#and if it’s all absolutely true and as bad/worse than it’s been portrayed? it’s still not because you don’t like his books! | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

stanlunter · 5 months ago

Note

i have an honest question for you. this is not meant to be a gotcha or accuse you of homophobia, just based on observing your post history of wlw vs wlm ships out of curiosity.

are there any wlw ships in cartoons that you actually do like the portrayal of?

Thanks for a question!

And yes, obviously. Actually, I posted a lot about them, so It's strange if you haven't seen it, but yeah. I understand where your answer is coming from since I do critic some wlw media and made a post about a wlw dynamic I don't like. Tbh, It's a problem for me too, bc I don't get enought of my "wlw ships type" in media and that's basically why Im complaining about it, bc every It's either bad-written or is so cliche that's it even boring. Also the problem is that I do love wlm ships as well and a lot of people say that "wlw is always better than wlm" even tho there are many good and bad examples of both of them and I think It's wrong to say smth is better just bc It's queer, even tho I am wlw myself. The "critic" wasn't towards wlw, but towards the most popular dynamic (sun x moon) that I don't like and the way people ignore others dynamics just for this one is sad to me, since bc of it I don't have enought representation of wlw ships I love, bc all of them either don't become a couple, or break up, or one of them dies (or all of these at the same time) and almost all ships that became canon have that dynamic I dislike. And at the same time it was also a joke bc It's actually true that like 80% of all wlw ships are basically the same, so It's funny to hear from their fans that all wlm ships are the same

"Are there any wlw ships in cartoons that you actually like the portray of?"

Do you mean canon or fanon?

As someone who generally in like 90% of the cases prefers fan ships over canon ones, regardless of if it's wlw, wlm or mlm, I obviously have much more fanon or half-canon favourite wlw ships, including those, where one of the characters is dead, there are some I like:

My favourite wlw ship and spop otp of all time is Scorptra. I absolutely adore everything about it and I really think they should have been stayed in Crimson waste. Some years ago I had a huge fixation on it and tbh, if I've discovered Tumbler to myself at that time, my acc would definitely be full of them and I would call myself "stanscorptra", lol. And the fact that they didn't become canon for the sake of the ship I hate - catradora, makes it even worse to me. (Scorpia x Catra from She-ra and the princess of power)

Yumihisu. That's my favourite ship from aot, Im actually glad It's popular in the fandom. I really love everything about them and the way they ended up is actually heart-breaking. In the finale of s2 I actually wanted to start killing people just bc Ymir decided to help Rainer and Berth instead od staying with Historia. And every time I rewatch it, I feel the same, bc they did have a chance to be happy together at least for some years.

It's basically canon and it was confirmed that they both love each other, but since Ymir died, I'm not sure if it is considered as actually canon since they werent actual dating (Ymir x Historia from Attack on titan)

Nanichiru, or whatever name they have, bc the fandom still hasnt decided it.

That was one of my first anime ships, I even thought It's canon and basically when I saw them together, I thought Nana is canon lesbian, which was so clear to me when I compare her with men and her with Michiru. Idk if they supposed to be "just friends", or wlw-coded, but I do consider them as a half canon anyways, bc, let's be real, if one of them was a guy, everyone would know It's canon. I absolutely love their dynamic and the way their relationship affected Nana and made her doubt her goal and actually understand that some of the people with talents are good people. Michiru changed everything for Nana and was her light in the dark, but ofc, how it always is, they didn't develop relationship and one of them died. (Nana x Michiru form Talentless Nana)

Mitsunoa. I am not obsessed with its depth, bc, ngl, they don't have such deep relationship as others, but I do love their dynamic and all of their interactions. Their homoerotic friendship and all the hints make me giggle and if we consider Mikayuu as "basically canon", than I will consider Mitsunoa as basically canon too (especially after the bath scene), bc these girls deserve the best things and they are the best things for each other. (Mitsuba and Shinoa from Seraph of the end)

Togachako. I still haven't finished the manga, so I'm not sure about what heppend with them in the end, I've only seen some spoilers. But I do love their enemies to lovers dynamic, which, unlike some other ships of this trope, isn't a romantization of abuse, but actual enemies to lovers. I doubt it has chances to actually become canon. But I still love the way their relationship was written. Uraraka is the only one who thinks Toga is cute and a pretty girl, not just a crazy monster. I absolutely love the line when she says Toga that she's the cutest girl in the whole world. I love that Toga says her feelings for Uraraka are real and that she made her happy. Toga sees her as basically a comfort person (??), someone who's love and appreciation she wants to get, someone who can save her from the hateness to herself and the world. I just want Toga to be happy with someone who can see her. Also, have you seen how mangaka draws them together?? He's either their biggest shipper, or a queerbaiter, Idk (Toga x Uraraka from My hero academy)

Also Ruby x Penny from Rwby, Webby x Lena from Duck Tales, Perfuma x Huntara from she-ra, Anne and Sasha from Amphibia, Sunset x Sci-Twi from Equestria girls, Sae-Byeok x Ji-Yeong form Squid game and others

As for canon ships, there are fewer ones, but yeah, I do have favourite wlw ships that are canon:

Menokari. Their relationship is really beautiful, It's actually similar to Nanichiru, but is gayer. I found it thanks to Talentless Nana as well, and Im glad I did. It may be seems too cliche for some people, but I think It's adorable, dramatic and well-writen. Definitely my favourite wlw anime (Menou x Akari from The Executor and her way of living)

Ellieriley. Unfortunately there are not enought scenes with them, but those we have is enought for me to love them. Riley was Ellie's first love and probably her lesbian awaking. I love their dynamic so much and I want to see more of them and I wanted them to live a happy life. I do like Ellie x Dina too, but I love her relationship with Riley much more. Riley's death has broken my heart. But at least I'm glad that they did have a kiss scene before it, that's why I do consider it as canon, unlike Yumihisu, since a lot of people for some reason are still arguing over it (Ellie x Riley from The last of us)

Spinetossa. Even tho this ship is far not the main one, I love it much more than the main canon ones. Netossa cares about her wife so much. They know each other for so long and still love each other so much. They're so cute and so sweet, that I was worrying for their relationship during s5 the most. And It's funny how Chaggie fans use "they're together for a long time" to justify the fact that Vivziepop has written them so poorly and that they look more like just friends, just bc of that, since these two exist and they actually do look like a married couple, not like just friends (Spinerella x Netossa from She-ra)

Harlivy

I ship these two in every universe. Even tho the Harley Quinn show has flaws, I still love their dynamic, yeah, even despite it being "one of those I have brought up in that post", I still ship them and think they're cute. I love that Harley has fully recovered from her relationship with Joker and that Ivy has found her true love, someone she can spend the rest of her life with (Harley x Ivy from Harley Quinn show and DC comics/cartoons)

Korrasami

I never was one of those people who say Korrasami was rushed. Yeah, the creators couldnt fully show them in the show, but they did in the comics and I haven't seen anyone who has read them and said they're bad-written. The comics show them so well, It's amazing, healthy and one of the best wlw representations I've seen! (Korra x Asami from The legend of Korra)

Obviously, that's not all of them, but those I love the most. Some of other canon wlw couples I love are: Bubblegum x Marcelin from Adventure time, Apple x Darling from Every after high, Haruka x Michiru from Sailor moon, Utena x Anthy from Revolutionary girl Utena, Kirari x Sayaka from Kakegurui, Ruby x Sapphire form Steven Universe, Vi x Caitlyn from Arcane, Sara x Nyssa from Arrow and Jennifer x Needy form Jennifer's body (I know the last two are not animated, but I still wanna include them)

So, yeah, there are a lot of wlw canon and popular ships I dislike or critic, which isn't because I hate wlw, but bc I love it and want it to be written better and be more various, than just "sun x moon", since there are a lot of so different wlm and mlm dynamics, while for wlw It's almost always either the same, or is just problematic, like Catradora. Tbh, as far as I remember, the only wlw ships I wrote bad things about were Lumity and Catradora, besides that post, so I don't know why exactly you thought it means I dislike all or most of the wlw ships, but I don't anyways

21 notes · View notes

wildflower-otome · 11 months ago

Text

Finally finished the Virche FD a few days ago and just wanted to write down a few thoughts/mini-review on it. Vague spoilers only below.

Started off by playing through the short story section of which there are about 8 pages or so of. There were lots of fun fluffy ones (I especially enjoyed the ones that are just the guys talking at Adolphe’s place), ones that fill in gaps or are POV stories of side characters, there are a LOT of CG’s in this section. There’s even stories that are after stories of the side bad ends from the OG game too for all the bad end lovers. Overall thought it was an interesting range of cute stories to some rather disturbing/dark ones.

Did the encore section next, which are basically alternate routes that start from a certain point in the original game and end the story in a completely different way. I do rather have mixed thoughts on the encores. Played Lucas’s first since he was my first route in the first game too and after playing all of them definitely feel his was the best one of the lot. Although it was still bittersweet, there were still a lot of good moments and parts where I cheered because they overturned some of the more awful things to happen in the OG route.

Aside from Lucas, also really enjoyed Yves’ route too, although I wouldn’t say it’s necessarily a ‘happier’ version of the OG either it still had some great scenes. Mixed thoughts on Scien’s route, I think people that are interested in a mad scientist Scien might like it but unfortunately it wasn’t really for me. I thought the main end was kind of cute but the bad endings really broke Scien’s image to me and I ended up really disliking him. Mathis’ route as a whole had me reeling and I actually had to take a break and play something else for a while. Truly the epitome of And It Got Worse. For Adolphe, I feel like he already had a good end in the first game, so unfortunately his encore was kind of mediocre in comparison.

The after salvation ends for the most part did not disappoint, with one exception I was really happy with all of them. Some nice romantic CG’s and moments, and also a tying up of loose plot ends from the original game. I also really liked how characters got new sprite outfits which was fun. Those after despair ends though…Yves and Mathis’s in particular were pretty disturbing imo. I actually thought Adolphe had the most interesting despair after end, definitely did a great job of portraying true never-ending despair.

The Drifter route was an enjoyable side story and also kind of functions as an origin story for Ankou as well which makes sense as it needs to be played before unlocking Ankou’s route. His and Ankou’s interactions and friendship was a lot of fun to watch and the ending was pretty touching too.

And last of all, just have to gush about Ankou’s route. Absolutely one of the best routes I’ve played in any otome game so far and will probably remain so. Especially after playing through some of the more gruelling routes in the FD, it was a really enjoyable experience. I think there’s also just something so cathartic about seeing the series’ most long-suffering character finally get the happiness he deserves. Ankou and Ceres at the beginning are two people that don’t really see the value in their own lives, and to see that slowly start to change as their relationship develops and they meet other people on their journey was really heartwarming. I teared up a lot at the explanation of the game title “Epic Lycoris” in the epilogue too, just a really special and amazing route to cap off the series.

Overall, Ankou’s route aside, I will say that people that are expecting lots of fluff or a fix it fic type of thing for the original routes because it’s an FD will probably end up disappointed. It is a fan disc but it’s also very much still Virche so I would say to temper your expectations and you’ll probably end up with much more than you think. Definitely been a wild ride at times and while some parts were hard to get through, am really sad to say goodbye to the characters. All in all, well worth a playthrough if you enjoyed the original game.

#shuuen no virche #virche evermore #shuuen no virche epic:lycoris #virche playthrough

17 notes · View notes

lemonhemlock · 2 years ago

Note

My personal interpretation of GRRM's bias during the dance is that he wasn't necessarily pro-Black or even pro-Daemyra, but he was pro-Daemon, and that kinda bleed out into the entirety of the Black side. What I think happened was that he set out to write the dance as a morally gray, no-good-sides type conflict using the Anarchy for inspiration, but at one point he created and fell in love with the character of Daemon, which then affected how he wrote the details of the dance. At one point he realized he inadvertently wrote a situation where one side was full of badass characters (Daemon, his kids, and the Velaryon family they're connected to) plus is backing a female ruler who appears progressive, and whose kids eventually inherit the throne, and maybe realized that oops, he made his morally-gray conflict a little bit TOO one-sided.

(He's had this same issue before with the Blackwood/Bracken conflict, where it's supposed to be a blood feud that both sides are at fault for, but it's also pretty clear how much GRRM favors the Blackwoods over the Brackens, because he keeps giving the Blackwoods cool features and interesting characters while portraying almost all Brackens as mostly assholes and losers.)

So then in an effort to try and balance the conflict, he doubles down on making Rhaenyra herself the absolute worst. She doesn't fight in the war herself, unlike her rival Aegon II, all the smart tactical decisions are solely attributed to the men around her (including her fifteen-year-old son), she makes nonsense decisions like throwing a lavish party during wartime, and she gets her own allies to turn against her, including Daemon. GRRM gives her some pretty horrific rumors surrounding her such as brothel queens (even if they're not true), and has her speak horribly about Nettles over her apparent "jealousy" for stealing away Daemon. He makes sure to point out that she is NOT progressive at all, having her pass over elder sisters for other houses. He makes her so bad as a ruler that the smallfolk rebel and kill the dragons under HER reign.

This is possibly where some of the weirdness surrounding the military aspect of the dance could originate from, because considering how bad of a ruler Rhaenyra proved herself to be, why does she still have people fighting for her? If there were rumors abound, and even evidence, of Rhaenyra passing bastards as trueborn, why are they so chill with supporting her? (I believe that's actually evidence of an early draft where Rhaenyra DID marry Harwin and therefore her sons with him were trueborn, which I think supports my theory that GRRM added the "Strong boys passing as trueborn Velaryons" subplot in an effort to make Rhaenyra more morally grey, but then failed to actually make them as big of a deal in Westeros as they realistically SHOULD have been, aside from like, giving the Greens more mean things to say about her.)

Heck, maybe GRRM did actually make Daemon worse than he originally was in an attempt to make the Blacks more morally gray. Maybe Nettles was originally a grown woman instead of another teenager he groomed. Maybe some of his other shady behavior such as murdering Vaemond wasn't originally there. But again, you run against the problem that if Daemon was indeed as disliked by the lords of Westeros as the text says he was, why are they still supporting Rhaenyra, and by extension him? Is it supposed to be maester propaganda, I guess?

But GRRM still loves Daemon, so he's still allowed to have his... "Heroic" action of letting the teenager he groomed live, I guess. And he's allowed to still have his anime death against his special enemy who's supposed to be a worse version of Daemon (even though Daemon is the worse version of Daemon). Rhaenyra unfortunately, did not get the same grace. GRRM might have actually tried to give the Greens a level playing field against the Blacks in terms of gray morality, but his attempts at doing so might have messed up other aspects of the dance.

So the showrunners kind of have a lot of their work cut out for them in trying to make the military part of the dance make sense. Why would certain lords support the Blacks despite their reputations and bad decisions? Is there truly no discourse over Jacaerys, and later Joffery, being the heir to the throne despite their dubious parentage? Why do certain Reach houses end up siding with Rhaenyra? Why does the Lads army exist? Addam Velaryon pulling an army out of thin air to fight for Rhaenyra despite literally everything? Aemond's decision to do fuck-all in the Riverlands? I'm probably going to be a lot kinder to the showrunners in this regard because it's really not their fault that these parts of the Dance make no sense, it was baked into the source material. It's a start that they know full well that Daemon is not a good person, and that they're trying to make Rhaenyra not the Absolute Worst like she was in the book, but for some of this stuff, it's literally going to have to be their job to try and make it make sense. So, good luck writers! I don't quite envy you.

Hello! This is a very comprehensive essay you wrote, thank you for sharing it with us. ✨ I feel like it basically encompasses everything there is to say on the matter. I do agree with the thesis statement that GRRM is not necessarily so much pro-blacks as he is pro-Daemon, as ranted in this post as well. Also agree the same kind of issue is visible with the Blackwood-Bracken divide.

Now, it is what it is at the end of the day, we're talking about supplemental material here and GRRM is certainly allowed to include his own Mary Sues and play around with them, but the quality does suffer as a result. And it's funny seeing people defending Daemon's actions or interpreting the fact that his line prevails as "righteous" when in reality he has the biggest plot armour imaginable. But, yes, Daemon growing as a character under GRRM's pen and in his mind is probably the most likely explanation as to how we got such an imbalanced story.

As far as what the writers can do to make the military battles more believable, they should start with redistributing the alliances, which is not impossible IMO. Generally-speaking, Rhaenyra can have fewer allies but make use of her considerable dragon army and she could even rely on mercenaries, if necessary. Should be enough to mount a serious threat to the greens without resorting to cartoon logic. :))

#ask #anon #anti daemon targaryen #fire and blood critical

32 notes · View notes

erithel · 2 years ago

Note

This is a different perspective but could the popularity of Keith's characterization be contributing to how Lance's is view. I swear every new show has a Keith in it but not many have a Lance. That lone wolf orphan bad boy with a heart of gold is everywhere. It's easy to write cause there's so many variations of it already written that we've read a billion times. (And I love them all)

But not Lance's characterization, it's not as common in other media. People are not as exposed to the depths that his characterization can have. This results in him being portrayed like every other character.

And the farther away we get from the show the worse it gets. People who say they haven't watched it in years or those who say they haven't watched at all are common now. They have their reasons but it makes it hard to remember details of Lance's character if you don't.

This is just how it looks to me but I'm right there with anon. So many fics leave me with an itch unscratch because Lance was not our beloved Lance.

So this is interesting.

And this could play a major role in the discourse, because yeah, if you break their characters down to the most basic level you get:

Keith the loner bad boy with a tragic backstory, and

Lance, the comic relief

In no show/movie or book that I can think of has "the comic relief" been given anything more significant in terms of development than "the loner": We always get to find out why the tragic one is tragic, but never question why the funny one is funny.

I will fully admit, Keith was my absolute favorite character in the beginning. And that was because I definitely had a "type" when it came to favorite characters, as I'm sure many people do.

Keith, Zuko, Bucky Barnes, Gaara -

And then everything changed when the fire nation attacked I watched My Hero Academia.

Because based on experience and type, my favorite character should have been Todoroki.

But nope.

My favorite character is Kirishima.

I mean, just look at him. No tragic backstory. No daddy issues (lol). Just a ball of positivity and motivation, and an honestly a really good take on manliness.

It didn't make sense to me, until we got to the part where we saw all of his personal insecurities about not being enough.

And that's when I started to view Lance differently.

Don't get me wrong, I still thrive off of the tragic backstory trope for the sake of angst. But it can also be hugely innovative if you start thinking "hey, maybe this positive/funny character is that way because it's the only way they can make it through the day."

And that leads to moments and thoughts of "hey, what if that positive/funny character slipped up one day? What if something happened that they couldn't cope with in their normal method?"

Lance is the type of character you have to sit with a little while to truly start to understand his potential, which is essentially why the way his story arc was handled was so detrimental.

(I will admit that I have not watched the show in a long time. And I do feel like the way I have been writing klance lately could also be straying away from their canon selves - so honestly these past few posts could easily come across as hypocritical... but I hope that's not the case.)

Regardless, though, there are just so many things about Lance that set his character apart from the others, and make his so interesting to write.

And with him, I think it's most interesting when he's not just seen as the comic relief, but as someone who uses humor in this weird mix of simultaneously trying to hide his true self, while also trying to be seen and noticed.

#asks #lance mcclain #voltron legendary defender #characterization #eijiro kirishima

23 notes · View notes

stillness-in-green · 2 years ago

Text

Chapter Thoughts: 373 — Friends

Thank you all, as always, for your patience. As I said previously, I had some cruds catch up with me, on top of holidays and house guests, so between those and work, it’s been rather some while since I’ve had the time and energy for dedicated post writing. But here’s this, finally! And since the next chapter is much more scattered around in multiple places, it should be easier to write about.

As to this chapter, I’ve decided, rather than breaking it down chronologically or by broad topic, to cover it one character at a time, since this chapter more than many really is about the interplay of characters.

Hit the jump!

On Pig-Nose Guy

Taken strictly as-written, he’s got a pretty good head on his shoulders. As many people have said, attacking a hospital under the auspices of a leadership of a known terrorist is the most desperate kind of play, the heteromorphs are doubtlessly underinformed and, as of this chapter, are being openly told not to think. The fact that he doesn’t give into his emotions in those circumstances is admirable! Still, I can’t help but think I’d have preferred to see him ask questions of his own leadership, rather than trusting the judgment of a teenage hero student who—like Deku in his bad faith bargaining with Overhaul—has no authority to speak for Hero Society at large.

Also too, it remains tiresome that he and the others are only asking these questions just now, instead of back when they were first told that they were going to be attacking a hospital. This is especially the case given the weird inconsistency between pig-nose guy saying he couldn’t bring himself to hurt the people in the hospital and the gaping absence of anyone asking him to hurt the people in the hospital. Maybe Scarecrow would have tried to goad them into that eventually or it was something they were told to do in advance, but if either of those is the case, we certainly never saw evidence of it on the page, which keeps his dilemma here from ringing completely true.

I do quite like the evocativeness with which he’s drawn. As ever, Hori’s art is great, especially his expressions, even when his narrative decisions are being underwhelming-to-infuriating.

On Scarecrow

Christ, I hate the way Horikoshi insists on giving the MLA these awful little extra cruelties to make them worse than they need to be, as if, “Militant antisocial terrorist cult,” isn’t bad enough. I could deal with the “meant to bring about our supremacy” bit—that’s not new rhetoric for MLA types—but am considerably more exasperated with “mighty meat shield.”

Like, guys, that’s just not how the MLA think of their rank and file. Yes, they prioritize their leadership, always have, so it’s not that I mind as such that Scarecrow would think of the civilians as ultimately expendable. But the key is that the MLA view such deaths as honorable, as important martyrdom to reach their goals. They don’t and never have treated their people as “meat shields” in the derisive, callous sense that that term implies.

Again, look back at this sequence from Chapter 329:

Does this sound like someone who doesn’t deeply believe in the orders he’s being given and the person he’s being told to lift up? There’s no reason to portray this guy as a bad actor. An extremist, absolutely, but thinking so explicitly about the manipulation of the civilians’ opinions just makes it sound like he wants power for its own sake, and that’s never been the MLA’s bag.

I’m particularly annoyed with Horikoshi having Scarecrow think of Shouji as an octopus, which feels akin not just to a minority thinking of another member of his group as [relevant derisive slur], but to putting that thought in the head of someone who wears the mantle of an activist, a student of history, someone who can speak passionately and eloquently of the rightness of his cause. Scarecrow should know better than this, and portraying him as falling back on this dehumanizing language for his own kind is just another thing that makes him feel like he’s operating in bad faith, making him an even more strawman-ish depiction of someone who’s already set up as a violent radical.

…All of which makes it even more strange that a nameless hero apologizes directly to him. Which is a pleasant surprise!

On the one hand, I like a lot that even someone who Horikoshi is making some effort to portray as not-genuine still gets a straightforward, genuine apology. In principle, I’m in favor of that, because I strongly believe that even villains who are acting in bad faith deserve to be treated humanely and have their issues recognized—and regardless of what else we can say about him, Scarecrow does have a huge scar on his head that’s implicitly a result of anti-heteromorph violence. Further, for Horikoshi’s plot here to land, it is important for heroes—not just students, but adult members of the system—to acknowledge that the heteromorphs have a legitimate grievance.

On the other hand, it does also still feel a bit like farming out apologies and weaknesses to nameless nobodies because god forbid any of the characters the audience has been encouraged to like be acknowledged as having flaws or biases. It’s one of BNHA’s long-running issues that Horikoshi has this big system he wants to critique but, with the exception of characters like Bakugou and Endeavor, whose whole arcs are founded on personal improvement, he’s uncomfortable letting sympathetic and/or popular characters meaningfully reflect that flawed system.

As a result, we get stuff like last chapter’s apology for perpetuating heteromorphobic microaggressions coming from Mineta instead of Sero, no shallow fame-chasing students ever folding from the pressure and dropping out, the immense wishy-washiness of any critique of All Might, and, inversely, the facile resolutions of thorny issues like the traitor plot, the HPSC’s corruption, Izumi Kouta’s hatred of heroes, or, here, the idea of heteromorphic discrimination.

On Shouji/The Resolution

This continues to be a desperately wanting resolution. Shouji still holds up this idea that heteromorphs can change the minds of bigots by just acting cool and admirable enough when his own backstory should have taught him that there is no such threshold. Bigots cannot be made to be ashamed of their bigotry, Shouji! They will find ways to justify it; they will hide it if it looks to be socially unacceptable and then talk openly about it when they think they’re among people of like mind; they will react with resentment when called out.

And like, I do believe that bigots can change, and some of the examples I’m aware of are a credit to the actions of a person the bigot had hated, but those examples are all the more remarkable for their rarity. It cannot be the default and ongoing responsibility of the oppressed to Nobly Endure until bigots change their minds, to risk their own safety just to win approval from those who hate them. That’s what Shouji’s answer here says, though, and it’s frankly unconscionable.

And it’s such a bizarre chain of events! Like, Shouji was just telling Spinner that this attack was going to set heteromorphs back thirty years, but now he’s saying the rioters are a shining light? He was (baselessly) castigating them for showing up without a plan, but now he’s saying that the feelings that drove them to show up were neither useless nor wrong?

Are we to believe that protests have never happened before? So either heteromorphs have been quiet and stoic and noble about this for generations and in exchange they’ve gotten infamous historical massacres and highly conditional semi-safety in sufficiently large cities while still suffering dehumanization and increased rates of criminality, or they have protested before but feel that their needs have been ignored. When Rando The Hero apologizes to Scarecrow for never having realized heteromorphs were in such dire straits, which are we to believe is the explanation: that he never saw because they never spoke up, or he never saw because he wasn’t looking?

When Shouji tells them they look like a shining light, it recalls Scarecrow’s dialogue about how heteromorphs were never illuminated and would have to become their own light—but who exactly is to be credited for kindling that light? Shouji tells them the feelings that drove them to come weren’t wrong, but we know that the MLA were working behind the scenes to stoke indignation and hurt up to the tipping point—what Scarecrow this week refers to as radicalizing these peoples’ passion.

So like… This all seems like it never would have come about without Skeptic and Scarecrow and even Spinner and all the rest’s hard work. So what’s going to happen to them, the people who enabled this change, in the end? Do the nice and good victims who stood down before they went too far get embraced, while the people who drove them to be noticed get thrown in prison and forgotten about?

There’s this weird dynamic in the series where heroes and Hero Society ignore the problems their society has—sweep them under the rug, as Shigaraki put it—so insistently that change requires people willing to Go Too Far, like villains. Then, when villains do exactly that, heroes are like, “You may have legitimate grievances, but you’re Going Too Far.” Yes! Because that’s what it takes to make “the good guys” pay attention!!

So what happens after this? Do the agitators get put in prison while everyone else is just free to walk away? What about the dozens and dozens of people who’ve already been rounded up and restrained? Do they just get to walk? Or are they going to prison too, for all that their feelings were totes correct, because they were captured before they had a chance to either press on or stand down? (This, incidentally, takes us right back to the difficulties in dealing with an underground army—how do heroes on the ground know who’s a radicalized civilian and who’s a member of the PLF?)

So that’s all the usual headache-inducing platitudes. There is one positive thing about all this that I want to talk about as well, though: the outcome of Shouji fighting while also talking. I said it about Mirio a while back, and it applies here too, for all that it got lost in my deep frustration with the content of Shouji’s words: it is possible to carry on a dialogue while still defending oneself and others.(1)

Consider how this would have gone down if Shouji hadn’t been here. Rock Lock thinks—in a moment that very clearly illustrates the current dilemma—that all the rest of the hero side could do was defend themselves by force. That fits the current hero modus operandi, which the students have, up until now, been playing into. Presumably, left to their own devices, the heroes and police would have either eventually hit a morale tipping point that broke the crowd, who would have been captured or fled with their resentment unaddressed, or the crowd would have overwhelmed them, freeing Kurogiri and cementing themselves as villains.

This makes Shouji—a pivotal figure as the tides of battle shift and we move into a new stage—a potentially very significant model for how the conflict resolutions from here on out are going to look.

A huge number of Hero Stan types disregard this strategy, which is why we’re all so frequently subjected to those tiresome, “Well, the villains were trying to kill people; do you expect heroes to just stand back and let them?” false equivalencies. Here, though, Shouji provides a sterling example of how to engage with villains in good faith: defend as much you need to while keeping the conversation going as long as you can, in the hopes that eventually a breakthrough/understanding can be reached. That’s the whole point of the Shonen Jump talk-no-jutsu trick.

I don’t buy Shouji’s message here by any means, but the manner in which he delivers it is unimpeachable.

On Mic

I love Mic being the ruthless one of the Rooftop Trio; I really do. It’s been very entertaining to watch the telephone game of Realist Mic Fans talking about how this was totally predictable and only Fanon Mic Fans are surprised by it. ‘Cause it’s 100% true; Mic’s always had those undertones, which were really what set him and Shirakumo apart despite their surface personas being fairly similar. Look no further than Mic’s reaction to the traitor reveal!

That said, predictable or not—and the set-up was always there for it to be Spinner carrying the day here, not Mic—it really does hit deliciously hard. My favorite part is that Mic never actually opens his mouth to call to Shirakumo himself—not this chapter, at least. All his thoughts and pleas for Shirakumo are strictly internal;(2) externally, he’s winding up to unleash his quirk again.

An aside: The one quibble I have with this scene is that it’s legit unclear to me who Mic is winding up to attack here. He’s very obviously prepared to kill Kurogiri if it comes to that—indeed, his internal monologue suggests that his killing Kurogiri was even a part of the plan here, albeit only as a last resort.(3) However, he also says that was only on the table if it looked like Kurogiri was about to be taken back. He explicitly notes that Spinner is down, though, and he’s already seen that Spinner’s alone, so who is he even worried about taking Kurogiri at this point? Why attack Kurogiri when the main threat has already been neutralized?

So is he attacking Spinner, then, to make sure he stays down? That seems a bit beyond the pale even for the most ruthless member of his group, doesn’t it? And even if he were willing to go that far, an attack on Spinner doesn’t seem consistent with where his gaze is focused—aimed forward rather than down and to his right—and is even less consistent with his train of thought about Shirakumo fading away and leaving only good memories.(4)

As it is, it reads like Mic is already telling himself to execute Kurogri to prevent even the possibility, now or in the future, of Kurogiri regaining consciousness and making a decision Mic doesn’t approve of. That’s very Plus Ultra of you, Mic, but like, in a really bad way.

Anyway.

Compare Mic’s silence to Spinner, who openly begs Kurogiri to save Shigaraki, and we have yet another scene that beautifully illustrates the tendency of heroes to embrace stoic self-denial even at the cost of their personal bonds for the greater good, while villains utterly reject questions of big-picture morality in favor of embracing/preserving the things and people they personally value.

On Spinner/The Final Hand

Man, I didn’t like Cook’s rendering of Spinner’s patchy dialogue as caveman-speak, but at least it made clear that Spinner’s thinking was irregular. Here, comparing to the raws, you can still see the irregular kana usage throughout, but the official release portrays his thinking as largely clearing up once he gets all the scales blown off and shrinks back down to his normal size. The sentences are fragmentary, but that could be read as a result of him being semi-conscious. More importantly, “I” is back in his dialogue (“All I wanted” rather than e.g. “Me just wanted”) and his verb usage gets more regular. That’s all to say, the official release makes it look like Spinner’s mentality stabilized in a way that doesn’t seem to match the raws. Frustrating to get my hopes up like that!

Anyway, there’s been a certain amount of discourse getting around about whether Spinner’s crutching on The Hand for Shigaraki and now Kurogiri is good or bad, whether Spinner’s feelings for Shigaraki are leading him to make decisions that are bad for both of them, to what degree Spinner cares or should care about heteromorphic discrimination and so on, and I just want to say that I’m in total agreement with @codenamesazanka and @robotlesbianjavert’s takes on the matter, as can be read in multiple posts. These posts put it all so well I don’t particularly feel the need to retread it at length.

To be succinct: Spinner is doing the best he can from a position of limited information, and dinging him because he’s, what, prolonging the amount of time Shigaraki spends away from the miraculous saving light of Deku’s good intentions? Fuck that; Deku doesn’t even have the courage of his convictions to speak them aloud, and even saying them to the people in his head, the best he could muster was, “I want to try.” Nothing he’s done so far has earned him a right to the League’s trust.

There is one aspect of that I want to talk about specifically that I haven’t seen discussed elsewhere, which is the Spinner-Stain-Deku angle. To wit, I once theorized that Spinner would be a key person in Deku’s drive to save Shigaraki because a) Spinner has the clearest understanding of Shigaraki as a regular person, whereas Deku’s limited exposure had only allowed him to see The Crying Child and The Symbol of Fear, and b) Spinner defended Deku that one time during the training camp attack on the grounds that Stain declared him worthy. I thought Spinner’s action at that time might later give them enough common ground to recognize each other as having good intentions, enough space to at least tentatively open a dialogue, and advance their common goal of Helping Shigaraki from there.

It’s looking less likely now, mostly because of Spinner’s eroded mentality meaning he doesn’t have the ability to carry on a conversation with Deku right now about Shigaraki. That’s not the entirety of the reason, though.

Firstly, there’s the issue of Spinner’s loyalties. He was only cosplaying at being a Stain devotee to begin with, and has cultivated a much more deeply felt loyalty to Shigaraki, who, last Spinner heard, explicitly wants Midoriya Izuku dead. New leader, new directive.

Secondly, there’s the problem that even if Spinner were inclined to give Deku the benefit of the doubt originally, so far as he can see, Deku has done nothing but align himself with the hero status quo, and particularly with Endeavor’s status quo. Endeavor, who Stain condemned, and who Spinner’s own teammate revealed to be an abusive monster, the worst kind of person imaginable to be hiding behind the mask of a hero. Endeavor, who contributed to Shigaraki being in such a state at Jakku that Spinner was driven to use The Hand to begin with! Deku has given exactly zero sign that Spinner would be aware of that he’s willing to treat Shigaraki any differently than the hero establishment would, so what basis does Spinner have to entrust Shigaraki to him?

Both in terms of a Spinner who decides things based on who he's following and a Spinner who decides things based on the evidence of his own eyes, Deku fails coming and going.

Anyway, I still think it would be good to somehow get back to Spinner as a bridge between Shigaraki and Deku, because Deku saving Shigaraki based on nothing but his empathy for The Crying Child is desperately insufficient to truly address all the problems Shigaraki Tomura represents, but that’s a good deal more up in the air at this point, so I guess we’ll see how it goes.

As far as The Hand is concerned, I really do wonder if we’re starting to see its symbolism shift somewhat. Like, yes, yes, it is a concrete reminder of everything AFO raised Shigaraki to be, that’s all true. But it’s this hand, too:

Nana, who wanted to save her son, wants Deku to save her grandson, and wants Shigaraki to not forget the boy he used to be—it’s her hand. Carried by Spinner, the person who loves Shigaraki the most, extended beseechingly to Kurogiri, the one who protects Shigaraki Tomura, the one who “cannot abandon others.”

Just saying, there’s a lot packed into that hand that AFO didn’t put there. Letting him be the only authority on its symbolism is kind of letting him make the rules, isn’t it? He isn’t the only one who gets to decide what things mean, and believing otherwise is just ceding him control of the narrative.

We even have a prior example of this in One For All: what began as a play to bring Yoichi under AFO’s control instead grew, through Yoichi’s desires and those of the people OFA was passed to, into a power meant to bring AFO down. Eventually, even that purpose was eclipsed by All Might and Deku’s desires to use that power to save people. The Final Hand, while much more gruesome, could go the same way in terms of it being utilized in ways counter to what AFO intended.

On Kurogiri

Kurogiri strikes me as being in a potentially crucial position, and not merely for his ability to disrupt the heroes’ plans, which up to this point looked like there were going to lead to nothing but yet another rotation in the cycle of Hero Society sweeping all its problems under the rug until something rancid causes an eruption.

No, the more important thing with Kurogiri is that he’s in an even better position than Spinner to provide a bridge between the hero and the villain sides at large. Spinner may have the better vantage point on Shigaraki as he’s developed over the course of the series, but Spinner’s pretty locked into the position of villain and victim; he’s never once been on the right/light side of Hero Society.

Kurogiri, if you assume that he’s become something of an amalgamated existence (reflecting his use of ore rather than watashi this chapter) has lived in both worlds. As Shirakumo, he has all the memories of an idealistic hero with a good upbringing, solid bonds and a stable place in society. As Kurogiri, he’s had plenty of exposure to the social deprivation, systemic bias and manipulative wickedness that creates villains. There's no one else in the story who has both the experience within Hero Society to believe in its value but also the perspective to understand why villains don't believe in that value.

That’s if you assume he’s become an amalgamated existence. My favorite read on Kurogiri treats him as the survivor of a traumatic experience, one that has fundamentally changed him such that he can’t reconcile with his old friends as long as they refuse to recognize the person he’s now become in favor of fantasies about who he used to be. Sadly, I don’t think that’s particularly well-supported by the story thus far,(5) but the pronoun shift is an exciting new development!

Really, despite Shirakumo breaking through once, I want to think that it would be impossible for him or the heroes who want him back to ever shake "Kurogiri" entirely if they can't assure him that his cat (Shigaraki) is going to be taken care of. Because even if Shirakumo might choose otherwise consciously, that care is him; it's the whole foundation Kurogiri is built on. Heroes can't just will it to go away and think they’ll have anything left afterward but fragments of a person.

The editor’s note at the end of this chapter said the battle was moving to a new stage, and let me tell you, I am so ready. Heroes are not yet at a point where they’ve earned a victory, moral or otherwise, so Kurogiri returning to his bartender roots and putting this whole war in a shaker before pouring it out into different glasses is incredibly welcome.

Stray Notes

O I appreciate that Nimble, even when her talk bubbles indicate that she’s shouting full-volume, still shows no indication of a mouth. How does she eat, I wonder? RIP to my dreams about Spinner’s #1 Advisor getting anything important to do, though; Horikoshi’s Women Sidelining disease strikes again.

O Spinner’s biggest contribution this chapter, wherein he finds the strength to surge forward in desperation to help the person he cares about, comes after he loses all the bulk and extra-scales; it’s like an anti-quirk evolution. This continues to prove the point that Spinner’s biggest role in the plot was never about the strength or weakness of his quirk, but rather about his heart. Love-interest coded Spinner is real.

O So what was up with that big ominous panel of the gun and the sound effects of it firing last chapter? Because I really feel like if someone just opened fire on the crowd, it should be WAY harder to have the whole extended dialogue Shouji and pig-nose guy have this chapter.

O The color page at the start really is incredibly gorgeous. God, I wish Hori did more color pages for the villains. We are so underserved in this specific category. I did see some people talking about how Shirakumo’s face here is an adult’s face, not a teenager’s, and if that’s true, I feel like it raises a whole bunch of fascinating questions about what Ujiko is doing with corpses to stimulate growth. As if the Winged Noumu didn’t raise enough of those already, mind. If Noumu can age, does that mean they can die of old age??

---FOOTNOTES---

1: I made a bitchy quip last chapter about the manga’s earlier stance that words are less important than actions, but just to be clear, my issue isn’t talking itself—I think talking is very important, and something the heroes should be doing a lot more of, but that the current system disincentivizes them from doing. The trouble is when the talk is a bunch of empty twaddle that refuses to outline the specific action being proposed to address a character’s accusations.

2: I’ve seen a number of people talking emotionally about Mic’s last yell for Shirakumo this chapter, but I think they’re misreading the art. If Mic were calling that name aloud, it would be in a talk bubble, not the internal monologue text overlay.

3: And wow, does that contingency ever remind me that Hawks was a key member of the team that masterminded this plan.

4: Please go read @codenamesazanka’s excellent meta on how Hero Society prefers dead victims to victims who couldn’t be saved.

5: Shirakumo’s sole action upon being woken by Aizawa being to spill Ujiko’s location is not a promising sign. The most generous read possible that reconciles that action with a Shirakumo who cares about Shigaraki would be that Shirakumo legitimately thought Shigaraki being imprisoned in Tartarus was a better outcome than letting Ujiko have his way. That’s feasible, but it’s also the case that, as far as Kurogiri-as-trauma-victim goes, I’m just not convinced Horikoshi approaches the story with that level of allegory in mind.

#bnha #bnha 373 #bnha civilians #plf advisors #octolad #dj parakeet #bnha spinner #iguchi shuuichi #kurogiri #heteromorph discrimination plot #chapter thoughts

33 notes · View notes

spacegaynsfw · 1 year ago

Note

what do you think of fifty shades in terms of kink representation?

So, simple answer first: it sucks. At best it’s bad representation of how kink actually works, and at worst it’s glorifying completely unsafe practices, normalizing harmful stereotypes, & suggesting actual honest to god sexual assault isn’t sexual assault if it’s in a kink context. A lot of the stuff that goes on in the book is not RACK, it reinforces the stereotype that kink comes directly from trauma (which isn’t necessarily true), and there are a few times where it’s pretty clear what’s happening would be considered sexual assault irl.

The complex answer: it sucks and it’s not a guide, but I can’t deny the fact it’s made BDSM a little bit more mainstream, which in turn also makes it easier to find relevant toys & equipment, and sort of destigmatizes some of it. (Obviously it hasn’t been a magic bullet, we still have no kink at pride weirdos out there.)

While it’s not a good representation of kink and absolutely should NOT be used as a guide, whomst amongst us hasn’t seen a kink portrayed perhaps a little wrong in a fic and gone 👀 and ultimately pursued it further? Something’s gotta be someone’s springboard, and honestly I don’t see this being much worse than like, just plain old internet porn. Y’know? Granted, it’s also pretty narrow as to what kinks it presents, so again, decent springboard, but it isn’t good representation as far as variety, safety, or like… ethics go.

So yeah. Is it good representation? No. Not at all. Have there been some benefits? Sure. Is the writing absolutely atrocious? Yes, at least in my opinion. Should you shame anyone for telling you they got into kink bc of fsog? No!

#tori answers questions #max answers questions #anonymous

1 note · View note

tanadrin · 9 months ago

Text

Man, this bugs me.

When proclamations are made that “voting is harm reduction,” it’s never clear how less harm is actually calculated. Do we compare how many millions of undocumented Indigenous Peoples have been deported? Do we add up what political party conducted more drone strikes? Or who had the highest military budget? Do we factor in pipelines, mines, dams, sacred sites desecration? Do we balance incarceration rates? Do we compare sexual violence statistics? Is it in the massive budgets of politicians who spend hundreds of millions of dollars competing for votes?

Yeah, you should do all those things. If you care about drone strikes, for instance, Joe Biden has massively curtailed the U.S. drone program. If you care about the environment, I think the policy platforms of the Republicans and Democrats are pretty distinct. If you care about immigration--well, that one's a wash, both parties are awful on immigration. But don't pretend like making the comparison is impossible. You absolutely can and should make that comparison, if you want to think about voting in a serious way.

Though there are some political distinctions between the two prominent parties in the so-called U.S., they all pledge their allegiance to the same flag. Red or blue, they’re both still stripes on a rag waving over stolen lands that comprise a country built by stolen lives.

The grift of nationalism (one of them, anyway) is that symbols matter more than policy. This feels like a blatant concession to that grift. "Policies don't matter; only symbols. If political agents with vastly different policy use the same symbols, there is no meaningful distinction to make between them" is directly contradictory to the assertion "We don’t dismiss the reality that, on the scale of U.S. settler colonial violence, even the slightest degree of harm can mean life or death for those most vulnerable."

We don’t dismiss the reality that, on the scale of U.S. settler colonial violence, even the slightest degree of harm can mean life or death for those most vulnerable. What we assert here is that the entire notion of “voting as harm reduction” obscures and perpetuates settler-colonial violence, there is nothing “less harmful” about it, and there are more effective ways to intervene in its violences.

The linked article goes on to assert in different ways that voting isn't harm reduction, but doesn't actually make an argument for why that is the case. No causal link is discussed, just a lot of thought-terminating cliches meant to affectively engage the reader. It portrays Native Americans being excluded from voting as being bad, while Native Americans being granted the vote as also being bad, and trying to elect Native politicians as bad, and indeed participating in government at all as bad, but offers no alternatives besides a vague invocation of "direct action." It doesn't explain why direct action is incompatible with participating in elections. I guess this is just sort of assumed to be true?

This is just... posturing. It's pure style over substance. It doesn't say anything. It uses buzzwords like "colonial occupation" and "white supremacy" without offering any serious suggestion for combating these things, or marshaling any examples to support its points. What history it does engage with it uses in a confused way. Like compare this to, for example, the Twenty Points from the American Indian Movement, which explicitly required action from the U.S. government, or the policy victories Indigenous activists have won as a result of pressuring government officials. This is worse than defeatism; this is shooting yourself in the face and acting smug about it.

At some point the left in the so-called U.S. realized that convincing people to rally behind a “lesser evil” was a losing strategy. The term “harm reduction” was appropriated to reframe efforts to justify their participation and coerce others to engage in the theater of what is called “democracy” in the U.S.

#sorry i guess this is technically voting discourse #but this is a bad bad article #if i didn't know better i'd say it was a conservative psyop to get leftists not to vote #but i know leftists are good at sabotaging themselves

449 notes · View notes

that-weird-girl-everyone-ignores · 2 years ago

Text

Causeway Review: Stop Burying Your Gays

*SPOILERS*

I want to start by saying the review has nothing to do with the performance of the actors; they all did a phenomenal job.

All in all, it was a good film with great acting and a very bad decision that ultimately lead to its downfall.

I’ll explain:

When Lynsey and James go out for the first time together for burgers, later on in the evening Lynsey says to James,

“I don’t have boyfriends. I have girlfriends. I mean, not right now, but when I do, that’s what I have.”

She quite literally told him she was gay and he said “okay cool” and the movie continued. No problems. If anything, at that moment the plot became immensely better- not because the character was gay, but because the movie became about a budding platonic friendship between a man and a woman. Something we don’t see much of- especially not with beautiful actors like Jennifer Lawrence.

However, later when they were hanging out together at a pool she had cleaned during the day, it all changed.

The scene started off really sweet and vulnerable; we saw James take off his prosthetic leg to go swimming and Lynsey hug James in the pool after him opening up to her further about his accident. Then she kissed him and it ruined the entire scene. And when he asked her why she bluntly stated, “I felt bad for you.” Which- even if that was true and that was why Lynsey kissed him- it still completely disregarded the fact she had previously come out as gay earlier on in the film. Yes, sexuality is obviously fluid, but in this film they made it a point for her to say “I don’t have boyfriends, I have girlfriends.” Which made it clear she was not interested in a relationship with James. If they would have vetoed that conversation between James and Lynsey, there would be absolutely no confusion and the audience would have been none the wiser. But they didn’t and it seemed as if someone forgot to cut that scene out or that it was forced to be kept in because of how the character was written. Regardless, somebody couldn’t figure out any other way to drive a conflict between Lynsey and James other than to ruin a beautiful and vulnerable moment between two friends by having the lesbian kiss the guy. Not to mention at the end Lynsey brings back James’ idea of her moving in with him because she’s “trying to make a friend.” If she would have never kissed James, the ending would have been a lot more innocent.

To make matters even worse, it was revealed by the film’s casting director, Ellen Chenoweth, that there was originally a flashback scene of Lynsey in Afghanistan. They shot the entire thing with several characters cast, including Samira Wiley, whose character was romantically involved with Lynsey. Ellen stated in an interview

“So there was a romance in this film, and then the woman was killed, which was a huge loss for Jennifer’s character. It was a large part of the movie and a big thing we worked on.”

Essentially, what would have been a pivotal and amazing scene to help portray more of Jennifer Lawrence’s character, the entire thing was cut, and instead, the still image we see when we pull the movie up on Apple+ is of Lynsey and James in the pool together.

It really takes “Bury Your Gays” to an extreme by cutting them out of the plot before they even have a chance to die in the movie.

#movie review #movie reviews #jennifer lawrence #jlaw #causeway #bury your gays #lgbtq #film review #letterboxd #letterboxd reviews #spilled milk reviews

0 notes

mostlymovieswithmax · 3 years ago

Text

Movies I watched in July

Once again I’m doing my monthly round-up of movies I’ve watched. This was a good month for the cinema getting back on track and seeing new releases including the new M. Night movie, Old and James Gunn’s The Suicide Squad. Pretty sure Marvel put out a new movie also. I’m hoping that this list can help in guiding a decision about what to watch (or what to avoid) and introduce people to movies they may otherwise not have heard of or bothered to see. These short reviews are my own subjective opinions on each individual movie and maybe a more informal approach to movie criticism can help include others who are just passing through. Here is every film I watched from the 1st to the 31st of July.

Bridesmaids (2011) - 4/10

Off to a good start. I won’t say Bridesmaids is a terrible movie but I don’t think I’m exactly the target audience. As far as I know, this is a beloved comedy but I just can’t get on board with all the boring, juvenile humour; with Maya Rudolph shitting in the street, with Rose Byrne and Kristen Wiig trying to one-up each other at a toast that went on forever, with Melissa McCarthy shitting in a sink… the conflict is so done to death and makes the movie feel unspecial. I do understand the appeal of the film, especially for women in that before this movie the likelihood of seeing something like this, where women play up the more crass and gross side of comedy, was probably few and far between. But the story is very tired and while I did appreciate some moments, namely a couple of decent jokes and some of the more intimate scenes, for the most part it felt like they wanted to corner a more quiet type of line delivery in a way that was supposed to be understated but very funny so as to not rely on over the top body language or musical cues, and it ended up being super dull.

Spectre (2015) - 7/10

As far as I can tell, a lot of people don’t like this instalment of the James Bond franchise… but I really enjoyed it! I’ve really taken a shine to these Daniel Craig-era Bond movies and while I can’t say any of them are the most amazing thing, I have a lot of fun with them. The biggest problem I have with Spectre is the villain being utterly pointless and uninteresting in basically every way. The idea of every villain Bond has fought before being tied to this one organisation controlled by this one guy is ridiculous, and what makes it worse is that the villain is barely in it! There’s so much that doesn’t come together in this but as it goes, I still had a really good time. Daniel Craig holds the whole thing together; he is excellent as 007 and the main reason I’m up for each of these movies is because of him. Sam Mendes directs again after the previous instalment and for what it’s worth I do think he does a good job with some of the action set pieces and the locations. I’m so ready for No Time To Die.

Shazam (2019) - 7/10

Shazam is a genuinely fun superhero movie that doesn’t take itself seriously at all. I was having a great time throughout and while it could conform to some of the same tropes we’re used to with these kinds of movies, it still remained playful and used the character of Shazam to his fullest potential in a way that showed an understanding of just how silly the idea of a kid who can turn into an adult and shoot lightning out of his hands is.

High School Musical (2006) - 6/10

So as you may or may not know, I co-host a podcast: The Sunday Movie Marathon. It’s a film podcast and every week I get together with my other co-hosts and watch movies. For episode 38, we watched the High School Musical trilogy. This first movie blew me away. I was really surprised with just how much fun I had, and if you want to hear more of my thoughts on the film, please listen to episode 38 of the podcast.

High School Musical 2 (2007) - 4/10

We then jumped into the second and while it’s certainly not as good as its predecessor, there are still some brilliant songs that manage to top the last movie. Again, more of what I have to say can be heard on episode 38 of the podcast.

High School Musical 3: Senior Year (2008) - 3/10

Senior Year was pretty hard to get through. I don’t remember it being as bad as it was, but then I didn’t really remember it anyway. It did however have one redeeming quality, which you can discover on episode 38 of the podcast.

The Piano Teacher (2001) - 9/10

What the fuuuckkkk. The Piano Teacher is horrendously affecting and I was so upset when it ended, maybe not because it’s not what I wanted but because it’s just so fucking dour and unrelenting. This is the second Haneke movie I’ve seen (after the original Funny Games) and I’m so impressed with how well executed it is. Following a woman who teaches piano, we get a glimpse into the life she lives, how sheltered she is from living with her mother at an age where you’d reasonably expect a person to be living alone or with a partner or friends (even going so far as to be sleeping in the same bed as her), and how repressed she is sexually. It’s clear she’s never experienced any kind of sexual interaction or romantic love with another person, so she goes out of her way to take control and make that happen. The upsetting nature of it comes from just what she does in pursuit of it or as a result of her repression, and what is done to her. It is by no means a movie to recommend to your parents but The Piano Teacher offers so much in terms of the ideas it presents (and I’ll admit there seems to be a lot more going on than I think I picked up on a first go round) about women in modern society, and about the portrayal of sex and expectations of people when it comes to how that is represented in a person’s character depending on their gender. I really enjoyed this movie but it is not for the faint of heart.

Sharpay’s Fabulous Adventure (2011) - 1/10

My podcast co-hosts decided it’d be a right laugh to add Sharpay’s Fabulous Adventure to this episode and that might have been a fun idea for them because they got to watch it together, but I was just watching it alone. Just a 24-year-old man watching Sharpay’s Fabulous Adventure alone and having a miserable time, I might add. But for a short and sweet ramble on what we all thought, please listen to episode 38 of The Sunday Movie Marathon podcast.

Dr. No (1962) - 6/10

A lot of very iffy parts of this movie. A lot of discomfort arising from how black people are portrayed that really didn’t sit right with me. As far as a Bond movie goes, this first instalment in the series is one I’ve seen before and it’s not wholly engaging but it plants the seeds for the rest, with Sean Connery breathing life into the role and making an otherwise lacklustre plot bearable.

Black Widow (2021) - 6/10

I think probably the best part about Black Widow is the experience I had while watching it. It was great being back in the cinema with a couple of friends in a packed theatre. The energy was high and I’m sure for a lot of people, this is the first time they’d been to the cinema since Endgame. For what it’s worth, I did have a lot of fun with Black Widow and I’ve explained more of what I thought about the movie in episode 39 of the podcast.

The Climb (2020) - 10/10

The Climb was added to Now TV recently and I already knew I loved it, having seen it in an empty cinema theatre last year, which I had an absolute blast with. The Climb details the years of a rocky friendship told over scenes filmed as one-shots. Not only is the presentation something to gawk at, but the performances by the two leads playing these friends with a terrifically dysfunctional dynamic is truly captivating. They’re both trying to figure out their own lives and where one can come across as being rather selfish, the opposite is true in his counterpart, whom everyone loves. This is a truly funny and heartwarming movie with a lot to say about how we choose to live our lives and who we choose to be with. It’s a shame the distributors of The Climb didn’t do a very good job because if not for it being available on Now TV, it would be near impossible to watch without forking out more money than is necessary to purchase a film.

From Russia With Love (1963) - 5/10

The second Bond movie. I thought perhaps I’d change my mind on it with another watch, having seen it for the first time maybe a year ago. But no, it’s still largely boring and it treats women like absolute garbage. From Russia With Love is one of those movies I forget as I watch it, and I was trying very hard (in the middle of the day!) not to fall asleep.

The Good, The Bart, and The Loki (2021) - 1/10

I don't usually talk about the short films I watch but for this I'll make an exception. As we all should know, Disney owns The Simpsons now, through their acquisition of Fox, so, coupled with another of their properties, that being Marvel, they decided to make a six-minute animated film wherein Marvel’s Loki is stranded in Springfield. This felt as though it was a minute long due to the horrendously jarring pacing; it is a movie that feels adamant that it needs to exist, while trying as hard as it can to be over as soon as possible. It serves only to stare the audience directly in the face and say “look, characters from The Simpsons are dressed as Avengers”, shit out three credit scenes, then end before you’ve even processed the atrocity you just bore witness to.

Russian Ark (2002) - 8/10

For this next episode of the podcast, we watched a few Russian movies, starting with Russian Ark, a film shot completely in one take as the camera moves about a luxurious museum in a first-person perspective as this main character watches what is happening around him, seeing people moving about the place but unable to interact with them, guided only by another man who seems to be just slightly out of his own perception of reality. This is a tremendous feat in filmmaking and more can be heard about what I have to say in episode 39 of The Sunday Movie Marathon podcast.

Ivan’s Childhood (1962) - 7/10

For my own pick of Russian movies to discuss on the podcast, I chose the debut feature from one of my favourite directors, Andrei Tarkovsky. It’s amazing that while this is not his best film by far, Ivan’s Childhood is still such a stellar debut, jumping around in its timeline as it details a child’s experience in the second world war. Again, I do go into more depth in episode 39 of the podcast, so be sure to check that out.

Outlaw (2019) - 1/10

The third movie chosen for this marathon is apparently the fourth Russian LGBTQ+ movie ever made. I’m unsure of the ultimate goal of this movie but what seems to be clear is that it hates the LGBTQ+ community. This is perhaps the worst film we’ve discussed on the podcast to date, so listen to episode 39 to understand exactly why it’s such trash.

Almost Famous (2000) - 7/10

I too love heavy music and also studied journalism so it stands to reason that a movie about a teenager who makes his way onto a band tour, following them through America and interviewing them as they hang out and play shows is going to be a premise that resonates with me. This certainly did. I enjoyed Almost Famous a lot; this kid is living the dream and I was so along for the ride, seeing a lot of myself in what was being portrayed. That said, the story itself is at times a bit by the numbers and I really would’ve been more on board if the visual component was more interesting. For what it is, technically it’s fine enough but nothing in that department ever jumped out at me.

Minari (2021) - 8/10

It’s crazy that this didn’t get a theatrical run where I live in the UK. It feels as though I complain about film distribution all the time but I really don’t understand the process by which a movie gets no cinematic release and yet, months later will pop up on the front shelf of hmv, taking pride of place. But of course I got the blu-ray straight away. Minari has a lot to say about the immigrant experience, specifically in America as a family comes over from Korea and tries to start a business and make something of themselves. You get to see a lot of what you might not think twice about when you think about immigration: the hardship of coming from a place where you know everyone to somewhere rural and sparsely populated, having to make friends with locals and integrate within the community; the strain it can put on a family and on a marriage where this idea is presented about the importance of making it on your own in order to live and not just survive, while also taking into account why you’re doing it in the first place and the value you place on being part of a family that you decided to make because that was more important than money, than economy, than proving you were good enough to make it in a place that gave you very little advantage from the offset. This concept of the promised land, of the American dream is a construct. There are times when it’s not pretty, when you have no running water, or you’re in debt, or a family member is dying and it just feels like you’ve been dealt as bad a hand as you can get. But it is better to know you’re not facing all that alone.

Roma (2018) - 10/10

This was my recommendation for the podcast episode on Alfonso Cuarón movies. Roma is as beautiful as it is heart-wrenching and I would recommend listening to episode 40 of the podcast to find out more about my thoughts.

An American Werewolf In London (1981) - 8/10

In all fairness, London is enough to make anyone a little crazy at the best of times. An American Werewolf in London showcases some fantastically grotesque effects, akin to something like Carpenter’s The Thing, in showing the dead brought back to life and a horrifically gory transformation scene. Although the film is from the perspective of an American protagonist, directed also by an American, the depiction of British culture and climate is something I’ve not seen many films pull off quite so well, and I was pleasantly surprised at the more comedic tone the film has overall, which is something that works more in its favour than straight horror would.

The Party’s Just Beginning (2018) - 6/10

Karen Gillan’s directorial debut is… pretty good! There are a lot of ideas I like in this movie: a woman living life and through convenient circumstances, is confronted with death in many ways. Gillan obviously knows her homeland as well as she can, imbuing the whole thing with an intensely Scottish vibe (though maybe not in the same vein as something like Trainspotting) that makes it a bit more unique than a more run of the mill movie of this ilk, backed up in no small part by her own main performance. The plot itself is no great diversion from the kind of story I’m used to with these smaller movies and for something that’s trying to include messaging about transgender issues and suicide, it probably could have been handled better or done in a different way.

Solaris (1972) - 9/10

Another Tarkovsky joint, one I thought I’d revisit to see if there was indeed more to get out of it a second time. Well, it’s no surprise that yes, there was certainly more to get out of it. Solaris is a crazy trip of a movie and I would liken it to Kubrick’s 2001 in terms of how grand the scale of it feels. Yet this is a film that comes across as deeply personal, choosing to focus on a specific character as he goes to a space station to help those on board who are experiencing some kind of emotional crises, only to feel the effects of the planet, Solaris invading his own mind as it has the crew. To many, I can see this lengthy Russian sci-fi being a tad slow but my personal experience is one of deep engagement. Solaris pulls its viewer in a lot of different directions and it is always doing something unexpected in terms of where its narrative goes. There’s a lot to think about with the movie and thankfully it’s no chore to watch again.

Y Tu Mamá También (2001) - 9/10

Another recommendation for the podcast episode on Alfonso Cuarón movies. This is a very relaxed experience, following three young people as they go on a road trip, visit different places and have sex. Listen to episode 40 of The Sunday Movie Marathon podcast for more of my thoughts.

Children of Men (2006) - 10/10

My favourite Cuarón movie, one that never stops being tense as its characters are constantly moving towards the end goal. Set in a future where humans are infertile, the oldest living person is 18, and London is the last city in the world that’s still keeping it together, somewhat. This is masterclass filmmaking. Listen to episode 40 of the podcast for more insights.

Minority Report (2002) - 5/10

I’m really not the biggest fan of Spielberg… Minority Report is an interesting movie in terms of its concept of stopping crimes before they happen by way of prediction, but I just didn’t connect with the heart of it. The colouring is way too overexposed in a way that’s supposed to be eliciting a futuristic vibe but instead feels so early-2000’s in the worst way. My biggest problem with Minority Report is just how long it is, clocking in at two hours and twenty-five minutes which allows for a lot of meandering, all while never quite developing characters enough for you to care about.

Caché (2005) - 9/10

Oh god! Another Michael Haneke movie! Here we see a couple periodically sent video tapes featuring hours of footage of the outside of their house. The anxiety ratchets up and the mystery gets deeper with every minute. There’s always at least one moment in any of his films that have so far made me realise just how out of my depth I am. Caché is no exception, and I won’t spoil anything here because I think it’s better just to watch the movie and see for yourself. He is a director that wants the audience to know something and that something is never what is explicitly shown at face value; it is pressed into the fabric of the film - plainly evident, yet hidden. Caché is so stupidly clever in displaying its themes and messaging - making reference to the Siene Massacre of 1961 as well as a deeper study of colonialism - and there’s no way to change a single detail of it without risking the Jenga tower crumbling to the ground. It all works in tandem. It is passion and fury and haunting.

Coco (2017) - 7/10

Pixar had a string of around seven forgettable movies before this point so thankfully Coco emerged to show the company still had something good in them. Coco deals a lot with themes of death and legacy, remembering those who are gone in order to preserve them and while its plotting is quite basic and there are certainly moments that either drag or cannot escape the same Pixar formula, most of what the movie has to offer is a lot of fun, with creative, colourful animation and emotional beats that resonate the way they’re supposed to.

Incredibles 2 (2018) - 5/10

Oh, they almost had it! There's a lot here that could have been explored in far more interesting ways. Setting Incredibles 2 directly after the events of the first movie was not a good idea. If it had taken place five or ten years after, the characters could have been in different places in life and it would feel as though they'd actually changed and developed. But instead of trying to be a film that actually cares about its characters and the journeys they go on, a lot of the film is wrestling with the idea that Bob isn't supportive of his wife and Jack-Jack has to fight a raccoon… They have to shoehorn in a villain that in no way compares to the genius of the original. The ending of the original introduces another antagonist that gets wrapped up within this film's first ten minutes, except they don't catch him and he's never mentioned again. It's a real shame because the animation is fantastic and the acting is superb and there are great ideas sprinkled throughout. It just doesn't come together.

Toy Story 4 (2019) - 6/10

I was rather reluctant to watch Toy Story 4 because from the get-go I’m not really here for sequels being made just for the sake of it. Everyone loves Toy Story and making another one is a sure fire way to make money. This is the first time I’ve seen Toy Story 4 and for what it’s worth, I did enjoy it. The animation is immaculate and that alone feels like a huge flex from Pixar who tend to step up the game when it comes to animation in film, despite not having the best track record for films generally at this point. While it was nice to see these characters again, I found a lot of them to be side-lined (namely Buzz) in favour of a story that focuses mainly or entirely on Woody, who I just don’t like as much as in the previous movies. Generally the movie is good and decent enough but there’s no real antagonist and the plot is quite loose… it doesn’t feel as though it needed to be made from a story point of view.

Onward (2020) - 6/10

And with that I have seen every Pixar movie. And Onward is a fine one to go out on. While I don’t think it compares to the likes of earlier Pixar it’s still pretty fun. Or maybe I’m just a sucker for a medieval setting filled with bright colours and magic! Speaking of which, the animation was super and the medieval quest element is something that hooked me with the film. Again, plot-wise it does feel very familiar and I don’t know, maybe I’m past the point now of expecting Pixar to mix it up where their formula for story-telling is concerned but the movie is quite predictable. Nonetheless, while I’m not rushing back to see Onward I would hardly turn it off or refuse if someone wanted to watch it.

Old (2021) - 3/10

Oh boy! New M. Night movie dropped and my word, was it fun! For more of my thoughts on this… masterpiece (?) of a movie, please direct your attention to episode 41 of The Sunday Movie Marathon podcast.

T2 Trainspotting (2017) - 5/10

Trainspotting is perhaps one of my favourite movies and I had never bothered with the sequel, 20 years on, because the ending of that first movie is so conclusive. T2 felt more an excuse for these guys to get together again and in that, I probably would have preferred a couple of pictures on Twitter of the main cast and director, Danny Boyle having dinner or something. This is a fine movie - very arty in its presentation but meandering and dull in its story that doesn’t offer much in the way of proof that it had to exist.

Taste of Cherry (1997) - 9/10

What makes life worth living? This is a central question and theme of Taste of Cherry, and one that leaves such interpretation not only up to its central character but to the viewer as well. This film got me thinking about times in my life when I truly have had no answer to hard questions. Because it’s hard to convince people of things they are so adamantly against and harder still to rationalise what you believe if you’re not even entirely sure why you believe it in the first place. We are all of us alive and in recognising that, does that make it precious? And if indeed living is not a happy thing, why then should we fight so hard to preserve it? I felt upset as I watched this movie because I’ve been asked these kinds of questions before and it makes me feel stupid when I’m unable to answer. But the only real answer I can give is, everything. And if you can’t see the point then you’re not looking hard enough. Taste of Cherry is beautiful in its exploration of these topics and in its overall presentation, offering some of the best visuals in any movie I’ve seen - fitting for a feature with so much to say about the beauty of life - and an ending that as much pulls the rug out from under you as it does pull you out of the dark and make you realise just how lonely you’ve felt.

Bones (2001) - 2/10

Snoop Dogg is Jimmy Bones! This film is super funny but I’m not sure it’s trying to be and I really didn’t love it overall. But I do talk more in depth about it in episode 41 of the podcast.

The Duchess (2008) - 5/10

Another recommendation for the podcast. The Duchess was pretty much exactly what I thought it was going to be and there’s a lot to like about it but generally it’s a bit sparse. For more chat on the movie, listen to episode 41 of the podcast.

The Man With One Red Shoe (1985) - 1/10

This was another one for the podcast and man, was it awful. We had to watch it at 1.5x speed towards the end because it just wasn’t getting finished otherwise. To find out more, make sure to listen to episode 41 of the podcast.

The Emperor’s New Groove (2000) - 7/10

Pull the lever, Kronk! Haha! Slays me. I do quite miss this era of Disney, where the animation was hand-drawn and the stories were actually compelling and funny. The Emperor’s New Groove is vibrant, it’s got great characters and memorable moments that will forever be ingrained in the memory of culture. All in all, it’s just a solid flick that doesn’t waste time, developing the standard fall from glory type of arc but smoothly and in an entertaining way.

The Suicide Squad (2021) - 8/10

Oh, bloody hell! They actually made a good one! The Suicide Squad is not only better than the ‘Suicide Squad’ of 2016 in every way, it’s a genuinely great film! This time, James Gunn (director of Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy movies) is at the helm and it seems clear that Warner Bros. basically let him do what he wanted with the movie, as it doesn’t seem to bog itself down with the restrictions of a more family-friendly rating. The result of this is a far cleaner, colourful film with a clearer vision that takes from early Vietnam movies and uses that style to craft a superhero/villain movie that differentiates itself among the copious amount of existing films of the genre. The Suicide Squad wastes very little time, introducing fun, crazy characters we’ve not seen on the big screen before and isn’t worried about killing a whole bunch of them, with standouts being Elba’s Bloodsport, Melchior’s Ratcatcher 2, Stallone’s King Shark (expertly rendered with fantastic visual effects), and Robbie’s returning interpretation of Harley Quinn. A lot of Gunn’s trademark sense of humour is laced throughout and more often than not, it hits. The audience at the cinema were truly loving this movie and I’ll admit, I was right there with them. This mix of the gritty, gory and absurd is not something that should work as well as it does but the basic premise of the film is already so silly (and boy, do they know it) that it just works! Certainly one of the best DC movies since The Dark Knight and one I’d be more than happy to watch again. This is what the modern comic book movie should be: just balls to the wall fun!

69 notes · View notes

egg-emperor · 2 years ago

Note

For better or worse, Pontaff added their own personal touch to the stories and characters they wrote, but they still had at least a basic grasp of the franchise. Their humor may be hit and miss at times, but their misses are basically just a couple of negligible weak jokes. Flynn, as you said, writes the characters doing whatever depending on where he wants the plot to go, regardless of whether it makes any sense in context or not (it usually doesn't).

Yeah exactly, you could see what it was that Pontaff brought to the series especially in terms of humor. But at the same time, part of it was likely also Sega wanting that specific lighter hearted tone and humor, so people putting all the blame on them for the overall story toning still isn't fair. And yeah I don't like all their jokes either but I do think some of them were genuinely funny to sometimes really clever (esp the Colors PAs while everyone was too busy whining about the really not so bad baldy mcnosehair joke) and the some jokes not being funny to me doesn't matter as long as they show an understanding and respect towards characters. And I felt they did that especially well with Eggman.

And yeah, Flynn writing characters ridiculously OOC for the sake of plot progression or making certain characters seem better than others has been an endlessly frustrating theme in recent years with IDW. I'd rather take Pontaff's humor that still comes with actual understanding of Eggman's character, than Flynn that writes an Eggman where the only joke is his entire character when he portrays him as an incompetent clown but instead of being a funny joke it's just really depressing, seeing what harm it's done to how people perceive Eggman. 💀

The plot should always be character driven in a way accurate and true to them and if they have to be written OOC to make the story happen, it's the plot that needs to be changed, not the characters. And the criticism towards Flynn doing the latter instead is based on absolutely valid concern.

#asks

7 notes · View notes

headspace-hotel · 4 years ago

Text

since I guess I’m talking about Star Wars now, calling the Empire in the Star Wars sequel trilogy “fascist” has always bothered me in a way that’s it’s very difficult to express, but has something to do with how...fucking abysmal the portrayal of the empire is in terms of like...being anything more than a vague, hollow aesthetic.

I mean yeah, “fascist-coded” might apply to them, but that term feels useless for anything except winning internet arguments. What they are is “bad guy coded.” There’s no substance. We largely don’t see the qualities that would make the Empire fascist. We get close, a little bit, with Finn’s backstory, but then that gets thrown out the window. “Speeches with lots of yelling” and “flag color schemes” aren’t what fascism is.

Like, here’s the obvious thing: if you are content to rely on how a regime is ~portrayed~ to decide if it’s fascist or not, you sure as hell are not going to notice fascism in real life because you’ll be waiting for your country to adopt a more evil-looking color scheme. I mean, if we’re going to take it seriously, this is not a good way to evaluate evilness.

“Kylo Ren is a bad character because he’s a fascist” is a take, but consider: “Kylo Ren is a bad character because he isn’t a fascist.” There is no substantial ideology or intent behind his actions, he’s just angry and likes power. The Empire doesn’t appear to have a culture, let alone an idea of their culture being superior. The fight against the Empire has nothing anti-fascist about it. As handled in the sequel trilogy, it’s just irritatingly shallow. It absolutely could have been better. The seeds absolutely were there! But Rise of Skywalker was too occupied no-homoing Finn and Poe to remember to complete their character arcs.

Yes, destroying an entire solar system is ABSOLUTELY genocide, but the film spent like, 40 seconds on this, because the role of Starkiller Base is to be another round thing in the sky to blow up while starfighters go pew pew pew. The annihilation of billions of people and untold amounts of culture is an afterthought. It’s also boiled down to a single person pressing a button instead of a massive project overseen and operated by countless people, and its impact seems totally forgotten about once the heroes blow the thing up.

I mean sure, this is true of the original Death Star, but Starkiller Base is “the same plot point, but worse.” The original Death Star took almost two decades to complete, for one thing. There was at least some recognition of how meaningful it was to create something with the purpose of annihilating planets. It was still shallow but it was something. In The Force Awakens there’s nothing, there is no weight to it at all. It’s not handled at all in terms of the destruction of cultures, of entire people groups, just as a Bigger Bad. Everything is just there to mirror the plot of the OT enough to make the fans happy (which is impossible, but I digress). That entire part of the story is executed in a way that just sucks unbelievable amounts of ass.

I guess my take is that if we’re arguing about whether Kylo Ren should be redeemed because he’s a “fascist,”—that is, if we want to take this stuff seriously at all—we should talk about how terrible a job these films did with portraying fascism. You can’t even say that Disney was *attempting* to portray fascism because let’s be real, I doubt Disney has an interest in meaningful social commentary with its cash cow franchise.

The argument we’re essentially having about the sequels is “If you imagine what these movies would be like if the villains had any meaningful, socially applicable ideology or motivation, they would probably be fascist because the people that gave them a vaguely “Nazi-like” aesthetic would, in this universe, have done that for a reason other than to tell us that these are supposed to be the bad guys.” At some point the execution of an idea in a story has to be so fucking bad that it’s overly flattering to the story to discuss it so much.

#fascism #star wars #genocide tw #we’re getting discoursey up in this bitch.#kylo ren #watch me take star wars seriously #star wars sequels #tfa #the force awakens

178 notes · View notes

feynavaley · 3 years ago

Note

That's not true, atleast not in canon, when he sees france is truly down about his new uniform he shown real worry and even America when he's down after being dismissed by African citizens, he cares and he acts, his acts are rejected inboth the cases because he's not exactly in good terms with either of them yet but that hasn't stopped Jim from showing worry. And it continues in modern world too.

I know HC mean making stuff up but do you have a reason for believing this way

Hi and thanks for the questions.

I have already partially addressed this in a reblog of that post [x], which I have since deleted because you guys are right – I did go overboard compared to what I actually meant to say. I'm sorry about this, I was half-asleep and posted that without thinking too much. I don't think England is unkind or callous at all. I do think he may come across this way at times, though.

Regarding the last point, there’s an important clarification to be made: coming across as something doesn’t mean truly being like that. England cares a lot and he has a big heart, I’ve never claimed the contrary. All I was trying to say was that he has trouble expressing it.

Furthermore, I should mention that my headcanons aren't meant to be taken as absolute. You can't encapsulate the entirety of a character in a few lines, they're much too complex for that. When I write such a short headcanon, it's only about one aspect of a character. In England's case, this is even more important than it is for other characters. I see England almost like an onion: there are many layers to him and to how he behaves, and his behaviour changes a lot depending on the situation and how uncomfortable he is.

Now, let me reiterate one thing: England is kind. In a neutral situation, when there's nothing he particularly cares about at stake, he has no trouble being kind and attentive. In spite of this, England is also extremely insecure – an insecurity born out of many rejections and bad experiences. Due to this, I think England may have trouble expressing himself and his true nature in situations that are more emotionally loaded. On one hand, he'd like to – on the other hand, the fear of rejection holds him back.

This doesn't mean England never intervenes. I never actually meant that (but definitely came across too strongly in the post) because he does when he cares about people and he thinks they're upset – but I do think it's extra hard for him, and it may make him come across as harsher than he means to. Even the situations you mention can lead to this: as you said, England was kind – only for his actions to be misinterpreted and overlooked. After these multiple experiences, don’t you think it would be harder for England to keep trying? I don’t think it would be far-fetched. Moreover, his confidence has been shaken more and more over the years, which I think would make him more hesitant to intervene.

England has also being called ‘a tsundere’ by Himaruya himself, which was also shown in several snippets: even when he’s being kind, if he’s feeling vulnerable he becomes flustered and acts in a sort of roundabout way that can make him come across as harsher than he means to. Once again, the key-word is ‘come across’. England isn’t like that, but he does tend to act in a way that portrays his character as worse than it actually is.

That being said, I acknowledge that I definitely went too far and worded that speculation of mine too harshly. It’s true that England does intervene, at last. Still, I do think it takes a lot out of him.

Lastly, there’s another point I’d like to address because I think that one ruffled some feathers and might have been a reason behind some harsh answers I got: I do not think Canada is, overall, a better person than England. The reason I made that comparison is that Canada and England share similarly severe self-esteem issues. However, Canada is younger and more naive than England – and, more importantly, other personifications are much kinder with him than they generally are with England. I’m simplifying a lot here, but as a result, Canada developed a positive mindset whereas England turned to pessimism in order to protect himself from the disappointment. I’m of the opinion this can also make Canada more likely to act even though he’s internally second-guessing himself just as hard as England is – but Canada hasn’t faced the same kind of rejection, which does make an impact.

I hope my point makes sense now! And thanks for correcting me.

#hetalia #hetalia headcanon #aph england #aph canada #feyna answers #feyna talks about hetalia #feyna's headcanon #anonymous #thanks for stopping by!#also no headcanons don't mean making up stuff out of nowhere #in order to be a headcanon it should be canon-compliant or at least plausible #of course than people can disagree but that's another point #in this case you thought what I said went against canon so you were completely right to point it out #but it's a weird point to make because if you'd really believe that headcanon is simply making up stuff #you'd have no right to complain about what I say?

10 notes · View notes

lunannex · 4 years ago

Text

Character Design of Latinos

by a Latina who is tired of y'all not doing your research.

—————

First of all, please keep in mind that I don't speak for anyone but myself. You should never stop at just one source of information, and I would honestly really advise you to listen to other Latinos —especially other Latinos of color— to hear their thoughts and perspectives as well. And second, please remember that Latino is not a race! I can't believe I even have to say this, but the term refers to anyone who is from Latin American or who has Latin American heritage or descent and should never be referenced as a race. Alright, now that that's out of the way, let's dive right into it!

—————

People don't seem to realize that Latinos can come in all shapes, colors and sizes. People like Sofia Vergara and Michael Peña shouldn't be your only source of reference when trying to figure out what you want your character to look like. As I mentioned here, Latinos are diverse not just in our cultures but also in our appearances and, contrary to popular belief, we're not a monolith of people that all look alike. Latin Americans, just like every other ethnic group, have an incredible amount of genetic diversity.

Don't believe me? Just look at all these people:

Now, what do they have in common? They're all Latinos. See how they all have different skin tones, facial structures, hair textures and body types? Yeah, they don't look the same to me.

A character's design can reflect their personality and give the audience a good idea of who they are as people. And just as whatever languages a Latino does or doesn't know shouldn't invalidate their identity, neither should their appearance.

The thing about character design when it comes to marginalized groups is that it goes hand-in-hand with all the stereotypes that are constantly perpetuated.

Why are Afro-Latinos only portrayed as maids, nannies or drug dealers? Why are the Latinos that look like Michael Peña portrayed as violent or lazy? Why are they always the comedic relief, immigrants or people with a lower-class status? Why are the Latinas that look like Sofia Vergara and JLo portrayed as spicy and exotic mistresses? I mean, we obviously know why, but I'm just saying, if that's what you think all Latinos are like then you are in desperate need of a wake up call.

There's this huge misunderstanding of the Latino identity. The misconception that we all have the same tanned skin tone, the same facial structures, body types, hair textures, personalities, etc. when that's...really not the case. Society has taught a lot of people that if our appearances don't fit in with this unrealistic ideal they have of us, our identities are therefore invalidated. And this misconception causes Black, Indigenous and Mixed Latinos to be underrepresented or entirely dismissed in media and society in general more often than not.

I want to add that while white Latinos' identities do get invalidated from time to time as well —I say this because one of my best friends is a white Latino but since he's, well, white, some people don't seem to believe him and just seem to think that he's joking—, it's not nearly to the same extent as the types of Latinos that I mentioned beforehand do. White Latinos still hold a lot of privilege in society despite this.

Also just an important note that you should keep in mind and take into consideration: just because a Latino is white doesn't mean that they don't or can't have features that are more frequently associated with their ethnicity.

It's alright to portray light-skinned Latinos. Like I said, we're very diverse. But you have to question your reason for making the character have that skin color. Remember, you are the creator. You're the one in control of all these decisions and if all of your characters are portrayed as light-skinned people then you really have to take a step back and reevaluate your decisions because that right there sounds a lot like colorism.

When you say you want more Latino representation, you should be referring to all kinds of Latinos. You shouldn't just mean the ones that you and the rest of society consider acceptable. And no, it's not exactly your responsibility to create diverse characters, but if you're preaching about diversity and sitting on your high horse then I sure do hope that you're willing to actually do something about it. Performative activism is harmful and, at the end of the day, does absolutely nothing if you're not willing to put the work into it.

Additionally, don't be afraid of implementing aspects of their culture into their design. Let them be proud of their culture, let them engage in it. However! Please don't take this as an excuse to center their entire personality around their culture. You may think you're doing something when, really, you aren't. You're just feeding into all the harmful stereotypes and not making any actual effort to add real depth to your character (looking at all the people that make celebrating Día de los Muertos, eating tacos, and liking "Gasolina" and "Despacito" their character's only defining personality traits).

Personally, I would love to see more of the following:

• A thin-lipped and curly-haired Latina.

• A Latino with freckles. This one may seem strange but most of the time I just see Latinos with moles, not that there's anything wrong with that (I have a lot of them myself), but it'd be nice to see some variation.

• For a Latina to be considered beautiful without being fetishized and objectified.

• A Latino who doesn't fit the "sexy macho" stereotype to be considered desirable.

• More LGBTQ+ Latinos, especially ones who are POC.

• Black, Indigenous, Asian and Mixed Latinos.

• Disabled Latinos.

• Jewish Latinos.

• Muslim Latinos.

• Latinos with different body types.

• Soft-spoken Latinos.

• Successful Latinos who are well-off.

• Latinos who are allowed to be emotionally vulnerable.

• Latinos with complex storylines and realistic flaws.

• Latinos at the center of the story instead of just existing in the background for the sake of "diversity".

• Just more positive and diverse representation overall.

There's not enough positive portrayals out there of us, and it's exhausting having to sit back and watch as my people get portrayed so negatively. Am I saying that there's no good representation out there for us? No, there absolutely is good representation (ex. In The Heights, On My Block, One Day at a Time, Coco, Miles Morales, Luz Noceda from The Owl House, the Molina family from Julie and the Phantoms, etc.), but that doesn't take away from the fact that a lot of the representation that we have throughout all types of media is, for a lack of better word, bad.

And you can't just say, "Oh, but at least you have representation, can't you be at least a little grateful? Why are you complaining so much?" because you don't get to decide what people are and aren't allowed to be upset about. Despite the positive representation that exists out there, it tends to be overshadowed seeing as a lot of people still view us through this negative lense that they've consistently been told to believe is true when it's really not.

All types of Latinos deserve to be represented in a positive light. So make sure the character you're portraying feels like an actual person as opposed to an offensive one-dimensional caricature because sometimes having bad representation is worse than having no representation at all.

#other latinos are free to add additional info btw!#i'm always a little hesitant to post these types of things but i really do feel like they're things that need to be said #anyway remember to drink your respect latinos juice please and thank you😌🔪💕#luna talks #latino #latine #latino representation #long post #diversity #character advice #writing advice #writing tips #important #also there's a reason as to why i don't personally use the term latinx but that's a topic for another day #i hope this ends up being helpful for some people and that i worded it all correctly lol #writing resources

167 notes · View notes