#russel reiter

[blahwithasideofblah]

Thinking about how Ten's whole he's not really me and "it feels like dying" regeneration affected so many people's views on Tentoo and Eleven and the other regenerations.

[itsvelyria]

"non-sexual acts of intimacy with the f1 boys"

Charles Leclerc

being there for each other. after a bad race, you'll be right there in the garage waiting with open arms or his phone will be lit up with a bunch of messages from you. a bad day at work? he's running a bath with your favourite sandalwood bath salts and your fluffiest towel is hanging on the heated rack. he is one constant presence you can always count on to be there, to smile at you and tell you it's going to get better, and vice versa.

Carlos Sainz

he finds comfort in physical contact, that means his hands are either on your lower back guiding you through crowds, or on your thigh during midnight cuddles on the couch, or simply just interlaced with yours. his family and friends are used to him drifting away from them, weaving through people to drape his arms over your shoulders from behind in greeting. he likes the reminder that you are right there with him, grounding him.

Danny Ricciardo

he loves your mornings together. being an f1 driver doesn't get him a lot of days at home so when he does, he enjoys waking to daylight slipping through the cracks of the curtains and slipping out of bed to make coffee for two. the aroma wakes you up and when you pad into the kitchen, rubbing your eyes, he thinks he might be the luckiest man in the world to be able to witness it. oftentimes you two sit there in silence, just relishing in each other's presence and sharing a quiet moment.

George Russell

its the little things he brings back from every trip or every outing, the excuse of "it reminded me of you" rolling off his tongue. the chrysanthemums outside the flower shop he passed by, the strange pink shell he saw at the beach. he shows them to you with such pride, the tiny burst of happiness in his chest when you laugh and admire the present, turning it over in your hands. every present he gifts another reiteration of your significance in his life and just how often he thinks of you throughout the day. what could be more of an indication of love than that?

Lando Norris

children at heart, you two love teasing each other — his messy curls that are sticking up in all directions when he wakes or the light foam moustache on your upper lip from the cappuccino you just drank. but you never take it too far and he finds it easy to just be himself around you, to be able to laugh everything off. its the intimate level of comfort and understanding that shines through all your playful banter and jokes that makes him never want to leave your side.

Lewis Hamilton

he really loves hearing you talk, it's like music to his ears whenever you're telling him about the bus you missed or raving over your new favourite song. the man hangs onto your every word, letting them sink in as he gazes at you with lovestruck eyes. and he's always there with the perfect response — how to deal with a difficult client at work or just filing your words away in his album of you in his brain.

Max Verstappen

remembering the littlest most insignificant things about you. he got you a first print copy of your favourite book after 3 months together and since then, he's surprised you every so often at just how much he knows you. sometimes orders for you at cafes and restaurants because he knows exactly how you pick items on the menu. you once told him about how you hate cracked phone screens so he has a bunch of them in his drawer and changes them for you. the sight of him squinting while trying to line up your phone screen makes your heart swell with adoration.

[dandelionjack]

doctor who is about music . well it’s been running for sixty years so it can’t really be about anything, there is no constant now but change, so if it’s about anything then it’s about change, time and memory. which makes it about music. i sound crazy but what i really mean is if i was more eloquent then i could um. i could articulate this. the doctor’s primary tool works its magic by manipulating sound, like a conductor’s baton? i have made a post about the theme of music in doctor who before and i’m going to reblog it above so i don’t need to reiterate myself. anyway

point is, russell could prove to be a sheer showrunning genius if he succeeds at his attempt to finally bring this theme to the forefront through inventing a music-themed campy villain to act as one of new-new-who series 1’s big bads. the way that this string of ideas began back in the 60th specials, with the TARDIS mysteriously playing wild blue yonder followed by the toymaker plagiarising the master’s trademark act by throwing a song and dance number of his own… i am so so excited for what the future holds now that the doctor dances, seeminly unencumbered by guilt this time. hang in there ruby . ruby’s a musician of all things too, on the keys like missy once was. much to think about. the giggle’s an arpeggio

this song is figuratively about the doctor

and controversially this one is too! i am a sucker for doctor who space jesus allegories because i (personally) view jesus as a mythical literary protagonist first and foremost rather than a religious figure. he’s just some guy to me. a kind wanderer who works miracles sometimes. you don’t know my buddy jesus h. christ like i do

[isolated-r0b0t]

The GPDA stands for all 20 Formula 1 drivers, giving them a strong, united front to address their issues and interests.

The association is led by former driver Alex Wurz, alongside prominent and notable directors like George Russell and Sebastian Vettel.

Recent Collective Statement:

The drivers recently released a firm statement criticizing the FIA’s policies, especially regarding how drivers are treated and the fines being imposed. This marks their first united public response since 2017, showcasing their growing frustration and the urgent need for change.

Financial Transparency:

The GPDA has consistently demanded clarity from the FIA about how monetary fines are used. They stress that the current fine system is vague and lacks clarity on it's benefit the sport.

Treatment of Drivers:

In their statement, the drivers take issue with the FIA's condescending approach, likening it to treating them like children—especially when it comes to recent penalties for swearing. They highlight their professionalism and make it clear they don’t need to be lectured on mundane topics like dress codes.

Public Critique of FIA Policies:

This statement acts as a public outcry against the FIA’s policies under President Mohammed Ben Sulayem. The drivers want an open dialogue and collaboration to constructively tackle their concerns.

Call for Respect and Understanding:

The GPDA calls on the FIA to adjust their tone and approach with drivers, advocating for mutual respect in their interactions. The drivers remind everyone that they are professionals who make significant contributions to the sport and deserve respect in return.

Now, let’s get real. Those tearing down the GPDA and their statement are missing the bigger picture.

These drivers are not just performers; they are real people facing serious challenges, and yes, they are often exploited workers!

NEWS FLASH!!Anyone who doesn’t own the means of production—yes, even in sports—is, in fact, an exploited worker.Even highly compensated athletes are subject to this reality.

To reiterate: Athletes ARE exploited workers.

They are here, putting their bodies on the line, putting on a show entertaining fans and boosting the profits of team owners, the FIA, and sponsors. So it’s absolutely commendable that they’re advocating for their rights and asserting their collective strength.If you find yourself mocking their wording or claiming their statement should have been polished by a ghostwriter, or saying these drivers must not be educated—guess what? You’re missing the mark! Every worker, drivers included, deserves applause for calling out the FIA and the governing bodies that try to keep them down.

Furthermore, suggesting that the drivers should postpone their advocacy because of external political events—such as the recent U.S. election—is shortsighted. Multiple struggles for justice can and must occur simultaneously. There should be no requirement for drivers to wait for unrelated political drama to subside before voicing their concerns.

The GPDA is finally stepping up as a united front, and it’s time we all support them. If you genuinely care about these drivers and believe they deserve justice, care, and their rightful rights, it’s time to back their efforts to improve their working conditions.

fin.

[umlewis]

Mercedes gave Hamilton short F1 contract to keep Antonelli option open

Toto Wolff has admitted that the Mercedes Formula 1 team didn’t commit to a longer-term contract with Lewis Hamilton because it didn’t want to risk losing protégé Andrea Kimi Antonelli.

Last August, Hamilton signed a two-year contract with the team, which was widely assumed to be fixed for the full term and left open the possibility for Mercedes to take Antonelli in 2026; however, Hamilton was able to use escape clauses to miss the second year and take up an offer from Ferrari, leaving his seat free for 2025 and giving Mercedes the chance to take Antonelli as early as next year. Antonelli, who is just 17 years old, is moving up to Formula 2 with Prema this season, having won Italian F4 in 2022 and the Formula Regional European Championship with the team last year. Wolff has compared the situation with 2014, when the team was keen to sign Max Verstappen but had nowhere to put him, while Red Bull was able to offer him a Toro Rosso seat for the following year. "There was a situation many years ago where we had the opportunity to let Max drive," Wolff told Austrian broadcaster ORF, "and that wasn't possible back then because we simply didn't have a cockpit. Rosberg and Hamilton were tied to us long-term, and Red Bull naturally seized the opportunity. They gave him a contract with Toro Rosso, with the possibility of driving for Red Bull the following year. We then lost the young driver, and you can see how successful he has become, and precisely because we have a junior on the horizon who is really driving at a very high level, I simply wanted to keep this option open. Wolff reiterated what he said in a response to Motorsport.com in Bahrain last week by stating that the newly-vacant 2025 seat is not necessarily being saved for Antonelli, who has yet to start his first F2 race. "That does not mean that we will actually put Antonelli in the car next year," he said. "He is 17 years old, and that might be a bit early. But with a view to the next five or ten years, I just wanted to have this option." Regarding the Italian’s potential, he said: "In a way, he's a wonderkid. He won everything there was to win in karting and then moved into F4. He won all the championships in his rookie year, then moved up a level and won everything there too. Now we've decided to skip F3, partly because there's not much time to test there. Instead, he'll go straight into F2, which is a huge leap for him. These are really big cars with power. Most of the races are part of the F1-supporting programme, so we'll have a good overview there too." Wolff has confirmed that Antonelli will do some private running in a 2022 car, noting that Mercedes will "run a big test programme with him in 2024 and then we'll see, is he ready for 2025? Or for 2026, will there be a different situation?" The conundrum over opting to hold him back until 2026 is that it would require another driver stepping in for 2025 only, assuming that George Russell remains in the other seat and his contract is extended beyond 2025. Wolff said that the driver market will be "incredibly interesting, because really strong people will be available for 2025," and that Mercedes will review the situation "over the next two or three races." He added: "Do we want to rely on experience and perhaps try something new? Or do we want to focus on youth and take the risk that we have a rookie and then have to look at this from a medium- to long-term performance perspective?"

op note: do not leave hate for a 17-year-old literal child in my notifs. absolutely hate on toto all you want tho.

[ahuactl]

on mathematical models

the question “is math invented or discovered?” remains to be the most contentious questions in mathematics.

a significant portion of people including mathematicians believe that mathematics holds objective truth insofar as their models, theorems and equations tell the truth about reality in which the Subject: their proposition exists independently of them. this position is familiar among those in the Platonist or Realist traditions of mathematics. common knowledge states that any proposition such as  P: 1 + 1  = 2  is true in which ever universe it is stated in such that its truth is not constructed upon the confines of our society and more strongly, not in our minds or cognitions.

i will present my argument here on why i disagree with this view. first, propositions like P: 1 + 1  = 2 are certainly not true in every construction of a mathematical system. for example, in boolean algebra and nonstandard number systems. even non-Platonist mathematicians would quickly disagree with this as they would claim that the Platonist view holds that the truth of a proposition exists not solely but with the pair (P, S) whereas P is the proposition and S is the system in which it is considered to be in. on such note, this leads me to my next argument.

from the development of set theory in the 19th century, it was discovered by mathematicians that mathematics as a field was built on shaky logical foundations (re: Russel’s Paradox). this thus necessitated the construction of a new structure which must possess the power to rebuild mathematics. this new foundation came with the introduction of ZFC. it is an attempt to systematically rebuild the previously known and accepted results of mathematics while working to eliminate the logical inconsistencies of previous naive set theory. from how it was made, ZFC does not posit the truth of any propositions insofar that it exists as starting axioms in which rules of inference can be applied. as with any theories of logic, its axioms must be decided and chosen. it could be noted that these axioms were posteriori in a sense that they were built to solve the issues such as Russel’s Paradox. it can then be argued that the process by in which these axioms were chosen is contingent upon the values of the persons that chose it as well as the developed culture of mathematics. in fact, it is by no means that ZFC is only the possible theory of mathematics (e.g. Model Theory, Category Theory). no matter the “objective” metaphysical existence of mathematical objects, by the way mathematics was built and practiced, these starting axioms still remain a choice.

to reiterate, the way mathematics has been agreed to be used by mathematicians, whichever system set in place still remains a choice. this reveals its use as pragmatic: the system, that is, ZFC was adapted because it works. this naturally extends out from its foundations to concrete mathematical objects studied in abstract algebra, analysis, etc. for example, a group is not just a set with specific rules with its binary operation; the construction of the properties that denote a Group came a posteriori in a way that it was discovered that the set of properties in the first place proved to be a useful abstraction to study. 

on a related note, i would argue that the existence of abstract mathematical objects actualize themselves by our need and desire for the world to conform to standard rules as appeal to our intuition and senses. the truth value of P: 1 + 1  = 2 in (P, S) in an arithmetic system S signifies an essence in which it “makes sense” that combining abstract objects  result to a set in which it succeeds singular objects by the value of each one of those objects. the value of (P, S) does not reveal a Platonic truth of our universe but instead a declaration of common sensical deductions. in such, a mathematical statement is a “model” the same way a bachelor is “unmarried”.

on usage:

regardless of the metaphysical existence of mathematical objects, it, as a system, is undoubtedly one of the finest works of humankind. i advise that one ought not to use this powerful tool to make claims of absolute truth. in a sense, the existence of mathematical objects remain irrelevant to how it ought be used. one should not at all invoke mathematics to justify repressive systems and to cause grave harm to humanity. as a tool, it must not be used for evil. one must always remain cautious of individuals who use mathematics as arguments by certainty. these individuals who swear by the sharp sword of mathematics is most likely using it to silence thought and keep one from questioning. always look at the mathematics; an equation is not just a set of symbols that denote some property; it is a theory of the world and this theory must be met with most criticisms when it is being used to make claims for human policies. look at the mathematics, specifically which assumptions were made by the ones who present them: it must reveal the true character of such persons.

[pers-books]

Doctor Who legend optimistic about return after 60 years: "Hopefully it's going to be a yes"

The actor remains enthusiastic – yet "emotional" – about the prospect.

Original Doctor Who star Carole Ann Ford has reiterated her hope of returning to the sci-fi drama, as the 60th anniversary of her final appearance nears.

Ford played the Doctor's granddaughter, Susan Foreman, for a year at the beginning of the show's historic run, before her character was written out in the Dalek Invasion of Earth story (broadcast on Boxing Day 1964).

The Doctor promised Susan that he would come back for her, but as of October 2024, that day has yet to come; at this point, Ford told crowds at Luton Comic-Con (via BBC News) that reprising the role would be "very emotional".

"I don't know if I could survive the excitement actually, it would be intense beyond all intensity," she said.

"It's not just returning, it would bring back all the memories of William Russell and Jackie and Bill [William Hartnell] and various other people who aren't with us anymore. I might be a little bit overcome and start blubbing."

The character of Susan was recently referenced in two episodes of Doctor Who season 14; first in The Devil's Chord and again in The Legend of Ruby Sunday.

For a time, it was thought that the mysteriously reappearing Susan Triad (played by Susan Twist) could be a regenerated version of the character, but she instead proved to be an agent of Sutekh.

Discussing the challenge of reintroducing her character after such a long absence, Ford explained: "He said he'd come back and get me and never did. I'd give him a good telling off if I saw him again.

"I understand their dilemma, how difficult it must be to write for me. It has been 60 years since I was first in it."

She added: "I've met Russell [T Davies] a few times and I absolutely adore him. He is the man that would be the boss man to say 'yes' or 'no' – so hopefully it's going to be 'yes'."

Ford previously shared her idea for Susan's reintroduction with RadioTimes.com, which would see the former companion suffering from a disease that only the Doctor – with his near-infinite knowledge – would know how to treat.

[denimbex1986]

'Doctor Who showrunner Russell T. Davies confirms that future episodes will mention the Fourteenth Doctor's (David Tennant) whereabouts. Tennant will be playing a unique role in the franchise following the shocking regeneration twist in the 60th-anniversary special, "The Giggle." For the first time in history, the show has two Doctors and two TARDISes in the galaxy at once. While the Fifteenth Doctor (Ncuti Gatwa) will be the show's primary focus, viewers know that the Fourteenth Doctor is somewhere in-universe. Ahead of Doctor Who season 14, Davies has provided some insight into how the show will handle the duo Doctors.

During BBC's Doctor Who commentary on "The Giggle," Davies confirmed that viewers will hear about the Fourteenth Doctor in new upcoming stories. He promised the show wouldn't ignore all the questions about when Tennant's next story starts because the Fourteenth Doctor gets one mention in the show's upcoming episodes. It's unclear if the mention will be in the Christmas special or season 14, though. Check out Davies' statement below:

Tennant: "All I’m gonna be asked is “So what does that mean? When’s the next story? When’s the…”

Davies: "Yes, I think that’s starting already. Let me tell you, you get mentioned once."

Tennant: "Oh! Showbiz is harsh!"

Davies: "One mention!"

What Is Doctor Who Going To Do With the Fourteenth Doctor?

One Fourteenth Doctor mention in upcoming episodes sheds a little light on how the show will continue acknowledging the Doctor's bi-generation. Previously, Davies confirmed that the Fourteenth Doctor was "parked" following the 60th-anniversary special. He would lie low with the Noble family and enjoy his happy ending, while the Fifteenth Doctor would do the world-saving at the show's center. Hence, this left questions about whether the show would even acknowledge the Fourteenth Doctor or the bi-generation in the future since his story had seemingly concluded.

On top of that, there's always the question of whether Doctor Who should mention the Fourteenth Doctor or if teases of him might take away from Gatwa's run. However, it seems the show is striking a balance between teasing Tennant and keeping the show firmly on Gatwa. One mention ensures that the show is not ignoring its major bi-generation twist but also confirms the show won't overdo it by mentioning Tennant just for fan service. The nature of this mention could also be vital in clarifying what's next for Tennant's Doctor.

The mention may reiterate his happy ending with the Nobles, but there's a chance it could tease some new adventures or travel. After all, he did keep his TARDIS, and Donna Noble (Catherine Tate) seemed to sense his restlessness by telling him he didn't have to stay. There are also so many unknowns, such as whether he can regenerate, that suggest he's not always going to lie low in the franchise going forward. One mention doesn't seem like a lot, but if it confirms the Fourteenth Doctor is getting around in his TARDIS again, it could tease his future role in Doctor Who.'

[riversmithmelody]

Let me reiterate on my thoughts on Wild Blue Yonder:

This had be fucked up on the same level as Blink. And yes I’m not a horror fan, at ALL!

But the slow psychological terror this gave me…omfg!

Once again SPOILERS!

The scene where they do their work Donna in one room and Ten (he’s always ten for me leave me alone) in the other.

Do you think I clocked that they weren’t there together?

NO THE FUCK I WAS NOT!!!!!

But it crept in slowly! The questions, the was they looked. And then I realised it just before them. Which honestly BRILLIANT WRITING Russel! Brilliant!

And then them being separated. How they both managed to out think the…monsters. The four of them at once.

The FUCKING VAMPIRE LAW THE HELL?!

And once again Donna, left behind giving up but still not BELIEVING in it…

Tens little for head kiss when they huddled together afterwards.

This was such a brilliant episode!

[ummick]

Mick Schumacher: Toto Wolff says F1 teams 'missing out' as Mercedes boss praises reserve driver's impact

Mercedes boss Toto Wolff says other F1 teams are "missing out" on Mick Schumacher as the German driver struggles to find a full-time seat for the 2024 season.

Schumacher is Mercedes' reserve driver this season after being replaced by Nico Hulkenberg at Haas at the end of 2022 following two difficult seasons with the American team. Schumacher, son of seven-time world champion Michael, was criticised by Guenther Steiner for a series of expensive crashes last season, with the Haas team boss revealing in his book that Schumacher had cost in excess of £1.6m from big crashes in Saudi Arabia, Monaco and Japan. Wolff, though, feels Schumacher was not in an environment to thrive at Haas and would expect him to perform well at the next team that signs him. "I think teams are missing out, to be honest. I think he was burned last year," Wolff said at the Canadian Grand Prix. "You need to give and provide an environment and framework that is different to every driver, we are all different human beings. And whoever gets him will have a very good pilot." Schumacher's hopes of returning to the grid full-time in 2024 are looking slim with limited openings available. A promotion at Mercedes will not happen as George Russell has extended his contract and Lewis Hamilton is on the verge of signing his own extension. As things stand, the only openings in 2024 are at Alfa Romeo/Sauber, Williams, AlphaTauri and Haas - with a return to the latter almost certainly out of the question. Wolff also says he cannot make a Mercedes customer team - Williams, McLaren and Aston Martin - take on Schumacher. "I'm not even sure that we can facilitate [a seat], because every time we speak highly of him, somebody feels to say something negative," Wolff said. "Wherever I can speak highly and praise Mick, that's what I'm doing. But at the end, it's every team's authority to decide on their drivers and I very much respect that. Our contracts with the teams were never 'you have to take our junior driver', 'you have to take our reserve driver', because when I was at Williams, I also wanted to have my own choice."

Wolff: Schumacher giving Mercedes tremendous advantage

Wolff also hailed the impact Schumacher is having in his role as reserve driver with Mercedes. Hamilton and Russell praised the work the 24-year-old had done in the simulator on the Friday night of the Spanish GP which helped the team unlock more pace in the W14 and culminated in a double podium finish on the Sunday. Wolff says having Schumacher's experience to do simulator work on race weekends at European grands prix gives Mercedes a big advantage and reiterated he would have no hesitation in having Schumacher step up to cover should Russell or Hamilton be unavailable for a race. "It's great to have a mature, successful and experienced Formula 1 driver supporting us," Wolff said. "In the simulator with his feedback, that is a tremendous advantage on some of the European grands prix, having him in the sim overnight and providing data for the Saturday is a super advantage for us. "And on the other side is that, if George or Lewis were to have fish poisoning - well, Lewis can't have fish poisoning, it would be avocado poisoning - then we know we have a super guy that would drive the car well. And as much as I like the situation for the benefit of the team, I would every day of the week prefer that Mick sits in a cockpit and actually races."

[hamliet]

weird how alice degraded bl and yet their hs has a ton of bl tropes there

I mean, yeah. It's white privilege and ignorance at its finest. I've talked about this at length before, actually.

It's kind of a disservice to Asian BL not only by appropriating its tropes, but also just sheer privileged bliss. People in communities that are not as progressive on LGBT rights are not only less likely to be able to come out, but also less likely to be able to even explore their sexualities and gender identities. It's easier to just conform and to not think of desire and what it means, especially when we think of sexuality as a spectrum.

It also ignores older queer media in the west that has influenced BL, which was influenced by yaoi, which itself emerged as a distinct market/genre in the 1970s. Nothing's as insular as it appears; for example, Queer as Folk (the 2000 US version) is reportedly huge in China today, and I can see that it's influenced Kinnporsche and danmei novels. QaF also was the first US media ever to show sex between two men on TV--in December 2000.

Yeah. We're not even 23 years out from that.

But of course, explicit sex scenes between two men or two women have existed long before that in yaoi, which itself draws from literary and artistic traditions across the world that have existed from ancient times, because gay people have existed from, y'know, ancient times.

I don't want to keep harping on AO, though. I hope they learn, and the posts were from over a year ago, so I'm hopeful they are in the process of doing so. Though I don't really keep up with them. The reason I also can't be too hard on AO was that even 7 or so years ago, I would have agreed with them about yaoi because I didn't know any better. And I was wrong, and I am still learning, and I hope I will continue to learn.

I'll again also reiterate that I do not care at all that Heartstopper has no sex in it; good for them because not all stories need it! Sweet, innocent stories have their place and can be just as powerful and necessary as those that are darker and more explicit. I just think declaring that a story's lack of queer sex is somehow revolutionary is ignorant at best and rewriting history at worst.

I'll leave off with this portion of an interview with the creators of the American QAF, who are themselves a married gay couple who have been together for like... 30? years. I'm bolding the parts I want to emphasize.

COWEN The first time we heard about Queer as Folk was in the Calendar section of the L.A. Times. The whole article was about [how] no one will ever have the g ts to do a show like this in the U.S. People thought [the US version] was going to be a much softer show than Russell’s [original British version], and we knew it had to be outrageous and more sexual. The sex on our show probably was the most political statement we made. Because we all grew up seeing gay people represented on TV — if they were ever represented — [as] eunuchs or clowns. We never saw gay people having a sex life or being complete people. We had a list of subjects that we were determined to write about because we grew up at a very inhospitable time in the U.S. Not just the Defense of Marriage Act and Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, but we didn’t have gay marriage here until 10 years after the show ended.

LIPMAN ... We wanted our Queer as Folk to be a celebration of being. We saw movies and TV shows where gay people would hang themselves; they’d walk into the ocean to drown. We didn’t want any of that. We used the sex on the show to be joyous, angry, vindictive, self-destructive …

COWEN … and celebratory. There were so many topics that we needed to address because it was such a politically oppressive, scary time....

DUNN That also was the only representation that I saw: It was suicide or it was Disney villains. That was queer representation for me, and so seeing this show that was just so irreverent, so joyful, so sexual, so free, and it still dealt with the realities of being queer.

Every story is in a sense a product of its time, and it's not bad that Oseman is writing their story to address concerns they have and issues they deal with. It's just not inherently any more revolutionary and definitely not more inherently moral than queer media with sex in it.

[emmashouldbewriting]

Hi! New royal watcher here. I wanted to know your thoughts on Chris Ship and Russel Myers. I want to follow the works of the Wales's in particular but based on their podcasts they seem dismissive of the Wales's and reiterating that Wales's actions towards the Sussex's shot their credibility in the mental health sphere and early years.

Welcome to the crazy!

Honestly, I don't pay much attention to many of the royal reporters - they tend to be pretty biased based on the media outlet they work for and say what they need to to get attention and clicks, so I honestly get most of my info on here. I do know I wouldn't trust Chris Ship as far as I could throw him.

Those with the best info about the RRs would probably be... @duchessbitch @thewales @cambridgemadness @claireofluxembourg off the top of my head, they're very smarty smart

and those I like to keep up with the comings and goings of most royals in "facty bits" like engagement reporting (but mostly the Waleses) would be @charlotte-of-wales @world-of-wales @theroyalsandi

[cinemaocd]

Jenny's ongoing list of films watched 2024

February

January list, here.

Inland Empire (2006)*** It took three attempts to get through this long, confusing film. Like Mulholland Drive or the Season Three of Twin Peaks, Lynch films improve on repeat viewings even if meaning remains elusive. That is part of the joy-- sometimes you just vibe with it.

Death of Stalin (2017)**** One of my favorite films of the last two decades. A harried farce with the bloody-mindedness of Macbeth. Like the Scottish Play, we know how its going to come out, but the fun is in watching the articulate villain, played with delicious malice by Simon Russell Beale being outdone by a team of bumbling, petty bureaucrats and one very bad ass soldier. The Boyfriend (1970)*** Ken Russell's surreal tribute to the burlesque musical genre makes the most of its setting in the 1920s by putting his star Twiggy in iconic psychadelic reiterations of the flapper dress. If you opine the fact that drop waist dresses come back into style every 15 years or so, then this movie is as much to blame as anything. Poor Things (2023)*** Emma Stone gives a wild and convincing physical performance as Bella, a baby's brain in the body of her dead mother and Mark Ruffalo as typical 19th Century Rake Getting His Comeupance iscasting I didn't know I needed. I loved the yearning Godwin (Willem Defoe in truly amazing Frankenstein's monster makeup) and though I haven't read the book, I was drawn into the grotesque, ai generated world of the film. The aesthetics of this movie are as engrossing as the story and characters. Adventures of a Dentist (1965)** The Soviet version of the live action Disney comedies of the 70s, where a humble person is given magical power. Here a dentist is given extraordinary, almost magical abilities to perform dentistry without pain. He becomes a celebrity and his fall from grace involves him giving in to the decadent trappings of being a popular dentist. The humor has a darker edge than Disney though I wouldn't go so far as to call it a black comedy. Adolf Hitler: My Part in His Downfall (1973)** This Spike Milligan film plays like a double episode of Dad's Army, not least because of the presence of Arthur Lowe who plays practically the same character here as he does on the tv show. That is not the end of the world however and this is easy to like farce with Milligan's ascerbic, anti-authoritarian bent that is grittier than anything on the sitcom. The Master (2012)** I had high hopes for this, one of Phillip Seymour Hoffman's final films and his last collaboration with director Paul Thomas Anderson is loosely based on the origin story of Scientology. Joaquin Phoenix plays a shell shocked veteran who drifts into the path of the cult leader played by Hoffman. Amy Adams gives a chilling performance as his much younger, controlling wife who is the real power behind the cult. I think I would have an easier time with this film if Anderson hadn't gone around giving interviews saying that Scientology and it's founder L. Ron Hubbard had "helped a lot of people." Of course, this is PTA and Phoenix's character isn't helped at all and he makes the cult worse by being a violent enforcer for the leader's enemies. The levels of whitewashing involved in making a deeply misogynistic cult into a secret matriarchy is just...ugh. However, the homoerotic tension between Hoffman and Phoenix makes the film worth looking out. Murder of Quality (1991)** Made for TV adaptation of John Le Carre's second novel. Denholm Elliott plays Smiley as more doddering and anti-social than Alec Guinness' iconic version of the character. This early Smiley story is more a traditional English village murder mystery, ala Miss Marple, with Glenda Jackson playing Ailsa, Smiley's war buddy that runs a women's magazine. Christian Bale plays one of the students at an elite prep school that forms the economic backbone of the town. Le Carre is merciless in his portrayal of the toxic, petty characters, the wealthy and wannabe wealthy swamp dwellers who run rings around the local constabulary until Smilley steps in and withstands their slings and arrows long enough to solve the case.

The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes (1970)*** Sometimes you sit down to watch a movie with such low expectations that you are pleasantly surprised that it doesn't totally suck. The excitement of things not being as bad as you feared can blot out some of a movie's excesses. At the end of the day this is Billy Wilder, physically incapable of creating a boring movie throwing the whole bag of tricks at this faux biography of Holmes starring Robert Stephens and Colin Blakely. There's farce and physical comedy, verbal gymnastics and exotic locations. Holmes' possible homosexuality is tastefully hinted at and attempts to create a sensationalist account of his drug use, amount to little before the mystery gets rolling. One of the big delights is Christopher Lee as Mycroft whose scenes with Robert Stephens are bitchy queen pissing contests. Genevieve Page does a turn as a would be damsel in distress who turns out to be a worthy opponent to Holmes similar to Irene Adler.

Irma La Duce (1963)*** For some reason between this and Poor Things I ended up watching two movies about Parisian brothels this month. Billy Wilder based this pastiche of 1950s travelogue adventure films like To Catch a Thief and Charade on a French stage play. A strange attempt to weld the success of the Apartment with Some Like it Hot, reconfiguring a Marilyn Monroe vehicle as a reunion of Jack Lemmon and Shirley MacLaine. Like the Apartment, Irma LaDuce is tinged with melancholy while avoiding a lot of the cliches about sex work that wind up dating so many films on this topic. The main complaint I have about Irma LaDuce s that it's about 45 minutes too long, a common complaint about many films of this period. (Damn Lawrence of Arabia and all who sail in her).

Witness for the Prosecution (1982)*** A made for tv adaptation of the classic courtroom drama, which credits Billy Wilder's screenplay of his film version. Ralph Richardson and Deborah Kerr star in this remake and honestly their chemistry is just off the charts and we're left to wonder how they never managed to make a film together before. Wendy Hiller, Diana Rigg and Beau Bridges round out the amazing cast. Lacks the tension and edge of Wilder's film but I'm having too much fun with Ralph to care.

The Major and the Minor (1942)**: Billy Wilder's first film as writer and director has some of the hallmarks of his later, greater works: farce, trains, mistaken identity, and queer themes in the form of a lesbian coded sister of Ginger Roger's romantic rival. That all the fuss is about fairly bland Ray Milland is easy enough to overlook as Wilder makes the film about toying with Rogers image as sophisticated, sexy, dancer. Typical Wilder inside jokes about the film industry abound, such as a craze for Veronica Lake hairdos among the tween set and swipes at Hollywood actors like Charles Boyer Rogers' childish masquerade to avoid paying full adult fare is preceded by a series of calamities where she's pursued and objectified by a lot of nasty older men. Hoping to escape their advances as well as the ignominity of turnstyle jumping, she maintains the charade through a long weekend with a lot of handsy tween boys until Milland's fiancee is discredited as a controlling social climber. There is a bizarre side track into her home town where Rogers also impersonates her mother before revealing her grown adult self to Milland. No one ever accused Billy Wilder of being restrained I guess.

The Children's Hour (1961)**** This classic of queer cinema was necessarily a scorched earth tragedy at the time of its release. William Wyler's dreamy, restless camera drags you into the warm, cozy life of this female partnership between Shirley Maclaine and Audrey Hepburn that seemingly has the potential to be a romantic partnership. When nasty gossips and spoiled children start a rumor that they are a couple, the scandal destroys their business and standing in the community. Terrorized by the homophobic townspeople, they are eventually "cleared" of the crime of being gay for each other, just when Maclaine's character comes to the brutal realization that she really is in love with Audrey Hepburn's character. It's hard to watch her grief and shame as she admits that the bullies have discovered a truth about her that she didn't know herself. A fact so many queer people can find relatable. The film is based on a play by Lilian Hellman which used the topic of homosexuality to expose the cruelty of female narcissists who bully their way into power. There is much in common with Hellman's The Little Foxes in that way, but the film, perhaps owing to Wyler's inherent romanticism has more of a Romeo and Juliet quality than the play. One feels that Audrey Hepburn has perhaps realized the truth in the lie, just a few moments too late.

Sweet Charity (1969)*** Directed by Bob Fosse, starring Shirley MacLaine and Sammy Davis Jr and Chita Rivera this classic musical combines the best of Fossee's signature choreography, sixties pop show tunes and the psychadelic aesthetics of the late 60s. This and the Boyfriend have a lot in common, though I think the music in Sweet Charity is more solid and the contemporary setting makes it a tad edgier. MacLaine plays yet another flavor of sex worker, a dancehall hostess and paid companion who seeks to be elevated out of her life into respectability through marriage. The fiancee here is uptight and lacking in appeal and when he finally just flakes out in the final reel it's no great loss to the film.

Thief (1981)** Atypical heist film starring James Caan and Jim Belushi, directed by Miama Vice creator Michael Mann. You can see the beginnings of that iconic 80s TV show, in this movie which favors long scenes of action being edited to music with sparse dialog. Caan squares off against Tom Signorelli a local mob boss who dares to threaten Caan's wife played by Tuesday Weld.

[boxboxblog]

COTA 2024: Sprint Q2

Let's go, Q2.

So just to reiterate, biggest surprise of SQ1 was the two Haas' getting into Q2, Lawson being ahead of Tsunoda, and Piastri being knocked out. This was due to a time deletion after going over track limits, but he had been significantly slower than Norris. Just shows how important track limits will be. Ferrari so far has had the speed, especially Leclerc. This could be due to being one of the few teams to not bring upgrades.

Let's go.

Drivers still on mediums, they are lining up to start. Haas and Mercedes first out, to avoid traffic. They should be the first to put a time on the board. Russell and Hamilton start flying laps first, and Hamilton jumps ahead with Russell second. No one else has gone yet, though. Leclerc and Sainz go, and it's a Ferrari sandwich with Hamilton in the middle. Sainz 1st, Leclerc 3rd. Norris gets in right behind Russell, and he is followed by Colapinto and Magnussen.

Verstappen out, and so far looks like he is having a great lap. Jumps up right behind Sainz. Not a terribly aggressive lap, but a great time regardless. Perez also jumps out, and puts himself up to tenth, but is at risk. All of the drivers in drop have not put in a lap, so Perez could be out in SQ2. So far Alonso, Stroll, Gasly, Lawson, and Tsunoda with no time. Gasly stays in drop, Tsunoda jumps to 10 and eliminates Perez. Lawson stays in drop. Stroll and Alonso both stay in drop.

Drivers eliminated in no particular order:

Perez

Stroll

Alonso

Lawson

Gasly

Next is SQ3.

Cheers,

-B

[summerstrash]

Options for how Alex is the secret traitor in the upcoming X-Factor #2, given the solicit that dropped yesterday:

Option #1: Genuinely Scheming

Option #2: The Other Alex

Option #3: Down Bad Again

Option #4: Possession/Brainwashing

See below the readmore for my more lengthy thoughts about each, but right now, my money's on option #4.

Option #1: Genuinely Scheming

This is the option for Alex genuinely agreeing with Lorna's goals and feeding her info. This is technically possible given the way the solicit is worded, but it feels unlikely because Alex never chooses the non-institutional side of a conflict of his own free will. He will always choose a comfortable bed and incrementalist change within the system over liberationary terrorism when given the choice; it's just who he is. So I can't imagine him playing spy on purpose in a way that would risk his creature comforts.

Option #2: The Other Alex

This option is for Alex's dissociative disorder from Hellions coming back with a vengeance after the fall of Krakoa and whatever events put him in the gutter in Malibu, and while vanilla Alex has no idea he's dissociating, his violent, ruthless counterpart is feeding Lorna and her group info and possibly working more directly with them. This is possible, but I doubt it because Alex's disorder didn't really manifest in a way conducive to this kind of plotting before, because alter!Alex is kind of an immediate action violence kind of guy, not a schemer.

Option #3: Down Bad Again

In this option, Alex has reunited with Lorna in some fashion and is giving her information about what X-Factor is doing, not knowing she's using that info to further her group's goals, and thus the reveal in #2 is that Lorna has been leading this group and using him. This is entirely possible, considering Alex's down-badness is chronic and terminal, and all Lorna would have to do is act like she needs him, and he'd roll right over. I don't like it, though, because Alex/Lorna is my least favorite Alex relationship, and rehashing it again is not something Lorna deserves to have to endure. She's a fucking PhD now, she shouldn't have to have her role in the story be about how she and Alex are fucking again and it's causing him problems.

Option #4: Possession/Brainwashing

In this option, someone in Lorna's camp, with or without her knowledge and blessing, has possessed or brainwashed Alex in order to infiltrate X-Factor. I think this is the most likely option, because it keeps Alex from doing anything ethically dubious while still allowing for the betrayal plotline, and keeping it from Alex's knowledge that he's doing this. Alex also has a long and storied history of being brainwashed and used against his teammates, so like, it's kind of a classic trope for him now. My specific sub-theories here are:

A) Malice has joined up with Lorna and is doing what she does best, possibly without Lorna's knowledge. I like this theory because Alex being possessed by Malice would mirror the nostalgic 80s & 90s Malice possessions, and it would inevitably give me more lesbian Alex subtext to work with.

B) Alternatively, The Exes Have Unionized, and Maddie is manipulating Alex psychically because she and Lorna are working together to further Lorna's liberatory goals. If this is what happened, it's entirely possible that Maddie dumping Alex, which i think is what lead to his Malibu gutter era, was part of the plot, and I think that's a strong possibility, given the way Maddie treats Alex in Dark X-Men as a sort of pet or object, and how we don't really have an in-built reason for her to decide to dump him.

Either way, I'm curious as to which option Russell's chosen here, and nervous about what Alex is about to be compelled to do, but I'm feeling a little more positively than you might expect, given my typical opinions and thoughts.

I'm just hoping that, whatever happens, Alex gets some, like, genuine characterization and development out of it, rather than just reiterating everything the Krakoan Era did with him, which was to use him as a plot device and crutch for other characters' development rather than his own.

But, well, we'll see, won't we.

[ghostartistrandomness]

I’m getting back into Doctor Who again! And I just gotta scream into the void because I’m so excited for how the new series is going! Be warned, minor spoilers! And also opinions, so please don’t get mad at me for having them. Reply or not, even if this gets not a single note, I just can’t not post this somewhere. It is a loooong audhd-fueled 1am ramble so yeah don’t mind me lol.

I got into Doctor Who about a decade ago. I was in middle school. A friend convinced me to watch it. And WOW, I loved it like the little middle schooler I was. I loved (and still love) those first four seasons. Those are defining parts of my childhood. There’s something magical about them.

But then… season 5 came along. The writing team changed. I could tell the moment that first episode played that the vibes were off. Something was different. Matt Smith did an excellent job, don’t get me wrong. But just… the vibes, the storylines, they just lost me. I get why most people like them, but the show changed. Season 7 came and I actually do prefer it to 5 and 6. Please, don’t hate me. A bit of the magic came back by then, but that was really cause it lost that really weird vibe the entire early 2010s had. It still wasn’t perfect. I got to Season 8 and it continued improving a bit. By the time I watched it, season 9 was about to come out, and I liked it even more, especially watching it live. Season 9 less so.

I lost it at season 10, and completely stopped season 11. Stopped watching live. Tried catching up later on, but the writing team had changed again. The vibes were all wrong all over again, and even worse this time. I don’t have high standards. The stories themselves don’t have to be perfect, as long as the writing is consistent and keeps the vibes I like. It killed my motivation the first time in season 5, and destroyed it for season 11. I didn’t even get halfway through season 12.

Now, the 10th Doctor has always been my favorite. Back in the day, I’d be called a David Tennant loyalist. And I do love his portrayal of the Doctor, and I always thought that was that. But the thing is, I do also with we got more 9th Doctor in the show. I always thought I just wasn’t a fan of the newer actors. Maybe my disdain for change gave me too much bias against the new actors that played the character. Well… that was part of it. But it had nothing to do with the actors.

I watched the 3-part specials a couple nights ago.

The magic is back. I was struck by my childhood seeing the 10th (well, 14th) Doctor and Donna together again! Literally felt like I was back in season 4! The characters, the story, the emotion and soul of the show was all back. It was as if nothing changed.

It didn’t stop at the specials lol. Besides the ending being so incredible it was the best closure I have ever gotten out of every TV show I have ever watched (a ramble for another longpost), it carried onto the main series, which is now the *new* season 1. I’m only five episodes in… and I feel like I’m back there as a kid watching the first four seasons all over!

I discovered it’s not who is playing the Doctor. I’ll like the show either way. It is the writing that counts. And yes, while the 10th Doctor will still most likely remain my favorite (nostalgia helps with that), as long as the writing fits the *vibes* I’ll be happy with the show. And the vibes are all here! Russel T Davies is the head writer again. I get that way back in the day, the head writers were a topic of debate, and I hope I don’t give out that impression in my text. I genuinely believe it’s his writing direction that really puts those perfect *vibes* into the show, the vibes that I fell in love with, the vibes that really speak to me. IMDB ratings of the show are iffy, so I must reiterate that my storyline standards are low in case the real fans’ consensus is that the show is bad or something like that. It’s the vibes that I took issue with, and the vibes that are bringing me back in.

What are vibes, you ask? Well… I can’t explain. They’re called vibes for a reason lol. They’re the general feel of the show. And it’s back. The vibes are back. The writing of all the characters has the right vibes. The stories have the right vibes. There’s a certain magic in the show again! Aaaaaagh it’s so good! It’s all so good!