#charmed analysis

[justgivemeabookplease]

Shrek 2, while a cinematic masterpiece, is also an interesting look at queerness and comp het.

Fiona is married so it's time to reunite with her parents. But instead of marrying a prince, she's married to an ogre. Not just that, but she's also an ogre. (Yes everyone knew she would sometimes be an ogre but that was when she was a child, she didn't know she would be an ogre for the rest of her life, and besides once she met the right prince she would stop being an ogre. She was supposed to stop being an ogre.)

But okay they're both ogres. We can still ask about when they'll have children because even if they're ogres they can still have kids, right? That's what married princes and princesses do so naturally that's what everyone does. Even if ogres might not be great parents (I've heard that ogres eat their young, is that something you people do?) it's still something that should be discussed.

And okay you can stay in Fiona's childhood bedroom filled with all the reminders that hey, everyone thought she was just a princess and princesses marry princes. Her toys left out from the last time she played with them. The prince slays the ogre. The princess offers a token of gratitude for slaying the ogre. Fiona wrote Mrs. Fiona Charming a million times in her diary because what else was she supposed to grow up to be?

And Harold you have to fix this, your country can't be ruled by ogres. You were unfit to rule when you were a frog but I changed you, I made you better, I made you a prince. You know how this works. Think of your daughter's safety.

Shrek goes to the Fairy Godmother and oh honey, ogres don't live happily ever after. It's just not done. It hasn't happened in all of fairy tale history. You have to change the both of you to be happy. You have to present as a prince and a princess. It will be better. You'll fit in better that way. You'll be accepted that way.

[lesbianwyllravengard]

People who think Wyll is too perfect try to make up flaws for him because they don't want to bother paying attention to his very real flaws in the game, such as hypocrisy, lack of self worth to the point of reckless endangerment, and finding Astarion charming.

[if-you-soul]

Mischaracterization in the CCCC fandom: a yapsesh (alternative title: Erm... What the Gore is Going On?)

Hi. Woaw. I'm actually making that post I talked about.

So. One thing I've noticed in the CCCC fandom is this weird fixation on gore, torture, violence, etc. Usually a level of graphic content that makes your average horror flick look... pretty tame!

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy horror! I even think a horror story based around psychological conflict similar to CCCC could work well!

But is it just me, or has this fandom COMPLETELY lost track of what the characters are like in the source material?

Like. Let's be real. Nowhere in the album does Soul do gruesome surgeries on Mind, nowhere does Mind go ripping people to shreds like Doomguy, et cetera. The closest thing we have to an implication of violence is what most of us call the "Juno incident"- as even "tines stabbed through eyes" is clearly a metaphor with the next line: "that the sides have condemned."

Im gonna talk ab the characters themselves under the cut

I feel the biggest victim of this mischaracterization is Soul. In the album he's... kind of a victim, really. He toughs out being dismissed and fought over and pushed aside and outright dehumanized for so, so long. Are we seriously just... going to characterize him based solely on his lowest point in TSE? Spring and a Storm and Mucka Blucka are also songs where he's present- along with his presence in Just Apathy that the fandom seems to outright deny to keep their characterization of him as some violent, abusive monster. (Which, again, is quite literally never alluded to! He's honestly kind of a victim, if anything!)

Ohhkay. Next topic. Mind. Oh boy I have thoughts on how people characterize Mind.

He's not emotionless. If you believe this, you've fallen for his stoic facade. All of his songs are just. So full of so much rage. Maybe even a little bit of grief and sadness and fear, masked by said rage. He isn't some emotionless robot- (Heart calls him an automaton as an insult, but that's another rant.) and honestly it feels like such a disservice to such an interesting character with so much unexplored depth to portray him as such.

Heart. Oh boy. Where do I start. Heart what did they do to you.

Heart is the emotional side, yes, but that isn't just some... smol innocent uwu baby who cries all the time. Emotions aren't small and cute and timid. They're INTENSE and PASSIONATE and EXHAUSTING. Strong emotions leave you so, so drained, good OR bad. This is so much more interesting than portraying him as some "uwu hai dere!!" type of character. Which is nowhere in the album.

Whole is hardly even a character. Soul worshipping and praying to whole is fanon.

This fandom's weird obsession with creating shock gore and one-upping each other in a violence competition has spiraled pretty far out of control, and it's honestly crazy. How do you go from an album about internal conflict to violence that would make even the cast of Resident Evil cringe? Brah.

Final notes uhhh. Soul is a victim who got pushed to his limit, not an evil heartless abuser. Mind is angry and unstable and hurt, not some emotionless robot. Heart is the entire emotional spectrum, not some innocent baby. Ok i . I think that's all. Have a good one

[ksjanes]

"To analyze the charms of a flower is like dissecting music; it is one of those things which it is far better to enjoy, than to attempt to fully understand."  

 ~Henry T. Tuckerman 

[sainteclectic]

the thing that's vital to understand about cccc is that they have reasons for what they do. but also, and this is important, they all kinda suck

mind is doing what he believes is best for them. he wants to be the perfect solution to every problem. he's also arrogant and incredibly petty, gloating and bitching every chance he gets about how much better he is than heart. he pretends his own feelings are just logical conclusions, while also devaluing other people's feelings. he sucks!

heart was never listened to by mind. he knows he's "weak and vile" but believes (rightfully!) that emotions are needed to survive. he also literally shot someone, refuses to admit that literally shooting someone is bad, and stubbornly both complains he's not listened to and never listens to anyone else. he sucks!

soul is exhausted. he's gone through this countless times, enduring the same arguments over and over. he just wants it to stop. so, he exerts as much power as he can over the two of them and threatens their lives. he's simultaneously both the most in control (of the three) and powerless (in the narrative), and he tries to control the other two for his own ends (even if those ends are ultimately good for them all). he sucks!

the story of cccc is ultimately about guys who kinda fucking sucks for their own reasons. the story is about the raw, unsanitized experience of mental illness. of course they're all deeply fucked up! removing their flaws is just re-sanitizing the purposeful mess that is the album and its characters

[royalarchivist]

Jaiden: Cucurucho, you have a lot of power, right?

Cucurucho: ...I don't know. Maybe.

Roier: Ah... Yes, you know, don't act like a dumbass, you have it. You have it, man. Eh?

Jaiden: Is there a way for us to protect all the Eggs? Do you know? I don't want anything to happen to the Eggs that happened to Bobby.

Cucurucho: Ha ha ha

Roier: WHAT? [Smacks Cucurucho]

Jaiden: [Bops him] Headpats.

Cucurucho: Maybe.

Jaiden: [Continues to bop him] Headpats. C'mon, I can get it out of you! Headpats! Chin scratches! Belly rubs!

Roier: [Joins Jaiden in bopping Cucurucho, chuckling and laughs]

Jaiden: Yeah? He's comin' around!

[Jaiden and Roier both laugh]

[that-random-outsider]

I heard mogan say this in an interview and I thought it was interesting to think about so here's a quick rant about Ella. So like Morgan was being asked about tge characters she plays (Ella if you some how didn���t get that from the beginning) and she mentions how Ella feels very much more like a teenager in the film, and I have to agree with that. She's very much more grounded, and blunt in the way you'd expect from someone who's realized just how shitty life can be. A trait that she shares with Red, who is another character who grew up poorly and tended to see things through a more jaded lens.

She also goes on to say that she thinks that because Ella didn’t have the best life growing up she channels all that energy into a protectiveness, and like I just don't feel like that's talked about enough because it's my favorite part of her character. Like throughout the story you hear Ella talk about her disdain for royalty and how Bridget is different, and how she's the strongest person she knows, and I just find that so interesting, because that protectiveness stems from a kind of selfishness in a way. She wants to keep Bridget safe because she doesn't want to have to believe that all of the world is this cruel. She wants to believe that if someone like Bridget can exist then there has to be good somewhere.

Bridget reminds her that there's good in the world, that maybe if you shine your light on the world, the world could shine back. And even if she doesn't completely believe that she's willing to protect Bridget’s light with her life because right now it's the only one she has. The only proof she has of good people existing, so yeah in Ella’s eyes she is different, and for not letting her light go out for all this time she is really strong, and Ella wants to protect her from the world's cruelty for as long as possible, and she does the same thing with Chloe decades later. She has this pattern of shielding the people she loves from all that's bad in the world (to the best of her ability) that she doesn't exactly know how to teach them to protect themselves. I.e Chloe’s naivety when she apologized to Lady Tremaine and Bridget falling for the prank. I don't know, I just feel like the people around Ella tend to become too reliant on her and it's really interesting because there's this fierce loyalty in Ella’s character that seems despite everything to never be enough.

[hollowed-theory-hall]

what would tom riddle's patronus?

Okay, it took me some time to answer this ask since I needed to spend some time thinking. I didn't really have an answer in mind until your question. It's just something I apparently never thought about. So I was interested in finding the most canon-adjacent answer I can for if Tom Riddle/Voldemort could cast a patronus, what would it be.

So, my approach to finding the right animal was based on a few factors, the first of which:

How exactly is the form your Patronus takes determined?

Because we don't actually get a straight answer in the books. We know Patroni can change with a person, but we don't exactly get an answer on what their form represents and why some couples have matching Patroni.

Basically, I don't know what you expected, Anon, but what you're getting is some rambling about the magical theory behind the Patronus charm followed by why that means Tom gets a certain animal over another.

So, let's start with the basics, the incantation:

"Expecto Patronum"

This is in Latin and literally translates to: "I await/expect a defender"

And Remus Lupin explains what the Patronus charm is as:

“Well, when it works correctly, it conjures up a Patronus,” said Lupin, “which is a kind of anti-dementor — a guardian that acts as a shield between you and the dementor.” ... “The Patronus is a kind of positive force, a projection of the very things that the dementor feeds upon — hope, happiness, the desire to survive — but it cannot feel despair, as real humans can, so the dementors can’t hurt it. But I must warn you, Harry, that the charm might be too advanced for you. Many qualified wizards have difficulty with it.”

(POA, page 237)

We also know the patronus is cast by thinking of a happy memory — well, not really. The memory isn't really important; the emotion is. The memory is to help you have the right happy feelings that can fuel a Patronus. "You got to mean it" just like with an unforgivable.

So, what does it tell us about the Patronus:

We have a defender made out of happiness, literally.

This already sounds like something Tom Riddle would struggle with. I don't really see canon Tom Riddle/Voldemort being capable of producing one, but let's assume he can in some hypothetical AU. Let's take a look at a few patroni to see how their form is chosen and why.

Obviously, we have Harry's (and James') stag. A stag symbolizes many things in different cultures, but deer (both Stags and Does, like Lily and Snape) in general symbolize:

The cycle of life and death

Agility and grace

Bravery

Nobility

All this fits the Potters quite well. The nobility and bravery of Gryffindor and the cycle between life and death. Stags actually represent regeneration, as in a return from death, which fits with the Potters' connection to the Paverells and death perfectly.

Stags also symbolize authority, strength, leadership, and fatherhood, while does symbolize femininity, grace, intuition, and devotion. All in all, both animals fit James and Lily well. And while the stag does fit Harry (to a degree), I don't think his Patronus represents him.

I think Harry's patronus is a stag because James' patronus was a stag. Harry was actually convinced his father cast the Patronus when he first saw it in POA. And it makes sense.

I don't remember where I saw this theory, but it essentially was that your patrons would represent a person or an idea that you feel will defend you. It's why certain couples have matching Patroni, why a Patronus can change when you or your feelings about people change.

And Harry, when he casts his Patronus, the idea of his father who he never knew but would have protected him is the idea represented in Harry's Patronus. It's a stag like James' not because Harry and James are so similar (they have very different personalities actually) but because Harry's Patronus is James. It's a stag because James was a stag, and Harry is calling the concept of his father to defend him.

Following this logic, Lily's Patronus is a doe, because she is the doe. Lily's defender is herself. Courageous, noble, graceful and devoted. Lily's devotion to her son is what literally sets the series into motion. The reason she and James match is that they always have. He was always represented by the stag and she was always represented by the doe. Their Patroni aren't matching because of their relationship with each other, but because they are so compatible their Patroni matched from the get-go.

Snape's Patronus is a doe because of Lily. Lily is represented by the doe. As she was Snape's first friend and defender, whenever he calls for a protector, it's Lily.

Let's look at a few other Patroni, like Hermione's otter:

Playfulness

Joy

Family and close-knit friendships

Loyalty

All of this doesn't really sound like Hermione. Ron's Jack Russell Terrier on the other hand:

Loyalty

Courage

Playfulness

Cleverness

Protectiveness

Tanasity

Does sound very in line with who Ron is.

But then who does Hermione's otter represent? Well, an otter is from the weasel family and the list of characteristics looks closer to Ron's list of traits than Hermione's. I think Hermione's otter represents Ron who did step in to defend her since the troll incident in their first year multiple times.

So, where does that leave Tom Riddle?

Well, we established the Patronus becomes your defender, and in Tom's case, it'll be himself. Tom is distrustful and sees himself as more capable than anyone else. Not to mention he never had a real connection or person in his life he could call upon to defend him. So, whatever animal his Patronus is would represent himself as his own defender.

So, which animal represents Tom best?

The first animal I thought of, is of course: the serpent. Snakes are heavily associated with Tom (for obvious reasons) and is an animal we know he has a soft spot for. When looking at what snakes represent, you can see why he is associated with them:

Deceit

Transformation

Power

Regeneration and rebirth (shedding their skin)

Healing (Cadcadeus)

For the most part, the list seems to fit him well. Specifically their association with rebirth and the cycle of life and death by shedding their skin. Deceit and power are also right up Tom's alley. And even transformation considering he rewrote his entire identity to become Voldemort.

But, just "snake" wasn't good enough for me, I wanted to know which kind. And as I wanted his Patronus to be as rare as Harry's stag, I went to the list of official Pottermore possible Patroni to find a snake that is as hard to get in the test as the stag while not being magical.

(Magical Patroni are incredibly rare and to have yourself represented by a magical creature in your Patronus you need to be incredibly unique or incredibly full of yourself. At least, that's how I see it)

And low and behold, there was one on the aforementioned list:

The King Cobra

So I looked up if this snake has any interesting additional unique symbolism that would fit Tom. And, well, there was:

Authority and Leadership

Aggression and Fearlessness

Destruction and Creation

Intelligence and Cunning

Which all in all sounds fitting for Tom Riddle.

I also continued reading and apparently, snakes are associated with lightning by some Native American tribes. And when I saw that I was sold on the idea. Considering how the killing curse is represented by lightning (Harry's scar and the lightning-struck tower being the name of the chapter Dumbledore dies in). It feels appropriate with Tom's connection with snakes.

The King Cobra is actually not really a Cobra and is considered a unique breed of snake, which Tom would approve of. It's also the longest venomous snake and its venom can result in a rapid fatality, as soon as 30 minutes following a bite. It's also a cannibal snake that eats other snakes, including its own kind.

Overall it just fits perfectly, both in traits, symbolism, and how rare and dangerous it is. So, for your question, I think Tom Riddle's Patronus, if he could cast one, would be a King Cobra.

[jaggybot3000]

in my head mind is more mentally/verbally violent towards heart and heart is more physically violent towards mind, since the "mind" is more an abstract concept than the "heart", who is named after a literal physical body part. not that heart doesn't attack mind verbally or mind doesn't ever get physical with heart, just that they prefer their respective methods because of their respective roles.

and it just makes more sense for their characters, too, in that mind would feel superior to heart, in that he only cleverly points out all that is inferior about him, and would never go down to his level by getting physical, (despite his insults clearly being an outlet for his anger/frustration at their dissonance) and in that heart, the manifestation of the best and worst of all emotions and all of their impulsive desires, would lash out physically(see:Juno Incident) in an attempt defend himself/to be seen as equal(following his own twisted logic/justification for his actions, and later trying to explain them)

tldr: my hc is that mind is mentally strong but not so much physically, heart is physically strong but not so much mentally, they prefer to attack each other in ways they know the other is weaker

[thermodynamic-comedian]

its understandable that people characterize elias as a stereotypical annoying bitch disney villain, but i feel like the canon was trying to do something so much funnier with him. his main personality trait was never being petty or overtly evil. it was being boring and corporate. this is not loki, this is like. the narrator from the stanley parable. ok. this is mr. does budgeting for fun. he is an automatically generated manager who just so happens to be a 200 year old evil false prophet.

[unluckycryptid]

An Unnecessary In-depth Analysis on the Movie and Soundtrack versions of "The Fight of Our Lives" from Descendants 4: The Rise of Red

Hi all, before I get started, I just wanted to say that I enjoyed watching The Rise of Red after being constantly bombarded about it on Tiktok, so now I've been listening to the soundtrack nonstop. I know "Fight of Our Lives" is one of those songs that are either on the top or the bottom of someone's favs list, and for me, it's at the top. I've been listening to this one song on repeat--moreso than any of the other songs.

Now, let's get into it.

There are 3 different versions of the song I'm going to try to analyze side-by-side: 1) the extended version on the official soundtrack 2) the movie version and 3) the visuals of the movie version.

So as some of us know,

The extended version features a conversation between Red and Chloe:

[Extended Version] How naive to still believe you'll get a happy ever after A privileged little princess, a fairy-fail disaster Spoken like a slacker, Red, you're seeing someone else I've worked hard for every single trophy sitting on my shelf You need helpYou're a poser with a bad attitudeThat's not true, you don't know the things that I've been throughNeither do youWell, then tell me, little goody two-shoes What do you think we should do?

Whereas the movie version, the conversation is cut down to Red's lines on the matter

[Movie version] Give me that! *Makes a grab for the watch* I don't need the help of some princess goody-two-shoes. I'll handle this myself

Already we're starting out with a difference in subtle characterization between Chloe and Red. The extended version gives it to us explicitly how they see each other upon their initial interaction, one that the audience may also have initially assumed. Red calls Chloe "naive", "privileged" and a "fairy-fail disaster" whereas Chloe calls Red a "slacker" and a "poser". Their shared defensiveness in the line "you need help" is hilarious, but also keep in mind it is also their first shared line in the song. Taken out of context within their conversation, but held up to the rest of the song, it all comes back to the purpose of the song and the whole movie in general where the two need the help of each other to complete their mission.

Individual characterizations can also be found here. With Chloe, of the three insults that Red throws at her in the extended version, she chooses to respond to being called "privileged" by talking about how hard she's worked for her trophies and whatnot. We see this later come back in the movie in her interactions with Ella and Ella's own views on privilege, but it is nice to see how it is first brought up here.

As for Red, her response after being called a "poser" gets her a little more defensive. She's already been called a "slacker" by Chloe, but "poser" means she's pretending to be something. Is this because of how she sentenced Ella to treason in an attempt to please her mom? Is Chloe referring to their first interaction, where Red immediately tries to threaten her? Or does it touch a nerve due to the fact that she genuinely tries to express herself (aka her clothing) but is always shut down by her mother? Either way, Red's shown to be misunderstood and most likely a loner with the exception of Maddox. Getting called a poser probably cut a little more for Red who is still trying to figure out how she wants to be seen (it doesn't help that she already threatened to feed Chloe to the jabberwocky).

Additionally, the next verse is prompted differently by Red. As opposed to the movie version, the extended/studio version has her prompt and ask Chloe what Chloe thinks they should do. I'll keep touching on this a little more, but this shines a light on the difference between the two versions. In the extended version, you'll see that it is formatted as a conversation between the two characters, which I absolutely love.

Alright let's move on to the actual song now.

Chloe's Verse [Movie/Extended] I'll tell it to you straight to your face There isn't any time left to waste My kingdom back home needs to be saved Give me the pocket watch or you're getting slayed You best behave [Extended only] Tell your pack of cards I'm coming back to cut their deck I could beat your evil army in a millisec I'll slice them up like cheddar My mom won't have forever The clock is ticking and it's time That's why it's now or never

So the movie cuts out a good portion of Chloe's verse which I understand since they need to save time and the second portion of her verse isn't too important in terms of the story since we already know this part. However, I will say that I still think they should have kept it in since: this is the first time Chloe sings. She doesn't have any songs sang by herself and the two songs she is most prominently featured in are duets. In "Get You Hands Dirty", Ella starts the song and leads it for the most part, and Red has her own intro song. Again, while I understand why they cut it out of the movie, the second part of Chloe's verse serves to add more to what we may have picked up about her. The first three lines of that second verse lets us know that Chloe is confident in her skills as a sword fighter and that she's willing to fight. The last three lines add to her desperation to go back to the past to help her mom.

Chloe's chorus [Movie/Extended] I'm running out of hope, running out of time I'll do what it takes just to change your mind Or we'll cross swords, hope not to die We're on opposite sides in the fight of our lives [Extended] There is no future in the past We gotta move forward, not stay back The moment is now, but it won't last We're on opposite sides in the fight of our lives

I think this is where the major difference between the extended and movie version come into play. If you've only listened to the movie version, an additional voice is added in the 2nd and 4th lines as a short bit of harmony and it sounds as though Red is singing it. However, the extended version doesn't emphasize that second voice, keeping it focused only on Chloe's voice making it Chloe's chorus. Again, like I said, the extended version emphasizes the conversation between the two characters and Chloe's the first one up to share her thoughts on the matter. Going back to the point that this is the first time that Chloe sings in the movie, this is the only time she gets a chorus to herself--and like her verse, it's cut short. :/

Now onto Red:

Red's verse Use your brains Going back will just cause more pain We agreed we gotta make a change To beat the queen above everything You're on my side or you're in my way You wanna leave but I got to stay There's a reason we're here today For past, present and future's sake, wait Pre-chorus Got too much at stake to go home (That's not true) Guess I'm gonna do it on my own (I'm here too) You're not gonna catch me if I fall (Maybe) Got me runnin' on these walls Dippin', flippin' somersaults (Stop) 'Bout to risk it all

So unlike Chloe, we do end up getting to see the full version of Red's verse. I'm not going to touch too much into it since its fairly straightforward but I did want to focus during the pre-chorus. I want to touch on little bits that Chloe cuts in because, in a way, it reflects and foreshadows their relationship.

When Red goes "Got too much at stake to go home" and Chloe responds with "That's not true" this is currently where their relationship is at. Chloe doesn't know what stakes are on the table for Red, while alternatively, Chloe's sang about what stakes are in it for her in her verse.

Now when Red goes "Guess I'm gonna do it on my own" and Chloe says "I'm here too" I find this interesting because up until this point, we're lead to believe that if Chloe gets hold of the pocketwatch and is able to leave without any interference, she would have done so already.

I want to bring in a bit about what what visuals we see in the movie right now, but I have more to say about other parts of the visuals separately at the end. Anyway, we see that, yes, Chloe has the watch and she stops to listen during Red's verse and turns around to leave once Red gets to the pre-chorus.

She could keep walking away, hell she could run off and use the pocket watch on her own. What incentive does she have to take Red back to the future with her? At this point, Chloe hasn't decided to trust Red. But Red runs up to her, unarmed mind you, and the two end up circling each other--almost as though Chloe's decided to listen to her.

So now, Red says "you're not gonna catch me if I fall" and its kind of hard to hear and some lyric websites don't show it, but Chloe says "Maybe" in response to the line (it's clearer in the live/studio version). It's small but its the first time Chloe verbally shows that she might be willing to trust Red and not just cooperate with her. But it could go the other way: maybe she won't catch Red, maybe she will, but what's important here is that she's not outright denying that she won't work with Red.

They're still circling each other during this point, and again Chloe didn't need to fall into circle with Red, she could have just left. But it also shows that Chloe doesn't want to want to just abandon Red in the past. At this point, she still wants to go back to the future, but she's just hoping to get Red to agree to return with her which could be a reason she says "stop" in a hilariously exasperated tone in response to Red talking about "running up on these walls" and "dippin, flippin somersaults".

Before we get into Red's chorus, we should note that in the visuals, it's at the last lines of the pre-chorus that we see Red decide to get a weapon to fight for the pocket watch. I've talked about how Chloe could have just kept walking, but alternatively, why didn't Red make a grab for the weapon/flag earlier? She could have done so just as Chloe turned her back with the pocket-watch. She spent the entirety of her verse and pre-chorus trying to convince Chloe, but only now does she decide to even the match between her and Chloe.

I know it sounds like I'm reaching here but it could have something to do with Chloe's first insult at Red in calling her a "slacker". The main weapon we've seen Red use so far are her words (both in the song and in the act of accusing Cinderella of treason). Yes, she's been trying to convince Chloe to stay in the past to fix things, but it's starting to get too long. She's just going to have to speak another language to fully convince Chloe--and what's a better language to convince a girl with a sword than the language of fighting?

Red's Chorus I don't need your help 'cause the watch is mine If you hear me out, then you'll change your mind Let's not cross swords, hope not to die 'Cause we're on opposite sides in the fight of our lives Change the future in the past We gotta move forward where we're at The moment is now, but it won't last We're on opposite sides in the fight of our lives

Even though Red contradicts my earlier point about trying to convince Chloe with the line "I don't need your help 'cause the watch is mine", she immediately contradicts herself with her next line "If you hear me out, then you'll change your mind." I'll analyze the line "Let's not cross swords" later when we go over the shared chorus.

In terms of visuals, Red is definitely giving Chloe a fight. She's attacking while Chloe is defending and it all comes to a culmination at the end of the chorus when Red manages to knock the watch out of Chloe's possession.

At this point she can keep fighting Chloe and go for the watch herself. It's the same as 'why didn't Chloe just walk away with the watch' and 'why didn't Red grab the flagpole sooner?'.

Alright this takes us to the bridge/breakdown:

Bridge Let me ask you something Why should I trust you? Your mom just staged a violent coup For all I know, you're gonna stab me in the back too Think what you want to, boo I'm nothing like my mom Her power trip was way too strong, I knew that she was wrong Well, maybe we'll get along, maybe we're not that different Maybe we need each other to complete the same mission I'm glad you put your pride aside to make the right decisionWe'll work together until history is rewritten

You'll notice that Chloe actually backs up from Red's attack with the pocket watch as she starts her portion of the bridge.

She's waiting for Red to attack her, hence why she hasn't sheathed her sword yet. But you'll also notice that Red isn't poised to attack. The staff is under her arm, not in front of her. I think, at this point, Red's goal in attacking Chloe with a weapon is actually achieved. The goal being: separating the watch from Chloe before she could return them to the future. Also, you'll notice that they're finally on even ground-literally in that they're both standing on the same level on the balcony, and that they both have weapons they can use to attack each other. Neither of them have the advantage here. So when Red starts her next line "think what you want to boo, I'm nothing like my mom" and throws the staff down, it really brings home the point that she's being sincere in trying to convince Chloe to work with her.

And Chloe is convinced as she sheaths her sword once Red drops her weapon. I skipped this part earlier but the dialogue where the second part of Chloe's verse is cut is where Chloe has the sword on Red while Red says "What are you going to do? Run me through and steal my watch? I think there's a word for that actually...it starts with a V... oh right: Villain." Here, with Red throwing down her weapon, she trusts that Chloe wouldn't do that to her.

Back to the bridge, Chloe's next line is full of the word "maybe" calling back to her first "maybe" during Red's pre-chorus. While that initial "maybe" in the pre-chorus can be thought of as how Red might be able to rely on Chloe if she falls, these "maybe"s reflect the same questions but from the opposite perspective. Can Chloe trust Red to have her back and complete their mission? The initial "maybe" calls into question if the two can rely on each other while these latter "maybe"s call into question how much can they rely on each other.

The bridge ends with their second shared line before going into their shared chorus. If we put the first shared line to this second shared line:

"You need help" -> "We'll work together until history is rewritten"

This almost sounds like it an problem and solution. Yes, the "you need help" line refers to their personalities clashing with one another, but the double meaning of "you need help, you can't complete this mission on your own" is solved by "working together until history is rewritten".

Final Chorus We might not be a team, but we gotta try Did you change your heart, or just change your mind? So cross our swords, hope not to die I'm kinda surprised, are we on the same side? Change the future in the past We gotta move forward where we're at The moment is now, but it won't last So we're on the same side in the fight of our lives Fight of our lives The fight of our lives We're on the same side

So going into this final chorus that they both share, I want to look into the music a bit. Both in the movie and the extended soundtrack version, you'll notice, neither of them take the harmony. They're both singing the melody signifying their equality in this team/relationship. With how the movie is named after Red, you'd think that it would be a main character-sidekick kind of relationship, but the overall movie really makes sure to emphasize that-no, Chloe is needed and she's just as important as Red to make this story work. (So I guess one could come up with an AU where Red makes it into the past but without Chloe. How would things have turned out?)

Now I want to analyze the three chorus's side by side and I want to look in particular at the first three lines.

I'm running out of hope, running out of time I'll do what it takes just to change your mind Or we'll cross swords, hope not to die I don't need your help 'cause the watch is mine If you hear me out, then you'll change your mind Let's not cross swords, hope not to die We might not be a team, but we gotta try Did you change your heart, or just change your mind? So cross our swords, hope not to die

The first two lines of both Chloe and Red's chorus reflects the conversation between the two. Both of them making "I" statements and how each one is trying to change each other's mind about what they should do next. What gets me with the second line of both of their choruses is that Chloe's "I'll do what it takes to change your mind" leaves no room for compromise or work with Red, while Red's "If you hear me out, then you'll change your mind" shows Red wants Chloe to hear her out and that Red is the one extending the possibility of the two working together.

This point is further hammered home by each of their third lines. Chloe's third line reads a bit like an "or else" threat. 'Give me the watch "or [else] we'll cross swords".' Red's reads as 'I don't want to have to fight you' so "Let's not cross swords".

For someone who is a VK, you'd expect them to want take the lone road in getting what they want--that they'd be jumping at the opportunity to fight someone for what they want. But not Red, no this shows that Red really isn't like her mom and that while she may have some bad attitude, she doesn't want to be selfish, she's not doing this for personal glory, and she is even willing to work with others to defeat her mom.

The third line of the shared chorus "so cross our swords" now ends up reading like a handshake, maybe even a pinky promise to get through with their mission without dying because now they're on the same side in the fight of their lives.

-

Before I end this analysis, I did want to bring up a couple more stuff about the visuals that I couldn't find a place to talk about.

Mainly I wanted talk about Chloe as a swordsman and Red's initial perceptions on that.

First, I wanted to talk about Chloe's physicality on the field. We've already seen her fight her dad (and she's pretty impressive given that she was able to disarm him using her non-sword arm) so we know she's a great swordsman, but I will say this about her: she's not exactly the most graceful one out there.

Case 1:

Girl throws herself a the wall with her sword just to get in front of Red. You can see that Red absolutely does NOT expect that she'd jump in front of her like that. It's unconventional but effective.

Case 2:

Her little shuffle to dodge Red's staff always cracks me up cause you'd think there would be more finesse in her dodging ability. But again, its effective-she was able to dodge Red's attacks.

Case 3:

Miss ma'am chooses to full send off a balcony that had stairs (which Red takes).

Case 4:

Jumping for the pocket watch hoping to catch it with her sword, and not getting any on-screen assistance from Red at all. (Although I do wish that we saw Red help her in some way by either giving her a boost or using per parkour skills so that they could work together to grab it and hammer in the point that they're working together now.) She does eventually get it down though.

So while yes, Chloe isn't necessarily the most graceful swordsman, her moves are-for the most part-effective.

But now I also want to talk about Red's perceptions of Chloe as a swordsman.

When Red initially has the watch and Chloe makes a grab for it, they're running around and Red turns around to basically taunt Chloe. From Red's perspective, the only other swordsman that she's encountered are her card soldiers (that we know of) and she easily runs laps around the handfuls of guards in her opening scene. She's not initially intimidated by Chloe and her sword because she's confident that she can outrun her. So when Chloe pulls the unconventional move of (again) running full speed at a wall in front of Red with her sword drawn, the surprised face Red makes probably comes from "oh sh*t, I may have underestimated his girl".

Remember, at this point Red's called Chloe "naive" and in the scene prior, she's says to Chloe "I thought you were supposed to be the smart one" so with Chloe being a swordsman, she may have extended the same thought process in the other girl's skills on the battlefield. But I think that Chloe pulling that move just to catch Red and then Chloe's subsequent move in using her sword to catch the watch's chain to pull it out of Red's possession, it shows Red that this girl can hold her own in a fight.

Once Chloe takes possession of the watch, we see Red considering something before she starts her own verse. I think it's at this point where she's fully considering trying to convince Chloe to work together or at least see her point of view instead of just doing it on her own, and she ends up doing so as her verse starts.

So yeah, this kind of brings it all full circle. We watch Red and Chloe going at it, Chloe's swordsmanship skills impacts Red's perception of Chloe, going against Red's initial impression of Chloe's naivety and privilege, which leads Red to decide to convince Chloe to work alongside her. On the opposite end, Chloe's initial impressions of Red being a slacker and being a poser are challenged once Red matches her skills in physicality and weaponry as well as finally seeing Red's genuine intentions in convincing Chloe to help her. When the two finally are on the same side, its reflected in the music in which both sing the melody, and in the subtle lyric changes that show the initial formations of their team/duo relationship.

--

If you made it this far, thanks for reading. I was hoping to get this out in one afternoon but this actually took a couple sessions to fully lay out everything I've noticed and wanted to talk about this song. Again, its my favorite song in the movie, so hopefully I've convinced some more people about how awesome this song actually is.

[shannonsketches]

[mandareeboo]

Deltarune snuck back up on me and I just wanna say. I fucking. LOVE Susie Deltarune. I love her inherent, core design. I love how she's entirely free from us. I love how she doesn't take orders. I love how she's learned to ACT entirely free of us. I love that she hates Ralsei's philosophy of Darkners existing entirely for Lightners. I love that she teaches him to ACT (even if he doesn't want to). I love that she's learning healing magic and is, slowly, absorbing everyone's abilities to be a better Lightner. I love that she cares so much about shit being fair. I love that she pretended to be this big bully but the moment someone thought she was cool she melted. I love that she didn't bully Noelle over a fucking pencil.

What a great example of autonomy in video games. She really feels real, you know? She feels free in this game of text boxes and silly goofs. She's the greatest butch lesbian rep I've ever seen. She's not bound to anyone- she doesn't even follow the player's hand. She just loves everybody a lot, deep down, and she's not afraid to put her life on the line for someone who doesn't act like she's gonna put them six feet under, and that makes her a hero who keeps trucking right along on this path alongside the person we've enslaved.

[pinkcove]

putting this here, HELLO CCCC FANS!! i hate hate hate when people mischaracterize Mind as emotionless like noo :(( he can feel emotions like worry, excitement, confusion and sympathy and all that. sure Mind is blunt and mean but that is his nature and I'm sure he is not grumpy almost all the time. (he can get excited for something for god's sake >:(

Mind is more verbal about his own thoughts than Heart's so that's why he's more judgemental (or seen as) but Heart's nature is also as vile as Mind's, there is no good or bad in this story (see them as not so black and white)

one more thingy, i think Mind often hides his feelings from Heart and Soul because he feels embarrassed to express them. so he's also a victim of his thoughts, they're inevitable

[dungeons-and-dictions]

Lucifer and Alastor over here shamelessly stealing inspo from other musical magicians

[sainteclectic]

and btw since I'm posting a lot of wholesoul content (intended as platonic but still), i do want to make it clear: my analysis of whole as a character is purely within the narrative of the story! while i am aware that behind the metaphors is whole is cj himself, that's never what i'm writing whole as in my work. basically I'm using the internal logic of the fiction (whole as viewed by the characters in the album) rather than the reason for the fiction existing (as a fictionalized version of chonny's mental state), just like i do with all the other characters. it's important to make that distinction when you're dealing with a piece of fiction so heavily based on the creator i think. I'll never use cj as a basis for how I write whole because I find that a little off putting tbh ^^;

basically I'm playing with touys. ok? play touys with me