#The Witch critical reception

[joymahidul]

Unearth the Haunting Secrets of The Witch: A Deep Dive into Horror’s New Classic #TheWitch, #HorrorMovies, #FilmReview, #JoyMahidul,#CinematicExperience,

[piningpercussionist]

Kim you a Kamen Rider fan

Uh, no? Don't think so.

Name sounds vaguely familiar... one of the other clowns around here might be acquainted with it.

I didn't really watch too much TV as a young kid? I liked to mess around with my kit or go fuck around in the forests, for the most part. I started watching stuff more in highschool and college.

Some stuff I enjoy, or enjoyed, off the top of my head- Batman: The Animated Series, Are You Afraid of the Dark?, Buffy the Vampire Slayer... There are definitely more things that I watched, but I'm not sure what all I really stand by enjoying... sometimes, you just watch something because it's so weird it fascinates you, ya know?

[generalpierrotdameron]

[...] What is crystal (kyber?) clear is that before Star Wars can have another successful show, the loudest voices online need to realize the Star Wars they want to return to never existed in the first place. Will the real Star Wars please stand up?  [...] Much of the online discourse around Star Wars has centered on the franchise’s most recent live action projects. First premiering in 2019, these include The Mandalorian,  The Book of Boba Fett, Ahsoka, Obi-Wan Kenobi, Andor, and The Acolyte. The market has been oversaturated with stories, especially many that occur within the same time frames, with fans frankly, getting tired and in some cases — outright bored. Each of the projects has had its own reception — and own problems. However the low audience scores, angry YouTube rants, and long Reddit threads can really boil down to one question: who determines what’s real Star Wars? First as a film, and then a trilogy, Star Wars established early on to viewers that even when they were focused on a set of powerful twins and a dark Empire, shit was going down on literally every other planet. This freedom has allowed for endless story arcs across decades. But while opportunities have been endless — the patience of fans hasn’t.  Take for example the most recent series, The Acolyte. Created by Leslye Headland (Bachelorette, Russian Doll), the series follows Mae and Osha Aniseya, a pair of mysterious twins (both played by Amandla Stenberg) who baffle a group of Jedi. [...] But well before the show premiered, vocal online fans mocked Stenberg’s casting, calling the series evidence that Disney was capitulating to a “woke” crowd by having multiple people of color in the cast. They also criticized news that the show would include queer characters, including a coven of witches. This week, Deadline reported that Disney canceled the series after just one season. Fans upset with what they called a social justice warrior direction for Star Wars celebrated, calling the show disrespectful to the original films, and simply not the Star Wars they loved. X owner Elon Musk even celebrated the news of the show’s cancellation, appearing to tweet a redacted version of the phrase, ‘Go woke, go broke.” [...]This backlash of racism, sexism, and online abuse seems consistent across all Star Wars projects — most heavily targeted at leads of color. But when online pundits criticize Star Wars for taking a “woke” direction, they ignore the power that exists in the source material to begin with. But what it seems like extreme fans don’t realize is that they’re creating a space where even the truest of Star Wars fans still wouldn’t want to participate. Let’s be real. If you thought you could make the next great Star Wars iteration, but you knew that your project could be lambasted simply for casting a person of color, is that where you would invest your time? Or if you were an actor of  color choosing between two roles you believed in, would you pick the one that came with an almost guaranteed hate campaign? The Star Wars fans clamoring for a return to the originals aren’t just talking nonsense, they’re ruining their chances to see the franchise they love grow in any meaningful way. Star Wars is about a galaxy filled with endless choices, battles, and people trying to make a difference. The fans who are loudest at the moment aren’t just willfully ignoring Lucas’ original vision. They’re making their own worlds smaller in the process.

👉 Renew the Acolyte - Sign the petition!

[classicmarvelera]

Unraveling the Legacy: Steve Englehart's Impactful Journey at Marvel Comics

In the intricate tapestry of comic book history, certain creators stand out as architects of enduring legacies. Among them is Steve Englehart, a prolific writer whose imaginative storytelling and nuanced characterizations have left an indelible mark on the Marvel Universe. Throughout his tenure at Marvel Comics, Englehart crafted narratives that transcended the confines of the page, breathing new life into iconic characters and redefining the landscape of superhero storytelling

Early Career and Arrival at Marvel

Before his ascent to prominence at Marvel, Englehart honed his craft through various ventures in the comic book industry. His journey towards the House of Ideas began with a passion for storytelling and a keen eye for character dynamics. Upon joining Marvel Comics, Englehart quickly distinguished himself with his inventive approach to superhero narratives, earning him a place among the company's top writers

Captain America: Redefining a Patriotic Icon

Englehart's tenure at Marvel is perhaps best remembered for his transformative run on "Captain America." Englehart embarked on a daring exploration of patriotism, identity, and the moral complexities of heroism during his time on the title. Through Captain America's lens, Englehart crafted compelling narratives that resonated with readers on a profound level

One of Englehart's most acclaimed story arcs, "The Secret Empire Saga," remains a seminal moment in Captain America's history. Englehart delved into the heart of America's political landscape in this epic tale, confronting societal issues with unflinching honesty. The storyline culminated in a shocking revelation that shook the foundations of the Marvel Universe, leaving a lasting impact on Captain America's legacy

Exploring Other Marvel Characters

While Englehart's tenure on "Captain America" garnered widespread acclaim, his creative influence extended far beyond the Star-Spangled Avenger. Englehart's work on the relationship between the Scarlet Witch and the Vision, two of Marvel's most enigmatic characters, stands as a testament to his ability to infuse depth and complexity into his narratives. In "The Vision and the Scarlet Witch" miniseries, Englehart explored the intricacies of their unconventional romance, navigating themes of love, identity, and acceptance in a superhero context

Additionally, Englehart's contributions to other Marvel titles showcased his versatility as a storyteller. From the cosmic adventures of The Avengers to the mystical realms of Doctor Strange to the brutal Avengers/Defenders War, Englehart's narratives spanned the breadth of the Marvel Universe, enriching the tapestry of interconnected stories

Creative Collaborations and Artistic Vision

A hallmark of Englehart's work is his collaborative spirit and his ability to synergize with artists to bring his vision to life. Throughout his tenure at Marvel, Englehart forged lasting partnerships with some of the industry's most talented illustrators, resulting in visually stunning and narratively rich comics. From the dynamic pencils of Sal Buscema to the ethereal landscapes of Frank Brunner, Englehart's collaborators imbued his stories with a visual dynamism that elevated his narratives to new heights

Critical Reception and Legacy

Englehart's contributions to Marvel Comics have not gone unnoticed, with fans and critics alike lauding his innovative storytelling and memorable characterizations. His work continues to resonate with readers, standing as a testament to the enduring power of comics as a medium for storytelling

In the annals of comic book history, Steve Englehart's legacy shines brightly as a beacon of creativity and imagination. His groundbreaking contributions to the Marvel Universe have left an indelible mark on the fabric of superhero storytelling, inspiring generations of creators to push the boundaries of the medium. As we continue to celebrate his achievements, we are reminded of the transformative power of storytelling to inspire, to provoke, and to unite us in our shared love of comics

Conclusion

Steve Engelhart is a titan in the comic book world, yet his contributions often reside in the shadow of more mainstream characters. His legacy is woven into the fabric of Marvel, shaping the narratives of both obscure and iconic figures alike, from the Avengers to the enigmatic Scarlet Witch and Vision

In the annals of Marvel history, Engelhart stands as a trailblazer, setting the stage for future writers who would helm the sagas of Captain America and the Avengers. Mark Grunwald's tenure bears striking resemblance to Engelhart's, a testament to the enduring themes of politics and cosmic exploration inherent in these titles

Engelhart's storytelling prowess shines particularly bright in Captain America, where political intrigue and global conspiracies intersect, birthing characters like Shang Chi. While rooted in martial arts, Shang Chi emerges as a pivotal figure in Marvel's tapestry, navigating the murky waters of SHIELD and HYDRA with aplomb

Amidst the tumult of the 1970s comic scene, Engelhart rose as a beacon of innovation, his work becoming synonymous with the decade itself. Remarkably, he achieved this without the crutch of marquee titles like Spider-Man or the Fantastic Four, solidifying his place as an unsung hero of the Marvel Bronze Age

Steve Englehart's tenure at Marvel Comics is a testament to storytelling's transformative power. Through his imaginative narratives and compelling characterizations, Englehart reshaped the Marvel Universe, leaving an indelible mark on the landscape of superhero comics. As we reflect on his legacy, we are reminded of the enduring impact of his creative vision and the timeless allure of his storytelling prowess

References

Captain America: The Secret Empire Saga

The Vision and the Scarlet Witch

The Avengers: The Celestial Madonna Saga

Doctor Strange: A Separate Reality

[batmanisagatewaydrug]

Hey Sex Witch,

I have a question about rejection.

There are a lot of ways that people can tell you that they want nothing to do with you, whether or not they actually say as much outright. Usually, this comes with some jab at your character, with the implication that you’re inherently unacceptable.

My question is, is there EVER a good reason to listen to and internalize this? Because I‘ve lately begun to think that it’s just better to write them off as a bad experience. Like Thomas Edison’s “we’ve only found 1000 ways that don’t work,“ is there ever a reason to search deeper than “this is just one more person who isn’t worth making friends with“?

(LOL. Assuming I’ve already reflected on my own actions, presentation, hygiene etc?)

I’m asking because I’ve changed myself a lot in the past to please others but lately I’m very, VERY skeptical of people who tell me that something core to who I am is something worth being ashamed of. (And I mean, how I like to dress, my hairstyle, my manner of expression etc. Not, like, my politics or something similarly spicy.)

But is that just me not being receptive to criticism? Or is it more situational? Cuz like I don’t want to just say “oh I’m perfect as-is and will be taking no crits at this time” but I also don’t want to be a doormat either.

hi anon,

I've been sitting on this in my inbox for almost two weeks and straight up? there is no a single answer to this. there is no universal answer to whether or not there's ever merit to someone rejecting you. sometimes people are being petty and shallow and want nothing to do with you for reasons that are entirely projection; sometimes they have very valid critique and you may have hurt them in ways you're not even aware of.

if I'm being totally honest? a lot of times it's a mix of the two. relationships are deeply complicated, and it's rare that any interaction features one person completely in the wrong and one person who's entirely blameless.

ultimately, I think all you can do is be confident enough in your sense of self to recognize what feedback is and isn't worth internalizing.

[kylesvariouslistsandstuff]

Long post incoming...

I guess I'll try to be more reasonable and put things into perspective.

I also happened to come out of FURIOSA earlier today, which to me felt like a nice antidote to what Hollywood tends to pump out when it comes to big franchises. A prequel that really expands the Wasteland world of MAD MAX without feeling like a Glup Shitto-fest. I was pretty much glued the whole time, astounded at what it was going for, the big swings it took and - in my eyes - greatly succeeded at. You can tell creator/director George Miller loves this world, and wanted to expand it meaningfully with both this and MAD MAX: FURY ROAD, after 30 years of the series being a trilogy. And apparently without anyone getting in his way, at that. Rare for a big action film.

Did you know Miller, who also directed the likes of... THE WITCHES OF EASTWICK, LORENZO'S OIL, BABE: PIG IN THE CITY (and pretty much was a huge part of the original BABE), the HAPPY FEET movies, and THREE THOUSAND YEARS OF LONGING... Did you know one of his favorite films is Walt Disney's PINOCCHIO? Which had a massive influence on him and his work?

Oh yeah, PINOCCHIO... The second-ever Disney animated feature film, a film designed to be like its European fairy tale-inspired predecessor - SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS - but double that, with its more sprawling story and larger budget. More multiplane shots, whole scenes in the ocean, all that hand-animated, meticulously hand-painted water...

And it was the exact opposite of SNOW WHITE when first released in February 1940. While reviews were generally positive, not really as glowing as SNOW WHITE's reception, it was largely impacted by World War II breaking out across the Atlantic. It couldn't play in the European countries where SNOW WHITE made tons of money, and the money it managed to make in the ally territories - the UK and France - wasn't going to cut it. Its American gross was solid, certainly in the shadows of the huge hit that was out at the time - GONE WITH THE WIND... But again, it couldn't cover the film's astronomical costs. Unthinkable for a film, whose opening song, is pretty much synonymous with Disney today... Once a big flop, now it's absolutely definitively Disney...

The Disney studio would continue to lose a lot of money during this period. FANTASIA did not appeal to audiences, and BAMBI also lost money. Only the relatively-cheaper DUMBO managed to make back its shoestring cost, in addition to appealing to audiences more than the experimental dialogue-free epic and the more lyrical, dramatic forest tale. Disney was deep in debt, and spent the rest of the decade making and releasing movies known as "The Package Features". Anthologies composed of short films/featurettes, with some sort of loose linking device for them. Disney wouldn't return to doing a singular type of story following one set of characters until CINDERELLA, released in February 1950 to critical acclaim and great box office.

Some animation fans and historians divide the Walt years into two halves, the Golden Age covering the streak that began with the runaway success of STEAMBOAT WILLIE and ended with World War II's impact on the studio's first five feature films. (Or six, if you count the hybrid THE RELUCTANT DRAGON.) The Silver Age, covering everything thereafter up until Walt's passing, typically marked at the posthumous 1967 release of THE JUNGLE BOOK. Again, in terms of features. I'd mark it at December 1968, when the 2nd Winnie the Pooh featurette - THE BLUSTERY DAY - was released. The wartime losses took so much out of the studio, that Walt and Roy O. Disney reached some compromises, which - to some - affect the features going forward.

Films like CINDERELLA and PETER PAN avoided the elaborate multiplane effects and minute details of PINOCCHIO and BAMBI, making up for it in their striking art direction and filmmaking choices. The storytelling is also something of a shift. Few of those films attempt to wear the frightening elements of SNOW WHITE and PINOCCHIO, the kinds of scenes that Walt often got angry letters from parents over. After BAMBI, not counting the package features, the death of a major "good" character was pretty much hands off as well. For example, during production of LADY AND THE TRAMP, singer/actress Peggy Lee begged the filmmakers not to kill off Trusty at the end of the picture, following his accident with the dogcatcher wagon. Walt and co. complied. By the time you get to the '60s, Walt's final years among the living, you're a country mile from the early films. THE SWORD IN THE STONE and THE JUNGLE BOOK are very lax "characters exist" kinds of movies, the latter having some danger in the form of the impending encounter with Shere Khan. Otherwise, they are much lighter in tone, much more fun-loving, like romps.

Over the years, I've come to really appreciate those later films for the things my 20-something year-old self tended to criticize them for. When really, it's just a matter of fact. Change happened, maybe had to happen, in order for the Disney studio to survive and keep making animated feature films. Few other studios during the Golden Age of Animation could afford such a luxury. The Fleischer brothers certainly gave it a shot, with GULLIVER'S TRAVELS in 1939 and MR. BUG GOES TO TOWN in 1941, but the falling out between Max and Dave coupled with distributor Paramount's neglect of MR. BUG put a stop to that. Feature-length films would be made in other countries using techniques other than traditional animation, though some studios in America would later get in on it once again - albeit with lower-costing methods.

But when Walt was around, it was really only him producing feature-length animated films on a regular basis. And to keep going with that, and not just making more money off of only the re-issues of SNOW WHITE and such, he and his crew ultimately changed course and... Well... I'll say it, I feel they still put in the hard work on a bad day. Even the films of the '50s and '60s that I don't like as much as some others, there's still... Say, a Milt Kahl head swaggle or something great from Frank & Ollie in there. Or a great score, or a good sense of pace, the late great Robert and Richard Sherman absolutely going off with a banger song somewhere, very inspired background art, etc. No slouching! Something like THE JUNGLE BOOK is very much as important to me as PINOCCHIO.

I've come to love all of it, really, even with perceived flaws or the results of the studio changing gears. The work of the animators, artists, musicians, etc.... They pulled the weight and then some, and even the more "middling" films of decades past hold some sort of special place...

Maybe this situation applies to the apparent mandates that Disney executives are compromising Pixar with.

Pixar went for many, many years without a box office loss. THE GOOD DINOSAUR, which was made during John Lasseter's 11-year reign, was the first film to lose money for them. It was released *20 years* after TOY STORY came out, and it's their 16th overall film. I remember the media trying to chalk it up to the film's troubled production, which is a silly sentiment, because TOY STORY 2 and RATATOUILLE were similarly-rough, rocky roads. That one just... Didn't appeal, no matter what work and effort went into it, and I also think STAR WARS 7 opening mere weeks later kinda cut into it as well. It was kinda tossed off by Disney's marketing department after INSIDE OUT debuted earlier that year.

But, it was viewed as a minor dent in the armor. CARS 3 didn't really break even when released in the summer of 2017, but that was a CARS movie, so a lot of people kinda just shrugged at that. John Lasseter was then slowly ousted from the Disney company as a whole months later... Not because of that film, or GOOD DINOSAUR, but because he was exposed by the Me Too movement that erupted in fall 2017. Lasseter abdicated his leadership roles at Pixar, Disney Animation, Disneytoon, and Imagineering, right before the release of COCO that autumn. With Pete Docter taking over as CCO of Pixar in June 2018, perhaps all eyes were on him. Unlike Lasseter, Docter was only running Pixar. Not WDAS, not Disneytoon (which was swiftly shut down upon Lasseter's exit), and no major presence in the parks apparently... How would he take on such a task?

Docter, I feel, had something going there. Lasseter's Pixar became what Ken called Sunnyside Daycare in TOY STORY 3, he turned the place into a pyramid and he put himself on top. So many directors and animators exodused out of Pixar in the early 2010s, notably Brenda Chapman, who had words upon being taken off of her film BRAVE. All of Lasseter's goodwill completely vanished after it was learned that he made many women at the studio - and at WDAS - very uncomfortable, and when it was very clear that he only favored his TOY STORY colleagues and wasn't keen on letting women nor PoC direct films at his studio. Docter sought to reverse that, and to let the filmmakers tell stories that meant a lot to them. Much in the same way he, Lasseter, Andrew Stanton, Lee Unkrich, and Brad Bird did when Pixar was relatively new to making features. It truly was like old times, and I myself was very excited about that.

And it seemed like the sky was the limit... What could go wrong? ONWARD was cut right off, in its second weekend, by the pandemic. SOUL, LUCA, and TURNING RED went straight to Disney+ in the U.S. and most other territories, and their subsequent limited theatrical debuts - expectedly - didn't do great. I see that situation as similar to World War II cutting right into Disney's animated features in the 1940s, impacting the studio/distributor's ability to give them a wide release (at the time, Disney was not big enough to be their own distributor, it was RKO Radio Pictures who were handling the releases of the movies)... and the way the world is now, how expensive it is to take a trip to the movies, what a gamble it is... Animated movies aren't guaranteed smash hits anymore, unless you're something like Mario or Minions, or some entry in a beloved franchise. Remember how PUSS IN BOOTS 2 literally had to claw its way up to such a winning gross and record multiplier? If that had cost the same amount of money as ELEMENTAL had cost to make? It'd be considered a big failure.

LIGHTYEAR was Pixar's big return to theaters, a summer bow in 2022 that was part of the studio's beloved TOY STORY franchise. It opened great, too. $50m! Quite above what other animated movies had been opening with from 2021 to now... But the legs were terrible, word of mouth was sour, audiences just didn't seem to like it. A rare swing and a miss. Pete Docter pulled a "Walt Disney responding to ALICE IN WONDERLAND's disastrous release circa 1951", taking the blame for the film's box office woes. ELEMENTAL opened blah, but had incredible word of mouth. Even Disney boss Bob Iger seemed happy with its slow-burn ride to $500m at the worldwide box office, until he wasn't... Now that's a failure, along with SOUL, LUCA, and TURNING RED... Which all didn't get to enjoy full theatrical releases due to a worldwide crisis that's actually still going on...

So now, the corporate logic is... Those movies all failed because they're too "autobiographical", the filmmakers' respective catharses being told through 90min animated movies apparently doesn't appeal to audiences... and that in order to be financially successful again, Pixar needs to make films with more "general" appeal. Pete Docter is not John Lasseter, and I feel the press takes advantage of that. Docter apologizes for films not appealing, whereas Lasseter - when his CARS 2 got panned by most critics - defended critical missteps with his chest. It's as if he still ruled at the end of the day and no one could touch him - given his four leadership roles within the company, while the quieter Docter... Not so much. I get the sense that Disney execs can push him around and the press can easily label him a weak leader, while John seemed invincible. Iger, for example, was aware of his erratic, gross behavior at awards ceremonies well before Me Too caught up with the Hawaiian shirt man... And he was very concerned, but... Lasseter kept his job for another decade, almost unscathed.

I get that studios often have these sorts of "Well, we've had trouble, what should we be making then?" moments. I feel that singling out the three films that went straight to streaming during a pandemic, and another that was high budget and was operating in a much different theatrical landscape than before, is not it, though. SOUL, LUCA, TURNING RED, and ELEMENTAL were liked by most audiences. They got good to great reviews. They were all nominated for Oscar.

This isn't like how FANTASIA and BAMBI were perceived by critics and audiences in the early 1940s. The mixed-to-negative reactions to those films back then must've played a part in Walt and Roy focusing on relatively safer films in the future. For example, CINDERELLA leaned into what audiences loved about SNOW WHITE, 12 1/2 years prior, and was one of Disney's huge hits of that decade that also did exemplary in re-issues. There's a reason the two big flops of the '50s, for Disney Animation, were the more experimental films - ALICE IN WONDERLAND and SLEEPING BEAUTY. Nowadays, both of those movies are beloved and like PINOCCHIO, FANTASIA, and BAMBI... Are synonymous with Disney, often ranked among the best, cream of the crop. The time isn't always right for certain movies...

But things are often unfair in these big entertainment conglomerates, who are run by money hoarders who only think in the moment... and if Pixar's gonna try to do this "general appeal" thing, they would still have to let filmmakers have all the fun that they can feasibly have with the stories. The current iteration of Disney Animation is buckled under so much executive interference, and test screenings where 7-year-olds dictate what goes in and what doesn't, and... Well... Look at their resulting output. How they still try to do the job passionately and not merely just pass the grade. It's like I'm watching them struggle to get their creativity out on films like RAYA, STRANGE WORLD, and WISH. It's, to me, much like where things were for them circa 1980-82.

And after nearly 30 years of making features, maybe Pixar might enter such a phase themselves, as executives place the blame squarely on the filmmakers for their own failures and uncontrollable outside circumstances... Like I said, we'll have to see how they navigate this particular set of rules. Does it work out for them? Does it create movies that audiences mostly don't care for? Who knows... Maybe I myself will like the movies still, maybe I won't even notice a difference... Maybe this is will all be moot, every sentence of it... But we'll see...

[s10127470]

The Best Thing About The Garfield Movie

So yeah, i just watched The Garfield Movie this past Friday night.

And all in honesty (and you're all probably gonna hate me for this).....I actually really like this film.

The story is solid (but I'll touch on that a little more when I get there).

The animation is really great. I'm always down for CGI animation actually being allowed to feel animated and this is the best the Garfield characters have looked in 3D.

It's basically night and day when you compare it to The Garfield Show and that CGI trilogy from the late 2000s.

Most of the characters are pretty solid and likeable.

My favorites were definitely Odie and Otto.

And the voice acting was actually really good all around.

Yes....even Chris Pratt as Garfield himself.

The movie's not perfect though.

A little bit of the humor can fall flat at times.

The villain is kind of weak despite being a classic, over-the-top villain.

Which is weird given the director's track record when it comes to villains.

And while Jon was fun to watch, he sadly wasn't around for much of the movie.

But all-in-all, I think this movie is a really good time and I would definitely recommend it for anyone who's a fan of Garfield.

However, if you've seen any of the reception towards the movie (largely from the critics), it hasn't been talked about in a very positive light.

With the biggest criticism being that the movie doesn't feel like Garfield.

Which to that I have to say....

BALDERDASH!

And I feel like the critics saying this are only familiar with the comics strips and not really anything else with the orange cat.

While yes, the movie doesn't quite feel like the comic strips, it does harken more to the adaptations, specifically the ones from his golden age during the 1980s.

The major criticism towards this movie is that it doesn't feel like Garfield, especially with the whole heist plot.

And while that may be the case when using the comics as a basis, but when looking at the adaptations, this actually isn't all that far off from what Garfield usually gets up to.

He's hanged with a tribe of tropical island natives inspired by 50s American culture while having to stop an erupting volcano.

He's had to escape a crew of ghostly pirates on Halloween night.

He's gone to Hollywood.

Yeah, Garfield has been going on exciting and wild adventures for a LONG time.

Hell, look at The Garfield Show.

The fourth season had several story arcs!

These included the likes of Garfield going to a school for witches, having to stop an army of alien robots from invading Earth, and going on an African safari and trying to save a pair of rare white lions from scheming poachers.

Also, that last arc I just mentioned was responsible for introducing us to the man....the myth....the legend himself....

This criticism has also been leveled towards the character of Garfield himself.

And I honestly feel like a lot of critics don't quite get the character of Garfield.

While yes, he's lazy, cynical, sarcastic, gluttonous and mocks just about everyone around him.

But that's not all his character is.

I can't believe I'm actually using him, but The Nostalgia Critic during his review of Garfield & Friends gave what honestly may be the best description of Garfield as a character.

That being while Garfield may enjoy being a lazy pessimistic, that's not what he's really like.

Although he's described as being lazy, Garfield is shown to be surprisingly more playful and energetic than you would think.

And on top of that, he'll usually go out of way to do stuff like creating huge ass sandwiches to eat for himself or think of unique and creative ways to mess with Odie, Jon and Nermal.

And despite the fact that he mocks damn near everyone around him (especially those close to him), he'll actually go out of his way to save them if they're in danger.

Basically, the best way to describe Garfield is that he's a character who ironically works hard to be lazy.

He won't exercise, but he'll dance and play.

He may be lazy, but he'll actually go the extra mile for something he wants.

He mocks people, but knows if they weren't there, life would be pretty boring for him.

And this part allows me to segway into what I think is the best part of The Garfield Movie: it's heart.

Yeah, The Garfield Movie has legitimately heartfelt moments where the characters get to reflect on their emotions towards those close to them.

Like Otto and his unwavering love for his Ethel and more specifically, Garfield and his estranged relationship with his father Vic.

Yes, I am a sucker for stuff like these.

Probably because I just appreciate just how sincere they come off as, and I appreciate them more because they're usually not ruined for a sake of mediocre joke.

But anyway, these moments really do favors the characters, especially Garfield himself.

One thing I really appreciate about his adaptations is how they make Garfield a little more multifaceted.

While he does still have his trademark traits and quirks, he's allowed to show other emotions as well.

He can be happy, sad, excitable, afraid, downtrodden, caring, angry.

Garfield is able to show that he isn't just lazy and cynical.

And although it was only shown in the beginning montage, I do appreciate that movie does show that Garfield does legitimately care for Jon and Odie, which is something that you rarely see in the comics and even a good chunk of the adaptations.

Once again, it kinda harkens back to the 80s adaptations, specifically the series of specials made between 1982 and 1991.

I guess to give you guys some examples.

In Garfield in the Rough, when the trio find themselves attacked by the panther that escaped from the local zoo, Garfield took shelter up in a tree while Odie and Jon were forced to take cover in the car. But that only got them so far as the panther was able to break the driver-side window. And when Garfield noticed this, he literally jumps from the tree, onto the panther's back, and proceeds to claw and scratch the big cat in a rage!

Yeah, Garfield literally fought a feral big cat for the safety of his owner and dog!

That takes fucking courage man!

Or how about in Here Comes Garfield, where Odie gets sent to the pound. And while Garfield was happy about that, he realized just how empty and boring life would be with Odie. And so, he decides to go rescue him, especially more so after finding out Odie was scheduled to get FUCKING EUTHANIZED!

Oh yeah! There was a Garfield adaptation where Odie almost got put down!

You realize how insane that sounds, right?

And despite his best attempts, Garfield ends up getting locked up with Odie.

And in the approaching hours to his demise, Garfield reminisces on the good times he's had with Odie (accompanied by an admittedly sad song).

And when it's finally time and Odie gets dragged off to meet his maker, Garfield actually starts shedding tears.

And finally there's Garfield On the Town, where Garfield gets lost in the big city. And during his journey, he stumbled upon his childhood home (an Italian restaurant that's now abandoned) and more importantly, was reunited with his estranged mother, who he hadn't seen since he was a kitten.

And during this special, we see a much more caring and gentler side of Garfield.

So yeah, that's all I have to see for all this.

Think I The Garfield Movie is pretty solid film overall and I can definitely tell that the people behind it really cared about Garfield and truly understood what makes him such a lovable character.

Unfortunately, I believe this film does have the issue of being obviously more geared towards the fans.

Which is not a bad thing.

But if the reception towards The Super Mario Bros. Movie taught anything, not everybody's gonna appreciate that.

But in all-in-all, I'm kinda glad this movie exists and I wouldn't mind rewatching every once in a while.

And I'm more glad that Mark Dindal has finally returned to directing animated films after not doing so in almost 20 years.

And while it may not be a good as Cats Don't Dance and especially the godsend that is The Emperor's New Groove, for a grand return to animated directing, this ain't half bad.

And even if you don't like this film, I think we can all agree on that it's leagues better than the last film Dindal was unfortunate enough to direct.

[troius]

Hi, Troius, I just wanted to let you know that I really appreciate your commentary and analysis. I've been reading bleach analysis for like 15 years and I never stop learning more about this manga. But your perspective is one of the most interesting I've read (do you do this professionally?). I would love it if you could keep going with the anime or the novels or even the rock musicals xD (did you hear they are adapting the arrancar arc?).

Actually, if you want to talk about another series or manga, that would be nice too! Anyway, if you don't continue, I just wanted to say thank you.

Thank you so much for the compliments! I do not review or critic professionally (though I'm open to offers...), although I do in a manner of speaking write for a living.

And yeah, I think I'm going to keep things up somewhat? I don't think I'll go back and watch the OG anime, but I absolutely plan on keeping close tabs on the new series, especially as we get closer to the point where the manga got compressed and new material might be forthcoming. Maybe I'll make episode recap posts if I have some time on my hands...

...although who knows if I will, because there is additional blogging content planned. Another manga by another author would probably be a stretch, but I'd like to cover (and I think my audience would be receptive to) the rest of Tite Kubo's published works, namely:

The Bleach pilot chapter

Burn the Witch

Zombie Powder

The Hell Arc one-shot

And who knows, maybe there will be more to add to that list by the time I'm done!

[normanjdroid]

MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR

The soundtrack to the movie that made absolutely no fucking sense!

TLDR; Bubba plays cards with a fish monster, Kickin is abducted by a witch, Crafty becomes a queen and Catnap fights greek gods.

With 12 hot new songs, Side A consisted of all the songs from the movie,

Magical Mystery Tour

(The Fool) On Melancholy Hill

Questionnare

Valhalla Calling

Burning Pile

Diggy Diggy Hole

I Am The Walrus

While Side B compiled both scrapped songs as well as side A from their current hit single "All You Need Is Lunch" and the double a-sided single "Strawberry Fields Forever/Holiday" along with two scrapped concept songs "Suffering/Different Beast"

Side B.

Holiday

Strawberry Fields Forever

Suffering

Different Beast

All You Need Is Lunch

Due to a surprising immense popularity of "Suffering/Different Beast" post release of Magical Mystery Tour, the songs were issued as a single as well as leading to the creation of the 1998 movie "Yellow Submarine Sandwich" which also featured both songs.

The sessions surrounding Magical Mystery Tour have been characterised by some biographers as aimless and unfocused, with the band members overly indulging in sound experimentation and exerting greater control over production.

However, despite the mixed reception of the Magical Mystery Tour film, the soundtrack was a critical and commercial success across the globe.

[findroleplay]

twenty1plus. 🍂

i am currently seeking a roleplay that is more a concept i have envisioned than a fleshed out narrative! i love the aesthetic of 19th-20th century americana, brunaille paintings, children’s picture books (alice in wonderland, namely), and weird, nonsensical settings that only start to make sense as the plot continues developing — this is the basis of what i am currently imagining.

i especially love the idea of perhaps writing a story about teenagers, stuck in a limbo-like world, who eventually find themselves and try to escape this world all together? except the world is full of symbolisms from our character’s lives and very own personalities, and i think it would be cute if their “archetype” is based off of the region of the US they are from (example; witch for new england, cowboy for the southwest, etc.)… or anything else this might make you think of. i am very open minded about this! at the end of the day, i would love for our work to be a form of social criticism, especially in terms of the 19th-20th century united states.

as i have mentioned, this is more of a concept than anything i have fleshed out thoroughly, so i would love a responsive partner that is active in world building as well as both opinionated and receptive in the plotting process. beware that i will indeed be sending paragraphs after paragraphs not only in writing, but in plotting and world building as well – i would prefer my partners to have the same energy. i want your input as well as your thoughts about things – i don’t want passive partners.

as for pairings, if eventually our characters romance each other, i am most experienced in mxm/nbxm/nbxnb. i also love platonic pairings!

this is a bit of a long read, so thank you to those who have read this – if interested, interact & i will reach out! 🌾

-

[connectparanormal]

Scott's Letters on Demonology and Witchcraft

The review of Sir Walter Scott's Letters on Demonology and Witchcraft provides a detailed and insightful analysis of this literary work, which delves into the supernatural beliefs prevalent during a transformative period in European history. Sir Walter Scott, known for his contributions to the historical novel genre, uses his deep understanding of folklore to explore and reflect on societal changes from superstition to enlightenment. The review skillfully places Scott's work within its historical context, emphasizing the shift in Europe towards rationalism and the questioning of old beliefs.

The analysis highlights Scott's methodical approach to the subject matter, as seen in his empirical examination of witch trials and supernatural phenomena. By critiquing the judicial processes and the misuse of power in exploiting superstitions, Scott not only critiques past injustices but also comments on the human tendency to find supernatural explanations for unexplained events. Each letter in the series is analyzed for its content and themes, showing how Scott's background in historical novels enriched his examination of demonology and witchcraft.

The review also discusses the impact of Scott's letters on his contemporaries and subsequent generations, linking his skeptical approach to a broader shift towards scientific understanding in Victorian society. It notes how Scott influenced other writers, including Charles Dickens and Nathaniel Hawthorne, who also explored supernatural themes in their works.

However, the review could be further enriched by comparing Scott's work with other contemporary skeptics or historians, discussing the critical reception of his work at the time, and considering its relevance in contemporary debates over superstition versus science. Overall, the review effectively captures the essence and significance of Scott's work, highlighting his role in both literary and cultural history as a figure who helped transition the discourse surrounding superstition and rationality. This analysis not only pays homage to Scott’s literary craftsmanship but also underscores his enduring influence on our understanding of cultural and psychological factors that influence human belief systems.

[courseyoulovemeyoudontknowme]

Sleeping Beauty (1959, Clyde Geronimi, Eric Larson, Wolfgang Reitherman and Les Clark)

11/02/2024

Sleeping Beauty is a 1959 animated film directed by Clyde Geronimi, Eric Larson, Wolfgang Reitherman and Les Clark, made with the animation technique and produced by Walt Disney based on the fairy tale Sleeping Beauty by Charles Perrault.

It is the 16th Disney Classic and was released in the United States on January 29, 1959 distributed by Buena Vista Distribution.

In the wake of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and Cinderella, the Studio revived a classic folk tale in an attempt to achieve great success again, but, despite the great and ambitious technical quality, the film received a very cold response upon release; such was its disappointing initial gross and mixed critical reception that Sleeping Beauty was Disney's last fairy tale adaptation for the next thirty years (the Studio only returned to the genre long after Walt's death with the release of The Little Mermaid in 1989).

The film is graphically inspired by the Gothic miniatures of the book Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry, catapulting the viewer into a bucolic and medieval setting with a sharp and precise line.

A live action of the film was made in 2014: Maleficent with Angelina Jolie in the role of Maleficent and Elle Fanning as Princess Aurora, Sleeping Beauty.

France, 14th century. King Stephen and his consort, Queen Leah, welcome the birth of their first and only daughter, Princess Aurora.

Before Merryweather is able to give her blessing, a terrible and treacherous witch named Maleficent appears in a whirlwind of wind and, to take revenge for not having been invited, curses the princess, proclaiming that she will be truly beautiful and graceful, but that before sunset on his sixteenth birthday she will prick his finger on the spindle of a spinning wheel and die.

Princess Aurora, the female protagonist of the story, renamed Briar Rose by the fairies. She is animated by Marc Davis.

Prince Phillip. He is animated by Milt Kahl.

[soulsanitarium]

Spain🇪🇸 Here's everything I found, organized by my favorites…

No 1. Netflix movie Akelarre - Coven (2020) Great and beautiful film, loads of history here⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ (see my previous post about the real history behind this film)

No 2. Witches Mountain🏔El Monte de las Brujas (1972) could be a great movie, but the execution is so poor that it ruins the experience. A photographer takes an assignment in the Pyrenees just across the Spanish border, but soon has supernatural encounters (witches). Waiting for the re-make!

No 3. Witching & Bitching - Las Brujas de Zugarramurdi (2013) has received a controversial reception, I think it was fun and entertaining. The Caves of Zugarramurdi have a historical connection to the Basque witch trials in Navarra. Zugarramurdi is near what is now the French-Spanish border, where there is also a water stream (Olabidea or Infernuko erreka, "Hell's stream") was said to be the meeting place of the witches.

Perhaps here the most interesting seems to be the story of LaCelestina (1499) and I noticed that it was translated into Finnish in 2019 (going to get the book) 📖 The trials of the Basque witches conducted during the 16th and early 17th centuries had a significant effect on the development of Golden Age Spanish Literature.

Often considered the first European novel, La Celestina was profoundly influential in the development of European prose fiction and is valued by critics today as much for its greatness as literature as for its historical significance. No 4. La Celestina (1996) with Penelope Cruz is good - and very romantic- but not a great movie. I haven’t seen the older versions ( poster below).

No 5. I tried to watch 1984 film Akelarre- mixed documentary & fiction - but I found only few parts with translation, its content did not seem very science-based, but otherwise interesting.

Few witch trials facts from the area of 🇪🇸 :

TheSpanish inquisition rescued countless of ’witches’ from local legal witch processes (Henningsen 1980; Ankarloo & Clark 2002).

Yes, burning at the stake was used as a method of execution in Spain, unlike in most other countries (Levack 1987).

In Catalonia, the Inquisition was less respected and more people died (Ankarloo & Clark 2002).

The general discourse emphasizes the number of women as victims, but there are large regional differences. In Castile 70 % was women, but in in Aragón 70 % was men. (Schulte 2009)

Navarra is famous for the huge number of defendants, but the number of victims sentenced to death remained low due to the Inquisition.

From Zugarramurdi 6 people were burned alive, 4 women & 2 men, 13 died in prison during The Basque Witch Trials (Henningsen 1980)

*Places to see in Zugarramurdi: River Infernuko Erreka, Caves, Museum

[influencermagazineuk]

Reviews of Red One, a holiday action-comedy action film from the studios about Dwayne Johnson and Chris Evans have surfaced early, quite unfestive. On this attempt to create another Christmas blockbuster, JK Simmons plays the part of kidnapper victim, Santa Claus. Dwayne Johnson plays Callum Drift, head of North Pole security, and sets out on a mission to save Santa. Chris Evans joins in as Jack O'Malley, a bounty hunter that joins Drift on this holiday rescue with high stakes. Thus far, the star-studded cast hasn't been enough to change the minds of the critics, as initial reactions have been very negative. Scathing criticism from IndieWire, deeming Red One as "a charmless, level-four naughty-lister that will make you wish Christmas was canceled." Pointing to the massive investment Amazon MGM poured into $250 million in a Christmas franchise with a promise of being "Marvel," one might say it failed to live up to that promise. Henry Villarama, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons Hollywood Reporter had no qualms to add either, stating that this is "ugly, artificial and overlong." This even went so far as it compared Red One as like "A Fast & Furious Christmas," as its excessive usage of computer-generated effects makes it like a movie losing the proper true magic. "It's a prime example of how CG effects have diminished the imagination of many filmmakers," said the review that calls the film "the equivalent of a lump of coal in your Christmas stocking." The Guardian concurred and described the film as "commercial and formulaic." Their review concluded with a statement that Red One would likely be remembered only until mid-November, since there was nothing warm or nostalgic about holiday classics. Meanwhile, Variety portrayed the movie as a chaotic mix of genres and styles, from buddy movie antics to family-reconciliation drama. "The villains are shape-shifters," they wrote, "but the whole movie is a shape-shifter. every quadrant and demo must be served." In a wry holiday nod to excess, the review highlighted the attempt at retrofitting Christmas into high-concept spectacle. Vulture's review was almost as pointed, comparing the thing to a cable marathon-familiar, over-engineered, and something like in Jingle All The Way. They quipped that Red One felt like a recycled holiday movie, only with the witch thrown into the fray played by Kiernan Shipka. The film wasn't an outright pan. TheWrap scored it fairly balanced with three stars. The review stated that there was nothing new in terms of plot but maintained a brisk storytelling style that didn't make the movie boring to sit through. The publication admired the ensemble cast and felt the action sequences were lively; overall, they gave the movie a slight above-average rating for an action-comedy. More reflective, Deadline saw potential in the holiday action franchise, as cinematic universes are in vogue and intellectual properties already abound. They cited that Red One could go on to become much more exciting in its sequels and with Krampus, in particular, being used so playfully to weave in holiday myths. "Whereas the Christmas cinematic universe might make eyes roll in the first instance, there is a refreshing spin on lesser-known holiday lore, the review said. Despite the mixed-to-negative reception, Red One is set to drop on November 6 in the UK and November 15 in the US. The holiday season is just around the corner, so there's still time to decide whether this festive adventure is going to make it onto your watchlist. If you're planning your movie outings, check out our guide to upcoming releases or browse our picks for the best films currently streaming on Netflix. Read the full article

[llpodcast]

(Literary License Podcast)

Welcome to the Literary License Podcast! This month is Dark Families Month, where we delve into family films with a dark twist. Join us as we explore two intriguing films: The Black Cauldron and The Spiderwick Chronicles.

 First, we dive into the 1985 animated classic, The Black Cauldron. Set in a mythical land during the early Middle Ages, this film follows a young swineherder and his companions as they battle the wicked Horned King. We'll discuss the film's beautiful animation, its mixed critical reception, and its impact on Disney's animation department.

 Next, we journey through the magical world of The Spiderwick Chronicles (2008). This film, based on the popular book series, features three children who discover a field guide to fairies and encounter various magical creatures. We'll explore the film's visuals, the performances of its cast, and how it stacks up against its source material.

 Join hosts Joe and Vicki as they discuss the enchanting darkness of these family films and share their thoughts on what makes them stand out—or fall short. Don't miss this captivating episode filled with fantasy, magic, and insightful commentary!

 00:00:40 - Films that scare, entice, and invite children into the underbelly of life as we know it.; 00:02:09 - Catching Up and Work Updates; 00:14:55 - Conversations on Movies and TV Shows; 00:20:18 - Late Night with the Devil and TV Shows Discussion; 00:25:22 - Horror Movie Reboots and Classic Films; 00:32:14 - Pluto TV Channels and Universal Monsters Discussion; 00:32:43 - The Serpent and the Rainbow and Wes Craven’s Versatility; 00:35:03 - Remembering Roger Corman and Mark Damon; 00:40:19 - The Black Cauldron; 00:42:49 - Legend of the Haunt King; 00:44:12 - Leisure Legends Podcast; 00:48:04 - Evolution of Animation Trends; 01:14:39 - The Black Cauldron and John Hurt; 01:16:09 - Animation Similarities and Dark Cartoons; 01:16:44 - Nods to Other Productions and Storytelling Differences; 01:19:42 - Almost Ruining Disney and Lloyd Alexander’s Series; 01:26:43 - Phone Booth Anxiety and Larry Cohen’s Intensity; 01:29:41 - Aging Actors and Tim Burton’s Beginnings; 01:34:15 - Animated Witches and Ugly Villains; 01:37:44 - Disney’s Renaissance and Steven Spielberg’s Influence; 01:43:46 - Connecting to Children’s Tales and Life Lessons; 01:48:55 - Critique on John Wick and Action Movies; 01:56:19 - Review and Discussion on Black Cauldron; 02:04:07 - Introduction to The Spiderwick Chronicles; 02:07:41 - Analysis of The Spiderwick Chronicles and Character Dynamics; 02:39:03 - CGI Overload and Storytelling Issues; 02:58:21 - Book Adaptation Disappointment; 03:03:44 - Tangential Discussions and Film Ratings; 03:10:14 - Closing Credits: Magic by Pilot

[clapperboardtalk]

SEASON OF THE WITCH (1973)

Title: “Season of the Witch”

Genre: Horror

Year Produced: 1973

Country of Production: United States

🎬 Movie Review: “Season of the Witch” (1973) 🎬

Story and Script: The narrative of “Season of the Witch” stumbles like a tipsy warlock on a moonless night. Too many dialogues, too little captivating scenes, and a pacing slower than a tortoise’s meditation session. It’s like watching a cauldron simmer without ever reaching a magical boil. My interest? Vanished faster than a witch on a broomstick.

Acting: Picture this: wooden performances, as if the actors were auditioning for a tree role. Their conviction? Barely passable. I’ve seen more convincing séances at a toddler’s tea party. The only thing haunting here is their lack of enthusiasm.

Visuals: Ah, the visuals – a relic from a bygone era. Imagine a sepia-toned Instagram filter slapped on a Polaroid. No special effects, just a splash of watercolor for the sole blood scene. It’s like they hired a budget-conscious vampire to do the makeup. The film screams “low budget” louder than a banshee at a discount store.

Sound and Music: The eerie soundscape? Decent, but hardly spine-tingling. Creepy scenes are rarer than a unicorn sighting. The music tiptoes around the edges, afraid to commit. It’s like a ghost humming a lullaby – soothing, but not enough to raise goosebumps.

Entertainment Value: Scary? More like a cat’s yawn. This horror witch theme movie is a misfired spell. I’m relieved it’s not an epic saga – my patience wouldn’t survive. If boredom had a patron saint, it’d be this film.

Personal Opinion and Rating: “Season of the Witch” is a cryptic disappointment. The low-budget seams show, like a patched-up broomstick. Marketing it as horror is akin to calling a rubber chicken a fierce dragon. Soft porn vibes? Oh, yes – suggestive glances and candlelit rituals. But excitement? Nah. I’d rather watch paint dry. ⭐ (out of 5).

General Reception: Movie lovers and critics alike buried this film deeper than a cursed amulet. Over the years, it hasn’t aged like fine wine; more like a forgotten potion in a dusty attic. No cult following, just cobwebs.