#but I like it even more when a character arc makes sense

[rohirric-hunter]

I don't know if I agree that escalation is important. Another series that did this well is the Redwall series by Brian Jacques. The first book written in the series had a protagonist, Matthias. A later book focused on his son, Mattimeo. The stakes in Mattimeo's book are, if we're quite honest, noticeably lower than in Matthias'. There are still stakes -- one of the villains kidnaps Mattimeo and a bunch of other children and another one threatens their home while they are away from it, but neither villain is as threatening as the main villain of Matthias' story, and both of their evil plots are fairly localized. If they both got away with it then far fewer people would be negatively affected than in the first book.

In fact, both villains are villains that Matthias, as the hero of the first book, would easily have been able to deal with if he had just happened to be in the right place at the right time, but he's not. Matthias' failing as a parent isn't that he is bad at it. It's that his greatest strengths are also his greatest weaknesses. He's a very kind character, and this results in him letting Mattimeo get away with far more than he should, and one instance of him choosing to be kind rather than cautious kicks off the plot and all the ensuing conflicts. (Note that this is not presented as the wrong choice, per se, just an example of how unfortunately bad people can often use people's good qualities against them.)

Matthias then spends the entire book being restrained from being involved directly in either plot (which, again, he would have sorted in about ten minutes most likely) by time, distance, or cave-ins. Getting thrown into a bottomless pit. That sort of thing. There's almost a third plot where Matthias struggles against himself, TBH. His actions only indirectly and distantly affect the downfall of either villain. (This is thematically appropriate for the character, something something themes and motifs, but only tangentially related to this discussion.)

Some of the things that make this sequel succeed where others fail are these:

Matthias is present and active in the story. He is not put on a bus or killed early on; lesser writers use this tactic when they fear the new characters won't hold their own against the old ones. He is present and active; the story is simply not about him. He also passively influences the story through his past actions from the first book (kind of) and who he is as a person.

Matthias is a good parent, albeit not a perfect one. This works to the story's advantage, as Mattimeo ends up sharing many of his good traits that endeared readers to him in the first place by virtue of having been raised by him. Now they endear readers to the new protagonist as well.

Matthias has his own proper role in the story and a satisfying character arc. Matthias enjoyers still have something to be excited about in the story even though he is not the protagonist: here the writer neatly sidestepped the pitfall of alienating readers who are primarily reading the sequel in the hopes of new stuff about their faves.

Stakes really have little to do with it -- if anything the story is helped by the fact that the stakes are all deeply personal to the protagonists and not an Even Bigger Threat that will Destroy the World Even Harder than the first time.

In the case of Tolkien also doing this well, I think the most important takeaway is this: The parent figure must in some clear and important way influence and direct the child figure's story. You cannot write a sequel about a beloved character's kid where things just happen just because. There must be a clear line of narrative that makes sense between the parent and child's story.

But it takes a really talented writer to pull that off (especially if they weren't planning the sequel when writing the first book) and well a lot of people aren't really talented writers.

Generational spin-off media is like “okay, what would be the most in-character way for the previous show’s protagonist to comprehensively fail as a parent?”

[geekgirles]

Hot Take

Season 3 should have revealed Eva is a demigoddess instead of Ruel.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm actually quite happy with season 4 focusing on her origins and Madagaskan, even if that was clearly only introduced to set up Flopin's character arc during the upcoming Waven series. But the thing I can never seem to get over is how irrelevant the Cra actually are in season 3. Their arc is literally to be rescued/to escape and to give birth (in Eva's case).

Because, let's face it, their relevance in the season hinged entirely on being Tristepin's family. Eva in particular, regardless of how cordial Echo was to her, seemed to have no value outside of being Tristepin's wife who's carrying his third child, who was later revealed to be an extremely powerful demigod.

Meanwhile, poor Flopin's kidnapping didn't even make sense because he just isn't a demigod like his siblings. Yes, he is Iop's son, but he's not an Iop, so he couldn't inherit any of his father's divine powers. As opposed to Élely and Pin, who already displayed theirs at 5 years old and before being even born, respectively. Hell, that ended up being the crux of his character in season 4! His insecurities over not being as extraordinary as his family, especially his siblings!

Yes, you could say Oropo's real plan besides killing the gods was to make Yugo's friends his, and that's why he wanted Eva and Flopin around. But considering he didn't seem all that contrite over Adamaï almost causing Iop's next reincarnation while he couldn't even bring himself to make Amalia age (even though he was not above breaking her spirit so she'd be easier to manipulate), it's fairly obvious he cared more about keeping certain members of the Brotherhood near than others. Which further proves he only kidnapped Eva and Flopin because of their connection to Pinpin.

And let's face it, between that and how out of focus they were compared to the Iops, that's just such a huge disservice to their characters. They deserve so much more than to orbit around Tristepin.

Which is why I believe Eva should have been Cra's daughter and Oropo's target instead of Ruel. Even though nothing really suggested her divine origins before, they could have always hand-waved it and have that explain her craziest feats, like how she was able to keep up with two demigods even while heavily pregnant or her formidable archery skills. Because, come on, until Madagaskan was introduced, the only relevant Cra in the show were Eva, Cleo, and Flopin. It's not like by the time season 3 dropped we'd seen any other member of their race display the same level of dexterity so as to make Eva's prowess being divine in nature not make sense.

Also, in could retroactively explain her exceptional beauty, since most Cra we've seen are actually fairly plain-looking.

Besides, you're telling me that out of the original members of the Brotherhood of the Tofu, only the boys are the ones related to gods? Come on. Is a little bit of parity that much to ask?

And let's face it, Ruel being Enutrof's son doesn't bring anything new to the table other than some shock value. Like, I get he's always been hinted to be more than meets the eye, but being a demigod doesn't really add much to his character.

Hey, maybe I just don't know much about Enutrofs since they don't give me brainrot compared to other classes, but compared to the rest of his kind, Ruel isn't all that unique either, except for how utterly greedy he is. His powers and attacks, while impressive at times, can never reach their full potential because he just doesn't pay tribute to Enutrof, so they remain relatively weak. And though being a demigod would explain how long-lived he is, that falls flat as well when Arpagone seems to be just as old as he is and his grandma's even older.

Again, longevity could be a standard Enutrof power I'm just not aware of. Still, it pretty much proves my point, doesn't it?

Not to mention, it's not like changing Ruel's status as the group's surprise demigod would really change anything from his storyline in season 3. They could have perfectly had Arpagone be the Enutrof demigoddess whose condition to play a part in Oropo's plan was to be allowed to keep her husband even as she ascended to godhood. Hence, you still get your flashback episode and an excuse to capture Ruel and have Sipho replace him to drive a wedge between Yugo and Amalia and kidnap the latter.

But no, let's go with the plot point that won't be touched upon ever again.

And speaking of things that wouldn't necessarily change just because Eva were a Cra demigoddess, you could still keep Madagaskan's role in season 4!

Maybe just make it so Eva and Cleo are actually half-sisters with the same father but a different mother (or vice versa, given the goddesses' apparent distaste for getting pregnant themselves). While I'd personally prefer it if Madagaskan simply had a tryst with Cra and then he fell in love with his late wife, if you're into drama, Eva could always be the result of an affair but his wife chose to take her in and raise her as her own, anyway. Hence, you would have another reason why Madagaskan went along with her last wish, out of love for her and to repay her kindness and forgiveness.

(Or you could enforce his love for his wife by having him be the one to accept her other child and to make sure both her and his own daughter had a better life).

And from then on, everything could play out exactly like canon.

In fact, Eva being semi-divine would also add another layer to Cleophée's inferiority complex and feelings of inequacy compared to her older sister. Much like Flopin, of course she could never catch up to Eva no matter how hard she tried, she isn't a demigoddess!

Which would make Eva's acceptance and pride over her abilities all the more meaningful too (even if by then they wouldn't know the truth).

And speaking of Flopin, his season 4 storyline would remain the same, too. After all, even if he would now be related to Cra, he'd still be a demigoddess' child first and foremost.

As @cocogum explored in one of her analyses, the children of demigods are their own can of worms. So far, we don't know anything about Kali and Poo's baby, but we do know that Goultard's children certainly didn't inherit immortality of any kind, so it wouldn't be far-fetched to assume they didn't inherit his divine powers either. In other words, Flopin could still feel left out—even with more reason, since now he would be the only "non-exceptional" member of his family—and choose to follow his grandfather in order to find his own path.

I guess what I'm trying to say with all this is that while Amalia might be my blorbo and Yumalia my OTP, I still care for all the members of the Brotherhood of the Tofu, especially Eva. And I can't really forgive that while Pinpin still had focus and issues of his own by virtue of being the reincarnated Iop god, Eva's character was ultimately reduced to being his wife and mother of his children when she's actually so much more than that.

[bengiyo]

saw ur recent post! can u break down ayan from the eclipse? 😆

Ayan is a difficult character to talk about these days, I fear. I struggle to discuss many of the characters from branded pairs anymore, because it often feels like viewers project their feelings about the pair onto their characters. This is even worse with fandom memory, because FK weren't as big a deal during the initial run of The Eclipse. This came to a head during Our Skyy 2.

How I feel about this character

I have complicated feelings about Ayan. I love that he's a queer character fueled by grief and spite when we meet him. Despite his awareness of social and political issues, his concerns are not really on the social movements organized by the queer people around him. Instead, he's focused on investigating the death of his uncle and getting revenge. I did enjoy that much of his arc involved mirroring some of what his uncle wen through in falling for a deeply closeted mess of a man.

All the people I ship romantically with this character

Honestly, just Akk. I could make jokes about how it might have been interesting if he'd gotten involved with Thua or on of the World Remembers Gang, but he didn't hate any of them. He's a mess of a man, and it makes sense that he would hone in on Akk after seeing Akk attempt violence against other queer people. I think their work in Our Skyy 2 made me appreciate how these two could maybe work long term, but damn do they have a ways to go.

My non-romantic OTP for this character

He didn't really have friends, right? Like he ends up befriending Akk's friends, but he didn't really connect with anyone else in a way that felt like bestie potential. You can't say the other prefects because they're Akk's friends. You can't say Thua because he threw them right under the bus for their hypocrisy. You can't say the World Remembers gang because he wasn't with them in the streets.

My unpopular opinion about this character

My unpopular opinion is that Ayan is a bad activist and a keyboard warrior at best. He's quick to prioritize his own relationships and goals over the work of the movement, and I ain't about that man or his cop boyfriend.

One thing I wish would happen / had happened with this character in canon.

I really wish we'd seen Ayan connect properly with the World Remembers gang. He was friendly to them, but he wasn't with them. I'd like to have seen him complete more of the work of the back half. His growth as a political gay felt stunted by some of the behind the scenes issues plaguing this show.

For the Character Breakdown Ask Game

[blood-starved-beast]

Hmm thinking about it I think of lot of ppl's issue with Caitlyn's arc this season is the confusion of what her arc in s2 act 1 was supposed to mean/represent and how that translates to her arc in act 2.

Cause the point was that Caitlyn's laser focus is what blinds her. It made her susceptible to manipulation by Ambessa, caused her to lean to fascist like behaviors, and with the priviledge of her birth, meant that translated into consequences for and damage to a lot of people of Zaun (including the war crimes). This does not justify her behavior now, but it doesn't make her a fascist ideologue, which a lot of ppl seem to have gotten the impression is where her character will be going.

Act 1 Caitlyn was her hardening and doubling down on her pain and grief, which culminates in her discarding Vi, something that pre-ep9 of s1 wouldn't have happened. Not after all what they've been through. That's where the parallels with Vi and Powder from s1ep3 come from - at an emotional/personal level, it's a betrayal not only to Vi/Powder, but also to what Caitlyn/Vi wanted in their relationship/how they engaged with their loved one/themselves even.

Fast forward to act 2. Time has passed, and Caitlyn's initial grief has cooled. Her hard boot actions of act 1 and leaning into the role Ambessa provided for her (which she did not want, cause again she's not an ideologue for fascism/dictatorships) did not bring her her results; rebounding with a woman her mother would've wanted (per Amanda Overton says) did not get her the satisfaction she'd hope. She misses Vi. But more pertinently, Ambessa is going too wild, she is causing too much problems, and this is going on for too long. And there's the Jinx issue. Caitlyn is smart, if a bit hamstrung with little allies who could do something (her mother, Jayce are now gone, she has no Vi for a guide in the undercity) to help her. Only Ambessa, whom Caitlyn is aware is manipulating her but Caitlyn herself is not politician with the skills to play back. And again, Ambessa knows how to press her buttons. Until Singed.

That's when I think, it becomes clear to Caitlyn that she needs to act now. When she learns that Ambessa not only was going behind her back about finding this weapon (thus, more self-interested and dangerous), she's working with the guy who has done so much damage to Piltover and Zaun both. And is actively hurting this guy and plans to do more. It becomes imperative when Ambessa speaks about destroying a peaceful commune. So when Vi shows up, finally, an ally whom Ambessa is not aware of and/or doesn't have a thumb in, she takes the chance. Hence the team up. She can trust Vi here, cause she learns that Vi has an invested interest in protecting the commune (her dad is there/is the beast). That's not of course, including the guilt and of course the love, but still. And that clearing of mind allows her to focus more on the important things - not attacking Jinx, ignoring her to focus on Vi being injured in the fight despite having the Shot for Jinx. Caitlyn now knows isolation (timeskip deal) and values more what she has to lose.

tl;dr - Caitlyn's issue was always that she had tunnel vision, and too much grief that manifested into rage which led her astray in many ways. She was never Anti-Zaunite in the sense she wanted them all dead - but cause of the grief and her flaws with her privilege led her to lean into her biases with little countermeasure. Even in episode 1 she was blaming Jinx, and later Silco's goons for the rogue actions in Zaun - not the whole population. Again, he Her "pivot" in act 2 makes sense therefore, cause it was less a pivot if more of a clear head/wake up call. Her actions in act 1/timeskip are not justified on moral grounds, but it makes sense for the character and her situation.

[shysublimecoffee]

Marinette receiving the Ladybug mantle was an absolute mistake. I watched the special, and honestly, gurl is doing the most—and for what? A guy? One dude, and she’s ready to throw her common sense out the window. Like, how has Hawkmoth/Gabriel not used his own son more often as leverage against her by now? That’s villainy 101, and he’s just sitting on it. Like for the amount of times I've seen this show rag on ChatNoir because of his weakness in romance when that Ladybug biggest weakness not CN lol.

At this point, I don’t even care about what Marinette’s going through. Whatever emotional investment I had in her? Long gone. She’s out here spinning lies on top of lies, desperately trying to hold together her crumbling Adrien-obsessed empire, and for what? She lost. Game over.

Now, if this were a story about a girl slowly getting corrupted, spiraling into villainy, and intentionally written as a downfall arc? No problem. That would’ve been a compelling narrative with a real lesson for kids about the consequences of obsession and dishonesty. But nope, instead we’re stuck with this mess where her choices make it harder and harder to root for her.

Marinette's speech at the press conference—“Ladybug holds the truth, she holds the truth” —had me scratching my head cause it sound more like a villain then a hero. Like, did the writers forget she’s supposed to have hero-like qualities? She’s meant to be the messenger, the symbol of hope, the hero. But how often does she actually display that in her own show?

Lately, it feels like being Ladybug is more of an obligatory chore for her than something that brings her real joy or fulfillment. Isn’t the whole point of magical girls to inspire, to help others, and to grow through their journey? Where’s the sense of accomplishment, the spark, the joy of making a difference? It’s like they’ve stripped her of everything that should make her role uplifting and meaningful.

I've seen here and there about how MC was never meant to come off that way or the writers are trying to make her more complex or how dare you do you dislike complex female characters or the most used it was never her intention to come off that way it was a mistake.

I want you to picture this without the music just dialogue cause i'm going to be clearcut about this.

Ladybug went to an orphaned, grieving child—one who had been locked away in solitary confinement, surrounded by nothing but white walls and being sensory deprived—and lied to him about his father being a hero. Let that sink in. Gabriel, who systematically abused his own son, was painted as a noble martyr by Ladybug.

Adrien, a kid who was finally starting to question his father’s authority, even beginning to tear down the oppressive image of the man who controlled and hurt him, is now trapped in an even tighter mental cage. After all, if Paris sees his father as a hero, a savior, how could he possibly feel justified in blaming or resenting the man? Gabriel is now a martyr in the eyes of the world, and Adrien is left to wrestle with guilt and shame for ever having cruel thoughts about someone everyone else idolizes.

Ladybug’s decision to perpetuate this lie doesn’t just protect Gabriel’s image—it messes with Adrien’s already fragile mind. Instead of helping him heal or giving him the freedom to process the truth, she’s reinforced the very chains Gabriel used to control him. It’s not heroic; it’s delusional and harmful, all in the name of preserving some twisted version of peace in her head.

You want me to feel pity for a girl who I'm sorry if I sound harsh to yall at the end of the day just want to keep the peace to fill her delusions that everything is going to work out in her part at the end when really she's just the worst type of coward there is when it comes to confrontations lmao. Accountability? She avoids them like they’re some kind of plague. It’s almost impressive how someone can masquerade as a hero while being utterly incapable of facing the hard truths. Lmao, sure, let’s all pity her.

Honestly, in the earlier seasons, at least Marinette seemed to feel bad about her mistakes. Now? She’s only gotten worse. I headcanon that receiving the Ladybug mantle or becoming the Guardian inflated her ego, giving her a power trip. With no proper mentor to hold her accountable and everyone automatically deferring to her leadership, who’s left to challenge her? Well maybe CN if he has the guts to do so but he'd rather cower into his shell lol.

In hindsight, I don’t think Marinette should’ve become Ladybug—not because she lacks the capability, but because the role itself seems to have worsened her as a person. Instead of growing into the hero I though she was meant to be, she’s devolved, losing some of the humility and self-awareness she had at the start of the series.

Let’s be real—we’re in Season 6 now, and we all know the writers aren’t going to make Marinette face any real consequences. The whole universe bends over backward to accommodate her. If you’ve seen Season 5, you know exactly what I’m talking about.

That said, I’ll give credit where it’s due: the special was fun. Yes, despite all my ranting, I actually enjoyed it because it was funny in its own way.

At this point, though, I’m only sticking around for Adrien and Lila. Honestly? I’m rooting for Lila to be the one to drop the truth bomb and expose everything. It would be chef’s kiss poetic if she ended up being the one to set things straight. Lmao.

P.s For anyone who thinks there is a dilemma to be had about the whole thing its really not lol rip the bandaid off.

It reeks of a megalomaniac in the making, making her come off like a gaslighting psychopath. Ironically, it reminds me of Gabriel—especially with the way he used similar wording. Honestly, are we sure Marinette isn’t Gabriel’s true daughter? Because the parallels are man.

I’m genuinely angry that she is the one everyone feels sorry for, and it’s only because the show is stuck in her perspective. If we spent even a fraction of the screen time on Adrien’s pain, it would make for a far more compelling story. It’s infuriating. Marinette isn’t some helpless sheep/damsel victim here—no one forced her into this role at gunpoint. She made her choices, knowingly and willingly. How dare she act like the weight of the world was thrust upon her without her consent? When she very much messed with a grieving kid here?

And yet, Adrien’s pain—real, tangible, and far more tragic—is constantly sidelined. He’s an orphan, being lied to by nearly everyone around him, adults and teens alike, and his suffering is treated as a subplot to Marinette’s endless drama. Why should the audience feel more for her than for the boy who’s lost everything? Why is his pain has to be centered to her??

This isn't a small mistake this has far reaching consequences if the show had the balls to do it to lie to the entire world over a man who terrorized on people fear.

If Adrien ever became a villain, I wouldn’t blame him. In fact, I’d understand and give him the free ticket to go ahead and cataclysm and burned the world .

[lemotmo]

You and she and several others are correct. Everyone needs to take a breath and relax.

Q. So you just have zero expectations for the mid season finale?

A. No, I have what I would call realistic expectations for the mid season finale given where we are storyline wise. And where we are is at the very beginning of storylines. Especially for Eddie. The reality is we are only 8 episodes in, and 3 of those episodes were used for the opening disaster which means no real storyline movement. The storyline episodes we did receive were basically used to clean up either what Tim meant to do or regretted doing last season. Getting Bobby back as captain. Breaking up Buck and Tommy and getting Maya back to Hen and Karen. I also think episode 9 was clearly supposed to be the original mid season finale episode, which is why they filmed it before wrapping for the year. So episode 8 was supposed to be a kind of penultimate episode, meaning basically a set up episode. So it's probably not going to feel like a traditional finale episode. But lots of shows on ABC will now have that problem because ABC decided to wrap up for the year 2 weeks earlier than people were expecting. Most shows expected the Thanksgiving break and then to have one more episode before wrapping for the year so lots of their shows will likely have disjointed mid season finales. This is not going to be a strictly 911 problem. Another issue, which I completely understand and agree with, is there has been entirely too much Athena focus. She was basically 85 percent of the first 3 episodes and was more than half of last week's episode and that theme sounds like it's continuing with the mid season finale. So 5 out of 8 episodes have basically been Athena centric and that is too much too close together. Especially considering how much screentime she ate up at the end of last season as well. People are Athena'd out. Angela Bassett is a total badass so I understand them wanting to utilize her but it's too much and at this point it's irritating most people because it's coming at the expense of the entire fire fam and no one wants to sacrifice their screentime for cop Athena screentime. I do think people would be slightly less annoyed if we had a bit more focus on the 118 characters as opposed to so much Athena.

The other big problem is Brad. I genuinely don't want to see him again after this coming episode. Callum seems absolutely lovely and the initial use of him prior to Bobby returning to the 118 was fun to watch, but in typical Tim fashion, it's been dragged out too long and now it's just in the way. So that's even more screentime being used on someone the audience genuinely doesn't care about. But the moment people started loving and interacting with Callum it was inevitable that Tim would change course and drag his arc out longer. Between Athena and Brad there just hasn't been enough time to give to Eddie, Hen and Chimney. Buck has had decent focus, but again that's because they initially intended to break him and Tommy up last season so they had to spend time fixing that at the beginning of this season. This is where we are storyline wise. So people going into this episode pissed off that Eddie isn't going to say he's gay, which I don't think he'll say even when they get to the sexuality arc, makes no sense to me. We are at the very beginning of Eddie's storyline. A realistic expectation for his character in the mid season finale is deciding to go get Christopher or having a nice video chat with Christopher that indicates positive movement on that part of the story. That's it. That's where we are for Eddie right now. A realistic expectation for Buck is him deciding to go out and enjoy his new found freedom in his newly expanded pond. That's it. Anything else we might get from them in the mid season finale would just be a nice surprise. And we might get something but I'm not expecting anything from a Buddie standpoint. Their storyline is going to be in 8b and I think it will be early. And once it starts I expect it to move fairly consistently because I do still think episode 12, the 118th overall, is still the plan for their first kiss. The first part of this season did not go how anyone predicted so I understand the frustration but everything indicates Buddie is a when at this point not an if. They're going to tell the story on their timeline not ours.

Thank you Nonny. 😋

Yeah, I'm just going into this one not expecting anything big for episode 8. The only thing I'm desperately hoping for is some Eddie and Chris interaction. I really think that the Brad & Eddie conversation Callum talked about will be about Chris. Nothing else would make sense at this point in Eddie's story. I'm also still hoping that we'll see Eddie leave to Texas at the end of the episode to go get Chris.🤞

After 8x06 I am now completely sure that Buddie is coming. I said that before. For me that episode showed me all I needed to see in order to fully believe. But I admit that we all miscalculated the timeline Tim would go for. He is obviously using 8a to close all the storylines he began in season 7. 8b will be treated as its own mini-season.

The only storyline that will still be unsolved will be Eddie's and I think Ali is right to think that his story (and the eventual Buddie story) will come to the forefront in 8b.

That's about all I wanted to add here. 😋

IMPORTANT! Please don't repost this ask and/or a link that leads straight to my Tumblr account on Twitter or any other social media. Thank you!

Heads up! For anyone who is giving me the shifty eyes for reposting Ali's updates instead of reblogging. Read this.

Remember, no hate in comments, reblogs or inboxes. Let's keep it civil and respectful. Thank you.

If you are interested in more of Ali’s posts, you can find all of her posts so far under the tag: anonymous blog I love.

[artist-issues]

While we're talking about HTTYD irks (while most of it is great), I think Valka coming back was a stupid idea and poorly done. It was literally so dumb and made no sense and there wasn't enough buildup and I am Annoyed by it every time.

Valka coming back was only a good idea to try and take the movie to that "Epic Fantasy" level. They had to have a connection to our main characters in the "new branch of the world" they were exploring, to make it more palatable.

But yeah, having her be this visionary who wanted peace (totally inexplicably) before Hiccup was even born really makes Hiccup's adventure in the original movie seem a little less...visionary.

I do think the idea is pretty epic. Hiccup being the son of two parents who are all about Protection, but one hides what she loves while the other wants to tear apart the world to protect what he loves...that was cool, because Hiccup gets to be the Balance. Make peace where you can (like with dragons) but where you can't, make war in the name of protection (like with Drago.) Nice and neat...for a Fantasy Epic.

But what I loved about the first How to Train Your Dragon was that it was more a plain, good, story. It just winked at Fantasy Epics as it flew by in a charming, quirky, adventure-package. It didn't go "KILL the father-figure! DRAMATIC Celtic-heritage character arc! ESTRANGED king-and-queen REUNITE on the EVE OF WAR! ELDRITCH Alpha-biology! We don't just have WARLORDS, we have PIRATE-TRAPPERS, we have VIKING CHIEFTAIN ASSEMBLY LORE!"

The first movie didn't take itself so seriously. It just showed its big heart genuinely, when it needed to. HTTYD 2 tries to maintain the quirk with grossness-jokes and Ruffnut's whole "romance" thing, but it's just not doing it.

Anyway! Those are my thoughts! I don't think the second movie was bad, I just think it fit a different type of story than what the first one really was.

[oddlydrawnfriend]

Considering how 911 has forgiven every terrible parent of the main characters, not forgiving Eddie who has devoted his entire life to Christopher since he was born would be absolutely ridiculous. Like Buck's whole speech to Chris on why to forgive Eddie is him forgiving his own parents who drove him to self-harm to gain attention? Which is way worse than what Eddie did. We've been told time and time again how much Eddie's parents messed him up in canon, and now suddenly they are the more 'stable' choice to parent a kid?

Another point if we continue with Eddie losing Chris is it would reinforce the very harmful lie that Eddie thinks: he cannot have joy, forgiveness, and identity outside of his son.

The blowout with Kim only happens once Eddie tries to find closure with Shannon in a very messed up form on non-consensual therapy. Eddie recognized what he was doing wrong and tried putting a stop to it. He was not going to go to Kim again after telling her about Shannon. But once he finds some sort of closure, he is punished harshly by his son walking in and then walking out of his life, making his worst nightmare come true.

He finds forgiveness with the help of the priest and joy in a very very long time? The newest clip seems to punish him immediately with now Chris might not even come back.

CHRIS'S POV

Even from Chris's POV, it doesn't make sense that somehow both the Diaz grandparents suddenly gained emotional intelligence and maturity to raise Chris in a healthy environment to get over his trauma when they couldn't do that for more than 30 years?! Chris is avoiding, I doubt he is getting therapy there to deal with it. It was traumatic and he is valid for being mad but staying mad is hurting him. Eddie's whole arc and issue stem from the toxic masculinity that he needed to unlearn which makes him the king of repression. You know who caused a silly goofy man (Eddie at his core is very silly and is forced to be serious) to repress? His parents who are now somehow better options to deal with Chris's complicated emotions?

They think Chris loves the water, but they don't know the enormous work Eddie did to help Chris get over the tsunami. Chris breaks down during COVID because he misses Carla and his friends which dredges up his abandonment issues? They don't know that it was Buck who supported him through it and how Eddie adjusted his relationship with Ana to make him more comfortable. They don't know that Eddie quit the job he loved so Chris wouldn't be scared of losing him. They don't know how scared Chris was when Eddie got shot. We often focus on how Buck broke down and how Chris hugs him but Chris is breaking down with him together.

THE WILL (DISREGARDING ROMANCE)

Eddie's not stupid. He didn't put Buck instead of his parents in his will out of spite. Because really when it comes down to it, Buck was the best option for the will in canon. In the very beginning, we were told Tia Pepa and Abuela can't take care of Chris full time (thus, Carla). But Carla is paid for her job, she won't be on the will. Eddie has no other family in LA and we don't know how his situation is with his sisters. However, considering canon implies then to be younger (thus his parentification), Eddie would consider them too young (subjective) to raise his son. None of the 118 is as involved with Chris as Buck is. In fact, a big reason is the fact that is that Buck allows the Diaz boys a safe space which Eddie was not allowed to have growing up.

Buck has respected Chris's autonomy (admires it even- canon from s2), supports and listens to him without making him feel bad, expresses his emotions and finds ways to support him (like finding equine therapy, accessible skateboard) and respects his decision even if he doesn't like it (going to Texas). And I'm not saying because of Buddie or anything. Even if they remain platonic co-parents (co-parenting as described by Oliver Stark and Ryan Guzman), they serve as parallels to things Eddie wouldn't have gotten from his parents if he was in Chris's position.

Eddie was forced to manage his mother's emotions while his father was absent. Chris has a dead/absent mother but never has he had to manage Eddie's emotions. When Eddie has a mental breakdown, he calls Buck and is told to focus on his own healing (equine therapy). Time and time again, Eddie has said that his problems are not on Chris to help.

When Chris wakes up crying from a nightmare about the tsunami, Eddie gets him help and never criticizes him. What do you think happened when Eddie would wake up from his own nightmares after being discharged from the army? He was living with his parents, Shanon and baby Chris, there's no way his parents didn't know about it. We have proof in canon that Eddie never received any help and Shannon was at the end of her rope until she abandoned him. All his parents did was fight him for custody and applaud him for almost dying (aka silver star).

POSSIBLE FIX

One way to maybe fix this is by working with the theme of Eddie reclaiming his agency. If he goes to Texas to fight for his son, to have that communication, group therapy even, letting Chris know he is working on making himself better and that Chris needs to confront his issues and how running away and not feeling with grief is how the Kim situation happened in the first place.

Or, I understand that Gavin McHugh might want to take a break and return to the show except a few scenes. We can give him the Denny or May Grant treatment, where they are there but we don't see them anymore, just referenced. Like have a video call saying he wants to come back, show Eddie ecstatic and ready to hug someone at the airport, fade to black, and next time we can have Eddie on cloud nine but also scared of losing Chris again.

TLDR; It's unfair to punish Eddie when every main character's terrible parent has been forgiven and reinforces the idea that he isn't allowed to have joy, forgiveness and identity outside of Chris. Keeping Chris with his parents implies they are a better choice when they're the reason Eddie has these issues. There are better ways to handle the situation while minimizing Gavin's screen time.

[casscainmainly]

I know your not really much of a Jason Todd fan but I kinda wanna hear your opinion on this. Is the Bruce Wayne Brainwshing Jason Todd still canon? If so so you think it’s out of character for Bruce to do this.

Also how do you feel about Bruce’s characterization in modern comics in general actually?

Honestly it’s one of the reasons I’m kinda hesitant to read the comics, because while I’m super interested in all the lore- both Batman himself and his family (especially Cassandra she sounds awesome I love characters that show unwavering, intense dedication to compassion)I DONT want to read comics where Bruce is like, a completely awful paranoid asshole with none ofhis redeemable qualities (I got interested in Batman via clips of the JLU/BTAS)And according to a lot of Batman fans his characterization in this respect has been on a downward spiral for years now.

Like I’m not even a “god dad Bruce Wayne” person, I think his actions regarding Stephane Brown make a lot of sense for him actually and play into the effect that Jason Todd’s death has on him well and kinda wanna read me about that outside of fanfiction.

PS.Sorry if this ask is long and kinda random, I know this is mostly a Cassandra Cain blog.

Interesting question!! I'm not an expert on Bruce or Jason, so I'll answer to the best of my knowledge. I'm assuming Bruce brainwashing Jason is a reference to Gotham War, when he injects fear toxin into Jason's brain to make him afraid anytime he experiences adrenaline. I haven't read this so I can't comment too much, but this breakdown is useful if you want context for what led Bruce to this moment; it did happen in an in-continuity comic, so yes, it is (unfortunately) canon.

Some things to note for the context of Gotham War is that Bruce is grappling with Zur-En-Arrh, a sort of second personality. While this doesn't make it good writing, Bruce is not 100% in-character when he injects Jason. Whether or not that absolves him of wrongdoing is questionable, but it's a little unfair to Bruce as a character, and even to Chip Zdarsky as a writer, to think the thing with Jason was meant to be an in-character moment. So while I do think injecting Jason is out of character, that's kind of the point of the arc.

That's not to say the run is well-written. I can't judge myself, but many people dislike this run for numerous reasons. But this is just one of Bruce's modern runs - there are many more amazing Bruce comics out there. Ram V's Detective Comics and Scott Snyder's Absolute Batman are two fantastic takes on Bruce (though the latter is an alternate universe and ongoing, it's so far extremely entertaining!).

There will always be better and worse times for a character's characterisation, and you will encounter some horrible stuff in canon, but you'll find some life-changing stories too. You sound like you genuinely want to delve into comics, so please do! Don't let the risk of reading something bad stop you - there is so much good in here, stories that will make you laugh and cry and stick in your mind forever.

Since you're specifically looking for dad Bruce Wayne stuff, here are some recommendations!

Batgirl (2000): a very nuanced portrayal of Bruce as a dad to Cass. Definitely not a Good Dad Bruce at all, but he genuinely loves her and tries his hardest. 5/10 on the Good Dad Bruce scale.

Tynion's Detective Comics (2016): very good starter comic in general for the Batfam, and Bruce has numerous sweet moments with Tim and Cass (Steph too, if you count her as a kid). 8/10 on the Good Dad Bruce scale.

Robin & Batman (2021): not 100% sure if this is in continuity, but it's 3 issues and a lovely depiction of early Dick and Bruce. Features very realistic mishaps on Bruce's part, but sets up the foundation for a strong, beautiful relationship. 6.5/10 on the Good Dad Bruce scale. (This is also getting a sequel featuring Jason!)

World's Finest: Batman/Superman (2022-): an ongoing series that is pure comic book fun. Robin!Dick features heavily here, and there's some wonderful Batdad moments. 8.5/10 on the Good Dad Bruce scale.

Tom Taylor's Nightwing: probably the best dad Bruce in modern comics, and has very sweet moments with Dick throughout. One big caveat is the characterisation can be off, so I recommend this only in the context of Bruce being a good dad to Dick. 10/10 on the Good Dad Bruce scale.

You also can't go wrong with either Batman and Robin (2011) or (2023), which focus on Damian and Bruce (haven't read either but 2023 in particular seems to have good dad Bruce). Batman & The Signal and Batman & The Outsiders (2019) have great Duke-Bruce moments, while Bruce Wayne: The Road Home: Batgirl is the best Steph-Bruce stuff we'll ever get that isn't wildly out of character. Batman and Robin: Year One is currently coming out for more Robin!Dick and Bruce relationship cuteness and drama.

I hope that answered your ask! I am mostly a Cass blog but I do love to talk about other characters so no need to apologise :)).

[cosmicjoke]

Okay, I've got one more bone to pick about the way people mischaracterize Levi's refusal to tell Jean that killing is right as Levi actually making some sort of moral statement and expressing his belief that killing is wrong. I really do wonder how people come up with this stuff.

Levi saying he doesn't know whether Jean choosing not to kill is right or wrong isn't the same as him saying he thinks killing is wrong. It’s Levi allowing Jean to decide that for himself, based on his own, personal beliefs and the objective reality of the situation, while acknowledging that for himself, Levi is able and willing to kill dependent on the circumstances. It's Levi NOT making a moral judgment on killing, or trying to convince anyone else of the moral rightness or wrongness of killing, and to try and frame it as such is pure projection. It's projecting ones own moral beliefs onto Levi and trying to twist his refusal to moralize this issue as some sort of proof that he's morally against it.

Again, though, for Levi it's not even a moral question. It's a question of objective reality. He doesn't try to justify killing to himself through some moral framework, nor does he condemn himself or others for killing in and of itself. Again, it's not about morality to Levi. It's just about objective reality. As in, if I don't do this, then this other thing will happen, and I have to decide which choice sits most right with me, which course I feel is correct in the moment. Either I let myself and my comrades get killed to uphold some static, black and white moral standard and worldview, or I kill the people trying to kill us and save lives in the process. Again, it's not a question of morality, it's a question of practical, objective reality. It’s about objectively acknowledging action and consequence and then weighing, based on that, which choice you feel is best. Where the morality comes in is in which of those options you believe most aligns with your own personal sense of right and wrong.

Also, this repeated claim that Levi is morally grey is wrong, because again, Levi's entire philosophy of no regrets is based on moral conviction. Do what you FEEL is right in the specific situation you're in, whether the outcome proves it to have been the right choice or not, and that way you'll have no regrets, because you'll have not compromised your moral values. I've said it before that Levi is the most morally consistent character in the series. He never compromises his moral values, something perfectly demonstrated in his choice during the RtS arc. When he does something quote on quote "bad", like killing or committing acts of violence, it's because he believes it's the best course of action in any, given scenario.

What people just don't get about Levi is that his moral values aren't static and don't adhere to one, single school of thought, i.e. "killing is always wrong". Levi's morality is fluid depending on the situation. That doesn't mean he has no moral conviction, it means he understands that morality itself is a complex and multi-faceted concept that isn't easily defined or pinned down.

And he doesn't try to force his way of thinking onto anyone else, as demonstrated, again, during the Uprising arc and his exchange with Jean and Armin. People seem to take that to mean that Levi is making some sort of statement as to the wrongness inherent in the act of killing. But again, it's got nothing to do with how he views killing morally, it has to do with Levi respecting the agency of others and allowing them to choose for themselves what they think is right and wrong, or what they think is best. Levi clearly doesn't view killing as "wrong no matter what" or he wouldn't do it. There would never be a circumstance, then, in which he felt killing was the best course. There would be no situation in which he chose to kill, or in which he didn't regret killing. Just because Levi doesn’t deign to tell Jean that he was wrong for not killing doesn’t mean Levi himself views killing in and of itself as wrong.

Again, it’s just him respecting Jean’s agency and acknowledging that he himself doesn’t know for certain what the right and wrong choice is. That doesn't mean there aren't circumstances in which he views killing as wrong though, either. He clearly does view killing in certain circumstances as wrong, just like he views it as right, again, depending on the circumstances, like what Zeke did to the people in Ragako village, etc… Killing innocent people who pose no threat to you is clearly wrong in Levi's eyes. See his disgust at Zeke, or at Kenny for killing members of his squad. Obviously Levi has his own moral standards. He’s just not a big enough dick to try and tell others that his personal beliefs should also be theirs. He’s not so arrogant or egotistical as to try and impose his personal beliefs and feelings on anyone else. That’s why he says he “doesn’t know” what’s right or wrong. Because he doesn’t. Nobody does. He can only go by what he personally feels and dictate his own actions by that. What everyone else does is up to them. He can form personal opinions about their actions, but he doesn’t try to tell anyone one way or another what they should do, again, because he actually respects other people and their choices.

Honestly, so many of these bad takes come down to people's inability to view anything free from the constraints of their shipping goggles. They always approach their understanding of Levi's character from the premise that their ship is canon and work backward from there. In particular, you see these takes coming from the eruri fandom, where some people in that community want to believe that Levi has compromised his moral belief that killing is wrong because he just looooves Erwin so much and is willing to sacrifice everything for his beautiful blonde hunk, lol. So they have to re-frame Levi's refusal to make a moral judgment to others on the act of killing as him actually making a moral judgement on the act of killing. That way, they can then claim that Levi sacrifices his moral values for Erwin because he just loves him so, so much, instead of approaching it from an objective viewpoint, which would then lead them to the obvious conclusion that Levi follows Erwin's orders and is willing to kill people because those actions, dependent on the circumstances, fall in line with what he personally values morally, i.e. doing what's best for humanity, i.e. saving the lives of the people he's directly responsible for.

Those are actions taken and guided by Levi's morality. It's why he's so upset when he learns that Erwin's main goal isn't to secure humanity's victory, but to discover what's in Eren's basement, because it throws into question whether Levi's been making the right moral choice all these years in following Erwin's orders. Levi chose to follow Erwin because he believed Erwin's own intentions were pure and it would allow Levi to help people in the most effective way possible.

Just to lay out further why saying Levi thinks killing is wrong is a ridiculous take, I want to reiterate that it's not about Levi choosing what he thinks or knows is "right" in the moment, it's about Levi following his heart. Following ones personal, moral beliefs won't always lead to the "right" outcome.

Levi doesn't know if ANYTHING is the "right" answer, and that's what his entire philosophy is predicated on. Not knowing whether his actions will lead to a desirable or good outcome, being able to accept that he doesn't know what the outcome will be, but not allowing that uncertainty to instill doubt or hesitation in him and his choices.

He follows what he FEELS in his heart is right, but he won't and can't give a definitive answer about whether it absolutely is or not. The way Levi is able to live with no regrets, as he says, is because, regardless of the outcome, whether good or bad, he knows he did what his heart told him to do in the moment. And yes, that includes killing in certain situations.

It has to do with practical reality. If your life is being threatened, and you know, if you don't take the practical action of killing the person threatening you first, it means your life or the lives of others will with certainty end, then you are absolutely, 100% justified in killing that person.

I've said this a million times already, but there's a very GOOD reason there's a distinction made between "murder" and "justifiable homicide" within the actual law. Like I said before, to criticize Levi for failing to be a pacifist, when his pacifism would have led to him and others being killed, is the definition of cruelty and ignorance and exposes those giving the criticism as having led breathtakingly pampered and privileged lives.

Isayama's story isn't meant to lead the reader toward condemnation of the characters for engaging in acts of violence and killing, or to make you think of them as "bad people" for doing these things. It wants to lead the reader toward understanding that it's the circumstances that force one into a position of having to kill to protect themselves and others that should be condemned.

Killing is "bad", yes, but that doesn't mean a person who kills is bad themselves, or morally wrong. Circumstances like war, like prejudice and persecution, like social ostracization and disenfranchisement are the real villains of AoT. It's why very few, if any, of the characters in AoT are framed as purely villainous. We aren't meant to think of any of them as "bad guys", per say, we're meant to think of the circumstances that led them down a specific path as bad. That's not to say there aren't bad people in AoT. There very much are. People that kill for pleasure, people that revel in violence and in hurting others. People that use their circumstances in life as an excuse to hurt others without there being a practical or understandable reason for it. Just like there are good people in AoT, too. People who, despite their circumstances in life, still extend great compassion and kindness and love to others. And yes, Levi is one of those good people.

These people also try to take Armin's statement that they're all "bad people" now as the narrative somehow trying to tell the audience the same, while never acknowledging that Armin's statement here is taken out of context, without regard to Armin's own bias against himself.

Isayama doesn't say Armin and the others are "bad people" for killing, he simply says they're troubled by having killed because there's this idea conditioned into them from the lives they've led that killing is wrong, no matter the circumstances. Whether one believes that or not though comes down to individual perception and moral belief, which in itself proves that morality isn't a static concept, but rather one that operates on a sliding scale, determined upon ones individual and personal views. Views which can be influenced, of course, by ones environment and societal norms and pressures. It isn't a definitive statement as to ones moral worth as a person, as to their morality or immorality, or a declaration on whether any of these characters are good or bad.

I could just as easily argue, and I have, that it's worse and more morally ambiguous to refuse to kill to uphold ones own sense of moral righteousness if that refusal leads to other people being killed. That kind of rigid moral standard shows a refusal to understand that morality is a complex concept with no, clear definition and could easily be seen as prioritizing ones individual sense of self-righteousness above the lives of people. It's why Armin later refuses to sit out the fight at the docks, despite Reiner's offer for him and the others to do so, because he refuses to put his own sense of moral comfort above what he feels is the right and necessary course of action. Armin's perception of their situation and of himself morally isn't 100% objective on any level. Yes, Armin feels he's a bad person for having killed, but that doesn't mean it's objectively true. Seeing killing as wrong, no matter the reason, is a dangerous and entirely unrealistic and impossible standard to live up to.

One more point. Levi is very firmly "morally good" based on general standards of moral goodness, because every action he takes extends out of a place of kindness and compassion, and as I stated before, he never compromises that morality. His compassion is his defining trait as a character and it dictates his every action.

Once more, it's what Levi's "no regrets" philosophy is predicated on. As long as you make the choice that you genuinely believe is the best course at the time and so long as it's rooted in and coming from a place of genuine compassion and kindness, (which again, Levi's actions always are), then even if the result is horrible, you still won't have any regrets because your decision was made by following what you felt in your heart was right. Not "knowing" what's right, but following what your heart tells you is right, according to your own, personal beliefs. It's about not beating yourself up for things out of your control.

Of course, this is probably what certain people in the fandom mean when they say Levi just does what he wants without concern for the consequences, but that's not what Levi is doing at all. He's simply acknowledging that he can't predict the outcome of anything, no matter how much knowledge he has, or how prepared he is, and so all he can do is make the choice he feels is the best one at the time, depending on the circumstances. Of course Levi would hope that it turns out alright, and that's what making the choice you feel is best is all about. Doing as well as you can and hoping it turns out good, but accepting that if it doesn't, it doesn't reflect on who you are as a person. The way some people frame it though, in typical fashion, is that Levi just does what he wants and doesn't care how it turns out. It's literally the most ungenerous and negative interpretation one could have of a genuinely honorable and wise philosophy.

It's also absurdly disingenuous to claim that Levi doesn't care about the consequences of his actions. He absolutely cares. He cares more than anybody. That’s why you can say, objectively, that Levi is a good person, because he genuinely wants everybody to be okay. He feels genuine compassion and empathy for others and makes every decision he does out of a pure desire to protect people and save lives, or out of a genuine desire to honor those lives or bring comfort. He just knows and accepts that no matter how hard he tries to get it right, no matter what precautions he takes or knowledge he brings to bear on any situation, no matter how sound he feels his judgment is, it could still all turn out wrong, and there's no point in dwelling on that, because all it will lead to, in the end, is a paralyzing fear which helps no one.

[sapsuckers-and-stardust]

People acting as if unification “fixes” everything when you need to dig deeper into it and investigate why the leads of the franchise got such stupid, shitty endings in the first place.

These corporations don’t care about the Star Trek universe. They don’t care about the characters. They don’t care about the timeline.

The reason generations requires a “fix” is because it was never meant to be a coherent or impactful story— it was literally a corporate solution to hard relaunching the franchise. It was to make people care about the TNG crew and close out the TOS arc. The movie was a nightmare to develop because it was created to fulfill a marketing goal and not because there was story to tell. They took forever to figure out what the film would be about— the basic plot didn’t exist until long after after the movie got a green light!

Nimoy didn’t like and refused to participate, which made it even dumber because Spock not being there makes no logical sense. Kirk dies stupidly because they wanted to aggressively “pass the baton” to TNG (no TNG hate it’s just stupid things were done to assert them as the new head of the franchise when none of it was necessary.)

The reason kirk and Spock need a fix-it is because the company didn’t care about the emotional core of the entire franchise and fucked it up to make a movie to promote their shiny new series. I don’t care what these people these people think about Spirk! I don’t care what bill shatner says about spirk! I don’t care what Leonard nimoy’s estate thinks about spirk!

WE— as the fans of start trek— and often times the queer people who have loved Kirk and Spock— have had our own version of what happened for decades. We own the story.

Fanfiction (and fandom and fanon more generally) is, as professor Harry Jenkins once said: "…a way of the culture repairing the damage done in a system where contemporary myths are owned by corporations instead of owned by the folk."

Like I don’t need some weird ai placation to tell me spirk is real— it also LITERALLY DOESNT DO THAT.

I was indifferent but I’m actually getting progressively more annoyed at this like this thing is not beautiful and cool it is just dumb.

And while I am still angry about it all, can I just scream here on my stupid blog that this?

If I have to see people tagging my stuff asking for Unification to be added again and again I am going to lose it. You want to add Unification to my web weave post that I made over the summer? Neat! Save the images, hit "create post," and remake it yourself. I am dead serious. I have zero desire to ever utilize that short or anything else from Otoy in my edits, web weaves, and so forth.

As angry as I am, it's great that so many of you love and support this short, really it is because I do understand what it means for their story (although why we needed a corporation to show us this vision of happiness... this modern era has killed the soul of fandom, the very desire to transform the canon. That's what fandom does. Like. This is straight-up depressing to me if you couldn't envision a happy ending for K/S prior to this), but leave me out of it, please.

[kacievvbbbb]

I think it’s interesting how as time goes on Zoro kind of becomes more and more like mihawk in some ways whether that’s just because if you spend time with someone for 2 years you’re bound to pick up their habits or a deliberate attempt to emulate him is a conversation for another time. And Mihawk and Zoro where already pretty similar at the start so it’s a little hard to notice now.

But yeah whether unconsciously or consciously Zoro is becoming a bit more like Mihawk and it’s interesting to think that while this means maturing in some ways (he’s swordsmanship for one but he’s also just quieter much more assured of himself) it also means deaging in some others.

Despite their significant age gap and general dispositions, when it comes down to it Zoro is just a lot more emotionally mature and developed than Mihawk is. And a big part of why is because he found something larger than himself to devote his life too, hell Mihawk himself even kind of acknowledges this when he agrees to take Zoro on as a student when Zoro begs for the sake of his captain and crew. He acknowledges that putting aside his own ego and dreams for the sake of someone else isn’t something he can do and sees it as a fault in himself and a strength in Zoro.

Mihawk may be outwardly mature and his skills defiently did not stagnant but I’d wager that Mentally Mihawk is still stuck at the same age he was when he took over the title of world’s strongest swordsman. Honestly maybe even younger. And it isn’t until training Zoro, letting Perona stay with him, for probably the first time in his life taking charge of lives outside his own did he finally unarrest his development.

If Zoro is purposely trying to emulate Hawkeyes, which it wouldn’t be a surprise if he was that’s who he’s trying to be Afterall, then it would honestly set him back emotionally because fundamentally as he is now Mihawk’s attitude doesn’t work in a crew. It’s too singular, too abrasive. And while that abrasiveness can be useful in Zoro’s role as Luffy’s first mate sometimes it makes him a little too callous a little too apathetic, like with his disregard for Luffy’s sadness over vegapunk.

But Zoro has his crew to temper that, they are honestly just too ridiculous to ever stay serious around. And try as he might to hide it Zoro is also just a silly dude who likes to be horrifically petty with his opponents. And zoro still has so much fire in him, so much he has too prove and so much he wants to protect to ever really fall into Mihawk’s apathy. Zoro has Luffy who even after they reach their dreams will probably still continue to turn the world upside down forever keeping Zoro in some kind of trouble and his life interesting.

Zoro can’t be Mihawk because even Mihawk can’t be Mihawk anymore. Being with crossguild and crossing with the Red hair pirates and the strawhats is going to change him, it has too. if Mihawk is going to live after losing his title he’s probably gonna have to become a little bit more like Zoro.

[pinacoladamatata]

Man like. I really hope the theories about 'redeeming Solas' ending being to die/mirror his friend wisdom where he dies but will eventually get respawned as a 'new' him, aren't true. Because ngl that's. A very unappealing ending imo. Like that isn't worth the 10 year wait at all.

[fiapple]

i'm getting towards the end of the skypeia arc, & i'd like to say just how much i adore the way the female strawhats have been treated.

just... every aspect of how the way their characters have been previously contextualized influences the story-line is treated with a masterful amount of consideration. we're given so many layers to both of them that enrich not only their characters specifically, but the arc, and the one piece world as a whole. without nami & robin having their specific skills, and their specific values, without those being built upon, the story would have come to a halt.

you could not have skypeia without nami & robin being who they are as individuals. not just because they never would've gotten there without nami, but also because the way these women think is itself foundational to the machinations of the arc as a whole.

to be totally upfront, if you think any other strawhats were more central to the skypeia arc than nami & robin were you are full-on fucking lying to yourself.

[futuretrain]

very good post, thank you. i love the idea of fuyumi, but her execution is very shallow and isolated, if it makes sense? and not in the way that the childhoods of todoroki kids were isolating, but in terms of storytelling. all of the todoroki siblings are like that, including shouto, because each of them and their experience and trauma get evaluated separately, and then they simply have to come together to stop touya. they talk for a bit, sure (like the very and i mean *very* brief discussion that shouto and fuyumi got to have after the family dinner in the endeavor agency arc), but we don't get to see them have much in way of interaction together without endeavor being just. there and dominating the panel space and sucking up all the oxygen in the room.

it's disheartening, because it leaves so much unaddressed. each of the siblings circle their recovery/processing around endeavor, when, considering how the subplot of the todoroki family started, it should have been about the siblings, together. shouto said "i forgot all about you", and that helped him self-realize for a moment as a whole person, not one part of a quirk and one part of legacy expectation.

and yet endeavor's presence entirely dominates the subplot thereon and to the very end of the story. the todoroki kids become extensions to endeavor's character and tools to prop him up as needed, and fuyumi, especially, i feel gets it terrible. she gets to say once that she feels a lot of the same as natsuo, yet she never gets to actually express it - it's just a throwaway line. what she is written to do (and what is never explored in relation to shouto himself or his relationship with fuyumi or fuyumi's mental state and thought process) is create convenient opportunities for endeavor to engage with shouto in a non-professional atmosphere. it's fuyumi who gets used to organize the family (and interns/friends) dinner during endeavor agency, so endeavor doesn't have to force his son who's just declared that he won't behave to him like his son during the internship to endure his presence in a personal setting, because that would make endeavor look like even more of a selfish insincere dick. it's fuyumi who gives endeavor shouto's phone number so endeavor can blow his phone up with messages during school hours(!!!), so endeavor doesn't have to work to obtain his number in a different and more intentional and forceful way, because that would make endeavor look like even more of a selfish insincere dick.

i feel like you may be on to something with the fuyumi-eri comparison, because they are characters who are used as plot devices/props and as ways for the story to answer difficult questions without really answering. for fuyumi, it's this. for eri, it's the unspoken question hovering menacingly over the entirety of mha: what should be done with people whose quirks are too strong and dangerous. even though i find the saving of eri very powerful and an overall very good moment, the logic itself that deku uses - saying that eri's quirk is healing him, ergo it's a kind quirk, ergo eri deserves to be saved - i find very dangerous, for the simple reason that it refuses to engage with the possibility that someone's quirk may not be capable of kind things, so the answer in the end by exclusion posits that people whose powerful dangerous quirks cannot perform good actions do not deserve to be saved. and that idea permeates the story till the end - if only toga had known love before, if only she'd been better, she would've wanted to be kind - to give blood instead of taking it. afo could've been the kindest quirk. till the end, the story refuses to consider that a person may not be kind, and still deserve salvation, and only dreams of worlds where that they were just kinder, so as to fit the profile of someone who deserves to be saved.

TW: ABUSE, CHILD ABUSE

“He wants to air this dirty laundry to the world does he…? Dabi, you fiend…you’ve been waiting for this moment…when they couldn’t prevent mass destruction…and faith in heroes is wavering.” - chapter 292

I truly, wholeheartedly, believe that MHA as a story upholds the myth of the perfect victim. I do not want to discuss if Horikoshi did that on purpose, or subconsciously because of inner bias – I find no meaning in doing so. For me the execution of an idea, in the grand scheme of the narrative, holds more value than the intention of the author. I’ve also had my fair share of people infantilizing Asian authors in the anime community for their poor writing decisions for one lifetime. It’s patronizing to both the author and the people reading it. Whether or not Horikoshi intended for his themes of abuse to paint the picture they did does not matter, because that’s how it reads as.

MHA puts victims of abuse in narrow boxes and softly dictates what’s an acceptable reaction to said abuse. Victims are continuously walking a tightrope between being deserving of compassion and sympathy and being unredeemable monsters who are too far gone and are only good for martyrdom after being put down.  

Eri fits the clean cut depiction of abuse victims that media usually gears towards. She is untouched by the cruelty around her - she preserves her innocence and kindness. She isn't assertive, but rather meek and passive. She doesn't fight back with force. And when offered help, she is receptive to it. That is not to say that Eri's depiction doesn't have a place in fiction, or that her portrayal can't be representative of the experiences of some - as we all deal with trauma and the inhumanity people throw at us differently. We see the same thing in the portrayal of Fuyumi, who shares many of the qualities discussed above. The same thing applies to her - i personally love the idea of all the siblings having different reaction to their childhood trauma and abuse. It shows that victims are not some type of monolith.

But the narrative treats the "forgiving" or "receptive to help/support" victims of abuse with more grace and with much more kindness. if you are willing to forgive, or the very least be quietly tolerant, the story grants you a happy ending. Forgiveness isn't a bad thing, it is an individual choice - but an abuse victim shouldn't have to do it for them to have a happy ending.

In a vacuum Eri and Fuyumi's character arcs and depictions of abuse are good but it becomes a problem when that's the only experience and type of victim we ever hold in high value or recognize as valid and deserving of compassion. Which the story reinforces.

Touya and Tenko's backstories aren't pretty nor comfortable or easy to sit through. Their responses to abuse aren't either. Reactive abuse is very much real.

[puhpandas]

steel wool has the hugest opportunity in the world for a sb 2 like. vanny cassie plotline of her having been manipulated by mimic to be its new minion by framing Gregory during the elevator scene to cut off her one support system. gregory vanessa and freddy protags fleshing them out with dialogue as characters but also their motivations and what theyve been doing for years. have their long absence in games period but also in universe from helping the glamrocks/setting up mxes be explained by showcasing their fear and trauma by them just wanting to get away and they thought they were safe but they werent. have cassie be the reason they have to jump back into the fray and realize no matter what they do theyll have to kill mimic for good to be truly free even if they're afraid. plot of the game is Gregory trying to convince cassie he didnt do it and that shes being tricked and it takes all campaign to get through to her, probably after an intense dramatic climax. have Roxy be there by Cassies side to show how Freddy abandoning them at the Plex affected her and the 2 sides of the same coin the 2 of them have going on regarding sentience and their relationship with the characters they were designed to be with Freddy who got to be free and roxy who didnt. the actual vanny comes back as a big betrayal towards mimic after killing glitchtrap in hw2, either to become an antihero or to try and take over as mastermind. superstar duo reunite and names cleared. throughout the campaign Gregory finds out about ggy and its revealed in a room with documents about patient 46 and tapes where a final tape is found and Gregory speaks in it or is addressed by name. he grapples with it and not remembering it. btw setting is a modern day fallfest which is like amusement park size instead of small festival. boom peak game