#they’ve cut so much stuff in the past that has been referenced in interviews i really | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

hermannsthumb · 3 years ago

Note

"different young (rebound) hunk on his arm every week…newton geiszler who?" CAN YOU WRITE THIS FIC PLEASE? Hermann as the new heartthrob of the science world, cheekbones that can cut glass, baby gay scientists everywhere using appalling math-related pick-up lines in an attempt to be the booty call of the week. Newton catches a glimpse of him at a fundraiser and the Precursors have to stop him from crying with lust.

so tragically I plotted a whole fic for this and then came back and realized this prompt involves PRU but I liked my idea too much so unfortunately I won’t be filling the PRU part 😔 but I DO love heartthrob hermann sooooooooo. this can be pre-PRU if you want to make it sad actually CW for drinking and mild allusion to not sfw stuff. when will these boys talk about their feelings?

-------------------------------------------

Hermann doesn’t like going out to bars at the best of times, least of all after he’s had the sort of exceptionally long day he’s had today (fighting his way through airports and hotel lobbies, fielding interview questions, having not even a minute’s break from Newton), but even he will admit that the one Newton has dragged him along to tonight could be far worse. The sorts of bars Newton fancied throughout their stint at the Hong Kong Shatterdome tended to be far hipper, far more becoming for a man of his (and, admittedly, Hermann’s) age, and likely aimed at tourists: pounding music, dark rooms, neon lighting, overpriced drinks, an inability to navigate through throngs of dancing bodies without bumping into at least half a dozen people. For that reason Hermann’s blood practically ran cold earlier that evening when, fresh out of their latest television interview, Newton insisted that Hermann needed to unwind a little. That Newton would help him unwind a little.

Hermann was pleasantly surprised to find that though the music (a live band) is still loud, and drink prices are still inflated, at least he can see Newton, and at least the few people dancing are dancing far away from them. And, well, perhaps it’s made him more amenable to (mostly) matching Newton drink-for-drink, and to indulging him in knocking back not one, but two rounds of the most disgusting-looking pink shots of all time, and— “Look, dude,” Newton declares, tossing an arm around Hermann’s shoulder. He’s shouting and leaning in too-close to Hermann, not because he’s intoxicated, but rather to be heard over the band, which has launched into a rather enthusiastic cover of some song Hermann’s sure he’s heard blaring from Newton’s iTunes before. His stubble tickles the shell of Hermann’s ear. “Just say it with me. It’s that easy. R-e-t-i-r-e-m—”

“We are thirty-five,” Hermann says. “We can’t just—”

“We absolutely can,” Newton says. He nudges his cocktail glass into Hermann’s chest, sloshing a bit of hot pink Watermelon Crush on his neat button-up. Hermann stifles a sigh; the shirt is brand new, bought just that morning for the interview, and will already be needing a wash. And smelling like liquified hard candy for the rest of the evening. “You and me, lying on a beach somewhere, sleeping in until noon every day, learning how to—to fish, or paint, or whatever the hell we want—”

“Not a beach,” Hermann says immediately. “I’m bloody well sick of beaches. Oceans, lakes, bays—no more."

Indulging Newton’s ridiculous little fantasy, even for a moment, is a mistake: Newton’s face lights up in a grin, and he tucks his arm around Hermann’s shoulder to pull Hermann flush against him. Hermann’s barstool wobbles dangerously. “Okay, no beaches. Far away from any coastline. The mountains, then.” It’d be just their luck, Hermann thinks, if the next Breach reopened far away from the ocean, too. Like it followed them somehow. “Let’s move to Switzerland or something and buy a log cabin or a cave and become weird recluses. I’ll learn how to ski, and you can grow a beard, and we can buy all our furniture at Ikea—” He frowns. “Is Ikea from Switzerland? Sweden? I haven’t been since college.”

“I don’t recall ever agreeing to move anywhere with you in the first place,” Hermann says, “let alone retire to do so. What on earth makes you think I’d follow you to Switzerland? I’ve no interest whatsoever in Switzerland.”

“Uh, because we’re best friends?” Newton says. “Anyway, what else would you do?”

“Anything,” Hermann says. He begins to tick off all the possibilities on his fingers while Newton watches him, unimpressed. “I could stay in Hong Kong—I’m sure they’d appreciate help monitoring what remains of the Breach. Or I could move back to England and resume my old teaching post, if they’d have me.” Hermann knows they’d have him; they’ve already sent him at least a dozen emails practically begging him to accept tenure. “Or back to Germany, with my parents.”

“I could totally do all that, too,” Newton says. “Well—not the Germany thing. No offense, dude, but your parents kinda suck. I don’t think I want them as my roommates.”

Hermann decides not to mention that the odds are very high they would not want Newton as a roommate, either. He’s tempted to ask Newton if he meant what he said about them being best friends—for Hermann can’t recall the last time someone called him their best friend, if ever—but Newton’s arm is slipping from his shoulders, and Newton is pulling out his mobile phone and tapping away frantically at it. Hermann feels strangely bereft without his touch. “Okay,” Newton says, his eyes scanning the screen, “Ikea was founded in Sweden, but they moved headquarters in—”

“Excuse me?”

Hermann and Newton both startle, Newton nearly dropping his phone, and the bartender who’d interrupted them smiles apologetically. He’s holding a pint of what appears to be beer. “Sorry to bother you guys,” he says to them, “but this is from the young man over there in the pink shirt.”

At the sight of the drink Newton brightens and puffs out his chest visibly. Bloody perfect, Hermann thinks. Just want Newton needs—another boost to his ego. “No sweat,” Newton says. He tosses his mobile to the bar counter casually and reaches to accept the glass. “Please tell him I’m super flattered, but—”

“Actually, sir,” the bartender interrupts, and—to Hermann’s surprise—slides the glass away from Newton’s grasp and over to Hermann. Hermann takes it without a word, not quite daring to believe it. Down the bar, out of the corner of his eye, he can see the flash of a bright pink shirt, but he can’t quite make himself turn to acknowledge the mystery admirer. Is that rude of him? No one has ever sent him a drink before. He’s not quite sure of the etiquette. “It’s, um, not for you.”

Newton deflates like a popped balloon. A blush spreads across his cheeks, barely visible beneath his freckles, which have come out again in the spring sunlight now that they’re not spending all their time in the Shatterdome basement. Hermann likes the look of them; he thinks they’re sweet, and that if he traced his fingertip across them they’d make a pattern of some sort, like a constellation. Not that he ever would, of course. Newton would surely ridicule him. "Right, duh,” Newton says.

He waits until the bartender is gone to round on Hermann. “Dude!” he says, almost accusatory, “Fourth time this week!”

“It is not,” Hermann protests. It’s weak to his own ears: even he isn’t thick enough to miss the sudden influx of attention he’s gotten since their first television interview last month. Hermann was never exactly popular, never exactly the sort the drive people wild with lust or romantic longing, yet it seems as if he can’t go anywhere these days without turning a few heads (including mid-twentysomething heads, mortifyingly enough) and getting a few cellular numbers slipped into his hand. Yesterday, a young man on the metro asked Hermann if he might like to see a movie some time. The day before that, another man wearing a jean jacket full of enamel pins stepped up to Hermann in a Starbucks and asked him if he could call-cu-later. Last week, a starry-eyed college student stopped Hermann outside a hotel to ask him to sign his Calculus 3 textbook, excitedly telling Hermann he switched degrees to astrophysics not a few days prior after reading an interview with Hermann in a rather obscure pop science magazine, and had blushed when Hermann thanked him. Newton had laughed at that one, and advised the young man to give biology a shot instead. (Newton had gotten very cross when he was promptly ignored, and in referencing the incident later, rather bitterly called the student an annoying little punk.)

This is to say nothing, of course, of the multiple news articles (listicles, as Newton calls them) Newton has forced him to read about himself on something called Buzzfeed, which have apparently helped to cement Hermann’s fifteen minutes of fame. One was called Twelve Times Dr. Hermann Gottlieb Was A Fashion Icon and was accompanied with a rather embarrassing array of candid photos of Hermann. Newton has been particularly incensed over that one.

“It is,” Newton says. “At least third. You know, I think the worst part is that you’re not even getting laid. Dudes are throwing themselves at you left and right—”

“Am I meant to go home with any random stranger who shows me the briefest bit of attention?” Hermann snaps. “I like to think I have somewhat higher standards than that.” I’m not like you, he nearly adds, but decides that it might perhaps be too cruel, especially considering that Newton has not gotten a fraction of the attention Hermann has over the past month. He remembers what it used to be like in the Shatterdome, is all; Newton seemed to like anyone who would give him the time of day. Most of his romances didn’t fare well for that reason.

“I’m just saying you could, and you’re not,” Newton says.

Hermann taps his finger against the pint glass, watching bubbles release from the side and rise to the top. When he finally takes a sip, it makes him wrinkle his nose. He’s not usually much for drinking. “I don’t like IPAs,” he says.

“I’ll take it,” Newton says, and the corner of his mouth hitches up in a grin, “as long as your boyfriend won’t get offended.”

Considering that Newton has only just finished following up his two shots with a cocktail, Hermann questions the decision, but slides him the glass anyway. Newton starts on it at once. Hermann wonders if he’ll need to call them a rideshare back to their hotel tonight; he’s not sure he can manage guiding a intoxicated Newton through the streets of the city on foot, especially not after a day that’s been rather unkind on his hip. “Only I suppose I have trouble believing it,” Hermann admits.

“Believing what?” Newton says.

“That they’re genuinely interested,” Hermann says.

To Hermann’s surprise, Newton snorts. “Nah, dude. You’ve got—” He taps Hermann’s chest, and leaves his hand there. “—sex appeal. You’ve got the, like, soulful eyes, and the movie star eyelashes, and the cheekbones and—” He drags his fingertip along Hermann’s jaw, and Hermann masks his sharp flinch in a cough, hoping Newton can’t feel his face heating up. He doesn’t remember if Newton has ever touched his face before. It feels shockingly intimate. “People think it’s super hot.” He takes another sip of Hermann’s drink. "Plus, you’re so—like—uptight. It makes people wonder what you’re bottling up.”

Hermann arches an eyebrow. “Bottling up?”

“In a sexy way,” Newton clarifies.

He settles his hand back on Hermann’s chest. Hermann licks his lips. Has Newton wondered those sorts of things about him, too? “You’ve had—too much to drink,” he says.

“A little bit,” Newton agrees. “I’m right, though. I like this shirt, by the way, it’s a nice cut on you.” He toys with one of the shirt’s buttons, and when he speaks again it’s in a low voice that makes Hermann’s mouth feel strangely dry. Hermann has never heard it from him before. “Wanna go back to the hotel and rent a movie or something?”

He’s peering at Hermann through his eyelashes, smiling in an odd little way. How terribly close they are to each other, Hermann realizes. He can count every tiny scratch in Newton’s eyeglasses, every fleck of gold in his eyes, every freckle on his cheeks. He wonders if Newton really wants to rent a movie; he wonders what Newton would do if Hermann closed the inch between them, and... “I,” Hermann stammers, gaze fixed on Newton’s mouth (stained pinker from his drink), “er, yes, only—only I feel as if I ought to thank the gentleman who sent me—”

At once, Newton drops away from him. His face hardens. His smile hardens, too. “Oh, right. I forgot,” he says. He inclines his head down the bar. “Pink shirt, right?”

Hermann casts his eyes about, searching for the pink-shirted stranger. When he doesn’t immediately spot him, a small bubble of relief swells within him. Perhaps he left, perhaps he decided he’s not interested in Hermann after all, perhaps Hermann is free to go back to the hotel with Newton and watch a film and argue about retirement and… “Oh, there,” Newton says. A man catches Hermann’s eye and waves timidly. He’s wearing a pink button-up.

“Bugger,” Hermann mutters. His admirer is not unattractive—in fact, he’s the opposite, with curly hair and glasses even thicker than Newton’s—which Newton seems to notice, too. He claps Hermann on the shoulder, hard enough that Hermann sways with it.

“He’s totally cute,” Newton says, “and he’s totally into you. You gotta at least get his number.” He takes another large sip of Hermann’s drink. “Better yet, get yourself laid. You could use it.”

Hermann feels the oddest sense of whiplash. Just a minute prior, he was about to kiss Newton (and he was pretty sure Newton was going to kiss him back), and now Newton is practically throwing him at another man. Hermann does not want to get anyone’s phone number—he wants to fall asleep in his stiff hotel bed to some absolutely awful science-fiction movie Newton picks out. “Newton,” he says, “weren’t we going to—?”

“No biggie, we can do movie night tomorrow instead,” Newton says. He nudges Hermann’s calf with the toe of his boot, and holds out his cane to him. Hermann feels his heart begin to sink. “I won’t wait up for you. Just give me a heads up if he wants to go back to our place, and I’ll make sure to stay out longer.”

“I’m sure it’ll only take a moment,” Hermann says. He’ll make sure it only takes a moment.

“No biggie,” Newton repeats. He raises his glass to Hermann in a mock toast. “Good luck!”

When Hermann looks back over his shoulder, halfway to the man in the pink shirt, it’s to see Newton’s stool vacant, and the back of Newton’s leather jacket swishing out the bar doors.

#newmann #maria's fanfiction tag #Anonymous

62 notes · View notes

oswincoleman · 4 years ago

Text

2020 Jenna Coleman’s Year in Review, part 3: Jenna and the Media

To summarize all of the following in one sentence; it is absolutely despicable how terribly print media treated Jenna Coleman this year.

The Daily Mail’s obsessive stalking of Jenna

Typically, the Daily Mail releases about 5 sets of paparazzi pictures of Jenna Coleman each year (not counting instances when she was seen attending, arriving, or leaving an event). This year, there were 21 such instances. It seems as though the Daily Mail, desperate to keep their celebrity section going, have increased their efforts of stalking celebrities. The pictures themselves reveal a lot about the kinds of methods the paparazzi employed throughout the year to fill the tabloid with nonsensical repeated stories, and desperate attempts to turn boring uneventful stalker pictures into somewhat interesting stories.

It all started out so well, with what might be my least disliked set of paparazzi pictures of Jenna. You could see Tom Hughes buying her a new bike for her birthday. Jenna could be seen beaming ear to ear while riding it, and Tom was visibly happy at having found such a great gift for her. The pictures captured such a beatiful moment that provided a great light during a dark time.

Jenna was pictured by the paparazzi once in a while over the next few months, mainly in Islington, and other nearby areas of London. The frequency was already alarming, but the pictures and articles weren’t nearly as intrusive as they would become later in the year. That all changed thanks to one particular article from The Sun.

The Sun and their invented rumour of Jenna and Tom’s split

On the 11th of July The Sun dropped a bombshell. They claimed that Jenna and Tom had split, after being together for four years. It didn’t take long for this news to be picked up by numerous other sites, who also wrote their own take on this news, eager to not be too late to the party.

And yet, where was the proof? Did The Sun have any evidence for it’s claim whatsoever? No, they didn’t. Their “evidence” is that an “onlooker” (aka the paparazzi taking pictures of them) said:

She seemed pretty subdued. She’s usually very smiley, but she and Tom looked really flat when they were talking — it was clearly not an easy conversation.

I wonder why they might look subdued when being stalked by a paparazzi, any ideas? The only other evidence is that an unnamed “source” who has no justified authority to speak on these matters said about them:

They are trying to salvage a friendship but obviously these are trying times, and it’s not easy. Tom actually helped Jenna with her new place, and they’ve met up this week to talk things through and keep everything as friendly and civil as possible. Both Tom and Jenna are terribly sad, but the relationship ran its course. There was no third party involved. Jenna’s career is going from strength to strength, she’s being offered increasingly more roles abroad, especially Los Angeles, and she wants to focus on this while she’s still young.

Notice how this “source” said a friendship. Not their friendship. A friendship. Not their relationship, but the relationship. Then there is the incoherent nature of these comments. Why does this “source” never directly say anything as simple as “Jenna and Tom ended their relationship”? All of this makes it seem as if The Sun saw the opportunity to invent a “rumour” of their split, and then cut certain parts of a text from the “source” to remove the context, and to make it seem as if the “source” was talking about Jenna’s and Tom’s split, even though they were actually talking about something else entirely. Taking a few choice segments from a long text, rearranging them, and telling the reader what the are supposed to say, will allow you to get readers to think pretty much whatever you want them to think.

But it should also be noted that not a single part in the above text provided anything to justify this “source” as having any authority whatsoever. In fact, the ability to look at this in retrospect puts even more doubt on the above quotes from the “source“. Jenna hasn’t had any role in LA except a tiny insignificant role in Captain America. And as pictures of Jenna and Tom since this article showed, they are still living together. Jenna does have a new house in the Cotswolds, but she has still not moved out of her London home, more than 5 months after this “source” seemingly claimed that that is exactly what she had done. In her recent interview for BBC Radio 1, Jenna was in her London house (the one that The Sun and the Daily Mail had claimed she had moved out of in July). And just briefly before and afterwards, Tom had also been seen at that very same house. They have both been seen there several times in all the months since The Sun first published these fake “rumours“.

The article in itself had more problems than truthful sentences. The authors of it even forgot how to write Jenna’s name halfway through, said that Jenna and Tom had been together for 4 years, even though they it’s been 5 years already, they got names, roles, places wrong, and didn’t bother checking their work afterwards. There are probably more mistakes in that article than there are sentences. Does that constitute a trustworthy source?

Oh and a friend of Tom had also confirmed that the breakup rumours told by The Sun were lies, that they didn’t break up. In the last 5 months, there has been more and more evidence to suggest that they didn’t break up at all. But that didn’t stop many news outlets from repeating The Sun’s lies, without ever questioning their validity. It’s like a repeat of 2015, when The Sun claimed that Jenna was dating Prince Harry. Countless media jumped on board with that, never even questioning the validity of the claim being made. And to this day there are still news outlets saying that Jenna dated Prince Harry, even though Jenna very clearly said that those rumours were completely wrong, on live TV.

This whole issue has been very illuminating in terms of which media outlets can not trusted; which news sites just copy and paste newsworthy articles, not bothering to question the validity of the claims being made, not trying to do their own investigation, not even considering the possibility that the claims could be wrong, not even if they are made by a highly dubious source with a long history of lying and deceiving. It’s startling how many news sites care more for jumping on the bandwaggon than accuracy, truth, or the principles of good journalism. Many sites that I had thought to be more respectable have lost that respect.

And even once the media will finally catch on to the lie that this story is, it will probably still persist. I won’t be surprised if we will still get media articles referencing Jenna and Tom’s 2020 “breakup” and subsequent “reunion” for many years to come.

Subsequent intensive stalking by the Daily Mail

Once the “news” of their alleged breakup was revealed, the Daily Mail decided to show it’s worst side. They ramped up attempts to stalk Jenna as often as possible. They stalked her right to her doorstep. So many of the paparazzi pictures since July were taken right in front of her and Tom’s house (though of course the Daily Mail never admitted where those pictures were taken, because that would contradict the story they wanted to tell). So it seems as if the paparazzi were just waiting in front of her house every few days, to see her either leaving or arriving at the house that she had, according to them, moved out of months ago.

The Dail Mail thought that they could test the gullibility of their readers even more than The Sun had already done. They pictured Jenna giving Tom the keys to their car. It is completely unambiguous that she is handing over car keys, not house keys. And yet, the Daily Mail made a huge deal of apparently capturing THE moment when Jenna gave Tom back the keys to the house they used to live in. And people actually believed it, even though the picture very clearly shows something very different. It’s times like this that I really lose faith in humanity, when a very dubious tabloid writes “this is a circle” below a picture of a square, and people genuinely believe that what is shown in the picture is a circle, and won’t be swayed by any evidence to the contrary. It sounds absurd, but that is what happened.

One week later, a paparazzi saw Jenna and Tom at the house that Jenna had allegedly already moved out of. The paparazzi even wrote “Have Jenna Coleman and Tom Hughes reunited?” alongside the pictures they took. But of course this contradicted the successful story the Daily Mail wanted to tell about them breaking up, so they obviously did not abandon their wrong narrative in favour of the truth. Once the paparazzi realized that the Daily Mail was willing to go with the story of their breakup, no matter the lack of evidence for it, and the mountain of evidence against it, they took special care to never picture Jenna and Tom together, even though the paparazzi did see them together several times over the next few months. Several pictures sets feature Jenna, and Tom at the same place at the same time, but the paparazzi deliberately waited for them to stand apart, before taking pictures of them separately.

In September, when Jenna was packing her stuff for a weekend trip with her school friends, the Daily Mail alleged that they had captured the exact moment in which Jenna was moving out of her house that she had lived in together with Tom. They never bothered mentioning that their new article completely contradicted all their previous articles, and yet people still believed the lies told by them. Unsurprisingly, time would tell that once again, the Daily Mail was wrong. And yet, it seems that the phrase “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me” does not apply to many people who can be fooled by the same lie again, and again, and again, and again, even though the new lies from the same dubious source always contradict the previous lies.

The intensive stalking of Jenna in this period seems to have had one main goal; to picture Jenna together with a possible new boyfriend, so that the Daily Mail would be the first to announce her new relationship. But no matter how hard and how long they tried, not even the liars at the Daily Mail could spin the frequent paparazzi pictures to indicate any new relationship with anyone other than Tom.

The Daily Mail’s Publishing of pictures of Jenna’s and Tom’s house

On the 24th of October, Jenna and Tom put their house in London up for sale, and attached several pictures of the interior of their house, featuring all their possessions, which provide a lot of insight into them, and their private lives. The listing of their house never mentioned thier names. Unfortunately, 3 days later, the Daily Mail got word of this, and knowing their precise address from all the stalking they did, published the pictures of their house on their front page.

Now I have to say, their house looks absolutely beautiful, they made such a wonderful job of decorating it to their tastes. But I really hated how these pictures were associated with them, and how these were then seen by many thousands of people, who now were able to learn very intimate things about them. Who could, in less than a minute, find out the exact address at which they are living. Jenna and Tom have tried their best to keep this a secret, and to not attach their names to this, but in vain.

Jenna and Tom have had a very clear approach to discussing their personal lives in public. They don’t say a word about it, ever. I think they are absolutely right to do so, because it is nobody’s business, and they deserve to at least have a tiny bit of privacy left, that was not yet completely invaded by the media. So this must have been a very great shock for them, to see how the Daily Mail discussed their house and their possessions in great detail, to many thousands of people.

It was a horrendous thing to do, and the real magnitude of how hurtful this was to Jenna and Tom can be seen in what happened within the next day. They no longer listed their house as being up for sale, got all websites featuring it, and the pictures from it removed, and even managed to pressure the Daily Mail into deleting their article. Unfortunately, the damage was already done, and could not be reversed. It is entirely possible, that Jenna and Tom would have already sold the house, had it not been for the Daily Mail’s horrendous decision to share these pictures to all of their readers.

Obviously, given the other “rumours” that the Daily Mail had repeated for months already, the selling of their house only had one reason; the proof of the breakup of Jenna and Tom. They even went so far as to ignore the fact that the house had been put up for sale by both Jenna and Tom, and instead said that Tom alone had put it up for sale. They ignored the fact that they would have no reason to sell the house if they had split; one of them could just keep on living there. They ignored that over the next two days their paparazzi pictured Jenna entering and leaving the very same house that they had claimed she had moved out of in July, and then moved out of again in September, the same house that was now up for sale.

Tatler and The Times

This year, Jenna had two photoshoots and accompanying interviews; one for Tatler, and a second one for The Times. I think the style of the Tatler photoshoot doesn’t suit Jenna at all. But The Times’ photoshoot looks amazing, but unfortunately, only 2 pictures of it have been released so far.

As for the interviews, although they both were initially intended to be about The Serpent, most of it (for Tatler), and a significant portion of it (The Times) was devoted to other issues, most notably, to badger Jenna repeatedly about her personal life, even though she made it very clear from the beginning, and has done so far years, that she was not going to say a word about it.

It is quite depressing to see both of these magazines blindly trust the lies told by The Sun without evidence, and repeatedly ask Jenna questions directly about that. If the rumours were true, those are painful questions, and if they’re not, those are still very painful questions. And even besides the repeated pestering of Jenna on a topic she wasn’t going to discuss with them, there were some unpleasant parts in both interviews, with the interviewers making quite disrepectful comments to Jenna. It’s a shame that these magazines felt the need to resort to this.

But on the plus side, both of these interviews provided several interesting points, for instance the mention of Jenna’s upcoming secret big-budget fantasy project in The Times’ interview, or Jenna’s story of taking a spaniel into Boots.

BBC TV and Radio Interviews

In the last 2 weeks, as promotion for The Serpent has finally gotten started, Jenna took part in a TV interview for BBC Breakfast, and three radio interviews, one of which was filmed. A segment of that can be seen here: https://youtu.be/4FqH8GvxVzA

These interviews were all really lovely, especially the last one, which was by far the longest, most informative, and most interesting. The interviewer, Ali Plumb, did his research on Jenna really well, and it’s a real joy to watch. I think this has become my favourite interview with Jenna that I have ever seen.

Since this post is already getting very long, I will not be discussing these in detail here, but you can always look up my recent posts in which I was discussing them, in the last few days.

#jenna coleman #jenna louise coleman #year in review #year in review 2020

18 notes · View notes

lightwoodsmagic · 5 years ago

Note

Hi! So I agree Liam is queer, and the pink🔺in his video compels me not to ignore it. I saw one of your Ziam posts making its rounds after the SIU video, so I thought you were the person to ask. I only joined the fandom after Zayn left, and I’ve always had a hard time finding info on why and how that played out at the time (nobody seems to agree). Could you elaborate (or link to previous posts) on why you think Ziam is still a thing, and how they are telling us? Thanks for your insight so far!

Hi anon!

Thank you so much for thinking of me! I’m sorry it’s taken me a little while to answer, but it took me a bit to gather all the info I wanted (while I should’ve been working oop).

Okay, please know that this post is gonna be loooooong, so I’ve popped it under the cut.

You’re right about nobody agreeing on Zayn leaving the band, and it makes sense that people have differing views. It’s such a complicated thing; there was a lot happening at the time.

I’m going to start by saying there’s a brilliant masterpost about Zayn leaving here. It’s incredibly detailed, talks about pretty much every aspect of it, and there’s so much to look into. It’s also wonderful to demonstrate how much the boys and Zayn still hinted at things and loved each other, like Harry using Zayn’s mic one night, Liam talking about him fondly in interviews, Niall still calling him by his nickname, and Louis wearing his clothes.

It’s a long read, but incredibly worth it, as it this stunting timeline.

Everyone is absolutely entitled to their opinion, so I’ll just give you mine. I’m gonna keep it (kind of) short though. A lot of what I’m about to say can be found in the masterposts I’ve linked above.

I believe that Zayn leaving was out of his control, and was never completely his decision. I believe that he was set to return, but for some reason, the plan changed. Mind of Mine was apparently written before he left, and while I think he would’ve been working on solo music before he left (and that all of them were to some extent), to tease an album right after the announcement that he left makes no sense. A contract like the one that 1D had/has with Syco would cost an obscene amount of money to get out of, and Zayn’s net worth didn’t change at all. They made it seem so simple in the very few interviews with Zayn afterwards, saying he just called his security, got on a plane, and left. I think Zayn struggled a lot with everything, they all did, but I don’t think he could’ve just left. There were articles put out about his new album that mentioned Simco and everything, but when people pointed out that it didn’t make sense with the narrative that Simon felt ‘betrayed’, the references were removed straight away.

There’s also a very solid theory that MoM was counted as One Direction’s sixth and final contracted album, and it really stands up. Check it out!

Look. There’s a lot to unpack with the whole situation, and I’ve hardly touched on it at all, but I really do encourage you to look into it with everything I’ve linked above 💞

Okay, now onto the second part of your ask!

Ziam. My loooovveesss.

I’m going to start by saying that there’s a lot of ways that Liam and Zayn have hinted that they’re still together, and honestly? The boys ain’t even subtle about it. I’ll start by talking about heaps of ways they’ve done that since Zayn left!

Alright, let’s start with the fact that they WILL NOT STOP LIKING, REBLOGGING, AND RETWEETING POSTS FROM ZIAM ACCOUNTS.

(x) (x)

These aren’t subtle Ziam accounts, and it’s not just these examples. This also isn’t just something in the past; that bottom right one references Stack It Up.

They’ve also both reposted fanart from a well known Ziam where each drawing referenced the other one.

(x)

The Zayn art says ‘Love Payne’ on the beanie. Well then.

And the Liam one? That he posted on his personal insta? The artist added the ‘love’ tattoo from Zayn’s hand onto Liam’s. It’s obvious, and it’s not like Liam wouldn’t have noticed that suddenly there was a new tattoo added ON HIS OWN HAND.

Not very subtle, hey.

It’s also not the only shady social media activity related to the boys 👀

There was the time that Liam explained why he’d written ‘personally’ twice in a thank you post in his insta story to Bvlgari.

But he hadn’t. What had happened was that Twitter account @TheZiamNews had made a small mistake, and had actually written it twice. The only explanation was that Liam saw it on a Ziam update page VERY quickly, thought he had made the original mistake, and then explained. Interesting that Liam keeps up to date with them.

There was also the time Liam blocked an account for talking absolute shit about Zayn, or when Herbie Critchlow (a producer from Icarus Falls) retweeted a tweet about Common being about Ziam. Also can’t forget Brandon Colbein posting on insta about some songs he’d written, and somehow there was one for Zayn and one for Liam.

Oh, and when Liam’s friend Andy (who seems to…split the fandom, but alas) posted a video of him listening to Icarus Falls, or every single mirroring insta post Liam and Zayn can’t seem to help making.

And their eyebrow slits! 😊 this goes allllll the way back to One Direction days.

(x)

Now, this is a constant, recurring thing for them over the years.

It’s usually at the same time, and it usually signifies something.

Zayn went ALL OUT one day, just after Z*gi ‘broke up’, and put a slit in his eyebrow, but it wasn’t a normal one. It was in the shape of an L. That fucking sap. Not to be outdone though, Liam popped a lil’ Z in the graphics for his show last year in Japan.

SAPS, THE BOTH OF THEM.

Now, jewellery.

OOOOOF are we in for it now. You’re probably regretting this ask already.

Cartier.

Say that single word around someone who believes in Ziam and you’ve lost them forever.

Back in 2015 (so yes, a while ago but bear with me) during the OTRA tour, Zayn suddenly started wearing a gold Cartier bracelet. It was interesting because Zayn didn’t wear bracelets at the time. It was particularly interesting because Liam had been seen earlier that day with jewellery bags buying a present. Curious.

Or obvious.

Either or.

A similar thing happened when Zayn attended the ‘Straight Outta Compton’ premiere, one of his first appearances after he left the band. He was wearing a Hublot watch, which was also interesting because Zayn didn’t wear watches either.

But GUESS WHERE LIAM HAD BEEN 2 DAYS BEFORE THE PREMIERE?

You’re damn right, anon. It was Hublot.

Now, the Cartier love bracelet.

This picture was posted when Liam was getting ready for the Brits in 2017. For those that don’t know, the Cartier love bracelet has little screws, and can only be undone with a little gold screwdriver that comes with it.

Liam wore it everywhere that year, and so often. It didn’t make sense for it to be ‘given to him by Ch*ryl’, because they would’ve used every opportunity to show that damn screwdriver.

But they didn’t, because she didn’t have it. Zayn did.

There’s also the other matching bracelets they’ve worn by Alexander McQueen.

And also the other time Zayn wore Cartier in his film clip, or the fact that Zayn started wearing a ring on his right ring finger that was sold and marketed by Cartier AS A WEDDING RING.

They also share watches if Zayn decides to wear one, because they’re cute like that.

Now, they also share clothes.

So many clothes, ohmygod.

(x)

A prime example of this actually happened just last year! TWICE! IN NYC WHEN LIAM WAS THERE (obviously to see his husband). Both times, Liam was out and about wearing two of Zayn’s jackets.

It’s also absolutely not a coincidence that when Zayn was staying at G*gi’s apartment on Bond Street, Liam stayed at a hotel a few minutes away a number of times, but when Zayn moved to Soho, Liam suddenly switched hotels to one in Soho, a few minutes away from Zayn’s new place. Just can’t stay away from an old band mate you hardly talk to, hey.

Also can’t ignore Liam wearing numerous Kooples shirts during the time Zayn was doing promotional stuff for them. Husbands givin’ gifts.

NYC isn’t the only city that relates to Ziam though!

Ahhhhhhhh. Ziami. What a time, what a time, what a time (for you and I).

Anyway.

At the start of last year, Liam and Zayn were both in Miami at the same time filming music videos for Let Me and Familiar respectively, arriving either at the same time or a day apart. It was at a time when Zayn was all over his socials, posting poems and selfies and generally being his relaxed, gorgeous self, which wasn’t incredibly common for a while.

People were convinced they could hear Zayn in one of Liam’s insta stories, talking in the background just before Liam realises and raises his voice. It’s definitely not firm though, and Liam has someone in his team with a similar accent, but I’ve linked it so you can judge for yourself! Regardless, we knew they were both there, but it was a fun lil’ talking point!

Anyway, according to people who live in the area and know the coastline, they were in the same area at the same time, and we also knew that Liam wasn’t with Ch*ryl because she was back in the UK. Now, Liam posted an Instagram story the next morning half naked in bed, his 4 tattoo (we’ll get to that) and roses on full display, and saying he’d wrecked his voice.

Well then.

He also posted this.

It was a video, but it was Liam, in his room ‘alone’ with two desserts for breakfast at a time when we knew Zayn was there and no one else was, and he suddenly had no voice.

Okay okay, we get it.

They also consistently reference the number 25, and honestly, no one knows why the fuck.

Just casually on Liam’s jackets and shoes, Zayn’s shoes and a shirt that was sold (even the red and yellow, ffs Zayn), and also Zayn’s NECK, which he got in 2018. There was also chevrons on a collection for Zayn, just like Liam’s tattoos.

Speaking of tattoos Zayn got in 2018.

That big, red wolf on his chest just up there?

One of the biggest Ziam things to ever happen.

Red was Liam’s mic colour in 1D, everything they fucking do seems to be related to red, and Liam’s nickname is Wolfie because he’s from Wolverhampton.

It’s a red wolf, directly on his chest, and it’s 100% for Liam. It’s not the only red wolf tattoo Zayn has; he also has one on his leg with feathers, just like Liam’s feather tattoo.

The media often talk about the eyes Zayn has underneath that, and that they’re for G*gi, but the eyes underneath are so much lighter than the surrounding ink, the shape fits easily, and to me, it seems clear they’ve been done in a way that they can easily be inked over. It was designed for a cover up, and hopefully it’s coming. Zayn also has Liam’s name literally inked into his skin.

They also have coordinating hand tattoos. The mandala on Zayn’s hand and the roses on Liam’s are explained brilliantly in this post. The two of these together mean ‘Symbol of Eternity’. Fucking hell.

The three roses on Liam’s hand also translates to ‘I love you’. FUUUCCCKKKKKKK.

Liam also wore a ring for a while, until he was forced to take it off, but then he rebelled anyway, and got this.

It’s important because not only is it on his wedding finger, it’s also what he said about it, and when he got it.

Now, not only is 4 as an angel number about changing the only things that you can in a situation, but Liam directly said that’s what it was. He can’t wear a wedding ring, so he did the next best thing.

It also came when Liam and Ch*ryl became ‘official’, and when he’d already quashed marriage twice in an interview. Interesting choice, then. He also spoke of the 4 and a ring forming a halo, but still somehow shut down marriage talk?

…….okay then.

Some incredibly brilliant people pointed out that it also came just before Valentine’s Day.

And just before he started wearing the Cartier bracelet from earlier.

There’s also the blatant references to a gorgeous, loving relationship throughout Icarus Falls, especially in Common and There You Are. There You Are was pushed as a Z*gi song, but people realised it was impossible when they found old pictures of the name of the song on his original plan for Mind of Mine, and realised it just hadn’t made that album. It doesn’t fit their timeline at all, but it does fit Ziam.

We don’t see Zayn very much at the moment, and I’m glad that he’s taking his time just doing what he’s doing! It does mean that we hardly see them interact or reference each other much, but I have absolutely no reason to believe they’ve broken up. The fact that they’re both still going through PR relationship bullshit, and the timing of Liam getting a ‘girlfriend’ right now instead of just rumours is very interesting to me, because Z*gi officially finished again not that long ago. When one is ‘single’, the other can’t be, it seems.

This isn’t even everything, anon. They’re not subtle; Zayn just isn’t in the public eye as much.

Everything they do screams love, devotion, and commitment to each other.

And it’s fucking gorgeous.

#ziam #zayn leaving #ziam tattoos #ziam coincidences #zayn malik #liam payne #ziam evidence #masterpost

410 notes · View notes

imbellarosa · 4 years ago

Text

The Larry Song by Van McMann

Or, that one time you accidentally wrote your best friend and bandmate a love song about being on tour without him and he tweets about it confirming it. This review is especially dedicated to @dalek-in-heels because she had to hear me talking about how I’ve been listening to this song FOR DAYS and wanted to talk about it. Oooh oooh and also to @belgianreader2 because we actually are 7 hours apart and although I’m not writing her love songs just yet, this song always makes me laugh bc I think of her. It is, as always, all under the cut because i have A LOT of words and don’t want to clog anyone’s timeline.

SIDE NOTE: I’ll be back to political content in the morning, I just need to post something for myself right now. If you’re looking for a way to get involved tonight, The Rolling Stone actually compiled a great list here. If you match my donation from earlier today or a donation that I made last week, let me know and I will write a prompt for you, if you’d like it.

Okay, onto the song. The first thing I should clarify is that the song is not actually called Larry - it’s called 7 and its by a rock band (a british rock band? maybe?) called Catfish and the Bottlemen. I’m not actually lying when I say it’s by Van McMann, though, because that’s the lead singer, and sole writer of this song. I call it the Larry song in my head because the first line of the song is “Larry call a load of smoke in/I want to lose a couple days/I know we never struggled coping/but I never want to.”

I know that it’s about a dude named Larry for a couple of reasons: the first is that it’s literally in the song. So. There’s that. The second is that both Van and Larry confirmed it. Larry Lau is Van McMann’s best friend and the guitar technician for the band. Van confirmed it here in an interview for Radio X in the UK, and Larry Lau tweeted on April 19th, 2016: “Ahahah funny as when your best mate puts you in a tune then it goes all over the radio #lotofshoutouts” (the tweet also had a bunch of emojis that didn’t copy paste well, but they are: a phone - you’ll see why later - a cloudy sky, an alien, and the number 7).

The thing is - this song is called 7 because of the timezone difference. And here lies the actual story. This song is about their relationship while Van is on tour. (I have to assume it’s their relationship because his name is the only name-drop in the whole song. The only other name-drop in the album is the song “Emily”, which seems to be about meeting up to catch up with an old flame in a pretty sweet goodbye song. Yes. I listened to the album, debated if I wanted to do a review, and decided that actually, I liked this song the best and wanted to focus on it. Sue me.). ANYWAYS. He talks about how: And I'd beg you, but you know I'm never home/And I'd love you, but I need another year alone/And I've tried to ignore it every time you phone/But I never come close/And I don't think through things, I never get time/'Cause I don't think things through...”

So that’s where the phone comes in haha! I also think that it’s really interesting how he talks about this relationship: just because he’s in love does not mean that he’s about to postpone his tour (his career, his life) for this relationship. And I know that some people might think that this means it’s not a good one or that it’s a sad song but...I actually think it’s very healthy? I mean, in the context of the album definitely, but we’ll go through some thematic stuff in a bit.

However, even as a standalone song, I think this is a very healthy attitude for a dude in his 20s to have. Or even a dude at the beginning of his career, no matter their age. Like. This is your chance man, so good for you for taking that. If your relationship is meant to be, it can survive a time difference and different ambitions and everything else that you have to do to grow and find yourself. Even if you need the year alone to do so.

On to the themes that I like in this song that are reoccurring throughout the album! The smoke thing. People speculate that “call a load of smoke in” means “let’s go smoke” (there’s also speculation that it means “throw a smoke bomb on stage, but in context of everything else, I don’t really think so?). I like the reading that “call a load of smoke in/I want to lose a couple days” means - let’s go do our thing, I want to spend the next few days doing nothing together. The smoking thing comes back in the song “Anything” - also written by Van - where he says, “ I won't smoke if you don't no more/'Cause I know you hate the taste of it/And I don't wanna picture our first born/If you've stopped discussing names with me/But if it means that we get through then you know I'm up for anything”, and in his song “Soundcheck”, he mentions that he’s rushing through rehearsal to meet up for a cigarette break (which, if that song is also about Larry, it would make sense? because they would be working together? and so they could have a smoke break together).

Let’s discuss: I think that it would make sense that this is both an activity they do together, and a habit that they try to break, depending on how their relationship is going. For example, if they’re doing great, and they can’t stay away from each other, then it’s “call a load of smoke in” or “let’s go meet during your break” (that’s not the lyric, sorry haha). But if their relationship is going sour, then it’s “do you need me to stop smoking? what can i do?”. And I think that’s a very normal reaction for a twenty-something-year-old person to have? It smacks of obsession and insecurity and love. You want to be with them at every moment, even though you know you can’t be. You understand that you have to do your thing, but you’ll do it a bit faster if you get to have a couple of moments with them, and if things are going not so great, then, well, you start obsessively reflecting on what you think you might need to change about yourself.

Another theme that keeps popping up in the album is thinking things through. Like, Van is clearly an impulsive person. He says here “I don’t think through things, I never get time”, and he says in the song “Twice”: “ 'Cause when you love the way you’re living/It's just hard to fret about much/Because if I got time I just regret most of it”, and then he goes on to list a bunch of mistakes he made. Hey, at least he’s self-aware, you know? I don’t really think this is significant to the story of the song other than it gives a bit of context to the person writing it. I also don’t really know anything about either of these guys personally, other than the interviews and such that I’ve found, so if i’ve just messed something up massively, please let me know haha.

ANYWAYS - to close! This song also includes gems like “I know we (Larry and Van) never struggled sleeping/But I never want to..”. Which like, ah, yes, I too tell my completely platonic bro and bandmate that I never want to struggle sleeping with them! Of course! Happens ALL THE TIME.

Nah, but really. It’s a great song in a pretty good album (the other songs I referenced are “Anything”, “Twice”, “Emily”, and “Soundcheck”, all of which I really enjoyed. I also liked “Postponed”, but be warned - that’s a sad song pretending to be a happy one). I searched, but I couldn’t find a relationship history for either Van or Larry, and apparently, they’ve been friends since childhood, and I think I’ve read this story once or twice. Or maybe seen the movie? So that’s what I have to say about that.

My final thought is that I would have paid an indescribable amount of money to see the rest of the band listen to the song the first time around. Like. Imagine the glances that the rest of them shared like ... “uh... who’s going to tell him this is a love song?”. I would also LOVE to watch this song get performed live because I think that would also be remarkably telling, and also because it would make me giggle uncontrollably.

This song comes from an album called “The Ride”, and it’s followed by an album called “The Balance”, which I haven’t finished, but is also pretty ok. Anyways I need a ship name for these two so if anyone has one I really want to hear it. Is Lan cooler or Varry? Or Vanry? or McMau if we’re doing last names. Actually, McMau seems pretty cool.

#7 #catfish and the bottlemen #van mccann #larry lau #song recs #and album recs #i say things #seriously if i tag varry is that a thing?#like i dont think im ever gonna talk about these two again #but this is the funniest thing #ive heard in a while #like oops i wrote you a love song #and the other dude is like MINE THE SONG IS MINE ITS FOR ME #in case anyone was gonna get it twisted

27 notes · View notes

bunnymcbunnister · 5 years ago

Text

SPN Season 15 Spoiler Sheet, update 11/11

Hello! I finally had some time to clean this up a bit. I am going to make a separate post about old episodes if anyone wants to reference the past. I also pulled out some general spoilers that have already happened to keep this shorter. It’s getting to be a monster with length.

As for updates, we got some nuggets from Jensen and Misha while promoting their latest projects. No pictures yet for ep 5 because of the holiday. Also no description for 7 yet because there will be a week off for Thanksgiving. Hopefully JaxCon will have some juicy updates like DC did. Under the cut!

DISCLAIMER: This is gathered info from various sources. This is not confirmed information. Stuff in this WILL be wrong. Don’t take this too seriously. This is for fun.

General Info (oldest to newest)

There is hope to wrap up some Wayward Daughters storylines in the back half of the season

They are adding a whole extra day to filming to do the final scene. They will film the final scene last. (Implies logistics- lots of returning people?)

Brad Bucker used the word “romance” when asked about Sam and Dean’s arcs. Did not specify who.

In an interview, Kripe indicated that the series ending would have “peace” for Sam and Dean

Not much new at the TCA’s, but it was said it is “unlikely” Jeffery Dean Morgan will be back since his last appearance was such a good end note. There were some jokes about a Castiel spin off. Hell, I’d watch.

There will be a special tribute ep, not clear if its one of the 20 or additional

Misha will be in 15 out of 20 episodes this season

According to Dabb, Sam and Dean are going to start to lose people who, in past seasons, we would’ve never lost — and lose them in a very real way. Our guys are going to realize there’s a certain finality, and some of the things they’ve relied on to get through the day — people, talents, things like that — they are no longer going to be able to roll out. And that’s going to throw them for a loop

Also according to Dabb, Jack is still in the empty and “he’s not coming back in the near future”

Cas’ deal with the Empty may come up later in the season.

Dabb intimated that Chuck was inherently responsible for killing Mary when asked how the boys would respond to Jack.

Adam Rose, who played Aaron Bass from the golem episode vauge-tweeted about working a show with two badass leads. Could be Supernatural, but I think the timing is off- he indicated he was filming late Friday night.

Dabb compared Chuck and John Winchester, claiming that Dean would have to break free of “conditioning.” Also, for Jack “there have been cosmic forces fighting for his attention since he was in the womb — and that will continue. As much as this season is about Sam and Dean finding agency, it’s also about Castiel finding agency, and it’s about Jack finding agency. As always, death is never the end. It’s just part of the journey and that’s certainly true with Jack.”

Per Variety: At the outset of the season, the “Supernatural” foursome of Dean, Sam, Castiel and Jack are split up, but Dabb notes they won’t be for long because “ultimately this is a found family, and they have deep emotional bonds” that make up the most important part of the show.

Sam’s wound from the equalizer gives his powers/an advantage of some kind (per TVGuide)

Jack will be a critical part of the ending of the show

The cage/Adam is looking like it will be coming up for midseason

Shaving People, Punting Things: https://youtu.be/azTwku2uosA

The shaving promo, punting things promo shows glimpses or Lucifer!Sam and MOC!Dean, as well as bearded Dean in tactical equipment. Recent interviews by Dabb seem to indicate that these are glimpses into other universes, a la Apocalypse World, and other endings from Sam and Dean.

According to the MarySue and other interviews, Sam’s bullet hole will give him a connection and insight to god- like a tin can telephone string.

In the cage, Micheal and Adam have formed a working relationship (MarySue)

Dean and Amara’s connection will be explored

There will be a bunker themed episode (MarySue)

According to Misha (Cinablend) Dean and Cas will have discord up to ep 8- which is the mid-season finale.

At a convention, Jake Abel was asked to share two lies about Adam’s return and a truth. The said 1. Adam is not upset about hell 2. Adam kills someone 3. Adam bring someone back. I am assuming its the bring someone back (Micheal?)

In one of his cookbook interviews, Misha used the word “we” several times when talking about the final scene of Supernatural. He said that would be the last scene they shoot. It seemed to imply that he was in the scene, but that could be open to interpretation.

The finale will air on Monday May 18th. The show will move to Mondays when it comes back on March 16th. It’s gotta come back either than that and go on a mini break or something, because that is not enough Mondays.

Episode 15x05

Title: Proverbs 17:3

OFFICIAL SYNOPSIS: RICHARD SPEIGHT, JR. DIRECTS – Sam (Jared Padalecki) and Dean’s (Jensen Ackles) routine case turns out to be anything but. Richard Speight, Jr. directed the episode written by Steve Yockey (#1505). Original Airdate 11/14/2019.

Written by: Yockey

Director: Speight

Filming Dates: 9/4-9/13

Airdate: 11/14

Photos: http://www.ksitetv.com/supernatural/supernatural-spoilers-photos-proverbs-17-3/198575/

Promo:https://youtu.be/4Jo1--7WqHA

Sneak Peak:

Castiel? No Jack? doubtful

Guest stars:

Other Spoilers/info::

This will most likely be Yockey’s last episode.

Matt Cohen was around, but I imagine he is following directors to prep for his own debut directing.

Scenes were filmed in the bunker and in a wooded area. A woman could be heard screaming in the outside scene.

The bible verse referenced is: “The fining pot is for silver, and the furnace for gold: But the LORD trieth the hearts.”

The preview indicates werewolves.

Episode 15x06

Title: Golden Time

OFFICIAL SYNOPSIS: OUT OF DIFFICULTIES GROW MIRACLES – Sam (Jared Padalecki) and Dean (Jensen Ackles) are visited by an old friend. Castiel (Misha Collins) investigates the disappearance of a local teen. John Showalter directed the episode written by Meredith Glynn (#1506). Original Airdate 11/21/2019.

Written by: Meredith Glynn

Director: Steve Boyum

Filming Dates: 9/16-9/25

Airdate: 11/21

Photos:

Promo:

Sneak Peak:

Castiel? Yes Jack? Not sure

Guest stars:

Other Spoilers/info:

Misha tweeted from set in costume, so Cas.

Misha also tweeted a pic in blood spatter with two bullet holes in his shirt

At least Jensen and Jared filmed in Rowena’s apartment

This will be a witch episode- Witches will invade Rowena’s apartment looking for books. They are very powerful. Dean gets thrown into a wall and Sam uses magic to stop them (from TVGuide)

Episode 15x07

Title: Last Call

OFFICIAL SYNOPSIS:

Written by: Jeremy Adams

Director: Amyn Kaderali

Filming Dates: 9/26- 10/7

Airdate: Dec 7th is what Christian Kane tweeted…. But that is a Saturday. Dec 5th maybe?

Photos:

Promo:

Sneak Peak:

Castiel ? Yes Jack ?

Guest stars:

Other Spoilers/info :

Misha posted from set in new shoes- very shiny with well tailored pants. (The next day he posted in full Cas costume, so are the shoes a one off? Another outfit with new shoes?).

Misha and Jensen made a video from set. I feel like if Jared was around he would have been in it since it was about money raised? Maybe a Dean Cas scene?

There will be a battle scene in this that Jensen mentioned he was looking forward to and we would enjoy.

After NJ Con, it appeared that Jensen returned to work, Jared and Misha stayed an extra day and then Misha went home. Misha only did about 2 days of filming.

Jensen and Christian filmed at a bar called Swazey’s. This was the fight scene Jensen was referring to.

At some point, Sam might be shirtless or we can see part of his chest- Jared had his anti-possession tattoo at the weekend convention.

Per TVGuide, Leo and Dean will have a wild night out in an effort for Dean to recapture his mojo. Dean will become the lead of a band called Dean and the Impalas, which is made up of Supernatural crew.

Osric Chau popped over to set, but he is filming on Legends of Tomorrow in the same studio. Sebastin Roche also indicated he would come by, he is filming on Batgirl. Unfortunately, neither Kevin or Balthazar will appear in this one.

Episode 15x08

Title: Our Father Who Aren’t in Heaven

OFFICIAL SYNOPSIS:

Written by: Buckleming

Director: Speight

Filming Dates: 10/8- 10/18 (no filming 10/14 for Canadian Thanksgiving)

Airdate: 12/12 (?)

Photos:

Promo:

Sneak Peak:

Castiel ? yes Jack ?

Guest stars: Jake Abel, Shoshannah Stern

Other Spoilers/info:

Jake Abel posted a script with the caption “hell hath no fury like a brother scorned”

Shoshannah Stern was spotted on set- Eileen!

This will be the midseason finale

At BurCon, Misha mentioned Dean is still acting like “a dick” in the ep they were filming- which is this one.

Episode 15x09

Title:

OFFICIAL SYNOPSIS:

Written by: Berens

Director: Singer

Filming Dates: 10/21-10/30

Airdate: March 16th?

Photos:

Promo:

Sneak Peak:

Castiel ? I can’t tell but maybe not Jack ? maybe

Guest stars: Rob Benedict, Kim Rhodes, Jim Beaver

Other Spoilers/info (newest to oldest):

Midseason premier episode

Misha was at home for the first week of filming, and I think the second. I don’t think he is in this.

Alex and Rob were hanging out- Chuck and JACK?

Kim Rhodes posted in front of the SPN set and with her trailer- Jody looks very likely. She also had dyed hair and she has been rockin the grey for the past few Jody eps. Maybe a flashback/AU?

Jim Beaver posted from set- Bobby!

Jensen shared that in this episode, Dean will pray to Cas to “confess” why he has been treating Cas the way he has. Misha confirmed this in another interview and said tears would be shed- not sure who is doing the crying (besides me)

Episode 15x10

Title:

OFFICIAL SYNOPSIS:

Written by: Dabb

Director: Showalter

Filming Dates:

Airdate: 10/31- 11/12 (No filming for Veterans/Armistice Day?)

Photos:

Promo:

Sneak Peak:

Castiel ? Jack ?

Guest stars:

Other Spoilers/info (newest to oldest):

Misha texted some local fans from set in costume about an WA election, but after the convention was promoting his cookbook all over the place. I think he filmed 2 days, max.

The story will be about Sam and Dean as heroes from the good and bad side (from MarySue)

At DCCon, Jensen shared that this a bit of a wacky episode- Sam and Dean lose their abilities to fight, Dean gets cavities and Sam gets a cold. Jensen later seemed to refer to this ep when talking to TVGuide- mentioning the Impala will get a flat.

Episode 15x11

Title:

OFFICIAL SYNOPSIS:

Written by: Davy Perez AND Meredith Glynn

Director: Charles Beeson

Filming Dates: 11/13-11/22 (?)

Airdate:

Photos:

Promo:

Sneak Peak:

Castiel ? Jack ?

Guest stars:

Other Spoilers/info (newest to oldest):

#supernatural #spn spoilers #spn season 15 #spoiler sheet #castiel #dean winchester #Sam Winchester

28 notes · View notes

bravagente · 7 years ago

Note

hello dear mod, thank you for everything you do. i have a question i apologise if it's heavier than the tone on this blog. recently a popular italian blogger said that race in italy is racist&was a product of il ventennio. i am french&i understand that we in europe don't like to say the word 'race', but i just want to understand how the construct of racism in italy, especially with all the far right/macerata from an italian persepective. I did read amara lakhous. thanks for everything you do!

Hi! Sorry for the late answer, it’s just such a complex matter to talk about and I’m not entirely sure I have the right perspective to handle it properly both as a white woman and as someone who lives in a city where that’s still relatively not diverse. Plus I study languages so I’m not really in the area - I basically really wanted to do right by this and I hope I will.

Disclaimer: it is true that in Italy the very concept of race, at least the way we know and use it in English is racist and a product of the ventennio. Whichever its etimology and original denotation, the word race (razza) has been very clearly connotated since Fascism: if you say men have razze, you’re implying some men have a pure, superior razza and some don’t. Nowadays in Italian dogs and horses have razze, not people. So, usually, if someone uses ‘race’ in italian as opposed to, say, ethnicity (etnia, colore), you’ll be quite sure they’re racist. It’s not that just because people don’t use the word they can’t be racist, but it does say something about how hard it is for us to cope with the American concept of race and the discourse that follows. The paradox is Americans are rightly very sensitive and careful about what they call race, when from our pov they’re just seeing it all from an inherently racist perspective: there are whites and then there are “people of colour”, all of them. Basically, a white race and then all those other races. Again, all of them. We can’t quite wrap our head around it, especially since we don’t really have a concept of, say, “brown” people. Come over in August, we’ll all be brown. We like a tan. It’s just beyond us.

Moving on to racism. It is possibly the most divisive thing in Italy right now and any conversation about it will escalate quickly because a) no one ever admits to being racist b) not everyone necessarily knows they are, if they are. Like everywhere else, it’s not always glaring. It’s not always a “racist slurs” kind of thing. There are subtle forms of it even here and not just in the alt right: I believe many liberals are actually as racist as one gets, they just don’t show because they never deal with people of colour in the first place. I once interviewed an otherwise pretty decent man who told me immigrants today don’t actually come here willing to work and therefore should be sent back home, another one praised a city he visited because he saw no blacks selling stuff there. I think it speaks volumes on how complex this thing is getting: you can deal with assholes who are 100% assholes. You can ignore them and decide they’re not worth your time and energy. But when they’re half-decent it’s just disheartening and makes you wonder where we’re going. Another reason conversations about racism often won’t end well is they slip into politics and fascism is far from over. Even though more-or-less openly fascist parties didn’t do well at the latest elections, the winners (League and the Five Stars) are firmly anti-immigration, making it about law and order as any Trump of the world would.

Having said this, race as we discussed it might be rooted in Fascism, but is the same true for racism? It is and it isn’t. There’s evidence that sub-saharian Africans were of always discriminated against. We had our own slave markets we don’t learn much of in schools, and while it’d buy and sell people of any race black Africans were definitely amongst them. There’s recently been a lot of discourse about how (in)accurate Still Star-Crossed was, with someone arguing that Alessandro de’ Medici was just an example of a class of black nobles. I’m afraid that’s not true. If I’m referencing to this particular period of time it’s because Renaissance is a personal interest of mine: The Ugly Renaissance will offer information about racism against dark-skinned Africans in 15th-16th century Italy. While light skinned Africans were considered as white as any European, sub-Saharans were thought to be strong and valuable workers, but also “uncivilized simpletons who could never hope to occupy a position of parity with the white majority”. That was a long time ago, sure, but it was bound to remain embedded in people’s mindset. And it did in ways we’d think were behind us by now.

Now, subtle forms of racism aside, there are many racists of the in-your-face, insulting type, more and worse than I ever thought possible growing up. They’ve actually probably always been there, it’s just now they have the Internet so they feel somehow validated and it’s made them unashamed to be openly hateful and ignorant with the support of the right.

However I have to stress that there many, many many more, non-racists. When fascists parade in our streets, anti fascist marches will follow. There’s always a firm reaction, it’s just decency doesn’t make any noise and rarely makes it to the headlines. Anyway I’ll give a few pieces of news encapsulating the two souls of Italy:

Refugee drowns in Venice as people film on their phones and do nothing

Teenager saves black child from getting hit by a train in Milan

Mein Kumpf-owning man shoots black immigrants on sight

Italians protest against racism

Refugee killed in Fermo after defending his wife from slurs

1500 in march to commemorate him

Black man shot to death in Florence

Italians join black people in march to commemorate him

So there’s the bright side I guess, we are genuinely engaged and young people who actually read books know we’re a country with very diverse genes, owing much of our language and culture and even food to “others”. This matters deeply to me because I think othering is the root of most, if not all, issues in our societies. This is a cultural problem first and foremost and I actually believe that. We often speak of inclusiveness or tolerance, but these are all patronizing concepts to me. Who the hell do I think I am to include or “tolerate” someone? No, I have to know in my heart of hearts that “others” aren’t to fear.

Anyway, racism is definitely an issue that exists and that’s getting worse. I’ve personally come to conclude racist behaviours in Italy are caused and fueled by three broader factors that often inform one another.

Ideology is the most glaring: most racists are unapologetic fascists and racism is mounting and growing together with a wave of nostalgia for Mussolini’s party. A lot of fascists obviously never lived under the Duce in the first place, but they have a misguided perception of the ventennio as a time of justice and order where trains would run in time and so on. Something you’ll hear from time to time is that the duce “ha fatto anche cose buone” (also did good things). To these people, the presence of black people or muslims goes hand-in-hand with crimes and chaos: they’ll rape women! They steal and murder! They’re drug dealers! The fact that these things are sometimes true because eventually a rapist or killer or drug dealer will statistically have to be black is irrelevant: if caught off guard they’ll admit to believing every racist stereotype out there.

Xenophobia is more nuanced. The reason I don’t necessarily associate xenophobia with racism is that, until just a few years ago, the most feared foreigners in Italy were the very white Romanians and even Albanians before them. The media are also to blame for the way headlines were worded and they still tend to, often unwillingly, magnify the one crime someone black commits as opposed to those commited by Italians. The Macerata episode was most probably “inspired” by the killing of a young girl cut into pieces by at least one Nigerian immigrant. What do you now, since the news spread every Nigerian person has become a public enemy. Another huge media-related problem is they’ve created an unjustified alarm on the refugee emergency, treating it as if more people than in the past were arriving in our country (they weren’t) and as if the situation was completely out of control (it isn’t, although it’s not easy either). Crime is just one thing, though: people are afraid because our times are scary and dangerous, there are no jobs and the welfare is dying. They are hoping the government will help them and fearing that we’re too many for it to be sustainable. There’s a common misconception for which every immigrant in Italy is being hosted in a hotel and given 30 euros per day while unemployed Italians don’t have any money to buy food: while you can argue that the immigrant will only get 3 of those 30 euros, Italians still live this as if those resources are being spent on foreigners as opposed to themselves because scapegoating is a human, if wrong, thing. Clearly this is turning into a war of the underprivilegeds that will only result in diffidence and hatred, and the staggering misinformation about black people being all but enslaved in some areas of out country isn’t helping.

Conservativism, finally, is a branch of ideology but it’s not necessarily related to actual racism (though it can be). There are some who are entirely cool with people of other ethnicities as long as they “don’t bother” them. They’re too culturally lazy to accept anything different than what they knew as children, they fear Christmas will be cancelled and they don’t want, say, mosques, because they hardly know what they even are. They’re usually the same people who are annoyed by vegans: probably harmless, but they certainly don’t help.

Again I hope this helps. I really tried to be clear and truthful and not offend anybody.

#italy tag #this took me like two months #ask #anon

8 notes · View notes

aion-rsa · 6 years ago

Text

American Gods Season 2 Hopes to Move Past Behind-The-Scenes Drama

https://ift.tt/2NH8Srd

Neil Gaiman and the cast open up about the many changes the American Gods Season 2 production has faced during NYCC.

facebook

twitter

google+

tumblr

Interview

Books

Andrew Husband

American Gods

Oct 15, 2018

American Gods Season 2

Starz

Neil Gaiman

NYCC

NYCC 2018

While executive producer Neil Gaiman may have grandiose plans for three more seasons of American Gods at Starz, the television adaptation of his 2001 fantasy novel has endured a great deal of seemingly divine intervention since airing its first season last year.

Showrunners Bryan Fuller and Michael Green exited the show after the pair had reportedly completed about half of the season two scripts. Cast members Gillian Anderson and Kristin Chenoweth subsequently left, and after stepping in as the new showrunner for a time, Jesse Alexander was asked to leave the series. Gaiman, who was already spearheading Amazon’s adaptation of his and Terry Pratchett’s Good Omens, stepped in to salvage things.

Despite all of this, American Gods showed up at the 2018 New York Comic Con with Gaiman and the cast to promote its return in 2019. (Ian McShane was not in attendance because, as Gaiman explained, he was busy “zapping kidney stones that he will be pissing out.”) They debuted the first trailer for the new season and, among other things, confirmed which sections of the book would be adapted for its current storyline.

Aside from an allusive comment Gaiman made about the cast’s “not compromising” during the second season’s production, however, very little was said about the showrunner shuffle at the American Gods panel.

Pablo Schreiber, who plays fan-favorite Mad Sweeney, mentioned Fuller’s name, which elicited a small cheer from the audience, but that was it. Speaking to the press afterward, Gaiman and the cast were slightly more forthcoming (and optimistic) about what had happened, and where American Gods would be going next season.

“My metaphor for season two is basically we're back at the same school but we're in a different classroom,” Yetide Badaki, who plays Bilquis, tells Den of Geek. “We have some different teachers, but we still have mostly the same schoolmates, as well as a few new people who came in from out of town.”

Emily Browning, who plays the once-dead Laura Moon, speaks with far less metaphor, though not before joking about being monitored by drones operated by Starz executives.

“If you had have spoken to me about it a few months ago, I would have been in a very different place with it. To be totally honest, I think we were all nervous about it in the beginning. We all loved Michael and Bryan, and this was their vision, so losing them was terrifying,” she tells us.

Gaiman himself spoke about the behind-the-scenes drama, though largely from the perspective of simultaneously running two different shows whose productions were taking place in wildly different time zones. He also explained his process working with Alexander early on in season two, but didn’t dwell on the nature of his dismissal from the series.

“Everybody knew I was going to be the showrunner on Good Omens, which meant that I wasn’t left a lot of time for American Gods,” he says. “Jesse came out to New Orleans, where I was at the time, and I spent two days briefing him on exactly what American Gods means. Not just what it is and what the plot is, but where we could take it in season two and what parts of the book we would be doing.”

While Gaiman’s comments help make more sense of the timeline (he was able to spend more time on American Gods after San Diego Comic-Con in July, and Alexander was asked to leave the show in September), they don’t necessarily explain what had happened. He did call the initial reports of Alexander’s being sidelined “bullshit,” but that was the extent of any explicit remarks about it.

Instead, Gaiman praises the show’s cast who, as he frames it, succeeded in defending their characters as initially contrived in season one despite apparent issues with new writers trying to change things up.

“We have a fantastic cast. They know who they are and they know who their characters are. They care about them. They've researched them. This is especially helpful when you’re getting new writers coming in, who might be a little wobbly on things that characters would do or say. The cast absolutely saw it and said, ‘No mate, the character wouldn't do that because of this, this and this.’ So things would get rewritten and stuff would be fixed, thanks to them.”

Interestingly, Gaiman may have been referencing one of the more fantastic aspects of the initial report about Alexander’s removal, which claimed he and McShane would partake in “screaming matches” over the quality of the season two scripts. The finale was even totally scrapped. Talking about it now, Gaiman admits that he was more involved in the scripts for the final three episodes, but leaves it there.

Even so, the American Gods cast now seems quite confident in the work they’ve put into the new season. They’re also just as confident in Gaiman’s ability to steer the show out of its troubled water and into the much wider (and hopefully less dramatic) seas ahead.

“These characters were created by Bryan and Michael, so they're based on Neil’s characters, but they’re different,” says Orlando Jones, who plays the African trickster god, Mr. Nancy. “I'm a lot like Nancy in the book in many ways, and I’m also not like Nancy in the book at all. Shadow Moon never got lynched in the books. He's living in a different America today.”

“I think there's a nuance there, and Neil really is the person that comes in and goes, ‘Stay on the theme, guys. The theme is here. Stay focused here.’ He's a master storyteller, so why do anything differently?”

Browning is also quick to note that the loss of Fuller and Green after season one, and Alexander toward the end of season two, never really meant the end of the series. After all, so many other people were helping to make American Gods a reality.

“All of that went away after we saw a bunch of footage. We grew less worried after we saw a few rough cuts from the first few episodes, especially the stuff that Chris Byrne showed us,” she says. Chris Byrne, who served as the first season’s second unit director, is now the show’s producing director. He’s also, as Browning puts it, “the fucking hero of American Gods” and partially responsible for how amazing season two looks.

“He is the vision of the show. The way the show looks has always been thanks to him, and it's still him. He is an angel, he's our savior and he's incredible. Seeing the stuff that he showed me, I was like, ‘Oh wow, we did it! This is our show and it actually looks kind of incredible.' It was scary. We obviously had a huge road bump to get over, but I feel like we're going to give you guys something really cool in the end.”

American Gods Season 2 premieres sometime in 2019 on Starz.

Read and download the Den of Geek NYCC 2018 Special Edition Magazine right here!

from Books https://ift.tt/2pTN2az

#aion-rsa #Books

0 notes

ethanalter · 7 years ago

Text

'Dark Tower' Director Nicolaj Arcel on What Did and Didn't Make It Into the Film (Spoilers!)

Idris Elba as Roland and Matthew McConaughey as the Man in Black in ‘The Dark Tower’ (Photo: Ilze Kitshoff/©Columbia Pictures/courtesy Everett Collection)

Warning: This post contains major spoilers for the film version of The Dark Tower

Fans of Stephen King‘s beloved Dark Tower book series have spent a solid decade anticipating a film version of the author’s magnum opus, only to see those plans repeatedly collapse like a house of cards. And Danish director Nicolaj Arcel experienced that disappointment right along with them. “I’m a massive fan of the novels, and have been since I was a teenager” Arcel tells Yahoo Movies. Unlike other fans, though, the filmmaker was given the opportunity to make the movie a reality. In April 2016, he stepped into the director’s chair previously almost occupied by the likes of J.J. Abrams and Ron Howard and called “Action” on the first entry in a potential franchise that could include additional sequels and a TV series.

Even though he was making his Hollywood debut with a big-budget film overseen by such established producers as Howard and Akiva Goldsman, the self-described “uber-geek” says he enjoyed a certain amount of creative control in crafting a Dark Tower movie that he and fellow fans, as well as mainstream audiences, would want to see. “One of the big things that the studio will always be concerned about with any kind of brand is, will people understand it who are not fans,” Arcel explains. “So I had as much creative control as anybody would have on a film like this.” In this spoiler-filled conversation, we talked with Arcel about the bits of Dark Tower mythology that didn’t make the final cut and the one Stephen King reference he couldn’t include in the film.

One thing that jumps out right away about the film is that this version of The Dark Tower is framed as Jake’s story rather than Roland’s, which is a very fundamental shift in the narrative’s point of view. Was that a deliberate choice on your part? When I got on board, Akiva Goldsman had already written the script. It was his choice, and Ron Howard’s possibly. They ended up going with the idea of, “Let’s enter this world through Jake. Let’s make it Jake’s story.” That was a choice they made, and it was part of the reason why I got excited about it when I read it. I saw that this version was different from the novels I read, but I also got the world and the characters, so I understood why they began the story like this. It’s an introduction to the saga — it’s not supposed to be the whole saga in 95 minutes.

Idris Elba as Roland and Tom Taylor as Jake in ‘The Dark Tower’ (Photo: Jessica Miglio / © Columbia Pictures / courtesy Everett Collection)

The first book in the series, The Gunslinger, is very different from what the first film ends up being. It’s a dystopian Western, and the movie has very few of those Western elements in it. Did you want to incorporate more of that genre into the film initially? We had to make a conscious choice. The first novel is a Western, there’s no escaping that. But the other books are not westerns; they are fantasy sci-fi adventure novels, some of which take place in modern-day New York and are kind of gangster-y. So we had to make the choice of saying, “What is the genre of this movie series?” And the choice was that it’s a fantasy sci-fi adventure. If we started out doing a Western and people saw that and liked it, but then the second one was nothing like a Western, everybody would be like, “What’s wrong? I thought this was a Western.” They would be so confused. So we tried to combine everything that we love about the novels into the world, and introduce that idea to the audience. But I do miss some of the Western style.

How did you settle on the visual tone of the film, especially since there are so many genres at play? I thought that the most important thing for me was to keep it grounded. That’s the world I come from, the European cinema. I was very concerned about making it feel real. Obviously, there’s some pretty crazy stuff in there; there’s magic and gunslinging and monsters and other worlds. But it’s not over Hollywood-ized. I tried to shoot on real locations and all that.

Stephen King has said over the years that he based Roland on Clint Eastwood‘s Man with No Name character from Sergio Leone’s spaghetti westerns. Were there movie gunslingers that you and Idris Elba looked to while creating your version of the character? Interestingly, we didn’t go to other movies when we were talking about it. We talked a lot about soldiers with PTSD and veterans of traumatic experiences. What are they like? What is their state of mind? How do they internalize all the troubles they’ve been through and try to get past that? With Matthew [McConaughey], it was a little more playful. He was immediately like, “This is kind of the devil, right? I’m just the devil?” I was like, “Sure, it’s the devil.” So we had a lot of fun with that. He was really happy to just be able to play evil, because a lot of villains always have a reason [for their actions]. I thought it was refreshing that the Man in Black is just evil.

‘The Dark Tower’ director Nikolaj Arcel at the film’s New York premiere (Photo: Michael Loccisano/Getty Images)

The Dark Tower book series is connected to all of Stephen King’s other novels, and the movie features several shout-outs to stories like The Shining and The Stand. Was it difficult to incorporate those into the film due to rights issues? I had a team of people who were helping me figure this out. I would say, “Can I do this?” They would say, “No.” Then I’d say, “But can I do this?” They’d say, “Yeah, you can do that.” There was a lot of that back and forth, and I spent a lot of time on that, because it was very important to me. One of the things that I love about The Dark Tower is how it connects all the other Stephen King worlds and novels into this one saga, so it was important to me to get that right. Even if some of it is on the edge of what’s legal — and I don’t know if it is, but even if it was — I’m pretty sure that the people behind these other properties are going to be like, “This is cool. He’s just making a commercial for our film now!”

Was there a reference you wanted to include but couldn’t get permission? I couldn’t have a city sign reading “Salem’s Lot” for some odd reason. I wanted it to be on an old sign in Mid-World that they’d be driving by. That would have been cool, but I couldn’t do it. I don’t know why.

Is it going to be difficult for future movies to deepen those connections? I don’t think so. Honestly, I think it’s going to be the opposite. What happens with movies like this is that the next one is made for more money, and they’ll be able to spend a little bit of dough. It’ll be like, “Can we buy the rights to this?” For us, it was more like a begging situation. And King himself is going to help; he might have done that once or twice [on this movie].

Did you meet King in person during the making of the film? We had a lot of communication, but I haven’t actually met him in person because he stayed in Maine the entire time. He didn’t want to come to South Africa, which I can totally understand. It’s a very long plane ride, and very grueling. But we communicated almost at least once a week throughout the entire production. It was very collaborative, and he was so cool.

Fans will obviously be watching very closely for the Horn of Eld, which signals that this is a sequel to the book series. It is on Roland’s person in the film, but it’s not directly referenced at all. Is there a deleted scene that explained its importance to the mythology? No. That was one of the things where, as a fan, I would have felt it was cool to do a scene where he picks up the horn and says, “This is what I need. It was left on the fields of Jericho Hill.” But it’s a case where the studio probably came in and said, rightfully, “Nobody who has not read the novels will know what this scene is about.” It’s just going to be weird to hear them talking about the horn now and never again. And I totally get that. As the story hopefully continues, we’ll slowly build to the idea of what it is and why it’s important. Now, it’s simply there.

Similarly, the “Crimson King” — another important part of the story — is only referenced in background graffiti. That was actually suggested by Stephen King himself. During the editing, there were one or two references to the Crimson King and I asked him, “Do you think we should keep it visual and wait a little bit?” He was like, “Totally.” Because that’s what he does in the first novel, too. He doesn’t even mention the Crimson King until later.

The 95-minute runtime did cause some consternation among fans. Did you understand that reaction? If I hadn’t directed it, I would also have been going, “95 minutes? How in the hell? What’s wrong?” What I’ve hopefully been able to explain in these interviews is that we’re meeting the three characters and are going on from here. I was actually happy this film was on the short side. My last film, The Royal Affair, was too long in my view. Every time I see it, I go “I could have just cut out 15 or 20 minutes!” [Laughs]

Matthew McConaughey as the Man in Black in ‘The Dark Tower’ (Photo: Ilze Kitshoff / © Columbia Pictures / courtesy Everett Collection)

Is there a longer cut? The early cut of The Dark Tower was maybe 12 minutes longer. On the DVD there’s going to be like five or six minutes of deleted scenes, which I felt kept the pace a little slow. There is some fan service stuff in there, too. There’s a little bit more about gunslinger lore, and more about the Man in Black. There’s also more dialogue between Jake and Roland; at one point they come across this diner which is a little bit tall and deep. It’s a very short scene, but fun to watch.

The later novels get very meta-textual; Stephen King even becomes a character in some of them. Would you try to replicate that in future films? It would be great. I love that stuff, but King really doesn’t want us to have him be a character in the movie series. I think he asked Ron Howard personally to promise never to put him in it. So we won’t do it if he doesn’t want to. I also think it would be weird. If Stephen King shows up in the fourth film people would go, “What’s going on?” [Laughs]

‘The Dark Tower’: Watch a trailer:

yahoo