umm, if your sponsor has to come with a disclaimer that they're complying with federal law, maybe don't work with that sponsor? i mean you've already gotten a multitude of comments from people who were harmed by betterhelp instead of helped, especially marginalized people. but that line just seems like a big waving red flag to me, idk 🤷‍♀

Yes! Please do Emperor Palpatine.

Another villain that would be good to do therapy on is Azula from Avatar the Last Airbender

If you want to teach the value of morality to somebody who has no empathy, make them play the interactive game/simulation "Evolution of Trust". It takes about 30 minutes. There is objective mathematical reason morality exists and it's engraved in our basic instincts.

hi, i like your channel in general, so here's an important advice to you and to other subscribers: AVOID BETTERHELP. they are Bad. here is the FTC report about it : www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2023/03/ftc-says-online-counseling-service-betterhelp-pushed-people-handing-over-health-information-broke

Yeah, i had Fun with that fun fact :D But seriosly, that IS worse.

yea that is definitely a lot worse

Didn't he also at one time mention he found the crying babies at the orphanage "annoying"

Annoyed me so much that the movie changed that. They made it seem more like he was being bullied and picked on. But in reality he was the one bullying and terrorising the other children. Two kids who went into a cave with him were changed for the rest of their lives and never spoke about what happened in there, and he hung another child’s rabbit on the ceiling by its ears.

@@davidfairweather3301 I agree. It annoyed me too. I understand the movies need to cut some things or maybe change some things a little to reduce screen time, but it wouldn’t have added any screen time at all if he had quoted the books in that scene, so I don’t understand what they were thinking when they changed it. In the movies, you get the impression that the other kids were mean to Tom and he had a rough upbringing in the orphanage, so maybe that’s why he went bad. But really Tom is just evil. No redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Oh I knew Silco's power line seemed familiar. He has the same idea of power as Voldemort. "You see, power, real power, doesn't come to those who were born strongest, or fastest, or smartest. No, it comes to those who will do _anything_ to achieve it. Time to let the monster out."

@@TheRibottoStudiosthat’s very true

Too bad Harry Potter is poorly written and he gets defeated because of a technicality of rules. Such good writing right? When evil just defeats itself.

@@chill-lady-brook You'll find whatever you're looking for.

@@chill-lady-brook I mean, sometimes it does. Whenever someone evil thinks they've won, that they're good, they can make mistakes that lead to their downfall (just as good can become too complacent, and thus make mistakes that leads to their downfall) ^It may not always happen, but it's common enough that it's hardly "bad writing" on principle imo. Just depends upon the usage and execution, as does all tools/aspects of writing

I also prefer the book ending. All the grandiose narcissism is basically laid to waste in a body rather than a separation of his physical self. He wasn't that special after all.

Yeah I 100% agree with you and find it weird. Like Voldemort literally spent all his life trying to be different, powerful But i the books, he ended up dying like any other person, like any other pureblood, half-blood, or muggle.

Yeah his book death was perfect karma for him because not only did he just drop dead on the floor just like any other human being, he died when he was only in his 70s. In the books a lot of wizards tend to live longer than average muggle because of using magic. But for all his horcruxes and sacrifices Voldemort only ended up living the same amount of time as the average muggle.

I partially agree and I agree with the argument specifically. However, I also like the idea that the reason movie Voldemort crumbles like that is because beyond the horcruxes and the magic, there’s nothing human left to him. He gave up his humanity and his very soul in the pursuit of power, therefore without that power, only dust remains

Lazy directing.

That could also be memory manipulation. When we focus on our memory and what ifs they change the truth. He could have been impress but dwelling on it changed to being creeped out

@@LeahWalentosky That makes a ton of sense to me. we know slughorn tried desperately to avoid recalling this memory at all due to his immense guilt, to the point he was doing damn near everything to dodge dumbledoor even after Voldemort was back. Editing it when he can no longer avoid handing it over, and in a way to give himself more credit for realizing the severity of the situation at the time, seems incredibly in character for him.

In the books, Horace Slughorn was almost certainly creeped out, at one point refusing to talk about it any further (though the harm was already done) when then-teen-Tom mentioned making SEVEN Horcruxes... but at first yes, he was fine when Riddle was treating it like a hypothetical. The flashbacks should've been handled better, they should've been the focal point of the movie; all of "Half-Blood Prince" was a look into what made Voldemort before the final book and final battle against him.

@@tfly999 To be fair, it's almost the equivalent of a student asking you "How do they make atomic bombs?"and you give a brief answer to reward their interest in advanced chemistry, but then they say "And where would I find those materials?" and you know they're no longer being theoretical...

@@smitefulaxe1344You totally got it!

Same lol

That was a very good save. XD

@@Hawner It was also a pretty cool girl-band, when I was a child. Every once in a while, I still hum their most famous song, "C'est La Vie", though I'm now old enough to recognize the thinly-veiled dirtiness in it. (1/28/2023)

Now I'm just hoping Cinema Therapy does a video covering Umbridge; even if she was a minor antagonist she just came off as so much more villainous sometimes because it was the kind of evil I'm sure most people had to deal with at some point in their childhood, if not in adulthood.

@@Verdha603 On the DVD for "Deathly Hallows: Part 2", there is a featurette called "The Women Of Harry Potter", which profiles the prominent female characters of the series. In this, one commentator describes Umbridge as, quote, "-- self-righteousness that covers self-interest...as sadistic as Bellatrix, but it's all justified, because, 'I work for the Ministry.'" Another person says, "On the surface, she's all fluffiness, and pinkness, and niceness. But on the inside, she's pure evil." (11/28/2023)

Yes!

No way really??

It would make his hug with Draco much more heartbreaking.

@@Harmonious028 If I'm not mistaken, it's Dumbledore's own theory in the books and while it's never ultimately revealed that's the case, it's Dumbledore who is wrong maybe twice in the entire series.

⁠@@Harmonious028No, this isn’t canon at all. The main source is an old interaction with a fan on an online blog: Fan: “How much does the fact that Voldemort was conceived under a Love Potion have to do with his nonability to understand love, is it more symbolic?” J.K. Rowling: “It was a symbolic way of showing that he came from a loveless union - but of course, everything would have changed if Merope had survived and raised him herself and loved him. The enchantment under which Tom Riddle fathered Voldemort is important because it shows coercion, and there can’t be many more prejudicial ways to enter the world than as the result of such a union.” People are taking this way too literally imo. The potion didn’t somehow make Voldemort incapable of love, rather the circumstances of Voldemort’s childhood (growing up without any experience with real love) led Voldemort to consider love unimportant. Choices are a really big theme in HP (Harry and the Sorting Hat, Voldemort choosing Harry over Neville, Sirius’ speech to Harry) and it’s discussed dozens of times that choices define who someone is. Harry in the books even gives Voldemort a chance at remorse, which Voldemort rejects. It would go against this entire theme to pin the blame for Voldemort’s inability to love or empathise on some side effect of a potion rather than his personal choices. It also ruins the parallels between Voldemort and Harry, because their similar upbringings yet different choices become obsolete if one is just magically hardwired to never choose love or empathy. This potion theory has horrible implications for children born from sexual assault. It also brings Voldemort closer to a pure evil villain, which cheapens his character and the overall story quite a bit. As far as I can tell, this is the closest JK has ever come to confirming the potion theory (which is to say, she didn’t confirm it at all), so unless she’s said something recently the theory is (thankfully imo) nonsense.

Nah just made me happy imagining voldy self imploding like credence

Voldy and the Dementors is one heck of a band name

I seem to recall Rowling saying that Snape was the only one of the Death Eaters who could cast a Patronus. Can’t remember for sure, though…

Not the point of your post, but dementors definitely don't eat happy memories, they eat negative ones, that's why they amplify negative memories and are defeated by a spell powered with happy memories. If JK said they eat happy ones in some interview years later or in some supplemental writing, she forgot what she wrote in book 3 and made some stupid shit up. Which is on brand.

@@demonzabrak I thought they ate the happy ones and left people feeling horrible because of the lack of happiness in them hence why people see their worst memories in the process and then you defeat them by highlighting the happiness within you

Completely agree.

TBH, this part was a bit frustrating to me. Many therapists don't have enough training on differentiating ASPD from other common disorders or circumstances (such as Autism Spectrum Disorder, less severe personality disorders, or social manifestations of severe trauma). It's sometimes gotten completely wrong and a person who could benefit from talk-based therapy is left without help. There's a difference between referring to get someone out of your office and referring to help someone. Clients can and do notice the first. And that's a massively damaging experience (see: looking-glass self theory). Doing a knee-jerk referral, if it looks like lack of empathy, is not uncommon with some therapists. To me, this is missed opportunity to support someone who desperately needs it (mostly outside of ASPD, but also sometimes in early intervention for conduct disorders). Making an effort to go through the diagnostic checks (FULLY) and finding someone with specialty and success in this area, while making a logical and strategic plea to the client that they should remain in therapy because it can actually help them... It's all necessary. On first reaction, the blanket "I'd refer" seemed to skip over much of that.

​@@paulcrenshaw812well as Jonathan had said already multiple times, Voldemort is obviously not a regular client coming into the office

Actually, if Tom were more sneaky and don't teared his soul for 8 pieces (7 hocruxes and his own body has a part of his soul), but 2-3 instead, he would easily take power and do whatever he want. And became immortal dictator of magic society

He fears death, not because he is afraid of dying, but because it makes him same as everyone else. He never had anything when he grew up he wanted to feel like he is better than others

@@nurglecultist2521 No, the main problem is that he chose to put fragments of his soul into famous objects. He could have literally picked anything, but instead he chose to put into objects that were either connected to him (his mother's ring, his diary, Nagini) or that were famous (Slytherin's Locket, Hufflepup's Cup, Ravenclaw's Diadem).

Or a Nokia

​@@lisboahso fucking true. He could've just split his soul into a bunch socks then bury them in some random location

I'm happy you said this because I also made a similar comment. XD

It wasn’t even implied. The words “bad evil child” written on a sheet of paper, glued to a hammer, and beaten into your skull. And this breakdown misses the entire scariest part of him. His self lotion over his heritage. As soon as he found out he had magic, and as soon as he found out his father was non magic, he buried that past. Framed himself as being pure and perfect and pristine, while persecuting anyone who was not, and it was all from a place of deep self loathing.

That could still be manipulation on Tom's part in the movie. It sounds better to imply it was self-defence. It doesn't mean he wasn't a bully and hurt those who annoyed him. He just said it in a way that would make him look better in front of this strange professor.

Saying they "annoyed" him also contributes to the fear and instability because then you don't know what's going to set him off or how he'll react so it forces others, if they can't avoid him, to walk on eggshells around him all the time. Either way making it completely about himself

​@@sonjaimmonen6610Yeah in the movie I took it as him being smart to not imply that he actually hurts innocent kids. I think the movie made it pretty clear that Tom was an evil child

I'd say all of the movie adaptations after Chamber are like that. They ham it in too much, lose all fairytailish feel the first two movies had and display just plain weird acting/directing choices, like Dumbledore losing his shit on Harry for having his name in Goblet of Fire. Hate them.

​@@akselandor8975i actually think 3rd movie is the better one amongst them, it definitely went downhill afterwards tho. the 4th movie was the worst!! they cut so many scenes and create so many unnecessary ones i hate it

@@wawaristi Gotcha. But I hate third one vehemetly.

@@wawaristi The 3rd movie has one major flaw that's very telling, werewolves are supposed to look like actual wolves in the HP universe. They even talk about it in class in the same movie! The only differences are slightly shorter muzzles, more human looking eyes, and tufted tales. (Plus the desire to kill humans of course). They weren't supposed to look like some bizarre alien CGI monster. They probably thought their CGI creature was more scary, but it makes no sense at all. Also a blood thirsty wolf is plenty scary.

​​​@@kx2174 that was because the concept of a werewolf is a humanoid wolf. Plus the whole animegas thing would be confusing. I mean, what if your animrgas form was a wolf? Then what's the difference? A werewolf and an actual wolf are two different things. Lupin looked like a giant long starved dog. There's ledgends somewhere about a creature like that, but it's not called a werewolf.

I would love a Dumbledore analysis

I love Dumbledore, cried so hard when he died, but for FUCK'S sake.

@@LizLuvsCupcakes For real. Love me some Dumbledore but good lord man get it together.

He's a good man... Just not very good at much else. 😂

to be fair to Dumbledore, in this case, as he wasn't headmaster at the time Tom came to Hogwarts, it wasn't his decision to him to admit Tom. He's still a problematic dude, though.

I had a therapist completely give up on me, telling me to, and I quote: "get out. Leave. Now." I never heard another word from them again. It didn't help that before all of this went down, they straight up told me, "You're fucked up." It's made me begin to lose faith in not only therapy, but also myself. And I'm still left suffering without answers. I don't like myself, I can't find a reason to. So every day I am forced to live with and take care of a person I don't even like, just because I have no real choice. I would let myself just wither and die but there is only one person I care about, and they are the only thread keeping me here. And I can't even tell them, because I don't want them to have that weight of responsibility. I don't want them to feel obligated to stick around out of sheer guilt.

@@kingblanketfort that's awful, I'm sorry you were mistreated in that way. It's no wonder you're not keen on trusting therapy. What they said to you was cruel, and more than that, it was just wrong. Like, factually incorrect. All I know about you is that you are a person who took the difficult step of asking for help, and just from that one fact, I feel confident saying that you are not "f'd up" - you are courageous and deserving of the help you asked for. (Also I love your username because blanket forts are a valid coping skill for all ages, but that's beside the point)

I, too, had major respect for my doctor when he told me, 'at this point I don't know -- let's find you someone who does.' That is WAY BETTER than letting their pride take over and just guessing, or pushing unnecessary pills on you, or acting like you're not really that bad off or you're pretending etc. Also sorry that people haven't had that experience and good doctors/health workers. They are out there, and so are the bad ones. Keep trying.

Yes! My doctor sent me to a ENT specialist when I was having balance issues, and after some time that doctor sent me for an MRI which found that I have MS. Medical professionals working as a team is how it should always work.

@@RhamanaChan I hope your doctors have continued being a team and finding ways to help you manage your MS! Good on them for doing right by you.

Yesss!! That would be awesome!!

I don’t think the book version of Draco is all that interesting. He’s simply a brat who tries to imitate his dad. The movies added some abuse to make Draco more sympathetic, charming and redeemable. Lucius would be more interesting, as he’s a very bad person, but a loving father and husband at the same time.

@@bramijdema759 what about both :0 the Malfoy family?

@@kikishiba That would be interesting

What ? He is a boring character...

avoid narcissists always, avoid them

​@@Elven. Sounds like sound advice. I was at ~2 minutes in though, so I didn't know what the diagnosis would be. Edit: Edit was a spelling mistake. Also the thing about the intrinsically evil still stands. Probably not good to be around them, but that doesn't mean they are intrinsically evil.

​@@dcworld4349 So the advice is very sound. I honestly think it is best to stay away from these people. But I can't condemn a whole group of people who got a diagnosis to intrinsically evil even if most of, if not all, the people diagnosed with it are bad to be around. There may be a person who has learned to live their life in a way which isn't harmful to others (Not that I'm saying it's likely, but it is a non-zero chance.), or someone who got the wrong diagnosis (Probably still someone who could/would do harm, but like earlier, non-zero chance they also won't. Though if they did get the wrong diagnosis, it probably was for a reason.), or something else. But I can't in good conscience say that anyone is intrinsically evil. Because even just calling someone evil denies that person the help and growth they need. It also dehumanises people. And while people with a diagnosis (Not specifically psychopathy or narcissism or anything else, just a diagnosis. Because my original comment was made without the knowledge of what the diagnosis would be.) have problems, they aren't any less human due to it. If we make the precedent of saying these people are intrinsically evil, we open the pathways to saying that ANYONE who is different from the norm is evil and not a human. It has been done before, and I really don't want it happening again. So, in summary: Are narcissists and people with antisocial personality disorder good to be around? No. Probably not. In most cases I, as a very much not expert, would advise caution. But are they intrinsically evil? No. Probably not. Because I don't think anyone really is. And I don't think we should call most actual people evil. We can call fictional characters evil, because they are fictional. Often they are made to be evil. Like they said, these characters can help recognise bad things. But the characters in fiction aren't human. Not really. At least not at the same level. So when do we use the term evil to describe someone? We take away part of their humanity. For people who do empathise it is the calling card to stop empathising. And while you probably shouldn't empathise too much with the person who is currently ruining your life, or stealing from you, that I agree with. If we stop empathising with entire groups of people based on their diagnosis we are practising very dangerous actions. Because dehumanise one group of people with a diagnosis and it makes it easier to dehumanise another, and another, and another. And suddenly decades of progress with understanding and humanising people who are different (Because honestly some diagnoses simply boil down to: This person is different. They can't do task X as well as what is expected.) is all down the drain. I don't want to be treated like I'm broken (Or at least, I wouldn't if I had a diagnosis. Not that I have one, future Palpatine-esque government/Umbridge-like future employer.). If we are not careful to treat everyone with some basic human empathy and see them as human beings. We will lose EVERYTHING. Something I'm very wary and concerned about. I hope this is clear. Please ask if I wasn't and you have questions.

From experience, I've known one person who was just evil. Always. As a child, as a teen, as an adult. He's in prison now. If there was a way to save him, I can't imagine what it was. I believe some people are just wired to violence, lack empathy and enjoy cruelty. Just like some animals (including dolphins) enjoy killing other animals in cruel playful ways.

Considering that you think it's probably not good to be around them just because of their diagnosis, people are going to believe that you think they're "prone to being evil" which isn't that different from thinking they're "intrinsically evil". @@BasicallyBaconSandvichIV

That’s true

Those who fight against fate/destiny, often are the architects of their own downfall.

That might of been the biggest burn of all. "Bit average, Tom" 😅

But he didn’t want to live to 120 where he didn’t have the control. He wanted total control and immortality.

"One often meets his destiny on the road he takes to avoid it"

That's a theory that I haven't heard before, but it totally makes sense!

I know what you mean

💯

In GOF and OOTP. Sadly, his character was a joke in both Deathly Hallows movies :(

His nephew also did great as young Voldy.

@@jdrvargo287 that was his nephew?!

Amen!

I'd like to see a Palatine episode

Similar gist, but I've always gone by "trauma/mental health issues/etc are NOT your fault. But they are your responsibility."

What about DID or whatever it's called where you pretty much have multiple personalities, and one of them is just an absolute ass? How does that get dealt with under that philosophy? They kill someone, you get arrested, and then say "they did it". Like, how does that work, just in general? Because if you send the guy to jail you're technically sending MULTIPLE PEOPLE to jail... Most of which are innocent. So how does that get sorted out?

​@colt1903 hi OSDD 1-B system here, with 3 "problematic alters". Someone with sociopathic tendencies, someone that has homicidal urges, and a narcissist. We tend to operate by the rule of the host is responsible for the actions of the system. Not sure if other systems do though.

Yes!!!!

Absolutely!!!

lol it’s your lucky day! I just came from their new Prince Zuko episode

@@jacquelynworkman8516 wow, I guess they heard me. I’m going to watch it now!

@@ethanfrench9111 haha yeah, it’s a great video!!

Thank gods that this god awful series is over with, he deserves a role that can let him actually act for once LMAO

Jonathan doesn't say Tom Riddle isn't a person, not at all, just that he would defer him to another therapist that would be better at treating him and at handling the struggles of having such a difficult patient.

​@@miriamrosemary9110Yea, no I get that. I was referring to the "losing his humanity both figuratively and literally" kinda stuff. Voldemort shouldn't be considered human anymore. Jonathan even said to get rid of him lol

@@iDunnoMan9000 Good point lol. Thanks for clarifying :)

@@miriamrosemary9110Thanks. Like, I know we don't wanna look at anyone as "too far gone," especially from a therapist's point of view; but if there was ever a person who was too far gone, it's Voldemort lol. We love to hate him XD

Which kinda makes no sense in the grand scheme of things. If he can curse a teaching position, why only that one?(I know it's specifically the one he applied for, but other positions can teach powerful magic too.) Why not curse other abstract concepts like Ministry of Magic positions? There's so many potential game-breaking things he can do and he only does this once because he was slighted. If he can curse his name in the final book so that it removes all protective enchantments and summons people right to your location why not make it deadly? He'd be rid of Dumbledore and Harry easily, since they're two of the few people brave enough to say his name. Not even his own followers are brave enough to say it. Another abstract ability that could have powerful uses and only gets used for capturing resistance members.

@@kyuubinaruto17 He did not cause at the time he cursed the position he was still young and it may not even have been a conscious type of curse to start with. Making it deadly defies his pride. He is not interested in "easy". He was interested in a) winning them for his team and b) getting rid of them in a way that would bring glory to him and very clearly display to everyone else, that he is worth of worship. He's very capable of ruling by cruelty alone, but he does not, because he understands how much easier it is to control people on a large scale by establishing that he is "just" and so powerful that he does not require to hide behind cheap tricks when facing the opponents he deems worthy. Which is why he keeps insisting that Harry is brought to him, not killed by Deatheaters. While Dumbledore's sickly condition + Voldemort's persistent, childhood related fear of him, leads to that task being left to handle by his "tools". Yet, even there, he insists on making it an impressive stage, to show everyone how noone will be save anywhere. plus, do you really want your enemy summoned to you at any time they say your name, when you aren't certain you'll be able to kill them and if enough ppl will be watching? XD You might be on the toilet (assuming he still does that LOL)

@@kyuubinaruto17 Its because Rowling isn't a very good author 😆

Honestly, once that was confirmed instead of being some sort of self-fulfilling superstition, I hated it. If he could do that, why not curse the Minister of Magic's position? Voldemort isn't as smart as he thinks he is, but he's not stupid. If you want to sew fear and anarchy, destabilizing the government is a good place to start.

I always took this as more strategic from him than (just) out of spite. He was making sure that no one in the future would be properly trained to defend themselves against him.

I second the Umbridge therapy! That would be a VERY interesting video...

Umbridge, definitely! I have never wanted to personally throttle a character quite like her!

​@@HowlflameShe is the pinnacle of lawful evil...which makes her so terrifying

There is a video called Harry Potter vs bullies and it includes Umbridge

I agree.

Our caption writer, Anna, is the best!

Wait they do? That's awesome. Now I'm going to have to turn them on.

the wand refuses to kill it's owner...

Definitely would like to see a video on this

He was such a powerful wizard and had influenced the education of most wizards alive in the UK by then. He was entirely well-respected almost to the point of being a caricature. It turns out he was human, wrestling with his own insecurities and flaws, and trying to right some of the wrongs he knew by the end he'd played into. Such a complex character. ❤

Not to mention how he and Grindelwald had an actual plan to subjugate muggles "for their own good" and he actually genuinely believed this at one point

This would require book lore not movie adaptation. The movies flip the intentions of Dumbledore and Snape

I agree with you

What’s the backstory????

​@@Harmonious028Voldemort comes from a family of pure bloods that have become unstable and impoverished because of inbreeding to keep the blood "pure"

@@ChristineTheHippie In addition to his mother using a love potion on his father (a muggle, Tom Riddle Sr.) to conceive him. She stopped using the love potion after birth, his father left her and she committed suicide which is why Tom Jr. is at the orphanage (the muggle Riddles being some of Tom's first victims after school.)

I hate it. I hate verything about that movie. That and five have the biggest failings. Five fails to showcase Harry's internal mental struggle, and completely omitted his breakdown in Dumbledore's office. Six just...fcks up everything. The Half Blood storyline, Voldemort's backstory, the felix felicis thing....ugh.

it's a bunch of words you wouldn't expect together and it was hysterical

I couldn't stop laughing until I cried 😂

That's just.... sorry for my word choice, but crazy

That’s because you need her for something that you don’t see… I would never stay because you never know when he’ll use it against you. And mostly, he doesn’t feel love so…

That's really interesting. What is love but wanting someone to thrive and feel safe? Huh.

@@elyalvarz I think it depends on the motivations behind it. Wanting the best for them because it's what they deserve is different than you want them to rely on you for it.

@@s70driver2005 very true! Seems like a very fragile situation, and I wonder if he'd be able to let her go if she ever decided she's no longer happy with him.

Ironically that might also put Voldemort on a better path on it's own - he approaches things on a purely logical level, and Jono would be a person who'd see his bullshit and just go "I'm not letting you in at all, you have been a shit so you can go away from me." and that would be a concrete result of his negative actions - the fact that new people who haven't already met him do not want to have anything to do with him. He cannot get any new pawns as all his secrets are out.

God I hate HBP soooooooo much. Not going deep enough into Tom's backstory, fumbling with the Snape reveal....god it just pisses me off as an adaptation lol. It DID give us book harry though for like one scene with the spider funeral though so there is that at least.

@@TheRibottoStudioswaiiiit how was the reveal on the books?? With Snape being hbp like it felt a bit lackluster in the movies watching it over but was there more plot?

​@@tigerunicornpegasesnah, it was lackluster in the book too, like okay, who cared about that...

@@Szokynyovics oh damn lmaoooo I sworeeeee it was gonna be Voldemort first time I watched it that would’ve been WAY BETTER

@@tigerunicornpegases The books are each better than the corresponding movie. If you haven't read them, you should.

That's such a clever take... and he only has a fraction of a soul left, so they might not be interested in him anyway

They'd probably try but then throw up afterwards

The dementors would feed on the memory of Neville standing up to Voldemort. We all remember that smile.😃

He does have a soul though, which means they could still perform the Kiss on him

In the books he hasn't jet killed at this point - The actor is sadly too young for this scene and it confused some people. In the books Tom was already 16 when Myrtle died but it makes sense to use the same child actor for both scenes simply because anything else would have been confusing. For the movie this scenes visuals with him twirling the ring was a genius way to foreshadow the core of what happened in the books and true to the rule "show don't tell".

I saw it more as he already has an idea of what the horcruxes will be. Like he knows the ring will be etc

Personally I thought they should’ve brought back the CoS actor but I guess he probably would’ve been too old at that point

​@@JP-uf9sh the actor was 17 and 18 when it released. he was old enough???

@danielallen When questioned about that scene in an interview, Jason Isaacs said it showed Lucius being, quote "emasculated". (11/28/2023)

@@daniellemusella1594 My wife and I had similar thoughts. Given the nature of wands and the (honestly) rather phallic shape of them.

the poor boy was so scared of doing that scene when he did the hug

@@samalight7249 If I remember correctly, Tom Felton said he had no idea Ralph was going to do that, when they shot the scene. There's still a hint of threat, which is demonstrated by how the wand is held against his back like a gun. (11/28/2023)

I always saw this as one of the actions Voldemort took that turned Narcissa against him. It started when he gave her son the mission to kill Dumbledore, a mission that would have gotten Draco seriously hurt or worse had Dumbledore and Snape not stepped in to keep an eye on him, and of course, culminated in that awesome moment where she lied to Voldemort and told him Harry was dead.

That was also because he learned not to reveal his true self after the slipped up in the first meeting with Dumbledore. He got excited when confirmed to be special and let things slip.

Thank you! Have you seen this Harry Potter episode? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/mbyTg7mfmqnbqps.html

I was thinking that too. Tom was not better off left to his own devices.

Also Fantastic Beasts indicated there are problems that an happen when untrained witches and wizards are left to their own devices so the practice of enrolling every magically gifted child into a wizarding school is probably as much for the benefit of the kids as it is for wider society.

I mean, idk, if he was left in the mental facility then at worst he might have burned it down or exploded or gone on a mini-killing spree, which sucks, absolutely, but isn't quite as damaging as becoming Wizard Hitler and doing a holocaust.

​@@GoddoDoggoDumbledore feeling he could correct the mistakes he made with Grindelwald?

I’m still trying to recover

(Grindelwald)

It wasn’t cringe at all

@@ninjanibba4259definitely cringey

@@sarahkrig6375 definitely not

@@ninjanibba4259 it really was. It was an obviously dumb plan on Harry’s part that clearly wasn’t going to work

@@sarahkrig6375 it’s not dumb at all, if you need information on something from someone, you need to feed into memory, Harry said what Tom said to bring back memories of the night Slughorn talked so it’d be an opportunity for discussion, it failed and that’s why another approach worked later in the film The story of Lily came from Slughorn and that was Harry’s in, this time he approached it with honesty and confidence instead of tricks from Dumbledore and that’s why it worked These things are done for a purpose, there’s nothing cringe about it

I don't think it was Sectum Sempra, we saw it in the 6th film when Harry used it. And Snape knows contr spell and can do wordless magic.

Yes but that’s assuming he would have reacted quickly enough to cast. It definitely could still be sectum sempra provided Voldemort caught him off guard. It does bring up an interesting conversation about whether snaps could have held his own if they had actually dueled in the scene!

He was killed by Nagini

@DanBeech-ht7sw so a question. Nagini killed Severus, but several times bite Arthur and he survived. How?

@@IrynaMerinova a very good question and I don't know except it was touch and go with Arthur wasn't it? And maybe he was just in the way and attacked with less mortal determination? Snake on another mission got a bit muderously sidetracked, not focussing properly? I honestly don't know but I agree it's a very good question.

Lol yup

So accurate XD

I don't think he actually thought this way cause when Harry asked him if he knew back then that he met the darkest wizard of all time, Dumbledore said no. Dumbledore is very intelligent but you cannot spot a psychopath based on one encounter and most importantly you never know what a child is gonna be like when they grow up. He's not a clairvoyant after all

He moreso thought he was saving him and that it was the environment that was the problem

​@Olivetree80 the environment was the problem because he never received enough love because of that If Tom was adopted by a loving family he would have been similar to draco(there would still be some good)

Great point, but also they should do Talk To Me. I really hope they do it, its a perfect film for therapeutic discussions

To be honest, I don't know if Voldemort gives his mother enough importance to actually care so much about being different to her, or at least not on a consciously aware level. In the 6th book he tries to reconnect to his family roots because he thought they must've been very powerful people. The first thing he does is completely discard his mother because she must be a filthy muggle, too weak to even survive, and goes directly at idolising a fantastic ideal of his father who he thinks is a powerful wizard. When he discovers his roots and especially his mother's history, he is completely disgusted and hateful about it, and loses all interest in his family (even killing his uncle). While he did feel some hate towards his mother for being so weak and dying, he seemed to hate even more his father for being human and blind to his existence. Maybe Voldemort just wanted to find in his remaining relatives or family history some vestige of power he could use to his advantage

@@rociogallegossanchez3147 I think what you said actually matches the original point here that Voldemort wanted so badly to be different from his mother who was ‘weak’ who ‘left him’. That’s why he abandoned her memory completely and latched on so hard to the fact that he was a wizard and that she couldn’t be a wizard because she was weak and died.

Oh my god, I LOVE this reading. It’s crazy I’ve never thought about this before.

Facts

I think Rowling even commented that Harry and Voldemort started in life very similarly and the main difference being, that Harry at early life got unconditional love from his parents and Voldemort didn't, giving early experiences as a child more meaning. Also, throughout all books it was highlighted that even in his similarities in starting life, the choices Harry makes has more meaning than the circumstances he has to endure being an orphan.

It's the choices of the people that make one good or evil, never the mental disorders, never the disabilities or being raised well.

And just like a lot of things on the DSM-5 the parameters are constantly changing or expanding or merging with other things, like autism research from the past decade. Stereotypes can be very harmful, especially in storytelling.

Well then I have a question that maybe you’re comfortable answering and maybe not and either way is fine but either way I’ll ask I’m always interested in hearing about how different people perceive the world differently and everybody I’ve ever talked to sees friendship a little differently than me - I’ve never been tested or diagnosed with APD or anything similar (though I have been diagnosed ADHD and suspected for Autism but never tested for it) but I have always thought it was interesting that I make connections differently than literally anyone I’ve ever known So for me, friendship is purely transactional - (using my best and just about only friend as an example) I make him happy and he makes me happy when we’re around each other so we might as well, right? In any given situation regarding him, I’m thinking about what’ll make him have the most fun because I owe him for lighting up my life Quick clarifying note: It’s mostly unconscious at this point - I don’t spend every minute we’re together thinking “what do I say to that that’ll make him happy??” but just when it comes to things like Am I going to tell him this thing that, if he knew, would make him sad, but if he found out I was hiding from him, he would feel betrayed? Am I gonna call him out on this thing he’s being stupid about? But not like day to day interactions Most people that I’ve talked to about it just say something about “he’s my friend” and then can’t reason anything beyond that and I just don’t understand that What’s your experience like?

@@samstromberg5593 not APD but diagnosed autistic. Sounds to me like, and I could be wrong hard to say from a singular comment, that you are doing the classic deconstructing a concept to the most core elements where it sounds clinical. You find happiness in his company and in turn you go out of your way to try to return the sentiment. You’ve not indicated you do it simply so you don’t lose your supply of happiness from him, but because you are trying to return the favour out of gratitude - that my friend is simply friendship in a nutshell, an investment in your SHARED happiness. It can be hard when you have a brain that demands answers about such abstract concepts, I do the same thing, but I would say from where I am sitting you’ve got a good honest friendship and just unlike most people who take that for granted, you are breaking it down so far it ends up sounding clinical and cold. Unless you are only returning happiness JUST enough to keep your friend around so they can feed your ego and do things for you or something like that, then it sounds pretty sane safe and healthy to me. And even subconsciously going out of your way to find things that make him happy is healthy, so long as you aren’t doing it to the detriment of yourself or others, it is normal to do that when you care about someone (I think you’ll find most genuine friendships involve investing energy, compromising and actively putting thought into your relationship). Doesn’t make you fake or antisocial or even make your friendship transactional - it just makes you human. Humans want to be liked by the people they care about, humans want to make the people they care about happy, no shame in that.

Also, an uncontrolled, undisciplined Riddle would also be a problem. The magic is in him, no matter what.

Dumbledore did say "did I know I had just met the most dark wizard of all time? No. If I had Id..." he never answered.

Well due to stuff Tom said to Dumbledore, thats probably why voldemort could never fool him. But if Tom was never admitted to hogwarts, how would he have turned out? Basically Riddle knew he could do stuff, but didn't fully understand how or why? I mean wizards go to school to learn how to control their abilities. What happens to an untrained wizard?

I also think it was because he recognized that Tom was just a child and deserved a chance. But Dumbledor was arrogant in thinking that he could fix him when he had zero qualifications and training to do so.

​@carolbaker2773 well most people grow up, maybe Dumbledore figured Tom was in a phase or something. Plus by Wizarding law, he had to be taught how to control his powers. But the whole "I can talk to snakes" thing defiantly cought Dumbledore's attention. That's why Dumbledore knew Hagrid didn't open the chamber of secrets. But Dumbledore couldn't prove it at the time.

Harry Potter is a very rare book series that starts as middle grade and ends as YA. It crosses genres as it goes. It does so organically and it makes sense, but it's a unicorn.

@@meganrogers3571 I feel like part of this is because of its serial natural. It literally written during a seven year 'school' period that would in correlation to us. . .be middle-school through highschool. Most children/YA series don't regularly take into account the passage of time. . .they just do broad time skips and say 'its been years' or 'a couple weeks passed' without really getting the how and why people change during that time frame. HP still has its flaws, don't get me wrong, But there are aspects to it structure that are great to this day.

It feels like we see them in the eyes of the main trio, themselves maturing, understanding the situation.

Well, everyone has this or that traits of persomality. It's all about our choices.

Psychopathy/sociopathy also seems to come down to lack of empathy. There are people who are empathetic who know how to be logical, cold and manipulative when the situation calls for it, and they wouldn’t be considered psychopaths/sociopaths because relationships and connection still matter to them and be a source of influence for them.

i’d argue that we see a lot of empathy from dumbledore,. being calculating, and even manipulative does not make a psychopath, and personally i wouldn’t describe him as cold but that one is easier for me to see. i see him more as he knows what must be done and has made peace with it, and made peace with making it happen. most of his actions people point to to reference him being cold and lacking empathy surround us finding out about the plan for harry through snape, but he’d already had time to process, think it over, have emotional reactions, etc. we see him in those moments i believe YEARS after he has already figured it out (if not, it’s been some time at least), and who could blame him for not showing emotion in that moment due to that plus he’s actively coaching snape through the emotions and trying to help him see it’s what must be done. moments like letting himself be killed and having snape be the one to kill him to help draco, his reactions to snape’s patronus, many moments with harry, all show a great deal of empathy. especially as a leader, and a leader directly opposite voldemort, being manipulating, calculating, and refraining from publicly showing too much emotion is frankly understandable if not absolutely necessary. hell even just being a teacher, sometimes manipulation is a part of what’s necessary to get kids to do what you need them to to help them. plus it definitely depends on your definition of manipulation, because just getting someone to do what you want isn’t manipulating them, it has to be more specifically harmful things being done to get them to do what you want (gaslighting, lying, guilting, etc). is telling your 5 year old the food you made has no vegetables in it lying, and in thus (here) manipulation? yes, but also kids need to get those nutrients however they can get them safely. most people wouldn’t call that manipulation you know? this was very rambley so i hope it made any sense, but also i do actually like the idea of dumbledore being any one of these things, especially because he’s very often used as a foil to voldemort and has nearly the exact same traits, but “good”! i just personally do see a lot of empathy in him, but that could just be my own read!

Arguing that Dumbledore is psychopathic is just wild. You either didn't understand essential parts of the story itself or there's something essential about psychopathy you didn't get.

Yet he regretted placing Harry knowingly with abusive magic hating Muggles. Also raising Harry like a pig for slaughter. It was only after Voldemort s return he realised Harry might survive. He used people like pawns.

Yes! 🙌

*ahem* YES

And the alternative is to let Riddle develop his powers either on his own or with someone less likely to try and curb his more sinister inclinations.

Dumbledore was not Hogwarts headmaster when Tom started school. It was Dippet who was the headmaster. Dumbledore was just the Transfiguration professor so it was not his call to deny or accept Tom at the school.

I'm a little iffy on the timeline: when was Fantastic beasts happening? Coz he's also learnt what sort of student comes out of Durmstrang (his boyfriend played by Johnny Depp who I forget name of)

@@auricstorm Grindelwald

Is there such thing as being too moral?

Not autistic but HSP (Highly Sensitive Person) I would say from experience it can backfire on you a little bit cause you can be overly open or honest in trying to live in integrity and that can often come across as disingenuous or manipulative even if you don’t mean it to be. Not everyone wears their hearts in their sleeve and extreme empathy can be confusing and even frightening for people at times who are more reserved. Whilst I’d guess people don’t necessarily lack morals they’re not so strained by trying to live by them to the point it becomes paradoxical and society itself is a heartache. Hope that makes sense. 😊

@@tell-me-a-story- I am also autistic. The 'too moral' comes often from what other people perceive as our 'over adherence' to rules. For (a small) example, I can't jaywalk or steal from a store (like little things), I return other people's shopping carts and get pissed at them for not returning it them themselves (for me, barring disability or wrangling 8 children, etc.). This has caused others to think I'm weird. - This is probably tied to common gender expectations (girls must always follow the rules), though I'm sure it's not exclusive to women.

Also when they were talking about how our brain subconsciously picks up on something that's off about a person's behaviour. My brain doesn't seem to do that, people never unsettle me for no apparent reason (and I'm far less likely to find people unsettling overall), but plenty of people found me unsettling as a child (usually other children) before I learnt to be deliberately non-threatening (and get mistaken for shy/awkward/childish instead).

Thankfully it's more and more understood that autistic people do not necessarily lack empathy, specially not the girls, who get more socialised that way, whereas normalized alexithymia in men is a very real thing. There's empathy, but reasoning tends to go other pathways. And it forms more via other channels. Aka rather than via observation, via talking and explaining. Empathy has cognitive/logic and emotional/intuitive components. And different people find their own "access" to empathy on that spectrum.

Very interesting!!🤔

That's essentially having affecting empathy but no cognitive empathy (who don't know but are willing to learn) vrs having cognitive empathy but no affective empathy (who know empathy and don't care).

"Knowing empathy but not caring" is just apathy. Apathy is not caring about anything, including empathy. "Why should I care if nobody else cares about me".

True!

That also made me smile!❤

It was a Producer's Note this time, and that producer was me! -Corinne :)

Except it doesn't make sense in the movies regardless. If the Elder Wand could slit his throat without issue then why wouldn't the killing curse work? In the books Voldemort had Nagini in a protective enchantment since she was one of his few remaining horcruxes, and had her pounce on Snape before biting him. He was brought down by the weight.

timestamp?

The cruelty of it all being that Snape did not command the Elder Wand. Malfoy had disarmed Dumbledore before Snape killed him. And Harry defeated Malfory, which is why the Elder Wand belonged to Harry by then.

Oo interesting point, I never realized that

Reading this kind of inspired another thought. What if his childhood and adolescents being spend during ww2 inspired him to start a Wizarding war of the same scale. Because the parallels are certainly there.

That's an error. Tom riddle was not a child during the london blitz. In fact, he was born right after and grew up obsessed with Grindlewald the moment he learned about him. Tom's lack of empathy is due to the love potion his mother fed his father in the beginning of their relationship.

@@Lenori55 Tom was born in 1926. You're right that Tom wasn't a child: he was a teenager.

There are plenty of people born evil, there’s lots of stories on killers that never had any chances

Tom riddle was never really deserving of redemption. His backstory of being an orphan is sad, but even at 11 years old he showed that he was manipulative and sadistic. He terrorised the children at the orphanage

He wasn’t labeled as a devil child because of accidental magic. He was a complete terror and even the staff at the orphanage were wary of him. He used his magic to terrorize the other kids at the orphanage… I mean he even killed a pet rabbit of one of them.

Same, the shock when she saw his devil face, so well acted

Absolutely

This. And just a whole video on Lucifer himself. Narcissism for sure, but what else? Does the devil himself get villain therapy, or psychology of a hero? Is he bad, or just misunderstood?

Love to see that too. Her reaction was perfect, I mean she literally saw the devil. I wouldn’t think it’s realistic is she just saw him, get shocked and then she accept it and talked to him immediately.

@@simonargent4650 well he's not exactly evil in the show, so maybe anti-hero

Also, other Hunger Games character breakdowns would be fun to watch too.

I mean they are planning on doing the series as close to the books as possible so... You'll probably like it 😄

The scene of Dumbledore meeting Tom at the Orphanage is even creepier in the books because of how quickly he switches between being charming and perfect and his true vindictive self to get what he wants. Stephen Fry did a great job getting this across this young version in the audiobook of Half Blood Prince but it's sad we don't get more in teh movies. Also in the books it goes into more detail about how he was already hurting his fellow orphans long before he knew he was a wizard. This included, not just theft, but the killing of a fellow orphan's pet rabbit and the implied torture two other orphans in the cave that appears at the end of the movie. In the book he shows very little remorse for his actions but pretends to when he realises that he could get into trouble for it.

@@Toonwalla2010 I don't blame the kid actor, or the teen actor in HBP, I think they did what the script and director told them. But they really should have cut out most of the filler romance plot to make room for the Riddle scenes. I could feel the scenes rushing and them needing to use short hand to get the main points across as quickly as possible but Johnathan is right it makes Dumbledore look like an idiot. In the book Harry does think to himself that this was Dumbledore's weakness of wanting to see the best in everyone. Yet in the book, during his first meeting with Dumbledore. Riddle does not act the way he's here where you sort of get the feeling that he's the spawn of Satan. Dumbledore reasoning that this was a child with a troublesome past, but seeing it was a child who had no guidance, didn't know what he was or how he could do the things that he did. And as Dumbledore also points out Riddle got so excited about being told that he was special that he forgot himself and let more things slip than he would have liked to. So while he was able to charm all the other teachers, Dumbledore always kept an eye on him from that moment. With Riddle himself admitting that he never was able to fool Dumbledore. Not that he went out of his way to make his life a living hell the way Snape did against Harry. In the subtext Dumbledore does say something to the effect of he had hoped once Riddle got to Hogwarts and started to learn who he was, gaining some friends. That his past behavior stemmed more the way a child raised in a somewhat cold environment would. Since lets be honest if a young child could get revenge on people who are mean to them, they would do so and they wouldn't be thinking with consequences or proportionality in mind. Dumbledore wasn't the head master at the time so all he could do was give his opinion. But the strangest thing to me is actually how Riddle got away with framing Hagrid after Mertyl died. Riddle might have been able to prepare to counter truth serums, altering memories for pensive exploration and such. But Hagrid wouldn't have, and they have plenty of method of finding out the truth, so I've never really understood how anyone who has a "it's my words against yours" would not be resolved by proving it with magic.

@@wifipigeon01 I really hope they commit to at least two seasons for the show. Obviously they are going to need more to tell the full story. But so that we don't end up in a House of the Dragon situation where they waited to see the reaction before deciding to move on. By committing to two season, they can do season 1, normal break, start right back up with season 2 since at that point they will know if it's worth it for them to do all the books. It's so annoying with the current model of TV where season 1 and season 2 has such gigantic breaks (I know there has been a strike but this was happening before the strikes). We used to get 23 episodes a year like clock work, the episode count is now as low as 6-8 on some shows. And I understand that more episodes means filler and you can't make it look as great for budgetary reason. But 12-13 episodes each 57-59 minutes should be something they can pull off. And here it's kind of important to actually do one book per year since no matter if they have to cheat and cast 12-14 year olds for the parts in season 1. Considering finding young child actors that are great is no easy feat. You can't stop them from growing, and at that age you never know what you are going to get. They are going to have to shoot things more chronologically, because you don't want a situation where they have filmed scenes at the end of the school year early, film for another 3 months and suddenly one or several go through a huge growth spurt filming a scene at the beginning of the school year.

It's definitely on our list!

I'd love to see their take on the parallel between Harry and Draco with the line "he's just a boy", where Harry took the role of a martyr so save the world vs Draco who was a victim of chasing his father's acceptance and how that led to Draco ending up on over his head in a war he never chose to fight in

​@CinemaTherapyShow yes please do Draco! It's a travesty that JKR didn't give him a full redemption arc.

YES!

Well, they already replied it's on their list, but is there enough for a full episode in the movies? Draco rarely gets much screentime compared to how much they interact in the books.

Yes! He's such a well written, fascinating villain!

@@aubreycarter7624I just suggested that on the Zuko video too, especially now that they can use clips from BOSAS

The old name for bipolar is manic depression, right? Maybe sticking to the old name helps to keep other peoples mind away from the TV tropes because the word bipolar seem so cold and alien compared to word depression that everybody understands, even if yours happens to be manic and hyper at the times.

Have you watched Spinning Out? May be is not your kind of show but I believe it is a very good depiction of Bipolar Disorder. Both the protagonist and her mom are bipolar and it is really interesting to see how that impacts their lives

My cousin has bipolar as well, and his was aggravated by years of mental abuse by his dad. He definitely has his issues, but honestly when he comes to my state to visit, I love just taking him out to lunch for a chat because he’s one of my favorite people to just chill and talk with.

My brother had bpd that manifested itself when he was almost 20. It was crazy for me to observe because it wasn’t the Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde type nonsense that I’d vaguely believed bipolar was. In mania or hypomania, the things that excited him before just excite him more intensely. In depression, things that excited him before excite him far less. It’s like a dial that controls his personality is being cranked too far in either direction. And there are stages between the manic and depressive phases where he acts the way he did before he started having symptoms. Mental disorders are definitely very different in real life from how they’re normally depicted onscreen