#scuffles 2002

[hockeytown-gifs]

Grind Line Glimpse - Wings @ Avs - May 22, 2002

[charlidos]

Just wanna let you know that i Love these little deep dives you are posting here about viggo and orlando. I wasnt around that time so it is rlly interesting to read all that info together

I'm glad you're enjoying it just like I am! I'm really finding it fascinating to look back like this, with all the hindsight you have 20-25 years later.

I was aware of them back then, but only marginally. Like for so many people, seeing Viggo being accosted by an adorable wild child was the first time I ever considered these two together.

It was an eye opener, to say the least. I remember seeing this clip, way back when (but still, not until maybe 2002?), and just thinking, ahhhhhhhh! Or something eloquent like that. I might also have thought something about Orlando being a terribly adorable, naughty boy. And with Viggo looking so very pleased but shy, both seemingly completely smitten by Orlando's childish antics, but also a little reluctant and trying to be the responsible adult (after giving in to a little flirty scuffle). The dynamic was completely fascinating from the start.

But I also remember, very distinctly, seeing these pics of Elijah jumping Orlando, and loving it. Maybe I loved this a bit more back then, to be honest. And it's still one of the cutest red carpet greetings ever, one must agree. I certainly shipped these two upon seeing this. They were just too cute!

Those first LotR-events were wild, weren't they? Like they didn't quite know yet what impact everything they did had. Like they just continued being just as they'd been on set. Rowdy, happy, boundless, loving. Not caring what it looked like. It was a beautiful thing.

[nicomrade]

Stupeflip (2003) / Interpol - Turn On The Bright Lights (2002) / Bayside (2005) Sir Chloe - Party Favors (2020) / Anri - Timely!! (1983) / Plumtree - Mass Teen Fainting (1995) Everything Everything - Get To Heaven (2015) / Peach Pit - Being So Normal (2018) / Nine Inch Nails - Pretty Hate Machine (1989)

was tagged by @scuffle-with-spirals for 9 albums ive been listening to ! ^-^ technically its been a while since my last mass teen fainting full litsen & another one probably shouldve made the cut instead but the woman/man ratio is already abyssmal im not kicking out plumtree for a buncha GUYS...

i will taaag i will tag @fullmoondagger @roublardise @albertbreasker @27thfirefly to start. and @diaphonisation @unmovingtroika because i like u two's music taste give me album recs

[vampirecave]

I saw your little call for tma OCs and oooo do I have a blorbo for you

This is Aleksi. They are an avatar of the eye the works along side Elias (not for the institute, they actually don’t like Elias they think he’s fuckin weird but they are a nosey ass bitch so they’ll do “favors” in exchange for access to info) they’re an only child from a pretty rich family. they are visually in their late 20s though I haven’t solidified anything except they were 18 in 2002 (which would make them specifically not late 20s teehee) they were first marked by the fears bc they were a competitive gymnast that was exceeding their current coach’s level of skill so they went searching for a new one and found a woman in London named Katrine Hoss, she was an avatar of the spiral (affected by a leitner like Jared). She had her own weird shit going on but Aleksi ignored 90% of it. She started training Aleksi and after a short time they started rapidly exceeding their skill level and their body started to change (twinkified basically, they weren’t always that tall) with the occasional vague traumatic experience happening during practices and (about a year or two later) after their dad got into a verbal scuffle with katrine about not being enough for their kid some even whackier shit started to happen, their dad died and the same leitner that affected Katrine was found by Aleksi shortly after their dad’s death, obvious connections were made and Aleksi quit competing and practically threw themselves into figuring out wtf was up with this “magic” book, que them finding the institute and Elias stinking a deal since he was able to tell Aleksi was already marked by the spiral. They typically play with the memories of institute employees to make them think he’s worked there forever so he doesn’t have to worry about questions, around season 3 when Jon goes a searching for avatars and gets more knowing powers he figures out Aleksi isn’t actually an employee and just fuckin weird. Little details aren’t ironed out, but I’ve got the big picture and I love my little blorbo. Oh hes also a bit of a sassy ass (and a flirt, but just to make people mildly uncomfy and question themselves. They think it’s funny) and they’ve got a bit of a temper but you wouldn’t be able to tell until they blow a fuse and they’ve kinda got weird triggers for said fuse. Love me a loose cannon. I didn’t realize how much I just info dumped about this until just now lol, I hope you enjoy. :)

i took one look at the "(glorified gaslighting)" in one of the refs and instantly knew i was gonna love this guy

[jobaaj]

The 500-year wait is over! Lord Ram is home!! Check out the full timeline:🔽🔽 - 1528: According to the history books, Babur's general Mir Baq was in charge of constructing the Babri masjid at the place where Lord Ram was born. The old temple was destroyed to construct the mosque.

- 1530-65: Unverified reports suggest communal violence over the Mandir-Masjid debate and Akbar, the then Mughal ruler, set up a common platform for worship. - 1853-85: After almost 330 years, communal violence erupts again. The British Empire sets up partitions and Mahant Das’s plea to build a canopy above the platform is denied. - 1949: The turning point comes when the idol of Lord Ram appears from inside the mosque. According to Muslims, the idol was placed inside the mosque by a radical Hindu outfit. As both parties file multiple lawsuits, the situation gets more complicated.

- 1950-61: Multiple lawsuits are filed and other parties join the fray with both sides claiming the land as theirs. - 1983-1989: The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) starts a nationwide move to build a temple and legal tensions flare up. Muslims set up the Babri Masjid Committee and the former VP of the VHP files a suit on behalf of Lord Ram to get possession and the first stone for the temple is laid. - 1990: BJP leader Lal Krishna Advani’s Rath Yatra from Somnath to Ayodhya saw thousands of volunteers march as they partially damaged the mosque in a scuffle that left scores dead. - 1992: The bloodiest event in the Mandir-Masjid dispute as Hindu volunteers demolish the mosque and a bloody battle erupts throughout the nation. Over 2,000 were reported dead. A small tent is set up where the idol is placed for worship. - 2002: PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee sets up an Ayodhya cell and the Allahabad HC judges begin determining ownership of the site. - 2003: The Archaeological Survey of India begins surveying the area and a survey reveals the existence of a temple’s remains beneath the mosque. Muslims challenge the findings as tensions continue. - 2010: The disputed land is split into 3 parts where one went to the Hindus, another to the Muslims, and the final one to the Nirmohi Akhara. - 2011: All 3 parties approach the Supreme Court to challenge the Allahabad HC’s judgment and the SC issues a stay on the order. - 2015-18: The SC removes all irrelevant parties from the lawsuit as the matter gets more sensitive during that time. - 2019: After a failed mediation attempt, a five-judge bench announces a judgment in favor of the Hindus, and the Muslims are allotted 5 acres for the construction of another mosque. - 2020: PM Narendra Modi lays the foundation stone for the construction alongside a commemorative plaque and a special postage stamp. - 22nd January 2024: The temple is officially consecrated and Lord Ram, who has been in a tent since 1992, is unveiled for worship in a state-of-the-art temple. Follow Jobaaj Stories (the Media arm of Jobaaj.com Group) for more.

[problemsynth]

Realizing as I map out a small project. Sol has spent the vast majority of her existence deeply unhappy and needing therapy...

Like...

1984- born oblivious to the world.

1994- still mostly happy. Mostly oblivious to the horrors in the bg. But very aware of her social isolation.

1995- grieving. Thinks her mom is dead. Her dad's efforts to train her increase. And she is aware something is deeply wrong, but it's all she's ever known and the only person she knows is her dad now.

1996- learns her mom is not dead witnesses the horrors her father has been doing. Makes a deal with a literal monster to escape. Her dads killed (good) her house goes up in flames (for the best tbh), and then her mom unable to cope actually dies. Leaving her heavily traumatized with a man who she's been trained to believe is the most horrific kind of monster.

1997- she just sort of accepts that this man she's not entirely sure about will raise her. Gets better at hiding that she's still very much afraid of him develops this strange relationship where she's entirely certain he's just going to kill her one day but he's also her father now and she loves him. (Spends the next several decades internalizing this and never bringing it up to anyone)

2001- nearly starts her first real relationship with an anarch girl who got killed a few months later in a scuffle with the cam. And is promptly shipped off to college in a new state so she's not in danger from the full on sect war that follows (for a variety of reasons) and has to grieve while preparing for school.

2002- starts college. Meets her girlfriend proceeds to have some of the happiest times of her life for two and a half years.

2004- gets embraced forced to fake her death and leave all those happy times behind.

2005- starts spiraling hard into several full blown addictions.

2014- gets so bad her dad decides to take her to her old city to get clean and restart.

2015- angry and messy and snapping at everyone as she begrudgingly tries to get clean. The general consensus from the people around her is "hot but too much of a mess to get too close to"

2018- finally clean (of hard drugs. Light drugs are still used) not terribly happy about it but she's starting to get her shit back together. People still hesitate to make more than small talk with her.

2020- pandemic. Unimpressed but staying in her lane. Surface level friendships but nothing deep.

2021- sent off on a road trip because shit hit the fan and her dad didn't want her to be a part of it/in danger.

2022- meets mouse and the rest of her coterie and after a rough start develops some good healthy friendships and starts her first relationship since 2004. Starts the steps to believing she can live a happy unlife.

2023- mental health back to zero as she's once again bannished from her home city away from her friends and family and loved ones.

2024-present day going through the horrors. Meeting her only gf, gaining a new one. Not entirely sure if she deserves to put her life back together. Just a mess of guilt and trauma trying her best.

[zedechemist]

— IN A WORLD WHERE...

'Zed never had his high-school chemistry accident.'

...THE ALTERNATIVE SEPTEMBER 12TH, 1994.

— Zed never attended the chemistry class where the accident that nearly cost him his arm occurred. He never took an interest in chemistry, or acids, nor pharmaceuticals. He does not have a disfigured, or burn scar across his forearm and lower hand. — Instead, he was off sick with a common cold. his Uncle Joseph had come over to talk business with his side of the family. Zed had listened in; learning; questioning his potential position in the family — subsequently following in similar footsteps as the rest of the Movska brood. — But he wasn't quite Fox News material. Instead, he pursued editing; easily accessible for an underachiever with the connections his family does.

— THE RIPPLE EFFECT...

— '94-1995; Zed finished his high school diploma, deciding to take a late interest in the media world his family seemed to thrive in. — 1997; By not attending further education; no college; no pharmaceutical degree; no Ph.D. Zed was not in the same scientific circles. He did not attend physics, or chemistry conventions. Therefore, he did not meet Rahi Kumar who would have been his best friend throughout his life, and career. — Late 1997; He and his cousin Lev's difficult and sometimes unhinged relationship became easier; Zed was not an overachieving intellect. He was another Movska in media chasing some sort of prestige. — 1998; Somehow ends up childminding his five year old cousin Diana Movska more frequently as his family's work progresses. He works out empathy among his family — and briefly considers his own future with a family of his own. — 2000; There is a 0.6% increase in the fatality rate within Affina Biotechnologies in a two year period; totalling 60 more deaths due to an inexperienced chemist taking a position. [ a contract Zed would have taken. ] — 2001; Zed attempts to cover the story everyone else is. — 2002; he interviews for WNBC, dabbling in radio before he lands a position in the New York Post, opting towards print media. He gets his own intern. — The rest of 2002; The intern is the worst. Lev and Zed make continuous jokes about his inevitable departure. — 2003-'06; He balances a life between New York and Russia whilst he scarcely misses out on a promotion due to the mysterious disappearance of his intern. He refuses to hire another. — 2008; Zed [And Lev] purchases a chinatown apartment. — 2009; He moves into an executive chair. — 2010; Zed does not meet what would be his colleagues, and residents at consultant hospitals, or Columbia university. There is no Kamilah Marques or Gus Amado in his professional life. — 2011; There is an underground scuffle between druglords that Zed is never present for. Instead of diffusing the majority of it, there is bloodshed. Four people are fatally wounded, and six injured. He never encounters Oz Saffet. Cops are called to a scene. They attempt to find medical attention that before Zed would have assisted with. Three are arrested and charged. One passes. The rest survive and go into hiding. The New York Times beat the Post to the scoop. — 2014; He stays in New York for the entire year. — Early 2015; he briefly dates the NYP's CFO. It ends pretty amicably. — 2015; Zed becomes COO, and is content with the position. — 2017; There is a decrease in toxicity in American Regent's latest quick-fix for migraine treatment by 0.2%, nearly two dozen benefit from the new chemistry. [Zed never altered it for a '17 hire job. ] — 2020-'23; He remains COO of the NYP.

— THE RESULT

— Anyone who knew Zed through scientific, medical or pharmaceutical means very likely will not know him now. His morbidity was more than skin deep, but he did not have such a vicious means of dispatch at his disposal, instead opting for media reckoning and political damning. — He will be more light-hearted — mostly — and far more approachable as a media mogul. There is almost a 0% risk of him threatening to end one via chemical warfare. He is not nearly as intelligent; he is not a professor, or doctor in the AU. — He will now edit your pieces to death if you hand him any documentation. — More familial orientated — if that were possible, considers himself fairly close with them. — May even make a joke, and laugh.

[asexualgilliontidestrider]

hihello rotating villain ashe its such a fun concept to play with. do you have any info about your ideas that i can Consume Completely im looking so hard

RRRRAAGAGHHHHHH HIIIIIIIIIII HI HI HELLO.. ok ok so . most of my headcanons for this au surround william wight because he is just so fucking full of character already but villain ashe. yeag. ok. he really turned into more of an OC than anything because im insane and also we never saw villain ashe in the what-if </3

ok ok oko k ok. villain!ashe is definitely sooo much closer to his dad in this au than he is in PD, just by virtue of solidarity. mark probably hates the idea that ashe wants to be a villain like him, but ashe pretty much acts as a minor villain on her own so like. might as well supervise him right?

ashe still kills his mom in this au with the book he has, but after that incident, however, she completely stops using it except for in emergencies (if someone needs quick healing or if he needs to be able to do something he cant normally do to help). william meets ashe because hes trying to steal ashe's book for mal, since mal knows what kind of power it holds. they get into a scuffle over it but dakota and william (and vyncent too, but only because he has to) end up teaming up to beat the hero that ashe and wavelength are dealing with the agreement that theyll deal with this after.

ashe, despite not using the book often, still doesnt want to give it up. he knows how useful it is in a pinch and even though he fears the day where he fucks up and hurts someone he loves again, hes not willing to part with it.

they end up teaming up because william bargains with ashe that hey, ashe could keep his book if he just goes to the spirit world with them and lets mal read it every so often before giving it back (or whatever. he doesnt even really know if mal will give the damn thing back but he doesnt really care)

ashe would probably name herself either some cringey villain sidekick thing similar to wavelength like idk. hertz. or echo or rewind or something idfk. OR. something edgy and over the top for a literal 17 year old sidekick of a pretty well known villain like uhhh. Plague or Black Thunder or Surge or Incognito or something. yeag. she is in my brain.

also just a little additional headcanon: people on the internet hate her! this boygirl can doxx you from one picture taken of you at your school prom in 2002 that got posted to facebook and will send death threats to your home address!

[thewebsiteicu]

Table of Contents

The Top 10 Most Watched Fights in NFL History

Revisiting the Most Controversial Fights in NFL History

The Most Memorable Fights in NFL History

The Most Intense Fights in NFL History

The Most Entertaining Fights in NFL History

The Most Notorious Fights in NFL History

The Most Unforgettable Fights in NFL History

The Most Shocking Fights in NFL History

The Most Controversial Fights in NFL History

The Most Iconic Fights in NFL History

“Witness the Greatest NFL Fights of All Time!”

The Top 10 Most Watched Fights in NFL History

1. Super Bowl XLIX: New England Patriots vs. Seattle Seahawks (2015) – This thrilling Super Bowl matchup between the Patriots and Seahawks was watched by an estimated 114.4 million viewers, making it the most watched NFL game in history.

2. Super Bowl XLVIII: Seattle Seahawks vs. Denver Broncos (2014) – This Super Bowl matchup between the Seahawks and Broncos was watched by an estimated 112.2 million viewers, making it the second most watched NFL game in history.

3. Super Bowl XLVI: New York Giants vs. New England Patriots (2012) – This Super Bowl matchup between the Giants and Patriots was watched by an estimated 111.3 million viewers, making it the third most watched NFL game in history.

4. Super Bowl XLVII: Baltimore Ravens vs. San Francisco 49ers (2013) – This Super Bowl matchup between the Ravens and 49ers was watched by an estimated 108.7 million viewers, making it the fourth most watched NFL game in history.

5. Super Bowl XLV: Green Bay Packers vs. Pittsburgh Steelers (2011) – This Super Bowl matchup between the Packers and Steelers was watched by an estimated 106.5 million viewers, making it the fifth most watched NFL game in history.

6. Super Bowl XLIV: New Orleans Saints vs. Indianapolis Colts (2010) – This Super Bowl matchup between the Saints and Colts was watched by an estimated 106.0 million viewers, making it the sixth most watched NFL game in history.

7. Super Bowl XLIII: Pittsburgh Steelers vs. Arizona Cardinals (2009) – This Super Bowl matchup between the Steelers and Cardinals was watched by an estimated 98.7 million viewers, making it the seventh most watched NFL game in history.

8. Super Bowl XLII: New York Giants vs. New England Patriots (2008) – This Super Bowl matchup between the Giants and Patriots was watched by an estimated 97.5 million viewers, making it the eighth most watched NFL game in history.

9. Super Bowl XLI: Indianapolis Colts vs. Chicago Bears (2007) – This Super Bowl matchup between the Colts and Bears was watched by an estimated 93.2 million viewers, making it the ninth most watched NFL game in history.

10. Super Bowl XXXVIII: New England Patriots vs. Carolina Panthers (2004) – This Super Bowl matchup between the Patriots and Panthers was watched by an estimated 90.7 million viewers, making it the tenth most watched NFL game in history.

Revisiting the Most Controversial Fights in NFL History

The National Football League (NFL) has been home to some of the most thrilling and memorable moments in sports history. However, it has also been the site of some of the most controversial fights in sports history. From on-field brawls to locker room scuffles, these fights have sparked debates and divided fans for decades. Here, we take a look back at some of the most controversial fights in NFL history.

The first fight on our list is the infamous “Bounty Bowl” between the Philadelphia Eagles and Dallas Cowboys in 1989. The game was marred by a series of fights between the two teams, with the most notable being a brawl between Eagles defensive lineman Jerome Brown and Cowboys offensive lineman Nate Newton. The fight was so intense that it resulted in both players being ejected from the game.

The second fight on our list is the infamous “Monday Night Meltdown” between the San Francisco 49ers and the New York Giants in 2002. The game was marred by a series of fights between the two teams, with the most notable being a brawl between 49ers wide receiver Terrell Owens and Giants safety Shaun Williams. The fight was so intense that it resulted in both players being ejected from the game.

The third fight on our list is the infamous “Brawl in Motown” between the Detroit Lions and the Green Bay Packers in 2006. The game was marred by a series of fights between the two teams, with the most notable being a brawl between Lions wide receiver Roy Williams and Packers cornerback Al Harris. The fight was so intense that it resulted in both players being ejected from the game.

These three fights are some of the most controversial in NFL history. They have sparked debates and divided fans for decades. While some argue that these fights are a part of the game, others argue that they are a sign of a lack of sportsmanship and professionalism. Whatever your opinion may be, these fights will continue to be remembered for years to come.

The Most Memorable Fights in NFL History

The National Football League (NFL) has seen its fair share of memorable fights over the years. From bench-clearing brawls to individual scuffles, these moments have become part of the game’s lore. Here are some of the most memorable fights in NFL history.

The first fight on this list is the infamous “Bounty Bowl” between the Philadelphia Eagles and Dallas Cowboys in 1989. The two teams had a long-standing rivalry and tensions boiled over during the game. The Eagles were accused of offering a bounty to any player who could knock Cowboys quarterback Troy Aikman out of the game. This led to a bench-clearing brawl that resulted in multiple ejections and fines.

Another memorable fight occurred in 2006 between the Denver Broncos and the Oakland Raiders. The two teams had a long-standing rivalry and tensions boiled over during the game. Broncos safety John Lynch was ejected after a scuffle with Raiders wide receiver Jerry Porter. The fight resulted in multiple fines and suspensions for both teams.

The most recent fight on this list occurred in 2018 between the Jacksonville Jaguars and the Buffalo Bills. The two teams were involved in a heated exchange of words that eventually led to a brawl. Multiple players were ejected and fined for their involvement in the fight.

These are just a few of the most memorable fights in NFL history. While these moments may have been chaotic, they have become part of the game’s lore and will be remembered for years to come.

The Most Intense Fights in NFL History

The National Football League (NFL) is renowned for its intense physicality and thrilling action. Throughout its history, the NFL has seen some of the most intense and memorable fights between players. Here are some of the most intense fights in NFL history.

The first fight on this list is between the San Francisco 49ers and the Dallas Cowboys in the 1994 NFC Championship game. This fight began when Cowboys defensive lineman Leon Lett and 49ers offensive lineman Bart Oates got into a shoving match. The altercation quickly escalated, with players from both teams joining in. The fight ended with several players being ejected from the game.

The second fight on this list is between the New York Jets and the New England Patriots in the 2011 AFC Divisional Playoff game. This fight began when Jets offensive lineman D’Brickashaw Ferguson and Patriots defensive lineman Vince Wilfork got into a shoving match. The altercation quickly escalated, with players from both teams joining in. The fight ended with several players being ejected from the game.

The third fight on this list is between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Cleveland Browns in the 2002 AFC Wild Card game. This fight began when Steelers defensive lineman Kimo von Oelhoffen and Browns offensive lineman Ross Verba got into a shoving match. The altercation quickly escalated, with players from both teams joining in. The fight ended with several players being ejected from the game.

The fourth fight on this list is between the Oakland Raiders and the Denver Broncos in the 2011 Monday Night Football game. This fight began when Raiders defensive lineman Richard Seymour and Broncos offensive lineman Zane Beadles got into a shoving match. The altercation quickly escalated, with players from both teams joining in. The fight ended with several players being ejected from the game.

The fifth fight on this list is between the Philadelphia Eagles and the Washington Redskins in the 2006 Monday Night Football game. This fight began when Eagles defensive lineman Hollis Thomas and Redskins offensive lineman Jon Jansen got into a shoving match. The altercation quickly escalated, with players from both teams joining in. The fight ended with several players being ejected from the game.

These five fights are some of the most intense in NFL history. They demonstrate the physicality and intensity of the NFL, and show why it is one of the most popular sports leagues in the world.

The Most Entertaining Fights in NFL History

The National Football League (NFL) has provided fans with some of the most entertaining fights in sports history. From bench-clearing brawls to individual scuffles, these fights have become part of the NFL’s legacy. Here are some of the most memorable fights in NFL history.

The first fight on the list is the infamous “Bounty Bowl” between the Philadelphia Eagles and the Dallas Cowboys in 1989. The game was filled with trash-talking and hard hits, and it eventually boiled over into a full-scale brawl. The fight was so intense that the referees had to stop the game and eject several players.

The second fight on the list is the “Monday Night Miracle” between the New York Jets and the Miami Dolphins in 2000. This game was filled with hard hits and trash-talking, and it eventually led to a fight between Jets linebacker Mo Lewis and Dolphins running back Lamar Smith. The fight was so intense that the referees had to stop the game and eject both players.

The third fight on the list is the “Brawl in Motown” between the Detroit Lions and the Green Bay Packers in 2006. This game was filled with hard hits and trash-talking, and it eventually led to a fight between Lions defensive tackle Shaun Rogers and Packers offensive lineman Daryn Colledge. The fight was so intense that the referees had to stop the game and eject both players.

The fourth fight on the list is the “Battle of the Bay” between the San Francisco 49ers and the Oakland Raiders in 2011. This game was filled with hard hits and trash-talking, and it eventually led to a fight between 49ers defensive tackle Justin Smith and Raiders offensive lineman Stefen Wisniewski. The fight was so intense that the referees had to stop the game and eject both players.

These four fights are some of the most memorable in NFL history. They are a testament to the intensity and passion of the players and fans of the NFL.

The Most Notorious Fights in NFL History

The National Football League (NFL) is one of the most popular sports leagues in the world, and its games are often characterized by intense competition and physicality. Throughout its history, the NFL has seen some of the most notorious fights between players, coaches, and even fans. Here are some of the most memorable brawls in NFL history.

The first fight on this list occurred in 2006 between the Denver Broncos and the Oakland Raiders. During the game, a scuffle broke out between the two teams, resulting in a full-on brawl. Players from both teams were involved, and the fight even spilled into the stands, where fans got involved. The fight resulted in multiple suspensions and fines for the players involved.

The second fight on this list occurred in 2009 between the San Diego Chargers and the Oakland Raiders. During the game, a fight broke out between the two teams, resulting in a full-on brawl. Players from both teams were involved, and the fight even spilled into the stands, where fans got involved. The fight resulted in multiple suspensions and fines for the players involved.

The third fight on this list occurred in 2011 between the New York Jets and the New England Patriots. During the game, a scuffle broke out between the two teams, resulting in a full-on brawl. Players from both teams were involved, and the fight even spilled into the stands, where fans got involved. The fight resulted in multiple suspensions and fines for the players involved.

The fourth fight on this list occurred in 2014 between the San Francisco 49ers and the Oakland Raiders. During the game, a scuffle broke out between the two teams, resulting in a full-on brawl. Players from both teams were involved, and the fight even spilled into the stands, where fans got involved. The fight resulted in multiple suspensions and fines for the players involved.

The fifth fight on this list occurred in 2018 between the Jacksonville Jaguars and the Buffalo Bills. During the game, a scuffle broke out between the two teams, resulting in a full-on brawl. Players from both teams were involved, and the fight even spilled into the stands, where fans got involved. The fight resulted in multiple suspensions and fines for the players involved.

These five fights are some of the most notorious in NFL history. They demonstrate the intensity and physicality of the game, and the consequences of getting involved in a fight. While these fights are certainly memorable, they are also a reminder of the importance of sportsmanship and respect in the NFL.

The Most Unforgettable Fights in NFL History

The National Football League (NFL) has seen its fair share of memorable fights over the years. From bench-clearing brawls to individual scuffles, these moments have become part of the game’s lore. Here are some of the most unforgettable fights in NFL history.

The first fight on the list is the infamous “Bounty Bowl” between the Philadelphia Eagles and Dallas Cowboys in 1989. The game was marred by a series of fights, with the most notable being between Eagles defensive lineman Jerome Brown and Cowboys offensive lineman Nate Newton. Brown and Newton exchanged punches and had to be separated by teammates. The fight was so intense that it caused a bench-clearing brawl.

Another memorable fight occurred in 2006 between the Denver Broncos and San Francisco 49ers. The fight began when Broncos safety John Lynch and 49ers wide receiver Arnaz Battle got into a shoving match. The altercation quickly escalated and resulted in a full-scale brawl between the two teams. The fight was so intense that it resulted in several players being ejected from the game.

The last fight on the list is the infamous “Monday Night Football” brawl between the Oakland Raiders and Denver Broncos in 2009. The fight began when Raiders defensive lineman Richard Seymour punched Broncos quarterback Jay Cutler in the face. The altercation quickly escalated and resulted in a full-scale brawl between the two teams. The fight was so intense that it resulted in several players being ejected from the game.

These fights are some of the most unforgettable moments in NFL history. They are a reminder of the intensity and passion that the game of football can bring out in its players.

The Most Shocking Fights in NFL History

The National Football League (NFL) is known for its intense physicality and thrilling action, but sometimes the intensity spills over into the realm of violence. Over the years, there have been some truly shocking fights that have taken place on the field. Here are some of the most memorable and shocking fights in NFL history.

The first fight on this list occurred in 2006 between the Tennessee Titans and the Houston Texans. During the game, Titans defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth viciously stomped on the head of Texans offensive lineman Andre Gurode. Haynesworth was suspended for five games and fined $35,000 for the incident.

The second fight on this list happened in 2011 between the San Francisco 49ers and the Oakland Raiders. During the game, a brawl broke out between the two teams, resulting in multiple players being ejected. The fight was so intense that it even spilled into the stands, with fans getting involved in the altercation.

The third fight on this list occurred in 2006 between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Cleveland Browns. During the game, Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger and Browns defensive lineman Shaun Smith got into a heated altercation that resulted in punches being thrown. Roethlisberger was fined $5,000 for his role in the fight.

The fourth fight on this list happened in 2009 between the New York Jets and the New England Patriots. During the game, Jets head coach Rex Ryan and Patriots head coach Bill Belichick got into a heated argument that resulted in both coaches being fined $50,000 each.

The fifth fight on this list occurred in 2006 between the Cincinnati Bengals and the Cleveland Browns. During the game, Bengals wide receiver Chad Johnson and Browns defensive back Gary Baxter got into a physical altercation that resulted in punches being thrown. Both players were fined $25,000 for their roles in the fight.

These five fights are some of the most shocking and memorable in NFL history. They serve as a reminder of the intensity and physicality of the game, and the consequences that can come with it.

The Most Controversial Fights in NFL History

The National Football League (NFL) has been a source of entertainment for millions of fans around the world for decades. While the game is often seen as a source of joy and excitement, it has also been the source of some of the most controversial fights in sports history. Here are some of the most controversial fights in NFL history.

The first fight on this list is the infamous “Bounty Bowl” between the Philadelphia Eagles and the Dallas Cowboys in 1989. During the game, Eagles coach Buddy Ryan allegedly offered a bounty to any player who could knock Cowboys quarterback Troy Aikman out of the game. The Cowboys were outraged and the NFL fined Ryan and the Eagles $50,000 each.

The second fight on this list is the “Monday Night Miracle” between the New York Jets and the Miami Dolphins in 2000. During the game, Jets defensive end Shaun Ellis and Dolphins offensive tackle Todd Wade got into a heated altercation that resulted in a bench-clearing brawl. Both teams were fined $50,000 and Ellis was suspended for one game.

The third fight on this list is the “Brawl in Motown” between the Detroit Lions and the Green Bay Packers in 2006. During the game, Lions defensive tackle Shaun Rogers and Packers offensive lineman Daryn Colledge got into a heated altercation that resulted in a bench-clearing brawl. Both teams were fined $25,000 and Rogers was suspended for two games.

The fourth fight on this list is the “Battle of the Bay” between the San Francisco 49ers and the Oakland Raiders in 2011. During the game, 49ers offensive lineman Anthony Davis and Raiders defensive tackle Richard Seymour got into a heated altercation that resulted in a bench-clearing brawl. Both teams were fined $20,000 and Davis was suspended for two games.

These four fights are some of the most controversial in NFL history. While they may have been entertaining for some, they also showed the darker side of the game and the potential for violence that can occur when emotions run high.

The Most Iconic Fights in NFL History

The National Football League (NFL) has seen its fair share of iconic fights over the years. From bench-clearing brawls to individual scuffles, these moments have become part of the NFL’s history. Here are some of the most iconic fights in NFL history.

The first iconic fight in NFL history occurred in 1976 between the Oakland Raiders and the Pittsburgh Steelers. The fight began when Steelers defensive tackle Ernie Holmes and Raiders offensive lineman Gene Upshaw got into a shoving match. The altercation quickly escalated, with both teams rushing onto the field and engaging in a full-scale brawl. The fight was so intense that the referees had to call a timeout to restore order.

Another iconic fight occurred in 1985 between the Washington Redskins and the New York Giants. The fight began when Redskins defensive lineman Dexter Manley and Giants offensive lineman Brad Benson got into a shoving match. The altercation quickly escalated, with both teams rushing onto the field and engaging in a full-scale brawl. The fight was so intense that the referees had to call a timeout to restore order.

The most iconic fight in NFL history occurred in 2006 between the Denver Broncos and the Oakland Raiders. The fight began when Broncos wide receiver Brandon Marshall and Raiders cornerback Fabian Washington got into a shoving match. The altercation quickly escalated, with both teams rushing onto the field and engaging in a full-scale brawl. The fight was so intense that the referees had to call a timeout to restore order.

These iconic fights have become part of the NFL’s history. They are remembered for their intensity and the way they captivated fans. While these fights may not be the most pleasant memories, they are certainly some of the most memorable moments in NFL history.

[mubashirnews]

India: Police and students clash as tensions rise over banned BBC documentary on PM Narendra Modi | World News

Tensions have escalated in India as police and students were involved in scuffles over a BBC documentary examining Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s role during the 2002 Gujarat riots. The second and final part of the series was screened in the UK on Tuesday evening, while authorities in the world’s biggest democracy have been trying to stop the controversial programme being aired across its…

[cinemaocd]

Underrated moment in film history in Possession 2002: the hilarious scuffle at the grave side between a bunch of angry academics. It's up there with It's Raining Men scene from that one Bridget Jones movie...

You know the agonies and the horrors are getting to you, when you long to spend the period of your confinement in a nunnery in Brittany.

[hockeytown-gifs]

Homer loses his temper - Wings @ Avs GAME 3 - May 22, 2002

[miserablesme]

The Les Miserables Changelog Part 3: 1987 Broadway Production

Hello, everyone! This is the latest edition in my attempt to chronicle all of the musical and lyrical changes which the show Les Miserables has undergone over the years. This time, we're going through all the changes between the musical as it existed on the West End around 1985-1986 and the revised libretto for the 1987 Broadway production.

In some ways, this is a much easier changelog to compile than the last two simply because it is much easier to find audio evidence of the show from this era than from its pre-1987 self. We have a full soundboard of the original Broadway cast as well as a very good quality bootleg of the very first Broadway preview, as well as several audios from the next few years which use exactly the same script. We also have an officially released Symphonic Soundtrack which almost (but not quite) follows this version of the libretto exactly. So no more relying on unclear bootlegs and speculation to figure out what was changed when!

Having said that, the changes in this production were MASSIVE. It's almost certainly the most extensive edit the show's libretto has received to this day. As such, this will be a very long edition of this blog. So make sure you have a bit of time on your hands before reading it! With all that cleared up, let's begin.

The first change literally can be heard as soon as the musical begins. The pre-Broadway show opens up with the same recurring motif also heard, for instance, at the openings of "At the End of the Day" and "One Day More". This music then transitioned to the instrumentals to the opening "Work Song". The post-Broadway libretto cuts right to the chase, with the opening instrumentals to the "Work Song" starting right up without any preamble.

One interesting little non-scripted change occurs later in the "Work Song", but only in American productions. For whatever reason, every American Javert from the original Broadway cast until the first Broadway revival sang "And I am Javert" instead of "And I'm Javert", for reasons that honestly baffle me. Again, the libretto retained the original contraption as far as I'm aware, and the West End production as well as later UK and Australian tours still used it as well.

The next change happens while Valjean is on parole. After Valjean pleads against the farmer underpaying him, this was the farmer's original response:

Do you believe

A yellow ticket of leave

Allows a criminal like you to earn full screw?

Since Broadway, his response is instead as follows:

You broke the law

It's there for people to see

Why should you get the same as honest men like me?

I much prefer this revised version. Though the information is essentially the same, it feels more dramatic, as well as feeling less awkward now that it is in the form of separate sentences as opposed to a single sentence spoken in three lines with pauses in between. Moreover, the phrase "honest men like me" as used here provides interesting foreshadowing for its more well-known usage in "Master of the House". One could spend quite some time analysing the implications of this recurring description, but this blog is long enough as it is so now isn't the time!

In the same number, originally the innkeeper's wife had the following remark:

My rooms are full

And I've no supper to spare

I'd like to help you really, all I want is to be fair

Since Broadway, her line has been slightly modified:

My rooms are full

And I've no supper to spare

I'd like to help a stranger, all we want is to be fair

I suppose "I'd like to help a stranger" sounds less slang-y than "help you really". Presumably this is why it was changed. I find the change of subject from singular to plural far more interesting. My hypothesis is that the writers wanted to make it clear than this is a communal grudge, not a personal one. Everyone around sees it as perfectly fair to deny shelter to a former convict, not just this one individual. I definitely prefer the revised line, but evidently the producers of the West End production didn't; that production held on to the original lyrics for more than a decade after they were originally revised! More on that in a later edition of this blog...

A more minor change can be heard during "At the End of the Day". Originally, Valjean asks the factor workers "What is this shouting all about?" The Broadway script changes this to "What is this fighting all about?" Much less trivial implications now. I'm curious as to whether or not a staging change may have accompanied this. Usually the two workers get into quite a bit of physical scuffle by this point, far beyond the realm of shouting. Did the original pre-Broadway production use more subdued choreography?

"The Runaway Cart" has some noticeable differences. After Valjean asks the townspeople for help, the original response was sung by the entire ensemble, and went as follows:

(SOLO)

Don't go near him, Monsieur Mayor

There's nothing at all you can do

(ENSEMBLE)

The old man is a goner for sure

Leave him alone

The Broadway libretto revised this into a sequence sung by one individual at a time with the following lyrics:

Don't go near him, Monsieur Mayor

The load is as heavy as hell

The old man is a goner for sure

It will kill you as well

A female ensemble member sung "The old man is a goner for sure" while a male member sung the rest. I sort of like it better as an ensemble piece (something that would be largely brought back in later years, as I'll soon discuss) although I think it's cool that it rhymes now. Having said that, I'm fairly confident that no one in the real world has ever actually used the phrase "Heavy as hell"!

An official change in the libretto occurred in "Who Am I?" but listeners to the original Broadway cast would not have heard it. While the pre-Broadway show had Valjean refer to "This innocent who bears my face", the revised libretto instead refers to "This innocent who wears my face". Perhaps a means of avoiding repetition, given that the word "bear" is used again later in the number? Regardless, Colm Wilkinson didn't actually bother to adapt to this change! He still sings "This innocent who bears my face" in the Broadway production (as well as the tenth anniversary concert; not until his 1998 stint in Toronto did he ever start singing the revised lyrics). Since every future Valjean (except Ivan Rutherford for some reason) sings "wears", I still see it as appropriate to mention here.

At the end of the song, Valjean's "You know where to find me!", used on and off in the Barbican previews before becoming a settled part of the production by the final pre-Broadway libretto, is once again removed for the Broadway show. However, the West End production would keep it for a few years - more on that later...

Just listening to the original Broadway cast, one might think Javert's "Dare you talk to me of crime?" becomes "Dare you speak to me of crime?" However, this seems to be a Terrence Mann-exclusive change. Every Javert after him reverts to the original lyrics (as did Terrence himself when he returned to the musical fifteen years later). I'm still making note of the change here for the sake of clarification.

An instrumental change occurs between "Castle on a Cloud" and "Master of the House". Mme. Thenardier's "You heard me ask for something and I never ask twice" was original followed by three bars of notes, then by six more bars of notes that are identical to each other. After the Broadway production, however, those six bars of notes grow increasingly more dramatic as they go on.

A very slight change happens during the preamble to "Master of the House". Originally one of the guests proclaims "Hell, what a wine" while the revised libretto instead has him claim "God, what a wine". Definitely more natural in my opinion, though not a huge difference by any means.

A few subtle differences exist in the "Waltz of Treachery" number. First off, Thenardier originally asks "Have we done for your child what is best?" The Broadway libretto changes "your child" to "her child". I personally like the original lyric better, as it goes back to the idea established earlier that Valjean is metaphorically bargaining through the spirit of Fantine. It's definitely not a difference that makes or breaks the number, though.

Towards the end of the song comes another change that cannot actually be heard by listening to the original Broadway cast. In the pre-Broadway show, Valjean used the line "Let us seek out a friendlier sky", while the revised libretto has him say "Let us seek out some friendlier sky". However, Colm Wilkinson once again doesn't bother to adapt to the change, and unlike the "Who Am I?" change he wouldn't learn it over time either. He continues to sing "a friendlier sky" throughout his on-and-off performances as Valjean, right up to and including his 2002 run in Shanghai!

After the bulk of the number comes a more significant change. Prior to the Broadway production, as was discussed in the last entry, the "Waltz of Treachery" was followed by about forty-five seconds of vamping and then this exchange in the tune of "Castle on a Cloud":

(LITTLE COSETTE)

We're going home right now, monsieur

What is your name

(VALJEAN)

Now my dear

I've names enough, I've got names to spare

But where I go, you always will be there

Nor will you be afraid again

There is a sun that's shining yet

(LITTLE COSETTE)

I'm going to call you my Papa

(VALJEAN)

I'm going to call you my Cosette

The Broadway libretto replaced it with just under twenty seconds of vamping, followed by a sequence in the tune of the "Waltz of Treachery":

(VALJEAN)

Come Cosette

Come my dear

From now on I will always be here

Where I go

You will be

(LITTLE COSETTE)

Will there be children

And castles to see?

(VALJEAN)

Yes, Cosette

Yes it's true

There's a castle just waiting for you

This is followed by another fifteen or so seconds of vamping, and then the humming duet between Cosette and Valjean carries on as before.

Arguably the biggest change in the entire edited libretto happens now. Whereas the number was originally directly followed by "Stars", things have been moved around so that it instead transitions directly into "Look Down". "Look Down" itself receives a lot of adjustments. First off, the number began in the pre-Broadway musical with a bar of music that was then repeated. The Broadway version only plays the bar of music once, and the sung part happens immediately afterwards.

Gavroche's verse receives some lyrical updates. Originally it used the following lines:

This is my school, my high society

From St. Denis to St Michel

We live on crumbs of humble piety

Tough on the teeth, but what the hell?

If you're poor, if you're free

Follow me, follow me!

The Broadway production rewrote that sequence a little:

This is my school, my high society

Here in the slums of St Michel

We live on crumbs of humble piety

Tough on the teeth, but what the hell?

Think you're poor? Think you're free?

Follow me, follow me!

Better lines in my humble opinion; "slums" conveys the poverty of Gavroche's community much more effectively than the original line, and phrasing the "poor" and "free" lines as questions is more dramatic than their original statement form.

The old beggar woman's original "You give 'em all the pox" becomes the less grammatically accurate "Give 'em all the pox" for Broadway, though I have no idea if the original "You" was part of the libretto or simply an improvisation. Since seemingly all actresses used that line for the first few years of the West End production, it strikes me as warranting a mention.

Right after this comes another change. In the pre-Broadway show, the argument between the beggar woman and the prostitute was followed by an exchange by a few individual beggars. All of the following lines were said by one person at a time, the first three being said by female beggars and the last one by a male beggar:

When's it gonna end?

When're we gonna live?

Something's gotta happen, dearie

Something's gotta give

The Broadway libretto changes this to an ensemble piece performed by all the beggars simultaneously:

When's it gonna end?

When're we gonna live?

Something's gotta happen now or

Something's gotta give

I really like the switch to a group effort, as it really emphasizes that the beggars are a community sharing the burden of poverty. It really feels like an epidemic to an extent that it doesn't when it's just a small conversation. Evidently the producers of the West End show didn't agree with me though, as they held onto the original sequence for more than a decade after the official change, and by that point it had already been largely reverted worldwide! More on that in a later blog...

Originally, the exposition about General Lamarque was given by a few random students (supposedly not specified in the libretto, but in practice portrayed as Combeferre and Feuilly). Some ensemble dialogue between beggars was put in between. Feuilly sings over the end of the ensemble's lines - but many have speculated that this was not intended by the writers, as the background music sounds super out of sync with his singing! Here's how the scene went:

(COMBEFERRE)

As for the leaders of the land

As for the swells who run this show

Only one man and that's Lamarque

Speaks for the people here below

(BEGGARS)

Something for a meal

Something for a doss

Something in the name of Him who died upon the cross

On the cross, come across

On the cross, come across, come across

(FEUILLY)

Lamarque is ill and fading fast

Won't last the week out, so they say

With all the anger in the land

How long before the judgement day?

Before we cut the fat ones down to size?

Before the barricades arise?

Fortunately, the writers of the Broadway libretto had the sense to change the purveyors of the message into people actually relevant to the show's plot, namely Marius and Enjolras. Moreover, the beggars' dialog was rewritten into a sequence that feels far less clunky to me. The background music was fixed to account for the solo singing (now done by Marius) overlapping the beggars' lines, so it is now perfectly in sync. Here's the edited exchange:

(ENJOLRAS)

Where are the leaders of the land?

Where are the swells who run this show?

(MARIUS)

Only one man and that's Lamarque

Speaks for the people here below

(BEGGARS)

See our children fed

Help us in our shame

Something for a crust of bread in Holy Jesus' name

(SOLO BEGGAR)

In the Lord's holy name

(BEGGARS)

In His name, in His name, in His name

(MARIUS)

Lamarque is ill and fading fast

Won't last the week out, so they say

(ENJOLRAS)

With all the anger in the land

How long before the judgement day?

Before we cut the fat ones down to size?

Before the barricades arise?

Much better in my opinion! It should be noted that David Bryant instead sings "these people here below", but as far as I can tell every future Marius (or later Enjolras - more on that later) sings "the people, which is the actually phrasing in the libretto.

One final change in Look Down: Gavroche now says that all of Thenardier's family is "on the make", as opposed to the original "on the take". A rather pointless change in my book, though it certainly doesn't hurt anything.

"The Robbery" is another heavily edited number. Thenardier's line after acknowledging Brujon, Babet, and Claquesous was originally as follows:

You Montparnasse, watch for the p'lice

With Eponine, take care

You've got all the hash, I've got all the cash

The Broadway show rewrote those lines into their still-current form:

You Montparnasse, watch for the law

With Eponine, take care

You turn on the tears, no mistakes my dears!

This changed lyric more naturally transitions the scene into the gang's actual plan, though the original is an interesting continuation of Gavroche's recollection of Thenardier once running a hash house.

Mme. Thenardier's response is also altered from the original lyrics:

Here come a student from our street

One of 'Ponine's peculiar gents

Our Eponine would kiss his feet

She never showed a bit of sense

Into the current ones:

These bloody students on our street

Here they come slumming once again

Our Eponine would kiss their feet

She never showed a scrap of brain

It's interesting how the edit shifts the focus from Marius in particular to the students in general. It seems that Mme. Thenardier is less aware of the specifics of her daughter's personal life now, something that makes sense for her character.

After Mme. Thenardier's "You'll be in the clear", there was originally just eighteen seconds of a musical motif (the same one which opens "At the End of the Day" and "One Day More") followed by Thenardier's speech. Since Broadway, it's instead been followed by a few more lines of dialogue:

(MARIUS)

Who is that man

(EPONINE)

Leave me alone!

(MARIUS)

Why is here?

Hey Eponine!

Only now does the musical motif play. But instead of staying silent upon seeing Cosette, Marius now sings "I didn't see you there, forgive me..." Interestingly, in this video of a 1987 performance of the original West End production, Marius just stops without bumping into Cosette as he usually does. This makes me wonder whether or not the bumping was added into the Broadway version, and the lyric was added to accomodate for the blocking change. Of course, this is all speculation; I have no way to know for sure.

Thenardier's con job is also quite a bit different post-Broadway. Originally it used the following lyrics:

How you do? Spare a sou

God will see all the good that you do

Look monsieur, lost a leg

Hero of Waterloo now has to beg

Wait a bit, know that face...

The Broadway libretto edited it into its current form:

Please monsieur, come this way

Here's a child that ain't eaten today

Save a life, spare a sou

God rewards all the good that you do

Wait a bit, know that face...

It's interesting how Thenardier's facade shifts in focus from his own supposed hardship to that of an alleged child. I suppose the latter would be a good bit more effective in convincing passersby to donate!

During "Javert's Intervention", Thenardier now says "It was me that told you so, as opposed to the original "Wot told you so"; however, this seems to be a regional choice to account for a lack of Cockney accent, not an official libretto change. British productions retain the original "Wot".

“The Robbery” ends quite differently. Its pre-Broadway form had Gavroche’s remarks directly follow Javert’s “Clear this garbage off the street!” However, now Javert’s line is instead followed by some instrumentals to a slower version of the same tune as, for instance, “Honest work/Just reward/That’s the way to please the lord” and “He will bend/He will break/This time there is no mistake”.

After these instrumentals come the “Stars” number, now in a much more natural location given that Javert now has a logical reason to be thinking about Valjean!

The number itself is mostly the same, up until the final segment. After Javert’s “Those who falter and those who fall must pay the price”, he originally had the following lyrics:

Scarce to be counted

Changing the chaos

To order and light

You are the sentinels

Silent and sure

Keeping watch in the night

Keeping watch in the night

The post-Broadway show replaced this with a much more climactic remark:

Lord let me find him

That I may see him

Safe behind bars

I will never rest ‘til then

This I swear

This is swear by the stars

WOW, what an improvement! Now the stars are tied much better to Valjean himself, and Javert’s motivation is much clearer!

Now that “Stars” is over, we finally get Gavroche's remarks. The lyrics are the same; however, instead of the tempo progressively getting faster as it goes along, it now gets progressively slower. Interestingly the audio of the first preview has Gavroche saying "mother dear" instead of "auntie dear", but it's back to the original line by the second known original Broadway cast audio. Both audio feature Braden Danner; whether the "mother dear" was a choice on his part or a director's, a flub, or a libretto change that was later reverted is unknown.

"Eponine's Errand" has some significant changes. First off, the original libretto gave Marius and Eponine this exchange:

(MARIUS)

Did you see that lovely girl

(EPONINE)

A lovely two-a-penny thing

The Broadway libretto edited it a little:

(MARIUS)

Eponine, who was that girl?

(EPONINE)

Some bourgeois two-a-penny thing

Marius' request has also been changed from its original lyrics:

Eponine, do this for me

But careful how you go

Your father mustn't know

He'll strike another blow

'Ponine, I'm lost until she's found

Into some far clearer and more direct instructions:

Eponine, do this for me

Discover where she lives

But careful how you go

Don't let your father know

'Ponine, I'm lost until she's found

And yes, the line was "your father" right from day one. Michael Ball flubs it as "her father" on the complete symphonic recording, leading many to assume that was the original lyric which was changed later. But I'm not aware of a single live performance to use that lyric (which doesn't make a lot of sense anyway).

Another side note: Some Marius actors have very slightly changed the third line to "Be careful how you go" or "But careful as you go", though neither lyric is the standard.

Post-Broadway, as the instrumentals to "Red and Black" play, a student (I'm not sure which one) now shouts Enjolras' name before the singing begins.

During "Red and Black", Michael Maguire changes the original "It is easy to sit here and swat 'em like flies" to "Oh, it's easy to sit here and swat 'em like flies". However, this is an individual choice of the actor, not an official libretto change. Every future Enjolras I'm aware of (except Ramin Karimloo for some reason) uses the original line.

An actual libretto change occurs soon afterwards. After Marius' entrance, Grantaire originally asks, "Marius, what's wrong with you today?" The post-Broadway show changes this to "Marius, you're late. What's wrong today?" This makes it much clearer why Grantaire might suspect something is wrong.

Soon afterwards, Grantaire's original line "We talk of battles to be won, and here he comes like Don Juan" is slightly tweaked to "You talk of battles to be won". This is a little more appropriate, since Grantaire isn't actually doing a lot of talking!

After "Red and Black", Gavroche's part is very slightly changed. First off, American performances for a few years would have Gavroche whistle right before everyone quiets down, though I have no idea if this was in the libretto or not.

Secondly, Gavroche's original remark, "It's General Lamarque! He's dead!" is shortened to just "General Lamarque is dead!"

In another contender for the biggest change in the entire edit, the entire "I Saw Him Once" number is totally removed. I have mixed feelings about this. It does give Cosette, a frustratingly underwritten character, some additional content. However, stylistically it's not all that much like any other number in the musical, and it doesn't really add enough information to the show to warrant a whole song. So I say with regret that it was probably for the best to delete the number.

To compensate for the lost number, "In My Life" is lengthened to include the establishing character moments that "I Saw Him Once" originally did. Originally it opened as follows:

(COSETTE)

Dearest papa, can I tell him of this?

How can I tell him the things that I feel?

How could he understand?

(VALJEAN)

Dear Cosette, you're such a lonely child...

The post-Broadway opener is instead as follows:

(COSETTE)

How strange, this feeling that my life's begun at last

This change, can people really fall in love so fast?

What's the matter with you Cosette?

Have you been to much on your own?

So many things unclear

So many things unknown

In my life

There are so many questions and answers

That somehow seem wrong

In my life

There are times when I catch in the silence

The sigh of a faraway song

And it sings of a world that I long to see

Out of reach, just a whisper away, waiting for me

Does he know I'm alive? Do I know if he's real?

Does he see what I see? Does he feel what I feel?

In my life

I'm no longer alone

Now the love in my life is so near

Find me now, find me here

(VALJEAN)

Dear Cosette, you're such a lonely child...

After Valjean gives Cosette his cryptic defense of his secrecy, Cosette had a remark that is sadly incredibly hard to understand in the quality of the recordings we have. It apparently went something like this:

There are voices I hear

That come into my mind

Full of noise, full of fear

When the noise was unkind

In my life

I'm no longer afraid

And I yearn for the truth that you know

Of the years, years ago

Her post-Broadway response is much shorter:

In my life

I'm no longer a child

And I yearn for the truth that you know

Of the years, years ago

Shorter, but just as effective in my book. Plus, the use of the word "child" nicely ties into Valjean's initial remark that Cosette is "such a lonely child", as well as Cosette's frustration that he still sees her as "a child who is lost in the woods".

The next number, "A Heart Full of Love", also has a LOT of rewritten lyrics. First of all, after Marius' "I do not even know your name", these are his original lyrics:

Dear mademoiselle

I am lost in your spell

The Broadway production changed the lyrics into:

Dear mademoiselle

Won't you say? Will you tell?

I suppose this fits a little better with his remark about not knowing Cosette's name.

After Marius and Cosette finally learn each other's names (an important step in a relationship if you ask me!) this was their original way of showing their affection:

(MARIUS)

Cosette, your name is like a song

(COSETTE)

My song is you

(MARIUS)

Is it true?

(COSETTE)

Yes, it's true

The Broadway production rewrote it into the following:

(MARIUS)

Cosette, I don't know what to say

(COSETTE)

Then make no sound

(MARIUS)

I am lost

(COSETTE)

I am found

In my opinion, the rewrite captures the slight awkwardness of young love much better, as well as making a lot more sense!

Immediately afterwards, this is the original exchange:

(MARIUS and COSETTE)

A heart full of love

A heart full of you

(MARIUS)

The words are foolish but they're true

Cosette, Cosette

What were we dreaming when we met?

(COSETTE)

I can sing

(MARIUS)

Dear Cosette

(COSETTE)

A heart full of love...

The Broadway libretto redoes the scene as the following:

(MARIUS)

A heart full of love

(COSETTE)

A night bright as day

(MARIUS)

And you must never go away

Cosette, Cosette

(COSETTE)

This is a chain we'll never break

(MARIUS)

Do I dream?

(COSETTE)

I'm awake

(MARIUS)

A heart full of love...

Almost a totally different scene! The post-Broadway variant is better structured, but I do like the original too.

As the trio of Marius, Cosette, and Eponine exchanges inner monologues, Marius originally has the line "I saw her waiting and I knew". The Broadway libretto changed this to "A single look and then I knew". I kind of prefer the original, as it implies a little more than something as trivial as a cursory glance.

In the closing lyrical overlap of the song, Cosette originally sings "Waiting for you", but post-Broadway she sings "I knew it too". Then, she originally sings "At your call" but post-Broadway she sings "Every day".

During the opening to "The Attack on Rue Plumet", Montparnasse refers to Valjean as "the one that got away the other day" as opposed to his original "the bloke wot got away the other day". However, this is another regional change made for the sake of making sense outside of a cockney accent. The official libretto still had the original lyrics.

A tiny change occurs during Thenardier and Eponine's fight. Claquesous originally thinks it's a palaver and an absolute treat "to watch a cat and its father" picking a bone in the street. The Broadway libretto changed this to "see a cat and a father". Why exactly the writers felt the need to make such a miniscule edit is mystifying to me, but it certainly doesn't hurt anything.

Another change occurs later in the number, after Eponine's scream. Originally this was Thenardier's reaction:

Make for the sewers, don't wait around

Leave her to me, go underground

You wait my girl, you'll rue this night

I'll make you scream, you'll scream alright!

These lines were mixed up a bit for the Broadway libretto:

You wait my girl, you'll rue this night

I'll make you scream, you'll scream alright!

Leave her to me, don't wait around

Make for the sewers, go underground

The post-Broadway variation arguably is a bit less climactic due to it not ending on a threat. However, the original climax isn't all that appropriate since Eponine and Thenardier never actually interact at any later point in the musical. I like that the post-Broadway version ends on something that's actually relevant to the remainder of the show (namely, that Thenardier will be in the sewers). Evidently the West End producers didn't agree with me; this is another line in which the original was kept there for more than a decade (at which point a rewrite closer to the original was already being used worldwide)!

In "One Day More", Javert's "One day more to revolution" is slightly changed to "One more day to revolution". However, the number is otherwise unchanged.

And that's it for Act One! The opening barricade scene to act two has a small change. Grantaire's pre-Broadway "Some will bark, some will bite" was changed to "Dogs will bark, fleas will bite". Makes a lot more sense in my opinion!

The opening to "On My Own" is changed as well. Originally it was performed as follows:

And now I'm all alone again

Nowhere to go, no one to turn to

I did not want your money sir

I came out here 'cause I was told to

The Broadway version rewrote it into the following:

And now I'm alone again

Nowhere to turn, no one to go to

Without a home, without a friend

Without a face to say hello to

A huge improvement in my book. It actually rhymes now, and is far less likely to be misconstrued as ungrateful.

After receiving a massive overhaul not that long before, "Little People" was slightly tweaked for the Broadway show. The pre-Broadway version had this ending:

So never kick a dog

Because he’s just a pup

You’d better run for cover when the pup grows up!

Another line (taken from the original longer version of "Little People" as well as all versions of its reprise) was added for the post-Broadway show:

So never kick a dog

Because he’s just a pup

We'll fight like twenty armies and we won't give up

So you’d better run for cover when the pup grows up!

Grantaire's line afterwards is literally reversed in meaning from the original "Better far to die a schoolboy than a policeman and a spy!" into "What's the difference? Die a schoolboy, die a policeman, die a spy!" This post-Broadway lyric fits better into Grantaire's cynical personality.

A very subtle edit is made in "Little Fall of Rain" (to the point that I only just realized its existence by reading an old internet forum!) Pre-Broadway, Marius asks Eponine "Did you see my beloved?" The tense is changed from past to present perfect for the Broadway libretto, so that he now sings "Have you seen my beloved?"

"Drink with Me" receives quite a bit of editing. The opening few lines are originally all sung by Grantaire:

Drink with me to days gone by

Sing with me the songs we knew

Here's to pretty girls who went to our heads

Here's to witty girls who went to our beds

Here's to them and here's to you

Now, those lyrics are split between various students:

(FEUILLY)

Drink with me to days gone by

Sing with me the songs we knew

(PROUVAIRE)

Here's to pretty girls who went to our heads

(JOLY)

Here's to witty girls who went to our beds

(ALL STUDENTS)

Here's to them and here's to you

A far more touching scene now that it entails an entire group of friends reminiscing about their lives, as opposed to the thoughts of one heavily drunk individual.

Originally this was followed by a segment by the male ensemble:

Drink with me to days gone by

To the life that used to be

At the shrine of friendship never say die

Let the wine of friendship never run dry

Then, this was followed by the same lyrics, but sung by the male and female ensembles overlapping. The Broadway libretto removes that and replaces it with an all-new segment with Grantaire. It's much more cynical and philosophical than his original lines:

Drink with me to days gone by

Can it be you fear to die?

Will the world remember you when you fall?

Could it be your death means nothing at all?

Is you life just one more lie?

The lyrics from the pre-Broadway show, in their male-and-female overlapping form, are played afterwards.

The next change occurs during the Second Attack. Pre-Broadway, this was how the opening lyrics went:

(ENJOLRAS)

How do we stand, Feuilly make your report

(FEUILLY)

We've guns enough but bullets running short

(MARIUS)

Let me go into the street

There are bodies all around

Ammunition to be had

Lots of bullets to be found

Some very small edits were made for Broadway:

(ENJOLRAS)

How do we stand, Feuilly make your report

(FEUILLY)

We've guns enough but ammunition short

(MARIUS)

I will go into the street

There are bodies all around

Ammunition to be had

Lots of bullets to be found

The following exchange also is a bit edited. Here's how it went pre-Broadway:

(ENJOLRAS)

I can't let you go, it's too much of a chance

(MARIUS)

And the same can be said for any man here

(VALJEAN)

Let me go in his place, he's no more than a boy

I am old and alone and have nothing to fear

Post-Broadway, it instead goes as follows:

(ENJOLRAS)

I can't let you go, it's too much of a chance

(MARIUS)

And the same is true for any man here

(VALJEAN)

Let me go, he's no more than a boy

I am old, I have nothing to fear

Finally, Gavroche's final lines are as follows pre-Broadway:

So never kick a dog

Because he’s just a pup

You’d better run for cover when the pup grows up

And we’ll fight like twenty armies and we won’t give…

A small edit is made for the Broadway production, so that the latter two lines are reversed:

So never kick a dog

Because he’s just a pup

We’ll fight like twenty armies and we won’t give up

So you’d better run for cover when the pup grows...

I'd say this is an improvement, since Gavroche's death is all the more impactful when his literal last unfinished words are about growing up.

Not long afterwards comes the Final Battle. Leading up to Enjolras' climactic moment, the original lines went as follows:

(ENJOLRAS)

Come on my friends, though we stand here alone

Let us go to our deaths with our face to our foes

(COMBEFERRE)

Let 'em pay for each death with a death of their own

(COURFEYRAC)

If they get me, by God, they will pay through the nose

(ENJOLRAS)

Let others rise to take our place

Until the earth is free

The sequence was edited for Broadway, giving a bit more breathing space:

(ENJOLRAS)

Let us die facing our foes

Make them bleed while they can

(COMBEFERRE)

Make them pay through the nose

(COURFEYRAC)

Make them pay for every man

(ENJOLRAS)

Let others rise to take our place

Until the earth is free

"Dog Eats Dog" is a very heavily-edited number. First off, the vamping at the beginning originally lasts about 30 seconds. By Broadway, it has been reduced to about nineteen seconds.

After Thenardier's "As a service to the town" line, he originally sung the following lines:

It's a world where the dogs eat the dogs

And the worst is as good as the best

It's a stinking great sewer that's crawling with rats

And one rat is as good as the rest

I raise my eyes to see the heavens

And only the moon looks down

That entire sequence was cut for Broadway.

Soon afterwards, Thenardier originally proclaims "Here's a little toy". The Broadway edit changes it to "Here's another toy", perhaps to make it seem less repetitive after his "pretty little thing" line.

The exact same lines from after "As a service to the town" are repeated in the pre-Broadway number after Thenardier's "When the gutters run with blood" line, with one more line added afterwards:

It's a world where the dogs eat the dogs

And the worst is as good as the best

It's a stinking great sewer that's crawling with rats

And one rat is as good as the rest

I raise my eyes to see the heavens

And only the moon looks down

The harvest moon shines down

Unlike the first instance of those lines, they aren't completely excised for Broadway. They are, however, significantly rewritten:

It's a world where the dogs eat the dogs

And they kill for the bones in the street

And God in His heavens, He don't interfere

'Cause He's dead as the stiffs at my feet

I raise my eyes to see the heavens

And only the moon looks down

The harvest moon shines down

I really like how the edited version focuses more on godlessness than on how gross the sewer is. Not that a lack of a god is inherently sinister; I am quite agnostic myself and I think the unbreakable connection between religion and morality alleged by some is ridiculous. But it is blatantly obvious that Thenardier sees no reason to be moral provided no one will punish him.

As a side note, the 1985 London official soundtrack oddly uses this variant, yet the 1986 bootleg audio I have uses the original. Perhaps the original was experimented with, reverted, and later put in again? Who knows...

After the number, Thenardier now shouts Valjean's name.

The encounter in the sewers between Valjean and Javert originally ended as follows, with Javert's first two lines here in a tune not heard anywhere else in the musical to my recollection:

(VALJEAN)

Come, time is running short

(JAVERT)

Go take him, I'll be waiting at the door

I've never met a man like you before

A man such as you

The sequence was extended for the Broadway libretto, to the tune of "Look Down" and the "Work Song":

(VALJEAN)

Come, time is running short

Look down, Javert

He's standing in his grave

(VALJEAN - simultaneously with the next two lines)

Give way, Javert

There is a life to save

(JAVERT - simultaneously with the previous two lines)

Take him, Valjean

Before I change my mind

(JAVERT)

I will be waiting, 24601

A slight change can be heard in "Every Day". Originally Marius sings that he and Cosette will "remember that night and the song that we sang". The Broadway libretto edited this into the decidedly less medium-aware "remember that night and the vow that we made".

"Valjean's Confession" has been reworked to the point that it can scarcely even be considered the same song. After Valjean's "There's something now that must be done", this was how the song went:

(VALJEAN)

Monsieur, I cannot stay a night beneath your roof

I am a convict, sir, my body bears the proof

My name is Jean Valjean

I never told Cosette, I bear this guilt alone

And this I swear to you, her innocence is real

Her love is true

Our love, our life, are now her own

And I must face the years alone

(MARIUS)

I do not understand what's the sense of it all?

Is the world upside down?

Will the universe fall?

If it's true what you say, and Cosette doesn't know

Why confess it to me?

Why confess it at all?

What forces you to speak after all?

(VALJEAN)

You and Cosette must be free of reproach

It is not your affair

There is a darkness that's over my life

It's the cross I must bear

It's for Cosette this must be faced

If I am found, she is disgraced

(MARIUS)

What can I do that would turn you from this...

After the Broadway rewrite, Valjean's "There's something now that must be done" is followed by this:

(VALJEAN)

You've spoken from the heart, and I must do the same

There is a story, sir, of slavery and shame

That you alone must know

I never told Cosette, she had enough of tears

She's never known the truth, the story you must hear

Of years ago

There lived a man whose name was Jean Valjean

He stole some bread to save his sister's son

For nineteen winters served his time

In sweat he washed away his crime

Years ago

He broke parole and lived a life apart

How could he tell Cosette and break her heart?

It's for Cosette this must be faced

If he is caught she is disgraced

The time is come to journey on

And from this day he must be gone

Who am I?

Who am I?

(MARIUS)

You're Jean Valjean

What can I do that will turn you from this...

The few lines afterwards are the same, but as you can see not much else in the song is! Even the tune diverges a lot between the two variants. I'm very conflicted about which one I prefer. I gravitate towards the final one, though it's nice that the original actually tried to address to confusing notion that Valjean wants to tell his son-in-law of his past yet not his own daughter.

"Beggars at the Feast" originally ended with a solo for Thenardier:

(THENARDIER and MME. THENARDIER)

We know where the wind is blowing

Money is the stuff we smell

(THENARDIER)

And when I'm rich as Croesus

Jesus, won't I see you all in Hell!

The Broadway libretto switched this to a group line:

(THENARDIER and MME. THENARDIER)

We know where the wind is blowing

Money is the stuff we smell

And when we're rich as Croesus

Jesus, won't we see you all in Hell!

I much prefer the revised version, as the two Thenardiers clearly are in this act together. It seems more appropriate to let them both have the last laugh.

A small change occurs in the Epilogue. Pre-Broadway, Fantine sings "You raised my child with love". However, post-Broadway, she instead sings "You raised my child in love".

Another change occurs later in the epilogue. In the pre-Broadway show, Cosette tells Valjean that "It's too soon to ever say goodbye". The post-Broadway libretto instead has her sing "It's too soon, too soon to say goodbye". Repetitive as it may be, I prefer it over the original because the original awkwardly combines language clearly denoting the moment with language implying eternality.

Phew, we're finally at the end! Rest assured this is almost certainly the longest changelog you'll ever be forced to endure. I'm fairly sure it's complete, but this particular rewrite was so extensive it's not impossible that I missed something. Please feel free to let me know if that is the case.

As a side note, both for this project and my own enjoyment, I want as complete a collection of Les Miserables audios as possible. I already have most of what’s commonly circulated, but if you have any audios or videos you know are rare, or some audios that you haven't traded in a few years, I’d love it if you DMed me!

Until the turntable puts me at the forefront again, good-bye…

[theasteriae-arc]

HOW DO YOU MEASURE A LIFE?

IN LOVING MEMORY OF LEOPOLD CONSTANTINE MORAN 7 AUG 1984 – 12 MAY 2004 1ST BATTALION, B COMPANY, ROYAL ANGLICANS 18 SEP 2002 – 12 MAY 2004 WE WILL REMEMBER HIIM

May 12th, 1984 The shades are closed. The city on the other side of the windows is greener than she ever expected it could be, but the sunlight hurts her eyes, gives her such headaches that she can’t even open them. She spends a lot of time in bed. There’s three months to go, still, till the baby is due, but she feels sick and tired all the time, just wants to lie here in the quiet, dim, coolness of the room with the fans humming, undisturbed.  

She’s almost asleep when noise erupts in the corridor outside. Running feet, shouts, laughter. Sebastian is almost four, August a little over a year younger and probably a couple of paces behind, determined to catch up. There’s a bit of a scuffle outside the door, then a flurry of knocks that feel like something sharp being driven into Vivienne’s skull. She groans and puts a hand over her eyes.  

Sebastian is loud and restless, likes to bounce on the foot of the mattress. It’s too much for her to handle on a good day, and she’s not had one of those in months. Thank God for Nanny, who shepherds both boys away, insisting, “We don’t want to disturb Mother now, do we?”  

Vivienne sighs, relieved, and hopes the new baby is a girl.  

May 12th, 1989  

“… Ready or not, here I come.” Sebastian is seven years old and clumsy with numbers. He starts counting on his fingers but loses track somewhere after twenty and skips a couple. He repeats a few more and finally gives up, calling to his brothers who are hiding elsewhere inside the residence.  

Leopold, the youngest ( and their mother’s favourite, despite the fact he’s another boy ), is hiding inside a wardrobe in one of the empty state bedrooms. He’s not scared of the dark like Sebastian is.  

The British High Commission is not a cosy building—a lot of the furniture is antique, breakable, and there are many rooms the boys are not supposed to go into—but if they ignore that, which they often do, it’s a great place to play hide and seek. So many rooms and cupboards and corners to squeeze yourself into.

He waits for what feels like hours, but really, is only fifteen or twenty minutes, hands over his mouth when Sebastian thunders into the room, but after ducking to look under the bed and yanking back the curtains, he wrenches the wardrobe door open, and for a second, the two brothers just stare at each other, identical blue eyes, before Bash grins and holds out his hand. “Help me come and find August?”

May 12th, 1994

August seems like a long time away. Leopold’s not sure whether he wants it to come quicker or slower. He’s looking forward to seeing his brothers again, though they seem like very distant figures now, voices on the other end of a telephone every two weeks or so. But when they left to go to school, they didn’t come back, and that’s what’s making him nervous. Torn between staying close to his mother’s side and spending every minute he can out of doors, playing cricket with the friends he might never see again.  

It’s very hot out today, and Vivienne’s taken to bed with another of her headaches. Leopold doesn’t need to pack yet, but he’s trying to decide what he wants to take with him when he goes to England in a couple of months’ time. These, definitely. His father’s always telling him he’s far too old for toys now, but Leopold still loves the collection of little tin soldiers he was given one Christmas when he was younger. They go with him everywhere.  

Once upon a time, he’d had a whole platoon of them, but now there are only three left. He makes them parachute into the open suitcase one at a time. Sebastian. August. Leopold. Then they crawl on their bellies under the mesh that he thinks he’s supposed to put his socks in or something, climbing up and out the other side.  

Absorbed by this game, he forgets about his upcoming trip again until bedtime. 

May 12th, 2000

Bash and August look very grown up in their parade dress uniforms. Dark blue jackets and trousers with a red stripe up the leg, gold braid on the shoulder, and a crimson band around their caps. Leo scans the rows of cadets, more than two hundred of them saluting the General as they pass by the stand, for their faces. Shoulder to shoulder, though one slightly taller than the other, both with their chins up and their chests puffed out. They have every right to be proud.  

Neither of their parents thought it worth flying out for, and Leo, sitting next to his uncle and his aunt, looking very smart himself in a navy-blue suit and a blue and red striped tie, is privately relieved. No doubt his father would have found some fault somewhere and ruined the day for them, whereas Uncle Thomas realises how important this is for them both.

“Will you come to my passing out parade too?” Leo asks him, while they wait for the ranks to be dismissed so they can go and offer their congratulations to the two brand-new 2nd Lieutenants. He’s already decided he’s going to be one too, when he’s older. “Only two years, then it’ll be my turn.”  

May 12th, 2004

Bash’s hand is outstretched again. Leo thinks back to that afternoon at the Embassy, fifteen years ago. “Help me come and find August?” Then, he’d let go of Bash’s hand as soon as he could and gone tearing off down the corridor ahead of him, little legs flying as he was determined to find their brother first. Now, he holds on tightly for as long as he can.

He thought it would hurt more, dying, but mostly, he’s just cold. Even with the fiery, Afghani sun beating down on the back of his neck, he’s shivering. Must be the shock. His fingers contract around Sebastian’s, nails digging into the back of his hand, but Bash does not react. Not at all. “Don’t let go!” he calls, but it’s his fingers that are slipping out of Leo’s grip. “Helicopter will be here, help’s coming, you just have to hold on.”

“So do you.” Leo grits his teeth and tries to pull Bash’s hand back. He can taste sand and iron when he coughs, chest spasming. “You can’t—” It’s getting harder for him to talk in between coughs. “—You can’t give up; do you hear me? No matter what happens, you can’t—fucking—” Another cough, longer this time. When the fit’s passed, he’s so tired, he can hardly keep his eyes open. He screws them up against all the grit and the dirt and sand and fixes them on his brother, two pairs of identical blue eyes.  

“—I love you, brother.” A red-toothed smile, then his eyelashes flutter, and he can hear Bash calling to him from the other end of a very long tunnel, but when he tries to turn back, the blackness is too much. It swallows him up whole. 

[fictionkinfessions]

So uh, spoilers for a book series that's been out since 2002 but I'm having feelings about A Thing that happens in Cirque du Freak so spoilers for that. Also trigger/content warning for death and blood

I honestly never really thought about the differences between my canon and the source, but honestly the two are both not that difference but also... man, that was not how it happened. Mister Crepsley didn't fall in the pit but he got hit in the side pretty bad on the way back to our platform, and then we got in a scuffle and he ended up getting much worse and yeah, he didn't make it. But before he went we actually finished the blood transfer that'd make me a vampire, and he told me he was proud of me. Honestly the fact that the fighting was still going on but we got a quiet moment was like something straight out of a movie/tv show, which I appreciate with hindsight. No matter how it turned out, though... it was the same. Steve telling me how badly we actually messed up and everything after, especially me not being able to cry. But I'm so glad that at least in some universe Mister Crepsley got to be the one to turn me into a vampire.

If there are any Steves out there, I really, really didn't want to become the apprentice and I didn't want to have to fight you like we were forced to. I don't hate you, for what it's worth. And I still think of you as a friend. Hope you have a better time in this life, Leopard!

And if there's any Mister Crepsleys (yes I know I used your first name but it's a habit and it's my confession), I miss you a lot. Thanks for not killing me after a month, old man! /j Oh and I hope you're doing good here too I guess. -Darren Shan #🦅🌑🚬

[thecrownnet]

Variety Streaming Room presented by Netflix 

Olivia Colman describes her experience briefly meeting Queen Elizabeth II, whom she plays on-screen in The Crown.

Colman met Queen Elizabeth II in 2014 at an event for the film industry that was held at Windsor. At first, Colman didn’t even know the Queen was there, but eventually ended up in a line to greet her.

“Suddenly we looked around the corner like, ‘Oh f—.’ This man in epaulets was telling us what to do, ‘Just a little bow, don’t overdo it,’ and sort of scuffled us forward,” Colman said. “So you might just meet your royal highness and just keep moving, keep moving because she had hundreds of people to get through. And that was it.”

[Hlelena Bonham] Carter had a more intimate conversation with Queen Elizabeth’s sister, Princess Margaret, a few years before her death in 2002.

“She was very small and I went up to her and she kind of knew who I was because she knew my uncle very well. She said, ‘Oh Helena yes, you are getting better at acting,'” Carter said. “And I just thought that is so inimitably her, which was basically a compliment put down… No it wasn’t really a compliment, was it?”