#and it has nothing to do with the other characters likability either!!!

[thattimdrakeguy]

This Is Who JASON TODD is As a PERSON. What His LIMITS Are.

Gosh, how I adore you Jason Todd.

Maybe not as a person--he does some prettyyyy messed up stuff. But as a character, how fantastic you were.

All right, so we talked about Jason Todd's skills a lot. How much of a genius he is. Stuff like that.

But who is he as a person?

What are his limits?

Don't have to answer that. 'Cause I'm gonna show you.

Can't let this post go to waste, can I?

A man who's dedication to stopping crime is far more fierce than maybe any other character in the main DC Universe. He often seems like he's playing around, but he never actually is as we discussed before.

Damn I miss when Jason Todd was scary.

People draw and write him like he's a 90s anti-hero or something.

No, he's a horror character for bad guys.

That makes him so damn cool and appealing. He's scarier than even Batman. And that says a lot.

He's shown to kill them without much care, unless he's actively using them, or manipulating them and the what not. Up to this point we really haven't seen what his limits are. Heck, I skipped it, but him leading Batman and Nightwing right to Amazo might make it seem like he has nothing against killing good guys.

Not the case.

He does not kill heroes.

While nowadays they softened Jason up so much he's barely recognizable. Close to the immediate aftermath of Under the Hood, some writers outright wrote him to be a murderous villain that'd kill anybody

That's horse shit.

Jason Todd is the most anti-hero, anti-hero, to ever be an anti-hero.

He wouldn't say he plays nice.

But you don't exactly see him killing her to get out of his way do you? Is he tying her up in some boobytrap 'cause he's a sadistic psycho? No.

Pit madness is mad up by fans to excuse Jason's behavior in comics like Teen Titans where he tried to murder Robin/Tim Drake, and later on in Nightwing where he was murdering anyone to ruin Dick's reputation.

When in reality that was all just bad writing.

Seriously, guys, it's fiction. You don't have to make up excuses. These guys aren't Gods that write this stuff. They make mistakes like the rest of us. Gotta learn to accept what is once in a while. Easier on the blood pressure.

I mean, damn, he's genuinely quite helpful in fact. Showing off his intelligence to help Onyx

What you don't remember Onyx? I can't--You're serious--?I mean--

I don't remember her either. I don't really care.

Just don't mistake his kindness for weakening of his own moral code. He does not back down. He will not back down. He refuses to back down. His mission is the most important thing to him. He won't kill you if you didn't do anything wrong.

But do not think you can get in his way.

He's that sort of a man.

Damn, I miss how cunning Jason used to be. It's soo gooood.

The confidence on this man makes even a nasty man like himself feel oddly likable despite his horrible and violent actions.

Art-wise, I love how he goes back to shadow-y and scary looking once he reveals his darker nature. It's extremely good visual story-telling. Could be them representing the lighting only.

It really works for it's benefit though in ways they may not have realized.

Still great stuff regardless.

He is scary as hell. Menacing. Calculated. Cunning. Genius. Never to be underestimated. Knows how to play people right where he wants them.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, but Jason Todd is one of the smartest members of the Bat-Family. He managed to out work BATMAN AND NIGHTWING for crying out loud. You don't just do that. And Batman acknowledges that it isn't luck either.

Intelligence comes in many forms. When it comes to manipulation and tactics though? It's Jason's ballgame. He's the one in control.

Still doesn't mean he'll kill anyone only for the sake of it. He actively helps clean the wound he causes. It's a very insightful character moments that let's you get inside the head and moral code of Jason Todd.

Shows you he's not another villain like that.

He's far more complicated than that.

So of course some writers had to be lazy and change that--

Love this big, scary, intelligent bastard of a man.

No ones out here doing it like Jason Mother Saving Todd.

[couldbebetterforsure]

Hi there everyone! My name is Willow and my toxic otome game player trait is that the longer it takes to unlock the route of the character I’m most interested in, the faster my motivation for playing the game plummets 😃😃😃

[ephemeral-roses]

Before I get the power to answer the asks that I got in my ask box; I'm gonna go on a little ramble about how people view Ares and some of the misconceptions I often see about him. I will, of course, not villainize him, nor will I glaze him, as I want to be very transparent about him. Just like any other god, he has two sides to him, good and bad, and really not concrete.

People did have varied views and ways of worshipping Ares back then. Even though there were certainly violent worships of Ares, with Ares depicted in a rather ominous light, with bloody sacrifices for victory in war or to keep war away, this isn't the entirety of his worship or how people viewed him.

I see people argue that Ares was only ever feared by people and that he can't be seen as any positive, as a pushback against Ares possibly becoming another Hades, where he is constantly portrayed as the misunderstood good guy who actually did nothing wrong. As much as I understand their fears, we can still acknowledge that people definitely have at least once and somewhere seen Ares as a positive figure. The Homeric Hymn to Ares calls him a lot of positive titles, asking Ares to drive away cowardice and anxiety to make them braver and more sound, to drive away anger that drives them to do bad things, and to help them abide by peace.

As I said, his means of worship and how people viewed him varies between time and place, so this doesn't represent all of his worship and character, just like his other ways of worship and portrays doesn't, but we do have to accept this view of him existed rather than deny it. If someone views Ares this way, do not tell them they can't.

There is no proof that Ares and Athena have a conflicting and tense relationship, with their only real conflict being in the Trojan War— but many gods fought against each other in that war. Athena isn't a greater goddess who is more level-headed and peaceful than her brother, not understanding his war loving ways, as she is said to be just like him, loving war.

They are both war deities, both representing a different part of war, but still, no matter what, represent war. There were places where they were worshipped alongside together, as well.

And, the gods were not assigned colors. Ares doesn't have to be red, and Athena doesn't have to be blue, and they can wear different colors or the same colors. Apparently, people get upset when Athena wears red because that's "Ares' color" or "a Spartan color". Ares and Sparta didn't own the color red. I regret to inform you that this isn't Team Fortress 2.

There was a festival in Tegea where only women were allowed to attend, celebrating the women's defeat of an army who invaded, and in Tegea, Ares was called by the epithet "Gunaikothoinas", which means "feasted by women" because of this festival.

But there was also a festival in Geronthrai, a village in Lakedaimonia, and women were forbidden from entering.

These bears no reflection on his character and how you can portray him as they clash with each other, but it is untrue to say that either one represents his worship more than the other. Some people use his Gunaikothoinas epithet as proof that he is a feminist and was seen as a Protector of Women. In reality, he was never given that title.

Some people also use the myth of Alcippe and the lack of sources that state he assaulted anyone as proof of him being a feminist. Even though many assaulters and those who are fine with assault are sexist and misogynistic, being against it doesn't mean you are a feminist.

You are free to write Ares as respectful to women, especially when people usually take away the assaults that the other gods do towards women in stories in order to make them more likable, but do not use these as proof of anything historical.

Hera, realistically, wouldn't favor either Ares or Hephaestus over the other. People usually portray Hephaestus as being the black sheep of the family because of what happened to him as a baby and the golden throne incident, but don't know that eventually him and Hera made up,

and defend her from Zeus, earning him to be thrown from Olympus for the second time,

Considering how they both defended Hera and seemed to have a good relationship with her, neither would be favored more than the other to her. If anything, Zeus would be the one both of them have a problem with since they both have gotten in trouble with him.

[some-pers0n]

I'm gonna be blunt and say that I really don't think a lot of people kinda get these two characters. Sure, yeah, there'll be people like "Psshh no?? Me?? I know exactly who these guys are" and like, yeah maybe you do. Maybe you'll read this while nodding your head and whatnot. Maybe you won't.

Either way, I think there's a decent amount of people who don't...get Qibli and Winter. I mainly see it in shipping stuff. I know it's kinda idiotic to go looking for character stuff in shipping-- you know what?? No. I think it's perfectly sound logic to try and look for meaningful character writing in ship stuff, especially with fanfics. I've got that aroace mindset where I can only comprehend a ship if it has a clear and exact thematical and character-driven purpose.

Anywho, I think there's something to be craved with how Qinter is talked about in the fandom. I think there's something in general to be desired when discussing Qibli and Winter in general (or, hell, most of the characters) or other ships they're in, but I want to discuss Qinter mainly as a means to view them through the lens of a relationship. Some sort of duo and pair. Two young dragonets trying to survive.

Winter and Qibli come from incredibly similar backgrounds. That sounds ridiculous at a first glance, but when you think about it, they do. They both were raised with terrible parents who held them to an unrealistic standard that neither really wanted to be.

Winter was forced to become a child soldier and be the best of the best, despite his best rightfully not being absolutely perfect and having a ton of heart and soul in him. Ironically enough, his sheer loyalty to his friends that he displays later would be commended in the IceWing army, but is only looked down upon because he's showing anything other than pure apathy at existence and disgust when confronted with the other tribes. Winter is a kind soul who was shaped and twisted into becoming somebody far meaner to fit the idea of what his parents wanted him to be. It's a mask he wears to fit in. To be at least be tolerated by the dragons he only wants the approval from.

Qibli was raised in the slums of Scorpion Den. The back alleys and dark, seedy streets that are avoided. He had to fit the build of a thief. A petty pickpocket that lurks around like his family, doing nothing more than swiping whatever goods they could get their hands on. Qibli was kind and sweet, which obviously was a terrible sin in the eyes of his family. Like Winter, this planted a seed of wanting to be loved, although to a significantly larger extent than Winter felt. Qibli became obsessed with the idea of being loved as he hated being seen as nothing. He wanted nothing more than to be praised and admired because of just how neglected he was. So, he pretends to be somebody likable. Somebody who others care about. A mask to conceal the dragon he feels can never be loved.

Because of their backgrounds, they feel at odds when they're introduced to one another. Qibli is the laid-back jokester type while Winter is snarly and angry. Thanks to Moon's powers though, we get a look into them even before their book.

We see that Qibli is paranoid and his brain is constantly trying to predict others. He's always in a state of stress and fear, putting on a performance to try and be liked and see which dragons are the biggest threats to him. He's never gotten used to living outside of the crime-filled Scorpion Den, and the memories of childhood where he had to lay awake thinking that some dragon who his mother stole from will murder them all in their sleep remain. He's scared and afraid.

Winter managed to convince himself that he is this mean and nasty dragon, but really he's not. There's moments of hesitancy in MR from him. He's also just. generally not really that much in the wrong in the book. Sorry my Winter Apologist side is coming out but y'all hate too much on a character who was just kinda mean for some random dragon he only knew for a couple days at most by then doing stuff that was very suspicious. Yeah obviously Moon is the protagonist and we like her and know the full context, but Winter?? He doesn't know anything!

I digress however. They're in. not the best of states. Sure, yeah, Qibli had ran from Vulture and Cobra and was now Thorn's adoptive son of sorts, but he was obsessed with Thorn to the point of almost blind worship. He hailed her as some grand dragon because he had never been loved before. Being loved by somebody felt incomprehensible. He wants to repay it since he feels like he doesn't deserve it.

Winter on the other hand has just gotten away from a terrible situation, where his family more or less just hates him. They hate him so much it's not even funny. Winter had gotten Hailstorm, somebody who Winter loved and admired, was stolen away by the SkyWings and presumed dead for years because of him. He blames himself. He constantly thinks that he should've been the one taken away instead. He doesn't see himself worthy to live, especially not compared to Hailstorm. Hailstorm is charming, smart, strong, and better in every capacity to Winter. How could he ever live up to that?

Their shared flaw is that they feel inadequate. They feel as though there's something inherently flawed with themselves, something that they need to hide away. It was shaped because of their similar backstories, where they were neglected and abused and put down because of them never being able to meet the unreasonable expectations placed on them. Because of this trauma, their personalities in the present are shaped to try and fit in.

It's only by being with the Jade Winglet do they begin to unlearn those habits. I would imagine that, in moments where they chat with each other for the first real time (not fighting or anything), they...notice how alike they are. Like holding up a mirror to themselves. Despite how differing their personalities are, they feel one in the same. The other side of the coin.

It's why I think Qinter really works as something more than a cheap means for comedic relief. They bounce off each other really well and in an interesting way, which makes for their interactions feeling a lot more meaningful when they put away the act and show and are genuine. I honestly think that they would want to help each other out. They see themselves in the other and don't want them to feel like they have to do this, but they can't even save themselves.

It's only with time however. Healing is a process. It's sure as hell hard to do it all alone. It's why I love a lot the themes of friendship and togetherness in arc 2 especially. All of the POVs learn how to be more confident and sure of themselves through their friends. I just wish that Qinter was talked about in a more intellectually stimulating way than "yellow boy laughs at blue boy for being angsty teen"

[licncourt]

What in particular makes you like Louis so much?

What is about Louis that you love so much? What draws you to him? Also do you know any other Louis lover accounts?? x

My gross baby book Louis….that’s hard, I actually had to think about it because I’d never really sat down and wondered why, even though I've been licking his nasty head like a mother cat since I was like 14. Though in a way I guess I have since I keep writing fics trying to figure him out and understand what makes him tick and why I care. VC, especially IWTV/Louis as a character has been such a fixture of my teenage and adult life, basically ten years now. That’s crazy to think about!

The first thing I want to talk about as far as what makes Louis so interesting is just how unpalatable he is without that being the point of the character . He’s not explicitly a villain, but the narrative isn’t asking you to like him either, he’s a wildcard with no clear character typing to fall back on. He came from the author’s grief and you can really feel that from the start. He’s like grief in a lot of ways, they carry the same pain and ugliness but nothing really exists without it, it’s just the dark side of love. He’s not supposed to be likable, the point isn’t even for the reader to empathize with him. What you make of him is 100% up to you. He’s not there to sway you in any particular direction in his regard. He doesn’t care what you think anyway.

At the very least, we can say he’s not at all a roguish, charming antihero character like Lestat eventually settles into, but he never becomes the stereotypical brooding-vampire-with-a-moral-compass archetype that he would directly inspire in the future (Edward Cullen, Angel from Buffy, Stefan Salvatore, etc). He’s not less evil than Lestat or any other vampire and he certainly isn’t aspirational, but his flaws are extremely human in a way that’s almost jarring. Becoming a vampire didn’t make him anything he wasn’t already (as opposed to Lestat or Armand). It’s just a catalyst for the unveiling of his true self, good and bad. He’s the scorpion who stings the frog and an ouroboros trying to muster the courage to sever its own tail. He’s ruled by his intrinsic nature.

[More under the cut because my brain worm took over]

Akasha calls him the most predatory of all the vampires and in a way that’s true. He never does anything by halves and there’s a violence in him that doesn’t come from vampirism, it’s something much deeper and more inherent to him than that. I’ve compared him to the gay serial killer phenomenon for that reason. When he kills, you see his weakness (physical and mental) because it’s messy and brutal and sexual and animalistic, completely primal, there’s nothing elegant or darkly seductive about it. He’s not a romantic vampire aristocrat taking a little drink like Lestat, he’s more similar to the revenants from vampire folklore, a Nosferatu with a pretty face which is somehow more disturbing. It makes you want to look away and look deeper at the same time. It’s either control or carnage.

A large part of what makes him HIM rests on that control (and the lack thereof). It’s what makes Louis such a time bomb, but also so relatable even despite everything else about him. So many people can understand what it’s like to have an eating disorder and be on the brink of a binge that will just restart the cycle, an addict white knuckling sobriety, a religious gay person fighting every natural impulse they have in an attempt to stay out of Hell, a victim of sexual assault who feels damaged beyond their ability to repair, to be suicidal and angry and horny and hungry and have no idea where to put any of it because putting it anywhere feels like an inexcusable failure somehow so you’re just paralyzed.

There aren’t very many characters who simply EXIST the way he does, completely laid bare by the narrative with a strange neutrality that makes him sort of a mirror for your own personality and life experience. He’s completely evil, deeply sympathetic, and morally gray all at once in a manner that feels very true to life. I think we all know a Louis or have been one at some point. A victim whose actions are still inexcusable, a perpetrator who is also abused, someone pitiful and loathsome at the same time but both are equally valid. Someone who thinks they’re completely self aware but that couldn’t be further from the truth. The embodiment of “an explanation but not an excuse”.

His appeal comes from his lack of appeal in a lot of ways, and how he exists primarily in the subtext of the narrative. You have to go looking for Louis if you want to really find him in the story. Especially since IWTV is from his POV, you have to pick apart what he says from what that actually means because the gap is WIDE. Nothing is spoon fed to you with him, it’s a never ending struggle to untangle him from his own perception of himself, then Lestat’s perception of him, Armand’s perception, David’s perception, even Marius’ perception. He’s a constant and brutal voyeur of himself who’s always the subject of observation and attempts to explain who and what he is to such a degree that the character shatters into a kaleidoscope. He’s almost a Helen of Troy figure where his agency is constantly being vied for (though unsuccessfully) and he can never quite escape the narratives other people place onto him. The narrative itself condemns him when he tries.

Something about Louis (maybe his beauty and supposed weakness) makes every other character feel like they have him figured out (maybe the reader too, for a while) but the conclusions never align and you get the impression the real him is somewhere in the cracks. Because of that, I’m also very interested in his own internal narrative and morality. It’s consistent in its inconsistency. The way he looks at the world is completely absurd, but he also has an unwavering point of view that informs even the most seemingly inexplicable of actions and it makes itself known the more he insists otherwise. Eventually, the narrative turns on him via the author and this particular flaw doesn’t matter anymore because that narrative has already judged and sentenced him anyway.

He’s just a walking contradiction to untangle. He’s so sensitive and emotional but so incredibly cold and callous. His sexual orientation keeps him up at night for decades but owning human beings seemingly never does at all. He’s deeply intelligent but totally out of touch with reality. He’s equally self loathing and uppity. He’s female-coded so deeply that he somehow experiences misogyny but he’s also a paragon of white, wealthy male privilege, intrinsically feminine and intrinsically masculine. Everything is his fault and nothing is. Mother and maiden, passion and apathy, his own shadow self, life and death, Adam and Eve.

Even with all of that though, there’s a certain charm and very real, dimensional tenderness to him that feels jarring contrasted against his mundane evil and vice versa. He’s awkward and strange and you get the impression that he always has been, he loves his daughter more than anything in the world, his favorite movies are The Company of Wolves and Beauty and the Beast, he’ll forgive the people he cares for just about anything, he’s always curious and almost childlike in how he interacts with art and nature and beauty in general, he wants to go to church, he still wears clothes that mimic the silhouettes of his human life, he tries to be a good brother but never quite manages, he gets carried away with crushes, he grew up too fast but his frontal lobe had barely finished developing when he died. He gnaws on grass and wears dusty sweaters and hates white sugar. He can be repelled with a cross because he chooses to be.

It’s maddening how he’s ALMOST lovable and ALMOST irredeemable, but those two things coexist so closely that you can’t quite fit him into a box no matter how hard you try. If anyone ever found the “right” box for him, the character of Louis would cease to exist. I hope I never fully figure him out because then the puzzle would be finished and I just don’t think that’s the point.

Anyway, there’s more I could say but I think that’s plenty for now! I hope that made some amount of sense at least.

Also I've been SO logged off for like a year so I have absolutely no idea who is actively Louisposting right now, but in terms of having good VC takes (Louis included) I will always trust @nasnyys @zisurru @swedenis-h @mothpdf and @loelett to not let me down!

[defelozedd94]

I don't really like Lan Zhan in The Untamed

I know this is an unpopular opinion, but Lan Zhan kind of bothers me in the drama. He always seems bored and annoyed by everything, he never talks, he comes across as emotionless, and he only seems to care when something is related to Wei Wuxian, which is pretty selfish I think. I have trouble connecting to him.

For example, Lan Xichen has always been there for him, always supporting him no matter what, even when he had no reason to believe him or when protecting him could have put him in trouble. But has Lan Zhan ever done anything for his brother? No. He seems to care mostly about himself and Wei Ying. For instance, when everyone was against Wei Wuxian except for Lan Zhan, Lan Xichen helped by hiding him in the Cloud Recesses, even though he had no proof and no reason to believe that Wei Ying wasn’t evil (let me remind you that all the other clan leaders were against Wei Wuxian at that time, so Xichen could have easily gone along with them on this). But he took that risk, because he always trusted his brother.

But when the situation is reversed and it's Jin Guangyao who is accused of being evil, does Lan Zhan do anything to support his brother? No… he only stands by Wei Ying’s side, even though he himself has no proof against Meng Yao (in the end, it was proven that they were right about Meng Yao, but at the time, there was no way to be sure). Xichen could also have trusted Nie Mingjue over his brother when it came to Wei Ying (since Mingjue also believed Wei Wuxian was evil), but he didn’t. So, when it’s about Wei Ying, Lan Zhan is willing to believe he’s still a good person, but when it comes to other people like Meng Yao, he doesn’t even try to give them the benefit of the doubt (even though his only proof against him was what Wei Ying reported him, since he's the only one who used Empathy on Mingjue). I guess he’s blinded by his love for Wei Ying, but that’s pretty selfish.

Now, I want to say that I do like Lan Zhan in the donghua. He’s way more likable and seems less selfish and more focused on justice. He's actually one of my favourite characters. I don’t know about the novel, as I haven’t read it.

People hating Lan Xichen...

I also saw people saying they hate Lan Xichen, and I was shocked. How can you hate someone who has always been good to others?

People say he was too passive, but they forget that he’s a clan leader. He cannot do whatever he wants in his position; he has to put his clan’s safety first. What if he had publicly protected Wei Ying? He could have turned all the other clans against him and his own clan. (The Untamed clearly shows how dangerous public opinion can be.) It’s just like when the Jin clan wanted to kill the innocent Wen people—Xichen didn’t agree with it but couldn’t openly oppose the decision of the other clans. Also, Xichen did help a lot more compared to the other clan leaders. Wei Wuxian's own brother did nothing to help him. Huaisang, Wei Ying's former friend, did nothing either, and Mingjue was clearly against Wei Ying. Same with Jin Guangshan.

Then people say he was too naive. Maybe he was, but that’s because he believed there was good in everyone. That’s why he trusted Jin Guangyao, thinking he still had some good in him despite everything he had done. If Xichen hadn’t been like that, he would have thought Wei Wuxian was pure evil, just like the others did.

I also saw people complaining that Xichen didn’t protect his brother when Lan Qiren punished him for injuring thirty-three elders of the Gusu Lan clan. Well… The Gusu Lan clan has strict rules, and attacking clan elders—no matter the reason—shouldn’t go unpunished. The rules are absolute and apply to everyone, even Lan Wangji and Lan Xichen. Lan Xichen is someone who follows justice and tradition, so he was in a difficult position. Even though he loves his brother, he was raised to respect the discipline of the clan. Intervening would have been seen as disrespectful to his uncle and to the laws of Gusu Lan. Also, Lan Wangji himself probably wouldn’t have accepted his help. Lan Wangji is extremely rigid and committed to his own moral code. He chose to act, knowing full well that he would be punished. Even though he suffered, he accepted the consequences of his actions. And in the end, Lan Qiren holds too much authority. Lan Xichen has a lot of respect for his uncle, who acted as a parental figure after their parents died. He wouldn’t have dared to openly contradict him. However, he did support his brother afterward, helping him recover and always staying by his side. That’s just his way—he prefers to offer support in the shadows rather than openly defy the rules. In the end, Lan Xichen is a good person, but he also believes in order and discipline. He surely thought Lan Wangji had to take responsibility, even if it broke his heart. Also, he was raised by his uncle to respect the rules and was used to being punished himself, so I’m pretty sure he was scared to oppose his uncle.

That’s it! If you have a different opinion, I totally respect it. :) I just wanted to share mine!

[savvthedate]

Skz!Smalltown!AU

Plot; after getting kicked out of her old private school, Y/N is sent to live with the family of her mother's closest friend in her mother's hometown. As Y/N struggles to get used to her new life she meets several interesting people.

RELEASE; January 5 2025

Characters

Chan - The hardworking boy nextdoor

• The son of Y/Ns mother's friend

• almost religiously devoted to his family's shop

• dreams to make it big as a music producer, until then he's stuck here

Lee know - Mayors' Son

• Rich douche bag (it's an act I swear stay with me now)

• his family's been in this town longer than anyone, and for some reason the last 3 mayors have been relatives

• honestly thinks this town doesn't do him any justice

• should be protecting his reputation (he doesn't give even half a damn)

Changbin - Manny McManface

• son of the local sheriff (don't know if this is a good thing or bad)

• brought up to be the best damn QB out there, but he ended up doing wrestling and spending most of his weekends with felix

• stress on 100, he's got expectations to meet and he doesn't know where to start

• sweetest person here (next to Felix)

• biggest protective older brother energy

Hyunjin - Vincent Van Hwang

• parents aren't really that big in town (there the local florist) but trust hyunjin is well known for the wrong things

• if he's not at school, he's either at his one of two jobs; delivery boy for his parents, or at his cashier job at the only fast food place in town (an off brand McDonald's called tastywing)

• working hard for his parents

• gets in the most trouble out of literally anyone in town (if it weren't for his parents relations with Sheriff Seo he'd honestly be screwed)

• people literally love his talent for art, but the majority hate him. You'll either hear "Van Gogh" or "Man go"

Han jisung - Local Loser

• working day and night like a dog at the local library just so he can afford a guitar

• aspiring rock star plays literally ever festival

• literally goes up to people hitting them with "you look like you got potential"

• always seems to be free

• doesn't get out much

Felix - That one guy

• the most likable person you'll ever meet, it's almost concerning

• part time model who's out of town often, but when he's there it's a sunny day

• has to work at tastywing just to make ends meet

• he's so sweet you couldn't even tell he's dated half the girls in town

Suengmin - dog washer

• lives alone (not really, his parents are always away)

• he either has nothing planned at all and just sits around or he's busy with the most random shit

• he works at a dog grooming place, but you swear you never see him there

• hardly works but is always dressed head to toe in designer

• has the biggest house in town, and with his schedule always doing something in said house

Jeongin - Pastor's Son

• His parents own the one church in town

• if you meet him on a Saturday you wouldn't even think he had a holy bone in his body, until you go to church that Sunday and hear him recite scriptures to the congregation

• if hyunjins not doing anything stupid, you can count on Jeongin to do something to keep it interesting

• do not be fooled at all, no matter how he acts trust and Believe he's never even been alone with a girl for more than five seconds, he just acts bold in front of others

[beemoon17]

opinions on thea?

I do not believe Thea to be a particularly likable character, but Nora doesn’t exactly write her to be. We don’t know her, not really, we don’t get her thoughts, she’s never engaged in any on page conversations that are about HER. I believe after Kevin’s books are released I’ll go through and make a comprehensive post about her character and my opinions.

For now my opinions of her are based on a few simple opinions

1. Her and Kevin’s relationship is not healthy or capable of fostering growth or healing for either of them, whether or not their age/school years/or the way they got together was moral. Not to be self important, but to quote myself in a previous post, “Kevin stayed latched on to Thea the same way he did alcohol, night practices, and the memory of his twisted broken brother (his forever partner).”

2. Thea is a cult victim. Bad things were done to her, she has done bad things to others. She knew horrific things happened to others and did nothing, others knew horrific things happened to her and did nothing. She never knew the full extent, she didn’t know because she didn’t want to know, when she was told outright she didn’t want to believe it. She was brainwashed, she had a life before to know different. Jean and Kevin were children, she was not. There’s no perfect moral answer to the abuse suffered by those in the Nest, and we see this in Jean’s series.

3. Her conversation with Jean did not make me like her any more, I disliked her before, disliked her even more after, and will likely continue to do so until I learn more about her to counter that. However I do not view her as a monster, or a bad person, nor a good person. A broken one, an abused one, a brainwashed one.

Overall I believe that she will always remain un-healed in a way that will shackle both her and Kevin unless they were to separate. She’s too attached to the Ravens, to her identity as one of them. At the end of the day I’m not ready to make a full assessment until after Kevin’s books.

[arttsuka]

My Phineas and Ferb season 5 review of the 10 first episodes.

Spoilers, obviously, but mainly vague. But still, spoilers.

So, so far the season has been 60/40 imo. Some episodes are great, really good even. Other episodes are some of the worst pnf episodes, either because they're just boring or because they feel like they belong in another show instead.

The jokes land half of the time, the other half they seem too self aware if that makes sense. I also really dislike the animation. It feels stiff for the majority of the time with some exceptions when it comes to the characters' facial expressions, but that's it. I thought 'maybe it's just me, I'm imagining things' but after watching some of the old episodes I can confidently say that the old animation WAS better. A big part of the visual comedy is lost a bit, at least to my eyes, because of this. The jokes had better timing in the older episodes too (if you don't believe me I strongly suggest you go and rewatch or watch some of the older episodes. Not the best of the best, just some random episodes. See for your own).

Also I think they used that farmer and his wife as a gag to explain where the invention ended a bit too much, in a short time. It felt like we were seeing them every episode (which I know isn't true but they usually made their 'cameos' a bit more spaced out from each one of their appearances).

Now about the characters.

Burford was legit the one consistently good thing about the series, he carried the episodes. I really liked what they did with him so far, how they leaned into the 'theater kid' part of him. I hope we see more of him, maybe even a whole episode.

Doofenshmirtz used to be one of my absolute favourite characters but I really don't like what they did with his character this season (then again his decline had started in season 4, I can't blame the new season too much). They're too in love with him. He always was a likable guy, never really evil. But they really tried to make him a 'good' guy, then they took it back. Idk. The Loki effect. Well see how they handle him in the next episodes.

Most of the other preexisting characters are basically how they used to be. Not any major changes, they're the pnf cast. That's about it.

A lot of the new characters on the other hand can't seem to shut the fuck up. They talk so much oh my god make them stop. Shut them up, zip their mouths, whatever. And they feel like they belong in other shows, like 'Milo Murphy's law' or 'Hamster and Gretel'.

The songs so far range from 'kinda bad ngl' to 'mmm that's pretty good', so I'd say it's like the average pnf soundtrack (and people who compare these songs to the literal best songs of previous seasons are just wrong. The other seasons had bad or mediocre songs too, they just forgot them).

The worst episodes were probably 'the haberdasher' (because it was actively ruining the shows logic and continuity. All of the animal agents wear the fedora why was there this whole song trying to ask Perry if he wanted another kind of hat in the first place? The organisation probably wouldn't even allow it. Also that hatman or whatever his name was was one of the most annoying characters) and episodes 2 and 3.

Episode 1 was a neat start but the premise felt a bit more like one of these special mid-season episodes rather than a reintroduction to the serie.

I'd say everything after episode 5 (including ep5) was pretty great, with one or two exceptions.

'The Candace suit' would have given me nightmares as a kid. This has nothing to do with this review, I just wanted to say it.

One of my favorite episodes so far probably was 'no slumber party'. It felt nostalgic, in a way. Like it belonged to season 2.

So yeah, I'd say this season started off a bit rough. The first few episodes didn't really land that well but they progressively got better.

Did I like this season so far? Yes and no. I had fun, but the negatives are there to stay (mainly the animation).

Will I watch the other episodes when the come out? Yes, duh. Obviously I will. I still have faith that the rest of the season will be great. I hope I'm proven right.

[ilovescaredysquirrel2]

The Lilo & Stitch remake has to be the most unnecessary remake Disney did

Okay, I'm going to be honest, I like some of the live action remakes that Disney made. Especially since some of the cartoon movies are outdated, like Snow White, Cinderella, Aladdin, and Beauty and the Beast were outdated and NEEDED remakes. I don't want my kids watching those movies! I made a post about the reasons why. Plus, even though the Snow White remake was cringe, it's still better than the old one where she's 14 and in love with a 30 something year old prince. Are we aware of the age gaps? However, there are a few of the movies that do NOT need remade and if there's any 2D movie they should have left alone, it's Lilo & Stitch! But guess what...

First off, Lilo & Stitch was made in 2000 or 2001 ish era, so it aged well. It didn't age poorly like Snow White, which was made in 1937 so obviously, that did need a remake. There was nothing about Lilo & Stitch that needed to be fixed. No age gap couple, cute family message, and good humor! Even the minor characters were likable. It's been a long time since I watched Lilo & Stich and I don't think I paid that much attention to it, I'm just seeing a lot more of the OG movie online recently. Also, not to mention that the female characters weren't hyper-sexualized, they had more normal looking bodies. Nani for example, she's probably the first Disney princess to not be super skinny (Snow White has kind of a normal bodytype but is still very skinny). Also, we can't forget about that lifeguard lady, who's curvy but not in a hypersexualized way. She doesn't have a 2 inch waist and her curves look like normal curves. Plus, she doesn't have a flat stomach if you look closely, so they went above and beyond when designing her (even with the hips, I think they gave her hip dips). Honestly, I love the designs in Lilo & Stich better than most other 2D Disney movies. I was never really a fan of vintage Disney art style either.

Now how did they screw up the live action remake you might ask? They ruined the story! Not to mention it didn't need a remake (when some of the other Disney movies did) but they ruined the story and made it worse, for their own political propaganda. Apparently, Nani gives Lilo up for adoption so that she could study to be a marine biologist in California, when Hawaii has a university that offers marine biology and has free tuition for native students! Disney obviously didn't care enough to do their research, and this remake was NOT written by Hawaiians, this remake was written by Californian (probably) white liberals who are nostalgia baiting the millennials and gen z, so that they could throw in their political views in a story that was literally about an alien finding a family. Disney is just proving that they don't care about anyone anymore, they just want money. I heard they canceled the Tangled remake because they got so much backlash on the Snow White one, and apparently they wanted to racebend Rapunzel too. The Lilo & Stitch remake was probably too far in the works for them to fully cancel, but I have a feeling that they're starting to learn from their mistakes.

My advice to Disney is just to maybe take a break on making movies unless you're working on an animated remake of High School Musical (a live action movie that didn't age as well as Lilo & Stich did). They're literally out of ideas, well that's an idea! They can no longer be self aware like Enchanted and Teen Beach Movie, making fun of the old movies but still keeping the songs. Anyone working for Disney who might be reading this, TAKE MY IDEA! An animated remake of High School Musical might work! It's the reverse, you're making an animated remake of a live action movie (if you still have a big enough budget for animation, that is). Honestly, I was 100% okay with old movies getting live action remakes until it happened to Lilo & Stich! Don't be afraid to bring back animation (just as long as Pixar isn't involved, that win or lose show looks so trippy).

Anyway, tell me your thoughts and it's okay if you disagree on some things I said, just let me know why. If you agree, please reblog and let me know your thoughts.

[mornington-the-crescent]

Why do Leftist writers in Hollywood suck at creating/writing relatable, likable, or decent characters?

The short answer, because they're talentless hacks.

The long answer... That would take a fair amount of time to get into.

Most leftist writers in Hollywood have very limited experiences. They typically grew up in cloistered, left-leaning urban bubbles; if they have traveled at all, it was likely to other cloistered, left-leaning urban bubbles, either domestically or abroad. They live and work in and around Los Angeles, a deep blue enclave in the deepest blue state in the Union. The only people they ever associate with are people with similar life experiences to them: Left-leaning people who grew up in left-leaning bubbles, who also work as television writers or actors.

So, under those circumstances, when you have never been exposed to a world or to people outside of sheltered left-wing environs, it is very easy to tell yourself that your way of thinking and living is True and Correct, and is in fact the default; it is the way that a Good Person lives. After all, it's how they live, and they are a Good Person: They have all the Correct Opinions, they have Correct Values, they consume the Correct Media. QED.

It goes back to the old communist tactic of the "struggle session": If you do something wrong, you must be brought up in front of all of your other peers and ridiculed for it. As has been said, part of the reason why the left is so insufferable is because they are more obsessed with not doing the wrong thing, than they are about doing something right. Doing something right doesn't get you buttpats and accolades, unless it's the correct sort of "right thing", and it's done publicly not for its own sake, but to remind other people what a Good Person you are. Doing the Wrong Thing, on the other hands, gets you ridiculed, it gets you shunned; you are branded a heretic and a traitor to the One True Cause. And these people will turn on their own at the drop of a hat: It's worth pointing out that J.K. Rowling agrees with the left on about 99.99% of everything; it's that .01% disagreement that has them baying for her blood.

So, what does all of this have to do with the price of tea in China? Well, two things.

The first is that for the most part, these writers are producing content not for general audiences, but for each other. Or, rather, for people who have the same narrow band of experiences as they do; when the rubber meets the road, whether you grew up in the cloistered, left-leaning bubble of Los Angeles or the cloistered, left-leaning bubble of New York doesn't really matter that much. They're not making things to entertain a mass audience; they're writing shows and characters to demonstrate that they are part of the in-group, that they know all the right signs and phrases, that they are a Good Person. Remember, being good only counts if you're doing it publicly, and to remind others that you are good, too. So, producing content on the assumption that the population as a whole has the same values as you do, that will in reality be completely alien to a large segment of the population who have never been to Los Angeles or New York, is not a recipe for relatable characters.

The second part... It has been said that the main difference between how the right and the left view the world is that the right believes that the left is misinformed, whereas the left believes that the right is evil. The left believes that anyone who doesn't think and believe and act exactly like they do is motivated by active, willful maliciousness, and literally nothing else. And this is borne out by studies where Democrats and Republicans were asked to fill out surveys based on how they thought that a member of the other party would answer; Republicans were spot-on on how Democrats would respond, while the Democrats were wrong far more often than they were right.

So, you, as a Good Person, are tasked with writing content which might be viewed by Bad People. What do you do? Why, you do what you do when someone of your own party misbehaves: You shun them, you mock them, you shame them. You trash them, and everything that they believe and everything they stand for. Because they are Bad People, and so the things that they like must be Bad Things, and so deserve to be dragged through the mud. After all, if the things that they liked were Good, then they would be Good People; they are Bad People because they like Bad Things, and the things that they like are Bad because they are Bad People, and around and around it goes. So, they write things which attack a large part of the population, and they mock and deride a lot of the things that said large segment of the population find important and valuable. And while, to the people on the left, such portrayals are cheered, to anyone not firmly in the LA or New York bubble, such portrayals come across as small-minded or mean-spirited.

At bottom, it comes down to this: They forget that, as storytellers, their first duty is to tell good stories. Not to preach, not to lecture, not to proselytize. To tell good stories, about interesting characters, doing interesting things. But when the only people that you know are boring, and the only things you do are boring, then you don't know how to write people and stories that people can relate to.

[praise-suns-and-chill]

Okay, so

My current Ranking List for Ace Combat

0. Ace Combat 4

The quintessential Ace Combat. Not the one I enjoyed the most. But there is nothing I dislike about it. It's a 10/10 in the "Yeah. I can't complain about it. It just works" kinda way. Hence, the #0

1. Ace Combat Zero

An interesting story, antagonists with nuance (even Discount German/Welsh mixed Antagonists, like holy shit, this is some insane rarity to not just take any flavour of german antagonist and not just make them cartoonishly evil! I will get to that later -_-), gameplay I enjoy, interesting mechanics, a path system to personalise how you imagine Cipher, it is a 9/10 for me! It has flaws. It's not perfect. But it's nearly perfect. I love it <3

2. Ace Combat 6

VERY FUN GAMEPLAY, likable characters across the board (likable antagonists, I can understand where they came from and I wish they all could have made it), your allies are sympathetic AND USEFUL, story is a bit simple but hey, that's alright! It doesn't need to be complex to be compelling!

9/10, will never be able to play it again because I was sobbing, crying my eyes out for hours straight over this game. Shamrock ;_; I'd have burned everything down to the ground if it would have helped you ;_;

3. Now here the rating gets more difficult, but I'm giving #3 to... Ace Combat X.

It really only has one character, Crux, but I love him. Story is simple, but very much serviceable! Gameplay is a bit clunky, but fun! It's just a good game all around with some gimmicks that were luckily kept, like the Parts System, and others that should get adapted again, like Mission Selection that changes follow up mission parameters! It's very innovative, very solid, highly reccomend it

4. Ace Combat Joint Assault

10/10, INSANE bullshit that did everything right except for Flight Physics in my opinion. It's the fever dream of Ace Combat games, and I love it, and it had ideas that should be brought into the general Ace Combat series. Operator Choice, I get why that was only used once, but its still a cool detail! But bring back the Co-Op missions, please. BRING BACK PROP PLANES, I want to fly a prop plane from like 70 years ago against modern fighter jets and win. That's the most insane power fantasy, its hilarious, it's stupid fun, please let me do it in HD.

5. Ace Combat 7

As a "Discount Belkan" if you will, I wasn't a fan of the "the monarchy that started a war three times over is actually just dumb lil uwu babies that were manipulated by a single belkan guy and at fault for nothing despite the fact that they literally cannot stop trying to take over the continent, repressing, colonising and erasing minorities, but they are innocent now, let's blame it on one guy from a country that, as a country, really hasn't done shit since 1995" For fucks sake just leave Belka alone.

But aside from that rant, AC7 is still a very fun game! Buff the guns and get the Skies Restored Mod, and it's very good, stupid fun! Just ignore the cutscenes. Focus on the real story only (aka, the in-mission dialogue, which is actually pretty fun!)

A 7/10 (the 7 in its title is apt), still a good game and good introduction to the series! There is just better out there.

6. And now for the last place. Yeah, I'll be honest, I think AC5 kinda sucks. Rant incoming.

First off, the few parts I actually liked.

Chopper. Pops. Grimm also wasn't always annoying. The music was fucking peak, as always for Ace Combat games. And I can't complain about Oka Nieba either.

The writing is just... not very good. The story is overly convoluted that the writer just clearly didn't have the skills to pull off properly, the characters range from "Actually kinda likable" (only a few) to "so bland and annoying they made me quit the game" (Nagase, looking at you). It also stretches on far too long for a story that really doesn't justify it at all. And it's not like the length is there for character development either. I genuinely don't understand why it's so overhyped (maybe because it was sandwiched between two actually GOOD games, nostalgia and, tbh, the cheap waifu bait). The story wasn't good, the characters were bland, the villians were cartoonishly evil and just the generic, cheap "Discount German, just make them evil, I am so clever as a Japanese writer" (told you we'd get back to that, zero self awareness), while absolving the other warmongering countries of all responsibility in the process, no matter how many people and civilians they killed in the process already, just blame it on someone else so we look good, and while the Reply Mechanic was neat, it really wasn't used properly to give flavour to the characters and was kinda wasted as a mechanic with a lot more potential. Also, the whole "supposed" message of peace and unity is completely destroyed by the fact that the Wall fell... but South Osea still is an Osean colony. Despite Osea being racist against them, and them not wanting to be part of Osea either. So peace and unity except for Belkans, they can go fuck themselves, lmao, racial cleansing (explicitly children included) incoming on Tyler Island in 9 years.

There are still more AC games I have to play, but I am very sure that AC5 will easily stay my last place, by a mile. It's cheap writing taints the rest of the series in a way that is just beyond annoying and disappointing. Because there are competent writers in this series! Who can actually write characters, stories and nuance that are succinct, functional and good!

But a bad apple can spoil the bunch. Belka deserves better. The Writer for ACZ knew that, the only AC game where you actually fight the country in question, and they are easily the most nuanced villians in the series there!

There is so much potential if you just let a competent writer have at it.

I'm sorry, rant end.

In summary, there is definitely a lot more love I have towards the series than anything else.

I just hope they will be able to fix their lore flaws moving forward.

[not-wholly-unheroic]

This is a weird question, but y'know how some versions of Hook are super serious nearly all of the time (like in the novel and in Peter Pan and the Pirates) and some of them are only semi-serious (like the Cyril Ritchard one)? Where does Disney Hook sit on that scale of silly to serious? What do you think the ideal ratio is?

Another thing, how rich looking do you like Hook to be? Toned down like his OG stage appearance or crazy, stupid, impractical wealthy looking like Hoffman's Hook?

Love the blog btw :)

Aw, thanks so much! I’m always happy to hear someone is enjoying my content and I’m not just rambling about my favorite character into the void. 😅

So…as this is primarily a Disney Hook blog, I’m admittedly a little bit biased in my preference. I love most versions of Hook (though there are a few I actually really dislike because I feel they do a disservice to the character), but Disney has a special place in my heart because it was Disney’s version that first drew me to the character and convinced me to read the novel. I was intrigued by the fact that he could simultaneously be a legitimately threatening villain and also show emotions like fear and despair that we so rarely saw in animated villain characters from that era. It was these moments of “weakness” that made him actually seem human to me. A Hook (or any character) who is TOO stoic and frightening either becomes entirely unlikable because the audience can’t relate to them or they become a sort of flat, boring stereotype, a sort of caricature of villainy.

The more classic Disney villains are generally meant to be the sort of character we love to hate and hate to love. They’re supposed to be a little over the top and larger than life. They’re meant to revel in their villainy while still being entertaining. We’re supposed to like them at least to a point even if we seriously disagree with their moral standpoint on things. There are a few, however, who become a little too “real” and who I genuinely despise… Frollo comes to mind. There is nothing “fun” about Frollo. He’s a racist, misogynistic, ableist man who mis-uses the name of God and his authoritative position to get what he wants. Is Frollo a well-written villain? Oh, absolutely. Is there anything about him that I find likable or redeemable? I mean, he has a good singing voice… But that’s about the only nice thing I can say about him. He’s a terrible person and I have zero sympathy for him at his death.

But to return to Hook specifically…. What I find interesting is that although Disney’s Hook is often accused of being too silly, really the only thing that makes him a comical villain is his fear reactions to the crocodile (and octopus if you include the sequel). And that is entirely a function of the lens we are given to view him as the audience. The music we hear in the background as the crocodile’s theme is rather lighthearted and the other characters (the heroes) are often making fun of him in the scenes where he’s having a complete breakdown and running/swimming for his life. But if we switched the music to something more ominous (check out the Drewe & Stiles Peter Pan musical theme for the crocodile—it’s frankly terrifying) and saw things from Hook’s perspective…it would really give off the same vibes as, say, Jaws or Jurassic Park. I strongly suspect that if it were our heroes being chased by the crocodile, things would look/sound/feel very different. Case in point…go watch clips of Pinocchio where Jiminy Cricket, Pinocchio, and Geppetto are fleeing Monstro the Whale and compare them side by side with Hook’s interactions with the crocodile. One is portrayed as comedic while the other is an action scene where we feel like the characters are genuinely in danger…but realistically, the same thing is happening in both. (Side note… I was absolutely TERRIFIED of that scene in Pinocchio as a kid. I literally had nightmares about it…so maybe I just relate a little too hard to Hook’s reaction and that’s why I’m so defensive of him.)

Compared to certain other Hooks, Disney’s is rather…soft, high-strung, and prone to being emotional but…that’s actually what I like most about him. That said, there are absolutely moments when we are reminded that we should be afraid of him. Heck, he shoots a man dead in his first few minutes of screen time which is more than most villains do. During the scene in Skull Rock, he climbs up behind Peter and—if Wendy hadn’t warned him in time of Hook’s approach—would have sunk the claw in through Peter’s eye socket. Not to mention the fact that he threatens Tiger Lily’s life and afterlife, sends a bomb to a child, and would have gladly allowed every single one of the Lost Boys and Darlings to walk off the plank to drown when they wouldn’t sign on with his crew. We also have him mention in passing “boiling in oil…keelhauling…marooning…” which would seem to imply that these are things he has done before and is willing to do again. In Return to Neverland we arguably have some even scarier moments on-screen. That final showdown with Jane…there are moments where you can see the murder in his eyes. He nearly lops off Jane’s hand at one point and then immediately attempts to run her through with his sword when that fails. A few seconds too late and she would have been a goner. In those moments, we are reminded of exactly what Hook is capable of and why the children should be afraid of him.

Disney’s Hook is, I think, a good mixture of scary and sympathetic; humorous and heavy…and that’s why he’s my favorite Hook. He’s very human and it makes him a lot of fun to play around with as a writer.

To answer your second question regarding Hook’s opulence…I tend to prefer my Hooks to be somewhere in the middle—wealthy but not totally impractical. If you go back through the series I did looking at versions of the Jolly Roger in different Peter Pan media and what we could learn about that particular Hook from his ship, Disney and Isaacs come out as two of the “middle ground” Hooks who I would label as well-off (unlike Jude Law’s Hook, who seems more like any other average sailor in terms of his wealth) but not rich to the point of impractical extravagance (like Hoffman’s Hook).

[madamegemknight]

How about MOTU hot takes? From any iteration (the 80s cartoon, the comics, the cgi reboot, the other serious reboot)

rubs my hands together maniacally. boy oh boy crispy you are ENABLING me here we go >:3

The 1987 movie really isn't as bad as people make it out to be. It's not great, don't get me wrong, but the people who made it were clearly passionate about what they were doing and it's a fun (if somewhat aggravating at points) ride. Dolph Lundgren is a good He-Man who understands that the character is just as much about his heart as he is his muscles, the way it and the Power Tour serve as sister experiences to each other with their incorporation of music and Earth storylines is fascinating to examine, and while Julie's subplot about her dead parents is utterly pointless, I think Kevin and Julie are two genuinely likable characters who deserve a second chance in the grander scheme of things.

The Greatest Show on Eternia is the worst episode of the Filmation series and should have never been made, but the way Masters of The Multiverse chose to "address" it was immature, childish, and nearly tipped the comic into edgelord territory for me. If something is bad, you should take the time to figure out what went wrong, then try and fix it - you shouldn't murder the only tolerable character in that episode and then have an aside about how the Eternian Circus is being thrown into chaos because of that murder that does nothing to progress the overall plot!!! wadda heck!!!!

CGI!Krass did literally nothing wrong. She was a deeply traumatized kid who was absolutely correct regarding pretty much everything (especially wanting to guard the Tiger Tribe instead of running off and ignoring it forever like Adam did, considering the later reveal that the Dark Masters kidnapped Justine), and the fact that the show is more willing to blame her flawed behavior on "evil rock that makes you evil in her helmet" than acknowledge she watched her parents die and literally cannot be in enclosed spaces without Adam as a result is legitimately disgusting. CGI tries so hard to have their cake and eat it too that they end up portraying Krass as in the wrong for wanting things to stay the same with Adam while ALSO establishing in one of the tie-in books that if she'd never met Adam she would have never even partially recovered from her trauma.

Speaking of which, considering that this IS apparently a hot take outside of my own little circle of incredibly cool and correct mutuals: CGI Season 3 is bad. It is so bad it makes the flaws of the previous two seasons, which I could mostly ignore up until that point, painfully obvious. It is genuinely upsetting to me that a series where the SOLE SURVIVOR OF A GENOCIDE BRAINWASHED INTO BELIEVING THE PROPAGANDA HE WAS FED ABOUT THE COLONIZATION OF HIS PEOPLE is made into a villain will be some kid's introduction to MOTU, ESPECIALLY considering how tolerant and accepting the Filmation series was.

Orko is a good character and plays a vital role in the franchise overall! Wow yeah it's weird to remember how that used to be a hot take in any non-tumblr MOTU fan community until like...2021. Crazy that huh.

Maybe not a hot take per se, but I don't personally think that Trollans have that different of a lifespan/age rage from Eternians. As far as I'm aware, the only implication of that being true is from the UK comics, and even there it's said that "it has been suggested" that Orko is over 500, not that he is - and this is also the same comic that said that nobody knows what Trolla is like, something that is patently not true, so I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that maybe the UK comics have some slightly incorrect information and possibly shouldn't be blindly trusted when determining major factors about a character! There are several times in the Filmation series that he either flirts with or shows a very clear attraction to adult Eternians (something that would be Weird if he was aging at a different rate than an Eternian), and while he does call Adam "kid" when they first meet, that's just how Orko talks - he says "atta boy" unironically for crying out loud. I have always envisioned Orko being around the same age as Adam, if a little bit younger, and while Trollans probably do age at a different rate on account of being a different species, it's probably not to that extreme of a difference otherwise it would have been mentioned elsewhere.

Netflix She-Ra is not special for having Adora start out as a brainwashed soldier who has a crisis over realizing she's been fed imperialist/fascist propaganda her entire life. That is literally the plot of The Secret of The Sword, which was released in 1985. I love Netflix She-Ra dearly and always will, as without it I would have never become a fan of MOTU in the first place, but head in my hands if someone calls it bold and innovative for doing things that the OG series did back in the 80s one more time, I am gonna wind up on the evening news 🙃

[lizarr7]

Guys, I watched Kpop Demon Hunters last night. I was originally planning to go see it with my sister in theaters, and we were hyped. Then we discovered that it wasn't a theatrical release. Luckily, my household has Netflix, so it was no big deal but guys. It's so good?? WHY is it not in theaters? Like I know why, but there needs to be an exception. I want to see it on the big screen so bad, it is 100% a big screen movie. The visuals are just So Stunning and I want that music on those massive surround sound speakers while I'm watching it. I need that experience in my life.

As an aside, I do have to state my full honest opinion because I am a bit of a self-proclaimed movie critic, but I had to share the hype first because it totally deserves it. I think what makes the movie great and worth your time are primarily the visuals and the music. The character design, the animation, the color pallets, everything about the aesthetic of the movie is really a masterpiece. And the music is good, even on it's own. It's what I would call solid. None of it is really anything crazy or amazing, but it's good. But with the visuals, in the scenes the songs are placed in, they really do their job amazingly well and it takes them to the next level. (except Free. Don't get me started on that one, that one is the exact opposite for 2 reasons. Not gonna get into them but it's absolutely better when listened to on its own after the movie, lol). These things make for a very enjoyable viewing experience that sucks you in and stays with you afterwards. The voice acting is also good, and the characters are unique and likable but also have their flaws in a way that keeps them human. It doesn't hurt either that it's pretty funny; humor is definitely a big part of the movie. And of course, you have the premise, which is the very foundation that sets the stage and makes things interesting. BUT. The plot is: fine. It's Fine. It's really, really nothing special, and in many ways, quite predictable and unoriginal. So, when I say that this movie was So Good, I'm actually not really talking about the plot, or even the characters so much, but rather Everything Else. Which is interesting because I am a person who is generally speaking: plot and characters first and everything else second. But I think this movie is a very good example of; if you are going to run with a safe, easy, generic plot, and decent but not amazing characters, as long as you go really hard in every other department, you can still create a wildly successful and very, very engaging and enjoyable product. But I do want to stress that that approach does rely on a good/unique premise, and a strong theme or themes throughout, which this film really nailed.

But anyway, theatrical release when? Come on Sony, Netflix, whoever needs to be involved to make this happen; MAKE IT HAPPEN!!

[bobbydagen24]

While I love World Tour something that's always Bugged me is The Hickory's Betrayal plot point.

Hickory is a stranger who they meet at a convenient time who seemingly sticks his neck out to help our main characters for no Reason other than Moral Goodness

and who Branch warns Poppy about Trusting but who she chooses to trust anyway and after a Journey where some trust is built up between the characters

Hickory is eventually Revealed to be a Bounty Hunter who was just getting close to them so he could find out where they had their string so he could give it to Barb

all in all not a bad plot point in the story personally it caught me by surprise the first time I saw it Hickory is a fairly likable character that from what I can understand most of the audience Grew fond of

and Poppy and even Branch Deffo built up a little bit of trust and maybe even friendship with him in the movie making his betrayal work on pretty much every level

a Twist needs to to work except the problem is the movie Really undersells it

after his betrayal he leaves the movie and is only seen again briefly at the end and its a little comedic scene where he proudly remarks about having taught Poppy the trick with using sweets as ear plugs.

my main problem is Poppy having no Real Reaction to his Betrayal as Hickory's turn is done seemingly just to get Poppy caught by Barb and that's it narrative wise

when I feel it should have been more of a turning point for Poppy's character as she's a overly trusting person

who in the last movie got betrayed by someone she trusted very much which Hurt her a great Deal.

and Despite warnings from Branch about Trusting Hickory she still chooses to keep being a trusting person only to get betrayed again

this should have a way bigger Reaction from her even tho she didn't know Hickory all that long she was clearly starting to view him as a friend

and she went out on a whim by trusting him but she got Burned yet again this should have either made her furious or emotionally Devastated her

instead she has very little Reaction to it and it Really didn't seem to at all change her character as in TBT she's back to being overly trusting such as

instantly taking Brozone's sides when Branch is mad at them going out of her way to make excuses for these total strangers

and comforting Crimp and trusting her as soon as she sees her Despite her being a willing accomplice in torturing her boyfriends Brother.

Hickory's Betrayal should have been used as a way to Develop Poppy into a more cautious person less Trusting person

that way the movie wouldn't literally be throwing away this likable character simply because they needed a way for Poppy to be captured for the climax

and his Betrayal would have a legit character Growth purpose so I feel Poppy should be more emotionally impacted by his turn

and he shouldn't just leave the movie after this he should Remain by Barbs side as a Remorseless Henchmen who is nothing but cold to Poppy when she tries to ask him how he could do this.

and Ideally the movies wouldn't just forget about this and Poppy would be a little more cautious when Trusting strangers in future movies

as Poppy's character Development seems to be undone in every movie making it very surface level tbh

so yeah Hickory's Betrayal has always Bothered me from a plot perspective for this Reason as he's an example of a Good Twist Villain in the way he's set up

( unlike someone else who I will be making a post on very soon ) but like I said the movie Really underplays this aspect and it makes it feel very pointless tbh

as there's a million other ways they could have had Poppy get caught by Barb along with the string without the Hickory Twist.