#Its absolutely fine as long as you separate the people from the cartoon characters (which is required and implied anyway tbh)

[crystalwhisp]

Ok so possibly unpopular opinion in tags vvvv

I don’t think this will get any traction but eddsworld fans put your genuine opinion on ships in the tags if you see this. I’m curious..

[millennialzadr]

WHY I LOVE ZADR!!!

HEY GUYS WHASSUP? LMAO

So this is a whole ass giant long post of me absolutely spewing my feelings of love for ZADR, it was the very first thing I wrote when I made this blog and I think it’s a nice, positive thing for my fellow shippers to inhale and enjoy 👌👌

it was originally a reply to mitarashiart’s post about why HE loves ZADR (link in replies) but I decided to delete that and make my own post since MY WHOLE ENTIRE TEXT WALL WAS SHOWN IN THE REPLIES and drowned out anyone else who was trying to talk (thanks tumblr mobile u fuckin idiot)

I had also posted a summary of an AU that I’m working on in the original post, but decided to remove it since it just about doubled the length (I’m thinking about posting it separately along with the wips I’ve been putting together, we’ll see 👀)

But ANYWAY, here is about a million reasons why I think ZADR is the fucking best, so if you like reading gushy gay ship feelings, please enjoy ❤️❤️❤️

[Posted June 2019][WARNING, LONG ASS THOUGHT BARF]

SOOO, holy hell y’all my journey back into this fandom has been a wild and unique experience for me, i went from adding invader zim to my bookmarks on kisscartoon, rewatching the series, finding out theres a movie coming out, finding out there was a shitload of content i’d never seen before (commentaries, lost episode scripts and audios, panels, the COMIC, episodes i’d never seen because the dvd i used to watch was scratched!! and a FUCKLOAD of quality modern fan art like oh my GOD) and finally curiously googling ‘zadr’ (which i was way into when i was maybeee 13/14) to see if there was any interesting new art, and holy hell, mita (the artist above) singlehandedly THREW me down the hole into modern zadr hell, first with his absolutely stunning IZ art (all his art is dope tho check him out yo), then reading the above explanation put the final nail in the coffin like, 100%

so i wanted to add onto his post here on why this ship got me so fucked up, both for anyone who might be wondering why on earth i’m shipping two characters from a kid’s show (i’m very aware how weird that is at first glance trust me) and also so i can get some ideas down for possible future reference (will i ever draw them? maybe)

(first of all, a disclaimer, and this is not pleasant to write but it’s important to address for clarity’s sake: I have no interest in romantic or sexual relationships between minors, and do not ship zim and dib as they are presented canonically in the show (as children). what i’m interested in is the conceptualized relationship they may have as modern adults, and i view zadr more as taking the concepts of existing characters and experimenting with them with different interpretations, which i personally think is a constructive and fun creative outlet, especially if these characters hold personal significance for you (childhood faves of course). growing up together is an important facet of their relationship, and certainly they were important to each other even as children (see: mopiness of doom) but as an adult i’m personally curious about what kind of adults they might’ve become, and that’s the focus of my interest. i’ll still be reblogging regular IZ art because it’s dope but if you see shippy looking art of them as tiny lil beans its either friendship or chibis (and i personally headcanon zim as getting taller with dib but some people stick with his canonical height when drawing them as adults, which is super short. it still doesn’t mean he’s a kid). aaand i wish i didnt have to write this and it would just be obvious but we live in a sick sad world and it is sourced from a children’s cartoon so i feel its necessary. end of disclaimer)

NOW THAT THAT’S OUT OF THE WAY

- ok, first reason’s a bit obvious - the nostalgia. holy hell, the feeling of rediscovering a ship that was popular when i was a preteen during the mid 2000s and discovering a totally new perspective on it as an adult comes with an almost totally overwhelming sense of nostalgia and comfort, as well as inspiration!! the kind of art that seems so common for zadr, these sketch pages of scenes and expressions and visual gags where artists would just scribble every idea they had and LOVE doing it, this was exactly the kind of art that made me so passionate about drawing as a kid, and it still sparks such a powerful feeling of love and admiration for me to this day. fan content of iz and zadr is simultaneously achingly familiar and totally new and fascinating, and it just makes me SO damn happy to consume, it is most definitely my new comfort content. and just, GOD. THE ART!! SO GOOD. FUCK

- now for the characters themselves: for some reason i just really love the thought of a mid twenties, modern Dib?? lanky goth dork, disaster bi, depressed as shit, uses bad sweaters and memes to cope?? when i was a kid i didn’t even LIKE Dib, but now i totally sympathize with him! he’s just a hyper obsessive nerd wishing there was more to life than the situation he got stuck with, how wildly relatable. he was a pretty big asshole as a kid (even to people besides zim) but he was also totally isolated and constantly bullied, so there’s a lot of room for growth. i feel there’s a lot of juicy character development potential for that boy, and there’s always been a special place in my heart for characters who are totally sad and screwed and hopeless, but there’s one thing, or person, that means the world to them and could possibly save them…

- aliens. Zim. i love nonhuman characters, i love monsters, i love aliens, i love characters that don’t understand human shit (and thus have much less room for shame or fear bc theyre just totally oblivious the negatives of modern society) and need guidance (bonding!!) from their human. i also love morally grey characters and characters with skewed logic, they’re always really interesting, and Zim himself just has such a unique personality and set of mannerisms, he contradicts himself a lot and you can never quite expect how he’ll behave, and i love that in a character, it makes them super versatile and fun, especially since there’s so many different possibilities for their development. Also, Zim is a gremlin, a little shit, and a disaster. I also love those traits in a character. And don’t even get me started on his character design?? big sparkly eyes? expressive antennae? monster teeth? complimenting colors? he’s adorable.

- mutual obsession. for someone like Dib, who seems almost repulsed by how boring and slow the people around him are, Zim quite literally personifies Dib’s  escapist fantasies, both as an inhuman entity from beyond the stars, and as a person who’s knowledge, charisma and mystery far exceeds that of anyone Dib has met in his entire life. (so basically what i’m saying is that for a shunned, jaded misanthropist, an actual alien is terribly alluring, even if said alien is dangerous, stupid, and possibly insane). not to mention Zim vindicates Dib’s entire life passion, the supernatural! Even when their relationship is totally negative, there is not a single inch of room for Dib to get tired of Zim. as mita explained, they validate each other. for Zim, WHO AGAIN, IS TOTALLY SHUNNED, ISOLATED, AND HATED BY EVERYONE HE KNOWS, Dib is the only person in the universe who gives a single shit about him!! he gives Zim credit as a threat, a capable invader, which if you ask me is the sole thing Zim is after (he’s hellbent on his mission because it would win him the approval of the tallest, all he’s ever wanted is recognition from the people he thinks so highly of). He literally gets depressed when Dib isn’t around to pay attention to him, not even the tallest were enough to motivate him before Dib came back. these two have no one and nothing without each other, and while lifelong nemeses is fine and dandy, i personally prefer friendship, affection and love, cause i’m a softie like that. how could they possibly get there after years of actively trying to kill each other?? well, i think under just the right circumstances it could become a possibility after a long, long time.

- growth. i. love. me. some. good. character growth. especially for characters with trauma/mental illness, bc again, relatable. these boys have issues, and as mita mentioned, their canon stories are actually INCREDIBLY sad! but the happy thought is, they could recover! they could help each other recover, for little reason other than the two are the only source of happiness for each other. now of course this also opens the gate for angst lovers, but at the same time offers potential for comforting, uplifting content of the boys supporting and inspiring each other, maybe even to the point of becoming happy and healthy enough to create the lives they want for themselves (as in appreciating life and doing things that make them actually happy instead of the delusions of grandeur they both sought when they were younger). gimme that positive shit and let the poor beans be happy  щ(ಠ益ಠщ)

- LITTLE THINGS. LITTLE THINGS THAT ONLY COME WITH CHILDHOOD FRIENDS. WITH HUMAN/NONHUMAN. WITH THE SHOW’S WEIRD LOGIC. Zim being the person Dib knows best and vice versa. Zim having an involuntary respect/admiration for Dib because he’s tall. Learning each other’s needs, limits, and communication methods, both emotionally and biologically. Sensitive antennae. Affectionate bickering. Being less insecure bc your partner literally has no idea why you see your flaws as flaws. Laughing at the flaws they do notice because they make no sense. Zim only wanting to eat waffles and chow mein. Dib being forced to overcome his depression lethargy and stay hygienic/keep the apartment clean because Zim has a sharper sense of smell and is afraid of germs. Endless conversation about anything and everything because they’re from literally different worlds, and endless intrigue. TOUCHING. TALKING. DOING EVERYTHING LIKE ITS THE VERY FIRST TIME AND ALWAYS NEEDING THE OTHER TO GUIDE THEM. HOLY HELL THERE IS SO MUCH POSSIBILITY FOR TINY LITTLE MOMENTS THAT MEAN THE WORLD. FUCK. GOT ME FUCKED UP.

so that wraps up the why. fuck man. its just such a good ship. if you read this big ass text post, thank you for indulging me, i hope you enjoyed it! because i enjoy it very much 👀 so stick around if you’d like to for a shit load of IZ and zadr content on this blog, possibly (MAYBE) even from me!! come roll around in alien hell with me why dontcha ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ its a fun time! thanks for reading!!!

-

SO THAT’S MY MANIFESTO Y’ALL, FEEL FREE TO REPLY WITH YOUR OWN REASONS!! I WOULD LOVE FOR THIS POST TO JUST BECOME A BIG GIANT PILE OF LOVE AND YELLING!! GO NUTS! SCREAM ABOUT IT! INFODUMP! DO WHATEVER YOU WANT! I’LL READ EVERY LAST REPLY! Y’ALL DESERVE TO ENJOY YOUR SHIP BC IT’S LITERALLY THE FUCKING BEST!!! LOVE Y’ALL!!!!!!

[mytwitterisdogtoast1]

Dragonball GT is the worst series of all the Dragonball series.

I recently watched a video created by Totally Not Mark about which series is better out of GT and Super when it came to the franchise in general and part of me remembered my huge dislike towards the series so I figured I’d get on my keyboard and do that good ol’ fashioned “post an opinion” onto Tumblr because that is what the site is mostly for. So Instead of posting about how I think super is better I’m going to just post why the hell GT is a horrible show to me and the things it gets right and why in general the show is horrible. Now before I get into that context I am in no way a super fan or the type of person who says that subs are better than dubs because we all love anime and shouldn’t restrict others from liking their thing because we fill we are superior to each other based on our willingness to read or because we think “that the voice actors in Japan are so much better and you lose the feeling you get when you watch Americans try and fail at it”. Look as a filthy casual who usually never gets angry or upset at most things my reasons for disliking GT aren’t going to be what most people would see as a bad thing or even say the reasons I like GT are the exact same reasons and if you can come to appreciate the reasons I give that’s cool and if you disagree that is fine as well as long as it leads to civil discourse because again, it’s anime and no one is superior in their likes to another just because of some arbitrary reasons. In the end, it’s all just cartoons. So before I get into why i dislike GT at every turn I see it show up I have to praise it for what it does right to me. That is the visuals of the how the characters looks. See I get that it’s like 10 years into the future or something like that and some people now look way too old like Krillin or just don’t show up ever unless it doesn’t matter but with who we got they look great and I would never take away how good they look. Also the villains as much as I will get into them are actually kinda cool in their own right and aren’t the worst ideas just implemented in such a poor manner that any real good they do is kinda mitigated by the fact that they are almost identical to some other villain in the end. So now with that out of the way I’m going to get into why GT is one of the worst anime of all time. At least to me.  So what makes Dragonball so great is it is a comedy genre even near the final seasons. They either had shitty reasons to amass an army or in general did silly things like make a holiday after themselves when they finally succeeded in ruling the world but in the end the genre of action anime is pretty much parodied with how it is a child who goes in and defeats these muscle men. We have a child who was never really raised by a normal adult trying to fit into a world outside of his normal views and fights these villains who against normal people would lose but in the end they all end up losing to a little boy. It’s a nice adventure with laughs and enough action to really get people to enjoy it. As much as I like Dragonball I never really liked it as much as Z. Yes I do know that it is mostly just Z over here in the west but I don’t see them really being the same manga with the shift in tone that the two had and the styles of adventure they ended up having in Z is so vastly different in comparison that to me they are totally different series when compared to each other. Also I was growing up when Z first came over to America so I didn’t see Dragonball until after it made its first debut on Toonami. So again, totally different series to me.  As for Z? Well Z is my favorite anime of all time. It’s by far not the best anime ever but I do believe it is the best action anime of all time for a couple of reasons. 1: I love how in the end they just fight better versions of the previous final boss. Vegeta? That’s just stronger Raditz who can transform. Frieza? That’s just stronger Vegeta who can transform multiple times. Cell? Thats just stronger Frieza who can transform multiple times, Regenerate, Use everyones powers, and also absorb people. You get the picture by now. Everyone else who comes after is just a “better version” of the last and that tickles my fancy. 2: It helped make certain parts of the genre of shonen manga via the introduction of tropes. Transformations weren’t really a thing before Z came along and pretty much every action anime since then has used tropes that Z has introduced. 3: It still holds up today in being a good anime and manga and in general the popularity of it was so big that even now when I’m a 30 something year old that it got a new series to continue even after GT finished it off in Super. These are the reason I think it’s the best action anime of all time but again, feel free to disagree if you want to.  As for why GT is such a shit show to me it all comes down to the fact that it introduces absolutely nothing new when it comes to itself that even the villains and the characters are a little in general copies of other characters. That and no one matters compared to Goku. If we start it off sure we have people like Trunks and Pan and even “insert comedy character who is only here because plot that could just be ignored and even removed” A.K.A. Giru. See the series starts off pretty generic in that Goku is training Uub up in the look out. He just disappeared and is finishing his time in what I assume was a 10 year training session. We are introduced to our first “villains” in Pilaf and his crew. They are finding out about not only gods look out but they also find a new set of dragonballs. Convenient plot details that are either confusing or just there to set up the series. Firstly before I get into that why was this never said before, Why did Bulma never pick up on these dragonballs, Why did pilaf just now find them if he’d been searching his entire life after dragonball? So many questions in general but still. Not the point. The point is this, they don’t have a real reason except to introduce our first main villains. Pilaf and his gang. A little weird when you look at it cause Pilaf has been bested so many times that him succeeding now seems like a stupid thing to happen. Thankfully his success is only to again, push the story. Goku and his gang have to now search for the dragonballs. Which is exactly what happened in Dragonball. This time, it’s across the universe. This is where my ability to really in general compare the shows ends. That is until in general I get to the final stretch. See there are very few things I can equate to Dragonball besides the adventure of the day aspect. You have the obvious nod towards Oolong with Zoonama who both want to marry a girl and end up falling for a boy in drag. You have the fact of Goku with a tech savvy Briefs person as well as a spunky fighter. Goku is a kid. Maybe a couple other things if I looked it up and compared but the main thing is that first section of GT is based heavily on Dragonball in general. The final stretch part begins with the “Red Ribbon Army” copy in the General Rildo part with Dr Myuu who is just also a copy of Android 20. So after this part finishes it kicks into the saiyan saga of DBZ. Baby is by far a complete knock off of 3 villains in DBZ being comprised of Vegeta, Frieza, and Garlic Jr. Why is this so? let’s face it, If you compare those 3 with him its basically a one for one beat on what he does with someone else. Firstly he’s in the body of Vegeta and even when he starts losing he goes and just becomes a great ape. Pretty much what Vegeta does in the first saga of Z. As for Frieza they can both survive in space, Has multiple different forms and lastly he hates saiyans. Now sure the reason is different but the disdain for them is pretty much comparing blue to a lighter shade of blue that looks just like blue. We could even mention that Baby is like Cell in that they are both made by science but the comparisons end there. As for Garlic Jr Baby does the same thing in taking control of people and making them the same as with the black water mist. These are what make Baby pretty much a whole of 3 separate people. Next comes the Androids and cell. Super 17 is pretty much just perfect cell. You have past villains returning to take out Goku. Those of which are Frieza and Cell. Which funny enough Frieza comes back but dies by trunks who warns of 2 androids coming to fight against Goku and kill him. Which comes in the forms of Dr Myuu and Dr Gero. Both of which, are you know, not the main androids being talked about. In fact it’s actually 17 and hell 17. Both of which are going to fuse and make one super android who changes forms into basically cell in that he can absorb energy and also has infinite energy as well. These are basically the main parts except that the end takes multiple people to fight off and kill Super 17. To which they then wish back people with the dragonballs because one of the Z fighters died and they want to bring them back. Seems that it would be fine except for the small little detail of its an evil dark dragon who when after granting the 7th wish he creates these evil dragons. Before I get into those dragons lemme question this. If Kami and Piccolo fused and the dragonballs stopped existing for a bit and it took Dende a new person to create new dragonballs wouldn’t he know of the evil dragons as well as also in general start a new chain thus stopping 7 evil dragons from existing? Oh well, at least we get 7 different dragons for Specifically only Goku to fight against. I can see people saying how can you compare the evil dragons to Buu which it’s a lot easier than you would think. How many different forms of Buu are there? would you guess about maybe 7? Cause there are 7 different forms of Buu. 6 of which are different forms when he absorbs other people. So lets take it this way. Omega Shenron also absorbs 6 different “people” in the 6 different dragonballs that aren’t his. Sure, he only gets one more form in that he has now been transformed into Omega from Syn Shenron but still. Transformations are a check. So what are the 7 different forms of Buu? 1:Kid Buu 2: Buff Buu which is when he absorbs the southern Supreme Kai. 3: Fat Buu which he gets from absorbing the Supreme Kai. 4: Evil old Buu. 5: Super buu. 6: Super buu with Gotenks absorbed. 7: Super Buu with Piccolo absorbed. 8: Piccolo with Gohan absorbed. Now some of you might be saying “that’s 8 different forms of Buu and not 7″ But in the end Syn and Omega are both different “forms” thus making 8 different forms of dragons as well. The main part that gets annoying though is how they defeat Shenron. Firstly they use fusion and then don’t win even though they could have in the end. Why? Arbitrary reasons. See in Z it was because Vegito wanted to be fused to save the others. In GT it’s cause they needed to defeat him with the spirit bomb. Just like they did with Buu. Both spirit bombs are also involving a larger amount of people than normal. In Z it was all of earth. Every person. In GT it was the whole universe. That’s not even the final part of how it’s the same. At the end of Z Goku says goodbye to his friends and fucks off. GT does the exact same thing. The show is honestly pretty much a beat for beat of Dragonball and Z. It adds nothing to the universe and what it does add  is half assed. Things like Vegeta having an epiphany that Goku is better than him twice at the final end villain or having Goku lose a tournament as a child or stuff like that fill in the cracks of the shit cake that is GT with more shit that doesn’t help or make it better. GT even fails to make what it had that was great good. The use of a new level of SSJ to defeat Baby was also used in the same ways of how Kaioken wasn’t enough to beat Frieza and then SSJ was also attained then. Everything is on a bigger scale while being comparable to the smaller scale before it. The reason I don’t compare this with Super as that even when it takes from earlier seasons of DBZ or anything else it is fresh in comparison. Goku and Vegeta doing their rivalry? not beat for beat. Older characters? They have use. Repeat villains? Frieza is almost a completely new person with his arc in that he now knows he needs to train and actually does and also does some good and even respects Goku. That’s why I don’t compare the two because they are incomparable. GT? It’s pretty much a shitty version of what came before it.

[fireflysummers]

Just Fiction (and When It’s Not)

I’ve been tying myself in mental knots for the last while about the “It’s Just Fiction” argument. At this point I’ve heard a lot from both sides that’s actually pretty valid, leading to a lot of general confusion. 

The conclusion that I’ve come to, though, is that “It’s Just Fiction” is not a universal defense, and its meaning shifts drastically when it’s shifted out of the originally intended lens.

I propose that there are three lenses through which the “It’s Just Fiction” argument can be viewed: in-universe, authorial intent, and public interpretation.

Before jumping into the analysis, I should note that there are a few assumptions here:

The fiction in question is actually fiction, and does not resemble any real life persons, living or dead in an identifiable capacity. Therefore, things like the Ted Bundy Case Files are immediately disqualified.

We are assuming innocence until proven guilty.

The In-Universe Lens

The “It’s Just Fiction” defense is most often applied to in-universe logic, and is related to the suspension of disbelief--the mechanism by which we can ignore our comparisons to the real world and immerse ourselves in a fantasy.

When you say "It's Just Fiction" about in-universe logic, it understands very clearly that fiction is fake, and that the characters and events do not exist in the real world. It may echo real life, and real people might to replicate it, but no matter how dark or gross or fluffy or fantastical the content, no matter how gritty and “realistic” it is, it is not real. 

Arguing that "It’s Just Fiction" is basically stating that you understand how to separate reality from fantasy, and treat characters and in-canon logic as the mechanisms by which an interesting story is told. While they may feel real, especially if you have a special connection with them, they fundamentally are not. 

As a result, content creators are generally allowed to use it as space to explore taboo topics and search for relationships and meaning in places that no sane person would enact in real life. 

However, this is not free reign to create whatever you want, and expect no consequences, as we will get to in our next point.

Authorial Intent

As stated earlier, the general assumption here is that the content creator did not intentionally have ill will towards anybody. Unfortunately, there have been too many case where this has proven to be bad faith. As a result, how to approach this aspect of the “It’s Just Fiction” argument is very difficult and controversial, because sometimes it is very difficult to “prove,” especially since the creative process is often multi-faceted as content creators draw from multiple inspirational and motivational sources. 

Oftentimes, content creators are young, ignorant, and lacking self-awareness. This leads to them not knowing how to take critique, especially if they are approached in a harsh, critical manner, and generally only alienates them in a way that stifles their desire to learn and grow naturally. It is generally not your job to educate strangers on the internet, either, since there are often trolls who disguise actual ill intent as ignorance.

The most surefire way to address this is to curate your own internet experience by blocking liberally those whose content you do not wish to see.

There is another case, though, that needs to be discussed: that of predatory content creators. These people usually straddle the line between “a distasteful lack of mindfulness” and “preying on vulnerable populations.” 

Accusations of ped/o/phil/ia against any individual are serious, and in process you have to consider a personal history of predatory behavior, rather than applying a blanket "if it's dark and taboo topics, then it automatically implicates the author as a pervert.”

You can usually identify these individuals based on the content’s tone and approach--that they aren't approaching a taboo topic for the sake of literary exploration, but because they are self-inserting themselves. There are heavy implications about people who  self-insert into that sort of fiction, such as people who write or draw cartoon character CP, and you can usually tell on a case-by-case basis whether or not somebody is hiding a gross perversion behind "It’s Just Fiction.”

Public Interpretation

Public interpretation is usually where the “It’s Just Fiction” argument breaks down entirely, because we are no longer working directly with the work (in-universe) or the people immediately responsible for its creation (authorial intent). Public reactions are very, very real and need to be treated as such--but first, you have to consider the likelihood that a work of fiction will actually contribute to swaying that public.

The argument here is “even if the person didn’t mean any harm, that doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t be held responsible.” And this is another tough one, because on one hand, yes, content creators ideally should exercise mindfulness about how their work will be received and interpreted. On the other hand, the public is beyond the control of any single individual, and things can easily be taken out of context or snowball out of their control, regardless of their intent. 

So, for the sake of this particular case, we have determined that the author did not mean to cause harm, the next question is how much harm is being done. 

In other words, who exactly is the public, and how many of them are there?

For instance, a bunch of kids filming a shitty monster movie featuring sharks may have the exact same messages as Jaws (sharks are evil and need to be killed). Neither one of them intend to do real sharks any harm; however, the one that needs to be held responsible is Jaws, not the shitty indie film. 

Why? Because Jaws was a box-office success that became a cultural phenomenon. It impacted the opinions of the millions of people, leading to a sharp increase of shark hunting. 

Yeah, the indie film was equally bad in the messages it was conveying, but it just fades into obscurity without actually doing any harm. 

It’s the same spiel with fandom works. Because fandoms are insular spaces, they feel a lot bigger than they actually are. That’s why fan-content creators are not held to the same standards as mainstream content creators, because the public they actually affect is actually quite small. 

When people say “It’s Just Fiction��� in relation to content that is not intended to do harm, but is controversial in content, what they’re really saying is “fandom is a small, in-bred pocket of the internet, and and because it is not written by somebody intending to cause harm and will never likely see the public eye, the damage that it does is negligible, and any energy that you put into causing an outcry over it is merely a petty waste of time.”

At which point, again, the best course of action is to just block what you don’t want to see.

Applications

This is a long read, and the basic point is to exercise your own critical thinking skills. My general rubric for what I keep versus what I block is:

Is the content actually fictional.

Is the content creator acting out of a desire to hurt others?

If the harm is unintentional, how many people are affected, and how wide-spread is the damage? 

Let’s Practice

Case 1

Person A is obsessed with a villainous character from an anime.

They know that the character is completely made up.

They have no desire to hurt other people, since this affection for a fictional character is literally just them. Their actions do not pose a threat to vulnerable groups. 

The number of people even directly aware of Person A’s special interest is pretty small, and if you’re squicked out by it they’re an easy block.

Therefore, by this rubric, “It’s Just Fiction” works just fine as an explanation for their actions.

Case 2

Person B’s fanfic reduces your favorite character to LGBT+ stereotypes. The tone of the fic, though, is fluffy and light-hearted.

Again, this is entirely fictional and all parties know it.

It’s difficult to gauge whether this was done intentionally or not; sometimes a quick chat with the author will clear things up; otherwise, the tone of the fic and the lack of mean spirit in any of their other works, so it’s probably unintentional. It’s probably safe to give the benefit of the doubt.

The general readership on the fic and the number of kudos is pretty low, which means that it’s not getting much attention anyways. It was distasteful, it made you feel gross when you read it, but overall the damage is pretty contained.

Therefore, by this rubric, “It’s Just Fiction” still generally works, because of the limited number of people even aware of the fic’s existence.

Case 3

Person C made an AU with characters aged-up from the canon, and there are some N/S/F/W scenes or jokes!

AU = fictional

This is a tricky one sometimes, because there are absolutely people who age up characters just to “legally” draw them in N/S/F/W situations. 

However, there is a difference between people who do that, and others who say, project out an entire timeline full of unique character interactions and are looking to explore the various aspects of adult life, which sometimes involves consensual sex. The authorial intent here is usually pretty easy to pick up on, because a well thought-out aged-up AU often takes a lot of mindfulness on the part of the creator.

Again, things limited to fandom spaces are by default pretty small in the public that they reach. 

“It’s Just Fiction” absolutely applies here because of the amount of work that has been put into it to create an adult version of the world and characters, and it’s clear that the intent was not to expose minors for the entertainment of perverts.

tl;dr: If you’re going to treat fandom with academic scrutiny, please apply critical thinking to situations as they come. “It’s Just Fiction” does not work as a general statement because it wasn’t originally meant to be a general statement.

[one-joe-spoopy]

I'm gonna start with what the people (Jay) (is it alright if I call you Jay? Or should I stick to smidgen-of-hotboy? I'm fine with calling you smidgen-of-hotboy if you're not comfortable being called Jay) want.

TATTOOS!!! AND PIERCINGS!!!

Okay, so, there are three separate uses for tattoos: body art, plain and simple, protection and magic.

Juno's tattoos are mostly body art interspersed with a few magical ones. His body art includes:

A peacock with its tail sweeping up around its throat and head on his shoulder and neck, but not the usual iridescent blue and green Earth peacocks. This peacock is ghostly white with hollow, misty eyes, like the ones in the woods that the twins meet up in. They roost up in the branches and lay themselves serenely in his and Benzaiten's lap, watching them talk with their guileless sockets. It's mostly stationary but will occasionally press its soft head against his jaw or sweep its tail across his arm, and it absolutely loves it when Rita strokes her long nails against the top of its head or the feathers on its throat. (This is usually during stream nights when they're both drunk enough to feel all soft and fuzzed-out at the edges and Juno lets her come close enough, which is rare even on occasions like this even though they've been stalwart friends for many years)

A little radio clock, half-smashed and permanently stopped at 11:45 above the crook of his left elbow, where he can ignore it if he keeps his arms crossed tight. It's his very own brand of guilt, or maybe it's reminder that happiness always ends, or some sappy metaphor about time that Rita would get emotional over. It's the only one of his tattoos that he deliberately got and he hates it, but feels like he needs to have it there. He can't forget.

Half-faded stick-and-poke cartoon characters like Turbo, a goofy little Earth rabbit with big eyes, a crab and a harpy, to name a few, on his side and his hip (they were done by him and Ben on each other and he's torn between getting them renewed and letting them fade.)

The scarred-over remains of a skeleton key on his right arm, which was his unit's symbol and is also expertly tattooed. The scars are from him scratching away at the tattoo with his nails and taking razors to it in fits of despair and anger after he was dishonorably discharged, because as much as he loathes it, he can't bear to have it removed. It feels like he'd be abandoning his purpose, so to speak, and it's almost confirmation that those days were real and not just a terrible hallucination brought about by smoking something he shouldn't have been.

Juno's magical tattoos are all function and are not meant to look pretty at all. They include the location of the portal where he goes to meet Benzaiten, (drawn in Jet's neatly spaced handwriting on his inner arm in permanent ink) (it changes ever so often as the woods change location), the unique incantation to get Rita's attention no matter where he is or what she's doing (it was a pain in the ass to coax Juno into letting her give him it but it was worth the peace of mind knowing that Juno would get her attention if he needed her) (of course he doesn't use it until he's badly hurt, but there's only so much Rita can do to stop him) on his inner wrist, a lantern on his sternum that glows to light his way, to name a few.

As for piercings, Juno has quite the assortment in his ears, septum, his labret (through the center of his lower lip) and, ahem, other places. He mostly keeps retainers in there (he can't risk accidentally getting jewelry ripped out on the chance that he gets jumped) (you know Juno, if something doesn't attack him it's suspicious) but when he does wear jewelry he prefers silver and they're covered in tiny spells (courtesy of one of Rita's friends) along the insides to gather up energy (kind of like little batteries) (don't let him hit you. Seriously. You will regret it.)

Rita's tattoos are both magical (the "birthmarks" that look like LED light tracks in perfect lines all over her face, arms, back, stomach and legs, the ball joints on her, well, joints, the delicate circuitry detailed in the gaps) and body art (the flowers wreathed around her upper arms, the serial number on the nape of her neck that spells her name and a date (that's what it looks like to Juno on one drunken night, at least) in the double-digits (yes, Rita is that old) (or is she? Juno won't ask and Rita will never tell ;)), a little digital kitty that purrs in time with her heartbeat on her breastbone, tiny hearts along her knuckles, etc). Rita has the added customization of being able to program the plate on her torso to a different screen if she so wants. Right now it's a smooth flow of green and blue lines across her chest and abdomen that glows ever so softly, something like this:

(Juno likes pressing his face to Rita's shoulder and napping with the soft glow just behind his eyelids, held safe and contained in the cubbyhole kingdom of soft sheets and throw pillows that Rita calls her apartment.) (It's some of the best sleep he ever gets.) As for piercings, Rita has her earlobes, her collarbones, her tongue, dimples and the bridge of her nose all pierced (she's a doll, she loves being bedazzled) and she prefers bright glowy jewelry there. She wears handmade bracelets that go all the way up to her elbows and plastic and acrylic rings, to match her nails (long and often as ludicrous as her jewelry). (She's literally so pretty I love her so much).

Peter's tattoos are on his human skin, all purely functional and meant for protection and to stay hidden ("I see you, you see me not" down his spine, a set of simple closed eyes on his collarbone as an enchantment to only be seen when he wants, various knives on his forearms and calves and hips—he's had to pay a pretty cred and quite a few things aside to get these done and they are worth everything). The reason why these are in his human skin exclusively is because that's when he's at his weakest and most vulnerable, stripped of every strength his true fae form has. He truly hates being human but with the way they're breeding like rats he needs to blend in with them. As for his piercings, he's pretty decked out although he doesn't wear much jewelry in them. Something cool and interesting I wanted him to have is that he has little metal rings and chains occasionally braided into his hair, specifically around the silver in his hair. Those are for his antlers and the buck's ears.

Lady Luck is indeed a real person, and she is just as annoying as you'd think. You could also call her Fate but that's not her exactly, just one of her aspects/the faces she has (she's actually got a doll's face that switches faces depending on what aspect is being shown). For example, Lady Luck has a crooked nose from being broken one too many times (she likes getting into fistfights way too often for it to just be coincidence. Or maybe it is Coincidence), a bright grin that borders just a little too much on smug and wears neons to stand out (she's bold and proud, why should she hide?). Fate has a soft round face, is heavy-set and matronly and seemingly comforting unless she's plotting something bad for you, at which point her helpless smile becomes something mean and wild, because fate is very, very cruel, just as much as it is kind and comforting.

When I say the word "blessed", I mean that somewhere along the line a supernatural creature (minor deities, fae, spirits, etc.) took note of the person in question and decided to give them a gift to use fit, often a lesser version of their own power. The downside of being given such a gift is that it corrupts the (human) recipient, as evidenced by the bloodthirsty Kanagawas (Cecil is not the worst one in that clan), M'tendere's monstrous creations, and Mick's hazardously dangerous luck (in the sense that it doesn't end well for him necessarily) (he'll hurt himself and others physically and emotionally but he won't die before his time and it sure doesn't stop the whispers that echo cursed, cursed, cursed with every step he takes, with every day he lives) (sometimes, when he's staring down the abyss of his life, he wonders if he really is as cursed as Juno and Sasha and everyone he knew used to say he was.)

The sludge Peter weeps is actually irritation from the polluted air of the Cerberus Province, not because his eyes naturally bleed sludge. He is actually injured as well, the protection tattoos on his forearms shredded by the shadowy guard dogs he fought on his latest heist, which is why he's bandaged.

The Ruby7 is a creature in a class of its very own. M'tendere did not entirely create it, they simply found her (and changed her just a little. Juuuuuuust a little bit) and tried to understand her but how the hell do you get something that isn't even on the same plane of existence as you?

There aren't gods per se so much as they are manifestations of beliefs fed by paranoia and fear. That's basically what all supernatural creatures are—the darkest inner horrors of imagination condensed into being. However, that does not mean that they are inherently evil. I want to make that very clear.

Juno's just a prickly old tomcat at heart. Seriously, he's just a little kitty-cat. (Also he has Small Fry too because I want him to.)

Hey! So, uh, I have some more stuff for the fae-hunter jupeter au, if you'd like to hear it? Regarding some more about the background and things and the other characters and also some intrusive thoughts Juno has regarding the cannibalism?

Oh fuck yeah babey lay it on me. This is the best Steel Twin Birthday Present and no other holiday or event going on irl I could've woken up to ever! And also does it mean anything if I say I have more thoughts on my monster hunter au bc I have a lot of new thoughts about it

[jordanrosenburg]

The Reboot Bubble

When your favorite TV show ends, how do you feel? Lost? Depressed? Lonely? All of the above? I am someone who usually sobs at the end of a beloved TV show. The end of Avatar: The Last Airbender still gets me, I can remember crying when Awkward ended, and even having not watched the last two seasons, I absolutely bawled my eyes out at the series finale of Glee. There are times we want the shows we love to go on forever. Adventure Time was on for over ten years, a dystopian cartoon about a boy and his dog. Even though I was sad, I knew it was time for it to come to an end. That was a show, much like Glee, that I had stopped watching before it ended. But like a good, true fan, I watched its finale. 

I think we feel sad when these shows end, especially the ones that last for many years, because we have grown with many of the characters. I started watching many of the above shows when I was in middle school and high school, and some didn’t end until I was in college, or even after college. It’s like a piece of our younger selves end with it. We wait for these shows to pop up on Netflix or Hulu, so maybe once in a while we can fall down the rabbit hole again. Usually I have to ask myself, “Am I really going to put myself through this again?”, as I push play to rewatch Glee for the seventh time. 

Not every show I rewatch gives me such emotion. I can contently watch reruns of That 70′s Show or Sex and the City and pretty much not feel a thing. I will admit when Eric and Donna break up I feel sad, but not enough to cry! 

I think it’s when our favorite TV shows end in a way that we didn’t like when we feel like it should come back for one more round. Fix the mistakes it made, let the characters we love be happy. Some of us turn to fandom to help cushion the blow. We chat with each other, read what others have to say, or even read fanfiction to help us grieve the loss over one of the things that would help us escape for a little while. 

Reunion specials started happening. These could be simple panels when actors get together to answer questions about a show. Or even as witty as the Seinfeld season on Curb Your Enthusiasm. A lot of people wanted to see their favorite characters together again. One of the reasons I had actually made an account on Tumblr back in 2012 was because The Legend of Korra had come out and I wanted to see how other fans had felt about the sequel series to the show I held so closely to my heart. As much as I wanted to see the characters I knew, I was happy to see new characters in the same universe. 

And then...Fuller House became an extension of Full House. I couldn’t even get through the first episode if I’m being honest. Watching all of the actors turn to the camera and make a funny face after making a joke about the Olsen Twins really turned me off. Gilmore Girls had a four episode reboot. I would say this one of the first, worthy of note reboots. I think most fans were disappointed with how the show actually ended, so getting to see these characters ten years later helped fill in a lot of gaps. I won’t get into how I felt, but I will say I didn’t love what they did with Rory. I was sad to see that she didn’t end being a successful journalist as she had hoped, but such is life. Will and Grace got a reboot around the same time, or shortly after. A show, ahead of its time, had come back. I would have been fine with just a reunion special, but a whole season was made, and then a second season was picked up shortly after. Clearly, there were some stories left to tell. 

Murphy Brown had a failed reboot, which came to no surprise. Did people really want to see a woman in her 60′s going through the same problems she had in her 30′s/40′s? But the networks must have seen how well Will and Grace was doing, and hopped on the bandwagon. Many networks are realizing that the 90′s nostalgia is alive and well. Whose Line is it Anyway also comes to mind. Another beloved show, but this time with a new host and some new comedians. A bit of a face lift, but still funny. Roseanne, now The Connors, was something I was surprised to see comeback. A program that truly showed what a middle class family looked like, and how they lived. This show came back at a good time because many other sitcoms today are all rich families. Is Modern Family only modern because of the different races and sexual orientations depicted? I know a lot of families, and they do not live nearly as comfortably as these people. 

Roswell New Mexico is an example of a reboot that no one really asked for, but am so glad it happened. This is a show that, to me, is the true definition of a reboot. They took the good stuff from the original, recast the entire thing with adults playing adults, not adults playing teenagers, and gave this show a fresh new spin. I sat and watched the original series, and it had its moments, but there’s a reason it only lasted three seasons. This new version of it is something I can see lasting for many seasons to come. 

I know everyone says they want a F.R.I.E.N.D.S. reboot, or an Office reboot, but do they really? Wouldn’t you rather see someone die a hero than see them live long enough to become the villain? 

What made me want to write this in the first place was because I was on Facebook the other day and saw that a reboot of Reba had been green-lit...SERIOUSLY REBA? A show that I know only because they would show re-runs on ABC Family. Don’t get me wrong, Reba wasn’t the worst show in the world, but what stories do they really have to tell that warrants 12-24 episodes? AN ENTIRE SEASON? I could see a reunion special on Netflix, a tasteful hour, to an hour and a half of Reba roasting Barbara Jeanne would be great. 

Rocko’s Modern Life and Invader Zim both have specials on Netflix right now. Rocko’s Modern Life did it right. A quick special, twenty or so years later, that pretty much made fun of itself. I haven’t been able to watch the Invader Zim special yet, but I’m sure it will be done in a similar way of just answering the burning questions fans have. Even Hey Arnold came out with another movie a couple of years ago. This was something fans wanted for years! We all wanted to know what happened to Arnold’s parents. We finally found out, and it was great. Do all of these shows have a chance of coming back with a full season? It depends on the ratings and what the creators of the shows want to do, but these small specials are enough. It’s good fan service. 

But now the networks are just getting greedy. Not only is getting harder to watch TV because every network now has their own app, or they will, that you need to pay for to use, but it seems like every network is rebooting just to make profits! Netflix made watching TV without cable a cheaper option. Now I have to pay for all of these apps separately just to watch TV? Is cable going to become the cheaper option again? Or are all of these shows going to be exclusively on these apps? It’s ridiculous! 

I digress...Let’s talk about Disney for a second. Raven’s Home became an extension of That’s So Raven. I will say, I think this reboot was done right because it’s about Raven and her kids, but now even shows like Lizzie McGuire are getting rebooted. Yes, we’re all excited to see Hillary Duff back at it in the big city, but who are the target markets for these shows? Are people my age sitting down to watch them? Are families watching these shows together? Do the younger generations know or care about the original shows? High School Musical is also coming back, but this time it’s mocumentary style about the kids who actually went to east high that also do theater. At that point I’d just love to see the original cast do another movie. They really missed their opportunity for High School Musical: 10 Year Reunion if you ask me. 

I just want to know when will it all end? Are there truly no original ideas left out there anymore? Are we only able to produce TV shows based off of ones that have been off the air for years, only to bring them back? What’s next? Dharma and Greg, a modern Mork and Mindy, Buffy the Vampire Slayer??? Let’s go back to thinking of these shows fondly, and letting the good ones rest as they were. Eventually the networks will run out of shows to reboot, and the bubble will burst. 

[benisasoftboi]

So on Friday night I made this post:

Which I expected that maybe ten, twenty people would see? I didn’t think anyone would really care about a joke about something so old and obscure, and it would just get lost in all the Detective Pikachu stuff. Instead, within five hours, it had become my most popular post. 

I know it’s still not a huge number, but it’s still way more attention than I’ve ever received for anything... ever, so I’ve been thinking about Pokemon Live a lot since. Which has been bad, because this morning I had to take a very important political economy exam, and instead of thinking about Bretton Woods or Marx, I was thinking about Pokemon. I nearly referred to my country’s former Prime Minister as ‘David Camerupt’. It wasn’t good. 

I need to expunge my thoughts. Specifically, my thoughts on one topic in particular - the way this show treats, or rather mistreats, the character of James. Because I truly, truly love Pokemon Live. I do. It’s one of the most glorious dumpster fires I’ve ever had the pleasure of watching a poor quality recording of. But this is the one thing I definitely don’t love.

I don’t expect anyone to read this. I mean, I said that last time, but this time I really don’t. It’s a long essay on a niche topic, and it isn’t even funny. But on the off chance it’ll get you to stick with me, I promise that there will be pictures of Andrew Rannells cuddling puppies at the end. 

So,

How Pokemon Live Mistreats James, and Why It Matters:

The Mandatory Mentioning of The Actor

I’m guessing anyone who knows anything about Pokemon Live also knows that now highly successful, Tony-nominated Broadway and television actor Andrew Rannells was in it playing James. And if you didn’t, now you know why I’ve mentioned him twice now. I’m a big fan of this guy.

He hated this role. Absolutely despised it. Apparently the show was a miserable environment to work in for everyone. The costumes were uncomfortable. The audiences were unbearable. There’s a making of for this show, which can be viewed on YouTube in its entirety - I’ve watched the whole thing more than once and you can see in every cast member’s eyes - there’s no light there. They’re all dead inside. It’s almost heartbreaking.  

To be clear - he’s the only one of these people I, or anyone else I’ve seen, ever makes fun of for this show. And that’s because he’s fine. He’s fine! He’s done very well for himself and talking about it won’t hurt his career, and there’s just always something really hilarious about seeing very successful people in terrible things, isn’t there? Chris Hemsworth in Saddle Club, Zach Braff in Babysitter’s Club, literally everyone in Foodfight. It’s not malicious or in any way intended to be punching down - just poking fun at a really good actor’s really bad early work. It’s not even really making fun of him, more that he was in this.

But there is one reason he hated the role that I don’t find so funny, and that’s that he felt the people that wrote the thing had made James a grossly over-the-top, borderline-to-over-the-line (depending on your tolerance) homophobic stereotype. And... yeah. They undeniably did that.  

Rannells understandably dislikes the character, and to be honest - that makes me a little sad. Knowing that musical!James is probably the only version of the character he (and likely a lot of parents who saw the show, and other cast members) ever really encountered, that’s a huge shame. Because if we go back to the anime the musical’s based on, the one I, and many others, grew up on, James is quite different. In fact, I personally consider anime!James to be the best character in the entire Pokemon franchise.

Why We Love Team Rocket 

Just want to quickly note that I can only discuss the anime up to about halfway through the Sinnoh seasons - I’ve seen basically nothing after that. My childhood was some original series, a lot of Hoenn, and a fair bit of early Sinnoh (somehow skipped over Johto almost entirely, don’t really know how that happened). If any of this is now not accurate, well - it’s not really relevant for this discussion anyway, but I still apologise. 

The Team Rocket trio, James especially, is, pretty queer-coded. This is not unusual for villainous characters in children’s media before the 2010s, so much so that I would guess that a lot of the time it wasn’t even being done deliberately - it was just that common a trope that it was all but expected your show would have at least one flamboyantly effeminate, villainous bloke. And James - especially early James - has no qualms about showing his feminine side:

Notice that Jessie adopts masculine attire to match - she doesn’t always do this, but I like that they have her at least do it sometimes. 

Team Rocket’s disguises became less and less likely to involve cross dressing as the show went on, but it’s one of the things best remembered about them. James also has a strong association with roses, and possesses several other feminine mannerisms. Arguably he’s far more downplayed than most other villains of the type (even more so than others present in Pokemon - Harley’s a great example, who was also, coincidentally, played by Andrew Rannells), but it’s present. And while yes, obviously in real life none of those things should be taken as definitive indication of a person’s orientation, and straight men are perfectly capable of twirling around in pretty dresses - in fact, I fully endorse it - this is fiction. Specifically fiction from the early 2000s. And in fiction, certain things are intended as visual cues and shorthand.

So I really, really doubt we were supposed to think James is entirely straight (I personally have always thought that he’s actually bi, but I’m not opposed to alternatives). You could make the case, but like. Come on.

But how is this different from musical!James? And how is this different than any other villain like him? Very simple. Anime!James has depth.

Not a tremendous amount. It’s a children’s cartoon made to cash in on a popular video game. But he, and Jessie and Meowth, are among the most well-rounded characters in the show’s cast, in a way that’s actually very relatable. It helps that they aren’t actually very villainous people most of the time. I know so many people who grew up with the show that loved, rooted for, and identified with them over the actual protagonists, by a mile. Myself included - I can remember two separate James-centered episodes that made me cry as a kid.

And these three are particularly beloved by young LGBT adults. We know from their backstories that they all came from rough circumstances - Jessie desperately poor and struggling to get anywhere or be recognised, Meowth having changed a fundamental part of himself in attempt to gain love and instead being ostracised for it, and James running away from an abusive household. They’re three people (/Pokemon) who felt alone in the world, that have now found each other. And whether you view Jessie and James’s relationship as romantic, friendship, or found family, it’s far more compelling than any other relationship in the show, at least to me. They may be criminals, but it’s not hard to see why some kids - especially the kids who might already feel like they’re just a bit different - would latch on to them. 

Even if you didn’t know James’s backstory, he still has a character. He’s frequently shown to be the most moral of the trio, he has a stronger bond with Pokemon than honestly even Ash - even more of a running gag than his flamboyance is the fact that his pets love him so much that they just wanna hug him all the time, with inevitable slapstick consequences - he has dorky hobbies like bottle cap collecting, and he’s even occasionally shown to be a bit of an environmentalist. Yes he is in many ways a stereotypical camp villain - but he’s also more. And that’s why we love him. 

And I’d bet anything there probably were some little boys who watched the show and saw James and thought ‘that guy’s like me!’. And yeah, that guy is a villain, because god forbid a maybe-gay character also be a good guy. But more than any other character like him that I’ve seen, he’s also always been a person. And considering how most of the other options kids like that had at the time were either one-note villains or nothing (and even now it’s sparse pickings) - that’s valuable.

And then there’s Pokemon Live.

*long, long sigh*

Oh, Pokemon Live. You beautiful disaster. 

What did you do to my boy?

Is there nothing that better encapsulates it than the bit where James asks Giovanni where Mecha MewTwo (...I know) “stands on campaign finance reform, social security and Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”?

First off, I like that James is politically engaged! Good for him! Completely out of character, but still!

And I do find this line incredibly funny, but I want to be very clear about why I find it funny. The line is funny because referencing a real world American discriminatory military policy in a Pokemon musical is just... so completely absurd. It’s super jarring and when I first watched it, I had to pause it so I could stop laughing about the possible implications of Pokemon Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Is there a Pokemon American military then? Pokemon Democrats and Pokemon Republicans? Pokemon Bill Clinton? POKEMONICA LEWINSKY???

It just raises so many questions.

Also Rannells’s delivery is incredible.

But the thing is, that’s not the joke here, is it? The actual ‘joke’ is ‘HA HA HE’S GAY! HE SAID THAT BECAUSE HE’S GAY!’. Which gets even worse when you think about it and realise that this situation is really just a gay man (I don’t think there’s any doubt about it in this particular incarnation, is there) asking his boss whether or not he thinks people like him should be discriminated against. How is that a joke? (The answer is that it isn’t.)

Which makes it that much more inappropriate for a children’s Pokemon musical, which is sort of, in a dark way, almost funnier. It’s that juxtaposition of something kiddy and cute with something that definitely isn’t. 

But hilarious as I find it, given the chance to I would go back and get rid of that line. I dislike what it implies - that being a gay man is nothing more than a punchline - more than I like the absurdist humour. 

And that’s the whole problem with how they chose to write James for this whole thing. They took a really good example of how you can have this type of villain while also making him a good character, and they turned him into nothing more than a stereotype.

You could say ‘but it’s a much shorter story than a TV show! They wouldn’t have time to make him nuanced!’, to which I would say 1. He doesn’t have to be nuanced, he just has to be slightly more than I’M GAY and 2. There have been 21 Pokemon movies at time of writing, two of which came out before Pokemon Live did. None of them, at least of the ones I’ve seen, committed any character assassinations like this. The first one even had another baffling reference to real world America:

That’s so out of nowhere and silly that I laugh every time I think about it (the Minnesota Vikings are an American football team, if you didn’t know). See, Pokemon Live! It’s possible to do jokes like that which aren’t at the expense of a minority group! Wow!

The anime even has examples of how you can do the gay jokes and make them funny. They are very rare in the show (beyond the humour of James’s personality), but remember the whole Flaming Moltres joke? It’s actually great. It’s a couple of good puns, it’s possibly Rachael Lillis’s best delivery in the whole show, and, just for confirmation, I’ve shown the clip to a few actual gay men in my life, who all said that they think that it’s very funny, and totally non-offensive. The joke is still ‘lol he gay’, but it’s also a neat play on words, it feels very in character for both of them, and it doesn’t have the same malicious, taunt-y feel of the Pokemon Live ‘joke’.

Look, the Pokemon anime is far from perfect. There are lots of moments where you have to grit your teeth and remember when it came out. But it still gave us a really, really wonderful character, and he absolutely deserved better than this.

Do I Still Love Pokemon Live?

Yes.

Even with all of this, it’s still an absolute masterpiece of unintentional hilarity. In some ways, this makes it funnier. Of course, of course, it couldn’t just have terrible costumes and a nonsense plot and really, really bad rapping - of course it’s also kind of offensive. Of course it is. Why wouldn’t it be.

And I would love to talk about all the things I genuinely love about it, and maybe I will one day.

But the thing is, it’s also representative of everything that was wrong with gay-coded characters at the time, something that the show it’s based on came way closer to handling well than most other stuff of its time, no less. And that, as a whole, isn’t funny at all.

So I want to be clear. I love laughing at this show because it’s a weirdly earnest cash-in musical for something that definitely shouldn’t be a musical, with endless bizarre, quotable moments - not because the way it warped this character is actually funny. I love laughing at the character’s lines because they’re absurd choices for a Pokemon musical - not because they’re in any way funny on their own. And I love laughing at the fact that Andrew Rannells was in it because he is so much better than this - not because this is what I think he should be reduced to.

And speaking of, here’s those pictures I promised:

I love one man.

[self-loving-vampire]

Politics in Fiction

Often, I see various arguments about politics in fiction (this most often happens specifically around video games for some reason). These arguments are rarely satisfying to me because I feel like I both agree and disagree with both sides at once.

One side says that some fiction has always been political, which is true but also not really what the other side is complaining about.

The other side is also prone to making many claims I do not agree with, like that including minority characters is always political pandering.

So there are actually many points I want to address on this topic and I hope I can separate them into readable chunks properly.

It is fine for fiction to be political

I do not dispute that many fictional works have political messages and themes. I also don’t think that this is inherently a bad thing.

The better Fallout games are political, for example. They often focus on the affairs of various societies and how they are (or should be) managed or governed, and their world is richer and more interesting for it. 

The central choice in Fallout New Vegas is basically about which faction should control the city and its nearby dam, which results in various different policies and consequences.

Political fiction can be good, it can help develop a setting or provide meaningful and memorable decisions.

However, as with all fiction, it has to be smart and nuanced about it. I will explain more below.

Sometimes things are not actually that political

One claim I have heard is that Star Wars is about “resisting fascism”. I don’t entirely see that in the movies as I remember them (though it might be more apparent in expanded universe stuff).

The bad guys in Star Wars are an authoritarian empire, yes, but at least in the movies themselves there doesn’t seem to be anything uniquely fascist about them, and not much is said about their ideology or policies in the movies either. They feel like a generic evil empire.

I know it has been long since I watched the movies, but I never really understood what the emperor’s motivations were beyond just personal power. Why did he want personal power? I don’t know. He barely feels like a real character.

And on top of that, Star Wars does not actually discuss or criticize fascism or even authoritarianism as an idea all that much. It’s just bad guys to fight in a way that feels superficial to me.

While on this topic, not all deep themes are political in nature. I know some people believe the personal is political, I don’t (for reasons I may explain in a different post). Sometimes I see works that deal with personal issues but that are treated as dealing with political ones, they are not the same thing to me.

I feel like people on both sides do this, too.

For example, there was a recent controversy about how Bloodlines 2 will let players choose their pronouns and how this was "too political” or “pandering to SJWs”.

Some people seem to just treat the very existence of LGBT characters in fiction as a political move, but to me they are just characters. 

Everyone in my Dungeons and Dragons settings (except the player characters, if they wish) is either bisexual or asexual, not because I am trying to make any kind of statement but because those are the states that are easiest for me to imagine and work with.

Sometimes the politics are not what you think they are

Because everyone has different views and experiences, people can look at the same story from a different perspective and take an entirely different message from it.

It is fine if your interpretation is uncommon, it is even fine if your interpretation is different from what the author intended.

But you should keep in mind that your reading is not the only valid one.

I most often see people on the left do this. They will claim that a piece of media is leftist, and often there may be some valid argument for why it may be, but then treat their interpretation as fact and try to shame and attack others for thinking differently without ever considering why they might have read the story differently.

For example, during the backlash to the backlash surrounding Bloodlines 2, I saw people asserting as fact that vampires are an allegory for the upper classes being parasites and therefore the people complaining are not welcome.

That did not seem right to me. All kinds of people write vampire stories and intend different meanings for them, there isn’t a universal to work with (not even when it comes to the physical powers and traits the vampires have).

Sometimes vampires are meant to represent corrupting yet irresistible sexual predators.

Sometimes they are meant to represent disease.

Sometimes they are just hot but troubled supernatural boyfriends.

Bram Stoker himself was a monarchist, and the vampires in the VTM setting are not all wealthy either. Some of them even live in the sewers and look too monstrous to be around humans. Not everyone is a Ventrue and not all Ventrue are bad, especially by the standards of the setting.

It is possible to do politics so badly that it ruins everything

I think there may be another reason why certain people may not notice that their favorite media deals with social issues and politics: That sort of thing is much more noticeable when it is done very poorly, which further convinces those people that adding politics to media is bad.

At some point social issues can stop being interesting worldbuilding or philosophical dilemmas and just become a ham-fisted allegory for a current real world issue that just hits one side on the face with an opinion they may not agree with.

For example, remember when Deus Ex: Mankind Divided pissed absolutely everyone off with that “Augs Live Matters” sign?

This has been said before, but good political stuff is vague and timeless: It deals with general principles that can be applied in multiple contexts. For example, 1984 was about extreme authoritarianism but not any one authoritarian group.

When fiction follows current issues/movements/political labels too closely, it risks being reduced to being about that specific issue instead of the things that lie underneath it.

On top of this, a lot of fiction that is deliberately aimed at being political is just badly written in that it tries to tell you how to think instead of letting you think. It is like those political cartoons that label everything and that have messages that can be summarized as “my side is correct and my enemies are dumb and evil” but do not actually tell you why that is.

I don’t like political cartoons even when I agree with them. They do not inspire deep consideration or persuade people, they just give the groups that already agreed with the message some short-term pleasure at how much better than their opponents they are.

People want interesting fiction that allows them to explore issues and come to their own conclusions. They don’t want propaganda that treats them with contempt and won’t change their minds.

If you want to see what extremely bad political fiction looks like, just check out that dying TERF webcomic known as Sinfest. In the webcomic, transgender people are portrayed as literal misogyny zombies and children are sent to “gender camps” to be forced to take hormones and re-educated.

The social metaphors in Sinfest are detached from reality yet so heavy-handed that they probably need cranes to lift their hands high enough to masturbate, and masturbate is all the author does in the comic.

If your primary aim is to make propaganda rather than to make interesting, thoughtful, and heartfelt stories then you will most likely make very bad fiction. We can see that happening here.

In my opinion, the best stories are personal or deal with timeless questions or core principles rather than just repeating current talking points or moralizing.

[thefoxesboxes]

A Gathering of Guys

Time to get back into the saddle on these reviews! This one has been a long time coming, something I honestly meant to review many months ago. But, between teaching English and travelling around the world, this writing fox has had a significant decrease in available brainpower. Did watching this movie for a second time help? Will it have passed the vulpine standards check? Look under the cut to find out as we discuss the “First R-Rated CGI Cartoon”, Sausage Party.

To begin, I will preface two things. First, I love animation. The creativity and freedom that can be made from almost any kind of animated movie has always been an easy way to make me happy. Look at movies like Zootopia, Spirited Away, and even Aladdin. These movies are each dramatically different in tone, style, and overall thematics. But they’re all some of my favorite movies. Even if I think CGI is overdone in the modern animation market, it still doesn’t detract from my love of watching something creative and fresh.

I also don’t mind movies that are using raunchy or vulgar humor. A movie like Deadpool can make me laugh pretty hard at the stupid jokes and over the top violence that it employs. A movie like this should use the language and themes to push the style of the movie. Is it a violent story with a murderous mercenary hell bent on revenge? Yeah, dark and violent, but add in the fun. These things can break up the movie into a more manageable tone than most people would like. Look at the difference in things like DC and Marvel, or new Ghostbusters and old Ghostbusters. That’s a coming review, by the way.

So the big point is that this movie is awful. It’s a raunchy and joke filled movie, but it’s never creative. It’s like someone took the movie FoodFight and pushed up the production quality and age rating. The movie is graphic, violent, and full of warnings for mature content and imagery. The whole movie tries very, very hard to make sure you know that this is mature and grown up.

Maturity, in this sense, means something that says the word ‘fuck’ approximately 1.85 times a minute, often in heavy bursts. Maturity is something that makes incredibly sophomoric and heavy handed assertions about the nature of religion and real life interactions between thousand year old cultures. Mature is when you have the movies plotline come to a screeching halt to constantly point out how edgy you are over and over again. Mature, in this sense, is being a 15 year old on Reddit screaming about how you took the red pill and don’t believe in things like religion, man.

There is nothing really mature here. At all.

“Just the tips” What the fuck is a tip? Your finger? Why does a hotdog have a glove but the lady doesn’t? Save it. It’ll keep.

But let’s talk detail. First, the movie has a song. It’s not a bad song, at least for how it’s written and sung. It’s really mostly just kind of tuneless and shifts a lot into ways that obviously want to invoke religious worship songs, but doesn’t do that very well. The song does a great job of setting the tone of this movie, which is “Religious people are dumb, ya here?”. It’s not really something I want to get into, but it slides nicely into the hotdog bun of hatred I have for this movie.

The writing.

As mentioned, the writing is self-congratulatory about the idea of being R-rated when it doesn’t know what that should mean. It decided to go out of its way to be a cartoon about hotdogs and sex before seemingly having any direction, as the world itself and characters are all over the place. Do they make any particular point using food that couldn’t be done with a different material? Nope. Do they make timely or classical references throughout the movie? Well, Meatloaf plays a singing Meatloaf. They make a “To Sir with Love” reference, which intrudes on one of my absolutely favorite films ever. Saving Private Ryan? Not exactly timeless.

But the writing reflects worst on characters and dialogue. While the voice acting is, mostly, fine it’s really just the characters are a bunch of assholes. Remember that scene in Star Wars where Han Solo doesn’t believe in the Force and Luke lectures him despite having learned about it that afternoon? That happens about atheism. Our beef tube hero who’s name I really don’t care to remember (it’s Frank) learns that the Gods are evil people who eat them! Oh no! So he immediately starts bashing everyone for believing in the Gods that he believed in until literally an hour ago. He makes no good points, he seems ridiculously hypocritical, and he’s just kind of a douche.

A running theme in this movie, the main villain is a literal douche. A douche who gets a tear and loses his douchey fluids, so he needs to replenish them to restore his superpowers. This begins with him forcefully and graphically violating a damaged juice container in a way obviously reminiscent of forceful oral sex. This scene was the first one that was simply disgusting, including him commenting that he’s “Juicin’ up” to reference steroids. A rape scene, classy as hell. This only continues as this literal douche walks about to murder the main heroes will constantly repeating the same joke over and over again. His plans involved him being able to teleport, his reason for revenge was almost understandable, but being a rapist murderer really made me not care about this villain.

Also. This joke. Five fucking times.

Other than the Frankfurter Hero and Douchey Villain, we have side characters. Jewish Bagel, Mexican Lesbian Taco, overly voluptuous hotdog bun, Muslim/Middle Eastern lavash, gay Twinkee, black grits, and Firewater. These stereotypes are the closest thing to characters that exist in this film and they mostly exist pretty much solely within those roles. They exist to either be stereotypes, be annoying, or try to poke mature points at the concept of geographically interconnected regions and classically dependent cultures having feuds with each other. But let’s talk about that in terms of the world.

These foods exist for, what, a week? They exist in the same aisles, for the same goals, and often have to interact with each other for their entire existence. Their existences, mind you, which are created for explicit purpose. Why do they have different viewpoints of the Gods, to the point where it is this disseminated? Is it to make a point about the rapid distribution of altering ideals among short lived humanity? I don’t know, it just seems to be extremely crass ways to point out that these things exist and are stupid. Again a running theme.

The last major theme I want to mention is consistency. A world needs to be made in a way that follows an internal logic. Yes, magic should be explained, a world should be detailed, and even comedy should follow some form and function. If there is no law dictated within the world, then there’s no reason for me to really pay attention to what you’re doing. It’s all just whitenoise for the pretense of having jokes.

This movie fails worldbuilding with a capital F and a giant minus. The food is alive, so are douches and some other inanimate objects! But things like shoes and ladles are not, why? Why isn’t the knife alive? When we open up a thing of off brand Mentos, each of those little mints is alive. Is this things ass full of living organisms that will proceed to exist in total isolation until released?  If I make a sandwich, is it a composite of painfully attached different creatures to each other? They did show that composite foods exist as a single entity, so does that mean that pushing cheese and wheat germ together creates a new living entity? The entire idea doesn’t make sense when you show that some things would require the painful things to exist. Pizza, sandwiches, all of it. How does it work? The movie doesn’t tell you.

This line here indicates that the peanut butter, married to jelly, is only alive as it is the container. But why isn’t the bag the hotdogs were in alive, or the box? There’s no sense to be had in this madness. Just extremely dry hotdogs.

Not that the external world is any better. Remember in Toy Story where the toys could move and had to very specifically hide that fact? Yeah, this movie says fuck it. Some of the foods move and we see people view it as a hot dog rolling around. But then the hot dog gets up, dodges, ducks, dips, dives, and dodges. They even stab a hot dog standing up in the middle of the air, or they can run across the street. Do people see them or not? It’s pointed out that they need to be literally high on bath salts to see the  food moving, but then can the food interact with the world when not on bath salts? How come the food never moves and people don’t notice it? Why do I even watch anything attached to Seth Rogan? Why did you ruin my night, Seth?

This isn’t even getting into the ending. The movie ended two separate times at the end, once when the orgy of murder happened, and once when the orgy that murdered the movie happened. There’s a full orgy, it takes actually 5 minutes to get through. Does it add to the plot? Nope. Does it push anything? Nah, it’s also the scaled down version from the honestly horrifying original script Seth Rogan spent years drafting up. Fuck him so much.

There’s also a murder orgy where the food kills everyone. Apparently we can’t beat hotdogs. Who knew? A guy gets turned into a testicle puppet by the douche, carries a giant revolver that apparently has 8 bullets in it. They make Terminator and Wizard of Oz references. A merry time was had by apparently a lot of people that aren’t me.

Also, the food smoke weed that is… Apparently not alive? Why is the marijuana not alive? Fuck it. Probably some stupid point.

The main point is this. The movie contains many flaws and

Fuck this movie. Fuck you Seth Rogan for your grinning assholery. Fuck the critics who think this movie is an insightful and raunchy godsend so they can openly enjoy cartoons. Fuck the idea that this movie grossed tons of money and will probably get some kinda sequel or spinoff. Fuck the media that believes that maturity is the juvenile banter of an idiot who cannot stop dragging his political diatribes into a different subject. And fuck this movie for killing any chance Kubo and the Two Strings had of being a financial success.

Summary? This movie is crass, brash, vulgar and tasteless. It’s also somehow not brave enough to say anything that has any real merit or in a way that’s unique. It’s a movie obsessed with its own egotistical idea of being the ‘first’ but has no idea of how to make that something worth seeing. This movie is just a waste of time. It’s a mix of immature and well past it’s expiration date.

[natasha-cole]

Kittens, Crayons, and Coffee

Pairing: Rich x Reader

Summary: Rich is pretty crazy about Y/N. The possibility of dating her is a bit scary, especially since she’s a single mom and he has no idea how to handle kids. When Y/N asks for Rich’s help when she is in a bind; Rich finds himself at her house, babysitting her young daughter. He figures he can gain points if he’s involved with the kid. The sweet little girl he’s fairly familiar with however; thinks she’s a cat 90% of the time, has a knack for drawing on things that she shouldn’t, and likes to terrorize her babysitters.

Word Count: 2243

Warnings: none

Notes: This was inspired by the Fic Title Game. This one came from @whinywingedwinchester and I thought it would make a cute oneshot. It’s only slightly different from my original Summary idea.

Rich had been on exactly three dates with Y/N. He adored her, and he felt that she liked him as well. They had made plans to see each other again, but Rich quickly learned that dating a single mom was not as easy as he hoped it would be. Any time he had free time to see her, she either couldn’t find a sitter or her kid was sick or something. It was slightly frustrating, but Y/N had made it very clear that her kid came first in her life. Rich was crazy enough to accept that if it meant he got to be with her someday.

The two of them had planned today’s breakfast date weeks ago. Rich really just wanted to spend time with Y/N, even if that meant making sure that he fit into her busy schedule somehow. The time it took to actually have that one-on-one time was difficult. So, since Rich was now receiving a phone call from her, just hours before their scheduled date, he felt a little worried.

“Y/N, is everything okay?” He asked when he answered. The only time she called him just before a date was when she had to cancel.

“I’m sorry, Rich,” she began. “I just can’t go to breakfast.”

Rich frowned as she spoke.

“One of my employees called in sick and we’ve been really short-handed as it is, I’ve got to go in.”

“Can’t you just close up shop for one day?”

“That’s not how owning a business works,” she pointed out.

“I get it,” he replied. “This sucks. We haven’t seen each other in weeks and you’ve had to cancel twice before.”

“I’m so sorry,” she said. “I really want to see you too, but I told you that this is my life.”

“I know, it’s okay,” he mumbled. “We’ll try to reschedule again.”

“Thanks Rich,” she replied. “Look, I wish I could chat for a bit, but now I’ve got to find a replacement sitter. My usual sitter is out of town and I don’t know very many people.”

“Your kid still needs a sitter?” Rich asked.

“She’s six,” Y/N chuckled. “Of course she needs a sitter.”

Rich paused for a moment, thinking about what he could do in this situation. His first thought made him laugh to himself, knowing damn well that he was no babysitter. But, all he could focus on was how stressed Y/N sounded and how disappointed she always was when she had to cancel. Being a single mom was no easy feat. Rich didn’t have experience with kids, but often saw how tough it was for Y/N. Just thinking about her and how worried she sounded was enough to make Rich lose his mind a little bit.

“I can come over and hang out with her,” he offered. He immediately scowled at himself, wondering why he had said that.

“Uh, what?”

“I mean, if you absolutely can’t find someone, I can help.”

“What do you know about kids?”

“Nothing,” he said honestly. “I do know your kid a little bit though.”

“You’ve seen her twice,” Y/N replied. “And she doesn’t know that we’re kind of seeing each other.”

“It’s not like I’m gonna tell her that I’m sort of dating her mom.”

“Okay,” Y/N chuckled. “I mean, I could really use the help.”

“Then I’ll come over and help.”

“I’ll only be at the shop for a few hours,” she promised. “Just to get them through the rush.”

“That’s fine. I’m sure I can handle a six-year old for a few hours.”

“Hmmm,” Y/N hesitated for a moment before speaking. “Yeah, you’ll be great.”

Rich arrived at Y/N’s house, giving the door a soft knock. Y/N answered quickly, grinning ear to ear once she saw that it was him.

“Rich!” She shouted as she threw her arms around him. “Thank you so much! I really owe you.”

‘One point for Rich’, he said to himself as Y/N hugged him.

“Not a problem,” he replied. Y/N ended the embrace, moving aside to let Rich come in. He had seen her house before and he glanced around, noticing that it was still in its usual tip-top shape. How she managed to keep a tidy house with a six-year old was beyond him. His eyes stopped on Chloe, Y/N’s little girl, who was sitting quietly on the couch, staring at Rich. She was still in pajamas, and wearing a headband with cat ears on it. Rich couldn’t be sure given the fact that she was sitting on the couch, but the little girl may have had a tail.

“You remember Chloe?” Y/N asked.

“Of course I do,” he beamed. “We’ve met before.”

“Sweetie,” Y/N began as she moved towards her daughter, “you remember mommy’s friend Rich, right?”

“Yeah,” Chloe said.

“Well, mommy has to go to work for a few hours and Rich is gonna stay with you, if that’s okay.”

“I said it was okay,” the little girl grinned. “I like Rich.”

Rich grinned, pleased that Chloe had said that. If nothing else, it would earn him a few more points with Y/N.

“Kids love me,” he chuckled.

“It’s because you’re a goof,” Y/N stated with a smile as she grabbed her coat and headed for the door. She stopped short, hesitating for a moment before leaving. “Please call if you need anything… and Chloe, be nice.”

Y/N was out the door before Rich could even question her warning to Chloe. Rich sat on the couch opposite from Chloe, looking at the little girl who was still beaming at him from her spot.

“So,” Rich asked. “What do we do for a few hours? I don’t even like kids.”

“Meow,” she replied. Rich frowned, confused as to what was currently happening. One moment, she was talking like a normal person, and now she was meowing at him. He watched as she curled herself up on the couch and began to lick her hand. Rich looked disgusted.

“So, you’re a cat or something?”

“Meow,” Chloe replied.

“Okay, right,” he sighed as he leaned back against the couch. This was going to be a long few hours, even worse if this kid insisted on meowing at him.

About 20 minutes into his shift, Chloe was still a cat. By now, Rich was still seated in his spot on the couch, and the girl was scratching at his leg, giving him angry growls.

“What do you want?” He asked.

“Meow,” she replied.

Rich sighed loudly, “Look, I don’t speak cat. I don’t know what to do for you.”

“I’m hungry,” Chloe replied, looking a bit upset that she had to break character.

“Well, we can get you some breakfast I guess.”

Rich stood up, heading toward the kitchen with Chloe crawling behind him. He began to rummage through the cupboards until he found some sugary cereal that he thought she might like. He held it up to show her and the girl nodded in agreement. Chloe broke character again to retrieve a bowl, which she set on the counter and watched as Rich poured it for her. He replaced the cereal and headed for the fridge where he found milk. When he walked back to the counter, Chloe had set out a second bowl and motioned for him to pour the milk into it.

“Is two separate bowls really necessary?” He asked.

Chloe nodded and meowed at him again. He let out a sigh, and grabbed both bowls with the intention to bring them to the table. Chloe sat on the kitchen floor and meowed at him again.

“Come on,” Rich urged. “Go sit at the table.”

Chloe shook her head in protest and Rich raised an eyebrow at her in concern. He figured out what she was getting at and he had to admit that it was a little weird. Instead of arguing, he placed the bowls on the floor and stepped back to watch as Chloe began to eat and drink the same way a cat would. Rich smirked as he leaned against the counter.

“Wow, you’re really in character, aren’t ya?” He mused. “This is weird, but you’d be a good actress someday.”

Once Chloe had her fill, Rich cleaned up, shaking his head with a chuckle over how little he knew about children. This was new. He understood the whole ‘imagination’ thing, but he had never witnessed it like this before.

“I’m bored,” Chloe whined as the two of them headed back to the living room.

“I thought you were a cat,” Rich replied. “Cats don’t talk.”

“I don’t wanna be a cat anymore. I wanna watch cartoons.”

“Okay, I can handle that.”

Rich found the remote and turned on the TV. He flipped through the channels until he came across a cartoon that Chloe approved of. It was something with a talking truck and before he knew it, Chloe was immersed in it. They spent the next long while sitting back in silence.

‘This is a whole lot easier than I thought it would be’, Rich said to himself. He made sure to tack on a few more points for himself.

“I’m bored.” They had been watching TV for quite a while when Chloe decided that she was over it.

“Well, what do you want to do? You could go back to being a cat and take a nap.”

“I wanna color.”

Rich watched as Chloe pulled out some coloring books and a package of crayons, laying everything out on the coffee table for them.

“You get this one,” she explained as she pointed to a Disney princess book. “I get to color the dinosaurs.”

“Of course you do,” Rich mumbled.

The two of them set out, coloring in their respectable coloring books. Chloe was mostly scribbling mindlessly, while Rich focused hard to stay in the lines and get the right color for his chosen princesses dress.

“I’m bored,” she whined again.

“We’ve only been coloring for like, two minutes,” Rich responded. He glanced up at her, watching as she stared at the crayon in her hand. She looked over, making eye contact with him as a sly grin spread across her face. She brought the crayon down to the coffee table, not breaking eye contact. Rich watched in horror as the kid began to scribble on the table itself.

“I don’t think you should do that,” he muttered.

“My mom lets me.”

“I doubt that,” he replied as he leaned over to take the crayon from her.

Chloe immediately pulled back out of his reach with the crayon. She squealed with delight and ran down the hall, Rich hot on her heels.

When he finally reached her, she was in the middle of making art all over the white wall in the hallway.

“Stop!” He shouted. “Your mom is going to be very upset with you.”

“You’re the babysitter,” she laughed. “I think you’re gonna get in trouble and be in a time out.”

Rich grabbed the crayon from her and she began to pout, arms crossed, a scowl on her face. Rich took a step back to assess the damage. He ran a hand down his face in frustration, wondering how he would be able to fix this.

Just then, he heard the front door open. He glanced at his watch, realizing that Y/N was back a bit earlier than had been expected.

“I’m home,” he heard her call out.

Rich glared at Chloe and Chloe smiled at him before running down the hall to greet her mom. Rich sighed heavily, trudging after her to face Y/N.

“Mommy!” Chloe shouted as Y/N scooped her up.

“Did you behave?” Y/N asked as she hugged her daughter. She looked at Rich as he leaned against the wall.

“Of course I did! Rich was bad though. He drew all over your wall!”

“Hey!” Rich called out. “I did not!”

Y/N sighed, frowning as she pulled back to look at her daughter. “Didn’t we talk about the proper canvases for art?”

“I know we did, but you forgot to tell him.”

“You know you’re scrubbing my wall, right?”

“It wasn’t me mommy!”

“I’m so sorry,” Y/N mumbled as she looked back at Rich. She set Chloe down and moved toward Rich to bring him in for a hug. “I talked to her about being nice, but she does this with all the babysitters.”

“She likes to frame everyone?”

“Yeah,” Y/N chuckled.

“You also didn’t warn me that she’s half-cat.”

Y/N let out a laugh, shaking her head as she glanced over at Chloe. “I figured it would be weird to mention it.”

“It’s okay,” Rich smiled. “I can say that she’d be better off not pursuing a career as an artist, but she’d make one hell of an actress.”

“Potty word,” Chloe mumbled as she sat on the couch.

“Sorry.”

“I promise I will never make you babysit again,” Y/N said as she stared up at Rich, something like a hint of adoration in her eyes.

“Hey, why don’t you, me, and the kid go have breakfast together?” Rich offered. “I mean, she already had cat food, but I haven’t eaten, and I figure you haven’t either.”

Y/N laughed again.” I am starving. I could really use some coffee too.”

“You and me both, sweetheart.”

Forever Tags (tag me in everything!)

@destielschild

@sorenmarie87

@smoothdogsgirl

@kocswain

@culturebay

@itsfunnierin-enochian

@typicalweirdbookworm

@angelsandhuntersgalore

@riversong-sam

@emoryhemsworth

@hunterpuff

@camelotandastronauts

@laffytaffyhumor

@cyrilconnelly

@jpadjackles

@waywardswain

@sirraxa

@thewordsmithofhell

@atc74

@shanghai88

@narisjournal-blog

@chocolategate

@perksofbeingafangirl26

@lucerospn1detc

@nerdyforyourbooks

[surveys-at-your-service]

Survey #470

“how can you choose to let the blind see better than you?”

What was the main character called in the last film you watched? Dewey. What would you name your pet snake if you had one? It would depend on its appearance. The snake I have now is named Venus because of her coloration. Do you like peanuts? Only if they're covered in chocolate or in granola bars in small portions. Have you ever gambled? What was your biggest loss/win? No. What was the last movie you watched? Who did you watch it with? Girt and I watched School of Rock together. What do you eat for breakfast? Excluding the rare occasions my mom cooks something, usually cereal or a sandwich. Do you have a Flickr? I do, but it's abandoned. Anything exciting happening in the month of September? No. When was the last time you had an ice cream sandwich? Oh man, it's been too long. I really want one now. Do you eat breakfast daily? Yeah. What was the last thing to scare you? "Scare" is a strong word, but I was very, very nervous to hear what weight I'd gained since my last doctor's appointment. Do you like mustard? Yeah, I do. Do you have a desktop computer or laptop? A laptop. Do you like to play Jenga? I guess? I don't really have an opinion on it. Do you like Fresca? Not very, but I'll drink it if I really want a soda and it's the only option. How many towels do you use after a shower? Just one. Would you ever flash a cop if you knew you'd get out of a ticket? Um, no thank you. What is your favorite thrill ride ever? I don't like those. I'm afraid of puking or fainting. Biggest irrational fear? Truly irrational, probably whale sharks. Favorite movie sequel? Hm. If you had endless funds, where would you buy most of your clothes? Cloak and Rebel's Market. How many jobs have you had? Three, technically. What is your favorite thing to do in your city? Oh hun, fun doesn't exist here. This place sucks. Have you ever gone strawberry picking? Ha ha, yes... but I was a little kid that absolutely gorged on the strawberries instead of putting them in my basket. The person that worked there didn't make my mom pay for what I did or anything, but they made a joke about weighing me to check the damage I did, ha ha. My face was COVERED in strawberry juice. I wish I could actually remember the occasion, but I was too young. How many times have you seen a doctor this month? It feels like a lot. >_< I had to get blood drawn for two different things on separate appointments, I had a follow-up appointment with my primary physician about my weight, I recently spoke to my therapist and psychiatrist... Could you pull off orange hair? I've actually considered like, a light creamsicle orange. I actually edited a photo of me with my current hair style trying different colors, and that tint looked pretty cute. Do you shave your legs? It sounds dumb, but yes, now that I'm in a relationship. I feel obligated to at least try and be attractive by societal standards. I know it seriously doesn't matter, but I would be so inexplicably mortified if he saw my unshaven legs kalsdj;flkasdjwe What type of weather is your favorite? Snowy! Coolest place you've ever been? Disney World, probs. Do you like corn on the cob? Yeah, man. Have you ever waited tables? No. Build your favorite pizza. Soft pan crust, your average amount of sauce and a good amount of cheese with various meats on it. What did you last get fancy for? I wouldn't say I got like, super fancy, but I wore a nice shirt and a necklace when Girt came over for the first time as a couple. I thought we were actually leaving the house to go out to dinner, but the plan was actually to have Buffalo Wild Wings delivered. It was totally fine by me, I'd just misunderstood. Dream pet? A female Brazilian Black tarantula named Black Betty. :') Do you tend to get clingy in relationships? I know I do. What is the last horror movie you watched? It's sad that I don't know. :( Would you be grossed out if your best friend mooned you? No, I'd just be extremely confused lmao. What is the last thing that you drank? Milk. Currently popular song that you can't stand? I have zero idea what songs are popular right now. What is the weather like right now? Too fuckin' hot to be mid-September. Do you have favorite type/brand of pen? I mean, I like the feel of gel pens. I don't know about brands. What is your go-to snack at the convenience store? Some form of Reese's. Popular drink that you dislike? Coffee shocks the most people. What TV show are you waiting on to return/create a new season? None. What is something you currently want but cannot afford? Oh, dear. -_- Do you have sensitive skin? Very. How many toilets are in your house? Two. Do you have an older sister? Three that I know, one that I don't really count because I know nothing about her and have never spoken to her. What color is your mum’s car? White. Do you live in an apartment? No. Cats are usually cuter than dogs right? Kittens are generally cuter than puppies, imo. Where do you keep your kitty litter box? It has to stay in my bedroom, which I hate. Mom insists on in being in here so I don't forget to clean it. My memory is awful, but I'm preeeetty sure I'd remember to give my cat a clean place to use the bathroom if it was kept in the spare room by the door... Are you rude to little children? No; even if I don't really like kids, that is something I definitely avoid. Kids should never lose their hope in or love for humanity, and I would absolutely hate to be one of those people that makes the human race appear unpleasant. Are you a lighter complexion than your father? BY FAR. He's a mailman so is out in the sun nearly every day, so he's pretty damn dark to be Caucasian. I wouldn't be surprised if by his complexion he's ever been mistaken for being Hispanic, because the color definitely fits. Do you like apricots? No. Are banana chips delicious? Ew, that sounds gross. Do you like kinky sex? I wouldn't know, my dude. I've never really explored outside of pretty vanilla stuff. What is one thing you will never do again? Rely solely on another person for happiness. Would you rather be twice as smart or twice as happy? Twice as happy. That's not even a competition. What would your parents be surprised to learn about you? I very legitimately wonder if I would be disowned for how fucked up some of the shit I write is, ha ha. Mom would probably cry if she saw some of even the milder stuff and force the topic to come up in therapy. If you could have been a child prodigy what would you have wanted to be skilled at? Maybe painting? If earth could only have one condiment for the rest of time, what would you pick to keep around? Hmmm... I suppose ketchup. Do you think it’s important to stay up to date with the news? I think it is, but I don't. .-. What is the best present you could ever receive? An all-expenses-paid trip to South Africa to visit and tour with the Kalahari Meerkat Project to meet and photograph the meerkats. :''''''''''') Would you give up one of your fingers if it meant you’d have free WiFi wherever you go, for the rest of your life? Nah. That's what data is for, lol. If someone told you you could give one person a present and your budget was unlimited–what present would you get and for whom? A new car for Mom. Giant house in a subdivision or tiny house somewhere with a view? Oh, that is SO easy. Give me the view. Well wait, HOW tiny is the house? My answer would change if it was one of those truly mini houses that would make me feel claustrophobic as shit. What was your favorite Disney movie as a kid? The Lion King. Still is. Do you brush your teeth in the bathroom, or do you get bored & roam around? I roam around. Does your city/town have a little festival/carnival every year? Yes. I never really pay attention tho 'cuz I never go. Have you ever been to an apple orchard? No, but I would love to go. Were there any cartoons your parents didn’t let you watch as a kid? Except "adult" cartoons obviously, no. Could you handle motherhood? No fucking way. Being entirely serious, I think I'd either end up dead or horribly depressed, and the kid psychologically damaged to some extent from having an unstable mother. Like do not get me wrong, I'd try very hard, but I know I couldn't stay sane and happy as a mom. Have you ever touched a squirrel? No. What's better, candles or incense? Incense. What movie did you see the most in theaters? I don't watch movies in theaters twice. It's expensive to go even once. Who played the best Batman? Idk. I didn't watch all the movies. Who’s the best American Idol thus far? *shrug* What’s likely to happen next in your family - wedding, funeral, or birth? Uh, I suppose a wedding? None seem likely any time soon. Do you like hot, cold, or lukewarm showers? Hot. Have you ever taken part in a threesome? No, not my jam. Do you plan on having both your parents at your wedding? Yep. Which movie’s musical score is truly memorable? Tarzan came to mind very quickly. What’s your favorite scene from the movie Titanic? Idk, I've only seen it once. Which TV show theme music do you remember most? That '70s Show. Have you ever bounced any checks? ... I don't even know what that means. :x Have you ever been snipe hunting? I will never in my life hunt in any way, shape, or form. Do you try to be politically correct? For the most part, but I do believe it's gone too far. Generally though, I try to conform to the "rules" to avoid offending someone. What’s your favorite kind of sea critter? Bottlenose dolphins, various types of whales, sea turtles... I don't think I could pick one. Have you ever tasted locally-made honey before? Does it count if it's from a honeysuckle flower? Do you like to wear toe socks? No, they're mad uncomfortable imo. Have you ever worn bright red lipstick? Yes. Do you think raccoons are adorable, like I do? BABIES!!!!!!!!!!!

[textales]

“The Kid is Hot Tonight.”

One of my best friends in Junior High was a girl named Sam. Her mom was the first female Top-40 Disk Jockey in Montana, and the reason I got into the radio business.  

Back then AM still ruled the air – even if it was in mono and all crackly.  The FM band was obscure - saved for nerdy technocrats who smoked pipe tobacco and hung out at the library…or worse, Radio Shack!   Even though it was in stereo and superior in sound quality, FM was not yet as popular as AM. Most FM stations ran in automation, playing boring lectures from some college, or “beautiful music” suitable for any elevator.  AM was fun and live and fantastically phenomenal.  The kind of radio that came standard in every car, AM was the real deal.  And Wendi Carpenter rocked afternoon drive on 1450 KQDI, entertaining countless central Montana listeners hungry for anything other than country.    

Most days after school, Sam and I would stop at “the station” while her mother was on the air, to scoop-up free records and kill a little time hanging out with the other DJs.

“Early Adopters”

Record labels sent music to radio DJs everywhere.  Even stations in places like Montana were great for launching new artists…and hungry programmers looking to make their mark would take the suggestions of record reps by adding new songs to the playlist.  If the new song sold more than 500,000 units, those “early adopter” radio DJs would get their name and the station call-letters engraved on a plaque with a gold record, mounted in a fancy frame to hang as a brag piece.  

One breezy afternoon in the early eighties, Sam and I were hanging out at KQDI when the Music Director told us “This band will never go anywhere,” and carelessly flipped a 12” vinyl record at me.  I wasn’t sure if he was joking – but who cares if he was, it was cool to have a first pressing of a record with a stamp that said: “Promotional Use Only – Not for Resale.”

Little did we know in just a few months that Loverboy would become a big deal, and soon I’d be making a trip with my neighbor to see them play live.

“Working for the Weekend”

As neighbors go, Don was the coolest guy on the block.  Not only did he have two of the greatest classic cars ever built (a red and black Chevy Chevelle AND a pretty blue Shelby Mustang 350 GT), but he was also a huge music fan with the biggest record collection and the nicest stereo on the North Side.  His wife Judy was stunningly pretty and they were a model couple, making all the right choices like buying a home and saving for retirement starting in their early 20s.  

Don was a bit of a purist when it came to music.  He had strong opinions about music videos that played on the new cable channel called MTV…he found most of them fake and cheesy - he just wanted to see the musicians play. He also preferred vinyl LP records to the synthetic sounds of the new Compact Disks which were just barely making their way onto the scene.  

I didn’t expect Don to give a shit about Loverboy – they were hardly a “real” rock band like Foreigner or Boston or Journey – so I was surprised when he invited me to go see them when they came to a college town nearby.  

Because I was just 17 we had to promise my dad that Don would make sure I’d behave.  Oh sure, I assumed Don would sneak a beer or two my way (and there’d be no need to bother my father with that detail!) but I was stopped like a deer in the headlights when he asked if I would mind if he smoked a joint.

At that moment I learned that he and Judy smoked pot.  It didn’t bother me that he might want to imbibe in what has been considered essential for almost any concert-goer since the 1960s.  What bothered me was the fact that I hadn’t even thought about it.  

By no means did I think less of them for this – hell, lots of people smoke pot – I just felt like a fool for being so incredibly naïve for not even considering it.

Now that I look back, I wonder if there were other secrets.  What else didn’t I know?  

“The Feedlot” served gargantuan sub-style sandwiches using whole loaves of bread.  I worked there for a stint between radio gigs.  As high-school jobs go, this was so much better than actually having to make the stuff - I just delivered it using one of two company cars….a 1978 Chevy Chevette or a brand-new 1981 Mercury Lynx.  I got paid to drive around?  How cool was that?!

The manager thought it was cute that some of the regular customers would specifically request me as their delivery person – they wanted “the cute blond one” and she obliged.  

Two big burly truck-driver guys who lived on Bootlegger Trail were particularly fond of me. I can’t remember their names, but they were always having parties and seemed so very happy and friendly. They’d invite me to stick around for a beer or a Coke.  I would routinely turn them down - I had to get back to the Feedlot.  I was on the clock after all, and my employer should get full value for the $3.35 an hour she was paying me.  

Although they were “old” and lived in a trailer, (they were maybe in their twenties, it was a double-wide with full skirting and a tip-out), they were clean and smelled good and were always so very nice.  They paid by check (everywhere still took checks back then), and they tipped well – very well, in fact. The tip for a five minute drive to deliver a sandwich in a paper bag was more than I made in an hour on minimum wage.  My goodness, they were generous.

I remember their checks were so weird – not the blue or yellow “safety paper” most people got for free with their account at Northwestern Bank – theirs were “personalized” – printed with the Strawberry Shortcake cartoon character.  

Strawberry Shortcake?  WTH?   That seemed kind of strange.  And I remember how they would say “Bye” with an unusual inflection.   It made no sense at the time because I didn’t realize they were dropping heavy hints and hitting on me. Hmmm…maybe they knew I was gay – I know I sure didn’t.  And what else didn’t I know?

Hindsight is 20/20…and looking back I realize there were so many other times that I was so very oblivious. Like when I would surprise guys who were “entertaining” in their rooms at the all-male barracks on Malmstrom Air Force Base. This was a decade before “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell” made being gay in the armed forces passable.  

“Oh, duh, THAT’s what they were doing!”  NO WONDER it took them so long to answer the door.  You’d think they’d be expecting me – although the wait-time on a sandwich is hardly that of a pizza.  Maybe they wanted to be interrupted? 

Huh. What else didn’t I know?

Naiveté has its place, mostly to serve and protect the innocent.  Although I usually got A’s and I considered myself fairly witty and articulate, I was completely naïve.  I was guilty of being “wholesome,” and my selective attention wasn’t at all finely tuned.  Or, on the other hand, my selective attention WAS finely tuned, with a filter added to keep out the unsavory thoughts I was consciously trying to avoid.  

In the early 1980s a new disease called AIDS was killing everyone in its path. However devastating, this “gay plague” was an epidemic confined to places far away, where homosexuals congregated in bars and bath houses and did unspeakable things in the dark.  Although gay men in big cities were dropping like flies, Montana was safe.  We didn’t have “those people,” and those places where unthinkable things occurred didn’t exist in Big Sky Country.

I got why people were scared shitless, and a majority equated being gay and having AIDS as an automatic given.  Misconceptions, myths and hysteria were rampant.  Victims were treated like lepers. Some feared you could get AIDS simply by being close to someone or kissing or hugging them.  

Most who had this opinion were essentially just naïve and innocent.  But the gleefully, willfully ignorant were the most troubling - often expressing their fear as “god’s wrath.”  Not surprisingly, many in this crowd also refused to believe Liberace was gay – go figure.

Hall & Oates sang: “Some Things Are Better Left Unsaid” and Ronald Reagan took the hint. The President said absolutely nothing about AIDS until 1987, near the end of his second term and years after his friend Rock Hudson had died from the disease.  At that point in the U.S., over 36,000 people were diagnosed with AIDS and over 26,000 people had died from it.  Montana was barely a bleep on the radar and it was still easy enough for the general public (and even the medical community) to avoid the issue for years.  “Not in my backyard” was a common sentiment.

Throughout most of the 80s and 90s nobody in Montana knew anyone with HIV or AIDS and if they did they wouldn’t tell you for fear of being shunned from their church or social group…or worse, being fired from their job or attacked by the gleefully, willfully ignorant.  Even doctors were dumb – my stepmother had a nurse friend who worked for a MD who threatened to fire her because her son had AIDS.  

For the longest time I was able to say “not a single person in my friends and family circle has been affected by AIDS.”  This was remarkable given that I had moved to a “real city” and was an open member of the very community in crisis hit hardest by the epidemic.

But hardly better than the gleefully, willfully ignorant, I had a self-righteous, cavalier attitude and figured I knew all I needed to know.  I wore my “garbage bags” and knew to never get in a situation of risk.  “I’ll just keep myself safe and sanitized and won’t have to learn anything about this unsavory thing.”  Even though I gave money to various AIDS and HIV charities, I separated myself from “those people” and wore a protective coating to prevent me from getting too close.  I still had tons of fun, knowing the rubber sheath would keep me safe, but I wouldn’t let love in or out…not in any way.  Figuratively or literally…emotionally or physically.  “Not in my backyard.”  

My personal “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell” approach on HIV and AIDS worked until 1990 when my roommate Robert tested positive, and I was forced to pull my head out of the sand.  I was not going to let myself become a victim of fear and ignorance, so I told myself I best learn about this shit and what to do about it.  I loved Robert and wanted to do everything I could to keep him alive.  My self-righteous stance had softened.

What else didn’t I know?  I discovered having an open mind and open dialog gave me the courage to reach out to people I’d been shutting out, including my high-school best friend Ross. My buddy, Buddy, with whom I had a one night encounter in college, had come out of the closet and announced his status, and others I knew were starting to surface.  Although I was no longer able to say “Nobody in my life is affected by AIDS,” I was happy to kill that willful ignorance that was getting in my way of loving people.  I let curiosity have a place at the table, right next to security. I started asking more questions. Not that I became obsessed, I just wanted to stop being scared to death.  I refused to let hate and fear win over love and understanding.

It was a sad story two decades later when I learned that Don and Judy both died from AIDS. I heard he got it by a blood transfusion and unknowingly infected his wife.  They died at home, both frail shadows of their once vibrant selves.  Many friends and family volunteered with home hospice, trying to make the torture tolerable.  They left behind two teenage kids…I can only imagine the emotional torture they had to endure with not one but both parents dying, made worse by bullying school kids mocking and making fun.

Somehow it was supposed to make it more palatable that the source of the infection was not self-induced but completely beyond their control.  “Good lord, it’s not like they got this by having sex or doing drugs!”  They were innocent and deserved no shame or blame.

Yet there was a shroud of secrecy.  Nobody was supposed to know.  If Don got AIDS from a blood transfusion beyond anyone’s control, why all the shame and silent treatment?  What else didn’t I know?  And why do I care?  Am I as bad as those so called Christians who want so badly to assign blame and often end-up showering the victim in shame?  I can hear them now: “You reap what you sow.“ “Play with fire and get burned.”  Blah blah blah.  

It was easy for me to have such a callous curiosity from a big city thousands of miles away.  My job or reputation wasn’t at stake and my life wasn’t under the sharp scrutiny of the terrified in a small town where even just talking about sex was taboo.

Don wasn’t naïve and clueless, was he?  Even though he was straight and a “guy’s guy,” I had no difficulty imagining a “what if” scenario.   WHAT IF he had been at the wrong place at the wrong time?  WHAT IF at a concert in Seattle or Calgary he smoked a little too much pot and drank too much?  Maybe he stumbled into the wrong crowd who took advantage of his innocence, or worse, if he was coerced into something he didn’t want to do and by then it was too late?   WHAT IF that was me instead of Don?  

I only recently learned that in his dying days Don sequestered himself to a room in his garage in a self-induced quarantine.  I wish I had been around to ask why….was it to protect himself from the outside world or it from him?  And I’d like to think I would have had the guts to face my own fear and spend time with him talking about classic cars and music.  But as much as I want to figure it out, I’ll have to be satisfied with a “You’ll never know” when asking “What else didn’t I know?”

It happened almost overnight: FM became the preferred band for radio listeners. The sound quality was infinitely better and in stereo, after all.  And by the ‘90s every car had an FM radio that came standard from the factory at no additional cost.   Program directors started putting more time and attention to programming their FM stations, and the AM signals were the ones left for automation and a disintegrating audience share.  

In the next decade medical science had revolutionized treatment making HIV something people live with by taking just a pill a day. And now Prep offers what is essentially a vaccine against HIV.  

It would be great if we could restore humans like we restore cars.  It would be great to have some of those classics back in our lives.  And it’s so unfortunate that so many who passed were essentially victims of bad timing – I’m fairly certain they’d still be alive if they got their HIV in this current era.  

Ross, Robert, Buddy, Don and Judy.  It didn’t matter how they got AIDS and died….they were all victims.  Unfortunately, none of them got a gold record to hang on their wall for being “early adopters.”      

What else didn’t I know? Too much to write…but one thing I did eventually figure out: whether the injection was by needle or by penis, knowing how it happened didn’t make the pain and suffering any easier for anyone.    

[droo216]

Drew’s Great Big Beauty and the Beast Review

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

THERE IS NO GOING BACK

THIS IS A SPOILER-FILLED REVIEW

IT IS ALSO VERY LONG

AND THERE ARE LOTS OF SPOILERS

SO PLEASE BE AWARE

THAT THERE ARE SPOILERS HERE

BEFORE YOU START READING

Let me start off by mentioning how much this movie means to me. I've kind of made my niche on the internet by dreamcasting Disney movies as if they were live action. I've made a ridiculous number of edits, I mean I've spent hours, days, probably weeks on this stuff at this point, and many of these edits have been focused on Beauty and the Beast. Live action versions of Disney movies are like... my Thing. And, to be totally honest, this really is only the second faithful adaptation. Alice in Wonderland was a total reworking of the Alice story, not really a cartoon-to-live-action like this. Maleficent completely retold the story from a different angle by making one Disney's most vicious villains not only sympathetic but good. Cinderella is so close (and so good, I might add) but visually it's vastly different from its animated counterpart, especially when it comes to Lady Tremaine and the Fairy Godmother, and it's not a musical. The Jungle Book is the closest we've seen to a real and true “live action remake” as opposed to a live action reinterpretation. But here we are. Disney did it. They took one of their most beloved animated classics and straight-up made it into a live action movie without cutting any songs or really very much at all...

And oh boy, did they knock it out of the park.

I love this movie. This is what I’ve been waiting for.

I love Emma Watson as Belle. I think she's a wonderful choice, I completely buy into her as Belle. She's beautiful and intelligent and spunky. Her singing is fine. She's not Kristin Chenoweth or Sutton Foster, but Belle doesn't need to be. She's also not Meryl Streep or Daniel Day-Lewis, you know, Emma doesn't go through a massive transformation and disappear into the role, but she doesn't need to because she's already so much like Belle. Still, I don’t find myself watching it thinking about Emma playing the role, I think of her as Belle, which is the goal of acting really. I love that this Belle is so active. I love that she is continuously trying to find a way to escape from the castle. The addition of the laundry machine and teaching the young girl how to read is so good because it actually shows us Belle's intelligence. In the animated movie, we know Belle's smart because we're told Belle's smart. She reads books and, sure, she acts rationally and she certainly shows the poise of an intelligent person, but this new scene gives us an active example of her intelligence and creativity while also demonstrating the oppressive and small-minded nature of the townspeople. Emma's Belle is charming and smart and lovely, and I think she captures the essence of Belle perfectly.

All that being said, our two male leads really steal the show for me. I've seen the movie twice now and each time, one of the leading gentleman really jumped out. The first time I watched, Luke Evans felt like the true shining star of the film. His Gaston reminds me of Jason Isaacs as both Captain Hook and Lucius Malfoy. He isn't just vain... this guy is a legitimate narcissist, it seems like his mind has truly been twisted by the war. This Gaston is even more evil than the one we left behind in the world of animation. Gaston has always been terrifying because of his charisma. The way he's able to charm the people of the village is chilling and this time around we see even more of that trait, paired with a darker and more violent streak particularly illustrated by Gaston tying up Maurice and leaving him for the wolves. Plus, both times I saw the movie the audience gasped in horror when Gaston stomped on Belle's lettuces.

The second time I saw the film, I was specifically watching for Dan Stevens's performance as the Beast and man, this is good stuff. The Prince at the beginning is such a drama queen. He's so over-the-top with his costuming, wig, even his gestures are extremely theatrical. The make up at the beginning is particularly brilliant, burying the Prince's face in streaks of blue and silver so he still feels like an obscure figure that we don't quite see. When Belle first meets the Beast, this is all still evident. The way he hides in the shadows, even his lines of dialogue, it's all very dramatic. And then as the movie progresses, you can see this flair for melodrama fade away as he becomes a more grounded person. He becomes gentler, kinder, and his intelligence, which has always been there, comes forward. By the time we see the Prince again at the end, you can tell that this is the same man but he has been changed. The animated film's human Prince always felt disconnected from the Beast for me. Sure, they made the eyes the same, but it was hard to see much else because we just see so little of him, so he always felt rather vanilla. That's not the case here. When the Prince transforms back to a human at the end, this feels like the same character we have watched throughout the film. I'm sure this is aided by the incredible motion capture and CGI work, because the Beast is animated superbly, but Dan's performance is just stellar.

The objects are perfect. There's only one shot that I think feels odd (when Belle is carrying Lumiere with Cogsworth walking in front as they lead her to her room) but other than that one moment, I never second guess them as objects. They feel and act real. Lumiere's movements in particular are incredible, right down to his close up at the start of “Be Our Guest.” I was worried about Plumette before seeing the movie because the bird design is so unusual, but it makes sense since they needed her to be able to fly to get around, and doesn't feel out of place at all in the movie. Mrs. Potts and Chip are also beautifully animated, they always feel like real and solid objects with weight to them. Their relationship is wonderful, so loving and caring. Chip's line, “OK. I'm older” is one of my favorite little moments of the whole thing. Cadenza is a wonderful addition to our cast of characters and I did not expect his relationship with Garderobe, but they were an excellent surprise. And Frou Frou! I love that Frou Fou is Garderobe's and that he becomes Cadenza's bench and is therefore the link between the two throughout their years in the curse. They're just so sweet.

Maurice has been an under-reported character in all of this, and that's a shame because Kevin Klein knocks this role out of the park. He is absolutely wonderful as Maurice. He is fatherly and kind but he has also clearly made mistakes as a parent and that is kind of embraced and understood in the storytelling. He is sincere at all times in a role that is pretty exaggerated in the animated film. If Maurice's arrival in the tavern had been played exactly like the original, it would have felt campy, but Kevin Klein's earnestness grounds the moment in reality. Not to mention his quips about snow in June and “apparently that's what happens around here when you pick a flower” are delivered brilliantly.

Let's talk Lefou. I don't like this Lefou, and here's why. Every other character in this film feels developed in a natural way. It feels like we are learning more information about these characters that has always existed, we just didn't fit it in the first time around. Lefou, on the other, doesn't feel like a character who has been developed but a character who has been rewritten. They clearly got the seed of an idea to make him gay but felt squeamish about making him evil and gay (and rightfully so), so they wrote this redemption arc that feels forced and really doesn't actually go anywhere... Lefou's turn during the battle with the castle objects doesn't actually do anything, so the whole thing feels arbitrary. After seeing the film the second time, my friend and I spent probably an hour and a half just talking about Lefou and came up with a brilliant solution to this whole mess of a character... more on that in a moment...

Incorporating the Enchantress into the story is very compelling. I think it's very obvious who Agatha is throughout the movie, but it gives the sense that she wants the spell to be broken, she wants the Beast to learn his lesson, which is very interesting. Having her arrive after the spell has completed and actively reverse it is a riveting choice, and I actually felt like we were missing a moment with her where she realizes that she made a mistake. When she was watching the separated loved ones reunite, it seemed like there was a seed of remorse that was not addressed.

The character development is very well done across the board, but I think something this movie did that was important and contributes to its success is the development of the spell itself. I think this was one of the most brilliant moves the film made. The eternal winter around the castle explains the sudden weather changes in such a short period of time while still using the seasons as an emotional storytelling technique like the animated film. The wolves are also clearly part of the curse here – I would have actually liked to have seen them included in the finale sequence, either transformed into humans like the objects, or else disappearing like mist with the rest of the eternal winter. Having the castle crumble every time a petal falls from the rose is so smart as well; it explains why the objects know every time a petal fall while also representing their and the Beast's disintegrating humanity. But the best part of the curse's development was definitely the memory loss. Adding the simple line to the opening narration about removing the people of the castle from the minds of the people who loved them was absolutely inspired. This one quick line explained a huge loophole that the animated film left regarding the presence of a massive castle in the woods and a royal family that apparently the entirely world did not know about. But even better than that, it created some wonderfully emotional reunions at the end. My friend beside me gasped so loudly when our favorite teapot exclaimed, “Mr. Potts!” and the moment with Henri Cogsworth and his wife(?) was so hilarious and, in my opinion, subtly hinted at our second LGBT character in this universe. Which brings me to the Lefou thing.

Here's what my friend and I came up with: in the opening sequence, we see Cogsworth lurking in the shadows telling the Prince that “it's time,” we see Lumiere handing the Prince a candelabra, we see Mrs. Potts chasing after Chip... in the midst of all this, we could also show a masked jester entertaining a few people at the ball. When the Enchantress arrives, a lot of people run out – presumably that's where Mr. Potts and Mrs. Cogsworth escape and why they're not included in the spell – and the jester leaves with them as well. At the end, the Pottses are reunited, the Cogsworths are reunited, and then Lefou recognizes his old beau, Chapeau the violinist/coat rack, and joins the finale back in his jester outfit. It makes total sense for Lefou to be “the fool” of course and explains why he falls into the abusive friendship he has with Gaston, since it would parallel the relationship he probably would have had as a jester for the similarly self-centered Prince. This adds two quick two-second shots to the opening scene, one of the masked Lefou juggling or something and one of him fleeing when the Enchantress shows up, and about twenty seconds at the end for the reunion and revelation and, in my opinion, is so much less problematic than writing our first ever LGBT Disney character as an evil sidekick with a forced redemption arc – this way, he had his memory erased, just like everyone else. Just our little idea but I think it could have blended into this world quite smoothly. Alas, here we are.

Moving on! The finale is absolutely gorgeous. The whole ending sequence is my favorite thing about the whole film. The fight scene is fantastic and then from there to the end, everything is so marvelous. We know the objects are going to be okay in the end, but seeing them all finally lose the battle they've been fighting and become motionless household objects is... emotional! Then the Prince's transformation is brilliant, giving the perfect nods to the original film, and each character's subsequent change back to their human state is perfect (Cadenza's teeth!), especially when Mrs. Potts and Chip go sliding down the steps. And then when she says, “You smell so good,” oh my gosh. Whoever contributed that line is a genius. I go all warm and fuzzy just thinking about it. Then we have the wonderful and funny reunions and then the final dance sequence, where Emma is beautiful and Dan is looking good in bright sky blue and rococo curls in his hair. Audra McDonald sings flawlessly and we have that beautiful moment between Mrs. Potts and Maurice that made my little shipper heart do a backflip, even if there is a Mr. Potts now. I'm still not sure if I'm on board with the growl, but I adore the line about the beard – apparently it was written for the original film and Paige O'Hara even recorded it! But it interrupted that finale sequence so they never used it. I think it works perfectly here, it's so cute.

The first time watching, I felt the pacing was so odd in the film, with some abrupt transitions that didn't quite work. I felt that less so the second time, maybe just because I was expecting it, and sometimes I actually liked the sudden change. I also don't fully understand the shuffling of scenes at the beginning. The animated film goes (1) “Belle,” (2) Belle and Maurice at home, (3) Maurice leaves for the fair, (4) Maurice arrives in the castle, (5) Gaston proposes, (6) “Belle (Reprise),” (7) Philippe comes back and tells Belle to the castle. The movie rearrange this so almost all of the village scenes happen together, reordering that sequence as 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 4, 7. Because of this we end up going from Maurice's whole scene in the castle, back to the village for about thirty seconds with Philippe and Belle, then right back to the castle again. This made the whole sequence of events feel rushed even though each moment was given about the same amount of time, or more, as the original film. Additionally, I felt some of the filming choices from a cinematography point of view were weird. There were several times that we were zoomed in on a character, usually Belle or Gaston in the village, and it felt like the shot was kept tight to hide something but then there wasn't anything to hide... it’s a hard thing to articulate, but I definitely noticed it through both viewings.

The design of this movie is amazing. Breathtaking. Thousands of beautiful costumes and such detail – human Cogsworth's buttons have the Roman numeral numbers on them! Not to mention the object designs. Lumiere's candlestick form is clearly inspired by the Broadway production, which was an absolutely brilliant choice. Garderobe's wardrobe form is A THEATRE, it has box seats and a stage with curtains as her mouth piece! Even the villagers are designed with such care, memorable and reminiscent of the original in many places – the man with the scissors and the guy with the mustache, the Baker is very similar to his animated design... I would have liked to have seen blonde silly girls to contrast them more distinctly with Belle, but they are what they are. The set design, from the village to the absolutely incredible castle, it's all so, so good. I love the little flowers painted on the doorway to Maurice's cottage and I loved the magnificent, baroque-meets-gothic design of an extremely unique castle. I know people are up in arms about the yellow dress, I know it's not perfect, but it doesn't stick out so horribly in the movie and it moves so beautifully in the ballroom scene. And honestly, I've never cared about the yellow dress, the blue dress is the one I've always loved and I just think the live action interpretation is glorious. It does not feel like a costume, it feels worn-in, it feels natural, like it's just Belle's favorite dress, and I just love it so much.

Speaking of detail, they named the village. And they named it Villeneuve. As in Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve, the original author of the fairy tale. Come on. That's fantastic.

Let's see, some of my other favorite moments that jumped out at me that I wanted to mention... the whole “Gaston” scene in the tavern is awesome, maybe my favorite scene besides the finale sequence. I love that Lefou is going around paying everyone off to boost Gaston's ego, I love the dance, I love the use of Tom, Dick, and Stanley as cronies throughout the entire movie, I love lifting the young woman and then lifting Lefou, the whole song is fun and funny and exciting and the new lyrics are just amazing - “Then I shoot from behind!” “Is that fair?” “I don't care!” ...That's exactly what's going to happen in the final battle. Ugh. So good.

The moment in “Something There” where the Beast moves to Belle's end of the table, she puts down her spoon, and they both sip their soup out of the bowl... that hit me in a way the animated movie never has before. It's amazing symbolism. He can't eat with the spoon, she's not going to lap it up like an animal, so they find a way they can both eat the same way. They're meeting each other halfway. That's some good stuff right there.

OH, and I can't believe I haven't mentioned “Be Our Guest!” Come on. They went hard with that. They put on a full Broadway production on the table in front of Belle! The way it just kept growing bigger and bigger was delightful. Plus I love that the grey stuff is designed after Be Our Guest Restaurant's grey stuff, complete with the silver and grey chocolate caviar beads.

Replacing the animated film's bookstore, which never really made sense in a town of people who think reading makes someone weird, with a small shelf holding a dozen old and worn books that Belle has read over and over is just such a wonderful touch. I love that Belle's favorite play is Romeo and Juliet because she's barely read anything else and I love that the Beast's reaction is to roll his eyes at her selection. I would have liked to have seen the giving of the library be a little more deliberate and a little less off the cuff, and I definitely missed the “promises you don't intend to keep” line, but I'm so satisfied with the choice to make the Beast a reader. Having “a very expensive education” totally makes sense, and what else would he have had to do with all that time? They each develop the other's literary taste! What's better in a relationship than that?

The new songs are lovely as well. “How Can A Moment Last Forever?” is so much better than “No Matter What,” I wish it could logically fit into the musical instead because it's really, really good. “Days in the Sun” is so sweet, it's nice to have those moments with the young prince and each of the objects and even Belle, and honestly I can't stand “Human Again” so I'm good with this one, plus the lyrical nod to “A Change in Me” is nice. But “Evermore” is clearly stealing the show as far as the new songs are concerned. What a great song. I still think they could have done a little tweaking to the lyrics in order to still use “If I Can't Love Her” but if we're going to write a new song for the Beast, I'll take this one. (But can we not digitally lower Dan Stevens's voice next time? It sounds like a computer singing at some points.) I also loved all of the new/old lyrics that were incorporated into the songs we were familiar with. They felt fresh without being forced. The new “Gaston” lyrics are definitely my favorite, but the new lyrics that Mrs. Potts sings in the finale are touching. Plus, using the Broadway songs as underscoring was really nice, especially “Home.”

I'm just so delighted with this movie. Everything from the original is there but now there's more. The stove is there. The coat rack is there. The footstool is there. They just paid so much attention to detail and did this movie the justice it deserved. I'm already prepared to call this my favorite movie. Easily. By miles. It's beautiful and just absolutely everything I was hoping it would be.

[mrmichaelchadler]

Home Entertainment Consumer Guide: March 28, 2019

3 NEW TO NETFLIX

"Kung Fu Hustle" "The Lives of Others" "A Separation"

8 NEW TO BLU-RAY/DVD

"Aquaman"

At its best, James Wan's "Aquaman" is a live-action cartoon, complete with armies astride seahorses and sharks. It has a fantastic cast, including great supporting work from Nicole Kidman, Patrick Wilson, and Willem Dafoe. It's refreshingly goofy from a company (DC) that too often takes itself way too seriously. Really, the only problem with "Aquaman" is one common to the genre: bloat. There's no reason for this movie to be 2.5-hours long, and you can feel its charm washing away as the length sets in. My kids were excited for about an hour and it almost felt more like an obligation to finish it. I recommend watching it in installments. And focus on the fun stuff. 

Buy it here 

Special Features Going Deep Into the World of Aquaman Becoming Aquaman James Wan: World Builder Aqua Tech Atlantis Warfare The Dark Depths of Black Manta Heroines of Atlantis Villaneous Training Kingdoms of the Seven Seas Creating Undersea Creatures A Match Made in Atlantis Scene Study Breakdowns Exclusive Sneak Peek of Shazam!

"Detour" (Criterion)

An acknowledged classic of Poverty Row, Edward G. Ulmer's 1945 noir is as pitch black as the genre comes. Restored recently after years of people watching degraded copies, "Detour" has probably never looked this good. As expert Noah Isenberg explains in an excellent special feature, "Detour" was made for almost no money in roughly a week, depending on who you believe. It's a stunning piece of work, containing one of the best femme fatale performances of all time from Ann Savage. Ulmer and Savage's take on the role is instantly mesmerizing. Gone are the typically glamorous looks of the femme, replaced by grit and sweat and dirt. Savage's character feels threatening in such a perfect way that we know the minute our protagonist crosses paths with her, he's doomed. 

Buy it here 

Special Features New 4K digital restoration, with uncompressed monaural soundtrack on the Blu-ray Edgar G. Ulmer: The Man Off-Screen, a 2004 documentary featuring interviews with actor Ann Savage and filmmakers Roger Corman, Joe Dante, and Wim Wenders New interview with film scholar Noah Isenberg, author of Edgar G. Ulmer: A Filmmaker at the Margins New program about the restoration Janus Films rerelease trailer PLUS: An essay by critic and poet Robert Polito

"I Wanna Hold Your Hand" (Criterion)

Robert Zemeckis has been working with American nostalgia since his first film, 1978's "I Wanna Hold Your Hand," now available on a bonus-packed Criterion release. The film itself is a sweet comedy about not just Beatlemania but those years in which one had the time and energy to commit their lives to something like a band. A cousin of "American Graffiti," this ensemble piece is about a bunch of teenagers trying to get to "The Ed Sullivan Show" on the night that The Beatles would make TV and music history. It's a light-hearted comedy that doesn't hit every mark but is also truly hard to dislike. And it's particularly interesting as a stepping stone in the careers of both Zemeckis and Spielberg, who get together with Bob Gale for a fantastic special feature on this release about the making of the film. 

Buy it here 

Special Features New 4K digital restoration, approved by director Robert Zemeckis and cowriter Bob Gale, with 5.1 surround DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack on the Blu-ray New conversation among Zemeckis, Gale, and executive producer Steven Spielberg New interview with actors Nancy Allen and Marc McClure Audio commentary from 2004 featuring Zemeckis and Gale The Lift (1972) and A Field of Honor (1973), two early short films by Zemeckis Trailer and radio spots PLUS: An essay by critic Scott Tobias

"If Beale Street Could Talk"

This might be the final great film of 2018 to be released on Blu-ray. There are some interesting films that came out the final few weeks of last year still to hit the market ("The Mule," "Bumblebee," others) but this is the last essential movie, one that you really need to see before you can close the book and move on to 2019. Barry Jenkins' adaptation of James Baldwin's book has been written about so many times since its TIFF debut, on this site alone, that there's not much I could possibly add to the conversation. Read my TIFF review. Read Odie's brilliant 4-star review. Read about it in our ten best. Read my interviews with Barry Jenkins and the stars of the film, KiKi Layne and Stephan James. I hold this movie very close to my heart and will for the rest of my life. It's gorgeous, riveting filmmaking and a true must-own on Blu-ray, especially given it has a commentary track by Jenkins himself. 

Buy it here 

Special Features Deleted Scenes Featurette: If Beale Street Could Talk: Poetry in Motion Audio Commentary by Barry Jenkins

"Mary Poppins Returns"

Everyone involved in this movie should give Emily Blunt a gift. Her prodigious charm is really the fuel that keeps this film moving (with no offense to Ben Whishaw and Emily Mortimer, who are always good). Blunt gets the film over its several dull passages, although even she can't save original songs that sound fine in the film but that I dare anyone to hum a section of outside of it. Like so many of the Disney live-action films, there's a magic missing here - the magic that allows a movie to live on in imagination when you're done watching it. This one is better than some (I'm still angry about "Alice in Wonderland" and "Beauty and the Beast") but that's mostly just because those movies didn't have a performer as charismatic and committed as Emily Blunt. For the record, my five-year-old STRONGLY disagrees. He loves this movie. But even he can't sing a song from it. 

Buy it here 

Special Features Deleted Song — "The Anthropomorphic Zoo" The Practically Perfect Making of "Mary Poppins Returns"  Seeing Things From a Different Point of View": The Musical Numbers of "Mary Poppins Returns"  Back to Cherry Tree Lane: Dick Van Dyke Returns  Practically Perfect Bloopers  Deleted Scenes Play Movie in Sing-Along Mode 

"Perfect Blue"

Satoshi Kon is an interesting enigma in that his name isn't as much of a household one as Hayao Miyazaki or Brad Bird but those who do know his work absolutely adore him. Kon's ambitious, visually breathtaking style is arguably never more brilliantly realized than in this 1999 masterpiece FINALLY getting a Blu-ray release for its 20th anniversary. That it took this long for a movie that so many people love to even get an HD release is telling in terms of how Kon's reputation doesn't seem to be at the level he deserves. 

Buy it here 

Special Features BRAND NEW REMASTER OF THE FILM NEW Lectures by Satoshi Kon featurette NEW Into The Blue featurette - New Interviews Original SD Version of Feature (Japanese mono Dolby Digital 2.0 with English subtitles) Angel of Your Heart Recording Sessions Angel of Your Heart Full English Version Theatrical Trailers and TV Spots—includes new trailers from US and UK re-releases Cast and Crew Interviews

"Spider-Man: Into the Spider-verse"

For months, it felt like Disney's "Incredibles 2" was the runaway favorite to take the Oscar for Best Animated Film. Who could have guessed that an animated superhero movie, which is usually the genre of straight-to-DVD fare, could be good enough to topple the highest grossing animated film of all time? Make no mistake -- this is no ordinary superhero movie. This is no ordinary animated movie. It may only be a few months old, but it feels like a classic already, a movie that I know I'll see at least a dozen times over the course of my lifetime. It gets richer and feels more ambitious each time I see it. This is a very strong edition of the HECG and I hope you got a nice refund from the IRS because this one is a must-own too. It also comes with some fantastic special features, including a cut of the film that includes several scenes that never got past the sketch phase re-cut into the movie. 

Buy it here 

Special Features We Are Spider-Man Spider-Verse: A New Dimension The Ultimate Comics Cast A Tribute to Stan Lee & Steve Ditko The Spider-Verse Super-Fan Easter Egg Challenge Designing Cinematic Comics Characters Heroes & Hams Alternate Universe Mode: In this all-new viewing experience, discover alternate scenes, plotlines, characters, and more with the filmmakers as your guide. "Sunflower" by Post Malone and Swae Lee "Familia" by Nicki Minaj & Anuel AA (feat. Bantu) All-New Original Short "Spider-Ham: Caught In a Ham" 

"Wanda" (Criterion)

I'll admit to not remembering having heard of Barbara Loden's "Wanda" until the Criterion edition showed up in my mailbox. It's a stunning movie, a bleak de-glamorization of the criminal life. A blue-collar woman named Wanda can barely make ends meet and has her kids taken away in a divorce. She basically stumbles into the life of a petty criminal, and the two form a strange, mesmerizing Bonnie and Clyde duo. He's abusive. She seems constantly uncertain, almost as if she could just wander off the face of the Earth. It's Loden's only film and it's a fascinating piece of work, almost akin to Cassavetes in its dirty, sweaty, naturalistic style. It's a shame Loden never got to make another movie, but I love that this one is getting appraised again a half-century after it was produced. 

Buy it here 

Special Features New 2K digital restoration by the UCLA Film & Television Archive, The Film Foundation, and Gucci, with uncompressed monaural soundtrack on the Blu-ray I Am Wanda, an hour-long documentary by Katja Raganelli featuring an interview with director Barbara Loden filmed in 1980 Audio recording of Loden speaking to students at the American Film Institute in 1971 Segment from a 1971 episode of The Dick Cavett Show featuring Loden The Frontier Experience (1975), a short educational film about a pioneer woman’s struggle to survive, directed by and starring Loden Trailer PLUS: An essay by film critic Amy Taubin

from All Content https://ift.tt/2TCB4ON

[endenogatai]

It was not consent, it was concealment 

Facebook’s response to the clutch of users who are suddenly woke — triggered to delve into their settings by the Facebook data misuse scandal and #DeleteFacebook backlash — to the fact the social behemoth is, quietly and continuously, harvesting sensitive personal data about them and their friends tells you everything you need to know about the rotten state of tech industry ad-supported business models.

Want to freak yourself out? I'm gonna show just how much of your information the likes of Facebook and Google store about you without you even realising it

— Dylan Curran (@iamdylancurran) March 24, 2018

“People have to expressly agree to use this feature,” the company wrote in a defensively worded blog post at the weekend, defending how it tracks some users’ SMS and phone call metadata — a post it had the impressive brass neck to self-describe as a “fact check”.

“Call and text history logging is part of an opt-in feature for people using Messenger or Facebook Lite on Android . This helps you find and stay connected with the people you care about, and provides you with a better experience across Facebook.”

So, tl;dr, if you’re shocked to see what Facebook knows about you, well, that’s your own dumb fault because you gave Facebook permission to harvest all that personal data.

Not just Facebook either, of course. A fair few Android users appear to be having a similarly rude awakening about how Google’s mobile platform (and apps) slurp location data pervasively — at least unless the user is very, very careful to lock everything down.

But the difficulty of A) knowing exactly what data is being collected for what purposes and B) finding the cunning concealed/intentionally obfuscated master setting which will nix all the tracking is by design, of course.

Privacy hostile design.

No accident then that Facebook has just given its settings pages a haircut — as it scrambles to rein in user outrage over the still snowballing Cambridge Analytica data misuse scandal — consolidating user privacy controls onto one screen instead of the full TWENTY they had been scattered across before.

ehem

Insert your ‘stable door being bolted’ GIF of choice right here.

Another example of Facebook’s privacy hostile design: As my TC colleague Romain Dillet pointed out last week, the company deploys misleading wording during the Messenger onboarding process which is very clearly intended to push users towards clicking on a big blue “turn on” (data-harvesting) button — inviting users to invite the metaphorical Facebook vampire over the threshold so it can perpetually suck data.

Facebook does this by implying that if they don’t bare their neck and “turn on” the continuous contacts uploading they somehow won’t be able to message any of their friends…

An image included with Facebook’s statement.

That’s complete nonsense of course. But opportunistic emotional blackmail is something Facebook knows a bit about — having been previously caught experimenting on users without their consent to see if it could affect their mood.

Add to that, the company has scattered its social plugins and tracking pixels all around the World Wide Web, enabling it to expand its network of surveillance signals — again, without it being entirely obvious to Internet users that Facebook is watching and recording what they are doing and liking outside its walled garden.

According to pro-privacy search engine DuckDuckGo Facebook’s trackers are on around a quarter of the top million websites. While Google’s are on a full ~three-quarters.

So you don’t even have to be a user to be pulled into this surveillance dragnet.

In its tone-deaf blog post trying to defang user concerns about its SMS/call metadata tracking, Facebook doesn’t go into any meaningful detail about exactly why it wants this granular information — merely writing vaguely that: “Contact importers are fairly common among social apps and services as a way to more easily find the people you want to connect with.”

It’s certainly not wrong that other apps and services have also been sucking up your address book.

But that doesn’t make the fact Facebook has been tracking who you’re calling and messaging — how often/for how long — any less true or horrible.

This surveillance is controversial not because Facebook gained permission to data mine your phone book and activity — which, technically speaking, it will have done, via one of the myriad socially engineered, fuzzily worded permission pop-ups starring cutesy looking cartoon characters.

But rather because the consent was not informed.

Or to put it more plainly, Facebookers had no idea what they were agreeing to let the company do.

Which is why people are so horrified now to find what the company has been routinely logging — and potentially handing over to third parties on its ad platform.

Phone calls to your ex? Of course Facebook can see them. Texts to the number of a health clinic you entered into your phonebook? Sure. How many times you phoned a law firm? Absolutely. And so on and on it goes.

This is the rude awakening that no number of defensive ‘fact checks’ from Facebook — nor indeed defensive tweet storms from current CSO Alex Stamos — will be able to smooth away.

“There are long-standing issues with organisations of all kinds, across multiple sectors, misapplying, or misunderstanding, the provisions in data protection law around data subject consent,” says data protection expert Jon Baines, an advisor at UK law firm Mishcon de Reya LLP and also chair of NADPO, when we asked what the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data misuse scandal says about how broken the current system of online consent is.

“The current European Data Protection Directive (under which [the UK] Data Protection Act sits) says that consent means any freely given specific and informed indication of their wishes by which a data subject signifies agreement to their personal data being processed. In a situation under which a data subject legitimately later claims that they were unaware what was happening with their data, it is difficult to see how it can reasonably be said that they had “consented” to the use.”

Ironically, given recent suggestions by defunct Facebook rival Path’s founder of a latent reboot to cater to the #DeleteFacebook crowd — Path actually found itself in an uncomfortable privacy hotseat all the way back in 2012, when it was discovered to have been uploading users’ address book information without asking for permission to do so.

Having been caught with its fingers in the proverbial cookie jar, Path apologized and deleted the data.

The irony is that while Path suffered a moment of outrage, Facebook is only facing a major privacy backlash now — after it’s spent so many years calmly sucking up people’s contacts data, also without them being aware because Facebook nudged them to think they needed to tap that big blue ‘turn on’ button.

Exploiting users’ trust — and using a technicality to unhook people’s privacy — is proving pretty costly for Facebook right now though.

And the risks of attempting to hoodwink consent out of your users are about to step up sharply too, at least in Europe.

Baines points out that the EU’s updated privacy framework, GDPR, tightens the existing privacy standard — adding the words “clear affirmative act” and “unambiguous” to consent requirements.

More importantly, he notes it introduces “more stringent requirements, and certain restrictions, which are not, or are not explicit, in current law, such as the requirement to be able to demonstrate that a data subject has given (valid) consent” (emphasis his).

“Consent must also now be separable from other written agreements, and in an intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language. If these requirements are enforced by data protection supervisory authorities and the courts, then we could well see a significant shift in habits and practices,” he adds.

The GDPR framework is also backed up by a new regime of major penalties for data protection violations which can scale up to 4% of a company’s global turnover.

And the risk of fines so large will be much harder for companies to ignore — and thus playing fast and loose with data, and moving fast and breaking things (as Facebook used to say), doesn’t sound so smart anymore.

As I wrote back in 2015, the online privacy lie is unraveling.

It’s taken a little longer than I’d hoped, for sure. But here we are in 2018 — and it’s not just the #MeToo movement that’s turned consent into a buzzword.

from RSSMix.com Mix ID 8204425 https://ift.tt/2pJDNcq via IFTTT

[sheminecrafts]

It was not consent, it was concealment 

Facebook’s response to the clutch of users who are suddenly woke — triggered to delve into their settings by the Facebook data misuse scandal and #DeleteFacebook backlash — to the fact the social behemoth is, quietly and continuously, harvesting sensitive personal data about them and their friends tells you everything you need to know about the rotten state of tech industry ad-supported business models.

Want to freak yourself out? I'm gonna show just how much of your information the likes of Facebook and Google store about you without you even realising it

— Dylan Curran (@iamdylancurran) March 24, 2018

“People have to expressly agree to use this feature,” the company wrote in a defensively worded blog post at the weekend, defending how it tracks some users’ SMS and phone call metadata — a post it had the impressive brass neck to self-describe as a “fact check”.

“Call and text history logging is part of an opt-in feature for people using Messenger or Facebook Lite on Android . This helps you find and stay connected with the people you care about, and provides you with a better experience across Facebook.”

So, tl;dr, if you’re shocked to see what Facebook knows about you, well, that’s your own dumb fault because you gave Facebook permission to harvest all that personal data.

Not just Facebook either, of course. A fair few Android users appear to be having a similarly rude awakening about how Google’s mobile platform (and apps) slurp location data pervasively — at least unless the user is very, very careful to lock everything down.

But the difficulty of A) knowing exactly what data is being collected for what purposes and B) finding the cunning concealed/intentionally obfuscated master setting which will nix all the tracking is by design, of course.

Privacy hostile design.

No accident then that Facebook has just given its settings pages a haircut — as it scrambles to rein in user outrage over the still snowballing Cambridge Analytica data misuse scandal — consolidating user privacy controls onto one screen instead of the full TWENTY they had been scattered across before.

ehem

Insert your ‘stable door being bolted’ GIF of choice right here.

Another example of Facebook’s privacy hostile design: As my TC colleague Romain Dillet pointed out last week, the company deploys misleading wording during the Messenger onboarding process which is very clearly intended to push users towards clicking on a big blue “turn on” (data-harvesting) button — inviting users to invite the metaphorical Facebook vampire over the threshold so it can perpetually suck data.

Facebook does this by implying that if they don’t bare their neck and “turn on” the continuous contacts uploading they somehow won’t be able to message any of their friends…

An image included with Facebook’s statement.

That’s complete nonsense of course. But opportunistic emotional blackmail is something Facebook knows a bit about — having been previously caught experimenting on users without their consent to see if it could affect their mood.

Add to that, the company has scattered its social plugins and tracking pixels all around the World Wide Web, enabling it to expand its network of surveillance signals — again, without it being entirely obvious to Internet users that Facebook is watching and recording what they are doing and liking outside its walled garden.

According to pro-privacy search engine DuckDuckGo Facebook’s trackers are on around a quarter of the top million websites. While Google’s are on a full ~three-quarters.

So you don’t even have to be a user to be pulled into this surveillance dragnet.

In its tone-deaf blog post trying to defang user concerns about its SMS/call metadata tracking, Facebook doesn’t go into any meaningful detail about exactly why it wants this granular information — merely writing vaguely that: “Contact importers are fairly common among social apps and services as a way to more easily find the people you want to connect with.”

It’s certainly not wrong that other apps and services have also been sucking up your address book.

But that doesn’t make the fact Facebook has been tracking who you’re calling and messaging — how often/for how long — any less true or horrible.

This surveillance is controversial not because Facebook gained permission to data mine your phone book and activity — which, technically speaking, it will have done, via one of the myriad socially engineered, fuzzily worded permission pop-ups starring cutesy looking cartoon characters.

But rather because the consent was not informed.

Or to put it more plainly, Facebookers had no idea what they were agreeing to let the company do.

Which is why people are so horrified now to find what the company has been routinely logging — and potentially handing over to third parties on its ad platform.

Phone calls to your ex? Of course Facebook can see them. Texts to the number of a health clinic you entered into your phonebook? Sure. How many times you phoned a law firm? Absolutely. And so on and on it goes.

This is the rude awakening that no number of defensive ‘fact checks’ from Facebook — nor indeed defensive tweet storms from current CSO Alex Stamos — will be able to smooth away.

“There are long-standing issues with organisations of all kinds, across multiple sectors, misapplying, or misunderstanding, the provisions in data protection law around data subject consent,” says data protection expert Jon Baines, an advisor at UK law firm Mishcon de Reya LLP and also chair of NADPO, when we asked what the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data misuse scandal says about how broken the current system of online consent is.

“The current European Data Protection Directive (under which [the UK] Data Protection Act sits) says that consent means any freely given specific and informed indication of their wishes by which a data subject signifies agreement to their personal data being processed. In a situation under which a data subject legitimately later claims that they were unaware what was happening with their data, it is difficult to see how it can reasonably be said that they had “consented” to the use.”

Ironically, given recent suggestions by defunct Facebook rival Path’s founder of a latent reboot to cater to the #DeleteFacebook crowd — Path actually found itself in an uncomfortable privacy hotseat all the way back in 2012, when it was discovered to have been uploading users’ address book information without asking for permission to do so.

Having been caught with its fingers in the proverbial cookie jar, Path apologized and deleted the data.

The irony is that while Path suffered a moment of outrage, Facebook is only facing a major privacy backlash now — after it’s spent so many years calmly sucking up people’s contacts data, also without them being aware because Facebook nudged them to think they needed to tap that big blue ‘turn on’ button.

Exploiting users’ trust — and using a technicality to unhook people’s privacy — is proving pretty costly for Facebook right now though.

And the risks of attempting to hoodwink consent out of your users are about to step up sharply too, at least in Europe.

Baines points out that the EU’s updated privacy framework, GDPR, tightens the existing privacy standard — adding the words “clear affirmative act” and “unambiguous” to consent requirements.

More importantly, he notes it introduces “more stringent requirements, and certain restrictions, which are not, or are not explicit, in current law, such as the requirement to be able to demonstrate that a data subject has given (valid) consent” (emphasis his).

“Consent must also now be separable from other written agreements, and in an intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language. If these requirements are enforced by data protection supervisory authorities and the courts, then we could well see a significant shift in habits and practices,” he adds.

The GDPR framework is also backed up by a new regime of major penalties for data protection violations which can scale up to 4% of a company’s global turnover.

And the risk of fines so large will be much harder for companies to ignore — and thus playing fast and loose with data, and moving fast and breaking things (as Facebook used to say), doesn’t sound so smart anymore.

As I wrote back in 2015, the online privacy lie is unraveling.

It’s taken a little longer than I’d hoped, for sure. But here we are in 2018 — and it’s not just the #MeToo movement that’s turned consent into a buzzword.

from iraidajzsmmwtv https://ift.tt/2pJDNcq via IFTTT