#I don't even want to say anything about the film itself in case someone wants to watch it

[thesewordsareallihavetogive]

what the fuck did I just watch 😭😭😭

[lauralot89]

So I watched Nosferatu

poor Nicholas Hoult keeps getting tortured by vampires

also

that certainly was a penis

it has been years since I watched the original Nosferatu and I no longer remember what it did with any of its characters or plot so I will not be comparing this to that

so if you're going to do a Dracula/Mina romance (or in this case, Orlok/Ellen) and you're not going to base it around their shared hobby of reading train schedules, this is probably the best way to do it, because this isn't actually a romance. This movie gives Mina/Ellen the psychic sensitivity that Lucy/Anna has in the book, and establishes that Ellen has had mental connection with Orlok since her childhood, and he essentially groomed her. She even calls him out on it in the film. Yeah, there is one moment toward the end of the movie where she comforts him, but she isn't trying to save him or anything and also even in the original novel, Mina was the one who said Dracula deserved the most pity.

Yes, there was the scene where Ellen was saying Orlok loved her more than Thomas/Jonathan but she was clearly possessed

There is no romanticism of Orlok/Dracula here. He's the worst and he doesn't even have the illusion of civility that most adaptations provide.

also I was told by early reviewers that this movie was very horny and I think they must have watched a different cut than I did. I mean, sure, you see (flaccid) vampire dick once and some nudity throughout but the movie has two sex scenes and both are deeply unsexy in that in the first, you don't see anything and also both characters have gone out of their minds, and in the second, it's not even really sex. You can't just show me a dick that's not even in use and tell me that's horny. Come on, people. Raise your standards.

I don't say this to be mean but: I think the original Orlok makeup from the silent film was scarier. I get what they were doing here, I do, and the makeup was immaculate (as were the costumes, the set designs, etc. It's an Eggers film) but I personally find Original Orlok scarier, and this Orlok was most intimidating when he was kept in the shadows.

This movie felt very much like a fairy tale. It even sets up a "three nights" limit at one point sort of like the earlier versions of Cinderella. I find that Dracula adaptations, particularly in film, often put vibes above, say, characterization, and this movie felt pretty vibe-y.

If I were to make a complaint, it wouldn't even really be about the movie itself. But like, Nosferatu was originally made to be Dracula without paying for the rights to Dracula, wasn't it? You're not bound by the novel (not that most straight-up Dracula adaptations follow the novel all that closely either). You literally have a built-in excuse to do whatever you want, but it seems like what people want to do time and again in vampire movies is a highlights reel of the most famous moments in the book without ever really delving into the characters that made the novel so good.

Again, this is not a criticism of this movie. It's just that what I realized while watching this movie is that I really really want a Dracula adaptation that's a character study. Not even necessarily a character study of Dracula. If someone out there made an adaptation that focused the story on Jonathan or Lucy or Jack or whoever, I would love for that.

God bless Ralph Ineson's voice

Everyone in this film did well, but Nicholas Hoult's performance was probably my favorite. He emotes terror so damn well. And of course Dafoe is always a delight.

Did Original Orlok also favor biting people on the chest or was he a neck guy

[livingformintyoongi]

Call It What You Want | Yoongi

I've been obsessing over this idea for like three days now and I NEED to share it just because. It's part of the activity for 300 followers, and since Yoongi is one of my ultimate biases I'm going to self-request to do this for my sake 🙃. So, reader here is bisexual, I don't consider it a warning, but if it's something that bothers you I'll leave it here just in case. taglist: @thunderg @minjianhyung @queenv1997 @yoongtism @lizzymizzy-blogg @superbbananananana @drpepperobsessed @themwordsblog @taekritimin123 @bluecloudss

Imagine being a third generation idol, you have had years of career, you are a woman full of talent, with good music, good vocals, good dancing skills and your stage presence is no slouch either. Despite that, the media and people on the internet simply downgrade you to a “too thin” or “too fat” body, only focusing on your physique and not on your talent. 

You feel totally frustrated by that, but you try to go on with your life, vent with your friends, have a drink or two and, at some point, you end up secretly dating a female idol with whom you had really good chemistry. Everything in your life seems to be going uphill until dispatch brings your relationship to light and a wave of hate comes your way, homophobes covered in so-called fans screaming at you every time you leave your house, saying how disgusting you are simply for not dating someone with a dick. The frustration gets bigger and bigger, and just when you thought you couldn't sink any deeper into your misery, your girlfriend breaks you overnight, coming out to the media to say that you were just friends and that she would never date a woman.

Yes, you felt your life sucked, but it was okay, you could get through this, you were a strong woman. 

It took you months to recover from that breakup, same months in which you were forced to take a career break because your company didn't want someone so “problematic” working with them. Still, you used that time to recover, to work on your next comeback, to do what you were most passionate about. It was then that you contacted a well-known rapper in the industry with the intention of doing a collaboration together, something he happily accepted, willing to hang out with you whenever he had free time. 

To your bad luck, you end up hooking up with this guy, something you obviously hadn't thought through clearly. You were only with him for one night, but again the news fed on your private life, making public each of your encounters, even though only one of them was “something more”.

Again the company, this time from the guy, totally denies the story that was made public, claiming that you have just work meetings and that both had been working on a collaboration, insisting that they would take legal action for defamation. And yes, again they dragged out your hiatus, and again you had to put up with hundreds of people outside your house, filming you, photographing you, shouting horrible things about you and how promiscuous you were. 

If you had been in misery before, at that moment you had been in hell itself. 

It was right then, at your worst moment, that Yoongi made his stellar appearance in your life. He went straight to your manager and asked (demanded) to do a collaboration with you. According to him, your voice was perfect for his new song and he needed you to make it happen, and who were you to deny Yoongi?

It took hundreds of sleepless nights where you both worked on the final touches to the lyrics of the song, Yoongi had asked you to help him also with the backing track, with the recording of the MV, basically he wanted there to be a part of you in absolutely the whole process, and so it was.

The two of you inevitably became close, to the point where he became your best friend, someone you talked to every night before going to sleep and every morning when you woke up. Little by little you began to fall more and more in love with him, and it wasn't at all like anything you had ever felt before. Yes, you loved your ex-girlfriend who practically ignored your existence as soon as she could, and you had also felt something for the rapper from almost half a year ago, but Yoongi? He was just different, he... he listened to you, and not only did he do that, he understood what you were telling him and took the time to prove it with his actions. 

He had taken the trouble to get to know you, he had given you his time. To explain it in a better way, your other two relationships were like a tornado, it happened fast, it was destructive and scandalous; with Yoongi it was more like a bonfire, he had to make it little by little, give it some wood, blow air on the small flame that little by little grew more eager, but he kept himself in check, he kept you warm even with the cold of the night, he illuminated your darkest moments with his orange light, that was Yoongi for you, and every day that passed you felt it even more real.

It was only a matter of time before you both fell for each other and ended up dating. Your hiatus was coming to an end and the song you released together with Yoongi was a hit, but the best part had nothing to do with that, but with your relationship with him. You had managed to see each other on the sly in such a successful way that neither of you could believe it. You spent most of the day at his house, waiting patiently for him to arrive only to greet him with a big hug that he would reciprocate with laughter as he carried you to the couch, where you would spend at least half an hour talking about each other's day. 

You even went so far as to buy some chains with each other's initial, it was a stupid impulse, you knew, but when you told him so he didn't hesitate for a second to put it on and leave it on every day since then, only taking it off to take a shower for fear that it would rust. 

He made you feel so safe that even when a fan posted a picture of the two of you together kissing at his house, you weren't afraid of the comments, neither you nor him, how could you focus on those lifeless people when you had Yoongi by your side, hugging you by the shoulders, whispering in your ear how he was going to stay with you even if his company demanded otherwise? 

This time you weren't abandoned by your partner, quite the opposite, he asked you to wear the kind of clothes you wore at home, baggy clothes in vibrant colors, something that represented you, he arranged his necklace with your initial so it was in plain sight for everyone to see, took your hand, and walked out of the house with you, intertwining his fingers with yours and giving you a gentle squeeze every time some idiot yelled shit at you. His gaze was almost always downward as he walked, trying to shield his eyes from the camera flashes. Still, he always had his attention on you, and despite the annoying light from the cameras he looked at your face to make sure you were okay before opening the car door for you. 

And it was only then that you thought you hadn't screwed up your life with your decision. For the first time in your almost thirty years you had managed to take the right path, and being there, sitting next to him as he caressed the bare skin of your leg, seeing his comforting smile and his gaze soften in your direction was enough to make you understand that no matter what happened from now on, he was with you, and he was willing to give up everything of himself in order to take care of you, even if it ruined his reputation. 

And just for that you were willing to go through all the shit you went through before, because if you needed that to have been able to meet Yoongi, you would go through it a thousand times more.

Masterlist.

300 followers event.

[bobbydagen24]

come to think of it how do you think Branch learnt everything he knows?

in TBT he says in the argument scene that after Grandma died there was no one left to take care of him confirming that he literally had no one after her death.

implying with everything else we know about his backstory that he Raised himself from a very young age likely 5 6 or 7 I'd assume based purely on his looks alone.

but thinking about it how could he have learnt how to do everything that he knows as an adult?

I mean I know some of it can simply be self taught but do you really think a little kid that age would be able to self learn everything that Branch knows as an adult?

like how to build an underground Bunker without it collapsing in on itself? and how to build a working lift in the Bunker?

and just basic stuff like cooking and maintaining a House by himself ( Hell I'm in my early 20s and I still struggle with a lot of that crap 😂😂😂😂 )

I mean do you think he literally is meant to have just been alone? or do you think its more a case where he didn't have a specific guardian per say.

but maybe he was still technically looked after by the village to an extent like he had people to teach him certain things and or bring him food and stuff that he needed to make sure he was still healthy.

but he still sorta just lived on his own and didn't interact with other people unless he absolutely had to due to how closed off he was.

some people like to HC Kismet as having visited him during all those years to check up on him occasionally and bring him stuff and make sure he was properly taking care of himself.

so maybe we could find out something like that was the case in a future film tho maybe not necessarily with Kismet as cute as that would be.

like maybe he did have certain people looking out for him over the years when he was a kid despite him closing himself off from everyone.

IDK it'd just be sorta cute I think he still has large gaps in his Backstory that DreamWorks could potentially work with in the future.

like maybe a future film does actually introduce a new character from his past during that period in his life who tried to look out for him or at least check up on him every now and then to make sure he wasn't literally dead.

as I like the idea of him maybe having a kinda surrogate parent figure in a future film who he didn't even really think of in that way.

but later on its pointed out to him just how much they tried to do for him as he was growing up even tho they had to somewhat do it from a distance given Branch's wishes of wanting to be alone.

like maybe they were someone who also lost loved ones to the Bergens and they were more understanding of Branch's grief and him not being able to move on like the rest of the village did.

plus they just had a basic human amount of empathy and could see it probably wasn't Right to leave a grieving traumatised little kid with nothing to take care of himself with.

and maybe over the course of the film he kinda slowly realises even during all those years he spent alone someone did actually care and at least tried to look out for him.

and Branch comes to appreciate them like family plus Bro zone would instantly like them given how they looked out for him when they weren't there.

so they don't judge the relationship at all and are just kinda happy for Branch. ( I mean they can't claim he's betraying their parents memory or anything he didn't even know them as far as we know )

but now I'm getting more into fanfic ideas territory than cannon based speculation territory lol.

I just want the next film to give my boy some Happiness and a cute little semi surrogate parent plot has been spinning around in my head for the past week now.

I just kinda love the idea even if it would sorta be a retcon to his backstory and more new characters for the future films to have to introduce and develop even tho the cast is already super full.

but like I said I just find the idea kinda sweet plus screw Brozone lol I'd love for my boy Branch to find a found family member in the future.

who actually did try and be there for him throughout the worst periods of his life even when the rest of the village may have saw him as a lost cause.

but like I said that's more fanfic idea territory anyway what do you think in regards to the main question of the post? 😂😂😂😂

[kustas]

I recently witnessed someone on twitter with the spicy but interesting position of: the only people vehemently bitching against 2D puppets are the animators who have to use them. So, what's the tea, why's this debate even a thing, and is one side wrong?

Rigged 2D animation, also known as puppet animation, and prolly other terms I'm not aware of. Most 2D animators I know treat it with disdain as something they're forced to work on to survive instead of "real" animation (=hand drawn in this case), and while I've encountered less negative sentiments towards the medium coming from fans, I have seen several people complain about it unknowingly, correctly nailing visual aspects they don't like without knowing their cause. Additionally, it can be really hard to tell apart what's rigged and what's hand drawn in 2D, with many series mixing both to their advantage.

The reason for rigged stuff being so prevalent is that it's cheaper and faster. Where hand drawn requires redrawing your entire character/thing frame by frame to make it move, puppet animation uses, well, puppets, ready-made articulated models you just need to pose. It's also possible to use interpolation - instead of deciding by hand every image between two poses, you let the computer calculate it and come later to tweak how each part moves to make it look good. There is little to no drawing involved in rigged 2D, asides of rare shots that need a little part drawn over when the puppet can't do something specific, or drawing the eyes/mouths/hands/etc when you're making the puppets themselves. Notice I said series and not films in my previous paragraph - this is because animations with longer runtimes and/or shorter production times benefit strongly from this medium. You will not need to clean, to inbetween, to color and whatever other steps can go in hand drawn 2D when you have puppets. You can use the interpolations to your advantage on some movements. It's near impossible to be off model. You don't even need to draw!

And most animators uh, they're here because they like to draw. You can say animating and drawing are two different things, that is true, I've even heard it from the mouth of an insanely talented hand drawn animator called Liane-Cho Han who described himself as a poor drawer despite an impressive 2D portfolio. Poor drawer, good animator, it blew my mind at the time but when I started animating I understood what he meant. But puppet animation is still animation, and much closer to how 3D animation works, with stop-motion being comparable to hand drawn in terms of difference between these mediums. Yet you don't see industry-spanning bitching about 3D vs stop motion! This leads to my next point: puppets are limiting.

One of the advantages of hand drawn animation compared with other animation techniques especially those using character rigs is that you're not limited to said rigs. You can just draw anything, regardless of digital puppet constraints, of art style, of physics. If you can put it on paper, you can animate it. Puppets, both 3D and 2D, have limitations - the art needs to be made (sculpt, drawings) and be placed on a complex invisible digital skeleton allowing you to correctly manipulate your character, which is a job in itself. The more stuff you want your character to be able to do, the more complex it gets. You can't automate all of it. This means productions with lower budget and/or ambitions will tend to have simpler rigs which allow less. An example is angles: when you're hand drawing a character and want to pose them, you can pick whatever angle you'd like for all body parts. Rigs might not give this as an option, especially subtler angles of the head and foreshortening. This might make some movements you had in mind impossible, with a need to stylize your poses and your breakdowns. Not being able to have these angles can make for animation that looks stiff or awkward and can be very annoying to work with depending on the animator.

That artificial stiffness is to me, one of the telling signs something is rigged, and part of the reasons I don't like it myself! That's right, I'm with the haters here. Except stiffness doesn't necessarily mean something used digital rigs, and stiffness isn't inherently a bad thing - as with all art styles, it can just be that, a stylistic choice. Enters a director who's work I'll use as a counter example to the dislike of 2D puppets, both from an animator's and a hater layman's point of view on the results: Michel Ocelot.

Famous in France and way less internationally, two staples of his work are his fixations on fairytales and Africa. Fittingly, his most famous movie is probably Kirikou, a feature film which mixes both. Ocelot's work is stylized in a way unique to him, which can make his work very repetitive, but also makes it instantly recognizable. Some of his staples include static shot compositions, actors that talk like they're reading their lines out of an old book, busy backgrounds and folk tale tropes. Stiffness is just a part of what his movies look like, as are art styles that take inspiration from traditional art and past periods. He started out working before digital puppets were a thing, and while he's embraced digital techniques, releasing a full CG feature film in the 00s before it was the norm, he has worked without, including on Kirikou which is animated the old way.

The earliest of his films I've seen is called Princes and Princesses, it's already got everything typical of his work, and one of the latest of his films I've seen (and among my personal favorites of everything he's done) is called Black Pharaoh, and while decades and different techniques separate these two, they're both based around, you guessed it, puppets. P&P is a blatant hommage/reference to animation pioneer Lotte Reiniger, who used literal paper puppets to animate fantasy movies who's style is very reminiscent of the graceful, slightly simplified illustrations popular at the time. Black Pharaoh uses digital 2D puppets and is entirely animated using the (meticulously researched) style of ancient egyptian wall paintings. Both of these films tell a story, not like movies usually do, but like an orator retelling a tale does. And it works! The characters don't move in a 3D space, but it doesn't matter, they're from a fresco or are paper. The character's don't move realistically and it doesn't matter either, they're not trying to trick your eyes into looking real, they're characters of a story. Ocelot's films are a case where using puppets and their limitations works in favor of the film, not otherwise, and his stuff that's not made with puppets looks like it could be.

I'll briefly talk about a film I hate here to make the final point before my conclusion, netflix's Klaus. This is a film who's insanely impressive animation has floored people regardless of how much they know about animating. Unlike a lot of "this looks very cool" (actually p easy to make) animations you see going viral online, here everyone's right, it is indeed insanely hard to animate like that. Klaus was hailed because of it's uncanny ability to look like modern CG while being entirely hand drawn, which I think is stupid, because it's a lot of effort and talent wasted for a result that looks incredibly generic. Would this film have been bad if it had used CG? Why do people think hand drawn is better than CG in the first place? That I can't answer but the reason studios use it is money: either because it's trendy and will make more money because it's trendy, or because it's cheaper to make, which depends on what you're trying to achieve. In the end, they're techniques. Techniques have pros and cons and things they're better at than others. Time and money are essential to producing a film wether you like it or not.

So: are people wrong to hate on puppets? Nah, it's a question of taste. You can hate the look a technique gives and that's fine. But "ugly" is subjective and it's important to be aware of that if critiquing stuff is your job.

Was that tweet right? Yeah, pretty much, lol. For many if not most animators it's a technique they're forced to use, that removes a major reason they like their job from said job, and can be frustrating to work with. It's worth noting a lot of the work you'll get nowadays is on cheap productions, and the techniques they'll use most will be associated with the slop they are. Doesn't mean you'll inherently make slop. A technique is just that, a technique.

[otomes-world]

Trail

i. Small Key, Portal, Detective It's not full fic, really not, just another idea I thought but never write a post. Also... I forgot I have my own prompts as well...Something like a general prologue and lore for possible works for this AU. You can skip next bunch of text, it's just my thought. There are no triggers yet, except barelly edited text. I haven't decided yet whether this will be a yandere AU or a regular one. I tried to think about possible conflicts in the story and realized that it directly depends on the character. Therefore, here is only the general part, which telling the state of affairs. How the reader even got to such a life, haha. As for plans, I can say that for some reason I thought about Jade. Don't ask me why. As if he would fit into this au better than anyone. I dragged out the introduction a bit… enjoy reading! Let me know your ideas as well, I`ll read and answer them later.

What is the best profession? Probably, every child asked this question at least once. There were always many proposals, but there was one that everyone thought about. Detective. Do they even exist? Or have they always been an idea embodied in books and films?

Are there schools that produce qualified specialists? Is it possible to became one? What is the principle of selecting candidates?

Calm down, hands on the table. You also did not know the answers. It’s trivial, but the profession found you itself. Moreover, if someone found out about your “Detective” badge, they would think that it was a high-quality craft. Seriously, aren’t detectives just an invention of film directors?

In the company of friends and their acquaintances, over a cup of tea or another drink, you would also laugh at the joke, adding your own to the general vat of barbs. Nevertheless, the rushing carriage harnessed by black horses was as real as the mantle of a prestigious college on you. Luckily, the hood was long enough to hide part of your face, so you could look around the room with a bored expression and no sense of professionalism.

A huge mirror in the middle and flying coffins. Crowds of students and a director late for the ceremony.

Never in your life could you imagine that your job would take you to a haven for magicians. Yes, magic existed and was the envy of many, even you, but nothing more. If that's how a mouse felt when cats were swarming around its hole, then be it. However this mouse was very well prepared. It had a hidden artifact that allowed cast simple spells. Nothing more. After all, your task was to gather the material and leave unnoticed. In no case would you become the best student among the stream of first years, heaven forbid.

You only hoped that the bribed principal and the Mirror would not throw you to the predators. Exactly. The kind teacher knew about everything, and the inside pocket of his jacket sank under the weight of money. Naturally, after convincing him that you had no desire to harm the college's reputation. The struggle between schools was not in your competence, let them squabble over talented applicants as much as they wanted. Your task was the simplest.

Just make sure that the representatives of influential families were not planning anything… interesting. The version for the director was to collect information about the college, for further writing of the article on behalf of the "student".

You had already received half of your payment, and the customer signed a contract in which you received your other half in any outcome. Plus, you could always earn extra money by publishing an article to the delight of Crowley, but that's it. Possible options after completing the job.

Finally, the director appeared, and you would have sighed with relief if not for the student who appeared behind him. It seemed that no one knew who it was, however, this was only to your advantage. Any information was important to the customer.

"Any information was important to the customer." This thought was worthy of a hit to the head with any heavy object. They were just students, what could possibly go wrong? The contract details did not include feeding flamingos in pink and painting roses from white to red and back. Why, of all the dorms, the Mirror decided to send you to Heartslabyul… that question should have been asked to Crowley. Only for him magically disappear every time, "and do not to interfere with a professional's work."

A professional could not work in such conditions.

Luckily, a pair of first years significantly attracted the attention of the head. All you had to do was secure their friendship and the article "headache" of Rosehearts. The collar on your neck in most cases explained why you did not use magic regularly.

However, in other dorms it was hardly easier. Whether this thought was self-consolation or acceptance of the harsh truth, you didn't care. Or it could be a simple complaint from chewing his lunch Ace.

If you had come here at an earlier age, when you yourself were a scholar, you would have been overjoyed. Of course, what child would refuse to learn magic? To travel between colleges using portals? The one who was now in the body of an tired of everything adult obviously.

It was much harder to study seriously when you needed to be in several places at once, and for missing classes the head "cut off your head". In your time, being a hooligan sounded easier.

Bless the existence of Internet storage, otherwise attempts to hide the notes of real work would have finally driven you to the grave. The promised payment was not worth it.

Fortunately, or vice versa, there was plenty of information. Filtering rumors, looking for the truth - that's another task. At least the soil for this was fertile. News of growing tension in a dorm. A rumor about a student who grants any wish. Possible conflict between two celebrities.

How true were the rumors about the strained relationship between the second prince of the Sunset Savanna and the crown prince of Briar Valley?

Everything was carefully written and saved for later editing. When did you have time to do this? The answer was simple. You sacrificed your time for sleep. All paper records were burned and destroyed after being transferred to the cloud. You didn't need any extra problems.

It felt like you had a kind of key in your hands that could unlock a box to nowhere. Your readiness to face everything that awaited you at the bottom was unimportant. A minimum of feelings and a maximum of facts were required from you.

[thecarnivorousmuffinmeta]

You’ve mentioned how boring the Avatar movies are despite how visually stunning they can be (I can’t help but agree.) How would you rewrite it to be a more interesting?

Can't be done and not for the reasons you're probably thinking.

The Thing about James Cameron

To get into this, we have to talk about James Cameron as a director.

Now, I say this being a large fan of The Terminator and Terminator 2: Judgement Day, as well as generally liking Aliens and Abyss.

But generally, the focus of James Cameron's films is not the story or the writing: it's a new cutting-edge technology he wants to develop and try out and or a particular setting. The story is presented as an excuse to do these things and is paper thin at best.

The focus of Titanic was the ship itself, the exact timing of its sinking, seeing all of the ship (both upstairs and downstairs) both before and after the sinking, and to aid that along we get this story of Jack and Rose where they run around the ship like lunatics so we can see everything.

Abyss, similarly, is exploring the concept of a setting at depth and the technology needed to produce such a film.

Now, what also ties into this, is that Cameron has a few tropes he really really really likes in films that aren't that... deep I guess I'd call them. Generally, in any Cameron film, you can count at least one (usually more) of the following:

US Marines (Good or Bad or Both)

Evil Corporations/Evil Rich People

A Surprisingly (!) Good Scientist/Science/Robot People

An Uncomplicated Action Hero/Heroine

An Uncomplicated Love Story

In the case of the Avatar series, Cameron had thought up this fictitious world Pandora, the native people there the Nav'i, and wanted to push both CGI as well as 3D to the limit (notable is that Cameron did 3D for these films in a way films generally don't, in that he did actual 3D where most '3D' films just have two cameras for stereo. This is why Cameron's 3D looks so fucking good and is actually worth seeing in theaters versus other 3D films which are eeeeeeh watch it at home). And, as usual, what we see is a story written in such a way to show off the setting, the made-up culture of the Nav'i, and the technology used to produce the film rather than the story in and of itself.

So, in the first film, we get a story that hits all the usual marks for Cameron. Through Jake's adventure, we get to explore Pandora and see all the things Cameron really wants to show off to us, we also get all the tropes Cameron usually loves: an uncomplicated love story, evil corporations, US Marines, surprisingly good scientists who seem bad at first but then are misguided, and a dumb uncomplicated hero.

In this case, it's just the plot of Dances with Wolves (almost to a tee) but uh... more blue.

(The second film is even worse in this respect, as well as just as a film, as Cameron now wants to show a new part of Pandora, the ocean but uh... has no reason for the characters to be there so has to make something up that doesn't make much sense or give the characters much to do.)

The trouble is where this works for Cameron in other films (Terminator and Terminator 2 were great in that they didn't need to be complicated, the setting and special effects provided what we needed for great films), in Avatar we're hampered by a plotline that has both aged and that we've seen before, and by a script that's... just not good.

But the point I was trying to make is that Avatar would not exist without Cameron. This isn't a case where you hire a new director, new screenwriter, new anything, this is Cameron's vision and there's really not much wiggle room in that without dumping out everything Cameron wanted.

The best someone could do is rewrite the script to make the lines more catchy/memorable/quotable without changing the plot.

(Caveat, again, I think Cameron is great when he's great. What he does well he does very well, and he has made some fantastic as well as very entertaining movies. However, sometimes, it just doesn't work out.)

Back to the Question

So, to 'fix' Avatar you have to have a script Cameron would like, one that shows of Pandora in the way he wants, and with the uncomplicated characters he generally likes.

Trouble is, that is Avatar. I can think of no way to produce what Cameron would have wanted beyond what Cameron himself did. He was involved in every step of that movie and it shows.

And again, to make it better or different is to make something that never would have happened as, well, it's not Cameron.

Long story short, you can't have Avatar without Blue Pocahontas in Space.

[ultraericthered]

Whitewash Fit For A King

Somewhat related to the post I just made.

It's quite ironic given King Magnifico's cult leader-like status in the film that there exists a small but still sizeable (for this site at least) amount of Wish viewers who make up a cult following of Magnifico stans. And when I say this, I mean they're all that kind of villain stan.

Oh no no no no no...

Yeah, it partially gives me more cause to resent the filmmakers of Wish including both scenes with the burnt tapestry of Magnifico's sad childhood trauma-related past that spurred him towards creating his kingdom in the final cut ("If only I'd known magic back then...", "so THAT doesn't happen again!"), but at the same time, I feel like even without those moments, these people would've found some way of woobifying and saintifying the character and act as apologists for his villainy. After all, this has happened with virtually every fictional villain in existence in the history of ever. These kinds of stupid, immature simps who don't want to look in the eye the reality that their faves are problematic to the point of being literal evil villains have always existed, and a character like Magnifico is hardly the most perplexing case of this. I recall long ago reading the opinion pieces of someone who was an apologist for Scar from The Lion King, trying to paint him as a lifelong victim and Mufasa as the real villain (can't wait for the upcoming Mufasa movie to re-ignite THOSE takes!). On Xitter I once came upon someone who actually simped for and woobified fucking Ghetsis from Pokemon, projecting all sorts of mental illness and disabilities onto him while insisting that the character had some redeemability that has never once been shown to exist in canon. Even on here, there are people who stan Phillip Wittebane/Emperor Belos from The Owl House, to the point where they maliciously trivialize the religious trauma that Dana Terrace had to grow up with so that they can act like she's petty for "vilifying" the literal villain of her own goddamn story. And I don't even need to get started on the "Magneto Is Never Wrong" subgenre of villain apologism that you can find all over social media. These stans are all absolutely koo-koo!

I've seen this whitewashing/apologism garbage for villains spewed out ad nauseum and the Magnifico simps all sound the same as what I've seen out of those other villain simps - "He deserved better, he wasn't at fault for his mental downward spiral that Asha, the citizens of Rosas, and even his wife drove him to, how dare Disney vilify the mentally ill and victims of trauma like this, blah blah blah blah." And yet there was still one in particular with takes that made me go:

To be specific, it was the very same "Rainbow the Clown" take that this post gave a mention to. The person in question felt the need to mention that they're a Christian (and I hate that in the Trump era, that has become almost a red flag for me), and that as such, they believe that all black magic/dark magic has demonic roots and that they can recognize a demonic possession when they see one. Their interpretation of the film's events, which had absolutely zero basis in anything that was made the least bit explicit in the film itself, was that Magnifico reading from the tome of forbidden magic gave some anonymous demonic entity that progenerated that magic access into Magnifico's soul, mind, and body, and it overtook him. Therefore, everything Magnifico went on to do cannot be blamed on Magnifico himself, as he was "possessed" at the time, not in his right state of mind and not truly aware of the reality around him anymore. And this is why it was so cruel that he ended up punished rather than saved.

Yeah, about that. In the actual movie, there's zero mention of demons or otherworldly entities tied to that spellbook. The black magic itself that is conjured out from the book once the pages are read from and is able to make the spells and curses described within the book work is its own natural force. Its capabilities are destructive and once it bonds with its caster, it poisons their mind with an unbreakable addiction to using it, so that's why it was considered "forbidden" to start with. Magnifico unseals the tome and reads from its pages during his grievance-laden villain song, and we see this:

The magic comes out like green arms or ropes that coil around both of Magnifico's hands, and once they do, we see that green magic juice flow right inside of Magnifico, which briefly makes his eyes glow green as well. This is not "possession" - this is amalgamation. This magic binds itself to Magnifico like a symbiote, and in turn Magnifico is one with the magic now, committed to wielding it and making it manifest as awesome power to service his whims and desires. The literal next thing that happens after is the green fading from the king's eyes as he goes "Where was I? Oh yeah." After the process has be done, he shakes it off and resumes his singing, only now with the green dark magic at his disposal to freely use however he pleases. The magic and the destabilizing effect it has on Magnifico's mental state as he uses it to break and ingest magically contained wishes was not the cause of his turn to evil: it was the consequence of it.

And let's say that the book did contain a demonic entity that made the magic happen and it went into Magnifico to influence him from within a la Myotismon with Yukio Oikawa. It was still Magnifico's own damn fault because he chose to go back on his word to his wife and open up the forbidden book. He's no more absolved of calling out the demon than Mok Swagger is for deliberately summoning a demon to devour his own concertgoers. And no, "but he's just so traumatized!", "he's mentally ill with anxiety issues and was having a breakdown!", or "Asha and those selfish, ungrateful citizens drove him to it!" don't erase Magnifico's agency and capacity for making choices that he did, even in a limited time, think through and decided to go for it anyway. I'm not into the discourse over whether or not Magnifico could be redeemed or if he "deserved redemption" or not, but if you'd like to see a character's redemption, they need to have done some unjustifiable wrongs or else there's nothing to "redeem" them for!

(There was another Magnifico cultist who was a little more on point and likened the book and its magic to a substance abuse metaphor, drawing parallels between Magnifico and the character of Jack Torrance from Stephen King's The Shining. But they specifically paralleled his situation with King's Jack Torrance, when in the actual canonical narrative of the actual movie, Magnifico is Kubrick's Jack Torrance - the alcohol addiction isn't there to draw his inner demons back out so that a demonic entity can better use him and ultimately possess him, it's there to reveal who he always truly was deep down, which is what he becomes when he discards anything and everything in him that beforehand was reigning him in and holding him back.)

Another argument for the demonic possession theory? This part here in the climax, cited as the moment the entity was exorcised from Magnifico, leaving him confused and afraid of what he awoke to find himself currently facing before getting oh so wrongfully imprisoned.

....Folks, that's literally Sakina's wish, the first wish he broke and absorbed into himself through use of his newly acquired dark magic, coming back out from him. The green glow is there because, as just stated, it was that green dark magic that was used to eat the wishes in the first place. The green eyes and green glow fade from Magnifico to signify his power weakening. All the wishes that he absorbed after Sakina's come out from him following this. And if he'd really snapped out of a possession and was back to being his true "good" self at that point, why would the first thing out of his mouth be "NO! THOSE ARE MY WISHES!"? And if the demonic dark magic entity was gone, then where do the green magic hands that drag Magnifico into the tip of his scepter come from? The magic did not leave him because it cannot leave him; it's a part of him, he's a part of it. Reading from the pages of that book even once made him committed to the magic. It's a symbiotic bond and there's no breaking it. That was the point!

Last argument for this crackpot idea I saw from this person was that "high on green-colored dark magic" Magnifico cannot possibly be a valid representation of the king's true character because....his face when we first met him looked so handsome and kind! Look at him!

It's the same ol' "Hans' Twist Villain reveal was bullshit because he was not set up like a villain at any point beforehand, meaning he was not a villain until that very moment, and we can tell this because he never LOOKED evil!" argument, the one that usually relied on a single moment of Hans giving a sweet looking yet condescendingly fond and amused grin to himself after having met Anna that ignores all context, and is based on the idea that only cartoon caricatures of delightfully foul and obvious evilness have to exist to play the villain in place of realistic people in a Disney animated movie, as in real life, evil people aren't easy to identify just by looking at them. The thing is that some Disney villains, arguably all the way back to the likes of Stromboli and the Coachman in Pinocchio, serve as reflections of the dangers of people that have existed and still do exist in the world. King Magnifico is that for the covert narcissist in a position of authority that they're prone to abuse. Yeah, he won't always have EVIL BASTARD written all over his face, but there's context for why that is. In that first image, he's just talking to another person when that person is applying for a job working for him, and as such he plays the part of the kind, charming, generous and benevolent king. In the second image, he's looking at the wishes. The beauty within those magic wish orbs and the splendor their magic gives off make him very happy; that's part of why he hoards as many as possible.

That is King Magnifico.

^ And THAT is ALSO King Magnifico.

He's a villain. He visibly enjoys being a villain. He is valid as a villain. Let villains be villains and love them for that, dammit!

[terrence-silver]

Random Concept: Terry Silver with a TikTok-obsessed Beloved

It would be cute if beloved wanted to film cute couple moments with Terry.

Spicier with Terry during the Halloween season because of all the Ghostface masks trending.

I can imagine Gen Z beloved doing something like the Gothic Baby account if they have a kids with Terry.

Like, I do think Terry Silver, in his old age majorly keeps up with trends.

He always has.

He always had his finger on the pulse of the 'brand new thing'.

More so than young people, undoubtedly --- he's a businessman, after all.

He's too clever not to keep up. That's how he can blend in so perfectly and adapt if need be, being chameleonic in nature, changing and transforming with the times. It's how he can manipulate perceptions and cultural norms --- by being in touch with things around him, sure, like the advent of social media. The Online sphere. Being Vegan for a while, because that's a la mode and acceptable in a more Liberal, upper crust crowd in Los Angeles --- it's admirable, even. A societal badge that says one's a conscientious, good person (And Terry Silver's just that? Right?) when that wouldn't have been the case in the past. Thirty years ago it was perhaps the discourse between nuclear and fossil fuels or green new energy that mattered, and today, it's all about Tik Tok. It's Twitter. Or X, rather. And what's trending on there --- the type of stuff that can make or break one's reputation because someone said something stupid or cancel-worthy two decades ago. Heck, even the branding of social media itself changes, having one name and taking on another practically overnight! The world moves fast and Terry Silver moves with it. But, in spite of him been keenly aware what's what and what it means, I envision his Online presence is incredibly scarce and unbelievably curated on purpose and what information can be found on him on the Internet has been fine combed and is continuously fine combed so really, not only can you not find anything too controversial about him on there (maybe just the right amount of controversial, tactically speaking; acceptable controversies, as to not make him seem too inhumanly saintly and by extension, unrealistic, too suspicious and fake) --- you can't even really find anything much of anything in general except what Terry deliberately and specifically wants on there. Man's incredibly private all while putting up a facade that he's an open book --- which, don't be fooled, he's anything but.

What I mean to say with this is that Terry Silver undoubtedly wouldn't be on Twitter, for example, posting his actual, real opinions about...anything. He's smart like that.

So, any beloved of his? Gen Z or otherwise?

Chances are, they wouldn't be chronically Online either.

They wouldn't be on Tik Tok, plastering videos of themselves, their family or Terry Silver himself for the world to see consistently, because the thought of thousands of people (Voyeurs, the way an already voyeuristic Terry would see it) tuning in to see and watch his beloved --- random punks commenting on them, expressing their opinions willy-nilly, judge, complementing them, leering, passing, bookmarking, downloading and sharing said clips around unstoppably, without any monitoring as to how they could use and abuse such material...legitimately forever --- well, it presses the button of someone fiercely territorial, jealous, possessive, protective and control oriented like Terry. He doesn't like it. He doesn't allow it. He thinks it's bullshit. He would take advantage of someone's else's uploads Online for sure, if push ever came to shove, so maybe it is a bit of projection on his behalf, that somehow, someone, somewhere, would do the same to him and someone who belongs to him to weaken him or retaliate against him, so to take precaution against it, beloved's presence Online becomes, possibly, even scarcer than his, because they're the most precious thing he has and when something or someone's precious or valuable, they're tucked away. Hidden, in ways. Plus side to this, though --- I can envision Terry Silver, like a man who was young in the 70's and 80's being big on home videos instead. Private collections for his private viewing pleasure and usage only. Cute couple moments galore are permissible --- everything is permissible, in fact --- but these recordings, lets call them, belong and remain explicitly in Terry Silver's private care, because he's a man who doesn't wear his heart on his sleeve and tends to strategically tuck away everything that ever mattered to him. Everything that makes him vulnerable. Everything that can compromise or damage him. Most of everything he really is from the public. Includes beloved. Whatever children he might or might not have with them.

If someone was somehow skillful enough to discover their names and Google them, chances are, nothing specific comes up in their search results. Not anywhere.

That's deliberate.

[synergysilhouette]

Disney has been really screwing over their creatives lately, especially the songwriters

I'm not saying that the songwriters hold no responsibility with how mediocre the musicals have turned out lately, but it doesn't sound like they were set up for success; Julia Michaels said that she and Benjamin Rice met with executives every Thursday to get a feel of the story and characters, but seeing how the story seemed to change and simplify, this isn't exactly comforting. "This Wish" was even written before the script, according to Jennifer Lee, and the fact that it still remains a vague concept in the final product--which itself it a dumpster fire--doesn't shock me. Nevermind the fact that Julia said that they usually only had one storyboard to go off of and thus didn't have a great idea of what was going on; the original concepts for "Wish" seem to suggest something more classical, only to be whittled down for unknown reasons. If I had to guess, it was another "Frozen 2" situation where the story was a bit more complex and early screenings didn't prove fruitful, so they had to simplify, simplify, simplify. Or maybe Disney worried that it didn't really "fit" with their modern films, or perhaps early screenings went we; ever since they became more successful than ever in the 2010s, they've become a bit more controlling and rigid with their 2020s stories; "Encanto" is the only great film they've made while they other 4 films were either fine or terrible.

Barlow and Bear are a different story. They worked with the same composers for "Moana" and seemed to have had a better foundation than Julia and Ben did, but this was when it was planned for a tv show. I originally thought Disney just brought them on a year ago, but according to Lin-Manuel Miranda in an interview, they were already on by early 2022 as a tv show (someone mentioned that maybe Disney just told them to imitate his style instead of doing their own thing, since this didn't sound like anything they made before; I don't know their work, so I've gotta take their word for it). In any case, the moment Disney decided they were gonna make the show a sequel film and NOT bring back the original directors/songwriter, they should've planned this for 2025 or 2026 to give more time. The film came off as very episodic, the new characters don't feel justified, and the songs at best feel cute instead of epic. NGL, I do wonder if more factors were at play; Disney had a film planned for fall 2024 for a while now. Before "Moana 2" was moved there, I wonder what was gonna be in that slot. Perhaps it hit a snag in production, and thus why "Moana 2" was thrown into that spot instead, since the story was there.

I'm living in FEAR with the music for "Frozen 3"; I adore the Anderson-Lopez's work on the last two films, and I fear Disney getting in the way of their process (especially since I want Disney to put them on a non-Frozen musical someday). Kristin AL said that she had to be quiet about the film for a while before the announcement, so hopefully that means she and Bobby have proper time and development to craft the songs, especially since Christopher and Jennifer are returning. Plus I kinda want the 2026 original film to be a musical since the last two were...unsatisfactory, if this post has not made that clear.

[mllemaenad]

The Magnus Protocol: Getting Off

Much like Gwen, I would very much like to know what the point of this is.

The first time I listened to this, I had a horrible fever, and honestly I think my only takeaway was that dying to the sound of that irritating Mr Bonzo song sounds tremendously unfair. That's a gross insult added to fatal injury situation right there.

Now, listening with a clearer head, I just keep thinking – this feels like a ridiculously convoluted way to achieve anything. So what are they aiming for, with all this rigamarole?

Most of the victims seem to be ... well, moderately important, let's say? They're throwing a bachelor party in a private room in what sounds like an upmarket strip club, so they have some money to throw around.

And this:

Norris/Jordan Bennett This lot weren’t the worst. Just a bunch of heavyset, middle-aged lads with names like Ozzer, or Rozzer or whatever. My guess was they used to be a school rugby team or something. The groom was fine, acted embarrassed even though he was obviously keen and they were easily pleased. – The Magnus Protocol: Getting Off

... very much gives off private school old boys vibes. Er. I mean public school, since it's British. But regardless.

They're probably somebodies, up to a point. Successful in business or politics. Drive Audis or Lamborghinis, or whatever is fashionable these days (my entire understanding of what car people like may be derived from a couple of Top Gear episodes I saw over a decade ago). Vote Tory. Have wine collections. Send their sons to the same school they attended. That sort of thing.

But only up to a point. Jordan, the bartender doing the narration, pointedly doesn't recognise any of them. They're just more of the same sort she served every night. The Prime Minister didn't die in that strip club that day, nor did any famous film star, nor any CEO big enough to have been on the news defending his company's dubious business practices. Just some guys, presumably with a bit of money.

It took a bit to set up, too. All the business with the name and address in the envelope, which required a hand delivery to the monster. Then, of course, someone had to plant the lunch box – or I suppose it could supernaturally manifest itself, but that does not sound like less work. And it seems to have only worked because "Baz" the groom was genuinely a Mr Bonzo fan.

Norris/Jordan Bennett They started giving the groom gifts. Same old tat as always, cufflinks, poo gags, all the standard stuff. Then the groom spotted the last one on the table, this cheap yellow and purple kids lunch box. It looked old and shoddy and no one admitted to bringing it but the groom just squealed with glee and carefully opened it before pulling out a bunch old souvenir merch. Pencils, postcards, keyrings, all sorts of crap, all the same yellow and purple and last of all a cracked CD case. When they saw it the whole bunch gave this big laughing cheer. – The Magnus Protocol: Getting Off

He had to like Mr Bonzo to trigger the trap. Had that lunch box been delivered to Jordan she would have tossed it.

It required research and setup, and access to exactly the kind of monster to which Baz would be vulnerable.

For an assassination, it's obviously absurd; there have to be thugs who'll do that job with less associated nonsense. It's entirely possible that somebody wants these guys dead, but that can't be why the OIAR did it. It's also a lot for the purposes of generating a scary story. I mean – the OIAR is drowning in scary stories. And if I'm honest, this one wasn't especially scary. I mean, don't get me wrong – it's deeply unpleasant and awful, but I've never been much moved by "monster on a rampage" tales.

But on the other side of it, it's much too small scale for a The Magnus Archives-style ritual.

There is Jordan, though. The thing about Jordan is that she is very much the sister of Dianne Margolis from Give and Take. If you subtract the specifics of the monsters, the stories are basically identical:

A place of business

A monster that is in some sense invited in

A massacre

A single, surviving staff member, traumatised and seeking compensation

Jordan and Dianne themselves are both professionals who find themselves wildly out of their depths when confronted with a supernatural interloper. And, crucially, both were abandoned by their superiors, and that isolation made them vulnerable. Dianne has a boss who goes on "personal development sabbaticals" and doesn't answer her emails. Jordan has a doorman who goes on unscheduled smoke breaks. Now, in fairness to poor Joey the doorman, it does seem as though Mr Bonzo took him out first. But there's a lot of plausible deniability to be found in that history – sometimes, Jordan is left on her own, and if something were to go wrong ...

Norris/Jordan Bennett All I actually want is my hand back so I can tend bar but that isn’t going to happen is it? So I’ll have to settle for the next best thing and sue you for everything I can get, because I don’t know what happened that night but it was in your venue and no one came to help. Not Derek, not another doorman, no one. So yeah, you’d better have one hell of a settlement waiting for me, or I'll see you in court. – The Magnus Protocol: Getting Off

A bachelor party is an odd choice of a place to kill someone. This isn't Baz's address. He wouldn't be here long, and in practice might be hard to pin down: he could arrive late or leave early; he could decide to go hang out in the public areas for a bit. Jordan, though. This is her workplace. You can just about guarantee she will be there.

Monsters in The Magnus Archives were not primarily interested in killing people. I mean – they did kill people, obviously. Sometimes quite a lot of people. But they killed people because dying people are often afraid, or because if you're, say, trying to make people afraid of falling, throwing one guy out of a cable car will make an impression on the other passengers.

Killing wasn't the point.

We have, here, another semi-public murder with a surviving witness. Jordan is unlikely to convince herself this never happened because she has her missing hand as evidence.

Geraldine The witness statements from three murders over the last five years – Nigel (speaking over her) I told your producer this wasn’t going to be discussed. Geraldine – that claim a person in a Mr. Bonzo costume was at the scene? Do you think there could be a copycat? – The Magnus Protocol: Saturday Night

On her own, Jordan might just be a spooky story. But that's a fourth witness statement for Geraldine. There have been at least four cases over the past five years of something almost exactly like this: grisly murders, and someone left alive to tell the tale.

Something is trying to get everyone's attention.

And I wonder if the name Gwen gave Mr Bonzo wasn't Jordan Bennett.

As for who benefits, I have no doubt Alice is quite correct.

Alice What are you getting at? Gwen You never wonder what the point is? Who benefits from all this awfulness? Alice I don’t wonder. I know. Gwen (sitting up) What? Really? Alice (portentous) Oh yeah. I’ve known for a while. What we’re doing here, it’s all part of a grand plan to satisfy one of the most unspeakable evils known to mankind… Gwen’s on the edge of her seat. Alice (almost a whisper) …the UK government. – The Magnus Protocol: Getting Off

Sure, that's one of those lines that sounds like a joke, but which actually speaks the truth. That's been the horror all along: the difference between The Magnus Institute, that had to coax people in, and the OIAR, which can just harvest the horrors, sometimes from very private sources.

And I have not forgotten this:

Alice Colin! There’s my guy! How's it hanging? Is it an app yet? Do we have a minimalist logo? I assume you’ve finished all the social features? Colin Don't you start. I swear I'm going to shove a cable down that prick's throat, pull it out his ministerial anus and floss him to death – The Magnus Protocol: First Shift

There's a minister behind this mess, somewhere, and he is likely the one pulling the strings.

The question, mostly, is whether Alice knows she's right. She does talk a good game about indifference, of course, but it's becoming abundantly clear that the OIAR does not hire people who are not marked by the supernatural. And something is already following her.

What could she tell you, if she were ever willing to talk?

Celia and Sam are what remains, of course, but that's just more put-a-pin-in-it-for-later stuff. Whether Alice does or no, Celia has things going on, but she won't talk until the plot is right for it.

[mk-wizard]

6 Things superhero films, games and TV shows do right that the comics should start doing

I love DC and Marvel, and I always will because they shaped my childhood, my standards in comics and more. They also played a huge role in how I learned to draw because I never went to art school. Sailor Moon taught me how to draw women, Dragon Ball taught me how to draw men, Looney Toons and Mickey Mouse taught me how to draw anthropomorphic characters, and DC and Marvel taught me how to do everything else and add to all of the above to make it my own.

However, unlike what the song says, love is not blindness. As ironic as it is, the DC and Marvel comics have fallen from grace to the point where the heroes, plots and relationships are not recognizable anymore. I know characters evolve, change and grow up, but there is a limit especially in good storytelling. I also don't want to be hard on the comics because like I said, I still love them. What I will do instead is mention the top six things the DC, Marvel and other superhero films, games and TV shows nail that the comics should start doing in order to get better and I think they still can.

PS: I am aware that some superhero media that is not in comic format don't have the following qualities, but for the most part, they are.

1- Starting the story over and tell it right (hopefully) this time. - Usually, I am against rebooting and retconning because as a writer myself, I see it as cheating, but in the case of the superhero genre, it goes by a different set of rules. Namely, just as it always ends in an open fashion, it also begins so. With that said, it is perfectly fine to start the main version over if it is taking a wrong turn. In fact, that is one thing I learned to appreciate about the various Spider-Man and Batman cartoons especially when you take into account that they make an effort to not repeat the same mistakes. You don't have to breakup Mary Jane and Peter. You don't have to have Bruce Wayne wind up alone. You don't have to fridge Green Lantern's sweetheart. Most importantly, you don't have to stick with a broken story nobody likes including you. It's fiction not a documentary. You're more than allowed to start over and do things differently. That is how we got Harley Quinn, the version of Mr. Freeze we know now and an Aunt May who can hold her own.

2- The heroes can find love and have families. - Moreover, getting married and having kids does not mean the story is over. I can confirm that it's a new journey and adventure within itself. Plus, why shouldn't you be able to do something your good at AND have a family to come home to? I really appreciate that in a lot of recent TV shows especially, heroes are finally allowed to have successful love lives and families, and still be heroes. If anything, the fact that it is fictional reinforces that they should be allowed to have it all. We all need someone to love and supers are not the exception. Besides, love is a beautiful thing to see and should be painted in a positive light. The same with family because who are we without a family to back us up?

3- Tell happy or fun stories. - This is something I have been saying for a while now. Fantasy is supposed to be an escape from real world problem not be a constant reminder of them. With that said, the fact that superhero cartoons, films and games (especially with the uplifting side quests that allow to just be nice) are moments of levity are really appreciated. Just to give you an idea, I'm going to dare to admit something; I LOVE the episode "I've got Batman in my basement" from Batman the Animated Series because it's fun, cute and I liked seeing average people saving Batman for a change. It is also why I loved the Christmas episode from Justice League. Plus, even when heavy topics are addressed, they usually get dealt with the right way with the hero finding peace. For example, did you know that in the original X-Men cartoon from the 90s, Wolverine moving on from Jean and finding a true love of his own was on the table?

4- The superhero genre can be a a hybrid of any genre not just drama. - It is not uncommon for superhero tales to also serve as a vehicle for other genres too, but lately, comics especially have become type casted as only working with drama and that's depressing. Even action has fallen to the side and that is one of the most exciting parts about superheroes. Why not have superhero media that also serves as a sitcom, comedy, mystery or even a love story (think Lois and Clark)? Plus, not everyone likes soap operas, so having options is very appreciated. Heck, even the superhero shows that are educational like Transformers Rescue Bots and ones that are aimed for kids like Spidey and his Amazing Friends are breaths of fresh air.

5- Have fun and inspire. - The number one thing that attracts us to superheroes is how cool they are not seeing life perpetually punish them for being superheroes. Seeing superheroes be resourceful, creative and even have fun with their powers is fun. Plus, did you know that superhero movies inspired a lot of technology as we know it now namely cellphones? Moreover, superhero anime like Dragon Ball (yes, it fits the superhero genre) and the Batman series inspired people to go to the gym. Supers don't just represent the best version of ourselves, but also encourage us to believe in ourselves and better ourselves with hard work. Watchmen was the exception not the new trend all superhero tales should follow.

6- Passing the mantle down for good and with grace. - I love Steve Rogers, Barry Allen, Bruce Wayne, Peter Parker, Clark Kent and all the other heroes from my generation, but I accept that they are heroes of their time and not fit for the modern generation. Heck, I don't think they're fit for my son especially when he starts reading comics. And that is ok. Accepting that these heroes are old is the right thing to do and it's gracious to have them pass their mantles down with dignity. What is so bad about Steve Rogers being able to grow old with the love of his life while knowing there still is a badass Captain America? Or Peter Parker being able to happily marry Mary Jane and have a child with her while Miles becomes the only Spider-Man after long since proving he IS Spider-Man? That sounds like a good way to end a character's arc. Everyone's retirement should be happy and dignified especially the retirement of heroes. It is not a blaze of glory, but you know what? Blazes are overrated.

Anyway, this is all my opinion and things I would like to see in comics again. Do you agree or have some things you want to see more?

Thanks for reading and stay safe.

[tvmicroscope]

Hi! Thank you ever so much for sharing your metaphor analytics. I feel like I'm seeing YR in a completely few light after having read them.

I want to ask you (but feel no pressure to reply), if you have any thoughts on verbal foretelling based on sarcasm, fears or simply being hideous wrong. I don't even know what's it technically called. But what I mean is a lot of the stuff that August spew in at least the early episodes of S1 are foreshadowing stuff that will happen to him ("Don't use the school WiFi..., You could kill someone and...) and my personal favourite "Do we want the future king..). So my question is there are some pretty evident lines that foreshadowing events - have you seen some more subtle and systematic usage of this technique throughout S1 and S2?

Actually there is one particular line by Rosh in S1 that I think foreshadows something about Simon, that is "Where are you going?". I really love that line and the ensuing dialogue.

Hey, I really, really have to apologize for replying to your kind ask so very late. I have a huge backlog when it comes to messages and comments right now. Everyone is so lovely and kind, but I can barely keep up with it all. I have a feeling that I will have to take a bit of a tumblr break (and break from other social media platforms, as well) because I can’t do both: write my analysis posts on my blog AND keep interacting on other platforms. I'll have to choose one, and that's going to the writing itself.

Anyway, I know this is no excuse for being so embarrassingly late, but I hope you’ll forgive me for the delay because I do actually find it so very encouraging and motivating when people like you say nice things about my little blog project. It really helps me and keeps me focused, so thank you for letting me know you enjoy the close-reading analysis I’m doing on the show. I’m surprised and a bit exhilarated to find out how many people tell me they’re seeing the whole show in a new light. It’s all very, very much appreciated.

As for your question…

Yes, I totally agree with and I think you are absolutely right: Looking at throw-away lines is very important when analyzing a ‘text’ (be it a novel, play, TV show, film, etc.). When a writer sits down to write a screenplay, they obviously don’t just come up with funny lines (or sarcastic or angry lines, for that matter) to fill the page. Usually, they will try to make sure the line in question is connected to the deeper theme of their ‘text’. Everything in their ‘text’ has to fulfil a purpose, i.e. either drive the plot forward or be plugged in into the broader network of metaphorical subtext.

One of the things we have to keep in mind, though, is the fact that not every line in a ‘text’ is necessarily a metaphorical line. There are lines that are just plain text, so to speak.

In essence, you end up with two types of throw-away lines:

1) Lines on the literal level (the textual layer=plot) that have ONE meaning (even if, at that point in the story, that meaning is still obscure to us, i.e. if the line serves the purpose of foreshadowing future events).

2) Lines that operate on both the literal level (textual layer) AND a subtextual level (metaphorical layer underneath) and thus have TWO different (sometimes divergent) meanings; they can even have three different meanings, when the meta-level is involved.

Let me give you an example: August’s line in s1 during the initiation party that you mentioned in your ask about being able to ‘murder somebody here without it ever coming out’ (I’m paraphrasing). That line is most likely a case of type 1. from our list above, i.e. it operates on the literal level of the script even if we assume it foreshadows some future revelation that we don't yet know anything about. It’s not a line that’s plugged into a metaphor. It’s not metaphorical subtext; it’s text.

If August were to proceed to murder (or try to murder) someone later on. Or alternatively get killed himself. Or if we were find out that somebody else was murdered and it was covered it up, then that would give us a resolution, explain to us why the line was said in the first place and what surprising revelation exactly it was foreshadowing.

This line is however (most likely) not a metaphor. In a metaphor something else represents the concept you’re trying to allude to. Just to give you an example: When Wilhelm in episode two of season one tells Simon in the boat to ‘keep the strokes close to the surface of the water, so as not to expend too much energy’, this is clearly a metaphorical line (type 2. from our list above) because it clearly has two meanings: the literal one (rowing advice) and the metaphorical one (rather dumb and conservative relationship advice). And we instantly see that it’s a metaphor because one thing (rowing) represents another thing (feelings/relationships), one concept stands in for another one.

This is most likely not the case with the ‘murder someone’ line: Here one thing (murdering someone) literally means that same thing (murdering someone). It’s (most likely) not a metaphor; it’s not metaphorical subtext; it’s just text – even if the meaning of the text is currently obscure to us because the show isn’t yet finished.

Why am I telling you all of this (you’re probably bored just reading it because you know all of this already :D)…

Because what I’m mainly concentrating on in my metaphor posts on my substack blog is the metaphorical subtext, i.e. the metaphorical lines, the type 2. lines, so to speak. I sometimes use plain textual lines (type 1 lines) as evidence when I think they are somehow connected to a broader point I’m trying to make or reinforce an argument I’m making, but I don’t really discuss them in and of themselves.

Mainly because, with a line that still hasn’t revealed its meaning to us because it’s obscure at this point in the story, I just don’t really know what to do with it. We can speculate what it means (which is always interesting, of course), but ultimately we don’t know. It’s fun. But if it’s not connected to the metaphorical subtext, I will probably not write about it in and of itself.

Now, as for the Rosh’s line that you mentioned (and thank you again for reminding me, my brain is like a sieve sometimes), that one arguably straddles the boundary between text and subtext, between type 1 line and type 2 line: Rosh, Ayub and Simon are pretty much talking figuratively already at that point, i.e. when Rosh says, “Where are you going?” she isn't asking whether Simon is literally leaving the room, this is meant figuratively (‘where are you going in life?’). It clearly foreshadows Simon’s path that’ll lead him away from Bjärstad not just as a place, but away from the narrow confines of his working class upbringing. So far the line is not a metaphor yet (there isn’t one concept that stands in for another one like, say, ‘water’ for feelings, or a ‘suitcase’ for a burdensome role, or ‘music’ for love, or the ‘ear’ for the heart, etc.). But it’s definitely meant to be understood figuratively. So far it has had only a tragic meaning (Simon only ‘went viral’ in the context of a crime that was committed against his privacy), but when it comes to leaving Bjärstad and the confines of his working class upbringing behind, I could very well see this at some point mean something along the lines of: going to university or study music at a conservatory - something often frowned upon in a milieu with a working-class background (the age-old, “What do you need that highfalutin' stuff for? Learn a trade like everyone else in the family!”). I still have a tiny hope that, “Where are you going?” might mean the famous Verbier Music Festival. If Simon gets at least an invitation in the mail and that’s the third time Verbier is mentioned (in a much more positive light than before), I would be over the moon.

Ultimately, it’s again a line that can foreshadow a lot of things, but it’s (probably) not meant to be understood entirely metaphorically, which is also why I most likely won’t discuss it on the blog itself where I’ll try to stick strictly to the metaphors.Does that make any sense?

I feel I’ve written too much, but I hope that makes up at least a little bit for the long delay.

Thank you again for your kind words, and you’re always welcome to read more on the blog. Even if I take a tumblr break, I will keep posting a new article every week (usually on the weekend).

All the best!

[slightlyrebelliouswriter23]

have you ever fallen in love?

how do i know whether i'm falling in love?

shouldn't it be beautiful? why is this so disorienting.. it's definitely not the right circumstance and quite a hopeless situation

i don't know what's happening to me and i don't know who can i talk to about this irl but it's affecting me a lot more than i expected

sorry this is random, have a nice day

oh, nonnie 🥺🖤 i have fallen in love.

i can't tell you whether or not you're in love (i was hardly able to admit it to myself that first time), that's something you have to figure out for yourself. i will say this, though: films and books and music love to romanticise it, but i can definitely identify with your feelings of disorientation.

the first time i fell in love, it felt like being pulled out to sea by a riptide. like i was caught in some great current. it was terrifying. certainly not beautiful.

i remember sobbing to my friend one night (after a few glasses) "why can't i think of anything else? why can't i get him out of my head?". it felt, helplessly, as if all thoughts led to him. every time i opened my mouth his name slipped out and, like a deluge, there was nothing i could do to stop it.

because i was frightened of the enormity of it all, the power these feelings had over me–and because i was a very insecure person at the time who felt as if there was no way someone could ever love her back, even though all my friends told me he did, and even though there were plenty of signs that he had feelings for me too –i lied to myself.

i told myself i wasn't in love. i told myself that i just wanted to be friends. that i was content to be in his life however he'd have me, which was certainly not as a love interest because there was no way he was into me like that.

but everyone knows you aren't supposed to swim against the rip-current. that's how you end up draining all your energy, by fighting something that is a force of nature. that's how you end up drowning.

and i did.

i don't mean to get all cautionary tale on you. i want you to know that you're not crazy for feeling this way, and if what you're experiencing is love, i don't want you to panic.

my advice to you is the same advice given about riptides. find the thin shoreline of hope and allow yourself to swim parallel to it. allow yourself to imagine what it would be like to give yourself to, not the feeling of love itself, but the person you love. and imagine yourself worthy of love in return, because you are.

i promise you, nothing is ever hopeless.

in any case, if you ever need a place for your feelings to go, my inbox is always open. sending you much love, nonnie 🖤

[sizzlingpatrolfox]

Re: your last post about Taekookers hating jimin. It’s also because Jimin’s very existence and the existence of Jikook’s past itself pretty much invalidates Taekook and it ruins all their lovely Taekook long-term relationship narratives. I remember when that video came out last year of the filming of butter where jungkook is trying to touch jimin’s waist under his crop top while they were watching the footage back- taekookers lost their minds because again, it ruins the illusion that jk is a devoted obsessive jealous boyfriend who has never even looked at another man. That one hurt them because it was hard to spin as “staged”. Along with the other few behind the scenes footage where Jungkook’s hands are down jimin’s shirt or whatever lol. They will continue to harass Jimin even if another jikook moment never happens, because he is a giant reminder that Taekook cannot exist romantically.

I don't really agree... I don't think that's the reason, no. I'm also against believing they get angry and hate on him because "jikook is too real", and I think it's a really dangerous mindset. The brain starts treating it as positive reinforcement. So it starts being a case of "they're hating = that must mean jikook is real".

After Jimin hugged JK in the Hoseok's entrance video, I saw a jikooker qrt a hate tweet and they said "kookminers we're back in business" because they were hating on Jimin. This is why jikookers don't even REPORT taekook accounts, and why they don't care about Jimin getting hate; because they do not give a fuck anymore. They have drunk their own kool-aid that tells them hate = jikook real.

NO. They're hating precisely because they think jikook it's a lie.

In their minds taekook ALREADY exists romantically, they're not looking for confirmation, in their minds they already KNOW that jikook is not real. They get annoyed and frustrated and they hate and fight because they want to prove what they believe is real.

And lately they've had the ammo. Jungkook plays a song and says "Taehyung loves this song." Jikookers have to make slow motion videos and edit lyrics on the video and cut clips from it to say "this song was about Jimin." No😭 He literally just played that song and thought of Taehyung. So jikookers want to take something that it's about "taekook" and make it into jikook. They don't feel threatened, they're literally standing up for what they believe in. In the wrong ways, but essentially that's it. It's more than what jikookers ever did for Jimin, let me tell you that. They never stood up for Jimin. All they ever did was use his love and care for Jungkook on "ship wars".

Taekookers don't hate on Jungkook when he does something because by logic they can't go against JK, they're supposed to love and support him too. So the solution is believing him to be a victim, someone with no control over the situation. That allows them to still support him and still believe he's a dedicated committed lover (in private) who would never look at another man and is only acting friendly with Jimin because it's work. Their response to Jungkook's suchwita live? "The company made him do it to promote flopmin."

Whereas when Jimin does something he's the aggressor, the rapist, the groomer, the queerbaiter. They hate Jimin because they geniunely have convinced themselves that he's the one forcing Jungkook to do anything. There's not more to it.

Same thing is happening with jikookers now, who are turning to hate on Taehyung because what else are they going to do? Call out Jungkook for it? Hold him accountable for his own actions? Admit that he's not being strung along and he hangs out with people when he actually wants to see them? No, now for jikookers "it's not Jungkook's fault; Jungkook doesn't say anything, it's all Taehyung."

When Jimin said he comes to my room three times, Taekookers response was exactly the same: "Jungkook didn't mention going to his room, that was Jimin" "Jimin is the only one who talks about Jungkook, JK never initiates anything". Now jikookers are going "Jungkook didn't mention hanging out with wooga, that was Tae" "Jungkook didn't post the photos, Taehyung did".

Both jikookers and taekookers the same lmao.

One of the first things I said in this blog was that -pardon my french- but I really don't give a fuck about jikook vs. taekook fights. It's the most absurd thing I've ever seen. I honestly never cared because in the end they're both fighting about who's Jungkook happiest with, who is he closest to, who does he love more, who does he go to bed with. IF the answer was SOOOO obvious for any side, IF Jungkook was actually a devoted committed loving partner to Taehyung or Jimin, there would be no fighting. If Jungkook actually made his position obvious and clear and everything shippers love to believe about him, people wouldn't spend years (because this has been going on for YEARS) analyzing the way the hugs people, or how wide he smiled, or analyzing his every word and action trying to understand what he meant.

[ajokeformur-ray]

Something else I'm wondering; when Arthur finds Penny's case file, it seems like he's seeing all the stuff about the abuse for the first time, like he didn't remember any of it. Is it really possible to forget events like that, or that much of one's childhood? (I'm not in medicine so I wouldn't know). Also, why would they give Arthur back to Penny after it was proven she did next to nothing to protect him from her boyfriend's abuse (granted, I know she was abused too, but still)? That just seems like, logically, it'd be a really bad idea.

It is absolutely possible to forget entire events; the brain is incredibly clever and it can basically hide memories from itself as a protection. I'd recommend looking up selective amnesia as a good starting place if you wanted to look into this some more, and maybe C-PTSD too!

I have no doubt that Arthur, on some level, knows he was abused as a child; he displays many signs of this. For example, his body language during the infamous Retail Smile scene (when Hoyt is telling him he needs to return the sign to Kenny's Music), is submissive. Hands in front of him to protect his stomach suggesting he feels threatened by Hoyt but is trying to seem non-confrontational, the way he smiles when he's being criticised and doesn't argue against it... These are all signs of someone abused as a child. It's not definitive, mind you, this is an incredibly nuanced topic, and there's more to it than what I'm going into here, but I do think he's aware of it. Especially because he says in the hospital just before he kills Penny, "you used to tell me that my laugh was a condition", and on his card in the bus scene, it states something like "neurological disorder caused by brain injury".

It's mentioned that Arthur was found, as a child, malnourished, tied to a radiator, with severe trauma to his head, which is another possibility behind why he reacts so viscerally to finding out he was abused as a child and Penny (potentially) facilitated it. Arthur's brain wanted to protect itself from a terrible truth but the memory loss could have come from the physical trauma of the head injuries, as well as the psychological trauma.

That's what I love the most about this film: nothing is canonical and everything is down to personal interpretation. It's all ambiguous and two people who watch it together in the same room at the same time will watch two different films. It's wonderful.

I think Arthur knows. Seeing his Arkham folder totally ripped the ground from underneath his feet and was the final catalyst behind everything happening.

As for Penny being given Arthur back, I really don't know much of anything about American history or proceedings, but as I said before in another ask, it was the 1950s so I suppose Arthur got to stay with Penny because she's his mum, even with the abuse and the way she allowed it to happen. I don't think any thought would have extended beyond the child staying with his mum. I'm sure her boyfriend abused the both of them; there are many signs to suggest Arthur and Penny were both victims ("repeatedly abused your adopted son, and battered you").

Overall, it's a very complicated situation and this answer isn't exhaustive but I hope there's food for thought in here!