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

[the-busy-ghost]

Me normally: Let people love what they love

Me, after a Test Match Special commentator expresses their belief that the new All Creatures Great and Small is somehow "better" than the 1978 version: This is pure insanity and TMS can no longer be trusted on anything, how can they even be trusted to know about cricket, do they have no TASTE

[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.

[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.

[juni-ravenhall]

sso and "its just a kids game!", "its not that deep!"

ive been thinking a lot about how there are things you really can and should excuse sso for "because its a kids game". those are things like the silly tone in serious situations, when carl and a DC goon just want to eat ice cream instead of doing villain things, or when mr anwir says "so anyway back to my evil speech", or when avalon/druid says :O, or when katja puts on an evil playlist and we change it to a less-evil playlist during a not-really-canon event quest. the goofy tone of the game makes it less scary despite having some dark and scary elements in the story.

(the goofiness shouldnt mess up the logic of the story, though, which i think the dark riders and DC really have an issue with, but thats a bit too much of a tangent.)

or things like making sure you know that nobody died when you and the soul riders did a thing, or seeing someone blast off in a goofy way after being struck, so you dont feel bad about it, or take away the lesson that killing bad guys is fine. making sure to spell it out to you if theres a lesson to be learnt sometimes, or shoving the magic of friendship in your face (although in a shallow way).

or having non-punishing and laidback gameplay (except economically) to suit the youngest players, like not having to lose anything if you fail, or giving the player very clear instructions for quests, or having NPCs not be very hard to defeat compared to games targeted to older teens and adults. (but accommodating young players that barely read and have never played a game before, or players with disabilities that can't always play in the most hardcore gaming manner, and so on - accessibility - shouldnt in any way relate to having bad or clunky gameplay or game design. sso doesn't actually do a good job of being accommodating, it would be much better if there was genuinely fun, well-designed, challenging gameplay for those who seek it, while allowing those who dont to take their time and play the same thing at their own pace without failing - having properly designed races and champs and overhauling the scoreboard system and testing every race until they're at the quality they should be; having rewards like more js for reaching higher scores while still allowing players to earn okay js if they aren't aiming for the gold medal times or highscore boards. having fun and challenging gameplay mechanics with different difficulties. etc. the concept of "adaptive difficulty" is also interesting.)

theres things that are very reasonable to excuse in kids media. theres just also parts that i dont excuse and dont think its appropriate to excuse. when ppl do the "its a kids game!" thing, its not always about what i described above.

should you excuse low-quality game design and gameplay functionality just because its a kids game? no, not at this price point, anyway - there are kids games for free or for a couple $€ out there that might be validly priced. however, this is also *especially* bad in "girl games" (fuck gender and sexism, but society exists). girl games are notorious for being low quality and not comparable in quality to "boy games" at the same price points. perpetuating this - trying to get girl game audiences' money without providing quality girl games - is a problem of misogyny and exploitation. not excusable.

should you excuse bad writing just because its a kids game? i certainly dont. i dont like badly written kids books, or picture books, or cartoons, and i didnt prefer low quality content over high quality content when i was a kid, either (but quality means different things in different circumstances and to different people). your ability to tell if something is crappy or great improves as you age, but even if its definitely possible for a kid to enjoy the hell out of an objectively low quality piece of media, there are problems that often arise from bad writing and bad design... because where low quality writing comes from, there is often also a lack of care for important issues and topics, and a lack of respect for the target audience.

should you excuse racial or sexist stereotypes, or fatphobia and harmful beauty standards in general, or ableism, or cishet normativity, lack of diversity, just because its a kids game? isnt it *even more important* in a kids game, since kids are still learning so much about the world and starting to form perspectives and opinions and feelings about it for the first time?

if you think "but sso doesn't have much of that!", i think you might have played the game with a very different perspective than i did. what about how courtney, the summers sister, is framed as a joke because of how she looks - you're supposed to find it funny (and sweet though!) that carl franz thinks she's beautiful and perfect, because that's not how the game assumes you reacted to her. the brothers obviously also are meant to be seen as goofy looking but i don't remember if it was handled in such a direct way as with courtney. the game also assumes that you find xin scary or strange-looking when you see him without his mask (it's in ydris' dialogue); which is especially fucked up since he's a person of short stature (and also part of the "circus freak" stereotype!), but also always fucked up regardless - people just exist, man. we are born looking some kind of way. it's fucked up to think xin or courtney are ugly. it's fucked up that we were supposed to find a disabled little girl scary during an old halloween event (i think her back was hunched and she walked differently?). it's fucked up to think pi is ugly, or mrs holdsworth, or the GED workers. i want the world to stop thinking of normal human traits as "ugly" no matter how unusual or usual those traits are, or how symmetrical or not, or how popular or not, how old or young you look, how sick or healthy you look, or whatever the fuck. its all ridiculous and should be stopped. we should think of people in terms of kindness, in terms of shared interests and shared joy, in terms of healthy relationships, in terms of caring and loving and making the world a good place to live in for everyone.

and thats just the aspect of beauty standards and shit. i havent even gotten started on the shallow idea of diversity they executed in the production of this game. on how there were lots of random npcs of colour suddenly, but without bringing poc in as important key characters with interesting and engaging continuous presence in the story. how the dark riders feature the most buff and masculine female character, a physically threatening and masculine woman of colour. how they were going to have 3/4 poc in the dark riders while the soul riders are 1.5/4, and the remaining dark rider appears to have albinism which makes it another harmful ableist stereotype. how so many of the important characters were designed as white - yes, its a swedish game, but the game is not from the 1950s, is it? when sso was released, sweden's population was more than 10% foreign-born. today it's even higher. can you guess if there is a class issue and if rich white game studio owners and directors didn't really think about people who weren't blond and light eyed and white?

or the lack of body diversity in anyone else than 40+ year old characters. sure, it's good there was anyone fat or beefy or differently shaped at all. and it's understandable that they didn't have the resources at the time of release to make the player character more customisable (doesn't excuse the lack of diversity in skintones though) and went with their typical fatphobic misogynist 2000's cartoon look they'd already created before sso (dont get me wrong, i love the old art, we can enjoy aspects of things while also criticising them). but they already *did* create npcs with different bodies and faces on and off - especially the 40+ yos - and there was nothing stopping them from spending a little more time on creating a fat young adult npc, or one with an androgynous body, or a beefy female npc, or other diverse bodies and faces, rather than spending it on putting together 10 more generic skinny background npcs (have you ever thought about just how fucking many random unnecessary npcs are in this game?).

those are a lot of things that are pretty serious and that you have to kind of be woke and analytical to think about in the first place (most players - esp if they themselves dont feel especially oppressed irl - arent ever going to really think about these issues, or might actively be *for* some of the issues, such as in the case of fatphobia directed towards the player model update). other things like the game design and quality of the gameplay, inconsistent writing and design and graphics and so on, are things more players might notice since it can make the game just feel more boring or frustrating compared to other games you play, even if you dont think too hard about the whys and hows.

but the fact that kids might not realise that theres ableism or racism or fatphobia or misogyny or that theyre being pushed into spending money on something that isnt really up to the standard - thats not really a reason to excuse those things. and if someone says "the writing is really bad" or "this makes no sense" or "why did they design these characters this way" or "this horse game sucks and is boring and inconsistent", rather than just saying "its just a kids game", "why do you take it so seriously", "its not that deep", maybe its worth considering this, that there are things you absolutely should excuse kids media for, and other things you really, really shouldnt.

[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)

[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

[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

[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.

[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.

[books-are-my-life-stuff]

Seeing so many anime nowadays getting production issues and delays, I'm really glad that Mob Psycho 100 is not one of them.

It's worth mentioning that the animation producer is often the one to blame for production issues as they are the one who bring the anime staff together (I recommend checking this thread since it brought up the recent case of Nier anime’s indefinite delay, 86 anime's notorious delays and many episode recaps that happened a while ago), so it's not always the studio's fault or the staffs’ fault. Digging through more information and sources before assuming what happened/blaming someone for something bad happening within the production is always good.

I am reminded of Wonder Egg Priority and how they had to ask help from many people all around the world just to complete the episode hours before airing, and the plot going completely off the rails, the staffs were overworked so much they went to the hospital (I believe it's either one of the animators or the director, I don't remember), and the final episode was delayed one month before it concluded with many mixed reactions. It started off great, like a passion project beloved by many, but it didn't last long before it started crumbling apart nearing the end.

Production issues have always been happening a lot since a long time. It's not something that has only happened in recent years. Anime industry is a complicated and harsh place. Animation producers like Kadokawa is aiming to produce 40 anime per year, which resulted studios unable to handle the project and many staffs are being overworked. Even Revue Starlight anime, despite managing to finish the series without a significant drop of quality or delays, was also known to have a lot of production issues behind it, even the chief animation director said "it's a miracle that we managed to finish the show".

Let's look back to Mob Psycho, and let's see how "far ahead" the production is. The second season trailer was released one month before its broadcast in January 2019, and it already has many footages up to Episode 8. And the third season trailer that's released before its broadcast, which showed footages and voicelines all the way to episode 12. Rumor has it that S2 had finished production a while before it aired in Winter 2019, but it’s never specified when, while S3 had finished its production in Spring 2022 (around April-June 2022). I can see why people are upset over the third trailer spoiling the final arc, but when I watch this trailer as a manga reader, I don't feel upset, instead I feel relieved. I'm glad that the production of the anime has finished in advance, which means it wouldn't be subjected into delays or mid-broadcast production issues many anime are suffering right now, and it still delivered many standout episodes like it’s never left. Even though many talented staffs, at that time, were booked for other projects (such as Tachikawa Yuzuru having to step back from being a Director to Chief Director, handing the position to Takahiro Hasui because Tachikawa-san had to direct the upcoming Blue Giant movie), Mob Psycho still kept the high-quality production of S3 even until the end. It just shows how different a series can be if handled by the right production team. Not just the right studio, but also the right director, character designer, producer, episode directors, animators, and many, many others.

Think about what would happen if Mob Psycho hadn't been handled by the same people, and not with the same amount of love and passion towards the series. It could have production issues. It could have delays. It could have a lot of episode recaps mid-broadcast. It could have many staffs hospitalized. Or it could manage to finish on time but with VERY recognizable drop of quality. Or it could be just another forgettable anime adaptation with nothing special happening in it.

I think we as Mob Psycho fans should be grateful that we have not just BONES, but also Tachikawa Yuzuru (director of S1, S2, Chief Director in S3), Takahiro Hasui (episode director of S2's Separation Arc and Director of S3), Yoshimichi Kameda (Character Designer and Chief Animation Director), Hiroshi Seko (Series Composition), Kenji Kawai (Music), Miyo Sato (the artist of all paint-on-glass and S3EP6's sand-on-glass sequences), all of the staffs, animators, episode directors working on it, producers, all of them. We are so blessed to have an adaptation full of love, passion, and care from the staffs. It's such a rarity these days.

I recommend checking this for reading Mob Psycho S1 and a bit of S2's production notes, or production notes of other anime that you want to see. For S3, I recommend SakugaRelux's very detailed production breakdown thread here.

[raptorific]

I mean, most people in the comments are mostly just concurring with my point, which is that she keeps her business to herself. She might be an amazing person with great views. She might be a terrible person with abhorrent views. The thing that I like about her, that I'm praising her for in this post, and that almost everyone in the notes is calling her an icon for, is that she gives us nothing to work with or judge her on except for her work.

Yes, everyone has flaws, but I am not friends with these people. I do not work with them. I am purchasing books from them. As with any celebrity, I do not need to care about anything they do in their own life as long as I like the product they are selling me. I give them money, they give me their creative output, end of transaction. Me and Mrs. Collins are on the same page about this. I know a lot about the books she wrote-- what happened in them, how they were adapted, why she wrote them, who she wrote them for-- but I only know as much about her (wrote "The Hunger Games" series) as she knows about me (bought copies of "The Hunger Games" series).

The thing you're saying is all tied into the point I'm making-- if J.K. Rowling had stayed off twitter, not gotten into a bunch of high-profile terminally online culture war arguments, and hadn't started publicly donating large sums of money to right-wing hate groups, then I would still be a big fan of hers! If she'd given me nothing to work with except her creative output, I would find her to be an excellent children's author who launched one of the most influential franchises of the century. But, she was foolish, and she made an ass of herself where I could see it, and now I don't like her anymore. She gave me a reason, beyond her professional output, to stop paying her to provide me the service of "write new books."

It's the same reason why I would stop eating at a favorite restaurant if I found out the chef was a Trump supporter, or was cheating on his wife, but I don't burst into the kitchen and demand to know who the chef voted for and whether he really loves his wife. I also don't hesitate to heap praise on his cooking, out of fear that I'll one day find out that he's got a mistress or votes republican. The stuff he does that's my business, unless he opts to share something else, is the quality of the spaghetti I'm paying for. If he comes out to my table and says "I run a dog-fighting ring," then he's made that my business, and I'm not coming back to the restaurant. Unless and until that happens, I'm giving my compliments to the chef on a spaghetti well meatballed.

Suzanne Collins is a deeply private person and doesn't share a lot about herself. Anything I know about her political views, I have to surmise from reading her books. I think she might live in Connecticut, to your point about how everyone has flaws!

My point is that the thing everyone is praising her for is not making herself synonymous with the brand, not putting her own business out there, and requiring people to judge her solely and exclusively on the merits of her work. If JKR had done that, she'd still have a lot more fans today!

So, unless and until Suzanne Collins stops maintaining appropriate boundaries between Creator and Audience and starts giving me stuff to judge her for other than the professional service she provides me by writing books which I then purchase and read, yes, I am going to judge her solely on her performance as a professional, which is stellar. If she gives me some personal or political reason to dislike her, I'll do so without hesitation, I'm an enthusiastic hater. Until then, yes, her keeping me from knowing anything about her except what she puts in her books is iconic and she does deserve praise for it.

Suzanne Collins really has the protocol down. On average twice a decade she writes a press release that's like "in one year there will be a new book and in two years there will be a movie based on said book. Here is the one philosopher I'll be referencing, and here is what upset me this time on the news enough to write another book. Enjoy!" and then she collects her millions, drops another banger, and doesn't go on twitter ever

[nik991]

How Do I Choose a Chauffeur?

When it comes to choosing a chauffeur service, whether you’re booking a luxury car rental in NCR, arranging corporate trips, or organizing employee transfers, you deserve a service that guarantees both comfort and professionalism. Here’s how to pick the right chauffeur to ensure a safe, stylish, and stress-free journey. And if you’re looking for reliable, affordable luxury on wheels, GoodGears has got you covered with premium chauffeur services that suit every travel need, all at a friendly pocket price!

1. Choose a Service with Verified, Experienced Chauffeurs

Safety and reliability are at the heart of any good chauffeur service. A trustworthy company ensures that each chauffeur is fully vetted, well-trained, and experienced. This means that your chauffeur should not only know the routes but also provide a courteous and respectful experience. At GoodGears, our chauffeurs are not just drivers; they’re trained to be your travel companions, making your journey smooth and enjoyable, whether you’re on an outstation car in East Delhi or just traveling across town.

2. Assess the Fleet of Luxury Vehicles

When you book a luxury chauffeur, the vehicle matters just as much as the driver. Look for a service that provides a range of luxury cars to suit different occasions and travel needs. GoodGears offers a range of high-end vehicles, from sedans to SUVs, so whether you’re booking for a corporate event, an airport pickup, or an out-of-town family gathering, we’ve got the perfect match to meet your style and comfort needs.

3. Check for Transparency and Pocket-Friendly Prices

Getting a luxury chauffeur service doesn’t mean it has to break the bank! Look for services that are upfront about costs, with no hidden fees. With GoodGears, we believe in providing top-quality rides at pocket-friendly prices, combining luxury with affordability so you can travel with peace of mind.

4. Look for On-Time Guarantees and Flexibility

Punctuality is key, especially if you’re booking a chauffeur for a corporate trip or employee transfer. A good chauffeur service should offer on-time guarantees and flexible options to accommodate any changes in your schedule. GoodGears prides itself on being prompt and adaptable to your needs, ensuring that you reach your destination without a hitch.

5. Consider Extra Amenities for a Truly Luxurious Experience

Small details can elevate your experience with a chauffeur service. Look for extras like in-car Wi-Fi, charging stations, and refreshments that enhance your travel experience. GoodGears provides these little luxuries to make sure your ride is comfortable, convenient, and memorable.

6. Look for Customer Reviews and Reliable Feedback

Customer feedback is one of the best ways to gauge the quality of a chauffeur service. Check online reviews to see what other customers have said about their experience with the service. GoodGears is proud to have a customer-first reputation, built on a track record of providing smooth, reliable, and luxury rides in the NCR region.

Why Choose GoodGears for Your Chauffeur Services?

At GoodGears, we believe that every journey is an experience. With a focus on customer satisfaction, top-notch vehicles, and experienced chauffeurs, we’re committed to providing you with the best ride at an affordable rate. From outstation cars in East Delhi to corporate trips and employee transfer services, our chauffeur services in NCR are tailored to meet your every need.

Ready to experience luxury on wheels? Book your next ride with GoodGears for a smooth, stylish, and affordable journey every time!

[englishwiseae]

Top 10 Benefits and Features of Online IELTS Classes in Dubai

otably, attending online IELTS classes in Dubai offers numerous benefits essential for students’ demands and success in IELTS tests. Here, we outline these online courses’ top ten benefits and features, helping users understand why they are a perfect option for IELTS preparation.

Flexible Scheduling

Another advantage that can be talked about when attending online IELTS classes in Dubai is that it provides flexibility in the schedule. In the traditional learning model, much of the learning is done in classrooms where lessons are conducted at set times, which can prove unsuitable to some people, such as working persons or those with other engagements. 

Alternatively, the online class can provide courses that enable students to attend sessions at their preferred times. The courses proposed by various platforms are provided at different time slots in the early morning, late evening, and weekends to welcome any possible candidates. 

This allows students to effectively combine their study endeavours with other tasks, promoting learning efficiency among students.

Access to Expert Tutors

Online IELTS classes in Dubai are staffed with exceptionally qualified instructors who are experts in IELTS coursework and student success. These expert tutors offer top strategies for each test section. The convenience of online learning allows students to access world-class educators globally, ensuring high-quality instruction and personalised guidance to enhance test performance.

Personalised Learning

Personalised learning is critical in online IELTS preparation. Unlike conventional classrooms, online IELTS classes in Dubai offer tailored training with options for one-on-one or small-institution periods. Tutors become aware of students’ strengths and weaknesses to tailor their teaching methods, ensuring personalised attention and enhancing knowledge of effects.

Cost-Effectiveness

Online IELTS training is commonly more powerful than in-individual education. The reduced overhead costs of running a virtual classroom translate into student savings. Numerous platforms for online IELTS classes in Dubai offer various pricing plans and applications, making amazing IELTS training handy to a broader audience. 

Additionally, students keep commuting fees and time, improving the cost-effectiveness of online studying.

Comprehensive Study Materials

Online IELTS courses offer a wealth of study materials, such as practice tests, e-books, and video tutorials, regularly updated by experts to reflect current exam trends. Access to these resources helps students practice effectively, stay updated with exam changes, and study independently using digital libraries and online tools.

Convenient Learning Environment

The convenience of learning from home cannot be overstated. Online IELTS classes in Dubai eliminate the need for travel, saving students time and effort. This convenience is particularly beneficial in a bustling city like Dubai, where traffic can be a significant concern. 

Learning in a familiar and comfortable environment can also reduce stress and improve concentration, allowing students to focus better on their studies.

Interactive Learning Platforms

Online learning methods used in the current era are conducive to learning, including interactive live chats, forums, and even whiteboards that imitate class settings. They involve the students in the course and get them to work together, making learning exciting. 

They also make corrections immediately, meaning that when the students are making mistakes, they can see and rectify them on the spot, making learning much more efficient.

Regular Mock Tests

Practice is essential to IELTS, so mock tests are necessary. Online IELTS classes in Dubai offer timed practice papers that mimic the exam format, helping students adapt to the test environment and time constraints. Most of these mock tests are followed by tutors reviewing different aspects and areas of potential improvement. 

Mock examinations also foster effective monitoring since students can evaluate their progress and devise more efficient approaches to their studies.

Global Learning Community

In online IELTS classes, students from different parts of the world frequently get together, and the classroom comes alive with differently structured interactive sessions. This aspect of global interaction will enable students to share their experiences, learn how to tackle challenging issues and learn coping strategies. 

Another important fact is that interacting with other students gives one a different outlook. This can be especially useful for those students wishing to sit the IELTS exam since the exam is designed to evaluate the students’ English in the international environment.

Career and Academic Counseling

Various online IELTS classes in Dubai offer career and academic counselling, guiding students on leveraging their scores for further education and career advancement. Counsellors assist with university applications, visa processes, and job opportunities requiring IELTS scores. This holistic support prepares students for the exam and future academic and professional endeavours.

Benefits and Features of PTE Coaching

Critical Benefits of PTE Coaching

PTE coaching in Dubai offers numerous advantages, such as experienced trainers who provide personalised study plans tailored to each student’s needs. Coaching centres deliver comprehensive route materials and regular exercise checks that simulate the examination environment, enhancing familiarity and confidence. 

Flexible scheduling alternatives, including evening and weekend classes, cater to busy professionals and students. Small class sizes ensure customised attention, and the advanced era aids in powerful learning. Additionally, coaching centres impart valuable exam strategies and tips, significantly boosting test performance.

Features of Coaching Programs

PTE coaching programs start with diagnostic assessments to tailor the curriculum based on proficiency levels. PTE coaching in Dubai offers interactive sessions and extensive study resources that facilitate effective learning, leading to success in the exam. Periodic assessments track progress, while specialised labs enhance speaking and listening skills. 

Emphasis on test-taking techniques, peer learning, and comprehensive support services enrich the experience. Post-course support, including practice sessions, ensures thorough exam readiness.

Final Words

English Wise AE is committed to offering online IELTS classes in Dubai, featuring flexible scheduling, expert tutors, personalised learning, and cost-effectiveness. They provide comprehensive study materials, a convenient learning environment, interactive platforms, and regular mock tests. 

They also offer students access to a global learning community and career counselling to further support their success. These advantages make online IELTS classes an excellent option for effective and efficient exam preparation.

[eregyrn-falls]

So, I think that this theory is true to an extent. It articulates ONE of the reasons that media gets fandomized. The problem is, it just leaves out and doesn't address OTHER reasons that fandoms spring up and why people get into a fandom, and produce fanworks for it.

In a way, I see this theory as related to the often-expressed idea that fanfiction is primarily a way of "fixing" things. And like, again, yeah, that is ONE of the reasons that people do fanfiction. But it's not the only reason, or the only way that fans engage with the stories.

And it's just... flatly untrue that "good media", even "REALLY good media", doesn't attract fandoms, or that fans can't find any way to add onto those pieces of media.

I mean, like... is The Lord of the Rings good media? The books have had a robust fandom since the 1960s, at least, and it hasn't significantly slowed down. Are the books good media? Are the movies good media? I would say that most people talk about them as if they are. But through decades, fans have found a LOT of ways to interact with both the books and the movies. (There's a books fandom, and a movies fandom, and sometimes those overlap, and sometimes those don't. And the movies didn't erase the books fandom at ALL.)

(I could also use the original Sherlock Holmes stories as an example, because I think most people agree those novels and stories are pretty darned good, right? And it had what we recognize as "a fandom" for it by the 1900s, if not earlier. It's one of the great early examples of what we think of as a modern fandom. And while its various adaptations - of varying quality - have attracted their own subset fandoms, the original stories still have their own fandom, and even some adaptations that are considered Very Good - such as the Granada TV series with Jeremy Brett - have a fandom too.)

I'm not saying this as a huffy fan who just wants to argue that I've never been involved in a fandom for a property that could be called "half-baked hot garbage". Oh I very much have! I was in Pern fandom for YEARS. I also spent years active in ElfQuest fandom. (The way both of those bodies of work are regarded is complex; they probably don't deserve to be called hot garbage, and people, including critics, have said good things about them over the years; but they also invite some pointed criticism.)

For the past several years, though, I've been involved in Gravity Falls fandom, and that's another media property that has gotten a lot of accolades from both viewers and critics. So I'd categorize it as "really good media" (well, of course I would, I love it; but as indicated, when I'm in love with media that isn't all that good, I'm willing to say it), but it too attracted a very robust fandom (that is still going, even though smaller than it was when the show was airing).

Again, I wouldn't say that the show is beyond criticism or doesn't have some flaws (frankly, I think it's really hard to name a media property that is truly "perfect"?). But the flaws are not, from what I've seen, the reason it has a fandom, or the main inspiration for a lot of the fan-works it still inspires.

(In my entire discussion of this so far, I'm not even including the aspect of shipping. I'm not, foremost, a shipper, usually; so I'm looking at fandoms from a more general point of view.)

In short: sometimes a media property that is a very good work attracts a fandom because there are things that people LOVE about it. There are plenty of aspects that people grab onto that inspires fan-works. Even in the best media, there's always scenes that aren't included, pasts or futures to explore, alternative plots to consider, motivations and internal reflections to expand on, and so on.

I don't even disagree with the chart above, and putting The Good Place at a high point of Objectively Good and Fun to Watch. I'm just not sure about putting it outside "the fandom zone" -- it has over 1,500 works on AO3. Does it have an "organized fandom"? I don't know the answer to that, but, what defines a "fandom" for the purposes of the original post here? Does it need to be a variety of types of fan interaction, or is there a fandom for a work so long as there are fans writing for it, and fans wanting to consume writing and art and discussion for it?

In conclusion, I guess, I think the question of "why does this very good, and well-loved media property NOT attract 'a fandom'" (meaning a large, "organized" fandom, I guess?), while these other media works do, can't be answered merely on the basis of "how 'good' is the media". While I think there's something to Gallus's suggestion above that some works are too "smooth" and don't invite fan engagement as obviously as other works, that isn't the only thing going on here. (And "smooth", in that sense, is in the eye of the beholder.)

stating to think there’s an inverse correlation between how good media is and how easily fandomizable it is 😁