#Escapist Fare

[rappaccini]

okay. i've already autopsied tua but a final overview may be in order. i'll do it one more time.

season one was the only good season of umbrella academy. it had issues, but those issues didn't yet compromise the story or the themes. season one had a stylized production, great cast who at that point were still playing their characters instead of themselves, strong story that mostly carried (though there was some filler), and fantastically coherent themes. the cracks in the foundation were always there. but they could have been fixed.

season two was bad, but entertaining enough to hide its flaws. it had a bigger budget, glossier production value, more action, a cool new setting, more Fun Moments, enough momentum from the source material to mostly fill up the season, and the character assassination didn't have time to reach its consequences yet so everyone acting like the fandomified version of themselves worked for the people who were just here for the fun. it also dropped in the summer of 2020, when people were desperate for escapist entertainment, and there was little superhero fare to compete with (and when the protests happening that summer had people wanting to Say Something about civil rights without actually wanting to change anything). the bar was lower, and season 2 cleared it. but season 2's story broke. look back at the actual story, and you'll see it.

season three was bad, and not entertaining enough to hide its flaws. it had some interesting ideas and good moments, but the whole thing was a slog. the pacing was terrible, the character assassination couldn't be denied anymore, and the momentum from the comics ran out and left the writers to their own devices, which revealed they had no plan, no substantive creative backbone, and no understanding of what they were making. season three could have saved the show with a hail mary of tight writing to pick up the slack, but quadrupled down on the problems and guaranteed it was past the point of no return.

season four was terrible. somehow with a reduced episode count it still dragged, every single character has no growth, the basic logic of the story is missing and the continuity is a mess. and ending the story about abuse victims trying to heal on them concluding that they should all just kill themselves makes the story both pointless and rotten. at this point it was a given. you can't recover from two bad seasons back to back. season two shot the show in the gut, season three let it bleed out instead of healing it, and season four kicked its corpse a few times for a couple klaus jokes, then confirmed that its very existence was a mistake. very meta.

so. what were the cracks in the foundation.

the lack of respect for the source material. as soon as they tried a plot that had no connection to the original comics, they were fucked. but even before season four, they were all over the place. in fact they still haven't adapted most of the comics. john perseus, calhoun, deever, dr terminal, the academy at war with each other in the 1960s, the actual purpose of hotel oblivion, the chimpanzees everywhere, the 1980s period setting, clarissa and oscar, the coming of the squid monster, carla the sparrow, grace having her own secret agenda, the actual character of jennifer? just not here. even the raygun gothic aesthetic is watered down and eventually barely even present.

the spinelessness of the creative team. as early as season 2, they were throwing character arcs and themes in the trash to beg the fans to love them. they had no plan and just wanted cheap thrills.

the lack of internal rules. the time travel mechanics don't make sense. viktor's powers just do whatever. lila's powers eventually just do whatever. the central reveal that vanya's medication had been repressing her powers, set up by klaus using drugs to do the same, is undone by season 2's climax revolving around vanya somehow using her powers despite being drugged. the 'marigold' reveal about their powers makes no sense (why does luther get his body back? we don't know.). there are no stakes with no clear world limitations.

the good victim bad victiming. as early as season 1, the show was arguing that harold jenkins is irredeemable for killing his abusive dad. that should've been your first warning that they were going to try to redeem reginald and have the academy basically kill themselves in the end.

the lack of continuity. as early as season 1, the writers forgot number five had a time travel briefcase sitting in the library, or that helen cho's body was in harold's house when he, allison and diego search it. then they forget when luther got disfigured in season 2. then they forgot how the powers work. then they forget literally everything about the story.

the racism. all the characters of color get the worst plotlines in season 1. allison loses her narrative in season 2 and gets it replaced with a civil rights plotline that concludes that 'hey, there's a black president someday!' diego and lila prance through the jim crow south without dealing with segregation as allison is hatecrimed every episode.

the sexism. look back at how all the female characters are treated. look back at how allison's mistreatment of patrick and claire is glossed over, and lila fully gets away with manipulating diego. look at how vanya's 'redemption' is all about finding maternal instincts she never had until season 2. look at how allison's assault of luther is dismissed the way it never would have been if the genders were swapped. look at how sloane is juxtaposed against allison.

the homophobia. the queer characters were either stereotyped or used as glaad award bait. the queerbait of ben and klaus's entire dynamic.

the ableism. in the comics, luther has mobility aids and his disfigurement is treated like a debilitating condition, not a punchline. his eating disorder isn't mocked. vanya's in a wheelchair after she's shot and goes through months of physical therapy and is still never the same. allison is an amputee. diego has one eye and severe ptsd. everyone's mental illness is taken seriously, including and especially klaus's addiction. in the show these elements are downplayed, absent or fuel for quirky moments.

the show is full of filler. the murder mystery plot, the meritech plot, allison following leonard around, the day that was/wasn’t…. even in season 1, there wasn't enough material to make ten episodes. there was never enough for a ten episode run for any season. and yet somehow the one season with the right runtime still drags.

the spectacle. in season 2 they fully lean into it over substance. case in point: the dance sequence.

actually i'll go into that in detail because the dance sequence sums up the whole show and its downfall.

in season one, the pilot's iconic i-think-we're-alone-now dance sequence was an emotional moment that symbolized how all the characters feel isolated and disconnected from each other, but are secretly interconnected and far more in sync than they realize. the song was catchy, but "i think we're alone now" is literally a commentary on the story it's playing over: now that the academy's abuser is dead, they can finally unwind and love each other, and they can fix their problems by literally "running as fast as they can, holding onto one another's hands." -- and how does the season end? by them doing just that.

in season two, allison, klaus and vanya's salon dance is meaningless because vanya has no clue who these people are, klaus has never given a shit about vanya before (watch season one. he doesn't care.), and allison should hate her at this point in the story. it's just there for fun... but if you swapped vanya with ben it would work as a joyful reunion between these three people. the concept of the dance is fine, but the decision to make it a fanservice moment throws it off.

in season three, the dance sequence comes out of nowhere as a ~wacky random fun moment~ to call back to the first season. the footloose song has nothing to do with the story, it's just fun and catchy. there is no substance to the spectacle anymore. it's just dumb fun.

and season four ends in 'i think we're alone now' for no reason other than to ask the viewer to remember when the show was good. no fun, just dumb.

... let's look back at the themes season one sets up.

the road to recovery takes a very long time, and you will fall off it and have to climb back on.

corporations don’t have your back. they’re soulless and they want to suck the life out of you.

abuse does not make nice people. abuse does not make happy people. there are no good victims or bad victims. (except leonard, i guess.)

it’s difficult to tell where programming stops and free will starts; toxic behavior begets toxic behavior, and we have to own up to it, stop it, and resolve to be better.

redemption is possible. the bad things you did in the past don’t define your future.

you're better together than apart. 

time. changes. everything. it isn’t too late to have the life and the love you wanted. it isn’t too late to realize your talents, or become a better person, or free yourself from a bad situation. it isn’t too late to get together, or to make up or to change your mind. there are no lost causes. the world is worth saving. your enemies are worth showing mercy to. your relationships and friendships and broken families can be salvaged and reshaped into something new and better.

things are fucked, but if we give it everything we have, we can save it, and it’s worth taking up that fight, because nothing is set in stone.

fuck it, be happy. 

remember those?

i'm gonna get into it character by character:

luther.

his entire plotline was meant to be about realizing he was abused, disavowing his abuser and finding his confidence to become the leader he never got to be and go after the love he lost with allison and make a family with her and claire. that was his starting point.

and the fandom hated him rabidly. they said he was just as bad as his father, insisted that he had no redeemable qualities, made fun of his body and his traumas, took the situation with vanya and removed all the moral grays to call him evil over it, and insisted that he was Somehow Abusing Allison.

in season 2, luther has conveniently disowned and confronted reginald offscreen before the plot starts.

he immediately apologizes to vanya, who is an amnesiac and can't actually hold him accountable for hurting her, and the situation is never mentioned again.

his body dysmorphia is played for laughs.

his intelligence and leadership qualities are gone and he's just a bumbling idiot. remember when luther was an astronaut who effectively kept up a faulty space station for four years on his own? could you believe this dumbass was that guy?

he's a punching bag for the fans who hated him.

and season 3 seals the deal. he's still an idiot, he's still hideous.

his romance with allison is destroyed as offensively as possible to reassure the fans who hated alluther.

his romance with sloane is a clumsy attempt to keep the payoff he and allison should have had into the story as they're placating the fans who hate them.

and in season 4, he's... a stripper. he never finds a way to love his body, he just conveniently doesn't have it anymore, and he's still treated like a joke for it.

he never meaningfully takes command of the academy, he just stops trying to.

the wife season 3 insists he loves so much is gone and he doesn't give a shit.

he never even confronts allison for assaulting him, or reconciles with her and has a significant relationship with claire.

he decides to just die.

his entire character trajectory was aborted after only one season. he spent 75% of the runtime with nothing to do, because the fandom hated him and the writers were too cowardly to follow through with his character.

diego.

his entire plotline was meant to be about letting go of his aggression issues by finding his place in the family, reforming his rivalry with luther into a deep friendship based on mutual support and unpacking his 30 year history with vanya in order to finally be happy and in love with her after facilitating her redemption.

and his character's arc is dependent on others....

so in season 2 when luther's arc was canned, so was diego's journey towards letting go of his ego and finding a way to support luther after spending his whole life being pitting against him.

in season 2, when allison's arc was canned, diego ended up with the commission / jfk assassination plot that was never meant to be his. his entire dynamic with number five was hers.

in season 2, because klaus took his vietnam plot in season 1, diego doesn't have one anymore, so there's no way to meaningfully unpack how he feels like his only purpose is violence. instead, his anger issues are totally ignored.

and in season 2, when vanya was split into elliot-page-playing-himself and lila, the romance went out the window too. yes, diego falls in love with lila, but he barely knows her, and all she's done is manipulate, drug, kidnap and hurt him and the academy... yet all that bad behavior is totally ignored in the Show About Abuse And Trauma, because they have chemistry. there's no deep, complex history between them that could have anchored the relationship. the redemption arc itself is rushed and undeserved.

oh, also, he doesn't feel upset about eudora anymore. never mentions how he got her killed, or that he loved her.

then in season 3, diego has nowhere to go but deeper into his romance arc. he has no tension with luther to resolve (and with the show assassinating alluther, there's no 'we both love our girlfriends and want to make it home to tell them that, so let's get over our bullshit and help each other get there' revelation like in the comics). his relationship with lila gets even weirder, with her... deciding to babytrap him, getting a kid killed in the process, and it being framed as quirky and hot. and no eudora again.

and in season 4, diego is a family man who doesn't give a shit when his kids are wiped from existence, whose marriage is about to implode. who decides to just die.

there's just... nothing. he's just himbo #2.

allison.

her entire plotline was meant to be about realizing how culpable she is in the abuse of her family, unlearning those manipulative tendencies and figuring out how to exist authentically, making amends with the people she hurt-- especially vanya and her ex-husband and daughter-- and restarting her life with someone she can love: luther.

allison isn't formally character assassinated until season 3, but she was wrong from the start.

because in season 1, they had her be already past all those things in the pilot episode because they're too sexist to let women be messy. allison is conveniently totally in control of her behavior and has already decided not to use her rumor anymore. she already accepts responsibility for hurting her ex and daughter.

and the writers refused to let her and vanya be angry at each other because ~we don't believe in girl hate~. leading to allison forgiving her for slitting her throat and leaving her to die.

in season 2, the writers wouldn't give her the commission plotline from the comics. allison was the protagonist of the dallas arc, who had a complex story about being willing to alienate her loved ones in order to save them, being ruthless enough to belong at the commission, making deals with the devil to get her powers back and save her the academy.... and unknowingly creating a paradox where she is responsible for the traumatizing incident of watching someone be killed when she was a girl.

instead, allison is saddled with a c-plot about how you have to be nice when you protest, and how fighting back violently against the racist who tried to literally hatecrime you yesterday makes you just as bad as him. rewatch that scene. look at how it’s framed. that’s the takeaway.

and throughout allison's time in dallas, none of the academy check in with her on how she's doing. no one cares. even when she was attacked at a protest they all know she was at, no one asks her if she's okay.

instead of showcasing allison's ruthlessness and dedication to her family, we meet her having conveniently moved on after her daughter was killed, happily settled into dallas with a new relationship, and having given up on ever finding a way home.

instead of showing allison learn to adapt to life without her rumor, we meet her having already figured out how to get a job, make friends, and have a relationship without it. she doesn’t even have to find the courage to join the activists because she did already.

instead of allison learning how to live without a physical voice, she can just talk again. her power's just... back.

instead of allison being rightfully furious at vanya for disabling her, depowering her, stranding her alone in the jim crow south for years, and killing her child... she instantly forgives her. dance party! no girl hate here!

her romance with luther is intact, but the writers know you hate it, so they're trying to please you by giving her a romance with a man who she doesn't trust with any information about her, who doesn't trust her, and who allison doesn't hesitate to abandon five days after luther shows up. but hey they have chemistry, so they were Truly In Love, apparently. no seriously, the raymond romance is bad.

season 3 tries to do the heavy lifting with the messier aspects of allison, but this happens too late, and it mostly functions as a way to assassinate her character to turn her into an angry black woman stereotype so they can kill her romance with luther as meanly as possible, and set sloane up to take her place.

she suddenly cares that her daughter is dead and that viktor technically killed her after an entire season of not caring. and her decision to alienate the academy to save her rings false because she spent two years not caring. why now.

her romance with luther implodes when the writers decide to just do what the fandom wants and make it Toxic All Along, after two seasons of framing it in the most positive light possible. and allison sits front row at his wedding to a woman he barely knows, smiling through it like that wasn't supposed to be her, or like she didn't just assault him.

because viktor and allison have had such an artificially nice relationship, there's no payoff to them learning to love each other again, like viktor encouraging the group to sympathize with allison afterher betrayal.

the effect of this is that at the end of season 3, allison has regressed into the person she was before season 1, but do you even want to see her get better or get along with the academy after she tried to assault luther, killed viktor's stepson, and sold everyone down the river to live in a fantasy world?

good news! all that doesn't matter in season 4! luther and viktor never confront allison for doing that to them. the whole family's over her betraying them. raymond? oh, he's just gone. yeah, he left between seasons. we won't even unpack the implications, or that allison's right back to being a divorcee whose husband abandoned her after learning what she did with her rumor, trying to live without that power. oh and don't worry, she isn't dependent on her power anymore. yeah, we just solved that offscreen again.

claire's here, but is there even a point.

allison and klaus's relationship is intact, but because the show won't seriously examine klaus's addiction, we can't discuss how they enable each other, or how allison's manipulative tendencies or klaus's flightiness and addiction might be affecting claire. no more intergenerational trauma discussion here.

allison has nothing to do because slowly learning how to admit how much harm she inflicted on her loved ones, live without her power, and earn vanya/viktor's trust back was her arc and it's... all over the fucking place.

then, she decides to just die.

klaus.

his entire plotline was meant to be about realizing how much damage his addiction has done to himself and his family, getting clean and conquering the crippling fear of his power that made him an addict in the first place.

then in season 2, he's clean offscreen. no exploration of klaus trying to stay on the wagon for the first time in decades. we're just three years into him being totally fine sober. no complications.

and his relapse is played for laughs instead of treated like a devastating moment.

in season 2, his grief over dave is glossed over. yes, we see dave for five minutes, which is more than the three minutes he got in season 1, but klaus is Moved On Already. no discussion of what this relationship meant to him (... or how ben was affected, being the third wheel). no rumination. just a quick 'here's dave to shut the fans up' and on we go.

in season 2, klaus's excitement about exploring his powers' potential is gone already. yeah, he figured them out offscreen.

his cult plotline replaces his comics story of being a clubkeeper in vietnam and becoming a father (yes, klaus has a baby in vietnam), and the entire plotline is a mean-spirited metanarrative about how dumb the writers think his fangirls are. like. fucking look at the narrative. they're making fun of you.

and yet there are no serious consequences to the implications of klaus immediately turning into his dad the second he gets a little power. he isolated a bunch of people from the outside world, derailed their lives, tattooed them, got them hooked on the idea that The End Is Nigh and Only He Can Save Them, got them to have sex with him, and only stopped manipulating them because he was bored. not even because he realized it was wrong.

his relationship with ben is queerbaited to hell, and has no resolution.

he spends the entire season deliberately keeping ben isolated from the rest of the academy, and this is never meaningfully examined. klaus is an absolute bastard in season 2, and the writers don't acknowledge it.

by season 3, he's just a joke machine and a flamboyant stereotype. he never has a substantive interaction with sparrow ben, or struggles with his sobriety or his addiction in a way that takes it seriously. even his meeting with his mother feels empty.

and in season 4, the mothers of agony plotline from the comics is so disjointed that it's meaningless. in the comics, this is his lowest low, that ben helps him come back from.

any depth to the implications of his immortality is gone. it's just funny that he's a germophobe.

(... immortality? how'd he get killed in the first season apocalypse timeline then. no answer? okay.)

any potential in his relationship with allison and claire is gone.

like luther, his crucial development is skipped over and he spends half the season wandering in circles making jokes.

and he decides to just die.

five.

his entire plotline was meant to be about learning to trust the academy and work within them as a team member rather than running off and doing his own thing. and about slowly learning to be a person instead of a vehicle for the mission.

in season 2, he inexplicably lets the commission go and trusts they're Good Now thanks to new management, after making it clear in season 1 that he can't ever trust them.

in season 2, his antipathy with vanya is transferred to lila. he never accepts responsibility for his role in leading to her isolation.

in season 2, instead of trying to get the family together, he's still working on his own.

in season 3, instead of riding hard for viktor and sympathizing with him, he calmly tells him he'll put him down if he ever steps out of line again and ignores him the rest of the time.

for three straight seasons, he's the plot driver. but three seasons in with no other characters having a coherent arc, the plot driver became all he was. he couldn't slow down or have an emotional moment because he's the only thing moving things forward and all the people who can bring out those emotions are so ooc that it won't work.

then in season 4... oh boy.

he's not the plot driver anymore because there's no plot.

five slowly trying to embrace domesticity could have been interesting... but boy does it fall flat.

five created the commission! no, we won't discuss the nature of him being responsible for his own abuse, or perpetuating the cycle that led to the apocalypse and the academy's misery.

five falls in love... with his brother's wife, who he hates, who hates him because he hog-tied and tortured her parents to death in front of her when she was a little girl. okay.

then he decides to just die.

ben

his entire presence in the story was building to a reveal that he's only staying with klaus because he's in love with him.

in season 2 they queerbait that connection for ten episodes by framing him as a literally possessive boyfriend, give him a 'love interest' in jill that makes no sense, kill him off in a scene that makes no sense because that's not how their powers work, and have the vaguest 'by the way he was in love with you' reveal via vanya that feels like an afterthought.

klaus keeps ben from talking to anyone in the academy for the whole season for no reason. he never mentions why, ben never gets mad at him. there are no emotional consequences. ben spent an entire season able to talk to the academy and inform the world and nothing ever comes of this.

in season 3, ben's a totally different character. none of the umbrella academy have emotional reactions to seeing him alive.

not even klaus.

and he feels nothing for them.

he also feels nothing for the sparrows, who drop like flies around him without him giving a shit.

in season 4 he's a completely different character again.

no interest in reuniting with his sparrow academy mates, or the umbrella academy.

he's a crypto bro for some reason.

the south korea subway ending stinger? idk where that went.

the show does use the comics' likely endgame of ben being the portal through which the final antagonist arrives. but they do it in such a strange, meaningless way.

the romance with jennifer comes out of nowhere and makes no sense. it's unclear why he'd want to become a blob with her. there's no emotion anchoring this plot.

also, jennifer was a large, dark-skinned black woman in the comics and... isn't here. (it's also unclear if jennifer was romantically involved with ben in the comics, or if she might have been one of the kid's mothers. so uh. we'll see how that ends up.)

his tentacles come out of his back sometimes. huh?

the reveal that he was killed by their father and they were all brainwashed makes no sense. especially given that allison has brainwashing powers that are never used to cover this up.

there's never a meaningful payoff for ben as a character.

and vanya/viktor…

to start, seasons 1-2 will call her vanya because that's how the character was written, performed and received. seasons 3-4 will refer to him as viktor. that's why the name/pronouns switch back and forth in this post. those are two different characters.

alright i'm gonna say it: the show basically killed off vanya at the start of s2 and split her into two characters: lila, who's the white violin from the comics-- and has vanya's style, punk musicianship, romance with diego, mutual hate with five, alliance with the commission, status as the most powerful character, and role as the antagonist who needs a redemption arc that rejoins her with the family-- …. and the character that would become viktor, who's just elliot page playing a flattened version of himself for token queer points.

the show literally got rid of its main character one season in, sped past all the conflict with the academy to the part where they're all besties again, and gave all the interesting shit to an oc. and they did it because they cared more about profiting off of elliot page's queerness than trusting him to do his job as a professional actor, and supporting that performance in the face of a fandom that only saw him for his sexuality/gender identity.

season 2 skips over vanya learning to use her power and lose her fear of it. she's just good at it now. also, the character will never use the violin to channel her powers again, and will never again acknowledge her love of music, because elliot page didn't like playing the violin. like, sir. what are you doing playing a character called 'the white violin' then.

season 2 skips over her rage and hatred of the academy. instead of being afraid of them, avoiding them, and being hostile whenever they interact, she's instantly cool with them, dismisses their years of mistreatment and dismissal, and is part of the family with no friction despite trying to kill them, blowing up the world, and killing their niece.

season 2 totally resets her personality. amnesia! she's nice again! we know you hated her when she was angry, so don't worry about that!

season 2 gives her a romance with someone who she has chemistry with, but who fundamentally doesn't understand her. the entire relationship is just fanservice. remember the lesbian vanya truthers who thought elliot page could only play characters who were lesbians because he identified as a lesbian at the time? remember their "give vanya a girlfriend" whining? this entire plotline was for them.

season 2 hands the moment where the academy understands vanya and empathizes with her in a moment of superpower meltdown.... to harlan.

in season 3, diet elliot page just becomes overt. it's great that page's transition was incorporated into the show at his request, and at this point the damage to the character's so massive that at least they're being honest about the character just being a different entity from vanya entirely. like, fuck it. you already gave all of vanya's character to the oc. might as well.

though it's great that the transition is quickly incorporated into the story, it happens so quickly that a very easy plotline for viktor in s3 is just rushed past. he has so little to do, the transition is such an obvious fix, and they just... don't do it.

because viktor magically has full control of his powers, there's no more growth from him. and at this point his powers just do whatever. who even knows what his abilities are. the show sure doesn't.

viktor is a beloved member of the academy with no friction whatsoever, even though they're trapped in an alternate dimension because of him

allison's anger at him is demonized instead of deconstructed.

the harlan plotline certainly exists. very funny that the show casually reveals that vissy ruined sissy's life and never goes into the emotional consequences of this.

in season 4... yeah this character has nothing to do. he never expresses anger at allison over killing his stepson. his powers are even more vague. he's in canada for some reason, just to complete the transformation into elliot page.

then he decides to just die.

the main character of the story was essentially killed off one season in. the whole thing became adrift because without vanya, there's no main character anymore. no central antagonist with history with the academy, no emotional weight to their connection, no payoff to a slow redemption arc that unfolds over multiple seasons. just shenanigans.

lila

took over the vanya storyline in season 2.

lila is vanya from the comics.

vanya's hatred of the umbrella academy and antagonism towards them? it's now lila's.

vanya's alliance with the commission to destroy the world? nope. lila's the commission's ally now.

vanya's status as the most powerful character? now it's lila.

vanya and five's mutual hate? now belongs to lila and five. even the fiveya vibe rubberbanded into That in season 4.

vanya's slow redemption from a hateful villain of the academy into one of its most crucial members is handed to lila. who barely knows these people, has only ever hurt them, and yet is treated with more empathy with them after three days than vanya received in thirty years.

vanya being set up as the character who'll save the umbrellas from the sparrows? nope, that's lila now.

vanya's romance with diego? that's lila's now. no, it doesn't make sense but they have chemistry.

then in season 3... oh god. instead of unpacking lila's severe mommy issues from being abused by the handler, she's just over them now.

the academy immediately trust and embrace her even though all she's ever done is hurt them.

and for some reason, this character who's shown no maternal instincts randomly decides she wants to be a mom because her one night stand with diego, who she knew for a few days, got her pregnant.

and she tries to convince him a little white boy is their kid to test if he'll be a good father and doesn't give a shit when that child turns to dust. what are we doing here.

then in season 4, their romance doesn't even mean anything. neither does their family. they're already on the verge of a divorce. which... yeah, follows, given what their romance actually consisted of.

then she hooks up with number five, who killed her family in front of her when she was a girl. what.

.... and then we die.

the whole thing came apart in season 2. you just didn't notice yet.

and here's where i get cunty and set aside my belief that writers have an inherent responsibility to never kowtow to their fans no matter what, because the fandom is a big part of how things went wrong, and someone has to talk about it.

the umbrella academy begun as a complex metaphor for recovering from abuse, using superheroes in a gothic-adjacent setting. every single character's power is allegorical of an attribute one may take on from living in an abusive home. (and part of the missed potential in lila is the failure to fit her into that metaphor too). and the metaphor is literally in the name: the umbrella academy.

it's an academy. not a family. the characters are only adoptive siblings because reginald needed a legal way to bind them to him. they grew up in a twisted boarding school, which they explain again and again, and call each other siblings out of habit, which they also explain. and they are choosing as adults to overcome the trauma that pitted them against each other to become a found family.

... i'm gonna say it. the pseudoincest is a vital part of the story, the same way it is in the comics. that was how they were going to love each other. their ability to love each other was the sign that the brainwashing failed, and the found family was, like actual found families, going to involve some of those people pairing off romantically. allison and luther. ben and klaus. vanya and diego-or-five. that was the story.

the umbrella academy is both a giant metaphor for healing from a dysfunctional family, and for finding a queer found family (... it's the umbrella academy. that's the part of the allegory that's still unfulfilled. everyone in this story is queercoded, not just klaus and vanya/viktor. the show massively dropped the ball in not exploring this deeper.) and the fandom screamed, whined and harassed their way into having it scribbled out of the story, and the writers were cowardly enough to do it for you. if you're wondering why they kept trying to sneak alluther in through the back in season 2, still had a harcest couple get married in season 3, and pivoted to shipping lila so hard, that's why. it's the most important thing about the story, and you hated it. is it any shock that the story ends with all their relationships stunted, and no love between them.

remember all those themes from season 1? remember how you guys hated them? remember how you concluded that luther is an irredeemable monster, and klaus is an innocent little baby, and vanya is somehow both and neither? remember how you were completely uninterested in watching everyone redeem themselves, and wanted to skip to the Fun Sibling Moments? remember how you immediately dismissed half the characters as lost causes, and directly demanded that the writers not let the characters love each other? congrats, the writers were listening!

the umbrella academy comic is meant for adults. the show was made for a wider audience and the writers were totally unprepared for the fandom of antifan teens they got. and they overhauled the show to make it what that fandom wanted. more fun, less substance. making luther a bumbling idiot and sidestepping his entire arc. making diego a himbo. skipping allison's complexities until it's time to demonize her for them. making klaus into the cartoon version of himself. making vanya into diet elliot page and handing all her storylines to a new character. dismantling the show's core tone to make it a fanservice carnival. creating vissy, allmond and dielila in the first place, and coining the ship names before the fandom even chose them. making alluther toxic all along, and swapping her out with a white-passing replacement. it was all for you.

then when they ended the show, they flipped off the fandom on the way out. of course it was going to end like that. you spent five years playing oppression olympics, making bigotry self-righteous, and declaring you didn't want a transformative ending for these characters. the writers gave the fandom the hopeless, nihilistic, meandering, substanceless, nonsensical ending it was demanding all along.

so. where do we go from here.

first of all, to ao3, for those of you who haven't moved on.

next, to the comics. assuming way ever wants to finish them, now that he's received an overwhelming message that the audience for his story hates it and prefers the bastardized versions of his characters. i get the sense he'll probably leave it unfinished. i don't blame him.

then... the umbrella academy was a massive success. it's going to get a reboot someday. in 10-15 years, we're gonna get it back. my hope is that

whoever has that responsibility has a clear vision and the talent to pull it off, the backbone to stick with it, and more loyalty to the source material. no subverting expectations for the hell of it. no kowtowing to antifandom. make a plan and stick to it and have confidence in it. hopefully, the next showrunner won't be a terrible person.

the next version of tua will be mature. so the adults who will watch will hopefully be old enough to understand what they're seeing. this truly isn't a show for kids. the fandom has proven that. let's not do it again.

that it'll be animated. the incredible visual aesthetic of the show and its edgier elements could never have been captured in live-action. and now that adult animation's starting to arrive, including on netflix, maybe in a decade or two we'll finally get the umbrella academy fully realized.

anyway. that's my piece.

[linearao3]

Anyway so the thing about the next chapter/what was supposed to be the end of the last chapter of Publish or Perish is: it’s focused on Inej’s status as an immigrant worker, and it does not end on an upbeat note. In light of recent events I thought this might not be great escapist fare for some readers.

[yuurei20]

Riddle Info Compilation part 2: Upbringing (pt2)

At the beginning of Book 4 we see a very subdued Riddle (Grim describes him as “kinda defeated”) in the Hall of Mirrors.

Ace explains that Riddle is not enthusiastic about going home due to “an extreme case of helicopter parenting waiting for him.”

Trey reminds Riddle that he is not allowed in Riddle’s house and thus cannot bring him any cakes, but encourages him to visit his parents’ bakery, assuring him that Chenya will probably be visiting as well.

Riddle says, “I think…I’m going to try talking with Mother some. I don’t know if she’ll listen, but even so.”

In Book 5 it is revealed that Riddle was ultimately not able to escape his home to Trey’s family’s bakery during the vacation.

We learn a little bit more about Riddle’s upbringing during Spectral Soiree when he tells Ruggie and Ortho that he has had “no exposure to the comic books and video games the rest of you enjoy.”

Riddle says that his opinion is “entirely grounded in reality” as a result, and that he has “never had much interest in watching or reading escapist fare. Ah, but I have read a great many autobiographies. By the time I was your age, Ortho, I was already reading medical dictionaries.”

Ortho comments that “there are studies that show consuming entertainment media is essential for well-rounded emotional development,” and Ruggie points out that Ortho—a robot—is worried about Riddle’s emotional growth.

Riddle accuses them of ganging up on him, saying it is none of their business.

Riddle insists that while he is not up to date on popular culture he has “read all the classics that are foundational for a literary education. Treasure hunting? Adventure? There’s no point in bothering with stories that have no lesson to learn.”

Ruggie reacts with surprise, as treasure hunting “is like solving a puzzle,” but Riddle seems confused.

We learn during Book 6 that Riddle didn’t have a TV in his home growing up, and he first tries to opt out of the video game that Ortho encourages him to play on the grounds that his mother has told him that “video games are addictive and can hurt academic performance.”

Idia mocks him for blaming games for his own lack of self control, leaving Riddle momentarily speechless.

Riddle takes offense, insisting that his grades would never drop just because he happened to play a video game, and Idia successfully provokes him into playing the game in order to prove it.

Vil comments that Riddle playing right into Idia’s hands is “embarrassing to watch” and Azul says, “Riddle’s very bright, but has zero resistance to trolling.”

Later, Riddle says that he has spent most of his time learning magic ever since he was born, receiving specialized magical training lessons at three years old.

Azul says he must have been quite the prodigy but Riddle explains that he can’t be certain if he ever had any special talent to begin with since his mother “apparently went to every possible length to ensure I’d be an exceptional mage, starting from when I was in the womb.”

Riddle says that grade skipping isn’t really done in the Queendom of Roses, and the private school he attended prior to NRC didn’t allow it,1 which is why he never did so.

He explains, “Besides, you have to be at least 24 to get a medical license in the Queendom of Roses. So I doubt my parents saw much point in me skipping a grade or two.”

Riddle’s education also included dance:

He explains that “social dancing is part of gentlemanly etiquette” and that he has “mastered it, of course.”

He offers to lead Ortho and Ruggie in a dance to thank them for what they taught him during Spectral Soiree, but Ruggie turns him down in favor of the buffet.

We also see Riddle waltzing with a ghost, and then with Vil.

Riddle explains, “I’ve had an interest in social dancing since I was a child. I learned it from my mother, as part of my rigorous education.”

Riddle says he knows how to behave in formal situations and will occasionally call out other characters for poor etiquette, such as when Silver falls asleep during a party and when he scolds Heartlsabyul students for holding conversations in the entrance to the dorm.

[seafoamreadings]

week of march 5th 2023

aries: let's be honest, there's a lot going on this week. all MONTH really. but for you the end of the week's featured jove/chiron/vesta pileup is the highlight. it is big huge devotional angst, but it can be channeled into really good actions.

taurus: while it is ok to stay home and do the luxurious languishing thing, it's not really auspicious; there is so much going on that you should really be out there in it. watch the transits especially for venusian activity, and prepare for a little fun romance. if you don't see it easily, just romanticize every little thing.

gemini: some of you may be wondering if mars is ever going to leeeeeave. yes actually, fairly soon. first this week he visits his lover venus in a cute little sextile, just after saturn vacates your 9th house and brings some discipline to your career and some good cheekbones to your look.

cancerians: others will need to steel themselves for a week of feelings and psychic turbulence but for you its very much home/friendly terrain. what to them is turbulence is to you simply the way you might putter about the home at the end of the day to put everything in its right place.

leo: money on your mind? go ahead and focus on that. there's a lot of astrology this week so to have a narrower focus might serve you well. as other things come up of course you can attend to them, but your personal values and wealth, and your pursuit of knowledge, are especially at the forefront for now.

virgo: don't get too distracted from whatever news is brought to you by the full moon in your sign and saturn into pisces. probably it involves some form of partnership. are your goals that important or did you make them to satisfy someone else?

libra: electricity just zaps like an ozone voltage arc out of someone around you. or maybe it's you? it's fine, ozone smells clean and crisp and lovely and that's really your whole thing anyway. enjoy the tingly sensations.

scorpio: those of you who resent being frequently referred to as "intense" may also resent me for saying this, but the intensity of this week quite suits you. nothing is shallow at this time. you can penetrate any depths you want with most anyone at this time, especially if you're willing to have a good conversation.

sagittarius: your 5th house is hyper-blessed these days. whatever happens you can find ways to make it fun, romantic, and glowy. don't let that go to waste! if you do the fun stuff you bring about healing. devote yourself to pleasure (just not at the expense of someone else).

capricorn: i won't sugar coat matters, this is not an easy time for your sign. you can definitely make this a positive experience with some effort, and i don't mean to incite any panic, it is just that many changes are rumbling in the earth. unsteady foundations will not survive.

aquarius: heavy soggy saturn vibes leave your sign this week, although you actually fare quite well under saturnine atmospheres. you then have only a brief period of such lightness, however; before the month is out pluto comes to call. get to doing your due diligence before he arrives.

pisces: saturn into your sign beginning this week does bring you back to reality pretty fast. as long as your escapist habits have not become full blown addictions, this is not too bad. neptune still in your sign can provide a protective and enjoyable buffer. but, you do have to act like you live in consensus reality and not like you've taken up permanent residence in the astral realms, even if you have.

[artiegenius]

The Aesthetics and Appreciation of Indian Parallel Cinema

Indian Parallel Cinema, often referred to as the New Wave or Art Cinema, emerged as a distinct movement in Indian filmmaking during the late 1940s and 1950s. Unlike mainstream Bollywood, which is characterized by its song-and-dance routines, melodrama, and formulaic narratives, Parallel Cinema aims to portray realistic stories with a focus on social and political issues. It draws heavily on the traditions of Italian Neorealism, French New Wave, and Japanese Cinema.

Historical Context

The origins of Indian Parallel Cinema can be traced back to the works of pioneering filmmakers like Satyajit Ray, Ritwik Ghatak, and Mrinal Sen. Satyajit Ray's "Pather Panchali" (1955) is often credited with setting the tone for this movement. The film's emphasis on realism, its nuanced portrayal of rural Bengal, and its departure from the escapist fare of Bollywood, marked a significant shift in Indian cinema.

Aesthetics of Indian Parallel Cinema

Realism

At the heart of Parallel Cinema is a commitment to realism. This is reflected in various aspects:

Narrative Style: The narratives are often straightforward and slow-paced, allowing the audience to engage deeply with the characters and their environments.

Character Development: Characters are complex and multi-dimensional, often grappling with socio-economic issues, personal dilemmas, and moral conflicts.

Setting: Films are frequently shot on location, capturing the authentic atmosphere of rural villages, urban slums, or middle-class households.

Visual Style

Parallel Cinema employs a distinctive visual style that enhances its realistic portrayal:

Natural Lighting: Filmmakers often use natural light to achieve a more organic and less polished look.

Minimalistic Art Direction: Sets and costumes are kept simple and true to the setting of the story.

*Cinematography: There is an emphasis on long takes, handheld camera work, and static shots, which contribute to the immersive experience.

Themes

The themes explored in Parallel Cinema are typically more serious and socially relevant compared to mainstream films:

Social Inequality: Many films address issues of poverty, caste discrimination, and gender inequality.

Political Issues: Films often critique governmental policies and societal structures.

Human Relationships: The complexities of human emotions and relationships are a central focus.

Key Films and Directors

Satyajit Ray

Pather Panchali (1955): A poignant depiction of a poor family's struggle in rural Bengal.

Charulata (1964): A sensitive portrayal of a lonely housewife and her emotional journey.

Ritwik Ghatak

Meghe Dhaka Tara (1960): A powerful narrative about the partition of Bengal and its impact on a refugee family.

Subarnarekha (1962): Addresses the issues of displacement and survival post-Partition.

Mrinal Sen

Bhuvan Shome (1969): A satire on the Indian bureaucracy, marking the arrival of the New Wave.

Ek Din Achanak (1989): Explores the mystery and turmoil following a man's sudden disappearance.

Shyam Benegal

Ankur (1974): Highlights the class struggle in rural India.

Nishant (1975): A grim tale of feudal oppression and the fight for justice.

Appreciation of Indian Parallel Cinema

Critical Acclaim

Parallel Cinema has garnered significant critical acclaim both nationally and internationally. It has been recognized at major film festivals like Cannes, Berlin, and Venice, helping to elevate Indian cinema on the global stage.

Influence

The movement has influenced a generation of filmmakers who continue to draw inspiration from its aesthetics and thematic concerns. Directors like Mani Kaul, Kumar Shahani, and more recently, Anurag Kashyap and Dibakar Banerjee, owe a debt to the legacy of Parallel Cinema.

Cultural Impact

Parallel Cinema has played a crucial role in shaping the discourse on social and political issues in India. It has provided a platform for marginalized voices and brought attention to the struggles of everyday life.

Conclusion

Indian Parallel Cinema remains a vital and influential part of the country's cinematic landscape. Its commitment to realism, its exploration of pertinent social issues, and its unique aesthetic continue to inspire filmmakers and captivate audiences. As we look towards the future, the legacy of Parallel Cinema will undoubtedly endure, reminding us of the power of film to reflect and shape society.The Aesthetics and Appreciation of Indian Parallel Cinema

[guillotineman]

How Steven Spielberg Dominated Culture and the 1994 Oscars With ‘Jurassic Park’ and ‘Schindler’s List’

By Brent Lang

Steven Spielberg kissed his wife and embraced his mother before his left hand floated to his temple in disbelief. Then he grew visibly emotional as he made his way to the stage of the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion. The 46-year-old Spielberg had just won his first Oscar — as best director for “Schindler’s List,” an unflinching look at the Holocaust and its horrors. “This is a big surprise,” presenter Clint Eastwood said somewhat sarcastically.

As Eastwood’s joke suggests, Spielberg’s victory at the 1994 Academy Awards was preordained — an unavoidable coronation after he had dominated popular culture so completely over the past year. Not only had he subverted his image as a boy genius, spinning escapist fantasies out of celluloid, by tackling a project as grown up as “Schindler’s List,” but he had also reestablished himself as the most successful director in Hollywood with another 1993 release, “Jurassic Park.” The adventure film, essentially “Jaws” with dinosaurs, topped box office records to become the highest-grossing movie ever, until “Titanic” surpassed it. Between “Schindler’s List” and “Jurassic Park,” Spielberg films would win 10 Oscars during the ceremony, an extraordinary feat that has rarely been replicated and one that bears reexamination on the 30th anniversary of that accomplishment.

“This is the first time I’ve ever had one of these in my hands,” Spielberg said as he clasped his Oscar, surprised by both the weight of the statuette and the moment. When “Schindler’s List” was named best picture and Spielberg stood behind the podium for a second time that night, he acknowledged his long road to awards glory, one that had seen Oscar voters largely overlook masterpieces like “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial” and “Close Encounters of the Third Kind.” Winning, he told the crowd, was like “the best drink of water after the longest drought of my life.” 

During his meteoric rise in the movie business, Spielberg was admired, envied and dismissed in equal measure. His complicated relationship to the industry became more apparent in the years leading up to the dual triumphs of “Jurassic Park” and “Schindler’s List.” At that time, Spielberg’s magic touch, his innate sense of what an audience desired and how to deliver it, had faltered. “Hook,” a budget-busting fable that reimagined Peter Pan as a jaded adult, made money when it was released in 1991, but endured blistering reviews — Roger Ebert panned it as “a lugubrious retread of a once-magical idea.” Other late-’80s Spielberg fare like “Always” and “Empire of the Sun” failed to exert a hold on moviegoers. Only “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade,” the third installment in his globe-trotting-archaeologist saga, scored commercially, though it hardly seemed fresh.

And many of his contemporaries were privately rooting for Spielberg to fail. He had been too successful, too beloved, and was overdue for his comeuppance. Plus, his guileless public persona didn’t square with his shrewd business sense and competitiveness, something that rubbed studio executives and power brokers the wrong way. “This man is not the same as the soft and cuddly characters he creates,” a top agent told Variety in a 1991 article. In that same piece, an unnamed studio chief knocked Spielberg’s monarchical tendencies: “It’s the rule of kings: ‘I am the king and I make the rules.’”

During the lead-up to the release of “Schindler’s List,” Spielberg bristled when asked by The New York Times about the resentment that he inspired in colleagues. “I don’t feel the jealousy, I don’t feel the envy, only when I hear about it. I have a feeling that the people who say these things about me are the ones who see me socially and drink my Evian water with me and call themselves my friends. But that’s Hollywood.”

That two-facedness has been a staple of a business that has run on backstabbing and hollow compliments since the silent era, and it remains a fixture of the industry today. But in other important ways, 1993 represented a transitional moment in moviemaking, politics and society.

Bill Clinton was inaugurated in January 1993, ending 12 years of Republican dominance of the executive branch, while ushering a brand of centrism that married social progressivism with economic boosterism. The president was a film fan too, one who urged all Americans to see “Schindler’s List,” an unprecedented White House endorsement of a movie.

There was also a growing tabloid-ification of politics and media. This was an era when coverage of the new administration collided with headlines about Tonya Harding, Joey Buttafuoco and the Menendez brothers, a convergence that Oscar host Whoopi Goldberg alluded to in her opening monologue, joking that she wanted Lorena Bobbitt, notorious for separating her abusive husband from his penis, to “please meet Bob Dole.”

And in April of 1993, the source code for the World Wide Web was released into the public domain, allowing people to more easily access the internet. This new digital age would loosen the cultural grip that Hollywood held on consumers, setting the stage for YouTube, TikTok, streaming and other forms of entertainment that would challenge the movie business’s preeminence.

At the same time, the CGI that enabled velociraptors and T. rexes to convincingly share the screen with human actors in “Jurassic Park” was a technological breakthrough that fundamentally altered blockbuster entertainment. It allowed filmmakers to conjure up mythical worlds, spectacular explosions and superheroes who defied the laws of gravity. Without these pixelated wonders, there would be no “Titanic,” no “Gladiator,” no “Forrest Gump,” nor any of the other special effects-heavy movies that came to define the ensuing decade of moviegoing.

But that lay in the future. In 1993, there were more immediate concerns. Al Pacino, Leonardo DiCaprio and other A-listers in the audience at the Oscar ceremony sported red ribbons, a symbol of the AIDS crisis, which snuffed out a generation of entertainers as it became the leading cause of death for Americans between 25 and 44 years old. The epidemic was the subject of “Philadelphia,” the first major studio movie to tackle AIDS, and an unlikely box office hit that scored its star Tom Hanks his first Oscar that night. “The streets of heaven are too crowded with angels,” Hanks said, choking up as he accepted his prize. “We know their names. They number 1,000 for each one of the red ribbons that we wear.”

The other big winner was Jane Campion’s “The Piano,” a drama about a mute woman’s dangerous bond with her musical instrument, which captured best original screenplay, as well as best supporting actress and best actress for 11-year-old Anna Paquin and Holly Hunter. Tommy Lee Jones rounded out the major acting categories, winning supporting actor for his role as a driven marshal in “The Fugitive.”

“The Piano” kicked off the awards dominance of Miramax, the studio that released the movie, and its volatile co-founders Harvey and Bob Weinstein. Before Harvey Weinstein became synonymous with the #MeToo era for his legacy of sexual abuse and assault, he created a business model around critically acclaimed art-house fare aimed at discerning moviegoers, which made it possible for films like “Pulp Fiction,” “The Crying Game” and “Shakespeare in Love” to reach a wider audience. Awards were always a critical element of this strategy, raising the profile of idiosyncratic movies.That resulted in more aggressive Oscar campaigning, with armies of bare-knuckled Miramax awards strategists boosting their own movies by privately slamming rival films as culturally insensitive or historically inaccurate. For a while, it worked. As Harvey Weinstein’s sway over the Oscars grew, winners thanked him in their acceptance speeches more often than they thanked God.

But on that March night, it was all about Steven Spielberg. “Schindler’s List,” with its refusal to sanitize Nazi barbarity, signaled a new maturity in his filmmaking and a shift in his artistic interests. He retained his flair for crowd-pleasers, directing a sequel to “Jurassic Park” and hits like “War of the Worlds,” but he grew more interested in historical epics like “Lincoln” and “Saving Private Ryan,” which used his cinematic gifts to bring the distant past to vibrant life.

As he accepted the best picture statuette for “Schindler’s List,” Spielberg spoke directly to the telecast’s 46 million viewers. “Do not allow the Holocaust to remain a footnote in history,” he said. “Please teach this in your schools. … Listen to the words and the echoes and the ghosts.”

Spielberg was joined onstage by a living reminder of those atrocities. His fellow producer and winner, Branko Lustig, had been imprisoned as a child for two years in Auschwitz and Bergen-Belsen. “My number was 83317,” Lustig said. And then, “People died in front of me in the camps. Their last words were ‘Be a witness of my murder. Tell the world how I died.’ … By helping Steven to make this movie, I hope I fulfill my obligation to the innocent victims of the Holocaust.”

[candont]

The Mortal Immortal

I kind of want there to be more to this story than there is.  It’s just kind of light considering it comes from the author of Frankenstein and that the opening is so reference heavy.  (Wiki-wormhole did cause me to uncover that Lefanu’s Great Grandmother wrote weird/fantastic fiction.  See: The History of Nourjahad ).

Still the ending tension between wanting to and not wanting too die does raise it above just escapist fare.

Am left with two questions though:

When does the it would be terrible to live foreveer thing first emerge as a trope?

And what kind of a name in Winzy?

[bakafox]

More Veilguard Rambling As I Inch Closer To Endgame

Veilguard has so much light-hearted and silly companion banter. It's so generally friendly, or at least understanding- Taash says inappropriate things or does them, but they're basically 18 and were raised by mercenaries and a demanding mother, and the other companions don't get super pissed. Other pairings of companions may snipe a little at each other and get each others' goats, especially at first, depending on personalities, but there's still the friendliness to it, or at least a tolerance?

Any real distrust type stuff is saved for the conversations you might steer a little.

It's really funny considering how 'polarizing' the game is and how it's led to so many people being absolute jerks towards other people online- but this banter type, the fact people aren't overstepping or being punished for not saying the best or right things is ABSOLUTELY what my soul needs right now in a videogame where I'm teaming up with some group.

I play on the 2 lowest difficulty settings because I don't really want to be challenged in the combat, I just want a fun escapist game that soothes my soul and Veilguard is delivering this so hard to me right now.

Which isn't to say the story and lore doesn't have grim elements, a lot of the main story and bits of lore you find are grim and/or tragic, as grim and tragic as in any other game, but it's far more my style in delivery than some kind of fixed grimdark level.

And admittedly, I have memory problems, and I don't perpetually replay previous games, I played each of them once all the way through and then maybe 4-5 games that got to varying degrees in, but the vibe to me is still so very Dragon Age. Even the new lore about elves and qunari and wardens or the like that apparently so many people hate- I do like it just fine, and I don't think it clashes badly with what DAO and 2 and then Inquisition set up.

Maybe the companions don't have some complexities that make them difficult for me to have my Rook talk to them, and I can see some people missing that sort of thing, but I like having the conversation scripts with them without even once wishing I could poke them about some belief or opinion they have, or try to get them to change their minds about things the game will never actually let you change their minds or even get more dialogue about where I felt absolutely required to write fanfic. I'm too tired to write fanfic right now. But I also still see where if I wanted to I could write fanfic and where they're all still inspiring enough, just- not in a frustrating way for me.

No game can please everyone. I really can see some of what some people might be calling overly-simplistic at times, though I still absolutely can't fathom the bitter bile levels that were stirred up. The creators of Veilguard clearly did love Dragon Age. They clearly knew and cared about what came before it.

Sometimes maybe it's a bit the 'they're a little confused, but they've got the spirit!' in how the dialogue or story treats a few things, but that's really the worst I find myself saying right now still, as I finish up a mess of companion quests before tackling a new story bit.

And while elves and the Dalish still were given a hard road to hoe- I think it feels a lot less unbalanced in Veilguard? Like, they have wins, they are dealing with discovering what was lost or taken from them, and the game doesn't have anyone acting like it's THEIR fault as the survivors that history was ripped away from them or they're just ignorant, and they're not treated as silly in Arlathan for trying to recover past info- and it feels like the Arlathan area elves did fare better than the southern Dalish in general, with no stupid motherfucking southern chantry, or at least less of it.

I. Do. Not. Miss. The. Chantry. Storylines.

I do not miss the 'must mages be controlled?' thing. Like, I wouldn't mind going back to the south if there's ever any future DA games with how this one's been received, but this is a nice vacation. Yes, there's the Tevinter nonsense, and the Qun stuff is still... hm. But it is really bloody nice to learn Thedas History without the 'big moral question' being whether or not mages deserve freedom or are inherently too dangerous to be allowed to roam.

Tevinter Slavery Bad. Venatori Human Mage Superiority And Lust For Empire And Power At All Cost Bad. And I don't have to explain any of that to any of my companions or allies in game or in fiction.

Unless it goes with some of the choices I did not make in the game saves I have going, there's no 'sins of the past generations should be taken out on the current'.

And right now, with how the world is, I like that. Honestly, also after surviving discourse about previous games to where I absolutely no longer interact with the fandom other than my circle of mutuals other than a rare tag dive for fanart alone- I still really like that.

[xtruss]

200 New Words and Definitions Added to Merriam-Webster.com

Including Beach Read, Street Corn, Touch Grass, and Nepo Baby

We’ve added 200 new words and definitions to our iconic dictionary – maybe not a beach read, but worthy of a For You page and nearly as irresistible as street corn. All the additions have demonstrated widespread use over time, and offer a window into the world today.

Here’s a Selection:

From arts and entertainment we get freestyle, “an improvised performance especially of a rap,” and the jazzlike sounds of a jam band. More bookish diversions include true crime, a genre “that depicts and examines real crime cases,” and beach read, “a usually light work of escapist fiction (such as a thriller or romance.)” You can also lose yourself in a dungeon crawler, a video game "primarily focused on defeating enemies while exploring a usually randomly generated labyrinthine or dungeon-like environment.”

Foodies who avoid ultra-processed fare can instead enjoy burrata, “mozzarella formed into a ball-shaped casing that contains curds and cream”; capicola, “a seasoned Italian pork that is cut from the neck and top shoulder”; and street corn, a grilled variation “coated with a creamy spread (such as mayonnaise, sour cream, or crema) and garnished with toppings (such as lime juice, cotija cheese, and chili powder).” While washing it down, consider the International Bitterness Unit, “used to assess the concentration of a bitter compound found in hops in order to provide information about how bitter a beer is.”

From science and nature comes heat index, a value “derived from a calculation using air temperature and relative humidity,” and – now invading the dictionary – the dreaded spotted lanternfly.

Social media fuels shadow ban and touch grass, “to participate in normal activities in the real world especially as opposed to online experiences and interactions,” and For You page (or FYP), “a social media feed that contains personalized content based on the user's interests.”

Informal words and slang entering the lexicon include the British term snog, and the colorful acronym IDGAF (not defined here, because politeness exceeds badassery).

Other notable additions include nepo baby, “a person who gains success or opportunities through familial connections,” cash grab, creepy-crawly, and the political terms MAGA, far left, far right, classical liberalism, and late capitalism.

“Our lexicographers monitor a huge range of sources to select which words and definitions to add,” says Peter Sokolowski, Editor at Large for Merriam-Webster. “From academic journals to social media, these give us a very thorough view of the English language.”

“The one constant of a vibrant living language is change,” explains Gregory Barlow, President of Merriam-Webster. “We continuously encounter new ways of describing the world around us, and the dictionary is a record of those changes.”

[primetimesnow]

Anurag Kashyap: The Maverick Filmmaker Redefining Indian Cinema

In the realm of Indian cinema, few names evoke as much respect and admiration as Anurag Kashyap. Known for his gritty storytelling, unflinching realism, and penchant for pushing boundaries, Kashyap has carved a niche for himself as a maverick filmmaker. His work, often marked by its raw and unpolished narrative style, challenges conventional Bollywood norms and offers a refreshing alternative to mainstream Indian cinema.

Early Life and Struggles

Anurag Kashyap was born on September 10, 1972, in Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh. His early life was far from the glitz and glamour of the film industry. Growing up in a middle-class family, Kashyap's initial aspirations lay far from filmmaking. It wasn't until he encountered Vittorio De Sica’s neorealism in "Bicycle Thieves" that he developed a passion for cinema. His journey to Bollywood was fraught with challenges. Moving to Mumbai in the early 1990s, Kashyap faced numerous rejections and financial hardships. Despite these struggles, his determination and unique vision for storytelling eventually caught the eye of the industry.

Breakthrough with "Satya"

Kashyap’s breakthrough came as a co-writer for Ram Gopal Varma's critically acclaimed film "Satya" (1998). The film, a gritty portrayal of Mumbai's underworld, was a stark departure from the escapist fare typical of Bollywood at the time. "Satya" not only established Kashyap as a formidable writer but also set the tone for his future directorial ventures.

Directorial Debut and Rise to Prominence

Anurag Kashyap’s directorial debut, "Paanch," though mired in censorship controversies, showcased his bold narrative style. However, it was "Black Friday" (2004), based on the 1993 Bombay bombings, that truly established him as a director to watch. The film’s raw depiction of real events was both lauded and criticized, further solidifying Kashyap's reputation for fearless filmmaking.

His subsequent films, "Dev.D" (2009) and "Gulaal" (2009), continued to challenge traditional Bollywood storytelling. "Dev.D," a modern retelling of Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay's classic novel "Devdas," was particularly notable for its innovative approach and complex characters.

The Gangs of Wasseypur Saga

The two-part epic "Gangs of Wasseypur" (2012) is perhaps Kashyap’s magnum opus. Spanning several decades, the saga of crime, politics, and family feuds in the coal mafia of Dhanbad is a testament to his storytelling prowess. The films were praised for their authentic portrayal of rural India and intricate plotlines, earning Kashyap international acclaim.

Beyond Directing: Producer and Mentor

In addition to his directorial ventures, Kashyap has played a significant role as a producer and mentor. Through his production company, Phantom Films, he has supported various independent filmmakers, fostering new talent in the industry. Films like "Udaan" (2010), "Lootera" (2013), and "Queen" (2014) owe part of their success to Kashyap's backing.

A Controversial Figure

Kashyap’s career has not been without controversy. His outspoken nature and willingness to tackle contentious subjects have often put him at odds with the establishment. Films like "Ugly" (2013) and "Raman Raghav 2.0" (2016) further cemented his reputation as a provocateur, unafraid to delve into the darker aspects of human nature.

Legacy and Impact

Anurag Kashyap's influence on Indian cinema is undeniable. He has paved the way for a new generation of filmmakers who are not afraid to experiment with form and content. His contribution to the Indian film industry extends beyond his filmography, inspiring a wave of realistic and narrative-driven cinema.

In a landscape dominated by formulaic blockbusters, Anurag Kashyap stands out as a beacon of creativity and originality. His films, often characterized by their depth, complexity, and socio-political relevance, continue to resonate with audiences both in India and globally. As he continues to break new ground, Kashyap remains a seminal figure in the evolution of contemporary Indian cinema.

[emilydaisymasters]

Researching into existing Studies / Media Representation

As I find my topic to be quite a niche one, or at least quite a refined and limited question, I don't expect to find a huge amount of conducted research that already exists, but I will attempt to find any research or representation that I feel links to my idea as best as I can. Below are my findings, with descriptions of how exactly I have related them to my own personal studies and thoughts, as well as how they may be of use to me:

Media Representation:

Adult Animation, Family Guy and The Simpsons

My first and initial thought about current existing media

representation of young girls took me to adult animated shows, in particular two of the biggest moguls in the category, being Family Guy and The Simpsons. Straight off the bat, I have so many thoughts about how these shows portray women as a WHOLE in such a demeaning and unhealthy way, on top of the representation of younger girls being just as damaging. Admittedly, shows of this caliber mainly create stereotypes in order to provoke a cheap laugh out of the audience, and every type of person is at risk of being marginalized in such a way, young or old, male or female. However, one thing I have come to really resent about these shows, is that their portrayals of women and girls always seems far more demeaning and damaging than that of their main, male characters. Taking Family Guy as a prime example here, any of the main and supporting female cast of characters fall into one of three categories; they got their starts in life via the sex industry, they are boring/nag a lot, or they are mentally ill. Of course this is a generalization in itself, and some characters are far more nuanced, but I really struggled to find an example that didn't fall into these categories. The male characters are far, far more varied and have personalities unique to themselves; even this slight difference in representation and narrative storytelling is enough for me to say shows as such have such a disrespect for women, far more than their male counterparts. And the younger female characters don't fare much better. Both Meg Griffin and Lisa Simpson are routinely characterized as outcasts, loners, girls who struggle with their emotions, making friends and things of the sort. These aren't inaccurate portrayals per say, as some girls indeed do struggle with that sort of thing, but they are often ridiculed for it, which is where the issue comes into play. Adults should of course, be able to differentiate between a joke and a serious portrayal of character, but the hoards of children and young teenagers watching these shows unsupervised, myself included, can have the lines blurred, believing the tropes to be true to reality. I personally think these points already form a brilliant basis to my argument about young girls and women struggling in society and with the way they are represented, giving merit to the idea that taking solace in an escapist outlet is sometimes, all they have.

Modern Disney

My next point is perhaps looser and more broad than the last, but equally falls into the category of representing young teenagers in a very narrow way. One trend I have come to notice over the last few years, up until about a decade ago, is the template Disney as a company use to write their young female leads, and its a template that I see in use more and more as their feature films are released. Essentially, their female characters, often teenagers, seems to consistently be personality clones of one another, being the awkward, quirky girls who get overly excited and always seem to come to some miraculous discovery and conclusion about themselves by the end of the film. Aside from that simply being a facet of storytelling, and a narrative needing a conclusion, I find this representation to be getting quite stale by this point. Whilst I initially welcomed the introduction of females in Disney animation who actually think for themselves, experience conflict and turmoil, and figure themselves out at their own pace, it's not directly representative of nearly as many young girls as the company seems to presume it is. I feel its important to not only give young girls the diligence they are due, but to not treat them as clones of one another, to create characters with completely different personalities, issues and resolutions.

Existing Studies

The Duality of Escapism - Matthew Ugolini, Northeastern Illinois University

Representations of girls in Japanese Magical Girl TV animation programmes from 1966 to 2003 and Japanese female audiences' understanding of them - Shimada, Akiko S. (2011), PhD thesis, University of Warwick.

MILLENNIAL READERS: AN ANALYSIS OF YOUNG ADULT ESCAPISM - Marina Demetriou BA, English, Carleton University, 2016

I have been browsing various related studies to my own question, and have read some interesting deep dives into questions, theories and reasonings behind things that could in some way inform my own studies. The studies are linked above, and reference things such as the power of modern escapism and it's subsequent detriments, the representation of teenage girls in animation, and how art can be created with the idea of producing an escapist outlet for others. All of these points are their own individual things, but pose some very poignant questions I need to begin to consider and think about before conducting my practical work.

[gsmattingly]

Review "Outlander"

I watched "Outlander" a 2008 movie directed by Howard McCain. It is in no way related to the series about time travel reomance and the Scots of the same name. It stars Jim Caviezel as Kainan (the alien), Sophia Myles as Freya, Jack Huston as Wulfric, John Hurt as Rolhgar, and numerous others. From an IMDb summary, "In 709 A.D., in the Iron Age, a spacecraft crashes in the Viking kingdom of Herot, Norway, and the pilot Kainan (Jim Caviezel) survives. He turns the beacon on; learns the language and culture of the planet using a machine; and finds that the predator, Moorwen, that he was transporting, had escaped. While chasing the alien monster, he finds a village completely destroyed and is arrested by the warrior Wulfric (Jack Huston), believing that he killed the locals. Kainan is brought to Herot as a prisoner." and "Though both man and monster are seeking revenge for violence committed against them, Kainan leads the alliance to kill the Moorwen by fusing his advanced technology with the Viking's Iron Age weaponry."

I don't think this will ever be considered a classic film. it seems to be a mashup of several genres and themes coming from various films of science fiction, monster, aliens and humans, vikings, etc. I thought it had decent special effects and certainly lots of actions and tension. It had a moderately good monster and interesting interactions between various and sundry characters in the films. It was a fun movie that held my attention and had some great setting scenery and cinematography. It is certainly an escapist film and has action, love interests, monsters, and a little bit more. The plot isn't really that intricate and the actual character development is fairly generic and minimal. But, as noted in the Empire review by Kim Newman , "A film version of fish and chips � humble, honest fare that�s ludicrous, inventive, gory within limits, and has a cast having so much fun it�s hard not to be swept along with them. And besides, you can�t have nouvelle cuisine every night of the week."

Overall it received mid to bad reviews with general ratings in the 2 to 3 range out of 5.

[ahb-writes]

Comics Review: ‘Witches: The Complete Collection’

Witches: The Complete Collection by Daisuke Igarashi My rating: 3 of 5 stars A preponderance of greed that skirts the intuition of the infernal. The deliberate and tactical abuse of nature's resources and the indigenous people who nurture them. Vast logical contradictions birthed from a narrow-minded religious intelligence. In WITCHES, the fundament of observing, documenting, interpreting, and relaying natural and cosmic phenomena occurs by way of the witch. But the function or application of the knowledge or insight obtained, one quickly finds, is often at the discretion of said greedy, abusive, or hypocritical authority figures. WITCHES is about witches, absolutely; but this manga is also, unfailingly, about the vulgar disruption of the natural order of which witches seem apt to value or protect. Collected as vignettes, WITCHES focuses on a branch of witchcraft and divination conveniently overlooked most casual consumers of such fare: translating ancient messages written on pieces of firewood; manifesting fog-induced hallucinations; listening to the rhythms and vibrations of all living beings; star-gazing. That is to say, acts of intimate focus and control meant to intuit something greater (or more fearsome) than can be had on one's own. Here, witchcraft is not supernatural; witchcraft is nature itself. And any individual trained or perceptive enough to read or interpret its omens effectively is thus a very, very special individual. Not all vignettes are the same. Some are long, multi-part endeavors. Others are a short, escapist rendezvous with the hidden, the unusual, or the finnicky. "Spindle" is an expansive two-part story about a weaver, a girl from a Central Asian community of nomads, who journeys to Istanbul to deliver a message of warning (and shame) to a woman of woeful corruption and ego. "Spindle" is not a particularly engaging story, but its climax is remarkably clever: "You who think in words cannot think beyond words," the girl says. "You cannot obtain that which is greater than yourself." The short story "Petra Genitalix" is phenomenal. In terms of genre affinity, the vignette traverses speculative fiction, science fiction, and surrealist fantasy. As the tale begins, a kind but stern witch, Mira, and her apprentice and house-mate, Alicia, are summoned by the clergy to ameliorate an existential threat to humankind. "Petra Genitalix" is beautiful for its intertwining of the small and the large. Tracking fox prints in the snow. Rebuking cocky cardinals overlooking a dying metropolis. Querying the power of rebirth while studying the lifecycle of wheat. Intuiting when the danger or hardship of others is of equal or greater import than the hardship afforded a single person: "Could you return love to someone who simply shrugs when a loved one is in peril?" Mira says. "Witches don't think. Witches just know." Igarashi's style is primarily a tepid fix of illustrative line art whose warm shapes and kind movements grant the artist the opportunity to add or remove detail as scale and perspective allow. The grass between a little girl's toes. The wrinkles of an old woman's face. An extraordinary cityscape, melting under otherworldly forces. In WITCHES, readers' closeness with the manga's running themes of abandonment, uncertainty, and the many gradients of human foolishness is increasingly teased and tested by the artist's careful affection for page compositions whose function is never without purpose.

Comics Reviews || ahb writes on Good Reads

[confluence-and-drift]

Again floored by the realisation that pointing out that Harry Potter has always been mediocre rubbish even in the escapist school novel sub-genre is considered contraversial... I mean...such opinions HAVE to be coming from people who never read another book right? It was obviously low quality fare, I could see that when I was 12, even when I enjoyed them overall, the mean spiritedness of it and the kind of regressiveness to it's morality, even fi I couldn't have put words to it was always there right? Rhetorical quesiton as it absolutely was. Writers and people into literature analysis were picking it over on the old internet, mystified by the mainstream press working itself into a frenzy over such bilge-tier stuff and now I just had to observe a post with my own eyes where people are pretending that thinking that is a product of purity culture and not just a product of a person having read better books. Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of times when I was younger where I shamefully pretended otherwise so I could be included in IRL groups of assorted nerds and not get shunned by people who thought the last HP book was grand literature and not a feeble cop out by someone whose fundamental lack of ability, morality and good sense shone through even clearer than her bigotry, which, at the time at least, was fairly low-key and deniable. Well, at least until 2014 when she went mask off during the independence referendum, but damn. I mean, she killed off main members of her supporting cast off-screen in her big finale. How people even pretend that that was anything other than an embarassing failure on the author's part...like fuck me, if me and my fucking Guild Wars guild at age 17 could see this clearly I don't see why it'd be beyond the ability of anyone else, nevermind beforementioned mainstream press. Ultimately, yes, I spent most of a decade lying through my teeth any time someone Hot, Cool and/or Popular some HP-obsessed idiot laid into my own interests and try to assert that HP was better than what I liked, what, no, of course they'd never read/engaged in it, but if I disagreed, I'd get fucking ostracised. *shakes head*. Look, not everything is fucking purity culture 'at it again', sometimes things, no matter how popular, were just kind of shitty and the psychological compulsion some people have to bounce back to saying "actually, people who say it was crap are engaging in purity culture" mystifies me. Is it just that you dislike people who are being smug about it? Is that all? I can't think of anything else... Are we going to be thinking of the Star Wars movies of recent times in the same light in 15 years time? =/. I swear if someone starts defending "somehow Palpatine returned"...

[billiethetween]

a little escapism in media is fine every now and then, because life is cruel and brutal and short and we do lots of things that aren't good for us to ease the pain of self-awareness and always have. it's when people build their entire identities around childish, escapist fare and start believing anything that isn't pandering to their expectations or god forbid challenges them is harmful and morally wrong that things get weird and unhealthy, and it leaves people vulnerable to exploitation and manipulation by corporations. like, most of those hardcore MCUs fans were only vaguely aware that Tarantino and Scorsese existed at all before they dared question the corporation feeding their addiction to formulaic sludge, and there is part of me that feels a bit bad for them. if you're an adult and your entire life revolves around superhero movies so much you feel the need to attack anyone who doesn't care for them, you're probably pretty miserable and not capable of understanding your being taken advantage of by a massive corporation with a monopoly on the industry.