>"Hazbin is female focussed"
>the only chaaracter with actual arc is male
What did Viv mean by this?
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
>"Hazbin is female focussed". >the only chaaracter with actual arc is male
gays are basically women.
Except he's straight
Then why did he have the sex with all the gays in the Hell? Hmmm?
He was raped. Remember how willing he was when being dragged into a gangbang?
>Le male rape is.. le funny
Why are women like this.
In a funny context, yes, it can be. The thing is, Vivzie would never show a woman getting raped as a joke, no matter the situation. It's just classic sexist double standards again.
Also she gets off to gay rape. This is factual.
Vivzie urgently needs a boyfriend who also acts as a guiding paternal figure to her. That's the only way to get her mind fixed for good.
It'd be even more amazing if it was an old fan of hers that always commented on her newgrounds/deviantart and wanted to learn her style. So she hires some animator whose name she vaguely remembers and finds out he knows her style. He happens to live in the same city as her and one day he finally tells her who he is. He thought he wasn't worthy of her until he worked with her. He'll stop her on the street and confess his identity as an old fan of hers who always watched everything she posted from the start.
If he's not bad looking, she will have found what she always needed.
Frick I just looked at one of her old posts in newgrounds where she asks for a boyfriend and some guy comments he also needs a girlfriend. How poetic if that man turned out to be her man.
Seek psychological help
She needs a boyfriend who will chain her to a threadmill lol
He was from the cannibal clan, so he might have potentially already killed (or at least eaten) innocent people. But on the other hand, he is too young to know any better.
>Lucifer will never have.
>still had a higher rank in heavens and beat the shit out of adam
Would Adam have fared better against Lucifer if he hadn't already fought off various mooks and overlords before Lucifer showed up? I think maybe if it was 1 on 1, Adam could have won.
The out of universe reason is probably so it's easy to recognize him as still being Sir Pentious. The in universe reason could be that's just the way his "soul" looks like. You could say that's a play on how some cultures view snakes as a symbol of rebirth due to how they shed their skins.
Nifty didn't kill Adam because he "deserved" death, she killed him because she is a little psycho. The people who actually defeated him were willing to spare him.
If Adam came back and saw Nifty he'd probably want to grab her and squeeze her until all her insides popped out. He'd be pissed.
Based, but won't happen. This clown world is too gay.
He didn't. He came out of the room relatively quickly and one of the guys that dragged him in when with Cherri right after. He probably came right out after he explained himself.
Remember the club is called "Consent".
>Remember the club is called "Consent".
That is a joke in and on itself. Even Husk comments on the creativity of calling a bar "consent" in hell.
because he's having sex WITH EVERYONE!
for real though, he's the only presumably straight character out of the ones at the hotel, and the only one to ascend... the gay pornstar stays there even though he's also not an butthole anymore lmao
he was raped.
No one is straight in HH.
I hope she gets stabbed in the eye multiple times by Lute.
> You liked stabbing, right b***h? Too bad for you. I like it even more!
Don’t be stupid Anon she’s the lol random character, you’ll see no consequences.
the only character who was redeemed is straight
coincidence? I think not
Nope.
Insane that this is toted as a good thing when the opposite of there being only one gay character will have Twitter in a fit
Insane that morons like you read into things this much. Where does it say it's a good thing? It's a "fun fact" trivia bit. It could say "Fun fact: Nifty killed her husband and then herself, it's why she's in hell", would you go "reee they said murder suicide is a good thing!!!"
But did they? No, they made her sexuality as the fun fact
Yeah moron, and there's nothing in there that says it's meant to be seen as a positive thing. You're making boogeymen in your head.
No, you are. You’re making me the enemy for pointing out the obvious
You're literally here to boogeyman a cartoon by assuming ill intent on something that has no proven intentions behind it. Frick off back to FOX news if you want fearmongering over the LGBT.
So now im a fox news fan just because i find it funny how having only one straight character is a okay but the opposite being pointed out in numerous shows would be bad
> the opposite being pointed out in numerous shows would be bad
find 1 example of this or stop getting mad at strawman in your own head
It would happen, is my point
Oh ok so you're mad and ranting at things that don't exist so you can get upset over strawmen in your head. and you convince yourself you're not as bad as a FOX fanatic how?
>show takes place in hell
>99% of the cast is LGBTQ+
What did Piggiepop mean by this?
nah.gays can at least love another person and create art and good music
So you're saying only men can do anything good.
no, just disproportionately create all the good shit
Yes
Does being a woman gay balance things out?
nope.
>"Hazbin is for the gays"
>The best couple in the setting is heterosexual.
They are native hellborn Imps
All the human sinners sent to hell are gay...very subtle Viv.
Hazbin Hotel is a really weird show that makes Satanist go “oh, daddy Lucifer will be a good boi and Adam will be a bad boi” and then they praise Lucifer for revealing himself as a piece of garbage to his own wives and mock Adam for wanting to be the father of his own children.
It literally repeated the Jesus tragedy to a tee, and the viewers are left confused and proclaim that the sinless messiah was a “sinner who deserves to be in hell” because Adam only smites the wicked who are rejected by Heaven and deserve their deaths.
The show is for people who like the "being bad and misunderstood" aesthetic while still being the good guys and the opposition are all biased hypocrites who should die already.
Well, Vivzie accidentally made Adam the most fun character and the most genuine looking ship, which is just 2 straight normal looking people. So she can eat shit and get even fatter. At this point she looks like the youtuber ProZD but with a wig.
>Adam the most fun character
yes, carried the show for me
I love how it actually looks like an album cover art. The only thing that's missing is Lute with her mask on.
I mean, he is one of the most entertaining characters. Him being an over the top dudebro stereotype just lands well with the humor in the show. So far the only people I've seen who don;t like him are overly left leaning pro-noun warriors.
>native hellborn Imps
Just realized that it's kinda fricked up for hell to have sentient "natives" in it, like why would God even make them. Humans at least have to choose to be pieces of shit in order to be sent to the torture death dimension but these guys just get born and they already have no choice in life but to torture and be tortured for all eternity
>why would God even make them.
God didn't make anything in the HH universe, it's all either created directly by angels or spawned by hell itself
They don't have souls. The might have been created in order to handle hell maintenance someone's got to do the torturing.
hell is never mentioned to be or to be intended as place of torture, but solely as dumping ground
>hell is never mentioned to be or to be intended as place of torture,
nta but one of the lines in Charlie and Emily's duet in Episode 6 is "make the wretched suffer just to kill them again!". This line makes no sense if we're not operating under the assumption that Hell is a place where sinful souls end up as punishment.
Even if the CARMILLA part of it went nowhere, the angel dying was the whole reason the purge got pushed up half a year and Charlie was freaking out about getting the Hotel to work the entire season. This is a pretty inexcusable plot hole.
>This line makes no sense if we're not operating under the assumption that Hell is a place where sinful souls end up as punishment.
never said that hell isn't used a punishment, only that isn't a place of torture by design/nature
the suffering there is the sinners fricking with each other other and adam coming each year for the annual genocide
>the suffering there is the sinners fricking with each other
This is dampened pretty significantly by the show's depiction of Hell though. The place just comes off as a slightly-shitter-than-average US city where you can't die (under normal circumstances) and some people have superpowers, not a place you get put specifically as punishment.
> adam coming each year for the annual genocide
This was never part of the initial punishment of Hell, this was added in post after Hell was getting too populated and they feared a revolt.
Who else would be doing the torturing?
sir repentious is actually xir repentious, mark my words
Idk about which one are you talking but Charlastor, Pentious/Cherri and Adam/Lute all mog 99% of the gay pairings.
>Charlastor
Never gonna happen. Alastor is canonically asexual as stated in the penultimate episode.
Yeah and it still mogs the shit out of Charie's canon relationship
>Hazbin is written by a woman
>All the women are one-dimensional and the only interesting characters are men
What did Viv mean by this?
she's a fujo. obviously she's gonna put more effort into the men.
giwtwm
>posts the most one-dimensional strawman villain in the show
What did anon mean by this?
>What did Viv mean by this?
Inevitable consequence of wanting your women characters to less flawed to promote women. Meanwhile the guys are free to be fricked up and grow from it.
But is Lute the exception to the rule?
Until it's revealed she was misled by Adam.
No. The theme of Adam’s story with his wives is that there are temptations for the wives to leave or disobey Adam, only for them to suffer grave consequences onto their “better path”.
Lute will have Lilith/Evetry to derail her away from keeping Adam’s promise (redeeming the sinners) or even from Lucifer since he’s a bastard of a person.
And like Lute’s arm, Adam will return to her.
Okay anon.
Adam does not deserve Lute
Angel, Husk and Vaggie have arcs
Alastor too, to an extent
Lame rushed arcs. Had to get to that Marvel battle.
Not anymore rushed then Pentious's.
Yeah, I love him but you could say that about him too. The whole subplot about Cherri only starts two episodes before it ends. There was no time to establish a sense of regularity like there would've been in a longer series. Then again it means there's less padding.
Was it justified?
Yes. Illegal Hispanic angels deserve no less. That ''''kid'''' was probably a serial killer pedophile or something similar too.
Gee I wonder what can harm angels. Hmmm it is a mystery.
To be honest, I don't think many people here watch the series by the quality of the script.
I mean I didn't either. I'm just a sucker for musical numbers
To be fair I skipped all the songs but 3 of them. I mainly watch it for the visuals and character interactions. After the last episode I'm also into Adam x Lute shit. I shipped them from the start but Adam's last moments were just too much for me.
Why would you skip the songs? They're like a couple minutes each. Also plot happens in some of them.
Most of them are not my style at all. The only songs I like are Hell is forever, you didn't know (only the part sung by Lute and the last part) and ready for this.
They should have shown a scene of her and Adam playing a rock/metal song in his band. I wouldn't be surprised if she's the vocalist. Vivzie again not wanting us to like a satisfying couple that could eclipse the canon lesbian one.
I think Lute and Adam were roleplaying the “why do you want the drummer” thing in episode 1, because Adam only sticks by Lute 99% of the time and he actually does have a natural disdain for adultery in episode 8.
I wouldn't be surprised if that womanizer attitude about him is just a facade to try and look cool in front of Lute.
She didn't even look offended when Adam insulted her when she made the comment about the giant shield. It was more like a "God, here he goes again, so annoying, why can't he just drop the act?". It's like she sees right through him with no effort at all.
Sure I understand if you don't like them, but I feel like you're going to miss context if you skip them. I just don't understand skipping a part of a show, especially when an episode is only 24 minutes. It's like skipping a page of a book.
Have you considered what Adam means by his last words?
>I’m $&$&&$$ Adam!
>I’m the &@$&$&& man, and you’re just some $@&&&@ clown or something.
>I started everything on Earth.
>All of mankind came from these $@&$$$ nuts.
>You all should be worshipping me (as your true father), you ungrateful, disgusting &@$&&$ losers!”
He wanted his kids back.
Why are you censoring swear words lmao
Too many f-bombs are annoying and distracting to read.
unironically please have a nice day, you simpering homosexual.
He's this weird schizo who's been posting about Adam and his "kids" in every HH thread
Botnon continues to bot like a bot on his butt, as always.
That's the joke moron, he is a nobody because everyone on earth is only special because they have angel blood. He dies because he represents the myth of creation that needs to die for anyone to understand what is happening.
Why the frick is Adam even an angle? He certainly wasn't the first "human" if he was one.
because he's not a well-"ROUNDED" character
Adam is a lot more special than an angel.
He’s a truly sinless winner.
That’s why his golden wings and eyes are the most beautiful out of them all and he is the only one with true and pure humanity. He has glory that Lucifer will never have.
>Adam is a lot more special than an angel.
he isn't
>He’s a truly sinless winner.
the apple
>That’s why his golden wings and eyes are the most beautiful out of them all and he is the only one with true and pure humanity.
no
>Lucifer will never have.
still had a higher rank in heavens and beat the shit out of adam
i don't agree with the shizo, but you are wrong at two points, nowhere it is stated that Adam ate the apple in vivzieverse, and according to bible humans will rise higher than angels, and Adam is a notable human.
While luci is also fallen
>according to bible humans will rise higher than angels
Where?
1 Corinthians 6:3 is the fist5 thing that comes to mind
Neat. Some dude who never actually knew the Redeemer has an opinion on things.
>ask for the source
>tells him the source
>gets mad
??
Honestly, there is a lot of controversy around that line given that Angels are higher in the hierarchy of being than humans. Some commentators take the line to be willful exaggeration to drive the point.
>according to bible
there's no reason to believe that anything in the bible is canon in HH universe and nothing in the show pointed for adam to be particularly special or important in the grand scheme of things
...
Adam died and became an angel after he fathered humanity, ya dingus.
I do get a load of you. Can you be entertaining on your own without using zombie memes as “absolutely I win”.
Why do you need a big folder to act like your pathetic, irrelevant bully from school?
lmao what a loser getting upset over an image of Wayne's World
No. I’m simply sick of image speakers because they are almost exactly like the botnons on Cinemaphile. Absolutely soulless. I was absolutely baffled in school that being a thinker was a special mindset, until I constantly keep finding worthless bugs like you that actually wanted to be like the World. Being a troony like my brother or other pathetic mindless cowards. You have no idea how patient and scary God is, and I do, so he blinds your eyes with the Devil. Letting you die on your own deprivations.
I replied to the wrong person disregard it
Are these "botnons" in the room with you right now?
Amazing, another Botnon!
Hahahaha
You hate the precision of the insult because it fits your entire existence.
Here’s a solution, in beginning was the Word, the Word was with God, and the Word was God, so go to him and beg him to unlock how he wanted your writings to be.
Are you alright there buddy?
Leave the schizo in peace
only the most moronic among retraeded type shit like "haha"
you fricking normalhomosexual, maybe also type out every time you coughed or sneezed?
*Cough* *Cough* You smell like a smash 4 player.
Hahahaha
Good ideas from idiots are so fun.
Normalgays are too robotic to go off the grid, so they normally go to hell, just like you.
Stfu christcuck. FRICK OFF.
And that goes for all religions too.
Is Vaggie moronic? How did she not figure out Angel weapons can hurt angels after this happened to her?
Didn't Viv say that the decision to make Vaggie an angel came later? Maybe Viv didn't think about how the change would fit in to the plot
I really don't want to sound racist but I've never met a smart Hispanic in my life.
I have friends from south of the border who have phds in physics and math. You're just going off of the Hispanic equivalent of rednecks.
Judging by how Adam turned out to be good and Lucifer turned to be bad (far worse than Mammon bad by masquerading as an angel of white), I think it’s probably canon that Vaggie is a big moron and it’s how she works with Charlie so well.
>how Adam turned out to be good
No he didn't
Does Adam know sin in Episode 6.
You are literally a blind moron
stfu unless you can explain right now why it matters and what the significance is for the executioner angels and Vaggie having one eye.
I'm more surprised at how the frick not a single angel knew this... they found the dead exorcist and were like "shiiiit, how did this happen???"
imagine if to sinner's surprise angels had angelic armor and submachine guns or some shit due to being dead serious after discovering a body
It's an asspull answer but maybe Vag figured that angels can be hurt and excommunicated, but not killed. Like, even if you decapitated an exorcist it'd be like a headless horseman and not dead-dead. I mean Lute got her arm ripped clean off and didn't bleed out, maybe that's a regular occurrence for exorcists
>huh, Angels can be hurt?
Dumbass b***h she pulled out your wings and blinded you no shit
>Gets cold feet for 5 seconds
No. I wonder how many other fallen exorcists are out there.
No one ever questions what the frick that kid did to go to hell. Even if it dindu nuffin it’s probably in for a life of being raped by pedophiles or something
I think the cannibals might not be sinners, they're just hellborn.
It'd explain both why so many of them look identical instead of being varied in terms of design like other sinners, as well as how Rosie never actually died.
In that case Lute and Vaggie are both fricking stupid.
>how did a cannibal end up in hell
gee idk
>Unironically hesitating to slay heathens, heretics, and monsters
Of course
That was an excuse for HB's horrendous writing on female characters (then again, not like it isn't shit on male ones either, but they get it better somewhat). Viv likes to make excuses. That's where you get most of the lore in her shows. In excuses.
>show's pitch is about making an hotel where sinners can be redeem themselves so angel don't commit mass murder to reduce overpopulation
>the hotel doesn't matter since angels just kill to instill fear in demons
What did Viv mean by this?
Killing demonic scum is based. They earned their damnation.
but that's just Viv changing her premise just because she was bored like she did with HB where it went from comedic target of the week to a gay soap opera
Heh, remember when HB was meant to be the happy-go-lucky comedic side of the Vivzieverse? Boy, were those the days.
I am curious as to what your pic is referencing, anon
%3D
Brandon and Georgina have done comedy skits together, their most famous role being a married British couple. Things were unironically simpler back then.
Viv’s premise went from “oh, Hell is fun and Heaven are meanies” to “Hell is awful to the core and Heaven is right.”
With Lucifer and Lilith being the reps of Hell and Adam and Lute being the reps of Heaven.
Eve/Roo is honestly stupid creepy because her appearance (she is disguising herself as Lilith in ep 8) is implying that she is using the Sinners as her lambs to stay afloat in Heaven. And because Adam took his kid’s sins instead, Eve is progressively losing all of her lambs in Hell, descending to Hell by every redeemed/Good Sinner that ascends to Heaven.
And because of this, the redeemed sinners will now belong to Lute, Adam’s new wife. “I’m in charge now.”
So the rest of the show is the main villain desperately and failing to escape her final destination, Hell.
>“oh, Hell is fun and Heaven are meanies”
that was never the premise
>“Hell is awful to the core and Heaven is right.”
that's not the premise either
>Adam took his kid’s sins instead
he didn't do that
I read this thread backwards so this might seem random, but you are an annoying troony. Stop typing. Please.
NTA but I'm glad I'm not the only one who reads threads backwards
well, pentious wouldn't have been redeemed if he hadn't stayed at the hotel. so in the end it did matter. the difficult part is getting heaven to accept that.
Heaven already accept him when allow his materialization there
It's will is independent of Sera's
Yes, it's basically gonna be about convincing the higher-ups that heaven dictates the hotel is valid. Heaven by nature accepts the idea, the people there just have to deal with it.
>Adam: This is my snake boi now.
>Adam realizes the best way to irritate all of hell is to provide irrefutable proof that redemption was always within their grasp and that they've spent 20,000 years going at their own undercarriages with a wire brush while slapping away any hand that was offered to them all for nothing
>Becomes the biggest bro in the world while maintaining consistent, shit-eating-grin eye contact Lucifer
Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven though, am I right buddy?
What's interesting is that this proves that the hotel DOES work, but he had to be exterminated to actually go to heaven.
This isn't set in stone. They can easily say that he earned it by becoming a martyr for a good cause after following Charlie, but other people can earn it the way Charlie hopes just with more consistent effort.
I don't get it
Vox is using those sand-cutting videos to try and get Val's attention
nta but wouldn't this joke have worked better with the character who's entire gimmick is being a social-media brained clout chaser?
Zoomer humor
Valentino is such a pissbaby Vox needs to explain things to him while having a video play, like those tik toks with split screen gameplay.
Because generally the people who want representation don’t want the characters to actually develop as people, they want them to just be props
>Charlie doesn't have an arc
>Vaggie doesn't have an arc
>Lute doesn't have an arc
Pentious didn't even get that much screentime, if he counts then Cherry Bomb counts as well (didn't want to be redeemed at start, now wants to join the hotel)
I had one in school and he was stupidly amazing and fast at math.
Smart people in general are stupid rare but you are bound to find one in every race. It’s just some genealogies are more or less corrupted than others by Satanic forces of evil. Which looked like a great achievement in beating God, until they realized it helped God/Jesus separate the nations further to prevent Babel’s return.
He wants to know who she really loves.
I don't get Charlastor. He has been confirmed to be an "ace" or whatever.
You're delusional if you think a character's sexual preference or lack of one will stop anyone from shipping them with whoever they like.
Boy I can't wait to see the atomic coping when Alastor--
>Shock, gasp, horror
Is revealed to have been a manipulative psychopath using Charlie to secure his freedom and ascension in power.
I love Al, he's great fun, but come on. He's probably going to be the final villain of the show.
What coping? Every shipper knows he's probably gonna betray her at some point and Charlie will be heartbroken about it, but he'll probably come back around and get forgiven before the final boss reveal.
Him being manipulative and having questionable motives is part of the appeal of shipping him with Charlie anyway. And how exactly she views him isn't entirely known; probably just a very close friend?
>Is revealed to have been a manipulative psychopath using Charlie to secure his freedom and ascension in power
you know this just turns the average woman on way more?
especially so for the femcels that are the target for this show
there's a reason why famous serial killers get tons of love letters. fricked up but true
I hate women so much
Surely you don't hate Charlie? she is pure.
>Arc
What was his arc again? He went from suicidally charging a much stronger opponent and getting his shit kicked in to charging a much stronger opponent and getting his shit kicked in.
>He did it for love the second time
Ah yes, a love that came out of the blue and didnt fit at all into his need for redemption at all. Mostly because we still dont know why exactly he got redeemed. Cowardice was never his issue, selflessness was never his issue. He was willing to lay down his life for the Vs before.
What was his arc?
He sang he was sorry once
That is my main gripe with the show. The songs are all amazing, bar the last two episodes. But it doesnt really matter how good a song is, it is no substitute for actual narrative.
wow. I didn't know it was so easy to get redeemed for unspecified crimes by learning the power of friendship and singing "sorry." thanks, viv.
>What was his arc again? He went from suicidally charging a much stronger opponent and getting his shit kicked in to charging a much stronger opponent and getting his shit kicked in.
Well, he did it for his friends the second time instead of a petty grab for more power.
>He was willing to lay down his life for the Vs before.
Going against Adam meant death for real, doing it for the V's meant probably a bit of torture and dying once before respawning as Sinners do.
>Well, he did it for his friends the second time instead of a petty grab for more power.
He was pretty much willing to do a favor for the Vs for their friendship. Selfishness was never one of Pentious's flaws, neither was cowardice. So it is highly unclear what personal flaw he overcame by charging against Adam.
>Going against Adam meant death for real
Going against Alastor could have meant an eternity of torment as part of his hellish radio show. Which is arguably worse. Again, selflessness or cowardice were never framed as Pentious' flaws.
If redemption merely means sacrificing for your friends then it is exceedingly easy and extremely immoral persons can accomplish it. It also involves not actually repenting for all the evil shit you have done.
Pentious did it for validation and power. The V's said it himself that he was pathetic and desperate, particularly to be taken seriously and not treated as a joke everyone, especially by his main rivals Cherri and Alastor. Charlie took mercy on him at his lowest point and the rest of the hotel over time became people he was willing to accept total oblivion for.
>Going against Alastor could have meant an eternity of torment as part of his hellish radio show. Which is arguably worse.
It is, but the fact he's been doing it to Alastor multiple times just shows how desperate(and stupid) he is to be taken seriously.
>If redemption merely means sacrificing for your friends then it is exceedingly easy and extremely immoral persons can accomplish it.
We don't know what it takes to be truly redeemed, not even the angels know. The closest we have is Adam's "Don't steal, Be selfless, and stick it to man" all of which Pentious did in the end. Also you're taking the whole "sacrificing" yourself bit far too lightly, especially in a place as craven and cowardly as hell.
Oh, also he was very much NOT willing to lay down his life for the V's before. The second he got caught he begged for their help and they told him kill himself. He only accepts his death after his spirit has been broken and he wronged those that had just shown him nothing but kindness and warmth.
>The V's said it himself that he was pathetic and desperate, particularly to be taken seriously
It is made pretty explicit that Pentious essentially did it to belong somewhere, not especially because he craved power. If the powerhungry part is true, it was never referenced again and never played any part in his character. Which inclines me to think that he just wanted to be part of the cool club.
>especially by his main rivals Cherri and Alastor
This is something that is not established at all aside from a couple throwaway lines. Referencing the pilot, especially when large chunks of it are not canon, is not enought to establish something.
>The closest we have is Adam's "Don't steal, Be selfless, and stick it to man" all of which Pentious did in the end
This was clearly a joke list that Adam made on the spot. It is kinda amazing that the show then forgot the whole thing was a gag and took it seriously.
>Also you're taking the whole "sacrificing" yourself bit far too lightly, especially in a place as craven and cowardly as hell.
I am not taking it lightly. Simply that jumping into danger for the sake of others was never something Pentious lacked. Hence, it is strange that it is that sacrifice the very thing that got him into heaven when he was more than willing to sacrifice himself before.
>Oh, also he was very much NOT willing to lay down his life for the V's before
He was willing to accept a dangerous mission on their behalf and then was perfectly willing to die.
>He only accepts his death after his spirit has been broken and he wronged those that had just shown him nothing but kindness and warmth.
I really do not see how accepting somebody's kindness and then laying your life for them is supposed to be an arc when its never been established that Pentious is particularly cowardly or selfish.
He basically speedran his redemption somehow.
>This is something that is not established at all aside from a couple throwaway lines. Referencing the pilot, especially when large chunks of it are not canon, is not enought to establish something.
Anon the pilot is literally canon, the first time we see Pentious he's starting fights specifically to take over newly opened up land after an Extermination. Power = Respect, especially in a Hell where power reigns above all. Just because you say it's not enough to establish something doesn't mean it actually is.
>This was clearly a joke list that Adam made on the spot. It is kinda amazing that the show then forgot the whole thing was a gag and took it seriously.
Yeah, it is, but it's also the only thing close enough to a tangible guideline to getting into Heaven. Don't forget that this show is also a comedy just as much as it is a drama.
>He was willing to accept a dangerous mission on their behalf and then was perfectly willing to die.
Again, for personal gain, and you keep ignoring the fact of WHY he was willing to die after the mission had already failed. He was not willing to die for the V's, he was willing to die because he was corned, left to die by himself, and because he was sorry to Charlie and the rest of the hotel who had given him a fair shake at becoming a better person.
And yes, you are very much taking sacrificing yourself lightly. Dying by Adam and dying in general in hell are to very different things. One is coming back, the other is forever. The mission with the V's wasn't forever and wasn't supposed to go wrong in the first place.
Imagine dying in a stupid way because you wanted to look cool for a Youtube you were making. And if you die you'll just come back later
Now imagine dying because you ran into a burning hospital to save people.
>Imagine dying in a stupid way because you wanted to look cool for a Youtube you were making. And if you die you'll just come back later
>Now imagine dying because you ran into a burning hospital to save people.
Right, but the point is that the difference between the two is not cowardice. Perhaps selfishness can be cited as a difference but even then, even while he first starts staying at the hotel, Pentious is never shown to be particularly selfish, so that cannot be one of his flaws.
>only thing close enough to a tangible guideline to getting into Heaven
It is literally meant to be a joke. Sure, you can argue that all the items in the list are good traits to possess but the whole point is that it is not enough. Adam arguably exhibits all of those at points and yet he is a terrible person. So clearly they are necessary yet not sufficient conditions for being in heaven.
>you are very much taking sacrificing yourself lightly
I have told you several times already why the sacrifice is not enough. We are never even told why Pentious landed in hell in the first place and he never actually apologized for whatever it is that landed him there in the first place despite the show acting like that is the first step. He only stops building death machines because Vaggie tells him to stop and he never seems to feel bad about building them, and terrorizing the denizens of hell in the first place. One more time, dying for your friends is not enough to actually redeem yourself.
>Dying by Adam and dying in general in hell are to very different things. One is coming back, the other is forever
Pentious never actually hesistates in doing either so, again, cowardice was never his issue. It cannot be cited as a flaw that he somehow recovers from. And even if he did, we are never even shown the process of him getting over his fear. Which is narratively necessary for his redemption to actually be justified.
>It is literally meant to be a joke. Sure, you can argue that all the items in the list are good traits to possess but the whole point is that it is not enough. Adam arguably exhibits all of those at points and yet he is a terrible person. So clearly they are necessary yet not sufficient conditions for being in heaven.
Anon I just said the show is also a comedy, just because something is a joke also does not mean it lacks any sort of significance. Literally, nobody knows what gets you into heaven, or rather what denies you into heaven besides obvious shit like rape and murder when other bad people, like Adam, get into it no problem.
Why are you so obsessed with selfishness and cowardice? My original post had nothing to do with either, just the fact that he was willing to accept forever death gained him way more good boi points than just throwing himself at whatever boss of hell he could find.
> We are never even told why Pentious landed in hell in the first place and he never actually apologized for whatever it is that landed him there in the first place despite the show acting like that is the first step.
I'm more than willing to believe a good chunk of hell doesn't know why they're there in the first place. For every murderer, rapist, and monster there could very well be someone that doesn't actually deserve to be there and is made worse by being in the pit of evil itself for who knows how many years.
>. He only stops building death machines because Vaggie tells him to stop and he never seems to feel bad about building them, and terrorizing the denizens of hell in the first place.
How's Adam murdering sinners and destroying their souls worse than Pentious building bombs and guns on people that WILL come back to life that can fight back. You can't say, and that's the entire point.
cont
>selfishness and cowardice
Those are the two things that someone who is willing to sacrifice themselves for others cannot exhibit. Therefore, they have to be the things Pentious is overcoming with his sacrifice.
>just the fact that he was willing to accept forever death gained him way more good boi points
My whole point is that accepting forever death, even if its for a good cause is not a satisfactory cause for redemption for Pentious. It definitely would be for Alastor.
>I'm more than willing to believe a good chunk of hell doesn't know why they're there in the first place
I dont think that is narratively good. Redemption should not involve the same actions for all sinners. And being redeemed should involve overcoming whatever landed you in hell in the first place
>Pentious building bombs and guns on people that WILL come back to life that can fight back
The fact that they come back is purely accidental. He most likely would have done the same thing even if they didnt come back. And still, he is inflicting pain and suffering for which he doesnt seem to hold no remorse whatsoever. He even planned on doing the same thing upon entering the Hotel, and we really dont see how he resolves not to do it anymore.
>One more time, dying for your friends is not enough to actually redeem yourself.
Unless whatever arbitrary power is in place decides it is and that's what gets him sent to heaven, we don't know until S2. Not even Charlie knows Sir Pentious actually made it to heaven.
>It cannot be cited as a flaw that he somehow recovers from. And even if he did, we are never even shown the process of him getting over his fear. Which is narratively necessary for his redemption to actually be justified.
You're working under the assumption that overcoming flaws is what gets you into heaven, your logic is faulty in the realm of the show even the people of Heaven aren't flawless.
>overcoming flaws is what gets you into heaven, your logic is faulty in the realm of the show even the people of Heaven aren't flawless.
Overcoming your flaws if those flaws are either sins or sin conducive is precisely what redemption is all about. It is understanding that you did something wrong, feeling bad about it, endeavoring to get better and then improving yourself to overcome those flaws. Then, being redeemed is what gets you into heaven.
>I really do not see how accepting somebody's kindness and then laying your life for them is supposed to be an arc when its never been established that Pentious is particularly cowardly or selfish.
Ran out of room. His arc was cutting down on the villain shtick, gaining friends in the hotel, and just in general being kinder, like how he didn't attack Cherri after she busted through the hotel.
>. Is Pentious going to start building death machines in heaven now? We never really saw him getting over that.
Anon, yes we did, that was literally the start of episode 3. He only took it back up for the battle against the angels.
>literally the start of episode 3
He only gives it up because Vaggie put it as a condition to be part of the hotel, not because he actually understood why you shouldnt build death machines.
There's a pretty wide gulf between taking on a suicidal mission because you're desperate and poorly informed and consciously choosing to make a suicidal strike in an attempt to save the lives of your friends.
That aside we have no idea what determines where souls go - the characters we follow believe that a soul in hell that gets killed is annihilated but clearly that's not true. Maybe dying in hell is part of the ascension process and Pentious earned his redemption much earlier.
>choosing to make a suicidal strike in an attempt to save the lives of your friends.
I think this is worthless as redemption unless being cowardly/selfish is precisely the flaw that kept you in hell. Its perfectly possible to lay down your life for your friends while still being an awful person.
>Maybe dying in hell is part of the ascension process and Pentious earned his redemption much earlier.
And for a show supposedly about redemption. I woul very much like to see sinners actually improving rather than just having them do a random selfless act, which is played as a joke btw, and thats all it takes for a character to be redeemed. Is Pentious going to start building death machines in heaven now? We never really saw him getting over that.
>I think this is worthless as redemption
cool story bro, we have no idea what pentious was like in life or what he did to deserve damnation
It sounds to me like you're making up a headcanon to rail against.
>I want to see something different!
Ok.
>cool story bro, we have no idea what pentious was like in life or what he did to deserve damnation
Which should clue you in about how his redemption is meaningless.
>It sounds to me like you're making up a headcanon to rail against.
How is it a headcanon if you literally said it yourself.
I like Sir Pentious, and precisely because I like Sir Pentious I dont like how we were robbed of his redemption actually being meaningful.
His redemption wasn't meaningless, it was shallow.
Which is fine, because that's not actually what this show is about and I have no idea why you think it was. Pentious was a bit character.
>that's not actually what this show is about
The show is literally about redeeming sinners from hell to heaven.
hahaha holy shit
media literacy is dead
>Inb4 anon comes with some elaborate headcanon about how the show is about shattering our preconceptions on the nature of good and evil and the role of heaven and hell as archetypal social narratives when they are just hypocritical constructs
Anon...
The show is about Charlie and crew's musical misadventures. It's a musical sitcom, not a character drama.
>not a character drama.
You have no right to tell anybody they have no media literacy holy shit.
>t. ESL and victim of the dunning-kruger effect
It has comedic and dramatic elements, a "Dramedy" if you wanna sound gay
No, I'm sorry, it is not a dramedy. A Dramedy or Comedic Drama is not just "A comedy with some drama" or "A drama with some comedy."
And for that matter drama as a genre is not just "something happens that is serious," a drama is defined by its deep dives into complex characters and explorations of motivations and inner conflict.
As an example: Naruto is not a fricking drama even though people have emotions and serious shit happens.
>YEAH HUH IT IS
It's literally and objectively not. Your problem is that your reading of episode 1's dialogue implies they don't know who did it or how, but that's just your assumption. Their dialogue is vague and the extermination is moved up so the legions of hell won't have anyone left to do it again.
Even then it wouldn't be a plot hole, it would be something unexplained. There's a difference and words have meanings.
I'm tired of you.
Look I think worrying too much about genres is dumb, but it's definitely incorrect to say HH is purely a "musical sitcom".
You're right!
It's a SERIALIZED musical sitcom!
>Your problem is that your reading of episode 1's dialogue implies they don't know who did it or how
Lute literally says "They've never managed to kill one of us before." and "We should just go there now and destroy them!" This isn't the language you used when you know exactly who did the offending action and why. Adam even shoots her down saying that just going back to kill them all would be suspicious, so if he was wary of raising questions from the Sinners, AND he had the knowledge he SHOULD have had from the Angels who witnessed the killing, why would he just randomly push the purge up with no apparent reason to those not in the know? Almost like he, I dunno, thought that it was their only course of action against a nebulous threat they had no clear details on. Dipshit.
>Lute literally says "They've never managed to kill one of us before." and "We should just go there now and destroy them!"
Which is vague and in no way implies they don't know who did it.
>the threat HAS to be nebulous in his mind!
It's not nebulous at all you fricking cretin. He's vocally afraid of demons figuring out how to kill angels and doing just that. That scene is not the first time this concept is brought up, it's literally in the opening exposition.
I'd go so far as to say that Adam's behavior works whether or not he knows or could find out who did it - he very explicitly does not want anyone to know this is possible because he's so afraid of the potential for uprising.
NTA but if adam was so worried about them figuring out how to kill angels it makes less sense that he wanted for them to wait it out
Regardless of who killed the angel, nothing was to stop whoever it was from telling other sinners "I just killed an angel"
Now that I think about it, despite an angel dying on the front lines, they didn't take any measures to give the exorcists extra armor or anything
Adam's moronic, his actions don't have to make flawless tactical sense. In fact they shouldn't because he's characterized as a huge frick-up from the start.
That said his actions do make sense in context and to be perfectly honest I don't get why you even care about this basic setup it's not the meat and potatoes of the show it's set dressing
Adam isn't meant to be a good general. It's stated directly in the show that the angels don't wear serious armor or use shields because they're overconfident and literally can't fathom being injured. Adam failing to adapt the war strategy lines up with this logic, he isn't taking it seriously enough to do more than double the speed of the slaughters.
Adam is not worried about not dying or slaughtering sinners. He’s more concerned on getting the sinners to kill him without making it too obvious (cause Roo is watching and Sera might be working for her).
not one of the people you replied to but who the frick is Roo
The stupid root of evil possessing Eve thinks to the apple of good and evil.
>If redemption merely means sacrificing for your friends then it is exceedingly easy and extremely immoral persons can accomplish it
Immoral persons don't really care about their 'friends'
>Immoral persons don't really care about their 'friends'
Lute is an immoral person and she clearly cares about her friend Adam. You are confusing immorality and selfishness. While selfishness is clearly immoral, not all immorality is selfishness.
Lute’s and Adam’s mission was to do redeem the sinners in Adam’s death, so they can be their parents instead in Heaven. Like how Christ’s death freed the righteous souls from Satan.
kid named media illiteracy
Okay
All winners = Children of Adam and Lute
All Sinners = Children of Lucifer and Lilith.
You're still clinging to this?
Vivzie genuinely can't get into moral grayness at all.
>Stolas actually had zero wrongdoing in cheating on his wife after raising a kid with her because actually she was super evil and said she wanted to make his life Hell even before the daughter existed
>Blitzo's supposed to be some Rusty/Rick/Bojack-esque figure except he actually never really did anything wrong in his life and either the people calling him a horrible person are worse themselves (Verosika, his sister) or it's all a misunderstanding (Fizz)
>The Sins are all actually swell dudes (barring the one that can be associated with capitalism and thus is something the show can shit on, amusingly he's the only actual entertaining one because of that)
>Vivzie's trying to say that the Heaven/Hell situation is morally gray while depicting Heaven as being run by a council that hate the idea of free will and regularly send angels down to Hell to commit genocide
>The show artificially does character development by skipping over a few months and pretending that everyone's gotten better instead of actually showing said growth
Your best case scenario is that Adam comes back as a sinner in Season 2 and gets a redemption arc where he learns to stop being a frat boy while skipping over any actual development.
>Typing all this because of a false-flagging turbo/x/chizo
I think this became extremely apparent when the whole "the apple was free will" part came about. You couldn't even say he did it partially to feed his own ego or subverted everyone while they were debating the right time to introduce free will? She removed the whole "lead an army against heaven" part, you know? Something which would actually make the paranoia which caused the exterminations make more sense because he was pretty firm on the "and I'll do it again" part in the actual lore.
>The show artificially does character development by skipping over a few months and pretending that everyone's gotten better instead of actually showing said growth
This is what I hate the most about the show. It has good characters and decent ideas and just refuses to explore them in any capacity.
It's almost like it's some kind of serialized musical comedy and not a drama
>It's almost like it's some kind of serialized musical comedy and not a drama
Yeah, Im sure thats why there is an invading genocidal angel army, the main character has severe daddy issues, deppression all around and one of the characters is raped daily while being addicted to the drugs his boss gives him. None of that is dramatic, totally. Also, are you aware of the concept of tragicomedy?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comedy_drama
?
Hazbin is in no sense of the word a drama. It is not a comedic drama, it is not a dramedy, it is not a tragicomedy, it's a serialized musical sitcom.
It has plenty of drama in it anon
>I do not know what a drama is, I have only ever watched cartoons
That's nice, dear.
Cant tell if bait or just moronation
Buddy you have been in this whole thread claiming this show isn't at least partly a drama, and acting like you're some high and mighty media expert. But nobody else has agreed with your assessment, hell wikipedia lists it a comedy drama, and I bet Viv herself would say it's partly a drama. Just because it doesn't perfectly fit in your autistic box doesn't make you right
>I disagree!
Ok, moron
You keep pretending it's trying to be/needs to be Breaking Bad, I'll keep enjoying the dumb gags and electro swing
Why are you getting so mad about other people's expectations on the show?
>I disagree!
The point is everyone else disagrees with you here. You seem to think that "drama" requires the creation to be highbrow and narratively complex, when it really doesn't. This show has moments with a serious tone and emotional conflict between characters, which is what most people mean when they call something "drama"
See
It has character crying and needing to be comforted by other characters over relationship drama and life conditions constantly.
>NOOOO comedies have to be surface level and lack any kind of thoughtful exploration of the themes or actually taking time with the ideas it introduces
Having things happen that aren't funny doesn't make something a drama
I can help: you're moronic
>Having things happen that aren't funny doesn't make something a drama
You are the one who insisted that any expectation of the show to be a little more thorough in its examination of the ideas it puts forward is to expect it to be a drama.
The show has very clearly dramatic elements. Like Valentino's abuse of AD or the threat of eternal damnation.
>The show has dramatic elements!
That does not make it a drama.
You're just proving my point.
My whole point all this time is that the show's dramatic elements, that it very clearly has and wants to have, are shallow and not thoroughly explored.
Yes, the dramatic elements are minor
Because it's not a drama
You're walking up to an omelette bar and going "where's the filet!?"
They are not minor, they are integral parts of most of the characters and the characters are the backbone of the show. The plot is driven by the dramatic aspects of the show.
you could delete the bat, the gay, nifty, sir pentious, vaggie and basically every background character, and the plot could easily accommodate. you could remove episodes 4, 5 and 7 and it could be done
>delete the bat, the gay, nifty, sir pentious, vaggie
You are deleting almost all the main cast at that point.
>the plot could easily accommodate
I dont think the plot can accomodate eliminating the genocide, the worries around redemption, Charlie's relationship with her dad and the final battle. All dramatic elements.
>you could remove episodes 4, 5 and 7 and it could be done
How can you seriously argue that you would have to remove more than 1/3 of the show and also say that the dramatic aspects are minor?
The plot is just a scaffolding for the music and comedy
You're both moronic
>I dont think the plot can accomodate eliminating the genocide, the worries around redemption, Charlie's relationship with her dad and the final battle
right. note how those do not include the bat, the gay, nifty, sir pentious, vaggie and basically every background character
>How can you seriously argue that you would have to remove more than 1/3 of the show and also say that the dramatic aspects are minor?
I said you could remove episodes 4,5 and 7 and the plot would not suffer for it
>right. note how those do not include the bat, the gay, nifty, sir pentious, vaggie and basically every background character
You cant remove Pentious and Vaggie though. Pentious is instrumental inn showing that redemption is possible and Vaggie moves the plot forward tying up with the angel stuff.
Plus you can even argue that AD is one of the primary motivations for Charlie in the show.
>I said you could remove episodes 4,5 and 7 and the plot would not suffer for it
You cannot remove episodes 5 and 7. episode 5 is essential for 6 to make sense and episode 7 is likewise essential for 8.
>Pentious is instrumental in showing redemption is possible
Not really, any character can do that.
I'm not sure you understand how stories work. They're not real things that happened, people put words down on paper.
vaggie is an awful character for any number of reasons. completely useless and forgettable in the first half, I think we can both agree, but then we find out she's a fallen angel. my question is: so what? it opens up a potential character conflict with charlie that her lover has lied to her, but that's immediately handwaved. her one contribution is getting the weapons from the arms dealer, but alastor could have picked up a phone and deal with that offscreen. same with the whole cannibal thing. they could have shown up and he could have made a spooky laugh and said here are my friends who've come to help, btw they're cannibals.
>Vaggie doesn't serve a narrative purpose!
Her purpose is to be a sorta-butch lesbian and straight man for Charlie to bounce off of.
The story is not very important.
fair enough. but with her I don't think there's enough there there for charlie to bounce off of. that's why charlie's interactions with adam and alastor are so entertaining. she's the straight man, and her optimism and naivete make the dynamic work
Vaggie is basically moronic to forget that angelic weapons can harm exterminators.
Also: Viv, you really expect me to believe no one in Hell for thousands of years ever tried fighting back against the exterminators until now? hah, no.
Lute was pretty much only turned into a character because of crew shipping and she’s much better than Vaggie.
>I said you could remove episodes 4,5 and 7 and the plot would not suffer for it
Basically, Adam x Lute was the plot of this show, with their first episode oddly being a shitty pilot where they weren’t a couple and the crew thought it was a good idea to make Adam and Heavenly residence bang each other like it’s Sodom.
This is a teachable moment about language and conflation.
See in different contexts the same word can have different meanings. When one is talking about "a drama" as in the genre, they're talking about a melodrama whose primary elements are internal conflict and character study. In a drama it is reasonable to criticize a shallow character arc as that is the main focus of the work.
A work having "dramatic elements" (in this case having been watered down so heavily as to effectively mean any kind of plot) simply makes it a functional story, not a drama.
Is Hazbin Hotel trying to tell a dramatic tale of complex characters redeeming themselves? Emphatically no. It is trying to make lots of crude jokes and sing.
>Is Hazbin Hotel trying to tell a dramatic tale of complex characters redeeming themselves? Emphatically no. It is trying to make lots of crude jokes and sing.
But it is trying to do exaclty that. The fact that it ultimately fails at it doesnt mean that it is not trying. The whole premise of the show rests on the fact that Charlie believes that the worst of humanity can improve on themselves and escape hell if they try hard enough. That is a dramatic tale at its core. Especially when you mix in the fact that these people will all be ultimately killed if Charlie does not succeed. The show also trying to tell a story where the characters are fundamentally flawed and yet trying their best to improve, complex characters. The fact that it mostly fails doesnt mean that it doesnt try and I bet that if you asked Vivziepop she would tell you that she is essentially telling a dramatic story of complex characters while using comedy as an engaging element of the show.
>Y-yeah huh it is!
>Is Hazbin Hotel trying to tell a dramatic tale of complex characters redeeming themselves? Emphatically no. It is trying to make lots of crude jokes and sing.
It is not just trying to make crude jokes and sing. There is clearly an attempt to have character conflict and growth be a major part of the show. There is also songs and crude jokes - nobody here is claiming it's trying to be some super serious pure drama. But to claim it's just some elements of drama and not a key aspect of show seems to me like a major misread of its intentions.
>There is clearly an attempt to have character conflict and growth be a major part of the show.
That's called being a serial
Are you actually moronic? Serialized just means the show has a continuing plot between episodes.
Are you?
Having a plot doesn't make something a drama
The actual redemption of the individual characters is clearly not the focus of the show. Pretending it is to justify b***hing that a tertiary gag character wasn't deep and realistic is fricking silly.
Again you seem to think that drama means complex. Also Sir Pentious is definitely not part of the more dramatic parts of the show, he was primarily comedic relief. I agree with you on that. The drama was more stuff like Angel in ep 4, Charlie's relationship with her dad, Sera and Emily's relationship, Charlie finding out Vaggie is an angel, etc. You might write those off as merely "dramatic elements", but the intention is clearly that this show wants to focus on interpersonal conflict and resolution, which for my money is "drama".
I'm curious though, what are some examples of what you think are "comedy dramas"?
>dramatic elements
pill popping gays belong in hell. there's nothing deeper than that
your thinking of Amoral, which is usually the lack of care for most things or absolute lack of awareness of the morality of things. You can be immoral and care for others many evil regimes and groups had comradery within them
>Mostly because we still dont know why exactly he got redeemed
The power of love.
Killing off Adam and by Nifty no less, was a terrible move. Having Lucifer able to just come in and save everyone and have Charlie power up to, sort of, be on Adams level ruins any stakes or drama this show could potentially have. So many terrible stroy decisions were made in episodes 7 and 8, it really makes me wonder what can they even do in Season 2 that won't feel forced or even more stupid.
The only way to salvage this is to have season 2 focused on Adam ending in hell and actually having to redeem himself. I dont say this out of love for Adam as a character. Its just that Adam has something much more valuable, narrative wise, than any of the current Hotel occupants: We actually know what his sins are and what he needs to redeem himself from. The current issue with the Hotel is that none of the residents are actually bad/need redeeming. Angel Dust is purely a victim
Husk is purely a victim (unless it is actually revealed whether he did something horrible as an overlord)
We were never told what was actually wrong with Sir Pentious.
Nifty seems more like an animal than an actual person.
Vaggie doesnt need redeeming, she is purely a victim.
Charlie doesnt need redeeming, she is purely a good guy
The show doesnt frame what Lucifer did as actually wrong.
The redeeming Hotel is pointless if there is nothing to redeem.
Adam actually did something wrong, in the show's eyes, he is prime candidate to be dragged through the mud and have an actual redemption story.
>unless it is actually revealed whether he did something horrible as an overlord
owning slaves at the very least
>Character voiced by black man owned slaves
>Character voiced by a latino man is a pimp
What did Viv mean by this?
It was a really weird design choice to change the background of people like Angel Dust to remove any negatives they did. Angel used to be in the mob and killed people and shit before dying to an overdose but now that was retconned and he just died from an overdose with no other real information. Same thing with Nifty, we were told she murdered her husband and then killed herself but now that's been scrubbed and we just know when she died, not why she was in hell. Same thing with Husk and Sir P, we have no information why they're even in Hell.
I am assuming that was mainly done because Viv wants her main cast to be sympathetic to the average viewer, and the average viewer mainly operates on a white/black moral standard, which is funny because that is supposed to be the bad guys' ideology. So, she needs her main cast to be as unproblematic as possible or else they will be like Adam in the eyes of the average viewer.
The sad truth is that the average person does not really believe in redemption, or only believes in redemption for unproblematic offenses.
It's weird that the one exception, apparently, is Alastor. It kills me how certain people will GUSH over Alastor, despite him being a confirmed serial killer and a cannibal but will say Adam is awful and terrible just for being a stereotypical dudebro. It reminds me so much of when people were fawning over that real life murderer because he was hot.
Yeah, I did not include Alastor in my initial comment
, because I assume he is being prepped up for doing something actually horrible further down the line and will be eventually redeemed in the show finale or something like that.
I think part of the reasons why Alastor is popular and unproblematic are 1.All his victims in the show are evil which goes back to the white/black morality and the fact that most people have a revenge fetish 2. He is a tumblr edgy sexy man and bait for the 'I can fix him'/'we can be awful together' demographic 3. He will absolutely have a tragic backstory probably fitting with his asexual status.
Also, Viv has stated Alastor is his favourite character which is probably why Charlie has so much patience for the awful shit he does constantly.
I forgot to mention that the fact that he has Husk enslaved is a giant disconnect with everything else I have said but also nobody who likes Alastor really acknowledges it/ considers it a point against him. Everybody hates Valentino but Alastor is essentially doing the same thing but just not in a sexual way.
Which makes it even more strange that Charlie doesnt give him shit for it. Charlie doesnt really need Alastor for the hotel honestly, she is the princess of hell. Why does she consent him so much shit?
Every time Charlie is criticized the excuse is always "she is naive" or "she is just too nice."
She clearly doesnt put up with Valentino or Adam's buttholery and yet, when Alastor does the same thing, she gushes over him. I understand that the former are worse, but she is supposed to be redeeming these people and yet she lets Alastor keep a slave.
This may be a hot take but I don't think Alastor, morally, is any better than Adam and Valentino. We're just not shown his atrocities but it's canon he's killed an eaten 100s of innocent people when he was on earth.
I don't like Alastor at all. He's deceitful.
>fawning over that real life murderer because he was hot
Dahmer?
Yes but no, it was Jeremy Meeks. He nearly beat to death a 16 year old boy because "gang gang" but people were fawning over him saying shit like "I'd let him beat me anyday."
I'd say you have to be more specific but you can just pick a murderer at random honestly and the statement still checks out
You forgot to add the average viewer judges people by their physical appearance above other things. Redemption for a good-looking character will always be more accepted. If Hitler had been good looking by today's standards, he would have a whole army of fangirls who would defend everything he did because of the "I can fix him" shit or that he was just misunderstood or never ordered many things that happened or whatever.
>we were told she murdered her husband and then killed herself
I didn’t know that, makes her way more interesting. Shame they scrubbed it
>Charlie power up to, sort of, be on Adams
i don't think she was, he almoust killed her with bare hands whithout any effort, but i get what you mean
Lucifer being around is especially moronic
Near the end of the battle, Charlie gives Adam a glare while he's flying down to punch Lucifer and she blocks his punch and that's when he seems confused as to why she can suddenly block his punch.
They literally set up higher stakes in the finale moron. Charlie's next opponent is going to be her own mother, who is lying and living and heaven on some form of deal. Alastor also has a deal he is trying to find loopholes around, and Charlie owes him a favor so she too will end up having serious drama when he decides to cash it in. The drama between Heaven and Hell might ramp up significantly because Sir Pentious entering Heaven proves sinners CAN be redeemed, which is going to jumpstart the hotel's popularity once word reaches hell and might cause even more friction if Heaven's reps still refuse to stop the attacks now that it's confirmed they're killing souls that have the ability to earn redemption.
They could go 3 full seasons each better than the last off of only the things we already have set up.
Charlie and her crew held back an Angelic horde, Lucifer was just able to pick up Alastor's slack to take down Adam. You might have had a point if Lucifer could just swat down the entire angelic army but that's obviously not the case.
I'm the first person to want to poke holes in this shit, Vivzie has shown to be a very sloppy writer and showrunner with Helluva Boss, but A24 really did an excellent job patching up the biggest flaws.
>You might have had a point if Lucifer could just swat down the entire angelic army but that's obviously not the case.
He clearly could have given how he easily slapped Adam around and the angelic army having trouble beating random sinners with spears.
>yeah-huh he coulda!
If he's in heaven now, why used he still a snake?
Because he's just the cutest thing ever as a snake.
She has her actual daddy for that with top tier tongue game to add.
See
when has that ever dissuaded me?
This is so on the nose it ceases to be hot.
more subtle?
>"black and white morality is wrong"
>"So there are those evil fricking exorcist fascists and nice good angels"
>"And there are misunderstoon misfits demons, and utter fricking monsters god i wish to see them in a woodchipper"
Don't forget
>everyone deserves a second chance, no matter how great the sin!
>except Adam and probably Valentino , they deserve death!
Oh yes, the easiest way to get, at least, 60% of the fanbase to hate you is to say you think Valentino is a great villain and character even if he is a shit person.
Dude just say, Valentino redemption and you will light the fire , remember that one dude who made the comic?
Oh yeaaah, that's so true.
What comic? Genuinely interested.
The show is barely using it's heaven and well setting, it used biblical canon as a base but barely follows it. Not only Adam wasn't even the first human soul to go to heaven but was Abel, he's for some reason put in charge of angels. Other religious figures are never mentioned, you can make Adam some random butthole and plot would barely change.
Anon, the show does not use the bible or any other abrahamic writings as canon, only as loose inspiration
Anon saint Peter was there.
he is associated with pearly gates in pop culture, that still is using abrahamic mythology as just loose inspiration, not as universe cannon
>This is dampened pretty significantly by the show's depiction of Hell though.
no, it's not
>The place just comes off as a slightly-shitter-than-average US city where you can't die
very far from that
try going outside and touching some grass
>not a place you get put specifically as punishment.
the punishment is eternity in a shithole instead of heaven
>This was never part of the initial punishment of Hell
yeah, but is part of the suffering mentioned
>this was added in post after Hell was getting too populated
overpopulation was never the true reason, just a excuse
The real reason is that Sera start fearing that hell might possibly try to rebel
try watching the fricking show
>very far from that
>try going outside and touching some grass
Anon, at one point in the show. The main cast just goes clubbing to have a good time as if nothing was wrong with the place they are in.
>The main cast just goes clubbing to have a good time as if nothing was wrong with the place they are in.
and ? hell as presented is still far worse and more anarchic as any american or either third word city
>very far from that
>try going outside and touching some grass
If the first rebuttals you have are to say "nuh-uh!" and "touch grass" on top of Reddit Spacing I'm forced to assume you're underage as well as mentally deficient and must promptly disengage immediately.
Eat shit, moron, and reply again when you have an actual fricking argument.
Wait a fricking second
>Angel died during last purge, no one in Heaven knew why or how
>flashback in Episode 7 shows how Carmilla killed her, with her angel-metal shoes
>....except for the fact that it was a single angel in a GROUP of them, and she only killed 1, right in front of them
>no other angels confirmed dead, and since even one dying was a huge deal the others being killed or even missing from the ranks when they returned to Heaven would 100% have been given the same significant by Adam and Lute, meaning they're CONFIRMED alive
So why the FRICK did the other angels in thew group not just say "some demon b***h killed our comrade, here's what she looked like"? Given this plot point is a significant driving force of the season this feels very sloppily done.
The whole Carmilla killed the angel plotline didnt really go anywhere. The overlords ended up doing nothing. Carmilla doesnt do anything other than lecture Vaggie for some reason and give her weapons that Charlie could have bought anyway.
It was also in her best interest that Charlie had the weapons since she was the most likely out of everybody to actually succeed against the angels. How long until an angel actually manages to kill one of Carmilla's daughters? Charlie didnt really need Alastor at all to get the weapons.
Bad writing
The angels didn't know she was using a angel weapon.
I decided to pop back into the thread like a minute before you posted this lmao, how lucky
That's not really the point. The point is that the Angels didn't know how, why, or by whose hand the Exorcist died, not that they didn't know the exact tool. With what I brought up, they should've known WHO did it and WHY, and the exact tool would've followed as they investigated.
You get my point, right? From the way the Angels death was framed in Episode 7, there is NO reason it should've been framed as a big mystery.
Is there any reason to assume the angels know anything about the people in hell? From what we can tell they have no surveillance or lists, the finale is very clear in the fact that Adam and Lute had no clue the Hotel spent the last month prepping and was ready to fight back.
The realistic way it worked was a few angels said "a sinner kicked an angel to death and we retreated because that's unheard of, no we don't know who she is she looked like a pretty generic grey demon woman", and then heaven said "well damn it's a shame we don't know who is who down there".
The real plot hole is Vaggie, I guess you have to assume she was no longer a true angel before they ripped out her wings and eye.
>The realistic way it worked was a few angels said "a sinner kicked an angel to death and we retreated because that's unheard of, no we don't know who she is she looked like a pretty generic grey demon woman", and then heaven said "well damn it's a shame we don't know who is who down there".
This play by of the events runs directly counter to the way Adam and Lute talked about it at the end of Episode 2. They were speaking like they couldn't even CONCIEVE an Angel being harmed by a Sinner and that it was wholly unprecedented. Once again, the mystery wasn't "what tool was used this angel?", it was "how the frick did this angel die?".
And they got their answer, some gray demon lady kicked their head off. What you're forgetting is that they also know the reason-to protect to other younger demon ladies.
That first part ALONE probably would've started a massive investigation in every gray demon lady in the city, but with that second point it coming back to Carmilla, the widely known WEAPONS DEALER with two daughters who'd match a the possible descriptions, would've been guaranteed with like the first fricking day of active research. You can't even bring up "the Exorcisms are on thin ice as is no way they could just barge into Hell like that!" Because the fricking moment Sera learned that an Angel died in Hell her fears of a Sinner's revolt being not just possible, but inevitable, would've been both validated and bolstered. She probably would've given them the go-ahead to frick the entire City up if it meant bringing Carmilla's head back. To be frank, this is an entire plot hole in and of itself, but that's not the main focus so eh.
>this is a plot hole!
No, that's not what a plot hole is. No internal logic or rules of the story have been contradicted. You're creating a contradiction through pointless speculation - also known as building a headcanon.
And honestly with the way this series is focused on music, dirty jokes, and broad emotional strokes these complaints that Pentious wasn't a character on-par with Walter White or that demons in Vivzie's magic universe don't act the way you think they should are "Who pumps the Batmobile's tires?"-tier autism.
>No, that's not what a plot hole is
It literally is. The Angels's not knowing the circumstances in which their cohort died was the crux of the Exorcism being pushed up by 6 Months, Charlie panicking over getting the Hotel to work, which led to her being desperate enough to call Lucifer, which led to her going to Heaven, etc. etc. It's a contradiction that runs directly against the logic of the show and if it was filled a significant chunk of it would have to be rewritten.
>these complaints that Pentious wasn't a character on-par with Walter White or that demons in Vivzie's magic universe don't act the way you think they should are "Who pumps the Batmobile's tires?"-tier autism.
Stop being reductive you big baby. If people are watching an adult show focused on it's characters and with an over-arching season-long plot and they find issues with either, they're well within their right to complain-in fact I'd say it's outright healthy. Discussion on what you don't like in a product (or hell, what you liked that may differ from what someone else liked) is integral to stopping shitty circlejerks where everyone agrees 24/7 and all discussion ends up leading back to the same exact topics.
>The Angels's not knowing the circumstances in which their cohort died was the crux of the Exorcism being pushed up by 6 Months
And you have failed to explain how this is a plot hole that can't be explained away by "they asked the other angels and they had no useful information". You're assuming multiple things that are unreasonable to assume, Heaven does not have dominion over Hell and can't do the things you are implying they can do.
Did anyone else notice the huge issue episode 7 and 8 introduce? So many sinners have angelic weapons now that can permanently kill other sinners. How are they going to deal with all of Cannibal town plus more having all these super weapons? Isn;t that going to cause a huge problem for Charlie "people?"
Charlie is not just moronic, she actively pretends "her people" aren't blatant monsters
Cannibals only agreed to fight angels because she promised them some warcrime potential,and she dosen't give a shit
I remember mentioning how Charlie is not a good person, at all, given the shit she lets slide and is okay with and man I got so much blowback.
Its because the average viewer has the most basic good/evil morality compass possible and whatever the people he likes (because they are good) do, is good, and whatever happens to the people he dislikes (because they are bad) is completely justified and moral.
its funny how this is something everyone claims to understand, yet up to 85% of people are more or less like this
>Adam is le bad because he executes sinners for being bad
>Nifty is le good because she executes somebody percieved as bad for being bad
What I find weird is that no one realizes that Adam would want to hug Niffty afterwards because he loves all of his children.
is this
guy vox mask shizo?
Yes. And I was happy to be utterly pranked by Vivziepop’s ending and I actually think it was much better than everything anyone else would’ve came up with.
So Vivziepop of all people is CORRECTING them? What????
She isnt though, the main cast are all good wittle bois who can do no wrong and are all victims (Except Alastor) and all the bad guys are evil hypocritical genociders who deserve painful oblivion.
Not really. Episode 4 had Angel and Husk get tripped out over the addictions that dragged them down (because blaming the past for them doesn’t excuse their actions) and she pretty much given Charlie, Vaggie, and Angel Dust plenty of moments of being super awful people, to the point that only Sir Pentious actually deserved his redemption.
In the end, Adam truly loved his sinners as his children while Vaggie’s gloated about his death and Charlie catered to their dark desires. Charlie doesn’t yet know how to actually love sinners and help them get redeemed, only Lute and Adam do. So Lute is likely going to be very important in Season 2 to help Charlie out, since any sinner in the hotel could be Lute’s winner in heaven.
Although, I get a sense of Lucifer going to attack Lute at some point for the redemptions and “taking Charlie away from me”, until Alastor and Adam get in his way.
We are supposed to feel bad for the cast, Alastor, and Lucifer, but we also know that aren’t supposed to say “they deserve to be in Heaven” cause of sad backstories, as Adam’s is the most tragic and he is nothing like them.
>Angel and Husk get tripped out over the addictions that dragged them down
Addictions themselves do not make people awful. And the mistakes they made because of the addictions only ocurred because truly awful people; Alastor and Valentino were there to capitalize on them. So, they made mistakes, but not damning mistakes and the only consequences for their mistakes occurred due to the sins of others. Angel Dust and Husk are victims.
>Charlie, Vaggie, and Angel Dust plenty of moments of being super awful people, to the point that only Sir Pentious actually deserved his redemption.
This is just strictly false. Charlie and Vaggie do not do anything that the show frames as morally wrong. Especially Charlie.
Sir Pentious didnt really deserve his redemption because we still dont know what he needed to be redeemed from and whether he actually worked to better himself.
>Adam truly loved his sinners as his children
Oh, you are the Adamschizo.
No need to read the rest then.
Lucifer had a great point in episode 4 about how the sinners are all awful psychopathic monsters and even hints at regretting giving them free will just for that to never be brought up again just because Charlie counters with "Muh people".
The fact Lucifer is egotistical enough to think he given them free will is such a massive red flag for his character.
I really dont understand why Viv introduced the notion that people in heaven or hell can be permanently killed. The whole fricking point of an afterlife is that it is AFTER your LIFE, you cant fricking die anymore. It just defeats the whole purpose of having an afterlife if you can permanently die in it.
She should have just had people who die in heaven or hell either be out of commision for a while or be pushed farther down if you are in hell. Or, if she wanted to spice the setting a bit, make it so that you are reincarnated into life.
She introduced it for "drama" which she then proceeded to throw out when she allowed Lucifer to be able to interfere and protect people and making Charlie an anime protagonist with super powers, thus removing all stakes and drama the show may have had.
It's because she wanted a cool reason why there are eyes in everything in hell.
Those eyes are the dark energy of slain souls that possesses objects.
that only makes sense if you assume that she and lucifer let the cannibals keep the angelic weapons afterwards
You mean like how they let Carmilla keep and distribute angelic weapons?
they have no control over her and no means do anything
Charlie can give Lucifer one call and he is more than willing to do whatever she wants.
Wha ..Lucifer is the King of Hell and ruler of the Pride ring, the ring all this is taking place. He absolutely could do something about it if he wanted to, the hell? If he can step in and stop the extermination he can stop the overlords from doing anything he didn't like.
I think Cannibals are the least likely to use those weapons.
If you think about it double death removes that soul from the menu, and Sinners have so many unique bodies that using them might actually be offensive to Cannibals.
Besides Exorcists kept leaving these weapons around for no reason... so its not like these weren't in circulation already.
Angelic weapons already existed in Hell, that was Carmilla's entire business. The only difference is who is holding the weapons, and realistically it is better for them to be Charlie's people than whatever criminals Carmilla was selling to.
Arent all citizens of hell her people
>Valentino throws Angel on the bed
>HOW CAN YOU *turns into satan*
>I WILL RIP OUT YOUR SOUL AND TORTURE IT, YOU FRICKING ANIMAL
>ahh, Alastor is having one of his momens again..
she's happy her bf survived. Now he can go back to living in her bedroom with her.
Who cares about a show for "edgy" middle schoolers?
1/4
2/4
3/4
4/4
Why is Carmilla framed as some sort of caring mother who doesnt want to stain her own hands with blood when she is a weapons trafficker?
And why do the people who like the show not treat her with the same disdain they do with the bad guys when she is directly responsible for most of the suffering that happens in hell?
Because hot; woman; power of love; slay queen etc.
>Carmilla framed as some sort of caring mother
because she is
> doesnt want to stain her own hands with blood when she is a weapons trafficker?
she is portray doesn't want to get personally involve in any conflict because of the repercussion of doing so
>And why do the people who like the show not treat her with the same disdain they do with the bad guys
because she isn't starting shit nor inciting anything, only profiting from the shit that always went on and, in a sense, keeping it under some control
>directly responsible for most of the suffering that happens in hell?
she has no direct involvement
>because she isn't starting shit nor inciting anything, only profiting from the shit that always went on
>Hazbin Hotel fans have unironically degraded themselves to thinking in the same "I'm just taking advantage, I didn't start it!" fashion as irl weapons dealers just to defend some half-realized character in their gay demon furries show
>she is portray doesn't want to get personally involve in any conflict because of the repercussion of doing so
Intentionally selling a weapon knowing it will be used to bring suffering makes you complicit in the suffering. So yes, her hands are very much stained with blood.
>because she isn't starting shit nor inciting anything
She is profiteering from all the bad shit by directly aiding towards it
>only profiting from the shit that always went on
>Its not bad because it was going to happen anyway.
moronic argument.
>keeping it under some control
Nice headcanon
>she has no direct involvement
She sells weapons to evil people she knows are going to do evil shit. She is directly responsible.
Why do some anons say that Abrahamic religion is only loose inspiration for the show when Viv said everyone who works on the show has "religious trauma"?
True we never see Adam eat the apple but why would it not be implied?
If he didn't eat the apple he would have no free will but clearly he does
We don't know what a human without free will would look like because we haven't seen it
>Viv's version of hell is not similar to any version of hell ever depicted by Christians or israelites
>the whole extermination business is her invention
>no Jesus, God, Holy Spirit, none of the core shit Christians believe in
>Adam is an archangel because...??
>etc. etc.
it's more of a popculture version of heaven and hell with some slight references to angelology and demonology and the genesis myth, really
which is for the better, because Viv would NOT have the writing chops to write an actual Bible fanfiction that says something worth listening to. you've got Paradise Lost or the Divine Comedy for that
Oddly enough, I think Lucifer and sinless Adam are pretty well written in this show, in which Lucifer is clearly a bastard who became a massive loser under his own pride and Adam is the the true loving father of sinners. Adam’s seemingly Sinner-like personality falls apart when you get more context on his life (Lute is the only girl he trusts with his body and plans, meaning they do weird “I wanna bang the guitarist” foreplays and they’ve might’ve met when Adam was in a band, before he was an arch-angel)
Charlie's boobs
Why did it ditch the redemption premise and go straight to muh "fight the power" in Season 1 of all things.
Because Adam’s death is the key to redemption and he planned it.
In episode 1, Adam wanted them to know that the exterminators can be killed by giving them time to find the body.
>could have gotten sexiest girl in the show
>goes to heaven
Someone save him
He's gonna get some wild aussie cyclops sex eventually! Just you wait and see!
Too late for Cherri, now Pentious will be property of Emily
Cherri is a used goods drug addict prostitute with a ton of STDs and no loyalty to any partner. Pentious WILL have his first lovemaking session (the rape at the bar doesn't count) with Emily, which will also be her first time.
Why not both? On a side note, I wonder why Pentious appeared directly in the seraphs' room rather than at the gates? Maybe he is just THAT cool that god sent him there directly
Given he's the first Sinner to make it to Heaven in history he was probably given a special manifestation in Heaven. His name wouldn't be on the logbook, after all.
God wanted to see the look on Sera's face when literal proof that everything she did and committed to was absolutely wrong.
I mean... she wasn't wrong, not entirely, Hell proved to be in fact way too powerfull and dangerous, now she would be completely justified in getting on the phone with Michael to bring Armagedon on Lucifer's ass
I'd love to see her tell Charlie and Lucifer that Heaven is willing to give them a chance since redemption does apparently work, but with the death of Adam and exorcists at the hand of an organized army of Hell has gotten Michael's attention so they best not frick up and repeat it.
How would they react when Adam’s body goes missing.
They probably would assume some of the cannibals took it.
also, why the frick are there so many cannibals, like goddamn its not even just a few its a fricking army.
i still don't know if the cannibals are hellborn or sinners
>Opponent is effectively neutralized
>Literally powerless against main cast
>kill him when he's defenseless, can no longer claim self defense
I'm sure heaven won't mind
need that full image
I saw some people here say that God doesn't exist in the Hazbin verse because Viv said she didn't want to get in trouble with religious people. Does anyone here have the source / actual quote?
I don't have the link but IIRC she didn't say God/Jesus don't exist, but that they wouldn't be in the show. Lucifer and Charlie have said 'God' and 'Lord' and I don't think they'd use those terms if God didn't exist.
there's also this in helluva boss
>"Surround yourself with people who will lift you up, so ditch your loser friends who you can't use" - GOD
Is viv going to make God evil?
I don't think God is going to show up, the vibe I get is that Sera and the council were left in charge while God went and chilled in the cosmos or something.
That's probably the best way to do it, if you show God and have him be a dick or something people will get mad, just have Him be retired boomer who let his kid and angels run Heaven while he's off grilling.
No, seeing as she has used the stereotypes of the Christian faith to some extent, she's probably aiming to show how often others twist the words of God in their favor. Kind of like how Sera had that private convo with CHADam, then also having that dreadful suprised when Sir CHADtious just spawn right infront of her
But I just realized that I'm giving too much credit so take it with a grain of salt
I think she said that about Jesus, not God.
idk about the quote, but God exists. In the cherub episode from HB one of the cherubs yelled "Get a hold of yourself! And do not use the Lord's name in vain!"
>doesn't want to get in trouble with religious people
>the christian right has completely lost all grip on the media at this point where LGBT is encouraged so other than israelites religious people can't do shit to her anyway
>she made Lucifer hot anyway
??? this makes no fricking sense
From what i take from Sera words on episode 6, heavens itself seems to have a mind on it own (God maybe??), choosing who stay and who goes to hell, something that beyond the high angels leaders control.
It's unironically a good arc too. He's a great character.
my 45 and 47 yr old parents were watching this today so it looks like this show has completely blown up
>This play by of the events runs directly counter to the way Adam and Lute talked about it at the end of Episode 2. They were speaking like they couldn't even CONCIEVE an Angel being harmed by a Sinner and that it was wholly unprecedented. Once again, the mystery wasn't "what tool was used this angel?", it was "how the frick did this angel die?".
It's not contradictory at all. It's not a question of the tool, it's a question of if they could identify the woman and they obviously couldn't.
>That first part ALONE probably would've started a massive investigation in every gray demon lady in the city
You're talking in fantasy now. They don't have jurisdiction over hell. They couldn't even find out Charlie spent a month prepping to kill Angels after they specifically told her they were coming to her hotel to start the next attack. So no they couldn't pull off an investigation either. All they have is a deal with Lucifer where they can attack once a year but not hurt hellborne, and when they wanted to cut it to half a year for the next time they still needed to tell Lucifer in person in a meeting, and we don't know if he had rights to deny it because he sent Charlie instead and she doesn't know the rules of the agreement.
>Carmilla, the widely known WEAPONS DEALER
She's not widely known to Heaven. That's the point.
>She probably would've given them the go-ahead to frick the entire City up if it meant bringing Carmilla's head back.
If you think it's in character for Sera to start a war to avoid a war I don't know what you're smoking. They didn't know who Carmilla was and didn't know how the angel died in detail.
>It's not contradictory at all. It's not a question of the tool, it's a question of if they could identify the woman and they obviously couldn't.
Except this is wrong because not even ADAM knew angelic weapons could hurt Angels until Episode fricking 8. Or did you forget him saying, and I quote, "THAT's how they can kill us? With our own weapons!? Fricking weak dude." No matter how you want to slice it, it makes NO sense that them knowing who killed the Angel, why, and how wouldn't significantly change the way they went about the plot.
>You're talking in fantasy now. They don't have jurisdiction over hell.
But they DO have observing ships that can just fly around unimpeded, can make portal directly to it, and can look directly at it's events/people involved in said events. You seem to be under the impression that launching an investigation into this would require them going there physically and interrogating people like some sort of crime drama when they've shown multiple indirect methods of keeping an eye on the Sinners throughout the show. If anything, them not checking up on the Hotel is ANOTHER questionable point that can only really be explained away by Adam's hubris in the moment.
>She's not widely known to Heaven
But she's widely known to Hell, and with the above point them knowing it was her should've followed shortly.
>If you think it's in character for Sera to start a war to avoid a war I don't know what you're smoking
It's in character for Sera to approve drastic action when she feels the safety of her people is being threatened, that's a fact. With the outright death of not just an Angel, but one who's job is specifically to kill sinners, I reiterate, her fears that Hell could revolt and realistically have a chance against the forces of Heaven would've been confirmed. Why do you think it's unrealistic for her to approve an escalation when she ALREADY signed off on the killing of thousands of souls every year at the first whiff of danger?
Anon if all you have to do to fix a "plot hole" is say "the angels didn't know the girl's boots had angelic metal in them" then it's not a plot hole. It's something that wasn't covered and probably for time because any moron can bridge that gap.
>Anon if all you have to do to fix a "plot hole" is say "the angels didn't know the girl's boots had angelic metal in them" then it's not a plot hole
That DOESN'T fix it you rube. They knew WHO killed the angel, WHY they killed the Angel, and the method. If they had used any of the resources shown to be available to them IN THE SHOW ITSELF they would've known who she was within the hour of a serious investigation, solved the mystery of what happened to the angel, and formulated a plan according to that that wasn't just "if they know how to kill us now we need to kill THEM even more!!!".
>And you have failed to explain how this is a plot hole that can't be explained away by "they asked the other angels and they had no useful information".
So you're assuming that the angels are moronic and don't know how to give a basic description of a lady, especially one who did something as monumental as, I dunno, be the first one in literal thousands of years and hundreds of purges to be the one to kill their comrade? As fricking if, and you're the one saying I'm making assumptions.
>they knew who and why!
So?
>They would have done a better job investigating from those clues!
That's not what a plot hole is you dumb motherfricker
>So?
So they knew exactly what to look for, meaning that them pushing up the Exorcism to kill indiscriminately no longer makes sense as a plot point.
>That's not what a plot hole is
It is though. Their lack of leads leading to a drastic action (6 Month time cut) is what drives the entirety of the underlying plot of the season, and if that action would've otherwise been altered given the context of what they DID know and the tools shown to be at their disposal throughout the show, then it's a massive problem. Stop acting like using basic common sense if a massive reach you fricking void-brained neanderthal.
>They knew WHO killed the angel,
Prove it. There is nothing in the show to even hint that they know, in fact the scene where they discuss the body makes it clear they DON'T know.
>So you're assuming that the angels are moronic and don't know how to give a basic description of a lady, especially one who did something as monumental as, I dunno, be the first one in literal thousands of years and hundreds of purges to be the one to kill their comrade? As fricking if, and you're the one saying I'm making assumptions.
Again you're assuming plot holes over basic logic. These are angels, they see demons once a year max at that point in the timeline. The angels are racist and probably can't tell the difference between generic grey demon ladies, they don't see them as people but as hunting targets.
>I disagree with the tactical decisions of this military force in this
>*checks notes*
>dirty animated musical comedy
>Except this is wrong because not even ADAM knew angelic weapons could hurt Angels until Episode fricking 8. Or did you forget him saying, and I quote, "THAT's how they can kill us? With our own weapons!? Fricking weak dude." No matter how you want to slice it, it makes NO sense that them knowing who killed the Angel, why, and how wouldn't significantly change the way they went about the plot.
You're still failing to understand the basics. It makes perfect sense.
They know an angel died, and got no information from the witnesses other than "it was a grey demon woman, she kicked the angel's head off". They couldn't find out who the woman was and they had no idea why the woman's kick was effective. End of story.
>They know an angel died,
Good so far
>and got no information from the witnesses other than "it was a grey demon woman, she kicked the angel's head off".
BZZT, here's where your completely lack of critical thinking is making you look like the kinda of dim-witted downie a jellyfish would call brainless! There's no indication in the show that the Angels who where with the dead one when she was killed were even SPOKEN to by Adam or Lute, and if they were, you're automatically assuming the ones A FEW FEET AWAY FROM HER would be to fricking moronic to give a basic ass relay of events and a general description like they were a bunch of children. Maybe this could've been a cool plot-point, the angels were so shocked by the unheard-of event of the death of a comrade that they were effectively traumatized and couldn't give specifics, but alas, that's apparently expecting too much from the poor widdle 30 year old woman and the gaggle of lobotomized tardigrades they call a writing staff. It's just a musical, after all!
>There is nothing in the show to even hint that they know
Which, if you could read, would realize is part of the problem I proposed in the initial post.
>Which is vague
They witnessed the offending party from a few feet away, and it was a singular sinner who was pretty unmistakably lady-shaped. The only other reason they wouldn't use clearer language is if the writers were too lazy to try and make the dialogue be believable while still hiding the full context from the audience, which is a whole other can of incompetent writing.
>It's not nebulous at all you fricking cretin. He's vocally afraid of demons figuring out how to kill angels and doing just that
And now that he KNOWS it can be done, his solution was to push up the exorcisms and just kill everyone faster, which is incredibly sus in and of itself and would contradict him wanting to keep it on the down low if more measured options were available.
>"THIS IS A HUGE PLOT HOLE AND SHITTY WRITING"
>pared down to "Adam's kind of stupid"
Hey, what do you know, we agree.
Now frick off kid
down to "Adam's kind of stupid"
Adam's a shitty general, yes, but he explicitly (and borderline uncharacteristically, in the context of the rest of the show) showed restraint when dealing with the situation of the dead Angel by shooting down Lute's proposal to go and kill more Sinners immediately because the felt that it would make the Angels look suspicious to them (preeeeetty weird if he ONLY considers the Sinners to be less-than-dirt frickups who screwed themselves into eternal suffering. Almost like a paradigm shift like this has a profound effect on those involved and would make them express otherwise unfitting traits, hm?).
If he was willing to take the measure by doing that, why would he act like they didn't know the specifics of the death and formulate a plan accordingly. There's only so far "he's SUPPOSED to be moronic!" goes in this context.
>You only weaken your stance by going for ad hominems
Make no mistake, I'm confident enough in my argument to call you the low-down monkey you are without making it look any weaker.
>My point isn't that they got bad information but that the information they got wasn't enough to know who Carmilla was
And you repeat this despite me outlining her specific, unique circumstances (protecting to other demons from harm), unique method of killing (weaponized ballerina shoes), and the angel's shown methods of surveillance (airships, portals, a literal beholder orb they can use to peep without knowledge or consent) and you giving no proper rebuttal to any of these points.
>You suck at lateral thinking, you have no reason to assume that angels are even familiar enough with demons to ID the generic grey ones
Even if they weren't (big fricking if, given what this Sinner did right in front of them), Carmilla's fit is incredibly unique among the entirety of the cast and so was her attack. They're not just face-blind to the denizens of hell, but also clothes-blind and even weapon-blind?
>Adam's a shitty general, yes
stopped reading here
I accept your concession
good thread homosexuals
>And you repeat this despite me outlining her specific, unique circumstances (protecting to other demons from harm)
Whoa what a genius, you're right it sure would be hard to find demons that are trying to avoid harm to themselves and others on the single day of the year where demons are targeted for slaughter. Now that's a unique circumstance! Newsflash genius, they can't read minds, they don't know what she was thinking and the flashback had no dialogue, at most they know a woman kicked an angel's head off.
>unique method of killing (weaponized ballerina shoes)
You're falsely assuming they knew the shoes were weaponized, or that they were close enough to even know she was wearing ballerina shoes.
>and the angel's shown methods of surveillance (airships, portals, a literal beholder orb they can use to peep without knowledge or consent) and you giving no proper rebuttal to any of these points.
You're the one failing to explain things, because you've yet to explain why they would have the power to find out this but not the power to find out Charlie's people spent a month training to kill angels. Having methods of surveillance is not the same thing as actively using them, and in the show it is clear they are not actively using any tools they have.
>Even if they weren't (big fricking if, given what this Sinner did right in front of them), Carmilla's fit is incredibly unique among the entirety of the cast and so was her attack. They're not just face-blind to the denizens of hell, but also clothes-blind and even weapon-blind?
Prove they could even see her that clearly first, because your entire assumption hinges on it and it's unproven. They wear masks that cover their eyes and for all we know they literally weren't looking at her but at the people the daughters, and then they saw the dead angel and ran without bothering to look around for the person that may or may not be able to kill them.
>Whoa what a genius, you're right it sure would be hard to find demons that are trying to avoid harm to themselves and others on the single day of the year where demons are targeted for slaughter.
Probably not, but it would stand out given both the perception of Sinners and hopeless frick ups in the eyes of the Angels in conjunction with the other point. Removing context from an argument just to make yours seem stronger only makes your position look weaker, buddy!
>You're falsely assuming they knew the shoes were weaponized,
They cut off an Angels head, and weaponization's definition is literally just "use as a weapon", which they 100% were in the context of the engagement. Using a dumbbell to bash someone in the head would be weaponizing it, even if it's just a normal dumbbell otherwise.
>You're the one failing to explain things, because you've yet to explain why they would have the power to find out this but not the power to find out Charlie's people spent a month training to kill angels.
Except I literally pointed out that this was ALSO questionable under my line of argument and said the only proper explanation was Adam being overly confident (which would be consistent with some aspects of his character but not all of it, given the apprehension he showed in the dead Angel plot. This is why I didn't harp on it). You CAN read, right?
>Prove they could even see her that clearly first,
They were a few feet way and literally just stood there while she jumped in the air. They were standing off for a good bit too. I'd expect a literal toddler to be able to ID someone in these circumstances, especially when someone as extraordinary as killing a comrade you previously thought invincible happens.
bro is still out here typing walls of text because his mind was blown that his headcanon wasn't specifically stated in the show so it's "A PLOT HOLE!!!" now
>If he was willing to take the measure by doing that, why would he act like they didn't know the specifics of the death and formulate a plan accordingly.
His preparation for the extermination was probably to turn his company of exorcists
Into a battalion and go all in in the entirely of hell before making it personal after charlie acted like a demon in the council
Being a warrior =/= being a leader
Adam was ridiculously strong and his army gives him joy, but that doesn't make him a grand strategist
>His preparation for the extermination was probably to turn his company of exorcists
Into a battalion and go all in in the entirely of hell before making it personal after charlie acted like a demon in the council
I'd accept that if the show had any indication of it. Instead it just made it seem like his plan was to kill the Sinners quicker. His words were to make sure that "no demon would be alive to do this again" and that's about it, so any further assumption of his plans as they were presented in the show veers into headcanon territory.
>It's been explained multiple times how whether or not they knew who killed the angel was irrelevant.
And I've shot it down each time, actually. First, You have to make negative assumptions about the intelligence of the Exorcists to explain why they couldn't ID Carmilla when they were a few feet from her and saw her do something extraordinary. Then, you have to assume that, even if Adam and Lute DID now, their plans and language wouldn't have changed despite the advanced technology Heaven's been shown to have access to that gives them a massive leg up on the information game with even a smidge of extra context. And then, if that fails, you have to assume that Sera, who sanctioned the killings in the first place under the FEAR of a Hell revolt, would change absolutely nothing about their current methods if approached with the explicit info of a Sinner killing an Angel with the CONFIRMATION of the denizens of hell being able to, not just harm, but actively kill Angels. At each and every step o this process I've been met with either deflections or circular reasoning as to why they couldn't be the case before my opponent promptly either stopped mentioning it, bowed out, or changed the subject.
If you're done, then just leave. No need to announce it.
>It's irrelevant if they did or didn't know who killed the angel
>ACKSHYALLY YOU HAVE TO ASSUME THE ANGELS ARE DUMB TO EXPLAIN WHY THEY COULDN'T ID HER
You went full illiterate
>You went full illiterate
No. The only explanation I've got for why angels a few feet from the scene of the crime is "well they're racist and think ALL denizens of hell look the same!", which is instead a negative assumption of thought process and also entirely unproven within the show.
They make it clear that they see Sinners as a monolith in terms of attitude and action, but there isn't a single indication that they wouldn't be able to ID a specific Sinner if need be, let alone when one does something like what Carmilla did.
Dude you're just moronic. If you're going to assume a plot hole you need proof it's a plot hole. You have repeatedly failed to prove it. If there's a single explanation, it's not a plot hole. The show doesn't need to stop and say "oh yeah and executors are racist against demons" for it to be plausible to think that they would be. Your "plot hole" is paper thin.
>here's where your completely lack of critical thinking is making you look like the kinda of dim-witted downie a jellyfish would call brainless!
cute post filler but it's not a replacement for an argument. You only weaken your stance by going for ad hominems before actually saying anything of value.
>There's no indication in the show that the Angels who where with the dead one when she was killed were even SPOKEN to by Adam or Lute
That doesn't make me wrong, it makes me even more right. My point isn't that they got bad information but that the information they got wasn't enough to know who Carmilla was, know that she killed an angel, and target her.
>you're automatically assuming the ones A FEW FEET AWAY FROM HER would be to fricking moronic to give a basic ass relay of events and a general description like they were a bunch of children.
You suck at lateral thinking, you have no reason to assume that angels are even familiar enough with demons to ID the generic grey ones. Maybe they only saw her for a few seconds from afar, or maybe they only saw her from behind, you don't know. You're assuming incompetence when there are a variety of more logical solutions.
Even if they knew it was Carmilla a targeted attack would bring attention to her risking other demons finding out how to kill angels
The complaint doesn't work from any angle
Very true. "It's a plot hole that the angels found out angelic weapons can kill angels yet didn't instantly target the famous angelic weapons dealer to assassinate her, which would alert all of hell to the fact that the angelic weapon's dealer must have something that the angels don't want people to have, perhaps related to the fact that she is a dealer of angelic weapons".
>Even if they knew it was Carmilla a targeted attack would bring attention to her risking other demons finding out how to kill angels
This would be a great point! Too bad the show doesn't go as far as to even acknowledge the fact that Carmilla would be pretty unmistakably the one who did it. If the show even just went "Okay we know this b***h did it, but we don't know WHY so we're going to have to make us killing her look incidental" we wouldn't be having this conversation. This is just you head-canoning sense INTO the show, which is a pretty dumb thing to do when an argument levied at me was writing sense out.
>"It's a plot hole that the angels found out angelic weapons can kill angels
They didn't until Episode 8, which I directly pointed out. You can't even strawman properly, wew lad.
Hope you had fun. Next time try and argue a little harder before dipping alright? It's no fun when opponents just show their ass and then run away.
>This would be a great point! Too bad the show doesn't go as far as to even acknowledge the fact that Carmilla would be pretty unmistakably the one who did it.
It's an 8 episode season, they didn't waste an entire plotlline on the tangent because you're supposed to be an adult that's smart enough to figure out that it didn't come up because it wasn't relevant to the plot enough to come up. Do you think they need to show every time a character shits too? It didn't happen on screen after all, must be a plot hole that none of them shit and we only see the important stuff.
It's a dead end plot thread so they didn't waste our time showing it.
>It's an 8 episode season, they didn't waste an entire plotlline on the tangent
This would literally all be fixed by making it so that one angel threatened both of Carmilla's daughters instead of a group of them. Don't talk to me about "wasted time" when a literal split second scene broke the spine of the inciting incident of the season's main conflict over it's back.
>It didn't happen on screen after all, must be a plot hole that none of them shit and we only see the important stuff.
When the context for something that's of great importance to a plot not only fails show up on screen but is also not considered in the actions of the characters it would relate to the most without having to jump through a dozen hoops to make assumptions about every involved party, it's a gaping hole.
>Irrelevant
Main reason behind inciting incident was them not having specifics on who killed the angel, pretty relevant in my eyes.
bro is still out here typing walls of text because his mind was blown that his headcanon wasn't specifically stated in the show so it's "A PLOT HOLE!!!" now
>Main reason behind inciting incident was them not having specifics on who killed the angel
Except no, it isn't. This is your headcanon. It's been explained multiple times how whether or not they knew who killed the angel was irrelevant.
If that's all I think we're done here.
>the primary cause of the plot is them not knowing who killed the angel!
>no, that's wrong. Them knowing or not knowing who killed the angel is totally irrelevant to the plot as presented
>BUT HOW COULD THEY NOT ID HER
>you are illiterate, it doesn't matter if they did or didn't ID her
>I'm not illiterate and here's why them not IDing her doesn't make sense!
Genuine moron, bot, or ESL?
You decide.
You seem to be a tad mentally deficient, so let me lay this out for you:
My argument about the angel's killer being relevant is not only directly tied to, but also built upon, the angels being able to ID the killer. If they had no means of doing so, then I wouldn't even be arguing, but given the show has shown that there WERE other angels at the scene of the crime, I now have the ground to argue that they should know who did it. From this, my argument stems into that them knowing to who did it should've significantly changed the approach they took given the observational tools they've been shown to have access to over the course of the show, and with ID even has basic as "grey lady, ballerina shoes, protected two others (ID of them optional even)" would have given them a massive leg up and avoided the, I reiterate, EXTREMELY desperate looking and incredibly suspicious moving up of the purge date (hell, after it's made public the first verbal response to it we see was "why").
Given "Adam is le moronic" can no longer be leveraged in regards to this incident given he showed restraint in how they approached this situation it brings up the very valid question of "why exactly did he feel the need to do something incredibly suspicious that would only make sense if they had to strike in broad strokes if they had any form of ID and the plan of action that would stem from it?". This has yet to be adequately answered by a single person. Please do so, or we'll just keep arguing in circles.
>If there's a single explanation, it's not a plot hole
No, you slop-eating rot brained failed abortion, the explanation must ALSO be satisfactory within the confined of the media itself. "Adam is dumb" is not a proper explanation given the context of how he acted towards the dead angel, "The angels are face-blind and also moronic" is also not a proper explanation given it's built entirely upon assumption built off of light context from the show proper.
bro is still out here typing walls of text because his mind was blown that his headcanon wasn't specifically stated in the show so it's "A PLOT HOLE!!!" now
>but given the show has shown that there WERE other angels at the scene of the crime, I now have the ground to argue that they should know who did it.
No moron, you only have the grounds to argue they COULD have. Not SHOULD. COULD. They are different words with different meanings. Someone else already spoonfed you multiple explanations on why they didn't, you're just not smart enough to comprehend them. Your entire head canon falls apart.
>No moron, you only have the grounds to argue they COULD have. Not SHOULD. COULD.
If you change to that word, you now have to make an assumption as to WHY they couldn't.
"They didn't see her properly!" "They can't tell one sinner from another!" "They retreated too fast!".
All excuses, none supported by the contents of the show. I'm basing my argument on what we saw AS we saw it, you're basing your counter-argument on what would the most convenient excuse for the show to avoid having to admit it did something wrong like a shitty mom
>"They didn't see her properly!" "They can't tell one sinner from another!" "They retreated too fast!".
>All excuses, none supported by the contents of the show.
You're the one with the burden of proof because you're the one claiming it's a plot hole. You need to prove it didn't happen, not that you don't like that it happened. If it's possible for Season 2 to have a scene where she says "thank goodness those angels didn't get a good look at me", it's not a plot hole it's just a detail that isn't relevant yet. A plot hole has to be an actual hole in the plot, not just you getting your panties in a twist because your headcanon isn't official.
>You're the one with the burden of proof because you're the one claiming it's a plot hole.
Yes, and I provided it. The Angels, as presented in the show, show absolutely none of the traits that would make any of these explanations probable. They're not shown to be flighty or scatterbrained, they're not shown to be easily frightened, they're not shown to be inattentive, and they're not shown to be face-blind because they hate Sinners. Like I said above, if you are going to present an explanation for something that FORCES you to make an assumption about characters that show none of the characteristics associated with said explanations, it should at the very least be supported by the show in some-no, any fashion. It is not, so these are not adequate.
>No, that's not how language works
As if you would know, you halfwitted waste of oxygen. If you say they only "COULD" possibly ID Carmilla as the one who killed the angels in the presence of the other 3 angels, you inherently have to make assumptions about either their characters or their actions in the moment which are not supported by the show. Instead, if you say the SHOULD have the means to ID Carmila, you work off of what the show presents (Exorcists as a militaristic force with a hatred of Sinners, but not entirely faceless, personality-less entities) with the tools they're shown to have access to (airships that can scan the grounds of hell, portals directly to and from hell, means of spying on hell's denizens without their knowledge.).
> you have an invalid claim that there's a plot hole despite it being possible to dismiss it.
Shame no one's managed to do so yet.
>we saw a dramatized mental image...from the POV of a character that we don't even know is reliable.
The frick are you talking about? The POV wasn't from Carmilla's, it started with an establishing shot of the battelfield. She also had no reason to lie OR dramatize this event if it was meant to be her recollection.
>If you change to "could" instead of "should" you have to assume why they couldn't!
No, that's not how language works. You're fricking moronic.
>I'm basing my argument on what we saw AS we saw it
1. You don't have an argument, you have an invalid claim that there's a plot hole despite it being possible to dismiss it.
2. We didn't see the scene, we saw a dramatized mental image flashback with a few still images of scene from the POV of a character that we don't even know is reliable.
>you're basing your counter-argument on what would the most convenient excuse for the show to avoid having to admit it did something wrong like a shitty mom
You have the burden of proof, not us. If there are multiple "convenient excuses" for it then there's no plot holes, only things that weren't relevant enough to be shown.
>You have the burden of proof, not us. If there are multiple "convenient excuses" for it then there's no plot holes
No, because the excuses for it have to be properly supported with the show's material, of which, not one of them have been. I've said this multiple times, and have yet to get an adequate rebuttal for literally any instance. I wonder why that is?
You're the one with the burden of proof because you're the one insisting their is a plot hole. You do not seem to understand what a plot hole is, which will not change reality.
>You're the one with the burden of proof because you're the one insisting their is a plot hole
And I've supported my position multiple times over, despite you seeming to think otherwise. Now get to the rebuttal, chop chop.
You've failed to support it even once. A plot hole has to be something that can't be explained away, if you think otherwise you do not understand what a plot hole is because you are an idiot.
>it should at the very least be supported by the show in some-no, any fashion. It is not, so these are not adequate.
You do not know what a plot hole even is. A detail not being mentioned is not a plot hole. The fact that you've even tried to argue "the show hasn't supported this so it doesn't count" proves you don't know what a plot hole is.
>No, because the excuses for it have to be properly supported with the show's material
No they don't, a plot hole has to be something you cannot logic out. If you can find an excuse for it, it's not a plot hole. A blind character seeing something is a plot hole because you can't explain it no matter what. If you could explain it it wouldn't be a plot hole.
>No they don't, a plot hole has to be something you cannot logic out
Making tenuous excuses that are not supported by the narrative is not "logicing out", which you seem to fundamentally understand. "the LoTR gang didn't ride the Eagles" isn't a plothole because you can just say "they were trying to be stealthy and flying on giant Eagles over the country is the exact opposite of that". No assumptions are made here, just the mission statement and things repeated by characters multiple times throughout the story. "Adam and Lute didn't act as if he knew anything about the circumstances of the Angel's death despite knowing being well within the confined of the story" IS a plothole because any reason you can make as to why this isn't the case is both either an out-and-out assumption or otherwise not supported by the story. "The Angels cannot tell sinners apart"-not supported. "The Angels just couldn't tell who she was"-assumption and not supported. "The Angels fled too quickly to ID her"-Assumption and directly contradictory to the behavior Exorcists were both shown and said to have throughout the season.
>You've failed to support it even once
False. Rebuttal now, hurry it up.
>A detail not being mentioned is not a plot hole
No, but said unmentioned detail having ramifications on the plot-to the point where one can say with confidence that it would have played out differently-DOES constitute one.
bro is still out here typing walls of text because his mind was blown that his headcanon wasn't specifically stated in the show so it's "A PLOT HOLE!!!" now
>No, but said unmentioned detail having ramifications on the plot-to the point where one can say with confidence that it would have played out differently-DOES constitute one.
There are no ramifications on the plot, it's all your personal headcanon. Somehow you have failed to notice literally everyone correcting you and think every other person on the planet has the wrong definition of the word, but no it's still you with the wrong definition.
>There are no ramifications on the plot, it's all your personal headcanon
There are though, and I've continuously outlined them. The, once again, ASSUMPTION that Adam would not do anything differently is directly contradicted by his shown cautiousness towards the dead Angel situation-which heavily contrasted his brash and reckless attitude and actions throughout the rest of the season. "Adam would have treated this situation that he was already treating differently even more differently if he had the knowledge he should have had given the tools we know he has" is my assertation. I'm not even proposing specific alternative takes at this point, just that things SHOULD'VE been different, but weren't.
>you and think every other person on the planet has the wrong definition of the word
Vivzie-slurpers are less than human, sorry.
Yes, I read that. Unfortunately, your website-lifted definitions largely serves to help my case, not hinder it. "When a text has an explicit inconsistency in its logic or structure" is bang on for what I'm arguing, because the angels around Carmilla who killed their comrade is inconsistent with how they've been shown and described throughout the show, and Adam and Lute not being able or willing to extract further into is inconsistent with the resources we know they have and the specific attitude they've been shown to approach the dead angel dilemma. Therefore, with the full assumptions that these would've been properly implemented into a story with actually competent writers behind it, I can only call it a plothole.
>A plot hole has to be something that can't be explained away,
Given the explanation is both sensible and gels with the characterization and actions of the involved parties, then yes. Unfortunately, none of your poor excuses fit this idea.
This guy is typing a lot of text for someone that doesn't get basic terms right
Quantity is a quality all its own, comrade.
>"When a text has an explicit inconsistency in its logic or structure" is bang on for what I'm arguing
There's no inconsistency, let alone an explicit one. You do not know what an inconsistency is. You're whining like a child that your headcanon isn't mentioned in the show, not that there's an inconsistency it's possible to point out. If there was an inconsistency no amount of explanations would change that, but there isn't.
A blind man seeing something is an inconsistency.
A show not giving you irrelevant details is not an inconsistency.
>There's no inconsistency, let alone an explicit one
There are, as I've explained
>A blind man seeing something is an inconsistency.
And if I were to argue this against your precious gay furries in hell show, you would say "he was probably lying about being blind" or "well, he's probably only LEGALLY blind, which means he can still see in limited circumstances", regardless of how supported they are within the narrative itself.
>A show not giving you irrelevant details is not an inconsistency.
The details are not irrelevant, as I have outlined prior. They have massive ramifications on the rest of the plot and their lack of relevance is deeply harmful to it's structure and believability.
repeatedly stating untrue things does not make them more true
Ditto.
>They have massive ramifications on the rest of the plot and their lack of relevance is deeply harmful to it's structure and believability.
The fact that literally only you are having this tantrum while every other viewer and person in this thread says you're wrong speaks volumes. You just don't understand the show. Seek help.
>The fact that literally only you are having this tantrum while every other viewer and person in this thread says you're wrong speaks volumes.
Yes, that the people who regularly consume Vivziepop's materials are either underaged, uncritical of the media they expose themselves to (which isn't negative in and of itself as long as they don't feel the need to defend it's sanctity on cantonese haberdashery forums), or mentally deficient.
whatever you have to tell yourself so you can avoid admitting you don't know what a plot hole is
Concession accepted.
Nice chat.
Low quality troll is low, I knew you were trolling from the moment you insisted you knew what a plot hole was despite clearly not using the term right.
>if I get basic facts wrong until people can't stand me, I can pretend I win arguments!!
I hope your life gets better
My life's fine, but keep projecting if it makes you feel better. Have a nice night.
If you really thought this, you would've stopped engaging an hour ago and I probably would've left the thread, having said my piece.
Instead, you entered a back-and-forth simply to end up saying I never actually had a point and effectively admitting that you wasted your time arguing about a topic you had no faith in from the outset.
>My life's fine
you're flip flopping between edgy comments and pretending to be right constantly, it's clearly not ok. never in the history of the internet has "concession accepted" been anything other than something edgy redditors say when they can't argue on merit and want to get the last word in by implying that them being too annoying to talk to means they're always right
>you're flip flopping between edgy comments and pretending to be right constantly, it's clearly not ok
>basic ass-Cinemaphile insults are "edgy"
>having confidence in your argument is "pretending"
Are you a Twitter zoomer or something? Did you stumble here thinking it was the Dark Web? Have you ever earnestly stood behind a position you thought was right in your life? Don't bother replying, because I already know the answer to all three. Get your armchair psychologist bullshit outta here, homosexual.
>You haven't been in a single back-and-forth. People have told you the truth 20 times and 20 times you plugged your ears while insisting reality isn't real
continual engagements via directly responding to what I post while making no headway on either position is textbook back-and-forth. Are we slipping on the definitions now buddy? That was, like, your whole thing.
You do not understand how to have a conversation. Over and over again you insist everyone is always wrong and you are always right even when you constantly get basic facts wrong.
>You do not understand how to have a conversation
We're having one right now. I say something, you say something, I call you a homosexual, you call me a moron, yadda yadda.
I know that, but I reckon one or two already bowed out given the multiple lines of argumentation that were suddenly dropped without explanation over the discourse.
>save face
?
Then everyone I've argued with has been either willfully or unintentionally disingenuous with their lines of argumentation while simultaneously trying to discredit mine with google definitions that bolster my positions instead. Saying that a couple of the one billion flies eating shit also happen to share the same braincell isn't the own you really think it is.
>"I'm only talking to one person!"
>By time stamps it's at least three if not more
>"i knew that!"
Pathetic.
You might as well not even reply to that troll. He's been told the same basic facts by 10+ anons and still can't wrap his head around them. He just lies and moves goalposts because he figures if he annoys people into not replying to him he'll never have to admit when he's wrong.
>I'm only talking to one person!
Never said that, actually. I just assumed that the one I had responded to in that post was someone that had been arguing with me for a protracted period of time. If it was a false assumption, I'll own up to it, but hey, that's the nature of an anonymous image board.
What you just said was real, and most of what you've been saying was real. Real moronic and REALLY wrong, sure, but real nonetheless, and I've interacted with it as such.
>They just left because you were too dumb! Ha, take that!
Question, are you 9 years old?
Hey, for what it's worth, I'm leaning more towards the unintentional option myself. It's clear at least some of you really believe this side, even if it's ridiculous.
Also please stop trying to assert that the position of defending a show about some millennial's version of hell where most characters are proportioned like anorexia patients and swears are a substitute for comedy is somehow a global one. I don't pretend that shitting on it is, even if it's the popular thing to do.
bro is still out here typing walls of text because his mind was blown that his headcanon wasn't specifically stated in the show so it's "A PLOT HOLE!!!" now
>Also please stop trying to assert that the position of defending a show about some millennial's version of hell where most characters are proportioned like anorexia patients and swears are a substitute for comedy is somehow a global one. I don't pretend that shitting on it is, even if it's the popular thing to do.
I accept your concession that you know you are wrong and can only get people to stop correcting you by pretending the show you obsessively spazzed out about "'""having a plot hole"""" totally isn't serious.
>that you know you are wrong
But I didn't say that though
>and can only get people to stop correcting you by pretending the show you obsessively spazzed out about "'""having a plot hole"""" totally isn't serious
The show isn't serious in the grand scheme of this, but my argumentation is-my thoughts about it aside. I still spent a couple hours of my life watching it and felt the need to discuss something that I thought fell flat. I could've discussed how I liked most of the songs but thought they were awkwardly placed into the plot instead, but the plot hole present was nagging at me more.
No, but thanks for the confirmation. Too bad you didn't really retain what you learned, though.
Of course you would know what Reddit was like, eh? Nice to have my suspicions about the people I'm arguing with confirmed
bro is still out here typing walls of text because his mind was blown that his headcanon wasn't specifically stated in the show so it's "A PLOT HOLE!!!" now
>Question, are you 9 years old?
No, I learned what a plot hole was in school. Are you?
You would like reddit, you have the mental fortitude to say complete bullshit, get -1000 updoots, and still say you're the only one that knows the real truth.
I'm half convinced it's just guy with his name off
>We're having one right now. I say something, you say something
No, I say something, you insist reality isn't real. Not a conversation.
>I know that, but I reckon one or two already bowed out given the multiple lines of argumentation that were suddenly dropped without explanation over the discourse.
People stopped trying to explain the obvious to you because you're an actual moron that couldn't pass a middle school reading comprehension exam. Why would they try to have a serious conversation with someone that can't figure out what a plot hole is even after being spoon fed the exact definition as well as the definition of the actual term they are looking for?
>Then everyone I've argued with has been either willfully or unintentionally disingenuous
true schizo logic. Yup, every other person on the planet is the wrong one, only you know the true definition of words, all the dictionaries are wrong.
You've been arguing with at least three different people going by time stamps
Dude you are trying way too hard to save face, just stop it.
t.dude who's in the entirely different argument happening in this thread.
Not everyone is 1 person. You are a moron that is consistently told by everyone that 2+2=4 while insisting it is 5 in post after post, then acting smug when people tell you that you are a lost cause.
If you were confident in something correct it would be confidence. You're confidently shouting that a plot hole is anything not said on screen and not grasping that a plot hole is explicitly something that cannot be explained away. Every time you try to argue you further prove you do not know what a plot hole is. When your most cohesive argument in the thread is "This is not possible because it's not confirmed in the show", you're just incapable of logic.
>Instead, you entered a back-and-forth
You haven't been in a single back-and-forth. People have told you the truth 20 times and 20 times you plugged your ears while insisting reality isn't real. You do not know what the term plot hole means, this is self evident to every person in the thread but you.
honestly you're not worth talking to if you can't even get basic things right
>ugh, you're not even worth talking to!
There are more graceful ways of bowing out of an argument than "teenage girl", but I accept the concession regardless
You provided no counter-argument after trying to argumentum ad populum my entire stance simply because you ran out of things to say. If anything, you're the troll
>You provided no counter-argument
You provided no argument worth countering that wasn't already countered
This was explained to you forever ago, you don't know what the phrase "plot hole" means. Here's the definition for you since you need it spoonfed again:
>False. Rebuttal now, hurry it up.
A plot hole has to be something that can't be explained away, if you think otherwise you do not understand what a plot hole is because you are an idiot.
>They didn't make this irrelevant detail explicit!
That's not what a plot hole is
hey look he's getting blasted in stereo
>But she's widely known to Hell, and with the above point them knowing it was her should've followed shortly.
In all of heaven, the only person that had any form of knowledge on hell got stabbed by a midget heaven cares not about hell just as the other rings of hell don't cabe about pride ring
There's another thing you aren't questioning much: why was carmilla and her girls running around in the open? Overlords like her don't fend for their lives, they hide in their holes, wait for the peasants to be killed like rabid animals, and get upset with how many contracts they lost
maybe the show is just poorly written
For some reason I am compelled to write down the definition of two different terms.
Plot Contrivance - When a plot proceeds in ways that do not seem natural or believable, typically as though events are being artificially warped to reach a desired conclusion.
An example would be someone with a powerful weapon not using it to end the plot, or a detective missing crucial evidence that his character should have understood.
Plot Hole - When a text has an explicit inconsistency in its logic or structure. An example would be a character allergic to nuts eating nuts and having no reaction, or a character showing up in two places at the same time.
Remember: don't just shout "plot hole!" when what you mean is bad storytelling.
>Darkseid stands around doing nothing instead of skullfricking the League while they're fighting his minions
Plot Contrivance
>Darkseid's eye beams hit Green Arrow and he gets knocked down, gets up, and keeps fighting
>The exact same eye beams hit Superman and he is mortally wounded
Plot Hole
Why did he do it
The twist ending.
Hell is Forever is by far the best song in the whole show and it isn't even close.
What happens to angels after they die
Will he be in season 2?
He died like a b***h in the season finale
Shouldn't he have regained his human form when he ascended?
No, a bunch of the people in heaven were weird animal people too. Our human bodies are mere vessels, the animals and cyclops and shit are probably meant to be what our souls actually look like.
Alastor will make good use of his favor with Charlie, and there's nothing Lucifer can do about it.
I can never tell if the thread is talking about show lore or biblical lore
This is the chaos that happens when Adam takes on the messiah role and it somehow actually works stupidly well.
I think people are reading too much into the Pentious thing. It's gonna turn out that Adam's list of what to do to enter heaven is exactly right, and Pentious followed it, with "sticking it to the man" by attacking Adam getting him into Heaven. The secret ingredient is just that you don't magically enter heaven the second you quality, Pentious had to die for it. Maybe there's going to be an official "process" to apply now that he's in Heaven and they know sinners can quality.
Did Gooseworx do the entire score?
All of the songs were well done, though I feel like Hell is Forever (and You Didn't Know which is basically a reprise) were far and away the best of the bunch. I also have a weakness for Jazz and Swing so anything involving Alastor was pretty great.
The other songs were good, especially the faux-disney musical stuff and the more latin-style stuff Carmilla had, but those aren't the songs I'm gonna remember.
I didn't love Keith David/Blake Roman's songs
>My whole point is that accepting forever death, even if its for a good cause is not a satisfactory cause for redemption for Pentious. It definitely would be for Alastor.
>I dont think that is narratively good. Redemption should not involve the same actions for all sinners. And being redeemed should involve overcoming whatever landed you in hell in the first place
Both of these have crossed purely into subjective opinion territory. How would a victim of suicide atone for their crimes and reach Heaven? Or an addict that OD'd? Or someone that just plain doesn't know why they're in hell? Your way of thinking closes the door on those who could very well want to be redeemed but could not have any actual methods of overcoming whatever sent them there in the first place.
> he is inflicting pain and suffering for which he doesnt seem to hold no remorse whatsoever. He even planned on doing the same thing upon entering the Hotel, and we really dont see how he resolves not to do it anymore.
And he stops because Vaggie asks him too, Adam doesn't when Charlie does. One could very well argue the way into heaven isn't the presence of good, but the absence of evil. You also dodged the Adam question completely despite what he's doing to the sinners is way worse than Pentious blowing up buildings and slaughtering hell-born or even other sinners who Heaven seems to have deemed not sin worthy to slaughter en masse.
GUYS I FOUND A PLOT HOLE!!! In episode 1 of the show, Vaggie doesn't say she's an angel, but in episode 8 of the show, now she says she's an angel! WHATS THE DEAL WITH THIS PLOT HOLE, HOW COULD A CHARACTER BE AN ANGEL IF THEY DIDN'T SAY THEY ARE AN ANGEL, CHARACTERS MUST TELL THE TRUTH AND CAN ONLY ACT LITERALLY OR ITS A PLOT HOLE!!!!!
Episode 1’s Adam, Lute, and Heaven are legit hard retconned in Episode 6 to make the monogamous Adam x Lute ship.
>Lute pulling Adam in for a kiss
You are trying a bit too hard
ITT: some moron posts 100 times that something is a plot hole because the show hasn't explained it yet, ignoring the fact that the reason a plot hole is a plot hole is that it can't be explained period.
idk what you guys are talking about, just wanted to say my boomer mom watched this and called it cute.
What did she think of the gay spider sex song?
I think she thought both Charlie and Angel Dust were genderswapped. Charlie because of the name, Angel Dust because of how feminine he is.
HEY get your own mom
Sorry I'm too used to yours
ok that made me laugh
i didn't ask her about that part lol, i think she didn't think too hard about some parts of the show compared to others. she likes charlie and lucifer. thinks alastor wants to marry charlie so he can become king of hell.
>When the casual audience thinks charlastor makes sense
But Chaggiebros, I thought we had the better ship?!?
Men = bad
probably
idk I didn't read the whole post
>His face stays black but his tail has turned white
Is his tail now 'clothed' like 'modesty'?
Was he just walking around his with wiener[s] basically swinging around the entire time down in hell?
Rushed pacing, ideas not fully developed, simplistic plot.
At least the songs are all great.
hey moron chasing these morons in circles. the dead angel being a mystery even though it clearly wasn't a mystery was obviously a plot hole. no duh
and sir pentious going to heaven? obviously a gag.
and lucifer, who theoretically embodies the sin of pride, acting like some xddd moron. kinda stupid. very stupid
and the charlie being bailed out at the end and learning basically nothing. really dumb.
I figured charlie not being a sinner and not being a psycho would have given her a potential path to heaven - but she would have to abandon "her people" in order to do so. silly me that may have led to some character development so ofc they didn't do it
>"Why's Sir Pentious in heaven he HAD SEX WITH EVERYONE?"
Well yeah, He did ok, But let's turn back the clock over 2000 years, Who did the exact same thing? - King Solomon, And that old israelite even wrote a song about how he loved fricking, Probably had booty-calls with Stolas and Asmodeus as well if his authorship of the Ars-Goetia is to be believed.
heaven?
hell?
no. . .
Is being gay a sin in this universe?
No, Vivzie basically said that Hell is just intergalactic prison and you get sent there after death for doing shit that's illegal in 'most places' - So basically if you just do a bunch of illegal shit under secular law you go to hell, If you do shit that's not allowed in the Bible/Quran it doesn't matter
>the "black" characters are barely black
What did viv mean by this?
I don't think Viv would know how to write a black character. Imagine her trying to write black ghetto sinners in hell. No wonder she punked out with the classic mafia sterotypes.
Hell should be overrunning with black kids from the hood who ain't never did nothin.
She is supposed to be black ?
ofc not. coloureds don't go to heaven
Viv actually did more pipeline people to /x/homosexualry and an interest in the occult then almost any other modern creative.
The H.P. Lovecraft of our era i would dare say.
>Charlie is at the door
How do I tell her to frick off???
Pop quiz:
Is Naruto a drama?
There is a correct answer.
So why do a bunch of murderers/rapists/pedos/cannibals/druggies etc. not deserve extermination exactly?