|
Post by randallsnape7 on Jun 20, 2014 3:33:15 GMT -5
The T-R-O-L-L capital of the Internet.
The Randall Boggs page on the Disney Wiki is DISGUSTINGLY biased against Randall! It says that Randall USED to be kind and friendly, and that he hates Mike, and that he was planning on torturing Boo just for fun, and yada, yada, yada...
...anyone ever seen that page? SICK!
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Jun 20, 2014 13:25:11 GMT -5
Yes, I've seen it, and we have discussed it here already. Keep in mind that a Wiki is NOT official; it's a fan-created site, and most of them ARE made by "trolls", people who put them up just to rile people. This is probably written by the same person who wrote the Disney Villains Wiki, a bored little kid trying to stir up something by creating a site that they totally control, so no one can challenge them. There are people like that on Tumblr, who believe that Randall was using both Waternoose and Johnny Worthington, as well as Mike, that he was always evil and planning all along to do horrible things just to rise to power, and was just hiding behind a mask of friendliness and insecurity. Recently one poster compared Randall to the California shooter, that Rodger moron, saying that Randall was the epitome of "male entitlement" and the "patriarchy" who believed he could do all those horrible things simply because he was male, and chose Boo as his "victim" because she was a helpless female!
pitbulllady
|
|
|
Post by randallsnape7 on Jun 20, 2014 15:50:57 GMT -5
How DARE someone say that about Randall?! Sounds like the kind of accusations IAN LUDLOW (from "Mr. Monk and the Two Assistants") would come up with. LOL!
<Exerpt from book>
IAN LUDLOW: (FALSE summation against Natalie, where he pathologically distorts reality left and right.) "Here's what happened. Somehow Sharona convinced you that even if Trevor was innocent, he was an abusive husband who would make her life and her son's a living hell. She made you a deal. She would disappear from Monk's life forever if you helped her keep Trevor behind bars.
NATALIE TEEGER: "That conversation never happened! None of it did! It's fiction... something you're very good at."
IAN LUDLOW: (arrogantly lays it on thick) "You concocted a brilliant scheme! You committed another murder in San Fransisco, one so bizarre, you knew that Monk wouldn't be able to resist it. One that even the police would agree, cried out for him, and while you did that, Sharona remained in LA to establish an alibi and erase whatever tracks she left behind when she killed Ellen Cole!"
Soon after that, he even snidely exerts that Natalie was secretly IN LOVE with Adrian Monk.
IAN LUDLOW: (calmly, matter-of-factly) "You didn't do it for the money... you did it because you're in love with him." (GASP!)
And yeah, yeah, yeah... just wait, you smart-ass! Adrian Monk will get you!
Back to the topic, there is a sick psychology at play when people connect an animated character like Randall with some guilty culprit or criminal in a real-life massacre broadcast on the news. They are painting a twisted win-win scenario to guard their inaccurate thinking. This may be hard for you to believe, but if we were to defend Randall to someone who makes that kind of comparison, they could actually twist our words. They would mistakenly think that since someone is taking up for Randall, then they must ALSO be taking up for the real-life criminal as well. They could actually misinterpret a person's words and allow themselves to become offended by hearing a character they have MISTAKENLY decided in their mind to be evil, being defended... when all we are doing is saying that we believe them to be good, which they cannot BEGIN to wrap their brains around.
|
|
|
Post by reptile682 on Jun 25, 2014 1:38:03 GMT -5
Yes, I've seen it, and we have discussed it here already. Keep in mind that a Wiki is NOT official; it's a fan-created site, and most of them ARE made by "trolls", people who put them up just to rile people. This is probably written by the same person who wrote the Disney Villains Wiki, a bored little kid trying to stir up something by creating a site that they totally control, so no one can challenge them. There are people like that on Tumblr, who believe that Randall was using both Waternoose and Johnny Worthington, as well as Mike, that he was always evil and planning all along to do horrible things just to rise to power, and was just hiding behind a mask of friendliness and insecurity. Recently one poster compared Randall to the California shooter, that Rodger moron, saying that Randall was the epitome of "male entitlement" and the "patriarchy" who believed he could do all those horrible things simply because he was male, and chose Boo as his "victim" because she was a helpless female! pitbulllady I cant believe someone would even think of comparing Randall to a mass killer. If this person truly believes this, then they might as well compare him to Columbine, V-Tech, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Naval Yard, and the countless mass killings that are plaguing this country. There is absolutely nothing that suggests that Randall is anything like Elliot Rodger, Eric Harris, or any of these mentally unstable people. I think this poster just wanted to hear himself talk, or like you said, stir something up. It just bugs me how people are so bias, and don't listen to Randall's side of the story, but that's probably because he looks reptilian even though he isn't biologically.
|
|
marsh
Randall's Skivvy (0-299)
Posts: 28
|
Post by marsh on Jul 14, 2014 12:26:43 GMT -5
The T-R-O-L-L capital of the Internet.
The Randall Boggs page on the Disney Wiki is DISGUSTINGLY biased against Randall! It says that Randall USED to be kind and friendly, and that he hates Mike, and that he was planning on torturing Boo just for fun, and yada, yada, yada...
...anyone ever seen that page? SICK! What part of the movie gave you the impression he didn't hate Mike?
|
|
|
Post by randallsnape7 on Jul 14, 2014 16:40:04 GMT -5
First of all, I hope you've seen 'Monsters University'.
Second of all, when Randall does the clock illustration for Mike, using his arms, it's important to understand that since Randall had tutored Mike in college, Mike's dim-witted answers to him like 'painted' and such, was simply more than Randall could take. When he tells him "EMPTY! It will be EMPTY, you idiot!", Randall was in the right, because Mike had no excuse for acting dim-witted. Randall is clearly of the mindset that monsters should stick up for each other.
Randall was NOT planning on kidnapping nor hurting Boo, he decided to capture Mike as a substitute, and he was risking his life by doing so. He merely PRETENDED to act surprised when he put him in the Scream Extractor chair, and when he asked "Where is it, you little one-eyed cretin?", that was all an act for Fungus' benefit, as well as Waternoose, because for all he knows, Waternoose might have been hiding in the Secret Engine Room to keep a close eye on Randall. Randall was actually asking out of concern for the child's safety, even though Mike didn't know this. He even deliberately set the levers at half-power, KNOWING that the machine would not work properly, because that central plug Randall tends to was not plugged in. This is a little thing called 'STALLING', as every precious moment gave Randall some more time to find a way out of the mess he was in with Waternoose.
These are the actions of a good person who has to pretend to be bad for an undetermined temporary stretch of time to avoid being killed or found out by their boss... they have to act the way they are EXPECTED to act. All the while, said person usually does everything they can to expose such corruption (if they know their boss is participating in illegal acts), and get them arrested or defeated while simultaneously making sure they stay alive, so that the oppressed worker will no longer have to play a game, thus enabling him to relax and be himself again once everything is over. Again, there is no indication that Randall hates Mike... if anything, Randall felt hopelessly let down that the one monster he had ever considered in his life to be a 'pal', won't even help him.
|
|
marsh
Randall's Skivvy (0-299)
Posts: 28
|
Post by marsh on Jul 16, 2014 11:17:20 GMT -5
First of all, I hope you've seen 'Monsters University'. Second of all, when Randall does the clock illustration for Mike, using his arms, it's important to understand that since Randall had tutored Mike in college, Mike's dim-witted answers to him like 'painted' and such, was simply more than Randall could take. When he tells him "EMPTY! It will be EMPTY, you idiot!", Randall was in the right, because Mike had no excuse for acting dim-witted. Randall is clearly of the mindset that monsters should stick up for each other. Randall was NOT planning on kidnapping nor hurting Boo, he decided to capture Mike as a substitute, and he was risking his life by doing so. He merely PRETENDED to act surprised when he put him in the Scream Extractor chair, and when he asked "Where is it, you little one-eyed cretin?", that was all an act for Fungus' benefit, as well as Waternoose, because for all he knows, Waternoose might have been hiding in the Secret Engine Room to keep a close eye on Randall. Randall was actually asking out of concern for the child's safety, even thought Mike didn't know this. He even deliberately set the levers at half-power, KNOWING that the machine would not work properly, because that central plug Randall tends to was not plugged in. This is a little thing called 'STALLING', as every precious moment gave Randall some more time to find a way out of the mess he was in with Waternoose. These are the actions of a good person who has to pretend to be bad for an undetermined temporary stretch of time to avoid being killed or found out by their boss... they have to act the way they are EXPECTED to act. All the while, said person usually does everything they can to expose such corruption (if they know their boss is participating in illegal acts), and get them arrested or defeated while simultaneously making sure they stay alive, so that the oppressed worker will no longer have to play a game, thus enabling him to relax and be himself again once everything is over. Again, there is no indication that Randall hates Mike... if anything, Randall felt hopelessly let down that the one monster he had ever considered in his life to be a 'pal', won't even help him. I have seen Monsters University. I regret it deeply, but I have. I need a list; 1. I'm pretty sure Randall less "tutored" more "Read questions". 2. Either way, that's a rather weird gap. Tutored a long time ago about scaring = Gets violent when tutored gives stupid answer to something completely unrelated? 3. The arm thing isn't the sole show of jerk-ness in that scene; pinning someone against the wall and just immediately leaping into accusatory questions isn't very pleasant either. 4. I don't know how you got to "Monsters should stick up for each other". 5. I find it unfair to even look at that scene from the point of view of Monsters U. That prequel was not planned, the scene was not made with anything remotely like it in mind. Done. This entire thing hinges on things we are given no reason to believe, including the idea that Randall is acting/"pretending". The guy is consistently a jerk, no matter who's around. He has vaguely not mean lines twice; both times, he's trying to coax something out of someone else, and both times it doesn't last longer than maybe ten seconds. The guy immediately rushes into siccing the Scream Extractor on Mike within like a minute and a half of him falling out of the box, goes on his own little search when it doesn't work and immediately fixes the problem when he finds it (by the way, Sulley pulled the cord without him knowing, he did not leave it unplugged), insists Fungus moves faster three times (and then is more concerned with finding Mike again than making sure Fungus doesn't suffocate to death), immediately jumps into "Where's the kid!?" instead of spending time on "What the hell are you doing here, Wazowski!?", straps Mike in instead of letting him slip away...what I'm saying here is, the guy's not stalling. He's moving quickly and efficiently. He sets it on half power because if Mike dies after five seconds he can't really get the information he needs out of him. ...The CDA was right there. They were outright asking him, REPEATEDLY, if he knew something. I cannot possibly think of a better time to "expose" something. Not to mention the repeated times of having full dialogues with other monsters and not saying anything. Why would he be afraid of Waternoose? He's old and, much more importantly, can't see invisible things. If anyone's at a potentially deadly disadvantage here, it's Waternoose. Yes, not having a single civil line directed at him (with the sole exception of the door offer, where he himself gets something out of it, and he quickly drops any pleasantness within...five seconds, I think), being introduced scaring the guy, getting violent with him almost immediately, then proceeding to try and kill him twice is an indication the guy hates Mike.
|
|
|
Post by randallsnape7 on Jul 16, 2014 23:19:11 GMT -5
There are about 4 or 5 flaws in your assessments.
To begin with... whether you like it or not, 'Monsters University' IS Film #1 now, of the 'Monsters' franchise... and 'Monsters, Inc.' is now Film #2. Therefore, it is ridiculously unfair to NOT take into account the events of that film. Whether or not a prequel had been planned is irrelevant. Many, many, MANY stories can have their original facts altered or embellished, whether it's a prequel... or even a sequel.
Take STAR WARS: EPISODE IV - A NEW HOPE for example. By the time you see EPISODE V - THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, the viewer knows now that Obi-Wan Kenobi lied to Luke about Darth Vader 'betraying and murdering' his father. It was also this truth that led to Obi-Wan glancing at Luke, then Vader, before raising his lightsaber to allow Vader to kill him. BUT..... after seeing STAR WARS: EPISODE III - REVENGE OF THE SITH, we ALSO know that Obi-Wan told a GARGANTUAN lie about Anakin's lightsaber: "Your father wanted you to have this when you were old enough, but your uncle wouldn't allow it.". Oh, REALLY? Because from what WE remember, Obi-Wan physically maimed Anakin at the end of their duel on Mustafar in a cruel manner, then he stole Anakin's lightsaber and left.
Correction: You think RANDALL is a jerk? What about Mike??? He spends both movies so wrapped up in himself, he doesn't even show the SLIGHTEST interest when Randall presents that plate of cupcakes that read 'BE MY PAL'. He had the guts to say "Your lifelong friend is right behind this door.", but did practically NOTHING to reach out to Randall and get to know him. About the tutoring thing and the clock illustration, the point is that Randall knew that Mike was no dummy, which is why he went to Mike for answers after seeing him in the newspaper. Mike was more or less insulting Randall's intelligence by giving out stupid answers, and Randall knows Mike is better than that. As for pinning him against that wall and leaping into accusatory questions, it was because it was URGENT for Randall to know where Boo was, so that he could protect her from Waternoose.
Why does Randall believe that monsters should stick up for each other? He asks about Boo to Sulley once and Mike twice. He would only do this to Mike if Randall believed that Mike would remember his place in the Monster World and cooperate with things bigger than either of them understand. Randall suspected Mike and Sulley were harboring a child anyway, and since Sulley had already acted dishonest before in the past, he knew he had to confront him. The pinch is that Mike and Sulley ended up choosing the welfare of a human child over a fellow monster, and in the Monster World, that simply isn't done.
Mike's primary concern is ALWAYS saving his own skin, even if he has to lie his way out of trouble whenever a person in authority calls him on the carpet. Who was it that bended and twisted the rules all the time at both college and work? MIKE. Who made fun of Randall by sticking out his lip and snidely repeating "YOU HEAR THAT? YOU HEAR THE WINDS OF CHANGE?", MIKE. Who stood there, cheering and gloating giddily like he was at some party while Randall was BEGGING and PLEADING for his life while Sulley prepared to throw him into a door where dangerous humans awaited him? MIKE. Not to mention that they both ILLEGALLY banished Randall, a fellow corporate employee who worked at the company, and possibly put his life in danger. Randall was already stopped when Sulley physically restrained him in that bedroom, so anything more than that was pure revenge.
Mike and Sulley's casual flippancy about such a cold-hearted, vengeful act is downright disgusting... because it's important to realize that Randall DID NOT deserve what they did to him. In my eyes, Randall can never be as big a jerk to Mike or Sulley as they were to him.
Also, you CANNOT think that Randall dropping the stuffed animals on the Oozma Kappas is any indication that Randall hated Mike. HE DIDN'T HAVE A CHOICE. Why? Because Johnny Worthington is a pushover type of fellow, and a real jerk. Johnny probably CAJOLED and BELITTLED Randall into doing that stunt to begin with. He probably threatened that if Randall didn't join the Roar Omega Roars in humiliating the Oozma Kappas, then JOHNNY and the RORs would humiliate RANDALL, and we know that Randall has already had humiliations before prior to this: Those cupcakes that said 'BE MY PAL' ended up spelling 'LAME', and his unique ability to turn invisible is still something Randall hasn't realized as an asset, instead of a liability... therefore, he was forced into doing it... but that DOESN'T mean he, personally, enjoyed it. It probably ate him up inside. First Johnny, then Henry J. Waternoose. Both made promises to him, played on his gullibility, but both betrayed him (yes, even Waternoose. When he tells the CDA about cutting the power when the door lands in the station, he adds "You'll have the child... and the criminal responsible for this."). Waternoose was going to further betray Randall by handing him over to the CDA, and put HIS OWN blame on RANDALL! You expect me to believe that Waternoose was at a disadvantage??? SHOOT! He ORCHESTRATED the whole thing, with the Scream Extractor and the child kidnapping, with virtually the entire Monster World at his back, being a powerful CEO, and he MANIPULATED both Sulley and Randall to achieve his own ends. If ANYONE is the jerk here, it's Waternoose.
Take Judge Ethan Rickover (played by Craig T. Nelson) from "Mr. Monk and the End - Parts 1 and 2": ALL Rickover did to murder Adrian Monk's wife, Trudy Ann Ellison, was make ONE phone call to Frank Nunn, hiring him to detonate a car bomb that Rickover wanted planted under Trudy's car. Nunn then took it upon himself to hire a small-time thug, Warrick Tennyson, to BUILD the bomb for $3,000 cash. Rickover didn't even have to know who Warrick Tennyson is to kill her. Even Tennyson showed signs of remorse and was asking forgiveness once he met 'the husband', Adrian. But, what would Rickover care??? He simply made his call, then swept the whole thing under the rug like it never happened. Waternoose operates EXACTLY like Ethan Rickover. You clearly do not understand how megalomaniacs in positions of power (like Rickover) work... they remain cool and composed, and they tell everyone what they WANT to hear, and will EASILY use anybody at anytime for whatever reason, and will go out of their way to put the blame on somebody else (like Randall), so that a poor guy takes the fall, while the REAL culprit gets away scott free, looking like Mr. Clean.
Randall had EVERY reason to be afraid of Waternoose, and don't think that just because he's old, he isn't aware of what's going on. He KNOWS Randall can turn invisible... so being at a 'deadly disadvantage' defies logic. Randall almost certainly knew the extent of his corrupt boss' wrath, and understood the consequences of disobeying Waternoose. Waternoose does not treat Randall with respect at all... in fact, sadly, NOBODY treats Randall with much respect... which leaves a MAJOR hole in the franchise's plotline. It is beyond me how anyone can miss this...
...if Randall was never meant to be made into someone, then all that character preparation throughout the two 'Monsters' films was essentially wasted. If you look at the story more carefully, you'll realize that Randall is one of the most tragic and sympathetic character cases in possibly any animated film. No matter how hard Randall tries, he keeps getting kicked down and humiliated over and over and over and OVER again. When we see such a constant stream of downers and misfortunes for just one character, we begin to wonder if it's a buildup to some relief down the road.
OHO! 2 sides! DID Randall set that machine at half-power for the sole purpose of keeping Mike alive JUST so he could get information out of him? Or did he DELIBERATELY set it at half-power so that there is no way Mike could die? Don't forget that it is Fungus who turned the Scream Extractor all the way up and winds up getting caught in it. Also, Randall would not be asking why Wazowski was there if he DELIBERATELY pretended to kidnap him for the purpose of asking about Boo's whereabouts. This may be impossible for you to believe, but I think Randall was secretly protecting Boo all along, and had NO intentions of killing her. WATERNOOSE is the one that wanted Boo dead.
FINAL THOUGHT: Ahem... there are MANY stories that hinge entirely on things we don't know. Watch the 'Harry Potter' series from beginning to end and see what happens to Severus Snape if you don't believe me. Or watch the 'Spider-Man' trilogy and learn what really happened between Uncle Ben and his true killer. What about 'The Dark Knight' trilogy? Watch it and learn about Ra's Al-Ghul's full involvement with the League of Shadows, as well as his personal life, which isn't revealed until the climax of 'The Dark Knight Rises'.
The fact you didn't enjoy 'Monsters University' lets me know that you definitely need to see that film again. Mike, Sulley, and Randall are clearly destined to become the best of friends. They are like 3 trains headed for each other, and none of them can complete their journey without the other. I was expecting this friendship CLEAR back when I first saw 'Monsters, Inc.', and was very disappointed that it didn't happen. I NEVER saw Randall as a villain, not even from day one, and I have held steadfast to this belief for 13 straight years now. The kind of role Randall had in 'Monsters University' didn't surprise me at all, because large portions of his moments only confirmed what I already suspected to be true.
|
|
marsh
Randall's Skivvy (0-299)
Posts: 28
|
Post by marsh on Aug 5, 2014 13:21:30 GMT -5
This forum has a horrible quoting system I've never seen these movies. I do, however, remember reading that the whole series was a planned thing, and if this was the case then the comparison doesn't work.
What, exactly, does Mike being a jerk have to do with the topic? That, to me, seems more like it'd help my point than yours'. Was there something he was supposed to say to the cupcakes? Besides "Randy, you're going to get laughed at", I mean, which is probably what I would have gone with but most people would probably consider it rude. I mean they're rather plain cupcakes, they're not very novel, and there are only like eight of them, so taking one would have been pretty rude. He specifically says they're for "the cool kids" and it's very clear he doesn't mean Mike, so...It's like if someone showed you a twentieth anniversary cake for a couple they knew and then got ticked that you didn't thank them. And my point was that the two things are completely unrelated, and that even if they weren't, normally, people do not immediately jump to violence when someone does something stupid.
Typically, "This is important, pay attention" works better than "*SLAM* LET ME YELL AT YOU!". Also, he's clearly not taking this as urgent to begin with, considering he decides to try and be vague with Mike instead of "You have the kid, bring it to my door at lunch, bye".
You've put no evidence toward the idea that it's a choice between Randall's well being and Boo's rather than only Boo's well being being at stake. No, "if you look at this scene this way with absolutely no prompting from the movie to do so" is not evidence (especially when it doesn't work even from the proposed perspective). I can do that for anyone. Isn't that WALL-E such a jerk for just acting like a sweet robot so he can get a hot girlfriend? Poor Hopper, having to pretend he hates and desperately wants to kill his brother! Something tells me this hasn't happened enough in the Monster World for it to be "Something that just isn't done".
Real quick, remind me; when, exactly, did he bend the rules at work? I mean, he forgot his paper work and Sulley filled in for him, but he's clearly close to getting in trouble for that and Sulley offered on his own accord. Yes, he mocked Randall, because Randall scared him and then mocked him for it for no reason. If it was something random like "Hey, look, there's Randall walking down the street, he has such a stupid voice, and he told me this really stupid platitude yesterday" then you'd kind of have a point, but that's not what happened. This is Randall, immediately before Mike and Sulley get shoved into a freezing wasteland (look at that, Randall's been standing there for like four seconds and the snow's already coating him) that would have inevitably killed them if the Abominable Snowman hadn't shown up (even with the Abominable Snowman, unless Mike has some weird monster heat system, he was probably still screwed). I'm using an image instead of just saying "He did the exact same thing to them" so that you can clearly see his face, which just screams "No sympathy or guilt". Dude's even doing a "There it is" gesture. And don't say he's keeping up appearances for Waternoose, cause, aside from you still not proving that Waternoose is bullying him to begin with or why he has to act like this while Fungus doesn't, if he didn't open that door, the situation's brought to a complete stalemate, Waternoose would be left to explain why he'd brought that door and not Boo's, and then that leaves him between two bigger monsters and one smaller one that are all very angry at him. Not to mention, later, when Waternoose is clearly ticked at having to banish them while Randall's advocating for it. Tell me; exactly what were they supposed to do in that situation to make sure he stays incapacitated? They don't have rope (and they'd need a ton of it, they'd have eight limbs, a tail, and his mouth to cover), they can't carry him with them, they can't force him into a corner and tell him to stay there. So what's the solution? 1. Randall, fifteen seconds or so before trying to strangle Sulley to death (he's invisible during the actual act, so early shot!).2. Randall, two seconds or so after purposefully sending Mike and Sulley falling to their death. This one even has a quip that comes with it; "Nice working with ya!". 3. Randall, about to shove Sulley to his death. Complete with insults, and a sarcastic reminder that, yes, Boo's screwed. And the aforementioned nonchalance, complete with smile, to their own banishment, which was happening for completely unjustified reasons, while his was happening for these.
Begging does not make the bad things people do go away (and Randall certainly didn't give a crap when Mike was begging him to turn off the Scream Extractor). He tried to murder them, three times, he was happy when they were banished, he had tried to torture Mike (and Boo, let's not even get into her), and earlier he was actively rejecting Sulley's attempts to be even on civil terms ("May the best monster win." "I plan to."). Monsters U establishes they banish people for offenses as small as messing with mail. Also, let's be real, he's going to have it a hell of a lot easier than any other banished monsters, considering he's got his invisibility and wall walking and isn't afraid of kids like the others presumably are.
What I'm trying to say here, by listing this, is YES, he deserved what he got. He did the exact same thing, except for less justified reasons, he did worse, three times, he did a bunch of other mean things. And even with the things you've argued make Mike a jerk, the best you can say is Randall did it in response to someone not being his friend somewhere around ten years ago.
And again, don't try and use a Waternoose excuse, the first one falls under the same umbrella as the banishment scenario (that is, perfect time to explain what's actually happening, except with this one Waternoose is outright stuck and can't get to them), and the last two are in the door vault, where he cannot possibly follow them. And no, he can't be worried about what will happen when he leaves the vault, because, again, killing Mike and Sulley is quite possibly the least proactive thing to do in that situation, and he's very clearly enjoying doing the killing. That's not what pushover means. You were just getting on Mike for only looking out for himself, now Randall does it and it's okay? Prove it ate him up inside, I remember no such indication in the movie. Waternoose being able to work a single situation to his advantage does not remove Randall's clear psychical advantage, which was what I was talking about.
Randall never sees this scene with Waternoose, he's out of the movie by that point, any effect it may have had on him never happens. I do always find the concept hilarious, though. A plan that relies on seeing Randall. It's pretty funny.
Also, you're giving Waternoose way more power than he clearly has. The CDA are perfectly willing and able to cart him away once it becomes clear he's doing something illegal, and it's made clear rather early on that the company's not in a good position to begin with.
Still waiting for the evidence this is all one hundred percent Waternoose with Randall being forced into it, especially since the aforementioned scene where they talk about banishing Sulley gives off the distinct impression Randall has more faith in the Scream Extractor than Waternoose does, since the latter's ticked about losing a top scarer and the former just knows the machine will work. And then later that same scene Randall is clearly smiling as the machine works while Waternoose isn't. Which, by the way, is another thing that doesn't fit into the idea he's being forced into this at all.
And here's a closer shot for the record,
More comparisons I don't know. Still hinging on the idea Randall wasn't on board with the whole thing. However Waternoose acts doesn't matter, it doesn't negate Randall being a horrible person. Movies can have more than one bad person.
I was not saying his age meant he wouldn't know what was going on, I meant it would have an effect on his fitness. Sulley knows Randall can turn invisible, too. Didn't help him. Knowing someone has invisibility does not do anything but let anyone they may use said invisibility on know who the person currently strangling/biting/slamming into/whatever else they may do know who's attacking them is. And by the way, Sulley's clearly trying to pull him off him here, but can't, and Sulley's the one who just ripped the Scream Extractor out of the wall and threw it, while Waternoose is still trying to get out from behind it. So Sulley's most likely stronger than Waternoose, but Randall has very little trouble killing him (would have succeeded were it not for sheer luck). So it's extremely likely Waternoose would have even more trouble fending him off. Because generally, people don't treat people who repeatedly attempt murder and are jerks to everyone they meet with respect. You seem to be under the impression Randy was a planned thing with seeds planted in the first one. He wasn't.
This is official concept art from the "Art of Monsters University" book. "Randy" was an idea among others that got tossed out and accepted, not some big plotted out thing. If it had been planned, they wouldn't have been going through the different options. There was no "character preparations", they're making it up as they go along.
He keeps getting kicked down because he keeps trying to do so to other people.
I assume this is just a phrasing error on your part, but both of those options are the same thing. Fungus being the one to turn it all the way up doesn't really effect anything. That's not the point; the point is that, if he's trying to stall, he'd ask anyway, because interrogations would waste time. And that was part of a more overall point that he is not stalling. You're still not offering any evidence as to why I should look at this scene from this viewpoint to begin with. What you believe doesn't have any effect on what's true. And there are also tons and tons of movies where we know everything. Movies where it takes them thirteen years to make a followup, which does not fit into the canon of the first movie to begin with, have a high tendency to fall under this umbrella. Also, when series "hinge entirely on things we don't know", the makers usually don't need to debate what to do with the character that that hinges on.
And no, I'm not buying/watching entire series. If the theory has any merit I shouldn't need to research completely unrelated movies for it to work.
I dislike Monsters U because it was cliche, pointless, unfunny, predictable, I didn't give a crap about anyone, and it ran on stupid plot points. It really has nothing to do with character interaction except where it adds to the cliches and stupidity.
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Aug 5, 2014 21:38:00 GMT -5
I have to ask, after reading your repeated attacks on Randall and those who do not believe him to be Satan Incarnate, along with that last statement: WHY ARE YOU HERE??? You clearly despise Randall and don't think much of his fans, either, you hated MU, and I have not seen anything to indicate you cared that much about MI, either. Randall "keeps getting kicked down because he keeps doing this to other people"? Obviously your hatred of MU blinded you to pretty much everything that went on that movie. Can you give ONE example, aside from the ROR prank that Randall did NOT orchestrate and had no real choice but to participate in, where that happened? Even in MI, he does not try to harm anyone or stop anyone until he's ordered to do so, and I'm sure you're one of those perfect little angels who would be able to stand up to someone like Waternoose because you aren't even capable of doing anything wrong yourself, just like the Milgram Experiment all over again. If the only reason you join discussion boards is to slam the character or franchise around which they center, that's pretty sad. Being "bored", which I believe was your reason for joining, is hardly an excuse for that.
DONE.
pitbulllady
|
|
marsh
Randall's Skivvy (0-299)
Posts: 28
|
Post by marsh on Aug 6, 2014 19:54:17 GMT -5
I have to ask, after reading your repeated attacks on Randall and those who do not believe him to be Satan Incarnate, along with that last statement: WHY ARE YOU HERE??? You clearly despise Randall and don't think much of his fans, either, you hated MU, and I have not seen anything to indicate you cared that much about MI, either. Randall "keeps getting kicked down because he keeps doing this to other people"? Obviously your hatred of MU blinded you to pretty much everything that went on that movie. Can you give ONE example, aside from the ROR prank that Randall did NOT orchestrate and had no real choice but to participate in, where that happened? Even in MI, he does not try to harm anyone or stop anyone until he's ordered to do so, and I'm sure you're one of those perfect little angels who would be able to stand up to someone like Waternoose because you aren't even capable of doing anything wrong yourself, just like the Milgram Experiment all over again. If the only reason you join discussion boards is to slam the character or franchise around which they center, that's pretty sad. Being "bored", which I believe was your reason for joining, is hardly an excuse for that. DONE. pitbulllady Could you please point out some of these attacks to me? I thought I was doing fairly well with not actually insulting anyone, but if I'm slipping up I can tone it down more. Just need some examples of what needs to be toned down. You think if I despised him I'd argue for him surviving and making it back to the Monster World? I don't hate Randall. I like him, he's an awesome villain. He's entertaining to watch, he's got good powers and uses them incredibly well to make himself a viable threat (it's pretty impressive that he's mainly going up against someone bigger than him and sends him running), and I just have a preference for jerk characters, they tend to be my favorite. And that would be why I'm here; I do like him and he genuinely is my favorite Pixar villain. The bad things I point out are pretty much the reason I enjoy him so much. Likewise, I don't hate his fans (I can't, I am one) or the idea that he's not "Satan incarnate". I know and acknowledge that sometimes Pixar screws up and makes a villain that's actually right or a hero that's actually wrong (and there are characters that I like/dislike partially because they're been screwed over/elevated by these missteps), but I've never seen a good argument that this is the case for Randall. And I am also perfectly fine with the concept of people holding not well proven ideas in their head as their own personal canon, but if it's being brought up in an argument (or in a thread that implies a different site has it wrong), as it is here, it'll be subjected to scrutiny. I mean, if "Randall does not hate Mike" had been brought up in, say, a thread for head canons, I wouldn't have given it a second glance, but this thread is implying it's something others should believe, and if someone wants another person to believe something, they need good arguments. Were we talking specifically about MU? The section of the post I was responding to gave off the distinct impression we were talking about the franchise as a whole. I guess it got confusing with me putting it below a comment on MU. To be honest, I felt way more sympathy for Randall in MU than I did anyone else (except Mike, in hindsight, because the whole "Never scary" thing, as it was, is, and always will be stupid), I think people make way too big a deal out of him not helping Mike (in my opinion, it would have worked better if he'd had some part in getting him kicked out, and then refused to help, it would have felt more like he actually did something wrong) and in hindsight I really wish they'd just focused on him through the movie cause whatever was going on with him was probably more interesting than what was going on with the OKs. I do things wrong and I know that. I tend not to smile and mock when my screw ups hurt others, though. I kind of pointed out four times in the plot (there are more) where the guy had the opportunity to not stand up to Waternoose alone, and instead do it with backup. And I'm looking up this experiment thing here, and it seems irrelevant. Randall is clearly enthusiastic and eager to do the terrible things (and I sincerely doubt Waternoose told him to just act rude all the time), while the experiment says that the 65% that even got to the farthest point were severely uncomfortable, questioning, and offering to give back the money they received. If they wanted to portray the guy as someone doing things he doesn't want to simply out of being told, there are ways to do that, and they don't involve constant grinning, mocking one liners, and dragging the process out for longer than it needs to go. This isn't a problem of what he does (well, not completely), it's a problem of how he does it. And he decides to torture the info out of Mike with absolutely no prompting, just for the record. I joined hoping to get in some discussion on a character I liked (the "bored" thing was mainly why I made an account after lurking for a month or so). If I was just here to slam the character and franchise I'd probably have way more than 19 posts after being a member for over four months.
|
|
|
Post by randallsnape7 on Aug 7, 2014 23:54:59 GMT -5
You clearly did a hell of a lot of planning for such an elaborate attack on Randall, but you call examining Waternoose EXCUSES? Why is it that so many viewers take what they see at face value? Haven't you ever heard of plot twists or revelations?
The fact that you aren't willing to watch the 'Harry Potter' series just PROVES that I have more evidence supporting Randall's innocence, because he is EXACTLY like Severus Snape. Like Randall, Snape is hated perpetually for 6 whole books. At the end of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (Year 6), Snape BLATANTLY kills Albus Dumbledore, the headmaster of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, in front of several spectators, and Harry makes a FURIOUS pursuit to kill Snape, but he fails. Harry yells out through bitter tears "SNAPE!!! HE TRUSTED YOU!!!", and from then on... EVERYONE - that is, ALL of the heroes - genuinely believed that Snape was a murderer and a traitor. From then on, his allies and companions viewed him as their enemy... ...but guess what? AN ALTERNATE EXPLANATION for Snape's killing of Dumbledore was provided by J.K. Rowling at the climax of 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows' (Year 7) via a series of flashbacks, revealing that Dumbledore TOLD Snape to kill him, in secret, because he was already dying, due to a deadly curse from a bewitched ring that was spreading on him. The two were actually the best of friends, and had NO one else to confide in. Snape contained the curse in Dumbledore's right hand to prolong his life. It turns out Snape and Dumbledore were the ONLY two people that truly understood what the whole thing was about.
I spent 4 years in riveting expectation to see the gargantuan revelation sequence that literally turned Snape from a 100% murderer and traitor, to being the most selfless, heroic, most emotional character in the ENTIRE series... and when the day arrived, I cried like a baby. The revelation lasts about 6-7 minutes, and it literally changes EVERYTHING Harry and everyone else has understood about Snape. I ended up seeing 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2' a total of 7 times in the theaters, I loved it so much.
So... NO, I do not consent. Waternoose was responsible for pretty much everything.
|
|
marsh
Randall's Skivvy (0-299)
Posts: 28
|
Post by marsh on Aug 10, 2014 11:25:57 GMT -5
You clearly did a hell of a lot of planning for such an elaborate attack on Randall, but you call examining Waternoose EXCUSES? Why is it that so many viewers take what they see at face value? Haven't you ever heard of plot twists or revelations? The fact that you aren't willing to watch the 'Harry Potter' series just PROVES that I have more evidence supporting Randall's innocence, because he is EXACTLY like Severus Snape. Like Randall, Snape is hated perpetually for 6 whole books. At the end of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (Year 6), Snape BLATANTLY kills Albus Dumbledore, the headmaster of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, in front of several spectators, and Harry makes a FURIOUS pursuit to kill Snape, but he fails. Harry yells out through bitter tears "SNAPE!!! HE TRUSTED YOU!!!", and from then on... EVERYONE - that is, ALL of the heroes - genuinely believed that Snape was a murderer and a traitor. From then on, his allies and companions viewed him as their enemy... ...but guess what? AN ALTERNATE EXPLANATION for Snape's killing of Dumbledore was provided by J.K. Rowling at the climax of 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows' (Year 7) via a series of flashbacks, revealing that Dumbledore TOLD Snape to kill him, in secret, because he was already dying, due to a deadly curse from a bewitched ring that was spreading on him. The two were actually the best of friends, and had NO one else to confide in. Snape contained the curse in Dumbledore's right hand to prolong his life. It turns out Snape and Dumbledore were the ONLY two people that truly understood what the whole thing was about. I spent 4 years in riveting expectation to see the gargantuan revelation sequence that literally turned Snape from a 100% murderer and traitor, to being the most selfless, heroic, most emotional character in the ENTIRE series... and when the day arrived, I cried like a baby. The revelation lasts about 6-7 minutes, and it literally changes EVERYTHING Harry and everyone else has understood about Snape. I ended up seeing 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2' a total of 7 times in the theaters, I loved it so much. So... NO, I do not consent. Waternoose was responsible for pretty much everything. I didn't actually. It is not an attack on Randall to point out things he did and claim his punishment was fitting. No, I didn't. I said blaming everything Randall does on him being afraid of Waternoose doesn't work for a variety of reasons, then proceeded to go into detail on these reasons. Yes, I have heard of plot twists and revelations. That was what Waternoose turning out to be bad was. But once the credits roll, if no revelation's happened, and there are no hints to perpetuate the idea it was supposed to/will, that's the cue that the twists are over. It proves nothing except that I'm talking about Monsters, Inc. and not Harry Potter. That sounds like a perfectly fine story line (though I am quite curious if Snape was laughing and mocking Dumbledore while he did it. It seems unlikely), but it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Monsters, Inc. There's no reason to believe Pixar will do that, especially since, as has been established, Pixar is making this up as they go along (J.K. Rowling wasn't). We don't know if a Monsters sequel will even happen to begin with, the prequel sure as heck wasn't going to when they made the original. It was made as a stand alone story, and at the end of that stand alone story, the guy who tried to kill people (people who we know for a fact did not want to die) got karma thrown at him, and we're given no indication we're supposed to think this is wrong. At best, this is a rather vague, not very probable sequel idea for a sequel that doesn't exist. And again, even if that is true (Randall's still more enthusiastic than he is, and you still have done nothing to prove it was Waternoose behind everything.) that doesn't do anything to erase the bad things Randall does with a smile on his face and laughter and one liners coming out of his mouth. Those are not the ways you show someone who's doing something they hate out of what they deem necessity, those are the ways you show someone doing something they greatly enjoy because they want to.
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Aug 10, 2014 13:54:52 GMT -5
Let me ask, Marsh-how old are you? How much real-life experience in the work-place, how much experience have you actually HAD, first-hand, with superiors like Waternoose? And without resorting to your pal Wikipedia, how much do you understand of the Milgram Experiment? Next question, do you support the concept of lynching and vigilantism, do you believe that all people should have the right to punish anyone they consider to have done wrong, in any way that they see fit?
pitbulllady
|
|
marsh
Randall's Skivvy (0-299)
Posts: 28
|
Post by marsh on Aug 10, 2014 15:46:34 GMT -5
Let me ask, Marsh-how old are you? How much real-life experience in the work-place, how much experience have you actually HAD, first-hand, with superiors like Waternoose? And without resorting to your pal Wikipedia, how much do you understand of the Milgram Experiment? Next question, do you support the concept of lynching and vigilantism, do you believe that all people should have the right to punish anyone they consider to have done wrong, in any way that they see fit? pitbulllady My age is irrelevant. What does it matter? My argument was "Even if he's only doing it because he's being ordered, he's clearly getting a high amount of sick enjoyment out of the bad things he's doing". Wikipedia was one of three sites I looked up, it being for the purpose of being a brief overview, the other two being specifically because I knew I couldn't trust Wikipedia. So no, I did not "resort" to my "pal Wikipedia". Enough to understand it doesn't work for a defense in the situation, for reasons I already explained and reiterated above. I think when someone tries to kill another person three to four times and the alternate option is to be a complete moron and let him go free so he can try and kill them again they're justified to get him out of the picture.
|
|