#Natalie also lacks this as a concept but she has given up

[sqebu]

@brownpaperhag

Show me he......or tell me about him.

Truly Ravinder could use more friends in general but especially male friends. Also the thought of his only dude pals being Natalie's cousin (insufferable but well-meaning) and some guy who looks like himself is funny to me.

(Related doodles)

[honorarycassowary]

I just finished reading Hench by Natalie Zina Walschots and found myself underwhelmed. For those not in the know, it’s about a young woman who works as a temporary henchman doing office-job work for low-level supervillains. But when she’s seriously injured by the world’s strongest hero during what is supposed to be a routine job, she finds herself consumed by quantifying the damage that superheros do - and gets a job offer from the world’s deadliest supervillain.

I think exploring the behind-the-scenes of how supervillains are able to make their schemes work is an intriguing premise. How DO supervillains find people not just to design their laser death rays, but do payroll and admin for those researchers, and janitors to clean up after those staff? There’s a fair amount of superhero stories that make it seem like Evil Office Worker is just a job you can have - I’m thinking particularly of the Alchemax scene in Into the Spider-Verse, where it’s revealed that ALL the scientists in the cafeteria are armed and willing to kill Spider-Man. Clearly they haven’t been tricked into doing evil, so are are recruiting agencies for this?

However, Hench’s execution of the moral dilemmas present in its narrative is lacking. The protagonist’s inciting moment is discovering the concept of years of life lost and beginning to quantify the cost of superheros on civilians and villains, per this metric. She ultimately concludes that superheros are terrible for the world. The issue with this is simple: at no point does she ever try to quantify the damage supervillains do to the world.

Those few minutes in a hotel conference cost all of us 152 years of our lives combined. Supercollider had decided that a kid’s little finger and the Eel’s ransom demand held more value than 152 years in hench lives. Maybe a lot of those years wouldn’t have been terribly good, and would have involved a lot of busting heads and driving recklessly and working for villains.

But those costs can’t be discarded! What are the years of life lost on the kid’s part, due to trauma from being kidnapped and nearly mind-controlled into chopping his own finger off on live TV? What about the years of life lost due to other people who could be mind-controlled by Eel’s tech or derivatives of it? What about the potential lives lost from other superweapons those R&D people would have made? (For that matter, how did they test that the mind-control device would override survival instincts to that extent? Our protagonist may not have known about the kidnapping plan, but other henches definitely did.)

That’s not to say that our protagonist wasn’t wronged (she was! she was asked to stand in the background as a diversity hire and got permanently disabled!) or that heroes have the right to kill or disabled indiscriminately (they don’t!) but this is a pattern throughout the book.

When her supervillain boss/crush has an assistant’s child kidnapped and returned with hypothermia as punishment for failing to properly care for the boss’s pet iguana, she tells it as a badass story, not a terrifying act of cruelty that highlights how she or her colleagues might be treated. Similarly, arranging for the kidnapping of a hero’s child as part of an experiment to see how the hero’s team reacts to stress is interesting and the trauma (and risk that they’d cause serious damage!) is something she can just dismiss morally.

Also, despite the premise being rooted in exploring the people who keep evil running, there’s very limited thought given to how supervillains make their money. Leviathan sells his/his people’s inventions; there’s mention of smuggling; at least one villain is an heiress who uses her trust fund to cause harm. But it’s all very soft-focus. That’s not necessarily a bad thing! It’s often just one of the acceptable breaks from reality of superhero stories. Even exploring the lives of henchman doesn’t necessarily need this - an exploration of supervillain office politics and why people become henchman is interesting. However, there’s a consistent exploration of the costs of superheroics - medical bills, repair costs, the erosion of civil rights - without a complementary exploration of supervillainy. The blurb compares working for a supervillain to working for an oil conglomerate, but the obvious comparison to me would be working for a defense contractor or a private military contractor. We actually see a supervillain-US military comparison in the book, and the character speaking argues that both the military and villains are evil, but at least the villains are honest about it. However, there’s limited discussion of the ethics of supervillainy. The general topic of grappling with the ethics of your job has been on my mind lately, ever since the recent discourse over Ana Mardoll working for Lockheed Martin. What does it MEAN for the protagonist to be part of the system of supervillainy? If the superheroics system, at least as practiced in the Anglosphere, is deeply corrupt and exploitative, does that mean that supervillains are justified? What personal responsibility for deaths do you have as an analyst who is enabling, but not committing, destruction?

The book ultimately works less as an exploration of a corruption arc and more as a power fantasy of undoing the people who ruined your life.

... I will say that I am extremely simple and predictable and found Leviathan very sexy. Cold, intelligent villain with a secret tragic past + weird insectoid monster with inhuman mouthparts? Unironically my monsterfucking catnip.

Also, the eventual use of Quantum Entanglement’s “merging” powers to merge someone with themself until they’re just a blob of flesh was genuinely horrific to the point of being on par with descriptions of the victims of the Slaughterhouse Nine. (It was also morally jarring, IMO, but hey, it was vividly described!)

[lilisouless]

i am giving Miraculous the last of the oportunities , i am watching Queen Banana ,maybe there is something there to spark my interest again and otherwise i´ll know if i am done for good with the show.

-See Marinette now has all the kwamis, i´d say i hope they do something interesting with them beyond just giving LB a new power but by this point i am not expecting anything

-Zoe...i mean she is not unlikeable but : she is a meek ,sweet girl who wants to be an actress , how is she diferent from Mylenne? . She would be way more interesting if she had been introduced in season 2 along with Audrey, because she just looks like something they pulled out of nowhere in order to have someone own the Bee Miraculous.

-I hope there is something more to be done with Chloe ,if they are not going to develop her (for an evil girl there is already Lila) then they should just drop her completely

-Nope, she didn't even developed to be a better villain, she still stupid, i´ll think by then she will at least learn to manipulate people,be given something

-Zoe. i don't really want to bash her so soon, i hope i change my mind later but, she has even less personality than Luka (i didn't believe that would be possible) she hasn't spoken, she is there so Marinette can be the hero and stand up to her

-And Sabrina is still lame ,Why does she even still exist? She never does anything

-Also, i skipped season 3 but are you telling me in one season and a half Andre is STILL the same doormat father? I would think he would put his foot down by now

-The whole reason this plot is going anywhere is because everyone is an idiot

-For godness sake, there are three adults in the show

-Gabriel has both Noroo and Dusu...where the hell is Natalie?,,, you know what, don't tell me, i don't think i want to know.

-Right, go the easy route and akumatize Chloe by the 4th time i think, you oculd had choosen the director or ...Zoe maybe? Mylenne and Nino again would be more aceptable.

-The only positive i have until now is that Marinette is not being unlikeable as she was in season 3, hope the other episodes keep it like that.

-So the only reason Zoe was given the BM is because...she was there,the right place in the right time. I know since she was introduced in the previous

-Though she does look pretty as a superhero

-No way, the writing wants the viewer to love her so bad that they actually said she was better than Ladybug aka Marinette aka the show creator´s pet...thats something else.

-And she served as distraction...i would had liked to have her rather Chloe a little more but ended up...you know what,i am too tired?

-Okay,Marinette DID have some develoment between seasons.

-Does Lila no longer exist? Or why is Hawkmoth actively using Chloe in plans? Wouldn't Lila make more sense (serious question, i have no idea what´s been going on with her)

-Oh now she stands up for herself, why?....because she was given a Miraculous? I mean, there is no really a momment when she realizes she wants to stop being meek.

-The only thing i liked, is that Marinette actually did something clever in protecting Chloe who is an easy prey for akumatization, so she is actually a good guardian.

-The hug was completely ungained, they have absolutely no bonding momment, no reason for Zoe to love Chloe beyond "Zoe is an angel"

-And yeah, Astruc,you dropped the change to give Chloe redemption in season three, is useless, it no longer works.

I am gona do something,only in fairness for Zoe and will watch her debut episode so my concept of her is better

-Her contrast with Chloe is not even funny.is kind of entertaining see her exited to have a sister but Zoe´s lack of response just makes it boring.

-Okay, she is acting like Chloe for fitting in i guess, but hasn't given a hint that she is interested in having a bond with her.It´s forced

The fact that Zoe is "too nice" is not bad itself, but, Rose exist, Mylenne exist,pre season 3 Adrien exist,etc.How is she diferent beyond "being Chloe´s sister",she is just a mix between Sabrina and Mylenne, and not a good one.

-i mean, i am supposed to find Chloe cruel for saying Zoe is just a copy of her and...i mean she is cruel to say and it would be wrong if they were real people...BUT Zoe DOES in fact exist only to be the anti Chloe.

Conslussion: Zoe is a purity sue and Chloe is the oposite of that, that´s the whole relationship dynamic. Is not even subtle, they have the same color scheme (the hair and eyes are forgiven because they are sisters but what with the clothing?, what if Zoe had dark blue or purple (how Chloe´s clothes would look like in a negative effect) ,so the contrast is more subtle?

[soracities]

do you happen to have any quotes about gluttony and/or devouring? thank you!!

Last year I abstained this year I devour

without guilt which is also an art

—Margaret Atwood, Circe/Mud Poems

“We aren’t here to eat, we are being eaten. / Come, pretty girl. Let us devour our lives.”

—Natalie Diaz, “Soiree Fantastique”

"O God, that I were a man! I would eat his heart in the marketplace!”

 — William Shakespeare, Much Ado About Nothing

“What is it in me would devour the world to utter it? What is it in me will not let the world be, would eat not just this fish, but the one who killed it, the butcher who cleaned it […] I would eat it all to utter it.”

— Li-Young Lee, “The Cleaving”

“There’s a YouTube video I’m fond of that shows a baby named Madison being given cake for the first time. The maniacal shine in her eyes when she first tastes chocolate icing is transcendent, a combination of “where has this been all my life” and “how dare you keep this from me?” Jaw still dropped in shock, she slowly tips the cake up towards her face and plunges in mouth-first. Periodically, as she comes up for air, she shoots the camera a look that is almost anguished. Can you believe this exists? her face says. Why can’t I get it all in my mouth at once?”

— Jess Zimmerman, “Hunger Makes Me”

“Hungry for the kill, but this hunger, it isn't you Voices disappear when you are speaking in somber tunes I will be the wolf and when you're starving, you'll need it too Hungry for the kill, but this hunger, it isn't you”

— Monsters of Men, “Hunger”

“In the end the heart turns on itself / like hunger to a spoon.”

— Silvia Curbelo, “Tonight I Can Almost Hear the Singing”

Tell me it was for the hunger / & nothing less. For hunger is to give / the body what it knows / it cannot keep.”

— Ocean Vuong, “On Earth We’re Briefly Gorgeous”

“Because desire won’t shrug off, and the heart begins to eat its stores its substance—slowly, at first, and sparingly— (but nothing’s left to lose so it is downed) We have a thing here called hunger A feeling and an ache, want of want. You could try it sometime if you like.”

— Hannah Sanghee Park, “[Because desire won’t shrug off]”

“If the story begins with the lack of a child, then hunger becomes central. Food often replaces sex in folktales, and witches with some rule-bound delicacy are the fertility specialists of choice, second only to daring the fairies to give you a baby hedgehog, a snow-child, or an infant the size of your thumb. The trouble starts when a childless queen is given specific instructions– eat the white rose for a boy or the red rose for a girl, but not both. Eat the fair flower and not the bitter, black one. Peel both onions before you eat them. Folklorists would group all of these motifs under the number “T511– conception from eating,” with increasingly specific Dewey-Decimal-style numbers for conception from a flower or a fish, from swallowing a pearl or a peppercorn. Inevitably, the queen fails the interdiction, because she forgets the warning, or because the first thing she eats is so delicious she just can’t help it. Without that failure, there would be no story. Interdiction, violation: a rule is broken and the world is changed.”

—Kristiana Willsey, “Hunger is the Beginning of every Folktale”

“I saw him open his mouth wide...As though he had wanted to swallow all the air, all the earth, all the men before him.”

— Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness

“She had wanted to eat the whole fruit. Knowing there would be hell to pay upstairs, he stopped her. Heartsick, she refuses to look at him – seven pomegranate seeds clutched in her hand and the always ravenous hunger.”

— Mary Jo Bang, “Persephone Leaving”

“What are we made of but hunger and rage?”

— Anne Carson, “To Compostela”, Plainwater

“Of all the female sins, hunger is the least forgivable; hunger for anything, for food, sex, power, education, even love. If we have desires, we are expected to conceal them, to control them, to keep ourselves in check. We are supposed to be objects of desire, not desiring beings. We do not need food: in many ways, we are food, trainable meat, lambs queueing up to buy mint sauce. We consume only what we are told to, from lipstick to life insurance, and only what will make us more consumable ourselves, the better to be chewed up and swallowed by a machine that wants our work, our money, our sexuality broken down into bite-sized chunks.”

— Laurie Penny, Unspeakable Things

“The rain knows I am full of ghosts. / Take my hair out of its fraying knot. / Give me this hunger and nothing else.”

— Ana Carrizo ( @elvedon ), “Full of Ghosts”

“It’s a mean thing to be alive And it’s a mean thing God did To make us To make us hunger.”

— Nick Narbutas, “The Language of the World”

“I will wait until the end of all things, and I will eat the sun and I will eat the moon.”

— Neil Gaiman, Norse Mythology

“I have never known peace like the damp grass that yields to me / I have never known hunger like these insects that feast on me”

— Hozier, “In a Week”

[Verse 1] At seventeen I started to starve myself I thought that love was a kind of emptiness And at least I understood then the hunger I felt And I didn't have to call it loneliness

[Chorus] We all have a hunger We all have a hunger We all have a hunger We all have a hunger”

— Florence and the Machine, “Hunger”

“I am starved for stimulation. I am so hungry I could eat a moon.”

— Sarah Jean Grimm, “Regarding Pilgrims”

“Eat me, drink me; thirsty, cankered, goblin-ridden, I go back and back to him to have his fingers strip the tattered skin away and clothe me in his dress of water, this garment that drenches me, its slithering odour, its capacity for drowning.”

— Angela Carter, “The Erl-King”

“In the desert I saw a creature, naked, bestial, Who, squatting upon the ground, Held his heart in his hands, And ate of it. I said, “Is it good, friend?” “It is bitter—bitter,” he answered; “But I like it “Because it is bitter, “And because it is my heart.”

— Stephen Crane, “In the Desert”

“After two praying mantises mate, the nervous system of the male begins to shut down / while he still has control over his motor functions he flops onto his back, exposing his soft underbelly up to his lover like a gift / she then proceeds to lovingly dice him into tiny cubes spooning every morsel into her mouth  she wastes nothing even the exoskeleton goes she does this so that once their children are born she has something to regurgitate to feed them now that.. is selflessness”

— Jared Singer, “An Entomologist’s Last Love Letter”

“Once, I asked for your favourite feeling. You said hunger.”

— Mary Szybist, “To Gabriela at the Donkey Sanctuary”

[recentanimenews]

INTERVIEW: The Creators of The Ancient Magus' Bride and The Girl From the Other Side

  In coordination with the recent anime announcements of The Girl from the Other Side and The Ancient Magus' Bride, Comic Natalie recently held an interview with the manga authors of both series: Nagabe and Kore Yamazaki. Crunchyroll News was given the opportunity to officially translate the interview in English between the two, posted below. You can read the original Japanese interview here. 

  Tetsuko Kumase held and composed the interview.

    The Girl from the Other Side by Nagabe and The Ancient Magus’ Bride by Kore Yamazaki are the two stories that develop around the theme of "Beast x Girl," and probably have many fans in common. To celebrate the release of The Girl from the Other Side as a full-length anime OAD (news article embedded) and the development of a new OAD series for The Ancient Magus’ Bride (news article embedded), Comic Natalie has set up an interview with Nagabe and Yamazaki. In addition to discussing their commitment to their work and the concept of "Beast x Girl", they also shared their thoughts about the new anime productions. At the end of the interview, they asked questions to each other to learn more about one’s perspectives towards creating stories.

    Respect for each other and the appeal of "Beast x Girl"

── There have been several projects you collaborated on, such as a joint event for the two works (see: The Ancient Magus’ Bride and The Girl from the Other Side fair where visitors could get the “Beast x Girl” playing cards) and the book of The Ancient Magus’ Bride including a trivia manga booklet, The Ancient Magus’ Bride: Quiet Talk, written by Nagabe-san (see: The Ancient Magus’ Bride volume 10 includes an acrylic stand and a booklet written by Nagabe). I know that many readers are fans of both of your works, but could you tell us about your impressions of each other's creations and what you like about them?

     Nagabe: The Ancient Magus’ Bride initially grabbed my attention because of the obi (belt) on the book that said "Beast x Girl." But when I started reading it, I found it to be a fantasy manga that’s really well thought out. Dragons, mythical creatures, folklore, and mythology are well integrated into the modern world, and each magical being is given its own meaning. The non-human characters also have their own meanings, backgrounds, and cultures, and interact with the protagonists. It's not just a fantasy, but the way the characters are connected to the world and make it feel so real is exquisite! Of course, the non-humans in the story are also wonderful. I love Elias.

Kore Yamazaki: Thank you very much. I'm often amazed at the range of stories and pictures you create. I sometimes even question if there are any non-human characters you can’t draw. I don't know if it's appropriate to say, but there's a hint of darkness or something in your work. I think it's a little sexy or maybe there’s secret eros? I love that I can feel a little bit of naughtiness in your work.

Nagabe: Thank you!

Yamazaki: The other thing is that I feel like I can almost smell the lines and shadows you draw if I trace them. Also, your story can be either very sweet or disturbing. I know you've been working very hard to achieve this, but honestly, I envy you. I wish I could create pictures and stories like you.

── I can really tell that you respect each other deeply. Now, please tell us what you like about particular scenes, episodes, or expressions in each of your works.

Nagabe: Personally, I think that The Ancient Magus’ Bride is a human drama in which you see Chise’s growth and changes as she confronts the environment around her. So, of course, there are impressive episodes that correspond to that. However, if I get to choose one based on my own preferences, I like the story of magic in Episode 2 and the Christmas story of Elias and Chise. The former shows magical instruments in a fantasy world, and the latter shows the integration of the real world customs in manga. I love portraits that showcase slice-of-life stories, so I thought those were great!

Yamazaki: I really like the gradual development of the relationship between Shiva and Sensei in The Girl from the Other Side. I love the scenes where they are about to touch but hesitate and also the scene that portraits the cute fight that heats up through the door. There’s also a scene where they touch each other by accident, but that triggers them to touch each other intentionally after, and that made me go "Wow!” The distance between them is so... delicate and exquisite. The softness of the flesh and the temperature of Shiva and the lack of physical temperature of Sensei next to her, all give me the feeling of winter, which is amazing. I think it just fits my sense of winter perfectly. The coldness that mercilessly takes away life, the feel of the felt, floor, and walls chilled by snow and water, and the warmth of having someone by your side in front of the stove… they all exist together in the story.

Nagabe: I'm very happy to hear that.

Yamazaki: My favorite episode is episode 29 in volume 6. I really want them both to be happy! It made me feel the warm temperature of Shiva’s tears. The scene where they go see Mother gave me chills. The design of the children of darkness is also epic!

  ── Now, can you talk about what you both find to be attractive about the “Beast x Girl," which is a common concept in both of your works?

Nagabe: It’s not just about girls but more so about humans, but I think I’m into cross-culturalism. Different races have different cultures, languages, and maybe even different body structures. The two characters have great differences and that brings out interesting gaps and interactions which creates a good drama. It’s also nice when they see each other’s similarities and go “oh, that’s the part we have in common”.  I especially like it when there are differences that are incompatible. For example, whether cannibalism is acceptable or not. The fact that taboos in the human world are practiced without hesitation in the non-human world creates clear divisions. Seeing how they deal with these negative differences is the best part and what makes this theme attractive to me.

  Yamazaki: The concept of non-human exists because there are humans. I am personally attracted to things that are distant from humans in appearance and sensibility. I love non-humans who don’t speak human languages, but I also have to balance my work for consumer products. In The Ancient Magus’ Bride, I used fairytales from Britain and Ireland as references, so they all speak human languages fluently. Their sensibilities and appearance are quite human-like except for their rules. It’s probably because humans wouldn’t be able to understand them otherwise, and they can be very different from your ideas of non-humans. However, they are very rigid about certain rules they have, so I have to be careful drawing those concepts clearly. It’s quite difficult to decide how much of the original folktales and fairytales I include in my creation. If I put too much just because it’s interesting, the originality in my work will disappear. This is something I have to be careful not to overlook.

  ── You've taken special care to balance these concepts.

Yamazaki: The other topic to consider is the reason why a girl is matched with a beast. Personally, I think it’s because girls have the most flexibility and softness. For better or worse, children are soft, malleable, and flexible to their environment. But they also have their own answers to questions, toughness, weakness, rigidness, and acceptance to their worlds, questions, hesitation, tolerance, anger, joy… all sorts of ideas and emotions, which makes them very attractive and easy to draw. I understand that adult characters are interesting as well. Also, it’s just exciting to see humans and non-humans together like with animals, monsters, and so on. In reality, people often don’t understand each other, but in creation, we can hope differently. I guess I like seeing everyone getting along as a bystander. But from a business point of view, I can’t just leave it like that, so I give them lots of challenges!

Nagabe: In The Ancient Magus’ Bride, I think that emotions are portrayed as something specific to humans. The contrast between Chise, who is always changing based on her experiences, and Elias, who is certainly changing but lacking in some crucial way, is brilliant. It seems that this kind of dissonance is there because we see Elias’ emotions in the same way we see that of Chise’s or humans. In the story, Chise said to Elias “I can’t understand you”, and I think it’s great that you are taking this difference between the characters seriously and depicting it in your work.

Yamazaki: Thank you. I think The Girl from the Other Side provides the perfect sense in terms of closeness among characters. Other works of yours also showcase this as well. Sometimes characters are all over each other, and other times they are trying to figure out the right distance. There’s rejection, and there’s also adorable connection. I love it. I think the struggle between a being and another being is wonderful. Also, it’s simply cool to have two different concepts exist together like big and small.  

── What kind of works have influenced the two of you in terms of drawing fantasy and the theme of "Beast x Girl"?

Yamazaki: It’s not that I’m only looking for the “Beast x Girl” theme, but it just triggers my sensors! Some of the books that caught my attention are the Darren Shan series, Rachel series, Koteki no Kanata, Dendera Ryu ga Detekitayo, Sukkuto Kitsune, and Hellsing. In terms of animation, I’d say the Monster Farm, PoPoLoCrois series, Brigadoon: Marin & Melan, and Blood: The Last Vampire series. Rather than finding the exact theme of “Beast x Girl," I find the subtle essence of that in these works. Also, I often use myths and folktales as references. I’d say the ones that influenced me the most are Ashiarai Yashiki no Juunintachi, J&J series, and Blood+.

Nagabe: I think Beauty and the Beast was influential for me! These are not about a beast and a girl, but Alice in Wonderland and Moomin also had a strong influence on my current manga creation. They are certainly fantasy, but not shiny and glamorous, and gives you a sense of antiquity, 

── Are there any works that you would like to recommend to each other?

Nagabe: In my case, I am more interested in art books and picture books than novels, so my tastes are a little different. But I would like to recommend Arthur Rackham and Saint-Exupery! Arthur Rackham is famous for Alice in Wonderland, and Saint-Exupery for The Little Prince. I also recommend Jon Klassen's picture book series. I like the airy atmosphere and you can see his energetic watercolor touch. I hope you will read them if you have a chance.

Yamazaki: I'd like to check them out. It's hard to make recommendations to Nagabe-san, but I'd like you to read Ashiarai Yashiki no Juunintachi. The characters are more human-like in appearance, but there is also great diversity. There are lots of characters so I'm sure you'll be able to find one, three, or even ten that you like.

Nagabe: I see. I’ll check it out.

  What they want to portray through their work

── Could you tell us about your own work? In a previous interview with Comic Natalie, Yamazaki-san, you said you wanted to create a story in The Ancient Magus’ Bride where "everyone is bad and everyone is good."

  Yamazaki: Now that I think about it, “everyone is bad and everyone is good” is not exactly correct. If I could answer it again, I would say it’s about differences. It's like a sample of where various emotions and thoughts are. I hope that reading my manga will give the audience a chance to think about the differences in their lives. But they are free to dismiss it if they think it’s boring. I have my ideas of what I want to convey as a message in my work, but I try not to give clear answers so that people can think and feel what they want.

── Now, Nagabe-san, in a previous interview, you said that the most important theme for you was "gentleness."

  Nagabe: After finishing The Girl from the Other Side, I felt once again that ‘gentleness’ is a difficult thing to express. I wondered to whom that ‘gentleness’ was meant for, what it meant, and what would happen if that feeling resulted in a bad situation. Is ‘gentleness’ shown in words, actions, or something else in the first place? Any of these can express ‘gentleness’ depending on the perspectives of each protagonist, so I was reminded of the ambiguity of emotions, the frustration that comes with interaction, and how difficult it is to depict those things. I’m glad I got to learn the difficulty of this theme, and I felt that I need to look at it from different aspects.

── I see. It's been a few years since any of the interviews I mentioned before, but has there been anything new you would like to emphasize in your works?

Nagabe: Since I’ve been thinking about the theme of emotions through "gentleness," I want to focus more on personality. In other words, I want to focus more on human dramas. In addition to that, I would like to depict a strange everyday life in a mysterious world. Of course, I want to include non-humans.

Yamazaki: I haven't really changed my main ideas. But if I had to say, I’d like to go back to the basics and draw non-humans again as I’ve been drawing only humans in stories lately. 

  The world of The Girl from the Other Side and

The Ancient Magus’ Bride in animation

── Both The Girl from the Other Side and The Ancient Magus’ Bride have been developed into anime projects in the past. How do you feel about your works being made into animation again?

Nagabe: My honest impression (after watching the animation) was "It's moving!” The artwork, visuals, and atmosphere of the manga are very important to me, so I was very impressed that the production team was able to recreate those of my manga with such care. In the previous short animation, the audience was able to enjoy the blank space created by the lack of words. It left room for interpretation. I was simply thrilled that they created such mature animation.

Yamazaki: In my case, I was looking at a hypothetical future where the project was in progress, but in the middle of the project, people would say, "It's not going to sell," and it would discontinue. I was thinking that I should at least be able to do enough work to feed myself, but it actually came true. Can you believe it? Now I can't quit so easily. Oops...

── Oh, no (laughs).

Yamazaki: I was just kidding and was actually very happy, and even though it was a lot of hard work, I had great fun working with many creators!

── What kind of messages and reactions did you receive from the readers of your manga who watched the anime?

Nagabe: The readers were also excited that The Girl from the Other Side was moving! That's how much they have enjoyed the world of The Girl from the Other Side in manga, and we’ve succeeded to meet their expectation in the anime.

Yamazaki: I've received a lot of feedback as well, but it's generally been positive and I’m relieved. I want to thank everyone for that!

  ── I believe that there are qualities that people are drawn to and ways of expression that are each unique to manga and anime, but when you saw your own work turned into animation, was there anything that you felt was unique to animation?

Nagabe: I think that the subtle movements of people and objects are best expressed through animation. For example, in the scene at the dinner table with Sensei and Shiva, you can see both a movement of Shiva where she tries to climb up on a chair and a smooth movement of Sensei at the same time. This contrast allowed the audience to feel a sense of life in our daily routines, and I thought that was great. One more thing is that the scenes like Shiva’s dreams and the star scene, in the end, achieved a better sense of realism because of the colors, and I think the black-and-white representation of manga won’t be able to quite do the same.

Yamazaki: I may have the same opinion. The manga is quite plain as I prefer low saturation, but I also knew that could be a hindrance for a consumer product. So I was impressed with the bright colors in the anime. Also, the animation complimented the lack of explanation in the manga and it made it more theatrical. I hope people will see both works!

Nagabe: That's right! I want people to see both, too.

── Both manga and anime have their own strong points, and I hope people will enjoy them both. And now, the development of a full-length anime of The Girl from the Other Side and a new OAD series for The Ancient Magus’ Bride has been announced. Please tell us your honest opinions about these developments.

Nagabe: YEEEESSS! I'm so happy. I personally gave the last short-length anime a perfect score, so I have…really...high expectations!

── I can feel your joy. (laugh)

Nagabe: This is all happening thanks to the hard work put in by WIT STUDIO, Yutaro Kubo (director), and Satomi Yoneya (director), and my expectations are very high and I have no worries at all! How about you, Yamazaki-san?

Yamazaki: I'm glad to be working with various creators again! I'm also going to be doing more work that I don't normally do, so in a way I'll be able to change up my routine. It's a lot of work, but also a lot of fun.

── What are you looking forward to and what are your expectations for the new animation?

Nagabe: I’m wondering how they will tell the story now that it’s longer. Of course, I’m interested in the visual expressions and the production of animation as I was for the previous short-length anime, but more than that, I’m looking forward to seeing how they will incorporate the world of The Girl from the Other Side into animation and how they will depict it. Also, Sensei and Shiva are going to talk… with voices. I’m pretty pumped about it and can't contain my excitement!

  ── As a fan, I'm really looking forward to it. What about you, Yamazaki-san?

Yamazaki: It's fun to have more opportunities to see the work of the animation staff. To tell the truth, I don't really have much expectation for my work. “New anime! Work is coming! I'll do my best!”, I don’t normally feel that way.  It almost feels like a collaboration between the supervising team and the animation team, so I have to do my best for our audience to enjoy it.

── How do you feel about the fact that both of your works are loved overseas as well?

Nagabe: Is that so? I'm glad to hear that! Since The Girl from the Other Side is more like a poem or a picture book than a manga, I’ve been wondering how it would be perceived even in Japan. But I'm frankly happy that it's been accepted so favorably. I'm also happy that TThe Girl from the Other Side has “flown” to a foreign country (the Other Side). That gave me a smile. Thank you very much.

Yamazaki: I'm really grateful that there are people overseas who are interested in my work since I basically published it for Japanese people. As the story is set in England, I tried to avoid using gestures and phrases that are unique to Japanese culture, but I guess you could say that worked in my favor. I've been getting a lot of positive feedback and art from fans!

  The influence of the pandemic

── I'd like to change the subject. In the past year, as I’ve had interactions with various manga artists, I've witnessed the impact of the pandemic in the writing process and the mental health of manga artists in general. Have there been any changes for you?

Nagabe: Due to the pandemic, of course, I thought about things like my daily life, how to go out, and how to enforce hygiene. But if I speak of The Girl from the Other Side, I feel that its world has gotten closer to our reality. In the story, there’s a curse, and one character would say “it’s safe to stay close to non-humans from the Outside as long as you take proper precautions” while another would say “we should eliminate the cause if nobody can take responsibility”, and they keep arguing. They are both right, and that is why there is friction. I think our feelings and societal reactions toward COVID-19 is very similar to that of The Girl from the Other Side.

Yamazaki: My assistant has been working from far away since before the pandemic, so our work itself hasn’t really been affected at all. But the fact that I can’t go out to gather information and materials for my work has put a damper on my mood. I can feel the significant influence on my work speed, physical condition, and mental health. I’ve always thought I was an indoor person, but in the situation where I am restricted to go out, it’s making me want to do so even more.

── I really understand. There are many people around me saying that they had thought they were indoor people but they got depressed when they couldn’t go outside for a long period of time. Along this topic, I have an impression that manga artists are more used to being at home than people with regular jobs, so you must have some useful tips on how to make it more enjoyable. Do you?

Nagabe: Leave it to me. After all, I am a professional at that.

── I’m counting on you (laughs).

Nagabe: In my case, I have three rooms: one is my workroom, one is my bedroom, and one is my living space, so I feel like I can make my home more comfortable just by not mixing up my personal and professional life. Also, it's exhausting to keep up 100% of my attention, so I think it's okay to cut corners where I can. I also wear pajamas except in my workspace. For me, it's important to keep my workspace clean and crisp and separate from my personal life. Otherwise, I think people should invest in hobbies. Yeah, I think so. Let's paint, everyone. Drawing is good. [To the reader] Why don't you draw pictures, too?

Yamazaki: Haha. I am an indoor person only when I have a lot of materials to read and work, so not being able to go out gives me a fair amount of stress. If I had to pick, I’d say looking at photo books, cooking, trying out musical instruments, or woodworking or something. Woodworking in particular is great because you can develop your concentration and you end up with a finished product in your hands. Just shaving the bark of a tree branch with a knife is fun, so I think it’s good to have a knife. It’s convenient.

  Questions to each other from their commitments to creation to the favorite features of non-humans

─ Since we are here to talk altogether, I would like to ask you to interview each other. First, Nagabe-san, could you please ask questions to Yamazaki-san?

Nagabe: I’d like to know your process of thinking out and what you are particular about in creating your stories. When I read The Ancient Magus’ Bride, the first thing that struck me was that Yamazaki-sensei uses motifs from Western mythology, fairies, and folklore, and then creates a human drama about how those characters confront each other and express their feelings. So I am wondering how you incorporate the elements that exist in fantasy into your own stories and characters.

Yamazaki: A human drama…… Can I call it a human drama? I'd be happy if I can!

Nagabe: I'm sure you can!

Yamazaki: To be honest, there are many parts where I’m not really sure how I’ve applied the concept of fantasy to the characters. When I'm thinking about a story, my brain starts going "This is it," "This person is that," or "That can be incorporated into this development,” and it often puts different pieces together like a puzzle.  On the other hand, when those things don't come out naturally, it's hard as hell to write a story (laughs). I usually read books on mythology and folklore, and I often have a stock of ideas that I can use in development. Perhaps it's because I don't think of fantasy as something that can't happen in reality, so I create a story where humans meet fantasy in an ordinary way. That's probably why I create the way I do. I feel that these things can happen right next to us, like the change of seasons.

Nagabe: Are there any techniques or theories that you consider in manga? For example, I'd like to know if there are any techniques that you use when drawing manga, such as creating a development every four pages or adjusting the number of frames.

Yamazaki: People have different opinions on this, but I try to include some funny parts here and there. I’ve had some people say they prefer for me to write seriously throughout weighty stories so that they won’t be distracted. But some say they enjoy those funny parts. Either way, I am enjoying drawing those scenes, so that’s the direction I’m going. Other than that, I only pay attention to the basics. Not too many frames, not too few, no more than three lines of dialogues because it’s hard to read, and wide horizontal lines for speech bubbles. When the bubbles are long in length, it's a problem when it’s translated into other languages.  

Nagabe: Oh, I see. I'm just curious, but you create manga, illustrations, and novels, and is there any new field you would like to work on?

Yamazaki: I'm mostly satisfied because I was able to get my hands on all three of those (laughs). I originally wanted to be a writer, but I found it overwhelmingly unsuitable, so I got serious about manga. If I don't have to think about what I’m suited for, writing picture books or game and anime scripts sound interesting.

Nagabe: Now, I'm going to assume that you like non-humans, but what are your favorite things about them? I want you to talk about it as much as you can.

Yamazaki: I don’t know if I’m qualified to talk about non-humans just because I like non-human characters, but personally, I think it’s their differences that attract me. Compared to humans, they look different, think differently, speak different languages, live in different ways, and have different cultures. But when you think about it, this all applies to humans, doesn’t it? If you are from different countries or even areas, all of the things I mentioned can be the differences among humans. I think I enjoy non-human characters because those differences are easier to see. The further away they are from humans and the more difficult it is to communicate with them, the more excited I get. But that also doesn’t mean that I like all non-humans just because. They need to have attractive inner qualities as well. I do love non-human characters, but the basic premise is that characters have to be attractive and stories have to be interesting!

  Nagabe: Yeah, I agree.

Yamazaki: Going back to the question, if I had to pick the best feature of non-humans, I would say that it's the fact that they seem to be able to understand humans, but can’t. Even when they are next to us and looking at the same things, what we see are different and we never understand each other’s point of view. I love the fact that we continue to be individuals who don’t intersect, don’t mix, and can’t be fixed into something. But even then, the human character and the non-human character stick around together! I love that concept!I love the fact that they seem to be attracted to each other but are not, and that they will forever remain different creatures. After all, the existence of humans is essential for non-humans because the premise of non-humans is that there are humans. Therefore, I don't get too excited when I don't know much about the non-human characters. If possible, I want to know their thoughts, tastes, words, and deeds of the being before liking them. Although, in some cases, I get really excited about characters based on their appearance only…. So, I guess it’s like an accident to find non-human characters I like.

Nagabe: Is that right? By the way, what do you think of cat ears? Do you like them or not? Is it a beast, a demi-human, or a non-human? Please tell me your opinion.

Yamazaki: There are many factors that I would personally consider, such as how the cat ears are attached, the facial structure, whether it has human ears in addition to cat ears, its lifestyle, and whether it seems to think like a beast rather than a human. Whether there are any features other than the cat ears that differ from humans is probably the main question. Personally, I don't think that a human with only cat ears can be considered a non-human, but in some cases, it can be, so it really depends on the character.

Nagabe: I see.

Yamazaki: For example, if the lifestyle is that of a feral cat or feline, it is a beast, if the lifestyle is culturally different from that of humans, it is a demi-human, and if the lifestyle is clearly different from that of humans, it is non-human. I think it’s important to keep in mind that people will judge cat ears, or rather animal ears, differently depending on who they are. I believe in freedom of what people think, each individual is wonderful, and you can step away from things you disagree with.

Nagabe: Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Lastly, I like non-humans so much that I draw them all the time, but I can’t find the appeal of human features. I don’t find it interesting to draw humans, so please help me.

Yamazaki: What? I'm not very good at drawing humans either! (laughs)

Nagabe: (laughs).

Yamazaki: To be honest, I feel that I’m not very good at drawing in general, but appeal… appeal…. I personally get motivated when I feel I’ve drawn something well, so I draw the features I like with my own fetishism in full swing. Eyes, hair, waistline, and facial expressions. That’s about it, I guess. So when I get into a slump, I am stuck there for a long time.  

── Now it’s time for Yamazaki-san to ask Nagabe-san questions.

Yamazaki: I've heard that you draw very quickly, but do you have any weaknesses or strengths in terms of creating a storyboard, plotting, drafting, or line drawing?

Nagabe: I don’t like creating a storyboard and plotting. I get bored easily so I don’t like to spend too much time creating one thing. If I think too much, I don’t make any progress, and as a result, my focus shifts to other things. Creating a storyboard requires an awareness of the direction and progression of the story as well as its intentions. I’m not accustomed to these very well and I can’t supplement these with just my drawing ability. 

Yamazaki: I also have a hard time with storyboards, so I understand. Are there any particular things that you can’t compromise in your work?

Nagabe: It's the composition of the picture. I like to deliberately draw blank spaces, and I think adding meaning to the empty spaces and adding emotion to the positions of the characters is an expression that is possible only in the framed world of manga, so I'm very particular about that.  

Yamazaki: Thank you very much. Now, do you have any activities or something that you do when you just can't bring yourself to work?

Nagabe: At first, I would draw the easy parts. For example, I start with tasks that I think will be easy, such as drawing only one frame, drawing only persons, or drawing only speech bubbles. I don't know if it makes sense, but I think motivation comes after I begin the work, so I try to start with easy tasks to get the engine going.

Yamazaki: I see. This is the same question you asked me earlier, but I would also like to know what Nagabe-san’s favorite features about non-humans are.

Nagabe:  Okay, you sure you have enough time to talk about it?

Yamazaki: (laughs).

Nagabe: First of all, I like the way they look. Sometimes they are human skeletons, sometimes they are four-legged, and they are just distorted and diverse. The visuals are beyond imagination, like a living creature or a sculpture, and I like the eeriness of it. Next is regarding common sense. For example, they may eat pet animals as food, and the pets just accept that they will be eaten. Is this similar to the Cambyses Lottery (Fujiko F. Fujio)? What is considered common sense in one country is considered heretical in another. I love the interaction created by these cultural differences.

Yamazaki: Yeah.

Nagabe: The other thing is their life expectancy. It doesn't matter if it's a long life or a short life. At the moment you are born, it’s decided that you will not live the same amount of time as others and I like the impermanence of it. I want to create a new feeling of discomfort that has never existed before through this concept. There's no end to what I want to say, but I think I put a lot of emphasis on appearance and external characteristics. It's like the characteristics of animal features, and I hope those shapes have meanings.

Yamazaki: I've always thought that you are so good at depicting the interaction between humans and non-humans who don't have control over human language.

Nagabe: Thank you!

Yamazaki: Regardless of whether you draw them or not, which do you prefer, the ones who can control human language or the ones who can't?

Nagabe: I think both are good. If they use words, they can at least communicate instantly, and if they don't, I can create drama through their trial and error process of interacting. But for a story, I think I like the ones that don't use words because it gives them a stronger sense of foreignness and makes it easier to depict the difference between humans and non-humans.

Yamazaki: So, do you have a favorite genre for a non-human with animal features?

Nagabe: All... of them?

Yamazaki: (laughs). Dogs, cats, birds, reptiles and amphibians, marine mammals, insects, etc. These are not animals, but robots and androids would be fine as well.

Nagabe: Anything is fine as long as it's not a human.

Yamazaki: (laughs).

── I can feel Nagabe-san’s love for non-humans (laughs). Lastly, please share a message to the readers who are supporting your work.

Nagabe: Thank you for reading. In my works, I try to eliminate or omit explanations and dialogues as much as possible, so there may be many places where you may wonder what's going on. I've tried to leave room for your imagination, so I hope you'll enjoy the intentional blanks!

Yamazaki: Thank you so much for your support. It's a story that has lots of twists, but there's always something beyond that. I hope you will enjoy it. Thank you for your continued support!

      By: Guest Author

[irikahkrios]

okay i wanna yell about this au

SO. first some ground rules re: how these werewolves and vampires work, ie. which bits of "traditional lore" we're keeping and which bits we aren't and which fun things we're adding in Because Aliens:

- lycanthropy is hereditary, but can also be given through bites

- vampirism is given through being made to drink the blood of a vampire, just being bitten/fed on by a vampire doesn't make you one it just means you probably have less blood in your body now lmao

- the existence of supernatural creatures is a secret to everyone except said supernatural creatures.

- all aliens are still aliens and the dextro/levo thing is still very much in effect. turian or quarian vampires can only feed on turians and quarians, and vampires of any of the levo species can only feed on levo species.

- any organic species can become a vampire, but only humans can be werewolves. there have, however, been rumors of other species being able to transform into large variants of native wildlife on their own home planets, but nothing has been confirmed. (but as the author of this au i can, in fact, confirm it.)

- vampire powers include increased strength and speed, supernaturally heightened senses, and a form of hypnosis for subduing their victims. the strength of this last ability varies with the individual. werewolf powers include "can turn into a big goddamn wolf."

- vampire weaknesses include direct sunlight on any planet (near-deadly or deadly, depending on length of exposure), any sort of holy symbols (burns the skin on contact, and even being in general proximity is just uncomfortable), and certain plants (garlic is the best example from earth, but most species have their own traditional equivalents. all of these will work to repel vampires of any species. it doesn't hurt them it just gives them Really Bad Vibes and they'll usually stay away). also, they can only enter a residence if invited in. the main werewolf weakness is silver.

- a werewolf's wolf form looks like an actual large wolf, though some individuals can enter a sort of "in-between" wolfish humanoid form. transformations are usually voluntary, but certain environmental factors, most notably a full moon (on earth or any other planet) can force an involuntary transformation. some werewolves live in environments where this does not happen (and some specifically move away from earth and onto space stations or moonless planets specifically to avoid this problem), and thus involuntary transformations are not a problem for them.

- vampires don't have body heat because they're technically sorta dead, and as such are always room temperature. werewolves run hot.

- vampires do tend to sleep in coffins during the daytime. it's an old tradition, but if it ain't broke, don't fix it. they need somewhere dark and enclosed to stay sheltered while sleeping during the day, and a nice, sturdy coffin fits the bill. even vampires of species whose death rites don't traditionally include coffins/burials have adopted the tradition of sleeping in them, because it's just so convenient.

- half-vampires are a thing. they can live on either blood or normal food, can develop painful skin blisters after prolonged exposure to sunlight but aren't severely weakened or killed by it like full vampires (but as a result still prefer to dress super covered up or just mostly come out at night), and age normally for their species until young adulthood and then stay that age forever.

- vampires and half-vampires are immortal. werewolves can choose to be immortal, they can literally just. magically stop and start aging at will.

NOW. FOR THE ACTUAL CHARACTER STUFF.

- thane and irikah met pretty similarly to how they did in canon, but with thane as a vampire instead of an assassin. irikah was walking home one night and heard a struggle in a dark alley, Rushed Headlong Into Danger (as she is prone to doing) and found thane about to feed on somebody, and threw herself between him and his intended victim. he was so shaken up by her anger, her lack of fear, and this act of selflessness that he just ran away without killing either of them.

- later on he tracked her down to apologize and they started a tentative friendship and then a romance, got married and had little half-vampire kolyat, and eventually after a few years thane finally turned irikah into a vampire too and now they get to be together forever.

- (also this is self-indulgent but at one point pre her getting turned i am really into the concept of him needing to feed in a really inconvenient situation and her trusting and loving him enough to let him drink a little bit of her blood because that is a vampire romance trope that i am WEAK FOR. aaaaaa the trust!!! the love!!!! the tenderness!!!!! i love them)

- she was the first one to consider that it might be possible to survive on the blood of animals instead of people, and they started living that way. the three of them are a little family/coven that stay together for centuries, though kolyat sometimes goes off on his own for a few decades so sometimes it's just the two of them.

- emmett was bitten by a werewolf as a young teenager and kicked out by his birth parents after his first transformation. he wandered around in the wilderness for a while and was eventually found and taken in by a werewolf pack consisting of moms hannah and natalie shepard and their four children. he finds a home with his new family and lets himself age in real time until he reaches around the age of 30, and then stops aging.

- after a couple hundred years, after first contact and after humans join the galactic community, he moves to the citadel to just kinda chill. while there he begins to realize what a massive vampire presence there is down in the wards. he's cool with them and they're cool with him, they just kinda nod at each other and go about their business lmao

- garrus is probably the closest to canon in terms of time period and setup. he starts off as a c-sec officer in the 2180s, investigating strange activities and what almost seems like a weird supernatural cult?? basically he goes off the deep end rambling to his superiors about supernatural conspiracies and gets fired from his job, and goes out to try and fight this vampire cult himself. he does manage to find a few vampires but he's no match for them, and instead of killing him they decide it'd be funny to turn him instead. so he wakes up as a vampire and is understandably freaked out. luckily for him a certain werewolf happens to be nearby and takes him under his wing, and introduces him to other, nicer vampires who teach him the ropes. said vampires probably include thane and irikah??

- i'm really tempted to give this an actual plot goddammit this is the pirates au all over again

- anyway the four of them know each other and after a few decades, just like in any universe, things get Cool and Fun and Polyamorous

[timeagainreviews]

Vengence on Gallifrey

Welcome back, friends. We’re meeting up sooner than we usually do! I could get used to the idea of a new episode every Wednesday and Sunday. Wouldn’t that be swanky? In the time since part one of "Spyfall," there has been a lot of speculation and theories about what would be in store for part two. How many of your fan predictions came true? I know a couple of mine did. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

Before part two aired, I revisited part one. I was curious to review O’s storyline in light of the big reveal. Would I notice any nods or giveaways to his being the Master a second time around? The answer is basically, no. Other than the Master’s reaction of "ridiculous," to the inside of the TARDIS, there’s not much telegraphing to be had. I did, however, notice some things that seem head-slappingly stupid upon a second viewing.

My pal Steve compared the episode to "Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker," in that it moves so fast that you don’t have enough time to realise how stupid it actually is. One of those things I noticed the second time around was the big glass box in the middle of O’s home. My mind had kind of glazed over by that point that I never questioned how stupid it was that he would have a spring-loaded glass box in his ceiling. Now, I’m only human, but the Doctor isn’t. Why didn’t that seem weird to her that he would have a trap hanging from the ceiling? It made me think of Troll 2 when the dad walks over and grabs a fire extinguisher conveniently propped against the house. Why was it there? Because the plot demanded it.

Despite this, there is one thing I feel deserves saying. As much as I liked "Kerblam!" "The Witchfinders," or "It Takes You Away," I haven’t watched any of them since they first aired. I haven’t watched any of season 11 since my initial viewing. Regardless of any plotholes I found, I wanted to rewatch Spyfall. And I think that goes to show that despite various failings on Chris Chibnall’s behalf, he’s got me watching the show again! What then is different?

My first response would be that the stakes are higher this time around. A lot of that has to do with the fact that the Master is back. Regardless of how overused he may or may not be in the new series, their relationship has gravity. As an agent of chaos, the Master ups the tension as we have a history with him. Like with the Dalek in "Resolution," he lends a familiar element that this new era deeply needed. In these past few days, I was truly worried about how our friends were going to get out of this mess. I haven’t felt that way about Doctor Who in a long time.

When we last saw our heroes, the Doctor had been transported to the brain realm and the companions were about to crash on a plane. Through a bit of time travel, the Doctor saves the day via phone app, thus continuing the trend of the Doctor messing with Ryan’s phone. At least the dude got to keep his data this time. I found the whole sequence with the Doctor making plaques and laminating belaboured the point a bit, but it was cute.

We learn that the Doctor is walking around in some sort of synaptic realm. She meets Ada Lovelace who seems to think it's her own mind, but that was her best guess. I would complain that it was a weird design if it was a mind, but then I remember "The Invisible Enemy," and realise how much worse it could have looked! According to Ada, she’s been visiting this place since she was a wee bairn. She seems rather cool about the whole thing but is perplexed to see the Doctor.

The two flash into Ada’s timeline of 1834, where the Doctor has found herself at a steampunk convention. I found some of the steam-powered devices like the grenade to be a bit moronic. It was so unbelievable that my initial reaction was that she was in some sort of alternate history. But no, it’s just goofy. The Master discovers the Doctor survived and goes to finish the job. Before the episode, I was thinking "I hope they show the inside of his TARDIS." Turns out they already had. I guess it’s the same size on the inside. I had kind of expected it to be like Clara and Me’s TARDIS in that the diner was just part of the facade with the real bit hidden away. But no, his console is right there in the main room. Weird. Also, remember when chameleon circuits used to make TARDISes look inconspicuous? The biggest thing we ever saw it do was when the Master’s TARDIS became a truck. The coolest camouflage still goes to my man Professor Chronotis’ TARDIS in Shada. It was just a door along a wall. How cool is that? Not complaining, merely lamenting the loss of simplicity.

From within the Master’s TARDIS we see Barton confront the Master. The conversation between these two really only serves to show Barton as alive, and establish the power structure which is that the Master is in charge, which we already knew. It also establishes the existence of a sculpture that looks like something a third-year art student might have half-assed while hungover. Barton goes to intercept the companions, while the Master takes care of the Doctor. He makes a grand entrance with his tissue compression device doling out murder without reason. Did anyone else wonder why the device seemed not only to shrink people but also to turn them stiff like plastic or wood? I suppose compacting material like that could increase rigidity, but it was an odd choice.

To get the Master to stop killing people, the Doctor placates his ego by getting on her knees and calling him Master. It was, for lack of a better word- hot. Ada shoots the Master with a steam-powered gun and they get away. This was more of Chibnall’s weird relationship with guns. The Doctor says to Ada that she doesn’t approve, but the second Ada uses a grenade the Doctor is like "Hell yeah, this is my bad bitch Ada! Represent!" It’s like in "The Ghost Monument," when she hated the use of guns against a group of emotionless robots and then used a bomb to take out the same group of emotionless robots. It’s almost as though it’s not the killing the Doctor hates, it’s the inefficiency of the whole thing. "Mate, use bombs, way more effective!" Okay, Chris.

In the last five minutes of part one, I wasn’t sure if Sacha Dhawan was going to be a good Master or not. I was worried he was going to be too flamboyant, but the second he hits the screen in part two, it’s as though he had always been in the role. I really love him and Jodie Whittaker’s chemistry. It’s great to see her Doctor faced with someone truly evil, and I feel as though it’s given her a lot to work with. Watching the two of them verbally spar is nothing short of delightful.

Barton comes up empty-handed in his search for the companions, which is no sweat off his back as he is Mr Tech Empire. After a little bit of finagling with the internet, their faces are soon posted everywhere as wanted criminals. Exactly like in "The Sound of Drums," they’re going to have to go off the grid. They even take refuge in a construction site! Doing so gives them a bit of downtime to talk and regroup. In a moment of clarity, it dons on them that they don’t really know the Doctor all that well. They decide that after all is said and done, they’re going to have a talk with the Doctor. Like many people, I was hoping that they would visit this concept, as series eleven made them seem a little too keen. It was a welcome bit of character development.

Another thing I love about this scene is that Graham isn’t annoying in it. "But Natalie," you say, "I thought you loved Graham!" And you would be right, I do love Graham. But I feel like it’s worth pointing out that they didn’t ruin him. Usually with a lot of shows and movies, if something is good or popular with fans, the tendency is to overdo it. This is the same lovable dude from the previous series and I feel that should be acknowledged. One of the things I really admire about Chris Chibnall is that he really seems to know his own character’s voices. One of my biggest issues with Clara Oswald is that her personality was all over the board. We don’t get that here.

Having travelled with the Doctor for a while now, the companions decide to carry on like she would have them do. They still have their spy gear and like exploding cufflinks and Graham’s laser shoes, and their timing couldn’t have been more perfect as the baddies from part one show up. Sadly, they’re not the Voord as me and many others had hoped. They’re a species known as the Kasaavin. It’s a name that’s about as inspired as Ranskoor Av Kolos, and that is not a compliment. It’s simply a very forgettable name. I dunno what it is, but I really hate the way Chris Chibnall names stuff. He’s willing to do groan-inducing puns like "Arachnids in the UK," or "Dinosaurs on a Spaceship," but then decides to reign it in with "Resolution," despite the naming convention established in previous Dalek stories like "Revelation of the Daleks," or "Remembrance of the Daleks." Though I suppose in his defence, "Resolution," is about a singular Dalek. Either way, Graham’s laser shoes save the day. It’s ridiculous, but unlike the Master, it is a compliment when I say it.

The Doctor has now regrouped with Ada Lovelace and Charles Babbage. After a bit of fangirling on her part, she goes into Doctor brain mode. She pieces together that the multiple maps of the earth are, like I had guessed, different points in time. The aliens are spying on important people throughout time, for some reason that still makes zero sense to me. Why would they care about the Earth’s technology? Wouldn’t their computers completely best our technology? What threat could humans pose to them? I thought their sights were set on taking over the universe, but now it appears their sites are set on one planet’s technology. I guess you’ve got to start somewhere.

The Doctor surmises that the Kasaavin must have difficulty keeping their form in our universe, thus a need for a machine that keeps them stable. This, of course, is the bad art student sculpture we saw in the Master’s TARDIS which has now found its way into Charles Babbage’s study. This must have been too close to the truth as at this moment a Kasaavin shows up. The Doctor uses this as an opportunity to hitch a ride off of the Kasaavin’s energy surge in hopes to end up back in the present day. As she does, Ada grabs her hand and is transported as well. Instead of 2020, they end up in the year 1943 during a Nazi blitz on Paris. Literally, the first person they encounter is another historical figure- Noor Inayat Khan. That’s gotta be some kind of record for the show- three historical figures in one episode.

After establishing that they aren’t Nazis, the Doctor and Ada hide in the safety of Noor’s home. However, it is then that the Master shows up in full Nazi regalia and orders a team of Nazi soldiers to fire into the floor and leaves. I, like many of you, was immediately confused. The Nazis weren’t known to ally themselves with people of the Master’s current complexion. However, we learn that by using a series of perception filters, the Master has disguised himself as white, which makes sense in relation to the show. We discover the Doctor and Ada narrowly averted death as they were, in fact, hiding in the floor.

On the other end of things, Graham, Ryan, and Yaz use being under surveillance to draw Barton’s people into a trap. Using Graham’s laser shoes, they steal a vehicle and head to stop Barton. Speaking of Barton, we’re treated to a deliciously dark scene between him and his mother. It was pretty obvious that the woman strapped to a chair in his bad guy lair had to be his mother, but that didn’t make it any less funny.  This guy is such a piece of work that not even his mother likes him. He tells her that she is to be the first person to be subjected to his grand scheme. After being taken over by blue electricity, she appears to die. What a dick.

Back in Paris, the Doctor realises Noor is a British spy. Using her telegraph, the Doctor baits the Master by tapping out four beats- the heartbeat of a Time Lord. Unable to resist, the Master taps four beats in response to the Doctor. What happened next was one of the coolest things I’ve seen on Doctor Who in a while. The Doctor and the Master make contact telepathically, something of which hasn’t been seen in the show for years. I quite literally threw my hands up into the air with joy. Kudos to Chris Chibnall for giving me the nerd feels.

The Doctor and the Master meet up atop the Eifel Tower where they have a rather intimate conversation. We find out it was the Master who killed C in the previous episode. So yes, they did waste Stephen Fry, which officially makes me a disappoint. The Doctor deduces that the Master isn’t actually in control of the Kasaavin. Instead, the Master has merely allied himself with them, claiming to have given them a broader scope of vision. I’m not exactly sure how going from wanting to take over the universe to taking over a small planet is a broadening in scope, but stop asking questions and watch the show.

Now, remember how I just gave kudos to Chris Chibnall? Well, I am going to have to take those back. In an attempt to delay the Master, the Doctor gives him away to the Nazis. She makes them think he is a British spy and directs them to their location. However, not only does she do this, but she also disables his perception filters. So effectively, the Doctor, a white woman, gives up a brown man to the Nazis. It wasn’t enough to make them think he’s a spy, they had to also see that he had brown skin. I was honestly a bit disgusted by this. How would they even recognise him as the same guy they were told was a spy? They’re going to arrive and find a person of colour in a Nazi uniform and not know who he was. Jesus Christ, Chibnall.

The Doctor uses the Master’s TARDIS to get back to the present time, just in time to find Barton unrolling his big plan. He goes on a long speech about how we give all of our information to corporations and how we should watch who we allow to pry into our privacy. It’s the social media equivalent of "Don’t blink." It’s a very effective bit of writing on par with one of Steven Moffat’s better speeches. It’s a shame it was preceded by the Doctor selling the Master out to Nazis.

So what’s the big plan? Well, remember the spy woman in part one whose DNA had been rewritten? And remember how Barton was only 93% human? It turns out that the Kasaavin plan to rewrite the DNA of the human race and turn us into hard drives by storing information within our DNA. They do so by using our smartphones and tablets against us. In the same arc of blue electricity as Mother Barton, people all over the world begin to be assimilated. During this entire press conference scene, I’m not sure if any of the actors in the audience were given proper direction as they have the most benign faces throughout most of this. Barton, whose speech went from zero to megalomaniacal in the first few seconds, should have sent up red flags across the room, but instead, they were as serene as cows. It was bizarre.

That was it, that was the big plan. Turn people into hard drives. I think? I had to ask a few of my friends what they thought it was supposed to be because I was worried I had missed something. Were they trying to take over the bodies of humans so they could have corporeal form? If so, then why say they wanted to store data in our DNA? Why do they need so much data storage anyway? Have they got a huge stash of hentai in their universe? Were they torrenting all of Doctor Who? Seriously, I do not understand their motivation or their methods. But honestly, I hardly care, because the real star of the show is the Master.

Having waited 77 years, the Master shows up just in time to be kind of late to the show. Like, he didn’t even buy a gun in that time. I do however look forward to the Big Finish audios pertaining to that era of his life. However, in the meantime, the Doctor took it upon herself to put a bug in the Kasaavin’s system which negates their mission and reverses the conversion. She informs the Kasaavin that the Master had planned to double-cross them. As they depart from our universe, they take the Master with them, but not before he mentions to the Doctor that Gallifrey was destroyed.

After getting Ada and Noor to their respective timelines, the Doctor goes to see Gallifrey for herself. Sure enough, the once-great Time Lord society has been raised to the ground. It’s a powerful bit of acting on Jodie Whittaker’s behalf. Devastated, the Doctor returns to the TARDIS only to be greeted by a hologram of the Master telling her it was him that did it, as a sort of act of punishment or vengeance. This is a much needed source of motivation for the Master’s current rage, considering how much of a departure it is from Missy’s redemption arc. Remember the timeless child storyline I’ve been dreading? Well, I’m genuinely surprised to be sitting here today to tell you that it has piqued my interest. Having something to do with the founders of Time Lord society, Rassilon and Omega, the implication is that their legend is based upon a lie, thus the Master’s final warning to the Doctor at the end of part one. 

So who is the timeless child? Well, I am relieved to say I don’t think it’s the Doctor. My wildest guess is that she was some sort of person that didn’t experience time like the rest of us and was killed to harness that power. Think Rusty Venture powering his dream machine with the heart of an orphan. Like I said, my wildest guess. The biggest takeaway from all of this is that I’m sitting here speculating about Doctor Who. With Moffat’s plotlines oftentimes leading nowhere interesting, I had grown wary of speculation. Why wonder what was next when it was most likely something disappointing? It’s nice to feel intrigued by Doctor Who again.

Upon returning to her fam, the Doctor is distant and quiet. The companions can tell something is up, but as they decided earlier, they needed to have a talk with the Doctor. The Doctor concedes and tells them the basics- she’s a Time Lord, she’s from Gallifrey, she can regenerate her body, the Master was her friend. This bit of truth on her behalf seems to please the trio as they don’t press the issue further. The Doctor throws the TARDIS into gear and we’re left lingering on her face for a moment before the episode ends.

Afterwards, my wife and boyfriend and I sat in silence. As the biggest Whovian in the house, I think they were waiting for my reaction. And in some ways, I think I was too. I really enjoyed the episode, I did. But I had my issues, which I’ve listed extensively above. My main qualms at that time were of structure. Much like the first episode, this one was clunky. The pacing was definitely better than last time, but still had issues. But otherwise, I needed to think about what I had just seen. I liked the anti-fascism angle, save for the Doctor selling out the Master to the Nazis. And there were a lot of great callbacks to classic Who. My wife had checked out at the DNA storage bit because she’s a giant nerd and was feeling nitpicky about the science in a science fiction show. But it was Duncan whose comments I think were the most on point. He told me that he, as a casual viewer, was lost throughout much of the episode. For him, a little bit of explanation peppered throughout the episode would have gone a long way.

One of the most persistent flaws in classic Doctor Who is that oftentimes they would explain what was happening within the final episode of a story, leaving you in the dark for the first few episodes. In the same way, Spyfall had left him feeling lost. I even said it recently that I am not the kind of fan Doctor Who needs to please. I will watch the show regardless of its quality. If someone as fanatical as myself was feeling confused, imagine how my boyfriend felt. It is, as he said, why people start tuning out. The show is on course to what may possibly be one of it’s best seasons in years. I’m hoping that the next few episodes give us a bit of breathing room before throwing us back into the deep end.

[from-the-gutter-to-the-stars]

A long nerdy review of Thor: Love and Thunder

There’s a theory that holds that with a few exceptions (T2: Judgement Day, Godfather Part II, Empire Strikes Back, Aliens etc) the sequel is always worse

That’s difficult to judge in the world of the MCU where every film is linked to every other film but this can be called the sequel to Taika Waititi’s first Thor film and regrettably that does indeed seem to be the case. Now Thor: Love and Thunder is not a disaster. It’s not a Godfather Part III or god forbid a The Last Skywalker. There’s a lot to enjoy and a lot to love. There are parts of the film that are good. But much like a donut, the (w)hole is less than the sum of its parts.

That’s a bit of pastry humor for you there. Much like a donut, I don’t want this review getting too dry.

As with my previous review I’ll start with the stuff I genuinely enjoyed

Chris Hemsworth is a joy to watch as Thor. He’s the boisterous idiot with a heart of gold my little queer heart melts for and even in scenes where Thor is screwing up or being a bit of a jerk he gives the character an irresistible zest for life and wholesome and cheerful outlook that makes it impossible not to find him adorable

Tessa Thompson, while given depressingly little to do in this film is still wonderful as Valkyrie and the few scenes she shared with Natalie Portman’s Jane Foster had me wanting to see more of their dynamic. Her presence in the film was one of the things I was most looking forward to and the only thing that let me down was how little we ended up getting of her.

Natalie Portman as Jane Foster/The Mighty Thor is wonderful and in addition to the aforementioned moments the scene with her and Darcy (Kat Dennings) is especially moving and she and Hemsworth have some moments that conjure up far more chemistry and emotion than the first two Thor films managed for their characters

The soundtrack is fantastic and rivals the first two Guardians of the Galaxy movies for best chosen musical tracks

Christian Bale as Gorr the God Butcher delivers some memorable moments. The opening that gives his origin is emotionally affecting and establishes a solid backstory for how he came to this point and why he’s so full of hate for the gods and his moments later in the film are effectively creepy with him as a creepy rotting mix of Don Bluth’s cartoon Rasputin and Voldemort and playing the role for maximum scenery chewing villainy while still having enough tragic elements to him to avoid becoming utterly one dimensional

Korg is adorable here and his narration is a welcome touch of whimsy that also provides an effective tool for delivering backstory and information that’s handy for the audience to know

There are lots of chucklesome moments and moments that had me laughing out loud in the theatre while watching this so this is definitely a movie with a solid sense of humor

The opening with the Guardians of the Galaxy is good fun and there’s some fun silliness with Thor’s adventures with them

I liked the goats!

The goats were delightful. As was the scene in which they are “Gifted” to Thor by the clearly pissed off people whose temple he accidentally destroyed  

The stuff with Zeus was great and the concept of a city of Gods from different pantheons is a great one. In fact the movie throws out quite a few good concepts like this but frustratingly does very little with them

The climax is a mixed bag but has some good moments including the final confrontation between the Thors and Gorr and Thor’s farewell to Jane.

But unfortunately for all the good in the film we now need to talk about the bad

I’ll start with the thing that annoyed me the most personally: The complete lack of any real on screen acknowledgement of Valkyrie’s bisexuality. Much was said in the lead up to this film about how Valkyrie would be properly represented as bisexual in this film, about how she’d be looking for a queen to rule beside her, how we’d get to see a queer on screen romance. What we actually get is…a scene of her kissing a random unnamed woman’s hand. Oh and a mention of how she had a girlfriend who is now dead, so Fridging and Bury Your Gays in a one-two punch there. And that’s it. More time is given to Thor’s romance with his damn hammer than there is to any kind of queer romance for Valkyrie or any real moments of her actually being bisexual unless you count blink and you’ll miss them bits and some moments that kind of imply she might have a thing for Jane

Look I know that romance isn’t the main focus of these films but given the sheer amount of screentime devoted to Thor and Jane’s romance I don’t think its unreasonable to ask that Valkyrie actually get the female love interest we were told she’d be getting. There is not a single scene of her and another woman so much as holding hands in the entire film. Given how much Marvel were talking up how the characters sexuality would totally be a thing here it comes off feeling not just half-assed but not even a quarter-assed.

And speaking of Valkyrie she not only doesn’t get any queer romance in this film she gets little to do full stop. She’s almost entirely side-lined and then gets injured in the penultimate fight, basically says “Sorry I can’t be part of the climax of the film now” and proceeds to vanish from the plot without so much as a cameo in the films end.

When you compare that to Ragnarok which compared to this film had a LOT more to fit in...The Grandmaster, Hulk, Hela, Executioner, Loki etc....but STILL gave Valkyrie a decent amount of screen time, a character arc, a backstory and an important role in the climax? To have her just thrown away here feels depressingly reductive

This trend continues with Sif who has been ill-served by all the movies and unfortunately is served even worse here. She appears for all of two minutes, loses an arm and then vanishes off screen for medical attention never to be mentioned again. I half expected them to say she’d been sent to a hospital planet to recover  

Jane Foster is likewise honestly often wasted here. While the character in the comics is portrayed as a hero easily the equal of Thor, here the character ends up feeling more like a plot device for Thor’s character than a protagonist in her own right. Both she and Valkyrie come off more as sidekicks and damsels in distress, which is especially disappointing after how powerful and bad-ass Valkyrie was in Ragnarok.

But most galling of all regarding Jane Foster in the film? Jane Foster is killed off. Killed off in a moment that only exists to help Thor’s personal growth and to provide a moment that convinces Gorr to change his ways at the last moment. So in other words a woman is killed off purely to provide resolution to the story arcs of two male characters.

Women in Refrigerators came out about two decades ago at this point. Why are writers still doing this?

It’s especially frustrating given that in the comics Jane is still alive and well. She beats the cancer. So this wasn’t simply adapting a bad story, it was changing the characters story to make the way it ended worse.

And on the subject of the story/character arcs in this film we really need to talk about those or more accurately about the lack of them.

I’ve nothing against wacky comedy business. Ragnarok is one of my favorite Marvel movies of all time. But the characters in Ragnarok still had an arc. The movie had themes. Thor’s character, Loki’s character, Valkyrie’s character and Hela’s character all had an arc and motivations that made sense within the story.

Here?

In the immortal words of Homer Simpson: “It’s just a bunch of stuff that happened”

Gorr’s sudden change of heart never feels earned or believable. Him leaving his daughter in the care of Thor, while it might lead to an adorable moment at the movies ending, feels like it comes out of nowhere. “Certainly, man who I was trying to kill moments ago and who is everything I claim to hate, I shall leave my child with you. You really seem like an excellent choice to adopt her based on absolutely nothing”

Likewise the film hints at having some kind of point to make. We see at the beginning that the gods of Gorr’s people were callous, cruel and didn’t care about their followers. We see in the opening scene with Thor that he can still be thoughtless in the destruction he causes in his battles and dismissive of the way it impacts mortals. We see in the scenes with Zeus that some of the gods are self-interested and cowardly jerks. In short we see that Gorr has a point in his belief that the Gods are bad.

But there is no resolution to this. No real examination of the moral questions it raises. No scene where we see Thor become more responsible, no scene of the Gods rallying to Thor’s aid to protect their believers that disputes Gorr’s point. Not even any scene of Gorr seeing the way Thor fights for the Asgardian children that really leads him to change his mind…in fact what DOES change his mind is a scene that is ultimately, selfish…Thor’s regret over someone he personally loves dying. This is the very attitude that Gorr hated in his own God but here it convinces him he was wrong to pursue his vendetta.

Likewise the idea that the promise of an Afterlife is a cruel lie made up by the Gods to trick their followers is treated as an abominable thing in the films opening scene and yet the ending has Jane going to Valhalla purely because her taking the powers of Thor means she counts to get past the velvet rope as a good thing. What are we meant to feel about this? Is it okay if the Gods are nice?

Oh and the fact that on a quest to stop a madman bent on killing the gods Thor just…casually tries to murder Zeus and then laughs it off as a joke. So it’s okay to kill gods if their jerks? But we don’t see anything to prove that the gods Gorr has been killing weren’t jerks, I mean the only god we see him kill on screen was worse than Zeus so again, how are we meant to feel here?

If the hero does the exact same thing the villain does and then justifies it the exact same way the villain justifies it then how are we meant to be invested in this conflict that appears to be less “Killing Gods is bad” and more “Killing Gods is bad...when I’m one of the Gods who is being killed”

They also seem to kill a lot of Zeus’s guards in this film and I know disposable henchmen is a long standing trope in action movies but there’s nothing to suggest that any of these guards are actually bad people. Zeus isn’t a villain or a monster he’s just a jerk who doesn’t want to get involved. That might not make him a nice person and it may not make his guards very nice people if they’re happy to work for him but I’m not sure “Being an asshole” is grounds for getting murdered with a magic axe

There is a lot of comedy business in this film. And I mean a LOT. And at times it feels like it really takes away from the stakes of the film. Ragnarok was funny but it knew when to be serious. It knew when a moment needed dramatic weight. Here it feels as if the movie is afraid that the audience will tune out if a scene is allowed to be serious for even a moment. If even the characters are treating everything as a joke then what is there for the audience to care about?

I didn’t hate this movie. There’s a lot I loved. Korg getting himself a boyfriend was adorable. Jane as Thor was a delight when she actually got to do stuff. Valkyrie is awesome. Chris Hemsworth remains one of the single most delightfully watchable actors of the MCU.

Perhaps the fault is my own. I went into this movie with very high expectations and perhaps that is why I was left feeling underwhelmed. But as someone who loves Taika Waititi, loves these characters and was very excited for the movie it couldn’t help but feel like a letdown.

Not to get all “Release the Waititi Cut” here but there is apparently a much longer cut of the movie that is close to four hours. As someone who enjoys their movies long I personally hope that the DVD and streaming release will have the option to view it with those cut scenes restored as perhaps in this longer cut of the film there is something closer to what I was hoping for. I’ll certainly be let down if once again the scenes that properly portrayed Valkyrie’s sexuality on screen were left on the cutting room floor and I’d like to see those restored if so. And perhaps these missing scenes will give the film a bit more of the direction and punch that it’s lacking.

Give the characters more of an arc, more of a sense of actually going on a journey in this film beyond the physical one they go on. Give the film more of a sense of being a story and not just A Series of Events

In conclusion I’d still recommend watching the film. I didn’t HATE it. I certainly don’t hate any of the actors or Waititi who remains one of my favorite directors and writers

It’s far from terrible and not even close to being the worst film or worst MCU film ever made. There’s a lot I think people who enjoyed Ragnarok will love here

But I do hope that if Thor does indeed return as the films end credits scene promises it’s in a film where Waititi delivers a stronger showing than here with a more well realised plot and more time for the characters to really get used to their best potential.

Also

Give me my damn Valkyrie lady-romance Marvel.

[rumandtimes]

The Friends Reunion on HBO Didn’t Work

Jens Weingardt

Senior Streaming Contributor

The addendum to an old sitcom in cheap self-justification for an uninspired corporate acquisition.

The other day I was watching a strange medley of content. The Friends Reunion on HBO Max was one of the places it started. “The Friends Reunion,” well known as shite, should be hated for a number of reasons. Partially that it is overproduced and unwanted corporate garbage where an HBO exec pushed a $45 Million obligation onto the contracts of the “Friends” cast. The cast could not have had more of a enormous contempt for the entire process — not wanting to be there and not enjoying the event of their exploitation.

The in-house HBO celebration of buying Friends off of Netflix, or more accurately the delusional self-justification of HBO bosses, did not put the content of the show Friends on display as the product, but used the show as a pretence, a pretence to sell the actors.

The show was two hours of corporate bullshit, steeped atop the usual pile of shit that represents the shows syndication. Two hours of overproduced, uninspired, pre-planned anecdotes that still managed to come off as boring and unpractised fillers of time.

The Lady-Gaga-avec-gospel-choir remix of a stupid, three-line cat song; The five-minute-long asides about support beams blocking camera angles; The potato costume full of Justin Bieber; The fake audience; James Corden: A cavalcade of shit, that some asshole at HBO thought would constitute showmanship.

The absolute worst part of the slapdash arrangements were the ending. The beginning and the end were meant to look spontaneous and unrehearsed like a kind of documentary, but was peppered by the actors of the main cast commiserating with each other about how much they didn’t want to be there. The ‘surprise’ ending of the “Friends Reunion” was that David Schwimmer and Jennifer Aniston actually wanted to have sex with each other twenty-seven years ago and would fool around behind the scenes on set, but they never actually had sex because she was dating Tate Donovan and he was dating Natalie Imbruglia.

There are many things apparent to all of the actors which they never bring up: controversies on the show that go unsaid. Like the fact that Tate Donovan got a job on Friends as Jennifer Aniston’s boyfriend almost immediately after they had broken up in real life. Like the fact that Mathew Perry’s career imploded through a combination of drug abuse, near sexual assaults, bankruptcy, and being a generally unlikable person (they do mention he fell out of contact with the rest of the cast, and he also disappears from later parts of the taping).

The myth that HBO floats at the end that two of the main cast wanted to have sex but didn’t is not only dubious, completely ordinary and a damp squid, and pitiful as hell, but it is also super creepy and exploitative. Here two people are pushed up onto stage front and forced to talk about a crush they had thirty years ago that they never acted on. Even more sad given the real life undercurrent of David Schwimmer being a divorced single dad from a woman half his age, to Jennifer Aniston being a thrice-divorced, barren cat lady who used to be famous for skin cream commercials and playing sluts on TV.

Half the time is given up to loser cameos and interviewing the creators, and a cringeworthy scene about how the show Friends, airing on NBC in the nineties, was somehow empowering to Ghanese women. A show where literally over half the cast is men, and two of the main male leads are notorious for being unchallenged misogynists that are horrible to women (“How you doin’?”). A show that aired on NBC, one of the most racist and dishonest companies in American media, the same company that was actually caught numerous times lying to peoples faces on so-called “news” programs, the same company that hired Megyn Kelly as a breakfast anchor, the same company that was sued by Gabrielle Union for racist discrimination, the same company that is repeatedly called out for racism and lack of representation, from late night, to broadcast anchors, to — notably — the show “Friends” itself.

More unstated controversy in a dishonest and trashy get-together on HBO. Not to mention that it is revealed that the original concept for the show was based on the real life experiences of a cliche of under-30’s Jewish television wonks in New York City in the 1970’s, a fact that besides the casting of David Schwimmer and Maggie Wheeler was completely scrubbed from the final product contribute only more so to the problem of racism on Friends. Those three or four women in Ghana might claim that the show Friends made them feel empowered, but in reality they would never have had the possibility to be on that show in a thousand years, except maybe as one of David Schwimmer’s tragic and ill-treated girlfriends.

ANYWAY!, the Friends Reunion had nothing to offer, was creepy, and stank of the heavy hand of a fat corporate shit patting himself on the back for buying the rights to an old syndicated television series that ended almost 30 years ago, in a personal escape from the fact that television media is dying and HBO is desperately trying to remain relevant as an ad-based streaming platform by bringing on the likes of John Oliver, Conan Tepenius O’Briain, and Matthew Perry.

But what do the cast of Friends think about they show? “I wasn’t sure how tonight would go.” “This will never happen again.” “What I have to say probably isn’t interesting.” “It was a long time ago.” “I’m not similar to my character because at my age you have to grow up sometime.” “I was miserable every night.” If you listen to the statements of the cast main six, there is really nothing in the way of enthusiasm or high praise they have to proffer. Other than a few tears and creepy reveals the Friends Reunion was a bore.

I’ve watched many sitcoms, and “Friends” is an extraordinary situation comedy. That is, it flows well enough, as a cast of recurring characters crack superficial jokes while locked in the small reality of a living room. “Friends,” however, is not anything more than that. It is not a TV show. It is not a serial. It is not a drama. It has no narrative. It has no moral. It is utterly pointless and inconsistent, as many sitcoms are. It was leagues above its competitors ages ago, but it should not be celebrated. The world (specifically the corporate world, and the third-world nations they now conspicuously market the old goods to) should follow the main casts lead be a bit more apathetic to the franchise as a whole.

HBO’s “Friends: The Reunion” has nothing to do with the content of that series, possessing no acting whatsoever beside some indifferent table readings by the aging cast.

[irregularjohnnywiggins]

(in response to @mirrorfalls question on my favourite Moriarty, which I answered... then deleted. Because I’m good at tumblr.)

To answer the question of what my favourite versions of Moriarty is, we need to figure out what, imo, makes a ‘good’ Moriarty. For my money, there are three aspects that make Canon Moriarty interesting:

Intellect: probably obvious, but Moriarty is an opposite to the World’s Greatest Detective, so his intellect, like Holmes’, is key to his character.

Familiarity: the phrase ‘everything I have to say has already crossed your mind/then possibly my answer’s crossed yours’ is a cliche of Holmes/Moriarty interactions, but it’s a damn good cliche for a reason. Holmes and Moriarty should have a healthy respect for each other, that’s true, but more importantly they should have this sense of, as Neil Gaiman once said about him and Terry Pratchett: ‘You’re another one of me! I didn’t realize they made another one!’

Savagery: Seems weird given the other two points, but a good Moriarty should always have this point that, if pushed off, attempts to, say, push a guy off a waterfall. If my favourite Holmes is a bleeding heart barely pretending to be an unfeeling machine, Moriarty is barely hiding his inner savage behind the mask of congeniality.

So, with that out of the way, my most interesting (not objectively worse/best, just the ones I feel deserve attention) Moriarty’s from worst to best.

10: BBC Sherlock (Andrew Scott)

Let’s break this down: he’s not 1 because no-one in Sherlock is smart, it’s just Moffat trying to trick the audience with lack of explanation. He’s not 2 because Moffat is so obsessed with twists that Sherlock and Moriarty spend most of their time twisting each other so much that there is no time given to their familiarity between them. He’s not 3 because he’s not savage - he’s a poor man’s Heath Ledger’s Joker, but boring and with more homoerotic subtext. He’s not Moriarty. He’s just boring.

9: Elementary Moriarty (Natalie Dormer)

I really wanted to place her higher because I honestly love Natalie Dormer’s version, but whilst she covers the first two points the focus is more on her torrid romance with Watson Holmes, which is all well and good but does rather detract from her Moriarty-ness.

8: Young Sherlock Holmes (Anthony Higgins)

This version of Moriarty, like this version of Sherlock, is... interesting. We don’t really see his savagery, but the entire movie works to build up his relationship with Holmes. I could have done with a little less racism, though. And a little more actual Egyptian Moriarty in a movie that makes him Egyptian.

7: League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

1 and 3, mostly - as interesting as the idea that he’s a former British agent turned actual bad guy is, that’s the disadvantage of removing Holmes from the story - it’s like a Joker story without Batman, Moriarty doesn’t really have anyone to contrast with, and the two people who can contrast with him - Mycroft and Fu Manchu - never share a second of pagetime with him. And yet you can only do Holmes v Moriarty so many times, so how do you make Moriarty interesting without Holmes? Well...

6: Newman’s Moriarty

...You make them the contrast of another character, that’s what. In all seriousness, Newman’s version of Moriarty might not get much to do, but man does he feel good.

The premise of Hound of the D’Urbervilles, i.e. Sherlock Holmes but Moriarty instead, is brilliant at giving us not just how similar Holmes and Moriarty are, but how different - a personal highlight being Moriarty telling Moran that of course he didn’t figure out Moran’s backstory using deductive reasoning, why would he waste his time, he researched everything about him before he entered the room. 

I’m not entirely sure if Newman’s Moriarty is savage as opposed to increasingly petty, but his relationship with Moran hints that whilst Holmes looks at people and sees problems to be fixed, Moriarty looks at people and sees tools to be exploited, and that is a pretty sweet contrast that isn’t really explored in other versions.

5: Brett Moriarty (Eric Porter) + Merrison Moriarty (Michael Pennington)

Moving on to a classic Moriarty, whilst I don’t really think Porter adds anything the same way Brett does, he is still a really engaging portrayal. The bit where Holmes and Moriarty exchange a look on the Reichenbach Falls? Brilliant, and it wouldn’t be half as good without his particular portrayal, which stems far closer to the canon than previous ones on this list.

The BBC Radio adaptation is practically tied with this because they’re extremely similar - both attempt to follow canon as closely as possible, whilst adding their own twists. I do prefer the radio version, though, because we get some hint as to how Moriarty’s organization works and how much of a threat Moriarty is. This is actually enhanced by it being radio - whereas Brett’s version has to have Moriarty enter the room because it’s a visual medium, the radio adaptation can just have Holmes playing the violin, suddenly stopping and then revealing Moriarty’s been in the room this whole time. It’s really good, is what I’m getting at. But speaking of canon...

4: Canon

@mirrorfalls said in their original question that no version of Moriarty since the canon has ever actualized the reptilian qualities of Moriarty, and I can’t help but agree. It’s really interesting that Moriarty is linked to an animal whilst Holmes compares his body in another story to ‘a mere appendix’ - something intrinsically human even as it is superficially worthless. The idea of Moriarty in this version - calm, cold, but liable to snap at any point - is quite simply perfect, and the only thing that doesn’t rank him higher is that, in the same way William Hartnell doesn’t rank as one of my favourite Doctors, what it means to be Moriarty has changed so much since his inception. I don’t think Conan Doyle ever intended Moriarty to have the staying power that he did - he’s a plot device, pure and simple. Other authors added to that, and so we’ve got the version of Moriarty which lasts today.

3: Light Yagami

...Hear me out.

No, Light isn’t exactly a traditional Moriarty. For one thing, I’m fairly certain Moriarty doesn’t have a god complex, or a magic notebook that kills people, or a snarky apple loving Death God as a sidekick (Though, who knows, give Moran an apple fixation...) But, there’s a reason I recommend at least the first half of Death Note for anyone wanting a great Holmes/Moriarty story... It’s really good at outlining exactly what makes Moriarty and Holmes so interesting: Mind Games. Mind Games galore.

Watch, say, L’s introduction. Now imagine Holmes challenging Moriarty in the same manner. Hell, Light definitely ticks all of the points of a good Moriarty in this scene alone: he anticipates the police noticing him, he builds such a good rapport with L without either of them actually meeting that I remember losing my shit when I first watched Death Note and realized that this episode would feature the two of them actually meeting face to face, and despite his apparently calm demeanor at first, he immediately kills Lind L Tailor the instant he says something he doesn’t like. Just... he might not be a ‘true’ Moriarty, but he’s a damn good interpretation even if that wasn’t the goal. Speaking of not exactly ‘true’ interpretations...

2: Professor Ratigan (Vincent Fucking Price)

No objections, I trust?

Really, though, I wasn’t someone who watched Great Mouse Detective as a kid - I first watched it about two years ago, and god damn is this a good movie. True Story, when thinking about which Moriarty’s belong on this list, I immediately jumped to Ratigan, because he’s brilliant. He ticks all the boxes and then some - His intellect may not be his primary trait, but it’s still there, and his rapport with Basil is the stuff of legend at this point. And, to be brutally honest, Ratigan is the reason savagery is on this list in the first place. That fight on Big Ben? No version of Reichenbach has yet surpassed it, and it is everything great about this version of that core concept. Really, everything about Ratigan is a summation of how to do a brilliant Moriarty.

So, who can top the World’s Greatest Criminal Mind? Well...

1: RDJ Moriarty (Jared Harris)

Yes, I know, I was surprised to.

I was around during the Sherlock/RDJ films strife. I remember how much these films were lambasted for being ‘too action-packed’ and ‘not cerebral enough’, in stark contrast to the majesty of Sherlock and it’s twerpish plot twists. But when I think of a great Moriarty? Oh, boy, this one kicks Sherlock’s ass.

It’s also irritating, because it’s really hard to point out what makes him better than Ratigan or even Light. His plan is convoluted at best (not that the other two are any better - a good Moriarty does not a decent plan make), not helped by it being exactly the same as his plan in that godawful League of Extraordinary Gentlemen movie (which, btw, would still be bad even if it didn’t drive Sean Connery away from the film industry, but is far worse on those grounds) but, still, look at this scene. Or this one. Or that fight scene.

Tell me that’s not Moriarty.

That first scene especially runs through all three establishing Moriarty traits, yet perfectly utilizes all of them. We see how smart he is, we see his and Holmes’ respect for one another, but at the same time we see how much Holmes wants to see him behind bars and we have the perfectly paced reveal of his murder of Irene and that he intends to do the same to Watson and Mary. Everything about this scene is brilliant despite it being just the two of them talking. There’s even a bit later in the movie where Moriarty outsmarts Holmes and they communicate the gamut of emotions both characters are feeling through them exchanging a single glance.

So, yes, these films may be a bit too action packed. Yes, they may exaggerate character’s abilities, their plots may be inconsequential for the most part. But goddamn is their Moriarty a classic.

[birdwired-blog]

Thor: Ragnarok and the MCU

Thor: Ragnarok might just be the best Marvel film since the Avengers. Characters they have been growing for five years have finally reached maturity and they’re let loose in this a film that understands a bold concept is better than an intricate story. In a series that has carved a near ideological stance on narrative construction, finally understood that their movies are about quirky outsiders rolling their eyes along with the audience at unbelievable circumstances. They’re goal is to create a 250 million dollar blockbuster, that still feels like it’s on your side.

Spectacle may be expensive, but it’s cheap. Any multimillion dollar franchise can give us spectacle. You can have spectacle in any flavour: fantasy, magical, sci-fi. Marvel films have always seemed to have had an edge over their competitors, but it’s not because of brand recognition (Superman or Batman would be more popular brands, after all), it’s not because they focus on characters either. Even the transformers understood the need to focus on their characters. So what is Marvel’s secret?

Marvel have learned to incorporate the fan’s understanding of their franchise through the use of metanarratives. Like a Shane Black film, The characters speak in a distinct cinema literate dialogue. Not only are they marbled with references to other films, the story structure itself is presented with an air sarcasm, so any of its perceived clichés can be dismissed as intentional or unimportant. Its shared universe is presented to us like a huge risk that Marvel is somehow weathering, despite the odds. The hard core fan understands the story is perfunctory, the characters will often acknowledge how derivative the plot or their nemesis is, usually through the intertext of another film. The moment in Avengers when Captain America acknowledges the reference to The Wizard of Oz (1939), is a funny bit, but it’s also a clear signifier that even this man out of time is playing along at being cinema literate. It’s here where Thor has always tripped up in the past.

With phase 2, Marvel entered their darkest and arguably weakest period. Thor: The dark world (2013) was grim; it lived up to its subtitle. Marvel tried to build on the world they created in 2012 by focusing on the fallout from the conflict in The Avengers: Stark’s post traumatic stress disorder in Iron man 3, Thor’s troubled relationship with Loki. This concluded with Avengers 2: age of Ultron (2015). Marvel films have always lacked a strong concept, so when they focus on their own story they start to become tiresome. By design the world and its people lack specificity, the players are already in place and it only ever relates to our own world in a general way.  Many complain about the villain of the week set up in these films, but any attempt to hold a long contiguous conflict would (and did) damage the series. While it is true that today’s  audiences can use the Internet to stay informed about long running film series, the reality of it is the stories don’t matter. From the moment they cast Robert Downey Jr in Iron man they established a series entangled in the real stories of its production and actors. As long as the audience have an understanding of who the actors are and what role they’re playing, they can jump into any of these films without much difficulty. The essential part of making this expanded universe work isn’t storytelling, it’s casting.

Tony Stark’s arc in the first Iron man film neatly matches Robert Downey Jr’s own career from ambitious talent, to egomaniacal self destruction, to eventual redemption. Through casting alone we already understand Tony Stark. The story we’re actually being told is Robert Downey Jr’s story, so the plot about robots and super villains are alienated. The typical role of a protagonist is to act as a bridge for the audience into a the strange world of the film. With Marvel the protagonists also act as gatekeepers; they keep us out by deliberately undermining the threats they face by quipping at them. We’re not here to take these stories seriously. The real heart is in the metanarrative: Will Robert Downey Jr clean up his act? Can this cross film continuity super team work? Can a modern audience accept the incarnation of America’s best ideals?

In 2011 Thor wasn’t a character, but a face that fitted a part. It was Natalie Portman that rolled her eyes and swooned with the audience while she admired some blonde guy’s impossible physique. The question was how could Marvel make this ridiculous character believable, Marvel’s answer was to take it all seriously. As the series got darker, it was clear that cynicism would not stick to Thor’s pre-modern origins, but where was Thor’s gusto and drinking? In the intervening years Chris Hemsworth was able to grow a Hollywood personality that matched his party-loving onscreen persona. He graduated from ‘looks the part’ to a persona we understood, and after two films he was ready to be the lead man. 

 Although the prologue does manage to get the plot started, all of it is overshadowed with awkward slice of life humour. Thor’s encounter with a devil-like monster is broken up with him turning in his chain to miss every other sentence; it subverts the cliché of villain capturing the hero to explain his plans with mundane humour to contrast against the absurd theatricality. The understanding is Thor is played by an actor that understands these clichés and mocking the film’s own weaknesses. After a brief encounter with their sister, Thor and Loki fall into a time bubble and straight out of the canon. Thor’s hair is cut so he appears more like his actor and he enters a battle arena to face off against the hulk. In another film this encounter would be unbearable fan service, but instead the film makes its intentions completely clear: this is a holiday where consequences and circumstance take a back seat to fun. The characters, who are enslaved into a deathmatch (a situation which in reality would be terrible), have the very best of time because they too are aware of ludicrous opportunity for spectacle. Taika Waititi, the director, plays a happy-go-lucky fellow slave. Again, this is a wink to the film literate audience members; the director is communicating directly to the audience that this is all just some silly fun. Even the character’s names are deliberately shallow; Grandmaster may as well be named Jeff Goldblum, that’s all we understand the character to be. Goldblum, known for his naturalistic, likable performances is cast as a slaver who seems more interested in giving his audience (both those in the arena and those of us in the cinema) a good show. We see the actors bulge at the seems of these characters, they seem almost embarrassed by their own grandiosity. They create specificity with a character who are otherwise broad.

We can see the inverse of this casting policy through Tessa Thompson, who is playing a former Asgardian valkyrie. Unlike the rest of the cast she is sincere and involved with the world around her. In fact, her situation within the film’s story drives her to drink. Her awareness is limited to the film’s reality, and so it falls on her to drive the plot forward. Valkyrie gets the most pronounced character arc in this film, a past failure keeps her from returning home to fight again, but it’s Thor we remember, because Hemsworth was finally able to play the fun version of Thor we were told about two films ago.

Thor: Ragnarok finally delivers on its promise; we were told that Thor was an obnoxious windbag who loved to battle, drink and make merry, but until now the films focused on responsibility and Thor’s role in a coming intergalactic war. This film is the crystallization of Marvel’s very best attributes as it actively rejects its own universe to focus on story about Thor’s capacity to entertain if we just allow him to enjoy himself. 

Once our heroes escape their time bubble, we return to story like school after Christmas and work our way through one last big action sequence before destroying another villain of the week at a great cost that will be mentioned briefly in a future film. But Thor: Ragnarok has one more thing to say: with the destruction of Asgard, the Marvel cinematic universe is not a setting, or a story; it is the characters and they’ll survive, even after you’ve long given up on the story.

[thecinephale]

Best Movies of 2017

I��m so excited that many of the great films this year did so well at the box office and are such a big part of the awards conversation. I’m grateful that every year brings great works of cinema, but it’s even better when a bunch of people actually get to see them.

This is the first year I’m not counting miniseries. The lines are becoming too blurred between TV and film and also nobody needs me to say again how much I love Jane Campion and Top of the Lake: China Girl.

Still need to see: All the Money in the World, Berlin Syndrome, Graduation, Happy End, In the Fade, Loveless, Lovesong, Prevenge, Princess Cyd, Professor Marston and the Wonder Women, A Quiet Passion, Slack Bay, Staying Vertical, Thelma, Woodshock

If your favorite movie isn’t on this list maybe I didn’t see it because a sexual predator was involved or maybe it was just a really crowded year with a lot of really good movies!

Honorable Mentions: -Battle of the Sexes (dir. Valerie Faris and Jonathan Dayton) -The Beguiled (dir. Sofia Coppola) -Call Me By Your Name (dir. Luca Guadagnino) -Colossal (dir. Nacho Vigalondo) -Columbus (dir. Kogonada) -A Fantastic Woman (dir. Sebastian Lelio) -Good Time (dir. Josh and Benny Safdie) -Landline (dir. Gillian Robespierre) -Lemon (dir. Janicza Bravo) -Logan Lucky (dir. Steven Soderbergh) -Parisienne (dir. Danielle Arbid) -Phantom Thread (dir. Paul Thomas Anderson) -Wonder Woman (dir. Patty Jenkins)

15. Planetarium (dir. Rebecca Zlotowski)

The first two movies on this list got fairly bad reviews so take my opinions as you will. And I get why many struggled with this film. Not only is it dealing with a wide swath of issues, but it’s also doing so with a variety of different tools. It dabbles in the occult, but it’s not a horror movie. It’s a period piece, but feels of the present. It suggests romance, suggests betrayal, suggests familial tension, yet… But here’s what’s great. It’s gorgeous. With some of the best cinematography of the year (Georges Lechaptois), some of the best production design of the year (Katia Wyszkop), and easily the best costumes of the year (Anaïs Romand) it’s compulsively watchable. Combine that with Natalie Portman’s incredibly grounding performance and I was more than willing to go along with Zlotowski as she explored the history of images, the power of images, and the danger of images without committing to a conventional structure.

14. It’s Only the End of the World (dir. Xavier Dolan)

I don’t know how anyone could love Dolan’s other films and dislike this one. It’s such a perfect embodiment of Dolan’s career thus far. Dolan’s films are operatic because he understands that for individuals their problems are operatic. Pretty much every family has conflict, disagreements, scars, but that can’t be dismissed so easily when they are OUR conflicts, OUR disagreements, OUR scars. I love how much respect Dolan always has for that truth. The cast is filled with French cinema royalty and they fully live up to the material’s grounded melodrama.

13. The Lure (dir. Agnieszka Smoczynska)

There’s one key reason this vampiric Polish horror-musical retelling of The Little Mermaid works in a way that other adaptations fall short. Sure, the sheer audacity of that genre mashup makes for a fascinating and unique viewing experience. But what ultimately makes it work emotionally and thematically is that it’s about two mermaids. This was always intended as the initial concept was a horror-less, mermaid-less musical about the Wrońska Sisters (who wrote all the songs in this). But still Smoczynska and her screenwriter Robert Bolesto really manage to keep all that’s wonderful about the source material while contextualizing its complexity. I’ve softened on the Disney version over the years, but it still can be painful watching Ariel change herself for a man (especially when one of those changes is not speaking). Here the presence of her sister, sometimes judging, always worried, creates a circumstance that allows this film’s “little mermaid” to make the realistic mistakes of a teen girl in love with a boy and in hate with herself, without the filming giving its seal of approval. There’s no judgment one way or the other. It’s just real. All that aside this is a vampiric Polish horror-musical retelling of The Little Mermaid. Like, come on. Go buy the Criterion edition!!

12. The Rehearsal (dir. Alison Maclean)

This is the only film on this list that isn’t available to watch. I was lucky enough to see it at the New York Film Festival two years ago, then it had a one week run at Metrograph, then nothing. The real shame is that this isn’t some avant-garde headscratcher to be watched in university classrooms and backroom Brooklyn bars. This is a deeply humanistic, very accessible movie that almost demands wide conversation. And given its setting at an acting conservatory I especially wish all the actors in my life could watch it. Well, hopefully it pops up on some streaming site someday. But until then check out this early Alison Maclean short film that’s equally wonderful albeit wildly different in tone (this one is more like feminist Eraserhead): Kitchen Sink (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lt58gDgxy9Q&t=1s).

11. Novitiate (dir. Margaret Betts)

The history of cinema is a history of queer subtext. But it’s 2017 and while it may be fun to speculate whether Poe Dameron is gay and I’d be the first to say “Let It Go” is a perfect coming out anthem, it’s no coincidence that the best queer allegories of the year ALSO had explicitly queer characters. This film in particular is so special because it’s both the story of a young woman’s repressed sexuality and a story about how faith of all things is comparable to said sexuality. Sister Cathleen’s mother does not understand her affinity for Jesus the way many parents do not understand their children’s sexuality or gender. While coming out stories are a staple of very special sitcom episodes, I’ve never seen one that captures the pained misunderstanding the way this film does. Part of this is due to wonderful performances by Julianne Nicholson and Margaret Qualley and part of it is that religion is oddly the perfect stand-in for queerness… even as it represses queerness within this world. The movie begins with a series of flashbacks that feel stilted and conventional in a way that’s totally incongruous with the rest of the movie. It’s unfortunate because otherwise this would’ve been even higher on my list. But this is Betts’ first film and the majority of it is really special. And while I do think she’ll make even better films in what will hopefully be a long career, this one is still really worth checking out. I mean, I haven’t even brought up Melissa Leo’s frightening and absurd (yet somehow grounded?) performance that makes Meryl Streep in Doubt look like Amy Adams in Doubt.

10. The Florida Project (dir. Sean Baker)

As marketing extraordinaire A24 has managed to spread this film to a wider audience, they’ve made a lot of fuss about this film’s political depiction of Florida’s “hidden homeless,” Baker’s approach of mixing professional and non-professional actors (shout-out to Bria Vinaite who deserves as much awards attention as Willem Dafoe), and how the film “feels like a documentary.” And while I’m glad this strategy has worked, I tend to balk at the tendency of marketers and critics alike to call any movie with characters who aren’t all rich and/or white “like a documentary.” But regardless of its realism which I feel in no position to comment on, it’s certainly a great film about childhood and fantasy and how sometimes it’s easier to be a parent to everyone except your own kids. And not to build it up too much if you haven’t already seen it, but the ending is truly one of the best endings in recent years, not only in and of itself, but how it contextualizes and deepens everything that came before.

9. Whose Streets? (dir. Sabaah Folayan)

This is an exceptionally well-constructed film. I feel like most documentaries in this style have great moments but show a lack of restraint in the editing room and/or struggle to find a clear narrative. But this film moves along at an exceptional pace while still feeling comprehensive. Every sequence feels essential even when the scope expands beyond the two central individuals. This can be credited in part to the editing, but the succinctness wouldn’t be possible if it weren’t for the footage captured. The intimate moments we’re able to watch are stunning and enhance the already high stakes of the surrounding film, the ongoing narrative of the country. This is an essential reminder of the humanity behind activism, the sacrifice behind news stories, and that for many people political engagement is not something to do with an open Sunday afternoon but a necessary part of survival.

8. Their Finest (dir. Lone Scherfig)

Easily the best Dunkirk-related film of the year, this is the rare movie about movies that doesn’t feel self-satisfied, but instead truly captures the joy of cinema and storytelling. It’s odd to me that romantic melodrama, a genre so celebrated when it comes to classic film, is often written off as fluff in contemporary cinema. Yes, this movie is romantic. Yes, this movie is wildly entertaining. But it’s also painful, it’s also telling a story of women screenwriters we haven’t heard before, it’s also showing how powerful art can be as an escape and a mirror in difficult times. If you’re interested in filmmaking and/or British people, check this out on Hulu. Gemma Arterton is really wonderful and Sam Claflin is good eye candy if you’re into that sort of thing.

7. Starless Dreams (dir. Mehrdad Oskouei)

This documentary about a group of teenage girls living in an Iranian “Correctional and Rehabilitation Center” is proof that sometimes the best approach to the medium is simplicity. Oskouei pretty much just lets the girls talk. But it’s truly a testament to his abilities as a filmmaker (and person) and the girls’ vulnerability and storytelling prowess that the movie remains compelling throughout. As the girls tell their stories it becomes clear that the center isn’t simply a prison, but also almost a utopic escape from the daily horrors they faced outside. Both options are so completely insufficient when compared to the lives these young women deserve this realization is enraging. And while the film takes place in Iran it doesn’t require a lot of effort to realize young women have similar stories and circumstances all over the world. This movie is on iTunes and I really, really recommend checking it out. The subject matter is heavy, but because the girls are allowed to determine the narrative it never feels maudlin or unbearable and at times is even quite funny and joyous.

6. Raw (dir. Julia Ducournau)

I really appreciated how Marielle Heller’s The Diary of a Teenage Girl captured the all-consuming lust of teenagehood. So, um, think that movie, except cannibalism. A lot of cannibalism. I feel torn between being honest about how truly gross this movie can be and pretending otherwise because I really don’t want to scare anyone away. I’ll put it this way. It’s really, really worth it to watch this through your fingers if you even maybe think you could handle it. Because it’s just a really great movie about being a teenage girl, discovering sexuality, being away from home for the first time, having a sister, having a first crush, a first sexual experience, feeling completely out of control of your desires and needs. Hey, even Ducournau insists this isn’t a horror movie. So don’t eat anything beforehand, but definitely check this out.

5. Get Out (dir. Jordan Peele)

I hardly need to add any analysis to what has easily been the most talked about and written about movie of the year. But I just need to say that it makes me so happy that a socially aware horror movie (the best subset of my favorite genre) not only made a huge amount of money but is also considered an awards frontrunner. That is so wonderfully baffling to me and a testament to the greatness of this movie. Many great horror movies capitalize on people’s fear of otherness, but those who are othered in our society are much more likely to be victims than villains. That Peele managed to show this without ever feeling like he was exploiting real pain is truly an accomplishment. The tonal balance this film achieves is certainly something I’ll study when I make a horror movie writing back to Psycho, The Silence of the Lambs, Sleepaway Camp, etc.

4. Faces Places (dir. Agnès Varda, JR)

Agnès Varda has spent her entire career blending fact and fiction, opening up her own life for her art. But there’s something different about this film which is likely to be her last. While so much of her work places her vivacious spirit front and center this film feels almost like a cry of humanity. Oddly enough I’d compare it to Mike Leigh’s Happy-Go-Lucky in that it seems to say, “Don’t fetishize my happiness, don’t mock my joy, don’t infantilize me, just because you can’t enjoy life like I can.” I look to Varda as the kind of artist (and person) I want to be in how open she always seems to be. But what this film made me realize is that part of that openness is how sad she can be, how angry she can be. Varda is often called “the grandmother of the French New Wave.” I guess this is the only way the film community knows how to contextualize a woman being the one to start arguably the most influential film movement. Varda is the same age as all those guys! She’s not the grandmother! She just happened to make a bold, experimental film about five years ahead of the rest of them. By ending with Godard, and pairing up with JR who is basically an incarnation of Godard and friends as young men, Varda is really exploring her place in film history and the world, and how difficult it is to be to be a pioneer. No country has more contemporary films directed by women than France and this is in a large part due to Varda. But being the one to create that path is exhausting. I realize I’m making what’s easily the most life-affirming, humanist film of the year sound like an angry, self-eulogy, but I think this aspect of the film and Varda’s career should not be ignored. If you’ve never seen anything by Varda, this film will read very differently, but still be wonderful (and honestly more joyous). I recommend seeing it, watching 20 of her other films, and then seeing it again.

3. The Shape of Water (dir. Guillermo del Toro)

The trailer for this film shows the main character, Elisa played by the always wonderful Sally Hawkins, doing her daily routine. Alarm, shining shoes, being late to work, etc. But even the redband trailer leaves out one of her daily activities: masturbating. Maybe it’s odd to associate masturbation with ambition, but the choice to show that early on and then repeatedly seems like a perfect microcosm of why this film is so great. It’s not afraid. Guillermo del Toro has made a wonderful career out of celebrating “the other” through monster movie pastiches, but this to me is his very best film because of how willing it is to be both clear and complicated. This movie is many things, but one of those things is a queer love story. And even though human woman/amphibian man sex is maybe even more taboo to show on screen than say eating a semen filled peach, this movie just goes for it. I’m not sure if this movie succeeds in everything it tries to do but I so deeply admire how much it tries. Not only is one of Elisa’s best friends gay, but we spend a significant amount of time getting to know that character and see that maybe his obsolete career hurts him even more. Not only is Elisa’s other best friend black, but we see how being a black woman affects her specifically in what is expected of her versus her husband. Fantasy and sci-fi often use real people’s struggles as source material for privileged protagonists, and while this film certainly does that, it works because the real people are still shown on screen. Also del Toro is a master of cinematic craft so this is really a pleasure to watch.

2. Lady Bird (dir. Greta Gerwig)

Before diving into this specific film it’s worth noting that this is one of six debut features on this list. It’s so exciting that we’re hopefully going to get full and illustrious careers from all of these people. But when it comes to Gerwig it feels like we already have. She has been proof that if the film community is going to insist on holding onto the auteur theory, they at least need to acknowledge that actors and writers can be auteurs. Gerwig is known for being quirky, but this really sells her talent short. She is clearly someone who has a deep understanding of cinema and, more importantly, a deep understanding of people. Part of being a great director is casting great actors and then trusting them and it’s so clear that’s what happened on this film (let me just list off some names: Saoirse Ronan, Laurie Metcalf, Lucas Hedges, Tracy Letts, Stephen McKinley Henderson, Lois Smith, I mean come on). They really make her wonderful script come alive. This is a great movie about female friendship and a great movie about mother-daughter relationships, but more than anything it’s a great movie about loving and hating a hometown. Even though I’ve only seen the film twice I think back on moments in the film like I do my own adolescent memories. They feel familiar even when I don’t directly relate to them. This movie feels big in a way only a small movie can.

1. Mudbound (dir. Dee Rees)

This is when my penchant for hyperbole really comes back to bite me in the ass. I use the word masterpiece way too much. But when I say Mudbound is a masterpiece I don’t just mean it’s a great movie I really loved that I recommend everyone see. I mean, it’s The Godfather. It’s Citizen Kane. It’s the rare movie that has a perfect script, perfect cinematography, perfect performances, is completely of its time, and will stand the test of time. If we ever get to a place where art by black women is justly celebrated it will be in the 2070 AFI top 10. It’s that good. Part of what sets the movie apart is its almost absurd ambition. It breaks so many movie rules (not only does it have heavy narration, but it has heavy narration from multiple characters), and yet it always works. I love small movies, I love weird and flawed movies, but there is something so spectacular about watching something like Dee Rees’ third feature. I’m so excited to watch this movie again, to study it, to spend a lifetime with it. I feel like it really got lost in the shuffle by being released on Netflix, but that also means right now it’s on Netflix and you, yes YOU, almost certainly have or have access to Netflix. So you could watch it. Right now. Watch it. Stop reading. Turn the lights off. Find the biggest TV or computer screen you have so you can really appreciate Rachel Morrison’s cinematography and watch it. It is perfection wrapped in a bow of perfection and I really must insist you watch it.

Television!

Still Need to Catch Up On: The Girlfriend Experience (S2), Queen Sugar (S2)

Honorable Mentions: -Big Little Lies -Broad City (S3) -Girls (S6) -Insecure (S2) -Master of None (S2) -One Mississippi (S2) -Orange is the New Black (S5) -Search Party (S2) -Shots Fired

10. Twin Peaks: The Return 9. Jane the Virgin (S3/4) 8. Transparent (S4) 7. Better Things (S2) 6. I Love Dick 5. The Good Place (S1/2) 4. Sense8 (S2) 3. Crazy Ex-Girlfriend (S2/3) 2. Top of the Lake: China Girl 1. The Leftovers (S3)

[mikeyd1986]

MIKEY’S PERSONAL BLOG 108, June 2018

On Queen’s Birthday public holiday, I decided to go down to YMCA Casey RACE for a Body Pump class with Natalie Blanch. As it was a “typical” Monday, I was struggling with both time and motivation but was still determined to get down to the gym regardless. Surprisingly, for a public holiday, there was a decent amount of members in the class today. I spent some time reflecting on how far I’ve come from my very first Pump class until now. I’ve certainly grown in confidence, able to follow Nat’s directions easier, can usually keep up and I feel fitter as well. https://www.lesmills.com.au/bodypump

Today we did tracks from Release 96 including Tiesto - Blow Your Mind, Panic! At The Disco - Hallelujah, Flo Rida - Wobble, Galantis - Peanut Butter Jelly and Zedd featuring Bahari - Addicted to a Memory. It was a pretty tough release especially the dreaded lunge track which Nat claimed was “fun” (My thighs were burning a lot). Some of the exercises we did included overhead presses, power cleans, deadlifts and rows (Warm-up, Back), push-ups, dips and bicep curls with the bar (Biceps, Triceps), flying raises, side raises and revolved raises (Shoulders) plus crunches, crunch pulses and Hurdler’s stretch (Core, Cooldown). https://www.siphilp.com/les-mills-bodypump-96-music-track-listing.aspx

On Tuesday morning, I had my final Employ Your Mind session for Phase 2 at WISE Employment in Cranbourne. It was a little disappointing and anti-climatic that I was the only participant leave at the end of this phase. Whilst it’s obviously nobody’s fault that clients can’t always attend due to having other commitments, it did make me feel awkward seeing as this was meant to be a “group” session.

However, support workers Karen and Vadim did the best that they could given the circumstances. Today I did a review of my Goal Setting Plan from Phase 1, going through the list and seeing if I needed to add or modify any of the goals that I set for myself. These included: Improving conversational skills and self-confidence. Being able to cope better with my mental health issues. Improving my memory, focus and concentration at work and in social situations. https://www.themhs.org/resources/1605/s58-employ-your-mind-improving-thinking-skills-for-work-and-community-engagement.

I decided to add two goals to my list: Making more friends and improving my social life. Losing weight and maintaining a healthy body weight. These two goals in particular have been things I’ve been continuing to work on over the past couple of years and have both had their share of challenges. But these goals are extremely important to me so I’ll continue to do what it takes to achieve them. https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/goal-setting

The next part involved having a brainstorm about reaching my goals. The things that help me to reach my goals include breaking them down and setting myself a plan, getting support from family, friends, support workers and counsellors as well as trying to eat healthy foods and exercising regularly. The things that get in the way of reaching my goals includes lack of motivation and struggling with my mental barriers (self doubt, worries, anxieties). Things that I’ve used to overcome these are positive affirmations, reminders of my strengths and personal qualities, meditation, deep breathing and asking people for help when needed. https://www.naturalhealthmag.com.au/content/6-ways-achieve-your-goals

On Tuesday night, I attended my Body Combat class at YMCA Casey ARC in Narre Warren. Tonight’s class was a bit different in that Cinamon Guerin invited Caitlin up onto the stage to demonstrate half of the tracks. She is essentially an instructor-in-training and I have to say that she did a great job. She had a really good rapore with Cinamon and was able to confidently instruct by herself as well.

As usual tonight’s Combat class was a tough one with plenty of high knees, lunges, esteevas, jab boxes, uppercuts, front kicks, back kicks, side kicks and tricky combos. I was dripping in sweat halfway through the class and had to pull back a bit due to fatigue and soreness. I’m still proud that I’m able to come to Combat classes and smash it, no matter how I’m feeling inside. I’m determined to drop those kilos again. https://www.lesmills.com.au/archive-bodycombat

On Thursday morning, Mum and I dropped into Insight Accounting on the rooftop of Cranbourne Park Shopping Centre. Ever since the bad experience I had with my tax return last year, I’ve been trying to shop around to find another accountant who I might be more suited to. A quick Google search pointed me towards Insight Accounting and today I thought I’d drop in to make an inquiry about getting an individual tax return claim done.

The Cranbourne office located next door to Anytime Fitness (Cranbourne) seemed a little daunting at first with a long white hallway leading to the reception desk. The receptionist named Emma ended up asking one of the accountants, Stacey, to have a chat with us in her office. The space was very inviting and comfortable. Whilst Stacey was a lot younger than my last accountant, I could tell that she was switched on and had the right know-how about the preparation involved with tax returns. I feel pretty confident that I’ll end up doing my tax return through them this year. http://www.insightaccounting.com.au/individuals/

I personally don’t think there’s any harm in changing companies if you don’t feel satisfied or happy with their services. That is the prerogative of a client and you should make zero apologies about it. I used to be much more passive about it in the past but now I apply this to everything in my life...psychologists, counsellors, personal trainers, teachers, doctors and now accountants. If you don’t do this, you end up getting stuck in a rut and feeling depressed, frustrated, annoyed and/or upset. Don’t settle for second best.

On Friday morning, I dropped into my local Centrelink customer service office in Cranbourne to (hopefully) sort out the birth certificate issue from last week. Thankfully the lady who was serving me was much more helpful and less vague than Ms. Sue from last week. I could feel my anxiety levels spiking up as she was busily typing away behind the counter. I was praying that this time the system would actually accept my birth certificate now that I had my Change of Name Registration certificate with me.

Unfortunately, we had the same issue again and not even the expertise of the male staff member next door could resolve it. However, she did make copies and scans of both documents to send away to Births, Deaths and Marriages to get them verified and matched up. Whilst it was another frustrating result for me, at least this time some progress was getting made and it didn’t feel like a waste of time. https://www.humanservices.gov.au/individuals/enablers/confirm-your-identity

On Friday night, I attended the re-opening night of Aaron Petty’s yoga studio, Level Up Yoga in Berwick. It’s really no secret that I find social situations to be tremendously difficult particularly when it comes to making conversation. How do I break the ice? What do I say? I don’t know 80% of the people in the room. And of course the wet weather had continued into the night. But I wasn’t going to let any of these barriers stop me from coming tonight.

Aaron has spent the last two weeks renovating and transforming the existing space located upstairs inside Personal Performance Training Centre into a proper yoga studio. It now features: a peach coloured feature wall, ceiling fan, air conditioner/heater, flooring vents, polished cork flooring, a storage cupboard and benches for the yoga equipment, mirrors, a new door and added wall. Honestly, Aaron and his team have done a magnificent job and all the hard work has paid off.

Tonight the space was beautifully lit up with lamps and fairy lights. The bench was decorated with little chocolates, love hearts, strawberries, tealight candle holders, a diffuser, native twigs and gum leaves. They also had some canopes and a glass teapot set up. I decided to start by having a chat with my good friend Daniel Cooper, whom I know from his band Spectral Fires. I actually did surprisingly well despite the obvious stumbles and mental blanks, grasping for the right words to say.

Then my anxiety was starting to kick in. I checked my phone and discovered that I’d only been there for 20 minutes. I was determined to push myself and not simply bolt out the door. It didn’t take long for the yoga space to start filling up with people. The volume level was also increasing pretty rapidly. I thought I’d sit down, grab some tea and read one of the orange timetables that Aaron had made up.

I was sitting next door to a tray full of peanut butter and coconut protein balls. In that moment, I could have honestly eaten the whole tray but that was the comfort eater inside of me talking. I was trying hard to be disciplined as weight loss is still an uphill battle for me. And here come the anxious thoughts (God this is so difficult. I hardly know anybody here. So many people know each other. Why do I find talking to people so hard? Maybe I should leave).

Thankfully this stream of thought was interrupted by Aaron Petty making an announcement. There was probably around 30-40 people in the room now which is a very impressive turnout. After delivering his thank yous and having one-too-many applauds, he started talking about his new concept for Level Up Yoga, Freedom and Stillness and what these words meant to him. Then he gently lead us all into a short guided meditation with Daniel Cooper playing some beautiful music in the background.

Finally he got us to introduce ourselves to a person we didn’t know and ask them “What does freedom mean to you?” Cue to typical thought of “OH SHIT!” But honestly this was exactly what I needed. To get out of my comfort zone and meet people. A couple of people actually approached me and it felt good despite how flustered my face was getting. But at the same time, my anxiety was easing a little and I didn’t feel quite as social isolated or withdrawn.

I aimed to stay for over an hour and I smashed that goal. I tried to do my usual sneaky ninja exit but was easily detected. To be honest, I didn’t mind because it showed that quite a few people in that room care enough about me to acknowledge my existence. Whilst it was hard for me sitting through the anxiety and the uncomfortable feelings I had inside, I’m really proud that I did it because that shows true strength. I deserve to be a part of the Level Up Yoga community. https://www.aaronpetty.com/teaching-schedule/

On Saturday morning, I did a Vinyasa yoga class with Aaron Petty at Level Up Yoga in Berwick. As I had the day off work, I figured I’d come along to one of the free yoga classes Aaron was offering this weekend. I was still feeling a bit restless from last night as I didn’t sleep very well but I somehow managed to motivate myself to go this morning. It was a small class with only two other girls joining me but I was very content with that considering how packed the studio was last night.

Being a Vinyasa class, I knew that this would be challenging but I just did the best I could. We did several different sequences of poses including:                      Vinyasa Flow: Downward Facing Dog, Plank, Chaturanga, Baby Cobra/Cobra/Updog.                                                                                    Warrior Sequence: Three Legged Dog, Crescent Lunge, Warrior 2, Reverse Warrior.                                                                                                      Strength: Half-Pigeon, Mermaid, King Pigeon, Side Plank, Elbow Plank.              Inversions: Legs in the air, Shoulder Stand, Handstand.

This morning I tried to use laughter as a coping mechanism to deal with my struggles particularly with the strength and balancing poses. Holding my own body weight is something I’m still continuing to work on. I also knew what my limits were and there were a few times where I had to pull back due to fatigue, especially towards the end of the class. This is not a sign of weakness. It’s actually a good thing to have enough self-awareness to figure out when I should be resting or pulling back. The last thing I want to do is injure myself. https://www.popsugar.com.au/fitness/Benefits-Normal-Plank-vs-Elbow-Plank-28902118

“It takes a voice to make a change. It takes courage to not be the same. If the world is silenced today. I make sure to scream my name. Don't lose your heart. If you're willing to change, willing to fight. Promise me. Remind yourself. You're breathing. Remind yourself. That you are bleeding.” Dream on Dreamer - Don’t Lose Your Heart (2015)

[yourartsyblog-blog]

Swan Lake: beauty, grace and hard work.

Beauty and grace at its brightest. The Swan Lake is a fairytale-ballet, structured by four acts and composed by Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, which was Tchaikovsky’s first ballet. Even though The Swan Lake has a certain popularity in our contemporary times, back in it’s premiere on May 4th 1877, due to their poor production and technical disagreements, it was hardly a public pleaser. Nonetheless, in January 15th 1895, Mariinsky theater on Saint Petersburg made this ballet a hit with the new choreography that was in the hands of Marius Petipa and Lev Ivanov, leaving behind Tchaikovsky’s initial idea for the ballet. Last Sunday, March 11th, this ballet was brought to Tampico by Bolshoi Ballet de Bielorrusia, performing on the Teatro Metropolitano. After the magnificent presentation of The Swan Lake, it’s appropriate to point that the best attribute by far is the beauty of the Black Swan, as well as the production design, though, in spite of these good elements, there were small, almost unnoticeable, details that could be improved such as the coordination of the dancers, still, their hard-work was shown during the whole show. Nonetheless, this ballet was a pleasing performance to admire.

The Swan Lake tells the story of the young Prince Siegfried and The White Swan, Odette. The tale’s First Act starts when the young royal arrives at his 21th birthday celebration at the Palace courtyard. As soon as the young man showed up he encountered the royal families and townspeople dancing and celebrating as the young ladies try and reach for his attention. During the celebration, Prince Siegfried receives a crossbow, given by the Queen, who states that now that he’s of age, he must get married, and the search for his fiancé was soon to be arranged. The young man, overwhelmed by the sudden realization of his newly acquired responsibility, runs away from the celebration into the woods, crossbow in hands, along with his hunting companions. The Second Act continues with the Prince trying to get some time alone, so he gets ahead and finds himself in a lonely and secluded spot near a lake, where swans are floating gracefully in the surface of the water. Unable to keep his eyes away, he finds the most beautiful swan, who wore a crown on the top of its head. While he was contemplating the animal’s beauty, his companions catch up with him, but instead of continuing walking with them, he decided to send them away in favor of him getting some privacy. Just as the sun sets, the crowned swan transforms into the most charming and alluring young lady the young man has ever seen. Odette, the swan princess, apprises the prince about her curse. She relates about Von Rothbart, the sorcerer that has enchanted her and her companions, and how the lake was made from the tears of their parent’s weeping, also explaining that the only way of breaking the spell was if a man, pure and loyal is willing to give her true love. The Prince, quickly enchanted by Odette, was about to confess, when they are interrupted by the sorcerer, who takes away the swan princess from Siegfried and orders the swan maids to not let the young man trace him down. Subsequently in the Third Act, the next day, a formal celebration where Prince Siegfried is introduced to many royalty young women, yet, even though they all hold the requisites to hold his attention, the young prince is still infatuated by the cursed swan lass. The Queen demands the prince to choose a young woman which who he will be engaged to. Unable to forget the swan princess, he complies with his mother wishes to at least dance with the girls. Von Rothbart then arrives with his daughter Odile, whose appearance was similar to Odette’s. The Prince, deceived by her similar appearances, dances with Odile, unknowing that the real Odette is watching from the window. As he finishes the dance, he proposed marriage to Odile, believing she was the same swan princess. The Prince soon realizes his mistake once he looks at the real Odette fleeing away. The Prince does not make a double take before he starts chasing after the swan princess. Act Four, and the prince gets to Odette and begs for forgiveness as he explains his mistake, the swan princess accepts his apologies, but then Von Rothbart appears, demanding the prince to accomplish his promise of marrying his daughter. They engage in a fight, which Prince Siegfried ends as a victor, and both him and Odette live happily ever after.

The Black Swan is one of the most magnificent, and complex characters on this ballet, and definitely one of the best represented. The Black Swan, also known as Odile, is the daughter of Von Rothbart, she’s known to have a similar appearance to Odette and even though at first there were two dancers for the two young ladies, due to the lack of interaction, it was decided both of them must be represented by the same dancer. Odile’s a mystery since her existence is not known until the climax of the story, she’s wicked, but even so, she’s still full of grace. There’s no doubt Odile is one of the hardest characters to represent since she must diverge from the others, after all, she represents the unexpected and the evil. During the recent performance of Bolshoi Ballet de Bielorrusia, The Black Swan presented herself beautifully. In contrast to the other characters, on the scene where she’s deceiving Prince Siegfried, her moves were sharper, more precise, and fast, while still managing to make it look swift, seductive and mysterious. Even when Odile and Odette were performed by the same dancer, the difference in the way they carried themselves across the scenario was contrasting. Although the characterization of The White Swan was magnificent, there is no way of comparing it to the performance of The Black Swan. Elegant, seductive and sinful, Odile is much more than just another antagonist of this classic.

What made the performance even more spectacular, was the production design. The costumes were beautifully made and fitted perfectly along with the tale. Just to give an example of the wonderful job made by the costume designers, it would be appropriate to highlight the design for the swans. Even when Odette’s costume had to accentuate her protagonism, the pureness and beauty of the other maids' swans were nowhere near lost, in fact, they were a big focus of attention during their appearances, thanks to the combination of both, their clothing and their choreography. As for Odile, the way her tutu was the exact same replica of Odette’s with a contrasting color represents perfectly the way they both are physically similar yet their auras are two opposite poles. In terms of the special effects, they were flawless. As an example of this, I’ll highlight two scenes. The first would be when the Prince finds himself at the lake, the background and the light blue lightning making the environment very authentic. The next scene to remark is when, along with Von Rothbart, The Black Swan makes her appearance, the way the red lights invades the scenario giving, along with the music and the performance, the feeling of mystery and suspense, The special effects were, without a doubt, one of the best works done by production design.

Perfection can never be reached, since there are always small flaws, and that is nothing to be ashamed of; performance is nowhere as easy as it seems on stage, it is a discipline that needs lots of hard work, and is never uncomplicated, subtle flaws are always there, like the lack of synchronization with the dancers during the event. Even though their hard-work was displayed on their performance, there were scenes where coordination was not always on point. Most of this was found when the swans danced on the lake, some finished their movements before the others ending in a subtle irregularity with the movements. Of course, this is not a big detail that puts in jeopardy this production, if not, a small observation made with admiration with the purpose of making this ballet the nearest to perfection as possible. Still, the performance was beautiful, and what made it even more admirable was the hard-work and dedication seen during this production by part of the performer.

Through time, The Swan Lake has been a classic that has had many different adaptations, references, and concepts. During the mute movie of The Phantom of the Opera (1925) extracts from The Swan Lake music were often heard throughout the film. Another example of this would come from the Broadway musical Funny Girl (1968) in which Barbra Streisand performs a parodic choreography of The Swan Lake.  Hakuchou no Mizuumi (1981) which adapts this fairytale into an almost loyal Japanese Animation. Richard Rich also adapted this classic into a trilogy of cartoon movies called The Swan Princess (1994), which at certain point diverges from the original tale, but maintaining some crucial characteristics such as the cursed Princess who turns into a swan, and the evil sorcerer. References about the Swan Lake also made an appearance during Billy Elliot (2000) ending scene, when the protagonist dances to the music composed by Tchaikovsky. The Swan Lake also takes a big part of the movie The Black Swan (2010), in which Natalie Portman represents a young ballet dancer, who tries to give life to The Black Swan to get the principal role on their production of The Swan Lake, ending in her being consumed by ambition and the darkness of the character in itself.

In conclusion, The Swan Lake is a story about love and fidelity, pure and evil, is the story of how love defeats all bad (At least according with the ending chosen for the performance given by Boloshoi Ballet de Bielorrusia). On a personal opinion, watching professional dancers perform The Swan Lake is more than just a simple show; it’s an experience, something to enjoy, something to fill you with emotion and to make you reflect on the true meaning of love, a way to make an indirect bond with the dancers performing on stage as well as the people surrounding oneself that are also admiring such a beautiful and well-structured art. The Swan Lake will always, and rightfully, be one of the best classics on ballet as well as one of the most beautiful fairy-tales to ever been existed. Gratitude must be given to Bolshoi Ballet de Bielorrusia for the greatly structured representation of this tale, and the very noticeable hard-work they invested in this production. For anyone planning on watching this performance, it would be recommendable to read at least a bit of background of the ballet, and definitely, have some general knowledge since ballet, and art in itself, is not always easy to read. So, for a better experience, the recommendation would be to read as much as needed before the show, to relax and enjoy the magnificent performance Bolshoi Ballet de Bielorrusia are about to give you.