#exec doesn't have a birthday

[sui-imi]

Birthdays!

Roo (aka UnderEats!Sans): 8th September [international food delivery day]

Cellphone Papyrus: 25th April [national telephone day]

Arbiter (the convenience store Sans): claims it's the entirety of September [national condiment month]

Burpi (the MTT restaurant BurgerPants): 8th August [international cat day]

PNG!Sans: 12th March [read as 12/3, and he has 3 modes]

Exec: N/A

[hainethehero]

No hate, genuine question. Why do yous think bucktommy was such a good relationship? Tommy bought him tickets to basketball when its established he doesn't like basketball and buck didn't even know if Tommy was gay or bi after 6 months like that doesn't seem like they knew each other at all what makes it seem like they have such a good relationship?

Genuine answer, I liked that Buck finally had someone that was upfront with him and really interested. Before then, it was mostly him chasing interests.

As for the basketball tickets etc., it was terrible writing. The writers clearly got direction from whoever (showrunner, execs etc) to just half-ass it. The writing was just terrible bc Tommy up until then was very in love with Buck, and even Oliver said, they were in the early stages of learning/exploring each other.

And again, there was clearly a miscommunication between the show & the interviews that Tim and Oliver did.

Tim said he liked Lou a lot and felt like Tommy was the perfect guy to set up Buck's queer storyline and relationship with. He also said he wanted to give the relationship respect and didn't want to make a big deal about it because a lot of shows do that, when queer couples should be treated not as something gratuitous and showy, but as something natural. He also said that he wanted to change up the fact that Buck has always been on a rollercoaster of relationships and has never quite settled and he wanted the opposite of that to happen with Tommy.

Oliver said that he wanted to do the same and be respectful of showing a genuine queer relationship. He even said that Buck and Tommy were taking things slow and getting to know each other and exploring this new territory for Buck. He even said he wanted a slow burn where the desire just builds etc.

Then, in the show, after season 7, there were barely any Buck and Tommy scenes. Yes, Buck and Tommy were there for Christopher's birthday, but that was more about Eddie. There was no genuine effort to develop their relationship. Most of season 8 was about Bathena & Henren, (not even Eddie or Chimney got enough screentime tbh). But they clearly showed through the writing and the pacing that the Buck/Tommy relationship was no longer something they wanted to spend time and energy on. The discrepancies then, are the difference in the interviews and then the show. People genuinely thought they were going to do what they said (see interview above & Google the rest of interviews bc there were a lot with the same sentiment expressed about being respectful about Buck and Tommy.) But they clearly didn't and went with the, "oh we were tricking you and rly just going to break them up so that Buck can kick off his yt boy angst" arc.

Honestly I'm still confused af:

Why did they dive into this plot if Tim and Oliver knew they were just going to half-ass it?

Did Oliver just not like Lou and ask Tim to end it abruptly?

If Oliver/the cast didn't like Lou, why did they keep him on?

If they did like Lou, why did no one defend him when he was getting sent death threats, petitions to get him off the show, degrading comments about his looks, name-calling etc?

And if Tim and Buck were genuinely truthful, that they wanted to be respectful in developing and building this queer relationship, why did they let it get railroaded by sloppy writing, bullying from stans, no promotion of the relationship ship whatsoever and minute long scenes where there's no deep conversations or focus on their dynamic?

If the 911 cast didn't like Lou so much, whyd they keep him on? Why did they continue the storyline? Why lie in interviews and say things like slow burn, instead of being brave and saying, well, i don't like the direction my character is going in, so we're scrapping Buck and Tommy?

It all just seems like blatant cowardice to me, from the entire cast, but specifically Tim and Oliver. And now that they broke up, Oliver's brilliant response is, "i want Buck to fuck this guy and that girl, and that girl and this guy and this girl..." like, CLEARLY he did not give a f--k about the relationship, so he should've expressed that earlier, instead of making stuff up about slow burn and desires, and getting over hurdles together.

So to answer your question, we were expecting what Tim and Oliver alluded to, (and up until 8x05 they seemed smitten with each other, even with boils on Buck's face- and then immediately broken up next ep) and instead got shitty pacing, little to no development of the relationship, and weak, half-assed writing that seemed more from a middle-schooler than an actual writer.

[onyxsboxes]

hi ame!! how about 👮‍♂️+ 🛫 for the mota what if asks? 🩶

hi jj, thank you for the ask 🥰

👮‍♂️: ... Gale became Air Exec and 🛫: ... Curt and Gale flew together on the Algeria mission

Jack was originally flying for the mission, so Gale would have done the same without to much change. Mister Gale “I always take the left seat” Cleven, would have taken that seat and nothing could have changed his mind, not even leading the whole group. "he can do both thank you very much, he's can't fly many missions so if on top of that people try to take *his* place 😤"🤣

Both of them would have made it to Algeria, maybe not even as damaged as when Gale flew in Our Baby because this time they would have flown in Jack's place 🤔.

As for Curt, I think he'd be happy to fly with Buck. They're both good friends, great pilots and have the same mentality: finish the mission and make sure everyone's safe. He'd definitely complain a lot about the lack of lobsters and champagne to Buck 🤣

Also Buck wouldn't have let Bucky off the hook so easily with his “reserve pilot” bullshit, especially because for once he can be in the air, he'll have to worry about Bucky getting hit too 🥺 at least he doesn't have to worry about Curt this time (but also he's glad they're both flying together because flying with Bucky is his favorite kind of flying).

And now, on second thought, I wonder if you didn't want the “what ifs” to be separated, woups 😅

MOTA Birthday What if Games part 2

[amuseoffyre]

Couldn't get to sleep last night and ended up thinking about the original plan for episode 6 of S2 and the muttering about the executive interference on the show, changing things up.

From what I've read, the original plan was that the party in episode 6 was going to be the celebration Pete and Lucius's wedding plus the crew helping Stede make a romantic move, but instead, we got Calypso's birthday and Pete/Lucius's wedding was tacked onto the finale in a 2-minute scene.

I don't know about anyone else, but when I heard this it reminded me of Rebecca Sugar fighting tooth-and-nail for the Ruby and Sapphire wedding. It reminded me of Korrasami's very, very brief moment of being allowed to hold hands. You can have your queer show, but maybe don't be too much of it.

And while I adore Calypso's birthday, there are a bunch of ways I can see why the wedding was the original plan:

Ed's gilt/guilt room - yes, using the money to finance the Calypso's birthday was good, but the idea that he would use all these ill-gotten gains in order to give Lucius especially a special day would have been interesting. Lucius still adamant this doesn't make them good, but he can see Ed's trying.

The crew actually interacting with the main pair as a pairing - this is a big thing that I thought was missing after episode 4. Aside from the bell scene in the opening of ep. 5, the crew don't interact with them together in any way until Frenchie and Jim request Calypso's birthday plans. Having them being wingmen for Stede, getting him dolled up, would have been sweet. It would have also played out interestingly if Ed felt so swept off his feet by it all and the "that was a mistake" would have a different context.

Calypso turning up as the officiant for the wedding instead of the speedrun of vows and "now you can slash each other's faces" in the finale.

That said, I feel like having Lucius and Pete's special day ruined by a sadistic torture bitch would have been a bit much after everything else they have been through between the seasons. Having them be the two people not getting tortured was nice.

Plus Ned Low is such a fun and awful character. Wouldn't have missed that guy for the world. In fact, would've enjoyed a lot more of him being a menace.

Once again, the limited time-scale is really showing. The amount they managed to condense and fit into 30 minute episodes is actually remarkable, especially with execs breathing down their necks and demanding changes.

[stormyoceans]

Even Jimmy and Sea themselves say that today they left the cave after a long absence. this is a very subtle hint that the boys really sit like recluses in the basement. hey there, helloooo. do something about it already? oh my god, today we saw their manager for the first time since Jimmy's birthday. she even posted one photo. well, thanks, but fans work better. of the good things that happened today: kissing sea's hand and confirming LT in november.

THE REAL REASON GMMTV DOESN'T LET JIMMYSEA OUT OF THEIR CAVE MORE OFTEN IS BECAUSE THEY'RE SIMPLY TOO CHARMING AND JUST MAKE EVERYONE FALL IN LOVE WITH THEM

directors meet them one (1) time and the next day they're marching into the GMMTV board room demanding jimmysea as leads for their new series. jimmy is so insanely charismatic he takes up all the air in the room and commands attention even if he's just standing in a corner. sea tawinan is let loose on unsuspecting men and suddenly they're all drawn to him like moths to a flame

GMMTV execs pulling jimmysea to the side before the event like okay we're letting you go this time but you can't make anyone fall in love with you okay for the love of god tone down the charm and keep a low profile your manager is gonna come with you to control the situation

10 minutes later

GMMTV execs: god DAMMIT

GMMTV CAN TRY WITH ALL ITS MIGHT TO HOLD THEM IN BUT THE TRUTH IS THAT JIMMYSEA HAVE TOO MUCH POWER

[opinions-about-tiaras]

Even if you discard the creative problems here (WHICH YOU SHOULDN'T) this seems like it will cause enormous issues just from, like, a pure, hard-hearted "we are capitalists doing capitalist business in capitalism" sense, which is somehow even more surprising.

Like... okay, off the top of my head? Jinx.

Jinx is sort of LoL's mascot. She's an enormously popular champion and she tends to feature prominently in damn near all of their huge marketing pushes. Riot has invested a LOT of effort into her! She was the face of the launch of Wild Rift. She's the face of the FRANCHISE. Both through her organic popularity and deliberate, effective marketing Jinx is synonymous with League of Legends; Riot very much wants you to recognize Jinx and think of League when you see her. This is useful to them! Strong branding and popular characters are important when the central conceit of your money machine is "look at all these cool action figures, let's make'em fight."

Jinx moves skins. Jinx moves game modes.

Part of the reason this works is because Jinx, regular Jinx I mean, is very "PG-13 crazy." She's happy fun wacky 'splosion girl, causing enormous amounts of property damage to stuffed shirts and people who deserve it, thieving and bombing and vandalizing, but never actually really hurting or killing people. The threat is occasionally there, Jinx isn't above pointing a rocket launcher at people and going "Uh-oh, ya better tell me what I wants t'know or BOOM!" but its never followed through on. Even her fiction tends to go out of the way to emphasize that Jinx hurts property and systems (in other words, the things that tend to oppress Zaun) rather than people.

Jinx is creepy and kooky in the same way the Addams Family is creepy and kooky. You never actually SEE the Addams Family murder or seriously injure anyone who doesn't clearly deserve it; you never see them actually pour scalding hot oil on Christmas carolers. Wednesday never ACTUALLY kills or disfigures Pugsley. Thus it is with Jinx. She can ride a bomb down out of the sky to Piltover, but you never see it kill and a mangle a whole ton of people.

This makes her intensely marketable. It's what allows Riot to pay an absolute ton of money to license "You Really Got Me Now" and then make a whole music video starring Jinx to launch Wild Rift with and consider that to have been an effective use of their marketing budget.

And none of this, none of it at all, works if you transform regular Jinx into Arcane Jinx.

Arcane Jinx is not "ha-ha funny crazy." Arcane Jinx is mentally ill in ways that are often not amusing, photogenic, or mass-marketable. Even her more benign moments, like when she pranks Chuck the Bartender (and that's a genuinely funny scene!) have a sinister undercurrent, where you're not sure if she's just going to disfigure or kill this poor guy live on screen. She's a damaged, brutal killer, a ruiner of lives, a breaker of bodies. They Jokerized her by like 75%, and it was stunningly effective.

Arcane Jinx cannot have a fun adventure where she blows up a building in order to give Vi a birthday present, and then they share a hug and tender moment as sisters. That... does not work. They are WAY past that now.

And that completely degrades her use as the face of the franchise. Arcane Jinx cannot do all the things that regular Jinx does, not without STUNNING cognitive dissonance. DC often uses the Joker in marketing... but the Joker isn't the face of their franchise.

Riot's marketing guys, like the actual marketing guys who have to assemble effective campaigns and aren't just execs who issue a diktat and expect it to be obeyed, must be tearing their hair out over this.

And this is just one business problem caused by this decision, one of many. What if Arcane implodes? There is no GUARANTEE it will continue to be excellent; if there was a way to churn out guaranteed hits, to make quality an industrial process, Disney would have discovered it by now. Then you're shackled to a failed media experiment, which is bad for business.

Even if Arcane continues to be excellent, it doesn't come out very often. If everything must genuflect before it... the core part of the business depends on a regular content cadence, new champions, new fiction, new cutscenes and updates and plotlines for older champions, etc. What do you tell the guys who are trying to write for that part of the universe? "Sorry, you can't use these ideas; they're all contradicted by the third season of Arcane." "Well, uh, okay. What happens there? We can incorporate those events." "And let you spoil the season? No way. You can't use events from there until it comes out." "When does it come out?" "2028."

This is all so baffling.

Thoughts on them meshing the Acrane and League lore? I am really unhappy with the decision because it means some of my favorite champions will be completely reworked. I honestly just wished they kept the two separate. I also think it's a horrible move on a story telling front, too, because now the Arcane team will be restricted by canon which is what made Arcane so fun and good in the first place. They got to experiment and explore characters and I am terrified for the future of Arcane after this decision.

Overall, I think it was a horrible decision and I can only hope they decide to go back on it, but I highly doubt it. Apparently Riot just really hates its writers and it's lore community lmao

It is a really, really bad decision, yeah. Arcane's greatest strength was arguably that it could tell good and interesting stories about its characters entirely unburdened by 13 years of shambolic canon MESS from the main game. Its version of Viktor simply could not ever have happened if Arcane had to respect canon, it could NEVER have done what it did with Singed or Heimerdinger or the Void.

The way they're trying to solve that is by saying "okay, ARCANE represents the canon now, and we'll change THE MAIN GAME to suit it" but that just creates exactly the same problem the other way around. Now the canon of the main game (and Legends of Runeterra and the Forge games) is going to be completely fucked by being forced to be shackled to whatever Arcane wants to do.

Arcane is predicated, it is a huge and important central part of its canon that magic is rare, that it is incredibly special and unusual, and that spellcasters and sorcerers are essentially fucking cryptids to the rest of the world. That is WHY being able to harness magic through Hextech is such a revolutionary technology, because it makes magical power accessible not just to the very few, but to the world.

But hang on a fucking second, the premise of DEMACIA AS A REGION is that magic is common, that it is normal and abundant and plentiful enough that the magical population of the country can launch a full scale insurrection to claim their rights.

The Demacian storyline requires it to be true that mages are commonly born into ordinary families, that everyone in the country knows someone who's a mage or someone whose kid or cousin is a mage, and that mages and magicians are commonly understood to be living in various states of hiding all throughout the country as a normal part of their communities.

And before anyone goes "yes but Piltover was founded to get away from the destruction of the Rune Wars so..." remember, so was Demacia, and it was founded inside a forest of magic-suppressing petricite trees.

Which means if Arcane is the central fount of canon now, Demacia... simply cannot exist in that universe. Not in any way that we would recognize it. And neither can any of the other regions, really. If magic is rare, mysterious and unknown to the vast majority of ordinary people, then Shurima doesn't work. Bilgewater doesn't work. The Freljord doesn't work. Not as they exist currently.

So either the main canon gets CATASTROPHICALLY retconned to hell to suit Arcane, or else Arcane has to very awkwardly retcon its own foundational premise to be like "uuuuh actually magic is normal and common in far away places in the world and everyone there is totally chill about it, and it's JUST Piltover that happens to randomly be founded in a place where mages don't get born and also they never travel to Piltover and also nobody from Piltover ever travels to places where mages are common."

Like, there simply is not a good way to merge the world state of Arcane with the world state of Runeterra as a whole without completely destroying important parts of either, and what gets me is there isn't even any real benefit to fucking doing it.

Seriously! What's the benefit? What does anyone get out of doing this? The only actual tangible benefit is that it will eventually (after like five years of constant retcons) be slightly easier for people who watched Arcane to understand what's happening on Summoner's Rift, which... who cares? The whole point of Arcane is that it expanded the reach of Runeterra to people who don't give a shit what League of Legends is! People who watched Arcane aren't going to tune in to Worlds and be like "oh my god that's Viktor getting a pentakill! That's the blorbo from my show, hooray, I am going to buy SKT T1 merch about it!"

This decision reeks from a million miles away of executive bullshit. It reeks of some bro in a graphic tee under a suit jacket wearing ugly $1000 sneakers being like "we should totally unify our brand appeal under a single consolidated IP umbrella to maximize audience engagement metrics" without any creative understanding of why different storytelling works for different mediums and you can't just find-replace a few keywords to turn 13 years of MOBA canon into TV show canon.

It's such a fundamental failure to understand that there is POWER in telling different stories in different mediums. Fucking Disney+-ass MCU-brained brand thinking is what it is.

[californiahq]

+𝟑 𝑾𝑨𝑵𝑻𝑬𝑫 𝑪𝑶𝑵𝑵𝑬𝑪𝑻𝑰𝑶𝑵𝑺 .

zacarias sheperd ( xolo mariduena ) is looking for 4 oldest sisters who is approximately 30+ years old. they look a bit like diane duerrero, elodie young, ana de armas, simone ashley, laura harrier, margot robbie, any fc. you do have to contact the mun prior to applying. ( @infamyd two of them should be at 35+. they are the adopted children of their mother's previous marriage to a record exec, and the oldest out of all of the siblings (8 total). their mom is the typical momager type, very kris jenner -- she pitched their reality show that ran from 2007 to 2020 and on e! network and have since relaunched on hulu. the siblings have since branched out and launched brands, clothing lines, etc. they are very inescapable figures in the public eye and are essentially the khloe / kim / kourtney types of the family and do not share the sheperd last name. their careers and path are entirely utp. )

nathaniel kwon ( daniel henney ) is looking for a husband who is between forty-fifty years old. they look a bit like andrew garfield, charles michael davis, pedro pascal, oscar isaac, utp you do have to contact the mun prior to applying. ( you can contact me at @diisgustednoiises . before meeting his husband, nathaniel's love life was pretty uneventful, just a series of one failed relationship after another. but then ten or so years ago he was set up on a blind date with the man that would eventually become his husband ! it wasn't love at first sight, at least not on nathaniel's part but the connection was defintiely there ! and after five or so years of dating they got married !!! apart from that i will leave the details of your character's background up to you ! ).

nathaniel kwon ( daniel henney ) is looking for his younger half-siblings who is between no older than thirty five years old. they look a bit like adeline rudolph, charles melton, alex landi, justin h. min, any fc at least half korean you do have to contact the mun prior to applying. ( my url is @diisgustednoiises ! nathaniel was the only child born to his parents, they subsequently divorced sometime after his second birthday. while his mom never remarried, his father was remarried by nathaniel's fifth birthday and he had at least two children with his new wife. admittedly nathaniel isn't super close to his younger siblings but he definitely doesn't hate them ! so i think there's plenty of potential for a good relationship ! but i am also not going to turn down any drama).

[alexhornefan]

My Secret Life: Alex Horne, 33, comedian

Saturday 17 March 2012 LINK

The household I grew up in... was very male. I've got two brothers and there was a male dog and two male cats and every family we knew had three boys. Great for us, slightly less great for my mum.

When I was a child I wanted to be... embarrassingly, the great novelist. Or a respected charity worker. I still think both might come true.

If I could change one thing about myself... I would be better at accents. I am genuinely good at copying people's handwriting, but that's less help on stage.

You wouldn't know it but I am very good at... I am almost incredible at table football. It's nothing to be proud of.

You may not know it but I'm no good at... reading books – even though I've written two and want to write the best in the world.

I wish I had never worn... At my dad's 50th [birthday] I wore a kilt. I'm a quarter Scottish but that's not enough to warrant wearing a kilt at any point in my life.

At night I dream of... my next show. They tend to go quite well in my dreams. And then I do the show and it doesn't go quite so well.

What I see when I look in the mirror... Not enough wrinkles. I'm worried that, at 33, it reflects a life that's been a bit boring.

My favourite item of clothing... Bowling shoes. They're from eBay but people think I've stolen them, something everyone wants to do – I quite like that they give me that air of recklessness.

My favourite building... This is vaguely soppy – it's All Souls Church by Broadcasting House. I met my wife on the steps of the church before our first date.

Movie heaven... Any Bond film.

My greatest regret... Supporting Liverpool football club. I wish I'd supported the club where I grew up so I would have a good reason to be fanatical.

My secret crush... Vorderman, I'm afraid. I'm a big Countdown fan. I was on it a few years ago, and she lived up to everything I had expected.

My real-life villain... Meddling execs, especially in TV.

The person who really makes me laugh... My two-year-old son, Tom. He will insist on eating a meal with a box on his head because he's a robot and then get upset because it's difficult to eat food with a box on your head.

The last time I cried... My son Barney's birth, Christmas day 2010. It was happy crying. But it kind of ruined Christmas!

My five-year plan... Everything goes out the window slightly with kids – we've written off the next 20 years.

My life in six words... Not wasting a very lucky life.

A LIFE IN BRIEF

Alex Horne was born in 1978. He studied at Cambridge University where he was a member of the Footlights. Horne made his Edinburgh Festival debut in 2000 with his show How To Avoid Huge Ships. He continues to tour as a stand-up, and also fronts 'The Horne Section', a live jazz comedy showcase. He has published two books, Wordwatching and Birdwatchingwatching. He lives in Chesham with his wife and sons. Horne's latest show, Seven Years in the Bathroom, is at the Soho Theatre tonight and tours in April

[thebrokengate]

Damn, the Duffers really said they're not adding new characters for S5 because they want to focus on the original, already existing characters. So, it's either Byler is happening or Will is ending up alone, which I would not have a problem with if they didn't make him suffer and didn't make him in love with Mike in the first place. Aside from that, if their only gay main doesn't get to experience romance on screen whereas all the other straights are given love interests at some point, it is gonna look really bad.

I don't see him getting a no-face love interest as well when they really could have given him a love interest in S4, back in Cali. They introduced Vickie into the story, so I see no reason why they could not have introduced a new love interest for Will. Even if someone doesn't ship Byler must see that this whole build up, context and storyline would be really meaningless if Byler isn't canon. Because like other people have already pointed out, the Duffers really wrote themselves to a corner. I hope the Netflix execs do not interfere...

Yeah, if they were going to give Will a new love interest, season 4 would've been the time to do it. And I don't see them giving him an underdeveloped love interest or them pulling the "and suddenly he makes eye contact with a random boy, and roll credits" card either for a main character, because Will is going to be a central focus next season. They wouldn't have set Byler up this way if they weren't planning to go through with it. Unless they really hate Will, they wouldn't set him up for so much heartbreak and suffering over Mike for it to end in unrequited love, and if making it seem like everyone in the show forgot his birthday instead of opting to change it later is too sad, then I don't think they would leave him alone and miserable, stuck pining from afar forever. Will doesn't just have a crush on Mike, he's in love with him, and even in fiction, that's not something you get over fast. So it would literally make no sense from a narrative standpoint to throw away all of that build-up, especially for a relationship that they've presented as mediocre in comparison.

[randomthingsthatilike1]

thinking about how in s1 Cat straight out says she doesn’t really pay Kara very much and Kara has a p nice apartment, no roommates, in the equivalent of LA, and eats a lot, we see her eating takeout quite a bit too.

After 2 years of Kara being the only assistant to the CEO of Catco Worldwide media, she’s probably also made a lot of connections in publishing and media and who knows what else. Probably by the 2nd month at her time at CatCo Kara has probably outlasted the majority of other assistants--definitely by the half year mark.

What I'm saying is every person who has to interact with Cat At All probably knows it's best practice to go through Kara first to get a guage on Cat's mood, or just simply a filter of no no. She's going to tear that apart.

People might scoff when they hear that from Kara at first but then surprise surprise Kara is right.

Cat loves it because she doesn't have to deal with as many morons in a day and other people love Kara because that means they're a lot less likely to be fired or verbally eviscerated, either at the office or whatever event Cat drags Kara to (in season 1 Winn called it "taming the beast"--how long did it take other people to start using that phrase?) Kara is the type to remember (and also hear bc thanks superhearing) small details about people, their favorite color, their spouses and children's birthdays, how their pet is doing--she also speaks multiple languages and yeah it's easier to coordinate with CatCo France or Brazil when guess what Kara speaks French and Portuguese. She makes connections.

Kara doing a favor for an executive at CatCo, maybe someone located in New York, and maybe deleting a drunk angry email that they call and Beg her to delete before Cat sees (Cat probably gets an ungodly number of emails a Day) and Kara reads it and relents and deletes it and then maybe a few months finding out that exec also owns an art gallery (let's name her Julie) and asking if she could look at some of Kara's art.

Julie agreeing, Kara just asking for her art to be looked at, not even displayed and oh, it's like nothing she's ever seen--Otherworldly and futuristic and animals and plants that are so clearly planned and detailed especially since there are repetitions on multiple paintings and sketches of the same flora and fauna but it's like nothing on Earth (Kara has been to 11 different planets before she was 13--she has plenty of experience)

It's not about the money--she cherishes her art and guards them possessively, like they're precious (because they are) but she wants people to know Krypton the same way she did, even if they don't realize it.

It's nerve wracking to give away these pieces of herself, She wants to be anonymous, and Julie agreeing. She knows these are going to do well. They're out of this world (literally) and Kara's perspective and use of color and just the sheer emotion pouring off the page on every one is just--brilliant. Either the sheer joy and wonder--or the absolute heartbreak of that one painting Kara brings in one day, the contrast between the two paintings

(one is the image Kara treasures of her view of Krypton when she's coming home from her travels with her Father--the other is the last time she ever saw her home.)

Art collectors and museums acquiring the pieces and every time Kara lets go of another piece it gets snatched up very quickly, a marvel--

And in one art gallery in Buenos Aires, a guest with distinctive blue eyes and a white streak in her hair recognizes the painting--it's been over 3 decades since she last saw Krypton but she'd know Argo City anywhere.

do you ever think about how kara was always into art, but once she got to earth, nothing but the clothes on her back and her pod (she doesn't know about Alura's hologram yet), she throws herself into drawing and painting with an almost crazed fervor bc she wants to be able to paint krypton and her family as soon as possible because what if she forgets?

what if things get blurry and years later she'll forget how her father looked when he laughed, how her mother's eyes sparkled when she's trying to be stern but kara knows she's amused or how Argo City looked in its glory, its flora and fauna that she'll never see again

(and on bad days those last few moments, the world shaking itself apart, buildings crumbling, the ground fracturing apart and her parents trying so very hard not to cry, the fiery, silent explosion she witnessed in space before sleep overtook her because there is no word in any language to describe the sound of a planet as it dies but the closest kara has found is heartbreak)

for the longest time, she's the only one remaining who remembers krypton. and she doesn't want to forget

[historylaura]

Reaction to S3 announcement

So like a lot of people I was disappointed that it is Polin for S3. The announcement came on my 30th birthday and to wake up to that, I was frustrated but I came to terms with it. It was the end of a wonderful but emotional holiday. (I will post stuff about the House Party at some point. I took way too many photos) These are my thoughts about how they could set up Benedict for S4.

I have said, WAY too many times on the Ton Discord server that I think to set Benedict up for S4, we need the masquerade in the first two episodes. Ideally for me Episode One. It would fit with Francesca coming out and potentially meeting John, Kate's possible pregnancy announcement, and a way to start Polin on their way too.

If it did start with the masquerade, my idea is that we only see Benedict's bit from his point of view. Not Sophie's. It would give the actress some more anonymity and they could switch actors easily if we don't see her full face. It could end up with Masked Lady on IMDB. The person who plays her in S3 doesn't have to be our Sophie. She could disappear at the end of the night and then Benedict would spend the rest of the season looking for her.

He would vent to Colin and Anthony about the frustration of finding her. At the same time, Anthony is being protective of his little brother. Colin is reminding him that it was one night.

Maybe visit the missing glove house. (It doesn't have to be named as Araminta's.) Just a random house like we see with the named extras like the Gorings etc... He can ask Gen in passing. Maybe he starts interacting with the other debutantes just to see if any of them is her.

He could be seen looking at Anthony with baby Edmund and wanting that for himself.

Like in the books he starts to sketch again but secretly and not openly as all he has is this image of his Lady in Silver. All of his work is his lady in silver in different guises.

Towards the end of the season, he gets invited to the Cavendars. Maybe we meet Philip Cavendar in S3. That is the setup for S4. He can leave town and head for the Cavendars ready to rescue Sophie.

I do not want to see My Cottage until Sophie sees it for the first time. It can be mentioned but since I think they will move the location anyway, due to it needing to be near Romney Hall, he could escape there to be in his pit.

The wait for Benedict is frustrating but I know it will be worth it. Some of us have been waiting nearly half their life for his story to be told on screen.

There is a separation between books and TV show and I am going to continue that. There always has been.

I will be writing more Benophie fics. I will not edit the ones I am currently working on as they were started before the S3 announcement. We'll Meet Again is not affected anyway since that is all three of the couples in one go.

Trying to get some ready for Benophie Week. We need to make it as big as possible so while we wait, we can enjoy all of this wonderful content.

No one should receive hate for the way they have done the show. The execs know what they are doing and for me, if it means we get a better S4 then that is great. It will be worth it.

[pinelife3]

A24 & Annapurna: Can A Patron Of The Arts Get Paid?

Two film studios, both alike in dignity, but with wildly different trajectories. Annapurna Pictures and A24 are studios with prestigious filmographies, famous for working with auteurs - but is it profitable to be a patron of the arts?

Contents of this blog:

Annapurna? I hardly know 'er! We look at Annapurna Pictures, the Ellison family, and how Annapurna landed itself in financial strife after being the most hyped production company of the early 2010s

How do film companies make money? This is something that I've always assumed that I understand but when I actually put my mind to it, I have no idea about how a production company actually makes money. How much of the box office cash does a production company get? Or does that just go to the distributor? Let's find out!

Will A24 face a similar financial fate to Annapurna? Let's do some quick math on the ROI of A24 films and compare their business model against Annapurna

Annapurna? I hardly know 'er!

Annapurna Pictures is a film production company founded and led by Megan Ellison. Ellison is the daughter of billionaire Larry Ellison, founder and exec of tech company Oracle.

The younger Ellison got started in the film industry by using her dad's money to finance movies. In her early 20s she worked on some flops that didn't really lead anywhere financially or critically. Then, according to Vanity Fair, "in 2011, on her 25th birthday, she received from her father what a source says was $200 million... The Wrap’s Sharon Waxman has reported a figure that is more often whispered about in town: a lump sum of $2 billion." Cashed up, Ellison founded Annapurna Pictures and began to work with the talent agency Creative Artists Agency to fund films from established prestige directors.

In a 2013 profile, a female writer at Vanity Fair described Ellison as "pretty but a bit overweight" (I'm not kidding!) and "the most talked-about independent financier in Hollywood". What's interesting about Annapurna (beyond the rich daddy backstory) is the crazy run of films they've released and the number of auteurs Ellison has worked with, especially so early in her career:

Kathryn Bigelow (Detroit and Zero Dark Thirty)

Paul Thomas Anderson (The Master and Phantom Thread)

The Coen brothers (True Grit, The Ballad of Buster Scruggs)

Spike Jonze (Her)

David O Russell (American Hustle, Joy)

Barry Jenkins (If Beale Street Could Talk)

Richard Linklater (Everybody Wants Some!! and Where'd You Go, Bernadette)

Curiously, Megan's brother David Ellison also has a production company - Skydance Pictures, founded in 2006. So Larry Ellison has funded two production companies for his kids?! Skydance is less discussed than Annapurna because it tends to produce idiotbrained movies like Geostorm and The Tomorrow War so David doesn't get the same glossy write-ups in Vanity Fair.

I told my software dev bf (Matt) that Larry Ellison had personally funnelled like a billion dollars into the American film industry to make his kids happy and Matt responded 'well I'm glad he's making somebody happy because everyone hates Oracle'. Matt also provided this apparently iconic quote on the evils of Larry Ellison and Oracle.

^^^ Larry, Megan and David

The Annapurna hype was undeniable in the early 2010s because they dropped so many Oscar players from 2011 - 2014. Banger after banger. A24 is similarly hyped today but what sets A24 apart is that they tend to take chances on lesser known talent - for e.g. A24 has produced or distributed early feature films of Robert Eggers, Ari Aster, Greta Gerwig, Alex Garland, Bo Burnham, Barry Jenkins (first $1 million+ budget), Dennis Villeneuve (first English language film), and Yorgos Lanthimos (first English language film).

All of the above might sound like Ellison is an old school patron of the arts, giving away her trust fund so the Coen brothers can make more movies. But Annapurna is actually a for-profit business. The Vanity Fair profile on Ellison from 2013 discusses the balancing act Annapurna faces in funding films from Ellison's fave directors and touches on the naivety of mixing art and commerce. Quoth one source: "Megan is arrogant and thinks she can re-invent the wheel... She suffers from a chronic case of rich-itis.”

So in the early 2010s Annapurna quickly generated a lot of hype by releasing films from indie darlings and garnered substantial awards attention along the way - these were films that were typically smaller budget and turned a small profit (if any) but were critically well received and often got awards play. The problem was, in the mid-2010s, Annapurna had a run of duds: Detroit tanked. Vice tanked (reportedly losing Annapurna $15 million). Phantom Thread didn't make any money. Missing Link lost tens of millions. Of the 14 films Annapurna released between 2014 - 2018, they had one decent hit: Sausage Party, which made $140 million on a $20 million budget. Stories emerged in 2018 that Annapurna was in financial trouble. Quoth a source at the time: "I don’t care how much money daddy gives you—you have to make something turn a profit." By August 2019 Annapurna was facing bankruptcy with $200 million in debt. The company was later bailed out by Larry Ellison and is still kicking around but has been relatively quiet since then (which may also be attributable to the pandemic). For Annapurna, producing arthouse movies for critics, film school kids, and the awards crowd has not been profitable - they have required the support of a billionaire backer to kickstart the company and keep it afloat.

As I mentioned above, Annapurna seems to have a similar approach to A24. They fund indie passion projects - they're in it for the art. But Annapurna got themselves $200 million in debt by only producing art they believed in, so how does the future look for A24? Can a company like A24 can be profitable while acting as a patron of the arts - or does it require billionaire backers to keep a business afloat?

But first: let's learn a bit more about how producers get paid.

How do film companies make money?

Accounting in the entertainment industry is infamously arcane, so I'll try to keep this high level.

Who are the main players?

Producer - The organisation that bankrolls, coordinates, and is responsible for actually making the movie. These are sometimes also known as 'studios'.

Distributor - The organisation that markets the film and arranges for the film to be made available to the public via screenings in theatres, production of DVDs, etc.

In some cases, the producer and the distributor are the same company or are closely related - for example, Avengers: Endgame was produced by Marvel Studios and distributed by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures which are both subsidiaries of The Walt Disney Company.

Where can money be made?

Movies can make money via theatre box office, streaming syndication, BluRay steel box sales, merchandise, etc. But the primary avenue and quickest return is box office - this is the metric that is typically used to determine whether a film has been a success or not.

How do distributors and producers work together?

This is all subject to individual agreements and may change from film to film, but in general there are two forms of agreement that a distributor might make with a production studio:

Profit sharing: the distributor and the production company split the downstream profits of the film. For example, the distributor may have a gross points arrangement with the producer.

Leasing: the distributor pays a fee to acquire the rights to distribute the film - profits made will largely be kept by the distributor (although there may also be a gross points arrangement). When Netflix has exclusive distribution rights for a film, we could safely assume that they are using some form of leasing agreement with the production studio because (1) films released on Netflix tend not to make much at the box office and (2) it's difficult to extrapolate profitability from Netflix's viewership and subscription numbers (although I'm sure they have methods of roughly approximating this).

It's something of a gamble for producers in terms of which arrangement is likely to be of the greatest benefit to them. You may be able to lease a film to a distributor for a modest profit and call it a day or you can gamble on seeking a cut of downstream profits, but audiences are fickle and these profits may never materialise.

As an example...

For any given film, it's difficult for an outsider to know what form of distribution arrangement the film had and therefore how to calculate whether the film would have made or lost money for the producer and distributor. In the end, for a film to be profitable, a film needs to make more in sales than it cost to produce and market. There are some rule of thumb calculations we can use to roughly calculate overall profitability and to determine whether the film was a win or a loss for the studio and distributor.

Let's look at an example to determine roughly whether it was profitable or not. Note: box office and budget info on Wikipedia can be inaccurate but let's just go with it. All of the following figures are in US dollars. Wikipedia puts Dunkirk's production budget at $100 - $150 million. Let's split the diff and say $125 million. According to Forbes, the marketing budget was $135 million. So $260 million in up front costs. Dunkirk made $527 million at the box office. As a rough rule of thumb, 50% of box office profits are kept by the theatre - this may vary based on deals, distributor, and even country but let's just go with 50%. So assuming the theatres took 50% of that $527 million, about $263 million might make it back to the studio and distributor. Subtracting the $260 million for production and marketing, this would give them only $3 million in clear profit. The film then would go on to make more through digital sales and rentals, streaming, etc.

So after production and marketing costs, a film needs to more than double its budget in box office takings to begin to see a profit. To keep making movies, studios need to do more than cover their expenses - they need to make a profit to be able to pay dividends to investors and fund future projects.

What's to stop A24 facing a similar financial fate to Annapurna?

As I've mentioned, A24 and Annapurna play in the same sandpit: they primarily work on movies that the studio considers art, there are no cynical cash grabs in their filmographies. I'm curious if A24 is in a similar financial position to Annapurna - and if not, why not?

So let's do some high level accounting with A24's filmography to see if their films generally make or lose money. I'm making the following assumptions:

Only looking at box office takings (because I just know I'm never gonna find details on the DVD sales of films like First Reformed)

Movie theatres keep 50% of box office takings

Marketing budget is 10% of production budget. It's difficult to say how much is actually spent on marketing for these kind of indie films (and it's not information that is available online) so I'm being conservative - for basically any of these films that you've actually heard of, I'd assume the marketing budget was significantly more than 10%

I'm only looking at films released up to the end of 2021 so they've had a decent stretch in theatres.

In this Google sheet, I've charted the budget, guesstimated marketing costs, box office, and a rough profit/loss based on those figures. For lots of movies, the budget wasn't available so I've excluded these from the final total - these were typically movies I've never heard of so I'd assume they weren't big money makers. Of the 60 films where I was able to calculate profit/loss, 26 were profitable at the box office. Of the 50-ish other films where I couldn't calculate profitability (because I couldn't find enough data) only a few look like they might have been profitable - e.g. The Killing of a Sacred Deer, Lamb, The Children Act. Overall it looks like A24 is running a significant loss on their films based on box office takings. I've arrived at A24 taking a $32 million loss but this is really just indicative based on my assumptions above and very rough calculations. Still, I think this is finger-in-the-air accurate and the finger points to A24 movies not recouping their costs at the box office. There is then streaming, DVD sales, etc. but the box office is generally a good indicator of public interest: a box office bomb is unlikely to perform much better via digital rentals.

As a disclaimer, obviously the pandemic has fucked up two years of releases so I'm sure every studio has had a rough run since Feb 2020. Before the pandemic, A24 had some big hits (Lady Bird, Hereditary, Midsommar, The Farewell) that probably worked well to cover their loses on other films. But since 2019, A24 has only had one film that turned a profit at the box office: Minari, which looks like it would have made at least $5 million profit. A24 didn't produce Minari so it's hard to say what portion of those profits they would actually have received.

From my digging, it looks like A24 has worked under both profit sharing and leasing agreements. This court case reveals a bit about the distribution deal for A24's second ever release, Spring Breakers - which was actually a film produced by Annapurna. Annapurna engaged A24 as the distribution partner for Spring Breakers, and the suit tells us that:

This was a profit sharing arrangement with A24 receiving 20% of profits

While A24 arranged the marketing, the marketing costs were actually covered by another party (Annapurna?)

The esteemed Mr. Harvey Weinstein (and the Weinstein Company) had offered to purchase the rights to the film (under a leasing agreement) for $2.25 million

Then this oral history describes A24 going on a 'spending spree' in their second year of operation (2014) and refers to them purchasing movie rights, so I'm assuming A24 had leasing arrangements - presumably funded off the back of their Spring Breakers success. This means A24 would largely bear the brunt of financial losses on these films as they paid out of pocket to acquire the film and then paid for the marketing. Of course, A24 also has TV deals (e.g. Euphoria with HBO) and, thanks to their popularity, also sell merch, but on paper they don't appear to be slam dunk profitable.

It's interesting to note that A24 initially started out exclusively as distributors and have moved increasingly into the production game. This is the opposite path taken by Annapurna which worked solely in production for years and then launched a distribution division in early 2017. When Annapurna faced bankruptcy in 2019, Indiewire noted: "The company’s financial woes began in full after it decided to start its own distribution arm to release its productions, beginning with Kathryn Bigelow’s “Detroit.” Since then, nearly every Annapurna release has been a box office bomb for the studio. Variety reported in March [2019] that only one movie has turned a profit for Annapurna since it launched a distribution arm: Boots Riley’s “Sorry to Bother You.”

Another point of difference with Annapurna is that the three founders of A24 all had experience in film production and financing before they founded the company. In fact, 'twas founder Daniel Katz' former employer Guggenheim Partners that provided "a few million in seed money" to start A24. This Hollywood Reporter article from 2014 actually says that A24 is owned by Guggenheim Partners. As of 2018, Guggenheim had sold their stake to MRC which is owned by Eldridge Industries, a holding company with a net worth in the billions. Cute arthouse film company you've got there... sure would be a shame if it was owned by a billion dollar investment firm, sure would be a shame if your sweet little indie cinema business was sold around town, passed from one LLC to the next like any other asset. Indie really doesn't exist.

So A24 actually has a billionaire backer too - apparently MRC/Eldridge only has a 'minority stake' in A24 but whatever ("I own 49% of this company!"). A24 also appears to rely on bank loans to operate, so at some point it has to turn a profit. Larry Ellison will keep pumping money into Annapurna because he loves his daughter - but cold hearted industry guys in Hollywood board rooms wouldn't bail out A24 unless there was something in it for them.

Remember what those snarky industry sources said about Megan Ellison: "I don’t care how much money daddy gives you—you have to make something turn a profit." No one seems to talk this way about A24 but on paper they don't seem to be doing that much better financially. But despite how it looks, A24 must be doing okay: the explored acquisition in 2021 with a reported price of $2.5 - $3 billion - supposedly Apple was interested. And then in early March 2022, A24 announced a $225 million equity deal - this amount apparently bought the investors less than a 10% stake in the company so A24's valuation is still sitting at $2.5 billion (ish).

So why is A24 valued in the billions while Annapurna nearly went bankrupt? Without actually seeing their accounts, it's difficult to say - spitballing some ideas:

Sources indicated that Megan Ellison and Annapurna were perhaps not prudent in how they spent money on film production. Blowing out the production budget makes it harder to recoup costs

A24 may be particularly canny in how they strike deals and run their operation meaning the business covers its costs or turns a profit even if the film they're releasing isn't profitable

A24 was founded by industry veterans using investor money whereas Annapurna was founded by a wealthy outsider using her own (father's) money. Having skin in the game (i.e. no trust fund) and pushy investors may be a more powerful motivation to turn a profit

Annapurna launched Annapurna Interactive in 2016 as a video game publisher. Annapurna Pictures never attracted the kind of rabid fandom that A24 did, but Annapurna Interactive is very popular with gamers so this venture appears to have been a success... but maybe video game publishing has actually been a drain on business funds which contributed to the bankruptcy?

A24 and Annapurna appear to be working on similar types of films, but Annapurna films typically have a much higher budget. Annapurna budgets appear to typically be $30-40 million. A24 budgets are generally smaller - more like $10 million. Losing money on a $2 million movie like First Cow is a lot less damaging than losing money on a $30 million movie like Detroit

The movies where A24 has dipped their toe into production as well as distribution typically seem to turn a decent profit (Uncut Gems, Midsommar, Mid90s) which may keep things rolling and increase interest in A24 as a production joint

I think this is the most likely explanation: the A24 brand is very valuable - maybe not worth billions but certainly worth something even if the business itself is not wildly profitable. People get excited about a movie because A24 is distributing it - A24 has such good taste that their decision to work on a film is a marketing point. Such is the hype around A24 that they could probably create their own streaming platform and compete with the Criterion Channel and maybe even HBO? This kind of reputation would certainly play a part in a valuation when a company like Apple begins sniffing around - A24 will confer a lot of credibility to any entertainment business that acquires them. As to why Annapurna has missed out on this juice? It may just be a marketing issue

Further reading: a likely bogus copy of A24's 2019 annual report is available online. I haven't included this in any of my calculations above because I don't trust the financials in this report - the income column in the theatrical releases table (numbered page 8/PDF page 12) includes dummy figures. The report is hosted on a graphic designer's website and I suspect is available only as an example of her work with the actual financial figures redacted. This would explain why the figures in the report don't make sense (why would net income be higher than gross?) but that may also just be my reading of it. It's still an interesting read if only to see a template A24 may have used for this kind of reporting

[sunkissedpages]

imagine cheating on ur exec producer whos buddies w drake and legitimately globally treasured just to date a nepotism baby whos kinda meh in the eyes of the public (but is definitely liked bc shes pretty and seems very nice ofc) but like CMON not a single cast member wished him a happy birthday like mans clearly did SOMETHING FUCKED UP....not even angus cloud said anything which is most telling to me bc he strikes me as very similar to ppl I know and who generally wouldn't care for that sort of drama and doesn't strike me as a "taking sides type" so like.....jacob had to have done SOMETHING to piss him off

lmfao we don’t like dr*ke in this house but everything else yep yep he fucked uppp like the whole cast is literally besties w each other how are you not gonna get a single happy birthday??

[swan2swan]

@omnisunbear @cretaceouschaos

The birthdays in Chaos Theory are obviously just based on a six-year addition to the characters' original ages--legally making them all adults (and thus removing any Children Shields that may be afforded to them by Television Law) from the show bibles...no birthdays are given, and thus, their ages are still subject to change (but ONLY in an upward direction!).

That being said, birthdays WOULD be a delight, but those would have to be something Scott, Zack, and Beth would probably all have to confer on. If, for example, they want to write a series of Camp Cretaceous junior novels, Golden Books, or even a comic anthology that featured their birthdays, they'd want to keep options only. Don't want people freaking out and doing a Ki-Adi Mundi, you know.

If Sammy is actually 14 through all of Camp Cretaceous, maybe they want to have a junior novelization where she has her quinceanera with her family and the family tensions start. Or, maybe her birthday is in January, and they want to tell a story where she tells her four surviving friends about how her family wasn't happy that she was going to miss her Big Day by going to an island to spy (but she DID IT FOR THEM!). Or maybe it's in April, and she has a moment in the middle of either island where she realizes that she doesn't know how old she is, and all her friends pitch in to celebrate. If they want to tell that story, they'll settle on a date.

The same applies for the others. If they want to tell a story where Brooklynn turns 18 and immediately takes control of all the lawsuit money she earned from her time on Isla Nublar, or that she earned from her videos, then we have a story. If they want to give Kenji a brief flirtation with alcoholism when he turns 21, that's also an option. Dark, probably not going to happen, but that's a Thing. Same thing goes for Darius getting a driver's license or joining the DPW, or Sammy getting her own land, or Ben obtaining fake IDs for himself and the other Nublar 6...once they tell one of those stories, the date is set in stone. You can't give Sammy a January Quinceanera on Nublar and then have her moving out when she turns eighteen in the middle of August. One or the other, you can't have both.

Thus, for now, those dates will remain unknown until the Studio Execs and Head Writers actually find a reason to hash them out. Better to leave it vague today and then adjust the ages later (though, admittedly, if you keep pressuring the higher-ups, you may Get Results). Don't forget, too, that there are multiple sources debating what date the Jurassic World incident happened: December 18? December 22nd? Who knows? The moon is askew in that universe! We can't tell!

Somebody needs to ask the panel what the cannon ages are for the N6.

[writingpoorly]

Ep. 2

This episode is so f*cked up ya'll.

First off, i know it's not mentioned until the end of the episode, but the fact that they have Diana give Clark the new rose species in this cartoon instead of Bruce makes me so upset. The reason i mention it first is because they have Bruce bring cash. They couldn't even let him do something thoughtful when he made a new species of flower for Clark in the comic the scene is based off of!

Secondly, Diana is portrayed as shorter than Clark and Bruce, which is already incorrect, but they have the GALL to make her struggle with a foe that Superman is able to put down with minimal last minute help! She is supposed to be the strongest member and I will be taking NO criticism on that take.

Clark's heart's desire is just really sad. I just know he still morns the son he never had. I hope he tells Jon stories about him in the future and holds a vigil for him on what would have been his birthday.

Bruce is just depressing and I have nothing constructive to add.

If I rewrote the episode it would have 60% less Diana losing, and maybe just have Clark come in at the last second with a finishing blow. Diana would cock her hip and say, "I almost ad him" or something to that regard and Clark would be all huffing and puffing and say, "I needed the catharsis" or whatever.

The next scene would show them both looking at Bruce under the plant's spell and be all "I wonder what he's seeing" fade to scene in B's head showing all of his kids around him, and his parents alive, acting like grandparents. Alfred is part of the family instead of a Butler, but just as proper. Clark, Diana, and whoever else from the League is actually close enough to him are there laughing with their protégés.

They don't show it being dismantled in the episode, but if they absolutely must, he gets it professionally removed on the watchtower so there is a vague idea that maybe he woke up from it gradually/without watching all his loved ones die around him.

Also Bruce would have gotten Clark the rose, because men making heartfelt gestures for each other doesn't have to be gay cartoon execs. (Even if I totally see them being together, they don't have to be)

JL:U

Recently started rewatching Justice League Unlimited and I had some thoughts. Not enough to do a full fic/fic series to rewrite anything, but wanted to get them down.

Ep 1

why oh why is GA joining the JL so late? Is he really that much of a late comer in other JL runs? I could have sworn he was on of the founders of something, but there are a ton of less prominent heroes already on the team by the time he joins.

I get it. Supergirl is impulsive bc she's young. We get it.

I like to think Batman planned on Canary being outside when GA gets out of the decon shower. The smug little grin he has tells me everything I need to know.

Overall not a lot of notes on the first episode.

[migleefulmoments]

"Hahaha. A friend pointed this out. W online shops too!" What does this even mean?! I don't know anyone in 2020 who doesn't online shop besides my 80 year old grandparents because they refuse to learn how to use a computer 😂 I don't get how Will, a 30 something year old man, online shopping is worthy enough for Abby to comment on it. I'm sure Chris does it too. And Darren.

On Nov 5, Darren wrote this post and the cc fandom lost their shit.    

They decided that organizing 10 costumes for multiple events in two different states for two different people was not worthy of acknowledgment- especially since they wore several purchased costumes. They spent the next 30-ish days mocking her “online shopping skills” like the petty idiots they are and now they bring it up two months later. 

Anonymous asked: this is funny, C posted a photo of beard, D posted photos with the beard. Almost like they were sitting next to each other and saying “ok ok I will say this”

ajw720 answered: The only difference, C controls his SM and the bearding, D does not, but they knew the Halloween post was coming when C posted his belated b-day wishes (not that he acknowledged they were late).  

It really is, if you can remove the very human, tragic element, like a script for a really bad D Movie.  C posts “Happy Birthday, Babe!” a day after the man’s actual b-day and “D” praises his fake bride for MAKING TEN costumes.  Sure praise her if she actually designed them and sat with her sewing machine.  No, she went online and ordered things (I doubt she even went to a store).   And 3 couple costumes were cheap frankly.  The only thought was how narcissistic she could be in their execution (as @flowersintheattic254pointed out even the Mario costume had  a reason, it was a reminder of Japan and the fake encagement by referring to the ad that paid for their trip there).

And seriously how are people not questioning that she spent the entirety of her month picking TEN costumes?  Who has time for this?  I know, i know, a person whose only role in life is to play fake plus one.

I am just so tired by D in particular being utterly dragged down by the useless dead weight by his side and his team’s sole ambition to promote her and make her sound like a decent person.  

If they wanted to praise her, maybe they should have forced her to participate in the zero waste initiative instead of sitting drinking by the pool or have her volunteer to help young girls who have been kicked out of their homes, or have been raped.  Or pick any cause and truly volunteer her time to promote it.  If she is not going to actually get a job and pursue a career, please force her to do something that is actually of value and contribute something good to the world. But to praise her for picking TEN costumes?  

Praise that comes from a man who this year alone won three awards, is starring in a show he created and wrote the music for, has his first big movie premiere this week, is exec producer and star of a huge show on N/etflix, just announced his starring role with 2 A++ lists actors next spring on Broadway, celebrated the 5th anniversary of the festival he created, volunteered his time for the zero waste initiative, performed at several charity events, and was just yesterday name limited series actor of the decade.  Where is the praise for him from his “bride”?  He at least deserves it.

How do they not see how ridiculous it is for someone with D’s accomplishments in 2019 alone praise a person for purchasing TEN costumes for Halloween?  And stans, how do you accept that this is right or normal.  You really know nothing about him and have such little respect for him as a person if you continue to accept the character his idiotic team has created on his behalf.  It is so far from the person he is and that he generally holds himself out to be when given the opportunity.  

This isn’t about being a “gay fetishist” or “hating woman” this is about wanting for D to be fairly and accurately represented and no longer forced to participate in this stupid, life sucking game to promote a person that contributes absolutely nothing to the world.  If you want to have a strong female role model, there are so many, i’ve talked about a few in the past few days (thus far Nancy, Lea, and Phoebe) and will continue to do so, but please stop worshiping a person whose sole reason you are speaking about her is her connection to D, even if you refuse to accept it is fake.  

klainecentric Finished reading the funniest ig story of the day, the qween being praised for sitting in front of either a sewing machine or computer...bravo your majesty qween....your my hero well done.👏👏. And all I can think of is how irrelevant the statement D made about being an emotional horder, being a very private person and finally D saying he's lazy when it comes to social media, I'm internally screaming in frustration because yeah we know D wouldn't have written a post praising that lazy good for nothing waste of space but he's coming across as a lier and it's extremely damaging to his character as a person. I absolutely hate lying and every time another "private" moment is posted to the world is another small piece that's chipped away from what D has originally stated about privacy. PBB, nobody cares about your cheap arse highly flammable costumes you buy online, did you forget about your piano baby adult strip club. I'm sure there are still plenty of people out there you can hire to rub and flaunt their flanges all over the beer taps, why don't you keep busy on that instead. If you want to make costumes, I'm sure you can sew some mighty fine titty tassels together. It'll be cheap nasty, sound familiar.

souly So, let me get this straight. We should all praise a person for going online, looking up different costumes in online stores, putting those in their shopping basket and hitting “buy”? Because I do that at least once a week with other stuff. Do I get praised for that now? Pretty please? I’m doing good work there and buy a lot of stuff, therefore I must be the best person ever!

notes-from-nowhere You’re my Queen. Please, love me.

souly

(I think I got it right. I’m getting the hang of what said person is doing. Wheee! ;))

notes-from-nowhere You nailed it 🤣

ajw720 Yesterday I got a delivery of car food. And instead of his usual seafood mix up greats, I got him shrimp flavor. I’m awesome!!!!!

souly Oh, hey! I think we should all take pictures of whatever we bought online during the week or month and make individual posts on all of our social media accounts about it. Because, you know…

cassie1022 I picked up stuff I ordered online at Target and PetSmart. Does that count? Should I receive accolades because my cat will have fresh litter to do her business on?

souly Only if you post the pictures to prove it! ;)

ajw720 As soon as I get home. Pictures forthcoming. Shrimp cat treats and I also got a burgundy blanket for my new comforter!!! Life goals!!!!!!!!!!!

souly Okay, so, let’s see… What did I buy online during the past month that can be shared as pictures? Some things are gifts, so I obviously can’t post anything about those yet. But I think these here are safe.

Let’s start with one of my fav new shirts. (Excuse the grainy quality. I had to quickly edit it for privacy reasons. :p And yes, that’s a butterfly mirror.)

The rest are behind the cut to save your dash from drowning in too many pictures. ;)

cheekyface72 You’re my queen from now on…

ajw720 I think emmy/sag/gg/CC winner DC should write a post @soulypraising your awesome, amazing, unparalleled online shopping skills!  You earned that praise.  That cat toy is particularly spectacular.

*********************

Just A Taste of M’s Amazing Online Shopping Skills that are worthy of such Praise

ajw720

Super Mario with inflatable Dragon $54.66 (x)

Princess Peach $78.99 (x)

chrisdarebashfulsmiles. i can’t

flowersintheattic254. When you add the fact that the wedding was sponsored so heavily, and her history of outfits I think it shows Mi@rren is something that’s always been done very much ‘on the cheap’.

From work vacays (honeymoon included), RC ���glue gun’ looks, thrift shoes and subsidized weddings.

It’s BUDGET BEARDING!!!

leka-1998. It’s not worth more than this, that’s for sure.

notes-from-nowhere  We are so ungrateful. She worked hard to find the gloves.

I bet she had to click on another link to find them. She deserves another accolade.

ajw720 @flowersintheattic254 Budget Bearding!  I LOVE It! (and something tells me D’s SW costume in particular was far cheaper than either of these).

souly That Snow White dress can be found for about $25 in a ton of online shops. I stumbled upon it even before Halloween way too many times. 😂

@notes-from-nowhere The plush question mark block can be found in a couple online stores like this one. She simply glued it onto some gloves - or asked L to do it with that glue gun of hers.

flowersintheattic254 Well funnily enough I think we may have confirmation that 🚽🚽 glued on the puppies so I guess YES to the question mark block too!!!

cassie1022 They can’t even glue things properly. Why am I not surprised?

leka-1998

SW

So, so amazing. Bow to the kween and her not so helpful helper.

************************************

There are lots more...I figured enough of your brain cells died reading the ones I posted.  On Nov 30 she is STiLL bringing it up”

Anonymous asked:

Whenever I see miarren gifset they always use the same quote underneath (the rolling the windows down quote) and at first I rolled my eyes and thought uh not that quote again, and I can't believe it took me this long to realise it's because there is literally no other quote that can be construed as loving. You can hardly put down "she's a big girl" whenever you make a set of gifs with M beaming and D looking like someone murdered the dog he's allergic to.

ajw720: And I love the Emmy quote as it was an absolute reference to his character who was a psychopath. Pretty telling if you ask me. But that reference is over their heads.

And pretty much the only one. Guess saying he’s a ball and chain kind of guy isn’t romantic. They can’t even take pooping exes as he clearly steered the conversation away from her. Lovely lady of many moons? Nah she sounds like a stranger. Saying nothing changes after marriage? Sounds boring. It’s a struggle. But hey she’s an excellent online shopper that he done got hitched to!!!