#just from a thematic perspective. it hits properly

[revanisadumbass]

Vernestra Rwoh's role in The Acolyte makes sense on a storytelling level, though. Here is a Jedi that represents the High Republic at their best: honest, responsible, talented.

To have her, at the era's end, have the weight of leadership bend her that far? It's the tragedy that the High Republic was always leading to. Good people trying their best in a galaxy that will never truly understand why they try, only to find that being good is complicated.

The mistakes repeat. Lies. Cover-ups. Because to tell the truth, to take responsibility, would damn more than just Sol. It has taken just a hundred years of rapid progress for the Republic to decide the Jedi might be more trouble than they're worth. Backed into a political corner, Vern plays the game. Takes the gamble, hopes desperately that this sacrifice will ensure the survival of the only family and home she's ever truly known.

[marley-manson]

Im realizing i didnt do this ask game properly at all???? I barely mentioned if i agree or disagree you just have to glean it from my answers... ANYWAY

☕️ potter is the fucking worst

☕️ hawkeye is pretty well-adjusted and doesn't lack confidence

☕️ GFA highlights the negatives of the Hawkeye-BJ relationship rather than the positives

lol fwiw I feel like it was mostly pretty clear whether you agreed or disagreed. Ty! lmao I'm sure you know my answer for all of these, but it's always fun to get an excuse to go on about them!

☕️ potter is the fucking worst

Agree, of course. He's the worst in that his addition to the show killed one of the things I enjoyed most about it, he's the worst in that his character is often extremely obnoxious, and he's the worst in that the show could've gone in such an interesting direction with him and it just decided to make him a nice grandpa army man instead 😔 The way the show ignores his flaws or treats them as cute quirks (army man mainly but also throwing around his authority in petty ways, lashing out when he's in a bad mood, etc) rather than interrogating them is such a tragic missed opportunity and really makes me hate him when otherwise I might be indifferent. It always annoys me so much more when the narrative is presenting a character in a way I don't agree with.

☕️ hawkeye is pretty well-adjusted and doesn't lack confidence

Absofuckinglutely. A major point of the show as far as I'm concerned, at least through the thematically on point first half, is that the war hits the most emotionally healthy people hardest. The reason Hawkeye is the most affected is because he's the most "sane," a la Hawk's Nightmare. It's one of the fundamental basics of the satire. The only sane reaction to being thrown into a warzone is to go insane. If you want to be there, that's what makes you crazy. Klinger's section 8 attempts only prove he's sane. etc etc. that catch 22 shit.

And of course from a strict character perspective rather than thematically, he's just... a fun, confident guy who has his shit together. It's hard to argue this case because it seems self-evident to me lol. He achieved his difficult life goal of becoming a surgeon, he's flirty and sexually experienced and despite some negative relationship experience isn't jaded and is still looking for love (though not so much in a warzone), he's optimistic, he acts on his principles heedless of corrupt authority and regardless of whether the odds are in his favour, he goes through life with a sense of humour but doesn't use it as a shield, he's very emotionally open and encourages everyone around him to be - and he listens and supports them when they are, he knows who he is and won't change to please anyone, but he will change his mind and work to do better if someone makes a good point about how he's wrong, he assumes a leadership role whenever he knows what to do and someone needs to do it but he's also happy to defer leadership to others more qualified, he's politically aware, he actively seeks out banned media, and just generally thinks for himself, he's willing to learn from people with more experience than him, he's happy to pass credit along to others, he's empathetic, he's willing to cry and admit to being afraid and talk publically about his mental health and discuss his nightmares with people and just generally doesn't bottle anything up... yk etc etc etc lol.

He has plenty of flaws, but they're not insecurity or reticence or feeling like he isn't good enough.

☕️ GFA highlights the negatives of the Hawkeye-BJ relationship rather than the positives

GFA is like the Hawk/BJ issues highlight reel and I love that lol. From BJ being the first one to toss the phone away to triggering Hawkeye when he should know better to not only not saying goodbye or having any alternative prepared but wanting Hawkeye to do the heartfelt goodbye for him despite Hawkeye not knowing he's leaving, to Hawkeye begging him for a goodbye when they get a redo and BJ refusing, to Hawkeye doing the heartfelt goodbye for him himself finally and extremely graciously considering how much BJ has jerked him around... I don't think the grand gesture "note" was a negative but I do personally see that as another incompatibility between them to add to the list lol.

send me controversial or unpopular opinions and I’ll tell you if I agree or disagree 🐸 ☕️

[sirquestingbeast]

Kingdom Hearts (Homestuck) Classpecting Part 2; And Another Thing

Link to the first part:

https://www.tumblr.com/sirquestingbeast/730023827295354880/kingdom-hearts-characters-homestuck-classpect?source=share

Welcome back to another episode of undersleeping and overthinking. In the first episode, we released a brainless torrent of classpects and the foundation of how they were chosen. Kinda. There are definitely some in there had too little to properly classpect and others...IDK man I simply cannot enter the headspace needed to dissect every line of Xaldin/Dillan or Luxord's dialogue for multiple interpretations that could lead to a more comprehensive psyche profile. Sigurd: Knight of Light I don't actually have a lot to say about this guy, I just ran out of tag space in the previous post lmao. Knights have this thing about vulnerability which is usually on visual or thematic display; shrouded faces, long sleeves, sunglasses and whatnot. They also tend to start pretty proficient in wielding their aspect. They are also more than happy to use their aspect to serve another or a greater cause. Seeing how he was introduced in KHUX, it is easy to see that for now, Sigurd is our Lore Guide...and maybe actually Luxord just saying. Master of Masters: Muse of Time Excluding all theories and just using what we know, he's giving void because it's surprisingly so little despite his impact. I think that could also be chalked up by being a Muse class; while this doesn't mean anything because typology wise master classes don't say anything about a person, considering his background and story that is kind of the point. He became Master of Masters - or the muse (master) class - because of events in his life. I think that in itself is just time player shenanigans. Time players have really strong and stonelike keywords that make them feel more tightly bound to their aspect in rigid ways than most. Master of Masters was definitely some other class and maybe aspect before, but gave that up-and maybe even who he is as a person- for his current objective. Hayner: Thief of Void Hey man check out this little dude. He doesn't get as much credit as he should for the ability to 1. Go with the flow when it comes to the insane bullshit Kingdom Hearts sometimes brings but from the perspective of someone 97% uninvolved and 2. Throw down with someone clearly out of his weight class. He is iconic and therefore thief. And no, he isn't void because he is irrelevant; his relationship with information-an aspect of light- does give a push and pull quality to him. But where a thief of light would increasingly pull more and more information until they achieve a relevancy in themselves, a void would literally take the information as it comes to them and work within their limited relevancy. Sterlitzia: Rogue of Rage: Rage gets a lot of bad rep for just being full of negative keywords; strife, struggle, tension, madness, and literally negative emotions and whatnot, but remember aspects are not bound to their most obvious connotations. Pining is a kind of struggle, and what is puppy love if not a certain kind of madness? All jokes aside, rogues feel like the type of class that takes the keywords of their aspect, reduce them to their most beneficial forms, and distributes them with the intentions of gaining a net positive. But I also believe rogues often tend to have a lot of eyes on them much like the thief, but usually with consequences. KHUX Player Character: Bard of Hope Hate to say this but player character's post KHUX story is hitting a bit too far home with Gamzee's. I know MY dear player character would never become a destiny fanatic, so they have me fucked up, but the fact that there is an arc that we don't see that leads player down this stalwart path hints to this being some sort of bard awakening. But whereas Gamzee what disillusioned by the idea of destiny and prophecy, player character literally gained a new life in it.

Ephemer: Witch of Breath Witches are a class that likes to operate outside the grid and think outside the box. They aren't often held down by conventional thinking and circumstances, so they are the best when it comes to utilizing the amount of control their class gives to them, but in a very specialized self-serving way. Ephemer isn't necessarily what we would normally see as good friend material; first he stands you up, then he hits up your dreams to ask you to bail him out of reality jail. I could really see him being a hope or breath aspect, but to me he leans more breath as conceptualizing him as a hope player also tends to spill into aspects of blood, but as a breath player, everything is still within the realm of breath and it's mirror aspect. Speaking of hope... Baldr: Maid of Hope Maid characters are thought to serve their power and are also a pun on the word "made", meaning that they are their powers. An aspect of both rage and hope is establishing a belief system that is healthy for you based on external forces; where rage often deeply understands these external forces, sees their critical weaknesses, and tries to rise above them, hope tends to start as naive to them and are challenged to find their own truth with what they have. Baldr's knowledge about the nature of hearts, light, and darkness was lacking and flawed. The things that are internally his hope took on these flaws, so he had to create an external ideal of the hope in his sister, only for that to be taken from him leaving him to rely on the hope he internalized. And why not just not give in to that power? Because he is a maid of it; that is who he is as a person. Take care of your hope players, y'all, as they can get really scary when misguided... Brain: Seer of Mind Seers are a fun class where they know their aspect and want to master it at the risk of some sort of peril; sometimes from their aspect or the mirror of their aspect, and sometimes just because of their own tunnel vision. They are one of the more explicitly characterized classes so you know one when you see them; a know-it-all and maybe even a little bit arrogant who isn't afraid to get unethical or harm themselves to reach a goal. While Brain has mostly been shown in a positive note, I can't help but feel with the information given to us at the end of KHUX, knowing he is involved in Missing Link, and knowing it is set before Dark Road sets things up for an equally dark path. Brain feels to me as strong of a blood player as his potential as a mind player. Ultimately I believe the difference is whether or not you consider whatever the events he is involved in are the appropriate path for him or not. Am I going to clarify which is which and what is my stance? No, because if I don't I cant be wrong, silly. Eraqus: Knight of Mind This guy was a little tricky for me to type at first, but ultimately I figured him out before Brain and it just may be a bit of a coincidence that they fall in the same aspect...maybe. Mind and heart both are aspects that involve the concept of making choices for people; mind from an ideological standpoint and one from a personalized standpoint. Mind is more about concepts like karma, justice, actions and their consequences, and moral choices. First instinct would tell you that Eraqus did a terrible job at all that, and as a knight, that should be his thing, right? But like Baldr, he was operating out of a system lacking critical information and perhaps was even fed misleading information. However, as a Knight, he still devoted himself to the service of what he knew. The knight of mind is a very dangerous classpect to have so much going wrong like things were in Dark Road, and that culminated to the events of Birth By Sleep. Also knight of mind is a jedi and he is voiced by mark hamill. jk but it is still funny. Tune in next time where we cover more bbs characters and probably some more tragedies alongside them. Ciao for nao~

[banavalope]

Thank u for the thought out discussions. Shipping discourse is like the most difficult thing to talk about with any sort of nuance (in American fandom spaces) cause a huge number of ppl will take anything you say to mean “I literally love seeing irl children getting abused” I’ve never wished more to be fluent in another language so I could step out of this US-centric bubble

While I can't speak to what fandoms of other countries are like - though I have made a large number of fandom friends outside of the US - I can say at the very least, US fandom is among the most reactionary. If I'm going to be brutally honest, I can't even blame anyone in fandom for being reactionary. So many people acting in bad faith or just being too exhausted having to explain themselves, people trying to protect themselves; like, man I get it.

But like, I'm an artist working hard towards posting more of my own original content yeah? I want to have a discussion with My Audience(tm) about my characters and the narrative I'm constructing around them. I see art as a conversational device. I can use fiction to temporarily place myself in the role of "agreeing" with a perspective I disagree with, for the purpose of exploring a theme that asks a much bigger question. Maybe that's what we're failing to break down what we mean properly, and why so many people in fandom will jump to the immediate assumption that writing about a topic in fiction places you in support of it.

Like, in my writing of Amadeus, he uses his status to manipulate a situation to his advantage, and it ruins his life. In narrative I've loosely constructed this as "he's outed for cheating in a battle of the bands type concert, he parasocially manipulates his fans and pays off another band in order to win. when he's found out for this one incident, other actions of his are put under a microscope; as a result, he's banned from participating in concerts altogether, and his career takes such a massive hit that he's unable to respectably recover" This is my way of starting a conversation about cancel culture, neither in favor of nor against any side of it. Amadeus has a redemption arc as a means to explore how artists relate themselves to their art, how we place our worth on the consumption of our art, social (media) expectations, the sensationalization of innocuous events, what puts someone in a position where they feel they have no choice but to make a very poor decision, and how an artist reconciles with the mistakes they make.

The twist is, I don't actively care about making a stance on my opinions of cancel culture. You'd think I do with the way I gave a character this entire backstory, but I've tricked you. It's a thematic device.

That's the energy of discussion I want to support having with people. Far be it from me to tell people how I think they need to live their lives or experience them, all I can do is ask questions and hope I find someone with the same level of enthusiasm who wants to answer. My world becomes more informed that way.

[jellogram]

Five Nights at Freddy's film review and general opinions

Spoiler free.

To preface, I've never played the games at all. I know the main lore but I am mostly coming from a horror film fan perspective and not a franchise fan perspective.

So from that perspective, it's.... fine. It's not great. It's not terrible. It's a bit bland.

There was so much that the filmmakers could have dug their teeth into. You've got the whole arcade nostalgia thing, you've got the straight-up camp of the premise, the tragedy, just a lot to explore thematically and stylistically, and it doesn't dig into any of it.

I liked the first act and I think Josh Hutcherson is well cast, but his character's development is mostly shown and not told. Vanessa really doesn't get any dimension at all.

I can live with flat characters if the campiness of the film is fun enough, but every time they could have gone batshit off-the-wall bonkers, they reigned it in and tried to play serious. And they don't pull off the serious elements at all. The story is simply not well-written enough for the emotional beats to land properly, some of the "twists" are completely pointless, and too many loose ends and plotholes are never explored.

So I think it's kind of caught between two worlds. The serious notes don't work well enough to ground the film, and the batshit parts aren't batshit enough to be fun.

I do think it could potentially be a good middle grade horror for kids. The violence is mostly implied and the contents are explained clearly enough for the age 10-14 group. If they were aiming for kiddie horror in the same vein as stuff like Goosebumps and Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, I think they were fairly successful. But existing in that category of horror doesn't mean the film has to be mediocre.

In conclusion, I would have liked to see the film lean way harder into the crazy premise and do something really campy and absurd, but the moment I saw Blumhouse in the opening credits I kind of knew that wouldn't happen.

If you're a big fan of the games, I think you will likely leave satisfied. From what I remember, it hits the major story beats and the animatronics are accurate and sorta neat. Fans so far seem to be loving it, so that's cool.

But if you're a big horror movie fan just looking for some fun thrills, you can probably skip this one.

[lucemferto]

Niki Nihachu & Barbara Kean

Gonna drop something controversial real quick.

Niki Nihachu is the most tragic character on the Dream SMP – and I don’t mean in the sense of her having a tragic story (though she is up there), but in the sense that she is tragically mishandled.

I want to start out by saying that this essay is by no means an attack on the content creator Niki Nihachu or her abilities as a performer. She is frequently one of the strongest actors on the SMP and I have no idea how much of her character writing was within her power. How much of it was improv, how much pre-planned, how much something she genuinely wanted to do and how much stuff she just stumbled into or – in the worst-case scenario – was forced upon her. I don’t know.

The Dream SMP is not very transparent when it comes to their creative process. As such I can only judge it as a discerning viewer and English major dropout, who retained some half-remembered stuff about narratology.

So, a few weeks ago, I tumbled on here that Niki’s character journey reminded me a lot of the character Barbara Kean from the hit TV-show Gotham. Then I got an ask asking me to elaborate. This is the elaboration.

Barbara Kean

So, a quick crash course for people who haven’t seen Gotham (the greatest comic book show on Television, seriously, what are you doing with your life?!): Barbara Kean was a major female character throughout all five seasons of Gotham – and not once during those five seasons did the writers ever figure out what they wanted to do with her.

Every 10-12 episodes or so, Barbara’s role shifted completely. She started out as cop-protagonist Jim Gordon’s girlfriend at home and moral compass, then became part of a bisexual love triangle, then a hard-drinking jealous party girl with a backstory as repressed, lonely rich kid, before being kidnapped by a serial killer and ultimately making her perfect metamorphosis into the psychotic ex-girlfriend trope.

And that was Season 1.

Since then, she became the pseudo-Harley Quinn to the pseudo-Joker, a whip-wielding dominatrix, the obligatory female member in a supervillain squad, some sort of information broker, a mafia kingpin, the leader of a girl-power posse and – my favourite – the reincarnated wife of an ancient immortal who also controls all of Gotham and transferred that control over to her before that plot-point was dropped harder than a half-dead Oswald Cobblepot of the Gotham piers.

Also, she’s Batgirl’s mom.

In short, it’s a mess – but that’s what makes Gotham kinda fun.

Character Cohesion

Now, obviously, Niki’s character journey has not been quite as extreme. But it falls into the same traps, I find. Namely, that there’s just a distinct lack of character cohesion or character continuity.

Now, character cohesion or character continuity doesn’t mean that the arcs these characters undertake can’t be explained in a logical way. Barbara’s character journey is logical in the sense that you can explain it all with in-universe logic – but it’s not logical from a narratological sense now, is it?

Character Cohesion basically means that a character’s journey is reflected in their personal conflict – their Want vs. Need. Their arc is the natural continuation of what was set-up in previous sequences. Everything falls into a whole with Set-up, Confrontation, Resolution – we set up the character’s Want, their Want and Need are conflicting, the Want vs. Need is resolved. Ideally this coincides with the plot beats of the large conflict surrounding the cast.

When you look at Barbara in Season 1 of Gotham, you’re not thinking “This one right here – she’s the reincarnated wife of Ra’s Al Ghul”. Because why would you? There was no set-up; it’s not part of what her character was about in this moment – or any moment before that concept was introduced. It’s not needed for her character conflict (or any thematic conflicts for that matter).

It’s quite transparently just something that is affixed to her so that she has something until the writers come up with the next at which that first thing will dropped, underdeveloped.

Niki in Season 1

Niki follows the same route, unfortunately. She’s set-up as the resistance in L’Manburg, allies herself with Eret and HBomb until – oops – it doesn’t end mattering, because that entire side of the “plot” is completely underdeveloped. Just be a damsel until Wilbur can swoop in and save you, Niki.

Okay, but now she has a big moment with Tommy and Tubbo just after the pit-scene. “We’ll figure something out”, she says. “We need L’Manburg back”. This is all before the backdrop of Wilbur completely giving in to his role as a villain and Techno’s apparent “betrayal”.

So, now, surely, Niki is gonna affect change in Pogtopia and will have some influence on either Tommy or Wilbur, the two people she’s closest to. What’s this? Her biggest contribution is holding a birthday party where Quackity convinces Wilbur to hold off on his TNT-plan? And after that … she’s just gonna be part of the Pogtopia-masses?

Now, I like Wilbur’s writing and Season 1 generally, but when it comes to Niki (and Eret) something went terribly wrong. Both of them provided many a set-up – none of which were taken advantage of, unfortunately.

And, just to be clear, I’m not putting the blame on Niki here (or at least not most of it). Season 1 was pretty firmly in Wilbur’s hand … and Season 2 was a train wreck.

Niki in Season 2

Niki is – for the most part of Season 2 – a nothing character. She has no real conflict, no character beats, no arc. This is because through some unfortunate writing decisions, Season 2 is pretty squarely focused on a specific set of characters – and even fewer of those characters are granted a fully explored, completed character arc.

It all culminates in her Doomsday villain arc – a moment that can be logically explained from both an in-character perspective and a meta-perspective, but unfortunately, it’s not justified from a technical writing point of view.

Niki burning down the L’Mantree is her “Ra’s Al Ghul’s reincarnated wife”-moment. It’s a big statement that put her character on the map for a large part of the audience again. It was a striking visual. It could not be ignored.

Most of that was because it was a stark departure from her characterization in Season 1. Now, such a departure doesn’t necessarily have to be bad. The problem comes in when

a.) The full potential of the character in their previous narrative role had not yet been fully or even partly exhausted

b.) It cuts into an on-going character arc and drastically changes its course

c.) It’s not foreshadowed or developed properly.

And most of those are true for Niki’s character. She was not necessarily underdeveloped but underexplored in Season 1 and had no consistent storyline going on in Season 2. She was a witness to Tommy’s trial, but that was never worked into an on-going storyline for her. No matter how much we retroactively pretend like this turn to villainy, this breakdown, was brewing deep inside of her – there was no foreshadowing.

The reason, why I said it’s understandable from a meta-perspective, is that the content creator Niki Nihachu had a self-admittedly hard time getting her foot in in Season 2 – because Season 2, for as much love as I will heap upon Tommy’s and Dream’s storyline, was a pretty messy.

So, the villain arc was not well foreshadowed and Niki’s turn was developed, but what happened after she was in it?

Niki in Season 3

Well, unfortunately that problem of an inconsistent storyline never really went away for her. In the beginning of Season 3, she hatched her wagons with Jack Manifold, which was a pretty big tonal shift – from darkly tragic to cartoonish villainy.

But as Jack kept developing his character in that lane and following up on big plot development with corresponding character moments, Niki again just … vanished. She then changed gears again, joining the Syndicate – a great idea if only the Syndicate actually streamed together and developed a storyline and group cohesion.

As it stands right now, Niki’s character exists in the negative space of the fandom imaginations. We are given some scraps and good character moments – her sleeping in a jail cell, “I started baking again”, her secret city – but those moments never coalesce into a full-fledged storyline.

Her character’s journey is still as fragmented and underexplored as it ever was. I really hope that – with Wilbur’s revival and the new character conflict that seems to arise from that for her – she manages to finally get the foot in and get the storyline and dynamic arc she deserves.

[scarfdyedshadow]

On the Decline of Mage Characterization in Ancillary Type-Moon Works (or On Magi Getting Flanderized Into One-Dimensional Evil Arrogant Sods) Part 1: The Matter of Magi Themselves

Yes, I am dumb enough and obsessed enough to basically write an entire essay on this. Yes, the title is pretentious as all hell.

A disclaimer before we start though, this is not directed at or meant to condemn or call out or mock or invalidate the many a Tumblr shitpost on evil arrogant magi getting owned by Guda or various other characters. It may not be humor personally up my alley, but I understand the appeal, and it’s not like there isn’t some grain of truth to them. Likewise this isn’t meant to in any way condone anything Nasuverse magi. A fair amount of them are evil regardless of mitigating circumstances, a lot of the ones that aren’t outright evil have capacity to be evil because of ethos and mindset, and the acts they commit are certainly evil. I am not condoning them, or dismissing them as not evil. I simply urge a more nuanced rather than simplistic analysis of that evil. This also unfortunately omits Mahoyo, which probably has quite a bit of insight, because I haven’t gotten around to reading it yet, thus rendering me a fake fan you should not listen to. Thank you for your consideration. Also, spoilers.

This first part is primarily concerned with the inhumanity of magi and misconceptions about magi and their ethos as a whole, while the next part will actually go into the history of magus villains in Type-Moon works and what I feel is their decline, and build upon and further points of this part. There may be a potential third part on the Crypters, Gordolf, and Olga, the modern faces of Nasuverse magi and the greatest illustration that magi are far more nuanced, complex, pitiful and yet admirable, than they aren’t, and Nasu’s thesis statement on the power of love and life.

(Note: Okay my theme is actually pretty eyesearing to the point I recommend you read this on dash, I’ll go get it fixed)

"Do you know what it is that magi are aiming for?"

After a moment of blankness, Gray replied with a difficult expression.

"Umm...I heard about it in class. What was it...the Spiral of Origin?"

"Right. The Spiral of Origin, or more simply the Root. Sometimes it's referred to as「 」, the thing for which there can be no reference. It is the source of everything, the 'zero' from which all matter and phenomena flow. Ah, but now that I'm trying to put it into words, I'm realizing that's not a good idea. After all, even the idea of 'zero' has baggage that makes it unsuitable as a comparison."

"Regardless, the goal of magi is to eventually reach that place. Of course, there are also those who simply derive pleasure from touching the supernatural, or from being superhuman. Because we are weak, we fall to that diversion. But in the end, that's not our ultimate goal."

For modern magi, most understood that reaching the root was something that just wasn't possible for them. After all, even though magecraft itself had been in a state of continuing decline since the Age of Gods, there were no reports of anyone facing that past and trying to return to it. Likely, the appearance in the Far East of the fifth - and often called the last - Magician was the same as the gate to the Root being all but closed to everyone else.

Even so, we didn't give up.

Anyone who would give up in a situation like this would never have become a magus to begin with.

Ironically enough, despite opening up with a quote from Lord El-Melloi II Case Files, which I’ll have some critique for, the crux of my thesis is this. As originally presented in Kara no Kyoukai, and generally only kept up to a meaningful degree in other Nasu written works like Stay Night, Clock Tower 2015, and Grand Order, magi were the piteous, tragic, inhuman not as in inhumane but as in a broken machine product of an impossible ideal and a broken system. They were the villains, yes, unambiguously so, but at the same time they were sympathetic and nuanced to an extent that would decline down the road.

You see, Araya. A mage always lives hurriedly. What for? If it was for themselves alone they wouldn't bother with the outside world. So why do they intrude upon the rest of the world? Why do they rely upon it? What will they achieve with that power? What will they save with the Ars Magna (Ars Magna: Meaning 'great secret technique', it stands not for a technique that is not learnt through study but for a mystery that is secretly passed down)? If that was the case it would have been better for them to become a king instead of a mage.

You think people live foully, but you yourself would not be able to live like that. You would not be able to live while accepting the fact that you know that everything is worthless and base. You would not be able to live without the pride of knowing that you alone are special, and that you alone can save this crumbling world. Of course, I was like that too. But that sort of thing has no meaning. --- Accept it, Araya. We chose the path of transcendence called magecraft because we are weaker than everybody else.

Magi were presented as absurd, as farcical, as maddeningly helpless and hopeless compared to those living normal lives. This will come up in Part 2, especially as pertains to Touko and Gordolf and the like, but normal everyday life, not superior thematic superpowers or an army of Servants, is what is truly far more powerful than any magi.

"... I'll just ask one thing. What do you mean when you say that secrets are kept even within that Association?"

Unexpectedly, I hear something from the sofa.

Over there is Shiki, who has been sitting there since before without a word. She's the type of person who doesn't get involved in a conversation that she's not interested in, so until now she had been staring at the scenery outside the window.

"--- There is that. A mage won't reveal the results of his experiments even within the Association. What the person next to them is researching, what their goals are, and what they have obtained are all a mystery. The only time a mage will reveal the results of their work is when they are passing it on to their descendants just before they die."

"Studying for their benefit alone, yet not using that power for their own sake? What purpose is there in a life like that, Touko? Is it that the goal is to learn, and the process is to learn too? If the only things you have are the beginning and the end, that's the same as having a zero."

Their pursuit for the truth is maddening. It is greedy yet at once devoid of greed. It is selfish yet at once devoid of selfishness. Their ethos and methodology are not fundamentally inhumane, but inhuman. Magi are an odd sort of creature indeed, and it isn’t the case that they’re all evil in their absurd quest. Indeed, virtually all early Nasuverse ancillary material, and this is still said today despite the opposite being true in practice, is that the vast majority of magi are shut ins who stay inside researching as opposed to eating babies.

The everyday life of a magus is mostly spent conducting research. Magi who use magic outside of a research capacity, such as those who use magi to work and profit for themselves, are few in number. People who treat magic as a tool, such as assassins, are called ��spellcasters”, and are looked down upon with disdain by the magical establishment.

Furthermore, it is precisely because they are magi that few magi use magic in their daily lives.

Practically speaking, for every mage you see committing mass murder or fighting the mass murdering mage with superpowers, there are ten who we certainly can’t call conventionally moral, who we certainly can’t call normal humans, obsessively striving towards a seemingly impossible goal inhumanly but not inhumanely. Because Type-Moon does action series this has never been tenable to properly depict besides the minority, but it is the truth regardless. This is from a later work I actually have some measure of criticism for, but Strange Fake actually illustrates that point perfectly.

"A mage's mage," he muttered disgustedly to himself, eyes narrowed, "is no different from a hard-working corrupt politician." What about me? He wondered as soon as the words were out of his mouth. As long as corruption stayed hidden, it was difficult for the public to tell the difference between a corrupt politician and an honest one. In which case, mages, who never entered the public eye to begin with, probably ought to be lumped in with them. There were exceptions, but from the standpoint of the general public, mages were generally evil.

Other Nasu written works like Stay Night and Clock Tower 2015 also touch upon it.

Magic is just what it sounds like… magic. I don't care if you get ideas like abracadabra or whatever. You can just think of us as people who do strange things by casting spells. Oh, though it's not like we fly around on brooms or make stars appear with a wave of a wand. …Well, we could do that, but we don't bother as it's kind of meaningless. We're basically heretics who hide ourselves from the world. We're prohibited from standing out and even if we weren't, we would rather be at home studying magic.

Clock Tower 2015 especially hits it up by depicting what might be called the ideal magus, the point of being a magus that is often distorted by human concerns but that all of them are to some extent, not an inhumane monster but an inhuman man who has dedicated his life to magecraft.

"Ahhh, the life of a magus is so brief. It would have been great if I were born with just the brain and nothing else." Like what you just saw, Leiv was a pure academic magus. All his efforts were poured solely into his theory and magecraft. He cared naught of any other responsibilities, the application of his magecraft, his lineage, or building his faction. From Leiv's perspective, those magi were the same as the plebians that were "normal people". If one were to decipher the mystical, then he must sacrifice his humanity. A magus was a creature with nothing but magecraft on his mind. There was no room for burdens such as "life".

So to begin with, what we call magi are far from all arrogant murderous sods, and if anything arrogant murderous sods are the minority. They come in all manner of varieties, united simply by the pursuit of the impossible, by the desire to reach the truth, by the desire to transcend. Even more so than just that, they do have their values and ethics. They are often cruelly distorted, to the extent “magi parents” is a phrase that might as well be an oxymoron, but I would opine that as a product more of recent years than anything.

"Keep those for me. They are some awful cigarettes from Taiwan but I only have those now. Of course there isn't any company that made them, it's a famous item that some eccentric master made only one box of. Yeah, out of all my possessions that is the second most valuable thing I have." Leaving behind some strange words, she turned around and walked out. ... Perhaps her most valuable possession is herself, that kind of thought popped into my mind so I asked her, but she only turned back her head and answered. "That's rather rude. I know it's me but even I don't treat people like possessions." Like herself when she has her glasses on, she pouts as if she's sulking. And then, returning to her usual cool expression Touko-san continued talking. "Kokuto. Those people called mages, with an apprentice or other people they are close to they feel like parents. Since they are something like their offspring, they often fight desperately to protect them as well. ... Well, it's like that so relax and wait here. I'll bring Shiki back tonight." Thock thock, the sound of her walking away. Unable to say anything to her back, I let the brown-coated magician go.

That magi value their children, their apprentices, their legacies, even if only as a next step on the path to the Root, is also a truth echoed at the same time that it’s often contradicted. But then, magi are in of themselves contradictory creatures. After all, despite pursuing an inhuman ideal, despite throwing away their humanity, they themselves are still human. That contradiction between reality and ideals, best exemplified by Fate/Stay Night, is one of the themes at the heart of Nasu’s work.

So, to repeat it once more, magi as a whole, magi society as a whole, is not fundamentally inhumane but inhuman. That inhumanity often lends itself to the inhumane, but not necessarily, and indeed I opine that should be considered on a deeper level. That inhuman society is by no means a good thing, but to simply call it evil and magi evil and call it a day is to do a disservice to its nuance. There are arrogant murderous magi as well, sure, but they too are products of a tenacious ideal, they are the long shadow cast by lineages stretching for thousands of years.

In reality, what really forged the magus of the modern day was not a supernatural power or transcendent conscience, but a tenacity built and reinforced over generations. Clinging to a shadowed, intense ideology for hundreds, or in some cases even thousands of years, developed its own sort of extreme power. Even if science were to exceed magecraft in all other respects, as long as that ideal survived, magecraft itself would be ineradicable.

But what then of Souren Araya? What of that bastard Zouken and worst dad of the year Tokiomi and that arrogant asshole Kayneth? Rest well assured that I will cover them in exacting detail in the next part of whatever the hell this is, and everything I say about them will build upon this. That may seem contradictory, since this part is mostly devoted to showing that magi are far more than just evil sods, but believe it or not Kayneth is going to be mightily relevant to how pitifully weak magi in truth are, and Tokiomi is going to be relevant to how magi value their children in ways that don’t have to be inhumane, but can be inhuman. Until next time, all I can ask is to consider that while magi are indeed monsters, monsters really can be quite interesting creatures.

Things in this world were all like that.

It wasn’t limited to magecraft. It wasn’t limited to those beyond humans (monsters). In a world of common sense (the obvious), it was something everyone understood.

If you said that misunderstandings, miscommunications, disagreements, and false understandings are what connected them, then...

“We are misrecognition. Our world itself is misunderstanding. We can experience a multitude of truths, not just one single reality. No matter how wise you are, or how much time you are given, you will never reach something like a single truth. Magi may just be those who continually reject that fact.”

Speaking as if in self-deprecation, my master had pursed his lips at that.

He had finally realized that his words and the objective that all Magi pursued, known as the “Spiral of Origin,” were in contradiction.

Sources: Lord El-Melloi Case Files (TL by TwilightsCall), Kara no Kyoukai (TL on baka-tsuki), Fate/Stay Night (TL Mirror Moon), Clock Tower 2015 (TL by food), Fate/Strange Fake (TL by OtherSideOfSky)

[likealittleheartbeat]

There are some really solid critiques out there of several aspects of atla. Despite what seem to be the team’s best efforts, it def appropriated and white-washed and could generally be insensitive about real people and cultures (esp. regarding Tibet). That being acknowledged, it’s probs more fruitful to lay a lot of our criticisms on television and animation production practices generally rather than Avatar or its head writers. Yes, keep asking for better representation in shows. And yes, keep asking that more writing rooms, and network exec offices, and voice actor booths are filled with people who have been historically marginalized. We can never have enough! Keep demanding your needs and desires from people with privilege. Keep demanding environments that are safe and comfortable and inspiring for every member of the team, demanding environments that limit dangerous hierarchies of authority. Avatar failed on more than one of these fronts.

Along with that criticism, though, I think we can simultaneously recognize that Avatar broke ground in creating a space for violently marginalized narratives, characters, and people. A television series--and especially animation--is not the work of one or two great minds. It is wildly collaborative, and as you look through the full production crew of atla, you will begin to see a diverse group of writers and consultants who were certainly as instrumental to the show as the “showrunners.” Notably for the audiences experience of the show, you’ll notice a cultural consultant from the Median Action Network for Asian Americans (an position that ought to be standard in the industry). At the time of ATLA’s production, marginalized folks were only JUST beginning to be allowed by corporate executives for these positions in animation in the US. In 1999, Brenda Chapman was the first woman to direct a major animated film (and that was a co-director credit with two men). And from what I can find, outside of Fat Albert (which was helped by the weighty influence of a certain individual who we don’t need to discuss here), it seems like Static Shock (made in 2000) was the first animated television series with black men as the lead directors and creators. As far as Asian or Native headwriters (both of which have multiple cultures strongly featured in ATLA), I can’t find specifics. As far as Asian input in western tv animation, since the 1960s, US companies regularly work with and outsource animation duties to Korea and Japan. Based on a quick google search, the past decade has seen a surge of a distinctly Native animation community.  While I am hella excited for more series led by these other kinds of voices, I think we need to acknowledge that avatar is a direction we want creators with privilege to strive for (and in some capacity almost everyone has privilege they can be cognizant of). We need to be investing in stories and causes outside of the dominant discourse. We need to be inviting people into our creative process to help us understand other’s perspectives and to avoid reasserting harmful frameworks. We need to find ways to properly compensate those we consult with. And last, audiences and networks need to create equitable responses for shows to fail in some capacity, so that those shows run by, representing, and/or telling the stories of marginalized people do not become reasons to stop supporting the growth of those artists and stories. If the stakes are too high, we will end new stories and careers before they have begun, and we cannot let that happen.  So yes, ask for better. Explain your thoughtful and impassioned criticisms. I, for one, cannot wait for creations that fill my heart in the spots where Avatar failed, and creations that can sit alongside or even eclipse ATLA in some of the thematic areas where the show really hit home for me. In the meantime, we can appreciate what we have without losing sight of what we strive for.

[impalementation]

what played differently positively and negatively on your buffy rewatch?

putting under a cut because this got long! disclaimer: this is all just my personal opinions and reactions, nothing objective or definitive. also when i talk about how i reacted “as a teenager” i mean from ages 13-16 rather than more mature teenage years. i did revisit the show briefly around 18, but don’t remember what i thought. so i’m comparing how i watched it at ~15 to how i watched it at 27, basically.

negative:

- a lot of trouble connecting to the more high school elements of the show. i just grew out of caring about teenagers, unfortunately. so i got impatient with a lot of seasons one and three, and some parts of two. which was really a shame, since i used to pretty unreservedly adore those seasons.

- in that vein, a lot of trouble connecting to buffy/angel. partly because adult men are no longer as opaque to me as they are to buffy, and so although i respect what the writing was going for by objectifying angel, it was still frustrating to feel like i wasn’t given much to go on as far as understanding his character motivation or why he and buffy were drawn to each other. boreanaz’s acting also got in the way of my enjoyment, unfortunately. i have nothing against the pairing, as a pairing, and i like a lot of the writing around it, but it lost the ability to give me any of the feelings it gave me as a teenager. i was sad about this!

- having seen a lot more movies and tv shows by now, buffy’s often ungainly execution was difficult to ignore. there are a lot of jokes that just strike me as clunky and unfunny, pacing i thought was slow, character writing i thought was dumb, etc.

- all the parts that haven’t aged well from a political perspective (some of which people complained about at the time too, of course). the weird attention given to xander’s self-deprecating possessiveness, terrible jokes like the one about the first slayer’s hair in restless, baffling moments of sexism, an often facile approach to gender politics, etc.

positive:

- i wasn’t a dumb teenager, but i wasn’t sophisticated either. i didn’t have the analytical toolkit that i have now. so the biggest positive change was being hit over the head with the realization of how intricately and elegantly thematic the show could really be. the feeling of “oh shit, they were doing things.” when i got to the end of season six and saw buffy crawling out of that grave a second time i was just on the floor like “fuck you buffy the vampire slayer and the symbolism you rode in on.” overall i gained a lot of respect for it as tv with literary tendencies. as messy as the show could be, and as superficially “pop” as it was (as in, it wasn’t a prestige-y hbo show), it’s one of the few tv shows i’ve seen that is clearly and consistently “about” something, both from season to season and over the course of the whole show. one of the few good comparisons i have is the wire, which is consistently about institutional decay and how systems fail people, and then explores that idea from season to season by looking at different failing systems (crime, labor, reform, education, media, etc). similarly, buffy is (among other things) about the trials of growing up, and growing into a person that has agency and ownership of themselves. and each season explores that subject in new ways by putting buffy into new situations that challenge her to be mature in a way she hasn’t been before. the wire achieves literary coherence in a much more controlled, focused, and overall skillful way. but people know that the wire is Serious Art. buffy fascinates me in that it has similar aspirations while also being goofy, stupid, messy, unabashed genre entertainment. unabashed television, at that.

- in general, i also felt like i had a deeper understanding of a lot of the storylines. i’d always liked seasons six and seven, even when i felt like i wasn’t “supposed” to (and hey that was another nice thing about watching it as an adult. i no longer had a need to care about whether i was supposed to like something or not, because i felt confident in my own ability to assess that.), but i didn’t quite get them on that emotional level. this time though, i felt like i completely understood the experience that the writers were trying to convey. buffy’s struggle with mortality in season five, depression in season six, and isolation in season seven, all hit me unbelievably hard. even the college experience stuff in season four had new, added layers.

- in a weirdly equivalent-but-also-opposite situation to buffy/angel, my life experience colored how i received the whole buffy/spike storyline. on the one hand, i was newly able to properly appreciate that their season six story was a story about a toxic and self-destructive relationship. as a teenager i found it hot and engaging, but also sort of baffling; i couldn’t tell what the writers were going for. because i was so used to a sex = romance paradigm in tv, instead of the sex-as-character-writing that you see in more sophisticated media. similarly, i was finally able to understand the more disturbing sides of spike’s character, instead of just finding him funny and entertaining. yet instead of that understanding making the dynamic, or spike as a character, less interesting to me, it actually finally gave me an emotional “in” with it. it made things compellingly complicated instead of just confusing. i couldn’t be moved by it before, because i didn’t understand the emotional conflicts at play. whereas watching it with life experience that echoed it, a lot of it felt like being suckerpunched, in a good way.

- for whatever reason, i also found myself really enjoying the willow/tara dynamic. i was pretty dismissive of it as a teenager. i thought tara was dull, and resented the feeling from friends that i was supposed to like it just because it was gay. but i found them (and tara) very sweet this time around, in a pleasantly subtle way, and with more understanding of my own queerness, i appreciated things like how implicit their courtship in season four had to be, or their easy domesticity. and it meant that when their relationship fell apart in season six it genuinely made me sad instead of just “well alright.” and i really like it when stories affect me, whether or not the way it’s affecting me is a happy emotion.

- my love for buffy as a character like...quintupled. i’d always loved her but, as i’ve said, my enjoyment of the show was on the superficial side. i think i used to basically take her at face value, and accept everything she goes through as “well, that’s just what happens to protagonists of tv shows.” also, since i’d never related to the sorts of coming of age narratives typical of high school shows (popularity! boyfriends! virginity! cheerleaders! prom!), and i hadn’t experienced any of the things the show explores past season three, it was difficult to feel like buffy as a character was speaking to my own struggles in growing up. but now that i wasn’t expecting to relate to her, it was easier to see her face everything and go “man, you brave, amazing girl.” i felt like i could finally really appreciate her as a character, which made all the times that i did end up relating to her feel richer too.

- all the parts that have aged well. there have been great female protagonists since buffy (and great female protagonists before her), but few great female heroes. and buffy is kind of incredible for being both. i’ve said this before, but one of the great things about her as a character is that on the one hand, she’s able to participate in a hero narrative that is normally only the province of male characters, and be a source of admiration or inspiration that isn’t about gender. but on the other hand, she’s also allowed to be human...sometimes to people’s dismay, especially in the later seasons. and that duality, particularly in a female character, is deeply, deeply rare. buffy summers is just an utterly remarkable character, and consuming more media only made that more obvious to me. aside from buffy, i think many of the show’s more experimental choices have aged quite well, whether the format breaking episodes in season four, or the postmodernism of season six, or buffy’s mourning and depression in seasons five and six. i also really appreciated the show’s themes around forgiveness, atonement, responsibility, and agency, and found myself wishing that more contemporary things had them.

[smokeybrand]

Smokey brand Select: Dark Stalkers

I wanted to take the time and kind of suggest films in particular sub-genres i find amazing. I’ve seen a lot of movies in my day and some stand out as real experiences in specific categories. To kick this thing off, i chose to delve into a few flicks in one of my most beloved film sub-genres; The Vampire film. When executed properly, you can create an entire world of unique romance or gory horror within this set theme. Some of the best character studies i have ever seen, begin with that irreverent perspective on life of someone cursed to live forever. Sometimes the vampire aspect is just thematic device to frame a series of savage massacres in the most lurid of bloody reds and violent imagery. There is so much flexibility in this particular category that i felt compelled to speak on it in the inaugural post to my Select series.

10. Doctor Sleep

Probably the most recent entry released on this list. Doctor Sleep plays out as a Shining sequel but don’t be fooled, this is a Vampire movie at it’s core. Wonderfully directed and acted, the vampirsim takes a backseat to the humanity of these characters. You see them at their worst, sure. I can’t say they aren’t ravenous animals, predators who tear children limb from limb, but there is a very human hubris to their overwhelming strength. I love the story told about this particular brood. These creatures are more psychic than sanguinarian but they still feed on humans, nonetheless.

9. Bram Stoker’s Dracula

I adore this flick, man. I remember seeing it as a youth and it is, indeed, one of my favorite interpretations of the Dracula tale. It takes some liberties with the overall narrative but, as a whole, it’s an amazing film to watch. Legitimately a feast for the eyes. I can’t say it’s a great movie on it’s own, truthfully it has some of the worst performances i have ever seen captured on film, but it’s absolutely gorgeous with all of it’s Gothic, yet, campy aesthetic, and has my absolute favorite rendition of Dracula as a character. That, alone, is enough to make this list.

8. What We Do In The Shadows

The beauty of the Vampire genre is how flexible it can be. Shadows is a perfect example of this. ore a comedy about social misfits than a vampire movie, it executes a rather creative narrative around the admittedly tired trope of Vampirism. It’s rare that such creativity and revelry is seen in this genre. Everything is always so dour and somber. This movie is not that. It’s actually rather hilarious and refreshingly upbeat. It’s the most human I’ve ever seen Vampires and i love that contradiction to bits!

7. Interview With The Vampire

This was the first Vampire flick i saw which actually asked the big questions about living forever and being a literal plague on humanity. you know i love my existential nihilism and this is rife with that sh*t. The premise was pretty amazing but it was the resolution that got me. Here you have a man, cursed with the what he has become, pouring his heart out to a man as a warning, and due just turns around and begs to be turned. This man told you his entire, depressing, f*cked up life story and you turn around and BEG to be afflicted with his condition. It’s the greatest slap in the face anyone can deliver. Aside from that, the entire look of this film captures that romantic yet dangerous nature of the vampire romance. It’s truly beautiful but absolutely brutal in it’s own way.

6. Nosferatu

It took a while for me to appreciate this movie for what it was. Seriously, a black and white, German language, silent film. I saw it as a kid and didn’t care for it but, as a n adult, i learned to love this thing. This film,considering these shortcomings of cinema at the time, had to earn it’s place on this list and it did it with the most palpable atmosphere I’ve ever seen in a movie. Later in life, I’d see this done just as deftly with films like Under The Skin, Suspiria, and the VVitch, but Nosferatu was the first and it made an impression. i was enthralled but what can be described as core film making on display.

5. Lifeforce

Lifeforce is another one of these not-bloodsucker vampire flicks. Indeed, these creature suck the life force out of people, thus the title. This movie is kind of ridiculous. It’s all over the place but still, a damn interesting watch. it’s said this thing was influenced by alien and it kind of shows, but still has it’s own unique flavor. This is basically a Roger Corman production with an actual budget so, if you know how those films go, you have a general expectation of how this thing is executed. It, by no means is a great film, but i loved the ride.

4. Byzantium

This film made the list on the strength of it’s gorgeous visuals. There’s an underlying current of despair that i love but, more so than any of that, the look of this movie entrances me. It’s truly stunning, especially certain scenes. The use of reds and shadows is impeccable and the actual lore is some of them most unique I’ve seen in a long time. I wanted to know more about these characters, about this world. It’s wild to see such human monsters; The regret they display for just existing, the trauma that they live with daily, and the resentment for their survival. It’s wild to see and an incredibly unique look at a centuries old theme.

3. Blood: The Last Vampire

Blood is easily one the best Vampire movie i have ever seen, as just a straight vampire slaying outing. The plot is incredibly simple but the execution is amazing. Blood is one of the most beautifully animated films i have ever seen. It can realistically give Akira a run for it’s money. More than that, an entire world was developed from this one film, and it’s just as compelling. If you follow this blog and keep up with the interjections of text between all of the images, then you know i am a lore hound. I love this world and everything in the expanded universe. Hollywood has been looking for an anime they can successfully adapt to film and Blood is it. The plot is simple, the pacing brisk, and the violence is more than gory enough to put butts in seats. If they give this thing the big budget treatment and someone who respects the source material, Blood can be one massive box office hit. On it’s own, as an anime film, it’s still one of the most excellent vampire tales I have ever seen.

2. A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night

This is going to start a trend. Girl is a fantastic film in it’s own right. More than just a vampire film, this thing is a master class in direction. This is actually a Persian-Language film, yet, one of the most compelling movies I’ve ever had the pleasure of witnessing. Seriously, this movie is absolutely beguiling in it’s imagery, which is a lot to say because it’s in black and white. That was a conscious choice which elevates the film as a whole, letting the brilliant direction bring this movie home. Girl is absolutely one of the best movies I’ve ever sen and it just happens to revolve around a vampire. Don’t let the subtitle barrier deter you from a truly excellent cinematic experience.

1B. Let The Right One In

Netflix suggested this movie to me a few years back.. I was mad skeptical at first but then i watched it. And then i watched it again. And then again. If you’d have told me a Swedish-language, child lead, vampire romance would become one of my all-time favorite films, i'd have called you crazy but, here we are. Let The Right One In is f*cking incredible. It takes the tired trope of boy-Meets-girl and turns it on it’s head, for several reasons. I won’t get into those because you really should watch this film, but it’s absolutely genius how that trope is turned on it’s ear. There are so many themes explored here, so much depth to the storytelling, i was actually shocked. It took multiple viewing for me to peel back all of the layers and, to this day, i still love checking this thing out. The vampirism is inconsequential, it adds a bit of flair to the narrative, but, at it’s core, this is a story about two people falling in love with each other. Or is it a story about the cycle of abuse and manipulation? There’s no definitive answer and i adore that.

1A. Thirst

This is a masterpiece of cinema and no one knows it because it’s from South Korea. Seriously, I’ve written about the shortsightedness of American audiences the second subtitles are brought up but gt the f*ck over that because this movie is one of the best ever made. It’s gorgeous and cruel and wonderful and painful; All of which are captured so richly on film. It’s rare a film can both hurt you and disgust you at the same time. A lot of that has to do with the direction but the to leads bring home this frailty and savagery like no other. There is gore in this film, and it is poignant, but it’s more a punctuation than a set piece. No, Thirst is the study of losing oneself to the passion of humanity and it’s rare you see such raw emotion articulated so well in a genre that decries humanity. Thirst is f*cking awesome and should be seen by everyone, but film buffs in particular.

Honorable Mentions: Vampire Hunter D, Lost Boys, Blade II, Nosferatu The Vampyre, Cronos, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Let Me In, 30 Days of Night, From Dusk til Dawn, Salem’s Lot, Fright Night, Innocent Blood, Vampire’s Kiss, Vampyr, Shadow of the Vampire

[posedmodern]

Review: “The Tatami Galaxy”

Masaaki Yuasa’s distinct set of stylistic and thematic tendencies were in many ways perfect for The Tatami Galaxy (2010). The animator blessed us with a welcome departure from the high-school-male-who-can-do-no-wrong trope that is recycled throughout legions of anime. The Tatami Galaxy provides viewers with a rare collegiate perspective that is flawed, human, and deeply relatable.

I struggle to think of a more significant transitory period in my life than the one I experienced during my switch from a high school senior to a college freshman. All of university’s oft-associated social conventions were byzantine and unfamiliar to me, and I don’t recall feeling properly “adjusted” until my third year of undergrad at the earliest. There were numerous instances before that where I would become broodingly introspective, wondering if the choices that I’d made up until a given moment had been the right ones.

If any of the above is even somewhat relevant to viewers, then they will likely find a small bit of themselves in the unnamed protagonist of The Tatami Galaxy.

Director Masaaki Yuasa’s break-out hit was the surreal, offbeat anime Kaiba in 2008. In addition to The Tatami Galaxy in 2010, his resume also includes Ping-Pong: The Animation (2014), Devilman Crybaby (2018), and most recently Keep Your Hands Off Eizouken! (2020). He has also made guest contributions to similarly quirky shows such as Adventure Time and Space Dandy. His style is especially recognized for its resistance of typical conventions found within the anime medium, i.e. slice-of-life, harem, Mary Sue-isms, etc. His dialogue is welcomely wordy but always thoughtful. His visuals, especially in Tatami, are delightfully loose and seem to become be whatever he needs them to be from scene to scene.

The central perspective of The Tatami Galaxy follows an unnamed, emerging third-year college student who can’t rid himself of the notion that he has somehow wasted his past two years. His missed opportunities include ventures with various student clubs, film-making, secret societies, and romantic pursuits. The narrative format of the series is somewhat unconventional: each episode is a condensed retelling of the protagonist’s first two years in college. Each iteration functions as a hypothetical vignette in which the protagonist made a distinct choice that he feels that might reward him with a “rose-colored college experience.”

Of course, each episode ends with what’s best case lingering melancholy or worst case complete disaster. The protagonist winds up dissatisfied no matter what he does, which necessitates the narrative “rewinding” to a fresh start that serves as the end of each episode before the final three entries. There’s no explicit fantasy element to the series, as the whole implied time travel occurs in the hyper-introspective protagonist’s internal considerations of hypothetical revisions of a collegiate experience that he feels was underwhelming and wasted.

The Tatami Galaxy is especially charming thanks to Yuasa’s expert characterization of college students. You have the jock-y yet pseudo-intellectual Jogasaki, who acts as a foil to the more introverted protagonist. There’s Ozu – the schemer – who often takes advantage of the protagonist’s jadedness. There’s romantic interest Akashi that works at the bookstore and collects mascot keychains, and there’s romantic interest Hanuki that the protagonist has to fight with Jogasaki for in a fratty drinking contest. There are also silly moments where the object of the protagonist’s affection is a life-like porcelain doll or Ozu in disguise.

However, as the protagonist comes to learn, college students don’t always act entirely within their tropes – this is where the tenderness of Yuasa’s writing really shines. The Gollum-like Ozu is revealed to be more sensitive than the protagonist initially thought, and is in fact just as insecure about his collegiate experience as his friend. The supporting cast is incredibly well fleshed-out, with dimensionality and nuance that could easily surpass that which is found in the “well-written” anime giants like Neon Genesis Evangelion. In convention-defying fashion, Yuasa delivers a heartfelt rendering of the collegiate experience in all its romance, chaos, and occasional serendipity.

posedmodern score: 9.2

postmodern because: A collection of similar, but different narratives – the majority of which occur in the protagonist’s mind as ventures into hypothetical experience. Stylistic choices help it stand out from other work in its medium.

images courtesy of Funimation, Masaaki Yuasa

[orangedodge]

Hey, years ago, you made a post arguing, among other points, that ADWD dumbed Dany down. Do you still think that?

Kind of. I feel the same way about ADWD today (or about the direction I felt it hinted towards, anyway), but how I would articulate it has changed. I wouldn’t really focus on cognition anymore, at least where Dany herself is concerned.

Firstly, before I try to explain, thank you very much for the ask. I was a little blown away that someone remembered a post I wrote years ago. I’m sorry it’s taken me so long to get to this, but it’s been one of those months, and I didn’t want too be too much of a downer about a series I think most of us still have a lot of good will towards. And I’m going to be explaining own thought process, so I’m hopefully not going to be completely incomprehensible to everyone else.

When it comes to Dany’s character, I’ve found myself vacillating on what Martin is trying to convey based on where I’ve felt he’s taking things, weighed against—as best as I’m able—what I think is a general lack of efficiency in Feast Dance’s narrative structure. On the subject of where he’s going with things, I’m always worried about either giving Martin too little credit for all he’s done, versus the other times when I’m probably giving him too much. The difficulty I have is the series is both unfinished and I don’t have access to Martin’s plans, so I don’t really claim to know his mind, and as many times as I’ve reviewed his work, I can’t be sure that I’m reading things the way that he intended as he wrote them.

I’m not very good at gauging where that intent diverges from the biases of my own reading. If I remember correctly, I wrote the post you discuss while I was leaning towards “he’s probably going to do something really gross so he can kill Daenerys off at last minute, so Jon can get all her stuff handed to him.” It’s hard to say if I still believe that will happen in part because so much of my disagreement with where Martin might go is tied up in “but why would he write that story?” I usually try to analyze stories from the perspective of “where is this going?” but in ASoIaF where the story is going is obscured just as much by what I find objectionable on a personal level, as by what would or wouldn’t make sense.

When there’s material in this series that bothers me, it may be to some greater thematic point, or there could alternatively be no purpose because his mind may be in a totally different place than where I am. I often have an issue with something I’ve read, but I have to acknowledge that doesn’t necessarily mean that he wrote it that way knowingly, or that he shares my view if he did. That’s something I’ve struggled with concerning a lot of the misogyny and gendered violence in this series. He may have thrown that in without thinking critically of it at all, because “that’s how things were back then,” so it’s hard to say at times what his motive is while making some of his storytelling choices. As Sady Doyle alluded to, is the misogyny littering the narrative an obstacle to be overcome, or is it just the misogyny of his narrative? That’s the issue I’ve faced with my attempts to analyze Dany’s storyline for years. There are a lot of options for where her story could go that I think are horribly sexist, and I’d really like to say he wont go there just because of that… but I can’t really rule it out as a possibility that he’s going in a direction I view as repulsive because that’s just the story he wants to tell and the way he wants to tell it.

With that out of the way, I had a lot of frustration in my first reading when I hit ADWD, and it seemed like Martin was increasingly unwilling to let key characters just know things they should already know, as a natural result of the experience that came with the histories he gave each of them, as an excuse to introduce exposition. I’ve revised that position somewhat what in comes to Dany, after looking back and reading her chapters again, in Dance as well as in earlier books as well, when I saw how much of her own luck she manufactured, and got a better picture of how much emphasis he was putting into cultural knowledge as Dany’s core strength. But I’ve also had to revise that opinion upon confronting the possibility that I just have no idea what this series is about at all, and that it’s heading in a direction I’m disinterested in reading more of.

So I’d say my overall sense of Martin’s means as a storyteller has remained the same, that he writes to a specific ending without knowing how he’s going to get there, and I wasn’t really articulating that view properly at that time due to not really having pieced together my real issues with his work. Dany has suffered from the consequences of that lack of detailed planning—i.e losing the Five Year gap, and losing Asshai as a goal— as much as anyone but I view that now more as a structural issue that makes her journey more static in later volumes, than as an issue of Martin trying to say something about her character. And while I do still think Jon and Cersei are operating at a reduced capacity compared to how they were portrayed in earlier books, with Dany the issue is more one of a more static narrative that looks to be inventing obstacles for her to make her react against type. Which could be great if it’s a temptation to resist, but it could also just as well be a means to take her down an inconvenient character once the main plot doesn’t need her anymore.

[afriendlyirin]

Steven Universe Rewrite

So I’ve now finished my rewrite of the final arc (go read it and tell me all your thoughts), and while I’m satisfied with it in many respects, I still feel like it doesn’t properly resolve or engage with everything I’d like to, nor is it fully in keeping with the parts of Steven Universe I liked, despite that being my goal. There’s simply too much to get into and too little space to for it. To fully “fix” the narrative in my mind, I’d probably have to diverge much farther back.

I’m not interested in actually writing such a story, but I think it would be a good exercise to sketch an outline of what such a thing might look like.

I think the biggest problem is that Steven Universe has too many antagonists. The three initial Homeworld gems work well on their own – we spend a lot of time between each one, giving us time to process what’s happened before they return or a new antagonist gains focus. But with the diamonds, we don’t really get that breathing room. We barely know anything of Yellow before Blue shows up, we’re only just starting to really process them before White appears, and then the show ends. And throughout all of this, we have even more unresolved antagonists dangling – Jasper, the rubies, Topaz and Aquamarine, Homeworld’s system itself. To do justice to all of these characters at the previous pace of the show would probably have taken twice as many seasons.

My second problem, which is more personal preference, is that I don’t like how the plot ended up going epic, with Steven having to take on uberpowerful opponents with an entire empire of resources. I’d say this is also thematically confused – the show starts off making it seem like everyone is safe on Earth and the war is in the distant past, but it’s then revealed the war is very much still on and the plot becomes about Steven continuing the rebellion Rose left half-finished. My favorite parts of the show were seasons 1-3, which were much the antithesis of that – the conflicts were much more subdued, against lone actors or just interpersonal problems.

So, let us combine these things to give us a different starting state.

There was only one diamond, and she was destroyed during Rose’s rebellion. Either she blew herself up with a corruption bomb, or the shattering of a diamond is what makes a corruption blast. Down-scale the empire’s resources such that they were putting most of their manpower into fighting the rebellion, meaning that their population is utterly crippled by the fallout of the blast in addition to their loss of leadership. The gem empire still exists but as a shadow of its former self; it no longer has the manpower to invade new planets. (We can also tone down the oppression; no killing people just for being born. Whether or not that is still the case for Era 1, it’s just not possible to keep doing that with your population so crippled. Homeworld can still be oppressively conformist, but not to the point of EUGENICS EVERYWHERE.)

Right off the bat, this dodges a lot of awkward questions that are present in canon. Why did Rose stop fighting just because she saved one of many colonies, and why did she make Steven when Homeworld was still a threat that could endanger him – why, in sum, does she act like the war is over? Well, because it is, and she won.

This shifts the tone and focus of the story away from an epic rebellion plot and into one of postwar reconstruction. After the dust has settled, what happens? How do you pick up the pieces and move forward? Steven will only ever encounter pale shadows of Homeworld’s former power. Things like the Cluster become akin to forgotten landmines, echoes of a violent past that can still hurt people long after the conflict is over. He can still fight Homeworld gems, but they are lone agents acting on personal grudges; Jasper is not acting under orders, she just really wants to take a swing at Rose Quartz. (This setup even works a lot better with the threat level we actually see from canon, which is that Homeworld keeps sending weak scouts and small groups instead of bringing their full military might to bear against the Crystal Gems.)

This frees up a lot of space to just get into the characters talking about their feelings, which was always the real core of Steven Universe. In canon, Amethyst is the only Crystal Gem who really gets a full arc with a proper resolution (the battle with Jasper at the conclusion of season 3); Garnet’s gets flattened to just be about her relationship so it can be rushed through in Heart of the Crystal Gems, and Pearl’s arc gets completely substituted for something else that officially has no problem for her to resolve at all. The time spent on the diamonds and battle logistics could instead be spent on developing those arcs. With the antagonist compression, we could develop the Homeworld gems further as well, perhaps making them proper foils to Crystal Gems – something I get the impression canon was trying to go for but never seemed to really commit to.

Speaking of which, this would make the Homeworld gems much more tragic and sympathetic. Lapis’ despair over how different the new Homeworld is would no longer be about the simple passage of time, but because it is genuinely a shambling corpse of what it once was. And because Era 2 is so different than Era 1, Peridot, an Era 2 gem, would lack much of the shared culture and knowledge other gems have, justifying her naivete and social awkwardness. Finally, the rebellion destroying the entire army makes Jasper even more isolated – she is one of the very few survivors of the war, further justifying her fury at Rose and her inability to open up to her peers – she has none.

This would also make everything about Bismuth so, so much more reasonable. Instead of reacting to the fact that Rose lost the war that is very much still on, she’s advocating for igniting a brand new one before the ashes have even cooled on the first. (For extra horror, she might not even be dissuaded by the news Rose killed the diamond after all – they may have understood Homeworld’s soldiers were only following orders and assumed they would defect if they removed the command structure… but now you’re telling her they assassinated the head honcho and they’re still loyal to Homeworld? Clearly the only solution is to KILL ‘EM ALL.) It is far more understandable for Steven to keep her bubbled in that situation, and for the Crystal Gems to agree to it.

Ultimately, I think this plotline could remain very similar for seasons 1-3; perhaps move up the “Rose shattered Diamond” reveal to around season 2, and follow it with the Cluster plot to show why that really was necessary while emphasizing that yeah, war is horrible we really shouldn’t be starting another one, Bismuth!

The major difference would be swapping out Yellow Diamond for a lower administrative gem. I thought Yellow Diamond alone worked as a fine antagonist, really, so not much needs to change – just transplant her personality into another gem. This character could function as a foil to Garnet, someone thrust into overwhelming responsibility because there’s no one else qualified left alive. We could even double down on this and make her a permafusion; that maps really well onto modern conservatism, where people who would actually be hurt by the old hegemonies still romanticize them anyway. Season 4’s arc could revolve around her; having dealt with Lapis, Peridot, and Jasper, Steven must go to Homeworld and address the problem at its source. (The events of “Raising the Barn” could happen here, giving Lapis an extra season to work through her issues.) This could actually be resolved very similarly to the White Diamond resolution in canon, but it would fit with the earlier themes much better – this gem really would have reasons to feel insecure about her failure to live up to a perfect ideal. And for bonus points, that makes her a foil to Steven, too.

It would also make it a lot more believable that these gems would need Steven to teach them what is, if we’re being honest, pretty basic philosophy. If they are technically free of the old system but still stubbornly cling to its trappings, it makes sense that they’d need an outsider to tell them to think for themselves and that this would genuinely be a radical new perspective for them. Hauntings, again – just as in real life, the system still influences peoples’ thinking long after it was officially dismantled.

We could replace the Zoo arc with something that hits the same beats. The rubies return (or someone new gets sent) and capture Greg for some reason. Instead of seeing the Zoo we get to see Homeworld society directly during the trip. The events of That Will Be All still occur, as Not Yellow Diamond, cracking under the strain, unfuses and argues with herself behind closed doors.

Instead of the gems only being caught as a joke (and having that also be resolved as a joke), it’s a choice Steven makes. We invoke the hero’s last temptation: He has everything he’s ever wanted, his family in one piece and Homeworld beaten so thoroughly they’ll never threaten them again… but to take that offer means looking away, and abandoning everyone who is still suffering on Homeworld. He looks upon the gates of Heaven, but willingly chooses to walk back into Hell.

(Connie should probably be present to witness this so we can set up the falling-out arc, which is important for deconstructing Steven’s martyr complex.)

This leads to an analogous arc to Wanted and Diamond Days where Steven navigates Homeworld until he finally reaches Not Yellow Diamond. For added tension, the gems are separated somehow and Steven spends a significant time on his own befriending Homeworld gems. Garnet converges with him for the finale so we can make it about her (maybe extend her themes to the previous arc, focus on her stress and failures as leader during the heist).

Not Yellow Diamond is a noncombatant, but hides behind elite guards and defenses that Garnet and Steven can’t handle on their own, necessitating a fusion. The theme here could be that Garnet is paralyzed by her responsibilities, unable to both mount an offense while also keep Steven protected; Steven cuts through this by taking on his own responsibility, showing Garnet that she doesn’t have to do everything herself.

Not Yellow Diamond’s redemption happens similarly to White Diamond’s, but because she’s a noncombatant it is actually reasonable for Steven to spend so long on a nonviolent solution. Possibly Garnet even tries to shatter her (this could be what makes them unfuse), but Steven stops her. Not Yellow Diamond more explicitly agrees to change things and protect Earth.

So by this point, Steven will have dealt with all extant threats… but there are still issues left unresolved. The corrupted gems still aren’t healed, Bismuth’s still bubbled, Lapis is still missing, and Pearl hasn’t had a personal arc to resolve her issues. This would then turn season 5 into something of a denouement season, tying up all the remaining loose ends. This season’s theme could be one of self-actualization, revolving around Lapis and Pearl working through their difficult mental health problems and Steven, though seeing his own issues reflected in them, overcoming his own imposter syndrome in the process.

Season 5 starts after a timeskip. Steven is trying to heal the corrupted gems but is making no progress. Make this into a metaplot, with snippets in other episodes throughout the season showing he’s continuing to try and making more progress as his personal arc progresses.

Bismuth is already unbubbled to leapfrog over that awkward conversation, but still suffers from PTSD. She gets an episode (or two) about her issues, primarily grief. She bemoans the loss of her friends, and Steven tries to assure her that he’ll heal the corrupted gems any day now. She shows him the shards and says bitterly, “Can you heal these?” Spirals into a breakdown naming and remembering all the shattered gems. Steven tries to lay down some generic platitudes like he always does, but this time it doesn’t work; Bismuth calls him out on his ignorance and innocence, that he’s never lost anyone so he has no idea how she feels. This forces him to rethink things and actually listen to Bismuth, foreshadowing that that will be the theme of this season. (For bonus points, could also have her echo Pearl’s “She’s gone, but I’m still here,” re: the shattered gems.)

This could probably happen simultaneously with the falling-out arc (though that interacts awkwardly with the timeskip since Connie would probably be upset immediately after), could draw a connection by having Steven realize or Connie point out his god complex, he wants to help people for his sake not for theirs.

After that heavy opening we can have funtimes with human friends; Sadie Killer arc happens here plus any outstanding human subplots resolve. Should probably also have an episode about Pearl that touches on her issues since that’ll be the topic of the final stretch.

Then Lapis comes back. Have a conversation about PTSD and how she needed to do it on her own time etc., Steven can show his growth by accepting this and not pushing.

If the Lion chest is important, Lapis found the key while soul-searching (it was hidden somewhere on Earth the CGs didn’t look).

Next plot episode is Steven getting frustrated over his inability to heal the corrupted gems (can have a comedy bit where he tries increasingly absurd and convoluted methods), wonders what he’s doing wrong. Something happens that leads to him talking to Pearl about Rose. Possibly he thinks whatever’s in the chest is the cure, but that seems pretty stupid even for him. Events lead to Pearl revealing that she shattered Diamond and Steven has a fresh meltdown, accuses all the other gems of secretly being shatterers and not telling him (Garnet could react really awkwardly, implying she actually has killed people), decides that’s the problem and runs off.

(If there is a similar memory scene with Pearl, it’s via hologram; Diamond literally does not get a voice.)

Either Pearl tracks him down, or someone else brings him back only for him to discover that Pearl has run off because she agrees that she is horrible and shouldn’t be around Steven. Either way leads to a deep conversation about their issues. The climax here would result in Steven fusing with Pearl as he has with the others, but perhaps this time the context is peaceful rather than it being a tactic used in desperation, affirming the idea that fusions are a way of life and not just a tool.

As a result of his growth from this, Steven finally figures out the method to heal the corrupted gems, whatever that may be. We have a great happy ending montage where it looks like everything’s resolved – Steven has forged peace with Homeworld, and all the corrupted gems are healed, including Jasper…

…who immediately attacks him. We get one final episode, or perhaps even a full arc, revolving around a final fight with Jasper. Because Steven never actually resolved her issues before she got bubbled! She is still mad, still violent, and still hurting. This is the most narratively satisfying climax, because Jasper is all the story’s themes embodied: the sins of the past come back to haunt us, the scars left by war, and the pain of grief and acceptance. She always made the most sense as a “final villain” to me. Steven’s usual approach of steamrollering people with generic feel-good platitudes would not work here; he must actually use what he’s learned and engage with Jasper on her own terms.

(If this were an actual show THIS is where I would pull the surprise season extension, lead everyone to think the Pearl reconciliation is the grand finale and then surprise them with Jasper.)

The Jasper episode, or the finale if it’s a whole arc, would be titled “Under the Stars So Bright” as a reference to Trigun and also the imagery of being under the star of Diamond.

I feel the only way to make this work would be to intercut the Jasper ep with flashbacks to her time under Diamond, much like Trigun’s final episode. Only issue is that the sudden change in POV would be really weird; Trigun worked because the hero was there for those events and we only see his perspective, but Steven has no window into Jasper’s past.

Jasper poofs all the CGs and digs a hole to the core with the intent of popping the Cluster. Steven proceeds to get the crap beaten out of him protecting and bubbling the CGs like Vash vs. Midvalley in Trigun. Make this incredibly gruesome, even with the bubble shields she cracks his gem and draws blood.

Steven tries to reason with her like he did before, and like before it just makes her push back harder. Eventually she tries to pull a suicide by cop and bait Steven into shattering her. He gruesomely rams his fingers through her face to grab her gem and draws his fist back to kill her, and then we get a flashback montage of all his family memories – but in an inversion of Vash vs. Legato, this results in him not killing her. (For bonus creepy, he could also be stopped by Jasper flashing a grin or letting slip that she wants to die.)

Maybe as a compromise, he does poof her – this would be the only time in the series he intentionally does so.

(In the fantasy world where I have an animation studio at my beck and call, this would be filled with visual references to Trigun, both the Legato and Knives confrontations.)

Ending is Jasper going to prison to face trial for trying to blow up Earth. Lapis gets to say her piece, then Steven gives a more mature redemption speech than usual, about how he can’t make her change and she has to want to become a better person but he still believes in her anyway. This can perhaps be the nuanced message that the movie… appeared to be trying to go for with Spinel, that people can have understandable reasons for lashing out and doing bad things, but that doesn’t mean you’re obligated to exhaust yourself for them; you don’t have to be a martyr.

In the final montage, Jasper reunites with other jaspers who were corrupted in the war (maybe mirrored with a montage of Bismuth hugging formerly-corrupted Crystal Gems). Final message is what the canon ending claims to be: Steven has gained a more mature and complex outlook on “good” and “evil” but he still chooses to be optimistic and believe in the goodness of people. GOOD END.

That’s my take. Ultimately, it seems Steven Universe bit off more than it could chew, or perhaps had too many cooks. The most important takeaway from this, in my view, is to keep things to a manageable level in your story. Don’t introduce elements you know you won’t have time to adequately address; a few points done well will often land better than a lot of stuff done slapdashedly.

[nat-20s]

top 5 breakdowns youve had over david tennant doctor who episodes?

okay okay okay so this is biased bc I’ve been rewatching the donna season and she’s my favorite but let’s GO

5. HE BLEW UP A SUN. TO SAY GOODBYE. WHAT THE FUCK. THAT’S LOVE BITCH!!!! AND THEN HE DOESN’T EVEN GET TO PROPERLY SAY I LOVE YOU I SCREAMED. I don’t actually remember which episode this was but I do remember that I was, as the kids say, Big Oof over it 

4. The ending of family of blood like holy shit. Holy shiiiiiittt. I think that even though we knew he was a no second chances kind of guy (which i could write so much on holy fuck am i back on my bullshit) that was the first time that it, like, hit me not only the things he was capable of but the kind of person he was capable of being was actually cruel. I think I had to sit down and reassess things after that.

3. Fires of Pompeii. Just all of it. Donna hearing where they’re at and what day it is and IMMEDIATELY trying to save people. The doctor being so so resignated and her being like umm??? fuck that actually??? Her learning about how much awful knowledge is stored up in his head. Them pressing the lever together, her deliberately reaching out so that he doesn’t have to take the burden of that decision alone. Him watching everybody suffering with practiced outward indifference and her sobbing, feeling all of their suffering, having to watch and STILL desperately trying to save them. The doctor leaving while Donna is watching the family and her having to leave them for a moment and her begging for him to go back. Them finally getting to reach out and save them. the fact that this moment is so vital that FUCKING TWELVE CHOSE HIS FACE TO BE REMINDED OF THE LESSON DONNA TAUGHT HIM I FUCKING CANT DEAL WITH THIS

2. I. DONT. WANT. TO. GO. I think we all collectively lost our fucking MINDS over that ending. David tennant was like: soft. Crying. and I was like SCREAMS. Also the fact that his doctor not from saving like the whole world or galaxy or universe but just so that he can save Wilf, even though Wilf begs him not to and is willing to sacrifice his life?????? Is so wonderful, like, thematically, and also fucking wrecks me.

1.Journey’s end? More like journey’s end my heart. I think I have yet to be so thoroughly traumatized by a character’s ending except maybe the end of bbc merlin. This one might be worse though. It’s been a decade and I get NO closure and I’m fuck. Like when Donna starts to repeat words and both you and the doctor know what’s coming and it’s absolutely fucking devastating to the point where, if you’re like me, going back to the earlier adventures with them is so much worse. Also just like 12 year old me and now year old me both projected pretty heavily onto donna so it’s all just fuckin rough. AND THEN!! AND THEN HE SAYS HIS LAST GOODBYE TO HIS BEST FRIEND AND SHE DOESN’T RECOGNIZE HIM AND BARELY EVEN NOTICES HIM LEAVE AND IM FUCKING CRYING ALL OVER AND IM JUST. This ending is so fucking much!!! Because it’s so tragic on BOTH ends!! Like I know TECHNICALLY donna is okay but you gotta wonder!!! We KNOW she felt like there was something missing from her life before she ever met him so it wouldn’t be unreasonable to believe that happens again but like 10 times worse!!! You GOTTA wonder if she goes through life feeling like there should be someone wonderful at her side, a best friend, a platonic soulmate, but there isn’t, and she, from her perspective, is desperately missing someone she’s never met. I’m!! Fucked up!!!! Also also also i read a snippet from a doctor who magazine that was like “a lot of people fancied the doctor but he was happiest when he was Donna Noble, his nest mate” and I’m losing my SHIT okay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GOD she was like..willing to die so that she didn’t have to forget what the fuck what tHE FUCK!!! WELCOME BACK TO ME SCREAMING

Honorable mentions:

the hand wall scene with ten and rose you know the one. Planet of the ood is A Lot, like when he lets her hear their song of captivity big oof big big oof. The fakeout in song of sauntarun (i have no idea how you spell this) where Donna is like “i have to go home” and he just immediately breaksdown and is like trying to convince her of all the amazing sights they still need to see and the fucking LINE YOU’VE SAVED MY LIFE IN SO MANY WAYS ooF PRESS F TO PAY RESPECTS BECAUSE I DIED. Actually all of season 4 is just me having a breakdown because they really fuckin love each other so much and make each other so happy and I know how it ends and knowing how it ends I STILL have to watch them make big goofy grins at each other and go off on adventures and delight in each others company ALL WHILE KNOWING THEY’RE GONNA LOSE IT anyway tldr I love Donna and I’m crying

[theatreworksstkilda]

DRIVE: REBECCA MESTON IN TOP GEAR

Theatre People

K.E. WEBER — MAY 31, 2019

Inspired by true events, playwright Rebecca Meston, has written a tale of loss and heartbreak set to a backdrop of time and space.

Drive is a play that was inspired by former NASA astronaut Lisa Nowak, who in 2007 drove from Houston to Orlando to confront her ex-lover’s lover and supposed attempt to kidnap her. Five months before this event she had been up in space on a mission.

Meston was gripped by the crime at the time, but it wasn’t until 10 years later, when she was constantly driving across regional SA that she remembered it like a flash.

“Then I couldn’t stop thinking about it,” she says. ” Now with a small child in the back of my car, and driving amidst highways and freeways and long stretches of horizon, I was struck by the more thematic elements of the story, like how big the world is, and how incredibly small. How completely capable and driven you can be when the stakes are so high, but you’re also feeling lost, or grief-stricken, or heartbroken.”

“Looking out at the road there was this immediate sense of “I can’t look away now. I can’t get distracted. Or seek to be distracted. Yes there may be a banger of a song on the radio and I’ll go into memory, or fantasy, or a conversation I wish could happen, but ultimately, at the eleventh hour of this drive, I will have to face it. Face myself.'”

While the show is about an astronaut and an otherworldly backdrop, it’s really about loss, heartbreak, the end of a marriage, a long-term relationship. In an epic way. Meston explains that the show charts a 14-hour trip through space and time, in the back seat of our heroine’s car, memory and fantasy come and go like a dark, otherworldly version of Taxicab Confessions.

Meston goes on to say that beyond the location and Americana of it all, is a 14-hour unravelling of a highly capable woman; filled with mess, nuance, and controlled rage. How does this happen? What does a complex unravelling of an inner-life look like? Bringing it back to the here and now, the relevant themes explored include:

How a woman so at the top of her game, with a family and a 19-year marriage, can fall so spectacularly apart?

How we often use this old adage “the truth will set you free”, but what is the actual process of getting free? What do you have to go through first? Is it a dark 14-hour drive of the soul made through the middle of a rainy night?

How close are any of us, at any time, to snapping? To getting into a car and not looking back? Do we in fact all have 10 per cent of Lisa Nowak in us somewhere?

When you put your distractions aside, your double screening, your social media, your Game of Thrones addiction, all the stuff that helps you look away, and properly face yourself, what happens?

The engrossing work took approximately two years of work from initial concept to completed work.  A first stage development, as part of Vitalstatistix’ ‘Incubator’ residency, was done in May, 2017. Meston then worked on it with dramaturg Saffron Benner, as part of ‘A Month in the Country’ at Hothouse, and then, in 2018, it went through an inSPACE development with a packed out showing. Meston and team have now spent four weeks rehearsing and it’s primed and ready.

Meston confesses that one of the challenges of getting Drive to performance stage was in explaining the idea in one or two quick sentences!

“The form of the show – road theatre – and that audiences are basically going on a drive from A to B over 50 minutes – isn’t a style we regularly see on stages,” says Meston. “We have road movies, Thelma and Louise, Death Proof, etc, but what does road theatre look like and feel like? What are its conventions? How do you abstract a car? All brilliant creative challenges.”

Meston acknowledges that the joys, on the other hand, was making this very style of work, and with a story that explores the more complex and nuanced elements of what it feels like to be human. “And working with an extraordinary team of artists who care deeply about making new work, and who are all exceptionally good at bringing new Australian work to life,” she says.

Research was a big part of Meston’s journey with two years devoted to researching the world of astronauts, NASA, space travel and what it takes to get there. In that time,  Metson’s insight into the world and mind of her lead character, Stella, heightened making writing her a little easier.  

“When it came to writing the show, it all just poured out of me,” she says. “Maybe “easier” is the wrong response. It was still really hard too, Stella is a tricky character and not exactly the easiest person to spend time with. “

“She is going through great loss while in a sense coping, or treating her car drive like a mission into space. No it didn’t end well, but she was highly functional. I relate to this, as I’m sure a lot of audiences will. We don’t all fall apart and become immobilised during loss and grief. Some of us do the exact opposite. I felt I knew my material very well, as opposed to her being “easier to write'”.

As a playwright, Meston cares about finding the genre that serves the story. Whether it’s cabaret, stand-up, direct address, a punk rock musical, a five-hour durational public performance. “Growing up, when my mum was angry at me when I’d have a friend over, she’d sometimes whisper in my ear, “When I get you behind closed doors, WOE BETIDE!!” (she’s English)”

It’s precisely this that interests her. The behind-closed-doors of a character. The hard parts of a character. Not the one smiling broadly, and waving goodbye to said friend. The one who closes the door, turns and shows the mess, the anger and all that’s been temporarily flattened out for public display.

“There is a British/Nordic detective series called Marcella with Anna Friel which I found so intriguing in the making of this work,” explains Meston. “The character of Marcella is not immediately likeable, but you are with her, care about her, are on her side, from the beginning because of her richly drawn, nuanced character who is neither maiden, mother or crone. The storytellers I like best include Patricia Cornelius, Kate Mulvany, Bryony Kimmings, Clare Barron, Jeanette Winterson, Barbara Trapdio and my late friend, poet Hima Raza.”

Next on the list for Meston is the making of Hits of the 70s, 80s and 90s – an intimate cabaret with a live choir, which aims to reimagine the mythology of Australian rock music from a female perspective.

Meston explains that it will feature a rambling house party come front bar of an Australian pub, complete with garish, swirly carpet that sticks to your feet and reeks of stale beer and cigarettes.

But for now, Meston’s focus is Drive – a work that aims to be brutal, funny, aware of itself as theatre and profoundly moving.

As the show charts a 14-hour trip through space and time, in the back seat of our heroine’s car, memory and fantasy come and go like a dark, otherworldly version of Taxicab Confessions. Urgent and immediate, Drive tells the stories you will never read about on your Instagram feed, but to which your heart will explosively relate.

June 6 – 15

www.theatreworks.org.au/program/drive/

[loopy777]

1/3 Unpopular opinion: from a purely thematic perspective, the Lion Turtle in the atla finale made perfect sense. Having Aang defeat the Fire Lord with a power given to him by an ancient creature who, just like Aang, is the last one of his species and who, also just like Aang, comes from a past that has been forgotten, is incredibly clever. After coming to terms with the fact that the Air Nomads are gone, after seeing the history of his culture either erased or altered to fit with

2/3 The Fire Nation's war propaganda, and after explicitly being told by the Fire Lord himself that his people and everything they stood for did not deserve to exist... Aang defeating Ozai without killing him and taking his powers away with a technique from days long forgotten is the biggest "fuck you" imaginable. It is, unto itself, an statement that needed to be made in a world that was already so scarred and hopeless due to the war. I'll always agree that the Lion Turtle

3/3 could've had a better build-up (things like the Lion Turtle statue in Piandao's manor were not foreshadowing, but mere easter eggs) but the parallels between it and Aang made everything tie in together perfectly, at least for me. Also, Lion Turtles are just pretty fucking cool in general and I want one as a pet. Thoughts?

You’re going to have to try harder to be unpopular with me, because I agree completely.

Well, mostly agree.

You’re on point with the part about it being thematically appropriate. I’m on record (via the Avatar Spirit forums) from before the airing of the finale as hoping that Aang’s defeat of Ozai comes about with some special Air Nomad move that embodies their philosophy. So I was already looking for something like we got, but as you say, bringing the Lionturtle with all its parallels is really clever.

I can understand if people would have liked Ozai to die as retribution for his crimes, as that’s a very human feeling and I’d be lying if I said I didn’t crave some cosmic retribution every so often, but the message of the way Aang actually defeats Ozai is so much better. I have more of a problem with people who try to nitpick the story. Like those who claim that no one will respect the Avatar if he doesn’t establish the possibility of a death penalty, to which I always ask which is scarier: dying, or having your soul ripped out and then being left to struggle through life without even the strength to sit up properly? And those who say that Aang selfishly placed his own spirituality above the safety of the world are completely missing what Aang’s ideals actually mean to him. He acted according to what he really saw as the best solution for everyone, not what would get him to a ‘heaven’ that doesn’t even exist in the setting.

Aang’s solution works both in-universe, and as part of the story.

What I do disagree with is that the Lionturtle needed better build-up or foreshadowing. I admit that the quick references to Lionturtles in The Desert and Sokka’s Master are functionally worthless, but I don’t think that Lionturtles need dedicated foreshadowing. Hei Bai, Koh, the Moon/Ocean Spirits, Wan Shi Tong, the weirdness in the Swamp, and Comet and Eclipse do all the foreshadowing we need, establishing that this world is full of weird, powerful, supernatural stuff that’s constantly surprising our main cast. The Lionturtle isn’t out of place amidst all of that, and it’s not like we’re given reason to wonder why the Lionturtle isn’t running around giving his power away to everyone. It’s established as a power that requires an ‘unbendable spirit,’ and that’s what Aang demonstrates when he meditates for an answer and the Lionturtle comes calling.

I’ve also never understood the criticism of the use of Deus Ex Machina, when ‘deus’ - literally ‘gods’ - are an established part of the setting who have reacted to story events before. So many people in our world pray, and they don’t even expect a response! But we get outraged when a god messes with stuff in a setting where gods get upset with mortals and sometimes rampage like Godzilla? XD

The only problem I have with Aang’s battle with Ozai is the rock that just so happens to hit Aang at the precise spot and Aangle (:P) to unlock the Avatar State. I’ll never be able to get over that one. Deux Ex Machina is great storytelling when done properly; Convenient Stuff is where my suspension of disbelief takes a hit.

Getting back to the Lionturtle itself, I too love the design, and also how little is really explained about it. The Mike and the Bryan have said that the reason Aang couldn’t be sniffed out is because the Lionturtle’s ancient scent covered up Aang’s, but that’s not said anywhere in any cartoon, so I’m sticking with my headcanon that the Lionturtle exists half in the Spirit World. I love how the Lionturtles are used in the tale of Avatar Wan, granting elemental powers and acting as shelters for humanity, still big and god-like and completely unexplained. They’re best left as a remnant of an age that has no surviving history, and showing their origins would risk destroying the impact for fan-service.

The only Lionturtle-specific criticism I have is that I could recognize Kevin Michael Richardson’s voice instantly. Something I couldn’t place so easily would have been better. And with the processing, he was a little hard to understand the first time I watched the finale.