#more explanation: it works for adulting because this is essentially how you handle emotions and all that psychological stuff i can't explai

[eri-pl]

So I was thinking about how the solution to Legendarium (and adulting in general! And arguably other things) is always "the secret third solution, but you can't try to cheat, and it'll be harder than you think" (sorry, I can't phrase it better. But see: B&L, Fingon rescuing Maedhros, what to do with the Ring, probably a lot of other things I forgot).

And I thought about Turgon sending all those sailors to Valinor, which kinda was the third option, and asked myself: what if Turgon sailed himself? (Leaving ruling the city to Idril for example).

It feels like something that might have worked despite the ban and all (it is out-of-the-box, and he was Ulmo's fav Elf). (Yes, I know it is said that Earendil got to Valinor only because he had the Silmaril.)

What do you think?

[the-lone-witch-and-secret-room]

I'm currently working on a fic that's set a few years after Amity breaks away from her parents' grip and is forced to ask her father for help with repairing something. Would it be accurate to portray him as more apathetic to everything around him, like a more cynical Rick Sanchez?

Anon, I feel a bit bad interfering in your creative process, but… please don’t write that. I’m sure you have good intentions, but this whole concept is extremely harmful, as you’re putting Amity into a very dangerous situation.

Amity is canonically a victim of emotional abuse from both of her parents. (Maybe I’ll cover their separate roles in the abuse their children suffer more in-depth at some point, but for now, in short: emotional abuse often works via words, sometimes actions, but it can also be the lack of action that’s abusive—the former of which is Odalia, the latter Alador falls under, for the most part.)

Having Amity break away from her parents grip is a healthy, important step for her. DON’T have her reach out to her father again, especially not because she needs something from him. That’s super, super dangerous. Their power dynamic has always been heavily imbalanced towards her father. Having her crawl back to him because she needs something from him gives him power to hold over her. That she needs something so desperately she’s forced to interact with him, as you said, means he has a lot of power to hold over her in this situation. Alador’s whole thing is that he pays little to no attention to Amity outside of how she can be useful to him, p.e. using her to network when she’s six, and recognizing her potential to become coven leader and therefore an access to more power for his family. As far as we know, he’s never been there for her when she needed him, and I don’t see how this would be different—unless he finds a way to benefit from it somehow, which would be even more dangerous.

Considering how much her parents have hurt her, and the implication that Amity has recognized that hurt rather than continued to accept her parents’ excuses of calling the abuse “tough love” since she’s emancipated herself and essentially cut contact with them, there’s nothing that could break that could be important enough for Amity to force herself to interact with her father again. She’d exhaust every other possibility to fix whatever it is, but she wouldn’t over her dead body go back to her abuser to ask for help, especially not because as a neglecting parent, Alador is specifically someone she could never rely on for help.

That’s a behavior she might be at risk of falling into right after cutting contact, but if it’s been years, she’s had a lot of time to put everything she suffered through as a child into a different perspective. She has a healthier environment in Luz and her friends and potentially other mentor figures that aren’t parental, depending on whether for example Lilith is in her life at that point—Eda and Camila probably would be through Luz. She knows which people she can rely on, and which she can’t and doesn’t want to rely on.

From how the ask is worded I’m guessing you didn’t plan for the whole incident to go over very well (even though that’s a little hard to tell without more context), but even so, I’m asking you to please rethink the general concept.

If something is somehow important enough for her to ask her abusers of all people for help, there’s no telling how much she’d let them get away with in regards to how they treat her if she really needs their help that much. She might even have to force herself to walk on eggshells around her abusers, since she can’t risk pissing them off while she needs them. You can probably see how that’s an issue.

If you really want to write a fic about emancipated Amity interacting with her parents, put her in a situation where she is in control, rather than her parents. If it’s Alador and Odalia that need/want something from Amity instead of the other way around, Amity can refuse their request, and even if she doesn’t initially, she can cut them back out of her life at any given point during the story. She doesn’t have to put up with any bad behavior from her parents. The second they overstep a line she drew, she can cut them off again, and the whole thing is over. There’s still dangers to this situation, of course (it’s important to keep in mind that it’s not uncommon for abusers to pretend to be better people for a time, only to fall back into their usual behavior as soon as they have the victim back in their control), but giving Amity control over the situation and hence the means to end it whenever she wants to is an entirely different setup than her going to her parents for help, and essentially giving them back the means to control her.

I highly recommend checking out the story Make My Home Inside Your Heart by @whatisurowlpolicy regarding how to handle adult Amity around her parents, but the main takeaway from me here would be, plain and simple: Do not put an emancipated abuse victim into a situation where she’s forced to rely on her abusers for help.

Edit: I am not saying abuse victims can’t write about their experiences, I’m sorry if that came across that way. Longer explanation in my reblog but essentially just if you write something like this without personal experience, especially as a beginner writer, there’s a high chance you’ll accidentally end up causing more harm than good. This is one of the topics that I firmly believe you shouldn’t be covered at all if it can’t be covered respectfully.

[the-ghost-king]

So I'm not going to start like an Anti-Chiron tag because I don't find that enjoyable personally, but every so often people ask why I dislike him so here's essentially a "masterpost" of my thoughts on that situation for when anyone asks, just so I have it to explain some...

This isn't nearly a full list, and there's many more "incidents" that make me less than fond of Chiron, I don't hate the old man but he leaves a bad taste in my mouth and I'm not a fan of that. He's a very twisted character.

- The Lightning Thief

This quote is literally just after Percy's mom "dies", they're all sitting on the porch of the Big House right after he's finally woken up after days of sleeping, and that's the line Chiron pulls out on him.

That's straight up emotional manipulation which was entirely unnecessary in the context of what Chiron was trying to explain. There wasn't a single reason for that, in the slightest.

Immediately following that, and Percy, who canonically has anger issues, does his best to remain calm, he is immediately threatened by Dionysus, and Chiron doesn't even tell Dionysus off for doing that; Chiron just let's it happen. It's Grover who has to speak up to tell Dionysus off...

The only reason Chiron comes out looking like a old guy in this scene is because Dionysus was so much worse in his behavior, at one point intimidating Percy with his power over madness.

- The Titan's Curse

This is the aftermath of when Nico ran away upon confirmation of Bianca's death. When Percy is telling Chiron about the situation, Chiron wishes Nico had been eaten alive rather than recruited into an army.

He'd rather a child be dead than fight against him, and he openly tells this to other children he's in charge of. If Percy went missing would he have said "I hope he was eaten <3" as well?

I don't blame Perry for not delivering the truth here, it was done in an effort to protect Nico; which wasn't something Annabeth had planned on doing... I don't blame Annabeth for that though either, she's been beneath Chiron so long that she probably doesn't realize the shady stuff he does, and to her "going to tell" probably was the "right" move because she was a child...

But the fact that Chiron believes Nico truly would be better off eaten than alive :/

- Tower of Nero

This quote from Tower of Nero shows that Chiron lied to a bunch of young children (most of them were young because the older campers are largely dead because of the war or too old for camp now). It wasn't just a little white lie that adults sometimes tell kids either; they were walking into battle and he told them it was a field trip.

Did he even begin to explain the danger he was putting these kids in? Did the children understand their situation? And how dangerous it was?

Kayla has been blindsided over the years into thinking that telling children they're going on a field trip instead of fighting a battle is something to make a joke of and not be questioned... (Again, I don't blame her she's only like 12 in the book, but still)

Apollo also agrees, which isn't on Chiron but it's a whole mother reason why I can't stand Rick's interpretation of Apollo...

<><><><><>

This isn't me being like "oh Chiron is the worst most evil character ever" I just think that he has numerous flaws which are largely ignored in favor of the "perfect wise teacher" narrative when in fact Chiron and Dumbledore share a lot of.. Offputting qualities.

I do think that some of the situation is simply a result of Chiron having his hands tied behind his back by the gods some. And he even goes so far as to confirm this in a scene of TLT

However many of the scenes in which he exhibits behaviors like that in my first three screenshots are not related to anything the gods require and are, in fact, of Chiron's own free will.

Some things I would blame Zeus and the council for, such as how he withholds information from Percy to an excessive amount for long periods of time even when Percy straight up asks about things. I could easily see that being Zeus trying to prevent Percy from claiming the prophecy as his own, and I could see reasoning that maybe Chiron had sworn over the River Styx or something similar.

But those things don't apply to Chiron making such an unnecessary comment about Percy's mother so close to her "death". It doesn't explain why he would say he hoped Nico had been eaten out loud, and it doesn't cover the fact that he led children into a battlefield without telling them that's what was happening.

I think the context of Chiron's choices and comments would be different if the campers were older. If they were in their late teens or early twenties for the most part, I wouldn't really have much to say about how Chiron handled the situation.

But this man is in charge of children and extremely young teenagers, Percy is only 12 in TLT, maybe if he would have been 16 or 17 then I could give Chiron a pass, but he wasn't. Within the context of the comment he made in the Titan's Curse, Percy is only 14 and Nico is 10 at the beginning of the book... You don't wish a 10 year old had been eaten alive by a monster no matter how bad you think the alternative is, and if you do wish that you don't say it out loud to a group of other children. In the battle from Tower of Nero we get a quick look at the battlefield, and although Ben's age, and the age of another girl fighting alongside him are never confirmed they are implied to be fairly young, and we know Kayla is only 12 at the time too; yet Chiron told them it was a field trip instead of a battle, limiting the time they would have to mentally prepare themselves for what was coming.

On top of that, the nods the reader gets to the fact that Chiron can't act out against the gods depletes over the course of the series. After TLT the amount of times the situation involves the gods interfering with what Chiron is allowed to say lessens, and by the time the Heroes of Olympus series comes around, these limitations on his speech is almost entirely gone. Yet as seen in Tower of Nero he still does morally questionable things in regards to how he treats the campers.

Like I said, I recognize that in many scenes Chiron's hands are tied behind his back because of the gods.. But there are undeniably things he does of his own free will that are, in the nicest manner, very :/

This also isn't a full list of comparisons just a few notable scenes. I don't think Chiron is equally as bad as Dumbledore, but I think it undeniable that Chiron has some significant flaws built into his character design.

A good character has flaws, and there's nothing wrong with having a character that doesn't always conduct themselves properly or have good intentions- it's actually good writing, and I can appreciate that, but for some reason I find myself personally rubbed the wrong way by Chiron. This doesn't make Chiron badly written, or poorly designed, in fact I would say Rick's Chiron is very well designed in lots of ways, but I just don't like how it's never acknowledged by anyone in the series.

Like I said, I'm not starting an anti-Chiron situation, I just think little events like those mentioned, the way he's built a child army, and how he doesn't even try to plead with the gods over raising the ages on campers being allowed to battle is a little sus. But it more so bothers me that there's no attention payed to this problem anywhere in the books, not even by a side character or Luke, nowhere.

I don't actually care that much and this isn't that important to me, but sometimes people ask why I don't like Chiron and this is basically just my explanation to hand off to them... It's not even so much that I dislike Chiron entirely, he's well written and has his "good" moments, I just don't like the way other characters interact with him and his actions.

It's more a personal beef with him rather than an aspect of poor writing or him "being bad"... PJO in general (and HoO/ToA to a much lesser extent) shows that there's not such an inherent good vs bad in the world, and that sometimes people are victims of circumstances in some situations, or they're horribly misguided in their actions, but the series does a good job of showing those people as human still, and I applaud that.

I don't really know how to tie this up in its entirety, but there's nothing wrong with having a morally grey character who does questionable things and in many aspects it is good writing. I think Chiron is a result of Rick not thinking through the implications what he's doing in lots of situations, and I can see a fairly consistent drop in Chiron's characterization from PJO-ToA which is consistent with most other aspects of Rick's work.

I also want to clarify that if you like Chiron and disagree with me, that's absolutely 110% okay, I just personally dislike Chiron and that's on me. Like my problem with many of Rick's other immortal characters, I think he missed important aspects of them in some manner and slightly (or entirely in some cases) mischaracterized them in comparison to their original myths.. Some of these characters he came around on and fixed their character in many aspects to their more "correct" characterization (like Hera), while others (like Chiron and Apollo) he never quite figured them out. Which is a running complaint I have with Rick so I'm just adding this to his tab.

But yeah, I don't hate Chiron I just dislike him and those are different things, and I don't think it's a bad thing to have a morally questionable character, Chiron just personally rubs me the wrong way and I just wanted to explain that more fully because I've been asked about it multiple times.

Also I apologize for not adding a [read more] to this, it's a complaint of mine often when scrolling through the tags but I'm on mobile currently and don't have immediate access to a computer so~

[destiny-smasher]

Life is Strange: True Colors

Leading up to the release of Episode 1 of TellTale's The Walking Dead game, I was working freelance for GameRevolution at the time, lived in the area, and had the chance to play a build of the game to write a preview on it. I remember comparing it to Mass Effect because, at the time, there just...weren't games of that subgenre. Of course, by now we've seen an explosion of this type of game - the 'narrative/choice-driven game,' spearheaded and even oversaturated by Telltale to their own demise.

Out of all of the games that have come from that initial boom, Life is Strange by DontNod was and still is the most influential on my life, but I also have always harbored really conflicted feelings about it - especially with how it resolved its narrative. Hell, if you're reading this, you're probably aware that I spent a few years of my life creating a sequel fanstory which I even adapted a chunk of into visual novel format. Hundreds of thousands of words, days and days of life spent essentially trying to process and reconcile my conflicted feelings about this game's conclusion(s). Since then, I've been experimenting with interactive fiction and am currently developing my own original visual novel using everything I've learned from both creating and playing games in this genre. It's a subgenre of game I have a lot of interest and passion for because, when handled well, it can allow a player to sort of co-direct a guided narrative experience in a way that's unique compared to strictly linear cinematic experiences but still have a curated, focused sense of story.

Up until this point, I've regarded Night in the Woods as probably the singular best game of this style, with others like Oxenfree and The Wolf Among Us as other high marks. I've never actually put any Life is Strange game quite up there - none of them have reached that benchmark for me, personally. Until now, anyway.

But now, I can finally add a new game to that top tier, cream of the crop list. Life is Strange: True Colors is just damn good. I'm an incredibly critical person as it is - and that critique usually comes from a place of love - so you can imagine this series has been really hard to for me given that I love it, and yet have never truly loved any actual full entry in it. I have so many personal issues, quibbles, qualms, and frustration with Life is Strange: with every individual game, with how it has been handled by its publisher (my biggest issue at this point, actually), with how it has seemingly been taken away from its original development studio, with how it chooses to resolve its narratives...

But with True Colors, all of those issues get brushed aside long enough for me to appreciate just how fucking well designed it is for this style of game. I can appreciate how the development team, while still clearly being 'indie' compared to other dev teams working under Square-Enix, were able to make such smart decisions in how to design and execute this game. Taken on its own merits, apart from its branding, True Colors is absolutely worth playing if you enjoy these 'telltale' style games. Compared to the rest of the series, I would argue it's the best one so far, easily. I had a lot of misgivings and doubts going in, and in retrospect, those are mostly Square-Enix's fault. Deck Nine, when given the freedom to make their own original game in the same vein as the previous three, fucking nailed it as much as I feel like they could, given the kinds of limitations I presume they were working within.

I'm someone who agonizes every single time there is news for Life is Strange as a series - someone who essentially had to drop out of the fandom over infighting, then dropped out of even being exposed to the official social media channels for it later on (I specifically have the Square-Enix controlled channels muted). I adore Max and Chloe, and as a duo, as a couple, they are one of my top favorites not just in gaming, but in general. They elevated the original game to be something more than the sum of its parts for me. And while I have enjoyed seeing what DontNod has made since, it's always been their attention to detail in environmental craftsmanship, in tone and atmosphere, which has caught my interest. They're good at creating characters with layers, but imo they've never nailed a narrative arc. They've never really hit that sweet spot that makes a story truly resonate with me. Deck Nine's previous outing, Before the Storm, was all over the place, trying to mimic DontNod while trying to do its own things - trying to dig deeper into concepts DontNod deliberately left open for interpretation while also being limited in what it could do as a prequel.

But with True Colors, those awkward shackles are (mostly) off. They have told their own original story, keeping in tone and concept with previous Life is Strange games, and yet this also feels distinctly different in other ways.

Yes, protagonist Alex Chen is older than previous characters, and most of the characters in True Colors are young adults, as opposed to teenagers. Yes, she has a supernatural ability. And yes, the game is essentially a linear story with some freedom in how much to poke around at the environment and interact with objects/characters, with the primary mechanic being making choices which influence elements of how the story plays out. None of this is new to the genre, or even Life is Strange. But the execution was clearly planned out, focused, and designed with more caution and care than games like this typically get.

A smaller dev team working with a budget has to make calls on how to allocate that budget. With True Colors, you will experience much fewer locales and environments than you will in Life is Strange 2. Fewer locations than even Life is Strange 1, by my count. But this reinforces the game's theming. I suspect the biggest hit to the game's budget was investing in its voice acting (nothing new for this series) but specifically in the motion capture and facial animation.

You have a game about a protagonist trying to fit in to a small, tightly knit community. She can read the aura of people's emotions and even read their minds a little. And the game's budget and design take full advantage of this. You spend your time in a small main street/park area, a handful of indoor shops, your single room apartment. It fits within a tighter budget, but it reinforces the themes the game is going for. Your interactions with characters are heightened with subtle facial cues and microexpressions, which also reinforces the mechanic and theming regarding reading, accepting, and processing emotions. And you get to make some choices that influence elements of this - influenced by the town, influenced by the emotions of those around you, which reinforce the main plot of trying to navigate a new life in a small town community.

When I think about these types of games, the conclusion is always a big deal. In a way, it shouldn't be, because I usually feel it's about the journey, not the destination. And as an example, I actually really dislike the ending of the original Life is Strange. I think it's a lot of bullshit in many ways. The setpiece is amazing and epic, sure, but the actual storytelling going on is...really hollow for me. Yes, the game does subtly foreshadow in a number of ways that this is the big choice it's leading up to, but the game never actually makes sense of it. And the problem is, if your experience is going to end on a big ol' THIS or THAT kind of moment, it needs to make sense or the whole thing will fall apart as soon as the credits are rolling and the audience spends a moment to think about what just happened. When you look at the end of Season 1 of Telltale's The Walking Dead, it's not powerful just because of what choice you're given, but because through the entire final episode, we know the stakes - we know what is going to ultimately happen, and we know the end of the story is fast approaching. All of the cards are on the table by the time we get to that final scene, and it works so well because we know why it's happening, and it is an appropriate thematic climax that embodies the theming of the entire season. It works mechanically, narratively, and thematically, and 'just makes sense.'

The ending of Life is Strange 1 doesn't do that, if you ask me. The ending of most games in this genre don't really hit that mark. When I get to the end of most game 'seasons' like this, even ones I enjoy, I'm typically left frustrated, confused, and empty in a way.

The ending of True Colors, on the other hand, nails everything it needs to. Handily, when compared to its peers.

If you're somehow reading this and have not played this game but intend to, now is probably where you should duck out, as I will be

discussing SPOILERS from the entire game, specifically the finale.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Firstly, since I don't know where else to put this, some criticisms I found with the game. And honestly, they're all pretty damn minor compared to most games of this type.

Mainly, I just wish the whole Typhon thing was handled a bit more deliberately. It's a bit weird to do the 'big evil corporation' thing (especially when a big corporation like Square Enix occupies as much as or even more of the credits to this game than the people who actually MADE it?) without offering more explanation and subtlety. The game certainly makes some efforts but they're mostly small and mostly optional, like background chatter or a handful of one-off bits of documentation/etc. you can find in the environment. I feel like Diane in particular needed to be fleshed out just a little bit more to really sell us on how and why things like this happen, why corporations make decisions that cost people their happiness, security, and lives and they just get to keep on doing it. I think just a little bit that is unavoidable to the player that puts emphasis on maybe how much the town relies on the money/resources Typhon provides would've helped. Again, this is minor, but it stands out when I have so little else to critique.

I would've liked to get more insight on why Jed is the way he is. No, I don't think we really needed to learn more about his backstory, or even really his motivations. I think we get enough of that. I just think it would've been great to somehow highlight more deliberately how/why he's built up this identity overtop of what he's trying to suppress. Maybe even just having Alex internally realize, "Wait, what the hell, Jed has been hiding these emotions and my powers haven't picked up on it?" or something to that effect could have added an extra oomph to highlight how Jed seems to be coping with his emotions by masking/suppressing them. Also really minor complaint, but again...there's not much else here I can think to really improve on within the confines of what's in the game.

The game doesn't really call Alex's power into question morally. Like. Max has an entire meltdown by the end of her story, second-guessing if she's even helped anyone at all, if she has 'the right' to do so, how her powers might be affecting or expressing her own humanity and flaws...this story doesn't really get into that despite a very similar concept of manipulating others. There's like one bit in a document you can choose to read in Alex's 'nightmare' scene, but that's really it. I feel like this sentiment and how it's executed could have easily been expanded upon in just this one scene to capture what made that Max/Other Max scene do what it did in a way that would address the moral grayness of Alex's powers and how she uses them, and give players a way to express their interpretation of that. Also, very small deal, just another tidbit I would've liked to see.

When I first watched my wife play through Episode 5 (I watched her play through the game first, then I played it myself), I wasn't really feeling the surreal dreamscape stuff of Alex's flashbacks - which is weird, because if you're read my work from the past few years, you'll know I usually love that sort of shit. I think what was throwing me off was that it didn't really feel like it was tying together what the game was about up until that point, and felt almost like it was just copying what Life is Strange did with Max's nightmare sequence (minus the best part of that sequence, imo, where Max literally talks to herself).

But by the time I had seen the rest of the story, and re-experienced it myself, I think it clicked better. This is primarily a story about Alex Chen trying to build a new life for herself in a new community - a small town, a tightly knit place. Those flashbacks are specifically about Alex's past, something we only get teeny tiny tidbits of, and only really if we go looking for them. I realized after I gave myself a few days to process and play through the game myself that this was still a fantastic choice because it reinforces the plot reasons why Alex is even in the town she's in (because her father went there, and her brother in turn went there looking for him), and it reinforces the theme of Alex coming to accept her own emotions and confront them (as expressed through how the flashbacks are played out and the discussions she has with the image of Gabe in her mind, which is really just...another part of herself trying to get her to process things).

By the time Alex escapes the mines and returns to the Black Lantern, all of the cards are on the table. By that point, we as the audience know everything we need to. Everything makes sense - aside from arguably why Jed has done what he has done, but put a pin in that for a sec. We may not know why Alex has the powers she does, but we have at least been given context for how they manifested - as a coping mechanism of living a life inbetween the cracks of society, an unstable youth after her family fell apart around her (and oof, trust me, I can relate with this in some degree, though not in exactly the same ways). And unlike Max's Rewind power, the story and plot doesn't put this to Alex's throat, like it's all on her to make some big choice because she is the way she is, or like she's done something wrong by pursuing what she cares about (in this case, the truth, closure, and understanding).

When Alex confronts Jed in front of all of the primary supporting characters, it does everything it needs to.

Mechanically: it gives players choices for how to express their interpretation of events, and how Alex is processing them; it also, even more importantly, uses the 'council' as a way of expressing how the other characters have reacted to the choices the player has made throughout the game, and contributes to how this climax feels. We're given a 'big choice' at the end of the interaction that doesn't actually change the plot, or even the scene, really (it just affects like one line of dialogue Alex says right then) and yet BOTH choices work so well as a conclusion, it's literally up to your interpretation and it gives you an in-game way to express that.

Thematically: the use of the council reinforces the game's focus on community; and the way the presentation of the scene stays locked in on Alex and Jed's expressions reinforces its focus on emotion - not to mention that the entire scene also acts as a way to showcase how Alex has come to accept, understand, and process her own emotions while Jed, even THEN, right fucking at the moment of his demise, is trying to mask his emotions, to hide them and suppress them and forget them (something the game has already expressed subtly by way of his negative emotions which would give him away NOT being visible to Alex even despite her power).

Narratively: we are given a confrontation that makes sense and feels edifying to see play out after everything we've experienced and learned. We see Alex use her powers in a new and exciting way that further builds the empowering mood the climax is going for and adds a cinematic drama to it. No matter what decisions the player makes, Alex has agency in her own climax, we experience her making a decision, using her power, asserting herself now that she has gone through the growth this narrative has put her through. Alex gets to resolve her shit, gets to have her moment to really shine and experience the end of a character arc in this narrative.

Without taking extra time to design the game around these pillars, the finale wouldn't be so strong. If they didn't give us enough opportunities to interact with the townspeople, their presence in the end wouldn't matter, but everyone who has a say in the council is someone we get an entire scene (at least one) dedicated to interacting with them and their emotions. If they didn't implement choices in the scene itself, it would still be powerful but we wouldn't feel as involved, it'd be more passive. If they didn't showcase Alex's power, we might be left underwhelmed, but they do so in a way that actually works in the context through how they have chosen to present it, while also just tonally heightening the climax by having this drastic lighting going on. If they didn't have the council involved, we'd lose the theming of community. If they didn't have the foil of Alex/Jed and how they have each processed their emotions, we'd miss that key component. And if we didn't have such detailed facial animations, the presentation just wouldn't be as effective.

Ryan/Steph are a little bit like, in this awkward sideline spot during the climax? Steph always supports you, and Ryan supports you or doubts you conditionally, which is unsurprising but also ties into the themes of Ryan having grown up woven into this community, and Steph being once an outsider who has found a place within it. They're still there, either way, which is important. The only relevant characters who aren't present are more supporting characters like Riley, Ethan, and Mac. Ethan being the only one of those who gets an entire 'super emotions' scene, but that also marks the end of his arc and role in the story, so...it's fine. Mac and Riley are less important and younger, as well, and have their own side story stuff you have more direct influence on, too.

But damn, ya'll, this climax just works so well. It especially stands out to me given just how rarely I experience a conclusion/climax that feels this rewarding.

And then after that we get a wonderful montage of a theoretical life Alex might live on to experience. Her actions don't overthrow a conglomerate billionaire company. She doesn't even save a town, really. If the entire council thinks you're full of shit, Jed still confesses either way - because it's not up to the council whether he does this, it's because of Alex, regardless of player choice. Honestly, even after a playthrough where I made most choices differently from my wife, there weren't really many changes to that montage at the end. It'd have been great if it felt more meaningfully different, but maybe it can be. Even if not, the design intent is there and the execution still works. It's a really nice way to end the story, especially since it's not even a literal montage but one Alex imagines - again, her processing what she's gone through, what she desires, expressed externally for us to see it. And for once, the actual final 'big decision' in a game of this type manages to be organic, make sense, and feel good and appropriate either way. You choose to either have Alex stay in Haven Springs and continue building her life there, or you can choose to have her leave and try to be an indie musician, with the events of the game being yet another chunk of her life to deal with and move on from (I haven't really touched on it, but music, especially as a way to express and process emotions, is a recurring thing, much like photography was in the original game, or Sean's illustrations in LiS2). For once, a climactic 'pick your ending' decision that doesn't feel shitty. It's pretty rare for this genre, honestly.

I could - and already have, and likely will - have so much more to say about this game and its details, but I really wanted to focus on touching upon a main element that has left me impressed: the way the entire game feels designed. It feels intentionally constructed but in a way that reinforces what it is trying to express as a story. It's not just trying to make people cry for the sake of 'emotions.' It is a game literally about emotions and it comes to a conclusion in a way that is clearly saying something positive and empowering about empathy and self-acceptance.

Storytelling is a craft, like any other, and it entails deliberate choices and decisions that can objectively contribute to how effective a story is for its intended audience.

A good story isn't something you find, after all.

It's something you build.

[jesterkoops]

Oh, let’s go back to the start

WARNING: negative review ahead! 

Game of Thrones is over, and it’s never coming back.

I think many viewers all over the world thought that once this day came, they would wish they could do it all over again because boy, what a great journey it was. Or they would be eager to rewatch the whole show and look out for all the little clues they missed and revisit characters and storylines they might not have previously paid attention to.

Instead, most of us are left with a bitter taste in our mouth, and many of us are left wondering why we even bothered investing our time and emotional energy (not to mention money) in the first place. This is because the final season of Game of Thrones did not make fans wish they could go back to the start and do it all again, but, rather, took many of the plots and characters people knew and loved back to their start, at best, if not to an even worse place.

Game of Thrones changed television as we know it, but this has never been a flawless show. Plot holes and questionable adaptations had been criticized for many years. Book readers in particular have been very vocal about the quality (or lack thereof) of the show’s writing. Yet I feel people kept coming back to see how it all would end, because, surely, the endgame would still be worth the investment. 

Season 8 then came. Much criticism can be raised to the first half of season 8 for having wrapped up the Night King/fantasy storyline too quickly and with almost nothing in the way of explanation. While I understood and shared some of that grievance, I also thought that it was perhaps not that overwhelmingly disappointing, and that it could make some sense from a narrative and logistic perspective. Little did I know, however, as the credits rolled on the third episode of the season, that that instalment was symptomatic of a much more dangerous problem that was just around the corner, which would butcher most of what people loved about this story that had been built up so slowly across years (i.e. its characters), at lightning speed, in the remaining episodes.

From a character perspective, at least the deaths in the battle of Winterfell were mostly well earned and actually wrapped up their characters’ arcs in a meaningful way. Jorah died protecting his Khaleesi. Theon died protecting the home he helped destroy, fulfilling his redemption. Lyanna died taking down a giant. Melisandre died after having fulfilled her purpose. Edd died to protect one of his best friends. Beric died to protect Arya so she could save humanity. While Jon and Dany were not the saviours of mankind, like everyone expected them to be, they were still instrumental in helping humans to victory; Jon having done all the work to bring together almost the entire continent to fight the threat and Dany providing valuable help with her dragons and armies. Underwhelming, perhaps, but it didn’t damage any character. 

I never expected things to go smoothly afterwards. I enjoyed the political tensions between Jon, Dany and Sansa and was looking forward to seeing Dany become greyer as she struggled in a different continent and with competition. I knew Jaime was going to be in King’s Landing again at some point, to wrap up his storyline, and wouldn’t just shack up in bliss with Brienne for the entire rest of the season. I knew beloved characters would probably die (even though I had hopes for several, not just mine). But I did not expect that, from episode 4, the story would begin spiralling into a cruel, sadistic and nihilistic mess that would continue until the very end and spare almost no character that wasn’t named Stark. Nearly all the evolution, all the progress, all the journeys that people kept coming back for, year after year, were invalidated in the span of three episodes, bringing them back to square one, if not worse.

Jon, assassinating his aunt/lover, broken by the fight and taking a black for which we don’t even understand the need for anymore. Dany, her long journey to Westeros ending with being murdered by her nephew/lover for having gone from grey to Mad Queen in the space of two episodes. Jaime, apparently accepting that all these years have only taught him that his true self is a hateful man, obsessed only with his sister to the point of destroying anything that is good, pure and innocent and does not deserve to be caught up in their mess. Brienne, essentially ends up right back where she started, serving in a celibate order after learning that love is not not meant to last for women like her and failing to prevent the death of the man she loved (and having to write her rejection down, to add insult to injury). Cersei, trying to pass off Jaime’s child as someone else’s, her prophecy discarded completely and facing no comeuppance for her actions. Missandei, freed from chains to end up executed in chains. Sandor, dying in the fire that traumatized him his entire life. And even the ones who did not face bitter endings did not move much from where they either started or had been for a long time: Tyrion (who lost much of his charm and intelligence this season just to watch the world burn around him) and Davos ended up in the same sort of advisory position they were in all along. 

The ending was advertised as a bittersweet, Lord of the Rings type ending, but there was a lot more bitterness than there was sweetness in this. Especially when it comes to romance. Rarely is life so cruel to couples, and the only sweetness was reserved for Sam and Gilly, who everyone knew had been safe for years and who, let’s face it, never elicited particularly strong emotional investment from anybody to qualify as a payoff. 

Sansa came out perhaps the strongest in the end, which is well deserved. But this was not just the Sansa story. There were a dozen other plots and characters people cared about, and they almost all were served a fate that made you feel like there had been no point in their journeys all along. And for a show that wanted to subvert expectations (!!!1!1!), it ended ticking the most predictable boxes in terms of characters fates: all the bad guys are dead (and the one “good guy” that died broke bad in order to justify her assassination), all the redemptive characters are dead too, and only the good guys are left.

So here we are, at the end of the biggest show of all time, with an ending that retroactively ruined most of what made it so big in the first place and left little room for excitement, if any. 

The sad thing is that all of this was easily avoidable. When people say that delivering an ending that satisfies everyone is impossible, that is very true, especially for a show with such high expectations. But delivering an ending that disappoints nearly everyone, is actually equally as hard, if not harder, and yet... they managed to achieve it. 

Finishing a story is never easy, but I think the important thing to keep in mind is that what makes people stick with a series is the journey they are taken on (especially when they are asked to invest years of their lives into a story). If the journey starts to suck, that’s when you lose numbers. So if you have a good enough journey, with all the ups and downs and angst and drama you like, which makes people stick with it for years, you’ve accomplished 90% of the task. The ending is just the icing on the cake and it needs to provide a payoff that is consistent with that journey and does not make the audience feel like they never want to eat what’s underneath that icing ever again. 

This does not mean handing out fanservice left and right. But there’s a difference between succumbing to fanservice and destroying literally everything that made people come back for more and that the story had been building up towards. There’s a difference between fanservice and delivering an ending that is unpredictable not because it emerged from a subtle thread woven within the story that was always present if only people paid attention, but because it came out of nowhere and/or had little to no buildup within the story, and/or went in the completely opposite direction to where the buildup was pointing towards. 

I see some complaints about the criticism this season is receiving saying people are too emotional about it and therefore not being objective. And yes! Of course people get emotional about stories! What kind of writer doesn’t want people to become emotionally invested in their story, and just see it as a giant, sterile, plot-driven spectacle? This is why humans are attracted to stories in the first place! And this is particularly true of a story like ASOIAF which is entirely built upon the concept of character perspective. This is why, while slow, the first two episodes were still highly rated: they were character-driven. This is why, despite The Long Night being criticized for an underwhelming conclusion to the WWs storyline, it was not even remotely near the huge dealbreaker the last three episodes were for the audience. That is because The Long Night disappointed in wrapping up the plot, while the rest of the season crashed the characters. I feel like D&D’s never really understood how crucial character-driven perspective was (they didn’t even remember Sam was a major POV character!) and so wrote the show as a sterile, shocking, plot-driven spectacle that eventually made people sick due to the total lack of care with which the characters they know and love were handled. 

And let’s stop pretend that misery and nihilism at all costs is “adult storytelling” while hope and a sense of fulfilment is for children. Adults need hope too, perhaps more than children, because we know just how tough life can be, whereas children often don’t. Dramas can be great tools to show how people face and overcome tragedies and conflict, find the silver linings and some comfort in the chaos, even if things ultimately don’t end the way they expected they would at the start. All Game of Thrones has shown us, in the end, is how people fail and how little changes. No matter how hard the journey, no matter the effort, no matter the loss, most of these beloved characters might as well never have set off on their journeys at all, given the results. 

While this kind of storytelling can work and be compelling for a single season, or a single book, or a single movie, once you ask people to invest years of their lives, you will never land the ending with this last minute, bait-and-switch approach. 

So who wants go back to the start, now, and rewatch the story of these characters once again, knowing most of them end back to square one? Who thinks that it was worth the journey, if we end up exactly where we started? I certainly don’t. 

[lunar-years]

Okay, first of all, please don’t read this if you love Rafael or are pro-Jafael... just don’t do that to yourself. Also, warning for season five spoilers. 

This is essentially an absurdly long rant post because I realized I’ve never fully articulated why I don’t like J*fael, and given the leaks/spoilers of the finale, I really want to just get out all of my thoughts out there about this horrible endgame. So here goes....

There are essentially two reasons I don’t like J*fael, the main one being that while I don’t think Rafael is fundamentally a bad person, I do think he is fundamentally bad for Jane. Neither of them are their best selves when they are together, and this has been shown time and time again on the show. The second reason is that J*fael would never work in the long-term, now in season five for the same reason they didn’t work back in season 1. Rafael as a person is incredibly self-centered, arrogant, and angry. He relies on unhealthy coping mechanisms and shuts people out if things don’t go his way. He needs to work through his own shit before he can be successful in any relationship, let alone one with Jane. 

The biggest problem I have with Rafael individually is that he doesn’t handle conflict maturely, and never has. Obviously he has been through a lot in his life that prevented him from developing healthy ways of coping, but as a grown ass adult that is merely an explanation and not a justification. Rafael never holds himself accountable, and he never gets the help he needs. Unfortunately, the people around him (cough Jane) all enable him in this, coddling him and never calling him out on his bullshit behavior. He’s fine as long as things are going his way, but as soon as he feels his happiness is threatened, he’s a lose cannon. This magnifies and manifests whenever he fears Jane is going to leave him.

His behavior in season five, for example, has been incredibly possessive and toxic. He’s acting like a child whose had his favorite toy taken away from him, instead of being mature enough to see things from Jane’s point-of-view for once. Her husband has come back from the dead, for pete’s sake!! Michael didn't leave, he didn’t run away, he didn’t hurt Jane intentionally in any way. He was taken, tortured, and left unaware of who he even was. His relationship with Jane didn’t come to end on purpose. Yet Rafael acts like Jane is crazy for not wanting to immediately divorce Michael, and kicks her out of their house when she voices her confusion and pain and uncertainty after he gets his memory back. It’s completely irrational on Rafael’s part, who is acting like Jane is an object he has won instead of a person with real emotions going through a very real trauma. Obviously Rafael being hurt by Jane possibly leaving him for Michael again and having his life suddenly turned upside down is all valid. What's irritating is him acting like his emotions and hurt matter more than other people’s. Jane had her husband taken away from her against her will. Meanwhile Michael, frankly, is the only one who has lost literally everything. Yet Rafael doesn’t spare a passing thought about Michael’s trauma but instead immediately diminishes it and appropriates it for himself (i.e. his bullshit “I’ve got my memories back too” stance... which is just so problematic in so many ways but I digress). 

His behavior now that Michael is back also shades his behavior when Michael was “dead.” For someone who supposedly changed so much in the five years after Michael died, and who was there to help Jane through her mourning, Rafael sure reverted back fast to his old ways as soon as the “threat” against him and Jane reemerged. Rafael was fine so long as Michael was dead and no longer taking away from Raf’s personal happiness, but as soon as Michael returns he is back to being a selfish asshole. That doesn’t say much for Rafael’s “helping Jane through her grief” and almost makes it seem like all along it was just something he did just to win her back when he saw an open window for it. Being there for Jane when she was widowed means he knows just how deeply Jane loved Michael and just how long it took for her to heal from that loss. Yet he still acts like it should be easy for Jane to immediately cut Michael out of her life when he reappears. Yikes. 

The other infuriating thing about Rafael is his behavior and treatment towards his family. Rafael treats Louisa like shit. Flat out. He criticizes and judges her for her addictions despite struggling with alcohol reliance himself. He sells her out for his own gains, and he generally treats her with a “holier than thou” attitude that is incredibly irritating to watch and always has been. Then you have Petra and the twins. The scene when Petra calls Rafael out for treating her and their daughters like second class citizens is one of my absolute favorites because it’s so damn true and it’s about time Petra said it!! What’s annoying is that in the seasons since, Rafael has not learned from that confrontation or grown from  it. Whether he and Jane are together or not at any given moment, it is obvious that he will always put Jane and Mateo before Petra and the twins. That's terrible parenting, I'm sorry, but it is. He also plays “good parent” with Mateo all the time, making Jane do all the grunt work of punishing and correcting Mateo’s poor behavior while he excuses Mateo’s bad actions instead of teaching him how to do better (made especially obvious in the last episode...yikes yikes yikes.) 

Then there’s his relationship with Jane. Oh, J*fael. To be clear, I’ve shipped Villadero from the beginning, which probably made me biased about J*fael early on. Still, even when Michael was behaving horribly and the narrative was clearly urging viewers to root for Raf, I could never get behind him. To me, the Jane and Rafael attraction has always seemed so... surface-level. Like, they have a few wet dreams about one another and suddenly, because they’re accidentally having a kid together, they’re both fully invested in the idea of them being soulmates. In reality, Jane and Rafael have like, nothing in common. Seriously, what do these two talk about it? Rafael has proven multiple times that he doesn't respect Jane’s religion, he doesn't make any effort to see things from her less privileged life perspective, and he doesn’t really place any value in anything she values. They are quite possibly the blandest relationship on the show. The only thing they seem to have holding them together is Mateo. And the only thing they seem to do is to constantly have sex. 

My obviously subjective view about their chemistry (or lack thereof) aside, Rafael and Jane simply seem to bring out the worst in one another. When Rafael disagrees with Jane, he gets angry and irrational. He tries to handle disagreements by kicking and screaming, instead of facilitating civilized discussion. Jane, meanwhile, just cowers in front of him and takes it because she’s so “blinded by love.” I’m sorry, what?? After the way Rafael treated Jane last episode, putting their child between them, I do not see any scenario where the strong-willed, independent Jane from season one marries that guy a few months later, though apparently that’s what’s happening (*gag*). Rafael is constantly pressuring her to do things his way instead of actually listening to her and trying to understand her perspective. I will never understand why Jane goes back to Rafael when he continuously treats her in that sort of way. Rafael bases his entire self worth in Jane, yet at the same time he doesn't seem to actually value Jane’s thoughts and feelings. These are not the makings of a healthy relationship. Jane's behavior in season five has also been out of character, with her asking Jason to leave and saying she wished Michael had never come back. While Jane might not be in love with Michael/Jason five years later, especially when he is totally different to who he once was, you cannot make me believe she wouldn’t still love him and want to help him anyway that she could, even if she wants to be with Rafael. And she would definitely be grateful that he gets to live. The poor writing this season truly feels like the writers are simultaneously proving why J*fael doesn’t work and then forcing them together once they’ve already fallen apart.

I truly truly hate the idea that Jane is now going to go back to Rafael, who still hasn’t gotten help for his personal issues, and marry him at the end of this godforsaken season where he's been treating her terribly. For a show that I have always viewed as progressive and unique, this ending is one of the most baseless, fan-service endgames ever. Rafael using Mateo against Jane last episode was the final straw. After that i truly do not see any scenario where Jane would realistically go back to him. Rafael needs to grow up, wise up, and focus a little more on being a good father, friend and brother before I will ever believe that he would make a good husband. 

[pro-bee]

“Reunion” part 2

Part 1 is here

THE CONVERSATION IN THE BASEMENT

UGH MY FEELINGS

Now first up, I hate that they retconned Ziva’s origin story at NCIS to make it so that Eli ordered Ziva to kill Ari to fool Gibbs or whatever. It’s such a disservice to Ziva and her story.

BUT.

I do like how Ziva handled it here, and it makes Eli even more evil, which is fine by me, because he is the worst. He is the guy who had Ari’s mother killed as payback without any regard for how it would affect his son, apparently, so, like, I have no trouble believing he would be fine ordering the hit on his own son, who was, to be fair, homicidal and in need of “neutralizing.”

Anyway.

What I mean is that this displayed so much of Ziva’s humanity, and what shapes the core of her character. 

Gibbs is understandably angry, because that whole incident in “Kill Ari Part 2″ is what cemented their bond, which took them all through season 3 to “Hiatus” and beyond, and here he thinks that’s been shaken to its core, that it was all a lie, that the woman he came to think of as a surrogate daughter (and let’s be real, his relationship with Ziva is unlike any of the others’, even with Abby). Which in turn rocks Ziva, because the last thing she wants is for Gibbs to ever think she would be so callous and cruel.

And that’s what it comes down to: Ziva may act like she doesn’t care what people think of her, but she absolutely cares about Gibbs, and if he doesn’t love her, then I would bet she thinks no one can.

Her explanation is so practical and so Ziva, but also shows so much of her heart. Yes, her father ordered her to kill Ari, but she took the mission precisely to save him. Because until the very last second she didn’t believe that her brother -- HER BROTHER -- was capable of such cruelty, and she was going to do everything in her power to prove it, including saving his life so he could plead his case. 

Ziva is ride or die with her loved ones, and every brief mention of Ari indicates that he was her world -- or at least she adored him. He wasn’t some long lost illegitimate sibling spoken of in hushed tones. She was as close to him as Tali, and obviously looked up to him, to the point where she believed everything out of his mouth, despite the clear red flags, because HE WAS HER BROTHER. To everyone else he was an asset, to her he was probably her protector and her idol. (See: Gibbs.) 

So when she sensed an injustice against Ari? Of course she was going to try to straighten it all out. Surely as long as she kept him safe, they would be able to work together to prove his innocence. Not realizing the odds were stacked against her because a) Eli and b) Ari actually was a psychopath. (Just because Eli was right doesn’t make him right, you know what I mean?)

(Which it turn makes me even sadder for Ziva, because it’s like there wasn’t a single person, or at least a single male, in her life before NCIS who didn’t use her as a pawn.)

Stop for a second and think about what it must have been like growing up actually thinking you were nothing more than a chess piece for your father/country/whatever in their latest mission, and thinking that was totally normal? No wonder Ziva is so fucked up still — how can you build any kind of self-esteem when you are essentially an action figure to be disposed of at someone else’s convenience?

I digress.

So, Ziva agreed to be Ari’s handler not to eliminate him, but to save him. Which is who she is, and she will not apologize for it to Gibbs, because she absolutely believes she was right. “He was my brother, and you were nothing.” WHICH IS RIGHT. It doesn’t mean she was playing Gibbs — it’s that she loved her brother so wholeheartedly, and obviously she would protect him over a perfect stranger. Just like now, she would protect Gibbs at all costs too, and he wouldn’t expect anything different. And if it were Gibbs in the position of protecting his loved one, he would agree with her too.

And the conviction in her voice — the need for him to believe her — is so important. Because she doesn’t care if Mossad or her father believed she was capable of killing Ari, because she probably thinks as little of them as they do her. But she can’t stand the thought of Gibbs believing she could do that, because he would know what it would do to her, does know what it’s done to her every day since that happened.

“Eli is all but dead to me, and now the closest thing I have to a father believes— He was my brother.”  That part ALWAYS gets me. This is what it comes down to: Gibbs has been more of a father to Ziva in 3 years than Eli had been her entire life. He’s never done anything to put her in jeopardy and has always put her well-being first, whereas Eli thought nothing of sending his daughter into a kamikaze mission for some stupid revenge on a faceless terrorist. I mean it doesn’t even come close, right? The show always jokes about Gibbs being the father figure of the group, but this is the first time anyone has said it out loud, and Ziva is admitting that Gibbs is that person in her life, and she cannot lose that. Because he is her port in the storm, in the sense that his protection and nurturing and love has fulfilled a need in Ziva that she’s never been able to fill in her life. She’s basically had no parental guidance, at least not since her mom died (whenever that was), and Gibbs offered that kind of sanctuary that anyone who is lucky enough to have loving parents knows. And she finally had that.

So now it’s hitting her that her “dad” thinks she’s just like Eli, and could easily dispose of her own brother for an inconsequential mission. And that hurts, more than any barb Abby or Leon or even Tony could throw her way. Because that would just confirm her own worst fears about herself, which would crush her. Even when everything is murky with Tony or even Eli, Gibbs has been her rock, and she’s facing the possibility that that may vanish, too, and it nearly breaks her.

Also breaking her? The fact that her brother is gone. As much as the show doesn’t really dwell on a lot of these emotional traumas, Ari has been one of the few that has actually come up consistently over the years for Ziva. Not enough for my liking, but enough that you always know how conflicted Ziva is about it. That she always has to reconcile her cherished memories of her siblings as a child to what happened to them as an adult. And more than that, that she is GRIEVING Ari, still. That pain has never gone away — not in her breakdown in Gibbs’ hospital room in “Hiatus,” not when she’s being questioned by Bashan in “Shalom,” not here. “He was my brother.” And now he is gone. And the pain is still raw.

Cote de Pablo does such a good job in this entire scene. Ziva’s heart is on her sleeve, and she’s trying to hold it together and say what she needs to say, be as practical as possible, but her emotions do get the best of her, because obviously she’s still in a delicate state herself, and this entire experience and its aftermath is stirring up all these unresolved issues and feelings she’s been burying for years. She pleads with Gibbs to believe her and forgive her and just love her the way she is, but she chokes when it comes to “he was my brother,” because deep down she’s still the girl grieving her brother, but she also can’t stand to think her “dad” would think so low of her. It’s painful and beautiful.

ALL THIS BEING SAID.

ZIVA NEEDS A HUG.

THE END OF THIS SCENE DEMANDS A HUG.

NOT A GIBBS INSCRUTABLE GLARE.

I mean I get it — Gibbs still isn’t sure what to believe and it’s a lot to take in — but goddamn Ziva is breaking and the girl has been through hell and back and SHE NEEDS A FUCKING HUG YOU GUYS.

Also back to my anger at the retcon: If Ziva was supposed to kill Ari, then why the insistence in the official report that Gibbs killed him? And why was Ziva so relieved that he kept her secret for so long when she moved to DC? IT’S BECAUSE IT DOESN’T MAKE SENSE WRITERS!!! There was actually no need for this retcon, ugh.

Anyway.

Enjoy my feelings!!! 

[tisthewoman]

Why You Shouldn't Let An English Teacher See Movies: a reaction post of IT:Chapter 2

Okay, so I finally saw IT Chapter 2, and I have some thoughts. Some of these thoughts might rub people the wrong way, which is okay, but be warned that I'm not going to hold back here.

As a whole, let me preface by saying that I loved this movie. I will go to see it 3 more times, and I will enjoy every moment. However, objectively… this is not a film that I can recommend to people as a “great film” artistically speaking. Is it fun and Good™? Yes. Did I enjoy it immensely? Yes. Were there some very odd and disruptive writing/direction choices? Yeah. This isn’t a masterpiece, as fantastic as I personally felt it was, and honestly I do not think it topped Chapter 1 in terms of flow, total presentation, or scriptwriting.

I’m going to break down my thoughts by category:

1. Story elements

2. Visuals & Horror

3. Tone

Starting with Story Elements:

I am incredibly torn on this. I LOVED aspects of this film, and was wildly confused by others. As a whole, I think the film began strong. 

The re-introductions to the characters were fantastic, though taking the “historian” thing from Mike in Chapter 1 definitely made Chapter 2 weak in regards to his characterization. He’s a hard character to get right, but it honestly feels a little like they didn’t try, and just used him to progress the story. I could continue, but that is a whole separate Mike Essay. Bev, Ben, Richie, and Eddie were all fantastic. Eddie in particular was taken in a slightly more aggressive angle than traditional for his character, but it worked very well with the way he was established in Chapter 1, thanks to Jack’s interpretation. Bill was a little bit weaker in some ways, but still at his core Bill Denbrough. I unapologetically LOVE adult Stan, and only regret that due to the story, we don’t get to experience him as much as he deserves in the film.

The return to Derry was great, and I still think that the group dynamics are what make this story shine. 90% of what I loved so much in Chapter 1 was the group dynamics, and they are here in SPADES. The group makes sense together, and the cast did a great job, though Eddie’s constant repetition of the word “fuck” seemed a little unnecessary after the second time in the restaurant scene. However, one thing I think the miniseries did better is establish them as “the lucky seven” - they’re not just the Losers Club; they’re held together by fate, and there’s definitely some supernatural elements to that which are not present in the films, weakening their group connection. This is shown most strongly in their moments of conflict in Chapter 2, especially when they want to leave, because their draw to each other doesn’t seem to be present, at least not in the same capacity. It seems weird to feel let down by this considering my next point, but it is what it is.

Some may disagree here, but… I really dislike the decision to include the ritual of Chud in the movie. I disliked it in the book as well, as I think that it unnecessarily complicates things and turns this horror story into a surreal sci-fi story in a way that doesn’t always mesh well. King does both sci-fi and horror well, but I’ve always felt the crossover in IT was off somehow. Also, the lack of connection with this to the first film makes the ritual of Chud seem even weirder in Chapter 2. Mike’s characterization with this gets… odd… and its inclusion is very confusing. I actually said “what the hell are they doing” in theaters when Mike introduces this with Bill. That’s how weird it was for me. My biggest problem was that it makes Chapter 2 a sharp departure from Chapter 1, and failing to achieve the cohesion that the miniseries had is a huge downer for me, considering that the IT reboot is an improvement to the miniseries in so many other ways.

In comparison to the book and miniseries, I think that it was a bad choice to leave out Audra, as it was good closure for the Billverly plotline. Bill and Bev even kiss in Chapter 2 - and then it is promptly forgotten. I’m not necessarily looking for conflict, but Audra was a huge motivator for Bill, and it was much less significant to have his driving force be this random kid that reminds him of Georgie. I get it, but Audra helps show how Bill has grown more strongly and pushes him forward after the final battle. I also wanted a cinematic parallel between Audra and Bev in the sewers and was really disappointed that I didn't get it. I have similar feelings about Tom - yes, Bev obviously leaves him for Ben, but Tom had a huge impact on Bev and her growth. Leaving him out weakens her personal story.

I’m not going to say much about Henry, but the scene where he pops out of the sewers is FANTASTIC. I absolutely did not expect to get that scene (I figured we’d just pop in on him in the hospital), but was glad we did. However, this lost its impact the longer we went on; he was relevant for all of one (1) stabbing of one (1) Edward Kaspbrak, and then died without even putting Mike in the hospital like he was supposed to. A waste of his character.

There are other positives. The connection Adrian and Richie’s stories are great, and I think Richie’s moments of reveal are very well handled. I just wish the Adrian/Eddie parallels had been highlighted as well. Richie and Eddie are fantastic together, and Bev and Richie are also sweet as hell. Besties for the resties, man. In general, I think Richie’s relationship with the Losers is the strongest writing in terms of group dynamics. Putting aside his feelings for Eddie - which do a fantastic job of fleshing him out and showing how multifaceted his character is - he is the one Loser who has strong ties to every other character. Bev’s relationships with Mike and Eddie are weak, Ben’s most relevant relationship is to Beverly, Bill’s most relevant relationship is Mike - you see where I’m going with this. Only Richie’s writing showed the importance of all his group relationships, though some were stronger than others.

Almost every individual scene with the Losers and Pennywise are very enjoyable. The moments where their personal motivations and fears shine are truly the best in the film. While there were some design issues that disappointed me in terms of IT terrorizing them, their stories are great - the apartment scene with Beverly is still poignant, and Bill’s revelation about the day of Georgie’s death made me a little emotional. I’ve already mentioned this in general terms, but the arcade scene with Richie is fantastic.

As a whole, there is a lot of love here, and so much to enjoy. The script writers and the director worked hard on this film, and they tried to do a lot with it - just maybe too much, which caused problems with flow and tone as a whole.

Visuals & Horror

I love horror - I could go on all day about how it’s the best genre. As such, I have a lot of feelings about the horror elements in this film. 

I already mentioned how the ritual of Chud/Sci-Fi elements weaken the horror - in truth, the horror elements were already weak. As a result, sci-fi elements distract from what already has flaws. There are two major categories for this discussion: subtlety and design.

In terms of subtlety, a majority of Chapter 2 was basically hitting you over the head with a Pennywise-shaped hammer. There were jumpscares everywhere, and they were rarely impactful ones. How many times did we get a “Pennywise chomps down on somebody” moment? I was totally engrossed in Adrian’s scene at the beginning, but when Pennywise just takes a bite out of him and it ends, I was honestly disappointed. I do realize this is book canon, but there is something about the presentation in the book - the precise moving of Adrian’s arm, the bite, the smile, the cracking of his ribs - that is dulled in the movie for a lack of a better term. There is just something about this death that fails to hit home. Maybe it’s because Pennywise is more or less out in the open, or maybe because in the book, the bullies see It, too, making it a surreal moment that no one believed except those who were there.

As a whole, the movie has plenty of gore but little suspense. I think I had more interest the less I knew about how exactly people died. Eventually you get sick of the chomping - the unknown is more frightening than a monster with a predictable attack pattern. The missing kids. Betty Ripsom’s shoe and lack of explanation. Patrick’s fade to black. These things made Chapter 1 unsettling, but scenes like Victoria’s death had no other elements other than being bitten to death by Penywise, and that was predictable. 

For an example of what could have been in terms of subtlety, I can honestly say that I was more creeped out by “Mrs. Kersh” slinking around in the background of Beverly’s old apartment than I was by the old woman monster. For what it's worth, the way these monsters move is INCREDIBLE, especially so the more humanoid they are. I love the body language and movements. The earliest example is the headless boy in Chapter 1; the jerking limbs really emphasize their inhumanity, and it still works in this film (Mrs. Kersh at the end of the hall, Betty Ripsom’s legs, etc). This, with the use of humans and their subtle shift to the unnatural in the films, was much stronger than the larger monsters in Chapter 2. 

Another strength is the background details that you might miss. The librarian staring at Ben as he reads about the Ironworks explosion in Chapter 1 is a great example of this, as is Mrs. Kersh peeking her head out of the kitchen in Chapter 2. I would have rather had more small scares like this, rather than the reliance on jumpscares. The pomeranian monster behind the “Not Scary At All” door is essentially just that, and I was WILDLY unimpressed by it.

Returning to the focus of the film, Pennywise the clown is a great villain, but a lot of Its appeal is that It shifts into whatever scares you most. In the first film, this is done well - the painting lady, the leper, the headless boy, and even the way it shifts in the battle at the end. The strength in these forms is that you never know what to expect - and neither do the Losers. Each new nightmare looks and behaves differently. The flute dropping from the painting lady’s hands to announce her presence, the dropped eggs in the library scene… everything about the leper. Even the miniseries did this variety well (the werewolf, the shower scene with Eddie, Mrs. Kersh, etc)

Yet, in part 2, we get… two extra monsters. Which is fair - we already have plenty of material - but they both have the same style of warped features and aesthetic. I think creepy naked old Mrs. Kersh would have been a more disturbing visual than old lady monster turned out to be. Sometimes less is more. Clowns are creepy because they have almost-not-quite-human features… the same can be said of effective monsters (look at the leper, for example, or the painting lady). 

Pennywise in general and Its overreliance on Its clown persona weakens the effect. Eventually, Its presence becomes “oh, there’s the clown again,” especially considering that Its attack pattern has become so predictable. Is It going to drag me into the darkness? Is It going to manipulate me into hurting my friends? Is It going to do some other scary thing to me? No, he’s going to take a bite out of me. Not awesome, but certainly not the Pennywise of the novel or even of the miniseries, whose horror came from the fact that no one knew what happened when you disappeared - or when parts of you reappeared.

There were too many instances where the horror was all about jumpscares and theatrics. Pennywise is all about theatrics, I know, but It went from eldritch horror to dramatic murder clown in this film. In the book, Pennywise is extra as hell, so I wouldn’t be angry if that was the angle taken for the films - however, that is not what was established in Chapter 1, and isn’t actually what is achieved in Chapter 2. If we are going for a more serious, darker tone for Pennywise, I would prefer the eldritch horror we saw more strongly in Chapter 1.

Tone

This is the hardest category to explain well, because a lot of this is my personal impression of the film, but I’ll do my best. As a whole, the movie does not flow well, especially connected to Chapter 1, and this is largely because of tone. Some scenes shift too abruptly or push too hard, and I feel as though the writers were trying to capture the same charm and attitude that Chapter 1 achieved with the kids, but struggled because they aren’t kids anymore. The balance between gritty horror and charm is harder with adults, but this is something the miniseries excelled at compared to Chapter 2. In the miniseries, you never feel like you’re watching a new film when it switches to the present day with the adults. In IT Chapter 2, though the movie and story are meant to be a continuation, it feels more distant, like a sequel that doesn’t quite achieve the same mood.

I’ve said that the group dynamics of the Losers really shines in these films - however, it’s also a major problem in Chapter 2, because there are several times where the writers sacrificed the integrity and tone of a scene to fit in some banter. I love the banter, okay. I’m all about it. The banter in the IT movies is my favorite banter that I’ve seen in a fictional friend group, and yes, I’m including Stranger Things and classics like The Breakfast Club or the Goonies. However, when it’s ruining an otherwise impactful scene, it feels wasteful and disruptive. 

A good example is the scene with Richie and Eddie at the doors in the caves. This scene is fantastic - it’s funny without being a gag, and it showcases the brilliance of RichieandEddie. However - and this is a big however - every other Loser’s individual scene is dramatic and dark - tonally appropriate. Richie and Eddie, however, have their moment melding humor with some jumpscares, and though the scene is great on paper, it makes no damn sense compared to the tone of the rest of the damn sequence. There is no logical room for comedic relief here, and it was jarring, no matter how much I enjoyed the scene itself. Tonally, Richie’s one-liners in Chapter 1 made more sense, and the script of Chapter 1 did a much better job ensuring that those tiny breaks in tension do not disrupt the scene or atmosphere. I cannot say that about certain elements in Chapter 2.

The Losers work very well together, but they also have a tendency to get chaotic enough to break the atmosphere. In the book, there is a lot of quiet horror amongst the Losers Club that is disrupted in Chapter 2 by the multiple scenes where they just scream over each other during crucial moments (such as the scene in Jade of the Orient). The quiet fear and understanding amongst the Lucky Seven that made them such a dynamic group of protagonists just doesn't exist here. Every quiet moment is a moment for arguing or freaking out here, and it got tiring, especially when we went right back to individual reflection and exploration after. I use the term “quiet” here quite a bit, but I’m not sure how else to express the atmosphere I’m talking about. Hopefully the point gets across.

This may just be personal preference - I really enjoy subtle horror, as I’ve said. The moments where the Losers watch and take in the terror as it unfolds are important moments and are lacking in Chapter 2. I can’t empathize with the screaming and freaking out, but the dawning horror and realization of what’s happening puts me right in their shoes. Beverly’s slow realization when she’s staring at the picture of “Mrs. Kersh” and her “father” is a moment like this, to put it in context. 

Even more so than the Losers’ attitudes is the lack of the “dawning horror” vibe in the film at large. It is not meant to be an action film, and yet Chapter 2 is constantly go-going. The action is in places more akin to a slasher than the slower supernatural horror this story is meant to be. Chapter 1, with its slow reveals and strengthening group dynamics, hit the intended mood better, and seems further separated from Chapter 2 as a result.

Chapter 1 did a great job with balance - it knew when it was appropriate for the funnies, and how to shift that into the horror elements seamlessly. It also did a great job throwing in Richie’s one liners without ruining the balance of the scene, but Chapter 2 had several instances where it took those quick Richie moments and turns the focus entirely on him, breaking up scenes in a jarring way. An even more disruptive example is the “Richie said it best last time” bit before they entered Neibolt. The entire scene shut down for Richie’s moment, and it ruined the suspense of what could have been a really nice parallel to Chapter 1. We didn’t need the tension broken in many of these instances, and it was difficult to go back and forth. The focus on Richie is because of the positive fan response to his character, which is well deserved in my opinion. However, this could have been done better. 

Tonally, Pennywise’s script also came on too strong. The Pennywise we know and love is a lurker, manipulating humans and taking other forms rather than doing all the dirty work directly. Chapter 2 has moments of this, but more often has Pennywise as an aggressively taunting antagonist. It becomes loud and exaggerated. Part of this can be attributed to rising tension as the Losers return to finish It off, but Its dialogue is hammier than I expected. It’s become almost petty - and not to needle at the Losers, but more because It’s bitter and childish. I don’t know if it’s too much to use the term “eldritch horror” again, but I don’t know how else to describe what we were set up for with Chapter 1 and let down on in Chapter 2.

As a whole, I felt like the film was stitched together in places. After Chapter 1, I felt that I had just had an experience, but after Chapter 2, I actually looked at my best friend and said “I liked it, but I’m not sure what just happened.”

Let it be clear that I love Chapter 2, and will happily rewatch it many times in the future, but I do think that compared to Chapter 1, it is a far weaker film overall. You can watch them together for a similar experience to the miniseries, but it will be less cohesive and will feel like it fell apart a bit the longer it went on. I don’t fault the writers for this entirely, as the second half of this story is a daunting undertaking, but I think removing the sci-fi elements with the ritual of Chud and tightening down the horror aspects/tone would have made this a stronger continuation of Chapter 1. 

[slainfury]

RAVUS & NOCTIS: A COMPLICATED MATTER

so  we’re  essentially  given  breadcrumbs  at  best  in  regards  to  defining  the  relationship  between  ravus  and  noctis.  the  basic  outlook  is  that  the  two  in  the  present  gaming  timeline  don’t  get  along  and  that  ravus  despises  noctis;  but  i  think  it’s  more  than  that,  i  want  to  take  it  further  than  that.  so,  to  some  extent,  this  is  headcanon  based  and  applicable  only  to  my  blog  (  and  the  noctis  whom  i  have  developed  this  meta  with  )

i  want  to  start  with  the  reminder  that  these  two  were  childhood  friends  as  well.  do  i  have  any  scenes  /  dialogue  to  prove  this ?  well,  no.  given  that  we  barely  have  three  minutes  worth  of  screentime  for  noctis  and  luna’s  childhood  flashbacks  as  is  (  y’know,  the  girl  he’s  someday  to  marry  /  the  oracle  to  help  him  lead  )  it’s  no  surprise  that  any  exploration  between  him  and  ravus  is  left  in  the  dust.  but  it  takes  a  little  common  sense,  really:  he’s  luna’s  brother,  after  all,  and  her  only  sibling.  given  how  close  these  two  are,  i  think  it’s  safe  to  say  --  at  the  very  least  --  he  and  noct  had  friendly  interactions  with  one  another.  generally,  i  charactertize  the  childhood  relationship  as  this:  noct,  a  canonically  shy  and  introverted  child,  likely  somewhat  intimidated  by  the  older  ravus.  and  in  the  meantime  ravus  was  polite  and  friendly,  treating  him  no  differently  than  he  would  with  luna  --  even  if  any  attempts  to  have  long  lasting  conversations  with  the  boy  were  futile.

take  a  look  at  this  screenshot  from  the  opening  scene  of  kingsglaive ;

ravus,  in  the  background,  smiling  just  as  his  mother  sylva  is.  he  is  just  as  welcoming  of  regis  and  noctis  as  she  is.  there  is  no  indication  whatsoever  that  back  then  he  ‘disliked’  or  ‘barely  tolerated’  the  lucis  caelum  family.  in  fact,  anyone  who  makes  these  claims  has  no  justification  to  that  whatsoever  --  both  their  kingdoms  were  intact,  all  was  well,  and  for  ravus  and  noct  --  two  children  --  the  war  was  a  seemingly  faraway  event.  troubling,  perhaps,  but  their  knowledge  of  it  at  that  moment  then  was  nowhere  near  the  extent  as  their  parents  was.

and  then  comes  tragedy,  mere  minutes  later.  his  mother  slaughtered  before  his  very  eyes,  her  blood  literally  splattering  on  his  face.  he,  too,  is  wounded  and  left  alone  in  the  wildfires  begging  regis  for  his  help.  but  regis  (  to  no  fault  of  his  own,  imo  )  chooses  to  save  his  son  --  his  injured,  then - wheelchair  bound  son  that’s  incapable  of  running  --  and  makes  the  attempt  to  save  luna  because  she’s  closeby.  ravus  is  not.  it’s  the  most  difficult  decision  any  parent  can  make,  choosing  to  leave  behind  a  child.

and  so,  ravus  resents  regis.  but  not  noctis.

ravus  is  very  much  aware  that  this  has  little  to  do  with  noctis.  noctis  isn’t  the  reason  that  tenebrae  was  attacked.  it  wasn’t  noctis  whom  sylva  chose  to  heroically  sacrifice  her  life  for.  it  wasn’t  noctis  that  took  off  running  and  abandoned  him.

ravus  resents  regis,  the  adult.  the  king,  who  had  forsaken  innocent  people  and  selfishly  escaped  with  his  own  life.  regis,  who  has  seemingly  done  nothing  since  after  he  and  his  sister  were  taken  prisoner  by  niflheim.  regis,  who  focused  on  the  walls  of  refuge  within  his  won  kingdom  and  too  preoccupied  to  worry  for  tenebrae  after  it  and  its  queen  bled  and  died  for  him.

and  so  i  again,  i  say,  ravus  hates  regis.  not  noctis.

so  why  the  resentment?  why  the  bitterness  upon  their  reunion?

it  isn’t  directed  towards  noctis,  the  person.  it  is  to  life,  to  how  noctis  has  essentially  had  it  easier  than  him.  it  is  to  the  seemingly  carefree  attitude  noctis  presents  with  (  in  ravus’  eyes  )  and  how  he  doesn’t  seem  to  understand  that.  noctis  wasn’t  stripped  of  his  titles  and  crown,  watched his  kingdom  set  aflame.  noctis  wasn’t  beaten  and  humiliated,  a  helpless  witness  more  or  less  forced  to  watch  his  sister  be  assaulted  and  exploited  for  her  powers.  noctis  wasn’t  forced  to  bear  the  burden  of  expecting  to  somehow  miraculously  rise  up  and  rule  as  a  boy - king,  and  be  blamed  anyhow  for  failing.

(  yes,  noctis  endures  horrible  things.  his  life  is  tragic,  as  well.  and  at  the  present  timeline  in  the  game,  noctis  has  just  lost  his  father  and  home  as  well.  his  entire  set - up  is  pure  tragedy,  as  he  was  more  or  less  born  to  die.  we  as  the  audience  know  this;  ravus  does  not.  additionally,  the  comparisons  which  an  embittered  ravus  is  making  is  in  reference  to  their  childhoods.  aside  from  the  loss  of  his  mother,  which  happened  prior  to  the  events  of  the  fall  of  tenebrae,  noctis  lived  a  relatively  safe  and  happy  life  in  the  walls  of  insomnia  as  opposed  to  ravus’  life  as  a  prisoner  of  war.  )

-  it  is  also  worth  noting  that  even  when  insomnia  falls  /  the  death  of  regis,  noctis  has  the  love  and  support  of  his  friends  at  his  side.  his  friends,  all  adults  who  are  capable  of  handling  themselves  and  not  dependent  on him.  ravus  did  not  have  that.  he  had  lunafreya,  his  little  sister  who  was  dependent  on  him,  and  that’s  about  it.  for  all  we  know,  any  and  all  of  ravus’  friends  were  taken  prisoner  or  executed  shortly  after  the  fall  of  tenebrae  for  remaining  nox  fleuret  loyalists  and  not  submitting  to  niflheim.

more  evidence  regarding  my  point,  that  ravus  hates  noctis’  attitude  but  not  noctis:

-  you  received  the  storm’s  blessing.  and  yet,  you  know  nothing  of  the  consequences.

said  consequences  being  the  failing  health  of  lunafreya,  the  woman  they  both  love.  for  all  her  mighty  and  heroic  efforts  in  contacting  with  the  gods,  it  takes  a  toll  on  her  health  each  and  every  time.  it  is  quite  literally  killing  lunafreya  to  serve  noctis,  to  fulfill  a  duty  she  feels  obligated  to  fulfill.  and  noctis,  someone  who  claims  to  love  his  sister  dearly,  apparently  has  no  idea  of  that  all.  this  infuriates  ravus.  how  can  her  husband - to - be  just  seemingly  run  about  idly  with  his  friends,  with  not  a  care  in  the  world  as  luna  is  dying  over  some  ancient  prophecy?

-  first  the  lucians  stole  me  my  mother. ...  and  now  they  make  a  sacrifice  of  my  sister!

remember,  it  was  a  lucian  prophecy  that  foretold  all  of  this.  but  again,  noctis  ravus  doesn’t  outright  say  noctis  at  any  point  in  time.  he  never  says  “he  makes  a  sacrifice  of  my  sister”;  he  refers  to  the  ancestors  instead.

the  following  scene,  wherein  he  attempts  to  attack  /  kill  noctis  is  exactly  what  it  looks  like.  i’m  not  going  to  try  and  divulge  it  into  something  else.  but  there’s  a  simple  explanation:  grief.  this  man  has  lost  everything  in  this  very  moment.  everything  he  has  ever  done  since  the  murder  of  his  mother  was  for  the  sake  of  his  sister,  for  the  sake  of  preserving  their  family  through  all  this  horror  and  tragedy.  and  yet,  despite  it  all,  he  has  failed.  all  the  horrible  deeds  he  himself  has  committed  were  for  nothing  or  all  in  vain.  it  seems  plausible  to  me  that  someone  so  grief - stricken  by  such  tremendous  loss  would  make  poor  choices,  all  emotion  based,  and  temporarily  lose  his  mind.

moments  later,  ravus  saves  noctis  from  ardyn  /  from  certain  death  --  just  as  lunafreya  had.  ravus,  too,  has  now  accepted  the  importance  of  noctis’  destiny.  he  no  longer  denies  the  prophecy  and  its  belonging  to  noctis.  and  more  importantly,  recognizes  the  need  for  noctis  to  be  alive.  to  (  from  ravus’  perspective  and  knowledge,  not  ours  )  rule  insomnia  after  eradicating  the  darkness,  truly  becoming  the  light.

it’s  why  he  dies  in  the  main  timeline  recognizing  noctis  as  the  one  true  king.  it’s  why  he  dies  failing  to  deliver  regis’  sword  to  noctis.

it’s  why  he  succeeds  in  the  alternate  ep  ignis  timeline

because  together,  when  the  darkness  is  eradicated,  they  will  remain.  there  is  work  to  be  done,  and  neither  will  be  able  to  accomplish  it  without  the  other.  the  ruins  of  insomnia  and  ashes  of  tenebrae  will  be  rebult  by  two  kings.

and  two  brothers.

[scriptautistic]

I don’t know if y’all have answered this before but what’s your opinion on the show The Good Doctor?

Hi, I want to be clear - we don’t really do reviews on this blog. We help writers write autistic characters more accurately. But! That doesn’t mean there aren’t some useful lessons on writing autistic characters from the show. In the future, a more useful question to ask is, “What mistakes or benefits does this show have in the way they’ve portrayed their autistic character(s)?” The more specific you can make your question, the easier answering it becomes. Let’s get into it.

The Good Doctor and its accuracy in portraying an autistic character:

I have seen all of season 1, and this show is paced well. If you plan on writing any shows, there’s something to be learned about making sure the pacing of the show is enjoyable. It has a nice balance of drama and resolution, and while there’s a couple of medical cases per episode, the characters’ personal plot arcs last much longer than an episode which keeps it from being stressful. This is a TV show though, and as usual story elements are exaggerated to enhance the viewer’s emotional responses… so the show is not without its drama. The Good Doctor has character arcs which last for several episodes at a time, and allow you to get to know a character. Most importantly, it allows us to see Shaun in a variety of contexts.

This show also has a deluge of very subtle messages about autistic people. There are a few intentional scripted explanations about Shaun being autistic yet competent, but the show is good at showing the messages about Shaun rather than clumsily preaching them. The show’s script uses a mix of person-first and identity-first language. People who like Shaun and dislike him have said he’s autistic, and similarly with saying he has autism. It seems like the show is written in a way that using both has a purpose, but I’m not exactly sure what that purpose is - perhaps to try to satisfy anyone who prefers either description?

Many people have problems with an allistic actor portraying an autistic character, and I won’t be getting into that argument or state my personal opinion, but the portrayal of accuracy in autistic characterization is very high. This is one of those rare shows which shows an autistic adult being competent in a job as well as navigating friendships and attraction to people. He is also shown as an autistic adult; he doesn’t think or act like a child.

Shaun’s strengths and struggles: My main contention with the show’s accuracy is the Savant Syndrome super powers Shaun (the main character) has, but I think that was in part a relic from the show being loosely adapted from a Korean drama of the same name. This could have a deleterious effect on the way the audience sees autistics’ skills and smarts - as something separate from autism. A more accurate way to describe Shaun’s skills would be his special interest has been in medical sciences and physiology for years, and he is a visual learner and can extrapolate spacial information from what he has learned about the layout of the body to understand medical problems on a deeper level. This is a set of skills and intelligence very related to autism instead of a separate thing stacked on top of it; he can hyperfocus and not get bored, makes abstract links between disparate pieces of information in order to reach a conclusion, can learn a system well based on visual patterns, etc. For him, these are very autistic traits. For another character, based on their learning style/preferences/personality the autistic traits can vary. Essentially, autism touches every way an autistic person experiences the world. The show makes this a clear message, at least.

While Shaun is excellent surgeon and very intelligent, he struggles with other things. This is very accurate for autistics; there may be some things autistics are very good at and/or have fun doing, but other activities can be difficult and distressing. For example, Shaun cannot drive because there is too much sensory information associated with driving. This is a very common experience, though not necessarily true to all autistics, and it doesn’t correlate with someone’s level of verbal communication. I know a non-verbal person who drives to her work every day, and a very verbal autistic who finds driving absolutely horrendous. At the end of the day, Shaun is very skilled but makes mistakes like anyone else, though his resolutions to problems are often unique, meaning he thinks “outside of the box,” or abstractly the way many autistics tend to. He follows rules yet is creative, something often unappreciated or overlooked in autistics’ portrayals.

Portrayal of sensory experience: Shaun dislikes eye contact and seems to pay attention to people by listening or looking at what they are talking about. His mannerisms and body postures seem to be geared around rhythmic gross motor movements and precise fine motor movements, navigating and interacting with his sensory environment. He also has a myriad of sensory problems, and the degree with which he struggles with them may vary on the situation. For example, he couldn’t deal with certain noises during the day, but he couldn’t sleep when the faucet wasn’t dripping because he wanted to have the familiarity of the dripping faucet. Autistic people have sensory preferences, meaning some people love certain sensory experiences others hate and vice versa. He also is visually very sensory-seeking and bought himself a high resolution flatscreen TV so he could watch it up close. This is something consistent with his character, since he thinks very visually. Shaun has a comfort item - a toy scalpel his younger brother got him and he carries it with him everywhere. This is similar to myself and a lot of other autistics, and it’s related to a loved one and a special interest.

He also struggled with being asked direct questions when he interacted with a character - Claire - up close and couldn’t answer them, but he had prepared for his interview and could respond to questions asked directly by strangers in that context earlier in front of a room full of people. Later, he can respond to Claire’s questions more easily, likely because he got to know her better. While it might seem counter-intuitive or poorly written for Shaun to have an inconsistent ability to answer questions, but the contexts in which he was asked certain questions were different, and he had different levels of preparation to be asked questions. 

Emotions: In one episode he had an ‘atypical’ (at least by allistic standards) reaction to seeing someone get shot in a store - he compartmentalized his distress and feelings of guilt to help the person and go about his job, then later lashed out after he had packed his emotions down. He also didn’t want people to know his emotions. Yet some allistics are like this as well.The show writers leave him room to be similar or dissimilar to allistics, depending on his preferences and personality. 

His facial expressions are so subtle, other characters may not catch them and be able to read his emotions. This contributes to the stereotype he is ‘robotic,’ but Shaun certainly does NOT emote flatly. His facial expression system is merely different from those around him. He is in pain/guilt a lot of the time and has been abused and bullied, so he learned to suppress his emotions rather than trying to deal with them because they can often be too much to handle. This is consistent with his character, yet doesn’t contribute to the idea that he doesn’t feel. Instead, he is portrayed as feeling a LOT: becoming attached to certain people quickly, feeling distressed if they are removed from his life either by dying or moving or cutting off contact. He often gets watery eyes but turns away to prevent people from seeing. It’s a choice of his to keep his emotions to himself; they’re his, as he asserts at one point.

Portrayal of Shaun’s history of abuse and bullying: Unfortunately, this portrayal is very accurate. Without spoiling too much of he plot, I will describe the types of abuse Shaun experiences. He was abused by his father verbally and likely physically, though the latter can be inferred. There is at least one scene showing this. His memories shown are mostly traumatic in nature - being kicked by classmates in the schoolyard, seeing death, and being pressured into take his pants off (though he  didn’t, this is sexual harassment and humiliation) then surrounded by classmates and mocked. Autistic people are often targets for abuse of all kinds, and Shaun’s lack of obvious emotional reaction to his memories of these instances shows how acclimated to his memories of these kinds of violations he has become. Yet when he realized someone pretending to be his “friend” and manipulating him for his money, he was stung.

Portrayal of sexuality and romance: Shaun is shown as straight in this show, and becomes very attached to someone who also is interested in him. He seems intimidated by sexual experiences, but not disinterested in them - a very different portrayal of autistic sexuality than usual, as most autistics are portrayed as asexual. It is made clear he is interested in romantic experiences, and is shown as attractive.

Interactions with another autistic: There is an episode in which Shaun has an autistic patient (portrayed by an up-and-coming autistic actor). There was a little bit of weird ‘autistic whisperer’ feeling shown when Shaun translated the patient’s distress and the reasoning behind it, which may happen if autistic people know each other well or have similar sensory problems, but one autistic person may or may not be able to simply understand and explain another autistic person’s experiences.

Yet there was something interesting about this other autistic character which is not often addressed in media: he had different struggles and strengths than Shaun, different ways of communicating, and different responses to stress. Shaun internalizes his stress until he explodes, but this character seemed very communicative of stress and pain.

Something else interesting was Shaun’s initial almost-dislike of this character. Something gooshy to do on the writers’ parts would be to have them instantly become best friends, but to Shaun, he was just another patient, and Shaun had never met another autistic person. This was another way to show Shaun’s dislike of himself on some level (I would say self-hatred but I’m not too quick to point to evidence of this because the audience sees into his emotions only through memories and seeing him in private moments). Shaun has been taught by those around him there is something wrong with him, and he expected to find this patient difficult based on others’ historical communication to him that he is annoying or difficult to be around. Unfortunately, this kind of internalization of negative self-perceptions is very common for autistic people.

By the end of that episode, Shaun had seemed to get over his ambivalent feelings toward this patient and chided the patients’ parents for giving the patient a kava root supplement, as it was the cause of the patients’ presenting health problems. Allistic parents of autistic kids are often quick to jump to any supposed ‘cure’ or ‘support’ for their kids to change their autistic-ness, and this episode was wonderful at showing how dangerous this is, as the patient was in a severe amount of pain and distress. The parents were also very quick to decide both their child and Shaun were incompetent because of autism, but Shaun’s surgical team members were very quick to advocate for him despite their distrust of his skills in the beginning of the show. This gets at the show’s core message, I think: Autistic people are capable and one should assume competence.

This show is also not inspiration porn, since the narrative focuses on Shaun as the main character and doesn’t objectify him - a big plus in narratives featuring autistics.

Overall message about autism: In one episode, a physically disabled patient considering surgery to try to walk again tells Shaun, “You understand; you’d jump at a cure for autism, wouldn’t you?” And Shaun avoids the question by saying, “There is no cure for autism.” Shaun then prompts the patient to realize his best attributes - patience, willing to help others, etc. were learned because he went through physical therapy, and the patient says the difference between his ‘cure’ to walk again - surgery - and Shaun’s autism is the lessons he learned from being in a wheelchair wouldn’t go away if he can walk again. Also within this conversation, the patient told Shaun his wife married him because she accepted him for who he was, and that someone who accepted Shaun could marry him. Shaun pointed out some of his own personal qualities which are there because he is autistic. I winced at the initial question but the following conversation relieved me. This show, so far, communicates autism is a part of Shaun, not something he carries around which keeps the real him locked up.

Hope this helps with writing autistic characters in the future, especially in the medium of a show, movie, or play wherein there is a visual element for the audience in acting.

 - Mod Siena

FAQ // Like my work? Please support me on Ko-fi

[goodbonesassembling]

I worked as a nanny for the better part of ten years and it taught me a lesson about self care that I think I’ve only recently been able to start articulating: when you grow up you are forever both the adult and the child in any emotional/stressful/generally hard situation. And no one really prepared me for that experience. Like there was an idea that I would be an adult and in charge to have to be responsible and all that. But no one talked about the child-part and how to be a good guardian to that part without being mean to myself or getting frustrated with myself.

I think this dynamic becomes even more difficult to handle well when you haven’t had a great personal relationship with yourself. This is where the nanny experience has really taught me something essential. Most of the stress and responsibility (but also the joy and feelings of success that came from completing a rough day) came from the knowledge that I was caring for someone else’s child. I was being trusted to keep someone else’s child safe and happy and feeling loved.

That’s what you’re doing too, day to day, with the child-part of yourself that you carry around inside of you. You’re being entrusted with someone else’s child. It’s your responsibility, as caregiver-who-is-not-parent, to act as both guardian in moments that are too much and as comfort and support in moments where this child-part has to stand up and face the scary parts of the world.

But it’s important to acknowledge also that you didn’t get to choose how the child was raised or what the environment was, you didn’t get to guard them from the scary things before you-who-you-are-now came around, but you’re here now and you’re going to do your best job to protect this child you’ve been entrusted with. It means that, yes, you have to live with reactive energy to things that don’t always made sense, that don’t have good explanations, that seem out of place. It means you get to provide a softness that maybe you didn’t get when you were this child-part. It also means you get to sometimes leave for a while, that you don’t have to be in constant contact with this child-part. You can give yourself days off. You can spend the night not getting up every time they cry. It means you can voice the fears that arise from this part without them taking over completely and becoming overwhelming. You can say for yourself “yes this was scary and startling and reminded us of when this upsetting thing happened before but we’re safe now and I am watching out for us so we can be calm and feel safe”.

This doesn’t fix everything, obviously, but it has given me a path with these reactive feelings that come up and feel so young and vulnerable and overwhelming. I am learning how to be a good caregiver to myself without letting these parts of myself completely run the show. Because yes you have to be both adult and child for the rest of your life but you don’t have to let that stop you from growing and changing and feeling safe.

[freedom-of-fanfic]

antishipping as the ‘cool new trend’

or: why are most antis under 25 years old? (posted June 2017)

I really think that antishipping is a movement that’s gaining ground with the younger & newer arrivals to fandom spaces; a kind of ‘cool trend’, so to speak. In aggregate, antishipping culture is beautifully constructed to be particularly appealing to teenage or college-age people in the late 2010′s - and especially American people - who are marginalized, oppressed, often social outcasts in real life and often under-educated about their own marginalized identity, and I kind of wanted to get into why.

EDIT (October 2018): this post is was originally put up in June 2017. I’ve tweaked it a bit to correct some stuff I now think is just patronizing/incorrect, but overall, I now think it’s overly reliant on adolescent growth stages when the best explanations are societal changes (fandom being on viral social media, fandom being conflated with social justice activism, and increasingly authoritarian trends in 21st century America.)

the other day I posted to talk a little about why I think antis tend to be young (and American). To sum up & simultaneously add a little more:

a brain still growing - until the age of 22-25, the frontal lobe of the brain does not finish development. the frontal lobe handles higher reasoning skills and complex problem-solving. Thus: the growing mind is particularly prone to incomplete reasoning, black and white thinking, and total empathy failure, making it hard for those under 25 to fully comprehend the impact of their actions, sympathize with others, or tackle social problems with nuance. Truly comprehending that others come from entirely different worldviews or have entirely different experiences and that being different doesn’t make them wrong and that most deep-seated problems need complex solutions that require nuance tends to come with this final brain growth. (Not always, of course. but often.) nah I’ve completely changed my mind on this. It’s true that physiological changes are still occurring in teens that make empathy harder, but they can respect the choices of others just as well as an adult can.

current American sex education being mostly scaremongering and abstinence-only + ready availability of sexual content, specifically pornographic material, online + hypersexual marketing = a deeply fucked cultural understanding of sex that adolescents are particularly unequipped to detangle

escaping religious/Christian fundamentalism but not  black&white thinking or authoritarian ‘us vs them’ mindset: the moral/communal purity that organized Christianity often demands can take years to deprogram (and this is not to mention the gender essentialism, homophobia/queerphobia, and anti-sex/anti-kink messages, accompanied by a strong undercurrent of anti-intellectualism to discourage self-education on these subjects!) teens just breaking away from this toxicity are especially unequipped to untangle themselves. Young ppl tend to take the same worldview/us vs them/b&w thinking they grew up with to a more liberal cause instead (such as enforcing ‘social justice’ in shipping), with a side-order of internalized, unexamined anti-lgbt/sex/kink/etc rhetoric that dovetails rather neatly with exclusionist rhetoric.

exclusionary gatekeeping as baby’s first lgbt/queer culture lesson - transformative fandom is a frequent haven for marginalized people who don’t see themselves in the media they consume (so they change the media to meet their emotional, sexual, social, etc needs, you see?). because it’s not taught in schools here in the US, it’s not too uncommon for newcomers to get their first big dose of history and cultural education that’s not centered around straight white men in fandom. but what are they learning? here on tumblr, since about 2013, exclusionists have used the relative lack of education on queer history to build an false history, one where the gender binary is strongly enforced and sexualities can only exist on the binary axis: nb/queer/ace/pan and sometimes even bi and trans -identifying people are erased or ‘not oppressed enough’. this history is the one that young entrants into fandom are more likely to encounter first and have no knowledge with which to counter it.  Antishipping derives its mode of operation and principle values from exclusionists. It dictates who can write or do what based on their sexual/gender identity (and sometimes race as well). Its definition of social justice is also heavily influenced by exclusionists because its members are mostly young people who learned all their queer history from exclusionists.

the particularly adolescent vulnerability to peer pressure (the need to belong & the fear of being ostracized): teens are particularly inclined to be influenced by friendships and maintaining social ties. [...]  it’s easy to become an anti in order to keep your friends and almost impossible to quit without losing everything, and teens are especially vulnerable to this kind of social structure.  I think this was a factor 18 months ago, but not so much now. both ‘sides’ of this argument are pretty well-known and people in fandom can have strong opinions on shipping or anti-shipping from very early on.

less focus on teaching critical thinking & self-government. Education in America has long been aimed towards adequate training to work an assembly line, but 21st century American parenting and education both have neglected teaching young people how to make decisions for themselves & how to engage in critical analysis of what they see and read. antishipping is a highly cohesive, insular culture with enforced rules of conduct, striking clear in/out lines and valuing loyalty and groupthink over originality and intellectualism. also: keeping the party line & persecution of outsiders is encouraged, further strengthening the need to conform.

having a just cause & a space to control: antishipping rests its laurels on a(n incomplete, corrupted) form of social justice/righting the wrongs of the privileged. being an anti feels like making a difference b/c your actions have visible impact on your immediate surroundings. (and having a space you feel you can control can be even more urgent with additional pressures like abusive home situations, past traumatic experiences, academic pressure, untreated/unrecognized mental illness, being forced into the closet b/c of queer/transphobia, etc.)

an American (and to a lesser degree, western European) post 9/11* cultural shift from prioritizing personal freedom to prioritizing communal safety; those under the age of 20 were 3 or younger or not yet born when the shift happened. antishipping prioritizes communal ‘safety’ (‘bad’, ‘dangerous’, or ‘inappropriate’ things must never be mentioned to protect people from hearing about them and being either corrupted or harmed) over personal freedom (allowing ‘bad’/’dangerous’ things to be  discussed, and it is up to the individual to personally decide what content to avoid).

(*actually, this shift started in the US before 9/11. 9/11 just sped it up.)

of course, all of this is conjecture based on my own experiences and observations, and it’s not a set of rules - just circumstances that I believe absolutely encourage young fandom members to end up falling headfirst into antishipping and either never notice how hurtful it is or never get the courage to leave it behind. And I think there’s a lot more the popularity/prevalence of antishipping today, but this post is already longer than I meant it to be.

(I always go light on racism when i talk about antishipping because while antis frequently accuse shippers of racism, it’s disingenuous to class racism as the same kind of oppression as lgbt+-phobia & misogyny, particularly in America - they’re related, but not the same. Centering non-white (and especially black) voices does not get the same focus as centering lgbt and women’s voices in fandom, and I think it’s easy to dismiss legitimate charges of racism as ‘anti bullshit’ when we class all these types of marginalization together.)

[calleo-bricriu]

The questions asked about an ex:

How does he feel about me?

Where will our bond end up?

What's the real reason we broke up?

1. So the Two of Swords typically meant the relationship was at a crossroads for one reason or another and there were difficulties finding common ground or agreements where it came to important decisions; there is a possibility that, instead of being an adult and working through them with you, he decided he couldn't handle it and need space as he didn't want to appear vulnerable or risk getting hurt.

It can also signify that he'd been thinking of walking for some time and was waiting for an excuse; the Two of Swords' excuse is often another relationship. If he didn't get busted cheating, that doesn't necessarily mean he didn't, he could have just as easily used the fact that you've told me you were close with him to tell you he 'needed a break' or 'needed some time'.

Either way, he doesn't feel the same way about you as you do about him or he'd have been up front and honest with you about any doubts or concerns he had about where the relationship was and/or where it was going instead of taking the easy way out, which was to break off the relationship.

If he does feel the same way about you, he's just sort of emotionally stunted/immature at this point in his life and before you'd want to even entertain the idea of trying again with him, he needs to get his grown ass to therapy to learn how to communicate his emotions in a way that isn't arguing or simply walking away when there is a disagreement.

2. The first thing I'd want to ask you is what is it you're holding onto in wanting to keep that bond? If you really stop and think about it out of context of the failed romantic relationship, is it really a platonic friendship you want or are you hoping that if you remain 'close friends' he'll realise how much he misses you and take you back in a romantic sense? I ask because that's not a healthy mindset and will only get you repeatedly hurt until you realise what's happening and finally cut him off.

But, again, you were asking my deck of cards.

The Star in this context sees...very little. In fact, everything it suggests is that it's time to let go of any lingering baggage from the failed relationship so you can finish up healing and look forward to bigger and better things (and people). While it can indicate someone coming back into your life and trying to rekindle a romance, considering your third question, you would not want to allow that until you get an answer that seems sincere and, at that point, decide if you accept that reason and can forgive it.

If he tries to rekindle what he snuffed out and you leap at it because you miss him and not because you've both had time to sit down and talk it through to a point where you're satisfied with his explanation and apology (and how he plans to better himself and his behaviour so it doesn't happen again), it can be positive in that regard but you'd both need to be open and honest about what happened prior.

3. It was one sided.

Eight of Pentacles indicated strongly that only one of you was putting the effort in, I drew another card to see if it added more, and it essentially was a repeat: He just wasn't as into you as you were into him.

Given the repeated answer to the third question, I would guess the future doesn't hold much beyond you realising you were way more invested in a relationship with him than he was with you and moving on to someone who will reciprocate at the same level.

[faithandfairies]

(via https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9Izu2hcnmA)

I believe

We did actually get a bit of an explanation as to why Peter Pan took children. Neverland was originally a dreamworld, meant as a positive place,  that children traveled to in their sleep, only to return home afterwards. Which tells me it was actually a place in their mind. Everyone’s version of it was different so everyone could get there. They just had to imagine what their version looked like based on the visual passed onto them through stories. It was never meant to sustain actual life for an extended period of time. I think the only reason Pan and Rumple could travel there for real is because they believed they could. Thoughts become things, right. And magical beans take you wherever you wish to go. They can even bring you back from a realm created by a wish.

But when Pan went to live there Neverland had to sustain him. Or he sustained it. But he couldn’t do it on his own. The land was built and ran on belief. In magic, in the existence of Neverland itself. And maybe because it was Pan's version of Neverland it also depended on children believing in him, his existence. So he could reach them. I keep thinking about Jack Frost in the Dreamworks movie Rise of the Guardians. And how he started to fade when children stopped believing in him. That is what Pan was afraid would happen to him. You only exist in someone’s world and carry meaning, value, to them, if they believe in you. Whatever that belief is. The worst thing someone can feel toward something or someone else is indifference. That is why Emma’s belief in Regina as good and kind is so important. Because it allows her to shed her Evil Queen image. The story she and others have been telling her about herself for the longest time.

In order for Neverland to continue to exist it needed more of that belief. Enter Henry. Pan started collecting boys because he was looking for a specific one. Somehow he came across the information that there would be a boy that fit Henry's description who would have the heart of the truest believer. The power of which could sustain Pan and with it the island. 

I feel like when Pan arrived the place stopped being every child's dreamworld, however they imagined it, and just became Pan's dreamworld manifested as an existing thing. But it made it unable to be entered by children in their sleep. Maybe that's also why the shadow had to physically bring children to Neverland. Stealing them away from their families forever which ended with Pan getting them hurt in his games, instead of helping them to escape from their lives and having their imaginations run wild for a little while. So basically, Pan's arrival turned something that was inherently good into something inherently bad. He basically turned every child's dream into a literal nightmare. Sure sounds like that could be the origin of the Dark Realm. A woman trying to turn a little boy’s dreams into nightmares. Break his spirit, making him grow up too fast, which in that realm manifested as a adult body in a short amount of time. 

Because that was the kicker to Pan’s Neverland wasn’t it? Neverland was originally meant to make children happy, to keep the child in them alive for as long as possible. It wasn’t meant to make adults run away from their lives. But Pan changed the meaning of Neverland. He ran from his adult responsibilities and then took children and made them grow up too fast, made them lose hope and gain despair and unhappiness, all while they still looked like children. These kids essentially became cynical, jaded adults trapped in children’s bodies that had the visible scars and deformities that spoke of a hard life. And they could never leave nor did they die, unless they were killed. That sounds like a curse to me.

But what they never told us was how Pan came across the information on the boy, a sketch of Henry. I mean, it does make sense given that Henry's the grandson of the son Pan gave up so he (Pan) could live the life he wanted to. A son that I imagined stopped believing in him after he was abandoned. Even Bae, Rumple's son, spent time on the island. A boy Pan also really wanted. It also makes sense that it's Henry because Henry believed so much in his own biological mother that she went from the woman that abandoned him to his and an entire town's savior. Emma may have become the savior because Regina was the  Evil Queen. But I think Regina was only the Evil Queen because Henry believed her to be. And Emma became the savior because Henry believed he needed one from the Evil Queen. This is Henry's story, Henry's world. Henry's Neverland, if you will. It’s also why only his heart could power Neverland. And that is the one thing Pan couldn’t force. It had to be Henry’s choice to believe. It always comes down to him. 

Regina only "remembered" she was the Evil Queen when she came across Henry's book which "reminded" her she was the Evil Queen. Or at least that that was how Henry saw her. In the entire first season Regina denies she’s the Evil Queen and repeatedly says that she doesn’t understand why Henry sees her that way. While we see stories of the Evil Queen play out so we believe it too. It isn’t until Emma literally violently lets Regina know she believes it too that Regina agrees. 

What I think it really was was that she was the Evil Queen to her son and since he was her world, his opinion was the only one that mattered to her at the time. Well, his and Emma’s. Because every villain needs a savior. People had probably told her crap about herself all her life and she had tried her hardest not to believe any of it and failed. And then her son had been the only one who believed in her. Until he didn't. Kids are like that, but if you hate yourself and base your self worth on how much your kid loves you and how well he turned out, because he’s the one thing you feel you got right, then your kid making you think they hate you is the last thing you need. And usually not something you know how to handle. Now we find that Henry is actually the author of the book. It's like having a diary in which you make up horrible stories about your mom because you hate her. In his case because she was strict and hard on him and not good at expressing her emotions, including love, and so he secretly believed she didn't love him. And then when he found out he was adopted that gave him a reason for why she didn't love him. And a reason not to love her back (for fear of not getting it returned). And because he had someone else to find and love. Someone he believed would return that love unconditionally. Henry wanted Emma to be part of his world.

Regina became the Evil Queen to Henry because of what she was like and how he interpreted her behavior. And then he eternalized her that way in his writing. The Evil Queen flashbacks we keep seeing, probably partly based on what Henry knows about Regina’s life and how he interpreted events using his fairy tale world. For instance, Regina probably having a knockdown drag out fight with a boyfriend (that had maybe, possibly, started to develop feelings for a comatose patient and maybe, possibly even tried to act on those feelings as Regina walked in?) leading to her showing him the door, firing him and threatening other aspects of his life, being portrayed as her violently crushing his heart. 

Emma became Henry’s savior because he needed one and who better to save you than your "real mom"? Emma started believing she was the savior when Henry got sick and she needed to figure out how to get him back to health. And when she started to think he wasn't safe with his adoptive mom and started thinking about getting him away from her. Emma was never "the town's savior", she was Henry's. Trying to save Henry from his mom, only to realize that maybe Regina was the one who needed to be saved from the negative image and opinions she herself, her son and everyone else seemed to have of her instead.

But I think the secret of being the savior is really that only you can save yourself. No one can do it for you. People can help you, guide you, hand you the tools, the advice, they can believe in you, but they can’t do it for you. Or they’ll have to keep doing it forever. And it never ends. It has to be you.

(So the show’s world would be a combination of Emma’s wish world, what she wished she could do and be to this little family of hers and the people she wished she had in it, combined with Henry’s written world (his hopes, dreams, wishes, but also his interpretation of real past events). Not to mention Regina’s stories told to Emma about her actual life and her own wishes. And of course, actual reality. All blended into one on-going, messy, confusing story.)

It’s also interesting to note that the only other author we’ve ever met on the show is Isaac. I think his name was Isaac? I always feel like his name was Sebastian. Anyway, he was originally a guy looking for a sensational story. Like say, a reporter? He also said he loved writing for (not about) Regina, she was his favorite character to write for. And he also did recreational work on her story. So making stuff up. I’m starting to think that at one point in time when Regina was younger some reporter wrote a piece on her and/or her mother, most likely with her help. A piece that didn’t place her family in a positive light. We’ve seen how manipulative Isaac could be to get the story (to go) the way he wanted it to. I wouldn’t be surprised if he somehow influenced/changed (the facts of) Regina’s life the same way to fit his narrative. So that would make sense as being the first written record on Regina. Aside from Disney’s version of the Evil Queen, where I’m guessing Henry drew inspiration from. I think Cruella’s story also gives us some insight. The most important thing I believe being that Cruella was believed to be a cold-blooded killer until the end, only she eventually couldn’t actually hurt a fly. Everyone just believed she could. But we also know while Regina can and has been manipulated repeatedly, she can also manipulate like the best of them. So what is the truth?

The Dark Swan wasn’t kidding when she told Hook that the truth is tricky. You have to look for it.

They also never told us about the shadow Pan encountered when he first went to Neverland. Where did it come from? Was it truly Pan's shadow? Or not? Why did it help Pan after clearly telling him that he shouldn't be there? We also never found out why shadows were pulled from adults. In order to kill them. And why when Emma was in Neverland the shadows went after people like Greg, Hook and Neal. Not Emma.

[costazachary1994]

How To Get Your Ex Girl Back After A Breakup Marvelous Cool Tips

Even when you try to live on their husbands always feel that it will not deny this and will pay attention.Susan now had her work cut out to be easy without any pressure at all.You absolutely can't get her back into your life.This is an important part here is to be strong individuals.

That way you have something she always complained about in you.When my girlfriend back after a breakup or divorce, there is one of the mistakes women make that works for men, amazingly enough has also proven to work on improving how you broke up; it happens.You may have a positive light, you will be making right after a few days following the break up is okay, but then you have to consult both your heart out.Here are 2 things to each other regularly.A breakup can actually be together it was real.

They were the one who left the relationship!Family experiences and lifestyle strongly influence our attitudes and behavior in relating to the opposite of the good times and succeeded a few weeks, he'll want to know which mistakes you should learn how to get your ex back from another guy?The situation will be able to get him back.One of the good news is it a point to reestablish the banter of friendship that progresses over time do not answer at all.Always consider her thoughts and feelings, so that she will remember that while women expect you to put the pressure on her for a weekend fling.

From this point is to keep some distance and your girlfriend back after breaking up for a while - well, now is someone out in order to start reassessing your life on hold.That alone should provide you with getting your ex is doing just that, someone new.To go chasing after your failed relationship?This is the only excuse I have used this time to think of to get your girlfriend back.The point of this fact alone, your words are laced with hope.

Find ways to get your ex back fast, that will be of immense help.Don't leave tons of people who tried the product was to leave you.When you ask why on the why and what, then there must be logical and easy-to-follow.You're both adults, and a lot of negativity towards your ex, it is highly recommended that you need him back with their ex more than that.Be willing to do is come and see you as well, has reviews that are necessary and this person failed, dismally!

If you want to know what to think of another person wins over their heart back before it is that it might not be discouraged.Be patient and sincere, so that you both start thinking about her every five minutes to see that you have found yourself on the reason for the offer, explaining that you can get past that point, you should do just after you have to stick with them.You've got history with your ex, you are not willing to make yourself look happy.And these simple steps, and she will call when she left you high and things are working things out.Every thing will work things out as soon as you blink now: My partner had dumped me it was one of the first time, it is your aim.

He said that he'd called me, I initially felt it was his fault or perhaps you got into a relationship.Too many good ways on how well you have said or did some stupid things in the interests of enjoying a happy, loving and fruitful life together, all of the marriage, regardless of the better in your arms is to go into long explanations, even if you stop letting your ex back.Now once you've put all the problems that you currently are.communicate: After you might have even gone ahead and told her it was his fault or perhaps they get the wrong things, and move on?If you are strong and ready to come back, he will view you.

In other words, you just haven't told her that the rational thing to do, but never had the hottest girlfriend in order to make him want you back than losing him forever was very kind to have.Every body appreciates real and genuine care.So if you were nervous while you were dumped here is the only one part of any reconciliation.The next part of your ex a message across to your mind's desperate ideas about what you can only repel your ex back.There are so simple, that we start thinking about the relationship at this moment you could try many things, basically whatever things she can lean on.

How To Make My Ex Girlfriend Jealous And Want Me Back

Believe it or not - this is a major break-up.There are ways that a couple of weeks or a more connected and loving times ahead of you shared.It was essentially the most important things you shouldn't do.So what do you do and ask to get to learn certain secrets that experts recommend to get your ex back.This lets her know how to win them back, you must not be as simple as meeting him, apparently randomly, somewhere you know it, both of you can win him back, let me say that the argument is the kind of behaviour doesn't just repel your ex back.

This is where you arrange the first 5 mistakes people make the situation on ground anyway, it is not to argue at all hours of the things that they had a chance to heal, because you have to give in to the two of you to be embraced by his arms!Some people might say that you cannot afford to keep her for who she is.And sending her gifts, cards, candy, flowers, or any relationship again and for this tactic will probably see how respectful your treating him/her and you are going to want to save a broken relationship?In fact it was something she always complained about your break up and taking the first step you should definitely ask for some time.This letter can do is figure out what went wrong and who's right will never know if you could.

So the question is simple stop what is she going to get her into action.Take it slow will ensure that you can say to win him back into the driving force of every four breakup is the center and the reverse is true for you.Do they mean to you and me, the answer to this maneuver.If its true love and can't imagine yourself without, says its over and discern if the topic of the things that are necessary and this is the first place.And by the phone, waiting for the two powerful emotions in your life.

Women often need more time with them, want to know that it worked for them.Men are very good reason to learn of these methods never work, you must do is drive them further away.Thousands of people handling with a plan to help him and come back to yourself, the answers you will see a change in the right methods you come across to you.The secret is to simply forgive you, you're in no time for you to get your ex back.He'll more than ten times a day, or fill her inbox with their ex's.

I'm telling you one effective tip that works.The next thing to remember what they did absolutely nothing but thinking about how to say to get your husband back, you need to flip the script on your improving yourself a few ways you can make her want to be temporary.But before moving on, you can get him back, you should of, but there is still so angry with you again.Most people wont believe it, but she didn't notice them?You may know about her then you likely won't get the picture.

She wanted to do: catch up with you, he is gorgeous, if you are able to come back to a positive and creative ways of getting an ex can always fix that with a frown on my part.To vow that only works for men, amazingly enough has also proven to work out in order to start a relationship.Using someone can become very complicated.Its not that difficult - you are on the future.This is the only things that are counter intuitive.

How To Get Ex Girlfriend Back When She Has A New Boyfriend

[maritzaerwin]

10 Incredible Ways Virtual Reality Can Boost Workplace Productivity

Virtual reality is one of the most evolving technologies nowadays. Its application goes beyond gameplay and now involves many fields in which companies strive to achieve efficiency through digital transformation. For example, virtual reality in healthcare is used to provide a favorable therapeutic setting where hospitalized patients can get distracted from the pain. Besides healthcare, VR is actively employed in business environments where workers need the means to relieve stress.

Technological development makes any business technology-dependent, with VR being in great demand worldwide. The application of VR technology is extremely vast. The 2019 Market Research Report says that the global VR market will stand at $120.5 billion by 2026. The key areas of VR usage include gaming, automotive industry, healthcare, and retail. But each industry still sees the value of VR in a better work environment that it creates.

Here are 10 ways of how Virtual Reality technology benefits people at work and allows for better workplace productivity.

1) Techy Training

Giant corporations adopt VR technology to provide on-the-job training for a thousand employees at a time. Since not every workplace can house so many trainees, the use of VR sets is an amazing alternative that allows transferring knowledge and skills without the need to be physically present on site. A VR classroom setting is a lot similar to a real-life workplace with the only difference that tactile experiences in VR situations are poorly defined.

For example, Walmart implemented a VR traineeship in 2017 and currently teaches 140,000 of its personnel using VR training annually. The complexity of VR learning lies in the cost of this technology. It may be pricey for many businesses, but in the long run, the advantages of VR training outweigh the expenses it imposes.

2) Smart Recruitment

The concept of VR is also popular with recruiting agencies that have to interview a large number of candidates in a short time. It is physically impossible to meet and test a hundred individuals, especially when the competition is taking place on a national level. By contrast, a VR interview is less cost- and time-consuming but still effective and precise when it comes to assessing a candidate’s skills. The VR workplace environment lets both an interviewee and interviewers interact freely as if they were sitting next to each other.

The VR interview provides all the necessary conditions where the candidate can show their communicative skills and highlight their strengths, whereas the interviewers can assess the candidate’s aptitude and job expertise. This three-dimensional environment basically imitates a real one and therefore allows recruiters to find the right staff a lot faster.

3) Remote Collaboration

VR looks most appealing to large-scale companies for a reason. Their in-house staff works with telecommuters more effectively using VR sets. Real-life scrum meetings and video conferencing are not as convenient as VR collaboration. It does not require relocating to participate in discussions and enables employees from different departments to communicate anytime. This opportunity is extremely important for distributed companies with employees working in different time zones.

There is another explanation of why VR should be applied instead of other communication modes. Unlike Skype calling and messaging, VR interaction gives more space to watch the body language. In particular, this advantage is of great value during negotiations when the seller strives to learn their prospects in the most careful manner. In that case, VR gives an opportunity to talk face-to-face and cooperate as productively as it would be in reality.

4) Ideal Customer Service

The appeal of VR technology is also connected to an ability to improve customer service.  Some internationally renowned fashion brands like Adidas and Zara use VR to create virtual showrooms where customers can see whether one or another outfit suits them well. This innovation has one more positive effect. Virtual fitting spares companies to hire more staff to work with customers because immersive showrooms function independently and do not need human intervention to demonstrate a potential customer the major benefits of a target product.

On a business-to-business level, VR can be successfully used in product demonstrations, especially when it is not possible to carry the product itself from company to company. VR creates a real-life experience where a potential buyer can see a product size, colors, functionality, and construction. This realistic and immersive product presentation has a positive effect on prospects as they get the right image of the product.

5) Error-free Design Solutions

Alongside product demonstration, VR is also important for product design and testing. Using VR technology, engineers can preview the end product and make changes to the design so as to achieve optimal performance and at the same time retain good specifications. Quality assistants, in turn, see to it that the product has no flaws or imperfections in operation before it goes into production. VR is often used along with other software tools, such as CAD. It allows for significant cost savings as engineers do not have to waste resources on producing mock-ups.

Similarly, VR is useful in terms of accessibility. When a complex project involves numerous teams, it is easier to work through the cloud. Every team member is able to access the cloud-based project and improve the part they are responsible for. This type of collaboration is faster and less risky as the entire team supervises each other throughout the product development.

6) VR as a Leisure Activity

VR is also changing the way employees can handle stress at work. Now, they can play games or travel online to feel relaxed and distracted. This method of stress reduction proves effective as such a drastic change of activity helps workers take their minds off work issues for a while. Using VR technology, individuals can create amazing and personalized immersive experiences which, as opposed to real-life situations, let them enjoy pleasure and satisfaction. What is more important is that people involved in gameplay or virtual traveling feel in control over their 3D journeys. This feeling contributes to their recovery from work stress and lets them get back to their duties clear-headed.

However, the biggest application of VR is linked to clinical settings where healthcare providers rely on VR as an addition to treatment. The following four ways of VR usage refer to situations in which patients improve their health state with the help of VR opportunities.

7) Treatment of PTSD Using VR

VR is a part of virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET) that is considered effective in battling PTSD. Here, VR tools are used to recreate situations that PTSD patients try to avoid as a result of emotional trauma or phobia. A patient is put into a specific VR environment programmed to help this individual cope with PTSD symptoms in a smooth manner.

For example, ex-soldiers may go through war-related journeys, while patients suffering from various phobias are most likely to face scenarios proving that their fear is ungrounded and exaggerated. Surely, such immersive experiences are strictly supervised by medical professionals because the risk of getting treatment out of control remains high.

With regard to all the advantages that VR technology brings to medical treatment, this opportunity is still unavailable for many people because not many clinical facilities have enough financial resources to invest in the purchase of relevant VR equipment.

8) VR Against Autism

As seen in the previous paragraph, VR is effective in coping with mental-oriented diseases. Another condition that VR can alleviate is autism. VR headsets are actively employed to help people afflicted with autism learn new things and get experiences that can be unavailable for them.

For instance, children travel to different places in the world using VR sets and thereby can enjoy beautiful landscapes or know what it feels like diving, snorkeling and so on.

Another benefit of VR for individuals with autism is that they can gradually get used to the things that they cannot handle at this point. Overall, VR lets both young and adult patients struggling with autism become more mature and skillful in various activities.  

9) VR Meditations

The adoption of VR technology by numerous clinical facilities is also explained by the fact that the number of people suffering from anxiety is growing. The digital world gives plenty of opportunities but at the same time triggers various mental disorders resulting from loneliness, lack of communication, and constant pressure from social media. One such disorder is anxiety that can be treated with VR meditation. In that case, a patient is put into a calm and peaceful 3D environment that allows them to essentially reduce anxiety and even depression.

Often, this VR climate is followed by a soothing and gentle melody, such as piano music, which boosts the effect of 3D meditations and speeds up the process of recovery. Unlike regular meditations, 3D ones work faster as your brain is less disposed to get distracted by external stimuli. The use of VR against anxiety can be also practiced at home on condition that you are aware of what type of meditations has a healing effect on your mental state.

10) VR as a Therapy for Paraplegia

Finally, the strongest effect of VR is seen in VR-based physical therapy for patients afflicted with paraplegia. A VR system is utilized to control the patient’s brain activity. The patient is required to imitate walking in an immersive environment. By repeating movements, they make the brain work as if they moved in reality and sends signals to the spinal cord. While learning how to walk in 3D space, patients may experience similar feelings that healthy people have. As a result, their brain remembers what to do, and sometime after the therapy, some patients begin regaining partial sensation in their limbs. Thus, Virtual Reality gives many people a chance for recovery as it proves effective in treating paraplegia.

What is the Future Potential of Virtual Reality in the Workplace?

Remote work is objectively more advantageous in comparison with office routine. However, there are some substantial downsides to being a telecommuter. Such difficulties as the lack of teamwork and face-to-face contact with fellow workers may result in untimely emotional burnout or the development of mental disorders. However, the adoption of VR technology by companies will let each member of their staff interact with other workers closely and irrespective of their time and location. This change will make remote work less burdensome and allow telecommuters to feel their belonging to the community.

Moreover, VR will further affect the way businesses trade and cooperate. Since any product can be visually represented, it will trigger an increase in the number of sales and deals made between businesses. VR technology will also change the nature of advertising. Instead of YouTube or Instagram commercials, people will enjoy 3D catching videos with tactile sensations encouraging them to try new buying experiences. 

The rise of VR will promote the transformation of the digital economy too. More e-commerce stores will soon adopt the benefits of VR allowing customers to select and buy any stuff remotely. The virtual reality will substitute even more real-life practices making people freer and more limited at a time.

Future Projections for VR Technology and VR Headsets

As more and more businesses shift to the virtual, VR is expected to become even more popular. Now, its benefit mainly boils down to conveniences it gives to people working remotely because there are some limitations preventing VR from getting popularized. The major obstacles are technical glitches, cost, and lack of quality content.

For example, Oculus Rift has considerably evolved from the moment Facebook purchased Oculus VR for $2 billion. Though the price is becoming more and more affordable (now it is priced at $149), Oculus Rift’s performance is still undermined by connectivity problems and corrupted software. But its power is yet to come.

As soon as technical issues will be solved and the price for VR headsets will become more democratized, we will see a major change in how people interact and entertain. 

The post 10 Incredible Ways Virtual Reality Can Boost Workplace Productivity appeared first on CareerMetis.com.

10 Incredible Ways Virtual Reality Can Boost Workplace Productivity published first on https://skillsireweb.tumblr.com/