#it is a good serial but the racism is worth noting

[hollow-keys]

The Devil's Chord is basically:

"Let's go visit Mr Wifebeater and Co, who are obviously the most important musicians of all time, and act like they were all totally cool people even decades after Mr Wifebeater's wifebeating became public knowledge."

"Oh no, the world went into a nuclear winter without music we have to save it by finding the right chord to banish the evil demon music thief!"

"BTW the music demon is a nonbinary drag queen called Maestro (I'm gonna assume they don't know that's a gendered word lmao) who was safely prevented from destroying the world by the Catholic church banning the chord that summoned them. Please do not think about the subtext of that."

"Also this random washed up musician somehow found out about the summoning chord and played it. Don't ask how no one else tried playing it out of curiosity when it was apparently already public knowledge or how the church knew it was evil without playing it."

"Ruby is just saur important she managed to hold off the music demon with the power of the songs in her soul (???)"

"The Doctor pulled 6/7th of the banishing chord's notes out his own ass first try somehow and Mr Wifebeater and Paul McCartney got the last one first try also."

"Musical number everybody! The End!"

Literally what the fuck was that?

Honestly the original Toymaker serial was so haunting at times with him trapping people from the real world in his domain and turning them into literal toys he would then bring back to life to use against new people who got trapped in his domain. He pit them against each other in games, promising freedom to whoever wins, dooming them to either remain his puppets and let the newcomers go free or doom the newcomers to take their place so they can escape, and that's assuming he was telling the truth. The Doctor can't beat him, only escape and leave the domain with those people trapped inside. The TARDIS team tell themselves they're not real, just puppets pretending to be real people, but it's not clear. They're tricking themselves into thinking it's clearer cut than it is to make it easier to leave them behind.

Those were such good episodes and all RTD can write is pale imitations that are insultingly stupid even for children's television. "We defeated the Toymaker with a game of catch" "We defeated his child (did I mention the Maestro is related to him?) with a musical note password we got first try." What is this?

And they're still going with the pouring salt at the edge of the universe weakened the fabric of time and let supernatural beings in thing? "I invoked a suspicion at the end of the universe where the walls of reality are thin" doesn't sell the salt thing, sorry. I can't take it seriously. If Chibnall wrote this, more of you would be hating. This is like the fucking rat saving the universe in Endgame all over again.

[edgiestdude]

So when I heard Roosterteeth shut down, I was debating on whether to make this post or not.

The last post I made was…

Wow, that was a year ago. A year ago I left RWBY because I lost interest in the show after my Weaboo self rose back from the dead. Not only that, but the more I thought about the show, the more I realized

“Wow that show wasn’t as good as people made it out to be.”

Throughout my RWBY fanself, I’ve done a lot of cringe things and decided to leave because: what was the point of sticking around and Criticizing RWDE and other RWBY critics who had some awful takes if I wasn’t interested in the show. (Fun fact, my memes are apparently popular in Facebook?)

It’s why I debated on making this post and decided: might as well. End it fully.

RWBY is a strange show. It’s neither good nor is it bad. It’s more…Mediocre. It’s not bad because the writers tried and did make a few good writing choices at times and didn’t go full on “Power fantasy!!!” (For those who think Jaune is Miles Luna self insert, go watch/read Isekais. Those are a different story). To be frank, as I thought about RWBY and its writing, I realized “RWBY was never as good as people made it out to be.”

RWBY, I feel, was never meant to be a fucking masterpiece like ATLA, Paranoia Agent, or Serial Experiments Lain. RWBYs more like Hellsing. It’s not thought-provoking, it’s more for fun. Now that’s not to say Miles and Kerry made some weird choices, like Faunus Racism and whatever happened in Atlas…

[Quick note if you want to write stuff on this: make sure to do research like reading books, looking at history, and reading up on websites (don’t just use Wikipedia kids). Oh and use appropriate timing and tone, that’s all]

So did Miles and Kerry write weird shit in RWBY? Yes. Should they get criticized. Yes. Were they planning on writing stuff like this on the long run? Maybe but I’m more leaning towards no.

RWBY was more of a show created by anime fans. Monty thought “hey wouldn’t it be cool if four girls fought and did cool things.” And with Miles and Kerry’s help created RWBY. RWBY, from what I saw, was more like a fighting game. “Fighting first, story second”

Now RWBY has been on a weird ride ever since Monty died, but I saw it more as Kerry and Miles carrying Monty’s torch. And that’s why I respected it. It could’ve just ended there, but they kept going. Also it’s worth noting that there was NO story thought of whatsoever, even when Monty was alive. It was more of a friend project that created a fanbase and franchise.

I came back to write this post because it was an interesting series that intrigued me back then. I was shocked that Roosterteeth shut down. The company that created Achievement hunter, Red vs blue, Camp Camp, and among other things.

Was it ever planning on coming? Ehhh…

Sort of. Roosterteeth did a lot of weird things and bad. But, be honest, how many companies do this? EA, Mappa, etc. Roosterteeth I feel had it coming since their founders were leaving left and right leaving very weird leaderships. And Roosterteeth was gonna be no exception to this. It’s why animation companies tend to be a pain in the ass for animators, especially in Japan. The thing about Roosterteeth is that it was more of an indie company, which later got swallowed by Warner, so I feel it was more prone to getting hurt worse. Roosterteeth was a sack of shit, but people tried to create content for people, even if they faced horrible harassment. No matter the issues that Roosterteeth had, may we never forget the memories and legacy they left behind. Every thing has an ugly side, that’s what makes us human. Roosterteeth had an interesting story with ugly and good, but it brought us memories and moments we may never get back. It’s a sad thing. But it’s life.

{Wanted to make a quick note: I read a RWBYcritics comment making fun of Canonseeker punching the air, which is funny because I forgot about Canonseeker a long time ago, so it’s kind of funny he lives rent free on some peoples head, even if he did bad shit back then}

Well, this is where it ends. I made this post to vent out my feelings about the situation and to finally close the book for good. I’ve might made some mistakes or bad calls, so I’d be interested in reading criticism, even if I don’t stick in tumblr for a while. Till then, farewell RWBY fandom and Roosterteeth, thanks for some of the memories.

[raayllum]

anyway, i’ve gone on record before that i didn’t want people to block / not interact with callmekatielee (previously thearcadialedger) / lettersfromxadia just because she was crappy towards me. i’m retracting that now. 

tw for transphobia, racism, mentions of suicide, and discussions of emotional manipulation / emotional abuse under the cut

if you have no idea who that user is, katie lee is a user who joined the dragon prince fandom around december 2019. her and i were on friendly terms but it didn’t end well, which i’ve gone into more detail here, if you want to get up to speed. 

but, if you don’t want to read a big long post: when i became more aware of katie’s conservative views i cut ties. this was initially over disagreements over black lives matter protests, in which she didn’t agree with acab. given that she’s a conservative white woman (and other issues in our relationship that i’ll get more into later) i didn’t think concern over the protests being ��violent’ (rather than people being attacked by police officers) was in good faith. 

then the fact she believed in reverse racism came out

as well as blatant transphobia

when called out for either of these things, she deletes the offending comments - or, on a since deleted post where someone patiently explained that others had blocked her not because of me, but because of her transphobia, she went on a tirade of defending biological sex. keep in mind that as of this time jk rowling’s next book is featuring a male serial killer who dresses like a woman which is the ultimate TERF trope in the book.

lastly, she is emotionally manipulative at best and has exhibited emotionally abusive behaviour towards me and others at worst. this is not something i say lightly whatsoever. but upon me blocking her (for my own personal wellbeing, as i was doing a lot of emotional labour and again, wasn’t going to stick around for shitty political views) her mental state spiralled. 

tw for mentions of suicide and gaslighting from this point onwards

she threatened to commit suicide and blamed me for it. that’s about as textbook emotionally abusive as it gets. she denied that anything about my post was true because i held back on posting screencaps out of respect to a friend caught in the middle of us. she believed that because i have ‘tumblr clout’ that somehow my own boundaries and mental health weren’t worth respecting, or real and valuable. further more, she has continued to blame me for things i had completely no awareness of, much less a hand in.

to say she sees fandom as a popularity contest or hierarchy is an understatement, given this screencap of a deleted post i mentioned earlier (the one with the transphobia)

my right to block her cannot be respected when it is simultaneously shamed and she attempts to guilt trip me for other’s actions. nor is this view of me as a “leader” remotely ingrained in reality. i was astonished to find how much this video, enclosed below from psych2go, described her behaviour / mindset and many of the situations i had found myself in, both before and after cutting ties. i also know i am not the only person who went through similar events.

if you don’t think this counts as emotionally manipulative rhetoric, let me remind you that this was literally over me deciding that i valued being anti racist and my own mental health over being her “friend.”

and again, like i said on my first and previously only post regarding, this is not a list of reasons to go send someone hate.

this is, however, a direct request for people to not engage and to check their followers’ list and notes and to block her accordingly. 

the only reason i am making this post at all is that, unfortunately, she has a habit of posting sometimes very triggering material in the main dragon prince tag without any trigger warnings or notices. (such as threats to commit suicide or previous posts regarding our own ‘drama’).

this is a fandom with a lot of young people and a lot of people who could easily be triggered by such things. no one is going into the main dragon prince tags to see this!! like i said at the beginning: worryingly enough, she is a toxic individual at best with a whole lot of questionable viewpoints. the best way to deal with someone who is a bigot (transphobic, believes in reverse racism, etc.) and who won’t tag properly is to block them. 

that way, if / when this post reaches her circle, we won’t have to see more of the bullshit that will, almost surely, inevitably follow

[knifeonmars]

Capsule Reviews, February 2021

Here's some things I've been reading.

The Curse of Brimstone 

DC's New Age of Heroes books, emerging from the beginning of Scott Snyder's creative-flameout-as-crossover-event Metal, mostly constituted riffs on Marvel heroes like the Fantastic Four (in The Terrifics) or the Hulk (in Damage). The Curse of Brimstone is a riff on Ghost Rider. It's... uneven. The first volume is generally pretty good, and when Phillip Tan is drawing it, as he does the first three and a half issues, it's gorgeous and unique, when he departs though, the quality takes a nose dive. None of the replacement artists, including the great Denis Cowan, can quite fill his shoes, and the story gets old fast. Guy makes a deal with the devil (or rather, a devil-like inhabitant of the "Dark Multiverse" as a not horribly handled tie-in to the conceits of Metal), realizes it's a raw deal, and rebels. The characters are flat, lots of time is spent with the main character's sister haranguing him to not use his powers (it is, in my humble opinion, something of a cardinal sin to have a character whose primary role is telling other characters to stop doing interesting things), too many potboiler "I know you're still in there!/I can feel this power consuming me!" exchanges, a couple of underwhelming guest spots (including a genuinely pointless appearance by the old, white, boring Doctor Fate) too many flashbacks, and not enough of the action. There's potential in the classic demonic hero rebelling plotline and its link to the liminal spaces of the DC universe, forgotten towns and economic depression, but the wheels come off this series pretty much as soon as Tan leaves. The really disappointing this is that the series is clearly built as an artistic showcase, so after Tan's shockingly early departure, the main appeal of the series is gone and there's nothing left but the playing out of an obviously threadbare story.

Star Wars - Boba Fett: Death, Lies, and Treachery

I don't care much about Star Wars these days, and I think that most of the old Expanded Universe was, as evidenced by Crimson Empire, pretty bad. Death, Lies, and Treachery, is that rare Star Wars EU comic which is actually good. John Wagner writes and he's in full-on 2000 AD mode, writing Boba Fett as a slightly more unpleasant Johnny Alpha (who is like a mercenary Judge Dredd, for those unfamiliar) right on down to the appearance of a funny alien sidekick for one of the characters. The main attraction is Cam Kennedy's art though, along with his inimitable colors: this might be the best looking Star Wars comic ever. The designs are all weird and chunky, with an almost kitbashed feeling that captures the lived in aesthetic of classic Star Wars, and the colors are one of a kind. Natural, neutral white light does not exist in this comic, everything is always bathed at all times in lurid greens or yellows, occasionally reds, and it looks incredible. In terms of "Expanded Universe" material for Star Wars, this hits the sweet spot of looking and feeling of a piece, but exploring the edges of the concept with a unique voice. It's great. I read this digitally, but I'd consider it a must-buy in print if I ever get the chance at a deal.

Zaroff

Zaroff is a French comic (novel? novella?). It's like 90 pages and it delivers exactly on its premise of "Die Hard starring the bad guy from The Most Dangerous Game." It's pretty good. Count Zaroff, he of the habitual hunting of humans, turns out to have killed a mafia don at some point, and after miraculously escaping his own seeming death at the end of the original story, finds himself hunted by the irate associates of this gangster, who have brought along Zaroff's sister and her kids to spice things up. Zaroff not only finds himself the hunt, but he also has to protect his estranged family as they struggle to survive. Nothing about this book or its twists and turns is likely to surprise you, but I don't think being surprised is always necessary for quality. Zaroff delivers on pulpy, early-20th century jungle action, is gorgeously rendered, and the fact that Zaroff himself is an unrepentant villain adds just enough of an unexpected element to the proceedings and character dynamics that it doesn't feel rote. There's a couple of points, ones typical of Eurocomics, which spark a slight sour note, such as some "period appropriate" racism and flashes of the male gaze, but for the most part these are relatively contained. It's good.

Batman: Gothic

Long before Grant Morrison did their Bat-epic, they wrote Batman: Gothic, an entirely different, but then again maybe not so different, kind of thing. It starts off with what must be called a riff on Fritz Lang's film, M, only where that story ends with a crew of gangsters deciding they cannot pass moral judgment on a deranged child-murderer, in Morrison's story they go ahead and kill him, only for the killer to return years later to rather horribly murder all of them as a warmup for a grandiose scheme involving unleashing a weaponized form of the bubonic plague on Gotham City as an offering to Satan. Along the way it turns out that said villain, one Mr. Whisper, is a former schoolmaster of Bruce Wayne's, who terrified the young Batman in the days before his parent's deaths. It's an earlier Morrison story and it shows. Certain elements presage their later Batman work; Mr. Whisper as a satanic enemy recalls the later Doctor Hurt, and the cathedral Mr. Whisper built to harvest souls recalls what writers like Morrison, Milligan, and Snyder would do concerning Gotham as a whole years later.The art, by Klaus Janson, is spectacular. If you're familiar at all with his work collaborating with Frank Miller you'll see him continuing in a similar vein and it's all quite good, even when he stretches beyond the street milieu which most readers might know him from. There's one particular sequence where Janson renders a needlessly complicated Rube Goldberg machine in motion that manages to work despite being static images. The writing by Morrison though, is not their finest. The M riff doesn't last as long as it could, and Mr. Whisper's turn in the latter half of the story from delicious creepy wraith to a cackling mass murderer who puts Batman in an easily escaped death trap feels like something of a letdown from the promise of the first half of the book. Gothic is good, but not, in my opinion, great. It's certainly worth checking out for Morrison fans however, and I imagine that someone well-versed in his latter Batman stuff might be able to find some real resonance between the two.

Green Arrow: The Longbow Hunters

For a long, long time, Longbow Hunters was THE Green Arrow story. It is to Green Arrow as TDKR is to Batman, deliberately so. Mike Grell wrote and drew the reinvention of the character from his role as the Justice League's resident limousine liberal to a gritty urban vigilante operating in Seattle over the course of these three issues, which he'd follow up with a subsequent ongoing. Going back to it, it certainly merits its reputation, but its far from timeless. Grell's art is unimpeachable absolutely incredible, with great splashes and spreads, subtle colors, and really great figure work. The narrative is almost so 80's it hurts though, revolving around West Coast serial killers, cocaine, the CIA and the Iran-Contra scandal, and the Yakuza, and it's hard to look back at some of this stuff without smirking. The story begins with a teenager strung out on tainted coke sprinting through a window in a scene that's right out of Reefer Madness. In the cold light of a day 30+ years later, parts of it look more than a little silly. The 80's-ness of it all doesn't stop with that stuff though, even the superhero elements smack of it. Green Arrow realizes that he's lost a step and has be to be shown a way forward by an Asian woman skilled in the martial arts (recalling Vic Sage's reinvention in the pages of The Question), and Black Canary gets captured and torture off-panel for the sake of showing that this is real crime now, not the superhero silliness they've dealt with before. The treatment of Black Canary here is pretty markedly heinous, it's a classic fridging and Grell's claims that he didn't intentionally imply sexual assault in his depiction of her torture is probably true, but still feels more than a little weak considering how he chose to render it.The final analysis is that this book is good, but it exists strictly in the frame of the 1980's. If you're a fan of Green Arrow, there are worse books to pick up, or if you're interested in that era of DC Comics it's more than worth it, but as a matter of general interest I wouldn't recommend it very highly.

SHIELD by Steranko

Jim Steranko is sort of the prodigy of the early Marvel years, a young guy who came up through the system, blossomed into an incredible talent, and then left the company, and by and large the industry, behind. He would go on to dabble in publishing, work in other mediums, and generally kick around as the prodigal son of Marvel Comics. This collection, of both his Nick Fury shorts in the pages of Strange Tales and the four issues he drew of the original Nick Fury solo series, charts Steranko's growth as an artist. The book starts off with Steranko working from Jack Kirby's layouts with Stan Lee's dialogue and writing, and Steranko might be the one guy in history for whom working off of Kirby's blueprints is clearly holding him back. The first third or so of this collection really isn't much to write home about, as Steranko is obviously constrained by someone else's style, and at the end of the day those early stories still read as somewhat uninspired pulp compared to the highlights of early Marvel. There are flashes though, of techniques and ideas, which foreshadow what Steranko is capable of, and when he finally takes over as solo writer/artist it's like he's been unleashed. He immediately has Nick Fury tear off his shirt and start throwing guys around over psychedelic effects. He writes out most of Kirby and Lee's frankly uninspired boys' club supporting cast, he makes Fury visibly older, wearier, but also so much cooler. It's the birth of Nick Fury as a distinctly comic book super spy.By the time he finishes wrapping up the previous writers' plotline with Hydra and Baron von Strucker, Steranko is firing on all cylinders. By the time it gets to Steranko's Fury solo series, he's somehow surpassed himself, turning in effects, panel structures, and weird stories which make the earlier installment about a suit-wearing Man from UNCLE knockoff and its strict six-panel layouts look absolutely fossilized.I can't recommend this collection highly enough for any fan of the artform, even if the stories themselves might not be everyone's cup of tear. It's truly incredible to watch Steranko emerge as an artist over the course of this single collection. The book itself has a few problems, it's not the most elegantly designed in its supporting materials and index, but the content of it more than outweighs that. It's great stuff.

[silenthillmutual]

horror/thriller movie recommendations based on your fave Danganronpa 1/2 character

the series in general: Saw (2004, dir. James Wan) - i can’t give much of a reasoning for this as i haven’t seen it but the “punishment fits the victim” trope appears to be a thing in Saw?

Makoto Naegi: It (2017, dir. Andres Muschietti) - as much about the power of friendship as it is about a fear beyond all others. the premise is probably relatively well known by now for the fact that there’s a big clown in it. content warnings: clowns, unsanitary, implied incest and csa.

Sayaka Maizono: Psycho (1960, dir. Alfred Hitchcock) - this suggestion is an incredibly cheap shot, please forgive me. famous film, not sure if i can talk too much about the plotline without giving away the most important part.

Mukuro Ikusaba: Us (2019, dir. Jordan Peele) - doppelgangers show up to wreak havoc on an american family. themes of identity theft. much bloodier than Get Out. 

Leon Kuwata: Scream (1996, dir. Wes Craven) - admittedly haven’t seen this either yet. i know, i know, i’m a fake horror fan. but i know that it was made as a sort of tongue-in-cheek homage to the tropeyness of horror films, and i didn’t want to put any movie too blatantly humorous here. i thought this would fit Leon.

Chihiro Fujisaki: A Quiet Place (2018, dir. John Krasinski) - monsters that attack based on noise terrorize a family. most dialogue is delivered through sign language. also has a really touching family dynamic, especially between the father and his children.

Mondo Oowada: Pet Sematary (1989, dir. Mary Lambert) - haven’t seen this one either, whoops. all i know is it’s about, like, bringing people back from the dead or something, and that it’s based on a Stephen King book.

Kiyotaka Ishimaru: The Stand (1994, dir. Mick Garris) - technically a miniseries, but i wasn’t really sure what other horror story fit him. it’s the world at the end in a final battle between good and evil, and nothing says Ultimate Moral Compass more than that to me.

Hifumi Yamada: Strangers on a Train (1951, dir. Alfred Hitchcock) - the whole “i’ll do your murder if you do mine” kinda hits for chapter 3 i think. i also remember his hostage being his sister, so he’d probably like the relationship between Anne and Barbara.

Celes Ludenberg: Crimson Peak (2015, dir. Guillermo del Toro) - there’s a line the main character says that’s something to the effect of how she’d rather be like Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley because she died a widow? that’s Celescore. content warning: incest.

Sakura Oogami: Hereditary (2018, dir. Ari Aster) - both in the way that her dojo is a family business and in the themes of being afraid of hurting your loved ones. content warnings: child death, car accident, decapitation, possession, drug usage.

Toko Fukawa: Rebecca (1940, dir. Alfred Hitchcock) - again haven’t watched or read the book on which it is based but the fact alone that it is based on a book? and it’s not directed by stanley kubrick’s book-ruining ass?

Byakuya Togami: Rope (1948, dir. Alfred Hitchcock) - based on a play which itself was probably based loosely on the Leopold & Loeb case, it’s famous in part for its protagonists being gay. also they have superiority complexes and think that the privileged few should be allowed to murder inferior people because they’re above morality.

Yasuhiro Hagakure: A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984, dir. Wes Craven) - i feel like this is closer to what his brand of horror would be, but also people not really believing that what’s happening is actually happening is kind of his m.o. too. content warning: i don’t remember if this is explicit in the original or not, but Freddy Krueger was a pedophile.

Aoi Asahina: Friday the 13th (1980, dir. Sean S. Cunningham) - again i just think this is closer to what Hina’s brand of horror would be, but also i feel like the summer camp aesthetic would be for her.

Kyouko Kirigiri: The Secret in Their Eyes (2009, dir. Juan Jose Campanella) - i don’t totally remember it but detective going off the rails trying to solve a rape & murder case. Very intense, but very good.

Junko Enoshima: Midsommar (2019, dir. Ari Aster) - gaslighting people into joining a death cult? yeah, that screams junko. content warnings: graphic suicide, drug usage, gaslighting, people on fire, nudity, sex.

Monokuma: Child’s Play (1988, dir. Tom Holland) - creepy toy carrying the soul of a murderer. still need to finish watching this one, other than “creepy doll” i don’t have anything to offer in the way of content warnings. 

Hajime Hinata: Get Out (2017, dir. Jordan Peele) - reluctant to go too much into details because i wouldn’t want to spoil the film for those who haven’t seen it, but the experiment done on Hajime vibes w this movie. content warning in that this film is about racism.

Twogami: Vertigo (1958, dir. Alfred Hitchcock) - too many details would give away spoilers but the identity theft theme of the film fits for a guy whose talent is in identity theft.

Teruteru Hanamura: Halloween (1978, dir. John Carpenter) - had a hard time thinking of a horror movie for Teruteru, but Halloween (and 80′s slashers in general) have a tendency to punish the horny.

Mahiru Koizumi: I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997, dir. Jim Gillespie) - would it be too much of a spoiler to say there’s similarities between this film & what gets Mahiru killed in-game?

Peko Pekoyama: The Purge (2013, dir. James DeMonaco) - people using masks to enact what they feel is justified revenge on the one day of the year when all crime is legal.

Hiyoko Saionji: The VVitch (2015, dir. Robert Eggers) - based on colonial-era folk tales about witches. very atmospheric, features the same kind of abusive slut-shaming verbal assaults Hiyoko hurls at others. content warning for briefly implied incest, some nudity, and parents being shitty.

Ibuki Mioda: Green Room (2015, dir. Jeremy Saulnier) - still need to see this one; punk band tries to survive to the end of the night after witnessing neo-nazis commit a murder.

Mikan Tsumiki: Carrie (1976, dir. Brian De Palma) - another film based on a stephen king novella, and also a pretty famous story. a longtime bullying & abuse victim starts to lose her shit after she begins developing telepathy. content warning for some nudity, fire, and an abusive mother.

Nekomaru Nidai: Les Yeux Sans Visage (1960, dir. Georges Franju) - wasn’t really sure where to go with him either, at first, and settled on body horror considering what happens to him later in-game. a doctor attempts to find a new face for his daughter after she is left disfigured from an accident. 

Gundham Tanaka: The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1921, dir. Robert Wiene) - a mad scientist claims his hypnotized ‘somnambulist’ can see into the future, including the deaths of carnival-goers. highly influential silent film, german expressionist so peak aesthetic.

Nagito Komaeda: The Silence of the Lambs (1991, dir. Jonathan Demme) - it’s probably well enough known for Hannibal the Cannibal being in it, but it’s worth noting he’s not the primary antagonist of the film. he is the most memorable part of it, and his psychoanalysis is what made me think of Komaeda. content warnings for gore, sexual harassment, referenced cannibalism, period-typical transphobia (period is the late 80s/early 90s).

Chiaki Nanami: V/H/S (2012, various directors) - a horror anthology film of found-footage type shorts, not shown in chronological order of events. i don’t really remember the contents enough for warnings, check at your own risk.

Akane Owari: The Blair Witch Project (1999, dirs. Eduardo Sanchez & Daniel Myrick) - don’t really have a good reason for this one other than “they all go feral, which Akane is seconds from doing at any given moment.” i think she’d dig it. no real content warnings to be had, the original found footage film.

Kazuichi Souda: Jaws (1975, dir. Stephen Spielberg) - i’m not even entirely sure i know what would make him like it, maybe just the mechanical shark? i think we all know this as the movie that made people double down on their hatred of sharks. i don’t particularly care for it, but it’s popular.

Sonia Nevermind: Perfume: Story of a Murderer (2006, dir. Tom Tykwer) - follows a would-be perfumer as he murders women in an attempt to create the perfect scent. in retrospect i probably should have picked something based on a real crime, but i still think she’d like this one.

Fuyuhiko Kuzuryu: M (1931, dir. Fritz Lang) - when the police fail to catch a serial child murderer, the criminal underworld steps up to take action into their own hands. fitting, no?

Usami: Trick ‘r Treat (2007, dir. Michael Doughtery) - another sort of anthology film that follows what happens to townsfolk when they don’t abide by Halloween traditions. i put it for Usami because i thought it was actually kind of cute, as far as horror films go.

[sclfmastery]

cw abuse mention - so im new to fandom and im curious about something. is it okay to ship toxic/abusive ships? like obviously not if one is an adult and the other is not or they're related but as anna karenina said "All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." you know? ive just seen different opinions on that so im curious.

Short answer: Do what is comfortable for you and the people you directly interact with.  Have open conversations about what each of you is comfortable with. Tag  known triggers diligently, and put especially controversial content under a read-more.  At any point in time, when someone with whom you are writing becomes uncomfortable, respect their discomfort and cease to write the content that’s upsetting them. On the other side of the coin, refrain from judging others for writing material you are uncomfortable with, and simply avoid their blog. Block if you have to.  Blocking has gotten a bad rep on social media, but it is actually a very important way to establish boundaries in a society that’s ubiquitous with instant forms of information (and social contact).  Do not feel ashamed for doing what you need to do to feel safe. 

Longer answer: This is a tough one. That’s probably why you’ve seen so many different (often strong) opinions about it, and let me disclaim that I’m no expert. I have written many toxic ships and I have written many ships that are healthy and balanced right off the bat. My end goal, however, is always healthy and balanced, with the understanding by all involved, “do not try this in real life.” 

At the core of this argument is the extent to which creative fiction may explore realms that are necessarily, and for good reason, inadvisable, even harmful and dangerous, in real life.  This of course then brings up questions of “to what extent can fiction influence reality by modeling certain cultural values?” And, therefore, “what is the creator/author/artist’s responsibility to real people consuming their work?”  As an artist and scholar by profession, I am deeply invested in analyzing media for the messages it conveys, and in the fact that art has a transformative power upon society.  There are things you just shouldn’t write about: egregious depictions of rape not responsibly and sensitively resolved, for instance.  

On the other hand, some content creators who explore deeply controversial content claim that it is therapeutic to explore their triggers from the safe distance of fiction, and that, if they tag responsibly and don’t force that content on others, who is to say that they are “forbidden” from doing so? 

It’s a complicated situation and I have come to believe that the best way to deal with it is on a case-by-case basis. Everyone has a different threshold, and every “toxic ship” you might write is a different level of toxic. A good way  to gauge this is the couple’s power dynamic. 

 For instance, I write the Doctor X the Master on this blog. To me, this is acceptable because both parties have informed consent about how toxic the partner is, and both parties have an equitable power dynamic: neither the Doctor nor the Master is stronger, or at more of an advantage, in terms of social or political privilege. They are both nonbinary and queer, both Time Lords of an elite social caste (important note: for this pairing this is not always true. Sometimes you do have to be very careful, and check both the character’s privilege and your own as a writer: for instance, if you write Thirteen x Dhawan, be aware of how she weaponized his brownness against him, which DOES matter to the human audience watching Doctor Who, as well as the character--the Master--experiencing a power dynamic imbalance, and how that is a very problematic incident that needs to be directly addressed if the relationship is to flourish).  Moreover, at different times in their complex friendship, both parties have shown a willingness to change out of love for the other: meaning there is still the possibility of healthy growth and healing.  I tag triggers diligently and always, and I make sure my writing partners are not feeling uncomfortable. 

 On the other hand, I will never write a toxic ship like Jessica Jones x Kilgrave. Why? Because he is a serial rapist with no remorse who shows no signs of repentance.  Because Jessica is his serial victim, and because she is a woman and he is a cis man. Because he literally has the power of mind control and she isn’t, until the very end of the first season, immune.  Right there we have an inequitable power dynamic that really can never be resolved, and probably shouldn’t, because pardoning the man of crimes so real and so severe to millions of survivors worldwide is just not something it’s worth it to do for a fun writing hobby.

Another example of a toxic ship I’d never write: a historical slave owner x a slave. Like, Thomas Jefferson x Sally Hemings (yes, people actually do this. believe it or not).  Not a good idea to try to render sympathetic and romantic a figure who participated in and benefited economically from the trafficking and abuse of human beings, the effects of which are still felt by black and brown people every day.  Do I even have to say, inequitable power dynamic, based both on gender and on race?  Plus it’s dangerous from a historical, cultural narrative standpoint to romanticize the institution of racism by sugar-coating some of its most infamous practitioners (America already has done this by ascribing “Founding Father” to Jefferson, who was frankly an asshole).  In this case you’re even blurring the lines of fiction and reality because these were real people that you’re “rping.”  

Summary!  Open, considerate communication is really important. The rules are different than when you’re writing a solo fanfic. You are collaborating with another human being, who has feelings and needs.  Always consider the power dynamic of the characters: “should I” is a dynamic question with very different answers, from fictional couple to fictional couple. 

You will make mistakes. I know I have.  Don’t berate yourself too severely, just ask what you did wrong, make a note of it, and move forward better aware of what not to do.  

Folks can reblog this if it’s at all helpful! 

[mask131]

A guide to watching AHS: Guide to the seasons (A)

Now... here is my opinion about how you should watch AHS, in which order, and what each season can bring you.

If you want to begin AHS, my first advice is: begin with one of the three seasons.

As I mentionned, AHS started out as an "anthology series", each seasons being its own story, with its own characters, own themes and own style - and each of them completely unrelated to each other. As a result, you can watch these three seasons in any kind of order you like, merely according to your preference and tastes.

The first season officially has no sub-name, but the one coined by the fans and later adopted by the team of AHS is "Murder House". Murder House reinvents the genre of the haunted house and of ghost hauntings, while also dealing with references to Frankenstein and religious horror. This season, being the first one of AHS and the one that created the AHS fame, is the more "balanced". You will find a bit of violence and gore, but it won't be over-the-top. A bit of sexuality, but it won't be outrageous. There is darkness and grim, but also humor and jokes (though they are rather dry and cold, of an ironic and dark humor style). There's both supernatural and natural horror here. All in all, it is basically the synthesis of all AHS in terms of style - or rather the fertile ground from which all the other seasons bloomed.

The second season is "Asylum", which as it title says, takes place in an asylum. This season is actually just as mad as its setting: there is an abundance and a profusion of horror styles and sources, from aliens and demons to serial killers, mad scientists and the sheer horror of mental health insistutions from the 60s. It is a very dark season, so if you look for dark, depressing, frightening and disturbing horror, this is the one for you, much darker and more adult.

At the opposite of Asylum, you have the third season, "Coven", which centers about the modernization of the myth of the witches and of witchcraft. Since it is set in New-Orleans, it also explores the vodou mythology, with a bunch of zombies and ghosts, but it also deals a lot with numerous harshness and cruelties of the human condition : racism, violence against women, horror related to sexuality, as well as the fear of aging and disease. This season, in term of horror, is much lighter than the other two, because it focuses a lot on jokes and fun. Note that it isn't a parody though, this season is still dark, with disturbing and very sad moments. It is rather a dark comedy, or rather a horror comedy, putting a certain emphasis on pathos, emotions and pity. Let's say, while it will be creepy and horrific, it will make one laugh and cry more than scream in terror.

As a result, basically if you are used to more a lighthearted, funny, "light" horror, go for Coven. If you want a dark, grim, terrifying and disturbing horror, go for "Asylum". And if you want an in-between, go for "Murder House".

These three seasons are in my mind all equally good. They present in high percentages the values and virtues of AHS as I mentionned them before, while having the "flaws" being at a minimum level, sometimes barely even noticeable. This trio is the first step to watching AHS, and an excellent experience.

After this trio, you get to a duo. "Freakshow" and "Hotel".

These two seasons are actually much more flawed than the previous one, I cannot deny it. The plots suffer from all the flaws I mentionned - weird social commentary, an excess of characters, plots that lead nowhere... As a result they are convoluted, frustrating, sometimes disappointing stories. BUT I actually would not call them the worst seasons of AHS and I would even say they are worth watching. Why? Because for their flaws in story, they have a ton of advantages. They have interesting, fascinating or genius ideas. They still have the perfect filming and the incredible soundtracks that make their cinematography a delight. They have beautiful, marvelous sets with memorable and mind-striking styles. What they lack in story, they get in ambiance. In fact, these two seasons actually "colored" my Halloween much more than the three seasons previously. Each of them is a unique, brilliant, unforgottable world. A flawed world with wasted potential, but still worth watching and remembering.

Another reason those two seasons are set apart from the other is that these seasons actually broke the "each season is unrelated" rule, by actually being directly linked to another season, and thus establishing continuities in the AHS universe.

Freakshow, the fourth season, was actually the first attempt at creating a seasons with "no supernatural horror" (spoiler, they eventually included a ghost, they couldn't resist). Centered around a freak show (based on the movie "Freaks" by Tod Browning) but generally dealing with "circus-style horror" (it has an evil, murderous clown and a creepy, demented ventriloquist dummy), it also proposes itself to show a "real" horror in the form of bigotry, discrimination, rejection, violence and hate against women, handicapped people and other form of closed-mindness in the 50s. This show suffers from the "excess" flaw mostly, having a ton of characters introduced at an extremely fast speed only for most of them to be pushed aside of disappear, resulting in a bunch of sub-plotlines not being finished or being forgotten. But, the whole circus theme, the set and the special effects are really worth it - plus, this season actually introduces three of the most memorable, mind-striking and notorious villains of AHS in the shape of the murderous clown Twisty, the psychopathic manchild Dandy Mott and another disturbed man.

To watch Freakshow, you should watch Asylum first because it acts as a prequel to it, but the emphasis on human emotions, pity and the cruelty of real life and humankind make it very similar to Coven.

Hotel is the fifth season of AHS, based originally on the idea of a haunted and disturbing hotel - an entire plot-reference to The Shining (even though it takes a huge inspiration from real-life haunted hotels). It actually is a season set after "Murder House" and exists in the same continuity as it, thus having a similar "haunted building" theme. But the other two major parts of this season are vampirism (reinvented as a modern "virus") and thematic serial killers (a huge reference to the movie Se7en, while there are explicit references to the most unfamous real-life serial killers of America). This season takes for its ambiance style more from Asylum, as  it is a more violent, a darker and more disturbing season. But where Asylum was more about psychological horror and creepiness of eldritch things, Hotel is mostly the "sex drugs and rock 'd roll" season, having a lot of explicit sexual scenes, a lot of nudity, a lot of gore and blood, and the recurring theme of drugs and addictions.

This season is difficult to categorize because it has some absolutely genius and mind-blowing parts (the hotel itself, the ghosts of the hotel, the basis for the Ten Commandment killer, the use of real-life serial killers) alongside some extremely dull and annoying ones (dull and uninteresting characters, details and appearances that lead nowhere, plots that are entirely unuseful and feel like padding) resulting in a season that I adore for the ambiance and the idea but that feels stale and unfinished in terms of story. OH AND THE ENDING! I actually had a lot of hopes and respect for this season, given that haunted hotels is one of my big loves, and despite its flaws I still had hopes for this seasons... until the final episode which I feel was honestly an insult to the AHS viewers. I personally do not even consider it canon, I just stop the season at the episode right before the finale.

This makes a guide for a beginner watcher of AHS. The five first seasons.

As a result, you can for exemple begin with the three first seasons in any order "Asylum - Murder House - Coven" in decreasing order of darkness, for exemple, or the reverse. You can also begin with Asylum for exemple, and then follow by Freakshow before jumping to Coven. Or you can begin with Murder House, then jump by Hotel to go to Asylum. Numerous roads are possible.

I however do not advice you to go per "chronological order" as in watching the seasons set in the more distant part first because it actually is not a good order. For exemple, if you go by chronological order you should watch "Freakshow" before "Asylum" (the first being set in the 50s, the second in the 60s), but the thing is that Freakshow acts as a prequel to Asylum as in you should watch Asylum first then Freakshow, else it kind of spoils you on things.

[auntynationalsblog]

5 Netflix Films for the Week, set before the 21st c.

How’s quarantine going? Yeah, same here. But it’s Monday after all, and you still have over 150 hours to kill if you’re dealing with this quarantine via a week-by-week approach. I can help you kill around 8%, 12 of those hours. Here are five must-watch films set before the twenty-first century. Don’t watch them all at once, that’s lame. 

No spoilers. 

5.  The Revenant (1823)

Main Cast:  Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hardy 

“Revenge is in the Creator's hands.”

Many of you will know of this film as the one which finally gave LDC his first Oscar, for Best Actor, at the 88th Academy Awards. Unfortunately, you would have stopped at that information and not bothered to watch the film. Released in 2015, the film is based on a novel of the same name. The definition of ‘Revenant’  is “a person who has returned, especially supposedly from the dead.” The story-line does not deviate from the title, as an American frontiersman named Hugh Glass is engulfed in a bear attack and is left for dead by his hunting crew. But he survives. And he’s fucking pissed. The novel is called The Revenant: A Novel of Revenge, and yeah, the film is pretty vengeful too. Interestingly, even though Hugh Glass was indeed a real person, and it is mostly believed that the film and novel are based on a story, there exist no writings from the man himself to verify the description of his story. His story was first published in a Philadelphia literary journal known as The Port Folio. Some say that it is no more than a legendary tale. Nevertheless, a brilliant film, don’t miss out. 

4. Before Sunrise (1994)

Only Cast (LOL): Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy

“If there's any kind of magic in this world…it must be in the attempt of understanding someone.”

If you’re a fan of love stories/romantic films, and if you haven’t come across the Before Trilogy, I don’t know what kind of love stories you watch. Why is this film unique? In technical terms, it’s minimalist. In simple words, there’s no real plot. There’s no action or drama or horror. These two just walk and talk. Then they talk some more while walking, and when they’ve nothing to talk about, they just walk quietly. So why watch the film? For starters, it’s very peaceful and relaxing, unlike The Revenant, which is fucking intense. Secondly, the conversations in the film constitute some of the best dialogue-exchanges in the history of cinema. Their characters are very carefully crafted, as their varying perspectives on living and loving bring out some deep AF points throughout the film. It is a slow film no doubt, but I promise you that the blandness is worth it, and the ending is too nice. Don’t get bored, give the film some time and thank me later. 

3. Django Unchained (1858)

Main Cast: Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, and Leonardo DiCaprio

“Sold! To the man with the exceptional beard and his unexceptional nigga!”

Django Unchained is Tarantino’s highest-grossing film ever, for good reason. Although it has been criticized for historical inaccuracies, violence, and unprecedented high use of the N-word, Tarantino delivered one of the most dramatic and entertaining films from the era of plantation slavery. While the image above portrays Foxx, a slave, and LDC, a rich plantation owner, the highlight of the film was the German dentist-turned-bounty hunter, Dr. King Schultz, played by Christoph Waltz. Waltz’s performance is impeccable, only matched by his portrayal of Standartenführer Hans Landa in Inglourious Basterds (also directed by Tarantino). While the film starts off with Dr. Schultz hunting for his bounties, it eventually goes on to become a rescue mission, where Django and Schultz look for the former’s estranged wife, Broomhilda von Shaft. TW; extreme cursing and racism. But the film is a work of art. In fact, Jamie Foxx has revealed that LDC was pretty uncomfortable on the set, as his character had to use extremely racial slurs. But boy, he pulled off that role brilliantly.

2. Zodiac (1969 - 1980s)

Main Cast: Jake Gyllenhaal, Mark Ruffalo, and Robert Downey Jr.

“I wanna report a double murder. If you go one mile east on Columbus Parkway, to a public park, you'll find kids in a brown car. They were shot with a 9mm Luger. I also killed those kids last year. Goodbye.” 

What happens when Iron Man, Hulk and Mysterio gang-up against one of America’s most notorious serial-killers? For now, I can only tell you that it was a pretty uneven contest. Based on a true story, this film depicts the useless San Francisco Police Department’s hunt for the Zodiac Killer, led by Dave Toschi (Ruffalo), and aided by political cartoonist Robert Graysmith (Gyllenhaal) and crime reporter Paul Avery (Downey). In case you’re wondering if they’re fictional characters, they’re not. They became pretty famous while the Zodiac Killer was running havoc, and have multiple articles and Wikipedia pages dedicated to all three of them. The Zodiac Killer remains unidentified by the way, and the cases are still officially open. Why watch the film then? Because the mysteriousness of it will blow your mind. Note that the film is directed by David Fincher, the same guy who directed Seven, Fight Club, Gone Girl and Mindhunter, among many other murder mysteries and thrillers. Don’t be surprised if you spend the rest of the day investigating the case yourself, happens to the best of us. 

Consolation Prize: The Irishman (1950s - 1970s)

Main (legendary) Cast: Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, and Joe Pesci

“I work hard for them when I ain't stealing from them.”

I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking how can a film with a cast of three actors who redefined cinema in the late twentieth century earn only a consolation prize on this list? The truth is, that such crime/mafia/gangster films, no matter how legendary the cast is, only appeal to a particular audience. A lot of film buffs who truly appreciate cinema and actors are simply not enticed by this genre, which is okay. Nevertheless, this film, which spans over 200 minutes, is one of Martin Scorsese’s best works, along with other mob movies like Goodfellas and The Departed. Based on a true story, it follows the adventures of ordinary truck driver-turned-assassin Frank ‘Irishman’ Sheeran (De Niro), who gets mixed up in some extraordinary business with mobster Russell Bufalino (Pesci), his Pennsylvania crime family and American labor union leader Jimmy Hoffa (Pacino). The punchline of the film is “I heard you paint houses” - a mob code implying: I heard you murder people for money, the paint being the symbol of the blood that splatters when bullets are riddled into the target. Typical Scorsese, mesmerizing direction. The punchline is also the name of the novel the film is based on, in case you love reading about organized crime. 

1. Dallas Buyers Club (1985)

Main Cast: Matthew McConaughey, Jennifer Garner and Jared Leto

“Sometimes, I feel I'm fighting for a life that I just ain't got the time to live. I want it all to mean something.”

On the day of the 86th Academy Awards, Facebook and Twitter erupted in outrage. LDC had not been awarded the Oscar for Best Actor for his portrayal of  Jordan Belfort in The Wolf of Wall Street, also known as The Film You Must Never Watch With Your Family. I merely asked every hot-tempered schmucks who posted that LDC had been snubbed, “Have you watched Dallas Buyers Club?” Either the answer was no, or the answer never came. The point being, Dallas Buyers Club is one of the best films ever made. Based on the true story of Ron Woodroof, a once homophobic, junkie cowboy diagnosed with AIDS, co-starring Jared Leto (who won best supporting actor) as Rayon, a fictional trans-woman with HIV, this film tells us an extraordinary tale of friendship, hope and empathy. When Ron discovers that the Federal Drug Administration has been systematically banning cheap drugs that can improve the condition of existing HIV-AIDS patients, he opens a ‘buyers club’, that enabled sick people to make drug purchases at lower prices. Things get more interesting with the role of  Dr. Eve Saks, an AIDS doctor, who recognizes the villainous role of the state, but wants to remain within the ambit of the law. Ron’s character development might be the highlight of the film, as he transforms from a selfish, homophobic asshole to a dying man waging war against the American government, fighting for the healthcare of the underprivileged. Very few equally magnificent films have come out post Dallas Buyers Club. Don’t miss out. 

So that’s it folks. Make good use of your quarantine by immersing yourself in good quality cinema. I’ll come up with some more suggestions on films and TV shows soon enough. Till then, Netflix and Don’t Chill. 

[aaronmaurer]

TV I Liked In 2019

Every year I reflect on the pop culture I enjoyed and put it in some sort of order.

The era of “peak TV” has never been more apparent to me than the past year. I am very aware of the many shows I have not seen (don’t have Amazon Prime, for example), and yet I expanded my list from a top 10 to top 15 and still had to leave out A LOT of stuff I really liked! These picks include my legitimate favorites, ranging from truly important looks at the criminal justice system to ensemble comedies that I couldn’t wait to return to. In another year I may have been able to include the latest seasons of Barry, Stranger Things, Queer Eye, Bojack Horseman, Glow, or the finale seasons of Legion, A Series of Unfortunate Events, Veep, Silicon Valley and The Deuce, all of which I’d still recommend. But these stood out even more.

14 (tie). Chernobyl (HBO) / The Hot Zone (National Geographic)

Two limited series focusing on real-life disasters in the 1980s: the meltdown of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant and an Ebola outbreak outside of Washington DC. Chernobyl is an incredibly harrowing account of humanity’s inability to believe things that don’t mesh with their interpretations of reality and the destructive power of lies and cover-ups. The Hot Zone adapts the non-fiction Richard Preston book, a revealing look at pandemics, the power of fear and human resolve. Taken together, they raise interesting questions about governmental gatekeeping, professional competence and personal sacrifice.

13. Mindhunter: Season 2 (Netflix)

Joe Penhall and David Fincher’s look at the early days of the FBI’s criminal profiling department goes broader and deeper in its second season. There are still chilling interviews with incarcerated serial killers and criminal minds (including Charles Manson this time out), but the season really revolves around the Atlanta child murders. This focus provides a compelling look at who the justice system helps and who it ignores, and the investigative – and bureaucratic – work it takes to put together a case.

10 (tie). A.P. Bio: Season 2 (NBC) / The Last O.G.: Season 2 (TBS) / Schitt’s Creek: Season 5 (Pop)

Three great hangout comedies that really came into their own in their most recent seasons. A.P. Bio transcended its first-season preoccupation with revenge and leaned into its fantastic supporting cast – one of the best comedic ensembles around – to become a show I loved spending time with each week. (Thank goodness it’s coming back via NBC’s upcoming “Peacock” service.) The Last O.G. has had a lot on its mind since it began, but its second season covers privilege and the opportunity gap among other issues, ending with a note-perfect homage to Spike Lee’s Do The Right Thing, making it an unexpectedly resonant comedy. Schitt’s Creek is obviously having a moment right now, and Season 5 (the first season I watched as it aired) was perhaps its best yet. While the whole cast is great, as a big fan of Best In Show and A Mighty Wind, I love seeing Eugene Levy and Catherine O’Hara share the screen again.

9. Crashing: Season 3 (HBO)

The first two seasons of Pete Holmes’ show made my list in previous years so I’d be remiss not to include the final one, which may be its finest. Pete spends the season making a lot of mistakes – saying yes to things (gigs, relationships) that he probably shouldn’t – and although they provide growth, he doesn’t come across as the “good guy” in how he deals with all of them. This adds additional nuance to the show, questioning its straight white male protagonist’s actions rather than merely rewarding him for following his passions, while still leading to an uplifting and fitting finale.

8. Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt: Season 4 (Netflix)

Netflix split the final season of Kimmy Schmidt into two parts, so technically only the final six episodes premiered in 2019. Those alone warrant a spot on the list, as the show concluded by following its idiosyncratic bliss to the end. The final group of episodes includes a (pre-movie) takedown of Cats, a Sliding Doors homage and an unexpectedly moving series finale. If this one fell off your radar a few years ago, it’s worth revisiting and seeing through.  

7. What We Do In The Shadows: Season 1 (FX)

Based on the horror-comedy film of the same name, this series follows a different crew of vampires who live together on Staten Island. I was initially skeptical because I love the movie and couldn’t see how a television version could do anything but dilute its charms. On the contrary, the show broadens the universe in hilarious ways by introducing characters like “energy vampire” Colin Robinson and the incredible Vampiric Council (with so many incredible cameos!). The core actors are all wonderful, but the MVP has to be Matt Berry’s louche and libidinous Laszlo whose line readings are simply hysterical.

6. Les Misérables (BBC/PBS)

Although it aired in the UK in 2018, the BBC/PBS production of Victor Hugo’s epic didn’t grace American screens until early 2019 so I’m including it here. I am a big fan of the musical adaptation and find it quite successful at cramming so much story into a three-hour runtime, though it obviously has limits to how much of the source material it can explore. This (non-musical) adaptation’s six episodes allow for more of Hugo’s tale of forgiveness versus retribution to live and breathe. The terrific cast includes Dominic West as Jean Valjean and David Oyelowo as Inspector Javert, as well as Lily Collins as Fantine whose backstory is more fully realized here than the format of the stage show allows.

5. Our Planet (Netflix)

Essentially a sequel to the Planet Earth documentaries, with the same production team and David Attenborough narration, this Netflix series presents another stunning collection of nature footage that showcases the incredible diversity and beauty of animal life on Earth. Each episode includes a haunting reminder of man’s impact on the featured habitats and serves as a rallying cry in the fight against climate change.

4. The Good Place: Seasons 3-4 (NBC)

The Good Place has been high on my list since its first season and shows no signs of dropping in quality or esteem as it enters its final stretch of episodes. 2019 encompassed the end of Season 3 (including the hilariously imaginative visit to the Interdimensional Hole of Pancakes) and the beginning of Season 4 (with its crew of new characters and just as many reversals and rug-pulls as you’d expect). The final episode before its winter break was “The Answer,” a touching spotlight on William Matthew Harper’s Chidi, which might have been enough to make this list all on its own. (And given the surprise cameo/quasi-crossover in its first episode of 2020, I wouldn’t be surprised if it shows up here again next year too.)

3. Unbelievable (Netflix)

The true story of a serial rape case adapted from journalism by ProPublica, The Marshall Project and This American Life, Unbelievable is one of the most simultaneously heartbreaking and satisfying procedurals I have ever seen. As crushing as it is to watch the initial investigation completely mishandled and devolve to gaslighting, it is powerful and inspiring to watch compassionate public servants and actual good detective work be carried out as the series progresses. Kaitlyn Dever, Merritt Wever and Toni Collette are uniformly excellent here (as they also were in their respective film roles in Booksmart, Marriage Story and Knives Out this year).

2. Watchmen (HBO)

Showrunner Damon Lindelof (LOST, The Leftovers) takes some incredibly bold swings in his limited-run sequel to the groundbreaking 80s graphic novel that deconstructed the ideas of vigilantism and superheroics. Picking up in the same alternate reality as that story but in present day, the main action is shifted to Tulsa, Oklahoma, and the central theme is race relations. It could have gone way off the rails in a million different ways, but I found it to be incredibly successful. Each episode is a captivating work of art and it somehow seems to top itself with each subsequent installment. While I appreciate the book, I don’t love it; this series takes that source material seriously and, to me, completely transcends it.

1. When They See Us (Netflix)

As compelling as it is devastating, this miniseries from Ava DuVernay (who directed and co-wrote all 4 parts) dramatizes the lives of the wrongly convicted children the media dubbed “the Central Park Five.” Even with some familiarity of the story from watching Ken Burns’ documentary years ago, I was utterly gutted by the depiction of the injustices and systemic racism that stole these childhoods. Everyone in the cast shines, but Jharrel Jerome’s portrayal of Korey Wise (the only one of the group played by the same actor as a child and adult – and so convincingly) is truly phenomenal. Not a comfortable watch but an essential one. 

Bonus! Musical Comedy Specials:

The Unauthorized Bash Bros. Experience (Netflix) – This “visual poem” from the Lonely Island presents “an album of raps” recorded by Jose Canseco (Andy Samberg) and Mark McGwire (Akiva Schaffer) at their steroid-fueled 80s peak with the Oakland A’s. Your likely enjoyment is probably about equal to your reaction to that description. The songs are great, catchy and hysterical on their own, but the videos take it to another level, parodying everything from 80s infomercials to Enya to Beyonce’s Lemonade. There is no 30 minutes of TV I rewatched more in 2019.

John Mulaney and the Sack Lunch Bunch (Netflix) – Debuting on Christmas Eve, this children’s television homage/parody snuck in just under the wire. The words of the day could be fear and mortality, as the group of kids Mulaney interacts with reveal their personal phobias and several skits revolve around existential angst. By the end of the first musical number I was sold, by the time David Byrne showed up I was committed, and by “Mr. Music’s” madcap finale I wished it could last forever.

[lastsonlost]

In an article for Buzzfeed titled “There’s an elephant in Harvey Weinstein’s hotel room”, Feminist Bim Adewunmi laments the fact that all of Harvey’s victims are white, and argues that the reason black women do not get leading roles in movies is because they are often seen as “not fuckable” by producers.

She argues that while the sexual assault allegations against Harvey are mainly being an issue about sexual harassment, they are also an issue about race:

The elephant in the room in discussions about the alleged crimes and misdemeanors of Hollywood film producer Harvey Weinstein looks eerily similar to an elephant of the past. It is the Race elephant. And among the allegations, the question of race is one that we are not really looking to engage with, because it is knotty and gnarly. 

But it bears talking about, because there are black women in Hollywood, and not talking about it does us all a disservice.In Hollywood, where both racism and sexism are rampant, what can look like a sort of mitigated blessing ends up highlighting another insidious problem in (the societal microcosm that is) Hollywood: Black women do not often come up for the kind of prestigious high-profile and award-winning roles that a producer with Weinstein’s power could offer.……..

If we are to discern a general message about black women (and other women of color) from the product churned out by Hollywood, it is that they are not seen as leading role material, and that is intertwined with the idea that they are not desirable “trophies.”

I would think not being considered a desirable trophy by a sexual predator is a good thing… but that’s just me.

She continues:

…….the narrative coming out of Hollywood right now is about the victims who have come forward with allegations specifically against Harvey Weinstein, and that list is largely made up of white women. This is worth remarking upon, not because it is odd, but because it is decidedly quotidian, considering who is permitted to be in the room at even the lowest levels of the industry.…….

In an industry as white as Hollywood, the racially problematic “attraction question” is part of what reduces the shelf life of black actresses as a matter of course, causing many of them to get half as far in twice the time it takes their white counterparts. 

To be deemed “fuckable” is not the honor a certain kind of man (and woman) believes it to be, but the ideas of fuckability are entrenched, and they serve to exclude black women very early on in the conversation — while dooming the women who do go on to get the roles to gross sexual harassment or assault

Now this is where things start getting weird.

She lists the different movies that have been produced by Weinstein’s production company, and notes that very few of them have starred black women. Her conclusion: Harvey Weinstein doesn’t want to sexually abused black women (As if that is a bad thing):

A cursory glance of both companies’ slates suggests fewer than 10 films starring black women or other women of color, Jackie Brown (1997), Frida (2002), Bride and Prejudice (2004), and Southside With You (2016) being the most recognizable. Black women weren’t even making it into Weinstein’s predatory thought process except, probably, to be expressly excluded.

I guess we should be alarmed that a serial sexual harasser didn’t incorporate diversity into his harassment escapades.

Thanks, Buzzfeed.

SOURCE

[bmaxwell]

Number 45: Heavy Rain

Games often require a suspension of disbelief, more so as they hew closer to reality. Heavy Rain required a lot of suspension of disbelief. I have to get some things out of the way before I can talk about this game. David Cage seems like a clown. Between the allegations of toxicity at Quantic Dream, the way they responded to those allegations, the clumsy way their games handle delicate subjects, the way they tend to oversexualize women, and the way Cage speaks as if he is an auteur creating high art, there’s a lot to dislike here. I can’t blame anyone who gets a whiff of it and says “No thanks.”

I didn’t run right out and buy Detroit Become Human, and I kept my expectations low for the game. And yet when I did come around to it, I found myself engaged with the game despite all its flaws. The situations it presents are often shades of grey, or things that must be decided under duress. Characters can live or die based on your choices and how well you engage in the game’s Quick Time Events*. Playing through the game with my wife and oldest child is something that will stay with me. My kid telling me to shoot the stripper** then immediately regretting it; my wife getting angry with me near the end of the game when I got a key character killed, those are moments other games cannot give me. 

My journey here started with Indigo Prophecy on the Playstation 2 years ago. That game felt like nothing I had ever played at the time. I can’t say it’s a great game or even a good one, but it has one of the most memorable opening scenes I’ve ever played. It spent the next several hours slowly losing its grasp on that promise, but there was something there. A few years later a buddy showed me this video at work, which sold me on both Heavy Rain and Giant Bomb:

 This is a self-contained DLC side story and contains no spoilers for the game.

Heavy Rain is a story about a serial killer where the perspective shifts between four characters: a young female journalist named Madison, a private detective named Scott, an FBI agent named Norman, and a father named Ethan whose son has been abducted by the killer. The game frequently puts the player in situations where difficult choices must be made quickly, and the outcome of those choices is almost always permanent; that is, you’re not seeing a game over screen and trying again, and you’re not initiating a conversation again and choosing the other dialogue choice. The story just adapts to the outcome and you keep playing.

There was a scene in the game where I was playing as Madison, and my leads had taken me to a man’s house. He offered me a drink, which I politely declined as something just didn’t feel quite right about him. A few moments later he excuses himself and heads upstairs. I begin snooping around his home for clues related to the case, and the camera splits to show him up in his room with all the creepy medical equipment and restraints, filling a syringe with something and heading back down. I found what I was looking for and got the hell out of the house before he returned, but my heart was pounding in my ears the whole time. These games have a lot of situations like that. Sometimes they walk that tightrope deftly, other times not so much. 

This creepy dude who wanted to drug Madison and take her up to his scummy sex dungeon is one example. Madison is a gorgeous woman who is, at one point, the star of an uncensored, player-controlled shower scene. Beyond: Two Souls also has a similar shower scene***. Beautiful women nude and on the wrong end of potential sexual violence and dangerous situations with men are a common thing to encounter in David Cage’s games. 

I remember a moment where I, playing as Ethan, was in a situation where I was confronting a drug dealer in his apartment. The encounter goes south and he ends up shooting a gun at me, trying to kill me. Long story short, I ended up with a gun drawn on him in his little girl’s bedroom (she’s not there) and he’s begging me to spare him because his daughter needs him. I killed him then and there. I had a spirited discussion with a friend who chose to spare the man. The game is great for these “What would you do?” discussions.

I found myself deeply absorbed in Detroit Become Human in spite of its flaws.

And it’s a goddamn shame I can’t recommend games like Heavy Rain or Detroit Become Human with no strings attached, because these games offer an experience unlike any other games I have played. They are wonderfully immersive, and the way your actions and choices permanently affect the story lends a sense of urgency not found in most games. I know that much of this choice is illusion and affects the details more than the main plot, but I can buy in enough to be invested in those moments and outcomes. But the way women are sexualized, the way delicate topics such as racism and child abuse are clumsily handled are hard to ignore. Even the regular stuff is often handled with all the delicacy of a hacksaw. Detroit Become Human opens at a hostage scene in progress. An android is holding a little girl at gunpoint on a balcony in a high rise. You’re looking around for clues before confronting him, and you find a tablet in the little girl’s bedroom. As soon as you unlock it, a video immediately plays of the little girl and android laughing and playing, and the girl saying “I love you, Daniel! We’re gonna be besties forever!” The core idea isn’t bad, but it hits you right between the eyes with it in the most can’t miss way possible. 

I like that Cage really goes for it, I just wish he wasn’t so convinced of his own genius. The man desperately needs an editor, he needs someone who can tell him when he’s going off the rails, someone who can say “No David, this bit is a bad look, let’s punch it up.” If you go into this game (or any of Cage’s games) looking to find faults, you’ll absolutely be able to do that and will have a bad time. If you can buy in and go along with the ride, and take the heavy handed writing in stride, there’s a lot of intensity in the moment to moment situations and decisions the games present. Maybe you can sympathize with the characters; it’s not their fault they’re in a danger-filled, badly-written video game. They need your help! I played these two games as shared experiences, and that helped make them magical for me. 

*Still not my favorite thing to see in a game. 

**A proud moment for any parent. ***Someone used a debug mode to uncover a nude model of Ellen Page that is censored in the retail game; worth noting that the developers crafted those assets and left them intact in the game to be discovered

[secretsofthemasquerade]

What this all means? WoD prelude issues

Abuse will be mentioned

Disclaimer: I don’t want VtM to become a nest for gamer-gaters asshats, so let it be clear that I stand for feminism, positive representation and progressiveness. And further than that, I stand for meaningful, well written media. This is both beyond offensive, and badly written (and badly coded!).

Alright, now that you may (or may not) have read my spoiler free review of the WoD: Prelude vampire game (we eat blood all our friends are dead), this is the second part of this review. The one that really stirs shit, tackles what this all means, and talks about the problems surrounding the two authors. Good brew incoming!

There are a few issues that need mentioning; Zak’s reputation of being a dick (to say the least), white wolf saying they don’t give a shit, and one trans character in the game.

First, I must say I said what I needed to about Sarah (the second author of the Vampire gale) in a few reblogged discussions I had with her about it; you can read that here. She claims the “problematic trans character” is a reference to someone else, but as the anon in that ask pointed out, the name given to the character totally references someone else (and it’s not like Avery is a common first name, so the “coincidence” excuse is weak, to say the least). It’s probably a little bit of both tbh. White wolf stands behind their choice btw.

This is my random, worthless opinion on the trans character’s subject: I don’t think the trans community deserves to be treated like this, and I’m not going to police whether trans people can talk about their dicks (or lack thereof) or not. Sarah likes her characters bold and unapologetic, which is perfectly “none of my fucking business”, I just find that it gives too much of an excuse for people to actually ask trans people about their dicks (or not) which is a definite no-no when it comes to, you know, basic manners. Why encourage that? Most trans people do not want to talk about it to random strangers they’ve just met, so why have that be the main representation of trans people in the media? Sex workers who brag about their dicks and who are serial killers? I find it tasteless at best, dangerous (again, “hey, if this is what trans people are, i totally can ask about their dicks!” kind of shits) at worst. Not that sex workers who talk about their dicks are wrong in anyway, of course. Note that I have no problem with a character being trans, being a serial killer, or being a loud unapologetic bitch. I have a problem with what it may lead to, and how respectful of/to the community the character is. And it’s simply not written with the respect and the love the trans community deserves. The fact that Sarah herself is trans doesn’t make her a good candidate to write well-made (trans or not) characters. I’m all for more diversity in authors (cuz it’s still a bunch of white old dudes out there), but they still need to be good writers (or at least more decent than the shit that’s being published nowadays). Writer is a job. And this is were Zak and Sarah failed; they just didn’t work with basic decency, respect and research of the characters, and what they are, what they represent and what they mean to the community. The fact that White Wolf Publishing used the “but we have a X friend!” excuse only makes it more profoundly wrong. And you guys can’t even blame that on Europeanism (racism takes very different forms here than in the US, certain things are more blurred, and ethnicity is overall understood differently), even in France we consider the use of a token minority person to excuse controversial stuff to be just plain wrong (and god knows France can be very weird about the treatment of minorities). 

If you’re trans and knowledgeable of trans representation, please tell me off about this. It’s just my thoughts on the matter as someone who cares deeply about characters.

The other trans character, Morgan, exchanges like, four texts with you. So, this character’s existence gave nothing to my run. I need to replay the thing and see if other choices give us more interaction with this one, and I really have no problem with this one so far.

Now, the “unique aesthetic” that was brought to the game, I could find interesting modern artists on tumblr to draw for this game, and actually have their modern art be readable, as in, “really in accord with the game’s content (a quick sketch needs to be a quick sketch)”. I can also guess that it would come out far cheaper than whatever this guy took (I hear he sells his art pieces in the thousands? people, you’ve got too much money on your hands, give it to me instead).

The writing, however, I’m pretty sure (read absolutely certain) there are very knowledgeable wod fans out there who can decently hold a pen (half of the RPers I exchange with can come up both with a decent story and can write it out in a very.. literary and interesting way, and so without having to sort through the bs ramble that brings nothing, and without the “options” branches that lead to just a game over screen...).

Zak’s reputation of being a harasser and abuser doesn’t seem too far fetched from where I stand, especially since people who complained have said that White Wolf never contacted them back, even if they said they did. I can’t say deffo what he did or didn’t, but I can certainly assure you that the choice of White Wolf knowingly hiring the guy, then defending him, all while knowing all of this shit, and having one of their writers be one of the victims of the abuse, is not an innocent move from WW/Paradox.

We wanted fresh blood, fresh views, fresh takes, and they willingly hire a veteran known for beyond “problematic” behavior. And excusing all this shit because “but he’s an artist!” doesn’t cut it. Not from White Wolf. Not from a Scandinavian company. Not in the world we live in today. Not with the very talented people who are fans of the WoD and who can come up with something so much better, so much smoother, so much more respectful, and without all this negative publicity. This isn’t just some loud mouth rough corners guy (like I can admit I am!! let’s be honest I’m a harsh bitch lol), this is seriously.. wrong. It leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth, and tbh, Werewolf already has a reputation of being a game played by fascists, and LARPs are known hunting grounds for less-than-polite predators, why fucking continue this fucking shit? This isn’t what we want our hobby to be. This isn’t the kind of people I or anyone around me want to be associated with. Art is political in nature, but that doesn’t mean I am willing to accept the company owning the IP I love most hiring fucking extremist assholes. Everyone has a “problematic opinion” on something, honestly, that’s fine, I mean I get my share of anon hate for many of those, but can you guys straightforward tell me I’m a bad person doing evil and spreading evil into the gaming industry? (If I am tell me now so I can quit!)

TBH, I believe they hired Zak because he was a known “controversial figure”. To have free publicity. To pander to the GG community (EDIT: I failed here, I wanted to say “attract extremes”, Zak is not a gamergater at all). To get everyone angry about “the gay agenda”, “modern art” and more. They’ve succeeded. But it’ll blow up in their faces, and I really want us all to show them this is not acceptable.

What to do now? Be heard. Show your displeasing of such choices. Don’t let them have it their way with an IP you care about. They may own the rights, but ultimately, as Brucato (Mage RPG author), the games belong to us, the fans. Write to white wolf, boycott. Do not harass and insult, but tell them exactly what you think.

There are free visual novels out there, and cheaper princess makers who have more interesting outcomes, badges, achievements, easter eggs, all sorts of different endings if you fail/die, and all sorts of different failure paths that still let you play, and replay, and replay, without feeling frustrated, fucked over, and just plain trying to follow some incoherent druggie’s trail of thoughts.

Here’s a few things I recommend playing, to read how good characterization, art and horror can come around, as well as player agency and choices that mean you continue playing despite failures (linking steam, but gog works too for most of them). So here’s a few games you deffo wanna try out instead of these.

Long live the Queen

Actual “Princess Maker” games :)

Cupid (I can’t recommend @cupidvn enough, it’s  great free game, it has a few flaws considering it’s purely fanmade but overall, it’s very interesting and treats the subject with a good amount of respect)

This war of mine

Choice of vampire (free on web, available as a mobile app)

Vlad the Impaler A very awesome replayable story, you pick one of three characters who has one of two specializations mid game depending on your choices. Just. Get Vlad. It’s great.

I’d also mention an Actual Lone Wolf (by Dever!) video game/visual novel/cyoa. 

Heavy Rain (PS3) So many choices, and the game goes on regardless of what happens. The illusion of choice is so well made. Beyond Two Souls also does this fairly well, but the story is more linear 

The Last of Us (the MC is still a 40 something rough guy, but there’s more to it I promise! there’s no “choice” to be had, but the characterization is great)

And finally, I highly recommend watching like, all of Extra Credits videos about game making, characterization, illusion of choice and so on. They did a playlist. And other one about genres that might come in handy.

I’m very close to angrily make the text/choice/agency/multiple paths adventure we all need and deserve, and publish it for free... But I really don’t have the time, nor the funds, nor the skills, nor the legal knowledge to make it. So if someone wants to, know that I have a hot story that’s worth telling to initiate new players to the WoD :)))

[bestdestined-a-blog]

Kat’s Guide to TOS

   so you wanna get into star trek, huh ?? well, that can seem like a daunting task, considering there’s so much to dive into. now if you’ve never watched any trek, I actually recommend starting with the reboot series. they’re trek for the Modern Audience and there’s only three of them out so far, so they’re much more accessible for budding trekkies. but if you know the characters and know the world and wanna explore it further, it can be hard to know where to begin.     now, the list below the cut is ENTIRELY MY OPINION. people can agree or disagree to their heart’s content, but these are the episodes as I see them and enjoy them. if you wanna watch all of tos, I encourage you to !! but if you’re looking for a taste, this is what I recommend. if you’re looking for some second opinions, someone ranked the eps from worst to best HERE, and there’s a skippable list HERE.

before I get to the list, I should point out that TOS can be watched in any order. it isn’t serialized at all (except for the two part Menagerie) and each episode stands alone. you can watch whatever you want and you won’t be lost. also please approach the series with an open mind. it came out in the 60s. it’s presented in a much more theatrical manner than modern television, and had an infamously low budget. don’t let that distract from thetruly good things. I’m breaking this down into a few categories: must watch, ones I like, and infamously bad. not all episodes will be listed, any episodes I don’t mention are ones that didn’t stick with me, personally, and you can watch at your discretion. doesn’t mean they’re bad, they just aren’t ones that resonated with me. there’s 79 episodes of TOS proper, I’m not gonna talk about ALL of them.

a note on ‘the cage’ - this is the original pilot that didn’t get picked up. the only character who carries over into tos proper is spock, and he’s quite a different character here than the one we know. you can watch this one for curiosity’s sake but you can get away with skipping it. the show revisits it in ‘the menagerie’ anyways.

MUST WATCH:

the naked time: the crew acts strange, we get shirtless swashbuckling sulu, sobbing spock and bones brutally ripping jim’s shirt to give him a hypo. a fun ep to watch tbh. maybe not the greatest introduction to the show but a solid ep nonetheless. balance of terror: introduces the romulans. arena: this is the gorn ep, widely considered a classic. does the gorn look a little cheesy? yeah but overall it’s a solid ep. space seed: it introduces khan. especially good to watch if you plan to watch the movies (which I’ll talk about in a separate post) the devil in the dark: the horta ep. it explores some neat concepts and there’s some good moments between jim and spock. errand of mercy: klingons !! city on the edge of forever: widely considered the best trek episode, and quite justifiably so. it might seem a little silly to modern audiences, but it has a good story, some good humour and some excellent emotional moments. amok time: pon farr. mirror mirror: MIRROR UNIVERSE !! journey to babel: sarek and amanda the trouble with tribbles: chances are, even if you’ve never seen star trek you know about this episode. it’s worth a watch.

PERSONAL RECOMMENDATIONS:

where no man has gone before: the pilot that eventually got picked up. it’s a little different from the rest of the series but worth checking out. the enemy within: there are some uncomfortable moments in this, but it features the unicorn dog and super hammy shatner with eyeliner. the corbomite maneuver: it can be a little silly at times but there’s a few moments I like in this ep the conscience of the king: can be a little grating if you don’t like shakespeare but there’s some important kirk backstory and also features kodos. shore leave: mostly I recommend this one for the line spock pulls on kirk but it’s pretty fun nonetheless. the galileo seven: it’s neat to see spock wrestle with command tbh. the squire of gothos: I mean, this one is really a personal preference. the timeline is way off bc they hadn’t quite decided the dates of the series, and the character of trelane can be a bit grating, but idk I have a soft spot for it. court martial: mostly I like this ep bc I like areel shaw. she’s one of jim’s former flames but she’s a good character. this side of paradise: the spores episode. the doomsday machine: decker is pretty much the defining example of an asshole starfleet higher up, but there’s some complex motives here I, mudd: the first mudd episode is. meh. but this one is just wild fun a piece of the action: gangster planet. spock and jim in suits. jim trying to drive stick. I really like this one. the ultimate computer: jim goes through some interesting existential stuff, and it’s a neat examination of how much power we should give technology. the enterprise incident: the romulan commander lady kinda rocks my socks the tholian web: I know that Enterprise references this ep, and there’s some good spones ish moments in it the empath: not the greatest of eps on this list but worth it for the wonderful mccoy moments the savage curtain: jim, spock, abe lincoln and surak fight genghis khan and a few other baddies.  all our yesterdays: good spones moments yes yes.

a couple eps worth mention

metamorphosis: this ep makes me a little uncomfortable with the way it treats a lady character (then again it’s not unique in that regard) but it is of note because it introduces zefram cochrane, a big figure in trek lore.  plato’s stepchildren: wow. this episode is. kind of a wild ride. most of it is weird af but it’s notable for being the first televised kiss between a black woman and a white man. this is the controversial ep. idk if that makes this ep worth watching bc the kiss itself is kinda. in a weird situation. but if you were curious this one’s the one. let that be your last battlefield: this is the one with the aliens who are half black, half white, and hate each other because of which side is which colour. sort of a ham-handed look at racism but you may have seen this one referenced. I’m not particularly fond of it but it’s interesting.

INFAMOUSLY BAD:

most of these are from season three. there’s a reason s3 is called the turd season by fans. skip these or watch them at your discretion.

the alternative factor: tbh I barely paid attention during this ep, and it’s just kinda weird. spock’s brain: when trek fans talk about bad trek, this is the finest example. it almost veers into ‘so bad it’s good’ territory tho. its campy and crazy and absurd.  the paradise syndrome: racist shit. and the children shall lead: children. a lawyer who can’t act playing a role. weird magic shit. ehh. the way to eden: space hippies. it’s. yeah. turnabout intruder: I hate this episode. it’s so sexist and just. not a good time. women can’t command starships my ass.

I might go back and edit this if others pop up but these are some of my personal highlights !! I encourage you to also check out the rest of the eps, reading the descriptions and watching them as you see fit.

[hermanwatts]

Sensor Sweep: Solar Pons, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Jurrasic Park, Topps Monster Stickers

Cinema (Pulp Curry): Simba also depicts the various perspectives on the Kenyan side. In particular, is an amazing scene in which locals are inducted into the Mau Mau guerrilla movement, a ceremony that is replete with boy’s own voodoo type histrionics, but also shows that while some locals were keen to join the rebels, others simply dis so out of fear. Key to the local perspective is the character of Kenyan doctor, Peter Karanja, a white educated black man who is the subject of vicious racism by the British and mistrusted by his fellow country people. Karanja’s good intentions are also fatally undermined, unbeknownst to him, by the fact that his father is secretly the leader of the local Mau Mau.

Science Fiction (Superversive SF): Cartwright’s Cavaliers takes place in a universe of relative anarchy, where a an interstellar Union rules with next to no laws. (The only one I can think of being mentioned is “Are you attacking a planet? Any ships involved in the fight can be no farther than ten miles up.”) Mercenary companies represent an enormous, galaxy wide industry, fighting for both defensive and offensive reasons, with some races more suited to the role than others. Earth, with its war-wracked past, produces some of the finest mercenary companies in the galaxy and 18-year old Jim Cartwright is the heir to one of the most famous of those groups, Cartwright’s Cavaliers.

Pulp Fiction (Pulp Net): While many may not be familiar with the name Johnson McCulley, we all probably know his most well-known character: Zorro. Zorro started off as a pulp character before moving to serials, movies, comics, and more. To keep things in context, Zorro was created in 1919, and if you read the first story, it seems clear that McCulley intended him to be a one-off character. When the 1920 movie came out, Zorro became very popular, and it wasn’t until 1922 that he followed up with the second Zorro novella, and the next didn’t appear until 1931!

Fiction (Black Gate): These days, in intersection with my Conan gaming (I enjoy both Monolith’s board game and Modiphius’s roleplaying game), I have been reading a lot of two things: weird fiction from the turn of last century into, maybe, the 1940s; and sword & sorcery — anything that, on its cover, features a muscled male wielding medieval weaponry — predominantly from the ‘70s or ‘80s.  These works offer various levels of quality. Early-last-century weird fiction is in a class of its own, and, though writers of that era freely borrowed tropes, themes and elements from each other (they very much appear to have been in conversation, literally or otherwise), the form of the weird tale is not as calcified as that of sword & sorcery appears to be by the ‘80s.

Fiction (Dark Worlds Quarterly): Jason M Waltz is the editor at Rogue Blades Entertainment, a company that focuses on action-driven Fantasy. His latest anthology is Death’s Sting—Where Art Thou? The book features Gothic Sword & Sorcery tales about immortals who return from Death, victorious over its sting—or horrifyingly despite! Inside this heroic anthology are stories featuring protagonists in the vein of Karl Edward Wagner’s Kane, Barry Sadler’s Casca, Steven Erikson’s Rhulad Sengar and Kallor, and Dennis O’Neil’s Rā’s al Ghūl. Dark tales of Death defeated, held at bay by willfulness, and desperately sought, its peace denied.

Tolkien (Jon Mollison): How am I just now learning about the Feanor Did Nothing Wrong memes? For those who don’t know, the story goes a little something like this: So the Valar (kind of like the gods of Middle-Earth, but maybe like archangels or something in-between) started out by making literal heaven for the elves, and they lit it with two magic trees.  An elf named Feanor caught the light and poured it and part of his essence into three amazing gems called the Silmarils.

Edgar Rice Burroughs (DMR Books): Edgar Rice Burroughs was born the son of a no-nonsense brigadier general for the Union Army who served during the Civil War. Ed’s father held a dim view of his young son’s imaginative musings–deeming all of it “lying”–and punished Ed for even entertaining such frivolous thoughts. Upon reaching adulthood, Burroughs knew the pain of failure after failure. Of not meeting his father’s expectations. He had gone out to work his brother’s ranch. He had chased Geronimo with the Seventh Cavalry. He sold pencil-sharpeners. None of it with notable success. Then, he sent “Under the Moons of Mars”–henceforth to be known for all eternity as A Princess of Mars–to All-Story Magazine… and the entire world changed.

Edgar Rice Burroughs (Frontier Partisans): Burroughs lays a stronger claim to Frontier Partisan lineage than just about any other writer. The man chased The Apache Kid while serving as a cavalryman in the Arizona Territory in the 1896. That’s right — while Frederick Russell Burnham was dueling with the Matabele in Rhodesia, Burroughs was riding the rough country chasing an Apache outlaw ghost. He was the real deal.

RPG (P. C. Bushi): When I started playing Dungeons & Dragons, the full Alignment Chart was the norm. Good vs Evil, Law vs Chaos.  Lawful Good was a straitlaced Bible Thumper (even though “Christian” wasn’t really a concept in the game), Chaotic Good was Robin Hood, Chaotic Evil was a serial killer, and Lawful Evil was Fascism. Law = Order, and Chaos = Randomness, in the way our group understood it.

Popular Culture (Mojo Bob): These are Topps Monster sticker designs from 1965, the artist being (probably) Basil Wolverton. I remember these sorts of things cropping up here and there in my youth; they were all part and parcel of the style that produced the Rat Fink hot-rod cartoons and the like. Somewhere in the AD&D DMG there are some random generation tables for creating demonic critters from the infinite planes of the Abyss. These guys would suit quite well as pictorial resources for the sort of nonsense that results from those tables.

Cinema (Blog That Time Forgot): Already folk are speculating over the meaning of Jurassic World: Dominion, which has supplanted Jurassic World: New Era. It isn’t the first time in the franchise we had such a significant name change: the Malusaurus became the Diabolus, which became the MURDERSAURUS Indominus we all know and hate. But it’s one that’s worth exploring.  Dominion itself is a fairly common word nowadays, but if you look, you can find all sorts of possible allusions.

H.P. Lovecraft (DMR Books): Like most stereotypes, this is generally true, but certainly not one hundred percent accurate. REH wrote some yarns where the protagonist–after witnessing unspeakable horrors–either died, went mad or killed himself. HPL penned some tales where his protagonists actively fought back, sometimes even winning–for now. Those are the Lovecraft stories I’ll look at today. I should note that much of the violence that takes place in the stories I’m examining occurs at–or near–the end of the tales in question.

RPG (Tenkars Tavern): Dear members of the Chaosium tribe, Many of you – like us – may be staying put at home over the coming weeks. We’re all in this together, and to help keep spirits up and minds occupied, the Chaosium team is working on some fun and engaging diversions we can enjoy while staying in, working-from-home, in quarantine, or in self-isolation. To start things off at #homewithchaosium, we’ve made the Gold ENnie award-winning Call of Cthulhu the Coloring Book available as a free download (FREE).

Detective Fiction (Pulp Net): I’ve posted several times about Solar Pons, a popular character inspired by Sherlock Holmes that was created by August Derleth, continued by Basil Copper and more recently by David Marcum. (I think calling him a pastiche doesn’t do him justice.) We’ve gotten reprints of the original works and collections of new stories, and now we get the return of the scholarly journal on Solar Pons: The Pontine Dossier.

Sensor Sweep: Solar Pons, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Jurrasic Park, Topps Monster Stickers published first on https://sixchexus.weebly.com/

[drangsaldrangsal]

Police Killings of Unarmed Black Americans Takes Toll on Blacks’ Mental Health

The mental health of black American adults is significantly impacted by the police killings of unarmed black citizens, according to a new population-based study published in the journal The Lancet.

With the recent police killings of unarmed black Americans widely perceived to be a reflection of structural racism, the findings highlight the role of this type of racism as a driver of population health disparities, and support recent calls to treat police killings as a public health issue.

The research was led by a team at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania and Boston University School of Public Health in collaboration with Harvard University.

According to statistics, police kill more than 300 black Americans — at least a quarter of them unarmed — each year in the United States. Black Americans are almost three times more likely than white Americans to be killed by police and nearly five times more likely to be killed by police while unarmed.

Beyond the immediate consequences for victims and their families, the population-level impact so far has been unclear.

“Our study demonstrates for the first time that police killings of unarmed black Americans can have corrosive effects on mental health in the black American community,” said co-lead author Dr. Atheendar S. Venkataramani, a health economist and general internist at the University of Pennsylvania.

“While the field has known for quite some time that personal experiences of racism can impact health, establishing a link between structural racism — and events that lead to vicarious experiences of racism — and health has proved to be more difficult.”

The study combined data from the 2013-2015 US Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a nationally representative, telephone-based survey of adults, with data on police killings from the Mapping Police Violence (MPV) database.

The researchers estimated the “spillover” effect of police killings of unarmed black Americans on the mental health of other black Americans living in the general population.

During the three-year study period, 103,710 black Americans participated in the BRFSS survey and rated how many days in the past 30 days they felt their mental health (in terms of stress, depression and problems with emotion) was “not good.”

Half of the participants were women, and half had been to university. A total of 38,993 respondents (49 percent of the sample) resided in a state where at least one police killing of an unarmed black American had occurred in the 90 days just before the survey.

Each additional police killing of an unarmed black American in the 90 days prior to the survey was linked to an estimated 0.14 additional days of poor mental health among black Americans who lived in the same state. The greatest effects were seen 30 to 60 days after the police killing.

Black Americans are exposed to an average of four police killings in their state each year. Applying their findings to the total population of 33 million black American adults, the researchers estimate that police killings of unarmed black Americans could contribute 55 million excess poor mental health days per year among black American adults in the U.S.

These findings suggest that the population mental health burden due to police killings is nearly as large as the population mental health burden associated with diabetes among black Americans.

The negative effects on mental health were limited to black Americans, and exposure to police killings of unarmed black Americans was not tied to any changes in self-reported mental health of white Americans. Exposure to police killings of armed black Americans was also not associated with changes in self-reported mental health among black or white Americans.

“The specificity of our findings is striking,” said co-lead author Dr. Jacob Bor, a population health scientist at the Boston University School of Public Health. “Any occasion in which police resort to deadly force is a tragedy, but when police use deadly force against an unarmed black American, the tragedy carries with it the weight of historical injustices and current disparities in the use of state violence against black Americans.”

“Many have interpreted these events as a signal that our society does not value black and white lives equally. Our findings show these events also harm the mental health of black Americans.”

The researchers suggest that the mental health effects of police killings of unarmed black Americans might be reflected in many ways, including heightened perceptions of threat and vulnerability, lack of fairness, lower social status, lower beliefs about one’s own worth, activation of prior traumas and identification with the deceased.

The researchers note several limitations that warrant further research on the topic.

First, the BRFSS public-use data was limited to state-level identifiers, and there was no information on the extent to which the participants were directly aware of police killings nor whether they were aware of police killings in other states. If police killings affected the mental health of black Americans living in other states, then the findings would be an underestimation of the true impact.

Secondly, the measures used in the BRFSS are self-reported. Thirdly, the research did not focus on other ways in which the criminal justice system disproportionately targets black Americans, and it is likely that other forms of structural racism — such as segregation, mass incarceration, and serial forced displacement — also influence the black population’s mental health.

Finally, the study did not include data on other vulnerable populations, such as Hispanics or Native Americans, nor did it consider the impact of police killings on the mental health of police officers themselves.

Source: The Lancet

from Psych Central News https://ift.tt/2tBzq5g via IFTTT

[junker-town]

The Bachelorette Episode 5 recap: What was absolute garbage last night, and where were the bright spots?

Lee’s racism is still a main storyline, and it’s still super gross.

Hey gang, welcome back to hell, aka the recent episodes of The Bachelorette. This week, we’re going to do things a little bit differently, because I’m fed up that the producers are still making one guy’s flaming racism a main storyline.

In case you missed it, we left off primed for a two-on-one date between Lee and Kenny, from which only one man can return. Oh, and as though that weren’t bad enough in and of itself, they’re dragging this out for two nights. There’s an episode tomorrow, too, which is, for a Bachelorette beat writer, like having two back-to-back exams in college and but without Cheetos from the library’s vending machines to get you through.

Last week I wrote about how this show stopped being fun. I debated not writing about it at all anymore, to be honest, because a) last week made me want to stop watching, b) I have only so much to say about how slimy it is, and c) I said it all here. I have a feeling that until Lee and his Richard Spencer haircut get sent home, I’ll just keep writing some version of that over and over, with varying degrees of disgust.

However, I’m hoping that once this Lee B.S. is done, the show will get back to being what it’s supposed to be: a dumb (as opposed to sinister), Monday night diversion. In the meantime, I’m going to write about this program by scoring it like a sports game. I’ll be awarding an arbitrary number of points to Team Garbage and Team Bright Spots, so that at the end of this we can see whether there was anything worth watching at all.

BACK IN GOOD OL’ SOUTH CAROLINA BECAUSE THAT’S WHERE WE ARE FOR SOME REASON

Ugh, Kenny and Lee are talking on the porch. Kenny’s trying to stay calm. Lee says, “I respect how f[bleeping] calm you are, because you couldn’t do that the other night.” Lee is egging Kenny on, asking if he wants to get violent, twisting his words, gas-lighting him. I hate this. Lee calls Kenny a stack of bleeding muscle.

+1,800 for Team Garbage.

But then Kenny says this about Lee when Lee eventually backs down: “See what a b**** does when a b**** is confronted?”

+1,800 for Team Bright Spot.

BRYAN IS A TOOL

Bryan and Rachel are making out in a sailboat tied to a dock. It’s reminds me of kids making out in parked cars behind the high school gym, but instead of a car it’s a boat, and instead of high school it’s a reality show, and instead of kids it’s two humans over 30.

Bryan’s smarmy, smooth voice sounds like that of a late night DJ on a soft rock station. He says to Rachel, “So if you think I’m too good to be true for you, and I think you’re too good to be true for me, then there’s a very simple solution: I just think we’re a perfect match.”

Someone call Shakespeare and tell him there’s a new all-time great wordsmith coming for his throne!!!

This is not a point for Team Bright Spot, but it’s not a point for Team Garbage either. It’s more a point for Team Goober, so let’s go ahead and add that to the mix.

+900 for Team Goober.

Bryan's priorities are in order. #TheBachelorette http://pic.twitter.com/cla5qLM32i

— The Bachelorette (@BacheloretteABC) June 27, 2017

OH NO, OH JACK STONE, OH POOR JACK STONE

The last one-on-one date in South Carolina goes to Jack Stone, the lawyer who, for some reason, is the first person in the history of The Bachelorette to get a last name rather than just an initial.

I thought Bryan was a tool. But Jack Stone is giving him a run for his money from the get-go, when he says, from the perch of the horse-drawn carriage, “I like to joke, and if someone can’t take a joke, and joke back, it’s boring.”

Jack Stone, buddy, pal, my friend: if you have to say it, it probably isn’t true. This schmuck has definitely texted one of his friends before and been like, “Why do nice guys always finish last?”

Rachel and Jack Stone go to this bar called Shuckin’ and Shaggin’, where they eat oysters and do a dance called shagging. Which is not, as Austin Powers would lead you to believe, another word for having sex. Rachel doesn’t seem to be having much fun. Jack Stone gets pretty creepy on the boardwalk afterwards.

Jack and Rachel laying down the law on the dance floor! Well, Rachel anyway. #TheBachelorette http://pic.twitter.com/r9RJbRP0QM

— The Bachelorette (@BacheloretteABC) June 27, 2017

“So it was really hard to focus in there,” Jack Stone says. “Did you not notice? I kept staring at you? You looked amazing. You looked so pretty in there.”

Then he tries to kiss Rachel and Rachel is like “Eh, I’m sick, you don’t want to kiss me,” and he’s like no I do, and she’s like, no you don’t, and then he kind of pecks her on the lips and I AM DYING. I couldn’t be experiencing more second-hand embarrassment if I were actually the second hand on Jack Stone’s body.

OH MY GOD THE MOST AWKWARD EVENING DATE IN THE HISTORY OF THE BACHELORETTE HAPPENS

Note: If you’ve ever been on an incredibly uncomfortable date and don’t want to relive it, skip this, because I guarantee it will bring those memories flooding back. After watching and writing this I can’t stop thinking about this one date I went on where the conversation was the romantic equivalent of pulling teeth, so I lied and said that my roommate called to tell me my dishwasher broke. And I said I had to leave to “fix my dishwasher.” I might be a jerk.

Jack Stone tells the camera he’s falling in love with Rachel, which is strange because I think they’ve had maybe one (1) conversation before today. She looks as though she’d like to fall into the void she’s wishing would open up underneath the table.

Rachel says all the right things though, about how he’s great on paper, and how she’s hoping there’s some chemistry there. I find it hard to believe she thinks there could be after she looked physically repulsed when he tried to kiss her that afternoon, but I guess she’s all in on Bachelorette-speak.

It becomes very clear very quickly that there is no chemistry to be found when Jack Stone starts getting super weird. This, I have to say, is quality television. I’m laughing pretty hard as Jack Stone says, “I love parents,” and, “is your dad funny? I feel like I get him.” Rachel’s like “you don’t know my dad?” And Jack Stone’s like:

When it's just not there. #TheBachelorette http://pic.twitter.com/M78lb36ibz

— The Bachelorette (@BacheloretteABC) June 27, 2017

AND THEN JACK STONE SAYS HE’D LIKE TO TAKE RACHEL TO DALLAS, LOCK THE DOOR, AND JUST LAY IN BED AND HANG OUT

Which is what serial killers say before they murder you. I’m pretty sure Jack Stone is blacked out; I think that’s what’s going on. I don’t know how many drinks he had at Shuckin’ and Shaggin’, but he can barely string sentences together, and has trouble processing it when Rachel sends him home from the date for being the Mayor of Sketchyville.

I don’t know how to score this. I think we might be back to Team Goober. And I think it’s, like, +90,000.

LEE TALKS MORE TRASH, WILL EXPLAINS RACISM TO HIM, LEE DOESN’T LISTEN

Lee is trying to get Will to be on his side about the whole Kenny thing. And Will is like, “When you call someone aggressive, there is a long-standing tradition in this country of regarding black men in america as aggressive to justify a lot of other things.”

Lee goes on a rant about how he doesn’t respect it when people play the race card, and I want to put my foot through the television.

+320,984 points for Team Garbage.

ROSE CEREMONY

We know Lee won’t go home because they’ve been teasing the two-on-one date with him and Kenny forever. My question is: Are the producers making Rachel keep him around? Is she okay with this? She cant LIKE him. Ugh.

+10,000 points for Team Garbage.

+900 points for Team Bright Spot, because Iggy finally got sent home.

BRYAN’S ONE-ON-ONE DATE IN NORWAY BECAUSE SOMEONE AT ABC HAS CONNECTIONS TO THE NORTH POLE

I don’t know why, but for the past two seasons we keep going to the arctic. Nick took his ladies to Finland, and now Rachel’s taking her gents to Norway. Nothing against either of these countries: They both seem great. But whatever happened to romantic beach escapes? One of the producer’s dads must owe Santa Claus a ton of money and this is how they’re working through the debt.

Anyway, Rachel and Bryan go on the first one-on-one date in Norway, which is funny, because she hated Jack Stone and loves Bryan and they look exactly the same. Actually, they both look just like Joel Osteen, as Clinton Yates of The Undefeated pointed out. And then Jeff Weiner of the Orlando Sentinal made this:

I don't know what this is (network sitcom? cult brochure?) but creating it was a welcome distraction from what's happening on this show rn. http://pic.twitter.com/zGDpzTQicA

— Jeff Weiner (@JeffWeinerOS) June 27, 2017

Anyway, Rachel and Bryan-Jack-Joel go to this huge-ass ski jump left over from the Olympics (I think, I dont know, kind of made that up) and repel down it. Rachel is scared.

“I think I'm more afraid to let go physically rather than emotionally, but today I’m afraid to let go physically,” says Rachel, and it’s the most impressive Bachelorette platitude I’ve ever heard.

They make out in mid-air; Bryan makes these soft humming sounds while they kiss and I feel physically ill.

RACHEL IS INTO BRYAN, PHYSICALLY

Rachel and Bryan have a ton of chemistry, I’ll admit, so I think she just wants to seriously smooch (wink, wink) him. She wonders why Bryan is 37 and still single if he’s so great, and I’m like, hey, listen, let’s not assume people aren’t dateable just because they’re not already spoken for. I say this out loud to the pint of Ben & Jerry’s in my lap and the house plant near the television that I have named Steven.

Your friendly neighborhood Bachelorette, Rappelling Rachel! #TheBachelorette http://pic.twitter.com/ZXWAMOyXxr

— The Bachelorette (@BacheloretteABC) June 27, 2017

Rachel is being honest about not being able to believe it when good things happen to her when it comes to relationships. She says she doesn’t believe men when they say nice things, and that she has trouble taking compliments, because she’s guarded and skeptical. I relate to this, and would imagine many other women probably can too, so this is a big win for Team Bright Spot.

But then Bryan’s like yeah I used to be skinny and had acne and no one liked me but then I got super hot when I was a senior in high school LOL. Who among us, Bryan with a Y?

Anyway I guess they had a nice date, Bryan’s fine, whatever, who cares. I don't know why he creeps me out so much. He just does. He tells Rachel he loves her.

Let’s give Team Bright Spot +20,000 for this date because the bar is so low.

HANDBALL DATE AND ALSO OH YEAH PETER IS GOING TO WIN THE SHOW

“He was like Jordan in the ’97 Finals.” –Rachel on Will #TheBachelorette http://pic.twitter.com/3y76Moiplb

— The Bachelorette (@BacheloretteABC) June 27, 2017

So the guys go play handball. Alex the Russian dude calls the Norweigians vikings, and the Norweigian handball coach says, “Handball is life.”

Peter is so clearly going to win this whole thing — he and Rachel make out (she straddles him!) in a hot tub at the night portion of the date. They walk back into the main room three and a half hours later the way two college kids who had sex all night walk into the dining hall in the morning and have to face all their friends.

But Rachel gives Will the Immunity Rose because if she gave Peter the Immunity Rose everyone would be like yeah, I’ll pack my bags and leave because there’s no way I can catch up to how much Rachel likes Peter.

There is, however, this really funny moment when Josiah tells Rachel, “You are the woman for me. The woman of my dreams. I just want to grow old with you and I really, really mean that, Rachel.”

Rachel is like hey, the thing is, you don’t ask me questions about myself.

Josiah says, “Right. You’re so perceptive.”

He leaves the conversation being like, “Nailed it!” and she literally tells the camera: “Do I question it? Of course. He sounds disingenuous. He likes the idea of me than rather than really getting to know who Rachel is.”

I love how this probably happens all the time with dudes. Where a woman leaves a date being like, eh, he seems up his own ass and self-involved, and he’s on his group text with his friends being like “she loves me, bro, I killed it, we’re totally going to bone.”

#TheBachelorette http://pic.twitter.com/6eEiPIA3RC

— The Bachelorette (@BacheloretteABC) June 27, 2017

Team Bright Spot gets points because Rachel dunked on Josiah behind his back. +1,825

LEE AND KENNY’S AWFUL, MANIPULATIVE 2-ON-1 DATE

This is where stuff gets bad again. I’m still so appalled by how long this storyline has gone on.

I have a hard time believing Rachel doesn’t see exactly what’s happening. It’s not about her relationships with them at this point, these guys have become a side show. Yes, that’s what the two-on-one date always becomes — no one who goes on it ever makes it very far after. But this is the grossest yet.

The whole back-and-forth on the date is fairly extensive, but, in short: Kenny tells Rachel he isn’t aggressive the way Lee says he is, and then Lee lies and says that Kenny tried to pull him out of a van one time. Rachel says she believes Kenny.

This reminds me a lot of WWE. Kenny’s a wrestler. He’s the face. Lee is so one-dimensionally evil that I don’t know whether this is scripted; he’s the quintessential heel. The producers have set it up so the two of them just sit there talking trash to each other for a while, and Rachel isn’t there. I don’t know where else she could be if not told specifically to hang back, considering they just flew into the middle of nowhere on a helicopter.

Perhaps it’s real. But either way, we’re all being manipulated racism for ratinga, and it’s and ugly and I wish they hadn’t gone this shameful route. No amount of knowing or not knowing absolves this plotline of it’s terribleness.

Tomorrow won’t be any better — Kenny bleeds from the eye and weeps, and Rachel cries a lot. I am dreading this with every fiber of my being.

But hey, nothing like a bunch of active racism to promo the next episode! This has moved to extremely shameful levels

— Clinton Yates (@clintonyates) June 27, 2017

Team Garbage points: +2,890,267

TOTALS

Team Garbage: 3,223,051

Team Bright Spots: 24,525

Team Goober: 181,800

Welp, Garbage won tonight by a landslide and I can’t imagine tomorrow will be any better! Classic 2017 for ya.