#there are also the like scale statues of the characters used for filming but they're less detailed and by extension ugly and less cool

[joshhhhhhhhhhhhhhh]

Speaking of Sonic movies I think the prop spinball used in the filming of at least the first movie but possibly all three would maybe be the coolest possible Sonic thing to own in the entire fucking world

[demon-of-the-ancient-world]

Really trying to get the vibes of the messy messy Paul/Irulan dynamic that lives in my fic and it's hard because we really don't see all too much of their actual relationship dynamic in the books? They're almost never together. All we really know is Irulan is kind of a disaster, Paul pretty much ignores her, she reeeeeally wants him assassinated but also obsessively writes down everything he says. There's some real interesting nuggets in there though, especially combined with how their characters have been shown so far in the movies.

ramblings under the cut:

Because while Irulan still is very much plotting against Paul, 1) the specific Thing I'm working on partly takes place immediately after Part 2 i.e. a long time before that so one of the things I'm working on is figuring out how their relationship evolves over that time and 2) what fascinates me about their relationship is that in a lot of ways it's an inverse of Paul and movie!Chani's. Both women are very much Not Happy with him, but their reasons are reversed. Chani knew him, loved him, and by the end of the film has been deeply betrayed by him on a personal level. For sure they end as political enemies as well, but the main source of strife between them is emotional.

And then Irulan is almost exactly the opposite. She has presumably never met Paul and knows little about him, but (at least in my version/interpretation) is somewhat fascinated by the idea of what he is now. And contrary to Chani, her reasons for conflict with him are about 90% political. Sure, he disposed her father, but I think Irulan - unlike Paul at the beginning and by extension Leto - understands how shaky the rule of a royal family really is and clearly sees the behind the scenes workings of all that it takes to keep that kind of rule in place. Her father killed his, and now he is taking revenge. Of course that results in some level of emotional baggage, but I think she gets it in a way. She's analytical and calculating, and sees this more as a political move on his part than a personal one. He's a threat to her status, to the Imperium as she knows it, but these threats are the sort she would be used to dealing with as an emperor's daughter, albeit on a lesser scale than what he brings.

So on one hand we have Chani's highly-emotional-but-wrapped-up-in-political-views conflict with Paul, and on the other we've got Irulan's emotionally-distant-but-based-in-large-scale-political-motions conflict with him. It's a very different vibe.

I'm also trying to sort out what will hopefully end up being some VERY messy complicated Feelings on her part. There's a whole spectrum of like:

"Who does this kid think he is???"

"...he kind of scares me"

".......he kind of scares me and I hate that a part of me is kind of into it"

"this BITCH took my dad's throne that could've been mine maybe if the patriarchy didn't exist how DARE he you little shit you won't get away with this istg I'm going to slit your throat --"

"wait ok if things weren't so fucked up you'd actually be a crazy interesting person hold still so I can put your brain in a test tube you weirdo"

"genuinely kind of wish I was just loved. No not by my husband ugh buuuut it's a shame our marriage sucks ass can't he just Be Nice"

"look how hard I'm manipulating him I'm such a girlboss he thinks he's won but I'm manipulating him soooo hard right now good job me"

"...this little shit doesn't scare me"

[kiraridertime03]

Talking Ultimate Spider-Man (2024) #1

So, Spider-Man, right?

(FULL SPOILERS FOR ULTIMATE SPIDER MAN (2024) #1, BY THE WAY!)

I want to have full disclosure here. This is my first Spider-Man comic. Most of my Spider-Man content came, before, from different adaptations. I mean, there was a period of my life where I didn't like Spidey, but that was in the unholy era of Ultimate Spider-Man (2012) and The Amazing Spider-Man (2012), two adaptations I am not a fan of. But I love the Tobey films, I love Spectacular, I even really like the Tom films. However, I am by no means a Spidey expert. I have heard the woes of modern Spider-Man comics, you know.

However, I did get excited when I heard of this new run, mainly because of the writer, Johnathan Hickman. Of all the American Comics I've read, a ton of them have come from Hickman, oddly enough. My first event comic was Secret Wars (2015), which sold me on him as a writer because, despite it being a multiversal event, it still worked on a small scale, on an emotional level. Then, though I didn't have time for the main books, I felt really fulfilled in reading House of X (2019) and Powers of X (2019). It is oddly compelling as an introduction, setting up this really interesting new status quo. Therefore, hearing he was writing a new Spidey book, I was intrigued. I knew about the other new Ultimate Universe intros he wrote, I just wasn't as hooked at them as the Spider-Man book.

It starts off promisingly. After giving a quick recap of what happened before to help explain things (which is simple yet necessary) recap, we spend most of the issue just learning about Peter. You know, he's a dad, however, unexpectedly to me, it focuses much more of its time on Peter's relationship with Uncle Ben. I don't mind too much, though. In creating an alternate universe, you want to discuss things that are different from what you can write in the main universe, and given this world's premise, this seems the most interesting. I fully didn't expect the Old Man Yuri, though.

This does lead to some endearing moments with J. Jonah Jameson, though. I love the moment seen above in particular, it really shows that, while abrasive, Jonah has a good heart, and cares for Peter. However, most of this helps to reveal concerns both JJ and Peter have been having about Ben's well being. Well, because May is dead

That teensy weensy, itty bitty tewwowism mentioned in the recap comes to a full head, as it turns out May died in it, alongside Norman Osborn, seemingly. They all go to this really interesting wake, headed by Matt Murdock, now a Priest, and Harry, who gives a heavy speech about it. He seems particularly scarred by these events, which I hope is explored further in later issues.

After this, we get a bit more plot as JJ and Ben storm out of the Daily Bugle as Kingpin tries to influence them in a way the two don't like. But as Fisk leaves, we meet another character, The Goblin.

I like this suit, and looking at its subtleties reveals the interesting merger of Stark and Oscorp, which can lead to interesting implications to the future. This also builds some mystery to their character, as they bomb the Kingpin... Intriguing. I am actually really excited to see where this goes, as it is likely that, if this is Harry, he'll be against Spidey due to his links to Tony Stark alone. However, this seemingly more heroic bent is an interesting use of this new universe.

Well, anyways, we cut back to Ben and JJ on a date...

They're actually talking about a new business, forging a new journal based on not lying. They have a really cute dynamic, and I hope to see more of them in future issues. However, from here, the issue pivots. The first half was mostly focused on establishing the Status Quo. Peter is married, Ben's alive, May isn't, so on and so forth. From here, though, things get more interesting.

Seeing Ben going forward in his life so bravely, Peter begins to speak on his mid life crisis. He starts asking about a longing, a desire for change. In this, Ben plays his usual inspiring role, but in a completely new context. Rather than great power and responsibility, it's more about seizing the day.

It continues to another scene of him and MJ, where they discuss the same thing. However, there seems to be a more specific focus to it. This scene, while important for Peter's character, also gives a brief moment to really build Peter's domestic life. With the pacing of the issue to this point, there hasn't really been much of this, but I also see there wasn't really much time, so it's good that it is here, if anything. However, MJ seems fully supportive of whatever it is as Peter leaves the room, we get a brief flashback.

This is were things get weird and multiversal, as Hickman tends to do. Peter learns of the whole, "Maker stole the future" thing, giving Peter the promise of his proposed future, if he will take it. We then get a brilliant scene where we watch as he gets bit, and becomes Spider-Man. There's this brilliant edit, which I'll link below, that really adds the gravitas that the moment has, taking it to the extreme.

Overall, this series seems to be about lost potential. Other people have noted this, but it is, incredibly, both a story that is metacontextually interesting, as well as emotionally resonant without that.

Look at it. On one end, this seems to be addressing the image of Spider-Man's Stagnation. It fells, with this, that his married, developed life, and his Spider-Man life were split with OMD, and this book seeks to make up for lost time. It also hits hard in a modern context, as many people's prospects have felt a sense of stagnation as well. It's brilliant, and an interesting direction to take this Peter's character. It leaves me excited to see where this book takes his character next.

Overall, what I can say about this book is that it feels like a great pilot. It gives me a good, brief taste of the characters, sets up the world, and builds intrigue, both in Peter's character and the purpose of the Goblin. There isn't a ton of Spider-Man, but all things considered, that's the least important to sell here, as people have gotten used to Spidey based action. We'll get time for it later, I'm sure.

If anything, I wish we got more time for meeting with the kids. We get a bit of them at the start, and I don't think there was really time for it in this really packed issue, but it is a tad disappointing. Here's hoping for some in the future.

Overall, a really strong, interesting issue of Spidey comics that will hopefully build into an all timer of a run.

[night-unfurls-its-splendour]

Every Emma Woodhouse Ranked and Rated

With all my reviews of all the period-set adaptations now finished, I'm beginning my series in which I rate and rank each interpretation of all the principle characters, starting with our girl Emma!

Now I wanna be clear--I am not rating the actresses that played Emma. I am rating how the character was handled in general in each adaptation. The actresses are a factor, but they're not the sole factor, since the writer and director have as much, if not more, to do with how the character ends up in the finished product. So without futher ado, let's rank...

“Emma Woodhouse, handsome, clever, and rich, with a comfortable home and happy disposition, seemed to unite some of the best blessings of existence; and had lived nearly twenty-one years in the world with very little to distress or vex her….

“The real evils indeed of Emma’s situation were the power of having rather too much of her own way, and a disposition to think a little too well of herself; these were the disadvantages that threatened alloy to her many enjoyments.”

NUMBER 5: 1972

Portrayed by: Doran Godwin

Age at time of filming: 28

Clocking in as the oldest actress to play Austen’s famously TWENTY-ONE year old heroine (at the ripe age of 28), Doran Godwin also snags the coveted position as inhabiting the worst portrayal of the character (in my personal estimation) to date.

Just about everything about this interpretation of Emma Woodhouse is bad, from her seemingly automated recital of her lines to her all-too-intense, wide-eyed, hypnotic stare. The 1972 portrayal of Emma highlights all the character’s worst qualities while also failing to convincingly communicate her good qualities, such as her caring nature. The script is equally to blame for the awfulness of this interpretation, adding unnecessarily cruel and condescending lines, including one where she negs Harriet for being sad after Elton’s marriage, and then forces Harriet to come with her to meet the new Mrs. Elton, when Emma in the book did her best to shield Harriet from exactly that kind of situation.

Godwin couldn’t pass for 21 if her life had depended on it, and the worst part is that the script actually states Emma’s age, so she seems like a bit of a crazy spinster, preying on the naïve Harriet. Whether it’s her intent to bathe in Harriet’s blood to keep herself young, or to bake her into a pie is up for debate.

Rating: 1/5 Half-finished portraits

NUMBER 4: 2020

Portrayed by: Anya Taylor Joy

Age at time of filming: 23

I thought long and hard about this. This movie is a modern period drama phenomenon. It’s gotten so many people into Jane Austen and satisfied long-time Austen fans by giving them an interpretation they never dared hope to see. It’s a gorgeous film.

But I don’t like this interpretation of Emma Woodhouse. Though Anya Taylor Joy is one of the youngest actresses to play Emma (only two years older than the character) she’s played with a careful stiffness that perhaps shows us a glimpse of the Lady Catherine she might turn into without swift intervention. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, and this isn’t a commentary on Anya Taylor Joy either—her appearance or her acting ability—but I just don’t like her as Emma. And she’s not the sole problem, she turns in a solid performance, she’s a good actress, but something about this characterization is just off-color to me. Anya Taylor Joy plays a great mean-girl; but I think that’s one of the reasons why they thought she’d be a good choice for this role, and it’s one of the prime reasons I don’t think she wasright for it. Emma is a deeply flawed character and, of course, the biggest turning point in her story comes as a result of a thoughtlessly mean remark to someone who has only ever shown her deference, hospitality and gratitude.

All that said, Emma is not, at her core, a cruel person. Emma has gone all her life thinking condescending things about Miss Bates but it’s only when Frank comes along and validates her less kind commentaries that she actually starts to voice them in search of validation from a peer.

The problem with this in the context of 2020’s Emma Woodhouse is that Frank hardly gets a look-in in this adaptation. Emma’s relationship with him is severely underdeveloped and the actors don’t have enough chemistry to pull it off in the limited time they’re given. The result is that Emma appears to cross a line just to cross it, and it pushes Emma’s character from thoughtless to out-and-out frigid.

Still better than Doran Godwin, since she's identifiably human.

Rating: 2 1/2 / 5 Half-finished portraits

NUMBER 3: 1996 (MIRAMAX)

Portrayed by: Gwyneth Paltrow

Age at time of filming: 24

Despite the fact that Gwyneth Paltrow was an appalling casing choice for Emma Woodhouse (I will be forever salty that they passed over Joely Richardson), and I know there are some who will think me, at best, crazy (sacrilegious, at worst) for ranking 1996’s interpretation of Emma higher than 2020, I actually feel that solidly in the middle is right where this version of the character belongs.

There’s so much wrong with this Emma: she swings from mature to bizarrely infantile at the drop of a hat, much of her script is genuinely tragic, Gwyneth can’t convincingly portray Emma's social naiveté, her accent is overwhelmingly nasal and impossible to listen to, just for starters.

And yet… I don’t hate her. I don’t like her particularly either, but even though much of the dialogue re-working butchered Austen’s prose, there are a lot of things McGrath seems to have gotten right about Emma’s character. Her relationship with Knightley feels comfortable and playful, and, while Emma of the book probably doesn’t really care for Harriet Smith in the spirit of true bosom friendship, I believe she does care about her and wishes to spare her (further) pain. She shows exasperation with Harriet while still being patient with her, which is very much in the spirit of the book. Her concern for Harriet at the ball feels real, and her contrition at Box Hill following Knightley’s rebuke, while not profound, at least feels like contrition and not self-pity.

Perhaps, given the soft-take that the Miramax version is, it shouldn’t be surprising that the biggest faults in characterization rest on awkward writing and the biggest triumphs highlight Emma’s better side. It’s not a very in-depth take on the character, but it at least, is an adequate one.

Rating: 3/5 Half-finished portraits

NUMBER 2: 1996/97 (ITV)

Portrayed by: Kate Beckinsale

Age at time of filming: 23

Those who’ve read my reviews of each adaptation of Emma might be surprised to see ITV’s portrayal of the title character sitting so high on my list. To be frank, it’s a distant second, and she may have stolen the number two spot only because she’s played by Kate Beckinsale and not Gwyneth Paltrow.

In truth, I see a lot of parallels between 1997’s Emma and 2020’s. Both actresses were 23 (or thereabouts) when they played the role, both have extremely childish moments, and both crumple down and burst into tears that don’t feel entirely genuine after Box Hill.

So why is 1997 on the good side of the number 3 spot and 2020 isn’t? I’m not precisely sure. I think it may be because Andrew Davies (and/or Diarmuid Lawrence) at least understood the scale of Emma Woodhouse’s wealth and status. This Emma feels sufficiently self-important, a bit haughty, sure—but she’s also believably naïve. You feel her isolation, you understand her caring relationship with her father, and she’s not as patently rude to Robert Martin compared to the 2020 version (she at least acknowledges his presence when he meets Emma and Harriet in the lane).

Grudging though this favorable placement may be, I can at least acknowledge that Emma herself is the least of my problems with this version, and even though Beckinsale’s acting is a bit sketchy at certain points, she also has some truly great moments, especially her interaction with Robert Martin at the end of the film. This portrayal is consistent, and Emma’s better qualities aren’t overpowered by her negative ones.

Rating: 4/5 Half-finished portraits

Number 1: 2009

Portrayed by: Romola Garai

Age at time of filming: 26

And in a shocking twist—I’m kidding this is neither shocking nor unexpected to anyone who knows me or has read my blog/reviews of the Emma adaptations. Am I totally biased? Probably. I don’t care, this is a completely subjective list. Here, finally—my first and true love as Emma Woodhouse—is Romola Garai. I suppose it’s also not surprising that the first actress I ever saw in the role would still be my favorite a decade on. I just love everything about this interpretation of the character. She rides the very difficult line of being bright, caring and intelligent, while also being completely naïve and lacking in social savvy (in her own age-group at least), coddled, and painfully sure of her own self-importance.

Even though Garai was 25 or 26 at the time (far too old for the character—almost as old as Doran Godwin) her energy and charisma are enough that she’s able to carry it off convincingly. Everything about this Emma screams youth, and when Emma’s child-like social ignorance is her most prominent characteristic, it feels authentic and natural. Equally authentic are her emotions—her love for her family, her dynamic with Knightley, he exasperation, patience, and concern with Harriet. Most of all though, this Emma seems to experience the most maturation in the last quarter of the story. Box Hill really feels like a turning point—not just a chastened young woman, but a true coming-of-age moment. Emma faces a reckoning here that begins a chain reaction culminating in her realization of her feelings for Knightley, and everything from the writing to Garai’s performance conveys the magnitude of this shift in Emma’s life.

This version of the character seems the most… complete to me. Somehow, between Romola Garai’s vibrancy, Sandy Welch’s screenplay and Jim O’Hanlon’s direction, this interpretation takes an extremely divisive character and helps the viewer understand just why everyone in Highbury loves Emma Woodhouse.

Rating: 5/5 Half-finished portraits

~~~~

If you liked this, check out my rankings of Mr. and Mrs. Weston

[lokiondisneyplus]

Director Kate Herron calls from her childhood bedroom. She's staying at her parents' home in Southeast London for the summer, having spent the past year apart due to the pandemic and directing her latest series, Marvel's Loki. "It's so surreal seeing the show go out," she says over Zoom, "and being in the room that I was last in as a teenager."

Loki's first three episodes have seen the God of Mischief (Tom Hiddleston) team up with Agent Mobius (Owen Wilson) and the all-powerful Time Variance Authority to track down a fugitive Variant of himself: A female Loki that goes by Sylvie (Sophia Di Martino) who's set on blowing up the Sacred Timeline and, with it, the MCU as we know it.

"My dad, bless him, he was never into Marvel before, but now he's obsessed with it," she says. "When I got the job, he started watching his way through the films, and he's got all these different YouTubers that he now watches for theories, and he tries to get spoilers out of me. He's like, 'What does it mean?!' and I'm like, 'Dad, I can't tell you!' It's very sweet, but very funny."

Now, with three episodes left of the season, she's bracing for their first family viewing experience. "I might not be able to, though. I might be like, 'You have to watch it by yourselves and then we can talk!'" she laughs. "Wait to hear the Loki theme and be like, 'Oh, I can go downstairs now.'"

In the meantime, Herron fielded all of ET's midseason questions about making Loki's bisexuality canon in the MCU, flexing more of his magic than ever before and why Sylvie isn't really Lady Loki or the Enchantress.

We are halfway through the season. Outside your parents, how has the reaction felt so far?

It's been amazing. We had these big ideas in it -- like, about free will and good and evil -- and wanting to [know that] if we're going back in with Loki because he's so beloved, that it's going to be a good story for that character, but some fresh terrain. I think the response has been pretty joyous and it's just so fun seeing what people are liking, what people's theories are. I couldn't be more happy, to be honest.

Being someone who appears pretty online and active on social media, how deep are you going into reading what people say and diving into those theories and all that?

I definitely read a lot of them -- I don't comment on them -- but I used to love Lost and Game of Thrones, and I was on Reddit, commenting, like, "Ooh, maybe it means this or means this," and I think that's the fun thing with our show, right? Our fans are so smart and it's fun seeing what they're getting right and what's not right but is very interesting. The Easter eggs they dig up are always amazing to me. Some of them we put in there, and I'm like, "Well, let's see..." and I'm like, "Oh, they found it!" So, it's really fun tracking it online. It's very weird directing something where you know every frame will be [screen]grabbed by some fans because they're looking for stuff.

I loved your tweet about why it was important for you to confirm that Loki is bisexual in the show. Not really reveal -- because he's bisexual in the comics -- but make that canon. Talk to me about having those conversations with Marvel.

I think it was something very important to everyone. And I felt like, OK, how can we acknowledge this? We have aspects of the story that are there, so how do we build this into the story so it feels earned in the moment? I didn't want it to feel like we were just wedging something in, but we had this beautiful scene where these two characters are being really raw and really honest about who they are, and I was like, "Well, it is a part of who he is and who they are." For me, talking with Michael [Waldron] and Bisha [K. Ali], it just felt like it was the right moment for that line. This episode is really beautiful for me, because it's these two characters getting to know each other, so in that sense, it felt like the right place for that conversation to happen. And I thought it was done really beautifully by the writers.

Obviously, like I've said, it's very personal to me, and I said it was a small step in some ways -- because obviously, he's just talking about it -- but in the bigger scale of things, I'm like, oh no, it's massive actually. If I saw that when I was 10, it would be really big for me. It's been really nice getting comments from people online. Some people were like, "It helped me actually talk about how I feel to my family and helped me come out." And I thought, "Well, if it helped one person do that, then it's worth it."

This is the MCU's first lead character who is openly queer. Did you know that? Were you aware of how big a milestone this would be?

Yeah. Well, in some senses, yes, and in some senses you're never sure, right? Because [Marvel is] so secretive about all their other projects. [Laughs] For me, I was like, I'm telling Loki's story, it's a part of who they are and I just want to acknowledge it. It's canon in the comics and if we can make it canon in the films, that would be amazing. When I came on board, I was like, if there's a way to do this, it would mean a lot to me and, I'm sure, a lot of people. But it was very welcomed, and I think we're all very proud of how we did that.

This may be getting into spoiler territory that you aren't able to talk about, but acknowledging one's sexuality is one important part of representation, seeing it play out through relationships is another. Can we expect to see any further exploration of what it means for Loki to be bisexual in this show?

I'm trying to think how to answer your question. [Laughs] I would say in our story, this is how we acknowledge it. But I hope that that paves the way for deeper exploration.

We're halfway through the season. What were your biggest goals in these first three episodes?

I think the biggest one was obviously, the Loki we're with in this story is on a completely different path, so it was tracking his character in the sense that he basically sees this amazing arc that the other Loki had gone on across the MCU movies, he sees that he reconciles with his brother, but that wasn't him in that moment. He's watching a different version of himself. But seeing that moment and seeing that he has room for growth and change is really interesting with our Loki, because he's in a very different headspace. So, it was tracking, what's familiar about this character from the Loki that we've seen over the last 10 years go from villain to antihero? And what is going to be completely different and completely different sides to this character that we get to now dig our teeth into? That was something really important to me and to Tom and the writing team, and it was really fun unpacking that and what his identity means.

The other challenges, honestly, were just setting up the TVA, because it's outside of time and space and giving that a grounding and a reality and making that feel like a whole new exciting corner of the MCU. That was a big responsibility, and I was really excited by that. And then you have the bigger arc of the story, but you also knowing it's going out weekly on TV. So, how are we going to track this week by week. Where are we leaving the characters and what are we leaving for the audience? Something we always thought about was we knew there'd be discussion week to week, so it was like, "Where are we going to give them certain bits of information across the show?" We wanted to provoke conversation and discussion about even just things like free will, you know?

I will say about the TVA, I'm basically a human Miss Minutes stan account. I think she's the baddest bitch in the MCU. I watch every Miss Minutes fancam that pops up on my Twitter feed.

She's incredible! What I love about it is that she's in our first episode and she actually used to come out of the presentation that Loki watches -- she came out on the screen -- but it was too crazy. We were like, "OK, we can't do that in the first episode. We'll do it in the second episode!" But what I love about her is that we're seeing the TVA through Loki's eyes and it's, like, the status quo, right? And if our status quo is a Southern-talking, Roger Rabbit-style clock, the show is going to probably get quite weird. I think that's what I love about her. And obviously, Tara [Strong] is awesome. Yeah, Miss Minutes is a lot of fun.

You talked about exploring who Loki is and could be. He's always had an arsenal of powers, but in this series, you really get to explore and define what his power set is. What were those conversations like?

That was something else, coming in, I was so excited about. We have six hours of him, let's see some more magic. Because across the comics, he's super powerful, and for example, in the last episode, that's what was so exciting to me about that, the oner at the end of episode 3 was that I've seen a lot of oners but I haven't seen one with magic. So, I was like, let's put loads of magic in there! We get Loki using his telekinesis and his magic blasts and then also Sylvie, as well, and her powers.

For me, it was exciting getting to bring those in in a way that pushed the story forwards. Because I get it, when he first lands in the TVA, they can't use magic, so I know if I was watching, I'd be like, "What? No magic?!" But I think that's the fun thing is, we still have three episodes to go and also it was fun to put him on Lamentis and see him using his powers in different ways. It was definitely something important to me and the team, was to get to show a little bit more of him. But across the films, you can only do so much. Now we have six hours, so it felt like, of course we have to delve into that more.

I don't know if you saw this on Twitter, one of my favorite reactions to episode 3 was someone tweeted a screenshot of Sylvie screaming and her hands glowing and wrote, "she did the meme!!"

[Laughs] That's great!

We've now officially met Sylvie, and we're starting to piece together that this may be sort of a hybrid character of Lady Loki and Sylvie Lushton, the Enchantress. Are you able to confirm that you pulled from both to create your Sylvie? Or is that something that's to be further revealed?

I would say there's more to be delved into. One thing I would say is, like, she's different to the comics. Like, she's a unique character, but obviously, there's things that have been pulled from. I think for her character, she's on the run and she's called Sylvie and she's dyed her hair. The blonde that we associate with Sylvie is played in that sense, but it makes sense for her character within our story. But I would say deeper than that, yeah, there's more to be revealed about her character to comes.

The main thing I would say is: Lady Loki in the comics is a very different character to our character, obviously. I love that character and I think she's got a very different journey. But our Sylvie is a female Loki, in that sense -- because in episode 1 and 2, they know it's a Loki they're tracking -- but I think that's part of the discussion. It's almost like Loki -- as in Tom Loki -- he's like, "Wait, how much of my life have you got? Who are you?" And I think that's the real question is, who is she? So, we will discuss that as the show goes on. Why does she not like being called Loki? What's her past? Where did she come from?

Tom and Sophia have such great chemistry, but how challenging was it for you and Michael and Sophia and the writers to create a character that essentially has to match up with our Loki, who's had however many films to become the fan-favorite character that he is?

It starts in the writing. Because she's a unique creation, and that was exciting and I was intrigued where they were pulling from with the comics. I was like, OK, that's cool. Beyond that, I think it's casting it. Sophia is an incredible actor. I've worked with her before. She has this fire in her and she brings this amazing vulnerability to all her characters, but she's also, like, so funny. It's just, so many of these things she always brings, I was like, they're so Loki. So, I was like, "We've got to get her to read!" And we were just all blown away by her read of it.

She definitely can hold her own. That's the other thing, as well. I know her, and I was like, she will hold her own. I know she will. Because she's going against Tom's Loki and that's such the fun thing about them. Even just on the train, where it's the end of the world and Loki's solution is, "I'm going to have a party and I'm going to have a drink. I'm going to have a lovely time." And her solution is, "I'm not going to have a glass of champagne, thanks. I'm going to focus on the mission of getting off the moon." Those little differences is what's quite fun about them to me. How are they different, and how are they the same?

Was there something you got to do as a director in these first three episodes that you had never done before that you were especially excited or nervous or both to tackle?

I suppose so much of the show, right? Because I've done a lot of drama and a lot of comedy, but they were like, "Here you go! Here's the reins to this massive, genre-driven piece where you have to set up a new corner of the MCU and you're going to have this beloved character." There was a lot to carry. But I'd say in terms of something I was excited about, only because Kevin Feige was teasing me, when we filmed the big oner at the end of episode 3, I was really inspired in the writing, because it sounded like you were really with the characters. I love doing long takes anyway and I remember thinking, "Oh man, this sequence feels like the one that we should do as this oner," because I want the audience to feel like they're with Sylvie and Loki in this moment, and it's also a moment where you finally start to see an apocalypse and it feels more real, because you're seeing the horror and the terror that's going along with that.

For me, that was exciting, but the really cheesy bit that made me so excited is they had these foam rocks that fell on people, but it felt like real movie magic to me. I was so obsessed with the rocks. I was like, "Oh my god. This is like real, big Hollywood filmmaking." And I remember Kevin Feige was like, "You can take a rock home, if you want," and I was like, "Oh my god!" So I have this rock. It's in bubble wrap now, and I'm going to unpack it when I move into my place. But that's probably honestly the most excited I've ever been. [Laughs] I was just so excited by the rocks. Oh, and also, I remember when we were at Roxxcart and Tom gets thrown into those robo dogs, I was obsessed with the robo dogs. He was like, "I think this is the happiest I've ever seen you." So, those are my favorite moments on set. The foam rocks and the robo dogs.

Somebody's going to come into your flat in the future and there's going to be a shelf with just a rock and a robotic dog on it.

Mhmm! And I'll be like, "Yeah, guys, I did something." [Laughs] They'll be like, "What is this...?" But the foam rocks are genuinely amazing, because they look like real, heavy rocks, but they're so light. I was so fascinated with them. I was so excited. I made a lot of low budget stuff before this, so it was a big deal to me.

My favorite part of the first three episodes is the Kate Berlant cameo. How did that come to be?

Basically, I love comedy and my producer, Kevin Wright, does as well, and we were trying to think of people that could be fun. We've got Josh [Fadem] in episode 1, and that was a miracle. I just spoke to her about the part and was like, "This is a very small role, but if you're interested, you're very talented and you're so funny." And she was like, "You know what? That sounds really fun. Renaissance faire? Yeah, I'll come do it." So, it was very kind of her to come down and do that for us. She's so funny, man. She's so funny.

Do you let her riff at all?

We did. We have a lot of alts and a lot of very extended bits of her talking to the Minutemen. I think there's one where she talks about a bird show at the faire. She's so funny. I was very flattered and grateful that she did that for us.

I'm going to start the #ReleaseTheKateBerlantCut campaign. I want a whole episode of her alts. Or she can be the new Stan Lee and cameo in every MCU project. Before I let you go, if you had to choose one word to tease these upcoming three episodes, what is that word?

Hmm. I thought of one word, but then I'm like, it's spoiler-y, so I can't say that. [Laughs] Oh, one word. Exciting? I have to say "exciting," because I can't say the other one I wanted to say!

[scifigeneration]

Versions of Han Solo's blaster exist – and they're way more powerful than real lightsabers would be

by Martin Archer

Harrison Ford as Han Solo with his blaster in the old Star Wars triology. BagoGamesFlickr, CC BY-SA

People who think physics is boring couldn’t be more wrong. It can explain everything from spooky interactions on the tiny scale of atoms and particles to how the entire universe behaves. As if that wasn’t enough, it can also be used to assess how realistic futuristic technology in science fiction is. My area of expertise – plasma physics – can explain many aspects of both lightsabers and the Death Star within Star Wars lore, for example.

I’ve now worked out how feasible the blaster weapons used by, among others, the Star Wars character Han Solo are – and how they compare with lightsabers. In fact, real life versions of these weapons have already been developed. So with the prequel film Solo: A Star Wars Story being released, it seemed fitting to share this “research”.

The key to understanding Star Wars technology is plasmas – a so-called “fourth state of matter” (in addition to solids, liquids and gases). This comprises freely flowing electrically charged particles which naturally interact with electric and magnetic fields. Plasmas are common in space but they rarely exist naturally on Earth. However, it is possible to produce them in laboratories.

Powerful plasmoids

A common misconception about blasters is that they are laser weapons. But within the Star Wars canon, people realised that this wouldn’t make sense. Instead writers stated that a blaster was “any type of ranged weapon that fired bolts of intense plasma energy, often mistaken as lasers” and that it “converted energy rich gas to a glowing particle beam that could melt through targets”. This means that blaster bolts (glowing projectiles) are simply blobs of plasma – similar to a lightsaber flying through the air.

Han Solo’s BlasTech DL-44 heavy blaster pistol on display at Star Wars Launch Bay at Disney’s Hollywood Studios. Quarax/wikipedia, CC BY-SA

Coherent masses of plasma and their associated magnetic fields are known as plasmoids. Within the Earth’s protective shield in space – the magnetosphere – plasmoids are commonly generated by a poorly understood process called magnetic reconnection. This is an explosive reconfiguration of magnetic field lines that can take place wherever there is plasma present, in particular when plasmas are forced together. When this happens in our magnetosphere, charged particles are accelerated into the top of the atmosphere – causing the aurora, or northern lights. A huge amount of material is also ejected away from the Earth as plasmoids.

However, it isn’t easy to create plasmoids on Earth. Many of the demonstrations that we can do (unlike the ones in space) produce structures which quickly expand and dissipate in the air. The solution to this problem is to use magnets – their fields can contain the hot plasma.

However, blaster bolts are projectiles so it’s not possible to have an externally powered magnet present at all times during their rapid journey. Thankfully, though, there is a solution. As plasmas are highly conductive, it is possible to set up electrical currents within the plasmoid itself. These currents, like all currents, generate magnetic fields that can confine the plasma. Such arrangements are known as spheromaks and they have received renewed interest in plasma physics experiments over the last 20 years.

Real versions

One way to create a spheromak is to use a “plasma railgun”, a device which uses an external magnet to induce currents in the plasma as well accelerate it up to high speeds. In fact, speeds of 200 km/s have been achieved with these spheromaks lasting some hundreds of microseconds. This is very impressive and certainly within the realms of use as a weapon.

Indeed, from the 1970s onward, the SHIVA Star programme (named after the multi-limbed Hindu god) at the Air Force Research Laboratory in Albuquerque, New Mexico, conducted various “arms” of research into this kind of plasma physics. One of these, known as MARAUDER (magnetically accelerated ring to achieve ultrahigh directed energy and radiation), was one of several US government efforts to develop projectiles based on plasmas.

The weapon was able to produce doughnut-shaped rings of plasma and balls of lightning that exploded with devastating thermal and mechanical effects when hitting their target and produced a pulse of electromagnetic radiation that could scramble electronics. However, its status as of 1993 remains classified.

The temperatures achieved in such devices so far are up to a thousand times hotter than the surface of the sun. With enough plasma in each bolt these would cause huge amounts of damage, so the blaster as presented in the Star Wars films looks to be quite feasible indeed.

But how would these real life blaster weapons fare against the other iconic Star Wars weapon, the lightsaber? A blaster bolt is essentially equivalent to a lightsaber blade, just without the hilt. But as I’ve mentioned before, magnetic reconnection is unavoidable when two magnetically confined plasmas meet. This is the case when two lightsabers collide, causing explosive destruction of both the weapons and the people holding them. However, with a blaster you are far away from that explosion – leaving you totally unscathed.

So it turns out that Han Solo was right when he said “Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side.”

Martin Archer is a Space Plasma Physicist at Queen Mary University of London

This article was originally published on The Conversation, a content partner of Sci Fi Generation.