#Fantasy-Satire

[triforcevillains]

Dogma (1999) In dem Fantasyfilm verbannt Gott zwei seiner Engel nach Wisconsin, wo sie nun ihr Unheil treiben. Ein Kardinal bietet die Vergebung jeglicher Sünden bei Eintritt in seine Kirche an. Die beiden Todesengel sehen so die Möglichkeit, zurück in den Himmel zu kehren - dies würde jedoch zum Untergang alles Lebenden führen würde, da die Rückkehr der beiden Engel in den Himmel sich der Unfehlbarkeit Gottes entgegenstellen würde. Die einzige Nachfahrin Jesu muss nun versuchen, die beiden von ihrem Vorhaben abzuhalten.

(10/10)

[madame-helen]

[thequietesthing]

they officially cancelled My Lady Jane after only one season because it apparently “didn’t find a broad enough audience”. i’m disappointed but not surprised, unfortunately it’s just one more name in the very long list of too-soon cancelled shows with incredible potential.

[weirdlookindog]

Heinrich Kley (1863-1945) - Untitled

from 'Der Orchideengarten' Vol.1 #15, 1919

source

[madame-helen]

[frankenmouse]

Galavant is streaming on Hulu!!!

If you like: fantasy, musicals, comedies, The Princess Bride, Terry Pratchett, or any combination of the previous you NEED to at least try Galavant.

[madame-helen]

[junebuge]

🍂Succubus. The Witcher 🍂

[rjalker]

fantasy oppression written by white people in a nutshell:

[ID: An MS Paint comic of two stick figures talking, saying:

Figure one: "I can kill you any time I want. I am stronger and faster than you and smarter and I can overpower you before you even realize you're under attack. If I decide to kill you there's absolutely nothing you can do to defend yourself." Figure two: "Um. Okay. I'm kind of scared of you now." Figure one: "You're oppressing me." End ID.]

[misforgotten2]

A book you very likely don’t have on your shelf #572

Cover by 1956

[vonlipvig]

As someone who read the original book (it is a surprisingly complex read, but I definitely want to tackle the sequels at some point), I’m guessing from your reaction that they’ve put the kiss scene back in? If so that’s good, because the original book had quite a bit of gay rep and subtext to it (which I started to list here before realising I’d written a fucking paragraph and deleted it), so it was top of my list of things I’d hoped the film would put that back in. (If you’re curious btw the other two were more world lore, and Boq and Elphaba’s pretty supportive friendship).

That said the book has rotted my brain slightly, because a small part of me genuinely wants each of the five parts of what is, effectively, a very dense fantasy biography, to be its own film. For clarity this would mean that we’d spend the ENTIRE first film in Munchkin Land, with Elphaba not yet able to talk, learning about the geopolitical, historical, AND religious position of Oz. While in the background the infant Elphaba’s parents slowly and messily fall into a polyamorous relationship with a traveler from the South… (very much a film I fear only I wish to see)

...THEY KISS?!

no, they definitely don't here (if you meant my comment about [REDACTED], that's something totally different, i'll drop it in the tags so people can avoid it if they haven't watched the movie yet, cause it's worth it to go into it blind for that!).

i mean, i'm pretty sure the movies are just adapting what's in the theater show (plus some new bits maybe? it IS a lot longer after all), so i doubt they're gonna go into that much detail or go further from what the play covers. but i mean, gelphie have always been gay as hell honestly, so i'd absolutely love to see a kiss hehe.

i never read the book(s?), but yeah, from what i've heard, i goes...pretty wild. something something animals? orgy? i don't know man, fantasy books are like that i guess lmao.

[wallacepolsom]

Wallace Polsom, Life During Wartime: Hot for Teacher (13 Feb 2024), paper collage, 21.6 x 27.5 cm.

[madame-helen]

[360degreesasthecrowflies]

I’m afraid I’ve come more and more around to the opinion that Rowling is the kind of author who simply doesn’t think. So to look for an analytical interpretation of anything in the series is probably an exercise in frustration. She paints what is intended as impressive word pictures — essentially vignettes — mainly on the basis of how they are supposed to push your buttons and make you feel, without ever considering how they are supposed to fit together. This sometimes produces a considerable emotional impact, if you are at all sensitive to that kind of jerking around, but it doesn’t necessarily make sense. And sometimes they just plain backfire. Quite a few of these issues are still slowly coming into focus. And one of the sharpest is the awareness that the world Rowling assembled is simply a lot bigger than the narrow-focused, smug, anglo-centric view of it she gave us. Because when you come right down to it, it becomes clear that she never really intended to build a solid secondary world to put her story in. She simply didn’t do the groundwork. Instead, she has ended up with this weird amalgamation that she threw together — which is highly detailed in some areas, and only vaguely sketched in elsewhere with several great gaping holes where you least expect them, to fall right out of the story through. But, back when she first assembled this pretend world, she used the best possible materials available. She mined folklore, and classic (written) tales that have been pretty fully absorbed by the culture, as well as ancient myth, and symbolism that has been around for centuries, she mimicked the authentically traditional “tropes” of how stories are put together and how they work, and she did it with a free hand. But I’m no longer convinced that she did it all consciously. I think she slung a lot of them together because they just “felt” right together. Sure, sometimes she tweaked them before she deployed them, or renamed them, or trivialized the hell out of them, but she hardly ever invented anything new. Most of her elements already existed. The only thing in the Potterverse that is really original are some of her combinations. And, of course, the Dementors. Consequently, as I say, she ended up with something that is a lot bigger than she is. And which upon first encounter comes across as a lot more erudite than she probably really is too, because all of the elements she used to build it came already equipped with their own baggage, and a whole pre-existing collection of associations which all originally led someplace. And most of them are so widely known and/or so universal that even with a 2nd or 3rd-rate education, you are able to recognize them, and are at least somewhat aware of what those particular elements usually mean. And the components are all thoroughly documented, so you can readily find out what the original source meant if you are at all curious. But that doesn’t mean that she ever intended to use any of that material. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. It is certainly bigger than the shallow, petty, and mean-spirited viewpoint that she keeps pushing into the foreground and expecting us to use as a lens.

via Red Hen's restrospective review of Deathly Hallows, 2008

[libraryleopard]

reading monstrous regiment and wrath goddess sing at the same time is really wild because they're both fantasy novels about gender and the patriarchy during wartime that also include a dead god and characters trying to get into the enemy's stronghold but they're completely different in tone and plot

[wolfdijon]

oysin hackinvar... u suck u did adanine Rly Bad i hope u rot 4 that