#so seeing such a high quality adaptation of the books that mean so much to me is. just so amazing

[shadowsandstarlight]

The new Percy Jackson show means so much to me I’ve barely even started it and it’s already so good. God they all mean so much to me.

[fishnapple]

Your successful qualities

Let's find out what qualities do you possess that can make you successful on your chosen path ✨️

This is a general reading meant for multiple people. Take only what resonates and leave out the rest.

Your feedback is much appreciated. If you find the reading resonated with you, leave a comment, I’d love to know 🎐

About me | Masterpost Book a reading with me - KO-FI (→ personal reading)

YELLOW

You have qualities that would make you a person of the people. You have a high level of emotional intelligence and charm that make it easy for you to dive into people's hearts. The chief element that will contribute to your success is how you connect with people. You know how to express your feelings in a calm and soothing way, people feel accepted and nurtured through the interactions with you and your presence. You care a lot about other's comfort. You intuitively understand what the other person wants without them having to voice it out. This is especially helpful when you are assigned a task or when you assign a task to other people. You know how to complete the task in the way that the other person wants and you also know what the other person is capable of, what is their working style, so you can give them suitable task and instruction. You also have the ability to pacify and harmonise difficult situations. Which are qualities that are very much needed when dealing with customers or working in employee relations. But if you're not careful, people's dependency and over demanding could be a problem. Dealing constantly with people's problems can drain your energy really fast. Also, when there are many people expecting something from you, a desire to please, to be helpful and perfect in your job, can become a burden for you. The downside of being in tune with others is that you're entangled with them, it would be hard to act independently.

What makes you popular with people is not just your aura or your caring and pleasant nature. It's also your communication skills. You have the gift of the gab, striking a balance between being funny and wise. Your humour can diffuse tense situations and your knowledge and wisdom can guide you through the intricate system of socialising, never appearing too jesting nor too serious. You can grasp abstract concepts easily and then explain them back in a simple to understand way, this ability will make you a great teacher or a supervisor or someone who needs to present their ideas to a mass. You also can turn those ideas into reality, ideas don't just stay in your head, you pull them out and mould them into solid existences. When you encounter new information or foreign topics, you don't shy away from them but revel in the process of analysing, understanding and absorbing that information. So new job, new position, new opportunities don't faze you, your adaptability is one of your biggest talents.

What can make you successful is your drive for success, it's very simple. As long as you have the desire to succeed in anything you do, you can achieve it, with patience, diligence but also a flash of genius. You are an innovative pioneer, you follow your own rules, and this will attract people and opportunities to you.

BLACK

This may sound corny but it's your heart and passion. As you can see in the picture above, the "heart" bead landed right next to the "sun" bead at the centre. It's just that simple. Your heart shines so brightly that it can attract success. The more you're in alignment with yourself, the better the chance for you to shine and soar. Self alignment can mean various things, self awareness, self compassion, self expansion, all the things that make you become clearer about yourself. In doing so, you can understand your strengths and weaknesses with an objective lens, develop a healthy ego to navigate the world and stand up for yourself, utilise your potentials fully and have a better vision of what you want out of your life (this sounds like an ad for self improvement program)

You being you, truthfully, unapologetically, without any shadow nor hiding, will make everything you strive for easier to grasp. Right now, you might have some fears about expressing yourself fully, showing your creative side, which is precious and a huge treasure. You don't want to be an outcast, being labelled as weird or individualistic. You might have a perfectionist living inside you, constantly criticising and questioning your every move and attempt at doing something creative. Maybe you don't feel confident enough, still thinking that you lack skills or you look at other people and see them getting busy and successful, you begin to doubt your resolution and your ability, no amount of practice is enough in your eyes. This line of thinking is really detrimental to your growth. Looking at other people for inspiration is fine but it can become an obsession, taking other's success as goals to achieve, while ignoring your own brilliance. There's something you need to know, that you don't have to be applauded by a crowd to prove that you're talented and worthy. You will find that, by being yourself and sharing your creativity, slowly and surely, there will be people who appreciate your work, even if they are not the mainstream crowd.

On the subject of the crowd, this group has a bit of similarity with the first group, in the ability to connect with people. But unlike group one, who uses their charm and verbal ability to harmonise and attract people, yours is more about your ability to get into the hearts of other people, through your sensitivity and kindness. This group's soul is like one of the artists. Beauty moves your heart, you see beauty in everything, down to their core, this kind of ardent appreciation will spread to your surroundings, the people around you. It's like you have a subconscious ability to beautify everything, making things softer, more tender, more kind. Don't hide this part of yours, the more you're willing to be transparent and spiritually "naked", the more joy and success will come into your life, for you will be the pure vessel that the universe will pour into endlessly.

GREEN

The quality that stands out the most is your ability to accept and commit to changes, whether those changes are about yourself, your environment, or other outside factors. It's not that you actively seek chaos or transformation just for the sake of shaking things up, but when changes come to you, you don't cower and complain, you accept them and try to find the best possible solution to deal with them, no matter how scared and uncomfortable you feel inside. It's this kind of courage that will help you sail through the ups and downs in life without being sunken and defeated by them.

When you feel afraid or anxious, uneasy in your mind, you actively try to find a solution, a different route of thinking to get out of that unproductive thinking mode. Sometimes you would even seek the very things that make you afraid, to learn more about them, to gain an understanding and to broaden your perspective. When your heart feels weak, you still believe in a better future. In doing so, you attract luck to your side. You would find that whenever you're in a difficult situation, if you keep your faith and your mind open, new understanding and support will come your way, helping you regain stability and inner peace again. Your heart is resilient, even though it might have suffered painful wounds in the past, it still remains optimistic and tries to break away from the clutch of the past. So you don't easily give up when there are hardship and setbacks in your endeavour. Your mind also can think up really out of the box ideas, great innovative ideas that can bring changes to the community, and the society you're in, as long as you give your mind total freedom.

With your resilient heart, your outward aura is very stable and solid, very sure of yourself. You have good self-control, from your body to your mind and your heart. Dark thoughts won't be able to stay in your mind for long, you exercise firm authority on them, not allowing them to sabotage you. Sometimes you can be in a melancholic mood, feeling hopeless or too weary, but you know how to get out of it, centering yourself to the physical reality around you, taking care of yourself and reaffirming your core values. You know how to offset the dark with light, the cold with warmth. When you're stressed, you might choose to do something physical or appreciate the beauty around you, bringing you back to simple happiness. This again points to the sturdiness of your core. You don't seek external validations or nourishment from others, you nourish yourself and shine your own light, you're not the moon waiting for other light to illuminate you and reflecting back that light, you are the sun that give out your light and illuminate others. This self containment, or independence will make you a great leader, or someone who can work independently, actually, any positive won't be daunting to you at all. You can take on lots of stress, not to say that you should, but when working or doing something under pressure, you can still manage the load and work efficiently.

BLUE

Life seems like a never-ending adventure to you. You're not meant to stay in one place, be contented with "normal" life, "normal" means what everyone thinks how life should be, not for you, you're a traveller, a seafarer, constantly following the flow of life. The fluidity of your energy enables you to navigate life situations with grace and ease, not that you're trouble-free or everything is smooth sailing all the time, but you don't get stuck. If you ever find yourself in a predicament, you don't sit and complain, asking why misfortune befell you, you try to find all the information you can get, the lesson you can learn, the most positive outcome and the most opportune moment to turn misfortune into your advantage, rising again, stronger and wiser. You have keen eyes that can notice opportunities from miles away and an open heart that can welcome those opportunities, which makes you seem like a very lucky person to the onlookers.

Your mind is your greatest asset that can make you rise in this world. You don't let valuable information slip through your mind, you examine it with curiosity and intense focus, extract from it the essence that can be used for the future. Your mind is not just geared with sheer laser focus, but also an ability for intuitive abstract thinking, it reminds me of genius, how it can weave all the bits of information into a fantastical picture. If something captured your attention, you would dive deeply into it, try to understand its core. This makes you an excellent researcher or someone who can do works that require focus and resilience. You can also read people accurately right from the first few exchanges and can adjust your approach accordingly. It's not about people pleasing, charming people to get your way, it's tact and understanding, thesr traits will make you greatly attractive, not just on one on one level but also on a bigger scale, in a professional environment or when you need to address a crowd.

Your energy is very balanced between masculine and feminine energy. It's both nurturing and authoritative. Drive and intuition, active and passive, strong yet soft. You shine but you also let others shine too, you don't steal other's light, if anything, you help them shine even brighter. Being with you makes people feel safe, at ease. You allow people to be themselves without ridicule or judgement. But you can also firmly lead people, giving them guidance and security. You can be serious but not rigid and cold, you can be chatty without being superficial, charming without hidden motives. These traits would develop gradually over the years, you will find that as you get older, you'll be more sure of yourself and more confident in front of people, stepping into your authority more, like growing a tree for many years and finally you can enjoy the sweet fruits.

WHITE

Right of the bat, the word "refreshing" came to my mind. You have a unique take on everything, from the most trivial matters to the worldly philosophical thoughts that you have, everything is different from the usual way many people are used to. People would definitely want to come to you when they're stuck in a problem and uninspired, they know that you will always have something unique to say to them, making them more aware of hidden aspects at play and a fresh solution. Problem solving could be one of your greatest skills. But it's not the logical, factual thinking that is usually associated with problem solving, it's highly intuitive. Your mind hovers between the collective thinking and the individual paths each person can have, you can synthesise those two worlds into an abstract thinking system that can get hold of information seemingly out of thin air and mix and match them together flexibly. You instinctively understand what people want and you deliver it, with a new twist. Your ideas are the road to manifest whatever your wishes are.

Not just mentally, but emotionally, you also express yourself truthfully, without trivialise other's emotions or making them feel ignored. You respect emotions, both of yourself and of others, creating an emotionally safe space that can foster trust. Commerce and sales might be the areas where you can express that strong point. Your emotional intelligence also adds charm to your physical appeal. You know how people always praise the eyes that are full of emotions and light? When you're in touch with emotions, your eyes show, and they beckon people to them. Your manner, your aura shows a charm that is real and earthy, nothing elusive or deceptive about it, like walking in an actual orchard instead of looking at it from a picture. You can see, touch, smell, hear all the things happening around you.

You also rarely judge people, if you do, it's not harsh or too triggering. You adopt the mentality of going with the flow, live and let live. You don't demand from people, other than respect for your boundaries and privacy, which you value above all else. Other than those, you let people live their way without imposing your beliefs on them. This open-minded attitude is very important when you're working in a team, you provide ideas, but you likely don't want to control and lead people. Though you could find yourself in the leader position often simply because the one with the good ideas usually is nominated to be the leader. You're fine working for others. But if you're in a leadership, you lead with leniency, allowing enough rooms for individuality to shine.

This might be a bit random, but you can be a good cook or a good decorator. If you're tasked with decorating an event or a living space, or just making anything aesthetically pleasing, you'll be surprised how positive people's receptions are. If this is not something you're aware of about yourself, you should pay more attention to it and develop it, it can open new career opportunities for you.

RED

There's a method to your madness, not that I'm saying you're mad or crazy, but you can think up some outlandish and original ideas, a little bit "out there". What people don't understand is that behind all those seemingly random and genius ideas is a very disciplined spirit. There's logic and sound reasons behind your every action. What people perceived were just the puppets playing on the stage, they didn't see the puppeteer controlling the puppets. Every action and word require fine skill, but you have the ability to make them seem effortless. Your mind is like the sky during a thunderstorm, thoughts and ideas zigzagging, making flashes that blind the eyes. What you say can be very spontaneous or somewhat irrelevant at first glance, but thinking deeper, people can't help but marvel. You might also have a knack of predicting the trends, always one step ahead. Creative careers of course would be very suitable for you, but you can also find success in predictive analytics or education. Your words need to be delivered to the world, they're your greatest contributions.

You have an air of feeling at ease with wherever places you're. You might be someone doing an independent freelance job, but then if suddenly, you're to be placed in the position of leadership or a completely different job, you wouldn't be fazed by it, you go into it as if it's the most natural thing to do, as if you've done this a million times. This air of confidence and ease makes people want to give you opportunities, to trust you with important tasks and jobs.

When you're faced with an unfamiliar subject, you would patiently deconstruct it into an understandable structure. There's an intense focus being put on it, not just to understand it but to master it. To be the object of your focus would akin to being scrutinised and studied by a scientist. You can be a quite obsessive and hyper focused when you're interested in something. Especially when you want to achieve a goal or possess something, you go with all your might, there's no fear, no hang-up involved, because you're not afraid to be judged. Your inner drive roots in the ideal vision you seek, not in simple egotistical desires like wanting to be recognised or praised. You might actually shun publicity or attention, because attention can curb your freedom, which is what you seek and value the most. So you're fine with working behind the screen, as long as you can achieve your goals, and those goals are usually about advancement and improvement of something that can benefit the collective.

[mayakern]

If you don't mind sharing, what happened to vanetta's ex Edmund and his new saintess gf?

oh boy, so, a LOT has happened here so BUCKLE UP.

(and here’s a picture of vanetta for context for the maybe 2 other ppl who will read this huge post, which i have tried to summarize)

TLDR: after vanetta “died” and was yeeted into time travel, edmund died and charlotte saved the world. but edmund got brought back… and he came back wrong.

but the full story is so much weirder than that:

the core conceit of this game is that we are time (and place) hopping every time the party levels up, and mostly this is pretty normal—someone who’s from an ancient time visits a future date and finds out their country no longer exists, someone from the future goes to an earlier time and is shocked by the severely lacking technology, etc etc

except for vanetta, who is not from the past or future. she is from a book series. and she has JUST discovered this.

our most recent time hop has taken us to a dystopian capitalist future that takes place in a big mall in outer space (think a combination of tron, zenon: girl of the 21st century, wall-e and other similar media), where our wizard comes from.

and as soon as we materialize there, vanetta is recognized as a “really high quality and authentic cosplayer” of, well. herself. the book series she is from (the briar path) is popular on a level that basically combines twilight, harry potter and the bible all in one. it is fantastically popular, but also pretty old, and also is continually getting remakes and re-releases and right now they are currently making a manga adaptation of it. and it has a very active fanbase that writes a lot of fan fiction. this is, somehow, incredibly plot relevant.

an npc shows vanetta the comic, which currently i think covers 2 of the books in the series, and it shows her being depicted as basically your typical shallow, unsympathetic villainess character. and it depicts her death: the moment when, on the ramparts of the palace she was meant to preside over, she is faced with an angry mob seeking her death on one side and the crown prince (edmund, her former fiance) and charlotte (the saintess, his new woman, who in the fiction of the book was isekai’d into the world of the briar path) on the other side. vanetta climbs onto the rampart and makes a big impassioned speech (aka a villain monologue) about how pathetic and horrible they all are and when charlotte makes a swipe at her, vanetta chooses to let it unbalance her, forcing charlotte to live on with the guilt of her death.

only, the real vanetta doesn’t die. she gets yeeted out of time and space with three other time travelers. and our story continues

anyway, back to present day, the manga adaptation has just reached the part of the series where edmund dies—something vanetta did not know about. but just because he died in the book doesn’t mean he died in real life.

see, edmund had some pretty devoted fans. and one of them, who thought edmund was robbed by the narrative, got into some ancient, evil magics and combining this with the immense power of FAN FICTION, he tried to bring edmund out of the novel and into real life, and in the process ended up fusing with him and also with a force called The Hunger, a roiling miasma of despair that was the ultimate evil in the novels.

and so they all fused together and became a new thing. a god. in fact, our yuan-ti paladin’s snake god. who uhh subjugates and eats all non-snake people. the creation of this god also uhh was a huge cataclysm that basically started the earth apocalypse that lead to everyone ending up in the sky.

vanetta has JUST managed to secure annotated copies of the entire series that include academic commentaries and notes on historical context and the first chance she gets she is reading them so hopefully i’ll get more info soon lol

[pretty-little-howtown]

What the casting of Dr Doom has made me realise about 'Deadpool and Wolverine'

Since I first watched 'Deadpool and Wolverine' I have not stopped thinking about the movie. It's hard not to with opinion pieces everywhere; the creators I watch on YouTube making videos about it; and my friends slowly one by one taking to the cinemas to see it. I really enjoyed it. However, over the past couple weeks, I have been doubting its narrative quality. This has in turn led to some pretty disorganised thoughts about the nature of the Marvel movies as well as any comic book or media adaptations. First I will begin by outlining my thoughts on the casting of Dr Doom. Then I will explain how the casting of Dr Doom affected my view of 'Deadpool and Wolverine.' Finally, I'll outline my very disorganised thoughts about the precedent it sets for Marvel movies.

I am one of the people very unhappy about RDJ (Robert Downey Jr.) playing Dr Doom. Originally this is because I believed Marvel would need some way of explaining why Tony Stark and Dr Doom look the same. I thought to do this Marvel would do the same character fuckery they did with Task Master. Then I forgot about the whole ordeal for a while. I mean I don't work at Marvel, it's not like I'm gonna be able to change it.

Having forgotten all about the announcement I was sent a Tumblr post, surprise surprise, by a friend on the topic. The post outlined how RDJ isn't the type of actor to be able to pull off the highs and lows of Dr Doom. Meaning that, in the comics, the character flips between calling himself a God with the utmost gravity and then being a complete and utter fool. Which I do agree with. So much so, that I created a list of actors I think would be better suited to play Dr Doom. But again, I don't work at Marvel. I can't change the casting. So, I forgot about it for a while once again.

Yet the cycle continues. I watched a YouTube video outlining all the easter eggs and references littered throughout the 'Deadpool and Wolverine' movie. One 'easter egg' in particular caught my attention. Chris Evans reprising his old role of Johnny Storm. In the video, the creator speculated this was a deliberate decision on the part of Marvel beyond it being a fun cameo celebrating the Foxverse (20th Century Fox Universe). They speculate Evan's Johnny Storm was deliberately cast to show that different characters can be played by the same actors. In the context of the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe), different people can look the same. In short, Tony Stark can look like Dr Doom, and Dr Doom can look like Tony Stark.

This should have calmed my original dislike of the casting. It's a simple and easy way to explain why in the Marvel film universe Tony Stark and Dr Doom look the same. Unfortunately, it didn't. This seemed inconceivable to me from an in-universe standpoint. Captain America died in the prime timeline. Johnny Storm was purged and left in the void. To me, this means Johnny Storm was not meant to be in the prime timeline and his existence there was a threat. Meta textually this, to me, would mean the same actor cannot play multiple characters within the MCU. However, I must note, there is no evidence the Johnny Storm we see is from the prime timeline. Despite this, I believe my point still stands, as the cast of the new Fantastic Four movies announced Johnny Storm will be played by Joseph Quinn. At this point in time we have no reason to say this movie won't take place in the prime timeline. As such, a more specific precedent is set by Marvel. One in which, characters can be played by the same actors in the MCU but they cannot be played by the same actors in the same timeline. In short Captain America and Johnny Storm can't look alike in the prime timeline so neither can Tony Stark and Dr Doom. The cycle repeats. I forget about the casting of RDJ as Dr Doom. I forget the possible intentionality with which Chris Evans was asked to reprise his role as Jonny Storm. I go about my daily life.

Until I watch another YouTube video. This one about the concept of Anchor Beings. The creator outlines their worries that anchor beings serve to shrink the multiverse Marvel has created instead of widening it. It goes on to mention disagreement about whether the idea of anchor beings is truly another multiversal concept introduced into the Marvel playbook or a metatextual reflection of the importance of Hugh Jackman and Wolverine to the Fox-men (20th Century Fox's X-Men) franchise. The creator settles on the two ideas being the same as a result of the reveal of RDJ as Dr Doom and the rumours of 'Avengers 5' having an anti-Kang anchor being squad. Those point to the concept of anchor beings sticking around as well as showing how integral RDJ is to the MCU.

Finally, the cycle ends. This time I wasn't able to let my thoughts go. Instead, I came to a conclusion I didn't want to come to. Narratively, 'Deadpool and Wolverine' probably isn't that good of a movie. Don't get me wrong I loved it. I watched the X-Men movies as a kid and loved them. I still love them, and this movie was the perfect Foxverse send-off. But that's the issue. The movie's value comes from the metatextual narrative woven into it. Every character in the Void is from the Foxverse. As far as I can tell, the characters are mostly from movies that have either been forgotten from the 20th Century Fox catalogue. A lot more have been from movies that were considered flops, or characters that were horrifically conceived. Juggernaut comes to mind. Wolverine is burnt out and useless, a mata[hor for the current state of the Fox. Deadpool is alive because since Logan he's been Fox's most bankable property, but he's not content because the Wolverine from the previous movies was the lynchpin of the franchise.

That's where Wolverine being an anchor being comes in. Hugh Jackman's bankablility as Wolverine cannot be denied and the X-Men movies made it clear that their protagonist is Wolverine. Metatextually, this can be seen from the generally bad reception of X-Men movies that did not have him as the protagonist. Of course, with the exception of First Class Last Stand and Origins Wolverine. X-Men follows Logan being introduced to the X-Men as well as taking care of Rouge. X2 focuses much more on Loagn's backstory. I would argue he's still the protagonist in Days of Future Past, not just because he is the one sent back in time but because he is the one who ultimately brings Charles and Erik together. This movie cemented Logan as the emotional anchor of the X-Men movies.

Now where does this leave us in terms of future movies? Well, I have to agree the idea of anchor beings does seem to have been created to allow for more stories with a select few favourites. However, it also sets a dangerous precedent that nostalgia can make for a 'good' movie, you just have to do it right. Many people complained about 'Rise of Skywalker' for leaning too much into nostalgia and dropping it into the movie at random. Scenes seemed to be written around easter eggs and not the other way around. Disney hadn't figured out the formula then, but by 'No Way Home' they had. The easter eggs had become part of the plot. If 'Deadpool and Wolverine' was a send-off to the Foxverse, then 'No Way Home' was the first send-off, this one to the Spider-Man IP. Both came after long and arduous legal battles over the IP. 'No Way Home' began with another uneasy marriage between Sony and Disney where 'No Way Home' could have conceivably been the last MCU Spider-Man movie. 'Deadpool and Wolverine' was the result of Disney taking custody of 20th Century Fox.

'Deadpool and Wolverine' is full of ester eggs and references that are woven into the story. A story that centres the character of Wolverine and makes him a metaphor for the Foxverse. As such the metatextual narrative of the movie cannot be removed from the film. It's hard at times to separate this movie from its context. It was conceived as a celebration of an era that will never come again. Now that Disney has cracked the code, I worry that these sorts of metatextual narratives will be used more liberally, stifling creativity and expansion. I worry this will also set a precedent that you need to do your homework before you go into a Marvel movie. Something that isn't an issue for fans more so casual viewers. A while back a friend said they really enjoyed the movie but didn't understand part because they hadn't watched 'Loki.' I'm sure this isn't an uncommon sentiment and it demonstrates something an admittedly vocal minority have been complaining about. Noel Carroll, in his paper 'Power of Movies,' argues that the reason films are quickly overtaking traditional art and literature as our society's dominant art form is because of their low barrier to entry. by that, he means, it's a lot easier to learn to understand pictures than it is words. It's also a lot quicker. I think an overreliance on nostalgia and overuse of established media (TV shows like 'Loki,' or Agents of S.H.E.I.L.D') will make that barrier of entry higher but instead of encouraging people to dive in and explore they might just steer them away.

Thank you for making it through this whole post. I have linked all the posts and videos in the appropriate places above but I will link them all in an easier-to-view list here as well.

RDJ as Dr Doom Tumblr Post

'I Watched Deadpool & Wolverine in 0.25x Speed and Here's What I Found' -The Cadaidian Lad

'Anchor Being's Suck' - Pillar of Garbage

'Power of Movies' - Noel Caroll

This was a sort of half-essay. I mostly wanted to get some of my thoughts down in some form or another. I would like to stress these are just my opinions, you do not have to agree with them. Furthermore, I enjoyed every movie I mentioned above (except 'Rise of Skywalker'). This post isn't meant to make you hate any of the movies mentioned, nor am I making a concrete judgment as to the quality of any of these movies. You're free to have your own opinions and free to watch and like whatever you want. As I said these are just my opinions and who knows they might change in a couple of years.

[creauxbarre]

A delicious soup made with Rancho Gordo's moro beans! The beans and the recipe were included in the Q1 Bean Club box. I saved a couple ladle-fuls of beans before blending because I think the texture is a little more interesting that way. Topped with queso fresco and served with homemade totopos. Wish I'd had some lime to squeeze on top, but it was still great!

[Text of RG newsletter]

Moro were a long sought-after bean from Mexico. I just loved the way they looked and tasted so much that I knew we had to figure out how to get them into the U.S. Luckily they're produced right in Hidalgo, where our partners at Xoxoc are based, and we have a somewhat steady supply. You can substitute them with black beans but the Moro have a little something extra. A firmer texture and an out-of-this-world bean broth. My friend Denise (https://www.instagram.com/hechovistocomido) studies old Mexican cookbooks and adapts the recipes to contemporary kitchens, without compromising the original intent. I've had some old Mexican books over the years but she's reminded me how valuable they are and they're still useful. This recipe is simple but with our beans and good longaniza, you'll have a feast. A lot of Americans use the word "chorizo" when they really mean longaniza. A simple pork sausage would be an adequate substitute, but avoid Spanish chorizo, which is cured and hard. I'd also avoid Italian sausages with a distinct fennel seed flavor. You could ignore me and make a delicious dish, it just might be off. This recipe is from the Frijoles section of the book Platillos Populares Mexicanos by Josefina Velasquez de Leon.

Sopa de Frijol con Longaniza

2 cups cooked Rancho Gordo Moro beans, drained, plus 6 cups bean broth (or a combination of bean broth and chicken or vegetable stock)

2 roma tomatoes

1/2 medium onion, roughly chopped

5 tablespoons olive oil

3 corn tortillas, cut into strips

Salt to taste

1 pound good-quality Mexican longaniza (see note above), casing removed

Crumbled Mexican cotija cheese for serving

Makes 4 to 6 servings

Heat a nonstick skillet or comal over medium-high heat. Place the tomatoes on the skillet and cook, turning occasionally with tongs, until charred on all sides, 10 to 15 minutes. Remove the tomatoes from the pan and transfer to a blender or food processor, along with the onion; puree until smooth. Heat a heavy-bottomed pot (such as a Dutch oven) over medium-high heat. Add 2 tablespoons of the oil and heat until shimmering. Add the tortilla strips and fry, stirring, until crisp. Remove to a paper towel-lined plate and set aside. In the same pot, add the remaining oil, and heat over medium heat. Add the longaniza and cook, stirring, until cooked through and slightly crisp, 10 to 15 minutes. Remove the longaniza using a slotted spoon; set aside. To the pot with the remaining longaniza grease, add the tomato onion mixture. Cook until the mixture reduces to a thicker consistency, about 8 minutes. In the blender, combine the beans and the 6 cups of bean broth and puree until smooth. Add to the pot with the tomato mixture. Bring the mixture to a simmer, then reduce the heat to a very gentle simmer and cook until it reaches a creamy consistency, about 10 minutes. Taste and add salt if needed. Remove the pot from the heat and stir in the longaniza and tortilla strips. Serve the soup in bowls topped with cotija cheese.

[zhalfirin-binds]

Edge colouring with acrylic paint

I was asked to go over my process for painting edges and I wanted to do a new one so I could take good pictures of the process. Alas, I don't have the time to do that at the moment so a quick write up with already existing pictures it is

These pictures only show the colouring of the top edge. Traditionally it's either the top edge or all edges that get coloured/decorated. Colouring the front edge of a rounded book comes with another set of challenges that I will not address here. (On the upside, colouring a straight front edge is just the same.)

The basic procedure is always the same though.

First up the book is set in a press. Trimming helps to get a more even surface and will help reducing the time one spends on sanding.

Prepping the bookblock I prep the bookblock and use some sturdy and not voluminous paper to cushion the bookblock between boards. A bonus on this is, the cushioning can adapt to the shape of the bookblock. As visible the pictures, these are from colouring the edge of book with shoulders (which means it has not only been rounded but also backed). By cushioning the bookblock I can protect the shoulders from being squashed by the boards when I apply pressure. The cushioning paper should also be larger than the book itself. Otherwise the pressure from clamping the edge tight can cause a smaller cushioning to leave marks on the bookblock. (btw paper from high gloss magazines is perfect, because it's very dense and will not be compressed/ reduce pressure on the bookblock)

Putting the book in the press For this you need a press that allows to have one side of the book (the one you're working on) point upwards. The paper is level with the edge, but the boards are a bit recessed (no more than 5mm). This is done to keep pressure on the bookblock without having to sand the boards at the same time. Also thinner bookblocks can quickly get sanded at an angle which is a) an aesthetic issue and b) causes trouble when taking the measurements for the case.

When the book sits tightly in the press (here the go to is, give it as much as you have! you want those pages so tight no water is seeping in and causes bleed! Sometimes paper quality is lacking though and it can't be avoided.)

Sanding the edge Sanding is, in my experience, the one of the crucial parts of edge colouring. A smooth edge will lead to an even result and removes one possible cause for flaking (there are more though). Even my trimmed books usually have a mark from the blade when trimming and to get an even looking result those need to go. I sand in different grits, starting with a 120 sandpaper wrapped around a block of cork or another tool for holding the paper. I go no lower than than to avoid getting even deeper groves than there still are. Then I follow up with 180, 240 and 320 paper. Usually that's enough to get a glossy sheen on the edge. (different book but you can see that gloss and the part I still had to go over in the pictures below)

Once they have that sheen...

DO NOT TOUCH THE EDGE!

I know it's hard. The temptation to just run the fingers over them great. They look so smooth and shiny. Almost silken to the touch... and they are... but I repeat YOU MUST NOT TOUCH!

The oils on your skin can interfere with a good result. Especially water based colours may not stick as well to the areas touched as others, glues and foils do not adhere as well, stuff like that. Applying colour When the book is in the press it's not removed or pressure reduced before the edge decoration is done. For the colour shift acrylic paints it's essential to get a dark foundation. Otherwise the colour will not show! I've done this with ink.

(This was really rushed and not neat at all, don't aim for a look like that! All the darker parts show where I did not have a smooth surface yet. Even the cutting marks from trimming are till visible.)

In my experience working with acrylic paints is more forgiving to laziness when sanding than inks. At least when it comes to even coverage in the end, possible flaking is a different matter.

The colourshift acrylic paint was way more liquid than the ones I'm familiar with, still they needed diluting (a first go with undiluted colour resulted in severe flaking). For the ratio on how to dilute I can't give measurements. I think I ended up with a rather thin colour and did several passes until I was satisfied with the colourshift effect.

No matter what coat is applied I use a soft brush that is wider than the bookblock to cover all at once and avoid to obvious streaks. The direction of brushing is from spine area to the front. I try to get the whole edge covered in 1 motion. To avoid colour seeping down the front edge I lift the brush towards the end so there's less pressure pushing a bit of colour ahead of the brush and spilling down the front edge. (I'm still working on that part, different paints behave differently, but that's the ideal to aim for.)

Now all to do is wait until the colour is completely dry. Which is rather fast with acrylics but takes a bit longer with ink. That step can be speed up a bit with a hairdryer on low heat and from a distance to allow the colour to dry evenly and then the book can be taken out of the press.

I've seen different approaches to separate the edges. Mine is a gentle wave motion. Holding on to the books spine and front and just twisting it and pushing the pages so they move against each other.

If all went well there's a rewarding crackle and no colour flakes off. If colour flakes off, it's back to square one, sanding until all is clean and smooth, colouring, drying and separating (and hoping this time all goes well).

As a reference for the colourshift paints I used, I did a test sheet for the chameleon colours. So here's a dot of the same colour on white paper as the stripes under or next to it on the black and also slightly different angles to show the colourshift (sadly it photographs really bad on flat surfaces)

[goshdangronpa]

Are we in the Golden Age of Video Games?

Maybe I'm just giddy. In the 24 hours before I started writing this, I got a Switch 2 at my first console launch event, played a genuine dream game in Mario Kart World, and revisited the self-evident excellence of Deltarune on a new save file. Still, I'm serious here. Even with the many problems we can all see in the industry, the products, and the community, there are several signs that it's really never been better. So many, in fact, that I'm putting them under a readmore.

QUALITY. Yes, we still get plenty of garbage, but our overall standards are so high now. It seems like something exciting, fun, fresh, clever, or otherwise impressive comes out every week. Every day, even, if you look beyond releases from major studios. This isn't just limited to a few notable types, either. Great games now vary in genre and aesthetic, length and complexity, budget and cost, pedigree and originality. Even new games that we consider terrible would've been the stuff of dreams just a few generations ago. That may sound like a backhanded compliment, but what I mean is we've come a long way.

QUANTITY. Video games are coming out from all kinds of entities. They may be giant corporations, funneling vast resources into AAA behemoths that offer hundreds of hours of adventure. Or they may be individual auteurs, independently creating something more intimate, poignant, and unique than you'd find from most studios. Between these extreme ends of the spectrum are many other teams and groups and studios, collectively releasing games at significantly higher rates than any other time in history.

ACCESSIBILITY. Looking for something new? Visit your local brick-and-mortar game shop (they're still out there). Or connect your console to the internet and browse its online store. Or check if there's a sale on Steam. Or explore any number of sites where people publish their own games, often free of charge. Looking for something old? Emulators, official and otherwise, make a half-century of history more accessible than ever before. Rereleases are also big business, so your fave may be available with shiny HD graphics and other modernizing updates.

MAINSTREAMING. We're on the third or fourth generation of gamers, and public perceptions have shifted greatly in the past 50 years. The belief that video games are purely for children or immature grown-ups is on the wane. All over the world, people of all ages are playing. The Olympics have embraced esports. Hollywood is turning to video game adaptations for blockbuster hits with promising results. Modern titles can generate more billions than the top-grossing movies of all time. This is not a niche hobby anymore.

YOU. Making your own video game has always been more challenging than, say, writing your own book. Nowadays, though, an incredible array of tools and resources are available to help you at every step, from conception to release. RPG Maker alone has been the foundation for multiple modern masterpieces. The gaming community, expansive and expanding, can also help. But you can also join as a fellow fan and engage with the hobby by spectating livestreamed playthroughs or esports competitions, discussing games on social media, watching and commenting on or shooting your own vlogs, and so much more.

They say that you don't know you're in the good old days until they're past. There's plenty of reason to believe that this moment in gaming history, right now, is "the good old days." Those of us who are not children may have a fondness for the games and systems of our youth. I'll always cling to mine, but the past few years have also given us an embarrassment of riches. We live in the age of Elden Ring and Sayonara Wild Hearts, The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom and Balatro, UFO 50 and The Hundred Line: Last Defense Academy, titles that feel like culminations of everything that came before, titles that may swiftly become staples on greatest-of-all-time-lists, titles that spark hope for the future.

Again, I know that things aren't perfect. The gaming community can be deeply toxic. The gaming industry keeps innovating in screwing over employees and customers for profit. Our current era, like every era, has its own novel and specific scourges. This does not dampen my positivity. It strengthens my resolve. If we can overcome the problems of our time, we may see that this isn't the Golden Age at all, but the age that immediately precedes it. We can build that better future, so that these "good old days" lead to the greatest days yet.

[eikopilled]

Worth the Candle (2022, 2024 anime)

With the release of the Worth the Candle webtoon, and with it getting to its Good Parts, I decided that I wanted to rewatch the anime and see how it really holds up years later. 

The Worth the Candle anime came out in summer 2022 (with a second season premiering in 2024); it was one of Crunchyroll's western joint-produced anime ie Tower of God, High Guardian Spice where no one really expected very much from it—it was definitely one of those bargain bin shows made by a low-relevancy studio without really anything special that it could offer (besides the writing cues taken from the original fic).

Worth the Candle means a lot to me as a story. It sort of saved my life and I think it's the single most me-targeted thing I've ever read. Everything from the subtextual theme to the textual philosophy appeals to me immensely.

No wonder I was really fucking mad about the anime, then!

WtC's anime is bad. It isn't bad (forgettable), not like the other mediocre seasonals that came out every year, it's bad (memorable), it's the sort of bad that sits in your head and you think and you think and you think and the only thing that you are thinking is:

Why?

The first big immediately noticeable problem with the anime is that MOSTLY it looks like dogshit. It fluctuates between generically ugly and noticeably very ugly; every action scene is still images sliding across the monocolor backgrounds with speed lines to indicate that they're moving fast. The lineart is awful, the colors are uninspired, and the phoned-in, uninspired direction cannot save it—somehow this is work directed by Masaharu Watanabe, who did Re:Zero. The character designs suck too—how does the webtoon get them so right while the anime completely misses the point? (It's because Japan.)

This is particularly a problem across the second season, which is 24 episodes in length. Episodes are wildly inconsistent in quality, there's one long stretch in the middle for six whole episodes which is mostly just reused footage and recycled cuts and the most god-awful CGI you've ever seen.

The first season (14 episodes) is a lesser offender, though not by much. Save for one singular fight at the end (the Onion fight, which does look very good, to the studio's credit—it's some of the best off-model animation I've seen outside of large shonen or Cygames productions), it keeps up this trend of bad art, animation, and direction.

And you know what. It would have been fine like this, I wouldn't have pulled my hair out over it so much, if only for the fact that they decided to tell the story in the most bafflingly stupid way possible, as well.

It's framed as Joon (I guess in the Heavens?) skipping through the master copy of Worth the Candle to find someone called the 'Iconoclast' (which isn't elaborated on during the first two seasons at all and I assume season three if it ever comes out will hopefully resolve it?). 

The problems here include

It assumedly expects you to have read the webnovel to be able to comprehend it. The plot is completely unintelligible without context and the seemingly random changes and dilutions of the original scenes (Joon's monologues? Gone! The flashbacks? Gone!) don't add anything, they just confuse me more. It's totally unclear who's supposed to watch this. I'm like 90% sure anyone who hasn't read WtC would have no idea what's happening and no investment in any of the big moments (editor's note: can confirm. I showed it to my little brother and he was baffled)

The pacing is awful. It's … kind of a nonchronological 'highlights reel' of Worth the Candle. For instance the Onion fight (which made me stand up and go KINO) is in episode 13 of season one and Juniper learns bone magic in episode 23 of season two. The emotional ups and downs are all over the place (contrast Haruhi). It's really hard carried by the narrator telling you about scene context.

The writing is bafflingly bad. Why didn't they just adapt the book scene-by-scene, if they didn't care about… literally anything? It takes cues from the book for sure; I guess maybe an effect of the English to Japanese to English subbing pipeline destroyed the original spirit of the lines? (But the conversations don't play out how AW wrote them, so I really doubt this)

The second time I rewatched it, I think I liked it even less than the first. I don't know what Mappa was cooking with this one, but i—oh it's by DEEN that explains it.

[adultswim2021]

Mary Shelley’s Frankenhole #1: “LBJFK” | August 16, 2010 - 12:30AM | S01E08

This episode begins with one of the rudest acts a person can do: having sex with the bullet hole in the brain of the guy you just had murdered. LBJ does “it” with JFK (it means have s*x) and then declares that he’s taking the corpse to Frankenstein’s funny house of weird guys. He wants to look like JFK so he can have sex with the bullet holes found between the legs of a gorgeous dame. He does this, but then he gets himself bitten by Lawrence while in werewolf mode. So the ending is a montage of Werewolf stuff happening like LBJ biting Marilyn Monroe and stuff. 

I didn’t really like this episode, but I can highlight jokes I respect, like “blink”, and Spencer Tracey’s unusually attractive forehead, and the “How to punch up a montage” book. But this one had a lot of “ummm… okaaaayy” jokes in it. I mean, LBJ might have literally said it exactly once in the entire episode, but some other jokes felt like “ummm… okaaaayy” style of jokes. Like, the high five bit. I’m considering that an “ummm… okaaaayy” joke. 

This is supposedly the first episode of the series in a more “proper” watch order. It doesn’t feel THAT much like a “first episode,” but there is some continuity that places it earlier rather than later. Mother Theresa is seen waiting to see Frankenstein and she is the subject of episode #2, which didn’t air.

Most of this episode didn’t make me laugh. I don’t think I really like this show that much! The design still irks me. Also wearing thin on me is the IO Perry music, which only sometimes suits the show. No offense to her, it is just mostly not my thing.

EPHEMERA CORNER:

I don’t wanna do EPHEMERA CORNER right now! Are you nuts?

Sorry I haven’t been regular. I had a hard drive failure that wasn’t disastrous, but required me to spend a few days getting some files back. Then I got addicted to not doing the blog, because I have a big TV and I had some very important gaming to do. Putting random bumpers in the EPHEMERA thing was sort of a pain in the ass, so I’m only gonna do it sometimes now. Okay?

MAIL BAG:

Actual scott facts: It's pretty widely rumored that the Scott Pilgrim short was made as a pilot for a potential TV adaptation of the comics,  but never picked up because the movie bombed in theaters. There eventually was a one-and-done miniseries made for Netflix, with the entire movie cast reprising their roles even, but it differed in plot greatly from both the comics and the movie. The short is the most faithful adaptation to da OG comics by a mile (it's shot-for-shot a snippet of volume 2).

Hey thanks for this, I should have figured it out myself. Just spitballing here, but I think they should use AI to make every comic book be animation, and the American tax payers should pay for it. They can even figure bots into the budget who comment on the videos and say they’re good, and they can also buy bots to watch it for us. And then maybe the bots could kill me

As cool as it is to have a show on TV say "9/11 was an inside job" as much as you could probably get away with in 2010 (you can tell he tried to veil it), I do agree that a tepid 24 spoof is probably not the best note to end your show on. Also, the fourth season was pretty infamously bad, not TERRIBLE but horrifyingly mediocre. Best way I can describe the quality is like jumping straight from golden age Simpsons to Season 26 Simpsons, with no slow, gradual decline in between.

I’m very scared of it, almost like if there was monsters on the show doing big scares at the camera. Please don’t tell me they put monsters in the show as well. I am stopping the blog immediately if a monster scares me on that show. 

So...Gregg Turkington is alive. It was all a goof for his Oscar Special. Yeah, okay. Weird stuff. Anyhoozle what are you liking on adult swim these days.

Is he alive? I assumed he was dead because I don’t pay for the new stuff. This is sort of an aside, but: Isn’t it weird that Tim hasn’t let that one guy who does the On Cinema Timeline just have a free thing to watch the new stuff? I heard that on facebook. I mean, he was basically like “I don’t wanna pay for it”, and I don’t think he specifically asked Tim for a free thing, but he clearly never got gifted one. Anyway, I don’t watch Adult Swim nowadays, I heard it’s all kids cartoons now

RIP George Lowe. I know you like making fun of Gregg Turkington on here but George really did die. I hope this blog does something nice and tasteful for once for him. He kind of was the original adult of adult swim, doncha think?

A tremendously important guy to me and my family (I had a few kids during the hiatus, so life goes on as they say). But yes, absolutely RIP to that perfect bitch. I am a little disappointed in myself that I didn’t do a proper post, but we can’t all be Lowtax.

Maybe this question is too soon or too grim but I'm gonna ask it anyway because you don't seem like a guy who respects the sanctity of life anyway with your weird ass opinions. Now that Clay and George are gone and Andy Merrill is on his way out (doing a podcast with MC Chris is basically a terminal illness) if they were the reboot of Space Ghost who would be good names to voice the four main characters. Zorak and Moltar can be seperate people. And dont say Jellystone. I fucking hate Jellystone.

I already did a really great AI joke earlier, so I’ll just say no one.

A long time ago I found a really horrible fan-made Space Ghost CGI cartoon and it ended with an earnest plea for Cartoon Network to let him (it’s probably a GUY let’s face it) head it up. It was post Clay’s death. Seemed like a very bad thing to do, and it pissed me off. I certainly do NOT think they should reboot Coast to Coast! FUCK YOU BITCH

[weaveandwood]

Rules: Use this order and insert images according to how you view yourself/your character!

Thank you for the tag @alpydk! This was really fun to do for Auroria, my Tav in BG3 and the protagonist in my fanfic Weave and Woods

Animal: Sparrow. Sparrows are common and tend to blend in (good for a ranger), but they also have so much symbolism in different cultures since they're found everywhere. They're known for their adaptability, and one symbolic meaning I found that I love is that they represent letting go and taking a leap of faith.

Place: Forest. Specifically the High Forest. Auroria feels most at home in the canopy with the breeze blowing and the sounds of nature surrounding her.

Plant: Mountain Laurel, a symbol of hard work and perseverance.

Character: Legolas. Listen, I know it's cliche, but I love Legolas! Auroria, like Legolas, is valiant and loyal as well as exceptional with a bow and arrow. Legolas also is brave, upbeat, and cheerful throughout the events of LOTR, which are qualities Auroria aims to emulate through her own journey with her found family.

Season: Spring. Auroria loves seeing nature come back to life after a dormant winter. Her favorite springtimes are surrounded with soft green grass, flowers, baby animals, and bright sunshine.

Hobbies: Admittedly, Auroria doesn't find the time for many hobbies. Prior to the events of BG3, she was a solo "freelance" ranger, so she would get a job, complete the job, and move on, living a nomadic life. During downtimes in her tent pre-tadpole, I like to think she would have packed a book - maybe a puzzle book if she had been in a city recently, or a fiction book from a local book seller if she had the excess funds after paying for a meal. She would never claim to be an avid reader, but finds it a good way to pass the time if there is no other option (insert Gale clutching his chest here).

Color: Green. Auroria has a deep connection to nature, not in a spiritual sense, but as a sense of duty passed on to her from her mother. She is drawn to green things because they remind her of her times in the High Forest with her mother and then with her best friend. Happier times.

Crystal: Amethyst (also one of my favorites!). It's said to be soothing, aid in protection, willpower, and sleep. Auroria spends most of her waking hours on high alert, so being able to relax at night is difficult, as her mind tends to wander to unhappier times.

Food: Oranges! Oranges are bright and sunny, optimistic and sweet. All things Auroria is naturally. They can also be a little bitter and acidic, and hard to peel. Auroria has moments where she wants to lash out, and she doesn't let herself truly feel her feelings. She is also reluctant to open up to anyone until she meets and gets to know Gale.

No pressure tags to @auroraesmeraldarose and @darkurgetrash - because I just read their fics on AO3! sorry if you've already done it <3

[racefortheironthrone]

I was interested to see Forge in the Hellfire Gala comic proposing some comic-book technology solution to the housing shortage. Aren't the problems with housing all legal and political, not technological?

So I've been writing a lot about housing recently, and it's certainly true that a lot of the problems that we face with housing affordability and homelessness are legal and political, but they're not solely legal or political as long as it costs money and takes up real resources to build buildings.

As we might expect from mutantkind's pre-eminent (but not omega!) technopath, Forge approaches the issue of housing from an engineer's perspective. Essentially what he's proposing is housing that costs nothing to build, which will be given away to the poor, and which provides both a carbon sink to the community and a source of food to the needy.

As we might expect from a well-intentioned engineer who has not consulted urban planners or social workers or lawyers or economists, Forge has neglected to think through some of the broader implications of his technology. Even if the buildings themselves are free - there is a fixed stock of land to put them on, and in capitalist societies that land belongs to someone else.

You'd better believe that there would be enormous outcries from developers, contractors and subcontractors, construction unions, banks, NIMBYs, mayors and city councils and police departments if the homeless could slam down solarpunk skyscapers on any open space instead of a mere tent encampment, or if the housing insecure or housing burdened could de-commodify the development process.

That being said, there is something classically Krakoan in this approach to political economy, because it very much is luxury automated gay space communism - with a twist in the tail. If humanity embraced "Red Krakoas," you could have universal high-quality social housing. However, Forge gives the game away when he describes his Treehouses as "biomes" - which means they are adaptations of Krakoan Habitats, and according to Krakoan law/ideology, "where grows Krakoa, there stands Krakoa."

In other words, by virtue of being grown from Krakoan biomes, these Treehouses would be considered sovereign Krakoan soil - and thus Krakoa's Third Law on land and property rights would prevail, thanks to the extraterritoriality agreements worked into Krakoa's treaties of recognition and trade.

So Forge's proposal would steamroller over a lot of the legal and political difficulties of his Treehouse proposals, but would further entrench the (old) image of Krakoa as benevolent soft imperialism.

[kitkat-the-muffin]

Silly Game Time: Are you a fan of the mystery/detective genre? If so, what's a story of that genre (movie, show, book, game, etc.) you really like, and why?

It could be a more dramatic one, a more comedic one, a cross-genre one (fantasy or sci-fi or romance or western, etc.) so long as the main focus of the plot is the mystery to unravel!

I don’t know if this counts cause it’s more of a treasure hunt but I really like the book I Am Princess X

The book is about a girl who used to draw comics about a butt-kicking princess with her best friend, but a few years ago her best friend died in a horrible accident where her car drove off the side of a bridge and plunged into a river. They only found her mom’s body in the driver’s seat, but found her bones in the water a while later

However, while walking down the street the protagonist sees a sticker of that princess character they used to write about together, but in much higher quality. Such high quality that the princess looks almost identical to her dead best friend. She freaks out, because the only person who could’ve possibly drawn this was her, and that means she’s alive and using this character to call for help

The whole book is a treasure-hunt mystery kind of story as the protagonist follows clues and puzzles left behind by her friend in order to find her, while also solving the mystery of how she survived, who did this to her, and why she can’t call for help directly

I really love this book and I hope to turn it into a movie someday. As in, I want to be the one to adapt it. I don’t trust anyone else to do it for me, I care about it too much lol

[wonderfulworldofmichaelford]

Is It Really That Bad?

In 1974, Stephen King’s career was launched with his debut novel (one rescued from the trash can by his wife, Tabitha), and two years later we got Brian De Palma’s iconic film adaptation that launched the career of Sissy Spacek, resurrected the career of Piper Laurie, and was so good that King prefers it over the book. It really set the stage for future adaptations of his work to be of a similarly high quality… Something which has unfortunately only rarely happened. To this day, it still remains a beloved classic.

And you know how it is with beloved horror classics: If they're good enough, you know they'll get remade. Now, the thing with remakes is that, when it comes to horror, they have as many hits as they have misses. Amazing films like The Thing, The Fly, The Blob, and The Ring all exist alongside mediocre crap like Rob Zombie’s Halloween films, the shot-for-shot Psycho remake, and the Jackie Earle Haley-starring Elm Street reboot. It really comes down to the creative vision and the story you want to tell, you know?

And Carrie is ripe for that, as the original movie cut out a lot of elements from the book that would be interesting to see in a modernized context, as bullying has evolved and even gotten harsher and more deadly over the years since Carrie was pelted with tampons in the locker room. And that’s exactly what director Kimberly Price wanted to do! She wanted to make a film that can stand on its own, a retelling of the story that wouldn’t be a remake of the film, but a different attempt at adapting the book.

The studio, however, had different ideas, and made her do a bunch of reshoots and trim 40 minutes off the film to make it more like De Palma’s version of the story. Three months prior to release the Sandy Hook shooting happened as well, which combined with the editing to turn the film into a remake pushed it back to October, and I’m sure it didn’t exactly help make the film more palatable to audiences either. While not a failure by any means, the resounding critical consensus to the film was “Why did this need to exist?” Even King himself was reportedly not much of a fan, though he did appreciate the modern updates to the story.

As time has gone on, the hate towards the film has cooled and it has picked up a fandom of its own, so I figured it was high time I gave this a watch. In honor of the film’s upcoming tenth anniversary, let’s see if the 2013 take on the iconic King story is really that bad.

THE GOOD

Across the board, I think all of the performances are really solid. Chloë Grace Moretz does a fine job as Carrie (even if, like Spacek before her, she seems a bit too pretty for the part) and Julianne Moore does a fantastic job as Margaret White to the point I might even say she’s on par with Piper Laurie. Judy Greer as Miss Desjardin might be my favorite performance in the movie, though; I just love how brutal she gets with enforcing the punishments on Carrie’s bullies, and how she doesn’t give an inch to the alpha bitch when she tries to start shit. As for Carrie’s peers, they’re all decent, but none of them strike me as very memorable. They all do a good job (even certified creep Ansel Elgort) but none of them really stand out as better than the rest. Still, there aren’t any weak performances here.

I think the finale really works better even if it is a little more over-the-top, mainly because even if it was significantly cut down compared to the original vision. We actually get to see some of Carrie’s rampage taken out into the town, and while we don’t get the full-on force of nature destruction the book gives us, we do get a pretty good taste. I think it gets a little too CGI at times (the floating knives at the end being particularly egregious) but I think it is ultimately a very satisfying take on the ultraviolent ending of the story.

I also like how the story was updated for the modern age, with cyberbullying now being a key part in how Carrie is abused by her peers. Carrie is genuinely a story I feel works much better in a modern context than in its original form. The ways bullying has evolved and become so much more horrifying in the modern age lends itself well to a story of an outcast being harassed by those around her, and her ultimate snapping feels even more justified and cathartic since the bullying she suffers is even more extreme and psychologically damaging than before. Honestly, I think this Carrie is even more sympathetic than the original; I’m not going to fault a teenager who is the victim of parental abuse and then has embarrassing videos of her spread across the internet from frying her bullies with electrical wires or blowing them up in a giant fireball. Fuck ‘em! They deserve it!

THE BAD

...Which is what I'd love to say, but real life has unfortunately made that a little harder to do. In the years since the original, there has been a very unfortunate number of incidents where people were killed in schools. School shootings weren’t really a thing in the 70s, but after Columbine it seemed like one happened every other year. In light of that, cheering while a high schooler brutally massacres her peers seems a bit… tasteless. Now obviously we as the audience are privy to all sorts of details that makes Carrie’s rage justified and her ultimate vengeance cathartic, but still, it does give me pause at least. Should I be cheering while these high school students get slaughtered like pigs? Is this not horribly fucked up? It’s an interesting moral dilemma with rooting for this killer, and while I did put this down in the “Bad” section I think being uncomfortable with what Carrie does is a valid response. I think that the fact her rampage can be viewed as either justified vengeance or as woefully disproportionate violence or even as both at once is a great strength of the story.

What isn’t a great strength, though, is how this was forced into a being a remake, because boy is it ever stuck in the original’s shadow. Moretz and Moore really end up trapped in the shadows of Spacek and Laurie’s takes on Carrie and her mother, and the whole film really just plays it straight with adapting what the original film did. It might be one of the worst studio decisions ever, because despite the strength of the cast and the overall solid quality of the filmmaking, the whole thing just feels boring. Even with the new angles and the interesting takes, the fact remains that the story and plot beats are unchanged and stuff we saw in the original film. It’s not as egregiously shot-for-shot as Van Sant’s Psycho was, but there’s not much here that justifies watching this if you’ve seen the original film.

IS IT REALLY THAT BAD?

As far as horror remakes go, this is one of the most inoffensive ones out there.

Look, I’m gonna be honest: Carrie is not even close to being my favorite King work, and the original movie isn’t one of my favorites. The book is a good debut and the movie is decent enough, but they’re not something I find myself revisiting. So even going into this movie I wasn’t expecting anything worse than what I’d already seen, and that’s basically what I got. This is a very unambitious film, though as mentioned before that was mostly by studio mandate, and thus it’s mostly more of the same—and what we got before was okay, so this ends up being okay too.

I think so much of the backlash comes from the original movie being a beloved horror classic, and thus not something that should be retried lightly. This film seriously would have benefited from more closely adapting the book and modernizing it like was originally planned rather than just rehashing the original movie with flashier effects. What we’re left here is a decent redo that lacks an identity of its own, but is still competent enough to not be the worst thing ever. If you like the movie, I can’t really fault you for it because I can understand why someone would like this much like I can with the original. Even if I’m not super fond of them, they’re decent enough movies.

I think the score is right about where it belongs, though I might be nice enough to round it up to 6. It’s a decent horror movie, and if you like it, I can’t really blame you. It has a lot of good elements going for it, and I think if it had been allowed to be an adaptation of the book I wouldn’t hesitate to call it the definitive Carrie adaptation. Bumping the good parts of It to the 80s made that story a lot better, after all! But the meddling to turn one director’s vision into a mirror image of a previous one’s vision really just holds this back a bit for me. If you want to throw this on your Halloween watchlist or add it to your Stephen King movie collection, it’s a decent addition, but it really deserved to be so much more than the reheated leftovers of De Palma.

[twilight-good-yall-dumb]

I just rewatched The Hunger Games with my friends, and it was a good time as always (especially with all the connections I could make after reading ABOSAS), but it got me thinking. The Hunger Games movies are each objectively well made movies. They all did well in the box office, they have surprisingly high critic scores (for movies in the YA genre), and they are all fairly well liked and respected by the general population. And yes, a part of this certainly is the fact that the source material is quality work with meaningful and thought provoking themes and characters, but what really stood out to me was the craftsmanship and care that clearly went into the movie.

Call it following market trends (they saw how well Twilight and Harry Potter did and put forth their resources, invested in the project), but even if they had put all the money in the world into the project, it wouldn't have been good unless the people making it cared. It's so clear that the creatives involved took the concept seriously, that they put in the work to create a convincing world with actors, sets, camerawork, costumes, and editing, that they saw something worth while in the story. I mean think of all the prolific actors involved (Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Lenny Kravitz, Stanley Tucci, Donald Sutherland), respected actors who would have had to agree to the project, who probably saw a real promise in it.

And because of that, they created something so incredible, a series of movies that both book readers and movie watchers could enjoy thoroughly, that people of all ages and genders could take seriously. And this made me wonder how much potential there was in other YA movie adaptations, how if only the source was taken seriously, how they could have thrived. Sure, some just didn't have the potential, the source material didn't offer enough, but for the ones that offered so much more than the movies ever could, I still reminisce on how much better they could have been. And yeah, maybe Twilight isn't the best example of this. There are YA works with far greater potential and genuinely eloquent writing, but to think of how much more Twilight could have been only proves this point, the point that YA novels are goldmines of good material, that if they were taken more seriously by Hollywood (and filmgoers), they would have endless of supplies of good material.

Because think of the Twilight we could have had, a Twilight with the budget of the later movies, but with the care and passion that Catherine Hardwicke had for the first. And this isn't to say that I 100% agree with the route Hardwicke took, but it's so clear that she respected the material, that she wanted to create something revolutionary, something real and raw. It's so hard to feel that in the later movies. I think New Moon was our only real taste of that, of a director who respected the source, of a budget that supported his vision, and of a team of creatives that made it all come true. Imagine if we'd had a four movie series of that. Imagine how much ridicule it could have potentially been spared. Instead, the Twilight movies (and its fans) were left the laughing stock, left to be ridiculed by the masses because the creatives behind the series as a whole never took it seriously in the first place. It became a money making tool for them, and they didn't care how badly it was done, as long as it raked in the young female fans who would spend their allowance to see it.

The Hunger Games did something different though. It took advantage of the gritty nature of the story and it used it to its advantage. It made something that could be respected by any audience, that could be taken seriously as an art form, as blockbuster film, but not one just for teenage girls, one for everyone. Now when are more directors and studios going to take this approach?

[darkness-holds-eternal-light]

I have decided to read more and not just fanfiction related stuff. If it's not online, it turns out I actually have a substantial reading quota, you just dont notice it when scrolling down pages.

So I decided to read general literature again. 😁 I'm reading "Perfume" again and yes, that's heavy. I've also just gotten "Looking for Alaska" in the mail yesterday and I'm looking forward to reading it. I found it recommended online and it seems to be more youth-literature but that doesn't mean anything about its quality. Very often I enjoy this more than specifically marketed grown-up literature.

So yesterday I went to a book shop because I was searching for books about Middle-High-German, which I'm currently learning and researching for my own happiness and it's great! I didn't study German studies for whatever reason (and I think that was actually not a bad decision) but I'm learning it now. 😊😍

So anyways, this book shop is a big one and it's a chain. No surprise that it is full of bs and third-rate zeitgeist literature, which huge parts of the population seem to be completely unable to identify as trash. Both stylistically and content-wise. Now I'm still curious, so I looked around a little yesterday. This was on display and of course I had to look. Beautiful, so beautiful! The cover, the design of the edges, the idea itself, even the name of the female protagonist (at least for the green one) ! Wonderful, it really draws you in!

So I opened the book and read a little bit randomly and yeah. The story as far as I can see is garbage and the way it is written is flavourless and verbally/ linguistically dismal and repulsive. Lots of useless anglicisms in it, which reflect well the level of verbal communication that many people are only capable of presently. No surprises here but it's sad in terms of literature being made. I looked up the lady and also no surprises there. Young, adapted and extraordinarily confident. She even studied German studies, which to no surprise didn't help her linguistic skills one bit, rather the opposite I reckon. I only wonder where she got the financial means to publish on that scale. Holding the books looks good on Instagram is all.

I've definitely read fanfiction MUCH more skilful and worth reading, really good literature!! Honestly, if you still have any tastebuds left that mainstream-culture hasn't etched away, I would recommend that you find something more stimulating and that doesn't mean it has to be super intellectual, but I would genuinely recommend you find something beautiful. You'll feel it, don't settle for that tasteless, unimaginative trash that is being presented as art. Follow your sense of awe and wonder and it'll lead you to places truly worth going.

[mugglenet]

Percy Jackson and the Potter Implications

New Post has been published on https://bit.ly/3xc0wV2

Percy Jackson and the Potter Implications

If you’re a 90’s or early aughts kid and you haven’t seen Disney+’s Percy Jackson and the Olympians streaming series, what are you even doing? The original quintet of books, released from 2005 to 2009, was right up there with the original Potter series in terms of young-adult real-world fantasy, and the adaptation is stellar. While certainly targeted toward a younger audience, it captures the humor and suspense of the novels well enough that it’s a fun watch regardless.

Source

But it also has important context: as an adaptation of a young-adult real-world fantasy series with emphasis on both epic scale and individual characters, the show is an essential precursor to the upcoming Harry Potter TV series. And from what Percy Jackson has done so far, some things are already evident — both good things and bad.

The good

Here’s the first thing you notice as the Percy Jackson adaptation kicks off: it is faithful to the books to an almost shocking extent.

The Potter films are faithful to the books, but in a different way: they capture the essence, and don’t stray too far from the main plot lines. But the Percy Jackson series is a different animal: scene for scene, and sometimes even word for word, what’s on TV nearly matches the book.

This is exactly what the Potter TV show needs to do: it needs to accurately show all the scenes for which the movies didn’t have time. We need to see Dudley throwing his cereal at the wall and Uncle Vernon walking across the street to buy himself a bun from the bakery.

Source

One looming question for the Harry Potter TV show is how it will differentiate itself from the eight-film series, and here again, Percy Jackson offers positive signs. There were two Percy Jackson movies (they were terrible), but once the adaptation starts, it’s easy to just forget about them and watch the show as its own thing. The Potter TV show badly needs this. Of course, it’s not clear how easy it will be to replicate the Percy Jackson adaptation’s success, but it’s a good sign that the phenomenon is at least possible.

Finally, we get another good sign: the child actors can completely handle their roles, and the show doesn’t see any kind of drop-off in quality with the move from cinema to TV. This wasn’t something I was overly worried about — the Potter show should have plenty of money and resources to put out a high-quality product — but again, it’s good to see it happen in the real world.

The bad

But here’s what gives me pause.

The Percy Jackson series can be as long as it wants. The book it’s based on isn’t that long (416 pages). The author himself is one of the main writers.

And even with all that, the show can’t completely capture the books.

It can take every scene on the page and put it on the screen, but that’s just checking off a box. And as faithfully as the Percy Jackson series is executed, it still can’t quite capture the most important thing: the author’s voice.

It’s obvious why this is so important: just like the Percy Jackson series, the Potter series is incredibly voice-heavy, starting with the first sentence. How can you capture “Mr. and Mrs. Dursley, of No. 4, Privet Drive, were proud to say that they were perfectly normal, thank you very much” on screen? Well, you show them in their house being very normal — but that can’t capture the care that goes into each written word, and the satisfaction of reading them in sequence, in exactly the tone that they were written.

Source

Scenes with context, that don’t depend entirely on dialogue, that are based on text the reader uses to visualize the events for themself — those are incredibly difficult to portray on screen. But if the Potter series wants to really, fully succeed, it will have to pull that off.

I’m by no means saying that the Potter TV show can’t succeed where Percy Jackson has fallen short. But capturing the original series’ voice and tone will be absolutely essential for the success of the show, and for a TV series that should be similar, it makes me nervous that Percy Jackson wasn’t quite up to that task.