#and i'm very critical of live action adaptations

[graunblida]

not me about to make lexa's pirate verse into a one piece au

[likeabxrdinflight]

I want to talk more about the way the characters have been adapted for the live action adaptation, because character writing is the thing I care about the most and as a psychologist it's probably the aspect of any story that I'm most invested in. I can get around pretty much any plot contrivance or weird maguffin or even shitty pacing if the characters of a story are engaging enough. This is my bread and butter, so to speak.

And I want to start with Iroh, because I think he is by far the best adapted character from the original. But I suspect I think this for different reasons than other people might, because the beloved Saint Iroh from the animated show this man is not.

See the thing with animated Iroh is that he's just...a bit too perfect. We know he's been complicit in the war in the past. We know he laid siege to Ba Sing Se, we know he had a complicated past. But we never really see it, we only barely hear about it, and more often than not there are other aspects of Iroh's past that serve to further deify him. He was a general in the war, but then he goes on to protect the last dragons and learn the true meaning of firebending. He led a 600-day siege and lost his son but he came out of that experience Enlightened, having journeyed to and from the spirit world. He joins up with the White Lotus (at some point) and becomes the wise old sage we know and love.

Except most of that is revealed in later seasons and is inconsistent with his actions alongside Zuko in season one. Season one animated Iroh is kind of a passive character, largely existing for comic relief and as a support to Zuko. But there's very little to suggest he's disloyal to the Fire Nation or their cause. He says it himself- "I'm no traitor, Zhao!" Now you can certainly interpret that line in several different ways, but I suppose that's the point- there's a lot left up to interpretation with animated Iroh. We get a sense of who he is in relation to Zuko, but his own development largely happens off-screen. And because to Zuko he's a wise, caring uncle and mentor, that's largely how we, the audience, see Iroh. We love him because Zuko loves him. And that's fine for what it is, and clearly it was effective- Uncle Iroh is almost universally beloved. But it does leave a lot of questions about him up in the air.

Live action Iroh is a very different character. This Iroh is a deeply broken man who was been profoundly impacted by the war and what he has lost because of it. I do not get the sense that the loss of Lu Ten has led to any spiritual enlightenment for this Iroh- there's no indication that he can see spirits, for example, or that he has ever traveled to the spirit world himself (he does still oppose the killing the moon thing, though.)

Right out the gate, we get the sense that this Iroh has lost faith in what the Fire Nation is trying to achieve with the war. He explains to Aang fairly early on what the Fire Nation's goal and perspective is, and can rattle off this dogma quite easily. But when questioned by Aang if these beliefs are also his beliefs, he dodges them rather un-deftly. So you know immediately that this Iroh doesn't really support the war. Later you see him somewhat bluntly telling Zuko that the throne may not be all it's cracked up to be, and he's fairly openly critical of Ozai in other moments. So you know from the jump that Iroh's not really on Team Fire Nation.

And yet this is also not a truly repentant man. When he is captured in Omashu, Iroh gets another brief scene with Aang while they are both imprisoned there (this is before Aang meets with Bumi). And in this scene, Aang tries to convince Iroh to help Zuko stop being The Bad Guy. And Iroh defends Zuko to Aang and stresses the point that it is not Zuko who owes him any great debt, but he who owes Zuko. Later, when he is confronted (and hit several times) by an Earth Kingdom soldier who lost his brother during the siege, Iroh does not apologize. He does not flinch at the man's accusations, nor does he deny them. He defends himself, albeit weakly, by stating he was a soldier, and it was a war. He has the audacity to accuse this soldier (somewhat obliquely) of having been made dishonorable by the effects of war. It's kinda messed up, honestly.

But then this man accuses Iroh of knowing nothing of loss. He leaves the shot, and we saw Iroh's face just crumble, and the scene cuts directly to Lu Ten's funeral, where Zuko chooses to sit with his uncle and support him through what must have been the darkest moment of his life. Back in the present, it is only later, after Zuko has come to rescue Iroh, that he speaks more honestly to the Earth Kingdom soldier- he shows mercy and states that they've all "seen enough death."

So what we have here is an Iroh who is deeply disenchanted by the war and does not support it or the goals of the Fire Nation, but who has continued to stand alongside Zuko and support him in his goals. We have a man who doesn't necessarily regret his actions as a soldier in the war but who very much does regret what those actions have cost. We see a man who is profoundly impacted by loss and grief and has become emotionally reliant on his nephew as a source of support. Not that he's parentifying Zuko or anything, he's very much not, but he is rather obviously channeling all the love he once felt for his son into Zuko instead. Zuko is his lifeline, he needs Zuko and you get the sense that without him, Iroh would truly fall apart. I mean the man is on the verge of tears more often than not when Zuko is in even the slightest bit of danger in a way that animated Iroh was not.

This is what I think is different here. Animated Iroh seemed to turn against the war because it was morally wrong, it had thrown the world out of balance, and imperialism is bad. Live action Iroh seems against the war because it wasn't worth it. It wasn't worth the cost, or the death, or the grief. He couldn't see that until he lost Lu Ten, but now he sees it everywhere. I get the sense that this Iroh just wants it all to stop, and I'm not sure he cares how that happens.

The White Lotus is definitely hinted at, but I suspect that was his motivation for joining it. It's not about restoring balance to the world for this Iroh. It's about restoring peace, so that he won't have to lose Zuko like he lost Lu Ten. So that the death and destruction stops. So he can just live a quiet life and put the past behind him.

It's a different take. And it's not that he doesn't still have a lot of wisdom to him, that he's not still a gentle, caring person. But he's a much sadder person, and he's lost that sense of "enlightenment" that his animated counterpart had. There's a selfishness you can read into to this version of his character that's much more apparent than the animated version.

I think a lot of people are gonna hate this, because it's a darker take on a much loved character. But I love it. This Iroh is human, this Iroh is flawed, and this Iroh has a lot more growing left to do. And that's awesome. If we get to actually see more of a character arc for him too, if we get to see him also growing and changing alongside Zuko? Please. It's not like he needs a total redemption arc, per se, but if in his journey with Zuko throughout the Earth Kingdom we can see Iroh gain some of his fortitude back, we can see when he decides he needs to push Zuko down a certain path, to take a side in the war, to see that it's not just the death and destruction that makes it wrong? God there's so much potential with that.

Now, maybe this isn't what will happen with seasons two and three. Maybe they'll back track and try to make him more similar to the animated version. I don't know. But for now? Live action Iroh is fantastic, and Paul Sun-Hyung Lee is giving a hell of a performance. He's warm and tender when he needs to be, fierce when he has to, and just profoundly sad throughout it all. And I love him so much more for that.

I'll be controversial here and say it. So far, live action Iroh is a better character than animated Iroh.

[twig-tea]

I haven't been posting about it week to week but I have been keeping up with My Love Mix-up (the Thai adaptation) and I'm still sitting with how badly this latest episode (ep7) is sitting with me. I just have to purge this so I can move on. Criticism of the adaptation below [including spoilers through to the end of episode 7 and very vague spoilers for the source material].

I wish these show writers would not try to shoehorn an adapted work into the bubble, because this line they are trying to walk is disturbing. By having an older gay character tell Atom that he shouldn't characterize his relationship as different, it's suggesting that societal norms and social expectations are not real, but are something Atom invented. His fear is treated as a joke and an overreaction, something to overcome, and everything I've heard from Thai people in the real world tell me that is very much not the case. This is such a different message from the original manga and Japanese live action, which were both about having the strength to defend your relationship in front of obstacles and trust the people in your lives who have earned it. There's a huge difference between learning not to live in fear even though there are realistic things to be concerned about, and learning your fear was misguided/not based in reality after all so you can just let it go. Queer kids should not be taught to not trust their instincts about who to trust with their truths.

This is the same mistake GMMTV made with the changes they made to 23.5, and it tells me their writers fundamentally don't understand internalized homophobia. You don't develop internalized homophobia in a homophobia-free bubble--kids are not born with it, it has to be learned. We are taught to hate ourselves by parents, by media, by teachers, by strangers...to set a show in a world where that is not a reality, and then to have characters have those fears anyway, is insulting and dismissive of where those fears come from and how they are based on realistic fears about potential outcomes. Gay kids do lose their families and have their lives blown up over the people they love--that is not a joke or an overdramatic statement.

I am really upset by this. It feels like these shows are saying queer people are foolish and delusional for being afraid. I've had people in real life tell me that my concerns were overdramatic before, and I've also seen people badly hurt because they didn't take the threat of homophobia seriously enough. I just...it's not that I worry this will be a model for anyone's behaviour. But this adaptation took a story about characters I could relate to, and changed them so that the show instead instead is invalidating my experience. It feels dehumanizing. In trying to be an escapist piece of media, this show instead became painful for me to watch. I sincerely hope I'm an outlier and other queer folks watching this didn't feel it in the same way, because I don't want other people to be feeling how I'm feeling right now.

I'll be walking away from this one.

@bengiyo I think you mentioned feeling similarly disturbed by this approach in your stray thoughts, so I'm tagging you in case you wanted to add on.

[im-getting-help]

The way people reacted to Saltburn reminded me of a tiktok trend or "challenge" in which you had to watch the opening scene of Nocturnal Animals (2016).

(I'm not going to spoil the movie, go watch it is beautiful.)

It reminded me because the movie is so interesting and enthralling but it was played for jokes. No one was watching the movie, they felt "disgusted and uncomfortable" even though they didn't even tried to watch it.

The commentary of Saltburn was so similar, it really upset me. It was like people were saying "yeah, we watched it this time, it's still too gross".

Nocturnal Animals explores the tense relationship between the protagonists in a very gruesome and violent way. Those choices are not made for shock value, they tell a story. The same way Saltburn showed desire and obsession and in my opinion the perfect representation of unchecked limerence with the bathtub and cemetery scenes.

I have no doubt that in a few years they will be a new tiktok (or new platform) challenge that dares you to record your reaction of the cemetary scene with no context. And it makes me so sad.

It makes me sad not only because of the unappreciation of such amazing movies, but because I feel we are teaching teenagers to not have media literacy. I honestly feel like we're allowing people to just watch movies like they're cocomelon. And I think is dangerous for cinema.

Martin Scorcese shared in a few interviews how he feel that the popular movies are not really cinema, that they fail to convey real emotion and they don't take risks. I think he's right, he makes a direct reference to the MCU but to me he's describing at least 70% of the movies that comes out in a year.

Everything is simple, easy to understand, overly explained. A cast full of well known actors and a beautiful score, or a passable one, and you have a movie. You don't need a new story to tell, not really, you can just reuse an old one. Make a retelling, a remake, a live-action adaptation, a secuel or a prequel with lots of CGI. You got a movie, congrats.

To me the new movies are always disappointing, they're a way to kill time but never a moment to appreciate art.

And this is why the criticism of Saltburn frustrates and saddens me so much. Cause is not a perfect movie (well, to me it is), but is so SO much more than what we're served on a daily basis. It's rich and complex and beautiful to watch. The score is fun and playful and at times heartbreaking and breathtaking. The actors are just incredibly talented and well directed. The clothing and makeup is just a wonder to watch, going from the cringe of 2006 teenage fashion to the opulent gowns and suits. So much of this movie is a pleasure to observe, to discover.

It breaks my heart to think that the future of cinema is... white noise, filler, the equivalent to eating a sandwich instead of cooking a meal cause you're too tired to do more. So much so that when you're presented with a home cooked meal you're unable to enjoy the taste, too accustomed to simplicity.

[maximumqueer]

In lieu of the second season of OPLA starting production, I want to talk about my mixed feelings on the first season of it.

Because I got into the anime and manga through the live action. So I will always like it at least a little bit for introducing me to honestly my favorite piece of media ever. But now that I'm caught up with the anime and manga, and know the characters and story better, I find myself having more criticisms of it.

The overall narrative is rushed in a way that leads to important character moments being glossed over. Syrup Village in OPLA is a good example. Usopp does a lot less in the live action, most of his big emotional beats cut for what I can only assume were time constraints. Reducing Gin's role to a one time appearance, and the Don Krieg Pirates to a cameo also feels like a product of the limited runtime, and cheapens Sanji's reasoning joining the crew, as we never get that moment where Luffy witnesses him feeding a starving man, and decides then that Sanji will be is cook. Replacing it instead with Luffy seeing him fight and tasting his food. Which in my opinion kinda misses the point of why Luffy wanted him to join. And that was because of Sanji's kindness, which is not nearly as present in the live action.

OPLA also removes a lot of side characters from the islands the main cast visit, making the world feel smaller, and the stakes lower. Like, the reason I personally cared so much about Luffy and Co. helping out places like Orange Town, Syrup village, Cocoyashi Village, is the people that live there who we get to know (in the anime and manga). I feel far more invested actually knowing the names of several of the people and the village, and knowing that their lives will be better after the big bad is taken down. It's not just a fight for the sake of having a fight, but a fight to help out a group of people who need it.

These characters also end up trying to free themselves from the big bad. Them playing an active roll, and not just being used as hostages (like they were in the live action) is just so quintessential to One Piece in my opinion. Having characters native to the island already willing to stand up to the force controlling them, and Luffy's involvement being to aid them, and not just swoop in a save a group of passive bystanders who were simply waiting for a hero to save them, is subversive for shonen (hell just fantasy in general) and having the live action remove that just feels wrong, as characters having freedom and agency is a big overarching theme in One Piece that has been there since day one.

Then there is the characterization. Zoro is probably the most egregious change. Zoro (bur especially pre-ts Zoro) was far goofier than his live action counterpart. And I do think that that level of goofiness is essential to him as a character. Like, I cannot picture OPLA Zoro attempting to cut off his feet, fail, and then decide to strike a cool pose while he is slowly turning into a wax statue. I cannot picture that version of the character beefing with a bird while lost, when said bird is LITERALLY a compass. OPLA Zoro just feels like your stereotypical stoic cool guy, when he is very much not. He is a bit of a loser (affectionate) and to see him be treated like he isn't feels off. Nami and Sanji are closer to their anime/manga counterparts, but are still different.

OPLA Sanji is not pathetic enough. To use an analogy, OLPA Sanji would take off his coat to place it over a puddle so a pretty woman didn't have to get her shoes and feet wet. Anime/manga Sanji would hurl his body onto the ground, and have the woman use his back to prevent getting her shoes and feet wet. They said this change was to dial down the more pervy parts of his character, which is fair. But that aspect of his character only really starts up in a bad way in Thriller Bark. The part of the series that adapted was when Sanji was pretty much only presented as a hopeless romantic who worships the ground all women walk on and would do anything a woman asked of him.

Nami is similar to Zoro, in that she is just to serious. They both lack the whimsy their anime/manga counterparts have. And she just feels a bit more one dimensional in the live action because of it.

As for Luffy. Him referring to himself as a "good pirate" just feels all sorts of wrong. He has never shied away from that label, and never has had any issue with being lumped in with "bad" pirates in the anime/manga. He never was angry about being framed for crimes, but I get the feeling that OPLA Luffy would be more likely to be angry about that, because he is a "good" pirate. This Luffy doesn't feel like he would go on a rant about not wanting to be viewed as a hero. They also made him nicer overall, and this sounds like a weird thing to complain about, but Luffy not holding his tongue and just telling people how he feels about them, positive or negative, is what makes him as a character work. Is what separates him from a typical run of the mill shonen protag. Him being a kind, but not nice and overall blunt in conversation is pretty integral to his character, and I can't help but feel that the writers and directors of the live action were afraid of keeping this character trait because it could make him unlikeable. (despite that fact that he as been #1 in literally every One Piece popularity poll)

And obviously this is not a critique on the actors, I think they did a phenomenal job portraying their respective characters. This is more about how the writers/directors/producers decided to adapt and change the characters.

I kind of suspected that when I watched the anime (a more one to one adaptation of the manga) as well as read the manga (the source material) that I would end up having more issues with the live action. I do still like it for what it is, and I'm planning on watching the second season when it comes out, I just wanted to share how my opinion on it changed after reading/watching and catching up with the anime and manga.

[jyeshindra]

ALL ABOUT VIRGO ASCENDANT

Hey y'all! We've got the next installment in the ascendant series (so close to the halfway point!) with Virgo!

Ahhh Virgo, the dutiful maiden of the zodiac. I actually find Virgo to be one of the most interesting zodiac signs (mostly because Mutable Mercury in Earth is a crazy combination), and the ascendant is no less interesting!

Again, the ascendant is how the world sees us. It rules our physical body, our life path, the zodiac rulers of each house in our chart, our outlook on life, and how our energy purely manifests.

Virgo's ruler, as I said, is the observant and mischevious Mercury. But Virgo is a bit different from it's counterpart Gemini. Where Gemini is bubbly, activated, and motivated to communicate, Virgo is more about analysis. Picking things apart and reassessing it for practicality, efficiency, and economy.

The risings are much like this. They see the world as a project that can always be improved. There's always something to fix, something to readjust, something to change. They're noticing all the little details and how each detail is working in the mechanical whole.

It's why you're so put together, Virgo. These risings tend to be well-manicured. They appear neat and well-groomed, usually preferring understated clothing. They can also be a bit self-preoccupied; they always need to look or present themselves a certain way. Perhaps the eyes are bit doe-like or their features are petite and dainty. Some may wear glasses or some other accessory to highlight their intelligence and reserved nature. Regardless, their eyes always have this special intensity...like they're studying you and sizing you up. I once had a Virgo Rising friend who said whenever she goes on a date she looks first at a man's shoes, then works her way up for her analysis. Very on brand for a Virgo Rising, lol.

Virgos can range in their presentation a bit. Some are more anxious, self-aware, and self-critical. Some are more observant and analytical, quiet and reserved. Others are more warm and service-oriented. But again, there's an emphasis on efficiency and service/work.

With a 4th House Sagittarius, these risings have a very Jupiterian-like home environment. There are many opportunities to learn, grow, and these natives may be blessed in many ways regarding their homes. However, with Sagittarius we usually find there is a message and a battle between man and spirit. Being mutable fire, Sagittarius wants to both investigate it's own actions and also disseminate information. Perhaps there was scrutiny in the Virgos home regarding their actions or a specific set of beliefs were established regarding what was acceptable or permissible in the home. In an unhealed manner, Sagittarius can be very stuck in its ways and attached to its ego. The home environment could be very rigid in this way...perhaps through religion, beliefs, faith, or education! School and learning may be very important to these individuals as it is something that could've been emphasized by the parents/home environment growing up.

In their private lives, Virgo Risings can indulge themselves in a variety of exciting behaviors. These types may like to drink, smoke, and vibe out in the privacy of their own homes. Or they love to learn and read about other cultures, far-away places, and interesting people. These natives have an innate curiosity about life that's been hammered into them!

Says a lot about the Virgo's discriminatory, cerebral nature and even their penchant for condescension/criticism.

Something else I'm now thinking about...perhaps Virgos need for control comes from a chaotic home environment. Mutable signs in general can hold space for turbulence both internally and externally. These are signs who most easily adapt. The home environment could've been filled with people/parental figures coming in and out. Family staying and leaving. Parental figures who were inconsistent or irrationally angry. Avoidant parents who did not know how to deal with conflict. Again, we can keep going and going and going with these Sagittarius themes.

I'll try not to make the other house breakdowns too wordy. For the 10th, the public image, life, and vocation of these natives is ruled by Gemini! Communication and connection is ultimately how these natives manifest service in their lives. Often Virgo Risings will become actors (Timothee Chalamet, Janelle Monae, Emma Watson). This is a good indicator for music or some other lyrical ability as well. Jay-Z himself is a Virgo Rising. Another funny way it could manifest is with the examples of Steve Jobs and Rachel Ray! One created a company that revolutionized communication forever, the other became a lively TV show personality. All very Gemini vocations. Something about the information you have to share or the way you communicate is key here, Virgo Rising. You have the potential to inspire and be seen for your articulation and your mind. Enrich the qualities of both and you shall see success. It is Mercury who awakens your authority in life.

As for the 7th house, Virgo Risings can tend to pick partners who need help or who need to be fixed or saved in some way. Or partners who are just bad for them/toxic. This is the more unhealthy side of Pisces, a sign who can be severely ungrounded and drain the energy from others. Pisces is also a bit of a helpless energy and so Virgo Risings can manifest partners who reflect this. Virgo may attract emotional people in general! People who seek to dump their worries and emotions onto the Virgo. It's a very Virgo thing unfortunately. Everyone wants you to be there mother! People may sense you can heal them in some way or emotionally fulfill them...and while that may be true...boundaries! You are not here to serve everyone, Virgo! You are here to understand yourself and to fall in love with your imperfections. A humility can be found in Virgo and Pisces can help you do this! The opposition here is that Virgo needs Piscean partners/people who inspire a dreaminess, a loftiness, and an ease in Virgo. You do not have to work all the time nor do you have to be so hard on yourself. Pisces can teach Virgo unconditional love and how to devote their energy to things that truly matter and will emotionally fulfill them. They will teach the Virgo to listen to how they feel and to truly evolve from their experiences. And Virgo, you need someone who is just as devotional as you!

Virgos have to investigate their own wounds and fears around authority and independence. There can be some guilt and wounding around leadership and being selfish (Aries 8H) that can take time to heal. There could also be wounding around being too self-focused! Virgo can be so caught up in controlling themselves and their own lives that they become vindictive and judgmental rather than open and receptive. It's about calculated risks with the 8H and acknowledging the areas of our growth so we may challenge those beliefs and unearth our power through change! Once you do, you will find a sense of peace and earthliness (Taurus 9H). Learning those Taurean themes will set you free and become your philosophy and foundation. Firm boundaries, stubbornness, holding your own. Learning to value oneself and one's abilities. Learning to hold space and be open to others as well. This is what you must learn so you may achieve your highest potential and communicate your truth! (Gemini 10th).

The esoteric ruler of Virgo is The Moon. Ultimately, Virgos learn to love without conditions, much like a mother loves their children. They focus on the immediacy of their needs rather than getting caught up in the details. Their lives become tapestries of healing and devotion rather than cold calculations. Information does not become the defense, instead it is distilled into medicinal wisdom that can benefit others. Virgo you are here to learn how to serve better.

That's all for this one folks! I had more to say here as a sidereal Pisces with a lottt of Virgo Rising friends. I tend to attract you all a LOT. Y'all bring so much rationality, care, and stability into my life and I appreciate it so deeply. I just want you Virgos to take care of yourselves and to open yourself up to new experiences! You can do it!

[drbased]

another thing I'm getting from this history of satanism video is how quickly and effectively society responds to feminism and redirect attentions away from men as a class.

second-wave feminism brings to light recognition of rape in the public consciousness as something done to all women -> satanic panic (rape is done by certain evil groups), stranger danger (rape is done by unknown men), serial killers (rape is done by specific, very bad men). the satantic panic one is especially interesting because it's such a clear diversion away from recognising where child abuse actually comes from: instead of recognising child sexual abuse as something done by men - any man from any background - to establish dominance over the family unit, child sexual abuse is redirected into something that happens under some evil corrupting force in a shockingly organised form. instead of it being random, it's done as a ritual; instead of it being patriarchal, it's done as a rejection of healthy patriarchal norms.

now we can look back and see that the psychiatrists who championed 'repressed memories' were agenda-driven and unprofessional, but the their motivations are never really given enough focus, and neither of the motivations of the general public, who were so ready to accept these now entirely debunked ideas. religious fears are the oft-cited reason, but as with all attempts to explain historical events without feminist analysis, the questions of why invisible, trauma-inducing child sexual abuse was the central fear are left on the table. feminist analysis makes the connection clear: as with any societal upheaval, there always needs to be a backlash, a re-establishment of social norms, an attempt to cram in the genuine rebellion of feminist ideas back into something palatable for the patriarchal society. recognition of rape as something done to cause harm and instill dominance makes a connection between rape of women and rape of children that society wants to ignore; the traditional view is that rape is of something erotic and adult-oriented, leaving child sexual abuse to be something rare and an aberration, and therefore scapegoatable.

so when feminist activism brought to light the inescapable connection between rape and patriarchy, the 'satanic panic' was a panic of patriarchy much more than anything - professionals, clients and society alike were so desperate to create a connection between child sexual abuse and literally anything other than patriarchy that they were willing to invent false memories of it. child abuse was once again recontextualised into an aberration that could be scapegoatable. and then within a relatively short period of time the ideas of both satanic child abuse cults and false memories were very rapidly debunked and dropped; they lasted for as long as it needed to to quash patriarchal fears, and then its cultural legacy was the implicit belief that you can't always trust people (women) who claim to be victims of sexual abuse.

as every cultural idea of its kind, there's a kind of dual purpose that serves as a two-pronged attack on feminist ideas: feminists bring to light criticism of a certain aspect of patriarchy -> invent a right-wing version of it that's farcical and absurd on the face of it -> debunk that idea as soon as needed so that the feminist critique is lost and forever tarred with the implication of extreme right-wing absurdity. of course, it's always impossible to say how much of this is deliberate; but leftist analysis always seems to uncover just how beneficial even seemingly damaging societal attitudes are to the power structures that perpetuate them - what's most likely is that these things are happy accidents and that power systems are incredibly adaptable. but also we see in our personal lives just how purposeful and knowing people can be in their actions in a way that seems unknown to them (freud brought to light the idea of the 'unconscious'), and it seems that this translates inter-personally/culturally as well. it seems to be hard-wired in us to seek out and perpetuate things that benefit our sense of self-preservation, even if they harm us in other ways. self-harm wouldn't be so attractive otherwise - people will come to the end of a journey of self-harm, depression, substance abuse etc. and say 'oh, I was doing that because my father left when I was 3' or something to that effect. we're creatures of narrative, and seem to desire to live according to it, and we're also social creatures who communicate with each other via narrative, creating a collective narrative. so it makes sense to me that societal patriarchal narrative-making would be as purposeful, arcane and self-destructive as individual narrative-making.

[gege]

Hiii, how are you? I hope you are doing ok! <3 sending love and hugs. I wanted to ask you... i think i remember something about tgcf having live action adaptation. Was that real or was just a dream i had or something? If it's real do you know if we will have it or what happened to the project? Idk if my mind made that up! sorry and thanks :)

Hiii Anon!

No, it's not some mad collective fever dream we all had, they really did film it (6 months of shooting between July 2021 and January 2022). Native title is 吉星高照 (Ji Xing Gao Zhao) English title is Eternal Faith.

If we ever get to see it is another matter, i probably don't need to say the main reason is because it's a danmei adaptation - it'll have a harder time passing the censors than the average cdrama. Since the popularity of other dangais it seems the censors have become stricter in any case. Job one is always going to be passing the censors.

While checking chinese websites and articles I did find several sources of a rumour that the site security punched a girl who was visiting the set. I can't vouch for the reliability of this but anything that can potentially attract criticism can delay a cdrama release further. Other criticisms include the casting of the male leads, how cheap the set design and costuming look, and a cancelled actress who may have to remain uncredited.

So it will need to satisfy the censors in order to be relased, as well as satisfy the general public and tgcf fans to be worth releasing and I'm not sure if it can do it all. If all goes well and it does ever pass censorship, we won't get a release date in advance. I don't know if you've ever experienced waiting for a cdrama release but you will not get much warning when it airs. It will likey drop with a couple days warning in form of internet rumours, or just completely out of the blue.

HAVING SAID THAT - another rumour is that a full costume bl drama like the untamed will be released internationally in Sept 2024, bypassing a Chinese release. It's just a rumour but it does make this webpage very interesting! But please remember everything above and not get too excited just yet 😂.

I'm gonna share some set photos just because 😍

Zhai Xiaowen as Xie Lian

Zhang Linghe as Hua Cheng/San Lang/Crimson Rain Sought Flower

Chang Huasen as Shi Qingxuan/Wind Master & Tian Xuning as He Xuan/Ming Yi/Earth Master

Vin Zheng as Nan Feng & Li Fancheng as Fu Yao (+ bonus Wind Master)

Liu Lingzi as Xuan Ji

Liu Jinyan as Ling Wen & Wang Yueyi as Female Wind Master

Xiao Kaizhong as Feng Xin/Nan Yang & Cai Yao as Mu Qing/Xuan Zhen

Bian Tianyang as Qi Rong/Prince Xiao Jing/Green Ghost

Lu Yuxiao as Yushi Hung/Rain Master. She played Shangguan Qian in My Journey to You, but as she was fairly unknown at the time of filming jxgz so there are no photos to be found of her as Rain Master 😩.

Anyway, let's all quietly try to will this into existence with physic powers etc.

Thanks for sending me an ask, have a lovely day anon!

(∩^o^)⊃━☆

[randomgirlyoudontknow]

No one will probably read this, but as a long-time fan of ATLA (as in, I literally watched the show as it aired in 2005-2008), I wanted to share my thoughts on the live action. Let it be known that I am far from an ATLA purist––the original certainly had its own flaws and aspects that didn't age well, in retrospect. Despite the generally negative reviews I've seen from the fandom, I was actually very satisfied with this adaptation! But I’ve seen people saying that the characters were butchered, that it’s a soulless and superficial reproduction, and those who liked the live action aren’t capable of thinking/watching critically, which I wanted to push back against (I mean, I’m working on a doctorate in literature…I am quite literally incapable of watching anything uncritically).

The shift in tone to a darker, more mature one was a positive change, imo. It is definitely a much angrier show than the original, even if some of the characters were not as fiery as they should have been (*cough* Katara *cough*). Overall, while there were certainly decisions made that I didn't agree with (mainly related to pacing and narrative), I thought the cast and crew really captured the spirit of the original, and even added depth and nuance to parts I felt were initially lacking.

In general, I really appreciated the added emphasis on the cost and suffering of war and imperialism, as well as the depiction of the physical effects of bending. Now, I realize this is largely a matter of personal preference––for example, I'm very interested in depictions of war in fiction (I mean, my dissertation partially covers the impact of WWI on avant-garde art & literature, so...). But I've seen several claims that the live action glorifies war and violence in a way that is meant to traumatize the viewer, and I simply don't think that's true? While the original handled war, genocide, trauma, etc. in a phenomenal way for a kid's show in the early 2000s, it was also still sanitized when it comes to death and injury, to an extent that I feel like we, the viewers, almost lose sight of the fact that bending KILLS. Sure, we were exposed to its after effects, like the death of Katara and Sokka's mother or Zuko's scar, but there's something to be said actually seeing and acknowledging the very palpable danger that something like firebending presents.

I've even seen someone say that the show's depiction of "gratuitous violence" constitutes a "profound misunderstanding" of the source text, which I think is frankly a bad faith take. The death and violence, though more realistic, is still not a major focus of the show, nor is it glorified in any way. A glorification of violence would look like indiscriminate killing and maiming for the sake of edginess (looking at you GOT). We would see graphic depictions of death and injuries, which simply does not happen in this show (they even joke about the fact that we never see anyone die in Ember Island Players). War and fighting are still treated with the same depth and gravity as the original, only this time, the severity of its consequences isn't obscured from the viewer.

I also thought the show's handling of trauma (especially Katara's) was excellent. The choice to have Katara's mom's death revealed in flashbacks (specifically when around firebending) was something that really stood out to me. And the new characterization of Bumi, which I realize was quite unpopular, was another change I quite appreciated. His bitterness and cynicism seemed more in-line with someone who had endured 100 years of war and the suffering of his people at the hands of a brutal imperial force. Lastly, I was pleased to see the narrative attempt to address the role Iroh played in the Siege of Ba Sing Se (something that was absolutely missing from the original). The Earth Kingdom soldier confronting him and calling him a butcher was a powerful moment, for me. I truly hope the show continues to dive into this aspect of his character in future seasons.

Speaking of characters, I loved that we got extra background and insight into several of the characters. Zhao, for example, was unexpectedly quite funny, and his actor really did a phenomenal job of fleshing him out and making him feel like a real person (as slimy and smarmy as he was) rather than a stock, cartoon villain. And I have to give kudos to the actors who played Sokka and Zuko––they both did an incredible job of embodying their respective characters, in a way that felt highly reminiscent of the original. In particular, I thought the handling of Zuko's backstory was truly outstanding––perhaps even better than the original.

All in all, I felt the live action did a really nice job of balancing the darker sides with the light. While I've seen fans complaining that the show doesn't have the same goofiness and lightheartedness, I actually thought the humor worked really well––it was one of the few times I felt the overly ironic, Joss Whedonesque one-liners actually fit. Sure, the humor was a lot drier and more toned down than the original, but I nonetheless thought it carried the show's spirit well (loved that they let Sokka say “ass” not once, but twice). There were moments when I genuinely laughed out loud! I also appreciated how, despite the more mature tone, hope, friendship, and harmony still remained the most important aspect at the end of each episode.

There's a lot of room for improvement, but I was overall very satisfied with the live action, and I'm very glad that the series has been renewed. I'm very excited to see what the cast and crew does with the rest of the show!

[burst-of-iridescent]

atla live action thoughts: season one review

first things first: anyone who says the Movie That Does Not Exist is better than the live action is straight-up lying. the shymalan film fails on the criteria of even being a decent movie, let alone an adaptation. the netflix series, for all its problems, is at least an enjoyable watch with great effects, music and (mostly) appropriate casting. there's absolutely nothing to compare here - the netflix version clears easily.

now that we've gotten that out of the way, let's delve into the series, starting with the positives.

the good:

visuals and cinematography. they really did a great job of making it feel like a fantasy universe you wanted to be in & i love how vibrant the saturation and colour grading was. it made the world feel so much more dynamic and alive instead of the same flat, boring dullness that so many movies and shows have these days. sometimes i didn't even mind that i was being fed obvious exposition because at least they were giving me something pretty to look at lmao

effects and action. the bending was surprisingly good for the most part, and they did a good job of making the elements feel unique through the stunt choreography and the actors' movements. i'm immensely thankful they didn't try to skimp on budget by merely cutting away from fight scenes or showing us as little as possible. almost all the action sequences were fast-paced and engaging, and i was never bored watching them

acting. the main four were all great, but gordon cormier and dallas liu have to be the standouts for me. gordon brings such an earnest, innocent sweetness to aang that you can't help but like him, and dallas plays all of zuko's facets perfectly: the angst, the explosive anger, the bratty snark, and especially the deep-rooted pain that characterizes so many of zuko's actions in book 1. the range he has, especially when flashing from younger to older zuko, was insane. special shoutout to maria zhang and sebastian amoruso as suki and jet respectively, because they killed it

music. leaves from the vine instrumental had me tearbending and i love how they kept the iconic avatar theme while making it a little darker for this iteration of the story. in general, the soundtrack felt very true to the animation while still being a fresh spin on it

zuko and iroh's relationship and expanding on zuko's crew. i think the fandom universally agrees that lu ten's funeral and zuko's crew being the 41st division were the best changes in the series, so i'm not going to talk about it further other than to say that these scenes show me what the show can be, and that's why i'm not giving up on it

the bad:

characterization. almost all the main characters are missing the little nuances that made them so great in the original, but the greatest casualty is katara. i hate that they took away so much of her rage, and gave many of her traits and struggles to sokka. i don't think this is a problem solely with the writing though, because certain lines do feel like things animated katara would say, but the directing and line delivery don't have the same punch that made her so fierce in the original. this is an easily fixed issue though, so i hope they take the criticism and let my girl be angry and fuck shit up next season

exposition. this was primarily a problem in depicting aang's personality and the relationship between the gaang, because a) why are you TELLING me that aang is mischievous and fun-loving instead of just showing me and b) the gaang do NOT feel like close friends, mostly because they spend so much time apart in every episode that they have little screentime to actually bond and develop intimacy.

lack of focus on the intricacies of bending. for a show whose tagline is "master your element" the characters spend very little time actually... mastering their element. zuko is never shown to struggle with firebending (which is going to have ramifications when it comes to developing his relationship with azula), and neither aang nor katara ever learn waterbending from a master throughout the the entire show. i'm pretty sure aang never willingly waterbends ONCE in the entire eight episodes, discounting the avatar state and koizilla. bending isn't just cool martial arts, it's closely linked to the philosophies and spirituality of each nation, and i wish that had been explored more.

pacing. they really needed to do a better job of conveying that time passed between episodes because an 8-episode season is just going to FEEL shorter than a 20-episode one. the original animation felt as though they'd truly been on a long journey before arriving at the north, but here it feels like the entire show happened in the span of a fortnight or so because each episode seemed to pick up right after the previous. they needed to have more downtime within episodes instead of just rushing from plot beat to plot beat because it made everything feel a lot more rushed. give the characters and story time to breathe.

final rating: 7/10.

overall, i would describe the live action as a better version of the percy jackson movies - not an accurate or perfect adaptation, but a decent story that's very fun to watch. but what really makes me root for this show to get a season 2 is that it has a lot of potential and more importantly, a lot of heart. it's evident that the people who worked on it do genuinely love and respect the original series, and it shows onscreen.

regardless of anything else, this show created opportunities for so many asian and indigenous actors, writers and creators to tell the kinds of stories and play the kinds of roles they don't usually get, and that's something worth supporting. if they take the criticism from this season and improve, i believe they really do have something special on their hands which - although it might not be the original we all know and love - could still be a story to be proud of.

[luminousdryad]

to make things brief cause I suck at organizing what I have to say, the live action was definitely Something™.

Cast: 10/10 kinda biased personally but yall can't take this from me

Gordon as Aang and Dallas as Zuko were the standouts imo. Gordon needs some direction on line delivery and the angstier scenes but overall he's very charming and I'm so proud of him for getting so much exposure!

Ian as Sokka was great, I just wish he was allowed to be more...messy? like Sokka pretends to be chill and all that but he's actually dramatic so I hope that gets improved in the next season if there is one

speaking of improvement, Kiawentiio as Katara brought out a softer side to the character but sadly diminished her spark and passion. I like that Katara now actually feels like a younger sister, it makes sense within the context of the story that Sokka and Gran Gran would shelter her after what happened, but as someone said, her anger is so central to her character and I just wish that got shown more. It's more of a script and direction problem tbh, if you look at Kia's interviews she has the sass and feistiness Katara needs

Lizzy as Azula is great, the writing is a bit clunky though so she did the best she could with it. Can't really comment on Mai and Ty Lee yet because they're kinda just there but it's a nice setup

Maria as Suki? perfection show stopping never the same she is a queen and I love the tidbit of Suki backstory which she never really had in the og show. I love her being such a loser around her crush we love to see girlfailures girlfailing. I wish the writers didn't make them KISS though 😭 slowburn ftw

the adults were great

Writing: 6.5/10

There were genuinely good moments and I love the concept of mixing up certain plot points to condense the story

But they just suffered from too much Telling instead of Showing WRITERS PLEASE LISTEN TO THE CRITICISM YOU HAVE TIME TO IMPROVE PLEASE

Omashu, mechanist, and Jet plot mixing as a concept was fine, but it dragged on and my friends and I got bored of it. I like it in theory but if it was going to take THAT long couldn't they have just separated one of those storylines for a different episode?

I appreciate that they tried to develop the water siblings' relationship by making them the stars of the Secret Tunnels, but I would've changed the way they "conquered" the problem (really? badgermoles respond to love? cute in theory but like why). If anyone's watched Barbie: A Fairy Secret there's a part where Barbie and her frenemy accuse each other of why their friendship failed, and it helps them make up and breaks the curse put on them. So that's what I would've done, force them in a life or death situation in which they have to say the unsaid things, maybe hug it out and boom

The way they handled Koh and the Spirit World was a Mess™ but the effects were decent

Zhao meeting horrible ends in every incarnation is so deserved

Yue having more agency was a welcome change AND I LOVE THAT SHE WATERBENDS. Then waterbends even when the moon is gone. It's such a nice visual nod to the fact that she has the moon spirit within her

That said, the show could definitely use more visual storytelling, less weird dialogue. Like it's so strangely common for shows or adaptations these days to exposition dump. Like they did not have to make Yue say that the ocean spirit was angry, literally just show me the dead moon fish and I'll get the idea. Then Iroh says "That's Wrath" that's just redundant now isn't it

I like that they saved Katara bringing Aang out of the Avatar State until last even if it could've been done better

HOW DARE THEY MAKE ME LIKE HAHN HE WAS A JERK IN THE SHOW BUT THEY MADE HIM A GENUINELY GOOD CHARACTER. Yes to brown men not being portrayed as jerks but also in the original it was a nice contrast to how far Sokka had come because Hahn reflected who he used to be. But live action Hahn </3

I like that they showed the deaths and blood. I wanted a live action that was both lighthearted but more realistic when it came to the injuries and death, and that'd kind of what I got

Other thoughts + overall

You can tell they put so much heart into this show, watching the bts, the bending boot camp with the correct martial arts, the easter eggs, the nods to the comics, the beautiful adaptations of Cabbage Merchant and Secret Tunnel nomads, there's so much passion behind the show it's a shame it suffered in its writing

which is why if they read reviews and criticism from the bigger name fans (TheAvatarist, HelloFutureMe, etc.) it would really help them improve for future seasons! The cast is stunning already and they have great chemistry (hopefully gets improved too!)

The live action is just a different angle to the show. And I'm saying this as an Avatar fan–the original wasn't perfect, either. I had some problems w it but the overall show was genuinely so good and heartfelt, those problems weren't glaring enough to put me off (unlike The Dragon Prince, sorry). The live action definitely wasn't perfect, but it tried to give us a new look into Avatar. Again, no adaptation will ever be a 1:1 remake and none should be. Where's the fun in that? But while the show is so full of heart and with actual fans working behind the scenes, I doubt if they listen to any criticism that they can't pull this off better next season.

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

Have you heard? Disney is making another Lion king, but this time, it's a prequel, and it's going to be about Mufasa's backstory. Which i think it's very interesting. i'm open to seeing how they're going to show/represent the movie. Even though it's coming out of nowhere? A prequel after all these years?

I've also seen a lot of criticism about the movie, even though it's not even out yet. A lot of fans are disappointed that Mufasa and Scar/Taka (interesting how they're using "Taka" instead of "Scar") are no longer blood related brothers, but instead, both are orphans which doesn't make much sense since in the original Lion king Mufasa comes from a lineage of royalty and gives Simba a speech talking about “great kings” and “let me tell you what my father told me” I'm open to new ideas and stuff but i don't know how to feel about it. Maybe it’s the nostalgia? This honestly feels like a cheap cash grab, and seeing how Disney has had quality control issues lately, it's either going to be a flop or not.

I'm just HOPING that they're NOT going down the "misunderstood villain arc" because I've had enough of it. if they’re going for the "Mufasa was adopted and usurper who took Scar's rightful place at the throne! Showing that Scar was right all along."

What do you think?

Oh, I’ve heard of it! I’m not that interested in watching though. I’ll probably just wait for it to come out while praying that TWST gives us free stuff in a promotional campaign and listen to some commentary or review channels give their takes.

According to Wikipedia, Mufasa: The Lion King is supposed to be a sequel to the 2019 live action adaptation, not the original 1994 animated film. The prequel film was confirmed in September of 2020, which isn’t that long after The Lion King live action movie came out. They’ve been steadily releasing new information about Mufasa, such as voice cast reveals in 2021, 2022, and April 2024. It was officially announced and title dropped in 2022 during the D23 Expo. It’s possible that the film took longer to make due to the pandemic and worker’s strikes that occurred between 2020 and now.

On the Scar/Taka thing, I believe “Taka” (I’ve also seen “Askari” in some sources) is Scar’s given name and “Scar” is a nickname Mufasa gave him following an incident in which Taka was as tricked and attacked by other animals, which was the origin of his scar. This information comes from The Lion Guard (a series I haven’t watched myself; this is what I was told by a friend who has). If Scar is being called “Taka” in Mufasa (and assuming The Lion Guard is canon), then that means Mufasa must take place prior to the brothers’ relationship souring and him getting his signature scar.

I watched the trailer and… the phrasing is quite odd??? Now Mufasa is “a lion born without a drop of nobility in his blood”. That implies he and Scar aren’t blood-related. In real life, that makes sense since it’s usually the strongest lion that leads the pack rather than the eldest. Scar has a line where he says Mufasa got the brawn whereas he got the brains, so it sort of supports this idea. However, making it so that Mufasa and Scar are unrelated orphans within the Lion King universe doesn’t make sense if you hold that up next to the already established lore. They imply multiple times that Scar lost his claim to the throne when Simba, Mufasa’s blood-related son, was born to succeed him. So royal blood of the king is important??? The only way Scar could take over was to eliminate those in Mufasa’s lineage. It’s possible that Mufasa’s speech to Simba about the “great kings” and his own father could be in reverence or to show love for his adopted dad or pack…? But that makes those scenes a lot less impactful. Additionally, part of the reason why Scar’s actions are so evil is because he committed fratricide. He turned against his own blood brother, then manipulated his nephew, whom he also shares blood with, into taking the blame. There’s something very visceral and cold-blooded about that—plus it adds to the Hamlet parallels.

Seeing as Mufasa is the titular character, I don’t think they’ll go down the route of intentionally making him the bad guy to Scar. Disney’s so shy about making its main characters morally grey or just bad people… though like you said, they might do it unintentionally because by writing Mufasa as an orphan, that means he’s an illegitimate ruler… meaning Simba is an illegitimate heir… meaning Scar killed/deceived those with no claim to the throne, so actually Scar was not in the wrong at all 💀 But technically it wouldn’t be Scar’s right to rule anyway because he’s not of royal blood either (since you said he's apparently also an orphan? I did not see this mentioned in the trailer though)??? Unless Scar is the one from a royal lineage and everyone else is just dead???

I think it’s still possible that we get something tragic between the two; blood does not determine everything. Mufasa and Taka could form a genuine brotherly bond that later falls apart. It doesn’t really make up for the retconning of current lore, but who knows 😂 maybe they’ll pull some of their old magic out and actually write a story that makes sense to lead into The Lion King. I’m not going to hold my breath though, the live action movies have never been that good to me 💦 I’m going to let the movie come out and speak for itself before I make any real judgments on its quality, as I don’t believe in jumping the gun (even given previous track records).

I wonder what this new movie’s lore would mean for TWST… Since Tamashina Mina was very inspired by The Lion Guard, that means (depending on how the film goes) Mufasa’s events could be retroactively integrated into TWST history?? It’s not a guarantee, but just something to consider.

[kustas]

Do you have reccs for "ugly" art (manga, comics, movie, etc.)? Thanks for the Tekkon recs btw I really liked it

That really depends on your own personal media landscape and what your definition of "ugly" is! As a random example, I've seen many people call ONE's art ugly because of the wobbly linework when I think it's lovely. Ugly could also mean something a bit shocking/crass in its themes. Etc, etc... I'm going to go with the definition of "something that's a bit jarring to look at or go through" here :)

Disclaimer: a lot of these tackle sensitive topics, sometimes for fun and not always tastefully. If there's themes you really can't handle in media, do your research before looking into them.

Manga

I keep recommending yes because it rules but Dorohedoro and its scratchy messy art and gore galore. talking about the manga exclusively here the anime is too polished for my taste

God's Child (Kami no Kodomo): tbh this one is for the art only I hated the writing. very gruesome & unique looking short story

I hesitate to recommend this one because it's edgy as hell but I shan't lie I had a lot of fun with Hellsing. it's "bad" in the same areas as something like berserk but unlike that one it does not take itself seriously

if you liked Tekkon i strongly suggest trying out more stuff by its author (saying this with immense biais). the most ugly/messy thing i've read of his, which isn't a lot because i find his work very delicate, is No. 5 which i would less describe as "good" than "very compelling to me". i also recommend this wonderful essay tearing it down

Comics (non JP)

FLEEP: a short story about a man who wakes up in a phone cabin seemingly encased in concrete. one of the comics i always recommend for its length and storytelling. (link leads to the artist's website where you can read it for free!)

The Astonishing Exploits Of Lucien Brindavoine: a young artist gets drafted in the first world war and goes through a series of almost supernatural adventures. beyond the adventure book aspect, a harsh criticism of nationalism/patriotism that's still awfully relevant

Animation

Ruben Brandt: Collector: a psychiatrist suffers from strange art related nightmares ruining his life. his clients, a bunch of high profile criminals, decide to help him fight off his demons by organizing one long vacation where they steal every painting involved. extremely unique visually, a fun heist movie with thriller elements.

Junk Head: goofy post apocalyptic movie about a man on a quest to save, who keeps losing sight his goal because cartoony violence episodes have his head tumble into new lows, literally. this is, perhaps, one of my favorite animated films ever, it's earnest and fun and lovingly crafted. very unique of a watch

The Apostle: freshly escaped from prison, a thief is on a mission to find treasure hidden by his old cellmate, and finds himself stuck in an ancient village who's strange looking elderly inhabitants are way too insistent on his stay. classic spooky folktale with its millennial curses and foreboding warnings, it's also a nice peek into the culture of Galicia and old world medieval weirdass catholicism. you can buy a DVD on their website

MKFZ: dumb as hell high adrenaline animated B movie with excellent animation. there's a plot about alien living undercover in fantasy california but you don't watch this kind of film for the plot. fair warning this is adapted from a french comic so of course, it's crass and racist

Blow to the Head - Lightning bolt: awesome music video (YT link)(warning for flashing/strobing lights if you're sensitive to that!)

Canon Fodder: from the Memories omnibus film. little slice of the life of a fantasy war obsessed industrial nation

with its new movie on the horizon, it's a great time to get into Mononoke, despite traditionally pretty visuals its got a unique style and gets pretty offputting

Live action cinema

7:35 in the morning: short film about the fear in improvised musical numbers where you don't expect any. it's on youtube in bad quality

The Draughtsman's Contract: an artist is hired by a Lady to draw several vistas of her house, in exchange for money, good drawing condition, and the Lady. follows a good hour of cunts in powdery wigs being awful to each other for their own gain. if you're into dark humor it's a good test, otherwise it has a really satisfying murder mystery to follow too.

Three Kings: during the gulf war, a group of US soldiers decide to steal Hussein's gold for themselves under the mighty standard of kuwait's loot repatriation. extremely caustic take on good ol murican international politics. i was shocked at how far it goes and it's express, low budget treatment which i did not expect from a hollywood film. the movie tires itself fast and becomes less good in its second half but the it's opening acts are interesting

Delicatessen: a sliver of humanity survives in an old timey stone building in the middle of nothingness on top of a functional butcher's shop. gossip follows the arrival of a new roommate. how does one even maintain a butchery in a no man's land? weird film with a unique(ly goofy) take on the post apocalyptic genre

Other

For traditional artists, I like the works of Beksinski (<3), Schiele, Giger. For modern artists Oleg Vdovenko (heavy gore warning for that one), Jeff Simpson

I'm less a fan of the MV and live performances they got infamous for than their music proper but I really like the band Cardiacs, who's judged by many of my friends to be extremely hard to get into lol.

[linkspooky]

Bohman is a good character you guys are just mean

Yu-Gi-Oh Vrains is one of the better received spinoff series. Though, like any of the Yu-Gi-Oh spinoffs it's not without its faults. Usually I'm the first to admit the flaws in my favorite silly card game shows, even while I myself take them way too seriously. However, there's one common criticism I can't bring myself to agree with.

That is calling the main antagonist of the second season Bohman "boring" or "badly written." I've noticed fans unfairly blame Bohman for season 2's writing flaws.

Forget for a moment about whether or not you find Bohman's stoic attitude interesting or likable. If you look at characters not as people, but as narrative tools the author uses to say something about the story's themes then Bohman has a lot to say about VRAINS cyberpunk themes.

Cyberpunk is a subgenre of science fiction that tends to focus on "low-life and high-tech." As I like to put it, in Cyberpunk settings technology has greatly advanced while society itself lags behind unable to keep pace with the rate at which technology changes. Yu Gi Oh 5Ds is an example of a cyberpunk dystopia because despite having what is essentially access to free energy, and living in a society with highly advanced technology resources are hoarded by the wealthy and an unnecessary social class divide still exists.

In other words technology changes quickly while humans tend to remain the same.

The central conflict for all three seasons of Vrains are actually based on this very cyberpunk notion. That technology changes, updates, and becomes obsolete at a rate too fast for humans to ever adapt to. For Vrains, the conflict is whether humans can ever coexist with an artificial intelligence they created that can grow and change faster than they can keep up with.

This is well-tread ground in science fiction. The idea itself most likely emerged from I,robot. A science fiction book that is a collection of dirty stories that details a fictional history showing robots growing slowly advanced over time. The framing device is that a journalist is interviewing a "robopsychologist" an expert in the field of analyzing how robots think in their positronic brains.

One of the major themes of the book is despite the fact that robots are 1 - intelligent and 2 - designed by humans, they don't think the same way humans do. Hence why a robopsychologist is needed in the first place. One of the short stories is the first appearance of Asimov's three laws of robotics.

The First Law: A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

The Second Law: A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

The Third Law: A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

This is just one example. A robot no matter how intelligent it is will be required to think in terms of these three laws, because robots aren't biological, they're programmed to think in pre-determined patterns.

Of course clever enough artificial intelligences are capable of finding loopholes that get around the three laws, but even then they're still forced to think of every action in terms of the three laws.

Robots and humans are both intelligent, but if AI ever becomes self aware it will 1) be able to process information better than any other human can and 2) think differently from humans on a fundamental.

Vrains is themed more than anything else around "robo psychology" or trying to understand the ways in how the Ignis think and how that's different from it's human characters.

Robo-Psychology is actually a common reocurring theme. "DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP?" fearless artificial humans known as Replicants who need an empathy test known as the voight kampff test to distinguish them from human beings.

There are other Cyberpunk elements in Vrains. There's a big virtual world where everyone can appear as custom designed avatars, that's taken from Snow Crash or of the most famous and genre defining cyberpunk novels. There's a big rich mega conglomerate that's being opposed by a group of hackers.

However, the central question is whether humans and AI can coexist in spite of the fact that AI are much smarter and evolve faster than us.

Revolver's father believes the Ignis must be destroyed in order to avoid a possible technological singularity in the future.

The technological singularity—or simply the singularity[1]—is a future point in time at which technological growth becomes uncontrollable.  According to the most popular version of the singularity hypothesis an upgradable artificial intelligence will eventually enter a positive feedback loop of self-improvement cycles, each new and more intelligent generation appearing more and more rapidly, causing a rapid increase ("explosion") in intelligence that surpasses anything humans can make.

Basically your computer is smarter than you, but your computer isn't self aware. It needs you to tell it what to do. Artificial intelligence already exists but it's programmed by humans, it doesn't program itself. The technological singularity proposes that eventually a self aware ai, will be able to program itself and improve upon it's own programming- therefore ridding itself of the need of it's human programmers.

This is what leads us to Bohman, an AI designed by another AI.

THE THIRD LAW

Before digging into Bohman let's take a minute to discuss his creator. Lightning was one of the six Ignis, created by Dr. Kogami through the Hanoi Project.

The Hanoi project involved forcing six children to duel in a virtual arena repeatedly, and using the data collected from that experiment to improve the AI they were working on, creating what became known as the Ignis. However, after Dr. Kogami ran several simulations and found that the Ignis would one day be a threat to the humans that created them Hakase decided instead to try destroying the Ignis before that future ever came to pass.

We later learn that this isn't the complete story.

Kogami and Lightning both ran simulations of the future when the Ignis were in their infancy. Kogami's simulations showed him the Ignis would inevitably go to war with humans. Lighting however, ran more in-depth simulations and found that he was the one that was corrupting the data set. If you ran simulations of the five ignis without him, then the projected futures were all in the green, but any simulation with Lightning counted as a part of the group projected a negative future for both humans and AI.

Which means that if Kogami knew that the bug in the program was Lightning, he'd likely respond by just getting rid of Lighting and letting the rest of the Ignis live on as originally intended.

This is where the third law comes into play - a robot must protect its own existence as long as it does not interfere with the first and second law.

Now, I don't think Kogami used the three laws exactly, but artificial intelligences are programmed in certain ways, and Lightning was likely programmed to preserve itself.

Even a human in Lighting's situation would be driven to act as they did. Imagine you're in a group of six people, and you fid out that YOU'RE THE PROBLEM. That if they removed you, everything else would be fine. Wouldn't you be afraid of your creator turning against you? Of your friends turning against you and nobody taking your side?

Lightning is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Ai asks him at one point why he went so far as to destroy their safe-haven, lie and said the humans did it and pick a fight with the humans himself, something that might have been avoided if they'd just stayed in hiding. It seems that Lightning is just defective as his creator declared him, but you have to remember he's an AI programmed to think in absolutes. AI, the most humanlike and spontaneous of the AIs ends up making nearly the exact same choices as Lightning when looking at his simulations later on - because they're character foils. As different as they may seem they still think differently from humans.

When Ai explains why he made his decisions based around lighting's simulation, he tells Playmaker that he can't dismiss or ignore the simulation or hope for the best the way Playmaker can because he is data, he thinks in simulations and processes.

AI even admits to feeling the same feelings of self-preservation that Lightning did.

While Lightning may seem selfish, he's selfish in the fact that he's thinking of his own survival above all else. He's afraid of 1) his creators turning against him, and 2) his fellow Ignis turning against him.

To solve the first he decides to make a plan to wipe out his creators. To solve the second, he needs every ignis on his side when he goes to war. The first thing he does is destroy their safe haven and frame the humans for it so the Ignis are more inclined to take his side. He's so afraid of his fellow ignis turning against him he even completely reprograms one of them - a step he doesn't take with the others, he just imprisons Aqua. He probably thought having one more ally would make it more likely for the others to pick his side.

Every step he takes is a roundabout way of ensuring his survival and the other ignis- eve when he actually goes to war with the other ignis he intended on letting them survive. Though his definition of survival (fusing with Bohman) was different than theirs.

So Lightning seems to be working out of an inferiority complex, but what he's really afraid of is that his inferiority makes him expendable.

At that point you have to wonder, what does death mean exactly to a being who is otherwise immortal? Ignis won't die of age, they'll only die if they're captured and have their data stripped apart or corrupted. Kogami made an immortal being afraid to die.

Some part of me thinks though that even after taking all these steps to preserve themselves, the simulations were so convincing that Lighting accepted their death as inevitable. Which is why they made Bohman, to find some way for them to keep on living afterwards.

After all AI are data, ad having their data saved in Bohman is still a form of living by Lightning's definition.

Ghost in The Shell

Bohman is the singularity. He's an AI designed by another AI to improve upon itself. Unlike the rest of the Ignis who were copied off of traumatized chidlren, Lightning basically made him from scratch.

Ghost in the Sell is a famous anime cyberpunk movie directed by Mamoru Oshii. The title comes from "Ghost in the Machine" a term originally used to describe and critique the mind existing alongside and separate from the body. Whereas in the movie the "Ghost" is the huma consciousness, while the "shell" is a cybernetic body.

The protagonist of Ghost in the Shell is Major Motoko Kusanagi, a human that is 99% cyborg at this point, a human brain residing in a completely mechanical body. The movie opens up with a hacker namd PUppet Master who is capable of "ghost-hacking" which is a form of hacking that completely modifies the victim's memories utterly convincing them of their false memories.

There's a famous scene in the movie where a man tells the police about his wife and daughter, only to be told that he's a bachelor who lives alone and he's never had a wife and daughter. Even after the truth is revealed to him, the fake memories are still there in his brain along with the correct ones. Technology is so advanced at this point that digital memories (hacked memories) are able to be manipulated, and seem more real than an analog reality.

Anyway, guess what happens to Bohman twice?

Bohman gets his memories completely rewritten twice. The first time he believes he's a person looking for his lost memories, the second time he thinks he's the real playmaker ripped out of his body, and playmaker is the copy. He's utterly convinced of these realities both time, because Bohman is entirely digital - and simulations are reality, and so simulated memories are just the same as real memories.

I think part of the reason that people find Bohman boring is because he's a little strange conceptually to wrap your head around, as an AI produced AI he's the farthest from behind human. If you use the ghost in the shell example I just gave you though - imagine being utterly convinced that you had a loving wife and daughter only to find out in a police interrogation room you're a single man living in a shitty apartment. imagine after the fact you still remember that they are real, even though you know they're not.

That's the weird space Bohman exists in for most of Season 2 when he's searching for himself. He's an AI designed by an AI so he can be rewritten at any time according to Lightning's whim until Lighting decides he's done cooking.

The Ignis at least interacted with the real world because they were copy pasted from traumatized children, but all Bohman is is data. So, why would he see absorbing human memories into himself and converting them into data as killing them? He is data after all, and he is alive. He has gone through the process of having his own memories rewritten multiple times, and he's fine with it b/c he's data.

Nothing for Bohman is real, everything is programmed so of course he thinks saving other people as data is just fine. He even offers to do the same thing to Playmaker that was done to him.

If Lightning is following the path of self-preservation however, Bohman is following his program to preserve everything in the world by merging with it.

His ideas also follow the idea of transhumanism: the theory that science and technology can help human beings develop beyod what is physically and mentally possible. That technology exists to blur the boundaries of humanity, and what humans are capable of.

Ghost in the Shell isn't just a work of cyberpunk, it's a transhumanist piece. Motoko Kusanagi is a character who has had so many of her human parts replaced with mechanical ones she even posits at one point it's possible for her to simply have been an android that was tricked into thinking it was human with false memories just like Bohman, and she has no real way of knowing for sure. The only biological part of her his her brain after all in a cold mechanical shell.

Bato, who represents the humanist perspective in this movie basically tells Motoko in that scenario it wouldn't matter if she was a machine. If everyone still treats her as human then what's the difference? His views are probably the closest to the humanist views that Playmaker represents in VRAINS.

Motoko Kusanagi meets her complete and total opposite, a ghost in the machine so to speak. The Puppet Master turns out to be an artificial intelligence that has become completely self-aware and is currently living in the network.

The Puppet Master much like Lightning, and later Bohman is gripping with the philosophical conundrum of mortality. In the final scene of the movie, The Puppet Master who wants to be more like all other biological matter on earth asks Motoko to fuse with him, so the two of them can reproduce and create something entirely new. The Puppet Master likens this to the way that biological beings reproduce.

Bohman like The Puppetmaster thinks that merging will fix something that's incomplete inside of him because he's so disconnected from all the biological processes of life. Bohman doesn't have anything except for which Lightning already prepared for him or programmed into him. I mean imagine being a being that can have his memories reprogrammed on the net, that in itself is existentially horrifying. It's only natural he wouldn't feel connected to anything.

Motoko accepts the Puppetmaster's proposal. Playmaker rejects Bohman's proposal. I don't think there's a right answer here, because it's speculative fiction, it's a "What if?" for two different paths people can take in the future.

However, in Bohman's case I don't think he was truly doing what he wanted. Puppet Master became self aware and sought his own answers by breaking free from his programming. Bohman thought he was superior to the Ignis, but in the end he was just following what Lightning programmed him to do. He'd had his identity programmed and reprogrammed so many times, he didn't think of what he wanted until he was on the brink of defeat by playmaker and then it was too late.

When Playmaker defeats him all he thinks about is time spent together with Haru, with the two of them as individuals. Something he can no longer do anymore now that he's absorbed Haru as data, and something that he misses.

He's not even all that sad or horrified at the prospect of death as Lightning was, and he even finds solace in the thought of going to oblivion with Haru, because if he were to keep living it'd be without Haru. In other words the one genuine bond he made with someone else by spending time with them as an individual was more important than his objective of fusing with all of humanity - which he believed was also bonding with them.

This is really important too, because it sets up the Yusaku's rejection of fusing with Ai. Yusaku's reasoning has already been demonstrated to be the case with Bohman and Haru. Bohman was perfectly happy being two individuals, as long as he had a bond with his brother. When he ascended into a higher being he lost that. Ai and Yusaku might solve loneliness in a way by merging together into a higher being, they might even last forever that way, but they'd lose something too.

Once again the problem with AIs is that they think in absolutes. That's important to understanding Lightning, Bohman and even Ai's later actions. Lightning can't stand any percentage chance that he might die, so he kills the professor, destroys the ignis homeworld, pulls the trigger to start humanity himself, he even reprograms his own allies all to give himself some sense of control.

Bohman's entire existence is outside of his control. He's rewritten twice onscreen, probably more than that, and he thinks merging with humanity is the thing that will give him that control - by ascending into a higher being than humanity. However, the temporary bond Bohman had with his brother Haru, was actually what he valued the most all along. Moreso than the idea of fusing with humanity forever.

Even Motoko making the choice to go with the transhumanist option is something that's not portrayed as 100% the right choice. Ghost in the Shell has a sequel that portrays the depression and isolation of Bato, the Major's closest friend and attachment to her humanity after she made the decision to fuse together with Puppet Master. In that case, just like Playmaker said to Ai, even if she ascended to a higher form, and even if she might last forever now on the network, something precious was lost. Motoko may exist somewhere on the netowrk but for Batoto his friend is gone.

Ai exhibits the same flaw as the previous two, he ca only think in absolutes, he can't stand even a 1% chance that Playmaker might choose to sacrifice himself for Ai and die, so he decides to take the choice entirely out of Playmaker's hands. However, no matter what Ai would have lost Playmaker one day, because all bonds are temporary. It's just Ai wanted to have that sense of control, so he chose to self-destruct and take that agency and free choice away from Playmaker.

It's a tragedy that repeats three times. Ai too just like Bohman, spends his last moments thinking about what was most precious to him was the bond he formed with playmaker, as temporary as it was. A tragedy that arises from the inability of the Ais to break away from the way they're programmed to think in simulations and data, even when they're shown to be capable of forming bonds based on empathy with others.

All three of them add something to the themes of artificial intelligence, and transhumanism that are in play at Vrains and none of them are boring because they all contribute to the whole.

Which is why everyone needs to stop being mean to Bohman right now, or else I'm going to make an even longer essay post defending him.

[wisehearts]

I don't know if this is spicy inherently, but there def could be some spicy elements depending on the answer.

The thin line between already being close friends with someone and officially dating them is an interesting question when it comes to byler. other than, like, making out and doing more lol, what do you think the main subtle differences will be between established byler and current byler? (spicy or otherwise)

Because they already have a pretty romantically charged friendship

I think you were maybe talking about the show, but I went overboard again, I'm sorry 🙏

it's a little tricky in ways isn't it, because in s4 they really were behaving like couples do, just standing closer or turning to each other in group situations.

I think the biggest differences are really going to be about intention. and behaving unapologetically both with each other and around others! they won't feel like their actions are "too much" for a friendship because it becomes unrestricted.

their friendship is romantically charged, which means there's a LOT of tension, and shifting into a relationship means there'll now be a lot more relaxed energy about them. They settle more into who they really are and can be, they'll appear a lot brighter both bc of their romantic relationship and from the acceptance of their sexualities. I think we'll start to see that right after the confession with the relief that comes from it 🥺

It's nothing we don't already know will happen, but I agree there's a very thin line in differences to happen with byler specifically. I honestly almost think it's just about putting a new label on what they already are 😂

When you have a connection that close, you can naturally get flirtatious too which is what happened in s4, and why I say the difference is about the intention and purposeful behaviour!

I guess actual examples would be in their touches? Right now we have them physically close but still not crossing the line between them, whereas in a romantic relationship they'd be touching in some way during deeper discussions, or at least offering it. An example being mike placing his hand on top of will's, or on his shoulder vs him holding will's hand and rubbing his thumb across it soothingly (something that can be platonic or familial too, but between two boys in this context, it's romantic)

in terms of their life there's the future planning: they may have little things about each other that they find annoying or don't agree on, or discover they will, but the difference is that with friends you can mostly just accept it because you're (usually) not living with them, or can criticize lightheartedly. The difference for mike and will is communicating they don't like something a certain way and finding middle ground because they plan to spend many years together.

you've got primacy and how maybe mike and will may have tried to divide attention between all the party, or sit next to them for movies etc, but once in a relationship they'll have reason to pick each other in those moments without feeling bad.

But that's also why I find it fun that byler are together in a friend group, because I like thinking about that development and how they will have moments dustin and lucas express they want time with them individually or together, but obviously byler would make it work easily and it's no problem. but lucas and dustin will adapt to the fact byler are officially each other's person now and it's not platonic "favoritism"

the spicy side again is intention! there are no accidental glances, or innapropriate touches, no guilt for enjoying the view, or perceiving things as suggestive and getting turned on. mike can stare at will's ass and then actually tell him how much he loves it

They're going to have sides of their everyday life reflect in there too. will feels comfortable to ramble as long as he wants without judgement? will's going to become comfortable expressing his pleasure and show another version of himself by being a little slutty in bed or whatever the vibe

As for what we could get on the show? I think a lot of the differences will actually come through in eye contact and held gazes. Definitely more touches and going back to that s2 physical closeness (ex. mike's arm around will's shoulder). and scenes where their priority is officially each other, even a little dramatically to get that point across. OH and a hug, but this time nuzzling into each other's necks and their hands having movement wherever they touch

I'd love any other examples others can think of, because I really had to wrack my brain, they're already behaving like such a couple 😭 but sometimes it's hard to define anyway because some friends have sex and some couples aren't super physical!

[themoodyestj]

I'm actually friends with a married couple, they've been together for a while, and they are adorable. one time I heard her call him a retarded pig, and I thought "wow, rude" but, you know how he responded? he started making pig noises on her face, and she freaking melted at that. he jokingly calls her an evil dictator and whenever she asks his opinion he always replies first with "I don't know, you are the dictator here, tell me what to do" I've heard her say things to him that are way meaner than anything Danneel has ever said about Jensen, but whenever anyone points out to them that she's too mean to him, he's like " oh yeah she treats me like trash, please help me" in a melodramatic voice. please note that I'm talking about adults here, older than 30. point is some couples are like that but that doesn't mean they don't love each other and even if they are my friends, I'm not entitled to poke my nose onto their business.

Ok, first of all, if you're the same anon from before, thank you for reading my reply and for using critical thinking while interpreting it. It makes you a far smarter anon than the ones I have been talking to this week. It is actually a pleasure to talk to someone who actually tries to consider a different opinion even if they disagree. You have my full respect.

Also, thank you for your anecdote about your friends, it actually helps me make my point. People have weird dynamics, right? We can be easy on making a wrong judgement, and even though I have a very strong opinion about this, I don't assume I know everything. But let me show you why i feel your friend's case is actually different: one time I heard her call him a retarded pig, and I thought "wow, rude" but, you know how he responded? he started making pig noises on her face, and she freaking melted at that. he jokingly calls her an evil dictator Here's the difference between laughing at and laughing with: he clapped back. It's an established dynamic between them, they both give as good as it gets but they know what the other means. In J and D's case, it's only her doing the talking, and he's taking it. Most often than not, he's praising her, but im yet to hear her say something nice about Jensen. It's not balanced, it's not a game with the same rules for both. Even the setting is different: would your friend call her spouse a retarded pig in front of his boss, or in a setting where he needs to look professional and presentable? D does it in interviews, where Jensen is trying to establish his image. Of course couples will have a weird dynamic in more private environments. But when a spouse refuses to adapt to the environment for the couple's needs (because his needs are the couple's needs) and uses said environment as a platform for veiled verbal abuse as a way to become relevant... that screams disrespect. Especially because he's making the money to feed her children, but even if he wasn't. whenever she asks his opinion he always replies first with "I don't know, you are the dictator here, tell me what to do" She asked his opinion! She considered his feelings! J, at some point in time, expressed his wish to take a break and live a bit more with the kids. He even expressed his joy for simple things, like spreading peanut butter in his kids' toast. He was away for months on end while shooting, he wanted to enjoy his family, and what does she tell him (which the AAs surely supported): "Get a job." Never once he said (to my knowledge) that they sat and discussed things. She mocked him for wanting to stay at home, and told him to get a job, even though she has none. I bet even though your friend's husband calls her a dictator, he deep down knows that if he expressed his opinion, it would be considered. I know other couples have different dynamics, different love languages, and they may not all make sense to me, but there will always be something that tells me they're in love with each other.If it's not words, it's actions. It's a mutual touch. A mutual understanding with their eyes. Something that tells me wihout telling me they are in the same team. Something that needs no words, but it's still there. I'm yet to figure out what Danneel's love language is. I've never seen an ounce of love in her. Not even self love, to be honest.