#funkiller

[totaleclipse573]

Eclipse and Lark, get fused into one body. Then spend 3 hours arguing and fighting for control over what kind of mischief they should get into. Finally, FINALLY, they make a decision and are off to find some trouble.

Only to look up and see a fusion of their older brothers coming to stop them 😒

(They see the older bro fusion) “ITS THE WORST PERSON EVER UGGHHHHHHH”

[immortalsins]

brushed off something my dad asked about earlier (a minor event related to my interests) because he wouldn't get it and he was like ooooh i wish you'd tell me about these things i'm interested to know. ok. you never have been in the past. this is a first. 3 minutes later i decided to take him up on that offer and mention something else related to my interests (i could be going to the heavy music awards, got randomly selected to get a ticket in exchange for money to charity) and he immediately went What if its a scam. how do you know that charity is even real. alright i will never tell you anything ever again

[samuraisharkie]

If you’re putting off loud ass firework tonight in the suburbs around other houses, let it be known I hate you. nearly kills my dog every year.

[bloodgulchblog]

Okay I know this is extremely unlikely and also ridiculous, but. I just keep imagining someone with a very old taste in music pranking Fernando by playing Fernando by ABBA every time he walks into a room.

Ah, I don't know that song!

I sometimes think about stuff like that, but always get hung up on how popular music to us is as close to them as the 1500s is to us so I can never bring myself to do anything.

[virusmeds]

do you think they hop on roblox to torment poor oblivious souls….

i love their silly dynamic of energetic goofball and his loser funkiller guy.. so fun to draw

anyways im new to this site and im still trying to figure things out but expect more clone high content from me 🎉

[courtmartialme]

riza comes across as very serious and proper... fuery thought she would make him return black hayate to the box in the rain if no-one took him in... i think riza doesn't even know she has resting bitch(?) face. she could be enjoying her team's antics but you wouldn't know it to look at her face... just a small smile showing... and she thinks she's emoting the 🥰 she's feeling...

i will die by the hill she's autistic. arakawa couldn't have her more autistic even if it was intentional. if you pay attention to riza any further than the scene she trips roy down you realize she's actually very silly....she does and says silly things while always having a neutral expression, and like you said she probably doesn't even notice she looks like 😶... it's moe... has a rest bitching face but makes time travel jokes with a serious expression, tells roy to not die with genuine concern that looks like she's jinxing him, draws cat whiskers on roy when he says he wants a mustache, and names her dog Black Hurricane^tm completely serious! she doesn't get social cues and she is moe and silly and funny and feels a lot and but is bad at expressing herself and thats ok!!!! not at all like the funkiller and nagging interpretation a lot of people have of her. quoting roy, she may look harsh but underneath all of that she has!! a gentle heart!!

[our-arospec-experience]

small reminder: if you do not feel like celebrating pride month, that's more than okay. i personally dont celebrate this year.

the constant erasure and being forgotton, the missing representation and discrimination from inside the queer community and outside can get very tough- so if you dont feel prideful or dont feel like celebrating at all, thats totally understandable and fine. you're allowed to not feel like it. you're allowed to feel distant from other queers celebrating, you're allowed to be hurt and sad. you're allowed to be jealous. you're not a "funkiller" or a "downer". just dont let the negative feelings consume you, okay? things will get better for us eventually. don't give up. we got this ♡

people who don’t celebrate pride month are just as valid as those who do :)

[pilferingapples]

hey pilf a random question that I don’t know who else to ask? Why does it matter that enjolras is a rich only son? His introduction begins with it so it seems important but I don’t know why.

Oh, I like this question!

I like it because I have no answer at all XD

It's something that could be said of at least two other characters, Marius and Jean Prouvaire--and in fact it is said , directly, of Prouvaire! But it doesn't seem to be used to create any specific commonality between the three characters; they're all friends, but not with any special reference to that shared family situation.

It also might mean something about his relationship to his own family-- but that never seems to become relevant again, and "My Mother is the Republic" Enjolras in general seems to exist almost without a family of origin; is that the point? is the line just there to keep him from being completely ethereal? Hugo messing with my ability to make crack theories about Enjolras being an actual ethereal ability, Victor Hugo funkiller killer of fun

Is it a Saint Just thing? In that case, should we actually be reading that ( " fils unique et riche") with the emphasis on only son instead of only child (it can be either way!) ? Does he have siblings we never know about?? and in that case, why give the same descriptive to Prouvaire? Should we be reading it strongly as "only child", and it's meant to emphasize his isolation from social ties apart from the cause and his friends?

Is meant to be kind of a Jesus reference? an "only begotten son" thing? (again: why call back to it with Prouvaire then?)

...Is it--and this is a wild theory, bear with me-- is it just a bit of character flavor text? Something to round out a quick introductory overview? (in almost any other book I'd say this was actually the most likely but I no longer trust LM to be Like That , EVERYTHING IS SYMBOLISM )

Why do YOU think it's mentioned, Nonny? :D

[gr4dient]

[ M3M0RIES. ] { a cn!gradient/vector angst fic?? ig? }

( AU by : @cloudyside I LOVELOVELOVELOVELOVE HIM SM IM SORRY IF THIS ISNT CLOSE TO CANON) CW: depictions of past trauma/abandonment, capturing, gray being a sadistic piece of shit /aff

Gray was busy at work, going through some monster's code- someone's very BEING- and picking out each itty bitty part he saw as imperfect. Or as.. not needed. For example, their color palette. Fixing that major issue was, not to his surprise at all, easy to fix. He'd done this time and time again, after all.

The trapped monster's soul- a white, upside-down heart- sat wrapped tight in bright cyan strings, which occasionally glitched. Back when he first began doing all of this, he would've been concerned, and scared they'd escape, but.. he'd learned to only worry about important people in AUs. Most people, like the monster he had tied, shaking, and wailing before him, didn't have much of a role in their universe. They were replaceable, which Gradient loved. If he messed up, he could just.. start over!

"Please- GAH! Please, s-STOP!" The captured monster cried, and Gradient looked up from their SOUL, giving them an unintentionally pitiful look. Stars, they were.. pathetic. After a moment of studying their appearance, and they way they squirmed helplessly against their restraints, he chuckled quietly. Cruelly. He knew just what to fix next.

"Keehehehee..." He grinned almost sadistically. "I’ve only jus-ist started thouugh-ough.. Funkiller-er...." He paused, only for a moment, before adding, "S-stop-op squirming-ing… you’ll 0nly make it hurt wor-orse.."

The monster, as he expected, didn't stop immediately, and so Gradient, with a sigh, set the monster's soul down, and got up to tighten the strings around them. When he stopped in front of them, though, they stared up at him. They looked so.. helpless. So..

Scared.

It almost reminded him of.. someone..

“N-NO-O! N0! PLEASE, PLEASE ST-ST0P! LET ME GO! P- PL34SE! I DON’T- G4H! I D1DN’T DO ANYTHING WR0NG! I DIDN’T—! .. W- WH3RE- ER3 ARE YOU G0ING?! PL3ASE, D0N’T LEAVE-EAVE ME H3RE!”

"Please, s-STOP!" .. The captured monster's words echoed in Gradient's mind, making him freeze up involuntarily. Who.. who else said that..? And why did it feel so.. familiar..? So wrong..? .. Was he doing something wrong?

..

No. No! NO! HE WASN'T! HE WAS FIXING EVERYTHING! WHAT WAS HE THINKING?! Gradient huffed, before quickly, and silently, tightening the strings that held his captive and returning to work. He had so much more to do.

[anothersebastianblog]

If anything I feel bad for Sebastian, because ultimately he is the one who gets fucked by this.

No, you don't, you're a terrible liar. If you did feel for Sebastian you wouldn't post the things you do.

Besides, you pretend to choose to care about the guy, but never about women, right? Not even about the real victims who lose out with posts like this. How do you say you choose to believe victims if you don't care about victims and only about Seb? Make this make sense, funkiller. Lies like this affect real victims who fight for people to believe them. Posts like this are used to discredit real victims. This isn't just about Annabelle, this is about real victims. I also feel for Sebastian, but because he has "fans" like you, for the fans he has who can't stand the idea of ​​him being in a relationship. Or who don't even respect his choice.

Don't lie that you feel for him. If you're an adult, own up, beat your chest, and admit you're a hater.

.

[grimfey]

need a version of 'fear is the mindkiller' but for holding a grudge. grudge is the funkiller.

[your-fave-is-cullable]

{@tabbygravedigger sh➰uld abs➰lutely be Bef➰ran culled wh➰ in their right mind let a tr➰ddler ➰nt➰ the g➰ddamn interhex}

(@/tabbygravedigger should absolutely be Beforan culled who in their right mind let a troddler onto the goddamn inter[net])

<>ε>man im the funkiller even i gotta say u dunb let the kid have fun<3<>

<>ε>like everyone else didnt also use the hex at their age<3<>

[plounce]

In the poll about what youre doing to the person you reblogged this from i chose to give you cool rocks because ive been following you since forever and i love your presence on my dash so i would definitely pick a cool rock for you <3

a fun fact about me is that my mom was a geologist (she hasn't worked as one since i was very small, she's a fulltime volunteer lmao) so i have been taught RockFacts. i havent retained most of them. but im a couple points above average. i get shown rocks by kids at my job very regularly and they always pick up either feldspar or quartz. i tell them "you can take one rock home, so pick carefully!" so that way they arent taking a lot of rocks but im not being a funkiller. anyway on family vacations when i was a kid, my mom would drag us to quarries. to look at rocks. and my older sister was like "im gonna find a FOSSIL" meanwhile i was like. i am going to gather my favorite mineral. the humble and peelable mica. my sister found NO fossils meanwhile i walked out of there w a grocery bag stuffed w mica. some of which i donated to my job. thats rob rockfacts.

[cruelsister-moved2]

i think my academic calling is just to be a hater and funkiller. im looking at all these papers on the queering of folk songs and like 2nd wave-core work on 'warrior woman' ballads and then you actually look at the content and its like. i do think this reflects some incredibly fascinating neuroses as well as broadly the issue that gender & heterosexuality have to be constantly maintained and in the historical working class esp in isolated professions like sailing where the maintenance work isn't done it's very interesting to see what happens. HOWEVER literally none of them reflect genuine girlbossery, liberation, or tolerance, it's more like 'isn't it interesting that people didn't think of these things as transgressive at all even though with a slight change of context they totally would be' than 'wow this is a ballad about Queer Desire'. but i think that's much more interesting so the appeal of these ballads is often to me how they represent a heterosexuality which strains at the seams in every direction, as well as how many things humans are willing to overlook provided it makes for a good story :)

[do-you-have-a-flag]

having a lot of fun talking to my parents being a funkiller about the apple visor thing that’s like google glass and vr headsets and half a dozen other already years old tech in one

because i wanna counteract the advertising hype that they’re getting into

and also as fas as i can tell the only truly new features of the device are: 

the external screen that acts as a kind of status update for others to know if you are looking at them or have a fullscreen display.  

it is essentially a smartphone/personal computer located on your face rather than just a display 

i’m not thinking about it as a new piece of technology so much as a mainstream convergence of a couple other devices and features. this is why the gesture and eye tracking controlled interface, augmented reality display, and ai utilisation with a vr avatar– are not particularly impressive to me on their own. The combination of them in a single smallish device is interesting though, for the logistics and accessibility.

but just like with google glass there is the concern i will always have:

 the impact of unreality and constant attention drain that comes with having a computer on you at all times being compounded by having it literally on your face.

intrusive advertising like we already have everywhere but now overlaid across your vision (the arms race of advertisers versus adblockers having to jump platforms always an issue)

privacy. passive listening and using the camera to track you for advertisers is already an issue with phones. add to that the factor that you are wearing a wireless display and you have all the same issues with more opportunity to forget its there or methods of quickly blocking it. if the security risk against malicious parties isn’t enough do you really want all that connected to your personal profile? 

in general i am always wary of this stuff because i try not to get complacent about giving up privacy, i try to balance convenience against risk, i keep up with tech casually and am wary of hype. i kill the fun of the new apple announcement for my parents. 

[denimbex1986]

'In anticipation of the movie event of summer 2023 known as Barbenheimer, the best and wittiest unpaid advertising Universal and Warner Bros. Pictures could have hoped for wasn’t an Instagram post of a grinning Tom Cruise, along with Mission: Impossible 7 director Christopher McQuarrie, brandishing tickets for Oppenheimer and Barbie. It was a recent tweet from television writer Noah Garfinkel, built around a still from Oppenheimer featuring Tom Conti’s Albert Einstein and Cillian Murphy’s J. Robert Oppenheimer, ostensibly involved in a serious conversation about atom splitting and stuff. The caption read “‘We’re gathering a group of top scientists to go see Barbie.’”

That tweet is great because it’s a life raft of spontaneity in a sea of hype that has come to feel desperate. In the week leading up to the dual releases of Oppenheimer and Barbie, on July 21, the fever has gone off the thermometer. Christopher Nolan, with his fixation on craft (and his status as the guy who made those Batman movies), tackling the story of one of history’s most famous theoretical physicists? The idea is so antithetical to the I.P.-fixated pack-em-in mentality of the past few years that it’s no wonder anticipation among actual grownups, whether they’re Nolan fans or not, is high. The juggernaut around Greta Gerwig’s Barbie is even more formidable: Barbie pink, a hothouse hue verging on fuchsia, is everywhere. And at the film’s Los Angeles premiere, on June 9, Margot Robbie appeared in a life-size version of one of early Barbie’s most famous ensembles, a strapless sparkle evening gown accessorized with a chiffon hankie and the famous Barbie mules, known as “Solo in the Spotlight.” She looked glamorous, sexy and adorable. You’d have to be a certified funkiller not to love it.

The Barbenheimer phenomenon is fun, and essentially harmless. But while it’s wonderful that adult people have not one but two reasonably grownup movies to look forward to in the same summer week, there’s also something depressing about Barbenheimer. It has less to do with the projects themselves and more to do with what we’ve come to settle for in the world of movies. It will be a great day in Hollywood, and pretty good for anyone who cares about film, if both Barbie and Oppenheimer do well at the box office. But as film scholar, industry observer, and all-around smart film person Mark Harris noted in a series of tweets, the success of Barbie, Oppenheimer, and Mission Impossible—Dead Reckoning, won’t be enough to solve Hollywood’s myriad problems. “I am rooting for all three of these movies to succeed, because we are definitely in the ‘A rising tide lifts all boats’ phase of the crisis, and it is a crisis,” Harris writes. “But the thing is, none of these three movies are going to fix the cracks in the hull.”

Those cracks are too numerous to contemplate without falling into despair, but Barbenheimer at least flicks at one of them. The idea of a do-it-yourself double feature, or even of seeing two big movies in one weekend, used to be a staple of frequent moviegoers’ lives; it has now become a novelty. There just aren’t enough big-screen movies for adults being released at any one time. The Barbenheimer model at least presumes people are excited about going out to a movie theater sometime around July 21.

But the reality is that prying former moviegoers—especially those over 40—off their couches, away from their big-screen TVs and sophisticated sound systems, isn’t going to be easy in the long haul. On the one hand, you can’t blame the stay-at-homes, given how few movies are geared to their demographic. Superhero films and CGI-heavy action movies with indecipherable plots have taken the place of things people used to hire babysitters to go out to see: romantic comedies, erotic thrillers, courtroom dramas, even just dumb comedies about teenagers doing dumb stuff. The even harsher reality is that in many cities, cinemas specializing in smaller movies have closed. Depending on where you live, you can love movies desperately and simply be out of luck.

But talk to people who have given up on the movies by choice and the sad truth is that they don’t seem to miss them: “There’s so much good TV these days, why leave the house?” “I hate seeing movies with smelly, noisy people, the at-home experience is so much better” and so forth. Admittedly, many of the people who think and talk that way probably never really loved movies in the first place. But there are still too many who have outed themselves as consumers of content, happy as long as there’s enough on streaming to fill their entertainment hours. Moviegoers has a romantic ring to it; content consumers is the role more and more people are settling for, unquestioningly, often without seeing how distasteful the concept of content is. There’s great stuff to stream, series that have been made with thought and care and create space for wonderful actors to do good work. But viewers who happily position themselves as consumers of content are playing into the mindset of the big streamers, who have a great deal invested in getting that stuff squeezed through the tube as cheaply as possible—hence the WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying TV—but right now may be the time to think about whose side you’re really on, especially if you’re of the generation that used to take great pride in sticking it to the man.

Let’s assume, though, that the Barbenheimer effect is enough to get at least some of the couch people back into the theater, which could help both movies become hits. What could box office success for either Barbie or Oppenheimer—or, with luck, both—mean for the future of movies? We used to get so many historical epics about Important Men—A Beautiful Mind, The Social Network, The Imitation Game—that we’d almost groan whenever we saw another one slouching down the pipeline. But in 2023, the promise of Oppenheimer—a story about a controversial historical figure, played an actor who has always been terrific in his movie roles but who ultimately found acclaim working in TV—is like a lake in the middle of the desert. If Oppenheimer is a hit, could it mean more movies drawn from history—that other kind of pre-awareness that has nothing to do with I.P.? Maybe. But even if not, it could open a door for filmmakers to explore bigger subjects.

Barbie, on the other hand, is a movie based on a toy—which is not an inherently bad thing when you’re talking about this particular toy. There are 70-year-old women who have played with Barbie in their lifetime, and harbor some sort of feelings about her, whether fond or complex. I have not yet seen Barbie; I’m excited about it, because I love Barbie, and I generally love Gerwig’s work. But what bothers me about the pre-movie hype is its overinsistence that Gerwig has made a “smart” movie about Barbie. Which suggests that Barbie by herself—or, more specifically, love for Barbie—is somehow dumb. The storied history of Barbie has its share of inherent subversiveness: if, in the 1960s and 1970s and beyond, feminists objected to her because of her highly unrealistic bodily proportions and empty smile, they weren’t exactly taking the long view. In the household I grew up in, one with much older sisters, we had in our attic two pre-Barbie adult dolls: one was a bride and the other was a nun. A doll you could dress in exciting clothes—one who eventually had her own house and her own car, let alone any job she could dream up—was a huge step away from that. The marketing for Barbie, rather than capitalizing on the sophistication of the finished product, feels desperate to cover every base. Love pink? Barbie is for you! You’re smart? Barbie is for you, too! That line of thinking is reductive, not revolutionary. But then, the proof will be in the movie, not the marketing.

That said, by now we’ve all heard that Mattel is planning a slew of movies based on its toys, from Hot Wheels to Rock Em Sock Em Robots, and we’ve been assured—by Mattel—that all of these movies will be “smart,” not dumb. Again, the proof will be in the movies. But none of those toys, no matter how loved, have the cultural resonance of Barbie. And in the end, what we’re being promised is really just more movies about childhood effects, things we already have some emotional attachment to. Does anyone else feel not just depressed and embarrassed by this, but also excessively exploited? As if the movies’ only hope is to latch onto old playthings and their attendant comfy feelings? What about seeing and experiencing something brand-new, that draws out feelings we didn’t know we could have?

No matter how well Barbie and Oppenheimer do, that dream feels elusive. Which is why I love the idea of a group of top scientists convening to see Barbie, presumably stepping out of their comfort zone because they’re curious to see what all the fuss is about, even making mental notes for the discussion they’ll have later. That’s what going to the movies used to be. For scientists, and for everyone.'