|
Avasculous posted:They didn't just 'mention' the Haversack, it's the name of the episode. And the kind of fakeout you're describing is literally a major plot point of Oceans 11- tricking both the villain and audience into thinking they'd been thwarted mid-heist. Community's Oceans 11 satire episode did the same thing. which is why what happens is ironic and funny...  which is more likely - a group of dudes, who have proven themselves been bumbling morons in every endevour that doesn't involve coding, manages to pull of a grandiose heist that makes no sense from their own standpoint, from the viewers standpoint, or from the shows standpoint... or it was all just a setup for a big joke at the end. hmmm.... panda clue fucked around with this message at 18:35 on May 11, 2016 |
#
?
May 11, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:47 |
|
|
What point are you trying to make here? That it's not a fake out because a fake out is "pants on head retarded" and that is the real skunkworks plan?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:The evidence for "it was a trick" is solid and sound, but I would really love it to be the case that an entire heist arc was set up for much of one episode and was immediately tossed aside in one gently caress up to screw with our expectations. On the other hand, I just want another Office Space music montage where some drones pull off a scheme to gently caress their company. I mean that slow-mo shot from the elevator was kind of a nod to that but I want it for real next time. Back up in your rear end with the resurrection!
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:What point are you trying to make here? That it's not a fake out because a fake out is "pants on head retarded" and that is the real skunkworks plan? Yes, showing an entire, completely contradictory plan to the viewer, and then executing another entirely different crazy wacky plan behind the scenes would indeed be 'pants-on-head retarded.' On top of all the other things that I've mentioned previously that cause this entire theory to make no sense whatsoever that you are so quick to casually gloss over, such as them having no way to know who would find the documents, if they would understand them, or what they would do with them.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 18:39
|
|
|
The trick theory is a little silly, but it isn't as nuts as poo poo like "I acquit", "Mike's Voice", or any LOST stuff. No way. It's much more plausible than any of that garbage.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Last Chance posted:The trick theory is a little silly, but it isn't as nuts as poo poo like "I acquit", "Mike's Voice", or any LOST stuff. No way. It's much more plausible than any of that garbage. lol, I kept thinking of the 'Mike's Voice' reference but I couldn't put my finger on what it was from. End of some breaking bad episode, right?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
panda clue posted:lol, I kept thinking of the 'Mike's Voice' reference but I couldn't put my finger on what it was from. End of some breaking bad episode, right? Yes, it was just some noticeable ADR that made Bryan Cranston's voice seem a little more gravelly than other shots in the scene. Someone thought it was Jonathan Banks (Mike) doing the dub for some insane reason
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
I would lean in favor of it not being a fakeout by our boys, if only because the shows loves to poo poo on them due to their own fuckups. Like, that's kinda the entire show, brilliant people being thwarted by really dumb mistakes. Writing their algorithm on the whiteboard in front of a competitor, Richard losing his keys, deleting all the porn data, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
my bony fealty posted:I would lean in favor of it not being a fakeout by our boys, if only because the shows loves to poo poo on them due to their own fuckups. Like, that's kinda the entire show, brilliant people being thwarted by really dumb mistakes. Exactly. People think that it can't be a fuckup because they spent half the episode planning it, but them spending half the episode planning it just made me think "ok, so how is this going to get immediately pissed into the wind". It's just what happens with these guys on this show, and is part of the comedy. panda clue fucked around with this message at 18:55 on May 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
panda clue posted:Yes, showing an entire, completely contradictory plan to the viewer, and then executing another entirely different crazy wacky plan behind the scenes would indeed be 'pants-on-head retarded.' On top of all the other things that I've mentioned previously that cause this entire theory to make no sense whatsoever that you are so quick to casually gloss over, such as them having no way to know who would find the documents, if they would understand them, or what they would do with them. The fact that they brought up Meinertzhagen's Haversack and Ocean's 11 makes no sense if the plan was "work on something in secret and immediately gently caress it up." Or even if the plan was "Pretend to work on a thing but really do another thing." The haversack plan was to put fake battle plans into enemy hands. What does that have anything to do with Working on something in secret and never telling anyone? The Ocean's 11 reference only makes sense if it was supposed to be like a heist and anything that appeared to go wrong was actually going right. So it's not retarded for it to play out that way, you just personally don't like it. I'm not saying that either theory is right because I don't know and we won't know until the next episode airs. Declaring that your personal idea is correct and all others are wrong with no evidence is "pants on head retarded."
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
You Lost fanboys sure are reaching if you think the main character letting his plans fall into his enemy's hands might have been a ruse just because it happened in an episode directly named after a historical event where fake plans were allowed to fall into enemy hands as a ruse.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:I'm not saying that either theory is right because I don't know and we won't know until the next episode airs. Declaring that your personal idea is correct and all others are wrong with no evidence is "pants on head retarded." All I'm going to say is that if a fake out is well planned and executed correctly, then I don't consider that dishonest film making. Other people might feel differently.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
It's not like there was no setup for it being a ruse on the viewer either. There was a whole scene of Jared explaining they'd have to act the part. Also I don't think I've ever seen a mentally disabled person wearing their pants on their head. Please cite your idioms.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
panda clue posted:"well since they mentioned oceans 11 and this other thing, using historical context we can see...." literally all anyone has posted for the last page, while still not a single rebuttal for the other reasons why this idea is retarded. panda clue posted:On top of all the other things that I've mentioned previously that cause this entire theory to make no sense whatsoever that you are so quick to casually gloss over, such as them having no way to know who would find the documents, if they would understand them, or what they would do with them. yes surely the logical course of reasoning is that this group of crackshots has masterminded a genius plan with several people in the office, including the salesman that they have no connection with and the random janitor, to maybe have a chance at possibly fooling their boss into thinking they are going to do the thing he doesnt want them to do. genius!!! panda clue fucked around with this message at 20:40 on May 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
panda clue posted:literally all anyone has posted for the last page, while still not a single rebuttal for the other reasons why this idea is retarded. Because you're still sucking from your moms tits for sustenance there you happy? loving idiots even if you're right who gives a poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
LOST really hosed a lot of people up
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
Veskit posted:loving idiots even if you're right who gives a poo poo I assume the people posting in the Silicon Valley thread on a TV show subforum of an internet board care about discussion involving Silicon Valley.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
panda clue posted:It was a bit of a tongue-in-cheek joke by the producers, with Hurley acting as the audience and Sawyer being the producers, making fun of people looking for hidden meaning in literally every tiny part of the show. And the final joke was to reveal that the major elements of the show had no real meaning either and that they were making it up as they went along. Silicon Valley is a way better show. Maybe we should do a SWOT analysis to demonstrate why we should talk about it instead? InfiniteZero fucked around with this message at 20:47 on May 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
panda clue posted:I assume the people posting in the Silicon Valley thread on a TV show subforum of an internet board care about discussion involving Silicon Valley. Remind me to never mention anything fiction related if I by any chance ever meet you at a party. Scratch that, just stay away.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Reasons I come into SV thread: Hey remember that thing that happened (then I think ohhh yeah that did happen that was awesome) Hey Look at this thing did anyone else notice? (poo poo i didn't notice that that was awesome!) Hey Quad jerking dissertation (WOWOWOWOWOW) NOT KNEE PAD CONSPIRACIES Xoidanor posted:Remind me to never mention anything fiction related if I by any chance ever meet you at a party. Could you imagine watching a movie like Idiocracy with this rear end in a top hat
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Veskit posted:Could you imagine watching a movie like Idiocracy with this rear end in a top hat I imagine him storming off indignantly 5 minutes into Rifftrax anything. InfiniteZero posted:Maybe we should do a SWOT analysis to demonstrate why we should talk about it instead? I'm thinking Porter's five.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
My theory is that this is all an autistic boy's dream.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
I/'ll give panda clue this much it is really fun having a Ginesh around.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
go back to byob
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
You have no home here because you have no place to write Richard fan fiction where he happens to always wear a panda cap
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Veskit posted:You have no home here because you have no place to write Richard fan fiction where he happens to always wear a panda cap 
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
panda clue posted:literally all anyone has posted for the last page, while still not a single rebuttal for the other reasons why this idea is retarded. 1) He tripped right in front of the group of people most likely to go whining to daddy (which is literally anyone in the office not part of the core cast). 2) They apparently printed "SKUNKWORKS" right at the top of the page because that's the first thing the guy read. 3) The one that no one has mentioned apparently: Richard trips because he's distracted by Jared's really, really off-color joke, which itself is completely out of place because up until then he was actually killing it with the chain insults at Dinesh. Even without the historical and movie references that back it up, that moment was so out-of-place in a show where the comedy and awkwardness are so tightly performed that it just doesn't FEEL like it's being played straight.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
ApathyGifted posted:1) He tripped right in front of the group of people most likely to go whining to daddy (which is literally anyone in the office not part of the core cast). 4) (my favourite little catch so far) Elrich mentions gaining the janitor as an ally in the previous episode.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
Too much conspiracy theory argumentation, not enough Jian Yang
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
MrMojok posted:Too much conspiracy theory argumentation, not enough Jian Yang not empty quote
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
They're using Jian Yang just right this season, I love it. Erilch screaming at him about the pizza and the ensuing slap fight got one of the biggest laughs of the episode from me.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
MrMojok posted:Too much conspiracy theory argumentation, not enough Jian Yang Mother gently caress!
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
Avasculous posted:Honestly, this is more or less my core reservation about it. I really like the problem solving nature of the work and I can see the logic in startups or companies diving into new areas wanting to purchase expert insight to avoid blunders.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
The group is socially inept and they hosed up their little scheme. Holy poo poo some of you people.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
Toplowtech posted:Big head spending his money well by starting an incubator. What do you want to bet that this house is the same one we are introduced to in the pilot's opening scene/party? The owner famously crashed and burned and Big Head doesn't strike me as having the slightest clue as to NOT follow pre-existing trends or patterns. Erlich literally tells him that 'this house talks to women'. Makes sense he'd go out and buy the EXACT same house. It's another example of him lazily advancing in life.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:The group is socially inept and they hosed up their little scheme. Quoting for when you're wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
ten_twentyfour posted:Quoting for when you're wrong. same
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
I think it'd be funny if Jian Yang joins Bighead's incubator and immediately launches an amazing startup so Bighead can fail up some more.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:47 |
|
|
Why would Gilfoyle (sp?) say to Richard, "You were supposed to shred those" when absolutely no one but their group was in ear shot? Better yet, what do they gain by tipping anyone off at a possible scheme at all? Better better yet, gently caress it, I acquit.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 00:30
|
|
