#and it’s not like the science was particularly amazing in the 70s | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

primalspice · 6 months

Note

blue eyeshadow beauty 👕 3, 10, 11 📦 3, 6, 14 🍽️ 2, 10 🌤️ 1, 12, 19 🤝 5, 12, 15 💓 3, 12, 🎲 2, 5, 15

hehe

👕3.) Is there something about your character's appearance that they would change if possible?

not particularly but she Is trans gender so its a wip/anything is possible. she's pretty happy as is tho currently <3

👕10.) If your character could splurge on a particular garment, what would it be?

idk i feel like shes the type of person to own 10 variations on the same outfit so maybe itd be something outside of that. a nice formal dress or pants suit perhaps. serving hillary clinton swag.

👕11.) Is your character's favorite color a color they wear often?

Maybe :3

📦3.) What type of object is likely to catch your character's attention?

Lab equipment or really any new technology. not particularly a tech nerd or anything, but amazed by the beautiful technological advancements of the 2000s

📦6.) What is something your character is proud to own?

Multiple degrees from University of California Berkeley <3 she's not very materialistic in that way tho idk. a House?

📦14.) Is there an item your character is embarrassed they own or want?

whatever lab equipment her bpd man Also wants because she has to be the voice of reason here. phht no... i dont think that science supplies magazine is cool AT ALL.... im not thinking of buying everything in it with your american express platinum... leave me alone.....

🍽️2.) Would your character prefer baking, cooking or mixing drinks?

Baking maybe? but yknow what i think she could make some crazy mixed drinks.

🍽️10.) What is a childhood meal your character cherishes?

Idk what was popular with white ppl in the 70s. casserole…..cake…jello….

🌤️1.) What would your character do if they were suddenly caught in the rain?

seems like the type of person to carry a travel umbrella in her purse. BUT if that's not an option then she'd be running to somewhere dry annoyedly.

🌤️12.) Could your character survive in the wilderness on their own for a week or more?

If she was allowed to pack food/water probably, but she wouldnt enjoy it. If she couldnt pack food/water it'd be a lot more questionable but she wouldnt just lay down and die about it. She'd get a kick out of observing flora and fauna and geography for like an hour and say hmm interesting then want to go home immediately. MUCH happier indoors, not a fan of the elements or weather or foraging.

🌤️19.) What animal would your character say best represents them?

Maybe a cat. I think she'd be pretty correct about it too. fursona confirmed.

🤝5.) Who would your character first seek if they needed medical help?

911 and the best hospital in the area (she'd done her RESEARCH on these things she KNOWS where's best)

🤝12.) How would your character react to being put in a position of leadership?

She's kinda an explosive control freak so SHE'D enjoy it for a little while but nobody else would. Would eventually give up after having a IF I WANT IT DONE RIGHT THEN I JUST HAVE TO DO IT MYSELF -__- moment and let someone else be the leader.

🤝15.) Is there a person your character would turn to for backup in a fight?

Not really becuase i think she's overly confident in her own ability but she might throw her labmate in there as a sacrifice.

💓3.) Is your character more prone to fight or flight?

She'd say 'fight' but she backs down pretty easily. just because you flee angrily does not mean you arent fleeing <3

💓12.) Is your character more likely to give advice or seek it?

Give. and in fact she actively avoids the advice of others. she can figure shit out for herself/no one else has a right to tell her what they think she should do with her life GRRRRR

🎲2.) Does your character have a secret hobby?

I don't think she keeps any of it a secret but i could see her being really into some cringe soap operas. i could see her being a crazy cat lady.

🎲5.) Which does your character try to prioritize more, work or hobbies?

Work definitely, and she has kinda few hobbies to really compare the time spent against. Reading and researching kinda counts as a hobby tho because she enjoys it for personal enrichment, but its also important to her field of work.

🎲15.) How good is your character at following through on projects?

If it's urgent or for work and she has others relying on her then she's great and incredibly Efficient. otherwise bad <3 girl where is your whimsy

#ask game #caroline

1 note · View note

lindsaystravelblogs1 · 2 years

Text

Days 55 to 57 - En Route to NZ

Day 55, Thursday, 9 February 2023

We are now really just filling in time until we get to New Zealand and head for home. Life on board is pretty routine, punctuated by set times for meals and a couple of lectures each day.

It is actually quite comfortable just sailing along, occasionally rolling a little, but often quite smooth. It is surprising how quickly the sea conditions change. Within ten or fifteen minutes, it can go from quite choppy to a millpond – or the reverse – but I have not needed any mal-de-mer medications for the whole trip. I took a Quells twice early in the trip just in case I got sick, but never needed them even when the sea was most excited – and exciting. I really revelled in the rougher weather and we had quite a bit. It has been surprisingly sunny day after day when the expectation was wet and gloomy, but we also had a few wonderful storms and a great deal of snow from time to time – much more than I have seen before. And the temperatures are now consistently above zero, although the ‘feels like’ rating is still in the low minuses – 3 to 5 mainly.

We had another general knowledge quiz in which Heather came second and pipped me by one point, but George beat her by three. He is a very smart cookie. That was followed by the Captain spending 70-odd minutes of his allocated 55 explaining why this ship is the best ever built and that it includes a dozen or more first-in-the-world innovations. Sounded very impressive even if I only understood half of it.

They have been running daily dance classes and craft workshops in the past week or so but we are not really interested – but Heather enjoys the cooking classes although most things are a bit elaborate and often too rich for our palate. W have not used either pool, the spa, sauna or Snow Room and we have avoided the gym quite assiduously. There have also been a couple of cocktail-making sessions and we have participated in them – and their product. There are always a couple of other food and drink opportunities during the afternoon as well as the three bars and one Detox bar (that doesn’t get a lot of patronage!).

There was a second caviar-tasting session during the afternoon and a lecture about the French Dumont d’Urville Station and its first overwintering.

After dinner there was a Cabaret – very slick and professional with amazing lighting and effects. There are a few musicians a singer and a couple of other ‘gymnast/acrobats’ on the ship (under contract) and they put on a great show for us. We hadn’t intended going, but did so at the last minute – so glad we did. It was a great performance, particularly the musician and the athletic dancing.

Day 56, Friday, 10 February 2023

Mum’s birthday today – she would be 108 if she was still with us. Sadly……. But I still think of her most days.

Another day at sea and it held the promise of the best birding day as we approached Campbell Island. The Captain had promised to call us early so we could see the Island (although for some reason, he said we could not approach closer than two-and-a-half-miles – we landed and walked across the island three years ago!) but he failed to keep his promise. He later said it was a bit foggy so he decided that we wouldn’t want to see it or its birds!

I went out on deck for an hour or so and explored numerous observation points, but it was pretty cold and drizzling so I eventually retreated indoors – and then they locked us in completely because it was a bit rough outside. They really are ultra-cautious and seem to think that zero risk is more important than client experience – but at least this time, we could get out on our balcony for a while until they came around and locked them too. As it happened, there were very few birds anyway in what was the bird-richest area on our last trip down here.

I was out on deck while Heather went to a session about the results of the science undertaken on board this trip. We toured the laboratories a couple of weeks ago and they were quite impressive – as were the scientists and the projects they are working on.

Heather went to another cooking class while I tried to identify some of the birds I had photographed before they locked us in.

After lunch, there was a lecture about a French Explorer that few Aussies have heard about despite a French Station being named for him almost due south from Australia. He is Jules Dumont d’Urville and he put France on the Antarctic map – a very impressive leader and explorer.

Late in the afternoon, we had a presentation by the helicopter pilot about NZ Flight 901 that crashed on Mt Erebus in 1979. He gave us a lot of information about the plane, the flight, the ground support, and the Government Enquiries in the aftermath. He had obviously done quite a bit of research, but equally obviously, he believes he knows better than the enquiries and sheets the blame on everyone except the pilots. As outsiders, we don’t have an opinion, but 237 people died as a result of numerous human errors – we are just not quite sure which humans were most to blame.

Day 57, Saturday, 11 February 2023

It was another day at sea with just one lecture in the morning. It was about Mawson and it was possibly something the Aussies were waiting for. It was a good lecture and although we knew the story, there were lots of snippets we didn’t know and it put more of it into perspective for us.

During the afternoon, there was a briefing about tomorrow’s land tours and final disembarkation early on Monday. It seems they just want us off the ship and left to our own devices as soon as possible with no assistance in getting to the airport. There were a couple of options where they would help if we topped up their coffers – about $AU600 per person for a private ride, but a combined maximum of three items of luggage (we have six) or a group transfer for about $AU400 per person with the same luggage restrictions – and neither options load your baggage for you. You have to do it yourself. We have opted for a shuttle into the city where we can get a cab to the airport – there are apparently no cabs at the port!

Then they drew a raffle to which we had not contributed – a good job we saved our money because we didn’t win anyway! That was followed by the announcement of the winners of the Photo Competition. There were four categories – Blue, Wildlife, the Ship and Landscape. There were some great photos but none of mine got anywhere. One guy won in two categories – but I wasn’t particularly rapt in his Wildlife pic – I reckon several others were better than his. He was just lucky that he hit the shutter while a penguin was still in the air hopping onto an icefloe.

There was then a long final recap – over two hours – but it was quite brilliant. Most of the Expedition Team gave a little summary of their aspect of the trip, often adding a bit more, including several video clips. One was from WIFFA 2022 – the Winter International Film Festival of Antarctica – an annual film festival of films made entirely during the dark months by people overwintering in Antarctica. It is open to all Antarctic Stations and is a really big event with some absolutely brilliant films – look them up and watch on the web. There was also an amazingly creative short video made by one of our on-board naturalists. It is hard to describe but it traced a strange wriggly line around the screen, that eventually transformed into the outline of a photo she had taken during the voyage. All the images were then linked into a powerful conservation message – strong and creative. No idea how it was done but quite brilliant.

And after dinner, the crew put on an absolutely inspiring show that they had created together during the voyage. There was some very energetic dancing, several instrumental and vocal musical performances and some funny skits. The one that really got to me was a superb rendition of Ave Maria by one of the male scientist – in the most fantastic high falsetto. He could put Ivan Rebroff, maybe even Kiri, to shame. I reckon he could go professional tomorrow – absolutely beautiful.

0 notes

raimispiderman · 3 years

Photo

From the booklet which comes with the Spider-Man Trilogy Limited Edition Collection blu-ray!

This talks about the making of Spider-Man 2, here’s the bit about the first Spider-Man movie.

Click for a transcript:

THE EVOLUTION OF A SUPERHERO

“It was truly gratifying and even a bit overwhelming to witness how strongly moviegoers around the world reacted to Spider-Man,” said director Sam Raimi. “As a filmmaker, I always want people to really enjoy my movies, and on that level, Spider-Man exceeded my expectations.”

After the triumph of the first Spider-Man, Raimi knew he had a responsibility to follow it up with a story that justified the fans’ enthusiasm and their built-in expectations for the next adventure. “There’s great interest in this movie, following the success of the first one,” he acknowledged. “For the kids who come to see it, Spider-Man is their hero. So while the job of making this movie is to provide entertainment, it is also to create a story that shows them a moral character, someone who has to make tough choices and the right decisions in order to continue to be worthy of their admiration.”

The wealth of detailed stories and characters in the Spider-Man comic book series provided a mother lode from which to cull the plot for Spider-Man 2. “The Marvel artists and writers have done a great job through the decades – I know, because I’m a big fan myself – so there’s a tremendous amount of good material to draw upon,” noted Raimi. “Finding a storyline wasn’t that difficult. It was finding the right story, the one that made for a proper follow-up installment, and provided a logical progression for the audience and a logical growth for the character. For the, I relied on the terrific storytelling instincts of my very fine producers Laura Ziskin and Avi Arad. Together with the contributions of our great writers, we found a plot line with ideas that reverberated.”

With the storyline of the new adventure locked, Arad looked forward to the reunion of the Spider-Man filmmaking family, not the least of which was Tobey Maguire. “Tobey was so happy to be Spider-Man again and to be Peter Parker,” said Arad. “As an actor Tobey relished deepening the audience’s understanding of who Peter Parker is and who is becoming,” added Ziskin. “Peter’s a man who is transition, someone who’s struggling with the choices he is making.”

Maguire added, “The theme ‘with great power comes great responsibility’ is never lost on Peter. It’s difficult to be a young man and have to sacrifice as much as he has – presumably for the greater good – and to neglect his personal desires. The struggle continues here and it’s quite complicated, because Peter’s searching desperately for a way to achieve some balance in his life.”

As Peter becomes more immersed in his dilemma, it creates a rift between him and the important people in his life. Though his love for MJ is stronger than ever, she has moved on with her life, pursuing an acting career, living in Manhattan and moving in new social circles. “In this film, Peter is off in his own world and not a reliable presence in MJ’s life,” explained Kirsten Dunst. “She still loves him a great deal, so it has become painful for her to be around him. Though they’ve both done a lot of growing up in the past two years, at the same time, they’ve drifted apart.”

Then, as if Peter’s life were not complicated enough, the situation moves from bad to worse – much worse. Enter Doc Ock.

Dr. Otto Octavius (Alfred Molina) is a brilliant scientist whose life work has been dedicated to experiments utilizing fusion as a new source of energy. Charming, vibrant and energetic, Dr. Octavius is introduced to Peter by Harry Osborn.

“This movie is the story of Peter’s life, which is out of balance, and Dr. Octavius who, for Peter, represents someone who has achieved that balance,” explained Raimi.

“Peter sees Octavius as somebody who has mastered both his gifts – in this case science, through which he can serve the good of mankind, while also maintaining a personal life, a loving relationship with his wife Rosie (Donna Murphy). This leads Peter to the conclusion that it’s possible to have both.” Dr. Octavius, with the support of his wife, has been working diligently in his home laboratory, trying to perfect his groundbreaking fusion theory. But when a demonstration of his creation goes horribly wrong, Dr. Octavius undergoes a terrible transformation – evolving into the powerful, multi-tentacled Doc Ock.

In Spider-Man 2, the talented and versatile Molina brings this powerful adversary to terrifying life. “He is a formidable enemy for Spider-Man,” said Arad. “He can climb walls faster and better than Spider-Man. In fact, there’s nothing Spider-Man can do that Ock cannot counteract.”

Doc Ock, one of the most popular villains of the Spider-Man comic book series, first appeared in “The Amazing Spider-Man #3,” which was published in 1963. He immediately became one of Spider-Man’s most formidable foes. According to comic lore, each of Ock’s limbs can move at speeds of up to 90 feet per second and strike with the force of a jackhammer. The extremely powerful tentacles enable him to lift a vehicle off the ground, pulverize bricks, claw through concrete walls and hover above his victims by rising into the air.

The filmmakers were eager to attract Molina for the central role. “We needed someone who brought a palpable reality to the part, and who was also sincere, had a great sense of humor and personal warmth,” said Raimi. “Alfred is a brilliant actor, and what he’s brought so effectively to the character of Doc Ock is the sense of him as a misunderstood man who has turned into a beast.”

Molina confessed, “I’ve always been a Marvel Comic fan because their characters are so interesting. They have problems. They’re very realistic.” From him, the mechanics behind the role of Doc Ock was a true education. “It was mind-boggling, the breadth and the imagination that went into how each of my character’s actions – flying across the room, crashing through a plate glass window, smashing a taxicab – was to be executed. It’s a unique way of filming that’s not like anything most of us get to do really. It’s a very particular way of working, and absolutely fascinating.”

J.K. Simmons also returns in Spider-Man 2 as Peter’s gruff boss at the Daily Bugle, J Jonah Jameson. “I fire Peter several times in this movie. Every time I see him, I fire him,” laughed Simmons. “And then I re-hire him because there’s always some pressing need for his services.”

Principal photography on Spider-Man 2 began on April 12, 2003, in New York City, where the production spent approximately three weeks shooting at various locations in Manhattan, Queens and Brooklyn, as well as on a Yonkers stage. From ground-level street shots to rooftops high above the city, the filmmakers efficiently utilized the time they spent in New York, giving them the opportunity to expand on the city’s unique environment, which had lent such vibrancy to the first Spider-Man.

“In the first film we established New York as a character in the movie. With Spider-Man 2, we went even further,” said production designer Neil Spisak. “We used a lot more of the city, including [photographic] plates of real buildings and real streets. Improvements in technology over the past three years enabled [visual effects designer] John Dykstra and I to marry existing buildings to scenery buildings to CG buildings even better than the first time around. It’s a much more complete experience.”

“We got more of a feeling of New York in this movie,” added Ziskin. “The movie is being shot in widescreen, which is appropriate because this is a different story, so it required a different approach.”

Production began on the campus of Columbia University in uptown Manhattan, which served as the university Peter Parker attends while he struggles with the responsibilities of his academic workload and his superhero duties. The rooftop of the Hotel Intercontinental, across from the Waldorf Astoria, was the location where Spider-Man contemplates his next move, while downtown, in the Wall Street area, another rooftop served as the “launch-pad” for the Spydercam camera, as it dipped and swooped over several blocks to replicate one of Spider-Man’s high-stakes aerial journeys through the city.

“We executed one of the longest wire shots the Spydercam has ever done,” said executive producer Joseph M. Maracciolo. “The Wall Street shot was around 2,400 feet. I’m an ex New Yorker, so I didn’t find the location shoot particularly daunting. But there are always difficulties when you’re doing wire work in New York, including the placement of the cranes on the buildings, the movement of the cast, crew and equipment, and of course, the crowds.”

“It was a challenge for us to move our production to the tops of buildings, but we couldn’t have been happier, because rooftops are Spider-Man’s world and that is his view of the city as he swings through it,” noted co-producer Grant Curtis. “It was breathtaking to see the world from 70 stories up – a world unto itself. You can’t fully really appreciate the beautiful architecture of New York’s skyscrapers from ground level. We showed some of that in the first film, but we wanted to show more of Spider-Man’s vertiginous world, and I think we really captured that with this film.”

In Spider-Man 2, Doc Ock sweeps Aunt May off her feet – literally – and takes her up several stories of a tall building. Rosemary Harris performed her stunts in a variety of harnesses, but only after she had managed to talk the filmmakers into letting her give her stunt double a rest. “I was a bit miffed at first, because my wonderful stunt double was going to do a lot of these harness maneuvers,” recalled Harris. “So I asked Sam and Laura, ‘Why not let me have a go at it?’ At first they were reluctant. But I begged them to at least let me try and they finally relented.”

Returning to Los Angeles, Spider-Man 2 shot on several stages on the Sony Pictures Studios lot in Culver City. Stage 15 was home to the Daily Bugle offices, as well as Peter’s tiny apartment and Dr. Octavius’ elaborate home laboratory. On Stage 29, the Osborn mansion, where Harry Osborn now lives, was recreated. Stage 27 housed MJ’s apartment set, a giant spider web, the interior of the Planetarium, the massive clock tower set as well as various other set pieces. A series of elevated trains were built on Stage 14, where Spider-Man and Doc Ock match wits.

One of the most elaborate sets for Spider-Man 2 was the pier set, designed by Spisak and built over the course of 15 weeks on Soundstage 30. “In contrast to Dr. Octavius’ lab, which was part of his apartment – a streamlined, organized and clean space – the pier is a maniacal, decaying, decrepit space,” explained Spisak. “It follows his character development in terms of his becoming a wilder, more dangerous and more formidable adversary for Spider-Man.”

The set, approximately 60 feet wide by 120 feet long and 40 feet tall, was constructed over a water tank and enhanced by several different components, including CG/plate work and miniatures.

“Before we built the set, we created an exact ¾ scale model of it, about 7 feet long and 4 feet wide, from drawings and blueprints. The model was extremely useful to the carpenters, who could take measurements to help them construct the full-sized pier, as well as for the miniatures team, so they could ascertain the dimensions, textures and materials that were used,” explained art director Tom Wilkins. “We shot plates down in San Pedro, where we panned from a real pier to the water. In post-production a New York background was added. We also built a miniature pier – interiors and exteriors – to complete the composition on the East River.” The art department team designed a 136 foot by 40 foot-high vinyl backing to represent Ock’s view of Manhattan through a large window at the end of the pier set. Wave machines were rigged in the water to create movement under the pier.

The production then moved to the Universal backlot for two weeks of shooting. Several city streets were transformed into a variety of New York neighborhoods including the exterior of the Lyric Theatre where MJ performances in an off-Broadway production of Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest. Ari’s Village Deli and Bakery became the site of an extremely complex scene involving a quiet conversation between Peter and MJ, which is interrupted by Peter’s “spider sense” – and a car careening through the plate glass window, followed by the arrival of Doc Ock.

“It was a great luxury to be able to build that set from every aspect, so that we could do everything we needed for the scene,” said Spisak. “The walls were made of french plate so that when the car smashed through it, the buildings around it were protected. We were able to design what we thought it should look like visually, then as tricks, gags and stunts became clearer, we were able to add them to the set before it was completely finished.”

“The deli was a full, 360 degree set, with a kitchen, deli counters, pastries, ceiling fans and chandeliers,” added art director Steve Saklad, who worked closely with Spisak. “We dressed the exterior streets so that you could look out of the window and see the intersection of Lafayette Street and Astor Place. It required an enormous amount of signage, billboards, street dressing, trees and traffic lights.”

For Raimi, “The diner was a complex technical scene, because it brought together so many different departments, each relying on the other to fulfil their function and communicate with each other so that each individual shot would work. We utilized mechanical effects and the stunt department had to take an automobile, spin it and flip it through the deli window, with the prop department providing the breakaway items. What made it even more complex was that we had to fly Doc Ock in, using something we dubbed the “walk rig.”

The “walk rig” was created for Doc Ock, because the character not only moves himself, but his tentacles move him around as well. When he walks on the tentacles, they support his weight, so a device was constructed to harness him and move him through space as if the tentacles were supporting him. The visual effects department also created “virtual” tentacles where practical ones weren’t feasible.

When he was in full costume, Molina’s tentacles weighed between 75 to 100 pounds, depending upon the action required for the scene. Each of the tentacles was fully articulated. In their expanded, 13-foot length, each upper tentacle consisted of approximately 76 individual pieces Each vertabra was handmade, hand molded, sanded, individually hand painted, chromed, then painted again and assembled by hand. The entire collection of Doc Ock tentacles, bases, heads and wrists, if laid end to end, would be taller than a 20-story building.

Academy Award winning costume designer James Acheson welcomed the opportunity to further explore and improve upon the already classic Spider-Man costume for Spider-Man 2. “Creating the Spider-Man suit for the first film was a real challenge since we were designing for a kind of Cirque du Soleil acrobat, someone who had a unbelievable kinetic spiraling ability,” he said. “So the suit had to be extremely flexible. For the new installment we made several improvements, though you’d have to be a real enthusiast to spot them. The colors are slightly different, and we have made subtle changes in terms of the movement inside the costume’s hood. We also adjusted the eyepieces of Spider-Man’s mask as well as certain aspects of the spider design on the front and the back of the suit.”

For Spider-Man 2’s Doc Ock, Acheson and Raimi spent close to a year collaborating with Spisak and visual effects designer John Dykstra and working with Edge FX in what began as a series of “group think” sessions, according to Raimi. “I needed John Dykstra’s input, because it was John who was going to have to handle Doc Ock’s movements in CG, so he had to be involved in designing the character, along with Jim, who was going to determine the look of the character,” recalled Raimi. “Part of the look determined the movement, and what the arms look like began to govern how it functioned. Neil was involved because Ock had to be a part of Neil’s world in the film. A great interdependence developed among the department heads in order to achieve the complex nature and physicality of the character,”

“The challenge with Doc Ock is to visually create a believable world, focusing on a man with four tentacles growing out of his back,” said Spisak. “Now, that can be a tough swallow. So, in creating Ock and his world, we needed to design and play it so that everything was credible. Ove the course of several months, it became clear what was physically possible for Ock and what would have to be achieved via CG. We conceptualized the look and only then did we deal with the physical limitations, rather than letting them stop us at the beginning.”

Added Dykstra: “It was a huge challenge to make Doc Ock come to life. His tentacles had to meet several criteria. They had to be appropriate with regard to the world Neil had created for Spider-Man and Ock. The components of the costume – the texture and the weight – had to bed something an actor could actually wear. Since using the tentacles wasn’t always practical, we had to create ‘virtual’ versions with Edge FX. In the end, integrating the tentacles into the story was a marriage of all those components and the collaboration of everyone involved.”

Spisak and his team designed and dressed more than 100 sets and locations for Spider-Man 2. “There are probably 10 enormous sets, while some are simply street corners. We covered eleven blocks in downtown Los Angeles and used many rooftops, streets and buildings in New Yorj City,” noted Spisak. “This is certainly the biggest film I’ve ever done.”

Spisak worked with director of photography Bill Pope on the color palette for the sets, and they pored over research and location pictures to inspire them for the story’s lighting requirements. “In the first film, Peter Parker was younger, less aware and just beginning to discover his new powers. That was reflected in the overall look of the movie,” said Spisak. “With this film, he has been Spider-Man for a while, so his frustration over how to deal with his life versus his duty is more complex. That’s reflected in the color palette and the tone of this film – it’s a little more sophisticated, more complicated and deeper, in terms of color and look.”

Among the tools Dykstra and his team utilized to achieve the shots presenting Spider-Man’s point-of-view, while he is soaring over the city, was Earl Wiggins’ Spydercam. During the New York portion of the shoot, the specialized camera was launched using a remote-controlled computer suspended on a cable from a Wall Street-area rooftop more than 30 stories in the air, which recorded what DSpider-Man saw as he swung over the city. The camera traveled along a line suspended over four blocks, dipping down into the street and over the tops of several blocks of vehicles and background art that had been placed for the sequence.

“We were dropping the camera and moving it up and down over the course of the shot to follow Spider-Man’s trajectory as he swings through the arch, releasing a web, and shooting a new web as he swings into the traffic below,” explained Dykstra.

“One of the successes of the first film was the empathy the audience had for the main character. He was very sympathetic,” Dykstra said, “This movie explores the character in greater depth, and in terms of the visual effects, we’re hoping to give audiences an event more intimate sense of what it’s like to be Spider-Man. In the first film, we get to fly with him. The idea here is to make the flying sequences poetic enough and evocative enough that you will get an even stronger sense of what it’s like to fly like Spider-Man.”

That approach is reinforced by Raimi, said Ziskin, “One of the really striking aspects about Sam is that he is the audience for this film. He makes the movie for the audience, identifies with the characters and is always aware of the rhythms and how each sequence will play – both to him and the other members of the audience. That makes him the perfect director for this kind of material. Also, he’s at a point in his directing career where he’s at the top of his game. He is brilliant technically, but also works extraordinarily well with the actors. Ultimately, his personal connection to Peter Parker and the other main characters is a great gift to the audience.”

“These are tough, scary times and during such periods we look to heroic stories to give us hope,” noted Raimi. “Maybe that has something to do with why the audience was so taken with Spider-Man when he first appeared two years ago. With Spider-Man 2, I truly hope that audiences will feel that they’re seeing a love story, that they’re participating in another episode of Peter Parker’s life and are seeing the challenges and conflicts he faces and how he overcomes them. I hope it will leave them feeling uplifted and exhilarated.”

#spider-man #spider-man 2 #sam raimi #avi arad #laura ziskin #tobey maguire #kirsten dunst #alfred molina #rosemary harris #jk simmons #interviews #behind the scenes #concept art #peter parker #aunt may parker #mary jane watson #doc ock #j jonah jameson #set design

95 notes · View notes

letterboxd · 3 years

Photo

Blurring the Line.

As a new Space Jam film beams down to Earth, Kambole Campbell argues that a commitment to silliness and a sincere love for the medium is what it takes to make a great live-action/animation hybrid.

The live-action and animation hybrid movie is something of a dicey prospect. It’s tricky to create believable interaction between what’s real and what’s drawn, puppeteered or rendered—and blending the live and the animated has so far resulted in wild swings in quality. It is a highly specific and technically demanding niche, one with only a select few major hits, though plenty of cult oddities. So what makes a good live-action/animation hybrid?

To borrow words from Hayao Miyazaki, “live action is becoming part of that whole soup called animation”. Characters distinct from the humans they interact with, but rendered as though they were real creatures (or ghosts), are everywhere lately; in Paddington, in Scooby Doo, in David Lowery’s (wonderful) update of Pete’s Dragon.

The original ‘Pete’s Dragon’ (1977) alongside the 2016 remake.

Lowery’s dragon is realized with highly realistic lighting and visual-effects work. By comparison, the cartoon-like characters in the 1977 Pete’s Dragon—along with other films listed in Louise’s handy compendium of Disney’s live-action animation—are far more exaggerated. That said, there’s still the occasional holdout for the classical version of these crossovers: this year’s Tom and Jerry replicating the look of 2D through 3D/CGI animation, specifically harkens back to the shorts of the 1940s and ’50s.

One type of live-action/animation hybrid focuses on seamless immersion, the other is interested in exploring the seams themselves. Elf (2003) uses the aberration of stop-motion animals to represent the eponymous character as a fish out of water. Ninjababy, a Letterboxd favorite from this year’s SXSW Festival, employs an animated doodle as a representation of the protagonist’s state of mind while she processes her unplanned pregnancy.

Meanwhile, every Muppets film ever literally tears at the seams until we’re in stitches, but, for the sake of simplicity, puppets are not invited to this particular party. What we are concerned with here is the overlap between hand-drawn animation and live-action scenes (with honorable mentions of equally valid stop-motion work), and the ways in which these hybrids have moved from whimsical confections to nod-and-wink blockbusters across a century of cinema.

Betty Boop and Koko the clown in a 1938 instalment of the Fleischer brothers’ ‘Out of the Inkwell’ series.

Early crossovers often involve animators playing with their characters, in scenarios such as the inventive Out of the Inkwell series of shorts from Rotoscope inventor Max Fleischer and his director brother Dave. Things get even more interactive mid-century, when Gene Kelly holds hands with Jerry Mouse in Anchors Aweigh.

The 1960s and ’70s deliver ever more delightful family fare involving human actors entering cartoon worlds, notably in the Robert Stevenson-directed Mary Poppins and Bedknobs and Broomsticks, and Chuck Jones’ puntastic The Phantom Tollbooth.

Jerry and Gene dance off their worries in ‘Anchors Aweigh’ (1945).

Mary Poppins is one of the highest-rated live-action/animation hybrids on Letterboxd for good reason. Its sense of control in how it engages with its animated creations makes it—still!—an incredibly engaging watch. It is simply far less evil than the singin’, dancin’ glorification of slavery in Disney’s Song of the South (1946), and far more engaging than Victory Through Air Power (1943), a war-propaganda film about the benefits of long-range bombing in the fight against Hitler. The studio’s The Reluctant Dragon (1941) also serves a propagandistic function, as a behind-the-scenes studio tour made when the studio’s animators were striking.

By comparison, Mary Poppins’ excursions into the painted world—replicated in Rob Marshall’s belated, underrated 2018 sequel, Mary Poppins Returns—are full of magical whimsicality. “Films have added the gimmick of making animation and live characters interact countless times, but paradoxically none as pristine-looking as this creation,” writes Edgar in this review. “This is a visual landmark, a watershed… the effect of making everything float magically, to the detail of when a drawing should appear in front or the back of [Dick] Van Dyke is a creation beyond my comprehension.” (For Van Dyke, who played dual roles as Bert and Mr Dawes Senior, the experience sparked a lifelong love of animation and visual effects.)

Julie Andrews, Dick Van Dyke and penguins, in ‘Mary Poppins’ (1964).

Generally speaking, and the Mary Poppins sequel aside, more contemporary efforts seek to subvert this feeling of harmony and control, instead embracing the chaos of two worlds colliding, the cartoons there to shock rather than sing. Henry Selick’s frequently nightmarish James and the Giant Peach (1996) leans into this crossover as something uncanny and macabre by combining live action with stop motion, as its young protagonist eats his way into another world, meeting mechanical sharks and man-eating rhinos. Sally Jane Black describes it as “riding the Burton-esque wave of mid-’90s mall goth trends and blending with the differently demonic Dahl story”.

Science-classroom staple Osmosis Jones (2001) finds that within the human body, the internal organs serve as cities full of drawn white-blood-cell cops. The late Stephen Hillenburg’s The Spongebob Squarepants Movie (2004) turns its real-life humans into living cartoons themselves, particularly in a bonkers sequence featuring David Hasselhoff basically turning into a speedboat.

David Hasselhoff picks up speed in ‘The Spongebob Squarepants Movie’ (2004).

The absurdity behind the collision of the drawn and the real is never better embodied than in another of our highest-rated live/animated hybrids. Released in 1988, Robert Zemeckis’ Who Framed Roger Rabbit shows off a deep understanding—narratively and aesthetically—of the material that it’s parodying, seeking out the impeccable craftsmanship of legends such as director of animation Richard Williams (1993’s The Thief and the Cobbler), and his close collaborator Roy Naisbitt. The forced perspectives of Naisbitt’s mind-bending layouts provide much of the rocket fuel driving the film’s madcap cartoon opening.

Distributed by Walt Disney Pictures, Roger Rabbit utilizes the Disney stable of characters as well as the Looney Tunes cast to harken back to America’s golden age of animation. It continues a familiar scenario where the ’toons themselves are autonomous actors (as also seen in Friz Freleng’s 1940 short You Ought to Be in Pictures, in which Daffy Duck convinces Porky Pig to try his acting luck in the big studios).

Daffy Duck plots his rise up the acting ranks in ‘You Ought to Be in Pictures’ (1940).

Through this conceit, Zemeckis is able to celebrate the craft of animation, while pastiching both Chinatown, the noir genre, and the mercenary nature of the film industry (“the best part is… they work for peanuts!” a studio exec says of the cast of Fantasia). As Eddie Valiant, Bob Hoskins’ skepticism and disdain towards “toons” is a giant parody of Disney’s more traditional approach to matching humans and drawings.

Adult audiences are catered for with plenty of euphemistic humor and in-jokes about the history of the medium. It’s both hilarious (“they… dropped a piano on him,” one character solemnly notes of his son) and just the beginning of Hollywood toying with feature-length stories in which people co-exist with cartoons, rather than dipping in and out of fantasy sequences. It’s not just about how the cartoons appear on the screen, but how the human world reacts to them, and Zemeckis gets a lot of mileage out of applying ’toon lunacy to our world.

Bob Hoskins in ‘Who Framed Roger Rabbit?’ (1988).

The groundbreaking optical effects and compositing are excellent (and Hoskins’ amazing performance should also be credited for holding all of it together), but what makes Roger Rabbit such a hit is that sense of controlled chaos and a clever tonal weaving of violence and noirish seediness (“I’m not bad… I’m just drawn that way”) through the cartoony feel. And it is simply very, very funny.

It could be said that, with Roger Rabbit, Zemeckis unlocked the formula for how to modernize the live-action and animation hybrid, by leaning into a winking parody of what came before. It worked so perfectly well that it helped kickstart the ‘Disney renaissance' era of animation. Roger Rabbit has influenced every well-known live-action/animation hybrid produced since, proving that there is success and fun to be had by completely upending Mary Poppins-esque quirks. Even Disney’s delightful 2007 rom-com Enchanted makes comedy out of the idea of cartoons crossing that boundary.

When a cartoon character meets real-world obstacles.

Even when done well, though, hybrids are not an automatic hit. Sitting at a 2.8-star average, Joe Dante’s stealthily great Looney Tunes: Back in Action (2003) is considered by the righteous to be the superior live-action/animated Looney Tunes hybrid, harkening back to the world of Chuck Jones and Frank Tashlin. SilentDawn states that the film deserves the nostalgic reverence reserved for Space Jam: “From gag to gag, set piece to set piece, Back in Action is utterly bonkers in its logic-free plotting and the constant manipulation of busy frames.”

With its Tinseltown parody, Back in Action pulls from the same bag of tricks as Roger Rabbit; here, the Looney Tunes characters are famous, self-entitled actors. Dante cranks the meta comedy up to eleven, opening the film with Matthew Lillard being accosted by Shaggy for his performance in the aforementioned Scooby Doo movie (and early on throwing in backhanded jokes about the practice of films like itself as one character yells, “I was brought in to leverage your synergy!”).

Daffy Duck with more non-stop banter in ‘Looney Tunes: Back in Action’ (2003).

Back in Action is even more technically complex than Roger Rabbit, seamlessly bringing Looney Tunes physics and visual language into the real world. Don’t forget that Dante had been here before, when he had Anthony banish Ethel into a cartoon-populated television show in his segment of Twilight Zone: The Movie. Another key to this seamlessness is star Brendan Fraser, at the height of his powers here as “Brendan Fraser’s stunt double”.

Like Hoskins before him, Fraser brings a wholehearted commitment to playing the fed-up straight man amidst cartoon zaniness. Fraser also brought that dedication to Henry Selick's Monkeybone (2001), a Roger Rabbit-inspired sex comedy that deploys a combo of stop-motion animation and live acting in a premise amusingly close to that of 1992’s Cool World (but more on that cult anomaly shortly). A commercial flop, Back in Action was the last cinematic outing for the Looney Tunes for some time.

Nowadays, when we think of live-action animation, it’s hard not to jump straight to an image of Michael Jordan’s arm stretching to do a half-court dunk to save the Looney Tunes from slavery. There’s not a lot that can be fully rationalized about the 1996 box-office smash, Space Jam. It is a bewildering cartoon advert for Michael Jordan’s baseball career, dreamed up off the back of his basketball retirement, while also mashing together different American icons. Never forget that the soundtrack—one that, according to Benjamin, “makes you have to throw ass”—includes a song with B-Real, Coolio, Method Man and LL Cool J.

Michael Jordan and teammates in ‘Space Jam’ (1996).

Space Jam is a film inherently born to sell something, predicated on the existing success of a Nike commercial rather than any obvious passion for experimentation. But its pure strangeness, a growing nostalgia for the nineties, and meticulous compositing work from visual-effects supervisor Ed Jones and the film’s animation team (a number of whom also worked on both Roger Rabbit and Back in Action), have all kept it in the cultural memory.

The films is backwards, writes Jesse, in that it wants to distance itself from the very cartoons it leverages: “This really almost feels like a follow-up to Looney Tunes: Back in Action, rather than a predecessor, because it feels like someone watched the later movie, decided these Looney Tunes characters were a problem, and asked someone to make sure they were as secondary as possible.” That attempt to place all the agency in Jordan’s hands was a point of contention for Chuck Jones, the legendary Warner Bros cartoonist. He hated the film, stating that Bugs would never ask for help and would have dealt with the aliens in seven minutes.

Space Jam has its moments, however. Guy proclaims “there is nothing that Deadpool as a character will ever have to offer that isn’t done infinitely better by a good Bugs Bunny bit”. For some, its problems are a bit more straightforward, for others it’s a matter of safety in sport. But the overriding sentiments surrounding the film point to a sort of morbid fascination with the brazenness of its concept.

Holli Would (voiced by Kim Basinger) and Frank Harris (Brad Pitt) blur the lines in ��Cool World’ (1992).

Existing in the same demented… space… as Space Jam, Paramount Pictures bought the idea for Cool World from Ralph Bakshi as it sought to have its own Roger Rabbit. While Brad Pitt described it as “Roger Rabbit on acid” ahead of release, Cool World itself looks like a nightmare version of Toontown. The film was universally panned at the time, caught awkwardly between being far too adult for children but too lacking in any real substance for adults (there’s something of a connective thread between Jessica Rabbit, Lola Bunny and Holli Would).

Ralph Bakshi’s risqué and calamitously horny formal experiment builds on the animator’s fascination with the relationship between the medium and the human body. Of course, he would go from the immensely detailed rotoscoping of Fire and Ice (1983) to clashing hand-drawn characters with real ones, something he had already touched upon in the seventies with Heavy Traffic and Coonskin, whose animated characters were drawn into real locations. But no one besides Bakshi quite knew what to do with the perverse concept of Brad Pitt as a noir detective trying to stop Gabriel Byrne’s cartoonist from having sex with a character that he drew—an animated Kim Basinger.

Jack Deebs (Gabriel Byrne) attempts to cross over to Hollie Would in ‘Cool World’ (1992).

Cool World’s awkwardness can be attributed to stilted interactions between Byrne, Pitt and the animated world, as well as studio meddling. Producer Frank Mancuso Jr (who was on the film due to his father running Paramount) demanded that the film be reworked into something PG-rated, against Bakshi’s wishes (he envisioned an R-rated horror), and the script was rewritten in secret. It went badly, so much so that Bakshi eventually punched Mancuso Jr in the face.

While Cool World averages two stars on Letterboxd, there are some enthusiastic holdouts. There are the people impressed by the insanity of it all, those who just love them a horny toon, and then there is Andrew, a five-star Cool World fan: “On the surface, it’s a Lovecraftian horror with Betty Boop as the villain, featuring a more impressive cityscape than Blade Runner and Dick Tracy combined, and multidimensional effects that make In the Mouth of Madness look like trash. The true star, however, proves to be the condensed surplus of unrelated gags clogging the arteries of the screen—in every corner is some of the silliest cel animation that will likely ever be created.”

There are even those who enjoy its “clear response to Who Framed Roger Rabbit”, with David writing that “the film presents a similar concept through the lens of the darkly comic, perverted world of the underground cartoonists”, though also noting that without Bakshi’s original script, the film is “a series of half steps and never really commits like it could”. Cool World feels both completely deranged and strangely low-energy, caught between different ideas as to how best to mix the two mediums. But it did give us a David Bowie jam.

‘Space Jam: A New Legacy’ is in cinemas and on HBO Max now.

Craft is of course important, but generally speaking, maybe nowadays a commitment to silliness and a sincere love for the medium’s history is the thing that makes successful live-action/animation hybrids click. It’s an idea that doesn’t lend itself to being too cool, or even entirely palatable. The trick is to be as fully dotty as Mary Poppins, or steer into the gaucheness of the concept, à la Roger Rabbit and Looney Tunes: Back in Action.

It’s quite a tightrope to walk between good meta-comedy and a parade of references to intellectual property. The winningest strategy is to weave the characters into the tapestry of the plot and let the gags grow from there, rather than hoping their very inclusion is its own reward. Wait, you said what is coming out this week?

Related content

Rootfish Jones’s list of cartoons people are horny for

The 100 Sequences that Shaped Animation: the companion list to the Vulture story

Jose Moreno’s list of every animated film made from 1888 to the present

Follow Kambole on Letterboxd

26 notes · View notes

lostartz · 2 years

Text

Hello!

Welcome to my Art Blog!

First, A Little Bit About Me

My name is Ryan, but you can call me Lost! I’m genderqueer and Pansexual, and I love the communities here on Tumblr! My profile picture was drawn by the incredible @jaythejokerfan ! Go check him out, he is an incredible artist!

Fandoms that I love so far are the following:

DC Universe in general! Particularly it’s older, wholesome content, but there are a few modern day DC movies/games that I love!

Good Omens - the cutest and most wholesome show you’ll ever find.

Steven Universe!

Our Flag Means Death ❤️

The Umbrella Academy - specifically Klause Hargreeves

Sony Marvel (aka Doc Ock and Sony Spider-Man characters)

She-Ra (I’ve only just started that one though!

Adventure Time

Likes!

70’s Music - David Bowie is incredible.

Video games - Horizon Zero Dawn, Breath of the Wild, and The Arkham Series are some of my favorites!

Science - I’m very interested in biology!

Digital Art, obviously! I’m using this blog as an opportunity to practice my skills and meet other artists and people that also like the fandoms that I like!

Kindness, I know this ones corny but I just enjoy kindness in general. ☺️

Books and Comic Books - I’d love recommendations!

Playing the piano, despite not being very good at it. 😅

Cats!

Dislikes/Hates

Board Games

Onions, with a passion - don’t mess with me on this one…

Spiders, although they’re chill as long as they’re outside

Politics

So, What is This Blog?

It’s an art blog! I love making digital art, and I love reblogging other amazing artists! I have thought of one day making comics based on requests, making a storyline/plot line for fandoms, or just in general doing something fun for this blog! Please let me know if you have any ideas for this blog or for what I should draw!

Well, that’s about it! Enjoy my blog!Feel free to use the ask box for drawing requests/ideas, or even just blog ideas! Thanks luvs!

#my art #text #mine #hello!

5 notes · View notes

scenics · 4 years

Note

what's your favorite thing about wong kar wai's movies? why do you like his movies so much?

wrote this in the notes app at 3am. this got very long. wkw’s one of my fave directors of all time

first of all, i did not like wong kar wai’s movies growing up. my first introduction to wong kar wai was with in the mood for love, and i always hated how slow the movie was—i could not understand the value of two middle aged people walking circles around each other on when i was eight years old. my mother was particularly fascinated with the movie and every few years or so she’d borrow it from the local library just to rewatch it by herself, or with me as an unwilling audience. maybe she just really liked tony leung like everyone else did, or i didn’t understand what she was going through back then. now, she watches it a lot less, but ironically i’m the one who watches it on a regular basis. when i look back, i realize my hatred of in the mood for love stemmed from my rejection of my mother when i was younger, along with anything related to my culture/heritage. it was my way of reconciling the isolation i felt in my new home at a young age—i thought that rejecting any part of my past would allow me to assimilate better (and for the most part it worked until senior year of high school give or take). i can say now that my former hatred/rejection of wong kar wai’s greatest work—his magnum opus—makes me appreciate him a lot more. like my mother taught me, it is best not to hate if you can love one day.

my real love and fascination for wong kar wai started when i was 18. the week after my first week of college finals, i watched his entire filmography (excluding anything post 2046) in one long sitting. i was exhausted from an accumulation of things: college did not go the way i expected and i hated science with a passionate sincerity by the end of the year. that year, i had also not chosen to go home. regretted not just going back to vietnam a lot and i spent the entire first year of college just missing it. i was mentally emotionally exhausted and homesick so i found immediate comfort and familiarity in wong kar wai’s films. all of wong kar wai’s films are based around the simple theme of connection, each character desires connection with another —whether through strangers like in chungking express or estranged lovers in a foreign city like in happy together. every character is lost in their own world of loneliness, but they’re not consumed by it as they constantly venture out to find a cure for their loneliness. there’s a sort of warm tenderness to their eternal loneliness. wong kar wai’s characters are all very simple, but that just makes them the more normal. he adds an amusing, yet charming aspect to a lot of his characters, which makes them all the more real. at the end of the day, they’re the most ordinary of people, but framed in wong kar wai’s romantic vision of the world. for me, i can see myself in a lot of his characters, especially as i’ve now settled myself into my twenties.

most of all, wong kar wai’s movies remind me of home a lot. more than anything. vietnamese cinema barely exists, and his films of hong kong are one of the only threads of my childhood memories captured in film. in his films, his characters loneliness stems from an urban isolation and a desire to find home. how can one constantly be surrounded by people, yet feel so lonely? 90s hong kong reminds me a lot of early 2000s saigon, right before true modern urbanization began to take foot. the saigon i return to now is not the place i grew up in, everything i once knew with familiarity has become foreign (you could argue the same for hong kong too). like both the main characters in happy together, i’m very much far away from home now, but what makes it worse is i don’t have a home to return to anymore despite it still being there. the isolation i feel here is much less comforting than the familiar isolation of asia, it’s an entirely distinct feeling i’ve come to differentiate. the night version of hong kong in fallen angels reminds me very much of saigon at night when i was little—when i would cling to my aunts back on the motorcycle. even more, hong kong at night is an unmistakable feeling—a true moment of limbo that you can experience nowhere else as the city seems to slow to a stop before starting up again (the dim sum scene in fallen angels reminds me of my uncle taking me with him to smalls shops buried deep in hong kong’s markets. in my opinion, the most crowded, dirty, loud places have the best food).

one of the things i also love the most about wong kar wais films are they are essentially “of an era.” context heavily influences his films, and watchers should understand that his best films are primarily made in the decade of hong kong’s handover from the uk to china. looking back now, his films are representative of the end of hong kong pop culture culture. they’re the last threads of a former culture powerhouse in asia—hk cantopop, film, and tv throughout the late 70s to 90s had an immense influence on asian pop culture today. everybody knew and loved hong kong, because it was the only true source of quality pop culture in an age of barely any in asia. hong kong was the beginning of everything essentially. kpop even, i would argue, would not be what it is today without cantopop—many idols are modeled after the cantopop idols of the 80s along with western influence. it’s sad to see that hong kong’s impact has been increasingly erased over the past 20 or so years—hong kong is now a shell of it’s former self as it can never return to its former glory. wong kar wai’s greatest films are chungking express, fallen angels, happy together, and in the mood for love. they’re all made in the years predating or after the handover, and you can see the differences in feeling of each film as it nears 1997. happy together, aside from being a somewhat tragic love story, is also the tragedy of hong kong. the handover of 1997 seems to haunt that film as the characters are also far way from hong kong; they’re on the other side of the world. there’s a sense of fear and desperation that runs parallel to the main love story and i feel like people don’t see that the first time without an understanding of historical context. chungking express and fallen angels are two sides of hong kong—hong kong by day and by night—they’re wong kar wai’s love letter to hong kong itself before it disappears in the subsequent years (which it has sadly). both of those movies are time capsules of an era, they capture an atmosphere that is now gone in hong kong. 2046 is an extension of those four movies above—an imagining of how hong kong would be be 99 years after the “end” of hong kong as it is in 1997. and finally, wong kar wai’s greatest work is in the mood for love. it’s his magnum opus, and the true end of an era: for wong kar wai’s creative capacity, for hong kong pop culture, for the actors themselves. wong kar wai has been unable to follow in the mood for love successfully with other directorial features, it’s a masterpiece in itself in its inability for recreation. the movie speaks for itself, even maggie subsequently quit acting shortly afterwards because she felt she could never top that role—it was the end of her acting career in terms of era. everything that wong kar wai put out in the 90s is of an era, it cannot and never be repeated or recreated just as the old hong kong is gone (which is why his attempt to make sequels for those movies with blossoms and the chungking express sequel will be futile. wong kar wai does not realize that that era has indeed passed (and his his break up with christopher doyle has proved to be fatal for both of them).

finally, a small addition about wong kar wai as a director himself. he’s a cancer, very true to his nature, which explains how he can so fluidly translate and portray emotion in his films. they’re almost overflowing with tender emotion, but very much so in an implicit manner. i could never do that in anything i create, it’d end up being very much lynchian in manner, which makes me appreciate his films a lot more. moreover, wong kar wai has a certain way, an intimacy with all his actors. he brings out the best in them for only his movies, and that’s what makes him so special. also, i relate a lot to wong kar wai’s method of working ..the man is one of the worst procrastinators he’s worse than me. he almost never plans or writes scripts for his movies. most of his films especially in the 90s are very much “go with the flow” improvisation (u can see that the characters are very much the actors even it’s hard to distinguish). he was editing in the mood for love up to the last minute before final submission for cannes, that’s just how much of a procrastinator he was and why it’ll take him a million years to release the chungking express sequel. it’s amazing to think how all of these great movies from wong kar wai are technically equivalent to 2000 word essays submitted a minute past the deadline. what i imagine is how different would his work be if he’d planned ahead (how much better would my essays be if i didn’t write them at 3am?). but i guess we can all see how much he’s changed in the release of his criterion collection—-he’s not the person he once was and he can’t recreate the past.

if u read this far i love you thank u for reading my inarticulate nonsense thoughts. i hope u like wong kar wai a lot more than before

#asks #very inarticulate but articulate im sorry this took so long

60 notes · View notes

mostlysignssomeportents · 3 years

Text

On the occasion of John Varley's quadruple bypass

John Varley, a beloved, versatile, funny, and wildly imaginative sf writer, recently had a quadruple bypass and is recovering well, but this is America, so he's also in need of financial support through his recovery.

https://varley.net/nonfiction/news/sending-prayers-to-the-cosmos/

You can donate to Varley's recovery fund via Paypal, which will support the Varley family's new expenditures (Dan Prall already helped them by buying the recliner chair John's doctors want him to sleep in).

https://www.paypal.com/donate/paymentComplete

When I heard Varley had been hospitalized, I felt that cold grue in my stomach, the dread that has haunted me not merely through the covid months, but also over the past decade, as the cohort of writers I grew up on have entered their 60s and 70s.

The news that Varley's surgery was successful came as an incredible relief - and with it, the realization that I didn't need to wait for an obit to write an appreciation of the writers whose work I love so dearly.

Varley is hugely influential upon me. I could never have written my 2003 debut novel DOWN AND OUT IN THE MAGIC KINGDOM without stories like his 1976 OVERDRAWN AT THE MEMORY BANK - a story that prefigured many of cyberpunk's central tropes.

Varley's short fiction is incredible - not just Hugo winners like THE PERSISTENCE OF VISION but also perfect gems like THE OPHIUCHI HOTLINE and THE BARBIE MURDERS - but they all add up to even more than the sum of their parts.

Much of Varley's work has been set in his "Eight Worlds" universe, where humans have been evicted from Earth by a mysterious alien race called "The Invaders," with the rump of the species being pushed out to the Moon, nearby planets, and the asteroid belts.

Varley's stories happily plunder one another for details of this scenario, lifting characters, technologies, and settings, but they make no pretense to being a "future history" of internal consistency.

The Eight Worlds stories and novels are only consistent with one another when it makes the story better - but when it doesn't, they jettison inter-tale consistency in favor of narrative. For me, the fact that writers could do this came as a jaw-dropping revelation.

Varley annihilated the pretense that an sf writer is some kind of oracle who knows the future - a bit of ghastly fatalism in that it implies that the future is knowable and thus will arrive irrespective of our choices today.

Instead, Varley treats his stories as entertainments and allegories, freed from the "Robert A Timeline" constraints, which allows him to collage his best ideas into new works, a kind of fan-service that is pure delight, freed from the tedious pretense of consistency.

This revelation led directly to my novel Walkaway, which incorporates ideas, props and scenarios from DOWN AND OUT IN THE MAGIC KINGDOM, EASTERN STANDARD TRIBE, and my other novels, without lumbering the story with the necessity to make it fit in with their continuity.

Varley is an unabashed plunderer, particularly of Heinlein, mashing up Heinlein tropes with contemporary ideas, progressive politics, and other delights to make new works that both pick apart and celebrate Heinlein's work.

This was always lurking in his work, but it became very explicit with novels like STEEL BEACH (1992), an absolute ROMP of a book that crosses THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS with the then-ascendant cyberpunk genre conventions (which Varley helped invent) to outstanding effect.

I just re-read STEEL BEACH and found it every bit as delightful as I had in the early 90s, when I hand sold hundreds of copies of it as a bookseller. It's also the direct ancestor of Ian McDonald's MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS-riffing trilogy.

https://memex.craphound.com/2015/09/22/ian-mcdonalds-luna-new-moon-the-moon-is-a-much-much-harsher-mistress/

Varley's work embodies the collaborative spirit of sf, as tropes are ruthlessly plundered and reworked without apology. It's a process that's wonderfully described in my mentor Judith Merril's Hugo-winning memoir, "Better to Have Loved":

https://memex.craphound.com/2003/08/11/science-fiction-prefigured-the-creative-commons/

"Whereas in other literary fields you wouldn’t dare take an idea from another writer and use it, because that would be considered plagiarism, science fiction people loved to build on each other’s stories.

"The business of giving away ideas and promoting other people’s work was a part of the community at large. The Futurians did this to an amazing extent. For example, every Futurian had a pen name that included the family name Conway. A good number of the stories that appeared in science fiction magazines at the time were written by someone-or-other Conway."

In other words, amateurs plagiarize, artists steal.

Think of the way that Varley's symbiotic alien spacesuits were beautfully plundered by Spider and Jeanne Robinson for their own Hugo-winning STARDANCE.

http://spiderrobinson.com/books.html

I found so many revelations in Varley's work: just the proliferation of "disneylands" on the Moon was an wonderfully economical bit of storytelling, an entire implied history of a notoriously bullying corporation in tatters after an invasion, all in a single, lower-case "d."

And then there's the RED THUNDER books, wherein Varley took apart and reassmbled Heinlein's "juvies" as parables about the paranoid, post-9/11 America, a country that occupied Iraq, Afghanistan and itself:

https://memex.craphound.com/2006/04/17/the-novel-heinlein-would-have-written-about-gw-bushs-america/

I don't think I'd have written LITTLE BROTHER - a book I thought of as an anti-authoritarian riff on HAVE SPACESUIT, WILL TRAVEL - if I hadn't read RED THUNDER.

Varley's work is worth aspiring to: a perfect mix of wildly imaginative and just plain *fun*. His most recent novel, IRONTOWN BLUES, is an Eight Worlds hard boiled noir novel starring an uplifted dog detective.

https://memex.craphound.com/2018/08/29/john-varleys-irontown-blues-noir-doggy-science-fiction-from-one-of-the-fields-all-time-greats/

Varley runs a shop for signed copies of his books, though shipping is slow ("We are strictly a kitchen-table operation. Your book will be carefully selected from our shelves, lovingly hand-wrapped, and decorated with real US Postage stamps").

https://varley.net/shop/

If you're looking for a title to order from the shop, may I recommend 2004's "The John Varley Reader: 30 Years of Short Fiction."

https://varley.net/collection/the-john-varley-reader/

Image: Arthur Jene https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:John_Varley.jpg

CC BY-SA: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en

#pluralistic

29 notes · View notes

fuckyeahstephensondheim · 3 years

Text

Rick Pender knows his Sondheim from A to Z

If the word “encyclopedia” conjures for you a 26-volume compendium of information ranging from history to science and beyond, you may find the notion of a Stephen Sondheim Encyclopedia perplexing. But if you have ever looked at a bookshelf full of book after book about (and occasionally by) the premiere musical theatre composer-lyricist of our era and wished all that information could be synthesized and indexed in one place, maybe the idea of a Sondheim encyclopedia will start to make a little more sense to you. It did to Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, an independent publisher that’s made encyclopedias such as this one of their calling cards, offering tomes on everyone from Marie Curie to Akira Kurasowa. Several years ago, they approached Rick Pender, longtime managing editor of the gone but never forgotten Sondheim Review and now, after years of research, writing, and pandemic-related delays, the The Stephen Sondheim Encyclopedia is finally hitting shelves. I sat down with Rick (via Zoom) to chat about this unique, massive project.

FYSS: I want to really focus on the new book, but we should start with your history with Sondheim and The Sondheim Review. How did you become so enmeshed in this work?

RP: As a teenager, the first LP that I bought was the soundtrack from West Side Story, and I didn't have any clue about who much of anybody was, particularly not Stephen Sondheim. But I loved the lyrics for the songs, especially “Something’s Coming” and “Gee, Officer Krupke.” These are just fabulous lyrics.

Then, of course, in the ‘70s it was hard as time went by not to have some awareness of Sondheim. I saw a wonderful production of Night Music in northeast Ohio, and I again just thought these lyrics are incredible, and I love the music from that particular show. Fast forward a little further in the late ‘80s, I was laid up with some surgery and I knew I was going to be bedridden for a week or two anyway, so I went to the public library and grabbed up a handful of CDs, and in that batch was A Collector's Sondheim, the three-disc set of stuff up through about 1985, and I must have listened to that a hundred times, I swear, because it had material on it that I didn't know anything about like Evening Primrose or Stavisky. So that really opened my eyes.

Later, my son had moved to Chicago. He's a scenic carpenter and a union stagehand. He worked at the Goodman Theatre, and I went to see a production when they were still performing in a theater space at the Art Institute of Chicago, and they had a gift shop there. And lo and behold in the rack I saw a copy of a magazine called The Sondheim Review! I thought, oh my gosh, I've got to subscribe to this! This would have been about 1996, probably, so I subscribed and enjoyed it immediately. A quarterly magazine about just about Stephen Sondheim struck me as kind of amazing.

In 1997-98 the Cincinnati Playhouse did a production of Sweeney Todd in which Pamela Myers, all grown up, played Mrs. Lovett, and so I wrote to the editor of the magazine and said, “Would you like me to review this?” That started me down a path for a couple of years of making fairly regular contributions to the magazine. Then in 2004 that editor retired, and I was asked to become the managing editor, which I did from 2004 to 2016. It went off the rails for some business reasons, but it lasted for 22 years which I think is pretty remarkable.

I tried to sustain it in an alternative form with a website called Everything Sondheim. We put stuff up online for about 18 months, and we published three print issues that look very much like The Sondheim Review, but we were not able to sustain it beyond that.

FYSS: How did the Encyclopedia project originate?

RP: The publisher asked me to write an encyclopedia about Stephen Sondheim! I envisioned that I would be sort of the general editor who coordinated a bunch of writers to put this together, but they said no, we're thinking of you as being the sole author. They had done a couple of other encyclopedias particularly of film directors, and those were all done by one person, so they sent me a contract asking me to generate 300,000 words for this book, and after I regained consciousness, I said all right, I'll give it a try.

It took me about two years – most of 2018 and ‘19 – to generate that content. I sent it off in the fall of ‘19, and then, well, the world stopped because of the pandemic. It was supposed to come out April a year ago, and they had just furloughed a bunch of their editors and everything stalled. But now it's coming out mid-April 2021.

FYSS: What was the research and writing process like?

RP: This project came about in part because the publisher initially approached another writer, Mark Horowitz, who's at the Library of Congress and who had done a Sondheim book of Sondheim on Music. Mark and I had become quite close because he wrote a number of wonderful features about different Sondheim songs for The Sondheim Review. When I heard that that he had put my name out there, I went back to him after I had agreed to do this and said, Mark, could we use some of that material that you wrote for the magazine about those songs? And he said, sure do with them whatever you wish. And I was glad he said that, because they were really long pieces, and I've reduced each of them to about 1500-2000 words, which I thought was probably about the maximum length that people would really want to read in a reference volume.

But other than that, I generated everything else myself. I relied upon plenty of material within the 22 years of back issues of The Sondheim Review. Another great resource was Sondheim's own lyric studies, the two-volume set which provides so much information about the production of shows and that sort of thing.

Of the 131 entries I wrote for this, 18 of them are lengthy pieces about each of the original productions, so again Sondheim's books were certainly useful for that, and other books like Ted Chapin's book about Follies.

I also spent some time in Washington, D.C. at the Library of Congress, and Mark loaned me a quite a bit of material that he had collected – not archival material but scrapbooks of clippings that he put into ring binders of stuff about Sondheim's shows.

I came back to Cincinnati with about four or five cartons of materials, and I could really dig through that stuff as I was working on these. And then I have, as I'm sure you and lots of other Sondheim fans have, a bookcase with a shelf or two of Sondheim books, and those were all things that I relied upon, too.

I actually generated a list with lots and lots of topics, probably over 200, and I knew that was going to be more than I could do. Eventually, some things were consolidated, like an actor who perhaps performed in just one Sondheim show wasn't going to get a biographical entry, but I would talk about them in the particular show that they were involved in. So, I was able to collapse some of those kinds of things. But as I said, I did end up with 131 entries in the publication, and it turned out to be 636 pages, so that's a big fat reference book.

FYSS: Who is the intended audience for a work like this? RP: The book is really intended to be a reference volume more than a coffee-table book. It does have photography in it, but it's black and white and more meant to be illustrative than to wallow in the glories of Sondheim. There is an extensive bibliography in it, and all the material is really thoroughly sourced so people can find ways to dig into more.

FYSS: Sometimes memories diverge or change over time. Did you come across any contradictions in your research, and how did you resolve them?

RP: I can't say that I can recall anything like that. I relied very heavily on Sondheim's recollections in Finishing the Hat and Look, I Made a Hat because he's got a memory like a steel trap. Once in a while I would email him with a question and get very quick response on things. I really used him as my touchstone for making sure of that kind of thing.

I also found that Secrest’s biography was very thoroughly researched, and I could rely on that. But I can't say that I found a lot of discrepancy, and some of those kinds of things were a little too much inside baseball for me to be including in the encyclopedia.

FYSS: For figures with long and broad histories, how did you decide what to include? George Abbott, for example, is the first entry in the book and he worked for nine decades! How important was writing about an individual as they relate to Sondheim vs. who they were more generally?

RP: To use George Abbott as an example, I would say that the first things that I did was to go back to the lyric studies and to the Secrest biography and just look up references to Abbott. I mean, it was George Abbott who said that he wanted more hummable songs from Sondheim, so you know that was certainly an anecdote that was worth including because, of course you know, it becomes a little bit of the lyric in Merrily We Roll Along.

So you know, I would look for those kinds of things, but I also wanted to put Sondheim in context because Abbott was well into his career when he finally directed Forum which, since it was Sondheim's first show as a composer and a lyricist, is significant. That was very much the focus of that entry, but I wanted to lay a foundation in talking about Abbott, about all the things that he had done before that. I mean, he was sort of the Hal Prince of his era in in terms of his engagement in so many different kinds of things – writing plays, directing musicals, doctoring shows, all of that.

FYSS: Did any entries stick out to you as being the hardest to write?

I think the most complicated one to write about probably was Bounce/Road Show because it's got a complicated history, and Sondheim has so much to say about it. And because it's not a show that people know so much about, I wanted to treat it appropriately, but not as expansively as all of that background material might have suggested. So I kind of had to weave my way through that one. It also was a little tough to write about, because how do you write a synopsis of a show that has had several incarnations quite different from one another, and musical material that has changed from one to the other? With shows like that, I particularly tried to resort to the licensed versions of the shows.

FYSS: I haven't had a chance to read the book cover-to-cover yet, but I did read the Follies and the Into the Woods entries to try to get a sense of how you covered individual shows, and both of those are shows that had significant revisions at different times. And I thought you made it very clear what they were and also where to go for a reader who wants to learn more.

RP: Let me say one other thing this is not directly on this topic, but it sort of relates, and that is that in writing an encyclopedia, I didn't want to overlay a lot of my very individual opinions about things, but with each of the show entries I tried to review the critical comments that were made about the show in its original form, perhaps with significant revivals and that sort of thing, and then to source those remarks from critics at those various points in time. And of course, my own objectivity (or lack thereof) had something to do with what I was selecting, but I thought that was a good way to represent the range of opinion without having to make it all my own opinion.

FYSS: Did you feel any responsibility with regards to canonization when you made choices about what to include or exclude? What made the First National Tour of Into the Woods more significant than the Fiasco production, for example? Why do Side by Side by Sondheim & Sondheim on Sondheim get individual entries, but Putting It Together is relegated to the omnibus entry on revues?

RP: I guess that now you are lifting the curtain on some of my own subjectivity with that question. I tried to identify things that were particularly significant. I mean with the revues for instance, several of those shows – you know, particularly Side by Side by Sondheim, the very early ones – they were the ones I think that elevated him in people’s awareness. So, I think that to me was part of what drove that. And then shows that that were early touring productions struck me as being things that maybe needed a little bit more coverage. I think the Fiasco production was a really interesting one, but with the more recent productions of shows I just felt like there's no end to it if I begin to include a lot of that sort of thing.

FYSS: I mean it's so subjective. I'm not the kind of person who clutches my pearls and screams oh my goodness, how could you not talk about this or that. But I was surprised to see in your Follies entry that the Paper Mill Playhouse album was not listed among the recordings, for example. I imagine that once this book hits shelves you're going to be bombarded with people asking about their pet favorites.

RP: Oh, I'm sure, and maybe that will be a reason to do a second edition, which I’m totally ready to do.

The Sondheim Encyclopedia hits bookstore shelves April 15. It’s available wherever you buy books, but Rick has provided a special discount code for readers of Fuck Yeah Stephen Sondheim to receive 30% off when you order directly from the publisher. To order, visit www.rowman.com, call 800-462-6420, and use code RLFANDF30.

Celebrate the launch of The Sondheim Encyclopedia with a free, live online event featuring Rick Pender in conversation with Broadway Nation’s David Armstrong Friday, April 16 from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. Eastern. More information and register here.

#Stephen Sondheim #Rick Pender #The Stephen Sondheim Encyclopedia #The Sondheim Review

17 notes · View notes

ineloqueent · 4 years

Note

i'll have to admit, i'm curious about which classic rock stars your mutuals are...

anon darling, you’re a star!

fair warning though, i’m referring to all of these people in the present tense. i don’t care. they’re still here, to me.

@archaicmusings — roger taylor

hear me out. cal and rog would get on like a house on fire. it’s very simple; they share opinions on so many things, and cal swears about as much as roger does. but that aside, like roger, cal knows good music when she hears it, tells the best stories, and is loyal to her friends until the last.

@drivenbybri — brian may

if i had to describe brian in three words, i’d say “extraordinary but humble,” and you know, i’d describe sofie exactly the same way. sofie’s got such an artistic eye, and has the ability to turn anything into a masterpiece. but she’ll never admit it; she’ll do it quietly and watch the amazement on people’s faces, and then not believe them when they express their admiration. like i said, humble. also, sof and brian have basically the same hair, so...

@brianmays-hair — paul mccartney

paul mccartney has always given me vibes of sheer and absolute chaos. jess is about the same. paul and jess have this energy in common, and also, similar smiles?? don’t @ me, but they definitely do. and similar writing styles! bet you paul macca would let jess write lyrics for his songs if she offered.

@joemazzmatazz — jimi hendrix

jimi is chill. regan is chill. i honestly feel like they’d get along very well, two creative souls, with a similar sense of humour (if you listen to some of hendrix’s live recordings, he’s honestly incredibly funny, and charming, like regan).

@deacyblues — david bowie

first of all, david bowie and pearl would gush over each other’s wardrobes. and makeup. definitely. both have such a distinct style, and that’s part of the reason why i liken pearl to bowie. but also, bowie was known for his kindness, his optimism, and his stubbornness. pearl is indefinitely kind, and stands up for what she believes in, just like bowie.

@aprilaady — john deacon

john richard deacon is a sweetheart!! just like dor. but he’s also wildly unpredictable, and has the ability to shock you with a single sentence (brian’s words on the subject were not quite this, but i’m trying to be nice here). sometimes dor will message me something, and i will burst out laughing. she’s got a wicked sense of humour, just like our beloved deacy, and if anything happened to her, i’d throw everything out the window and then jump out of it myself.

@imcompletelylost — freddie mercury

if anyone’s freddie, it’s libby. libby’s got this charisma, exactly like freddie’s. and then i ask her to tell me her secret and she insists that there isn’t one. if that’s not a freddie mercury move, then i don’t know what is. not to mention, libby is so musically talented, it’s ridiculous. she’s iconic, and kind, and funny, and freddie would definitely take her shopping, because they’re just that alike.

@speciallyred — george harrison

oh, c’mon. have you ever seen george harrison smile? it’s like the sun. anna has the ability to brighten anyone’s day with a few words, and this is a quality which george harrison also has. anna’s a wonderful poet, and i’ve always thought of george as a wonderful lyricist. anna’s got style, too, and she’d fit right in during the height of the beatles’ career, in the 1960s.

@mistiermistshazierdays — marc bolan

now, i may be a bit biased here, because phoebe posts a lot of marc, and i reblog all of it. but also, marc’s got this lovely, bright, bubbliness about him, and if phoebe is anything, it’s bubbly (i love that word!!). with her warmth and her humour, phoebe is the perfect marc bolan, and marc the perfect phoebe.

@doing-albri — elton john

vi makes clothes, and elton john, as we all know, is the ultimate fashionista. then there’s elton john’s charitability, which translates to vi’s kindness. and of course, both are musically talented, and love their friends to no end.

@im-an-adult-ish — robert plant

okay. so i don’t really know how to explain this one. but when i was brainstorming all of these, this was the third one i wrote down. i guess meredith and robert plant just have the same sort of… energy? i honestly do not know. but i think the connection is robert plant’s overall charisma, and meredith’s wonderful ability to make anyone feel welcome.

@sixbloodyminutes — suzi quatro

listen, i love suzi quatro. so much. not only did she inspire bands like the runaways, joan jett in particular, with her revolutionary talent and pioneering as a woman in the music industry, but she’s also fucking awesome. back in the ‘70s, she was a symbol of girl power, and if morgan’s got anything, it’s girl power. also, if you’ve seen that one episode of pop quiz, you’ll know she and roger taylor got along well. and i know morgan likes roger taylor ;)

@hijackmy-heart — joan jett

another queen of the 1970s rock scene was joan jett! also a pioneer in the male-dominated music industry, joan jett is known for not only for her music, but her hard-heartedness. the latter is not at all a bad thing, particularly in this world we live in; joan knew what she wanted, and she went out and got it. nat has that same spirit, and the same occasional savageness, which i can only admire.

@dancingdiscofloof — jimmy page

considered one of the best guitarists in the world, even to this day, jimmy page is one hell of a creative soul, and was responsible for (or at least in part) a great deal of led zeppelin’s discography. a dedicated session musician, jimmy determined that there was a certain science to making music. rove strikes me as someone with this same dedication, so there you go!

@almightygwil — stevie nicks

rolling stone has called stevie nicks one of the greatest solo artists of all time, and while they may have written a shit and completely untrue review about queen, they were certainly right about stevie nicks. stevie nick’s lyrics, both on fleetwood mac records and on her own, have always been poetic, and lyrical, even without music. ellie absolutely writes just like this, and so that alone is enough to liken her to stevie nicks. stevie nicks was and is iconic, and in interviews, she was always very genuine, just like ellie.

@mazzell-ro — janis joplin

emblematic of the glam rock era, janis joplin’s voice is one-of-a-kind, and her presence one of unmatchable warmth. genuine, thoughtful, intelligent, and revolutionary in terms of her rebelling against gender norms, janis joplin is perhaps one of my absolute favourite people of the glam rock generation. ro has the same genuineness, the same intelligence, and the same thoughtfulness, going out of her way for her friends, and thus, she reminds me very much of janis joplin.

#much love for you all <3 #mutuals tag #ask #anon

32 notes · View notes

n1ghtm3ds · 4 years

Note

I recommend reading the introduction to Invisible Women by Caroline Criado Perez, she talks about the importance of language in fighting misogyny and the overwhelming bias toward males found throughout language. For instance, she compared countries with super gendered language (where every word has a gender), countries like America where words aren’t all gendered but can denote gender (like actor, actress) and countries where the language is almost completely genderless (so like actor only.) And you know what she found? The second type of country, countries where the language isn’t all gendered but gender can be specified - are more equal than countries where gender can’t be specified. Because if you can’t specify that it’s a woman, everyone assumes it’s a man. You can’t correct the hidden bias towards men unless you can emphasize the presence of women. Men try to tell us that ‘he’ is the default, that it includes women. (Perez mentions a Greek myth where a man claims this.) They’re lying. Male language always denotes men, and gender neutral language also often denotes men because we aren’t used to it referring to women. The simple act of using she/her can be a meaningful act of rebellion under the patriarchy. Job vacancies, particularly in leadership, tend to use male language. Male is the default, women is other. Except that’s utter crap. Don’t let men erase us, and they will try their best. Did you know the first writer we have a record of was a woman? Her name is Enheduanna. One of the first movie makers was a woman, named Alice Guy-Blache, only her husband tried to steal credit for her work. 135 years before the Brothers Grimm, Madame d’Aulnoy coined the word ‘fairy tales.’ Most people at least know that Mary Shelley wrote the first science fiction story, Frankenstein, and it’s not a coincidence that her mother Mary Wollstonecraft was one of the first feminist philosophers. They’re realizing now early cave paintings were probably done by women. “Man’s” first calendar was almost definitely a woman tracking her menstrual cycle. Plus, any time a woman has wanted to exist outside of her cage, they’ve questioned whether she was a woman. They made jokes about Sappho being a man. They pretend warriors that were clearly women must actually have been men. They want to make women a tiny little box that no person would be able to breathe in, and they pretend that’s what it meant historically. They. Are. Lying. Our maternal ancestors always always always fought this bullshit. There’s discourse from I shit you not, the 1500s, about all the women dressing in “male” attire. In the beginning of the 1900s sexual harassers and cat callers were called “mashers” and women were praised for stabbing them with their hat pins. I could go on for a while lol - the point is, they will always try to disparage and erase anyone who we’d refer to as She/Her. But, a She created superheroes, She discovered sex chromosomes, She single handedly freed 70 slaves. She went to prison to get women the vote. On International Women’s Day a bunch of men always ask about the male equivalent. It exists. But no one cares. Because the first IW Days were 15,000 working class American women protesting for their rights and tens of thousands of Russian women protesting for theirs, and over a million women in Europe protesting for theirs. IWD means something. It wasn’t easy, but they did it, and often they did it thinking of us. That’s the heritage they’ve given us. Don’t listen to misogyny when it tries to get you to reject it, when it tries to redefine and limit it and belittle it. You know the quote ‘Well-behaved women rarely make history?’ It’s often misunderstood. It’s not just that rejecting patriarchical bullshit helps us achieve. It’s also that a man could be perfectly ‘well-behaved’ and still “make history,” while our maternal ancestors wouldn’t. They’d be erased. Don’t let them erase you. She can be and do anything. All we share is our biology and an amazing history. Help us fight to make it heard. Existing and embracing yourself is a radical act.

thank you so much for haring this, this is fascinating

20 notes · View notes

pascalpanic · 4 years

Note

ALRIGHT I bit the bullet. here's my regular spiel! I'm 5'6 mixed race girl with curly hair and green eyes. I'm an ENFP, a former theatre-geek, classically trained singer, and ballet dancer. I have a major love of all things soft and pastel pink and *vintagey* so I like to imagine I have a pretty good sense of sophistication but Im in love with science and I always have been! I'm pretty into organization and stationery things as well. I practice calligraphy for fun and live for color coding :)

YAY, THEA!! I’d ship you with Frankie Morales!

Um, Tiny Dancer anyone?? (shameless self plug) You just know Frankie would adore you and call you Tiny Dancer, even though you’re not that much shorter than him. He thinks your green eyes are the most beautiful thing and he absolutely adores your curls too. Frankie admires how organized you are (he’s a very type-b kinda guy) and how feminine you are. He loves how soft and kind it makes you seem, but he knows you’re pretty kickass too. He loves vintage stuff too, especially music from the 70s and 80s, and the two of you will have a beautiful home with a vintage feel to it if that’s your speed! Frankie loves watching you dance, he seriously thinks it’s amazing and wants you to teach him some of the basic steps, as long as you promise not to tell any of the Delta Squadron boys. He’d never live that down! He also loves how beautiful your voice is and sometimes you’ll sing him to sleep after he wakes up from a particularly hard nightmare. He swears nothing is more soothing to him than your voice and he doesn’t sound half bad when he’s singing along to your music either! He’d definitely have an adaptable music taste and he’s down to listen to whatever your wheelhouse is. He absolutely adores you and calls you his tiny dancer all the time, super sweetly and always with some kind of kiss following the name.

ships are still open!!

#frankie catfish morales #frankie morales x reader #frankie morales #pedro pascal #josie talks #pascalpanic100

6 notes · View notes

wisdomrays · 4 years

Text

TAFAKKUR: Part 228

IS THE SHAPE OF THE EARTH CHANGING?

THE EARTH'S SHAPE IS BECOMING ROUNDER AS A RESULT OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF PROJECTS LIKE THE THREE GORGES RESERVOIR. THE WEIGHT DECREASE DUE TO THE MELTING ICECAPS HAS PLAYED A MAJOR ROLE IN THESE CHANGES.

From time immemorial, humanity has wondered about the shape of the Earth. Over the centuries countless studies exploring the Earth and its shape have been conducted, and they still continue today. With advancements in technology, the methods and measuring devices have constantly changed. In earlier periods the Earth was believed to be flat; nevertheless from around the fifth century bc there were varying opinions suggesting that the Earth was actually round and calculations were conducted to measure its radius. Particularly from the seventh century ce onwards, the number of studies regarding what the Earth really looked like have increased tremendously.

In later years, with the advent of Islam and its open encouragement of Muslims to explore the universe and make advances in science, Muslim scholars made huge progress in astronomical research. Historians who have studied these advancements in astronomical science agree that the era between the eighth and fourteenth centuries can aptly be designated as a period of Islamic astronomy. In the years following the sixteenth century, significant research was undertaken in relation to the shape of the Earth and measurements of its radius in both the Islamic world and the West.

In the eighteenth century astronomic research and the advancement of technology proved not only that the Earth was round, but that it had a distinctive shape. According to calculations, the Earth was bulging around the equator and flattened at the poles. The maps produced by satellite systems show that the Earth is not completely round or smooth, but rather it has protrusions, creating an uneven surface that resembles a face with spots.

"Geoid" is the term scientists prefer to use when referring to the physical depiction of the Earth's surface. The shape of the Earth is not a perfect ellipsoid, thus, scientists use this representative surface that is thought to be most approximate to sea level, in order to identify departures from the ellipsoid shape. Due to the events of nature and human-related factors the geoid constantly changes, and this is why a precise mathematical account of the geoid has not yet been possible.

The Earth is known to be a geologically active planet. Just as everything else in the universe, from atoms to galaxies, has not been left to their own fate, the Earth is also constantly being transformed, thus making our magnificent ecosystem possible. The continuous geological process of changes in the Earth's crust is related to a variety of factors: the varying density of the rock layers which form the Earth's crust, the activity of the tectonic plates, as well as the movement of the continents, shifts in the center of gravity, tidal activity, hydro-spherical and atmospheric phenomena, and human intervention in some regions.

Researching the variations in the gravity of the Earth with satellite systems is a relatively new method of recording the changes in geoid elevations. The distance between the center of the Earth and its surface is constant (the tallest mountains will rise or decrease 1-2cm per year at most); if we take into consideration that the Earth's physical body does not vary much and disregard the other forces, then we can say that the main reason for these infinitesimal changes in gravity on the surface of the Earth is due to differences in mass. While there is a decrease in weight in specific regions from melting glaciers, in other areas there is an increase in weight due to melting water flowing into reservoirs; both these phenomena play a significant role in the variations of the Earth's gravity.

Even a minor variation in mass can be detected by measuring gravity. The change of mass location on the Earth's surface results in gravity variations in the same region; in brief, today the commonly used gravity measurements are the most important source for detecting and identifying variations in geoid elevations, as well as determining the actual reasons for these changes. Gravity measurements are conducted via satellite systems; these indicate changes in mass location by detecting an increase or decrease in weight. The most modern technological satellite systems that can detect gravity change and allow us to follow the variations in masses on the Earth's surface are the satellite used by the European Space Agency, called GOCE, and NASA's satellite, called GRACE. GOCE has been designed to perform accurate studies of the Earth's gravity field as it progresses into orbit. As the satellite passes over the regions where gravity is intense or weak, it measures the variations in gravity with signals that have been conveyed by a device called a gradiometer. GRACE is a pair of identical satellites that are flying in the same orbit, 136 miles apart; they orbit the Earth at a distance of 300 miles. These satellites can measure distances with microwave signals, and can detect changes of less than 1% the thickness of human hair; thus the twin satellites are able to accurately measure the distance to the surface of the Earth. The measurements provided by this satellite system make it possible for changes in gravity to be calculated. The GRACE satellite data is 1,000 times more accurate than other gravity field detection systems.

The enormous waves that occurred on the sea surface as a result of the Sumatra Island earthquake, which measured 9 on the Richter scale, caused a level ridge, measuring about six meters in height, to form on the shore. According to data produced by GOCE, such changes in the mass of the Earth's surface caused a variation of 18 mm to occur on the geoid; this is recognized as a relatively high degree of change.

Changes in the polar glaciers also cause variations in the geoid; data provided from satellite GRACE shows that the layers of ice in Greenland and the Antarctica are melting at a higher rate than previously expected. The melting icebergs are causing a rise in sea levels of up to 0.41 mm every year and the weight of water produced from the melting icecaps is causing changes to the shape of the Earth's surface.

One of the interesting facts attained by GRACE is the changes in the Earth's gravity field that have been caused by Three Gorges in China, the largest reservoir ever built. The lake region of the reservoir that is being built measures around 372 miles long, 70 miles wide and approximately 574 feet deep; when the casing of the reservoir is completed it will house an amazing 39.3 billion m3 (9.4 cu mi) of water. The area that this reservoir will cover once the project is completed is so great that it will make an estimated 1.5 million people homeless. It has been observed that the enormous accumulation of water in the completed sections of the reservoir has increased the gravity level in that region, which in turn has caused changes in the geoid structure.

Scientists have confirmed that the Earth's shape is becoming rounder as a result of the construction of projects like the Three Gorges reservoir. It is also estimated that the weight decrease due to the melting icecaps has played a major role in these changes. In some regions of Scandinavia and Canada the ground is rising 1 cm every year due to the melting glaciers. The water produced from the melting glaciers is forcing the currents in the Atlantic Ocean towards the equator, while the decrease of mass at the poles and the increase of weight in the equator region have caused significant changes in the shape of the Earth.

Many scientists claim that changes in the Earth's surface have been caused by changes in the climate. Unfortunately, according to a report published by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), humans are responsible for 90% of global warming. As a result of these vast variations, the geoid shape of the Earth is becoming rounder and its radius is increasing annually by 0.4–0.8 mm. The reasons for these changes are being closely monitored by scientists. According to scientists, the variation of the geoid that has been caused by changes in mass location is having an effect on the Earth's dynamics, with the transfer of mass demonstrated by the changes in gravity causing a reduction in the speed of the Earth's rotation around its axis; this is expected to result in variations in the daily time-zone.

2 notes · View notes