#like media in general I guess

[masterchef901]

We're weird here, right? Yeah? Good. Let me tell you about the fucking MAGICAL narrative journey that is the CoD Zombies story. It's weird, it's jank as hell, and by the end it has me thinking seriously on the implicit meta-narrative to it. Also, the story ends like 4 separate times.

So we begin with CoD: World at War.

"Nazi Zombies", a minigame unlocked by beating the main story, where you get to feel more justified in sinking lead into a horde than possibly anywhere else in gaming, or life for that matter. Over the course of the original maps, the devs see positive fan response and put a little effort into it. We get perks, fancy technomagic laser guns and wonder-weapons, and even some characters and lore.

That lore, by the way, is "The nazis were experimenting on mysterious rocks that turned out to turn people into zombies. Then the zombies broke out. The end." Our heroes, meanwhile, are all simple as hell. A Japanese honor-obsessed samurai, a German mad scientist, a Russian whose only desire in life is vodka, and an ultra-macho rambo-esque American with an IQ only marginally higher than that of the zombies they'll be working together to slaughter. Basically, all stereotypes, but played for that over-the-top sort of comedy enough that I'll be generous and call them 'caricatures' instead. This group would eventually come to be called "Ultimis".

Call of Duty: Black Ops

Back by popular demand, is the Zombies mode, now no longer exclusive to the nazi brand of zombie, because the story's going international. This time, our heroes are going on a tour of WWII-era conspiracy theories. Ancient Vril mysticism, Shangri-La, nazi moon bases - basically the plot of Iron Sky 2. Simple, except not really, but definitely absurd in a fun, goofy way. Notably, the loading screens and advertising also framed these maps in a sort of "comic book"-y way, to help us understand the level of narrative consistency and complexity we'd be seeing here.

(Before continuing, by the way, we also have the absolute TREAT that is the map "Five". Seriously, go watch its opening cutscene, and then imagine those characters being your friendly voices for the duration of the game)

The critical thing here is that, while WaW had some "easter eggs", they were just cute little bits and bobs. "Interact with some rocks hidden around the map, play a song", stuff like that. But Black Ops easter eggs were something else entirely. Trying to explain these feels like explaining the conspiracy theories that inspired the maps. "Go stand on the floor panels to enter Eclipse mode. Then find the four wall-dials and set them to specific values. Now use the shrink ray on a specific rock, which you must then shoot around the map until it lands on the temple." Stuff like that. And even though nobody realized it until the end, they were all connected - if you do all the easter eggs leading up to it, then the Moon egg culminates in the mad scientist character taking over the zombie horde. And then you blow up the Earth.

That's right, they decide to just go flying beyond all chance of imagining this stuff was happening on the fringes of history, it was all-along the story of an apocalypse enacted by a mad scientist and his rival engineering events against him. The End. This was the BIG moment that grabbed the attention and imagination of me and others as a kid. It took Zombies from "neat" to "COOL", and, for better and worse, secured this storyline and style as the "zombies breadwinner" for several games to come.

Side note: I don't recall exactly when they did this, but at some point Treyarch's writers realized that it's maybe a bad look to have one of the playable characters be "'German scientist who helped create the Nazi Zombies", on account of, y'know, the fact that that makes him a nazi. So at some point they did that thing where they "soft-retcon" in some audio clarifying that actually while he was always a psychopath, he was only ever in it For The Science (tm) and it was actually his rival Dr. Maxis who signed his research team on with the reich.

I'm not sure if there's a term for this sort of the thing - when writers don't really retcon in the sense of overwriting previously established facts, but use "reveals" to try and overwrite the meaning of those previously established facts. Yes, technically that's what all good reveals do, but it's also obvious in times like these that there used to be a clear understanding of the lore on both the authors' and audience's parts, which the author has since decided they don't like and want to redo. "Oops, that previous evidence/event didn't count because of contrived circumstances you knew nothing about and could not possibly have guessed."

If I sound like I'm going off on a tangent, I want to be clear - firstly, this sort of practice always frustrates me, because it makes it clear that the author is readily willing to "cheat" in the game that is the communication of a narrative, and secondly because that's secretly what this whole mega-ramble is actually about.

Black Ops 2: We Care About The Lore Now

So, Treyarch wanted to do more Zombies, and they liked the vibe they had so far, so they decide to stay in the storyline that exploded earth. The characters - now a farm girl, a nerd, a hobo, and a schizophrenic guy, all American, all came off more annoying than the "comedic" take Treyarch wanted. This group would be dubbed "Victis", and not only were these characters poorly received, but the story itself would feel aimless. How do you one-up a grand master scheme and the apocalypse? What are our survivors even doing? Treyarch has our old mad scientist and his rival acting as voices in the Victis gang's collective head to try and vie for control of the zombies, and this story would ultimately culminate in one of them (based on player choices involving arcane steps punctuated by some oddly sexual ones) winning the power struggle, and either way, some type of "the world ends again", either with the mad scientist turning the world into his plaything, or (the canon ending) the rival scientist enacting some weird arcane collapse that will let him be with his daughter. Either way, we don't revisit this world again.

I specify world because the characters will return, and even in the same game, actually.

But first - in the middle of the Victis plotline we take a brief visit to Alcatraz for an unexpectedly great zombies experience that's entirely disconnected from either of the plotlines so far. I bring this up only for completeness sake, and for a point that'll hopefully become clearer later.

Anyway, we now return to our regularly scheduled zombie programming - by which I mean, a whole new experience, Origins, featuring "modernized", more tasteful renditions of our original Ultimis team. We're introduced now to a strong-but-disciplined American soldier, a now safely WWI-era not-quite-mad German Scientist, a world-weary Russian who uses alcohol to tastefully take the edge off, and a Japanese samurai warrior who's struggling with the decaying traditional idea of "honor" in a World-War 1 setting.

This "new" (yet chronologically older) variant of the team would be dubbed "Primis".

And this time the plot has them freeing the spirit of a young girl, Samantha, daughter of Science Rival Guy Dr. Maxis who we'd just seen end the world (twice) from some weird arcane trap on the battlefield "of the Great War" so she can go to a mysterious place called "Agartha". Also, the ending cutscene shows her and "Eddie" (who appears to be a child version of our playable german scientist) to be playing with dolls and action figures of the zombies and the playable characters - implying that in fact our whole storyline thus far was "just a game", and the shift of control over the zombie hordes in the first game to Edward Richtofen was in fact just "Eddie" taking his turn playing as the zombies.

It's easy to forget for those of us who've kept up with the story since this, but I cannot overstate how confusing this entire situation was to resolve from a lore perspective. Options were:

1: As implied in the cutscene, acktually "it was all just a game". The lore that players had worked hard to uncover was all, within its own canon, a game being played by children. This was wildly unpopular, but also quite possibly the authors' intended interpretation because in a very real sense, it all WAS a game, and the lore mostly WAS made-up by players out of scraps of lore they'd found.

2: Our four protagonists had acktually all met for the first time in WWI, then again incidentally wound up together again after un-developing as characters due to Magic Rock Exposure (tm) in WWII. Somehow the little girl freed in Origins and her dad whose brain got put in a drone during that process both get put back into their bodies, I guess.

3: It's all a parallel universe with its own separate continuity; the little girl and Eddie believe they're just playing games with toys when in reality they've been shipped off to copyright-safe-Heaven and "games with toys" is how they cope with the trauma of their zombie-filled lives.

BLACK OPS 3: MORE

So, Treyarch picks option 3. Makes sense, it keeps us gamers feeling like our investment was in something worthwhile and not arbitrarily patched together, while also allowing them some more narrative liberty. Easy, right?

WRONG

Rather than just roll with "We're doing zombies again in a newer, cleaner universe", they have to tie everything up ALL together. Our new plotline is that ACTHSDHALY the zombie-rocks came from a bunch of eldritch tentacle-creatures called Apothicons from super-hell. We meet Dr. Monty, who's basically like if Willy Wonka was actually secretly God who's trying to get the kids safe and sound up in heaven and the now eldritch-based zombies sealed back away.

We follow Team Primis as they go back into our first universe to harvest the souls of Team Ultimis (so, their own original souls) which will somehow allow them to go to I-can't-believe-it's-not-Heaven too. They go there, shit accidentally goes wrong when eldritch-satan breaks out, but the gang beats him up with guns and Monty is able to re-establish his perfect world.

Except, uh, he tried to delete the Primis crew while he was it it, but don't worry, that random moment in Alcatraz earlier was act[coughing fit]ally super-duper important and drinking the blood of those prisoners let out heroes survive! BUT ACTASKFHALY THIS WAS MONTY'S PLAN ALL ALONG and he teleports them back in time to fight in-

oh right so "the great war" from origins wasn't in reference to WWI, it was

actually

the site of The Great War between humanity and the apothicons, and Monty time-travels the crew back then to be the heroes of legend that set up Origins to happen, creating a time loop. Characters are, this whole time, saying "the paradox must be resolved" without ever explaining what it is.

But yeah anyway the whole ride this game leads to a big "it was all a time loop" cycle deal, and also the tone has slowly shifted from BO1 comic-style to something that feels more like an "Avengers"-style quiptacular with MORE budget, MORE stakes, MORE lore that actually isn't a good thing because the more lore they pile on the more twisted and absurd the story has to get and also it occurs to me that "going avengers" actually is kinda the natural conclusion to "being like comic books".

BLACK OPS 4: BUT WAIT THERE'S FOUR

So at this point, Treyarch and Activision in general are spending more focus on trying to figure out a new angle to Zombies, but nothing takes off. Infinity Ward's "Zombies in Spaceland" was a whiff, Cod:WW2's "reboot" of Nazi Zombies didn't stick, and their new "Chaos" storyline featuring mixed-religious lore was also met with lukewarm-to-poor response (sidenote here: now that we're in a proper era where it's common practice to ask "What if Ra punched Odin in the face while Ares watches" we really should establish a term for it, like "Mixed-Religious Combat" following the form of "Mixed Martial Arts).

SO They felt some pressure to go back once more to the cash cow what is their absolute mess of an "original" zombies story, now termed the "Aether" arc. They don't have many maps left to develop this but that doesn't stop them from opening the story again, and this time the writers have fucking HAD IT with this story so they decide it's time to fucking END it.

Here's your finale: Victis crew (the all-american team nobody liked) are back, slightly better written this time, on the map that had gone the longest without a remake (notably, in keeping with modern media practice, every zombies map from from the Ultimis-Primis plotline had been remade at least once by now), and they make a macguffin.

Then Primis Nikolai (the russian guy) uses it to wish a new, zombie-free universe into existence and sends the kids away into it.

Also he poisons and kills all of Ultimis and Primis. Then has the kids shoot him. THE ADULTS ARE ALL DEAD NOW AND THEY GOT BANISHED TO SUPERHELL WITH THEIR MULTIVERSE THE END. Nikolai gives us some lore mumbo jumbo about how the arcano-babble and the eldritch-babble had done some techno-babble that "bound the team's destiny forever to the apothicon menace", so that the only way a universe could ever be free of zombies would be for him and his friends to all die.

And the thing is, he's right. Because if you've followed this far, you're probably seeing a pattern: People like these characters, even in their worst-written moments, and Activision isn't going to just let that go unmilked. As long as there is any possible way for these characters to return, they'll be brought back and the lore is going to be held and gunpoint and forced to cook up a reason for them to be there shooting zombies. So the only possible way to let this tortured, tangled mess of a plot finally reach an actual ending is to kill its protagonists - and not just kill them, but write them off so conclusively that there's no chance of resurrection, no more alternate universes containing them, NOTHING. THEY ARE GONE. And true to the Homestuck-ass law that was inspired by this exact effect, the only way death can stick from a narrative sense is if everyone's death is either a Just end or a Heroic sacrifice to nobly ensure a better life For the Kids.

Samantha and Eddie (at this point nobody asks why Eddie even exists or what timeline these kids are from) are finally safe. The end.

COD COLD WAR THE STORY KEEPS GOING

As if to prove my point, Cold War Zombies picks up with a new set of protagonists... and an easter egg featuring the return of Samantha, now slightly more grown up, I guess, and also with superpowers? And then she flies around a bit, before finally heroically sacrificing herself out of the story for good. Eddie - now a full adult Edward Richtofen once more - is a "big reveal" in a cutscene afterwards, confirming that, in fact, there will be no peace fucking ever until every last character from this beautiful, twisted plot is gone.

EPILOGUE

And I want to be clear, it is beautiful. I wouldn't have followed it this far or spent two hours learning just how much I have to type about it if I didn't love every second of it, especially the seconds spent hating on it. I could, and probably eventually will write another essay at some point on how fucking much I love jank-ass "broken" things like this.

But for now, I hope y'all see my points here. It's this weird case you see happen every now and then where people just fall in love with their characters, and won't ever let go. Certainly doesn't help that the authors of those characters can't figure out how to write anyone else decently, but this is just one of many franchises I've seen where the unwillingness to let go of a fan-favorite leaves the plot tied in knots as it constantly has to try and present a NEW BIGGEST THREAT EVER that becomes a BIG DRAMATIC CONCLUSIVE FINALE that then needs even bigger contrivances to bring the favorites back.

It's done a fucking number on Halo's story, which is impressive because a lot of halo's core fans never even really consider that it has one. It's hard for me to talk about Halo here without thinking to myself "STOP TALKING ABOUT JOHN"

Same deal with Marvel, same with Homestuck, same deal in a lot of cases that I'm sure you're aware of too.

So as my closing thought and my reward to you for reading this far, here's some homework! What the fuck do you call these problems? What do you call it when lore starts to go sour because it's spent too long being about the same thing? What do you call it when fan demand forces writers to rethink their endings repeatedly? What do you call it when writers "cheat" their way around prior writing, re-contextualizing everything so much that it's hard to actually believe anything they say anymore and we're just left to sigh and feel odd relief when they say "Somehow Palpatine has returned" without further explanation because at least that means ONLY the ending of the original trilogy has its weight retroactively worsened?

[icewindandboringhorror]

Little bright colored outfit with a fun vest ~

(shoes from ebay like 10 years ago. everything else is thrifted)

[abyssal-ilk]

dragon age in general. why the fuck are you like that about the qunari and the qun.

[ecoterrorist-katara]

I’m so tired of wlw background ships in mlm fandoms.

mlm shippers almost never develop wlw ships to the degree that the audience feels invested in them. The conflict and character development and love story rely on tropes rather than actual narratives, yet fandoms act like they’re doing wlws a favour by shoehorning in this shitty “representation” when it’s just golden retriever x black cat over and over and over again in different fonts.

To be clear I don’t blame anyone for not having big wlw ships, because most major media out there do not have two fully fledged female characters you can ship together. If you want to write mlm ships, good for you! If you want a lazy wlw ship in the background, that’s fine! But don’t act as if the fandom actually cares about them, or that anyone did the legwork to make them characters that you can care about. Most of these female characters are never properly developed in the canon source material, and they’re almost never properly developed in the fanon material either. You can always tell by how these women are like, one archetype + gay (sporty gay, feisty gay, slutty gay etc, like some kind of gay Spice Girls). Yet fandoms just love to act like these background wlws mean so much & have the best love stories & everyone just should ship them. It’s all so performative.

wlws are not an aesthetic. wlws are not 2D happy couples to round out your queer utopia, a queer utopia that somehow still manages to foreground men. Women are always treated as 2D characters in narratives, except now there’s a subgenre where these 2D women are gay. Groundbreaking.

[prettyflyshyguy]

Congratulations! You aged.

🎉🎂🎉

[skrunksthatwunk]

actually i'm still thinking about the moral orel finale.

he has a cross on his wall. do you know how much i think about that bc it's a lot.

a lot of stories ((auto)biographical or fictional) centering escape from abusive/fundamentalist christianity result in the lead characters leaving behind christianity entirely. and that makes complete sense! people often grow disillusioned with the associated systems and beliefs, and when it was something used to hurt them or something so inseparable from their abuse that they can't engage with it without hurting, it makes total sense that they would disengage entirely. and sometimes they just figure out that they don't really believe in god/a christian god/etc. a healthy deconstruction process can sometimes look like becoming an atheist or converting to another religion. it's all case by case. (note: i'm sure this happens with other religions as well, i'm just most familiar with christian versions of this phenomenon).

but in orel's case, his faith was one of the few things that actually brought him comfort and joy. he loved god, y'know? genuinely. and he felt loved by god and supported by him when he had no one else. and the abuses he faced were in how the people in his life twisted religion to control others, to run away from themselves, to shield them from others, etc. and often, orel's conflicts with how they acted out christianity come as a direct result of his purer understanding of god/jesus/whatever ("aren't we supposed to be like this/do that?" met with an adult's excuse for their own behavior or the fastest way they could think of to get orel to leave them alone (i.e. orel saying i thought we weren't supposed to lie? and clay saying uhhh it doesn't count if you're lying to yourself)). the little guy played catch with god instead of his dad, like.. his faith was real, and his love was real. and i think it's a good choice to have orel maintain something that was so important to him and such a grounding, comforting force in the midst of. All That Stuff Moralton Was Up To/Put Him Through. being all about jesus was not the problem, in orel's case.

and i know i'm mostly assuming that orel ended up in a healthier, less rigid version of christianity, but i feel like that's something that was hinted at a lot through the series, that that's the direction he'd go. when he meditates during the prayer bee and accepts stephanie's different way to communicate, incorporating elements of buddhism into his faith; when he has his I AM A CHURCH breakdown (removing himself from the institution and realizing he can be like,, the center of his own faith? taking a more individualistic approach? but Truly Going Through It at the same time), his acceptance (...sometimes) of those who are different from him and condemned by the adults of moralton (stephanie (lesbian icon stephanie my beloved), christina (who's like. just a slightly different form of fundie protestant from him), dr chosenberg (the jewish doctor from otherton in holy visage)). his track record on this isn't perfect, but it gets better as orel starts maturing and picking up on what an absolute shitfest moralton is. it's all ways of questioning the things he's been taught, and it makes sense that it would lead to a bigger questioning as he puts those pieces together more. anyway i think part of his growth is weeding out all the lost commandments of his upbringing and focusing on what faith means to him, and what he thinks it should mean. how he wants to see the world and how he wants to treat people and what he thinks is okay and right, and looking to religion for guidance in that, not as like. a way to justify hurting those he's afraid or resentful of, as his role models did.

he's coming to his own conclusions rather than obediently, unquestioningly taking in what others say. but he's still listening to pick out the parts that make sense to him. (edit/note: and it's his compassion and his faith that are the primary motivations for this questioning and revisal process, both of individual cases and, eventually, the final boss that is christianity.) it makes perfect sense as the conclusion to his character arc and it fits the overall approach of the show far better. it's good is what i'm saying.

and i think it's important to show that kind of ending, because that's a pretty common and equally valid result of deconstruction. and i think it cements the show's treatment of christianity as something that's often (and maybe even easily) exploited, but not something inherently bad. something that can be very positive, even. guys he even has a dog he's not afraid of loving anymore. he's not afraid of loving anyone more than jesus and i don't think it's because he loves this dog less than bartholomew (though he was probably far more desperate for healthy affection and companionship when he was younger). i think it's because he figures god would want him to love that dog. he's choosing to believe that god would want him to love and to be happy and to be kind. he's not afraid of loving in the wrong way do you know how cool that is he's taking back control he's taking back something he loves from his abusers im so normal

[tvntheatre]

I would like to bring up how user @cracksh0t is the major reason I got here, drawing these damned cracknutters.

[moreespressoformydepresso]

So I was thinking (shocker I know) about Gaul's theory about humanity. That people, when cornered, lose their humanity and become monsters. More specifically, I've been having thoughts about the moment that "confirmed" this theory in Snow's head for a while now and decided to put them into words. Which might be a terrible idea, but I never claimed to be smart.

According to Gaul, people who are cornered will do anything to survive and lose all sense of humanity to do so. The Games are supposed to be a constant reminder of this, which already raises a few questions that I was going to pose before getting to my actual thoughts here until it evolved into a whole separate train of thoughts. I'll make it a separate post instead but long story short: If it was supposed to be a reminder of this "truth" it was a sloppy, embarrasing failure at best (and also that's not how science works). Regardless of that though, the moment that solidified this delusion is his brutally murdering Bobbin while escaping the arena with Sejanus. There's a problem though. Or rather, there's several problems. Firstly, Snow chose to bash Bobbin's head in until he was unrecognizable. Chose, because he didn't have to do it. If you want my more interesting/unique(?) thoughts skip the next paragraph.

Most people would have knocked Bobbin out at most and then kept running, Snow chose to keep hitting with the wooden plank. He did this not because he lost all his humanity, but because he is a deeply disturbed individual. His formative years were filled with war and propaganda, and his family's proud name being dragged into the mud by his living situation understandably gave him a complex about power and wealth. He needed to feel above other people to cope, and the Capitol provided. Now, that does not in any way excuse his actions (and if anyone's interested I have several essays worth of thoughts on that and all the ways in which it makes me adore Collins and hate extremes in fandom), but it does explain them. Moreover, that complex and stubborn pride in his family's former high status likely fed into his belief in Gaul's theory. If it's true for someone of his status, it must be true for everyone.

Now, the actual reason for this post

Gaul's theory is that people lose their humanity when they're cornered. Emphasis on cornered here. When people are put under pressure, they will act in depraved ways. From Snow's perspective of reality, this is true because when he was cornered he brutally beat a child to death. But was he cornered though? No. Sure, he was in a scary situation, but he was not cornered. There was one child with a knife chasing after him. A starved, dying one. Snow and Sejanus could've easily outran him with some adrenaline boosting them (that shit makes moms lift whole cars to save their kids, come on now), nevermind the millions of other solutions that aren't "beat a child to death with a wooden plank until they're unrecognizable". More importantly though, they're not stuck in the arena. The peacekeepers didn't actively protect them, but they opened the fence for them. Snow could leave the arena. He could've dodged Bobbin and ran, and he'd have been able to leave the arena without murdering a kid. He was pressed, but he was not cornered. Not only does this theory have the most pathetic "proof" of any scientific theory since Andrew Wakefield's vaccine scam, the incident that confirmed it in Snow's mind isn't even a situation where the theory is applicable in the first place. It doesn't prove that people who are cornered lose their humanity. You know what it does prove, though?

People who have power lose their sense of humanity

Snow was not entirely cornered, but he did have power. As mentioned before, Bobbin is a starving child with nothing but a large knife. Snow might not be well-fed by Capitol standards, but he was certainly doing amazing by district standards. He had a wooden plank and a child at his mercy. What did he do? He maimed and murdered the kid. And throughout the entire book, stuff like this happens. Gaul showed him how the snakes work because he's her favorite prodigy. What did he do? He used it to cheat and help Lucy Gray win. When he had that recording of Sejanus admitting to rebellion, he had power over Sejanus' life. What did he do? He got the guy executed. When he had a gun and Mayfair became a possible problem, he shot her. When he became president, he kept the games going and poisoned anyone in his way because he had the power to do so. Mayfair has the power to influence who gets reaped, and uses it to try and get Lucy Gray killed. It happens on a larger scale too. It's the whole point of the series. The Capitol has all the power, and they use it by abusing and murdering the people from the districts, either to keep them in line or just because they want to. For entertainment. Because they can, and there's nothing the districts can do about it. Coin has power, and what does she do with it? She gets Prim killed to break Katniss into her pawn and suggests to put more innocent children through the Hunger Games because she can. Just like the Capitol did, 75 years before that. They can, so they do it. Who's gonna stop them? It's all over the series. And they all try to justify their actions by blaming it on people. Mayfair’s excuse is getting rid of “competition”, the Capitol claims the districts are getting what’s coming to them for the rebellion, Coin claims this new version of the games is what the rebellion wants. Snow has all his mental gymnastics.

It's not desperation that turns people into monsters, it's power.

And those with power will always convince themselves it's not the power, it's the people.

[july-19th-club]

giggling and kicking my feet and prancing into my armchair to watch this annoying guy do embarrassing things on my tv show with his hot friend . and also Tim is there

[fiapple]

i'm getting towards the end of the skypeia arc, & i'd like to say just how much i adore the way the female strawhats have been treated.

just... every aspect of how the way their characters have been previously contextualized influences the story-line is treated with a masterful amount of consideration. we're given so many layers to both of them that enrich not only their characters specifically, but the arc, and the one piece world as a whole. without nami & robin having their specific skills, and their specific values, without those being built upon, the story would have come to a halt.

you could not have skypeia without nami & robin being who they are as individuals. not just because they never would've gotten there without nami, but also because the way these women think is itself foundational to the machinations of the arc as a whole.

to be totally upfront, if you think any other strawhats were more central to the skypeia arc than nami & robin were you are full-on fucking lying to yourself.

[fallloverfic]

I've seen some very odd takes about certain language used in the scene where Mizrak rebukes Olrox at the end of Castlevania: Nocturne, which I think might be due to lack of knowledge about the historical context of certain things.

CW: historical racism against First Nation groups

I know reading academic articles isn't for everyone, but I have to wonder if a lot of people in the Castlevania: Nocturne fandom have not watched things like, say, Disney's 1995 animated Pocahontas, which, for all its many, many flaws, features the song, Savages. I'm not going to quote it in full here, you can find the song lyrics elsewhere (though the European colonizers do use the lines "vermin" and "barely even human", among other epithets). It's not a great song for a lot of reasons (among them being it tries to "both sides" things). But to look at the scene in CN where Mizrak, a Christian working in a European Christian church with at least some Europeans, calls Olrox, a First Nation man, an animal without the understanding of how Christian European colonizers (typically as part of or at least backed by some Christian churches) have viewed First Nation peoples and treated them, and certain epithets used for them, and how European Christian dehumanization of "new world" groups and non-Christians generally worked/works?

Well.

[icewindandboringhorror]

I've referenced before how I have a big google document to keep track of every media I've ever seen in my entire life (just for reference because I like to track everything possible lol… I am the Data Collector), but recently as I was updating it, I thought of actually evaluating them to find out random percentages (like for example, out of Total Shows Watched, what percentage did I finish vs. stop watching, what percentage did I like or dislike, etc.)...

Evaluating these things is made easier by the fact that I already place everything on each subsection of the list into 6 broad ranking categories, so I don't have to go back and guess to figure out how I feel about them or anything. The categories are: Ranking 5 - overall best* (despite some criticisms of course because I'm too much of an Analyzer to ever find anything Perfect lol) Ranking 4 - more positive than neutral, but not good enough to be 5 Ranking 3 - either the good + bad negate each other, OR it's just not memorable/interesting in any way enough to be ranked higher or lower (this is the Default category ALL things are placed in if no other rank applies) Ranking 2 - maybe a few redeemable elements but largely more negatives than positives Ranking 1 - So bad that it circles around to being fascinating to observe in some way (not necessarily Funny, or Good, but just interesting somehow) Ranking 0 - Bad in a genuinely frustrating or obnoxious manner

*("best" primarily defined here as most interesting, rather than most good in a technical sense, or some other measure. I tend to value more highly whether there's something novel or thoughtful about the worldbuilding, tone, writing, base premise, etc - than about whether it's actually executed perfectly.)

And here's the amount of shows that have so far been placed into each category -

TV shows ~ Rank 5 (highest) - 20 shows ~ Rank 4 (mid-high) - 28 shows ~ Rank 3 (neutral/default/meh) - 114 shows ~ Rank 2 (mid low) -33 shows ~ Rank 1 (low low but intriguingly so) - 14 shows ~ Rank 0 (iredeemably low) - 2 shows

This would make for a total of 211 TV shows overall. However, there are 57 shows within these list marked as "didn't finish" (typically meaning I quit on the very first or second episode - but log them still to keep a record that I at least had a brief view of them).

So my total of genuinely fully watched shows would be more 154. 211 Total, but a More Accurate Total of 154.

Counting them all and using the Total Number Of The List (211) -- that means roughly 9.5% of all total shows I have ever watched (or at least attempted to watch) have been Mostly Good, 13% have been Moderately Okay, 54% have been either entirely Forgettable or some mix of good + bad that lands them right in the Neutral Middle, 15.6% have been Mostly Bad, 6.6% have been Bad (but in an interesting way), and 0.9% have been Terribly Bad.

Additionally, I didn't even get past the first two episodes of about 27% of the total.

Sooo, discounting ones I didn't finish, my total TV shows ever watched in my life would be about 154 (maybe give or take a few, assuming I might have forgotten some from very long ago).

But instead of entire life, let's just say this is the total for 'About 20 Years' (so, not counting very early childhood when I likely wouldn't remember things I saw/have no detailed recollection of them (like for example, I'm sure at some point when I was like 4yrs old I must have seen an episode of Spongebob or something, but I have zero distinct memories of it, can't quote anything of it, and barely recall the premise - so I don't count it on the list, etc.)).

In that case, 154 divided by 20 would be roughly 7.7 shows a year.

Which is actually surprisingly low considering that I often have stuff on in the background for hours whilst I make sculptures and do costumes and stuff (maybe I should have also marked some distinction between 'things I fully paid attention to' and 'things I kind of half listened to whilst sculpting', but that would further split the categories too much probably lol), but I guess a lot of that is youtube videos or random documentaries, so .. eh.. maybe I get it being lower.

Now, doing the same thing for movies-

Movies ~ Rank 5 (highest) - 4 movies (3.4% of total) ~ Rank 4 (mid-high) - 12 movies (10.3% of total) ~ Rank 3 (neutral/default/meh) - 91 movies (78.4% of total) ~ Rank 2 (mid low) - 8 movies (6.8% of total) ~ Rank 1 (low but interesting) - 1 movie (0.8% of total) ~ Rank 0 (irredeemably low) - none in this category (0%)

That makes 116 for a Total (Actually Remembered) Movies Watched In Lifetime (Or At Least In 20 Years).

116 divided by 20 is roughly 5 or 6 movies a year (I feel this has probably been skewed though by adding everything since like elementary school onwards, as I remember a lot more movies from child/teen years.. Whereas, the past 3 years I feel like I've barely seen maybe even 5 movies?? lol). I also have "Didn't Finish" marked on 18 of them. Which means I quit halfway through about 15% of the total movies.

So, a for broader summary stuff..

I seem to be less forgiving to movies than tv shows, by far. Which makes sense to me, I guess, because I love elaboration and details, so "short form" things that only last an hour or two are often lost on me a bit. My biggest complaint with movies is indeed usually walking away just wishing there had been more exposition, more scenes where characters are doing nothing, more "mindless bantering" conversations, more Quiet Downtime and Lore Elaboration and so on lol, so... of course most 1-2hr films end up feeling a bit Not Enough To Draw My Interest/Nothingy to me.

If you count 5 and 4 as "like" and rankings 2 to 0 as "dislike", then for TV shows I at least somewhat liked 48 of them, and at least somewhat disliked 47 of them.. So it's almost exactly the same lol. I'm just about equally as likely to find something bad as I am to find something redeeming about it. But overall, the largest chance is that I just won't really care much for it at all and it will be tossed into the 'neutral' pile, forgotten forever. Movies have a bit better of a balance, "liking" 16 of them, and "disliking" only 9 of them. So I'm slightly more likely to enjoy a movie than to find it annoying - though still VASTLY more likely to just not find it anything in particular, possibly not even finishing it.

ANYWAY.. this is vague and literally pointless, but like I said, I just really find information fun. Like my document where I've rated every apple flavor I've ever tried (like 40 of them now?), or reviewed every oreo flavor (32?), or ranking data from my entire 10 years of Trying To Make Friends process (out of 100 people, roughly 8% chance of a moderate compatibility, 3% chance of high), or etc. etc.. I love to have random pointless things to analyze I suppose lol.

I doubt anyone tracks things in their life in this same exact way, but I'd be interested in hearing any at least somewhat similar data !!! (like, how many TV shows you watch a year on average, and what percentage of those you like vs. dislike (if you keep track of that sort of thing), etc.)). I guess it might be easier with movies, since I think some people use those websites where you curate a list of movies you've seen and you can rate them or something, so maybe the numbers are already available on those places. :0

[meirimerens]

straight up not respecting some of the alleged p2 characters' ages as they were given on the VA's papers bc you're telling me this is a 27yo man on the left & a 35(!)yo woman on the right? you jest. this woman is in her 20s at most. she doesn't have a wrinkle of age on her face. just worry. i know men age like milk this is taking the piss. i know patho 2 is the "hot blemishless 20something white(-passing) women" game but at this point own it. don't try lying to me. she doesn't look a day past 29. got friends below 25 with more winkles. in the first half of the 20th century too. where would she be getting her anti-aging serums.

you're telling me this woman who's a chronic worrier, dealing with chronic pain, who smokes like a locomotive to cope is allegedly 5 years Older than this guy who's been drinking himself to sleep for like 5 years.

(mike's mic voice) don't piss me off

[dotsartspot]

Aight maybe an unpopular opinion but i have to say it bc i feel like i’m going insane??? I just don’t understand why people are so insistent on seeing this season as a black and white scenario in regards to TRG and especially Kipperlily.

First of all I have zero beef with this season. Dimension 20 has never once claimed to be on the same level of narrative seriousness as a show like Critical Role. D20 is a full comedy show on a streaming platform that posts almost exclusively comedic content. I get that people are disappointed and I understand why and it’s fair but it also just seems a little… i guess odd is the word I’ll use, to be so upset about feeling like the message fell flat or that the bad kids were rewarded for being assholes or what have you when Dimension 20, first and foremost, is a comedy show done by professional improv comedians. These comedians have also fully stated on record that emotionally heavy seasons are really rough for them. That’s the whole reason why they haven’t done a second Crown of Candy with the full cast of Intrepid Heroes. Their lack of making this season super emotionally impactful is probably simply bc despite the overarching message that was setup, they didn’t WANT it to be more serious than that.

And the second issue I have with complaints i’m seeing is the way people are coddling Kipperlily. I get she was manipulated I get that it’s tragic its part of why her character is so good but also hey guys can we please stop pretending like the kid who willingly became a pawn of a man trying to become a war god is fully innocent in her own downfall? Can we stop pretending like emotional distress, especially when it’s fueled by so much bitter jealousy towards someone who has truly done nothing to you, is any sort of justification for her actions? She’s the only one who joined them willingly. I’m not saying she wasn’t manipulated and that her story isn’t tragic but she wasn’t a GOOD person. She was a fucked up teenager who decided her sadness was more important than everyone else in the world and then actively aided a plan that would cause direct harm to innocent people who did not affect her in the slightest. Redemption is real and second chances are worth giving but not everyone is worth giving it to and i know some people think that’s such an awful thing to say but as much as they think it’s so awful that doesn’t stop it from being true. EVERYONE has their battles. EVERYONE is messed up in some way shape or form, that’s just the reality of the world. But not everyone who has trauma is an asshole. Because despite whatever pain you may have, you yourself ultimately decide what you’re going to do with it and how you’ll respond to your own ugly negativity towards others. And imho people who choose to take their pain and wield it as a weapon against people who have done nothing wrong are not always worth talking off the ledge. Sometimes these people don’t WANT to be better, they just want their behavior to be justified. Sometimes they take your attempts to reach out a hand to try to drown you instead, or just fully drown you with them. Sometimes people aren’t willing to put in the work to make themselves better, and you can extend all the hands in the world but if that person does not WANT to get better, they simply never will.

[valtsv]

why is no one freaking out about the new tumblrtv feature wtf??? do you have it?? am i the only one who gets sucked into a tiktok viewing hell whenever i tap on a gif or picture on the app???? im so fucking mad i sent staff feedback for the first time in a decade jesus

i mean it's annoying but i've been able to exit videos i click on to watch by hitting the back button on my phone so it's not like. life ruining for me. i sent feedback saying i'm not happy with it anyway because i think it's stupid but i have very little personal investment in it. if tumblr ever becomes unusable for me i'll just leave.