#don’t even know if I want to play patho 3 but I miss him I love him

[aotopmha]

Hi! I love reading your posts. These days I mostly look forward to your episode analysis. But I wanted to know what are your thoughts on mikasa's character and would you say she is well-developed given the latest chapter? The fandom in the past mostly argued that mikasa is the most poorly treated female character by isayama. And now I guess people have resorted to some disgusting takes which I dn't wana bring up in your space. Thanks.

Cool you like my stuff!

I think she is one of the best executions of her character archetype and she is just like every other character in AoT: there are sections of the story where she has less focus and sections of the story where she has more focus.

In her character's case, I think her main focus was in the first arc and in this last arc, but there are key moments peppered in other arcs to bridge the way to her character in this arc.

In my eyes, she has been absolutely great in this final arc.

Mikasa has not been the only character I've seen criticized to be wasted potential in the story, but I think what some people want out of the characters simply is not what AoT offers or how the story writes its characters in the first place.

There are walls of text about the lore and plot, but the big character moments are always punctuated by big panels that let the moment breathe.

I think people want volume because volume automatically means more complex characters to them, but I think AoT likes to be concise much more.

I've said this before, but I think Mikasa is one of the best examples of this in the story.

I've disagreed with the claim that Mikasa specifically is wasted potential for quite a bit, but I think I do with most AoT characters. I think most of them were used to their fullest potential.

But with Mikasa I especially do now because I did get everything people seem to claim they are missing out of her character.

I got a character arc about gaining a healthier understanding about relationships.

I got a character arc about growing more pragmatic and mature and understanding when feelings need to be put aside to do the right thing.

I got a relationship-centric female character who is not required to throw away her relationships to grow and plays with gender roles in a fun way because of the masculine elements of her character, like her strength and muscular build.

I got a relationship-centric character who has relationships outside of her most focused-on relationship.

Her backstory would've worked just as well were she a male character.

There are several key points in the story where her caring about others drastically effects the plot of the story.

If she could've killed Reiner and Bert when they revealed themselves, the story would be very different.

If she did not throw away the blade Armin had back in Trost and wasn't there to help him, the story probably would be very different.

If she wasn't there to stop Kaya from killing Gabi, the story probably would be pretty different.

Hell, if she wasn't there to save Sasha in that one scene in Trost, even then things would've been much different because Sasha is so essential for some of the events in the early stages of the final arc.

People talk about how details add up and I think Mikasa is 100% that character, except some of these details are actually key points in the story.

This is also true in the anime. We had a few altered scenes, but we got other ones in return, like the one with Hannes in season 2 or a couple of scenes with Historia in season 3.

I think every ounce of pathos you could wring out of her character has been wrung out of it.

I love her character as this motherly, but powerful protective presence and her being powerful, but also human.

The scene with Reeves in Trost and the scene with Hange in Shiganshina come to mind as two contrasts. Her as powerful and her as grieving.

The reason why she is lower on the ladder of female characters for me is that her character is still constrained to her archetype.

Everything you could do well with that archetype is done incredibly well, there's even subversions in there with the masculine elements of her character and details of her character arc.

But there isn't anything in particular I find that's very unique about all of the aspects that make up her character.

I think at some point people were complaining that she had only a few lines of dialog in the Shiganshina arc or something like that, but I still take that over the four scenes with Levi in the Uprising arc that all said the same thing in essence (torture scene, scene with Historia, scene with Armin, scene with random MP thug).

She is very much a quality over quantity, show don't tell character:

(Chapter 84)

I take this over any monologue about pragmatism Levi makes in the Uprising arc.

Of course, Mikasa is a character and characters are written by people.

Maybe Isayama could've written her in a way where her relationship with Eren isn't as big part of her character or not a part of her character at all.

Maybe he could've even made her be the kind of character that does have elaborate inner and outer monologues about losing her parents or those she cares about or being stuck between duty and family.

He could've made her have the same amount of focus every arc.

But I feel like she's not the only character who was like this.

As I said, I think everyone has been out of focus at some point or another.

Reiner was a non-character before Clash and wasn't even there in Uprising.

Eren was actually gone or unconscious for a lot of the Female Titan, Clash and Uprising arcs.

All of the Paradis crew was gone for most of the Marley arc.

I also feel like even the most complex characters in the story don't reflect or angst massive amounts in the first place. As I said, I think there aren't that many walls of text concerning character motivation.

All of the information you need is there in simple, but layered dialog.

In that sense I don't see her being treated more unfairly than other characters.

I can say that I think the only characters that I feel weren't used to their fullest potential were probably Bertholdt and Historia.

I really do feel we got everything we could out of Mikasa's character, though and the ending for her is pretty much perfect.

Thank you for the ask!

[smokeybrandreviews]

Smokey brand Postmortem: Missing Number

It’s weird writing a postmortem for a game so soon after release but, with these leaks and the disheartening truth behind them, The Last of Us II might as well have been out for months. i wrote, at length, about the biggest issues I saw while experiencing this game and wanted to double back a little bit. I have a few ideas about how to fix what was so obviously broken. So, now that we have all mourned for what could have been, let's dissect what ails this death on arrival.

Issue: The writing is absolutely abhorrent for these characters

A few days ago, i addressed why i thought TLoU II failed so miserably upon release; Poor writing and even worse execution. The Last of Us II has an interesting and compelling narrative, the bones of this story are dope, but the execution is the absolute worst. In a vacuum, this story could have been something, but by using established characters and events, it becomes a disgusting mess.

Fix 1: This should have been the third game in a trilogy

Why was Joel such a weenie? Why was Ellie so blood thirsty? Who the f*ck even is Abby? Either this sh*t was addressed superficially or not at all during the course of the story we were given. That doesn't cut it. Thee is too much missing from everyone involved. Ellie, in the first title, would not have been driven for such violent revenge. Not even a little bit. When we last saw her, she was just beginning that descent into darkness. Joel was the murderer. Joel was the monster. Joel was the antagonist of the first game. Joel was what that world made him. The sh*t Abby pulled would never have flown with TLoU I Joel. What the f*ck happened during the time jump to make him so goddamn gullible? More important than anything, who the f*ck is Abby? She has such an emotionally driven tale of revenge and we don't even know who the f*ck her parents are? We are given a glib idea but, as someone experiencing a story that demands you emotionally attach to it's characters, what we got was not enough. There is an entire chunk of character development, world building, and crucial narrative growth that should have been explored BEFORE we got where we are in this current title. The Last of Us II should have been a III.

We should have got another title where we saw Ellie strain and eventually break from Joel. We should have seen him lose another daughter and watch as that slowly erode the Joel we knew, into the Joel we have in II. We should have seen bits of Abby struggle alone in the world, finding her way through a darker version of what was left behind. We should have been able to play as Ellie, maybe learning of hints to what Joel did for her, to her, coming across the name “Anderson” during her soul-searching. Hell, she could have actually helped Abby at one point, neither really knowing each other during a mission or, maybe, Ellie having a feeling about this new girl. Maybe she senses the animosity and you, as the player, have to witness Ellie debating whether to kill this girl, even if she hasn’t done anything just yet. All of the bloody pathos that will bind them together, curdling just under the surface of this budding relationship. There is so much fertile narrative ground there to build an awesome third title, to make what we got, great, because The Last of Us II has the bones to BE great. The execution, though, kills it all.

Fix 2: Give Abby Some DLC

Abby is mystery and not in a good way. We don’t know anything about this broad outside of her paper thin motivations. She’s the main antagonist and half the protagonist, but we are playing a stranger. That’s just poor writing right there, especially coming off of how rich everything we got with the first title turned out to be. How can you follow such story driven girth, with such limp drivel? Give Abby her own DLC. Make it follow her growth into the murder revenge machine she turned out to be. Why is she so yoked? How long was she been part of that crew? How many motherf*ckers did she kill on her blood-soaked rampage? We don’t know. This doesn't fix the left-turn Ellie and Joel make, i think you’d need to release an entire game to develop that sh*t properly, but giving Abby more agency can go a long way to making people care about who we fans see as a story-derailing, sour puss, homewrecker.

Fix 3: Make a prequel

That game i said we were missing in the middle? Yeah, make it anyway and call it III. Look, to make II worth a damn, you need those missing narrative beats. You need to explain why the characters we spent so much time with in I, characters we learned so much about and were so connected with emotionally, act completely different than where we left them. That’s how you tell a compelling story. That’s how you develop characters. That’s how you build worlds. You can’t just drop us in the middle of an arc that has nothing to do with anything we actually know, and expect us, as the player, to care. I mean, you can if you’re good at your job but it’s very obvious the writers were more concerned with agendas, rather than creating a great narrative and plot. You bring in Anita Sarkessian and you’re story is about to go straight down the toilet. That’s exactly what happened here. Motherf*ckers got bogged down by politics and forgot to tell half the story. Well, get to it, Naughty Dog. Show us what we missed. Convince us that Joel would willingly abandon his agency and why Ellie can be a straight up murderer. We need THAT story to give value to THIS story.

The Last of Us II isn’t a bad game. It’s decent to play. The narrative, itself, isn’t terrible, if you remove our principal characters. If this had a cat of brand new motherf*ckers, okay. Great story. Holy sh*t, things have gotten bad. I wonder what Joel and Ellie are up to? Right? Next game, guess who’s back? Nah, that’s not where we went with this thing. Instead, they pulled a Last Jedi and alienated everything about the characters we journey with before, in favor of uplifting OCs and Mary Sues. I love the idea of exploring what it means to live trauma. How people survive with everyday horrors. The PTSD all of these people have must be devastating. hat does that do to a person? How does that effect them? Why was this story told, the way it was told, with the characters it had, when there was so many other ways to go with this narrative? In this world? It doesn’t make sense and the overall narrative suffers for it.

[angedemystere]

My Rewatch of Les Miserables, 1998

Ah, yes, I have decided to revisit that much panned film version, directed by Bille August and starring Liam Neeson, Geoffrey Rush, Uma Thurman and Claire Danes (and Hans Matheson and Toby Jones thrown in for good measure). This movie holds a complicated place in my heart by being the adaptation that introduced me to Les Miz, inspiring love for these characters and spurring me to look into the musical and the Brick itself .... only to then earn my distaste for all the inaccuracies from the original text.

So, now that I’ve revisited it with fresh eyes and a barometer by which to compare it to other adaptions, is it as bad as everyone says?

Well ... it depends.

Let’s start with how this stands as a movie.

First, the cinematography. In terms of setting and sets, this film is gorgeous. It starts with nature scenes (opens early on with a shot of the river ~ooohh~ foreshadowing) and provides a strong sense of location and space. Now I think in certain urban scenes, especially when the story moves to Paris, there’s a lot of washed-out grey that kind of blends together. It does have a purpose: to portray the desolation plaguing the poor that’s stirring l’ABC to action. Even so, it can be harder to focus on the details when color blends too much. Other than that (and some not necessary close-ups), the filming is dynamic, easy to follow, and overall really nice to look at.

Next, the script and pacing. The scenes within themselves are for the most part effective at getting across character and important information and making interactions feel natural. (The one bench scene between Cosette and Marius might be the exception - can no one write romantic banter well? Or is this true to how awkward romantic banter is in real life? Tell me, I have no idea). Of course you’re dealing with characters like Javert (and lovestruck teens) who make natural dialogue a challenge, but in the movie’s first half, there’s a strong reliance on exchanges from the book itself to make it work. 

Pacing within scenes keeps at a steady clip while giving time for important moments to breathe. But then the movie has to deal with time jumps, which can be awkward since we the audience are forced to reorient ourselves. The first jump works better because we’re meant to feel some suspense about what’s happened to Valjean between his encounter with Bishop Myriel and his being mayor. We instead meet Javert and follow him to his new post in Montreuil-sur-Mer I’ll ... get to that later. When he’s introduced to the mayor, we realize it’s Jean Valjean! That’s pretty satisfying. This movie most succeeds in the first half in giving us enough about Valjean, Javert and Fantine to get who they are, what their situation is and why we should pay attention. 

The next time jump brings us to 1832 and teenage Cosette. This time we’ve missed out on seeing Valjean and Cosette’s relationship grow, and not a whole lot is shown to solidify what their relationship has been like in the convent and what they stand to gain or lose by leaving that environment. We do get some insight, just not as much as I would’ve liked. 

Now, how are the actors? Everyone does at least a decent job, even sometimes a brilliant one. Liam Neeson brings warmth, shy awkwardness, and humanity to the character in ways that feel genuine. The awkwardness is most endearing when he’s interacting with Fantine, which is a deviation from the novel that I really don’t mind because, damn it, they’re just so cute! Speaking of which, this addition of a mild Valjean/Fantine romance (don’t worry, it’s as raunchy as kindergartners holding hands) actually plays a role in how Valjean handles Cosette and Marius’s romance. There’s a bit of lampshading when Cosette acknowledges that she has pretty strong feelings for a guy she’s known only a few weeks and it’s not rational, but her feelings are no less real. And Valjean respects those feelings because he experienced them in his own way with Fantine.

Hang on ... hang on a sec ...

Okay, I’m fine. BBC 2019 miniseries, eat your heart out.

Uma Thurman captures Fantine’s vulnerability without overselling it. She pleads for her case while flip-flopping between honest frustration and appeasing servility. But I must ask this: when her hair was cut, why wasn’t it cropped shorter? Maybe a clause in her contract? Also, no tooth removal. The filmmakers probably wanted Fantine to still look attractive enough for the little romance budding between her and Valjean. Points off for accuracy but still effective in pathos.

I remember not being a fan of Cosette when I first saw this film, not through any fault of Claire Danes or the writing but because I cared more about the Valjean-Javert dynamic than her romance (not predictable of me at all). And she can be pouty, but that poutiness is often justified by her cooped-up existence and a desire to live more freely. I also have renewed appreciation for the fact that Cosette 1) stood up to Valjean when he slapped her, especially given her abuse at Mme. Thenardier’s hands, 2) stayed fairly calm while lying to Javert’s face, and 3) held Javert at gunpoint while she freed Marius. For her sheltered upbringing, girl’s got nerves of steel.

This Marius, while still foolish (slipping out of the barricade that he’s supposed to be in charge of to visit Cosette and being not at all subtle while stalking her), has more sense than book!Marius. Granted, he’s undergone a fusion with Enjolras, but I understand the decision, which I’ll address shortly.

And Javert .... Javert is probably the hardest major Les Miz character to pin perfectly in any adaptation. This is for a couple reasons. One, because films have limited time, certain scenes that can establish an otherwise unseen facet of a character are often cut. This frequently happens with Javert’s later scenes: the police station (where he burns his coattails) and the Gorbeau house (twice - one when he’s disguised as a beggar, the other when he jokes about offering his hat and rebuffs Mme. Thenardier’s assault with his “claws of a woman” comment). Two, his frequent run-ins with Valjean are altered from being coincidences to international face-offs orchestrated by him, making him much more fixated, even downright obsessive, about catching Valjean. On both fronts, Rush’s Javert suffers from these cuts or alterations. But when it comes to the performance he delivers? 

This is the silhouette of a man who makes criminals wet themselves.

Is he my definitive Javert? Oh no. That dream has yet to come true for me. But I rank him in my top five preferred Javerts. I do have issues with some of his actions, like toppling the mail coach (just .....why?), smacking Fantine, and pointing a gun in Cosette’s face. That’s the wrong kind of asshole or creep for him. I do think it interesting, on this rewatch, to be reminded that this Javert’s mother was a prostitute, and when Fantine is harassed by Bamatabois and then retaliates, he first holds back from interfering (and stops the captain from interfering) and then “takes care of this” by slapping Fantine when she tells him the gentlemen started it. I don’t see Brickvert doing any of these things, but the purpose of this moment is to give us a glimpse into the depth of his hatred for the class of people his parents came from. We don’t know why he hates them so much apart from his overall moral and philosophical perspective, but you can’t help but wonder about what he experienced in his early life that would make him act violently toward a woman with the same occupation as his mother, but ONLY when she lashes out (understandably) at a member of good society. This outburst could also explain why he fixates on Valjean, a thief like his father. It’s not just his commitment to his ideals; he’s living a morality play with his parents as the criminals he needs to punish in order to prove he’s not one of them, that he’s risen above them, that he will not and CANNOT fall to their level. The fact this movie captured that nuance and had it carry out in subtext is a credit, even if I don’t agree with all the actions this version has him do.

No surprise that, given how much attention has clearly been given to Javert’s character by the film, this adaptation chooses to keep the center of narrative focus on Javert and Valjean, sacrificing a lot of other characters in the process. Eponine? Gone. The Thenardiers overall, gone in the second half once Valjean has rescued Cosette (except for Gavroche, but you wouldn’t know he’s a Thenardier in this). The Les Amis exist as a collective but have no individual identities apart from Marius and, arguably, this movie’s Enjolras, who is reduced to a team lieutenant and stripped of all other book!Enjolras characterization. Again, a good chunk of Enjolras’s charisma and commitment to the cause is lumped into Marius. The writers were likely interested in making Marius a more dashing love interest. This doesn’t always jive with the moments he’s actually Marius: stalking Cosette, writing her pages of love letters, ducking out of meetings early to see her when he’s supposed to be heading the planning of the uprising. The clash can be distracting. Still, Matheson tries to balances these two sides as well as he can.

This is where a lot of Les Miz fans have or will have problems with this version. If you’re anything other than a fan of Valjean, Javert, Fantine or Cosette, you’re going to feel deprived. I don’t actually consider this a major flaw of the film because the filmmakers were at least consistent in their focus, preferring to develop a few characters than stretch too thin with more characters who would have ended up with shallow portrayals anyway. But I will highly suggest that if you’re a diehard Les Amis or Eponine fan and are annoyed when adaptations reduce those characters, you might want to skip this version.

Now that the issue of character omissions or reductions has been dealt with, let’s get to what I have problems with that are actually on screen:

Valjean’s outbursts toward Cosette - this aspect of his character isn’t as prevalent as I remember, to be fair. There is one scene where he snaps at her as a child (and he immediately apologizes) and two scenes where he yells at her as a teen and/or hits her. Nonetheless, the notion that physical assault was necessary in his character toward Cosette of all people--please no. There’s no reason for it. In fact, there’s better reason to go against it to show contrast with how Valjean reacted to stressful situations in the past. Yes, those knee-jerk reactions can be hard to shake, but Cosette’s presence in his life is meant to show how much he’s grown. Granted, Cosette acknowledges that his outbursts are out of character, that he’s “acting so strangely,” and we do see tenderness between them most of the time. Still, it taints the relationship when his and Cosette’s book relationship, while plagued by secrecy, is entirely wholesome. Any hint of violence makes me wary of when Cosette says she needs to be there for him after learning about his past and plans to flee the country.

Javert’s suicide - again, more on Valjean’s end. Obviously this version is different from canon; Javert makes it seem like he’s going to murder Valjean and let his body fall in the river, only to free him and do it to himself, and Valjean is there to watch. And he fails to attempt saving him, which, given his actions at the barricade and the kind of man he’s become, comes across painfully out of character. So does the glee he expresses when a man has killed himself in front of him only a minute ago. Maybe if Javert had said something or done something to make saving him impossible or clearly against his wishes, Valjean’s inaction would’ve been more understandable. I do also question Javert’s wisdom in killing himself in front of a man who tried to save him mere hours ago. Why did he not consider that Valjean might try rescuing him again? Well, he seemed to make the right call.

Both of these choices point to an attempt to make Jean Valjean more flawed. This is a conversation the fandom has had before, and the question of slipping in a sharpness to redeemed!Valjean has come up in other versions, even some actors’ portrayals in the Broadway show. I see the argument on both sides--he’s human, he suffered years of conditioning that turned him hateful and willing to harm others. But it should be noted that, while Valjean is physically capable of throwing someone around like a sack of potatoes, he’s never demonstrated an inclination to do so, not even from what few details we have of his life in prison. The movie adds that violent edge to Valjean’s narrative, from when he first hits Bishop Myriel on the head to smacking Cosette in the face. Javert gets some of this treatment, too--never shown violent behavior in canon, smacks around Fantine and manhandles Cosette in the film. Maybe the filmmakers were worried a modern audience wouldn’t find a nonviolent ex-con and a non-violent policeman believable. Yeesh.

All right, some minor issues:

The changing of names - Montreuil-sur-Mer becomes Vigau. Fauchelevent becomes Lafitte. Champmathieu becomes Carnot. What’s going on? Were they scared of pronouncing French names longer than two syllables? Oh, and Valjean as the mayor never has a name. He’s just “monsieur le maire” wherever he goes. You think his alias is M. Maire? So he became Maire Maire? No wonder he was pushed to take office.

Child actors - they aren’t great. Hardly any get dialogue and it’s no surprise why. For those who do, it’s obvious they’re being prompted offscreen. The kid playing Gavroche is the exception and there’s too little of him.

Illiteracy - eh, I kind of give this a pass. It’s not book canon that Valjean is illiterate post-Toulon, and I don’t remember if book!Fantine is illiterate, but it gives them a little bonding moment and gives Neeson the opportunity to show off his first-grader-concentration face when he practices his cursive.

Having addressed the big (and not so big) problems of the film, were there good parts in terms of adaptation? Yes--I think Neeson and Rush have a scintillating Valjean-Javert dynamic. I like how they have some understated snark jousting in the Vigau scenes. The 2019 series wishes it could achieve that level of sniping. But then, Brickvert wasn’t very subtle when he brought up how he knew only ONE man, one CONVICT, who could lift the cart, and Valjean is trying to deflect or ignore him while Fauchelevant is being crushed. Maybe not book-accurate, but entertaining as hell.

Also, while I don’t ship them, the Valjean-Fantine scenes were cute and made my heart squeeze. I know it was gratuitous. Their bond provided a little spot of light in their miserable (hah!) lives.

Also also, I like Javert’s informant in the 1832 scenes. He’s funny, cynical (he complains how nauseating Cosette and Marius’s romance is and swears off having daughters), committed to his job (he catches a cold from watching Cosette and Marius in the rain on Javert’s behalf), and respects Javert without being afraid of him. They even walk together to the barricade so Javert can get in and not draw suspicion. And for some reason he doesn’t have a name! Guys, if you like Rivette from the BBC series, let’s give this unnamed informant some love. I want a buddy cop series with him and Javert.

To wrap this up, I’ll say that Les Miserables (1998) is certainly flawed as an adaptation. Jean Valjean and Javert get injected with violent tendencies, Fantine stays prettier than she should, Marius and Enjolras have undergone fusion, and 80% of the book characters have vaporized or barely exist as bit parts. But I wont say stay away from this abomination because it’s not abominable. It’s ... ok. It’s serviceable in capturing the main plot arc of Les Miserables and a couple of its crucial themes. I think Les Miserables is one of those books where you’re probably not going to get the screen adaptation you want, so maybe watch a bunch, pick a few that least offend you, and fuse them together into your own imagined adaptation. With luck, the components are more cohesive than those of Marijolras.

[al-norton]

for character opinions... peter? & eva if you wanna do more than 1? 👁

Sure sure! 

 I've got to say though, I haven't played P2 yet, so my opinions are only based on the Patho Classic... Minus the last few days of Changeling, because I didn't complete her route yet. 

 Here's Peter! 

• How I feel about this character: I really love him. I also feel strongly for his particular set of issues. The fact that he let himself be completely defined by his creative work; his codependent relationship to his brother; the creative crisis brought on by a big success that he deems his greatest creation; the substance abuse… I think all creatives have to deal with these things more or less, and seeing them cranked up to 11 just really stokes my empathy. His condition isn’t cool and isn’t pretty, but I get it. So I just kinda want to hold him gently y’know 

• All the people I ship romantically with this character: only Daniil, I think? They are both fucked up, of course, but Daniil genuinely seems to want good things for Peter 

• My non-romantic OTP for this character: Peter and Andrey, obviously :’) but I also like friendship of Peter and Eva very much! Of course, idea of him adopting Grace also seems wonderful, but I haven’t experienced it for myself yet… 

• My unpopular opinion about this character: I’m not sure if it’s this opinion is really unpopular, but I’ve seen a couple of takes about how people shouldn’t make an accent on Peters alcoholism since even in the concept it was stated that he was ‘a deeply tragic character that should not be played for laughs as a pitiful drunk’. Well yeah, it shouldn’t be played for laughs, but it shouldn’t be ignored either, because it’s a big part of Peters tragedy! Like alcohol is literally is a depressant, capable of causing hallucinations within prolonged use. And alcoholism is a serious illness that literally ruins your brain. Yeah it is often played for laughs, but it’s just as often ignored or glossed over for the cool factor of your grizzled cool protagonist downing whiskey like it’s nothing. It’s actually really nice to see a clear but compassionate look on this problem, and I think it shouldn’t be erased 

• One thing I wish would happen / had happened with this character in canon: I wish we got more interactions between Peter and Andrey :’) maybe even have them discuss their relationship a little haha. But also I just want good things for him 

• My OTP: none really? Like, Daniil/Peter is good but I also just want him to learn to be happy on his own y’know. 

 • My OT3: none really 

 And I’m always happy to talk about Eva :’) 

• How I feel about this character: I love her unconditionally </3 

• All the people I ship romantically with this character: Andrey, Yulia, and also… Maria?? I know that Maria is evil and allegedly forced her to do the leap of faith, but I just… have a lot of thoughts about their dynamic, I think it’s really cool (I also just think Maria is really cool) 

• My non-romantic OTP for this character: oh you know, Daniil, Peter… I also think all the ladies in the town (Eva, Lara, Yulia, Anna, Maria) are tense friends and have tea-parties every week. The parties are full of gossip and philosophy :)

• My unpopular opinion about this character: again, I don’t think it’s that unpopular? But if I see Eva being characterized as ‘pretty and kind, but kind of dull and uninteresting’ in fanfic one more time I’m gonna throw chairs >:( 

• One thing I wish would happen / had happened with this character in canon: it’s more like I wish something wouldn’t happen… I wish it wasn’t implied that Maria made Eva kill herself :/ I may have missed some cues on my Bachelor run since I was just getting to know the game, but it just didn’t seem reasonable to me from Marias perspective and it kind of undermined Evas believes? Not to mention it had a weird flare of ladies fighting over Daniil? Idk just seems like a weird bit of writing to me (although if anyone would care to explain in to me I’d be grateful!) 

• My OTP: Eva/myself tbh :’) 

• My OT3: hmmm none? I feel like Eva would like to keep her relationships compartmentalized hehe. But I kind of think of Eva & Andrey & Peter as a… brot3?? They are a cool group of friends where Eva and Andrey also happen to kiss sometimes! I think about them a lot as a trio :) 

 thank you for the ask ♥ and also for all the exrtimely kind Peter content :’)

[stevenuniversallyreviews]

Episode 110: Onion Gang

“No more weirdo friends.”

There have been a handful of Steven Universe episodes that I only watched once, didn’t like, and didn’t watch again until reviewing them for this project. Time has been kind to many of them: I’ve come to appreciate Ronaldo (especially in Rising Tides, Crashing Skies, which I was super down on) as well as Say Uncle and The New Lars. I don’t necessarily love all these episodes now, but they’re a lot better than I once thought.

But yeah sometimes my first impression is right on the money.

Onion Gang is the most boring episode of the series by a country mile. The show has meandered before in the likes of Cat Fingers, Steven’s Lion, and Open Book, but these stories at least resolve in interesting ways. Looking forward, Escapism has even fewer words than Onion Gang, but it’s designed to simultaneously add to Steven’s many ordeals and act as the calm before the storm (and it’s also, y’know, watchable; silence can be a good thing, ask any episode of Samurai Jack). But Onion Gang is relentlessly uninteresting throughout.

The glacial pace isn’t helped by comedy bits falling flat at a rate that’s almost impressive. I try pretty hard to find things I like in episodes I don’t, but there’s literally nothing here for me. That is not easy. Especially considering how much of a sucker I am for Onion, slapstick, and weird goofy side adventures. This should be right up my alley, but hoo boy is it not.

Still, I’ll give it a try: the most generous reading of Onion Gang is that it focuses on Steven misunderstanding Onion, and if you squint, you can draw a parallel between his assumptions about Onion and his assumptions about Rose (both silent, mysterious figures in his life) being proven wrong. False narratives are a recurring theme in Steven’s arc, and another one pops up here. But even if that broadest of strokes is an intended connection, it doesn’t stop Onion Gang from being a catastrophe.

The only Onion Pal that leaves any impression is Garbanzo, and the impression is that Garbanzo is the worst character the show has ever produced. Villains like Kevin and Aquamarine are horrible, but that’s the point. Irritating secondary characters like Ronaldo and Lars have actual depth, and otherwise further the plot and are reliable for decent humor at times (it’s a shame that only one of them grows, but still). Garbanzo is a kid who shouts the word “Garbanzo” as if this is inherently amusing, and uh that’s it. The joke isn’t funny the first time, and doesn’t become funny through brute force repetition. It’s just annoying.

Squash, Soup, and Pinto are...there? They mostly exist for the gag of Steven naming all of them, a continuation of his unusually domineering presence in Onion Gang. Because oh yeah, on top of everything else this is a dreadful Steven episode. It’s not Sadie’s Song, because his presumptuous attitude doesn’t cause actual harm, but this is a bad look on a hero whose powers are supposed to be based on empathy. His narration of Onion’s actions mostly acts as another gag, and like Garbanzo, it’s not a funny one, but that doesn’t stop the episode from repeating it ad nauseam.

Steven’s weird behavior doesn’t stop there. The overlong go-kart scene ends with Steven seeing Garbanzo spray ketchup on himself, then instantly forgetting he saw this and openly wondering if Garbanzo is hurt. Which makes this the dumbest Steven has ever been. It makes zero sense that he would be bamboozled by something he saw faked with his own eyes, to the point where the gag itself becomes confusing: this would be like if he saw Amethyst eat his dinner then asked where his dinner went, it requires Steven’s intelligence to plummet so perilously that it confounds what we’re supposed to find funny about the joke in the first place.

But the most bizarre misfire by far is Steven declaring that he’s “the lonely boy with no friends his age” when Connie Maheswaran exists. She’s busy (as is the underused Peedee), but our hero makes the flying leap that this means he’s utterly friendless. This is a kid defined by his ability to make friends. He saves the ocean once and the planet twice by making friends. The entire show hinges on his fundamental friendliness. This plot point is ludicrous, even when we take into account that Steven is being annoyingly melodramatic.

A nitpick, but one that fuels the Ronaldo-level conspiracy theorist in me, is that Connie was prepping for school in Buddy’s Book and is attending school in Mindful Education, so if she’s shopping for school supplies in Onion Gang then either she’s doing it super late (which doesn’t sound like something she or her mother would ever allow) or this episode, which mind you is stated to take place as summer ends, should've aired between the two Connie episodes. The conspiracy theory is that Onion Gang would’ve looked even weaker when shoved between two episodes about what good friends Steven and Connie are, so it got moved to settle between two Crystal Gem stories.

I think that it’s theoretically possible to make a good episode that evokes unambiguous pathos from Onion. But considering the character works because he’s this strange, menacing force of nature in an otherwise pretty normal population of humans, I’m not sure he’s a character that needs the depth. Onion Friend hit a sweet spot of making him grow a little, but maintain his creepy charm. Onion Gang goes further, but in doing so removes everything interesting about Beach City’s resident weirdo. Gone is the kid who two episodes ago was robbing the arcade with a crowbar and a bandit mask. Here instead is an odd but sensitive kid whose mischievous friends somehow render him less mischievous than usual. It’s bad enough to have a boring episode, but a boring episode with Onion as the focus? Again, it’s almost impressive.

There’s no reason to watch this episode instead of any other Onion-centric episode if Onion is your jam. There’s no reason to watch this episode instead of any other Steven-centric episode barring Sadie’s Song if Steven is your jam. There’s no reason to watch this episode instead of rewatching Last One Out of Beach City if being charmed by friendship is your jam. There’s no reason to watch this episode instead of Buddy’s Book if thematic resonance in regards to false narratives is your jam. There’s no reason to watch this episode instead of any episode of Craig of the Creek if kids playing outside is your jam. Only watch Onion Gang if you’re a glutton for punishment.

We’re the one, we’re the ONE! TWO! THREE! FOUR!

Part of me wants to rank this higher than Fusion Cuisine and House Guest, where I find more insulting mischaracterizations. But both of those episodes have enjoyable elements that are weighed down by lousy depictions of Connie and Greg; Garnet’s a riot in the former, and there’s a sweet song in the latter despite being muddled by context. Whereas there are no real bright spots in Onion Gang. It’s an unbearable eleven minutes that I’m never going to watch again.

Sadie’s Song is worse because it’s the worst Steven episode in the series and it misses the mark so much, and it’s important to Sadie’s arc so it’s harder to skip, which makes me resent it more. Island Adventure is worse because its moral is that abuse is a reasonable method of communication. But that’s all that’s stopping Onion Gang from reaching the very bottom.

The good news is that this is it for my No Thanks list, and while I might’ve had a bit of fun dissecting why I dislike Onion Gang so much, it bears saying that 6 stinkers in 180 episodes and a movie ain’t shabby.

Top Twenty

Steven and the Stevens

Hit the Diamond

Mirror Gem

Lion 3: Straight to Video

Alone Together

Last One Out of Beach City

The Return

Jailbreak

The Answer

Mindful Education

Sworn to the Sword

Rose’s Scabbard

Earthlings

Mr. Greg

Coach Steven

Giant Woman

Beach City Drift

Winter Forecast

Bismuth

When It Rains

Love ‘em

Laser Light Cannon

Bubble Buddies

Tiger Millionaire

Lion 2: The Movie

Rose’s Room

An Indirect Kiss

Ocean Gem

Space Race

Garnet’s Universe

Warp Tour

The Test

Future Vision

On the Run

Maximum Capacity

Marble Madness

Political Power

Full Disclosure

Joy Ride

Keeping It Together

We Need to Talk

Chille Tid

Cry for Help

Keystone Motel

Catch and Release

Back to the Barn

Steven’s Birthday

It Could’ve Been Great

Message Received

Log Date 7 15 2

Same Old World

The New Lars

Monster Reunion

Alone at Sea

Crack the Whip

Beta

Back to the Moon

Kindergarten Kid

Buddy’s Book

Like ‘em

Gem Glow

Frybo

Arcade Mania

So Many Birthdays

Lars and the Cool Kids

Onion Trade

Steven the Sword Fighter

Beach Party

Monster Buddies

Keep Beach City Weird

Watermelon Steven

The Message

Open Book

Story for Steven

Shirt Club

Love Letters

Reformed

Rising Tides, Crashing Tides

Onion Friend

Historical Friction

Friend Ship

Nightmare Hospital

Too Far

Barn Mates

Steven Floats

Drop Beat Dad

Too Short to Ride

Restaurant Wars

Kiki’s Pizza Delivery Service

Greg the Babysitter

Gem Hunt

Steven vs. Amethyst

Bubbled

Enh

Cheeseburger Backpack

Together Breakfast

Cat Fingers

Serious Steven

Steven’s Lion

Joking Victim

Secret Team

Say Uncle

Super Watermelon Island

Gem Drill

Know Your Fusion

Future Boy Zoltron

No Thanks!

     6. Horror Club      5. Fusion Cuisine      4. House Guest      3. Onion Gang      2. Sadie’s Song      1. Island Adventure

[future-critical-blog]

How Pacing Fucked Steven Universe

Note: this is anonymous because I know what will happen!

Steven Universe is without a doubt one of the best shows I've ever seen. It's certainly the best cartoon series I've ever watched. The first four series, and a large amount of the fifth, are truly wonderful.

So, I'm going to be entitled and complain about the last little bit that didn't work for me. I got all those hundreds of episodes, and I’m just going to take a moment to really honk about the stuff I don't like.

Because we live in an age where Nazis are back, feminists think trans woman are the biggest threat they face and the world is burning - at this point, a bit of a moan about Steven Universe/Future will get lost I think.

Bear in mind: this comes from a place of love. I care about Steven and the characters because they took me on an amazing journey that really had an emotional impact on me. Then they tripped me right at the end, and now they're fuck-twaddling around taking up space in my brain that should be used for thinking about how great the show is.

This is about how the inability to wrap Steven Universe properly sucks and undermines all the amazing work the creators put into it. Now, that work hasn't gone anywhere: I can, and will, re-watch the series to reminisce about it. About what could have happened. Nobody has taken that away from me.

But still, there's nothing worse than a story that buggers up the ending. Worse yet, that ending is still going in Steven Universe: Future.

So what's the problem? Let's start.

Pacing, pathos and atmosphere

Things used to be teased, hinted and slowly revealed. Steven Universe used to a slow-burn that really built things up with the even-hand of a masterful storyteller.  Remember that long shot at the end of 'On the Road', after the characters leave? We see just the empty, sinister kindergarten whilst a discordant note builds in the background before... bang, credits. It builds atmosphere and tension.

What happened to that? Slowly building a feeling, weaving a narrative, and taking us on an emotional journey? We got a very rushed pay-off to all this with Series 5. The crew thought the show wouldn't be renewed, so they made the executive decision to wrap it all up.

·       Everyone’s fixed now. Pearl, Garnet, Amethyst, Steven.

·       Diamonds are friendly now. Blue got sad, Yellow got angry and White got… put in her place by a comeback?

·       The bubbled gems/corrupted monsters are all fixed.

·       The Off-Colours and Lars just got home.  No further adventures, they just got home.

Bits got missed out. Things got rushed. Homeworld, the Diamonds and five series of build-up got dealt with in the space of 40 minutes. For comparison, just Series 1 alone was 8 hours long.

Yeah, the network created that situation. You're cancelled! They seemed to say. No you're not! HA! They continued.  But it still sucks, narratively, and the creators are now compounding that problem by trying to go back and add in the bits they missed.

Worse, there's no pacing now because there’s no more overall story.  No atmosphere. Fundamentally, post Change Your Mind, everything is done. The series was wrapped up.  All we have left now is some loose-ends and Steven being moody.

It came back mostly just to tie up random ends. But more of something isn't always good: Series 1-4 and about half of Series 5 are amazing. We shouldn't clap and applaud we get more just because it's more for its own sake, we should cheer things for being good in their own right.

I don't just want more meep morp, I want the morp to have something to say and to mean something. Victory laps and adding unnecessary lore is pointless: characters and emotion are what drive stories.

This isn't about 'filler' episodes as such, nor is it about breaks and hiatuses. It's about spreading the story arc (and the individual elements within that arc) correctly over the allotted time. A story that takes 700 pages to set up, only to be resolved in 3 pages feels badly unbalanced - I'm looking at you, Stephen King. And that's exactly the problem Steven Universe has. The set-up is incredible, and the payoff is badly disappointing. That's pacing.

Being the Underdog

This was covered nicely, if ironically in hindsight, with the episode ‘Historical Friction’.  The play about olde-time mayor William Dewey was utterly uninteresting until Pearl rewrote the play’s script to make him an underdog.  This is part of pacing. It's dull to watch a winner win constantly. The characters need to be in situations where they're facing actual threats, otherwise we're just watching a series of foregone conclusions unfold.

What would Lord of the Rings look like if the Hobbits just marched from The Shire to Orodruin, with no setbacks or problems, and then just lobbed the One Ring into the fire? What's the point of the story? It'd be like a grand-scale version of watching someone go out for groceries.  Nobody wants to watch that, not really: you can go to the supermarket and see it if you’re that interested!

This couples with suspension of disbelief. Usually, the good guys win. We know they're going to win. We need to be able to suspend our disbelief, and that's something that the pacing and storytelling need to enable. We need to be able to get caught in the story, even though we know everything will probably work out by the end.

When you get it just right, even the creators don’t know for sure everything will be alright.  Remember when Picard was assimilated by The Borg?  Even the writers weren’t 100% sure how it would play out, because Patrick Stewart was playing hardball with the studio at the time over his contract.  There was a chance this could have been the end of his character.

But Steven isn't an underdog anymore. He's a bossy, self-important grump with a martyr complex. He wins all the time, not least of all because of the pacing problems. By this point:

·       Steven has healing powers that can literally bring people back to life

·       He has all the powers of a Diamond

·       He has the backing of the three other diamonds

·       He now has an army of friends who will fight at his side

So where is the story to tell? Consider, in Steven Universe: The Movie, Greg's arm gets hurt by the injector. There's no danger, no worry. We know Steven has healing powers. So why bother showing it? It's about as relevant or interesting as watching Greg brush his hair.

There’s no danger.  There’s no suspension of disbelief because the hero is now so super-powered.

This is even worse when coupled with the uneven pacing: when something takes so long to be painstakingly set up, only to be knocked down in a heartbeat, then why get invested in it?  The 21st Century reboot of Doctor Who falls into this trap a lot: multipart episodes about a Dalek (or whatever) invasion… but luckily their Evil Machine has a ‘reverse’ switch that fixes everything. Dust hands, job done. All that build-up utterly squandered on an almost supernaturally fast resolution.

You Need a Story to Tell

The first five series have a definite story. It gets rushed, badly, come series 5 but there is still a story. That is done now: there's no grand, overarching tale now. We're very much into 'oh, what if...' territory.

What's the problem with that? Things get missed, because they don't need to fit into a cohesive whole. They just happen because they're cool.

Consider The Movie:

·       Spinel goes from a cuddly, professional buddy to a would-be mass-murderer

·       Spinel knows where to find a stupidly powerful injector

·       She knows how to work it

·       It is tuned to work to her 'trumpet' sound

·       It is shaped like her gemstone

·       She knows specifically where Earth is

·       She knows how to fly a massive injector, with no obvious engines, to Earth

·       This all happens in an afternoon

And the explanation we're given, after the event in a Q&A session? It's because Spinel and Pink Diamond were close. That is supposed to explain the entirety of those bullet points. It rankles me because it's not truthful. Those questions aren't answered by that, they're answered by 'because we thought it would be cool'. It's an unsatisfying explanation, but it's true and they’ve tried to handwave it into something else.

It's also what happens when you run out of proper story. Sure, you can still come up with little adventures but there's no big narrative anymore. There is no large picture for everything to fit into.

That’s dangerous territory. Not only does it lead to weird scenarios, but it also starts generating new lore at a maddening amount. The fans don't help this, it seems to me that some people purely watch Steven Universe to demand moar fusions, moar songs and moar lore.  Even when that’s all they get, it’s not enough.

It's like demanding more swimming pools in your home because you're bored with foundations.  Sooner or later the whole structure falls down because swimming pools can’t hold a house up.  Neither can lore hold a story up: stories are about characters.

Similarly, the concept of 'fusion' relies on characters otherwise it's nothing more than the character dumps we used to get in toy-driven franchises back in the 80s. Songs have to have an emotional resonance otherwise they're just empty pop.

Remember the X-Files? How they got into a rut just generating series after series with no pay-off, but lots more wrinkles to an already convoluted story? Then it got to the end and... you can't end it. It's too sprawling, too stupid and too contradictory. That's where lore without a story takes you. Lore has to serve a vision, not the other way around.

Filler

Not filler the way it's come to mean to SU fans. I like the 'boardie' episodes - they're full of interesting characters and ground Steven's world in something resembling ours. No, I mean filler in terms of stories that don't mean anything: the characters don't learn anything, the world isn't made any more interesting. Things just happen in a self-contained bubble with no payoff or consequence.

In itself, that's fine. Some episodes are like that. If that were the only aspect to 'filler' episodes in SU, then who cares? The problem is the pacing. After glacial teasing, hinting and laying down groundwork... things get wrapped up so fast it'll make your head spin.

·       The cluster? We talked it into staying bubbled.

·       The Diamonds? They're fine now.

·       Bismuth? Steven chatted to her.

·       Lapis? She's sort-of fine, but not really.

·       Spinel? Sent to live on a farm.

These are all things that took many, many lines of dialogue and building to create and were knocked down in the space of a couple of sentences.

This is where the 'filler' comes in. Instead of another story about Onion being weird, why not devote it to tying up the plot in a way that feels paced properly? Instead of answering questions about Watermelon Stevens, why not draw-out a little more the actual conclusion to a big story point?

Why do I think Onion and Watermelon Stevens should be singled out for Calvary? Simple: they have no explanation and don't matter. They don't matter to the day-to-day lives of the characters or the world. They serve no narrative purpose. They don't advance other characters' arcs. They don't ground the world they inhabit. They turn up, do 'stuff' in a little bubble and then go back into the toybox until the next Onion episode.

As a side note, I would lay a lot of money that Onion will never get any sort of pay-off. He doesn't age. He's deeply bizarre. He's apparently a wanted criminal. He's terrifying. And I don't think for an instant he will ever get a reason for being any of those things: he'll just carry on as a quirky in-joke and take up episode space because apparently that is a story-telling priority now.

Songs

Songs are sung when something is too important for the characters to just say it. The song needs an emotional resonance, to show what a character feels effectively. Contrast 'That Distant Shore' to 'Independent Together': one is about a deep longing and sadness for a home the character has never had. The other is a soft-rock ballad about how great stuff is when you can be your own self but also be with other people... or something.

See the resonance that the former has, and that the latter lacks? Whether you like Lapis or Steg, or the songs, is irrelevant to the story and the characters. One song has something to say, the other is there for the sake of giving fanservice. Independent Together isn't something so important to say that the characters feel they need to sing it.

This really kicks off around the middle of Series 5. Previously, songs were a special event. Now, they're commonplace. Even in Mr. Greg, a fully musical episode back in Series 3, the songs have so much emotion. Plus, Mr. Greg is an experiment: 11 minutes, mostly held together by 6 solid songs:

·       Don't Cost Nothing: how much Greg and Steven just love one another.

·       Empire City: how excited they are to go on a trip together

·       Mr. Greg: Pearl almost lets her guard down, then realises and shuts down.

·       It's Over Isn't It? : A heartbroken character sings for a life they never had.

·       Both of You: A child shows the two adults they have something special in common.

·       Don't Cost Nothing: reprised as a coda.

I won't pretend that all those songs have a huge emotional impact, but they do all serve part of the story arc. You can see it there: the status quo, the trigger, the choice, the quest, the showdown, the resolution and the new status quo. Couple that with the fact that at least 4 of those songs (counting Don't Cost Nothing and its reprise) do have a very real emotional punch, you've got a great episode.

All in 11 minutes.

That's the level of truly amazing, genius storytelling we're working with. Now contrast that to the 1hr 20m of Steven Universe The Movie:

·       The Tale of Steven: A prelude to a re-cap song

·       Once Upon a Time: a re-cap song

·       Let Us Adore You: The Diamonds are emotionally disturbed and co-dependent! How adorable!

·       Happily Ever After: The status quo. Also another bloody re-cap.

·       Other Friends: The trigger! Not huge emotional resonance, but up-beat and plot-relevant.

·       system/BOOT.PearlFinal(3): The quest.

·       Who We Are: NICE. This one has emotional impact and says something important.

·       Isn't It Love?: A Garnet re-cap. So at this point we're recapping what we re-capped when we recapped the re-cap. Lost yet?

·       No Matter What: Again, NICE. Emotional relevance and says something about Amethyst and Steven.

·       Disobedient: Kate Micucci hadn't been given anything to do yet?

·       Independent Together: Aimee Mann brought a friend! Can he have a job and some dollarydoos?

·       Drift Away: CHARACTER. PUNCH. PATHOS. It's here, folks. They can do it!

and so on.

See the pattern? For every one song that brings what we saw in Mr. Greg, there are at least four that are there just because. Because we thought it'd be cool. Because we needed more tunes to fill the runtime. Mr. Greg achieved more in 11 minutes than Steven Universe: The Movie achieved in over 80 minutes.

What's the reason? The Movie doesn't really have a story to tell. It's a victory lap. It's not bad: it's fine. Bits of it are simply excellent. But this is what happens when you stop having a big, cohesive narrative arc that you're trying to bring together.

Characters

Characters grow and evolve. Specifically, they have arcs. Just like the plot as a whole, and just like the subplots that compose it.  Generally, the stages are:

·       A status quo (Luke on Tattoine)

·       A trigger (his Aunt and Uncle die)

·       A critical choice (he leaves to become a Jedi)

·       A quest (the adventure)

·       A climax (the fight at the Death Star)

·       A turnaround (the Death Star is destroyed!)

·       A new status quo (the Rebels are ready to take on the next challenge)

SU gave most of its characters arcs broadly representative of this. The problem is, once those arcs were done the characters got put back in their boxes. They were 'fixed' and that was it. Amethyst's arc probably worked best: it spread over most of the first five series and felt like a real progression. Hence her fusion with Steven (Smokey Quartz) felt 'earnt'.

Pearl doesn't really grow or evolve much at all until Series 5. Ditto Garnet. Lapis is basically the same throughout the show: she broods, runs away and then comes back because of Steven's coaxing.

So, it’s back to my main drumbeat: its pacing is badly off. Some things take their good time and evolve naturally, others are wrapped up quickly and cast aside. Examples:

·       Peridot worked to become friends with the CG. She had a character arc that took half a series.

·       The Diamonds: it mostly turned on a sixpence in the 2nd half of Change Your Mind. Off-screen they then became annoying relatives, rather than murderous galactic tyrants.

Why does this matter? Well, most of the characters are now 'done'. Pearl is no longer co-dependent. Ruby and Sapphire know they're together (as Garnet) for love. Amethyst no longer hates herself. Peridot is a sweet (albeit socially clumsy) sidekick. Lapis is... well, the same as she's always been but seems happier with it now?

How do you tell more stories when your characters are already done? When the veg is cooked, you can't put it back on the hob because you've decided you want dinner prep to take longer.

SU keeps wrapping things up, believing they're 'done', then getting more time and needing to draw it out. This means either dawdling around with characters not going anywhere (which feels like either a smug victory lap or just something for its own sake) or actively unpicking their development.

Scrubs, in my view, is the poster child for the latter option: the show's cancelled, quick wrap up JD; Elliot; Dr. Cox; Carla; Turk etc! Oh no, we got another series! Undo the happily-ever-after so we can do more stuff!

That's why the pacing, particularly around characters and where they're going, matters.

Fusion

Fusion is the absolute biggest muddle of a metaphor. Is it friendship? Understanding? Sex? All? None? In any case, it used to be meaningful. Fusion meant something, even if that something would vary depending on the characters and the circumstance.

It took special effort to do: characters had to synchronise themselves through dance, to bring their thoughts together to fuse.

Now? It happens at the drop of a hat. No synching, no dancing. Fanwank it away any way you like: the characters are all 'fixed' now, they all trust each other, whatever. Fusion now doesn't mean anything because it takes no effort: pop here's Sunstone, pop here's Smokey, pop here's Opal. The fusions have just become like alter-egos that take no more effort than a quick-change in a phone booth.

And then there's Steg. Yeah, I get it: he represents the familial love between father and son. But why is he so built? Why does he look like some sort of sex-god? I'm a long way from a prude - it's just weird is all. A 16 year old boy + his middle aged father + the memory of the mother/wife shouldn't create a weird Adonis! But let me set that aside: the true problem with Steg is we had no build-up. Greg and Steven didn't talk about it, Steven just suggests fusing (through whispered dialogue we don't hear) and then it just happens.

Steg also isn't saved by being an interesting exploration of either Steven or Greg. He's fanservice. Fans wanted more fusions and more 'what if so-and-so fused!!' so they got it. He has 0 character. Just like Sunstone has no character beyond being an 'after school special'. Rainbow Quartz 2.0 has no character, aside from being chipper and cockney.

Contrast that to Smokey Quartz. Smokey is a delightful, self-deprecating scamp. She has a definite personality and stood up to a full interview with Sardonyx.  Smokey has enough of a character that it would be possible for her to act out-of-character.  What would out-of-character look like for Rainbow or Sunstone?  Provided it was cartoon-English and early 90s cartoon dialogue (respectively) it could be anything.

What happened? Fusions used to be characters, they used to have personalities that couldn't be written down on a postage stamp in luggage marker.

The answer is the story ran-out. The characters are all fixed now - so there's no emotional or narrative drive for their relationships. Hence the concept of fusion is now just serving fans who want to see 'what if' combinations of characters.

Too Many Endings

I’ve touched on this already, but here it is again.

The problem with wrapping up a show is you put all the pieces away as well as you can, and implicitly make work for yourself if it is not the end. You've just set up a load of strawmen you need to kick over if you decide you've got more story to tell.

That's what happened here. Change Your Mind ended it. Except it didn't, so we went back and unpicked what we could. Even though everyone is basically fixed now and the characters have no real growth or underdog-fight. Then The Movie ended it. Except it didn't, so we went back and unpicked what we could. Even though everyone is still basically fixed.

Will Future be the end?  Probably not.

That's why Steven is now a moody little jackass with a hero complex - we needed some conflict to drive what little plot there is, which exists only as a vehicle for tying up loose plot threads (Jasper!) we left out because of how rushed the first ending was.

It's a bit like when you misspell something, then you go back over it with your biro. But now it looks unclear. So you go over it a few more times to make sure it's clear. But now it looks like someone took a biro and leaked half the ink onto the page. The very act of trying to tidy it has made it less clear.

A Special Note About Garnet

This isn't about pacing, but whilst I'm on the moan I'll leave this here.

I feel wicked for this. Garnet is a brilliant character. I love Estelle: she brings Garnet so well to life. Any LGBT representation in a cartoon is rare and amazing, and we need more. But Garnet also sucks.

Why?

She's a metaphor. She's a metaphor for being gay and together in love. She is a symbol of a same-sex relationship.  On a side-note: yes Gems don't have gender technically, but let’s not be wilful here: they have female-coded designs and the subtext is so obvious as to barely be subtext.

It's nearly 2020. We're now 20 years into the 21st Century. 2001 A Space Odyssey was set 20 years ago.  First contact between Zephram Cochrane and the Vulcans is now only 43 years away.  And we can still only talk about gay (or, God forbid, bi or transgender) characters in children’s' media through metaphor. I cannot emphasise enough how utterly shitty that is, and how glacial progress has been.

Now, that isn't SU's fault. However, what is SU fault is their clever (and I mean that genuinely) ploy to sneak a same-sex couple into the show means that we don't see them as a same-sex couple 95% of the time. They're hidden. Ruby and Sapphire's love and relationship literally lives under a disguise called Garnet.

And that sucks. It makes sense as a plan. It's great we have Garnet. Garnet is still amazing. But she also sucks, because she acts as invisibility for the lesbian couple she represents.  Yeah, that’s some tough mental gymnastics to work that cognitive dissonance but I managed it.

My God, I Get It: You're a Cat Person

This is also nothing to do with pacing, it's just a creator conceit that bugs me. I freely admit it's also piddly and petty.

So: I'm not a cat person. And no, it's not because I haven't met your adorable little Tiddles or whatever. I don't hate cats, it’s just that most of the cats I've ever met are simply ghastly little shits. Their owners, through some mental blind spot; ancient Egyptian curse or brain parasite have become convinced that these hairball-gobbing, furniture-shredding, wildlife-destroying little cunts are angels. Somehow they've convinced themselves everything they do is adorable.

No amount of murdered birds or small mammals change their minds.

I've met, officially, two nice cats in my life and I treasure their memories. The rest can go to hell.

Why does this matter to SU? Cat Steven. Lion. Peridot and Amethyst doing little kitty-mouths when they're being cute. My God, crew, you love cats. I got the memo.

Why does that work me up? Well, do you know what I'd like instead? If a tiny amount of that 'cats are brilliant!' energy went into a proper wrap for Pumpkin. Created by Jessie Zuke and obviously a puppy metaphor... what happened to her? The crew don't care, because they won't tell us. If they cared even a jot it would have a story around it. Instead, we got some half-arsed bullshit from Joe Johnston about 'pumpkins don't last forever' and... scene. That's it.

But Cat Steven, OMG, yes we have to make sure to include him. Whenever we're at the Beach House. Especially if Garnet is there. Because... lesbians all love cats? Or something? Just... CATS. MOAR CATS.

Couldn't you show a little more respect for a character, albeit a not particularly important one, rather than worrying about how much airtime the various cats all get?

In Conclusion

It bears restating, this is mostly ire directed at Series 5 onwards. The other series are all still there, and I can watch them to reminisce. I can still enjoy some truly wonderful episodes of just about the best cartoon I've ever seen. This show is incredible... but the endings kinda suck. And that's down, mostly, to pacing. And how it kinda fucked Steven Universe.

[mrlnsfrt]

Plot Twists and Surprise Endings

The story so far.

Joseph’s brothers had returned to their father, Jacob, bringing grain and bad news. Simeon had stayed as a prisoner in Egypt, and when they went back to buy more grain they would need to bring their youngest brother, Benjamin. Jacob told his sons that they had bereaved him. Genesis 42:36

The Famine Was Severe

As much as Jacob wanted to keep Benjamin from going to Egypt he did not have any option in the matter. Jacob could either let Benjamin go or starve along with his household. This was not only about him but about his sons and grandchildren, and servants, and animals who were all under his care. At this points the need to survive superseded Jacob’s preferences and his fears. Though in his heart wanted Benjamin to stay, in his mind he understood he must let Benjamin go down to Egypt.

Judah spoke up and offered himself as surety for his brother Benjamin. Genesis 43:9

Place yourself in Jacob’s shoes for a moment. His whole life he loved one woman, Rachel. He was tricked by his uncle and married Leah. But Jacob never loved Leah, though Leah gave him one daughter and six sons. Jacob loved Rachel, who was barren for many years. Finally, Rachel gives birth to a son, Joseph, who Jacob now believes to have been killed. Rachel also gave birth to another boy, Benjamin, and sadly she died (Genesis 35:16-20). How would you have felt if the love of your life had died, and then you lost your favorite son, her firstborn? Now all you have from her, her only living son, must leave for a dangerous trip to a foreign country with a ruler who seems to not like your family. If I was Jacob I would be having a very difficult time. I would be wondering where God was. It was God who called Jacob to return to the land of Canaan. Genesis 31:13 more details on my blog post “Mighty to Save”. Why would God allow all this to happen? Where was God? What about all of God’s promises to protect, provide and be with him? Was this not the land that God was giving him and to his descendants (Genesis 35:9-12)?

Do you ever find yourself facing severe famine and feeling like you are slowly losing all that you love and hold dear? Does your faith hold strong when you feel cursed and abandoned by God?

Facing Your Past

Broken relationships have a way of coming back to hurt you repeatedly. Joseph and his brothers were experiencing this. They suffered while apart and now continued to cause one another to suffer. The Bible tells us that Joseph’s heart yearned for his brother Benjamin (Genesis 43:30) yet he is not ready to allow himself to love and embrace. Joseph longs for reconciliation but he is not ready for it, not yet, he had been through too much. How should he deal with his brothers? I imagine Joseph had given this much thought. It is unclear how much time had elapsed since his brothers had last seen him. We don’t know how long Simeon had been in an Egyptian prison. The brothers meet again. Joseph has the power to punish, torture, enslave, imprison, or even kill his brothers for what they did to him. But would that undo the past? Is that what God was calling him to do? Was that God’s will for his life? What about God’s plans for the lives of his brothers?

Joseph had been extremely mistreated and abused in his lifetime. It would be understandable for him to be bitter, angry, to want revenge, for him to be scarred and have trust issues. But God had been with him. He was alive, he was successful, he had been blessed after all. Would Joseph use his blessings to bless those around him or would he hoard the blessings and use them to make himself more powerful?

With your permission, I would like to imagine a scenario and I invite you to join me in this exercise of our imagination. Imagine Joseph uses his current power and influence to destroy all who had hurt him. He could enslave his brothers. Joseph could throw Potiphar in prison, and have Potiphar’s wife executed. Joseph could send Pharaoh’s cupbearer to prison for a couple of years since he forgot about Joseph in prison for two years (Genesis 40:23-41:1,9-13). Since Joseph had interpreted the dreams and married the daughter of a priest, I imagine it would not have taken much for him to convince the people that God was on his side and that he should be Pharaoh. Joseph could have made a power play and even taken advantage of his food storage to wage economic warfare and essentially dominate the portion of the ancient world that was being affected by the famine.

I know we just imagined this scenario, but I believe this to have been a possible outcome, perhaps even a temptation for Joseph. When you have power and wealth, you can afford to be your true self. You don’t have to be nice, you don’t have to do anything you don’t want to. When you have all the power and wealth, you only have to forgive and be kind if you want to. At least temporarily speaking (disregarding eternal consequences). Do we continue to behave like Christians when we have the power to be selfish and get away with it? Do we forgive and seek to make peace with those who have wronged us when we could punish those who have hurt us?

Joseph longed for a mended, loving relationship with his brothers, at least with Benjamin for sure. But earlier in his life, his brothers had made that all but impossible. Now, would he give them a second chance?

Had Joseph’s brothers changed? Were they still selfish and jealous? The way Joseph treats them in Genesis 43-44 seems to indicate that he was testing them. Perhaps Joseph was still trying to decide what he would do to them, whether or not he would forgive them.

As the story unfolds we learn that Joseph’s brothers have changed, they honestly want to protect and care for Benjamin. In Genesis 44:16 Judah even confesses that God had found out their iniquity, which is odd since they had not stolen Joseph’s cup unless Judah is talking about their iniquity regarding something else, perhaps regarding the well-being of their missing brother.

Judah’s Speech

Judah then delivers a speech, but not just any speech.

This speech has appropriately been called one of the masterpieces of Hebrew literary composition, one of the finest specimens of natural eloquence in the world. - The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Volume 1

—the speech of Judah in behalf of his young brother Benjamin has been fittingly characterised as “one of the masterpieces of Hebrew composition” (Kalisch), “one of the grandest and fairest to be found in the Old Testament” (Lange), “a more moving oration than ever orator pronounced” (Lawson), “one of the finest specimens of natural eloquence in the world” (Inglis). Without being distinguished by either brilliant imagination or highly poetic diction, “its inimitable charm and excellence consist in the power of psychological truth, easy simplicity, and affecting pathos” (Kalisch)— - The Pulpit Commentary: Genesis

​

The encounter between Joseph and his brothers has now reached its climactic moment. A personal appeal to the great man is Judah’s last desperate resort. He pours out his heart in what is the longest speech in the Book of Genesis, although it could not have lasted more than five minutes. - The JPS Torah Commentary: Genesis

Judah’s speech moves Joseph so deeply that Joseph could no longer hold back his emotions. Sending everyone else out of the room and reveals himself to his brothers. Joseph wept so loud the Egyptians and the house of Pharaoh heard it (Genesis 45:2).

The Final Outcome

Ultimately Joseph chooses to forgive his brothers and to mend their broken relationship. He chooses the path of reconciliation. He realizes his brothers had also been suffering, and he decides to put an end to that cycle. Joseph interprets all these events as being used by God in order to ultimately bring about the salvation of many. However, this does not mean that what his brothers did was acceptable in any way. I believe that God could have brought about the same outcome without the lies and betrayal. But God was able to use even the sinful actions of Joseph’s brothers to bring about salvation because Joseph was willing to remain faithful to God and to continue to trust Him even when suffering incredible abuse and unfairness.

There is so much in these last few chapters of Genesis that we could explore, but the year is coming to a close and we have been studying the Book of Genesis for almost 3 years so I will leave a deeper study of these passages for another time. I feel like we must stop and I would like to conclude with the words spoken by Joseph recorded in Genesis 50:20.

But as for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is this day, to save many people alive. - The New King James Version

Takeaway

Joseph recognized that his own brothers wished to do him harm. You must also likewise recognize that people may wish to do you harm. They may persecute and abuse you. But God can take you and still use you to bless others. No one can keep you from being used by God except you. When you choose God, even your worst moments can become a source of strength and blessing for someone else. Your scars and your pain may be what God uses to touch a life that no one else could reach.

Reading Genesis we have learned that God loves plot twists and surprising endings. As I mentioned earlier, it is December, a time when we talk about the birth of Jesus. The earthly life and ministry of Jesus is the clearest and most extreme example of how all the wickedness of this planet and even supernatural beings are unable to thwart God’s plans. As the Apostle Paul put it in 1 Corinthians 1:27

But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; The New King James Version

When you feel weak, when you feel beat down, when you feel betrayed, and alone, and abandoned, just remember that God can take you, if you are willing, and use you to save many people alive. People may mean evil against you, but God can turn it around and use it for good.

[rebelsofshield]

Panels Far, Far Away: A Week in Star Wars Comics 9/25/19

A crowded week ends the Age of Resistance, brings the fight to Darth Vader, and dives further into the inner layout of a dark temple. Yup, even when I’m over half a week later, I’m still gonna review Star Wars comics.

Star Wars Adventures #26 written by Cavan Scott and Adam Christopher art by Derek Charm and Megan Levens

Star Wars Adventures doubles down with two new Sequel Trilogy stories this week. Superstar team of Cavan Scott and Derek Charm showcase a lost lesson between Luke Skywalker and Rey and Adam Christopher and Megan Levens guide Tallie Lintra through Wild Space.

I’ve put a lot of praise over the past few years on the creative duo of Scott and Charm. The two have regularly proven a near unparalleled ability to tell creative and visually fun short stories starring Star Wars’ ever expanding pantheon. Their story of Rey and Luke may not be their most striking, but the ability for these two creators to tell fun and true to character narratives stays consistent.

While placing it in The Last Jedi’s chronology is more than a little difficult, “Life Lessons” still provides a fun little character study of its central duo along with lots of requisite action and humor. Charm and Scott manage to nail Luke’s world weariness while still keeping his sense of humor and nagging responsibility for duty and heroics. It manages to be a fun glimpse into Rey and Luke at a key point in their lives while also offering a sea serpent and Chewbacca saving Porgs.

It appears that Tallie Lintra is set to join the likes of Biggs, Porkins, Dac, and dozens of others shortlived pilots who became franchise staples years post mortem. This story of Tallie rescuing a stranded smuggler is surprisingly economical with Christopher plugging a full story into just eight pages. We don’t necessarily get more of Tallie as a character, but it makes for a fun enough tale and opens the door for further adventures later down the line.

Score: B

Star Wars Age of Resistance: Kylo Ren #1 written by Tom Taylor and art by Leonard Kirk

Kylo Ren is one of the most dramatic and thematically rich characters in the Star Wars saga. Whether you want to see him go down as a self-destructive force of evil or redeemed to join the light, the lost son of Han Solo and Leia Organa has carved a path of tragedy and intrigue in his wake. It’s hard to blame Tom Taylor for making three of his eight Age of Resistance titles orbit around Kylo, but now it’s time to give the son of darkness the spotlight.

One of the most inspired aspects of Kylo’s character has always been the insecurity of his own legacy. Star Wars could never replicate a villain of Darth Vader’s gravitas and pathos, so the shadow of this family history became a defining part of his character. “Out of the Shadow” takes this dynamic and spins it into a large scale galactic battleground.

The First Order looks to capture a planet that tested The Empire during its original reign. In particular, the local warlords and their mysterious god proved difficult for Vader himself. Kylo looks to bring this planet to heel while also fulfilling and also exceeding his grandfather’s example.

The resulting narrative is simple but effective. By pairing Kylo with a Stormtrooper that served in the original Imperial army and seeking parallels between both generations of Dark Siders, there is an impressive layering to the story that makes it feel more mythic in scope. Kylo’s struggle with his own legacy won’t be resolved by the end of this comic, but Taylor plots an effective glimpse into his back and forth.

Leonard Kirk succeeds in particular here. Many have complained about some of Kirk’s creative choices when it comes to rendering Adam Driver’s face to the page. Luckily, like his earlier Captain Phasma issue, much of the issue calls for a mostly masked protagonist and lots of large scale and high intensity action sequences. It gives Kylo a larger than life victory that he’s been missing from much of the recent canon.

Finally, after a year in publication, the Age of… maxi series has come to a close. While most of these comics were fun and forgettable, we did get a few stunners along the way and finally got to see more of some of the franchises iconic but less highlighted characters. Hopefully, this opens the lane for more exciting things to come.

Score: B+

Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order-Dark Temple #2 written by Matthew Rosenberg and Paolo Villanelli

We are just a little under two months until Jedi: Fallen Order releases on video game consoles. With a new trailer highlighting the games story and gameplay dropping earlier this week hype is starting to build for this long overdue addition to the lengthy Star Wars gaming canon. Luckily, we have Dark Temple to hold us over.

Matthew Rosenberg continues to split the script for this series into two segments. The first taking place in a present sometime after Revenge of the Sith following Second Sisters hunting down of a Jedi holdout and the other following Cere’s adventures on the planet of Ontotho. Now separated from her apparently deceased master and uncovering the hints of a massive conspiracy, Cere finds herself searching for allies and desperate for survival.

As with last issue, Dark Temple offers two disconnected but nonetheless entertaining segments. Paolo Villanelli’s pencils are stellar at capturing in motion action sequences and his depiction of the Second Sister continues to be brutal, swift, and deadly. Visually it’s enough to make these openings exciting even if how they connect to the main story is still mostly a mystery.

Cere on the other hand is still struggling to define herself as a character. Thompson has crafted an intriguing and detailed conspiracy to ravel her up in, but as fun as it is to read, I still can’t help but feel that we are failing to get to know this young woman and what makes her tick. Luckily, Thompson populates the mystery with an enjoyable smarmy villain and a cantankerous droid sidekick that feels classically Star Wars.

Hopefully the less impressive aspects of Dark Temple come together over the next few issues. As of the moment, the plot and art are more than enough to keep me reading, but I would love to get to know more about the woman at the center of this comic.

Score: B

Star Wars Target Vader #3 written by Robbie Thompson and art by Stefano Landini

Writer Robbie Thompson is playing the slowburn approach to our getting to know the galaxy’s newest (sorta) cyborg badass. Each issue of Target Vader so far has slowly teased out the history of Beilert Valance with each giving us slightly bigger glimpses into his past. While backstory is never a substitute for poor characterization or bland dialogue, getting in touch with Valance’s past does help and slowly Target Vader is improving alongside it.

As it stands, most of the regular issues behind this comic remain. Valance and his bounty hunters are for the most part an uninteresting cast of characters and it’s more than a little difficult to get invested in their high stakes hunt of Darth Vader. The big reveal that the rebellion are the Hidden Hand at the end of this comic’s first issue still robs the story of much of its mystery. (There is also the possibility that this was a fakeout, but there hasn’t been info presented in the script to really challenge this reading so far.) The art is serviceable but is often let down by some bland coloring decisions by Neeraj Menon.

There are some of life though. As mentioned earlier, this issue’s opening flashback to Valance’s time in the Imperial military is the strongest of these so far and hints towards an intriguing relationship between him and Darth Vader that will hopefully get fleshed out more down the line. There is also a welcome wrinkle in bounty hunter, Urrr’k. While simply having a sharp shooter badass female Tusken was a great addition to the comic, the idea that she might actually be some sort of imposter or sleeper agent adds a welcome air of uncertainty to the ensemble and spices up an otherwise bland cast of characters.

All in all, there is still some thrill in watching a well laid plan by some galactic scum bring Darth Vader down to their level. Thompson centers the issue around one large trap of a set piece and the result proves fun despite the shaky foundation that is built upon.

We are only halfway through this comic so maybe the story hints that are starting to show themselves will make this story worthwhile. Let’s hope so, because the potential is certainly there.

Score: C+

[wsndonuts]

The Good Place Season 3 Finale: after-thoughts

*SPOILERS! duh..also it is very long, read at your own discretion*

So, that was a rollercoaster ride of a season. It started with Eleanor finding Chidi, for like the 803rd time, and it ended with Eleanor having to say goodbye to Chidi. After years of getting the soul squad back together, they are all having to face the torments of The Bad Place once again. Can’t they get a break?

Before getting in to Chidi and Eleanor’s storyline, I want to start with Michael, Janet, Tahani, and Jason. 

For Michael, he is just the sweetest demon in the entire universe. In the first season, he was not only an evil liar but also hated humans and did not want to do anything else in his immortal life other than to punish the four humans. Now, he literally is doing everything to save the four from eternal damnation while trying to fix the inevitably corrupt modern society we live in today. To me, he truly had the greatest glo-up. I am very hopeful to see Michael return to his Architect position and perhaps solve mankind’s greatest issues. In this episode, it was very insightful to see how he referred to himself as middle management because he technically is. The stress of the pressure of running this universe-changing experiment is insane and the humanity in Michael really showed during the finale.

Janet, too, had a great character arc within this season and throughout the show. She/It (remember she is not a girl!) was merely a physical version of Alexa and now, Janet is almost like the humans with feelings and the incredible ability to throw shade. I do feel bad about the situation with Jason. To be honest, I never really gave much importance to it until the finale. Going in to season 4, I see what the writers did there. They set up this supposedly insane love story between a Floridian DJ and a “Busty Alexa” (Eleanor’s words, not mine) who fell in love hundreds of years ago in literal hell. Now, Janet is going to play a much larger part in the new neighborhood but importantly, she/it is now a human-like member of the Soul Squad and will probably be Eleanor’s source of strength in the upcoming season(s). Woo go Janet!!

Tahani al-Jamil has been through a lot. Just this finale episode alone she was the first to be targeted by the Bad Place and their schemes. It was almost deja vu when she was planning to plant the ‘Marc Fake-obs’ joke on John, but then again, the Good Place reminds us of the evolution each of the characters went on. Though she is a supporting character, I would really like to see her play a bigger part with keeping the integrity of the soul squad together during the upcoming seasons and perhaps find love herself.

I felt kinda sad that Jason Mendoza wasn’t in this episode that much, but his character providing some much-needed comedy relief in all of the heaviness in the finale. I do wonder though why he is back in the monk outfit, maybe to keep him quiet for safety purposes. There must be a secret Schur reason why he is in different garb for this iteration of the Fake Good Place. Like with Janet, I think they are pretty cute together and I need at least some happiness. Also, he is also one of the remaining few to not have an ex or a gossip blogger in the new Good Place yet. It will be interesting to find out. I think it will either be his dad or an ex-dance crew member or even Pillboi.

Okay. Here we go. I just rewatched the episode a few times to not only feel the feels but also to catch any details that the podcast mentioned and I might have forgotten. Without knowing it, the entirety of the show’s plot relies heavily on the unlikely relationship between Chidi Anagonye and Eleanor Shellstrop. Looking back at this season, there were little hints that the writers planted that makes this ever the more heartbreaking.

In 3x08 (Worse Possible Use of Free Will), the entire episode is basically a flashback through cheleanor’s development in Reboot 112, a previously mentioned version in season 2. I was really excited to be fed that day and the subsequent episodes but I just rewatched it again and I noticed that the same type of situation happened again. (yes I know, reboots happen every second in this show) At the end, Eleanor promises Chidi that they will find each other again and that they are true soulmates. Even in the very first episode of season 3, Eleanor comes to Australia to ask Chidi for help to be a better person and the end of season 3, it once again is Eleanor in a doorway meeting Chidi. 

A lot of this season had to do with faith and memories. the Janet(s) episode reminded Eleanor, in this case, who she was because she did not remember and Chidi, like the amazing man he is, snapped her back to reality with a kiss and all was well (for a few eps). The sad part is that this time, when Chidi won’t remember Eleanor or any of the gang, Eleanor can’t just kiss him back to reality because he doesn’t even know how much she means to him. 

I cry a lot at very emotional things, but this episode was a kicker. It touched a lot of people since 1) the writers are very good and also very cruel, 2) the past few episodes saw a happy cheleanor, and 3) it was all very real in a way. We all have dealt with loss and love. Seeing one person love another and miss another but the partner doesn’t remember is so devastating. In all of the reboots, every one of them forgot everything. The sad thing is only one of them can’t remember the rest and that one is the moral glue that held all of the squad together. And looping back to a previous episode when Eleanor is crying and talking about how she is both happy and sad, she mentions something about love isn’t a sure thing and now, that love that she has been so afraid to give for the longest time was ripped away from her and now she has to watch and take care of the man she loves from a distance.

Going in to season 4, we are steering less towards philosophy and hard factual morals but rather towards the pathos side of things. What it means to be a human in the face of adversity and tragedy is the theme for upcoming seasons. I do hope the slow burn of Chidi finding Eleanor again is not so slow because they truly deserve to be happy in the little dot on top of the ‘i’. I also wish for less reboots now and tears because I never expected a comedy show that makes fart and sex jokes and puns all the time to make me sob over fictional characters but here I am and I don’t regret it.

Gah this whole episode was all too much. The memory video was touching and also very soft. The line that made me bawl was when Chidi said “I am gonna miss you” and his voice cracks, then Eleanor responds “but you won’t” and then “Bye, Chidi”. I felt that. To end, I just want to say thank you to Michael Schur, Megan Amram, and Jen Statsky for this episode and the entire crew for this crazy, funny, smart, and now very sad show that never fails to make my day. Also lots of hugs to Jameela, Manny, D’Arcy, Ted, and most especially Kristen and Will for gracing our screens. By the way, KB and WJH are two of the best actors I know and I love them as Chidi and Eleanor. Ok good night everyone and thanks for reading my braindump about my feelings. 

Everything is fine.

[tanadrin]

Actually managed to see Endgame tonight; thoroughly enjoyable, a solid entry in the franchise that met or exceeded all expectations. There is no post-credits scene, though, so don’t do like I did and sit through the credits on the off chance and nearly miss the last train home.

Individual thoughts that are not spoilers:

1 )Brie Larson’s haircut hoooooooly shit

2) I mean hoooooooooooooly shit

3) I have plenty of thoughts about like the characters and the way the plot was constructed and how it was all carried off

4) but can we just talk about Brie Larson’s hair for a minute please

Thoughts which might constitute spoilers:

5) Absolutely nothing about this movie was a surprise; it in fact hit all the expected notes in the expected order. That said, it did it well: Even with the opening scene, where you 100% know exactly what’s going to happen from the moment you see what’s going on, it still manages to hit pretty damn hard--doesn’t hurt that it’s basically one of the ur-Adult Fears come to life. Like Infinity War, it juggled a frankly huge cast, it built on ongoing narrative and character arcs well (and closed them!), and it worked very well both in its context in a larger franchise and as a standalone move--although it’s probably not narratively inseparable from IW for obvious reasons, I think those two together work as a fun, big, goofy, two-parter superhero movie.

6) As to the general plot: Thanos isn’t a stupid villain, and although his motivations are incoherent after five seconds of thought (”Hmm, killing half of all living things--wouldn’t that cut the economic and biological productivity of all inhabited planets by half or more, thus meaning in fact the survivors would be no better off after? Why would they be grateful to you?” At least in the comics this was a secondary motivation for another goal--being in love with Death--which mean it didn’t have to stand on its own as a premise), he goes about executing his plan competently. So of course he destroys the Infinity Stones right after he wins! And we get to watch the heroes impotently murder him in revenge, which does nothing to bring their friends back and only serves to highlight how traumatized they are by their loss. The movie doesn’t really explore much of the post-Snap world, but it doesn’t have time to, and what we see of it serves to reinforce what it’s really focused on in the beginning, which is the microcosm of the surviving Avengers’ grief. That works very well. I’m a little bummed they played Thor only for laughs, because “alcoholic loner too consumed by grief to lead his people” could also be full of pathos; but I think Thor was doomed to be some kind of comic relief after Taika Waititi’s makeover. It’s not a super objectionable choice (the movie badly needed its comic moments!), but I would like to see Thor be done justice as a dramatic character.

7) The time travel aspect was nonsense, but fun nonsense; I usually hate time travel plots with a passion, but this one was done very well. Specifically, it avoided you wondering whether it was creating alternate timelines where just as many people were doomed to suffer as in our prime reality, which always undercuts the whole concept; and because this was a capstone film on 11 years of a franchise, it provided the opportunity to revisit iconic moments and characters--but it avoided being a dumb clip show. It did that by making a nonsensical hash of causality, but Marvel movies in general make a nonsensical hash of physics, politics, history, biology, and astronomical scale, so w/e. Also Thanos being like “well, future me was a dumbass; clearly I should kill the entire universe this time” upped the stakes nicely in a very organic way. Although now there’s gonna be a little voice in the back of my head going like “This universe has been proven to have TIME TRAVEL which DOESN’T EVEN FUCK UP CAUSALITY, why do you not just recharter SHIELD to raid the future for super advanced technology.”

8) The post-snap world is gonna be a bureaucratic clusterfuck though. Half the population is five years younger than the other half. Will they avoid the mess with Peter Parker’s classmates by just assuming they were all dead too, or just ignore it?

9) Thor dual wielding! Holy shit!

10) That cast list at the end! Holy shit!

11) I like how they had to work really hard to keep Captain Marvel offscreen so she didn’t just meteor Thanos into the ground when he showed up

12) Can we get an undocumented Captain America next??

13) I like that the Infinity Stones are powerful, but costly to use; and that many of the deaths in the previous film weren’t fixable, so that there was a clear cost, and those stakes aren’t retroactively reduced to zero. It’s not really clear why Hulk couldn’t have brought back, say, Vision, given that he died just before the snap and by mundane means, but I’m glad (from a critical standpoint) they didn’t.

14) Pepper in an ironman suit FUCK YEAH

15) “I am inevitable!” “And I am Iron Man.” Great line--great sendoff for the character--and the reversal with Peter watching Tony die instead was friggin’ heartbreaking. They could have plausibly killed Cap, and I don’t think anybody would have been surprised if they’d killed Barton (I think they really wanted it to be ambiguous who would have to die to get the Soul Stone), but it was nice that some characters got their happy retirement.

16) Actually that whole giant fight scene was great. I’m a sucker for huge climactic battles, and the moment where you see Strange’s portal forming and you know the fight wasn’t all in vain, that they actually clawed back their redemption from the abyss, is really really satisfying; the Asgardians and Wakandans and everybody else showing up just looked really fucking cool, and the ensuing battle did not disappoint.

17) Peter’s nanosuit is also hilariously OP though

18) Tessa Thompson on a flying horse with a giant fucking spear HOLY MOTHERFUCKING SHIT

19) Tony/Cap/Thor was a good character triad to build the movie on, given their respective relationships, but I think that shot of all the women together showed the directors were aware that most of the movie wasn’t working with an exactly diverse cast.

20) I like that “just explaining what the fuck is going on like a reasonable person” gets tried at least once during the time travel, and that it works--but Bruce and Tilda Swinton are probably the two most reasonable people in the Marvel universe. (My headcanon is that Tilda Swinton is actually playing herself in all her Marvel appearances.)

All in all, I really liked it. Nothing there for someone who doesn’t enjoy the Marvel movies, but I don’t think anybody who appreciates the underlying premises of big, dumb superhero movies will be disappointed.

[raptorific]

i agree with what ur saying wrt the deadpool post but then i went and saw dp2 amd was surprised bc it really is about dp rejection cycles of revenge and embracing compassion and mercy (to some extent) and idk im just confused about why you would reject it so wholeheartedly when the movie really is trying to say the same thing your post is. am i wrong about the movie or do you dislike what it represents to other people & therefore any individual adaptation cannot redeem the concept as a whole?

The plot of Deadpool 2 is too incoherent and nihilistic to say literally anything about anything, honestly. I’m probably gonna say some spoilers in my post so here’s hoping you have some combination of the phrase “deadpool spoilers” blacklisted if you care! I don’t wanna get angry messages about how I spoiled the movie for you because I gave you all three whole paragraphs to hit “J” and skip to the next post before I even mention a single plot detail.

Now, I’ve read detailed plot descriptions of Deadpool 2-- I haven’t seen it because honestly I just can’t bring myself to give money to a project that I feel like should’ve been mothballed within the hour after the production team killed that stuntwoman, and frankly I think less of anyone involved with the project who didn’t walk off set rather than continue making the movie after that-- but I know the whole plot and frankly it sounds like I haven’t missed very much. 

So, the issue with Deadpool 2 is essentially that it carries the same insulting-to-the-audience’s-intelligence thesis statement as “South Park,” which is “got a problem? you’re just overthinking it, who cares this much, it’s just a movie, shut up and enjoy it.” The majority of the time I have an issue with people using the word “plotholes” when an ounce of critical thinking would resolve the problem, but in the case of Deadpool 2, the plot only makes sense if you aggressively refuse to think critically about it.

For example, and here’s where the spoilers start: the villain, Cable AKA Not-Thanos, has come back in time to prevent the murder of his wife and family. Deadpool eventually manages to help him in this endeavor, but gives up his life in the process. Cable’s time machine only has one use left, and he sacrifices his ability to return to the future and be with his family in order to save Deadpool’s life as thanks for his help, trapping him in the present day forever. There’s an ending you can work with, some real pathos, a conflict that you can really truly sink your teeth into as a media consumer. But does it matter? Nah, because Negasonic fixes the time machine in literally the next scene. 

So why doesn’t he just use the now-fixed time machine to go back home? The movie doesn’t stay! The plot, and Brolin’s multi-picture contract, requires Cable to be trapped in the present because his time machine broke, and “the time machine can be, and has been, fixed” seems like a pretty glaring inconsistency to me. The film gives no indication that the fact that Deadpool can give Cable back his ride home will be addressed or resolved in later films. 

In my opinion this is a way more glaring issue than “why doesn’t Thanos just make more resources,” since at least with that you can pretend the answer is “because what he really wants is to kill half the universe, and making more resources doesn’t enable him to do that.” The answer for this is basically just “this isn’t a movie that expects you to give anything a second thought or remember anything but the set-up for the punchline you’re currently hearing.”

There’s also the issue of him going back in time and killing “X-Men Origins Wolverine” Deadpool. I get that it’s a joke but it makes zero sense. A joke that’s only funny if you don’t think about it at all isn’t actually funny. Did Wolverine rewrite that timeline so the current version of Deadpool exists instead of that one? Then why is he able to travel back into a movie that never happened. Did that movie happen as part of this Deadpool’s backstory? Then how can he kill his past self and still exist? The entire joke is “clap if you know what we’re referencing!” and anyone who thinks it’s stupid is just being a buzzkill and overthinking it. 

Which brings me to the other issue-- no part of Deadpool’s character journey in this movie matters in the slightest. None of it. Because it didn’t happen. At the end of the movie he goes back in time and literally erases the plot of the movie. The writers fridged his girlfriend in the opening scene so they could have a whole movie about what happens to Deadpool when his girlfriend dies, but they didn’t feel like committing to it, so they go basically end the movie with a big “just kidding! this was all a What-If situation and none of it actually happened, but if it did, that’s how it would’ve gone down!” They really wanted to have their overtly sexist cake and eat it too!

In order for the story to make sense, the status quo going into Deadpool 3 has to be exactly the same as the status quo going into Deadpool 2, but I know that won’t be the case. I’m sure that, other than Morena Baccarin being in it, the franchise will straight-up never address why Cable can’t go home or how a plot that revolves around Morena Baccarin being unceremoniously fridged in the first scene (by writers who admit they didn’t even know that “women in refrigerators” is a thing until people got upset about it in their movie) can have happened when she’s clearly still alive. 

And that’s the big issue I have and why Deadpool 2 is included in my post about soulless, cynical, insulting entries in the superhero genre. It’s a movie that not only doesn’t make sense, it’s a movie that goes out of its way to spit in the face of anyone who expects it to make sense or ever actually thinks about the movies they watch. 

The movie is absolutely not trying to say the same thing as my post. Deadpool’s brand of casual liefeldian ultraviolence is inherently antithetical to my post’s thesis statement. The only way to make a Deadpool movie that isn’t directly counter to the point I’m trying to make is to either omit him entirely from the movie or portray him unambiguously as a villain. There is no such thing as a Deadpool movie that is not an insult to the superhero genre. His existence as a character is antithetical to the values of mercy, compassion, and reverence for human life. 

Ultimately, the answer to “am I wrong about the movie?” is up to you. If you’re asking me, the answer is “if you like it, then yes.” I’m sure other people find value in it or enjoy it, and I think those people have the wrong opinion, just like I’m sure they think I have the wrong opinion because I hate, and I mean truly despise, the Deadpool movies, the Deadpool comics, and all the Deadpool merchandise at your local FYE. I’m not equipped to tell you that you’re wrong about the movie. This is my position on this movie, if you disagree with it, then as far as you’re concerned, you were right about the movie. If you agree with it, then as far as you’re concerned you were once wrong but now you’re right. You own your opinions and you’re the one who has to decide whether or not they’re the right ones. Anyone who disagrees with my take completely is well within their rights to do so, because I sure as hell disagree with them. They can even think I’m an absolute moron who just wants to rain on people’s parade, doesn’t make an ounce of difference to me. 

Personally, I’m really not interested in changing anyone’s mind. I’m confident my opinion is correct so, just to deter any other anons (I know who this anon is and they’re not a dick, so this part isn’t addressed at them) it would be pointless to try and argue with me. If you think I’m wrong, great, the feeling’s mutual, but I have zero interest in changing my mind or yours beyond what I’ve already done, stating my position and you either agree or disagree. I think you’re wrong and I can live with that. I only ask the same courtesy. 

I also don’t think Ryan Reynolds should’ve been given a second chance to play the character, and tbh I think the main reason he still has an acting career is because he’s a generically inoffensive white dude with name recognition but not much else going for him, but that’s a matter for a different post. 

[why-this-kolaveri-machi]

avengers: infinity war

um. SPOILERS.

so i finally watched spiderman: infinity war avengers: infinity war yesterday with the inimitably awesome aakanksha ( @franklyineedcoffee). it was great! very cgi and very Epic.

like. mcu movies were never terribly remarkable to me, but then they got Spiderman involved (and made him great!) and the ensuing trifecta of extremely enjoyable films (homecoming, ragnarok and black panther) finally made a fangirl out of me. which basically primed me perfectly to enjoy the shit out of infinity war. 

a few thoughts! a second reminder for SPOILERS because i discuss about basically everything.

1. the film did a great job juggling so many characters and so many plot threads? of course some parts were under-served (the whole wakanda stretch was a bit meh to me), but at no point was i just waiting for the film to get back to the Interesting Bit. almost all of it was equally engaging.

2. i’d heard a lot about thanos going into this film but what i wasn’t expecting was to be reminded of two villains that the mcu had done really, really well recently: adrian toomes/the vulture from homecoming, and erik killmonger from black panther. thanos isn’t nearly as compelling as either of them and certainly doesn’t deserve a fraction of the sympathy we can reasonably afford to either toomes/killmonger, but the kind of sad, single-minded conviction that he used to justify murdering trillions of people? yeah, that was all-too-familiar. far from the cackling, evil villain trope, both toomes and killmonger were shaped and scarred by unforgiving circumstances; you didn’t approve of the stuff they did but their pathos was palpable. thanos plays this part of the villain arc very well--he doesn’t visibly delight in death and destruction, but does it because he is burdened with it. and isn’t that how it usually goes in the real world? the worst people in the world never believe in their own evil--just their own status as a Special Person Who Knows Something Better Than Everyone Else. a special destiny, a special responsibility with all that power. sometimes the line between superhero and villain is so, so thin.

2.5. because looking at it objectively, his motivation was some malthusian bullshit, yeah? and in a way recalls some of the most harrowing repercussions of bullshit science from the early twentieth century. so if i read one more thinkpiece about ‘errrrr guys maybe thanos had a point’ i’m going to lose it. both the writing and performance for thanos was fantastic--he practically dripped with gravitas, even under all the layers of cgi and chaotic fight scenes--but let’s not confuse that with actual sense/decency, yeah?

3. the groupings were great--so great that i could’ve readily watched an entire film based on any one of them. my favourite had to be thor with rocket/groot. i would’ve never guessed it, but it turned out to be the most poignant dynamic of them all. that little conversation that rocket had with thor was a little oasis in the middle of a terribly chaotic movie and neatly tied in and mirrored the incredible character development both the characters had undergone in their last movies--GotG vol 2 and ragnarok. this scene for me was an example of the ultimate reward of getting a film like infinity war--a moment of truly resonant emotional connection between two wildly differing characters and genres.

3.5. and, btw, the genres! can we talk about that a bit? it was a really cool mix of generic superhero stuff with sci-fi, a touch of horror, magic, swords-and-sorcery, opposites-meet comedy, a bit of romance, and just good old-fashioned family drama. 

3.75. and speaking of drama, the whole arc with gamora was gutting and inspired more tears from me than the much-talked-about snap. the sheer range of emotions she went through right before and after she realised that thanos was going to kill her and why! zoe saldana is fucking amazing.

4. aagh i just wished we had more time but all of the groups played really well off each other: i enjoyed iron man and company in particular because duh, spiderman, and watching three gigantic egos clash in the form of tony stark, dr strange, and peter quill was entertaining as all hell. and i know tumblr fandom in particular likes to give tony a hard time but i was impressed not just by his quick thinking, his surely-impossible technology, and his raw physical strength, but also his ability to lead, well, any team. he had spiderman covered (summoning the iron spider suit! appointing him an avenger! collaborative flying of an alien spaceship!), had dr strange figured out pretty quickly, and tried his best to steady peter quill. 

4.5. the group on wakanda wasn’t nearly as compelling, but much of their screen time was filled with fighting cannon fodder and that’s literally the least interesting part of any mcu movie, so. i guess i was also annoyed by rhodey basically throwing away the principled position he took in civil war--the narrative had to essentially make the regulatory body a one-dimensional super-villain. and, like. whatever. the avengers have to reform, etc. but it still stinks. i kind of dozed through the parts of civil war that didn’t involve spiderman but some of the issues that it raised were compelling. but then those issues were just used as an excuse to get a slugfest between iron man and captain america and now somehow an agreement signed by 150+ countries is all about oh no! will steve and tony ever make up?? like, fuck that shit. 

4.85. i didn’t expect to be as moved as i was by vision and wanda, though. unlike the nat/bruce thing that also kind of came out of the blue in ultron, these two were weirdly compelling. (although wanda’s missing accent is bothering me.)

5. there was so much cgi in this movie! some of it was truly breathtaking but more often than not it felt suffocating. i feel like tony stark and co. were especially ill-served: the deep blues of the doughnut spaceship and the flashy, dusty oranges on titan just made it more difficult to see the characters and, idk. i’m not a fan of the effect. 

5.5. everything involving thor was great, tho. couldn’t possibly match the climactic bridge scene in ragnarok in terms of pure Epicness but came close several times. 

6. mmm, what else? i really liked that this film undercut a lot of the truly dramatic scenes with humour--it just lent a dreadful sense of finality to the scenes that left us with death rather than a punchline.

6.5. another note: i realise that thor continually calling rocket and groot ‘rabbit and tree’ was supposed to be funny, but why would he do that? the ‘captain’ has a name. and he speaks groot’s language! why would he call him something as reductive as ‘tree’? (unless groot’s actual name is tree) it’s just a little niggling thing but it’s starting to bother me a lot now.

6.55. but i do find it a little endearing that prideful, extremely sensitive rocket never once bothered to correct thor.

7. ultimately the Epicness that made this movie possible is also one of the things that repeatedly threatens to bring it down. i just don’t want this film to fall down the rabbit hole that SPN finds itself in--expand its scope exponentially and find itself unable to remotely do it the justice that it deserves. what do you do with a character who could kill half the universe with a snap of his fingers? what do you do with characters who, in their individual movies, have expressed powers and resources that are seriously large-scale?

we see the film sputter in this respect a couple of times: i never understood why thanos didn’t just use the reality stone to, say, turn tony’s tech into cheesecake or something. out of respect at the man’s sheer tenacity? idk. and loki going out by trying to stab thanos was weird to me. was he deliberately sacrificing himself? is there something else going on? doesn’t he have much better weapons in his arsenal? at least he was aiming for the head

and the consequences of the final snap where more than half of the heroes disintegrated in front of their friends’ eyes should’ve felt more devastating, but the neatness of the old avengers being spared so that they could save (avenge if you will) their next generation in a final hurrah in the next movie seemed way too obvious. that’s not to say it wasn’t impactful. watching peter parker disintegrate in tony’s arms, fighting till the very last minute to stay he was so scared oh god he just wanted to stay and for mr stark to make it all right was gutting, no matter how much i’d prepared myself for it. i may have whimpered. 

8. i’m sure i have a lot more to say but it’s getting late and i’m tired, so. another post in the near future maybe.

but before i go, how could i not talk about spiderman?? i screamed my throat raw at the first sight of peter parker, and although he doesn’t actually get all that much screen time he made every second count. the awe-inspiring appearance of the iron spider. “have you ever seen that old movie, aliens?” the sheer range of emotions that passed his face when tony stark officially made him an avenger. flying spaceships along with tony. fun with magic portals! almost getting the gauntlet off because he is Just That Strong. saving mantis and drax. and clinging to life till the very last second even as the edges of his body were starting to wisp away. this boy. god. how mcu hit the perfect formula to represent my all-time favourite superhero on screen is a mystery, but i’m so so glad it happened. 

[rametarin]

About Dead By Daylight.

I’m not a player; don’t own the game, don’t want to. Only really know of it because someone I know plays it.

But, it has some Silent Hill lore that I feel is very interesting. Likely not CANON, but it’s nice to see their take on it.

Pyramid Head in Silent Hill’s DLC content breathes under the mask and helmet.

But there’s some very... interesting artifacts on his person that boost his abilities.

If you are familiar with the game, the inventory, the context, then I submit to you the conclusion I have that the Pyramid Head in Dead By Daylight is none other than James Sunderland.

Now, what would lead me to conclude this? Well. If you’ve played Silent Hill 2, then I only need to give you the tl;dr.

Pyramid Head is able to acquire the Tablet of the Oppressor- an item that is unique to James Sunderland and his story and pathos throughout Silent Hill 2. In addition to the video tape. And the wax doll. And portraits relevant to Pyramid Head, from the painting in the Historical Society, to the Seal of Valatiel Sect.

In addition to the rest, there’s also the two books, the obsidian chalice.... but missing the White Chrism. The essential ingredient to make the ritual work.

The last item in that series is the Seal of Metatron. Which is a Valatiel sect symbol of the older cult. You find it in Silent Hill 3, picked up after Heather/Cheryl Mason (Gillespie) kills Leonard Wolfe. But the thing about Dead By Daylight, is the Entity that is behind the whole thing always gives the killers an iridescent shined and polished up version of an icon from their home franchise.

Pyramid Head’s Seal of Metatron caps off the list of his items, and gives him one shiny token.

But notice how the only item that’s missing on this list.... the White Chrism.. is missing? It’s presumably drank upon enacting a ritual to Awaken your spirit self in Silent Hill. A white oil, derived from the White Claudia plant (presumably) native to the region.

Why is it that Pyramid Head would have every single item for this ritual MINUS the oil, and a few items ALL of them associated with James Sunderland? Even a shred of Maria’s skirt is on his person. ALL of the items of the ritual, BUT the drink that makes it work!!

I believe the character and lore designer’s intention was to make it ambiguous and subtly say that James Sunderland is Pyramid Head in Dead By Daylight. And that is so lore-compatible that it’s just beautiful. DBD’s character designers and writers are real horror afficianados and go balls to the wall for accuracy in the depiction of their licensed franchises, doing them honorably and with integrity.

If you want the LONG story about how that ritual is supposed to work and why that could be considered any sort of canon, I’m a bit exhausted right now, but I could explain it over DMs.

Or, you could play the games yourself!

[anotherdayinchuckletown]

Crossed Wires (Part 2/3)

(A/N:Hey, guys! This chapter took forever and a day for me to complete because the story I had planned out in my head just kept weaving and changing direction on me. My own characters are filthy traitors who don’t listen to me, but that’s okay because it means I’m doing something right.

Anyway, I wanted to thank everyone who left me such lovely comments on the first chapter - here’s a link in case you missed it! - and encouraged me to continue on with this story. Just one more part left, guys! With a hopefully shorter wait period in between next time lmao

If you enjoy it, please like, reblog, and comment! Hearing from you guys is always such a pleasure! Thank you so much for reading!

-Love, Katherine <3)

Summary: Charlie needs a vacation, or maybe at least one well-adjusted role model.

________________________________

For most kids like Charlie Bucket, people like Willy Wonka only come around once in a lifetime. Sometimes passing like a ship in the night, then disappearing for good. Sometimes crashing a jet-propelled elevator through the roof of your home, insulting your family, dragging you along with them to reconcile with their estranged father, then moving you and said family into their massive factory to live forever.

Most likely not the second one, though. Metaphor is not Charlie’s strong suit.

Regardless, it’s his uncanny luck that brings yet another ship to port in his once simple life. That ship contains one Dr. Margot Elizabeth Weber, his austere yet kindly teacher.

Where Wonka and Charlie excel in the theoretical and abstract, she often flounders, much more comfortable in the physical and concrete. After all, concrete is solid and unyielding, unbending once it has formed a pattern.

That is, until Charlie spotted the first break.

He was waiting by the door of his family’s little house in the Chocolate Room at eight fifty-nine that morning. Dr. Weber arrived at nine o'clock—not a minute earlier or later—and crisply knocked on the door three times. He opened it for her, and that was when he noticed the inconsistency. A tiny distortion, as though he were seeing the same pattern through the rippling water of the Everlasting Gobstopper pool.

She was dressed casually, something that he had never seen before. Her normally immaculate hair was pulled haphazardly into a messy ponytail and dark, heavy circles adorned her eyes.

“Dr. Weber?” he blurted out, voice laced with concern. More tactfully, he added, “Er, good morning!”

The young woman blinked slowly at him, eyelids clearly fighting to remain open. “Charlie, this is the four hundred seventy-eighth day that I have worked here. You should no longer be surprised to find me at your door.”

“…Right, sorry. How are you?” Unwilling to correct her on the source of his shock, he gathered up his supplies and joined her outside—in the Chocolate Room, that is. The emerald fields of swudge and the warmth from the heat lamps meant to mimic sunlight often make it easy to forget that they are, in fact, still indoors.

Dr. Weber seemingly pondered his question as they started for their usual spot—a secluded knoll near the base of the chocolate waterfall. “I am very well,” she finally said, spectacularly unconvincing.

From then on, the morning proceeded as usual. Dr. Weber’s zeal for mathematical equilibrium overshadowed her apparent exhaustion and moodiness. And Charlie became too preoccupied with remembering the steps of the quadratic formula to worry over her.

That had been a little over a week ago.

Charlie knows he is perceptive, has known it all his life. No matter how his parents and late grandparents tried to shield him from the full extent of their poverty before meeting Wonka, he was always acutely aware of their hardships. That is why he began shining shoes in his spare time, when his family likely thought he had been off playing with friends. Because he has always been able to tell these things.

Dr. Weber likely thinks that she does an adequate job of hiding how much she fancies Wonka. Luckily for her, Wonka is twice as ignorant as she is obvious. Nearly constantly, Charlie staves off his own secondhand embarrassment as Dr. Weber runs herself ragged tending to Wonka’s every beck and call, stands far closer than necessary, and openly stares at the chocolatier whenever his back is turned. Meanwhile, Wonka carries on with his day, blissfully unaware.

Yet, ever since that day Charlie saw the first crack, Dr. Weber’s pattern has been completely broken. She appears in the same room with him only when it is mandatory. When that happens, she keeps several yards between them and refuses to spare him a glance.

It doesn’t take Charlie long to put the puzzle pieces together.

“What did Mr. Wonka do to you?” he asks her point-blank one day after cornering her in the Coffee Cream Room.

She looks taken aback, having been absorbed in grading assignments and guzzling coffee (her third cup, if the two empty ones next to her are anything to go by). She peers up at him over the frames of her glasses. “Hm?”

“You’ve been awfully cross with him for a few days now,” he clarifies, moving to sit across from her cautiously. Appealing to Dr. Weber’s pathos is tricky business. He needs to apply just the right amount of pressure for her to feel comfortable speaking freely—too much or too little, and his window slams shut.

Dr. Weber focuses back on her work. Wearing a thin veil of nonchalance, she asserts, “I am not sure what you are referring to. I have no complaints against him whatsoever.”

“Then why have you been avoiding him recently?”

His teacher sighs in exasperation, and something in her eyes hardens. “Let him know that he needn’t worry. My productivity has not been affected.”

Charlie winces. He wonders what Wonka could have possibly said or done that would elicit such a strong reaction from someone as composed as Dr. Weber. “Oh, no, nothing like that!” He backpedals, thinking that he may be overplaying his hand here. “In fact, he only ever has good things to say about you! I was just…worried. That’s all.”

To his surprise, she sets down her pen. “I appreciate your concern, but I was sincere when I said I have no complaints.” She frowns, lips pursed with guilt. “You see, when I presented Mr. Wonka with blueprints for his new mixer last week, he made a comment.”

“He didn’t like it?” Charlie asks incredulously.

“No, it’s not that—he loved it. It’s what he said to me after that.” She seemingly braces herself before reciting, “’Eliza, you are as reliable and efficient as a machine’.”

The word “machine” drips with venom from her lips. If it weren’t for her clear contempt for the word, Charlie might be at a loss for the source of her rancor.

Grand and impressive as machines can be, especially here in the factory, they are nothing more than a means to an end. An empty husk for man to impart his will upon. An object to be discarded once they have fulfilled their purpose. Cold and unfeeling.

The way Dr. Weber must now believe Wonka views her.

Charlie can sympathize with her plight. Those couple weeks after he first met Wonka, after his family had been harshly refused access to the factory, he had felt utterly betrayed. The sparkling image of his childhood hero, tarnished in the blink of an eye. Of course, bygones are bygones, and the two of them now have a much more organic relationship. Charlie would go so far as to say Wonka is like a second father to him (as much as the least paternal person on earth can be, that is).

Charlie knows good and well that his mentor is no smooth talker. There is no doubt in his mind that the chocolatier is capable of insulting Dr. Weber, whether intentional or not.

Dr. Weber’s voice breaks him out of his reverie. “In any case,” she says evenly, “I have come to realize that I overreacted.”

“What do you mean?” Charlie tilts his head curiously.

“I am an employee here,” she explains. “I complete tasks…I perform functions…and I leave.” Straightening the papers in front of her, she gathers them into her tote bag. “But I became conceited. Clearly, I assigned myself undue importance—a mistake I shall not be repeating.”

Charlie gapes at her from across the table, disheartened by the sincerity in her words. “That…that’s not true! You are important here, Dr. Weber!” he insists. “And I know Mr. Wonka thinks so, too. Why don’t you see for yourself?”

That earns him a skeptical look. “What are you suggesting? That I broach the subject with him myself?”

“Yes, exactly!”

“Neither I or Mr. Wonka have time to spare over such nonsense.”

“You mean, your thoughts and feelings,” Charlie surmises.

“Yes, as I said, nonsense.” Slinging her bag over her shoulder and pounding back the rest of her coffee, she stands.

Charlie nods wryly, resisting the urge to roll his eyes at her. Looking at Wonka and Dr. Weber on any given day is like looking at his own parents through a carnival funhouse mirror, but this is plain ridiculous. “You can’t just let him walk all over you, Dr. Weber. He will, but only if you let him.” He stands as well, only half as gracefully, as his adolescent body continues to adjust to suddenly being nearly six feet tall. “If you’re uncomfortable, I’ll say something for you.”

Dr. Weber spins on her heel to face him, features hardened. “Charlie.” She says his name gently, yet firmly, the way his mother used to when he misbehaved as a little boy. “Again, I appreciate your concern for me, but that is hardly necessary. As your teacher, it would be unseemly to involve you in my personal matters in such a way.” She starts for the exit, discarding her empty cups on the way. “As it stands, I’ve already said too much.”

Charlie trails her into the hallway. Time for one last Hail Mary. “Technically speaking, we’re not in a lesson right now,” he rationalizes aloud. “And I don’t work for Mr. Wonka—well, not like you do, at least. So your record of conduct would be perfectly safe.” In fact, Wonka doesn’t even keep records of conduct. He doesn’t generally do much hiring and firing.

Dr. Weber looks him over warily, carefully considering. Charlie squirms nervously as he feels himself being dissected under a microscope. Finally, she tells him, “You make an excellent sales pitch…but I’m not worth the fuss. I’ll be taking my leave now; I have business at the university.” Without leaving room for further debate, she turns and strides down the hall, noticeably hastier than usual.

Releasing a breath he hadn’t realized he had been holding, Charlie lopes back inside. He needs a shot of espresso, stat. And he would rather not look too deeply into that compulsive need to help every simultaneously ingenious and emotionally stunted adult he comes across just yet.

Maybe Dr. Weber is right that he shouldn’t worry so much. After all, things have a mysterious way of ultimately working out around here.

[thebastardofgloucester]

all the posts collating reactions to The Empire Strikes Back or writing mock Rotten Tomatoes reviews to imply that the criticisms of this film aren’t worth paying attention to are just…so missing the point

exactly two works that said what ‘Star Wars’ was existed at the time of Empire’s release in 1980: Star Wars (not yet renamed ‘A New Hope’) and Alan Dean Foster’s 'Splinter of the Mind’s Eye’ (a sequel written in case Star Wars was a flop that could be filmed on a shoestring budget and without Harrison Ford. It’s Wild and puts the lie to the idea that Lucas had any idea where the Skywalker story was going; highly recommend)

in the year of our Lord 2017, The Last Jedi was released as the third film in a revival of a six film, single creative vision franchise, with the added baggage of over two decades of novels, comics, video games, and other media (the only thing ever fully expelled from canon was the infamous holiday special, which, honestly, had greater creative merit than some of the stuff that got to stay)

what’s the point? Expectations. No, not people who didn’t want anything to change and are Mad About It or whatever facile narrative the authors of those blog posts and reviews are using to explain why this film is probably more divisive than the goddamn prequels. The problem is that not only does The Last Jedi clash with decades of fandom, it is even at loggerheads with its sister films in this particular revival. and it doesn’t get the same benefit of the doubt that ESB got because that’s not how franchises and fandoms actually work. you don’t get to ignore everything that came before to tell your own story. they have to work together. 

Sure, not everybody read the EU (and trust me some of them are better off for it). But almost everybody saw The Force Awakens, most of them saw Rogue One, and a fair number of them, old and young fans alike, eagerly consumed the New EU content that offered glimpses into how the events of The Force Awakens came about and what mysteries were set up in what was effectively a reboot rather than a sequel. Generally, you know, regardless of how much you hate 'puzzleboxes,’ it is reasonable to expect that what one film sets up will have a payoff in the next, particularly when the first film takes such care to be sensitive to what the fans want (as JJ and Kasden did with TFA) - because while this is a money faucet for Disney, sure, there’s no point in bringing this franchise back without those fans (and of course, their kids) - and what they got from Rian and the Lucasfilm story team was…a confirmation that they had been wasting their time. It’s all well and good to pull the rug out from under the audience (as this film does incessantly) but it’s cynical bullshit to basically bait them with promo material and the preceding canon and then to deliver on basically nothing and expect everyone to just be okay with it. This film effectively penalizes the people who cared the most and spent the most time engaging with The Force Awakens and rewards people who may not have really been here for what Lucas was selling to begin with. As one review put it, it ‘does not care what you think about Star Wars’.

But when you set expectations as deliberately as Kennedy and the Lucasfilm Story Group did in JJ and Kasden’s TFA, it’s not great writing to blow them to pieces mid-narrative. It’s just lazy. the idea that Rey has no connection to the Skywalker line? a good idea, potentially, but clumsily executed, as it is played out less as an important revelation and more an excuse to not actually give any kind of answer to how Rey came to be Ben’s equal on the Light (or why she even is ‘Light’ honestly; I love Angry Rey but there’s seemingly no danger in her temptation) or where she got a skill set rivaled in this franchise only by literal Space Jesus Anakin Skywalker. Snoke is a one-noted villain; having him be betrayed by Kylo in the midst of his own villain arc? a very good idea. it belongs as the climax of the film, not the end of act 2 so there is no time for anything to breathe, just more never-ending crises and hardship.

Like, spare me the 'force visions are unreliable’ (Rey’s was unlike anything we had seen before, it wasn’t Anakin’s nightmare or Luke on Dagobah) bs; the film didn’t say that what Rey saw was wrong for x reason, it just pretended that it never happened and Rey didn’t say anything about it); spare me ‘our heroes have to fail and sometimes all the plans don’t work out’ we know that, we live in the real world of 2017 but while making your clever point you have wasted the presence of three extremely talented actors of color, and let down the audiences waiting for a chance to see people who look like them be the heroes for once. instead it turns out they didn’t actually matter all that much, but maybe next film! 

It’s not clever. It’s not visionary. It’s cheap, it’s cowardly, and it isn’t actually that original because the film leaves us exactly where we expected. Poe is the leader and Leia’s heir to command, Finn is a newly-committed Rebel brimming with unrealized potential, Rey is a Jedi character (amorphously defined) who we know exactly as much about as we started, Luke is gone, even if he went out in pretty spectacular fashion, Carrie’s death means that Leia will be leaving us soon, and Kyle Ben has become the big bad. That’s the only real development - Snoke’s death and Ben’s rejection of his redemption - and it’s buried under Rey, our erstwhile heroine, being a vehicle for the villain’s character development. The only character this film particularly cares about is a white fascist who gets every chance to be redeemed and rejects them while the film expects us to keep caring. 

So, yeah. People are mad. Not because of the same ‘the series is changed forever now’ shit that the haters of ESB were on about. Because the real changes? Ben being the real villain, the smallfolk of the galaxy being the source of light and conduits of the Force? I don’t see anyone complaining all that hard about them. 

the complaints are about the damage done to beloved characters for…not all that much of a payoff. the misuse and marginalization of the characters of color. the disdain with which the script treats the nostalgia of the Force Awakens. the unrelenting pace of the film that just grinds the Resistance (and the audience) down and just tells them to trust us, even as more and more and more is taken away. Rey’s parentage isn’t the only thing cast aside - promises of developments in Finn’s story - his identity, his potential to cause a revolt in the First Order, even his force sensitivity (you want a force user from nothing? how about a child soldier from a nameless family who as we are continually reminded used to be on sanitation crew) - are broken. Rey has her dream of family taken away…and replaced with…well the film doesn’t really bother to say because she’s a plot device for most of act 3. We don’t get to see her reject Ren and leave him. Because this isn’t her story; it’s his. Kylo is unconscious, so the scene is over. Tell me how that is a satisfying arc for our erstwhile protagonist? Poe’s character is completely uprooted from what we’ve seen before to make him an obnoxious hotheaded menace whose emotions threaten the survival of the Resistance if two old white women aren’t able to keep him in check. Rose says a lot and gets to do almost nothing. Luke…Luke is torn down to justify the fall of Ben Solo, never given the chance to establish a meaningful bond with his erstwhile successor, and is only given the chance to atone by acting as a diversion to give the others time to escape. he dies alone, a failure, even if he is at peace with how things turned out.

last year we were shown a movie in the wake of one of the more traumatic political events in the life of the people on this website where a diverse and sympathetic cast fight hard and are entirely wiped out. But their deaths come in a spectacular and charged finale that carries the desperation and grief and pathos through into the beginning of the story we know and love. it all feels worth something. Rogue One has its flaws as a film but it comes together in a way that The Last Jedi does not. In the end, what Jyn and Cassian and the others do is just enough to get the plans away, to start the sequence of events that will lead to the Empire’s destruction.

Here?

there’s just not enough left. not enough of the Resistance, not enough story, not enough hope. 

to have that hope repeatedly stripped away and cynically exploited through a narrative that drags the characters from crisis to crisis without bothering to justify itself or its role in the story (while retreading the highlights of Episodes V and VI without the emotional depth to back them up), and in so doing wears down the audience as much as the characters is not why I have devoted so much of my life and emotional energy to this series about space wizards and their galaxy-destroying family squabbles and eventual chance for redemption. for all his many, many faults, George Lucas understood that.

you can’t just talk about hope. sooner or later you have to see it. You have to feel that what you are suffering will be worth it. The text needs to tell you as much. it’s clumsy and cliched and it is necessary. In the Empire Strikes Back, after Han is captured and Luke is beaten, the turning point is Lando. Lando changes the course of the movie, rescuing Leia and Chewie, who rescue Luke. They live to fight another day, and at the end they are wounded but among friends. 

the moment in The Last Jedi where that could have happened was when Leia’s signal went out. How terrific would it have been if after being betrayed by a scoundrel the original scoundrel with a heart of gold, Lando Calrissian, arrives at the head of a fleet made up of all the alien races so inexplicably missing from the sequel trilogy so far, fending off the First Order long enough for the Resistance to escape with most of the survivors on Crait?

But Rian had to have one last twist of the knife. so nobody came. only Luke, and only as a distraction to buy time that ultimately cost him his life and reduced his legacy to giving everything to atone for his past sins. there is no Lando moment. there is no turning point, no moment where a larger victory is hinted at. and no, a single stable boy far, far away from the war is not the same thing. It makes an interesting point about the force and the metanarrative of Star Wars. It is not what this film needed after everything it put its characters and audience through.

and so at the end I’m not hopeful. I’m just tired. So, very tired. And I miss what made me fall in love with this series about space wizards and the Skywalker family in the first place

[nightmareonfilmstreet]

Scaring Up The Neighborhood For 32 Years, HOUSE Released Today in 1986

Hollywood released quite a competitive catalogue of films in 1986, many of which we consider classics by today’s standards. For mainstream films, these included Pretty in Pink, Top Gun, Ferris Bueller’s Day Off and Platoon (just to name a few). The horror genre released quite a few memorable features as well in 1986, attempting to capitalize on the overwhelming popularity of visual effects of the times. Such horror films included Aliens, Poltergeist II, Night of the Creeps, The Fly and Little Shop of Horrors. A particular film, released 36 years ago on February, 28th 1986 was House.

The American horror (sometimes comedy), came into the scene with a cavalry of seasoned actors/actresses, bringing genre fans a movie both terrifying and appealing. Rather than the overly gore filled horror films of the time, House was a dark, character driven story with personality.

Box Office

Directed by Steve Miner (Friday the 13th Part II & Part III) and co-written by Fred Dekker (Monster Squad), House reportedly placed second at the U.S. box office, grossing $5.9 million opening weekend against a production budget of $3 million (USD). Also released on February 28th, Pretty in Pink dominated the box office with $6.1 million, taking first place as highest grossing film that weekend. UPI journalist, Bob Webster, published an article shortly after the films release stating, “Three films fell close behind Pretty in Pink in competition for the nation’s second most popular motion picture. House, a New World horror suspense film about the weird doings of strange and sometimes funny monsters, either fell to or remained in second place — depending on who you ask”. Ultimately, House was a financial success grossing $19.4 million in domestic box offices.

  Plot

Novelist Roger Cobb, a troubled Vietnam war veteran whose son went missing under mysterious circumstances. His ex-wife, played by Kay Lenz (Death Wish 4, Headhunter), continually makes an effort to help Cobb move beyond his grief. After the puzzling suicide of Cobb’s aunt, Elizabeth Hooper, he inherits his childhood home and immediately moves in to work on his latest novel. In an attempt to absolve himself from the trauma of war, Cobb’s latest novel is based on his wartime experience in Vietnam. As Cobb’s nightmares become more vivid with every passing night, the spirits of the house begin terrorizing him with visions from his past. Eventually, the fears borne from Cobb’s mind materialize in the form of monsters capable of killing him. Throughout battling the evil spirits plaguing the house, Cobb manages to unfold the mysterious behind the disappearance of his son, Jimmy.

  Cast & Crew

Prior to directing House, Steve Miner’s directorial debut included the first two sequels of the Friday the 13th franchise. Initially serving as associate producer to the first Friday the 13th film, Steve Miner helped pave the way for Jason Voorhees’ entry into the film series. After helming the classic horror series, Miner’s third feature came to be his first horror-comedy, House (1986), produced by Sean S. Cunningham. Yeah, THAT Sean S. Cunningham.

Written by Fred Dekker, House was meant to serve as a segment for a horror anthology that was initially inspired by The Twilight Zone: The Movie (1983). In an interview with Roger Cobb’s House, the official movie website, Dekker states, “My college pals and I wanted to be filmmakers. Between beers (or because of them), we decided to embark on a group endeavor inspired by Twilight Zone: The Movie. Each of us would direct our own segment of a video anthology.” He later explains, “At some point, it occurred to me: what if my Twilight Zone-ette and my scary haunted house movie were one and the same? What if my protagonist is the Vietnam vet, and the reason he’s going into the house is to exorcise his personal demons once and for all??”

William Katt, who plays House protagonist Roger Cobb, is also known for a notable role in the horror film world. Katt played Tommy Ross in 1976’s Carrie alongside Sissy Spacek. Katt would eventually star in a variety of roles which required a different set of disciplines and challenges prior to returning to the horror genre in ’85. As Sean S. Cunningham, House producer, notes on the selectiveness of choosing the right actor(s) for the film, regarding Katt he states, “In this picture, if you don’t like the character of Cobb you haven’t got a movie.” He continues, “It was essential to have an actor who could blend humor with pathos; and the part also required the actor to be in top physical condition. Bill was a natural for the role.”

The film also employs the masterful American film composer, Harry Manfredini, whose movie credits include that of the Friday the 13th series (including an original score for The Friday the 13th: The Game). According to Manfredini’s official website, he has scored over one hundred films including Slaughter High, The Hills Have Eyes 2, The Horror Show, and Lake Eerie.

  Monsters and Special Effects

Creature and special effects designer James Cummins wanted to create an environment that would compliment Cobb’s nightmares with its manifestations. In describing his attempt to design the creatures for House, he stated, “While we hope the creatures are frightening, we want to cut down on gore and shoot for something more surrealistic.” He continued, “The overall feel of the motion picture is that the character of Roger Cobb is experiencing things in a surreal, dreamlike way, so we constructed the beasts to achieve a fantastic, almost cartoonish quality.”

  Legacy

Known for its horror and slapstick humor, House also utilized a familiar theme that was pretty controversial at the time; the film touches base with PTSD in an era during the American public’s lack of understanding. Just as Roger Cobb was wrestling with the demons of his past, the audience could have an opportunity to better understand how his nightmares and guilt were collaborators in tearing at his sanity. Roger Cobb was not only a victim to the haunting spirits in the house, but to his wartime traumas as well. At some point throughout the film, you may find yourself asking if Cobb had imagined the entire ordeal. I know I did. Today, House stands as one of the most notable horror films of the 1980’s, mainly due to its special effects at the time. Even for a saturated market in the horror genre, House held its own by even producing three additional sequels.

Let’s celebrate House’s 32nd birthday today by revisiting this little horror gem! Pop in your movie disc, VHS or stream this monster classic to relive the haunting nightmare. For the latest in horror news, you can follow Nightmare on Film Street on all social media platforms. Stay ghoulish, friends!

The post Scaring Up The Neighborhood For 32 Years, HOUSE Released Today in 1986 appeared first on Nightmare on Film Street - Horror Movie Podcast, News and Reviews.

from WordPress https://nofspodcast.com/house-1986-horror-comedy-anniversary/ via IFTTT