#they're bad but not in a good way like the original trilogy

[jellyjam]

honestly i like reveals and plot twist that are kinda obvious. like it's fun seeing hints about it throughout the story which leads me to form theories and will still make me suprised when it gets revealed but also excited because i was right. in my opinion way more fun than plot twists that try so hard subvert expectations by being absolutely unpredictable and don't even making sense

[supercrazyangel4]

The thing I've always loved most about aa4 is how much darker the tone is than the rest of the series in a way that isn't just edgy for the sake of it, but subverts your expectations from the original 3 games in a really interesting way. The trilogy was built upon the trust Phoenix had in others, and it was something we as players could almost always feel certain in. AA4 flips this on its head and makes it so Apollo effectively can't trust anyone but himself.

Your mentor, who the in the trilogy was a paragon of wisdom you could always turn to no matter what, gets revealed to be the culprit and sent to jail in the first trial and by the end of the game his list of crimes has stacked high but you still have so few answers on why he did any of it.

Your boss, the goofy protagonist of the trilogy, is now inexplicably a washed-up, disgraced, cheating poker player with an implied drinking problem who seemingly found a new hobby in evidence forgery and jury rigging.

He has a codependent relationship with his daughter, your assistant, who usually is a completely innocent and hapless victim of circumstance. She sees herself as the provider for the house and will help her father cheat at poker, or forge evidence, or guilt trip the poor attorney they knowingly screwed of out of a job into working for them for dirt cheap.

The detective, the only other returning main character, a previous assistant, is completely changed since we last saw her. In the trilogy she was chipper and bright despite the hardships she faced, and now she's unfriendly and burned out, turned bitter by the world. The scene we're first properly introduced to her in Apollo genuinely spends several minutes thinking his boss is making him bribe her with cocaine.

Every single defendant is a criminal guilty of something other than what they're charged for. Each case centers around an underground black-market poker ring, a mafia family and medical malpractice, a smuggling ring, and a family of forgers and an incredibly shady troupe of magicians. The one thing all of these people have in common is that none of them will tell you literally anything about what's happening, half of them clearly reveling in being as big of cryptic assholes as possible.

The only person who doesn't fit this description is, for once, the prosecutor. Usually your biggest obstacle and the most morally corrupt of the main cast, he's the only person who's both 100% on the side of truth and on the same page as you for the entire game. He's just as clueless as you, being used nothing more than a chess piece just like you are.

But the truly masterful thing about AA4 is how morally grey it is. These characters aren't just one note villains. They're not even villains at all. Most of them aren't even malicious.

Your boss, for all the low levels he stoops to, is underneath it all the same guy he's always been, doing everything he can to bring a criminal to justice and protect his family. Your assistant is a sweet girl who truly cares about you, she's just prioritizing herself and her fathers safety before anything else. The detective is the same passionate and kind woman under everything else. The rest of the defendants are genuinely well-meaning young people who got involved in shady stuff they didn't fully understand.

The game is filled with good people trying to make the best of bad circumstances. The game has just as many fun moments as the original trilogy. For all it's rough appearance, the game has a similar heart. For every unanswered question or unrighted wrong, there's a smile or a hope for a better future. For every bad action, there's usually someone trying their best behind it. The game is melancholic and dark, but isn't afraid to let good shine through. It knows there's no shadows without the light.

[david-talks-sw]

Ironically, contrary to what most of the angry YouTubers are saying, I think The Acolyte is a story that heavily focuses on lore.

(Well, not really "lore", more like "fanon.")

But my point is, it makes a lot of metatextual commentary about these fanon tropes and lore elements that fans debate about ("are the Jedi truly good? Is the Sith way really so bad if they allow you to feel?") but it completely forgets that all those elements were created in the first place because they were telling a story.

Example: how the Jedi approach emotions.

The Jedi control their emotions. They don't repress them.

They allow themselves to feel them, but they do their best to not let themselves be ruled by them. Sometimes they succeed, sometimes they fail, but they do their best.

This is because wielding the Force is based on emotions... you use it with compassion in your heart, you're on the Good Side, you use it with negativity and selfishness, in search of pleasure, and it leads you to the Dark Side.

This all then ties in to how Luke and Anakin approached the Force, how the former saved the galaxy because of his compassion,after the latter one doomed it because of his greed, etc. It's a metaphor for emotional regulation and teaching kids to be compassionate.

There's a reason this has all been laid out this way.

So when you're making a new story, and your narrative is that:

"The Jedi think they're controlling their emotions, but actually they're just repressing them, and at one point one of them will snap and kill them all..."

Well... no? That's not the story. Because the narrative of the Prequels clearly frames Anakin's selfishness as the cause, and that of the Original Trilogy clearly frames Luke's retreading of his father's path to darkness as a bad thing.

Same goes for:

"Osha frees herself from the shackles of her trauma by killing her father and joining the Dark Side."

Joining the Dark Side is portrayed as a bad thing, it's synonymous with losing yourself, not finding yourself. That's why Episode VI frames Luke not killing his Dad as a good thing.

So... are we just gonna ignore all that?

There's a narrative attached to these points, and you can either reject it or embrace it... but if you don't address it in some way, you're missing the point.

The same way that, if tomorrow I decide to join a soccer game, then pick the ball up and shoot a hoop, I'm missing the point. The ball is being kicked around for a reason, the game is soccer.

The Acolyte focuses on lore and fanon tropes too much... and forgets to even address what the story of Star Wars is.

[sunderedstar]

good books of 2024

according to meeee.

there is no order here, at least one of these was published ages ago, I'm just working my way through my 2024 timeline, godspeed spiderman. 🫡

Metal from Heaven

surprise hit of 2024. top of the charts. stunning, spectacular. gorgeous. Metal from Heaven FUCKS. almost every single main character is an explicit spicy toxic hot mess of a lesbian committing literal highway/train robbery, the bad guy is literally named Industry, leading to such peak sentences as "I am going to kill Industry." the prose is synesthetic in a way that most writers cannot sustain for a full novel but which here culminates in a moment of pure blissful Neon Genesis Evangelion that I will not elaborate on due to spoilers. the author pulls out the FUNNIEST lines, and also the most abrupt and heartbreaking tragedies. we're not here to be subtle, we're here to put the pedal to the metal until the engine explodes. such a damning, whip smart condemnation of industry, capitalism, power. all in the form of Lesbians. also the phrase 'clown orgy' is mentioned. this shit is like gideon the ninth with CRUNCH. NSFW.

but don't take my word for it. take amal el-mohtar's.

Absolution

Absolution is a hard book. requires thought and rigor at all times to absorb what's going on - and also a reread of the entire trilogy beforehand, because there's time travel nuance involved, which makes it next to impossible to sum up the plot coherently on its own without spoiling things. jeff vandermeer described it partially as 'fuck that alligator from the movie' and - valid. the first 60% had me; the later section...swapped gears drastically, which meant it took a while to hit its stride (aka until it reached Area X again). in hindsight I was just not prepared for one of the POVs to be the Freudian, violently stoned, unreliable narrator love-child of Karkat and Dave Strider whose perception/conception of the heart of the Southern Reach is extremely phallic. and then suddenly cannibalism happens. I liked Annihilation and Acceptance better, but damn. it almost feels like this should be the set up to another trilogy. much 2 think about.

Yield Under Great Persuasion

I don't know why I didn't hear anything about this one before it came out! (instead, I only saw posts about rowland's other book released this year, running close to the wind - which sadly did not hit for me at all). Yield Under Great Persuasion is just ridiculous enough to be fantastic. stubborn little gremlin man, big mad about Pumpkingate years after the original inciting incident that set him at odds with his love interest, attempts to pack his little rucksack and run away from all his self-inflicted gay problems, fails, is forced to deal with said personal problems by direct goddess-intervention. you know it's gonna be good when the guys are hate-banging by page 2. a short, delightful mix of (extremely silly and low-stakes) enemies to lovers and hurt/comfort and working out your emotional and communication issues on page style comfort food. self-indulgent in a fanfic way that is rowland's trademark in a taste of gold and iron (which was also fantastic and probably deserves a reread now.) NSFW.

The Spellshop

between this and yield under great persuasion there's an odd cozy fantasy pairing here. a self-isolated shut-in spellbook librarian who lives for her work escapes the fall of her city and sets up shop back in her old hometown on a severely magic-deprived island. there's some internalized trauma being worked through, against a simply charming backdrop of community and solidarity and magic spells. really. I was. charmed. which is a rare reaction on my part.

The Hunter's Gonna Lay Low

the curveball of the list, The Hunter's Gonna Lay Low is a translated (gay) Korean web novel, and it's the perfect intersection of a decent translator meeting an author who knows what they're doing. notorious tumblr user @spockandawe has a write up of the plot and its major themes here, but in essence it hooked me with its hunter/super-hero meets Pacific Rim setting, its themes of gifted kid burnout and unacknowledged trauma with the weight of the world on his shoulders, and the fact that the author clearly plotted out all of this in advance, with minor details from the opening chapter being extremely plot relevant a hundred chapters later. also, the characters are FUN! the relationship compels me. clownery abounds in all the best ways, while the world-ending stakes are also scarily sky high. its translation is currently incomplete as far as I'm aware, which is literally this story's only downside right now, since you can read it online for free - but so much of the main story is up and translated already that it's hard to imagine how much higher the stakes can go, and I'm dying to know if these two make it through and get the happy ending they deserve. a delicious repast.

Apostles of Mercy

I'm gonna rant here. this is the story of a series that got the redemption arc it deserved.

if you don't know, axiom's end is lindsay ellis's blatant Bayverse Transformers female lead alternate history fic. period. she has openly admitted this. you can easily and clearly pick out the Optimus/Megatron/Starscream expies. and that first book was GOOD. it understood the assignment. loved it.

then...truth of the divine happened. book two of the series. was frankly. god awful. it was like twilight's new moon, where the main character's depression saturates and therefore stagnates the entire narrative, in this case to its detriment. it dragged. the entire appeal of first book of the series is the bond between the main character and her new definitely-not-a-Transformer life partner, and book two managed to both sideline that - the entire point!!! the main thing you're reading it for! the alien time! - and introduce the most skeevy and (for me) unpleasant to read human hetero romance of all time. it was so unpleasant I actually forgot how bad it was.

somehow. somehow. palpatine returned. after I spent three years mourning what could have been. book three saved it. Apostles of Mercy addresses the whole damn skeevy toxic mess that was book two and refocuses on what matters - the alien love interest and a LESBIAN love interest. yes. it's true. once again the sapphics won. we now have a book where the main character is reliving lesbian sex memories as an alien-robot-insect-definitely-not-a-Transformer mindmelds with her so I mean. good job team? her love interest also acquires an alien life partner of her own to expand this into potential alien foursome range? the assignment is once again UNDERSTOOD. in terms of the action scenes, to quote myself while reading it, "I can't believe I'm saying this but you needed to channel far more Bayverse" [for book 2], and doing so for book 3 has produced a work of art. I would say skip book 2 entirely and thank me later, but experiencing how bad the series got at its darkest point is part of what made book 3 such an exhilarating high in comparison. possibly that was the goal all along, impossible to appreciate until now. I just need lindsay ellis to get the contract to write the currently-in-publication-limbo books 4 and 5. because the series deserves it. it only just got good again! NSFWish because I can't remember currently how explicit they got all these months later, forgive me.

The Deep Sky

yume kitasei is new to me, but this book hit some interesting notes as a sci fi debut. it too is about gifted kid burnout and imposter syndrome, funnily enough, in a thoughtful take on the standard sci fi concept of 'a bunch of rigorously trained young adults are sent out into deep space as an ark to save a dying humanity' that actually does discuss how fucked up that is as a concept, both for the kids as they grow up under enormous pressure to win a spot on the mission and for all those people being left behind, in what might just end up being an overhyped waste of resources, since civilization sure is still kicking when they leave. the summary on the book is somewhat misleading - asuka, the main character, doesn't fall under suspicion until wayyyy late in the book, and spends the majority of it in a pseudo-detective role that is absolutely sanctioned by those in charge. she's not 'an immediate suspect' like the book blurb insists. go figure. it didn't knock me out of the park like most of the books above, but it was an engaging little read.

The Bees

a weird one from 2014, picked up on a whim - it's literally about bees! fictionalized bees! with personalities and priesthoods and caste politics and everything! I cried about it to be honest. very plotty, somehow all of it neatly taking place within the Lifecycle of A Bee™️, which takes some real craftsmanship to pull off and make compelling as a narrative. since I'm an unrepentant Raksura fan, I was like 'wow...how Raksura coded...' knowing full well that Raksura are dragon bee people, not the other way around. also the Raksura could never be as toxic (complimentary) as these bees are. 😂 it's just good literature your honor.

honorable mentions:

Heavenly Tyrant

has not come out yet. but let's be real. it's on the list in anticipation. it's what she deserves.

The City in Glass

I love nghi vo's work, have read and adored all of the singing hills cycle novellas. it took a month for my library hold on this book to be available. and then I promptly got distracted by metal from heaven and the hunter's gonna lay low 😂 I will read it!!! the first eight pages were good! vitrine's voice is very good! I've just had a very busy end of the year interrupting my everything. (update: I read two more pages and it immediately and promptly popped off. whoops. guess I'm reading that next. whenever I have free time again...)

[rambosgirl]

Logan x hypersomniac reader headcanons

you guys this is literally just insomniac x hypersomniac, but I realized when I was finished writing this ;-;

also, I imagined the original trilogy Logan for this, but if you want to use your imagination ig it could be a different Logan

Masterlist

First of all, Charles is super nice to you and gives you a rest period in your teaching schedule so you can use it to nap

Your students are also very nice if you happen to fall asleep in class, which doesn't happen often but has a few times.

Jean is super supportive and will help you try to find solutions when your doctors can't help you

So pretty much everyone knows (how could they not when you literally fall asleep at meals?) but you don't mind people knowing

especially when they're this supportive

So when Logan first came to the mansion, you were in the middle of a nap so you had no clue who he was when you finally met him after you woke up

Logan was clueless to your condition, I guess no one told him

As he got to know you better, he started to notice some things about you

like how you would disappear for hours at a time and then resurface like nothing happened

he also noticed you yawned a LOT but didn't piece the two together for a while

He would ask around but everyone says they haven't seen you

When he asks you about it you tell him everything - your struggle to wake up and stay awake, the naps, and even the other effects that come with it like memory problems and trouble concentrating.

Logan's just like :0 How did I not figure that out before?? it all makes sense now

He's SO SUPPORTIVE

He'll remind you about the things you have trouble remembering, and he'll make sure you're taking care of yourself between naps

he'll never admit he's gone soft for you teehee

but it's obvious to everyone else

he still gets moody sometimes, but less around you, and he'd NEVER take it out on you (he takes it out on Scott lol)

you joke about him needing a nap more than you when he's especially grumpy

sometimes you'll sleep way later than you meant to, like waking up at 10pm, and he'll stay up with you

you guys will just be talking in the kitchen until you start to feel tired again

y'all make snacks for your late-night chats

he tries to make sure you're awake from late afternoon naps at a good time (like before 7ish) so that you don't mess up your sleep schedule too bad

he gets to know your schedule, even if you don't stick to it as often as you'd like, he tries to help you stay on it

AND GUYS

if you spontaneously fall asleep somewhere you're not supposed to, Logan will CARRY YOU to your bed and tuck you in (I'm MELTING)

You feel safe around Logan, making it easy to doze off around him

he often finds himself in situations where you're resting your head on him, fast asleep

he'll stay there for a while, and if you don't wake up soon, he'll carry you to bed

Sometimes he watches you sleep

Not in a creepy way (he tells himself) but he loves seeing you so peaceful, the worry melting off you

Jean tells him it looks creepy and he should probably stop before you wake up

Sometimes you get overwhelmed with your feelings about your hypersomnia, and Logan is there to listen and quietly comfort you.

You feel like you're sleeping through your life, like you're not truly living to the fullest potential you can

You also get so frustrated about the lack of answers you have for why you need so much sleep and the constant fogginess of your mind and memory

Logan is here for it all

he might not be the best at openly showing affection and support, but there is no doubt that he cares about you and will do anything for you.

He prefers actions over words, which becomes obvious in the way he treats you and takes care of you

That's all I have for now babes, hope you liked it (again, if you want a full fic lmk)

[schlong2]

latest fix rant time

none of my friends want to talk to me about monkey movies and then i remembered i have a whole blog dedicated to my latest fixations so. i've watched Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes two (TWICE ✌️) times in theaters. this was after watching the newer trilogy (Rise, Dawn & War) and the first 1968 original in prep.

things (SPOILERS!!!):

Kingdom's run time is 2 hours and 25 minutes. this is incredibly long for a movie. compared to 1968's 1 hour and 52 minutes, that's a half hour difference. Infinity War was 2 hours and 36 minutes for reference. that's a whole marvel cinematic convergence, but ape. the run time isn't exactly the issue i've seen talked about. it's the pacing. sitting twice through this movie was not a problem for me. i sat there engaged all the way through. on the second watch, i tried to be mindful of times in which it might have been dragging for the average person, and i like, literally couldn't find any. pretty much every scene had meaning and didn't drag imo. which is something these newer movies do extremely well. Kingdom is pretty equally split between verbal communication and sign language compared to the first three before it. the apes use both verbal and visual cues to talk. but because they don't talk every single time, it makes every moment that they do feel special. it reminds me of the Quiet Place concept, where most of the movie you only hear a human voice a few select times when it's safe to do so. Rise, Dawn, & War were kind of like this, as Caesar only really spoke when he was trying to make a point or communicating to humans, who are mostly speaking in those movies. he speaks more as he gets more fluent, and by War, he can speak very well. we see other apes like Koba, Maurice, Blue Eyes, and Bad Ape also speak English. these moments are rationed pretty well throughout Kingdom, making the dialog more select and meaningful. this makes every time these beasts talk feel like it means something and isn't just fluff to fill your ears. every other scene feels like it's building or showing a side of a character we hadn't seen before, and the scenes between those advance the plot or are like, really action-packed. i just don't see why some people say it has pacing problems. it's just long. i understand the average person's attention span is super short, but when you're sitting down to watch two and a half hours of movie, you gotta know there's gonna be downtime. moments where they're not fighting or advancing the plot. and i think that's GOOD man. but im also not one for action/adventures very much so maybe that's it? i think a lot of people maybe watch these apes for the violence and conflict rather than their introspection, genuinely thoughtful world building, and complex characters. and hey, that's completely fine to enjoy, but POTA is originally about morals and asking the audience questions and posing dilemmas to popular beliefs at the time. ok

Raka. he's great. Peter Macon has this butter smooth voice that's just perfect for the kind of character he plays. you can't help but like him. but he dies like 1/3 into the movie and is really only there to religion dump about Caesar (ape jesus) and then he's swept away. people are complaining that that's all he was really there for. to explain the real values of Caesar and provide a foil to Proximus. and i agree to some degree. i really hope he's not actually dead. his presence and death are felt throughout the movie, as both Mae and Noa (mostly Noa vocalizes it, Mae just silently shares in his loss and i think cries at one point?) seem to mourn him, saying shit like "if Raka were here..." and especially at the end when Noa gives the Caesar pendant to her. it's the shared memory of Raka and what he devoted his life to. but they never really like, actually linger on his death. there's a moment after he's swept away, and the shot stays on the rushing waters, Raka no longer visible and plays some sad tunes, but like. C'MON. he's not really dead. he isn't please tell me he isn't PLEASE

Noa isn't Caesar. i honestly do not get why you would want otherwise. of course, he isn't Caesar. we don't need another Caesar. he had a whole three movies to be the center of. i would be extremely disappointed if they just made a carbon copy of him or made Noa like a direct descendant of him or whatever. i hate that Chosen One bullshit. Caesar was just a guy that wanted peace for his people and that got him killed in the end. Noa is also a guy who wants peace for his clan. they're both leaders and have good hearts, but like. they're different characters. i LIKE that Noa has no relation to Caesar, i LIKE that he's his own character with his own ideals and purpose. Owen Teague does a wonderful job making the character his own. i mean Andy Serkis is Andy fucking Serkis. pretty big shoes to fill and i think Teague has the right foot size you know. i heard one guy say like "we've had our time to mourn Caesar" and yeah. we have. let's accept that and move on

WHERE MY APE DIVERSITY AT. we get a fuck ton of chimps, ONE orangutan, ONE gorilla, and ONE bonobo. what the hell. i mean. what is with the bonobo villian. Koba i fucks with because bonobos are some of the most playful, nonviolent apes out there. that humanity and its cruelty could twist a naturally peaceful creature into what Koba became.. i mean, that's great. but again with Proximus? maybe trying to evoke some of the same energy and nuance Koba had? ALSO. GORILLA PSA they are like so sweet. all that muscle is there to protect their families, and they're strictly vegetarians. i feel like Rise, Dawn, & War portrayed this better with most of the gorillas getting bodyguard jobs because of all their bulk. especially when Luca tucks that flower in Nova's ear. man. and Red going out like he did. gentle giants. in Kindgom we just have Sylva. gorilla henchman for Proximus. that's it. then we have Raka, the one orangutan character that i saw. wise and knowledgeable, guides and accompanies Noa and Mae then dies. at least we get one female chimp character that's more than just wife or mother. wikipedia lists Soona as Noa's love interest, which i can totally dig, like it's there. he takes her to the telescope at the end of Kingdom, which is more than what we saw romance-wise between Caesar and Cornelia. and the only other important chimp female is Dar, Noa's mom. in Rise, Dawn & War there was usually only one of each species of ape assigned a main role, but we saw much more diversity it felt like. maybe that's because there were smaller in numbers and have since spread out in the last 300 years? also like, bonobos are known for having female-female & male-male sex. dont know about the other apes. my friend mentioned that Raka said something about having a male companion and promptly searched reddit. all they had to say was: gaype?

the visuals. dear god the visuals. this movie is just visually stunning. absolutely breathtaking. they did a great job. i mean Rise, Dawn, & War are all triumphs of cgi and are excellent examples of the animation style done right. i did hear some guy say there is a loss of texture, as mostly everything in Kingdom is cgi, from the characters to the landscapes. but there's an explosion of texture in this film. there's one point where Noa is covered in the ash of his village and you can see it on his fur. there's quite a couple water scenes where the moisture clings to the apes' fur. It's all very impressive. great work

the references!! Rise especially has a ton of them (IT'S A MADHOUSE!!! & GET YOUR STINKIN PAWS OFF ME YOU DAMN DIRTY APE), and names like Nova and Cornelius, but Kingdom... i picked up on at least three main instances, but im sure there are more. there's the scene where the apes are rounding up the feral humans, and its very reminiscent of the scene from 1968 where they're doing the same thing for sport. there's the scene where Mae is running in the field, and she jumps on that log structure to get to Noa, which is nearly identical to a similar scene in 1968. the scene when Noa, Soona, and Anaya are exploring the human bunker and they come across an old classroom. one of them picks up a doll that says a distorted "Mama" which was huge in the original because that was evidence that once man did speak, why else would he make a doll that talked? superb call backs to the og. respect what was there before

SCHLONG THEORY

here me out guys. the starring ape-human relationship in Rise was between Caesar and Will. this type of love is called storge and describes the love a child has for a parent as well as the love a parent has for their child.

the starring ape-human relationship in Dawn was ultimately between Caesar and Malcolm. which i believe is truly philia towards the end, the love between friends and allies. just two dudes trying to keep peace in the world.

in War, i mean Caesar well and truly hates the Colonel. like more than he's hated any human in his life before. close to mania, obsession. anyways it's a study on this type of relationship between an ape and a human. true, all consuming hate.

SO in the newer movies we've explored familial love, platonic love, and hate, between an ape and a human.

in Kingdom the main ape-human relationship is between Noa and Mae. and their relationship is complex. not really that friendly and certainly not familial. no trust. some kind of begrudging respect maybe? i just think it would be neat if in further installments they explored a romantic love between a human and an ape. ok.

i KNOW Noa and Soona are probably going to get ape married and they're never going to touch on the subject but i just find it hard to believe that in the last 300 years or so that's NEVER been heard of. apes have the same level of intimacy between each other as humans do in this universe and can willingly consent. what are you so afraid of wes ball

after all, the whole franchise is about how apes, when given intelligence, compare to humans and begs the question: how different are we really?

is it possible for an ape and a human to fall in love?

[indigo-casson]

something that i've been thinking about lately is the parallels between star wars: andor/rogue one and tamora pierce's trickster's queen duology. primarily because the star wars brainrot is real and the tamora pierce obsession is forever, but also because they are kind of both tonal and thematic departures from their main 'verses in some similar ways?

in both the star wars verse and the tortall verse, the majority of the media has focused on one individual (or a small group of individuals) who make a profound difference in the world. Whether that's alanna singlehandedly finding the dominion jewel/becoming king's champion/making way for female knights, or luke skywalker blowing up the death star, or daine and numair going to the divine realms during the immortals war, or anakin skywalker becoming a sith and dooming the republic, most of the original material has seen battle and political change as something that is affected by either an actual chosen one or simply a single very plucky and well-placed individual.

trickster's queen and andor, however, really look at rebellion as something that has to be done by a diverse group of flawed people who work together despite their differences. mon mothma knows that her role is raising money. ulasim, chenaol, and the other members of the raka conspiracy each take their individual roles in the rebellion, and recognize that even though they might not want to work with aly or the luarin nobility, they need their skills and influence to make it happen.

both stories also show rebellion as extremely costly and something that requires making tough calls. nobody has their hands clean by the end of a civil war. notably, trickster's queen explicitly narrowly avoids having the protagonists kill a group of 5 year olds. luthen is ready to kill cassian when he becomes a liability, and cassian does kill lots of people, including some allies whose only "crime" is being susceptible to giving up rebellion secrets.

in rogue one, we don't like davits draven because he orders jyn's father killed, and that just feels wrong. jyn is our heroine and it upsets her, so emotionally it's distressing. but of course, draven and cassian and jyn are all working towards the same goal. draven did what he had to--galen erso is a liability as long as he's alive. dove and sarai's little brother elsren has to die because he's a direct heir to the throne, ahead of his sisters. it doesn't matter that he's five and totally innocent. as long as he lives, a luarin has a greater claim to the throne than a raka, and as long as that's true, the rebellion can't succeed.

in the star wars original trilogy, people for sure die! i'm not trying to say that they don't, but it's definitely not something that's shown affecting our protagonists on a deep, emotional level. they're all side characters, or else they come back as force ghosts. the prequels are uh. fucking tragic, but at the end of it, almost all of our heroes make it out. even the casualties of the war are droids vs clones, which is to say, totally interchangeable cannon fodder on both sides!

the number of character deaths in the tortall 'verse is fewer, probably because it's primarily created for middle grades, but even when people do die, they're either demonstrably bad people or minor enough characters that the emotional resonance isn't the same.

by contrast, at the end of trickster's queen, almost the majority of the main conspirators die in battle, not to mention those who don't even make it to the final conflict. at the end of rogue one, all of our heroes are dead, and people aren't exactly making it out of andor s1 in good shape either. more than half of the aldhani team dies on that mission.

I could go on further, but I think my main takeaway is that once you've invested a lot of time and attention and fandom into a 'verse, you have a lot more leeway to tell different kinds of stories. tamora pierce could not have written trickster's choice until after the values and world of tortall were so clearly established, and if she had, it wouldn't have had the impact that it did. similarly, part of what makes rogue one/andor so striking is the fact that it is such a departure from the preexisting values and story format of star wars.

for every chosen one we see in media, there are hundreds of people working behind the scenes to make their big, death star destroying moment possible. the only way to improve society is through collective action, and part of that is that everyone's hands are going to get dirty. i think lots of people want to imagine that they could be like luke skywalker and swoop in 2 weeks before the battle of yavin and become a hero, but the fact of the matter is that that's not how the world works! war requires us to do things that would ordinarily go against our values, but in the context of a drawn out, bloody, thankless battle, maybe we decide the ends justify the means.

[mamawardentotherescue]

Okay, so I've slept and gathered my thoughts more and I'm going to explain why I don't like da:v (because some of you have assumed a lot about me and my relationship with the series)

First off, I have been in love with dragon age since I was 13/14 and have been obsessed with it for 12 years. It was my muse for writing and creating art; I read every book I could get my hands on and lived on the wiki and forums for everything else; when I got my first pay check I bought the lore books (which was hard to find in Australia). When I was depressed or so lonely my heart felt like it would burst, I would come back to the companions I would call friends. This game saved me from killing myself more times than I could count.

I have loved this game series for all it's writing and lore - the good, the bad, and the ugly. So, for me to be upset and disappointed in this game is not to be taken lightly.

Straight up, da:v felt wrong (I'm not going to mention why I don't like the inquisitor creator because I feel like at this point you should know why). They launch you straight into the middle of a plan your character has apparently known all along, but it left me feeling confused. I had so many questions! It's been 8 years since Trespasser, 10 years since the beginning of Inquisition and 20 for Origins; a lot has changed and I want to know what's happened in thedas since I've been away because I've invested a lot of time with that world, regardless of whether or not you respect my input on the world building...but the writing doesn't care about that.

I had a constant thought of "they're trying to recreate Mass Effect but have forgotten why people play Dragon Age, and they're not even respecting ME while they do it" and the more hours I put in to this game the more obvious this became.

"But MamaWarden, it looks so pretty and the combat is fun!" I hear you say, and yes, I do agree. The game was built really well in comparison to past games, but good hair isn't a good enough distraction from shit writing and a lack of respect for the series.

Before finishing the game I would often say that the best part about the game was the companions. They felt familiar and I enjoyed what I had with them but wished I had more. I was prepared to stick with that until they made me choose between Harding or Davrin (and Assan)...

Let me explain very simply why I fucking hated this:

1. It was another "look at us trying to be Mass Effect" moment but done shittily

2. Feels sus to say the least to pin Harding, the first female dwarf we've been allowed to romance and have a pre-existing relationship with (as the player), against Davrin, the first black elf we've encountered that wasn't just an OC of the player

3. Doesn't matter if you complete their companion quests, gain max approval and send what I would argue the "right" one to survive to a mission, only to have that person die because they were the other group's leader

As soon as it happened and the companion (I felt like I was forced to choose because I was romancing the other) was killed, I felt like nothing mattered. Again, it felt like someone tried to recreate the OG ME trilogy into one game but completely misunderstood what made those games ironically heart wrenching. I wasn't given a choice where I knowingly sacrificed a companion the way they did with Ashley and Kaiden, I was instead given a "who do you think will be best for the job?"

You might think it's a taste or preference thing, but it's not. It's a "dragon age has followed a particular pattern that's different to mass effect but now they've subverted expectations" type of thing. I might be autistic, but doesn't that bother you?

I hated that unless you were romancing Solas, your inquisitor really doesn't matter much to the story. I hated that your Lavellan felt like she was reduced to an additional underling to Solas instead of being his equal. I hated that characters like Mae, Dorian, Isabela and the Inquisitor had NOTHING to say about Varric, regardless of whether everyone knew the truth about him or not. I hated that bioware spewed "no unnecessary cameos" but barely used the old companions for anything useful outside of Varric and Solas pushing the story. I hated that shit is blowing up in the south of thedas but it feels like no one cares except for me, the player who has spent literal years invested into Ferelden and neighbouring countries.

Nothing felt like it mattered and that's the worst part of all of this. That might the intended meta commentary but fucking save it for a different game. This series has always been about hope in times of darkness, but this game feels like it cheapened that ideal and abused it so they can give this half-baked "morally grey" shit of a story and expect us to eat it

[antianakin]

I need scary Jedi. But not like... in a "RAAAAAAGGGGHHHH! I'M SCARY!" way. More like.... you're a bounty hunter after your target, you have killed Wookies, Gundarks, and many other dangerous species. The target? They are wearing robes, playing with children. Laughing and helping others. Sure they have a lightsaber, but you brought a slugthrower. Those are supposed to be effective against them. You line up a shot and... they're looking at you. They are smiling in such a friendly manner. But all you can feeling is cold. You suddenly realize, you're not the most dangerous person there. I just want more bad guys getting the shit scared out of them when they realize a Jedi is here to stop them.

I could see that for someone who's likely never MET a Jedi before and so all they know are the legends and stories they've heard.

I feel like this happens a lot less for Prequels Jedi because, even if there's fairly few of them and not everyone will even MEET a Jedi in their lifetime, they are still a known culture. You might not expect to see a Jedi in the street, but you wouldn't think it was impossible to see a Jedi in the street, either, necessarily. And you probably think you have a fairly good idea of what the Jedi are and what they do and why they might be on the street in the first place.

But it DOES happen to people like Luke. By the time Luke comes around, the Jedi have been nearly erased from the galaxy's memory. All that's left are some stories and those stories are likely highly exaggerated and they've gone through many different retellings that embellish and add things that never existed in reality. NO ONE expects a Jedi to show up anywhere because they're all supposed to be GONE. No one even believes the Force exists really and if they do see a Jedi, they probably think that the magical abilities they have are just made up. So when Luke starts using the Force to make things float or read people's minds or whatever, it's probably VERY unnerving. I know there's some comics where that comes up, even among some of the rebels he fights with. People ARE scared of Luke, even if they're fighting alongside him instead of against him, because he's something they can't understand and shouldn't exist.

There is a scene sort-of similar to what I think you're talking about in the films, and it is actually in the Prequels. It's when Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon start fighting back on the Trade Federation's ship at the beginning of TPM. Neither Nute Gunray nor the other Neimoidian with him have ever met a Jedi and they clearly underestimate what the Jedi are capable of doing and overcoming. So when the Jedi start fighting their way through the ship, both Neimoidians start getting REALLY scared. The moment when they close the blast doors and think that that'll DEFINITELY keep them out and then Qui-Gon just shoves the lightsaber in again and starts melting the door from the center shows that very clearly. The moment where Obi-Wan catches Zam Wesell in the bar during AOTC could be another example, too, I guess.

This is supposed to be the Jedi at the peak of their power, their Golden Age of sorts, so it makes sense that this is when we see them able to really fight back in this way. After this, from AOTC on, the Jedi are often struggling against forces they can't quite overcome, and we need to see that so that it doesn't feel crazy when they're ultimately defeated in the end.

It's an interesting concept, the idea of the Jedi being a little frightening sometimes, because I feel like there's layers to it. With the Prequel Jedi, it's more about people underestimating them because the Jedi ARE more known and so their enemies often think that they can get the upper hand on one even if they've never actually done it before. But in the Original Trilogy era, especially with characters like Luke, it's the opposite problem, where Jedi are such an unknown quantity now that anything they do is a little frightening, even to people who aren't their enemies, because there's just no context for them to use to understand what the Jedi are and what they can do. They're SO Other that it becomes scary even if the Jedi in question is on your side or trying to save you.

This seems to be less of a thing in Disney canon for some reason. Kanan, Ezra, Ahsoka, and Cal seem to experience this very little if at all. Luke doesn't even seem to engender that kind of response when he makes his grand entrance in the season two finale of The Mandalorian (obviously Bo-Katan and Fennec would be more familiar with Jedi, but Din is not and should've had a MUCH more freaked out reaction to what a fully trained adult Jedi is capable of doing). Maybe it'll come back one day.

[nyaagolor]

What are your thoughts on Apollo Justice (the character)?

OH BOY. OHHHHHH BOY. I have a fever and some free time lfg.

So honestly, I think part of the reason I love Apollo so much is because he runs parallel to Phoenix but also counter to him at the same time. I always saw Simon and Athena as the successors-- in terms of ideology and job and all that other stuff-- to the Phoenix-Edgeworth dynamic and status rather than Apollo and Klavier. Athena and Simon, to me, feel like extensions of the arcs of Phoenix and Edgeworth + the vibes of the original trilogy. Apollo and Klavier ( who I will not talk about bc we will be here all day)? They're the antithesis.

Apollo Justice The Game directly foils the original trilogy in so many ways, but I think even on a more base thematic level it runs counter to a lot of the ideas that we take for granted about the original trilogy, and because Apollo sits at the center of this, the things I love about the game are encapsulated in why I like him. There are a ton of themes in the ace attorney trilogy-- support networks, faith, trust, the truth-- and Apollo is defined by their limits, their failures, and their absence. He is let down, kicked around, defined by abandonment and betrayal and distrust. Apollo is defined by everything that Phoenix is not, and bc of how the timeline goes we don't really get any retribution for that, just a steady march forward, and I think that gives me a lot to think about with his character

Phoenix's arc right from Turnabout Sisters is about the building of a support network, and the ways that developing this support is integral for when things go wrong. We contrast Phoenix with Godot, Maya with Dahlia, and see how people left to stew in their resentment can chase vengeance to dark places (wow I wonder who also does this after the death of a dear friend leading to a crusade of misplaced revenge that almost leads someone they care about being killed.). With Apollo we get to stand on the precipice of resolution, but the important part is we don't get it. Apollo's life falls off the rails, and he's the one left to pick up the pieces.

We see through him how our trust can be betrayed by people of good and bad intentions, and the lingering consequences that has on one's ability to not only trust the people around them but themselves. And yeah!! That's why I adore him so much-- he's tested not by the possibility of failure like Phoenix often is, but climbing up from the reality of it. It's less "how do we make our way out of this mess before it goes nuclear" and more "things are already destroyed-- where do we go from here?". It has more of an element of recovery than prevention to me, and I think that's a fascinating avenue to explore in stories like these. Apollo pushes the envelope of the themes of the narrative and the characters-- he is the epitome of what it looks like when things fall apart, and it gives him and the trilogy characters something to reconcile

A lot of people have complained that Apollo barely feels like the protagonist in his own game, but that's honestly a huge part of the reason why I love him so much. He's defined by the spaces between, the limits and failures of things we had up to this point taken to be true, and left with a pretty limited degree of autonomy through it all. He's pushed around and puppeteered by people who mean well and those who don't, and I feel like a major theme of AA4 that I love but don't often see talked about is "what does it mean to have autonomy-- and by extension, control? What does it mean to take it back? What does it mean to lose it, and what does it mean when you'd do anything to keep it." Most of what I said is only partially resolved bc AA4 is... a game. A technically finished game. but!! Because it eviscerates our expectations of the franchise so thoroughly AND leaves open so many avenues, it makes Apollo and the rest of his crew some of my favorite characters because there's so much you can think about and do with them!!

also he's like. An insect to me. <3

[adhd-roided-red-panda]

I have a gripe to pick with a Phoenix Wright AA character

There is no character in the original Phoenix Wright trilogy I hate more than Morgan. Why? One word, Pearls. I can speak from personal experience that childhood trauma lasts forever, which is what Pearls would have gone through if any of Morgan's plans worked. When I think about Morgan's situation, the thing that makes me unsympathetic toward her is that she did it for Pearls. After all she went through, she chose to do terrible acts like framing her own niece for murder, and even resorting to an attempt at killing her, and not once did she think about what Pearls would think. Pearls loves Maya dearly, so think about how she would turn out to be if Maya was incarcerated or worse, dead. Now think about how she would've felt knowing that it was her own mother who orchestrated the outcome. I don't think Morgan's tragic backstory would have been enough for Pearls to forgive her mother. That's why I hate her. Was what she went through terrible? Yes. But in no way does her past outweigh her actions. And let's not forget, Misty went through the same shit after the DL-6 incident, and on a greater scale, so it's not like the sisters didn't share that in common. However, Misty turned out different. Hell, Misty's whole family turned out different. When we see her for the first time, Misty is breathtakingly gentle. Mia took her mother disappearing with actual empathy, and instead of getting someone killed over it, she took to law to try and take down the person who ruined her mother. Maya turned out to be a stronger woman than Morgan could ever amount to, helping Phoenix take down criminals in whatever way she could. These characters all went through terrible hardships, and because they had a solid rock to lean against, whether it be the fey sisters for Misty, Maya for Mia, or Phoenix for Maya, they all turned out to be strong women in their lives. But Morgan could've had someone as well, however, she was too busy resenting her. Morgan could have consulted Misty, and it's not like Misty would have done nothing, it'd be out of her character if she actually did do nothing. No, Morgan chose to revel in her hate, and that hate blinded her from being a good mother to Pearls, Dhalia, and Iris. She abandoned her firstborn twins and orchestrated a plot where Pearls would've killed her best friend. So, to all the people who get confused about why people hate Morgan Fey despite the backstory, it's because her actions speak louder than her intentions, she happened to have both terrible intentions and bad actions. I'm not saying her backstory is bad, but I don't think it's meant to be a justification for her actions. A backstory is just that, a backstory. Not every tragic backstory is a redemption. If a tragic backstory creates an evil character, and that character's heinous actions reveal them to just be evil, then they're just f**king evil and don't automatically deserve sympathy.

P.S. I know I included Dhalia in the list of Morgan's unbecoming, but I have problems with her backstory too, but that's mostly a writing thing.

[artist-issues]

are there any controversial pieces of media that you like? why is it controversial? why do you like it? do you defend it against people who don't like it, and if you do, how?

Do I

Oh boy

This answer is going to dive in to how I've worked out "The Right Way to Make Sequels." So it'll be another long one.

I really, truly like Star Wars: The Last Jedi. And without that movie, I would not like The Force Awakens as much as I also like it.

TLJ is one of the most hotly contested Star Wars movies of all time, which is saying something, because the Star Wars audience loves to hotly contest everything.

I think Star Wars: The Last Jedi is the best Star Wars film since the original trilogy. I would rather rewatch it than any of the original movies, or the prequel movies, or any other Star Wars media.

Because it's just good. It's just a really good movie—and it is also a really good Star Wars movie, because it nails the whole theme of Star Wars, which is "Faith Triumphs Over Fear."

But. Not everybody measures the phrase "really good movie" or the the phrase "good Star Wars movie" by the same metrics I do.

You know that I believe a story is good when it reminds you of the Good, the Beautiful, the True, or all of them at once—by nailing the "main point" or "theme," instead of being entertaining alone. Add to that the fact that I believe a Star Wars movie (or any franchise movie, or story-sequel) is good when it believably emphasizes the overall main-point of its predecessors, without losing the ability to be compelling.

To be "believable," it has to make sure that the characters (if they're returning from their predecessor appearances) make in-character choices. It does not mean that those returning-characters have to make choices that the audience approves of. Nobody likes the fact that the two characters in La La Land choose not to stay together forever. But there comes a point when it doesn't matter what the audience likes, it matters what the characters "would do."

Anyway.

Another way to have the sequel be "believable" is to make sure that what filmmakers call the "style & tone" stay somewhat familiar, echoing their predecessors. There's a lot of wiggle room for this. Some deviation from what the predecessors did in terms of style or even is good and right. But you want to keep the core stuff—because "style & tone" are just another tool used to "nail the main point" that the predecessors used, so you don't want to change it too much.

What I mean is, in The Last Jedi, you have things like:

Epic-scale visuals (dramatic shots that make use of big objects and light and shadow in the composition)

Dramatic Use of Color (Red is bad, blue is good, black is bad, white is good—very in-your-face symbolism)

Quirky Alien Cutaways (even though it's a dramatic adventure, you still sometimes cutaway to see a funky alien or a funny little creature, to remind you this is a fun space-romp.)

Somewhat-Obvious Adventurous One-Liner Dialogue (No explanation needed)

INTENSE emphasis on orchestral score (I don't have to explain this, Star Wars is one of the greatest examples of all time for music in movies)

All of the above contributes to the "tone and style" of a Star Wars movie. The Original movies have that. Most of the Prequel Trilogy has it, too. The Last Jedi does it right. You're supposed to feel heights of "operatic" drama, but it's not working very hard to be subtle or "clever." It's just common-sense, easily-accessible storytelling, from the lighting to the colors to the dialogue. Everyone of all ages can watch and enjoy.

(It doesn't mean a Star Wars movie is not profound—it means that it lets simple-truths shine, because truths that are plain and simple are profound, and only arrogant "intellectuals" can't accept that and clamor for something more "complex" just for the pleasure of hearing the gears in their own heads click. Anyway.)

So The Last Jedi gets that right. You know what doesn't?

Andor. The Star Wars show on Disney+. Andor does not get the Star Wars Style & Tone right. It tries too hard to be complex. It is all about grey areas and blurring the line between right and wrong, good and evil. It tries really hard to be "sophisticated" and "for mature fans." And its style and tone reflect that. It doesn't feel like Star Wars.

So you see how I can show the different examples of what gets this right and what gets this wrong, even in other areas of Star Wars—I'm not just biased and using the movie I like as a template. I enjoyed Andor. But Andor is not a good Star Wars story; not if I apply the metric fairly.

So that's "believable." You have to make the audience believe that they are re-entering the world, and seeing the characters, or the story itself, continue. Otherwise you lose them. Because you got them in the first place with a promise: "you're going to see a continuation."

Let's move on to "compelling."

To be "compelling," you have to tell a good story. That's it. That's all.

It is good and right to re-enter a franchise's "world" and shine a light on the same main-point as the original stories—from a new set of characters' perspective. It is good and right to not re-tell and reboot the same old characters and recount their lives, over and over. It is good and right to make a new story that continues the theme of the old story.

And as long as you're doing that, you don't need to follow any other supposed "rules" that the "fandom" made up.

The Last Jedi does that perfectly. It takes the characters that were introduced in "The Force Awakens," takes into account where each of them began and where we last left them, and then believably and compellingly moves forward.

That's all it was supposed to do. And it did it, super super well. In a way most Star Wars media does not.

Like for example, I said Andor is a bad continuation of the Star Wars franchise because it gets the Style and Tone wrong, right? So it's not "believable" as a Star Wars story?

Well, the other side of the coin is also true. Ahsoka, another Disney+ Star Wars story, is on the other end of the spectrum. It might nail (in lots of ways) the "Style and Tone" of a Star Wars story, to make it believable. But it's not compelling. Because it gets the other thing wrong: it's a bad story.

The Last Jedi gets both "believability" and "compelling storytelling" totally right.

But the fans didn't want a good story. They didn't want a continuation of the Star Wars theme, because they probably never really thought about what that theme really was.

No. The fans wanted what I call 💫 A Checklist of Star Wars Stuff Disguised As a Story 💫 . They wanted to hear more name-drops of characters from Deep Cuts in the previous movies. They wanted the New Characters to have familial ties to their favorite Old Characters. They wanted the movies to be about the Old Characters—so they really wanted Luke Skywalker to come out swinging as an undetectable Jedi Messiah with no character flaws who makes the New Characters look like fools because the fans hate the New Characters. They also wanted more Old Characters to come back, and they would only have liked the New Characters if those characters, in and of themselves, were...bad characters, because Star Wars fans, by and large, really often forget what made their precious Old Characters well-written characters in the first place. And that was: human flaws.

Luke is always focused on how he can control his future, especially when it comes to fulfilling his destiny or saving his friends. That's a flaw. That's pride. But Star Wars fans forgot that that's Luke's "fatal flaw." They just remember the nostalgia of green lightsaber backflips and retconned Legends books.

So then when Rey comes along and is focused on her past, and has her own pride issues, the fans go "ew, she's so annoying, let's nitpick about whether or not she could win a fight in real life."

Because Star Wars fans went into The Last Jedi believing that "A Good Star Wars Story has Luke Skywalker Being a Total Beast, a Realized Messiah who Dominates New Characters," or "A Good Star Wars Story Has Ultra-Powerful Villains Who Fit the Previously-Done-to-Death Mold, Like a Video Game Boss..." then they found the movie unbelievable. They don't believe it because they had silly expectations going in.

The one thing they can't deny was that it was compelling. Every showing I went to, even way past the premier, you could cut the tension in the theater with a knife when you were supposed to, you could feel the air move as everybody gasped when they were supposed to, you could hear laughter at all the right moments and empathy with the characters at all the right moments. But then a few months after the release, and online, everybody's claiming to have hated it. I know that's not true. I experienced it.

But Mark Hamill, the guy who played Luke Skywalker, ran his mouth about how he didn't understand Luke's character direction. He very cleverly, in interviews, set himself up as the Actor who Understands His Character being ignored and misunderstood by a Plebian Director...and as a "consequence," they "got Luke all wrong." So then of course the nostalgic fan base, who already had silly expectations, feels those silly expectations justified by the actor from their childhood. Who is wrong about his own character, I don't care, that's happened before, actors are wrong about their own characters, get over it.

Anyway. My point is, The Last Jedi is controversial because it's a good story, and not a Star Wars Checklist Disguised as a Story. And people have a skewed idea of what stories are for, so no wonder they have a skewed understanding of what made Star Wars good—and if you don't know what makes it good, you won't be satisfied when the real thing comes back around in the form of a good sequel. Because you thought "good" meant "name drops, intellectual tickling, and a regurgitation of Focus on Old Characters to entertain me."

You could apply this whole measurement-system for sequels to where the MCU did everything right for so long, and how it's doing it all wrong here recently. Anyway.

I have a lot of posts expanding on this. One or two argument-reblog-matches with fans who hated the movie, too. They're not very popular, because people have been majorly gaslit by the loudest Star Wars fans concerning the Sequel Trilogy.

Thanks for reading!

[namesisfortombstones]

Okay, we need to deal with this once and for all...

Why in the hell do people seem convinced that Clint Eastwood's character in the Dollars Trilogy are three different people? Like, who put that into their head and why are they listening to such lies?

So, because Gian Maria Volonte, Mario Brega, and Lee Van Cleef are all playing different characters, Clint has to be as well? That's an American mindset… and these are not American movies; that's not how acting and filmmaking are regarded overseas. For example, actor Michael Ripper appears in the Hammer horror films Dracula Has Risen from the Grave, Taste the Blood of Dracula, and Scars of Dracula as three completely separate characters. But that does not mean that Christopher Lee's Dracula are three different Draculas.

They also point to "the Man With No Name was made up by United Artists as a marketing ploy." Yes, they did, but that doesn't mean Clint still isn't the same man in all three films. You know what isn't a marketing ploy? The Italians referred to the character as "Il Straniero/The Stranger." That was their "man with no name" name back then in the 60s. The Italians have since adopted calling him "Uomo Senza Nome/Man Without Name."

And people seem to be convinced somehow that "Sergio Leone and Clint Eastwood both said he's three different people." No, they didn't. Never once has Clint made that claim. And Sergio Leone co-wrote all three films (and Once Upon a Time in the West--more there later) and he wrote him as the same man.

But the facts of the matter are there to see in the movies if you watch them. In For a Few Dollars More, the second film, il Straniero is referred to as "Manco." "Manco" in Italian means "mangled" and it refers to his hand being crushed by Chico (Mario Brega) near the end of A Fistful of Dollars. If you pay attention, you'll notice Manco does everything in that movie (play cards, karate chop, drink, etc.) left-handed… except shoot. He still shoots with his right hand. If you pay extra close attention, you'll see that the Man With No Name wears his poncho backwards… to hide the bullet holes shot into it by Ramon Rojo (Gian Maria Volonte) at the end of Fistful.

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly is an origin story for the character, set during the Civil War before the previous two films. The movie literally has a plot point about how the Man With No Name got his poncho! It chronicles how the character changes from a selfish, dickish drifter to the more altruistic, caring person (as seen in the previous two films) after a near-death experience. Additionally, whilst the dialogue in the screenplay for the film only refers to Clint's character as "Il Biondo/Blondie," the descriptive passages of the script refer to him as "Joe," the nickname given him by Peripero in A Fistful of Dollars.

"But the Man With No Name has $100,000 in gold at the end of The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. He has to be a different character because he's poor at the beginning of A Fistful of Dollars!" According to co-writer of For a Few Dollars More and The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, Luciano Vincenzioni, he's poor again at the beginning of Fistful because he gave the $100,000 to Father Ramirez's mission for saving his life. Now, why would he have that answer if they're all different people? Why wouldn't he have said "Oh, they're not the same man," when asked?

On top of that, Once Upon a Time in the West was originally meant to be the final adventure for il Straniero/Joe/Manco/Blondie/the Man With No Name. This gets complicated, so saddle in.

After The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, Sergio Leone didn't want to do another western. He wanted to make Once Upon a Time in America, even way back then. But Paramount Pictures told him "We'll make America with you… but you have to give us another western first." So he set about on his fourth western. The script he and his writers (Sergio Donati, Bernardo Bertolucci, and Dario Argento) concocted revealed that everything Il Straniero did in the previous movies was all sort of a training for a revenge duel with Frank (presumably because Frank did to him what he did to Harmonica in the finished film). This is why it would have been such a shocking moment for the audience when Frank asks who the Man With No Name is and he responds "Dave Jenkins." The audience would've gasped, thinking "That's his name?!" before discovering it's just one of Frank's victims. The problem is that on the set of The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, Eastwood and Leone had a huge fight that nobody seems to talk about often. I've heard that it was Eastwood finally having enough of the lackadaisical manner in which Italians made movies and I've heard it was Leone finally having enough of Eastwood cheating on his wife with his interpreter. Whatever the subject of the fight was, it is what ruined/ended the relationship between Leone and Eastwood. When it came time to make Once Upon a Time in the West, Leone flew to California to personally deliver the script to Eastwood, but Clint would not meet with him (I've also read an interview with Lee Van Cleef where he revealed he was offered the role of Frank when it was set to star Eastwood, but turned it down because he didn't like the script. And he apparently didn't like the finished film when he saw it either). So with his main star gone and still having to deliver the film to Paramount, Leone returned to Italy with his writers and was forced to turn Il Straniero/etc into the new character Harmonica and go from there (and finally managed to cast Charles Bronson in the role). Leone later came up with an idea to have the three gunmen at the beginning of the film be cameos by Eastwood, Van Cleef, and Eli Wallach (though, they were never meant to be the Man With No Name, Angel Eyes, and Tuco--just three randos like in the finished film). It was both a gag and a storytelling device to show the audience, "You thought these guys were bad/cool… Harmonica's even worse/better!" Wallach was in for it. Eastwood was having none of it and Van Cleef turned it down too. For what it's worth, Leone continued to try to work with Clint; he wanted him for the James Coburn character in Duck, You Sucker, but Eastwood wouldn't do it either.

So, whether you call him Joe, Manco, Blondie, the Man With No Name, or The Stranger, they are all the same man in all three films. Unfortunately, the lie that he's not has spread way further than it ever should have.

[queer-ragnelle]

What are some of the weirdest stories/books/movies etc you've encountered in your Arthuriana journey? Whatever weird might mean to you (good/bad/unsettling/unexpected/surreal/goofy)

Hi anon!

This is honestly a tough thing to answer because what even constitutes a weird Arthurian retelling? They're all pretty weird haha! But I definitely have a few that come to mind

The French film Perceval (1978) is super weird in a great way! It's shot on a stage with painted backgrounds and metallic trees and structures for the set. Real horses are brought on. A troupe of bards provide diegetic music, playing instruments and singing a narration of events on screen while also acting as characters in their own right (such as the jester Kay throws into the fire). Perceval and Gauvain narrate their own stories in third person at times too. It's surreal! It's as if Perceval's world is "fake," since his mother has kept him isolated for so long, it's a distorted view of reality. This is the closest adaptation of Chrétien de Troyes's Story of the Grail I can think of, it's nearly word-for-word, BUT! They removed the racism and antisemitism. Two thumbs up! The ending is bananas. There's no describing it, you just have to watch. You can download this movie from my MEGA drive or it can be watched for free on Tubi! (Content warning for nudity and some gore.)

The film Unidentified Flying Oddball (1979) is my favorite adaptation of Mark Twain's A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. The main character Tom works for NASA developing an android named Hermes. Through a comedy of errors, both Tom and Hermes end up launched into space at the speed of light, traveling through time, and crash land in Camelot, 508AD. Mordred mistakes Tom for a monster (due to his space suit and orb-shaped helmet) but Tom quickly wins Arthur's trust and allowed to hang out. He meets Sandy, a girl who thinks her dad has been transformed into a goose, and together with her and a page named Clarance, works to return home. It's exceedingly silly. I much prefer the character Tom (and Hermes, who is identical in appearance to Tom and jousts for him) to Sir Boss in the Connecticut Yankee film from 1949 with Bing Crosby. Tom's gun is funnier than the original as it's more like a science-fiction laser that blows things up. He also has a magnet ray he uses to draw armored knights where he wants. Not a good film, but goofy and fun. You can download this movie from my MEGA drive! (No content warnings, it's a family movie!)

The film Excalibur (1981) obviously has to make this list. Coincidentally, it's mostly for Percival again. The Grail Quest segment accounts for just 20 minutes of the entire film, but it feels like eons. And it's So Weird. It's safe to call it horror. Percival meets struggle after struggle, encountering many dead comrades along the way, raving mad townspeople struggling to survive, Morgan and Mordred attempting to steer him wrong. He's eventually hung from a tree and has a vision of God's voice. (Hallucination or real?) The dead knight dangling above him sways and his spurs cut Percival free. From there he runs into Uriens and holds him as he dies, struck down by miscreant knights. Percival eventually achieves the grail, obviously, but it's not until he's pushed the absolute limits. It's probably one of my favorite sequences in film ever. 11/10. You can download this from my MEGA drive! (Content warning for nudity, rape, gore, and incest.)

As for books, I recommend The Modern Arthur Trilogy by Peter David. The first one is Arthur running for mayor of NYC, the second one is President of the United States, and the third one he sort of becomes a god. It's wild. Other characters include Guinevere, Lancelot, Morgan le Fay, Mordred, Percival, Merlin, and of course the Lake of the Lake. The sequels randomly add Gilgamesh and Enkidu (and later Noah, like the guy with an ark in the Bible??) and it's all very strange indeed. The first book is definitely the best but Gilgamesh/Enkidu were pretty freaky (affectionate) so I did enjoy that, although the whole premise of book two is...meh. I listened to the graphic audio books which were awesome, the sound effect of Arthur falling down the subway stairs in full armor is worth every penny. (Content warning for incest, murder, cannibalism, racism, and terrorism)

[david-talks-sw]

So, why should I care about Lucas’s narrative? Like seriously why should I care? Not to sound dismissive but a genuine curiosity? Man sold it for one thing and the EU and the fans that made it showed Star Wars was may more then his narrative at some point.

If anything Star Wars moved beyond Lucas’s narrative even before he sold it. Even from a grande perspective his narrative stopped mattering in some sense the minute A New Hope arrived and became a hit.

Oh, you're free not to care about it.

But the fact remains:

When Lucasfilm creatives promote new content, they’ll use George as an authority figure to legitimize what they say.

Big chunks of the fandom do the same by using Lucas’ words to make authority arguments on why they believe the new films and the current direction of the franchise is good or bad.

Seeing as there seems to be a general consensus that Lucas’ word holds some power, I'd rather set the record straight on what he actually stated and intended.

You totally can just say “death of the author, what Lucas intended or what he said outside the movies doesn’t matter, what matters is what’s actually on screen” and I’d have nothing to counter that argument with because this is a subjective stance. We can debate its merits, but that’d result in a much larger discussion about the place of authorial intent in fiction.

But again, you can discard my posts and analyses by simply saying:

“I don’t care what Lucas stated, I’m a free-thinker and I can interpret any movie I watch however I want.” 

At which point, the only answer I can give you is “cool, good for you”. 

You wouldn’t be the only person I’ve met who takes this approach, either. I have friends who are older than me, saw the Original Trilogy films in theaters and felt Lucas’ dropped the ball as early as Episode VI: Return of the Jedi or the Special Editions, let alone the Prequel films. These friends don’t put Lucas on the same pedestal as everyone else seems to do, and flat out tell me:

“David, either the Jedi are the problem or the Prequels are bad, I don’t care what Lucas was going for, the result is crap and the only thing that makes it all have some degree of sense is that interpretation.”

And I mean… what do I say to that? What can you say to that? That’s a personal interpretation of a movie, it’s not an opinion that’s less valid than anyone else’s. 

But when I’m taking this approach, I’m not saying “your read of the movie is inferior to that of George Lucas” (unless you confer some degree of power to his word, as the creator of the franchise).

All I’m saying is “Lucas’ message was X”. 

You can agree with the message, you can disagree with the message, the message may be factually/morally/philosophically right or wrong, that’s all debatable. 

I’m just pointing out that, when you look at all the data and you go by what George Lucas stated, it’s X, not Y, like most of the fandom and even authors of the franchise seems to keep stating.

Finally, on a personal note:

I don't like the fact that every time I see my childhood heroes on screen, nowadays, they're portrayed as protocol-worshipping stoic assholes.

I don't like that 90% of the fandom thinks that's how they're meant to be seen when the data demonstrates it's not.

I don't like that the reason my childhood heroes keep being portrayed in this uncharitable light is because the fans from the generation prior to mine - whom these characters weren't meant for - wanted to ensure that their childhood hero, Luke Skywalker, would be preserved as "the ultimate Jedi" and concluded that the only way to do so would be to reframe the Prequel Jedi as dogmatic and emotionless.

So now the OT fans have Luke, the Sequel fans have Rey, the TCW fans have Ahsoka... all unsullied protagonists.

Whereas pro-Jedi PT fans need to mentally ready themselves for when Lucasfilm decides to release the nth "Windu was more strict than a droid" case.

[prince-toffee]

So, I rewatched the trailer over and over again, I stepped back, organised my thoughts, and I think I get it.

So first the Bad, then the GOOD, because there's actually a lot to like here.

The Bad:

So, the trend of companies kicking actual voice actors onto the curb and replacing them with celebrities continues. I remember being really angry when they first announced the voice cast, and I still am. It's quite literally the most boring, generic casting possible. You can not get much more white bread, milk toast than a Chris and Scar - I want to play an Asian woman and trans man - jo. Also, why is Chris Hemsworth here? Do he really need the money? Did Thor 4 damage his pockets that bad? There are so many talented voice actors that could've been Orion, David Kaye is a prime example Animated Optimus and Beats Wars/Unicron Trilogy Megatron, beloved by fans, if he was announced people would've been over joyed. I love Brian Tyree Henry, and he actually has some experience with va work as he voiced Jeff Morales in Spider-Verse, my original criticism still stands.... And Kegan, oh Kegan, I love you so much, Key and Peele was my childhood, and the Toad performance was perfectly fine, endearing even. But as Bee? I'm sorry, but no, that's not BumbleBee that's just actor/comedian Kegan Michael Key, I can't hear anything else. And it doesn't help that he's handed the worst lines.

Which brings us to the comedy. First impressions are EVERYTHING. And if you fumble that that hurts your film, and the perception of your film. I think that's really the problem here, it's a bad trailer not necessarily bad content. Packing the trailer with jokes for the sake of jokes and having that samey Hollywood liscensed music cringey feel to it. Like the guitar riff that played when the 'This Fall' card came up just made me turn off the video immediately. That's why I recommend watching the trailer without sound. Bee's jokes don't really land for me, I'm sure kids with love it tho, and that's good. But I'm sure all the jokes won't be bad, the final door gag is actually really funny. So I think it was just a bad joke that soured out feel of the tone at the beginning, which is unfortunate because like I said first impressions are everything. Because this is Josh Cooly, of Up, Inside Out, Toy Story 4 fame, I'm sure the film will have an emotional core to it.

A minor thing I don't much care for is having Bee be in the same age range as Orion, in my mind he's always constructed during the war at like the half way mark or near the end, he's the little brother of the group, and now he's old enough to remember Op and Megs before the war. Also he sounds way too old.

Oh, also I don't like Orion's personality.

Good:

Now for the good; I think the animations style is gorgeous. Would have I liked something Spider-Verse/Mutant Mayhem-esk, of course, but what are you gonna do? The stand out here is the environments, a visual feast. This might already be my favourite Cybertron, it's so different yet reminisant of the Cybertron we know. The fact that the surface transformers and shifts and changes is genius, very IDW Phase 2 inspired. And the fact that Cybertron is a techno-organic hybrid world ala Beast Machines is crazy! I love that, and wildlife! I bet that's how we get the cassettes. The character models are great too, you can actually tell what emotion is happening on a person's face. Gone are the days of faces being made up of razor blades and mandibles BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT INSECTS FUCK YOU MICHAEL BAY. THEY'RE PEOPLE! There's the nose, the lips, the eyes, and I can tell where one begins and ends. The eyes are gorgeous and detailed, and the face surface detail has smuges, wear, specs of dirt, metallic texture. Like, you nailed it! It's a person but a robot, you got it!

We see what we assume are the 13 Primes, Alpha Trion being the only survivor, maybe they were killed by the Quintessons and they took over. D-16, a ref to IDW and his toys designation in the toy catalogue, he'll obviously name himself after Megatronus ala TF Prime. He seems to have the Decepticon insignia before meeting The Fallen so maybe Megatronus' face is some sort of religious iconography, the Primes are a religion on Cybertron after all. It's all so fascinating, I can't remember the last time I was so excited to learn more about a new TF continuity.

Orion and D-16 are both miners and or workers, that's a refreshing take, no coptimus here. They've suffered the same way together, I bet story will be about dealing with that pain, what justice means, how far one is willing to take it and where justice stops and injustice begins. I know people are mad that the origins are a little different, but I ask you, different from what? Which continuity are you talking about? TF has never had a consistent singular timeline, and that's what I love about this franchise! It builds on itself with each new continuity! Take a bit of the old, mix it with new ideas and create something fresh, then that old guard leaves and a new team takes over and does the same and the franchise continues to evolve or should I say transform. Like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get, and new incarnations always give second chances to improve apon what came before. No Reboots, no risks means no Skybite, or Nemesis Prime, no Stasis Pods, Sparks, Protoforms, Energon ore, no Star Saber, Hot Shot, Knock Out, Airachnid, no All Spark, no Sari, no Bulkhead, no old grumpy Ratchet, none of that. Reboots are a part of this franchise's DNA. I sense the people that are complaining are the people who only value one continuity and discard all others.

It's really neat this universe's version of The Cast System is lower class worker protoforms being denied a Transformation Cog, it seems like it's reserved for the higher classes, the very thing that makes their species special and unique is denied to them. Also I didn't notice it the first time, but Alpha actually pulls the t-cogs out of the dead Primes which kind of signifies a passing of the guard, the old Primes failed, now it's your turn, and of course history repeats itself with the downfall of Megatron.

I like how Trion is covered and intertwined with moss and vines and has a beast mode, showcasing that he's of an older era now gone and forgotten.

Some other smaller stuff:

The sun looks like a holographic simulation, which makes me wonder, Cybertron doesn't usually have a sun, but there's plant life now, so what's up?

The cave that the dead Primes and Trion are in kinda looks like a Dweller.

Megatron's black helmet is a ref to Marvel G1.

That spin kick where Elita twirls her entire waist around is sooo satisfying. I love it.

AIRACHNID!!?!!!! MY QUEEN HAS RETURNED!!!!!!!

I think that's a good point to end on. So, yeah, v excited.