#my most controversial adult-who-watches-kid shows opinion

[partywithponies]

[itsmoonpeaches]

On Greek Mythology and its darker topics and how modern audiences view them, an essay for some reason.

For further context on my thoughts on a similar topic, please see my post, "ATLA fandom and other fandom spaces have been ruined by purity culture, an essay."

First, for those of you who are new here, let's define what I mean by purity culture.

Purity culture in my own terms can be defined as an extreme obsession with purity, particularly in Western (but mostly American) audiences which is a culture that seeks to make everything positive, pure, and acceptable. Not to be confused with how some religions view purity culture as abstinence.

Please note that before you attack me, I am a person who encourages and champions progressiveness and openness in media. This is not an essay to chase away notions of continuing to represent difficult topics respectfully in modern pieces. Simply, it is to point out something that troubles me, especially in communities that tend to consume modern retellings and the more ancient stories centered around Greek Mythology and other mythologies.

Purity culture and modern Greek Mythology retellings

To put it simply, there is no purity culture in most modern Greek Mythology retellings. There are modern storytelling structures, maybe more kid-friendly ways to put things into perspective, but generally speaking, I have not seen much of a culture in which authors, playwrights, and other kinds of writers have watered down myths into something wholly unrecognizable in which none of the darker topics exist. Instead, they are either retold in a way that fits the target audience, reframed into something that fits the context of the story, implied or not covered because maybe the audience is too young, or outright said because the audience is old enough.

This is not to say that inaccuracies are not a problem. Disney's Hercules exists. (I wouldn't be the first to say that the film is a fun time though.) But completely covering up dark topics is not something modern retellings seek to do.

The Broadway musical, Hadestown, does not shy away from the true ending of Orpheus and Euridicye's story. Jorge Rivera-Herrans' Epic: The Musical does not brush over the atrocities war and desperation bring. Rick Riordan's Percy Jackson and the Olympians, while written as a book series aimed at children, does not hide the consequences children have to face when forced to fight for the gods, including what it's like to grow up under neglectful parents especially. Netflix's Kaos, a show I haven't even watched yet, is aimed at adults, and from the clips I have seen it does not back away from telling the mortals just how messed up the gods are.

So, with all this in mind, it begs the question: Why are audiences so fixated on watering down what Greek Myths and their retellings are?

Purity culture and how modern mythology fans view retellings

This is definitely a controversial opinion, but I don't think that it's beneficial to anyone to have too much discourse over the darker topics present in ancient myths. The fact is that ancient myths were not written for us, they were written for ancient people to explain the unexplainable.

Audiences now tend to view certain aspects of myths as problematic. And yes, they are. I'm not disagreeing with those of you who will argue this point. The problem is that many are viewing these aspects through a purity culture lens through which they don't want to see these topics portrayed at all. (Remember, these myths were not written for you.)

[Trigger warning ahead for mentions of assault.]

The most common mythological characters I've seen argued about are Medusa and Calypso. The common theme between these two characters? Their stories revolve around sexual assault.

Ovid's version of Medusa has her assaulted by Poseidon, while the original Greek version has Medusa already born with her curse. Calypso in The Oddessy is an immortal nymph cursed to live alone on the island of Ogygia because of her association with the titans, namely her being the daughter of Atlas. However, she fell in love with Odysseus (or should I say, potentially obsessed with him), and forced him to remain on the island with her and sleep with her.

In fan spaces, I see these stories argued about a lot. For example, whether they should be talked about at all, whether these women are problematic or not (or if the gods are etc.). And while the point is often made that there were victims in their stories, it's almost as if when audiences find out the truth of their ancient origins, they are in denial.

This Tumblr post in particular comes to mind:

Link to original here.

While the original poster does realize in the tags that this was a topic that had to be reframed because of Riordan's target audience, it reminded me that there are others who find this truth all too jarring.

People forget or fail to realize that Greek Mythology and other mythologies are not pleasant stories. So, it's only to be expected that modern versions of them or stories that use their characters have written disturbing things too.

In Calypso's case, I often see her character canceled in a way only fictional characters can be I suppose. She's not a great person. She forced people to stay with her. Yet, she was cursed to do just that.

It's also interesting that sometimes Calypso is called out because she's centuries old and Percy was 15 if we're going from the retelling perspective of Percy Jackson and the Olympians. Yet, Odysseus was also a lot younger than her. Not to mention many of the gods had affairs with mortals an X amount of years younger than them in myths. I don't have to remind you of Zeus' many trysts. The hyperfixation on age difference is something born out of purity culture as well, even if sometimes that difference is only a few years. The gods and immortal beings, however, do not and should not work out the way humans do, but I digress.

Calypso's story is a whole cycle and it is disturbing. There is no use in denying that this is her character, however. Just how it would be the same as denying that fairytales had dark origins. (Remember how Cinderella's stepmother sawed off parts of her biological daughters' feet just so they could fit into the glass slipper? Or how birds picked out their eyes?) The modern Disney-fied versions of fairytales is a whole other topic, but it stems from similar beliefs under purity culture. It's just that there isn't the same kind of audience for fairytales as there is for Greek Mythology, is there?

Purity culture and themes in Greek Mythology, or TLDR

There are common themes in Greek Mythology including betrayal, death, consequences of actions, hubris, loyalty, and overwhelming greed. Gray morality above all, fits into the puzzle that is mythology. Nothing is black and white.

Purity culture has colored the way even themes in Greek Mythology are viewed. Purity culture makes things black and white. In reality, the world is not so. Themes in myths are now too abhorrent to talk about, or too nasty to reproduce. Especially in fandom circles, topics can't be talked about because they are too taboo. People get angry. There is discourse. Suddenly, everything in a myth can be fixed if everyone just had access to therapy.

But, these myths are ancient. These dark topics are common. While many topics are triggering for people, perhaps it would be more beneficial to the art of storytelling itself to simply not engage. Or, better yet, to never try to change the narrative to fit your own personal beliefs.

Ancient people still had the same problems as we do. Watering down what is the truth serves to cover up what looks ugly.

It should not be a surprise that with Greek Mythology comes darkness, and darkness in fiction or in myths should not make anyone angry.

Perhaps if you cannot accept that there are and will always be dark, disturbing topics in stories inspired by mythologies, you should not be part of an audience that consumes them.

[youreonyourown-kid]

I just saw The Wild Robot! Some thoughts:

Bring tissues

It’s not the saddest movie ever but it’s definitely emotional and filled with so much heart

I’m not really a robot person. My most controversial millennial opinion is I don’t like the Iron Giant. But this was a good robot movie.

Like I get why some people relate to robots with this one

Roz was just so lovable

The animation was gorgeous

Like throughout the movie as Roz become more and more wild and starts to grow some greenery*chefs kiss”

The landscape and nature was the best part. The animal character designs weren’t as breathtaking; which is a little bit of a bummer. But the babies were adorable as you could want.

Matt Berry! (Not a bat funny enough)

Lupita Nyong’o was perfect as Roz

I know it’s based on a book; I don’t know if it’s a series. I could see a sequel; but I hope it doesn’t get run into the ground.

Overall recommend. My showing didn’t have a lot of kids; but the ones that were there seemed to enjoy it and it held their attention (as far as I could tell; like there was no screaming or running in the isles). But even as an adult who just loves pretty animation and good movies it’s with a watch!

[flowerandthesongstress]

Hi I'm dropping by to share an opinion that might be controversial, but might just as well be common and widespread among the 'loved this show as a child, rewatched as an adult' crowd. I'm not sure. I'm always out of the loop. All of the loops.

Anyway.

Recently I'd learned that my SO never watched the X-Files, the show that was my favorite when growing up (yes, I should not have been watching it, but oh well...frankly, I had much worse sources of childhood trauma in my life) and we decided to amend the fact.

Over the course of a few months, we went through approximately 85 to 90% of the episodes. We skipped a few insignificant ones. With insects.

Some short remarks first. One: all of my favorite episodes still hold up and some go twice as hard and Clyde Bruckman goes ten times as hard. Two: Mark Snow might have been in an abusive and mutually codependent relationship with an oboe. Three: "Everything Was Inspired By The X-Files" seriously, so much media in the last two decades has just been 'a person who watched the x-files when growing up is now writing stuff' and I'm not immune ... Four: this video essay that I found after we'd gotten to 'JS's from OS' and I was like "waaaaait I minute, this is... postpomo? in 1996? released around the time Infinite Jest was published? when metamodernism still was little more than a concept in DFW's head? what the heck?" and looked it up to see if my brain was wishful-hallucinating, and found this video essay. Five: when watching the show for the first time, I only knew three names: Anderson, Duchovny, Carter. Like, 'Hello yes this a cool scary TV program with The Anderson and The Duchovny as my Mom and Dad, and all of this program in its entirety is made by The Carter'. That was it. Because only those three names were translated in the credits.

And now I'm going to ask you to please don't kill me. Please. I'm going to die, I promise, I just don't want to be killed right now because of a possibly controversial X-files opinion. This is just a personal opinion. You are free to not share it, you are free to hate me, but could we please avoid conflict and arguments? I love you. I was drugged.

Anyway x 2.

Here's the most important thing I realized now that I'd rewatched the show in English as an adult who'd loved the X-Files as a minor (and watched it dubbed), and then went on to receive a university education that very specifically gives her a shmauthority to determine if a writer is actually a crap writer...

...Chris Carter is actually a crap writer.

He's uuuhm. He's bad at writing. Wait, no, that's unfair. He is what I like to call 'painfully mediocre'. Slightly paraphrasing a quote from my other favorite American show: he's every kid on the playground that didn't get picked on. He's a business casual potted plant, a human white sale. He's VH1, Robocop 2, and Back to the Future 3. He's the center slice of a square cheese pizza. Actually, that sounds delicious. Vince Gilligan is the center slice of a square cheese pizza. He's Jim Belushi.

He's just so. painfully. mediocre as a writer. Some of his choices were BAFFLING. Not just bafflingly bad, but simply baffling in a 'how and why and why would anyone ever think this is a compelling idea' sense. Some moments made me wonder if there's zero self-awareness or negative self-awareness.

Chris Carter would hardly make you mad with how bad he is. He's seldom bad in a memorable way. He was cliche when those cliches weren't yet cliches. When the TV tropes website didn't exist. When metamodernism still was little more than a concept in one bandana-covered, troubled head.

He attempted three other shows. All of them were canceled. Two of them he had to wrap up in the X-Files, and he wrapped them up with as much poise as I wrap burritos when high. One was canceled before airing, but he put a piece of it into an X-Files episode: a minor character in the cold open watches and praises this show, so enraptured that he doesn't hear his daughter being kidnapped by a serial killer or abducted by aliens or neither or both, tbh I'm still not 100% sure what happened and what didn't happen, because that episode was written by Chris Carter. The highest rated episode out of all the episodes in all of the three canceled shows has Darin Morgan's writing credit, and it's a sequel of an X-Files episode. Where Jose Chung just goes 'you know what? this sucks' and dies.

Yes, I did enjoy The Lone Gunmen, but guess who has the most writing credit? Yes, Vince Gilligan. Perhaps, executives didn't really understand and didn't bother looking into why X-Files was such a popular and beloved show? And kept on greenlighting Carter's pet projects and then going: Wait, Where Money? Probably. That's how I imagine the reason. Thing is, the X-Files was so beloved and popular not because of Carter's obsession with Christian symbolism and conspiracies and apocalypse and ambiguity so vague and lazy and full of itself that I felt vicarious embarrassment, not because of his narcissism God complex that is manifested on screen in such a way that watching it feels exactly and very specifically like grinding your teeth while there's a bit of slightly wet sand on them, and not because people ached to learn how aliens would colonize Earth. Characters. We loved the characters. We loved the relationships in the show. And we loved the CRAZY and the over-the-top. And all of the Human, all the Silly, and the Funny, and the Tragically Funny.

Every single episode I remember loving the most, and every single episode that tops every single 'bestest X-Files episodes evah' list, has the writing credit of either Darin Morgan (Humbug, Clyde Bruckman's Final Repose, Jose Chung's From Outer Space, War of the Coprophages), or Vince Gilligan (Soft Light, Pusher, Bad Blood, Small Potatoes, Paper Hearts, Meme— you know what, this is easier), or Glen Morgan + James Wong (Squeeze, The Field Where I Died, Never Again, Musings of the Cigarette-Smoking Man). Not Carter. Although according to a WaPo article I read, Carter was insanely controlling and everything had to go through him. Duh. :-\ Not to mention, his entire writing room was a sausage fest, apparently? And Gillian Anderson finally got to write an episode only in season seven, when the show was about to be foreclosed by Fox and turned into a movie franchise (never happened, alas), and around the 'f*ck it who cares anymore we're rich and uncancellable' time when Gilligan was allowed to write the episode where Mulder solved existential nihilism via freeing a genie? Not surprised.

Meanwhile, Carter himself had written the episodes I was looking forward to the least during this rewatch. And my SO would be like: wow, you're rolling your eyes so hard I'm worried about your vision, should we maybe skip this one..? And I'd be like: no-no imma just do some chores, I really wanna do some chores, I'll be nearby, yes please keep on watching babe, no need to pause, I'll keep the bathroom door open to hear everything while I do my favorite very entertaining things like clean the toilet and scrub the shower and wash the litterbox.

Hmmm? What's that? Post-modern Prometheus is highly rated? Hoo boy :-| Can we please not go there... Also, even without all of the problematic aspects of PMP: 1) even a broken clock can do postmodernism is right twice a day, 2) no, it is not a well written episode; it's loved because of its subtly familiar nostalgic visuals and because it attempts to imitate Darin Morgan's signature style with about as much success as I had while trying to imitate Lovecraft when my English was at ~C1 level and then I started crying and went to Postmodernism and told him 'please mister postmodernism sir, please save me by making it all into a long setup to a punchline'.

Anyway x 11:21.

This whole realization made me dislike the Auteur theory even more. My relationship with it was already so hostile that we've been sending each other death threats every month since I was seventeen.

Yes, I should be fair(er). Chris Carter's primary role is NOT that of a writer, but a producer and director and *cringes* shOwRuNnEr. He was the one who pitched the show to Fox, was rejected, and fought for it until they agreed. Without him, the X-Files would not have existed at all. And all bad jokes aside, this show helped me a lot when I had no one and nothing else to help me. I was indeed in a parasocial relationship with its leads. They were my TV parents. Thing is, everything you love about the X-Files' writing... like me, any other casual viewer might discover that all of these things were not done by Carter. Yet he was getting all of the credit.

This is a very important, and seemingly obvious but not really, factoid that applies to a lot of shows and movies. The person you give credit for a thing is often not the person who should be getting it. If you're rolling your eyes right now and calling me agent Obvious: may I remind you, I'm permanently out of the loop about everything. EVERYTHING.

I'm not going to devolve this into a rant about Auteur theory...Because then I'd be here all day or until I start foaming at the mouth. And I'm sure everything has been said without me and before me, anyway. I'm not even going to write a more detailed analysis to defend my views regarding the 'painfully average'. Shmviews.

I've said what I wanted to say.

This rewatch was an interesting experience.

"Skinner wants our report in one hour. What are you going to tell him?" — "What do you mean what am I going to tell him? I'm going to tell him exactly what I saw. What are you going to tell him?" — "I'll tell him exactly what I saw".

[bramblepatch]

yeah im leaning heavily towards starting with icewind dale, i think itd be fun to start with seeing how drizzt is characterized before being designated giga series protagonist, without me already knowing a lot about the gang. but i suspect if i make it through one book at all, i'm going to read at least both of those trilogies eventually.

i've read a bunch of salvatore stuff as a kid (there was a thing with a nerd who lives at a library and then becomes the chosen of god and defeats his father and his father's boss or something? very aspirational. first time i heard "forgotten realms". and another thing with a guy who is raised by sword fairies to basically become aragorn i think. some other stuff. it's inexplicable i never got into drizzt books except maybe the local bookstore hated drow) so i feel like i roughly know what to expect in terms of tropeyness. i was present for i wanna say the latter half? second third? of the dragon heist thing but we didn't engage with jarlaxle much, in my mind he was just an inconvenient antagonist guy and being surprised that y'all are so into him is a good part of why i started paying attention to the drizzt posting. we did want to steal his hat though.

does all the drizzt stuff hold up or does salvatore eventually start phoning it in? is there like ongoing character arc things or do the character arcs happen in the first few books (i hate saying it like this) and the rest is kinda The Further Adventures Of style?

ty!!

Oh cool! If you've read his Cleric Quintet, some of the characters from that show up in the Drizzt books, too.

Personally, I think the later books hold up? This is kind of a controversial opinion in some parts of the fandom, and I won't deny that there are parts of the series that wallow a little, but it's not because Salvatore has run out of things to do with the characters, it's because he takes their trauma seriously and sometimes that means spending a while with a character who is straight up not having a good time right now. And this is compounded by the fact that Drizzt is a very young elf at the start of the series; around the middle there's an editorially mandated time skip and Drizzt goes from a traumatized teen who is coping through the Power of Friendship to a traumatized young adult who has outlived most of his mentor figures. There is a definite tone shift, is what I'm saying.

I think they're still really good, and Drizzt does eventually regain his equilibrium. The later parts of the series are also increasingly an ensemble act, with Jarlaxle and Bregan D'aerthe taking more of the spotlight. If you went up against the magnificent bastard (affectionate)(also derogatory) in Dragon Heist, you've had a taste for what it's like to be on the receiving end of his shenanigans, and yeah, that's frustrating. (My WDDH party actually ended up allying ourselves with him, and he still manages to be deeply annoying sometimes.) But he can be really fun to watch work when he's not messing with you, and he's a great foil to Drizzt. A lot of the time Drizzt just wants to be left alone to live a life that's not defined by his origins; Jarlaxle is all about drow solidarity and bringing what he's built with him.

[seerofmike]

Mike's Media Medley--June 2024

things i watched and played FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME this June 2024 (belated due both to hurricane beryl and also cuz im depressed <3)

2024 movie/show releases: Young Woman and the Sea, Inside Out 2, The Bikeriders

non-2024 movie/show releases: 10 Things I Hate About You (1999, recommended to me!), Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002), La La Land (2016), One Piece (2023)

games: Chillquarium (2023)

10 Things I Hate About You (1999)

this was recommended to me by a friend who swore up and down i would like this and tbh, i did! it was way funnier than i thought it would be, but kinda towards the middle (maybe more 2/3rds into the movie) it starts becoming more romance and drama heavy and kind of loses the comedic edge i was really liking about it. i also thought kat liking and disliking heath ledger was based more on whims sometimes. like i understood why she'd get pissed with him sometimes but i'd be confused other times, and also equally as confused as to why she decided she liked him again. idk maybe i just dont understand straight people

75/100

The Bikeriders

this movie meant nothing to me and i have already forgotten everything about it except for this thought which i was having the whole movie:

idk i feel bad rating it incredibly low since it didnt piss me off like Civil War did but also, is it worse to get pissed off by a film or is it worse to get so utterly bored by one that all of its details lapse from your mind as soon as you stop watching it?

idk. i guess it could've been worse. 20/100

Inside Out 2

okay so controversial opinion perhaps but i actually liked this one better than the first. HOWEVER, its not like i was necessarily the biggest fan of the first one. it's not like i hated it, i just never really clicked with it, i guess.

i think generally speaking the first one is more cohesive and more creative with its concepts, and has a bigger 'Pixar gutpunch' in the form of Bing Bong, but I thought Riley herself didn't really feel like a character and I found Sadness to be really annoying. so it was very appealing to Me, Specifically, that Sadness wasn't a main character and the other emotions got to play a bigger role (I am especially a fan of all the new emotions, even the ones that don't do shit like Ennui) and also that Riley feels like a PERSON

even if i think the first one had a bigger heartstrings-pulling moment this one overall made me feel way more. mostly cringe and secondhand embarrassment but it was out of recognition like "ohhh fuck ive been like that before". i saw this opening weekend amidst a sea of kids and there were some moments that i (and mostly other adults) were the only ones laughing.

ESPECIALLY a big fan of the vault with all of Riley's secrets. Pouchy was the best character actually. idk I just had fun with this one. I probaaaaaably wouldn't watch it again for a while but if my little brother put this on I would pay attention

70/100

La La Land (2016)

i did not like La La Land

i am not at all an expert on music nor musicals so i don't really feel like i can critique the musical aspect of it too deeply, but i CAN tell you that i didn't really vibe with any of the music and at times i found myself like. daydreaming instead of paying attention to what the characters were singing. i didn't really believe in her and ryan gosling's chemistry and i generally found his character to be irritating.

the most enjoyable parts of the movie to me were probably the musical sequences without any actual singing. i do like them tap dancing in the street and then their date where they start flying. i thought those were well-directed. in fact i thought there were a few well-directed and well-edited sequences in the movie. unfortunately i just never found the actual plot music or characters to be on par with the visuals.

i have not seen pretty much anything else that released that year re: Best Actress nominations (although Elle has been on my list) but i really find it hard to believe Emma won her first Oscar for this. idk i know a lot of people love this movie but it truly did nothing to me.

i guess i will say one of the things i DID like was the ending. how it didn't really work out, the silent musical scene at the end over a montage of what could've been. i like that there wasn't a happy ending just because generally i like when movies do that (if it feels believable anyways lol). but it didn't hit for me as hard as it should have because like i said it's not like i really cared for them to be together nor did i care for ryan gosling's jazz journey. i was a bit more invested in emma's acting journey but not enough to really say i truly cared about what happened to her.

idk. pretty visuals but weak everything else. 40/100 maybe

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

soooooo they put on the LOTR movies (the extended editions, specifically) which are the ones i watched. and i have something to admit. i have TRIED, several times, to get into the lord of the rings. i tried reading the hobbit. i ordered a fancy boxset of the LOTR trilogy and tried to read them. i watched the first movie but it took me 3 tries to complete it.

so i thought, okay. everyone raves about these movies. they HAVE to be good. maybe my attention span is fried. recently i've been getting tickets to movies that i could technically watch for free at home but buying tickets forces me to actually pay attention to them since i paid money and i won't be reaching for my phone or stopping to do something else. so i got myself 3 tickets to all 3 movies, back to back to back.

the first one was okay. i've seen it before. i found myself daydreaming midway through because i'd seen it already. i don't HATE it. i think a lot of the characters are generally very charming and likeable. i love samwise gamgee. i really liked borimir. frankly i could do without the elf lady because the way she speaks drove me insane and made me physically uncomfortable. the plot was a slow burn to build up the Fellowship, which I appreciated. surely the second movie would build upon this.

i do think, generally, that I liked the second movie better. i think Gollum is an interesting character and he was being performed and animated VERY well, especially considering the time when it comes to CGI effects. i liked merry and pippin's journey becoming more like heroes. the big battle at the end was done very well. and obviously i thought frodo and sam were a highlight.

that being said there were parts of the movie that i just did not care nor did i understand. im already hard of hearing and having to listen to british accents without any subtitles means that i legit didn't know what characters were saying maybe 1/3rd of the time. the new subplot of the. kingdom of guys. didnt work for me. i cant even remember what the hell the random kingdom of guys was about or named or anyone relevant because i didnt understand what was even going on. it was very fun seeing karl urban though

despite liking a lot of the movie, a lot of it just weighed down on me to the point that when i walked out i was like, "do i REALLY wanna sit through another 3 hours of this tomorrow?" and i decided i didn't and got a ticket refund.

at least the directing is fun. a lot of fantasy movies feel kinda boring and without personality but peter jackson really had a specific flair when it came to directing these.

60/100

One Piece (2023)

i didn't finish it so i wouldn't be rating it yet but i actually thought this was pretty fun! this could've been way messier but i think so far it looks like everyone is having fun and its juuuuust wacky enough. my only complaint is that zoro is waaaaaay too serious but idk maybe it gets better, i only watched maybe...4 episodes? i dont remember. i do look forward to finishing it. eventually

Young Woman and the Sea

well this was the sleeper hit i wasn't expecting to like as much as i did

i was bored one day and wanted to see a movie but nothing really jumped out at me that i hadn't seen yet. i ended up picking this one because I have seen Daisy Ridley in NOTHING. i will not watch Star Wars unless someone pays me actual money so I was curious to see her acting in something and picked this one. ive seen sports movies. i figured this one would be like a cheesy inspirational story but hey those arent necessarily bad

and yes, it IS cheesy and inspirational, but i liked it. a lot? it's 'based on a true story' which probably means that there are some embellishments but i found it genuinely compelling, between her childhood after surviving the measles to the way she and other young women were treated as swimmers, even during the olympics.

i thought the swimming seasons were decently thrilling. like, idk as someone who has attempted to watch competitive swimming it's just not really a glamorous sport to watch but the way this was shot and directed and the fact that they literally filmed it IN THE OCEAN, *in the English channel*, means that i was actually really invested in her managing this feat, both as a personal character motive and also for what it represented more widely when it came to women's physical accomplishments.

idk i guess im just kinda in shock i enjoyed it as much as i did. this was probably the movie i walked out of with the most positive outlook of all month. i'd watch it again.

80/100

games:

Chillquarium (2023)

i only played one new game this month, and that was Chillquarium, which is an idle/clicker kind of game where you manage fishtanks and grow fish by feeding them pellets.

fishe. what can i say

[ashcadence]

More of, Ash reviews random shows/movies! Today's edition, Hazbin Hotel!

!!SPOILERS!!

(Disclaimer 1, Make sure you look up the trigger warnings for the series.)

(Disclaimer 2, I didn't know there was controversy surrounding the creator when I watched it. I'm not in the independent animation YouTube scene which is where the original pilot episode is, but I've decided to not let that affect my enjoyment of the series. If it will affect your enjoyment that's okay! Everyone has different opinions about separating the art from the artist.)

With that out of the way onto the review!

If you like adult shows, and musicals, then you'll like this show. I personally do like both so I LOVED it! I mean, with that cast alone the music was going to be amazing. There are arguably some of the best voices from Broadway in the cast!

The music is the thing that really stuck out to me me. Almost every single song was a banger. I've had the song More than Anything on repeat since the episode came out. The singing was top tier for the entirety of the show, and I could write an entire essay on just that.

I also loved the characters! I thought they were all really fun and unique. They felt very fleshed out and all had very distinct personalities. With a cast of characters that large, sometimes that's hard to do.

It was very fun to look at. The character designs were creative, and the animation was extremely smooth. Also I'm a sucker for things with bright colors. It's impressive they set a show in hell, and gave it such a bright color palette.

For me, I really enjoyed the humor, but that's incredibly subjective. Some of the jokes were a uncalled for and insensitive, but for all of the edgy jokes, they did make a tasteful asexual joke and I was happy about that.

Speaking of that, it has a canonical aro/ace character which is a bonus point for me! Also Alastor canonically being around/ace, but not knowing what that means is hysterical to me, and also me for most of my life.

My only complaint is it felt rushed. Six months takes place between the eight episodes, and off screen the characters are developing bonds with each other, but you as the audience don't really get to see that. I think the only one we did see was with Angel and Husk. Then later with Charlie and Lucifer. But it's clear all of these characters have developed bonds with each other, we just rarely see that happen and are just told it's happened. I think it could have benefitted from "filler" episodes that would serve the purpose of cementing the relationships between characters.

Overall I really enjoyed the series and I've already rewatched it...multiple times... Listen, I'm a sucker for musicals and it's probably my inner theater kid who never got to do theater. Also it's basically My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic for adults and I was obsessed with My Little Pony in my early teen years. So it was a given I was going to enjoy Hazbin Hotel.

[duskargentum]

Extraordinarily controversial bird Pokemon tier list

"Perfect, objectively":

These Pocket Monsters, or Pokemon as they have come to be known by people who are too lazy to type out the special e, are among my favorite Pokemon, even outside of the "bird Pokemon" ranking. Piplup may well be my favorite Pokemon. If not, it is in my top 3 (but, between you and me, I couldn't name the other 2 that would be above it...). I have been emotionally attached to Biblub since the war. We go way back. We still meet up to play games sometimes. Hasn't been the same since the wife divorced him. Anyway. Rowlet is also very good and is one of the only plushies I still own as an adult. I still remember buying it: I went to go buy dice at Chain Bookstore Name, and I walked past him. So I decided to buy him. He sits on my desk and guards the very same dice I purchased that day. Natu is an orb with psychic powers and wings. Swablu is very cute, and its Pokedex entry in one of the games in which it was first introduced states that it will sometimes just straight up fucking fly to people and curl up and nap on their heads if their hair is tidy?? That's the cutest possible shit? And, lastly, Murkrow is very silly, very funny, and very cool. The little hat? So cool.

"Exceptional":

These Pocket Monsters, or Pokémon as they have come to be known by people who copy the accented e from the "List of All Pokemon" url on Bulbapedia they were just viewing to check and make sure they didn't miss any birds, are most of the rest of my favorites among bird Pokemon that may or may not rank above other, non-bird Pokemon. I still really like them all, and have emotions or memories tied to them. Chatot is a fun little guy with a cool gimmick that was sadly tossed to the wayside. Also, I love Pokemon Mystery Dungeon: Explorers of Sky. He's like a father to me. He was always the one to show up at my recitals as a kid. Wigglytuff only showed up when there was free food involved. Not that I blame him. Anyway. Starly is one of, if not the ONLY post-Gen 2 Pokemon that my mother has been conscious of. One of the Cartoon Network bumpers in like 200whatever had Starly in it, and one day when we were watching it together, she said "oh, that one's cute!". As she is someone who has owned and been around birds most of her life, I value her opinion in this matter rather highly. Also, Starly is always my starter when I play Pokemon Ranger: Shadows of Almia. Wingull is always a must-catch when I start a new Gen 3 game. Love it. Honchkrow is like Murkrow but more edgy, the aesthetic here is on point, also Cyrus uses one. He uses both, but I forgot about that until writing this. Rookidee is one of the only post-Gen 7 Pokemon I can recognize. It probably beeps. And I love that energy. I would probably feel emotionally whole if I saw a bunch of Rookidee sitting on a phone line. Decidueye is a fun and almost wholly unique typing, and REALLY gives Incineroar a run for his money as my favorite final form of Alolan starter. Hisuian Decidueye's design is one of, if not, my favorite final bird starter final forms in the whole series. Altaria is Swablu but bigger. Swablu was good enough. Gets a pass for being a cloud. Dartrix looks like me in high school. Staraptor is one of my favorites when I play a Gen 4 game, its moveset is pretty diverse (Close Combat on a bird Pokemon??? fuck yeah). Empoleon is the final form of Biblub, and its unique typing is giving it a lot of points. Its design is fine. Its moveset is OK. Biblub carries the hell out of this line. Hoothoot is round. Corvisquire (who's name I just had to look up again) is fine, and is not the Pokemon in this entry, that is Corviknight. I didn't play any games past Gen 7, could you tell? Anyway, Corviknight is the type of Pokemon that I would have killed to have irl between the ages of 14 and 17. Honestly, I might still maim or injure to have one. Pidgeot carried the hell out of the postgame of Platinum for me as a kid. Don't know how. I distinctly remember teaching it Heat Wave and then it was over for everyone that stood in my way, or something. A Pidgey named Ken is featured in an episode of the Pokemon anime that moved me so deeply and thoroughly that I actually named a Pidgey I caught in HGSS as a kid "Ken". Swanna is pretty and also a shopkeeper in one of the Pokemon Mystery Dungeon games I have played little of.

"Pretty good":

These Pocket Monsters, or Pokémon by people who still have that accented e copied to their clipboard, are creatures that are on the high end of mid to me. There's a few legendaries here because I think legendaries are legendarily overhyped. But some of them are still good. Pidove is very cute. Prinplup puts the "mid" in "mid-stage evolution". Articuno has an ice dual-typing, which is one of my favorite types, and is blue, which is one of my favorite colors. Ho-oh has a hyphen in its name, which made it difficult for me to understand how to pronounce when I was six. Pikipek looks like Pearl (Steven Universe) and is very pointy. Ducklett is blue and its encounter method is unique. Icecue Eiscue is from a generation that I didn't play, but I heard people don't like it for some reason. I think it's cute. I also had to really flounder to try and find out how to spell its name. Fletchling is very cute, very powerful, and evolves into a cool typing that definitely isn't shared by any legendary Pokemon, and its cry lives in my head rent-free. Oricorio's variety of forms is very unique, and it seems criminally underrated. Quaxly is possibly the starter I might have picked if I had played ScarVi (though Sprigatito is probably the one I would have picked, realistically). Noctowl is not round, but it is cool.

"Like 'em fine enough":

These Pocket Monsters, or Pokemon to people who are tired of this bit, are sorted in no particular order as Pokemon that I think are the middling middle of mid. Not bad, just not stand-out. Most of the rest of the legendaries are here because I think they're overplayed. Tranquil/Unfezant are near the top here because Pidove is near the top of the tier above. Staravia is kinda far from the other forms of Starly because it killed me once in Pokemon Ranger: Shadows of Almia. Don't ask me how, I was a kid. Yveltal is a box legendary. Talonflame is objectively above Fletchinder but they're both pretty OK as far as designs go, but Talonflame is a pretty alright Pokemon to have in mid-late game in Gen 6. Shame they don't want to talk about this line anymore. Torchic is my least favorite bird starter and I've gone on record to say this and will say it again. Skarmory's alright. Apparently, everyone thinks it's gen 3 but it's gen 2. Delibird is in a couple of specials, and I remember specifically where it's located in Pokemon Ranger: Guardian Signs. Pidgeotto is another mid mid-stage. Doduo is cool because it's based on an extinct bird, but does it truly need a second head? Sirfetch'd is cool, comparatively, but I never played that game and I heard its evolution method is annoying. Psyduck is a classic, but only is so because it's old. Zapdos/Moltres are here. Fletchinder is fine. Bombirdier is from a game I didn't play but I think it's design is OK. Xatu is a big downgrade from Natu but I still think it's pretty cool. Honestly it should be a tier above. Pelipper is a go-to for Surf/Fly in gen 3 games.

"Just Kind of OK":

These Pokemon, or Pocket Monsters to the people who got used to the bit and are committing to it, are ones that I don't have any real opinion on. A lot of Pokemon in this tier are ones I have no real experience with and don't have enough strong feelings about to bother to form an opinion. Combusken/Blaziken are the progenitors of a long line of lazy starter typing choices in later generations. Mandibuzz gets no thoughts from me. Corvisquire has no standout traits compared to its final and pre-evolutions. Archen/Archeops are only noteworthy because they're fossil Pokemon. Spearow/Fearow traumatized Pikachu and Ash. Golduck is blue. It should be yellow. Farfetch'd has an apostrophe in its name, which made it hard for a child me to pronounce, for some reason. Dodrio... Must we have three of them? Taillow/Swellow are unnecessary; Wingull/Pelipper fulfill the role of early-game bird for Gen 3 just fine. They're also the only early-game bird with only 2 stages of evolution, which makes them less memorable. Braviary. Hawlucha has... Had a unique typing and concept but apparently that was stolen by another Pokemon further down this list. Squawkabilly has a name that feels too long, also I don't even know if there are bird Pokemon that I'm missing because it feels like an early game bird that should have three stages but I can't care enough to find the other 2. Fezendipity is naughty, apparently. And maybe a killer? And also perhaps a reanimated corpse? Let's move past that.

"Not a huge fan":

These Pokemon, or Pokemon if you're a voice actor in the 4Kids dub of the anime, are mostly Pokemon from games that I've never played with designs I don't like. Flamigo stole from Hawlucha, which made me sympathetic for Hawlucha. Cramorant is eating Pikachu? Quaxly's evolutions, who's names I don't know because I forgot them after looking through the list and I've been working on this for like half an hour and don't want to re-look them up because I want to be done with this already, are not good, imo. And I think the mid-stage is better than the last stage, in a unique twist. Vullaby is wearing an eggshell for a diaper. Birds don't need diapers. They will shit anywhere, like Arceus intended. Toucannon is mad all the time. Toucannon's pre-evolution has a name that is not memorable. Wattrel looks like its going to burst. What is in that pouch? I hope it's not pus. Rufflet should be higher up on this tier if I had remembered to sort it. Honestly, maybe even a tier above. I think it's fine. I don't know why it's so down low. Wattrel's pre-evolution has a name that I don't remember, and it looks too cartoony.

"Why are you even here":

These bird Pokemon, or "bird" Pokémon if you're trying to be overly granular and analytical, may not even be considered birds to some. But they're birds to me, and I don't like them. Sigilyph looks like it's going to poke someone's eye out. Iron Feathers? Or whatever Delibird's Super Special Time Travel Whatever Bullshit Forme is called, has a fucking cannon. Put that away! Aerodactyl is only a bird if you think that it comes from an era of Pokemon history that is before Archen/Archeops, because they kind of did the whole "prehistoric bird" thing better than it did.

"This is a separator":

These are my opinions, you can like them or dislike them and mostly I just posted them because I felt like talking a lot about bird Pokemon. If you like the ones I don't like then that's fine. Opinions are formed due to a multitude of subjective factors that no one can ever predict, and are thus extraordinarily unreliable in comparison to facts. You may have a more correct opinion. That's fine. You're encouraged to have it.

I will not be making this tier list publicly available unless this gains too much traction before I close the tab, probably before I go to sleep tonight. Until then, it shall be forever exclusive to me. That's enough typing from me now

[hecksupremechips]

Penny for your thoughts on puppetry

Okay OKAY so in case nobody knows I fucking LOVE puppetry. I’m a fucking Sesame Street/muppets ass son of a bitch. A lot of people like to jump on this stupid bandwagon of hating puppets cuz "uwaaaa they’re sooooo scarrryyyy!!!11!1" and that just ughhhh PISSES ME OFF. PUPPETS ARE HERE FOR WHOLESOME PURPOSES ARE YOU TELLING ME YOU FEEL NO BLISS WHEN WATCHING COOKIE MONSTER YOU JERK??/? Very annoying

I’m obsessed with just like sesame street lore and fun facts like. First off the show was waaaayy ahead of its time it started in like 1969 as a way of making preschool accessible to kids who were low income but it did it in such a way where like adults who were watching it would also have fun too. When they teach kids the alphabet they do funny skits or silly songs about it to make learning seem fun! Not to mention that any kids who’d be in those segments weren’t actors or anything it’d be their genuine reactions and so often they’d be trying not to laugh cuz holy shit they’re talking to elmo! Plus the show would just be so casually integrated with people of different races who all respected each other and it makes me think of my mom who grew up in very white area saying that sesame street was literally how she learned about like, the existence of black people. And it gave some black actors a chance to be in roles where they weren’t mocked or brutalized. Though a lot of progress had to be made throughout the show like one of the black actors early on thought that the show was too white and wasn’t reaching black youths like it should. So he created Roosevelt Franklin, a black-coded muppet that he performed

His role was essentially to teach the same basic education shit but trying to add black culture into it. He said he wanted black kids to have their race be a positive experience for them. The character was really controversial though, many black people not in favor saying he was too stereotypical and felt like a caricature of black identities. Whether or not the character was indeed Problematic didn’t really matter in the end though because he was removed from the show just a few years after he was introduced. I’ve no clue about what the show is doing today but as far as I know they’ve made better choices with black characters and have black muppets who are less of a caricature. Also important to mention that while the concept of Roosevelt was created and performed by a black actor, there were still many white performers playing a part which is what could’ve caused more offensive writing. Plus many black people had different opinions on the subject so I’m not gonna say they all felt one way or another

I also just wanna go over some of my favorite techniques and effects the puppeteers made and used on some of the muppets. One of the most iconic ones being Kermit on a bike

Where he miraculously is able to ride without any visible puppeteers in view. And it’s not a small model either, that’s without a doubt the full sized muppet. Essentially what they did was attach invisible wires to Kermit’s limbs and the bike and a puppeteer was using a crane above camera for some marionette style puppeteering. Remains to be an absolute hit to this day. There’s also the big bird mechanism where he is essentially a suit puppet. Because of this, one hand must be in the head in order to control mouth, eye, and head movements. That means only one arm is available to be an actual arm, and there clearly isn’t anyone else operating the other arm. What’s happening in that the empty arm is actually stuffed and has wires attached to the occupied arm that allows it to move in relation to it. Plus Carrol Spinney had to wear stupid big ass bird pants all the time I just think that’s funny. As for smaller effects theres the simple technique where an arm rod puppet can have their arms easily removed and reattached if the scene calls for a live hand substitution. Blinking puppets have a handle behind their eyes that can be moved by fingers. Puppeteers for shows and movies like these absolutely have to stand in close proximity to each other with their arms straight up which mean that they better be buff and use good deodorant. It’s not an easy job to do and it shouldn’t be underestimated

I have sooooooo much more I could say but ummmmm I’ve already said a lot and I need to move around 🤪

[thoughts-on-bangtan]

I’m guessing all Vmins were right Sweet night is about the past. I guess it’s why Tae give it for the movie instead of for his mixtape. I’m guessing JM gave him the ok to do so and why he’s been silent about it cause it’s over between them. TK are making it too obvious. jk treating JM like they aren’t friends suddenly. jk in purple/green all the time. v not shutting up about jk suddenly. JM is not handling it well. I guess it’s why v said he likes JM the most (guess as friend) cause he feels bad

Admin 1: “Sure, go and release a song easily identified as being about us and your hope of me giving you a second chance with a hopeful ending seeing as we aren’t together anymore, sounds like a nice idea to me. Go, Taehyungie, do it. Then also let me hold your hand on national TV and show it to the cameras happily, smile sweetly at you while we stand next to the president, talk about our song and memories and how much they mean to me, perform this song that's essentially a love letter to our bond in a live-streamed concert for almost 800k people, and when you tell me you like me the most, I’ll say I like you a lot as well. Because we’re over and not even friends anymore.” Sounds like some sound logic to me, and I mean that in the most sarcastic way possible to humans.

Honestly, either I’ve just been around too long and all these asks are starting to sound the same and impossibly uncreative, or they are just getting more farfetched and bizarre. If you want a proper answer, I told you, bring something to the table that hasn’t been talked to dust yet, or leave it be.

To quote Tae, the man who knows best what he feels: 95z is love.

Until he (and Jimin) changes his mind, this is the answer I have for any and all Xkooker ask, as well as any other ship involving Tae or Jimin.

Also yes, I did see the hate against Jimin that exploded yesterday, we even have an ask about it in our inbox, and honestly these types of questions, anon? Yeah, you're not helping, in fact, you are part of the problem, just saying.

Admin 2: Man, man, man!

We didn't really want to answer these types of questions anymore, but this ask takes the trophy when it comes to delulu/nonsensical questions, so I decided to answer it after all. Because it’s hot and I need a distraction.

Also, this question basically confirms most of our suspicions we’ve had so far. Let me explain.

Folks, who is behind these kinds of stories which are being presented and preached as truth on various sns?

I don't believe this is any single persons invention (in this case, that anon came up with this idea “without help”), if anything it’s the result of delulu, and often times toxic, scenarios and stories created by a group of people intended to further a narrative and actively disrupt the “peace” within ARMY (or at least that’s what it feels like since all these things do is ignite hate and toxicity). Where is the origin of it all? Ship centric YouTube channels.

It is very evident that these "imaginative creators/shippers" behind those videos have no consideration of the consequences and harm their content does because, in my opinion, the more controversial and clickbait-y, the better. You know why? More views means more money, which is the goal of it all. We’ve spoken about this before, I believe, how these videos on “ship evidence” and “ship drama” for Xkookers are the most beloved topics of these videos and thus make up one of the easiest means of generating income, in some cases even something upward of $80k a year depending on the channels CPM, sub and view count.

The average person has to work hard all year round to make this amount of money, if they even have a job that brings in that much. So, it is not surprising that these content creators go very far in their fantasies to support their claims and keep their viewers/costumers engaged and coming back.

I wouldn't be surprised if the creators (or rather the whole lot of them) of both Xkook camps are basically the same people, because their ideas, conclusions and explanations all sound the same and follow the same nonsensical patters. Which is why we’ve already told you many times that the best thing you can do is stay away from this type of content altogether.

So! Let's analyze this ask a little more:

"…Vmins were right Sweet Night is about the past. I guess it’s why Tae give it for the movie instead of for his mixtape."

Ok, let's say Tae wrote "Sweet Night" for Jimin, but in the meantime he has changed his feelings (that's how I understand the question) so he gave the song to the Itaewon Class OST instead of putting it on his mixtape. I wanted to note that Taehyung's mixtape isn't finished yet and we will probably wait many more months for it.

It seems to me that Taehyung really wanted to show his feelings to the world, so he saw an opportunity with the OST, and therefore a quicker release for SN, and took it. The fact is that SN is about the past, but there is also hope for the future, hope for the fulfillment of wishes, which likely did come true judging by how Tae said he wrote SN during tour abroad (so sometimes summer/early autumn 2019 perhaps) and we saw vmin holding hands at the airport on Tae’s birthday in 2019 when they thought no one would see, just three months before SN was released (and likely long schedules for said release since these types of things don’t just happen overnight) and many, many other such things.

“I suspect that JM gave him his consent and why he kept silent about it because it was over between them, TK makes it too obvious. "

And I suspect that Jimin was very touched by Sweet Night and ultimately wrote Friends in which him and Tae sing: “Many promises and memories / and more to come / Someday, when these cheers die down, stay hey / You are my soulmate”

The fact is that BTS didn't say much about SN, but it was the same with many of their other SC releases as well, so it wasn’t unusual, especially since SN came out while they were promoting MOTS7. Also, in my opinion, the content of this song is too personal to be able to describe/discuss the song in detail beyond the bit that was mentioned during Tae’s vlive with Namjoon. During a Japanese interview, the members basically confirmed/pointed out how romantic Tae is and when SN came up, Namjoon “coincidentally” turned around toward Jimin who has a similar facial expression of pressed lips as he did during Let’s BTS.

"JK treats JM as if they suddenly weren't friends"

And here I have caught you, dear anon. I think you're not even looking at the original BH content, but that instead you are basing your conclusions and opinions on manipulative YT ship videos instead because if you would’ve watched the original content like RUN, the recent SOWOOZOO concerts, and interviews, you wouldn’t arrive anywhere near such thoughts and conclusions.

Jimin and JK are still close, also Jimin calls JK his little brother (dongsaeng) and JK describes Jimin (or associates these words with him) as charm and cute. Does there seem to be any kind of conflict between Jimin and Jungkook? Certainly not, no.

„JK always in purple / green. v not shutting up about jk suddenly."

You mean their microphone colors? I wanted to point out how Tae wore a yellow shirt during the concert, which is the same color as the chick emoji ARMY associates with Jimin as well as his mic color. LOL.

As far as I know, when Tae has something to say, he will say it, and if he is praising JKs songs, and especially You Eyes Tell which we know is a song Tae liked a lot, that is a good thing. It simply means Tae appreciates the song JK created, appreciates and values his talents and hard work. If the entire band praises Namjoon and his lyrics/contributions on their songs, does that automatically also mean all six are “not shutting up about him” and therefore must be in love and in a relationship with him, or it’s an indicator of it? If anything, it’s merely an indicator that Tae is an honest person and JK did a good job on those songs. Easy as that.

That's my favorite part of the question: "JM doesn't handle it that well. I think that's why I said he likes JM best (as a friend, I guess) because he feels bad."

Personally, I consider myself a person with a great imagination, but I wouldn't really come up with a scenario like that.

How cruel of a person do you think Tae is? Imagine they aren’t together anymore or close anymore, or whatever else you tried to insinuate anon, and then Tae would go on national TV and do this whole thing of asking for the card in his letter to Jimin to be blurred and then said “Jimin-ah I like you the most”? To do something as hurtful as that you either have to be a sadist or an asshole and I’d like to believe even you, anon, don’t think in such a way about Tae, of all people.

Perhaps that’s something dumb teenagers or kids would do, but not adult men in their mid-twenties who see each other every single day, are part of the same team and have to work with each other. This is real life, not a soap opera. If these types of dramas really would be happening within BTS, they would’ve stopped existing as a band a long time ago because no one would be able to live with such actions and people for a prolonged amount of time. BTS are grown men, best friends, even found family, and not actors on a badly written TV show for our entertainment where they act out increasingly stupid relationship drama in which JK somehow ended up being the toy going from hand to hand like he’s not even an actual person anymore.

In summary, this question was written by a child, teenager, or an emotionally immature person naïve enough to buy into outlandish ship narratives.

Anon, hear what the members had to say during FESTA 2021. Make your own conclusions and stop watching and believing the nonsense on YouTube. As Tae said: Get out of your imagination. It’s not good in there.

[ordinaryschmuck]

What I Thought About "Echoes of the Past" from The Owl House

Salutations, random people on the internet who most certainly won’t read this. I am an Ordinary Schmuck. I write stories and reviews and draw comics and cartoons.

What probably gets debated the most in the fandom is the legitimacy behind King being the King of Demons. Some believe that there's truth to his statement, while others, like me, like to think that he was just some stray Eda picked up off the streets. Either option seemed likely, especially since Season One never gave an answer that leaned one way or the other.

Then here comes the writers finally answering the question of who King is in episode THREE of Season Two! Because, again, they don't waste time on giving fans exactly what they want.

Fans wanted answers behind King, we got 'em, and analyzing what those answers mean requires going deep into spoilers. So if you haven't checked the episode out yet, I highly recommend that you do. Trust me, it's worth seeing.

Now let's review, shall we?

WHAT I LIKED

Luz Experimenting with Spells: Hey, look! More proof that Luz isn't an idiot like some people flanderize her to be!

But, seriously though, this is a perfect little thread to introduce into the story. Luz collecting knowledge from Lilith's old books and past work she and Eda made adds to Luz's intelligence while also providing a believable explanation for how she gets new spells. It's also nice to see that she has this little notebook (or spellbook) to help see what works and what doesn't. It's a level of experimentation that proves her dedication to becoming a witch while also exemplifying how she isn't stupid. Occasionally reckless, sure, but you can't say that the person who figured out an invisibility spell through showing her work is also an idiot.

Francios with a Knife: How did Francois get a knife? I don't know. But the fact that a random knife plopped out behind him with little to no explanation is funny, and I will not hear otherwise.

I don't make the rules. I just abide by them.

Luz’s Invisibility Spell: I breezed past this, but I honestly love this invisibility spell. More specifically, I love that there's a limiter. It can turn you, objects, and people you're in contact with invisible, but only as long as you can hold your breath. It helps make the spell something the characters can't always rely on, which is appreciated. Because if it works as long as they concentrate, what's stopping them from sneaking into Belos' castle and assassinating him in his sleep? It's a smart way of explaining why they can't always rely on something, despite how insanely useful it is.

Luz: Let's gush about Luz some more, shall we!

"Echoes of the Past" is another episode that has Luz on top form. She is constantly supportive of King, even if Lilith has a point in the dangers of indulging his fantasy as a powerful tyrant. Doing so would cause more harm than good, especially when King finds out Luz doesn't believe him, but her going along with it was all done with the best of intentions. Luz doesn't want to hurt her friend, and even if she did in the long run, she still makes up for it by helping King learn more about his past.

And, as another reminder, Luz isn't stupid. She's the first to say they should leave when it's clear how dangerous the castle is and is quick to figure out there should be more at the top. Luz is a loyal and caring friend who's also guarded and intuitive when the situation calls for it. This episode understood that, so here's hoping other fans will too.

Lilith: Yeah, she's still growing on me.

I feel like this episode shows a better idea of Lilith's place in the group more than the past two. She's a person who's obsessed with knowledge and learning but considers herself above the jovial nature of King, Luz, and definitely Eda. Therefore, she acts as the perfect catalyst for what jumpstarts this week's adventure. It doesn't surprise me in the slightest that she almost instantly dismisses King's claims due to considering herself more knowledgeable than everyone else. Still, I like how she's willing to believe King once she finally sees evidence that seemingly proves he really was the King of Demons, to the point of referring to him as "her lord." Hooty does the same thing, but it comes across as him fearing for his own life and choosing to be friends with someone who could maybe kill him in an instant. For Lilith, her newfound respect comes from the desire to learn more, and it's that desire that makes Lilith an enjoyable character to me. It's adorable to see, and it has some comedic flavor in moments like when she dismisses everyone else and their emotional revelations to take pictures of the carvings around her. I'm sure she'll cause some controversy like other characters with rushed reformations, but for me, I'm more than ok with her addition to the main cast.

More of Lilith’s and Hooty’s Friendship: HOW DOES THIS WORK!?

ON PAPER, IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD BE A BAD IDEA, BUT IT F**KING WORKS!

HOW?!

WHAT BLACK MAGIC DID THESE WRITERS USE TO MAKE A RELATIONSHIP SO UNEXPECTED COME ACROSS AS SO ENDEARING AND ADORABLE?!

And where can I get some for my stories...just asking.

But seriously: HOW?!

Hooty Making Himself Portable: Ah, yes. The classic bit where a character does something horrifically grotesque off-screen, and we have nothing but character reactions and sound effects to imagine what happened between shot A and shot B. It's an oldie, but given how hard I was laughing (mostly because of Luz's gagging), it's still a goodie.

Eda’s Portable Bathtub Boat Thing: I mean...I was expecting Eda would use something to catch up with the others, but...that thing...well...I mean, I'm still laughing just by thinking about it. That should tell you how well executed this joke was.

John Luke: ...I'm gonna go ahead and add him to the list because HOLY S**T was this guy disturbing! From his design to his movements to even the sounds he makes when moving, everything about John Luke screams as something that will stay in kids' nightmares for a while. Now, this might seem like a complaint, but to be honest, I'm more than alright with how creepy John Luke is. I highly doubt adult viewers will consider John Luke scary, but I guarantee he'll terrify some of the youngins that this series is aimed for. And that's fine. It's good to creep kids out a little bit with something somewhat scary, as it might introduce them to more good horror stories later in life.

Plus, the reveal that John Luke was only a guard for King is pretty solid narratively speaking. You can see how John never really meant to hurt King aside from one accident when Eda escaped with him. If you want to read into it, I guess it might be questionable to tell kids that something that looks dangerous is secretly nice, but that's really nitpicky, in my opinion. John Luke was a fantastic threat that is designed and animated well, with a solidly executed twist. Some might hate what he presents, most will fear him, but we can all agree on one thing: His theme is awesome (can I get the track for that, please)!

King’s Backstory: Finally, at long last, we know who King is, thus putting an end to a year-long debate. And I fully mean it when I say that the writers gave the best possible answer. Because in a way, everyone was right. Yes, King was just an animal that Eda decided to adopt, like the nature-loving hippie she is inside (She's got the hair for it). However, while he may not be the King of Demons himself, he is still the son of someone who deserves that title. So while he isn't the King, there's a chance he might be the Prince. Once again, there's no direct answer, but given how the writers came up with something that pleases everyone while still providing more questions for debate, it acts as a brilliant move, in my opinion. So whatever answer we get next, I'm sure it will be just as perfect.

Baby King:

My heart was not prepared for that level of cuteness!

King’s Breakdown: NOR WAS IT READY FOR THIS LEVEL OF SADNESS!

But in all seriousness, a HUGE round of applause to Alex Hirsch for his performance in this episode. He expertly captured the raw emotions of shock, anger, betrayal, and sadness that King must have felt when finding out that everything he believed he was is a lie. It's one of those moments where I don't hear a person voicing lines in a booth (or wherever the hell VAs are voicing characters nowadays), but instead hear a living person being emotionally torn apart. It was heartbreaking seeing King so vulnerable as he's so guarded with his emotions. Seeing him like this adds so much more layers to a character that many would mistake him as a cute, comedic animal sidekick. But just like with Luz, there's more to him than people will tell you.

“I don’t even know what’s real or fake anymore!”: I'm just pointing out this line because I believe it's what convinces Luz to help King learn more about who he is. Hell, not knowing what's real or fake is the main reason why Luz got sent away in the first place, so I feel like she can relate to King when he's in a similar predicament.

Hooty and Lilith vs John Luke: This was just a cool scene with some epic moments of dodging John Luke's attacks and some funny ones, like how Hooty said the word "pain." It's a ten out of ten that I would rewind to watch again.

King’s Other Horn: I'd question the logistics of how a horn that got broken off when he was a baby still manages to fit perfectly in the present...but it is neat symbolism of King accepting his past and letting it be a part of him, so who cares?

(The fact that the colors of the broken-off piece don't match the rest of the horn is nice attention to detail as well.)

WHAT I DISLIKED

It's a Little Too Predictable: I pretty much figured almost every little twist the episode offers. But, I'm willing to say that's because I'm in my twenties, and I've seen enough stories similar to this one, so I'm more likely to know what will happen. The little monsters watching this will see it for the first time, so they'll most likely get more surprised than me...And that was my only complaint about the episode...which is more of a personal problem than an actual issue...I guess that means it's perfect.

IN CONCLUSION

"Echoes of the Past" is an easy A+ in my book. It gives lore and backstory that furtherly develops the characters that episodes like this should. It also tells a tragic story about King that still sprinkles in a few good jokes every now and again to lighten up the mood. Sure, there are some nitpicks I could mention (how did King remember his own birth?). But when the good stuff is done so well, what's the point of dwelling on small, insignificant issues? This is still a phenomenal episode that flew past all expectations I had for it, and it continues the winning steak this season is having so far.

(But that's still three home runs in a row. Meaning that a stinker is coming. Ooiee, is it coming!)

[laufire]

(CW for mentions of csa)

A lot of Commonly Accepted (Often Through Uncritical Repetition) Wisdom in fandom leaves me baffled, when not straight up ticked off, but one that's been on my mind lately, that never fails to bring a scrunched up expression to my face, is the idea that Bela Talbot's backstory was some last minute add-on to her character.

You might argue that the reveal was rushed since the writers caved in and killed her off against their original plan (or at the very least, earlier than). Or that using abuse is a trite way to raise sympathy for an antagonistic character. You could even say that some of the finer details might’ve not been set in stone until they sat down to write her exist, although that one is dubious. But I’m never really going to buy that Bela’s backstory hadn’t been already planned, likely in big part.

The reason why is Season Three Episode Six, “Red Sky At Morning”, Bela’s second episode, co-written by Eric Kripke himself. As all episodes with Bela were, may I add; which means he had a hand in crafting her story from the beginning, as creator, director, and writer.

There Dean, a character that has been shown as sharp and intuitive (although his success rate ain’t that great when it comes to Bela, admittedly xD), immediately pegs her as someone with Issues TM, asking “how did she get like this”. He even taunts her by referencing her father, showing off his talent to hit where it hurts by asking if he “didn’t give her enough hugs”, ‘cause he’s classy like that. This visibly affects Bela, changing her demeanor in their conversation, from more playful to defensive. Hell, I remember during my first watch in real time this moment, especially paired with the rest of the episode, was when I first thought it was possible she came from an abusive family.

Because, c’mon. This whole episode is about parricide. The monster of the week is a ghost who haunts those that “spilled their own family’s blood”. We get two other examples: a woman whose accidental car crash killed her cousin, and two brothers who killed their father for the inheritance. Clearly, the ghost doesn’t have a narrow criteria when it comes to means or culpability -which makes sense given his particular story: he was tried for treason and his brother, the captain of the ship, issued the sentence.

And just as we find out this information... Bela sees the ghost ship that foretells her death. This, paired with the insinuations about an unsavvory past and her discomfort at the mention of her father, aren’t a wealth of information, but they start to paint a picture. We now know for a fact that Bela caused the death of at least one relative (mom and dad); that she wouldn’t have needed to do it directly (she made a crossroads deal); and that she might’ve had a sympathetic motive (her father sexually abused her and her mother turned a blind eye).

That scene offers some more tidbits of information about her past that seem too in tune with 3x15 to be coincidental, and that absolutely break my heart: Bela’s “You wouldn’t understand. No one did.“ and “I’ll just do what I’ve always done. I’ll deal with it myself”. See, I always thought Bela must’ve told people, when she was a kid. That she reached out for help not just to her mother, but to everyone around her that she thought could’ve help: teachers, maybe even law enforcement; adults that should’ve being worthy of that trust and protected her. Except no one did (and the fact that her family seemed to be not only very rich but influential paints a very bleak picture that surely contributed to her cynic view of the world). So she took matters in her own hands, and sold her soul for ten years of relative safety and freedom from her abusers.

To tie it all up, her final scene in that episode offers some more moments that again, are very in line with her backstory. We see how she treats relationships as transactionals: she pays ten grand to the Winchesters for saving her life, like she paid with her soul. Dean, again, draws attention to her likely messed up past by calling her damaged, and she replies that “takes one to know one”. Terrible childhood, ammirite. The show wasn’t been subtle here: it’s telling us Bela has a terrible past, like the Winchesters do, but of a different kind that has resulted in a different kind of person. So yeah, I think all the facts were hinted at back in 3x06.

We could go even futher back and point out 3x03, Bela’s introduction. One of the very first things she says in the show, during her first face to face with Dean (a character that just condemned his soul to Hell), is “We’re all going to Hell, Dean. Might as well enjoy the ride”. Sure, it could be an incredibly fortuitous coincidence; as a writer, I’ve had those and they’re damn great. But it seems VERY lucky, and more likely to be a case of the kind premeditated, well-placed foreshadowing that Kripke excels at.

So, okay. I’ve established why I think Bela’s backstory wasn’t a spur of the moment decision. But why is there a notable narrative in fandom that it IS?

First thing first, I want to get something out of the way: you don’t have to like it even if it was planned ahead. I understand it’s a very thorny subject, and to make matters worse, it’s inherently tied to her death. You might even be fine with the what, but not with how it was dealt with (although personally, I appreciate that neither the abuse nor her death were shown onscreen. In fact, the worse violence we see Bela on the receiving end of in her run is Dean’s threats and manhandling, which seems like a very purposeful choice ngl. Even Gordon freaking Walker was gentler lmao).

But I do disagree with some extended fandom opinions on the topic, and I guess that’s what the post is about. For one, I don’t see how the show “condemned” or morally judged Bela in this scenario. If anything, they clearly wanted to make her sympathetic, AND they showed Dean as being in the wrong by robbing him of information. Dean’s opinion on Bela couldn’t count for shit, for once, because he didn’t have the full picture; because Bela had deemed him UNWORTHY of the full picture, and thus anything he had to say on her couldn’t be taken at face value (except this is Supernatural, so I guess this was a little too much to ask of some people?). I think saying that just because Bela died and went to Hell as a consequence of her deal, IN THE SAME SEASON the same happened to our co-lead, because the writers deemed her evil and irredeemable is simplistic at best, and the audience projecting their own feelings (or being unable to see past Dean’s) onto the writing.

All that said, to go back to the initial point of all of this xD: WHY does fandom seem to insist on viewing this narrative choice as some cheap last minute addition?

There might not be one explanation that fits all, but I have a few ideas. One is that, if this wasn’t planned for and hinted at from early on, some people might feel as if this “absolves” them of their previous (and disgustingly hateful and misoginistic) reactions to Bela. Others will see this as absolving Dean, and maybe even Sam to a lesser extent, for not helping her and for being callous towards her; if her tragic backstory was this artificial, rushed choice made by Those Writers, then Dean wasn’t responsible for reprehensible attitudes towards someone who deserved his compassion (and it can’t be denied that this fandom loves absolving Dean of responsibility lmao). And a lot people are probably only repeating what they've heard from others as the accepted narrative, especially those that didn't even watch all of s3 if at all (Castiel is my fave too, but seriously, s1-3 are worth it).

It’s like they’re creating this imaginary separation between Bela pre-reveal, and Bela post-reveal, to make the situation easier to themselves. See, Bela pre-reveal was this annoying bitch who inconvenienced and embarrassed our leads (not to mention dared have chemistry with them), and thus deserved to be punished for it; or, if we’re going with more modern fandom sensibilities, she can be made to fit into the shallow #GirlBoss mold, with a side of “Secretly A Lesbian And Therefore Not A Romantic Threat” flavour -the current preferred method to make controversial female characters more palatable.

The reveal throws a wrench into this narrative. “Bitch who deserves her comeuppance” is a hard sell when you’re talking about a character who survived csa. And a shallow #GirlBoss reading doesn’t work if you have to acknowledge that Bela was one of, if not the most tragic characters in the entire run of Supernatural.

She spent over half her life at the mercy of her abuser(s), hurt by those who should’ve loved her and protected her most. The rest of her life was extremely lonely, with seemingly only a cat as company, and a surface-level freedom that hid under the sentence that loomed over her head. She died without a single friend, or a simple show of kindness and compassion, without anyone bothering to fight for her. And then she ended up tortured for who knows how long until she became one of her torturers.

All of that is extremely difficult to digest. And when things are hard to swallow, people do as people do, and they try to simplify them. So, sure. Bela’s reveal wasn’t ever hinted at, it’s completely removed from her character and the person we met, and is not even worth trying to fit into the narrative. Sounds easy.

[sapphic-lemonair]

My Last Post Regarding The Tommy Scandal:

Let me start off by just saying holy hell, what a day.

And second:

Twitter is literally the most disappointing platform I have ever been apart of.

I don’t even know where to begin with how badly Twitter handled the situation with Tommy. I’ll admit, it isn’t the worst they’ve acted before, but damn they really didn’t do their best either. It sucks, cause the situation could have been handled better- and it was at first.

Cis Twitter stans are probably some the most confusing bunch I’ve ever come across. The fact that they pick and choose who can get away with doing controversial things is so annoying, and probably one of the most high and mighty god complexes I’ve ever seen. The fact that they called out and made Tommy trend instead of the actual problem itself was just pathetic in my opinion. KSI has interacted with so many other creators before in the past, a prime example being Quackity, yet no one made a single post in calling them out until now. This fact alone just goes to show that Twitter stans will come out of hibernation when they feel like it.

Twitter had made no type of effort in the past to call out KSI when he first made these transphobic comments before. There were no trending tags or @‘s or “lets educate him 🥰” posts for him because Twitter didn’t bother to care about it until now. The amount of hypocritical energy that was brimming through the platform is astounding.

We’ve gone through months of Twitter stans watching by as KSI interacted with other Minecraft youtubers and not a single one of them complained the entire time until now.

A lot of the adults on that platform did nothing but post passive aggressive comments to back handed advice. Adults, actual adults, were mad that a kid they put on some pedestal made one mistake and continued to state about how “disappointed” they were in him. Let me just remind you that once again, there’s no reason for any of the older fans to talk down to minors like some type of parent. Cause you’re NOT. It was very mature of Tommy to reach out to his own mom and take effort to see how he had hurt his words had affected his fans. It’s so abundantly clear that Tommy would never maliciously hurt his fandom in any way, not to mention that his first instinct would be to immediately apologize to everyone as well.

It was honestly mind boggling to see so many adults debating on whether or not is was morally right to forgive a 16 year old for a mistake he would obviously fix. The amount of people who were making threads stating how “it’s valid if you never want to forgive Tommy” was childish in my opinion. You’re adults.....holding a grudge against an actual child??? Like come on.

Twitter stans did nothing but juggle back and forth with “Tommy needs to address the situation right now!” And “Tommy, you need to take a while and think about what you said 🥰”. Yet when Tommy posted his first apology people were mad that it didn’t live up to their expectations. Were they aware that Tommy, like I said, is a whole child who was under the pressure of posting an apology despite not having time to really grasp what had happened? So many people flamed him because his post “sounded so confused” and “Tommy, honey nobody called you transphobic 😘”.

Except you did.

Of course Tommy is gonna sound confused in his apology. He wakes up and the first thing he’s greeted with are hashtags linking HIS NAME to the the word transphobic/transphobia. Of course that’s gonna be the first thing he apologizes for! Twitter basically made nothing but click bait posts that did nothing to properly explain to Tommy why transphobia was being brought up. And even despite this Tommy STILL apologized even when he didn’t know what he did wrong.

It’s so blatantly obvious Twitter realized that instead of tackling the problem at head, aka calling out KSI for his transphobic behavior, they chose to force and instigate a minor for collaborating and apologize on KSI’s behalf. It’s the most childish thing I’ve seen this year. It’s clear that Twitter stans are just awaiting to jump into next drama and put their two cents in before leaving the moment they realize they can’t get clout off their posts.

It’s frustrating because the amount of users making those posts as well weren’t even trans. The amount of “savior complex” energy cis Twitter stans showed while they spoke up over actual trans people who were genuinely upset was so embarrassing. It’s stupid to see how so many cis users got thousands of likes and retweets on their posts and acting on behalf of the trans community.

I’ll just wrap up by giving a genuine thank you to the trans community on Twitter who had the best interests in the whole Tommy situation. I’m sorry that a lot of you got trampled over by the cis users who basically used your problems as clout chasing tactics. You had every right to be upset and I appreciate that a lot of you took the situation with ease and attempted to quietly solve the problem without a hassle. Once again the cis side of Twitter blew everything out of proportion and attempted to but their two cents into the whole thing despite knowing it was an issue for the trans community to handle.

Dear Cis Twitter users, next time don’t be hypocrites and tell other users that they have no right to speak up about the situation before making your own posts for clout and followers. You look like clowns. I’d like to think that in another situation like those Twitter will act more mature....but I wouldn’t count on it. However a super big thank you to trans tumblr users who treated the entire situation with a mature personality. The mass difference between the two platforms shows me that people here have always had the best interest in actually making a difference.

In conclusion: Twitter is a dumpster fire 😁

[nitrateglow]

Favorite films discovered in 2020

Well, this year sucked. I did see some good movies though. Some even made after I was born!

Perfect Blue (dir. Satoshi Kon, 1997)

I watch a lot of thrillers and horror movies, but precious few actually unsettle me in any lasting way. This cannot be said of Perfect Blue, which gave me one of the most visceral cinematic experiences of my life. Beyond the brief flashes of bloodletting (you will never look at a screwdriver the same way again), the scariest thing about Perfect Blue might be how the protagonist has both her life and her sense of self threatened by the villains. The movie’s prescience regarding public persona is also incredibly eerie, especially in our age of social media. While anime is seen as a very niche interest (albeit one that has become more mainstream in recent years), I would highly recommend this movie to thriller fans, whether they typically watch anime or not. It’s right up there with the best of Hitchcock or De Palma.

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (dir. Sergio Leone, 1966)

Nothing is better than when an iconic movie lives up to the hype. Clint Eastwood, Eli Wallach, and Lee Van Cleef play off of one another perfectly. I was impressed by Wallach as Tuco in particular: his character initially seems like a one-dimensional greedy criminal, but the performance is packed with wonderful moments of humanity. Do I really need to say anything about the direction? Or about the wonderful storyline, which takes on an almost mythic feel in its grandeur? Or that soundtrack?

Die Niebelungen (both movies) (dir. Fritz Lang, 1924)

I did NOT expect to love these movies as much as I did. That they would be dazzlingly gorgeous I never doubted: the medieval world of the story is brought to vivid life through the geometrical mise en scene and detailed costuming. However, the plot itself is so, so riveting, never losing steam over the course of the four hours it takes to watch both movies. The first half is heroic fantasy; the second half involves a revenge plot of almost Shakespearean proportions. This might actually be my favorite silent Fritz Lang movie now.

Muppet Treasure Island (dir. Brian Henson, 1996)

I understand that people have different tastes and all, but how does this movie have such a mixed reception? It’s absolutely hilarious. How could anybody get through the scene with “THA BLACK SPOT AGGHHHHHHH” and not declare this a masterpiece of comedy? And I risk being excommunicated from the Muppet fandom for saying it, but I like this one more than The Great Muppet Caper. It’s probably now my second favorite Muppet movie.

Belle de Jour (dir. Luis Bunuel, 1967)

I confess I’m not terribly fond of “but was it real???” movies. They tend to feel gimmicky more often than not. Belle de Jour is an exception. This is about more than a repressed housewife getting her kicks working as a daytime prostitute. The film delves into victim blaming, trauma, class, and identity-- sure, this sounds academic and dry when I put it that way, but what I’m trying to say is that these are very complicated characters and the blurring of fantasy and reality becomes thought-provoking rather than trite due to that complexity.

Secondhand Lions (dir. Tim McCanlies, 2003)

The term “family movie” is often used as a synonym for “children’s movie.” However, there is an important distinction: children’s movies only appeal to kids, while family movies retain their appeal as one grows up. Secondhand Lions is perhaps a perfect family movie, with a great deal more nuance than one might expect regarding the need for storytelling and its purpose in creating meaning for one’s life. It’s also amazingly cast: Haley Joel Osment is excellent as the juvenile lead, and Michael Caine and Robert Duvall steal the show as Osment’s eccentric uncles.

The Pawnbroker (dir. Sidney Lumet, 1964)

Controversial in its day for depicting frontal nudity, The Pawnbroker shocks today for different reasons. As the top review of the film on IMDB says, we’re used to victims of great atrocities being presented as sympathetic, good people in fiction. Here, Rod Steiger’s Sol Nazerman subverts such a trope: his suffering at the hands of the Nazis has made him a hard, closed-off person, dismissive of his second wife (herself also a survivor of the Holocaust), cold to his friendly assistant, and bitter towards himself. The movie follows Nazerman’s postwar life, vividly presenting his inner pain in a way that is almost too much to bear. Gotta say, Steiger gives one of the best performances I have ever seen in a movie here: he’s so three-dimensional and complex. The emotions on his face are registered with Falconetti-level brilliance.

The Apartment (dir. Billy Wilder, 1960)

While not the most depressing Christmas movie ever, The Apartment certainly puts a good injection of cynicism into the season. I have rarely seen a movie so adept at blending comedy, romance, and satire without feeling tone-deaf. There are a lot of things to praise about The Apartment, but I want to give a special shoutout to the dialogue. “Witty” dialogue that sounds natural is hard to come by-- so often, it just feels smart-assy and strained. Not here.

Anatomy of a Murder (dir. Otto Preminger, 1959)

I’m not big into courtroom dramas, but Anatomy of a Murder is a big exception. Its morally ambiguous characters elevate it from being a mere “whodunit” (or I guess in the case of this movie, “whydunit”), because if there’s something you’re not going to get with this movie, it’s a clear answer as to what happened on the night of the crime. Jimmy Stewart gives one of his least characteristic performances as the cynical lawyer, and is absolutely brilliant. 

Oldboy (dir. Park Chan-Wook, 2003)

Oldboy reminded me a great deal of John Webster’s 17th century tragedy The Duchess of Malfi. Both are gruesome, frightening, and heartbreaking works of art, straddling the line between sensationalism and intelligence, proving the two are not mutually exclusive. It’s both entertaining and difficult to watch. The thought of revisiting it terrifies me but I feel there is so much more to appreciate about the sheer craft on display.

Family Plot (dir. Alfred Hitchcock, 1976)

Family Plot is an enjoyable comedy; you guys are just mean. I know in an ideal world, Hitchcock’s swan song would be a great thriller masterpiece in the vein of Vertigo or Psycho. Family Plot is instead a silly send-up of Hitchcock’s favorite tropes, lampooning everything from the dangerous blonde archetype (with not one but two characters) to complicated MacGuffin plots. You’ll probably demand my film buff card be revoked for my opinion, but to hell with it-- this is my favorite of Hitchcock’s post-Psycho movies.

My Best Girl (dir. Sam Taylor, 1927)

Mary Pickford’s farewell to silent film also happens to be among her best movies. It’s a simple, charming romantic comedy starring her future husband, Charles “Buddy” Rogers. Pickford also gets to play an adult character here, rather than the little girl parts her public demanded she essay even well into her thirties. She and Rogers are sweet together without being diabetes-inducing, and the comedy is often laugh out loud funny. It even mocks a few tropes that anyone who watches enough old movies will recognize and probably dislike-- such as “break his heart to save him!!” (my personal most loathed 1920s/1930s trope).

Parasite (dir. Bong Joon-ho, 2019)

This feels like such a zeitgeist movie. It’s about the gap between the rich and the poor, it’s ironic,  it’s depressing, it’s unpredictable as hell. I don’t like terms like “modern classic,” because by its very definition, a classic can only be deemed as such after a long passage of time, but I have a good feeling Parasite will be considered one of the definitive films of the 2010s in the years to come.

Indiscreet (dir. Stanley Donen, 1958)

Indiscreet often gets criticized for not being Notorious more or less, which is a shame. It’s not SUPPOSED to be-- it’s cinematic souffle and both Ingrid Bergman and Cary Grant elevate that light material with their perfect chemistry and comedic timing. It’s also refreshing to see a rom-com with characters over 40 as the leads-- and the movie does not try to make them seem younger or less mature, making the zany moments all the more hilarious. It’s worth seeing for Cary Grant’s jig (picture above) alone.

The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (dir. Joseph Sargent, 1974)

This movie embodies so much of what I love about 70s cinema: it’s gritty, irreverent, and hard-hitting. It’s both hilarious and suspenseful-- I was tense all throughout the run time. I heard there was a remake and it just seems... so, so pointless when you already have this gem perfect as it is.

They All Laughed (dir. Peter Bogdonavich, 1981)

Bogdonavich’s lesser known homage to 1930s screwball comedy is also a weirdly autumnal movie. Among the last gasps of the New Hollywood movement, it is also marks the final time Audrey Hepburn would star in a theatrical release. The gentle comedy, excellent ensemble cast (John Ritter is the standout), and the mature but short-lived romance between Hepburn and Ben Gazarra’s characters make this a memorably bittersweet gem.

The Palm Beach Story (dir. Preston Sturges, 1942)

Absolutely hilarious. I was watching this with my parents in the room. My mom tends to like old movies while my dad doesn’t, but both of them were laughing aloud at this one. Not much else to say about it, other than I love Joel McCrea the more movies I see him in-- though it’s weird seeing him in comedies since I’m so used to him as a back-breaking man on the edge in The Most Dangerous Game!

Nothing Sacred (dir. William Wellman, 1937)

I tend to associate William Wellman with the pre-code era, so I’ve tried delving more into his post-code work. Nothing Sacred is easily my favorite of those films thus far, mainly for Carole Lombard but also because the story still feels pretty fresh due to the jabs it takes at celebrity worship and moral hypocrisy. For a satire, it’s still very warm towards its characters, even when they’re misbehaving or deluding themselves, so it’s oddly a feel-good film too.

Applause (dir. Rouben Mamoulian, 1929)

I love watching early sound movies, but my inner history nerd tends to enjoy them more than the part of me that, well, craves good, well-made movies. Most early sound films are pure awkward, but there’s always an exception and Applause is one of them. While the plot’s backstage melodrama is nothing special, the way the story is told is super sophisticated and expressive for this period of cinema history, and Helen Morgan makes the figure of the discarded burlesque queen seem truly human and tragic rather than merely sentimental.

Topaz (dir. Alfred Hitchcock, 1969)

Another late Hitchcock everyone but me seems to hate. After suffering through Torn Curtain, I expected Hitchcock’s other cold war thriller was going to be dull as dishwater, but instead I found an understated espionage movie standing in stark contrast to the more popular spy movies of the period. It’ll never be top Hitchcock, of course-- still it was stylish and enjoyable, with some truly haunting moments. I think it deserves more appreciation than it’s been given.

What were your favorite cinematic discoveries in 2020?

[derekfoxwit]

Doctor Dorpden’s Critical Tips of Prestige

Note: This post was made with satirical intentions in mind. I’m only emphasizing because I’ve had a couple of comments on previous joke posts I’ve did take it seriously. With that said, here we go.

Tip 1: For starters, remember that when looking at the work, if the Mystic Knee twitches fast enough to punch a hole in a wall, this suggests that the work should be near the lowest of the low. No further development of opinion is needed.

Tip 2: For an equal degree of sophistication, give the warm comfort of nostalgia at least 5 times more chances than the new thing that MAY seem actually poggers.

Tip 3: If you have the anecdote of encountering shitty fans, then use them as a scapegoat for the show they flaunt over being shitty. Clearly, they’re always making the show the way it is.

Tip 4: If you haven’t heard much about a newer film or show you’re yet to watch, there’s an 85% chance that film or show is actually not worth your time. The Father (2020) isn’t as widespread as Joker (2019) for a reason.

Tip 5: At this point, just go for the Asian Artist Dick. I’m actually in the mood to see merit in that because I want to look edgy against cute doodles. Stop attacking Uzaki-Chan, you cowards!

Tip 6: Avoid the electronic tunes. They’ll make you smell like a bum, for there’s no structural in a music album that’s nothing but wubs.

Tip 7: If you see a Tweet that looks dumb, use it as a means of generalizing all the fans of a work as sharing that same opinion.

Tip 8: If the cartoon I’m given doesn’t provide me with mature ideas such as slicing an Arbok in half or fake boobs, then the cartoon might as well be on the same level as Teletubbies.

Tip 9: You know the music is (c)rap when it brings up drugs, regardless of lyrical context.

Tip 10:  Raw mood is the indicator of quality cartooning. If you’re quick to assume the worst in the newest HBO Max original cartoon, then you got thyself a stinker. Same thing if you were super bummed out when watching a new thing, regardless of anecdotal context.

Tip 11:  When you’re not given continuous throwbacks, ensure you’re as reductive and over-generalizing about the works shown as possible.

Tip 12:  If your hazy and imperfect as hell recollection of a children’s film, whether it’s Wall-E or Lilo & Stitch, would describe said film as “too sugary” or “key-waving schlock”, then that HAS to be the case. No meat on that bone whatsoever.

Tip 13: Simpler, more graphic style that isn’t as realistic as old-school Disney or Anime? You got yourself a lazy style with zero passion put into it.

UPA? Who’s THAT?!

Tip 14: Don’t trust anyone saying that western children’s cartoons had any form of artistic development after 2008 (with, like, TWO exceptions). If it did, why didn’t we go from stealing organs in a 2001 cartoon to showing opened stomachs in a 2021 cartoon?

Tip 15: Big booba is always important to the strong female character’s quality.

Tip 16:  Only MY ships count, for they provide me with a feeling of intelligence.

Tip 17: “PG-13″ and “R” rating just simply mean you’re not caring for expressing themes in a sophisticated manner. It’s just THAT simple until I dictate otherwise.

Tip 18:  In this age of smelly radicals, “Death of the Author” is more important than ever. Without it, this’ll imply that a classic like The Matrix was secretly toxic, due to what the Wachowskis have to say about it being an “allegory of trans people.”

Tip 19: Turn the fandoms you hate into your torture porn. Ask in Tweets to Retweet one sentence that’d “trigger” them. Go out of your way to paint all of them as blind consoomers. That’ll show them, and it’ll show how much more intelligent you are compared to those clowns.

Tip 20: Whatever the Mystic Knee dictates upon the first viewing of a work is what shall indicate the full structural extent of the film.

Tip 21: The mindset of a 2000s edgelord is one that actually understands the artistry of the medium of animation. Listen to that crazy but ingenious man.

Tip 22: Because sheer ambition makes me feel manly, the high pedestal you bestow upon a cartoon work should be based mostly on the mere mention or mere suggestion of serious topics. This means that pure comedy is smelly.

Tip 23: Is the new work tackling subjects that you’ve loved a childhood work of yours for covering? Just assume it’s super bare-bones in that case compared to the older case, for there’s nothing the older work can do to truly prove itself otherwise. Seriously, Letterboxd. Stop giving any 2010s cartoon anything above a 4/5

Tip 24: If the Mystic Knee is suggesting that the work is crummy, then consider any explanation off the top of your head for why the work in question is crummy.

Tip 25: Sexual and gender identity is inherently political, so don’t focus on them in the story. It’s no wonder why Full Metal Alchemist has caught on more than the She-Ra reboot.

Tip 26: Since I got bothered by a random butt monkey type character in a crummy cartoon, I’m now obligated to assume that having a butt monkey will only harm the writing integrity of the cartoon.

Seriously, Mr. Enter....what?!

Tip 27: We’re at a point where pure comedy for a kids’ cartoon is doing nothing but dumbing down the children. Like seriously...... I doubt Billy and Mandy would ever use farts as a punchline, unlike these newer kids comedies.

Tip 28: The difference between the innuendo in kids’ cartoons I grew up on and the ones Zootopia made is the sense of prestige they give me. Just take notes from the former instead.

Tip 29: Wanna make a work of artistic merit? Just take notes from the stuff I whore out to. It’s just THAT simple until I dictate otherwise.

Tip 30: Always remember this golden rule: If the newer work, or a work you’ve recently experienced the first time, was truly great, why isn’t it providing the exact emotions from your younger, more impressionable years?

Tip 31: If the Mystic Knee aims to break the bones of a character doing certain things (.i.e. having body count of thousands; lashing out to character; etc.), that means the character is bad and deserves no redemption.

Tip 32: If you want me to believe there’s any intrigue or depth in your antagonist, give them redemption, for I am in need of that sorta thing being spelled out. Looking at you, Syndrome. Should’ve taken notes from Tai Lung.

Tip 33: In a case where you’re going “X > Y” (.i.e. manga compared to western comics), ALWAYS CHERRY PICK! Use the recent controversies of the “Y” item while pretending that the “X” item has never had anything of the sort.

Tip 34: BEFORE you bring up those comments that shat on the original Teen Titans cartoon back when it was new, whether for making Starfire “more PC” or whatever.......the DIFFERENCE between them and me is that THEY were just bad faith fools that couldn’t see true majesty out of blind rage. I, however, am truly certain that calling any western TV cartoon from 2014-onward a work that transcends its generation suggests a destruction of the medium.

Tip 35: Based on fandom growth, it shows that any newer show isn’t being watched much by kids, but rather loser adults that act like children. Therefore, there’s more prestige in what I grew with.

Tip 36: The focus on children is bad at this point since the children of today have attention spans that flies would have.

Tip 37: A select few screenshots (or even one) of either a less elaborate attacking animation, less realistic game graphics, or a less on-model image in a cartoon indicates EVERYTHING about the work’s quality.

Tip 38: Consuming or writing media where characters go through constant suffering is little more than gaining pleasure out of it. YOU SICKOS!

Looking at you, Lily Orchard!

Tip 39: Whether it’s a sexual awakening story or just simply a romance, focus on a character being lesbian, trans, bi, etc., then it shouldn’t be in a kids’ work. It’s too spicy for them by default. Kids don’t want romance anyway.

Tip 40: The very idea of a western cartoon with no full-blown antagonist (i.e. Inside Out) is a destruction of animated artistry. Sorry, but it’s just THAT simple until I dictate otherwise.

Tip 41: Unless it’s my fluffy pillow, such as Disney’s Robin Hood, it should be obligated to assume the inserting of anthros is only there to pleasure the furries. Looking at YOU, Zootopia!

Tip 42: With how rough and rash The Beast was, it shows that he was more of an abusive lover. Therefore, I refuse to believe that Beauty and the Beast has any of the meticulous moral writing that most of Disney’s other 90s films has.

Tip 43: When you suggest one work should’ve “taken notes” from another work in order to do better, BE VAGUE! Those who agree will be shown to be geniuses.

Tip 44: Remember how morally grey Invader Zim was? That really goes to show how little the Western Animation scene has been trying since that show. Really should just be taking notes from that series (and of course anime).

Tip 45: Even if I have a radar that clearly indicates such, hiding the item I look for inside an enemy is always bad, for I refuse to believe it would be inside the enemy.

Goddamn it, Arin!

Tip 46: People struggle understanding your gender identity or pronouns? All there is to see in that is a giant cloud of egotism that reads “My problems” zapping another smaller cloud that reads “other people’s problems”. Seriously, kids are starving, so WHAT if you identity confused someone. Grow a spine!

Tip 47: Stop pretending that adaptations should colorize how a story or comic series should be defined. No way in FUCK can a cartoon or film incarnation become the definitive portrayal of my precious superhero idol.

Tip 48: Enough with your precious “limited animation” techniques, YOU WESTERN HACKS! All you’re doing is admitting to sheer laziness and lacking artistic integrity. Now if you excuse me, I’ll be watching more anime, since that gives me a sense of prestige.

Tip 49: If getting five times more detail than the 2D animated visuals have requires someone getting hurt, so be it. No pain, no gain after all.

Tip 50: Yes, I genuinely struggle to believe there’s this majestic level of layered material without having the most immediate yet still vague re-assurance practically yelling in my face. But that’s STILL the work’s fault, not mine.

Tip 51: Every Klasky-Csupo cartoon has more artistic integrity than any of them cartoons with gay lovers such as Kipo or the Netflix She-Ra show.

Tip 52:  If Sergio Pablos’ Klaus is anything to go by, we have no excuse to utilize those smelly as fuck digital animation “styles” found on Stinky Universe, Suck-Ra or Rise of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turds.

Tip 53: Stop projecting your orientation onto works of actual talent. Seriously, how does Elton John’s I’m Still Standing expel ANY rainbow flag energy?

Tip 54: Hip hop and electronica have been the destruction of music, especially the kind that’s actually organic and not farting on the buttons of a beeping or drumming gadget.

Tip 55: The audience for cartoons has become significantly less clear over the years. We should just go back to Saturday mornings of being sold toys or shit kids actually want.

Tip 56: PSAs for kids shouldn’t be about ‘woke’ content. They should be actual problems such as doing drugs; not playing with knifes / outlets / matches; or acceptance.

Tip 57: The instant you realize a detail in a childhood work that’s better understood as an adult, you’re forced to paint that work as the most transcendent thing in the world. It’s just THAT simple until I dictate otherwise.

Tip 58: Before you lash out on ALL rich people, remember this: #Not All Rich People.

Tip 59: There’s nothing to gain out of the (c)rap scene other than becoming a spiteful, gun-wielding thug that sniffs weed for breakfast.

Tip 60: Since the Mystic Knee told me to get anal about prom episodes in several gay cartoons, this shows that writing about one’s younger experiences just makes you look pathetic.

Tip 61: Another smelly thing about Zootopia is how it was painting a police chief as stern and exclusive. #Not All Chiefs

Tip 62: Me catching a glimpse of Grave of the Fireflies as a kid and turning out fine shows that you may as well show kids more adult works without worry. No amount of psychological questions being asked will suggest otherwise.

Tip 63: There’s a reason why the Mystic Knee keeps leaning more toward the 90s and early 2000s than most decades. That knee KNOWS where there’s a sense of true refinement.

Tip 64: The BIG difference between rock and electronica? Steward Copeland actually DRUMS. All that the likes of Burial, Boards of Canada, Depeche Mode and several others did was push drum buttons.

Tip 65: One exception to the golden nostalgia is when the work in question doesn’t stuff your face with fantastical, bombastic stories. At which point, there can only be rose-colored blinds covering Nickelodeon’s Doug. Nothing of merit or personal resonance to be found.

Tip 66: Remember that the sense of nuance in the work comes down to there being everything including the kitchen sink, whether it involves multiple geographic landscapes; giving us hundreds of characters; etc. Only through the extremes will I be able to tell there is nuance.

Tip 67: Once you see a joke that has an involvement with sexual or violent content, just ignore the full picture and just reduce it to having nothing to it but “sex, violence, gimme claps.”

PKRussel has entered the chat

Tip 68: With all the SJWs messing up the art of comedy, lament the times where you could be called a comic genius, NOT a monster, for shouting out the word “STAB,” calling a gay weird, painting Middle Easterns as inherently violent, etc.

Tip 69: Guitar twang will always win out over (c)rap beats. There’s a reason your grandma is more likely to listen to Lynyrd Skynyrd than Kendrick Lamar.

Tip 70: Once the Mystic Knee notices a lack of squealing at the video game with linearity, that shows there’s more artistry in going full-blown open world.

Tip 71: Related to Tips 66 and 68, ensure your comedy gets as much information and mileage out of each individual skit as possible. EMPHASIZE if you need to. Continuously spout out your quirky phrase of “STAB” if needed.

Tip 72: Based on the onslaught of TV shows with many seasons and episodes, animated or otherwise, it shows that there’s more worth going for that than simply having a miniseries or a 26-episode anime.

Tip 73: Building off of the previous tip, you’re better off squeezing and exhausting every little detail and notable characterization rather than keeping anything simple and possibly leaving a stone unturned, especially if there’s supposed to be a story. 

Tip 74: Playing through the fan translation of Mother 3 made me realize how much some newer kids’ works just try too hard to get serious. Why even make the kids potentially think about the death of a family member?

Tip 75: The fear I had over Sid’s toys from the first Toy Story and similar anecdotal emotions are the be-all indicators of what kind of show or film is fitting for the children.

Tip 76:  Seeing this British rapper chick have a song titled “Point and Kill” just further exemplifies the fears I’ve had about rappers being some of the most harmful folks ever.

Tip 77: The problem with attempting to make a more “relatable” She-Ra is that kids aren’t looking for relatability. They want the escapism of buff fighters or something similar. This is why slice-of-life is so smelly.

Tip 78: Based on seeing the rating of “PG-13″ or “R,” I can tell that the dark humor is little more than “hur dur sex and guns.” Given the “TV-Y7 FV” rating of Invader Zim, the writers should’ve taken notes from that instead just so I can sense actual prestige.

Tip 79: The original He-Man has more visual intrigue in its animation than any of those smelly glorified doodles found in the “styles" of the 2010s and early 2020s.

Tip 80: It’s always the fault of the game that my first guess (that I refuse to divert from) on how I have to go through an obstacle won’t work.

Tip 81: Zootopia discussing prejudice ruins the majestic escapism I got from my precious childhood films from 1991-2004. Them kids might as well be watching the news. Now to watch some Hunchback after I finish these tips.

Tip 82: There is no such thing as an unreasonable expectation, and there’s especially no wrong way to address the lack of met expectations! For example, if you expect some early 2010s cartoon on the Disney Channel to be a Kids X-Files, yet you get moments such as some girl getting high on stick dipping candy, you got the right to paint the worst out of that show for not being “Kids’ X-Files.”

Tip 83: Related to my example for Tip 82, if you get the slightest impression of something being childish, you know you got yourself a children’s work that does little than wave keys and has basically nothing substantial for them. In this situation, those malfunctioning robots found in Wall-E are the guilty party.

Tip 84: Without the extensive dialogue that I’m used to getting, how can one say for certain there was any amount of characterization in the title character of Wall-E?

Tip 85: Ever noticed yourself gradually being less likely to expect an upcoming work or view a work you’re just consuming as “the next best thing”? That’s ALWAYS the fault of smelly “artists” (hacks really) and their refusal to give a shit.

Tip 86:  It’s obligatory for your lead to be explicitly heroic just so there is this immediate re-assurance that they’re a good one.

Tip 87: Without the comforting safety net of throwbacks, one cannot be for certain that there has been an actual evolution of a series or the art of animation and video games.

Tip 88: Don’t PSA kids on stuff they give zero fucks about. That means no gender identities or pronouns, race, etc.

Tip 89: Don’t listen to Mamoru Hosoda saying that anime women tend to be “depicted through a lens” of sexual desire. He’s just distracting from the superior prestige found in anime women.

Tip 90:  If you’re desperate to let others know that your talking points are reasonable, just repeat them over and over with little expansion on said talking points.

Tip 91: 7 or more seasons of art is better than 26 episodes of art.  EVERY TIME!

Tip 92: Always remember to continuously talk up the innuendo and mature subject matter of the childhood work as the most prestigious, transcendent thing of all time. With that in mind, there’s a high chance that your favorite childhood work will be better known than Perfect Blue (1997), and there’s likely a reason for that.

Tip 93: An art style that gives many characters relatively more realistic arm muscle details will always shine through more than any sort of art style done for “simplicity” (laziness, really).

Tip 94:  Seeing a few (like, even VERY FEW) people show more enthusiasm for Steven Universe over Invader Zim really shows the lower bar that has been expected out of the western animation scene compared to anime.

Tip 95: Electronic music makes less conventional time signatures cheap as hell. REAL music like rock makes them the exact opposite.

Tip 96: If your Mystic Knee suggests that the 90s cartoon being viewed doesn’t showcase a vague sense of refinement or artistic integrity, then every related assumption of yours is right. EVERY TIME!

Tip 97: Doing everything and the kitchen sink for one series or movie shows a better sense of refinement and prestige than any form of simplicity. THIS includes character design as well.

Tip 98: The advent of that Star Wars: Visions anime really shows just how stinky western cartoons have become.

Tip 99:  For those wondering, no, Europe isn’t being counted in my definition of “western animation”. Doing so is a complete disservice to prestige.

Tip 100: If even less than half of these tips aren’t being considered, you can kiss that prestige badge goodbye. After all, I SAID SO!

[pseudophan]

yeahhhh the whole "family channel" branding is hella cringe. don't even get me started on mommy vloggers 😑 the ethics of filming your child and using them as a prop to make money from?? (i would go off about how much i dislike louise for doing That but you get enough angry discourse anons as is lmao) the whole thing is a youtube rabbit hole that i've never been brave enough to tumble down, not even out of morbid curiosity 😅

dfgshjfgdjh yeah i really don’t like that whole,,, thing. i don’t have a Strong opinion on louise cause i haven’t watched much of her content but i THINK she doesnt showcase her kids in Every video ? idk how she shows them though but in general, and this might just be me, i don’t personally mind people showing their kids in videos like that in itself is not an issue for me but the issue For Me Personally is when people make their children the focal point of their channel. like people’s reason to subscribe and watch you should NEVER be your kids. if you want to show your kids in videos sometimes that’s fine i don’t think that in itself is an issue, and Once In A While you can maybe make them a focal point but i do mean very rarely like once in a blue moon. h o w e v e r family channels where the kids are obviously the main draw for most of the videos and where they make them act and ugh just in general perform for the camera oh so often is just.... thats gotta be harmful for your kids man

and ok this might be controversial but i’m not one of those people who thinks you can’t ever show your kids in content online like involving your kids in your content isnt in itself and issue, it becomes an issue when they’re the focal point of all your videos. like for example one of my favourite tiktokers is this.tourettes.guy which is a very much adult man with tourettes who films himself in various situations sometimes alone, sometimes with his wife and sometimes with his young kids and grandkid! and that, to me, is fine, because while he does show his kids and grandkid in some videos they’re first of all not in every video and they’re never the main focus of it, so it - to me at least - is a lot more innocent and wholesome than people shoving a camera in their kid’s faces at all times demanding them to be entertaining

i forgot where i was going with this. sorry im kind of tipsy. anyway dont exploit your kids and also follow this.tourettes.guy on tiktok cause hes cool and funny