#the 1990s and 2000s were weird

[brightlotusmoon]

[brightlotusmoon]

The box would scream.

remember when you were 10 and you would hang out with your friends in order to Look At The Computer together like you went to their house and experienced the information superhighway together. and then leave

[prokopetz]

Folks talking about the weirdness of late 1990s/early 2000s forum culture usually focus on the macro-level stuff – the inter-forum beefs, the raids, etc. – but on a personal level they were often even more unhinged. Like, many popular forums had recurring issues with people putting on the persona of a Sickly Artist (often claiming to have a heart condition, though just as often the nature of their ailment would be left unspecified), building a following based on the idea that they were this gentle, tortured artistic genius who could kick the bucket any time, and eventually "dying", only to return a few weeks later in a different Sickly Artist persona and start the whole thing over again. Many of the worst offenders went through this cycle multiple times. Sometimes they weren't even real artists, and were simply misrepresenting someone else's art as their own, which was much easier to get away with because Google Image Search wasn't yet a thing.

[omgthatdress]

An Analysis of the Ubiquity of Mall Brands in the late 1990s to early 2000s, or

I Fucking Hate These Guys

by OMG!thatdress

If you were a tween to teenager from roughly 1997 to 2004, chances are, you were left with profound life-long trauma caused by someone wearing Tommy Hilfiger, Abercrombie & Fitch, Ralph Lauren, Nautica, American Eagle, The Gap, Old Navy, or, if you were came along a little later, Hollister or Aeropoastale.

I cannot overstate to my young followers how over-saturated these brand names were in teen culture at the turn of the millennium, the extend to which EVERYONE was wearing them, and yet, in a weird way, how light the imprint they actually left on fashion history was.

Watching iconic teen shows of the era, you don't see any of them because a.) TV teenagers tend to be way cooler and more stylish than awkward and desperate real teenagers actually are, and b.) these brands were all copyright protected, which kept their names and logos off the airwaves.

Look in a middle school yearbook, however, you'll see it. Look at your aunt and uncle's high school photo albums, you'll see it. Ask any late Gen X or early Millennial. It was real and it was fucking awful.

The big question is why? Why? WHY, GOD WHY?! There's a lot of answers to that question.

First of all, I'm going to cite this absolutely wonderful article from Collector's Weekly about why everyone's grandma had a hideous orange couch in the 70s, and give the most simple and straightforward answer: it's what was available.

This is when the concept of online shopping is still very much in its infancy, and the hub of American consumer culture was still your local mall. If you needed new clothes, you went to the mall. And guess what stores were at every local mall? You guessed it.

For the second answer, I'm going to dig up this utter relic from the early days of internet meme-ing, that has nonetheless stuck with me and had a profound impact of my understanding of how popular fashion works:

I'm pretty sure that the reason Abercrombie & Fitch manages to survive as a brand today rests solely increasingly middle-aged Millennial men whose sense of style has refused to evolve past the shit their mom bought them in high school.

And why the hell would they? Nobody wore Abercrombie because it made them stand out or feel special. I'm still pretty convinced that nobody actually *liked* the aesthetic or thought the clothes actually looked good. You need not look past the basic color palette to understand these were not brands meant for uniqueness or self-expression.

While Britney Spears pranced around stage in her iconic neon colors and body glitter, American teenagers existed in a never-ending hellscape of washed-out neutrals, faded denim, and American flag primary colors.

All of which served its exact purpose: it was safety. It was a way to appear cool if you didn't want to go through the ordeal of actually having a personality or a sense of style. Which, of course, goes back to point number one: it was just shit you bought at the mall because you needed clothes.

It wasn't enough to save you once the school bully caught that whiff of autism and/or queerness on you, but it was enough that you could blend into the herd and pray no one ever noticed you.

Underneath it all was a very subtle undercurrent of class and classism: to wear mall brands was to declare to the world that you could indeed afford to shop at the mall. It meant you weren't, god forbid, poor.

Status symbol clothing goes back to the invention of clothing itself. The concept of brands as status symbols is still very much alive and well, its just more limited to actual luxury brands nowadays. One need look no further than your favorite high-end children's clothing website to see that rich parents still very much think it important that you know their five-year-old is wiping its boogers on Versace.

None of these brands were actual high-end luxury brands, but they still advertised and presented themselves as such. Their ads featured signifiers of "all-american" (read: White) wealth: yachts, skiing, horses, beaches, shirtless dudes with chiseled abs playing verious sportsballs.

The color palettes and cuts mimicked the preppy "Ivy" style of the New England old-money elite, along with their hobbies and lifestyle. You may not actually own a horse, but you can wear a polo shirt. You may not be able to run without breaking your ankle, but you wear the same shirt as the dude holding a football in the ad.

It was an elitist, White and skinny image that didn't age well into the diversity and body-positivity of the 2010s.

In 2003, a lawsuit was filed against Abercrombie & Fitch alleging systematic racial discrimination. People of color were rarely hired, and if they were, they were given jobs in the back, away from customer view. In 2005, the U.S. district court approved a settlement of $50,000. A few years ago, Netflix released the documentary White Hot: The Rise and Fall of Abercrombie & Fitch which admittedly I haven't watched yet because my hatred runs too deep to remind myself of its existence.

It was a hatred of Abercrombie & the (white, thin, neurotypical, heterosexual) conformity that it represented that drove me screaming into the loving arms of Hot Topic and Linkin Park. Jordan Calhoun wrote an excellent article for the Atlantic about his experience growing up poor and Black and not fitting in to the Abercrombie aesthetic.

I would be very remiss if I didn't bring up the "urban" mall brands of the early 2000s: Fubu, Sean Jean, Ecko, Baby Phat, among others. They were favored by Black teenagers and White teenagers who wanted to be Black. I know there's a lot to be said about these brands, but I'm too Caucasian to really be able to talk about them with nuance. Maybe someone else will, and I will be very happy to listen.

As much as I hate Tommy Hilfiger, I really do have to give him credit for recognizing the incredibly lucrative "street wear" market and selling power of hip-hop. While most of these mall brands kept their image sparkling White, Tommy made Aaliyah his brand ambassador and regularly appeared in the wardrobes of popular rap and R&B artists of the time.

It'd be very easy and very reductive to say that the changing ideology of the 2010s was the downfall of preppy mall brands, but really, the thing that truly killed them was the downfall of the mall itself. Shopping habits changed, and logos and brand names no longer held the power they once had.

The moral of the story is that being a teenager is fucking hell, and these popular brands both offered the safety of conformity and a status symbol to hold over the heads of the poor and uncool. The irony is that everyone who hated them as teenagers (read: ME) and the freaks who grew up to truly love the power of self-expression through personal style (read: ME) became the truly cool people. If you wore Abercrombie you grew up to vote for Donald Trump.

GO GOTH. PREPS SUCK. THE END.

[dropthedemiurge]

Let Free The Curse of Taekwondo: Things you didn't notice #1

Isn't this another K-BL where I'm internally squealing because of every single detail? You bet it is. You can read my other meta/cultural detail/Korean language posts for Love for Love's Sake, Time of Fever, Grey Shelter and Boys be Brave on my pinned post or hashtags^^ (I really need to organize it under one singly hashtag tho...)

I already talked about how impressed I am with the fact that this series has done their preparation job well, with props, settings, language, history etc.

It is about a countryside/small town in Southern province of Korea - because a lot of characters use satoori (southern dialect), almost all of them except for the main two guys. There is also a distinct contrast/conflict between 'fancy Seoul rich guys' looking down on 'Southern town'. Juyoung even was surprised Dohoi doesn't use satoori.

To which, he responded with 'You'll be uncomfortable if I use it". And Juyoung said there are plenty other uncomfortable things around here, beside understanding/listening to everyone using other accent xD Confusing Gaga translation errors, we meet again!

Actually, it's interesting because Dohoi's name is written 이도회 in Korean, which typically would be written as 'Dohoi' but pronounced as 'Dohwe' (think of surname Choi that is actually pronounced as Chwe), yet in the first episode I clearly heard them actually say 'Dohoi', letter by letter. Now I wonder if it's also related to satoori... I wish I could speak it, it sounds so cool tbh.

He actually said 'I'm not in a good condition', meaning his physical form. What do you mean, mood, when was that ever an excuse in sports..?xD

By the way, what is it with boys trying to get closer to other boys by buying them unusual ice cream?:') Okay, garlic sounds more weird than red bean one :D

Also, I tried to find the Hasong town they talked about but failed - maybe because of incorrect transcription or maybe they made up this town based on Uiseong - a small town close to Daegu which is famous for being the most famous garlic town, they produce a lot of it and garlic fame would be seen everywhere - so who knows, I bet they allude to this when Juyoung said 'why can't there be a vanilla garlic ice cream? It's like a collaboration!'

Another thing, I thought the time of this series was somewhere around 1990s-2000s (because I watched a movie in similar setting that was called 1997 year but they still used pagers, now that I think about it). It was also still the time where teachers could use physical punishment on their students, it's heavily highlighted but I don't actually know around what time they stopped... Probably in Seoul, they already were getting rid of it but in small towns it was old-school teaching, which is again why Dohoi tried to tell Joyoung out of it.

I'm not familiar when small laptops and phones appeared in Seoul but I think the series is actually somewhere around 2005-2010! Which would make sense, Juyoung got the 'cool' flip-phone and a laptop with Windows XP (released in 2001) but small town is still far from that, as they use landline house phones to make a call.

He also has mp3 player and as other tumblr folks figured out, he was listening and dancing to Jewelry song released in 2005 :)

And another thing that convinced me about the time era... the final scene!

Do you want to know why at the end of Ep 1 Dohoi smiled and laughed and ran to Juyoung even after so many exhausting days and neverending small miseries and a new loud housemate?

Because Juyoung not only came to pick him up with an umbrella in the acid rain, he also reenacted the famous umbrella scene from the classic romantic K-drama called "Temptation of Wolves" (늑대의 유혹) which was released in 2004! To make Dohoi laugh.

(Yes, when Juyoung intentionally put the umbrella down and the camera cut the shot to the framing when the umbrella slowly lifts up, showing smiling Juyoung, I was like 'you did nooooooot' xD)

(last screenshots taken from @heretherebedork post, I'm sorry I am very lazy and cannot take a good screenshot for life :'))

So that was already our very first romantic teasing-implication!

Another cute thing: optimistic Joyoung wrote a diary entry into the fake old Korean "Facebook" (they had Cyworld instead) to share his first selfie with Dohoi:

"[Excited Shin Jjuyoung]" (typing in a popular back then teenage style) "I miss you guys... But here it's nice too hehe ^___^ Come to play with me!! Together with my friend Dohoi too~~!"

Aren't they the cuteestttttt? I mean, this dynamic is not new but I love how unique the setting is. And I can't wait to watch the second episode, I'm waiting and savoring the first one for now but I'm going to make notes about other episodes as well so stay tuned! If you reply/comment in tags, I will put you in my tag list^^

Tag list: @benkaben @pickletrip @troubled-mind

[brightlotusmoon]

We had Tweety Bird, now the kids have Bluey.

I love Bluey.

slay I'm not even joking

[brightlotusmoon]

[wayslidecool]

arabic numerals ranked from worst to best by their potential as the lens in new year's glasses

#10: Seven (7)

seven is a very awkward number for a lot of things, and new year's glasses are no exception. its weird angular shape leaves no opening to put a lens in, and unlike the next entry, it's too wide to comfortably squeeze between lens in the second and fourth digits. and the impressive thing about 7 is that this is a number with plenty of writing variations, and yet i can't think of a single one that makes it an efficient lens! sorry 7. i think you're the best number for a rating scale, but that's about it.

#9: One (1)

the 2010s were a rough time for new year's glasses, huh? coming off the high of the 1990s and 2000s, people were determined to make the 2010s work, but that's a tall fucking order. the saving grace of 1, and the reason it's above 7, is that it's skinny enough that you can slide it between numbers and use the fourth digit of the year as the lens, but the fact you have to resort to that is only further evidence of how much 1 sucks at being the lens.

#8: Two (2)

two is definitely a tier above the previous two entries. it's an interesting and versatile enough shape that you can mess with it to try and make a viable spot for a lens, what with the upper loop and lower angle, but i feel no matter what you try, you always gotta make some concessions. like, you have enough to work with that a talented enough designer can make something that works, but usually the result is more "functional" than "good".

#7: Four (4)

now we're getting into numbers that could actually make for passable lenses. i mean, check it out! we have a closed loop here and everything, that has GOT to count for something! what makes me put four relatively low on the list is that with its right-triangle shape, i can't imagine it being a very comfortable shape for a lens, especially with how much ends up sticking out and downwards. still, a vast improvement over the previous three entries, even if it's basically just a worse 9.

#6: Five (5)

i feel like depending on what you prioritize in new year's glasses, these next two entries could end up going below the previous one, but personally, i think the not-closed round loop feels like a more practical spot for a lens than 4's closed-but-angular loop, y'know? so what if the loop isn't closed, it still mostly surrounds your eye, and feels generally passable to me. this is a number that wouldn't inspire the idea for new year's glasses, but certainly works now that the idea has been established.

#5: Three (3)

three is basically the same thing as 5, and i could even see some people putting it below 5, since 5's loop is a bit closer to being closed than either of 3's loops. that being said, 3's dual-loop is ultimately what gives it the edge to me. it ends up feeling more versatile to me. i feel the bottom loop is generally the correct choice, but just having the option of the top loop as well really helps it out. either way, after suffering through the 2010s and 2020s, i expect the 2030s to be a welcome breath of fresh air.

#4: Nine (9)

now we're getting to the really good ones. i mean, the 1990s are when the trend of new year's glasses started! if this number was good enough to kickstart the trend, then clearly it's a good number to put the lens in. having a closed round loop really goes a long way, it turns out! what puts 9 below the next three entries is the tail. having that swoop down towards your face feels like it'd be a bit uncomfortable, and this issue doesn't crop up with the next three entries. still, 9 is a trailblazer and its place in the New Year's Glasses Metagame needs to be respected.

#3: Six (6)

if 9's only issue is the tail getting all up in your face, then what better way to solve that then just turning it upside-down? it might just be me, put having it brush up against your forehead feels much, much less intrusive than having it brush up against your face. and plus, it can give the impression of a raised eyebrow! bonus! the 2030s-2050s are going to be a refreshing breath of fresh air following the awful new year's glasses of the 2010s and 2020s, but the 2060s are going to be a true new year's glasses renaissance.

#2: Eight (8)

hey, so remember how i put 3 above 5 since i felt the double loop made it a bit more versatile? well now imagine that, but both loops are closed. 8 makes for such a good lens, it's a little surprising we didn't see new year's glasses in the 1980s (i'm guessing having two of the same number is more inspiring than two different numbers?) either way, eight isn't content to give you just one closed loop. it'll give you a second closed loop right above. (or below!) 8 is a versatile number with many options, and i hope i can live to see the day we see it in new year's glasses. a true stand out in its field.

#1: Zero (0)

still, even with all the good years ahead, it's hard to ignore the fact that the best years are sadly behind us, with the 2000s being the absolute pinnacle of new year's glasses design. i mean, come on. a single loop with no frills is basically what glasses designs default to already, so using the middle two zeroes as the lens for glasses? impeccable design. the 1990s were good enough to kickstart the trend, but the 2000s were good enough to make us want to brute force the 2010s and 2020s. if that's not the mark of a good design, i don't know what is.

sadly, it's likely we'll never see design this good again. the next year with the middle two digits being two zeroes is 3000, and while we might be able to execute double-zero designs at the turn of each century, they'll end up looking weirdly lopsided in the process. i believe humans are hubristic enough to try and brute-force bad decades, but multiple bad centuries? forget about it.

oh well. happy new year

[luna-rainbow]

Hey, I don't know if you've already answered this (and this may be a weird question lol) but why did Hydra just let Bucky's hair grow long? Why didn't they just cut it? I've seen you do other metas and stuff like that (which I love, you're a great writer!) So do you have any ideas?

Aww thanks for enjoying the other metas 💕

That is a very interesting question that I’ve never thought much of 😅

From a Doylist perspective, the Winter Soldier arc was published in 2005-6. Ed Brubaker was born 1966. Men having long hair became more acceptable and even fashionable from about the 1970s (ie Brubaker’s formative years), and that style carried over to the late 1990s (or, if you’re like me who was in the JPop fandom, it was still popular for most of the 2000s). Longer hair in men was generally seen as subversive and cool, or untamed and unkempt, which were descriptors that would have fit Bucky’s reappearance in his new persona. It was also a good way of indicating that time has passed and his character has changed significantly. One other thing is, when it comes to 2D art, long hair flows, ie it’s easier to express dynamism, which is why so many superheroes wear capes. I believe (not having read the actual comics) Bucky’s role changed in The Winter Soldier run from a pure sidekick to something closer to an antagonist and partner, so the more distinctive character design reflects that too.

From a Watsonian perspective…I guess men’s short hair can be somewhat high maintenance in that you kind of have to trim it once a month at least. Who knows if the serum affects the speed of hair growth as well, because if it does then maybe he needs more frequent trims and it just gets long if they miss any. Presumably, given his history, he’s also not an easy customer to approach with a sharp implement, especially not that close to his face. And they’re always in such a hurry to pack him back in the cryo tube or to get him prepped for his mission that it just gets missed until it really gets in the way.

The other possibility is that the longer hair also changes his face shape substantially speaking as someone who didn’t recognise Bucky when the mask came off. It makes his face more angular and the shadows deeper. It probably stops his memories triggering as easily when he sees his own reflection. It serves to erase his original identity, along with his new “name” (although we have no evidence that he knew he was called the Winter Soldier while he was still brainwashed), new uniform and the bionic arm.

The third reason is that the long unkempt hair could be used as a psychological tactic. It’s emasculating and demeaning, especially for someone born in the 1910s and normally known to be well-groomed and tidy. It’s an element of control over his bodily autonomy that he cannot change without them allowing it or at least giving him access to implements to cut it. It contrasts him with the other soldiers, including the other “Winter Soldiers” we see in CACW, who are allowed to sport typical masculine haircuts, and serves as a continual reminder that he is “other”, if not considered somewhat subhuman.

So that’s my two boring cents. I wonder if anyone else has other ideas.

[beesmygod]

I'm actually bummed about YouTube as a whole bc We're in Hell and Channel 5 both turned out to be rapists and just kept making videos so now when I need inoffensive background noise at work my eyes glaze over and I type in "bossa nova" like literal elevator music is better

tumblr is fucking with me and wont let me post the whole post without telling me why but i think bc of all the links i put its getting flagged as spam lol. bear with me as i update this post

oneshorteye: speed run history vids about sierra games and their ilk. interviews with the creators. https://www.youtube.com/@OneShortEye

anomaly documentaries: short form docs about weirdness in the world mostly prior to 2000. delivery and presentation like a 1990s educational video. not edutainment. https://www.youtube.com/@AnomalyDocs

atrocity guide: similar in tone to the above. not as dark as the name would suggest. https://www.youtube.com/@AtrocityGuide

anyaustin: seeks out mundane, odd, tranquil, haunting, or idiosyncratic areas in video games. sometimes roleplays as a census taker to determine the unemployment rate of video game citites https://www.youtube.com/@any_austin

drripVHS: a hero, a legend. uploads rips of VHS tapes he picks up from thrift stores in the portland oregon area. soooooooo many RLM wheel of the worst picks can be found here. https://www.youtube.com/@DrRIPVHS

taskmaster/bbc shows: a shocking amount of british tv shows are uploaded in full on youtube by official accounts. taskmaster fucking rips lol https://www.youtube.com/@Taskmaster

bobby fingers: irish artist who creates dioramas of famous people and events while collecting an oral history of the event and everything surrounding it. this is underselling his production quality by a lot. subjects include mel gibson's drunken arrest and steven segal getting bodied by gene lebell https://www.youtube.com/@bobbyfingers

danooct1: computer enthusiasts who runs old, weird viruses from the 1990s-2000s on his machines. its funny how many of them were little pranks. https://www.youtube.com/@danooct1

primm's hood cinema: funny guy reviews hood movies. simple as. https://www.youtube.com/@PrimmsHoodCinema

treytheexplainer: history nerd (history student?) explains really, really, really, really, REALLY old stuff. but funny stuff. https://www.youtube.com/@TREYtheExplainer

ann reardon and how to cook that: an aussie mom who creates frankly astoundingly beautiful confectionery creations. started to debunk dangerous 5 min craft vids after becoming alarmed at their proliference. also shows how to fix your busted ass cakes and explains why they fucked up. https://www.youtube.com/@HowToCookThat

MEpearl: i love georgette i would move heaven and earth for her and her opossums she rescues. shes insane (strongly positive) https://www.youtube.com/@MEpearl

tara a devlin: some aussie who translates and plays obscure horror games of varying quality from japan. VERY obscure and weird stuff. fun. https://www.youtube.com/@KowabanaJapan

[dylweedwastaken]

Just did some math regarding Rogues! The Podcast and the results were interesting.

Jon officially turned 44 in 2024, placing his birth year 1980. This is where things get weird.

What's weirder is that "S04E00 | The Files of Dr. Hugo Strange 0932 - Jonathan U. Crane" takes is recorded September 7th, 1995, meaning Jon is 15 in that recording?

Jon killed his dad on October 31st, 1990, meaning he was 10 years old. I was under the impression he was older, like in his late teens.

"Oh well, maybe the series just takes place in the 90s-early 2000s."

You fool.

Edward acknowledges the year multiple times in the series. The earliest in season 1 has him wishing everyone a happy 2013.

Did an independent writer who voices the majority of the characters in an extremely well-written series make a minor mistake?? Am I stupid??

Yeah probably

ABSOLUTELY NOT

[alphynix]

April Fools 2023: How Titanis Lost The Right To Bear Arms

Huge, flightless, and carnivorous, the phorusrhacids (or terror birds) were some of the largest apex predators in South America during its Cenozoic "splendid isolation" as an island continent – and they were possibly the closest that birds ever came to reclaiming the ecological roles of their extinct non-avian theropod dinosaur relatives. 

And for a while in the late 1990s and early 2000s there was a hypothesis that they'd even re-evolved clawed hands.

This idea was based on the wing bones of Titanis walleri, the only terror bird known to have dispersed northwards during the Great American Biotic Interchange when North and South America became connected via the Isthmus of Panama.

Living during the Pliocene and Pleistocene in Florida and Texas, between about 5 and 1.8 million years ago, Titanis stood around 1.5-1.8m tall (~5-6') and was heavily built, with long strong legs and a massive hooked beak. Remains of its small wings were incomplete and fragmentary but had seemingly unusual joints, with what looked like a stiffer wrist and more flexible "fingers" than other birds, which led paleontologist Robert Chandler to propose in 1994 that this terror bird species had modified its wings into clawed grasping arms similar to those of dromaeosaurs, used to restrain prey animals while its beak tore them apart.

But the idea of a giant murder-bird with added meathook-hands only lasted about a decade. Further investigation in 2005 showed that Titanis' arms weren't that weird after all – the same sort of joints are found in terror birds' closest living relatives, the seriemas, and so Titanis really had the same sort of small vestigial wings as many other large flightless birds.

…However, there still could have been some claws on there. Many modern birds actually have one or two small claws on their hands that aren't visible under their feathers, and terror birds like Titanis having something like that going on is completely plausible – they just wouldn't have been using them for any sort of specalized predatory function.

———

NixIllustration.com | Tumblr | Twitter | Patreon

[my-world-my-stories]

Considering the Predator movie Marathon i made way back in Halloween, I feel now in a mood to comment on which movies I liked the best. Especially on a a scale on how much I enjoyed them.

Keep in mind, these are just my opinion, everyone is entitled to their own tastes, i'm no way shape or form a movie critic, so don't take these too seriously.

(Obvious spoilers for the movies)

Predator (1987): Honestly, for being an 'action' movie, the pacing was really slow. Like literally the only entertaining bits for me where the Predators scenes and they were very few and far in between. We only get to that cool fight between Dutch and El Diablo (badass nickname honestly) at the literal end and the rest is just about a bunch of sweaty military man walking around in the jungle and getting picked one my one. Did not care one bit when they got killed either since most are just assholes. I still give it a 7.5/10 for being the one to start off the franchise.

Predator 2 (1990): In my opinion, objectively an improvement from the first one by a lot. The Predator is part of the plot since the start, the action is satisfying and while the pacing goes at a neck break speed, making it feel very over the top and hammy, i was having a blast through it all. The human characters feel like a buch of stereotypes of 90' cop movies (the rouge cop that does whatever he wants, the cop best friend that gets killed, the chic cop, the newbie, the evil druglords) but the predator being part of the mix kinda saves it from being too cliche like the rest of his genre. I give it a solid 8/10.

Alien VS Predator (2004): AvP is an interesting case for me. It's a very much a movie of it's time, that got that 2000’ movie energy where they try to be so cool and edgy, in some scenes it can work, while in others, it kinda fumbles. The CGI doesn't help either. But the elements that do work, like Lex and Scar team up, the Xeno Queen fight, the idea in general of Yautja hunting Xenos as a trial of sorts, make the movie for me (if we don't count the finale). It's a good movie to vibe with, just to see cool predator action, so I say it's a 6 or 7/10.

AvP Requiem (2007): Did not watch it. No opinion. (Literally everyone agrees that Wolf is the sole worth it part in this movie)

Predators (2010): It's not bad.... But not good either. Recently, a friend asked for recommendations on Predator movies, and without hesitation I said 'do no recommend' about this movie, so that says a lot. None of the human characters are actually interesting, the predators get so little screen time, Cruci predator deserved better and in general, it has a lot of wasted potential. The movie is even supposed to take place on an alien planet, which sounds so interesting as a setting, but they made it look like every generic jungle in a movie ever (with a few weird plants, a funky skyline and ONE scene with another alien creature that isn't a yautja or a hound). It didn't completely ruin the vibe, but I definitely won't come back to this movie anytime soon, 4/10.

The Predator (2018): Did not watch it. No opinion. (The few things I saw and heard discouraged me in an heartbeat.)

Prey (2022): I do not care if I'm saying what everyone else has, Prey IS a good movie. Even if you're not familiar with the franchise, it's a good movie to enjoy, with great cinematography, good special effects, a badass design for a Predator AND a human main character that I can actually root for and I care about if she manages to survive or not by the end (if we also count Lex from AvP. That girl and Scar deserved so much better.). Her victory felt earned, even if I still feel salty that every Yautja must die by the end of their movie. Might be slightly influenced because the bar of comparison for the other movies is low at this point, but it deserves a 9/10.

[brightlotusmoon]

They covered Pink Floyd, U2, Peter Gabriel, REM, Nick Cave, Evanescence, Madonna, Queen, Rammstein, Simon And Garfunkel, my personal favorite Belinda Carlisle's Heaven Is A Place On Earth...

Over time 90s music will get boiled down to just cheap nostalgia for boy bands. This is disgusting. How dare you erase the year where everyone was inexplicably super into Gregorian Chants

[maxdibert]

Yes, I agree - it's ridiculous that common wizards seem to have no knowledge of Muggles. I mean, what the hell? But what about those who specialize in making sure Muggles don’t find out about the wizarding world? Obliviators, for instance, who specialize in memory charms, or the ones practicing all types of spells to hide wizarding locations from Muggle eyes- even their cameras, which already existed in the 1990s. And then there are the departments focused on managing magical accidents and breaches of secrecy.

There must be magic that prevents public cameras from capturing magic. I don’t buy the explanation that magic inherently messes with technology—if that were true, wizards wouldn’t be able to live in Muggle cities, like the Blacks did. Maybe there’s a spell on all Muggles in the country that detects when and where they’ve witnessed magic. Whatever the case, this is insane, and I believe magic is much more powerful than it’s often given credit for.

And Arthur? He’s just a weird guy. He works with Muggle cars but knows nothing about electricity? What’s wrong with him? I have no explanation for that, honestly.

Honestly, it’s all just plot holes at this point. For me, one of the biggest flaws in the series is that the relationship between wizards and Muggles is barely explored. For example, we know everything about the Weasleys, even that they had a distant Muggle relative or something, but we know nothing about Hermione’s parents because she literally spends the entire series avoiding them. At one point, she doesn’t even spend her holidays with them. It’s absurd.

The only thing we know about Muggles are the Dursleys, who are terrible; Snape’s father, who’s terrible; the Muggle kids who traumatized Ariana Dumbledore and also behaved terribly. Every single Muggle close to the main characters LITERALLY implies a story of trauma for those characters. There isn’t a single good Muggle in the entire series, and yet we’re supposed to believe that pureblood wizards are prejudiced for no reason? Literally every example we’re given only shows Muggles who are either bad to wizards, treat them poorly, or have issues with magic. Even in the story Rowling told about McGonagall on Pottermore, this trope is repeated: when McGonagall’s father finds out her mother is a witch, their marriage falls apart.

It’s continuous examples of rejection from Muggles toward wizards, and we’re supposed to believe that Muggles are the oppressed or endangered side? Don’t some wizards maybe have valid reasons for not wanting anything to do with them? The series doesn’t give us good examples, and it could have done so through Hermione’s parents, but paradoxically, they don’t even have names. There’s no effort to show us what it’s like for two Muggle parents to have a daughter go to Hogwarts and to be happy for her. They’re supposed to be dentists, middle-class people who love and support their daughter, but they’re never given relevance to show us that there are Muggles who are good people. Every Muggle that gets any mention or importance in the series is presented in a negative light—it’s honestly laughable.

Kingsley Shacklebolt worked in the Muggle world for years, right? And he didn’t create a special department for the prevention of Muggle technology potentially discovering wizards? In the '90s, advanced technology didn’t exist yet, but by the 2000s, there was already the internet, and forums and group chats were a thing, however rudimentary. This means that just two or three years after the end of the series, a Muggle could take a photo or record a video and upload it to a forum or send it to countless people worldwide.

What happens to the Statute of Secrecy then, if there’s no prevention or containment system? If wizards generally think Muggles are stupid and that everything can be solved with an Obliviate, how do you manage exposure through digital media? Even if you tell me Rowling didn’t think about this because the internet wasn’t widespread yet, what about fax machines? Cameras? Are you seriously telling me cameras can’t capture magical moments without wizards noticing because they have no clue what a camera is, and if a Muggle sees something, they can’t send it to two hundred TV stations and have it show up on every primetime entertainment show? That absolutely happened in the '90s.

I mean, portraying magical society as a ghetto that sees Muggles as “something” existing in parallel while canonically interacting with them and even living among them in hiding, yet knowing absolutely nothing about their culture, is absurd to me. It’s logical for Muggles not to know because they’re unaware of the existence of magic, but the other way around? Even if only for the sake of prevention. It’s just a plot hole.

[duhragonball]

Dragon Ball AF Lore

Last night I reblogged a thing about Xicor, the imaginary villain of Dragon Ball AF, the imaginary sequel to Dragon Ball GT. There were some cool responses to this, but I didn't want to reblog the entire post all over again, so I thought I'd carry the discussion over here.

@brotoman-exe : #so do they ever explain why Goku cheats on his wife in this set up?#(to be clear Im guessing it was likely a stolen dna Superman 4 thing just having fun)

My understanding was that the West Supreme Kai faked her death and then came back as a bad guy. She somehow obtained a DNA sample from Goku and used it to impregnate herself? The end result being that Xicor is the biological son of Goku and the West Supreme Kai, even though Goku himself had no idea of any of this.

Of course, it's impossible to cite sources on any of this, since I'm talking about made-up details from a made-up show. It's entirely possible that there are other versions of the AF legend where Goku cheated on his wife like a jerk.

What I always wanted to know was how the West Supreme Kai survived the fight with Kid Buu five million years ago, and why she laid low for so long.

But now that you've brought up Superman IV, I can't stop thinking about the raw chicken thigh Lex stuffed in that little lockbox. This is my new DBAF personal canon.

@scarabats123: #As someone who wasn't alive in 1994#let me tell you Xicor and AF was THRIVING in the 2000s up into the early 2010s#hell even now some people make nostalgic fanart of it#Everyone knew about Xicor and Evil Goku and that blue bald dude

It really is bizarre how long the AF mythos has persisted. I think Dragon Ball Super was the final nail in the coffin for any true believers that were still left, but by the time DBS came out AF had already established itself as this weird little thing in its own right. It's like Bigfoot. I think everyone knows it's not real and doesn't make a lot of sense, but the idea is too much fun to discard completely.

@mozillavulpix: definitely think there's a lot of information here that's wrong, but I wasn't in the fandom in the 1990s to confirm any of it But the one big thing is...I'm pretty sure 'Dragon Ball AF' was originally supposed to stand for 'April Fools'. Like at one point someone somewhere started the name just because it'd be hilarious to trick people into believing something with a name so obviously-fake if you were paying attention. But when people started believing it they came up with their own theories on what it meant. kanzenshuu also says the rumours probably only started around 2002-2003 https://www.kanzenshuu.com/rumor/dragon-ball-af/

There were some factual errors, but the one that stood out to me was the notion of Toyotaro creating Towa and Mira, since I'd always heard Toriyama created her for Dragon Ball Online. And I've heard of the Goku Black/Xicor parallels before, but I'm pretty sure that's more of a coincidence than anything else.

I also found the 1990s to be a little too early for AF rumors to really get started, so I went back to that Kanzenshuu article you linked to and read it again just to check. This time, I ran across the link to the message board discussion about the "SSJ5 Goku" image that seems to have started it all.

Apparently, this was all discovered back in 2012, but I don't think I ever heard about this until now. Someone found the "AF Goku" image in an issue of the magazine Hobby Consolas, cover dated May 1999.

It looks like the magazine just published reader-submitted fan art, and this particular one was credited to David Montiel Franco of Alicante, Spain. Forums member Raykugan published this information in February 2012, and then Derek Padula contacted the artist and published his findings on his blog "Dao of Dragon Ball".

David Montiel Franco, as it turns out, has his own blog, af-dragonball.blogspot.com, where he appears to be promoting his Dragon Ball AF fancomics. And apparently, the guy in the image is not Super Saiyan 5 Goku at all, but an OC named Tablos.

So it appears that the true original DBAF was a fanwork created by Franco prior to May 1999. Everyone else was building onto his creation whether they knew it or not. The alternative is that Franco is stealing the credit from the true artist, but that seems like a weird thing to still be holding onto after all these years. I mean, if he wanted clout, you'd think he'd do more self-promotion than this. By now, everyone would have heard of his claims to be the creator of AF. So I think he might be the real deal.

Anyway, it definitely ties DBAF to the year 1999, although I have a feeling the rumors didn't really pick up steam until 2002 or so, as U.S. fans became aware of a sequel series to Z and wondered what might follow after that. There may have been rumors in other countries that got earlier access to GT, and there were surely American fans in the 90's who knew more about GT before it was localized. But at least the concept of AF was around in the 90's, even if it was the tail end of the 90's, and even if it was very obscure.

But that's AF in general, not Xicor. I get the sense that Vintagegeekculture seemed to conflate Tablos with Xicor, and that's probably an understandable mistake to make, since Xicor was probably invented as a response to what was thought to be SSJ5 Goku. So Xicor must have come later, but how much later?

I guess what bugs me is that there ought to be someone who would claim credit for the character, the way Franco claimed to be the artist of the DBAF image. It's kind of fascinating how Xicor is out there and no one's trying to act like it was their idea.