WTFAW: Frozen (Pt. 3)

It seems spring is in the air and we are moving towards warmer times. So what better way to say goodbye to the sleet, snow and ice, than by discussing a theory about Frozen?

Back when we covered a collection of Disney fan theories, there was one theory I left out, on account of having discussed a theory about Frozen at length fairly recently.

But now, I think I’ve recovered enough to deal with whatever madness Dave has in store. So, what is the theory?

Dave: The theory is that Hans was turned evil by the trolls.

I see. And what do you base that on?

Dave: Ok, so Hans starts off as a caring, charming prince who falls in love with Anna, and he’s later shown handing out blankets to people. But suddenly, towards the end, he becomes a cruel, powerhungry monster, willing to murder to seize the throne.


Dave: And in between his introduction and his reveal as the villain, Anna and Kristoff meet the trolls!

Yeah. So what?

Dave: So, the trolls have adopted Kristoff, and they of course want him to be happy! When he comes along with a girl, the trolls start going on about how the two should hook up. Then, they find out that she’s actually engaged, and immediately start discussing how it’s a “flexible thing” and even tell Kristoff  to “get the fiancé out of the way and the whole thing will be fixed”. We already know they can alter peoples minds, because they altered Anna’s memories of her childhood. They could have done something similar to Hans, to split him and Anna up so she could end up with Kristoff!

All right, let’s begin, shall we?

There are a few problems with this theory. First of all, what they did to Anna was slightly alter her memories, tweaking them in simple ways. What you are suggesting is full on rewriting Hans’ personality. Those are NOT the same thing! Also, there’s only one troll shown to be able to alter the minds of people: The troll elder, Grandpabbie, and he doesn’t strike me as the “alter peoples minds just for kicks” type. He simply isn’t as impulsive as the rest of the trolls, which might be the reason he’s the wise elder entrusted with the knowledge of magic.

Dave: But suppose the other trolls convinced him? Isn’t that a possibility?

Well, the possibility does exist, but even if that is the case, the only time we see that kind of magic performed, it required the subject to be physically there. Why else would the King bring Anna to the trolls? There’s nothing to suggest the trolls can use that kind of magic over vast distances.

Not to mention that if they’re trying to match Kristoff with Anna, turning Hans evil is an incredibly complicated way to do it!

Think about it. If this was all part of their plan, they would turn Hans into a killer, and hope that he won’t just stab Anna, but simply refuse to help her and leave her to die, and then that Anna, despite being on the brink of death, tries to save Elsa, and is miraculously saved, and then hope that she falls in love with Kristoff…

It seems overly convoluted, doesn’t it? Wouldn’t it be easier to just alter Anna’s mind to make her fall in love with Kristoff?

Dave: But that would be immoral and evil!

And turning a man into a murderer to help your adoptive son isn’t?! At least with this plan, there’s less of a chance of the girl you’re trying to pair up with your son BECOMING A FUCKING ICE SCULPTURE FOR ALL ETERNITY!

But the main issue, to me, is that you claim that Hans begins all friendly and charming and lovely, and then he turns evil for no reason.

Which is true… so long as you ignore that scene when he explains his motivation for his actions.

As thirteenth in line in my own kingdom, I didn’t stand a chance. I knew I’d have to marry into the throne somewhere. […] As heir, Elsa was preferable of course, but no one was getting anywhere with her. But you? You were so desperate for love, you were willing to marry me just like that!

Maybe this is just me, but it seems pretty clear this wasn’t some sudden impulse brought on by magic. This was his plan right from the start!

Dave: But he was so charming…

Oh, gee, I wonder why! Could it be because he’s A COMPLETE, MANIPULATIVE FUCKING PSYCHOPATH?

He wanted Anna to fall in love with him! Then when he finally DID marry her, he could cause Elsa to have a little “accident“, and voilá! He’s the king of Arendelle! Mission accomplished! When that plan failed, he found himself with Anna dying, and Elsa facing execution. Letting Anna die and blaming Elsa would present him as the hero who killed the “wicked winter witch“. Again, mission accomplished, and this time, no queen to worry about!

The trolls had nothing to do with it at all! Hans was evil from word go!

The movie actually highlights how ludicrous it is that Anna and Hans seemingly fall madly in love and getting ready to MARRY within moments of meeting one another! It’s what causes the conflict that caused Elsa to lose control!

This is in contrast to the relationship between Anna and Kristoff, whom she meets, gets to know, and their relationship grows over time! And even then, by the end, they’re not on the verge to be married!

Dave: Uhm…

Has it occured to you that this entire concept is a criticism of the stereotypical fairytale “love at first sight” clicheé?

I mean, it’s not exactly subtle. You can’t have missed it. So why are you so into the idea of Hans being a victim here?

Dave: Because it ties together with another theory!

Oh, son of a…

Dave: The theory is that Hans can control fire!

Wait, what?!

Dave: Think about it. Isn’t it strange that Hans is constantly wearing gloves?

Not really… In fact, plenty of other characters also wear gloves…

Dave: Well, it could be because he has secret powers too! He’s a mirror image of Elsa!

But… wouldn’t that mean Hans is also struggling to keep those powers under control? That was the whole reason Elsa wore gloves, after all. Yet, at no point does he seem to show any powers what so ever!

Dave: That could be because just like Elsa, he is worried about fear and prejudice because of his powers! At one point, he tells Elsa to “not be the monster they think [she] is”. That suggests he knows what she’s going through.

Yes… Alternatively, it could have something to do with that aforementioned manipulative trait I mentioned. You know, making her trust him enough so he can enact his plan?

Dave: But some of his outfits seem to have a flame motif…

Which would mean something, if Elsa wore clothes with a winter motif. But the clothes she wears during her coronation are NOT snow themed. She does wear a winter themed dress, but that is AFTER she has decided to no longer hide her powers and build her ice castle. Hans’ clothes are tailor made. If he is trying to keep those powers under wraps, why would he highlight the fact he has them by wearing an outift that implies it?!

And if he had those power, wouldn’t he try to USE them at some point in the movie?

Dave: Aha, but he does!


Dave: When he reveals his plan, he removes one of his gloves, and snuffs out a candle.

…That’s it?

No fireballs? No flame cascades? No towering inferno of apocalyptic proportions…

He snuffed out a candle with his fingers, so now he’s a flame wizard?

I hate to break it to you, but THAT’S NOT MAGIC!

But let me get this straight… You’d rather support both these theories, neither of which work, rather than the idea that “love at first sight” is a ridiculous clicheé?

Is it really so unthinkable that marriage might be a somewhat serious issue and not something you can just rush into?

Dave: You can, if it’s true love!

What the fuck do you know about true love?!

Dave: More than you!


Dave: You just know how to shut people out!

Oh dear god. You’re either trying to be funny, or you’re actually trying to disprove my argument by quoting the movie at me… Either way, I’m going to leave now, otherwise, there’s a very real chance I might feed you very slowly into a meatgrinder.

Back to Main Page


Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

It is time, once again, to throw all caution and sense of self-preservation to the teeth of the gale.

In other words, I have decided to write about Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, the first movie in the spin-off/prequel series to the Harry Potter movies.

Obviously, seeing as the movie is fairly new, there may be readers who haven’t seen it yet. So, if you don’t want the movie spoiled, you should probably stop reading right about here.

Now, first of all, the thing I should make clear about this movie is this: I liked it. It was a fine, enjoyable film. My issue, and subsequently this article, concerns just one thing. One part of this movie caught my nitpicky attention, because in my opinion, it was handled completely the wrong way!

That something being The reveal of Gellert Grindelwald.

A quick recap. At the end of the movie, the Obscurial has been destroyed by MACUSA. Percival Graves, who has attempted to track down the Obscurial, declares that the law against exposing the world of magic only exists to protect muggles, rather than wizards, and that he refuses to obey that law any longer. The President of MACUSA orders her Aurors to relieve Graves of his wand. When Graves attempts to leave, they raise a magic shield to stop him.

In response, Graves attacks the Aurors, while making his way towards the President herself, presumably to kill her.

This is where Newt releases one of his creatures, which catches Graves. He then casts a spell, which reveals Percival Graves as really being Gellert Grindelwald in disguise all along!

So, what is wrong with this reveal?

If you pardon me being flippant, I think the better question is: what’s RIGHT about it? This reveal is done completely wrong, on every single level! Let me explain.

Firstly, there’s the storytelling perspective. Could someone tell me how Newt knows “Graves” is wearing a disguise? Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to assume he was just a follower of Grindelwald? He just instinctively knows, despite the complete lack of any indication to suggest this is the case. You’d think someone, somewhere, would give some token line of “ Percival had a mole on his eyebrow” or “Graves wasn’t right handed“. But no! Newt just knows, because of plot convenience.

Also, there’s the way he restrains Grindelwald. He releases the Swooping Evil, which turns into a restraining webwork around Grindelwalds arms.

That ability comes completely out of fucking nowhere! Since when could it do that? It never does that at any other point in the entire movie! There’s no foreshadowing or chekovs gun-like moment where Newt goes ”Oh, and it can also turn into a sticky cobweb to restrain people”. It suddenly just can, because the plot demands it!

Then there’s the meta perspective. I know it might not always seem it, but I really like Harry Potter. I wouldn’t be so good at disproving fan theories about this franchise, if I weren’t familiar and cared about the lore and story. And it’s safe to say most people who watch this movie will also be fairly familiar with that lore.

What that means, is that we know Grindelwald won’t be stopped by this. This is a completely empty victory, because pretty much everyone knows he will escape.

And for reasons that I’ll get to soon, it’ll happen pretty damn quickly.

Because now, we reach the matter of internal logic. Unless Grindelwald escaped within one day of being captured, this ending is really stupid. Remember that exchange between him and President Piquery when his true identity was revealed?

– Do you think you can hold me?
– We’ll do our best, Mr. Grindelwald.

Here’s the thing: They don’t NEED to hold him! Think about it. What is stopping them from just executing him?!

It has been established that the death penalty exists in this society. It’s not like the execution chamber was destroyed when Newt and Tina escaped! All that happened was the chair burned up, which was part of the procedure, and somehow, I think they can get a new floating chair! There’s not all that much to stop them beyond that, as far as I can tell.

After all, there didn’t seem to be that much red tape involved when Newt and Tina were sentenced to death. Yes, that was Grindelwald in disguise, but considering the two executioners didn’t seem that conflicted about it, I’d say it means Percival Graves had the authority, at least in extreme circumstances, to issue a death sentence. Otherwise, it would be really tricky for Grindelwald to explain why a foreign national and a MACUSA official were suddenly sentenced to death without a trial. If you’re trying to lay low, overstepping your bounds like that isn’t exactly a good strategy.

Don’t get me wrong. I am very much against the death penalty. I am just going by the rules already established. Newt was sentenced to death, ostensibly due to suspicion of trying to use an obscurus to expose the wizarding world, in order to spark off an all out war between Muggles and Wizards. And this was done even though Newt Scamander is a British national. This means that extradition is most likely not an issue here.

Gellert Grindelwald, to our knowledge, is guilty of multiple counts of murder, torture, the abduction, impersonation and possibly murder of a MACUSA Official…

AS WELL as trying to use an Obscurus to expose the wizarding world, in order to spark off an all out war between Muggles and Wizards.

In other words, going by internal logic, he would be facing execution pretty much by the time he gets back to MACUSA HQ!

But we already know that he won’t be executed, which means either he got a stay of execution for as-of-yet unexplained reasons, giving him time to escape, or he escaped very soon after being caught. The former makes little to no sense and the latter, again, makes the ending victory seem a bit hollow and contrived.

But perhaps worst of all, there are all the ways this ending pretty much wastes and ruins the character of Grindelwald!

Think about that ending.

The big monster has been defeated, the villain has been caught and unmasked in front of officers of the law, and his plan has been lain bare, before he’s lead away to prison.

Sound familiar?

That’s because this is basically the ending to any given episode of Scooby-Doo!

I’m half expecting Grindelwald to exclaim

And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren’t for that meddling zoologist! And that mangy muggle too!

A somewhat odd choice, considering literally the first thing we see in the movie is Grindelwald wiping out five Aurors singlehandedly. Not just defeating or knocking them out. He OBLITERATES them, reducing them to ash in a matter of moments, quickly followed by several headlines talking about his reign of terror. And THIS is how he is defeated?!

Of course, I’m being a bit unfair. It’s not really Newt or the Swooping Evil that defeats him. It’s his own bottomless stupidity!

Again, this is quite apparent, if you’re familiar with the lore of Grindelwald. See, there is this tiny, miniscule detail about Grindelwald at this point in time…

What was it again… Oh, right!


You know, the most powerful wand in existence?

And yet, when he attacks MACUSA, he’s still using Graves’ wand. Even if he had claimed that wands loyalty, it’s not as powerful! So why the hell would he use that wand?!

Remember, at that point, his disguise has no function anymore. The benefit of posing as Graves was that it gave him access to MACUSA and their resources, in his search for the Obscurial. But now, the Obscurial is gone and he has outright declared his true intentions. So why bother staying in disguise any longer?

So, from all these different perspectives, this reveal was handled absolutely wrong.

Now, I freely admit I’m not a screenwriter, but if I may, I’d like to offer my own suggestion for how this might have been handled better, based on my experience as an avid consumer of fiction.

Same basic setup. The Obscurial has been destroyed, Graves orates on how the law has them scurrying like rats etc.

President Piqiuery tells her Aurors to arrest Graves. When he tries to leave, they put up the magic shield, and the President asks him to relinquish his wand.

At this point, instead of attacking, Graves just looks at his wand, and throws it across the subway station.

The Aurors approach… and are then blasted away by Graves, now holding the Elder Wand, and everyone freeze with surprise and confusion. He then dispells the transfiguration disguising him, and is revealed as Gellert Grindelwald, to the shock and horror of everyone.

He then starts attacking, while deflecting the incoming attacks from the Aurors, making his way towards the President.

Suddenly, they collectively put up a magic field around him, trapping him. He’s told to give up, since he is outnumbered and can’t win.

So he turns his power to the magic shield, and blasts through it.

(It’s the Elder Wand. I can buy that being possible.)

There’s a big shockwave as the field fails, and when the dust clears, Grindelwald has vanished, having apparated to parts unknown.

From there, it simply leads into the rest of the movie as normal, with the massive bird, the memory-wiping rain and all that stuff.

Now, I admit it’s not perfect, but I’d say that seems the more appropriate way to deal with the reveal. It aligns better with continuity, it makes sense according to internal logic, and from a storytelling perspective, it works because it would give us an idea WHY Grindelwald is so feared.

And crucially, it would make the reveal so much more effective! As soon as we’d see him hold the Elder Wand, everyone familiar with the lore would collectively have an “oh crap” moment, because we KNOW what that means!

I mean, this is Gellert Fucking Grindlewald we’re talking about here. Before Voldemort, HE was the Big Bad. He was the one people would call “You-Know-Who” back then. When he finally WAS defeated, it was in a duel so great, it damn near entered fucking LEGEND!

Their approach here diminishes that so much! Not only that, but it also wastes Johnny Depp!

One of the things we knew for certain about this movie, something many were excited about, was Johnny Depp playing Grindelwald. Seeing a great actor portray one of the most infamous, but until now seldom seen dark wizards in the franchise? Not as a young kid, not as an old man, but in the prime of his life? I don’t know about you, but that was something I was looking forward to, when watching this movie.

Do you know how much of that we get in the movie? I do. I fucking counted.

Five minutes? Two and a half? No.

42 seconds.

I repeat. 42 seconds, and TWO LINES OF DIALOGUE! And that is INCLUDING the transformation sequence!

You screw up the resolution of the main plot with a nonsensical scooby-doo ending, and in the process not only ruin what could have been a great reveal, but also reduce a great actor (and a major draw to the movie) to a smaller on-screen performance than Keith Richards cameo in On Stranger Tides!?

I’m sorry, but what the tenpenny hell is wrong with you?!

And yes, I am aware that this movie was written by J.K Rowling, and you may well call me arrogant for trying to correct a highly acclaimed author.

However, I’d like to remind you that this is the same author who saw nothing wrong with love potions being legal.

My point is, she’s not immune to making mistakes now and then.

And that’s just it! This is one mistake. Like I said earlier, I liked this movie! It was just this ONE thing in an otherwise perfectly fine movie that raised my ire! One thing which I felt the movie could have done better.

Everything else was done about as well as one could expect. Hell, there was one really nice and clever thing someone pointed out to me, which I didn’t even pick up on. So, to appease those who may even now plot my horrible death, I present said observation, to distract you while I make my escape.

The reason Jacob Kowalski still remembers the beasts, if only subconsciously, despite having his mind wiped?

That’s because the poison from the Swooping Evil, when properly diluted, is explicitly mentioned as being able to remove bad memories. For the majority of citizens in New York, this means all the weird occurrences, the destruction, fear and chaos caused by monsters in recent days is forgotten.

But to Kowalski, most of his exposure to the world of magic WASN’T negative. Seeing those amazing beasts, finding a friend in Newt Scamander, meeting Queenie… Those weren’t bad memories! Because of that, they were not erased, only suppressed.

So there’s a good chance that meeting Queenie again might restore those positive memories.

That’s an uplifting, heartwarming and absolutely valid idea, I think.

WTFAW: Portal 2

It has been a while since we covered a fan theory about a video game, back when we talked about Majoras Mask. Now, that theory was painfully pretentious and idiotic, bordering on being actively insulting ever so slightly flawed, but hopefully, Dave has learned from his mistake and brought me something more promising this time.

Dave: The theory today is about Portal. Specifically, that GLaDOS is Chells mother.

Then again, I could be completely wrong, and he instead doubled down… Very well, Dave. Explain this theory.

Dave: So, we know that Chell was the child of an Aperture employee, since her name can be found on one of the potato battery experiments made during “Bring Your Daughter to Work Day”.

Ok, but how does that prove she’s Carolines daughter?

Dave: Well, notice that the potato is incredibly overgrown, compared to the others? It’s because she used rapid growth hormone given to her by her father, Cave Johnson!


Dave: And there is an oil painting of Cave and Caroline, which suggests they’re something more than just co-workers. In fact, that would explain why Cave requested Caroline to be uploaded to GLaDOS. Instead of a more rational choice for a successor, he chose the woman he loved the most to continue his work


Dave: Also, in the oil painting, there’s a little girl in the background. That’s Chell, back when she wasn’t a test subject. 

Wow, there’s a lot to unpack with this one…

You claim that Chells potato grew out of control, thanks to chemicals given by Cave Johnson. Let’s ignore a crucial detail for now, and instead answer me this: why would he give her growth chemicals, to make a potato battery?

Dave: Because he doesn’t mind cheating. It’s exactly the kind of thing he’d do.

No, it isn’t! Cave Johnson would splice the potato with a nuclear isotope or something, not just make it bigger. A bigger potato makes no difference in a potato battery! You’d get surface area, but no additional power to use.

On that subject, getting something extravagant as an oil painting for himself and his personal assistant IS the kind of thing Cave Johnson would do. This is the guy who spent 70 MILLION DOLLARS on moon rocks!

He cared for Caroline a great deal, I agree. But love? I doubt it.

Dave: But he requested the personality core that created GLaDOS be based on her, instead of the head scientist or someone who’d know more about running the installation!

Firstly, he requested she’d be stuck into the machine if he died before he could be put in there.

Second, ”someone who’d know more”? Caroline was more than just some ditzy secretary. He described Caroline as ”the backbone of this facility”, and as his personal assistant, she’d be instrumental in the day-to-day details of administration. He DID pick the most fitting person for the job.

And thirdly, and most importantly, you think that’s a sign of LOVE?! What did he say, regarding her being uploaded into the core?

If I should die before you people can pour me into a computer, I want Caroline to run this place. Now, she’ll argue. She’ll say that she can’t. She’s modest like that. But you make her. Hell, put her in my computer. I don’t care

Call me a traditional romantic, but I’m pretty sure uploading someones consciousness into a computer without their consent isn’t something you do to THE PERSON YOU LOVE!

And finally, you claimed that Chell could be seen in the back of the picture of Cave and Caroline?

You mean this picture?


Dave: Yeah! Look, there to the left of Cave!

That’s a statue, Dave… Please don’t tell me I have to explain the difference between a living child and a piece of stone to you…

Of course, there is another gaping issue with this theory. Let’s suppose, for the time being, that it IS a child (which it isn’t, because it’s a fucking statue), that the child is Chell, and Cave Johnson and Caroline are her parents.

Why the flying hell is GLaDOS trying to kill her?!

Dave: For revenge. Chell destroyed her, after all.

No, GLaDOS tried to kill her first! Or did you forget that whole ”Lowering of a platform into a lit incinerator leading to Chell trying to escape” thing from the first game?

What followed was SEVERAL murder attempts, mingled with abuse and insults, then a big fight that ended in GLaDOS being severely damaged.

Dave: But why did she say Chell broke her heart, then? Isn’t that something a mother would say?

What the hell are you talking about? You know what Chell did to break her heart? She refused to die!

Dave: But… that makes no sense.

Congratulations, Dave! You’ve just understood the fucking joke!

Dave: Well.. maybe GLaDOS didn’t remember who she was or who Chell is. After she discovers the truth, she becomes much more caring and supportive of Chell, and even defends her when Wheatley tries to insult her.

Ah, yes. That’s her being super protective and motherly. Remind me, Dave. What did she say to Chell right after asking Wheatley what’s so bad about being adopted?


For the record, you ARE adopted, and that’s terrible, but work with me here.

Weird. It’s almost like she’s just saying whatever she can to antagonize him and make him look stupid. You know, like she did to you for the entire first half of the game?

Dave: Ah, but she DOES save Chells life, preventing her from being lost in space, and shows concern about her when she wakes up. And if you translate the turret opera, it contains phrases like ”My dear” and ”My child”. She is singing to her daughter to leave the laboratories behind.

Ok, I agree that she did save Chells life. But is that because she’s her mother, or because her human side is getting more and more pronounced, and it was a case of simple, human compassion?

Also, isn’t it odd that GLaDOS, supposedly remembering being Chells mother, refers to her as a ”Dangerous, mute lunatic”? Not especially motherly, is it?

Dave: Well, yeah. she deleted Caroline shortly before that.

But… if she deleted that part of her that recognices those motherly bonds, then explain how she can be singing to Chell as her child mere moments later!?

On a side note, the lyrics in question are ”Mia Bambina”. That doesn’t mean ”My daughter”. It means ”My (female) child” or ”my little girl”. You can refer to someone as ”mia bambina” without being their parent.

Dave: Uhm… maybe there are some lingering traces of Caroline in there… 

Ok, even if I accepted that explanation, Chell couldn’t possibly be Carolines and Caves daughter.

Dave: Why not?

It actually covers that earlier, crucial problem I mentioned. Remember that potato experiment? How old would you say Chell was, at that point?

Dave: Uhm… about 8?

I’d say so too. Somewhere between 8-10. It’s a science experiment for third graders.

Now let’s look at that oil painting again. How old would you say Caroline is in that painting? In her mid-to-late thirties, I’d say.

Dave: So what?

So, do you know when that painting was made?

Dave: Well…

It was made during the 1960’s.

The ”Bring Your Daughter to Work Day” where Chell made that exhibit was on the very same day GLaDOS went online and promptly killed almost everyone with neurotoxin. That happened in 1998.

The first voice recording where we hear Caroline, when she was described as the backbone of the facility, was in 1952.

Let’s do some simple maths here. Let’s be generous and assume that Caroline was in her early 20’s, let’s say 23, in that recording. If Chell was eight in 1998, she was born in 1990. That means that by the time Chell was born, Caroline would be in her early 60’s. It’s somewhat unlikely Caroline would have a child at that age. If Caroline was going to have kids, she would have had them sometime BEFORE she was 60 years old!

And even if we ignore that (which we shouldn’t), Caroline was described by Cave as being ”married to science”, right?

Dave: Right…?

Well, it’s fair to assume then, that if there ever was a man in her life, that’d be Cave Johnson.

Dave: Exactly.

Well, that last recording, when Cave talks about uploading Caroline, was in 1982. He was DYING by then.

So how the actual tenpenny hell could Caroline get pregnant with Caves child 8 YEARS AFTER HE DIED!?

Suffice to say that he would be equally unable to give Chell some growth chemical for her third grade science exhibit another 8 years later!

Dave: Ah, but if she isn’t Chells mother, and all her compassion was purged when she deleted Caroline, why does she give Chell her freedom, then?

Oh, good question, Dave. If only she had given some reason for why she’d do that… Oh wait, SHE FUCKING DID!

You know, deleting Caroline just now taught me a valuable lesson. The best solution to a problem is usually the easiest one. And I’ll be honest. Killing you is hard. […] So you know what? You win. Just go!

That’s not compassion, it’s PRAGMATISM! Every single, solitary attempt to kill Chell has failed. Not one thing has worked, and has only ever made things worse for those that tried. So, now GLaDOS has control of the facility back, she has two robots to test with, and her options are to either try make another attempt to kill Chell, and risk losing everything all over again…

Or activate the elevator and let her leave, guaranteeing she won’t be back.

That’s an incredibly easy choice to make.

And finally, even if this theory was true… It doesn’t really change anything.

Think about it. Either, GLaDOS isn’t aware of being Chells mother, in which case, it doesn’t affect the dynamic between Chell and GLaDOS, their fundamental relationship or the story in general in any meaningful way, or she DOES know, in which case she is trying to kill her own daughter for no adequately explained reason.

In conclusion, none of the arguments add up and the theory wouldn’t have a reason to exist, even if they did.

While this theory isn’t as pretentious and frustrating as the previous video game theory, it’s still among the most aggresively stupid ones I’ve ever seen.

If I didn’t know better, I’d say it was the result of some the most dedicated fans, getting together and trying their hardest to create the dumbest theory ever imagined…


Back to Main Page