#someone come analyze me

[the-golden-dragoness]

My confession is that I enjoy the big bang theory. Is it funny? Not really. Do I identify with any of the characters? Not really. Do I find it respectful toward women, poc, neurodivergent, queer identities? Definitely not. But for some reason I am always watching it if it’s on tv.

[risetherivermoon]

i dont really like it when people dumb down Curly's characterization to just the guy enabling Jimmy. I get that that makes it easier to not like him, so that's why a lot of people do that, because they feel guilty about sympathizing with someone who's done smth fucked up like that, but i really don't think it's giving Curly the justice he deserves.

regardless of if you like him as a person or not, Curly is still a victim and he suffered greatly at Jimmy's hand. Just because he did something fucked up doesn't make him a 'monster' (sorry because i saw someone say that he looks like a monster post-crash and thats sticking with me because why TF are we saying disabled burn victims look like LITERAL MONSTERS- yall use some common sense I BEG)

Dumbing down characters is what fandom does best, but i think it particularly irks me in Mouthwashing because of the nature of the story. Jimmy already thinks of the rest of the crew poorly and doesn't see them for how they really are, we don't need to be doing that too.

I also feel like people don't really recognize the fact Jimmy manipulates and abuses Curly too, even before the crash. What Curly did was fucked up but for the love, don't dumb him down to just this one thing he did.

[reggiestein]

March the man u are...🤕🌠

[sukibenders]

The Arcane fandom, especially on TikTok is never beating the allegations because why, now, some fans act like it's too inconceivable to imagine that Ambessa was, not only, pregnant twice but gave birth twice as well? And their reasoning for this is "She looks like the type to get a man pregnant instead" or "She's too tough for that, I just can't see someone like her going through that." There are layers to these statements because, for one, just because someone, especially a woman, is a dominant force doesn't mean that they can't get/don't want to become pregnant (do you believe overtly dominant men can't be fathers?) It's also very weird because the undertones of misogyny and misogynoir and the overt masculinization of black women are there because, not only are they viewing pregnancy and giving birth, in general, to be viewed as something "weak" (even though it's grueling hours of labor that results in tearing the body apart, sometimes even death) but also attempts to strip Ambessa of her nuance. Yes, she is strong and very dominant, but she also deeply loved her children, who she birthed, and when one was taken away from her it changed her deeply. It's very gross to view a character like her in this way because it also reflects how you view dominant women in real life, pregnancy, and childbirth as a whole. Like how are you going to praise Arcane for having such a wide and diverse ensemble of female characters, but then have misogynistic takes like this? Make it make sense.

[chiimeramanticore]

it's cool if I ramble about yes man unprompted right. ofc it is. i wanna talk about his capacity for violence bc I think it's one of the most interesting parts of his character

yes man is nice. obviously he's nice. but yes man is not a kind character. he helps you, sure, but that's mostly just because he likes you specifically (and even that's debatable depending on how you play). i feel like this is exemplified w his pre-combat lines– "a pulled trigger's a happy trigger!" and "woo! bang bang!" like, he's clearly having fun! he takes glee in killing people, but not because he's sadistic, but because he just doesn't realize the weight of taking a life- or if he does, it just doesn't matter to him.

he was programmed without a sense of morality or an understanding of mortality. to him, violence is second nature. to him, violence is no different from play. he's like a guard dog– he doesn't care who he's shooting or why, he's just excited to do the thing he's good at.

and on one hand, he is a fantastic guard dog. but on the other hand, six must watch how... efficiently he kills, and wonder if they'll ever wind up on the receiving end of it. he wouldn't do it as long as he likes six, of course, but... if yes man was given good enough reason to believe six deserved to die, would he even hesitate? would their history and relationship mean anything to him? or would six just be another target, forgotten about as quickly as a radroach you stepped on?

six can only hope they never need to find out.

[realtapiocafan]

justin 😭😭😭 my babyyy

[tsugarubecker]

My favorite thing about being an Old Byler is seeing y’all figure out the same things we figured out years ago. Maybe that sounds sarcastic or ironic, but it isn’t. I just saw a post analyzing the Snowball scene in season 2, and I’m like yesss youthhhhh discover the same things we did 🎉 Give us as Bylers more independent sources drawing the same conclusions from similar research / a replicated experiment, yassss, sciencccce 🔬🧪🔥

[youregonnabeokay-kid]

SO. i was able to figure out the general structure of the script JLH leaked.

[explanation under the cut]

in order for all this to make sense, the first thing you need to know is that in north america all screenplays (scripts) are written in the same format

knowing this, we can deduce the general structure of the scene and even the length of some of the words

first we need to address the big question everyone's been asking:

are they talking about Bobby or Eddie?

screenplays are always typed in courier font, and in courier the capital letters B and E are identical at their left sides.

so while i enjoy people trying to figure out if the blurry letter in line 24 is a B or an E, the answer is it could honestly be either

where we really need to look is line one. the screengrab is blurry so i've outlined the word "going" and circled the area we should pay attention to

at first, the last letter of the prior word looks like an undistinguishable blob, but there is actually one key thing we can discern from it: the letter can't be y, it doesn't hang low enough

there is a chance that the word is not a name and is "he" which would not rule out Bobby or Eddie. however, that would mean the conversation goes on for at least 14 lines without mentioning "him" by name which is (heavily) frowned against in screenwriting. so chances are they're talking about Eddie

also, with what we know about the characters it's most likely Eddie. can you really see Bobby not talking to Buck because of... well, anything? and we already know that Eddie has a difficult time communicating. so i've decided to go with him for this script but haven't 100 per cent ruled Bobby out

moving on to the actual script itself, anything not highlighted in red is something i'm confident is either the exact wording or something similar. the red sections are the parts that i'm less confident in or know are incorrect somehow

Maddie's first dialogue block is the part i had the most trouble with. with context from the following conversation i figured that she probably asked something along the lines of when [Eddie] will be back at work. the main issue with this section is that the top line is actually six letters shorter than what i have written. this also means that the word that follows "going" has to be at least eight letters long. i tried messing around with the dialogue a bit but couldn't come up with something that would fit the appropriate letter count so for now i just wrote a line similar to what i think the actual line probably is

line six has to be either 12 or 13 spaces long and the first word has to be at least four letters long so i used "really soon" as a place holder, but i'm not completely confident in it

for line eight i initially had "Oh, that's good." but the line was one space short so i changed the "Oh" to "Hey" instead. i don't feel too poorly about this one but it still doesn't feel right to me. if the actual script says "Hey" i wouldn't be surprised if JLH changes it to something else or forgoes the exclamation completely

the final line is just a rough guess of what it could be. i'm not sure how formal the 911 writers are with action lines so i just took a random guess. some writers are extremely formal with action lines while others are more comedic with it (Neil Gaiman is a great example of this). i'm guessing the 911 writers are more the former but i honestly have no clue

[flying-cat]

Preparing myself to read a Persona 5 fic because it sounds super interesting but Maruki is a tagged character which means there's like a 70% chance that he's being mischaracterized

[smartzelda]

Sorry guys I gotta speak my truth on this one

I'm not kidding when I say that I think that blaming shit media literacy from fans on shipping/shippers avoids the actual root of the problem to throw people you can easily throw under the bus (simply because it's not unpopular to consider people who post about ships or ship characters in media as having lesser or derivative tastes by default)

And here's why.

I think when you blame people who are "shippers" or "consume media through shipping lenses", the true root of it all is a mindset problem.

In actually, putting on shipping lenses can be helpful when trying to analyze a piece of media. When analyzing media you're supposed to approach it through a number of mindsets and put on different lenses (both to deepen your personal understanding of the media, and to pick it apart and see what you can find there (whether intentional or not on the author's part)), and different ships can be some of those lenses

When it comes to ships between main characters (for those who are genuinely willing to see what the narrative is showing with their relationship and what it's doing), there are times when analyzing it from a shipping lens may be helpful. As someone from KH fandom, I have seen people come to deeper understandings and pick canon apart in the process of analyzing a relationship that is genuinely integral to the story (platonic or not). I've also seen people get into rarepairs of characters who barely interact or who just suffer little screen time, and I've seen them come to better understandings of those side characters and how they potentially fit into the world of the media simply because people are now focusing on these characters and how they fit into the narrative.

Frankly, I resent the idea that the only way to truly objectively analyze a piece of media is by turning off the part of your brain that gets excited over relationships and individual characters. Don't get me wrong, that is a way to approach a piece of media and a valid one at that, but the truth is that we cannot be free of bias.

For instance, I was watching House MD with my parents circa last year. At some point I started heavily tuning into what was going on with House and Wilson's relationship. My parents, on the other hand, were largely watching casually. They're not thinking of character relationships or getting heavily invested in most characters, they're watching because they like watching. One of them in particular did try to analyze things that were happening in the show as they happened. However, when it came to the scene late in the series where House threw out Dominika's letter approving her American citizenship, my parents could understand that he was doing that because he didn't want her to leave, but not much beyond that. I ended up explaining to them that House's fake marriage for Dominika was an explicit parallel to when Wilson was living with House in the early seasons. Both situations started with House being none too happy about it but ultimately letting them stay, spending a considerable amount of effort getting them to leave/getting this situation to be finally over so he didn't have to deal with it anymore, and then by the time a piece of news comes through that would mean the person in question actually leaves, House hides this news as long as he can. Because he doesn't actually want them to leave and has grown attached. And by doing this he became a self fulfilling prophecy. By reacting to the truth of Wilson and Dominika leaving him the way he does, he seals his fate and they ultimately leave anyways. Maybe I ship Hilson, but becoming open to how their relationship was handled allowed me to transition to doing character studies and recognizing patterns/parallels that I wouldn't have noticed if I didn't particularly care about the characters or their relationship.

Likewise, I've seen mutuals complain about how people who don't like or don't care about certain characters often overlook these characters (what they're actually like and their place in the narrative), while the mutuals in question (by default) are able to come to deeper understanding of what the writers/story is trying to do because they care about this funky guy

You can't eradicate bias when you're engaging in media analysis, but you can consciously put on a range of lenses and observe the media through different povs with the goal of understanding the media better or bolstering your reading of it. And those lenses/povs can include focusing on specific relationships or the perpective of certain characters

And this is why I say it's actually a mindset problem. Shippers and people who have this one blorbo they like a lot aren't inherently terrible "fandom brained individuals" who are the root of media analysis problems. The problem only arises when people's readings/analysis of a piece of media are inherently restrictive/narrow and self centered. Your problem is with people who view a piece of media through a ship they like but don't keep an open mind about it, and whose "media analysis"/views on canon cannot be split from fanon and their comfortability levels. These are the people whose "media analysis" starts and ends with justifying their fanon as canon, whose views on media revolve around sorting characters and relationships into categories they personally enjoy rather than trying to understand what's going on.

Here's another example.

Here we have a fictional ship we'll call uhhhh...Blanebin. this fictional ship I made up on the spot for characters that don't exist named Blane and Corbin

Person A is super into Blanebin. They're part of the main cast of characters and canonically childhood best friends, so person A (as much as they enjoy fanart and fic) is also enjoying analyzing how narratively important to each other they are. Recently, Corbin started dating another character in canon, but Person A is enjoying watching how Blane is reacting to this. "Is this potentially a tell that Blane is jealous or is having complicated feelings about this? What if he was, how would that contextualize his behavior this season? Here's what I think based on how Blane dealt with explicit jealousy last season in a different situation". It's not impossible that person A is still missing further understanding due to their obsession with Blanebin, but at the end of the day this obsession has allowed them to start picking through the characters both in and outside this relationship. It has allowed them to see potential subtext and theorize on what might happen next with these characters' relationship. Not to mention that with addition of Corbin dating someone else, instead of trying to erase this fact or state that Corbin canonically isn't into that person, Person A is trying to factor in how Corbin's current dating life affects his relationship with Blane (irregardless on personal views on the nature of Corbin's relationship with the person he's dating).

Person B is also super into Blanebin. They really enjoy fanart and fic of the characters, love obsessing over their moments together, and just feel like there's really something between the characters. To person B, every moment between them is just further proof that the writers are ship teasing them. But Corbin getting together with someone else this season? Oh that pissed person B off. They cannot believe that even though Corbin and Blane are CLEARLY gay for each other the writers had Corbin get with someone else this season. Perhaps, they think, it was even a decision specifically made to spite fans. How evil of the writers to tease a perfectly good ship and then have them not get together first? They must have been just doing those teases to get views from Blanebin shippers those scoundrels. To Person B, since Corbin started dating someone when he obviously has some chemistry with Blane (even though the series is far from over) means that Blanebin can never get together now and Corbin x person he's dating is ruining Blanebin by existing. In fact, they think, this is terrible writing for Corbin to be dating someone else because they don't like that relationship and don't see the point. Obviously if the writers were good then Corbin would have started dating Blane instead because this was supposed to be the Blanebin show.

Person C despises Blanebin. Don't get them wrong, they've always enjoyed the character's childhood friendship, but they actually have always thought Blane would have been better off with Victoria. They have a lot of moments too! But they're tired of seeing people ship Blanebin. Corbin just got together with someone else, so obviously that's not gonna work out. Plus Corbin and Blane totally has always given person C bro vibes. In fact, person C thinks, sure Corbin and Blane have a close friendship, but people shouldn't be shipping them. Person C likes Blanetoria and Blanetoria can't be canon if Corbin is in the way of it. So Person C likes to read Blanebin as siblings anyways. Sure they're canonically friends, but obviously their friendship turned into brotherhood. This means that nothing can be in the way of Blanetoria and Corbin can keep dating the person he's already canonically dating. Actually, now Blanebin just straight up makes Person C uncomfortable. Don't the pesky shippers understand that Blanebin are sibling coded because they're childhood best friends and that they're important to each other because they're brothers? It's obvious to anyone with eyes.

Sure, ships are involved here, but is the root of this problem shipping? Character A isn't as knowledgeable of other characters in the plot due to this lens they're using, but at the end of the day they're dedicated to analysis. Their love of the characters is pushing them beyond what they like or dislike to try to understand what might be happening through their lens. Not perfect, but they are slowly broadening their horizons. But Person B and C's problems here are their restrictiveness. What is or should be canon to them is tantamount to what they personally like or find comfortable. Is person C actually analyzing the this fake show when they decide to "read" Blanebin as basically canonically siblings (and this all of their moments are totally a bro thing) just because they don't like Blanebin and the idea of them getting together over Blanetoria makes them uncomfortable? Is person B actually analyzing this fake show when their "analysis" of Blanebin goes only as far as asserting it's being ship teased and deciding anything short of canonizing Blanebin is a targeted attack or "bad writing" because it's not what they wanted personally to happen?

This is what I'm talking about. This is the mindset. Shipping isn't the problem. The problem is when people marry fanon and canon to the point where they have a vested interest in superimposing their fanon over canon as "a reading" and trying to make "collective decisions" on what is canon (or what canon is trying to say) based on what does or doesn't make them uncomfortable. The problem is people being restrictive and centering their own likes and dislikes in the conversation, so they can only interact with canon "analysis" wise by deciding what is canon or should be canon "as obviously agreed on by everyone". You can't simply claim you like media analysis. To be able to analyze media and bolster your views on any given canon, you must be open to looking at it through multiple povs, to studying characters without trying to pretend things you don't like don't exist or do like do exist. There is a balance that must be kept between trying to keep objectivity and putting on specific focus/bias based upon the lenses you're putting on. You have to be willing to try to figure out what a media is doing or saying, not saying you're trying to figure out what it's saying while in actuality trying to define the narrative around what people believe it's saying in ways that suit you.

Thank you for coming to my ted talk.

[thevaelguard]

Ignoring strange items, Sebastian's room in Knight Errant feels so. depressing, even ignoring he might be spending the royal coffers on other things than himself.

This is the room of the Prince of Starkhaven? What is said to be the richest, most powerful city-state in the Free Marches? I can't see his father or the Princes before him sleeping in such a tiny room, it's around the same size of the front area of Gamlen's home!

It makes me wonder if this was Sebastian's room before he was forcibly shipped off to Kirkwall, seen so unneeded and worthless by his family he got what could have been once a guest room and not a proper room for family members.

And the kicker is he still chooses to sleep there, in the Undesirable room, barely decorating it that it doesn't feel like a prince lives there. The only unique item is a tapestry of Maferath mercy killing Andraste on the pyre, possibly showing that the one thing he still finds comfort in is Andrastianism, in the Chantry, in the one place he was made to feel wanted.

Mr. Sebastian Vael are you doing well...

[barrioghost]

Sydney Adamu & Carmy Berzatto | True Blue, boygenius

pt.1 | pt. 2

[what-even-is-sleep]

thinking about Bodkin again bc I mean,,, ALL THE SYMBOLISM OHHHHHGH. i NEED some tumblr film analysis hobbyists to watch this show and tell me all the themes n such

[chirpsythismorning]

bylers when over 350k people don’t have the exact same thoughts and opinions as them

[demadogs]

as a gay swiftie i need to say it i fucking hate gaylors so much. the news of the split of her 7 year relationship came out yesterday and gaylor is already trending on twitter. it doesnt matter how huge of a status a person has STOP READING INTO THE SEXUALITY OF REAL HUMAN BEINGS!!!!!!

[anthony-crowleys-left-nut]

i feel like i'm definitely something of a loustat love child. my lestat is my struggle with empathy, my lofty morals i don't always stick to, charming when i wanna be, kind of an asshole (sometimes), my vanity, and my desire to be feral. my louis is my brooding and wallowing, my more lowkey side, my constant bitching about being what i am, my self hatred, and my worry about whether i'm a good person.

and they are both my guilt. they both have so much guilt.

and like most vampires do, i carry a deep sense of loneliness and alienation.

none of this makes me sound particularly good does it? ofc that's not all i am. but it's a lot of me.