#also it was just a very visually appealing film too. and great acting and filming and everything. very well made and enjoyable the whole wa

[pickapea]

the kens being portrayed as the villains in barbie is kind of giving the same as fantasy racism (like when the oppressed ethnic group are oppressed as a kind of revenge for something bad they did in the past) like it's pretty whack that the happy ending in barbie is the oppressive matriarchy regaining absolute power again

[rruhlreviews]

Film Review - The Hunger Games

In many ways, The Hunger Games film is all the spectacle the book warned against. Within the story, the Games themselves were a blockbuster, the biggest entertainment event of the year in the consumerism-crazy Capitol. The film is a blockbuster not only because of the wild success of the books, but by reaching a broader audience with the action scenes, glamorous photo shoots, settings, and celebrity actors. Visually, the cinematography is innovative, colorful, and dynamic. Had the movie gone into as much gritty detail about poverty and pain as the books, as well as showing more of Katniss’ unlikeable traits that were smoothed out in the film, I don’t believe it would have had such mass market appeal. Book and film markets have different criteria, after all.

Katniss is a strong and appealing protagonist, which is vital to any successful story. The high stakes and romantic elements mean nothing if you don’t care about the central character. The books and movie were my first experience with a story about a girl that people of all genders in my class were excited about. I recall when the movies were first being developed. I was around eleven years old and had just read the books, and I was so excited to see previews and read magazines about the making of the film. I dressed as Katniss for Halloween and remember visiting a friend and reenacting the Games with our toys. For a young adult in the target audience, it was a fun adventure story, even if it made you cry sometimes.

As an adult, I see this very much was not in line with the message of the story, but don’t mistake me for a cynic. The thriller elements are what make it appealing and successful. For a story to endure the ages, it must captivate the audience’s attention. Fans of the books were blown away to see the danger, unique setting, and the characters they love brought to life. The stakes are high—it’s a matter of life and death not only for Katniss, but for her family. The entire story is a struggle for survival, not only in the arena, but against hunger and the Capitol’s harsh punishments for stepping out of line. Something else interesting about the film which adds to the thriller aspect is how it has a different point of view than the books. The book had a limited first person point of view, whilst the film showed things happening in the Gamemakers’ offices and from President Snow’s viewpoint. Seneca Crane’s death was changed for irony and a stronger visual scene. This fills in some gaps in the worldbuilding that don’t translate well from a book, but also, a film audience wants to be privy to the action.

Many of the parts of the book that were slower-paced didn’t make it into the film. Katniss’ friend Madge is cut, and Katniss’ struggles with her relationship with her mother are shortened. During the games, there’s no time in the film for Katniss’ slow struggle with dehydration, or to linger on Katniss’ and Peeta’s recovery from the infected wounds and blood loss. Honestly, those slower scenes are some of my favorite parts of the book for how they show the struggle for humanity behind the spectacle. In many ways, the movie sanitizes the books and makes them more palatable for a wider audience. The desolate poverty of the Seam isn’t shown in too great detail. Katniss in the book has a darker complexion and shows the scars of a hard life. I wouldn’t want a real actress to endure a dangerous lifestyle to have a certain body type or “method act” trauma, but I still feel there was an emphasis on physical attractiveness of the characters typical of visual media.

This segues into my final point—the way the film and the resulting media storm honed in on the romance elements. A love triangle is a surefire way to generate buzz. However, the romance in the book was scary, with Katniss’ and Peeta’s relationship founded by a struggle for survival that went back from the boy with the bread all the way to faking it for the favor of the audience. The film audience stands in for the Capitol audience. The younger adult viewers have attractive actors to admire in the roles of the characters, with “Team Peeta vs Team Gale” being a popular phenomenon at the time when the movie first came out. I personally don’t like focusing on the romance because it misses the point of the story even more than the cutting of the slower-paced scenes does, but I can’t deny it’s part of the reason this was a blockbuster.

For better or worse, the success of The Hunger Games film launched the market for books and movies in the YA dystopia subgenre (that is, until the Divergent trilogy brought the demand to an unglorious end). It’s most certainly a good thing that there are more female action protagonists as a result of the success of The Hunger Games. Despite the elements of the book that were cut to make the film more of a blockbuster, the film remains a moving story with unique thriller elements that makes the audience care about the characters and desire to see them triumph over perilously high stakes. Everyone loves a story about an underdog overcoming an oppressive ruler. It's a classic plot structure that has endured the ages for a reason. I hope kids keep wanting to dress up as Katniss and play out elaborate thrillers with their Barbies. It really is a rite of passage of childhood.

[whatyourusherthinks]

Saturday Night Review

Live from New York... IT'S SATURDAY NIGHT! Okay, it's not live. This movie looked really cool from the trailers. I so glad that movies are copying Late Night With the Devil and making movies that look old. I think it's a neat visual identity idea, like making a movie black and white on purpose. I don't know anything about SNL, I don't think I've watched a full episode. I've seen some skits and a lot of Weekend Update, but the most SNL I've ever seen was the Drew Gooden video where he watches one episode from every season of the show.

What's The Movie About?

The first episode of Saturday Night Live, how everything is going completely wrong, and how close the show got to not airing.

What I Like.

First, obviously, is the cinematography. They very effectively capture the chaos of the night, the film grain of cameras at the time, and the shaky hand held approach of a behind the scenes shoot. It's similar to The Apprentice, true, but I really liked that movie too so I don't care. There's quite a few impressive long shots in the movie as well, it give an air of a jazz melody. Actually, the music is really damn good in general. The acting is great, especially portraying wild personalities of the comedians. But the absolute best thing about the movie is it's energy of the scenes, and flow of the movie's pacing. This movie is a roller-coaster. You basically follow Lorne Michaels for the entire movie, and there are several scene of him moving through the studio, with cast and crew members constantly rushing up to present their problems and update him on constantly changing events. It's exciting, electric, keeping you engaged the entire time. I got swept up energy of the movie, which is one of my favorite things.

What I Didn't Like.

So... This movie has a million characters. I get it, the idea is all these people are the chaos that threatened the first show. I'm sure everyone who wasn't famous was real. Or at least was based on someone real. But because there are so many people running around, some of them are very one note. The best example is Dan Akroyd. He's less an actor playing young Dan Akroyd and more an actor doing a comedic impression of him. This also slips into oversimplifying plot beats as well. John Belushi and Chevy Chase are set up as parallels in the movie, but John gets several scene of Lorne trying to appeal to his sensibilities, while Chevy just get's cock-slapped into compliance. Literally. And I have to stress that I don't know for certain, but a lot of this movie smack of revisionism. The biggest thing is Lorne Michaels himself. He's too perfect, just a really nice guy who is passionate about artistry and saying yes to everyone's ideas. His character arc has to do with learning to cut things from the show. He doesn't really change as a person, he's just a nice guy throughout the whole thing. Again, I don't know if that's true or not, maybe Lorne Michaels is super cool. But I feel like it just lacks introspection.

Final Summation.

But Saturday Night has energy and style that overtakes it's flaws tenfold. I love movies that are what I imagine sex is like. A flurry of motion and chaos that build and builds until the satisfactory climax. Saturday Night is good sex, and I highly recommend it!

But y'know... Is this enough? I've been thinking recently about my style of reviewing recently, more specifically about how I review a movie I love versus a movie I hate. You may have noticed that my last negative review, the review for Terrifier 3, was longer than this and my review for The Apprentice. Combined. And I love both those movies! Why am I giving more of my energy to drive away business from art than to drum up awareness of something good? Part of it definitely because I don't want to spoil anything from movies I like. I hope the undercurrent of "Watch this movie, experience it for yourself, it'll be much better than anything I describe" comes through with all my positive reviews. I find it much harder to describe something that makes me happy as well. That sounds... Incredibly depressing, yeah, but I think it's more that I'm critical of myself and what I think when I dislike something. I kinda need to justify hatred in my head. A little peek behind the curtain, I do think out what I want to do with reviews before I see the movies. Not that I inform my opinions before sitting down in the theater, but I'll come up with some jokes, analogies, and obviously the prerelease portions of my review while waiting to watch something. Somethings come to print, like mentioning that I watched that Drew Gooden video more than I've seen actual SNL sketches, but others I drop, like doing the Terrifier 3 review as a written out parody of "Alice's Restaurant Massacre" by Arlo Guthrie. (Although that idea came closer to fruition than I care to admit.) I might be over thinking this silly review blog. I'm going to be taking some time away from movies and focusing on my tabletop gaming hobby for a few days. Maybe not thinking about film for a few days will get some ducks in a row mentally.

[moviemunchies]

[Yes, person who asked, I did get around to re-watching Madagascar, though a bit late for its anniversary.]

Oh thank goodness, a Dreamworks movie I like. Glad to be back on these. Okay, I do have some nostalgic attachment to this one–I first saw it in theaters (and I haven’t seen it since, though I do listen to the soundtrack sometimes).

Marty (a zebra), his best friend Alex (lion), Mellman (giraffe), and Gloria (hippo) are animals in the Central Park Zoo. Marty dreams of one day living in the Wild, though his friends discourage this–especially Alex, as he’s a superstar, the zoo's main attraction. The night of Marty’s birthday, he escapes, and when his friends go to rescue him, they’re branded as unfit for captivity and shipped off to a wildlife preserve in Kenya. But the zoo’s penguins (also caught in the escape attempt) hijack the ship and the four friends slip off to wreck on the island of Madagascar.  Shenanigans ensue, and no small drama, as Alex has been fed on steaks his whole life and doesn’t have a clue where to find more.

It has been a long time since I saw this movie, and I was worried that if I saw it again I wouldn’t like it as much. I don’t know if I’d ever say I was a maniac for the film–I didn’t see the sequels in theaters, after all. But I liked it. I enjoyed it. I thought it was hilarious. I was scared how I’d re-watch it. I didn’t need to worry though, because I still like this movie. And it’s still hilarious!

Okay, mostly. I think there are some pop culture jokes and references that are unnecessary and drag things down. Plenty of the humor and drama stands on its own without those pop culture references. It seems like, after the making of Shrek, a lot of family films decided that they needed these allusions to “appeal to the parents” or something? No. No you don’t. Not this many of them, anyway. I don’t pile too hard on these because again, the movie has a lot of jokes that work fine on their own, so it’s not too big of a problem.

This is a movie that asks a fairly interesting question: how would anthropomorphic zoo animals survive in the wild? There are a lot of movies that sort of act as if zoo animals, or pets, would just adapt immediately towards the wild, and that’s not what happens here. The one who has a clue how to survive is Marty, who has been dreaming of this for ages; and even then, he doesn’t have fresh water. And noticeably, his ways of survival involve building things, a very human way of surviving in the wild.

And of course: what is Alex going to do? He can’t eat plants but if he’s been given steaks his entire life, he doesn’t have a clue how to get food for himself! This is a major part of the Plot! I appreciate that very much.

[It’s weird how the sequel ignores the question of ‘What does Alex eat if not his friends?’ when it’s such an important element in this movie.]

I will admit that the character design took some getting used to. I recall not actually liking it when I saw the first trailers. And I was still not sure when I started the film the first time. It works, though! It makes the movie have a visual identity that’s different. It’s good to see an animated film with an artistic identity–there was a while we had (before Into the Spider-Verse showed its influence) that everyone was seemingly copying a Disney/Pixar style, and this movie is nothing like that.

All the characters in the movie are fun! I think sadly, Gloria and Melman aren’t too developed other than the general traits, though that’s kind of okay–Marty and Alex are the leads here, and those two still get enough to be entertaining. There are movies in which side characters are basically non-entities. And they get more stuff to do in the sequel, which is good. The penguins are also great fun to watch on screen, and I’m not at all surprised that they got their own television series and movie (though I am sad that the movie didn’t do that well).

It’s far from the best of what Dreamworks can do, but it’s definitely moving in the right direction. It’s pretty good, pretty funny, and pretty memorable. It’s not a must-see, unless you’re a huge fan of Dreamworks or CGI animated films, though at the same time it’s a fairly good time if you need something to watch.

Last side note: Do you guys remember this had a tie-in video game? I mean, all movies did back then, but this game had an insanely addictive shuffleboard mini-game. I don’t know how, given that shuffleboard sounds ridiculously boring in real-life, but for whatever reason I couldn’t stop playing this mini-game.

[edrew0607]

Stranger Things Journal Entry

Stranger Things, the popular Netflix series created by the Duffer Brothers, is well-known for its deep dive into 1980s pop culture, mixing nostalgic homages with inventive storytelling. Intertextuality, in Stranger Things, is used as a powerful tool that connect audiences to the narrative on a more emotional level. But this raises an important question: does the show's intertextuality truly enhance the story, or does it sometimes feel like it's just relying on a series of familiar references?

Stranger Things is undeniably good at weaving in elements from the 1980s, from its themes and aesthetics to its character archetypes. For instance, the character of Eleven, with her telekinetic abilities and mysterious past, echoes elements from Stephen King's Firestarter and the character of Carrie. As Eric Goldman points out, " The Duffer Brothers have done a rather amazing job of combining different tones of the likes of Spielberg and Carpenter and making it all feel at home together, as the show goes from moments of wonder to moments of terror, all anchored by a very likeable group of kids" (Goldman)> This suggests that the show's intertextuality isn't just about visuals or nods to old movies; it is fundamental to how the story is told. It's hard not to feel the echoes of films like E.T. and The Goonies in the narrative beats, but the show also manages to carve out its unique path. This approach creates a feeling of comfort and familiarity, drawing viewers in through a shared cultural memory.

What's fascinating is how this use of intertextuality creates different experiences for different viewers. Some people might watch Stranger Things and feel like they are stepping back into their own childhoods, while others see it as a fresh, exciting story. Goldman notes that the show is great at creating a compelling overall mythology - can lose some focus as the series progresses (Goldman). This balancing act seems to be both the show's strength and its challenge, as it tries to appeal to multiples generations with varying expecations.

However, there's a risk that comes with leaning too heavily on nostalgia. I've noticed that sometimes, the show feels a bit too much like a game of "spot the referene," which can distract from the story itself. Sean T. Collins provides a critical perspective here, stating, "It's so fixated on stirring nostalgia for the science-fiction, fantasy, horror, and adventure tales of yore that it has no time or energy left over for what made those horror tales compelling in the first place: wresting with the fears and desires of the time period" (Collins). This critique makes me think about how sometimes the show's obsession with getting the details of the past "right" could overshadow the need for originality and depth in its storytelling.

Still, despite these critiques, I find that Stranger Things usually does a great job of making intertextuality feel like more than just a gimmick. For example, the show's portrayal of Hawkins, Indiana, with its small-town charm and underlying mysteries, echoes the settiung of Twin Peaks, blending a sense of familiarity with its own supernatural elements. The Duffer Brothers use these references to not only evoke nostalgia but also to engage with the themes of the past in a way that speaks to today's audience. The show explores issues like trauma, adolescence, and friendship by reimagining familiar 1980s tropes and using them to serve a modern narrative. It's not just about looking back; it's about rethinking what those stories meant and what they can mean now.

The intertextuality in Stranger Things mostly succeeds in adding richness and emotion to the series. When it is done thoughtfully, it connects to the audience on a deeper level, creating a tapestry of references that doesn't just lean on nostalgia but uses it to enhance the story. For me, that balance is key: when intertextuality is carefully woven into the fabric of the show, it becomes a powerful tool for storytelling, adding layers of meaning and emotional depth that might not be possible otherwise.

[burtlancster]

Outside Washington, D.C., studio, before Youth Wants to Know got underway, a few students cornered Burt to ask, "Do you think certain of our movies encourage juvenile delinquency?" Burt paused, thoughtfully lit a cigarette, and said, "I'd like a moment to think about that."

Please Tell Us, Mr. Burt Lancaster. . . — PHOTOPLAY MAGAZINE DECEMBER, 1957

Twenty high school students were lucky enough, recently, to interview Burt Lancaster, who is currently breaking box office records as the star of his own film, Sweet Smell of Success. And the teens broke a record of their own. "It was one of the toughest interviews I've been put through," Burt admitted at the end. The questions ran through everything from sex and censorship to the high price of the neighborhood movie and Marilyn Monroe. There wasn't a dull moment.

STUDENT: Sir, does the average American moviegoer's preference for films dealing with crimes, sex and violence indicate that he cannot appreciate more refined acting and drama? I've wondered about this.

MR. LANCASTER: No, I don't think that is necessarily true. I think you will find most people go to movies for purposes of relaxation, and they like to see things on the screen that cause visual excitement but that don't particularly disturb or distress them too much or make them think too hard.

STUDENT: In other words, intellectual movies would not appeal to the average American moviegoer?

MR. LANCASTER: To the average American moviegoer, no, I would say.

STUDENT: In this light, do you feel that you are debasing yourself when you are acting, just to satisfy American moviegoers' cravings and likes?

MR. LANCASTER: No, I think you have responsibilities to the likes and dislikes of people. What we as a group have to try to do in the making of movies is to make those that will appeal to a large, mass audience. We must also try to make movies that will appeal to, shall we say, a smaller and minority group. And as long as we maintain our own standards of what we like, we will find we can make pictures that can appeal to all peoples. Not all the time, though.

STUDENT: Mr. Lancaster, as a producer, would you tell me this: When you choose a picture, do you choose one that is popular with the American public even though you personally feel that story is not too good?

MR. LANCASTER: Not always. Well, no, we would never choose a picture if we felt the story is not too good; that is, if it doesn't have the basic ingredients of what would represent drama and entertainment to people.

STUDENT: Mr. Lancaster, do you feel that movies such as "The Man with the Golden Arm" gives Europeans the wrong impression of America?

MR. LANCASTER: I don't think any picture gives European people a wrong impression of America if it is well made and made with honesty and integrity as to the subject matter.

STUDENT: Well, do you think such movies encourage juvenile delinquency here in the United States?

MR. LANCASTER: I think juvenile delinquency is not encouraged by movies, specifically. I think juvenile delinquency is encouraged by unfortunate economic conditions and conditions in homes where children don't have a proper upbringing because, very often, of those conditions.

STUDENT: Sir, we know now there are a lot of foreign actors and actresses over the United States. Do you think the American public seems to like these people much better than their own people, those they see all the time?

MR. LANCASTER: No. This brings up the question of what makes really a star performer. American people and, of course, European people and people all over the world, for that matter, like the performer who has that unique personality and quality which appeals to them personally. It has nothing to do with the fact that they are, shall we say, of foreign extraction, I don't think.

STUDENT: Do you feel foreign films are going to make any great inroads into the habits of the American movie-going public?

MR. LANCASTER: I think time has proven at least that foreign films as such do appeal only to a limited group of Americans. Again, it goes back to the original question that was asked earlier. One of the reasons is that American people as such are more comfortable with a subject matter that pertains to things that they particularly understand. Foreign people talk with accents that are very hard to understand. Very often, they have a very grim and brutal kind of realism which a great many American people do not like to see, since they do not have any identification with the problems. These are some of the reasons foreign films are not especially successful in a broad sense in the American cinematic world.

Moderator Steve McCormick nodded to a boy in the front row, who demanded, Mr. Lancaster, how do actors and producers react to censorship groups?" The girl next to him wanted to know, "Do Americans like foreign films and stars more than our own?"

STUDENT: I am interested in knowing why you think western films should be done necessarily with fun and action.

MR. LANCASTER: It isn't that they necessarily should; and a peculiar thing happens in movies. You see, there have been pictures like "High Noon," for instance, which have been highly successful. On the other hand, there have been pictures like the one I made with Gary Cooper called "Veracruz," which by critical standards does not measure up to a "High Noon," but which is a much more satisfying picture from the point of view of entertainment. There is also another problem: When you make a film of a special nature that will appeal to limited groups of people, you have to face the fact that these films are not in the broad sense of the word, popular. Therefore, when you do them, you must be careful that you do them for a certain price, because you have a limited income on such films, and the first cardinal rule of making pictures or writing a play or any form of entertainment is to make something that is financially successful. If they are not successful, you don't continue in business, and you have no opportunity to present the ideas that you think are unique or even artistic.

STUDENT: How does Hollywood face competition between TV and movies?

MR. LANCASTER: What Hollywood has attempted to do about it is this: Actually, it is my personal opinion that the advent of TV, as far as Hollywood is concerned, has been a very, very healthy thing. There was a time, about ten short years ago, when almost anything that came out of Hollywood could be assured of reasonable financial success. Naturally, this sort of lulled people into a sense of false security, and there was not a great deal of attempt on the part of the studios to try to do anything worthwhile and different and challenging. Now that great inroads have been made in the whole financial structure of Hollywood, they have realized they have to do better things, things that are more exciting, more challenging so that people will leave their television receivers and come out to look at them.

STUDENT: Sir, I have read you do not attend many Hollywood social functions. Don't you like the type of people at these functions?

MR. LANCASTER: Oh, yes. It has nothing to do with the functions. It is just that I have a group of friends that I would prefer to be with. For example, my wife and I like to play bridge. I have never been particularly comfortable or at ease in large social functions, cocktail parties, and so forth.

STUDENT: Would you ever encourage your own children to go into acting if they wanted to?

MR. LANCASTER: I would certainly do it. I feel a child should have an opportunity to do anything he has an inclination toward.

STUDENT: Do yours watch you when you are performing in movies?

MR. LANCASTER: Yes, and they're among my toughest critics. They have traveled with me all over the world while I was making movies. They have lived in the Fiji Islands for four months and attended school there, they attended school in Mexico City, they have lived in France for the summer and they have lived in Italy for six months when I was there making a picture. But now they have reached the age where it is very difficult for them to go with me because they go to school. They have certain ties there, so I try to arrange my program so if I am shooting on location, it occurs in the summertime so I can take them with me.

STUDENT: Mr. Lancaster, you mentioned a few minutes ago about the entertainment of movies, and that is why people go to movies, to be entertained. But it seems to me a juvenile delinquency film or a film on corruption in life, the baseness in life, would be rather not too entertaining.

MR. LANCASTER: Let me make clear what I mean by entertaining. Every movie that is made has a point of view, whether it is a good one, a bad one, a useful one or what. By entertainment, I mean that regardless of what the subject matter may be, it should have an entertainment quality to it. That does not mean that the subject should not be treated with great seriousness, and great depth and great definition.

STUDENT: I was wondering if the type of film such as "On the Waterfront," where you can come out fighting mad and want to clean up the waterfront, has the purpose of reforming. Or "Baby Doll."

MR. LANCASTER: Well, about "Baby Doll," I would quarrel with you. But certainly on "On the Waterfront" I agree with you.

STUDENT: Most of your films are hard-bitten, often violent, dramas. Do you object to your children seeing them?

MR. LANCASTER: Here is what I try to do. I let my children see the films that I am in. Some of them—for instance, "Come Back Little Sheba," which I think is a worthwhile picture in addition to being an entertaining one are difficult for their immature minds to understand completely. But rather than have them not see it, if they ask to see it, I let them, but I make sure to see it with them so I can try to answer all the questions they might raise. Therefore, I hope I can give them some sense of security about it, even those matters they might not particularly understand.

I would like to cite an example of just that. My little boy asked yesterday to see "Sweet Smell of Success," which is also a very hard-bitten picture and not what you would normally call children's fare. I said, "Well, Jimmie, that is fine; you can see the picture. But I don't think you will like it. Why do you want to see it?"

"Well," he said, "I'd like to see it, Daddy, because you're in it."

"That is fair enough," I said, "but I don't think you will understand it." And he answered, "I may not understand it, but that doesn't mean I won't like it."

STUDENT: Mr. Lancaster, what is the reaction of producers to censorship groups?

MR. LANCASTER: As you probably know, there is no official censorship problem in the movies in the United States or any official censorship at all. This is not so in England, where they do have an official government censorship, and can refuse you a license to show a picture. In short, they have a police force that can stop you from showing the picture. There is the Johnson office which has its headquarters here in Washington, and is a self-imposed censorship by the industry.

It is known as the MPPA—Motion Picture Producers Association. Their attitude is this: They say to the producers, "In order to protect the morality of the nation as it might be affected by motion pictures, if you will let us see the scripts you are going to make, we will attempt, not to censor, mind you, what you are trying to say, but attempt to guide you in matters of how to handle these problems as best you can."

Now, of course, it always comes to the question of who are the people who are going to decide this, how knowledgeable are they, do they know better than the actual creators of the motion picture?

What has happened is that in recent years (and I think this a very healthy thing) the MPPA has been forced to recognize—perhaps not forced but has willingly recognized—the fact that enormous advances have been made in the general education of the American public and, therefore, the subjects which were considered taboo before are now permitted.

So what has happened is this: The old code has been enormously changed. The whole attitude of the so-called censor board has improved a great deal. We do now show pictures in which words like "abortion" and "prostitution" are mentioned, and in which we discuss divorce problems, and then, of course, there is the matter of narcotics, which was recently brought up in several pictures. The picture "Hatful of Rain" now has been approved by the board, where before the "Man with the Golden Arm" was not approved. It looks like things are looking up in the censorship problem.

STUDENT: I would like to know, would you agree with some critics who say that Jayne Mansfield and Marilyn Monroe have acting talents equal to their more obvious appeals?

MR. LANCASTER: Well, I don't know what the critics feel about it. That is their opinion. One of the things I would like to be made clear about movies again it goes back to the business of being a star: The most unique thing a motion picture actor or actress can have is an outstanding or peculiar personality of some kind. And these girls certainly have some outstanding qualities that appeal to people visually, at least. Those are the elements most important in the making of a motion picture star. Not necessarily the acting ability as such. On the other hand, to be a good actor, to be an exciting personality on the screen, of course, is that much better.

STUDENT: Who is the most beautiful woman you have ever acted with?

MR. LANCASTER: They were all beautiful. I am just quoting my lines from "The Rainmaker." "They are all beautiful in a different way."

STUDENT: I want to know what your wife thinks about your performing in movies and having these torrid love scenes with Hollywood leading ladies.

MR. LANCASTER: The torrid love scene you have with a Hollywood leading lady is, from our point of view while we are in the process of making it, "work." You have a job. You are creating an illusion for an audience to see, and the only assurance I think that my wife has is that she knows I love her, and that is about all I can say on that subject.

STUDENT: I am interested in knowing why you didn't change your name when you started acting. Most actors and actresses do.

MR. LANCASTER: As a matter of fact, I did want to change my name. They were going to give me the name of an economist, Stuart Chase. They decided this by numerology. Then a gentleman by the name of Mark Hellinger, who is now dead, and who produced the first picture I was in, "The Killers," said to me, "Is Burt Lancaster your real name?"

I said, "Yes."

He said, "What's wrong with that?" I said, "Nothing." He said, "Let's use it." I said, "O.K."

STUDENT: Sir, because of television, do you think that the pictures now coming out might break down some of the prices that these theatres have? In other words, producing prices and everything?

MR. LANCASTER: You think the prices are too high?

STUDENT: Well, yes.

MR. LANCASTER: I know this has been a subject of great discussion among distributors, because I have also been in that end of the business since my pictures are distributed and exhibited. The feeling is they try to keep the economic level of prices and pictures as low as possible since it is, first of all, a traditional thing and the people who generally support the pictures are not those who have a great deal of money, normally speaking.

I will gladly say this: The distribution groups would gladly put a picture up for a nickel tomorrow if the cost of production would permit them.

There is no desire on their part to try to cheat the public. Sometimes pictures are so expensive they have to charge certain prices in order to get any kind of income from them.

"This has been one of the most provocative questioning sessions I've ever gone through. Our young people are really serious about motion pictures," said Burt as time ran out and the interview came to a close. "Anyone who says American teenagers are delinquents is all wet. I am grateful to the National Broadcasting Company's 'Youth Wants to Know,' and the National Education Association for bringing us together today."

THE END

[trekkingthroughthestargate]

Hi! Film professional here, who has degrees in film and theater, who worked in television for years, and who writes screenplays, and I will have to respectfully disagree with what you are saying. @musula I’m trying to mostly avoid spoilers here for your sake, and the only spoiler here is one that most people are aware of (I think).

First of all, to say that the Star Trek movies are bad movies is a rather insane statement, at the very least considering their longevity (bad movies don’t have that), and to say that they are only good movies if you are insane about Star Trek is a bit puzzling to me - particularly when I consider my own intro into Star Trek was me going from genuinely thinking it was stupid and never wanting to watch anything about it, to watching one of the movies and realizing that it’s actually genuinely very very good. But I digress - that’s just a personal anecdote and at best is proof that they can appeal to me specifically.

I’m also going to refrain from talking about the acting, because frankly the acting in Star Trek movies is generally top notch, as these are all seasoned, professional, performers who have a deep understanding of the characters they are playing and turn in amazing performance after amazing performance.

TMP: The Motion Picture is a study in how not to make a Star Trek movie, as well as how not to make a movie for a more modern audience. Trekkies expect more of an adventure - that is the Star Trek mission statement after all - and expect their philosophy to be more strongly intertwined with fun and exploration. Modern audiences, especially since attention spans are getting shorter and shorter, expect fast pace, short scenes, and speedy action.

However, the story of TMP is not by any means bad. It’s almost quintessential Star Trek in that we are quite literally encountering what is to become a new life form, it’s just too small to really fill in the runtime of the movie. The other problem is that the life form comes to us and it does so very. very. very slowly. We are not the explorers in this scenario, but rather the ones the explorers are coming to. The character arcs that we do get in this movie are good, but not enough to really carry the story, which is again good, but very small. Rather than a sense of camaraderie, adventure, exploration, we merely get a sense that we are stationary while events take place around us. This certainly would have worked well as the pilot for a TV show, but by the time you find yourself wanting more (and it takes a while to really elicit that desire for more), the movie is over.

From a film/production standpoint, it’s also not bad. It’s a study in magnificence, in how to portray magnitude and the vastness of space. And the vfx look just as good today as they did when the movie first came out. I could absolutely see it being used in film school to teach the importance of music and visual depth. It’s good for analysis, but not always good for entertainment.

It’s a fair movie, and a fair Star Trek movie.

TWOK: I am truly puzzled but your estimation that this is a bad movie, because not only is this a great Star Trek movie, but it’s a great movie even if you took it out of the Star Trek franchise. This is the only Star Trek movie that, in my opinion, is a “great movie”, while the others are just “great Star Trek movies”. (This btw is not a slight - a great Star Trek movie is often better than many other “great [franchise] movies”). The thematic depth, tightly intertwined with the events of the story, culminating in one of the great tragedies in film history make this movie a study in how to write a perfect screenplay. When nearly every line of dialogue, every moment, every sequence of events, can tie into the thematic depth of the film, you have a masterpiece. The structure of this screenplay is very nearly flawless.

From a film/production standpoint, it’s also breathtaking. Just about every single vfx shot in this movie holds up to this day, often surpassing the CGI that we get in modern movies. It’s also the very first movie in history to feature a fully CGI rendered sequence, and that also largely holds up. It is another movie that I could see (and have seen) taught in film school as an example of how to pace battle sequences, how to use music to emphasize or de-emphasize important dramatic moments, and how to emphasize the magnitude of a situation without (as TMP did) losing your film within that vastness.

It’s not just a good movie, and it’s not just a great Star Trek movie. It’s a great movie.

SFS: The Search for Spock is sometimes considered a lesser movie simply because it sits between The Wrath of Khan - the greatest Star Trek movie ever made - and The Voyage Home - the most popular Star Trek movie ever made. And it is the weakest movie in the “Genesis trilogy”, but it is also by no means a bad movie. In fact I would argue that SFS is exactly what a sequel needs to be. Most sequels fail, not just because they are bad movies, but because they try to be bigger and better than the preceding movie, oftentimes disrespecting and violating the resolution that came before. SFS does not do that. Instead, it honors what came before and while it does change that resolution through the resurrection of Spock, it is done so without diminishing that sacrifice.

The story itself is smaller than The Wrath of Khan, the themes are not explored as deeply as they could have been, and the plot and thematic elements go hand in hand more than they are tightly intertwined. However, while there are shortcomings, this is a “great Star Trek movie”, because if the story is not as strong as it was in the previous movie, it more than makes up for it through the exploration of character. Nimoy himself is missing through a majority of the movie, but Spock’s essence is such an enormous part of what is going on that his loss is felt as an important part of that structure. The story would not have worked if we did not feel that loss as keenly as we do, because it makes the decisions the characters make something we the audience consider 100% essential. Additionally, unlike the previous movies, it gives every single character a chance to shine.

From a film/production standpoint, it’s stunning. With the exception of one scene, this was filmed entirely on soundstages, and yet it doesn’t feel small or cheap because of how effectively everything was filmed. The use of light and shadow throughout is also something that can be (and has) been used to teach how to use these tools to create mood, emphasize style, and elicit an emotional response.

This is a good movie, and a great Star Trek movie.

TVH: The Voyage Home is the most popular Star Trek movie, and for good reason. It’s a classic fish out of water story that uses clever dialogue, genuinely funny comedy, and deep emotional beats that more than overcome any shortcomings it might have. This movie has much less thematic depth than the previous two, and the plot really just exists to allow the audience to have a good time with these well developed and interesting characters, but those are not shortcomings in any way, rather an active choice to end the “genesis trilogy” on a breath of fresh air after the heaviness of the previous two. The question of why a probe would be evaporating the oceans when they know that’s where whales live, for example, is not important. It exists to be an inciting incident - to motivate our characters’ actions and to allow us to get to the comedy of the fish out of water story. It continues the character arcs set up in TWOK and continued in SFS, and brings them to a satisfactory close (for now - the true conclusion will come later).

From a film/production standpoint, it’s also a phenomenal movie. Pause the movie at any particular moment and you are guaranteed to have something visually interesting to look at. There is no single shot that is not beautifully planned, excellently shot, and stunningly executed. While it’s not unique in its greatness, it’s truly just a well produced, well shot film.

This is a good movie, and a great Star Trek movie.

TFF: The Final Frontier is… not a good movie. There are moments in it that I love as a fan of Star Trek, but they are hardly worth everything else that we have to suffer through in this movie. The main plot is poorly thought out, ludicrous to the extreme, and is a disservice to the characters that deserve so much better. It tries to explore political intrigue, and fails completely. It tries to explore philosophical concepts, and fails completely. It tries to utilize comedy, and fails completely.

From a film/production standpoint, it’s even worse. Even little things like, for example, when the triumvirate are climbing up the turboshaft and Spock appears in his rocket boots from… above them? If he was able to so quickly get his boots, go up several floors of the ship without detection, all to descend down to them… what was the point of them climbing up? It’s just one example of extremely bad directing, editing, and filmmaking. While there are a few nice shots - the Enterprise framed against he moon come to mind - the majority of the special effects are terrible, don’t make sense in the context of what they are (why does a planet look like a goddamn star?), and an utter embarrassment.

This is a terrible movie, and a bad Star Trek movie.

TUC: The Undiscovered Movie is the swan song for the original cast, and while it is deeply flawed in some ways it’s a fitting end to an iconic crew. The plot finally gives the conclusions to the story arcs set up in TWOK, continued in SFS, and expanded in TVH. It’s also an extremely good political thriller, explores deeply important topics, and delivers a satisfying - if predictable - mystery for our characters to solve. If not for a few flaws would be genuinely a great film, not just a great Star Trek film. However, there are some elements that prevent that - namely the predictability of the mystery, partly due to needing to create a whole new character instead of being able to bring back Saavik, and the handling of some of the characters. It makes sense for Kirk, for instance, to over the years begin harboring a deep hatred, distrust, and prejudice against the Klingons because of what he personally has lost at their hands, but the rest of the crew’s prejudice makes much less sense. A stronger outing would have allowed Kirk’s prejudice to be something his crew are concerned about and comment on, rather than something they agree with. Additionally, unlike in TVH, the humor often comes at the expense of the characters, rather than the humor coming from a deep understanding of the characters. But while the comedic moments do not always work, the emotional beats work every single time. In spite of its flaws, it’s great screenplay, and a fitting swan song to an iconic group of characters.

From a film/production standpoint, this is again a very good movie. The vfx are great - even if I personally dislike the Klingon’s pesto bismol pink blood, it was done to avoid an R rating - the cinematography is beautiful, the pacing (particularly of the battle scenes) is amazing, and the music is superb.

This is a good movie, and a great Star Trek movie.

hello jellyiferous . i'm almost finished with TOS, so i'm gonna watch the movies soon. i hear a lot of mixed opinions on them and since i consider you more of an expert than IMDB (and a star trek movie enjoyer) i wanna know if there's anything i should know before i watch them (anything about any of them) (feel free to rant or ramble) (or pass this along if you don't wanna do this) (thanks)

hello hello!!!

thats so exciting i love the movies!!!

dont listen to anyone elses opinions they just dont get it ok. the movies are so fun. they're fun and campy and so so gay

are they Good Movies™️? hell no. but i dont care about that and neither should you

the motion picture has terrible pacing. nothing happens for like a quarter of this movie. but its so cute and a real comfort watch. the outfits serve cunt, the side characters are cool, the plot twist isnt very twisty but you will go "ohhhh ok. sure. yeah that makes more sense". they could never make me hate you, tmp

the wrath of khan will probably make you cry. its generally considered better than the first movie i think but its very sad in a few places so. prepare accordingly for that one

the search for spock is fun but obviously contains very little spock until they find him. thats kinda my only criticism of this movie lmao. not enough spock!! where is he!! find him faster cmon!! very sweet ending tho. the rest of the crew really get to shine in this one. we get some iconic sulu and uhura moments especially

the voyage home is probably most peoples favourite. it is commonly referred to as "the one with the whales" as a sort of. fandom inside joke? i think? it is very fun. lots of old married couple spirk moments.

the final frontier is so good for mcspirk moments. there is very much a found family vs blood family vibe to this movie. the real family was the friends we made along the way etc etc. i love this one

the undiscovered country i have only seen once and i was a bit distracted while watching it, i will admit. but i still enjoyed it. its a bit of a tone shift from the other movies from what i recall. its like. star trek if it were a murder mystery.

so yeah basically. the star trek movies are bad movies but if you're insane enough about star trek they become good movies. you just have to let yourself be insane about it. look for the spirk moments, enjoy the outfit changes, complain about the set design because its 'not the same', you'll have a great time

[miladythewinter]

i just came back from Avatar 2. james cameron you son of a bitch, you really did it, you did an avatar sequel! you can cross it off your to do list

first, i haven’t seen a movie theater this full in literal years. maybe the marvel movies get this kind of audience but idk i don’t watch them. obviously the fact that both kids and adults can watch this is a plus. it’s a family film after all. literally

the bad things: overlong though it didn’t feel like it until the end and that’s because of the usual action film ending fatigue that also plagues this movie. dialogue is straight from 2009: i haven’t heard this much “bro” and “dude” in some time. plot is barebones and uninspired and very similar to the 1st movie

speaking of, i’ve only seen avatar once, back in 2009, and i wasn’t lost at all during this film but just know that there’s no recap about what happened then. obviously it shares some characters and calls back to some moments but it’s nothing thorough.

the new theme song is by the weekend but it’s no “i see you” by leona lewis. that was iconic and was a song i used to play A Lot

the good things: despite the flaws in the writing there’s just.....something about these characters that’s really appealing. including the new ones. you just can’t help but loving them. i read a review that said that unlike the first movie, after this one is over you really feel like you’d like to see more of these people, and i agree. maybe it’s the family dynamic, maybe it’s the familiarity with this type of story that carries this through but whatever it is, it’s good. 

i do think that the acting helps - despite all the motion capture it comes through.... the tech is actually incredible in that regard. i remember that zoe saldana’s performance in the first movie was really acclaimed (pretty sure i remember roger ebert saying it) and i agreed back then. and it’s still as good except her character is not so much in focus in this one. but the kids were great.

the so and so: ok yes the technology on display here is amazing. i can’t imagine what it takes to make this work but the fact is, it looks real. it doesn’t look like cgi but like animation with some real people thrown in. sort of reverse roger rabbit. and it’s all seamless. i don’t play video games but it’s basically that with a few flesh and blood humans. the underwater scenes were a highlight and if you love ocean documentaries you’re going to love this movie.

but to me....it just all feels like style over substance. sure the tech is incredible and i’m sure it’s like.... innovative and a break through for cinema but at what cost? i mean it’s not just all spectacle with no story but this story is so.... well it’s basically Pocahontas & Dances with Wolves with all that entails. it just feels like a lot of work put into one thing and not a lot put into the others. maybe it’s just me but this story does not have the quality to make visuals like these worth it   and maybe that’s why the original movie had no staying power after 2009. compare it with Titanic for example. that movie had spectacle but it wasn’t the main thing - that was jack & rose and the human tragedy. people laughed and cried with that film because the sinking (while technically brilliant and it still is) served the story. it was integrated with it and by that point the ship was a character too. and that all came together to make an unforgetable movie. can’t say the same for avatar

and speaking of titanic - i read a review earlier that said that this movie, avatar 2, was basically James Cameron’s Greatest Hits and my god that is so accurate. if you’ve never seen a Cameron movie, don’t worry, you’ll see them all here

[absolutebl]

I'm in quarantine rn and my credit card isn't here yet so I can't get gaga/viki. What are your favorite bls on YouTube that came out like this year or near the end of last year. Or in general a favorites by platform would be interesting too if you don't have one already 👀

Gotcha covered. Not sure on your particular taste so I popped the mini reviews in too. 

Best 2022 BLs Available to watch for Free (with ads)

Gonna do just 2022 because I have that post in progress, and I can just pull from it. And also SO MANY happening this year. Gonna suggest completed series ONLY, so as of mid May 2022.  

Semantic Error - (Korea Feb Viki*) 10/10

Main Tropes: opposites attract, enemies to lovers, bully romance, sunshine/tsundere, teasing & pranks

This is my favorite BL of 2022. Korea hits it entirely out of both Parks (pun on the actors’ last names intended) by doing a university set BL with everything we might expect done exactly right, their signature quality executed perfectly, and added bonus good story, great pacing, yaoi style filming, and fantastic chemistry. You cannot ask for more from a BL, let alone a KBL. Full review here.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED 

* (I believe it is now free with adds to many countries, some of my other favorites might also be free on Viki but I don’t check which ones are free, because i have a sub. In general, I suggest Korean BL on Viki and watching whatever you can.)

Bad Buddy - (Thailand, Nov-Jan on YouTube) 9/10

Main Tropes: secret lovers, Romeo & Romeo, sunshine/tsundere, enemies-to-friends-to-lovers, GL side plot

GMMTV’s flagship BL started 2022 on a BANG (okay no actual banging but you know what I mean), starring heavy hitters Ohm & Nanon in a pitch perfect university Romeo & Juliet masterpiece that will give you domesticity meets pain whiplash throughout and jet lag at the end. Great production values, killer acting, and some conscious effort to correct for half a decade of Thai BL’s anti-queer mistakes. GMMTV, we forgive you. More. Live blog of this one is here. Full review here.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

Not Me - (Thailand Jan-March YouTube) 9/10  

Main Tropes: enemies to lovers, secret identity, identical twins, goodboy/bad boy

GMMTV gave us a dark disestablishment narrative (in a time of civil unrest) with established queer award-winning director Anucha and starring OffGun. THIS IS AN AMAZING THING to get to experience in the BL world - nerve racking but remarkable. But was it ACTUALLY BL? Not Me had a lot of BL elements, but in the end that’s not what the show was about, or even what it was genuinely trying to be. Still an amazing piece of Thai cinema certainly worth your time. Don’t worry, it all ends happily. Full review here. OffGun Eulogy here.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

Cutie Pie (Thailand Feb-May on YouTube) 8/10

Main Tropes: arranged marriage, age gap, secret identity, cohabitation, rich kid problems, he’s in engineering

Very high production and a lot of visual references to live action yaoi gave this show a whiff of Japan but ultimately it stayed firmly in Thailand’s BL camp veering from absurd to appealing to annoying and then back to absurd again. If you can roll with the arranged marriage conceit and very lifestyle D/s relationships, the chemistry is spot on even if the plot is naff and sappy and driven by miscommunication. Watch this one for the pretty, give it a pass on depth. Full review here.

RECOMMENDED

Mr Cinderella (Vietnam Jan YouTube) - 8/10

Main Tropes: forced proximity, cohabitation, childhood sweethearts, opposites attract, good boy/bad boy, domesticity

Higher than normal production values plus experienced BL actors plus two charismatic smoldering leads with good kissing and comfortable body language make this Vietnam’s objectively best BL to date. Plus we got a fabulously (and quintessentially Vietnamese) domestic ending. Full review here.

RECOMMENDED

Love Stage (Thailand, Feb-March YouTube) 8/10

Main Tropes: childhood crush, sunshine/tsundere, unrequited love, secret identity

This BL surprised me with its charm. The acting was good, the leads were appealing, support cast on point, and the production values high. It followed the original manga story arc relatively closely: boy falls in love with girl as a child, grows up to discover girl is actually a very pretty boy. Although there are some quintessentially Thai changes that mellowed, softened, and extended the romance arc. One of the things I’ve always appreciated about this story is that the climax is about coming out as a celebrity couple as well as gay. I like the examination of the nature of celebrity versus privacy, and the contrasting kinds of closets. And I love that they depicted two couples with two different versions of this choice. A solid and enjoyable show. Full review here.

RECOMMENDED

Enchanté (Thailand, Jan-March YouTube) 7/10

Main Tropes: childhood sweethearts, sunshine/tsundere, secret admirer with a touch of Cyrano de Bergerac and dose of Boys Over Flowers.

Theo returns from France and starts a written flirtation inside a library book (!) at his new uni with the mysterious Enchante. When he and his best friend Akk hunt for Enchante’s real identity, 4 senior boys step forward - all intersted in dating Theo, all with ulterior motives. Can’t fault the chemistry or the classic old school Thai uni BL and Akk (Force) was particularly sympathetic. But the twist over Enchantie’s identity felt disingenuous, manipulative, and unnecessary and the whole narrative was flawed as a result, Theo became unlikeable and irredeemable. GMMTV seems to specialize in squandering great chemistry on shoddy scripts. Honestly it probubly should get an 8/10 by my rating system but I was so disappointed I’m gave it a 7/10 and did not bother to write a full review. Live blog ep-by-ep recap here.

RECOMMENDED WITH RESERVATIONS

Secret Crush on You (Thailand Feb-May YouTube) 7/10

Main Tropes: stalking, obsession, hottest guy on campus, multiple couples, queer affirming

Previously known as Stalker the series, and you can TELL. Co-produced by and featuring (but NOT staring) Saint and directed by Cheewin (sigh) with all fresh faces it was pure pulp and... I hated the plot. In fact I was ALL OVER THE PLACE with this show. SCOY drove me nuts and made me bush but had flashes of unparalleled genius. It had a ton of things I really did not like (e.g. the humor was crass and awkward, and the whole stalker thing was extremely CRINGE). It also had things that really worked: (e.g. representation of multiple different kinds of queerness, about which it very Taiwanese - in that there was no doubt that the characters really did want to bone). It was the opposite of sanitized gay. Honestly, if you can make it through the first half, and survive the never ending cringe-factor that IS this show, the second half is entirely unique - content we’ve never seen before in BL. Full review here. 

RECOMMENDED WITH RESERVATIONS, but not the usual ones.

Rainbow Prince (The Philippines Jan-Feb-March YouTube) - 6/10

Main Tropes: disney princess, opposites attract, sunshine/tsundere

This long form MUSICAL BL is fucking LEGEND. Also it’s profoundly not good. The acting is absolutely terrible but that’s not the point, the point is that it’s a cheesy af fairy story. Possibly the gayest BL to ever BL and certainly the most camp and very Disney. Watch it of that’s your thing, otherwise hard pass. (Full review here.)

RECOMMENDED ONLY IF YOU ALSO LIKE DISNEY SHIT

I hope these help and let me know if you tray and like any of them!

[flufffysocks]

let's talk about andi mack's worldbuilding

sorry this took forever to make! i've been pretty busy with school stuff and i kind of lost my inspiration for a bit, but i ultimately really enjoyed writing it! i wish i could've included more pics (tumblr has a max of 10 per post), and it kinda turned from less of a mini analysis to more of an extremely long rant... but i hope it's still a fun read!

i've been rewatching the show over the past few weeks (thanks again to @disneymack for the link!), and i’ve been noticing a lot that i never did the first time around. this is really the first time i’ve watched the show from start to finish since it aired, and it honestly feels so different this time - probably a combination of the fact that i’m not as focused on plot and can appreciate the show as a whole, and also that the fandom is much, much smaller now, so there’s a lot less noise. so the way i’m consuming this show feels super different than it did the first time, but the show itself doesn’t - it’s just as warm and comforting to me as it was the first time around, if not more so.

i think a lot of that can be attributed to andi mack’s “worldbuilding”. i’m not quite sure that this is the right word in this context, to be honest, because i mostly see it used in reference to fantasy and sci-fi universes, but it just sort of feels right to me for andi mack, because you can really tell how much love and care went into constructing this universe. for clarity, worldbuilding is “the process of creating an imaginary world” in its simplest sense. there’s two main types: hard worldbuilding, which involves inventing entire universes, languages, people, cultures, places, foods, etc. from scratch (think “lord of the rings” or “dune”), and soft worldbuilding, in which the creators don’t explicitly state or explain much about the fictional universe, but rather let it’s nature reveal itself as the story progresses (think studio ghibli films). andi mack to me falls in the soft worldbuilding category. even though it takes place in a realistic fiction universe, there’s a lot of aspects to it that are inexplicably novel in really subtle ways.

so watching the show now, i’ve noticed that the worldbuilding comes primarily from two things - setting and props, and oftentimes the both of them in tandem (because a big part of setting in filmmaking does depend on the props placed in it!).

one of the most obvious examples is the spoon. it really is a sort of quintessential, tropic setting in that it's the main gang's "spot", which automatically gives it a warm and homey feel to it. and its set design only amplifies this:

the choice to make it a very traditional 50s-style diner creates a very nostalgic, retro feel to it, which is something that's really consistent throughout the show, as you'll see. from the round stools at the bar, to the booths, to the staff uniforms, this is very obvious. the thing that i found especially interesting about it though is the choice of color. the typical 50s diner is outfitted with metallic surfaces and red accented furnishings, but the spoon is very distinctly not this.

instead, it's dressed in vibrant teal and orange, giving it a very fresh and modern take on a classic look. so it still maintains that feeling of being funky and retro, but that doesn't retract from the fact that the show is set distinctly in modern times.

of course, this could just be a one-off quirky set piece, but this idea of modernizing and novelizing "retro" things is a really common motif throughout the show. take red rooster records. i mean, it's a record shop - need i say more? it's obviously a very prominent store in shadyside, at least for the main characters, but there's no apparent reason why it is (until season 2 when bowie starts working there, and jonah starts performing there). a lot of the time, though, it functions solely as a record shop. vinyl obviously isn't the most practical or convenient way of listening to music, but it's had its resurgence in pop culture even in the real world, mostly due to its aesthetic value, so it's safe to say that it serves the same purpose in the andi mack universe.

the fringe seems to be nostalgic of a different era, specifically the Y2K/early 2000s period (because it's meant to be bex's territory and symbolic of who she used to be, and its later transformation into cloud 10 is representative of her character arc, but that's beside the point). to be honest, exactly what this store was supposed to be always confused me. it was kind of a combination party store/clothing store/makeup store/beauty parlor? i think that's sort of the point of it though, it's supposed to feel very grunge-y and chaotic (within the confines of a relatively mellow-toned show, of course), and it's supposed to act as a sort of treasure chest of little curios that both make the place interesting and allow the characters to interact with it.

and, of course, there's andi shack. this is really the cherry on top of all of andi mack's sets, just because it's so distinctly andi. it serves such amazing narrative purpose for her (ex. the storyline where cece and ham were going to move - i really loved this because it highlights its place in the andi mack universe so well, and i'm a sucker for the paper cranes shot + i'm still salty that sadie's cranes didn't make it into the finale) and it's the perfect reflection of andi's character development because of how dynamic it is (the crafts and art supplies can get moved around or switched out, and there's always new creations visible).

going back to the nostalgia motif though, the "shack" aspect of it always struck me as very treehouse-like. personally, whenever i think of treehouses, there's this very golden sheen of childhood about it, if that makes sense. i've always seen treehouses in media as a sort of shelter for characters' youthful innocence and idealistic memories. for example, the episode "up a tree" from good luck charlie, the episode "treehouse" from modern family, and "to all the boys 2" all use a treehouse setting as a device to explore the character's desire to hold onto their perfect image of their childhood (side note: this exact theme is actually explored in andi mack in the episode "perfect day 2.0"!). andi shack is no exception to this, but it harnesses this childhood idealism in the same way that it captures the nostalgia of the 50s in the spoon, or the early 2000s in the fringe. it's not some image of a distant past being reflected through that setting; it's very present, and very alive, because it reflects andi as she is in the given moment.

some honorable mentions of more one-off settings include the ferris wheel (from "the snorpion"), the alley art gallery (from "a walker to remember"), SAVA, the color factory (from "it's a dilemna"), and my personal favorite, the cake shop (from "that syncing feeling").

[every time i watch this episode i want to eat those cakes so bad]

these settings have less of a distinctly nostalgic feel (especially the color factory, which is a very late 2010s, instagram era setting), but they all definitely have an aura of perfection about them. andi mack is all about bright, colorful visuals, and these settings really play to that, making the andi mack universe seem really fun and inviting, and frankly very instagrammable (literally so, when it comes to the color factory!).

props, on the other hand, are probably a much less obvious tool of worldbuilding. they definitely take up less space in the frame and are generally not as noticeable (i'm sure i'll have missed a bunch that will be great examples, but i'm kind of coming up with all of this off the top of my head), but they really tie everything together.

for example, bex's box, bex's polaroid, and the old tv at the mack apartment (the tv is usually only visible in the periphery of some shots, so you might not catch it at first glance) all complement that very retro aesthetic established through the settings (especially the polaroid and the tv, because there's really no good reason that the characters would otherwise be using these).

besides this, andi's artistic nature provides the perfect excuse for plenty of colorful, crafty props to amplify the visuals and the tone. obviously, as i discussed before, andi shack is the best example of this because it's filled with interesting props. but you also see bits of andi's (and other people's) crafts popping up throughout the show (ex. the tape on the fridge in the mack apartment, andi's and libby's headbands in "the new girls", walker's shoes, andi's phone case, and of course, the bracelet). not only does doing this really solidify this talent as an essential tenet of andi's character, but it also just makes the entirety of shadyside feel like an extension of andi shack. the whole town is a canvas for her crafts (or art, depending on how you want to look at it. i say it's both), and it immensely adds to shadyside's idealism. because who wouldn't want to live in a world made of andi mack's creations?

and, while it's not exactly a prop, the characters' wardrobe is undoubtedly a major influence on the show's worldbuilding. true to it's nature as a disney channel show, all of the characters are always dressed in exceptionally curated outfits of whatever the current trends are, making the show that much more visually appealing. i won't elaborate too much on this, because i could honestly write a whole other analysis on andi mack's fashion (my favorites are andi's and bex's outfits! and kudos to the costume designer(s) for creating such wonderful and in-character wardrobes!). but, i think it's a really really important aspect of how the show's universe is perceived, so it had to be touched upon.

[^ some of my favorite outfits from the show! i am so obsessed with andi's jacket in the finale, and i aspire to be at bex's level of being a leather jacket bisexual]

and lastly, phones. this is a bit of an interesting case (pun intended), because the way they're used fluctuates a bit throughout the show, but i definitely noticed that at least in the first season terri minsky tried to avoid using them altogether. these efforts at distancing from modern tech really grounds the show in it's idealist, nostalgia-heavy roots, so even when the characters start using their phones more later in the show, they don't alter the viewer's impression of the andi mack universe very much.

so, what does all of this have to do with worldbuilding? in andi mack's case, because it's set in a realistic universe and not a fantasy one, a lot of what sets it apart from the real world comes down to tone. because, as much as this world is based on our own, it really does feel separate from it, like an alternate reality that's just slightly more perfect than ours, which makes all the difference. it's the idealism in color and composition in andi mack's settings that makes it so unmistakably andi mack. even the weather is always sunny and perfect (which is incredibly ironic because the town is called shadyside - yes, i am very proud of that observation).

the andi mack universe resides somewhere in this perfect medium that makes it feel like a small town in the middle of nowhere (almost like hill valley in 1955 from "back to the future"), but at the same time like an enclave within a big city (because of its proximity to so many modern, unique, and honestly very classy looking establishments). it is, essentially, an unattainable dream land that tricks you into believing it is attainable because it's just real enough.

all this to say, andi mack does an amazing job of creating of polished, perfect world for its characters. this is pretty common among disney channel and nickelodeon shows, but because most other shows tend to be filmed in a studio with three-wall sets, andi mack is really set apart from them in that it automatically feels more real and tangible. it has its quintessential recurring locations, but it has far more of them (most disney/nick shows usually only have 3-4 recurring settings), and it has a lot more one-off locations. it's also a lot more considerate when it comes to its props, so rather than the show just looking garish and aggressively trendy, it has a distinctive style that's actually appropriate to the characters and the story. overall this creates the effect of expanding the universe, making shadyside feel like it really is a part of a wider world, rather than an artificial bubble. it's idealism is, first and foremost, grounded in reality, and that provides a basis for its brilliant, creative, and relatable storytelling.

tl;dr: andi mack's sets and props give it a very retro and nostalgic tone which makes its whole universe seem super perfect and i want to live there so bad!!

[circular-time]

All caps for my favorite for each Doctor and bold for my alltime fave; I've listed a smattering to give you glimpses of most of the companions and some vague non-spoilery comments since different stories appeal to different tastes.

First Doctor: The Daleks although slow-paced by today's standards set the show on its feet as the second serial and there's some extraordinary visuals for a 1963 show with no budget and almost no precedents to work from; The Aztecs has Babs being awesome some interesting perspective on white saviour syndrome trying to avert colonialism filmed when the last of the British Empire was still throwing out the Brits (also blink and you'll miss it gender discussion), THE ROMANS is a Funny Thing Happened on The Way To the Forum Meets Doctor Who, The Dalek Invasion of Earth was groundbreaking for the time (post-apocalyptic Earth was not yet a setting many mainstream audiences had seen outside of a few blockbuster films) a chewy story plus the first companion departure

Second Doctor: MIND ROBBER is just fun watch it, Enemy of the World with actual ( gasp) sharp acting all around partly because Troughton is the villain as well as the lead

Third Doctor: Spearhead from Space so you get at least one with Liz who is Great and the Brig in fine form, a lot of fans will rec Inferno for very good reason but be warned it drags in the middle, Terror of the Autons for a great Jo & Master story, The Daemons ditto plus one of the Brig's signature moments, no one ever remembers Carnival of Monsters because it's not important or epic and there's a lot of running about but it's a fun little D&D adventure like Ghost Monument, THE TIME MONSTER which is a bit naff but we love it to bits as The Gift That Keeps on Giving there's so many dumbass and funny and heartwarming moments in it

Fourth Doctor: MASQUE OF MANDRAGORA fun melodramatic costume drama with bonus gay couple don't talk to me I shipped Marco/Giuliano before I knew what gay WAS, Brain of Morbius has Sarah Jane and the Sisterhood of Karn and Four in fine form with bonus throwaway Hey That Totally Screwed Up Canon (What Canon?), The Deadly Assassin which established Gallifrey as we know it today and therefore pissed off fans tremendously, Face of Evil as an all around fun story introducing Leela Who Is Great I wish I could rec more of hers but i've already got too many of Four here; Horns of Nimon for a drinking game ep that's so bad it's hilarious (moreso if if you know the camp villain was considered for the role of the fourth doctor) but Romana is in a different story acting her socks off LIKE A BOSS, City of Death aka the Doctor and Romana's Paris honeymoon, Keeper of Traken because I just love it (preview of my favorite companion though she's only a side char) plus it kinda sets up spoilers spoilers still relevant in new Who

Fifth Doctor: Castrovalva is a fun regeneration story but find the Blu-Ray if you can where they were finally able to achieve the MC Escher effect intended, Black Orchid (I dunno why some people dislike this one it's Who meets Agatha Christie!), Kinda which is a little crack but there's some great acting and classic quotes even if my fave is out with a migraine, Mawdryn Undead for an interesting reunion with an old friend even if the writers once again can't juggle an ensemble cast, ENLIGHTENMENT is awesomesauce ok not as much now as then when the first cliffhanger literally pulled mom and me out of our seats but the story has aged well even if the FX now look quaint, Planet of the Shorts of Fire for some Master/Doctor shipping although they nearly had the Master say he was the Doctor's brother and cut the line mid-word!

Sixth Doctor: oh this poor guy didn't get enough good scripts until the audios showed just how fantastic he can be but The Two Doctors (which shows his era had gotten a bit grim for classic Who, but it's good), VENGEANCE ON VAROS which believe it or not predates the reality TV fad and I haven't seen it since the 80s but it was a damn good episode at the time

Seventh Doctor: Delta and the Bannermen is nutty and joyful and unique and a palate cleanser after Sixie's era got too dark and I will defend it to the death even if it's kind of insane, The Happiness Patrol for a strong Sylvester ep with Ace being great (these two are always great), BATTLEFIELD with the Brig (both of them!) and a girlfriend (we wished) for Ace and random Arthurian bullshit and Kate Stewart's mom and oh this was LOVE when it came out Doctor Who was BACK baby (poor Colin), Remembrance of the Daleks which should have been the 25th anniversary special and we all pretended it was and there is the most awesome cliffhanger ever (it's like the punchline to a joke 25 years in the making for fans) but really it's so good the guest chars in this story have a popular multi-season spinoff audio series; Survival as the very last story of classic Who with more Doctor/Master shipping which may have been deliberate and this time we know Ace's "girlfriend of the month" plotline was deliberate although it's coded and cloaked because the queer author had to slip it past the censors

Okay so I'm continuing to venture through Classic Doctor Who. I've watched chunks of Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker and adore the TV Movie. I've also seen a few of the "specials" like The Three Doctors and The Five Doctors. I know some episodes are considered much better than others 👀 What's your favourite or must watch episode??? Help me out

[dailyniallnews]

Niall Horan: Live at The Royal Albert Hall

While some may argue that too few artists have done their bit to raise awareness for the people of the music industry who since March 2020 have been forced to stop practicing their profession, one artist who has stepped up to the plate is singer-songwriter and former One Direction star, Niall Horan. Joining forces with the crew-led organisation, We Need Crew, on 7 November 2020, the singer welcomed fans from around the globe to bear witness to a one-off performance from the eerily empty Royal Albert Hall, with all profits going to his touring family and technical entertainment charity, Backup.

In the lead up to the livestream, Horan could be found on almost every television network, promoting the show and explaining why the performance required the attention of all music lovers. In his own words: “I’m putting on this gig to raise awareness of the immense value they bring to an industry enjoyed by so many and do something to help them and their families. I ask all my fans to support them with me and buy a ticket if you can, and I encourage all artists to do the same.”

With several weeks passing since both artist and crew took over the RAH, TPi caught up with the crew behind the project and to get their thoughts on this very special event.

PRODUCTION ORIGINS…

“I remember it was a Monday morning when I got the call from Karen [Ringland] and Alice [Martin], who explained the concept of We Need Crew,” reminisced Ant Carr, Head of Production for Modest! Management. Both founders of We Need Crew explained to Carr that the goal of We Need Crew is, in association with #WeMakeEvents, to raise money for touring professionals who have fallen on hard times due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

“What really appealed about their organisation was that it was created by crew, for crew,” Carr said. “Around the same time, I was having conversations with Niall, who had already seen a few peers doing livestream performances, and we discussed the idea of performing in an iconic venue to raise awareness for the plight of the industry.”

With these two conversions in mind, Carr began to pull the pieces of would become Horan’s streamed performance together, as well as a big launch for the We Need Crew campaign. Carr and the rest of the Modest! team got to work reforming his touring family, whose album cycle had been stopped prematurely in March 2020.

“We were in LA when everything began shutting down,” stated Carr, who explained how he and the rest of the crew were in their last few weeks of promo before heading into rehearsals for Horan’s world tour. “We were finishing up a week on James Corden when the announcement came that the borders were due to be shut, so we all had to head back to the UK pretty quickly.”

After several months with no work, both Carr and the rest of the crew were all enthusiastic about getting back together to put on a very special performance. “In many ways, it was like we had never been away,” explained Production Manager, Andy Colby. “There was a part of me that thought it might have been a bit strange with it being so long since we worked together, but 30 minutes into the first rehearsal at SW19, it was like we had just got off the plane from LA.”

Colby was one of many familiar faces from Horan’s touring family who got the call to help with the livestream, alongside several technical suppliers including Wigwam and midnight:lights. KB Event provided a Megacube Artic for rehearsals in SW19 along with a Tech Kit for the show, oversaw by Lead Driver, Steve Crawley. Pulse Films and promoter, Driift were brought into the fold to make the event a reality.

In total, some 127,000 tickets for the performance were sold to 151 countries. “The response we had from fans was fantastic,” enthused Carr. “The funds raised are going to be able to help a good number of touring crew and their families and we kept this in the forefront of our mind in all aspects of the show.”

Carr was also quick to complement the attitude of the man in front of the camera. “Niall was very involved in every step of the process. He really gained a full grasp of the situation and during the promotion of the show, he really wanted to educate the public, and his fanbase, about what was going on in the sector.”

SETTING THE STAGE…

A few weeks from the broadcast date, a small group visited the Royal Albert Hall to make a start on planning how the show would come together. Lighting and Show Designer, Emma Bull and Director, Paul Dugdale led the creative vision. The livestream began with Horan performing a song on the piano on the venue’s stage, before walking down to the centre of the room to play the rest of the show in 360° in the centre of the hall. A top priority for the visual team was putting both Niall and the venue in the spotlight.

Bull elaborated: “Although several dance shows utilise the centre of the room, Paul’s Dugdale’s suggestion to do this for a music act felt fresh and was a strong starting point for the design,” she noted. “Having Niall and the band in the centre gave us a few options to really show off the building and take advantage of the fact the whole space was empty.”

One of her design ideas to make use of the space was to fill the empty boxes of the hall with lights. “It really ‘shined a light’ on the fact that there was nobody in the space,” she commented.

Aiding her in both the programming and running the show was Richard White of midnight:lights. “In total, we built 114 bespoke plinths for the audience boxes,” he stated. “On these sat a combination of Robe LED Beam 150s and Robe Spiiders.” The arrangement of these fixtures and boxes created a 360° backdrop of the central stage, with fixtures focussed into the room as well as back on themselves to flood the boxes.

The other key lighting elements included three Robe BMFL Robospots for keylight, which were placed in the venue’s gallery level. “We kept most of the control of these at the console with it being a 360° shoot,” stated White. “We were then able to shift the keylight/backlight across the fixtures as the camera tracked.” Around the central stage, the lighting team deployed SGM Q2s to provide some glowing footlights, along with Litepanel Gemini Softlights for Niall’s microphone position. “From the beginning, I knew I didn’t want there to be any rigging or trussing in the shot,” explained Bull. “We didn’t want anything to distract from the key elements of the shot – Niall and venue – to produce a clean look.” This is also why the visual department moved away from the idea of a backdrop and instead showed off the immensity of the famed venue.

Aiding both Bull and White in their endeavours was Lighting Programmer, Dan Young. In the lead up to the show, both Young and White spent several days in the previs suite at midnight:lights using Syncronorm Depence² to plan the show. “I have worked with both Dan and Richard several times and they have a great understanding of my aesthetic,” praised Bull. “I like things to be quite static in terms of colour palette with refined looks.” During the show, White oversaw the key lighting with Young programming all the moves. This gave Bull the freedom to act as a go-between between both the lighting and the stage to ensure the integrity of the design for the broadcast.

“The main challenge for this show was to provide consistent lighting over the different shooting styles,” mused White. “On one hand, we needed to have soft beauty lighting for close-up shots and steadycam work, but we also needed to make sure that the stage was physically as clear as possible for all the wide room shots and overhead wire-cam.” To add a level of accuracy, most of the live show was programmed to timecode because the visual team were situated outside of the room during the shoot.

LIGHTS, CAMERA, LIVESTREAM…

Jim Parsons was brought in by Pulse Films to assume the role of Producer. “By the time I got involved, the concept had already been fairly well developed by Emma Bull and Paul Dugdale,” Parsons began. “From my side, it was a case of getting all the video and visual elements and working out some of logistics of how we’d get the event to the finish line.”

Parsons has collaborated with Horan several times over the years. “The fact he came from the TV world means he has much more of a grasp than many of his peers of what goes into this style of performance and how to connect with fans through a camera,” he enthused.

Speaking a few weeks after the event took place, Parsons reflected on what he and the team achieved with the livestream. “We always knew we had an opportunity to do something different with this show,” he commented. “The end resulted was big and beautiful, but it was still ‘live’.  It had the feel of a real show and didn’t come across prescriptive or dull.”

Parsons went on to describe the collaboration between himself and Driift, having worked together several times during 2020 on shows for Kylie Minogue and Sleaford Mods. “Ric Salmon and the rest of the Driift team are the kind of broadcasters I really like collaborating with in that they just let you get on with your work,” stated Parsons plainly. “They were obviously interested in the initial conversations and in the creative, but once it was all in place, they left us to it.”

Driift CEO, Ric Salmon offered his two cents on the project. “The fact that Niall ended up selling 127,000 tickets for the event is such a huge achievement, made all the better as it was all for such an amazing cause,” he stated. Unsurprisingly, 2020 was a busy year for Driift as the company offered livestreaming solutions for several artists. “There are almost too many benefits with this format of show,” stated Salmons while discussing the progression of livestreaming solutions that have only expanded in the past few years. “As we move forward, I think you’ll find more people opting for this style of event over, say, music videos,”

Parsons described what it was like working in the RAH. “It’s a beautiful venue, but we have all seen it thousands of times and there’s no denying that making it look different is quite a challenge. So, hats have to go off to the visual team for making this livestream look so unique.”

A Luna Remote System Junior 5 Telescopic remote compact dolly on a circular track along with a Dactylcam Pro point-to-point wire camera system captured the magic of the livestream. The spanned the periphery of central stage to present virtual audiences with a 360° view.

Camera Supervisor and joint Owner of Luna Remote Systems, Dean Clish discussed what it meant to be involved in such a prestigious show. “It was an honour to be involved in Niall’s show,” he commented. “It was for such a great cause and it’s always good to be in the Royal Albert Hall – you can’t go wrong with such a beautiful location.”

He continued to discuss why the camera selection was ideal for this type of performance. “The Junior 5 and the Dactylcam Pro are perfect for this kind of shoot because of the need to socially distance and, of course, with this sort of intimate production, they are both really unobtrusive and discreet systems,” he explained. “We’ve rigged the Dactylcam in the Royal Albert Hall before. It’s a brilliant system to use in there as you can really capture the essence of the hall from a height, in flight, in a way that you can’t with static systems.”

SOUNDING OUT…

The production brought back the audio double act of FOH Engineer, Matthew Kettle and Monitor Engineer, Joe Campbell to oversee the mix for the livestream and the band on stage. Having started working with Horan on his first solo album cycle, Kettle gave an overview of his time with the artist. “I didn’t really know what to expect before I’d heard the debut record and, as I was more known for working with rock music, I wasn’t sure I’d be the right fit,” he commented. However, with Horan’s solo music citing influences including Fleetwood Mac and Bruce Springsteen, the Engineer explained how it had been a fruitful partnership over the past three years. “Niall is really quite involved with the audio production and often during rehearsals will listen to the mixes to get a feel of what is being produced.”

Having been put on a hiatus since the tour’s cancellation in March, Kettle described what it was like to pull the pieces back together for the tour. “It’s really quite a different process producing a mix for a livestream compared to a live show,” he mused. “I have always had massive respect for broadcast engineers as it is such a different craft. When you’re mixing live in a venue, if anything goes wrong, you can fix it for the next performance. However, with a broadcast, everything is under much more of a microscope and under a great deal of scrutiny. Not only that, but you only have one shot at a show.”

Kettle explained that once he and the team entered rehearsals, they soon found their rhythm. “The approach to mixing was not too dissimilar to what we had already been working on for the tour. Just like the visual department, we didn’t want the production to be too flashy, aiming to simply reflect the intimacy of the performance without too much embellishment,” he commented.

For this reason, both Kettle and Campbell virtually replicated their audio setups they had planned to use for the world tour, featuring two DiGiCo SD5 consoles for monitors and FOH, along with Shure Axient Handhelds with Sennheiser 2000 Series IEMs, d&b audiotechnik wedges and a V-Series for side fills.

The console setup was not significantly different from the touring configuration, with multiple inputs from various SD-Racks in different parts of the stage and performance areas going to the broadcast SD5, all connected by an Opticore loop and shared with Campbell’s SD5 in monitor world. “The SD5 is my favourite console in the world,” said Campbell. “I love it and, because DiGiCo products are well proven and rock solid reliable, we rarely have to include them directly in what we do.” Cambpell was initially concerned in the lead up to the show, having not touched a desk since March. “Thankfully, Wigwam had kept the desks in pristine condition – so much so that our show files were even still loaded on the desk from the tour. This saved a great deal of time in rehearsals and certainly made it easier to get back into the saddle.”

Campbell was keen to replicate the same stage setup for Niall and the band. “During the tour, although he uses IEMs, I still have a wedge and side fills just in case he wants to take out his ears to hear the crowd,” he explained. “Even though it was a livestream with no audience, I wanted the show to feel as familiar as possible for him and the band.”

Despite a relatively “meat and potatoes” band setup, Campbell had just under 100 inputs on his desk – the result of several reverb returns and an elaborate talkback system. “Each one of the band members have a talkback mic so throughout the performance they can talk to one another and me,” he noted.

Meanwhile, Kettle’s ‘FOH’ position was slightly further away, setting up in a corridor off from the main hall. “Wigwam prepared an acoustic treatment kit so I sat at the desk with several studio monitors to mix the show and then sent my audio feed to the Pulse team,” stated Kettle. “Before going into the RAH, I was concerned with how the room would react with no audience in there to dampen the sound, but from the first sound check it sounded fantastic.”

Discussing Wigwam’s involvement with the project, Tom Bush commented: “We were all extremely proud to be supplying Niall’s livestream, especially as it was addressing the We Need Crew and #WeMakeEvents funds and highlighting what goes into putting on a production with the unseen and behind-the-scenes rolls.”

Bush went on to explain the approach to this type of performance: “A slightly different thought process can be needed – the standard positions for mixing, for example. The package wasn’t too dissimilar to the one we had ready for the world tour, so we had a good starting point. A few additions and tweaks were needed to adhere to the show setup, but Matt and Joe’s attention to detail made sure the process was smooth. The need for trucks full of PA hasn’t been required yet, but soon hopefully. We currently have a few livestreams pencilled in that we’re all looking forward to.”

#WENEEDCREW…

Looking back at the slew of 2020 livestreamed performances, Niall Horan stands out among the crowd, not only for its aesthetic, but because of everything it represented – not to mention the sizeable pot of funds it raised for the live events industry.

As we enter a new year with the live events sector entrenched in the clutches of the COVID-19 pandemic, the hope is that more musicians will follow in Horan’s footsteps to shine the spotlight on hardworking crew members that are so often out of sight and mind to the average live music lover. In the meantime, more information regarding the We Need Crew initiative can be found on www.weneedcrew.co.uk

[sugar-petals]

Hey Caro ☺️ I just took your super m quiz - thanks for making such a fun quiz, I feel like it helped me get into super m! I know nothing about them yet but I thought it fit soo well that I got Kai bc I’m a full time dancer - now you have me super curious about him 👀👀

KAI :: INTRODUCTION MASTERPOST (dance focus)

so you wanna know about the god of k-pop choreo? oh yeah, i’ll talk to you about fucking kai! if you dance, this guy is the #1 must-know. once you see him move, there’s no going back. i don’t exaggerate: kai is the gold standard. brace yourselves, i’ll show you why.

kim kai aka kim jongin (27) is a solo artist and super m’s plus exo’s main dancer — est 2019 and 2012 respectively — heading either group with a passionate, hyper-physical style that roots in his early practice of of jazz dance and ballet. the influence definitely shows. 

learning choreography, he’s become the gorgeous fusion of emotional grace and explosive power that unites both tension and extreme accuracy. while at the same time: never sacrificing his interpretation. and HOW MUCH HE BLEEDS FOR HIS CRAFT. he enjoys it so much. 

and he’s communicating it 100%, jongin’s dance is so interactive and raw, luring. i swear to god, put the seatbelts on for this one. it’s never just him, it’s you as well. you’ve never seen this before. he’s like “yes, i meant you, i’m looking at you”:

he’s even gonna modify the choreography to point right at you to underline that very thought. he’s so good, he can learn it, ace it, epitomize it, and do his own thing anyway. even the person in the last row will get whatever point kai wants to make. this is dance that belongs on the biggest stages.

even when he films without a crowd, it’s like you’re literally standing opposite to him. he focuses on two people: his moves, and the viewer. he has it look like you made him smile and self-aware, or you made him determined. INCREDIBLE. he shows his charisma, BUT he also shows your own (!) impact on him. it’s a duet. he wants you to join him on the dancefloor. this is from exo’s call me baby mv where kai does his famous come-hither:

he flirts and he encourages. he values the audience and wants them to be confident as well. i think it’s the reason why he’s so outstanding and addictive, kai thinks beyond himself. it’s a tango he involves you in with his eyes and how he opens his body, interprets a lyric.

it’s not about imposing himself going one way. instead: he plays the back and forth ALL. THE. TIME. in any context. whether it be frivolous, or fun, or gloomy, or sweet. even with a simple little smiley wink it’s happening. and he acts like you had a reaction to it. there’s literally just a camera.

this guy’s physique, strength, elegance, feeling for the beat, character portrayal (!), and control is unbelievable. he’s destroyed it in every fancam out there. he can’t switch it off even if he tried. your eyes would go toward him in the largest group formation still. put him in the center, that’s his spot, he showcases it.

because he doesn’t just show learned moves, he makes it radiate something dynamic and animalistic (he embodies superm’s ‘tiger inside’ all the way). 

jongin’s dance says: i love this, you love this, let’s do this, the feeling is right. he makes bodies and unrestrained touch the opposite of wrong, he pronounces it a source of having fun and being instinctual. and he never breaks the tie with you throughout, and uses his shoulders and lips to put the oomph into it. 

he uses innuendo and a ‘we both know’ sentiment perfectly as an invitation rather than just going through his routine. that’s how he can make each move fascinating. you can tell kai knows exactly how to make everyone scream their lungs out. i bet somebody held their breath just reading this post already.

exo’s most famous choreo is ‘monster’ (kai focus linked) with good reason: jongin can turn himself into nothing short of a roaring beast. it’s one sharp, complex move after the other. kai can bend any gravitational law he wants to show any feeling and pose he wants. a glimpse:

now, how to spot him in general if you’re new to him? here are some pointers. kai’s execution is clean, fast, and powerful. those are two decades (!) of experience showing. kai is an all or nothing dancer, he plays no games. he treats every group and solo stage like his best and last. his work ethic is beyond words. yeah, he’s a capricorn. his style is direct as can be, working every axis.

as you can see, jongin is hard to overlook anyway: he’s a 182cm giant made of steel. he strives to acutely visualize impact in his style and it is always successful. in fact, it’s his signature. it’s like he creates invisible objects and pushes through them. boom, he just burst another bubble.

when the song gets to his part, i guarantee you won’t miss him and all the boldness and expression he brings to enrich the performance. hell... he carries it. jongin can handle the center, i’m telling you. (look how fast he rotates here)

talking features — this is what to look for when he dances in a group setting: you can recognize kai’s face by how wide, bluntly structured and sensual it is. jongin is a sight. he has such an aura, serious, sultry, and smiling alike.

with a very recognizable silhouette (like... holy hell!):

he’s very cute as well ♡ the fandom and kai himself have an adorable analogy going on. jongin calls himself a teddy/nini bear and we joined in on it. (i made a thread about it here, it talks more about his offstage life) — hence kai’s fans are called eri-gom, eris as in exo’s fanbase and gom meaning bear. 

and i mean. look at him. what an attractive guy. he’s that handsome. strong brows, teddy eyes, square jaw, swept hair, glorious lips, tan skin. 

now yes, something important concerning his appearance and a serious topic: i don’t want to list you the endless instances of colorism that kai has to endure but it has to be mentioned. jongin has been called every name in the book and people agonize him over his skin incessantly. it goes on and on and on. every day a new terrible comment about him emerges because some pitiful person thought it was funny and would elevate them. 

he’s had to deflect, ignore, reframe, defend, remotivate, assert, harden, prove, denounce, and push himself, protect his confidence, decline skin bleaching constantly, laugh along, dance and practice thrice as hard to get the respect, and still see his dignity torn to pieces all day. i’ll just give it to you straight, that’s all fucked up. kai’s skin is perfect, he’s amazing and wonderful. 

in his own words:

— exactly right. say it even louder.

having him at the bottom of every joke is weird and messed up. this man is an utter beauty and nothing has to be fixed. it is up to him to define himself rather than get called ugly for his skin’s appearance by default, and get whitewashed at every opportunity. it’s been going on for 27 years, he scrunitizes himself all the time and doesn’t look at himself fondly because he hears these beatdowns daily.

it’s heartbreaking that this happens literally with no end in sight (’kai is just a stripper!’... ‘he has bad vibes’... ‘darkest guy jongin!’). for his skin, and how he decides to show it, too. jesus christ his skin looks fantastic, end of debate. they just can’t handle him, kai couldn’t be any more immaculate.

♡

jongin has vigorously protected fans from discrimination, bullies, and shaming himself whenever it came up. in a very straightforward and deadpan manner because he knows exactly how it damages you. (”J” in the subtitles = jongin, he’s wearing the plain white top at the very back)

we need to protect and praise him that way right back. it’s important.

so, needless to say. all in for jongin getting the center stage he deserves. because he has the wow factor in every regard. kai usually opens an MV because there’s no better way to get people’s attention with that level of presence. with kai, you can’t go wrong. if you get the center in a an all star group like superm, you are the king.

being part of that presence, kai’s stage alter ego has reached levels of infamity you can’t even imagine. it’s great to see him being sovereign without apology.

and it doesn’t stop there. he shows time and again that acting, props, and commanding the audience has to be mastered to be an exceptional dancer. kai owns his sex appeal. sometimes, he even dances a portion of choreo with his eyes closed because he’s feeling it so much.

he is a pro in using his surroundings as well, superm’s stages are a glorious opportunity for kai to show how he comfortably ‘lives in’ the 3D space around him.

which makes the viewer do the same: watching kai makes you feel amazing, energized, but also serene and enjoying the moment. 

there’s always balance. it’s the magic of it. e.g. he comes along with so much impetus and decisiveness but eventually, he halts to offer himself. here i am — take me. i’m yours. closed arms, open arms. walking, kneeling. looking down, looking up.

kai goes every extra mile there ever was and makes each eye contact count. involving the audience, one grin at a time. it works. it’s about establishing contact. he connects to the onlooker with so much nuance. 

kai’s smirk is notorious and you can see why it’s so raw and real: he makes it linger. it’s such a duality since his dancing says i’ll come over, while his message is come and get me, i know what’s on your mind.

with a hilarious twist – kai expertly uses humor. you don’t get that in many dancer repertoires. i love it. all those quick expression changes. his smile! 😊 what a man.

so — what makes him so good and known: yes, his style doesn’t deny that dancing and eroticism are one in his business. that takes courage. kai has it. iconic performances have been his reward. point dance/killing part: exo’s love shot choreo. 

that suit has swept the nation. what’s more: kai shows you it’s more than just good hip movement that a good dancer needs. he does everything at once, he puts the pleasure on his face, all his limbs are following the template he chooses.

the thing is. kai couldn’t be any shyer, but when the music starts he becomes a oscar-winning madman. he emotes constantly (!) and stays in character. this is gold.

jongin always plays it up. he knows how to use that face and does a lot of power posing. this is how visceral looks like. he’s interpreted exo’s aggressive concepts to a T.

and he has so. much. fun. it propels him. on every beat.

past every hurt, heartbreak and injury, man. if you know about his genre you knew this was coming, kai does all of that with 4 herniated discs. since debut days, never recovered. every gif in this thread, he dances with a battered spine. wheelchairs, stage collapses, relapse-recovery-schedule tales, the dilemma of injuries being inevitable, limping, kai falling into depression during breaks, constant pain killers, countless tears on stage, we’ve seen it all, the extreme end of it. 

kai works out like hell to literally keep his body from falling apart. but it doesn’t help the nerves in his back that are impacted. doing choreo you can sometimes literally see the pain kicking in and he pulls himself through with force for the last minute. once you know how strained his back is, you can see it.

at the end his expression goes fuck now it’s coming when the adrenaline fades. he takes every second-pause he gets to rest but still finishes each move. even when he holds back, he keeps it together and executes each turn. sometimes, he has to restrict himself and soften his movements to protect his health (especially in hard choreographies such as lucky one which is universally disliked by exo — still jongin makes the very best of it smiling bright and dancing so hard his sleeves come off).

he frequently states he ‘dances in any case unless his legs are affected by something’. all torso injuries are fair game, this guy is hardcore. and people claim he’s just pretending. chen (a fellow exo member) says not a single part of jongin’s body is intact. he has paid every price to get this far to follow his love. he’ll step on stage with crutches. he works SO HARD.

that being said: exo being called the official nation’s group, i say kai is the nation’s dancer. period. he has had his great moment at the korean olympics flawlessly dancing in a hanbok with traditional instruments and fulfilling his dream. 

i love the tension and drama he can bring. he can also thrill with slow, vulnerable movements alike.

kai’s is called a legend, he’s all that and even more. the facial expressions alone are feared by any kai stan because they hit home. 

this guy is a sex icon and goes off like a gun, messing around was never kai’s incentive. 

while at the same time being incredibly nuanced and so, so descriptive with his movements.

point dance: baby don’t cry. yep, kai has danced in water. must-watch.

this man loves what he is doing. he said he wouldn’t regret to die on stage because dancing is his destiny. boy, it shows. this guy has found his purpose. he can tell any story he wants. he’s a complete artist.

he’s perfectly portraying his incentive and he couldn’t look any more like a god on earth.

long story short, kai is dance and motivation goals. if you dance professionally, you can easily look toward him for the right words.

if you want to further your study and knowledge: he released a self-titled solo album recently. highly recommended. he worked forever on it, and he’s really dishing it on there. you get to hear his soft voice plus sizzling footwork. and he isn’t even getting started yet. you’ll hear from kai, i promise. he constantly achieves new levels of artistic perfection.

a last remark. jongin is amazing for a myriad of reasons that go beyond what i show you here given the post focuses on his work on stage. but the point stands, while other people have tried to break him, he broke through every barricade instead and stood up for himself. we can be extremely happy to have him and witnessing his unreal dance is an exceptional pleasure. here’s to jongin continuing his passion and confidence, healing, and getting the sweeping respect and acknowledgement that is his.

[mostlymovieswithmax]

Movies I watched in March

Thought I’d chronicle the films I’ve been watching over the March period, from the 1st to the 31st, and how I’d rate them. If you’re looking for something to watch, perhaps this will help. A lot of these movies are available on streaming services also.

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013) - 10/10

I hadn’t watched this in a couple of years but I was blown away. Peak Scorsese.

Rushmore (1998) - 7/10

Not the best Wes Anderson movie for me but still fun.

Lion (2016) - 8/10

I discussed this at length on my podcast: The Sunday Movie Marathon. Great movie!

The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014) - 10/10

Now this is one of the best Wes Anderson movies. I discuss this more on The Sunday Movie Marathon. Fantastic, funny and I watched it twice because it’s so much fun.

Inception (2010) - 10/10

Discussed on The Sunday Movie Marathon. Best Christopher Nolan movie for me, Inception is just breathtaking.

The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou (2004) - 5/10

This might be Anderson’s weakest film (at least from what I’ve seen) but it’s still not as bad as a lot of directors at their worst.

The Royal Tenenbaums (2001) - 10/10

I was really on an Anderson binge in March. The Royal Tenenbaums is one of the most wholesome movies I’ve seen and certainly one of his best films.

Rome, Open City (1945) - 4/10

This was filmed in Nazi-occupied Italy and from that premise, the film enticed me. Despite having some interesting qualities, I do feel that initial pull is most of what the movie has going for it.

The Prestige (2006) - 7/10

I showed this to my brother and for what it’s worth, he enjoyed it. I do think this is one of Nolan’s weaker efforts but considering how much I like it, that speaks a lot to Nolan’s filmography as a whole.

Nostalgia (1983) - 10/10

I watched Nostalgia three times in the space of a week and reviewed it on The Sunday Movie Marathon. It’s phenomenal.

Kangaroo Jack (2003) - 1/10

Another one I watched for the podcast. Kangaroo Jack is truly terrible and it upset me a great deal. Avoid this movie.

Stalker (1979) - 10/10

Another Andrei Tarkovsky movie (director of Nostalgia). I watched this again during the day before my second watch of Nostalgia and while it’s hard to compare such different movies, I enjoy Stalker more. It’s a staple of Russian cinema for a reason.

Four Lions (2010) - 5/10

Watched for the podcast. I didn’t really gel with this comedy but it would certainly appeal to someone who enjoys the humour, as my co-hosts did.

Revolutionary Road (2008) - 6/10

This Sam Mendes joint was a tad too melodramatic but still boasted some great performances from Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet.

Metropolis (1927) - 6/10

This silent film is a staple in cinematic history. Its themes are as painfully relevant today as they were in the 20’s, yet despite that I found a lot of it to be intensely boring. After it hit the hour mark, I started playing it at 1.5x speed.

Crimson Peak (2015) - 4/10

A lot of great set design and costumes and colours, yet the story itself was madly uninteresting.

Eternal Sunshine of The Spotless Mind (2004) - 10/10

Who doesn’t love a good movie written by Charlie Kaufman? I reviewed this on The Sunday Movie Marathon and after a third watch, it is as fascinating as it is gut-wrenching.

Godzilla (2014) - 3/10

If you wanted to see Godzilla fight a bunch of monsters for two hours, then this is not the movie for you. There’s maybe about ten minutes total of on-screen Godzilla action and considering that’s really all anyone’s watching this for, it’s amazing the titular sea lizard occupies so little of the movie.

Prisoners (2013) - 10/10

Brilliant mystery thriller by my favourite director, Denis Villeneuve. Discussed on the podcast.

Eraserhead (1977) - 7/10

David Lynch’s debut feature film went down in my estimations this time around. You can listen to why on The Sunday Movie Marathon. Still, Eraserhead is a very good movie.

Raiders of The Lost Ark (1981) - 6/10

The first Indiana Jones movie proved to be a fun romp and Harrison Ford plays the character beautifully. I’m just not a big fan of Spielberg and his average verging on pretty good but rarely ever great movies. Perhaps on a second watch, I may enjoy this more.

The Seventh Seal (1957) - 9/10

Watching this movie again was so much fun. So far, it’s my favourite Ingmar Bergman film. It’s a celebration of life and love, with an underlying sense of dread as death looms ever-present.

Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom (1984) - 5/10

I can tell why this generally looked on as the weakest in the trilogy. Harrison Ford is still great but the movie dragged a lot and felt more like a bunch of things happening for the sake of it rather than a fun action/adventure.

Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade (1989) - 7/10

The Last Crusade was a lot of fun and maybe it was Sean Connery’s inclusion, or perhaps the bottle of wine I drank through the movie elevated my enjoyment. But alcohol aside, I still believe this to be the best in the series.

Justice League (2017) - 2/10

People really weren’t kidding when they said this was bad. I watched this in preparation for the Snyder cut and I was not happy. This took years off my life.

Zack Snyder’s Justice League (2021) - 3/10

Barely any better and double the run-time of the original. I discussed this on The Sunday Movie Marathon and I was certainly not impressed. Better luck next time, Zack!

The Truman Show (1998) - 10/10

Brilliant movie and one I would highly recommend for a stellar Jim Carrey performance. This was another recommendation for the podcast.

Eighth Grade (2018) - 7/10

I was impressed with Bo Burnham’s debut feature. This is a coming of age story centred around a young girl growing up in the modern world and how it can affect the youth of today. Burnham shows a deep understanding of youth culture and a real knack for filmmaking.

Bad Education (2019) - 8/10

A real “yikes!” movie. If you want to learn a bit about the embezzlement that took place in an American school back in the early 2000’s, you need not look further than this tight drama with fantastic performances from Hugh Jackman and Allison Janney.

Twelve Monkeys (1995) - 8/10

One of the only movies where the time travel makes sense. I recommended this for The Sunday Movie Marathon and it’s pretty great.

Ready Or Not (2019) - 7/10

Despite a premise that is not wholly original and a super goofy third act, Ready Or Not is gory, violent fun with a lot of stylish art direction.

Dead Man (1995) - 3/10

Recommended on the podcast. I really did not get a lot out of Dead Man. It’s a very slow movie about Johnny Depp going through the woods and killing some people on the way, but it’s two hours long and hugely metaphorical and sadly it just didn’t connect.

Misbehaviour (2020) - 6/10

A big draw for me in Misbehaviour is Keira Knightley; I think she’s a great actor and I’m basically on board with anything she does. I’d been wanting to see this for a while and I was shocked to see just how relevant it is (being set in 1970) to the world we find ourselves in today, where women are still fighting to be heard and to be treated equally. While the film is not spectacular, I still got a lot from its themes, so recently after the murder of Sarah Everard and how women are being treated in their protest.

Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love The Bomb (1964) - 7/10

I was surprised at just how hilarious this early Kubrick movie is. While I can’t say it floored me or took any top spots, it’s still a great examination of the military and how they respond to threats or try to solve problems and the side of war we don’t often see in films: the people in the background sitting in a room making crucial decisions.

Taxi Driver (1976) - 10/10

Wow! I can’t believe I’d never seen this before but I’d never really had access to it. Taxi Driver is a beautifully made movie with so much colour and vibrancy. De Niro puts on perhaps his best performance and Paul Schrader’s timeless script works miracles.

Sleepy Hollow (1999) - 5/10

Classic Tim Burton aesthetics in a pretty by the numbers, almost Supernatural-esque story eked out over an hour and forty minutes.

Seaspiracy (2021) - 6/10

Everyone’s going crazy over this documentary and I agree it tackles important issues we’re facing today surrounding the commercialization of the fishing industry, but a lot of what’s presented here is information already available to the public. The editing feels misplaced at times and the tone is all over the place. Nonetheless, it’s still quite fascinating to see good journalism being done in a way that exposes this side of the industry.

Pirates of The Carribean: The Curse of The Black Pearl (2003) - 8/10

Super fun and a great first instalment in a franchise that sadly seems to have peaked at the first hurdle.

My Octopus Teacher (2020) - 8/10

Great cinematography and a lovely premise, this documentary has garnered an Oscar nomination and I can see why.

The Sisters Brothers (2018) - 8/10

A really solid western I was happy to watch again. It’s a shame no one really talks about this movie because it is excellent with stunning visuals and great performances.

Pirates of The Carribean: Dead Man’s Chest (2006) - 5/10

A strangely massive drop in quality from the original. If I didn’t like the whole concept of this franchise so much, I might have had a worse time.

Reservoir Dogs (1992) - 8/10

On a second watch, Tarantino’s first feature is still wildly impressive.

Life of Brian (1979) - 7/10

This is perhaps my third time watching Monty Python’s Life of Brian and it’s still incredibly funny, however it never manages to measure up to its predecessor (and one of my all time favourites), Monty Python and The Holy Grail.

[authenticdesperation]

A Review of Every Single Episode of Inside No. 9 [1/2]

Disclaimer: my opinions are not definitive but they are bloody good. There may be spoilers so read at your own risk. This will probably have to be a two-parter for the sake of my sanity and your scrolling.  

Series 1

1. Sardines 

A killer way to kick off a series with an absolutely top notch cast. This episode probably wins the award for the episode I’ve spent the most time thinking about after watching, putting all the little things that went over my head at first into place. I love the set design in this episode as well with everything seeming delightfully old fashioned. 

2. A Quiet Night In

This episode is something of a masterclass in farce and it is a Bold Move to have the second episode of a new series almost completely free of dialogue. It’s dirty, it’s fully of silly slapstick and it’s a nice change of pace after the rather harrowing ending to the first episode. 

3. Tom and Gerri 

This is an episode I enjoyed more when I thought about it more. It beautifully shows the decline of Tom’s mental health (acted impeccably, lovely work from Reece) due to grief. Also it was quite nice to see Reece and Steve acting opposite each other more, they have great chemistry together and Steve as Migg is perfectly unsettling. 

4. Last Gasp

Now, I have to be honest with you: I do not exclusively have glowing praise for this episode. I enjoyed it far more after watching it more than once as I liked the humour of it. One of my favourite things was the video camera perspective at the start, as well as some lovely moments with the music. However, I’m not overly keen on the ending, I just found it slightly underwhelming. 

5. The Understudy

Back on the praise train kids! I am a big old Shakespeare nerd (as are Reece and Steve, apparently) and I studied Macbeth for my GCSEs so I was particularly excited when I watched it. I will also have to give a little nod to the directing of this episode, it was an absolute feast for the eyes. 

6. The Harrowing

Oh hell yes (no pun intended). I think this episode is a great one to cap off the first series, really demonstrating the versatility of Steve and Reece. Also, I’m a big horror fan and the entire atmosphere of it really appealed to me. Though I would say that the second I saw that house I would have run about fifteen miles in the opposite direction.

Series 2

1. La Couchette

This episode is very similar to Sardines in the sense that it feels rather claustrophobic, but this time it leans far more towards the comedy side of things rather than drama. Bonus points for Steve demonstrating his German skills. 

2. The 12 Days of Christine

Ah yes, the episode I’ve cried at every time I’ve watched it. This one is a strong demonstration of how to wrong foot an audience: you never quite know what’s going on until towards the end and all of the horror-esque moments just add to the confusion making the ending one hell of an emotional gut-punch. I wouldn’t watch it if you need something to cheer you up, though.

3. The Trial of Elizabeth Gadge

My second favourite episode of series two, The Trial of Elizabeth Gadge is packed to the brim with silly puns and smutty jokes. I personally predicted the twist but in this case I don’t think it really mattered as I was too busy enjoying the Horrible Histories for adults thing that was going on. Bonus points for another killer cast.

4. Cold Comfort

The first of two episodes directed by Steve and Reece and really quite a bold one at that. The whole thing is filmed in the style of a CCTV feed, which I’m pretty sure an experienced director would warn you off trying, but it really pays off in the narrative. Since the camera doesn’t switch focus at any point, it really relies on the acting performances to keep your focus which, in my opinion, the cast fucking nailed.

5. Nana’s Party

If I had to describe the episode in two words they would be ‘domestic drama’. It’s a fairly classic setup of a family with their fair share of secrets, namely adultery and alcoholism, but happily doesn’t give the game away too early and a layer of humour is added by the slightly irritating prankster character of Pat. It’s the second episode of the series directed by Steve and Reece and has a sort of understated quality to it, showing Claire Skinner’s character’s exacting nature above a layer of familial drama. 

6. Séance Time

My favourite episode of series two, at first you think you’re walking into another haunted house scenario until you find out it’s a prank show that went off the air due to a scandal. There’s a great sense of humour throughout, and I don’t know whether I’m easily freaked out or the final jumpscare was genuinely terrifying but I flew about fifteen feet into the air when I saw it. Once I’d peeled myself off the ceiling, I really appreciated that it felt like a slow burn horror despite still only being half an hour. 

Series 3

1. The Devil of Christmas

I live for schlocky horror films that are so cheesy they give you nightmares if you watch them before bed. So the 1970s film within the episode, accompanied by a director’s commentary-cum-police interview performed by Derek Jacobi, was an absolute treat. The story of Krampus is one that has been done a lot, but never as a snuff film (as far as I know) so it was a nice little twist.

2. The Bill

Every time I rewatch Inside No. 9 this is the episode I always have to watch no matter what. It is such a simple premise and it feels slightly reminiscent of the Geoff, Mike and Brian sketches from The League of Gentlemen. Now is probably the moment where I should sing the praises of director Guillem Morales who has, quite frankly, become my personal hero having seen the many, many episodes of this series he’s directed. The framing in this episode is absolutely genius, but it’s only really obvious after you’ve watched it a few times and I have to give kudos for making a dialogue-heavy episode visually interesting. There are jokes that I think about at least twice a week and I am obsessed with Jason Watkins’ acting...I think this will be my longest review of this whole post. 

3. The Riddle of the Sphinx

This is the best episode I will never watch again. I love horror, and I’ve watched some bone-chilling films but something about this episode made me feel so uncomfortable. It is also a real testament to Steve Pemberton, who I’m led to believe is the cryptic crossword fan who took the lead writing this episode, that he wrote something involving cryptic crosswords that didn’t give me a migraine. 

4. Empty Orchestra

Ah, what a nice change of pace after the last episode with something far lighter. The karaoke booth concept is so fun and I’ve never understood the criticism of the episode. That being said, of every single antagonist in every single episode of Inside No. 9, Connie is the character I love to hate the most. All of the characters feel more like people you’ve met before and the vibe of a group of work colleagues in a karaoke booth going through the usual petty drama feels familiar. I think series three is one that has some of the darkest concepts and this is a great exception to that. 

5. Diddle Diddle Dumpling

When I looked in the background more while rewatching this episode, I noticed a lot of things were in twos. I can only assume that was a deliberate choice made somewhere along the line, and one that pays off when you notice it. Both Mat Baynton and Keeley Hawes played their parts to perfection, with Mat really doing quite a lot with a fairly small part. The whole episode reads as an interesting analysis of grief, in a similar sense to Tom and Gerri. Also, Reece’s character did not murder the remaining twin and apparently I’m the weirdo for thinking that was what was being implied. In my defence, there was cannibalism earlier in the series; filicide did not seem like that big of a leap.

6. Private View 

Agatha Christie eat your heart out (that wasn’t meant to be a reference to the ending, it’s just a happy accident). Murder mysteries are my absolute jam so I am obsessed with this episode. The modern art show is such a great setting for a whodunnit as demonstrated by the reaction to the discovery of Peter Kay’s character’s body. All the characters have their brilliant little quirks, and the killer is revealed at the perfect time and it was a good idea to not make that reveal the twist. 

[kishimoto-did-us-dirty]

Naruto Arts School AU

Reposting bc I love this post and bc I can lol

Character

- major

description

Naruto

-Drums

okie nobody can deny that our main boy over here is a loud soul, however, he can also carry a damn good beat that compliments his band mates’ music really well. Tbh, he sucked at music to begin with and had trouble matching rhythms and listening to his band mates when they played, however he eventually became a really good rhythm maker.

Sasuke

-Guitar (lead)

He’d be assigned to the same band as Naruto, and that’s how they met. This boy is a damn good guitarist y’all, but has attitude problems™, and used to not be able to deal with Naruto’s haphazard beat making, thus perpetuating a rivalry between the two. He constantly feels overshadowed by his elder brother Itachi, a piano major.

Sakura

- Dance

Ya girl fucking demolishes every single dance routine. Initially starting out with a focus on ballet (pre-shippuden in canon), our pink headed queen soon realized that she wasn’t getting the full experience of what it meant to dance. Her point shoes were her loves, however they hurt and nipped in places not just physical. She realized that she didn’t want to be pigeonholed into a genre of which she would be inhibited by standard, and rather to dance so as to forget technical perfection. Thus, what would partner with post-shippuden Sakura in canon, Art School AU Sakura got into hip-hop. And bitch, she goes hard. A lot of the other girls who she used to dance ballet with admire her for her absolutely BODYING her dance routines, but also for never sacrificing her femininity to dance and not taking BS for being a girl who goes so hard in a male-dominated genre. (Some people believe that hip-hop is heavy hitting and a little metaphorically “dark” so to speak, which Sakura is not. So obviously I expect a little disagreement regarding this, however if you look at people like Delaney Glazer or Kaycee Rice, that is how Sakura would dance).

Hinata

- Creative Writing

Shy and bookworm-like, Hinata can write the best poetry, romance and adventure pieces out of all the creative-writing majors. She’s especially good at writing character relationships and development, and has such a subtle sense of intelligent wit in her writing, that if you blinked you would miss it. However should you catch it, you’re sure to chuckle. Her only struggle is that she tends to drag on in important scenes, stretching them against the regular flow of the rest of her writing. Needs validation for her writing through an IV drip.

Kiba

- Drums OR Photography

Drums for obvious reasons (loud and obnoxious), although ruff boi looks good with a camera, too. Great at landscapes and street photography.

Shino

- Creative Writing OR Photography

I could definitely see Shino having fucking beautiful handwriting, and being a beast at writing anything within the sci-fi realm. I could also see him doing some journalism, and writing for the school paper. He’s very good at the logic of his sci-fi books and coming up with logical but enrapturing stories, that intermingle knowledge and mystery. He’s a very specific type of read, however, and may not appeal to all, however if you enjoy anything similar to Star Wars or Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy, then Shino is your author. If this doesn’t float your boat, though, try photography-major Shino. He can get the best angles of bugs he sees, and has an extensive portfolio with entomology-related snapshots.

Ino

- Dance

Like Sakura, she, too, began with a focus on ballet, however began to branch out into contemporary ballet a little later than Sakura. This is another reason why Sakura switched her focuses, as she and Ino had always had a fierce rivalry for dieting (ballet dancers are pressured to be as thin as possible) as well as battling for technical perfection when they were ballet focused. As the two grew, Ino focused more so on contemporary, but can certainly do some hip-hop with Sakura every now and then, just as Sakura occasionally takes a contemporary class with her. The two still have a rivalry, however, just not to the previous extent as when they were actively competing against each other. They’re more like sisters.

Shikamaru

- Guitar (bass) OR Creative Writing OR Architecture

Smart boy’s a tricky one. He would either be a bassist, a mystery and historical fiction writer, or, of his school offers it, be great at architecture. Idrk.

Choji

- ermmmmm….. maybe graphic design? Tech theatre (props)? Vocal???

Choji is hARD dwnccnpc (that’s what she said). I could see him behind a computer screen, animating and designing games/covers/posters or whatever. He could also do something in theatre, but I don’t think he would do anything up on stage. Something like props would suit him. He might do something in music, tho???? Can he sing???? Help???

UPDATE: Choji is a band kid. He plays tuba or some shit. Big boy got big lungs.

Tenten

- Dance

Always has been, and always will be a hip-hop dancer. She wanted to be like Tsunade, a legendary dancer and followed in her footsteps, taking up hip-hop. (that’s why Sakura focused on hip-hop, too, because Tsunade mentored her and taught a few of her classes, too). Tenten is fast and can keep up with any beat. Not only is she a great dancer, but she’s also athletic, and does track and field (cross country), football, and softball at another school too, since the arts schools doesn’t offer it. Overall great dancer with styl. She’s really looked up to by some of her underclassmen for her cheery, but badass style and skill.

Lee

- DANCE (hip-hop, too)

It’s sweat. It’s burn. It’s energy. It’s Lee.

Neji

- Violin

First chair violinist in his freshman year for the school’s philharmonic orchestra. He be extra like that.

Gaara

- Guitar (bass)

He had a lonely childhood with neglectful/abusive parents, and rock music really helped him with that. Emo music is emo and often made fun of, but the songs have messages and Gaara related, so self-taught himself the bass guitar to help cope, and bring him closer to the music that salvaged him.

Kankuro

-Art

Specifically sculpting. For obvious reasons.

Temari

- Acting

Girl can make you cry with some of her monologues. Total lead. Has a seriousness in her acting that makes her believable, however can falter on the less-serious roles. She may also double-major in whatever Shikamaru does. And she’s better at it than him.

Itachi

-Piano

Boy could play any etude at age 7. Performed at Carnegie Hall when he was 10. And no, he didn’t pay to play there. The hall invited him. Began composing at 9. Has perfect pitch. Owns international awards. If he’s not at school it’s because he’s traveling to play for crowds. He excels at classical and baroque, however has an ear for romantic, and enjoys playing/composing pieces either written or inspired by romantic pieces. Enjoys Schumann, Debussy, and Tchaikovsky. Hates modern classical music, though. Can only take cinematic pieces composed by people like Williams, however can’t stand Prokofiev at all. He does like modern music, though, so long as it’s outside of the orchestral/classical music realm. He likes R&B. He would have liked to do film with Shisui, particularly producing, however his parents pressure him with piano, so he helps Shisui with student films and projects outside of school (will probably pursue film after graduating, tho).

Shisui

- FILM / VIDEO PRODUCTION

Fight me on this!!! THIS BOY IS SO GOOD AT CINEMATOGRAPHY MY FILMMAKING ASS CAN’T EVEN. AS SOMEONE WHO IS IN LOVE WITH FILMOGRAPHY, TRUST ME, SHISUI HAS IT™. THE IT™. HE’S GOOD AT EVERYTHING. CINEMATOGRAPHY. DIRECTING. SCREENWRITING. GRIP-WORK. EDITING. PRODUCING. HE’S SUCH A FILM NERD TOO, AND WATCHES OLD FILMS ALL THE TIME. HE’S JUST TOO GOOD AT IT. DOES STREET PHOTOGRAPHY TOO. HE’S OVERALL A GENIUS WITH CAMERAS. Does film with Itachi outside of school and teaches him, and the two are overall geniuses at filmography. They want to start their own studio together (they do, and it becomes huge). He becomes a leading director, while Itachi becomes a producer and directs sometimes too.

Sasori, Deidara, and Sai

Guess.

Kakashi

- Saxophone

It’s the only thing that suits him and it suits him so well. Has suave.

Obito (omfg his arms y'all)

- Not to say drums or anything, but…. drums.

Narutard 2.0. But he also dabbles in other areas of music. Like, he can also play guitar and sing. He’s also pretty good at music production. Makes R&B sometimes. He wasn’t always the best musician but proved to be a late bloomer, and really harnessed his potential. Tries to be as suave as Kakashi and his saxophone. He isn’t.

Hashirama

- Vocal

OkaYYYYYY. VOCAL GOD. CAN DO RIFFS AND RUNS AND HAS PERFECT PITCH. ALSO THE SWEETEST GUY??? WAS A CHAMBER SINGER AS A FRESHMAN. EVERYONE LOVES HIM, GOOD BOY ENERGY.

Likes to belt.

Madara

- Piano

Total prodigy, but hates classical music. Once was accompanist to Hashirama for a solo vocal performance and hasn’t been left alone since.

Tobirama

- Viola or Cello

Some sort of string instrument and takes it very seriously. Probably plays cello because violas are violas and that’s lame (if you know, you know). Has almost as many awards as Itachi and Madara, but hates his usual piano accompanist, Izuna.

Izuna

- Piano

Also a piano god. The uchihas breed them. Hates being accompanist for Tobirama. They’re secretly best friends though, don’t tell anyone.

Karin

- Tech Theatre.

Idk why. Probably started out with props and made her way up to TD (technical director) in senior year.

Suigetsu

- Tech Theatre

Fucking hates theatre kids. Assistant TD. Karin hates him.

Jugo

- Visual Art

Paints landscapes and nature. Really good with oils and gouache respectively.

Yamato

- lmao Trumpet.

Met Kakashi since they both play brass, but boy he ain’t got that suave. That’s why he plays trumpet. Lmao he plays the fucking trumpet anjdwcnojdnn.

Rin

- Vocal

Sweetest voice and could also play the acoustic guitar when she sang. Died in a car accident junior year. Kakashi was at the wheel when they got hit by a drunk driver. Obito saw the whole thing.

Kurenai

- Visual Art

Can create dream like paintings that almost seem like illusions.

Asuma

- Cello / guitar

Used to play cello because of his parents, but loves to play guitar. Can sing but his voice is raspy from smoking.

Gai

Who the fuck do you think teaches dance?

Jiraiya

- Guitar (lead)

Used to major in lead guitar. Sucked at first. Probably has a couple, casual Grammy Awards (they’re actually not that hard to be awarded with, The Recording Academy award many people outside of mainstream media. My school has a few). Now teachers as head of the Band department at this school.

Tsunade

-Dance

Legendary dancer. Probably toured with a few famous people. Now teaches. Mentored Sakura, and mentored Ino but for a shorter time.

Orochimaru

- Idk, didgeridoo, or some shit

Definitely a wood wind. Flute maybe??? Teaches now but no one knows what he does. Pedophile. Has a thing for Sasuke.