#Shakespeare was a really great and affecting writer | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

murfpersonalblog · 8 months ago

Text

What else would you call a fan of Richard III writing fictional stories about him, other than a fanfic? 🤔 That's like people who say celebrities didn't exist before the Industrial Revolution and the creation of radios & tv. Which is total BS.

YES, modern media revolutionized the way we access/consume & circulate creative works like fanfic & fanart. And sure, the human inclination to categorize & label every frikkin thing impacted how we've come to identify & codify said works. But that doesn't mean modern society created fanfiction as a concept, even if things like the internet, mass marketing, and even literacy rates definitely broadened how we as a community engage with art & e/o.

IMO the only difference between fanfiction & religious texts or Shakespeare is the level of power/influence/respect an institutionally-sanctioned text can have, compared to a story posted as a recreational hobby/creative outlet. I think a lot of the pushback comes from connotations about hella serious works like religious texts, vs uber-respected works like Shakespeare, vs more frivolous(?) works like fanfiction. But I don't think they're as distinct as it's being made to seem.

Like, yes, there's the divine right of kings; but fandoms are cults (e.g.: cult classic movies, books, etc; X X X X X X X), and monarchs 100% have cults of personality. Folks have been invested in the lives of popular figures since forever ago. Not even the divine right of kings kept monarchs (hell, even popes!) safe from people gossiping, spreading stories/rumors, satire, making up all kinds of stuff about them--headcanons, etc. Same way there are modern celebrity fandoms--people even ship band members & actors together who are verifiably NOT a couple. Look at the INTRIGUE surrounding Versailles, and the MASSIVE cultural impact that the lives of the Sun King's Court had on the popular imagination (even in his own time!)--from Dumas (Man in the Iron Mask, Musketeers, etc), to La Voison, all the way down to the Scarlet Pimpernel (Louis 15 not 14 but you get what I mean), and Monchevy--all involving the lovers & love-lives of kings (which is a big deal in a hereditary monarchy surrounded by a sycophantic Court (fans/posse/entourage/groupies/etc).

And when your king is tantamount to a god (i.e.: divine kingship, priest-kings, no separation of church & state), then ofc religion can be seen as a type of fandom, with religious texts being tantamount to fanfiction--or vice versa (depending on the text's impact).

Look at the oldest story on the frikkin planet: the Epic of Gilgamesh, a (fan)fictional account of a (quasi?)historical king. He was an idolized hero--a popular local/international celebrity, and a cult was built around him that included the creation of multiple stories by all kinds of people, of which the EoG is just the biggest & best preserved--in which the author denied that he'd become an immortal god. Other writers disagreed, and said Gilgamesh really was deified. The lines between CANON & FANON blurred, to the point that we don't really know if he was a real or fictional dude. But people wrote all kinds of stories about him for THOUSANDS of years! He had the world's earliest known literary fandom, that exists to this day!

Sectarianism & schisms occur when the CANON is disputed--literal wars start over people not agreeing with peoples' interpretations or takes. FANON can lead to the Mandela Effect, which can even affect the REAL canon if certain ideas gets picked up by people with enough influence to turn fanon into the new canon.

Look at Plutarch & Shakespeare's "biographies," which we often treat as legit history--the lives of Alexander the Great (which started an entire genre of "Romances"), Julius Caesar, Antony & Cleopatra, King Henry & Richard etcetc. That was straight up fanfiction, but it's so dang OLD that everyone knows these stories/"histories", and we have a hard time separating fact from fiction cuz we just weren't there; and archaeological/textual evidence can only tell us so much.

Look at the history of theatre, and the way playwrights & rhapsodes & griots & skalds & bards retell events for entertainment, but are also relied upon as historians who orally preserve information that is treated as fact. It often recounted a religious story about a culture's gods, the origins of popular cult(ure) practices, folklore, and legendary/historical events & figures--look at the way Greek theatre emerged from worship of Dionysus (plays like the Bacchae and the Frogs are literal fanfiction versions of the Dionysus myth). Look at Japan's kabuki, and its creation by a miko (shrine maiden) who performed Buddhist dances. In many ancient cultures, theatre was a RELIGIOUS performance art. These were held as fun & funny performances & art, but also dead serious. We laugh at Jaskier/Dandelion's antics on The Witcher, and how skewed his songs are, but also look at the HUGE fanbase he has, where even kings and actual historians look to his songs as legit information when really they're just fanfiction.

Speaking of singers--look at Star Trek TOS, and all the DECADES of speculation behind Spock & Uhura being a couple, before someone with influence & power finally went for it and made fanon into canon in the 2009 reboot.

Look at the Church of Scientology--which started as LITERAL (fan)fiction, before celebrities turned it into this big ole thing that some people actually take seriously 🤣, treating it as an actual religion. (They have a whole parasocial relationship with Hubbard, I can't even.)

The professional/monetary aspect of fiction (as Art™) vs fanfiction is important too. Terms like Intellectual Property, Transformative Work, and Copyright are new--imitation is the greatest form of flattery, but also the quickest way to a lawsuit nowadays. A lot of folk use "fanfiction" pejoratively (thanks, My Immortal, for giving fics a bad name), to demean its quality. Some literati get offended by even using Shakespeare and Fanfiction in the same sentence, like, blasphemy! 🤢🤮 But there are PLENTY of fanfic authors out there who write WAY better than some Pulitzer authors! Ao3 even won a Hugo award. But because fanfiction is transformative, the legality of publishing or getting monetary compensation for writings fics is a slippery slope, even with some fic authors successfully getting their work published (50 Shades, Shadowhunters, etc). Who cares that Virgil ripped off Homer, and Shakespeare ripped off Ovid?! God forbid you rip off GRRM or *boss music starts* Anne Rice! 💀 (And the WILDEST irony is that after making SUCH a stink about fanfic authors touching her work, Anne Rice sold the rights to ALL of her books to AMC, whose tv adaptations have sometimes been called fanfiction! 🤣 And look how many THEATRE KIDS make up the cast of Interview with the Vampire--and the triple irony wrt Lestat's origin story and the creation of the Theatre des Vampires!)

So really, all it takes is someone powerful & influential enough to reinvent the wheel and turn (fan)fiction into high art, a story into history, fandom into cult/religion, and fanon into canon.

My least favourite type of internet person is the person who claims fanfic is over thousands of years old or whatever. I understand we like to joke but fanfiction is fundamentally tied to fandom culture and is a very specific way of engaging with media. Religious texts based off other religious texts is not fanfiction and it is worrying the only way you can justify your interest is by comparing the two. I promise you you don't have to reinvent the wheel to write fanfic you can just do that but we don't have to say "Shakespeare wrote fanfiction about Richard III", there was not a Richard III fandom in 1592, that was called the divine right of kings.

#fanfiction #fandoms #religion #shakespeare #anne rice #greek mythology #the witcher #since OP showed their maturity by blocking me i'll just say in the tags that #this is not me tryna “justify” anyone liking fanfiction #or propping up fanfiction by equating it to shakespeare & religion #it's about how FANON and CANON can become so intertwined that one leads/bleeds into the other #and how anything that has a large powerful and influential enough backing (patrons etc) can become fact/history/religious canon in time #and gain enough clout that it becomes a respected medium (e.g.: Ao3's Hugo award)#and fandoms ARE cults as the various article links I provided will demonstrate #you're the one who brought up weird examples like shakespeare & king richard & the divine right of kings #and then don't wanna have a serious conversation about how religion politics and literature/theatre are interlinked????#and your reblog about the protestant/catholic wars was literally rooted in exactly what I'd already said: disagreements about CANON #read a dang history book

5K notes · View notes

pazodetrasalba · 1 year ago

Text

To Her Coy Master

Dear Caroline:

This was a delightful reworking of Andrew Marvell's original poem, including reversed gender roles, reappropriation and wittiness galore. I guess you would have made a great writer, and there's still time and opportunity for this to actually become a reality.

Apart from the able wordsmithing, what strikes me the most is how outrageously passionate you appear in these lines. Granted, literature has always an element of the theatrical and performative: the poetic persona is a mask the writer creates, connected in complex and dubious ways with the author in most cases. Still, I am pretty sure at guessing that the fervor is real, and denotes a facet of your personality which only a few privileged people get to know about.

Given what we know about your relationship with Sam, it seems pretty clear that this was written with him in mind, at about the same time he was moving to Hong Kong and you were sending him a memo which Michael Lewis has luridly exploited to the full. Nobody in their right mind would envy Sam today, but I really wish I had been in his shoes in late 2018, and not for the billions - I really don't give a damn about money as an end in itself, and marginally more so as an instrumental means-, but for the blessing he enjoyed of holding the key to your heart and your affections. But in this, as in so many other instances, life likes to make fools of us, and greatly mismatch what we desire and what we have.

To a great extend, your feelings and your words were wasted on Sam. I suppose at this time he might have made it known to you what he has since made known to the world: an arrogant disdain for culture in general, and Shakespeare in particular, and a non-appreciation for books (“I think, if you wrote a book, you fucked up, and it should have been a six-paragraph blog post”). Such comments have probably gone a long way to deactivate my innate co-sympathy for nerds in his case, and to act in the exact opposite direction as regards you.

After all that has taken place, you might feel embarrassed at having written and made public this text. That shouldn't be the case. You know my inclinations are deontological, so I'd say that your intentions and feelings when you wrote it were noble enough, and one should never feel ashamed of having loved, whatever the results and consequences in the end. The only thing that is good in itself is the “good will.”

Quote:

My love is of a birth as rare

As ’tis for object strange and high;

It was begotten by Despair

Upon Impossibility.

Andrew Marvell

#caroline ellison #poetry #love

1 note · View note

wickedpact · 4 years ago

Note

dear tumblr user crim wickedpact pls write the essay/dissertation about nicky being shakespeare's fair youth (if you have time, ofc!!)

Not To Imply Nicky Was Shakespeare’s Fair Youth But Ive Read The Fair Youth Sonnets & Nicky Was Definitely Shakespeare’s Fair Youth, an essay by me, tumblr user crim wickedpact

background knowledge: our man shakespeare wrote some 120 sonnets about a young man referred to as the Fair Youth during the mid 1590s; there has been some debate among shakespeare enthusiasts whether shakespeare’s interest in the Fair Youth was platonic or romantic (but like. they were definitely romantic). no one knows for sure who the Fair Youth was, but it was definitely nicky and my first and most important piece of evidence regarding this hypothesis is the ‘lmao babe do you remember that guy who had a crush on me?’/ ‘i try not to remember the guy who had a crush on you’ look joe and nicky exchange when Merrick brings up shakespeare during the movie. especially since gina confirmed in a tweet that joe and nicky canonly did know shakespeare

my second piece of evidence is that it just Works (except for a couple small facts like.. the Fair Youth was prolly closer to his 20s than his 30s. and the fact that shakespeare implies that the Fair Youth slept with his mistress at one point. but he doesnt know what hes talking about shhh we IGNORE)

long post under cut

A. The Description Matches

when describing the Fair Youth (who I’ll call the FY from now on), shakespeare says he has a ‘gold complexion’ and ‘beautiful eyes’ and compares him to a ‘summer’s day’. He says the FY has “A woman’s gentle heart" and “An eye more bright than [women’s are], (...) Gilding the object whereupon [they] gazeth”

As much as shakespeare’s perceptions of sexuality and gender are very........ late 1500′s (whoo boy sonnet #20 is a wild ride) ...... the description does match, and also:

B. The Fair Youth Refused to Get Married

it’s never really said why one way or another (shakespeare assumes it’s because the FY is selfish) but the FY didn’t/wouldn’t take on a wife and have a kid, and this was something that was a real sticker for our man Willy S. because, as he says in his sonnets a million times: beauty doesn’t last forever, but having a child not only passes down the FY’s beauty, but also blesses the woman the FY would have a child with (im not saying shakespeare wanted to bear the FY’s children, but he definitely did)

Whose fresh repair if now thou not renewest, Thou dost beguile the world, unbless some mother. For where is she so fair whose uneared womb Disdains the tillage of thy husbandry?

(ie. If you don’t renew yourself/ have children, you deprive the world and deprive a woman from having your child, since what woman out there is so beautiful that she wouldn’t want to bear your child?)

Like.

1.) if nicky is the FY then so many of these poems center around the idea of nicky growing old sometime soon and that must have been pretty funny to Nicky and

2.) the fact that shakespeare would have been So Desperate for nicky to find a wife must have been the opposite of funny to joe. considering the ease of his and nicky’s relationship and the fact that being gay in late 1500s england was probably not a walk in the park, it is very likely shakespeare wouldn’t have known they were in a committed relationship-- or at least not known how close they actually were. Thus:

C. The Rival (aka. Joe)

shakespeare mentions having a poetic rival in regards to the FY in several sonnets. In sonnet #21 he talks about how he’s not like Those Other Writers who use grand metaphors to talk about their muses

So is it not with me as with that Muse, Stirred by a painted beauty to his verse, Who heaven itself for ornament doth use And every fair with his fair doth rehearse, Making a couplement of proud compare With sun and moon, with earth and sea's rich gems, With April's first-born flowers, and all things rare,

(ie. I’m not like other poets who, when inspired by a ‘painted beauty’ use heaven and every other beautiful thing on the planet to make a grand comparison to their muse: he specifically lists the sun and moon as examples as well as other beautiful things)

He then goes on to say

And then believe me, my love is as fair As any mother's child, though not so bright As those gold candles fixed in heaven's air:

(ie. my love [the FY] is as beautiful as any other beautiful person, though I wouldn’t compare them to the stars/heavens (which is what he means by the 'gold candles’. those are stars.))

So shakespeare insults poets who compare their subjects to the sun, moon, and stars (amongst other things) and in the comics, Joe does literally exactly that

That man is the stars in my sky, and the sun that lights my days. That man is the moon when I'm lost in darkness, and warmth when I shiver in cold.

shakespeare also goes on to say in the same sonnet “Let them say more that like of hearsay well / I will not praise that purpose not to sell” which is to say ‘let people who like that kind of language use it, I wont because I don’t want anyone else to have the subject of my affections (the FY)’.

(which is a bit of a contradiction regarding his feelings abt the FY getting married, but these sonnets are full of contradictions. shakespeare was a confused dude; man spent the first 100 or so sonnets convinced the FY loved him back only for him to start wondering if the FY ever loved him near the end)

(not to mention Marriage For Love wasnt really.. much of a thing in Ye Olden Times but thats a different conversation. so shakespeare prolly didnt associate marriage with love/competition? anyways)

Shakesy-boo goes on to complain about this rival several times. In #79, he says

Yet what of thee thy poet doth invent He robs thee of, and pays it thee again. He lends thee virtue, and he stole that word From thy behaviour; beauty doth he give, And found it in thy cheek: he can afford No praise to thee, but what in thee doth live.

(ie. everything ‘your poet’ (as the FY apparently favored this unnamed rival) says about you, he takes it from you in the first place. he talks about your virtue, but learned the word from watching your behavior. he calls you beautiful but only discovered beauty by looking at your face. every compliment he gives you he took from you in the first place)

[and, as a smaller example, he also bemoans the fact that people want to paint the FY in #67, saying, “Why should false painting imitate his cheek, / And steal dead seeming of his living hue?”. and yknow. Joe’s an artist.]

And then another example in #86

Was it the proud full sail of [the rival’s] great verse, Bound for the prize of all too precious you, That did my ripe thoughts in my brain inhearse, Making their tomb the womb wherein they grew?

Was it his spirit, by spirits taught to write Above a mortal pitch, that struck me dead?

(ie. he’s talking about how he’s having difficulty writing abt the FY and is rhetorically asking if ‘the proud sail’ of the rival’s verses was the reason his ‘ripe thoughts’ were killed in their ‘womb’. He then asks (again rhetorically) if it was the rival’s ‘spirit’ (or creativity, maybe) ‘’’‘by spirits taught to write’’’’ that killed his own drive to write. none of the analyses I’ve read really explain what shakespeare means by ‘spirits taught to write’, other than maybe being a joke or reference to something we dont know, but... ‘taught by dead people to write in a way mortal people can’t’ very much sounds like a description of an immortal poet, eh?)

Which brings me to,

D. Willy Boy Thinks There Are 500 Year Old Writings About the Fair Youth

shakespeare talks about people having written about the FY ‘500 years ago’ from the late 1500s in #59 which......................... would have been around 1100 AD. :thinking face:

Oh that record could with a backward look, Even of five hundred courses of the sun, Show me your image in some antique book, Since mind at first in character was done, That I might see what the old world could say To this composed wonder of your frame;

(ie. Oh if I could look back 500 years and see how you were described in some old books so I could see/reference what people used to write about you)

Which again brings me to,

E. I’m Not Saying shakespeare Stole From Joe, But:

1.) In #22, shakespeare says this,

For all that beauty that doth cover thee, Is but the seemly raiment of my heart, Which in thy breast doth live, as thine in me:

(ie, your beauty is due to the ‘clothes’ my heart gives you-- probably means something like ‘you’re beautiful because i love you’. goes on to say his heart lives in the FY’s chest, and the FY’s heart lives in shakespeare’s chest)

so: shakespeare tells the FY he has shakespeare’s heart. in comparison, Joe calls nicky ‘my heart’ in the comics...... :thinking face x2:

2.) In #109, shakespeare tells the FY ‘thou art my all’,

For nothing this wide universe I call, Save thou, my rose, in it thou art my all.

which rings similar to Joe’s ‘he’s all and he’s more’ as well as (from the comics) ‘he is my everything’

and just saying. joe looks pretty #done the mention of shakespeare.

F. The last One

Despite shakespeare writing 30+ poems about the FY eventually growing old, the very last poem he writes about/for the FY says,

O thou, my lovely boy, who in thy power Dost hold Time's fickle glass, his sickle hour; Who hast by waning grown, and therein showest Thy lovers withering, as thy sweet self growest.

(ie. you [the FY] have power over the ‘mirror’ (fickle glass) of time as well as time’s ‘harvesting’ ability (sickle hour) and as you grow older, you remain beautiful while your lovers [shakespeare] wither and grow old)

The transition from ‘get married and have a baby before you get old!!!!’ in #1-20 to talking about the FY’s presence in 500 y/o books in #59 to admitting the FY isn’t growing old in #126 kinda seems to imply shakespeare learning of/about nicky’s immortality at some point, and this last poem is him accepting it.

TLDR: not only does it make perfect sense if nicky was the Fair Youth from the FY sonnets, but it also makes perfect sense if joe was the Rival from the FY sonnets. its canon nothing will convince me otherwise

#IS THIS GETTING TAGGED? YES #nicolo di genova #joe x nicky #my_essays #the fair youth saga

1K notes · View notes

terrainofheartfelt · 2 years ago

Note

Are there couples like dair that you know of?

Do you mean in real life? Because that’s classified. Also, not really. That kind of insanity only exists in fiction.

Fictionally though…I can think of many. I think that’s why my affection for dair is so enduring, it ticks so many of my ship boxes for me, so let’s dive in, on a tour of liz’s fave romantic ships

Let’s start with the classics.

The original romcom couple: beatrice x benedick of shakespeare’s much ado about nothing. They have everything: eviscerating banter, guy being an absolute simp for his beloved. Nads has written about it before.

And of course, the austenites: Darcy x Lizzie and Knightley x Emma are big ones, and I think there’s definite vibes with Wentworth x Anne too.

the Blueprints are When Harry Met Sally and Summer x Seth (and tbh you could probs throw Holly Golightly and Paul Varjak and Tracy Lord and Mike Connor — I would have picked jimmy stewart tbh. rip to katharine hepburn but I’m different. )

Sidebar: Oh but you know who knows SO much about Philadelphia Story and all romcomedy bc they’ve written academically on the subject? tumblr user scabopolis!—somewhere, mayhaps a fic comment?—they told me that that script was written with the intention of the ending being punitive for the heroine. if hepburn and the writer weren’t combating early 20th century misogyny, would the play and subsequent film come to a different conclusion???

As mentioned here: kate x anthony from bridgerton have a multitude of parallels. absolutely dair coded.

And I mean…I already made this post about the parallels with Japril but REALLY: the different backgrounds—one rich one middle class; workplace romance; adversaries to best friends to lovers; shared trauma through the loss of a child; RUNAWAY BRIDE; mutual pining; backdoor endgame which I know the gg revival will not give me but a girl can dream

Nads and I have discussed at length how dair coded the Emily Henry couples Gus x January & Charlie x Nora are. And Henry’s talked about how inspired all her work is by Nora Ephron, so. Mutual blueprints (Poppy x Alex have a best friends to lovers that is DELICIOUS but the characters themselves aren’t that similar to dan and blair on that level)

Speaking of mutual blueprints, the mindy project’s mindy x danny have a GREAT workplace enemies to lovers arc in the first couple seasons…the second half of the show roughens them up a bit. (and danny castellano is SUCH a different daniel than our girl dan humphrey)

And in the realm of “stop being so mean to me or I swear to god I’m gonna fall in love with you” allow me to talk a bit about one of my favorite ships of all time: luke and mara jade skywalker.

Okay so, in the extended star wars universe; in the novels that were written BEFORE the new trilogy (and before the prequel trilogy in some cases), these published fanfic pulp scifi books introduced this character, mara jade. She was the personal assassin and fixer for the emperor, and when he was killed, she was like “I have to get revenge” so of course she makes it her life mission to destory luke skywalker. And then of course they get thrown into a few impossible situations where they have to team up and she discovers that actually she doesn’t hate him which of course makes her furious, and then after a couple more teamups she realizes she likes him, how horrifying, then after luke convinces mara to train as a jedi in between smuggling deals she realizes she’s in LOVE with him?! while luke has been down bad since the first assassination attempt they are literally those posts that go “she thinks they’re sworn enemies but he is just some guy with a crush on her” and “she stops trying to kill him and honestly he’s a little disappointed. star wars sequels committed many sins but the original one was cutting out my girl mara jade skywalker.

I have discussed at length with S (and even written fic) on the dair-codedness of amy and jonah from superstore.

Speaking of S, she also made me watch Hart of Dixie and whilst the main couple zoe x wade have a chaotic adversarial romance that may speak to dair, the true dair of the show, the couple that came late in the game, but looking back seems like they should have belonged together all this time (I caught Vibes in s2 but that’s neither here nor there): ANNABETH X GEORGE! They have a long history of mutual disinterest/only tolerating each other for the sake of the mutual love of their life, Lemon, and then after a couple heartbreaks and a long winding road, they fall for each other! and Lemon is like the captain of their ship—it’s both Dair and the resolution the blair x serena x dan triangle deserved!

And in terms of childhood love vs the love you grow into have this whole fic verse that expands upon the dair & amy x laurie parallels

#asks #anon #gg meta #dair #much ado about nothing #billy shakes #p & p #emma #persuasion #jane austen #kathony #japril #the mindy project #nothing but respect for my favorite skywalker #hart of dixie

17 notes · View notes

tired-inyxe · 10 months ago

Text

Ok so I was originally going to do a basic character breakdown for you but that was rapidly approaching thousands of words territory (it was over 2000 characters and I was on the second fucking character) and I feel like that’s a little overwhelming so I’m just gonna give you a one sentence descriptor of The Guys(tm) and some of my favorite panels

First off, in dc, canon is your sandbox and you play with it how you wish. There are a million and one retcons and different writers write different characters in wildly different ways. There’s a base form of a character and all the details are up to interpretation, I recommend looking at people’s headcanons and opinions about the batfam to get a deeper understanding (and I can send that absolutely massive character breakdown when I feel like I can finish it if you want). Take everything here with a grain of salt as this is just my interpretation!

Also yes, they’re all extremely wild. Tim is arguably the most insane but they’re all so far above the “normal” bar that it barely matters

Now, the characters!

Bruce Wayne: emotionally repressed furry that’s trying to be a good dad but desperately needs therapy

Dick Grayson: sunshine boy that’s one second away from some sort of mental breakdown any time

Jason Todd: overdramatic gremlin that has a point even tho no writer takes it seriously and treats him as the rebellious kid. Also an extremely traumatized victim that’s constantly treated as being a bad guy because he doesn’t act like a victim “should”. Loves Shakespeare and swears every other word

Tim Drake: Skateboarding gay maniac that hides his insanity with way too many lies and a relaxed demeanor. Also a stalker

Damian Wayne: traumatized bb that hides his vulnerability behind a facade of murderous anger and apathy. Loves animals and drawing

Cassandra Cain: Perceptive of everything and knows your deepest secrets but tends to see things without nuance, also an absolute maniac that’s hiding behind a facade of Good Child(tm). The scariest person in all of dc

Stephanie Brown: Angry girlie that loves throwing quips and bricks. She’s independent, competent and understands the needs of gothams uptown, since she lived there

Duke Thomas: Absolutely insane but hides it remarkably well. Has a chill vibe, loves quipping back and isn’t afraid of anyone or anything. Also besties with Jason and Steph (the uptown trio my beloved <3)

Alfred Pennyworth: Sassy old man that’s coldly professional. Not very good at affection but gives great advice

Barbra Gordon: Badass that keeps eyes on anything and everything. Keeps all the bats together and won’t stand for anyone’s shit

Traits that commonly tie em all together: Neglecting physical and emotional health, poor communication about anything related to emotions, a strong moral code that will not waver, a love of fighting and freedom, downright extreme levels of paranoia and trauma, a sense of humor and a flair for the dramatics

Anndd… some panels! :D

Now, for your other questions

Who’s my favorite? Jason. He says Bamboozled unironically I love this looser. I love all the batkids but he’s my favorite

What would i recommend? It depends on your tolerance for out of character stuff and if you prefer angst over fluff. I love enemy to caretaker Jason Todd and Tim Drake but it’s absolutely out of character and makes no sense. The crack fics in this fandom can be really fun as well and they tend to be more in character unless they’re angsty. The angst fics will fuckin destroy you but damn are a lot of them good. Also, there’s a lot of rape/non con stuff and quite a bit of batcest so just be prepared for that and block it if you’re not comfortable with it. Also so very many AUs and crossovers. So fuckin many

So uh yea, hope this helps! I love these idiots but they vary so wildly that you can mix and match a downright insane amount of stuff. Have fun! Go insane >:D

First batfam fix I read is a sick fic with Tim and his ???missing spleen???? oh well it was amazing and now I might branch out into batfam aus along with my usual fics

24 notes · View notes

atopfourthwall · 3 years ago

Note

Ive only recently gotten into classic Star Trek so I don't think I can properly answer but what is it specifically about Discovery and recent Star Trek that classic Trek fans hate?

Putting this behind a cut because... it's a lot.

Well, first of all a big rejection of it is just on an aesthetic level. Up until the 2009 movie (which was considered a reboot, even with time travel elements), Star Trek tried to treat the original series and how it was portrayed as pretty sacrosanct. Sure, they might occasionally make jokes about goofier aspects of it and discard some of the stupider stuff (like how in the final episode, penned by Gene Roddenberry himself, that women weren't allowed to Captain starships), but how TOS looked? That's how the 23rd century looked. Buttons and multi-colored outfits and boxy computers and smooth, undetailed ships WAS what was appropriate for the time. When Scotty came back in TNG, they had him on the holodeck and it was the TOS bridge. When DS9 traveled back in time to that era for an episode? They went onto the Enterprise and visited it. When in an Enterprise 2-parter we had a TOS-era ship? It looked like a TOS ship. They even did a 2-parter on Enterprise to explain why Klingons had smooth foreheads when later (and earlier) they didn't. Star Trek up until then cared about maintaining that continuity of appearance. But Discovery is set in the TOS era... but nothing looks like TOS. Even when we got the Enterprise and those uniforms and we saw inside the ship, it was an upgraded form. The only logic I've seen people try to argue about WHY it doesn't look like it actually did was "Well, audiences won't accept something as cheap as TOS being futuristic." Well, then you've got a few responses there: -Don't set in TOS era, then. -That's horseshit, because audiences from the 90s through the 2000s accepted it just fine. Even a piece of dialogue from DS9 explained it perfectly: "I LOVE 23rd century design." It LOOKS cheap, but it was just the aesthetics of the period. And the Enterprise 2-parter it still looked good in HD. Hell, arguably it looked BETTER in HD because they knew how to light it and create mood and its own unique flavor. -It's even more horseshit because people are STILL going back and watching it even today, as indicated by you saying you've started watching it, so clearly it's not that much of a barrier. But what's even more egregious is the TECHNOLOGY. You might be able to accept updated aesthetics if at least matches what was present during the period... and it doesn't. Holographic displays and communication (holodeck technology AT ALL, frankly - it's possible it was there, but TNG seemed pretty adamant that the holodecks were fairly new, very impressive technology), weapons not looking or acting like they traditionally did, Enterprise and Discovery having R2D2-style repair droids that certainly did not exist in TOS, the wrong sound effects being frequently employed, replicator technology for good-looking food instead of food dispensers that gave out marshmallows and cubes, and honestly the tech level shown in Discovery looks just as advanced - if not MORE advanced than seen on TNG 100 years later. And this is a minor thing, but despite the attempt to make the future LOOK futuristic, from a cultural perspective, the future looks... way too damn similar to now. The excessive swearing (it was said in particular in Star Trek 4 that while they certainly did cuss, it was less common and they sure as hell weren't dropping F-bombs), a party on Discovery that looked like a rave (when previously it seemed like the most popular music and culture of the 23rd/24th century was considered fairly high-brow entertainment [classical music, Shakespeare, great works of literature and plays, etc.] - and while you could certainly argue that that snootiness and love of that stuff is a problem with Star Trek and a sign of how sterile and homogenized it is, THAT is the future they presented and a character in Voyager loving some of the goofier parts of 20th century culture like jukeboxes and old sci-fi serials was considered unusual), and just the general way people talk betrays the idea that the writers aren't thinking about how society changes in the future. It's just the modern day, but with cooler technology. But hey, let's set aside the general aesthetics - some people aren't going to mind that and find

ways to handwave away a lot of stuff (even Discovery season 2 TRIED to handwave away stuff like the holographic communications, but did a piss-poor job of it). This brings us to the problem of the WRITING. And the problem with the writing is a big Michael Burnham-shaped indentation. To be clear, I don't mind Michael as a character or her actress - there are interesting aspects to her, centering a Star Trek show around the science officer is a neat idea (though that means you should probably NAME IT AFTER HER and not around the ship, because it suggests this is a standard ensemble group and not JUST her)... but the actual execution is that it feels like the entire universe bends over backwards for HER. She has a unique relationship with a beloved longtime character that is retconned in. She has unique relationships with several important characters to the point where the fate of billions of people hinges on her and the decisions she makes. She is presented as almost always correct about everything, and those that oppose her are often wrong, naïve, or active enemies. Now, this is less of an issue in the third season - but that has its own unique problems - but in the first season, the resolution of two major storylines (mirror universe and the Klingon war) revolves around her and her relationship to the Terran Emperor and Lorca. In season 2, her mother trying to help or save her is the basis of the ENTIRE friggin' plot with time travel and the like, with special knowledge and history having to do with her and everyone ready to abandon their lives for her so she won't be alone when she has to go to the future when arguably they barely know her (the timeline of the show is debatable). Season 3 has a few different problems with her - the first is that she keeps being involved in things that don't concern her (why is she going down to Trill?) and she keeps violating orders. Now, her violating orders is a problem throughout the entirety of Discovery - in fact, it's kind of the instigating factor OF the series. And arguably, other Star Trek characters are guilty of that and they face no consequences, just as she faces none... and yet it's the brazenness with which it happens, and in those other series it's arguable because the series tries to avoid excessive continuity changes for its episodic nature, so the status quo MUST return to normal... but Discovery is pivoted as one of MAJOR continuity, so her lack of consequences (and indeed eventual PROMOTION) is baffling to the point of frustration. Now again, let me be clear here - she is not a bad character in and of herself. Honestly what it shows is that being the science officer on a starship is not where her talents lie. She should be in a position where she has a lot more freedom to act and not in a major command structure... but being in that command structure, what we see in season 3 is that she lacks the discipline, emotional maturity, responsibility, leadership qualities, and general other traits necessary to be a Captain. Only once during season 3 did she display such a quality - putting the safety of the Federation above a friend and colleague... but other times she will happily disobey orders and put herself and others in harm's way, creating potential new problems. Now, again, Star Trek is rife with characters doing that... but usually not the Captains. And, in fact, when this happened once on DS9 with one officer disobeying orders and putting their own personal feelings above the greater responsibility, it was made VERY clear that the incident would mean that they would never be able to command a starship because of the unofficial reprimand. What's even more frustrating about her is that the character is ALWAYS shoved to the forefront so much to the point where we just get sick of her. SHE is the one giving log entries (usually pretty piss-poor ones, at that - very flowery and nonsensical and kind of dumb) and not the Captain. SHE is the one given so much focus and how the plot of the episode affects her. Barely anyone else gets any focus episodes - I STILL can't

remember the names of some of the secondary characters because they're so rarely said, and a PTSD-related plotline in season 3 for one of the secondary characters basically gets resolved OFF-SCREEN. Michael would be fine if we actually had a chance to miss her... but we never do. Arguably one of the best episodes of the show is in season 2, when it focuses on Saru and his people because Michael DOES take a back seat. It's his story and his development and problems relating to him and his people. And even if, again, we forgave the idea of so much focus on her even in plots that aren't about her... she never seems to really change that much. She'll TALK about how she's changed, but I see no real difference in the way she acts (MAYBE season 1 to 2, where in season 1 she was stiffer and more Vulcan-like, but that's it). But hey, let's assume that's not a problem for you - you really, REALLY like Michael and are fine with so much focus on her. Simply put, the writing of the rest of the show... is just kind of dumb. The ship is powered by magic mushrooms that let it teleport everywhere because the universe has super fungus capillaries throughout it that nobody can see and also it's magic and can resurrect the dead. The time travel plot of season 2 doesn't make any sense when you sit down and diagram it. Well-established Trek lore is just kind of sprinkled in, but now in ways that doesn't match what it was before or at least in ways that completely recolor how it's supposed to work, because it needs to serve THIS plot. Everyone remembering a murdererous monster fondly after she leaves because "Hey, she was coooool." The explanation for the big mystery in season 3 is just fricking stupid and one of the two big reasons why I've finally given up on Discovery, because it's just so absurd, doesn't match how anything works, and just feels like the writers giving the middle finger to the audience because they care more about "YOU MUST FEEEEEEL THINGS!" instead of it making sense. And indeed, there is certainly a balance to be made of plot vs. emotion-driven storytelling - some stories are dumb, but are forgivable because the character writing and emotion are so strong that they override how goofy the plot is... but sometimes a plot is just so dumb it overrides anything I'm SUPPOSED to feel. And it would help if I already liked the show, already gave it some benefit of the doubt... but I don't and it hasn't done enough to impress me. A little thing that's a problem with ALL of current modern Trek shows is that whole sprinkling lore thing - I don't think a single episode goes by in ANY current modern Trek series that doesn't have a random reference to classic Trek lore. A name, a line of dialogue, etc. It comes across like the creators don't trust you to enjoy it on its own merits, but want you to like it because "Hey, remember thing? We know about thing! Like us because we mentioned thing!" But hey, I recognize that these are things that other people may not have any problem with or just disagree in general. But for me and my family, these are the big ones that keep us from enjoying it. Hell, my brother and dad still watch it for hatewatching purposes, but I was done after season 3. I gave it plenty of chances to impress me, and while each season MARGINALLY got better as it went along, I'm tired of waiting to actually like it and to stop feeling like it thinks I'm a fucking idiot. If other people still like it, great - it clearly appeals to them in a way that it doesn't appeal to me and they are free to enjoy it. Other people probably have their own issues, but this long, rambly bit is the major stuff for me.

107 notes · View notes

transaurus · 5 years ago

Text

my straight friend who’s been dating this guy for a few months and has spent the last 3(ish) months arguing with him non stop just asked me ‘you’ve been together for almost a year, how are you still in your honeymoon phase?’ and like the phrase ‘honeymoon phase’ just kinda felt odd??? so i looked it up and realised why

so the etymology of ‘honeymoon’ comes from ‘hony moone’ with hony referring to literal honey as an ‘indefinite period of tenderness and pleasure experienced by a newly wed couple’ and moone referring to this period of tenderness being short. the phrase ‘hony moone’ was coined to ‘warn newleweds about waning love.’

The first recorded description we have of ‘hony moone’ is from 1542; writer Samuel Johnson said it was ‘the first month after marriage, when there is nothing but tenderness and pleasure... comparing mutual affection to the changing moon which is no sooner full that it begins to wane.’ he literally described it as ‘at the beginning, everything is great but then your love will fade until there’s nothing left in your relationship’ like what ?????? what kinda heterosexual bullshit propaganda is this????

if you fall out of love with someone you shouldn’t stay together for the sake of it. if you’re spending more time arguing with your partner than anything else, that’s not a healthy relationship and y’all need to seriously think about what’s going on. if you think ‘i can’t stand being around them’ then that’s not love

if you’re not completely enamoured by your partner every day, if you don’t adore all their little quirks, if you can’t feel your heart burst every time you hear their voice, what the fuck?

not to be a slut for shakespeare or anything but like

‘O, swear not by the moon, th’inconstant moon,

That monthly changes in her circled orb,

Lest that thy love prove likewise variable.’

tl:dr love shouldn’t fade with time. love should grow by the day. nurture your love like a plant, don’t let it wane like the moon - but if you have to force it, it’s not love.

also this applies to all relationships, not just romantic love!! if you don’t look at your best friend and think ‘i’d do anything to keep them happy,’ if you don’t look at your siblings and think ‘i would sacrifice everything i hold dear to keep them safe,’ if you’re keeping them around out of habit rather than out of love, is it really worth it?

#relationship #love #etymology #languages #honeymoon phase #platonic love #romantic love #familiar love #uhhhh idk what else to tag

862 notes · View notes

silvanable · 4 years ago

Note

Hi! I saw your requests were open! This might be really specific, but it would mean the world to me if I could request Dazai, Mozart, Shakespeare, Leo and Theo from Ikevamp with an s/o that comes out to them as panromantic and nonbinary? I'm so sorry it's so specific, I've just been coming out to a lot of people recently ('cause I've found out I'm nonbinary ^^) I'm curious about what their reaction would be. Thank you, take care!

congratulations darling! i am so happy for you that you have found who you are and are able to express that with others. from one non-gender defining person to another, i send all my love.

i took this as the boys’ s/o comes out to them after meeting them. hope i did this justice and sorry for such a long wait hun!

↪ GUIDELINES

ー DAZAI OSAMU

his s/o had been meaning to tell him something, which they mentioned off handedly a few nights ago.

dazai was all ears but between his writing and his s/o’s work helping sebastian around the manor, they had not had the time.

dazai is himself, per usual.

meaning he is airy and teasing as he practically breezes through the day.

he actually forgot that his s/o had something important to tell him, especially because if it was direly important they would have told him already.

so it slipped from his mind.

constantly being interrupted and unable to tell him, did not settle well with his s/o though.

over the days they grew increasingly more anxious, as their resolve from before starts to chip away.

that is until they mention is again to dazai, who promptly forgot.

his s/o blurts it all out in one go, a mixture of emotions causing the outburst.

at first dazai does not understand and he makes that clear when he asks for his s/o to elaborate.

it takes some time, with several odd comparisons to understand from dazai, but eventually he does get it.

he finds his s/o’s confession intriguing, as the future seems far more curious and open.

he messes up from time to time but even as forgetful as he appears, dazai does his best to correct himself.

he never wants to devalue his s/o and how they want to be perceived or referred to as.

he still uses nicknames when talking to them, toshiko-san being the prominent one.

will correct others if they say something wrong or to upset his s/o about their gender.

he’s very mild about it, stating the facts rather airily but there’s an edge of a warning hidden in it.

he adores his s/o regardless and love them no matter what.

they were able to accept and love him for who and what he was, therefore he sees no issues in reciprocating the same affection.

ー LEONARDO DA VINCI

there were all sorts of things leonardo had come across in his years and more he had heard from comte from his travels through the door.

leo’s s/o was one of those rarities that, unlike before, had stumbled through the magic door from a distant future.

when he had first met them, they were curious and amusing, and he found them to be pleasant company.

of course he had asked questions, on occasions, about the future which was normally the result of his s/o offhandedly mentioning how people revered his work.

the day his s/o approached him and asked if they could talk, fidgeting and nervous, made him worry.

he had grown quite comfortable with his s/o and he had hoped they felt the same.

when the two finally sit down, his s/o has a hard time really finding their words.

leo waits patiently for them though, which eventually encourages them to speak.

they manage to explain that they had been in thought over themselves for some time, even before they traveled back through the door.

the discovery of themself was that not only did they find they had romantic inclinations towards people of all genders, but they themself did not fall into the normal binary.

out of all the suitors leo has the most relaxed response.

he is silent for a short while, while his s/o is busy twisting their sleeves, before he finally begins to ask questions.

most of the questions he asks his s/o are regards to what it means, how this effects them personally, and what more he needs to understand.

he is fairly good about their pronouns and any mistakes he makes he will apologize and correct.

sees his s/o no different, as they are who they are, and he adores them regardless.

they are unique and special to him no matter what.

ー THEODORUS VAN GOGH

despite theo’s persona of being very outwardly gruff and standoffish, he is quite sweet.

still, even knowing that his s/o was having a hard time talking to him about something very important.

something they had finally figured out about themself.

theo is as perceptive as they come though, so the tense nature of his s/o did not go unnoticed by him.

it was one evening when he was returning from work that he found his s/o out in the garden that he decided now was the time to ask them.

they were a bit tense at first, unsure of how to explain exactly what was going on.

theo reassured them, no matter what, that they could talk to him if something was bothering them.

with that encouragement his s/o decided to bite the bullet and tell him.

the words, if they could even be called that, let their lips in a panicked rush that ended with a “please don’t be mad!”

theo genuinely has to ask them to repeat what they said, slower.

they manage, one more time, to say it again, this time at an understandable speed.

after a few questions, theo seems to grasp the subject.

his first response, in fact, is to tell his s/o not to let arthur not lest the writer drag them out to the bar to join him in picking up girls.

he is very respectful towards his s/o pronouns.

would absolutely practice by himself so he could show them how dedicated he is to showing that he loves them regardless.

if his s/o decided to change their appearance, to appear less gendered, he would support.

while he might not have the best advice, he’s willing to try his best for his s/o to make them comfortable.

regardless he loves them and they’re perfect to him either way, so long as they are themself.

ー WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE

shakespeare is probably the most curious out of them about his s/o.

so when his s/o says they have something to tell him in the middle of their afternoon tea, he is all ears.

his s/o starts off, reiterating that they are from the future, and some things are different, more people have a better understand of themselves and who they are.

he is probably the easiest to explain to about being panromantic and nonbinary.

shakespeare, while often very vocal, seems to actually stay silent to absorb all that he’s being told.

when his s/o is finished he asks questions, as the topic has piqued his interest.

absolutely would make a comment about how women are beautiful and delicacies of this world, meant to be admired.

he uses this as the base line for understand that his s/o sees many people, of all forms, very beautiful.

would have no problem with using their pronouns correctly.

shakespeare would be curious to learn more about their gender as well, how one discovers themself like his s/o did.

this boy would most certainly go out of his way to adjust his s/o wardrobe for them.

this man is a theater vamp, you can’t tell me he does not have a ginormous walk-in closet in his villa with a huge array of outfits.

catch our dear will actually using gender neutral terms in his plays from time to time.

one particular play he has yet to finish follows a young, beautiful lead who none can define without great respect and admiration.

he happens to be very equip for genderless poetry to his s/o too.

shakespeare knows how to spin words that inspire emotions and his s/o does that to him, so much he has to shower them with verses.

ー WOLFGANG AMADEUS MOZART

talking to wolf is not always the easiest task, as he is quite reserved and silent himself but that was never an issue between him and his s/o.

until his s/o gets too nervous about something very important that they want to say.

it was not that his s/o was worried about what he would think or say, but still they could not shake the general nerves.

it was always a process and part of it was his s/o rationalizing and gathering up their courage.

wolf is probably the easiest to tell.

his s/o explaining their romantic attractions and gender perception of themself does not earn much more then confusion.

he has his s/o explain, asking questions here and there to get a better grasp of the topic.

one thing that does start him is when it clicks that his s/o is attracted to all persons romantically.

he feels a little threatened by that, as if suddenly that means anyone could win the affections of his s/o.

really it just makes him feel a little insecure.

other than that he has no issues.

he does bring it up to his s/o some time later though.

it takes some time to convince him that just because they are panromantic does not mean they will fall for anyone.

especially when they were already in love with him.

wolf does his best to stick to his s/o pronouns. he is probably one of the most diligent ones in the manor.

he practices with himself in his room too.

absolutely will correct the other residents when they use the wrong pronouns.

the usual quiet and reserved wolf will interrupt conversation to make sure they know his s/o prefers to be referred differently.

that surprises everyone, since it’s so out of character.

but it also shows how much he is dedicated to his s/o and their happiness.

70 notes · View notes

taeyongdoyoung · 4 years ago

Photo

summary: the forest is your only escape from the everyday troubles with your family until you find danger lurking behind the trees. or rather, danger finds you. your fateful encounter with the vampire ravn leaves you wishing for a different life. you strike an unexpected deal with the stranger that will soon turn into something more…

pairing: vampire!ravn x reader

genre: vampire!au, humour, fluff

warnings: unresolved sexual tension, a lot of shakespeare lmao

word count: 2.2k

part one 🌙 part two 🌙 part three 🌙 part five 🌙 part six 🌙 part seven 🌙 part eight 🌙 part nine 🌙 part ten🌙 part eleven 🌙part twelve 🌙 epilogue

A month after you started living in Ravn’s castle and you were getting anxious to go out. Not that you weren’t doing fine inside. The vampire was treating you great and you were happy to read books together, feed each other (literally) and have interesting conversations. However, you missed the fresh air outside, you missed just walking around aimlessly and wandering to new places. You didn’t want to risk your parents spotting you so the village was out of the question. The forest, though…

You wondered how to bring it up. Ravn had initially said that he doesn’t expect you to stay trapped in his castle forever, but he never mentioned it after. Maybe, he enjoyed just chilling at home. You did, too. But your adventurous spirit was eager to try something new.

As you were lost in thoughts, Ravn touched your shoulder and you jumped at the sudden contact.

“Sorry, did I frighten you?” he asked gently and sat down next to you on the couch.

“N-no, it’s fine, I was just thinking.”

“You do seem a bit antsy. Anything bothering you?”

“Why? Everything is peachy,” you quickly responded, because you still hadn’t figured out how to ask Ravn if it was okay to go out without upsetting him. You didn’t want him to think that you were ungrateful for everything he had done for you.

“Don’t lie to me, Y/N,” Ravn said in a serious tone, which made shivers run down your spine, reminding you of the first time you met him. “I can’t take that.”

“I’m s-sorry,” you whispered. “I was…hoping we could go out sometime? But I didn’t want to seem unappreciative of your efforts to make me feel at ease. Which is why I had no idea how to ask for it. I’m so sorry.”

Ravn smiled softly.

“Is that it? You didn’t have to lie. I told you that I won’t keep you prisoner, didn’t I?”

You nodded slowly.

“I know you did, but still, I’m so used to being a burden that I don’t know how to act around…around someone like you.”

“A vampire?” Ravn laughed ironically.

“No. Around someone who doesn’t judge everything I do or say.”

“Oh,” Ravn was surprised at how you viewed him. He was supposed to be the monster in the story. So, why did you treat him like a saviour of some sort?

“I mean it,” you insisted once you noticed how unsure he was.

He shook his head. This emotion thing was too new and too scary for him and he didn’t know how to deal with it.

“Where do you want to go?”

“Maybe the forest?” you asked quietly.

Ravn was shocked at your choice.

“Haven’t you been there a lot? Don’t you want to try something new?” he suggested casually.

“As long as it’s not anywhere near my parents, I’m game,” you chuckled.

“Do you want me to surprise you or would you rather know where I’m taking you?” Ravn teased, a wonderful idea already forming in his mind.

“Surprise me, then,” you lifted your chin and looked at him boldly.

“You trust me?” he repeated the question you had so far responded to negatively.

“I do, actually,” you decided to be honest for once, because he had warned you not to lie to him ever again. He was obviously taken aback by your answer.

“You stupid lamb,” Ravn chuckled and placed your hands around his neck. Then, wrapped his arms around you and lifted you up. “Hold on tight.”

And he began running at a speed that shouldn’t have been humanly possible. But yet again, he was no human. At one point the accelerated motion made you so sick that you closed your eyes and hid your head in his chest. You had no idea where you were going but the realization that it didn’t matter amazed you. He didn’t scare you. But this terrifying journey did. You probably should have warned him you had never travelled with anything faster than a bike. You had spent your entire life in your small village and the forest nearby. You were pretty sure you would pass out soon, but before that happened, Ravn stopped running.

“You may open your eyes.”

You did as he said and looked around. The first thing you noticed was how big everything around you was. The buildings, the towers, the cars, the bridges, the river. How…magnificent. And not in the way his castle was. Ravn’s home felt familiar in a way you couldn’t quite put into words. This place, wherever it was, felt so strange. But in a good way.

“Where are we?” you murmured nervously.

“Can’t you tell?”

You shook your head in embarrassment.

“Welcome to London,” Ravn informed you of your current whereabouts.

“You’re kidding!”

“Nope,” he laughed. “I thought you were into Shakespeare. How can you not recognize where we are?”

“I only managed to borrow and read some of his plays in my village. I’ve never seen…”

“Pictures of London?” Ravn helped you out when he saw you were struggling to find the right words.

You nodded, suddenly feeling intimidated by the vampire’s vast knowledge of the word.

“I’ll be your guide, then,” Ravn offered you his hand like a gentleman. “Do you want to visit the Globe Theatre first? It’s a reconstruction of-“

“I know what it is,” you responded. “Again, I haven’t seen pictures, but I read about it in one of the introductions to the book of plays.”

Ravn smiled proudly.

“That’s my girl,” he smirked.

First, he’d called you his human and now this? You could swear Ravn was going to kill you. Not with his fangs but his words.

The two of you spent the morning visiting many interesting places. Starting from the Globe Theatre, where Ravn showed you around like an expert, pointing out curious facts about Shakespeare that got you staring like a wide-eyed puppy. He also led you to a couple of lovely vintage bookshops and insisted on buying you some of Shakespeare’s plays you hadn’t read.

“But you have these already in your library!” you reasonably argued.

“Yeah, but I want you to have them. Besides, they’re different editions.”

“Ravn…you really don’t have to,” you were ashamed that he was spoiling you so openly.

“Y/N…please, let me,” Ravn whispered in your ear. It was like he was asking you to get him something and not the other way round.

You finally conceded and once the two of you left the bookshop, you found yourself clutching a paper bag with Shakespeare plays. You weren’t sure how to thank him properly for doing this for you and you couldn’t exactly offer him to drink from you in such a public place, so you did the one thing that came to mind. You lifted yourself on your toes and gave him a quick but heartfelt kiss on his cheek. Ravn seemed flustered and you could swear you saw his usually pale skin turn red for the briefest of seconds.

“Thank you,” you told him, your smile full of gratitude and affection.

“It’s nothing,” Ravn coughed and suddenly found the ground beneath you very amusing. You smiled when you reached the conclusion that he could get so easily embarrassed.

“It means everything to me,” you confessed. “No one has ever given me such a precious gift.”

“Come on, we still have many places to see,” Ravn grabbed your free hand and pulled you along.

You were lucky enough to see a couple of museums associated with famous British writers. The afternoon was dedicated to the more “basic tourist destinations” as Ravn called them such as the Big Ben, Tower Bridge and the River Thames. Everything was so grand that you couldn’t help staring at it like a lost puppy. Finally, as the sun was setting, Ravn suggesting going to the London Eye, which was most magnificent at night. Its lights shining through the dark, you were completely awestruck. Suddenly, you remembered a story you must have heard around the village.

“Wait, how did you survive throughout the day?”

Ravn laughed.

“Funny, it took you so long to notice. And if you’re referencing the foolish myth that the sun harms vampires, fear not, my lady, I am perfectly immune to daylight.”

You were relieved to hear that but a large portion of your mind was choosing to focus on the part where Ravn called you my lady, which was honestly making things to your heart that you couldn’t quite control or comprehend.

“I’m sorry for being such a dim-witted person,” you looked down in shame.

“You’re the brightest person I’ve ever talked to,” Ravn reassured you.

You faced him in the dark; the London Eye lights were giving his features a mystical, supernatural glow. He was so beautiful. You wanted to trace your fingertips down his porcelain skin and tell him how much you ached to touch him. It was insane, you knew. He was supposed to embody everything little kids were taught to fear, every dark fairytale, every warning whispered before midnight, to force the kids to finally go to bed or the scary vampire would take them away. But he was nothing like the stories. In the brief time of your acquaintance you’d seen nothing but tenderness. Who were you supposed to believe? These foolish myths or your own eyes, your mind and your heart?

“Shall we?” Ravn urged you to approach the London Eye, thus, breaking the spell he held over you. You followed him in a rush.

“Oh no,” you mumbled, pointing to a sign. “It says here it’s closed.”

Ravn smiled devilishly.

“When has that ever stopped me before?”

“Ravn…what are you planning?” you asked cautiously, but it was already too late.

His hands were already on you and the next second you had somehow ended up on top of the London Eye, with a view to the whole city, its lights making it look even more beautiful at night.

“This is…insane,” you gasped, holding tightly onto his shirt for support.

“Yeah.”

“Bite me,” you requested out of nowhere, looking into his dark eyes.

“W-what?” Ravn choked.

“Bite me, so I know I’m not dreaming.”

He laughed, amused by your reaction.

“If I bite you, we’ll both fall from here.”

You scoffed lightly.

“Thus with a bite I die,” you joked, slightly paraphrasing Romeo’s last words.

“Rawr,” Ravn teased.

You looked around the city street lights. Everything seemed so tiny from up here. And there you were, a human and a vampire on top of the world. It felt surreal.

“It’s so beautiful,” you said, completely stunned by the view.

“It really is,” Ravn confirmed, only you had no idea it wasn’t the city he was staring at…

🌙🌙🌙

Once you were back in Ravn’s castle, you walked to your room in a daze, still finding it hard to believe how you’d spent the day. But the paper bag with Shakespeare plays in your hand was the material proof that it had, in fact, been real. Ravn followed you silently and the minute your back hit the bed, he tucked you in gently.

“Good night, Y/N.”

“Aren’t you hungry?” you asked sleepily.

You were so exhausted from the journey and you still found enough energy to care for his needs. Ravn couldn’t believe he’d met such a selfless, precious human.

“I can manage a couple more hours,” he chuckled.

“You’ve given me so much more than I deserve,” you murmured weakly.

“That’s not true,” Ravn said. “You deserve all the stars and the moon.”

“O, swear not by the moon, th’inconstant moon,” you were still able to recite Shakespeare despite being so tired and it was only fitting, considering today’s adventures.

“What shall I swear by?” Ravn played along and you could feel yourself falling, not only asleep.

“Swear by thy gracious self and I’ll believe thee.”

🌙🌙🌙

You woke up to the smell of something delicious. Eggs? Bacon? What was this enticing odour? You hurriedly put on a robe and ran down the stairs and towards the kitchen. You were struck to find Ravn cooking human food!

“What are you up to?” you asked, sneaking up behind him. To your further astonishment, he hadn’t heard you, maybe because he’d been so focused on the task at hand.

“Nooo, you should go back to bed!” Ravn scolded you. “You ruined the surprise.”

“This all for me?” you inquired curiously and wrapped your hands around his waist, which made Ravn jump in shock.

“Duh,” he replied. “I can’t eat that.”

“So, you’re just fattening me up so that you can eat me later?” you admonished him playfully.

“Oh, no, you’ve uncovered my evil plans!” Ravn groaned dramatically.

“What shall we do, then? Do you think I’ll be so easily tempted?” you continued to joke around and ran your fingers down his back, making him slightly tense under your timid touch.

“I think,” he started. “That after you try my eggs, you’ll be begging me for more.”

“Yeah?” you giggled at the double entendre. “We’ll have to see about that.”

You were still trying to distract him from cooking when Ravn turned around swiftly, grabbing your hands.

“Don’t play with me,” he hissed, aiming to sound threatening but you were having too much fun to feel any fear.

“Why not?” you pouted adorably.

“Because you’re making it really hard for me to resist you.”

“You can have me whenever you wish,” you pointed out. That was your arrangement, after all.

“Not like that, I can’t,” Ravn whispered, almost too quiet to hear. Key word: almost. “The eggs are ready. Eat up.”

You didn’t question it, because you were too hungry to care what exactly he meant by that.

To be continued…

#oneus #ravn #ravn x reader #twilight #oneus fanfic #kim youngjo #fluff #vampire au #ravn fanfic #vampires #kim youngjo x reader #writing

44 notes · View notes

fitchersvogel · 4 years ago

Text

my only comment on fanfiction vs literature

The most useful distinction between “fanfic” and “literature” is MEANS OF CIRCULATION AND DISTRIBUTION.

As many people have been pointing out, the basic fundamental act of “using pre-existing characters/narratives to tell a new story” is really fucking old. In Western lit, the idea that originality was a virtue (never mind the highest one) is fairly recent: it really takes off during the Romantic period (late 1700s-early 1800s). This is also, NOT COINCIDENTALLY, the time when modern ideas about copyright/intellectual property ALSO start getting codified.

Prior to that, a general attitude was that any assclown can write something ~original~: what takes REAL SKILL is tackling the Great Stories and bringing something new to them. (Note: GREAT stories--writers like Chaucer got sneered at for reworking “low” genres like smutty comedies.) Dante, Milton, etc. were responding to Biblical and theological narratives, and putting their own twists on them--and in Dante’s case, self-inserting.

(Note: I have zero problems describing what Dante did as “self insert” or using fanfic terms in general to describe similar literary concepts: AU, hurt/comfort, whump, etc. Because a) it’s funny, and b) fannish terms are often both accurate and accessible.)

And it’s not just fanfic-ish stuff either: there’s a basic lit-crit concept called “intertextuality,” which states that ALL literature refers back to other books--as Barthes said, “all writing is rewriting.”

However, there are certain types of literature that are much more specific and directed in their intertextuality. This whole category of storytelling can be called “recursive literature”: any story that is extensively and explicitly intertextual to an identifiable pre-existing source, and expects the reader to understand it as such. You don’t pick up Paradise Lost or Ulysses without being immediately aware that they’re retellings of the Book of Genesis and the Odyssey. Likewise, you don’t click on an AO3 link without knowing that you’re getting a reworking of The Terror or whatever. It all falls under the category “recursive literature,” because that category is about specific relationships between texts and the audience’s understanding of that relationship.

Fanfiction is a SUBCATEGORY of recursive literature: it is recursive lit that circulates unofficially, outside of the formal mechanisms of commercial publication. Sometimes this is due to copyright reasons--there’s a fuckton to be said about the relationship between modern commercial concepts of intellectual property and the development of modern fandom--but there are other reasons.

Fanfiction is like a giant slush pile for recursive lit: there’s no barriers or quality controls. While this means that the My Immortals of the world can traumatize us all, it also means that you don’t have to bound by commercial publication’s notions of genre, length, saleability, etc. @seperis once said that great fanfiction is often unpublishable: not because it’s bad, but because it’s so niche, and so deeply embedded within specific microfandoms and friend-group headcanons and fanon that it’s incomprehensible to more than, like, 5 people.

It’s also worth noting that recursive lit in general has often been created by people who were and are marginalized by mainstream literary cultures: women, ethnic and religious minorities, LGBTQ+ people, young people. Not surprising: while wanting to respond to stories is pretty much universal, the people for whom the need is most urgent are those who are ignored, condemned or stereotyped within those narratives. And fanfiction--because, again, fanfiction is recursive lit that circulates UNOFFICIALLY--is far more accessible as an artistic medium for marginalized groups.

As for “but but but Riverdale a/b/o mpreg is NOT the same as Paradise Lost!!!!!” Like, no shit? But both of them are recursive lit, because recursive lit is a category defined by relationships between texts, not quality or importance.

On that note, those of us in actual professional literature academia don’t really sit around contemplating whether a given text is ~great literature~ or not: if you’ve ever read academic articles on, say, Shakespeare you’ll notice almost no time spent blowing smoke up his ass for how great his writing is. “Great literature” is subjective, because taste is subjective. What we do care about: is it INTERESTING? Like, does it reward further study? Does it use language or symbols in a distinctive way? Does it tell us something about its purported subject matter, or the context in which it was written? Is it by and/or aimed at a particular audience? What does it tell us about its author, the audience, their priorities and concerns and tastes? And on and on. Stuff can be INTERESTING without being necessarily good! Likewise, it can be interesting without being “important.”

And it’s ALWAYS worth asking questions as to WHY certain texts get considered “good/important,” and why others do not: often, the gender/race/sexuality of the author, the purported “importance” of their subject matter/narrative, and the makeup of the audience affects these things: we ALL know how “stories about straight white men are IMPORTANT and for EVERYONE, while stories about not-straight-not-white not-male people are ONLY for members of that group, and are automatically of lesser quality and importance.” It’s also worth asking why so many assume that “fits into models designed by commercial publishers” is the same thing as “guarantee of quality,” and “circulates informally” means “not good enough.” (As a folklorist, official vs. unofficial, and how those differing circulation models function and impact us, is 100% my wheelhouse.)

A note on the ~Western literary canon~: when those of us who aren’t Harold Bloom (or Harold Bloom-adjacent, like whoever decided the St John’s Great books Program should be a thing) talk about a “canon,” we’re generally talking about literature that was IMPORTANT and INFLUENTIAL. Stuff that broke new aesthetic ground in some way, or became a major cultural touchstone, or had a huge impact on later works. These are texts that people keep returning to, over and over through the years, because they say something meaningful--even centuries after their own time. The “canon” is always in flux, and always being adjusted to reflect social and cultural changes, and changing tastes. It’s a canon because enough people have found meaning in these specific texts to keep returning to them for insight. That doesn’t mean everything in it is going to fit your or my idea of “good” or even “readable,” because it’s more about impact. Taste is subjective, influence can be documented.

TL;DR: recursive literature is a category that includes literature (including Major Classics) and fanfiction; fanfiction is recursive lit that circulates unofficially; Great Literature is stuff that we have defined as meaningful and important for the development of literary storytelling; it’s always worth asking questions about why we consider certain things more or less important, based on their perceived authoriship/audience/method of production.

#literature #fanfiction

7 notes · View notes

grigori77 · 5 years ago

Text

Movies of 2020 - My Pre-Summer Favourites (Part 2)

The Top Ten:

10. TRUE HISTORY OF THE KELLY GANG – Justin Kurzel has been on my directors-to-watch list for a while now, each of his offerings impressing me more than the last (his home-grown Aussie debut, Snowtown, was a low key wallow in Outback nastiness, while his follow up, Macbeth, quickly became one of my favourite Shakespeare flicks, and I seem to be one of the frustrated few who actually genuinely loved his adaptation of Assassin’s Creed, considering it to be one the very best video game movies out there), and his latest is no exception – returning to his native Australia, he’s brought his trademark punky grit and fever-dream edginess to bear in his quest to bring his country’s most famous outlaw to the big screen in a biopic truly worthy of his name. Two actors bring infamous 19th Century bushranger Ned Kelly to life here, and they’re both exceptional – the earlier half of the film sees newcomer Orlando Schwerdt explode onto the screen as the child Ned, all righteous indignation and fiery stubbornness as he rails against the positions his family’s poverty continues to put him in, then George MacKay (Sunshine On Leith, Captain Fantastic) delivers the best performance of his career in the second half, a barely restrained beast as Ned grown, his mercurial turn bringing the man’s inherent unpredictability to the fore. The Babadook’s Essie Davis, meanwhile, frequently steals the film from under both of them as Ellen, the fearsome matriarch of the Kelly clan, and Nicholas Hoult is similarly impressive as Constable Fitzpatrick, Ned’s slimily duplicitous friend/nemesis, while there are quality supporting turns from Charlie Hunnam and Russell Crowe as two of the most important men of Ned’s formative years. In Kurzel’s hands, this account of Australia’s greatest true-life crime saga becomes one of the ultimate marmite movies – its glacial pace, grubby intensity and frequent brutality will turn some viewers off, but fans of more “alternative” cinema will find much to enjoy here. There’s a blasted beauty to its imagery (this is BY FAR the bleakest the Outback’s ever looked on film), while the screenplay from relative unknown Shaun Grant (adapting Peter Carey’s bestselling novel) is STRONG, delivering rich character development and sublime dialogue, and Kurzel delivers some brilliantly offbeat and inventive action beats in the latter half that are well worth the wait. Evocative, intense and undeniable, this has just the kind of irreverent punk aesthetic that I’m sure the real life Ned Kelly would have approved of …

9. JUST MERCY – more true-life cinema, this time presenting an altogether classier account of two idealists’ struggle to overturn horrific racial injustices in Alabama. Writer-director Destin Daniel Cretton (Short Term 12, The Glass Castle) brings heart, passion and honest nobility to the story of fresh-faced young lawyer Bryan Stevenson (Michael B. Jordan) and his personal crusade to free Walter “Johnny D” McMillan (Jamie Foxx), an African-American man wrongfully sentenced to death for the murder of a white woman. His only ally is altruistic young paralegal Eva Ansley (Cretton’s regular screen muse Brie Larson), while the opposition arrayed against them is MAMMOTH – not only do they face the cruelly racist might of the Alabama legal system circa 1989, but a corrupt local police force determined to circumvent his efforts at every turn and a thoroughly disinterested prosecutor, Tommy Chapman (Rafe Spall), who’s far too concerned with his own personal political ambitions to be any help. The cast are uniformly excellent, Jordan and Foxx particularly impressing with career best performances that sear themselves deep into the memory, while there’s a truly harrowing supporting turn from Rob Morgan as Johnny D’s fellow Death Row inmate Herbert, whose own execution date is fast approaching. This is courtroom drama at its most gripping, Cretton keeping the inherent tension cranked up tight while tugging hard on our heartstrings for maximum effect, and the result is a timely, racially-charged throat-lumper of considerable power and emotional heft that guarantees there won’t be a single dry eye in the house by the time the credits roll. Further proof, then, that Destin Daniel Cretton is one of those rare talents of his generation – next up is his tour of duty in the MCU with Shang-Chi & the Legend of the Ten Rings, and if this seems like a strange leftfield turn given his previous track record, I nevertheless have the utmost confidence in him after seeing this …

8. UNDERWATER – at first glance, this probably seems like a strange choice for the year’s current Top Ten – a much-maligned, commercially underperforming glorified B-movie creature-feature headlined by the former star of the Twilight franchise, there’s no way that could be any good, surely? Well hold your horses, folks, because not only is this very much worth your time and a comprehensive suspension of your low expectations, but I can’t even consider this a guilty pleasure – as far as I’m concerned this is a GENUINELY GREAT FILM, without reservation. The man behind the camera is William Eubank, a director whose career I’ve been following with great interest since his feature debut Love (a decidedly oddball but strangely beautiful little space movie) and its more high profile but still unapologetically INDIE follow-up The Signal, and this is the one where he finally delivers wholeheartedly on all that wonderful sci-fi potential. The plot is deceptively simple – an industrial conglomerate has established an instillation drilling right down to the very bottom of the Marianas Trench, the deepest point in our Earth’s oceans, only for an unknown disaster to leave six survivors from the operation’s permanent crew stranded miles below the surface with very few escape options left – but Eubank and writers Brian Duffield (Jane Got a Gun, Insurgent) and Adam Cozad (The Legend of Tarzan) wring all the possible suspense and fraught, claustrophobic terror out of the premise to deliver a piano wire-tense horror thriller that grips from its sudden start to a wonderfully cathartic climax. The small but potent cast are all on top form, Vincent Cassel, Jessica Henwick (Netflix’ Iron Fist) and John Gallagher Jr. (Hush, 10 Cloverfield Lane) particularly impressing, and even the decidedly hit-and-miss T.J. Miller delivers a surprisingly likeable turn here, but it’s that Twilight alumnus who REALLY sticks in your memory here – Kristen Stewart’s been doing a pretty good job lately distancing herself from the role that, unfortunately, both made her name and turned her into an object of (rather unfair) derision for many years, but in my opinion THIS is the performance that REALLY separates her from Bella effing-Swan. Mechanical engineer Norah Price is tough, ingenious and fiercely determined, but with the right amount of vulnerability that we really root for her, and Stewart acts her little heart out in a turn sure to win over her strongest detractors. The creature effects are impressive too, the ultimate threat proving some of the nastiest, most repulsively icky creations I’ve seen committed to film, and the inspired design work and strong visual effects easily belie the film’s B-movie leanings. Those made uneasy by deep, dark open water or tight, enclosed spaces should take heed that this can be a tough watch, but anyone who likes being scared should find plenty to enjoy here. Altogether a MUCH better film than its mediocre Rotten Tomatoes rating makes it out to be …

7. ONWARD – Disney and Pixar’s latest digitally animated family feature clearly has a love of tabletop fantasy roleplay games like Dungeons & Dragons, its quirky modern-day AU take populated by fantastical races and creatures seemingly tailor-made for the geek crowd … needless to say, me and many of my friends absolutely loved it. That doesn’t mean that the classic Disney ideals of love, family and believing in yourself have been sidelined in favour of fan-service – this is as heartfelt, affecting and tearful as their previous standouts, albeit with plenty of literal magic added to the metaphorical kind. The central premise is a clever one – once upon a time, magic was commonplace, but over the years technology came along to make life easier, so that in the present day the various races (elves, centaurs, fauns, pixies, goblins and trolls among others) get along fine without it. Then timid elf Ian Lightfoot (Tom Holland) receives a wizard’s staff for his sixteenth birthday, a bequeathed gift from his father, who died before he was born, with instructions for a spell that could bring him back to life for one whole day. Encouraged by his brash, over-confident wannabe adventurer elder brother Barley (Chris Pratt), Ian tries it out, only for the spell to backfire, leaving them with the animated bottom half of their father and just 24 hours to find a means to restore the rest of him before time runs out. Cue an “epic quest” … needless to say, this is another top-notch offering from the original masters of the craft, a fun, affecting and thoroughly infectious family-friendly romp with a winning sense of humour and inspired, flawless world-building. Holland and Pratt are both fantastic, their odd-couple chemistry effortlessly driving the story through its ingenious paces, and the ensuing emotional fireworks are hilarious and heartbreaking in equal measure, while there’s typically excellent support from Julia Louis-Dreyfus (Elaine from Seinfeld) as Ian and Barley’s put-upon but supportive mum, Laurel, Octavia Spencer as once-mighty adventurer-turned-restaurateur “Corey” the Manticore and Mel Rodriguez (Getting On, The Last Man On Earth) as overbearing centaur cop (and Laurel’s new boyfriend) Colt Bronco. The film marks the sophomore feature gig for Dan Scanlon, who debuted with 2013’s sequel Monsters University, and while that was enjoyable enough I ultimately found it non-essential – no such verdict can be levelled against THIS film, the writer-director delivering magnificently in all categories, while the animation team have outdone themselves in every scene, from the exquisite world-building and character/creature designs to some fantastic (and frequently delightfully bonkers) set-pieces, while there’s a veritable riot of brilliant RPG in-jokes to delight geekier viewers (gelatinous cube! XD). Massive, unadulterated fun, frequently hilarious and absolutely BURSTING with Disney’s trademark heart, this is currently (and deservedly) my animated feature of the year. It’s certainly gonna be a tough one to beat …

6. THE GENTLEMEN – Guy Ritchie’s been having a rough time with his last few movies (The Man From UNCLE didn’t do too bad but it wasn’t exactly a hit and was largely overlooked or simply ignored critically, while intended franchise-starter King Arthur: Legend of the Sword was largely derided and suffered badly on release, dying a quick death financially – it’s a shame on both counts, because I really liked them), so it’s nice to see him having some proper success with his latest, even if he has basically reverted to type to do it. Still, when his newest London gangster flick is THIS GOOD it seems churlish to quibble – this really is what he does best, bringing together a collection of colourful geezers and shaking up their status quo, then standing back and letting us enjoy the bloody, expletive-riddled results. This particularly motley crew is another winning selection, led by Matthew McConaughey as ruthlessly successful cannabis baron Mickey Pearson, who’s looking to retire from the game by selling off his massive and highly lucrative enterprise for a most tidy sum (some $400,000,000 to be precise) to up-and-coming fellow American ex-pat Matthew Berger (Succession’s Jeremy Strong, oozing sleazy charm), only for local Chinese triad Dry Eye (Crazy Rich Asians’ Henry Golding, chewing the scenery with enthusiasm) to start throwing spanners into the works with the intention of nabbing the deal for himself for a significant discount. Needless to say Mickey’s not about to let that happen … McConaughey is ON FIRE here, the best he’s been since Dallas Buyers Club in my opinion, clearly having great fun sinking his teeth into this rich character and Ritchie’s typically sparkling, razor-witted dialogue, and he’s ably supported by a uniformly excellent ensemble cast, particularly co-star Charlie Hunnam as Mickey’s ice-cold, steel-nerved right-hand-man Raymond Smith, Downton Abbey’s Michelle Dockery as his classy, strong-willed wife Rosalind, Colin Farrell as a wise-cracking, quietly exasperated MMA trainer and small-time hood simply known as the Coach (who gets many of the film’s best lines), and, most notably, Hugh Grant as the film’s nominal narrator, thoroughly morally bankrupt private investigator Fletcher, who consistently steals the film. This is Guy Ritchie at his very best – a twisty rug-puller of a plot that constantly leaves you guessing, brilliantly observed and richly drawn characters you can’t help loving in spite of the fact there’s not a single hero among them, a deliciously unapologetic, politically incorrect sense of humour and a killer soundtrack. It got the cinematic year off to a cracking start, and looks set to stay high in the running for the remainder – it’s EASILY Ritchie’s best film since Sherlock Holmes, and a strong call-back to the heady days of Snatch (STILL my favourite) and Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels. Here’s hoping he’s on a roll again, eh?

5. THE INVISIBLE MAN – looks like third time’s a charm for Leigh Whannell, writer-director of my current horror movie of the year – while he’s had immense success as a horror writer over the years (co-creator of both the Saw and Insidious franchises), as a director his first two features haven’t exactly set the world alight, with debut Insidious: Chapter III garnering similar takes to the rest of the series but ultimately turning out to be a bit of a damp squib quality-wise, while his second feature Upgrade was a stone-cold masterpiece that was (rightly) EXTREMELY well received critically, but ultimately snuck in under the radar and has remained a stubbornly hidden gem since. No such problems with his third feature, though – his latest collaboration with producer Jason Blum and his insanely lucrative Blumhouse Pictures has proven a massive hit both financially AND with reviewers, and deservedly so. Having given up on trying to create a shared cinematic universe inhabited by their classic monsters, Universal have resolved to concentrate on standalones to showcase their elite properties, and their first try is a rousing success, Whannell bringing HG Wells’ dark and devious human monster smack into the 21st Century as only he can. The result is a surprisingly subtle piece of work, much more a lethally precise exercise in cinematic sleight of hand and extraordinary acting than flashy visual effects, very much adhering to the Blumhouse credo of maximum returns for minimum bucks as the story is stripped right back to its bare essentials and allowed to play out without any unnecessary weight. The Handmaid’s Tale’s Elizabeth Moss once again confirms what a masterful actress she is as she brings all her performing weapons to bear in the role of Cecelia “Cee” Kass, the cloistered wife of affluent but monstrously abusive optics pioneer Aidan Griffin (Netflix’ The Haunting of Hill House’s Oliver Jackson-Cohen), who escapes his clutches in the furiously tense opening sequence and goes to ground with the help of her closest childhood friend, San Francisco cop James Lanier (Leverage’s Aldis Hodge) and his teenage daughter Sydney (A Wrinkle in Time’s Storm Reid). Two weeks later, Aidan commits suicide, leaving Cee with a fortune to start her life over (with the proviso that she’s never ruled mentally incompetent), but as she tries to find her way in the world again little things start going wrong for her, and she begins to question if there might be something insidious going on. As her nerves start to unravel, she begins to suspect that Aidan is still alive, still very much in her life, fiendishly toying with her and her friends, but no-one can see him. Whannell plays her paranoia up for all it’s worth, skilfully teasing out the scares so that, just like her friends, we begin to wonder if it might all in her head after all, before a spectacular mid-movie reveal throws the switch into high gear and the true threat becomes clear. The lion’s share of the film’s immense success must of course go to Moss – her performance is BEYOND a revelation, a truly blistering career best turn that totally powers the whole enterprise, and it almost goes without saying that she’s the best thing in this. Even so, she has sterling support from Hodge and Reid, as well as Love Child’s Harriet Dyer as Cee’s estranged big sister Emily and Wonderland’s Michael Dorman as Adrian’s slimy, spineless lawyer brother Tom, and, while he doesn’t have much actual (ahem) “screen time”, Jackson-Cohen delivers a fantastically icy, subtly malevolent turn which casts a large “shadow” over the film. This is one of my very favourite Blumhouse films, a pitch-perfect psychological chiller that keeps the tension cranked up unbearably tight and never lets go, Whannell once again displaying uncanny skill with expert jump-scares, knuckle-whitening chills and a truly astounding standout set-piece that looks set to go down as one of the year’s top action sequences. Undoubtedly the best version of Wells’ story to date, this goes a long way in repairing the damage of Universal’s abortive “Dark Universe” efforts, as well as showcasing a filmmaking master at the very height of his talents.

4. EXTRACTION – the Coronavirus certainly has thrown a massive spanner in the works of this year’s cinematic calendar – the new A Quiet Place sequel should have been setting the big screen alight for almost two months now, while the latest (and most long-awaited) MCU movie, Black Widow, should have just opened to further record-breaking box office success, but instead the theatres are all closed and virtually all the big blockbusters have been pushed back or shelved indefinitely. Thank God, then, for the streaming services, particularly Hulu, Amazon and Netflix, the latter of which provided a perfect movie for us to see through the key transition from spring to the summer blockbuster season, an explosively flashy big budget action thriller ushered in by MCU alumni the Russo Brothers (who produced and co-wrote this adaptation of Ciudad, a graphic novel that Joe Russo co-created with Ande Parks and Fernando Leon Gonzalez) and barely able to contain the sheer star-power wattage of its lead, Thor himself. Chris Hemsworth plays Tyler Rake, a former Australian SAS operative who hires out his services to an extraction operation, under the command of mercenary Nik Khan (The Patience Stone’s Golshifteh Farahani), brought in to liberate Ovi Mahajan (Rudhraksh Jaiswal in his first major role), the pre-teen son of incarcerated Indian crime lord Ovi Sr. (Pankaj Tripathi), who has been abducted by Bangladeshi rival Amir Asif (Priyanshu Painyuli). The rescue itself goes perfectly, but when the time comes for the hand-off the team is double-crossed and Tyler is left stranded in the middle of Dhaka with no choice but to keep Ovi alive as every corrupt cop and street gang in the city closes in around them. This is the feature debut of Sam Hargrave, the latest stuntman to try his hand at directing, so he certainly knows his way around an action sequence, and the result is a thoroughly breathless adrenaline rush of a film, bursting at the seams with spectacular fights, gun battles and car chases, dominated by a stunning sustained action sequence that plays out in one long shot, guaranteed to leave jaws lying on the floor. Not that there should be any surprise – Hargrave cut his teeth as a stunt coordinator for the Russos on Captain America: Civil War and their Avengers films. That said, he displays strong talent for the quieter disciplines of filmmaking too, delivering quality character development and drawing out consistently noteworthy performances from his cast. Of course, Hemsworth can do the action stuff in his sleep, but there’s a lot more to Tyler than just his muscle, the MCU veteran investing him with real wounded vulnerability and a tragic fatalism which colours his every scene, while Jaiswal is exceptional throughout, showing plenty of promise for the future, and there’s strong support from Farahani and Painyuli, as well as Stranger Things’s David Harbour as world-weary retired merc Gaspard, and a particularly impressive, muscular turn from Randeep Hooda (Once Upon a Time in Mumbai) as Saju, a former Para and Ovi’s bodyguard, who’s determined to take possession of the boy himself, even if he has to go through Tyler to get him. This is action cinema that really deserves to be seen on the big screen – I watched it twice in a week and would happily have paid for two trips to the cinema for it if I could have. As we look down the barrel of a summer season largely devoid of big blockbuster fare, I can’t recommend this film enough. Thank the gods for Netflix …

3. PARASITE – I’ve been a fan of master Korean filmmaker Bong Joon-ho ever since I stumbled across his deeply weird but also thoroughly brilliant breakthrough feature The Host, and it’s a love that’s deepened since thanks to the truly magnificent sci-fi actioner Snowpiercer, so I was looking forward to his latest feature as much as any movie geek, but even I wasn’t prepared for just what a runaway juggernaut of a hit this one turned out to be, from the insane box office to all that award-season glory (especially that undeniable clean-sweep at the Oscars). I’ll just come out and say it, this film deserves it all. It’s EASILY Bong’s best film to date (which is really saying something), a masterful social satire and jet black comedy that raises some genuinely intriguing questions before delivering some deeply troubling answers. Straddling the ever-widening gulf between a disaffected idle rich upper class and impoverished, struggling lower class in modern-day Seoul, it tells the story of the Kim family – father Ki-taek (Bong’s veritable good luck charm Song Kang-ho), mother Chung-sook (Jang Hye-jin), son Ki-woo (Train to Busan’s Choi Woo-shik) and daughter Ki-jung (The Silenced’s Park So-dam) – a poor family living in a run-down basement apartment who live hand-to-mouth in minimum wage jobs and can barely rub two cents together, until they’re presented with an intriguing opportunity. Through happy chance, Ki-woon is hired as an English tutor for Park Da-hye (Jung Ji-so), the daughter of a wealthy family, which offers him the chance to recommend Ki-jung as an art tutor to the Parks’ troubled young son, Da-song (Jung Hyeon-jun). Soon the rest of the Kims are getting in on the act, the young Kims contriving opportunities for their father to replace Mr Park’s chauffeur and their mother to oust the family’s long-serving housekeeper, Gook Moon-gwang (Lee Jung-eun), and before long their situation has improved dramatically. But as they two families become more deeply entwined, cracks begin to show in their supposed blissful harmony as the natural prejudices of their respective classes start to take hold, and as events spiral out of control a terrible confrontation looms on the horizon. This is social commentary at its most scathing, Bong drawing on personal experiences from his youth to inform the razor-sharp script (co-written by his production assistant Han Jin-won), while he weaves a palpable atmosphere of knife-edged tension throughout to add spice to the perfectly observed dark humour of the situation, all the while throwing intriguing twists and turns at us before suddenly dropping such a massive jaw-dropper of a gear-change that the film completely turns on its head, to stunning effect. The cast are all thoroughly astounding, Song once again dominating the film with a turn which is at once sloppy and dishevelled but also poignant and heartfelt, while there are particularly noteworthy turns from Lee Sun-kyun as the Parks’ self-absorbed patriarch Dong-ik and Choi Yeo-jeong (The Concubine) as his flighty, easily-led wife Choi Yeon-gyo, as well as a fantastically weird appearance in the latter half from Park Myung-hoon. This is heady stuff, dangerously seductive even as it becomes increasingly uncomfortable viewing, so that even as the screws tighten and everything goes to hell it’s simply impossible to look away. Bong Joon-ho really has surpassed himself this time, delivering an existential mind-scrambler that lingers long after the credits have rolled and might even have you questioning your place in society once you’ve thought about it some. It deserves every single award and every ounce of praise it’s been lavished with so far, and looks set to go down as one of the true cinematic greats of this new decade. Trust me, if this was a purely critical best-of list it’d be RIGHT AT THE TOP …

2. 1917 – it’s a rare thing for a film to leave me truly shell-shocked by its sheer awesomeness, for me to walk out of a cinema in a genuine daze, unable to talk or even really think about much of anything for a few hours because I’m simply marvelling at what I’ve just witnessed. Needless to say, when I do find a film like that (Fight Club, Inception, Mad Max: Fury Road) it usually earns a place very close to my heart indeed. The latest tour-de-force from Sam Mendes is one of those films – an epic World War I thriller that plays out ENTIRELY in one shot, which doesn’t simply feel like a glorified gimmick or stunt but instead is a genuine MASTERPIECE of a film, a mesmerising journey of emotion and imagination in a shockingly real environment that it’s impossible to tear your eyes away from. Sure, Mendes has impressed us before – his first film, American Beauty, is a GREAT movie, one of the most impressive feature debuts of the 2000s, while Skyfall is, in my opinion, quite simply THE BEST BOND FILM EVER MADE – but this is in a whole other league. It’s an astounding achievement, made all the more impressive when you realise that there’s very little trickery at play here, no clever digital magic (just some augmentation here and there), it’s all real locations and sets, filmed in long, elaborately choreographed takes blended together with clever edits to make it as seamless as possible – it’s not the first film to try to do this (remember Birdman? Bushwick?), but I’ve never seen it done better, or with greater skill. But it’s not just a clever cinematic exercise, there’s a genuine story here, told with guts and urgency, and populated by real flesh and blood characters – the heart of the film is George MacKay and Dean Chapman (probably best known as Tommen Baratheon in Game of Thrones) as Lance Corporals Will Schofield and Tom Blake, the two young tommies sent out across enemy territory on a desperate mission to stop a British regiment from rushing headlong into a German trap (Tom himself has a personal stake in this because his brother is an officer in the attack). They’re a likeable pair, very human and relatable throughout, brave and true but never so overly heroic that they stretch credibility, so when tragedy strikes along the way it’s particularly devastating; both deliver exceptional performances that effortlessly carry us through the film, and they’re given sterling support from a selection of top-drawer British talent, from Sherlock stars Andrew Scott and Benedict Cumberbatch to Mark Strong and Colin Firth, each delivering magnificently in small but potent cameos. That said, the cinematography and art department are the BIGGEST stars here, masterful veteran DoP Roger Deakins (The Shawshank Redemption, Blade Runner 2049 and pretty much the Coen Brothers’ entire back catalogue among MANY others) making every frame sing with beauty, horror, tension or tragedy as the need arises, and the environments are SO REAL it feels less like production design than that someone simply sent the cast and crew back in time to film in the real Northern France circa 1917 – from a nightmarish trek across No Man’s Land to a desperate chase through a ruined French village lit only by dancing flare-light in the darkness before dawn, every scene is totally immersive and simply STUNNING. I don’t think it’s possible for Mendes to make a film better than this, but I sure hope he gives it a go all the same. Either way, this is the most incredible, exhausting, truly AWESOME experience I’ve had at the cinema this year (so far) – it’s a film that DESERVES to be seen on the big screen, and I feel truly sorry for those who missed the chance …

1. BIRDS OF PREY & THE FANTABULOUS EMANCIPATION OF ONE HARLEY QUINN – the only reason 1917 isn’t at number one right now is because Warner Bros.’ cinematic DC Extended Universe project FINALLY got round to bringing my favourite DC Comics title to the big screen. It’s been the biggest pleasure of my cinematic year so far getting to see my top DC superheroines brought to life on the big screen, and it’s been done in high style, in my opinion THE BEST of the DCEU films to date (yup, I loved it EVEN MORE than Wonder Woman). It was also great seeing Harley Quinn return after her show-stealing turn in David Ayer’s clunky but ultimately still hugely enjoyable Suicide Squad, better still that this time round they got her SPOT ON this time – this is the Harley I’ve always loved in the comics, unpredictable, irreverent and entirely without regard for what anyone else thinks of her, as well as one hell of a talented psychiatrist. Margot Robbie once more excels in the role she was basically BORN to play, clearly relishing the chance to finally do Harley justice, and she’s a total riot from start to finish, infectiously lovable no matter what crazy, sometimes downright REPRIHENSIBLE antics she gets up to. Needless to say she’s the nominal star here, her latest ill-advised adventure driving the story – finally done with the Joker and itching to make her emancipation official, Harley publicly announces their breakup by blowing up Ace Chemicals (their love spot, basically), inadvertently painting a target on her back in the process since she’s no longer under the supposed protection of Gotham’s feared Clown Prince of Crime – but that doesn’t mean she eclipses the other main players the movie’s REALLY supposed to be about. Each member of the Birds of Prey is beautifully written and brought to vivid, arse-kicking life by what has to be the year’s most exciting cast – Helena Bertinelli, aka the Huntress, is the perfect character for Mary Elizabeth Winstead to finally pay off on that action heroine potential she showed in Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World, but this is a MUCH more enjoyable role outside of the fight choreography because while Helena may be a world-class dark avenger, socially she’s a total dork, which just makes her thoroughly adorable; Rosie Perez is similarly perfect casting as Renee Montoya, the uncompromising pint-sized Gotham PD detective who kicks against the corrupt system no matter what kind of trouble it gets her into, and just gets angrier all the time, paradoxically making us like her even more; and then there’s the film’s major controversy, at least as far as the fans are concerned, namely one Cassandra Cain. Sure, this take is VERY different from the comics’ version (a nearly mute master assassin who went on to become the second woman to wear the mask of Batgirl before assuming her own crime-fighting mantle as Black Bat and now Orphan), but personally I like to think this is simply Cass at THE VERY START of her origin story, leaving plenty of time for her to discovery her warrior origins when the DCEU gets around to introducing Lady Shiva (personally I want Michelle Yeoh to play her, but that’s just me) – anyways, here she’s a skilled child pickpocket whose latest theft inadvertently sets off the larger central plot, and newcomer Ella Jay Basco brings a fantastic pre-teen irreverence and spiky charm to the role, beautifully playing against Robbie’s mercurial energy. My favourite here BY FAR, however, is Dinah Lance, aka the Black Canary (not only my favourite Bird of Prey but my very favourite DC superheroine PERIOD), the choice of up-and-comer Jurnee Smollet-Bell (Friday Night Lights, Underground) proving to be the film’s most truly inspired casting – a club singer with the metahuman ability to emit piercing supersonic screams, she’s also a truly ferocious martial artist (in the comics she’s one of the very best fighters IN THE WORLD), as well as a wonderfully pure soul you just can’t help loving, and it made me SO UNBELIEVABLY HAPPY that they got my Canary EXACTLY RIGHT. Altogether they’re a fantastic bunch, basically my perfect superhero team, and the way they’re all brought together (along with Harley, of course) is beautifully thought out and perfectly executed … they’ve also got one hell of a threat to overcome, namely Gotham crime boss Roman Sionis, aka the Black Mask, one of the Joker’s chief rivals – Ewan McGregor brings his A-game in a frustratingly rare villainous turn (currently my number one bad guy for the movie year), a monstrously narcissistic, woman-hating control freak with a penchant for peeling off the faces of those who displease him, sharing some exquisitely creepy chemistry with Chris Messina (The Mindy Project) as Sionis’ nihilistic lieutenant Victor Zsasz. This is about as good as superhero cinema gets, a perfect example of the sheer brilliance you get when you switch up the formula to create something new, an ultra-violent, unapologetically R-rated middle finger to the classic tropes, a fantastic black comedy thrill ride that’s got to be the most full-on feminist blockbuster yet – it’s helmed by a woman (Dead Pigs director Cathy Yan), written by a woman (Bumblebee’s Christina Hodson), produced by more women and ABOUT a bunch of badass women magnificently triumphing over toxic masculinity in all its forms. It’s also simply BRILLIANT – the cast are all clearly having a blast, the action sequences are first rate (the spectacular GCPD evidence room fight in which Harley gets to REALLY cut loose is the undisputable highlight), it has a gleefully anarchic sense of humour and is simply BURSTING with phenomenal homages, references and in-jokes for the fans (Bruce the hyena! Stuffed beaver! Roller derby!). It’s also got a killer soundtrack, populated almost exclusively by numbers from female artists. Altogether, then, this is the VERY BEST the DCEU has to offer to date (Wonder Woman 1984 has got a MAJOR job ahead of it beating this one), and my absolute FAVOURITE film of 2020 (so far). Give it all the love you can, it sure as hell deserves it.

#movies 2020 #true history of the kelly gang #just mercy #underwater #onward #the gentlemen #the invisible man #extraction #parasite #1917 #Birds of Prey #birds of prey and the fantabulous emancipation of one harley quinn #awesome sauce

25 notes · View notes