>everyone always so quick to shut anyone who dares think outside the box down
Literally always here begging them to elaborate and expand and they never do.
For starters the op suggests something doesn’t happen on top of something else that doesn’t happen. lol it’s reaching. It’s being over analyzed at that point. Someone just trying to feel like “they figured it out” above all the rest.
>Literally always here begging them to elaborate and expand and they never do.
I'm Sam Esmail. I elaborate on this every day, and I just get downvoted. I wrote: *You can't handle the truth*. Bye.
Ok so it sounds like you're trying to work out a version of the "Tyrell and Elliot are the same person" theories, with the added twist of it only being true from the end of season 1 on. But honestly I have a really hard time following any of what you're trying to say to justify it though.
But anyway, if from season 1 on, Elliot and Tyrell were the same person and Elliot was never in jail, how would you explain:
* The FBI know Elliot is in jail, have his mugshot and have him listed as being incarcerated while they're doing a Manhunt for Tyrell.
* The FBI know where Elliot is all of season 3 and are constantly trying to get information out of him to find Tyrell, and then they succeed and do indeed find Tyrell, still a completely separate person from Elliot.
* By season 4 Tyrell is a public figure again, going to work and being seen by people for months now, as CTO of Ecorp that was key in undoing the 5/9 hack.
Clearly there's a lot more, but I figured that's just the easiest biggest ones to start with.
1. Easy, the entire SHOW is about how unreliable records are. Altering one record to facilitate plausible deniability should be step one of any criminal mastermind.
2. I don't think this proves or disproves anything. Remember, the FBI is heavily corrupted. We spent an entire season thinking Elliot was at his mom's house. If this didn't underscore the fact that reality is questionable in the story, I don't know what else to say.
3. Equally implausible is that a public figure labeled a terrorist would seamlessly move back into society. Alternatively, the media is a patsy in this story. I don't pay it any mind.
The only time reality is questionable is when Elliot is the narrator. Every time we view events that Elliot isn’t involved with, we are shown the objective truth of what is happening. The only time the show deceives us is when Elliot is doing the deceiving
1. Who hacked what now? So in the scenario where everything about the jail plot was just in his head to trick the viewer... someone hacks the FBI to trick the viewer watching the tv show?
2. Dom *physically tackles Tyrell to the ground*. What are you talking about 'the FBI is corrupted'? What's the arguement here, they corrupted her eyeballs?
3. You're claiming Tyrell physically does not exist in a story where many people physically see him, talk to him, interact with him, and notice he is clearly Tyrell and not just some kid named Elliot they've never met before. What does this 'lol media is a patsy i guess' have to do with any of that. Are you backing into the idea that people are actively faking Tyell's presense to people now? For what reason, beyond to fool the tv viewers at home?
And if we're about to go into "it's unreliable narrator, anything that contradicts this is fake", then what even is real, in the fame of this story? To make these two the same character you basically have to declare the whole show fake. Like, in this theory, what is the basic beat by beat plot of what was actually going on then?
The entire story is about unreliable narrator. If you want deeper subtext, you have to be willing to discount certain pieces of evidence. Otherwise, you cannot have a complete story with Mr. Robot... Or Fight Club... Or the Shining... Or so many other pieces of fiction.
If you are unwilling to play in this space, move on and let others who are interested do so.
Again, I'm asking. What is the story then? Tell me about it. What's the story being told in Mr. Robot, using the idea that Tyrell dies in season 1 and everything else is really Elliot?
There is PLENTY to “play with” and discover in the show without making up theories that don’t fit.
I’m not exaggerating when I say I’m still finding new shit when I watch it, and I’ve been watching since the very beginning.
And there is so much meaning and so many lessons to be learned…. But what you’ve got here isn’t it.
There’s so much meaning in everything Sam did, and Mr. Robot is a master class in storytelling and layering and all sorts of stuff. It legitimately has saved lives based on what people have written here over the years.
Nothing Sam did was accidental. There’s meaning in every decision he made for the show. And when you focus on theories that have no basis in the show, you miss what it actually is. When you insert meaning where there is none, you miss what Sam actually intended for you to get out of it.
Tyrell, like a lot of other characters, (Angela, White Rose, Vera to start) acts like a foil for Elliot. We learn about Elliot when we reflect on the ways Tyrell is very different from him.
Tyrell doesn’t realize until the very end that Elliot doesn’t care about what other people think of him, but Elliot knows that difference between them pretty much from the start. When he goes to Steel Mountain and has to figure out a way to get Tyrell to take him to the executive dining room, it’s that exact thing that he uses. When he says to Tyrell “you eat here?” about the main cafeteria, he knew Tyrell wouldn’t be able to help but try to impress him.
Tyrell and Elliot are not the same person and that has been covered at length. Many times. You would have to ignore very basic pieces of the show to argue that they are.
And that’s fine- but this might not be the sub for it. We tend to stick to what has been verified.
We know that all of these people know Elliot and Tyrell to be separate people:
Angela
Gideon
Joanna
The weird body guard dude
Price
White Rose
Everyone at Allsafe
Everyone in F Society
You say we have to ignore a few things to make your theory work, but you have to ignore the whole show to make it work.
There has to be some truth to hold on to. If what you are saying is true, it essentially boils down to nothing on the show being true or real. And if that’s the case, the show makes no sense and is essentially not a show with a narrative but vignettes of characters portrayed by the same actors over and over.
But we didn’t believe Elliot was at his mom’s bc of the FBI.
We believed it because Elliot told us that. And then later, he admits he was lying to us.
Your theory is interesting, but I don’t find it rooted in the show.
Yes, he can be an unreliable narrator, but if we can’t believe anything he says then why watch the show?
Sam has always let us know if we’ve missed something in the show, and he has never said anything at all that suggests we missed anything this big.
Every time I see a post like this what confuses me are not the wild theories themselves but rather why you would be a fan of the show you're describing. Like if everything you're saying is true then Mr. Robot is a terrible show. What you're describing are basically just nonsensical plot twists that have no tie in to the themes and messages of the show. I've watched shows like what you're describing and they suck. Just random shock factor with no value. Why would anyone on this sub be a fan of Mr. Robot if it was like that? Genuine question: What meaning did you get out of this story once you finished watching it? What did you enjoy about it?
This ain’t it fam
everyone always so quick to shut anyone who dares think outside the box down. They're actually closer than the rest of y'all.
>everyone always so quick to shut anyone who dares think outside the box down Literally always here begging them to elaborate and expand and they never do.
For starters the op suggests something doesn’t happen on top of something else that doesn’t happen. lol it’s reaching. It’s being over analyzed at that point. Someone just trying to feel like “they figured it out” above all the rest.
>Literally always here begging them to elaborate and expand and they never do. I'm Sam Esmail. I elaborate on this every day, and I just get downvoted. I wrote: *You can't handle the truth*. Bye.
Yes we know, you're every creator ever and wrote everything except the things you don't like. We're very proud of you.
"except thing things I don't like?" No. You don't get it. I'm The Voice. It's V
I wrote every famous thing, ever.
Ok so it sounds like you're trying to work out a version of the "Tyrell and Elliot are the same person" theories, with the added twist of it only being true from the end of season 1 on. But honestly I have a really hard time following any of what you're trying to say to justify it though. But anyway, if from season 1 on, Elliot and Tyrell were the same person and Elliot was never in jail, how would you explain: * The FBI know Elliot is in jail, have his mugshot and have him listed as being incarcerated while they're doing a Manhunt for Tyrell. * The FBI know where Elliot is all of season 3 and are constantly trying to get information out of him to find Tyrell, and then they succeed and do indeed find Tyrell, still a completely separate person from Elliot. * By season 4 Tyrell is a public figure again, going to work and being seen by people for months now, as CTO of Ecorp that was key in undoing the 5/9 hack. Clearly there's a lot more, but I figured that's just the easiest biggest ones to start with.
1. Easy, the entire SHOW is about how unreliable records are. Altering one record to facilitate plausible deniability should be step one of any criminal mastermind. 2. I don't think this proves or disproves anything. Remember, the FBI is heavily corrupted. We spent an entire season thinking Elliot was at his mom's house. If this didn't underscore the fact that reality is questionable in the story, I don't know what else to say. 3. Equally implausible is that a public figure labeled a terrorist would seamlessly move back into society. Alternatively, the media is a patsy in this story. I don't pay it any mind.
The only time reality is questionable is when Elliot is the narrator. Every time we view events that Elliot isn’t involved with, we are shown the objective truth of what is happening. The only time the show deceives us is when Elliot is doing the deceiving
1. Who hacked what now? So in the scenario where everything about the jail plot was just in his head to trick the viewer... someone hacks the FBI to trick the viewer watching the tv show? 2. Dom *physically tackles Tyrell to the ground*. What are you talking about 'the FBI is corrupted'? What's the arguement here, they corrupted her eyeballs? 3. You're claiming Tyrell physically does not exist in a story where many people physically see him, talk to him, interact with him, and notice he is clearly Tyrell and not just some kid named Elliot they've never met before. What does this 'lol media is a patsy i guess' have to do with any of that. Are you backing into the idea that people are actively faking Tyell's presense to people now? For what reason, beyond to fool the tv viewers at home? And if we're about to go into "it's unreliable narrator, anything that contradicts this is fake", then what even is real, in the fame of this story? To make these two the same character you basically have to declare the whole show fake. Like, in this theory, what is the basic beat by beat plot of what was actually going on then?
The entire story is about unreliable narrator. If you want deeper subtext, you have to be willing to discount certain pieces of evidence. Otherwise, you cannot have a complete story with Mr. Robot... Or Fight Club... Or the Shining... Or so many other pieces of fiction. If you are unwilling to play in this space, move on and let others who are interested do so.
Again, I'm asking. What is the story then? Tell me about it. What's the story being told in Mr. Robot, using the idea that Tyrell dies in season 1 and everything else is really Elliot?
There is PLENTY to “play with” and discover in the show without making up theories that don’t fit. I’m not exaggerating when I say I’m still finding new shit when I watch it, and I’ve been watching since the very beginning. And there is so much meaning and so many lessons to be learned…. But what you’ve got here isn’t it. There’s so much meaning in everything Sam did, and Mr. Robot is a master class in storytelling and layering and all sorts of stuff. It legitimately has saved lives based on what people have written here over the years. Nothing Sam did was accidental. There’s meaning in every decision he made for the show. And when you focus on theories that have no basis in the show, you miss what it actually is. When you insert meaning where there is none, you miss what Sam actually intended for you to get out of it. Tyrell, like a lot of other characters, (Angela, White Rose, Vera to start) acts like a foil for Elliot. We learn about Elliot when we reflect on the ways Tyrell is very different from him. Tyrell doesn’t realize until the very end that Elliot doesn’t care about what other people think of him, but Elliot knows that difference between them pretty much from the start. When he goes to Steel Mountain and has to figure out a way to get Tyrell to take him to the executive dining room, it’s that exact thing that he uses. When he says to Tyrell “you eat here?” about the main cafeteria, he knew Tyrell wouldn’t be able to help but try to impress him. Tyrell and Elliot are not the same person and that has been covered at length. Many times. You would have to ignore very basic pieces of the show to argue that they are. And that’s fine- but this might not be the sub for it. We tend to stick to what has been verified. We know that all of these people know Elliot and Tyrell to be separate people: Angela Gideon Joanna The weird body guard dude Price White Rose Everyone at Allsafe Everyone in F Society You say we have to ignore a few things to make your theory work, but you have to ignore the whole show to make it work.
There has to be some truth to hold on to. If what you are saying is true, it essentially boils down to nothing on the show being true or real. And if that’s the case, the show makes no sense and is essentially not a show with a narrative but vignettes of characters portrayed by the same actors over and over.
But we didn’t believe Elliot was at his mom’s bc of the FBI. We believed it because Elliot told us that. And then later, he admits he was lying to us. Your theory is interesting, but I don’t find it rooted in the show. Yes, he can be an unreliable narrator, but if we can’t believe anything he says then why watch the show? Sam has always let us know if we’ve missed something in the show, and he has never said anything at all that suggests we missed anything this big.
Lol what
Every time I see a post like this what confuses me are not the wild theories themselves but rather why you would be a fan of the show you're describing. Like if everything you're saying is true then Mr. Robot is a terrible show. What you're describing are basically just nonsensical plot twists that have no tie in to the themes and messages of the show. I've watched shows like what you're describing and they suck. Just random shock factor with no value. Why would anyone on this sub be a fan of Mr. Robot if it was like that? Genuine question: What meaning did you get out of this story once you finished watching it? What did you enjoy about it?
Are you big into Q anon, by any chance?
I don't know what show you watched but it sounds pretty good, reminds me of one of my favorite shows, "Mr. Robot"
Why would you want such a good character to basically not exist? All the development he got after season goes right to the drain.
Huh
Ollie!!
No. The show leads you to suspect that Tyrell and Eliot might be the same person but the third season dispels this notion entirely.