#critical care products franchise

[tea-earl-grey]

i do think it's really interesting to compare the ways Star Trek and Doctor Who succeed and fail as pieces of progressive media because they almost have the opposite problem.

both of the shows are progressive, let's make that clear. while there are exceptions, both shows and worlds consistently critique capitalism, value compassion, solve problems without violence, and at least try to be diverse. there will always be individual episodes (and even eras/arcs) that contradict those values but in general, they are progressive compared to your average procedural or whatnot. but they, by the very nature of their premise, often fail to live up to fully realizing those progressive values. and yes, individual instances of racism or misogyny or any type of bigotry is a product of the bigotry of the writers/creators, but Star Trek and Doctor Who ultimately fail and will always fail to fully embody progressivism.

Star Trek is trapped in its own system of the Federation & Starfleet. for any of the shows to work, we the audience have to believe that the Federation is almost always a good & benevolent force and while criticisms of it are made, those criticisms are the exception and not the rule. the Federation/Starfleet can be criticized but at the end of the story, we must reaffirm that our characters are still good people and it's individual corruption that's the problem. the system can be portrayed as flawed but it must always be better than the alternative. if there is a Star Trek show that would truly dig far enough into how the Federation is a product of imperialism and how the nature of exploring & going where no one has gone before is inherently rooted in racism & orientalism then the franchise would collapse because nearly everything to this point relies on the belief in that a fundamentally good utopian system is possible.

now there's Doctor Who. Doctor Who has a quite different premise in that it is never rooted to one place or time the way Star Trek is attached to Starfleet/the Federation. (there could be an argument that Doctor Who is ultimately rooted in Britain but despite the 2005 series and the UNIT era in classic who, there are large swathes of classic who and the EU that never visit Britain. it's been made an important part of the show (as the show is an important part of British culture) but it's not inherent to the basic premise.) however, because Doctor Who is focused on traveling and seeing the wonders of the universe, its premise essentially becomes "some people turn up to fix a problem and then disappear". again, there are exceptions to this (especially in early classic who), but the formula of the show is almost trapped in the belief of individual action and power to solve systemic problems which... is not how most problems or solutions behave in reality. and just as Star Trek can criticize the Federation but must ultimately forgive it, Doctor Who can criticize the Doctor and portray them as flawed but must still reaffirm their status as a hero.

so we have Star Trek too caught up in its own systems to be able to critique them and Doctor Who too focused on running to portray how complex, long term solutions are needed to solve deeply entrenched problems.

and honestly... i don't think either of these are bad. they're simply the limitations of the shows as they exist and it would be far more worthwhile to develop new premises & find other media that incorporate those types of leftist political values from the start than to try to graft them onto 60 year old media franchises and pretend like they've always been there.

and they do serve a purpose! Star Trek might not be able to adequately portray the flaws of a system but it does give you hope for a better utopian future where people are taken care of and allowed to live however they choose, where there's infinite diversity in infinite combinations. Doctor Who might not be able to portray the complicated solutions to complicated problems that we face today but it tells you that every life matters, that kindness is the most important quality, and that everyone can make a difference in some way.

[tweedfrog]

Been reflecting on why HOTD really noticeably dropped off in quality this season and I've been thinking - the central story of the Dance of the Dragons is supposed to be a tragedy right? A family tearing itself apart and killing off these powerful magical creatures they control because of a throne?

Except EYE think that the reason it's not landing well and that they've made weird choices for the main characters *who we should all care for* is because HBO is primarily viewing HOTD as an investment in the larger GoT show ecosystem franchise and not u know. A piece of art to be created.

Tragedy doesn't sell well. Letting characters sit in their grief and discomfort and pain won't help you flog your 18th show in production about idk the wives and adventures of Viserys Plumm. Telling a story where everyone is humanised to some degree and you encourage the audience to sympathise with them although they make bad or evil decisions but then still face consequences for those decisions won't lead to IG content creators making 10 REASONS YOU SHOULD STAN THIS CHARACTER reels. It might lead to critical acclaim like Succession but large numbers of customers are not racing to Target to buy a Kendall Roy FunkoPop.

Idk i feel like a lot of the gripes with ASOIAF adaptations and tv show adaptations in general these days are because studio execs don't view film and TV as an art form to be shown but as a product to be sold to a consumer ideally with tie in merch and brand collabs

[shelleysmary]

gotta laugh at everyone who has ever said that "~unLiKE tHe pEtEr jACkSoN fILmS~ the trop people don't care about tolkien, don't care about middle-earth, it's a soulless adaptation for the money just because amazon is behind it" because (and i say this while also saying fuck amazon, fuck jeff bezos. it goes without saying - two things can be true at the same time, i can't believe it bears repeating)

how do you think films and television get made?? hate to break it to you, but it's all for the money. new line cinema didn't say "we love tolkien, pj, let's do this for free!" they were literally looking for a franchise hit when they decided to take the films over from miramax - which is exactly what every studio and their mom is trying to do now!!! it's movie business, baby! to say the people behind trop - the actors, the casting directors, the production designers, the vfx artists, the art directors, the armorers, the costume designers, the set decorators, the makeup artists, the ADs, the carpenters, painters, prop-makers, steelworkers, laborers, animal handlers, sound editors, miniature builders, stuntpeople, craftspeople, movement and dialect coaches, trainers, lighting techs, jewelers, etc. - don't care about the story they're telling???? is a wild reach. obviously they work for the showrunners who work for amazon who care the most about making a profit, but so did peter jackson and new line!! wanting your project to be financially and critically successful is not an inherently evil thing, come on guys, are you still buying into the starving artist fallacy 😭

there are tons of little nods to the silmarillion and other parts of the legendarium in the rings of power. yes, there are also changes and goofs, but lotr and the hobbit film trilogies also had their fair share of changes and goofs. i just think that "these people didn't read the books/this is just a money grab/pj & co. cared about the source material while these losers clearly don't" are tired arguments used to justify subjective opinions, not to mention the way it reeks of revisionist history considering the way tolkien purists initially took great issue with deviations made in lotr and especially the hobbit.

it's almost like...the most hated tolkien adaptation is ever the current one.

[ganondoodle]

even if i didnt love botw as much as i do, totk drives me nuts bc, similarly to pokemon, this series is so SO SO full of potential, they have so many games they can pull from, theres so many themes, characters and worldbuilding thats just left to rot, you dont need to connect anything with a chain to old titles, you dont need to bring back any things that already had their ending, but PLEASE harness at least a fraction of all this!!!! and they just refuse to do it beyond shallow references

totk jsut drives it all home to me, bc this isnt just the next game in the franchise, but a DIRECT SEQUEL no 10 years apart from botw, yet they cant even, they REFUSE to even keep the continuity with its OWN lore it established in botw together, and that, i think, is what truly makes me so insane (derogatory) about totk

it PROVES they do not care, they dont care to build on anything of the lore of old titles beyond references in form of amiibos or whatever, they dont even care to make a sequel to their most successful game in the franchise coherent with its own lore

botw established a captivating detailed world full of potential, while lacking in active storytelling, it had environmental storytelling, characters and ideas that were the perfect ground to build on-

and then they do away with it bc idk .. they want you to build mechs and make videos of it that go viral and thats all they care about or something

shiekah tech? forget that existed character being the character you know? act as if you are seeing them for the first time just like they are lame story? dont think about that just be distracted by the epic presentation of it lore the previous title established? forget that, all that matters is what is here and now beloved character from old games beign brought back? hes a new guy and has no background and no lore and just sits waiting for you at the end to have a flashy fight with references from old titles and their lore? just here for nostalgie bait, dont you remember? you LOVE this series, now give me 70 bucks for a glorified DLC that ruins what you loved about the series and makes you realize that nothign matters and nothing is interesting anymore

you are supposed to take it all at face value, to not think about anything, to see a character say something and just go with it, and forget it the second its over, be distracted by good music and pretty visuals, but dont think about, dont think about anything but what is directly said to you like you have no critical thinking skills, forget there was a game before this one, only the one you play matters, empty your skull and dont let yourself feel anything but what the game tells you to feel

if they dont even care to make the sequel to their most successful game actually build on the previous title, dont even care to keep their continuity of two games supposedly directly happening one after the other in tact- maybe they never cared, and all the meaning we thought we saw them build into their games was all accidental and meaningless

and that is absolutely soul crushing for fans like me to discover

its a game. its not a story, its not a world, its not themes, its not characters, its not lore. its a product made to make you pay money, not to make you think about anything.

[ordinaryschmuck]

Alright, last time ever that I’ll talk about Velma. I promise.

Because I’ve been extra salty towards this show all week, and I don’t want to take it further than that. Talking nothing but bad stuff about this show for the entirety of its run is exactly what the writers want. They want us to hate watch it so we can talk about each new atrocity the show brings up week after week, and call us haters or anti-woke propagandists. When, in reality, they don’t give a FUCK about any of that. They don’t care about other races, genders, or sexualities. They just WANT you to think they do. Know how I can tell? Because I’ve SEEN genuine attempts of representation.

THIS is a genuine attempt of representation. Matt Braly, the series creator of Amphibia and a Thai-American, felt like Thai culture was underrepresented in media. So, he not only made his main character and her Thai, but he also dedicated subplots and entire episodes showcasing the culture he wanted to represent.

THIS is a genuine attempt at representation. Dana Terrace, series creator of The Owl House and open Bisexual, wanted a main character that was explicitly bi to finally help kids feel like they’re seen. To help give the representation SHE always wanted.

But when I look at Velma? None of it hits the same.

This isn’t a genuine attempt for representation. This is Mindy Kuling turning a character into a self-insert to make herself look smarter than everyone else and the most important person in a narrative. Truth is, this Velma is nothing more than a sociopath, narcissistic dipshit who thinks she’s better than everyone else but is actually more aggravating than endearing.

So...Good job representing YOURSELF there, Mindy.

And this?

This isn’t representation. This is a shield.

A way to protect the show from any criticism because it couldn’t possibly be bad. They have gay characters! Gay characters are good in everything!

Except that is the LAST reason you should include gay characters! Don’t get me wrong, I LOVE more LGBTQA+ representation in media. What I don’t love is obvious attempts to pander to audiences just to avoid criticisms. And keep in mind, this is NOT the first attempt a creator wanted to make Velma gay.

James Gunn wanted to make her gay in the live action movie, but WB said no.

Scooby-Doo: Mystery Incorporated (the GOAT of the Scooby-Doo franchise) wanted to make Velma gay, but could only imply it because Cartoon Network didn’t greenlit Steven Universe yet.

THOSE are genuine attempts to make Velma gay, to represent people because the creators of both products agreed that it was the least they could do.

But making Velma and Daphne a thing just to protect a show is nothing more than shallow and inconsiderate of the hard fight dozens of people put up with for the sake of representation.

And, honestly, I’d be a little more forgiving if the writing in Velma was good. But it’s not.

Within the first minute, this show features...

Cockroaches having sex...

And fifteen year olds taking a shower to make a joke about how over-sexualized a series’ pilot can be.

First of all: FUCK YOU FOR MAKING ME FIND THIS SCREEN SHOT FOR A POINT!

Second: You lose every ounce of credibility that you actually care about people when one of the first moves you make in your series is to sexualize minors for the sake of a joke.

A joke that doesn’t make sense at that. Point me to a series pilot that’s over-sexualized. If you get more than ten, I’ll say you have a point. I won’t say that sexualizing minors to make it was a good thing, but I’ll at least say that, “Yeah. You’re right. So many pilots do this. SO STOP DOING IT!”

That’s the level of writing Velma has. And it’s why they have their “representation” to protect themselves. Meanwhile, you want to know the level of writing you’ll find in The Owl House and Amphibia?

Villains who prove that the most dangerous people are the ones who make the rules.

Jokes that are actually funny.

Likable main protagonists who are kind and caring to the people around them.

Protagonists who have heartfelt relationships with other great characters, to the point that it breaks your heart to see them leave each other.

And on top of that, actually good representation. But here’s the thing: The representation isn’t only genuine. It’s a bonus. Something great to add onto everything else the writers and the creators do right.

What it isn’t is an attempt to protect a show from what it does wrong.

And that’s it. That’s the LAST time I’ll ever talk about Velma. I really mean it this time.

Talking about this show past it’s premier is already more attention it deserves. And if you were smart, you would not only stop watching, but stop talking. The best attention to give something you hate is NO attention.

If you really want to waste time, waste it by watching something good, like The Owl House and Amphibia. They may be kids shows, but they have more maturity than a single second of Velma.

[getvalentined]

I posted about this on the twits, but I'm gonna do it here too because it's not like this is limited to that platform.

Since I've been seeing my least favorite shitty FF7 rumor around again, friendly reminder that there are no "legal issues" between Gackt and SE delaying anything. Sources claiming otherwise say "trust me bro" when Nomura has literally said it was just the workload.

People who claim that delays in production of anything in the Compilation are because of Gackt are parroting a rumor that's been around for over a decade, which was started by people who used it as an excuse to be racist and homophobic under the thin veneer of frustrated criticism. The majority of hatred toward the character of Genesis Rhapsodos in early fandom, and hatred toward Genesis in modern day fandom from OG Purists, stems from this same place.

Why do you think these people always assert that Genesis' very existence "ruins Sephiroth's character," but never complain about Angeal? Why do you think they have no problems with Aerith having a Jenova-infused Angeal Copy in her church for years—something that should totally change her understanding of the Crisis, but doesn't seem to in any way whatsoever—and yet anything and everything Genesis does is treated as an unforgivable retcon?

It's an excuse to say heinous, horrible things about an all-but-explicitly queer character who is modeled off a real Japanese man, and that's all it ever was, but it gets a pass because they dress it up as criticism of the franchise. Then, when they inevitably start throwing out slurs, nobody cares because "it's just Gackt—I mean Genesis, everyone knows he sucks."

Yeah, you "know" because you let a bunch of bigots tell you he should be judged more harshly than any other character in the entire series because he's not white or straight enough. Because he's based directly on a real flesh-and-blood Japanese man, and to these people that makes him deserving of hate, because people like that shouldn't exist. Because the character is all but explicitly queer (and it is even more explicit in the original language and when accounting for some key culturally-specific literary references portrayed throughout the narrative), and people like that shouldn't exist.

You "know" because you never questioned why this character specifically is the only one it's "objectively and morally correct" to hate and belittle, even though everything he's supposedly hated for applies to multiple other characters throughout the series.

The character is loathed, and the actor is blamed for everything, because some old guard fans said that's how it's supposed to be in this fandom, and if you don't engage with things that way then you don't deserve to be here.

Very cool and normal behavior!

There are very valid reasons to dislike this character, mind you, and plenty of reasons to be critical of the actor. I'm not saying otherwise. I'm saying the pervasive and frankly disgusting fandom-wide hatred stems from the same place as the continued, repeatedly disproven assertion that Gackt is to blame for everything "wrong" with the Compilation and its development: bigotry. I know this because I saw these assertions come into being in real time when Crisis Core first came out. I watched the people saying these things post the most homophobic rants on their personal accounts, I watched people I considered friends get banned from LJ communities for referring to Genesis as Gackt and referring to Gackt with racial slurs.

And I watched them come back later, promising they were better people now, armed with new claims and new arguments that allowed them to continue to be hateful trashfires without getting in trouble. As long as they weren't overt, it was okay. If they slipped up and used a slur in the comments that was mostly okay, since it wasn't in the main post. Mods might lock a thread here and there, but those people got to stay. Their "criticism" was "valid," and thus their bigotry was validated.

Those same claims and complaints are still regurgitated today, only now it's by people who aren't racist and aren't homophobic, but don't realize that their criticism is horribly unbalanced because it was all born from people who were just masking hatred.

Even worse is when these behaviors are mimicked by people claiming to like the character, because the fandom taught them that this was how you're supposed to engage with him, because it's just Gackt—Genesis (I said Genesis!) so he's a piece of shit no matter how you slice it and he deserves to be treated that way. Nobody else does, and nobody questions it, because this is just how it's done.

I'm sorry to be the one to tell people this, but if you slap a bunch of gay stereotypes onto Genesis and then have the characters around him treat him like shit because of them, while implying or outright insisting that IT'S OKAY BECAUSE IT'S GENESIS AND HE SUCKS SO IT'S FUNNY, you are following in the footsteps of bigots. If you constantly refer to the character as "Gackt" like the name itself is a pejorative, you are following in the footsteps of bigots.

No, there is no nuance here. I don't care if you allegedly came to all these conclusions on your own—you didn't and you know it—except for the fact that actually that's worse, because it means that you did some kind of deep dive in the source material and came out the other side agreeing with a bunch of racist homophobes who are still spitting bullshit after over 15 years.

Do fucking better.

[locuas642]

Okay so. I think the whole "Bethesda does not GET Fallout 1" is sometimes a bit exaggerated, but this was a bit that is hard not to read as "missing the point so hard"

so in short. the creative lead for Fallout 4, in response to the positive buzz the tv show was getting, decided to share what he thought was a neat tidbit of information that was not mentioned in the final product. Which was to reveal a certain unnamed background character was the Male Protagonist/Husband from Fallout 4, Nate.

This in and of itself is not uncommon. all sorts of big multimedia franchise have the writers pick up random background characters and say "okay, but what if...?" or use them to try to make the world feel connected as it grows bigger. Star wars did it, Star Trek has done it. It's nothing new, weird nor necessarily bad.

so... what's the issue?

here is the intro for the original Fallout game

In this, we see a depiction of post-annexed Canada as a soldier in POwer Armor executes someone while his companion looks. this is all through the framing device of being american military propaganda.

That companion, according to the Emil Pagliarulo, is Nate, one of the two protagonists you play in Fallout 4. he clarifies Nate did not shoot, seemingly aware of what a bad look that would be, but he obviously missed it only meant Nate was laughing his ass at the dead Canadian.

The whole scene is "Starship Troopers" levels of Satire. it is a depiction and criticism of the American militarism and authoritarianism, before showing the audience how that lead to the present day america being a shithole destroyed because of armageddon.

And look, nobody cares about Nate or his wife. they are nothing characters who you forget what their life before was the second the game stops handholding you and you can stop pretending you give a rat's ass about their missing child. But it is something weird that Pagliarulo thought this was some neat bit of continuity he was sharing with people, then was surprised when everyone took it to mean Nate was a War Criminal.

He quickly backpedalled from that one, explaining he did not mean Canon canon. and something about how everyone makes their own character. but the interesting bit, again, for me was that him further explaining that their idea was that Nate's life during the war was Hell. with that being another day.

Except, again, what we see in the scene he points out is a (theoretical) Nate who is explicitly complicit with the american military complex, celebrating and laughing when commiting horrible acts to their fellow men.

And is like, it's a minor thing really, but it's odd that the writer for that game missed the point of that scene so hard, he did not realize he was making Nate a war criminal until right after he wrote that tweet.

[mythalism]

i agree completely with the bootlicking and also the “um just let people enjoy things” mentality. it’s not great art and that’s okay! it’s pretty aggregeous in some areas and i wish people would just own that instead of throwing themselves at the feet of bioware. bioware as a company doesn’t care about paying its staff or honoring the writers of the past games. they literally fired almost all of them. they care about money! they view the fanservice and “deep lore” cameos as a way to earn more money! any credit for artistic value should be given to the current writers’ attempts and NOT to the company or game as a product itself! everyone needs stop being insecure about the fact that it’s kind of garbage and call this shit out because that’s why we keep getting games with shitty writing quality. because the community lets it slide! stop letting it slide! demand and expect high-quality writing the same way we demand and expect high-quality graphics.

i completely agree and i love that you brought up how these business practices harm the actual people who work at bioware and the developers themselves and how a refusal to express our criticism and anger with a product that not only is disappointing but was also advertised deceptively (again, thats EA marketing, not bioware) just further enables business practices like the massive layoffs that lost us writers that were foundational to dragon age like mary kirby. if you love dragon age and you want games with depth and complexity and that carry over your past decisions and that prioritize narrative over combat and flashiness and are made for adults and not teenagers etc. etc. etc. you have no choice but to speak up and be critical! or else EA is just going have some out-of-touch marketing consultant decide that making dragon age 5 rated T for teens is the future of the franchise because gaming's largest demographic is 12-18 year old boys and they really need to "expand to new markets" or whatever other bullshit (no i dont think this will actually happen its hyperbolic). we KNOW how beholden EA is to their own market trends because of the fact that veilguard is single-player at all thanks to fallen order!!!!! we can send a similar message again!!!!!!! there is a reason baldurs gate 3 is so good and was such a breath of fresh air. its not because those devs have some magical talent that bioware devs dont have. its because larian isn't owned by a mega media conglomerate that will happily crush any remaining shred of human creativity under their boot to make an extra dollar. and so they could make a game like bg3 that looked at every single larger, more lucrative gaming trend in the face, shrugged, and did what they actually wanted to do. the only way we will ever get a game like that from bioware will be if you STAND UP!!!!!!!!!

[omegansamurai]

I hate that these YouTube videos complain and moan about how the Netflix live-action Avatar: The Last Airbender was a 'failure'...I mean, if that was the case, then why had it been renewed for not one, but TWO seasons, huh?

And like...I doubt the Avatar Studios stuff is gonna be anything groundbreaking. I don't even think Avatar Studios' content will be any good. Really, it's like, why is this even a thing? Just leave the franchise alone, Bryke, and just let people who can write and make your story a lot more enjoyable (Netflix's Avatar).

It just reeks of desperation and Bryke trying to be relevant. Avatar is not the next Star Wars, I'm sorry. It's a Nick cartoon that should've been an epic four-season (maybe five seasons, who knows?) show, but it shrunk to three, to make a failed shitty trilogy movie that the first movie bombed at the box office, thanks to the creators 'SUPER WISE' decision of canceling the fourth season because they want that trilogy movie series, and honestly? That itself was a bad idea. Bryke tries too hard to make their product the next Star Wars(which I think they're fans of, which says a lot), and it painfully shows. They try too hard. REALLY hard.

Like with Legend of Korra, they try to be super edgy with their 'story' and 'characters', but they just miss the mark on what made ATLA great. I mean, they don't even care about how the bending looks anymore in Korra. Really, there's a reason why they put the final season online, and it was just a bad show. Don't deny it, everyone. I'm certain it would've been good...but it was executed poorly and made not only a mockery of the characters in that show but the OG characters of ATLA(especially Katara). Well, maybe Zuko is the only one who's doing alright...but that just reeks of sexism doesn't it? Toph is all alone in the Swamp, and Katara is...not who she is...always sad about Aang's death...like get it together girl, you're mother-effin KATARA. Get with it!

And another thing, what more is there to tell? What is the next series even going to be? The Avatars are cut off after Korra, right? So...what now? And if you put the setting in some lame-ass futuristic steampunk or cyberpunk world and have bending in it, then...well, that's not really Avatar, is it? It's just its own thing at this point. And really, I don't want any new characters...I never wanted Korra's characters either if the writing they have for them was that bad.

I just think this whole Avatar Studios is just...again, desperation. Like why not reboot it or just...tell the same story, but with a different setting?

Sorry, lost track.

What I'm trying to say is, is that people act like the Netflix live-action of Avatar: The Last Airbender supposedly 'failed', which isn't the case. Y'all are just butthurt about how your 'perfect show' got 'tainted' by big corporations, and honestly, that's far from it. The people behind this live-action were very committed, and the actors were very respectful of their roles. The BTS looked like everyone was having a good time. And here you have idiots going on about how the live-action sucks because...what, Aang talks too much? No sexism from Sokka? Katara didn't act all rage-filled or whatever? I can get the criticisms, but still, I enjoyed it. I liked it. I want to see more.

It's just that this stupid fandom likes to put down the live-action because the cartoon is supposed to be this or that and it doesn't have this...when honestly, it's its own thing, but it's still Avatar! Let it be its own thing! You got the cartoon, now look at this NEW Avatar: The Last Airbender by Netflix! Look at the way they portray the characters, look at the direction they're going, look how they world-build, just look at it! It's almost like fanfiction, and really, isn't that what Avatar is? Fanfiction? It may be a cartoon show, but it's still fiction. They're not real people. We can do whatever we want with them. We're just borrowing their characters, story, and world.

This whole thing is an adaptation. So it's not your cartoon...but it's still Avatar.

I know I'm just rambling at this point, but I'm just kind of tired of seeing thumbnails on YouTube of people bringing down the live-action Avatar. I genuinely enjoyed it, and yes, while it may have some things to work on, the people behind the show will listen to their criticisms and work on that. But again, I still liked it.

Just know one thing...Bryke would've made the live-action of Avatar a whole lot worse if they were in control. I really do believe that. And as for Avatar Studios...I give it a year before it goes bankrupt. I know that's a little harsh, but I just know that the animated Avatar movie is going to be disappointing. ^^;

[nelmyriel]

[ Castlevania: Nocturne ]

Briefly (haha, nope) about my attitude to Netflixvania: I’m neither a fan of the original animated series, nor its hater (I like S1 and S2, but S3 and S4 are absolutely not for me. Apart from the franchise, it remains one of the strongest animated works). I'm always open to new things as long as the creators try to keep at least some connection between characters and their prototypes (and I have some concerns about it).

As a fan of Maria Renard (especially the grown-up version), I'm glad she's not forgotten. The gaming community is largely divided between those who see Maria as a funny child added into the universe as a joke, and those who hate the adult version for being implied to be Alucard's love interest (I don’t agree with some fans' interpretation of their relationship, but more on that another time. glorfys_glorioushair's vision is the closest to me).

I'M TIRED, I just want to meet new people, even if we have different canon sources. I will take care of them, warm them up, presenting the games xD

In more detail (not criticism, just verbiage): Let's start from the obvious part — this is a product of inspiration, not an adaptation in the literal sense. To get some pleasure watching the animated series, you need to distance yourself from games. This is a quite standard method nowadays, I think.

I'm still forming an opinion about Nocturne, because the story is not finished yet. But I'm also slowly plunging into melancholy, because Alumaria ship and Maria are the cornerstones of my love to Castlevania per se.

How changed is the huntress' image? Well, I feel like Netflix missed some potential that games contained (or will implement it later?) and done a hideous damage with Maria's swearing, but there's still a chance to patch up such flaws with her growing up.

I always imagined her as a battle Lady. Dangerous and daring, but elegant and well-mannered (if I correctly understood Renard family's position). If I were the adaptation's author, I would tend to the archetype of a young noble lady breaking stereotypes. (Without extremes, of course — she is engaged in a tough business). This would have provided interesting dynamics with other characters (and an interesting detail for Richette), since the nobility side would be represented not only by vampires, but also the dissident protagonists.

This doesn’t mean I think Netflix’s biography of Maria is bad — it’s just different and takes us away from Konami again. Whether this is good or bad — we still have to find out. Perhaps it's just a matter of habit?

However, I'm hopeful about the family arc. Such plot has controversial nuances, but it's much better than the off-screen death of nameless parents. I want to witness the girl's experiences and life lessons! I'm also absolutely thrilled with how Tera's character was reworked!

I thank and at the same time judge the creators for the way they managed characters' age. Now the gifted summoner better fits the gloomy setting, but, unfortunately, she meets Alucard too early — this fact obviously sets the audience against the romance. Because of S4*, I already had to bury my dream about "one true love" story (its symbolism is expressed in the wolf form), and then they added fuel to the fire**.

(*A dude can't experience "first and/or only love" more than once (not being reincarnated, of course), so my favorite trope just won't be adapted. It's not about Greta, she's a good (one of the best in S4, actually) character. You can substitute Sonia in her place or swap Maria and Greta, and my message will not change. It’s just that Konami — many years ago — hooked me with a story about naive and inexperienced lovers. Given Alucard's nature, this made an interesting topic to explore. But, since I am still here, it means I accept new rules.) (**In my culture, only the moment (age) when a romance begins is important. Not the moment of first meeting. But it's hard to miss the public outcry — people haven't seen the characters' relations yet, but already hate their dynamics).

I'm also upset that in battle scenes Maria is a pale shadow of herself. In the opening fight, she couldn't handle just one vampire, but I hope that the writers intentionally left room for her skills development. Drawing a little minus for this. But a plus for the sword and the underrated DXC design!

Well, if the plot disappoints me, at least a lot of visual content will remain, which is a real treasure for a fan of unpopular Maria. I'll always admire the work of all involved artists.

P.S. Yes, I deliberately omit the analysis of general history, setting, etc. (After all, this is not a review of the entire Nocturne, just a character's superficial analysis). There is a huge room for discussion, but I will leave it to more historically savvy people. One thing I understand for sure: this is one of the most visually and historically rich basis, which wasn't used properly. On the other hand, it's mainly a matter of budget. Corporations are unfair to creative studios. In my perfect world, Powerhouse and Konami join their forces.

Hey Konami, don't you have an animation studio? Your followers are dreaming about a canonical adaptation or a remake of an iconic game with significantly deeper plot.

I never seriously criticize and certainly never post angry manifests, especially dedicated to someone’s creative expression. I'm always looking for the positive aspects, but if my patience runs out, I usually just retire.

Anyway, since the release of S1 I've been immersed in the Nocturne fandom and even prepared something unique for you!

P.P.S. Sorry for the confusion and my poor English!

[wellpullmystring]

hm. knowing how so many ppl disliked ts4 (i know ppl who actually hated it) and also knowing disneys tendency to self-correct, added to bo not appearing in that first look... im scared man. i have faith in pixars writing teams of course (even monsters university which i didnt care much for had some really interesting concepts) but then i think of the incredibles 2 and the whole screenslaver thing, and in general how ppl dont know how to talk about technology to kids who were basically raised by it... its a lot to ask from a movie. and then i dont really like the delusional buzz bit anymore tbh... idk. from what you said im kinda worried

There's so many intricacies to filmmaking, especially when it's a big franchise that's being overseen by a massive corporation. It's really so hard to tell how a product will turn out when there's such a wide array of moving parts here. The fact that all four Toy Story movies have been great (IMO) is a complete miracle. I don't think any other franchise has kept that consistent quality. There's always risk involved in doing another one. I'll say that I have faith the movie can be as great as the others. Andrew Stanton hasn't let us down with Toy Story yet. He has a great track record. And The Incredibles 2 did have a different creative team behind it. I think a movie being directed by the man who did Wall-E has the potential to sell the whole "technology" bit. Toy Story 4 seemed like a completely different movie when you compare the teaser with the final product. I know that Disney has overcorrected sometimes, but Toy Story 4 was still a critically acclaimed film that won an Oscar. I can believe that any undoing of TS4 can be done with tact. I noticed on another look that Woody isn't wearing his badge in the concept art. Jessie still has it. There's some continuity being kept there. Regardless, it's gonna be an interesting ride. Thanks for the ask

[blazehedgehog]

How do you feel about the Like a dragon/Yakuza series? Cause on a surface level at least, it has all the elements many take issue with in modern big budget games A big focus on a cinematic experience and realistic looking presentation. But I rarely hear that criticism for those games.

I dunno. They have different feels than what I'd consider a "cinematic" or "prestige" game.

For starters, Yakuza games aren't really any more cinematic than, say, an typical JRPG. You get a lavishly produced cutscene every few hours, but a lot of your dialog interactions aren't even voiced, as far as I remember.

A lot of scenes are classic scrolling text and canned animations.

Two, I think it's important that the Yakuza games do not take themselves seriously. Even Uncharted, with its pulpy adventure, still takes itself seriously.

The primary Yakuza game I've played is the first Judgment, and that's a game with claw grabber (UFO) machines, arcade games, drone races, there are questlines advertising real Japanese restaurants that are full of cheeky product placement dialog, there's a whole quest where you're photographing stray cats, a quest that's a big parody of Phoenix Wright where you have to gather evidence and make a case for who stole a cake, etc.

Like those games have a very serious core, make no mistake. but there's a lot more going on that runs a wide gamut. Prestige games mainly seem focused on being real, and dramatic, and "epic." Yakuza games will do whatever they want as long as its fun and interesting.

Prestige games are also seemingly in a race to see who can spend the most money. Again, we can go back to the Insomniac leaks to reveal Spider-man 2 cost half a billion dollars and they'll be lucky to break even, for a game most people might not even notice is any better looking or more technologically complex than the last one.

Meanwhile I think someone at Sega said "The Man Who Erased His Name" took them 18 months to put together, and since probably 50-75% of the game's story sequences don't even require voice acting or complex animation, they both go together quickly and don't cost much to make. That's not to say they're cheaply made games or that it's totally problem free, far from it, but they are more economical than something like a Horizon, or The Last of Us 2, or whatever.

I mean, Digital Foundry noted we haven't actually gotten a proper new Naughty Dog game since The Last of Us 2 in 2020. But in the last four years, we've gotten two Yakuza games? Three? Maybe even four? That's not to say quantity beats quality, and I think to some degree Sega should be careful about burning people out on this series and its spinoffs.

But whereas Spider-Man 2 could be a game that sinks Insomniac if it doesn't meet its nearly impossible sales figures, I don't think Sega's in too much danger if a Yakuza game under performs.

A cinematic/prestige game is something trying to pretend it's not a game at all and is an interactive movie. Very little about the Yakuza franchise has ever felt ashamed to be a video game.

[sage-nebula]

Look man, there's nothing wrong with disliking someone's writing. Sometimes a writer's style or content is just not for you, and that's okay! It's okay even when the writer is super popular. For instance, I myself am not a fan of Tolkien or Neil Gaiman. Tokien takes way too long to get to the point for me, and at least in American Gods, Gaiman just used too many metaphors in quick succession, which made me feel the writing was pretentious to its detriment. It was Pratchett's style that made me love Good Omens, not Gaiman's.

Of course, that's not to say these men were / are bad writers! They're wildly beloved for a reason, after all. It's just to say their styles aren't for me. This happens sometimes. It's okay.

So when it comes to Sonic writer Ian Flynn, not everyone has to like his work. Heck, there are things he's written that I myself don't care for, such as:

The House of Cards arc in Archie

Sonic not correcting Kit when Kit called him "sir" in IDW

How the conflict between Tangle and Whisper was resolved in #58

Belle somehow knowing who Surge and Kit were despite Metal Sonic not knowing that

No writer on this planet is perfect, and that includes Ian Flynn. Good faith criticism of his work is natural, and from what I've heard on the Bumblekast (and I've listened to a good number of episodes at this point) he takes good faith criticism very well.

You'll notice, though, that I said good faith criticism. There is a difference between good faith criticism, and bad faith attacks. Here are some examples of each:

Good Faith Criticism:

I feel that [character] was written out of character in [thing] when you consider recent characterization in other things (with emphasis on recent; games that came out 16 years ago may no longer align with Sega's view of the character)

I think that the writing was a little sloppy here for the sake of speeding the plot along

I don't enjoy this plot arc because of the pacing / the themes / the characters being focused on

These are good faith criticisms because they don't attack the person or people who created the work; they make sure to note that this is personal opinion / preference on behalf of the critic; and they're grounded in reality, rather than conspiracy.

Bad Faith Criticism:

The writer on this licensed product HATES the IP and HATES these characters and wants to make them something totally different

All of the writers on staff are LYING when they say the company that owns the license they are working on has rules they have to follow

The writers have an AGENDA they're pushing and that's the ONLY reason why they're working on this licensed product at all; if they say they're doing it for love of the series or work they are lying once again

These are bad faith criticisms because they attack the people who make the works directly; they contain baseless accusations as a form of defense against the idea that the parent company could be moving their mascot and characters in a new direction; and altogether they paint the writers as some sort of nefarious masterminds instead of what they actually are: people who are fallible.

And then of course, there is always something so unhinged it's even worse than the above:

Heinous Behavior:

I hope [writer] dies and I'll celebrate when they do!

This sort of behavior isn't even criticism. It's just heinous, and I shouldn't need to explain why. Disliking someone's work is fine. Talking about why you dislike the work is fine. Wishing death on someone because you dislike their work (or dislike that people enjoy their work) is deplorable behavior. When you are at this stage, you need to log off the internet and go sit alone in a quiet place to reflect upon your behavior. Also, if a children's comic (or discussions about a children's comic) is making you this deranged, perhaps consider seeking counseling, because this sort of reaction to a franchise about a blue hedgehog is not healthy.

Overall, there are healthy and unhealthy ways to engage with media. If a piece of media is making you seethe with rage to the point where other people enjoying it makes you think wishing death on an innocent person is okay, you should probably find another piece of media to engage with. It's not difficult to not read a comic or block fans whose opinons upset you. Actually, it's quite easy and I recommend it.

Be decent to each other. That's all anyone asks.

[corellianhounds]

For the character ask game… 25. What was your first impression of this character? How about now? (Din, Grogu, Boba and Fennec—all, some, or just one if you don’t want to do too many 😉)

I LOVE this question tysm 💕

My first impression of Din was colored by intrigue; I knew next to nothing about the show going into it, but I’ve always loved silent stoic masked characters, and then they made him a cool, capable lone gunslinger type?? Awesome, I’m already into it

And then as the first episode went on and we get the religious/cultural aspect of his code going into the covert, the deference he gives the Armorer and the mere GLIMPSES of his past in the flashback (all of this sequence of scenes scored by Ludwig Göransson’s incredible soundtrack), I was suddenly SUPER invested in this guy. They’ve already made him complex and interesting and I’ve loved every second so far, what’s next??

And then they introduce the kid at the end. And he’s possibly the cutest thing to come out of Star Wars. And you know just from looking at him what his species is meant to imply. And the second Din shot IG-11 I knew immediately what kind of story this was going to be and I was hooked

I was a fan of Star Wars before season 1 of The Mandalorian, but season 1 made me a Star Wars Fan™

I was also super intrigued by Fennec and was really impressed with Ming-Na Wen (no surprise there, she’s a great actress) and I was SHOCKED that they legitimately killed her off bUT THEN WE GET A POST-CREDITS SCENE!! I’M ALL IN BABEYYY! GIVE ME MORE OF HER!

As far as first impressions go of Boba Fett, I was passingly familiar with the character beyond surface level canon lore and I’d read half of one book where I really loved his character (The Mandalorian Armor by K. W. Jeter, Boba’s characterization there is solid and a lot of the basis for how I’ve always viewed and written him), but his reintroduction via “The Tragedy” was one of THE BEST character intros EVER. It’s one of the best fight scenes in terms of how it was shot and how he’s depicted; Fett is framed as and successfully shown to be a POWERHOUSE of strength, skill, intimidation, and sheer stage presence. It’s one of my favorite sequences to come from Star Wars, especially season 2 of Mando. I was so jazzed about it I was scream-texting my sister and I could just KEEP going on about it. Boba Fett in that episode is SOOOOO GOOD

Aaaaand… Then season 2 finishes and we get TBoBF.

I still love Mando and the kid as they were originally written, but I don’t love what they’ve done with the story and direction of this (and adjacent shows). Season 2 was messy and I wasn’t as big of a fan but I thought “okay maybe the story’s just going in a different direction and I should see what the creators have in mind” but by TBoBF I realized (with all four of those characters) OH, no, the showrunners didn’t have a cohesive game plan or long term story planned out with any meaningful thought, and by season 3 I realized I was pretty much done with whatever direction the original creators were taking the characters. I have better ideas and creators of something I used to like aren’t above criticism and they’re not immune to fans expecting better of them. You have control of one of the biggest franchises on earth and you can’t afford better writers? I don’t care about production quality or quantity of shows if the stories themselves are bad. Do better.

(Also not only are the stories not great, it sucks to see TBoBF, a show led by two veteran actors and people of color, be as badly written and received as it was. It, like many things, wasn’t the actors’ faults. It had a bad script and bad direction and now it seems like Boba’s character— one that has had a long and LASTING cultural presence— is being put on a shelf because the show wasn’t received well, but Disney/the Star Wars producers aren’t admitting to their role in its failure.)

These actors deserved better, the source material deserved better, and I’m disappointed by how quickly it went downhill and, in my opinion, isn’t salvageable based on how they’ve handled all of the original story hooks and character arcs. I have zero excitement for the movie and aside from Andor (which is not without its own flaws in other ways) I’ve haven’t enjoyed any of the other Star Wars shows in the last four years 🤷‍♂️

So I guess I’m short, love the initial characters, dislike the present depictions based on later material

Ask Game

[maythearo]

Yeah! The g3!! I know it has certainly been a uhhhh controversial topic lol

Imo draculaura looks sooo cute

Certainly lolll

You know how it goes I'm gonna ramble again so I'll put the read more thing for the sake of scrolling past it 😭

Well I'll start off by saying that, in this era of reboots and mass adaptations of every mildly old franchsie ever, is kinda impossible to avoid negative reactions from the people who were fans of the first generation of such franchises, because it happens, when someone takes something you grew up with and changes it to a modern audience most people's reaction will be "what in the world that's not how it was back in my days" + the phenomenon of older generations not liking the stuff that comes all for younger generations and etc. And I mention all of this bcs this definetely affects how people's opinions on things such as design (of MH in this case) go, there's lots of strong biases in this conversation of reboots and all

And tbh I wasn't immune to that 💀 at first I didn't like a lot of small decisions they made because I was used to the old one and "the og's always better" type of opinion, monster high was a big part of my childhood and probably a big boost to my interest in art! Which is what I live for baisically nowadays so ofc I felt strongly about it 😭 but when I came back after some time I realized, hey it's not that serious. I don't even remember specifically what those things I criticized were about, so that's an indicator of how much I actually cared, deep down lol. Like, pink Lagoona did not kill me, can you believe that? /s.

My opinion as of now, is that I think the g3 designs are really cute on their own!! I'm gonna stop myself from comparing it to the first gen because for the most part that's a waste of time and also a huge tangent from where I want to get 😭 recent reboots are a product of this era and they adapt accordingly. Sometimes they hit sometimes they miss, I think g3 mh is going well mostly!

(Talking about the concept designs and doll designs in this part) g3 takes from general modern fashion, clothing-wise the characters are not draaastically different from each other, they all just dress like how teenagers nowadays do but each got their own little motifs to their wardrobes. I don't think this "lack of difference" between each other's outfits is an enormous one nor is it inherently a bad thing because hey, if it looks good it looks good, and you can distinguish their clothings between one another just fine imo. In some cases I got some nickpicking in terms of "the pattern of this shirt is not working with these pants" or "whoa there's a lot going on with these colors" or "they really love to put bright pink lipstick on everyone huh" but it's rarely something I heavily dislike (only cases I can remember are that I wasn't a fan of was Heath 💀 feels like halfway through the process of his design mattel said "no you can stop now he's good like that" nothing is happening with that look, it's crazy, what happened to my boy. And Twyla, that wasn't as bad a s Heath's, but it just didn't work for me)

I can't say anything about the quality of the material of the dolls themselves bcs I don't have any of the new ones but oh my god, I also think Draculaura is adorable 😫 I think Venus dropped too recently and I'd buy her for sure!! The braided hair is everything and her fashion sense is probably one of my favorites so far? I also love Abbey's doll, and Frankie too especially that one line that they got a guitar? Instrument? Rockstar theme I think? (I'd cosplay that, no joke) from what I can see the designs are putting a lot more variety on drawing and sculpting different body types, features and details on the dolls and I think that's super fucking awesome! G1 also experimented with facial features and details on the body every once in a while but not as nicely done as now!

For the animated series I understand they had to tone it down to some extent because inserting all details the dolls and concept art had could lead to technical trouble (I think), so it isn't fair to compare them to one another. I'm just gonna ignore the animated series in terms of design for now, cause it's in the dolls and in illustration that a franchise like monster high work best anyway. I don't think much abt the cartoon tbh and I'm also not up to most episodes, idk who else dropped recently. But honorable mention, in the standards of the animated series my favorite designs are Deuce and Medusa for sure

That's long enough of a post so I'm gonna stop right hereeee, this was more of an overview of the g3 as a whole rather than ratings of each character, but yeah! I'm no longer a hater, I'm ok 👍 (if you're one of the people who heard me extensively complain over g3 before in another social, honestly I don't even know what it could have been about but you know what, disconsider it, it's easier that way 😭) I may have more opinions about it but that's all I could remember for now. Also my brain is fried.

And I can always change my mind on this, so there's that! Someone get me a Venus and Frankie doll rn please and thank you

[katebishopofearth]

I know this is out of nowhere but do you have any tonynat fic snippets you can share with us? I really love your writing 🥹

Ahhhhh this ask means so much to me you don't even understand 🥹

Here's... a thing...? that started out as a response to a prompt from a million years ago, it takes place in a Hollywood AU, but in order to write for that AU I obviously had to develop the entire elaborate backstory, after which... I did not finish writing for the prompt I am so sorry 😭 it's in the works I promise

But for now, here's the backstory:

In the glamorous world of Hollywood, money alone wasn't enough to open doors. You also needed status and fame, the ephemeral currencies of Hollywood.

And Tony Stark was nothing if not Hollywood royalty. He grew up in the limelight, the only child of celebrated actors Howard and Maria Stark. He had cameos in blockbusters before he could walk, became a leading man at the age of sixteen, and made a name for himself as not only a brilliant actor but also a notorious playboy following in his father's footsteps. Everywhere he went he had a different girl on his arm, he courted the affections of a handful of men, and when an interviewer asked him about settling down, he shrugged off the idea with his trademark devil-may-care smirk.

Natasha Romanoff found it all rather amusing. Because for a year now, Tony Stark hadn't been going home to his sprawling beachside mansion with a carousel of beautiful and interchangeable men and women. He had been going home to her cozy townhouse, cooking dinner in her kitchen, and spending his evenings curled up with her on her couch.

It had started as a chance encounter at the friend of a friend's, which led to an evening of lively, engaging conversation over drinks. He had seen her debut movie, which came out eight months ago, a small indie picture about two sisters that made barely a splash critically or in the box office. But he had seen it, and he had some surprisingly deep and pointed insights into it. It proved to her that there was a brain behind all his bravado, and broke through any reservations she might have had about his status as the A-lister of A-listers.

Then Tony expressed interest in her new project, and she cast him in a supporting role. They spent a lot of time together during that project – two months in the middle of nowhere. When Natasha was deep in the mires of rewrites, shooting schedules, and editing, it was Tony who brought her a sandwich, a cup of tea, or an aspirin. Sometimes, he acted as a sounding board, letting her bounce her ideas and frustrations off him. Other times, he cajoled her into taking a break – watching old spy movies, going for a walk, or drawing her out of her hyper-focus with a lively debate over something as pointless as almond milk or the Star Wars prequels.

It was on one of these breaks, in the last two weeks of shooting, that she kissed him. It might have been in the middle of From Russia With Love, in the middle of a field at dusk, or  in the middle of a discussion about aliens. The details didn't matter – what did matter was that despite his reputation, despite the energy that fizzled between them, Tony didn't make the first move. That had always been reserved for Natasha. When she pulled back and asked him, "was that okay?" he smiled so that the edges of his eyes crinkled, and he said in wonderment, "no one's ever asked me that before", before he leaned in for another kiss. When their lips met, it was with a sense of inevitability, like they had been, all this time, finding their way to each other.

After that, the world shifted imperceptibly. It was the subtlest of paradigm shifts. Even after the shoot wrapped up and they went back to LA, and Natasha dove into the post-production phase of her film and Tony started shooting a new movie in his superhero franchise, there was no picking up their normal lives again.