#john is a complex character we see so little of but his influence is felt throughout the entire show

[daisukekaza]

THIIIIS.

Don't get me wrong, I love reading fic where John has those types of reaponses for the conflict too, but the way he treats them in canon? He's so afraid of losing what's left of his family-- what's left of his wife-- that it stops occuring to him that his kids are kids. That they aren't just soldiers because he was a soldier and they're not just extension of himself and his grief.

If he told them that they shouldn't feel things, it was because he felt so much grief he was numb with it and he can't let it paralyze him. He needed to protect them and get revenge to keep them safe and somewhere he lost the plot on how protecting them is his job and not Dean's. How teaching his kids to fight the monsters they shouldn't know about isn't a substitute for protecting them.

He's a broken man who can't see his own abuse until Sam throws it in his face by being just like him while Dean quietly tries to keep the non-existent peace. And just when he manages to start figuring out how to fix that, he goes and sacrifices himself instead and passes on his solution to Sam's being the true vessel of the devil without any of his reasons why or information about what's going on to Dean. It's all so fucked up but it's also so realistic for a character with his background.

Because let's also not forget his own trauma of his dad disappearing (thanks, time travel) and having the closest thing to a father figure for him be the military.

At least Sam and Dean got Bobby and Pastor Jim sometimes to mitigate some small parts of the damage, but John did a number on them without having to be physical or homophobic or anti-feelings. His biggest sin was being absent, just like his own father, and putting the weight of responsibility on Dean's shoulders. Dean raised himself based on the few memories he had of his mom, the few interactions he had with his dad, and whatever the television told him was a proper way to interact with family. Sam followed Dean's lead, but adults were transient creatures to him. Never permanent.

Abuse takes a lot of forms, and I'd be willing to bet that one of the real reasons that they never had a home base like Bobby's house was to avoid CPS while John hunted monsters.

Meanwhile Dean is barely old enough to buy food at a grocery store and I don't think we ever really learn how he got the money before he was old enough to hustle pool--assuming he didn't just steal what they needed instead. Sam never trusts adults enough to talk to them even when he's angry at his dad, and neither of them is in one place long enough to make friends who might notice what's going on. They're codependent for a lot of reasons in this show, but a huge one is that John never let them make any lasting connections with anyone else, even him.

On paper, John's crusade might seem Good and Just, but in reality it makes him a broken, abusive father. He doesn't need to have bad intentions, or be narrow minded about gender or sexuality, or even be emotionally constipated (though he might be that, he doesn't have to explicitly teach that to Sam or Dean) to be those things.

yeah to me it feels like the popular idea that John was homophobic/beat his kid(s)/taught them that having emotion makes you weak is just ppl choosing to interpret 'abusive father' in the shallowest most black-and-white movie villain way possible. when the ways he fucks them up in canon are so much more interesting and complicated.

[garrulousgeologist]

> Begin Again

I skipped to the trolls.

Haha just kidding, but could you imagine?

I love a good data structure crash course.

I’ve always been someone who struggles with comprehension when I don’t have all the context.

When my friends (s/o to snipey and cam) first pitched the webcomic to me, they gave the option that many people prefer to skip to act 5 where you are introduced to “the grey kids with the candy corn horns”, as anyone on tumblr in 2011- regardless of fandom affiliation- could have recognized.

This suggestion was due to the first couple acts of Homestuck generally being seen by young audiences at the time as dense and irrelevant to the plot, and while I admit I barely followed what was going on tutorial-wise at the time, getting to know each beta kid was and is profoundly important. From page 1 there are themes and symbols echoed to the very end with enormous ripples of influence along the way.

Yesterday on 4/13/23 I read through the first 214 pages, right up to the introduction of Rose, which felt like a good stopping point.*

I am thrilled to declare I could follow nearly everything this time, as I wouldn’t dare claim I catch every single bit of information given out in any given page. That being said every 10 pages or so I had the recurring thought that I am thrilled to be revisiting this as an adult with so much more experience reading all sorts of documents and being exposed to a wide range of fields of study. Hussie is clearly well-learned, far beyond what my 14yo brain could absorb.

"The moon's an arrant thief, and her pale fire she snatches from the sun." -Mark Twain

You are almost certain Mark Twain said that.

[William Shakespeare said that]

Also, Broblerone?! It was there from the beginning…

I’m interested to see how my opinion of John evolves as I remember hating him for a large portion of the years I spent reading updates as they came out. I honestly can’t say what I think of him anymore, but from the introduction alone he’s just a kid and life is a nightmare. So, no harm no foul, yet.

Dave Strider I was an enormous fan of from the get-go back in 2011 and to this very day I ride or die that kid. He’s marred deeply enough in irony that he thinks he can get away with just being real and saying how he really feels and no one can tell.

He loops right back around and ends up being a hilarious, startlingly talented, complex, compassionate and cool genuine individual. It just takes him time to figure that out himself. He also reminds me of someone possessing all those traits as well…someone admittedly more ornery from the compassion he extends…someone who is constantly fighting for his life from infancy as well…someone with the exact same demonizing eye color…hm, guess it’ll come up later.

I can tell, Dave. We can all tell.

"Absence diminishes little passions and increases great ones, as wind extinguishes candles and fans a fire." -Walt Whitman

Yes, you are certain Walt Whitman said that. One hundred percent positive.

[Francois de La Rochefoucauld said that]

Rose Lalonde was my favorite character by far back in the day. I am also interested to see where that goes nowadays. I’m one of those people who came out of the 2020 quarantine as a completely different gender/person. It’s a little uncomfortable for me to look back at how I was forcing myself to identify in high school, but I don’t necessarily think it’ll taint my view of Rose. She is badass as all hell, and over-intellectualizes everything she hears, thinks and feels just like me <3. Let’s not talk about my mommy issues.

"When two great forces oppose each other, the victory will go to the one that knows how to yield." -Oscar Wilde

Wise words by a man who likely could resist everything but temptation.

[Lao Tzu said that]

Tl;dr

No strong opinions yet other than I am so excited to be getting started again and to see what I inevitably missed. And the music!!! I missed it SO MUCH!!

*(a/n: bare with me on my timing with posts on this blog, I am an adult now with a 40hr/week big kid job and it sucks the energy right out of me, be impressed I mustered up the life force to make a post on a fucking friday)

[behold-a-dark-horse]

The Impostor Syndrome...

I think it's pretty clear that Tommy struggled with a form of impostor syndrome, but one thing I've just recently come to observe is how that manifests in his relationships with women.

No matter how much money he made or or power he acquired, he never felt like he fit in with people who had become his peers and even though he rants about how those "bastards" will never accept him or his family because of their humble beginnings, you can clearly see that he feels the same way and I think that bothers him far more than their opinions.

Tommy never has any problem lording himself and his power over people in any kind of relationship, whether it's allies, enemies, the Peaky Blinders or even his own family, that's where he's comfortable. Except with May and Grace. With both of them, his mannerisms change completely. He's gentle, soft and attentive, all about catering to their needs. It’s not about character or personality given just how different May and Grace are (even though there's not a whole lot to go on). It's like he's always trying to prove his worth, but what matters most to him, they've already got and all it could earn him in that situation is a bit of validation. And it's not validating him as a person because he gives so little of himself in their interactions.

Like when Tommy and Grace meet in season, for having supposedly missed and craved her so much, he doesn't want to spend the time alone, he wants to go out into a public and crowded place that allows very little relaxation or intimacy. He starts off with some fake hostility then flips the switch to "look at me! look what I can do!" Yes, it’s cool that she got to meet this super famous movie star and anybody would've appreciated a night out like that, but again (and maybe it's just me reading too much into it), it looked like it was less about Grace getting to meet Chaplin and more about Tommy being able to get her there. She was certainly no stranger to high class crowds like that, but it was just the fact that this time, he was able to get her in. If it had been something special that we knew was specific to Grace and not just the most famous man in the world, it would've been a different story. But we never get to see that, based on what we do see, Tommy probably never asked that.

With Tatiana, you can see that although he does find her class and her power appealing, knowing that her family has lost much of their wealth and status does seem to affect his treatment and perception of her. She could see his impostor syndrome herself, when Tommy thought she was saying that his weakness was women/sex and he told her that he could get a fuck whenever he wanted and she responds to him saying "Yes. But I am a duchess under you like a horse" and talks about how he walks around his house like a boy who'd broken in through the window. And I absolutely love how boldly she confronted him with it.

He does it with his own family. Maybe it's a stretch, but I noticed it in how he reacts to Esme vs Linda challenging his authority even though Linda had far more influence over Arthur than Esme ever had or tried to have over John. [And not exactly the same situation, but worth mentioning here is when Charlie was taken and he thought the painter might've been involved, he basically told Polly she was foolish to believe that (even with all the success they'd had by then) a man like him could've ever been interested in a low born woman like her, and this is all while he involves himself with rich women who are always less likely to date/ marry down than their male counterparts. So, what's the truth there? Does he really think he's special or does he realize and just choose to ignore how shallow his relationships are?]

Tommy and Lizzie’s relationship is far too complex to dive into on this post, but the major difference between her and the other women is that he shows more of himself to Lizzie than he ever does to them. He’s more vulnerable, he shows more of his flaws, because he’s confident that he can trust her and that she won’t leave. And they spend time together not fucking. It’s clear he cares otherwise he could’ve easily left her working the alleys in Small Heath and he definitely wouldn't have opened up to her like he does, but she doesn't have the status that gives him validation or inspires his worship like May and Grace.

Also, it's not just a class thing because he's the opposite with men. I don't wanna get into that too on this long ass post but you can see the difference there.

It's super late and I know this is a rambling mess probably full of typos, but I've just been thinking about the ways some of his issues were presented. There's so much that is said through Tommy's relationships with women, but this is one I just noticed and thought was interesting.

[daisukekaza]

Can we talk for a moment about this? After 15 seasons and 4 years post series? About how Dean is presenting this to Sam just after Jess has died?

Specifically:

The book is their dad's most precious posession, not Sam, not Dean, not any of the weapons or other things. The book. Left by his suddenly missing dad, filled with information about monsters and demons *and the times he visited his third son his first two don't know about*.

Dean presents this to Sam with all the hope and sincerity of a traumatized brother trying to keep his family together, trying to get Sam onboard with a life he hated, that stifled him, that prioritized other people's lives over everything including a better life for Sam and Dean, right after Jess went up in literal flames.

And they both have such good reasons to react the ways they do. Sam has just watched his better life fall apart and Dean is grasping at the chance not to be alone or with only their dad, trying to get back the brother he loves at the first chance.

Some of this was planned at this point, some of it came later, but it makes me wonder now: how real was the statement about the book being John's most valuable posession? How much more weight and interest did John attach to the book over his children? Consciously or otherwise? How much more did Dean value that book than his own life because of it? And for how long? Was this one of the early sources of Dean's lack of self worth? Was this why he valued saving others first, even when it got him killed?

How much did John's obsession show through moments like this before we, as an audience, even had a clue?

[spnfanficpond]

Pond Diving - emilyshurley

Welcome to today’s Pond Diving Spotlight! We hope that you enjoy this little insight to our members and perhaps even find some useful tips for your own writing. Happy reading!

Want to volunteer, send us an ask! We’re looking forward to learning more about all of you! Not sure what PD is, you can learn more here.

Name: Emily

Age: 21

Location: India

URL: @emilyshurley​

Why did you choose your URL: Okay this is embarrassing. I was trying to sign up for AO3, so I did a quick Google search for two things, what's the name of Dean's daughter? Emma, and Chuck's last name, Shurley

I accidentally typed Emma as Emily and that's it. 

There was a very real chance that my url would have been emmashurley. Thoughts on that one? Maybe I'll change it someday. 

What inspired you to become a writer: Being an only child who wasn't allowed to watch tv for more than 2 hours. And not having friends, that also had something to do with it. 

How long have you been writing: Fanfiction? 4 years (was on Wattpad before this). In general? 12 years, I guess... I remember showing my first short story to my english teacher in 6th class. 

What do you do when you are not writing i.e. Job/Hobbies etc? Cooking, eating what I made. I don't get to cook often so I enjoy it when I can. Other than that, college takes up most of my time. Currently getting my bachelor's degree in science. It's my last year, will probably get master's in zoology next. 

How long have you been in the SPN Fandom? 4 years

Are you in any other fandoms and do you write for them? Way too freaking many. But I write for marvel and I'm thinking of re-posting the very first vampire diaries fanfic I wrote. But are people still into vampires?

Do you do any writing outside of fanfiction? If so, tell us about it? Mostly journalling, but I occasionally take part in writing competitions and things.

Favorite published author: Amish Tripathi (He mainly writes Hindu mythological fantasy? If that's anyone's jam here)

Have you ever read a book that made an impact on your life? Which one and why?: Leap of faith by Danielle Steel. Not for any reason other than the fact that it was the first novel I ever read. My grandfather was reading it, and I told him I wanted to read something too so he gave it to me. 

Favorite genre of fanfic (smut, angst, fluff, crack, rpf, etc):Platonic fluff!!!! Give me all the fics of best friends being adorable. 

Favorite piece of your own writing: Once upon a Winchester. But I gave myself so little canon to work with that I think I'll continue it after the show ends. I have to know the ending to continue it. 

Most underrated fic you have written: Letters to no one. For any marvel fans, it's a two part fic in Natasha's POV, just some letters she thought no one will ever read. 

Story of yours that you’d most like to see turned into a movie/tv show: Project Latrodectus, again marvel. I kinda feel bad for mentioning my marvel fics so much but I'm pulling influences from the story of Eklavya in Mahabharata, which is a Hindu epic so complex that I won't attempt to explain it here. 

Favorite Tumblr Writer(s): Ahh that's a tough one. I love so many people. At this point, mentioning Myin ( @myinconnelly1 ) feels like cheating because another who has ever looked at my posts can tell she's my favourite human. So I'll try not to mention her further. 

Otherwise, Beka ( @impala-dreamer), Kate ( @katehuntington​ ), @katymacsupernatural and other hoomans I can't remember because I have been away from Tumblr for a while. 

Favorite Fic from another writer: Blood and Honey by @kittenofdoomage. And the proposal by @katymacsupernatural

Favorite character to write: Marvel: Natasha Romanoff, Supernatural: I have never written Charlie but I'd love to. 

Favorite Pairing to write: So they are platonic ships but Dean and Charlie, the boys and Garth and Clint Barton and Natasha Romanoff. 

Least favorite character to write (and why): Easily John Winchester. I don't know, my brain just can't process his character. Like no matter how many times I try, John just sounds off. 

Do you have anyone you consider a mentor? Irl, my grandfather. On tumblr, Myin. I know, I know I said I won't mention her but Myin is my support system here. No matter what goes on in my brain, no idea is too crazy for her. 

Do you have any aspirations involving your writing? To make people feel less alone because I think that feels like shit. My goal moving forward is to write more Indian reader and LGBTQ reader fics because I think not many people in the fandom (that I know of) are writing those fics. 

How many work-in-progress stories do you have: Four, all of them are series. Technically 2 are my ongoing ones. And one is an MCU x SPN crossover that's taking a while to plan. 

What are you currently working on? Nothing focusing on college these days. But will write random one shots here and there.

“Pond Diving” - All About The Writing

What/who has had the biggest influence on your writing? My inability to write romance. No joke, I don't feel like I write it well. So I tend to write general fics and crack fics.

Best writing advice you've been given: Someone recommended the book, writing down the bones, to me a while ago. In the very first chapter it says, use a cheap notebook (so you don't feel guilty about 'bad writing') and a fast writing pen. 

Since most of my non fanfic writings are done by hand I like that advice.

Biggest obstacle you’ve faced in your writing: Procrastination. I'm the creator of my one misery here. I push stuff till the last moment then complain about being too busy to do anything. 

What aspects of writing do you find difficult when you write fanfiction?Smut. I can't. I don't know I like to say I don't feel comfortable writing it but the truth is I just think I'd put people off. Which is not the intended outcome. 

Is there anything you want to write but are afraid to (and why): More LGBTQ+ characters/reader inserts. Why? Say for example, even though I'm bi, but my version of bisexual Dean might not be something other people would relate to and I'm scared of accidentally offending someone. 

What inspires/motivates you to write: What if scenarios. I love speculating and coming up with the context behind what we see on screen. Like an idea that I'll one day use is, what was Sam going when Dean was in hell or purgatory. Sure in one case he hit a dog and met a girl but how? 

So I want to write more general fics or like filler between the scenes we see on the screen. 

How do you deal with self doubt: By talking to people, knowing I'm not alone in this helps. And sending fics to friends before I post them. 

How do you deal with writer's block: Play the sims. What I mean is take a break, do something completely different for a while. 

Do you plan/outline your story before you start: I don't, for one shots. For series I have to have an ending or else I'll lose interest very quickly. 

Do you have any weird writing habits: Would you consider writing/planning things on paper before writing it on the computer weird? 

Have you ever received hateful comments on your fic and how do you deal with it? I did. My very first fic on Tumblr. It was a Tony Stark x Indian!Reader fic and someone messaged me saying most content media is written for an American/Western audience. And that Tony Stark would never actually do for someone who's Indian because well Indian characters aren't primarily present in the MUC. So no one wants to read it. 

What I did about it? I deleted the fic and every backup I had of it. Because in my head they were right. All Indian get is Bruce Banner doing charity work for "all the poor Indians".

It wasn't until recently that I started talking to @desisamslut that I realised that people actually want to read about reader inserts that are like them. I mean it's called a reader insert for a reason how could I not see it?

Conversely: what’s been some of your favorite feedback on your fanfic?When someone made a mood board for my Black Widow fanfiction. 

If you could give one piece of advice to a new and/or struggling writer, what would it be? Hang in there, no matter how uncommon you think what you want to write about is, you'll find an audience. I mentioned @desisamslut in another answer, the first thing she told me was she has never seen an indian reader fic, so she felt happy when she read the one I wrote recently. 

[ceristhedivine]

@ravensvirginity Oh, no, no! It's fine! I deeply love your answers, nonetheless! 💜💜💜

I was just doing some thinking while looking back from panels between the characters. Everyone messed up in their own ways leading up to Raven's birth. Angela was fooled into a cult. Trigon raped Angela to have his baby. Azarath takes Angela and her baby in while knowing they brought their mistakes back into their hands; essentially wiping the child from feeling anything to prevent the end of all things. Every single character was flawed and I really liked how it developed in Raven's complexed story.

I know Azarath had good intentions for Raven. They did what little options they had without leading it to "We gotta kill this demon child!" I solely felt that isolating her from the only familiar kin she has was a damaging risk. Especially to a child since birth. I only imagine from another lense how I'd feel if I were separated from my own parents because... my nature is just so dangerous! Realistically, I wouldn't be able to last holding my emotions like Raven could. It'd be so much pressure! I'd be asking questions, why am I doing this? Will I ever see my family? Can I truly hold this in forever? It's a sad thing to introspect when I'm putting myself in Raven's shoes. Aside from Azar, Raven had little support and I'd only wonder how ANYONE can last keeping themselves in such a long span...

Trigon was also a bad influence too. He's a damaging figure by his own right. I will not deny that fact. It's just that I seem to notice how Trigon seems to care about Raven in his own twisted way. Trigon was the reason Angela & Raven got to stay in Azarath. Trigon was also watching over his daughter and kills a man who attempted ridding her into a FREAKING VOID— 😵‍💫 I wouldn't blame him! If someone were to try throwing MY kid in a spaceless void, I'd be at the verge to commit a murder (partially a point). It might've been so he'd keep her of use to him later on but it's also a... slim display of how protective he may be to his child. There were also points where he wanted to shield her when he's plotting actions to raid earth. And in the Injustice comics (I believe) he was even concerned about his daughter's whereabouts when facing John Constantine. And yes, when he does actually get Raven to embrace the evil she has, he feels proud like the malevolent father he is.

Also! Even when Raven is at her struggling point – without fighting his influence, time to time – he aids her out from the situation she's in. Those instances being somewhat like Apokolips War for example. Essentially being part of this protective part but still.

I simply saw how Trigon, in a way, seems to care about Raven.

Even if his ways are... not entirely benevolent. At all. 😅

I'm playing devil's advocate here, but...

Trigon is a BID BAD in DC. He's raped Arella/Angela to create Raven. He's always trying to influence his daughter to embrace her true nature even when she constantly reminds him – it's not what she wants.

However. Considering Raven's perspective and childhood...

The neglect of emotions, the unwillingness to let Raven thrive...

Azarath was more abusive/neglectful than Trigon will ever be.

In a oddly fascinating, twisted way...

I very heavily disagree, unfortunately 😔 I do 100% agree that the way Azarath raised Raven was definitely bad and abusive towards her, but I think that's still better than the way Trigon treats her.

I do think Trigon loves Raven (that's like the entire thesis statement of my blog), but that doesn't translate into an even remotely healthy relationship. Some of his greatest parenting hits include:

- Torturing Raven the first time they ever met, after provoking her into attacking him by torturing Arella. Whatever he's doing with his powers is clearly causing her agony, and he doesn't stop until she admits that she's his daughter. (Tales of the NTT #2)

- Lying to her and forcing her to come with him to his dimension, only to reveal that he's going to destroy Earth despite what he'd told her only about half an hour before. He then renders her unconscious when she tries to leave. (NTT vol 1 #6)

- Later that same issue, he begins indiscriminately murdering innocent people to draw Raven out after she escapes the cell he put her in. After she returns to him to get him to stop slaughtering people, he attempts to attack her and is only stopped by Arella's magic.

- His biggest thing with her is using their connection to psychologically torture her for years, and physically torture her by making her powers malfunction. He does this until she's so worn down that she feels she has to give into him to make it stop. (This happens a lot over an ongoing arc spanning years worth of comics, but here's an example from NTT vol 1 #25)

We never really fully get a sense of what Trigon is like to demon Raven, as they're both defeated pretty quickly in the Terror of Trigon. My personal opinion is he'd probably treat her better than he normally does when he's trying to wear her down so she'll join him, but I think he'd hurt her if she ever displeased him in any way. He's a very cruel demon, it isn't really a stretch to imagine.

I am open to hearing other takes about this, though! I would love to hear what other people think. I love talking about them so much.

[goodshipsherlollipop]

Self-interview (but not really) Part 2

Thanks again @sherlollyappreciationweek

Comp1mom

Q: What made you decide to create a “Christian” version of Sherlock?  According to the BBC version, he is a self-avowed atheist.

A: When I look at Sherlock’s true nature, I see such potential for him as a Christian.  He exhibits so many characteristics that we, as Christians, try to show - forgiveness of wrongs done to him (note how he doesn’t fight back when John assaults him); sacrificial love (his willingness to die for others, as in TRF); the desire for true justice, the way Moriarty says he’s  “on the side of the angels”.  At least for me, I was intrigued by the idea of converting him to Christianity, to give him a true purpose for his life that has eternal consequences.  

Q: Do you think that portraying Sherlock as a Christian is important? Why or why not?

A: I am always hopeful that people will read and see the validity in my reasoning for him becoming a Christian, given how often he has escaped death.  Quite often, in stories, Molly puts the question to him - Why are you still here?  Why have you escaped death so many times?  That should be enough to make anyone reevaluate their life’s purpose.

Q: Molly Hooper is the one who proselytizes him, right? Why do you use Molly? Why not John, who must be a believer in Christ in some way or he would have had a problem with christening Rosie?

A: For me, it HAD to be Molly.  Her character and the way she behaves in the show is consistent with the behaviour of a Christian.  She loves Sherlock unconditionally; she sees beyond the detective persona to the real man beneath.  She needs to be the catalyst for Sherlock to be open to the idea of Christianity, because he loves and trusts her.  John, although he certainly believes in God and has some Christian (or Catholic in my story canon) background, does not live a life that is consistent with Christianity and its ideals.  He has multiple sexual partners.  Although I think he is an ethical man, I don’t believe he has the kind of sexual morality that is typical of committed Christians. Identifying yourself as a Christian because you were raised in a Christian home and went to church, does not make you one if you display behaviour that is contrary to what the Bible teaches.  Either you’re committed to what you believe and try to follow what the Bible teaches, or you are not really committed to your faith, (not that Christians are perfect - far from it, but we do try to follow what the Bible teaches, and we feel guilt when we fail).  There’s a difference between being a Jesus fan and a Jesus follower.

Q: What evidence does Molly use to convince Sherlock of a Higher Power?

A:  In various stories, Molly points out the beauty and balance of creation, that it does not make sense for that balance to have occurred spontaneously.  She also points out the complexity of the human body and how it is built with all its systems designed to work in harmony.  Personally, I believe these two facts are huge considerations, and that it takes far less of a leap in logic to believe something created this beauty, rather than it happening spontaneously.  Molly also points out the fact that Sherlock has been spared from death so many times and asks him to question why that is so, whether there is a higher purpose to his life because of that.  

Q: How do you maintain Sherlock’s acerbic wit and still have him believe that Jesus Christ is more than a swear, is a deity, the Deity?

A:  I try to show that Sherlock is not the “perfect” Christian.  He has many years of conditioning in one type of behaviour, and that is something that is going to come out from time to time. I don’t find it as difficult to write him as someone who does not use the name of Jesus Christ in a profane way, because he doesn't talk that way in the show (unlike John). Personally, I am also not comfortable in writing (or reading) stories that use the name of Jesus Christ as an expletive.

Q: What does belief in Jesus Christ do for his detective work? Or does it influence his detective work?

A: Oh, I definitely think his faith adds an element of compassion to Sherlock’s detective work.  He is no longer answerable only to himself, but he is trying to behave in a way that displays his faith and pleases God.  That means thinking before he speaks, caring about the people involved in the case, rather than just the case itself. His motives, to glorify God in his work, are his priority.

Q: Is there any evidence in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s writing that Sherlock Holmes believes in Something Higher than himself?

A:  I absolutely believe ACD’s Sherlock believed in God, which is one of the reasons I felt it believable to change BBC Sherlock’s atheistic stance.  ACD’s Sherlock mentions Providence, as evidenced in this quote from The Naval Treaty.

“Our highest assurance of the goodness of Providence seems to me to rest in the flowers. All other things, our powers, our desires, our food, are all really necessary for our existence in the first instance. But this rose is an extra. Its smell and its color are an embellishment of life, not a condition of it. It is only goodness which gives extras, and so I say again that we have much to hope from the flowers.”

Also, in The Boscombe Valley Mystery, when Sherlock lets a dying killer go, he says, “You are yourself aware that you will soon have to answer for your deed at a higher court than the Assizes.” This implies God will judge the man after he dies.

Penelope Chestnut

Q: How long have you written  Sherlolly stories? What made you start writing?

A: A dear friend of mine recommended watching Sherlock, and my husband and I binge watched it in the summer of 2017.  After the final episode, I was so sad that the Sherlock and Molly dynamic was not resolved, I was moved to write a happy ending for them.  My daughters have been involved in fanfiction for years, so I knew people did this kind of thing.  My intention was to write a one-shot happy ending for them, just for my own satisfaction.  After I wrote it, though, I found I didn't want to let the characters go.   I had fallen in love with their story, and I wanted to keep writing for them.  60 chapters later, I decided to start publishing my story, A Journey to Love, Faith and Marriage.  This was just over 3 years ago, on November 7th 2017,  when I joined fanfiction.net.  I later joined ao3 as well and was publishing on both sites for quite some time.  I've had a better response though on fanfiction.net, so have pretty much limited myself to that site over the past year and a half.  I continue to make revisions and correct errors on my fanfiction.net stories, while I don’t really do anything on ao3. I have been likened to a writing machine on a couple occasions.  To date, on fanfiction.net, I have published over 1.9m words.  Putting that in perspective, in three years I've published the equivalent of more than 7 volumes of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (the longest book in her series), or close to two and a half volumes of the Holy Bible.

Q: Do you have a certain routine you follow when you write?

A: I don’t have a set daily routine, but I do set myself a goal to complete a certain amount of work per week.  This has changed over time.  Currently, I set myself the goal to write at least one chapter of a story each week, to keep myself in line with my publishing schedule of one chapter per week.  If I am writing an installment for my COVID-19 series that is published in addition to my regular publishing schedule, I still try to write that in addition to my usual chapter writing for the week.  So, at times I write more in a week than other times. I am also working on revising one of my AU’s into a Christian historical romance I hope to publish professionally next year.  

Q: What is it like being a Christian author?

A: It brings me joy to spread a Christian message through my work, but, like anyone else, at times I do suffer self-doubt.  I've questioned in the past whether my limited audience makes worthwhile the enormous effort I put into writing these stories.  It can definitely be discouraging to get very little return on your work, and I have a bad habit of comparing myself to more “popular” writers in the fandom.  I am, however, getting better at recognizing my own self-worth, having confidence that the lack of readers is not a reflection on my ability and talent as a writer, but more a reflection on the general lack of interest from the majority of Sherlolly fans in reading stories with Christian themes and the values that go along with it (particularly sexual purity outside marriage). Just as I don’t care to read stories of characters with a colourful sexual history because I don’t agree with that kind of behaviour due to my Christian beliefs, I imagine those without similar beliefs are probably not interested in reading about sexual purity or abstinence before marriage, as it is not something they can relate to. Thankfully, I am blessed to have a small but vocal support group who really give me the impetus to keep writing these Christian stories.

Q: Are there any devices you use in your writing as a legally blind author?

A:  As I mentioned earlier, I absolutely would be lost without my iPad.  Actually, it is the larger sized iPad Pro.  I would also be lost without programs that give me the ability to resize the font so I can read it!  Thank God for technology!

If you made it to the end of this two-part interview, I hope you enjoyed getting to know my writing journey better.  God bless!

[talesofafangirlwithadvr]

JULY PICKS!

You heard me correctly, I said JULY! Whoosh, this year is going by fast-but not in a good way if you know what I mean. This will be my last monthly wrap up where I am strictly staying home in quarantine as this upcoming week I’m heading back to work in person. Wish me luck!

We had quite the range this month from newly released, reality, musical and then some favorites from last month that I’ve continued watching. Without further ado here we go....

There’s going to be PLENTY of SPOILERS this go round. ESPECIALLY with my first pick of Stargirl. You’ve been warned!!!

DC’S STARGIRL

I need to talk about 1x10 or I’m going to burst!!! As stated above there will be A LOT of SPOILERS IN THIS POST!! So scroll down to the next picture if you don’t want it to be spoiled. 

You’ve been warned...again.

IT CANNOT END LIKE THAT!!! ARE YOU KIDDING ME???? Henry! Wow! 1) Epic fighting 2) The backstory and how he wasn’t going to give up on his dad AND THEN how he wouldn’t give into his dad. 3) HE DIED RATHER THAN JOIN HIS SIDE OR PRETEND (which I honestly felt was going to happen). His character arc and I can’t believe it’s over!!! 4) His speech at the end: *weeping.* I knew Brainwave was going to say he killed his mother. It just felt like the build up. Brainwave Jr. would have been a GREAT ADDITION TO THE JSA! AND OMG THE WAY THE REST OF THEM FOUGHT FOR HIM! I loved how they framed it so you could still see them in the back when Henry spoke to his father. Super heartbreaking. Man, it feels like a lot of people have been killed off this first season (or am I just still thinking about Joey?) 

Side note: Check out the Instagram Live between father and son Brainwave on Stargirl’s CW page. Jake Austin Walker did an AWESOME interview in his take over.

This was one of the strongest episodes overall and definitely one of my favorites so far. I agree with many others that while it is SOO GOOD and I want to rewatch it again, I don’t know if I can emotionally yet. I can’t remember the last time I felt that way about a show. 

Some other thoughts this episode: WAY TO GO BARBARA! Way to record them to translate later (such an awesome app btw, how do I get it?). I’m glad her and Pat came more to an understanding because I love them especially with that glimpse into how they met. Jordan’s parents give me the creeps, like the couple from The Visit vibes. I feel like Mike’s got to find out ASAP, especially because he’s spent time in the garage. Something’s got to show him the truth; because I’m really feeling he figures it out rather than being told. Very curious to see what his reaction will be. SOLOMON GRUNDY. Thank God Beth talked Rick down. She really is like Chuck in being the voice of reason. She did really well in the cafeteria too. While I still don’t believe Starman is Courtney’s dad, how cute was it when she put together her and Henry were cousins? Speaking of Court’s dad, who else didn’t feel like Starman was her dad until they saw that upcoming promo? I don’t know who that impostor is but he is not her dad. Something’s fishy.

Loving this show. So happy it’s renewed for a second season!! 

THE 100

From a show I can’t get enough of to one whose final season is a disappointment. I’m not going to spend too much time talking about The 100 because I feel I’ll just be repeating myself from previous posts. However, I did want to include it because I haven’t spoken much about the previous 2 episodes that I wound up watching back to back and I didn’t overly dislike them. 

As many have complained, when you have a final season you shouldn’t introduce SO MANY new characters and just push aside your originals (or the ones who are left). You also shouldn’t include so many confusing plots that are making it look like were the main points overall (like this many world concept was around since the first grounders) and playing with time in so many episodes is hard to keep up with too. Having so many people separated makes it difficult to remember what just happened to this specific group because I haven’t seen them in forever. ANYWAY, I did promise some positives. I didn’t except to like 7x08 because of it being a flashback episode with brand new people that was just going to feel like a potential spin-off pilot. Well...I actually really enjoyed it and the concept that the bunker was used before One Crew. The characters were easy to like and it was cool seeing Allie again (and this time not as the villain). While it felt forced including the orb (is that what it’s called? If not that’s what I’m calling it), but I liked how all the other pieces fit together (ex: the flame, the grounders’ language). Honestly, I surprise myself to say this, but I’d watch another episode. For 7x09, I liked being on Bardo and watching Octavia, Echo, Diyoza and Hope slowly get “brainwashed” I mean trained. We all knew it wouldn’t work for Hope and if I was them I would rather be on Sky Ring than Bardo (but then I guess I’d go crazy, so...) I enjoy the Octavia and Levitt relationship and would love them to work out, but if this show taught you anything it’s to be skeptical. I also want to shift to the Primes plot, just to showcase John Murphy for a second. THAT MAN! What a character development he’s had on this show. From the first season where I was like come on Murphy to now me awaiting his scenes. From cockroach to someone who won’t view himself as a hero. So good and something that is fantastic about this final season. They might have forgotten about other characters, but they’re doing it right by Murphy. 

Well, that was more than I was expecting. ;)   

THE CIRCLE

It feels like I haven’t watched a lot of reality TV this year, which makes sense because of our quarantine situation (but then again I’m watching World of Dance, but that’s a different because it’s more of a competition/dance show. I’ll stop rambling). The Circle is a reality ‘game’ show that could be easily completed during quarantine and social distancing because the contestants do not see each other in person. They each have an apartment in this complex and only communicate with each other on a social media platform called the Circle. The objective is to become the most popular and an influencer who gets power over who stays and who goes in the competition. There’s some side contests throughout, but most of the show is just people chatting through an insta messenger and trying to learn as much as they can. Alliances are formed and cat fishes try to thrive all for the grand prize of $100,000. (Wow, that’s a lot!) It is SUPER addicting and very funny. Having a voice-over narrator really makes it even funnier because she says what we’re all thinking. Just about every episode a contestant leaves and then is able to meet one other person in their apartment. It’s been cool seeing their reactions as oftentimes it’s someone they did not expect AT ALL. I can’t wait to finish it. If you’re a fan of Big Brother than this is definitely for you. Looks like there will be a second season, which I am excited about.  

THE BABYSITTERS CLUB

Jumping from one Netflix show to another. Released on Netflix on July 3rd, I tried not to binge it all in one day because then it would be over (and we still don’t know if there will be a second season yet). This is definitely my feel good watch for July. If you want something that’s a quick watch and just wholesome and fun to escape our current world than this is for you. I always felt so happy after watching and couldn’t wait to watch another. While I was familiar with the franchise--the 90s movie and of course the books (although I was more of a Babysitter Little Sister fan, so I was very excited to see Karen), you don’t have to have any knowledge of the Babysitters Club to enjoy this show. I was hooked just about right away by this new series shown by me watching the first three episodes back to back. I really like how they set up each episode with one girl as the main focus (just like in the books) where she takes over the voice-over narration. Great representation and made modern to fit in with our current times. The first example that comes to mind is when Mary Ann babysits Bailey who is transgender. I liked how Bailey says those are her old clothes while they’re playing. It’s shown in a way that explains the situation without feeling like a lecture. It fits so naturally into the episode. And then Mary Ann’s speech at the hospital is super powerful for both Bailey and herself. This is just one example of how well represented this show is. Extremely strong cast and actresses who are the proper ages. I also love the adult casting and how they threw in a Clueless reference from Alicia Sliverstone (who plays Kristy’s Mom). As someone who is writing for this age group, I really liked hearing and seeing how authentic this show is. 

FEEL THE BEAT

A Netflix original movie that has been on my list for a while that I just got around to watching. It didn’t come out too long ago. In the film, Sofia Carson’s character is a dancer who is a perfectionist. She gets on the bad side of a big NYC producer when she not only leaves her in the rain as she steals her taxi, but also knocks her, accidentally, off stage and becomes a viral video-this basically blackmails her in Broadway. This all happens within about the first 10 minutes of the film and the majority takes place back in her small home town (very Hallmark-like) in Wisconsin. While there her old dancing teacher wants her to share her Broadway wisdom with her young students. Meanwhile Carson has only been a chorus girl, so she doesn’t really have any. What draws her to helping the young girls is the chance to perform in front of a big choreographer that could get her to be the star she always dreamed of. The catch is that it’s the teacher dance in the childrens dance competition. While this might sound like a movie you’ve watched many times before, it was still worth it and a really fun watch. I think the kids really make the movie. They are adorable, funny and super talented. You feel connected with them really fast and want to see them succeed. I loved Dickie and how he joined the group. I think he was my favorite overall. I loved how inclusive the cast was here too (just like BSC) from a mixed race family, to single parents and even a student who was Deaf. It was great seeing the other actors sign to her. Carson’s character, April, can be annoying at times, but you understand it’s her character and something she needs to overcome. As I said before the plot may seem familiar, but the ending was something I didn’t see coming. Overall, wholesome, feel good and fun for the whole family. You can consider to watch while babysitting. (See what I did there??)  

VIOLETTA SEASON 2

She’s back! I know last month when I included Violetta it was mainly me being excited to see the second season FINALLY streaming on Disney Plus. I had watched a few episodes (remember there’s 80 altogether, so even if I watched 20 that’s still very early on and just a dent in the season) and was still getting used to this season. Well, now I’m happy to report I am in the 40s and more than half way. For a bit I was watching many of these episodes a day, which told me that I was loving it again. Recently, I feel I need a little more of a push to watch, but it’s mainly because of certain story-lines that feel like they’re dragging. (For example: Violetta’s voice. One minute it’s fine and the next she’s like dying). For this section I have two words: LOVE TRIANGLES. And I’m not just talking about Violetta, Diego and Leon. For a bit it felt like each character had their own love triangle, which honestly I was loving. These characters have definitely developed a lot from last season, which allows this to happen. Olga was in a love triangle, which just recently got resolved. I think German is still in one because of his alter ego Jeremias. Jackie was “kind of” in one. For her it was more of a misunderstanding, which is very classic on this show. Lots more secrets have been uncovered in these episodes as well as songs! You know how excited I am for those. Overall, I think I’m still enjoying season 1 songs more (which get referenced enough in this season), but some of the season 2 ones are really growing on me. Specifically Leon’s Entre dos mundos and when he sings with Diego Euphoria in English. Also, Yo Soy Asi has been real catchy. I know Frederico will be coming back soon and I can’t wait to see him again!  

HAMILTON

Like many I watched Hamilton this month-actually on the day it came out. It’s been a musical that I’ve been intrigued by, but never thought I’d get a chance to watch because of how popular and expensive it is to see on Broadway. So, I was very excited to hear I’d get the chance when it was to be released in theaters for a special event. Then because of Corona it was released to Disney Plus, which was EVEN more convenient and exciting. I really enjoyed it and watched it twice within the same week. I immediately downloaded the playlist and started singing it around the house. I do this a lot with many of the plays I see, but depending how good they are is shown by how long I listen to the soundtrack. (Some of my top ones are Bandstand, Once, Newsies and Anastasia.) Because there are so many songs in Hamilton it is taking me a little longer to know all the words, but I feel pretty confident with the first act. It was the perfect timing for this to be released on Disney Plus. Not only because it was July 3rd, but also because of the world we are living in. Lin’s diverse cast brings to life the world of 1776 and the revolutionary war (as well as the time after it), but it’s such a strong commentary on our world today. This is something I am continually noticing with historical dramas/pieces being released within the last 5-10 years. It feels like there’s more we can say in this genre than in a commentary piece. I also like all the analysis videos I’ve seen popping up, which just make it even more powerful. (Like it being Eliza’s story and her putting herself back in the narrative. That the play Hamilton is named for both her and Alexander.) I don’t know if all of what I see were intentional, but  either way well done. I hope it doesn’t leave Disney Plus soon. 

1917

And lastly, 1917. I promised quite the range this month and you can see that’s definitely the case. I always enjoy watching war films and with 1917 there was so much hype (both before it came out and after) that I was interested to give it a watch. Giving the movie to my dad for father’s day felt like the perfect excuse to be able to watch it. Even though our DVD stuck in a few places (still don’t know if it was the player or the DVD itself), the film was very entertaining and I would suggest it to anyone who is a history/film buff. Taking place in WWI, we follow two British soldiers as they attempt to deliver a message about an upcoming ambush that could take countless lives. I feel that I often watch more films revolving around WWII, so it was very interesting to be immersed in the first great war. After watching I am not surprised that the film was up for so many Oscars. While cinematography is the first thing everyone discusses when it comes to this movie (and it should be because the one shot/long shot is sooo impressive and beautiful to watch. It really brings you into the scene and has a way of making you feel like you’re there too. There’s a realness to it that’s raw and new compared to other war films I’ve watched in the past), there’s so much more to this film too. First, I like how it connects back to Sam Mendes’ grandfather, so while it’s not a true story it has real facts in it. I LOVE the score and music to this film. In the scene where George Mackay runs at night through those ruined buildings I could really hear how well the music worked with the action. Because of this I made sure to listen to some of the soundtrack and now I’ve added some of the songs into my writing playlist. I have chills just thinking about it. The other point I want to bring up is the cast! While there are SO MANY big names in this film from Colin Firth to Benedict Cumberbatch, the two main characters are played by George Mackay and Dean Charles Chapman and they are the ones with the most screen time. If their chemistry and acting wasn’t so great then the movie wouldn’t be as successful as it is. Because of this I have been watching non-stop YouTube interviews of the two of them for this film. 

They are so well-spoken, stand-up guys and I can’t get enough of their dialogues with each other and others. (You should watch these interviews too). While familiar with Chapman’s time on Game of Thrones, I haven’t seen him in much else, so I’m excited to see what he’ll have in the future (as well as checking out his IMDB page). For Mckay, I’ve seen him before when I just watched Ophelia earlier this summer so that was my first time watching him act. After that film I was curious what else he was in, but it was only after 1917 that I started doing more research. So far, I’ve only been able to watch the short film he was in called Infinite. While only 17 minutes it was very strong and deep. I highly recommend. As I’ve shared on this page already, in another post, the more I hear him talk the more of a crush I am developing. It’s been a long time since I’ve experienced a celebrity crush this strong so soon. This quarantine has to end so I can make it to England to just casually bump into him like one does. :) 

[aion-rsa]

Why Turner Classic Movies is Reframing Problematic Hollywood Favorites

https://ift.tt/3rnt3hu

Breakfast at Tiffany’s is a movie Alicia Malone fell head over heels in love with during childhood. Seeing it more times than she can remember in her native Australia, the future author and Turner Classic Movies host still recalls failed attempts to launch a high school film club with Audrey Hepburn’s Holly Golightly as the star attraction.

“I thought for sure people were going to get excited about classic movies if they watched Breakfast at Tiffany’s because it has so much life to it!” Malone says today. How could they not fall for Hepburn’s iconic performance, which Malone still describes as luminous? “Holly Golightly is a complex female character, and for the times it was quite sexually progressive.”  Yet there was always another element, even in those halcyon days, which Malone recognized as uncomfortable—that discomfort has only grown to modern eyes.

Beyond the movie’s bittersweet romance between a pseudo-call girl and the kept man living in the apartment upstairs, there’s a grossly racist caricature of Japanese Americans in the movie’s margins, and it’s portrayed no less than by Mickey Rooney in yellowface makeup. It’s technically a small part of the movie, only appearing briefly and sporadically, but each time the character arrives, it’s like a sledgehammer swung across the screen. For decades the performance has been rightly criticized by Asian American advocacy groups, and even Rooney acknowledged late in life that if he knew people would become offended, he “wouldn’t have done it.” Nevertheless, the shadow that character casts over the movie has only loomed larger with time.

“I just kind of hold my breath and half shut my eyes every time Mickey Rooney shows up,” fellow TCM host Dave Karger says during a Zoom conversation with Malone and myself. “Mercifully, he’s gone pretty soon, and I’ve chosen actively not to let that performance ruin the movie for me, because ‘Moon River’ and the party scene, and George Peppard looking so great—there’s just so much to love and appreciate, so I actively choose to focus on that.”

Despite those personal struggles with the movie, Karger and Malone are both unafraid to examine the full implications of Rooney’s Mr. Yunioshi head-on. It’s why they hosted, alongside Ben Mankiewicz, a lengthy discussion of the character’s legacy last week during a special Turner Classic Movies presentation. That conversation was part of TCM’s Reframed series, a new season of content from the network which looks at some of the most beloved Hollywood classics of the 20th century—the crème de la crème, as Karger describes them—and studies why they can also be problematic and, in some cases, stunningly offensive. In the case of Breakfast at Tiffany’s, that can even lead to larger discussions about prevailing anti-Japanese attitudes and stereotypes in American society that persisted in the immediate decades after World War II… and can still be found as echoes in the anti-Asian stereotypes of today.

For Karger and Malone, these are the types of discussions TCM hosts have been having off-screen for years. So bringing those dimensions to the forefront for new generations of viewers felt only natural with Reframed.

Says Malone, “We often talk to each other about how we approach certain films when it comes to writing our scripts for our intros and outros for each individual film. We also talk with the producers about what we should bring up, what we shouldn’t bring up; if we should talk about an actor or director’s problematic past during that particular film, or if it doesn’t go with the content of the movie.”

So the five main hosts of TCM–who also include University of Chicago Professor Jacqueline Stewart and author Eddie Muller–were eager to have these frank discussions on screen while offering historical context from a modern perspective.

“All of us at TCM are watching the world change and watching the culture change,” Karger says, “and even though we show movies by and large from the period of the ‘30s to the ‘60s, we all realized that it doesn’t mean we can’t be part of today’s cultural conversation. It’s not a stretch at all to talk about classic movies from a point-of-view of the 21st century; that’s very possible to do, and I think a lot of our fans are looking for that kind of context when they watch the channel.”

The Reframed series, which was spearheaded in part by Charlie Tabesh, the TCM head of programming, and organized by producer Courtney O’Brien, looks to balance what Karger describes as the push and pull between nostalgia and criticism. Both Malone and Karger are acutely aware of the hesitance some classic movie fans might have about evaluating works from nearly a century ago through a 21st century prism, however the new program is intended to renew engagement with these movies—particularly in an era when there are just as many loud voices that attempt to dismiss or wipe away the legacies of these film’s from the cultural canon.

“That’s really important to remind everyone that this series is not here to shame these movies or to tell anyone that they can’t love these movies,” Karger says. “And if there’s a frustration that I’ve had in this last month, it’s to see some of the reaction to this series be along the lines of ‘you’re part of cancel culture with this series.’ It could not be more the opposite of that. We’re not cancelling anything; we’re showing the films a hundred percent in their entirety, we’re just talking about them.”

Malone further emphasizes this is what can keep so many of these movies vital in an era when sequences like the aforementioned Rooney scenes in Breakfast at Tiffany’s are being deleted from a Sacramento film festival—effectively erased from the collective memory.

“I think everyone at TCM sees this as the way forward,” Malone says, “the way that we can continue to make sure these movies stay alive for younger generations. We can continue talking about them, discussing them, they can change over the years, our feelings can change about them; you can love a film and not be able to justify parts of it at the same time. What’s so important though is just to have the discussion, to talk about these problematic areas and face up to them rather than hiding them. To me, if you take out a film from existence or you just delete parts of a film, you’re in a way saying these problems never existed.”

Indeed, even the opinions of folks as steeped in this history as the hosts of Turner Classic Movies can evolve as the culture does. Ben Mankiewicz, for example, is TCM’s unofficial statesman but he surprised some viewers two weeks ago when he revealed during a Reframed discussion that he can no longer comfortably watch Gunga Din (1939), a rollicking adventure movie set in British India. Based on a Rudyard Kipling poem, that classic film’s influences can still be felt in more modern blockbusters like Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984). However, Gunga Din is also a movie that glorifies the British Empire at the expense of then-contemporary Indian independence movement, with the villain being a character who Mankiewicz noted is physically modeled after Mahatma Gandhi, who would’ve been seen as subversive by some white audiences in the ‘30s.

“I’ve never been a huge fan of that movie, even though Cary Grant is my favorite actor,” Karger says. “And I was even a little surprised when Ben and Brad Bird included it on [the TCM program] The Essentials last year. Not because it’s not a revered classic movie, but because it’s more than a little offensive. And it was fascinating to be part of that conversation with Ben, talking about the evolution of his feelings for Gunga Din, because he’s been with the network 15 years. I can’t imagine how many times he’s talked about that movie, and it’s just showing you that culture and history are living, breathing things.”

Opinions change. Malone had a similar experience when she joined Mankiewicz and Muller to discuss John Ford’s seminal Western, The Searchers (1956), a movie where the director began reckoning with his depiction of Native Americans on screen. The film is a touchstone to this day for filmmakers like Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorsese, and George Lucas. Mankiewicz and Muller note that Ford is grappling with the racism of his earlier films via John Wayne’s lead character, an unrepentant bigot who becomes both the movie’s protagonist and antagonist. However, the film still bathes Wayne’s character in heroic imagery, and still relies on Native American stereotypes.

“Watching The Searchers again with the lens of talking about it during Reframed, I just saw so much,” Malone says. “I know John Ford was trying to have a conversation about racism involving Native Americans, but there’s just no doubt that many of his films contributed to the very dangerous and horrific stereotypes based around Native American people. And I think Native American people have suffered greatly because of the way they’ve been stereotyped in Hollywood films.”

That subject of intent comes up quite a bit during the Reframed series; Karger describes the movies they discuss as running the gamut from mildly problematic to extremely offensive, yet that ambiguity should invite education about the times they were made in, as opposed to preventing audiences from knowing about those eras.

Says Malone, “I think [Reframed] does show an attempted evolution on the parts of the filmmakers, and that’s interesting. Seven Brides for Seven Brothers and The Searchers, and My Fair Lady are trying to comment on a particular issue. Seven Brides for Seven Brothers comments on the sexism of the brothers in the film; My Fair Lady comments on the misogyny of Henry Higgins; and The Searchers comments on racism. But at the same time, they are also sexist, misogynistic, and racist.” She ultimately concludes movies can be both progressive and not progressive because of the times they’re made in.

Read more

Movies

From Hitchcock to Star Wars: What Makes a Great MacGuffin

By David Crow

Culture

Was John Wayne High Noon’s Biggest Villain?

By David Crow

My Fair Lady (1964) will be the centerpiece of TCM’s final night of Reframed programming this Thursday. A lavish big screen adaptation of Lerner and Loewe’s Broadway musical, which itself was an adaptation of George Bernard Shaw’s 1913 play, Pygmalion, it deals with the story of cockney flower girl Eliza Doolittle (Audrey Hepburn) being remade into Professor Henry Higgins’ (Rex Harrison) ideal woman through diction lessons. And the fact the musical, written in the 1950s, changed the more transgressive ending of the original play where Eliza leaves Higgins behind, will invariably come up on Reframed.

“Some people would look at that and say, ‘My Fair Lady? What could be the problem with that? It’s a very strong female character who stands up for herself and has so much agency and power in the movie,’” Karger admits. “But then when you really look at specific scenes, particularly the end of the movie, which is what I think we talked about a lot, there are certain things that just kind of make the movie, for me at least, have the tiniest bit of a sour note.”

The question of whether My Fair Lady is a sexist movie or rather a movie about sexism became the heart of its Reframed discussion.

Adds Malone, “We also talk about the fact that that ending has been changed by some stage productions. That is happening now, and we also talk about the idea of the makeover movie. I think the Pygmalion myth is something that’s fairly sexist and outdated when you look at it, but there’s also so much to love about My Fair Lady.”

The opportunity of having these discussions has been a gift for Karger and Malone. They both stress they don’t have the answers to all the questions they raise, and that even with added time for the outros on Reframed, there is no way to cover everything that needs to be said about a film in a handful of minutes.

“I thought about multiple things I wish I said or I forgot to say, or just didn’t have time to say,” Malone says. However, she hopes the series gives viewers the tools to begin engaging more seriously with these films and embrace a greater curiosity about the past. On tonight’s line-up alone, Malone and Karger will both get to engage in discussions of films they lobbied to have included in the Reframed series.

“I had just a brief conversation with Charlie [Tabesh] about including something around the idea of gender identity, or the transgender community, because I wanted to delve into that,” Malone says. “And of course from there, it becomes what do we have the rights to? What’s in license, what can we show? So there are certain limitations on the types of films we can show in the series.” The film they ended up agreeing on is Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho.

“I love the fact that it is one of the classic movies that everyone should watch, a horror classic,” Malone adds.

Karger by contrast will be discussing another Audrey Hepburn movie, this one dealing with Hollywood’s history of depicting LGBTQ characters on screen.

Says Karger, “I will never forget watching the documentary The Celluloid Closet in the mid-1990s when it was released, and that was one of the seminal moments for me, as far as looking at film critically. This was a history of LGBT characters in film history over the years, and one thing you learn when you watch a documentary like that, there was this trope in films where if there was a character who was gay, that character would not live to survive at the end of the movie. That character would either be murdered, have some kind of horrible accident, or end his or her own life.”

He continues, “So you think of The Children’s Hour in the early 1960s and at first you think, ‘Oh this is something to applaud. Shirley MacLaine and Audrey Hepburn playing two women who may or may not be lesbians. Wow! This is a great thing to bring attention to.’ And then you realize they couldn’t even use the word lesbian in the movie… then the character who ends up being gay also ends up being dead by the end of the movie, and I just think it’s this unfortunate trope that tells people, consciously or not, that you can’t be gay and you can’t be alive in society… It’s a shame, because it came so close to getting it right but you realize it didn’t have the opportunity to get it right in 1961. It couldn’t with all the restrictions in the film industry and society in general.”

It will be the last night that TCM dives so directly into the murkier waters of some of Hollywood’s legacy, although both hosts hope for a second season of Reframed. Karger, who admits he shouldn’t spend so much time on social media, has seen the predictable social media reactions of “you’re ruining these movies” by talking about these elements. But he’s also been heartened by responses from fans who wished TCM provided Reframed discussions on movies that aired later in the evening, like Stagecoach (1939) or Tarzan, The Ape Man (1932). Karger says if he has it his way, they’ll include all those movies in a second season of Reframed.

Meanwhile Malone would really like to continue a thread begun with the screening of the Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy classic, Woman of the Year (1942), from several weeks ago.

“I love having discussions for films where we talk about the representation of female characters,” Malone says. “That’s something I’ve done a lot of work on, so that’s something I’d like to continue—to talk about the way women have been portrayed in films throughout Hollywood history, and we could talk about that in terms of their beauty and how that was seen to be the most valuable quality a woman could have, or the way they could search for love. I love all the women’s pictures that forces the woman at the end to give up everything for love, but for most of the movie she is a fantastically independent woman.”

Other examples of this trope she cites are His Girl Friday (1940), and nearly every movie Katharine Hepburn made after The Philadelphia Story (1940).

Karger conversely would be interested in revisiting movies with extreme age differences between couples.

“I’d love to look at films like Gigi or Love in the Afternoon,” the host says, “because I think there are some people who have issues with the much older man and much younger woman pairing. And I think I’d love to hear what my fellow TCM hosts have to say about that, because you never see it in the opposite direction.” In fact, based on just this one comment, Malone began thinking aloud about all the ageist movies spawned by Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962), a camp horror classic that kicked off what Malone describes as “hagsploitation.”

When it comes to revisiting (and reframing) Hollywood classics, the options for learning more are limitless. Not that the lessons should be intimidating.

“I think it’s quite exciting the way things change,” Malone says. “Society changes so quickly, and you learn more and have different opinions, [including] on films. I love being more educated and finding out more of my own blind spots and trying to fix them.”

Reframed continues that search on Thursday March, 25, beginning with My Fair Lady at 8pm EST.

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

The post Why Turner Classic Movies is Reframing Problematic Hollywood Favorites appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/2P4DWYw

[karrova]

Favorite Films of 2019

Hello! I thought I’d put together a little list of some films that deeply affected me this year because I’ve started watching so many more movies. Got something from every decade since the 60′s on here. I’m sure there are a few missing but I’d really recommend watching these if you can!

1. Come and See (1985) directed by Elem Klimov - A haunting film about Nazi occupation in Belarus. There are shots in this film that still replay over in my mind, some beautiful shots, and some horrifying ones. 

2. A Woman Under the Influence (1974) directed by John Cassavetes - Of every movie I’ve seen, none has affected me as much as this one did. It’s a whimsical heartfelt film about a deeply misunderstood woman who has every ounce of my empathy. Gena Rowlands is incredible. 

3. Paris, Texas (1984) directed by Wim Wenders - Another extremely heartfelt yet bittersweet film about a man and a woman and their son. It explores the way relationships change, and the ways people deal with that. A very quiet film.

4. Gummo (1997) directed by Harmony Korine - Crazy. Unlike any other thing I’ve seen before. Very much a poem but one thats grimy and weird but also filled with small moments of hope and tenderness. 

5. The Lighthouse (2019) directed by Robert Eggers - I saw this one twice in theaters and I absolutely loved how the layers of myth and lore of the sea as well as the myth and lore we experience in our own personal lives interconnect and create a narrative that exposes the the complexities of a person’s psychological makeup. 

6. The Godfather Part II (1974) directed by Francis Ford Coppola - I saw the first two Godfathers this year, and the way the plots are structured in each are perfect. I especially like the second because we see the contrast between the two main characters and how each one becomes the person they are throughout a majority of the films. A wonderful representation of how characters are subject to change through their own decisions.

7. At Eternity’s Gate (2018) directed by Julien Schnabel - Oh my god this movie made me weep so many times. It’s utterly beautiful. It made me fall in love with Van Gogh. The director explained that rather than a historical account of Van Gogh’s life, he wanted it to feel like an intimate experience where the watcher leaves the film feeling closer to the subject and I felt that way in its entirety. 

8. In the Mood for Love (2000) directed by Wong Kar-wai - An utterly beautiful film. Worth watching for the cinematography alone. The colors, the emotion, the way each shot can say something about what’s occurring within the plot is complex and so captivating.

9. Wings of Desire (1987) directed by Wim Wenders - A very slow film that takes place in Berlin. A lot of the film is spent listening to the private introspections of the people in Berlin, heard through the ears of angels who are simply there to listen. The major shift of the story takes place when one of the angels decides he no longer wants to be an angel, and instead wants to be human. A lot of the dialogue is based on the poems of Rainer Maria Rilke who is my absolute favorite poet of all time. 

10. Andrei Rublev (1966) directed by Andrei Tarkovsky - I’ve seen many of Tarkovsky’s films and each always feels like a mediation of sorts. Andrei Rublev is an incredibly important historical figure in Russia and you can feel the love for him and his importance within the film itself. It’s definitely not a traditional narrative, and it was somewhat confusing upon the first watch, but I think the softness and underlying emotions are unmissable. 

11. There Will Be Blood (2007) directed by Paul Thomas Anderson - I felt this film was somewhat similar to The Godfather in the way that we see a character slowly push away those around him in order to further his own obsessions and greed. The way it’s shot is so clean in the way that most of PTA’s films are. It’s a slow burn at times, but when the more fast-paced times come I found I was at the edge of my seat. There’s a scene when they hit a pocket of gas while looking for oil and the entire following scene is hypnotizing. 

My goal for next year is to explore more female directors, as I’m now seeing how each of these films were directed by men. Please let me know if you have any recommendations for female directed films!!

[adamwatchesmovies]

Adam Watches the 92nd Academy Awards

The 92nd Academy Awards have come and gone. As always, there’s plenty to be happy about and plenty that’ll make you wonder what the heck the voters were thinking. I watched the ceremony and while I may say that I don’t care… I do. Those awards are a big deal. Legions of people who would’ve otherwise dismissed Parasite as some movie that requires them to read subtitles saw it because it was nominated. One of those golden statues can make a career and let’s face it, you like to hear your love for something validated by people who have even the semblance of authority on the subject.

But here’s what you may not know: most of the voters really don’t know what they’re doing. While cinematographers NOMINATE what films are up for that Best Cinematography Award, EVERYONE in the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences gets to vote for the winner and there’s no guarantee they’ve actually seen every nominee, know what the technical terms mean or are voting because what they saw is what they actually believe was “the best”. Once you take into account the dollars required to produce a nomination campaign, the stigma many genre films face, the prejudices against certain types of roles and/or actors, and how popularity influences votes, a win hardly means more than a bunch of people you don’t know saying they liked a movie.

If you want a better idea of which of 2019’s films were “the best”, you’re better off asking someone you know and trust, someone who can prove they’ve done their homework and aren’t just voting for their friends, the one they’ve heard is good from their kid, or got a special gift basket from. I may not be a paid professional, but I have put in the time and effort to see EVERYTHING nominated (with a few exceptions I’ll detail below). Reviews for some of these (The Irishman, Judy) are coming to the blog in a couple of days. If it were up to me the list of nominees would be different but we’ll get to that later. Without further ado, here’s who SHOULD’VE won. 

Best Visual Effects

1917 – Guillaume Rocheron, Greg Butler, and Dominic Tuohy The best special effects are the kind you don’t even notice. I couldn’t tell you where the explosions, sets, and actors in 1917 begin, and where the computer-generated imagery takes over. It’s seamless.

Best Film Editing

Parasite – Yang Jin-mo Got to hand it to Parasite for its amazing use of montage and the way it stitched its footage together. Some shots I initially thought initially were one take I realized under carefully scrutiny - and by that I mean frame-by-frame examination - were actually two melded together. The scenes showing how the Kim family infiltrate the Park’s household should be shown in film class to demonstrate how the art of montage is at its best should be done to maximum effect.

Best Costume Design

Little Women – Jacqueline Durran Funny how every single film nominated at the 92nd Academy Awards was a period piece. My vote goes to Little Women not because it was necessarily the most accurate (I couldn’t tell you what people wore in 1868) but because of the way the costumes were used. You can tell a lot about the characters from the multiple outfits they wear throughout the film - check out that purple bonnet adorned by Aunt Marsh (Meryl Streep).

Best Makeup and Hairstyling

Bombshell – Kazu Hiro, Anne Morgan, and Vivian Baker I called it when I reviewed the film. The makeup used to transform John Lithgow was nothing short of incredible. It was an easy pick.

Best Cinematography

1917 – Roger Deakins I’m glad to see The Lighthouse on this list but I have to hand it to 1917. The one-shot motif adds so much to the story. Then, there are the individual shots I remember so vividly. The quiet meadow just outside of No Man’s Land, the raging inferno Schofield sees when he wakes up, the trench he must run in front of to reach the Colonel are all shots that permanently imprint themselves into your memory.

Best Production Design

1917 – Production Design: Dennis Gassner; Set Decoration: Lee Sandales Tempted to hand it to Parasite for the house they constructed for the movie but I’m give it to 1917. The trenches, the blasted landscape of No Man’s Land still haunt me. When you see the craters, it’s jarring. Then, as your eyes become adjusted, you notice the rats. Then, the chunks of bone and charred meat that have now become part of the landscape. It’s horrific.

Best Sound Mixing

Ford v Ferrari – Paul Massey, David Giammarco, and Steven A. Morrow What you remember most from Ford v Ferrari is that big race at the end. The climax wouldn’t have been the same without the sounds we heard. The roar of the engines, the clacking and grinding as the pedals are pushed and gears are switched… the air rushing by. Out of the nominees, it’s the one whose sounds I most remember.

Best Sound Editing

Ford v Ferrari – Donald Sylvester This year, the Best Sound Editing award goes hand-in-hand with the sound mixing. Obviously, the actors were never moving at the kind of speeds depicted in Ford v Ferrari but you wouldn’t be able to tell because of the foley and sound design.

Best Original Song

Stand Up from Harriet – Music and Lyrics by Joshuah Brian Campbell and Cynthia Erivo Stand Up plays during the end credits of Harriet and it perfectly caps the film. Whenever I hear its lyrics, I’m transported back to that moment. It’s the most memorable and emotional song on this list.

Best Original Score

Joker – Hildur Guðnadóttir I chose the best song for its ability to stand out. In this category, Joker wins because its music doesn’t stand out… at least not at first. While you’re watching, those notes don’t draw attention to themselves. They subconsciously build the mood, augmenting the performance by Joaquin Phoenix, the visuals, and the story. You don’t notice how much of an effect it has on you until you see isolated clips. When you do, it’s shocking.

Best Animated Short Film

Abstaining (I’ve only seen Hair Love)

Best Live Action Short Film

Abstaining

Best Documentary Short Subject

Abstaining

Best Documentary Feature

Abstaining

Best International Feature Film

Abstaining, as I’ve only seen 2 films (Pain and Glory and Parasite)

Best Animated Feature Film

I Lost My Body – Jérémy Clapin and Marc du Pontavice I Lost My Body is the most audacious and inspired of the animated films nominated. The only movie among these to be aimed at adults, it often tells its story through visuals alone but when you get to the end, you realize it’s about more than just what was on-screen.

Best Adapted Screenplay

Little Women – Greta Gerwig based on the novel by Louisa May Alcott Greta Gerwig does more than merely adapt the classic novel, she breathes new life into it, makes it her own, makes it feel wholly new and modern. This version of the film surpasses all others we’ve seen before because of the changes she’s made to the story’s structure. 

Best Original Screenplay

Knives Out – Rian Johnson What a ride Knives Out was. It’s got so many twists and turns, so many delightful characters you want to re-watch it the second it’s over so that you are no longer distracted by its central mystery and can simply step back and admire the handiwork by Rian Johnson. A sequel’s been announced and I can’t wait to see it.

Best Supporting Actress

Laura Dern – Marriage Story as Nora Fanshaw Laura Dern was also in Little Women and her two roles couldn’t be more different. Here, she’s loathsome and captivating. As soon as I saw Nora take off her shoes before she kneeled down on the couch to console Nicole, I knew there was a whole lot more to her character than what we were told. The more you see her, the more you want.

Best Supporting Actor

Al Pacino – The Irishman as Jimmy Hoffa Al Pacino has the advantage of getting A LOT of screen time as Jimmy Hoffa. The Irishman clocks in at over 3,5 hours and he isn’t in the whole movie but when he is, the seasoned performer gives us so much. At different periods of the story, you’ll feel differently about him. There’s no point comparing him to the real-life person. He takes the meaty role and makes it his own. His voice, his mannerisms, I can’t think of anyone who could’ve done it better.

Best Actress

Renée Zellweger – Judy as Judy Garland Judy was the very last movie on my list to watch, having missed it when it came to theatres. When I think back to Zellweger’s performance, I don’t see her. All I see is her character, a rich, complex person you sometimes hate, sometimes love and feel sorry for. The movie is not going to be on my “Best of” list but she is.

Best Actor

Joaquin Phoenix – Joker as Arthur Fleck / Joker To me, there was no question Joaquin Phoenix would take this one. I saw Joker three times and each time, I found something new in his performance.

Best Director

Sam Mendes – 1917 With this award, I’m awarding Sam Mendes for the craft he displayed in 1917. It’s such a visceral experience that when people asked me how it compared to Dunkirk, it felt weird to lump both together. This is coming from someone who gave both pictures a 5-star review, who put both on their respective “best of the year” lists. It’s a movie I’m going to go back to and wondering “how did they do that?!

Best Picture

Little Women – Amy Pascal It’s a tough call for me this year, partially because I loved Parasite, 1917, Joker, and others so much. I’m planning on adding those three films to my collection so I can pop them into my Blu-ray player any times I feel like it. That said, I would’ve given the Best Picture Award to Little Women. You’re so emotionally invested in this little story that telling you why with merely words is impossible. You fall in love over and over. It made me cry and every time I think back to that scene at Christmas, I tear up again. I’m choosing it because of all the things it does differently from the other films. At the end of the day, it isn’t a big story. It isn’t about people with guns, corruption, war, a turning point in history or even necessarily the biggest event in the lives of the characters but it feels like it is. That’s exactly why it’s so good. 

Disagree with my choices? I don’t blame you. What kind of idiot finds a way to leave out Marriage Story from their list? You let me know where it should’ve gone. Hopefully, commenting keep you warm until MY Best of 2019 list gets posted in the next few days.

[shittyshakes]

Shakespeare Commentary from Someone who has never read Shakespeare (Much Ado Version)

 In which Mod Rachel just. Nerds out. Because Beatrice and Benedick deserve it.

Act 1

Scene 1

I can already tell that this shit is going to be over-dramatic as fuck, but I live for these kinds of romcoms

Beatrice is a WOMAN, like holy fuck she’s a whole mood

(yes, I’m thirsting on this feed and i’m not even sorry)

she either realllly likes this Benedick fellow or really despises him, but I’m going to go with the former

their banter is really funny though

i will state this reads like flirting? like this is just establishing all the sexual tension right?

I don’t know how I feel about Don Pedro’s character

What does Benedick have against love or is he just against Hero? Or is he just salty from his lack of love?

although to be fair Claudio did just see Hero and declare his undying love for her, that’s kind of ridiculous

“I’ll live as a bachelor”

those are famous last words, why you always lyin Benedick?

wait...

Benedick, as in bene-dick; is Benedick’s name a pun on dicks??????

I knew this play was wrought with sexual innuendos but holy crap

after confirming with Leo, I can confirm that we talked about this exact fact in lecture and I’m just a dumbass

For some reason all of Don Pedro’s plotting to set people up gives me bad vibes but maybe I’m just superstitious

Scene 2

gasp! An Antonio appears! Is he gay

side note, apparently this is the only Antonio in Shakespeare that is not and, won’t lie, I’m slightly disappointed

wait was all this scene just 2 dudes sitting around and talking about Hero? what was even the point?

Scene 3

Is Don John sad like Antonio was from The Merchant of Venice? 

for some reason I think not

oh wait, maybe he has an inferiority complex to Don Pedro

okay, since this guys name is Borachio (which means drunkard in Spanish) can I infer that he is always drunk and/or is drunk in this scene?

maybe Don John is just salty, maybe that’s all his motivation is

Act 2

Scene 1

Hero speaks!

I’m interested to see if Hero is the “hero” of the play, implementing the pun

P.S. I’ve finished reading, she is not and I’ve never been more disappointed to be wrong. I was really rooting for her

In text (before watching any kind of staged edition) I imagine this to be like the dinner in Shrek 2, so I’m curious to see how people blocked this scene in film and stage

Does Beatrice really need a husband though? She’s doing fine on her own and we stan 1 strong independent woman

side note, sometimes I forget Hero is even in this play, she speaks so little

I am so confused, who is Margaret and where did they come from? Is she even that important or is she just here to move the plot?

are she and borachio a thing? wtf even was their exchange???

Same with Ursula? 

I can’t believe they’re going to talk to Benedick like he’s not Benedick because of the mask

THE TROPES, THE TROPES

So wait, now Claudio is pretending to be Benedick? None of this is a good idea

So wait, now Claudio thinks that Don Pedro loves and wants Hero?

God, what a mess. This is more of a mess than I am

So, Benedick likes Beatrice then

he kind of reminds me of a young boy who can’t confess his feelings so he’s just awful to her (pulling pigtails)

I agree with Don Pedro that Benedick and Beatrice would make an excellent married couple; imagine the hate-sex

but also, Don Pedro has waaaaaaaayyyyy too much time on his hands

Scene 2

Is Don John being influenced by Borachio?

Is borachio the real mastermind?

better question, is borachio drunk right now?

Scene 3

oh Benedick definitely has the hots for Beatrice

oh my god he just wants her to confess first, what a dork

Claudio @ Benedick: oh how the turned tables rawr XD

I both love and hate how easily Benedick is buying into all this

They totally know Benedick is listening, those sly dogs

This is prime bad romcom right now

Act 3

Scene 1

Hero is back and with some lines

I hope she speaks more in this second half, I’m intrigued by her character

oh so even she is in on the “let’s trick Benedick and Beatrice into confessing”

I love this for her. I hope she is having the time of her life because it’s what she deserves

because tbh, no one here gives a frack about her and Claudio

Also I can NOT believe that these people say Benedick’s name with a straight face. They are basically complimenting his penis the entire play and I am here for it

I still can’t believe these dumbfucks bought it

Scene 2

ooh this is when Benedick changes appearances, he did it to woo Beatrice

i love that for him, i love that he is so soft for her

we stan 1 brotp between Benedick and his homies

Don John noooooooooooooooooooooooo

I’m really not here for Claudio x Hero but it is what it is

Scene 3

what the fuck kind of name is dogberry?

wait is this insinuating that he’s shit? or the shit?

a shitty bitch?????

so they’re just plotting

Scene 4

so much speaking from Hero

we live to see it

all things that begin with H --> ‘horny’ ;D

Scene 5

they’re talking about the wedding, right?

this is the part where i begin to get lost and wish for an adaptation to watch

so is dogberry going to crash the wedding?

Act 4

Scene 1

wait did Claudio just deny marriage? And they just continued on like nothing happened?

did he just insult Hero in front of her father?? what balls

oh he’s saying she’s unpure

oh my god this is a mess

i can’t believe that everyone just believes this? and now she’s not worthy to live? That’s cray-cray? like what is even happening

oh shit, is it happening????

oh shit it’s happening!!!

oh shit no

but as a side, please do kill claudio, he’s a dumbass who doesn’t deserve Hero

Scene 2

sexton, really?

i’m not really sure what the point of this scene was?

also what was all the talk about ass? do they mean like butts? or like a donkey? 

i’m so confused ?????

Act 5

Scene 1

so they’re talking about the “death” of Hero

so they’re pulling a juliet? or is juliet pulling a hero?

I guess this isn’t important but I don’t actually know which was written first

yeah suck on that claudio, you piece of shit

AND DON PEDRO STILL BELIEVES THIS GARBAGE

absolute heresy I say

Benedick is the actual homie, the MVP

get Claudio’s head out of his ass

god, all men are bastards except benedick

yeah that’s right, I said it

Scene 2

I actually love Benedick, 10/10 great character

I wasn’t sure how I felt about him at first, but now we gucci

I’m glad they’re back to playful bantering. 

I love that for them

Scene 3

so we’re at the “funeral” or just Claudio before the grave?

despite the fact that he’s the one that humiliated and betrayed Hero at the altar he’s still going to return every year? i’m so confused

Claudio isn’t a great character and I don’t like him

to be completely honest, I can’t even tell if he’s sad during this interaction

Scene 4

so Claudio was sincerely sad then?

Benedick’s asking permission to marry Beatrice? That’s so cute, he’s such a dork, an absolute Hufflepuff

we stan 1 respectful boi

and now we’re back with the denial and insecurity but at least we’re finally getting to the true confession

the tension was killing me

aw yeahhhhhhh, they finally kissed

I don’t know how I feel about Beatrice’s lack of lines following the kiss but it is what it is

and just remembering that during Shakespeare’s time this was all played by dudes makes me absolutely lose my shit

final rating: 7/10

Benedick and Beatrice were the highlights of this play and I can’t wait to see the adaptations to see people genuinely have fun playing these two characters

genuinely a really fun play and I wasn’t completely lost reading this so we count that as a win

minus points for claudio, i’m still salty that he and hero got married

[thedeaditeslayer]

Running Time Restored Interview: 1997 Josh Becker and Bruce Campbell Indie Gets a New Life in 2K.

You can read the full interview on the upcoming release With Josh Becker, Bruce Campbell, and Don May Jr. from Diabolik Magazine below. 

In 1995 on New Year’s Eve, Josh Becker had an idea. Born out of a session pondering Alfred Hitchcock’s legendary, true crime classic, Rope, he decided that he was going to improve upon the master of suspense’s legendary concept of shooting a film in real time. A daunting task but Becker was up to the challenge.

What resulted was perhaps one of the most ambitious efforts to ever grace the silver screen, Running Time. This neo-noir thriller about a heist gone wrong and a small-time criminal who rekindles his love affair with his high-school sweetheart was a hidden gem that didn’t get the recognition that it deserved. Written expressly for Becker’s childhood friend and Super 8 cohort, Bruce Campbell, the pair were once again, doing gonzo-style filmmaking just like when they were growing up in Michigan with the likes of Sam Raimi and Rob Tapert.

Josh Becker was and is an adventurous soul who does things his way, just like the director gods of old. When I think of his work, the names of John Ford, William Wyler and John Huston readily spring to mind. There is something admirable about his driven determination that was the heart and soul of this black and white throwback to another era which is ultimately endearing. Yes, I have a special place in my heart for Running Time because it is honest and not filled with “tentpole” tendencies. At the core of it is the written word. The end result is one of the most overlooked masterpieces of both Becker’s and Campbell’s careers.

What is truly amazing is that this flick was shot in two weeks and that everyone went home early. It was like having a 9 to 5 job. No 18-hour-days, just fast, efficient, run and gun style filmmaking that resulted in a production that could stand toe to toe with noir classics from a bygone era like The Petrified Forest and Desperate Hours.

Prior to Running Time, Bruce was known predominantly for his work in the horror and science fiction genres which can sometimes be limiting for an actor. Becker gave him an incredible script to work with that really showcased his range as a thespian. Behind the smart-ass quips and bravado lies a talented individual who takes his craft seriously. He is capable of creating complex characters and he is most assuredly fit to be a romantic lead.

I had the chance to sit down with the major players in the restoration of Running Time (Josh Becker, Bruce Campbell, Don May, Jr. and Gerry Kissell) to reminisce about the journey of this film from its humble beginnings to preserving this indie classic for future generations.

The Director and His Muse

Diabolique: Bruce, I have to start off by telling you that Running Time is my favorite out of all of your films.  

Bruce Campbell: It’s a cool, little flick. Too bad it sort of escaped, it wasn’t released as the old joke goes.

Diabolique: What I like so much about it is the neo-noir aspect. It’s a throwback to the 40’s and 50’s. In Josh’s book, Rushes, he talks about how he convinced you to be in the film. You weren’t getting paid and you invested in it. What was his pitch, how did he sell the concept to you?

BC: The pitch was that it was NOT McHale’s Navy. I just spent 11 weeks in Mexico just sort of bullshitting our way through that film where we would make up our lines of dialogue because there was nothing written for us. In the script it would say things like, “McHale and his guys get off the boat,” “McHale and his men go to Cuba.” Which means they hadn’t thought anything up for you. I did it because I liked the show as a kid. It was a very popular thing; it was from Universal. It made sense at the time. It was just a case of when something is underwritten, the problem that it causes actors. I had just come off of that, and Running Time was very ambitious, low budget it was meant to be this conceit of being done in one shot so it was cinematic. So, I was like, okay, yeah. It was like the anti-studio movie, small crew, fast moving and yet no money. Basically, I invested the money that I was paid back into the movie in order for them to make it. It was definitely for a love of the movie type deal.

Josh Becker: I’ve known Bruce since we were twelve and I’d seen him in a number of plays. I knew that he had a much bigger range as an actor than he’d had a chance to show at that point. Plus, he’s a pleasure to work with. Once I pitched him the idea, he was all for it, partially because the long takes are a way for an actor to really show their ability.

Diabolique: Thinking about your filmography, Bruce, you haven’t played a traditional romantic lead. Do you see Running Time as a love story of sorts?

BC: What’s funny is Josh had Carl come back. In a proper film noir, he would have gone, you would have heard the tires squeal and she would be sitting there crying and the credits would roll and that would be it. It would be bleak, but Josh deep down is a sentimentalist and I think I am too. We had no issue with the happy ending. We wanted to make the audiences think for quite a long period of time that it’s going to be a sad ending. She packs her bag and then she unpacks it. The whole thing is quite an extended piece but I thought it was well worth playing just to kind of throw a little wrinkle in it. Maybe even in a criminal story you can have a happy ending.

Diabolique: In terms of the storyline, Josh, we all know that Rope was the blueprint for Running Time. You hadn’t made a film in 7 years. What was it about that production that captured your imagination besides the challenge of the “long take”?

JB: Part of my inspiration was simply getting another feature film made after seven years of working in television, which was never my goal.  But as I thought about Rope, I wondered why the continuous, real-time concept didn’t really have any impact on the story. Then it occurred to me that there was no time element involved.  Two young men—ostensibly Leopold and Loeb—have killed another young man for the fun of it, put the body in a chest, then invited people over for a party, including a cop. Well, if the chest was spring loaded and had a timer on it so that at some point it would pop open and reveal the corpse, that would be a time element. So, I thought, how do you use the real time technique and add a ticking clock? The first story that came to mind was a heist which generally has a time element—we’ve got to get the money and get out of here before we’re caught.

Diabolique: Running Time was shot in sequence like a play. Did it pose any challenges for you as an actor?

BC: I liked what Josh was trying to do. These long uninterrupted takes from an actor’s point of view, you know stuff can get really choppy these days. My complaint from Burn Notice is they wouldn’t let a full sentence stay on camera; they would have to cut away to somebody else. It felt like they had to keep cutting, cutting and cutting. This movie was no cutting for like ten minutes at a time. It’s great from an actor’s perspective because you can feel the juices flowing. It’s like a play. You can work on the pacing; you can have something build over a period of time and minutes to play out in literally real time. It’s a real time crime drama. I liked it conceptually and it was challenging. There was a fair amount of dialogue because my guy, Carl is calling the shots. I thought it was a good premise. Guy gets out of prison turns right around and robs the prison because he knows how the prison laundry system works. I thought that was pretty sound. I am always sympathetic for the low budget independent movie. I always will be.

Diabolique: Were there any other films that influenced you and your writing partner, Peter Choi? The entire concept is very noir and the desperate situation that Carl finds himself in is reminiscent of any number of films from the 1940s.

JB: My main inspiration was Straight Time with Dustin Hoffman, an overlooked movie from 1978. And though I didn’t think of it at the time, several folks brought up Joseph Lewis’s Gun Crazy after it came out, and I do see that. The film has one long take in it during a bank robbery, and even though the camera stays in the backseat of a car, it has that same feeling of a real time event.

Diabolique: I know you are a fan of classic movies, Bruce and in a sense Running Time reminds me of Desperate Hours or The Petrified Forest especially when the robbery is botched and the situation is escalating in the enclosed office. Did you find any inspiration from the noir genre for your portrayal of Carl?

BC: No, but the classic tough guys were always awesome. We loved them all, Bogart and Robert Mitchum…the fact that Josh shot the film in black and white was perfect. Because it really helped lend itself to a look of that time period when Jack Palance was a leading man.

Diabolique: In your book Rushes, you talked about your decision to shoot in 16 mm Kodak ASA 64 black and white stock. You get sharper images due to the finer grain of the film, but did that pose any problems in terms of showcasing your work at that time since most people weren’t shooting in black and white?

JB:  I didn’t think of it regarding showcasing my work. I thought it was appropriate for the subject matter and that it would be visually striking.  Also, moving the camera from inside to outside in color posed the problem of adding or removing filters which would not be an issue with black and white.

Diabolique: You shot over a period of 10 days which was unheard of even back in the 90’s. How were you able to keep things moving along?

JB: It was based on pre-planning. I knew exactly what I wanted. We rehearsed the film and the actors were all very comfortable with the dialogue. Then it was just an issue of getting the complicated camera moves in regard to the actor’s blocking to work right, and that didn’t turn out to be all that difficult.

Diabolique: As an actor, did you enjoy working on an accelerated timetable?

BC: It was exciting to do and so different. The toughest thing was the technical demands. It wasn’t like there were explosions and stuff like that. But in order to do blocking inside of an apartment, the camera is moving in circles, well, the crew had to move every object behind the camera before it got there and then had to put it back before the camera saw it again. So, there was a lot of voodoo, a lot of magic. We would rehearse and rehearse and rehearse and we could never get it right. Finally, we were like fuck it. Let’s just start shooting because everyone gets a little more alert when you shoot. That did it. That allowed us to conquer the impossible. After 3 or 4 takes if we got it, we were done even if it was 10:30 in the morning. I don’t think we spent more than two thirds of a day getting that particular shot. The end result is cool. I’ve seen the cleaned-up version without all the scratches and the dust marks. You can’t even tell what year it is. It almost seems like its videotape transferred like those teledramas of the 60’s that were done on TV. There were moments in the film that weren’t perfect, and that’s okay.

Diabolique: When I revisited Running Time recently, I was impressed with how well it holds up because some efforts don’t. With the 2K restoration, Bruce, this will give your fans a chance to see it. For some, it might be their first time. Do you have a scene that you are particularly fond of?

BC: There’s some scenes that are fun to do. After I get shot, I am in Janie’s apartment and she’s trying to put me together, that fainting on the toilet while she’s trying to patch me together it felt kind of real, playing shot and being delirious. Stuff like that. Just fun to be able to take the moment to do it.

Diabolique: Josh, do you feel shooting in black and white made the 2K restoration more challenging?

JB:  Slow speed black and white film stock has a lot of silver in it which creates an inordinate amount of static electricity. When I did the initial film transfer back in 1997, the negative kept getting covered with dust, causing us to have to stop and clean the film every 30-60 minutes. Since the transfer was $375 an hour—in 1997 dollars—I could only stop so many times before it became financially prohibitive.  Dust on a black and white negative shows up as white dots. Using the newest technology, Don May was able to remove all of the dust digitally. Therefore, the film has never looked as good as it does now.

Diabolique: What excites you the most about Running Time getting restored, Bruce?

BC: I am always happy when something gets re-released which means in this case, it gets preserved. It will look fantastic in 2K. That’s why with all these reissues fans are like, “Why should we care?” Like well, if you care about preservation, this means it will be the latest version of a movie that is fairly obscure. Sometimes a movie can die on the vine because no one will pay the money to keep it current. Now, we can show the sucker, hopefully, anywhere.

Diabolique: Josh, do you have any plans to showcase Running Time once the restoration is completed? This is a great film that fans should definitely see.

JB: We have no plans at the moment, but then the film isn’t out yet. When it’s done, we’ll see what happens.

Breathing New Life into Running Time: The Art of Restoration

Don May, Jr. along with Jerry Chandler and Charles Fiedler created Synapse Films in 1997. Known for their work in preserving unique genre classics, May had previously collaborated with Josh Becker when his company restored the director’s 1985 production, Thou Shalt Not Kill…Except.

Gerry Kissell was the official artist on Running Time and will be reprising his role for the 2K restoration. He has been friends with Josh since the Freaky Film Festival where he and Bruce premiered the film on the University of Illinois campus.

Both gentlemen were kind enough to take time out of their busy schedules to talk to us.

Diabolique: Were you able to obtain the original negative for Running Time?

Don May, Jr: Yes, thankfully. Josh Becker is a true movie fan and loves the filmmaking process, so we were fortunate to work with him. He kept everything stored properly in a climate-controlled vault, as a man who cares about his movies should.

Diabolique: Can you talk about the scanning process for 2K?

DMJ: The 16mm negative was separated into A/B rolls, so we had to scan a lot of reels separately at Prasad in Burbank, CA. Luckily, because of the actual nature of the “one-take” aesthetic Josh utilized, there were only a total of about 30 cuts in the entire film… hidden in editing, of course. So, we basically scanned the 30 separate shots, and then assembled them digitally using DaVinci Resolve. We had to be VERY careful the way we put the 30 cuts back together, making sure the shots were frame accurate and of the proper length. Unlike a film that has a conformed negative separated into 10- or 20-minute reels, Running Time was all in separate pieces, with each shot edited on separate reels. It was a challenge, but we were able to use a previous master as a reference and most of it went together without a hitch. Being shot in B&W also helped in color correction to hide the edits properly to make the real-time aspect as seamless as possible. Once the film was properly assembled, we were able to ship everything off to India for restoration. Because Josh had everything stored properly for decades, the negative itself was fairly free of a lot of dirt and scratches, but we did carefully sonically clean all the pieces before scanning commenced.

Diabolique: How long does it take the digital artists to fix debris or scratches on the original negatives?

DMJ: There’s a lot of data wrangling involved. Copying data for safety. Making backups, etc. But we have a great working relationship with Prasad. They have worked on such classics as Lawrence of Arabia, How the West Was Won, A Fistful of Dollars, Gandhi, The Red Shoes, etc. They do the lion’s share of my output, and I put a lot of trust in them. They’ve never failed me. We do ship the film scans to India and that takes time. I think Running Time took about 4-5 months. I let them take their time, though, because I don’t want to have to keep sending things back for fixes. With Running Time, they did an excellent job, right from my first restoration test reels. But, again, Josh had taken very good care of his materials, so it wasn’t much of a challenge.

Diabolique: Gerry, what artwork did you originally provide for Running Time and what can we expect from you for the 2K restoration?

Gerry Kissell: I did promotional art that ended up on tee-shirts. It included the shot of the three main characters, which I called Tres Hombres, on one, Jeremy Roberts aiming the pistol at the camera on another, and the last, which you’ve seen of Bruce’s mug all heroic and chinny. All of the art was done on Bristol cold press illustration board. The new painting for the Synapse release is me, 20+ years later, a tad bit better at drawing and painting, lol.

Diabolique: Besides the idea of preserving Running Time, Don, what attracted you to the project?

DMJ: We had worked previously with Josh on Thou Shalt Not Kill…Except, and we had a lot of fun with that one. I like working with Josh. He’s a great guy, and I love that he’s so passionate about film. He loves movies, and he loves MAKING movies. It’s so great to see people like Josh doing things like Running Time, back when using computers to do a “one take” approach was non-existent. You see things today like the film 1917, which is a fine film in its own right, but they cheated a lot of its “one take” aspect using computers. Josh did Running Time, but used his brain, and actual organic film splicing and editing to achieve the same result. He’s smart, funny, talented and I love working with people like him. It also doesn’t hurt that Running Time stars Bruce Campbell, so… yeah… of course, we jumped at the chance to do it.

Diabolique: When can fans expect to see the Running Time 2K restoration?

DMJ: I would imagine late summer/early fall 2020. We’re wrapping up extras and artwork now.

[superman86to99]

Superman #82 (October 1993)

REIGN OF THE SUPERMEN! The climax of this 19-part storyline, the entire "Death and Return of Superman" saga, and seven years of long-ass plotlines. And it only took this blog a mere six years and six months to get here! PREVIOUSLY: After Superman’s death, five different Supermen popped up to reclaim the mantle, some more convincingly than others. The front-runner, the Cyborg Superman, kinda ruled himself out of the competition when he nuked out a whole city and replaced it with a giant engine. Now the other would-be Supermen converge in that place...

The Last Son of Krypton/Eradicator finally arrives on Engine City, having set off from the Fortress of Solitude two weeks ago. We noted back then that he suddenly looked like an old man, but he's back to Superman's age now. If this storyline had gone on any longer, he would ended up Benjamin Buttoning himself into a grumpy, ultra-violent baby.

Superboy also flies in from Metropolis. It's the fourth time he makes the Metropolis-Coast City trip in a few days (not counting the time he got a ride on a missile), so he's gotta be pretty bored of it by now.

Steel, last seen getting crushed by some giant cogs, emerges from the bowels of Engine City with his armor in tatters but his body intact. Dude’s a tough nut to crack.

Supergirl and the powerless Man in Black continue making their way through Engine City. Supergirl's like "Wanna step out and let those of us with powers handle this one, chief?" but the Man in Black ain't having it. Wow, that's pretty heroic. Maybe... maybe he's actually the real Superman?! Nah, that's crazy.

And Green Lantern Hal Jordan is also there, because this whole issue takes place on top of the ashes of his old city and childhood memories and all. We see the end of his fight with Mongul from Green Lantern #46.

The Cyborg watches as the Super-People invade his fortress from his control room, but he's a glass half full kind of guy, so he's choosing to focus on the fact that he (apparently) gets to kill Superman again.

After the Eradicator joins the party and the Cyborg reveals his true identity, the Man in Black finds himself in the awkward position of having to team up with one of Superman’s worst villains (the one who wanted to turn Earth into Krypton) to fight a good guy driven crazy by space travel (and who once looked like Johnny-5). It's only after the Eradicator goes on a two-page exposition dump about how he brought Superman back to life that the Man in Black goes "alright, guess you're cool".

The Man in Black and the Eradicator follow the Cyborg to the center of Engine City, where a giant chunk of kryptonite powers the entire fortress. The combined powers of the Eradicator's Eradicator-ness and the Man in Black's punching (OK, mostly the first thing) seem to be winning -- but then, in a desperate move, the Cyborg shoots a blast of concentrated kryptonite at the Man in Black. The Eradicator, however, heroically jumps in front of the blast...

...which has the unexpected side effect of restoring the Man in Black's Superman powers, allowing him to dispatch the Cyborg with a swift "broosh". What's a "broosh"? You know, a "broosh":

After Supergirl uses her convenient clothes-shifting powers on the Man in Black's costume, it only takes one second of him in the classic red and blue tights to convince everyone that HOLY CRAP HE'S THE REAL SUPERMAN AND HE'S BACK FROM THE DEAD! (Side note: I like how Green Lantern goes "We'll mop up here! Not like I have anything better to do, what with all my friends being dead and stuff. Haha. I-I’m okay, seriously.")

It's him! It really is him. I knew it all along. Never doubted it.

Character-Watch:

The Eradicator is this issue's real MVP. His whole arc has been about slowly turning him from an emotionless robot into a sentient being through his interactions with people (Lois, Steel, even Loose Cannon and Guy Gardner), and it pays off when he jumps in front of that kryptonite blast yelling "I WON'T LET YOU DIE [AGAIN]!".

Also, when he tells Superman "We have always been linked, you and I", that's true. While their psychic connection influenced Superman negatively for a while (the Day of the Krypton Man saga), it looks like it also worked in the other direction and some of Superman's goodness rubbed off on him. By the way, it might be a stretch but the climactic shot of the kryptonite blast always reminded me of the Day of the Krypton Man's climactic shot, with Superman finally overcoming the Eradicator’s influence with Pa Kent's help.

Anyway, sorry, Superboy and Steel. The Eradicator had the best sacrifice scene in this storyline, hands down. Of course, they eventually brought him back again and turned him into a lapdog for the Cyborg and then Zod, but let's enjoy his dignified retirement while it lasts.

Plotline-Watch:

I'm not kidding when I say that this issue represents the convergence of seven freaking years of storylines. Let's recap (strap on, this is gonna be long):

John Byrne's Man of Steel #1 (1986) introduced Superman's birth matrix, the flying artificial womb that took him from Krypton to Earth. When young Clark sees the matrix for the first time he feels weak, because there's some kryptonite lodged into it. In Superman #1, a few months later, we find out that a crazy scientist stole the matrix and used it to build Metallo, so Superman decides to leave it suspended in orbit to prevent it from being used against him again. Three years later, the distraught mind of a disembodied astronaut called Hank Henshaw jumped into the matrix, and he made himself a tiny little spaceship from its technology, then sped off into deep space. Eventually, he went mad, hooked up with Mongul, and used the DNA information he got from the birth matrix to make himself a half-Kryptonian body. Hence: the Cyborg Superman. (As for that kryptonite rock, it ended up in Lex Luthor's hands... soon to be "hand".)

Also during Byrne's run, Superman briefly visited a "pocket" universe inhabited by a Silver Age-type Superboy, who died by the end of that storyline. Months later, the pocket Earth had turned into a hellhole thanks to three Kryptonian criminals. They too died by the end of that storyline... by Superman's hand. Feeling guilty over killing those killers, Superman exiled himself in space, was captured by Mongul's Warworld, and found an ancient egg-shaped relic created by his ancestors: the Eradicator. Superman brought the Eradicator back to Earth and it built him a nice Fortress of Solitude, but it also took over his mind and turned him into the emotionless Krypton Man -- who became an entity of its own after Superman overcame it. After Superman's death, the Fortress' robots rebooted the Eradicator so he could follow his “preserve Kryptonian life” directive and restore Superman back to life, but he got a little confused and thought HE was Superman. Hence: the Last Son of Krypton.

Another concept introduced by Byrne was the idea that Kryptonian DNA is too complex to be duplicated by Earth scientists, which led to the creation of Bizarro. Byrne's World of Krypton miniseries also established that Kryptonians used clones as spare parts to extend their lifetimes, and the conflict over clone rights literally tore the planet apart. So when Superman learned of a cloning facility near Metropolis called Project Cadmus, he immediately felt uneasy about it. After his death, Cadmus got hold of his body so they could create a replacement, but, again, you can't clone a Kryptonian... so they simply created an approximation of Superman's powers and features using human DNA. Hence: Superboy.

As for Steel, he's just Steel. Hence: Steel. Incidentally, if you’re wondering why his armor has been reduced to just some metal shorts by the end of the issue, here’s the answer. Pretty self-explanatory.

The only major plotline left dangling after this issue (aside from Dr. Stratos, of course) is Lex's own death/return/cloning misadventure, but the Super-Squad will deal with that in a big way pretty soon. Oh, and then there's the mess they left for Green Lantern, but that's another creative team's problem. (SHAMELESS PLUG: Follow my new Green Lantern '94 to '04 blog to see how that mess turned out.)

Believe it or not, there's even MORE stuff to talk about in this issue, so don’t miss the great Don Sparrow's section after the jump:

Art-Watch (by @donsparrow):

In the first place I have to say that this issue is an all-time favourite of mine, probably in my top three of this era of comics we’ve been so dutifully covering.  The excitement at my local comic shop for this issue was incredible, and already being the Superman fan that I was, I felt like I was on the ground floor. [Max: I also remember the excitement when I first saw this issue in my cousin’s hands after he showed it to me the day he bought it... then didn’t let me touch it, so I read it years later.]

We start with the cover, and I got the deluxe edition, with the chromium cover.  Back when this issue came out, I had a love/hate relationship with Image comics.  I wasn’t interested in the dark & gritty characters like Spawn and the like, and generally thought the Image books favoured flash over substance and storytelling.  BUT, man, did the colouring and paper they used at Image ever look cool!  So I was a bit torn about DC using a “gimmicky” feature like this—it looked amazing, but I also felt it was leaning a little far in the direction of sizzle over steak.  But I didn’t mind that much, since this had been such a great story to this point.  Aside from the metallic 3D look of the cover, the drawing is great, too.  It was the first look at the returned Superman in the full suit, and also with the long hair present.  DC must have thought that the long hair was a gamble on some level (even though we’d seen it for months in the actual issues) because they hid it from the covers for so long. [Max: This was also the cover they used in both the Spanish and Mexican editions I have, so that’s what I went with for the top of this post. The “normal” cover looks like a historic oddity to me.]

Inside the issue, we jump in with another splash page—there are a lot of these, and it really calls back Superman #75, as most of the pages have one main image, with a few small panels laid overtop.   This one features another interpretation of the Eradicator, with short, non-spiky hair—it’s interesting to see these characters reinterpreted week to week.  This opening page also commits the unpardonable sin of demanding that we stop reading the issue until AFTER we read Green Lantern #46.  Being a naïve 13 year old when I read this issue, I of course complied with the demands of DC editorial, and read Green Lantern first, not realizing it has a near identical plot (albeit from a different point of view), right down to the “broosh” at the end, very much spoiling what is about to come in Superman #82.  I remember being pretty steamed that my first glimpse of a returned Superman didn’t come in a Superman book.  While I appreciate the coordination, I do find the caption misleading.

Also similar to Superman #75—it’s very hard for me not to talk about every panel or page, because this whole book is just gorgeous.  The badassery from the last issue continues into this one, as Superman with his tough-guy attitude and giant gun is pretty cool.  One quibble I have with this team is that when they bury Superman’s eye’s in shadow, it can have a sinister or tired look, which I don’t think is the intention.  Some panels it’s more prominent than others, but in one panel on page 6 where it makes Superman look pretty rough, and a lot less handsome.  We get more big gun Superman later when he starts taking it to Engine City in general, knowing it is connected to the Cyborg.

The Cyborg taking different shapes is done pretty effectively here, particularly when he forms himself out of what must be a lead-like metal to accuse Superman of a bunch of nutty stuff. The reveal of the Kryptonite heart of engine city is very well done, in part because of Eradicator’s bulging red eyes.  It is a bit weird to imagine a lipless robot saying “mmm, hmm” though.

We get another great full-page splash as the Eradicator goes all-out in his effort to defeat the Cyborg.  The captions here always confused me though, where it says “(The Eradicator)  was built to kill…the other (the rocket that brought Superman to Earth, which the Cyborg used to create his new body) to bear new life.  The victor would be obvious.”  But to me, it’s not obvious.  I would think that in a Superman comic, a vessel of LIFE would be the big winner over ancient weaponry, but I think the caption intends the inverse. I guess it’s saying a gun would beat a baby crib? It’s one of those passages that sounds cool, until you think about it.  Or think about it excessively, as I clearly have. [Max: To be fair, a gun WOULD beat a baby crib. It would kick that baby crib’s ass.]

Superman’s haymaker knocking off the Cyborg’s jaw is an incredible visual, and there’s a subtle set-up for the great cape visual call-back that comes later.

The entire sequence of the Eradicator taking the blast of Kryptonite is well done, in particular the panel when we see Superman through the vanishing Eradicator.  I’m a bit confused as to just how the Kryptonite suction thing works here—the Kryptonite meteor is shrinking and shrinking, but nothing is attached to it except for that one hose.  

Jurgens and Breeding do a great job of showing the physical cost of Green Lantern going toe to toe with Mongul.  It also sets up for my all-time favourite Superboy quote, one I think might be seen on this site from time to time in meme form, “Check it out! The Lantern looks so totaled it makes me want to hurl!”.  This entire saga has been worth it, to get to that line.  Just magnificent. [Max: I think Hal went evil because of that one comment.]

The glimpse of the burnt-out husk of the Eradicator is also incredibly well drawn—and painful looking—but even by the end of this story he seems a lot more recovered.

The scene of the returned-to-full-power Superman decking the Cyborg is a stand-up-and-cheer moment, and I love the detail that Superman is holding the cape for this whole scene. It’s interesting that as the Cyborg starts to get damaged in the fight, we see how little organic material there is. Metal seems to poke through the skin on his face, as if only a thin sheet were laid over the metal.  and when Superman punches right through him, there’s really no blood or anything, just a dry, cracked crater.  I had thought, up until this issue that the cybernetic parts were beside real skin and bones (as if to replace the damaged parts of Superman’s body from his fight with Doomsday), but this issue seems to posit that he’s all robot, with only a veneer of Kryptonian flesh overtop.  

The normally merciful Superman is pretty blood-thirsty here, vibrating his arm fully in the knowledge it might kill Henshaw (who helpfully reminds us, he’s survived before).  [Max: That moment kind of rubbed me the wrong way, and I think Jurgens himself felt uneasy with it too. One of the highlights of his recent “Rebirth” run was that Superman deliberately decides to jail Hank instead of killing him to at least give him a chance to be rehabilitated, which would be cool to see happen one day.] I love the little glimpse we get of the restored, and re-costumed Superman before the full reveal, and as a character moment, I love that he would think to show gratitude for the heroes who filled in when Superman was dead.

The next few pages are pure joy, as it’s such a treat to see our Superman soaring around in the sunshine, even with the new Tarzan haircut.  It’s such a show of restraint that they didn’t pack a reunion with Lois into this issue, instead allowing a different superteam to tell that story, which very much deserves its own issue.  Overall, though, I just remember feeling such a sense of joy, and relief that Superman was back, and back to full power. [Max: SPOILERS: And then some...]

STRAY OBSERVATIONS:

I do love this era of comics before swearing (or even censored swearing) was a thing, because they have the weirdest phrases. John Byrne would always have characters saying “blast” instead of “damn” to an absolutely ridiculous degree.  In this issue, I don’t know for sure if “crud” is a stand-in for another word, but it does strike me as downright odd for Green Lantern to use it as a noun against Mongul.  The concept of “a crud” just amuses me, though I suppose it could be meant in the same vein as “scum” or something.

Is it me, or does Jeb look like Ricardo Montalbon here? [Max: Oh crud, I forgot Jeb was in this issue! Jeb was in this issue, everyone.]

I love they don’t even give the Cyborg a moment to be cool.  Just as he’s about to reveal his true identity in a villainous speech he gets clocked by Superboy, in one of my favourite moments with the character (but not my very favourite, as we’ve seen.)  I also like the low-level burn that Henshaw assumes that Superman must already know who he is, but Superman’s like, nope.

I do like that this issue goes to great lengths to explain that Superman can’t just keep returning from the dead, even going so far as to say it would never work again.  My pet theory is that the Eradicator’s Resurrection Matrix only worked because Pa Kent’s spiritual journey in Adventures of Superman #500 really did happen. [Max: I might be misremembering, but I think the upcoming issue of Action pretty much confirms that.]

I’m glad to see him recovered, but I kinda think Eradicator spoiled the moment a little with his observation about Green Lantern.

[Max: Blast it, Sparrow! You’ve done it again!]

[rockettransman]

MANY THOUGHTS ABOUT ROCKETMAN

I HAVE SO MANY! HERE WE GO!

prelude: i went into this movie pretty jaded and not thinking i was gonna like it. in my head, i got john lennon and elton john confused. i was thinking it was about john lennon. “oh god, they made a movie about that prick?” further, i was already dreading it because they play EJ’s hits on the radio at work all the time, and frankly i was fucking sick of tiny dancer and im still standing. when i watched the trailer i was like “aw geez, elton john sings these? damn, i was hoping i could tolerate him at all.” so. not many high hopes for this movie.

that was until i was on a six hour flight from boston to portland, oregon, and i was delirious with pain and boredom. i was sat in the middle of a father and daughter, and so i really didn’t wanna pull out my laptop and get in their space. reading the subtitles from the office off the airplane tv made me sick. the lights were off and it was 2 am, so no reading. i. was. BORED. and then, i saw someone watching something in the row in front of me. where i was sitting i got a whole view of their screen. oh, they were watching that elton john movie. they didn’t have subtitles on, so i could only take from visual and context clues what was happening. it looked flashy, and oh-- that man just stared lovingly, tenderly into another man’s eyes. oh shit. oh yeah. elton is gay. 

now i’m hooked. if i’m anything, i’m a trans man in a desperate search for a complex queer romance movie. i wanted something that would pull on my heartstrings, that would wreck me emotionally with a high reward. suddenly elton is staring at himself in full garb, putting on and taking off his glasses. smiling then frowning. glasses on. smile. glasses off. scowl. oh he’s in distress. oh, is he snorting coke? okay, cool, tight.

from here on out, i watch the movie with (no audio) the predisposition that elton is in severe distress, dealing with drugs and self-sabotage all because his feelings and attraction towards men are confusing and frustrating and he doesn’t know how to cope with them. is he in denial? does he hate himself for it? does he try to make himself attracted to women? obviously, i was incorrect. elton was pretty secure in the fact that he was gay in his personal life. 

i think about rocketman for days until my flight back to sarasota. i decide to watch rocketman on the plane back instead of renting it. but for some reason, my goblin brain told me to rent it, and i did. but i ended up just watching it on the plane anyway.

i was disappointed. really, kinda bummed about it. every article and review said it was R for a reason. there was plenty sexual content and drugs to do elton’s real life comparison justice. in the movie i watched, i saw none of it. there was some drinking of alcohol, he took pills, it was implied he snorted coke. i saw no kissing, no intimacy, not even a tender hand on a cheek or embrace between elton and another man. this movie was praised for being so groundbreaking! for representing so much of what elton’s life was really like, with drugs and sex and all that. and now that i thought about it, i heard not one curse word. “bloody” was tossed around a lot, but that is used as an inflection. and during the pool scene before he throws himself in, when he meets john at the deck, he spits something about “his secretary shagging him in front of the pool boys.” that had me in utter confusion. there... was no one there with john? he was just sitting there? must’ve been something i missed.

SO IT TURNS OUT THE AIRPLANE’S VERSION OF THE MOVIE WAS HEAVILY CENSORED. i watched the real thing when i got home yesterday and was FLOORED by the differences in the same movie i had just watched. in the scene where elton remarks he’d like to change his name, they completely edited out the character behind him peeing into a glass bottle. they also cut out the scene where elton is staring at the performer, being yelled at to close the door, and the kiss where he’s pinned against the wall. holy fuck. i realized when i saw that, i had missed something MAJOR. this meant i was missing some MORE major explicit, probably important-to-the-plot-and-character-development stuff. oh, now i was excited. 

(we could talk all day about the fact that a single kiss between two men was cut because it was deemed “too explicit”, and in a movie about elton john being the ultimate irony)

the sex scene AND take me to the pilot were completely missing in the airplane version. i had no idea this song existed! oh my god, it was a banger! i cried tears of happiness during the song. holy shit. the tense energy between he and john, standing there silhouetted by the window, and then all of a sudden they’re all over each other, fingers tangled in hair, moaning into each other’s mouths, squirming, trying to get as close to each other as possible. this is what i wanted. this is what i was looking for. not because i was looking for something “hot” or “dirty.”’ i wanted an intense sex scene because then i knew it was real. i wanted the desperation, the nerves, the tender way they cradled each other, and how they went to town on each other. it was elton’s first time being intimate with a man, and it was such a nerve-wracking, intense, lustful, desperate moment. taron and richard absolutely nailed it. The swaying and the leaning into each other, the grabbing and nuzzling and all of a sudden they’re all over each other... it honest to god moved me. not to sound too “grew-up-baptist”, but sex, especially the first time you have it is so special and intimate and personal and important (imo). i know all the times i’ve had sex, it was a very, very special moment to me, and i wholly and completely trusted my partner then. i was so happy elton could find security and love and a heckin good time in bed with another man. it must’ve felt so freeing.

This was between two men! In the smack dab of the AIDS crisis in like 1975 or some shit! If being queer is this fucking tough in 2019, imagine what it was like in 1975!! MILLIONS of people were left to die by eat-shit Raegan who say by and said “aw that’s cute.” MILLIONS of people died for loving who they love!! That’s fucked man!! Seeing a triumphant moment like this in the middle of what was happening and what it could mean for Elton and his career just rly got me ya know

my entire perspective of the movie changed from then on. i was excited to see what else i had missed. in fact, some of the songs weren’t bad. maybe i’d like some of elton’s stuff after all?

i missed the scene in the closet. on the airplane, he followed john into the closet and shut the door. the scene cut. but in the real version, suddenly john pinned him against the wall, mirroring the scene of the first kiss i missed, and elton lamely stutters he wants dinner with him, not a sexual act john was certainly looking for, and in the next moment he was hungrily snapping at his finger. i missed exactly how much coke elton snorted. i missed entire scenes and nuances that provided so much to the story. man, i was angry i missed all this. i was cheated.

when i finished the real version, my perspective on the movie, and elton, and his music, had spun an entire 180. i dug it. i listened to rocket man on repeat during the entirety of my forty minute run. i fell asleep listening to the soundtrack. i woke up today listening to it, and have been through the whole day. i have not been able to get this movie off my mind. im watching it for the third time right now.

WELCOME TO THE THIRD POINT OF THIS POST!

if you made it this far, thank you. what i wrote feels so important to me. someone needed to hear it. I WANNA TALK ABOUT THE ENTIRE ROCKETMAN SCENE. I have PTSD with psychotic features. This means that under the right triggers, i hallucinate, visually or auditorily (is that a word), things that aren’t there. sometimes they’re scary, connected to my past trauma, but sometimes, they’re hazy outlines of good people who i think i know. i also deal with all the lovely things that come along with ptsd, including dissociation. pretty much any and everything can trigger me in a specific way. the pool scene was incredibly difficult to watch. seeing a little boy playing piano underwater, him sinking and hovering and singing along, and people slowly descending, dancing in the water until they retrieve him. the vision snaps apart and holy fuck elton is in trouble. (as an aside, that’s one of my favorite affects of film: the protag is under the influence of something, whether it be a hallucination, drugs, in a deep fantasy, or just otherwise a storytelling device, and he is in imminent danger. the audience is aware he is in imminent danger. the protag, however, is cool and chillin and hanging out, not aware or bothered, and maybe this is where a major character arc beat hits. in an instant, they’re pulled out of it, and we--the audience and the characters--are hit with how dire the circumstances really are.)

Suicide is a super sensitive subject to me. when he mumbled “i’m going to fucking kill myself” and plunged into the depths, my throat constricted. it was a difficult few minutes, but i held my breath, gritted my teeth, and paced myself through it. despite the sheer terror and panic that was racing through my brain, the entirety of it was so beautiful. the bright blues, whites, and blacks of the pool lighting and bubbles decorating him, the flow of his--forgive him, i don’t know if there’s a cultural name--outer garment, how curious and confused he looked as he watched his younger self do something he did now, and the people twirling through the water, reaching out, and eventually snatching him up until we’re suddenly in the present--dude, the cinematography of the entire first verse is so, so breathtaking. the scene in the ambulance and getting his stomach pumped was a bit too graphic for me (i could feel a flashback/hallucination creeping on; sometimes i can’t tell them apart.) but it was all done so smoothly. when they lifted him up, spun him around, undressed and dressed him all in one fluid motion, i lost my fuckin mind. i rewound it several times to just watch that sequence. the pain, reluctance, and exhaustion in his face right before he was handed his bat and exuberantly entered the stage was so intense it was palpable. my heart ached for him deeply. it’s allll about putting on a mask of being truly happy and well, when just before that, he had tried to fucking kill himself. how fucking heavy is that shit?

the downward spiral kept me on the edge of my seat. honky cat was funky as hell, and i loved the little tiny moments and gestures towards each other. maybe john and elton truly cared for each other for mere heartbeats before it all went south. he was hurting so bad and ruining everything and in such denial i wanted to throttle him by the shoulders to scream “LOOK WHAT YOU’RE DOING! YOU BIG FUCKING IDIOT!” he was constantly suffering, doing more coke and drugs than i thought a person could keep in his system. the suicide attempt, the fantastic Dodgers show, the night and day between his outward appearance and his actions, all of it was so gripping. the group therapy medium through which the story was told was insanely cool, too. i thought at first it was a bit cheesy, but it worked. i loved that he confronted everyone who had hurt him, and who he had hurt, and reconciled. i loved that as the major plot beats went on, his clothes eventually toned down in loudness, mirroring how the story was going along in real time. he went from having an explosive outburst, to levelly confronting his parents, and firmly insisting they not treat him like that anymore. they didn’t have the right. we could see how he’d grown through several different literary elements. the fact that it was laid out so plainly really helped me, someone who is dumb as fuck and constantly misses nuances like that.

it’s so disheartening to see elton’s first love was someone who was aggressive, non-interested, and who refused to listen to him.

(im at the pinball wizard scene, and holy shit this tune fucks)

at the end of the day, when i had thought the movie fell through so many expectations, i watched the real, authentic version and was so, so happy with how it turned out. it was much more honest than what i had thought it was. when the credits rolled, and it said he and his husband David Furnish had been happily married for 25 years, the tears really started coming. Elton did it. He survived through all the shit he put his body through, all the heartache and loneliness and terrible isolation and suffering, and he won. He got what he always wanted. A man who loved him deeply, purely, passionately, and properly. 

i haven’t shut up about elton john for days. i’m kinda baffled how something gripped me so intensely, when i had written it off as stupid just a day before this. thank you for reading. i’m sure i forgot a lot of things i wanted to express, but hopefully i got something across. let me know if you read this, please. if you made it all the way down here, i owe you like $5. drop me your venmo.

thank you for reading. this movie touched me in a way i didn’t think was possible. thank god for elton john. thank god for his perseverance. thank god for his story, giving me and millions of others hope that happiness will come. recovery is possible. healing is possible. you just need to reach out first. thank you and goodnight.

[mediaeval-muse]

Book Review

The Raven’s Tale. By Cat Winters. New York: Amulet Books, 2019.

Rating: 2.5/5 stars

Genre: YA historical fiction, supernatural

Part of a Series? No.

Summary: Seventeen-year-old Edgar Poe counts down the days until he can escape his foster family—the wealthy Allans of Richmond, Virginia. He hungers for his upcoming life as a student at the prestigious new university, almost as much as he longs to marry his beloved Elmira Royster. However, on the brink of his departure, all his plans go awry when a macabre Muse named Lenore appears to him. Muses are frightful creatures that lead Artists down a path of ruin and disgrace, and no respectable person could possibly understand or accept them. But Lenore steps out of the shadows with one request: “Let them see me!”

***Full review under the cut.***

Content Warnings: verbal/emotional/financial abuse, morbid thoughts

Overview: In the author’s note at the back of this book, Winters states that she tried to “offer reader’s a window into Poe’s teenage years” and “root the book in [Poe’s] reality while also immersing the story in scenes of Gothic fantasy that paid homage to his legendary macabre works.” Regarding the first bit, I don’t think the concept is itself a bad one - writing about the early life of a major cultural figure is a great way to get a YA audience (who may be teenagers themselves) to connect with them. Regarding the second bit, I don’t think this story came across as “Gothic” so much as it was more “magical realism.” I wouldn’t call this story “macabre” in any way, nor do I think Winters used any elements that were evocative of Gothic fantasy in the literary sense. Even if we abandon the idea that The Raven’s Tale is supposed to be “Gothic,” I do think Winters could have used the concepts she established to a greater effect than she did, such as using Poe’s muses more allegorically to talk about things that matter to modern-day readers (like the value of art, how darkness can be comforting and can help process emotions, etc). But as it stands, this book mostly reads like Poe stumbling around, trying to find his feet as the poetic genius that he’s destined to be - something I don’t think is as interesting.

Writing: Winters alternates between using her own prose style and mimicking Poe’s sense of meter and rhyme. In some cases, she does very well. I was impressed by the way she was able to use her vocabulary to mimic what she thought Poe’s young voice might sound like, and the intertextuality within this book shows how she was cognizant of Poe’s education and background.

I do think, however, that Winters misused repetition. There are some moments when a phrase, sentence, or group of sentences are repeated, perhaps in the attempt to create emphasis on a concept, but to me, they felt tedious. I can’t tell how many times we’re told that Poe is a swimmer, and in one scene, artistic inspiration is portrayed as the same phrases being repeated two or three times until the words are written down.

I also don’t think that, despite the rich vocabulary, Winters makes use of language to create evocative settings or convey emotion well. No matter how many turns of phrases I read, I didn’t quite connect with the characters or feel invested in their well-being.

Finally, I found the genre of this book to be a little strange, given the author’s intention to infuse the story with tributes to “Gothic fantasy.” In my opinion, the tone wasn’t sufficiently gloomy enough to warrant the book as a whole being characterized as “Gothic” or “dark fantasy,” nor were the defining characteristics of Gothic literature present. At most, you could say there was a tyrannical antagonist and some dark imagery, but I don’t think the atmosphere was pushed into the realm of Gothic or even horror. Rather, I think the story is more rooted in magical realism in that we get magical elements in a real-world setting without much explanation as to how or why muses are able to take physical form and everyone accepts that. I don’t think that magical realism is a bad choice or inferior genre, just that Winters’ intention doesn’t quite match up with her results.

Plot: The plot of this book follows a young Edgar Allan Poe as he leaves home to go to college, enduring abuse from his adoptive father as well as financial trouble. Along the way, he comes face-to-face with Lenore, his “dark muse,” who urges him to shrug off his foster father’s influence and embrace his destiny as a writer. I think the potential for something interesting was there - student loan debt is definitely something many young people grapple with, so in some ways, Poe could have been made more relatable to modern readers. I don’t think, however, that the plot itself as it stands was very engaging, primarily because the focus was entirely on cultivating Poe’s “literary genius.” If the story wasn’t talking about whether Poe should write macabre tales or satires, it was focused on Lenore’s desire to “be seen” and “evolve.” Artistic genius is something very few people possess, and the righteous struggle of embracing art no matter the real-world consequences doesn’t quite acknowledge how those real-world consequences have a real effect on a person’s well-being. True, this book does mention that Poe struggles financially and resorts to drinking and gambling and taking out enormous loans to cover his debts, but they felt like afterthoughts in that not much time is given to exploring them compared to Poe’s literary journey. I would have liked to see Poe’s story brought down to a level that more people could connect to, such as using Lenore as a sounding board for exploring more complex ideas like the value of art, how art is used to rebel against oppressive power structures, the cost of following one’s dreams in a world that doesn’t value them, or how darkness and morbid imagery can be a source of comfort (rather than wholly an indicator that something is wrong with someone).

Characters: This book is told in first person, alternating between Poe’s perspective and Lenore’s. Poe is supposedly a teenager obsessed with death yet afraid of dying, yet that defining characteristic comes up so few times that it’s easily forgettable. Poe is also a little hot-and-cold towards his muse, Lenore, sometimes caring for her and desiring her presence, other times pushing her away out of shame. I think the struggle to overcome internal shame could have been interesting if more was done to explore the concept, but as the book stands, it doesn’t seem like young Poe does much except react to the whims of his muses and lament his financial and family situations. 

Lenore, Poe’s “Gothic muse,” is a strange figure in that’s she’s a concept made flesh. Representing Poe’s macabre side, she follows Poe around, demanding that she “be seen” so she can evolve into her final form, a dark-winged raven. As much as I liked having half the book narrated by a female character, I don’t think her perspective enhanced the story much. Her perspective demystified Lenore in ways that I think undercut the book’s intended mood, and even the scenes in which she delivers poetic inspiration aren’t very gripping or fantastical.

Poe does have a second muse named Garland O’Peale, who represents Poe’s satirical and witty side. The real Poe was a master literary critic in addition to horror-smith and poet, and it was great to see this part of the literary giant’s career explored in some capacity. Garland is frequently in conflict with Lenore, claiming that focusing on dark imagery and the macabre is “childish.” I think there was some potential here for a deeper dive into why certain literary genres are valued more than others, as well as a more complex rendering of Poe’s mental characteristics being externalized and turned into an allegory. However, because not much is done with this allegory, both Garland and Lenore read a little flat.

Supporting characters are likewise a little underdeveloped. I didn’t get the sense that Poe truly connected with any of his friends and classmates, and I didn’t see why he loved Elmira (other than he tells us so). His adoptive father is sufficiently evil for the purposes of this story, but again, John Allan’s obsession with snuffing out Poe’s literary impulses in favor of turning him towards “real work” could have been taken up as a central theme of the book and made more complex.

Recommendations: I would recommend this book if you’re interested in the life and work of Edgar Allan Poe, 19th century America, dark or Gothic literature, the concept of artistic inspiration, and magical realism.