#i need you all to understand that most of the plot was retroactively written to justify certain stylistic choices in my art

[egelskop]

i am so interested in ur hlvrai au can we get a rundown

oh boy, this is going under a readmore.

fair warning, this is a LONG read because (1.) i am not a competent writer and (2.) i can't for the life of me keep things brief. sorry and or good luck.

ACT I

The Black Mesa incident: Gordon Freeman is provided an opportunity to do an informal beta test for a combat training simulation program that's in development in the Research & Development department of the Black Mesa Research Facility. (Read: He knows a guy in R&D and said guy knows Gordon likes video games and VR stuff, so he was like "hey you should come check this out when you're on break.")

The combat sim would be a revolutionary training simulation using artificial intelligence to enhance and realize the experience for the ‘player character’.

The test goes wrong, and Gordon can’t seem to disengage from the simulation and odd, unscripted things start happening; he has to ‘play the game’ to its full completion before he is able to exit the simulation safely. He has suffered a brain injury throughout the process, eye damage due to prolonged exposure to the headset and is generally traumatized by the simulation experience he at some point could no longer physically and emotionally distinguish from the real world. The project as a whole is shut down and Gordon is put into a rehabilitation program. Black Mesa covers up the incident as best it can, but whispers of it still echo around the facility.

Below is a page for a two-page comic i never finished detailing said events.

ACT II

The rumors reach the ears of a particularly tech-savvy researcher named Clark, who steals the project documentation and anything else he can get his hands on from a storage. At home, he looks into the project, reads about it, and gets curious about the simulation’s files themselves. They’re on a drive he plugs into his computer, and suddenly his system’s performance lags, windows open and close until a txt. file opens up. He comes into contact with one of the simulation’s AI that has somehow entered his operating system. He tries to keep it busy by having it poke around as he reads up on the simulation and its ultimate shutdown. When the AI reveals it can see him through the webcam, he panics and rips the drive out of the port. The invasive AI and the other project files seems like they’re gone from his system, he does a checkup but sees nothing odd running or otherwise. The next day after work he does another checkup. Finding nothing, he surmises he’s in the clear and starts up an online game. The slumbering, corrupted data of the AI sees its out, and disappears into the game.

ACT III

The transition/journey to the game is a rocky one, and the already corrupted data of the AI known as Benrey splits and gets even more fragmented. The largest fragment embeds itself into the game’s files to keep itself running. Without the foundation of the game to support it, it’d be lost to a dead void and slowly die out. Somewhat stable, it learns about the world around it; the game seems to be an exploration sandbox game. For now (and clarity), I’ve chosen to call this bigger, embedded fragment ‘Data’. (so this is the big benny with the right eye/one big eye in my art)

Data splits off a smaller fragment of itself, intending it to be an avatar or ‘player character’ but this grows into its own awareness and becomes who we’ll call ‘Beastrey’ (the smaller benny with the left eye and tail in my art).

The fragment ‘Beastrey’ wakes to a dead void, so Data uses its knowledge to create a private server for Beastrey, an empty world. Beastrey’s existence is an extension of the bigger part, with more freedom of movement to parse through the game and move freely within it, with the caveat that it can’t go ‘too far’ away from the host. Beastrey can visit other servers and relay information. Data learns and slowly starts building up the world/private server, at some point settling for an aquatic world because it reminds it of itself (something something sea of data). It's important to note that Beastrey retains little to no memories of the events of canon VRAI.

Data makes it easier for Beastrey to move around, and they grow to have more reach with time. At some point Data can alter the basic structural elements of the game, so it plays around with making things that are reminiscent of the memories it has of Black Mesa and Xen. At one point, it gains access to parse through the player base of the game, and takes note of an email address: ‘g.m.freeman@gmail.com’, attached to a player account. The name is somewhat familiar to it.

It sends an invite to join the server to the player account.

ACT IV

Gordon tries going back to work at Black Mesa after rehabilitating, but he has trouble separating his experiences with the simulation from reality, to a breaking point where an altercation with a security guard drives him to quit. He seeks professional help for his PTSD and anxiety, but still experiences dissociative episodes, migraines and somatic flashbacks localised mostly in his right forearm. Despite this, he is determined to continue living his life as normally as possible. He applies for a part-time job teaching physics at a local high school, the one where his son Joshua goes to, and remains relatively stable from there.

Joshua is 15 years old. Regular teen. After an impressive amount of pleading he got a VR-headset for his 14th birthday from Gordon (much to the disapproval of Gordon’s ex), and he’s been captivated by an exploration sandbox game since it came out a few months ago.

He gets an invite to an unnamed private server, and he accepts.

He is struck with awe as the world he enters seems completely different from the ones he’s seen so far in the game. Different flora, different fauna. Most of it uninteractible, though, or otherwise just retextured from its base game variant. Even the new enemy types, after a scare, can’t actually hurt him, it seems. He stumbles upon Beastrey, who is just as surprised to see him and wants him out until Joshua says he was invited.

Joshua commends Beastrey (who introduces himself as 'Ben-') on ‘modding’ everything in, but admits that he was disappointed to find that everything was just surface-level stuff. Beastrey inquires about what he’d like to see. Data is always watching, unseen, and decides to alter the world in the way Joshua described when Joshua leaves.

Joshua starts appearing more often, if only for a few hours at a time. He marvels at the ways the world shifts and grows with each time he plays, and takes to exploring it with Beastrey at his side, for whom strangely enough a lot of things are also new. Joshua teaches both Beastrey and Data about the outside world, thinking Beastrey is just a somewhat reclusive but likeable weirdo.

Joshua tells Gordon about the new friend he made, ‘Ben’, and the adventures he’s been having with the other. Gordon is happy to hear Joshua is having a good time, but is otherwise none the wiser. Joshua starts losing track of time in the game, but chalks it up to being invested.

During one play session, Beastrey confesses he isn’t the one who did all the ‘modding’, and invites Joshua to meet Data. Data, or at least its ‘physical’ in-game manifestation is deep within the world, past the aquatic twilight zone and strange, drowned ruins of an unknown facility. Data, for the first time, really sees Joshua, and the resemblance sparks something within it. Joshua is drawn closer to it, and just before he reaches it-

Joshua wakes up lying on the floor with Gordon hunched over him in his room, pleading with him to wake up. Joshua unknowingly got drawn into the game much like Gordon had been, and Gordon urges Joshua to never touch the headset again, taking it away. Gordon opens up about his experiences with the simulation a bit more. They both agree to not touch the game or the headset again.

ACT V

Gordon comes into contact with an old coworker from Black Mesa, and he inquires about the combat simulation project, if anything happened to it after it was canned. This is where he learns that an employee had taken the project files from storage and was consequently fired. He comes into contact with Clark, and Clark explains he had no idea he accidentally unleashed the AI unto the game. Gordon asks if anything can be done to prevent what happened to Joshua and himself from happening to other people. Clark confesses he doesn’t know, and that it’s up to the developers of the game to find anything out of place and make sure it gets fixed. Gordon decides to leave the matter where it lies, not wanting anything to do with AI and simulations anymore and to safeguard his son.

Some time passes.

Joshua starts getting repeated invites and messages, at one point he gets into a conversation with ‘Ben’ via a platform’s messaging system. Ben says he can explain everything, that he’s sorry. Joshua decides he would like one final goodbye. He finds the headset stashed away somewhere in the house, and, while Gordon’s gone, he turns on the game and enters the server.

Beastrey (Ben) is surprised to see him, urging him to log out and turn off the game, but it’s already too late and Joshua can no longer leave. Beastrey helps Joshua attempting to ‘exit’ the game by going as far away from Data’s reach, but Data stops Beastrey and traps Joshua, determined to wait to the point that he assimilates into the game completely.

Gordon eventually finds Joshua comatose with the headset on, and he panics. He considers calling the emergency services, but he’s afraid they’ll take the headset off or that removing Joshua too far from the game will hurt his son like what happened to him. He calls Clark, urging him to help in any way he can. This results in Gordon and Clark going back to Black Mesa to retrieve the project files and the other gear they can get their hands on to get Gordon into the game to free his son.

Gordon enters the private server with Clark’s player character, and thwarts any attempt from Data to impede his progress and trap him as well. Beastrey’s awareness is overridden by Data as a last ditch effort to deter Gordon and Gordon is forced to destroy Beastrey before he can reach Data. As Beastrey is taken over, Data gains Beastrey’s awareness, and finds his other, littler half never wanted to trap Joshua in the first place, and the way it hurt him to hurt both Joshua and Gordon to this extent.

At this point, Data wavers in its intention to keep Joshua trapped, even more so with Beastrey now gone, and recognises whatever it is that is driving Gordon forward in the game is outside of his control to manipulate, so he lets Gordon destroy it as well. In a way, it also feels as a fulfillment of its intended role as the ‘villain’. The server crashes, the world breaks apart. The ‘game’ is completed.

The final boss is defeated and both Gordon and Joshua wake up. Joshua luckily wasn’t exposed long enough to have suffered any lasting damage, except for what seems to be a minor headache and some light sensitivity (and a vow from Gordon to get him checked out by a doctor as soon as the clinics open).

--

The whole ordeal results in Clark, Gordon and Joshua sitting in a Denny’s at four in the morning, eating pancakes somewhat solemnly, completely exhausted but also still reeling from the virtual battle. Joshua learns that ‘Ben’ essentially died, and he can’t help but cry for his friend.

“Honestly, I don’t think he’s gone,” Gordon admits, picking at the last bites of his pancakes. "I think he- or whatever that was, has a hard time staying dead. Like a cockroach, you know? At this point I’m just wondering when he’ll turn up again.”

Clark hums in agreement. Joshua seems somewhat reassured by his words, wiping at his eyes with the scratchy napkin as he settles into the squeaking diner seat.

“But,” he starts with a sigh, pointing his syrup-covered fork upwards to the ceiling in a decree, “One thing’s for certain…”

He thinks back to a time rife with virtual gunfire, caging walls and hysterical laughter echoing through the halls of the Black Mesa research facility. Five sets of footsteps and a whisper of his name.

“…No more VR. No more headsets. Ever.”

--

TL;DR: Gordon got trapped in VR and then Joshua also got trapped in VR. Benrey is there but also not.

thank you for reading. here. ( x ‿ o ) 🫴

[laura-de-milf]

Doom Patrol. A Eulogy

*inhales deeply*

This. show.

It isn't really a show about superpowered people. I think it's actually a show about underpowered people who, sure, can occasionally pull off a cool stunt, but for the most part are so broken that they can barely function. With such a strong focus on character, personal growth and The Human Condition- this isn't just something I haven't seen in superhero media; it's something I haven't really seen in all of television.

Shall I list all the ways that this show has improved my outlook on life? (ok, not all-)

The queer rep. Need I say more? Genuinely though--I can't recall ever watching a show where I trusted so implicitly that the queer relationships would be a) intentional, b) integrated into the plot naturally, and c) handled well throughout the show. Looking back on my Doom Patrol experience- not once did I worry about queerbaiting or the queer rep feeling tokenistic. I never worried that the queer storylines would be unceremoniously written out to "improve mass appeal". The queer themes were there, intentional, and unique. We have the classic repression/acceptance arc with Larry, but we also have the slow-burn courtship arc with Jane and Shelley (Jane's block being her personal trauma rather than shame for being queer). Characters like Cliff openly accepting the queer relationships to the point where Jane feels completely comfortable opening up to him--and only him--about her and Shelley. Rita and Laura might not be a canon romantic couple, but those two forged a deeply loving bond faster than you can utter the phrase "uhaul lesbians" and have had a tumultuous relationship that is entirely different from Jane x Shelley. Absolutely magical. There's nothing formulaic about The Gay Plot here: the queer relationships (plural!!!) are unique and explored, given just as much importance and screen time as any of the heterosexual relationships. (I know there is still time to fuck this up but the point is: I have trust in this show in a way that I don't normally for most shows. That's really special.)

The Sisterhood of Dada. I know they weren't everyone's cup of tea, but personally I cared less about their plot relevance and more about what they represented: the pure, wholesome and shameless creation of art. Literally any art. Film. Interpretive dance. Sculpture. Spoken word poetry. Bent paperclips. Don't "choose a niche" and pigeonhole yourself as just A Filmmaker or just A Writer: try whatever you want because it's fucking fun. You'll learn something. Shit doesn't even have to be good; it doesn't have to make sense. It just has to empower you against the forces which seek to hold you down. Maybe Dada is nonsense, but it's subversive nonsense. Most of all, though, I loved the found-family aspect of the Sisterhood: a safe place in which one could experiment creatively without fear of judgement from the outside world. I'll probably spend the rest of my life trying to cultivate elements of this in my real world, even if I can't necessarily build myself a secret teleporting salon out of fog where I can be weird and free with my 6 eccentric pals. The world needs more room for creative experimentation.

Lastly but so very not-least that it's actually the most important point of all: this show gave me Laura. I'm admittedly not as well-versed in the DC/Marvel universes as most fans, but I can't tell you how floored I was to find such a captivating mature female superhero. I've finally started to understand the appeal of having a fantastical super-powered person to look up to--even as a grown-ass adult. She's not a 25-year-old in a latex bodysuit with a physicality I'll never be able to (retroactively) attain. She's not here to be a looker for the boys. She's real. She's fucked up. She's incredibly intelligent, street smart, competent in her ability, and benefits from a wealth of wisdom forged in life experience. She deals with intense trauma. She struggles. She's made huge mistakes. But she's trying her best and she's genuinely growing. Probably most importantly of all, she reinforces how, contrary to what society will lead us to believe, a woman's life, growth, wisdom, wit, accomplishments--and, hell, beauty!!--are only just getting started, even as she turns 40. And that she's so heavily queer-coded?? Sublime. We need people like Laura. I need people like Laura.

So...yeah. I am SO grateful that a show like this exists and that I found it. Thanks for the good times.

🖤

...now all that being said- Doom Patrol has nothing to lose now. Go ahead. Give us the Rita x Laura smooch. As a treat. 😇

[tuiyla]

I just meant compared to something like Santana is mean and angry because she's hiding who she really is and that's her way of dealing with having to carry that. Here, a logical explanation, good job glee, we love that for you. There are many stories in glee with logical explanations for characters' actions and many where there is none and and imho uht bullying is one of those were there is none. Sometimes things just aren't that deep, the plot has to move along somehow. Have we learned nothing from the endless cw teen shows jajajaja Glee is just like them in many regards. I personally wouldn't delve deep into some things because there is really nothing to delve into imho but that's of course just me and I completely understand that that's not you, both can coexist and that's great i think, itd be boring if we all agreed on everything. My apologies if what I said earlier offended you or the anon it wasn't my intention

Can I offer the counterpoint that sometimes, often in fact, bullying itself isn't all that deep either? People just suck sometimes. And sure, they themselves are hurting, etc etc, and that does end up being true in the case of Quinn and Santana, but it's not like that excuses their actions. So I don't see the harm in looking deeper into why Rachel was the main target of this bullying. Yes, of course, she was the show's main underdog and Glee's nothing if not the self-proclaimed champion of underdogs. But they do show why she'd be an easy target for bullying so there is actual logic there.

But you know, all that's to say, I do get what you mean. I just think that this line can be drawn anywhere, of what we consider to have been born out of necessity and what is a compelling story on its own. For example, you bring up Santana's meanness. And y'all know I'm nothing if not a thirsty bitch for Santana's... everything. Especially her anger issues. But I could also say that Santana was mean because that was her archetype and her narrative function. Her struggles with her sexuality and self-image were added later and offered a compelling, retroactive explanation for even her earlier actions. And believe me, I do find it compelling. But I also think, if we really wanted to, we could just as easily dismiss her as being the way she is because the plot needed an even bigger bitch than Quinn was at the beginning. Why does she sleep with Finn? I can write as many comphet posts as I want but that doesn't change the fact that it was for Finchel reasons, ultimately. I know that, and I know she wasn't originally written to be a lesbian, but I still choose to put the puzzle pieces together. And despite Santana spelling her anger issues out in Sexy, I have seen people ignore that and consider her to be a bitch because that's what the story needed. That's what I mean by being able to draw the line anywhere, and dismissing any particular moment as a case of out-of-universe writing necessity. Or even just plain writing choice.

But I mean, you know, you're right, we all choose to look at differently and draw that line at different places. So we do agree and also on agreeing to disagree, and no worries because what you wrote here or previously wasn't offensive. We're all good, Anon, I acknowledge that my line of what I choose to read into tends to be further down the road than others'. Not because I'm that deep or anything lol, it's just a choice I make so I can try and make things of a TV show that didn't make sense a lot of the time. I suppose if I did take issue with any of what you said it's just that I think everyone is aware that it's just fiction and doesn't always make sense. But I'm also a believer in the author being dead and all so I do whatever I want with the text that they give me. What I want, for the most part, is for things to make narrative sense. I certainly picked a hard battle with choosing Glee.

So true, things often aren't that deep. Not with Glee and not with every little thing fiction introduces. I periodically try to put out a disclaimer that, when I pick my shovel and start digging, I'm well aware the intention wasn't to make it that deep. I keep digging anyway to have these conversations with people. Rachel was bullied because she was the main character in a cast of underdogs and she needed to be, fully agree with you. I just also think that we can, if we want to, examine the why and, in the process, flesh her and others out more than the writers intended to.

[dreamieotome]

Recently played Paradigm Paradox and I'm afraid I have. A lot of thoughts. And I need to talk about it because WTF did I play?? Spoilers! (duh)

Paradigm Paradox

Overall Rating 1/10

Favorite ML KAMUI

ML Rating 6/10

ML Trope / Personality Golden retriever bf who is too hard on himself</3

Genre / Summary Magical Girls in a post-apocalyptic world

Overall Thoughts (SPOILERS UNDER THE CUT FR FR)

All I can say is. What a weird game. The tone is so off. The background music never fits what's happening on screen (character: talking about how he had been experimented on without his consent. the music: hehe frolicking in the fields~). The pacing is INCREDIBLY off. The characters. Just don't act normal? It's SO weird. The game is set in a post-apocalyptic world where you transform into magical girls to kill monsters, but the twist is that the monsters started off as humans. There’s a lot of heavy topics discussed like human experimentation, forced imprisonment, brainwashing, child abuse, authoritarianism, government cover ups, but none of it is handled very well. It doesn’t get the depth or time it deserves, and it’s more so a backdrop for the “love” story lines, which honestly are not that great either. Then in the final route you find out about ANOTHER plot twist that doesn’t get time to sink in, and neither was it foreshadowed or hinted at on any other route. Every route is very short, and I don't know if that’s a good thing or not because on one hand they could have improved the story lines with more time, but also, being short is one of its only redeeming qualities because at least it goes so quick. That’s mitigated by the fact there are EIGHT routes to get through. Holy shit. The only other redeeming quality is Kamui<3 because all the other love interests SUCK or are mediocre at best. Also the most disappointing part was Ryou, I was so excited for him and then. It’s just a grown ass 26 yr old man flirting with a 16 yr old high schooler…..my guy … what are you doin….

Individual Short Reviews

Kamui my shining beacon of hope in this stupid game. Genuinely a good story line about a people-pleasing character who tries to sacrifice himself to keep everyone else safe. (Mayhaps I cried)

Ibuki this is an interesting case of where even the writers had no idea what personality they wanted this character to have. So every scene, they have a different personality and motivations. I was so interested to know about their motivations, and just. Got nothing? Go girl, give us nothing!

Yukinami I was so excited to have a yandere route and then it.. just wasn't yandere enough? Idk it just didn't hit. I chalked a lot of plot holes to it being the 2nd route I played but in hindsight, none of the plotholes were retroactively fixed. it was not great.

Hyuga 1st route I played and I was so disappointed. There is a serious problem with how his route is written and he does not make choices that make sense for his character.

Mihaya the plot about his parents and how he overcomes his anxieties surrounding death was interesting, but could have been explored more imo

Tokio I have no feelings about him. Like I understand the trope they are trying to hit, but the transition from the misunderstanding to him being in love wasn't believable at all

Ryou get out of here weirdo. flirt with people in your own age range

Ayumu is on my shitlist fr fr. Straight up in last place in the last tier on my otome ml ranking list. Out of every ml I've ever encountered. Ticks literally every box for everything I hate in a character.

weeeeird ass game fr

[tommyssupercoolblog]

I'm pretty sure this is literally just a point of contention because people believe that his obsession, if acknowledged directly, seems a little bit like dream being a pedophile and grooming Tommy, and people don't want to see it that way. There are a lot of lines and scenes that CAN be (and have been in darkfic circles) read that way...

But the thing is:

1. obsession doesn't have to be romantic or sexual. Full stop. I don't know how people keep forgetting this. You can be obsessed with a person in the same way you're obsessed with a TV show or something. There are people who go crazy over things and want to possess them without being attracted to the non-living-entity, changing it to a person doesn't make a similar obsession impossible.

2. Dream is already a bad person. He's already abusing Tommy and beating him to death and shit. I don't understand the need to make sure he can't be "worse". He's unquestionably a villain who does awful things. And the DSMP specifically regularly addresses dark and dead dove content. it's usually not sexual (sexual jokes are usually lighthearted) but relationships can be and are still dark in their ways. it's not like that reading can change the DSMP streams to have a rape scene in it- that just doesn't happen. Even if dream's obsession with Tommy is romantic/sexual he doesn't touch him like that in the lore, and that being his motivation wouldn't retroactively make it so he did. Is it gross? Yes. Is it awful, terrible, abusive? Yes. Dark and scary? Yes. But also....so is everything else he did? What are we trying to save?

As someone who was there in early fandom I really do think it ties into poppytwt and problematic ships and darkfic and all of that shit, because I've seen people tie the two together a lot...people assume obsessions are romantic and people really, really don't want to confront grooming in their silly Minecraft roleplay even though child soldiers and actual torture and suicide are all already prominent elements.

I'd imagine part of it is that most of us have never been a child soldier in a war or been personally exiled from a country we founded, but a lot of people have been victims of CSA and really would rather not think about it.

The other part of it is that people are more squicked out by sexual violence than other kinds of violence.

And the OTHER part of it is the idea that some people may really care about these dark elements and grow attached to them and write angsty torture fic about it, and some will be deliberately knifetwisting and reveling in how awful and terrible the situation is, which while generally accepted for angst of other kinds is, again, really squicky to a lot of people when the abuse and angst is also sexual.

Especially if someone depicts those elements onscreen in their fanfic and/or romanticizes them (or even just depicts them without telling you directly straight out, "hey this is bad") and ESPECIALLY if the villian doesn't get comupance in the end.

The mere POSSIBILITY of people writing that content made some folks want to rule out the idea of obsession altogether, because it's the lead to the rabbit trail and they want the whole thing closed off permanently so no one ends up making the 200k word torture porn bloodbath fic of their nightmares.

But that fic is getting written anyway. All we're doing is missing a key part of how abuse functions AND ignoring a blatantly obvious plot element. There's scenes of characters saying all dream cares about or talks about is Tommy, Sam thinks dream won't hurt Tommy because dream never shuts up about him, Dream says over and over that Tommy is the most important thing to him, complains about "losing" Tommy when he's in prison, he's blatantly a creep regardless of wether it's because he's grooming him or because he just thinks Tommy is like his little blorbo he wants to keep as a pet. Regardless of the KIND of obsession it is THERE and ignoring it is deliberate ignorance in service of a clean-up initiative that doesn't work. That nightmare fic you might have is out there, It didn't prevent that content from being MADE it just made everyone erase like 90% of dream's screentime from their memory.

it’s so wild how there’s still people who say c!dream wasn’t obsessed with c!tommy like. like you do realise that’s fundamentally just saying c!dream isn’t abusive with extra steps right. like abuse isn’t just a Bad Person Thing that people do for no reason it is in fact part of a mindset. abuse comes from entitlement and possessiveness like abusers feel like they're owed whatever they want from their victims whenever they want it and any time they’re not being actively controlled is theft of something that rightfully belongs to them. that’s like the fundamental thing that Makes an abuser. and that counts as obsession in my fucking books. like either you’re saying c!dream isn’t an abuser in a convoluted way or you’re arguing he did it for literally no reason which is like. that is worse. you know that causing pain onto people when you believe they don’t deserve it and know you’re causing severe psychological damage is in fact even more one note evil villain than the psychology of abusers that exists In Real Life right.

[burst-of-iridescent]

Hi, so just starting off by saying that I despise the comics and L*K. Character and plot assassination at its finest. However, I did read some of the Imbalance comic. And I will say that, like the other comics, it’s not well-written in the slightest. That being said, if we’re being comic critical here, I can actually see some points being made for KA in that comic. Aang actually going out of his way to comfort Katara for once? Aang admitting that Katara was right, that he listened to her, and that the city needs both of their help, when she says that the city needs only him? Bryke’s incel self-insert would NEVER. It genuinely had me confused when I read it the first time ngl. Then I realized that the comic was written by a woman, and it suddenly all made sense why their relationship was a lot more equal in ways that the show never gave us. Obviously, whatever small amount of growth the comic gave to their relationship is null because the other comics and LOK exists. But yeah, I genuinely think if the ship was written like this (where both of them are older and the romance is a lot more subtle but they are both on equal terms, a lot of people wouldn’t have problems with KA. Just wondering if you’ve seen those parts and what are your thoughts on it?

i've heard that the comics do (retroactively) try to fix kat.aang by addressing some of the issues pointed out in the original show, like giving katara more agency, making her a more equal partner in the relationship (like you pointed out) and having aang explicitly ask for consent, and good on them for trying, but it's just too little too late. not only are the other comics also terrible to ka (*cough* love is a battlefield, the promise, whichever one it is where katara just sits sad and neglected by the side while aang shows off to his fangirls) the original show still exists and that cannot be salvaged. besides, reading and taking the comics as canon means accepting the most bullshit character assassinations, and getting a marginally more tolerable kat.aang just isn't worth that tradeoff.

but i think you hit the nail on the head to say that if the ship had been written with both of them being older and on more equal terms, many people would've been far more okay with it. i've said multiple times that kat.aang was never doomed from the start (the way mai.ko was) and it was a deliberate writing choice to make them not work.

in my opinion, four things had to be done to make kat.aang a palatable and healthy ship:

katara and aang needed to be on the same maturity level, preferably through having aang actually undergo growth. the reason i enjoy book 1 kat.aang is because i think this is the season where katara and aang are the closest in maturity, but the gap between them grows wider as the show continues and hits its peak in book 3, right when they get together. this makes their relationship feel unequal and imbalanced, and makes aang impossible to buy as a romantic partner, because we see him only as a child.

there had to be a give and take on both ends. this means seeing aang give actual emotional support to katara (especially in the southern raiders), and katara stop mothering aang. aang comes from a monastic culture, so having him just naturally help katara with cooking/cleaning/etc because he's used to being in an environment where everyone pitches in would've been a great way to establish katara and aang as a feasible couple who would work well together. i would also most definitely have had katara and aang bond over being the last of their respective benders, because this is something only the other would've truly been able to understand. it would have showed us that katara and aang get and help each other in ways that no other characters can.

the relationship had to be framed from both katara and aang's point of view, not just aang's. scrap the ridiculous will‐they‐won't‐they and just show us that katara is actually interested in aang. have aang be presented from katara's view the same way jet is, the same way she is from aang's. have moments that show us why katara would like aang (see point 2) and for the love of all that's good and holy, do not make katara a voiceless reward for aang's efforts. she deserves just as much say in her romantic relationship as aang does. one of my favourite episodes is the cave of two lovers even though it's so kat.aang heavy because it actually does this reasonably well. katara initiates their romantic interaction, blushes thinking about it, and actually seems to be into it.

take out the chakra blocking plot point. kat.aang was already bad in universe, but making their relationship an external narrative problem just fucked them over both in and out of universe. kat.aang became a huge stumbling block in aang's character arc, was never resolved satisfactorily, and overall contributed nothing to either the ship's or the plot's development (unless another ship was supposed to be endgame)

of course, i also wouldn't have made aang an incel who felt entitled to katara's affections and forced his romantic affections on her, but maybe that's just me.

[anarchy2021]

PSA Day! (Rp etiquette)

{ID: A person standing next to a flipchart. They're thin, and have medium-length brown hair, pale skin, and dark brown ears. The ears are angled horizontally. They're wearing thin-rimmed glasses, and their expression reads as confident. Their hair is partially tied up in a bun. They also have a long tail the same brown as their ears, with brown fur the same color as their hair on the end. They're wearing black trousers, a black waistcoat with a white shirt underneath. Additionally, a black overcoat with gold edges is draped over their shoulders. The inner lining of the overcoat is red, and partially visible behind the person. They have their right hand on their hip, and with their left hand, they're holding a stick up to the flipchart, which reads "RP 101 :)". The 101 is underlined. END ID.}

Greetings! You may not recognize me (unless you were watching the debate perhaps, then, sup) as I admit I’ve been a bit…. Behind the scenes as it were (as secretary of VOID there is a lot of looking at the void, usual routine for me mhm mhm). Regardless, I’m Days (or Nights, either or) and for today’s PSA I’m here (along with some words from our recently freed from totally-not-prison president, Graphite, at a later date) to talk to you about roleplay! More specifically, rp etiquette and terms and how that relates to the DSMP and how it should be talked about. 

Now now, you might be wondering “oh but what is your experience?” Glad you asked! I’m a long term text rper with over 5 years of experience- and my main avenues of rp are rps similar in structure to that of the DSMP- long term improv driven sandboxes that also have important events planned ahead of time in some regard but are often player driven most of the time. Now, let’s get into it!

Head writers/admins

Let’s start off with a pretty hot topic regarding the server, which is the existence of a ‘head writer’ (usually in reference to Mr. Soot). Now, mainy take this as meaning quite literally a writer- like in a show, but, with what information we have I think it’s safe to say he’s not really that and more along the lines of an rp admin/head. The admin’s main purpose is to keep things structured and organized, as well as putting together the events they’re in charge of. This is pretty much how everyone treats the man anyways, BUT, while an admin is in charge of a lot they do NOT have the final say over everything, particularly in regards to the characters and their players. 

Players in an rp for the most part have full control over their characters (within reason and the confines of the rp setting) and an admin enforcing their will onto a character (such as enforcing certain backstory choices that don’t seem particularly wanted. For example, the fridge with c!Phil) is often frowned upon unless there is a good reason for it and discussed with the rper. 

It is also notable that just because there is an admin, that doesn’t mean they’re the sole writer/organizer/etc. It is not at all uncommon for specific subplots and or other important events to be headed by players involved in it in this type of rp. This can be seen in practice with how the Eggpire plotline was headed by BBH and the prison plotline was mainly written by Dream and Tommy. 

Summary:

- head writer/admins do not and should not control everything

- organise and structure events

- players might admin their own smaller plots within a rp

Narrative consequences

Now, another hot topic- especially in regards to character discourse (my abhorred personally). Narrative consequences. These are generally referred to when someone thinks a character is not getting the consequences for their actions in the story that they should, or (more rarely in my experience) when they feel a character is being punished too hard for their actions. While this is an understandable feeling to have, at the end of the day narrative consequences just aren’t much of a thing in roleplay, at least not to the same extent as a book or tv show. 

This is for one simple reason, consequences rely on the character’s actions and how they respond to others around them, if a character does not feel like it’s fit to react or if it angers their character- it is 100% within their right to respond accordingly. 

However, there is also an argument that can be made if a character responds to something in a way that doesn’t align with a character’s usual actions. For a personal example, one time in a rp I was playing a character who was intervening when another character was being hurt, however, my character was met with scorn from being somewhat aggressive regarding it- I felt that this was unfair as none of these character showed the same scrutiny to characters who did worse things, and none of these characters had been established as hypocrites. 

This grudge lasted the entire rp until my character died. This is a point where believing that the consequences to a character are unjust is more or less fair, but, a character simply not getting immediately smited or a character getting scorn is not automatically a point against the character, especially since an rper cannot reasonably make their fellow rpers react a certain way.  

Summary:

- narrative consequences are not the same in RP as in other mediums

- can't force characters to react, or force players to react in a way they don't feel is fit

- but can critique RP if things feel unfairly ooc/inconsistent

Retcons

Next up, retcons. What is a retcon? It’s short for retroactive continuity, in essence it’s when in a piece of media something is changed retroactively- such as a character’s personality, how an event occurred, etc. for an outsider audience perspective retcons are often looked upon unfavorably, as it’s changing something already established which can cause friction among those attached to certain ideas, but in reality retcons are both a neutral concept and fairly normal to occur in rps. 

Rps are (generally) not professional writing, they’re things made up on the fly with perhaps a base to work off of (and depending on the rp, not even that. However in the rps I’ve done we generally had character sheets and the like for backstories and all) and thus sometimes mistakes happen. One of the main causes for minor retcons is when details are confused or left out that would have realistically affected the situation or how characters would have responded to it, unless in severe cases these usually happen on the spot and don’t cause much of a fuss. 

Major retcons often fall along the lines of players and how they choose to present their character. This is especially common when a player is using a character for the first time or even if they’re just new to an rp in general, sometimes as we rp we simply decide to take things in a new direction and sometimes that direction may cause things already established to be retconned, even if not outright stated. 

A good example of this is the enderwalk with c!Ranboo, the enderwalk as it was first introduced is very different than it is portrayed now, likely as a result of Ranboo taking a new direction with his character since then. More widespread retcons may happen if people are unhappy with a certain plot thread, in this case an example would be the canon status of SBI, Wilbur used to push it but Techno (and later Phil) didn’t want it to be canon, so anything about it previously said has been soundly retconned. 

In my own case character retcons very often happen to me when I first use an oc, as the character takes a different shape than what I put on the paper in practice, even sometimes within the same rp (one of my first ocs was practically unrecognizable as the same character in the beginning of an rp as compared to even just a few weeks later).

So, retcons are fine and normal to occur, but, like I said- they’re neutral. A retcon can very well be done poorly and cause problems. This is mainly in issue with retcons made that affect highly established and built upon aspects without discussion with all those who’d be effected, this can cause confusion, plot holes and cause characters to be in a weird limbo if they don’t know how to have their character act without whatever was retconned. Major retcons need to be discussed in order to prevent these problems, and in some cases should be avoided entirely- instead it being better to work for a compromise and rework events rather than removing them. 

Summary:

- retcons are normal and neutral

- small retcons happened frequently in RP to help keep things going in an improv heavy medium. Usually unnoticeable

- large retcons tend to have with new players, or if the story is taking a new direction.

- large retcons require a lot of communication, and sometimes whould be avoided, instead working to compromise and rework the direction of the RP

Metagaming and godmodding

Metagaming and godmodding are two very important terms to know for rp etiquette and if you’ve done any rping you’ve probably seen these words thrown around in rules lists and such already. These are both ultimately negative things that should be avoided at all costs. What are they? Metagaming is when you use information that you know OOC and use it IC even though your character should not have that information. Godmodding is when a character is taken over by another person for one reason or another against the player’s will- such as having a character react to something without letting the actual rper do it. 

The former is a big issue when it comes to discussion of the DSMP and how people interact with it, mainly in the chat and donos. When you are trying to get a character to react to information that they shouldn’t have you are trying to get them to metagame, which is heavily frowned upon in an RP. This is also important to note in discussion, a character not responding to certain important events is not a mark against them if the character has no way of even knowing what was going on, or would not reasonably respond to it with the information they have. 

Summary:

- both frowned upon

- god modding is taking over someone elses character

- metagaming is using out of character information to do in character acting

- Meta gaming is relevant to DSMP particular in how it relates to donos and chats. Don't encourage meta-gaming

All of these factors are important to consider when discussing the DSMP and it’s narrative, it’s not going to function the same as other forms of media nor should it- as once you go in that direction you’re competing with the big boys over at tv and at that point things would fall apart. Improv and it’s unique variables is what makes the DSMP, and anything else like it, special and interesting to follow!

[raymondebidochonlifechoices]

All fans are equal but some are more equal than others. NOT.

There’s been quite a few people in the fandom lately getting very stressed, feeling they’re obligated to constantly be on the defensive re: their fandom choices.

Apparently, whoever has a different opinion about a character or a ship must be said character’s/ship’s stan i.e. overzealous and/or obsessive, i.e. not an objective viewer. Even worse, they must be a dreadful person, who condones a number of moral offences that said character/ship perpetrated (or is thought to have perpetrated). Because, of course, the only acceptable reason for appreciating/enjoying a fictional character or dynamic is their morality. And, by that reasoning, fans who support the correct character/ship must be better fans and better people.

Nothing is more ridiculous than the notion of the objective fan. An “objective” fan is called a “viewer”. You and I, Riverdale friends, we are not just viewers. Otherwise, we wouldn’t have created blogs and dedicated hours of our lives to a fictional couple from an extremely mediocre show. We are still undoubtedly capable of critical thought and objective analysis but we are also aware of our own emotional investment in the show. (Or, at least, one hopes). As a fandom, we engage in activities that exist independently of the show. Fandom is a space of free expression. No one gets to play the higher moral card here. Needing to loudly tell everybody how wrong they are? That’s not the sign of an objective viewer. That’s the sign of a viewer who is also extremely invested, just for different reasons than I am.

Are we seriously holding the morality card over people’s heads for a show that used a poc woman’s pregnancy (Toni) as the means to retroactively establish trauma for a white male (Kevin), all the while touting it in every media possible as a woke response to the BLM movement?!

Are we seriously holding the canon card over people’s heads for a show that treats its 5th(!) season as a tabula rasa?! If the Lodges new backstory in 5x12 shows anything, it’s that s5 is not a time-jump. It’s a reboot.

There are so many people “enlightening” others on their inability to understand canon …

Seriously? That’s the hill you’re willing to die on? Canon Riverdale? You think that people don’t understand what they’re watching? That they’re interpreting canon incorrectly?

No, but seriously: canon for a TV show consists of what the characters say, what the characters do and how the actors portray them. Does this really apply to Riverdale?

Let’s take Donna for example.

Canon explicitly tells us Donna did what she did to avenge her grandmother. At the same time none of her canon actions were against the people who were actually responsible. So, riddle me this, fandom friends: why did Donna do what she did, as per canon?

Let’s try this another way:

Donna is a psycho bitch. Both in terms of Riverdale’s canon (the writers’ intention) and real-life criteria. To create a tag that reads “Bonna for ever uwu!” is deranged.

On the other hand, her character is (like a lot of Riverdale’s characters) an inconsistent caricature. Canon uses ridiculous dialogue and a lot of the Bonna scenes are cartoonishly enemies-to-lovers tropey. To create a tag that reads “Bonna for ever uwu!” is hilarious.

This doesn’t mean that Bonna is a canon couple. It does mean, however, that a Bonna crackship is based on Riverdale’s campy and over-the-top canonic writing.

A viewer who thinks Bonna is disgusting is not more “objective” or more “correct” or more “true to canon” than a viewer who thinks Bonna is funny. Nor are they a better person for it, and this cannot be stressed enough.

Similarly, who is canon Cheryl?

1. Cheryl is an absolute bitch: if a privileged student was calling an actual homeless boy a hobo in your real-life school, you would neither think her a queen nor use “hobo” affectionately in your tags, comments etc.

2. Cheryl is a deeply traumatized person: her father killed her brother, her mother killed half the town and forced her in conversion therapy, she attempted suicide and more.

(Note #1: this more does not mean more than the other Riverdale characters).

(Note #2: nor is it an excuse for her rudeness, affectionately called “mood for chaos” by the writers).

3. Cheryl is also a caricature of the archetypal mean girl who’s there for laughs and meta comments. She’s not to be taken seriously.

4. Cheryl is lgbtq+ representation …

5. … who canonically shits on other lgbtq+ characters.

6. Cheryl is one half of Choni, who are canonically presented as an uber couple.

7. Choni is also, as per canon, a couple with an acute power imbalance (cough!gaslighting!cough) that visually very clearly panders to the male gaze.

But most importantly:

8. Cheryl canonically is not the sum of her parts. The different facets of her character do not intermingle in any meaningful way.

Was Betty kissing Archie specifically a sore spot for Jughead?

Canonically no [2x14]. But, also, canonically yes [5x03, 5x10].

Are there seriously fans that are astonished that Betty is making some highly questionable choices while investigating?! Did they just discover Dark™Betty/Killer Genes Betty? That is canon Betty! Was it ok before because she was then smooching Jughead instead of giving him the cold shoulder? Honestly, the only newly outrageous part of s5Dark™Betty is the fact that she still believes in “killer genes” despite having spent 4 years at Yale …

As for liking/disliking Betty and morality …

Look, I’m going to be very honest: I am NOT particularly enjoying s5 Betty. And it’s not because of b*rchie.

S5 Betty has 99 problems but the sexcapades ain’t one.

For me, it’s the fact that she’s turned into s1 Alice 2.0. But surely that’s not news either? Ever since the first info about the time jump, everyone and their mother have been speculating about the teens becoming their parents …

Just because Jughead is better written (and written to be more likable), it doesn’t make him more worthy of redemption. Just because the writers are keeping Betty’s redemption “secret” (insert eye roll) for their big reveal in the season’s penultimate episode, it doesn’t mean she won’t have one.  

Simply put, the writers have made Jughead more likable. He’s still the underdog. He’s the only character in Riverdale actively trying to deal with his trauma, since the very first post-time jump episode (working at Pop’s explicitly to fend off the debt collectors). He has scenes with a new and extremely likable character (Tabitha). He has the only new plot line (the Mothman). Said plotline is narratively already tied to both his unknown past and the town’s destruction by Hiram. His behaviour is explicitly explained, even as his recent trauma remains unknown. He’s transparent.

In comparison, s5 Betty is traumatized but not the underdog. Her trauma (TBK killer) is both known to us and a repetition of previous storylines, which makes it narratively less exciting. She is completely disconnected from any other storylines. She comes out as being judgmental and self-interested: telling Tabitha Jughead’s not her business while previously accepting his help? Berating Polly for lying while not keeping in touch and lying about her own life (TBK)? Please note: I’m not saying there isn’t a reason behind her behaviour, just that it comes out in a negative way.

You don’t like Betty’s current behaviour? You don’t consider trauma a good enough excuse? Cool.

You feel sorry for what she’s going through? You consider trauma to be a valid explanation for her behaviour? Also cool.

Personally, I don’t give a flying fig, either for Betty’s trauma or Jughead’s. Because, even though Trauma™ is s5’s actual mystery plot, narratively speaking, trauma never affected the plot of the past 4 seasons, nor s5 trauma will affect future plots, once revealed. And you know what? That is also cool.

None of the above is better.

And just because I’m not enjoying Betty right now, it doesn’t mean that I don’t want her to overcome her current situation or that I won’t cheer for Bughead like a River Vixen on fizzle rocks, once they reunite.

This thing though, where people are made to feel as if they owed anyone in the fandom an explanation about why they like the things they like, because, somehow, their preferences are a reflection on their character or their cognitive abilities to read a TV show? This is a joke.

There is no “wrong” way to consume any show, let alone Riverdale, with its fractured format, its short-term memory and its see-sawing characters.

Look, everybody’s here for their own reasons. For most people this is a place of escape. No one’s escaping better than the other, because of how they enjoy their teen TV show ... 

[sebastianshaw]

I know everyone here is SICK of my Duggan hate but-- It strikes me, he really just CAN’T write complex characters? I’ve noted many times over how he’s dedicatedly stripped Shaw of anything likeable or human not only the present, but actively retconned events to make him a 2D sack of evil (and frankly, inept evil) in the past as well. But he also goes out of his way to do the reverse for Emma, retconning that she’s ACTUALLY been a good person All Along even when she was at her most evil (so. . . what about her neverending journey to be a better person then, if she always was?) and actually Always Helped Other Women (which is like. . .pretty laughable to anyone who has read her past issues) to fit his ‘feminist’ theme. And there’s also, as many others have noted, how the secondary cast is just. .  .bereft of character, or likewise one-not. Bobby, Pyro, Shinobi, and Bishop can go for ISSUES without speaking, and when they do, it’s like. . .one line. They show the bare minimum of personality most of the time, and while sometimes Duggan can hit a home run (Shinobi’s remark about how he and his dad have done well in not trying to kill each other so far) a lot of it is just. . . why are they there? No, really. They don’t really do anything, and the “plots” he gives them are typically underwhelming and resolved in one issue.  Pyro, as @sammysdewysensitiveeyes has noted, hasn’t been demonized into a total strawman like Shaw, but he’s also really not at all recognizable as Pyro either. His character is entirely a one-note buffoon who is there for stupid comic relief, and there’s zero discussion about his past prior to coming back---his time with the Brotherhood, his battle with the Legacy Virus, the changes he underwent as a person when he was at death’s door, or even the stuff before that as a wartime journalist in Southeast Asia. None of that is there, there’s just this chaotic frat boy joke that Duggan pretty much entirely made up; he only even acknowledges Pyro is a Gothic Romance novelist after 20 issues, and even then it’s to make him look like a joke some more. Like Shaw, he’s just got one dimension now. Duggan seems to WANT to talk about abuse, specifically at the hands of men, which both Christian and Shinobi have experienced, as both were abused by their fathers. But he never, ever brings that up. Instead, he retroactively invents that Shaw abused Lourdes, and tacks on an abusive backstory to a female villain. I don’t think he thinks men can be abused? Or just. . .doesn’t care. His male characters are the ones who suffer most from flatness and having to be inept, evil, or both while the Cool Women Do Things, and I guess he, like lots of men, thinks that’s what Feminism (TM) is, just he’s not whining about it and is performing it instead. Speaking of that female villain, Wilhemina is a nasty evil sadistic little girl who not only happily kills/hurts people, she also kills and tortures animals, especially kittens. And you know what? I bet in the hands of a skilled writer, she very much COULD be made sympathetic and understandable. But what Duggan does is he just takes her and literally in ONE SCENE is like “oh she understands it was wrong now and is SUPER SORRY see she’s CRYING and also she did it because she was SEXUALLY ABUSED” and bam, we’re supposed to feel for her. There’s no buildup, no exploration, just a sudden explanation and remorse and that’s. . . .it?  Compare MANON AND MAXIME whom I’ve written about before. They’re two children who were traumatized, abused, exploited, and made to hurt others by their abuser, which they seemed to enjoy doing. Now that they’re free and living on Krakoa, they do still exhibit unacceptable behavior at times, sometimes out of vengeance, sometimes in self-defense gone too far, and sometimes out of a desire to help and please others but lacking the tools to understand boundaries and appropriateness and respect for other’s autonomy. They’re a very unsettling blend of being sweet, childlike children, too eager to please adults, and little gremlins who seem to take joy in messing with people’s minds---or who just don’t understand when it’s wrong even when they mean well. Unsettling, and realistic. Psychic powers aside, I find the twins to be much closer to real-world victims of abuse, especially children, in that they’re NOT “good victims” or “bad victims”. They’re not the “abuse makes you evil” trope, but they still have fucked-up behavior so they’re not the “little abused angel who just sobs beautifully but whose symptoms are all sympathetic uwu” either, which is just as rare and as damaging a stereotype in its own way because it holds that up as how survivors of abuse “should” be. And, as said, that’s rarely it. Most survivors come out of abuse with behaviors that AREN’T sympathetic but DID help them survive, and they ARE NOT BAD PEOPLE FOR IT. This shit is complicated. Then there’s Wilhemina, who starts out as just a monster (even though, realistically, if a child is hurting animals, they probably DO need help) and then the moment her tragic backstory is revealed, she also recognizes and regrets all her wrongdoings. She jumps from one extreme to the other in the space of a few panels, but remains totally one-dimensional either way. And of course, Lourdes. We didn’t see to much of her personality BEFORE Duggan got ahold of her, but in her two issues pre-retcon, she showed a surprising amount of depth and moral ambiguity. She was a member of the Hellfire Club and high enough in its ranks to try to prevent Shaw from being nominated as Black Bishop, claiming she’d seen how it changed people. She clearly had seen some shit and despises it, yet she remained within it. She also seemed content with the idea of Shaw and Buckman experimenting on mutants as guinea pigs, her concern was more doing it on the X-Men specifically and that Buckman would betray Shaw. And she had far more agency when she chose to give her life to save Shaw’s, than Duggan’s version that needed Emma to tell her what to do. Duggan’s Lourdes is a brainless doll who talks like a little girl and needs Emma to handle everything for her, despite it largely not making sense that she would, given her own resources. She’s more morally pure, perhaps, but also one-dimensional. Only room for ONE Woman With Agency here, honey! TL;DR Duggan really can’t write characters that are more than one or two notes, and it shows. 

[armageddon-generation]

Articulating Why His Dark Materials is Badly Written

A long essay-thing with lots of specific examples and explanations of why I feel this way. Hopefully I’ve kept fanboy bitching to a minimum.

This isn’t an attack on fans of the show, nor a personal attack on Jack Thorne. I’m not looking to ruin anyone’s enjoyment of the show, I just needed to properly articulate, with examples, why I struggle with it. I read and love the books and that colours my view, but I believe that HDM isn’t just a clumsy, at-best-functional, sometimes incompetent adaptation, it’s a bad TV show separate from its source material. The show is the blandest, least interesting and least engaging version of itself it could be.

His Dark Materials has gorgeous production design and phenomenal visual effects. It's well-acted. The score is great. But my god is it badly written. Jack Thorne writing the entire first season damned the show. There was no-one to balance out his flaws and biases. Thorne is checking off a list of plot-points, so concerned with manoeuvring the audience through the story he forgets to invest us in it. The scripts are mechanical, empty, flat.

Watching HDM feels like an impassioned fan earnestly lecturing you on why the books are so good- (Look! It's got other worlds and religious allegory and this character Lyra is really, really important I swear. Isn't Mrs Coulter crazy? The Gyptians are my favourites.) rather than someone telling the story naturally.

My problems fall into 5 main categories:

Exposition- An unwillingness to meaningfully expand the source material for a visual medium means Thorne tells and doesn't show crucial plot-points. He then repeats the same thing multiple times because he doesn't trust his audience

Pacing- By stretching out the books and not trusting his audience Thorne dedicates entire scenes to one piece of information and repeats himself constantly (see: the Witches' repetition of the prophecy in S2).

Narrative priorities- Thorne prioritises human drama over fantasy. This makes sense budgetarily, but leads to barely-present Daemons, the Gyptians taking up too much screentime, rushed/badly written Witches (superpowers, exposition) and Bears (armourless bear fight), and a Lyra more focused on familial angst than the joy of discovery

Tension and Mystery- because HDM is in such a hurry to set up its endgame it gives you the answers to S1's biggest mysteries immediately- other worlds, Lyra's parents, what happens to the kids etc. This makes the show less engaging and feel like it's playing catch-up to the audience, not the other way around.

Tonal Inconsistency- HDM tries to be a slow-paced, grounded, adult drama, but its blunt, simplistic dialogue and storytelling methods treat the audience like children that need to be lectured.

MYSTERY, SUSPENSE AND INTRIGUE

The show undercuts all the books’ biggest mysteries. Mrs Coulter is set up as a villain before we meet her, other worlds are revealed in 1x2, Lyra's parents by 1x3, what the Magesterium do to kids is spelled out long before Lyra finds Billy (1x2). I understand not wanting to lose new viewers, but neutering every mystery kills momentum and makes the show much less engaging.

This extends to worldbuilding. The text before 1x1 explains both Daemons and Lyra's destiny before we meet her. Instead of encouraging us to engage with the world and ask questions, we're given all the answers up front and told to sit back and let ourselves be spoon-fed. The viewer is never an active participant, never encouraged to theorise or wonder

 Intrigue motivated you to engage with Pullman's philosophical themes and concepts. Without it, HDM feels like a lecture, a theme park ride and not a journey.

The only one of S1's mysteries left undiminished is 'what is Dust?', which won't be properly answered until S3, and that answer is super conceptual and therefore hard to make dramatically satisfying

TONAL INCONSISTENCY

HDM billed itself as a HBO-level drama, and was advertised as a GoT inheritor. It takes itself very seriously- the few attempts at humour are stilted and out of place

The production design is deliberately subdued, most notably choosing a mid-twentieth century aesthetic for Lyra’s world over the late-Victorian of the books or steampunk of the movie. The colour grading would be appropriate for a serious adult drama. 

Reviewers have said this stops the show feeling as fantastical as it should. It also makes Lyra’s world less distinct from our own. 

Most importantly, minimising the wondrous fantasy of S1 neuters its contrast with the escalating thematic darkness of the finale (from 1x5 onwards), and the impact of Roger’s death. Pullman's books are an adult story told through the eyes of a child. Lyra’s innocence and naivety in the first book is the most important journey of the trilogy. Instead, the show starts serious and thematically heavy (we’re told Lyra has world-saving importance before we even meet her) and stays that way.

Contrasting the serious tone, grounded design and poe-faced characters, the dialogue is written to cater to children. It’s horrendously blunt and pulls you out of scenes. Subtext is obliterated at every opportunity. Even in the most recent episode, 2x7, Pan asks Lyra ‘do you think you’re changing because of Will?’

I cannot understate how on the nose this line is, and how much it undercuts the themes of the final book. Instead of even a meaningful shot of Lyra looking at Will, the show treats the audience like complete idiots. 

So, HDM looks and advertises itself like an adult drama and is desperate to be taken seriously by wearing its big themes on its sleeve from the start instead of letting them evolve naturally out of subtext like the books, and dedicating lots of scenes to Mrs Coulter's self-abuse 

At the same time its dialogue and character writing is comparable to the Star Wars prequels, more childish than media aimed at a similar audience - Harry Potter, Doctor Who, Avatar the Last Airbender etc

DAEMONS

The show gives itself a safety net by explaining Daemons in an opening text-crawl, and so spends less time showing the mechanics of the Daemon-human bond. On the HDM subreddit, I’ve seen multiple people get to 1x5 or 6, and then come to reddit asking basic questions like ‘why do only some people have Daemons?’ or ‘Why are Daemons so important?’.

It’s not that the show didn’t answer these questions; it was in the opening text-crawl. It’s just the show thinks telling you is enough and never shows evidence to back that up. Watching a TV show you remember what you’re shown much easier than what you’re told 

The emotional core of Northern Lights is the relationship between Lyra and Pan. The emotional core of HDM S1 is the relationship between Lyra and Mrs Coulter. This wouldn't be bad- it's a fascinating dynamic Ruth plays wonderfully- if it didn't override the Daemons

Daemons are only onscreen when they serve a narrative purpose. Thorne justifies this because the books only describe Daemons when they tell us about their human. On the page your brain fills the Daemons in. This doesn't work on-screen; you cannot suspend your disbelief when their absence is staring you in the face

Thorne clarified the number of Daemons as not just budgetary, but a conscious creative choice to avoid onscreen clutter. This improved in S2 after vocal criticism.

Mrs Coulter/the Golden Monkey and Lee/Hester have well-drawn relationships in S1, but Pan and Lyra hug more in the 2-hour Golden Compass movie than they do in the 8-hour S1 of HDM. There's barely any physical contact with Daemons at all.

They even cut Pan and Lyra's hug after escaping the Cut in Bolvangar. In the book they can't let go of each other. The show skips it completely because Thorne wants to focus on Mrs Coulter and Lyra.

They cut Pan and Lyra testing how far apart they can be. They cut Lyra freeing the Cut Daemons in Bolvangar with the help of Kaisa. We spent extra time with both Roger and Billy Costa, but didn't develop their bonds with their Daemons- the perfect way to make the Cut more impactful

I don't need every single book scene in the show, but notice that all these cut scenes reinforced how important Daemons are. For how plodding the show is. you'd think they could spare time for these moments instead of inventing new conversations that tell us the information they show

Daemons are treated as separate beings and thus come across more like talking pets than part of a character

The show sets the rules of Daemons up poorly. In 1x2, Lyra is terrified by the Monkey being so far from Coulter, but the viewer has nothing to compare it to. We’re retroactively told in that this is unnatural when the show has yet to establish what ‘natural’ is.

The guillotine blueprint in 1x2 (‘Is that a human and his Daemon, Pan? It looks like it.’ / ‘A blade. To cut what?’) is idiotic. It deflates S1’s main mystery and makes the characters look stupid for not figuring out what they aren’t allowed to until they did in the source material, it also interferes with how the audience sees Daemons. In the book, Cutting isn’t revealed until two-thirds of the way in (1x5). By then we’ve spent a lot of time with Daemons, they’ve become a background part of the world, their ‘rules’ have been established, and we’re endeared to them.

By showing the Guillotine and putting Daemons under threat in the second episode, the show never lets us grow attached. This, combined with their selective presence in scenes, draws attention to Daemons as a plot gimmick and not a natural extension of characters. Like Lyra, the show tells us why Daemons are important before we understand them.

Billy Costa's fate falls flat. It's missing the dried fish/ fake Daemon Tony Markos clings to in the book. Thorne said this 'didn't work' on the day, but it worked in the film. Everyone yelling about Billy not having a Daemon is laughable when most of the background extras in the same scene don't have Daemons themselves

WITCHES

The Witches are the most common complaint about the show. Thorne changed Serafina Pekkala in clever, logical ways (her short hair, wrist-knives and cloud pine in the skin)

The problem is how Serafina is written. The Witches are purely exposition machines. We get no impression of their culture, their deep connection to nature, their understanding of the world. We are told it. It is never shown, never incorporated into the dramatic action of the show.

Thorne emphasises Serafina's warrior side, most obviously changing Kaisa from a goose into a gyrfalcon (apparently a goose didn't work on-screen)

Serafina single-handedly slaughtering the Tartars is bad in a few ways. It paints her as bloodthirsty and ruthless. Overpowering the Witches weakens the logic of the world (If they can do that, why do they let the Magesterium bomb them unchallenged in 2x2?). It strips the Witches of their subtlety and ambiguity for the sake of cinematic action.

A side-effect of Serafina not being with her clan at Bolvangar is limiting our exposure to the Witches. Serafina is the only one invested in the main plot, we only hear about them from what she tells us. This poor set-up weakens the Witch subplot in S2

Lyra doesn’t speak to Serafina until 2x6. She laid eyes on her once in S1.

The dialogue in the S2’s Witch subplot is comparable to the Courasant section of The Phantom Menace. 

Two named characters, neither with any depth (Serafina and Coram's dead son developed him far more than her). The costumes look ostentatious and hokey- the opposite of what the Witches should be. They do nothing but repeat the same exposition at each other, even in 2x7.

We feel nothing when the Witches are bombed because the show never invests us in what is being destroyed- with the amount of time wasted on long establishing shots, there’s not one when Lee Scoresby is talking to the Council.

BEARS

Like the Witches; Thorne misunderstands and rushes the fantasy elements of the story. The 2007 movie executed both Iofur's character and the Bear Fight much better than the show- bloodless jaw-swipe and all

Iofur's court was not the parody of human court in the books. He didn't have his fake-Daemon (hi, Billy)

An armourless bear fight is like not including Pan in the cutting scene. After equating Iorek's armour to a Daemon (Lee does this- we don’t even learn how important it is from Iorek himself, and the comparison meant less because of how badly the show set up Daemons) the show then cuts the plotpoint that makes the armour plot-relevant. This diminishes all of Bear society. Like Daemons, we're told Iorek's armour is important but it's never shown to be more than a cool accessory

GYPTIANS

Gyptians suffer from Hermoine syndrome. Harry Potter screenwriter Steve Kloves' favourite character was Hermione, and so Film!Hermoine lost most of Book!Hermoine's flaws and gained several of Book!Ron's best moments. The Gyptians are Jack Thorne's favourite group in HDM and so they got the extra screentime and development that the more complicated groups/concepts like Witches, Bears, and Daemons (which, unlike the Gyptians, carry over to other seasons amd are more important to the overall story) needed

At the same time, he changes them from a private people into an Isle of Misfit Toys. TV!Ma Costa promises they'll ‘make a Gyptian woman out of Lyra yet’, but in the book Ma specifically calls Lyra out for pretending to be Gyptian, and reminds her she never can be.

This small moment indicates how, while trying to make the show more grounded and 'adult', Thorne simultaneously made it more saccharine and sentimental. He neuters the tragedy of the Cut kids when Ma Costa says they’ll become Gyptians. Pullman's books feel like an adult story told through the eyes of a child. The TV show feels like a child's story masquerading as a serious drama.

LIN-MANUEL MIRANDA

Let me preface this by saying I genuinely really enjoy the performances in the show. It was shot in the foot by The Golden Compass' perfect casting.

The most contentious/'miscast' actor among readers is LMM. Thorne ditched the books' wise Texan for a budget Han Solo. LMM isn't a great dramatic actor (even in Hamilton he was the weak link performance-wise) but he makes up for it in marketability- lots of people tried the show because of him

Readers dislike that LMM's Lee is a thief and a scoundrel, when book-Lee is so moral he and Hester argue about stealing. Personally, I like the change in concept. Book!Lee's parental love for Lyra just appears. It's sweet, but not tied to a character arc. Done right, Lyra out-hustling Lee at his own game and giving him a noble cause to fight for (thus inspiring the moral compass of the books) is a more compelling arc.

DAFNE KEENE AND LYRA

I thought Dafne would be perfect casting. Her feral energy in Logan seemed a match made in heaven. Then Jack Thorne gave her little to do with it.

Compare how The Golden Compass introduced Lyra, playing Kids and Gobblers with a group of Gyptian kids, including Billy Costa. Lyra and Roger are chased to Jordan by the Gyptians and she makes up a lie about a curse to scare the Gyptians away.

In one scene the movie set up: 1) the Gobblers (the first we hear of them in the show is in retrospect, Roger worrying AFTER Billy is taken) 2) Lyra’s pre-existing relationship with the Gyptians (not in the show), 3) Friendship with Billy Costa (not in the book or show) 4) Lyra’s ability to befriend and lead groups of people, especially kids, and 5) Lyra’s ability to lie impressively

By comparison, it takes until midway through 1x2 for TV!Lyra to tell her first lie, and even then it’s a paper-thin attempt. 

The show made Roger Lyra’s only friend. This artificially heightens the impact of Roger's death, but strips Lyra of her leadership qualities and ability to befriend anyone. 

Harry Potter fans talk about how Book!Harry is funnier and smarter than Film!Harry. They cut his best lines ('There's no need to call me sir, Professor') and made him blander and more passive. The same happened to Lyra.

Most importantly, Lyra is not allowed to lie for fun. She can't do anything 'naughty' without being scolded. This colours the few times Lyra does lie (e.g. to Mrs Coulter in 1x2) negatively and thus makes Lyra out to be more of a brat than a hero.

This is a problem with telling Northern Lights from an outside, 'adult' perspective- to most adults Lyra is a brat. Because we’re introduced to her from inside her head, we think she's great. It's only when we meet her through Will's eyes in The Subtle Knife and she's filthy, rude and half-starved that we realise Lyra bluffs her way through life and is actually pretty non-functional

Thorne prioritises grounded human drama over fantasy, and so his Lyra has her love of bears and witches swapped for familial angst. (and, in S2. angst over Roger). By exposing Mrs Coulter as her mother early, Thorne distracts TV!Lyra from Book!Lyra’s love of the North. The contrast between wonder and reality made NL's ending a definitive threshold between innocence and knowledge. Thorne showed his hand too early.

Similarly, TV!Lyra doesn’t have anywhere near as strong an admiration for Lord Asriel. She calls him out in 1x8 (‘call yourself a Father’), which Book!Lyra never would because she’s proud to be his child. From her perspective, at this point Asriel is the good parent.

TV!Lyra’s critique of Asriel feels like Thorne using her as a mouthpiece to voice his own, adult perspective on the situation. Because Lyra is already disappointed in Asriel, his betrayal in the finale isn’t as effective. Pullman saves the ‘you’re a terrible Father’ call-out for the 3rd book for a reason; Lyra’s naive hero-worship of Asriel in Northern Lights makes the fall from Innocence into Knowledge that Roger’s death represents more effective.  

So, on TV Lyra is tamer, angstier, more introverted, less intelligent, less fun and more serious. We're just constantly told she's important, even before we meet her.

MRS COULTER (AND LORD ASRIEL)

Mrs Coulter is the main character of the show. Not Lyra. Mrs Coulter was cast first, and Lyra was cast based on a chemistry test with Ruth Wilson. Coulter’s character is given lots of extra development, where the show actively strips Lyra of her layers.

To be clear, I have no problem with developing Mrs Coulter. She is a great character Ruth Wilson plays phenomenally. I do have a problem with the show fixating on her at the expense of other characters.

Lyra's feral-ness is given to her parents. Wilson and McAvoy are more passionate than in the books. This is fun to watch, but strips them of subtlety- you never get Book!Coulter's hypnotic allure from Wilson, she's openly nasty, even to random strangers (in 2x3 her dismissal of the woman at the hotel desk felt like a Disney villain). 

Compare how The Golden Compass (2007) introduced Mrs Coulter through Lyra’s eyes, with light, twinkling music and a sparkling dress. By contrast, before the show introduces Coulter it tells us she’s associated with the evil Magisterium plotting Asriel’s death- “Not a word to any of our mutual friends. Including her.” Then she’s introduced striding down a corridor to imposing ‘Bad Guy’ strings.

Making Mrs Coulter’s villainy so obvious so early makes Lyra look dumber for falling for it. It also wastes an interesting phase of her character arc. Coulter is rushed into being a ’conflicted evil mother’ in 2 episodes, and stays in that phase for the rest of the show so far. Character progression is minimised because she circles the same place.

It makes her one-note. It's a good note (so much of the positive online chatter is saphiccs worshiping Ruth Wilson) but the show also worships her to the point of hindrance- e.g. take a shot every time Coulter walks slow-motion down a corridor in 2x2

The problem isn’t the performances, but how prematurely they give the game away. Just like the mysteries around Bolvangar and Lyra’s parentage. Neither Coulter or Asriel have much chance to use their 'public' faces. 

This is part of a bigger pacing problem- instead of rolling plot points out gradually, Thorne will stick the solution in front of you early and then stall for time until it becomes relevant. Instead of building tension this builds frustration and makes the show feel like it's catching up to the audience. This also makes the characters less engaging. You've already shown Mrs Coulter is evil/Boreal is in our world/Asriel wants Roger. Why are you taking so long getting to the point?

PACING AND EDITING

This show takes forever to make its point badly.

Scenes in HDM tend to operate on one level- either 'Character Building,' 'Exposition,' or 'Plot Progression'.

E.g. Mary's introduction in 2x2. Book!Mary only listens to Lyra because she’s sleep and caffeine-deprived and desperate because her funding is being cut. But the show stripped that subtext out and created an extra scene of a colleague talking to Mary about funding. They removed emotional subtext to focus on exposition, and so the scene felt empty and flat.

In later episodes characters Mary’s sister and colleagues do treat her like a sleep-deprived wreck. But, just like Lyra’s lying, the show doesn’t establish these characteristics in her debut episode. It waits until later to retroactively tell us they were there. Mary’s colleague saying ‘What we’re dealing with here is the fact that you haven’t slept in weeks’ is as flimsy as Pan joking not lying to Mary will be hard for Lyra.

Rarely does a scene work on multiple levels, and if it does it's clunky- see the exposition dump about Daemon Separation in the middle of 2x2's Witch Trial.

He also splits plot progression into tiny doses, which destroys pacing. It's more satisfying to focus on one subplot advancing multiple stages than all of them shuffling forward half a step each episode.

Subplots would be more effective if all the scenes played in sequence. As it is, plotlines can’t build momentum and literal minutes are wasted using the same establishing shots every time we switch location.

The best-structured episodes of S1 are 1x4, 1x6, and 1x8. This is because they have the fewest subplots (incidentally these episodes have least Boreal in them) and so the main plot isn’t diluted by constantly cutting away to Mrs Coulter sniffing Lyra’s coat or Will watching a man in a car through his window, before cutting back again. 

The best-written episode so far is 2x5. The Scholar. Tellingly, it’s the only episode Thorne doesn’t have even a co-writing credit on. 2x5 is well-paced, its dialogue is more naturalistic, it’s more focused, it even has time for moments of whimsy (Monkey with a seatbelt, Mrs Coulter with jeans, Lyra and Will whispering) that don’t detract from the story.

Structurally, 2x5  works because A) it benches Lee’s plotline. B) The Witches and Magisterium are relegated to a scene each. And C) the Coulter/Boreal and Lyra/Will subplots move towards the same goal. Not only that, but when we check in on Mary’s subplot it’s through Mrs Coulter’s eyes and directly dovetails into the  main action of the episode.

2x5 has a lovely sense of narrative cohesion because it has the confidence to sit with one set of characters for longer than two scenes at a time.

HDM also does this thing where it will have a scene with plot A where characters do or talk about something, cut away to plot B for a scene, then cut back to plot A where the characters talk about what happened in their last scene and painstakingly explain how they feel about it and why

Example: Pan talking to Will in 2x7 while Lyra pretends to be asleep. This scene is from the 3rd book, and is left to breathe for many chapters before Lyra brings it up. In the show after the Will/Pan scene they cut away to another scene, then cut back and Lyra instantly talks about it.

There’s the same problem in 2x5: After escaping Mrs Coulter, Lyra spells out how she feels about acting like her

The show never leaves room for implication, never lets us draw our own conclusions before explaining what it meant and how the characters feel about it immediately afterwards. The audience are made passive in their engagement with the characters as well as the world    

LORD BOREAL, JOHN PARRY AND DIMINISHING RETURNS

At first, Boreal’s subplot in S1 felt bold and inspired. The twist of his identity in The Subtle Knife would've been hard to pull off onscreen anyway. As a kid I struggled to get past Will's opening chapter of TSK and I have friends who were the same. Introducing Will in S1 and developing him alongside Lyra was a great idea.

I loved developing Elaine Parry and Boreal into present, active characters. But the subplot was introduced too early and moved too slowly, bogging down the season.

In 1x2 Boreal crosses. In 1x3 we learn who he's looking for. In 1x5 we meet Will. In 1x7 the burglary. 1 episode worth of plot is chopped up and fed to us piecemeal across many. Boreal literally stalls for two episodes before the burglary- there are random 30 second shots of him sitting in a car watching John Parry on YouTube (videos we’d already seen) completely isolated from any other scenes in the episode

By the time we get to S2 we've had 2 seasons of extended material building up Boreal, so when he just dies like in the books it's anticlimactic. The show frontloads his subplot with meaning without expanding on its payoff, so the whole thing fizzles out. 

Giving Boreal, the secondary villain in literally every episode, the same death as a background character in about 5 scenes in the novels feels cheap. It doesn’t help that, after 2x5 built the tension between Coulter and Boreal so well, as soon as Thorne is passed the baton in 2x6 he does little to maintain that momentum. Again, because the subplot is crosscut with everything else the characters hang in limbo until Coulter decides to kill him.

I’ve been watching non-book readers react to the show, and several were underwhelmed by Boreal’s quick, unceremonious end. 

Similarly, the show builds up John Parry from 1x3 instead of just the second book. Book!John’s death is an anticlimax but feels narratively justified. In the show, we’ve spent so much extra time talking about him and then being with him (without developing his character beyond what’s in the novels- Pullman even outlined John’s backstory in The Subtle Knife’s appendix. How hard would it be to add a flashback or two?) that when John does nothing in the show and then dies (he doesn’t even heal Will’s fingers like in the book- only tell him to find Asriel, which the angels Baruch and Balthamos do anyway) it doesn’t feel like a clever, tragic subversion of our expectations, it feels like a waste that actively cheapens the audience’s investment.

TL;DR giving supporting characters way more screentime than they need only, to give their deaths the same weight the books did after far less build up makes huge chunks of the show feel less important than they were presented to be. 

FRUSTRATINGLY LIMITED EXPANSION AND NOVELLISTIC STORYTELLING

Thorne is unwilling to meaningfully develop or expand characters and subplots to fit a visual medium. He introduces a plot-point, invents unnecessary padding around it, circles it for an hour, then moves on.

Pullman’s books are driven by internal monologue and big, complex theological concepts like Daemons and Dust. Instead of finding engaging, dynamic ways to dramatise these concepts through the actions of characters or additions to the plot, Thorne turns Pullman’s internal monologue into dialogue and has the characters explain them to the audience

The novels’ perspective on its characters is narrow, first because Northern Lights is told only from Lyra’s POV, and second because Pullman’s writing is plot-driven, not character-driven. Characters are vessels for the plot and themes he wants to explore.

This is a fine way of writing novels. When adapting the books into a longform drama, Thorne decentralised Lyra’s perspective from the start, and HDM S1 uses the same multi-perspective structure that The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass do, following not only Lyra but the Gyptians, Mrs Coulter, Boreal, Will and Elaine etc

However, these other perspectives are limited. We never get any impression of backstory or motivation beyond the present moment. Many times I’ve seen non-book readers confused or frustrated by vague or non-existent character motivations.

For example, S1 spends a lot of time focused on Ma Costa’s grief over Billy’s disappearance, but we never see why she’s sad, because we never saw her interact with Billy.

Compare this to another show about a frantic mother and older brother looking for a missing boy. Stranger Things uses only two flashbacks to show us Will Byers’ relationships with his family: 1) When Joyce Byers looks in his Fort she remembers visiting Will there. 2) The Clash playing on the radio reminds Jonathan Byers of introducing Will to the song.

In His Dark Materials we never see the Costas as a happy family- 1x1’s Gyptian ceremony focuses on Tony and Daemon-exposition. Billy never speaks to his mum or brother in the show 

Instead we have Ma Costa’s empty grief. The audience has to do the work (the bad kind) imagining what she’s lost. Instead of seeing Billy, it’s just repeated again and again that they will get the children back.

If we’re being derivative, HDM had the chance to segway into a Billy flashback when John Faa brings one of his belongings back from a Gobbler safehouse in 1x2. This is a perfect The Clash/Fort Byers-type trigger. It doesn’t have to be long- the Clash flashback lasted 1:27, the Fort Byers one 55 seconds. Just do something.

1x3 beats into us that Mrs Coulter is nuts without explaining why. Lots of build-up for a single plot-point. Then we're told Mrs Coulter's origin, not shown. This is a TV show. Swap Boreal's scenes for flashbacks of Coulter and Asriel's affair. Then, when Ma Costa tells Lyra the truth, show the fight between Edward Coulter and Asriel.

To be clear, Thorne's additions aren’t fundamentally bad. For example, Will boxing sets up his struggle with violence. But it's wasted. The burglary/murder in 1x7 fell flat because of bad editing, but the show never uses its visual medium to show Will's 'violent side'- no change in camera angle, focus, or sound design, nothing. It’s just a thing that’s there, unsupported by the visual language of the show

The Magisterium scenes in 2x2 were interesting. We just didn't need 5 of them; their point could be made far more succinctly.

In 2x6 there is a minute-long scene of Mary reading the I Ching. Later, there is another scene of Angelica watching Mary sitting somewhere different, doing the SAME THING, and she sees an Angel. Why split these up? It’s not like either the I Ching or the Angels are being introduced here. Give the scene multiple layers.

Thorne either takes good character moments from the books (Lyra/Will in 2x1) or uses heavy-handed exposition that reiterates the same point multiple times. This hobbles the Witches (their dialogue in 2x1, 2 and 3 literally rephrases the same sentiment about protecting Lyra without doing anything). Even character development- see Lee monologuing his and Mrs Coulter's childhood trauma in specific detail in 2x3

This is another example of Thorne adding something, but instead of integrating it into the dramatic action and showing us, it’s just talked about. What’s the point of adding big plot points if you don’t dramatise them in your dramatic, visual medium? In 2x8, Lee offhandedly mentions playing Alamo Gulch as a kid.

I’m literally screaming, Jack, why the flying fuck wasn’t there a flashback of young Lee and Hester playing Alamo Gulch and being stopped by his abusive dad? It’s not like you care about pacing with the amount of dead air in these episodes, even when S2’s run 10 minutes shorter than S1’s. Lee was even asleep at the beginning of 2x3, Jack! He could’ve woken from a nightmare about his childhood! It’s a little lazy, but better than nothing.

There’s a similar missed opportunity making Dr Lanselius a Witchling. If this idea had been introduced with the character in 1x4, it would’ve opened up so many storytelling possibilities. Linking to Fader Coram’s own dead witchling son. It could’ve given us that much-needed perspective on Witch culture. Imagine Lanselius’ bittersweet meeting with his ageless mother, who gave him up when he reached manhood. Then, when the Magisterium bombs the Witches in 2x2, Lanselius’ mother dies so it means something.

Instead it’s only used to facilitate an awkward exposition dump in the middle of a trial.

The point of this fanfic-y ramble is to illustrate my frustration with the additions; If Thorne had committed and meaningfully expanded and interwoven them with the source material, they could’ve strengthened its weakest aspect (the characters). But instead he stays committed to novelistic storytelling techniques of monologue and two people standing in a room talking at each other

(Seriously, count the number of scenes that are just two people standing in a room or corridor talking to each other. No interesting staging, the characters aren’t doing anything else while talking. They. Just. Stand.) 

SEASON 2 IMPROVEMENTS

S2 improved some things- Lyra's characterisation was more book-accurate, her dynamic with Will was wonderful. Citigazze looked incredible. LMM won lots of book fans over as Lee. Mary was brilliantly cast. Now there are less Daemons, they're better characterised- Pan gets way more to do now and Hester had some lovely moments. 

I genuinely believe 2x1, 2x3, 2x4 and 2x5 are the best HDM has been. 

But new problems arose. The Subtle Knife lost the central, easy to understand drive of Northern Lights (finding the missing kids) for lots of smaller quests. As a result, everyone spends the first two episodes of S2 waiting for the plot to arrive. The big inciting incident of Lyra’s plotline is the theft of the alethiometer, which doesn’t happen until 2x3. Similarly, Lee doesn’t search for John until 2x3. Mrs Coulter doesn’t go looking for Lyra until 2x3. 

On top of missing a unifying dramatic drive, the characters now being split across 3 worlds, instead of the 1+a bit of ours in S1, means the pacing/crosscutting problems (long establishing shots, repetition of information, undercutting momentum) are even worse. The narrative feels scattered and incohesive.   

These flaws are inherent to the source  material and are not the show’s fault, but neither does it do much to counterbalance or address them, and the flaws of the show combine with the difficulties of TSK as source material and make each other worse.

A lot of this has been entitled fanboy bitching, but you can't deny the show is in a bad place ratings-wise. It’s gone from the most watched new British show in 5 years to the S2 premiere having a smaller audience than the lowest-rated episode of Doctor Who Series 12. For comparison, DW's current cast and showrunner are the most unpopular since the 80s, some are actively boycotting it, it took a year-long break between series 11 and 12, had its second-worst average ratings since 2005, and costs a fifth of what HDM does to make. And it's still being watched by more people.

Critical consensus fluctuates wildly. Most laymen call the show slow and boring. The show is simultaneously too niche and self-absorbed to attract a wide audience and gets just enough wrong to aggravate lots of fans.

I’m honestly unsure if S3 will get the same budget. I want it to, if only because of my investment in the books. Considering S2 started filming immediately after S1 aired, I think they've had a lot more time to process and apply critique for S3. On the plus side, there's so much plot in The Amber Spyglass it would be hard to have the same pacing problems. But also so many new concepts that I dread the exposition dumps.

[newtedison]

my thoughts on the crank palace

i touched about this a bit on twitter (@newtedison_) but i figured i would Try and touch on my points more here (spoilers obv) again, its sort of lengthy

1. im gonna start with talking about the ending because i need to get it out of the way. either i havent read the books in a while and i forgot some canon (which could very well be true, i literally forgot that Bliss was a thing) or this ending makes no sense and is (somehow) setting up for a tdc sequel? so first off, newt was shot in the Head with a Bullet and somehow didnt immediately die? i know that that can happen in real life but it just seems so unlikely that not only would he not die, but he would survive long enough for someone from WCKD to transport him back to their labs and try to revive him. and who the fuck was he talking to? did thomas get newt’s journal at some point and i just dont remember? like i said, either im forgetting stuff or this ending doesnt make sense and is setting up a sequel which...i’ll get to later

2. why was this written? like, what was the point? i understand that this wasnt going to be all sunshine and rainbows but i feel like i was reading torture porn. like, literally all that happens is newt gets tortured (which is described in detail) by WCKD soldiers, has bouts of insane-fueled rage where he KILLS MULTIPLE PEOPLE, and then he dies. ??? what did this contribute to the canon? what was this trying to accomplish? truthfully, i never really wanted a newt-POV...well, anything except for maybe those little nuggets he wrote some time ago. but even if i HAD wanted a newt-POV novella, this is not what i would have wanted. he KNOWS that newt is almost universally the most loved character in this franchise. you can tell because he constantly uses him as a way to get fans in his good graces again. so why on earth would he take that character that so many people love and write a novella where its torture porn and a descent into madness before death? i am not interested in that At All. i’ve read fics (and even written a drabble) where newt is a Crank, and those were more respectful and easier to read than tcp. the parts where newt is having bouts of the Flare were literally exhausting to read; it was described in such vivid and torturous detail that it made me sick reading it. and it didnt help that newt is a character i care a lot about. i didn’t need to know what becoming a Crank felt like. the way it was described in the other books (and even the movies) told me everything i needed to know. the way thomas and everyone found newt at the crank palace in tdc and hes described as obviously not well, but not knowing what exactly happened to him...thats good enough on its own. the mystery of what exactly newt had to endure is part of what gives his journey more emotional depth. not everything needs to be written out and explained. not every gap needs to be filled in. 

3. me saying “the characterization felt off” is going to make some people roll their eyes because ‘duh, sami, the characterization will be off because he’s going insane’ to which i say...exactly. we weren’t really reading a newt-POV novella, were we? even if he isn’t past the Gone in the beginning, hes clearly not the same person we knew him as. the whole novella felt like an uncanny valley situation; i knew i was supposed to be reading about newt, but it felt like i was reading about someone else who looked like him. and that is part of what made this such a disconnect and made me lose interest at parts. not only that, but the world building and lore is inconsistent. newt makes a comment about how it used to rain in the glade, and apparently (as ive been told) that is simply not true. keisha having somehow working cell phone that magically connects her to her family also doesnt make sense. how would they have each others’ numbers? what are the odds that they BOTH found working cell phones in an apocalypse? i get that its a novella but you cant just throw something that crazy in there as a plot convenience. actually work on your plot and world building in a cohesive way, please. and another thing that doesnt make sense...

4. ...is newt finding out that sonya is his sister. if there was anything i would have wanted from a newt-pov novella, it would have been this. him finding out that not only is sonya his sister, but he already knows her post-WCKD. something that would have made this novella actually captivating, contributing something worthwhile to the canon that i would actually want to read, is if newt found out while in the crank palace that sonya was his sister; the Flare would remove that part of the Slice in his brain, and he would realize it was her. then, knowing that he couldnt go past the Gone before seeing her, he would try to find a way to get back to her. he could learn this after thomas and everyone originally see him, so it could match up with the canon. and then, by the time 250 comes along, hes lost all hope of that actually happening, and lashes out to thomas in a fit of rage. the journey of him trying to find his ACTUAL sister would have meant more to me than the story of keisha and dante. trust me, i love a found family trope as much as the next girl. but this series is FULL of the found family trope. it pretty much is the backbone of the franchise. so to see a blood family dynamic would have been a refreshing change of pace that i actually would have been interested in reading. also, the way that newt DOES find out about sonya is...underwhelming. he just randomly says “you remind me of my sister, sonya” to keisha in the WCKD truck. first of all, sonya is not the name you would actually know her by. you would know her by her birth name (which is lizzy? elizabeth?). second, why does he act like he didnt already meet her in the series? when the WCKD doctor tells him sonya is his sister and is alive, hes so surprised. wouldn’t he have known that already? why is there not more emphasis on the fact he already met her? that would have been a really interesting dynamic to explore, and im sad they didnt

5. the pacing and dialogue of tcp is so dragged out. i remember specifically there was a section where newt goes to talk to keisha after she starts abandoning dante, and i swear to god there was a page and a half of text before anything ACTUALLY happened or anyone ACTUALLY said anything. dashner described a launcher at one point as “the energy dependent electric firing projectile device.” that’s SIX words to describe a stun gun. a fucking stun gun! we know what it is! why did you have to use six words??? it just felt like everything was dragged and stretched to the longest it could possibly be and it added to the exhaustion i felt while reading it

6. okay i cant end it without talking about newtmas. its very obvious by now that newtmas is a VERY large part of this fanbase. its clearly the most popular ship and what keeps a lot of people interested in this series. even the marketing team for the MOVIES used newtmas as a advertising tactic (i.e.; using thomas and newt standing face to face as a thumbnail for the trailer, emphasizing newtmas based questions in interviews, even making a fucking facebook memories video for them. yes that last one is real). not only does dashner use newt as a way to lure fans in; he also uses newtmas. the parts that were sprinkled into this were so obvious that it didnt feel authentic. i cant speak for the original trilogy; i dont know the culture around ships back then, and i dont know how much it influenced his writing at the time. but the scenes in those books felt more genuine than tcp. by genuine i mean; he wrote scenes without a relationship in mind, but the chemistry had noticeable subtext that, while unintentional, was largely agreed upon by the larger audience. the parts of newtmas he added into tcp felt artificial and forced, likely as a way for people to take snippets of and use as a free marketing tool for him. one example you might have already seen; “he had already gotten used to his post-thomas, post-WCKD life.” the fact that dashner SPECIFICALLY used the phrase “post-thomas” rather than “post-his friends” or something similar shows that he is using newtmas as a hook on purpose. not only that, but to make newt’s last thoughts as he died “tommy. tommy will understand...” is...wow. first of all, i never wanted to know what newt’s dying thoughts were, but thanks, i guess? and second, when we all initially thought newt died underneath thomas with a gun to his head, i was pretty much inferred that newts last thoughts would probably be about thomas; they would sort of have to be, given the circumstances. so adding that in gives me the same feeling that “i’m coming for you, newt” at the end of the fever code gave me. not as offensive, but written very much on purpose. and the ending is implying that there will somehow be a sequel where thomas gets newt’s journal from...someone. at this point, i can only think that this sequel will retroactively make newtmas canon somehow. now that newt has been confirmed as gay, it could happen. which brings me to my last point...

7. hearing dashner confirm newt is gay was already mind-boggling before. now that i’ve read the crank palace...im angry. im very angry. i think its safe to say that newt is the character that suffers the most in this series. you can argue with me but hes definitely high on the list, if not #1. so; you take this character. you give him a horribly sad arc in the original trilogy, then decide to expand upon it and tell us, your largely QUEER fanbase, exactly how painful and torturous his last days were, in detail. and then you tell us he’s gay. something that is never mentioned in the canon, only in an offhanded reply to a tweet of someone calling you out. on a base level, i can understand why people would be happy. representation (i guess), seeing themselves in the character, having their headcanons be confirmed. great. but what i see is you telling your largely queer fanbase “hey, you see the only confirmed gay character? im going to literally write torture porn about him before killing him off and offer it to you like im providing a service to your community.” how fucked up is that? “hey, kids, if youre gay, you WILL be violently tortured and become violent and a danger to the ones you love. then you will die and your love will never be reciprocated.” what a message! and if he DOES end up retroactively making newtmas “canon” in some weird sequel...i will start foaming at the mouth. THIS is an example of how not all queer representation is good or genuine.

i’ve definitely forgotten some points but this is long enough already. let me know if you agree or if theres anything else you want to add! im interested in what you guys think

(8. I JUST REMEMBERED!!! if WCKD needed to study newt so bad bc sonya is his sister and is immune while he isnt, why did they let him run around the crank palace in the first place??? you cant test his vitals or anything you’re literally just watching him. what is the point????)

[cosmicheromp3]

let’s talk about snowbirds don’t fly for a second, shall we: the arc where roy’s addiction was first introduced, and how it actually affected the relationship between roy and ollie.

people’s perception of snowbirds don’t fly and the events surrounding it is so... weird, to the point where it often makes me wonder whether they’ve actually read the comic (and roy’s appearances right after, but i realize those might be less known) or whether they’re just going off a few very specific panels and inaccurate recounts – usually from people that will twist anything in their favour to call ollie a bad guy.

because, if you pieced together what most people seem to think happened – and this is what i was expecting to find once i decided to read it myself –, in snowbirds we should see: roy, not yet an adult and still under the active care of ollie, starts using drugs, and oliver’s so caught up in himself and negligent that he doesn’t notice what’s happening. when he finally finds out, he lashes out, hits roy and kicks him out of the house, leaving roy without a home. this makes their relationship crumble, and roy starts hating ollie because of it. they don’t speak to each other, and leave in awful terms.

and... in many aspects, that’s so far from the events you'll see if you actually go read green lantern #85 (snowbirds don’t fly) and #86 (they say it’ll kill me... but then won’t say when!). i’m assuming a lot of misconceptions happen because of a) writers with a grudge against ollie who retroactively, and unfairly, painted him in a bad light, and people took this at face value, and b) retcons that came with the new 52 reboot – but, i'll be honest, i don’t care enough to go read that mess even for this post. in general, i’m pretty sure we all agree that we ignore out of character comics; let’s not make roy and ollie the exception to that, yeah?

first i want to get something out of the way, that i feel like i need to mention even though there’s probably people that have talked about it better than i could. when we analyze this comic we should keep in mind that the characters in the story were meant to fill specific roles for the sort of... PSA comic that dc was trying to make, and in the 70s, at that. considering this, both roy and ollie are plot devices.

the creative team behind the story (o’neil and adams) have said that they chose roy to be the average “good” teen who fell into drugs – as a way to say “this could happen to anyone, even to this reputable superhero”. ollie was the caring but imperfect parent who missed the signs – not abusive but distant at the moment, he was meant to be more like a nudge to parents to pay closer attention. it was written to play as a sort of “this could happen to the best of us” situation. and in that context, ollie is made to react in a way that is at most "not ideal" for the standards of its time: he hits roy, and denies to himself that roy’s addiction is a real problem that needs to be dealt with delicately. this is used to send the message of “don’t react like this”.

that isn’t exactly the point of this post, and i don’t want to downplay the harm ollie did with his reaction or absolve him of any blame. the point of this post is: people seem to think that’s where the storyline ended, that was ollie’s final reaction, and those are the terms in which ollie and roy parted; which is just not true.

instead, ollie hitting roy happens in the very first page of green lantern #86 – we have an entire issue in which ollie is faced with his initial reaction and made to confront his mistake (which is more than we can say for, um, other father superheroes that have hit their children. i won’t name names.) the only moment you could read as him “kicking roy out” – which is the phrasing i’ve seen applied to this – happens the very next page, where ollie tells roy to “get out”.

the thing is, roy was not living with ollie at the moment. there was nowhere that ollie could kick him out from. “get out” means just that: get out of this room (and ollie didn’t intend anything more than that with his words.) the comic makes a point of stressing that roy is, by that point, independent, and old enough to be living without a guardian.

ollie, right after roy leaves, thinks: “but he shouldn’t need attention–at his age”. ollie is in the wrong here because of his close-minded view of addiction and because he’s not considering that, though a legal adult, roy is still young and needs care, but it still shows that roy was largely on his own by then. ollie’s reaction is definitively negative and a rejection, but can’t in any way be seen as “kicking roy out”, because it isn’t. (note, also, how ollie’s first thought is that he failed roy, but his denial and stubbornness get in the way and he shifts the blame. he’ll eventually have to get over this and change.)

we see that ollie plays the role of the father that reacts poorly, and he is directly contrasted with the adults who do take responsibility for roy – hal at first, and dinah after, are the ones who play the role of “this is how you should react.”

hal finds roy without knowing what happened between him and ollie, and his first reaction is to take roy to a doctor; he immediately recognizes that what roy needs is help – and will later say so to ollie. when roy refuses, saying he wants to kick the addiction on his own – to prove himself to ollie, because even though he doesn’t think ollie was right he still values his opinion and their relationship, but i’d say there’s something he’s trying to prove to himself, too –, hal recognizes that he doesn’t know anything about drug withdrawal or addiction, and he’s receptive to roy, asking him questions and listening without judgement.

so he takes roy to dinah, who is the one that (very kindly, might i add, because dinah and roy weren’t that close at the time) cares for roy while he goes cold turkey. roy, possibly rather unrealistically, though i’m no expert, kicks the addiction in the span of a few pages. before the ending of this arc, roy has already gone clean.

there’s a one week timeskip there, where we assume that out of the characters featured in this story, roy only interacts with dinah, and ollie’s been with hal. then, before the conclusion of this story, roy is given a place to confront ollie and call him out for his mistakes. roy calls him out for turning his back on him, and he gets to tell him – and show him, punching him in a scene where it’s implied that ollie completely deserves it, unlike the opposite situation that this issue started with – about the pain he’s been in. we are given, in text, a moment where roy can express to ollie what he’s been going through, what he did wrong, and how it affected him.

(this is a moment where the intentions of the comic are very clear, not only because roy practically turns to the camera to deliver the PSA, but also because of the wording: roy told ollie that he turned his back on him, and in the same page he talks about society turning its back on drug addicts, same wording twice. ollie and roy are both meant to represent something other than just themselves, even if this happened in continuity and ended up affecting their characters in the long run.)

and ollie – unlike in that first page, now ollie is shown to listen and understand. he’s not in the same place or mindset he was in when everything started. in the beginning, ollie thought that there must be something inherently bad about a person who does drugs, in a reflection of society’s – and parents’ – views of the issue. and that shows in his initial denial and reaction: ‘how could my son, who’s a good person, do this?’ then, in this scene, when roy tells him he beat the addiction, he answers “good boy” – roy immediately rejects this notion, and emphasizes that there’s more to it than his own goodness: what’s important is the help he received, namely from hal and dinah, and a caring environment. ollie, at the very least, begins to understand this, and in doing so understands very clearly what he needs to change about their relationship if he wants roy back.

this means that ollie starts undergoing character development in this one issue alone. the thing about ollie, in regards to his relationship with roy, is that he has made mistakes and the narrative acknowledges it; but, when well written, he realizes and admits it, making a point of learning from his mistakes. roy knows that ollie has fucked up, too, and doesn’t let him off the hook for it, but he also recognizes that he makes an effort to be better. especially after snowbirds, this informs their relationship a lot.

by the end of the issue they’re not hugging, and roy is leaving on his own, but that’s completely of his own accord. and these are the last panels in the entire issue:

the whole original comic, but mostly these panels specifically, is what makes me wonder about people’s perception of these events, and the misconceptions i previously mentioned – because i really am confused as to how you could reconcile these two opposite readings. unless, you know... people are speaking without ever touching the original comic. (i don’t want to blame anyone for not reading older comics, but please, if you’re gonna speak, especially if it’s to shit on a character or call them abusive the way people do with ollie, do it in an informed way.)

so, right after the events of snowbirds, because roy was allowed to speak up and ollie was made to listen, at least as much as can be expected through his stubbornness, they’re in much better terms than people usually think. if you look at roy’s chronology, he interacts with ollie in his next few appearances (barring the teen titans ones), teaming up as they normally would, with the one difference being the emphasis that’s put into the fact that roy has grown away from ollie – in the same way as any young adult would grow away from a parent. there’s also roy’s resentment for ollie’s actions, but this resentment is portrayed as deserved and it doesn’t turn their interactions into something negative. it’s still clear that they both care for each other, and there’s certainly no hate.

[from action comics #436/2]

this first one takes place a few months after roy goes his own way. roy is in the middle of working a case when ollie gets involved, and they work on it together. green lantern #100/2 is their next appearance and has a similar plot, this time with dinah working with them as well. in both of these, they still work well together, are able to communicate in action and have each other’s backs.

in the action comics issue, ollie insists that roy is still welcome by his side, and that he should still feel free to ask for help whenever he needs it. roy refuses in the way that’s shown in the panels above – saying that he needs to “be a loner for a while” and build a life of his own (though it’s not an exact parallel, because ollie is ollie and takes “loner” to a whole other level, the wording here reminds me of the way ollie tends to leave on his own whenever he feels like he needs to find himself). you’ll see that these interactions aren’t hostile at all – quite the opposite.

world’s finest #251/3 might be the one where their interactions are the most tense, and that’s mostly just in the end. when they’re done with the usual superhero team-up, ollie shows willingness to talk to roy:

“i can’t help out. roy’s back, and, well– we’ve got a lot of talking to do.” through these issues, we realize that ollie has learned: his previous mistake was not paying enough attention to roy, and not showing him that he could always count on ollie (both in noticing roy’s addiction, but also before, in not taking enough care so roy wouldn’t get to that point). he tries to make up for it every chance he has, but it’s always on roy’s terms. everyone is aware that ollie is the one who was in the wrong, and it’s up to roy to forgive him or not, but no one ever pressures roy to do so. when roy doesn’t want to stay and talk, ollie accepts it.

ollie atones again and again, and their relationship isn’t magically fixed and they don’t go back to being close without effort – effort which rightfully has to be done, again, mostly on ollie’s part. but they never, ever go so far as to hate each other.

then, in green arrow (1988) #75, ollie feels so bad about what happened between them, about the way he screwed up, he essentially says to roy that he wouldn’t fault him for wanting to shoot him. “so go ahead. god knows, you’ve got plenty of reason.” roy has been brainwashed here; he breaks through it because of ollie’s words. 

and, after this whole ordeal is done, this is how they part ways:

by this point, roy already has lian and a life of his own. he’s gone back to being speedy and then arsenal, he’s in the titans again and he will become a renowned hero in his own right. he might have forgiven ollie a long time ago, but now that he has found himself – like he set off to do at first – he seems more prepared to make amends and see where he stands with him (maybe i’m attributing more consistency among these issues, that happen years apart, than we should actually give them credit for, but i can’t help trying to find the common themes.)

after these, which are the most immediate interactions after snowbirds, we have multiple instances of them being close again. it’s in every small moment they have together, really, but off the top of my head, a couple that are illustrative for their relationship are green arrow: the archer’s quest and justice league of america (2006) #7, even though they don’t directly interact in this last one. i was gonna include panels from both, but this is getting long enough; i urge you to read them, especially if you followed along reading the issues i’ve mentioned, because they’re great. what i am gonna include, cause it’s amazing, is this panel from justice league of america wedding special.

in my opinion, these misconceptions around ollie and roy not only are a disservice to their characters but also mean that people are missing out on what i think is a really interesting relationship. it’s almost rare to see a relationship evolve in a way that feels so organic in comics, not only because the interpersonal conflict here is shown to have real, tangible consequences but also because the characters are allowed to grow in a way that is gradual and natural and even satisfying.

ollie and roy's relationship might have never been the exact same after snowbirds – but which father-son relationship stays the same after the son grows up? and i think it's a testament to the strength of their bond that without ever ignoring these events (because, as i’ve shown, they’re very much acknowledged again and again) they not only never stop loving each other, but are also able to keep building something meaningful going forward.

[necroalx]

My problem with P5R new ending (spoilers)

I’ve been asked in my curiouscat about why I have problems with P5R ending a bunch of times by now, and honestly, I can't really put it in a way that wouldn't sound personal since my dislike over the matter comes from a personal appreciation of how the themes were handled in both versions.

With that being said feel free to ignore my POV:

First I would like to mention the things I loved about P5R (with spoilers ahead):

-The gameplay improvements were just perfect.

-Akechi's character arc was top notch for me, exactly what I wanted from him and I feel very satisfied with his new interactions.

-Sumire characterization during the first 8 ranks of her confidant were pretty cool.

-The individualization of the thieves until December, I loved the showtime attacks If anything I would have wanted they added more of those between more of the thieves too.

-Maruki is an incredibly well written character and Daiki Itoh's direction for relatable antagonists shines through him, he was really what P5 needed, the timing of the new semester events may be debatable for me, but I loved everything about him.

-Also loved Jose even we didn't get that much of him.

-The final boss fight was amazing!

Anyway My problem with the P5R ending is (Also, obvious spoilers for P5 and P5R):

-Retroactively diminishes the meaning of the original ending:

P5 vanilla original ending was in a way, the ultimate message about changing the world in the most healthy way possible, seeing it as the way it should be FIRST.

There were theories about this being an altered reality, and this is proven right by the events of the last semester in P5R.Also, with the mere existence of the events of P5R new content, the original ending becomes now an inconclusive story. Which makes it ultimately a lessened ending, because "this isn't the way the story should end".

-The theme of rebellion against an unjust society gets pointlessly messy and lost in transition:

Yes, I get the subject of facing reality is a way more important topic and way more down to earth, the thieves disbanding the way they did and going their own separate ways is indeed thematically fitting and shows some growth coming from their experiences in the new semester. Still, the game being written by a different person, plus having a scenery of "kids dreaming about their perfect world given to them by a overprotective father figure" seems to in a way tarnish and overwrite their experiences gained through the whole story.

I understand this is not the message meant to be conveyed by this new ending. I know and for sure love that in Royal the thieves don't exist just for Joker's sake was their whole characters aren't defined just by his actions anymore. BUT with those things mentioned above, all these change feels like a "correction" made to express how "japanese societal expectations were ultimately right all along things are not always like how we want and you have to deal with that" instead of the original ending's more positive outlook towards the future, that's now seen as a naive handled view of how things should be, and ultimately as I mentioned before, inconclusive.

Things are clear in that regard for me, (In the original, without Maruki's existence in the plot, the thieves were granted a world were they could do "whatever they wanted", between the limits of their own cognitive knowledge of how the world worked, after defeating Yaldabaoth and getting the holy grail treasure to basically "grant them that wish" as a reward after the fusion between mementos and the real world is finished. In P5R new ending, the change is made evident by having Morgana not steal the plug from the man in black chasing the thieves Van and the thieves not taking Joker home in the new ending to give the "more realistic" approach to that matter.)

This conclusion couldn't exist until P5R came out. Since now the entirety of the new Semester concept lies on the basis that the Phantom Thieves subconsciously granted Maruki his power and caused the whole "actualization event" through wishing someone could make those ideal realities for them, with Maruki being the only one capable of seeing the world the way they would've wanted to be because of their interactions with him. I actually give them credit for this since this is a brilliant detail and makes his tragic antagonistic role even more appealing.

But that leads me to my real and biggest problem with P5R new ending:

-The phantom thieves becoming secondary characters after being the main characters and vehicles to the story in the original game and through the 80% of P5R's story.Now people would call Kasumi waifu bait and other things, hell, even I memed about it before, the reality is, she's the most important tool Itoh and the new writers used to built this new ending, she is the most important character (besides Maruki himself obviously) to make the player empathize with Maruki's motives and actions, she is a victim of her circumstances just like the rest and she's "rescued" by this overprotective father figure character found in Maruki, but he was taking away her freedom as a consequence, thus making her relevant to the game's theme of rebellion. But then she faces that reality and she has to grow out of it by... "insert Itoh favorite writing trope of the protagonist beating the crap out of the heroine to make her come back to her senses" (Same thing he did with Marie in golden). Which is ok I guess, it can be a forgivable writing sin since the built to this was pretty well done. But then... there's nothing.Kasumi is presented and forced into scenes and moments so the player realizes "this character is important, more important than the rest" from very early on, it goes from scene to scene while the original events of the vanilla game still happen, and she was not the only one of coruse, Joker Akechi and Kasumi having their little arcs separated from the rest of the cast was obviously building towards something. But then going against everything Joker did in the original game, (and through 80% of P5R since those events are still in the game obviously) he chose both Kasumi and Akechi (twice in his case) over his other friends. Yes, the thieves were trapped on their fake realities, yes they came to the rescue in the end FOR Joker. But at this point they were: Not fully aware of who Kasumi really was and her involvement with these developments, not aware of the alliance between Joker and Crow, not aware of the weird palace that's been there the whole time. ALL because Joker and Mona kept these things secret from the rest, why? What's the sound logic behind this? Why would Joker not trust his friends with such important information after all they went through? Why are they reduced to convenient sidekicks after they saved his life and proved themselves capable of doing the impossible when they all decided to work together? Why? It makes no sense. They all have been through so much with him, just days before they all were inside the velvet room alongside Joker, finding out about his most intimate aspect and sharing an irreplaceable moment of realization and conviction of together. Just for them to become anticlimactically trapped on their dream worlds and completely forgetting about Joker and their true bond with him. Sure they come back to their senses AFTER Joker triggers their true memories with some words, but this SHOULDN'T have happened after all they went through after their fight with Yaldabaoth. Call it bad timing in the writing sense, but it was a testament of how separated they become from their original role in the new story, all for the sake of these new additions. And still, we can ignore that, I can see over that and say "well it's the ultimate tentation they were never tested through", but here's were the problem lies, besides the fact of Joker never telling his friends about the things I mentioned before, he is now a fully self insert character, when 80% of the original story (which is just the vanilla game honestly) he was written as Joker being his own entity, with his own sense of justice very clearly defined and a focus towards his friends as his most precious part of his life. This is suddenly thrown to the garbage in the new semester.

Why? Because now the player has to make a choice that the original Joker wouldn't make in the original, chose Akechi over the other phantom thieves. It honestly feels like a huge regression.Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Akechi's new confidant and his amazing dynamic with Joker being exploited the best way possible. I do, I am a fan of Akechi's character archetype and his characterization in both vanilla and his new scenes in royal. I am a sucker for antagonistic villainous characters getting a proper redemption arc in convincing ways. But the price was too high for my liking.

By the price I mean; You literally CAN'T get the new TRUE (complete) ending without choosing to keep your promise with Akechi, which means, you can't see the full extent of the story conclusion, Maruki's and Kasumi's arcs won't get any closure and you will only get a now "diminished" ending (the vanilla original ending), if you don't chose to keep your promise with Akechi. A "personal" promise and one you never told your friends about. The worst part of this decision is, the whole reason Joker and Akechi's dynamic works so well is because they were originally written as pretty oposite characters with their own unique distinguished quirks morals AND sense of justice. But then, suddenly, at the climax of the story, Joker is just a self insert blank state? That just does not work.

As for Sumire, once she's brought back and awakens again, her character arc ends, she becomes just another sidekick like the rest of the thieves, which makes all the built her character was used for... what? It's not really pointless, since it brings the story to this point, but what's left for her? What's her role now? She goes back to being Kasumi in the metaverse and the optional aspect of her confidant makes this transition to her going back to being Sumire feel kind of ambiguous and also inconclusive. Yes I know she is honoring the memory of her sister and that she has accepted her reality, that's true, but the development comes to a sudden turn when she suddenly becomes just another one in the crew behind Goro and Joker. All the phantom thieves had their roles cleared out beforehand soon after their insertion arcs were finished, Ann was the conscience of the team, always asking "are we doing the right thing?" Yusuke was the same, always second guessing every choice with a worst case scenario since as he said in his awakening "in order to see true authenticity, one has to be dispassionately realistic", Ryuji was always the one going for it and wanting things getting done he's the focus, Makoto is the advisor, so she became the clear headed tactician, Futaba was the tool device, she became the medium to the ends always finding ways to work around towards their goals, Mona is the heart and the hope representing their wish to inspire society through their actions, Haru was the kindness, a reminder of what are they trying to inspire and a source of tolerance the thieves were missing until she joined in. Sumire was... what? This honestly bothered me, made me feel the whole journey was just a bad joke, because now not only the phantom thieves were reduced to mere sidekicks, so was the one character with most promise in the story while Goro became the player's beating husband through Joker, a testament of the choice he made of choosing the image they made the player have of Akechi, the one person Joker couldn't save, the one who's beyond saving at thins point over the friends and family he did saved. By the way, as contradictory as it may sound, I loved the twist, having Akechi's life depending on the final choice for true freedom, it was clever, it added the right heart wrenching moment right before the climax, what I didn't like was how clear it was made at this point how little the other thieves mattered. Why? Have the phantom thieves ever sent a calling card without having giving their full agreement? Especially when a new important development could come up from their actions at the last moment? Not until this point, Goro's life was on the line here, he was an ally now, he was a phantom thief member, they all agreed to this. But were they informed of this last minute development by Joker, you know, so they could all agree to what was the right thing to do like they all had swear to do every time? No, because Joker made that decision himself, because all that mattered was the player decision the self insert decision. Hell not even a cheap text group chat scene, nothing.You can say "this is a personal thing between Joker and Goro and a personal choice for Akechi". Well sure, yet they were all about to put their lives at risk for this, like they've been doing this whole time. They would've argued they deserved to know this, even if they had reached the same conclusion at the end, but with this, in a story that focuses so much on details, whatever oath the phantom thieves had before this, became meaningless. The player can once again just like with Yaldabaoth chose to ruin everyone's chance for true freedom by choosing a selfish self inserted reasoning out of the blue to get a "bad end". Honestly, I also felt the original bad end in vanilla P5 was bad but this? This was worst, this took things to another level, sure the angst was well written and the suffering masked behind this fake happiness was very clever, but its also so cheapened because at this point, why would the player care about those other characters if you make this choice? They were sidelined so bad that their "happiness" becomes just flavor to the story and to be honest, the good decision was just as selfish because of this. I have no problems with the final boss fight, it was honestly amazing and almost made me forget all that happened before when I first played it because it was just so over the top and emotional, I honestly loved it. But then comes the final cut-scenes. Skip Joker going back to prison (why even bother with that though? He literally went just for 10 days and every value of the sacrifice he made in the original was now lost because of the new semester events), skip the the decisions the thieves made about their futures, their display of individuality was great but they don't matter at this point anyway. And here's the final insult, yes I am salty because the "main party" didn't take Joker home, but not because they didn't go through the action of taking him home, but because they weren't really doing anything relevant if anything at all after being the main characters the whole game (except for the new semester) No closure for them just quirkiness and flavor for the sake of a "reality" based message, felt cheap and dismissive, like someone not wanting to go through the trouble of writing something for characters they didn't create or even like. Why did I called the P5R ending lazy you ask? Because they didn't bother making an ending at all, but just to rewrite the original in a way the message of "reality" is settled over, sure their individuality is highlighted by not taking joker home and them being focused on their own different things on their lives, but so they were in the original, this ending and them being sent away was made at the price of the relevance of the thieves bonds with Joker once again, I would've been ok if we at least got to see more of THEM as individuals through the ending or even just as a group, hell this was the final time we'll see them and they were our most precious allies, maybe give us some time with them for the sake of the experiences we had, they did that with Golden's epilogue after all, why not here? But instead, we just see them just go around town being quirky and sneaky distracting the corrupt policemen while Joker gets his new cut-scenes goodbyes with the new characters in the game, because they deserve closure as well for sure, yet they do so over the others? In my opinion, at this point, no. But they did just that, they declared with this change that, the phantom thieves members weren't needed and their futures and story were irrelevant, it was all about Joker, Goro, Maruki and Kasumire, the rest were just sidekicks and these scenes were more important so the player can get what happens to these new favorites, all at the price of the original team relevance. That, was my problem with the new ending. Of course I'm happy to know about their futures and choices through the credits, but that's just lazy, they were more relevant than that in the original, but now they're just afterthoughts shown through credit scenes. No relevance whatsoever in their final moments in this story. It certainly hurt seeing them being this diminished after the original made me care about these characters so much.You can say to me "well, there's still the vanilla ending for you" but no, I said it before, retroactively that ending has become irrelevant and inconclusive, which means this is now how the phantom thieves are represented as, Joker's sidekicks, not a team of bandits and misfits working together as a unit like it was in the original. Again, this is my very personal take on the game new ending, feel free to disagree and call me a clown, but the original made a huge impact on me, the events of P5R ending wounded my appreciation for this story, not it's characters, not the theme, just the future they'll write for these characters from now on. That is all.

Sorry about this Essay lol, but this is the only way I could fully communicate everything It made me feel wrong about this new ending. It was not just a matter of preference for me.

[solacefruit]

Writing advice meme, 31-40.

I saw this ask meme on this post and I love the concept, so I’m going to take a swing at it myself. The idea is to assess these common pieces of writing advice–i.e., what your interpretation of it, do you like/agree with it, etc.–and as someone who thinks and talks about writing a lot (and is perhaps guilty of giving a lot of advice myself), I have a ton of opinions on what good writing advice looks like and I’m so excited to go through this list with you all. I have to break it up into separate posts because I talk too much, so here’s the fourth set (31-40)!

31. Read your story aloud. Excellent advice! Doing this is going to show up so many glitches that you would otherwise have not noticed, because you’re going to hear what your work actually reads like and you’re also going to find it easier to pick up spelling errors, missing words, unintended repetition or rhyme, and other such problems in need of fixing. My particular method for writing seminars and speeches specifically is half-dictation, half-typing, where often I say the sentence and then write it out if it sounds right or I write out a sentence and read it immediately before moving on to the next. In my opinion, that’s the best way to get a work that made to be said or read aloud. 

32. Start with the end in mind. I don’t think you need to know all the details or have everything mapped out, but I definitely feel it’s important to have a destination in mind before you begin a story and maybe some major landmarks you intend to pass on your way there. If you want your ending to feel earned and satisfying to a reader, it’s a good idea for you to know what it’s going to be so you can start laying the groundwork for it early.  33. Embrace structure. There’s two types of writers: plotters and pantsers. Plotters--as you could guess--are the people who plot intensely and have plans (even spreadsheets sometimes) and have nearly everything they need to know decided long in advance before they write. Pantsers, by comparison, are people who have a more jazz approach to writing: they make things up as they go along, letting the story go where it leads them, often without having a clear idea of where they’re going or how they’re going to get there. 

I don’t think one style is better than the other, and I personally feel that what’s most important is figuring out how to be successful and make your life easier and fun using whichever style feels more right to you. I’m personally about a 60/40 plotter-pantser split and I’m super happy like that. I really love to have an approximate map of where I’m going and what needs to happen and how all the significant pieces interlock, but I also really love the freedom of being able to create on-the-fly and follow new ideas as they spring up. So yeah, my advice: embrace your style.  34. Dialogue should be purposeful. All writing should have a purpose. If it doesn’t, what are you doing? 

35. Be empathetic. I don’t know if empathy is necessary--but people-watching and paying attention to how people think and feel and interact is definitely a vital skill, so I agree with this one on that front! Being able to capture nuances of character and behaviour is hard to do if you don’t have some idea of how different people think and behave, and personally I find it super fun to try to get into the head of a character I don’t necessarily like or agree with and figure them out like a puzzle. Why do they believe x? What brought them to do y? I especially love making unlikeable or actively hostile characters complex and ~relatable~ and allow them to make convincing arguments for themselves within the story, because to me that’s so interesting to engage with--not even a case of doing the right thing for the wrong reasons, but doing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons but you completely understand why this person did it and you can’t bring yourself to really begrudge them for it because from their standpoint, it was right. I live for that, and I feel that you need a specific sort of investigative little mind to be able to weasel into people’s heads and hearts and start dissecting them until you figure out how they work, like a clockmaker tinkering with an antique watch. Is that empathy? I don’t know. Probably not.  36. Never use a verb other than ‘said’ to tag dialogue. Terrible advice! You can use other dialogue tags, just use them appropriately.  

37. Do not start a sentence with a conjunction. It really doesn’t matter that much. Don’t do it for the sake of doing it, because that’s a bad reason to do anything, but it’s not illegal and the people who would knock excellent writing for sometimes having sentences that start with conjunctions are really not worth listening to, because they clearly care more for the upholding of rules than recognising the effect that bending and manipulating rules has on the work. It’s a failure of critical thinking that speaks to a larger issue re: that person’s view of literature.  38. A new speaker always gets a new paragraph. Yes! Obviously you can bend this rule if two people are speaking at once, but otherwise a new speaker should always get a new paragraph. Be nice to your reader and make sure your work isn’t a nightmare to look at.  39. If there’s a story you want to read but it hasn’t been written yet, you must write it. This isn’t advice, this is just a sad fact of life. My advice regarding it is let it motivate you to create, rather than disappoint you that what you want to read doesn’t exist yet. You’re not the only person who wants to read that story, I promise. They’ll be so grateful when you get it done.   40. The ending is just the place where you stop your story. I don’t think this is true. The ending matters, because it retroactively changes your entire story--for better or for worse. If you fail your ending, you’ve quite possibly made an unrereadable book, or soured previous moments that readers  loved, or even made readers wonder why they bothered picking up your story in the first place. There’s a reason some people won’t read fanfiction that’s unfinished: it matters where the story stops. An abrupt, inappropriate, or out-of-place end to the narrative isn’t satisfying. 

[eisforeidolon]

Episode: Atomic Monsters

I watched this at least a week ago, but just didn't get around to rewriting my notes into a post 'til now.  I did actually find this the best episode so far, but lets be real, that's such a low bar to clear at this point it says basically nothing.

The opening sequence is really fun!  I found the whole thing genuinely enjoyable, both the action itself and that it included exactly the kind of return cameo I can actually get behind.  No retcons or resurrections that make death somehow even cheaper or ruin the original finish to the character's story!  Not even to mention that, instead of existing just for the sheer fanservice of it?  A sequence like this is actively improved by giving us a familiar face we have investment in to keep it from being all just random unfamiliar cannon fodder getting offed.

Unfortunately, this isn't the rousing endorsement it could be when we know that both expanding to a big action sequence and bringing Benny back for it were actually Jensen's ideas.  Not even to mention that the thing which really works best in the episode?  It's the dream sequence that's not actually connected to anything else and doesn't have to worry about continuity to work. This is my surprised face.

I enjoyed the exchange between Sam and Dean in the kitchen.  The meat man conversation over the bacon was rather silly, but in a fun way. I've seen some people reading things into it (it's insulting Dean doesn't know the slang, Sam is randomly vegetarian now) that I didn't really see there.  I did appreciate how Sam was weirdly jumpy and had trouble meeting Dean's eyes after the creepy alternate world dream.  I thought it worked really well for both slice-of-life and Sam’s reaction.

In terms of the Winchester's case, well, for the most part it could have been worse.  I don't honestly believe even if I hadn't been spoiled that I wouldn't have immediately suspected the parents from their introductory exchange about how Billy playing in the big game was more important than a cheerleader's death.  I think it was supposed to be a retroactive subtle clue, but it was more of a clue-by-four.  So the “mystery” of tracking down the monster was pretty lost on me.  I did like that the one girl having braces was a clue!  But I also thought the scene with her rehearsing her speech on a live mic in an empty auditorium was weird and contrived.  I straight out cannot forgive that a girl was literally abducted from the school campus and NOBODY checked the security footage near her car fucking IMMEDIATELY well before Sam & Dean.  C'mon.  Then, of course, a couple random middle-aged suburbanite humans get the drop on Sam and Dean, because Dabbernatural really just loves to make them incompetent so plots happen.

Then the big reveal and blah blah blah, kid accidentally ate his girlfriend.  WHAT WERE WE SUPPOSED TO DO???  Um, maybe try not being scumbags?  Idiotic scumbags at that, abducting a second girl from their son's own school instead of somebody that wouldn't be missed or even, hey, maybe encouraging him to try harder not to eat people.  Don't try to sell me on this pseudo hallmark 'but they just love him so much' bullshit.  At least the kid has more self-awareness and conscience than his fuckwad parents.  

Then we get to the infuriating character assassination part of the programme.  Having Sam and Dean say that they'd do the same thing as the dad for Jack their “son”?  Fuck you very much, show.  I could maybe, maybe, see Sam or Dean kidnapping and draining the life out of an innocent to save the other at their most desperate worst.  Though I think the only time they even really get close to that kind of an actively, knowingly evil choice is with Doc Benton.  Not only do I not buy for a second that they would do that for the totally-really-their-actual-child-for-reasons albatross Dabbernatural has shoehorned into their lives?  Struggling to do the right thing even when it hurts used to actually mean something – it was always a very important qualifier that while Sam or Dean might make that choice, the other would not let them.  So having them both agree this kind of straight up villainy would be a-okay for oh-so-totally-loveable-no-really-woobie-blob Jack ...

Like carelessly assassinating every human in the BMoL headquarters, it fundamentally fails to understand what it is that keeps Sam and Dean from being the monsters.  Hint: it's not just that the show centers around them.  “We do the ugly thing so that people can live happy” - these moronic hacks seem to be actually trying to parallel Sam and Dean saving innocent victims and the world to human monsters that were going to selfishly help their son eat his way through the entire goddamn cheerleading squad.  Am I getting this wrong somehow?  Is there some other, less appalling, reading here that I'm missing? This whole scene honestly made me nauseous.

They talkity-talk on for a while longer, but it's really not much better.  Sam declaring that God was totally done with them was the writers putting those words in his mouth based on nothing.  At it’s very best, it was Sam’s bad habit of convincing himself conclusions he’s come to are true because he wants them to be.  So them both just deciding to believe it's true after Chuck has admitted to orchestrating their entire lives … I'm not sure if we should conclude the Winchesters have brain damage or if that's just the writers.  Especially when the underlying reason for it is nothing more compelling than , “Watch the Winchesters see-saw on the angst fulcrum completely at random!  Yay!”  If this was actually well written, there would be some precipitating reason for Sam to suddenly be the one being all fatalistic while Dean is accepting.  Instead, the writers  just slap some coin-flipped angst angst angst on the page and meander on in a supposedly forward direction.

So then there's the other half of the episode, the Becky storyline. Am I the only one a little disturbed that Becky's first reaction to seeing Chuck was to look scared and try to run away?  Like, they're exes and all, sure, but she doesn't know any of the god stuff yet – I think the only thing she even says about their breakup is that Chuck dumped her.  Is that reaction supposed to be yet another bit of “new canon” showing how Chuck was just that terrible all along? But then she does let him in, so maybe we're just supposed to take it as Becky still having a tendency towards dramatics?  I honestly don't know, but it was weird to me.  

I do genuinely love that they had Becky go to therapy and realize just how absolutely fucked up what she'd done was and ultimately sort herself out to become someone who seems to be a well-balanced adult. A well balanced adult that didn't have to give up being a fan for that!  Seriously, kudos to the writers for this, because 7.08 is such a loathsome episode that otherwise ruins Becky as a character.   Though I do have to nitpick a bit – while I get that they wanted to put SPN merch in Becky's home as a callout to her still being a superfan?   In the show's universe, Chuck's books were never that popular, so I'm having some suspension of disbelief issues that there would be Funkos for them.  We could pretend they were customs, but she's got at least one Impala, so even that doesn't quite work.  I'm not entirely sure who “people only want them sitting around doing laundry anyway” is a dig at, but I'm giving it the side eye.  

I also am not entirely sure what to make of Chuck's whole no one needs me I kinda hate me I'm all lost and don't know what to doooooo shtick.  Is this a game he's playing?  Is he really that wishy-washy? Did some of Dabb's sad internal monologue as showrunner somehow end up in a script by accident?  

He goes on like that and laments he's lost the Winchester's trust and had words with them or whatever, and then he zaps Becky and her family away at the end.  Like, if he cared enough about Becky to care about her opinion, why does he turn on her, too, just like that?  I guess we're supposed to see it as him having found his mojo in her space and vanishing her because taking over her space that's working for him currently is his latest whim.  I suppose they're intending to show Chuck as just being that capricious and flighty, but I don't know that it works for me.  The way they've been writing him he's acting so randomly and impulsively that it's kind of unbelievable he can even sit still at a keyboard long enough to write another Sam and Dean installment.  Again, I definitely find it unbelievable that the Chuck they're giving us now would be capable of playing the long game that he would have had to for him to be actively behind everything.  Until he suddenly got impatient and lazy and popped up in the cemetery at the end of the last finale ... for reasons … and is now just … like that … because.

Not to mention that his powers are, big shock, just as arbitrary as everyone else's in the current show.  He can't actually see what is happening to Sam and Dean because of the bullet sapping his power or whatever, but we're supposed to be worried about the ominous ending he's writing for them because … he's got those god powers to make it happen, I guess?  Uh...

I will grant that the ominous bobbing of Sam and Dean Funkos' heads to Chuck's furious typing was a wonderfully foreboding shot to end on.  

[loopy777]

One complaint I've seen about Maiko is that season two gives a few hints about a childhood crush, and then BOOM, season three comes and they're already together. I'm curious if you would have preferred a slower build-up, and how would you tweak canon to make that happen? (Thanks in advance for what will probably be an interesting answer!)

I don’t know that I would have preferred it, exactly. Romance is not a big focus of AtLA, and the Avatar franchise as a whole shows that it’s not a strength of the storytellers, so seeding some hints and then just jumping into it as part of Zuko’s ‘get everything he wants’ state is nicely efficient storytelling.

On the other hand, I’ve written two different (irreconcilable) multi-chapter stories about how Zuko and Mai could have gotten together between Books Earth and Fire, so clearly I think there’s fertile ground in the matter. ;) However, I think the opportunity exists only for Mai as a character and Maiko as a relationship; I’m not sure that showing the get-together would serve Zuko’s character or story arc in any meaningful way.

So, back to the first hand, that makes it prime material to cut. Mai is definitely a secondary character in the overall story of AtLA. The storytellers made the right call.

But if we’re talking tweaks, then there’s a very simple way to get the material in there and do something with it: replace The Beach as an episode.

Now, I’m not saying that we drop The Beach and add another episode set before The Awakening. I say we take the same slot in the story as The Beach and still do something focused on the Fire Teens- but this time we retroactively flesh out how Zuko and Mai got together. Either do it in the style of Appa’s Lost Days, which covers a large amount of time parallel to the prior run of episodes, or do it in the style of Zuko Alone and show flashbacks that contrast with or explain scenes set in the present. It would be pretty funny to see Zuko and Mai go through a breakup interspersed with how they got together, and the changes in their behavior, right?

The point of the episode would be the same: show how poorly the Fire Teens fit in typical teenage life, reveal the characters’ tragic backstories, and have Zuko realize that he’s dealing with self-loathing. If we’re pressed for time, we can cut the whole B-plot with the gAang and Combustion Man. Either stick it in another episode or just drop it completely. It’s a cool fight, but all the Combustion Man fights are filler until The Western Air Temple.

As for what those flashbacks would show, my fanfics probably cover the basics, but for those who don’t want to read full novellas to get the answer, there’s a few major points we need to hit:

Establish Zuko as being interested in Mai, even when he can’t see her, but dealing with such a messed-up emotional state that we sense disaster on the horizon for the relationship. Zuko should be shown to believe that Mai is one of the few people who listen when he talks, even if he doesn’t think she always understands.

Establish Mai as being interested in Zuko is a way that pierces her regular facade of apathy, but not sure that she’s ride-or-die about the relationship. This creates tension for when Zuko leaves to join Aang, and sets up Mai’s character arc for when she really does go ride-or-die for him at the Boiling Rock. As noted above, Mai should be shown as interested in Zuko, his life, and his difficulties. She wants to make him happy, but isn’t sure how to actually make it happen.

Establish Azula as being completely mystified by the whole matter, but feeling safe enough about it because she thinks she has Mai firmly under her control. Bonus points if we can expand Azula’s psychological state to add more setup for her mental deterioration after Zuko’s defection; show that Azula is betting everything on Zuko behaving as she predicts.

Most of this stuff is already present in AtLA as we have it (or, at least, The Beach is trying to present it), but this would bring the matters to the forefront and make the subplots clearer. The big improvement is confirming Zuko’s investment in the relationship, as I’ve joked that the only time we see Zuko care about Mai is when he can see her or someone is directly asking him about her. Literally the only time in the cartoon when he acknowledges her without her being present is the “That’s rough, buddy,” conversation with Sokka, and that just doesn’t cut it.

As a bonus, I hate The Beach (it’s just not funny, and the whole ‘Breakfast Club’ scene is some terrible writing), so this can only be an improvement.

The actual way Zuko and Mai get together can be almost anything, as shown by my wildly disparate fanfics, but I do think Mai should be the one to initiate. After all, we see her actively blushing in the Zuko Alone flashbacks. I think Zuko should be surprised; we don’t see him blushing in those flashbacks, and he’s struggling with his self-worth. Perhaps he thinks her attention goes along with his defeating Aang and ending his banishment. And there needs to be friction, awkwardness, difficulties, misunderstandings, but ultimately a soothing happiness. Despite it all, we should see that Zuko and Mai really do make each other happy just by being in each other’s lives. With those rules, the get-together can be anything from a Blue Spirit adventure to silly comedy in the background of an imperialist conquest.

Well, I hope that was interesting. If not, please contact Customer Service to discuss a refund.