#THAT seriously. except then you have to retroactively frame

[greenerteacups]

Fair warning: I don't think this is going to be a question, just a few post-latest chapter thoughts haphazardly stacked together under a trenchcoat.

Thank you for this chapter. It made my day to read something almost fluffy (I don't think anything in LH can be called purely fluff, and that's a good thing because fluff is best when it is padding for the plot, and that's what this chapter was).

LH Book 5 has been the beginning of payoff for the Dramione slow burn, and while that is immensely satisfying, it also means there are less milestones to look forward to. I don't know if this was an intentional decision, but I love how you started seeding in another slow burn that has kept us equally invested: the Black family drama.

I love reading anything that does the dysfunctional family dynamic well, and seeing Draco getting old enough to identify it clearly, have questions, testing his boundaries, fighting back against what he's been told to accept, has all been immensely satisfying as someone who has gone through this myself. Your depiction of the Black family dynamics has been /chef's kiss/. * spoiler for chapter 70 * when Draco witnesses his cousins casually throwing information his way, what I wanted was for one of the adults to see how much he needed that information, that connection, and give it to him. My god ❤️ You have written a lonely boy craving family so well.

Back to the Dramione of it all (and this might be a question), I love how Harry chose to approach the contained chaos waiting to unravel around him and just bluntly told Draco what he did. Question: do you think this is something Canon Harry would have done in this instance? Was there a choice to change anything in your characterisation of Harry (with respect to Canon) that resulted in this wonderful, blunt, more-mature-than-many-adults-who-can't-even-identify-their-needs version of Harry?

If not, what canon Harry actions/traits do you think would point to him acting this way?

Thank you! This is a beautiful and very kind trench coat, and I am luxuriating in it.

I will answer your question while continuing to luxuriate: I don't think canon Harry would ever confront his friends about an emotional problem, mostly because because he never does. Hermione and Ron, the two people he's most comfortable with in the world, are feuding for most of HBP, and while he does have a few "can't you guys just get along?" type-outbursts, he doesn't really sit down and ask "hey, what's going on with you? How can I help?" because canon!Harry is, as you might expect for a 15-year-old boy, better at ignoring his problems than solving them. (I also think there's an ingredient of conflict-avoidance in there from his upbringing with the Dursleys, but I'll be the first to admit that's mostly headcanon.)

My Harry is a bit softer — in part because that's just how I prefer my Harry, my favorite scenes with him are those where he's showing tenderness for things other people have neglected. This is the best of him, and this is the core of him, in my opinion. Canon Harry has this marvelous capacity for empathy, and when he chooses to use it, it's kind of astonishing how capable he is of resisting prejudice and caring for people. He's fiercely loyal in defending Hagrid, always. He makes a point of freeing Dobby, who's just spent a book trying to maim him. He refuses to let Sirius kill Pettigrew, even knowing that Pettigrew betrayed his parents ("My dad wouldn't want you to" — sweet boy, you mean you don't want them to, and you understand on some level that's the only thing you can say that will stop them.) He saves Gabrielle Delacour, because even if she would have been safe in the end, he's not leaving a little girl at the bottom of a fucking lake. He reads the Half-Blood Prince's handwriting — Snape's handwriting — and thinks: "I bet he's someone like me." On the basis of handwriting, he empathizes with this person! Harry is constantly trying to save people, and he doesn't ever really tell us why. And we'll never know why canon!Harry does that, consciously or subconsciously, but I have to imagine that every time Harry looks at someone in pain, he sees a lonely kid stuck under a staircase, and he thinks not fucking today.

[squiiids]

Lies of P thoughts after finishing the demo

biggest gripe is a serious lack of evasive options. Parrying is tied to a skill that drains this game's version of FP so you can only successfully parry 3 times then have to recharge. The dodge is fine and smooth, nice amount of i-frames, but it very notably has No mobility to it, and two out of three of the bosses in the demo very deliberately have combos that punish dodge-spamming. Blocking is *fine* but as precise as the timing is for a perfect block, there's no benefit to it except that you don't take damage so it's just not worth trying to go for it except for the flex.

Another issue is that like in thymesia, the bosses recover hp over time if you're not constantly attacking, but unlike thymesia there isn't a way to *stop* the hp recovery (except for crits which i'll talk about next) so really all this mechanic does is make some fights drag on for a little too long.

Scoring a crit is a *very* satisfying process, and while I am totally bummed that you can't just parry an enemy into getting crits, the whole Groggy system rocks, *except* when a boss'll cancel right the fuck outta that to go phase 2, that's basically robbing the player for doing too good.

Of all 5 weapons and all 3 puppet arms, there isn't a single one I don't love using and I'm super stoked to see what the rest of the game'll have for options. Particularly the puppet string which is such a genius tool and opens up overworld combat so much that i'm retroactively mad Sekiro didn't have it

The city is BEAUTIFUL and atmospheric as all hell. Story's also excellent. You know it totally captures the soulslike energy when you read a mysterious cryptic note and go "wait what the heck does that mean" then you round a corner and see some corpse that's a whole new kind of effed up and you go "Oooooh that's what that means."

I'm very genuinely shocked at how they managed to make me actually take playing as Pinocchio seriously and i'm really really really interested in seeing what direction the story takes, with the ability to lie seemingly changing who you are as a puppet.

[lucemferto]

You know what's something that's been on my mind for a long time? The treatment of techno and wilbur basically the difference fandom and narrative wise. Because the did a lot of similar things especially in nov 16th. Both were the traitors both destroyed lmanberg had their big speeches (whilbur was mire to himself and later phil while techno was to basically every one else) they both targeted tommy technically (techno spawning withers telling tommy to die and wilbur wanting to make tommy president blowing up in his words tommys lmanberg to send the message that he will never be president) they both took a brother/mentor? Role to tommy and both wanted him tried to convice him to join their side in blowing up lmanberg in both cases tommy refused and both were manipulative despite realising it or not. And yet it's weird that wilbur is the only one who gets hate for this while techno not only doesn't get that much hate from the majority of the fandom but also the blame tommy for everything that happened in both scenarios (nov 16th and green festival). Wilbur is viewed as an irredeemable villian while techno is viewed as a hero for doing the exact same things??? I'm not saying techno is irredimable or something only dream is irredimable for me but it's interesting how much the fandom downplays technos actions while villanising other characters for doing the same thing

Smells like ableism

Now ... I have to defend the audience and Techno-fans a little bit, at least from a narratological point of view.

As you (maybe) know, I’m not one to discuss in-character morality a lot. I don’t think that’s super productive and it can lead to some very heated discussion where the tone can get nasty.

So, I’ll approach this ask more from the point of view of someone trying to look at the narrative from a detached perspective.

There are a number of differences between Techno and Wilbur in terms of narrative purpose, framing, mood of their storylines, etc. that naturally leads to this “discrepancy” when it comes to how they are perceived.

First of all, Wilbur refers to himself as a bad guy, which Technoblade ... kinda doesn’t do? Technoblade jokes a lot about being the bad guy of the server, but I’m still very unclear on how much that’s cc!Techno or c!Techno and how seriously it’s meant.

Secondly, Wilbur undergoes negative character development - he spirals from the respected leader to unhinged villain - whereas Techno remains static throughout Season 1. There is some dynamicism surrounding him, but that has more to do with audience perception rather than with character development - I talk about it here.

Thirdly, retroactive morality. Whether or not you think the Techno/Butcher Army-storyline is constructed well (which, for the record, I don’t) it is for the most part constructed in a way where it casts Techno as a protagonist opposed to the Butcher Army’s antagonist - the storyline is very keen on justifying Techno while villainising the Butcher Army. Now, again, whether you agree with that or not - it is a factor in this.

(Exception is Doomsday, because it’s Doomsday. You can search my blog about how I feel about Doomsday, I’ve written a novel’s worth of analysis on it.)

Fourthly, Technoblade stands for something concrete - namely Anarchy - while Wilbur’s destruction is more personally nihilistic in nature. Now, like with point 3, whether or not you agree with how well Techno portrays anarchy or whether he’s a hypocrite or not is not of much concern here. He’s the only open anarchist for the majority of the two seasons and thus people who agree with that philosophy will be more inclined to agree and sympathize with him.

And even people who don’t agree with anarchy as a political philsophy will have an easier time legitimizing an actual political philosophy as opposed to the very internal struggle Wilbur faced.

Lastly - and I think this is a big one! - one of the characters most directly affected is Tommy. And Tommy, by virtue of having a large audience, being generally involved in a lot of plot-changing events of both seasons, and beginning to have this Hero/Main Character-meta built up around him, is an important focal point for a majority of viewers. Even if you don’t follow Tommy directly, you will absorb this focalisation through fandom-discourse (and probably clips, if we’re being honest).

And Tommy has first-row seats for Wilbur’s spiral and is the character most deeply involved in exploring it in all of its ... unfortunate glory. Now, for most of Season 1, Tommy and Techno had a pretty warm relationship - again, I elaborate on thaz in the linked post above - and after the reversal of their dynamic there isn’t much narrative exploration of their new antagonism - not in the way that Tommy’s connection to Wilbur’s villain arc was explored. The narrative pretty quickly jumps to Nov. 16th.

So yeah. If it was just one of these factors, I don’t think the fandom discourse would be the way it is now. But all of them combined? That naturally leads to the perceptions being the way they are.

[perpetuallyfive]

some thoughts on Endgame

I always find it a lot easier to write very long rants about things I dislike than praise about things that I like. It just feels like the good things are obvious, you know? So compiling them in lists feels a little pointless.

It’s why I haven’t written anything about Endgame yet. I honestly thought Infinity War was pretty average at best, so the fact that I fucking loved practically every single minute of Endgame kind of caught me by surprise. It checked so many of my boxes that it’s almost hard to even articulate. 

So much of what was good about it honestly felt almost inevitable.

Mark me down as pretty confused then as I read some of the negative responses. Like... obviously, I’m just being dense. Nothing exists, especially on the internet, without some negative response. And I don’t even mean that in a pithy way. People are really different and what works for one person doesn’t work for everyone.

Which brings me back to my earlier point.

Just because I thought some of this stuff was obvious or amazing doesn’t mean everyone did, so here are a few observations, in an unordered list:

The way that time travel works in the movie is deliberately left a little vague, in my opinion, to allow wiggle room for the multiverse moving forward, especially as they expand into streaming services.

They do however clearly say that you cannot change your own past. Bruce says it. This means that Steve absolutely is not in our timeline, whatever the writers might say about it now. He’s not. In our timeline, he knew Peggy married someone else. That’s in his past. He cannot change his past in his own timeline. Therefor he cannot change who Peggy marries in his own timeline.

Seriously, he’s not in our timeline. They’re just wrong.

This means you have a million possibilities in fanfic for all the things Steve did that sent out ripples in his own new timeline or the many multiverses he could have created. It’s a fucking candy shop.

Try not to be too hard on the writers for having no idea what they’re talking about, I guess; it’s hard writing characters that are way smarter than you.

Am I less than charitable toward the writers because of their dumb takes on Natasha in defending why she’s not a part of the funeral at the end? Yes.

Just put a fucking second wreath there, god damn, would it have been so hard.

Framing Nebula’s storyline as a bad thing, which I’ve seen a few times now, is frankly insane to me. She isn’t, as the daily dot put it, killing herself. She missed her chance to save her sister five years ago and has regretted it every since. The second Gamora is at stake this time, she makes it clear that she would sacrifice anything (even someone who looked like her), to prevent losing her sister again. That’s great shit!

I am bummed we don’t get original Gamora back, but I’m also intrigued by the soft reset this does on her relationship with everyone in the Guardians. I wonder what their plans are with that in Vol 3. In many ways, her healing process away from Thanos was sidelined in the first two films and this allows the possibility of reframing that as more central to the focus in the third. Fingers crossed.

More Gamora and Nebula in general but especially in Guardians 3 please; I might threaten to retroactively like this movie less if this is the last we get of this much attention on their relationship, please and thank you.

The problem with the MCU crossover movies is they have to exist as two things at once. They have to be a movie that works as its own thing with good timing, pacing, structure, and an end that feels conclusive. They also have to pay off minor characters that mainstream audiences might not care about, as part of larger world building and the stories shared across an entire universe. Endgame, in my opinion, did a much better job of it than Infinity War or Ultron. (it’s hard to compare it with Avengers, when the scale was much more intimate.) 

No but really, I don’t think a lot of us in fandom have an appreciation for how many people don’t know any of this shit we take for granted. A shocking number of the people I have spoken to IRL who are entirely apart from fandom didn’t even know what “on your left” was a reference to and were actually a little confused by that moment. 

Just think about that and understand the levels this movie has to operate on at all times. It’s almost enough to make me feel bad for the writers, except they still said dumb shit about Nat, so I’m good.

I did actually love all the more subtle callbacks, like Natasha’s necklace and T’Challa knowing Clint’s name, but the direct quotes were pretty great too, especially Steve’s reaction to “I could do this all day.” Super charming.

Another awkward thing about the crossovers is they have to try to level the playing field slightly and there are some Avengers who are just way more powerful than others. Carol was disappointingly absent, but she’s also insanely OP. It’s why Thor got depressed and it’s why the Russos now say that Hulk will have limited use of one arm. They nerfed some of the classic Avengers, but kept Carol full powered just off in space. That’s preferable, so long as she gets more screen time later and jesus please fix the wig. Or just do the actual haircut now that it doesn’t have to be a secret.

Please dear god the hair is great in concept but seriously if there’s anything about the straight agenda ruining Endgame it’s how borderline soccer mom they managed to make that hair look.

Natasha deserved better and I think we can all agree on that, but here’s hoping that her prequel is deliberately designed to echo the destination we know she’s headed toward and to give her a better resolution more in line with what she deserved. I want to believe that they didn’t give her a full ending entirely because they knew she still had a movie coming up and didn’t want to create that sense of finality that might keep audiences from seeing it. Here’s hoping they can make it work. 

Like specifically with very different writers, please. Hopefully a woman. You’ve maybe heard of them before, one of them wrote Guardians, the movie that nobody thought could work and fucking made it work. Yeah.

Tony and Steve were always headed in opposing directions at the end of their arc. This has been covered. Tony went from living selfishly to living selflessly. He went from a playboy bachelor, to a husband, to a father. His one priority when he decided he had to save the world wasn’t even himself, it was specifically keeping his daughter in existence. He went from a selfish dick with daddy issues to someone whose only priority was being a dad.

it was perfect. Like people can say otherwise... but they’re wrong.

 I’m an expert on this, clearly. Tony’s death was perfect. 

THEY FINALLY GAVE ME RESCUE. I loved everything about it, from Tony planning it carefully for a long time -- like obviously I think it’s because he was customizing the design to be more in line with Pepper’s wants and values, like it is in the comics -- to the fact that it actually does look more defensively focused but still super capable in battle. I want to watch this movie a billion times, honestly, but this scene in particular. I need to know everything about what her suit can do.

Steve was always going to end up settling down. We don’t actually know what he did in his own timeline -- again, IT’S NOT OURS -- so there’s a chance he was still a bit of a troublemaker, but honestly the five years seemed to take a lot out of him. He doesn’t always need a war, and that actually is forward momentum and growth. I get that some people are against the idea and think that getting to be with Peggy was somehow a step back, but I’m not sure I buy that.

Tony taking out the arc reaction at the end of IM3 wasn’t actually about him erasing his trauma or leaving it behind, and Steve getting to be with Peggy doesn’t erase his growth. It was part of it.

Theoretically Sharon was always an option, except the audience (and fandom) response to her was pretty terrible, so actually she wasn’t.

And not to just keep harping on points made in an article that I think is frankly pretty terrible, but Steve going back to the past instead of settling in the present wasn’t about compulsory heterosexuality so much as it was about a franchise that is going to keep making movies needing to keep the next decade of films in mind. 

If Steve is still around in the now, that will always linger as a nagging question. The same way that people can’t shut up about where Carol was for the last decade, Steve hanging around in retirement refusing to help would hang over the next phases of movies like a cloud. Putting him in the past lets him live (which he deserves) and clears the slate.

Let Steve rest but, more than that, dear god won’t you please let Chris Evans rest too.

This goes back to how these movies, especially the crossovers, have to work on almost too many levels and it’s frankly shocking that they manage to do it and still have moments of sincere humanity and sweetness. 

Like I’m not going to try to oversell it, but seriously fucking think about the fact that one of the most successful blockbuster movies of all time actually has quiet moments where people talk about trauma, loss, parental abuse or neglect, failure, and depression. 

Hey remember when the movie gave us acknowledgement of Rhodey and Nebula’s disabilities? In the possibly going to be most successful movie of all time, they had characters with disabilities say how they’re different now but it’s okay, they work with what they got, and they bonded over that and it was so fucking shocking for me and BEAUTIFUL. Just a reminder for us all that THAT happened in the movie that may actually pass Avatar to become the MOST SUCCESSFUL FILM OF ALL TIME.

Just allowing another moment to let that sink in while I try to wrap this up (for now).

ps I can’t believe this movie made me have nice thoughts on Ultron, which I fucking despise with most of my being. 

Actually I might have to take back every nice thing I said, just because of the Ultron thing. How dare you, film.

But still lol at the fact that even talking about Ultron for a few seconds was enough to make Tony Stark pass the fuck out. Hard same, Tony. 

LOOK OBVIOUSLY I LOVED MORGAN STARK. I AM EXCITED ABOUT MORGAN STARK. SHE IS A PRECIOUS PERFECT ANGEL AND I LOVE HER.

SHIT.

So this is a totally incomplete list but here you go. Some of my thoughts on Endgame.

[casualarsonist]

Disenchantment: Season 1

Matt Groening is an Ideas Man. Life in Hell, The Simpsons, Futurama, it’s not often that a single creative becomes the voice of more than one generation. And yet, his TV shows, at the height of their respective successes, were not identifiable by Groening’s direct influence so much as they were their fantastic team of writers. At their apex, Groening’s greatest successes were far bigger than Groening himself, and while he was adept at dreaming up the conceit and the characters of the worlds he created, it was on the back of the efforts of a fantastic writing team that his shows flourished. So while Groening’s typically warped and cynical worldview held his comic strip in good stead, his short-form, frame-by-frame method of joke-telling lacks the subtlety and nuance that a good story-writer can use to build to a punchline, or to thread its characters into the weave of its plot rather than just having them stick their heads through a door and utter a joke because it’s been five minutes and the egg-timer sitting by his computer has gone off. In saying that, his contribution here is in co-operation with one of The Simpson’s most acclaimed writers - Josh Weinstein - so I don’t really know where to start in trying to figure out exactly what happened in the production of Disenchantment to start it off on such a bad footing.

Disenchantment is a ‘Netflix Original’ - a brand I can’t help but instinctively flinch at the mere mention of. To be fair to Netflix, not all its releases under that title are trash - some are even straight-up excellent - but there are literally hundreds of Netflix Originals released all over the world, and when you have the money and ambition that Netflix has (or had) there’s going to be an inevitable temptation to throw shit at the wall and see what sticks. After all, Netflix is the bastion of those willing to settle for cheap thrills, rom coms, and anything that will drown out the deafening sound of existential dread reverberating around the inside of their skulls. Not the most discerning audience, is what I’m saying. And to be fair to Disenchantment, Groening’s writing only appears credited in the first episode (even though the symptoms of that writing appear throughout to various degrees throughout the series). But when you’ve only got ten episodes to make your mark, and your appeal is in part trading on the pedigree of a back-catalogue of seminal shows such as The Simpsons and Futurama, the bar you’ve got to leap is going to be higher than usual. Which is why it’s so baffling that the opening episodes of Disenchantment are just. so. bad.

Full disclosure - I barely got half way through the first episode before I gave up with a groan and a roll of the eyes and turned it off. I even called it ‘Disenchanted’ seven times in this review before I realised I was getting the title wrong. Perhaps I was projecting. The only reason I watched the rest of the series was so I could write this review in good faith. Characters bounce from scenario to scenario in a chaotic, everything-but-the-kitchen-sink fantasy world. The narrative almost invariably plays out in a ‘this happened, and then this happened, and then THIS happened’ format. Mediocre visual gags and one-liners are shoehorned into scenes with no care at to how relevant they are, or how they affect the pacing. Everything is overstated, lacking the finesse that the best episodes of The Simpsons or Futurama used to let their humour and emotion sneak up on the viewer and take them by surprise. It lacks the endearing characters, the contained and engaging storylines, and the genuine social commentary that both of its predecessors had.  And on top of all this the animation is really, really cheap, meaning that my first impression was that it was as amateurish in its visuals as it was in its script.

Growing pains can be a passing thing. The first season of the American Office was mostly trash, as was that of Parks and Rec, as were the first few seasons of The Simpsons, and while the entry point into Disenchantment reeks like a teenager’s bedroom, with time and distance from the first episode it does open up in two something more engaging. But that doesn’t absolve it of its sins, as the budgetary and temporal constraints of the ‘Netflix Original’ title have clearly failed to let this series grow large enough to support the wide creative team it needs to even entertain thoughts of approaching its predecessor’s quality. Everything about Disenchantment feels impermanent compared to its predecessors - from the meandering and indefinable conceit, to the clutch of thinly-written characters, to the cheap, badly-written, throwaway jokes…it all feels like it wasn’t made to last beyond the initial ten episodes. It feels like a draft copy.

Which is a real shame, because Disenchantment is a vehicle for an excellent cadre of modern comedians and performers who simply haven’t got much to work with. Abbi Jacobson and Eric Andre both came from better, more ground-breaking shows to play far-less interesting characters. ‘He’s a demon, BUT HE’S KINDA CUTE!’; ‘she’s a princess, BUT SHE’S ALSO A ROUGH-AND-TUMBLE REBEL!’ The best a character can hope to be in this series is a thing that is also another thing, otherwise, they’re Kissy, the promiscuous elf. Or Weirdo, the sex pest elf. Or Shocko, the elf that expresses shock, and is legitimately the only joke I laughed at in the first episode by virtue of the fact that it was just so dumb. Below even that rung lay the characters that exist only as vessels for shitty end-of-scene one-liners, like the guy who walks through the door after the King has threatened to decapitate anyone who looks at his daughter, saying ‘oh boy, did I look at HER!’ Ugh.

And when the jokes aren’t content to simply be bad, they straight-up don’t make sense - a perfect example of this being when the princess’ betrothed accidentally impales his head on a sword.

Let’s break it down:

- A prince drops the ring during his wedding ceremony, and when bending to pick it up accidentally impales his head on a sword. The joke being that a character is suddenly killed in an unexpected way. This is mildly amusing.

- A member of the court declares him dead. To which the prince replies with the garbled mess of a line: 'Ah, I think I’m alive. No, wait, never mind.’ He then slumps down dead. Aside from not being as funny as the first joke, in showing the price to be alive it undoes the punchline of the first joke. ‘Prince has an accident and lives’ is not funny. ‘Prince has an accident, seems to live, but doesn’t’ is also not funny.

- Finally, after two increasingly poor gags that both rely on the prince’s death to even be considered jokes at all, the scene moves on for around a minute before the prince opines the fact that no-one is helping him. Not only does this YET AGAIN render the two previous jokes moot (’Visibly alive man turns out to be alive’), it just plain doesn’t make any sense. The joke was that he died. Twice. Why would anyone be expected to help him? Did they forget to take this out of the script? Or did they just forsake consistency and the internal logic of their show so they could cram as many shit gags in as possible?

In two minutes we have three crappy bits that are all essentially the same joke, each one simultaneously worse than the last AND retroactively rendering the jokes before it less funny. To be honest, I’m kind of impressed. It’s almost the perfect, literal, anti-comedy. And it’s the norm, rather than the exception, for the first few episodes at least. Any time the show starts to get any steam up and you allow yourself to be invested, some kind of desperate, tone-deaf non sequitur swings in and ruins your mood. The best jokes in the series are either less-painful versions of this, or the occasional rare gem that is both unexpected AND YET makes sense for the scene. When the king laments that he can’t possibly lose anything else, and then his crown slips off his head and plunges over the railing of his tower, THAT’S funny. In the moment, I laughed out loud. And it’s not even that spectacular a joke. But it’s sadly among the best that Disenchantment can offer.  

I’ve got a real bone to pick with Netflix’s ‘Originals’. If you ever held hope that one day down the track the channel’s trashheap would be thinned out, or somehow transformed by the platform’s success, then one five-minute wade through the collection will convince you that this is a pipe-dream. It’s an endless sea of low-budget, thrown-together mediocrity that seriously suggests the person greenlighting these things needs to have their rubber stamp confiscated. Disenchantment grows on you, and by episode ten you might even find yourself a little bit invested. But big picture, the series is just another idea flung at a wall and failing to stick. The potential is there, I suppose, and I can only hope that the upwards momentum carries over to the newly-commissioned second season, but the low quality animation and poor execution just pulls the rug out from under it. Groening’s style is best suited to self-contained episodes that allow the writers to condense the humour; a ten-episode arc with a flimsy plot is not fertile ground for a style of show that needs time to find its feet and settle into the premise and the characters. And while it might amuse you if you hang around long enough, I don’t really feel like awarding points to a show for being kind of worth it eventually. Disenchantment simply doesn’t hold a candle to the best of Groening’s works.

5/10

[kachiwaze-blog]

Investing Review: Be Debt-Free in 9 Ways

Some things you can easily neglect or forget without causing any harm, such as what the last two answers are in the crossword puzzle today; but you cannot do that to a debt. Debt stays like a recurring nightmare in the night, haunting us and chasing us like Mr. Anderson in a Matrix world, charging compounded annual rates of 20% or more of monthly interests. We are stuck in that world’s system – with no escape in sight. But there is a way out of debt, using our free debt-crushing strategies -- and with the help of some of your rich friends and wealthy relatives (see tip No. 5). The nine ways to escape this enslaving system follow:

1. Exceed your monthly dues

The first step toward freedom from debt is to pay above the demanded minimum monthly payment. Do not extend your burden of paying the usual 2% to 3% of the outstanding balance for the required payment term. Moreover, banks would enjoy such subservience, even wishing you would pay for longer terms to increase their profits. Tell yourself now that it is time your own happiness is your priority, not the bank’s.

The strategy is to pay as much as you can afford regularly for every month. For instance, if your minimum amortization is $200, make it $150 or 200 even more. Try to look into your daily or monthly expenses to see where you can get the extra money. (To find some tips on how to do this, read our Living Below Your Means discussion forum.) For example, minimize or eliminate dining out and cook at home. Desserts are things we can do without, if you think about it. Happy hours would not be so happy if you think you have a debt to pay off. "Luxuries", in short, are things you can do without and are rich sources of hard cash.

The operative word (as in, you need to get it out of your system through some form of mental surgery) is “sacrifice”. Then, you will find a way to drastically up your debt amortizations and avoid getting scammed. It is the best way to save valuable money that would go into paying interests. Moreover, you will have a faster way of escaping your “debtly” situation. There is no joy in that kind financial crisis, having to live in constant penury and fear.

2. Snowball your debt payments

If you have credit cards, think seriously of how you can win some more points. Which one gives the lowest rate of interest? If you have not gone beyond the highest amount allowed on that card, try moving your higher-interest bill to it. This is allowable in most cases. Why pay 18% if you can pay only 12%?

In case your total credit balance does not fit on your low-interest card, pay at least the minimum amounts required for all cards except for one. You can then transfer most of your debt repayments into that one credit card, and do it as fast as you can. Once the balance on that card is zero, transfer the next by applying the same rapid repayment scheme.

This is what “snowballing” means – one small step at a time until you accomplish more. While the debt is decreasing, the money you will need to undo your debt will increase. The money you use to pay off “snowballs” until your debt disappears. You see how easy it is?

One alternative means of moving higher-interest debt to a lower-interest card involves the use of promotional offers from banks which provide credit card facilities. Note such ads offering to "Transfer all your credit card balances” to them at only “5.9%" for a period of a year. Why not? 5.9% is far beneficial to you than 18% interest. It would be unwise not save all that money in interest which could be funneled to reduce the principal every month, effectively decreasing the outstanding debt balance even more.

But think before you bite into any offer. Check properly the details for any possible catches. For instance, find out whether the interest rate will remain at the offered rate after the introductory period expires or revert to what you pay now. This would mean changing again and other possible surprises along the way. Banks have become wary of credit card holders who jump from one card to another to avail of the low introductory interest rates. Many such offers now stipulate that once you move outstanding debts from the new card within a year, the regular interest rate will revert retroactively to all outstanding balances. That stipulation might come as a big burden to bear for cash-strapped individuals, giving no relief whatsoever. The fine print tells it all – if you can read patiently.

3. Withdraw your savings account

You can decide to withdraw your savings and investments and slowly pay off your debt using the proceeds. It might appear unwise; yet, sometimes one has to play the fool to survive. Even at 12% rate, your investments would need to bring in above 18% before paying all taxes to match the dollars flowing out. Besides, the money in your savings account will not earn you close to that rate of interest. Terminating the debt this way, amounts to achieving that 18% gain, minus any risks involved otherwise. The greater the interest rate you pay, the more desirable repayment becomes against any existing investment.

4. Take out a loan using your life insurance policy

Does your life insurance policy provide a cash value? Then, make us of it by borrowing your own money. The interest rate is usually way below commercial rates avoid online fraud; and you can have longer terms to repay the loan. Be sure you pay it faithfully. In case you die prior to repaying the debt, the remaining loan balance and interest will be taken from policy’s face value due to the beneficiary. Indeed it is a small burden to carry now to try to remove a debt than allowing your loved ones to carry the burden, if you leave them permanently before paying it back.

5. Persuade family and friends for help

There must be a relative or friend who trusts you and cares enough to reach out to you with a helping hand. If so, you stand to get a loan at a bargain rate with less pressure on the payment schedule. In order to keep your relationship intact, frame up a formal agreement on paper to clarify expectations on either side as to interest and repayment scheme. This will do away with any hurt feelings or doubts in the future. And try to stick to the agreement if you want to remain welcome at family, office or school events.

6. Acquire a home equity loan

If you have a home whose equity has piled up over the years of paying the mortgage, why not get a home equity loan (HEL) credit facility at the highest allowable amount?

There are two ways that a HEL can help you save: first, applying the loan amount to your debt repayment, which allows you to exchange an 18% loan, for example, for a 6%-7% loan; second, itemizing deductions when you file your income tax credits HEL interest as a deductible item in most instances. A 25% marginal tax bracket will provide the 6% loan an effective rate of 4.5%, which is probably the best deal you can get on a personal debt.

Avoid, however, the common pitfall of getting an HEL, paying out your current debt and then ringing up credit card charges once again. That will give you two birds to shoot at with a single bullet, since you cannot afford another bullet to solve both challenges. Avail of HEL to erase your credit card debts, and then pay off HEL as well. Makes you appreciate your dire situation and the meaning of the saying, “There’s HEL to pay!”

7. Avail of a loan through your 401(k)

If you have a 401(k) retirement plan, yours may have a facility for loans up to 50% of your account's value, or $50,000, whichever is smaller. Usually, the rates are one or two points above prime, making them lower what credit cards charge. This makes 401(k) plan loans a way to pay off your debts. The best thing about this scheme is not just the lower interest but that you pay it back to your account as each dime paid on interest goes straight to the borrower's 401(k) account and not the lender's.

The downside on this plan includes the following: first, you repay the loan and interest with after-tax dollars, and the interest will be subject to tax again when you finally withdraw money from the 401(k) in the future. Moreover, the loan repayment period is five years. Leaving your work before repaying the whole loan will, therefore, require you to immediately pay off the loan. If not, that amount will be considered as a distribution to you and subject to tax at regular rates. And in case if you are below 59 and one-half years old, an additional 10% excise tax will be charged as penalty for cashing out your retirement funds early. Hence, make certain your 401(k) loan can be fully paid prior to leaving your job.

8. Restructure your loans

Are you at your rope’s end? No savings left. Friends and relatives cannot be of help. You do not own a home or a 401(k) account to loan against. In short, you are wiped out and you consider filing for bankruptcy. Wait! Hope always shines in the darkest places. Ironically, the prospects of bankruptcy can be of use to you.

If your creditors become aware of your situation and that you cannot renegotiate, your only recourse is to declare bankruptcy. You may seek a lower repayment term; ask for a lower interest rate; and satisfy their demand for payment. Creditors, more often than not, will choose to receive any deal where they get to recover some of their investment rather than nothing at all.

The transaction table is always open to a reasonable compromise where everyone wins and no one loses anything. It is worth a try and in time you will realize such recourses do work for the best. There are even organizations which will do it for you, in case you are not sure what you need to do.

9. Final option: Declare bankruptcy

If it comes down to the last option you have left, file for bankruptcy. As much as we all want to pay our debts, sometimes repaying is not at all possible. But be aware of the consequences.

For ten years, you will have a credit record with this bankruptcy information, making it hard for you to acquire a loan for that long. Furthermore, it is ironic that filing for bankruptcy requires a lot of money. Hundreds of dollars of lawyer fees and court filing expenses have to be met to get the relief you seek. With tougher bankruptcy laws in the offing as well, you might end up not obtaining any relief at all.

Two kinds of personal bankruptcy relief are available: Chapter 7 and Chapter 13. Chapter 7, called straight bankruptcy, provides almost total relief from debts, not including such items as alimony, taxes, child support, loans acquired through filing false financial records, loans not included in the bankruptcy petition, student loans and legal decisions against the petitioner.

Although Chapter 7 frees you of the duty of paying back most creditors, you may need to give up a big part of your property to partially pay off the debt. Nevertheless, some states have different laws providing exemptions on particular types of property, for instance, a specific amount of home equity, an old or low-value vehicle, minimal worth of jewelry and other personal belongings, and tools used in the pursuit of one’s business or occupation. Although such exemptions are quite small, no one will need to start over from zero.

Chapter 13, also referred to as the "wage-earner plan," is quite different. You can hold on to your property but give up all financial control to the bankruptcy court. The court recommends a repayment scheme based on your financial capability for paying off all or part of your debt for period of 3 to 5 years, during which creditors cannot harass you for any payment. You are also free of any interest charges on your debts during that period. Once the requirements of the court-approved scheme have been satisfied, you come out debt-free from the bankruptcy.