Difference between revisions of "Talk:2160: Ken Burns Theory"
Latest revision as of 03:34, 15 June 2019
Is the joke in this comic that Ken Burns made documentary films about real events, meaning all of his mini-series truly were a part of a common universe - our own universe? Ianrbibtitlht (talk) 15:12, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Could someone put in a summary of the Pixar theory from the Mental Floss article? It's the kind of thing that Randall is trying to reference. --18.104.22.168 17:25, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
- Ehh, The Pixar theory is a famous example, but there are a lot more, like the snow globe theory, I don't think a single one needs to be summarized here to get the point 22.214.171.124 01:16, 8 June 2019 (UTC) sam
Is it weird that I found this funnier before I understood that Ken Burns was a documentary filmmaker? For some reason I thought that Burns was an actor and that cueball was trying to explain how his character could be the same person in some weird pseudohistorical fictional universe.
- OMG same here! I thought Ken Burns was an actor I wasn't terribly familiar with (outside of having heard his name), and these were fictional movies based on elements of real life that he's acted in... Somehow it's less funny that Burns is a documentary maker and Cueball is just trying to create a fictional link that's actually really already there, LOL! NiceGuy1 (talk) 04:01, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
- Uh, yes. You're both weird! ;-) Ianrbibtitlht (talk) 04:38, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
All the movies by M. Night Shyamalan are in the same universe though, right? 126.96.36.199 16:41, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
And I thought the joke was related to the liberties that Ken Burns takes with his "Histories" so that it isn't clear whether his versions of events could exist in the same universe.