Joyce and Karen picking up the kids from the first day of kindergarten after worrying that their autistic sons wouldn't make any friends
One Nice Bug Per Day
Fai_Ryy
taylor price
macklin celebrini has autism
đȘŒ
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
đ

No title available

ellievsbear

⣠Chile in a Photography âŁ
No title available
art blog(derogatory)

if i look back, i am lost

romaâ
Sade Olutola
tumblr dot com
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open

tannertan36
wallacepolsom
NASA

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Russia
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Bangladesh
seen from Russia
seen from Philippines

seen from United States
seen from United States
@bylerholiclion
Joyce and Karen picking up the kids from the first day of kindergarten after worrying that their autistic sons wouldn't make any friends
What's the point of making all of season 4 about Mike saying ily to El because he's "inspired" by Will's words into being vulnerable and then them staying together still for those months between s4 and S5 only for then making Mike not able to say it again when El is literally DYING in front of him, he could say it when he thought she was dying inside the mind battle but now that she's about to stupidly kill herself in front of him he's just like no sorry I can't say it again because I'm back to my old selfish mindset where I want to protect myself from the hurt so I stay full of regrets, you die without hearing it from me in that moment and I make it look horrible for us as a couple from a writing point of view?????????? Did he actually forget the whole speech of the painting like, did Vecna just take it away? What the hell would be the point of that in a "this is the real finale" scenario... as a writer that is the most idiotic decision you could ever make, you literally regressed him for no fucking reason once again???? Nothing makes sense in that hellscape season, that shit cannot be real
You realize that their whole plotline in season 4 is now completely POINTLESS??? You could have called a fucking Uber for El and had the same results.
Yeah exactly like Melvin was entirely based on a fantasy and you should have had a REAL love interest lmao
bruh im so tired of people in tik tok villainizing us for not liking will's ending.
"aren't you happy he finally got his happy ending"
IT'S NOT A HAPPY ENDING. AND IT SHOWS YOU DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE EMOTIONAL DEPTH OF HIS CHARACTER AND HIS FEELINGS.
also wtf his ending seems also conforming. like, wtf. it's the kind of ending everyone would expect. conformity destroyed those characters i swear to god.
Cyrano troupes and ESOTSM (an edit!)đđđ
@nightnutâs post mentioning esotsm and cyrano troupes in the same sentnce made me #inspired bcs i remembered PATRICKđđ who parallels El
Even though Elâs intentions are much different from Patrickâs, she still plays a similar role when it comes to substituting another character
In ESOTSM, Patrick wants Clementine to fall in love with him, so he tries to recreate her memories she has with Joel, except it doesnât work because Clementine is in love with Joel. Sheâs in love with who he IS, not the role he plays in her life, meaning Patrick could never recreate that.
Cue Mike finding El in the woods while heâs looking for Will. Though itâs not Els intention, she starts to replace Wills role in Mikes life, but no matter how she fills that role, he still canât tell her he loves her, because he loves the person sheâs replacing. He loves Will, but he doesnât feel like he can, so he redirects that to El. And even after Mike finds Will, heâs still looking for him in El throughout the entire show.
This is also why itâs important that El and Will not only parallel eachother story-wise, but also parallel eachother visually, down to their wardrobe, especially in shots with Mike. Itâs showing us his issue distinguishing between the two of them and their roles in his life.
Then we have the cyrano troupe. In ESOTSM, Patrick rehearses the lines that Joel said to Clementine on the frozen lake so he can replicate that memory. Similarly how Will conveys his own feelings as Elâs in the van scene.
Patrick also gives Clementine a necklace that Joel got for her, which also parallels the van scene, with Will giving Mike the painting on Elâs behalf.
And then the void scene feels like three cyrano troupes in one, where El is reciting Mikeâs words from the ily monologue back to him, which was Mike plagerising Willâs words from the van to El.
But that also wasnât El in the void scene, and I canât see it being Kaliâs projection of her either. Which means it really is a manifestation of Mikeâs fears of:
1. Not being enough (not being able to say ily)
2. Losing El
3. (In a weird fucked up sense) losing the person that allowed him to redirect his feelings for Will into something more ânormalâ
4. Facing the guilt of the consequences of making El an âideaâ instead of humanising her (possibly meaning he couldnât say âI love youâ back because he couldnât perpetuate this idea again and make the same mistake he did at the end of s4, lying to her in her last moments) leading his guilt to concoct this situation where El is telling him she loves him again, because he never got to tell her the truth and itâs too late now
Heâs going to have to live with how heâs the reason she never got to be more than a Superhero and how he never got to tell the truth
But itâs interesting to me how after all of that, in the end he still tells her story in a way that dehumanises her, not even giving her the liberty of grief, instead creating a fantasy, because otherwise it would mean heâd have to acknowledge that it isnât a happy ending. That heâs still stuck hiding from himself and not taking action in reality under the guise of hope and being a storyteller.
Anyway, a lot of substitutingâŠ..
You know, them stealing "The Paladin & his Cleric" to twist it into that disgusting "the storyteller and the mage" bullshit after Bylers have been using the same concept for our ship for years does piss me off a lot
Mike saying he wanted to run away with El is the most OOC shit ever lmao
Movies the Duffers wanted us to watch before S5 âą Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind + Stranger Things
Mike put Will somewhere he DOESNâT belong to save his memories connected with Will. They are there TOGETHER too. Mike IS Carlton. đ
@upsidedownlurkerâs theory checks out!
Everyoneâs memories have been altered/erased.
Mike and Will conformitygate edit to Killing Time - Magdalena Bayđđđ
WITH ESOTSM PARALLELSâŒïžâŒïžâŒïž
Bcs boy oh boy is time killing them!! Ha ha bcs vecna messes with time and clocks and is kinda like time personified as a villain!!
Time and memories are so important!!
And mike is the âkeyâ and hes swallowing himself hahahaaaa the lurics are so perfect
Also the song mentioning forgetting âa weekâ is perfect bcs itâs like for the entirety of season 5 (and even earlier, really), theyâve all forgotten the week that will went missing for (mike saying its when his life started, will saying they like getting lost in the woodsâthings that contradict the events of s1)
Which brings me to the ESOTSM parallels with the theme of tampering with memory, bcs i feels like vecna has tampered with their memories SPECIFICALLY of the WEEK will went missing for
And it seems like his obsession with time and âreversing itâ could lead to these altered memories, bcs heâs rewinding time and changing things
Also also the first shot of the epilogue being bricks in the wall (pink floyd) and then showing them at grad all linedup perfectly in orange gownsâŠ.looking exactly like bricks in the wallâŠ.
The mileven void scene genuinely reads to me as some kind of statement of how shows try to sell you a narrative, through flashbacks and a horrible attempt at an emotional scene despite evidence showing otherwise and it works just because of heteronormativity and taking that laughable montage at face value. "Well, if this is what they're showing us now, it must be true." "It's a boy and a girl, why should we believe they're not in love?"
Yeah rightâŠ
I swear, if tomorrow we casually decipher the word âtogetherâ on the painting too, I might not survive to see the light of byler endgame as I will die immediately from the heart attack
the find is done by @badbuiltghostbones and Iâm just stuck atp, Iâve just circled it differently, mb itâll help someone, who canât tell where this word is hidden, to see it; let the main pic be blurry a bit, watch from the distance as a whole, donât zoom in, youâll lose the picture, donât look for details, itâs readable when your eyes are relaxed đ§
The âSuperMANâ gets me every time when Argyle calls her âSuperGIRLâ several times in the SAME season!
Mr Whatsit = WILL BYERS
Or rather, why Vecna chose to appear to Holly as "a friend" in Season 5...
...and why this has been foreshadowed from the start.
Theory Overview
Theory Summary
1) Mr. Whatsit is in fact "real"
2) Evidence Vecna disguised himself as Will to Holly
3) But how???
4) The Party found out... but they couldn't save Holly
5) What does Vecna want with Holly and Will? Season 1-2 told us already...
Final summary
Theory Summary
After "stalking" Holly, Vecna disguised himself as Will (someone âgentle and kindâ, a "friendâ) in order to gain her trust.
Will: âI was him. I was Vecna.â
Mr. Whatsit, AKA "Will", told Holly that âthere are monsters in Hawkinsâ, that they eat kids like her... and that he was attacked by a monster when he was a kid!
Mike and Nancy realised that Holly was a target, and told her that Mr. Whatsit was the monster, thinking they could stop his plan.
But then, on November 3rd, Vecna sent a Demogorgon to attack the Wheelers. Mike and Karen were heavily injured in the attack⊠but Mr. Whatsit âsavedâ Holly.
Mr. Whatsit: The monsters, they tried to take you. But I saved you just in time.
He took her to the Wheelers' front door â the Demogorgonâs gate to the Upside Down. He told her it was their exit. A dimension door.
Holly: It doesnât look like an exit⊠are you sure youâre not a monster? Mr. Whatsit: Pretty sure.Â
He convinced her that he was a hero, not a monster.
And so, when Vecna took Holly into the Upside Down, there wasnât a struggle â he proved to her that he wasnât a monster through a staged rescue, which was really a kidnapping in disguise.Â
This explains...
Why the concept of "Mr. Whatsit" was introduced at all
Why Mr. Whatsit's identity was framed like a huge reveal (it is!)
Why the characters never realised who he was until Holly was already taken (they did realise â they tried to save Holly, not Derek)
Why Holly wonders if Max is a monster, but it never amounts to anything (it was about Mr. Whatsit, not Max)
Why the "we have to save Derek" plotline was so important (it was Holly, who is much closer to the Party)
Why Will is repeatedly said to literally be Vecna
and more!
^ there's evidence for all of this!
Now let's get into that evidence!
First, as always, here's a brief overview of my main theory:
MIKE IN THE RIGHTSIDE UP
Mike is stuck in his own version of Camazotz: the Rightside Up.
In the 8 months after Season 4, the gang prepared for a big battle with Vecna. On November 3rd 1986, the Wheeler house was attacked and Holly was taken; then, on November 6th, Mike was taken â on the anniversary of Will's disappearance.
Every important plot point from Ep 1-8 was an edited version of what really happened in those 8 months. Vecna just changed the order, characters or context to suit his own narrative, keeping Mike trapped in the Rightside Up. That's why Mike's real memories will be crucial to his escape in the upcoming episodes: a reversal of the current episode descriptions.
Evidence! ORDER OF EVENTS: Part 1 (Reality = reversed), Part 3 (12 Episodes), Part 4 (MWTFDYD), Part 9 (Wheeler attack -> Mike's kidnapping), Part 11 (Mr Whatsit = Will) SCENE ANALYSIS: Part 2 (Will/Robin), Part 5 (Rainbows), Part 6 (The roof talk), Part 7 ("Where's Dustin right now?"), Part 8 (El is missing), Part 10 (Byler's missed date)
1) How do we know Mr. Whatsit is ârealâ?
First of all, how do we know that Mr. Whatsit even⊠well, exists in the real story?
As I said: every major plot point is based on something that really happened, and Vecna would have changed as little as possible to make it as believable as possible. So if there's a plot point which has huge ramifications and impacts multiple scenes, it's almost certainly part of the real story.
If Vecna didn't target Holly as Mr. WhatsitâŠ
Three big scenes would not have happened (Mike telling Holly that she doesnât need Mr Whatsit, âWhat if Mr. Whatsit is real?â, Mr. Whatsit's big identity reveal)
Will would not have realised the full extent of his powers by seeing through her eyes, and his entire character arc would be impacted
Three MORE big scenes would not have happened (Willâs self-acceptance moment + killing the Demogorgon(s), saving Max and Holly, falling into a trance)
Sounds like a pretty big deal to me!
Considering these ramifications? At the very least, Vecna targeted Holly in a way that allowed Will to see through her eyes â and most likely, he did it as Mr. Whatsit!Â
We can pretty safely assume Mr. Whatsit exists in the real story.Â
mikeâs behaviour with el and his behaviour with will are not interchangeable data points; they are two distinct relational constructs that the series deliberately stages using different formal, narrative, and performance strategies. the often repeated question, âif you think he mistreats el, why would you want him with will?â only holds if you treat mike as a static psychological unit rather than as a character whose subjectivity is mediated through specific dynamics, blocking choices, and camera logics. in other words, itâs a question that refuses to read the text.
the el relationship is consistently framed as a site of performative dissonance. diegetically, mike is positioned as âthe boyfriend,â but the series repeatedly undercuts his fit within that role. the blocking isolates him at key emotional beats; heâs frequently placed at the edge of the frame, turned away, or visually disconnected from el even when they share the space. the dialogue hands him romantic scripts he cannot convincingly inhabit, declarations that feel forced, delayed, or externally prompted rather than organically motivated. performance wise, his body language trends toward withdrawal: crossed arms, averted gaze, physical stillness in moments that ostensibly call for intimacy. the camera doesnât reward him with romantic close ups; instead, it lingers on his discomfort, his hesitation, his visible panic. what some people shorthand as âmike being a jerkâ is, on a formal level, the show staging a boy miscast in his own narrative, suffocating under a role that doesnât align with his internal architecture.
with will, the entire formal system shifts. the relationship is constructed through openness rather than constriction. spatially, mike is allowed to occupy the centre of the frame; the blocking brings him into proximity with will in ways that feel unforced and reciprocal. we get shot/reverse shot patterns that emphasise mutual recognition, not obligation. the eyeline matches are cleaner, the camera lingers on his face when he listens, when he softens, when he reaches out. the colour palette and lighting often move toward warmth and softness in their shared scenes, visually cueing a space of emotional safety rather than pressure. narratively, mike is granted clarity: his dialogue with will tends to be more direct, more vulnerable, less mediated by performance. he articulates fears, doubts, and needs in a way the text rarely permits in his scenes with el. the performance follows suit, his posture opens, his gestures become more animated, his affect more legible. he reads less like someone performing âboyfriendâ and more like someone allowed to exist.
this isnât incidental; itâs how the show encodes relational difference. one dynamic is built on misalignment and narrative obligation, the other on recognition and emotional legibility. to collapse them into âmike just mistreats peopleâ is to ignore the way television actually constructs character through form. the el dynamic functions almost as a critique of compulsory romance: the series uses their scenes to stage what happens when a character is slotted into a heteronormative script that doesnât fit. the resulting âjerkâ behaviour is symptomatic of that structural misfit, not an innate, context free cruelty. by contrast, the will dynamic operates as a space where mikeâs better capacities, care, attentiveness, reciprocity, are not only visible but actively foregrounded by the camera and the writing.
so, if weâre being precise: mike does not treat will the way he treats el because the text does not author him as the same subject in those two relational contexts. with el, he is written and framed as a boy under pressure, performing a role that fractures him and produces brittleness, avoidance, and emotional shutdown. with will, he is written and framed as a boy in proximity to his own authenticity, which produces openness, generosity, and a capacity for genuine connection. preferring the latter is not about wanting will to be âmistreatedâ; itâs about recognising that the show itself marks one relationship as a site of distortion and the other as a site of coherence.
the more accurate question, then, isnât âwhy ship him with will if you think heâs bad with el?â but âwhy insist on reading mike as a flat, universally awful partner when the series went out of its way, visually, narratively, and performatively, to differentiate who he becomes in each relationship?â thatâs not ship bias; thatâs basic textual analysis.
what confuses me most is the fact that will's love for mike was planned from the beginning, but it didn't make any sense other than will's powers appearing, and these powers were not properly explained and developed in the plot, and it's still not clear why mike said that will is a sorcerer and not a wizard and that these powers are innate, and what happened to them anyway?đ does anyone want to explain to me the connection between henry and will and why in this show the âunrequited loveâ took up 10 times more screen time than the connection between the main character and the main villain?
I'm just reminding you that people don't believe that byler exists because of heteronormativity. If mike and will were a straight couple people would immediately see the romance in them, just like they see romance in couples who act exactly like them