# HIMYM - Vesuvius - 2014/03/03



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

What the hell was that ending  

it sounded (and looked) like two people reminiscing about a friend at a funeral


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Mother is dying, so won't be at her daughters Wedding whenever that happens

HAS to be it


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

MikeMar said:


> Mother is dying, so won't be at her daughters Wedding whenever that happens
> 
> HAS to be it


Agreed. Very bittersweet, sad. Interesting choice.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

MikeMar said:


> Mother is dying, so won't be at her daughters Wedding whenever that happens
> 
> HAS to be it


If that was the case, then why didn't the Mother seem to feel anything when Ted said that? I mean, we know Ted is super sentimental, but we've been led to believe that the Mother is basically a female clone of Ted, so I can't imagine she'd seem to have basically no reaction to that statement if what you said is accurate.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

DevdogAZ said:


> If that was the case, then why didn't the Mother seem to feel anything when Ted said that? I mean, we know Ted is super sentimental, but we've been led to believe that the Mother is basically a female clone of Ted, so I can't imagine she'd seem to have basically no reaction to that statement if what you said is accurate.


She's accepted it and since it's happening to her she has moved onto accepting it.

A lot of times when someone is dying, at a point isn't it harder on loved ones than the person themselves?


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

If this is indeed the case, then it sucks.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

A couple of other points to remember:

-At the beginning of the episode, the Mother (I'll bet a lot of money that her name is going to be Kim) says, "Thanks for bringing me here." It was said earlier this year that they come back pretty regularly, I believe around the time of the wedding (he proposed at the lighthouse). But they were there in the middle of a snowstorm, and she says, "Thanks for bringing me here." Why? Because she wanted one last trip to one of her favorite places.
-This is something I only thought of in hindsight, but when they revealed they knew all of their stories, they high-fived and said, "It's official, we're an old married couple." Maybe a small celebration for something they thought they'd never attain?
-"Kim" says, "I don&#8217;t want you to be the guy who lives in his stories. Life only moves forward." You can see a look on Ted's face that shows a sadness that this woman won't be there much longer, that life will be moving forward without her.

When theorized last week that the kids simply look bored when their father is telling them the story, someone asked how they could be bored when their mother has just passed away (therefore seemingly debunking the death theory). But their mother hasn't just passed away, she's been gone for 5-6 years at that point (this storytelling takes place in 2024, the Bob Saget stuff in 2030). It also explains why we're not hearing the mother's side of the story. She's not there to tell the story.

On another note, does anyone know the name of the Dylan song at the end of the show?


----------



## LooseWiring (Jan 6, 2003)

Yeah, that was my take.

It sucks considering how much I like the mother but it would help explain why he's telling the story in the first place.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

After the debate in the thread for last week's episode, with several of us -- including me -- saying "no way" to the "mother is dead" theory&#8230; it sure looks like we were wrong.

I didn't like this episode anyway, but it could have been the funniest one ever and I still would have hated it for what Bays & Thomas are apparently up to. Perhaps the worst of it is that the truth now stinks either way. Either she's dead, which is horribly manipulative of the audience, or it's a fake-out, which is horribly manipulative of the audience. Oh my. I can't believe it.

Sepinwall has a good screed up about this one.


----------



## vman (Feb 9, 2001)

cmontyburns said:


> Sepinwall has a good screed up about this one.


agree with everything in that. Sadly, it appears the mother's warning in this episode comes true - Ted will be a guy who forever lives in old stories...


----------



## Michael S (Jan 12, 2004)

I would hate it if they ended the series on the she's dead thing. I would like them to end the series on a high note instead of downer. Also did they make Ted look older in this episode? He looked like he had a receding hairline.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

No, no, no, no.

We finally meet the mother, and she's TERRIFIC. A character I wish we'd spent more seasons with, and now they all but tell us they are killing her off?

I think "Burn in Hell, Fox" is about to get a companion slogan.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

The song was "If You See Her, Say Hello" by Bob Dylan from Blood On the Tracks.


----------



## Donbadabon (Mar 5, 2002)

waynomo said:


> The song was "If You See Her, Say Hello" by Bob Dylan from Blood On the Tracks.


"And though our separation
It pierced me to the heart
She still lives inside of me
We've never been apart"

I really hope they are not leading us to her dying after all we've been through getting here.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

Yep, after my hesitation last week, they've all but put the nails in her coffin, even Sepinwall is on this path and we all think it's a horrible idea, if they do head there, this may be the new poster child of how not to end a series, I can hope they're just screwing with us ala Patrice.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

OK, let's assume that the "mother is dead" theory is correct, which it certainly appears to be judging by this episode. While I understand people being upset about that, personally I love the fact that on a mainstream network show like this, Bays and Thomas have been bold enough to have that as their ending and also that they've been planning it from the start.

I've hated this season ("How your mother met me" aside) but this redeems it as far as I'm concerned and the only thing that annoys me is that the fact that I'd heard the theory previously and that reduced the impact of the emotional gut-punch that I'm sure I would have felt when Ted started to tear up at the end.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

Oh and the fact that the mother has been so great and we've seen so little of her to me is a perfect analogy for how Ted's kids would have felt about her.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I won't know how I feel about it until it's over: I hate it now but I'm not ruling out the possibility that they could pull it off.

I wonder if Ted's telling the kids about the mother because he's met someone else and they'll end on a bittersweet note showing Ted's moving on after all and not living in the past.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

I don't know why, but the dead mother storyline doesn't bother me. I think it's another look at love, like Ted spends all this time looking for "the one", and when he finally finds her it's gone before he knows it.

What I WOULD hate is if they use this development as an excuse to get Ted and Robin back together. When I read the lyrics to the Dylan song, it's not hard to come to the conclusion that the song is not about the mother but instead about Robin. That would be a horrible twist for the show to take.

There is one thing I'm curious about. Throughout the years on this forum some of us have complained about the fact that the reveal of the mother had taken too long, had been teased too much, while others said that the story was about the journey, and that it was fine if we didn't meet the mother until the very end. I'm genuinely curious how the "journey" people would feel if this is truly how the story ends, with a dead mother or a new love interest for Ted. I can't imagine it would be as simple as being about the journey in such a case.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

I liked the show more when it was a sitcom.


----------



## loubob57 (Mar 19, 2001)

Guess I wasn't paying close enough attention. What happened at the end of the episode that everybody is taking as a clue to the dead mother?


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

loubob57 said:


> Guess I wasn't paying close enough attention. What happened at the end of the episode that everybody is taking as a clue to the dead mother?


The main thing is that, during the retelling of the story when Robin's mother arrived, The Mother said something like "she wasn't going to miss her daughter's wedding." And then Ted teared up.


----------



## Supfreak26 (Dec 12, 2003)

cmontyburns said:


> The main thing is that, during the retelling of the story when Robin's mother arrived, The Mother said something like "she wasn't going to miss her daughter's wedding." And then Ted teared up.


If they were hinting that the mother is going to die, they did a horrible job of it. My wife and I were totally confused by teds reaction.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

Supfreak26 said:


> If they were hinting that the mother is going to die, they did a horrible job of it. My wife and I were totally confused by teds reaction.


I think that's what the writers were aiming for though. For people who weren't aware of the theory that the mother was dead, this was one of the moments that would be designed to make sense only once the reveal at the end of the season happens.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

For a brief moment I thought she was saying that Ted's mother wasn't there for THEIR wedding. So there's a chance for that


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

I guess I should have paid more attention to these HIMYM threads. I had no interest in commenting on anything this season because it has been so mundane. Little did I know what I had been missing.

When I started reading this thread I felt like my local provider had broadcast the wrong episode. I couldn't figure out what everybody was talking about. I get it now. Thanks!


----------



## AeneaGames (May 2, 2009)

MikeMar said:


> For a brief moment I thought she was saying that Ted's mother wasn't there for THEIR wedding. So there's a chance for that


How about the mother's mother wasn't there? That's what I immediately thought...


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

AeneaGames said:


> How about the mother's mother wasn't there? That's what I immediately thought...


I was just going w/ Ted's mother since he is the one who teared up.

But who knows


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

MikeMar said:


> I was just going w/ Ted's mother since he is the one who teared up.
> 
> But who knows


For me, the moment felt too "significant" for it to be about some minor character missing a wedding. The likelihood is that Ted and the mother had been married for a number of years by 2024 and for Ted to tear up about it all that time later would seem unrealistic to me.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

I see a lot of negativity, but I myself don't feel that way towards this path. There have been plenty of possible hints at a melancholy in the story. Even this year when we've had glimpses of the mother, it's been laced with sorrow. Her prior love for sure.

I think perhaps this shows why they were reticent to give us too much mother before the end of the show. If they hit it out of the park and made us love her, then the ending really is a downer. If they give us hints instead, we hopefully feel sorrow for Ted, but not crushingly so. A real pickle they put themselves in.

Anyway, not everybody thinks this is a terrible choice.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

This post is about the name of the series finale, so spoilered just in case



Spoiler



"Last Forever" to me is clearly a bittersweet phrase that just reinforces the fact that the mother is dead in 2030


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

I was not aware of the whole dead mother idea. Isn't this plot twist in keeping with Ted's exploits in finding love during the show? He has fallen in love several times and it always gets destroyed for some reason. Why should this time be any different?


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

If true, I also mildly appreciate their willingness to give us the non-standard Hollywood ending. I usually think of HIMYM in the same universe of shows as Friends. And truly, the last season or two of Friends was pretty hideous. The characters became shells of their former selves, endless parade of guest stars, 'super-sized' show lengths. And of course Ross and Rachel live happily ever after.

In this case, our Ross and Rachel doesn't end up together. And even though there have some terrible stinkers this season, overall I think it holds up fairly well to those final seasons of Friends.


----------



## Donbadabon (Mar 5, 2002)

loubob57 said:


> Guess I wasn't paying close enough attention. What happened at the end of the episode that everybody is taking as a clue to the dead mother?


She told him she didn't want him to be the guy that lives in stories, and that life moves forward.

He broke down when they talked about not acknowledging what needs to be said.

And broke again when they talked about moms not being at their daughters weddings.

And she mentioned a 'surprise ending'.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

billypritchard said:


> I see a lot of negativity, but I myself don't feel that way towards this path. There have been plenty of possible hints at a melancholy in the story. Even this year when we've had glimpses of the mother, it's been laced with sorrow. Her prior love for sure.
> 
> I think perhaps this shows why they were reticent to give us too much mother before the end of the show. If they hit it out of the park and made us love her, then the ending really is a downer. If they give us hints instead, we hopefully feel sorrow for Ted, but not crushingly so. A real pickle they put themselves in.
> 
> Anyway, not everybody thinks this is a terrible choice.


Totally agree with this.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

billypritchard said:


> If true, I also mildly appreciate their willingness to give us the non-standard Hollywood ending.


I assume that most of us who don't like the possibility aren't objecting on the face of it. We were not promised a happy ending, life isn't fair, the show has dealt with death and melancholy along the way, etc. And it would be a creatively bold choice. The problem I have (and others, I expect) is that such an ending doesn't go with the show we've been watching for the last eight years. As Sepinwall wrote, the show wasn't built to support that conclusion.

Along those lines, here's what Time media critic James Poniewozik posted today:



> My problem isand of course this is all contingent on how the finale plays outit retroactively makes the series that led up to it nonsensical. If Ted and The Mother are alive and happy in 2030, its understandable, if a little eccentric, that hes regaled his kids with eight years worth of stories about how he became the person who ultimately would fall in love with their mom. If she died young, though, why wouldnt he spend 90% of his breath telling them about Slap Bets and Robin Sparkles videos rather than the stories he lived through with their dead mother?
> 
> HIMYM has never been afraid of bold shakeups, but this feels like a twist for its own sake, rather than one that actually makes sense in the context of the narrative and tone of the eight seasons that preceded the last one. (Could the show be setting up a 2030 second marriage for Ted and Robin, who some fans always wanted to end up together, an elaborate way of writing itself out of the Aunt Robin twist that ended the very first episode? In that case, the show may have sabotaged itself by introducing The Mother too well.)
> 
> Again, this all depends on how it plays in the final episodes, but it doesnt feel right. Best case scenario, Vesuvius is screwing with us for the sake of some tension in a few episodes and a feel-good ending. Worst case, its whacking us with an emotional 2×4 that the series (which is told in retrospect, after all), has done nothing to prepare us for. This show lives and dies on its twists. I hope this one isnt fatal.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Sparty99 said:


> There is one thing I'm curious about. Throughout the years on this forum some of us have complained about the fact that the reveal of the mother had taken too long, had been teased too much, while others said that the story was about the journey, and that it was fine if we didn't meet the mother until the very end. I'm genuinely curious how the "journey" people would feel if this is truly how the story ends, with a dead mother or a new love interest for Ted. I can't imagine it would be as simple as being about the journey in such a case.


I'm one of the "'journey' people" to whom you are referring.

I'm not sure how the choice of ending somehow retroactively changes any of that.

The show is not called "Look At Me Meeting Your Mother". That would be a TV movie, not a series. It is called "_How_ I Met Your Mother". The "how" is a lot more than just, "ran into her at a wedding"; it the story of what led Ted to be the person he is to be in position to have that meeting actually result in something meaningful.

That being said, I'm about 75% certain that going with a dead mom would be a crap ending, but I'll wait and see. 

Although I wonder if the dead mom plan isn't the showrunners' way of slapping all the "we want to meet the mother _*now*_" Verucas in the face. "You want to meet her so bad? Fine, here she is. Isn't she great? Don't you just love her? Well guess what? _SHE'S DEAD!_"

Looking at it from that perspective, I think I might just enjoy that ending.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

busyba said:


> Although I wonder if the dead mom plan isn't the showrunners' way of slapping all the "we want to meet the mother _*now*_" Verucas in the face. "You want to meet her so bad? Fine, here she is. Isn't she great? Don't you just love her? Well guess what? _SHE'S DEAD!_"


Doesn't fit with the fact that we know they filmed the ending with the kids years ago though.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

pahunt said:


> This post is about the name of the series finale, so spoilered just in case
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



"Last Forever" is also the name of a Jethro Tull song, which is sung from the perspective of a dead man at his own funeral:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJnfiUWOifk

So why are you holding my hand tonight?
I'm not intending to go far away.
I'm just slipping through to the back room --
I'll leave you messages almost every day.
And who was I to last forever?
I didn't promise to stay the pace.
Not in this lifetime, babe
but we'll cling together:
some kind of heaven written in your face.

So why are you holding my hand tonight?
Well, am I feeling so cold to the touch?
Do my eyes seem to focus
on some distant point?
Why do I find it hard to talk too much?
And who was I to last forever?
I didn't promise to stay the pace.
Not in this lifetime, babe
but we'll cling together:
some kind of heaven written in your face.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

pahunt said:


> Doesn't fit with the fact that we know they filmed the ending with the kids years ago though.


They couldn't have filmed it _that_ far in advance, since they would have had to have shot it (or at least _re_shot it) after they switched over to HD.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

cmontyburns said:


> I assume that most of us who don't like the possibility aren't objecting on the face of it. We were not promised a happy ending, life isn't fair, the show has dealt with death and melancholy along the way, etc. And it would be a creatively bold choice. The problem I have (and others, I expect) is that such an ending doesn't go with the show we've been watching for the last eight years. As Sepinwall wrote, the show wasn't built to support that conclusion.
> 
> Along those lines, here's what Time media critic James Poniewozik posted today:


All that stuff just obscures the fact that this is a television show, who's job it is to tell (hopefully) funny stories with characters that we know and enjoy. Why does the show focus on 9 years of Ted and Gang stories leading up to the mother? Because they have to fill 200ish episodes, right? We are the audience, just as much as the kids, and we demand to be entertained while getting to the end of the story.

At its essence, the story begins with meeting Robin, and ends when Ted lets her go and meets the mother at the wedding. Can't we just accept that this is the story they set out to tell?

And I guess I just don't see the tonal problems overall. Sometimes the show is wacky, sometimes dramatic, sometimes romantic. And the romance of meeting the mother, being happy, and losing her, well, that's a story that fits in fine with Ted's story, at least in my opinion. I realize that many many many other people disagree.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

I should stipulate that I have never been overly invested in the who of the mother or the when.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

busyba said:


> They couldn't have filmed it _that_ far in advance, since they would have had to have shot it (or at least _re_shot it) after they switched over to HD.


According to this article (NSFW language and possible spoilers) they say they shot scenes with the kids for the series finale in 2006.


----------



## Silverman (Jan 18, 2013)

Nobody thinks of the real reason I doubt the mother dies and the show becomes a super downer for all with a bunch of mad audience? That would destroy the residual value of the series in syndication, and it is already showing early episodes on stations!! Even if the writers wanted to do this, the owners of the show would say hell no. Last hing you want is a mass tune out of the show on syndicated stations because everyone says it's all a terrible downer, see? There is your answer to that. Someone is going to die but not anyone that will make viewers mad.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

Silverman said:


> Nobody thinks of the real reason I doubt the mother dies and the show becomes a super downer for all with a bunch of mad audience? That would destroy the residual value of the series in syndication, and it is already showing early episodes on stations!! Even if the writers wanted to do this, the owners of the show would say hell no. Last hing you want is a mass tune out of the show on syndicated stations because everyone says it's all a terrible downer, see? There is your answer to that. Someone is going to die but not anyone that will make viewers mad.


I don't see the reveal that the mother passes away after 10+ years of married life to Ted as a show-killer in syndication. If anything, perhaps it adds another level to those old episodes, especially ones about their near misses (ie, the architecture class or the yellow umbrella). We suddenly have an extra emotional response to those scenes.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

billypritchard said:


> I don't see the reveal that the mother passes away after 10+ years of married life to Ted as a show-killer in syndication. If anything, perhaps it adds another level to those old episodes, especially ones about their near misses (ie, the architecture class or the yellow umbrella). We suddenly have an extra emotional response to those scenes.


Plus looking for clues or foreshadowing that we missed the first time round.


----------



## Jagman_sl (Mar 14, 2001)

pahunt said:


> Plus looking for clues or foreshadowing that we missed the first time round.


There was an episode many seasons ago, back when Ted was remodeling the house, where there was a flash-forward to the much older gang sitting on his back porch and there was no mother and no Barney. Granted, that could have just been them filming with the cast they had available, or it could have been "Ted and Robin do end up together" foreshadowing....


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

pahunt said:


> Plus looking for clues or foreshadowing that we missed the first time round.


This. A friend of mine has watched every episode since Christmas while also watching the new episodes. She's occasionally come to me and said, "Watch this episode again," and you see Ted describing the mother to a T (hence my being convinced that her name will be Kim). It's entirely possible that they filmed multiple endings back in '06, but it's also possible that they knew this was a possibility and there's a lot of foreshadowing out there. That would make the show more appealing to me in repeats.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Jagman_sl said:


> There was an episode many seasons ago, back when Ted was remodeling the house, where there was a flash-forward to the much older gang sitting on his back porch and there was no mother and no Barney. Granted, that could have just been them filming with the cast they had available, or it could have been "Ted and Robin do end up together" foreshadowing....


I don't believe Barney or Robin have ever been seen with the gang in the flash forwards. I could be terribly wrong, but I don't think it's happened.


----------



## Jagman_sl (Mar 14, 2001)

Sparty99 said:


> I don't believe Barney or Robin have ever been seen with the gang in the flash forwards. I could be terribly wrong, but I don't think it's happened.


Robin was with them on the patio. I tried to link directly to a picture, but I don't think it worked. Image is here:

http://sepinwall.blogspot.com/2009/03/himym-front-porch-bridge-game-too-far.html


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Jagman_sl said:


> Robin was with them on the patio. I tried to link directly to a picture, but I don't think it worked. Image is here:
> 
> http://sepinwall.blogspot.com/2009/03/himym-front-porch-bridge-game-too-far.html


I stand corrected.


----------



## Jagman_sl (Mar 14, 2001)

But I don't remember Ted sounding like Bob Saget in that scene, so it may not be the real future.


----------



## loubob57 (Mar 19, 2001)

cmontyburns said:


> The main thing is that, during the retelling of the story when Robin's mother arrived, The Mother said something like "she wasn't going to miss her daughter's wedding." And then Ted teared up.


OK, I did see that.



Supfreak26 said:


> If they were hinting that the mother is going to die, they did a horrible job of it. My wife and I were totally confused by teds reaction.


But like you I didn't read "dead mother" into it.


----------



## Silverman (Jan 18, 2013)

Pay more attention to the syndication issue, imagine channel surfing with your girl, you tune across HIMYM in 2017 and she says "turn that downer off, I cried the whole weekend when that ended, it's all a sad useless story."

Speaking of those, how is the syndication of LOST doing? Never seen it here happen despite big budgets and great scenery, but I do see Hawaii-Five_0 reruns. Imagine tuning across an episode of the Dharma plot, you'd realize why watch, the whole thing made no sense at all and nothing was answered, even when an atomic bomb later went off. These guys protecting the island never noticed Dharma came there and built all that and we never heard why they even left. The island was not lost, remember it had food drops, see, nothing made sense in the end at all. It sure reduced its value!


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

Jagman_sl said:


> But I don't remember Ted sounding like Bob Saget in that scene, so it may not be the real future.


FWIW I don't remember ANY Saget in last night's episode


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

This puts that tweet from Alyson Hannigan (the one with a picture of her seat at the table read for the final episode with a bunch of crumpled up kleenex littering her area) in a slightly different context.

I just assumed the implied emotion was from it being the final table read. But now....


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)




----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Silverman said:


> Pay more attention to the syndication issue, imagine channel surfing with your girl, you tune across HIMYM in 2017 and she says "turn that downer off, I cried the whole weekend when that ended, it's all a sad useless story."
> 
> Speaking of those, how is the syndication of LOST doing? Never seen it here happen despite big budgets and great scenery, but I do see Hawaii-Five_0 reruns. Imagine tuning across an episode of the Dharma plot, you'd realize why watch, the whole thing made no sense at all and nothing was answered, even when an atomic bomb later went off. These guys protecting the island never noticed Dharma came there and built all that and we never heard why they even left. The island was not lost, remember it had food drops, see, nothing made sense in the end at all. It sure reduced its value!


This theory about syndication being the reason they wouldn't kill anyone off is pure crap. Most of the syndication deals have already been made, which means they've already bought the finale with what's on 18 different channels right now. Could there be a reduction in renewal values because of a somber ending? Sure, but I seriously doubt it. HIMYM is still a great show to turn on for a one-off viewing if you're clicking around the channels and always will be.

And if I'm not mistaken, Lost got a pretty significant synidcation deal when it was still on the air. The syndication purchasers can't just cancel that deal because they didn't like the ending.


----------



## getbak (Oct 8, 2004)

Jagman_sl said:


> There was an episode many seasons ago, back when Ted was remodeling the house, where there was a flash-forward to the much older gang sitting on his back porch and there was no mother and no Barney. Granted, that could have just been them filming with the cast they had available, or it could have been "Ted and Robin do end up together" foreshadowing....


I just looked up that episode on Netflix, and all of the "future" scenes in that episode are the characters imagining themselves in the future. In that scene, it is Lily imagining what Ted & Robin being married would be like.

It can't be used as any foreshadowing to the "real" future.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cmontyburns said:


> The main thing is that, during the retelling of the story when Robin's mother arrived, The Mother said something like "she wasn't going to miss her daughter's wedding." And then Ted teared up.


No, that's not what it was. They were talking about Robin's mother showing up to Robin's wedding, and Ted said that was the "surprise ending." The Mother then said, "That's not really such a surprise. I mean, c'mon. Of course she showed up. What mother is going to miss her daughter's wedding?"

And that's when Ted teared up. The implication is that Ted realizes the Mother is going to miss her own daughter's wedding because she'll be dead before then.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> No, that's not what it was. They were talking about Robin's mother showing up to Robin's wedding, and Ted said that was the "surprise ending." The Mother then said, "That's not really such a surprise. I mean, c'mon. Of course she showed up. What mother is going to miss her daughter's wedding?"
> 
> And that's when Ted teared up. The implication is that Ted realizes the Mother is going to miss her own daughter's wedding because she'll be dead before then.


I'm not sure how that's not what I said.


----------



## Jagman_sl (Mar 14, 2001)

getbak said:


> I just looked up that episode on Netflix, and all of the "future" scenes in that episode are the characters imagining themselves in the future. In that scene, it is Lily imagining what Ted & Robin being married would be like.
> 
> It can't be used as any foreshadowing to the "real" future.


Interesting! I remembered the scene but apparently not the context. So that does leave things open....


----------



## Silverman (Jan 18, 2013)

Regarding syndication, the buyer can always say they will never buy again or demand a credit on the next contract for a show because this one turned out so bad. So if there was a big deal for LOST, where are they on the air? Compare that to all the stations running CSI, NCIS, Hawaii5-0 and other high budget shows and they just keep showing them. LOST was one of the best and most exciting shows on the air, too, till the stupid last year and ending. I think I have a valid point. How many out there are watching LOST reruns, compared to these other shows I named?


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Silverman said:


> Regarding syndication, the buyer can always say they will never buy again or demand a credit on the next contract for a show because this one turned out so bad. So if there was a big deal for LOST, where are they on the air? Compare that to all the stations running CSI, NCIS, Hawaii5-0 and other high budget shows and they just keep showing them. LOST was one of the best and most exciting shows on the air, too, till the stupid last year and ending. I think I have a valid point. How many out there are watching LOST reruns, compared to these other shows I named?


CSI and NCIS are procedurals and Lost is not. Totally different viewing dynamics.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Silverman said:


> Regarding syndication, the buyer can always say they will never buy again or demand a credit on the next contract for a show because this one turned out so bad. So if there was a big deal for LOST, where are they on the air? Compare that to all the stations running CSI, NCIS, Hawaii5-0 and other high budget shows and they just keep showing them. LOST was one of the best and most exciting shows on the air, too, till the stupid last year and ending. I think I have a valid point. How many out there are watching LOST reruns, compared to these other shows I named?


As cmontyburns said, NCIS, CSI, Hawaii 5-0, and any number of other shows - including HIMYM - are conducive to the one off viewing that Lost is not. A random individual cannot tune into an episode of Lost and have any clue about what's going on. While there's an overarcing "mythology" to HIMYM, for the most part it doesn't interfere with individual episodes. With Lost, every episode connected to that mythology and unless you've watched from episode 1, you're going to be lost (no pun intended).

So, sorry, but again, Lost wasn't some grand syndication failure because it's ending sucked, no matter what you'd like to believe.

Hell, Seinfeld's ending sucked and that thing's on 14 times a day.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

Sparty99 said:


> As cmontyburns said, NCIS, CSI, Hawaii 5-0, and any number of other shows - including HIMYM - are conducive to the one off viewing that Lost is not. A random individual cannot tune into an episode of Lost and have any clue about what's going on. While there's an overarcing "mythology" to HIMYM, for the most part it doesn't interfere with individual episodes. With Lost, every episode connected to that mythology and unless you've watched from episode 1, you're going to be lost (no pun intended).
> 
> So, sorry, but again, Lost wasn't some grand syndication failure because it's ending sucked, no matter what you'd like to believe.
> 
> *Hell, Seinfeld's ending sucked and that thing's on 14 times a day*.


Ha. They could have the mother getting hit by a bus in the very last scene and not match the Seinfeld finale!


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

So using my own idea about foreshadowing, I went for the obvious and rewatched the Time Travelers episode and it now could not be clearer in my mind that the mother is dead in 2030.

The way the scene plays out when Ted literally runs to her apartment, gives the speech about how he wants those "extra 45 days" and that he'll love her "to the end of my days and beyond" means that if she is not dead, I'll actually feel cheated.

I just pray that they don't put him back together within Robin because in my eyes to do the story justice Ted has to end up lonely, anything else would feel like a cop out.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Sparty99 said:


> With Lost, every episode connected to that mythology and unless you've watched from episode 1, you're going to be lost (no pun intended).


My understanding is that even having watched from episode 1 doesn't really help either.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

billypritchard said:


> Ha. They could have the mother getting hit by a bus in the very last scene and not match the Seinfeld finale!


Maybe the Mom gets cancer from licking all the cheap envelopes Ted bought for their wedding invitations.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

pahunt said:


> So using my own idea about foreshadowing, I went for the obvious and rewatched the Time Travelers episode and it now could not be clearer in my mind that the mother is dead in 2030.
> 
> The way the scene plays out when Ted literally runs to her apartment, gives the speech about how he wants those "extra 45 days" and that he'll love her "to the end of my days and beyond" means that if she is not dead, I'll actually feel cheated.
> 
> I just pray that they don't put him back together within Robin because in my eyes to do the story justice *Ted has to end up lonely,* anything else would feel like a cop out.


I wouldn't say he 'ends up lonely'. He finds the 'one'. They get married. They have two kids. He has a family to support him if she does die. He's got his friends to support him as well.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

I vaguely recall (and could be completely wrong) that some episode in a previous season had a flashforward scene with Ted, Marshall, and Lilly at a funeral where they ended up "eating a sandwich". Any chance that could have been the Mother's funeral?


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

billypritchard said:


> I wouldn't say he 'ends up lonely'. He finds the 'one'. They get married. They have two kids. He has a family to support him if she does die. He's got his friends to support him as well.


Fair point, I suppose what I was getting at was I don't want them to pair Ted up with Robin for the sake of it. I want him to be alone and treasuring the memories of the women that we waited 8 seasons to meet, rather than just moving on with someone else as it would just make the story we've been watching seem less important somehow.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Ereth said:


> No, no, no, no.
> 
> We finally meet the mother, and she's TERRIFIC. A character I wish we'd spent more seasons with, and now they all but tell us they are killing her off?
> 
> I think "Burn in Hell, Fox" is about to get a companion slogan.


I don't really feel this way. It's not like there's more show to be had that we aren't going to see her in.

If it's a story that's well told, it doesn't really matter to me what it is.

I think it'd be worse if this is just a story he's telling his kids for no reason.

-smak-


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

billypritchard said:


> He's got his friends to support him as well.


You could argue that that is really the theme of the show. Friends supporting friends. (Loosely based around Ted's search for the one.)


----------



## Donbadabon (Mar 5, 2002)

Regarding the mom and whether or not she may die, this has an interesting note that I hadn't seen mentioned before:

http://jezebel.com/how-i-met-your-mother-fans-worried-the-mothers-been-de-1535996287

(Note there is a strong curse word in that whole article linked above, but not in the spoiler text below).



Spoiler



During the show's scenes that allegedly occur in the year 2030, the mother has never, not a once, been mentioned in the present tense. She also never appears in flash forwards of the gang of friends around which the show rotates; not even from the back. It seems like The Mother is simply not present in the future beyond the year 2024.


----------



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

busyba said:


> Maybe the Mom gets cancer from licking all the cheap envelopes Ted bought for their wedding invitations.


:up:


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

It occurs to me that "Vesuvius", is the volcano of outrage they expect from the audience when this aired.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

Ereth said:


> It occurs to me that "Vesuvius", is the volcano of outrage they expect from the audience when this aired.


I doubt they would name an episode based on expectations from the audience.

More likely it's the "eruption" of the secret that has been bubbling for a long time waiting to be released.


----------



## Donbadabon (Mar 5, 2002)

pahunt said:


> So using my own idea about foreshadowing, I went for the obvious and rewatched the Time Travelers episode and it now could not be clearer in my mind that the mother is dead in 2030.


Thanks for the reminder of this episode. I just re-watched it too. What a great episode.

And based on Ted's delivery of '45 days' and '45 seconds', it really does tell us that he needs those days.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

I don't suppose that it's actually Ted that's dead in 2030 and the Bob Saget voice over is a recording Ted made in 2024.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

I still have an issue with the kids being bored in all of the stories if she died. A wonderful woman as we have seen would not engender boredom on stories as we have seen. 

Maybe it is as simple as she left him but she comes back to him after hearing all the stories again. The kids would be bored from those stories. He would trade that time as he feels he messed up and she comes back in the final scene. All happy. But whatever they do, they do. If it is well written, fine. 

"Don't stop (believing)"


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

This whole thing is beginning to remind me of "Paul is dead" from 1970.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> I still have an issue with the kids being bored in all of the stories if she died. A wonderful woman as we have seen would not engender boredom on stories as we have seen.


They're bored because 99.8% of the story has had absolutely nothing to do with their mother.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> They're bored because 99.8% of the story has had absolutely nothing to do with their mother.


The whole "how I met your mother" non-part of the show never really bothered me, because the show was funny, and I really didn't care what the premise was, it was just a setup to tell funny stories.

Buuuuut, if this is Ted reminiscing about his kids dead mother, it makes the whole thing a bit weird.

Why this story at this time?

Kind of makes me wonder about Barney's absence in the future...

Ted never meets her without being there for Barney & Robin's wedding....

-smak-


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

I've always assumed that the sorry from the kids standpoint took 30 minutes to relate. The kids are always wearing the same clothes. They haven't changed at all, etc. No way they sat there for 3 days straight. You can always tell a story in a lot shorter time then it does to act out on the TV.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

This show is known for its fake outs. The mother is dead theory has also been around for awhile and I'm sure Bays and Thomas are aware of it. It wouldn't shock me at all if they are laying all the bread crumbs to make it seem like that theory is indeed correct but then pull a switch at the end that goes in a different direction. It's not like they haven't done that type of thing before.


----------



## ThePennyDropped (Jul 5, 2006)

There could be a variation of the dead mother theory that isn't such an (inappropriate?) downer. Perhaps the mother has recently undergone testing for some awful medical condition (cancer, for example), and they're waiting to find the results, and distracting themselves during this waiting period by visiting the inn where they met. Ted is worrying that he's going to lose her, but she has confidence that everything's going to be okay. So she's able to be strong, and he falls apart whenever she talks about the future (daughter getting married).


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

ThePennyDropped said:


> There could be a variation of the dead mother theory that isn't such an (inappropriate?) downer. Perhaps the mother has recently undergone testing for some awful medical condition (cancer, for example), and they're waiting to find the results, and distracting themselves during this waiting period by visiting the inn where they met. Ted is worrying that he's going to lose her, but she has confidence that everything's going to be okay. So she's able to be strong, and he falls apart whenever she talks about the future (daughter getting married).


Another possibility that works.

But would the kids be bored or anxious?

I just can't get by the bored part.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

It is TED telling the story. Anyone would be bored.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

On the subject of whether the show's owners would tell the writers they can't end with a dead mother, I find myself thinking of the finale for Dexter. I'll spoiler that in case anyone hasn't seen it (and wants to (and hasn't yet been convinced to just skip it, please, in the name of all that is holy, we're not kidding here)).


Spoiler



If the show's owners refused to let Dexter end with his death, despite how it really had to, is HIMYM's ownership really THAT much more brave than Showtime? Then again, maybe Dexter's utter failure has sent them the message they should stick with it -- despite that it's as UNnecessary here as it WAS necessary there, IMO.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Michael S said:


> I would hate it if they ended the series on the she's dead thing. I would like them to end the series on a high note instead of downer. Also did they make Ted look older in this episode? He looked like he had a receding hairline.


I thought it looked like a wig on Future Ted.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

cmontyburns said:


> The main thing is that, during the retelling of the story when Robin's mother arrived, The Mother said something like "she wasn't going to miss her daughter's wedding." And then Ted teared up.


I thought that that meant that Ted's mother wasn't at HIS wedding..?!?!?!


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Silverman said:


> Speaking of those, how is the syndication of LOST doing?


Hour long shows as a whole, ESPECIALLY ones as serial as Lost (I say "as serial" since it's not quite as bad as a soap opera, every episode literally continuing directly on), haven't done well in syndication for a very long time. I've seen that covered in media articles for a long time.

Plus, _my_ own guess is that things like Netflix and DVDs/Blurays have even more lowered the potential watchers of hour long show reruns.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

waynomo said:


> This whole thing is beginning to remind me of "Paul is dead" from 1970.


1969, according to Wikipedia.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Hunter Green said:


> On the subject of whether the show's owners would tell the writers they can't end with a dead mother, I find myself thinking of the finale for Dexter. I'll spoiler that in case anyone hasn't seen it (and wants to (and hasn't yet been convinced to just skip it, please, in the name of all that is holy, we're not kidding here)).
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


The last season of Dexter sucked . . .



Spoiler



. . . not because they elected not to kill Dexter. The last season sucked because the story sucked.



Having the mom die or not die will not determine how good or bad this season of HIMYM was.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

ThePennyDropped said:


> There could be a variation of the dead mother theory that isn't such an (inappropriate?) downer. Perhaps the mother has recently undergone testing for some awful medical condition (cancer, for example), and they're waiting to find the results, and distracting themselves during this waiting period by visiting the inn where they met. Ted is worrying that he's going to lose her, but she has confidence that everything's going to be okay. So she's able to be strong, and he falls apart whenever she talks about the future (daughter getting married).


Even if so, I come back to what's the point? There's only a few episodes left. Nine years of waiting to see the moment when Ted meets the love of his life doesn't create enough drama? And why wait all that time, build up all that anticipation, and then submarine it with some plot stunt? Either way, all they are doing is jerking the audience around needlessly.


----------



## alpacaboy (Oct 29, 2004)

Maybe in this episode, future them just think she's going to die.
But it takes place right before Barney gives her a legen
dary high-five of awesomeness that completely cures her.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

DUDE_NJX said:


> I doubt they would name an episode based on expectations from the audience.
> 
> More likely it's the "eruption" of the secret that has been bubbling for a long time waiting to be released.


Which secret would that be?


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

Ereth said:


> Which secret would that be?


The premature death?


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

The episode title refers to Robin keeping everything bottled up, and the appearance of her mother being the catalyst for the volcanic eruption.

At least that's how I would read it.


----------



## Silverman (Jan 18, 2013)

mattack said:


> Hour long shows as a whole, ESPECIALLY ones as serial as Lost (I say "as serial" since it's not quite as bad as a soap opera, every episode literally continuing directly on), haven't done well in syndication for a very long time. I've seen that covered in media articles for a long time.
> 
> Plus, _my_ own guess is that things like Netflix and DVDs/Blurays have even more lowered the potential watchers of hour long show reruns.


Well you sure could be right, but up thread someone said LOST got a huge syndication deal before everyone got mad at it, either that's not true or it failed miserably due to bad ending and no resolutions to it all. Even saying they are dead does not explain Dharma, atom bombs, and the food drops by military on an island supposedly "lost" that can move, it even had submarines come visit too. People got mad, I know I did, and never will watch again.

That will happen to HIMYM if they do this downer. Some mentioned Seinfield, that was a dumb episode but nothing in it was a downer or made the older episodes wrong or sad at all. Actually they had a bunch of bad episodes but the good ones were quite good, kind of like Star Trek.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

mattack said:


> I thought that that meant that Ted's mother wasn't at HIS wedding..?!?!?!


I don't think that would explain their reactions. If the Mother said something insensitive that upset Ted, she would have apologized when she realized it. But she didn't apologize. Instead, her reaction was, "Oh hey...no...c'mon..." I think it was pretty clear why Ted gave her that sad, pitying look and then teared up after she said, "What mother is gonna miss her daughter's wedding?"


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Silverman said:


> That will happen to HIMYM if they do this downer. Some mentioned Seinfield, that was a dumb episode but nothing in it was a downer or made the older episodes wrong or sad at all. Actually they had a bunch of bad episodes but the good ones were quite good, kind of like Star Trek.


HIMYM has had lots of great episodes that hold up well individually also. The downer MASH conclusion didn't kill that in syndication. And they had some downer episodes through the years also.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Silverman said:


> Well you sure could be right, but up thread *someone said LOST got a huge syndication deal before everyone got mad at it,* either that's not true or it failed miserably due to bad ending and no resolutions to it all. Even saying they are dead does not explain Dharma, atom bombs, and the food drops by military on an island supposedly "lost" that can move, it even had submarines come visit too. People got mad, I know I did, and never will watch again.
> 
> That will happen to HIMYM if they do this downer. Some mentioned Seinfield, that was a dumb episode but nothing in it was a downer or made the older episodes wrong or sad at all. Actually they had a bunch of bad episodes but the good ones were quite good, kind of like Star Trek.


LOST was sold into cable syndication in 2008. G4 and SciFi bought the rights, and apparently combined they paid about $200k per episode.

http://variety.com/2007/tv/news/lost-found-by-g4-sci-fi-channel-1117974108/

That doesn't include broadcast syndication rights. I know I remember seeing episodes being rerun late at night on broadcast channels back in the day.

As for whether LOST was successful in syndication, take a look at the per-episode prices in this chart and you'll see that even in 2008 when LOST was in its heyday, the per-episode value of its syndication deal was relatively low, which is because everyone knew that the serial nature of the show would reduce its popularity as a syndicated show. It had nothing to do with the ending, since the ending didn't air until May 2010.


----------



## ferrumpneuma (Jun 1, 2006)

They should end it with Professor Proton waking up from a dream next to Penny in the BBT universe.


That would be a satisfying end.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Sparty99 said:


> I don't know why, but the dead mother storyline doesn't bother me. I think it's another look at love, like Ted spends all this time looking for "the one", and when he finally finds her it's gone before he knows it.
> 
> What I WOULD hate is if they use this development as an excuse to get Ted and Robin back together. *When I read the lyrics to the Dylan song, it's not hard to come to the conclusion that the song is not about the mother but instead about Robin. That would be a horrible twist for the show to take.*
> 
> There is one thing I'm curious about. Throughout the years on this forum some of us have complained about the fact that the reveal of the mother had taken too long, had been teased too much, while others said that the story was about the journey, and that it was fine if we didn't meet the mother until the very end. I'm genuinely curious how the "journey" people would feel if this is truly how the story ends, with a dead mother or a new love interest for Ted. I can't imagine it would be as simple as being about the journey in such a case.


That's my thought as well, that they are leading us to the inevitable conclusion that Ted winds up with Robin after all, but she's not the mother. The interesting thing is, the character Robins has morphed into...the tomboy, beer swigging Canadian, to me is completely incompatible with what Ted has become. They made a HUGE point about Robin not being sentimental in this episode and yet we know Ted is extremely sentimental. Why I think it's SO wrong if Ted and Robin come back together at the end is they have just spent an entire season showing why they AREN'T really compatible as if to say that there's no way Ted and Robin should be together.

If they go this route, it will rank up there with Lost as the most disappointing ending ever (of course they could prove me wrong and I might like it).


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

DUDE_NJX said:


> The premature death?


Ok, we must be talking past one another. Because this conversation seems circular to me.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> That's my thought as well, that they are leading us to the inevitable conclusion that Ted winds up with Robin after all, but she's not the mother. The interesting thing is, the character Robins has morphed into...the tomboy, beer swigging Canadian, to me is completely incompatible with what Ted has become. They made a HUGE point about Robin not being sentimental in this episode and yet we know Ted is extremely sentimental. Why I think it's SO wrong if Ted and Robin come back together at the end is they have just spent an entire season showing why they AREN'T really compatible as if to say that there's no way Ted and Robin should be together.
> 
> *If they go this route, it will rank up there with Lost as the most disappointing ending ever (of course they could prove me wrong and I might like it)*.


+1

I am perfectly fine with the mother being dead in 2030, and Ted and the kids living their lives. I am NOT fine with Ted hooking back up with Robin. Giant Enormous Fail if that happens.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

busyba said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Based on this, here's another theory about the ending:



Spoiler



Maybe TED is the one who's dead. The kids are watching a recording of Ted telling the story(s). If you look at the kids, they are ALWAYS looking forward and staring at the same spot. Maybe they are looking at a TV screen.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> Based on this, here's another theory about the ending:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


First 10 seconds of the pilot episode rule this possibility out, unless the kids are having a conversation with the TV.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

pahunt said:


> First 10 seconds of the pilot episode rule this possibility out, unless the kids are having a conversation with the TV.


What happened during those first 10 seconds, I haven't seen it since it first aired.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> What happened during those first 10 seconds, I haven't seen it since it first aired.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

pahunt said:


> First 10 seconds of the pilot episode rule this possibility out, unless the kids are having a conversation with the TV.


Or they are asking an offscreen Mother/Robin/Lily/Marshall/Barney/Ranjit.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

JYoung said:


> Or they are asking an offscreen Mother/Robin/Lily/Marshall/Barney/Ranjit.


Except that Future Ted responds to their questions.


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Except that Future Ted responds to their questions.


Technology has made great strides between now and 2030.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Or Ted simply could have anticipated the questions when he made the recording.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

pahunt said:


> First 10 seconds of the pilot episode rule this possibility out, unless the kids are having a conversation with the TV.


You could argue that when Ted sees Robin for the first time agrees with the theory that Robin and Ted do get married. It starts about 5:45 in. "See that girl. I'm going to marry her one day."

Also, kids are kids. I'm not sure you can attribute much to their remarks except it was a funny way to start the show. All they really indicated is they didn't want to hear another boring story from their dad. There is nothing in what they that indicates their mom is either dead or alive.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

waynomo said:


> Also, kids are kids. I'm not sure you can attribute much to their remarks except it was a funny way to start the show. All they really indicated is they didn't want to hear another boring story from their dad. There is nothing in what they that indicates their mom is either dead or alive.


Except it would make it very hard to justify why they were talking to Future Ted, and why he responded to them, if it's him that's dead in 2030 and they're watching a video that dad made for them before he died.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Except it would make it very hard to justify why they were talking to Future Ted, and why he responded to them, if it's him that's dead in 2030 and they're watching a video that dad made for them before he died.


I thought we were talking about the mom dying. Sorry, I guess I lost the train of thought. No way Ted is dead.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> Except that Future Ted responds to their questions.





verdugan said:


> Technology has made great strides between now and 2030.





JYoung said:


> Or Ted simply could have anticipated the questions when he made the recording.





DevdogAZ said:


> Except it would make it very hard to justify why they were talking to Future Ted, and why he responded to them, if it's him that's dead in 2030 and they're watching a video that dad made for them before he died.


Hologram Ted.

Holograms are future canon in HIMYM...

-smak-


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> I don't think that would explain their reactions. If the Mother said something insensitive that upset Ted, she would have apologized when she realized it. But she didn't apologize. Instead, her reaction was, "Oh hey...no...c'mon..." I think it was pretty clear why Ted gave her that sad, pitying look and then teared up after she said, "What mother is gonna miss her daughter's wedding?"


I mean that Ted's mother had died, and thus was not at his wedding. That would explain his reaction to me.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

mattack said:


> I mean that Ted's mother had died, and thus was not at his wedding. That would explain his reaction to me.


Again, the Mother said, "What mother misses her DAUGHTER'S wedding?" If the writers were trying to have Ted become sentimental because his own mother missed his wedding, they would not have had him get sentimental at that line. They would have reworded it to say "What parent misses their kid's wedding?"


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Well a running joke in the series is how girly Ted is. :-D


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Except it would make it very hard to justify why they were talking to Future Ted, and why he responded to them, if it's him that's dead in 2030 and they're watching a video that dad made for them before he died.


You never talked to the TV and anticipated questions? It's extremely plausible.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Again, the Mother said, "What mother misses her DAUGHTER'S wedding?" If the writers were trying to have Ted become sentimental because his own mother missed his wedding, they would not have had him get sentimental at that line. They would have reworded it to say "What parent misses their kid's wedding?"


The phrase "What mother misses her daughter's wedding?" Makes it sound like she would have done that on purpose. If the mother died, that wouldn't have been on purpose. I don't see the sentimentality of that comment.


----------



## Jagman_sl (Mar 14, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> The phrase "What mother misses her daughter's wedding?" Makes it sound like she would have done that on purpose. If the mother died, that wouldn't have been on purpose. I don't see the sentimentality of that comment.


I think the mother meant it differently than Ted wound up taking it. She was saying one thing but then the actual words sank in with Ted and caused his reaction.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> The phrase "What mother misses her daughter's wedding?" Makes it sound like she would have done that on purpose. If the mother died, that wouldn't have been on purpose. I don't see the sentimentality of that comment.





Jagman_sl said:


> I think the mother meant it differently than Ted wound up taking it. She was saying one thing but then the actual words sank in with Ted and caused his reaction.


The Mother was responding to Ted saying that Robin's mother showing up for Barney and Robin's wedding was a surprise. The Mother said it wasn't really a surprise. "What mother misses her daughter's wedding?"

Clearly the Mother meant it as a mother wouldn't intentionally miss her daughter's wedding. Not a very earth-shattering statement. But clearly Ted read deeper meaning into it, because presumably he realizes that the Mother of his own daughter is going to miss her daughter's wedding. Once the Mother realizes what she said, and how Ted interpreted it, it's clear she knows what he's thinking, and she tries to act like it's not something he should worry about.

Is anyone actually trying to argue that the Mother being on the verge of dying in the 2024 scenes ISN'T what the show was trying to hint at? Note that I'm not saying that's what will happen. This show is known for its twists. But I think it's very clear that's what the writers were trying to have us understand from that scene. I haven't yet heard/read any rational explanations for anything else.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Is anyone actually trying to argue that the Mother being on the verge of dying in the 2024 scenes ISN'T what the show was trying to hint at? Note that I'm not saying that's what will happen. This show is known for its twists. But I think it's very clear that's what the writers were trying to have us understand from that scene. I haven't yet heard/read any rational explanations for anything else.


I'm with you 100% on this. I'm sure that the vast majority of people who watch this show have not heard the theory that the mother is dead. Those are the people who they're writing for most of the time and they need to start preparing the ground for the big reveal. The Time Travelers episode hinted at it but with only a few episodes to go they need to start ramping it up and in my eyes that's what the last scene was all about. Clearly, judging by some of the comments in this thread, not everyone interpreted it that way but I honestly believe that's what they were aiming for.


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

pahunt said:


> I'm with you 100% on this. I'm sure that the vast majority of people who watch this show have not heard the theory that the mother is dead. Those are the people who they're writing for most of the time and they need to start preparing the ground for the big reveal. The Time Travelers episode hinted at it but with only a few episodes to go they need to start ramping it up and in my eyes that's what the last scene was all about. Clearly, judging by some of the comments in this thread, not everyone interpreted it that way but I honestly believe that's what they were aiming for.


I'd heard about the episode before watching, and that may have colored how I watched. By having that information beforehand, it was obvious that was the case. I just hope it's mis-direction, but I kind of doubt it.

I never liked Ted, or more accurately who he turned into, but I felt really bad for him here.


----------



## sushikitten (Jan 28, 2005)

Mr. Soze said:


> I'd heard about the episode before watching, and that may have colored how I watched. By having that information beforehand, it was obvious that was the case. I just hope it's mis-direction, but I kind of doubt it.


Same here.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

My friend who I discuss the show with, but is not an internet reader type, didn't really pick up on the dead mother aspect. I think his thought was the Ted's mother theory.

So it obviously wasn't clear to everyone.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

Mr. Soze said:


> I just hope it's mis-direction, but I kind of doubt it.


I doubt it too. The point I was trying to make when I was talking about who they're writing for is that we are all way over-analysing this stuff and the simplest answer (i.e. she's dead) is most likely to be true.

Since watching Time Travelers again the other night something else has struck me that I hadn't thought about before. It's easy to forget that the "45 days / 45 seconds" speech never actually happened, it was just 2030 Ted's imagination. So while on screen we saw 2013 Ted talking, the words were coming directly from 2030 Ted and if the Mother is dead at that point the urgency and intensity with which he delivers it make perfect sense.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

billypritchard said:


> My friend who I discuss the show with, but is not an internet reader type, didn't really pick up on the dead mother aspect. I think his thought was the Ted's mother theory.
> 
> So it obviously wasn't clear to everyone.


Interesting, so whether it was intentional or not on the writers part, this may turn out to be a Sixth Sense type scenario where once you've seen the end you want to go back and pick up on the clues you missed first time around.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

billypritchard said:


> So it obviously wasn't clear to everyone.


It wasn't clear to me. I guess I should have read more of the threads here.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

My wife doesn't know about the mom being dead theory. Should I tell her?


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

waynomo said:


> My wife doesn't know about the mom being dead theory. Should I tell her?


No!! I wish I could unknow it.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I didn't catch what Ted was getting emotional about when I first watched. I came here to see what people thought. I read the first few posts, then rewatched that scene, and then it was very clear. I could see how someone might not catch what's being hinted at if they're only casually paying attention. But I can't see how someone could interpret it any other way after watching it a few times.


----------



## 2004raptor (Dec 31, 2005)

waynomo said:


> It wasn't clear to me. I guess I should have read more of the threads here.


I just got around to watching the episode last night. I had already read the thread at that point. I didn't get the same sense from that scene as others say but in hindsight I guess it's a possibility.



waynomo said:


> My wife doesn't know about the mom being dead theory. Should I tell her?


Mine doesn't either. I almost wanted to as her her thoughts and see what she said but she didn't have any reaction at all to the scene or episode.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

I guess I'm not going to tell her, but I really want to discuss it with her.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Again, the Mother said, "What mother misses her DAUGHTER'S wedding?" If the writers were trying to have Ted become sentimental because his own mother missed his wedding, they would not have had him get sentimental at that line. They would have reworded it to say "What parent misses their kid's wedding?"


Wow.. I think you're taking it way too literally... (and I pride myself on taking things literally)

I think it makes it MORE impactful to say it that way, with daughter, but then imagine in Ted's mind him remembering that his mom didn't make it to his wedding.

In other words, if she had said "kid's wedding", it would be more clear to me she would (in real life) not make that mistake.. But saying it as "daughter's", that kind of a goof would happen more easily.

Again, I have no idea if this is really what they're referring to, but seems to be a valid interpretation of the scene.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

waynomo said:


> I guess I'm not going to tell her, but I really want to discuss it with her.


I'm in the same situation, but we'll be able to talk about it in a few weeks.

In a way, I'm not telling mine as an experiment: is she going to hate it as much as I think I will? Is all this speculation ruining it for one of us and if so which?


----------



## nyc13 (May 31, 2013)

My wife doesn't read here or anywhere about the show. After that scene we both said something like "that was a strange scene". Then *she* was the one to say she had a theory. It was the dead mother theory. So it is possible to come up with it independently (of course, since someone had to be the first to mention it here).


----------



## JoeyJoJo (Sep 29, 2003)

mattack said:


> Wow.. I think you're taking it way too literally... (and I pride myself on taking things literally)
> 
> I think it makes it MORE impactful to say it that way, with daughter, but then imagine in Ted's mind him remembering that his mom didn't make it to his wedding.
> 
> ...


Not a chance. They high-fived because they got to be an "old married couple." She told him she didn't want him living in his stories. He got choked up when she made the comment about the wedding. In that scene they both knew she was dying.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> The Mother was responding to Ted saying that Robin's mother showing up for Barney and Robin's wedding was a surprise. The Mother said it wasn't really a surprise. "What mother misses her daughter's wedding?"
> 
> Clearly the Mother meant it as a mother wouldn't intentionally miss her daughter's wedding. Not a very earth-shattering statement. But clearly Ted read deeper meaning into it, because presumably he realizes that the Mother of his own daughter is going to miss her daughter's wedding. Once the Mother realizes what she said, and how Ted interpreted it, it's clear she knows what he's thinking, and she tries to act like it's not something he should worry about.
> 
> Is anyone actually trying to argue that the Mother being on the verge of dying in the 2024 scenes ISN'T what the show was trying to hint at? Note that I'm not saying that's what will happen. This show is known for its twists. But I think it's very clear that's what the writers were trying to have us understand from that scene. I haven't yet heard/read any rational explanations for anything else.


When I first watched the episode, no, I didn't think that at all. It was only until everyone here started talking about that I saw that it could be that. I'm still not convinced, but you could be right.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> I didn't catch what Ted was getting emotional about when I first watched. I came here to see what people thought. I read the first few posts, then rewatched that scene, and then it was very clear. I could see how someone might not catch what's being hinted at if they're only casually paying attention. But I can't see how someone could interpret it any other way after watching it a few times.


I think, after watching it A FEW TIMES, and armed with all the theories here, it's easy to convince yourself that this is what you saw. If you didn't know anything about it and watched it a few times, would you have thought that?


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

waynomo said:


> I guess I'm not going to tell her, but I really want to discuss it with her.


I'd tell her. It's only a TV show 

Plus, if she doesn't know, and she does die at the end, are you prepared to deal with the waterworks?


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> When I first watched the episode, no, I didn't think that at all. It was only until everyone here started talking about that I saw that it could be that. I'm still not convinced, but you could be right.


I really don't understand how, having seen the episode and having heard the theories, how you don't see that. I mean, theoretically the reference about the mother missing her daughter's wedding could refer to Ted's mother not being at his wedding, but I can't imagine it would get that kind of response from Ted. I mean, we all know Ted's girly, but we've never known him to be weepy, and at the time we're watching Ted and the Mother in the inn, it would've been something like 9-10 years after their wedding. I just can't imagine he would've had that reaction that amount of time after the fact. Count me among those who don't understand how people are not seeing the dead mother overtones.



Steveknj said:


> I think, after watching it A FEW TIMES, and armed with all the theories here, it's easy to convince yourself that this is what you saw. If you didn't know anything about it and watched it a few times, would you have thought that?


I will admit that I've known about the dead mother theory since at least the Time Travelers episode, so I can't speak about watching it without that knowledge. But I just can't imagine not seeing that in that reveal about missing her daughter's wedding. I didn't think much about the comment about Ted getting lost in his stories until after the episode was over, but with the ending to the show it was just so clear that she was saying that Ted will have to move on without her.


----------



## jehma (Jan 22, 2003)

waynomo said:


> My wife doesn't know about the mom being dead theory. Should I tell her?


I told my husband after the last episode. I warned him first that there was no way to unhear it and he wanted to. He immediately said "that all makes perfect sense now". I think he'll enjoy it more picking up on the clues rather than being surprised at the end.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> I think, after watching it A FEW TIMES, and armed with all the theories here, it's easy to convince yourself that this is what you saw. If you didn't know anything about it and watched it a few times, would you have thought that?


I watched it exactly once. And it screamed out at me that she was dying. As I said, they hit us over the head with it.

Perhaps it's more obvious to someone who has lost a parent? There was no question in my mind that they were telling us she's dying, she's accepted it, and she's trying to help Ted get used to the idea of going on without her.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

Ereth said:


> I watched it exactly once. And it screamed out at me that she was dying. As I said, they hit us over the head with it.
> 
> Perhaps it's more obvious to someone who has lost a parent? There was no question in my mind that they were telling us she's dying, she's accepted it, and she's trying to help Ted get used to the idea of going on without her.


Yeah, personal experience might play into it. I lost my sister-in-law (brother's wife) to cancer when she was just 36, two kids 6 and under. I had dinners with her where she looked young and vibrant, but where you knew it wouldn't last. It's no shock that the emotions for Ted were just under the surface.


----------



## jehma (Jan 22, 2003)

I heard the theory last week and watched this episode once. By the end it was very clear to me, and I haven't had any personal experiences that are relevant. My husband was able to immediately list the clues that had been in the episode when I told him the theory afterwards, which to me means they stood out to him even without knowing why.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Steveknj said:


> I'd tell her. It's only a TV show
> 
> Plus, if she doesn't know, and she does die at the end, are you prepared to deal with the waterworks?


You raise an interesting point seeing as my wife lost her mom in October. It was very sudden. She is still not entirely over it. But I could handle any emotional outbursts that brings.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Ereth said:


> Perhaps it's more obvious to someone who has lost a parent?


Not to me. I've lost both of my parents, but it has been quite some time.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I think, after watching it A FEW TIMES, and armed with all the theories here, it's easy to convince yourself that this is what you saw. If you didn't know anything about it and watched it a few times, would you have thought that?


I knew there was something about that scene that I missed when I watched it the first time. I was only partially paying attention and couldn't hear the TV that well. But I could tell that the reason Ted got emotional was something important.

I think whether I read the theories here or simply watched it again, I think it would have become obvious. I simply don't see how it could be interpreted as anything else.


----------



## Silverman (Jan 18, 2013)

I think just the length of this thread about just one short scene in 1 episode shows how upset the network audience will be if this is true. Others can think what they want but such an ending will turn off the value of the show in reruns for sure. Sure, some will watch, but the show won't make the ratings goals if it's such a downer and the owners will know that if the writers don't. You can't compare to MASH, that ending was a guy wanting to go to an active combat zone during a war. The result should not be that surprising at all. Especially in a show about...guess what...servicemen being shot in the war. 

A young girl in a comedy dying without purpose is just not going to happen with all the audience studies they do now days. If people leaving a taping of the show were surveyed, how many would you think would want to kill the newly seen mother? Everyone loves her, me too. Now maybe if this was a deep drama... like that doctor killed by a copter in Emergency, you might have something.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Stop with the dire predictions about the syndication market. This show has made over 200 episodes. It's already been in syndication for years. It will continue to be in syndication for years. The quality of the show has dropped dramatically from the first couple of seasons. But it's still going to be available in reruns for a long, long time, regardless of whether the Mother dies or not.


----------



## awsnyde (May 11, 2007)

I'm in the apparent minority that does not believe the quality of the show has declined precipitously, although it's not quite as funny as it was in the earlier seasons. Still, unlike the later seasons of Scrubs, Roseanne, etc., etc., I haven't stopped watching altogether, and still find it quite entertaining. In particular, I am enjoying this season a lot.

That said, I would *not* like it if the mother ends up dying. However, like any fiction that ends in a manner I don't like, if that does happen I will simply rewrite the ending in my head. I've been doing it for decades, and I'll almost certainly keep doing it 'til I die. A recent example would be Dexter. I actually liked the final episode, even as written, but I did indeed rewrite the ending so that Dexter's sister lived *and* Dexter and Hannah end up happily together.

Of course, that doesn't work with movies or TV based on real events, and I'll often put off or avoid watching works that have unhappy endings, even if they end up being fantastic, a la United 93. (Note, the ending was as happy as it could be given the circumstances, but if it were fiction, I'd have rewritten it so that most of the passengers livehey, I watch or read fiction for escapism from real life.)


----------



## DVC California (Jun 4, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> Stop with the dire predictions about the syndication market. This show has made over 200 episodes. It's already been in syndication for years. It will continue to be in syndication for years. The quality of the show has dropped dramatically from the first couple of seasons. But it's still going to be available in reruns for a long, long time, regardless of whether the Mother dies or not.


I agree that the Mother dying won't affect the syndication market for HIMYM. It's a great series on the whole and many episodes show well standalone.

BUT, I think they would be concerned about future viewership for the planned spin-off *How I Met Your Dad*. I for one will probably not invest anytime whatsoever watching the new show just out of spite for making the Mother so adorable, then pulling the rug out from under us. :down:


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

I am just finally getting caught up on threads and this episode, but I've had the "she's dead" vibe ever since last season.  I'm not really a fan.


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

Sparty99 said:


> I will admit that I've known about the dead mother theory since at least the Time Travelers episode


I had to go look it up to see if this was the episode that gave me the dead mother vibe last season, and it totally was.

It wasn't anything I read on here or elsewhere afterwards that made me think this... as soon as they had the scene where Ted gave speech at the door about 45 more days with her, I got all verklempt and turned to my SO and said, "The mother is dead."


----------



## alpacaboy (Oct 29, 2004)

I can only document my "dead mother" suspicions back a little more than a year
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=9444123#post9444123
I could have sworn I had darkly joked about that before that, but can't prove it.

I want future mother to be alive though.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

As I've stated in this thread numerous times, I'm in the "she's dead" camp but I'll admit that the more I think about it, I'm starting to wonder if the writers are double-bluffing by hinting that the mother's dead only for her to suddenly pop-up in 2030 with a "is your dad still telling his stories" type comment. This would be a great way to generate a lot of hype around the last few episodes.

Perhaps I'm over-thinking all of this though, it's just a TV show after all


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Sparty99 said:


> I really don't understand how, having seen the episode and having heard the theories, how you don't see that. I mean, theoretically the reference about the mother missing her daughter's wedding could refer to Ted's mother not being at his wedding, but I can't imagine it would get that kind of response from Ted. I mean, we all know Ted's girly, but we've never known him to be weepy, and at the time we're watching Ted and the Mother in the inn, it would've been something like 9-10 years after their wedding. I just can't imagine he would've had that reaction that amount of time after the fact. Count me among those who don't understand how people are not seeing the dead mother overtones.
> 
> I will admit that I've known about the dead mother theory since at least the Time Travelers episode, so I can't speak about watching it without that knowledge. But I just can't imagine not seeing that in that reveal about missing her daughter's wedding. I didn't think much about the comment about Ted getting lost in his stories until after the episode was over, but with the ending to the show it was just so clear that she was saying that Ted will have to move on without her.


That's just it, since we know all the rumors it's easy to make that leap, but imagine if you didn't? Would it be that obvious? I don't think so. I took it as if Ted's mother (or perhaps the Mom's mom) had died, and didn't see their wedding. It's just as easy a leap if you didn't know the rumor.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Ereth said:


> I watched it exactly once. And it screamed out at me that she was dying. As I said, they hit us over the head with it.
> 
> Perhaps it's more obvious to someone who has lost a parent? There was no question in my mind that they were telling us she's dying, she's accepted it, and she's trying to help Ted get used to the idea of going on without her.


Did you know the theory that she was dead before hand?


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

jehma said:


> I heard the theory last week and watched this episode once. By the end it was very clear to me, and I haven't had any personal experiences that are relevant. My husband was able to immediately list the clues that had been in the episode *when I told him the theory afterwards, *which to me means they stood out to him even without knowing why.


Did he see it BEFORE knowing the theory?


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> That's just it, since we know all the rumors it's easy to make that leap, but imagine if you didn't? Would it be that obvious? I don't think so. I took it as if Ted's mother (or perhaps the Mom's mom) had died, and didn't see their wedding. It's just as easy a leap if you didn't know the rumor.


I don't agree. As I said before, Ted's wedding would've been 9-10 years before the events of this episode. I can't imagine Ted would've had that kind of reaction that long after either of their parents missed their wedding, especially since Ted has viewed his mother more with annoyance than anything. Also, I believe - but I'm not positive - that Ted's mother is alive when Bob Saget is telling their story. Ted's reaction is much more appropriate for someone who realizes that their wife will not be at their child's wedding.

Also, as has been noted in this thread, the line wasn't, "What kind of parent wouldn't be at their child's wedding?" It was a very specific, "What kind of mother wouldn't be at her daughter's wedding?" It wasn't a catchall, generic question.


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> That's just it, since we know all the rumors it's easy to make that leap, but imagine if you didn't?


I don't know... I don't usually follow these threads, and I didn't know there was a specific dead mother theory/rumor. All I had was the vibe I got way back from the Time Traveler episode.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

How far back does the "mother is dead theory" go back? Does anybody remember when this first started cropping up and why?


----------



## jehma (Jan 22, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> Did he see it BEFORE knowing the theory?


He saw the episode before knowing the theory. I told him the theory right after we watched it.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Sparty99 said:


> I don't agree. As I said before, Ted's wedding would've been 9-10 years before the events of this episode. I can't imagine Ted would've had that kind of reaction that long after either of their parents missed their wedding, especially since Ted has viewed his mother more with annoyance than anything. Also, I believe - but I'm not positive - that Ted's mother is alive when Bob Saget is telling their story. Ted's reaction is much more appropriate for someone who realizes that their wife will not be at their child's wedding.
> 
> Also, as has been noted in this thread, the line wasn't, "What kind of parent wouldn't be at their child's wedding?" It was a very specific, "What kind of mother wouldn't be at her daughter's wedding?" It wasn't a catchall, generic question.


Three things here.

One, perhaps they are talking about the Mother's mother? Not Ted's mother.

And two, while it's specific in what she said, Ted could be thinking about his own mother not being there. It's not a huge leap.

And third. The daughter is a teenager, and not ready to be married, I'm not sure it would invoke that kind of reaction in Ted. Plus, the way I heard it, the way the mother said that, it sounded like she was saying, the mother was being bad for not attending. "What kind of mother?" Sound like the mother would be a horrible person for not being there. If she's dead, that's not the case.

Again, you might be right, and it's highly possible, but, I'm playing devil's advocate to show how it could be interpreted differently if you had not known the rumors ahead of time. Or didn't believe them.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

waynomo said:


> How far back does the "mother is dead theory" go back? Does anybody remember when this first started cropping up and why?


I will spoiler just in case:



Spoiler



The first I heard of this was reading here about a reaction Colbe Smulders had when reading the script for the finale. She supposedly broke down and had to leave and she had to check with the writers to see if what was in the script was really happening.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> I will spoiler just in case:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


As has been mentioned quite a few times here, this theory is pretty old. If you want specifics in an episode, the Time Travelers episode from last year sparked a lot of debate about the mother being dead.


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> And third. The daughter is a teenager, and not ready to be married, I'm not sure it would invoke that kind of reaction in Ted.


I am baffled how this is not obvious.  If they know that the mother is dying when they are having this weekend alone at the inn in the future, then of course the mother saying "what kind of mother wouldn't go to her daughter's wedding" is going to make Ted sad as he immediately thinks how his wife isn't going to be at their daughter's wedding in the future.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

laria said:


> I am baffled how this is not obvious.  If they know that the mother is dying when they are having this weekend alone at the inn in the future, then of course the mother saying "what kind of mother wouldn't go to her daughter's wedding" is going to make Ted sad as he immediately thinks how his wife isn't going to be at their daughter's wedding in the future.


I would've typed this out exactly if I wasn't so lazy.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

laria said:


> I am baffled how this is not obvious.  If they know that the mother is dying when they are having this weekend alone at the inn in the future, then of course the mother saying "what kind of mother wouldn't go to her daughter's wedding" is going to make Ted sad as he immediately thinks how his wife isn't going to be at their daughter's wedding in the future.


Because, "What kind of mother..." makes it sounds more like they are divorced or estranged from the daughter/Ted than dead. It sounds like such a nasty comment about a mother who would miss a daughter's wedding. Like the mother is some sort of jerk. At least that's how I took it. I didn't once think the mother was dead when I heard it. So THAT'S how. I can't believe that you can't see it any other way than she is dead. That baffles me.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

The line was, "What mother is gonna miss her daughter's wedding"?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Minor nit... the exact quote is, "of course she showed up; what mother is going to miss her daughter's wedding."


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> Because, "What kind of mother..." makes it sounds more like they are divorced or estranged from the daughter/Ted than dead. It sounds like such a nasty comment about a mother who would miss a daughter's wedding. Like the mother is some sort of jerk. At least that's how I took it. I didn't once think the mother was dead when I heard it. So THAT'S how. I can't believe that you can't see it any other way than she is dead. That baffles me.


I can see where you're coming from, it just strikes me as highly unlikely. If you're watching every episode as a standalone episode, maybe I can see what you're saying. But that's not the case with this show. Go back to the Time Travelers episode and watching the 45-day discussion, if you're not looking for anything you might think, "Hmm, that was kind of strange, but whatever, the guy just wants as many days with her as possible and he's lonely."

In this episode alone, after seeing the full show, I was able to come up with 4 different clues that could/would/should lead one to believe that, yes, the Mother is in fact dead. And I'm not that smart. To me, it's something of an Occam's Razor thing - your explanation to me requires far more explanation than the relatively simple, "The Mother is dead" theory.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

billypritchard said:


> As has been mentioned quite a few times here, this theory is pretty old. If you want specifics in an episode, the Time Travelers episode from last year sparked a lot of debate about the mother being dead.


So it was the Time Travelers episode where this theory arose? I had read the the references to that episode here, but I wasn't sure that's when it started. I thought I had read that the theory started even before that.


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

Other people were not as lazy as me and actually found the quote, not my paraphrase. 

In the context of the scene, it seemed more like she offhandedly said that about Robin's mother, then realized after she said it that SHE was going to be "that mother".

In case anyone else doesn't want to go find the speech from the Time Travelers episode, here it is:



> "Hi. I'm Ted Mosby, and exactly 45 days from now, you and I are going to meet, and we're going to fall in love and we're going to get married and we're going to have two kids. We're going to love them and each other so much. All that is 45 days away. But I'm here now, I guess, because I want those extra 45 days with you. I want each one of them. If I can't have them, I'll take the 45 seconds before your boyfriend shows up and punches me in the face. Because I love you. I'm always going to love you. To the end of my days and beyond."


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Sparty99 said:


> I can see where you're coming from, it just strikes me as highly unlikely. If you're watching every episode as a standalone episode, maybe I can see what you're saying. But that's not the case with this show. Go back to the Time Travelers episode and watching the 45-day discussion, if you're not looking for anything you might think, "Hmm, that was kind of strange, but whatever, the guy just wants as many days with her as possible and he's lonely."
> 
> In this episode alone, after seeing the full show, I was able to come up with 4 different clues that could/would/should lead one to believe that, yes, the Mother is in fact dead. And I'm not that smart. To me, it's something of an Occam's Razor thing - your explanation to me requires far more explanation than the relatively simple, "The Mother is dead" theory.


Honestly, I don't remember The Time Traveler episode. This is not one of those shows that I watch over and over (and I don't find that I enjoy it in syndication for some reason). So, again, without knowing the rumors and not spending a whole lot of time digging into old episodes, I can see where someone might not come to that conclusion. My wife for instance, never reads any of this stuff and she didn't think of it immediately until I mentioned that people think this here, and talked about what has been discussed here. She said she could see that, but didn't get that reaction from watching the episode.

Maybe I'm not seeing it as definitely happening because I don't WANT it to happen. As stated, to me, this would be up there with Lost as one of the worst endings of a TV series of all time. After investing so much time trying to find out who the mother is, and now getting to know her, to take her away from us, to me, seems like a cruel joke.


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

Also, that speech is why I do not think that they are going for some ultimate fake-out and he ends up with Robin.


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

Steveknj said:


> I will spoiler just in case:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



Thought that was Lily who cried.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> Maybe I'm not seeing it as definitely happening because I don't WANT it to happen. As stated, to me, this would be up there with Lost as one of the worst endings of a TV series of all time. After investing so much time trying to find out who the mother is, and now getting to know her, to take her away from us, to me, seems like a cruel joke.


I'm the wrong person to judge this because I didn't hate either the Lost or Seinfeld endings and went on a 20-minute rant about how bad the end of 24 was. With Lost, my theory was that they were always dead, but when all the viewers figured it out early in the series run, the writers had to come up with another way for it to work. And the reveal at the end of season 3 where we discovered we were watching a flash forward instead of a flashback was one of the great TV moments I've ever seen.

So I guess it's hard for me to say I'll hate the ending until I've seen it. Like everyone, I love the Mother, but I don't understand why her dying would be a cruel joke. People have said they gave us this great character and then they're taking her away from us. Well, they're taking her away from us anyway. We're not getting a season 10 where Ted and the Mother explore their romance. She's gone regardless. What difference does it make if Ted and she live happily ever after or she winds up dying? I just want to see the ending done well.

I will say I can't envision a scenario where I would like or be satisfied with an ending where Robin and Ted wind up together. First, it strikes me as a cop out, like people want them to wind up together and they've figured out a way for that to happen. And two, and perhaps more importantly, how are they going to explain Barney's disappearance? We know they get married (see the flash forward from a couple of episodes back where Robin and Barney were clearly wearing wedding rings). So how can they explain that Robin not only leaves Barney but winds up with Ted? It rings hollow to me.

All that said, perhaps the best way for us to judge is to just wait to see how they pull it off.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Barney not there?

Single bus theory?

Dies from having 9,000 different STDs?


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

Sparty99 said:


> So I guess it's hard for me to say I'll hate the ending until I've seen it. Like everyone, I love the Mother, but I don't understand why her dying would be a cruel joke. People have said they gave us this great character and then they're taking her away from us. Well, they're taking her away from us anyway. We're not getting a season 10 where Ted and the Mother explore their romance. She's gone regardless. What difference does it make if Ted and she live happily ever after or she winds up dying? I just want to see the ending done well.


This reminds me of my inability to understand the complaints about the ending to St. Elsewhere.



Spoiler



People hated that the whole show was nothing more than the imagination of an autistic child, but forget that even without that scene, the whole show was nothing more than the imagination of the writers. How exactly did the end tarnish the series, which was going bye bye in any event?



Nevertheless, I can sympathize with steveknj in not wanting the series to end on a downer. If the claims that the writers had this planned from day one are true, they were caught between a rock and a hard place when this final season was greenlit. I think finding out that the mother had died would have been a bittersweet revelation not all that out of character for the show had we not been introduced to her this year (I would compare such an ending to the some of the revelations at the end of the final episode of The Wonder Years in that they didn't negatively impact the journey). That said, once they decided to do this final season, I don't know that they could have gotten away with continuing to keep the mother hidden. Unfortunately, they made her too damn likable.

p.s. I also liked the Seinfeld and Lost finales.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Milioti has commented on the rumors. She kinda sorta confirms things one way or the other.

http://popwatch.ew.com/2014/03/10/how-i-met-your-mother-cristin-milioti


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

cmontyburns said:


> Milioti has commented on the rumors. She kinda sorta confirms things one way or the other.
> 
> http://popwatch.ew.com/2014/03/10/how-i-met-your-mother-cristin-milioti


The headline and the article aren't even in the same galaxy.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

cmontyburns said:


> Milioti has commented on the rumors. She kinda sorta confirms things one way or the other.
> 
> http://popwatch.ew.com/2014/03/10/how-i-met-your-mother-cristin-milioti


The title of the article seems to but she doesn't really say for sure one way or another.
Here's a link to the video with the interview.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/video-how-i-met-your-686668


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Azlen said:


> Here's a link to the video with the interview.
> 
> http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/video-how-i-met-your-686668


I'm even _more_ convinced now that she's dead. The body language when she said "that's insane" screamed deception to me (not to mention the fact that "that's insane" is technically not a denial). The way she sat back in her chair... subconsciously she was trying to distance herself from the person asking her questions. That's a common tell for people who are being deceptive.


----------



## JoeyJoJo (Sep 29, 2003)

I hadn't heard or seen the "dead" rumors before this episode.

My first thought when Ted started to tear up was "holy ****! She's dying!"


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

busyba said:


> I'm even _more_ convinced now that she's dead. The body language when she said "that's insane" screamed deception to me (not to mention the fact that "that's insane" is technically not a denial). The way she sat back in her chair... subconsciously she was trying to distance herself from the person asking her questions. That's a common tell for people who are being deceptive.


I love how people read into things like that. "That's insane" and "people have some crazy theories" say to me that she's not dying....but yeah, she could be lying.

I liked the Seinfeld ending, at least after awhile watching it in syndication, and St Elsewhere too. Lost, I was just too involved in the story line to like that one.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> I love how people read into things like that. "That's insane" and "people have some crazy theories" say to me that she's not dying....but yeah, she could be lying.


How is she lying? "That's insane," and, "People have some crazy theories," is not the same as her saying, "My character is not dying."


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

busyba said:


> I'm even _more_ convinced now that she's dead. The body language when she said "that's insane" screamed deception to me (not to mention the fact that "that's insane" is technically not a denial). The way she sat back in her chair... subconsciously she was trying to distance herself from the person asking her questions. That's a common tell for people who are being deceptive.


She's an actress.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Mr. Soze said:


> She's an actress.


Yes. And?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> That's just it, since we know all the rumors it's easy to make that leap, but imagine if you didn't? Would it be that obvious? I don't think so. I took it as if Ted's mother (or perhaps the Mom's mom) had died, and didn't see their wedding. It's just as easy a leap if you didn't know the rumor.





Steveknj said:


> Three things here.
> 
> One, perhaps they are talking about the Mother's mother? Not Ted's mother.
> 
> ...





Steveknj said:


> Because, "What kind of mother..." makes it sounds more like they are divorced or estranged from the daughter/Ted than dead. It sounds like such a nasty comment about a mother who would miss a daughter's wedding. Like the mother is some sort of jerk. At least that's how I took it. I didn't once think the mother was dead when I heard it. So THAT'S how. I can't believe that you can't see it any other way than she is dead. That baffles me.


Is it possible that these things could be interpreted another way? Sure. It's possible.

But this show is written by writers trying to convey something specific. Do you think it's likely that they would have written the line "Of course she showed up. What mother is going to miss her daughter's wedding?" and had Ted get emotional at that specific line, if they were trying to convey what is being discussed in this thread? If they wanted Ted to get emotional over the fact that his own mother missed his wedding, they wouldn't have worded it as a mother missing a daughter's wedding. If they were trying to convey that the Mother's mother missing their wedding, then it would be the Mother getting emotional about that, not Ted.

Remember, this isn't real life. This is a script written by writers. So we have to assume they crafted that line, and Ted's reaction, and the Mother's reaction to Ted's emotion, to convey a very specific idea. This isn't an indie movie where they're going to leave the ending ambiguous and expect hipsters to debate over what the ending meant. This is a sitcom and it's going to be pretty clear what happened. Given that we only have four episodes left, I think the idea that Ted is telling his kids about their mother because she's dead makes a lot more sense than them having to introduce and explain the fact that Ted's mom or the Mother's mom missed their wedding.


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

busyba said:


> Yes. And?


Consider the possibility that she might be able to control her body language.


----------



## jgickler (Apr 7, 2000)

My guess is that the scene was designed to make us think the mother dies, if they were going to make it a big surprise for the last show, they would have been much more subtle IMO.


Spoiler



My guess, 2024, the mother has a miscarriage, the baby would have been a girl. Ted is having a harder time coming to grips with it then the mother. I predict they eventually do have a third kid, and sometime in the last episode, we hear a crying baby or a toddler walks in or something else heartwarming and causing tears or joy.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Mr. Soze said:


> Consider the possibility that she might be able to control her body language.


Well, she's an actress second and a human first.

And in that video she's not playing a role, she's giving an interview. She's answering questions as herself, based on her own knowledge of what is true and what is not.

And even though it's counter-intuitive, in general actors are actually _worse_ at lying than laypeople. As part of their craft they train to be more aware of their emotions and feelings and to eliminate the filter between thought and action. Playing a role is not lying. In fact it's the opposite; it's the honest expression of someone else's truth.

The really good liars are the ones who are disconnected from their feelings and/or the feelings of others, like sociopaths for instance.

But let's go with your assertion that as an actress she can control her body language. What then?

Are you saying that she was not being deceptive with what she was saying, but at the same time deliberately simulated subtle body language to falsely convey the idea that she _was_ being deceptive? That doesn't seem likely.

Now, I'm not saying that my observations are necessarily definitive proof of anything, only that your dismissal of my observations appears to be severely flawed.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

jgickler said:


> My guess is that the scene was designed to make us think the mother dies, if they were going to make it a big surprise for the last show, they would have been much more subtle IMO.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


This strikes me as another one of those, "Theoretically possible, highly implausible," explanations, and it really doesn't have anything to do with the line that got Ted so choked up. On top of that, consider that in 2024, Ted is 46, and I presume that the mother isn't significantly younger. The chances of them having another child at that age strikes me as amazingly small.

ETA: Apparently the Mother is 42 in 2024. Again, not impossible to have kids, but highly unlikely.


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

busyba said:


> Well, she's an actress second and a human first.
> 
> And in that video she's not playing a role, she's giving an interview. She's answering questions as herself, based on her own knowledge of what is true and what is not.
> 
> ...


In that case, I concede you're a better armchair psychologist than she is an actress, and the mother is indeed dead.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

I keep going back to the first scene from the first episode with the kids, and if it's true the creators knew the outcome the whole time, the kids are WAY WAY to blase about a story about their dead mother.

Even though we as the audience realize the story is 99% not about the mother, that's not the way Ted starts the story out.

And the kids don't say anything like "this again", like he's telling it to them for the 90th time, and their we've heard this a million times attitude trumps their thinking about their dead mother.

And Milioti calling the ending "beautiful" doesn't lend me to the thinking that her character dies.

So I am probably in the not dead category.

-smak-


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Reading through all this, I was struck with "maybe Ted is dying." It does work. 

But also I am struck with the fact that this show is all about setting you up. How many times have we seen a story be told then be told the truth which fit but was different. 

I just don't think they'd telegraph her death. If they were to kill her off, it would be sudden and stunning. Not something every amateur detective would see coming. 

As for actresses crying at the final read through. That's nothing new. 

I don't know if they kill her off but I'm in the camp that if they do, it would be hard to ever watch a rerun again. Who wants to watch a comedy all about how a character died?


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

TonyD79 said:


> Reading through all this, I was struck with "maybe Ted is dying." It does work.
> 
> But also I am struck with the fact that this show is all about setting you up. How many times have we seen a story be told then be told the truth which fit but was different.
> 
> ...


She's going to be in maybe 8 of 200 shows. I don't really think of the show as being about her at all.

Maybe others feel different, but for the vast majority of the show, the meeting the mother was just an interesting way to frame a comedy.

-smak-


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

Even though I'm firmly in the Dead Camp, I didn't really think anything out of the ordinary about Alyson Hannigan's picture with all the crumpled tissues. I just assumed they were emotional because it is the last episode... like the last day of high school, where everyone is all sad it's ending.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

laria said:


> Even though I'm firmly in the Dead Camp, I didn't really think anything out of the ordinary about Alyson Hannigan's picture with all the crumpled tissues. I just assumed they were emotional because it is the last episode... like the last day of high school, where everyone is all sad it's ending.


Agreed. In fact, I think if she thought she were giving something away by posting that picture, she wouldn't have posted it.


----------



## pahunt (Apr 7, 2003)

So I've be going back and watching random episodes and happened to land on the season 4 episode "The Front Porch" this morning which is where Ted finds out that Lily has been breaking Ted up with people she didn't think were right for him, including Robin. The episode concludes with Ted and Robin eating a meal together and discussing why they broke up. This is how it ends:

ROBIN: We should make a pact.
TED: If the years go by, and we both turn 40, and we're still single Robin Scherbatsky will you be my backup wife? 
ROBIN: A girl always dreams of hearing those words. Yes! Yes! A million times,yes!
TED: All right,it's a deal.

I really am getting worried that they're setting this up for a Ted/Robin reunion after the mother is dead :down:


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

smak said:


> She's going to be in maybe 8 of 200 shows. I don't really think of the show as being about her at all.
> 
> Maybe others feel different, but for the vast majority of the show, the meeting the mother was just an interesting way to frame a comedy.
> 
> -smak-


Basically agree with you 100%. However...

For the record imdb lists her as being in 25 episodes.

Also I find your comment, "I don't really think of the show as being about her at all" kind of funny because after all she is in the title. I mean you're really right, but I think it is kind of funny.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

waynomo said:


> For the record imdb lists her as being in 25 episodes.


That's because she was in last season's finale and then she became a "series regular" which means she's listed in the opening credits for all 24 episodes this season. But we all know she definitely hasn't appeared in most of the episodes this season.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

smak said:


> She's going to be in maybe 8 of 200 shows. I don't really think of the show as being about her at all. Maybe others feel different, but for the vast majority of the show, the meeting the mother was just an interesting way to frame a comedy. -smak-


I agree that it is a framing device mostly but making it about her dying elevates her status for those who now know she died. It now makes every smaller comment about her more important. In other words, when the end of the journey is known, the focus changes.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> That's because she was in last season's finale and then she became a "series regular" which means she's listed in the opening credits for all 24 episodes this season. But we all know she definitely hasn't appeared in most of the episodes this season.


I didn't realize that's how it works.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> That's because she was in last season's finale and then she became a "series regular" which means she's listed in the opening credits for all 24 episodes this season. But we all know she definitely hasn't appeared in most of the episodes this season.


I wish IMDB didn't do it this way. It's very misleading.

-smak-


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

smak said:


> I wish IMDB didn't do it this way. It's very misleading


It's not IMDB, it's the way credits are given to the actors via their contracts and the SAG, IMDB just reports it the way it is.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

dianebrat said:


> It's not IMDB, it's the way credits are given to the actors via their contracts and the SAG, IMDB just reports it the way it is.


Let's blame both. Imdb could clearly sort out the difference between being listed in the credits and actually showing up in an episode.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

waynomo said:


> Let's blame both. Imdb could clearly sort out the difference between being listed in the credits and actually showing up in an episode.


They usually do in the individual episode listings.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

When an actor is listed in the credits but doesn't appear in the episode, IMDb puts "(credit only)" next to the episode title.

Here's what it says on Cristin Milioti's IMDb page:










So as we can see, of the 21 listed episodes that have aired, she's appeared in 10 of them and has "credit only" in 11 of them. Assuming she appears in the final four episodes, that will be 14 appearances and 11 credit onlys.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Is IMDB still basically a wiki, in that the data in it is all maintained by the public at large?


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

busyba said:


> Is IMDB still basically a wiki, in that the data in it is all maintained by the public at large?


Not sure, but for this point it's not like they don't have the correct information. They know exactly how many shows she was actually in, but for some reason, post her official number as 25.

I don't think that's the correct way for them to handle these type situations, because it's not really what happened.

-smak-


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

smak said:


> Not sure, but for this point it's not like they don't have the correct information. They know exactly how many shows she was actually in, but for some reason, post her official number as 25.
> 
> I don't think that's the correct way for them to handle these type situations, because it's not really what happened.
> 
> -smak-


IMDb is a professional resource that lists the credits attributed to industry professionals. Therefore, if she's credited as being in the episode but doesn't actually appear, it would be inaccurate of them to not list her name.

The way they do it, with the "credit only" notation for episodes where she didn't actually appear, seems like the most accurate way to deal with this.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

I know users can change some info on imdb, but also some things they can't. I know a year or two ago I deleted some minor info. I think it was something that was reported as an error, but wasn't. However, I remember needing to send a correction in about something more significant that I couldn't change.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

waynomo said:


> I know users can change some info on imdb, but also some things they can't. I know a year or two ago I deleted some minor info. I think it was something that was reported as an error, but wasn't. However, I remember needing to send a correction in about something more significant that I couldn't change.


Credits, no. Trivia and goofs, yes. Those can be adjusted but I think those are even reviewed as I did it a long time ago.


----------

