#the fact that so many people (myself included) were shaped by this film | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

kevinsreviewcatalogue · 1 month

Text

Review: Alien: Romulus (2024)

Alien: Romulus (2024)

Rated R for bloody violent content and language

Score: 3 out of 5

Alien: Romulus is a movie I've seen another critic describe as the best possible adaptation of its own theme park ride. Specifically, it's a nostalgia-bait sequel of the sort that both the horror genre and Hollywood in general have seen a ton of in the last several years, set between Alien and Aliens and filled with voluminous shout-outs and references to both films -- and, for better or worse, the rest of the Alien franchise. It's a very uneven film that's at its worst when it's focusing on the plot and the broader lore of the series, repeating many of the mistakes of other late-period films in the franchise while also being let down by the leaden performance of its leading lady (especially amidst an otherwise standout cast), but at its best when it's being the two-hour thrill ride that writer/director Fede Álvarez intended it to be, hitting some impressive highs with both great atmosphere and some intense sequences involving the aliens stalking and killing our protagonists as well as them fighting back. What few new ideas it brings to the franchise are largely secondary to the fact that this is pretty much a "greatest hits" reel for the Alien series, a film that, for its first two acts at least, is largely a straightforward and well-made movie about people stumbling around where they shouldn't and getting fucked up by creepy alien monsters.

Said people this time are a group of young workers on what seems to be Weyland-Yutani's grimmest mining colony, located on a planet called Jackson's Star whose stormy, polluted atmosphere means that it's always night on its surface. They don't want to spend their lives in this awful dump, so when they hear about a decommissioned spacecraft that's been towed into orbit, they decide to go up there, loot it for any cryogenic stasis chambers and other valuables it may have on board, and then take their shuttle on a one-way trip to another planet, a plot description that right away reminds me of Álvarez's previous film Don't Breathe about a group of crooks breaking in somewhere they shouldn't. When they get there, they find that it's actually a former research facility split into two halves, Romulus and Remus, where scientists had been conducting research into a little something-something they'd recovered from the wreck of a derelict space freighter called the Nostromo... and that there's a reason why this place was hastily abandoned and left to get torn apart by the rings of Jackson's Star. Yep, this place is infested with xenomorphs who are eager to chow down on the bunch of little human-shaped snacks who've just come aboard.

This movie's got a great ensemble cast that I often found myself wishing it focused more on, and which it seemed to be trying to frequently. David Jonsson was the MVP as Andy, a malfunctioning android who serves as the protagonist Rain's adoptive brother. He has to play two roles here, that of a childlike figure in a grown man's body who frequently repeats the corny dad jokes Rain's father programmed into him, and the morally ambiguous figure he transforms into after he's uploaded with data from the station's shifty android science officer Rook, including his mission, his loyalty to the Weyland-Yutani Corporation, and his cold calculations about human lives. Archie Renaux and Isabela Merced were great as the brother and sister Tyler and Kay, the former a hothead who you know not only isn't gonna make it but is probably gonna fuck things up, and the latter as somebody who, at least in my opinion, should've been the film's heroine, especially with her subplot about being pregnant making her struggle to get off Jackson's Star into a mission to get a better life for her child than what they'd face in such a dump. All in all, this was a great cast of young actors who I can see going places...

...and then you have Cailee Spaeny as Rain Carradine. Look, I don't want to hate Spaeny. While she's been in plenty of bad movies where her performance didn't exactly liven up the proceedings, she also proved last year with Priscilla that she can actually act. I don't know if it was misdirection, miscasting, a lack of enthusiasm, or what, but Spaeny's performance felt lifeless here, with only a few moments where she seemed to come alive. The character had some interesting ideas behind her in the writing, such as Rain's background as an orphan, her having apparently lived on another planet before Jackson's Star, and her relationship with Andy, who serves as an adoptive brother of sorts and her only connection to her family, and a better performance probably could've done a lot to bring those ideas to life. But Spaeny, unfortunately, just falls flat. She seems to be getting into it more during the action scenes where she has to run from and eventually fight the aliens, especially a creative third-act sequence involving what the xenomorphs' acidic blood does in zero gravity, but during the long dramatic sequences, she simply felt bored even as the rest of the cast around her was shining. Honestly, Kay should've been the protagonist just from how much livelier Merced's performance was. Give her the focus, and bring her pregnancy to the forefront given how it winds up impacting the plot, meaning that she's the one who has to do that at the end, the one for whom it's personal, while Rain's relationship with Andy ultimately leads to hazy judgment that costs her dearly (and believe me, there was a head-slapper on her part towards the end). Spaeny may have been styled like a young Sigourney Weaver in the older films, but she was no Weaver.

Fortunately, behind the camera, Álvarez makes this one hell of a horror rollercoaster. It's a very fast-moving film, but even so, he's able to maintain a considerable sense of tension throughout, the film clearly being a product of somebody who loved the older films and, more importantly, knew how to replicate what worked about them on screen. Yes, there are the obligatory quotes of the older films that can feel downright cringeworthy with how they feel shoehorned in, even if I did think they did something funny with how they used "get away from her, you bitch!" by making it come off as deliberately awkward from the film's most deliberately cringy character. But Álvarez also knew how to make the Romulus/Remus station a scary, foreboding place using many of the same tricks he learned watching Ridley Scott and James Cameron do the same with the Nostromo and Hadley's Hope, making full use of the busted lighting and the '70s/'80s retro-futuristic aesthetics that have long lent this series its characteristic worn-down, blue-collar feel. Even when the plot was kind of losing it in the third act, calling back to the series' lesser late-period entries in the worst way (I don't really want to spoil how, though if you read between the lines with what I said earlier about Rain and Kay, you can probably figure it out), Álvarez always made this a very fun and interesting film to actually watch.

The Bottom Line

When it comes to revivals of classic sci-fi horror properties, Alien: Romulus isn't as balls-out awesome as Prey was last year, with a whole lot of components that don't work as well as they should. That said, it's still a very fun and intense movie that delivers the goods where it counts, and was quite entertaining to watch on the big screen.

#alien #alien series #alien romulus #2024 #2024 movies #horror #horror movies #science fiction #sci fi horror #monster movies #fede alvarez #cailee spaeny #david jonsson #isabela merced #archie renaux #aileen wu

1 note · View note

fozmeadows · 4 years

Text

race & culture in fandom

For the past decade, English language fanwriting culture post the days of LiveJournal and Strikethrough has been hugely shaped by a handful of megafandoms that exploded across AO3 and tumblr – I’m talking Supernatural, Teen Wolf, Dr Who, the MCU, Harry Potter, Star Wars, BBC Sherlock – which have all been overwhelmingly white. I don’t mean in terms of the fans themselves, although whiteness also figures prominently in said fandoms: I mean that the source materials themselves feature very few POC, and the ones who are there tended to be done dirty by the creators.

Periodically, this has led POC in fandom to point out, extremely reasonably, that even where non-white characters do get central roles in various media properties, they’re often overlooked by fandom at large, such that the popular focus stays primarily on the white characters. Sometimes this happened (it was argued) because the POC characters were secondary to begin with and as such attracted less fan devotion (although this has never stopped fandoms from picking a random white gremlin from the background cast and elevating them to the status of Fave); at other times, however, there has been a clear trend of sidelining POC leads in favour of white alternatives (as per Finn, Poe and Rose Tico being edged out in Star Wars shipping by Hux, Kylo and Rey). I mention this, not to demonize individuals whose preferred ships happen to involve white characters, but to point out the collective impact these trends can have on POC in fandom spaces: it’s not bad to ship what you ship, but that doesn’t mean there’s no utility in analysing what’s popular and why through a racial lens.

All this being so, it feels increasingly salient that fanwriting culture as exists right now developed under the influence and in the shadow of these white-dominated fandoms – specifically, the taboo against criticizing or critiquing fics for any reason. Certainly, there’s a hell of a lot of value to Don’t Like, Don’t Read as a general policy, especially when it comes to the darker, kinkier side of ficwriting, and whether the context is professional or recreational, offering someone direct, unsolicited feedback on their writing style is a dick move. But on the flipside, the anti-criticism culture in fanwriting has consistently worked against fans of colour who speak out about racist tropes, fan ignorance and hurtful portrayals of living cultures. Voicing anything negative about works created for free is seen as violating a core rule of ficwriting culture – but as that culture has been foundationally shaped by white fandoms, white characters and, overwhelmingly, white ideas about what’s allowed and what isn’t, we ought to consider that all critical contexts are not created equal.

Right now, the rise of C-drama (and K-drama, and J-drama) fandoms is seeing a surge of white creators – myself included – writing fics for fandoms in which no white people exist, and where the cultural context which informs the canon is different to western norms. Which isn’t to say that no popular fandoms focused on POC have existed before now – K-pop RPF and anime fandoms, for example, have been big for a while. But with the success of The Untamed, more western fans are investing in stories whose plots, references, characterization and settings are so fundamentally rooted in real Chinese history and living Chinese culture that it’s not really possible to write around it. And yet, inevitably, too many in fandom are trying to do just that, treating respect for Chinese culture or an attempt to understand it as optional extras – because surely, fandom shouldn’t feel like work. If you’re writing something for free, on your own time, for your own pleasure, why should anyone else get to demand that you research the subject matter first?

Because it matters, is the short answer. Because race and culture are not made-up things like lightsabers and werewolves that you can alter, mock or misunderstand without the risk of hurting or marginalizing actual real people – and because, quite frankly, we already know that fandom is capable of drawing lines in the sand where it chooses. When Brony culture first reared its head (hah), the online fandom for My Little Pony – which, like the other fandoms we’re discussing here, is overwhelmingly female – was initially welcoming. It felt like progress, that so many straight men could identify with such a feminine show; a potential sign that maybe, we were finally leaving the era of mainstream hypermasculine fandom bullshit behind, at least in this one arena. And then, in pretty much the blink of an eye, things got overwhelmingly bad. Artists drawing hardcorn porn didn’t tag their works as adult, leading to those images flooding the public search results for a children’s show. Women were edged out of their own spaces. Bronies got aggressive, posting harsh, ugly criticism of artists whose gijinka interpretations of the Mane Six as humans were deemed insufficiently fuckable.

The resulting fandom conflict was deeply unpleasant, but in the end, the verdict was laid down loud and clear: if you cannot comport yourself like a decent fucking person – if your base mode of engagement within a fandom is to coopt it from the original audience and declare it newly cool only because you’re into it now; if you do not, at the very least, attempt to understand and respect the original context so as to engage appropriately (in this case, by acknowledging that the media you’re consuming was foundational to many women who were there before you and is still consumed by minors, and tagging your goddamn porn) – then the rest of fandom will treat you like a social biohazard, and rightly so.

Here’s the thing, fellow white people: when it comes to C-drama fandoms and other non-white, non-western properties? We are the Bronies.

Not, I hasten to add, in terms of toxic fuckery – though if we don’t get our collective shit together, I’m not taking that darkest timeline off the table. What I mean is that, by virtue of the whiteminding which, both consciously and unconsciously, has shaped current fan culture, particularly in terms of ficwriting conventions, we’re collectively acting as though we’re the primary audience for narratives that weren’t actually made with us in mind, being hostile dicks to Chinese and Chinese diaspora fans when they take the time to point out what we’re getting wrong. We’re bristling because we’ve conceived of ficwriting as a place wherein No Criticism Occurs without questioning how this culture, while valuable in some respects, also serves to uphold, excuse and perpetuate microaggresions and other forms of racism, lashing out or falling back on passive aggression when POC, quite understandably, talk about how they’re sick and tired of our bullshit.

An analogy: one of the most helpful and important tags on AO3 is the one for homophobia, not just because it allows readers to brace for or opt out of reading content they might find distressing, but because it lets the reader know that the writer knows what homophobia is, and is employing it deliberately. When this concept is tagged, I – like many others – often feel more able to read about it than I do when it crops up in untagged works of commercial fiction, film or TV, because I don’t have to worry that the author thinks what they’re depicting is okay. I can say definitively, “yes, the author knows this is messed up, but has elected to tell a messed up story, a fact that will be obvious to anyone who reads this,” instead of worrying that someone will see a fucked up story blind and think “oh, I guess that’s fine.” The contextual framing matters, is the point – which is why it’s so jarring and unpleasant on those rare occasions when I do stumble on a fic whose author has legitimately mistaken homophobic microaggressions for cute banter. This is why, in a ficwriting culture that otherwise aggressively dislikes criticism, the request to tag for a certain thing – while still sometimes fraught – is generally permitted: it helps everyone to have a good time and to curate their fan experience appropriately.

But when white and/or western fans fail to educate ourselves about race, culture and the history of other countries and proceed to deploy that ignorance in our writing, we’re not tagging for racism as a thing we’ve explored deliberately; we’re just being ignorant at best and hateful at worst, which means fans of colour don’t know to avoid or brace for the content of those works until they get hit in the face with microaggresions and/or outright racism. Instead, the burden is placed on them to navigate a minefield not of their creation: which fans can be trusted to write respectfully? Who, if they make an error, will listen and apologise if the error is explained? Who, if lived experience, personal translations or cultural insights are shared, can be counted on to acknowledge those contributions rather than taking sole credit? Too often, fans of colour are being made to feel like guests in their own house, while white fans act like a tone-policing HOA.

Point being: fandom and ficwriting cultures as they currently exist badly need to confront the implicit acceptance of racism and cultural bias that underlies a lot of community rules about engagement and criticism, and that needs to start with white and western fans. We don’t want to be the new Bronies, guys. We need to do better.

#race #racism #c-drama #fandom #fan wank #fandom wank #microaggresions #culture #the untamed #bronies #whiteness #ficwriting #fanwriting #cultural bias #discourse

6K notes · View notes

maxwell-grant · 3 years

Note

Having asked your thoughts on designing Frankenstein's daemon, might I now ask your thoughts on bringing Count Dracula from the written word into illustration? (I'm definitely in favour of the 'Hairy Old Mountain Man of Horror pretending he's people' look from the original novel; one of the small tests too many Draculas fail to pass is an absolutely tragic lack of the Evil Beard and/or Wicked Moustache explicitly described by Mr Stoker).

Unlike with Frankenstein, where I think the design needs to be painstakingly thought out in order to achieve the best balance of the creature's traits for horror and tragedy alike, I think with Dracula you can actually just take an approach of "whatever works". Because as I mentioned before, I think much of the appeal and longevity of Dracula is how the character's both a layered villain as well as a shapeshifting narrative force that can be tailored to whatever you want to do with. Granted, there are bad or dissappointing Dracula designs, of course there are, but in regards to the leeway you get for reinterpretation, you get a lot more of it with Dracula than with other literary icons.

Like with Frankenstein, I'm gonna bring up how I'd tackle a less grim, more comedy-centric Dracula first, one that's less a force of horror and more of a charismatic villain, and I think to that end I definitely agree that people are sleeping a lot on the hairy old man barely-passing-off-as-humanoid of the original story. Despite very much loving these performers, I'm actually not a fan of takes that mold Dracula too closely to people who've portrayed him, like Bela Lugosi and Christopher Lee, partially because I think it's a waste of an opportunity to create your own Dracula design. Since I can't draw (yet), I'll do what I usually do and make a board of images to try and convey some of my thoughts on one way I'd design Dracula.

(Pictured: Kiwi's design for Dracula, Hotel Transylvania concept art, Nandor, Castlevania Dracula, Charles Dance in Dracula Untold, Vladislav, a Transylvanian rug)

I used the images in my other Dracula post and I’ll post it here again because I absolutely adore @kiwibyrd's designs for Dracula and it's main heroes, in particular I love the way it strikes a good balance at making sure Dracula looks distinctly separate from the humans, but not too much that he couldn't conceivably operate in society as just a harmless old man. I also adore the mustache and bushy eyebrows and pointy ears and I think these three are wonderful features to keep on any Dracula design. I'm also very partial to the Hotel Transylvania concept art, even if it makes me incredibly depressed to look at all the great designs they had for Dracula that they threw in the trash because they somehow decided making him look like Adam Sandler was the idea to go with.

I deeply adore What We Do In The Shadows, both the movie and the show, and Jemaine Clement's Vladislav is one of my favorite (maybe even my actual favorite) on-screen Draculas. But I also enjoy Nandor just as much, and I think it's really great that as a character he's completely different from Vlad while also being ostensibly a take on Dracula, and in particular I bring up his Jersey look because "Dracula in common clothing" is a criminally underrated concept for a joke.

As a character, I'm very partial to comedy takes on Dracula that play him up as a decadent aristocratic supervillain, the kind that can get away with talking in third person. I also have this idea for a version of Dracula who dresses ostentatiously in finely-broidered Romanian or Transylvanian patterns, maybe even wearing a rug as a cape, claiming that he's carrying the legacy of his people on his back. And of course he's lying, he's not Vlad Tepes and he's not even Romanian, he is just a parasite pretending to have a history to be proud of, but good luck getting him to admit that. And finally, I'd like this version to be played by Charles Dance, and I consider it a tremendous crime against humanity that he has yet to play Dracula proper even despite being in a film with the character's name on the title.

So that's kinda how I would design a take on Dracula for something more comedic or more based around him as this guest character and personality on-set. Now, if we're talking a more serious version, I think the possibilities increase, and I won't be getting into all of them because I may prefer to keep them to myself, but I'll elaborate a few ideas.

For example, the edition of Dracula I personally own comes with these really scratchy, really creepy B&W illustrations related to the story, that I can't find scanned online so I'm uploading them here so you can look at. They don't necessarily depict the scenes but rather some of the story's moments, like Van Helsing staking Lucy, Renfield in a straightjacket, Dracula as a coachman, and they are more focused on conveying the horror of the concepts at play.

Dracula never looks the same way in any of the illustrations, in fact you kinda have to piece him out of them by trying to find teeth or capes or eyes or bat-features to see where he's hiding this time. In the first, it's the half-man half-bat, in the 2nd, he's the shrieking bat silhouette next to Renfield, and in the latter, he's the gaping jaws and eerily humanoid eyes in the wolf. The effect to me almost feels like if you were to look at a bunch of tv static and then see a humanoid shape form for a split second before everything went back to normal, something like you'd get from Slender Man or other modern creepypastas, and I’ve argued before that Dracula’s form of horror is a very modern one.

In terms of illustrations of Dracula that keep up the original traits while still pulling off horror, I definitely have to hand it to the one at the left of the image above, drawn by regourso on Deviantart (account deleted at present). Going back to Castlevania’s many takes on Dracula, two in particular that stick out to me would be Castlevania: Judgment’s armored dress Dracula, who’s got this great twisted heart/rose motif going on in his outfit, and Dracula’s final form in SOTN where he just sits in his throne and his cape twists into all these monsters, particularly how it’s depicted by witnesstheabsurd’s depiction.

I’m not particularly a fan of how Dracula’s “final form” in these games is usually just some big demon, and part of what I like about his final form in SOTN instead is that, while it’s not a particularly challenging final boss, I do find it interesting the idea of us never actually getting to see what Dracula’s true final form looks like, only an ever-shifting pitch-black torrent of teeth and claws and bloody veins pouring out because that’s ultimately what Dracula is and brings to the world.

On the flip-side of the rotten old monster, we have the charming seductor Dracula, and while I’m really not a fan of how various adaptations have convinced people that “the point” of Dracula is that he’s a seductive force and an allegory for Victorian xenophobia and I’m reeeally even less of a fan of adaptations that make Dracula some misunderstood tragic hero (and I think I’ve made rather violently clear my feelings on interpretations that play up a romance between him and Mina), that the seductive force part exists is impossible to deny, so conversely, while on one hand we can have Dracula as the gargantuan whirlwind of predatory violence, we can also go for Dracula as the tantalizing lover.

I’ve seen a lot of opinions proclaiming Frank Langella as the best Dracula because he was the best at actually being seductive while still playing Dracula, although I haven’t yet seen his performances. If I had to point at one picture I look at and do buy for a second the idea of Dracula as a romantic character, it would be that particular still of Raul Julia in the left of the above image. And it’s strange for me to think of Raul Julia as attractive because I mainly associate him with his brilliant comedy performance of M.Bison (I know it’s far from the highlight of his career but, look, I grew up with Street Fighter, I can’t help it) but those eyes are definitely looking pretty convincing to me, if nothing else.

And I’ve included this still of Sebastian Stan in the right because, during a conversation between me, @krinsbez and @jcogginsa about who could be a good fit for Dracula, jcog suggested Sebastian Stan, partially because he’s Romanian, and I’ve learned recently that Stan was actually interested in playing the character in Blumhouse’s upcoming remake. And you’d think I’d hate this idea considering how much I don’t care for tragic anti-hero Draculas, but who says that’s what he’d have to play?

Do you have any idea how much actors, who are traditionally known for heroic or supporting roles, usually LOVE it when you give them a chance to cut loose as the main villain?

I’d want Sebastian Stan to put all of his charm, all of his talent, all of his good looks and etc, into playing the absolute most vicious, bloodthirsty and irredeemable Dracula put on screen. Someone who is exceedingly, eerily good at being a lovable protagonist, who’s all smiles and charming eyes and politeness mannerisms and maybe even a funny accent, and then it isn't as funny when he's flying through your window intent on kidnapping babies to feed to his brides, except he may take a moment or two to do so because he's feeling pretty hungry himself right now.

Now, admittedly this is kind of a lot to juggle in regards to a single character, which is why my answer for questions like these inevitably has to be “depends on what I’m going for”. That being said, if I was going to try and cast someone who I think could both look the part of Dracula, as well as respectively, play “cartoon aristocrat” Dracula, “mercurial embodiment of evil” Dracula, as well as realistically be an attractive, even seductive performer who can charm viewers even as the character descends into horrible villainy, and juggle these performances even?

I think I’d have to go with Mads Mikkelsen. Not specifically because of Hannibal (I actually haven’t watched it yet), although it’s definitely a factor, the thing that actually made me pick him specifically is, other than his looks, his voice, his reputation for playing sinister characters, the fact that he loves the role and wants to play it, or how many people are deeply in love with this man, or that people already joke that he looks like a vampire, was watching him in Another Round, and specifically that glorious final scene where he’s just dancing to his heart’s content and just, moving with such spring in his step and such joyful vitality even though he’s past his mid-fifties, and that was the moment where, in regards to how much you all love this man, I went

And now I am going to add “casting Mads Mikkelsen as a dancing Dracula” to The List of Reasons Why I Became a Filmmaker.

#replies tag #dracula #horror tag #bram stoker #charles dance #sebastian stan #mads mikkelsen #castlevania #raul julia #wwdits #what we do in the shadows #vladislav #nandor

313 notes · View notes

maverick-werewolf · 4 years

Text

Modern Dragon Designs - Where they came from

Your regularly scheduled werewolf facts will return soon. For now, we provide this special, because you may not realize this, but I love dragons. There’s a reason one of my protagonists is basically obsessed with dragons.

Once upon a time, there was a movie - I don’t see anyone talk about it, I’m not even sure how many people are familiar with it...

It’s called Reign of Fire.

This movie shaped the modern Hollywoodian concept of dragons. Seriously, it did. Hear me out.

Released in 2002, Reign of Fire was a movie about - essentially - dragons as that age-old trope of “let’s take one monster and turn them into an overpopulated zombie plague so we can use them to tell a story about humans and make the monster just this brainless evil locust swarm backdrop.” This has happened to a lot of monsters by now.

But wait, these dragons aren’t like the dragons you might be used to: these dragons were completely redesigned from the ground up by the filmmaker(s) in order to make a more “realistic” and “animalistic” dragon that was acceptable by Hollywood, who generally views “dragon movies” (like so many other fantasy things...) as cheesy and silly. Market your movie as a film about dragons and you probably won’t get a deal. Well, turns out, coming up with your own gritty dragon designs worked!

Doesn’t this remind you of every other dragon you’ve seen in a movie for the last, you know, 18 years? Although it actually looks quite a bit cooler than those other ones that came after it

Please note that while I may sound sarcastic, jaded, and often maybe a bit scathing, I mean nothing against the creators of Reign of Fire or director Rob Bowman. I watched the movie in theaters when it released. I applaud Bowman for coming up with unique and interesting dragon designs, in order to have a different take on the creatures, so that they fit the story he wanted to tell, instead of doing what so many people do and completely co-opting concepts without trying to alter them to fit anything and... yeah... okay, I’m not going to talk about werewolf things in this post. Getting back on track:

What I don’t applaud is everyone ripping off Reign of Fire for their own dragons, doubly so because most of these people didn’t even take into account the reasons why it was designed that way. They should have left his dragons alone and come up with their own thing, but at least I guess Bowman can go down in history as the man who designed every Hollywood dragon for over a decade to come - with no signs of stopping - even down to the tail shape.

On Vice, you can find an article and interview with Rob Bowman, the director of Reign of Fire, discussing how he came up with this dragon design and how influential it has become. I highly recommend giving it a read.

Please note the Vice article is clearly written with the bias of someone who “can’t take dragons seriously,” so it’s also a good look at the Hollywood mindset about dragons and how much Hollywood treats fantasy in general like garbage (jerks).

It’s impossible to pretend this movie didn’t basically reshape modern dragons. Let’s get to the details...

Animalistic Design

Dragons in popular culture are generally - or at least they were generally - assumed to be powerful, intelligent creatures, often of a higher nature than humans and other mere mortals. They may be good or evil, but one can’t understate that traditional fantasy dragons are regal and majestic either way.

Reign of Fire wanted to usurp the majestic, intelligent dragon image, creating a smaller, hunched, knuckle-dragging sort of dragon that looks more like an animal - like a pteranodon. This is because the dragons in Reign of Fire are not exceptionally intelligent, noble beings that speak and hoard gold and have the wisdom of the ages. They are brutal hunters that set things on fire and eat everything smaller than them. So this design choice was a conscious one and a smart one.

The dragons in Reign of Fire are meant to be more scientific, more plausible, and also simpler, in a manner of speaking. They are not colorful, magical, ancient fantasy dragons...

Trouble is, everyone took cues from this design for their talking wise noble fantasy dragons, and it... doesn’t really work, at least if you ask me.

The dragon design in Reign of Fire looks like an ancestral throwback, an evolutionary ancestor to the intelligent, talking fantasy dragon, although they are smaller. They’re hunched, they haven’t evolved forelegs independent of their wings... you get the idea. Take a look at the “proto-drakes” in World of Warcraft versus the ordinary drakes, which have tiny dangly T-rex forelegs that haven’t fully developed yet, so they walk like the Reign of Fire dragons.

A proto-drake in World of Warcraft - also say hi to my worgen warrior

So many things taking this design for their intelligent, “higher being” dragons seems kind of... odd to me, to say the least. Unfortunately, Hollywood decided that’s the only way moviegoers can “take dragons seriously,” so here we are.

“Wyvern” - Two Legs vs Four

Municipal arms of Stjørdal, Norway

In medieval heraldry, there came to be a creature called a wyvern. Now, the etymology on the term “wyvern” is a little shaky. It originally didn’t specifically refer to a “two-legged dragon.” It is thought to mean/be derived from words meaning anything ranging from “asp” to “light javelin,” and essentially boils down to a flying serpent. It is noteworthy, of course, that the word “dragon” basically just means “serpent” too.

In heraldry, though, “wyvern” came to refer to a two-legged dragon - at least, if you ask the English, Scottish, and Irish; elsewhere in Europe, they may not be so picky. And now, in modern pop culture (such as Dungeons and Dragons), we often use it in the same sense.

Wyverns weren’t really a “thing” in folklore, just as dragons in folklore didn’t look like our modern idea of a dragon. It’s debatable whether the father of our modern concept of dragons, Fafnir (from whom Tolkien drew inspiration for Smaug), even had wings at all; he was essentially a serpent, perhaps with legs. Point is, wyverns come from heraldry, especially the specificity of two legs versus four.

So now you know why you might see a lot of people (myself included) referring to this design as a “wyvern design” for a dragon.

Dull Coloration - Grey and Brown over Red, Blue, Green...

There’s something else - something very important - that Hollywood took from Reign of Fire... the concept that dragons aren’t pretty colors and are, in fact, various hues of grey and brown, and any more contrasting colors are just vague indications instead of bright red scales.

Now, Reign of Fire obviously did this because - again - they were going for the more animalistic, natural look as opposed to the mysterious majestic magical being look. Okay, that’s fine. But then Hollywood decided that fantasy, too, has to be devoid of dragons with bright colors.

The green dragon in Game of Thrones

There are countless examples of this in modern media. Any dragon that was previously brightly colored has been dulled pretty much to an extreme. Sometimes you might catch a fleeting glimpse of them looking like a brighter shade, but it was probably just a trick of the light. Why? Because all dragons are desaturated to the point of being almost indistinguishable by color.

The golden dragon in The Witcher Netflix series

This is also why you see so many mods on the Skyrim Nexus called things like “true red dragon.”

There are plenty more examples of this - I’m sure you can see the difference when you look at those dragons and other modern film dragons over, say, something like this...

Red dragon in D&D

And now we move on to...

The Fire Breathing - Chemicals, not Magic

Bowman insisted on ditching traditional fire breathing (you don't want the audience wondering whether the dragon's mouth is being burnt up with every flame) and again looked to the animal kingdom for inspiration. The king cobra, once again, was a great starting point. It doesn't spray fire, but it can spit its venom. Even more useful was the bombardier beetle, which shoots two chemicals from its abdomen that, once mixed, create a hot, burning spray. Bowman used these real-world examples to inspire his own dragons. They don't breathe fire exactly, but rather spit chemicals from two different sacks in their mouths that, when combined, ignite. "That's anatomy. That's already been designed, so we're going to draw from there," he said.

(quoted from the Vice article linked to earlier in this post)

The Hungarian Horntail in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - fire is streaming from two separate organs in the mouth, but they aren’t chemicals mixing together like in Reign of Fire...

The director of Reign of Fire wanted his dragons to be more natural in that they breathe fire through organic means, based on chemical reactions, instead of the usual dragon magic. But lots of people loved this “mouth flap”/”mouth organ” design with “streams” of fire coming from the mouth instead of fire flowing directly from the dragon’s throat, so now you see it pretty dang often.

Horns? Brow Ridges!

Another thing that is basically out now in dragon designs is the real horns of many traditional dragons, like Spyro, and like the dragons in Dungeons & Dragons used to have.

These days, it’s all about brow ridges and big spiny scales that aren’t separate horns, they’re just big pointed scales or piles of scales or bone ridges - and they aren’t a different color than the dragon’s scales, either, pretty often. And, in general, dragon’s horns have become much smaller and far more numerous, and more like spines/ridges, as opposed to the great, sweeping horns of classical dragons.

Firkraag, the red dragon, in the D&D video game Baldur’s Gate II, from 2000

Firkraag is a very traditional dragon. Now, while Dungeons & Dragons has generally kept more traditional dragons (yay!), they did fall into the brow ridge horn thing - although they, thankfully, didn’t make the horns smaller and subtler and more numerous little spikes, like so many other modern dragon designs. They also went with the brow ridge horns for tieflings (once humans with demon blood, then some weird thing in 4E, and now I think they’re humans with demon blood again), as opposed to the ordinary horns of the tieflings in previous editions of D&D.

Skyrim dragon head concept art

The Desolation of Smaug(’s design)

Here is... a big one. Here, we’ll talk some about the production of The Hobbit films over time, so we’re going behind the scenes.

Alright, so we all know Smaug, probably, by pop culture osmosis if nothing else. He is the quintessential dragon. He’s basically the founder of all Western dragon concepts: he’s big, he’s red, he hoards gold, he’s extremely intelligent and talks, etc. You get the picture. Every dragon that we have borrowed at least something from Smaug. And, in turn, he was inspired by Fafnir, the father of all our dragon concepts, from Norse mythology - but Tolkien took it all a step further and created the concept of dragons that we have today. Or, well, the not Reign of Fire ones. The fantasy ones.

A map drawn by Tolkien: notice the winged, four-legged Smaug over his mountain

During the first Hobbit movie, An Unexpected Journey, we see Smaug attack the Lonely Mountain...

In this clip, you can plainly see that Smaug has four legs. This was actually edited slightly for later editions of the movie, or so I’ve heard (I haven’t watched any later editions).

I can tell you for certain that when I saw the theatrical release, it was like this, too. It is apparent throughout the scene that Smaug has four legs and wings, separately. I know because I was paying very, very close attention, because I was going to be very upset if Hollywood turned Smaug into a wyvern.

Well, they did - later.

Smaug the wyvern looking like just another slightly different take on the bog-standard Hollywood dragon

Apparently, some studio exec decided that having a traditional fantasy dragon, even if this dragon happens to be frelling Smaug himself, would not be okay in this modern Hollywood world. So we ended up with a dull reddish spiney hunching knuckle-dragging wyvern with an angler mouth (I’m sorry; I really am sorry if you like the design, that’s totally fine, it’s a fine design, I am glad you enjoyed it, but Smaug shouldn’t have looked that way IMO and forgive me but I am still in pain over it) in place of a more traditional dragon that held more to things like, I dunno, how Tolkien himself drew Smaug. Smaug’s movie design flies right in the face of that and destroyed our chance to finally see a proper traditional dragon done justice on the big screen.

Tolkien’s art of Smaug - note the position of the forelegs, separate from the wings, like in the earlier map

This is all just one big example why we should be thankful that The Lord of the Rings films were all shot in one go, so no one could alter important things like the design of the fantasy genre’s father of all dragons, in the middle of production. Of course, the production on The Hobbit movies was a nightmare at best, as you can read about in assorted other articles, and Peter Jackson was very unhappy with what the studio had him do to the series. All of that is just another story, I suppose.

Dragons Redesigned by Reign of Fire: Example List

Now that we’ve gone over just a few of the talking points about Reign of Fire’s dragon designs (although I didn’t even get into the flat, spaded tail look in detail), here’s an undoubtedly incomplete list of several examples that have either entirely taken the design and/or were massively influenced by it...

(please note that not everything in this list held entirely to Reign of Fire’s design, obviously; some have the fire, some don’t; some have horns, some have head/brow ridges; but all of them are wyverns and most are darkly-colored)

Skyrim - Obvious influence with the general design, skin/scales and ridges design, as well as coloration; however, it is noteworthy that the Elder Scrolls has had dragons with no forelegs since at least 1998, in the game Redguard - though that dragon was also very brightly-colored (also of note: Peryite, while technically a Daedric prince and not a dragon, had four legs at least as far back as Daggerfall in 1996)

The Hobbit films, specifically The Desolation of Smaug onward - as mentioned before

Harry Potter movies - Wholesale. Two streams of fire from mouth flaps in Goblet of Fire, generally dull greyish and/or brownish colorations, no forelegs, short/simple horns that are mostly ridges...

Gods of Egypt - The giant fire-breathing cobras have the mouth flaps

Game of Thrones - This one’s pretty obvious too.

Disney’s Maleficent - In the new live action Disney movie(s), the dragon falls right into this design (though the fire doesn’t come from mouth flaps)

Netflix Witcher series - Villentretenmerth is very much a wyvern design and a dull shade, and he in fact has no horns at all, even though dragons weren’t portrayed this way in any previous Witcher adaptations

Stargate SG1 (season 10) - In the episode series “The Quest,” a dragon appears and... well, it looks just like all those other dragons, though the fire does come from its throat.

Beowulf (2008) - I try not to ever talk about or think about this film, but I have to just throw out there that the dragon is very much Reign of Fire, especially with that wyvern design.

Seventh Son - If you can call Malkin a dragon - she was called one, I think - she definitely also has the same kind of dull-colored wyvern design.

Sucker Punch (movie)

Lots and lots of B-movies and direct to DVD/streaming films - Dawn of the Dragonslayer, Dragon (2006), Dragon Crusaders...

Something to note, also, is that cartoons, anime, and other non-film media is mostly - but not entirely - free from this influence. Cartoons especially are free from it, partially because they aren’t influenced by Hollywood producers who want “serious” and “realistic” dragons. Cartoons are allowed to have magical, colorful, four-legged dragons. Unfortunately, we are deprived of those in live action film and television, by and large.

There are still other exceptions - most notably things that were created before this influence, like Dragonheart and its spinoffs and sequels, which have thankfully kept their dragon designs consistent instead of erasing their forelegs.

Of course, why dragons are depicted as four-legged and winged in the first place - and when this depiction arose - is another topic entirely. I’m not going into that right now, seeing as how this post is already preposterously long.

Long story short, I was rewatching the movie Gods of Egypt and, when I saw the giant cobra monsters breathe fire, I was possessed to write this article. Because Reign of Fire’s influence is something I have always noticed ever since its release, and something my brother and I talk about a lot (and everyone who knows me has surely heard me talk about it, too) - because, frankly, it’s always bothered me. My favorite dragons are traditional dragons: four legs, bright colors, wings, horns, breathing fire, the works.

So, although the original creator of these design ideas did something cool and different because he wanted to do his own take on dragons, Hollywood decided that these design cues should be taken to dumb down all dragons forever, the same way that Hollywood has dumbed down so many monster designs so that the only acceptable ones just a bunch of near-replicas of each other, including werewolves.

I think it’s very sad that film producers think you can’t take something like dragons or werewolves seriously unless they are dull, nontraditional, and ugly. And I say ugly in the sense of these are not pretty, majestic fantasy designs - they are, many of them, intended to be ugly. Though I personally also hold the opinion that most of them are ugly regardless of if they are intended to be ugly.

So - now you know! If you haven’t seen Reign of Fire, go check it out to meet the father of modern dragon designs, from the color of their hides to the shape of their bodies, the smaller horns, and - sometimes - even their tails.

(Special thanks to everyone on my discord who helped me compile this list, as well as of course my brother and all our ranting at/with each other on this topic over many years)

If you like this post, maybe you’ll enjoy the rest of my blog, where I post a lot about folklore and all kinds of monsters (especially werewolves)!

Werewolf Facts --- Patreon

#dragons #pop culture #dragon #reign of fire #creature design #folklore #wyvern #wyverns #game of thrones #skyrim #harry potter #the desolation of smaug #the hobbit #movies #film #hollywood #long post #EXTREMELY LONG post

3K notes · View notes

not-xpr-art · 2 years

Photo

But it ain’t no lie, baby BI BI BI (ballpoint pen drawing) ~

(06/2022)

I’ve been wanting to do a visual representation of my bisexuality for a while, so here’s a piece to reflect my feelings regarding attraction and gender!

I’m gonna go a little bit more into the meaning of this piece here, as well as a little bit of my creative process!

so my mum recently brought back some purple and pink ball point pens that the school she works at were throwing out (despite the fact they still work perfectly well smh...) & I figured they’d be perfect for me doing some kind of bi pride themed artwork!

below was my initial sketch btw! I knew I wanted 3 heads each in one of the 3 colours of the bi flag, and I knew I wanted them to sort of blend into one another, although I think I originally was planning to have them be more in the order of the flag (but I like my final piece and how it looks like the purple figure is coming out of the pink and blue figures!)

after this I went to my tumblr likes (since that’s where I keep a whole load of inspirational stuff in a disorganised pile lol...) to see if I could find some useful references of faces, cos although I didn’t really want the faces to be of anyone, I still wanted to have a base so they at least felt some what realistic lol

I settled on these three (photoshoot of luca marinelli by tony zecchinelli, kai isaiah jamal for CAP 74024 new romantic obsessions and promo shots of zhu zanjin for the c-drama mystic nine) since I felt all of them had a strong sense of genderfluidity which I wanted for this piece!

I followed the meaning of the bi flag colours (blue for different gender attraction, pink for same/similar gender and purple for attraction regardless of gender).

the blue section is both a reflection of my own sense of masculinity and my attraction to men/masc people! harsh lines, angles and logic are usually associated with masculinity, so I wanted to include that but with the idea that it isn’t always neat lines or angles, showing the many forms that masculinity can take!

also did this for the pink section, which is a reflection of my femininity and attraction to women/fem people, which is usually connected to curved shapes, which I made more ‘me’ by amping up the chaos lol... also made them kinda look like cells and wheels, suggesting a kind of fluidity and movement that comes with my feelings of femininity.

the pink with blue question marks in the blue figure’s eye was me expressing that feeling of confusion that comes with growing up bisexual, and having to come to terms with your attraction to both the opposite and same genders (it’s also to reflect how a lot of people claim that bisexual people are ‘confused’, or even the phrase ‘bi curious’, as if the very existence of bisexuality is something that should be questioned and critiqued... I think it’s honestly this attitude that meant it took me a long time to truly realise and appreciate my sexuality, since I kept believing I had to somehow explain myself again and again... something I still feel the need to do, which was partly why I wanted to make this piece, as a sort of signal to others AND myself that this is who I am and I’m PROUD of that!)

the purple section is more about my concept of genderfluidity, which I represented with a character from chinese opera called a ‘dan’, which was a female character that traditionally was performed by male performers dressed in what is essentially drag (xiran jay zhao did an awesome video where they recreated one of the looks and discussed the history of the character which is really interesting!) drag is something that intrigues me, especially in the way it emulates a purposeful performance of gender, which as a nb person feels particularly interesting to me!

(also, a lot of my childhood and teenage yrs had a lot of instances with me experiencing ‘drag’ like things in places such as pantomimes, music videos and films (shout out to borstal boy for dressing danny dyer as a woman in that one scene that did SO much for me as a young queer kid ngl lol), so it’s something that I intrinsically link to my sense of identity even if I’ve never actually tried doing drag myself lol)

I used triangles as the motif for the purple section because triangles just feel really genderfluid to me idk I can’t explain it lol (maybe it’s because I used to think love triangles were when three characters had feelings for each other pfft...)

although this is of course a very personal piece, I hope anyone who sees it and is bi feels some of the meaning I poured into it! everyone’s experiences with their gender and sexuality are individual, but there’s a feeling of joy and pride that I think is something we all feel once we’ve finally allowed ourselves to be comfortable with who we are <3

happy pride everyone, especially to all my fellow bisexual and nb peeps, and thank you for anyone who’s read this far lol <3

#artists on tumblr #bi pride #bisexual #pride month #ball point pen drawing #pen drawing #drawing #traditional art #bi #lgbtq art #queer art #pride #art #artist #only click read more if u wanna hear me talking about the meaning and process of this piece btw lol

21 notes · View notes

doorbloggr · 3 years

Text

Tuesday 6/7/21 - PaleoMedia; Outdated ≠ Unscientific

Megalosaurus, Mark Garlick

I've made a couple of posts on this blog where I've gone over mistakes the mainstream makes when reconstructing dinosaurs and pterosaurs. Lots of representations of dinosaurs and other ancient reptiles have physical features inaccurate to our current understanding of their physiology. Today, I want to just make a quick post about that last part in the previous sentence.

Crystal Palace Dinosaurs

When Dinosaur remains were first scientifically described as an ancient group of animals that resemble nothing like what we have today... well, they resembled nothing like what we have today. There was little in the way of analogues we could compare body structures with to restore the fossil remains, so we had no idea what they looked like.

Below are pictures from the Crystal Palace Dinosaurs, a series of sculptures commissioned by Sir Richard Owen (the man who coined the name Dinosaur), of some of the first described species of dinosaur.

Top left: Iguanodon, Bottom Right: Megalosaurus

Benjamin Waterhouse Hawkins, Richard Owen

Now these statues were not made with the intention of appealing to the masses (well maybe a little), their main function was to communicate to the wider community what scientists genuinely thought dinosaurs looked like. The fact that we amassed more information that changed what we think Iguanodon and Megalosaurus looked like, does not make the Crystal Palace Dinosaurs unscientific.

Top Left: Iguanodon, Bottom Right: Megalosaurus

Gabriel Ugueto

Walking With Dinosaurs

Walking With Dinosaurs was a CGI documentary series that released in the late 90s/early 00s that, like the Crystal Palace Dinosaurs, aimed to convey palaeontologically accurate information on dinosaurs and other ancient animals. There are many reconstructions that are drastically inaccurate in those series, mostly in sizes and integument of some species portrayed, but this wasn't done to make the animals cooler, or more exciting. They were reconstructed with information that was thought to be accurate at the time. A couple examples to touch on:

Liopleurodon was described as being 25 m long in this documentary, but this was a gross overestimate based on fragmentary fossils that did not give much idea of the animal's whole body. We now know that an upper estimate of 7 m is much more accurate.

Liopleurodon size estimates, modern accepted size in violet at the bottom, WWD restoration at the top in orange.

Anurognathus was a tiny pterosaur portrayed as a scavenger, engaging in mutuality behaviour like modern cowbirds, and it was shown off as scaly, with a fairly long neck. This was based on an older restoration from the 70s, and we know now Anurognathus had a short neck, a very blunt face, and was likely very fluffy. It also was likely insectivorous and lived like today's bats.

Top Left: Anurognathus (WWD), Bottom Right: Anurognathus (Julio Lacerda)

What was the point of this?

Well I felt like writing this because, very often, dinosaurs are reconstructed wrong, and not always because of negligence, but because they want them to look cool.

Many people, myself very included, are fatigued with Jurassic Park in particular. Sure when the first couple of entries in the series were released, there was some information up to date with the times. But they have purposefully ignored a lot of the literature at the time too, like feathers. And because Jurassic Park was a very successful franchise, much of the mainstream's vision of what a Dinosaur looks like has been shaped by the JP portrayals.

The Raptors in Jurassic Park 3 (above) are no more accurate than they were in the first two films, despite feathers in dromeosaurs being known for decades prior.

The Raptors in When Dinosaurs Roamed America (below) had an almost full body covering of plumage. Despite being released the same year as JP3 (2001).

The point of this blogpost was to communicate that, although many mainstream dinosaur reconstructions aren't trying, over the years, many series have tried their best to be faithful to science. And I want to distinguish a difference between the two types of inaccuracies.

Sometimes, dinosaur media ignores the science to make dinosaurs cool or scary, but sometimes, the science just moves too fast, and reconstructions that did try, age poorly.

Animal Crossing New Horizon (released March 2020) portrays what was at the time a fairly newly updated take on Spinosaurus, but as of the new tail discovery described in April 2020, the design became inaccurate. ONE MONTH and the design was outdated.

So what I'm trying to say with this blogpost is... sometimes the dinosaur looks bad because, at the time, we didn't have all the information.

And we should respect them because they tried.

#blogpost #blog #palaeontology #dinosaurs #pterosaurs #pliosaurs #Liopleurodon #Anurognathus #Megalosaurus #iguanodon #spinosaurus #dinosaur #raptor

368 notes · View notes

oingo233 · 3 years

Text

You Are Beautiful (1)

Summary: Sirius Black was entranced since the moment he saw you. He had to have you but you are convinced his feelings are fleeting, and will only hurt you. People inside and outside of your relationship meddle in the makings of something that could be beautiful... or disastrous. Will love and confidence win? Or will doubt and uncertainty tear you both down?

Young Sirius Black x Pus SizedFemReader

Warning: one inappropriate joke lol, fluff I suppose and nothing else really. All the real stuff comes later :0

Authors note: I mostly write my xreader fics as neutral but as this is a request, I wrote this as fem. But if anyone would like a male version or neutral version let me know and I will copy this but obviously change readers gender (and it's no burden to me I'd love to make more readers feel included and represented). Also reader is plus sized and she is confident and strong throughout the fic -because plus sized characters aren't represented like that in film/books alot (but if looking for amazing and empowering plus sized female characters Nina Zenik from Six of Crows owns my entire heart and changed how I saw myself personally and I would recommend that book for anyone really)- but as any human she has her insecurities because beauty standards are unattainable and have a way excluding so many people and making us feel less than beautiful. As a plus sized/overweight person myself, I understand how we have to fight to feel beautiful and fight this internalized bias we have when we look in the mirror. But WE ARE BEAUTIFUL. WE ARE WORTHY OF MAGAZINGE COVERS AND COMPLIMENTS AND ABOVE ALL SELF LOVE!! The self insert character in this has fought for her confidence, but it will shake and stumble throughout the series and Sirius and friends are there for her to help her realize for herself how beautiful she truly is, once again. So I hope I didn't stray too far from the request :) Enjoy....

Word Count: 1.8

Authors Note: About halfway through I decided to make it a series oops-

****Blabbering Idiot****

Sirius Black is a man of many, many words. In fact, I'm sure if he was writing this he could quickly turn it into one of the most entertaining novels ever written. He'd describe the laughter of his friends for a whole page. Tell a hilarious joke on the next. Then he'd describe the wind blowing through the open halls and courtyard and the spring sun. He could write about a great many things in great detail. (But he wouldn't because he doesn't quite enjoy writing as much as he does anything else, but that's above the point.)

As I said, Sirius Black is a man of many words. So it was such a curious thing when he first saw you. It was an astounding thing really, because for the first time he found something that rendered him completely speechless.

The sun was peeking through the open corridor and pooled onto you, caressing your skin and hair in an ethereal glow. Highlighting curves that brought both sinful and sweet thoughts running through him. It was as if the universe was telling him, look at what we've created, look at this beautiful creature. But he could hardly believe that this world could create something so lovely and kind. You threw your head back in laughter at something your friend said and suddenly the world is back to normal and all he can hear is your laughter and the sound of his friends curiosity at what could have possibly kept him from the conversation about muggle rock compared to Wizard bands. In fact, James was so passionate about it half the hall turned to listen to his rendition of The Chain by Fleetwood Mac.

But he didn't care, he took a feeble step towards you and suddenly felt so nervous his hands began to sweat. He stuttered and coughed up his words just for a simple "hello" in your direction only for the wind blowing through the halls to carry it away. And his friends laughed at him as he watched you walk too far from where he wanted you. Because, oh did he want you.

Sirus POV:

"I'm telling you, I won't be able to sleep tonight unless I know who she is," Sirius says for not the first time that evening. James started to laugh.

"Why? Because you'll be too busy thinking of her?" James said, laughing as he made a very suggestive hand motion. Peter cackled and Remus rolled his eyes, trying to find the cleaner side of his humor but instead he couldn't help but snort. Sirius pushed James's shoulder.

"Yeah, I'm sure Lily would love to know how familiar with that feeling you are," Sirius says and James stopped laughing immediately, his eyes narrowed.

"Please, you wouldn't dare. And I will deny all accusations, you'll be made out to be a liar. Then the mystery girl will never love you. Is that what you want, Pads?" James joked with a single arch of his brow. Sirius just rolled his eyes. He was only half paying attention, he has been scouring the hallways since he first saw that girl. He wanted to speak to her again, or maybe just stare for a bit. If things went well, he'd be able to do both those things on a date. But he hasn't seen her since that morning and his heart felt oddly shallow. He wanted those butterflies he had when looking at her to come back and overwhelm him again.

"What'll it matter if I don't even know who she is? Or- or if I can't talk to her? No one falls in love with a blabbering idiot," Sirius says. Remus shrugs.

"Lily fell in love with James," he says, Peter laughed again.

"Yeah, regardless of what he does at night," Peter added and now both James and Sirius were rolling their eyes. James and Lily just recently stopped denying their feelings for one another and gave into the sexual tension and mutual pining. Their relationship was still fairly new but they act as if they've been together for years. Sirius supposed that in a way, they have been.

Sirius would watch them giggling, hand and hand in the hall. He'd see them cuddling in the common room, or coming back after dates with rosy cheeks and beaming smiles. Sirius would never admit it out loud, but his heart cried out when he saw them like that. He rarely ever felt lonely. He could have any girl or boy he wanted if he really tried, but for what? One fun night? Only for one more morning where he wakes up alone? He wanted more than that whenever he saw Lily and James, their happiness was palpable. Their love was suffocating.

Sirius always thought he'd find the one after Hogwarts, if at all. But when he saw her... well that changed everything. In a flash he saw himself with her, their hands intertwined and her head thrown back in laughter. Rosy cheeks and bruised lips. Warm beds and making love... being in love. He nearly felt silly after and yet, he knew that even if he did sleep tonight, it would be her he'd dream of.

"Ello' guys!" Lily said, bouncing up to James who kissed her cheek. They walked with their arms looped and Sirius glared at the easy sign of affection. He thought of his parents, how they would be stiff with one another except for in quiet moments, when he'd pass through a hall and glance into their room. He'd spot a quick kiss on the cheek, and soft squeeze of the hand. It were those odd moments for him, that struck him so strongly with a sharp bitterness. They don't deserve softness and love, he'd think, how can such cruel creatures even feel such things? But even then, he'd walk away seeing them as still awful creatures born from the depths of hell, but more human.

"That's her," Sirius whispered so quietly Remus almost didn't hear it. In fact, Sirius didn’t think Remus heard it at all, but it was rather his look of longing towards the Great Hall entrance that gave him away. Because standing right there, was you.

Your hair was a little wind blown, messy around your face, bits of iit shaped your round cheeks and soft eyes. Sirius eyed you up and down and cursed clothes and cursed shyness and cursed his own head for thinking he could even talk to you. But most of all, he cursed a group of boys who walked past you.

Sirius was a confident boy, he knew how to spot someone who held their head up just as high as he did, and you were very much one of those people. You were giggling as you stole a biscuit from a friend and popped it into your mouth, you covered your mouth as you laughed when they complained with a little smile of their own.

"It's just so yummy, and I haven't eaten since breakfast." He heard you say, your friend just shook his head and handed you a plate as you sat down next to him. But right before you could get comfortable a sneering group of boys stole a piece of food from your hand and said something rather rude.

Sirius didn't even realize he had been walking towards you, this girl he has never even spoken too, yet thought of so endearingly, until he was standing right before the boys and had the pack leaders wrist firmly in his grip.

"Drop it boy, c'mon, drop it," he teased. It was humiliating for the boy and he knew it by the laughing and sneering others directed towards the group of boys, but Sirius did not care. The boy dropped the biscuit and looked as if his tail was tucked into his legs. "Good boy," he said, ruffling his hair until it was a knotted mess, the boy winced at just how hard Sirius dug his knuckles into his scalp, Sirius relented with a satisfied smirk.

Sirius’s voice took on a much harsher tone, "Now scram." The boys were out of their seats and in new ones within seconds.

Sirius felt his mood shift completely once they left, because now all eyes were on him, yours included. He looked up at you rather shyly, his hair falling in strands over his forehead. He tucked it behind his ear and found some confidence in the way your eyes followed the movement and how you blushed. He gave you his best smile, hoping his charm wasn't as weak as his legs felt at that moment.

"Hello, I'm Sirius... Sirius Black." Then, like an idiot he put his hand out for you to shake, what charmer just shakes the ladies hand? He stopped belittling himself the moment you softly placed your hand in his.

"It's nice to meet you, Sirius, and thanks for helping me. I know how to handle those filthy 'dogs'" you said, smiling as you remembered the way he spoke to them, he chuckled. "But I suppose it's nice not always having to," you finished with a bright smile on your face. He felt his own cheeks heat up and he nodded but could not think of anything better to say.

"Name," he said, you raised your brows. He cleared his throat, "your name?"

"Oh, how rude of me," you said and then you laughed, that same laugh that caught his attention and has yet to let go. "I'm (y/n) (y/l/n)."

"Nice to meet you," he said, it was as if he couldn't feel the appalled stares of your friends because all he could see was the blush on your cheeks and your head thrown back in laughter. He swallowed thickly before making his way back to his friends. They all wore raised brows and smirks, and he knew they were about to bite into him.

"Treating them like dogs, really? A bit ironic don't you think," Lily said, James shrugged

"That's why it was so good," he said, high fiving Sirius.

"But it admittedly went downhill from there," Peter was sure to add, just like Sirius knew one of them would. Sirius just laughed, too elated to finally know who you were.

"Don't start," he said, but it was too late.

All in union they sputtered out the lame word that will plague Sirius' memory of that moment forever, "Name?"

They cackled at him and ruffled his hair all the way to their seats, but Sirius knew they were pleased for him. And Sirius didn't mind, he could feel the pretty eyes of a pretty girl following him across the room. If only someone told him how important she would become to him, maybe he would have looked back at her and never looked away.

Taglist <3

@enchantedblackrose

#sirius black #sirius black fanfiction #sirius black angst #sirius black fluff #sirius black x y/n #sirius black x reader #young sirius x reader #young sirius black #young sirius imagine #harry potter fandom #the marauders #plus sized reader #sirius black x plus sized reader

178 notes · View notes

freddyfreebat · 4 years

Text

Jack Dylan Grazer Discovers Who He Is in Luca Guadagnino's “We Are Who We Are”

After supporting roles in the It and Shazam!, the young actor shifts gears with his turn as a capricious army brat in the Call Me By Your Name director's new HBO series.

by Iana Murray / Photography by Nik Antonio — September 14, 2020

A few years ago, Jack Dylan Grazer took a trip to the movie theater. He was in Toronto and it was one of his days off from filming Shazam!, the DC comedy in which he plays the shape-shifting hero’s foster brother. He decided to watch Call Me By Your Name, and he immediately fell for it. Grazer took note of the director’s name that appeared in the credits—Luca Guadagnino—and turned to his mother.

“I want to work with him,” he told her. With eerie prescience, she assured him: “You will.”

Whether Grazer, now 17, has a knack for manifestation, or it was all just happenstance, his wish came true in the form of We Are Who We Are, Guadagnino’s coming of age drama which follows a group of army brats living on an American military base in Italy. Thematically, the show is something of a spiritual successor to Call Me By Your Name: Grazer plays Fraser, a tempestuous 14-year-old with a pair of headphones constantly plugged in his ears. He’s the new arrival at the base with his mothers (Chloë Sevigny and Alice Braga), and quickly forms a deep bond with his neighbour, Caitlin (Jordan Kristine Seamon), as they both wrestle with their sexuality and identity in the midst of domestic troubles and teenage debauchery.

“He’s an enigma to himself,” Grazer says of his character. “He doesn’t really understand a lot of the things he does but he’s so forthright so he convinces himself that he knows everything. He feels like other people don’t deserve his intelligence. But he’s also very volatile and aggressive at times, and not because he’s coming from an angry place but because he’s constantly questioning who he is.”

If Fraser is just beginning his coming of age when we first meet him, Grazer is inching closer to the end. Starring in enormous blockbusters including IT, he became the Loser Club’s resident hypochondriac at age 12 and a superhero’s sidekick by 15. His films have grossed a combined total of over $1.5 billion. Suddenly the stakes are multiplied tenfold during what are ostensibly, and horrifyingly, the most awkward years of your life. Every misstep is now being monitored, examined through a microscope of millions. (See: His 3.8 million fans on Instagram, to say nothing of the countless stan accounts.) Child fame is a disarming transaction like that: a stable career and all the other perks of being a celebrity, but at the cost of normalcy. That unalleviating pressure forces a kid to mature fast.

Grazer is acutely aware of this fact, admitting outright that he’s “not a normal person.” But he wouldn’t have it any other way.

“I became 70 when I was 7!” he laughs. “I don’t know if I really had much of a childhood. But I didn’t want to. I wanted to grow up really fast.”

Nevertheless, he’s still 17. When we meet over Zoom, his shoulder length curls are damp and disheveled (he just got out of the shower), his black painted fingernails contrast with his brightly-lit, white bedroom as he rests his face on his hand. It’s a Saturday morning and he looks tired: It’s his first week back at school, which has traded classrooms for hours of video calls reminiscent of the one we’re currently on. “It feels like the days are shorter because the teachers don’t want to torture their students by keeping them on a computer for six hours a day,” he tells me. “You do miss the social aspect of being at school.”

If you were to judge Grazer by what’s out there on the internet, you’d expect an anarchic and relentless bundle of energy. A quick YouTube search brings up results like “jack dylan grazer being a drama queen” and “jack dylan grazer being chaotic in interviews for 4 and a half minutes straight.” He trolled a YouTube gamer on Instagram Live. His TikToks are inscrutable.

But here, he’s incredibly earnest, as he excitedly talks about his skateboarding hobby (a skill he picked up after auditioning for Mid90s) and his attempts to learn the flute (“I need to learn how to read sheet music, but it’s like reading Hebrew!”). He’s calm and thoughtful, as if this project we’re discussing requires a shift in sensibility.

For Grazer, acting had always simply been fun. While other kids might take up a sport or get hooked on video games, he performed in musical theater with the Adderley School because he “just wanted to play.” His roles so far have been reflective of his carefree approach to the job: Up until now, he’s portrayed best friends with biting one-liners, or the younger version of the protagonist in a flashback. IT is a prime example of both. In the horror franchise, Grazer plays a neurotic germaphobe running from a fear-eating clown, but in reality, the film felt like “summer camp.” Both films never felt like work; he just learned his lines and got to hang out on extravagant sets with his best friends. Likewise, school amounted to being pulled off set by a teacher in between takes to cram in the mandatory hours.

But with We Are Who We Are, he steps into his first leading role, one that required him to convey longing and confusion through Elio-like physicality and subtext. It’s abnormal to talk about the show as a turning point for an actor who isn’t even a legal adult yet, but Grazer explains that the show required him to radically change his approach to acting. He spent six months in Italy (“It felt like I was in Call Me By Your Name.”) and built up the character beyond what was on the page in collaboration with Guadagnino. “His philosophy is that we know our characters better than anyone else—even the writers—because we are the characters essentially,” he explains.

In many ways, Grazer absorbed that philosophy entirely. He describes the experience less as a performance and more like a “rebirth”—perhaps even an attempt at method acting. Over those months in Italy, the distinctions between actor and character gradually became indistinguishable. “I had no other choice but to act and surrender to Fraser entirely and throw Jack Dylan Grazer out the window,” he says. “I would go out and get a coffee as Fraser and walk like Fraser. That was just me trying to get into [character], but then I slipped at some point and just became Fraser.”

One day on set, he looked at himself in the mirror, and the hardened kid standing there with a bleach-blond dye job and oversized shorts was unrecognizable to him. He could only see Fraser. While talking about his character, he seems to unintentionally switch pronouns, from “he” to “I”, as if the two still remain one and the same.

The process was so transformative that it forced him to re-evaluate himself entirely. “I never really struggled with identity before,” Grazer tells me. “But I think the show opened up my eyes to question myself. Being Fraser forced me to question what I wanted and what I stood for and what I believed in. At some points, the show bled into reality.”

When asked how he has changed, he takes a pause and a pensive swivel in his armchair, unsure of how to answer. “I think I was more ignorant before I did the show,” he says, and he leaves it at that.

Coming of agers are a particularly well-trodden genre, but there’s a naturalistic, raw energy to We Are Who We Are that is distinctive from what we’ve seen before. Each character quietly struggles with their own problems and growing pains—for Fraser, it’s his sexuality. Caught in a fraught relationship with his lesbian mother and an infatuation with another man, his story doesn’t tick off the familiar beats. His personal discovery is instead internal and intimate. "I think every single person born as a boy has this guard. It’s this guard that they don’t even realize they have, where they’re initially like, ‘Being gay? I could never.’ But we’re all born as humans who are attracted to whatever we’re attracted to," he says. "I think that’s how Fraser interprets it as well. Yes, he’s reserved and nervous about it in the beginning because he’s unlocking this new idea for himself. He’s figuring it out, and that’s what you see in the show: him coming to terms with this idea."

As our conversation winds to a close, I ask him if Martin Scorsese ever visited the set—his daughter, Francesca, plays the confident cool girl of the show’s teen cohort—and his eyes widen. “That was actually a really stressful day,” he divulges. Still, he revels in the memory, speaking so fast it’s like someone has put him on 2.5x speed as he shows off his impersonation of Guadagnino. The director was so nervous about Scorsese’s presence that production halted that day.

“Luca was like, ‘I cannot do this today because Martin Scorsese is on my set. I don’t know what to do, this is not good for me. I will have a panic attack before the day ends,’” Grazer says in his best Italian accent. “It’s like if you’re a painter and Van Gogh shows up.”

Admittedly, Grazer is also a self-proclaimed superfan of the Wolf of Wall Street director, and afterwards, he got to spend several days with his idol, as they went on lavish restaurant outings in Italy and talked about anything and everything.

He takes a second to compose himself. A giddy, Cheshire cat smile spreads across his face. The kid in him comes flooding back.

“...Oh my god!” he yells. “I met Martin Scorsese!”

#jack dylan grazer #fraser wilson #we are who we are #eddie kaspbrak #it chapter two #freddy freeman #shazam!#wawwa #luca guadagnino #hbo #hbo max #sky atlantic #interview #gq #wawwa press

631 notes · View notes

diamondcitydarlin · 3 years

Note

what do you think about the arguments that lokius is being queerbaited? I want to enjoy and ship it so bad but it seems like im setting myself up for disappointment

And I can't assure you with full confidence that you wouldn't be. I can't be certain I won't be, though I've personally chosen to enjoy what is there and extrapolate from what we are given, even as I know that historically, statistically, it's best to assume a mainstream depiction of a m/m relationship in a Disney-Marvel production is pretty slim. But then...not nonexistent and, in many ways, the likelihood of it actually going there is higher than it's ever been. So there is that.

I've been independently studying LGBTQA+/queer representation in mainstream media for over a decade now. The term 'queerbaiting' is relatively new in fandom spaces (if we're looking big picture, back into the earliest films and TV shows, some of the earliest shipping fandoms like Star Trek), as I only started seeing it maybe around 2012-2014. It's a term I appreciate, because it represented a switch in cultural thinking from holding no expectations of creatives in Hollywood to large swaths of LGBTQA+ fans gaining the confidence to say 'no, this isn't good enough'.

It also represents the switch in Capitalist approaches to LGBTQA+ citizens, from catering solely to the religious, satanic panic morality by pretending gay people simply don't exist, to deciding that gay fans are in fact lucrative and need to be included just enough to feel inclined to monetarily contribute to a brand. They'll write scenes between characters with intentionally confusing, ambiguous energy, give them moments that are meant to be read into deeply, but rarely, rarely, with any kind of payoff that would alienate homophobic investors. The insidiousness of this tactic is in the fact that when payoff does not happen, viewers can be easily gaslit into thinking that was never the intention in the first place, they were the ones who were wrong in their takes. As I've worked professionally in entertainment as actress, director and producer with rather big capitalist brands I won't mention names of, I can assure you this -is- very much a thing, please stop giving corporations the benefit of the doubt.

There is no clean definition or qualification for queerbaiting, despite how often people want to gatekeep how gay viewers use this term. To be clear though, it is an accountability term before anything else. Not an insult, not an accusation that someone isn't good at what they do, it's a reminder that we're owed more than what we're usually given. If we don't speak out, if we don't label things queerbaiting (when they very much usually are), if we don't demand better we will never, ever, ever get it. I promise you that.

Okay, so now that we've established what queerbaiting is at least in my mind...

Do I think Lokius is being queerbaited? Yes, possibly. I'm waiting to see how the rest of the narrative plays out before I come to a definitive conclusion on my own (yes I'm actually optimistic I say as I put on clown make up), but I'm also not going to deny LGBTQA+ fans the right to feel like that's what's happening and voice their opinions. Anyone tasked with writing/creating content for mainstream audiences has a huge responsibility, in that this content will reach millions of people and has the potential to help shape our culture, perceptions- it even has the potential to help normalize and give broad optics of what it means to be queer and have queer relationships, romantic and otherwise. None of this is as trifling as, 'it's just a TV show', because it's never that simple.

As far as Lokius itself is concerned, the show spent a great deal of time first developing their bond and dynamic before (seemingly) switching gears towards elevating romantically the first feminine-presenting character Loki ran into even though there are some clear, uhm...conflicts with the idea of this actually being a thing. If it becomes a thing. It also seemed to first build a solid, unique platonic bond between the 'fem' and 'masc' character that a lot of gay fans would have appreciated seeing playing out before having them mashed together haphazardly as a romantic pairing, as has been done in media for 50+ years now. That's to say nothing of the fact that the most visible feminine character being forced into role of 'love interest' for a broken main character is one we've had to see play out over and over and over and over again too, poorly. People have a right to feel frustrated about that and voice their frustrations accordingly. We expected more of this show than that. (And yes, I am bisexual, I know that it would still technically be a queer relationship, but please consider the broader history/picture here of queer rep in media and the optics of that against that mosaic, please consider the heteronormative lens that so often claims any and every possibility for itself, please consider the long history of how feminine characters are often used as coping tools and objects of lust before they are treated as individuals deserving of their own development)

Now, again, I want to say that I am not convinced of anything really right now. I'm not taking any of the writers at face value because they are all bound by contracts and NDAs and aren't going to come out and say what the outcome of the show will be, so nothing they're putting out on twitter or in interviews is something I will be taking as absolute truth beyond assuming they're trolling, maybe even have been instructed to keep the pot boiling in the fandom through social media antics. Don't rule it out.

Things really could go either way, but my point is I do not deny the possibility of what this is and I'm certainly not going to gatekeep how other gay viewers feel they're being queerbaited, and I really don't see any reason why anyone else should either.

#lokius #im a little stoned and got wordy #to be clear i love lokius it is my life #but i have to pair it with my intimate knowledge of what goes on in capitalist entertainment #also i choose to use the term queer and im not going to debate that with anyone sorry

53 notes · View notes

lovee-infected · 4 years

Note

Hello Geo-san, just read your post on Malleus's birthday. It says that his only relative is his grandmother and she still rules the Valley of Thorns. There are theories that his grandmother is none other than Maleficent herself. If that's the case, there are two options here, either she survived her encounter with Prince Phillip or the TW timeline is following the 2014 film. Where she's still alive and ruling the Moors, maybe renamed as the Valley, alongside with Aurora. We'll just wait and see.

I've actually been thinking about this myself, that was much of a shoking reveal!

Aside from revealing the fact that Malleus's parents are dead, this somehow dropped a bomb on "Maleficent being Malleus's grandmother theory"

The main discussion going over the fandom regarding the topic is whether his grandmother is Maleficent or not, which is a really important question!

As someone who strongly supported this theory before this reveal, I can't say I wouldn't be disappointed if Maleficent isn't actually his grandmother, but on the other hand, the possibility of her being Maleficent and still alive would face some strong contradictions in the story:

First off, let's flash back to where this theory begun in the first place:

In Malleus's personal chats, we can find Sebek complimenting Malleus's performance after the classes, telling him that he'd even surpass the witch of thorns herself one day!

Malleus immediately objects to it, saying his powers barely come close to his grandmother's.

Well, to think that they were actually talking about Maleficent but all of a sudden Malleus mentioned his grandmother instead, left us qith a great possibility of him being Maleficent's grandson, to the point that many, including me, considered this theory as canon! But now I highly doubt this theory, even though I wanted it to be confirmed true so much. But since we have more information to seriously discuss the matter right now, here are my thoughts whether this theory is still acceptable or not, which is mainly explaining what would happen if they're actually using the 2014 and 2019 live action movies as a reference:

1) Maleficent being alive would totally WRECK Silver's character development and design!

Come to think of it, there would be no Silver if Maleficent is still alive! Silver's twisted logo is the sword, and the one and only famous sword in the sleeping beauty classic AND the live action movie is the one which slayed Maleficent.

So... If Maleficent's still alive -> There hasn't ever been a sword which slayed her -> Silver doesn't have any special or specific symbol/ character which he is twisted from!

While his name might have something to do with the live action version, where they strongly used Silver to defeat Maleficent, it can also be referring to the fact that dark fairies would immediately be wounded if touched with Silver, which is most likely because of Yana's studies in the fae mythology field (Like how she chose ice cream as Malleus's favorite food since fairies love cream) which isn't necessarily bound to the live action version. But since the sword is Silver's most important role in the game, we can't really stick with the live action version because not only didn't we have any special swords in the live action version, but there also would be a big confusion if there hasn't ever been a sword which slayed Maleficent and Silver is twisted from!

In summary, I'd be honest and say this out loud: Maleficent HAS TO be dead because we need the Silver sword to exist somewhere in the story!!!

2) History of 'Classic Maleficent' vs 'Live action Maleficent'

one of the main points which needs to be considered in this matter, is how different Classic Maleficent and Live action Maleficent are. Maleficent is the very first Disney live action to present a totally different face of a well-known Disney villain such as Maleficent, which also led to a considerable growth in both "Maleficent" and the classic version of "sleeping beauty"'s popularity at the same time! But while 2014's Maleficent was an absolutely amazing movie (to at least) and nearly turned Maleficent into the most beloved villain of Disney's history, the live action (especially the 2019 version) received some strict critiques regarding how they pictured Maleficent: Many of the fans were familiar and attached to the original Maleficent, the mistress of all evil who had control over the powers of hell itself. A REAL villain and an absolutely perfect one. But the live action Maleficent wasn't meant to be a villain, the live action narrated a totally different story from what the classic was.

Though it didn't really lessen the movie's popularity, there were fans who begun to dislike this version of Maleficent after the 2019 version and their reason for disliking the movie actually made sense, the live action went TOO FAR with creating a second Maleficent, almost to the point of not being anything similar to the original, that strong villainous sense they were expecting to see in Maleficent had disappeared.

Now let's talk about twst, what is twst about? Villains. It's basically the world of villains. We need that evil, menacing and demonic sense of villains to be brought back to life through this twisted vessels, as it's confirmed that this school's students have villainous souls. From the Heartslabyul chapter till now, the Pomefiore chapter, his is all we've dealt with: Absolute villains. Each chapter is about a dorm leader (expect for Kalim) discovering and revealing their villainous spirits, which leads to an overblot. They want them to see just as evil and reckless as the original villains, which is why they put them into a mode such as overblot, where they're controlled by a puppet in the shape of one of the great seven.

Is such a story, where they need to make each of the main characters be as evil as possible, choosing live action Maleficent (who is a half villain, half hero character) not only is debatable but ia also a big contract to the previous chapters as they all followed the original villains' stories!

I guess we can all agree that Diasomnia's quite special compared to the rest of the dorms, but going as far as using a different source in character development and plot design compared to the rest of the characters and dorms seems to be a bit too much- I don't think Diasomnia's design and development is planned to be THAT different.

3) Key points about fhat has been officially mentioned in twst

Personal chats are VERY important to go through while doing a character analysis, they're such a wealthy and perfect source of information regarding each and every of the characters!

As for Diasomnia, each and every of the members mentioned something about the witch of thorns and her background, which directly leads us to how and who is the twst's Maleficent:

Lilia: Explains how Maleficent's Chronicles spent 16 years looking for a baby in a cradle -> This only happened in the classic! Live action Maleficent never sent any of her minions to look after aurora as she never had any!

Silver: Explains how the King of a well-known kingdom forgot to invite Maleficent and offended her with this, he wonders what kind of King would ever do such a disrespectful thing? -> Original Maleficent was offended and mad just because she wasn't invited, while the Live action Maleficent was betrayed by the King Stephan, Aurora's father who intentionally refused to invite Maleficent. Keep this in mind that Silver said forgetting to invite her, which is exactly what happened in the classic and King and Queen seriously forgot to invite Maleficent, not to intentionally avoid and decide to keep her away from baby Aurora like what happened in the live action.

Malleus: In his chats with Lilia, he mentions how The witch of thorns once invited the prince of as enemy Kingdom into her own castle -> This is again, something which only happened in the classic, referring to the scene where Maleficent captured prince Philip and imprisoned him inside her castle. Live action Maleficent didn't even have a castle to begin with, note that all she did was to take Phillip to Stephan's castle to give Aurora a chance to live.

Malleus: He explains how The Witch of thorns could turn into a dragon -> Live action Maleficent never turned into a dragon, she just once turned her crow, diaval, into a dragon (2014 ver.) and turned into a phoenix (2019 ver.). The only Maleficent which could and did transform into a dragon is the one we know from the sleeping beauty classic.

Hitting with the lighting: This is something Malleus is capable of doing, he both did this to Sebek back in the manga anthology and threatened Rook with it -> Again, this is something which the original Maleficent and herself only could do.

There are quite a few of other orginal Maleficent references you can find if you carefully go through the story and voice lines, but I'm not going to mention each and every of them because I believe I've already discussed this enough. Note that while there are tens of original Maleficent references in the story, there hasn't been anything mentioned about the live action Malleus so far expect for fan content and stuff.

Obviously, they're using Original Maleficent as the main reference. The question is whether they're using the live action too as a reference or not.

4) A summary + Existing debates

Aside from all of the current theories and headcanons, I guess this is all we can tell about the canon information revealed so far. But before we end, I'd like to add a few of small notes:

Lilia has never referred to the Witch of thorns as Queen of thorns, it's not quite specific to tell but it seems like Queen of thorns and Witch of thorns are indeed to different people.

But then again, why does Malleus bring his grandmother up in the middle of a discussion about Witch of thorns? Could it be that he just used her mother as an example since her too, is a very powerful magician but not exactly the witch of thorns herself, or...??

There hasn't been any information revealed regarding the great seven's current position in twisted wonderland's history, how long ago has their stories taken place? Could it be that some of them are still alive? Did their stories end just the same as orginal stories or did they decide to twist the endings as well?

The main reason why I think Maleficent cannot be alive now is not becuase she died in the original story, it's becuase of Silver, which has already been explained in part (1)!

At last, I'd like to add a final note to this piece: Even if the "Grandmother Maleficent" theory turns out to be wrong, many of the fans are already enjoying the eixisting fanon twst content which are using the live action as a reference! The most popular reference is probably with Malleus's back, where many artists decide to add two wounds on as a reference to what happened to Maleficent's wings in the live action. This is personally one of my FAVORITES and I just love it when artists draw the wounds, though the possibility of Malleus actually having wings is pretty low! We can almost call it impossible lol. The thing is, from how the story has gone so far we can assume that they aren't going to use the live action at all, but if they do, that'll be quite amazing and interesting to discuss!!

#answered #mister-jedblack #twst #twisted wonderland #malleus draconia #character analysis #twst x reader #twisted wonderland x reader #disney twisted Wonderland #twst theories #twisted wonderland theories #lilia vanrouge #sebek zigvolt #silver

245 notes · View notes

iampikachuhearmeroar · 2 years

Text

honestly looking back at my undergrad degree…. i find it so strange how the philosophy faculty while i was at my home uni didn’t think that presentations were a good way to assess people. don’t get me wrong, i hated public speaking and i had anxiety attacks around presentations during uni. but like. it was so bizarre that the one subject who obsessively prides themselves on being able to communicate complicated esoteric ideas to the layman- ie keep the ideas of tableau rasa in philosophy of mind or epistemic injustice in epistemology “simple stupid��; just didn’t want students to present these ideas to an audience.

so the one main way to present the said esoteric ideas in a formal assessment with my home uni’s philosophy dept was either wholly essay based (eg my epistemology subject had two 50% essays only- once they scrapped philosophy exams or mid term in class written assessments/quizzes as a form of assessment) and maybe an unmarked essay plan worth 2% and class participation that was always around 5%. and yeah, again, i loved the fact that not having presentations meant i had a reason to avoid my readings in philosophy.

but still. i think being forced to communicate the esoteric ideas in a marked presented assessment would’ve probably made me engage with the readings more. bc otherwise it was just a vague “oh yeah i think i understood the first 2 pages of dennett’s view of the zombie problem” (this was a 50 page reading) or “the narratives in our lives that goldie posits shape us into human beings correlates with our sense of self and the way we interact with the world and media around us” (this was a whole ass book my dad bought me for a first year subject called media, art and censorship; but we used one like 100 page chapter) in the class go around of pretending that you’ve done the readings.

because you can spit all that bullshit out during tuts for days, weeks, months of a sem or YEARS of doing your degree, with either a major or a minor (like myself) in philosophy. but the minute that you have to do a presentation for say, like, your honours thesis or your phd or whatever else degree there is with philosophy (i’ve forgotten tbh)…. just how the fuck do you actually posit and present those incredibly complicated philosophical problems clearly to an audience???

for example, how do you easily explain the twin earth thought problem (which my tutor for philosophy of mind was doing his dissertation on i think)??? or intelligently and clearly speak on the importance of the structure of thought problems and their philosophical patterns of learning connections or whatever the fuck (alas philosophy of science and logic was not my friend but i think my tutor of that subject did his dissertation on that. props to him (and also his corgi’s that he’d always use in his class tut questions) honestly.) and communicate them simply to your professors and other marking people??? when they’ve never let you build presentation skills???

but once you force me to present this then…. fuck man. maybe i actually have to do the 50+ page readings. maybe i actually have to form my arguments properly, before tyler, one of the really annoying philsoc dudebros that i can’t stand, will shut his fucking know it all kissass mouth….. just so i don’t hit him over the head with a chair.

but the irony of it was that by the time i finished my degree, the philosophy dept of my home uni FINALLY introduced presentations as an assessment method…. after marking what i think would’ve been too many failed philosophy rote learning exams; where no one remembered the meanings of epistemology or phenomenology or whatever else. they also added some more interesting fields to include stuff like the philosophy of media, film and literature which was the main one with a presentation (and i’m pretty sure it was even a GROUP presentation…. when philosophy is always painted as a solitary subject/activity) . there was also philosophy of religion which i think had a presentation as well. and the philosophy of narratives, self and psychosis; which was a third year subject i never took bc it had a 6,000 word essay in it lmao.

but still. to go through an entire degree that’s all about clear communication, argument and reasoning skills etc etc etc, it’s weird to think that they just straight up avoided or outright ignored presentations for so long and just wholly relied on essays upon essays and exams as their main source of assessment marking (not counting class participation and any of the dumbass 2% essay plans).

if there’s any philosophy tutors or profs on here, please feel free tell me your views on including presentations on your syllabuses. maybe it’s too much marking. maybe they take up too much time in 1hr tut slots. maybe people don’t want to hear jenna or freddie, the class stoners, half baked 20 min presentation on who the fuck knows what else i did in my philosophy minor. maybe philosophy profs don’t want to inflict more stress on students who have like 3 other subjects that ALL have presentations as assessments, some of which may be group ones. but i think i would’ve benefitted from doing presentations during my philosophy minor, whether they were individual or group.

#life #about me #shut up ilona #uni #uni life

6 notes · View notes

bixisarusher · 3 years

Text

Bix Reviews: Call Me Kat (Season 1, FOX 2021)

I thought a lot about how I feel about this show, and there are lots of words, so it’s gonna go under the cut.

In summary: I didn’t enjoy it quite as much as I hoped to, and i discuss why I think that was. BUT there are great things in this remake, and I want to name them as well!

There are two ways to look at Call Me Kat: As it’s own thing, and as a Miranda remake. As a Miranda Hart stan, I’ll have a lot more to say about the latter, so let’s start with the show itself.

On It’s Own

That felt appropriate, nvm me

It’s a cute show. It’s not a groundbreaking concept, and it’s not re-inventing the genre, but it has some really good things going for it:

Kat is happy and confident in her quirks, but doesn’t have it all together - so she has room to grow and is very sympathetic, all the while encouraging the viewer to celebrate their own quirks. Lovely! Also Mayim is a treasure and it’s great to watch her perform.

The show openly discusses “taboo” topics, like using anti-depressants and their side-effects, freezing your eggs, comparing yourself to a hallucinated version of your crush’s ex... The show isn’t a trailblazer, (partly because there have been many great shows in the last couple years) but I thinks it’s awesome to see them further treading out the ground and normalizing these topics.

It has a nice set of characters that go through their indepent stories, I found myself excited for any new episode and enjoying the varying storylines. (Most of them Randi.)

And, although the last episode dragged it right back into the romantic territory, Kat has a genuine friendship with Max and I value that a lot. Neither of them harbours secret feelings, instead they are open and honest about it. The only thing they overdid here was to have an exchange of “Do you remember, when we were in college together and [blank] happened?” in at least every other episode.

Another thing on the down side: Neither the writers nor Mayim seem to fully know what to do with the fourth wall breaks. I don’t mind the thing, it just doesn’t feel fully rounded out - like how much they want to use it, what purpose it really has, ...

I think it’s due to the circumstances of the filming (pandemic restrictions and all), but more on that later. So much for the show itself.

As a remake

First of all: Do I love Jim Parsons for looking at this absurd british gem of a TV show and deciding “the world needs more stuff like this”? Absolutely! Because I agree! There were two or three moments that leaned on Miranda a little too much for their own good, but overall: it is content inspired by Miranda, but neither correcting, it nor copying it. More power to this concept.

More power to celebrating the silly joys in this live, to celebrate not being normal, more power to amazing friendships and women who find their own path. Call Me Kat does all of these things.

However, it doesn’t quite live up to it’s Mothership. Let me elaborate.

There is a myriad of reasons why Miranda works and I will not attempt to list them. However there’s one thing that does stand out to me in the original, and that I really miss in the adaptation: Miranda didn’t just write “a plot” and salt it with “a few jokes”. She carefully built tensions and different storylines to culminate together. Sometimes it’s a funny word that the character hears in the first act, and later nervously blurts out in the wrong moment. Sometimes it’s a parade of characters she met through the episode that all meet in one spot at the end. Or there is a throw away comment in the beginning of an episode that sets up a revelation toward the end.

I could swarm you with examples, a good one is in 1x03 Job: trying to impress Tilly, trying to deny waitressing, and then: the multiple “You weed in a ball pool?” and Gary in uniform walking in right on time to sell the lie about being an undercover commander. Another one of my personal favorites is in 2x04 A New Low, when Miranda in the end tells Gary that he lost her trust, and he’ll “never get to see her naked sweep” - and then he find’s the portrait Tamara did of Miranda’s “naked sweep”. Just hit’s right.

That is a testament to how well crafted the episodes are. In Call Me Kat? All Nighter and Gym had moments like that, and Double Date very early on set up Kat’s dream to use the sound system, but it just never reached that same level of mastermind.

But, in defense of CMK: Miranda was crafted over ten years with a full of 20 episodes airing (21 if you count the radio series) and the cast worked together a good year before they filmed the first series of 6 episodes. Compared to that, work on Call me Kat started around 2018, the cast was assembled in the first half of 2020 and started shooting in late October. They then shot 13 episodes in their first season. (which is more than half of the total episodes of Miranda, just saying) Sources: english wikipedia articles for Miranda and Call Me Kat, as well as Mayim’s Youtube. (Jep I did research for this.)

Also the CMK episodes were written and directed by a variety of people, while the Miranda episodes have all been at least co-written by Miranda Hart and all except for the last two were directed by Juliet May.

These are - as much as I as a humble consumer with a bit of wikipedia knowledge know - basic differences about how shows are made in the UK vs. in the US, and neither formula is any way of guarantee for the quality of the final product. However I think somewhere in those facts is the reason why the Miranda ship feels a lot more in shape and ... coherent. The pilot that we know and love is the fourth time they recorded the script, and I don’t even want to know how many times the script had been edited in between. The cast knew each other well, the material had been tested in front of multiple audiences. Call Me Kat had neither of these luxuries. On the contrary, CMK has been put together under restrictions due to the pandemic.

So on the one hand, I am majorly grateful that this show even got to see the light of day! That means that a full cast and crew had jobs in these trying times, and it means that we were provided with good entertainement.

On the other hand, the circumstances are showing in the final product. The cast had an awkward chemistry with each other, and the comedic timing, though not horrible, could have been a lot better.

This may be an unpopular opinion, but I think studio audiences can be a blessing. There is something about the actors having a genuine connection to real time observers that helps me as a screen audience connect to it. And for this staged multicam show that includes glances at the camera? I think a real audience would have grounded the concept. And it would have given the team a direct feedback as to which moments were working comedically and which weren’t.

What I’m trying to say is: they had big shoes to fill, and the odds were not really in their favor, and so it doesn’t really hold up in comparison.

That’s sad. But that doesn’t mean that it’s a horrible show. As I said in the beginning, I love that this show is done in the spirit of Miranda, even if it’s not just as good.

I have no idea how the show’s chances are to get a second season. If they do get renewed - I’ll keep watching.

-----

Now, let me finish with a few gifs that I feel like they can be applied to the whole “they remade Miranda and it went both ok and less then ok but at least the word is being spread, right?”-situation.

because Kat/Max is good but could anything ever be Miranda/Gary?

Not really...

ok that one’s a bit rude. but you thought it, too.

Jim turning in bed at night overthinking if Mayim was the right choice. But she was. Much like Stevie was for Miranda.

Honestly a very good part of the remake is Mayim and Cheyenne performing together! I personally think this moment above is responsible.

Trying to match the CMK characters to the Miranda characters like: I thought Phil is supposed to be the Customer but turns out Phil originally was supposed to a Phillys? So Phil is Stevie, but then who is Randi? Tilly? So many questions.

And with that, dear Caller, back to you.

38 notes · View notes

anti-porn-unicorn · 3 years

Text

I’m a girl (18 now) who got exposed/addicted to pornography at a really young age, and I wanted to share my specific story on this blog so that the platform can get it out there.

Under the cut is my full story, and it’s a little long winded, so if you don’t want to read the whole thing, I bolded in purple the general topic/idea of that section. Just look for whichever of those interests you and the section will be about that. The first and last paragraph are good for context and end goal, though.

Thank you.

I don't fully remember my first exposure to porn. I know I was in third grade (6-7 yrs old, I had skipped a grade). The reason I had wanted to share my story, in fact, is because I don't see many stories with circumstances similar to mine. Most I see have at least one of the following 'modifiers', for want of a better word. Most I see have at least one of the following 'modifiers', for want of a better word. Most I see have at least one of the following 'modifiers', for want of a better word. 1. The person is a victim of CSA/grooming. 2. The person was at a generally pubescent age (~11-14). And/or 3. The person experienced porn as a quick disturbance. To be clear, these stories are as valid and important as mine, and I simply think more perspectives make evidence of the effects of porn more airtight. I've never been the victim of SA, harassment, or grooming, ever in my life. My story shows the effects of exclusively porn.

The first memory I can recall about this was actually the first time I got caught. I was 6 yrs old, and very into video games,so on this day, I was playing a 3D porn game on my crappy hand-me-down laptop. I kind of knew that what I was doing wasn't acceptable, so I was sitting in my room in the corner as far from my door as possible. My mom walked in so I just slammed the laptop shut because I wasn't that good at hiding things. My mom obviously asked what I was doing, and I tried to keep her from looking, but it was right there when she reopened it. This is where the battle of it begins.

From ages 6-14 I don't have a good timeline of events but a few pop out that exemplify the severity of the issue. These are very probably out of order.

I got an iPod Touch for Christmas (~6-7), and every night I would watch porn on it until they caught on. I literally still remember some names of the sites, most that don't even exist anymore. My parents have always been amazingly caring. I couldn't ask for more. During the earlier ages (~6-8) I was put with a child therapist for fear of a deeper issue. My parents started either taking technology away in the night and/or setting restrictions on the internet. Unfortunately, between my slight tech-savvy, and my crazed addiction at this point, this wasn't a solution.

The addiction got DEEP. It warped my brain. When I had no technology, I used everything I could find.

Whenever I had access to less restricted internet, I used it. Once I asked my older cousin to use her iPod and watched it on there.(she noticed and told my mom. I remember my mom had asked me "Is there anything you need to tell me?", and I knew what she meant, but I just said "nope!" and walked away. At one point my dad's work provided him with a Blackberry, and I asked him could I play one of the built in little games. Once I had it, I watched porn. (when I gave it back to him he pressed the "back" button, and I was caught.)

I used Youtube. This was when YouTube was way less moderated (back when the app was a little old timey TV). I learned I could look up "striptease" and "nip-slip" and other stuff like that, finding more soft-core videos that could suffice when the internet in general was locked down.

I straight-up found out ways to disable the restrictions. Once I found out my mom's PIN for the controls, I went and disabled them, but changed the PIN so it would look like they were still on, and so that she couldn’t access and re-enable them. (I made it 7399. Spells "sexy". My mind was a mess.)

My parents bought a book called "The Classical Tradition". I'm just learning now as I'm looking it up that it was a Harvard Reference Library book (probably why it was so damn thick) about ancient Greek and Roman culture. I didn't know that. I had realized that sprinkled throughout the book there were pages that were more glossy than the rest, which you could see from the sides of the pages (the book was HUGE). These were the photo paper, which had the classical paintings and sculptures. And because these had nudity (Think "The Birth of Venus" type) I would regularly flip through this book when I needed a "fix". Absurd.

My parents got me an American Girl book that was made to ease worries about the developmental years. The pages on breast development / the anatomy of the vagina were what I looked at the most. When my parents had gotten me the child therapist, there was the logical fear that I might have been molested. The therapist gave me a book where there was a page with two cartoon mice, a boy and a girl. They were wearing swimwear/underwear and the point of that was "anywhere the clothing is covering is somewhere that adults can't touch you without telling.” They might as well have been stick figures, there was NO detail. But since they were in ‘underwear’ I'd always look at that page a lot. Anything barely vaguely sexual.

During this part of my life, I got no real pleasure out of this, I was just obsessed. For the first year I even watched it on mute out of fear of being caught. The lowest point during this period was when I very unfortunately filmed a video of me touching myself. I got nothing out of it and had no intent on ever sending or posting it. I was just emulating what I had been seeing. I deleted it the next day. I was 9 then.

From puberty until now (11-18) is when my sexuality was shaped by it. The addiction was far more controllable, I could spend a couple weeks to a couple months without it, but I'd always come back. Because it was now tied to my body. And while my need for it to be constant was gone, now I had to deal with the tolerance issue.

Over time what I watched became more and more depraved. I had the personal preference of hating anything amateur, because of the low quality, so I managed to avoid anything obviously non-consensual or involving visibly underaged girls, but that doesn't really mean much with the stuff the studios were putting out. During the middle points it got REALLY violent and disturbing. Bordering on torture (extreme kink) and even bodily deformation. As a young woman, I couldn't really tolerate any of the role based Kinks (father-daughter, babysitter, schoolgirl), so more extreme for me meant more extreme acts. Just absolute destruction of women's bodies for the purposes of sex. I moved away from that when tumblr banned porn and I started using reddit for it, and also during that time I was realizing how fucked up of an addiction that this was, even before I found feminism/anti-porn. I actively started trying to quit it, for good. But I always went back.

One big effect is heavy confusion with my sexual orientation. A lot of people face this, but the addition of porn for me really throws things off. Like: Am I bi, and a form of comphet/denial/inexperience keeps me from seeing women in a romantic way? Is it a mix of that and porn? (relatively likely) Or am I just straight, and the porn has completley shaped my mind (likely). 90% of the time I watched solo female content or lesbian content, and could only stand to watch certain specific forms if it included men at all. In real life I find a fair amount of men attractive but their bodies in a sexual sense are tolerable at best, but usually cringe inducing. l've never been attracted to a woman romantically, but exclusively women's bodies are sexual to me. It feels like everything in my brain that I would have been able to use in order to figure myself out has been permanently overwritten with incorrect information. Because of porn.

I've still got it bad. Every once in a while, I’ll read something vaguely sexual, or see a woman in a risque photo, and then the seed is planted. I'll always say "I'm not going to do it, I always feel disgusting after, it’s not even really enjoyable at this point, I can do better than this”. I always give in the end of the night. I'm 7 days off of it. I've been on this earth for 18 years. 12 of those years I've been cripplingly addicted to pornography. Two thirds of my life, and for as long as I can remember. I can never undo it. Just like an alcoholic will always be an alcoholic, only able to achieve remission, I will always be a porn addict. I have to be careful. But I have to hope for the future. And with finding the community that is speaking the truth about this, I'm heartened to do better. To no longer be held down by an addiction to consuming my own oppression.

#thank you for sharing #you’re not alone in this #I’m glad you escaped the addiction!#submission

40 notes · View notes

i-know-my-value-darling · 4 years

Photo

Supernatural stars reflect on the show's undying legacy

Jared Padalecki, Jensen Ackles, and Misha Collins discuss 15 years of fantasy, family, and flannel.

"We only get one shot at this." Sam and Dean Winchester are surrounded. The monster-hunting brothers are standing on the edge of a cliff. They look to Castiel, their brother in arms — or is it wings? — but even he can’t help. One move in the wrong direction could ruin everything. After years of fighting demons, going toe-to- toe with Satan himself, and saving the world multiple times, they once again find themselves in a position of having to perform under pressure. But this situation is unlike anything they’ve ever dealt with before. All eyes are on them as they have one shot…at getting the perfect picture.

It’s a dry, hot August day in Malibu — when people were still allowed to gather outside — as Supernatural stars Jensen Ackles, Jared Padalecki, and Misha Collins prepare for the last setup of their final Entertainment Weekly cover shoot. With a bottle of champagne in each of their hands, Ackles once again reminds them they get “one shot” to do this right. But if their characters can shoulder the weight of the world, surely these three can handle a photo. Read the whole story below

The champagne soaking is meant to be a celebration of 15 years, of making television history. Supernatural, the story of two brothers destined to save the world, is the longest-running genre show in the history of American broadcast television. (So old, the first three seasons shot on this thing called film.) What started as an underdog story, living its first few years on the verge of cancellation, has become an institution, a milestone to which other shows aspire. Supernatural not only survived the move from The WB to The CW after its first season — it’s now the final WB show left standing — but became the backbone of the now highly successful CW network. Over the years, the sci-fi series has aired on every weeknight, helping to launch shows including Arrow and The Vampire Diaries. The network moved it one final time, most recently, to Mondays, to help Roswell, New Mexico expand its audience. “Supernatural is a major link to many of the shows that we have successfully built to market,” The CW’s chairman and CEO Mark Pedowitz says. “Almost every one of our shows has had it as a lead-out or a lead-in.”

And to think, it all started as a promise to bring horror to television. After Supernatural creator Eric Kripke had finished working with Warner Bros. on 2003’s Tarzan series, he pitched the idea of a reporter who travels around hunting urban legends. As he puts it, it was a Kolchak: The Night Stalker rip-off. But when he realized the story would benefit from having brothers at its core, he started writing. “At the time, The Ring and The Grudge were huge hits in theaters,” Kripke remembers. “We said, ‘We’re going to take that experience and we’re going to put it on TV,’ and the initial goal was to be scary.” After Warner Bros. passed on his first, what he calls “uptight,” draft, Kripke had to reassess the kind of show he was creating. “I canceled all my Christmas plans and wrote that second draft in three weeks,” he says. “That was when the show got its sense of humor, because I was locked alone, over winter break, in my office. I couldn’t do anything fun, so I started entertaining myself.”

The show was still scary, but it was also funny and, over the years, would continue to evolve. Sure, you could say it’s a little bit X-Files — in its early days, the show often used the line “The X-Files meets Route 66” — and there were definite Star Wars influences (Sam and Dean were originally based on Luke Skywalker and Han Solo). But no combination of pop culture is going to perfectly describe Supernatural because the show has managed to do something remarkably rare in the age of peak TV, where audiences are so overwhelmed with content that an original idea seems foreign: It’s created a truly one-of- a-kind experience.

For starters, it’s a show about two flannel-wearing, beer-loving, blue-collar dudes from Kansas who for a good chunk of their lives traveled from cheap motel to cheap motel, paying for gas and greasy diner food with a mix of fake credit cards and money they earned scamming people at the pool table. “Almost all television is about rich people or, at the very least, middle-class people,” co-showrunner Andrew Dabb says. “The fact that we’ve been able to take this Midwestern blue-collar approach to this genre feels like we’re breaking the mold.”

But the mold-breaking didn’t stop there. Supernatural might’ve started out as a horror show with some snarky one-liners, but it evolved into some of the boldest, most experimental (and certainly strangest) stories on the small screen. “We’re a show of big swings,” co-showrunner Robert Singer says. “I used to say, with every idea, ‘This will be a home run or they’ll cancel us,’ but every year we wanted to do something really nuts." And when he says nuts, we’re not just talking about the episode with the talking teddy bear or the murderer targeting imaginary friends. Those are just some standard monsters of the week. We’re talking about the black-and-white episode shot like a classic Hollywood monster movie, or the episode that introduced Chuck (Rob Benedict), a prophet — who’d later reveal himself to be God — who was famous for writing a book series called Supernatural. That, of course, led to Sam and Dean attending a Supernatural fan convention as the show continued to redefine what it meant to inject a series with meta humor. And the swings never stopped. Season 13 featured a Scooby-Doo crossover as an animated Sam, Dean, and Castiel solved a case alongside the Mystery Inc. gang. And in season 14, after giving God a sister a few years prior, the show made the Big Man Himself its final villain. “I don’t think any idea, barring some production concerns, has been viewed as too crazy,” Dabb says. “Because we know that our fans are smart and that they’ll follow these guys anywhere.”

So long as each episode features Sam and Dean — and the occasional heartfelt talk on the hood of the Impala — the show can do just about anything, which is another reason Kripke had to rewrite his first draft of the pilot. Originally, Dean was the only brother who knew about monsters growing up, bringing Sam up to speed later in life. It wasn’t until Kripke figured out that they needed to be in this together that the series snapped into place. Because at the end of it all, they’re two brothers bonded by the loss of their mother and a life spent on the road with an absentee father. (It just so happens that their mother was killed by a demon and their father hunted them.) The familial dynamic — the irrational codependency, as the angel Zachariah (Kurt Fuller) once called it — is the most important part of the show. “The first inkling I had that we had something special was shooting the pilot,” Kripke says. “It was the scene on the bridge when Sam and Dean talk about their mother. It was the first time that you really saw their chemistry and their connection as brothers on full display. Because I’ve always said this show begins and ends with whether you believe that sibling relationship.” But Sam and Dean weren’t just the center of the show. For many years, they were the show.

Supernatural has never been an ensemble drama. For the first 82 hours of the series, Ackles and Padalecki were the only long-running series regulars — Katie Cassidy and Lauren Cohan briefly joined for season 3, appearing in 12 episodes combined. But Sam and Dean weren’t just in every episode; they anchored every episode. (They skipped table reads because there would’ve been only two actors there.) “I had many moments of not only questioning, ‘Can I keep this up?’ but an answer of ‘I cannot keep this up,’ ” Padalecki, 37, who’s been vocal about his struggle in the early seasons, says. “I borrowed strength from Jensen.” But even Ackles, 42, admits it was a tough job. “The 23-episode seasons were nine and a half months of filming,” he adds. “It was a lot of work, but I always came back to: I still enjoy it, I still like telling the story, I still like these characters and the people I work with.”

Not only did the guys stick around, they built a reputation of having created one of the warmest sets in the business, with a number of crew members staying with the production all 15 seasons. It all dates back to a talk Kripke had with his stars during the filming of the series’ second episode. “I said, ‘The show is about your two characters, and with that comes this responsibility,’ ” Kripke says. Padalecki remembers the exact setting of what he calls their “Good Will Hunting moment,” a bench in Stanley Park in Vancouver, where they film. It was a chat both actors took to heart. “We’d both been on other sets,” Ackles says. “We knew we wanted to enjoy it, to have fun with our crew; we wanted them to like us and us to like them and to have fun doing what we do.” It’s an attitude Pedowitz hopes bleeds into other CW shows, an attitude that launched an annual tradition where the CW chairman/CEO takes his new casts out to dinner with the Supernatural guys, a chance for the vets to share advice. “It’s always the most flattering situation,” Padalecki says, recalling a moment he had a few years back with the late Luke Perry, who was a part of the Riverdale cast. “Luke was sitting next to me and he was like, ‘What y’all have done and what we hear about you guys, it’s really cool to be associated with y’all in some way, shape, or form,’” he recalls. “And I’m sitting there pinching myself.”

It’s a behind-the-scenes legacy that’s perhaps just as impressive, if not more so, than the onscreen legacy. Collins, 45, who started as a guest star and the show’s first angel in season 4, has become the show’s third-longest-running series regular, and he still remembers walking onto set his first day. “When you’re coming onto a show as a guest star, it can be a little bit nerve-racking,” Collins says. “Coming to this set, it was an immediately different vibe. Think- ing about working on other shows in the future, that’s something that I aspire to bring with me.”

A similar reputation extends to the fans as well. Not only is the #SPNFamily one of the most dedicated fandoms out there, it’s also known to be a pretty nice one. (Not many fandoms can say they’ve helped launch a crisis support network for their fellow fans.) But their dedication isn’t just about seeing what crazy twist God throws at Team Free Will next. Thanks to fan conventions and social media, the viewers are just as invested in the lives of the actors. Supernatural’s not just about the words on the page, it’s about the actors saying them. “When you’re dealing with the public taste, there’s an alchemy of great writing, a great idea, and the close-up that’s required,” Peter Roth, chairman of Warner Bros. Television Group, says. “You need stars who you want in your living room.” And you need stars who want to be in your living room, and who, even after 15 years, care so deeply that they get emotional while taking photos in Malibu.

"It's going to be a long eight months," Ackles declares. Standing on that same ledge, an hour before the champagne shot, Ackles, Padalecki, and Collins walk away from a group hug after unexpectedly starting to tear up. It might be the setting — looking out over the ocean — or the occasion: their last-ever photo shoot. Or maybe it’s the fact that they’re almost a month into filming their final season.

It had been a question posed to the stars for years: How long will this show continue? How long can it continue? “Even my mom and dad were like, ‘When are you going to be done with this?’” Ackles says with a laugh. It was a decision the network and studio had ultimately put into the actors’ hands, and it was a conversation they’d been having for a while. Back in 2016, Padalecki told EW, “If we don’t make it to [episode] 300, I think Ackles and I will both be truly bummed.” But in season 14, they hit 300…and then kept going. While filming episode 307, they announced the upcoming 15th season would be the end, which will bring them to a total of 327 episodes when all is said and done. “[Jared] and I were always married to the fact that we never wanted to go out with a diet version of what we had,” Ackles says. “We wanted to have enough gas left in the tank to get us racing across the finish line. We didn’t want to limp across.” Padalecki remembers the moment it hit him — not the decision to end it, but rather the opposite. “We had that moment where he and I both realized that we didn’t want it to end,” he says. “It finally got to a point, ironically, where it was like, ‘I never want to leave this. I could do this until the day I die, and then if I get the choice when I’m dead, I’ll re-up!’ But you never want to be the last person at a party. We just knew. That’s not to say there haven’t been vacillations, but we all trust the decision that was made.”

Starting in July 2019, the cast and crew returned to Vancouver to begin filming the final season, but in March 2020, with two episodes left to go, they were sent home. For years, fans had wondered what, if anything, could stop the Winchesters, and now it seems we have the answer: a global pandemic. As sets closed amid social-distancing measures due to the spread of COVID-19, it didn’t take long for fans to start connecting the dots, sharing relevant GIFs from episodes that featured viruses, most notably Chuck telling Dean to hoard toilet paper “like it’s made of gold” before the end of the world in season 5’s “The End.” (Did we mention that Supernatural is also kind of psychic? In a season 6 episode, Dean calls Sam “Walker, Texas Ranger,” which just so happens to be the role Padalecki has lined up after this ends.)

When production paused, it all felt a little like we were living in an episode of the show, just waiting for Sam and Dean to drive up in Baby, open those creaky doors, and save us. They might not be able to do quite that, but the thing with the Winchesters is that they never stay down for long. When Supernatural is able to safely resume production, it will. And though there are only two episodes left to film, fans will enjoy a total of seven unseen hours, including the return of Charlie (Felicia Day) and a mystery woman who visits the bunker and, for some reason, gives Sam and Dean all the holidays they never got to celebrate. “She makes Christmas for them and Thanksgiving, birthday parties, and all that. It’s a very good episode,” Singer says, adding, “I don’t know when it’s going to air.”

That’s the thing—no one knows, not even the guys who took out Yellow Eyes, stopped Leviathans, defeated Death himself, and are supposedly destined to be the messengers of God’s destruction. But Sam and Dean do know the value of a good plan B. “Obviously it’s a horribly unfortunate situation we’re in, but the silver lining is that it gives us an opportunity to recharge,” Ackles says. “We had just finished episode 18, we shot one day of episode 19, and I was reading these two monster scripts thinking, ‘It’s like we’re at the end of a marathon and they want us to sprint for the last two miles.’ I feel like this almost gives us an opportunity to refocus and go into the last two episodes and hit them with everything we got.” Because when they do return to set, shave their quarantine beards, and step back into Sam and Dean’s shoes for the last time, they’ll have one shot at ending this thing…and they’re determined not to miss.

Photos: Peggy Sirota for EW

https://ew.com/tv/supernatural-stars-cover-ew-to-reflect-on-the-shows-undying-legacy/

#supernatural #jensen ackles #jared padalecki #misha collins #last season #season 15 #entertainment weekly #cover story #dean winchester #sam winchester #castiel #full post #SPN #spn family #new photo #new photos

785 notes · View notes