#tl;dr — if you make good movies people will actually come

[lilietsblog]

Ok so first of all there's always going to be BAD ART. Of any art form. Movies feel special because they take so much work, so shouldn't they all come out good because of that? No. That's not how making art and storytelling works.

Well, movies ARE a little bit special. For most/all other forms of art, there's a filter between actually /making/ the thing and /publishing/ the thing. You can draw a picture that doesn't come out right, and you can just put it away in a folder and draw another. You can write a book that you then look at and realize is not up to your standards, and you just don't send it to a publisher or self-publish and nobody needs to know.

Movies? Are way too expensive for that. There's way too much investment from way too many people to just put a movie away without anyone ever knowing it was made. Losses need to be recouped at least partially. It does not, at that point, matter if the movie is good or bad, SOMEONE will hopefully pay to see it.

(Then there's the serially published works that don't have this luxury, and there TV shows have incredibly greater reach and universality than any other serial media. Most works on RoyalRoad, most webcomics etc only get /known/ if they pass the filter of minimal audience engagement. Fanfiction has 0 reach outside of the fandom, short of getting rewritten to have original characters, which puts it into the traditionally published novel category. TV shows are on TV, which means everyone who watches TV has a chance to just stumble on them)

Now I don't know much about filmmaking, maybe I'm off-base with some of this. But I don't think this is a capitalist vs communist problem.

For one, communism as central planning - as you said, committees and government-approved budgets - is an incredibly bad economic system. Like, not morally bad, like bad at being an economy. I can elaborate on that if anyone wants, but tl;dr Do Not Do This. It will not improve art either, for all the reasons noted.

If you want more good movies, proportionally, what you want is a filter that allows bad movies to be made and then /not published/. What would allow this?

a cultural shift towards lower-budget movies. If everyone is more interested in stuff that has theatrical type production with visibly painted cardboard props and dance routines from like ten people as large scale battle choreography, that'll relieve a lot of the financial/organizational pressure, I think;

technological advances! We've already got a whole new short-form video genre on tiktok, including with people who are amazing actors playing multiple roles switching around clothing and angles. Yes, most tiktoks are bad, see again: any and all art, but like my tumblr dash only has the good ones filter to it and I'm quite happy for that;

An economic system where the average person has A LOT more free time and money on their hands. I will refrain from going on a UBI tangent here, but tl;dr the only way to avoid movies needing to recoup losses and therefore going to publication even when they didn't come out good, is to have these losses be genuinely write-off-able. Filmmaking needs to become a plausible hobby, like writing or drawing, something you do without expectation of necessarily making money off it. Communally, meaning a lot of people in the same hobbyist community need to have this ability at the same time in the same place.

(No, the USSR was not this. Everyone involved was a professional that the state was paying to make movies. The state could afford to discard some movies that were being made, yes, but you don't want "the state" to be the decider any more than you want "the corporation" to be the decider. The creatives involved need to be in charge, and that means doing something about budget concerns, as said above)

Yes, you will always need someone to organize production and such. There are people, I know for a fact, who would gladly do that as a hobby /if/ that were logistically possible in their lives. See amateur theatre, a very real thing that is not particularly far from filmmaking.

The key is not "making better movies". The key is "making movies in a way where you can afford to then discard them if you don't like them".

I've been trying to get a good overview of communist art, and it's difficult, partly because of the language barrier, but also partly because I think what I want isn't the art itself, it's a comparison of how the landscape of art-making shifts.

Movie-making, in particular, is a massive undertaking that requires a fair amount of time and money if you want to do it right. You need someone to write it, someone to direct it, someone to act in it, a cinematographer, some lighting, sound and music ... under a communist model, none of this would actually change. You would still need to acquire the personnel and make sure they were housed and fed. You would still need sets to be built and artists to devote their time and energy.

So one of the common criticisms of capitalism is that it produces Bad Art, that everyone is just trying to make a buck and they don't care about the product unless it finds consumers who will pay out cash. Everything is geared for the lowest common denominator. This gets worse as you involve more and more capital.

But I've always wondered: is this not also true under communism?

I don't mean in practice, that question is simple, all you have to do is read up on the film production processes from a number of different communist and formerly communist countries, whose source materials are often not accessible in English, mired in propaganda and disputes, and cover many decades. Easy peasy. I did what I think is a surface skim, but the common threads were that film studios were state-owned, scripts were approved by party officials, there were regular reviews during production, and a final review before release. You usually have to promote socialist values, or at least not criticize the current regime, and you have reviews for "ideological content". In spite of all this, some good movies got made, some bad movies got made, and some movies were banned for lack of ideological conformity or "frivolity". There are different eras to filmmaking in every country, times when the industry was thriving and times that it crashed to the ground in spectacular fashion as the government involved itself. A lot depended on who was in power and what the then-current ideology was. I think it's tempting to say that the widely agreed upon "great films" got made in spite of having ideological overview, but it's hard for me to evaluate that claim, and if someone said "the great American films were made in spite of capitalism" I think that also would be a difficult claim to evaluate, even though I've actually seen a pretty substantial amount of the canon and speak the language most often used in analysis of production processes.

No, what I mean is that in theory there's someone that has to be running the numbers. The film studio is state-run, sure, everyone is in state housing or whatever, they're getting food somehow ... but someone, somewhere, is authorizing all this. You don't make a film without a plan, so those plans have to be submitted to someone, or a committee, and that committee has to decide which films will get made and which will remain a dream. And if they're doing that, then they're either trying to make the film that they think benefits the country the most, or they're applying their own taste and judgment, but probably both.

And if you're under some kind of model where no one runs the numbers, where film-making is entirely volunteer work, then you still have problems, because you need this large volunteer organization, and you need to bring them in on your vision, and if they can just walk away, you need to maintain that energy and vision through the whole process.

I guess what I'm saying is that yes, capitalism presents problems when it comes to this specific artform, but I feel like as soon as you're out from under the yoke of the dollar, you're immediately under some other yoke. And I do wish that when people saw a bad film and said "the problem is capitalism" they would take a moment to consider that maybe there is always necessarily going to be oversight and compromise, just because of the nature of the enterprise.

This does not apply nearly so much to other forms of art, like those that can be done by a single person sitting in a room all alone.

[rottmnt-residuum]

Hi, I've read the Residuum comic, and I think the characterization of the boys is really good. I was wondering if you have any tips on how to write them? Especially Mikey, please.

I'd actually recommend re-watching the show with one character in mind. All my notes on the turtles come from doing separate re-watches for each of them. The key is to ONLY watch the character you are focusing on.

In the end, you'll probably be happier with your own personal interpretation. As we are with ours lol

TL;DR

Massive post under the cut

To preface: we'll be contrasting (this Mikey) against the fandoms version of Mikey, as our interpretation is very different. Don't worry if you prefer the fandom version, there's nothing… wrong per se with writing him this way. We just find him flat and uninteresting. (Main author: not me, I just hate him, lol).

Every reader or fan comes into a story with their own biases and experiences. A ton of our view of Mikey is based on how our siblings acted. We see Mikey as the young sibling that got preferential treatment from the whole family, simply due to being the youngest, but is now aging out of the privilege. Which all youngest siblings do at some point or another.

The fandoms version of Mikey is empathetic, naive, vulnerable, co-dependent and quite often a door mat who cries at the drop of a hat. And as much as the fandom like to say that people love him… when this particular character archetype is in other media, they seem to attract the most criticism. Mable pines, Bolin from Korra, people rag on Aang all the fucking time, and Steven Universe is a whole other bag. These characters don't deserve it, and yet it happens anyway.

To flatten Mikey to simply 'the baby' is a disservice. We don't see or write Mikey as the fandom “baby” version (cinnamon roll uwu). Part of this comes from having multiple siblings, so we interpret the times when Mikey does the puppy dog eyes as typical younger sibling bullshit, mostly by the way that the other turtles rarely react to it, if at all.

The other turtles traits can also get projected onto Mikey. Mikey being the fandom therapist is in the same category as this. He isn't a therapist, he's a psychology nerd who likes to psychoanalyze people and meddle in their relationships. (Donnie and Shelldons relationship, Splinter and Draxums...) he's not trying to resolve your emotional issues. Of the turtles, the character that cares the most about people's feelings is Raph. And Leo is more of a consoler than Mikey ever is. It flattens all the turtle's characterizations when you start doing this because you are ripping out parts that are integral to another characters' complexity.

Co-author has told me that they've seen people become confused when going into the show after only reading fan fiction or coming from the movie. They see his characterization as inconsistent and become upset when their view of him is contradicted. This also happens when a fandomized version of him becomes the primary characterization that they use. Sometimes when this disconnect happens (or if they just don't like the character), Mikey characterization is swung in the complete opposite direction.

They make him manipulative and abusive, or someone who is hyper violent and avoids being held accountable for anything. This is an uncharitable interpretation of him and can come off as pretty racist depending on the circumstances. (like if someone considers the turtles black or not)

Every version of Mikey is a shithead (affectionate), even this one. Especially this one, really. When Mikey not doing the "baby schtick" hes mean. If you pay attention to what he's saying, and just not his tone of voice, he's consistently saying pretty mean or condescending stuff. (You could take this as simply naïveté, but he still says mean shit pretty often regardless)

The times he does say genuinely nice stuff the turtles don't exactly expect it from him, at least, in the early season. And while he is mean, and seems to find saying mean things to be funny, Mikey isn't cruel. Nor will he ever be.

This shit-headery behavior is found in both 2003 and 18 Mikey. They have a degree of social intelligence that lets them use it to annoy people into doing what they want. 18 just has the advantage of being baby faced and having better tonal control. He's good at using people's perception of him to get what he wants.

Let Mikey have his problematic traits, but don't overexaggerate them. He doesn't revel in fooling people. He loves doing character bits, and the baby faced one just happens to be one of them. However, to infantilize or to deem him incompetent is to piss him off, he wants to be viewed as a competent part of the team and competent as an individual. He's not insecure about being young, he just doesn't want to be treated like he can't do anything.

Mikey above all is an optimistic character, he sees the brighter side quite often and is conscious of the harm his actions have on people. Mostly after the fact, but he consistently attempts to rectify the harm he has personally done to peoples lives. (Todd, Bullhop, Draxum). Food and shelter seems to be a thing that he considers to be a right. He doesn't cross a boundary twice once he learns of it, and he never pushes people too far (if he likes you, that is. if he doesn't know you or doesn't like you, he doesn't give a singular shit. But that is standard to most people.). He doesn't care about people's stuff, though. He breaks things all the time.

Mikey understands boundaries, but he doesn't automatically recognize them. He needs them to verbalized or for there to be a very obvious reaction to the boundary being crossed (unfortunately, for Todd and Donnie). Sometimes people mess up (esp. younger people), and it can take a while for teens to learn where boundary is, but he fully respects the boundaries he does know about. He doesn't act petulant when he's told about boundary, he apologizes, accepts it, and moves on. He doesn't dwell.

Mikey doesn't hold on to distressing emotions. He bounces between emotions quickly, but isn't effected in the long run. One thing Iv'e seen people often conflate is the difference between sensitive and vulnerable. Mikey is sensitive, but I have never seen him vulnerable to others. To be sensitive is to be easily influenced by the current situation. To be vulnerable is to hold that influence for a long time. Characters can have one, both, or neither of these traits. But Mikey is not vulnerable. It is the difference between compressing memory foam and a piece of metal until they deform. One will pop back, the other does not.

Those who are vulnerable but not sensitive will take longer to effect, but once you do, they will hold on to that emotion for a very long time. The vulnerable, are grudge holders. (leo). But like I've said, Mikey bounces back. What a character does has an effect on his emotions, but it doesn't make a lasting impression.

Forgiveness is another thing people like to push on him. It is not that Mikey forgives people easily, it's just that he doesn't hold grudges. He neither forgives nor forgets, but he does not ruminate. He's generally affable, first impressions seem to be a big part of how he views people. He is idealistic, and doesn't assume people are unchanging and/or evil, but he's not a mark.

Mikey isn't so much as naive or overly trusting… it's just that he's inexperienced. He doesn't get fooled by anyone in the series except meat sweats, and that's because Meatsweats is on Todd drugs. Mikey just didn't notice when he started faking. He's not… actually all that aware of people's emotional states, passively. He has to tune in to notice things like that.

Mikey isn't someone who really tries to regulate others emotions, either. The fandom like to make Mikey afraid of his brothers fighting and others being upset, but Mikey doesn't actually care. The most distressed we ever see him in a fight is in the movie, and he's not SCARED, he's just concerned (and then alarmed once it turned physical). If anything, outside extenuating circumstances (like the movie), Mikey actually seems to find their fights annoying.

(Mikey actually seems to have a pretty short fuse, but his bounciness doesn't really let it linger very long, lmao)

(One pet peeve of fandom Mikey is the constant crying, crying at fights, crying at insults, crying for no reason all the time. Sure, he tears up when he gets emotional, but when Mikey is genuinely crying It's when he's desperate, like when he's hungry, or when he's trying to save Leo from certain doom. Same thing, really.)

Mikey respects no one (we love him for this). He admires people, he admires his family: April, the turtles, his dad, Lou Jitsu. He admires Rupert Swaggert, but he respects none of them. No one is sacrosanct to the Mikey.

Above all, the way we write characters is to give them a past that informs how they act now. We view Mikey and the other turtles as teenagers that were kids, and that will be adults. Yes they all have “problematic” traits, but 1) good characters need flaws, and controversial traits are one of the best to use, and 2) they're teenagers, don't expect adult behaviors from them, also don't expect them to be kids. They're minors, not toddlers.

This is getting as long enough as it is, so we'll stop here, but this is a very broad overview of how we characterize him. There's a lot we didn't cover here, but if we even started on hobbies, or the real minutia of his quirks and ticks, or even how he feels about other specific characters... we'd be here all day. So I hope this is good enough lol

If there was something you wanted to know in particular, you'll need to get specific. Feel free to ask again ahahh

[arliedraws]

What are your thoughts on Sirius and Lily’s friendship?

While many in the fandom focus more on her friendship with Remus, but aside from one quote from the movie, there's not much evidence to support that.

Lily's friendships are mostly unexplored, primarily for Doylist reasons, making her relationship with Snape a plot twist in the story. However, based on little we know about her character, she could have been an close friend to Sirius, not just the wife of his best friend. Lily was loving, intelligent, confident, and empathetic—qualities that would allow her to relate to people with tough personalities.. (some Snape fans argue that she was a bad friend to him, but it’s important to remember that it was not her, who at 15 already wanted and later willingly chose to join a terrorist organization).

I think Sirius was naturally drawn to people he viewed as equals, which could explain why he could become closer to Lily than to Remus or Peter over time.

And her letter to him was the last treasure Sirius has of Lily and James :(

Ummmmmm. I took an hour of my life and wrote this. It’s like three pages of thought. But hey! I think I figured out how I see Lily . So thanks!

TL;DR: Sirius resented Lily until he didn’t, and then they were very close until she died.

If you want to read my full take, it’s under the cut.

First of all, to answer your question, I’d like to look at Lily overall.

I find Lily challenging as a character. There are so many ways to interpret her. She’s described as funny, smart, kind, brave, and beautiful. She’s also popular. And cheeky. Unlike James, there isn’t an unflattering side of her shown to Harry. This is why I’m not much of a Jily person—I wish I had what Jily people have regarding Lily. It’s so much easier to interpret a character based on their flaws than their strengths, their failings and how they deal with them than their successes.

I say this because we have to make guesses to her flaws. She made excuses for Snape for years when he was clearly being a prejudiced asshole behind her back. Who knows what he was actually saying about her? But he was her best friend, and she was loyal to him. Then, when his prejudice becomes public, that’s when she declares it the final straw.

My interpretation is that Lily wants to fit in. Unlike most people at school, she came in with a best friend. How cool! But it prevented her from getting close with anyone else. Maybe she has other friends, but I doubt they were very close (Snape would probably make sure of that). Lily is incredibly loyal—and if Snape says someone is bad news, I think she’d trust him.

Anyway, Snape rejecting her publicly was the last straw. She knew it was coming, but she loved him and she has to believe that people are flawed and deserve a second chance. And a third and a fourth and so on. Until she’s faced with arrogant toerag James Potter defending her in front of the whole school. Even this guy she can’t stand is appalled at Snape’s behavior.

Snape is embarrassing. He just is. He’s desperate, and he thinks groveling and kissing her feet will make up for being chummy and racist with his Death Eater wannabe buddies.

What does this have to do with Sirius?

Well, all this time, she’s spent years with these four boys who are clearly sneaking around after hours, will defend each other to the death, and won’t for a moment put up with anyone bullying their friends. Even pathetic little Peter is worth defending. Remus Lupin might even be a werewolf. But they don’t care—he belongs to them. Even when they’re alone, Lily sees that they aren’t two-faced, they aren’t pretending to care about each other.

It would have been very easy for Sirius to talk shit behind James’s back to stay in the good graces of his family/Slytherins. But he doesn’t. He doesn’t even talk to his brother.

I think Lily watches this over the years and wishes Snape were like Sirius. She wishes that just one time, Snape would defend her. When she finally tells Snape it’s over, I think she was desperately lonely in the aftermath. She’s popular, yes, but all the girls in her year have been friends for almost six years, and how could there be room for her? Lily is also incredibly proud. I don’t think she’d be asking to be friends with girls who tried to be her friend for ages but gave up every time she cheerfully told them, “Thanks for inviting me to hang out in Hogsmeade this weekend, but Sev and I are going to [fill in activity]!”

Anyway, Lily’s pride also keeps her from admitting to James she likes him. Maybe she doesn’t even have a crush or feelings romantically, but she’s incredibly aware of James. I think she’s jealous of his bond with his friends. Lily has an undercurrent of anxiety that she’ll be rejected—she’s a social chameleon. She can charm professors, she’s wicked smart, she’s pretty, and she’s funny and clever as hell. So here’s this guy, James Potter, who seems to be no one other than himself. He doesn’t have to pretend. An asshole, an arrogant prat, but undeniably honest.

James declares publicly that he likes her. This is…uhh…the opposite of Snape. Obviously. But Lily’s pride and embarrassment of the whole situation bruises her. I’m sure she also didn’t want people to think that she was dating Snape—would people think she was dating James to get back at Snape? Would they think she was desperate to be with a pureblood like James?

Meanwhile, Sirius is watching Lily Evans. Her friendship with Severus Snape has just exploded, and he watches her watching James. Sirius, who demonstrates canonically that he is very good at reading people, can see through Lily’s pleasant façade and unflappable exterior. Maybe she has friends, but he can see that she isn’t close with them. She’s a loner. She’s like him.

Here’s where I think Sirius and Lily match up—they’re both fearful of rejection, they’re extremely proud, and they’re exceptionally careful about how they allow others to see them. I think Sirius is more easily offended than Lily, but she’s also better at hiding when she’s hurt. To regain power, Sirius will punish you while Lily will regain her power by pretending it didn’t matter and your opinion doesn’t matter.

As soon as Lily is sans Snape, she becomes a threat to Sirius. He knows it’s only a matter of time before she gets over her pride and gets close to James, so he’s very wary of her. Soon she’ll figure out that James makes you feel like the cleverest person in the room. She’ll figure out that James will defend you until he’s dead. James loves his people too hard, and Sirius does not want to share him.

Well, once Lily and James become head boy and girl, keeping them apart is impossible. Sirius isn’t outwardly cold to her because James isn’t stupid, and he’d quickly know what Sirius was doing, but he’s not exactly welcoming either.

Lily and James become friends in seventh year. This is the first time James has had a friend outside of their group—and there are things he talks to her about that he doesn’t discuss with the others, not even Sirius. And Lily opens up. She even finds herself slipping out of her constant performance, and for the first time in her life, she can say whatever she wants. James loves when she’s silly. Not funny—everyone loves a funny—but silly. And he’s silly with her. And all of the pretending is gone, and Lily can be exactly herself and honest and not try to mold herself into what James wants her to be.

This is not good news for Sirius who has always been the one that James relies on for emotional support. And Sirius resents Lily a little. For the rest of their time at school, he’s fairly certain she’s just pretending.

Then school ends, and Dumbledore recruits them to the Order of the Phoenix. James and Lily are firmly together, and she just “gets” James. At least, that’s what James says. Very naturally, she knows what James is thinking and she respects him, and Sirius is secretly infuriated that she reads people as well as he does. It becomes clearer and clearer that Lily really does love James.

I think Sirius wants James to be happy—if James isn’t going to choose Sirius, then at least Lily makes him happy. And he forces himself to smile, cheers for them, champions their relationship. Except that Lily sees right through him, and she knows that if she doesn’t get Sirius on her side, one well-placed comment about her might influence James.

But also, she loves James and doesn’t want Sirius to fuck it up. There are a few ways they could become friends, but one way I’ve imagined is that Lily invites Sirius out for a drink. A good actor and loyal friend to James, he engages her in the sort of conversation he knows will interest her—they have shared interests, and she’s intelligent and creative like him. As long as they stay away from talking about James, he’s pleasant. Then, once they’re a few drinks in, Lily tells him that she doesn’t blame him for hating her. This stuns Sirius who thought he was being so clever. He insists she’s making things up, but Lily tells him that she feels the same way about Sirius—that she’s scared he’s going to take James away.

This is the sort of vulnerability Sirius needs to see from her. He needs to know that Lily hasn’t won—that she’s just as afraid of Sirius as he is of her, that she hasn’t tried to steal James from him. She just loves James for exactly the same reasons Sirius loves him. Lily promises that she will never keep Sirius away from James.

As time goes on, there are things that Lily can confess to Sirius that she can’t tell anyone else—and, eventually, Sirius starts to confide in her too. But it’s different than talking to James for both of them; they’re so incredibly similar that they understand each other on a level that James just doesn’t get.

I think you’re right—I think post-Hogwarts, Sirius was closer to Lily than he was to Remus or Peter. The friendship was hard-won, but canon supports a tight Sirius&Lily bond with that letter he kept.

In the end, I really do think he lost both of his best friends when James and Lily were killed—one was his soul mate and the other was his best friend.

[prettyinpwn]

What is your opinion on Filbrick Pines?

Oh boy... long story short, my opinion on him is pretty low, not gonna lie. I went into his character a lot in my analysis post on Ford's writing (found here), since Filbrick had a large effect on Stan and Ford's characters, even if only in subtle ways. To summarize my points on Filbrick:

Definitely abusive, in my opinion. I don't think physically, but for sure emotionally and mentally. He's the type of father who provided materially, but otherwise didn't seem very good at it.

Was way too focused on money. Now, I think it's very possible that Filbrick could have a great backstory reason for this. My biggest guess is a life of poverty and wanting to provide better for his family, but the cruel irony is that in seeking wealth, he hurt his family (e.g "Stanley, by "sabotaging" Ford you hurt our whole family, because he was going to make us millions, so I'm gonna throw you out, ignoring the fact that by throwing you out I'm currently hurting the family in the way I'm accusing you of."). He also hurt Ford. The way Filbrick treated Ford was like a Willy Wonka golden ticket. "Oh, you're smart? This college might make you a millionaire? I'm impressed!". He didn't care about what Ford wanted, he cared about what Ford's brains could get him. Case in point: he didn't seem to give a rat's ass about Ford's brains or college dreams until the principal implied it could make money.

Iirc, according to Hirsch, the quote Stan says in Little Gift Shop of Horrors ("Movies are great! You watch the movie, you scare the girl, the girl snuggles up next to you, next thing you know you gotta raise a kid. Your life falls apart. Forget that last part.") was actually something Filbrick used to say. Like DEAR GOD Filbrick said that in front of Stan and Ford? "Hey kids, my life was great until I got your ma knocked up with Shermie, and then my life was pure suck after that.". Like... who... who just says that in front of their kids? Who even THINKS that about their kids? Yikes.

The way Stan and Ford are named. The code at the end of A Tale of Two Stans is played as a joke, but when you think about it, it's... kinda sad. "A STUBBORN TOUGH NEW JERSEY NATIVE, FILBRICK WASN'T TOO CREATIVE, HAVING TWINS WAS NOT HIS PLAN, SO HE JUST SHRUGGED AND NAMED BOTH STAN.". Filbrick did not give a single f*ck. "Oh, I have twins? Eh, I'm too lazy to think about a name, just call 'em practically the same thing.". What father does this?

In the post I linked above, I also hinted at how I thought Bill's manipulations of Ford almost were a mirror echo of Filbrick (even in their character design, it's odd how they both have yellow brick and blue with hats themed designs, he's got the literal word 'brick' in his name, etc). Because when you think about it, what did Ford's father teach him but "you are a puppet to be used by me to get what I want"?

There's a reason Ford and Stan are incredibly broken people, and it all started with Filbrick. He's the one that taught Stan to believe he's worthless and a f*ckup, and the one that taught Ford that he's a tool to be used. So... nah, not a fan of the guy, if I didn't make that obvious already lol. BUT... I will say this, as this is something I did give him credit for in my Ford analysis post: a lot of Ford and Stan's positive qualities are things he passed down to them, namely their protectiveness of family and "toughness". But unlike Filbrick, who manifested that in toxic ways, Stan and Ford took a heavy albatross necklace of generational trauma and turned it around to a positive.

This goes even further when Stan passes the lesson to Dipper. Dipper learning to "fight back"? That's a family lesson that comes from Filbrick, originally, when he signed Stan and Ford up for boxing. Some have criticized the way Stan taught Dipper that lesson, but you can't argue with the end result:

TL;DR: Filbrick mostly sucks, but... like most well-written characters, he does have some gray area. Was he a good father? No. But the gauntlet meat grinder he put Ford and Stan through - worth it or not - made them the tough family protectors they are as adults. I will give him that, at least.

[astromechs]

ok i actually want to talk about this a little more, specifically with respect to a few of my favorite things: box office analysis, and industry shifts as a reflection of the wider culture.

i hear the term thrown around, and this article uses it, too — is the failure of madame web a reflection of "superhero fatigue"? in my opinion, yes and no.

is the failure of madame web related to franchise fatigue? yes and no.

while studio-produced and distributed comic book movies have existed and had success since the 1970s (think richard donner's superman, batman '89, etc), comic book movies gained real momentum in the 2000s. sony's original spider-man live action film series directed by sam raimi, as well fox's x-men movies, did pretty well at the box office; these showed studios that there was, indeed, a market here. marvel, which had sold off its film rights to its most popular characters in the late 90s when it was on the verge of bankruptcy, was now crying. additionally, nolan's 2005 batman begins was a modest success.

2008, though, with two little movies called iron man and the dark knight, heralded a meteoric rise in the popularity of comic book movies. which of course eventually brought the avengers, and — i don't need to tell you all of this.

by the late 2010s, it'd pretty much gotten to a point where anything with the marvel logo slapped in front of it printed money, everyone else wanted a piece of that pie, and hollywood had truly thought it'd found its golden goose. yes, they thought, we can keep making these forever and people will come. we don't have to put quality into them. who cares when they'll still come!

but audiences noticed this shoddy craftsmanship, these lazy films. audiences aren't as stupid as the average studio exec thinks they are — and what you've seen since particularly 2021 is people turning away from comic book movies, which have been saturating the market, as mid to low quality shit just continues to get pumped out and released.

i've been predicting the decline of the superhero movie for a while. when something dominates/saturates the market, it's inevitable; it happened to musicals, it happened to westerns. i'm not saying this as a hater, i love superheroes and have read way too many stupid comic books in my life (also was really wild to see one of my more niche interests become super mainstream in real time?), but it was always inevitable. so, combined with the decline, plus audiences getting weary of very obviously half-assed product, you get all but two comic book movies released in the past year flopping really hard.

across the spider-verse did well; it was a good movie. guardians of the galaxy vol 3 did well; i didn't personally like it very much, but a lot of people did, and it was a well-made movie from a production perspective (all of my issues with it stemmed from the script). comic book movies aren't dead and never fully will be, but people aren't willing to see halfassed shit just because it has a marvel logo slapped on it anymore.

it is bad movie fatigue, yes, but to say "superhero fatigue" isn't a thing wouldn't wholly be true; people got tired of lazy product, and superhero films were the dominant market share for big budget tentpole movies because hollywood had thought they'd found their ticket. so it's a lot of things.

articles like this are so funny

like, the reason why madame web flopped big is not deep; it's a really bad movie lmaoooo i solved it all for you

[wc-confessions]

I’ll do a full breakdown of why the news surrounding the Tencent animation disappoints me.

Disclaimer: while you can have criticisms about Tencent as they seem to be a controversial company, don’t use it as an excuse to be sinophobic. If your thoughts ever go to “well of course a Chinese production would suck” or something of that ilk, please stop right there. The main issues are corporate greed and laziness, not China. Got it? Time to carry on.

Firstly, it strikes me as more of a proof of concept than an actual announcement. It’s the most minor problem IMO, so I’ll let them off the hook. They probably wanted to make sure people knew it was being worked on.

Secondly, AI. Warrior Cats is an art-centric community; it’s no wonder fans are pissed. I don’t like AI art, you - a (probable) Warriors fan reading this - likely don’t like AI art, your father doesn’t like AI art, everyone here doesn’t like AI art. Which means I’m going to argue on a more technical side. Looking at the confirmed and possible AI art, I have a question. What do they achieve? They don’t fit with the style of the hand-drawn illustrations, they resemble galaxy cats in space, while that Yellowfang generation is just a bootleg of the reprinted Rising Storm cover. Their existence in the presentation is a waste of time and resources (literally, AI prompts use up absurd amounts of water). I’d rather them show exclusively human art because you can tell they’re going in a direction, even if it’s uninteresting.

Speaking of the presumably human art, oh boy. To start off mildly positive, I’ll say a majority of the illustrations are decent. You get some character designs and scene concepts. They’re clearly playing with art style. I don’t find them particularly ugly, so… good job! I suppose! Now, to address the elephant in the room: anthro cats. For the love of StarClan, I’m begging on my knees, don’t make these cats anthro in the final product. It would fundamentally break the entire series. They call humans “twolegs” for a reason! Go work on the Redwall movie if you want anthro animals.

Finally, my last concern. As of writing, there hasn’t been confirmation of the Tencent animation being a movie, TV show, or other. My opinion on a TV show is “it’s fine.” Warrior Cats is a long series, making it suitable that it gets a longer adaptation. Meanwhile, my hope for a Warriors movie is as big as a single grain of sand. 

Warrior Cats is borderline unadaptable when it comes to shorter-form media unless you want to dish out a pretty penny. We can already see this with the Prophecies Begin graphic novel; it’s transparent HarperCollins or whoever is in charge of these things didn’t want to pay for six TPB comics, so they had to hastily mash two books together in one. If the Tencent animation is a movie, I’m afraid some concepts already have signs of this. Multiple pieces have what can be assumed to be Fireheart and Tigerclaw fighting. I’m sorry, but that happens later in the books. Are they going to scramble the narrative worse than the graphic novel adaptation? Are we seriously going to wait 20+ years for an official animation, watch at least one high-profile fan project get canned, only for it to be about as accurate as evil snipers in an action movie? If it’s not a movie, ignore what I’ve said. If it is a movie, sigh.

TL;DR: Should’ve made the Little Dragon Studios series official instead of forcing them to cancel, guys.

.

[nientedal]

Is it worth watching Megamind rules? I know I’m not the target, but I’m curious yet also really really nervous. I know it’s for a younger audience but I’m still very on the fence and nervous. Also, love your writing

Omg, thank you, and thank you also for asking and yes yes yes 100% it's worth watching! It got crapped on by a bunch of people who decided based on the trailer alone that it was going to suck (how fun, a movie about a guy who everyone decided would be bad despite not knowing him got a spinoff show that...everyone decided would be bad despite not watching it, lol), so there's a lot of hate out there for it. I'm assuming you've caught wind of some of that, and that's why you're nervous? But for what it's worth, I was staring at the screen like :D basically the whole time.

Some more specific notes below the cut, but the tl;dr is please do give it a chance, if you can find the time. A G-rated direct-to-stream spinoff show wasn't what a lot of people were hoping for, and there were some folks who watched it and didn't care for it. But from a writing and storytelling standpoint, I think it is genuinely good! If you go in expecting a cute kids' show with some silly jokes and social misfits finding their way forward together, and keep an open mind, I don't think you'll be disappointed-- in fact I think you may be pleasantly surprised.

Just a gentle heads-up on some stuff because I'm not sure what you've heard about the show yet, and I'm also not sure what your existing expectations are!

The show was given a shoestring budget and not a lot of time to go from writers' room to final product, and yes, there are places where you can tell. But that was always going to be the case-- Dreamworks was absolutely not going to be spending big bucks on a franchise they've barely even acknowledged in more than a decade-- and it wasn't the fault of the people making the show. And even with the low budget, I think the animation is still genuinely solid, especially in later episodes! The people who worked on it really did a great job with what they were given.

And the writing!!! Holy shit!!! My skin is clear my crops are watered etc. The original writers handled this project and they absolutely delivered. Megamind & Roxanne's whole Thing progresses and grows and blooms in a really sweet and realistic way. Roxanne & Chum have a great dynamic. (Minion's name needed to be changed for legal reasons, but the writers worked that into the show and I gotta say, as a trans person, it was really lovely to see everyone else respond to "actually, because of [spoiler], my name is Chum now" with "oh! cool okay" and just keep rolling. I love that that was modeled for kids.) The character development is tangible; we get to watch Megamind really grow as a person and come into his own over the course of the series. And the new characters are really fun-- I genuinely enjoyed Keiko and everyone else.

Even if you never watch it (it's OK if you don't!) please just know: this was not a cash grab; Megamind Rules was made by people who truly cared about this world and these characters.

It's also worth noting that Megamind Versus the Doom Syndicate (the extended pilot) recaps a bunch of the same lessons as the original movie, so it can feel a little bit "...didn't we JUST do this??" but I'm pretty sure that was because Dreamworks didn't want to rely on kids to watch a 13 year old movie rated PG instead of G in order to get context. So like, I get it. And it's still cute! But it did mean I was nervous about what the rest of the series would be like until I was laughing my ass off halfway through Episode 2. If you're nervous, you can probably skip MMVtDS.

But yeah. I truly do think Megamind Rules is worth watching, and I've been so sad about the reception it received. Thank you so much for asking about it, and not just deciding it sucks and moving on. I appreciate you.

[weaselbeaselpants]

Lindsay Ellis plagiarized a ndn author

This post isn't a callout and it's only my own post because the OP source I just learned it from, @neechees, doesn't allow rbgs at a certain point on that post.

After Hmbomberguy's expose on Illuminaughtii and James Somerton some people are giving a well deserved eye back to the leftube sphere that was kind of schism-d and held under scrutiny in what I feel was, a lot of the time, misinformed hate campaigns in response to genuine criticism; especially towards Lindsay Ellis who up left after she was canceled and hasn't returned to continuous video making publicly even after people have mostly agreed the hatedom directed for her Raya and the Last Dragon takes was stupid and was erasing actual SEA people's discussions of the culture. To hear and see a decent breakdown of that film's representation problems BEYOND the Ellis-parts because it's worth your wild regardless of if you've seen the movie, please watch the three part video series hosted by Xiran Jay Zhao.

To tl;dr the 2021 drama: people have held an ire towards Ellis for a long time feeling like her and her white-woman base talk over, steal, or just straight up don't apologize for their own racism towards women and ppl of color, and after Lindsay did a problematic by pointing out that Raya and the Last Dragon was like ATLA, people jumped on her.

Being both a longtime fan of Ellis and white as fucc, I personally feel like Lindsay kind of forgave herself and threw out the actual criticisms held against her every bit as much as people just kind of treated her like a punching bag. Or, to paraphrase @padawan-historian's old takes from then, they treated Lindsay like she was trying to be the ENTIRE conversation, not the start of one, and like every possible outcome that could happen over her videos was her fault personally. Some of Lindsay's loudest and nastiest 'critics' were, in fact, other white people or just people who have no good faith in addressing her fuck ups, like Lily Orchard, fe.

One 'Lindsay did a racism'point tho that I felt wasn't truly addressed in full though were claims by indigenous people that she was anti-native, especially in her videos about Twilight and Pocahontas, which yeah at the time I was very passive of you can 100% find post abt that. But then Neechees linked me to an article I, and I think a lot of other video essay-fans had never seen before. This article accused Lindsay of stealing half of her talking points on Disney's Pocahontas from theirs.

When people on the breadtube spectrum talk of Lindsay, even people who criticized her at the time. all kind of agree that the intensity of the backlash was uncalled for and, while not everyone agrees if her public silence is a 'canceling' or not, agree with her need to just take care of herself these days. For those curious, this is the article making this claim:

I am not saying you need to all unfollow and hate everything Lindsay ever touched, mkay? But I also genuinely hope that Lindsay addresses this+comes clean because holy fuck. Unlike Somerton, all I can tell you is I don't just 'believe Windsey wouldn't hurt nobody uwu~'. I am pretty certain that Lindsay care about the topics she covers, for whatever that's worth to say as another whiteperson. It's just that, like Contrapoints, I ALSO think she has a tendency to deflect criticism within that sphere and lump all her negative bagage together. This really sucks cuz not all of us are Lily Orchards or Vaush clones.

Most of us are/were casual watchers of Lindsay like we are Hbomber, Contra, Lady Emily, Folding Ideas, and ToddintheShadows (does he count as leftube idk?) and we really, genuinely don't want to believe that Lindsay stole from + refuses to listen to women of color when they call her out.

Where I like almost everyone in the leftoob analyst sphere that's ever growing and hopefully now weeding out Illumanaughtii-s and Sommerton-s of the world, there ARE controversies within the space that I don't agree with creators on. Some are dumb things like the exact takes Lindsay has about movies n shows that I just up and disagree with her on, Princess Weekes' proshipping apologia that I have LOTS of thoughts on. However, some matters are clearly personal and about maters that just don't involve me. Earlier this year, Folding Ideas and Lady Emily ctrl+alt+deleted some replies they made to Quinton Reviews, making clear that they very much still dislike him based on something that happened between Quinton, Lindsay and I think SarahZ. And by "dislike", I mean also still believeing his former editor over him on who was boundary pushing about who in their relationship. On the offchance any of those creators or their stans somehow see this, know that I'm not going to tell any of you guys how to feel about whatever Quinton did in private I'm not aware of; it's just that I also happen to believe Quinton on this issue and I don't like the guiltybyassociation mantra.

>>>>side note: I hate that every time someone says "I believe so and so after hearing their side now" ppl jump on the "you were just a stan from the beginning and never actually able to listen"-bs. Yeah, being more familiar with one creator over the other means there's bias, sure, but I kinda hate that that once held bias means you can't be held as any kind of source or form your own opinions. <<<

Big introvert vibes ahead: the thing about any big social circle of better-spoken people than you is they ALL seem like a scary meangirl's table from outside looking in. The kind that'll send goons after you with passive-aggressive "this is slander against me and I have the right to be upset abt it sorry if the stans eat you alive". They can also be made out by their fans to be harmless internet nobody's who YOU are at fault for getting mad and staying mad at cuz it's not like it matters on the internet and are clearly just out for drama and 'twofaced' yourself. I think the reality is the same thing that drives every community forward as well as drives them apart: these people are legitimate friends. They stick up for each other the same way we stick up for our personal internet friends whenever there's shit coming their way. The breadtube circle, whoever that is at this point, clearly know some shit we don't about themselves as much as they don't know shit about us and our true intentions. One of them has a platform and responsibility, where the other has power in masses and following them or not. We gotta all make the choices best for us.

Anyway. I guess, if any of the stuff about Lindsay ripping off that writer IS true, I really hope that she admits and apologizes for it. That's not cool to do to her indigenous audience, or even me, one of her white fans who expects actually allyship.

[revasserium]

Do you ever feel like writing Fandom content is a waste? 😭 I started with writing original content but I fell into writing Fandom and fic works years ago. At first I was like cool with it because I saw it as practice but I made ocs for the fandoms and I'm invested lol now I've been feeling like I should be putting this time and energy into original things. I know I won't ever get published but like still 🤣

hmmm i think to a certain extent, it depends on what your "end goal" is -- but even then, i don't think it's a "waste". writing is one of those things that you have to practice to be "good" at (like most things), but it also requires a degree of life experience. and not to say that you can't produce good writing when you're younger (there are lots of super talented young authors out there!) but for the most part, it's always more "true to form" if you write based on things you've experienced. and those experiences tend to only come with time.

i think the cool thing about producing for fandom is that it does several things at once: it hopefully gives you joy (if writing is a hobby of yours and the fandom is one that you like), it allows you to try your hand a bunch of different writing styles without any kind of "personal commitment" to a style, and it gives you super valuable practice.

if you enjoy writing for fandoms and ocs, then i don't think it's a waste of time at all. any time spent being happy or joyous in this life is time well spent. and there's many many proper scientific research papers out that there prove your brain and body need this kind of "down time" to indulge in the things you love, that have no sort of monetary-tie.

even IF your end goal is to be published someday, there's nothing to say that one of the oc's you've created now can't make it into original work later. or that a storyline you've been thinking through and building out can't become the plotline to your debut novel. i think the super cool thing about "the arts" as a genre is that aging is actually seen as a great benefactor. because the older you are, the more you do it, the ultimately better you'll get. because unlike sports where you're trying to do the thing before your body can't anymore, your mind continues to grow and get better as you age. and so does your writing.

as someone who writes for pleasure, and at one point in time was a paid writer (that was my full time job), i can tell you that it definitely changes things when you start to get paid for it. it takes some of that enjoyment out of it. and it felt so nice to write for myself and for fandom again after leaving writing as a temporary career.

and you shouldn't be so sure you'll never get published! look at all those wattpad fanfics that get turned into movie-deals!!! do i think they have the best writing ever? no! but does it prove that regardless of what kind of writing you do, if you're able to harness an audience, people are bound to take note? yes! and even if, again, you aren't able to get yourself a netflix movie deal with the fanfic you write, the community you build and the happiness it gives you is i think more important! it'll make whatever your actual money-job is more bearable :) it def does that for me!

tl;dr -- just bc it's not making you money, doesn't mean it's not important! in fact, most of the time, the stuff that you do for yourself and your friends, for your fandom, for the things that you love are the things that make life worth living! the things that make you you. so keep at it!!!! <3 and if you DO want to publish a novel someday, it's never ever too late to start. you'll have just as much of a leg up on the writing part, because you've been practicing while writing for fandom too! :)

[bambi-kinos]

This is just speculation, and your own speculation is very interesting too, but I definitely think Paul McCartney is autistic. I come from a family with a lot of different presentations of autism, and he reminds me of my brother like crazy.

To me, a lot of his more successful social skills come from just being very extroverted and a people pleaser, i.e. he got really good at figuring out how to get positive responses from people in most normal social interactions. To me, the biggest tell is how he handles situations where his wants directly conflict with someone else's: He just completely shuts down and acts like he didn't hear them. That's like. 100% in line with the more socially savvy autistic people in my life (including me to some extent lol). I also don't think he's as good at reading people as you seem to think (this is just a difference in interpretation, not trying to say you're wrong!) I just think he knows what generally makes people happy, and sticks with that mostly, often to the detriment of nuance when it comes to people like, say, George.

I am hesitant to commit to Paul being possibly autistic because I am personally allistic. If I tried to essay about that then I would at best say something stupid and at worst say something bigoted. I am dating an autistic NB but that made me aware of how much I don't know about being autistic and being trans so I tend to back off from those topics. I feel relatively confident about Paul because I've had so many friends who autistic in nerd spaces like this one. Paul doesn't remind me of them. I tend to gravitate to autistic people anyway because autistic people don't mind me being blunt so I have more experience than the average person. But ultimately I just can't bring myself to commit to Paul having full blown autism because I'm not qualified to make a judgment like that. I have to commit to what I know. I trample on a lot of people just in my day to day, I don't want to add autistic fans to that list because they go through enough shit irl, I don't want to add to it on this platform. I am not able to make posts saying "autism Paul thinks this way" or "he does this because autism does that." I don't want to make hurtful pronouncements like that.

My interpretation stems from the idea that Paul is heavily self interested. I don't see much of a people pleasing element to him at all or else George wouldn't have made the "pleasantly insincere" comment about him. I think Paul is much more about camouflage and smoothing things over so he, John, and The Beatles (in that order) can have an easier go of things. The newspaper maneuver always reads as a "I'm pointedly ignoring you to make you feel bad about speaking that way to me" to me.

Otoh I'd really love more interpretations of Paul as autistic provided it was autistic fans making them. (I want authenticity not other allistic fans meaning well and getting it wrong like with the Rosie books.) Part of the mismatch here is that the gulf between allistic and autistic people is narrow but deep and communicating across it is hard.

Like in Ghostbusters fandom the character Egon Spengler has been retroactively recognized as autistic because Dan Akyrod got his autism diagnosis as an adult which then influenced the creation of the character Phoebe who is heavily autism coded. That's cool but what's happened in Ghostbusters fandom is that Egon is infantilized quite a bit which runs against his actual character in the original movie. And I have to think that it is because of the gap between allistic and autistic fans that this happens.

Tl;dr anyone can and should believe in autism Paul, my only thing is that it needs to come from an autistic fan because I don't believe in an allistic fan's ability to understand and portray it well, including myself.

[meraki-yao]

The taylor zakhar perez hashtag just full of praise for Nicholas acting and twitter full of anonymous messages asking for his recast because he's not as good as Nick. That shit hurts and I can't even enjoy the new content I'm tired of the hate that man has been getting for a year and a half (it's not about Nicholas I love him so much)

First and foremost this is awful and Taylor doesn't deserve any of this unfair critism that are frankly insults, it's fucking sick

I will say this about the acting (and I'm typing this while listening to the podcast where Matthew talks about how well suited the boys are for the roles)

Both of them nailed their roles. But because of how the roles are written, certain things show easily than others.

Henry is more emotional sensitive and "broken", and because that's kind of an unhealthy mentality which isn't the normal state of human being, it's easier to pick up, which is why even with a surface glance audience can pick up on Nick's intensity and level of performing. For example, Henry spiraling on the lake. It's a crescendo of negative emotions, and you can see it go from opposite of the previous emotion (happy and content) to increasing panic and heartache.

Alex is the healthier one, in the movie he doesn't have much baggage as Henry does, but he does have baggage. At first Alex might seem like a sunshine puppy or something but if you paid attention to the details which Taylor does, you can read so much more. His fingers fidgeting whenever he's nervous like when Henry's taking off his clothes or Zahra barging in looking out. Like him clenching his jaw and watching every second of Henry's face when he goes in. Like how you can feel the aggressiveness in him die down as Henry shouts his thoughts during the Kensington confrontation. Like how fucking in love he looks all conveyed in his eyes.

So TL DR and this is my understanding of the performance: the tricky part for Nick is not to go overboard so that it's too dramatic to the point of being unrealistic, while the tricky part for Taylor is too not under perform it that Alex becomes one dimensional. AND BOTH BOYS NAIL IT PERFECTLY.

But for people who watch it passively, or watch it with negative assessment already in mind, it's easier to miss Taylor's details than Nick's details.

I WANNA MAKE IT PERFECTLY CLEAR THAT I DON'T AGREE WITH THE SHIT TAYLOR'S GETTING I DON'T AGREE WITH ANY OF THIS AND TAYLOR JUST IS ALEX TO ME

But this is a speculation from the acting perspective as to part of the reason why Taylor's getting so much shit

Also Twitter people are just another fucking type of crowd who mostly should use their life to do something better (I'm not on Twitter and never will be) and I'm convinced that there's still racism involved in these commentary even if it's internalized or latent

Anyone who says Taylor should be recast or is not as good as Nick either didn't actually pay attention to the movie or don't understand Alex. Taylor read the book 8 times. Matthew and Nick, the two most important people in regards to his performance, have nothing but praise for him.

Taylor is Alex, just as Nick is Henry.

Hopefully after a while these stupid "opinions" die down and only intelligent/genuine/constructive comments will be left and things will get better. And I truly hope Taylor can see more support than insults. He doesn't deserve any of this.

I'm sorry that this has affect you, and I understand it. Honestly this is why I don't directly look at tags, especially the actors' tag, block whoever I don't wanna see or deal with, and don't go on Twitter.

Just from my experience on dealing with shit like this, I would say give yourself some distance from RWRB and social media for a bit, even if it's a day or two, and come back when it hurts less. Take a bit of a break. And avoid places you know you will see shit like this as much as you can.

Both of the boys did amazing, and imo perfectly in the movie and in these roles, and they deserve all the love and support. Both of them.

[ckret2]

youve gotten a few asks about billford before, and your plans for ford's relationship with bill in your fic, but im curious if you personally ship it yourself/*like* it. and, just for the hell of it, if you have any opinion on billdip too, since that one's even more controversial.

I'm gonna put most of this under a cut since it's not only long, but also long about two different topics, but the tl;dr is:

Yeah, I'm a fan of billford. I don't think it's canon, inevitable, or necessary to their dynamic, and I'm still on the fence about whether things will tilt toward the romantic in my fic or if it'll stay platonic, but I do enjoy the ship a lot because it has a lot of (obsessive, weird, unhealthy, angsty) elements that interest me to explore in ships. Billdip, on the other hand, does nothing for me. I don't care about how people ship imaginary characters in their fictional fandoms and I'm not gonna block anybody for liking it, so this isn't a moral stance, here—I just don't like it personally.

One of the things that intrigues me most about a ship is the idea of love that's gone so far it isn't even love anymore but punched out the other side into unhealthy obsession, and "I'll spend the next thirty years of my life hunting you to death" versus "What if I turn you into a gold statue and carry you around to stare at you a lot" sure fit right into "unhealthy obsession." On top of that, some of my favorite ship dynamics are:

the worshiper and the person they've picked to revere as their god, either metaphorically or literally—with bonus points if the person they've devoted themself to doesn't deserve that worship and maybe isn't even all that special, and the worship actually reveals more about the mind of the lover than it does about the (un)divine nature of the beloved

the mad scientist and the muse who gives them ideas and inspires their work (one of my all-time OTPs has a line where the mad scientist says to his ex "we were each the muse to the other"), with bonus points if they both get so caught up in "what can we do together? What dreams can we make reality—" that they plunge into full "so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should" territory—and bonus bonus points if they eventually come out of the haze of SCIENCE and one of them is horrified by what they've done... but maybe the other one isn't.

two people who are wildly compatible with each other (similar hobbies, tastes, worldviews! they fill in the gaps in each other's personalities! they each happen to be the other's type! they understand each other like no one else can! whatever, fill in the blank!), but for some reason one betrayed the other, they've tried to kill each other, and now things are vicious and bloody and painful and raw between them; but if they talk to each other and accidentally let their guards down for even a split second, all that history is still there, they still like the same stupid movies and share the same stupid inside jokes no one else will ever understand and have the same stupid complementary life dreams, they could have been good for each other, but there's no road back to where they were before the betrayal. Their chemistry is like two huge magnets strapped to land mines: the attraction is as powerful as ever but heaven help them both if they ever touch.

or, alternatively, two people that have all that chemistry, but are just really toxic and do bad things when they're together and enable all each other's worst tendencies, even if they don't necessarily do bad things to each other; and they've got to navigate the fact that they might adore each other so much but they are objectively worse people when they're together.

I like ships with inhuman things. As a writer I like waxing romantic about the inhuman things and trying to convince the reader that yes, this too is beautiful and lovable when seen through the eyes of a lover. I will make you take the stupidest love interest seriously for five minutes. I've romanticized a sticky pile of goo, I've romanticized a robot spider, I've romanticized the concept of being a disembodied voice, I've romanticized a pteranodon made out of lava, and I'll romanticize a cyclopic gold-plated corn chip too, don't test me. Who better to adore a sentient triangle than a scientist-artist who sees the beauty in precise angles?

Depending on the headcanons and/or AUs you're working with, you can get all of these pretty darn easily out of Billford.

I like writing Ford as the awed naive intellectual, hungry for knowledge, for the secrets of the universe, for more, who was utterly dazzled and starstruck by this divinity who tantalized him with esoteric secrets—and who's been furious at Bill for thirty years for betraying him, hurting him, threatening his home and everyone he loves, but underneath all that also furious at him for not being what he advertised when he could have been that; and Bill, meanwhile, playing it cool, far too comfortable playing the role of faux god, but privately, secretly distraught that his favorite "student"—the one who takes Bill's "teachings" and gets creative and inventive with them, the one who always wanted to know more, not just about the universe but about Bill personally—his favorite student no longer worships him, doesn't even respect him, doesn't even see him as an equal, but looks at him like he's the scum of the universe, and Bill won't even admit that it bothers him but it's killing him that nothing he does can get his favorite to so much as smile at him again.

That's the dynamic in my head when I write them. You could play it as purely professional, a god disappointed to lose a worshiper like a boss disappointed to lose his best employee or a celebrity disappointed to lose the president of his fan club; or you could play it like platonic friendship, maybe a QPR; or you could play it like a romance. I like the zest added when you toss romance into this already nasty mess of emotions. I like capping off all that heartache with, "—and if things had turned out differently, maybe I would have taken your hand and traveled with you to the ends of eternity, if only you weren't [such a brutal heartless backstabbing piece of shit]/[unable to forgive a few white lies and some light torture]."

Billdip, on the other hand, does absolutely nothing for me. Not even just for the age reason—that does squick me out, but even if I try to look at it like "okay pretend he's aged up" or "stick it in an AU where they're both dumb kids having dumb kid crushes" I just, see nothing there. I don't even see anything there platonically. Like, legitimately—for the fic I'm working on, I've been trying to figure out what kind of dynamic/interactions they'd have beyond just "Dipper scowls at Bill a lot" and even on that level I've been struggling to think of something compelling between them. I look back on the fact that for a good few years billdip was the ship in the fandom and I go, "why? where's the meat? what do they do for each other?"

I'm forced to imagine that the ship must have been based on some combination of "fandoms naturally want to ship the everyman main character with the charismatic fun villain," "a bunch of teens with crushes on Bill were using Dipper as their self-insert stand-in," and "people assumed Bill wasn't lying when he said Dipper impressed him and didn't start revising that opinion until we got to see firsthand that he uses lines like that on everybody." It feels really uncharitable of me to the shippers to assume that their OTP is founded entirely on statistically average fandom trends and character misinterpretations rather than, like, y'know, traits actually present in the characters, so I'm taking it on faith that there's probably more to it than that and I just don't see it because it just ain't my jam.

When I do try to speculate harder on "how would I get them to interact with each other in a compelling way, like, just in a platonic sense?" my brain starts going "well, dipper's a nerd who's into the paranormal, he wants to know about mysterious things? maybe he's fascinated with bill as a mysterious thing? and maybe... idk, why would bill give a hoot about dipper—maybe bill takes advantage of that fascination, tempts him with more information, maybe he's amused by Dipper's curiosity about weird things—?" and that's usually about the point where I go "this is just, the way Bill and Ford met. This is the watered-down junior version of Bill and Ford's first few weeks." In trying to figure out what the heck Bill and Dipper would even talk about I keep accidentally recreating a less interesting version of Bill and Ford's dynamic.

I want and need Bill and Dipper to have an interesting character dynamic in this fic so being unable to come up with something that personally compels me has been actively frustrating me lmfao, but it does serve to illustrate my main point here: man, billdip does nothing for me so hard that I can't even see them platonically interacting.

[cleolinda]

Weekend links

My posts

1) From earlier this week: “My ~longform posts are going somewhere else. Dreamwidth? Definitely previewed on Patreon and backed up there. Here’s an unlocked post about it. tl;dr: I know tech bros already scraped everything, but if you tell me you’re going to do it, I’m not gonna hand it to you. Maybe it’s a token effort, but there it is.” Of course I’ll still post links to new writing here. 

2) Some people have March Madness. I now have the Hot & Vintage Movie Women tournament. 

One of the best parts of the tournament (you may remember that Toshiro Mifune won the male matchup) is people reblogging and submitting pictures, further bio information, and personal anecdotes--that sense of the Tumblr collective scrapping for the pure love of their blorbos. I love Edwige Fenech’s eyes and her iconic eyeliner, and I had to step in when she went up against powerhouse Julie Andrews with only one small picture. No, I’m not letting Edwige go out like that. She won’t win, but the people must make their choice knowingly. 

I also posted some pictures for Lady Tsen Mei, because I’d actually never heard of her and was curious. Also, because she’s going up against Musidora and that’s not an easy row to hoe, either. If you see matchups like that, where hotvintagepoll didn’t receive much to post about an actress--appealing to the people with a good picspam in the reblogs is where the fun comes in. 

Bear in mind that running the tournament is an INCREDIBLE amount of work; this was Friday alone. Like, I don’t know the person who’s running this, but it couldn’t be me. They’re working with what they were sent, and here’s how we can be the propaganda we want to see in the world. I will jump in as necessary when Ava Gardner, Gene Tierney, Norma Shearer, Paulette Goddard, and (on my mom’s behalf) Julie Christie show up. But there’s 512 contenders, and it’s going to be a hard fight. 

(I am now reblogging the polls at only one an hour, and when I fall behind, that just means that people who missed them can catch up. Each poll lasts a week, after all.)

Reblogs of interest

You are invited to the assassination of Julius Caesar! If you joined Tumblr during the various internet shakeups last year, you may not be aware that the Ides of March is a major Tumblr holiday. You need to be. 

People have always been people: an immensely long collection that may make you cry. 

Respect for the Welsh language

The “Fool in a Field” theory of life in the universe

A helpful guide to some common birds here in the western US

The Forbidden Colors

“You get to drive away”: A Tale

I was not ready for this development in the Fairy vs Walrus debate

(Did William Butler Yeats believe in fairies? An anecdote from my grad school days)

(”While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a slapping”)

Video

“Recently I’ve been interested in what I’d like to call the historical lesbian wardrobe”

“This is the snake I’ve been looking for my entire life”

Angry kitten scolds water, slaps it for good measure

Cat plays theremin

A speedy boi who doesn’t need a bike to jump

The most relaxed tiger

The sacred texts

Yes, THAT Stinky Bastard Man

Personal tags of the week

I want to be clear that AI has incredible scientific uses and could be used voluntarily by writers and artists for their own experimental projects. That is... not what this AI tag is about. 

Speaking of AI: truly, the Willy Wonka Experience debacle has been a DashCon for the 2020s. 

[the-things-ive-seen]

Batman: Ninja

Disappointment in America, famous in Japan

As someone who started reading the Batman series a few years ago, with detective comics added to that reading schedule, it probably comes as no surprise that I entered the film with big expectations. Even if the movie turned out kind of mid, it would be a slam-dunk animated action film that would make me love Batman anywhere, at any time. I was certain that it couldn't disappoint.

I was disappointed.

For context, fanservice, according to Wikipedia, is material in a work of fiction or in a fictional series that is intentionally added to please the audience, often sexual in nature, such as nudity. I suppose that might explain why my screen was coated in DC vomit with Feudal Japanese aesthetic paper stickers blocking my view of any logic or reason. Like most fanservice, I'm not supposed to actually understand it, I'm supposed to laugh and masturbate with my friends as they point at Poison Ivy and Harley Quinn, saying they recognize them from a doushinji. I'm not saying I didn't do that, I'm saying that if I had known the movie would be all over the place, I would've just watched Gotham by Gaslight to save time and hand cramps.

Batman Ninja is about Batman fighting a Gorilla, then the Joker. That's the TL;DR version since most Batman movies end up that way. It's actually about Batman being sent back in time so he can be told over and over again that he's completely useless without money and fancy machines, but he can change that by being a magical ninja. That's the second TL;DR, in case you think Batman sucks and isn't as cool as Superman. It's also about every character from the Batman universe showing and wearing time-appropriate clothes and using feudal Japan weapons, but only before the giant robots show up. That's the last TL;DR, because you either get the gist or you think the movie sounds much cooler than it is, in which case I welcome to watch it before coming back. You'll have two scenes worth talking about with your friends and nothing else good to say about it.

I wish I could say it was one of those movies that's taking a tour of Batman's cast and rogues gallery, but that describes Batman vs TMNT. This is more like one of those movies where a random guy with no familiarity with the series is put in charge, assigns characters in simple roles based on quick summary readings, and then yells at the 3d animation department that they aren't getting paid overtime. A 12-year-old could make this movie, but I'm pretty sure most twelve-year-olds know Batman was already a ninja, if a guy dressed in black sneaking up on people didn't make that incredibly obvious.

Since the story is already a wash, and the Joker is only added in to give both the movie and marketing some teeth, maybe the action is worth the watch? And it is. The choreography, the music, the animation; it feels like watching a masterpiece in kickass drama. I was so hyped when during the beginning watching Batman fight the Joker with the tricked-out Batmobile... and then losing somehow. And then being told over and over again that technology is bad, and that tradition is good, and that technology is bad, and that tradition is-

Later, the Joker, the gorilla, and the other DC villains ride in on giant mecha robots to fight each other over feudal Japan territory. Don't ask how they made those robots, or how the language barrier is gone, or worse, how they built giant robots while dealing with a language barrier. Just know that everyone of the villain characters not only did it, but all the machines actually fit together and can controlled with a wooden chessboard.

Yes. Seriously.

How does Batman fight them? Without any tech, it'll be a huge, perhaps cinematic, challenge to even- oh right! The monkeys can just work together to make a huge monkey man. Then the bats will help for some reason and make a gigantic Batman that is immune to fire. And that will be how they beat the Chessboard Mecha.

YES. SERIOUSLY.

here's a picture.

Now, there are two things I should go over before I put a lid on this ridiculous sham of a film.

One, Batman: Ninja was made for Japan with the specific purpose of introducing Eastern media to the sheer awesomeness of DC comics and the illustrious Batman who is notably tied to it. A lot of the scenes are meant to represent certain historical points in Fedual Japan, like the DC villains fighting for territory, or Joker taking over the Mecha (and the plot), not to mention the Monkeys and bats being summoned by nature gods. It was all meant to serve as subtext for Japan's history. Even the Mecha's are meant to represent Japan's weirdly advanced mechanical puppets from the 1600s. Was it worth it? Hell no. I'm not going to explain how 'story integration' because I shouldn't have to. If there is literally no connection between every historical nudge in the film and the plot of the movie, then you didn't write a Batman movie, you made an incomprehensible documentary and layered comic book shenanigans over it.

Which leads to my next point, my second thing. Why should I care? A man in a bat suit fighting a mind-control expert genius Gorilla, without guns for personal reasons, is insanely stupid in itself. Why can't I just enjoy the film as it is? My response to that is... I tried. The reason I'm even mad is that I tried. Even with the crap plot, it's hard not to see something like this as... enjoyable fluff, but in reality, is indigestible slop. There are too many what-if moments that go unanswered and far too many WTF moments that go unanswered. It just goes beyond being tolerable or acceptable; it can't be fixed with one moment of Batman turning into a semi-literal Batman. I'm still pissed off by that, by the way. All that build up and we don't see how they changed, what their time did to them, what the point of all the modern world bashing was supposed to be. All it says is that ninjas are cool... if you don't know what a ninja is.

Batman: Ninja is a disappointment. Not too much of a disappointment to stop them from making a sequel, but a disappointment all the same. Seeing it makes me cringe and reminds me why I began to lose interest in Batman movies. People see themselves in the Batman characters too much, characters who are supposed to define instability and impatience with the current world. So instead of stories about how their inherent character fails them and others, we get stories about how some characters weren't that bad, or how they have something in common with historical figures, or how they weren't that great in the first place but if they'll get better if they become a magical ninja. It's bullcrap that a film with this good animation and budget is somehow still a trashy, surface-level toy sales pitch.

I hear the Batman Ninja Manga is good though.

[inkblackorchid]

What are your thoughts on the 5DS movie bonds beyond time? Plot characters villain animation and so on

Ahhh, good old BBT. Minor caveat: It's been a hot second since I've seen the movie. But generally speaking, right from the gut? Bit of a mixed bag, this one. Let me address what you asked point by point, though. The tl;dr for anyone who doesn't want a lengthy response: I don't hate it, but outside of making me grin and/or fondly roll my eyes about some fanservice, I'm mostly just ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ about it. I appreciate it for the extremely fun attempt at a for the time pretty ambitious crossover, though.

The longer response, then:

Okay. Okay. Conceptually speaking? This movie is the absolute peak of fanservice. All three protags of all three ygo shows that had come out by that time, all teaming up against a special bad guy, and everyone's allowed to show off their coolest shit? Absolutely bananas. Fuck yeah.

Where the execution is concerned, though... Let me start with the obvious: This thing is too short. It doesn't feel like a proper movie, it feels like your average big plot duel stretched over two episodes. And that's a shame! Because Yugi's there, and so is Jaden, and these two and Yusei get to bounce off each other and I think a lot of people would have eaten it up if we had gotten more of that. Interactions aside, though, the short runtime also makes the plot feel rushed. First Yusei's sad, then things are going to shit, the he's off, then we're suddenly in Venice (what the fuck is Jaden doing in Venice??), then we're in Domino City, then blam, bam, onto the big duel. Can I get some time to breathe and actually enjoy the characters interacting, please?

And speaking of plot! Now, on paper, I don't have an issue with the idea of a guy going back in time to try and get rid of duel monsters. My problem lies more with the fact that the guy in question ties into 5Ds' main plot. And in a not insignificant way, at that. Like, perhaps in a universe where this movie was handled differently, BBT tying into the Iliaster stuff could have been cool as heck, but as it stands, Paradox and his plans feel a little too close to his namesake to me. The guy is almost exclusively relegated to a movie, to outside content of the show that wasn't shown in sequence with the rest of the episodes, yet he's actually one of the major characters of the Ark Cradle arc. And worse yet, said arc only gives us the barest, shittiest recap of who he is and what he wanted. It feels too disconnected from the rest for me, especially considering that Sherry more or less ends up replacing Paradox. And don't even get me started on the batshit implications his quest to kill Pegasus has on the way time travel is handled in 5Ds. The way this movie shows direct, devastating consequences of time being tampered with is a major reason for the headaches the emperors of Iliaster give me, which I've discussed in my Meklord post.

That said. I don't think Paradox, per se, is a bad antagonist. He's got the whole long-suffering shindig the other major players of Iliaster do, too, his design is bonkers in a fun way and of course, the idea of him hijacking protagonist ace monsters with his Malefic shenanigans makes him perfectly hateable. On paper, he's a completely fine antagonist, and I actually think the 3 V 1 duel he has with the protags is pretty fun.

And as for the animation, no notes there, honestly. I think BBT has some of the nicest animation of the 5Ds era (and especially like the way Yusei is animated in the movie).

So yeah! The whole thing is a bit hot and cold for me. I know some people love BBT to death, I know some people hate it with a fiery passion, and tbh, I get where both sides are coming from. Ultimately, I'll happily watch it, but there are always at least twenty other 5Ds episodes I'd watch even more happily. BBT is fine.

[bigfan-fanfic]

How do you feel about Damien’s Mom Talia Al Ghul? Because some people said she’s a victim of bad racist writing and she’s had a bad portrayal in the animated movies. Is Talia really just victim of bad writing or she’s actually a horrible mother/person? I’m just confused because when I read the comics about Talia and the bad things she did and I just assumed that’s was part of her character because she’s a morally questionable villain of course she’s not a “good civilian person.” I knew DC is a dark adult comic book series and I already expected going in that the villain characters like Talia would committed terrible/horrible actions against the heroes. Like for example when she drugged Bruce and took advantage of him, I was slightly shocked but wasn’t surprised. Cuz to me this was the dark stuff DC was known for doing.

Alrighty, so the answer is a little bit of both!

TW for sexual assault mentions, miscarriage, parental abuse, etc.

There's a TL;DR ("too long, didn't read" summary) under the cut if you don't wanna read my report which is pretty awesome and was fun to write.

So, nobody seems to be able to agree on who Talia is at her core, and that's generally par for the course for a comic book character with multiple writers. She's been around since 1971, so that's already 52 years! And like Greek myth, there's just a lot of different interpretations of the character.

Let's get to the nitty gritty before we talk history. In 2006, writer Grant Morrison established that Talia drugged and raped Bruce, conceiving their son Damian (and also for some reason adding a whole unnecessary "artificial womb" thing? I don't get it either). However, this is based off the fact, which Morrison later admitted, that they misremembered the story they based the Batman and Son arc off of, and later comic arcs (in 2012 and 2014) would retcon the incident as consensual. Put a pin in this.

Talia was originally more of a damsel in distress slash prize for Bruce. Remember, this was the 70s. Her main deal is being the daughter of Ra's al Ghul and thus if Batman marries her, he becomes the heir, which Ra's wants. Despite not wanting to succeed Ra's, Bruce and Talia do share romantic attraction and Ra's considers them married. Then, later on, they do actually marry and she gets pregnant, and then Talia realizes that Bruce will always be in danger having to protect her and their child, so she fakes a miscarriage and they dissolve their marriage. She gives the child to an orphanage, and he is given the name Ibn al Xu'ffasch, or "son of the bat". This is the story arc Morrison adapted later.

Talia was kinda badass in the period before 2006, where she was sort of an anti-villain. She breaks out and starts having her own self after Ra's engages her to Bane whom she despises. She, under the name Talia Head, runs LexCorp as CEO while Lex Luthor is President of the United States, and basically not only tips Superman off about all his plans, but sells LexCorp's shares to Wayne Enterprises leaving Lex functionally penniless. Then she gets brainwashed and basically evil-fied by her half-sister Nyssa Raatko who literally kills her over and over, resurrecting her each time in the Lazarus Pit as an extreme form of torture and reprogramming. She usually does more evil shit after this like joining leagues of supervillains and such. However, her motives of helping Jason Todd recover and train are usually ascribed to her love for Bruce and not wanting Jason to kill him.

Then after 2006 she goes full tilt crazy ex girlfriend and murders people, trained Selina Kyle to resist any and all psychological coercion to reveal Bruce's identity, and PLANTS A DEVICE IN DAMIAN'S SPINE THAT LETS HER CONTROL HIS BODY, and reveals that she's started cloning him because she thinks he's too weak and disowns him.

Then comes the New 52 (the part where DC did a reboot to make everybody darker and "more realistic" that absolutely nobody liked, so it started in 2011 and then DC did another reboot in 2016 to make it better) and Talia is just off the wall completely evil. Genocide, cloning Damian, killing Damian, being resurrected, then fighting an ancient alien cult and claiming she's redeemed, then literally rejoining the League of Assassins moments later.

Incidentally, apparently Grant Morrison wrote Bruce, Talia, and Damian from their own experiences as a child of divorce, which is just... wow. Like... that's just a lot to unpack there, but we're just gonna step past it.

As of the DC Rebirth reboot, Talia is more or less sort of back to being anti-villain, still yes a killer, but also more emotionally open and supportive of her son and back to trying for true redemption.

Let's take, as I usually try to do, the sum total of these experiences and from other sources and try to average it out.

Unfortunately, despite the retconning, a lot of people now still see Talia's rape of Bruce as canon. I did too for the longest time, and honestly, although it makes Talia despicable and completely irredeemable in a very visceral way, it also does allow for interesting dynamics for Bruce and Damian, the batfam and Talia, Bruce in general, and allows there to be discussion for the tragically underconsidered circumstance for female-on-male sexual assault, and by having Batman, who is often used by hypermasculine dudebros for their weird ideals of stoic toxic masculinity be a victim, and be vulnerable, and go through this could be a deeply powerful arc that nobody in comics really wants to touch. It does however, deprive us of an interesting and nuanced Talia and instead catapults her right into mustache-twirling evil.

Ultimately, Talia is the daughter and heir of Ra's al Ghul. She sees no problem murdering people, and in fact she usually shares her father's genocidal ambitions of culling much of the human race to help preserve the planet. Ra's boils down to an ecoterrorist and genocidal maniac, and Talia his henchman, though when she does strike out on her own, I can't quite get a handle on her motivations. She does tout a desire for "equality and peace" but there's really no standard she gives for what this means, so I can't really see if she's just crazy or if she has good intentions.

I think, even at her best, Talia is a perfectionist and is very strict, intent on Damian being who she wants him to be. I think she has very little empathy or compassion for others, although parts of her, at her best, regret this and she tries to grow. At her worst, she is irredeemably evil, and at her best she is... morally shady to the point of never really being able to be thought of as a good guy.

I can't speak to whether or not racism plays a part in her portrayal either as mustache twirling villain or whatever. I don't know that it's necessarily bad writing because I don't know if Talia was ever intended to not be a horrible person or morally ambiguous, apart from the early days when she was mainly a figure to be pursued by Batman. When it comes down to it, adding sexual assault to her list of crimes is not going to change much because she's a mass murderer, an ecoterrorist, an abusive mother any way you slice it because she's training her child as an assassin, and generally just not great. A fascinating character, yes, but a terrible person.

TL;DR: Talia al Ghul is a terrible person in general, but the Big Incident you refer to has been retconned and is based off a poorly-remembered story. However, considering she's a mass murderer, assassin, eco-terrorist, and also let's face it classist villain, she's still not great even if you remove that from her rap sheet. She's done some cool stuff like putting Lex Luthor in his place and that one Elseworlds story where she left Bruce and gave her son to an orphanage to protect him, but otherwise, once she was made her own character and not just a love-interest-of-the-week, Talia has been morally ambiguous at best and irredeemable at worst. I can't say if it's racist or not because I don't know the motivations in her writing, but I don't know that it's necessarily bad writing to make her unsympathetically evil.