#arguably the SECOND most damaging thing to happen to the franchise

[randobambo]

If I had a nickel for every time Subway had their reputation destroyed as the result of a formerly successful ad campaign...

I dunno man. I found out today that a subway sandwich is $14 now. A shitty subway footlong sandwich that isn't actually 12 inches long and is occasionally made with expired ingredients and was never a great option to start with. I ate those in high school because I was broke and at the mall a lot.

There are poke bowls in my city from a local place for $16. Super fresh fish and veg, warm rice, more than I can eat in one sitting, for the price of a sandwich and a drink at america's most mid-tier sandwich shop.

Someone in another post said (paraphrased) you used to be able to get something mediocre for cheap, but now the mediocre things cost as much as the nice things so why would you?

[shihalyfie]

Wait wait, WHAT Ken hot take!? 👀

Okay, this is going to be one of my spicier takes here, so please go easy on me ^^ But yes, I do actually believe that the American English dub's take on Ken was arguably more accurate to his original Japanese characterization than the way a lot of the fanbase portrays him, even when they're going off the original Japanese version.

So for context, while the degree and nature of characterization changes in our dub varied from character to character, the part that was most consistently applied was that most of the characters got a lot more outspoken (in terms of criticizing things, speaking their mind, and being sassy or even outright dunking on things). Fundamentally speaking, this is an understandable concept due to cultural differences; anyone who doesn't really have a grasp of Japanese seniority or politeness culture might read the kids as extremely stiff if their dialogue was brought over unaltered.

The part where this posed problems was that our dub overdid it way too much at times, so the kids would just dunk on each other or get really condescending for no good reason, and that often caused quite a bit of damage to character arc integrity or the portrayal of character relationships (or pose issues for characters like Takeru or Hikari, where them not being entirely honest about their feelings is part of the point of their characters). But it's not a fundamental problem at its core to make the kids mouth off or banter a little more; I think Diablomon Strikes Back and Kizuna's dubs did a much better job pulling this off while still staying true to the characters, and I generally consider them my reference for how I'd have been perfectly fine with a lot of things the TV series dub was doing already if they'd only been executed a little differently.

Our Ken was voiced by Derek Stephen Prince, and I suspect they casted him more for “the Digimon Emperor" than they did "Ken". (This happened with a lot of 02 dubs, from what I hear -- the Kaiser having that drastic of a 180 is really that big of a plot twist, so I doubt very many casting directors had enough warning about that. Our Wormmon, voiced by Paul St. Peter, is also a bit too obviously casted and directed under the concept of "evil villain's minion" than the more "pitiful" character he ends up becoming, but he did do his best with what he had.) DSP is an incredible voice actor who adapted to the change very well; he's voiced an absolutely unreal number of completely different roles across the Digimon franchise, including even Veemon in 02, who sounds very distinct from Ken. But since his tone isn't as "soft" as Park Romi's, and because Ken got a certain degree of "sassiness" treatment like everyone else, it's easy to get the impression that our dub's Ken is much harsher while the Japanese version is a soft-spoken kid. That's probably how it seems on the surface, but...

Even in Japanese, even post-turn, Ken was never a saint or anything. Park Romi's delivery may have a bit of a soft timbre to it, but that doesn't preclude Ken from having some choice words or complaining about things when he feels like it -- at most, he's the kind of person who holds his words back until the right time. (In fact, if you look at their speech patterns, his is actually slightly rougher than Takeru's, and he is certainly more likely to be blunt or open about his feelings than Hikari, Takeru, or Iori.) And yes, it's true that our dub made him a lot more vocal, but it's well within the range of necessary localization procedure; his occasional formality would probably be seen as way more stiff in America than it would be in Japan (where he's closer to "well-behaved"), so this level of change is reasonable. There were definitely some hiccups in the first half when they went a little too hard on portraying the Kaiser as more of a composed villain genius rather than a pathetic eleven-year-old throwing a tantrum, but as far as his second-half characterization goes, the dub writers definitely seemed to understand that he was not in a position to harshly criticize or look down on the others when he was trying to patch things up with them, so he actually still comes off as one of the "nicest" kids in the group by virtue of not giving his dialogue the same degree of condescension the others often got.

The problem is, it's unfortunately very common in fandom (in Japanese and English, so this isn't a language-specific problem) to portray Park Romi's Ken as a saintlike doormat who, post-turn, is incapable of doing a single thing wrong, impeccably polite to a fault in all circumstances, and constantly pensive and sad about everything to the point he's completely reliant on other people to snap him out of it. And that's just not the case at all! Throughout the entire latter half of 02, Ken is consistently portrayed as resilient, oftentimes far more put-together and assertive than Daisuke, and still capable of being cold or fierce when the time calls for it (the Kaiser came from somewhere, after all). So even if you do take the dub changes making him ostensibly more aggressive into account, that's still more accurate to the original Japanese portrayal than completely flattening Ken into that kind of saintlike doormat. He chooses to be kind, but the operative word is chooses, and that nuance is present in both versions.

[itsclydebitches]

I’m utterly confused by that Twilight post. What does it even mean? Literally all the criticism it receives is for the legitimate reasons. Heck, it has been accused of misogyny, as well. It’s like 50 Shades of Grey, for all it’s accusations of misogyny and creepiness, it was written by a woman, and popular with them. If you want to say some of the criticism was misogyny, go ahead, I’m sure some were, but you can’t say most when I’m sure most people haven’t seen a single example of it.

We don’t see as much of it now because the focus has indeed shifted to legit criticism of the series - and that criticism did always exist - but there was a time (really kicking off around 2008 with the first film) when people simply tore Twilight apart. It was hated. It was reviled. Hating Twilight was an entire personality for some people and you didn’t admit to liking Twilight unless you wanted to deal with a truly horrendous amount of backlash. I honestly can’t think of anything we have today that’s comparable. Maybe something like Steven Universe or Homestuck where the mere mention can get you a side-eye of, “You like that?” But even then that response is often more along the lines of teasing and, if it’s not, it pales in comparison to what Twilight fans received. I’m honestly not sure how to summarize this if you didn’t live through it. It was really, really bad. When people bring up misogyny in this case they’re often referring to how the world reacted to the series, not saying simply that the series lacked women representation. 

“But, Clyde,” people may ask. “Homestuck and Steven Universe are both arguably excellent stories that tackle a lot of sensitive subjects. Not always perfectly, but they’re trying. How does that compare to a series with stalking, racism, and a character falling in love with an infant?” I’m so glad you asked! The difference is that at the time - more than a decade past - most people weren’t criticizing Twilight for those things. Many certainly were (as said, these criticisms have always existed) but the majority of attacks centered around how badly written the series was. How Bella is the worst role model ever. How incredibly stupid a sparkling vampire is. Yet when fans of the series pointed out, “Hey, this other franchise is just as badly written?” or “There are thousands of stories where women just act as eye candy for the men and are basically treated as slabs of meat, but you’re still praising them?” or “Yeah, it’s kind of silly, but lots of stories are silly. Have you seen some of the nonsense in Star Wars? Why is Twilight getting such an extreme backlash?” there were no answers. Because the answer actually boiled down to, “We hate this series because it’s explicitly geared towards young women.” It’s a female fantasy story, taking a previously badass, dangerous creature and turning him into a love interest. Making him sparkle. Giving us the woman’s point of view (unlike Harry Potter). Making that women more passive and romance focused rather than, say, a deadly archer whose romantic side is turned into another weapon (The Hunger Games). Then Twilight was sold to a primarily women-centric audience. Young women. Teenagers. Tweens. One of the most instinctively hated groups in Western media. Men want nothing to do with a “girly” series. Many girls reject it because they’re “not like other girls.” For a long time hating Twilight was the cool thing to do not because it has serious problems with racism, stalking, pedophilia, etc. but because a bunch of young, nerdy women unabashedly loved it and were expressing that love in what was deemed a “cringy” manner. 

A lot of people didn’t hate Twilight fans because they praised a problematic book. They hated Twilight fans because they were women (and many queer individuals) who refused to like the “right” kind of literature. It comes down to the double standard. There’s a lot of really bad movies and books out there. Like a LOT. Most of the time when someone says they enjoyed a “bad” thing people shrug and allow them to have that enjoyment: “Oh god yeah. That Transformers movie was horrible! Still fun to watch on a Friday night though.” However, when the story is written by, for, and primarily about women, suddenly it’s The Worst Thing Ever. It’s why Romance gets so much intense ridicule despite much Sci-Fi being equally ridiculous/“badly” written - Sci-Fi is considered an “art” whereas Romance is “trash.” It’s why (as I’ve discussed in the past) we can have a thousand absurd male fantasy films that make you question who green-lit this project even while you happily buy a ticket, but the second we get one in the form of Jupiter Ascending, “quality” is a necessary component for enjoying the story. People enjoy badly written and incredibly offensive literature all the time - we read a ton of them as Classics in our schools! - but when teenage girls enjoy a badly written, offensive series the whole world rises up to shame them for it. I think Princess Weekes put it well in her article about just this issue: having good reasons for hating Twilight while also acknowledging the double-standard that colored her younger, visceral hatred: 

What is the difference between Twilight moms who turn their bedrooms into shrines for Edward and Bella, and dads who do the same thing for Star Wars, Star Trek, or any other male-targeted franchise? The difference is that we have assumed that one has more value, even at its weakest points, than the other.

The fact that we thought that Twilight was the worst thing to happen to science-fiction/fantasy when Ready Player One exists is … yeah.

There are so many male authors who have done more damage to concepts of masculinity than Stephenie Meyer ever did to femininity. So while we should discuss the sexist, racist, and problematic themes in Twilight, dragging down women with it is neither necessary nor productive—especially considering all of the other things we give a pass to because the way they write sexism/racism is … better (coughOutlandercough).

I’m simplifying this situation a great deal. There was a lot going on that fed into the Twilight hate, but the takeaway is what the post I reblogged initially said. There are people who hate Twilight for specific, legitimate reasons that need to be acknowledged. There are also people who hate Twilight because they can’t stand the fact that a huge swath of women enjoy something they don’t. These two things do exist simultaneously and should be considered when discussing the series. Is someone criticizing it because they’re appalled by the horrific treatment of Native Americans? Do they think it’s the stupidest thing ever but are happy to let others enjoy it? Or are they ranting/attacking others because only men are allowed to enjoy stupid, shallow, “badly” written stories? It’s that last one that’s a problem. 

[kanralovesu]

The Narrative Devices of “Minecraft Speedrunner VS 4 Hunters” (One of the greatest Shonen anime OVAs of all time?)

With over 17 million views and counting, this video of one man attempting to beat Minecraft while 4 other players chase him has become a huge success and its not hard to see why. The video is exciting and tense to a completely new viewer while still carrying with it the 32 million fans of the previous video in the series and the 29 million fans of the video before that. While those videos are also amazing, as a newcomer when I watched the vs4 addition I couldn’t help but dive deeper than I had any right to into WHY this video was not just exciting and tense but also a master of storytelling. So today lets run down a couple of extremely common narrative devices and structures that this video uses and possibly how Minecraft as a game contributes to this.

The High Concept

What if a bunch of teenagers were forced to fight each other by a tyrannical government? What if humans revived the dinosaurs but were unable to contain their power? What if 1 player is pitted against 4 others in a race to beat Minecraft?

High Concepts are quick, catchy premises that the story is centered around. They’re designed to get butts in seats by targeting people before the piece of media has actually begun. Once you’re watching, the High Concept needs to be played with an drawn to its natural conclusion in order to satisfy readers who were likely drawn in specifically because of that premise.

The Minecraft Hunters video does this multiple times when the person being hunted suddenly becomes the Hunter. While not inherit to the premise, this is a logical leap the audience can make that in order to be safe the hunted must get rid of the hunters.

The Hook

Its become part of the James Bond formula now to start every movie with a big, bombastic fight scene and that’s for good reason. Once someone has decided to view your media they’re still not necessarily invested yet. In an age of Netflix where you can flip to a new movie at the click of a button, a proper hook keeps the audience watching, provides a promise of things to come and leads into the first lull in action where more exposition can be given. 

In the Minecraft Hunters video we get a brief bit of exposition explaining the high concept and then its off to the races. One extremely fun thing the video does is bait you into thinking they’re going to stand around and explain things more when out of no where Dream punches and runs. The following chase is a classic James Bond opening scene. It also sets up mechanics that are used multiple times in the run such as towering. Like any good action scene it ends on a twist and then immediately the pace slows and we see Dream doing his first real resource gathering. The stage is set!

The Underdog Hero

A main character is an action movie or shonen anime narrative is often a paradox: they are an unkillable, hero, one man army and yet constantly the underdog. This is because the character cannot die (or the franchise is over), but at the same time a constant tension must be maintained that losing is possible. People also naturally want to root for underdogs its important to include this aspect of your character to make them relatable. The most common ways you can pull this off is to take a heroic person and either give them an impossible task or to pit them against multiple opponents or both (think a heist movie where there are several guards defending the vault). Naturally, the High Concept of this video leads itself to doing both of these things, turning Dream into the ultimate Underdog Hero. 

As a side note, the antagonists of the series, the Hunters, are character more similar to a shonen anime rival as opposed to a more western style of villain. Its all in good fun and you’re less rooting against them as you are rooting for Dream.

Chekhov's Gun

Named after the principle that if a gun is shown in a room someone is bound to grab it and use it, this refers to the general idea of setup and payoff. There are 2 major uses of Chekhov’s Gun in the video and they each have different delays between the setup and payoff.

The first is the Strider Saddle play and its perfect to illustrate the concept. First we see Dreams find his first Nether Fortress, killing a Wither Skeleton and opening a chest. We see him pick up the Saddle but we cut away and don’t belabor the point. This is because only 2 minutes later we see him use the Saddle to escape on a Strider.

The second is the Frost Walker boots. Dreams find a Nether Portal structure in the overworld and finds these in a chest at the 9 minute mark, well before the Strider play. At about the 10:30 mark we get this extremely exaggerated scene where Dream uses the Frost Walker boots in front of us and highlights the item. Then its not until 16 minutes later than he uses the boots to kill the hunters via fall damage.

So whats essentially going on here is different levels of setup based on how soon the payoff is coming. For a quick payoff we don’t need to draw attention to the setup because the audience will naturally have a short term memory of the recent events. However for the long term payoff we need to be primed to pay attention to a certain thing. When we see Dreams showing off the Frost Walker boots we internalize “this will be important later”. You’ll also notice that Minecraft’s game design helps prime you to remember these Chekhov’s Guns: both items being found in very noticeable and memorable structures not just dug up from a generic piece of dirt. (This also applies to the 3rd Chekhov’s Gun I didn’t touch on for time concerns, the TNT from the Pyramid) 

You’ll also notice that the video uses a Chekhov’s Gun in arguably the most effective way, as a twist. We need only think back to early Naruto to know how effective a twist Chekhov’s Gun can be in a shonen fight. You never forget the first time you saw Shikamaru win Chuuin exam fight by using the hole Naruto created during his duel. 

The Three Act Structure

I’m sure we all have heard of the 3 act structure before. While they go by many names lets go with Setup, Confrontation, Resolution for now. The key is having a cycle of tension and release while still slowly escalating tension over the course of the show. The video neatly divides into Overworld, Nether and End sections which translate very well into the 3 act structure. 

Tension is slowly escalating because each new dimensions has more and more hazards. This is of course Minecraft’s game design doing the heavy lifting, however the End in the hunter’s realm is a lot more dangerous considering its a closed off arena where Dreams can’t just escape, he has to fight.

There are also cycles of tension and release. Naturally tension builds up while a chase is happening and then we get some time to relax after Dreams escapes. However, what I want to focus on is how each increasing dimension gives an opportunity for the players to find each other again. Each step in the Nether counts for 8 in the Otherworld, so even if Dreams built a far away Nether portal on the surface he would still be closer to the hunters than ever before. This stage also requires finding a Nether Fortress so the players are forced to reconvene. In the End the forced grouping is more obvious as there is only one End platform so the action is forced upon the players.

This is mainly why I say the 3 act structure lines up with the Overworld, Nether and End dimensions so neatly. Its not just me observing that there are 3 dimensions in Minecraft but that each new dimension forces a new confrontation to happen even after Dreams has successful escaped and the tension is lessened. 

However, this observation does only go so far. I think the biggest flaw of the video is that End lasted too long. This makes sense when you lay the 3 act structure over top of it: you rarely want your conclusion to be drawn out. Usually the final confrontation is more elaborate than the previous ones, but not 2 times as long. 

Ambiguous Ending

So you’ve dragged your audience to hell and back and they loved every second of it, how do you ensure you piece of media becomes a discussion point after that’s all done? Well one way is to have an Ambiguous Ending. We see this a lot in fiction, but most famously at the end of Inception where we are unsure whether we are still in the dream world or not. This Minecraft Hunters video sparks similar online debate by posing the question “does it count if I killed the dragon posthumously?” Personally, these types of ending are my favorites! I think it takes a lot of balls for a piece of media to ask a question of the audience at the end instead of wrapping everything up neatly but of course not every story should have one. 

Conclusion 

All pieces of media are telling stories regardless of whether they’re Hollywood blockbusters, indie novels or Minecraft Lets Play videos. Sometimes even in unscripted content, a story can emerge especially if a content creator is looking to tell a good story. And lets not forget the role video editing has in putting together a story. Entire narrative devices such as Chekhov's Gun owe their entire existence to the editor. The decisions of what to linger on and for how long drove the pacing of the story from beginning to end. Finally, if you want to hear more on how editing can create a story from unscripted content, I highly recommend checking out the video below. Remember, stories are everywhere!

[jenniferladybug]

Essay Wars - it’s a doozy

Last night my friend got in a texting debate about the story structure and character developments of Star Wars (a majority of it Kylo Ren). Well, what started off as my vigorous texting writing turned into full-blown essay responses. 

Alright, let’s get into how this actually happened.

First, I was so excited about The Rise of Skywalker Final Trailer and I began to sing praises for Kylo Ren/Bendemption. My friend did not like that...so I whipped out the big guns. 

I began to send scattered texts about certain things, mostly pertaining to:

Kylo Ren was turned to the dark side before he was even born via Bloodline, where Leia describes a dark presence over her womb.

Someone must be impersonating Darth Vader when Kylo goes to the Vader mask for advice.

Leia and Han were emotionally neglectful/did not know how to raise their son in the right way, mixed with brainwashing lead to Kylo Ren.

The Jedi are not good for the galaxy (yes, yes I know, but see my explanation down below...if you last that long)

Kylo wants to let the past die and start fresh with a new ‘order’, leave behind the Sith, Jedi, First order etc.

I also rambled on about a few other things in separate texts, but that is the gist of it.

So, in response to my scattered texts I received this from my friend Sammy, and oh boy was I ready:

So, let’s start with the story of Ben. The dark side since before he was even born thing is interesting and the fact that he’s been influenced his entire life by it is something they should have made much more clear in the films. That’s actually one of the problems I have with this new expanded universe- it just seems like damage control for the movies. The Previous EU EXPANDED everything, giving backstory to the characters we know and understand, in addition to secondary characters. Hell, they even gave us new characters as well but they never negated or changed the meaning of the films which is the bread and butter of the franchise, so if this super important info is coming from the book I think that’s just silly. You really shouldn’t have to read the novel iteration to understand what the movie did a bad job of interpreting. But I digress, that is some crucial info…

The Vader mask scene and the theory that it’s someone else like Snoke who has been pretending to be Vader is interesting, and I buy that, but like…Kylo didn’t know Vader was redeemed? Did Luke, Leia, Han, Chewy, Lando, Akbar, Wedge, or like literally anybody else form the Rebellion forget to tell him that? Big yikes.

IMO, feeling “misunderstood and neglected by his parents” isn’t a valid excuse for him to kill his own dad and being ok with his mom getting bombed to hell. Idk, you can ask why it’s ok for us to forgive Vader through his redemption arc but I think comparing his experiences to Kylo’s is like comparing apples to oranges. Vader was a BAD guy, but he ended up doing the ultimate GOOD thing in the end, and then the prequels fleshed out how he became bad intangible way, which to be fair, Kylo doesn’t have. But still, this is why most fans don’t take him seriously.

About the Jedi not being good- I challenge your credentials. “For a thousand generations the Jedi knights have been the guardians of peace and justice for the Old Republic”, then they were hunted down and everything turned to shit. And both in this canon and the previous one, it’s wildly considered that the few thousand years preceded the events of the movies things were super peaceful all things considered when the Jedi were in charge…and the Sith traditionally only operates in agents of 2. So how come everything was so peaceful for a thousand generations when there were a million Jedi and 2 Sith…ying yang in this case is bollocks.

And if Kylo really wants to “Start fresh”, why’d he start by becoming Supreme Leader of like the Star Wars version of ISIS? This is something we’ll need to find out in this next movie. I agree, his motive is to dismantle the Jedi and Sith way and create something else entirely, but the second Rey says “nah” he goes back to how he was. It’s not looking good.

The George Lucas rhyme thing lets not forget he’s talking about Episode 1 which was arguably one of the worst Star Wars movies made and he ended it with “hopefully it’ll work” and then grimaces…IDK bud lmao. And I doubt back in 1977 he knew there was going to be an episode 9 because he didn’t even know what he just made was Episode 4! It definitely was never a 9 episode arc from the get-go. Now, I know for certain after the prequels he had another trilogy in mind, and when he sold the rights to Disney he did hand them his drafts and notes, but even Bob Iger, CEO of Disney, admitted in his new book, they didn’t follow those drafts AT ALL. LIKE NOTHING. And he said that George felt betrayed. This idea of a new trilogy is something that was created in 2012, but I suspect they have been making this up as they went. After this last movie, Disney scrambled to get JJ Abrams back and figure out how they were going to get everything back on track. Daisy Ridley herself said JJ wrote a story for each of the 3 new movies, but Rian ended up created his own completely. I think that alone shows that production for these movies has been inconsistent, I don’t buy this was all part of some 9 series plan with a definitive beginning, middle, and end from the get-go.

Not sure what Rey’s lineage is, we’ll find out for sure in this next movie. I read one theory that Palpatine created her sorta through the force like many people think he did with Anakin.

So that was what I was up against.

Let’s take a brief moment to appreciate this:

Okay now that that is done...great. 

My turn! 

Now, I wrote my response (copied below) at top speed in about an hour, so maybe some of the things I say start sounding rushed or not as fleshed out as they should be. But I cracked my knuckles and gave it a go:

I am the first one to advocate for a film to have the ability to ‘stand-alone’ in any particular universe, whether it be Marvel, DC, Hunger Games, and Star Wars. By introducing a backstory for Leia’s pregnancy and hers and Han’s marriage in ‘Bloodline’, LucasFilm is doing just that: giving a backstory. In both The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi, there is proof that Snoke is the one pulling the strings when it comes to young solo. In the first film, Leia is quoted saying to Han, “There’s still light in him I know it! No. It was Snoke. He seduced our son to the dark side”, and in the second film Luke is quoted as saying, “Snoke had already turned his heart”. It is made apparent that ‘Kylo Ren’ is the production of Snoke, and Ren suffers abuse both mental and physical from his master. Though this changes when Kylo finally becomes free of the shackles Snoke once had on him when Ren slices him in half. The look of shock and release on Ren’s face when he realizes what he’s done says it all. Who are we to judge someone who is freshly out of the control of their captor? By just watching the films it is clear that Kylo Ren is not fully in control of his actions and he is being manipulated consistently as shown by the quotes above. When having that manipulation in conjunction with the neglect of a parental figure, then you get the full-blown reality that is Kylo Ren.

Feeling “misunderstood and neglected by his parents” is a valid excuse for turning to the Darkside in the world of a fictional fairy tale. Keep in mind we are not in a reality where this is okay, yet the world in which Star Wars exists allows such things to be redeemable and explainable. Take for example when Padme knew about Anakin killing younglings; she wanted him to still come home because she ‘loved’ him. If he had turned back to the light at that moment she would have most likely accepted him back. It is a danger of the force. They are not dealing with everyday normal emotions; the force, as well as the genre of the franchise, creates a heightened sense of urgency which is apparent throughout the forty-plus years Star Wars has been around (hell, as long as any fairy tale has been around). When you point out that Vader did the ultimate good thing in the end, do you mean to save his son and push Palpatine down a duct? If so, then this would be his redemption which occurred in the last of the original trilogies. If you are to treat Kylo with the same rules as Vader, then we must give him a chance to ‘do the right thing’, something which the filmmakers have been steadily building his character-arc for. Vader did numbers ‘wrong’ things, some of them much worse than Kylo has done. But yet the audience still chose to respect him, even before the prequels which fleshed out the story of Anakin Skywalker.

Now, you may be correct in that Ben Solo knew of Vader’s redemption, and I misspoke, to which I am sorry. He, in fact, learned of his heritage when he was training with Luke at his academy when he received a letter from his mother. The contents of the letter are unknown, though it is assumed she told him of his heritage when he was in his late teens. This was only because one of her rivals she was campaigning against in the senate threatened to leak the knowledge to the public that Leia was the daughter of the infamous Darth Vader. Ben had no idea before-hand though, so once again we assume that this had some type of impact. Imagine finding out your grandfather was Hitler. Would that be fun? But, since we addressed the fact that external material should not need to be consumed in order for a film to make sense, then we should disregard any idea as to how Ben Solo came to learn of his heritage. It is not mentioned in the films, but it is a widely held belief by many in the fandom that if Kylo Ren knew of his grandfathers’ redemption then he merely took this as a lapse in judgment in his late years (especially since it is hinted to in the films that Ren is speaking to someone via the Vader mask). Perhaps said mask has been telling Ren lies in lieu of the true story of the redemption. But that is speculation. What is not speculation is the line Ren utters in The Force Awakens, “Forgive me. I feel it again... The pull to the light... Supreme Leader senses it. Show me again... The power of the darkness... And I'll let nothing stand in our way... Show me... Grandfather... and I will finish... what you started.” What we can tell from the film is that Ren is in a constant struggle to stay within the dark, and through his words, it is expressed how this warrants forgiveness. The second half of the statement is even more worrying in the fact that Ren says ‘show me again’, referencing a previous time this ‘Vader’ has shown him what the darkness entails. Will we find out in episode nine if there was an imposter (Palpatine?) feeding more lies and brainwashing to Kylo Ren? That means not only was he getting terrible treatment from Snoke, but from his ‘grandfather’ as well. Perhaps this is why in the final trailer for episode nine we see Rey and Ren destroying said helmet. Until the film comes out, this will still be a mystery.

In coming to why I believe the Jedi are bad, I side with Luke Skywalker on this one. As he says in The Last Jedi, “ At the height of their powers, they allowed Darth Sidious to rise, create the Empire, and wipe them out. It was a Jedi Master who was responsible for the training and creation of Darth Vader.” To that, Rey points out that it was also a Jedi who saved him. Which is true! Yet, the rules surrounding the Jedi order are such that allowed for Anakin to search elsewhere for support. True, he was very conflicted, but the Jedi are so extreme that they do not welcome outside opinions or thinking. You are either all light or you’re bad. There is no intermediary. That is why the answer is grey Jedi. I know those exist, and what needs to happen is a yin and yang between the light and the dark. Working together fosters acceptance and love within the galaxy. Even the symbol in the pool of the Jedi Temple in which Luke tucked himself away had a figure in a yin and yang pattern. “Powerful light and powerful dark...a balance”. Yet, any dark whatsoever that the Jedi see they stamp out.

When Anakin says, “If you’re not with me, then you’re against me”, Obi-wan responds with, “Only sith think in absolutes!”. Well, can you see the issue there? Obi-wan is also thinking in absolute. Using the word only further segmented and cast aside Anakin, by labeling him a lost cause. Such a similar thing happened with Kylo Ren and the incident with Luke at the Jedi Academy. The momentary lapse which Luke expressed to Rey was the tipping point. In Ren’s eyes, even his Master saw him beyond saving. And since everyone around him insists on thinking in absolute, then he must be bad according to them, right?

Slowly, Ren is beginning to realize there is another way, something not presently defined within the Star Wars universe. It is not Sith, it is not Jedi, it is not the First Order: it is the ‘new order’ which he proposes to Rey. Yet, he is not ready for redemption yet. The entire point of the scene was for Rey to realize that Kylo Ren cannot be saved by anyone but himself. This is a very powerful message and I am quite looking forward to seeing how his self-realization occurs in Episode Nine. Now, keep in mind that he had banked everything on Rey saying yes, and in his mind, she is “Still. Holding. ON!”, which she is, and he is right that it is holding her back. How can you expect someone from a family of yelling, angry people to get it right the first time? In fact, Adam Driver had to ask Rian Johnson if Kylo Ren had ever kissed a girl before. Kylo is not experienced in this ‘love’ world. He did not receive much love language from his absentee parents, so the only relationship he’s known for most of his teen and adult life is that of Snoke and General Hux. At that moment in which he wakes up to realize she is gone is one of abandonment and rejection. He thought he had found his match, the answer to his loneliness, and she snapped his lightsaber in two. He is basically throwing a grownup temper-tantrum, which is blatantly apparent in the standoff with Luke. When Kylo threatens everything, even ‘destroying’ Rey, Luke claims that everything Kylo says is “a lie”. It is clear in the last few moments of the film when Kylo is defeated and on his knees holding his father’s die that the audience begins to realize his anger was all a facade. In that shot, he is merely a lost and lonely boy realising the path he has chosen is wrong. The final force-bond between Kylo and Rey exhibits every one of those notions. There is no anger in his face, not very ‘destroy-ee’ of him, and he looks up with her with an almost longing. But when she sternly shuts the door on him, once again he is left alone, the die slowly fading from his gloved hand.

If that doesn’t sound like poetry then I don’t know what is! George Lucas was quoted saying in the behind the scenes of the prequels, “You see the echo of where it all is gonna go. It’s like poetry, sort of. They rhyme.” Similar themes and sequences occur within the franchise, and they have kept that alive at Disney Lucas Films, especially in regards to the parallels drawn between Anakin/Padme and Kylo/Rey. They even designed their respective costumes in a similar fashion. Kylo has his mother and father’s anger and stubbornness. They had a rough idea of where it was all going to go. And in regards to JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson, JJ Abrams was an executive producer on Episode 8 and had a say in the general outline of the plot. JJ had set up the relationship between Kylo and Rey in The Force Awakens, and Rian continued along that path. He followed the skeleton needed to get the plot from 7-9. But think about it, Disney would not allow Rian to just veer off the path completely. Yes he had some creative license but within parameters. Sometimes I don’t think people understand the workings of a large corporation with creative decisions. On a project like Star Wars there is always input from the higher-ups. In addition, JJ Abrams auditioned potential Kylo Ren actors with the script from Pride and Prejudice (Mr. Darcy of course). This is made clear in the writing decisions and parallels which have been made for that particular character.

Lastly, would you really want George Lucas at the helm of this new trilogy? People thought the prequels were terrible and Lucas went back and digitally altered the originals against the will of fans. He is not technically the best when it comes to scriptwriting (Exhibit A: “I hate sand, it gets everywhere!”) Also, Mark Hamill was interviewed in the early ’00s and said, "You know, when I first did this, it was four trilogies. 12 movies! And out on the desert, any time between setups...lots of free time. And George was talking about this whole thing. I said, 'Why are you starting with IV, V and VI? It's crazy.' [Imitating Lucas grumble,] 'It's the most commercial section of the movie.'” Yes, the first film was a stand-alone, since they had no idea they would receive any further funding. But then the immense success allowed for Lucas to develop the franchise further.

What I think people tend to forget is that Star Wars is a fairy tale, and it is not supposed to be about ‘a mass murder’ who is going to jail. It is supposed to be about redemption at its very heart. George Lucus had expressed that he intended Star Wars as a series for “twelve-year-olds”. This explains things like Jar Jar Binks and other bizarre choices he has made as a creator. Though this explains a lot of why most of the people who hate the franchise now are angry adults online who live in an overly politically correct world judging a fictional character who is in the middle of a character arc. As JJ Abrams had said in the director's commentary of The Force Awakens, “We looked at it like […] a fairy tale. What are the elements that you’re going to see that makes it this genre, this specific genre? […] You’re probably going to have a castle, and a prince and a princess, if you’re looking at a fairy tale. We wanted to give these fundamental, not cosmetic, but prerequisite elements.”

Okay, I’ve talked too much. I am going to end it there for now. Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.

Haha hope that was entertaining and that sparked some thinking and inspiration. I know I let my keyboard run away from me and please excuse the odd typo from time to time. Let me know your thoughts.

I mean just look at that beautiful man.

Love you all!

[blueeyeswhitegarden]

Arc V Anniversary Day 20

Day 20. Favorite antagonists

Zarc is still my favorite antagonist in Arc V. I liked his backstory when Leo first revealed it. I thought that it was an interesting concept to have what was basically an Entertainment Duelist turned evil to be the big villain of the series. It offered an interesting parallel to Yuya's own journey and it also made me think of it as a commentary on using violence for the shake of it in entertainment. Despite this, I initially thought that Zarc was going to be just another typical overpowered final Yu-Gi-Oh! villain. Overpowered villains aren't necessarily bad. It is an easy way to increase the tension. Plus, with all of the buildup they had for Zarc throughout the series, they needed to establish just how big of a threat he was by defeating all of the remaining characters.

However, my opinion instantly changed the moment Crow asked Zarc if he was that afraid of losing. That put Zarc's motivation, action and deck in a whole new light for me. It provided an in-universe justification for Zarc's overpowered cards and tied into his backstory. Zarc wanted to keep winning until there was no one left. That was his main reason for merging with his dragons for the first time around. After being defeated by Ray and split apart, of course he'd be afraid of losing again. Even his deck was more defensive than expected. His monsters were clearly powerful too, but he always had effects and combos that prevented destruction and drastically limit the amount of damage he would take. It also helped that Zarc was slowly but surely becoming more emotional with each match, so seeing his anger upon Crow making this comment was pretty fitting. Crow saw through Zarc's anger and power and realized it was a cover for his own fear of losing.

I especially love that Zarc wasn't just an evil version of Yuya. He was more like a dark mirror to what Yuya could have, and almost did, become. I always thought it was rather telling that all of the remaining Lancers were set on saving Yuya from Zarc, but there wasn't any mention of people in the original world trying to save Zarc. Granted, we learned about Zarc's downfall from Leo who thought that Zarc was always a monster, so he might not have been aware of anyone trying to save him, but it would make much more sense if no one tried to do so. If Zarc had any friends besides his dragons in the original world, then I don't think he would have fallen so hard in the first place, He would have been able to find some guidance or reassurance from his friends instead of lashing out at the world. But Yuya did have a lot of friends. He was able to connect with a lot of different people throughout the four dimensions and as a result, they wanted to save Yuya. It made the battle against Zarc more emotional because they weren't focused on just saving the world, but there was a much stronger emphasis on reaching out to Yuya because they all cared about him.

Zarc is what Yuya could have become without the emotional support of his family and friends to help guide and reassure him. Zarc was too focused on appealing to the audience's demands for violent duels that he threw away his true dream and his real self as a result. Zarc didn't have the courage to keep dueling in his own way because he gave into the demand of other people around him. His anger combined with the anger he felt from his dragons led to Zarc's downfall and the destruction of the original world. Because Yuya had his parents to lay the foundation for his ideals and his friends to provide emotional support, Yuya had a much stronger grip on his ideals. He struggled throughout the series to understand what kind of dueling he wanted to do and questioned if he was capable enough to reach out to people with his dueling, but he didn't abandon those ideals in spite of all of the hardships he dealt with throughout the series. Yuya's reaction to defeating Duel Chaser 227 perfectly shows the difference between him and Zarc. Yuya knew right away that he didn't want to duel like this and was upset even with the crowd cheering for him.. Zarc, on the other hand, threw away his ideals because he was too consumed by the audience cheering him on.

I also really liked how they handled Zarc's redemption. Zarc's true dream was to make everyone, even his monsters, smile with his dueling and it was so fitting. Yuya is the embodiment of Zarc's pure desire to make people smile, so the idea that Zarc was at one point a good person made perfect sense. Yuya and Reira crying upon remembering Zarc's true dream was pretty emotional and it made Zarc more sympathetic than I thought he could be. Even Zarc's evil heart was sad upon realizing just how far away he was from his dream. I think it also helps that Zarc doesn't get a proper second chance. He doesn't magically get his own body like I was expecting when the last arc first started. Zarc is able to learn what he couldn't before as Yuya, but that doesn't instantly undo all of the damage he originally caused or give him a completely fresh start at life. Yuya is both himself and Zarc at the same time, so it’s not quite like giving Zarc a complete do over. It made me appreciate Zarc's redemption more by not underplaying that he still effectively destroyed the original world. Zarc is just such a terrific and interesting villain. He's easily my favorite Arc V villain, as well as my favorite villain in the franchise.

I also think that Leo is a really interesting villain. For most of Arc V, I just wrote him off as a power hungry villain. I'm not sure why I was so set on that image for Leo, but I didn't really think much of him. He was an effective type of villain who was hiding in the shadows. Even with minimal appearances prior to the Fusion arc, Leo was still the leader of Academia, as well as being Reiji's father, so he still had a strong presence within the series. Leo's backstory really changed my opinion on his character. After years of waiting, his motivation was far more personal than I could have expected. Instead of being a power hungry dictator, Leo was ultimately a father grieving for his lost child. Learning about the original world also explained why Leo had no problem with turning children into soldiers or destroying an entire dimension. He didn't think any of these dimensions or people were real, so hurting them wouldn't really matter, especially when he wanted to bring back the original world as well. It made Leo into a more complex and arguably sympathetic villain than I thought he would be.

However, I really appreciate that the show didn't downplay how terrible his actions were either. While wanting to get Ray back was an understandable desire, he still hurt countless people in order to do so. Reiji called Leo out multiple times on causing so much destruction and being a bigger threat to the four dimensions than Zarc was. It was also Leo's actions that allowed for the Dragon Boys to meet and eventually merge back into Zarc after all. If Leo didn’t start the dimensional war to revive Ray, Zarc wouldn't have reformed, or at the very least I don't think it would have happened as quickly as it did. His motivation was entirely selfish too. Instead of trying to honor Ray's sacrifice and continue to live with his new family, Leo wanted to bring Ray back to satisfy his guilt and grief. Leo was so narrowly focused on reviving Ray that no one else mattered to him. Not Reiji, Himika or anyone else in the four dimensions because they didn’t matter to him as much as Ray did.

Despite Reiji pointing out how much damage he was causing, I don't think Leo fully realized this until Zarc nearly destroyed all four dimensions. Seeing that his actions almost caused such destruction again made Leo reflect more on his behavior and actions. He realized that he did hurt countless people, that the Bracelet girls did have their own lives before he kidnapped them and that he didn't deserve forgiveness. As much as I would have loved Ray to yell at Leo for everything he did upon her revival, I'm glad that went with this route instead. I think having any kind of interaction with Ray, even a negative one, would have still been seen as a reward for Leo's terrible actions. He still would have gotten a reunion with his daughter and potentially been able to deal with his grief a bit more easily because of having one more moment with her. Instead, Leo doesn't really get anything after everything he did. Plus, I think it makes his realization much more meaningful knowing that he came to it through his own self-reflection. Even though Leo is with everyone at the end of the series, I don't think he's forgiven or redeemed. Neither the series or the characters gave me the impression that everyone was okay with Leo. He realized he did a lot of terrible and unforgivable things and did what he could to help out during the last arc, but that isn't the same thing as being forgiven or redeemed. I don't think Leo would want to live with his family again, but I think he was ready to start dealing with his grief for Ray in a healthier manner after coming to that realization. Leo was just such a surprising villain for me. I already thought he was interesting after watching Arc V the first time, but I just grew to appreciate how complex and interesting his motivation made him upon rewatching the series. He just stands out a lot more than I thought he would when he was first introduced and he's definitely one of the more interesting villains in the franchise for me.

[brothermouzongaming]

My Splinter Cell concept

It was recently reported that Facebook is looking to bring Assassin’s Creed and Splinter Cell into the fold of their Oculus VR titles. 

So you’re going to tell me, that the only iterations of Sam Fisher we’ve had for the past six years are gonna be a more than likely shitty mobile game, a couple missions in GR Wildlands, an easter egg in Far Cry New Dawn and now this bullshit. How in the fuck have the higher-ups at Ubisoft allowed that? One of their most beloved protagonist from arguably one of their most cherished IP (AC is a close second with Far Cry in third imo) hasn’t seen a full game in far far too long. In the drought, we’ve had six Assassin’s Creed games. Does anyone else find that a little excessive? I think they could really do something special. 

Potential Story

An older Sam like we saw in Wildlands with an almost Old Man Logan kind of delivery could really work. I'm referencing the parallel of a very dangerous man potentially approaching the end of his rope. It could literally be a send-off with Sam dying of something or finally deciding to get that midwestern ranch he’s always wanted. This is, unfortunately, going to be the weakest of the sections because as far as storytelling goes I blow hot wet ass at it. My only problem with the whole dying thing is now that RDR2 has come out everyone is going to scream “ ArThUr mOrGAn” and that’s what happens when a game like that comes out. That doesn’t mean that is can’t be done though. The fact of the matter is, canonically the man is getting on in age and his tale has to come to an end somehow. Literally, almost anything is better than Sam Fisher walking off into the night without so much as a goodbye. 

Level Design and Gameplay

Open levels (levels, not open-world) that let you take advantage of the environment much like BreakPoint is currently parading. Hide in water, foliage, tree lines, crowds. Really let the player go about these missions how they please with some/most missions requiring stealth with occasional levels where the player can cut loose a little. It would be amazing if they could orchestrate some kind of broad daylight stealth mission where Sam needs to kill in the open while remaining inconspicuous. Throw a little of that schweet Wickian gun-fu with the Execution system and that sounds p compelling to me personally. Even at age 50 I can see Sam still dispensing a gratuitous amount of ass beatings. I’m not saying he has to be yolked to the gills but as a dude who deals in wet work, he could probably still swing for the fences. He isn’t exactly eating twinkies all day. All that unnecessarily said, his age could play a factor in expending energy at a higher rate or having to avoid extended conflict. To compensate, perhaps our boy has a few new tricks up his sleeve like a modular pistol that allows light modifications or maybe some heavier ones if they can fit the SC tone. I’m thinking Cornershot firearms if used sparingly could be a fun touch, suppressed combat shotguns for mildly crowded rooms. Hell, bring back the EMP crossbow thingy from Blacklist. Maybe even another shot at the heavier outdoor combat they tried in Blacklist and Conviction. Yes I know I’m taking from older games but that’s just it; when the history of this franchise is as deep as it is how can you not go back even if it is just to pull from the “greatest hits”. None of that flashback tutorial mid gameplay bullshit I just want the sneaky sneaky and the shooty bang dammit. Save that shit for the cutscenes. It was a decent idea I just think it was executed poorly.

Since Ubisoft loves RPG mechanics so much...

Okay Ubi ya like fisting those RPG mechanics real deep into games that don’t need it, but what if you actually put thought into it and made it work for the game instead of vice versa? What if instead of dumbass damage wicking enemies, a fucking headshot on bare fucking skin is a kill! Do not bloat the gunplay, push the intensity, push the realism. Instead, what if Sam had two or three disciplines or talent trees “First Blood” could be one focussing on “loud” combat which would force players to get in close to avoid alerting everyone in stealthier situations due to them being predominantly ready for firefights. “Chigurh” for a heavy silencer and stealth focus but lack of viability in the same open firefights (less range/ damage cause video games?). “Kingsman” would be the last one (maybe not the best movie parallel) but something more tech and gear focussed that may lead to a more hands-off approach to taking down enemies ie Cornershots, some mild form of smart pistol no Titanfall shit, you get where I’m coming from. You would lock into one of these styles but the reward would be class-specific weaponry and I’m talking the entire arsenal. Each tree would have their own slew of weapons(25-30) that fit the bill of each playstyle and encourage replayability. Maybe you can dabble in up to two but each tier of skills unlocks a number of weapons associated with said classes. Once you beat it one or two times you get the ability to have access to all the trees but having to pick and choose skills and having the entire library of weaponry at your fingertips. Whichever is better. Is the idea really rough around the edges? Sure, but god dammit at least I’m trying. Where you at Yves!!

[comingupforblair]

The MCU vs DCEU approach to world-building

Of all the complaints leveled against the DCEU, the difference in world building compared to the MCU is arguably the most prominent, to the point where it could even be said to be why other criticisms have been as intense and frequent as they have been to the point where it’s acceptable to accuse Warner Bros of being actively uncaring or disrespectful to their characters I’ve been vocal in my defense of the approach taken, not least because of how exaggerated it has been and how it ignores the numbers, and my feelings that the MCU approach, despite it’s undeniable merits, is not and shouldn’t be the only way to build a franchise nor should alternate ways be dismissed as has been the case with the DCEU.

My intention in this post is not to say advocate for one over the other but to look at both as objectively as I can and analyze the benefits and costs of each. I won’t pretend for a second that I’m nit biased as my feelings on this subject are very well documented and I don’t aim to change anyone’s minds but rather to add a sense of nuance to a discussion which has been frustratingly reduced to a narrative that there is a right way and wrong way to build a universe and Warner Bros have chosen the wrong one.

First, I’ll give a brief definition of each approach as I see it

The MCU approach - This method involves giving characters solo films prior to a team-up in the belief that it will create audience familiarity and emotional attachment so that they will care about them all in a team-up film.

The DCEU approach - This method is far more streamlined and is built around an idea that giving audiences a taste of characters first and then building upon that to build hype for a solo film will bring in audiences as well as not including backstory that is not seen as a high priority (not showing audiences a character backstory that they have already seen multiple times for example). Solo films are, in theory at least, more director driven and stand-alone.

Since the MCU method is the one most often praised as the correct one, I’ll start with that

Benefits

Audience attachment - While I don’t believe that solo films before a team-up are absolutely necessary for creating attachment, there’s no doubt that it is helpful and can make big team-up films easier as audiences will likely have at least one character they want to see in it.

World-building - The MCU approach can allow for audiences to be introduced to new parts of the universe and meet supporting characters more easily as well as add a sense of depth to the universe as a whole, making it feel more whole.

Easier film making - Introducing a lot of characters in one film can be very difficult and this approach means film makers won’t have to spend as much time on introductions and backstory and can cut right to the important stuff

Building on characters arcs - Through this method, film makers can build on what has been established already in solo films and develop the characters more efficiently in a team-up film as audiences will know their previous films

Freedom for solo directors - This approach can allow directors to set the first impression of a character, which can be critical, and put their own stamp on them. I still believe one of the best examples was the first Thor film where Kenneth Branagh was free to cast an actor of his choosing for the role and he picked Chris Hemsworth, who was perfect. Branagh was a lifelong fan of the character and it would have been unfair for him not to get a say in that element.

Downsides

The homework effect - This is starting to rear it’s head as an issue for the MCU as it can be very difficult for audience members to understand a major film if they haven’t followed all of the preceding ones so far and films outside of it can be seen as necessary and not in a good way. This also overlaps with frequent accusations of major studios, not just Disney, making things into trilogies that don’t need to be and dragging out stories for more profit.

Continuity lockout - As with the above, this is also starting to be an issue where it can be legitimately confusing to watch films if you don’t have a good knowledge of all the preceding ones. If your favorite Avenger is Captain America and you only want to see his films and skip others, you might find yourself wondering who Scarlet Witch and Vision are and why Steve and Tony are at each other’s throats. If you have no interest in any of those films but just want to watch Thor: Ragnarok because you’re a fan of Taika Waititi, you still have to at least know the plot of the last Thor film and who Doctor Strange is and other elements such as Thor’s scenes with Loki may lack weight if you haven’t seen The Avengers and first Thor film.

Investment - The aforementioned investment from the benefits is a double-edged sword. If you place your bets on a character people love, it works out brilliantly. But if you invest a lot of time and money in a failure, it can be tough to walk back from such a blunder.

This has happened in the MCU with the Inhumans. Disney spent years pushing for them in the comics and shows to take over for the X-Men. Agents of Shield was written to revolve heavily around them to create hype for a film that ended up becoming a TV series that failed spectacularly. This puts Disney in the awkward position of now trying to downplay the characters they spent years building up and Agents Of Shield is stuck being inextricably linked to a mythology no one cares about anymore.

Emphasis on luck - As noted above, this approach requires every piece to do it’s part and that requires a lot of luck. A single failed film can seriously damage future plans or overshadow them considerably. This occured with Marvel and Iron Fist which was intended to build hype for The Defenders which was seen as a crossover event similar to The Avengers. 

Unfortunately, Iron Fist was very poorly received by critics which ended up taking a lot of hype out of The Defenders, a fact not helped by Iron Fist being a fairly crucial building block which overlaps with the first downside. This ended with The Defenders, a show that once seemed like it would be one of Marvel’s defining accomplishments, getting a reception which mostly praised it in comparison to Iron Fist.

Aversion to Controversy- When you’re building such a universe, you want everything to work efficiently and that means not having any wild cards. This recently showed up with James Gunn who was dropped the instant any controversy arose about him because Disney didn’t want the bad press. The response ended up creating an even worse controversy which will have it’s own effects on the films.

Accusations of formula - The level of investment means that producers aren’t as willing to take chances. Directors seem and may feel like they are hired to set up the next big film rather than to make something unique and audiences may struggle to find a reason to see it.

Next up is the DCEU approach

Benefits

Peaking audience interest - The approach taken so far has allowed audiences to get an idea of what characters are like and build hype for a solo film from there. This worked amazingly well with Wonder Woman in BvS and there’s a strong possibility of it happening again with Aquaman and The Flash and Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn. On the Marvel side, it worked with Black Panther and Spider-man in Civil War, especially the latter who had to overcome the ‘’another Spider-man already?” reaction.

Less pressure on creators - Going with the above, actors in solo films don’t have as much pressure on them which is also handy if they’re relatively unknown as is increasingly the case. Creators can build upon what works and discard what doesn’t and they won’t worry as much if they appear first in a solo film. Tom Holland has said that playing Spider-man in Civil War first was extremely helpful for that exact reason. There’s also less pressure on directors to win people over to characters as that’s already happened.

Streamlined stories - I think a fact often missed out in this debate is that audiences don’t need to know or see everything. Things can only be hinted at or referenced in backstories and work just as effectively. This is especially true of characters we’ve seen a lot or whose stories we already know. I can’t give an estimation on how many people wanted another solo Batman film or rehash of his origin so soon but I reckon it was about zero. Further more, the success of the CW show means a lot of people know Flash’s backstory even if it’s another continuity. 

Other franchises such as Harry Potter and Lord of The Rings show that backstories don’t need to be seen right away or even at all. Marvel also showed this with Guardians of The Galaxy where their stories are only briefly shown or hinted in non-specific details and Spider-man’s backstory which, in the case of the latter, the average cinema goer already knows and will know exactly what Peter is talking about when he references tragedy in his past. 

Creative freedom - Warner Bros has always been a director driven studio and the DCEU has made an effort to live up to that. Whatever your feelings on them, Man Of Steel and Batman v Superman look and feel like Zack Snyder films and Aquaman looks set to follow with James Wan as hopefully will other films. This allows for films that feel unique and has the potential to attract other directors who worry about their vision being compromised for the sake of the franchise. Disney have learned this as well with films like Guardians of The Galaxy, Black Panther and Thor: Ragnarok which weren’t as burdened with world building.

Easier access - Having films that are more stand alone can potentially allow for audiences who are uninterested in superhero films coming on board as they don’t have to worry as much about knowing a lot prior. Warner Bros are taking this a step further with the non-DCEU Joker film which, if it works, has the potential to raise immense possibilities for the genre as a whole which it needs to avoid the stagnation that is always being threatened as upcoming.

Downsides

Less audience investment - I said before that audiences don’t need to see characters on their own before a solo film and I stick by that but it is still a helpful tool in doing so. Not using it can be risky if you don’t know how to pull it off. 

Burden of exposition - Having a lot of characters in one film and giving each some kind of backstory can be tough and, if done poorly, can drag the film down. Justice League had mixed success with doing so, not helped by the cut running time.

Less freedom for solo directors - The DCEU approach means that directors in charge of solo films are already losing control of a major element which is casting and initial audience introductions. Sometimes, even most of the time, this can work out for the best as Patty Jenkins admitted she wouldn’t have cast Gal Gadot as Diana but it’s safe to say that the first Thor film might not have worked as well if Kenneth Brannagh hadn’t been the one to choice Chris Hemsworth for the role. 

They also don’t set the tone for the audiences’ first impression which can be critical. This can leave follow-up creators having to clean up messes more than make films and shows as was the case with Iron Fist’s appearance on The Defenders.

Less overt leadership - This can be a positive or negative depending on how you see it. On the one hand, not having a leader who sets a strict tone for films and outlines an arc can creates feelings of disjointedness. On the other, it does allow for more independence among directors even if WB have undercut that possibility with BvS and Justice League.

So that’s the benefits and downsides of the two franchises as I can see it. If I’ m missing anything, let me know.

Like I said at the start, I’m not trying to win anyone over. If you still feel like the DCEU would benefit from an approach like the MCU, that’s fine. I just wanted to outline the shades of grey in this discourse that I haven’t seen others mention. 

[mysmashplaythroughs]

My choices for the final Smash character. (And other general stuff)

Well, figured I would post something. My OOT Zelda post is taking a bit and admittedly I’ve just been wrapped up in other things. I’ve made a lot of progress with playing through the games on my list, having only three games for stages left before I’ve done all the ones I had in place for them. The thing is, two of those are somewhat long games and the other is Minecraft which I’ve just been casually playing alongside everything else for a while now. The Direct yesterday had a lot of pleasant surprises, especially for me with games like Dr Mario 64 and of course Banjo finally being available on a Nintendo console again (would have loved to be able to buy it but I guess I’m glad it’s on there at all...) Not to mention Castlevania Collection (which will come in handy in not too long on my list.) 

With the reveal that the final Smash character will be shown in detail on the 5th of October, it’s given me a drive to try and finish the last three games on the stages portion of my list, Minecraft, Final Fantasy 7 (which I beat before but it was on Steam on PC and I lost my save data so I’ve been playing the Switch version again.) and finally Three Houses. Since I want to be in a position by the 5th where I can play through (granted depending on who it is) the game/s related to the final character, I’ve decided for my current playthrough of Three Houses to stop it at a specific point (without spoilers let’s just say the halfway point) along with playing the DLC for the first time. I will come back to it for the next section on my list which are the background and stage hazard characters, with the second half representing the various Three Houses characters who appear in Garreg Mach in the background. My rationale for this is that as I’m playing currently for the stage, it changes a lot in the second half of the game, so therefore that part of the game is better suited to representing the background characters. Call it a copout or whatever you want, I just want to avoid burnout with too many long games at once which has been hitting me a little admittedly. Oh also for context, my first playthrough of the games I went with Blue Lions, this time I’m playing through Black Eagles, I plan to play the other paths when I get to Three Houses for the Spirits part of my list.

So, onto the title of this post. I mentioned in an earlier post plans to talk about what I want/expect for Smash, but seeing as this is confirmed explicitly to be the final update, I thought it was now or never really when it comes down to it. I will admit with this list, I have definite biases, there’s characters I just don’t want (Fortnite Jonesy, Freddy Fazbear), characters I think are fine for base roster but would not bring enough new as the final DLC character to really be justified (and admittedly some I’m just absolutely sick of people saying ‘everyone wants’) such as Waluigi, Skull Kid or Shadow the Hedgehog, and finally, ones I keep seeing people ask for that I just don’t want and don’t feel would fit in Smash (Master Chief, Kratos, Doomguy (I only give him a bit of a pass because of how big DOOM’s legacy is)) I know ‘anything is possible’ and people are always going on about ‘fan rules’ but there are things I think it’s reasonable to think damage a characters chances. I believe if a character’s had a Mii costume added as DLC (eg. Dante), if their game has had a spirit event (Resident Evil) or most importantly to me, they’re an assist trophy, it means Sakurai’s team considered the possibility of adding them and decided not to, representing them in another way. Mii Cosumes I think it only applies to the specific characters who have had DLC Mii outfits as we’ve seen with Kazuya getting in after the Heihachi Mii Costume, but if it’s a character who was a Mii costume in the base roster it doesn’t necessarily count them out (Dixie Kong for example). For Spirit events, I don’t believe they’d have done an event if the series was planned to be added with a fighter, there’s not been any cases of that happening so far, such as there not being a Three Houses spirit event. We know spirits in the base game don’t matter like for Min Min and Pyra/Mythra, but I think with the DLC already planned they wouldn’t then do those series for a spirit event. Assist Trophies, I feel whilst people keep saying about there being an option to switch them off when they’re playable, there was probably lot of work put into making them work as Assist Trophies and it was done to represent them in the game, so I just personally don’t believe they’d suddenly go “Oh actually lets add Waluigi as DLC.” Of course, I do have a big bias with this, I like seeing new stuff with the DLC, or for them to bring something new other than just the fighter. Yes Waluigi could bring ‘Mario Sports spirits’ or something but that’s hardly something not in the game already, not to mention it’d be seeing a character who already has a model in the game, there’d be very little new about him imo.

Anyway, now I’ve probably pissed off half of the people who might read this, my personal wants for characters in Smash are first and foremost that they bring an interesting franchise to the series. Simon and Richter were really cool additions, but even bigger to me was how they brought all the Castlevania stuff, a franchise I love which got so much representation with the stage and even a Dracula boss. A second element for me personally, is I like when it’s a character who has a history with Nintendo. Obviously, this isn’t a dealbreaker and I know they’ve done plenty now who have very few links to Nintendo (although, still even now every character in has had at least one small appearance on a Nintendo console beforehand) but part of why Banjo was such a big deal to me was because of just how intertwined with Nintendo he and Rare had been in the past. This has played into my list admittedly a bit. So, with that all said, here’s my top 5 predictions based on what I think it plausible and I would like for Smash.

5. Crash Bandicoot: Simply put, this isn’t one I personally want, just of all the popular suggestions that I think are workable, he’s the one I’d be most ok with. I believe his legacy in gaming is enough that he ‘deserves’ a spot in Smash. I’ve never been particularly interested in his series, but it does seem like it’d be ripe for adding a lot to Smash with a stage, spirits and music etc. Overall, if I don’t get one I want, I guess Crash is the one I’d be most ok with. (to be clear even if it was Master Chief I’d be fine seeing what’s done with him, only Fortnite really would be one I’d not like in any way.)

4. Dixie Kong: I don’t think this is likely at all, it goes against everything I’ve said before almost, as unlike with Sephiroth or Pyra for example there’s not tons of things Dixie could bring with her not already in the game for the DK series. This choice is purely if I got to add my dream character and since the DK franchise is a really huge deal to me, Dixie would be it.

3. Professor Layton: If this was Smash 4, I’d be putting Layton at number 2, his games were a pretty big deal on the DS and he’s got a lot of history with Nintendo, not to mention seeing Sakurai think up a way to make him work would probably turn out really special. The main problem with him nowadays is simply his series has pretty much ended. There’s a spinoff (which I really need to finish someday) but the Layton series was really at its peak on DS and 3DS. In more realistic terms, I’d love to see a Mii Costume of Layton at least, paired with my number 1 choice would make it fit even better.

2. Dr. Eggman: So, growing up during the SEGA vs Nintendo era, honestly, I never ‘picked a side’. I enjoyed both consoles and I liked Sonic just as much as many Nintendo series back then. In my mind, Dr. Eggman is one of the most iconic videogame villains of all time, he has that same quality Bowser has where he can work as the overall antagonist or a side character and not ever really feel out of character. Apart from that though, fighting in his Egg Mobile there’s all sorts of cool things could be done with him, and being a fair bit bigger I think it’d be different to how Bowser Jr works meaning he wouldn’t be redundant. On top of that, Sonic is one of the series in Smash that arguably is somewhat lacking in content, not to the degree of FF7 of course, but there’s a lot that could still be added, with Eggman perhaps bringing various Badnik spirits with him and there being plenty of awesome music from the Sonic series that could be added. Overall, if they were to add a character who wasn’t from an all-new series as the finale, Eggman would be in my opinion the best choice.

1. Phoenix Wright: So, yes I am a huge fan of Ace Attorney, it’s a very important series to me so I’m absolutely biased in this. Whilst I understand why there’s plenty of reasons to doubt this happening, I think the chances are higher than people think. Firstly and probably least importantly, but something that I do personally consider is that the AA series has a long history with Nintendo, starting in Japan on GBA, then on DS, 3DS and now Switch, the series whilst not remaining exclusive has never skipped out on a Nintendo console. When it comes to how iconic the series is, honestly for visual novels, I think it’s the most famous overall. So many times when I see people who don’t really play visual novels talk about them they often say things like “so it’s like Phoenix Wright.” This doesn’t mean of course that these people have actually played the games, but they are easily the most recognisable examples of the genre in my mind. (Maybe Dangan Ronpa would also count, but I don’t hear that referenced as often) Add to that how often people recognise “OBJECTION!” as being a Phoenix Wright reference, even if they barely know the series and I’d say it’s pretty iconic. Next, probably most surprisingly to me, Capcom’s only new character in Smash Ultimate is Ken, an Echo Fighter. Capcom has a long history, a huge list of franchises (in some ways arguably rivalling Nintendo themselves with how many iconic franchises they’ve put out) and have definitely had a lot of involvement with Nintendo over the years (I mean, they’ve been involved in a few Zelda games such as Minish Cap). The thing is, almost all of their biggest franchises that weren’t already in Smash have now been represented in various forms, Resident Evil got a spirit event, Dante infamously got a Mii costume, as has Arthur from Ghouls and Ghosts. Of the most recognisable Capcom franchises not represented at all in Smash from Capcom, I’d say off the top of my head, the only two really remaining are Ace Attorney and Okami. Of those two, AA imo is the one that’s more widely known (not to mention has had a lot more entries etc).

One thing that both supports and goes against his inclusion is that he appeared in Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3 as a fighter. Going for him with that is that it’s been shown he could work in a fighting game before, but against it is therefore it wouldn’t be as surprising to see as it was in that case. I’d argue, due to the nature of Smash as a game, there’s a lot that could be done with Phoenix that couldn’t have been done in UMvC3 (btw, I really enjoyed playing that game). Probably one of the biggest things to me is the stage it could offer. In the Ace Attorney series, the majority of the game shockingly is set in the courtroom, Phoenix Wright being the Defence Attorney (in the original Trilogy, there’s other characters in later games) and there being various Prosecutors he’s faced over the years with the majority of the time the same bald bearded Judge presiding over every trial. The somewhat sedentary nature of the games, where the characters stand in the same spot 99% of the time and cycle through various reaction animations (desk slams, damaged shocked sprites and of course lots of pointing) would be fantastic as a stage. Given how many cameos and things we’ve seen in recent DLC stages, having the courtroom rotate through various prosecutors as well as maybe having Phoenix (when not being played as) appear behind the Defence bench would be something I’d love to see. I realise now I’m going into way more of a ‘moveset ideas’ type thing than I should so I’ll just leave it off with I feel Phoenix would be a really awesome if admittedly controversial choice (with those that wouldn’t have some sort of controversy if they get in becoming a smaller and smaller pool and mostly ones I find personally kinda boring.) and as a final plus would represent a game genre not represented yet overall with visual novels.

So yeah, that’s my personal hopes. I said before, there’s very few characters I’d outright be unhappy with if they got in. I’ve gotten sick of hearing certain choices but either way based on everything so far I trust whoever it is will be done well. I got my wish for Banjo, so anything else now is a bonus. Just as a blog that’s focused on Smash (although, I definitely want to stick to my references and origins of characters lane rather than the whole competitive etc scene...) I wanted to at least put my guesses out there before the final reveal. Looking forward to it.

[aion-rsa]

Best Movies Coming to Netflix in August 2021

https://ift.tt/3yg0gQx

As quickly as the summer movie season of 2021 seemed to come upon us, it’s already about to begin its long, languid slide through the dog days of August into fall. That’s not to say that theaters won’t still have plenty of interesting fare to encounter, with films like The Suicide Squad, Free Guy, Respect, Candyman and The Night House all on deck. Hopefully the other hideous sequel happening at the moment — Pandemic 2: The Delta Variant — won’t set any of these potential hits back.

In the spirit of keeping August entertaining, Netflix is rolling out a slew of new streaming additions as well, including an underrated Spielberg gem, fantastic teen comedies both old and new, a couple of stoner classics and perhaps the finest film from the canon of one of the modern era’s most revered directors. We’ve rounded up our recommendations below, and hope you stay cool and healthy whatever you’re watching!

Universal

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

Beethoven (1992)

August 1

Hollywood in the 1990s was a glorious and furry era when studio executives never met a family movie that couldn’t be improved with the addition of at least one animal character. Beethoven is one of the most successful examples of this winning formula. Directed by Brian Levant from a script co-written by John Hughes himself (alongside Mystic Pizza co-writer Amy Holden Jones), Beethoven is basically the story of how a husband and father, Charles Grodin’s George Newton, feels threatened by the attention his family gives their new dog, a St. Bernard named Beethoven.

George eventually works through some of his issues and accepts the charming Beethoven into the family, a process that comes to a head when Beethoven is dog-napped into an animal experiment scheme run by evil veterinarian Dr. Herman Varnick. (Honestly, the plot isn’t dissimilar to the story in cinematic masterpiece Paddington.) The deep supporting cast includes Bonnie Hunt, David Duchovny, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Oliver Platt, Stanley Tucci, and Everybody Loves Raymond‘s Patricia Heaton. The film’s sequel, Beethoven Second, will also be available on Netflix starting on August 1st.

Dreamworks

Catch Me If You Can (2002)

August 1

As one of Steven Spielberg’s most charming and laid-back efforts, Catch Me If You Can is a breezy and star-studded entertainment. The story is loosely based on the real grifts of conman Frank Abagnale Jr., who beginning as a teenager was able to pass himself off as a pilot, lawyer, doctor, and many other things. But really, this is a cat-and-mouse chase movie between a still baby-faced Leonardo DiCaprio as Abagnale and Tom Hanks as the FBI stiff who hunted him down. It’s all good stuff, with the movie enjoying a light touch and fresh take on Spielberg’s favorite subject matter: fathers and sons.

Warner Bros. Pictures

Deep Blue Sea (1999)

August 1

A shockingly entertaining B-movie about a bunch of genetically engineered super-sharks which break out and take over a testing facility, this is horror silliness at its best with great turns from Samuel L Jackson, Thomas Jane, Saffron Burrows and LL Cool J. Partially shot on sets built around the same water tanks used for Titanic, with animatronic and CGI sharks, Deep Blue Sea is action-packed, schlocky fun from director Renny Harlin (Cliffhanger).  

STX Entertainment

The Edge of Seventeen (2016)

August 1

A bit like Lady Bird before there was a Lady Bird, Kelly Fremon Craig’s Edge of Seventeen is an underrated gem that stars a teenage Hailee Steinfeld as a young woman stumbling through an especially awkward time in her life. Steinfeld is terrific in her best performance since True Grit, playing Nadine as a bundle of insecurities, yet still nobody’s victim. Also of special value is Craig’s hilarious and authentic script, which captures the specificity of growing up in the social media age while being near-universal in its accessibility and empathy for a wide ensemble which also includes Kyra Sedgwick, Haley Lu Richardson, and Woody Harrelson.

Paramount

Ferris Bueller’s Day Off (1986)

August 1

Just in time for the dog days of summer comes one of the best summer movies ever. Relying on charm and sharp characterization instead of special effects for its spectacle, John Hughes’ Ferris Bueller’s Day Off is a truly great teen comedy that follows the easygoing bon vivant (or secret sociopath?) of a high school’s senior class when he decides to take the day off in the best fashion: by faking he’s sick and then guilting his BFF into giving him the keys to his dad’s Ferrari.

Read more

TV

Should Netflix’s Pokémon Live-Action Series Explore the Franchise’s Dark Side?

By Matthew Byrd

TV

Never Have I Ever Season 2 Review: This Netflix Teen Comedy Deserves to Run and Run

By Louisa Mellor

It’s silly yet curiously honest stuff about the pressures of young adult life, at least in 1980s suburban America, and a beguiling showcase for an ensemble that includes Matthew Broderick in his coolest role, as well as Alan Ruck, Mia Sara, Jennifer Grey, and a seriously stoned Charlie Sheen. If you haven’t seen it yet, you’re due.

Warner Bros. Pictures

Inception (2010)

August 1 Still Christopher Nolan’s most complete and satisfying film to date (yes, even more so than The Dark Knight), Inception is a cerebral sci-fi set of stacking dolls combined with a rollicking James Bond adventure that all happens to be mostly situated inside one guy’s head. Leonardo DiCaprio leads a team of professional thieves who steal things from people’s minds — only this time they’re hired to implant an idea, even if they have to dive deep into the mark’s subconscious to do it.

Mind-bending imagery and several jaw-dropping action sequences are wrapped around a surprisingly emotional core, with only the usual unwieldy exposition there to remind you that there are some things Nolan may never get right.

Lionsgate

The Lincoln Lawyer (2011)

August 1 Based on a novel by crime writer Michael Connelly, this gripping, suspenseful 2011 drama arguably kicked off “the McConaissance,” a shift from rom-coms to more serious roles by Matthew McConaughey that launched a new, largely acclaimed phase of his career.

McConaughey is formidable as attorney Mickey Haller, a slick lawyer who works out of his Lincoln Town Car and undergoes a crisis of conscience as his new case starts to feel disturbingly like an old one. In addition to McConaughey stepping up his game, this Brad Furman-directed thriller is the kind of character-driven, literate melodrama we don’t see much on the big screen anymore — although we see plenty of them these days on, of course, Netflix.

Paramount Classics

The Machinist (2004)

August 1 Director Brad Anderson followed up his cult classic 2001 horror effort Session 9 with this surreal, Kafka-esque psychological thriller. Christian Bale plays Trevor Reznik, whose inability to sleep leads him to cause an accident at his industrial job that costs a co-worker (Michael Ironside) his arm. Already physically and mentally deteriorating, Reznik begins an even deeper descent as he tries to unravel what’s happening to him and why. Bale is intense and viscerally shocking as the emaciated Reznik, with his riveting performance anchoring an atmospheric, visually striking film that is sometimes an exercise in style over substance.

New Line Cinema

Magnolia (1999)

August 1

Boogie Nights pushed director Paul Thomas Anderson into the spotlight, but it was his massive, sprawling jigsaw puzzle Magnolia that made him into a superstar filmmaker. Following multiple narratives and numerous characters all finally brought together by a climactic storm of frogs, this is high art packed with standout moments.

Read more

Movies

Top Gun: Maverick Footage Shows Tom Cruise in Real Jet Behind the Scenes

By David Crow

Movies

Best Modern Horror Movies

By Don Kaye

Tom Cruise is electric as a toxic motivation speaker, Julianne Moore is brittle and tragic as a trophy wife who has grown to love her dying husband, while the burgeoning relationship between Melora Walters’ addict and John C. Reilly’s cop added sweetness and hope to a tale of messed up people and damaged families. Epic.

Sony PIctures

Pineapple Express (2008)

August 1 After its trailer introduced everyone to M.I.A.’s amazing “Paper Planes,” Pineapple Express’s work was already done. It didn’t even have to produce a satisfyingly funny movie on top of that. Thankfully the filmmaking team of Seth Rogen, Evan Goldberg, and David Gordon Green decided to give us one anyway, because Pineapple Express is the ideal of the little-seen-or-attempted stoner action comedy.

Rogen stars as process server and marijuana enthusiast Dale Denton, while James Franco portrays his annoying drug dealer Saul Silver. When the pair witness a murder, they are forced to flee hitmen, a pair of corrupt cops, and worst of all, Danny McBride. The Rogen/Goldberg comedy catalog has very few misses and this one is particularly excellent.

Universal Pictures

Seabiscuit (2003)

August 1

No one would ever accuse Gary Ross’ Seabiscuit of being subtle. With its voice-of-god narration by Ken Burns fave David McCoullough, which helpfully spells out the themes of the movie every few scenes, and its achingly sentimental score and dialogue, Seabiscuit is a Cinderella story which all but asserts its titular race horse ended the Great Depression. Yet Ross captures some of the simple American grandeur of Laura Hillenbrand’s non-fiction source material book, as well as the beauty of this true story where a horse that everyone counted out as worthless was nursed by three men into becoming one of the greatest racing animals of all-time.

It’s the type of feel-good yarn that won people over in the 1930s and which is still winning now. When coupled with a handful of strong performances, including from Jeff Bridges, Chris Cooper, Tobey Maguire, and a seriously underrated Elizabeth Banks, you have a crowd-pleaser that actually pleases.

Paramount Pictures

Team America: World Police (2004)

August 1 Roger Ebert’s one-star review of Trey Parker and Matt Stone’s Team America: World Police sums up the film’s nonsensical political stance nicely. “I wasn’t offended by the movie’s content so much as by its nihilism,” the great film critic wrote.

Rog was right to criticize Team America’s incomprehensible worldview. Nearly 20 years later, its seeming position that Alec Baldwin and Kim Jong-Il are equally bad hasn’t aged that well (despite Mr. Baldwin’s best efforts). But it’s hard to argue that the South Park creators’ nihilism doesn’t lead to some great comedy. The novelty of Thunderbirds-style puppets saving the world amid graphic sex acts and voluminous barfing never quite wears off.

The post Best Movies Coming to Netflix in August 2021 appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3BY7St3

[cappuccinocommie]

alright, i'll bite! why was homecoming almost marxist?

THANK YOU! OH MY GOD I HAVE BEEN BURSTING TO SAY THIS SHIT SINCE LIKE TWO DAYS AGO

WHY “SPIDERMAN: HOMECOMING” (2017) WAS ALMOST MARXIST: AN ANALYSIS

I’ll do only the non-spoiler shit above the cut because I don’t know if you’ve seen or not, and put the spoiler stuff under a read more. 

Let’s begin with the most obvious difference: the new “Spiderman: Homecoming” movie is NOT AN ORIGIN STORY. 

This in itself is incredibly important, because it means that the old politics of Spiderman can really no longer apply in this new narrative. In previous Spiderman movies, Peter Parker/Spiderman has been said to be analogous to America – a budding young country, finding itself wielding untold economic and military power, and unsure of how to use that power in the world. Likewise, Peter struggles with his powers, even wondering if it’s right to use them in the first place – but by the end of both series, he feels he is called by a sacred duty to be Spiderman. So the previous two franchises were essentially metaphors for American imperialism. You can find a much better explanation of why that is on THIS video; because I haven’t had my second cup of coffee yet. (my guess is that the creator of this video feels very differently than I do about America’s place in the world, but it’s a good analysis all the same.) But remember the motto: “With great power, comes great responsibility.”

Not only is that motto NEVER MENTIONED in the new Spiderman (you heard me right, they DON’T SAY the “great motto” line, ever), Peter has no qualms about his powers. He doesn’t struggle with “how to use them properly.” He KNOWS he’s Spiderman. He wants to help people. And that sets up his primary goal during the entire movie: to prove himself to Tony Stark. (I’ll get back to this.) But case in point; Peter can no longer be comfortably analogized to be representative of America; at least not in the way he previously was, as a world power trying to find how to best impose its influence. He’s something different now. 

This is where it gets spoilery. I’ll see you below the cut. 

Okay. So let’s talk about the opening scene.... which has literally NOTHING to do with Spiderman. 

THE OPENING SCENE

It starts “8 years ago,” or RIGHT AFTER the battle of New York in the first Avengers movie. We see a cleanup crew, a ragtag band of workers with a contract from the city to scavenge all the alien technology. 

But enter “DAMAGE CONTROL.” They are an organization designed to clean up the mess left behind by superhero battles, and they unceremoniously kick the workers from their jobs. But it gets better – Damage Control is headed up by, you guessed it, TONY STARK. Which makes THIS beautiful line possible: “So the people making the messes are the people profiting from cleaning it up.” Which, if you didn’t already know that Stark is bourgeoisie…. Stark is bourgeoisie. Though his days of selling weapons to armies might be over, his days of hurting workers are not. 

But instead of just capitulating to Damage Control, those scavengers KEEP some of the alien technology and are able to create incredible tools and very deadly weapons from it, as well as a flying suit that enables the leader of the group to be the Vulture.

This is an ENORMOUS departure from the previous two films. “Spiderman” (2002) opens with a voiceover from Tobey Maguire as Peter before introducing Peter himself, on a school bus. “The Amazing SpiderMan” (2012) opens with Peter’s backstory, of his parents disappearing when he was a young child. In Homecoming, Peter isn’t even mentioned or shown until, like, 5 minutes in. This may seem like a minor detail, but it’s incredibly important. The backstory that we get in Homecoming is not for the hero, but actually of the VILLAINS – Vulture and his crew. We get their backstory, and they are humanized and even justified in our eyes. Damage Control, headed by Tony Stark, took their jobs away. Why shouldn’t they have fought back to keep themselves and their families fed?

(Essential Disclaimer: Yes, using alien technology to build incredible powerful weapons and selling them is bad. But… we should also probably consider how this is a deliberate, DIRECT parallel to Tony Stark’s own origin story.)

PETER PARKER: WORKING CLASS HERO

So, THEN we get to see Peter. It’s essentially a recap of his time in the Civil War movie, in which he had a brief role fighting on Iron Man’s side against Captain America and the Winter Soldier. But after that battle, it shows Peter being quite unceremoniously dropped back at his house, and consequently ignored by Tony Stark.

That sets up Peter’s motivation. He WANTS to be Spiderman. He wants to fight alongside the Avengers. He wants to prove himself to Tony Stark so he can be Spiderman, the Avenger.

My interpretation of this is thus: the Tony Stark uses the Peter Parker. He needs SpiderMan be “on the ground,” to help and fight his wars. But Peter is ignored afterward; he’s given a high-tech suit and put back in his place. This, to me, is directly comparable to the bourgeoisie’s relationship to the working class. I also have a theory that the high-tech suit represents a “wage,” but that’s a bit extraneous. 

Peter’s motivation is also analogous to the ideal of the “American Dream.” Just as the proletariat believes it can achieve its wildest, wealthiest dreams if it just works “hard enough,” Peter believes he can join the Avengers if he just impresses Tony Stark. He believes he can “rise up in the ranks.” 

But this is shown to be damn near impossible. Peter is shown to… not actually be that great at fighting everyday crime. He liberates a stolen bicycle, but can’t find its owner. He gives an elderly woman directions (arguably his most successful effort in the entire movie). He tries to stop a car from being stolen, only to find out that the “thief” was in fact the owner of the car.

Then, when stopping an ATM robbery, Peter happens across super-powerful weapons made of alien technology – sold to the thieves by Vulture and his crew.

After a fight with those thieves goes awry, Peter tries to contact Tony Stark again, and is once again ignored.

After the next run-in with the weapons, Peter is actually told by Tony Stark – or rather his empty – to drop it, and to let other people handle the situation. Which, let’s talk about that. The suit that came to rescue Peter was empty, and Tony Stark was actually off in a foreign country at a party or something. This, to me, says a lot about the alienation of the working class. 

Then, we get to the “PETER FUCKS UP” stage. 

Vulture has a weapons deal on a ferry that Peter goes to in order to finally capture the criminals – it goes badly, and the boat is lasered in half and almost sinks, until Tony shows up and saves everybody. He’s angry at Peter and actually takes the suit away. He thinks Peter doesn’t deserve to be Spiderman. 

(Another important note: Tony’s alliance with the government, or really the bourgeoisie’s alliance with the state, is really fleshed out here. Not only does Damage Control do state work, but Tony, instead of dealing with the Vulture problem, called the FBI to let them deal with it. But also didn’t tell Peter that.) 

Peter goes back to normal life, and even gets a date to homecoming, a girl named Liz. On the night of homecoming, he goes to her house – only to discover that her father is the Vulture. 

Vulture recognizes him, too, and because of how much his daughter likes Peter, gives him a chance to let it go. But Peter being Peter, chases after Vulture as he and his crew go on one last job – to steal Tony Stark’s property when it’s being moved from Stark tower to another location. 

This results in a VERY interesting dynamic. Peter is bound to retrieve Tony’s property, because he needs to get back into Stark’s favor and because it’s the “right thing to do.” (Also, Tony owns a bunch of dangerous shit that would be bad in the Vulture’s hands.) But in the end, though Peter succeeds at saving Tony’s property, he saves Vulture’s life. There’s no hesitation. No second thoughts. Peter instinctively uses the only strength he has not only to warn Vulture about the explosion, but drag him out of burning debris. They collapse in the sand together. 

PETER’S REWARD

After all of that happens, Peter is on Tony’s good side again. He’s brought to the new Avengers headquarters, where he’s told he will get to be an Avenger, get a new, super hi-tech suit, and that there’s a bunch of reporters waiting behind a door to hear from Spiderman. Peter is suddenly offered everything he wants after his loyalty to Tony Stark, after saving his property. Peter has achieved the American Dream. 

But he turns it down. He goes back to being regular old Spiderman. He doesn’t join the Avengers. And though Tony bluffs it like it was a test, it’s revealed that he genuinely made that offer to Peter, and was extremely surprised that he turned it down. 

LOOSE ENDS

A big thing in movies is that a lot is shot, but a lot is also cut. So what ends up on the cutting room floor, and what ends up on screen, is very important. Not only do we get the entire opening scene being about Vulture and his crew’s backstory, Vulture also gets several solo scenes at their base. 

Tony Stark NEVER gets a solo scene where he’s not talking to Peter. This has a large effect on who we perceive to be closer to us as the audience; it has a great deal to do with who we feel CONNECTED to and empathize with. Tony Stark is not meant to be an empathetic character... but Vulture, who is arguably a victim of Tony Stark, is. 

Now... I say Homecoming is “almost Marxist,” because I don’t think it ever fully draws marxist conclusions. Does it have implications of class struggle and of working-class solidarity? I think absolutely. But it never comes to the obvious conclusion that it set up – that Tony Stark is actually still damaging, even as a “philanthropic” billionaire, and Spiderman is bound to fight the villains created by his mistakes. Vulture is a sympathetic villain, but he’s never made out to be MORE than that – as a product of the vicious society he lives in, wherein workers are crushed under capitalism and have to fight for survival. It’s even possible that both of these conclusions were actually shot, and ended up cut, though I doubt it. 

But Peter is DEFINITELY DIFFERENT from the old, imperialist Spiderman, and I hope that we get to see more of who the new Spiderman is politically and philosophically in the future Marvel canon. 

[philiprolz]

CHOOSE YOUR FRANCHISE By Philip Rolz  Nov 7, 2017 

I was lucky enough to go to a couple of Orlando Magic games back in the 90′s and 2000′s and fell in love. But living almost 2,000 miles away from the nearest NBA city made it hard for me to really root for a team, a city, a franchise. But like a drunken, low self esteem college girl with daddy issues I gave myself to the first one that wooed me... a Shaquille O’Neal and Penny Hardaway led expansion team in Florida. I’ve stuck with them ever since. 

But it got me thinking, how do you choose a team? Are some teams more likely to be a fan favorite than others? What’s their fan-ability? Before I make my case I gotta tell you what I took into consideration making this list: how cool or uncool the city is, how good-looking their uniforms are, GM decisions over the years, iconic players, fan base, the culture of the organization, overall success or lack there of, team history. OK, here’s my list:

Atlanta Hawks

You can’t NOT love a place people refer to as “The dirty south”, I mean it sounds fun and rappers made it cool to root for Atlanta based teams (specially the Hawks and Falcons).

Dominique Wilkins and Spud Webb were the first real iconic players that put the Hawks on the map with their amazing athletic abilities. The rivalry with Jordan and the Bulls was real (both in real games and in dunk contests at All-Star Weekends) and people noticed them. They were fun to watch. 

Ever since the “Dominique era” the franchise has been kind of a letdown though. Always underachieving and kinda disappearing in the clutch. 2014-2015 was a clear example of a roster that made a lot of noise but crapped their pants when it got real in the playoffs.  

Currently they’re probably one on the top teams looking to tank this season to get a franchise defining rookie in this apparent “loaded” draft, so the Hawks aren’t really a team you root for this year but they have been fun to watch largely in part of high flying young players like John Collins and Taurean Prince.

Fan-ability: B-

  Boston Celtics

The Celtics are one of the most successful franchises in sports. Their fan base is extremely loyal, somewhat violent and friggin’ loud. They might be responsible for starting the whole “superteams” trend some seem to hate, but when it comes down to it, it’s just good management and recruiting. Then there’s the legendary Celtic players from oldies Bill Russell and Larry Bird to not so oldies Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce. These guys are deified by the hardcore Boston fans and man have they come through with epic playoff performances and hard nosed triumphs.  Nowadays they seem to expect a LOT from the young roster GM Danny Ainge put together majestically and guess what? They are they fun to watch. Kyrie Irving has the most insane handles in the league and I haven’t seen a small guard finish as efficiently in the paint since Tony Parker’s best days. The Celtics are also very similar to the Spurs when it comes to drafting well which is a big thing for fans looking for franchises to root for when there’s youth and potential. Will Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown be the NBA’s next studs? Will Markelle Fultz be a complete bust? (therefore making the Celtics even smarter)  The Celtics are NBA Elite and that makes them either really loved or really hated.  Fan-ability: B+

Brooklyn Nets

Brooklyn, New York. Home of everything cool in the world, right? Wrong! The Brooklyn Nets seem to be a forced fed team (notice the cheesy SI cover above) completely divorced with the whole swagger of this New York borough. Nobody wants to be associated with failure, and the Nets have been failures in so many ways during the last years it’s embarrassing. They basically gave away all their draft picks, they over-hyped a Deron Williams that was arguably one of the biggest free agent busts of all time. Their iconic players? Dr J? Jason Kidd? Kerry Kittles (just kidding)? Kinda feels weird picking guys who did play for the Nets, just not the Brooklyn Nets. I feel bad for them though, playing in one of the biggest markets in the country and not being known for enticing big name free agents, not even with Jay-Z helping them out for a little while. I’m pretty certain HOVA wanted out before the stink rubbed off on him.  They haven’t drafted well, they’re not fun to watch, they’ve become synonymous with losing. The only good thing they have going for them is the fact that Brooklyn is a tourist destination and there’s a chance some tourist will buy a Nets ticket before a Knicks ticket.

Fan-ability: D+

Charlotte Hornets

Remember those big flashy Starter Jackets with the Charlotte Hornets logo plastered all over them? Those were the days! The Hornets used to be good and/or fun. An Alonzo Mourning team alongside Larry “Grandmama” Johnson, Muggsy Bogues and Steph Curry’s dad (who apparently could shoot very well, too) was a fun thing to watch.

Several years later it all went straight to hell with the Bobcats. Let’s face it, when you think of the Bobcats you think of a bunch of scrubs and Adam Morrison. Good God!

Now they’re back to being the Hornets, although, they’re still not that fun. They don’t have Zo they have Dwight Howard, one of the least likeable players out there. They don’t have LJ, they have Frank Kaminsky (crickets chirping). They don’t have Muggsy they have Kemba Walker... ok that’s better. And instead of Dell Curry they have a rookie who I’m really rooting for: Malik Monk.

They’re ok. They’re not super exciting but they have some star power. Hopefully this year the young guards can do some damage down the stretch and maybe be a sneaky team in the playoffs.

Fan-ability: B+

Chicago Bulls

You think Bulls, you think MJ, his Airness, the G.O.A.T.

For younger fans you think D.Rose being drafted by his hometown team and making them a force to be reckoned with in the East and dethroning the King with a 2010-2011 MVP award.

But it’s 2017 now. The face of the franchise is a blonde kid from Finland named Lauri Markkanen and the face of Nikola Mirotic was obliterated by fellow teammate Bobby Portis. Well maybe not obliterated, but I hear it was a heck of a knockout.

It really doesn’t matter how bad GM Gar Foreman and owner Jerry Reinsdorf have been, because what Michael Jordan did for the NBA he did for this NBA franchise as well. Fans crave for the second coming of Michael and until that day comes (I’m pretty sure it’ll never happen) the first thing you’ll think of when you see a red Bulls jersey is #23.

Fan-ability: A-

Cleveland Cavaliers

I’ve never been to Cleveland. I don’t think I’ll ever go there. Not really a bucket list destination.  But I have to admit, LeBron James made Cleveland relevant since the day he was drafted by his hometown team. He was the chosen one entering the league and did not disappoint. He carried a really weak team to an NBA Finals versus a really strong San Antonio Spurs team (and lost). Took his talents to South Beach making everybody in the league feel sorry for the Cavs. As soon as he ditched Miami to go back to “The Land” they were legit once more. LBJ is no MJ however. Some people seem to dislike his demeanor, question his clutch gene and doubt his leadership. He is a little whiny sometimes. Yet no one has denied that LeBron is still the best player on the planet and has been for the better part of his career. I mean it feel like its been 30 straight NBA Finals for him.  He’s great. He made Cleveland great. Even if he leaves this upcoming season, Cleveland should be forever grateful for everything King James has done. And because people enjoy experiencing greatness the Cavaliers are a fan favorite. (Me personally, not really a fan) Fan-ability: A

Dallas Mavericks

A lanky slow-ish blonde forward from Würzburg, Germany made the Dallas Mavericks NBA champions against, non other than, the chosen one (or as Skip Bayless likes to call him “the frozen one”). But aside from being lany, kinda slow and uh... blonde, Dirk Nowitzki is one of the top 20 greatest players of all time, one of my personal favorite players and proud owner of one of the sweetest fade away jumpers ever. 2010-2011 was the Mavericks championship season and man was it a well constructed team that no matter if you love or hate outspoken owner Mark Cuban, you gotta hand it to him. Combining veteran leaders like Jason Kidd and Jason Terry with defensive anchor Tyson Chandler and freaks of nature like Shawn Marion was the recipe for success under the brilliant mind of one of the most underrated coaches, Rick Carlisle. You felt glad they were champions. It wasn’t a “super team” but it was really really good and they were underdogs against a Miami team that promised not 1, not 2, not 3, not 4, etc. championships. After the ‘chip they remained relevant until maybe last season. Dirk is rapidly aging and this really seems like it’s gonna be his last season. To be honest I’ve stopped watching Mavericks games because this is not the Dirk I want to remember. I do watch a lot of highlights though, mostly because of rookie Dennis Smith, Jr. Holy cow! That kid looks like he was made with the same stuff Russell Westbrook was made from. DSJr is another rookie I’m really rooting for, specially because he’s in great hands with old man Dirk to guide him and Rick Carlisle to coach him and get the best out of him. It’s a winning franchise in a hip warm weather city, with a wild celebrity owner, an iconic international player and champion, with a lot of young talent. Nuff said. Fan-ability: A-

Denver Nuggets

I think the Nuggets’ greatest moment in franchise history was the improbable win against the #1 seeded Sonics in 1994. Big whoop. There were other highlights in franchise history like drafing Melo (who later demanded a trade outta there). They did have Allen Iverson on their team, but then they traded him to Detroit because he wasn’t the 76ers Allen Iverson of old.    And this is the part where I want to talk about Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf. He was a muslim player (duh!) and was unbelievably good. But he was a muslim. Many compare his game to Steph Curry’s. But he was a muslim. He had crazy handles, the highest basketball IQ and one sweet jumpshot. But he was a muslim, and he started the whole Colin Kaepernick thing where he protested during anthems. Oh boy. Can you imagine a guy named Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf protesting in front of thousands of proud americans back in the 90′s? Yeah, that was the end of that. It’s really sad to wonder how good he would’ve been. At least Ice Cube gave him a shot in the BIG3. Anyway, back to the Denver Nuggets franchise comprised of young exciting talent but not a clear cut superstar. Nikola Jokic is really entertaining but is enough to make the Nuggets relevant? Millsap just joined them, but let’s face it he’s a really good boring player. Garry Harris was supposed to have a breakout year and it’s still early but he’s been a little too quiet for my taste. Jamal Murray, Emmanuel Mudiay seem a long way from being relevant and Kenneth Faried hasn’t been traded after 1,864,227 times it’s been rumored. The biggest indicator the Nuggets are in trouble is the fact that their own fans don’t show up as they finished last in attendance last season. Yikes! Fan-ability: F

Detroit Pistons

Personally I can’t really talk about the Bad Boy Pistons from the 80′s because I didn’t really get into the NBA until a little later. But from what I’ve heard and read, I really dig it. An uber-defensive team that wasn’t scared of anything or anyone. Hard nosed defenders, clutch shooting, trash talking and an iconic coach kinda sound like... hey! The 2004 champion Pistons! The comparison just goes to show that a culture within a franchise can go a long way.  The 2004 Pistons were tough, smart and had the winning mentality that I’m sure legendary coach Larry Brown implemented in the locker room. Big Ben was scary big even though he wasn’t as tall as your traditional center. ‘Sheed was a bad man with a sick jumper and a f*ck you attitude. Rip and Chauncey were the smart and offensively skilled guard combo. Okur, Tayshaun and McDyess played their roles just right. To this day I can’t believe they beat Kobe, Shaq and another “superteam”.  The Pistons of 2017 however lack some of that old school attitude. It’s well coached (shout out to Stan Van G) but no very well managed (sorry Stan Van G). Drummond is a huge piece of human who can block shots, dunk over anyone and has kind of improved the free throw issues of the past. Reggie Jackson seems to be a conflictive dude lacking the leadership of a Chauncey Billups. Tobias Harris who’s good but would’ve been better in a different era. Today’s NBA doesn’t really work for a guy like him. It’s not a roster you can nip and tuck and turn into a legitimate force in the NBA, to me it feels like it’s either this group of guys to maybe get past the first round of the playoffs or blow it all up and tank away to get younger and better. Can we send Avery Bradley to the Celtics, please?  Overall, it’s a city with a lot of heart and a franchise with a lot of history but right now who knows what they are? Fan-ability: B-

Golden State Warriors

My first memory of the Golden State Warriors is Chris Mullin’s hair and short shorts. Tim Hardaway’s crossovers. Latrell Sprewell’s angry two handed dunks (also angry head coach chokings) and an underachieving Chris Webber. But that’s all in the past. Even the good stuff like the Baron Davis and Stephen Jackson Warriors that made a lot of noise in the 2006 playoffs. That’s all irrelevant now because things changed in the bay area. Mark Jackson started coaching a young group of really promising guys and started a style of play that later Steve Kerr, who replaced him as head coach, perfected and made history. I don’t need to talk about how good Steph Curry is and how he revolutionized the game or how good of a shooter/defender/heat check guy Klay is. Or how Draymond is the new villain and best defender in the NBA or how Durant made this team virtually invincible... because everybody knows it. The only thing that worried me was if I would ever get bored of this team; short answer: NO. Again, people like greatness and the bar set by these basketball juggernauts is so high it’s become ridiculous. People call them “bandwagon fans” but it’s really just a matter of wanting to feel part of something as special as this group of future hall of famers... that and they’re totally bandwagon fans. Bandwagon fan-bility: A+

Houston Rockets

Probably not gonna be on the same page as a lot of people here but I’ve always found Rockets players kind of douchey. Maybe not the championship Rockets Olajuwon, Drexler, Horry or Cassell. More like Steve Francis, the worst version of Dwight Howard, and now James Harden AND Chris Paul. Yes, I said it. James Harden is a douchebag. He gets a lot of points, has become an elite point guard but his game isn’t really that exciting... and he’s a whiny flopper. 

They have a lot of history and a bunch of iconic players but ever since the championship years in the mid 90′s we haven’t gotten a dominant conference shifting team. Today’s roster is a poor man’s Golden State Warriors and they’ll eventually find out (the hard way) that in a 7 game series you won’t outshoot or outscore the Dubs. OK, I’ve really bashed the Rockets here, but don’t get me wrong I have to give credit where credit is due: James Harden is an MVP caliber player and Chris Paul is the point God but nobody likes ‘em. Fan-ability: C

Indiana Pacers

Back in the day the Pacers of Reggie Miller, Mark Jackson, Rik Smits, Derrick McKey and Antonio & Dale Davis were for real. They had shooting, rebounding, star power, coaching ...they had it all! It’s a shame that Michael Jordan and the Kobe/Shaq combo never let Reggie and the Pacers win a championship. A decade later the Pacers found themselves with a very strong group of talented players that made LeBron and the Heatles a little nervous. Paul George the emerging superstar along Lance Stephenson, Roy Hibbert and company were battling LeBron down to the last second but eventually falling short. Paul George broke his leg got better and basically told everyone in Indiana to go screw themselves because he would leave them for his hometown Lakers. Now he’s in OKC as a rental and Indiana has highly motivated Victor Oladipo (fan favorite in Indiana) Arvydas Sabonis’ son and what’s left of Lance Stephenson. They should be tanking this year but they’re not in large part because of phenom Myles Turner and a rejuvenated Thad Young. So, what are they? Good? Mediocre? Bad? At this point, we don’t really know.  It’s a small market team with no real superstar anymore and a lot of young talent that could either shine or implode. Fan-ability: D

L.A. Clippers

CP3 leaving means the Clippers are now terrible, right? Nope. Point Blake is for real, DeAndre looks like he’s having fun again and all the role players seem engaged. Oh! And this guy with the scruffy beard is their 30 year old rookie point guard who’s soooo fun to watch. What about the history of the franchise? Well, it’s no pretty. The Clippers were synonymous with failure for a long time. They were terrible at attracting free agents, terrible at drafting (i.e. Michael Olowakandi) until they put together what would become Lob City. It was fun but not very successful.  Los Angeles is sexy and cool but you don’t really think Clippers, you think Lakers, even when the Clippers have clearly been the better basketball team for the last 3 or 4 years now. With the Lakers making a comeback it’s becoming more obvious that the the Clippers should just move north and become the beloved Seattle Sonics.  Fan-ability: C+

L.A. Lakers

Showtime is back in L.A.! Not particularly because of their style of play but because of all the buzz the young players have caused and the circus surrounding Lonzo Ball, who in his first month playing in the NBA looks... different from what Lavar promised. It’s okay, nobody really expected Lonzo to be better than LeBron, Steph and God in his first games. The bottom line is Lonzo not bad and could become really good! Ingram is looking pretty good (just needs an extra 50 lbs) and I’m predicting he could become a Greek Freak type of superstar. But enough about the Baby Lakers, who we know are gonna be alright eventually, let’s talk about the incredibly successful franchise throughout the years. Ugh! Can’t believe I just said something nice about the Lakers. Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Magic Johnson, Shaquille O’Neal and of course Kobe Bryant are one of the biggest names in the history of the league and they’re all Lakers (shout out to Nick Van Exel, one of my favorite players ever). I was blessed to witness the early 2000′s reign of Shaq and Kobe (even though I kept thinking what would’ve happened if Shaq stayed in Orlando) and their epic battles with the Spurs.  Let’s face it, the Lakers are the Yankees of basketball. People love the city of Los Angeles and they root for what the Lakers were and what they could eventually become once again. Fan-ability: A+

Memphis Grizzlies

They’ve come a long way from those Vancouver days when their best player was Bryant “Big Country” Reeves. They established a culture of hard work reminiscent of the city they play for. They created “Grit and Grind” and should be very proud of it. The history of the franchise is a little iffy since they were really bad for a really long time (normal for an expansion team in small markets).  Marc Gasol, Mike Conley, Tony Allen and Z-Bo put the league on notice and transformed a joke of a franchise to a legitimate contender. The roster has been almost completely revamped but Gasol and Conley are keeping the “Grit and Grind” very much alive. For how long? Only time will tell (hopefully as long as possible). Fan-ability: C+

Miami Heat

Fun fact: Did you know the Miami Heat won a championship without LeBron James? Yup!  Here’s another one for you: Did you know the Miami Heat and the New York Knicks hated each other and had a bunch of epic playoff battles back in the 90′s and early 2000′s? Hell yeah! My point is Miami has had a lot history before the LeBron and Heatles “superteam” nonsense. Pat Riley is largely responsible for all of it. And this post LeBron phase hasn’t been as terrible as you’d expect because this well oiled machine of a franchise keeps drafting, signing and getting all the right pieces to be contenders in a very weak Eastern Conference. They’re still a couple of moves away from being the top dogs so don’t be surprised if they make some moves during this season or once the season is over. The city of Miami is fun and sexy and so are the Heat fans. As long as Pat Riley is there they’re gonna be relevant and in the conversation. Fan-ability: B+

New Orleans Pelicans

As Tony Montana famously once said: “Manny, look at the pelican fly. Come on, pelican!” refering to some flamingos he was watching on TV. I kind of feel that way when I’m watching these guys play... I think I’m watching two of the best big men in the game along with some decent role players but I’m really just watching a franchise with no idea of what they’ll do when they inevitably lose both their big men (AD & Boogie) and return to being bad (worse). My second thing about this franchise: how are we supposed to root for a team called the Pelicans?! Wait... their arena is called the “Smoothie King Center”? OK, I’m done.

Weird to not root for a team that has 2 of the top 15 players in the league. Fan-ability: F 

New York Knicks

New York IS basketball. When you walk around this magnificent city you breathe basketball. Some of the best street ballers are New Yorkers. Yet, the Knicks haven’t been as great as Knicks fan expect them to be (not in the last 3 or 4 seasons anyway). Owner James Dolan is not exactly a fan favorite, Phil Jackson left without accomplishing what he was hired to accomplish, Charles Oakley has been banned from MSG (yes, the former Knicks legend) and the Melo-drama of last year(s) was quite frankly very annoying. So yeah, it’s been pretty brutal. It’s seems like a very long time because their last championship was in 1973 but there have been some really interesting, talented and semi-successful Knicks teams since Bernard King’s epic finals performance. One of the most sought after rookies landed in MSG and had a really good career (Patrick Ewing) and the aforementioned Charles Oakley along with John Starks, Anthony Mason and Doug Christie among others were talented, feisty, tough and relentless enough to reach the finals against a really loaded Rockets team. Then there’s Van Gundy’s squad with Ewing, Allan Houston, Latrell Sprewell, Larry Johnson and Marcus Camby who played the role of the underdog from day 1 until they reached the finals which they once again lost, this time against a dynastic Spurs. As of today the Knicks, minus Carmelo Anthony, have been quite surprising and own of the most precious assets in basketball: a unicorn. Kristaps Porzingis has won the heart of every single Knicks fan because of the dog in him, something very important to a city that values hard work. His stellar numbers and the potential of becoming a very unique type of player (hence the nickname “unicorn”) might be that x-factor that brings the championship back to the mecca. All they have to do is be patient, avoid the drama (hard to do with the New York media) and draft well... let’s hope Frankie Smokes is the perfect compliment to KP’s amazing talent. Oh, and please pray to the basketball gods... no injuries, please! Fan-ability: A-

Oklahoma City Thunder

You know what helps building a fan base when your not the coolest city in the world? Superstars! Oklahoma City has had some of the biggest names in the NBA play for them: Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, James Harden and Serge Ibaka. More unbelievable? They played together! Just goes to show what a great GM (Sam Presti) and great scouts will do to a franchise. Even with all these amazing atheletes on their team they really never got to win it all. KD and Russ were an unbelievable duo but many wondered if they didn’t really compliment eachother... maybe KD needed more of a playmaker, maybe Russ needed more of a role player and shine on his own. Well KD left to join the ridiculously talented Dubs (and won the title) and Russ won the MVP averaging a triple double.  Now they have even more star power adding hoodie Melo and Paul George to the mix and hoping this trio will knock down the reign of the all mighty Warriors (highly unlikely).  Superstars aside, OKC really has had an uphill battle developing a fan base in such a small market and have done so beautifully.  Fan-ability: B+

Orlando Magic

Whoa! This is hard for me. I’m probably gonna bash the franchise I first loved (and still do for some strange reason). My best memories as a kid are in Orlando when me and my whole family went to Disney World, Universal Studios and Islands of Adventure, so I’m a little bias. Imagine a kid from Guatemala city going to a basketball game in a jam packed arena where Shaquille O’Neal and Penny Hardaway put on a show. Done deal! I’m a Magic fan for life.  Orlando somehow managed to lose Shaq by lowballing him in an almost  offensive way comparing him to other players in the league and criticizing his rebounding and defense in an attempt to “negotiate” a deal that wouldn’t mean breaking the bank for Shaq. But guess what? For Shaq, you DO break the bank and by not doing so they broke the heart of every Orlando Magic fan. So Shaq left and it took a long time to recover. 13 years later Dwight Howard somehow managed to go to an NBA Finals with a very weird and well coached Magic team that seemed content to just get there, and let’s face it, didn’t really have a shot against the Lakers.  Then, Rob Hennigan happened. Bad draft picks, horrible free agent signings and head scratching trades were the norm under this guy. Even though he’s still no longer with the team the stench of his horrible decisions still linger over the very bizarre roster today’s Magic have assembled. Granted the beginning of this season has been a very pleasant surprise many people feel it’s just a phase in which a lot of “bad teams” started hot and will eventually fall back down to earth. I’m just trying to believe they might snatch the East’s 8th spot and finally be back in the playoff picture, but... why? Shouldn’t they just tank and hope to get ANOTHER draft pick? Who knows? All I know is Aaron Gordon is finally playing some decent basketball and I have really high expectations from rookie Jonathan Isaac and might eventually become a steal in the draft.  Fan-ability: D

Philadelphia 76ers

Oh God! The Process. The day they win a championship I’ll tolerate the Process. I feel awful for the Philly fans that had to endure such a long run of shameless, utter failure while being the laughing stock of the whole league. Having the commissioner actually getting involved in the team’s plan to continue sucking has got to be embarrassing. But 76ers fans have shown they always trusted the process and are now celebrating as if Joel Embiid and Ben Simmons are the next best thing since sliced bread, but I have to remind every Sixer fan once in a while that they drafted Michael Carter-Williams and traded him for nothing, Nerlens Noel and traded him for nothing and Jahlil Okafor, who’ll be traded for nothing... so let’s not get too excited just yet. We still have to find out what Markelle Fultz becomes. The level of incompetence they endured for so long actually made us all root for them making them the most lovable underdog in history and thus captivating a new fan base of people rooting for the eternal losers to finally get a break. They used to be good though. Real good. Mostly because they had Allen Iverson, the best pound for pound player ever. Those A.I. teams were surrounded by a bunch of scrubs, role players and stiffs that watched “The Answer” in awe as he dismantled every opponent they faced. The team had a superstar and a lot of heart that would eventually take the finals against another almost invincible Lakers team, that for a second, crapped their pants when Allen Iverson tore them apart in Game 1. Eventually L.A. won 4 straight and the series was over. Philadelphia was praised for valiantly battling a star studded team with a minuscule scorer along with a bunch of unknowns (so yeah, they’ve always been the lovable underdogs). In a very “Rocky” way, Philadelphia always seems to be forced against the ropes and fighting back the best way they can.  Fan-ability: B

Phoenix Suns

It’s hard to imagine a time where the Phoenix Suns were a great Western Conference team. They were. My first memories of good Suns teams was the Barkley, KJ and Majerle led team. Then there’s the Nash-Stoudemire era where the battles against their Western Conference nemesis were pretty epic. It’s seems like its been forever since the glory days for the Suns. They had a nice little run not long ago with a trio of guards that are really good (Eric Bledsoe, Goran Dragic and Isaiah Thomas) but seemed like they handled it very poorly only ending the very brief run with some questionable GM decisions. Overall the Suns are franchise that hasn’t really clicked and found a clear path to becoming a fun team to watch. The Suns are very young and do have a great-to-be shooting guard in Devin Booker, but they’re probably 4 years from being competitive again and some young players like Bender, Marquese Chriss and Josh Jackson have to prove their worth in the next upcoming seasons. Trading Bledsoe seems like it could be a fresh start and open up some very important playing time for the younger talent. So brace yourselves, it’s not gonna be pretty. Fan-ability: C-

Portland Trailblazers

Hispters rejoice! There’s no doubt that rooting for the Blazers is the cool thing to do since nobody really trusts their backcourt defense, bench or bother to give Dame Dolla (a.k.a. Damien Lillard) an All-Star nod.  CJ McCollum and Damien Lillard think they’re the best backcourt in the NBA and it’s a legitimate claim since they score at will against any and every defender. When it comes to clutch shooting... you know it’s Dame Time! I personally find the Blazers a really fun team to watch and when you think about it, it’s been the case for a very long time. Awesome Blazer players throughout the years: Clifford Robinson (headband included), Jerome Kersey, Rod Strickland, Arvydas Sabonis, Rasheed Wallace, Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge are just some of the names that made this cool-ass city much much cooler. They’ve been relevant but haven’t really won a championship but at least they’ve been to one. Even if they’ve lost more than they’ve won they are definitly a cool team. Fan-ability: B+

Sacramento Kings

Before owner Vivek Ranadivé thought Nik Stauskas was the next best thing, before they drafted every single big while having arguably the best center in the league in Boogie Cousins and confusing everybody with every single poor decision the Kings were exciting.

Can it be argued that Jason “White Chocolate” Williams was the most entertaining point guard of the last 25 years? I certainly think so. He put the Kings on the map along with a very productive Chris Webber, the shooter extraordinaire of Peja Stojakovic and a bunch of really good role players. They kind of underachieved but looking back on that team, they might have been a little too young and flashy. The only time they made the NBA Finals was unfortunately in the movie “How to lose a guy in 10 days”. They lost those fake finals to the Knicks, how about that?

They might be making a comeback, though. The fun team they used to be could once again excite us basketball fans with rookie phenom De'Aaron Fox, second year shooting guard Buddy Hield, big man Willy Cauley-Stein and the rest of the young core. After all the DeMarcus Cousins drama they dealt with I sincerely hope they find their way with this young squad and make the Kings games a must watch. Fan-ability: C

San Antonio Spurs

You know how some organizations are so good they become kind of annoying and after a while they stop being annoying again because you’re in awe of how well they do everything? That’s the San Antonio Spurs.

Only the Spurs can reach the playoffs a record setting 20 consecutive years (also the longest active playoff streak in any major North American sports league as of 2017) and keep drafting really good under the radar rookies, who eventually turn out to be really good. You can’t talk about the Spurs without talking about Tim Duncan or Gregg Popovich, and even though there have been a lot of other amazing Spurs players (David Robinson, Manu, Tony Parker, Sean Elliott, now Kawhi, etc.) it’s Pop and Timmy’s dynasty. And is it just me or was Gregg Popovich really unlikable back when we didn’t really know him? He seemed like a real a**hole but now people want him to be the next President.

They are an iconic dynasty that will be a trademark of greatness for years and years to come. Watching Timmy retire was hard, I can’t imagine what’ll be like when Pop calls it quits.

Fan-ability: A+

Toronto Raptors

All Star Weekends aren’t really important. I was always a fan of these long, flashy, ceremonious events, but not really. It’s like it’s supposed to happen and it’s kinda like the mid-season awards in a way but it’s definitely not a big deal. In the year 2000 (shout out to Conan) though, it mattered, mainly because of the Canada’s basketball ambassador unbelievable display of amazingness and athletic dunk display that became, and still is, the single best dunk contest in the history basketball. Vince Carter was “Air Canada” but eventually it became a messy divorce with the franchise and once again became a sub par team. Nowadays they a decent top 3 team in the Leastern Conference, but I don’t expect them to go further than the second round of the playoffs, even though Masai Ujiri managed to assemble a nice roster that inlcudes the Big Medium 3 of: Lowry, DeRozan and Ibaka. The Raptors have always been ok and cool to root for (they are the only non U.S. team in the league, and that might be a plus) and the list of iconic players is actually pretty decent: Vince, T-Mac, Damon “Mighty Mouse” Stoudamire, Marcus Camby and Skip to my Lou (Rafer Alston). The most notable Raptors fan nowadays is Toronto’s rapper Drake (see also: Nav Bhatia) which really boosts popularity for the franchise, even when we know LeBron will have his way with the Raps come playoff time. Fan-ability: B+

Utah Jazz

Ok, first things first... let me just say that the biggest oxymoron is this franchise’s name. Has there ever been actual jazz played in the Mormon state? (shout out to Trey Parker and Matt Stone for the hilarious “Book of Mormon” musical) Now that I got that out of the way, let’s go ahead and analyze the franchise. They’ve been a really well coached team for the most part (Jerry Sloan and now Quin Snyder) and even when they’re lacking star power they seem to be that team you don’t want to face. They’re really good at drafting and developing young talent and that translates into really feisty hard working potential all-stars... that eventually leave via free agency, probably because Utah isn’t the sexiest place in the world. Deron Williams was on his way of becoming the best point guard in the league and almost overnight became an expendable bench player. Gordon Hayward was the big white hope but opted to join forces with his former Butler head coach in Boston and got injured 5 minutes into his Celtic debut... wait is this a “Leave Utah curse” theory? Nah. Hayward will be alright... I hope. The 90′s and 2000′s were different though, Utah was a star studded franchise always representing the west come playoff time mainly because of the one the best duos of all time: Karl Malone and John Stockton. Although they never got to win the championship they’ll always be remembered as a legit force in the league. As for now, let’s just hope Rudy Gobert keeps developing into the best dang Center in the league... he certainly has the potential. Rodney Hood (awesome name by the way) needs to become an offensive force and most importantly be consistent. Dante Exum sadly, hasn’t really lived up to the hype and I believe has reached his ceiling. They are what all Jazz teams are, gritty and tough. Fan-ability: C+

Washington Wizards

DC’s team is and has always been a conundrum. Wizards teams have been pretty good on paper but none of them, including a Michael Jordan led team, could really make them relevant (granted MJ was getting pretty old and wasn’t in the best shape). It seems the current team is the best the franchise has had in a long time, yet they’re not close to being a Conference favorite. Do the Wizards have big names? Yup, John Wall is in the prime of a stellar career. Bradley Beal has proven he can stay healthy and stay productive. Otto Porter got paid All-Star money and should become one for this team to really go further. Are they well coached? Debatable, but I believe Scott Brooks is a huge improvement over several of the last coaches in Washington. Now the big question is can they actually dethrone Cleveland? The other big question is whether this roster is built for the future like Boston is. Sadly, my answer for both these questions is no. They had their share of bad draft picks (Kwame Brown most notably), players gone bad (Gilbert Arenas, Juwan Howard) iconic players that never really transcended or carried the franchise (MJ, Chris Webber), but the bottom line is they’re a cool franchise to root for (used to be cooler when they were the “Bullets”) in a cool city. Hopefully one day they’ll become a legitimate championship contending team. Maybe if they figure out how to get Boogie Cousins that’ll happend sooner rather than later. Fan-ability: B-

[oumakokichi]

what's your opinion on the "ouma is komaeda 2.0" debate? or, more aptly put: why is ouma NOT komaeda 2.0

I’ve written various pointsabout why Ouma and Komaeda are extremely different as characters in previousmeta, but all of them were a long time ago, and I don’t think I’ve everactually written an entire post that was only dedicated to talking about thetwo of them. So this is actually a really, really good question, and one that I’vebeen meaning to respond to for a while.

In order to go into depth aboutwhy the two of them are so different as characters (and most importantly, whyOuma isn’t just “Komaeda 2.0” or a “purple Komaeda clone” or anything of thesort), I’ll have to talk about spoilers for all of ndrv3. So please only readif you’re comfortable with that!

I suppose the most importantpoint to start with is the fact that Ouma is a deliberate subversion of Komaeda’scharacter (and Junko’s too, for that matter). The reason why they seem similar on a surface level islargely because that’s what you’re supposed to think, especially at first.

Komaeda is not exactly theantagonist of sdr2, but he is a force of conflict, someone who deliberatelyhinders the plot and stirs up chaos whenever possible. Ouma crafts this kind ofpersona for himself and steps into the role, but he is ultimately acting thepart. By constantly telling the group at large that he’s a liar, warning themnot to trust him, refusing to participate in their efforts to cooperate, hesucceeds in making himself seem much more antagonistic and hostile than heactually is.

The most important note ofdifference, however, is that whereas Komaeda poses a very real threat to hisclassmates because he really, genuinely looks down on them, Ouma is only everacting. His bluff is never anything more than a bluff, and his primary goal isto put an end to the killing game and all the chaos, death, and sufferingassociated with it. From start to finish, every single action that he takesproves this; even when he acts seemingly hostile or chaotic by “refusing tocooperate,” he also emphasizes that he does what he does “for everyone’s sake,”such as his plan to try and make the group watch their motive videos in Chapter2.

Because Ouma is a liar, it’simportant to note that many of the things he does or says change drastically inperspective on a rewatch. Things which seemed incomprehensible or downrightmean or aggressive on a first playthrough shift quite a lot when going throughthe game again. Every single line he has can be scrutinized and analyzed—and it’smuch easier on a second playthrough to see that even when he sets himself up asthough he’s a Komaeda-like figure early on, his actions truly are aimed towardstrying to maintain the group’s safety or breaking out of the influence Monokumahas over them.

To put their differences evenfurther into perspective, Komaeda is legitimately a threat to the group’ssafety as early as Chapter 1 of sdr2. Despite setting himself up to seem like arelatively laid-back, easygoing person who was agreeable despite maybe being atad too self-deprecating, he completely crushes this impression of himself inthe Chapter 1 trial, revealing his true colors as well as the fact that he canand will put everyone’s lives at risk if it’s for the sake of “hope.”

He’s a dangerous idealist, asubversion of everything Naegi was in dr1 as well as the beginning of thefranchise’s point that “hope” and “despair” are two sides of the same coin, andthat both can be lethal when taken to extremes. His adherence to the ideal ofhope is just as fanatical as Junko’s adherence to despair, and that’s preciselywhy Komaeda is such a threat. His persistence and loyalty to that ideal and hisdesperate need to see hope “triumphover” despair make him a threat right off the bat, because he is honestly, 100%willing to sacrifice other people’s lives in order to obtain that ideal.

Not only that, but he’sincredibly smart. Not to the point of having SHSL Analysis the way Junko,Kamukura, and arguably Ouma himself are, but Komaeda is still extremely cunningand intelligent. Whatever his own plans don’t account for, he knows hisinexplicable luck will fill in the gaps for him, and that serves to make himeven more dangerous than he would be otherwise. He’s effective, because he cancreate plans and take incredible risks and gambles in order to put them inaction, knowing that the outcome will work out the way he wants when it wouldn’tfor any normal person.

Ouma is not an idealist of anysort. He doesn’t embody “hope” or “despair,” but instead represents ndrv3’scentral theme: “lies.” As a result, he rejects the “hope vs. despair” themes ofthe previous games right from the start. Even when he’s literally set up by theHope’s Peak remember light in Chapter 5 to be a “Junko 2.0” figure, the “leaderof the Remnants of Despair,” it’s clear that he had no interest whatsoever in aconcept or ideal like “despair.” A large part of ndrv3 Chapter 6 is actuallyspent clearing up the false accusations of Ouma being “Junko’s successor,”objectively proving that he had no such interests.

Unlike Komaeda, who trulybelieves that “hope” is equivalent with “talent” and that people without suchtalents are disposable, just “stepping stones” along the way to his goals, Oumahas no such biases against people, regardless of their talents or lack thereof.He’s a realist, rather than an idealist, someone who grasps the necessities ofparanoia and suspicion in the killing game right away but who also values humanlives more than abstract concepts like “hope,” “despair,” or “talent.”

Ouma’s motive video, found inhis room in Chapter 6, shows that he and DICE were nothing more than a band ofpranksters who enjoyed “laughable crimes,” and that their most important mottowas a taboo against killing others. While he will retaliate and have peoplekilled if push comes to shove, as Chapter 4 shows when Miu tried to kill him,it’s not a course of action he wants to take, and he’s never one to make thefirst move. The fact that he calls himself a pacifist in his FTEs with Saiharafurther supports this, as does the fact that he refrains from punching Momotauntil Momota takes a second swing athim in Chapter 4.

There’s no denying that Ouma isdefinitely not harmless or weak;clearly, he can and will fight back when his back is up against the wall. He’sa master strategist and not someone anyone should take lightly as an enemy. Buthe’s not someone who instigates violence for no reason, nor does he enjoy it.Even though it was arguably in self-defense, manipulating Miu and Gonta intogetting killed in Chapter 4 still took a toll on him. Violating his own mottowith DICE and getting people killed, regardless of the fact that it wasindirectly, was still something he hated, and the fact that he refused to takethe same course of action in Chapter 5 is proof of that.

It’s important to note toothat, as I mentioned earlier, Ouma very likely has some variation of SHSLAnalysis. Like Junko and Kamukura, he displays an uncanny knack for predictingthe behavior and outcome of his classmates and the situations around them, aswell as a distaste for boredom and stagnation. “Boredom” has been associatedwith “knowing everything before it happens” for some time now in the DRfranchise, ever since dr0, and many lines in Ouma’s dialogue seem to indicatethat he is, in fact, bored by how much he’s able to predict everything aroundhim.

The fact that he writes roughly300-or-so page script in Chapter 5 in the span of only two hours also backs upthis theory. His script was able to predict nearly every single one of hisclassmates’ lines and responses in the entire trial, and according to Momota,it featured “multi-branching routes.” Clearly, this sort of script would beoutside the realm of possibility for a normal person, so it follows that histalent must be related to it.

My main point is this: whereKomaeda leaves everything to the whims of chance and luck, knowing that it willpull through in the end for him, Ouma leaves nothing to luck. He analyzes, strategizes, and plans everythingout, and when one plan falls through, he immediately comes up with another oneon the spot in order to try and lessen the damages. He’s not a gambling man andunlikely to take any risks unless he’s 100% sure he can win—though he willcertainly bluff and claim that he’s “betting it all on the line.”

Even his FTEs with Saihara areproof of this: despite seeming like he’s playing games entirely based on chanceor luck, Ouma manipulates the outcome every step of the way, and eventuallyloses on purpose in order to let Saihara win. His ultimate advice is to “win agame without playing it,” which turns out to be exactly what Saihara and the othersurvivors do in order to put an end to the killing game once and for all inChapter 6. Where Komaeda would undoubtedly take any bet because he would knowfrom the start that he’d be the most likely to win it, Ouma refuses to play bythe rules of anyone else’s games but his own, and tries to find any loopholesor workarounds possible, even to the point of snatching the game away from thereal ringleader and trying to grind it to a halt in Chapter 5.

Ouma wants to seem like Komaedaon the surface: dangerous, chaotic, and willing to sacrifice the lives ofothers for his own needs. Not only does this make him seem like a bigger andbadder threat than he really is, which keeps his classmates on their toes andprevents them from getting complacent, but it also plays up the role that boththe ringleader and the audience very likely expected him to play. By actinglike such a huge, chaotic presence in the group, Ouma was able to disguise thefact that his real aim was to end the killing game itself until very late intoChapter 5.

I have no doubt the audience probablyloved the façade he put on, especiallyat first. The audience, the ringleader, and Monokuma himself all prioritizeanything at all that will make the killing game more exciting—and from theirperspective, a character who seems dedicated to showing up, playing thevillain, and ruining everyone’s efforts to get along and be friends andcooperate would be extremely entertaining. Such characters prevent the gamefrom getting “too boring,” just as Komaeda prevented the rest of the sdr2characters from fully cooperating with one another by constantly interferingwith them in order to “try and witness their hope” for himself.

But by playing into that roleand pretending to be a Komaeda-like character, it was the perfect way for Oumato downplay his real objectives. Acting like he was enjoying the killing gamewas, as he admits in Chapter 5 before his death, “a lie that he had to tellhimself in order to survive.” Without that lie in place, he wouldn’t have beenable to act the part, or to avoid attracting the ringleader’s attention muchearlier, as he points out as early as Chapter 2 that Monokuma always shows upto “torment” the group whenever they try to openly cooperate and rely on oneanother.

I understand why people assumethat their characters are similar, but Ouma and Komaeda are incredibly different once you scratchthe surface. Just as Komaeda was an intentional subversion of themes and motifsbrought up by Naegi in dr1, Ouma himself is a deliberate subversion of Komaeda’scharacter, as well as many of the themes found in the entire Hope’s Peak arc,such as the “hope vs. despair” dichotomy.

Trying to say that he’s “theexact same character” or “just a rehash” misses the point entirely, and ignoresthe fact that viewing Ouma through the same lens as Komaeda glosses over manyof the actions he takes in-game in the later chapters. As an example, let’stake the fact that they both choose to commit suicide in Chapter 5 of theirrespective games.

Komaeda engineers his own deaththrough a method entirely of his own choosing, in order to “expose the traitor”among their group and further his own goal of witnessing hope win out overdespair. Ouma manipulates the circumstances of his own death in Chapter 5 ofndrv3, but not by choice; he didn’t foresee being poisoned by Maki because hegenuinely believed that even she wouldn’t want to continue the killing gameanymore after seeing “the truth of the outside world,” and he didn’t know themeans by which the ringleader would manipulate her into it. Where Komaeda’sdeath was arguably aimed to punish his classmates for their involvement withSHSL Despair, Ouma died intentionally in order to try and strike back at thereal ringleader, and in order to let Maki live and let Momota have a chance tosay his farewells with the rest of their classmates.

Just an example like this helpsto highlight the differences between them because once again, proving that ifyou scratch the surface of their actions and dialogue, they’re very differentcharacters with very different mindsets and objectives. Although their behavioris somewhat similar at times, they do what they do for very different reasons.

I feel that it’s important tonote that DR has always been a franchise based on the subversion ofpreestablished tropes and expectations. Dr1 took a handful of clichés andtropes and played around with them, sdr2 took what dr1 had to offer and subvertedupon that, and ndrv3 took both games and went even further with the subversion.

Trying to act like a charactercan’t be interesting or unique in their own right just because they havesurface-level similarities seems a pity to me, because many characters in DRhave these surface-level similarities with one another, many of which areaddressed and then turned on their head in the main story. Komaeda and Ouma areboth interesting characters in their own right, and while they certainly doseem to have a lot in common initially, I would say their differences vastlyoutweigh their similarities by the end.

This has gotten fairly long, soI’ll leave it at this for now. This was a really excellent question, so I hopeI’ve managed to express my thoughts on the matter. Thank you for asking, anon!

[junker-town]

4 NFL teams with something to panic about right now

The Browns are without their best player, Myles Garrett, as they try to crawl back into playoff contention.

The Browns lack any discipline whatsoever, while the Steelers and Panthers have major questions to answer about their future.

There was really only one team we could start off the panic index with this week. Some teams lose even when they win — none more so than the Browns.

At some point over the last two months, the Browns and Raiders swapped identities. Oakland became the ascendant AFC team surprising foes en route to a winning record behind an efficient quarterback, a dynamic running attack, and a defense that jelled into a better-than-expected unit. Meanwhile, Cleveland was out there making poor decisions, losing winnable games, getting constant flags, brawling with rivals, and seeing a defensive player suspended for the season.

The Browns beat the Steelers Thursday night to improve to 4-6 and remain in the AFC playoff hunt, but threw a wrench in their comeback plans by losing Myles Garrett indefinitely after he ripped off Mason Rudolph’s helmet and summarily struck him with it. Garrett was the catalyst of the Cleveland pass rush, recording 10 sacks in his first seven games. The club will also be without tackle Larry Ogunjobi, who ranks second on the team with five sacks, for Week 12’s game against the Dolphins due to his role in that Pittsburgh melee.

The Browns likely have to win out — or at worst go 5-1 — to find a spot in the 2019 postseason. They’ll have to do so without arguably their best player. And if the previous 11 weeks are any indication, they won’t just have to beat their opponents; they’ll have to overcome their own stupid mistakes.

No team in the league has had more ejections or given up more yardage to penalties than the Browns, who’ve gifted opponents 822 yards over the course of 10 games. Cleveland’s been flagged an average of 11.2 times per game, effectively keeping the team from finding the rhythm that pushed the 2018 Browns to a 5-3 finish in the back half of the season.

Baker Mayfield, often tasked with having to throw his team back into contention late in games, has thrown more interceptions (12) than touchdown passes (11) in what was supposed to be his breakout season. If those paces continue, it’ll be a 12th straight losing season in Ohio.

Panic index: The Browns have the easiest remaining schedule in the league, so if there ever was a good time to lose a defensive player of the year candidate (there is not), this was it. Cleveland will have to win out against a schedule that includes games against the Dolphins, Cardinals, Steelers, and two matchups against the 0-10 Bengals. The Browns can still rally here — as long as the team doesn’t inflict too much damage on itself to prevent takeoff.

The Steelers still need a post-Ben Roethlisberger plan

The Steelers have drafted several quarterbacks in the last 11 years as insurance for mainstay Ben Roethlisberger. Dennis Dixon, Landry Jones, and Joshua Dobbs worked as backups and emergency options in Pittsburgh, but that was their ceiling. The Steelers didn’t really need them to be anything else, either, because Roethlisberger had never missed more than four games in any given season.

Until this year, that is, when he suffered a season-ending elbow injury in Week 2. Since then, 2018 third-round pick Mason Rudolph has taken over. Judging by his play recently, he’s not the answer to the team’s search for the next franchise quarterback.

In his first four games, Rudolph put up solid stats (67 completion percentage, 7:2 TD:INT ratio, 102.5 passer rating), even if the Steelers didn’t ask him to do too much. His last four games have been a different story, though.

Now that teams have more game tape on him, Rudolph has seen a major dip in his numbers (59.5 completion percentage, 5:6 TD: INT ratio, 70.8 passer rating). This season, only embattled Bears quarterback Mitchell Trubisky is throwing for fewer yards per pass than Rudolph’s 6.3.

Rudolph is coming off the worst game of his NFL career, too. He threw just one touchdown pass and four interceptions in the loss to the Browns (though what he’ll be remembered for most is his involvement in the Myles Garrett brawl).

That loss moved Pittsburgh to 5-5 and even further down the wild card playoff picture. While Rudolph hasn’t been entirely to blame, he falls short when he needs to make plays rather than be a game manager:

Another takeaway for the @Browns defense! Joe Schobert slides for the interception. #Browns @TheSchoGoesOn53 : #PITvsCLE on @NFLNetwork | @NFLonFOX | @PrimeVideo How to watch: https://t.co/I6INVckndX pic.twitter.com/CBRHvmsalg

— NFL (@NFL) November 15, 2019

Roethlisberger still has two seasons left on his current contract, but he’s 37 years old, and is coming off his biggest injury yet. Without a first-round pick next year (due to the Minkah Fitzpatrick trade), the Steelers could find themselves in the same boat next season if Roethlisberger gets hurt again: slipping out of the playoff race because of not having an adequate backup plan.

Panic index: It might be a little soon to give up on Rudolph after just seven starts, especially because his best playmakers (including JuJu Smith-Schuster, Diontae Johnson, and James Conner) have been banged up.

If Roethlisberger is fully healthy next year, that’ll give the Steelers more time to develop Rudolph and determine if he’s worth an investment, or if they should try once more to draft Big Ben’s replacement.

Or, they could just listen to some of the fans and see what third-stringer Devlin Hodges can do again.

The Panthers’ future suddenly looks like “long-term mediocrity”

Just a month ago, moving on from Cam Newton in the offseason looked like it could be the right move for the Panthers. His play declined since his 2015 MVP season and, for the second year in a row, his season ended early due to injury.

The good news for Carolina was the play of Kyle Allen softened the blow. In his first four starts of the 2019 season, he threw seven touchdowns, no interceptions, and had a 106.6 passer rating. Allen appeared to have a real chance at being the Panthers’ quarterback of the future.

Now, not so much.

In his last four starts, Allen has three touchdowns, nine interceptions, and a putrid 60.3 rating. It was understandable when he threw three picks against the 49ers, arguably the best defense in the NFL. But four interceptions against the lowly Falcons? That’s awful. It was so bad that it sent Panthers owner David Tepper into an existential crisis. Via ESPN:

Tepper’s frustration over losing was evident, as he continually said that long-term mediocrity would not be accepted. He also said fans, many of whom left the stadium early Sunday, were smart enough to recognize long-term mediocrity.

Newton may end up sticking around in Carolina after all, given Allen’s recent play. But that might not be enough to get the Panthers back on track.

Panic index: It’s better to have an owner who’s determined to fix a team rather than one who’s fine with being stuck in neutral. The Panthers have several good things in place, including Christian McCaffrey, one of the most dynamic players in the league. The sky isn’t falling even if Allen’s not the answer.

The Bengals are reaching new levels of terrible

It’s not surprising that the Bengals are among the league’s bottom teams, but they weren’t expected to be this bad. They’re 0-10 on the season, and the switch from Andy Dalton to Ryan Finley at quarterback has not resulted in anything but much shakier play from under center.

Their latest loss was against the Raiders, a rather pitiful 17-10 game in which the Bengals never really threatened to win despite actually leading at one point. More than anything, the Bengals look lost and lethargic on the field. There’s no consistency outside of their winless record, and it’s hard to see any real identity on either side of the football, except maybe apathy:

Never seen an NFL team operate with less energy than this year’s #Bengals from play-calling down to players on the field. The #Dolphins are well coached & play hard. Bengals are nothing like that. Look like they just want to go home.

— Evan Silva (@evansilva) November 19, 2019

Following the loss to the Raiders, the Bengals were officially eliminated from the playoff race. It’s the earliest a team has been knocked out of postseason contention since at least 2002, per ESPN.

That was also the last year the Bengals had won fewer than four games. They finished 2-14. But at this point, even getting one win seems like a pipe dream.

Panic index: After that dreadful 2002 season, the Bengals ended up with No. 1 pick in the draft — and landed longtime quarterback Carson Palmer. Currently, they are in line for No. 1 pick again and can take whichever quarterback they like the most. The best thing that can happen at this point is the Bengals look to the future and figure out what kind of team they want to be.

Another option for Bengals fans? Just accept this dire present and decide nihilism is the only way forward.

[brothermouzongaming]

Borderlands 3 review

Level 50 Zane, 15 Amara. Minor spoilers ahead World/Maps -The worlds you travel to are impressively large even though they're broken up into smaller sections; the term "smaller" is used very loosely. I may be wrong but these are by far the most areas and largest in the franchise and its kind of impressive. My favorite level is the Lectra City section of Promethea. It's both organized and maze-like where a gunfight can break out literally around every corner. All the sections are noticeably big and feel unique to the planet or area they represent with that "if it's on the map there's probably something there" design that not enough games take advantage of. -The color pallet is miles better than any previous game in the series. This game can be pretty but its even prettier when everything is blowing up and shit catching fire, particle effects are trying to fuck your eyeballs. The previous games were kind of bland color-wise, the pre-sequel did try and venture out more but this is way above that in my eyes. Gameplay/Guns/L00t

-The combat is sublime. I have heard people complain that doesn't feel much different but I think they are wrong and need to go back and play the less enthralling, less involved combat of the previous games. You didn't have many options in the first games when firefights broke out and it was dated but distinctly Borderlands. Now that the slide and mantle have been implemented (it's about time really), combat is faster and players can take advantage of high points and hit cover faster. The slide even has combat implications once you get to the later parts of the story. It's all very well worked and thought out as opposed to being just thrown in because it's what shooters do now. -The guns and gunplay are on par with Destiny, they may even be a little better when you consider how deep the loot is and how the stats visibly and tactically affect the guns they’re applied to. You get one Duke in D2 and you've pretty much got them all. Here you can get the same gun to drop and actually see and feel the difference between the stats it rolled with. The distinct differences in the manufacturers have really been leaned into as well. They reworked some of the distinct hallmarks of the makers and improved them to help ramp up the combat. This is minor but I really like how manufacturers will mail you guns the more you use theirs. -Vehicle controls are muddy as hell and will take a second to get used to. It’s definitely not the best possible setting even after messing with controls for a few minutes. The default kind of forces you to shoot where you’re looking unless you’re standing still, you may want a little more flexibility in your controls which is available. That said, the models and their functionality are varied and cool but I’m honestly surprised they haven’t perfected controls yet. Story/Writing

-The story is decent, wildly better than the actual writing and dialogue itself (which doesn't say that much) but once you get to the end there are some connection's made that are interesting and well thought out. Now that I've gotten the "good" out of the way. What the fuck is up with all the cutscenes not having our character in them. All events in cutscenes play out like our guy or girl isn't in the room and can't affect the events that play out in them. There will be so many times where you yell at the screen as to why your character is never seen/not doing anything in pivotal situations that could use a Vault Hunter. LIKE THE ONE THAT SHOULD BE STANDING RIGHT THERE. -Troy (male villain) literally says "You were like, 'My powers boo hoo'!!" which is a Handsome Jack reference. It would be nice and nostalgic if it wasn't the very first thing that comes out of his mouth when the Twins intercept you at the Dry Dock. Instead, it just seems beyond lazy and proves just how lacking in identity they both are. Tyrene is arguably worse, she just says things and then follows it with "I don't believe that," or " That's just something people say". That could show how little she cares and that would be fine if it wasn't the only thing about her that stood out. They almost do something interesting later in the story where Troy takes center stage but that lasts literally a boss fight. Both of them are just, underwhelming in almost every single way. All seldom the connection they have and how Troy is capable of being a Siren and Tyrene's seemingly completely unique and powerful abilities. Co-op, Optimization, and Performance

- Co-op will go from fluid and fantastic to laggy and rubber banding at the drop of a mag and it's as frustrating as it is thrilling as hell. It's strange what situations will slow things down and what runs smooth as hell. We had four people on one internet connection and everything ran really well. One day my friend and I tried with just us on Promethea and the session was so fucked I actually couldn't see or fire my guns at one point and I had to back out and come back to get them functioning again. There are definitely more patches coming but for a game boasting online co-op, it should be better. I will say though, level balancing is amazing and can even be quite useful if you want guns to drop at level no matter where you are in the game. People have been complaining about the UI and I totally understand, I don't mind the design, what I do mind is how obnoxious the input lag is. Oh and the weird glitch where as you scroll your inventory, the pictures of the items toward the bottom copy to rows above them. It's easy to fix in-game but...why is it even a thing? How have they not fixed that glitch where your FFYL timer just drops off despite still having time on the meter. It's happened since borderlands 1 maybe there's a certain amount of damage you can take before the timer doesn't matter anymore? I genuinely don't understand it and on boss fights, it's infuriating to lose money when you could've gotten a kill for your second wind. Misc. -Of course, the first patch they put out isn't to fix the performance issues but to kill the Loot Tink farm on at the Jakob estates. A farm you can still do offline fyi ;) A billion guns and you mad people getting a slightly higher chance at getting the guns they’re just gonna get anyway. WHY -The trinkets are cute but useless, why not put a minor stat buff on them to actually give them reason? They're so small they almost don't exist to me. -Also, that end credits song is absolutely terribly chosen. The end sequence, in general, is just strange and seemed a little forced. Not how they presented it but what exactly they showed because as perplexing as it was to see what I did, I was just more upset I didn't get the development of those scenarios to see how we reached the outcome. I'm trying not to spoil things but it's difficult so I'll just be quiet. I'm not even sure of what I saw but I do know what it looked like. I just wish there was more background given since our character gets literally none. -REALLY weird cameos. Like, really strange. tl;dr BL3 is an 8.5 for me which flys in the face of my many criticisms but I can't deny how fantastic the gameplay is on top of the absolute wealth of content delivered, all without the modern monetization bullshit. The story is meh, writing meh, but god damn if it isn't rewarding in its gameplay. IF you like BL as a whole there's no reason not to play unless you're waiting for the Steam release. An Endgame post is in the works.

[thisdaynews]

Katherine Legge: The woman who ‘had to fight and claw' her way into motorsport

New Post has been published on https://thebiafrastar.com/katherine-legge-the-woman-who-had-to-fight-and-claw-her-way-into-motorsport/

Katherine Legge: The woman who ‘had to fight and claw' her way into motorsport

Media playback is not supported on this device

The car doesn’t know the difference between male and female drivers – Legge

In the reception of a nondescript Northampton office block, a young woman sits and waits. It’s a rare moment of quiet for someone used to the thrilling speed of the racing track.

The woman is Katherine Legge, the year is 2004 and the office is the UK headquarters of Cosworth. Legge is, in her own words, “stalking” Kevin Kalkhoven, Cosworth boss and owner of the United States’ biggest racing franchises: Indy Car, Champ Car and Atlantic Series.

At 23 years old and with almost 15 years of driving behind her, Legge had run out of money and was struggling for sponsorship. She feared her dream of being a racing driver was coming to an end.

She was refusing to leave – until she got a meeting with Kalkhoven – so Kalkhoven sent his daughter Kirsty out to get rid of her. After a short conversation Kirsty went back to her father and said: “You ought to meet this person, there’s something different about her.”

In a sport where fine margins and money make the wheels go round, this was Legge’s sliding doors moment. Kalkhoven offered her a chance to compete in the first three races of the Atlantic Series that season.

Looking back now Legge says: “That was the first time I’ve driven a car full-time in anything. It was the first time I’d had such a big, heavy, powerful car. The first race was Long Beach and I won that.”

Victory in her debut race. She would go on to win three of her first six races that season. As she says now: “The rest is history, and I think the moral of the story is tenacity.”

Legge on the starting grid early in her go-karting days

Legge’s journey into racing started almost by chance. After seeing an advert in the local paper for a go-kart track near her home in Guildford, the self-described tomboy and adrenaline junkie nagged her father Derek to take her. Eventually he relented, and her obsession with motorsport began.

“I just loved it,” she says. “The first race I won, I was nine years old. They give you the flag to carry and I wasn’t strong enough to carry it!”

Her pace, however, was not in doubt. She progressed through the same ranks as many Formula 1 hopefuls, coming up against young talents such as Jenson Button and Lewis Hamilton and, on occasion, beating them.

Legge was making a name for herself, but the idea of forging a career in the sport seemed a distant dream. “I didn’t know I was going to be a racing driver. I didn’t even know that it was possible because at that time there really weren’t any females doing it.”

She looked for inspiration outside of motorsport.

“Ellen MacArthur – do you remember how she used sail around the world single-handed? I looked up to people like that and I thought if they can do that then I can be a race car driver.”

But the further she progressed, the harder it became to find funding. She was beginning to realise how much of a challenge it was just to make it into the car.

“I wasn’t one of these people who had a rich family and was handed it on a plate, but I’m also grateful for that in a way because I think if it’s easy, then you don’t want it as much.

“I don’t know many people have driven the variety of things that I’ve driven, but then I had to fight and claw my way through racing, so I took every opportunity that was thrown my way.”

Media playback is not supported on this device

Katherine Legge crashes at Road America 2006

When Legge was breaking through, motorsport’s land of opportunity was the USA, and it was there her career took off. But chasing the highs of motorsport brings huge risks.

In 2006, she was racing at Road America in Wisconsin when a mechanical failure caused her to lose control entering a 180mph corner. The force of the crash caused her car to disintegrate in dramatic fashion.

Her dad, who rarely misses a race, was watching, gripped by fear.

“I’m not religious, but I was just praying to any god that would listen that Katherine would just be alive,” he says.

Derek hasn’t spoken to the media about the accident since it happened, and his voice breaks as he recalls it.

“I thought she’d died…”

It took 15 minutes for him to discover that not only had his daughter survived, but she had somehow emerged with only bruises.

“It was one of the worst moments of my life and one of the best moments of my life. Literally within 15 minutes I was down in the depths and then elated.”

As for Legge, she said she would have finished the race if she could.

“It didn’t faze Katherine at all. She’s wired differently,” Derek says with a knowing smile.

Media playback is not supported on this device

‘Wear a sports bra’: A lap of Daytona with Katherine Legge

That 2006 crash had followed an uncertain time in Legge’s career. She had tested a Minardi F1 car the year before, but a shot at an F1 drive never materialised despite her ambition to race in the world’s most popular racing category.

Instead Legge’s is a career that reflects her assertion of having to fight for drives throughout motorsport – touring the world in search of work, a freelance racer for hire.

She competed in the German ‘DTM’ touring car championships from 2008 for two years, then spent two more years racing in the US Indycar series, taking part in the famous Indy 500 race. The following year saw her compete in the ever-more popular Formula E electric racing series – and a stint in the American Nascar series came in 2018.

But none has yielded the kind of success her early career suggested.

Fast-forward to January 2019 and Legge, 38, is lining up on the the grid for the iconic and gruelling 24 Hours of Daytona endurance race.

It’s an event she knows well having finished second in her class in 2018, but this year there is extra scrutiny. She is the lead driver in a ground-breaking all-female team.

“So far it’s been received by everybody really well because it’s being taken seriously. We have the best female drivers in the world. It’s not a gimmick. We’ve got a legitimate shot of winning.”

Legge was instrumental in recruiting Brazil’s Bia Figueiredo, Swiss driver Simona de Silvestro and Denmark’s Christina Nielsen to the line-up. All “bad-ass women”, according to Nielsen.

However, none of this would have been possible without the persistence of Jackie Heinricher, a former US Air Force Medic and successful businesswoman whose name shines proudly from the car they’ll be racing in.

As Heinricher runs her hand over the bonnet she says: “It’s an amazing feeling. We’ve worked for years to bring this whole effort together.

“Sponsorship is probably the hardest thing you can get in any sport let alone racing and let alone women. The door was slammed on me over and over for two years. This makes me feel like all that time paid off.”

The race begins well enough for the team, the first all-female line-up here since 1994.

For the first two stints of the race, driven by Figueredo and Nielsen, the team hold their own in a field that includes several former F1 stars and a sister team car driven by men.

Then comes Legge’s chance to shine. Considered the team captain for her experience and leadership off the track, she hauls the car up six places as night falls and fatigue begins to set in for all teams.

And then, drama. Legge tangles with one of the lead ‘prototype’ cars, sending them both on to the grass. Having lost several positions in the spin, a fired-up Legge claws her way up to third by the time she hands the car over to De Silvestro, wowing fans and commentators with her skill and determination.

Another milestone for the Daytona 24 changes everything. Halfway through the race – in the dead of night – torrential rain arrives, putting out the fans’ campsite fires and many teams’ hopes. For the first time in history the race is under threat of being ended early because of conditions.

Legge senses her chance to seize the initiative again. But this time her willingness to risk everything is punished.

Her car brushes the wall at speed, breaking the suspension and forcing Legge to limp back to the pits.

“Why didn’t you tell us?” comes the question over team radio, as mechanics frantically try to fix the damage. “I’m sorry,” is all an emotional Legge can muster in response.

The race is eventually called off around 10 minutes earlier than scheduled, and the team finishes 15th in their class.

“It hurts, but we gave it everything,” says Legge. “Once you’re done there’s nothing you can do. But we’ll keep fighting – we’ll never give up.”

Caterpillar Acura racing Daytona 24 Hours 2019: (l-r) Ana ‘Bia’ Beatriz Figueiredo, Katherine Legge, Simona de Silvestro, Christina Nielsen and Jackie Heinricher

It’s not difficult to find evidence of women attempting to blaze a trail in motorsport history. It’s just that each time a pioneer puts on a helmet, after the initial wave of publicity fades, so does the trail being blazed.

The presence of women in the cockpit began as early as the late 1920s, when Helle Nice drove in several races, including for an all-female team.

But only two women have actually contested a race in F1’s 69-year history. Maria Teresa de Filippis drove a Maserati during three grands prix in 1958, and Lella Lombardi qualified for 12 races across 1975 and 1976, with a highest finish of sixth at the 1975 Spanish Grand Prix.

Several more have competed outside F1. One of the most high-profile female drivers away from the F1 paddock was rally star Michele Mouton, who won four World Championship rallies and was runner-up in the World Championship during the 1982 season for the all-conquering Audi team.

Mouton, arguably, provided the greatest inspiration for women in motorsport during her 12 years as a driver, and it’s a cause she has picked up again as head of the women in motorsport commission for the FIA, the sport’s governing body.

“It’s a pity we don’t have more female drivers, and it’s hard to tell what the targets are – we have to wait and see,” says Mouton.

“But we have initiatives in place to be working on the grassroots. It’s a difficult time for women in motorsport but we must increase the numbers at the bottom of the pyramid.

“There was no problem with sexism when I was in competition. Women need the passion – they need to be motivated.”

But is there a lack of wider support? Has modern-day sexism caused this shortfall?

The new all-women W Series can be viewed as a positive step to provide a platform for women in the sport, but it is not endorsed by the FIA, and for Legge the jury’s out.

“I think part of me is against it because I think you have to race against the best. So, in a way, I think it’s putting the spotlight on women in a negative connotation. Why segregate us? It’s one of the sports where men and women can compete on equal footing. So I think it’s a step backwards in that respect.

“Then I think, well, if I didn’t have the money and I wanted to go into racing and they’re offering this big purse, and then maybe if you shone there then you would get the opportunity that you wouldn’t have had necessarily… I can see that, too. It’s ‘tbc’ in my mind.”

Media playback is not supported on this device

Inside the Caterpillar GTD car with Katherine Legge

While Formula 1 is under new ownership which moved quickly to remove the ‘grid girls’ in favour of a more progressive side, some fear there not enough is being done to promote women drivers.

Despite Susie Wolff taking part in two practice sessions for Williams in 2014, Helmut Marko, a senior figure at the Red Bull team, recently said the “huge physical demands are maybe too difficult and too strenuous for women”.

Two-time F1 champion Fernando Alonso believes women have been under-served until now, and says there is still work to do to establish a more permanent presence.

“There’s no reason why women could not succeed in Formula 1 or motorsport in general, and there are more and more coming. I think in future it will balance much more than we see now and that’s what we all hope.

“[Katherine Legge] is great – she is an example to all of us, and I wish her all the success.”

Money is the fuel that currently drives young racing talent to the top. In the absence of funding, talent alone is all too often not enough – for now, it has to be coupled with an extremely rare tenacity and drive.

That, combined with the simple fact that there are fewer girls than boys entering the sport at an early age, means the number of women currently getting to the top of the sport is still shockingly small.

Although Legge may not have had any racing role models growing up, she is now the one providing inspiration for future generations.

Hopefully the only stalking they will have to do is in pursuit of the car in front.

BBC Sport has launched #ChangeTheGame to showcase female athletes in a way they never have been before. Through more live women’s sport available to watch across the BBC this summer, complemented by our journalism, we are aiming to turn up the volume on women’s sport and alter perceptions.

Find out more here.

Read More