makeila04 - Tumblr blog

makeila04 · 1 month ago

Text

I stand for this, also because in BO6 we have a picture of Adler when he was younger and we see that he didnt have it in his 20s

pt.1

When Adler got his scars pt.2

I think I figured it out yall

When you turn this picture over, it says 12/22 (most likely of 1967). That is the last known instance we see Adler without his scars.

Then the first known instance we do see him with his scars is in this cutscene with Stitch.

It's implied that the interrogation took place after Rebirth Island, but that's simply not possible for his scars to look as healed as they are—if it happens right after, at least. And we're never really given a proper date to when it does.

What we do know is that Stitch was contacted by Perseus in 1972 in Petropavlovsk Gulag, which gives a 4 year window between that and the Rebirth Island Raid; for Stitch getting interrogated, escaping, punished by Kravchenko and sent to the Gulag. My bet? '69, since it gives Adler a year to heal, and a plausible time period of Stitch being held in custody.

And bonus, we do get these undated photos of Adler in the Fracture Jaw briefing cutscene.

[Credit to @adlerboi]

These photos are of a very scarred and very cursed looking Adler way back in Vietnam itself. Meaning that's where he has to have gotten them. That's it; ladies and gents and non binaries, we got em, lock it in.

In fact, if I could keep going, I'd go as far as theorising that he got his scars in the fall of MACV-SOG. Yeah, the mission you play in BO1.

C'mon, Adler not being called in to defend as literally MACV falls? Especially when he's in such close proximity? Mason even recollects it:

Maybe he was also being literal; maybe he was saying that Adler's unit was literally next to theirs right there, defending a different part of the compound while they went in to secure the defector.

'We were after a different spy (the defector) in KheSanh. That's right. Our team was right next to Adler's when we touched down in Hue City.'

But even if he isn't, I find it hard to believe that Adler wouldn't be there to defend from the compound being overrun. We don't see him—cause he wasn't created yet—but it doesn't mean he couldn't have been in a different part of the same conflict.

Also, the Rebirth Island Raid happens right after—which he was part of, and the following Nova 6 crisis. And then his work with Stitch, chasinh Perseus, etc etc; so this was likely his last operation in Vietnam, which makes also makes it the last opportunity for him to get scarred.

Why I'm fixated on just this idea is cause it'd track with one of the stories Adler tells us in BO6:

Got hit by shrapnel in Hue City—this was back in '68. Hurt like hell.

The details check out, and there really aren't many more opportunities for the story to happen in that timeframe. Plus, it does feel like Adler to drop the actual story like it's a fib.

There was also the possibility of it being from Fracture Jaw, which could also make sense; Perseus being the indirect reason he got his scars is pretty neat and gives Adler a reason to call him his lifelong nemesis. But me personally, I doubt Adler would give Bell his memories of that very vulnerable event for the sake of a memory exercise. And I don't really think Fracture jaw was that massive of a fuckup; the helicopter crashed—which is about as common for COD characters as finding a three leaf clover—and they had to defend from VC for like 5 seconds till Napalm came in. Doesn't really feel that plausible, but it's a possibility, I suppose.

I still really like my own hypothesis, inaccurate as it may be. Adler's called in for reinforcements at Hue City, he gets overrun, tanks were rolling in and a strike next to him got his face in the ongoing mayhem. Air support makes it in time to rescue the wounded, saving him, but the scars leave their mark permanently. Literally, and figuratively.

But that's just a theory, A GAME THEO–

Conclusion: Adler got his scars in early '68, in Vietnam.

more stuff

#russell adler #bocw #call of duty #black ops #bo6 #black ops cold war #bo1

108 notes · View notes

makeila04 · 1 month ago

Text

Call of Duty and its female characters, you love them, you obsess over them, etc. I mean, we have Kate Laswell, Farah Karim, Valeria Garza, Helen Park, Sevati Dumas. I love them, I adore them, they’re all my queens, etc. Seriously, why doesn’t anyone talk enough about this? Well-written characters. Let’s set aside gameplay for a moment, the campaigns in general, and talk about how incredible all these female characters are.

Anyway… this time, I’m here to talk about contrasts, pairings, duos, however you want to see them.

Examples:

1. Modern Warfare: Alex (American) & Farah (Urzikstan—a fictional Middle Eastern nation, but let’s say Farah is Semitic, for argument’s sake)

Central tension: Liberation vs. occupation.

Him: A trained American soldier, a "liberator" in his own eyes.

Her: A local revolutionary commander, independent, intelligent, zero damsel in distress.

Subtext: She hates being told what to do. He respects Farah but also needs her to validate his role. Farah is not your redemption object, Alex.

Implied sexuality (or not): Extreme tension, but they never cross the line—because if they did, mutual respect would be lost. She dominates the scene, always.

Cultural commentary: It’s both a critique and a tribute to real-life female leaders in conflict zones.

This pairing isn’t just intercultural; it’s a metaphor for post-9/11 U.S.-Middle East power dynamics. But Farah isn’t a passive victim, and Alex abandons his official role to fight alongside her.

So, the narrative breaks the classic colonialist stereotype and presents something more nuanced: An alliance based on mutual respect, where the Westerner disarms (literally and symbolically) and commits.

Implicit critique: Military occupation isn’t the solution. Only through real respect and collaboration can there be redemption.

2. Modern Warfare: Phillip Graves (Texan American) & Valeria Garza (Mexican)

Central tension: Power, ego, borders.

Him: An imperialist cowboy, a charming con artist, plays nice but is brutal.

Her: A former Mexican military officer turned cartel leader, pure strategy, zero guilt.

Both: Dominant, violent, cynical. An explosive mix.

Subtext: Graves underestimates, Valeria manipulates. There’s unresolved sexual energy that would be purely destructive if acted upon.

Graves represents U.S. arrogance—economic/military interventionism and the use of PMCs as "loose dogs" of the system.

Valeria is the monster the U.S. helped create with its failed drug war and support for corrupt regimes.

Implied sexuality: If they slept together, it’d be like two snakes in a deadly dance. And Valeria would kill him afterward.

Cultural commentary: A brutal metaphor for U.S.-Mexico territorial control, borders, double standards, and betrayal.

What does this represent?

Graves: A private military contractor, Texan patriot, overly smiley (👀).

Valeria: A former Mexican military officer now leading a cartel (like El Sin Nombre)—dangerous, calculating, ruthless.

It reflects how the U.S. has played with fire in Latin America… and ends up burned.

3. Black Ops: Russell Adler (American, from San Diego, California) & Helen Park (British, nearly 20 years younger than Adler)

Central tension: Authority vs. intellect / Experience vs. morality.

Him: An ENTJ military type, explosive, a stylish psychopath.

Her: Rational, strategic, knows how to handle him, challenges him fearlessly.

What does this represent?

Adler is CIA—a product of the Cold War, bitter, traumatized, masculine, dominant, sarcastic.

Park is younger, MI6, technical, detached, intelligent, British.

Subtext: Park irritates him because he can’t control her. She despises his methods but studies him with fascination. There’s an erotic "I hate you but respect you" tension that’s mutual.

Implied sexuality: Sadomasochistic. Obvious. If anything ever happened, it’d be one unforgettable night, and they’d never speak of it again.

Cultural commentary: The British as the "moral," diplomatic voice vs. the American who does whatever he wants. Helen is the evolution of the Cold War that Russell can’t tolerate. Generational shift, change in methods—from direct combat to subtlety, the maturation of warfare.

Double critique here: Age difference + nationalities/approaches, as mentioned. But they need each other. Two sides of the same Cold War coin.

Subtext:

Adler represents the old guard—the generation that did everything for "freedom" but was destroyed inside.

Park is the new intelligence—more cerebral, globalized, less emotional.

4. Black Ops: Felix Neumann (German) & Sevati Dumas (Moroccan/Pakistani)

Here, I feel like I don’t have as much to say, or at least it’s more subtle than the previous cases. But in Black Ops 6, we can see a bit of the subtle way Felix gets irritated by Sevati—I find it playful and fun, but it could also be a quiet critique of different styles and methods.

Neumann is a German, methodical to the core, but haunted by his past.

Sevati, also tormented by her past (her husband’s murder), confronts it more directly by seeking revenge, while Felix seeks change.

P.S.: I LOVE the representation of blond man + brunette woman pairings. Chef’s kiss.

Call of Duty, y sus personajes femeninos, las amás, te obsesionas,etc.

Osea, tenemos a, Kate Laswell, Farah Karim, Valeria Garza, Helen Park, Sevati Dumas. O sea, las amo, me encantan, son todas mis reinas,etc.

O sea, ¿por qué nadie habla lo suficiente de eso? personajes bien escritos. Dejemos de un lado la jugabilidad por un momento, las campañas en general, y hablemos de lo increíbles que son todos estos personajes femeninos.

Como sea… en este caso vengo de hablar de contrastes, parejas, duos..como lo quieran ver.

Por ejemplo:

- Modern warfare: Alex, estadounidense, y Farah...Urbekistan es una nación ficticia en medio oriente pero digamos que Farah sería semita, por decir algo:

Tensión central: liberación vs ocupación.

Él: soldado estadounidense, entrenado, “liberador” según su visión.

Ella: comandante revolucionaria local, independiente, inteligente, cero damsel in distress.

Subtexto: Ella odia que le digan qué hacer. Él respeta a Farah, pero también la necesita para validar su rol. Farah no es tu objeto de redención, Alex.

Sexualidad implícita (o no): tensión altísima, pero sin cruzar la línea. Porque si lo hicieran, se acabaría el respeto mutuo. Ella domina la escena, siempre.

Comentario cultural: Es una crítica y homenaje al mismo tiempo a las mujeres líderes en zonas de conflicto real.

Esta pareja no es solo intercultural; es una metáfora de las relaciones de poder entre EE.UU. y Medio Oriente, post-11S.

Pero Farah no es la víctima pasiva, y Alex renuncia a su rol de agente oficial para pelear junto a ella.

Entonces, la narrativa aquí rompe el estereotipo colonialista clásico y plantea algo más matizado: una alianza basada en el respeto mutuo, donde el occidental se desarma (literalmente y simbólicamente) y se compromete.

Crítica implícita:

La ocupación militar no es la solución. Solo a través del respeto y la colaboración real puede haber redención.

- Modern warfare: Phillip graves, estadounidense de Texas, y Valeria Garza, mexicana:

Tensión central: poder, ego, fronteras.

Él: cowboy imperialista, chanta con carisma, juega a ser simpático pero es brutal.

Ella: exmilitar mexicana devenida en jefa narco, estrategia pura, cero culpa.

Ambos: dominantes, violentos, cínicos. Una mezcla explosiva.

Subtexto: Graves subestima, Valeria manipula. Pero hay una energía sexual sin resolver que sería puramente destructiva si pasara algo.

Graves representa la arrogancia de los EE.UU., su intervencionismo económico y militar, y el uso de PMCs como “perros sueltos” del sistema.

Valeria es el monstruo que los EE.UU. ayudaron a crear con su guerra fallida contra las drogas y su apoyo a regímenes corruptos.

Sexualidad implícita: Si se acostaran, sería como ver a dos serpientes en una danza mortal. Y Valeria lo mataría después del polvo.

Comentario cultural: metáfora brutal del control territorial USA-México, fronteras, doble moral y traición.

¿Qué representa esto?

Graves es un contratista militar privado, patriota tejano, excesivamente sonriente (👀).

Valeria es una exmilitar mexicana que ahora lidera un cartel (como El Sin Nombre), peligrosa, calculadora, despiadada.

Es el reflejo de cómo EE.UU. ha jugado con fuego en América Latina… y termina quemado.

- Black ops: russell adler estadounidense de California, san diego, y el odio mutuo y relación complicada de trabajo por visiones distintas con Helen Park, británica casi 20 años menor que Adler:

Tensión central: autoridad vs intelecto / experiencia vs moral.

Él: ENTJ militarizado, explosivo, psicópata con estilo.

Ella: racional, estratégica, sabe manejarlo, lo desafía sin miedo.

¿Qué representa esto?

Adler es CIA, un producto de la Guerra Fría, amargado, con trauma, masculino, dominante, irónico.

Park es más joven,MI6, técnica, distante, inteligente, británica.

Subtexto: Park lo irrita porque no puede controlarla. Ella lo desprecia por sus métodos, pero lo estudia con fascinación. Hay una tensión erótica tipo “te odio pero te respeto” que es mutuo.

Sexualidad implícita: Sadomaso. Clarísimo. Si alguna vez pasara algo, sería una noche inolvidable y nunca más se hablaría del tema.

Comentario cultural: los británicos como la voz “moral” y diplomática vs el estadounidense que hace lo que quiere. Helen es la evolución de la guerra fría que Russell no puede tolerar. Cambio de generación, cambio de métodos, del combate directo y confrontativo a la sutileza, el cambio y madurez en los conflictos bélicos. Acá siento que la crítica es doble, por un lado la diferencia de edad y por otra las nacionalidades y enfoques como ya mencioné antes. Pero se necesitan. Son dos caras de la misma moneda en la Guerra Fría.

Subtexto:

Adler representa la vieja escuela, la generación que hizo todo por la “libertad” pero quedó destruida por dentro.

Park es la nueva inteligencia, más cerebral, más globalizada, menos emocional. - Black ops: el alemán de Felix Neumann y Sevadi Dumas que es marroquí/pakistani.

Acá siento que no tengo tanto para decir, o al menos es mucho más sutil que en casos anteriores, pero dentro del Black ops 6 podemos ver un poco la sutileza de como se irrita Felix con Sevati, me parece divertido y juguetón pero también podría ser una sutil crítica a los diferentes estilos y métodos. Siendo Neumann un aleman, metodico en toda regla, pero con el pasado que lo atormenta, mientras que Sevati tambien atormentada por su pasado lo confronta de otra forma más directa al buscar venganza tras el asesinato de su esposo, mientras Felix busca cambiar.

PD: AMO la representación de parejas hombre rubio + mujer castaña. chef kiss.

35 notes · View notes