#True Betrayal

[hingefreelester]

when your husband doesnt know your green room request

[notforemmetophobes]

M Emmet Walsh Promotional Photo For 'Love And Lies'

M Emmet Walsh promotional photo for the ABC tv movie 'Love and Lies', aka 'True Betrayal'.

[every-koito]

[mikibagels]

Perpetually doomed siblings my beloved

The more tragic and irredeemable the better.

[bibliophilesince2003]

Transformers One

I just thought of something sad. Now, my fellow fans, you will suffer with me. I apologize in advance. Also, if you haven't seen Transformers One yet... this is your warning. Spoilers are present!

Orion, D-16, Elita, and Bee were given t-cogs by Alpha Trion. D-16 became a tank, equipped with a massive gun. Orion received smaller guns, but they can only be used in his vehicle form. At least, that's the only time we see them in use before be became Optimus Prime.

That means Orion had the ability to defend himself when he was trying to stop D-16 from killing Sentinel. He took punches to the face. He fell to the ground. I think it's safe to say that Orion knew D-16 would resort to violence, and yet...

He never fired at D-16.

He could have seriously hurt his friend, or at least slowed him down. I think Orion hoped D-16 would stop, evaluate the situation, and consider how to best deal with Sentinel. Orion didn't think D-16 would fire on him... why else would he get in D-16's way? Or, maybe he wanted to keep D-16 from succeeding in his task, which would taint his reputation. Maybe Orion acted recklessly and wasn't really thinking, but I highly doubt that. There was purpose behind it.

Hurting or killing D-16 wasn't his priority, even if he had the ability to use force.

He still held out hope that his best friend would come back. He hoped hesitance and critical thinking would come to the forefront of D-16's mind.

Orion only fights when he has to, even in the bleakest of times. His words are powerful for a reason.

So yeah, now I'm sad. Orion cared more about his friend's condition than his own.

[meowsticmarvels]

posted this on twt but god. i have talked a lot about how insane phi's character is to me but it's just. i will never get over how for most of both vlr and ztd she's relatively cold and unemotional but ztd has moments where she just. breaks. i.e. the shoot:live option of fire where she literally breaks down crying and can barely get a sentence out even BEFORE diana kills herself. or in the final decision when she fucking YELLS at delta and kicks him in the face not even out of reasons like with dio but out of sheer anger for everything he's put her though. like IDK. i fold easily for the "unemotional character is pushed to their breaking point and shows MUCH more emotion than usual" trope but its so fucking interesting. phi i love you we will get you therapy

[geisterzeit-art]

Judas' kiss

[neo-zone]

TITLE DROP

[princescar]

whats wrong with him

Inspired by that tweet and this scene from dr0

anyway this was expression practice bc im so burnt out help

[thewistlingbadger]

I fear that the arcane fandom asks all the wrong questions. One of the biggest questions the fandom has had is what happened for Vander to go from seeing silco as his brother to trying to kill him? I believe the better question to ask is when the HELL IS Silco's attempted murder? Is it before the bridge, or after? Both choices change the story with their major implications.

If Silco's attempted murder happens BEFORE the bridge, then this could explain why silco seemingly isn't present on the bridge, which is one of Zaun's biggest revolts against piltover. If he had just severed ties with Vander, he probably wouldn't go to the bridge bc he knows Vander is there and the last time Vander saw him he tried to kill him. His physical injuries caused by Vander could also be a reason why he didn't attend: he physically wasn't able to. However if the attempted murder happens before the bridge, then this doesn't explain Vander's change of heart. This would imply that Vander nearly killed Silco because he saw how dangerous and extreme he was, only to turn around and lead a violent revolt against Piltover. That doesn't really make a lot of sense.

If Silco's attempted murder happens AFTER the bridge, then this would explain the falling out. Vander would have seen first hand the damage of their actions and would have tried to stop Silco from repeating those dire mistakes. This could also explain how Silco knew Vander had kids and how he knew exactly who his kids were. If Silco tried to contact Vander after the bridge, there's a possibility he would have actually seen or come across his kids. This would be crazy because this would imply that there could have been a point where Vander, vi, jinx, and silco were all in the same room or had came across each other when they were all alive and young (currently it's believed that Silco knew about Vander's kids because he had been keeping tabs on Vander/stalking him/everyone knew vander had kids in the underground. Silco included, even though he was cast out by society). However, this wouldn't explain Silco's absence from the bridge. I don't see why he would have missed that unless he absolutely was unable to go. This could also go against Vander's character. If he truly did swear off violence after the bridge, then did he really turn around and then plot Silco's murder? But then again, see the first statement made in this paragraph.

[jaggedjot]

The tale Lestat told of his turning was met justifiably by open suspicion from Claudia (“Magnus could be a sous chef in Switzerland for all we know.”) and unspoken doubt from Louis. It speaks to the unnavigable depths of mistrust created by Lestat’s actions that the pair have to question even the horrific violence he describes receiving (“One sob story about his birth”) or the complicated trauma caused by Magnus’ suicide (“I think he killed Magnus.”). The only person who could possibly verify the truthfulness of this story is Armand; he met Lestat shortly after the latter became a vampire, he knew Magnus and what he was capable of longer than Lestat did (“[...] one of my deserters”), and he has a penchant for perusing the minds of others. Armand sharing this knowledge could provide Daniel with a better understanding of the events and subjects of the interview, as well as help Louis parse his complicated feelings for Lestat. It is striking then that when recounting his shared past with Lestat to Daniel, which is presumably the same story he had previously given to Louis, Armand is careful to never say anything that could fully corroborate or dispel those suspicions. When Daniel calls attention to this (“To hear Louis tell it, Lestat becoming a vampire was a horror show.”), Armand gracefully deflects (“That may be.”) and heavily insinuates that Lestat is not someone who can be trusted; calling into question the extent of the trauma that Lestat expressed over a century later (“But he made a remarkable recovery shortly thereafter.”), before describing Lestat as a skilled manipulator (“[...] his hand feeding the audience”), using imagery that paints Lestat’s words as equally captivating as they are fantastical (“How words came out like canaries, summer fruit in the dead of winter.”). The quickness in which Armand concludes that Magnus must be dead (“He’s died, hasn’t he?”) suggests that Lestat could only be free if he was, but still leaves it ambiguous whether Lestat played a role in his demise. While Armand confirms that there is truth to Lestat’s claim that he was not given any guidance by Magnus (“I can teach you what he didn’t.”), the subsequent accusation that Lestat pretended to reciprocate Armand’s love in order to learn that knowledge means that Lestat is still positioned as dishonest. By maintaining and reinforcing this uncertainty about Lestat through opening up about his own past, Armand is looking to gain a degree of sympathy and trust from Daniel, as well as reinforce the image that he would not deceive others.

[muttsterion]

Just finished re-watching the Superhero trilogy after a long while and ha I swear Mysterion's expression in this scene still gets to me. Imagine thinking the universe finally reveals to you why you're stuck with your curse....only for it to be "Oh sorry I'm talking to the guy behind you..." and what's worse you can't blame the other guy or even explain to him and your friends why you're so upset.

[writerfae]

Thinking about him again (teacher Callan from the modern au)

[shrikeseams]

'So @corsairspade's post about Celegorm and Orome and luck sent me down a tangent, because--

Okay. Part of the silmarillion that rubs me wrong is that the Valar never seem to experience any actual consequences for their failures and missteps. Their choice to trust Morgoth has disastrous consequences--everywhere outside of Aman*. Their mismanagement of Noldorin politics leads to the kinslaying at Alqualonde and the Doom of the Noldor (and arguably the knock-on dooming of beleriand) while the valar sit tight at home. Sauron gets loose and spends millenia wrecking shit, but that shit is all conveniently far away from Aman. The only time he gets close to Aman, it ends in a genocide--of people that the Valar wouldn't let into Aman in the first place. They stay high and dry and unchanging through the literal re-shaping of Arda.

So. Consequences! I want them. So what if the apparent waning of the Valar's strength across the Ages is actually a direct consequence of their isolationism?

After all, why are the valar in arda? They're there to build it, and then maintain it. They're there to embody their domains. My conception of them (and I know this isn't universal but this is my personal working baseline) is that each ainu's domain of power is their calling. Their reason for existance. It's the lens they perceive the world through, and they derive their strength of existence in the world by perpetually embodying and enacting that calling. Ulmo is defined by the restless motion of the waves. Varda is defined by the light of the heavens and the shining of the stars. Orome is defined by the hunt.

But then they restrict themselves to Aman. They functionally took themselves out of Arda well before the third age. They made a deliberate and conscious choice to restrict the scope of their activity/influence. What if that choice also restricted the scope of their power?

I keep coming back to Orome because. Look. His case of obedience to authority vs obedience to one's own nature/calling feels so egregious. If any valar should have spent the first age in beleriand, it should have been Orome and Tulkas. Orome's calling is The Hunting of Evil. Tulkas only showed up in Arda to fight Melkor! The act of sitting out the fight reduces both of them from forces of active good to... what? Courtly vestigial remnants of their own true natures? You don't stay the best at what you do by avoiding doing it. Maybe the valar don't retain their primordial powers if they don't exercise them. Maybe limiting the scope of their direct influence (to the place it was arguably least needed ) likewise limited the scope of their strengths.

Which leads to a situation where the valar cannot, in fact, defend Aman against Numenor, because they thought that isolation was enough. So they sat out two ages of the world, and when the world came to find them at home they realized too late that their choices would have consequences for themselves, not just others.

*If you try to argue that the loss of the Trees is equivalent to the destruction of a fucking landmass and the actual enslavement of unspecified numbers of people, save your energy. Just take my disappointed look as a given and go find some other post to comment on.

[ocdhuacheng]

To the half of my mutuals in my notes that would vote for Philly over Chicago……. Sleep with one eye open babes.

[lumpywhump]

"Betrayal is definitely the worse emotion I've felt so far. So..." whumpee blinked back tears. "why would you make me feel this?"