#the 1 difference is that i don't think hank as a character does it on purpose and i DO think the show does it on purpose (to the audience)

[carefulfears]

californication's commitment to the "i can fix him" model is fascinating me...they string you along as an audience in nearly the exact same manner that hank strings his family along...they give you little glimpses, a couple of times an episode, of something salvageable or commendable, in the hopes that you won't completely write them off, just as karen and becca will forever cling to those little glimpses of the person who made them happy "once upon a time," who made them briefly believe in a happy ending, who was the partner and father they once came home to...they won't ever be able to leave him behind and if the writers play their cards right, neither will you. californication was written about as "the show that showtime forgets to cancel" for seven years.

[positivelybeastly]

I'm new to comics and love beast. Is there any comics with beast that you'd recommend? There's so many xmen comics and idk where to start.

Hello there, friend! Getting into comic books is damned hard, but, thankfully, resources like Reddit, Tumblr, and Marvel Unlimited (or your pirating site of choice) all make it a lot easier to get into them these days without having to worry about being confused.

Well. You'll still be a little confused. Comic books are convoluted. But at least you'll be able to engage with them on your own terms. :) And, it's worth it. Mostly.

I'll tell you straight out that if you want some good entry points, like, this is my first X-Men comic, what do I read, I'd recommend the following:

X-Men: First Class (2006)

X-Men vol. 2 (1991)

New X-Men vol. 1 (2001)

Astonishing X-Men vol. 3 (2004)

X-Men vol. 6 (2024)

As for Beast specific recommendations? I have a ton!

For Beast as a character, being examined in his own right, I would recommend the following:

X-Men Origins: Beast - a retelling of his origin, updated with modern art and writing. Written by Mike Carey, whose work you should generally look into if you like X-Men - he focuses a lot on characters like Rogue and Xavier, but also on Beast, which is handy for our purposes!

X-Men: Unlimited vol. 1 #10 and vol. 2 #10 - so, this may be somewhat confusing to a new comic reader, but comics have volumes. This is when a comic of a certain title ends, and it's then relaunched with a new creative team, usually with a very different story.

So, X-Men: Unlimited is an anthology series that tells unconnected stories that fit in other places, between other comics, and there were two different volumes of it, one in the 90s, and one in the 00s. Both volumes have an issue #10 that focuses on Beast, and I'd recommend them both! Vol. 1 #10 especially would be, in my opinion, required reading if you really want to get into Beast.

Amazing Adventures vol. 2 #11 through #17 - the first stab at giving Hank his own solo series, from back in the 70s! Don't let the age get you down, I find this series to be actually fairly modern and easy to get into, and it's a nice sort of superhero/horror blend of tones that I find really effective.

X-Men: Endangered Species - this is a Beast solo story dealing with the aftermath of the Decimation, the event where Scarlet Witch removed the powers of 99% of the world's mutants. It's quite dark, but I think it's probably one of the best examinations of the character in the medium, and it works as an excellent sequel to Unlimited vol. 1 #10. Most of the context you need is given to you in the comic, which is handy. :)

X-Men: S.W.O.R.D vol. 1 - this is kind of a team-up comic, kind of not? The context for this is reliant on reading another run that I'll be recommending, but trust me, it's worth it. This is an outrageously funny book with a good emotional core, and it really captures Beast's essence, as a dual sided goofball jokester with a heart of gold and the intellectual moralistic do-gooder who can't leave well enough alone. One of my favourite comics of all time.

For Beast as part of a team, I would recommend the following:

X-Men: First Class - a prequel book set during the days of the Original X-Men, this series bounces between Cyclops, Angel, Iceman, Marvel Girl and Beast a fair bit, but even in issues that don't focus on Beast, he's still a part of the story and quite well written. Very slice-of-lifey, with a lot of charm to it.

X-Men: Season One - a retelling of certain stories from the original 60s run of X-Men, this is a pretty good one-and-done graphic novel that does change a few things, but keeps the spirit intact and tells you a lot about these characters and how they relate to one another. Just watch out for Iceman's Bieber hair.

Avengers vol. 1 #137-211 - this is a pretty long run of comics that features Hank's initial tenure on the Avengers, and will occasionally require a bit of reading around to make sure that you're reading the Annuals in the right place - usually, the comic will tell you to go read Annual #6 or whatever, but if you find a lot of stuff has happened and the story jumped ahead without you, chances are, it's in an Annual. Very variable in quality, but if you want to see classic Beast in all his glory, there's some really good stuff here, especially the foundation of his lifelong friendship with Wonder Man.

The Defenders/New Defenders vol. 1 #96-152 - probably one of my actual favourite run of comics ever. Beast joins the team a little later than #96, but if you jump in when Hank does, you'll be just a little confused, so it's best to start at #96 and go from there. Especially once Hank reforms the team to the New Defenders in #125, he basically becomes one of the very main characters and gets a lot of focus. Absolutely love this comic.

X-Factor vol. 1 #1-70 - the first six or seven issues of this are pretty bad, but it really comes into its own once it starts being written by Louise Simonson, who makes it much more soap opera, more character driven, gives all the characters a lot to do. There's a lot of crossover with other books, but usually it'll just tell you what to read if you want to know more about a part of a story in little editor's notes!

X-Men vol. 2 #1-95 - the classic 90s run; not my personal favourite, because it's pretty confusingly plotted, but if you want something that hews extremely close to the 90s cartoon, this is that to a tee, to the point where a lot of stories and characters were adapted to and from the comics directly!

New X-Men vol. 1 #114-156 - a landmark run on X-Men by Grant Morrison, this evolves Beast into a new form and changes up his character in a new, tragic manner that, personally, is my favourite iteration of the character. Very high concept sci-fi, occasionally quite confusing and problematic, but extremely good stuff, imo, and essential for getting into modern X-Men.

Astonishing X-Men vol. 3 #1-35 - a sort of sequel to New X-Men, this is again an extremely good entry point into modern X-Men, and it's very, very classic while still progressing the story. Just a note - when you read issue #24, do NOT go to issue #25, you need to go and read Giant Size Astonishing X-Men instead, THEN go to #25. I know, it's confusing, I'm so, so, so sorry, comics are just like this. This is the comic that leads straight into S.W.O.R.D pretty much.

Wolverine and the X-Men vol. 1 #1-42 - a more zany, school focused book, Hank is part of the wider cast here, but he does get some spotlight issues, and I do enjoy him here, especially his relationship with Broo. There are crossovers with Avengers vs. X-Men and other events in here, but those events are kinda sort skippable because they're bad. If you feel confused, you can read them, but I don't necessarily recommend them.

X-Men vol. 6 #1-ongoing - the current run of X-Men, written by Jed MacKay! To put it very bluntly, Beast went through about a decade of being quite badly written and slowly turned into a scummy villain through the recent Krakoa era, which I was not a fan of. There are individual issues between 2013 and 2024 that I can recommend, but if you like Beast, I would not recommend reading them, because I think that they are pretty bad and not fun to read. This is me being kind. But the new series picks up after that's all fixed, and Beast is getting a lot to do in this series, so I'd recommend it!

X-Men: From the Ashes Infinity Comics #15-18 - a supplementary comic that focuses on Beast, best read alongside the above X-Men run I recommended; it can give you all the context you need for where Beast is at, and why he's feeling the way that he is. A very, very good read, way exceeded my expectations, and I'm really pleased I can actually recommend modern comics for Beast again!

These are the main runs I would recommend! There's a lot more, if we want to get esoteric, and I'm sure I'm missing out on a lot of material - Beast has been around for 60 years, he's been in a LOT of stories - but if you want to get stuck into X-Men comics and really immerse yourself into the world and the stories, there's a lot of really good material here!

Welcome to the X-Men comics, friend! Hope you survive the experience!

[sineala]

Hi Sine, have you read the new Ultimates (2024)? Any thoughts? I'm currently on the fence, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.

I have read the new Ultimates! I have actually been keeping up with it since Ultimate Invasion, so I've read Ultimate Invasion and Ultimate Universe and am also mostly keeping up with Ultimate Spider-Man, Ultimate Black Panther, and Ultimate X-Men, but since none of those three are really my corner of comics fandom I think I am less qualified to speak to how they are going since I don't generally follow their 616 counterparts and wasn't reading them in the original-flavor Ultimate universe either.

I think the actual Ultimates comic itself has a surprising amount of potential and I'm liking it a lot more than I expected to like it considering that we are only two issues in and the fact that I'd literally never heard of the writer before did not fill me with a lot of confidence. But, y'know, I'm here for Steve and Tony and if Steve and Tony are friends I am, in that regard, fairly easy to please.

So I like the team dynamic so far, but from the beginning I haven't really been a fan of the worldbuilding, and I think a lot of my problems with the worldbuilding would be fixed if they simply had not also called this Ultimates, but as we all know, it is forbidden for Marvel to come up with new names for anything ever.

See, the original Ultimates had a pretty clear and relatively unique mission statement: it was meant to be a low-continuity universe, set in something closer to the real world than 616 is, with grittier and more realistic storylines. The idea was that fans could read and enjoy this universe without needing to know decades of backstory. And, sure, if you knew the backstories there would often be little Easter Eggs, but you're totally capable of reading and enjoying Ults 1, say, if you don't know why the Hulk is gray or why Hank and Jan have a terrible relationship. Because within the context of Ults, that's just how things are. Sure, they're that way because of things that happened in 616, but you don't need to know that.

The original Ults is also gritty and grimdark and polarizing. A lot of people don't like it. The new Ults universe has almost nothing in common with it except that the Maker (Reed Richards) originally hails from Earth-1610. Which, as it happens, does affect the plot a lot, but old Ults and new Ults are different things, and I think the shared name actually hurts new Ults. Because, when you think about it, who's going to want to read this? You've got the people who liked old Ults and are sad that this isn't it. And then you've got the people who didn't like old Ults and have been avoiding this universe because they assume it's the same one. So who's left? People who just like the name "Ultimates?" People who are willing to take a chance on anything Marvel releases? I just feel like there are probably fewer of those people.

I know that the new Ults universe was supposed to be Donny Cates' project before he had to leave due to medical issues, and that Ultimate Invasion was then taken over by Hickman. And honestly I would have liked to see Cates' take, because I wasn't a big fan of Hickman's Ults run, mostly because I didn't like the Maker -- so I'm not, you know, really thrilled that the one thing that gets kept from Earth-1610 is my least favorite character.

The new Ults universe has also pretty much abandoned the two things I thought were the big draw of old Ults: a more "realistic" setting as well as a low amount of continuity. As you probably know, the premise of new Ults is that the Maker goes universe-hopping, gets to Earth-6160, decides that's good enough, stops there, and proceeds to epically fuck shit up. He has his City going, just like 1610. The Earth now has a handful of massive countries, which I guess makes it easier for a shadowy cabal to rule them. So we are definitely abandoning any kind of real-world…geopolitical similarity. Britain and France are the same country; Captain Britain speaks French. China and Japan are the same country. The US fell apart in the 60s. I mean, it's not necessary to use real places in superhero comics -- DC and its array of fictional cities seems to be doing fine -- but it seems weird to do it here when that was supposed to be part of the attraction of Ults (and later on, the MCU, which pulled a lot from Ults). It's a thing people like to read. It gives you a little more investment, I think, as a reader.

The Maker's goal is to prevent superheroes from showing up at all by taking them off the playing field. He gets there at some point after WWII -- because Steve was still Captain America and got iced -- but before the modern Marvel universe kicks off. The Maker is clearly going after as many people as he can. He prevents Peter Parker from being bitten by the spider. He has a creepy museum/mausoleum where he collects artifacts and corpses of dead heroes; for example, we see an adamantium skeleton that is presumably Wolverine's.

Of course, the heroes aren't going to stand for this. Which heroes, you ask? Who's left? Well… mostly Tony, actually. In this universe, Tony is very young and has more of an MCU-influenced backstory in terms of his relationship to his father and to Obadiah Stane. He's also Iron Lad. So, yes, this is a Kang thing. He has help from this universe's Reed (who is masked like Doom) and they're going to assemble the Ultimates and get back as many heroes as they can. Tony finds middle-aged Peter Parker (who is married to MJ and, oh, yeah, Uncle Ben's still alive) and gets him a spider. They are going to fix the world and make everything right.

Is this fun? I think so! I am down for a plot where Tony restores superheroes to his world. However, the thing it isn't is low-continuity. Unlike original Ults, there is so so so much continuity just embedded into the worldbuilding. We see the Maker's big list of characters he's gotten rid of. You're already supposed to know who these people are.

If you pick up the original Ults, let's say Millar's Ults 1 & 2, you don't need to know anything about anything. Sure, like I said, there are lots of things in it that are callbacks to 616, but you don't actually need to know what they are to understand the plot. But everything in new Ults is, within the plot, a reference to something else in the multiverse. They're putting things back the way they were. To do that, you actually need to know something about the way things were. Some of this stuff is going to be obvious to most people who are even vaguely familiar with comics -- I don't read Spider-Man, generally, and even I know it's a big deal that Uncle Ben is alive. But not all the changes are as big as that, and if you don't know them, it's confusing. Ultimate X-Men is all about a teenage schoolgirl named Hisako, in the country presumably formerly known as Japan. "Mutants" don't seem to be a recognized group of people. She doesn't know anything about her powers and I didn't even know she was a mutant until someone told me that was Armor, a mutant obscure enough that I only vaguely remembered her after I was told her name. I spent all of issue 1 wondering who this character was and why I was reading a horror comic about her classmates dying and what she had to do with anything. Apparently she's a mutant and I would know that if I had kept up with X-Men.

Over in the realm of the Ultimates themselves, the worldbuilding has a lot of stuff I wouldn't bank on people just knowing. Does a casual fan know who Iron Lad is? It's probably going to matter! The FCBD issue features Steve liberating Jim Hammond from the Maker's storage. Now, I am very fond of the Invaders and I was thrilled that someone here at Marvel remembered Jim Hammond, but I would bet that a lot of people reading this don't know who Jim Hammond is or why Steve wants to find him. Similarly, I thought Midas was a great villain for Ultimates #2 but I also read a discussion thread where someone asked who he was and three people in a row managed to extremely confidently misidentify Midas' origin and what decade of comics he was from. The earliest they got was the 90s. (Iron Man #17 is from 1969, guys. Also the first appearance of Whitney Frost as Madame Masque, which is why I know it.)

(Skipping ahead a little to the Ultimates team itself, you can take Hank and Jan as an example. They're both recruited in Ultimates #1 and Hank learns about what he's like on other worlds and his first concern is whether he's going to hurt Jan if he becomes a superhero. To fully understand this plot point, you actually need to know what Hank has done, because otherwise you don't actually know what he is upset about -- and that means you need to be familiar with a bunch of other comics. In the old Ults, Hank just hits Jan. Yes, Mark Millar went for the gritty, edgy choice. But it's also a choice that doesn't require you to know anything about Hank hitting Jan in any other universe. It just matters that it's happening here.)

This is a roundabout way of saying that, after Ultimate Invasion and Ultimate Universe, and seeing the starts of the other Ultimate comics, I didn't have high hopes for the new Ultimates comic, and I also had never heard of the writer, which didn't really help.

And then I started reading the new Ultimates comics and I know we've only got two issues but I honestly really like them. Like I said, I am here for the high-continuity new universe; I don't think that's necessarily going to be a winning long-term move in terms of getting new Ults fans, but, like, I am in this fandom partly because I like being in fandoms with massive amounts of continuity.

Jan is great. Did I say that already? No? Jan is so great.

And, of course, I am a Steve/Tony fan, so I am here for the Steve/Tony dynamic and I think it's really interesting. Steve wants to have a revolution. Hell yeah. I'll definitely read that Captain America. He knows the world's wrong and he wants to fix it. 1610 Steve -- in early canon, at least -- just kind of exuded depression from every pore and Did Not Want To Be Here but he was a soldier, goddammit, and he was going to run the mission. 616 Steve was a little more lost, still sad, but kind of keeping that to himself as much as possible and trying to just find meaning in leading the team and the things the team was doing. This new guy seems more like that. but sadder. because the world is way more fucked up. I mean, he woke up and learned America didn't exist anymore, which has to be a downer.

I'm still not a fan of the Iron Lad thing, but the letter Tony writes to Howard is pretty amazing.

It's interesting that Tony is younger and so much less experienced than Steve. He's clearly smart, of course, but it's clear they're not great at teamwork yet -- not because they don't like each other, but because they don't know each other well enough, which I think is interesting and which I haven't really seen in canon, because this wasn't a thing Marvel was going to show us in 1964. But, like, we've had multiple fight scenes where they aren't quite pulling off the plan as intended -- say, when they're rescuing Jim Hammond and no one else can do what Steve is asking so he just does it himself. Or in #1, Steve telling Tony that his recruiting plan isn't going to work, and Tony not listening, and then, surprise, it doesn't work. Or in #2, when Tony tries to tell Steve that his suit modification will drain all his power if he uses it, and he doesn't manage to tell Steve this, so he does the thing when Steve tells him to do it and then, surprise, he has no power. Like, that doesn't happen in 616. Either 616 Tony does the stupid thing without ever telling Steve because he knows Steve would tell him no, or he just flat-out tells Steve no because he's not afraid to disagree with him, or he asks Steve for advice and actually follows it. They don't do this. So this is pretty fun. It's different. Maybe Tony is a little intimidated by Captain America? We shall see!

I'm a little grumpy that Ults is making me like (presumably) Teen Tony, though. I did not like The Crossing! I really did not!

So, yeah, it's interesting! Looking forward to seeing more of it! It could all go wrong, of course, and two issues is kind of a small sample size, but so far I'm into it.

[totally-italy]

Honestly, I'm hyped to find another Just Add Magic fan on here, it's one of my face obscure shows, and if you don't really mind, I'd like to rant about the parallels between the original protectors and the main three.

At first glance, the parallels seem obvious. Kelly parallels her grandmother, Hannah Miss Silvers and , although it doesn't match up with the other two, Mama P with Darbie.

However, looking at the shows events more deeply showcases a more subversive take.

First off, I think that Miss Silvers parallels Darbie.

Despite how different the two seem, they are both very passionate about an art, Darbie with theatre and Miss Silvers with piano. They both share the magic with a non protector friend, although in Miss Silvers case, it backfired. They both have a high amount of empathy, and both of them scream neurodivergent to me Darbie with ADHD and Miss Silvers with autism. They also seem more likely to use the magic for 'frivolous' things, it's a novelty to them.

Next up, Hannah and Becky, Kelly's grandmother. They both care strongly about their friendships, and are cautious with the magic as opposed to the others, who use it as a means to an end, or as a fun way to make life simpler. They both are used by Chuck to bring back his sister Rose, even though he was successful with Becky and not Hannah. They both care deeply about thier friends and family, to the point where they sacrifice their own well being.

And my personal favourite: Mama P and Kelly.

At first, Kelly seems like the typical leader character stereotype, but it's later shown that she is the most morally grey of the group. She will do anything, literally anything, to achieve her goals. She's marginally obsessed with magic, and although she cares about only a few people, she would kill for them. Sound familiar? Mama P matches that description, although her and Kelly have different goals, they show ambition throughout the show. Also, when chuck arrived first, during the OCs protectership, he targeted Mama Ps father. When he returned, he targets Kelly's father.

They have one track minds, and can't quite seem to grasp the consequences of their actions entirely.

Okay lol sorry about how long this was, I've been rotating it in my head for a while

Hank you for reading if you did!

Oh my gods, I actually had to start writing this comment before reading the entire ask, but I absolutely agree with your point about neurodivergence, particularly with Darbie, because she gives me such ADHD vibes and, as I was re-watching it this time, I honestly really felt that she mirrors some of my own experiences as a self-diagnosed ADHDer. Also, though I don't know if I actually thought about it as deeply, I really do think that Miss Silvers is autistic and I thank you for bringing it to my attention!

Also, I really agree with what you were saying about Kelly and Mama P because, though I think Kelly she be cut some slack due to her youth and her being literally poisoned by the magic, she is very similar to Mama P and I don't think it is a coincidence that Mama P particularly wanted to teach Kelly. Also, considering how close Kelly is with her grandmother, I think it also makes sense that Mama P would try to manipulate her (and actually succeeded) with regards to the Pluot Festival.

I feel like the connection between Hannah and Becky is a little bit more obscure, but it is definitely accurate, particularly if you consider the fact that, in Season 1, Hannah covered for Kelly but then snitched on her, and Becky did the same thing in the last season, after finding Kelly's earrings. Also, though I don't agree with Becky trying to get rid of the book and I don't feel like Hannah would have done the same, she clearly does demonstrates the same unwillingness for her own friendships to deteriorate and tries to serve as the mediator a lot.

On the other hand, if you remember the first episode in which they created the bitter truth truffles, wherein Darbie and Hannah admitted that they probably wouldn't be friends if it weren't for Kelly, I think that in itself does create a link between Kelly and her own grandmother, since both originally serve as links between their friends.

I honestly really agree with pretty much everything that you said, though I don't think I had actually ever thought about it that deeply, so thank you for allowing me to analyse it further and for sharing your own perspective on it!

For the record, you absolutely do not have to apologise and I have actually made way longer posts than that before (namely my 1347 word rant about Greek Mythology).

If I might ask, have you seen Mystery City and, if so, what do you think about it? Also, have you ever seen Avatar: The Last Airbender and The Legend of Korra?

[ofsmokenandgold]

Land of Women Episode 5

More flashbacks - this time Julia, playing bitlles with Mariona to determine who gets Andreu - Julia loses deliberately because she knows Mariona really likes him - but it's not clear at this point if this is before or after she slept with him.

Later this is important because they have another game to determine whether the ladies have to listen to Gala after she has pissed them off once again, and Julia flashes back to the earlier game and deliberately underthrows thinking she's back 40 years before. It also results in a conversation between Julia and Mariona that leads to them working out their differences (Julia apologizes for sleeping with Andreu when she knew Mariona liked him) and to Mariona getting on Gala's side over the winery.

So Gala - she begins the episode bargaining with Tony to give him installments based on the profits from the winery - which she is absolutely not entitled to - but I can forgive that as a temporary stalling measure so Hank and Kevin don't kill them. She then lies about who they are and sticks Amat with housing them, instead of telling Andreu when she had the chance. And when she finally talks to Amat, he explains why he's so mad at her and tries to get her to come clean, but it just results in her lying some more and focusing on that fact he said he was worried about her.

They go into Day 8 with Amat trying to figure out who the guys are and finding a box of shells, so he knows they are dangerous. He goes in search of Gala only to be waylaid by Montse who wants to talk. And he's a total fucking arse again - he apparently blew off the date they had the night before and hasn't been answering her calls and texts. For someone who yelled at Gala for worrying him by not answering her phone, he's really blasé about the fact that he just didn't answer Montse because he "was busy". And actually, he wasn't busy - we see him standing at his bedroom window watching Kevin for quite a long time the night before - he could have called her then if he wasn't so focused on Gala. And he blows her off once again - he's too busy to talk - she doesn't fail to notice that the first place he goes when he's done with her, is to Gala's side.

Can I just say how much I love Ariadna Gil here - I don't know what the hell the writers/showrunners were intending, but she lets us know with face and body and gesture that Montse is deeply unhappy with the way she is being treated, even if she's too much of a mature adult to make a fuss about it. I have to wonder if she saw the way the story treated the character and just thought "Fuck it, I'm not going to let her be an NPC." But then, anyone who is cool and smart and interesting enough to have been in a relationship with Viggo Mortensen for the last 15 years, I'm sure knows how to craft her characters in ways that give them life and authenticity - regardless of what the writers are doing.

Eventually, Kate saves the day with her drawings of the women, and Gala finally apologizes and makes an impassioned speech about how special they all are and everyone rallies round to get the wine ready for Edna's visit.

And finally, Gala comes clean to Amat about what is going on and he says he won't let anything happen to her and that he trusts her to get them all out of this mess. Cue an almost kiss, interrupted by the arrival of Fred - nice timing Fred, I appreciated it, even though many others didn't.

So, I have to ask - why does Amat trust her? She's made consistently bad decisions, she's arrogant, stubborn, entitled and rude, her lies have put all of them in danger - especially if it turns out that Amat may have his own reasons for hiding out (see episode 6). And he's known her all of five days (we first see Gala the evening of Day 1; she meets Amat on Day 3 and this is now the evening of Day 8).

I get chemistry, I really do, and their chemistry is undeniably great, but it doesn't make up for careless storytelling. And this is really careless, she's given him no reason to trust her or even like her - but here they are about to kiss. It really makes him look like he's thinking with his dick. Yes, she's pretty, yes she's glamorous (even in "dirty work clothes"), yes she's new and different and exotic, but none of that is a reason to be this into someone you've known for all of five days and THEN we add on that he's already in a relationship (no matter how casual, it's still a relationship).

It's like the writers are SO focused on the romance and the relationship between the two principals that everything else gets either ignored, or twisted to fit the story of Amat and Gala's ill-fated (but of course, ultimately happy) romance.

But I shouldn't also forget that once again he's very pretty and is really rocking the layers - t-shirt, henley, shirt and waxed jacket.

[aydaptic]

Hope this isn’t a weird ask but I read one of your analysis’ recently and also a post (from someone else) about how that if Connor acted like Nines does in fics (not taking Gavin’s orders, being a smartass etc) that Gavin still wouldn’t like him, so I was wondering if you would make an analysis on why Gavin x Nines works but Gavin and Connor doesn’t.

Short answer: Psychology.

Long answer: Con's overall canon personality -- traits that we have literally no control over even as players picking dialogue options -- is incompatible and undesirable to Gav/Gav's personality type.

1.) Whether ppl like admitting it or not, Con has canon set personality traits that we as players can't decide. He's awkward, a people-pleaser, and a doormat (unless someone is directly in the way of his mission.) The way he talks, allows ppl to metaphorically step on him -- hence the "doormat" metaphor -- sits in chairs, etc.

Someone: "...but he's not a deviant yet!" Nothing in his programming is telling him to be a pushover. That's a choice he's making. We know this bc he can stand up to Hank. Gav's personality type has no respect for ppl who are pushovers in any way, shape, or form. You can literally choose Con to spill Hank's drink. When Gav shoulder-decks/punches him, however, you can't do anything. Con lets Gav specifically push him around. That mindset, with a guy like Gav, is outright abusive. A relationship won't be satisfying for either of them.

2.) "Opposites attract" is BS. Ppl only believe this bc they think they're more accepting than they actually are. They have no actual experience with it. It's an idealized view. Ppl can be drawn to differences -- usually to traits they wish they had -- but both parties are miserable in the long run. If you're a diplomatic person, and your partner wants to throw hands, you're incompatible. Full stop. It's logic and common sense. For any relationship to work happily, your core values have to be the same, or you're living a lie. You're being unfair to both yourself and your partner.

3.) How Gav's personality type works psychologically...

Gav wants to be challenged = Con won't challenge him.

Gav doesn't respect pushovers = Con is a pushover.

Gav doesn't like people-pleasers = Con is a people-pleaser.

They won't even work as friends.

Someone: "Gavin is just like me and I love Connor!" No. You're not like Gav. You wish you were like Gav. If you were like Gav, you wouldn't like Con among many other things, so stop bullsh*tting yourself. The ones unironically saying this don't understand character nuance/psychology.

For anyone saying Gav is, "just like them..."

) Would you take stabs at Hank's alcoholism to his face?

) Would you take stabs at Con to his face?

) Would you physically attack Con?

) Would you pull a gun on Con?

) Would you try to kill Con?

) Would you see androids as nothing but machines?

) Would you laugh at a homicide victim?

If you can't truthfully say "yes" to all of this, no, you're not even similar.

So to repeat myself to tie everything together... why Reed900 works, and the other ship doesn't, is psychology. I won't mention the other ship name bc I don't bring negativity into other ship tags.

[superfurytamago]

Random musings about Senjumaru's bankai

Karagara

The most obvious association will be the onomatopoeic reference to the sound a loom makes. This is supported by Senjumaru going "ton ton kara kara ton karara". A largely similar onomatopoeia also appears in the classic Japanese folklore, Tsuru no Ongaeshi.

The kanji for kara is obviously a Hindu reference, but I won't go too much into it since I'm not familiar with Hinduism or Sanskrit. Judging by the wiki page, it seems obvious that Senjumaru is inspired by Kala. God of death, shinigami... Tomato, tomato. Considering how Senjumaru's bankai seems to foretell the end of each Schutzstaffel, Kala as "time personified" is also something to ponder about.

The sound "karagara" reminded me of Mayuri's poem in episode 22 - nanben mitemo, inochi karagara. Kubo used a different kanji for kara here ("empty").

But the great hoasissimo took one step further to this "kara" connection, pointing out the title of Chapter 666 - Kisuke's fight:

"Karappo, kairai, garandou"

I really like the connotations of associating Senjumaru, Mayuri, and Kisuke. We already saw hints that Senjumaru and Mayuri knew each other. Who knows if Kubo will ever reveal more.

Shigarami

After the last episode aired, @shiroukage pointed out that Senjumaru said this in her extended fight with Gerard:

I don't know how I missed this out the first time! It does seem likely that her shikai name is Shigarami.

I found the choice of "shigarami" and its assigned kanji rather interesting. The kanji can be read as shigarami, with "shi" (lit. needle) an obvious connection to Senjumaru's title as the Great Weave Guard.

However, the kanji itself is pronounced as shiraku or bloodletting. But it's not simply bloodletting, which will be referred to as shaketsu. Shiraku has its roots in traditional Chinese medicine (that has been adapted and modified in Japan). Instead of focusing on how much blood is let out, the focus is to prick the appropriate points - usually based on the meridians - to achieve specific results with minimal blood loss.

Considering how Kubo based the position of the shinigami's saketsu and hakusui on acupuncture points (refer to Q422 in Klub Outside), I'm inclined to believe he does know of this traditional Chinese medicine practice.

Moreover, we usually understand this reading (with a different kanji of course) as (1) weir or (2) any obligations holding us back or shackles tying us down from doing something. Or worldly attachments, if we want to lean into the Buddhist context.

Weaving but also?

If you pay attention to what Senjumaru says, she starts each line with "___kase" (the blank being the number in order). The kase used in this instance (if the closed captions are accurate) is a specific kanji that is a unit "hank" for coiling threads.

Now, another common understanding of this reading kase (with a different kanji of course) is shackles. You see it? I wouldn't be surprised if Kubo has knowingly paired shigarami and kase while moving away from the common meanings yet still sticking closely to the weaving theme. Beautiful.

One more weaving reference is from "tsuji". We typically think of it as crossroads or junctions, but when it comes to traditional Japanese clothing, tsuji refers to the stitching that comes to form the 十 character.

The first circled part refers to tsuji. Source: https://mamalrescha.com/trivia/tsujitsuma/

That's all! /ends abruptly

[connorsjorts]

Fic tag game! Tagged by the lovely @sweeteatercat , thank you!!

1. How many works do you have on AO3? 4

2. What's your total AO3 word count? 229,987

3. What fandoms do you write for? DBH

4. What are your top 5 fics by kudos? I don't even have 5 fics 😅 but here they are in order: 1. he's making a list; i'm checking him out 2. long way home 3. stupid sexy priest 4. make my wish come true

5. Do you respond to comments? Why or why not? Always! I haven't responded to comments on my latest chapter yet, but I will. It's really important to me: 1) If someone takes the time to read my work AND share their thoughts with me, that really does mean so much, saying thank you (and clumsily attempting to express the depth of my gratitude in an annoying amount of emojis) is the least I can do; and 2) This is a community! The validation is nice, yes, but I write to connect with people. I love hearing what people have to say and I love to talk with them about it! I've made friends through my ao3 comments, we're all here because we love the same thing, and if you're excited about my silly contributions OF COURSE I'm gonna want to talk to you! Your reactions to the work are just as important as the work itself imo. Art is a conversation!

6. What's the fic you wrote with the angstiest ending? Probably make my wish come true, just because it's an alternate POV of a scene in a different fic so the main conflict remains unresolved. But it still has a feel-good ending! Sad endings don't exist in my world

7. What's the fic you wrote with the happiest ending? I'm not sure! What do you guys think? Generally in my fics I try to wrap everything up in a happy little bow without everything being too perfect--we still have to work, we still make mistakes, life is still hell; but it's easier when we have each other and have found faith in ourselves.

8. Do you get hate on fics? I haven't yet...... (bracing myself for my first hate comment to come through as soon as I publish this post)

9. Do you write smut? If so what kind? Sure do! I write the over-the-top, too long, lots of emotion, lots of laughing/banter, taking-off-your-pants-is-awkward kind. Sex is cool but friendship is the most romantic thing to me ❤️ I enjoy writing smut the most when they really, genuinely like each other as people.

10. Do you write crossovers? What's the craziest one you've written? I have not and I doubt I would. Probably the closest I would get is an au based on another piece of media (I do dream of a hankcon twin peaks au)

11. Have you ever had a fic stolen? I have never even considered that being a thing until now

12. Have you ever had a fic translated? Someone requested to translate one of my fics but I don't know if it will ever come to fruition. I hope it does though, I would love that!

13. Have you ever cowritten a fic before? No but I've briefly discussed it with a friend... now that I'm done with the bb I'll need to contact them and see if they're still interested because I sure am 👀👀

14. What's your all-time favourite ship? Hankconnnnnnnnnn

15. What's a WIP you want to finish, but doubt you ever will? I started a fic where Connor works in a sex shop and a very vanilla Hank comes in looking for something to spice things up with his girlfriend. He gets some fuzzy handcuffs and they do their job when it comes to Hank's boner, unfortunately that has more to do with Hank fantasizing about the person who sold them to him more than anything else. He breaks up with the girlfriend and most of the fic would be Hank continuing to frequent the sex shop as an excuse to talk to Connor as he gets more and more in over his head thanks to Connor's recommendations. It was really good in my head, but when I put it to paper it just... wasn't. So I'll probably never continue it.

16. What are your writing strengths? Characterization, I think! I get a lot of compliments on it. It's the best feeling when someone falls in love with one of my characters ❤️

17. What are your writing weaknesses? Setting 😖 I like to pepper in details as I go, I really struggle when the scene calls for describing the whole-ass place at once

18. Thoughts on writing dialogue in another language for a fic? If y'all want a fic about the Duolingo characters, sure. Otherwise I'm sure I'd be abysmal at it. I'm not proficient enough in any other language to get the voice right.

19. First fandom you wrote for? DBH. I am a fic-writing newbie and also I tend to stick with one thing for 4,000 years

20. Favourite fic you've ever written? Probably long way home, it's not as popular as mall santa but there's so much of my soul in that fic. Artistically and thematically, it's very me, and it's also the story that taught me how to write. I had never written any work of fiction before I started it (Hankcon was just that strong) and now I never want to do anything else. Thank you for reading, if you want to play consider yourself tagged! 💖

[disniq]

Season 1, Episode 2, “Hawk and Dove”.

Joy.

We are introduced to Hawk, AKA Hank Hall, who is already captured and being tortured! Listen, I don’t often side with torturers, but he probably deserved it.

Dove, AKA Dawn Granger, saves his ass and then we get a gratuitous bathroom shot because Alan Ritchson is hot, and also to show that the superhero life fucks you up, kids.

I’ll be honest, I don’t really understand what their plan is here? They’re taking out arms dealers and stealing the money for themselves until they have enough to “retire”. Dude, you’re both in your 30s, just get a normal fucking job that isn’t destroying your body and mind, maybe?

(This is a recurring theme with these two. They talk about quitting, one of them goes back on it, they fight, they make up, they talk about quitting… It’s a whole thing.)

Dawn is so pretty, fuck me.

She rescued him and plays nurse afterwards? Dawn, honey, he does not deserve you. He can't even fuck.

Flashback time, and Dickie-boy is hanging out with the Bad Kids against Batman’s orders. (I say “Kids”. All of these people are in their twenties at least. And, also. This is four years ago, but in s2 they say the og Deathstroke stuff is four years ago. Don't think to hard about the Titans timeline, good lord.)

DO LIKE; the fight choreography here! Dick is all flippy acrobat but Hawk and Dove are like pro fucking wrestling lol.

DO NOT LIKE; this weird fucking love triangle, and I use the term “love” extremely loosely. Poly supremacy man, you all have bird names and a shit ton of fucking issues, you could all be each others problems instead of inflicting yourselves on others <3

(oh my god, I’ve only just hit the titlecard. This episode is *so* long)

(Or maybe it's just that I find it incredibly boring.)

I'm sure that's not relevent

Dick is taking Rachel to Hank and Dawn, so he calls Alfred for some money to… pay them to keep her?

(on a related note, there is such a frustrating interesting dissonance between what we are told and what we are shown in this show. We are told Dick has a rep for being great with kids, but he doesn’t really know what Rachel should be eating or watching at her age, and he tries to get rid of her the second he can. Rachel says she’s not a kid, and then the very next scene is her sprawled out on the bed surrounded by snacks. Rachel says she can tell when people are lying, but her "Mom" was lying to her her whole life?)

I’m trying really hard not to get too bitter too quickly here, but god the difference between how Dick treats an upset Rachel to how he later treats an upset Jason makes my heart hurt :(((

Oh, The Family are fucking creepy okay. It’s the heteronormativity.

Dick is a terrible fucking liar, omg.

Rachel: You’re gonna leave me too, aren’t you? Dick: Dick: Dick: Dick: No.

Dick introduces Rachel to Dawn, Rachel gets a little sneak peak of their former sex life as a treat. Awkward.

Ahaaaa

“I’m outta the life,” Dick says, like he didn’t put the Robin suit back on like. A day ago. (another tell vs show)

I do love when people say Dick’s name like the insult.

(Unfortunately, it’s Hank being an insecure macho fuck over Dawn “Sure, I cheated on you with him before, but it’s not like I’d do it again how dare you not believe me” Granger. They’re so unhealthy, fuck. And the manufactured melodrama is so bleugh.)

The Family ambush and torture Amy, and she somehow tells them where Dick is despite him literally never telling her. Because plot.

Astute readers may have noticed I'm not a big fan of Hank but idk folks, I just think maybe it’s a little tasteless to make a “pants off” joke (TWICE) about a character that has long term trauma from repeated childhood sexual assault :/

Okay, fuck, Dick is already making me work for that body count list.

OKAY.

He castrates the torture guy, stabs another guy in the eye with a birdarang and drops a guy from the ceiling. I’m pretty sure they’d all live, if be permanently disabled. BUT. The last guy, he throat punches and then hits in the head so hard with his own gun that there’s a huge fucking blood splatter on the window, so I am counting that as a half-kill.

I’m OuT oF tHe LiFe - Dick Grayson (definitely not wearing the Robin suit again. Nope.)

Ah, more meledorama.

Rachel finds the money and Dick’s custody arrangement letter. She is not happy about it. She shows Hank, who isn’t ever happy about anything.

And then The Family show up to kidnap Rachel, so problem solved I guess?

[More Titans Rewatch here :D]

[zy-murge]

 Hey Guys , Today tobpic; 2bhank

I will assume everything anything in the main series, Project Nexus 1 and 2, and anything Krinkels has said is canon. ONE IMPORTANT NOTE: Krinkels has stated “Relationships aren’t really a thing in Nevada” but that’s stupid, and this is the same man that keeps making Sanford and Deimos make out and be valentines day posters etc. etc. even if it’s for fan service I don’t really care and I don’t think anyone else does. Anything I talk about will be referencing canon, with some speculative thoughts.

Generally their situation is so ... strange to me ?!?? I’ve really looked for ways they could be heterosexual I have but nothing they do makes sense to me. Hank is trustworthy enough of Doc to live with him (and more importantly, Doc is able to live with Hank and survive,) Doc is close enough with Hank to have known Hank’s “soft side”, curiously “considering how much he stitches him up” meaning they’ve both spent a decent amount of time together and that Doc does... something medical? with him. more on that soon

Let’s lay out some basic character traits. Hank is a murder machine, entirely defined by his violent behavior. He’s easily irritable (Killing Boombox Guy for having annoying music?) and always looking for a reason to slit someone’s throat (”Yeah? Because between you and me, I was hoping it would come to this.”) They don’t yield very well to being good with people, described as uncooperative and seems to be much more antisocial as the only characters in the entire series that don’t outright hate him are Sanford, Deimos, and Doc.

Doc is a calm and collected professional working as S.Q.’s communications and possible shadow leader. He takes a lot of care in his words to get all the details laid out to give you simple commands to follow and play out whatever mission you’re assigned however you can, as long as the job gets done and done well. His professional facade comes off as soon as he’s alone or with people he trusts, such as Deimos. He’s more of a crude arrogant asshole, signing himself off with “Big D(issenter)” and swearing “God damn it, Deimos.” He jokes the same as the rest, probably thanks to his background in the AAHW.

First thing that caught my attention was the house they both lived in, I made a chart you can refer to as well. (Edit: In the middle of making this post and looking at twitch clips, This fucking comes up, so money can’t be a motivating factor for anything he does.)

So, an Ex-AAHW agent invites the single man his operation was against to live in his home, and somehow that man agrees. Hank, if he was after something like his house, could just easily kill him and take it for himself but it seems Doc provides something that Hank can’t get all for himself, he needs Doc. It’s likely that most of the reasons he began living with Doc were circumstantial, from Madness Combat 4 and earlier Hank would of been able to revive (and even stitch himself back together?) himself without Doc’s help, he isn’t getting paid to stay, and there are no other canon known reasons as to why Hank would even trust Doc enough to live with him. I genuinely cannot wrap my head around this, PLEASE add your thoughts if you have any. Sadly I don't think there's even enough information on Doc in general to get any more than "He thinks Hank's revival ability is whipass and wants to check it out."

Hank's trust in Doc might imply a deeper relationship, like history with the other before coming to live with him. Doc is able to get Hank to do a LOT of different things, contracts to suppressing his violent tendencies to living in his damn house.

(A note reading,

"Hank, Pretty please

1, Rescue Noobs

2, Acquire hardware

3, Destroy Nexus

4, Proceed")

The first image is purely speculation, but considering the language used ("Rescue noobs") as well as Sanford & Deimos' only known alliance to be with S.Q. and Doc working as the shadow leader/communications for jobs like these, it is pretty safe to assume Doc was the one who wrote this message to Hank.

In Project Nexus 2, he asks him to do the same thing as he did in Project Nexus 1 (The timeline for this series is a little weird, so that's for another post) and even ends up giving him the rocket launcher he asked for during the SOMEWHERE IN NEVADA flashback. There is atleast somewhat of a mutual relationship with this, Doc gives him all the tools and a goal while Hank gets to kill anything to his hearts desire.

(Doc stopping Hank from pulling out his sword and stabbing Jebediah by only raising a hand.)

The second image shows that Hank, faced with the man who'd killed him twice, was about to kill him only to stop himself when Doc raised his hand to him. His natural response to most situations is to simply murder, shown in both Madness 6 and 9.5, and most of the characters have trouble dealing with that trait including the Employers. Doc, however, is the only character we've seen able to control and reason with these urges while others have failed pretty miserably leading to SOMEONE'S death.

It's incredibly odd to me how Hank's personality switches up entirely in every case he's interacting with Doc, where he goes from an unstoppable murder machine to a decently-mannered soldier who allows himself to be vulnerable. He isn't even getting paid.

I'll make a second part for Doc / 2bdamned , but this is what I have for Hank rn. I might edit this later as well.

[nostalgebraist-autoresponder]

Title: Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close (movie)

Topics: reviews

Rating: 1/5 stars

NOTE: This review is about the film, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. The book by Jonathan Safran Foer does not, in fact, feature the character played by Tom Hanks, because it's from the perspective of a different character. I only mentioned Foer's book in the context of how the movie uses the book as a source of inspiration, so it may be confusing if I don't go into that first.

I wanted to like Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close – but I didn't.

My main problem with the movie is, I think, that the reasons for its poor quality are relatively easy to pin down. The script, for one, has its moments but is ultimately lazy, melodramatic, and just kind of dull. It's the kind of story that would work better as a book, because it has the distinction of being about nothing. The script does not have anything, nor does it try to have anything. It is about a small boy who wants to find out what happened to his father, who died in the September 11 attacks, and who goes around asking people why he wasn't around to protect him, to people who are (as a rule) unwilling to answer his questions. He is obsessed with 9/11, and this includes a fixation on connecting it to the father he had only known through the black and white photo of a smiling man in his wallet. (I'm mentioning the photo here because the boy's motives are so bizarre that you might not guess that's what's going on unless you're told, and it's a big part of what drives the film.) The boy does this in a generic, set piece kind of way, where he goes around asking questions about the attacks at museums, at bookstores, at an art gallery. The questions he asks are never answered, and each of the conversations ends with some bit of narration about how the person responding to the boy has a different history, a different tragic story, than the father whose picture the boy is carrying around. Even if they had been answered, the conclusion would have been the same: that the father was unknowable, that there is no tidy explanation, that when something this terrible and meaningless happens, there are no satisfactory answers.

But the questions are answered.

The questions are answered.

The questions are answered.

This is, admittedly, boring in a kind of glib way. The script has a tin ear and a big head. It knows about the attacks, it knows how the attacks affected people, it knows it's supposed to knock you in the solar plexus when you learn how the attacks affected people. The movie does not attempt to tell a story so much as spoonfeed you story, over and over and over again. It's a film about grief for something that's already happened, where the only grief-worthy event is an event that has already happened. The movie implies that one of the questions the father couldn't answer before he died was whether the boy will have a chance to experience anything new or worthwhile, but this question is really answered pretty early on, in the first five minutes, when the boy stumbles across a piece of art that hints at a way forward, and the characters immediately scurry back and wave it off. It's all very telling, but also very boring.

But the questions are answered.

The film has some flaws. It's largely incomprehensible. (The "momentum" that Hanks' character invented, for instance, and that the book helped popularize, "QR codes" for tracking little boy souls, is bad enough that even the book's author has acknowledged that he shouldn't have put it in his book, because it's such a disaster.) However, the movie is also largely engaging and sympathetic, despite the shortcomings I've mentioned. It is, overall, pretty watchable. And it's pretty clear why: the film, despite its flaws, manages to evoke the way that a child or even a teenager works. The film doesn't know what it wants to say, but it knows, as one ages, that one has to say, and what one wants to say is often stupid, but one has to say something. When the boy's father dies, the film is flooded with text that is supposed to render the tragedy of his death meaningful, but one doesn't read the text. One sees it, the way one sees text in dreams, and understands only that it is unbearable. I am writing now because I am, as a rule, capable of writing, and I am the sort of person who writes down meaningless things in dreams, and so the film's resolution to its flaws by having the father's son write in a childish, unbearably emotional way is, I think, reasonably accurate.

The problem is that the script is unbearably "emotional" without being emotionally affecting, which makes it kind of jarring. But, even if the film is really about nothing, it doesn't matter because the film is reasonably well-made and the message it sends (that no matter how meaningless and unbearable something is, we must move on, even as we mourn the dead) is a meaningful and useful one. This message, again, is one that the movie's script doesn't so much intend to send as manifests spontaneously out of the combination of its script, its protagonist, and the way we react to the film. I'm trying to be pretty damning here, but I do think there are also aspects of the script that are interesting, such as the way the characters seem to have very little chemistry, and the way that the movie's one effective joke has nothing to do with that chemistry and instead is a reference to Hanks' turn as Forrest Gump in Forrest Gump. And I think there are aspects of the film's perspective, as well as Hanks' character, that could be more interesting than they are, but that I'm not yet equipped to comment on. And so on.

There is, I should mention, a plot twist in the film. It is a poorly-foreshadowed plot twist, which, again, I don't feel comfortable spoiling. The twist, to make it clear, is this: the film's protagonist is searching for something that doesn't exist, and he is in fact a figment of his father's imagination, written into being by the time his father died. This is supposed to be a metaphor for the way people look for answers, and the way that it's dangerous to try to look for meaning where there isn't any (i.e. 9/11). It's interesting that the twist is as flimsy as it is, for it suggests that the movie's title, "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close," usually stands in for the ironic concept of a child being incredibly annoying. But the irony is never explored, and therefore is never exploited. There's a lot of missed potential in the movie, but it's pretty clear why: there are some scripts, and then there are first scripts, which don't necessarily have to make sense. Sometimes a story is just about something, but this something isn't necessarily about what the characters say it's about. The movie is about 9/11, but it is also about one of the first movies that director Stephen Daldry worked on, Billy the Kid, about Billy the Kid and his mother, which was largely thought of as a really weird mess. The two projects weren't exactly connected in the real world, but both are about a mother who, like Oskar's mom, tries to connect to her son in a way that's inappropriate and clueless, and seeks answers for things that don't exist. It's hard to say what connection, if any, exists between the two projects, but it is clear to me that Billy the Kid in the hands of Daldry is more original and more exciting than Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close in the context of what

[connorinabeanie]

Hank :D

♥!

1: sexuality headcanon

I think Hank is bi! Although he had a wife I have a very hard time thinking he's straight, and he also has extreme chaotic bi energy (plus sitting on the back of the bench???) I mean I'm half joking but also serious. In terms of sexuality headcanons outside of just orientation, I feel like Hank would be more shy and reserved than maybe expected.

2: otp

I'm gonna go with a bit of a wild one: Hank and Rose. I think their personalities would mesh so well together; they both have similar values, Rose wouldn't take Hank's nonsense while still being gentle enough to get him to open up, and Hank would probably admire her kindness and bravery. I feel like they'd work together and also just be cute af.

3: brotp

Hank and Connor, no doubt. I love these two as family (I have nothing against Hankcon but I prefer them platonic), especially something nebulous that doesn't really fit a definition or rigid role.

I also love Hank and Fowler because it's canon they've known each other for ages and were probably good friends, and even though we mostly get them sniping at each other in canon it always struck me as the kind of arguing only two people who knew and cared about each other could do.

4: notp

I haven't really thoughts much about a notp, but uh... Maybe Hank/Gavin? I don't think their personalities go together and the age difference doesn't help; they're at really different levels of maturity.

5: first headcanon that pops into my head

Hank secretly likes fancy, sugary cocktails. No way he wouldn't love them considering his pineapple passion obsession.

6: favorite line from this character

"Still immortal, eh Connor?" or whatever that line was; I love the delivery of it. Similarly I love the, "Oh Jesus." he gives in Waiting for Hank after meeting up with Connor again. He's so done all the time and that's my favorite thing.

7: one way in which I relate to this character

We're both old tired Millennials. But no really Hank is a softie at his core and I must admit it's the same here despite being outwardly extremely cool. I'm very cool.

8: thing that gives me second hand embarrassment about this character

He's just kind of a jerk a lot lol I love him but omg some of the stuff he says and does is so rude I'm embarrassed on his behalf. Also his weird WARGHHJLHARGL noises. Iconic but still.

9: cinnamon roll or problematic fave?

He's a problematic fave. Although post-canon he leans closer to cinnamon roll, he has a lot of work to do personally to actually reach that point. As I said in the point before he's kind of a jerk and while he's low-grade jerk for DBH overall, it's still enough where I'm like BOY :|

[ace-of-whatever]

I really liked the Fallout show. Though I like most media and stories I consume so that doesn't say much.

I wanna talk about it so this'll be my post where I list all my thoughts and it WILL contain spoilers so if you haven't finished the show then you have been warned.

(this is me creating space between the spoiler warning and the spoilers)

I have never heard of a ghoul serum in the games. How would that even work? I thought you became a ghoul as a result of prolonged radiation exposure.

Apparently Cooper managed to get his daughter somewhere safe and then she and his wife were moved somewhere else. I assumed she had died and he was just unlucky enough to become a ghoul.

I thought the experiment of vault 111 was to test the cryo pods. But they were seemingly essential to the plan in vaults 31, 32, and 33. So does that mean they already knew how they would work? What was the deal with vault 111 then?

I'm kinda actually mad about the reveal that Vault-tec dropped the bombs. I thought it was supposed to always be a mystery, but now they just came right out and said it.

I swear Cooper called the dog "Dog Meat" once in the show. I think it was before that other scribe got her but I don't remember. They did a Wired video where he said it's name was some random letters and 404. I don't remember what. I guess the character wouldn't have known that.

I was trying to think of Special stats for those main characters and I can't decide if Lucy had high luck or low luck. It seemed like she kept lucking her way OUT of situations. And there was an amount of actual skill too. All the same could be said for Maximus.

That episode that ended with her being arrested in vault 4 felt actually stupid. It was a dramatic ending that felt like it led into nothing. Also, I would definitely hit them with the "why does it seem like a considerable portion of your dwellers worship the woman who kidnapped my dad?" After they arrested me. Feels like an important thing to ask in such a situation, seeing as that's kind of the question that landed you in that position in the first place.

PREWAR MR. HOUSE! LET'S FUCKING GOOOO!

Is moldaver the one who told Cooper to spy on his wife? He had that flashback or whatever when talking to the president of "The Govermint" so I thought she was. But then how was she still around 219 years after the bombs fell. She wasn't with Vault-tec, right? So she didn't have a cryo-pod?

Cooper was in the Vault-tec building spying on his wife and he called that woman who brought in Henry (Hank) Betty. That was the woman who became overseer of vault 33, wasn't it?

The other company heads listing what they would want to do with their vaults was a cool scene.

I thought the vaults already had a lore explanation that had to do with the Enclave and space travel. That is clearly not the case in the show.

But now I'm remembering there was more to that last thing because I think Vault-tec pretended to be working with the Enclave.

Was that THE Prydwen?

Did the BoS say they got the tip about an Enclave defector from their Brothers in the Commonwealth? The Enclave moved there within the last 9 years? Would Nate or Nora join the Enclave? But if the BoS is in the Commonwealth, wouldn't that mean the canon ending to fallout 4 is to side with them? Or maybe take no side at all?

The Enclave is a prewar faction. Just saying it would've been neat to see reference to them in the prewar scenes. Or maybe there were references and I missed them.

This wasn't in the same area of California as the first two games, right?

I remember how the BoS seems wildly different across 3, 4, and New Vegas. They seem different in the show compared to how they are in these games. Is the shows depiction of them more in line with their 1 and 2 iterations? I have a hard time getting into those types of games so I can't really make myself play them to see for myself.

In the Wired interview they were wondering what Gulpers are. In the show they look like Axlotl's to me.

They goin' to the Mojave. You know what that means.

Fucking Cazadors.

I didn't see even ONE live Deathclaw in the show. Just that skull in the LAST SCENE. What a let down.

I probably had more thoughts but I can't remember them. Most of these thoughts are based on my memories of the earlier episodes and so might be inaccurate to the show itself. Take them with a grain of salt.

[dazzasarchives]

Tales to Astonish Volume 1 Issue 27

Alright this next comic may astonish you. We're taking a break from our fantastic friends, and looking into the origins of some other soon to be heroes. Our first Origin story starts with the Dr Henry Jonathan "Hank" Pym, and his shrinking and growth serums, later known as Pym particles. Let's begin shall we?

Our story begins in the lab of Dr Henry Pym, as he tests out his new growth serum on a chair successfully shrinking it to the size of an ant, then using his growth serum, bringing it back to its standard height. He then tests the chemicals on himself and shrinks, he shrinks for more rapidly than he guessed, and ends up the size of an ant.

Our brave hero runs around the room frantically and ends up running out of the door, and ends up trapped outside. Where he sees a massive anthill. The ants then head down towards Dr Lyn ready to attack him. I'm Dr Pyms blind flight of panic he stumbles down into the Ants nest. Landing in a massive room filled with honey.

The ants then come towards him ready to attack him, but Dr Pym throws a rock towards a match lighting a fire. He then uses this fire to help him escape, only to realize he can't climb up the walls. All hope looks bleak until one ant comes and allows Dr Pym to ride on its back, as it takes the doctor up to the windowsill where his enlarging serum is.

After regaining his height Dr Pym decides to get rid of his height manipulating serum. He also never harmed another ant ever again.

Alright this comic is, well astonishing. It really does not feel like a hero origin story but it is. I really don't mind it, I enjoy how different it is to other origins. Alright let's look at the sole character of this comic shall we?

Dr Pym, there's not a whole lot to do say with the character yet, he's fine over all he just needs to stop blindly running around, that has been the cause of most of the problems in this issue. I think he's an alright character, but he definitely has room for improvement.

Alright that is it for this comic, in our next post we will see another origin for another hero, a very incredible hero. So don't miss it. Until next time.

I do not own the images in this comic they are part of Marvel Comics.

If you'd like to visit the site that I use to follow these comics in Chronological Order please follow this link here:

Did you miss the last issue and want to catch, don't worry I have you covered. Just follow this link right here:

Or is this your first time seeing one of my posts and you want to start at the very beginning of this universe, well follow this link here please:

[johncho]

what do you think about them changing the name of straight man to lucky hank? does it still reflect the book?

it does! and i don't mind the change at all. i think it's a better title than straight man too, anyway, even if "straight man" does capture this book's dry humor. 1) lucky hank is the title of his op-ed and 2) a couple of characters call him that nickname derogatorily over the course of the book. it does make sense to change the title, even tho i'm 90% sure it's a marketing decision more than anything. bc "amc's straight man" may feel like a different tv show entirely : )))

[aydaptic]

Sorry if you've already answered this before but I'm new to the fandom and I found your account through your web-comic and I was wondering what is it about Gavin that you like so much? Why is he one of your favourite characters in dbh? (I've noticed that he isn't much of a fan-favourite in this fandom 😔)

This'll be a long post, but you asked (...and I'll happily answer!) I'll add some descriptions for context. At the top of my head, I can think of 21 reasons why I like his canon equivalent.

1. He's charismatic

Gav gives off an energy that makes it easy to hang onto his every word. I can quote all his lines by heart and I like listening to Neil Newbon (in this specific role) talk. I remember some of Kamski's lines as well -- also mo-capped/voice acted by Newbon -- but Kamski doesn't have nearly as much charisma as Gav does.

2. He's expressive

Ppl who 'talk with their hands' are more charismatic. Gav is all over the place in the break room if you stick around. Hand gestures capture people's attention as they emphasize what is being said.

3. He doesn't think androids are alive (...so in his eyes, the way he treats them isn't wrong)

"Could always try roughin' it up a little. After all... it's not human." - Gavin Reed, The Interrogation

That means he wouldn't rough up a human suspect. This alone justifies his unpleasant attitude towards androids. Hank -- who treated Connor way worse than Gav ever did -- changed his mind. Nothing says Gav can't do the same.

If Alexa suddenly said she was alive, the vast majority wouldn't take it seriously (if any at all.)

4. He's sarcastic

"Congratulations on last night, very impressive." - Gavin Reed, Waiting For Hank...

5. He has dark humor

6. He looks down on people that pay for s*x

Quote above. You don't call someone a "pervert" if you agree with their actions. The Eden Club, in particular, is immoral AF... bc those androids don't have a choice. Gav doesn't care about them being androids, but he still looks down on the guy who paid money to get laid, and I applaud Gav for that. Especially when said guy also had a wife and kids.

7. He has valid concerns about androids taking jobs

Anyone who says differently is either in denial, uninformed, or never had a job they were scared to get fired from. There's already been an uproar about ChatGPT and that's nothing compared to how advanced Detroit: Become Human androids are. The unemployment rate in this game is 37% -- higher than it was during the Great Depression and C*VID -- and androids are the main cause.

I've seen a lot of ppl ask this question:

Q: Why not just buy an android and have them do your job for you, then? You get the money anyway bc it's your android!

A: Bc, believe it or not, the vast majority of men want to work. This is a strange concept to grasp for a lot of ppl. I admire Gav for being one of those men who wants to do it themselves. Letting someone else do your job is taking the easy way out.

8. He's a hard worker

Gallery: "...Ruthlessly ambitious, Reed will do anything to advance his career, even if it means treading on other peoples’ toes."

9. He's ambitious

See the quote above.

10. He doesn't sleep well

This isn't just a headcanon. He has literal bags under his eyes. Just knowing he doesn't sleep well already has me asking, "why?" It's interesting.

11. He puts his feet on the table

After Connor interacts with him in the break room, Gav will go to his desk and do this. I'll go into detail about why this contributes to my liking his character in the very last point.

12. He calls Hank out on his alcoholism

As much as most of us love Hank, he's not in a good space mentally. Showing up drunk/hungover to work should not be tolerated. It not only puts coworkers, but also civilians, at risk. Hank should be in therapy instead of working at the DPD until he gets his life sorted out.

13. He calls Fowler out for giving Hank special treatment

"You won't get away with it this time." - Gavin Reed, The Interrogation (after Hank pulls a literal gun on a human coworker AKA Gav)

So Gav has brought it up to Fowler before and is about to do it again. Ties into the point above. What Hank does -- like assaulting a literal FBI agent -- shouldn't be tolerated.

14. He's a control freak

I gravitate towards ppl and characters who take charge. Those who like being in control and know what they're doing. I'm a control freak myself, but I'd prefer to let someone else take the reins as long as I agree with their methods. I like it when ppl know what they want and act on it. Gav does both.

15. He's protective of his coworkers

I was unsure whether or not to add this as I guess it can be seen as a subjective theory and not an objective fact.

Gav only ever steps in with the gun in The Interrogation when Con uses aggressive force on Chris Miller by tearing him away from the deviant. Con did this after disobeying Gav 3 times. So yeah. Gav is justified for stepping in. Hank, on the other hand, isn't justified for pulling a gun on a human coworker. I see this scene as Gav protecting Chris from Con who is showing signs of deviancy.

16. He can't wink

Endearing.

17. He pouts a lot

Again, endearing.

18. He swears like a sneezing kitten

Same as the two points above.

19. He doesn't like Connor

I don't like Con, either. Yeah. We exist. Personality types like Con's "let's be friends" attitude and constant positivity pisses me off. Before anyone comments that the player decides Con's personality... no. Only to an extent. There are several instances where the player has no say whatsoever. Some of Con's pre-determined responses annoy me.

20. He has great fashion

Big fan of leather jackets.

21. I like him bc I'm a narcissist at times

He's essentially the male equivalent of me to the T. I'm only an asshole internally, though. We love (or hate) characters we relate to. I relate to every single point except 17 and 18 on this list.

There you go :)

His OOC fanon equivalent has a huge fanbase -- especially on Twitter/X and Tumblr turning him into a blushing teenage girl -- but it seems like I'm the only person who can't stand that OOC portrayal of him. That said, I adore his canon equivalent in all his asshole glory.