#But this is actually the exact squad you send when the message you're trying to get across is

[makutas-chronicle]

I'm putting Miserix on Fraudwatch

There's a bit of a to-do about Miserix needing three Makuta to take down, they don't make a super big deal about it, but you're supposed to be impressed when they mention it. But if you look at the crew sent to do the job, a different picture begins to emerge.

We've got Antroz, the only of Teridax' Makuta that refuses to kill anyone, for... personal, reasons.

Krika, local sadboy, will kill but hates doing it, not really jazzed about The Revolution, only here because he's rightly terrified of what the Brotherhood(read: Gorast) will do to him if he refuses.

And Gorast, a vicious opponent, fully willing to die if you go down with her, does not take prisoners, Teridax' #1 fangirl, responsible for at least one genocide- I'd be willing to bet two because Bionicle Cthulhu used to have a faction and she is directly cited as the reason that this is no longer the case.

Taking that into account, the narrative quickly and violently shifts from "it took three Makuta to take Miserix down" to "It took two Makuta to make Gorast stop mauling him long enough to get him in the cell."

[blaiddfailcam]

Idk man. It felt a bit like you were being all git gud about this guy and then when someone said “is it really owning someone when it’s two on one with two strong builds?” And though the guy was real rude and uncalled for in how he said it, I don’t see how policing victories like that is much worse than mocking someone as a tryhard for losing a really stacked fight

This is such bizarre discourse. But sure, I'll oblige.

I think if I messaged someone directly and told them "LOL I OWNED U SO HARD," that would be pretty shitty. But I'm just posting a dumb video to my personal account where my counterattack looked cool, lol. I use this blog as a journal, and this particular exchange was gratifying because I got to showcase how lethal my dumb playstyle can actually be. If I sounded like I was gloating, I was, because I know I suck as a competitive player and it feels good to defend a host who's clearly not very skilled.

I didn't think it was necessary to include all three minutes of the invader, whom I observed as quite capable and skillful, baiting other cooperators and the host to that same old pinch point beneath the cliff behind the tomb, then killing everyone who dared to follow them. I also didn't include the two following times they invaded this exact same host, did the same thing again, eventually killing me as well. If what I was doing was "bullying," I don't think invaders like them would continuously and purposely seek out challenges against entire teams, would they?

Moreover, I'm actually a pretty sympathetic player, often to my detriment! If I can tell an invader doesn't stand much a chance without booking it to a den of mobs for backup, I tend to take the backseat. (You can see at the start of the video that I was kind of just goofing around, then debating what setup I wanted before deciding on a clean, simple counterattack.) I don't seek out gank squads, either—I just send my summoning sign to the wind, whether for PvE or PvP. Whatever the host's goal, they're employing my service as a cooperator, so I simply follow suit. Ideally, I prefer a good fight club, but some invaders at the First Step aren't about that and will try to take on everyone at once. And what can I say? There's something very liberating about hunting someone down as a pack, lmao.

Lastly... it's how the game is designed. There's no way to be an "unfair" player unless you're clearly using cheap exploits or glitches (which as of late, a good number of invaders are mysteeeriously invincible). Ganking has always been a thing, and while I normally avoid partaking in it, it's not like it's an accident that From forgot to address. Elden Ring gives solo invaders vastly more tools to effectively deter gankers, which I always found fascinating. For as much honor anyone wishes to preserve, there are no rules in the game against a gank. It's just a game, after all—the invader can simply try again, as this one did, I imagine because they enjoy the challenge.

The person who responded to my video has kind of irked me before with comments about how my playstyle is "wrong" or giving me backhanded compliments (?), and I got kind of sick of it. I don't care to be The Perfect Player, or even renowned for my alleged skill with a focused build. I'm just enjoying the game for the silly stuff I can pull, then celebrating to myself. I'm not sure how that's offensive to anyone, unless they're upset with From's approach to PvP and invasion in general. Regardless, I think it's much more rude to share someone's video and swear at them for playing in a way they don't like, lol. Do you know how much nonsense I see people post and simply move on with my life, because it doesn't actually affect anyone?

I'm not sure how I'm supposed to make it up to everyone. Merciless, if you're reading this, sorry I killed you twice, and also thank you for giving me the opportunity to feel like I accomplished something. Let's get a drink.

[wendynerdwrites]

Wendy, can you reassure me? I want to go see Wonder Woman, but ... Friend: "I hope you're keeping your expectations for Wonder Woman low. I went with a friend who studies film and she thinks the movie is not very feminist"

TBH, I found it feminist, but I’d really have to know what the arguments are. I don’t hang my standards for a feminist film on “Female lead who beats up people”, but I’ll admit, some nuances can escape me. But it is hard to give a full answer without spoilers and without knowing what the exact arguments are.

I’m of course going to say “go see it”. Even with its flaws, it’s one of the best movies currently playing, it could potentially lead to more female-centric films WITH female directors getting work, it might lead to Warner Brothers learning from the success and giving us decent Gotham City Sirens and Harley Quinn movies, and it’s also just a purely enjoyable movie. (even my mom, who normally doesn’t even like superhero films, loved it).

Could there have been more PoC taking more central roles among the Amazons? Yes. Could Etta Candy have had more to do? Yes. Did the characterizations of Charlie and “Chief” get to me? Totally (They had good characters, but the stereotyping was, uh, heavy. I mean, the Native guy is literally named “Chief”, FFS)  But one of the things I enjoyed about the movie is that it doesn’t make the female empowerment about men through big moments where Diana has to “prove” she can do things despite being a woman where she’s framed as “showing up” the boys. (sorry, but those moments end up being more about the men than the women. And it does sort of reinforce the idea that men SHOULD be surprised by competent women, and yes, can even send the message to women that 1) Their skills are “threatening” and 2) That such behavior from men is acceptable.). In much the way Fury Road does, there’s no time wasted on “But you’re a girl” and “I feel emasculated!” People just do what they have to do and believe in each other. There’s a ton of “Diana, No!”/”Diana, YES!” moments, but it has more to do with her doing things that are superhuman (like deflecting a bajillion bullets and ripping apart trenches without breaking a sweat). Diana’s naivete, when I first heard about it before I saw the film, made me worried, because I was afraid that it would involve stereotypical moments where she has to be “humbled” or talked down to by (mostly male) characters. But it’s scripted very well. Steve knows she’s smart, he argues his points, but it’s never a one-way thing. 

The fact that this takes place in World War I has a lot of good reasons for it, but among them is that it works better thematically than WWII. Diana definitely doesn’t get why people are fighting this war and doing the things they’re doing, but you still get the clear sense that neither does anyone else, entirely. WWII, there WAS a genuine, straight-up villain where, yes, many of the Allies did not great things that enabled the Axis, but it was up against Nazis, so… WWI, on the other hand, was just a clusterfuck of unclear, mixed, and contradictory motivations, pettiness, and incompetence on all sides. If you fought for any side, it was simply because your country is on that side. So while Diana’s naivete still stands out, her confusion and struggle really does mirror any other character or even any soldier in WWI. She has a character arc that makes sense, is served by the setting, and she’s at no point infantilized or condescended to for it. So I was actually, truly pleasantly surprised by how well it was scripted. I know some might have some issues with Diana’s arc being naivete on principle, but honestly, I can’t think of a way for her not to be naive that a) would stay true to her origin story and b) not be totally disingenuous. She grew up on an island utopia totally isolated from the rest of the world where the biggest issue was “SHOULD we train Diana to fight?” and she’s entering the rest of the world in the midst of the biggest war ever, of course she’s not going to know things. Neither did any of the other people who entered the war who WERE raised in this world. Her naivete stems from her upbringing. And pretty much EVERYONE entered WWI totally naive, anyway. 

Also, the way she does things, the determination she shows, actually make sense. She isn’t a complete moron or paranoid a-hole like the other “heroes” in the DCEU thus far. Despite being the “naive” one, she’s not incompetent enough to flatten entire cities like Superman, not as easily manipulated and paranoid as Batman, not as idiotically poor at communicating as Batman or Superman, she’s not got the near-suicidal hubris of whoever it was in Suicide Squad that claimed to be Amanda Waller. Like, objectively, she is easily one of the smartest, most competent, characters in the DCEU, even during her “you should be very proud of your ice cream!” phase, it’s very clear that both Metropolis and Gotham City would be waaaaay better off with her as their defender since she’s the only person who can actually wreck shit without DESTROYING ENTIRE CITIES FULL OF INNOCENTS, would never try to defend the world with an EVIL GOD WITCH whose only leash is a heart you’re not bothering to properly monitor (and then your other failsafe is a team of other people you can barely control, most of whom, rather than superpowers, just have excellent sniper abilities, martial arts, and a boomerang…? THAT was supposed to both combat SUPERMAN and your god-witch? Seriously, I will NEVAH forgive Suicide Squad for making Amanda Waller into such a corrupt, incompetent asshole. Sorry, tangent, but Amanda Waller is sacred to me, and making her such a FAILURE to me is like making Steve Rogers a HYDRA agent. Just… No.) and doesn’t get turned into Lex Luthor’s dumb puppet so easily or want to murder someone just because they’re super strong. UGH the DCEU… 

She’s competent always. And while she does learn things from Steve and the others, she does everything on her own terms, and doesn’t get “shut down” in any way where she’s just so absurdly wrong about a thing and Steve Trevor just lets her know what’s what and she just starts doing things as he wishes. 

Spoilers below:

Even when it seems like the moment comes where it seems like she’s “learned” that Steve was right and she was wrong all along, it turns out to be more complicated than that.

On one hand, he is right about people being grey morally, and that it’s not just one God of War making people do bad things. On the other, Diana is ALSO right that there is, in fact, a God of War still influencing people (even if he isn’t forcing everything and just “whispering inspiration”) and that he must be destroyed. And she still has the mission of the Amazons to destroy Ares she has to fulfill. He does exist, and she still has that mission.

Granted, there may be/are some things that make this movie seem less groundbreaking or feminist due to some possible constraints, like the deliberate  courting of a family-friendly MPAA rating, and the superhero film and origin story formulas. And, like I said, there are flaws, but I honestly can’t imagine a superhero film, or think of many mainstream blockbusters (aside from Fury Road) that are more or even necessarily as feminist as this one. 

I’d like to know what your friend’s points are. I’m not a student on film techniques, and it can come down to a perspective thing. I mean, there are people who seem to truly think that the live-action Cinderella remake is “more empowering” and “feminist” than the original animated film. Whereas I actually think it managed to somehow be LESS EMPOWERING and “feminist” than the 50′s film featuring female characters either being petty or dressing up and the line “leave the sewing to the women.”

It possible I missed something, or that I simply don’t agree. But I’d like to know what your friend has to say. 

Still, go see it. Even go see it with her and see what you think. It’s awesome and fun. Is it the perfect feminist film? No. But I don’t even think that exists anyways, so…