter William Blake would change in Durden's first name?
** Also, is the very ending where {{spoiler|Marla and the Space Monkeys show up and the buildings blow up}} real, or is it all {{spoiler|another hallucination that Jack/Tyler has while he is dying from the gunshot to his face?}} Novelist Chuck Palahniuk and screenwriter Jim Uhls even suggest this on the DVD commentary.
Line 286 ⟶ 288:
*** Things may be powerful aliens, but they're not God. They're certainly not omniscient, at least.
*** They've been frozen for hundreds of thousands of years. Maybe they're suffering from an epic case of brain freeze, or cabin fever, or something.
*** At the very least, they predate humanity. They could've been frozen or kept in stasis for billions of years prior to the crash, giving them little time to brush up on situational protocols. Toward the end of the movie, one can't be sure that either or both of the survivors haven't been assimilated.
* [[The Man Who Knew Too Little]] provides an in-universe example. We're supposed to see Wallace Ritche as a bumbling fool who accidentally foils an international conspiracy to start the cold war back up. But if you look at it from the point of view of those actually in the conspiracy...
** We get the American Agent, a man with no name except for when he stole the code name of other agent he murdered. A double agent, already working for both the CIA and the Mafia, he laughs at and mocks peoples attempts to kill him, and apologizes for being too loud after shooting at someone. He pretends to execute people just to cover up his murder of other people, and plays with dead bodies just to make sure they really are dead. He often acts bored or just plain annoyed by life-threatening situations. He cannot understand emotions, nor why a woman would cry at the thought of her selling herself sexually because of desperate financial need. He holds prisoners in front of two perfectly ordinary people by claiming to just be an actor, not breaking a sweat. He dodges a poisonous dart by interposing a matroishka doll in the way, while disarming the bomb inside it, all while making it look like interpretive dance to a large televised crowd. And at any point, it's never clear whether or not he's doing or saying something just for his own amusement. In short, this is James Bond if he were even less professional and at least slightly sadistic.
Line 298 ⟶ 300:
* Missy in ''[[Bring It On]]'': straight, and they just didn't feel the need to throw in a [[Romantic Plot Tumour]] to clarify this, or as gay as she's hinted to be, and suffering a classic case of [[Did Not Get the Girl]]?
* [[The Boondock Saints]]: True vigilantes striving to destroy evil without killing an innocent? Or is the entire film focused on the warped view of two downtrodden brothers from the wrong side of Boston who decide to kill criminals only to keep others from coming down on them.
** Or are they, in fact, on a [[Mission
* In ''[[Thor (film)|Thor]]'', Loki has inspired a lot of this discussion because the film leads the audience to potentially doubt everything he says since he's such an effective [[Manipulative Bastard]]: Did he always hate Thor or was it a simple grudge from [[Sibling Rivalry]] that grew to [[Cain and Abel]] levels only after {{spoiler|he found out he was a Frost Giant}}? And does he really still consider himself {{spoiler|a son of Odin}}, or was he just saying that as another manipulation?
** And it could go either way. As notoriously having a "silver tongue" he could be manipulating both the characters in the film ''and'' the audience. On the other hand, however, he genuinely comes across as a [["Well Done, Son" Guy]] [[The Unfavorite|Unfavorite]] who wants nothing more than to move out from under the shadow of his older brother and receive some recognition for what he has done. The more popular opinion is that he is a [[Woobie, Destroyer of Worlds]], and this is the more likely possibility. If one just considers how much it would break a person to have always been [[The Unfavorite]] all his life and then discover that he is in fact one of the creatures he was raised to hate and ''that'' is the reason why he was [[The Unfavorite]], then it is not shocking what Loki did. He set up a situation where he would have saved his father from an assassination attempt, an event that his father could not ignore. He attempted to destroy the creatures that were threatening war upon his land in the hopes that it would finally make him Thor's equal. But his attempt failed, as did his attempt to explain to his father why he had done such a thing. And.... it's also more popular because girls do love those [[Draco in Leather Pants]].
Line 317 ⟶ 319:
* ''[[The Fugitive (film)|The Fugitive]]'': Was the Chicago Police Department [[Police Are Useless|so stuck in the dark about who actually murdered Kimble's wife]], or did they frame Kimble to protect the one-armed-man {{spoiler|, who was a former CPD cop}}?
* In the made-for-TV movie [[Cyberbully]], the main character Taylor faces problems when a guy from another school befriends her on a website but then goes and tells everyone she gave him an STD. It later turns out that her friend Sam, who throughout the movie had been trying to convince her that the guy she had a crush on was no good, was really just pretending to be the guy who spoke to her online. Her motives are never explained so it's left for the viewer to come up with something. The most accepted theory? Sam is a closet lesbian with a crush on Taylor. She wanted to convince Taylor that all men are scum so that maybe, she'd given women a chance.
* DVD-R Hell's ''Rock: It's Your Decision'' is presented as if it's the brave story of a young man who, in spite of overwhelming peer-pressure, rejects a powerful tool of Satan to glory in the grace of God. [[The Cinema Snob|Some people]] interpret it as the story of a young man named Jeff who is systematically brainwashed and mentally dismantled by his parents and church because he dares to like a genre of music they don't. [https://web.archive.org/web/20140312143152/http://www.agonybooth.com/recaps/Rock__It_s_Your_Decision_1982.aspx Others] think Jeff lashses out at everything and anything because he's repressing his homosexuality.
* ''[[Dumb and Dumber]]'': Is Lloyd just [[The Ditz|extremely stupid]], or is he insane? Throughout the film, he:
** Mistakes Mary's politeness for affection, and is oblivious to the fact that he's creeping her out.
Line 330 ⟶ 332:
** The only reason he doesn't get called on any of it is because Harry's too genuinely stupid and passive to do so.
* Is Kevin from [[Home Alone|Home Alone 2]] really just a nice boy looking to do a good deed for Christmas, or a sadistic psychopath? At the end of the film, Kevin lures Harry and Marv from Duncan's Toy Chest, to his uncle's house to put them through hell, and then into Central Park where he calls the police. If all Kevin really wanted to do was stop Harry and Marv from robbing the toy store, he could have lured them directly into the park from the toy store and still called the police; instead, he catapults them onto cars, pummels them with bricks, wrenches and bags of cement, shoots them with staple guns, electrocutes them, sets them on fire, throws them through floors, etc. Sounds like stuff [[Saw|Jigsaw]] would pull.
** Also, is Marv somehow actually dumber in the second film (possibly due to the head injuries he sustained in the first film and/or additional head injuries he sustained in prison), or is he ''drunk''?
* ''[[The Social Network]]'' asks whether Mark is a [[Jerkass]] or simply has a [[Jerkass Facade]].
** A trick the film itself uses makes serious implications of the character's actions. Did Mark steal Facebook from the Winklevoss twins and Narendra? {{spoiler|Did Mark try to cheat Eduardo out of Facebook? Did he leak the story about the chicken? Was he the one who called the cops on Sean's party?}}
* ''[[Love Actually]]'' applies this to almost every single relationship in the movie. Did Harry and Karen separate at the end of the movie or decide to brave on? And we never find out how far Harry went with his secretary. As Karen points out, she doesn't know if it "was it just a necklace, or sex and a necklace, or, worse of all, love and a necklace?"
** Karl is supposed to be a [[Nice Guy]] but he doesn't do anything to help Sarah with her brother and treats her more like a one-night stand than anything.
** Since Mark is still in love with Juliet, his friendship with Peter may deteriorate.
Line 343 ⟶ 345:
{{reflist}}
[[Category:{{SUBPAGENAME}}]]
[[Category:{{TOPLEVELPAGE}}]]
| |||