#she continued to watch bad

[bitchthefuck1]

you know what, I actually will talk about this because it's bothering me. The issue with focussing so heavily on syd and carmy's potential for a romantic relationship isn't that there's something inherently unintellectual about romance or whatever, it's that a lot of people seem incapable of doing that without immediately flattening the story and ignoring or intentionally misreading any and all nuance for the sake of that romance. Every scene suddenly becomes about how it impacts their relationship, every analysis is done through a romantic lens, every frame or line of dialogue becomes about finding some easter egg or hint that "proves" these people should start dating. Their dynamic is absolutely a fundamental part of this show, but if you can only see it as a will-they-won't-they, you miss so much of what the story is actually trying to say with these two.

There are good versions of this story where their relationship is romantic and there are good versions of this story where it isn't, but as soon as you decide them being together is "the point," you lose the ability to actually judge the story for what it is, not what you want it to be.

[outlying-hyppocrate]

i have officially returned. ask me anything.

[phannibal]

they need to come up with code words for when they’re fucking cloned or body swapped or whatever like girl this has happened at least five times at this point

[impossible-rat-babies]

enjoying the time honored tradition of I will watch a video about a video game instead of playing the video game

[little-whats-her-name]

"I can't hear you over the sound of the eight billion glasses and plates clinking, and the very high possibility that I'm going to lose my job, and the fact that everyone at this charity dinner hates me but we have to act nice to each other, and the weird lighting in this room, and these fucking Spanx!" - Katherine Hastings, probably

[orcelito]

Shino raising his dead friends and friend's dog from the dead with the power of bugs as one friend's cousin watches [not clickbait]

[zuzu-romeave]

“oh wow aphmaus back thats so cool-”

JESSICAAAA!!! DROP ANOTHER SEASON OF MERMAID TALES AND MY LIFE IS YOURS!!!!!

[in-tua-deep]

So I followed you years ago for the first season of tua. It has been years and now tua has come to an end. I just watched the final season. Did you or will you watch it? I might not be able to recommend it. Which is such a shame. The first season was amazing and will be forever one of my favorite shows.

I have a terrible confession to make…

I’ve only fully watched season one of the umbrella academy. I started season 2 and haven’t finished it yet 😭

[july-19th-club]

seska did nothing wrong god forbid women do anything

[thetimelordbatgirl]

....Well this is news to me: Ariana Grande starting beef with Elvira, mistress of the dark???

[trewelove]

It's interesting to me that there's a very clear delineation in my mind between characters id consider to be f/os (romantic or platonic) and characters that i just want to keep inside my heart forever. They're also like, not me either, even if i relate deeply to them - i love them on a very specific level where i wish i could keep them safe and know i never could so instead i preserve them & their memory in my heart forever, like a locket. Characters like this for me are like. Laura palmer, and owen/isabel from i saw the tv glow. I think part of that delineation must be death especially if said death is of narrative importance - i can't deny they're dead (in some form) because that'd be rejecting what they went through and it's important that was acknowledged. So i just tuck them safe into my heart forever and ever. As long as i'll live i won't forget you! For the rest of my life, you'll be alive inside me!

[vmures]

Highly recommend reading this essay about grappling with art and the creator's bad acts/monsterousness:

I've struggled to put much of this into words myself. It's a hard thing to grapple with and I think the point being made in the article is incredibly valuable. When we work so hard to claim we only take in unharmful art, we willingly blind ourselves to the truth that we too are capable of great harm, which in turn can perpetuate abusive systems. It can create this mindset: If I am not capable of harming others, because I am a righteous and "good" person, then any harm caused must have been the fault of someone else. You are essentially gaslighting yourself, which leads to gaslighting others.

If you asked my mother, she would tell you that she was a great mother. She gave up so much for her kids and sacrificed all her own wants and needs. She'd tell you that I was a fragile, overly emotional child. That I was difficult and over imaginative. She'd express confusion about how I went from the perfect, quiet baby to the angry, depressed teen, to an adult who no longer spoke with her.

She'd never mention the thrown objects, the rages, the climbing into my bed (not just to comfort me after a nightmare), the belittling, the emotional manipulation, the times she told me I must be mistaken and played off my observations as imagination (gaslighting me), the constantly changing expectations and rules. Because she was incapable (and probably still is incapable) of acknowledging that she herself had the capacity to do the same things her father did to her. In her head she was a victim and a good person, and she used those ideas to shield herself from her own monsterous behavior.

It is important to acknowledge that you can and will fuck up. That no one is purely good or purely evil. That we all contain the potential for both helpful and harmful acts and that if we are not mindful of others actual needs our helpful acts can be harmful.

When it comes to art, I do think it is important to not just shun, without thought or contemplation, art when we find out something awful about the creator. What we learn will change the way we see the art, but that goes from learning anything about the creator--good or bad.

[serendipitous-mage]

......... who's gonna tell him ... .. ill do it @markiplier

[undergoing-mitosis]

we've all seen this:

but now, i raise you this:

that's it that's all i had to say thank you for coming to my ted talk

[stinkrascal]

i try to give ppl grace when it comes to media literacy bc analyzing media is a skill you have to actively learn to sophisticate so its very understandable that ppl are at different levels w this skill. but at the same time i really do hate it when ppl say theres no such thing as a "bad way" to interpret art cuz like ok i understand our interpretations of art are shaped by our experiences in our lives but also i watched "the shining" in theaters a few days ago and it was super good so i went to watch some video essays on the movie and i saw a video about "the wendy theory" and it actually made me lose hope for media literacy way faster than literally any fandom discourse any of you buffoons have forced upon me. like im sorry but if you watched the shining and your only takeaway was well wendy was actually hallucinating the whole time cuz thats the only way the story events make sense cuz the supernatural isnt real therefore it couldnt Really Be Ghosts or whatever in this story nay this documentary where only things that can happen in real life can happen in this fictional story. it mustve been my whore wife all along. it very much gives "i really enjoyed this story, except for the parts where the story happened"

[jupitermelichios]

man I will never forgive marvel (and the trolls on twitter they listened to) for cancelling the planned new warriors volume 6.

to be clear, I don't think it would have been good. honestly, I think it might have been kind of awful. and I think it probably would have lost marvel money, so from a financial perspective cancelling it was a good move.

but as an enjoyer of weird awkward superhero media, as someone who spends a non-0 percentage of every day on this earth thinking about the Generation X tv pilot and the unreleased 1995 fantastic four movie, who absolutely adores the deeply sincere and yet wildly out of touch vibes of the runaways...

there was a "cool teen" vampire called b-negative who dressed like prince going through a goth phase. there were characters called snowflake and safespace who had ice and forcefield powers and who I really think were intended to be an awkwardly sincere attempt at representation. and on an unironically possitive note, there was a fat female superhero! do you know how rare that is?!

obviously the right wing trolls hated it, and they're probably the primary reason it was cancelled, but I also saw a lot of nice sane people making good faith criticisms that basically boiled down to 'but it looks like it's going to be so awkward and out of touch and probably accidentally low-key offensive in ways the writers would be horrified by if it was explained to them', and that's totally fair. it absolutely looked like that.

but that's where the new warriors thrive as a team and always has been, they're 'how do you do fellow kids' the team, and because of that they got to have some really important firsts and representation (after silhouette left the team it took almost two decades before we got the next crutch-using superhero in a big two cape comic). the new warriors trying too hard to be relatable and ending up feeling like a parody of a 'woke' superhero team is a big and legitimately important part of both their whole deal and the history of comics generally.

which makes it sound like i'm arguing we need to let comics be bad and cringe if we want to make strides in representation, and that is true, and I am saying that

but mostly I'm just saying that it would have been terrible and cringy in the very specific way I love, and I'll go to my grave still sad that I didn't get to enjoy it.