#i know my paul fans will come to my aid

[curlyshepardconfirmed]

I need paul drawn in an "im kenough" shirt stat

[d-criss-news]

Darren Criss Comes to Little Shop of Horrors with Disney Fandom and a Yen for an American Crime Story

“Suddenly Seymour” from Little Shop of Horrors is, of course, one of the great musical ballads. Beginning with feather-light piano and words of reassurance that are nearly sung-spoken, it grows and grows and grows—much like the plant the story revolves around—ending with a finale so rousing it could probably be heard in outer space.

If there’s one guy who knows his way around “Suddenly Seymour,” it’s Darren Criss. Among his countless performances of the song, he has sung it with Lea Michelle on Glee, on Carpool Karaoke and, most recently, on stage at Carnegie Hall. “There's never a point where I roll my eyes at it or go, ‘Oh god, I can't. I have to play this again,” he told Broadway.com Editor-in-Chief Paul Wontorek on The Broadway Show. The song is “bulletproof."

The number hits a little different lately. In January, Criss stepped into the role of the downtrodden flower shop assistant Seymour Krelborn in Little Shop of Horrors off-Broadway, with Evan Rachel Wood (Westworld, Across the Universe) in the role of the similarly put-upon Audrey. “‘Suddenly Seymour’ suddenly has a narrative context. It's not you and me at a piano bar having a couple beers singing our favorite song. It comes from a real narrative place. It's nice when you are doing the show in context, telling the story.”

Despite a deep love of the musical, Criss never thought he’d play the role of Seymour. “I can't say I ever sat around going, ‘Oh, one day I'll play Seymour'—I just never saw that,” he said. “But here we are and I'm doing my damnedest.”

Criss is especially delighted to be sharing the stage with Wood, a close personal friend. As Criss reveals, he personally asked Wood to join him in the show. "I can't take full credit for it, but yes, I may have nudged it," he said. A couple of weeks into their run, audiences are buzzing about the pair. “Listen, come for me. Stay for Evan Rachel Wood. She's the chef's kiss. I'm just the amuse-bouche that you forget about by the end.”

"'Suddenly Seymour’ suddenly has a narrative context. It's not you and me at a piano bar having a couple beers singing our favorite song." –Darren Criss

Not that long ago, Criss played Andrew Cunanan, the handsome and tormented real-life killer in The Assassination of Gianni Versace: American Crime Story. Weirdly, Cunanan’s story is not worlds away from that of Seymour Krelborn—another killer feeding insatiable appetites (albeit those of a monstrous plant). “I seem to have a thing—I don't know what it says about me—about playing men that will go to extraordinary lengths to accomplish greatness,” said Criss. The stories of Cunanan and Krelborn “have the same sort of parable to them, of the consequences and cost of obsession. There's only so far you can go before really bad things happen to the people around you and to yourself.” Seymour Krelborn: American Crime Story, anyone?

The crucial difference is that Little Shop of Horrors is enormous fun and packed with catchy doo-wop tunes. A lifelong Disney fan, Criss is also enjoying reveling in his love for the late Howard Ashman who, as well as writing and directing the original off-off-Broadway production of Little Shop of Horrors, was a central figure in the Disney Renaissance of the late ‘80s and early ‘90s. Before his death in 1991 due to HIV/AIDS, and in partnership with musical chameleon Alan Menken, Ashman brought tremendous heart and intelligence—and a Broadway sensibility—to The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin.

“As the kids say, he’s like my Roman Empire,” said Criss. (Chatting before the formal part of the interview, Criss suggests that “Mushnik & Son,” with its minor-key Klezmer vamp, is a prequel to “Poor Unfortunate Souls” from The Little Mermaid, while the fizzy frolic of “Closed for Renovation” anticipates “Something There” from Beauty and the Beast.) “I spend a lot of time thinking about Howard Ashman. My whole life, he has been such a North Star in the way that I think about creating things as an actor, as a writer, as a songwriter, as a lyricist—anything. I never had the pleasure of meeting him. But anytime people ask me: ‘Dead or alive, who'd you have dinner with?’ I always say Howard Ashman. I pretend he's in the audience every night—sort of as a barometer of what I think he would like or not like."

"'Being in this is my own little contribution to the altar of Howard Ashman."  –Darren Criss

As an example of Ashman's exquisite dramatic instincts, Criss points to the well known video of Ashman directing Jodi Benson's vocal performance of "Part of Your World" for The Little Mermaid. "If this show [Little Shop] is like proto-Disney Renaissance—if this show is the beginning of Little Mermaid and Aladdin and Beauty and the Beast, which had such a profound influence on my life—then there are so many pieces of those things in the show that I'm tipping my hat to that it's hard not to feel connected to him in some way every night. It's an extraordinary legacy that I've been so obsessed with my whole life. Being in this is my own little contribution to the altar of Howard Ashman.”

Criss is already looking forward to sharing his love of Disney (and all things Howard Ashman) with his daughter, who turns two in April. “I'm praying she likes them. I'm pretty sure she will,” he said. “I mean, listen, you don't have to give me a reason to rewatch anything that I love, but now it's an even more elevated reason, to share it with somebody.”

With a second child on the way with his wife Mia, Criss also shared his thoughts on fatherhood more generally. Child-rearing, he explained, is kind of like creating a storytelling franchise: “Look, if you're a fan of storytelling—which, most of us that love Broadway are—the inevitable, most natural, logical sequel is having kids. Right? Because you now get to experience the same characters and themes with a brand-new character that isn't familiar with the prequel. In that person’s movie, it’s the first one.”

[harrisonarchive]

In Florida, November 1970. Photos via Meet The Beatles For Real.

“We were really determined to find him. From various sources, we had learned that George Harrison was somewhere in the Deerfield area. We cordoned off a five-block area and patiently began our search. Claudette Cyr, Beatle fan Club president for Florida, went over to the area to investigate personally while I was on the phone. She got several leads, many bad answers and enough suspicion for us to know the rumor was true. We drove to the place later at night and went about looking at all the places she had selected as likely spots. No luck in any of them. Disappointed, we decided on one more sweep by the beach. Standing on the beach we saw four long-haired figures and I figured they must have been looking for Harrison too. We asked them and got negative responses and strangely, no interest. Once in the car, I told Claudette I thought one of those people was indeed George. She thought I was crazy. Back we went and this time we saw them walking through a parking lot. I aimed the car lights on them. George and Patti[e] Harrison and two aides. I jumped out of the car and told him, ‘George Harrison, nice thing to do. We have been searching for you for almost two days and you are dodge us.’ He smiled and our conversation began. We asked him about the breakup of the Beatles and about Paul McCartney’s departure. He replied in a non-committal sort of way. He compared the Beatles after so many years to four guys in jail, trapped in an image and trying to break out. The new album was also a topic. He expects it to be released within the next few days. Included in the album are 25 songs.[…] About the fans (us included) he was grateful but worried the place where he was staying might be discovered. ‘I am not famous anymore. I am not Beatle George anymore. If I wanted to hear screaming I would play Shea Stadium. But I don’t. I am George Harrison, a musician. That’s all.’ George was in Florida to rest and relax. He plans to come back. His wife, Patti[e], was with him. She remained silent all throughout our conversation. She wore no makeup at all. Patti[e] used to be a top model before marrying Harrison, and her face has a way of lighting up when George says something. She smiles a lot. I have talked to pop people before in my position as entertainment editor for The Phoenix Broward Community College’s newspaper. Harrison’s honesty struck me as being out of this world. Here we were, intruding in his private life, and he took the time to talk to us, sign his autograph, and make some memories we will never forget.” - "BCC Editor 'Traps' A Beatle - George Harrison Stops To Chat," by Ruben Betancourt, Fort Lauderdale News, November 21, 1970

“[George] told [Adria, Tom Petty’s daughter] something that he had never mentioned to me, which is that he had a cousin from Florida who reminded him of me. Before George was really settled at Friar Park, he and this Florida cousin would sleep in every room in this, well, this castle, trying to figure out which one had the best vibe and ought to be the bedroom.” - Tom Petty, Runnin’ Down A Dream (2007) (x)

More about these photos, via the comments section of the Meet The Beatles For Real post:

"A friend of the family pulled up in a station wagon with the mountain lion that day. I was living at the apt. complex owned by George'd uncle (Gregg Apts.). We all had a fun picnic that day." - anonymous [x]

[lucienballard]

Bob George in the ARC NYC stacks. Photograph: unknown/ARC NYC ...

‘No one else is saving it’: the fight to protect a historic music collection ...

It all started in a loft in Tribeca, New York, long before it was a trendy neighbourhood. “I had 47,000 records and nobody wanted them,” recalls Bob George, who had just published a discography of punk and new wave music. “That led a lot of people coming to me and saying you have to save this stuff; no one else is saving it. That got the ball rolling in my loft in what is now fashionable Tribeca, which was an incredibly unfashionable war zone in 1974 when I was first there.”

George turned his record collection into the ARChive of Contemporary Music (Arc) in 1985 with co-founder David Wheeler. The non-profit music library and research centre now contains more than 3m sound recordings or over 90m songs, making it one of the biggest popular music collections in the world. Donors and board members have included David Bowie, Jonathan Demme, Lou Reed, Martin Scorsese and Paul Simon.

The Arc is not open to the public but has been a vital resource for film-makers, writers and researchers ranging from Ken Burns looking for a song for his series Baseball to the new Grammy Hall of Fame and Museum in Los Angeles needing cover art for its inducted recordings. Now, however, this unique treasure trove is under existential threat.

The Arc cannot remain at its current Hudson Valley premises indefinitely and is in need of a new and bigger home. “We have to move and we don’t know when we’ll have to move and the collection is really at risk because it’s all on pallets,” says George, who dreams of a patron like James Smithson, the British scientist who left his estate to the US to found the Smithsonian Institution. “We’re looking for someone to help us buy a very wonderful property or for us to build a new building on vacant land in upstate New York.”

After growing up in Youngstown, Ohio, George moved to New York in 1974 as a visual arts student and started collecting records as a DJ. In 1981 he released Laurie Anderson’s first single, O Superman, which sold nearly a million copies worldwide and made it to number on the UK singles chart. He was a guest on John Peel’s beloved BBC radio show, sneaking in little-known records from New York, and took music to European broadcasters too. People kept giving him records that other collections turned down.

Some of the 18,000 recordings in the Keith Richards Blues Collection. Photograph: Arc NYC

“I was doing the book and then doing Peel shows and it accidentally became this large collection that nobody wanted. They kept saying, oh, we collect classical, we collect Broadway, we collect ethnic music. I said, well, I have funk, reggae, African and hip-hop and they said, oh, no, we don’t collect any of that. Forty years later, I say, you put all those together and that’s what music has become.”

The simple goal of the archive, which has always had a peripatetic existence, is preservation. “We have no interest in quality,” George cheerfully admits. “It started that way from the very beginning because there’s no way to tell what’s valuable in the future. Everybody brings their own criteria and tastes to things in their own time. But the future is quite different, as we hope.”

The archive has never received aid from any city, state or federal organisation but its scale gives the Library of Congress a run for its money. It has absorbed major collections from musicians and fans and is home to most of Rolling Stone Keith Richards’ extensive blues inventory.

George dispatched two semi-trailers to a condemned house in Boston sinking under the weight of Jeep Holland’s set of more than 125,000 recordings and over 2,500 signed albums from the likes of the Stones, Jimi Hendrix, Bob Marley and the Sex Pistols. “Going towards the bathroom, he has a gas stove, the pilot light is on, there are records in the oven. It was just a storage space ... His car had become so full of records that he abandoned it and rented a car.”

George has made repeat trips to countries such as Brazil, Cambodia, Colombia, Cuba, Japan, Jordan, Laos and Thailand. The Arc contains Demme’s personal collection of Haitian albums. More than 150,000 pieces of world music have been catalogued; there are plenty more to do. “We’ve tried to get as much of that material as possible so that collection is just fabulous.”

The Arc preserves copies of every recording in all known formats. It has electronically catalogued more than 400,000 sound recordings and digitised 200,000 with the Internet Archive – more than any other public university or private library in America. It also contains more than 3m pieces of material including photos, videos, DVDs, books, magazines, press kits, sheet music, ephemera and memorabilia.

The late Andy Rourke of the Smiths at Arc looking at Smiths records he had never seen. Photograph: Arc NYC

George says: “We catalogued 105,000 singles just recently; we have another 200,000 or 300,000 to go. This is the first way a band at one time got their feet in the water. They put out one or two or three singles. If they did hits, they got the chance to do an album and so much of this material does not exist on LP or CD. Little by little more of it might be streaming because of YouTube, as people can get away with murder on YouTube, which is great, but YouTube will disappear. Everything commercial will disappear.”

Among those who have turned to the archive is the Oscar-winning director Ang Lee, who wanted records by the singer Bert Sommer for his film Taking Woodstock. “The archive is amazing because we don’t know what we have until somebody needs it. We’ve been into the stacks and we found five LPs by Bert Sommer. For me, it’s like I have no idea who this guy is and what he did; he’s sort of a folkie. For Quincy Jones, we just sent him a list of the 8,000 things that he’s either produced or on.

“Research was how we basically stayed alive along with the largesse of the rock stars or celebrities that we had hooked up with. The idea was never to open to the public but that’s what we want to do now. I don’t think it’s untrue that we’re one of the largest in the world and that we want to make that available. We’ve tried to save two copies so there will always be a listening copy and then that would then become a listening library.”

George hopes the new archive will be open to students, educators, historians, musicians, authors, journalists and the general public. An anonymous donor has come forward with a million dollars to help realise that dream but more money is urgently needed. One possible new home is an abandoned IBM campus spanning 34 acres, although that would cost $8-10m. George is considering partnering with an upstate university and has plans to offer residencies for scholars.

“People could come in and produce a work, and that would go out into the world. It could be a blog, essay, tape, compilation, new recording, whatever. We’re really quite un-academic. I’m against it somewhat and I’d like people to have ideas and bring those ideas and put them back into the world as opposed to making it an interactive experience for everybody. I don’t want to be Disney World. It’s nice to have seminars. It’s nice to have listening parties. It’s nice to have dances.”

source

[kudosmyhero]

Legends of the Dark Knight (vol. 1) #139: Terror, part 3: Greatest Fear

Read Date: January 24, 2023 Cover Date: March 2001 ● Writer: Doug Moench ● Penciler: Paul Gulacy ● Inker: Jimmy Palmiotti ● Colorist: James Sinclair ● Letterer: Kurt Hathaway ● Editor: Andrew Hefler ◦ Harvey Richards ●

**HERE BE SPOILERS: Skip ahead to the fan art/podcast to avoid spoilers

Reactions As I Read: ● Hugo Strange under the influence of Scarecrow's fear gas. I don't think I've yet seen him so vulnerable… ● Scarecrow asks the panic Strange what his greatest fear is; Strange doesn't give a straight answer--merely continues running through the house… ● …and falls down into a hole, where he is skewered on a weathervane that Scarecrow has placed there o_o ● 3 nights later, at Selina's place with her kitties ● (I'm not a huge fan of her costume having a tail. I prefer her whip serving as a tail-like addition) ● she goes to a warehouse where she expects to find jade cats, but instead she finds a skull in the crate ● fear toxin goes off in her face ● (really unforunate how the artist draws her figure) ● (she looks amazing here, though!)

● she's just woken up to Scarecrow taking her picture ● Scarecrow demands a service, else he'll release her photos to the police and the press ● Selina has little choice but to agree ● 2 nights later, Gordon is surprised to see the Bat Signal shining ● he and Batman arrive at about the same time. Gordon informs him that he was not the one who activated the signal. ● Catwoman reveals herself then ● (seriously, her suit would have to have huge, separately sewn pockets for her knockers to fit into because that is not how boobs look in clothing) ● she tries to convince Batman and Gordon to just let her operate, but when that doesn't work, she leaps off the rooftop with Batman close behind ● Batman dives face-first into a pile of garbage when she moves out of the way (heheh)

● HAHA, ok, that's straight out of Looney Tunes, with the trashcan lid ● (the art in this issues is really good, but the painted-on clothes with everyone is quite distracting) ● heheh, Batman's getting pissed and I'm here for it ● he goes after her, preparing to no longer hold back, when he realizes she's led him to Crime Alley ● the actual fuck? I know this artist can do better than this. Feels like a rushed panel.

● Batman suspects a trap, though only Hugo Strange knows of the alley's significance. Someone is strung up by his heels at the end of the alley ● a hand-scythe comes out… ● feck, the hanging man's throat is cut. or maybe he was fully decapitated? it's hard to tell ● Batman figures that Strange, Scarecrow, and Catwoman are all working together. ● oh, it wasn't a hand-scythe but a full scythe. not that it matters. but I try to correct my info ^^ ● (not that anyone actually reads these. if you do--hello!) ● at least Scarecrow's clothes aren't painted on… ● Batman just keeps getting kicked in the face tonight ● I wouldn't have expected Scarecrow to hold his own so well against Batman in a physical fight… ● ah, and it was a full decapitation! (see? accurate details matter) ● apparently the years Crane was in Arkham, he honed his martial art skills. good on you, Crane! your progress shows ^^ ● Catwoman comes to Batman's aid ● Scarecrow says to forget the photos--she's just been added to his bully list as he runs off ● Catwoman apologizes to Batman for leading him there, and says she had no idea Scarecrow was going to kill that guy ● …but then when Batman turns his back, she knocks him out with the handle of the broken scythe ● 👏👏👏👏

Synopsis: Terrified by Scarecrow and his fear toxin, Hugo Strange leaves his bed and runs through the house of Sebastian Cole. Strange does not recognize the hole which Scarecrow has cut into the wooden floor and, thus, he falls right onto a spike from a weathervane. Strange looks to be mortally wounded and does not move anymore. Now, Scarecrow wants to make his move against Batman whom he calls the big bully. The first step of his plan is to kidnap Catwoman which he actually achieves. Scarecrow unmasks and takes pictures of her face so that he is able to blackmail the female thief.

Two nights later, Captain Gordon goes onto the roof of GCPD Headquarters because somebody has activated the Bat-Signal. He is surprised to find Catwoman responsible, but as intended by her Batman arrives as well. She talks about reaching an agreement and bribing them which of course is no option for either Gordon or Batman. Quickly Catwoman tries to escape and as planned she is being followed by Batman. Interestingly, the hunt leads them into the alley where Thomas and Martha Wayne were shot. A man unknown to Batman hangs in the alley headfirst and then gets beheaded by Scarecrow using a scythe. Then Crane attacks Batman and he actually is able to best him. But then Catwoman interferes in Batman's favor, so Scarecrow flees screaming about how he will use the photos he took from Catwoman. She apologizes to Batman for luring him into this trap, but when he turns his back she strikes him down …

(https://dc.fandom.com/wiki/Batman:_Legends_of_the_Dark_Knight_Vol_1_139)

Fan Art: Cat Woman by Artgerm

Accompanying Podcast: ● Batbooks for Beginners - episode10

[denimbex1986]

'All Us Of Strangers might be one of the most moving films of the last decade. The film, which is based on the 1987 novel Strangers by Taichi Yamada, follows a middle aged man named Adam who has a chance encounter with a mysterious neighbour, which punctures the rhythm of his everyday life.

As a new relationship develops between them, Adam is preoccupied with memories of the past and finds himself drawn back to the suburban town where he grew up.

To celebrate the release of the movie this weekend, we sat down with director Andrew Haigh to learn more about the making of All Us Of Strangers...

So, congratulations! I’m a big fan of your work including Looking and Weekend. In fact, I’ve indoctrinated so many people to Weekend, so I was very excited for this film.

Oh, thank you!

My first question is, I feel like there’s so many amazing elements to this movie, but one thing that really stands out is Andrew Scott’s performance. How did you go about casting him and what was it like working with him?

The minute I finished writing – I didn’t think about anybody as I was writing, I never do normally – I thought about Andrew. He was the first person we went to and he was the first person I really thought of. My gut said he would make sense as the character of Adam. You know, he’s of a certain age, and he understands growing up in that time, so that helps, but he’s also such a good actor. We obviously wanted that at the same time – someone who’s a really, really good actor and also really understands the role. Those two things were in perfect alignment with Andrew.

That definitely shines through. And did you learn anything interesting about your main cast from working with them? Any fun facts about Andrew, Paul, Claire or Jamie?

It’s funny, when you’re working on a film you definitely get to know each other in a very strange way. It’s an intense working period, and in your conversations with each other about character and such, some really personal stuff comes our – stuff about my life, stuff about Andrew’s life and everyone’s, really. You sort of get close, but I don’t know how well I know them as such, I just know a lot about elements of their lives.

Did any of them have any weird habits on set or anything?

Well, everybody’s got strange habits. That’s certainly not something I’ll share, and hopefully, they would never talk about my weird habits either! I feel more like a therapist on set sometimes, and the job is to work out when to step in and when to say something or not.

Speaking of “personal stuff”, was any part of Adam’s relationship with his parents based on your own experiences?

It’s less based upon my own experiences with my parents, although some of it is, and more about a generation of gay people who were coming into their sexuality at a certain time in the ’80s and ’90s. Most of us, if not all of us, experienced a similar feeling growing up in a very complicated time when it really was quite tough to be gay, and it certainly wasn’t easy to come out to anybody, let alone your parents. We’re talking about, you know, the height of AIDS and section 28 and homophobia being incredibly rife in the UK. It was a rough time for a lot of people.

I think it’s so different now, it’s changed so dramatically, but for a generation of people, we still remember what that felt like, it’s still there. We still feel it. Sometimes it can re-emerge and you feel suddenly triggered by something. So rather than it being like an autobiographical experience of me coming out to my parents, it’s about feeling what it was like to be gay at that time.

Absolutely. I mean, I’m a slightly later generation, but I think you’ve done such a good job of encoding that. The movie is also based on the book, of course, but the respective plots are very different. How and why did you diverge away from the plot of the novel?

I loved this idea of meeting your parents again, which is in the novel, but then it takes a very different direction. It turns into more of a traditional ghost story. The Harry character was not only a demonic spirit in the original story, but also a woman, so that was quite a fundamental shift. So it’s now a queer relationship, which changes how Adam relates to his family, I think. That central idea of going backwards in time in order to move forward is definitely still there though, which is what I think the novel is about.

I feel like you could’ve ��gotten away with�� not even mentioning the book, because they truly are so different. Did that ever cross your mind?

It’s funny, when I read the book again recently – actually, just before I started doing all this press – I realised that while so much is different, the story itself is very personal to that writer, he really made it his own, and in a similar way I did that with this film. I took his book and made it personal to me, but I’m still taking the core of what he did in that book. I feel like that can be the joy of adaptation. You take the truth of the original thing and you throw it up in the air and remix it and re-make it.

One thing I want to ask you about is the recent BAFTA nominations. The film has been nominated in quite a few categories, including casting, but Andrew didn’t received a nomination for Leading Actor. What are your thoughts on that?

I mean, I’m very sad and heartbroken for him. I think it’s tough. Like, clearly, all of the other nominations would not have happened if Andrew hadn’t been incredible in the film. It wouldn’t be nominated for a screenplay nomination if Andrew hadn’t been good. I wish he’d been nominated and it’s sad for us. But all of the nominations would not have existed without him, and it doesn’t change his performance, which I think is brilliant.

So many of the scenes are so intense to watch, which scene was most difficult for you to write or direct?

I guess the scenes with Adam’s parents – the ones back in the house when he speaks to his mum and his dad – they took a long time to write and get the tone right on. We had to make sure you weren’t hating his mum and dad in those situations and that you could sort of understand where they were coming from, but you could also understand the pain that was being resurrected in Adam at the same time.

So there was a lot going on and they weren’t easy scenes to shoot. They weren’t easy to watch either! When I was editing them, they were very challenging to watch. Obviously, it’s shot in my old house. So–

I’m sorry, it’s shot in your old house?

Yes, that’s my old house that I lived in when I was a kid. I haven’t lived there for 40 years. So it’s sort of like I’m watching, let’s say the scene of Adam and his dad in what was our old front room, they’re around the Christmas tree where we used to put our Christmas tree up. So there’s a lot of sort of strangeness within that for me.

Did you just rock up to the house and go, “do you mind if I film here?”

Yeah, pretty much.

That’s amazing. Well, speaking of that, are there any other sort of Easter eggs or random details in the movie that you left in hoping people would notice?

There’s always things. It’s more things from my personal life that only people I know will recognise, and I’m sure will mean nothing to other people, which is fine by me! I like the fact that there’s bits of me in there that people can decide whether or not are me.

I guess something like The Whitgift Centre would be one of those things, no? I actually used to live near there with an ex-boyfriend and we went over a few times. Why did you want to include that place and do you hope there’s an increase in visitation there after the film comes out?

I lived nearby when I was a kid and we would go there on the weekends. It felt like a glamorous place to go in the ’70s and ’80s, it was kind of like a version of the future. It felt so British that we live in these little places and the centres of our lives become these things that mean nothing in the scale of anything to anybody. The Whitgift Centre is not some glamorous location, but for Adam, as a kid, he loves going. Kids love going to weird places and I think those places become quite important in our lives. Even if it’s just a place you go on the weekend with your family.

At the start of the movie, I remember Andrew gets his kit off a lot – was that just because you wanted to see Andrew Scott naked? Because fair enough.

That’s funny. I think they both get more naked in the beginning of the film and then less naked later on. That makes sense in the scope of their relationship. Their intimacy develops throughout the story and sometimes that involves sexual intimacy, which usually you are naked for! But as they go on, while that’s still a part of their relationship, there’s also everything else that’s happening. So I feel like it sort of makes sense that they’re physically naked first, before they become emotionally naked.

Do you have a shot or scene you’re particularly proud of?

I kind of feel like every scene links to the next one, so all of them speak to the same kind of thing. I do like the scene when he gets in bed with his mum and talks to her, and then he leans over and his dad’s there. It’s all one shot, which is kind of nice, and the acting is so beautiful. It also goes from a little bit silly and humorous to being very heartfelt and sad, so I like how that scene develops, too.

I also like the first time that Adam is walking through the park and sees his dad. He feels him appear behind him, and turns around like they’re cruising or something. It’s sort of mysterious and strange and odd, kind of like you’re drifting off into a dream.

I completely agree. I mean, so much of it stuck in my head, but for some reason that bit really did. Because you do think it’s going to be one thing, and then it’s completely different. Now, I feel like I know what you’re going to say here, but what do you think is happening when Adam sees his parents? Is it really happening? Is he imagining it, or is it some sort of mental break?

I think you can read it in whatever way you want to. They could be actual ghosts that have reappeared, it could all be in his imagination. I mean, for me, I actually don’t know how much I care about what is the specific reality. All I know is that Adam has longed for this encounter so much that it has been brought into the ether, and whether it’s all in his mind or not, the important thing is that he’s desired this into existence.

That’s roughly what I thought you might say! In your career, you’ve worked with quite a few openly gay actors on some very queer-centric material. What’s your view on the debate about straight actors playing gay roles?

Look, I completely understand the debate; I think about the debate long and hard. I’d say it’s a very complicated argument. There are times when, absolutely, I think you should cast a gay actor in a gay role. I also think trans characters should be played by trans people. in those roles. I guess I’m not so dogmatic that it means it always has to be like that for gay roles. You just have to understand what the role is, and it makes a difference if the writer is gay or the director is gay. There’s a lot of gay people involved in the making of this film, for instance.

For Adam, I knew I wanted a gay actor to play it. There’s too much nuance and there’s too much stuff in there that I wanted to get across. But it’s not a hard-and-fast rule, it’s about what’s right for the role. Sometimes, it’s definitely right to cast a gay actor as a gay character, sometimes I think it’s less important.

Finally, I’d love to know what your favourite film of the moment is?

Probably Anatomy of a Fall. I loved Sandra Hüller’s performance in that, I think that’ll go down in history as one of the greatest ever.'

[nephalemwitch]

FINALLY SOMEONE HAS SAID IT,

I also think it kinda hones in who Chani is supposed to be as a character. I know its different from the book and past movies, but I think it worked for the movie, because it did multiple things:

1) Made her a better character overall. Personally, I always thought she was a boring character in past iterations because it kind of felt like they made her only to be a love interest, and it was of the small reasons that made me have a little bit of a sour taste in my mouth. I think that this iteration finally made her a character that actually felt like a person, and felt very real in some instances.

2) I wanna say that even I though Paul as the protagonist, and said that he thought of them as equals between Chani and the Fremen, it felt like that this movie finally addressed that Paul is flawed. He uses his status as this god figure as a tool to get revenge on the Harkonnen and gain power. Chani has basically set boundaries that she doesn't want to be with someone who tries to put them in a hierarchal system, no matter where they put themselves in, and after she started to see him go beyond those boundaries, she was understandably upset. Stilgar (I want to preference that what I'm about to say might come off as rude, but you'll know what I mean once you read it) is VERY RELIGOUS, and I think Chani is the definition of Anti-Religous. She doesn't want to bow down to someone, nor vice versa. She even said that this religion is enslaving them. I think this is actually what not only makes her a good character, but also the most morally right in the story. She wants Equality, and Paul broke that one rule for power and to be a religious figure.

3) Chani is the best example (in my opinion) of deuteragonist (Which means: acts as a constant companion to the protagonist or someone who continues actively aiding a protagonist. The deuteragonist may switch between supporting and opposing the protagonist, depending on their own conflict or plot.). The reason why I think she is so good as it is because not only does she aid Paul throughout the story, but actively shows why Paul is not a good person overall and when it happens. Its a part of the 'Show, Don't tell" method that I think is one of the strongest parts of the story.

4) She is the one of the best Allegories for inequality (and some of the fans coping and seething from this proves my point way to well). When she starts to realize that she is being with someone that is taking advantage of her people, she actively gets upset about it and feels very betrayed. Fans getting upset at this change perfectly shows why this is the case as well, because the books and past movies make it feel like they pulled a JK Rowling and only put her in to be a mother. They finally show a character who has goals and most importantly, ACTUAL PEOPLE WITH EMOTIONS AND BOUNDARIES. People are complain because no one batted eye to maybe this being a problem, because even if they didn't those morals as much in the books, I personally really hated how Paul just up and outed and married someone for a power move in past iterations.

Sorry if this became such a rant. Just wanted to explain my opinions.

I disliked how book readers dismissed or dislike how movie!Chani is portrayed, especially the part how they don't like her walking out after Irulan bargain Paul for their marriage. Other than being different between movie and book, there's a reason why will not accept being a concubin, one crucial aspect of movie! Chani ideology.

Equal.

Even though Chani and Paul loved each other, there's a massive power dynamic between them. When Paul arrived on Arrakis, he came as an heir of House Atreides, his received the planet as his fief, his ownership. Though he's a far better Lord than the Harkonnen, he is still an Outworlder, a non-Fremen controlled Arrakis. And by the of part 1, Paul inherited Arrakis.

Chani stated in part 2 that all Fremen are equal (there's still misogyny in her culture but still), which it is imperative for her. However, as the story goes on, we see how Paul, even though he loved Chani and appreciated the Fremen, started his domain over them. We saw it firsthand when he acquired his family nuclear warheads, allowing him to cause a nuclear holocaust on the planet and, most importantly, controlled the spice. Other than how acute spice is in her culture, Chani is angry that Paul will controll over her people. And reminded how inequal their relationship was.

And this continued as he embraced his dukeship and challenged the Emperor for the throne. Paul was using Chani's people as his personal army, using Lasin, a prophet that Chani despised, to take advantage over them. When the duel between Paul and Feyd happened, when Feyd called Chani "his pet", she was cruelly reminded where she stands in their relationship, especially where Irulan betrothed Paul. Readers said that concubine is acceptable and tolerated in the Imperium, but a concubine (and usually women) are inferior in their marriage and not in equal standing. This is one of the reasons why she walked out because she will never be equal to Paul, politically and culturally.

[louisupdates]

MY FOOTBALL

The One Direction star has two principal loves: Ronaldinho and James Coppinger

FOUR FOUR TWO, MARCH 2023 (by PAUL WILKES)

Which was the first match that you ever went to?

I actually got into football quite late, when I started playing at around 11. There were a few Manchester United fans in the family, so the first match I ever went to was an unbelievable first game: the FA Cup fifth round tie against Arsenal in February 2003 - the match when Sir Alex Ferguson kicked the boot and hit David Beckham! My best memories come from Doncaster, who are the only club I support now. We had a fantastic League Cup run in 2005 - we beat Manchester City on penalties, then beat Aston Villa 3-0 and lost to Arsenal on penalties in the quarter-finals. That was my first real low as a football fan. I can remember walking back home absolutely gutted.

Who was your childhood hero and did you ever meet them?

James Coppinger is my club hero - he played at every level and really played for the badge. Everyone in Donny loves him and he’s a great bloke too. After I got into One Direction, I was lucky to meet him and played alongside him a couple of times in charity games. As a fan growing up watching him, that was amazing l. The best person I’ve ever met in football was Pele. I met him about four or five years ago and it was incredible - he had all these stories and we spoke for ages. He was lovely.

What has been your finest moment playing football?

I played in Soccer Aid and Ronaldinho tried to nutmeg me. I was all over his shirt, giving him no respect, and I just managed to nick the ball off him! There's a sick picture that I've seen of it.

The other moment was when I was about 15. I started as a centre-back, but didn’t grow any taller so moved across to right-back, and scored the only Sunday League goal I ever scored. I’ll never forget it.

What do you like most about going to the match?

The whole atmosphere, that magic. When you have those experiences as a young lad, there’s an element of nostalgia each time you go into a football stadium.

Which players do you admire even though they’ve never played for your club?

As some of my family supported Manchester United, I was never allowed to like Thierry Henry, but those grudge matches against Arsenal were amazing. He was a serious player.

Where’s the best place you’ve ever watched a game?

The Bernabeu - it was Neymar’s first ever Clasico for Barcelona against Real Madrid, which is pretty special. It’s one of the bucket list fixtures to go to. When I was young, Doncaster signed me as a reserve player and I went to a pre-season training camp in Portugal. As a supporter of the club, that’s not something you’re normally privy to, so watching how the squad trained and prepared was fascinating.

A few years ago, you filmed a music video with Bebe Rexha on the pitch at Keepmoat Stadium. What was that like?

It was really important for me and my career. The reason I’m sat here today is because of Doncaster - it’s played a huge role. It’s who I am as a person and it’s what I write songs about. The fact that we were able to film the video at the Keepmoat, where I’ve spent many days and evenings, made it so special. It felt appropriate.

What’s your favourite football book?

It’s not a book, but FourFourTwo! I used to subscribe when I was younger. I’m not a big reader otherwise. I should be, but I’m not.

What’s been your worst experience at a game?

I was playing in a charity match at Celtic Park. I got the ball and turned to my right, then Gobby Agbonkhor come through the back of me and I tore my medial ligament. A combination of the impact and me being very unfit meant I ended up throwing up all over Celtic's stodium, which I know will please a lot of Rangers supporters.

Have any footballers been to a gig?

Paul Pogba came to a One Direction show once, that's the one that stands out - he was really sound. I won’t lie, I don’t think many footballers listen to One Direction songs.

What’s the strangest place you’ve ever met a footballer?

I was in this bar in South America and, purely by chance, Bryan Robson was there with a few friends. He was a bit drunk. We went straight over and he was nice, but it was one of those times where you think, “What is he doing here?!” [Laughs]

What’s the greatest goal you’ve ever seen live?

I was at Zlatan Ibrahimovic's debut for the LA Galaxy, because I spend some time over in Los Angeles. The LAFC keeper launched the ball upfield and it was cleared back to Zlatan about forty yards out. He watched it bounce and then smashed it over the keeper’s head - an unbelievable goal. I love him - I like a bit of s**thousery in my footballers, and he's always had that.

Who’s your current favourite player?

The obvious answer is Erling Haaland, because any fan seeing him rack up the goals this season has been totally in awe. Even if you support Manchester United, you watch him and think he's superb. But for me, Jude Bellingham. I’m so excited by Jude - he's been in brilliant form this season, even before the World Cup.

If you could drop yourself into your all-time five-a-side team, who would you be playing next to?

Well, I play at the back, so I want me and Rio Ferdinand. I'd pick Edwin van der Sar, he was a top keeper in his day, then in midfield I'd have Ronaldinho - I grew up loving his football. Up front, I'll go for Cristiano Ronaldo.

What’s the most important piece of memorabilia that you have?

I had a Doncaster home shirt as a kid that I associate with growing up. A few years ago, I bought the same shirt in my current size - it's special to me, and when I met Pele I asked him to sign it. That was the pinnacle.

[Thanks to TeamLouisMedia for the HD photo.]

links to fourfourtwouk’s posts about Louis on Twitter and Instagram

[two-red-lungs]

Hey I loved your Marko headcannons 🖤 Do you have some nsfw headcannons about tall dark and handsome Dwayne?

(Bursts through the door like the Kool-Aid man) OH DO I EVER!!! Listen I love Paul and Marko and David, they are my blorbos, my boyfriends, but DWAYNE. I would PROPOSE to him. Husband material.

TLB Dwayne NSFW Headcanons

Okay, let's get the basics out of the way. Sex is gonna be rough, occasionally aggressive, and potentially deadly but hey?? If you wanna fuck a vampire that comes with the territory

Out of all the boys, he and David are probably the hardest to bed TBH

Where as Paul will throw himself at anybody, Dwayne kind of looks down his nose at a lot of humans. There are not a lot of people up to his 'standards' and he's pretty jaded about mortals in general

Because "they all die in the end, anyway."

But if you catch his interest? Oh no baby I am so sorry you're gonna need a wheelchair by the time he's done with you

Insanely intense. Ridiculous amount of patience, fucking phenomenal self-control (sexually, hunting is a whole other deal), the stamina of a goddamn greek god (and the abs of one lmaooo)

Breeder. Breeding kink for days especially if you're a woman. This man will fill you and keep you as full of his cum as you'll let him

Extends to cockwarming. He adores it. Loves feeling you squirming on his cock, devolving into a begging mess asking him to just move

All about the timeline: Dwayne doesn't have a lot of sex but when he does, it's an all-night event. It's a whole thing. Bring water.

He's very big and very strong and he will use it. Enjoys pinning/bending/folding his partners. Wall sex is a fave. Expect to be held up by nothing but his arm strength at some point.

Definitely a dom. I usually think most men are a mix of dom and sub but not this guy. The most submissive he'll get is power-bottoming and letting you ride him cowgirl-style, but even then he's got a handful of your hair in his grip and he's purring

Speaking of noises, not super vocal. Like Marko, he's more animal than man in the sack. Growls, purrs, snarls, hums.

Has a daddy kink because of the breeding kink

He's meh about exhibitionism and public sex. I mean, he WILL fuck you in public, but he'll fuck you anywhere because he does not give a shit. For him sex is more about what he's doing to you, not the environment.

Enjoys emotional sex: angry sex and makeup sex especially

I have great/terrible news. Dwayne's nickname is "horsecock" because he's hung like a stallion. Like that thing is a monster. If you're under 5 feet tall you'll die

The amount of prepwork needed??? For that beast??? Insane. Real talk sometimes he'll have to fist-fuck his partners to get them ready

Master of eyesex. He'll just lean back against a wall far away, and pin you with a stare so intense you're sweating and blushing

BIG fan of multiple orgasms. He'll dedicate entire hours to it, just to see how many he can wring out of someone. His record is eleven.

While Paul is Laddie's best friend, Dwayne does most of the actual parenting: so if Laddie needs literally anything, sorry, sex is getting rescheduled

Can fluster people really easily. He's just big and dark and silent, but his touch will legit set you on fire. Always seems to know exactly where to touch someone

Grazing fingers behind your neck, dragging knuckles up the inside of your thigh on the boardwalk, etc. You are HELPLESS you are WHIPPED for him in 10 seconds

He and Paul actually do a lot of honeypotting for the gang

Not a big fan of oral. Prefers penetrative sex and it absolutely shows: his thrust/hip snap technique is 👌. Can find a G-spot like a goddamn metal detector

Favorite thing is turning his partner into blabbering, drooling, exhausted putty in his hands. A different sort of sadist than Marko. He wants it to feel so good it hurts and you're crying for mercy

Loves partners begging. LOVES it.

Dwayne is an ass man. I will not elaborate

Out of all the boys, the line between hunting and fucking is the most clear for him. You always run the risk of dying, bedding a vampire, but you're safest with him

David likes to get rough in the bedroom and so does Dwayne, but in different ways. David likes to slap, and Dwayne likes to crush. Likes a nice hand on your throat, or putting all his weight on you as he fucks down into you, watching you struggle to breathe under the force

He's one of the strongest vampires, so you will be bruised. Anywhere he grabs you, bruised. Ass? bruised. Neck? Bruised. Cervix? Sorry bestie that's bruised too. Buy some ice packs.

TL:DR a very hard man to bag, and if you do, expect to get folded like a greeting card and have your organs rearranged for three straight hours until you're stuffed like an eclair. If, somehow, you manage to still walk afterwards, don't ask for a phone number. He doesn't want you to contact him again: not unless he's fallen in love with you. And that hasn't happened in three hundred years.

[jmdbjk]

Okay Indigo, hit me.... show me what you got.

Closing out his 20s with a little angsty emo alt-pop R&B electric rock, Namjoon presents Indigo. Independent. Indulgent. Ingenious.

Though I was unfamiliar with the Korean individuals collabing with Namjoon on this record, I did take a "pre-listen" to some of their work before Indigo's release so I could be familiar with their style.

Of course I knew who Erykah Badu is. Though very talented and respected musically, she is not without her own controversies.

And I know Anderson .Paak. I am a huge fan of Silk Sonic, his Grammy winning duo with Bruno Mars who I am also a big fan of.

So these are just my opinions after listening and learning the lyrics. These are my interpretations of the vibe of the songs...

Yun. It is hard hitting first-out-the-gate and I can understand why Joon put this song first. It's a statement: Fuck you, imma do what I want.

Still Life, definitely love the R&B groove, love Anderson's vocals and the improvisation: "Joon: Shit happens in life...Paak: it's gonna be what it's gonna be brothah, you just have to do your thang." "Y'all can't lock me in a frame. I'm still life." The clever wordplay. A "still life" is typically defined as a tableau of inanimate objects such as flowers, fruit and other objects, arranged and then painted or photographed and framed. A still life. A moment in time. But in this song, I am seeing it meant as I am still LIFE, as in still living...you can't put me in a frame because I am living and breathing. So my take is this song says "let's keep it moving, never stay still, live life and don't let them define you by one frame of an image or one point or moment in time."

All Day, yay finally experiencing TABLO, great song, nice fast beat. TABLO's delivery reminds me of Eminem... personally, I am not a big fan of Eminem, but in this song, that type of vocal from TABLO works well. The beat will probably get this song added to my "walking playlist." WE GOT DYNAMITE IN OUR DNA! Might be my fave song off the album.

Forg_tful, an acoustic, laid back vibe, especially with the whistling... sort of John Mayer-ish? Very folk music-y and right up in the middle of Sawol's music genre kool-aid. Makes me want to order a caramel latte with a touch of almond milk at an independently owned hipster coffee shop. And I don't even like almond milk.

Closer, nice little bubbly intro segues to smooth urban R&B. Love Mahalia's vocals. So. Most of this song is sung in English. Paul Blanco has a few Korean words and that's it. The lyrics are very sensual. I find it conveniently uncontroversial that it is Mr. Blanco singing about 'when our lips lock' and 'making her body go diddy diddy bop'. The lyric: "but you run away like a fish"... that one sticks in my head because it is so visual! I saw a small fish get scared and scurry away! Great song.

Change pt. 2, unexpected electric riffs. Interesting that this song is entirely in English. I wonder who he is singing about? Harsh! Lol! Since its in English, it might be about the western music industry–as we know, they have to be spoken to in their language or they "just don't get it". Or it might be about a past significant other who did him wrong. "Some day a great grief will come for you." (That Miss Karma, she's the biggest fuckin' bitch I know.) "That's all I can say to you." (mic drop).

Lonely, I'm so fuckin lonely... super emo alt pop rocker. Joon made this song and these lyrics sound like some sort of weekly Top 40 groove-fest banger. The hook is an earworm in the making. "I'm fuckin' lonely....so fuckin' lonely." And the bridge is big and awesome. This song is a masterpiece of chart topping geniusness songwriting.

Hectic, with all its bright notes and beat, the gist of the lyrics say 'I been working my ass off, nothing glamorous about it, and people still say the same shit. Why am I doing this? What am I chasing? If doing this THIS way is a pain, how can I do it different?

Wild Flower... a big sonic, soaring, epic type song. Youjeen's big vocals and lyrics give me Katy Perry Firework vibes. The MV visuals help push the "big" to me. It's just a big song. Big Namjoon asking "what is this big life I have? what does it mean?" The visuals of him standing on top of the mountain and being able to see the entire world and it's a dawning day...not gonna lie, I did tear up. Seeing Joonie like this, expressing his lyrics visually in a music video touches my heart for him. The stage surrounded by Army... him standing and then laying in the field of purple flowers (also Army), it's very emotionally stirring. But I have something to tell Joon... as time goes by, one still searches for who they are and sometimes we never really understand who we are. All we can do is live our truths as authentically as possible.

No. 2, what a nice closing song to wrap it up. Don't look back anymore. There's nothing to prove. You've done your best. No lookin' back, no. The album ends and I'm smiling.

Like everyone else, my heart swells with pride. Over all, the lyricism is off the charts of course. Joonie is a wordsmith. Thank you Kim Namjoon/RM for putting your soul out there, sharing your emotions and thoughts with us in such a poetically lyrical way. Well done.

My disclaimers: I am not a music expert. These are just my personal opinions. But I do have impeccable taste in music. 💜

[hermanngottlieb-geiszler]

Well *cracks knuckles* it’s my turn for showing the internet my take on the new Riddler design Paul Dano is playing.

I have seen people flooding the riddler tags with their takes and I personally am in shock. As a long time riddler fan, who’s read every issue and played all Arkham games and watched all media including him, I think Matt Reeves take is such a great one.

Now now, don’t flood my comments crying “boo hoo he’s not neon” or “but herrrrrmannn he’s not flamboyaaaaant”. Listen first.

The Edward in this scenario, is a serial killer using his killings to draw light to the corruptness of Gotham city and in turn the Waynes. Showing how the city relies heavily on mobs and the over abundance of corruption in the police force and soon to be the reliance on vigilantes. So he’s not trying to get attention on himself. He’s getting the light shown onto the dark and true parts of Gotham. This is paralleled with how I can assume Selina’s character is going to come in play with Bruce, how she will “show him the ropes of Gotham” with aiding in fighting styles like how she was shown sparring with him in the trailer.

Anyways, Ed isn’t wanting the attention. He wants to destroy Gotham in a more interesting and wit required way. Through slowly showing the public the truth of the gcpd and the nature of the mobs, through live broadcasts on hacked Jumbotrons (similar to Arkham-verse, Riddle Factory, and to an extent Zero Year) and through his game he discovers a new player which is the Batman who is working through the gcpd with Gordon. Thus, furthering the corruption as the police is working alongside a vigilante as well as the mob on some portions. This Riddler does want the attention, but he wants it for different purposes. And his outfit conveys that stunningly.

Okay onto his outfit design that people can’t seem to wrap their heads around. His outfit is based off a military grade extreme cold uniform. The mask was designed to conceal the wearers identity and keep them warm in frigid terrain. Riddler has added onto the concealment of his identity by putting plastic over his hair, allowing himself to be at crime scenes without leaving behind any dna evidence like hair follicles. Thus, allowing the duct tape scene to make more sense with how he was able to do it and not be caught. People don’t seem to realize that dna evidence is pretty damning for serial killers. So the fact that he has all these bases covered for one in this is AMAZING DETAIL. As much as it hurts all you idiots, Riddler in a real world scenario cannot be flaunting his face and showing the world his identity. Which is WHY he is covered. Which is WHY he’s finally back to being enigmatic. Not to mention, he’s going against some of the most dangerous groups in Gotham (at the time, since it is before the rise of the Rogues). The mob in Gotham is NOTHING to joke around about, especially since this is Pre-Rogue Gotham so they are the strongest force in Gotham at the time.

So this new Riddler is GREAT. He’s smart. He’s methodical. He’s sly. He KNOWS what he’s doing. He knows it’s dangerous but he loves the thrill of the game because he knows he can’t be caught. And since a new player entered, one that isn’t hive minded like the mob, he is LIVING for it. Because Batman is not legal either. He’s a vigilante which to an extreme sense Riddler is too. This is the start of Batman realizing that once he enters the ring as a vigilante, people are going to rise up and play against him. This movie is showing the downfall of the mobs grip, and showing the rise of the Rogues. Showing the rise of penguin alongside the rise of the Riddler.

It feels very Riddler-esc and I’m so glad that the dcu finally is giving him justice. He is enigmatic. He’s smart. He’s cunning. He KNOWS the game. He sees everyone as a chess piece and he sees himself as the game master.

Unfortunately, no one seems to understand that riddler is not just some “campy hee hee hoo hoo villain”. People don’t seem to understand that he isn’t just tights and spandex. He’s MORE than that. I know the only other live action versions of Riddler have been Frank Gorshin (who is one of my favorite iterations I will say), Jim Carrey (which was a great performance, just wasn’t 100% the riddler), and Corey Michael Smith (who did alright, I just don’t like how Gotham handled his character as the show progressed. He never grew and stayed pretty one note and wasn’t…a smart riddler which was alright in his arc for season two but as the show progressed, he didn’t). But riddler in the comics and even the Arkham-verse games, has NOT been campy.

I’ll probably make a part two, comparing past riddler iterations and showing how he isn’t just “an annoying gay twink” as some put it and that he is fully capable and has been shown as a serious villain. He has killed people. He has done serious heists and schemes and he isn’t what the majority seems to think he is.

Part two coming soon

[dreamings-free]

interview with Louis in the March issue of FourFourTwo magazine 2/2/23

full text under the cut..

by Paul Wilkes

Which was the first match that you ever went to?

I actually got into football quite late, when I started playing at around 11. There were a few Manchester United fans in the family, so the first match I ever went to was an unbelievable first game: the FA Cup fifth round tie against Arsenal in February 2003 – the match when Sir Alex Ferguson kicked the boot and hit David Beckham! My best memories come from Doncaster, who are the only club I support now. We had a fantastic League Cup run in 2005 – we beat Manchester City on penalties, then beat Aston Villa 3-0 and lost to Arsenal on penalties in the quarter-finals. That was my first real low as a football fan. I can remember walking back home absolutely gutted.

Who was your childhood hero and did you ever meet them?

James Coppinger is my club hero – he played at every level and really played for the badge. Everyone in Donny loves him and he’s a great bloke, too. After I got into One Direction, I was lucky to meet him and play alongside him a couple of times in charity games. As a fan growing up watching him, that was amazing. The best person I’ve ever met in football was Pele. I met him about four or five years ago and it was incredible – he had all these stories and we spoke for ages. He was lovely.

What’s been your finest moment playing football?

I played in Soccer Aid and Ronaldinho tried to nutmeg me. I was all over his shirt, giving him no respect, and I just managed to nick the ball off him! There’s a sick picture that I’ve seen of it [right]. The other moment was when I was about 15. I started as a centre-back, but didn’t grow any taller so moved across to right-back and scored the only Sunday League goal I ever scored. I’ll never forget it.

What do you like most about going to the match?

The whole atmosphere, that magic. When you have those experiences as a young lad, there’s an element of nostalgia each time you go inside a football stadium.

Which player do you admire even though they’ve never played for your club?

As some of my family supported Manchester United, I was never allowed to like Thierry Henry, but those grudge matches against Arsenal were amazing. He was a serious player.

Where’s the best place you’ve ever watched a game?

The Bernabeu – it was Neymar’s first ever Clasico for Barcelona against Real Madrid, which was pretty special. It’s one of the bucket list fixtures to go to. When I was young, Doncaster signed me as a reserve player and I went to a pre-season training camp in Portugal. As a supporter of the club, that’s not something you’re normally privy to, so watching how the squad trained and prepared was fascinating.

A few years ago, you filmed a music video with Bebe Rexha on the pitch at the Keepmoat Stadium. What was that like?

It was really important for me in my career. The reason I’m sat here today is because of Doncaster – it’s played a huge role. It’s who I am as a person and it’s what I write songs about. The fact we were able to film the video at the Keepmoat, where I’ve spent many days and evenings, made it so special. It felt appropriate.

What’s your favourite football book?

It’s not a book, but Fourfourtwo! I used to subscribe when I was younger. I’m not a big reader otherwise. I should be, but I’m not.

What’s been your worst experience at a game?

I was playing in a charity match at Celtic Park. I got the ball and turned to my right, then Gabby Agbonlahor came through the back of me and I tore my medial ligament. A combination of the impact and me being very unfit meant I ended up throwing up all over Celtic’s stadium, which I know will please a lot of Rangers supporters.

Have any footballers been to a gig?

Paul Pogba came to a One Direction show once, that’s the one that stands out – he was really sound. I won’t lie, I don’t think many footballers listen to One Direction songs.

Where’s the strangest place you’ve ever met a footballer?

I was in this bar somewhere in South America and, purely by chance, Bryan Robson was there with a few friends. He was a bit drunk. We went straight over and he was nice, but it was one of those times where you think, ‘What is he doing here?!’ [Laughs]

What’s the greatest goal you’ve ever seen live?

I was at Zlatan Ibrahimovic’s debut for LA Galaxy, because I spend some time over in Los Angeles. The LAFC keeper launched the ball upfield and it was cleared back to Zlatan about 40 yards out. He watched it bounce and then smashed it over the keeper’s head, an unbelievable goal. I love him – I like a bit of s**thousery in my footballers, and he’s always had that.

Who’s your current favourite player?

The obvious answer is Erling Haaland, because any fan seeing him rack up the goals this season has been totally in awe. Even if you support Manchester United, you watch him and think he’s superb. But for me, Jude Bellingham. I’m so excited by Jude – he’s been in brilliant form this season, even before the World Cup.

If you could drop yourself into your all-time five-a-side team, who would you be playing next to?

Well, I play at the back, so I want me and Rio Ferdinand. I’d pick Edwin van der Sar, he was a top keeper in his day, then in midfield I’d have Ronaldinho – I grew up loving his football. Up front, I’ll go for Cristiano Ronaldo.

What’s the most important piece of memorabilia that you have?

I had a Doncaster home shirt as a kid that I associate with growing up. A few years ago, I bought the same shirt in my current size – it’s special to me, and when I met Pele I asked him to sign it. That was the pinnacle.

Louis Tomlinson’s solo album, ‘Faith In The Future’, is available to buy now.

[natromanxoff]

Evening Post - November 25, 1991

(x)

Pop world mourns loss of Queen singer

FREDDIE MERCURY DIES OF AIDS

[Photo caption: Mercury pictured in September]

[Photo caption: SHOWMAN: Mercury’s unique stage style that made him a rock legend]

FANS and friends of pop star Freddie Mercury were today mourning his deah from Aids.

The 45-year-old singer of rock group Queen died peacefully during the night at his luxury London mansion, just hours after telling the world he had the disease.

Mercury's publicist Roxy Meade said: "His death was the result of broncho-pneumonia brought on by Aids."

The flamboyant star had lived like a recluse for the past two years, the illness leaving him frail and gaunt.

Tributes soon poured in for the singer who had helped make Queen one of the most successful acts in the world.

Ultimate

DJ and comedian Kenny Everett, a close friend of the singer, said: "He burnt the candle at both ends — and in the middle."

Rock critic Paul Gambaccini told TV-am: “What a star. They don’t make them like him anymore. He really gave life and showmanship to (…).

“He could command an audience, hold an audience in the palm of his hand. The climate was when he and the group absolutely stole Live Aid.”

Queen rose to force in the early 70s with a series of epic albums and singles culminating in the Number One smash hit Bohemian Rhapsody.

That was the song which began the video revolution in pop music. and the band stayed ahead of the pack with a run of spectacular and sometimes outrageous promotional films for their hits.

Mercury will be cremated in a private ceremony later this week.

He confirmed only on Saturday that he suffering from Aids. He issued a statement saying he wanted to end speculation about his health.

His statement to The […]

Mercury dies

[…] Press Association said: “Following the enormous conjecture in the press over the last two weeks, I wish to confirm that I have been tested HIV positive and have Aids.

“I felt it correct to keep this information private to date in order to protect the privacy of those around me.

“However, the time has now come for my friends and fans around the world to know the truth and I hope that everyone will join with me, my doctors and all those worldwide in the fight against this terrible disease.”

Musician turned politician Screaming Lord Sutch, who played on the same bills as Queen in the early 1970s, said: “We have lost a most original and entertaining singer who inspired many, many people.”

He said Mercury deserved to ranked alongside Mick Jagger and Elvis Presley.

DEATH OF A SHOWMAN

Front door exit for a legend

THE BIG FINISH

By JAMES BELSEY

FREDDIE MERCURY died as he lived last night… in a worldwide blaze of publicity.

It was only on Saturday that the over-the-top rock singer confirmed what we’d all suspected for months — that he was suffering from Aids.

Rare sightings of Mercury this year had shown a shockingly different picture of the man.

The chin-forward, grinning arrogance and that amused, boyish look had vanished.

Fortune

In its place was a spectral shadow of the Mercury who had catapulted Queen to worldwide fame and kept them there for almost two decades.

His kamikaze lifestyle of sex and drugs and rock'n'roll had finally taken its toll.

Rock music’s long list of stars who thought they were immortal and could live by a different set of rules to the rest of us had found its latest casualty.

Freddie had enormous talent and a stage presence that magnetised an audience at the swivel of a hip or the raising of an arm in his characteristic pose of defiance.

He amassed a huge fortune, lived in a £5 million mansion home in Kensington, showered gifts on friends and lovers but remained, at heart, a lonely, increasingly bitter man.

He once said: and "You can have everything and still be the loneliest man and that is the bitter tupe of loneliness.

Success has brought me world idolisation and milions of pounds, but it has prevented me from having the one thing we all need… a loving, on-going relationship.

I can't win Love is a Russian roulette for me. I try to hold back when I’m attracted to someone, but I just can’t control love. It runs riot. All my one night stands are just me playing my part.”

Freddie made no secret of his bisexuality. “I’ve had a lot of lovers. I’ve tried relationships on either side — male and female. But all of them have gone wrong.”

His longest love affair was with blonde Mary Austin which ended after seven years. They remained close friends and she worked for him as part of his staff.

He even became godfather to her son Richard two years ago and spoke of a new sense of responsibility.

His lavish generosity and party-living was outrageous and legendary.

Banquet

After Wembley in 1987 he hired a body painter from Germany and guests were amazed to find the “uniformed" bell boys were, in fact, naked. And at a banquet in New Orleans he hid a nude model in a huge tray of raw liver, making it quiver.

For another he hired Concorde and flew friends over the Atlantic at vast expense.

In one of his final interviews a few weeks ago, the by now painfully thin Mercury said: “I don’t really think about when I’m dead or how they are going to remember me.

“When I'm dead, who cares? I don’t”.

How Mercury became the first video star

FREDDIE MERCURY was born Frederick Bulsara in Zanzibar on September 5, 1946, son of a government accountant. He was educated first at a boarding school in Bombay.

When the family returned to England he became a student at Ealing College of Art. For a decade Britain’s art schools had been the breeding ground for a string of the world’s top groups.

Freddie longed to be a star and in 1971 teamed up with like-minded students Brian May, John Deacon and Roger Taylor.

Their aim: to shock and amuse their way to the top. A new, young generation of glam rockers were pressing hard on the heels of the now mature Sixties superstars.

What was the most outrageous title for a band? They chose Queen, with its clear double meaning and, just in case anyone had missed the point, dolled themselves up with make-up.

Within a year they were the talk of the college circuit. Within two years they’d been signed up by EMI and their debut album Queen was released in July 1973, followed up with two gigantically successful national tours in 1974 and 1975.

Queen came to the Colston Hall in Bristol on November 12, 1974 and November 17, 1975. After the second gig Freddie changed out of his stage gear, a slashed to-the-waist catsuit and threw a party for pals and the road crew.

They returned to Bristol Hippodrome on December 9, 1979, as one of the world’s top attractions.

Mercury knew how to sell himself and the band better than anyone. It’s no coincidence that Queen single-handedly changed the rock industry overnight.

They knew they had s huge hit with their dynamic single Bohemian Rhapsody. But how to sell it?

In came the innovative answer. At the cost of a few thousand pounds they recorded a video film to promote single. Within months the rock video had ceased to be a novelty — and became an essential part of the business.

Typically, it was Freddie who’d been the first rock video star.

Avon Aids campaign launched

FREDDIE Mercury's death comes as health experts in Avon launch a new campaign to highlight Aids.

A series of events began today as part of a week-long Avons Aids Week designed to bring the disease into the public eye.

Experts are keen to dispel any complacency — particulary among heterosexuals — about the HIV virus.

anyope had missed the point,

And Health Secretary and Bristol West MP William Waldegrave has backed the campaign.

Increase

*We have done slightly better than was initally predicted but there is a slow-ticking time bomb of the disease moving across to the heterosexual community,” he said.

“Unless we act now we can predict that in five or ten years’ time we will see a big increase again of the disease in the straight community.

“We have got to get everybody as sensitive to this issue as they gay community is now.”

FAY GOULD

[Photo caption: THE CHAMPION: Top, Mercury had it all. Above, on stage during Queen’s Colston Hall concert back in 1975]

[fatalism-and-villainy]

Reparative Reading

I would love, and indeed have been meaning for a long time, to talk about a piece of academic writing from one of my favourite theorists that I think has an ongoing relevance. This is Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick’s “Paranoid Reading and Reparative Reading,” first published in the mid-to-late 1990’s and compiled in her 2003 monograph, Touching Feeling. There’s a some free PDFs of it floating around (such as here) for those who want to read it in full – and I would recommend doing so, despite its density in places, because Sedgwick has a marvelous critical voice.

Sedgwick’s topic of contention in this essay is the overwhelming tendency in queer criticism to employ what she thinks of as a paranoid methodology – that is, criticism based around the revelation of oppressive attitudes, and that sees that revelation not only as always and inherently a radical project, but the only possible anti-oppressive project. This methodology is closely related to what Paul Ricoeur termed the “hermeneutics of suspicion” and identified as central to the works of Marx, Nietzsche, and Freud, which were all progenitors of queer criticism. Sedgwick objects to the fact that the hermeneutics of suspicion had, at her time of writing, become “synonymous with criticism itself,” rather than merely one possible critical approach. She questions the universal utility of the dramatic unveiling of the presence of oppressive forces, pointing to the function of visibility itself in perpetuating systemic violence, and identifying the work of anti-oppression as one based in a competition for a certain type of visibility. She also rejects the knowledge of the presence of oppression alone as conferring a particular critical imperative, instead posing the question, “what does knowledge do?”

As an example, Sedgwick critiques Judith Butler’s commentary on drag in Gender Trouble, one of the works that she uses as an example of a reading based in a paranoid approach. She identifies Butler’s argument that drag foregrounds the constructed aspect of gender as a paranoid approach, due to its focus on revelation of structures of power and oppression, and she finds Butler’s argument lacking in its neglect in acknowledging the role that joy and community formation play in the phenomenon of drag. Near the end of the essay, she also does an example of a reparative reading of the ending of Proust’s In Search of Lost Time, claiming that the narrator’s remove from the traditional familial structure and its temporality is precisely what confers his particular moment joy and insight upon discovering that his friends have aged. Broadly, Sedgwick rejects the implication that readings based in joy, hope, or optimism are naïve, uncritical, or functionally a denial of the reality of oppression.

Now, it’s important to note that the message of this essay is not that paranoid readings are bad, and reparative readings are good. Sedgwick is drawing on a body of affect theories (most prominently Melanie Klein’s) that posit the reparative impulse as dependent on and resulting from the paranoid impulse – reparation by definition is something that can only occur after some kind of shattering, and Kleinian trauma theories generally posit that process as something that produces a new object or perspective than pre-trauma. (Something I love about Sedgwick is that she often sets up these binaries that seem at odds with each other, but end up being mutually dependent.) Furthermore, the critical tradition in queer studies that Sedgwick is critiquing in this essay is one that was itself, in many ways, a manifestation of communal trauma, particularly with the impact of the AIDS crisis. Sedgwick herself acknowledged this last point in a later essay, “Melanie Klein and the Difference Affect Makes,” claiming that she didn’t feel she did a good enough job of identifying the AIDS crisis as a driving force behind this trend. So Sedgwick is not discounting the utility of paranoid readings, but rather rejecting the notion that they ought to encompass all of criticism. (In fact, a running theme in Touching Feeling is her representation of various perspectives and methods as sitting beside one another, rather than hierarchically.) And reparative reading, as Sedgwick portrays it, is not the denial of trauma or violence, but a possibility for moving forward in its wake.

Why am I taking the time to outline all of this? Because, while the original essay was written almost 25 years ago, with the academic community in mind, it reflects a similar pattern that I see now in online fandom.

Queer fandom (as that’s what I feel the most qualified to talk about) has a considerable paranoia problem. Queer fandom is brimming with traumatized people who carry varying degrees of personal baggage and are afflicted by the general neuroses that come from existing in a heterosexist, cissexist society. And many people in fandom have been repeatedly burned by the treatment of queer people in media – Bury Your Gays, queerbaiting, queercoded villains, etc. And in such a media landscape, and within such a communal sphere, much of fandom has developed the kind of “anticipatory and reactive” method of media criticism that Sedgwick identifies in this essay.

Fandom gets very excited for new media, certainly, and is prone to adulation of media that seems to fit its ideological beliefs. But it is also very quick to hone in on any potential representative flaw, and use that as a vehicle for condemnation. (This cycling between idealization and extreme, bitter jadedness has been widely commented on). Not only is there a widespread moralistic approach in fan criticism that is very invested in deeming whether or not a piece of media is harmful or not, “problematic” or not, within a simplistic binary framing, but that conclusion is so frequently the end of the conversation. “This is problematic,” “this is bad representation,” “this falls into this tired and harmful trope,” etc, is treated as the endpoint of criticism, rather than a starting point. This is the spectacle of exposure that Sedgwick critiques as central to the paranoid approach – simply identifying the presence of oppressive attitudes in a text is not only treated as an analytic in and of itself, but as the only valid analytic. So often I have seen people jump to take the most pessimistic possible approach to a piece of media, and then proceed to treat any disagreement with that reading as in and of itself a denial of structural homophobia, as naïve, and as not being a critical enough reader/viewer. “Being critical” itself has been taken on as a shorthand for this particular process, which many others have commented on as well.

Now, again, I want to stress that taking issue with this totalizing impulse is not discounting the legitimate uses of identification and exposure, or even of reactivity and condemnation. There are particular contexts in which these responses have their uses – in Sedgwick’s words, “paranoia knows some things well and others poorly.” But that approach has a finite scope. And rejecting the universal application of this particular analytic does not itself constitute a denial of the existence of oppression, or its manifestation in media and narratives. Nor is it about letting particular works “off the hook” for whatever aspects they may have that are worthy of critique. Rather, it’s a call to acknowledge that other critical approaches exist, and that the employment of a more optimistic approach is not necessarily a result of ignorance or apathy about the existence of oppression. It is one that invites us not to lay aside paranoia as an approach, but recognize that it has limited applicability, and question when and how our motives might be better served by another approach.  

I think that “is this homophobic, yes or no?” or “is this good representation, yes or no?” are reductive critical approaches in and of themselves. But I think there’s also room for acknowledgment that not everything needs to be read through a revelatory lens regarding societal oppression at all. Rather than “what societal attitudes does this reflect back?” being the approach, I think there could be a good bit more “What does this do for us? What avenues of possibility does this have?” I think there’s already been leanings in this direction with, for example, the reclaiming of queercoded villains, with dialogues that treat those characters not as reflections of societal anxiety and prejudice, but rather as representative of joy and freedom and possibility in their rejection of norms and constraints. I’d like to see that approach applied more broadly and more often.

Let’s try to read more reparatively.  

[deanwasalwaysbi]

Thinking About How This Wasn't Actually a Denial

But was it self preservation?

The year was 2013 and rather than a denial, Jensen said "Don't ruin it for everybody now."

What was the fan 'ruining' for everybody? The Con? or something else? So if I was a tinhatter - and sometimes I am - I might think about other tv shows from the past that were covertly queer and how they handled the question, were TV shows 'out'?

Mainstream shows like Bewitched, you know, shows that are so clearly straight, you can tell because... well. ... they never technically used the word 'gay'. ... witches honor

SPN Film Studies is Back in Session! Join Under the Cut for more on supernatural & the story about how Bewitched! came out of the Broom Closet

Bewitched aired from 1964-72, it's so old the first season was in B&W. The show starred Elizabeth Montgomery as Samantha, the strange housewife with a stranger secret. Her husband, Darrin, unwittingly married into the whole witchy family, from the now drag icon Agnes Moorehead's Endora with her open marriage, to the unmarried and batty Aunt Clara (Marion Lorne who played the mother in Hitchcock's heavily gay coded 'Strangers on a Train'), to the extremely coded Uncle Arthur (gay actor Paul Lynde). (We can't know for sure, but it seems at least 4 members of the cast were gay themselves.) The core premise of the show involves Samantha balancing who she really is with repressing that self for the safety and comfort of her family.

Samantha and her husband keep her [ahem] 'queer' nature a secret which gets harder on Samantha when she has to tell her daughter to live the same way, “I know what fun it is to be a part of the magical life ... to have so much at your fingertips. But we’re living in a world that’s just not ready for people like us, and I’m afraid they may never be. So you’re going to have to learn when you can use your witchcraft and when you can’t.”

There are plenty of generic 60s wacky hijinks but there are also whole episodes metaphorically about repression being harmful, episodes where characters asked if another was a 'thespian', episodes where Darrin was queercoded while under a spell, episodes about representation & bad stereotyping in media, and even two episodes where witches discussed whether it was time for witches to come out to the mortals, (whether mortals could accept that they were just nice normal people trying to live their lives like everybody else - or not - and would just freak out and kill them again).

When it came time to recast Dick York's Darrin with a new 2nd lead, Elizabeth and her husband, William Asher, knowingly cast the gay Dick Sergeant. (Although he wasn't out publicly at the time.) Then, when Sergeant came out in '91, Montgomery supported him and the two served together as the grand marshals of the Hollywood pride parade.

Dick Sargent expressed in the 90s what he would want in a Bewitched reunion episode: for Darrin to meet another like couple, a witch and a mortal who are married, and another, and another, and end up forming a whole community and support group, finding out that it was never so uncommon after all, that it was actually "about 10% of the population." The two would march in the first mortals and witches pride parade, saying they should have come out years ago.

In '94, Montgomery had this to say about the queer themes of the show, “Don't think that didn't enter our minds at the time. We talked about it on the set, that this was about people not being allowed to be what they really are. If you think about it, Bewitched is about repression in general and all the frustration and trouble it can cause. It was a neat message to get across to people at that time in a subtle way.” (x)

Interviewer: Are you concerned that your involvement in the gay-pride parade will lead people to believe you're a lesbian?

"[Laughing] I'm really not worried about that. There are bigger things to worry about. Like the presidential election and finding a cure for AIDS. I did the parade in support of Dick. I mean, in the end, didn't we all?" (x) (Montgomery was also one of the first celebrity allies to fight for LGBTQ rights and support HIV/AIDS-related fundraisers.)

So did they talk about it at the time? No. You can bet they didn't speak about it publicly. What would have happened if a fan, publicly, had asked Elizabeth, William, or Dick about the show's queer allegory content? This was a time when being gay was a literal felony. They would have had to have lied or risked losing the show, their careers, and possibly subjecting themselves to violence.

Now. back to Jensen and the Schrodinger's long con:

This was in 2013 - The same year that the Supreme Court of the United States struck down a federal ban on gay marriage. You certainly couldn't call homosexuality illegal in the US at that time. It's the same year that Dabb and Sgriccia spoke about the Aaron moment on the DVD and whether there's 'this potential for love in all places' for Dean. Of course Jensen said this about the very same scene: "But it was - you know - it was comedy. It was a comedic moment in the show and fortunately Dean gets a lot of the comedic moments in the show and it was just, you know, Ben was poking fun at the fact that - you know, how can we make this very kind of manly, heterosexual guy uncomfortable - uh -you know, or  or have him back on his heels and throw him off his game a little bit.”

I'm reminded of 2012 when Ben Edlund stepped in about a Destiel question at comic con, pretending it was some freaky thing that fans had made up even though he'd already written and directed TMWWBK, which had already aired.

Jensen: “What’s Destiel?” Ben Edlund: That’s some weird shit. Jensen: Is this something that you created, Ben? Ben: You don’t want any part of that.

Or the next year for season 9 when Jensen said “I think the whole Cas and Dean thing has gotten out of hand”  “I don’t think there’s anything secret to their relationship even though a lot of people wish there was” EVEN THOUGH- that season we got the nightstands acknowledgement and Misha (or both of them?) was told to “play him like a jilted lover”

Or Jensen's knowing bromance smile in 2015

I think recent events (cough spn gate) have made clear that the network and many viewers were still uncomfortable with CAS being gay in 2020, deleting even familial mentions of Cas from the finale episodes once he was revealed to be not only gay but also in love with Dean. (x) (x) (x) Can you imagine then what Warner Brothers would have said to an acknowledge bisexual Dean Winchester in 2013? Granted, there was no Trump election, but legitimate, could that have been the end of the show? Or the Russian and Conservative US viewership? Is it possible that Jensen would have feared so?

Is it possible that Jensen had a more personal reason for a knee jerk defensive response?

So was Jensen covering in 2013? Well. This happened 5 years later in 2018:

That hostile "? No." came even though Misha confirmed that he and Jensen had discussed Destiel by that point. Granted, discussing Destiel as a concept and accepting Dean being inherently bisexual are two very different things - Cas is GN after all - still, less than encouraging.

I may never get over the jumps back and forth that Jensen did. At this point I think there's no denying that a lot of SPN's queer content was on purpose, even as writers and actors were telling fans and network execs otherwise. Yet when each person involved was brought in? that question haunts me at night. I have gone off before about the timeline in my pursuit of whether Jensen was Ben Hur'd (x) and, if so, for how long. I'm sure many in this fandom have so much to add.

In the meantime we'll just have to cherish this moment from 2019:

Interviewer: 'So, tell us just a little bit about what you’re most excited to tackle with your character this final season.’ Jensen: “Cas. Just like a full football form tackle.”

Bewitched references in SPN:

2.05 - Dean: Well, it looks like he can't work his mojo just by twitching his nose, he's gotta use verbal commands.

2.20 - Dean says Barbara Eden was hotter than Elizabeth Montgomery - sigh - Dean.

7.05 - Dean thinks a husband has no idea his wife is a witch, and refers to him as Darrin. Dean also indicates he likes the first Darrin better. - (I guess I can't make a comment about how much TV Dean watched as a kid if I get all of his references and also haven't saved the world.)

14.03 - Jules refers to the witch as 'Brunhilde' - this is a minor character in bewitched but more so from mythology and likely referred to the cartoon witch from WB cartoons - the stereotypical witch that faced bugs bunny with the green skin and straw hair.

let me know if you have any to add. Stay Witchy ✌

[ohblackdiamond]

kiss and homoeroticism

You wanted the essay, you got the essay. 

Disclaimer: Please remember, cynical as it is, that KISS has always been into portraying particular images of themselves, and can and will change with the times and what they perceive as showcasing  what they feels is the appropriate message/depiction. I’m not saying they’re never sincere, but, well, I’d take most of what they say with a grain of salt. And I say this for every single one of the original guys. They are all chronic exaggerators and often embellishers, and no showman worth his salt has ever let the truth get in the way of a good story. It’s all about perception.

There’s more of a focus on Paul here than anyone else and I do apologize for that; I just know more about him so he’s much easier to point out for an essay like this. 

Calling this something like “times KISS has directly tried to court the LGBT audience” may, sadly, be a little bit of a stretch and a little too inclusive-- what they were mostly courting was the gay male audience. But let’s start with some stuff that’s definitive and, well, devolve from there. This one got away from me a bit. All opinions are my own.

*Bill Aucoin, their first manager, and his boyfriend, Sean Delaney, were gay. There’s a joke here about how despite everything this is the only real way KISS ever emulated their heroes the Beatles (having a gay manager), but that’s beneath me. Bill and Sean were out as far as the band and its associates went (and as far as their area of the music industry/celebrity went), but not as far as the general public was concerned. This was not remotely uncommon for the time period. All band members were cool with it and Bill and Sean would sometimes take the band to gay bars. All this to say that KISS was not unfamiliar with the gay scene at all.

*Their very first outfits that weren’t courtesy their moms’ sewing machines had their initial inspirations in, of course, the glam rock genre (KISS was one of, if not the last group to make it big in glam rock), but also in the leather subculture and S&M. This influence starts to fade out from tour to tour, but is probably most evident, I’d say, in Peter’s first real costume.

*Their stage moves-- specifically the KISS sway, and Ace dropping to his knees while Gene and Paul do the sway-- are courtesy Sean Delaney. Does it look cool for three guys to be synchronizing their movements while playing guitar? Yeah. Does it simulate oral sex? Yes. Was that their intent? Yes. There are a handful of concert clips where they go even farther with it (here is Gene simulating oral on Paul , and the second gif is Paul doing the same with Ace/Ace’s guitar). I want to emphasize that they’re not the only band at the time that did things like this, and I also want to emphasize that, again, image is everything to KISS and they absolutely enjoyed doing this for shock value and to play themselves up as “transgressive,” subversive, and dangerous. (No, I don’t know why or when Gene started licking Ace and later Tommy; I don’t think Sean can be credited with that stage move-- I feel like Gene just saw Ace’s bare neck one horny evening and went for it, and Ace either didn’t mind or at least dug it enough that it just became a thing.) But it’s also intentionally erotic.

*Photoshoots-- Hotter than Hell and the White Room sessions are the main culprits people point to (and again, it’s worth noting that everyone in the Hotter than Hell session besides Gene is drunk, and everyone in the White Room session besides Gene is high), but there are plenty of other press photos where the guys are posing, humping, etc.

*Marketing-- I’ve said this before, but Paul in particular was marketed as bisexual (I hate that this needs to be said, but I am only speaking of his marketing and not his actual identification.), even in goofier stuff like the fake KISS bios put out for kids. Paul even admits that his note to the fans in Alive is deliberately gender non-specific in order to appeal to as wide a range of people as possible. 

*Paul’s 1989 Playgirl article-- Playgirl’s main readership was gay men rather than straight women. While the interviewer for his article is a woman, Paul’s also really aware of the magazine’s primary demographic, and talks about losing friends to AIDS. (This is not me casting doubt on him having lost friends to AIDS at all, but I don’t think he would’ve mentioned it in a “straight” publication, especially not during that time period, when knowledge about AIDS, its communicability, etc., wasn’t what it is now at all, treatments were limited to nonexistent, and homophobia ran very rampant.) He really plays up to the interviewer and the whole thing comes off like a more mature, nuanced version of his feature articles from ten years prior, sort of portraying himself as this put-together, thoughtful, sweet rockstar that’s so different from his image and wants to settle down-- he’s selling the rockstar boyfriend fantasy.

*You can argue plenty of ways for the general antics of Gene, Paul, Ace, and Peter in particular during interviews. Ace tends to like to touch the other guys on the arm/thigh/whatever’s around. Gene hits on female and male interviewers without really skipping a beat. Sometimes the whole band starts hitting on each other. Gene jokes about his and Paul’s secret relationship and makes rather forthright statements. In KISS’ most infamous interview, Tom Snyder makes a pass at Ace, and Ace, inebriated, reciprocates (”I’ve got a little piece of pipe backstage I’d like you to work on...” “Tell me about it!”).  Again, I’m not going to make any statements on any of their actual sexualities-- that’s not what this is about; these are real people. I’m only focusing on what’s being projected. whether it’s just meant as a joke to throw people off, envelope-pushing, or on occasion an appeal to their gay fans, it’s quite frequent. Ace and Peter are referring to their sexual relationship over here, though, for what that’s worth.