#which feels like lazy storytelling to me

[raphexim]

Melian reference!!! AND Morgoth!

Tropey fake kiss to hide the escape tool! (Phew!)

The dwarves showing they aren't mindless followers but a people of shrewd wisdom!

Adar grieving lost uruk! Uruk asking questions and treated as a people and not mindless slaves.

I was sad af about the horse; they really could have just glossed past it and not focused so much on making it so visual. But one thing I do really appreciate about this show is that it does the animals honor. (It even does the orcs honor. No one is simple fodder for death.) Elrond grieved his mount and took time to bid it farewell. In the first season, Adar's horse fell -- and they made a point of showing it getting back up.

Arondir's story came too far to wind up where it wound, so I hope there is something yet to be said for him.

And Sauron's showing that he's just as slimy in a 'fair form' as he was with no form at all.

I wish the archer had had some character development. That was an epic scene, but we had no emotional attachment to her.

[majeoeje]

Start over

Megumi x reader (male implied reader)

I wished we were two other people more times than everytime you had forgotten about me

"You have really pretty lashes"

Megumi has heard you uttered these words countless of times before, at first he didn't harbor a lot of opinion on this, but now it serves as a painful reminder that he had to start over with you once again. But even now he can't comprehend how to respond other than a simple thank you

"You're Fushiguro right?"

"That's correct"

here we go again, he thought

"It's nice to meet you, i hope we can get along" you gave a lazy smile before entering your shared dorm room, all beat up from your previous fight as if it was just another day.. well you pretend that it was everytime because what else can you do? You once had told him

"Yeah...it's nice to meet you too" he told you. As if he was in a same play for who knows how many times

Megumi had lost count on how many times you had introduced yourself to him, he knew everything about you. Yet you're here asking about his name once again. Your cursed technique is the one to blame for this strange dynamic

That being said, your curse technique transfers memories into curse energy and a technique which grant their wielder the power to imbue a weapon of their choice with curse energy and a guarantee that it would cut anything as if it wasn't there

A cheap cost to pay for power, some would say. But he always watches the fear in your eyes everytime it has to come down to it, afraid you might use it too much to the point you'll forget how to breath.

Afraid...yes you were always afraid. Afraid that your life would succumb to nothing but blank pages of nothing. To the point you'd write every last detail of your day until late at night so that at least your days could amount to something. Even if it were as simple as you went outside and train like how you usually do.

"I'm kind of hungry, you got anything to eat?" You said perking up your head from the non-fiction book you curiously skimmed up from Megumi's bookshelve trying to gather information from the stranger in front of you

"Gojo-sensei dropped some apples earlier, suit yourself" he said pointing to a basket from the corner of his desk remembering how the unusual white haired man hasn't change over the years

"Well don't mind me" you say, picking one up before looking for a something on your side of the room

You didn't have to go through a lot before Megumi tapped you on the shoulder making you face him

"Looking for this?" He pointed to a small knife on his hand

"Oh thanks a lo-"

you didn't even finished your sentence before he took the apple from your hand

"Your hand's fractured, Miss shoko said you shouldn't try to move it a lot in the mean time"

He said, pulling a nearby chair before he started to peel the apple for you. Just how you liked it.. a prefrence that has never changed no matter how many times you've erased your memories

"Aye you did it in one peel, impressive" you commented "How'd you know that i like my apples peeled?"

"You made me do it for you for months when you broke 7 bones on your body" he said handing you the peeled fresh fruit

"Eh, really? Tell me about it" you rested your hand on your desk as you sat comfortably on your chair as if you were getting ready to catch up to an old friend after not meeting them for years. And despite how bad he think his storytelling abilities was, Megumi couldn't disappoint that glimmer in your eyes, never.

"That day you saved me from a first grade curse" he started, as you bit into your freshly peeled apple

"you used up your curse technique to the point you forgot how to wield your weapon"

Megumi was not one to run his mouth, he preferred to listen most of the times. But in times like this, he feels the need to encapture every detail about that period of time as much as possible. And in turn, you'd listen to his voice, tuning in his gentle tone. Perhaps you got distracted at some point but that is surely not your fault

"We must've been pretty close" you grinned, hearing him finished his story

"We were"

You were practically attached to the hip from middle school, so it'd be a lie to say you weren't. But on the darkest pit of his heart he still wished you two was so much more even after knowing you like the back of his hand. How you'd swing your weapon in such way as if you were a dancer, how you'd give a lame excuse on how you peeled too much orange or apples just to get him to eat , how you purposely talk to him to keep him out just to watch a horror movie program in the middle of the night, how you'd play your music loud enough to cause hearing problems when he's not at the dorm, how he knew that you were just assigned a roomate to exploit your Curse technique, how disconnected you truly are from the world, how you'd laugh, how you'd cry, how your skin would make him shiver everytime it touches his

There was never enough of you for him really. Yet he'd wished for the impossible everytime

"So..what's your curse technique?" You asked and he would always answer

Just what was one more start?

[alexanderwales]

I finished the rest of Save the Cat almost in a single sitting, not because it was particularly riveting, but because I had time to kill, so this pseudo-liveblog is at an end.

Chapter 6 and 7 are basically the same, collections of small tricks and tips. Neither of them are terribly helpful, and all the tricks have terrible shorthand names like "Pope in a Pool". There's very little in the way of any thematic cohesion to these bits of advice, and no grand theory of the Laws of Storytelling emerges, in spite of the laws being invoked a number of times.

The advice itself is, I think, generally good:

give the reader something to root for early on to kickstart investment

spice up exposition with something entertaining

only one kind of magic per plot

don't tell a story that requires too much setup

don't tell a story with too many moving parts

include a ticking clock

have character arcs

keep the scope limited to the characters we care about

make the hero proactive

show, don't tell

make the bad guy very bad

the plot should go faster the further in it goes

use the whole spectrum of emotion

make sure each character has a distinct voice

make sure desires are "primal"

give characters something that makes them stand out

I don't endorse this whole list, and I especially don't endorse the way that Blake Snyder talks about them or the examples that he gives. And if I endorsed the list, then I would include a lot of caveats, and some general principles of storytelling that should be followed, rather than these specific pieces of advice, which are all conditional. Like ... okay, here's an example:

Exposition is a broccoli that the audience doesn't want to eat. There are very different ways of dealing with this, but we can start with "minimize exposition" as the first "law" of storytelling, and from there, we have different strategies:

Spruce up the exposition, making it into a mini-story, delivered in an entertaining way, so that people aren't bored.

Run something alongside the exposition so that people aren't bored, like sight gags in a comedy or an action scene in a thriller.

Have the exposition delivered through implication and clues, rather than stated outright, like having a character limp rather than explaining to the audience that they were wounded in the war. This is show, don't tell, and it's harder than it seems.

But while Snyder lays out some of this advice, it's all in different sections even though it's dealing with the same fundamental problem, and I'm not sure that he really understands that. If he does understand it, then he's not making that clear for the reader.

My thesis is that to understand storytelling, you want to understand root issues and classes of solutions. I have not written a book on writing, nor do I think there's a market for that, nor do I think I'm qualified, but it's the kind of thing that I would strive to deliver. There are a lot of writing problems that are parallel to each other, and there are a lot of structural elements that are mirrors of each other, so why not try to put it all together that way?

But Snyder makes basically no attempt to put even very related problems together, it's just little bits of advice to gnaw at the most common problems, and ... maybe that's fine, but it felt lazy to me.

Chapter 8 was the final chapter, and was mostly about trying to sell screenplays. This was irrelevant to me, but kind of interesting, and also made me feel like Blake Snyder is a better marketer and salesman than a screenwriter, and also maybe just got lucky to be working at a time when scripts were getting huge bidding wars for no good reason. The efficient market hypothesis gets clowned on again, I guess.

I'll probably write up some overall thoughts, a short review: I think I am unsuited to liveblogging because I go long. But the even shorter version is that I think I picked up a few things that were interesting to think about, and while Blake Snyder is a hack, he's an entertaining writer.

[thealexchen]

hi! i recently got back into lis2 again and that made me really curious - do you still agree with a majority of the critiques you made on lis2 in 2020? i know it's been 4 years since that post was made, but i actually do remember when you dropped this critique on a separate account and i'd thought it was an interesting one to keep in mind back then :)

i appreciated a lot of what you have to say, even if i respectfully disagree with almost all of it 😭 - i didn't want to drop a whole "why" i disagree discussion on here because it seems kind of rude to drop such a huge thing about it haha, but i would like to say that this critique actually did stick with me for a bit and i appreciate that you made it when you did! your account was a big lis2 acc that i remember back in the day, and i always loved seeing your posts!

Hi there and thanks for your ask! I think I may know who you are, but you did get me thinking about that critique again (has it been four years already?? Jesus). After rereading it again, I have to say my overall opinions haven’t changed… I’m just not as invested in them as I used to be.

Since DE came out, I’ve seen a drastic shift from favoring D9 to DN, but I really think the reception comes down to their creative choices (or lack thereof). When I gave my initial thoughts on DE in May, I said that D9’s games rely heavily on fanservice to be marketable, while LiS2 was divisive from the jump because it was so obviously rooted in DN’s prioritization of making a game out of passion and not what would sell well (a continuation of Max and Chloe’s story). People have mostly been complaining that DE feels written without much thought or care for the original game, with lazy offscreen narrative decisions. Unfortunately, I believe this output is really due to D9 being puppeteered by Square to “corporatize” this series to death, which I find really depressing.

When LiS1 first debuted in 2015, the gaming industry was still recovering from Gamergate (which proved how misogynistic it still was) and LGBT+ issues were finally achieving mainstream attention, both positive and negative. The media storm surrounding LiS1 all focused on how different it was. It was truly radical at the time to turn what would be a typical Sundance indie film plot into an interactive AA game and make it mainstream. I think both the positive attention from gamers starved for a story like this and the negative attention calling it “Life is Tumblr” contributed to its massive popularity and attention that hasn’t been matched since.

I have always, always believed (like since 2018) in LiS being an anthology series and letting Max and Chloe’s story end. “Farewell” was supposed to be that, and I was really excited to see what DN was making next and hopeful I could fall in love with LiS2 like I did the first game. Even if I found LiS2’s narrative choices really frustrating, I still respect DN for sticking to their vision. Honestly, Michel Koch deserves his flowers so much for staying active on Twitter through years of fan hate and complaining and posting consistently respectful replies, even as his own characters have likely become unrecognizable to him.

But while DN stuck to their vision about LiS2, I think the main contextual issue with the game (and where my critiques came from) is there was too much pressure to follow up an accidental hit. DN wanted to follow up LiS1 with an even bigger, more serious, more ambitious, maybe more “artistic” and “daring” game that was boldly political… but I just don’t think they achieved that. The game still looks beautiful, with a strong soundtrack, art direction, moments of calm, and great environmental storytelling like the first game. But while LiS1 lured you into a false sense of security with its cozy vibes and high school setting, only to blindside gamers with heartbreaking and shocking plot twists late in the game, LiS2 is just a misery fest from start to end in an attempt to be as serious and memorable as the first game. There isn’t enough joy and nostalgia (DN is SO good at nostalgia) to contrast the sorrow, and the game wasn’t as memorable or fun to play for me.

My main critique in 2020 was the game relies too much on a violent trauma narrative without proper research and content warnings. Looking back on it now, I think DN internalized the praise too strongly that LiS1 was daring and different. They tried to be even more topical and bold without regard to how actual players of color might react to the racial violence onscreen. In addition, I critiqued LiS2 for not showcasing the positive aspects of Sean and Daniel’s Mexican heritage to contrast all the racism, and I thought True Colors did a better job at including meaningful and positive cultural details for Alex and Gabe’s family. They likely didn’t think to research more carefully how to depict POC (and how the standards for sensitive representation might be different in the U.S. compared to France). American politics are also wayyyy more complex than what’s on the news, and have a massive historical, social, and economic background, and nowadays, I’ll cut DN some slack and say I think that’s too much to tackle for any game. Yes, DN could’ve done better, but I wouldn’t critique them as harshly today, and I know they had good intentions.

If the pressure to follow up LiS1 wasn’t there, maybe LiS2 could’ve been different. Maybe DN wouldn’t have bit off more they could chew, or maybe this game could’ve been made independently of the LiS series and judged on its own merit. A game like Tell Me Why shows how DN is at their best when they tell smaller, nostalgic stories and are able to do the right research and collaborate with the right consultants and actors. I hope Lost Records can be the same, since DN is pitching it from the jump as an anthology and likely their do-over of LiS as their own independent studio.

Thank you again for asking! It was nice to revisit my critique. If you’d still like to talk about it, I am down for a friendly debate!

[artist-issues]

this my sound silly, but do you have any advice on how you come up with something to say for a story?

I think you're right that good art has something to say and communicates it well. That's certainly true of every story I've ever loved.

But while I love inventing fantasy worlds, you've made me realize I've never actually planned to say anything with them.

I've got lots of opinions, lots of beliefs, lots of stuff to say, but now that I realize I need to, it's been hard to pick one of those to be the core point of a story.

the trouble is, the dominant writing advice I saw online was the opposite. that stories made for the purpose of communicating a message or promoting something just turn into preachy propaganda, so the best way to make a good story (that, dare I invoke the curse, appealed to a wider audience) was to muddy it so you could take away as many interpretations from it as possible. thus most of the material I've given myself to work with has been slightly poisoned.

I really like how you said all of that! I agree with your assessment of the advice most people give.

Here's how I do it:

A loose concept, like a disgraced knight falling in love with the King's head of staff who's come to live in the village he's hiding in, will pop into my brain. I'll like the concept. I'll imagine one or two interactions between them that I just like.

But when it comes time to write anything down, even just for my own notes—then it's time to find a message. And usually that's not hard, or at least, that's not disingenuous, because:

what I believe, my worldview, was already subliminally shaping the things that I liked.

So then as I go to write down the names, the histories, the plot points, of my fun little knight love story idea, I find that something kind of...readily fits them.

But now here's the catch; it really helps to know what you believe, and to feel strongly about it, for all of that to come as naturally as possible.

About Propaganda "versus" Stories:

It's a lie to say that something which is created to say something is always propaganda, and something which is created with no careful point thought out is always art. Silly thing to believe. It's like saying "all words are propaganda." No, all words are communication. It's not our fault they don't like that we know what we want to say, and we want them to understand it clearly.

I mean. All art is propaganda, if by "propaganda" or "preachy" you mean, "I tried to take what was going on in my head & heart and put it in your head & heart." All art, all storytelling, is that. Otherwise you'd just keep what you think and feel bouncing around in your own brain, instead of doing anything outward (writing, drawing, painting, singing, speaking, reacting with your body language) with it.

I think what people are getting at when they say "avoid being preachy" or "that's not art, it's propaganda" is "you weren't being genuine." And that can be true. Sometimes people can tack a meaning onto a movie or a story where it doesn't fit because they either a) don't believe that strongly in the thing themselves, but everyone around them was clamoring for it or b) they were lazy and didn't do the work to make the story fit, genuinely, with the message, in a way that enhances and makes the message winsome.

But as bad as those two mistakes are, neither of them prove that intending to say something with your story, very carefully and genuinely, that you don't want misinterpreted, is somehow a bad thing.

Look at the fairy tales that the Brothers' Grimm collected. Look at any stories from the time before commercialism: Our oldest stories combined genuine enjoyment with the virtues and meanings that made enjoyment possible/worthwhile.

Anyway. I have a feeling you agree with me already about this so I'll hop down off that soap box.

What Comes First: Having Fun Making What You Like, or Choosing Something to Say?

I don't think it is wrong to tell a story that...you didn't have an intended thesis written down for. I think people like J.R.R. Tolkien and Walter Elias Disney prove that. But the thing is, what they believed got infused into their storytelling, because of course it did. It can't help it. When you want the audience to like your lead character, you make her likeable—but the traits you think are likeable are informed by something.

Snow White is innocent and pure because Walt Disney naturally considered those things beautiful and good and worth liking. He probably didn't even think to write it down and revolve everything around it: it just came out that way.

Frodo is a little scholar, and willing to soldier on with what little he can do, despite his lack of experience, because those are character traits Tolkien felt were good and likeable. Why? Because deep down, in his worldview, he believes being book-smart and doing what you can with what you have is valuable. And that just...comes out, much like his valuing of history, in the thing he creates.

Now, if they didn't know what they believed--or if they were insecure people "blown about by every wind of false doctrine" that comes their way--or if they were focused more on satisfying what the largest number of people liked--they wouldn't have been able to infuse the story with any genuine meaning, planned-out or natural.

That's what I think.

I think it's all a matter of loving what's good and true. Training your affections, so that you care most about things that are worth caring about—the things you feel most strongly about in characters will be the things you feel most strongly about in life. I love Stitch because I love redemption. Not primarily because I love sci-fi characters, the color blue, or the blend of ugly-and-cute—even though I do like those things on a more minor scale. See?

But if you've trained your affections for junk food—you feel most strongly appreciative of characters that are hot, or spout off funny one-liners, or come onscreen to cool music—then that's what will naturally come up in your own storytelling.

There's also nothing wrong with doing it the other way; saying you want to teach a certain lesson, and then coming up with characters and settings to fit that lesson. Coming at it from that direction is just as valid—as long as you put in the work, and care more about that lesson you genuinely believe in than you do what other people think.

Anyway,

To Write Your Own Main Point/Thesis/Armature/Theme

When it’s time to start writing anything down, it’s time to figure out the main point, and that’s when I...typically think about what I'd want to teach the kids I'm around, to be honest.

With my disgraced-knight love story, I go "what is it he loves about the girl, in all those vague vibe-y scenes I’ve been picturing?" And I make the connection between her virtuous character traits to what I want him, the main character, to learn.

So for example, she used to live in the palace, working for the King, but she was humble enough to give all that up and live in a no-name town to take care of her stepfather. He's disgraced and doesn't want anyone to know who he is—well, that's a pride issue, totally the opposite of how humble his love interest is. And why’s she humble? Because she’s not focused on herself. She doesn’t care about her own reputation or status. So then I just reverse engineer that: the point of the story is "Live in the King's name, not your own." Now one of the two main characters embodies that—the other has to learn it, and the story is the obstacle course he’s pushed through to get there.

I wasn't consciously thinking about making her the king's former head of staff, or him disgraced, when I first came up with the vague concept of the story, see? I just liked the "vibe" of a hopeless dude suddenly seeing a ray of light in the "vibe" of a girl from poor circumstances who seems happy regardless of them. I liked that "vibe." Then I traced what I liked about the vibe back to something that is true and worth teaching or appreciating in real life.

I’m in a job I don’t love right now, and it could make me miserable, but if I just remember “in everything you do, whether in word or in deed, do for the glory of the Lord,” then my focus isn’t on myself and I have joy and hope. And that hope can be used to point others, around me, to hope, too. So I’m not “preaching” something disingenuous; I’m living it, because this is what I believe, so no wonder it’s also leaking it’s way into my story. I just happen to be creating a pipe so that the leak flows more smoothly, which can only help, in the long run.

But I’ve done it other ways, too. Once I watched kind of from afar as a friend’s family fell apart. I felt like, from the outside, I could see where one of my friends was hurting and what they needed to accept (from the Bible) to move forward, but I wasn’t in a position to say it to my friend directly. Then I figured, “if my one friend is going through this situation, others probably are too, and this lesson from the Bible is universal anyway” so I…made up an analogy for the way their family fell apart, then came up with an ending that taught the “family” in the analogy the lesson I got from the Bible. So for that, you can see how I first came up with the main point, then built up characters and a world and a story to fit around it.

Both ways work, the chicken or the egg first. But they only work if you are committed to working hard and serving others with your story, not committed to being popular or “only making what YOU like.”

Make sense? I hope so! Thank you for the question!

[dayscapism]

My Thoughts on the Percy Jackson TV Show (was not a fan):

Months have passed but, I guess I like to throw wood to embers to make fires again. Honestly, I would have abandoned it after episode 3 if it weren't one of my favourite book series ever and I wanted so bad to be hopeful and pleasantly surprised.

I don't think it's a terrible adaptation, but I think it's boring, badly edited, with character inconsistencies, has first-draft-level writing and just missed potential. I'm happy it's been working for so many others, but I've also seen a lot of people being so reluctant to negatively criticise anything about it. Which is weird, it makes me feel like we're watching two different shows and I'm the problem (am I the drama? perhaps. I don't care.)

It's not been an easy time to watch for me; it's a sustained, painful, physical effort to pay attention to this show, especially during dialogue scenes. Like how do you make a show about a bunch of ADHD kids and make it so NOT ADHD-friendly to watch?? (The writers and editors should watch EEAAO, that's how an ADHD brain approaches visual media). The pacing, the terrible exposition, it's the static and uninteresting camera work, the lack of a campy hyping music/soundtrack, the lack of stylization, the lazy editing, the actors stopping to chat in a static shot every other minute, no running during urgent situations, etc. Nothing is engaging! It's such a boring show! There's always exactly 1 thing happening on screen and nothing else around it, no hidden meanings, no mystery, nothing that could be layered storytelling, which is such an important thing in a TV show where you only have 8 episodes to tell your story! Spekaing of, ADHD and dyslexia don't seem to be shown or discussed again after it's mentioned that Percy has it in episodes 1-2. I was hoping for bolder representation with that. (Why didn't they include the little dialogue where neither Percy of Annabeth can figure out the sign at the emporium because of dyslexia, and Grover has to tell them? These little moments count so much for representation of this kind!)

The dialogue paired with the pacing/humour is not landing. It truly feels unpolished, like a first draft. Like technically it serves its purpose, but it's an ineffective, unengaging manner to write a tv script. They should have done more flashbacks too, to give context and exposition. But instead, everything is given to us like you would in a book. (And this is coming from someone who read the books years ago so I NEED this exposition because I don't remember a lot of details, but the exposition isn't even helpful and the writing doesn't keep me engaged enough for me to even pay attention to the exposition!) The actors are doing the best with the material they have, they're all really precious, but this writing and directing is hurting their acting so bad. The dialogue and scenes are so awkward, which hurts the chemistry between the characters too (I expand on my issues with the characters later).

A lot of the tone and pacing issues could just be a book-to-tv adaptation thing because we're no longer in Percy's head with his funny sarcastic remarks and long paragraphs that can give us context. But then why didn't they include narration? Why didn't they keep it up after the intro in episode 1?? Why did they even include that bit if they weren't going to keep it up?? We have 4th-wall narration in lots of things these days (from the top of my head, Fleabag and Deadpool), usually done for comedic and style effect. This would help so much with the pacing and tone! the lost potential is so frustrating. Many movies/shows don't need narration; this one could have benefitted so much from it.

The show is not funny whatsoever when the books are hilarious. At no point did I laugh out loud here. Such a crime. I hate to be one of THOSE but the movies at least got the unserious and funny beats right. Like why is the music in this show just an epic forgettable MCU-like soundtrack but with a serious tone? Why didn't they include modern or campy songs? They should have taken clues from the Umbrella Academy's first seasons. And they could have included Greek music in it too! How cool would that have been? It's not a bad soundtrack by any means, but if nothing else is used in a very strange manner in some scenes because it sometimes cuts the action or doesn't match the energy or vibe of the scenes. The visuals and settings are pretty good, I admit, but these are underserviced by the entire production's lack of style and music and tone are a big part of that.

Some people have said the action scenes are bad, but I feel the problem is there's no sense of urgency, of danger (no layered storytelling here either). The fights with the monsters are okay, great even, the problem is this lack of excitement. The problem is the setups to the action: the lack of tension and then rushed resolutions. For example, they dragged the scenes with Medusa and Equidna talking that it lost all suspense. Equidna literally says instead of just jumping to it, showing what she would do to them kids. (Ok the chimera is cool tho, looks really cool. I want it as a pet 😊 And the editing when Percy falls from the arch is pretty cool too, rare exception.)

But most feels so underwhelming. These kids should also be running everywhere, not calmy walking (bad directing!) This makes the monsters not feel as menacing, because they always have time for a calm exposition break long conversations in the middle of what are supposed to be life-or-death encounters with ancient Greek monsters. And mind you, these pauses for conversation aren't even layered, they're often shot with a static camera, with dull dialogue no 12 yo would speak. They could be having these conversations while running, while hiding, while doing something else! Mix dialogue and action! Layered storytelling, it's about themes and characters but also about how you present the scenes themselves.

An adjacent problem is also that the actualization of the myths for a modern audience is a bit surface-level (like with Medusa). They could have done so much more here.

Now, issues with characterization:

Characters can really make or break a story. Here we have a lot of character inconsistencies, or rather, a lack of definition of the characters. It's not about the show being exactly accurate to the book here, it's the show wasting perfectly good character and plot moments from the show, while not being true to tone and to the core of the characters. Change in adaptations can be good, to consolidate or make things clearer and work for the new medium, but they character work here was very ineffective and inefficient.

Percy is supposed to be cunning, smart but not knowledgeable about the Greek world. The show has this being reversed many times.

Grover is perceptive and has more life experience but he is reduced to nothing here. Like I'm wondering why is he even here?

And Annabeth... Oh. Annabeth is a hard character to portray and write, tbh, it's easy to make her unlikable and straightforward, can very easily come off as annoying, pedantic perhaps, though I am all for unlikeable female heroines. But this is such a baffling iteration of her character. She comes off as a stalker in the first episodes, then she's mean and bossy yet she doesn't seem to actually plan or have good strategies (all is deferred to Percy really), then she sort of uses "the power of friendship" to resolve things but never her growing wisdom. Yes, she could be weird and caring and smart but they didn't nail any of those traits either. They striped her of any complexity. But my biggest gripe is that they didn't make Annabeth nerdy enough! Annabeth sure recalls a lot of facts during the show to look smart I suppose, but she rarely gets to problem solve or truly nerd out neurodivergent kid style, which I think is a huge missed opportunity.

An example, which might be very niche but it shows my issue with her characterization and I have to talk about it cause I'm a physics nerd (literally, it's my major), the part in the ST Louis Arch in episode 4 where she tells Percy and Grover stuff about the construction is so... basic. Like she just read it out of a tourist pamphlet or something. She just says how tall and wide the arch is and that it's symmetrical. That's it. Right...

Why didn't she mention what type of arch it is?? (A catenary arch, more specifically one that follows a weighted catenary curve. It isn't just held by "symmetry" it's tension! It's cool math!) Maybe she even mentions that it's a hyperbolic function and Percy and Grover can be like omg what are you even talking about, and she keeps going on and on about calculus and architecture, like a neurodivergent kid would about their interests. I mean, sure she's like 12, but she's supposed to be like a gifted kid, daughter of Athena, right? She probably knows some of the science and engineering behind the arch. Missed opportunity. Or maybe it's just that I see so much of myself in Annabeth and it hits too close when they can't make her justice. Idk. Like having a true nerdy, brilliant, neurodivergent, bossy but caring, black Annabeth would have been amazing. I guess the world wasn't ready for that.

This was episode 4 and the episodes are NOT getting better...

Also, Annabeth and Percy get sincere with each other really quickly after like 1 day of knowing each other, no layered storytelling or emotional reactions to them baring their deepest fears and darkest backstories either. (Poor kids are doing their best with mediocre adaptation, though Walker is carrying the show at this point, tbh.)

Annabeth and Luke's relationship also suffers a lot from telling and no showing. Why don't we have flashbacks?? Such a missed opportunity for a show. As a rule, showing isn't superior to telling, but these two techniques need to be balanced in the writing, they can be combined too to serve the story during a specific scene or passage. In this case, telling was the wrong way.

For Luke, if they want his arc to have the emotional hit it has in the book, they really needed to build his character more and give him more screen time! Which could have been done with flashbacks. Because with Annabeth's stoic acting, too, we don't really get the emotional reactions appropriate to the events she recounts. So how are we going to feel with the betrayal since the relationship hasn't been built strongly so far? Nothing. We'll feel nothing.

Annabeth's actress is doing her best with what she's given she portrays her like she's in a Disney Channel kids sitcom from the 90s, deadpan but snarky, which is not a flavour of acting that helps this adaptation. This might be a larger directing issue, though, because Percy barely reacts when he sees his mother "die" in front of him.

Anyway, Flashbacks and narration could have saved this series alone, tbh. We don't even know how Thalia looks like! How are we gonna know it's her at the end of the book with the fleece reveal??

Ok, disclaimer, I didn't finish the show. I got distracted and bored and couldn't be bothered. I think I stopped after the Underworld episode (episode 7 I think.) I couldn't be bothered to watch the finale even with Toby Stephens in it. That's how enthusiastic I am about this.

Also a bit of a nitpick but why isn't it explained why are Percy and Sally are stuck with Gabe in the first place? About his scent? Why is the abuse so... sanitized too? Like yeah, we could have a more psychological and verbal form of abuse situation, of course, but we also didn't get that? Gabe was just unpleasant and a bit of a jerk, pathetic, but that was basically all. Also, no explanation for the blue food?? When it's such insight into Percy's relationship with his mom?? So much EXPOSITION in this series yet they missed many of the important parts!

Disney watered down Sally too. They really did. Her makeup is nice though.

So... yeah, they could be doing so much more with all the characters.

Concluding thoughts:

I don't hate the show (the visuals are great and Walker Scobell's acting is amazing, such a young talent!), but every time I finish watching an episode, I'm just bored and underwhelmed and wished I had done something else with my time.

I know it's frustrating that in previous decades usually had 20+ episodes, plus season 1 and 2 being shot side by side so we didn't even have to wait and fear of cancellation after so little; shows really don't have to be perfect from season 1, they need room to grow, but they have to have SOMETHING to pull the viewer in from the beginning, to make them stay. Anything! This show is giving me nothing to work with. I do hope the show gets better in season 2, and I understand that the 8-episode-season model is a constraint for writers, but I still think it could have done much better with the resources it did have.

For example, Black Sails had an infamous first season, but then it grew to be what imo is the best show ever put to TV. And yes, it took a while for it to find its perfect footing, but it was like a delicious cake that maybe has some bad frosting but the foundation is there, it just needs polishing and a few changes. But this PJO show doesn't live up to its potential and it's just so frustrating because I wanted to love this show so much but I'm finding it difficult to think of anything that I truly loved about it other than Walker Scobell's acting and course Toby Stephens (but I already love him from his previous work so it hardly counts).

Honestly, I'm a little bit tired of discourse going around saying that critiquing a show from season 1 is not acceptable because the show hasn't finished growing and we want a second season, we don't want the criticism to affect a season 2. But this is irrelevant and that's not how media criticism works. People can get very on board with good shoes from 1 season alone. That's no excuse. There are genuinely good book adaptations out there that make changes for the better and get a good foothold from the get-go! Look at Lockwood & Co, OPLA or Anne with an E. It can totally be done. The criticisms we have are precisely because we love the books, because we wanted this adaptation to succeed, because we wanted to love it, but it disappointed us. And we are allowed to voice that, as long as is done in good faith.

I'm happy this show got renewed because of the fans who enjoyed it, love the Percy Jackson series, it is truly dear to my heart, but would I be sad if the show was cancelled? Honestly, no. I couldn't care less what happens to this show at this point. Why should I? I was given no reason to care, aside from my already existing love for the books. I'm not intrigued about how they're going to adapt book 2, I didn't connect with the characters, I wasn't having fun. Nothing. And sure, I want young kids to be introduced to Percy Jackson, great if it's through this show, I want younger generations to love this series too, but I don't know any gen alpha who would enjoy such a show. (Hell, I really wanted my audience-age-appropriate niece to love it, but she couldn't care less about it and jeez, I wonder why...) Kids deserve better shows than this.

Will I watch season 2? Idk. Maybe? I can put it in the background while doing something else perhaps. I do hope they improve stuff but I don't have my hopes up. Will I watch episode 8? No. Life's too short. I already read the books so why bother (hehe)

[thestrangestthlng]

a story of the impact of groundbreaking representation in media

On April 30, 1997, I was eleven years old and at my godmothers' house for the night. I don't know how many remember but network tv during the week used to be a big deal. This is when families would sit down together and watch their favorite shows.

This evening I remember sitting on the couch and feeling something buzzing in the air. My godmothers' were so happy and excited about something, but I didn't really know what.

They put on Ellen and I remember brushing my Barbie dolls hair and an electric rush fill the silence of the room (outside of the tv of course).

"I mean, why can't I just say… I mean, what is wrong? Why, why do I have to be so ashamed? I mean, why can't I just… say the truth, I mean, be who I am... I'm 35 years old, I'm so afraid to tell people, I mean, I just… Susan, I'm gay."

And in that moment Ellen Degeneres made history. I was too young to understand the impact, but it was still strong enough for me to remember, 27 years later, the impact that had on the lives of two of the most important women in my life. Their clasped hands and tears of joy have made a marked impression in my life and I consider one of the most defining moments of my life.

We had this moment again. We had, on network tv, which is still extremely censored and conservative by the way, a ~33 year old man discover another part of what makes him so special. It was treated as such, like they understood the impact. This ~33 year old man was also masc and a firefighter--a career which is regressive in many areas and there are many, many firefighters in the closet--and his love interest was another masculine gay man who also happened to be a firefighter. We had wonderful friendship representation and development.

Then... all that was undone in 42 minutes by lazy, reductive storytelling. Writing that undid all that beauty in under three minutes. And that is the probably the biggest slap in the face.

They used harmful and reductive stereotypes in a breakup that wasn't even properly plotted for the story structure they use. So, yes, I am going to remain angry at the writers of 9-1-1 for a while.

I will always love Buck and I will always love the characters of 9-1-1. They also made me love Tommy. If the intention was to always just have him only be a chapter in his story, that's okay, but the chapter didn't need to be a dissertation, just to leave us with a cliff noted eight grade book report.

[soleminisanction]

Thoughts on RedHood!Steph ?

Boring. Pointless. Kinda dumb.

Sorry to be blunt. I have a special disdain for the brand of fandom storytelling that boils down to "Steph should get to be every single legacy in the Batfamily, it would Be So Cool," and have ever since I first saw that fucking Nightwing panel from the end of BG09. It's just, so fucking superficial and lazy, the equivalent of playing superhero dress-up dolls instead of bothering to give the poor girl any actual depth or personality. It's aggravating.

With this one specifically -- if you ask me, there's a reason the "Reverse Robins" AUs file her with the Batgirls. Partially, it's because she's more notable as a Batgirl than she's even been as a Robin (and far more notable as Spoiler than either legacy). But mostly, I think, it's because doing it with the five-Robin count just isn't as interesting, because then there isn't as much change to the line-up.

Switching Dick and Damian is interesting because it upends their entire dynamic and relationship to the other characters, presenting both of them in an entirely different light and -- because Damian's the one setting the standard -- making the Robin legacy much more about Robin than Batman. Switching Jason and Tim is interesting because it reverses their fortunes, giving Tim the tragedy that was meant for Jason and vice-versa, and the good ones will examine how these two fundamentally different characters would respond differently to otherwise similar external stimulus.

But if you throw Steph in there, the only ones who actually switch are Dick and Damian. Tim's story fundamentally wouldn't change at all aside from needing a new origin to explain why he's fanboying Damian when there's no circus involved. Meanwhile, Jason and Steph's Robin eras are so similar -- short, defined by conflict with Bruce and ending in tragedy at the hands of a villain -- that I can't imagine her adding much more to Red Hood than exactly what she brought to Robin: her specific flavor of daddy issues and a miniskirt.

In other words, she'd feel even more like Huntress with a gun than Jason already does. There's no point to any of it.

Which is why when I do RR AUs, I tend to include Betty Kane in my Batgirl count and switch Steph with her, making Bette Spoiler and Steph Flamebird. If you ask me, that's an interesting character contrast.

[madam-whim]

The Gold Road Reveal and my thoughts on it

I’m gonna start this off by saying I love ESO. I have been playing since 2017 and I’m pretty much doing everything the game has to offer. Quests, dungeons, trials, antiquities, sometimes PvP. That being said, this post will include lots of criticism that I feel (or know) is shared by many other fans.

But first things first, let me start off by listing some of the things on yesterday’s stream that had me bouncing in my seat:

The new zone is absolutely stunning! There’s a lot of variety to it and it does look very pretty. Exploring it will undoubtedly be fun and a feast for my eyes.

Also, Fennorian will be there, so I know there will at least be one well-written character that my Vestige has an actual bond with.

The scribing system being more of a roleplay thing – I don’t know what some people were hoping for, but I’m glad it’s not some Big Damage For Those Who Are Good At Maths kind of system. It still allows for a more unique playstyle, and I suppose it’s going to turn out like always: Do whatever you want in open world spaces, but keep your bow backflip heal out of veteran content.

And maybe the biggest “Yes!” moment of the evening: Ed Stark being the zone lead for Gold Road. While I did not like High Isle as much (too predictable for my taste, but at least it had recurring characters), he was responsible for Greymoor and Murkmire as well. I thought Greymoor was fantastic (good quests, excellent new characters alongside very familiar recurring ones), and Murkmire… well, I think Murkmire suffers greatly from being “the DLC that came after the Daedric Triad” so to speak. It kind of fell into the void created by a storyline spanning a full year (or even more, if you count the setup for the whole thing, which really began with the Varen’s ghost and Darien’s letter in Wrothgar and the Gold Coast sweetroll killer quests). I think that’s why lots of people don’t seem to like Murkmire very much despite it having great storytelling. My point is this: I do have some hope that after the fiasco some recent DLCs were story-wise, Ed Stark will at least make sure Gold Road makes sense.

And now for the criticism.

Ithelia’s design (Whenever, wherever, I want to kill Hermaeus…)

… yeah, about that. As one of my friends put it, she looks like Shakira with wings.

They really could have done so much better. The way she is now, as @akaviri-dovah said, she really just looks like a Meridia clone who somehow stole Jyggalag’s crystals, which is funny on so many levels (more on that later). Suffice it to say that I personally think the design choices are kind of lazy, given that we already have an angelic-looking Daedric lady.

Also, what’s with this picture? This kinda makes it seem as if she originally looked. Um. A lil different from the way she is now. In any case, I’m just gonna call this a missed opportunity for something more unique. I do like the glass shard aesthetic, I just wish they’d taken it in a different direction.

Dragon Break Princess Ithelia, or something like that

Now I know Dragon Breaks have to work differently from what Ithelia does, but I am kind of wondering what the consequences of her fate-altering abilities are. How do you alter fate in a way that threatens reality (with reality consisting of past and present events, with all possible versions of the future being possibly-real until one actually happens) without altering the timeline? Just by removing a possible future? Then one could argue that any Daedra could do the same just by manipulating people. Granted, it’s possible that Ithelia sees all possible futures and can do whatever she likes with them, but even then, she’d only be influencing what can become reality, not what already is. So how can she be THAT dangerous?

Right now, it just seems to me that they needed an adversary for Hermaeus Mora, and since his big things are knowledge, secrets and fate, and they couldn’t very well make a Daedric Prince of Anti-Intellectualism or a Daedric Prince of Snitching, she had to be a fate-altering type of Daedra.

At this point I’m still wondering how she even works, because how does she not accidentally cause Dragon Breaks? And if she is that damn powerful, how on earth did Mora alone manage to pretty much remove any trace of her? Which kind of brings me to my next point.

Memory Issues

I know, I know, Ithelia is not the first “new” Daedric Prince. (Which makes her stolen Jyggalag crystal vibes rather funny if you ask me.) And I don’t mind her being crazy powerful either, because so was Jyggalag or else he wouldn’t have been cursed. But that, to my knowledge, required several other Princes, whereas Ithelia apparently got owned by Hermaeus Mora alone, who then erased all memory of her. Which is not only quite the feat given how powerful she has to be, but also a very weird thing for Hermaeus Mora to do. I kinda thought stealing memories was more Meridia’s style. This entire part does not quite make sense to me yet and seems a little out of character, but well. By the way, speaking of Meridia…

Meridia-baiting the players

At this point, ZOS have to know we’re getting tired of waiting for villain Meridia. Everyone I know who is even the least bit interested in ESO’s storyline wants to see it. And I’ve seen people get their hopes up in recent days (new Meridia/Dawnbreaker-themed music box, the Ayleid ruin hint on the fragments sent to streamers…). Even in the twitch chat, there were people hyped about what they thought was Meridia, and who were disappointed when they were told it was Ithelia. And yes, I am absolutely saying they did this and made her a Meridia lookalike on purpose. But I’m well aware that we haven’t gotten any new hints about either Meridia or a certain someone since Greymoor, and that chapter will be four years old soon. Even I am beginning to give up, as much as I hate to say it.

By the way, I really did NOT appreciate Matt Firor name-dropping Darien right at the beginning. If you’re not planning to do anything with him, just let it go. I know absolutely nobody who appreciates being fed very tiny hints for two years and then being left in the dark for four years straight. If you don’t want to pick that storyline up again, just stuff the man into the Old Life quest and be done with it.

Honestly, once again, I’m gonna say this is a MASSIVE missed opportunity right here. ESO’s 10 year anniversary is coming up, what could possibly be better than to go back to the roots now and reward all those loyal players with the story they are waiting for? I distinctly recall Molag Bal telling me to watch my step around Meridia, and the setup is all there. I’m honestly disappointed that there is no Meridia content at all. And this ties in with my final point, albeit vaguely.

“Recurring” characters

Ah, yes, we do love recurring characters. Sometimes. We do love it when a fan favorite comes back – a character who’s accompanied the Vestige over the course of an entire story arc or has made multiple appearances over the years and has become beloved by many players, and, most importantly, who is well-written, i.e. has a unique personality. And that’s why “recurring characters” is not always a recipe for success when it comes to getting people hooked on a story.

It is when it’s one of the five companions, or a Ravenwatch member, or your main alliance buddy (Raz, Naryu and – oh, wait, yeah, us Covenant babies don’t have one anymore). It also works when it’s a character we’ve run across several times already, like Alchemy, who I know tons of people love, or my favorite walking disaster Revus Demnevanni.

But it’s certainly not working when it’s a character we barely know anything about, and who isn’t a hit with the community. Like Eveli’s brother whom I had to google because I could not remember who he was. He’s from a prologue quest. Nothing more. That’s not a “beloved returning character”.

ZOS have several of those just lying around, and they’re just not using them. And even the base game had so many characters that were there over the course of several zones, that were well-written and at least memorable to the degree that people would recognize them with just a little reminder, like Indaenir or Holgunn and Walks-in-Ash or the Vanos siblings. Hell, we haven't seen good old Vanus Galerion in a while. They are ten years old now and deserve to be dragged to the surface again.

Okay, I’m done now!

This concludes my rant (because that’s what it is, I’m aware). I just want to say again that this is not be dragging ESO through the mud, this is just me pointing out that the devs (especially the writers) could do so much better if they listened to their lore nerds and story-interested players more.

[cookieandbread]

SPOILER FOR TUA S4

because I'm French (a hater at heart) here's everything I disliked about tua s4

it felt like half a season. and yeah there was half as much episode as there is usually, but even in the storytelling it felt like half of the story was missing (notably the EXPLANATIONS on so many things)

Klaus being sidelined. AGAIN. just kill him at this point if you have no idea what to do with him (I mean they did kill him so....)

since we're on Klaus, every season I feel like I'm rewatching him doing the EXACT. SAME. THING. but in a different outfit + hair. there's a commentary that could be made about being stuck in the vicious circle of addiction, which, fair. but while s2 shows that vicious circle, s3 and s4 are just a repeat of s1 because the writers were lazy.

I HATED the Lila x Five thing. it's not so much about the ship (that I don't like anyway) but I feel like it's an insult to both characters (but particularly Five) to make it happen. Lila loves Diego, and even through the hard parts of their marriage she tried her best to make it work. and Five? Five "I waited 45 years in the apocalypse and became a time assassin just to get back to my family" Hargreeves? you're going to tell me that THAT Five would dare to do something that would shatter his brother's entire world? PLEASE.

the ending is lazy. I'm all for tragic endings that make people cry until they drown in their own tears, but only when they're WELL DONE. this just felt like "oh idk what to do anymore with them so let's kill everyone". and I saw it coming since the beginning of the season so...

is it me or was there more gore and swears than all the other seasons? like I get they finally had the right to swear and all that, but I feel like it was a little overdone? idk maybe that's just me

most characters felt like caricature of themselves, notably Luther. (tbh for Luther it has felt like that for a few seasons now, but the issue extended to other characters this season). either that or it felt like they had no reasons to be here, like Viktor.

why did Ben make everyone drink the marigold? he could've just took some himself and that's all. why did they even need to vote on that considering the fact that, even if one of them took marigold, not all of them would get their powers back?

s3 post-credit scene wasn't explained AT ALL???? all the season I was waiting for Umbrella!Ben to pop up in the tube station with Five & Lila but nope. nothing. did they even rewatch the previous seasons before making this one?

WHERE IS THE INCREDIBLE SOUNDTRACK???? THE ONLY THING I THOUGHT WOULDN'T FAIL ME FAILED ME?????

WHERE WAS THE DANCE SEQUENCE????

probably forgot some things but idc anymore at this point (which is probably more care than Steve Blackman put into this season)

[alexanderwales]

Hey, have you watched/heard of the anime Sonny Boy? I've read about 3 million words of your writing and I think Sonny Boy would appeal to your creative interests -- especially the latter half of its 12 episode run. It has some things in common with Thresholder, minus the Cool Guys With Big Swords, but beyond the resemblance I think it's a well told story with lots of nice concepts to chew on.

I'd love to hear your take on it, if you end up watching it and felt inclined to share, but no pressure obviously.

Sonny Boy is one of my favorite anime.

There are a lot of things that I really liked about it, but non-traditional storytelling is one of the big ones. There's one bit of storytelling advice that I feel like I repeat a lot, which is that rather than saying "2 + 2 = 4" you can get a stronger impact from "2 + 2 =" and letting the reader do the math. And then there are some creators who go further, removing more and more pieces, and so long as there's something to it (rather than a lazy writer not wanting to do the work), I usually enjoy it. In the case of Sonny Boy this is also done for thematic reasons, I would assume, heightening a feeling of alienation and emphasizing the passage of time and rootlessness of the characters.

Aside from that, it's possessed of a slow melancholy that speaks to me, and a lot of the themes are ones that tumble around in my head. It feels like it gives itself a lot of room to breathe, too, which is something that I think anime excels at. I watched it and felt some feelings I associate with depression, but in a positive way. And it's a philosophical show, one that concerns itself with larger questions, even if it sidles up to them more than confronting them head on (though it does that too).

I'm less keen on the first few episodes, which felt a little more boilerplate at times.

I should also say that it's one of those things I don't recommend often, because yeah, I assume it's a show that not everyone appreciates. There are some media like that, which feel like they're speaking to me in a way that isn't about universal human experience, it's about my experience (and worldview).

[monstersinthecosmos]

can i ask what you mean re: disliking how the amc show deals with SA? (zero judgement ftr i just love hearing opinions about this show from other simple italian perv enjoyers. btw you're one of my favorite fic authors ever ever & i think abt gallows bird daily 🙈)

Obviously since you mentioned Gallows Bird in this very ask (thank you btw dskjglads I’m blushing) I’m not going to sit here and say people should never write about rape!!!!!!!!!!!  And I’ve been soul searching and talking this out with a friend today to make sure I’m not just being a hater and that I’m not having cognitive dissonance over the difference between writing porn (intentionally, intended as porn, labeled as porn) vs lazily throwing sexual assault at female characters for “character development”.

(putting this under a cut bc I'm not trying to hate on youse guys's show!!)

It's not that we should never talk about it, or never write about it, but I think it’s like any other storytelling where like, the framework and intention inside the text matters, and criticizing if it landed the way the creator intended is worth discussing. So like, I’m a fan of noncon smut fic, I won’t deny that. I also approach it in a context where I know I’m consuming smut, and it was intended as smut, and it belongs in its own lane. And I think, personally, I enjoy fics (which by nature are anarchistic and transformative) because they tend to be a commentary either on our culture or on the canon source material. Even when fanfics are PWPs that don’t go out of their way to talk about character arcs or make profound commentary on the canon, fanfic EXISTS as a commentary on canon in the first place, so it’s there by default.

So with AMC there’s a few things that really bother me about how they wrote Claudia in S1, and full disclosure I haven’t watched S2 yet, so take this with a grain of salt.

I don’t think it’s cool when a production team of mostly cishet men think that the only way to develop a female character is to have her raped. It’s lazy and it’s hurtful to the audience, and in this particular show it was not handled with sensitivity to make the story worth it. Like, what was the weight of the scene vs what it told us, and what was the payoff? Did the show earn this? (I personally don’t think it did.)

RJ himself said it was to “toughen her up” and that’s just, absolutely fucking nauseating to me, especially when it’s stamped with so many hallmarks of How Not to Write Rape. For example, the fact that they use it to tell us about LOUIS. It’s about LOUIS. It’s not about Claudia at all; we see her assault and the net result is seeing how it affects the MEN in her life. And even using her diary as a framing device for these moments, to tell it from her own words the best they can, it’s still about Louis. The pages being ripped out (in S1, idk how this lands in S2) are about protecting Louis. Claudia didn't remove the pages to protect herself, as far as we know--the men in her life removed them to protect Louis. Fridging a female character for the sake of developing the mens feelings is lazy and obnoxious, and in this story in particular it felt extremely unnecessary to the plot, and adding it at all just came across as gratuitous to me.

(Also, I can tell that this show is like, an exercise in slow burning, but, I just think the bar is really fucking high if they make this all mean something smarter but made everyone sit through this and wait 1.5+ years to get around to tucking it in lol. And like, idk what the pages could possibly say/how they will present it that will change my opinion, but RJ's comments can't be unheard so I'm not sure it matters and the trust simply isn't here, for me. Personally I don't have the patience to wait years for a show to close a loop like this but maybe you're more patient than me.)

I don’t want to get into a whole side essay about how gross I find the Claudia writing in general, but like, as a TLDR the way they aged her up only to reduce her to sex is just so fucking gross to me, and not like in a IT’S HORROR, IT’S SUPPOSED TO BE GROSS way, but in a This Is Kinda Fucking Sexist way. Especially with the sexist comments RJ has made about Anne Rice herself, while piggybacking her IP to make his show. But like, there were OTHER things about Claudia already. They already told us she came from an abusive background. She did not need to be raped for her to come home and recognize the abuse between her parents. Any number of horrific things could’ve happened to her out in the world, but the only way this team knows how to traumatize a girl is to have her raped.

And again I didn’t watch S2 yet so like, I’m not entirely sure how it shakes out, correct me if I’m wrong, but we find out now that it was prolonged and worse than what S1 showed us?

Like, why.

Who does the torture porn serve. We already got it, it was already horrific. We already got it. You’re overselling lol.

Claudia is already tough. She survived her dismal mortal life, she survived Lestat. She was brave enough to wander into the world, not just as a teen, but as a Black girl! She was already independent! In the book, she was the driving force behind helping Louis escape Lestat, and she was pulling the strings in getting them to Europe. The show has that material to pull from. We can see that she’s strong already. We don’t need more rape to communicate it. It’s lazy and gross. Especially when, in the same episode, they are able to traumatize Louis with horrific violence. The show knew how to use violence, mind gift manipulation, race and age and power dynamics in ways that did not involve rape, but still chose to have Claudia raped.

I don’t have an issue with stories talking about sexual assault but I think like, especially after Game of Thrones, we’ve had like, 10 years of media criticism mapping out how to write sexual assault successfully or respectfully, we’ve had endless commentary about how we can find other ways to traumatize women that do not rely on sexual assault, we’ve had endless commentary about how stories about sexual assault would be more effective if they were about the victim and not ultimately about the men in the story.  Like, enough of this already.

So, I’ll be curious to see how the show handles Armand’s sexual assault history, and if we see the writing handled differently because he’s a man, or because we have him directly on screen to tell us about it. This might reveal if this is a like, “only tool in the toolbox is rape” situation or a “women exist in fiction to be raped” situation. But if Lestat suffered at the hands of Magnus without being raped and Louis suffered at the hands of Lestat without being raped*, I have to ask why it was okay to have Claudia raped, why that was the thing they came up with, and while they can’t backpedal and fix the way RJ spoke about it during S1, they have an opportunity to be more intentional with the way they write it for Armand.

(*I do want to add that S1E5 being bookended by blood drinking was a hint that Lestat drinking from Louis during their fight was also rape, contrasted by the way Louis drinks from Armand in the beginning as ~ lovemaking ~; imo that could've been a more tasteful way to handle it in this universe specifically, when that’s the sex analog in the books. So like, yes in some ways Louis was raped by Lestat in this episode, but that also shows we respect Louis enough to have it symbolic vs Claudia’s being literal.)

But I just have a real bad feeling, the way they made Lestat WAY WORSE I just imagine they’ll do the same to Marius. And it’s sort of ironic that the show in a lot of ways exists in conversation with the book canon, like, the racial commentary feels at times like a commentary on the books’ racism, and I wonder what the decision making process was when they were picking which themes to correct, or comment on. Because a LOT of people criticize themes of rape and abuse in VC, and in some ways the show making it more overt feels like they’re putting a huge spotlight on it to acknowledge it properly, and in other ways, having Claudia raped feels like it’s going down the same path of insensitive, shallow writing.

And also, idk where I’m supposed to tuck this thought lol, but as an addendum I can’t not mention that I think it’s really fucked up that they’ve talked nonstop about how much they respect AR and the canon and yet had the analog character of her daughter raped. Like, in S1 they burn the tapes, in S2 they mock the plotlines as being a soap opera, and they have her daughter raped. Like, Claudia was the REASON for VC in the first place. IWTV is about Anne Rice grieving her daughter, and it sucks that the best way they could come up with existential cosmic horror for a teen girl vampire was to give her a perma-hymen and have her raped. It’s just gross, I don’t like it lol.

The first quote I saw from RJ when the show got announced, he said something like "IWTV was written by a grieving mother" -- not Anne Rice, best selling author who reinvented the vampire genre, but "a grieving mother." And it's just, idk. Rubs me the wrong way that he can reduce her that way and be this disrespectful for the character based on her daughter. =/

[artist-issues]

Hey, it’s me again

I know this was a while back but I just remembered what you said about cultivating tastes

My unwillingness to do so cane from my experience from those who lectured me to do the same but they themselves did not practiced what they preached

"You need to curate your tastes if your tired of being disappointed with shows"

Fine *does so*

"Ugh, you're so close minded and immature, why don't you take risks, broaden your horizons, and cultivate your tastes?"

Okay, why don't you do that too?

"Well I prefer the broad and nitty gritty things tragically, which are broad and risky by default so I don't need to do that."

It just felt like people like me had to keep bending over backwards and follow all these rules and regulations while those who preferred things tragically could just do whatever and act however they want

They were kinda like Uncle Andrew from The Magician’s Nephew, they have these deeper knowledge of things and are not bound to the same rules as us ordinary people

Hey, I'll be honest, I can't find my answer to your original ask and I don't fully remember our conversation (I vaguely remember the context, though!)

I mean, Uncle Andrew was wrong and being ridiculous when he said that rules don't apply to people like himself. But I guess that's your point.

I don't understand. So people are telling you that you should like things that are "gritty and tragic?" And that that is where your deficiency in taste is? Thats silly. A story is not high-quality because it has "grit" or "tragedy" in it. It has high quality elements if the "grit" or "tragedy" support the main point of the story well. But tragedy or grit for the sake of shock-jock emotion-grabbing is a waste of time and energy.

Also, I'm not advocating for adjusting your tastes so that you like disappointing shows. I don't know who is doing that, but whoever they are, that's a silly goal. It's like telling someone who got sick because they ate a whole can of spray-cheese, "you know what, it's just because you're not used to it. Eat another can of spray-cheese and you'll gradually start liking it."

Okay, well, that's a terrible goal to have. I don't want to have a taste for something that is bad. I don't want to like spray cheese, which tastes awful and also has no nutritional value and is going to make me sick. There's no point in me liking it. It's a good thing that my body's (my tastes') natural response is to reject something that is bad. Why would I want to dull it? Disappointment in a show that is poorly made and has no value is a defense mechanism that you shouldn't disable.

All I'm saying is, why are you disappointed in the show? Is it because it's poorly made? Is it because the story has no point, or makes its point badly? <- Those are good reasons to be disappointed in the show.

Or is it just because the story doesn't have the kind of "flavors" you are used to liking? Maybe the tragedy serves the story (like Sydney Carton dying in a Tale of Two Cities) but you don't like to feel sad for any reason, (even though feeling sad in the case of A Tale of Two Cities can lead you to appreciating the lesson better) so you don't read/watch that story because it's not your "flavor." <- That's an example of a not-very-good reason for being disappointed in a story.

And ultimately, who cares what other people are doing or liking? Figure out what is good, true, beautiful—objectively, whether anyone believes it or not. Then measure everything by that, whether everyone else does or not. And shrug off people's badly-thought-out reasons for liking or disliking something.

I believe and have found it to be true that God invented storytelling by inventing this reality we're living in. And His story has a point. And everything He put in His story—the setting, the characters, the mood, the way it all works—points back to the point of the story, and it does so in a beautiful, engaging way, with no shortcuts or laziness in craft. Therefore, all human-made stories are echoes of that. Some of our echoes are really good, close resemblances to God's story, because they support the main point of their story in an engaging way. But some are not, because they don't. It's a simple metric to measure things by.

But some people's standard is just "does the story entertain me?" And that's a fine sub-standard. Stories can't be engaging if they're not, on some level, entertaining. But it's a terrible ULTIMATE standard—because your tastes in entertainment can be bad, or change, or be inconsistent. Other people's standards are "does the story make me feel something?" But that's another poor ultimate standard. Because an emotional bit of music can make you feel just about anything, for a moment, even if the story behind it makes no sense. Better to ask, "what is the story making me feel, about what?"

Anyway. Thats what I believe. So I don't give two shakes of a lamb's tail what other people think I should like or dislike. I mean, I'll consider it, if they have good reasons for me to like or dislike something. But the point is, I know what I believe about the world. So I know what I believe about storytelling. And I'm trying to train my tastes to match up with that—regardless of who agrees or disagrees with me.

[lunarzomb]

Ok, had to boot up my 'puter to write this ramble of mine.

So, to be completley honest, when the episode ended, I felt nothing. Like not one bit sad, angry or anything. Maybe it's still because I am in denial, but I have some criticism, some praise and a theory brewing up in my head.

As far as criticism goes, one thing that I didn't liked was how the writers hadled Isha's character. She felt like a simple character that we had to feel sorry for when she died. We don't know anything else about her, other than the fact that she liked to hang out with Jinx. Unlike Mylo, for example, she has no other characteristics nor meaning to be in the show, if not to make Jinx fall back into her pit of despair. In one of schnee1's videos, he mentions all of the little characterizations that make Mylo feel like a real human begin: he is insecure, it's clear that he makes noise only for the meaning to make himself known to others because without Powder, he's the weakest character in their friend group. Maybe in three years the writers had not enough time to fully flesh out all of the characters. To be honest, I would have gladly waited another two to three years if it meant the writers could take their time.

I probably have not noticed them to be honest, but Isha felt more of a blank character to me. I probably will start to feel worse for her when some hours pass and I'll understand what it means for the characters. 😭

Next, I absolutley love the use of colour and movment in this episodes, more than last season. Every emotion, every little movment feels like it has a purpouse, which is what I will base my next pharagrap on.

Maybe it's my denial talking, but I want to believe that Isha, Viktor and Vander haven't died yet. As of right now, we don't know what happened to Heimerdinger, Ekko and Jayce. We only see Jayce visibly traumatized, sort of 'summoned' by the wild rune when Salo comes inside the hextech core (also, haven't understood what her got from there). At the very end of episode six, we get a sort of 'time freeze'. We can interpret it in two ways: a time freexe for the audience or a time freeze for the characters. If it's the first option, it may simply be a visual for us to fully understand and take in all the shit that went down in the last fifteen minutes. If it's the second, then it may mean that it's Ekko's freeze/rewind time abilty. That would mean that there is a chance of our characters living after all.

Arcane has a way of telling us what is really happening without explictly showing us. For example, in episode five, we understand that there is something wrong with Mel's brother's scene when the droplet of water that's supposed to fall downwards from the prison's cieling, instead 'falls back up', from the ground upwards (minute 23:06) . Also the very subtle way of his lexis changing, the fact that they did held a funeral in both Noxus and Piltover but he can't explain why they did have it if he wasn't dead, and so on... Maybe the freeze frame is not just a visual aspect, but something that is actually happening in the show.

I think that my theory might be proven wrong by the time saturday comes, but I still want to believe that that freeze frame might mean something.

Lastly, this is just me lashing out, but why EVERYTIME JAYCE TOUCHES SOMETHING EVERYTHING FALLS APART?!

HI HELLOO !! Okay so first off, feeling nothing and being in shock in denial, so real... I was literally not expecting what happened at ALL and I was just saying to myself over and over "No no no no no". Secondly, I think the points you brought up when you talked about the criticisms you had about how they handled Isha are valid. To me personally, I think Isha was used to further Jinx's story line. Which I know, most people would say that is lazy story telling or something like that. But honestly in my opinion how they used Isha was realistic and while the end of her character made me unbelievably sad, I don't think it was bad storytelling. But ofc, that's just my opinion. Thirdly, I 100% agree with you that they're going all out with the artwork and colors and EVERYTHING like that and I LOVE IT !!! This show is genuinely a piece of art like I'm so grateful to be able to enjoy this show that is so filled with creativity and passion and people behind it who really care about it. Fourthy, I like your theory about how the deaths that happened in ep 6 could be reversed somehow with magic. I don't think that that theory is unreasonable. One, because they haven't shown us where Ekko and Heimerdinger are yet. And two, because I genuinely have no idea how they're going to end the show off with act 3. Like, I feel like they could do anything, I have no predictions at all. Lastly,, about Jayce, I WAS JUST IN SHOCK.. like no fucking Jayce are you for real right now.... like I know that he was doing as Viktor wished of him in season 1 (to destroy the hexcore) but oh my god what horrible timing you have Jayce.

[688199]

i will, don’t test me thomas doodooballs. my hatred for you triumphs everything 🔥🔥🔥 once i familiarise myself with mlb (🤮) i will maybe write a test script for an episode.

thomas and his writing team is proof that just because you have a job in something doesn’t mean you’re good at it.

huge rant and ramble:

as an avid enjoyer of story telling, i strongly despise everyone behind the writing of mlb.

firstly, marinette is supposed to have bad luck through her ditziness. i watched a few episodes, and her “bad luck” seems to just be with anything regarding adrien? it’s actually just more of her being obsessive and leading to stupid mistakes. on the other hand, bridgette obviously has bad luck. getting drenched, burning her tongue, yet she smiles through it. THIS IS POTENTIAL FOR BRIDGETTE’S CHARACTER. marinette’s character has never been properly explained. why is she this way? why is she different as ladybug? (honestly is she even different? kinda, but it’s not obvious) we sure do know why adrien is more carefree as chat noir. but not marinette. on the other hand, the set up for bridgette’s character can lead to so many plot possibilities. why is she so optimistic? is it because it’s what is expected of her? is she purposefully dense? when she gets drenched by the car, she pauses for a short while looking solemn, then smiles. but that smile looks pained almost. like she’s sick of acting that way. (yes i know i’m looking too much into a pv but that’s the point. i’m saying why the pv has potential.) therefore, as ladybug, she can be herself. someone who does whatever she wants, going ahead without thought, being the person she cannot be. anyways, why the hell is marinette even in love with adrien anyways. he just gave her a god damn umbrella or smth idk. i believe my baby bridgette loves felix because she truly sees his soft side. it may be cliche but it sure is a better reason than an umbrella.

secondly, felix. thomas and his team said he was too much like a cliche male anime protagonist, and adrien would let them tell more interesting stories. i mean sure, but it’s most ironic how they even FAILED AT THAT. i rather a cliche male anime protagonist than bitch boy adrien who is as bland as cardboard. felix being cold to those around him is very reasonable because as a model, he’s used to people only liking him for looks and his money. he thinks that bridgette only likes him for those reasons, so he pushes her away. but as chat noir, felix, like bridgette, is able to be someone he truly feels. unrestrained by societal pressures. EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE BOTH POLAR OPPOSITES, ONE BEING COLD WHILE THE OTHER IS TOO WARM, THEY SUFFER FROM THE SAME ISSUES DEEP DOWN. AS HEROES THEY ARE THEMSELVES. ISNT THIS COOL????? ISNT THIS A GOOD STORYTELLING POINT?????????? then even though he needs to kiss ladybug to break the curse, he soon falls in love with her because he admires her boldness, which is something he lacks when he’s himself. he doesn’t have the courage to stand up against his father. i think mlb chat noir likes ladybug for similar reasons but i don’t remember it being connected like that. (never watched the entire 100+ episodes, only bits and pieces, and read up other stuff so might be wrong.)

i believe his team is just straight lazy. they watered down the relationships and characters to the point that dynamic contrast is just not as powerful as before. in early preproduction art, the concept shown is supposed to revolve heavily around the idea of opposites. marinette is now just an obsessive stalker and adrien takes it. chat noir flirts with ladybug and she takes it. where’s the rejection from the opposite party??? where’s the oomph?? where’s the spice???

i do enjoy the concept of them letting go of their crushes. but i didn’t like how it was done in the series. it’s as if the writers don’t fucking know the hell they’re going. felix struggles with understanding whether he truly loves bridgette or is it because of the effects of the ring’s curse. does he really want the curse to be gone? while it gives him bad luck, he gets to be himself. what does he truly want? for bridgette, she realises that she is bothering felix too much. wanting the best for him and for her to focus on being ladybug, she learns to leave him in the past for both their good. she also suffers with the weight of being the main heroine. even though she uses her identity as ladybug to be free of expectations and responsibilities, yet it’s coming back to haunt her so she starts to feel stress. while chat noir and bridgette backs away, felix and ladybug realise that they miss the other’s company since the other was always there for them when they needed it the most. the way this was written in mlb was awfully horrible.

look at what i can do thomas astruc, look at the potential. “their chemistry sucks it’ll never work” SUCK MY BALLS WHAT BULLSHIT IS THAT.

anyways, other than the obvious reason as to why the animation is a lot more visually striking and can express more things the cgi can’t (dynamic movement, special effects, etc) (funny enough, the people behind mlb said the cgi made the show more dynamic???), this is why the pv has much more potential and i will never stop believing that.

(also why didn’t the cgi ever put in effort to make ladybug and chat noir look different than their normal selves. it’s the biggest fucking plot hole that never attempts to change. even the pv tries to make bridgette’s hair change.) (sorry for low quality but see, her hair is more messy too.)

thomas astruc and zag you’re just lazy money grabbing bastards 🗣️ i stand by that. if you’re truly passionate about what you want to do (which i believe you guys were until you weren’t), you wouldn’t have sacrificed quality for money.

“the concept of the original show dealt with political themes geared towards teens and young adults but it failed to gain traction with networks so it retooled for a younger audience.” other than the team failing to realise that “cliche” doesn’t automatically mean bad, the other huge fault is that they think children are stupid and can’t handle heavier themes. look at bluey, look at all the series out there with a relatively large children audience which also deal with such stuff. it’s not impossible, it just needs exceptional writing skills. but what can i expect from a team like that.

sorry not sorry, i’m pretty mad. i have a lot of other complaints but i already spent 2h writing this. down with thomas astruc!!!!! all hail ladybug pv!!!!!!

[animehouse-moe]

Blade of The Moon Princess Volume 1: An Incredible Look Into Endou's Vision

Rather imprudent of me to title this after the artist rather than the art itself, but it's very hard not to. When your most recent work is your greatest hit, and one of the largest out of nowhere successes in a good while, it's hard to relate everything to that feat.

Regardless, what we have here is Endou's last serialized work before Spy x Family. There's a trio of one-shots bridging the gap, but all three (I Spy in particular, of course) contribute a significant amount to what it is that Endou distills into Spy x Family. Of course, you get borrowings from Tista, and most certainly from Blade of The Moon Princess. Because of those ties, I'd love to explain the connections (and quality) of Blade of The Moon Princess in relation to Endou's Magnum Opus.

Let's get the story out of the way: there are people living on the moon. All Feudal Japan-like but with fancy technology and unimaginable power. Kaguya, the young girl on the cover, is the next-in-line princess to succeed her mother and rise from princess to empress of the moon. Of course, not everyone likes that, as the branch family that was disgraced by the actions of the prior empress that originated from their family has stained their history. Desperate to claw back the power they had lost, they attempt to murder Kaguya's mother and steal away the symbol of her power, a sword passed down from empress to empress that's meant to protect the people of the moon. The coup-meets-assassination fails, and Kaguya is able to flee to the tainted planet (Earth) with the sword and evade the branch family, if only briefly.

Surprisingly well put together, yeah? I thought so too. Where Tista lacks a clear cut vision as to the reason behind Tista's story, Endou rectifies that hole here by providing viewers with the idea that Kaguya's goal is to return to the moon as its empress and usurp the branch family that has wrestled control away from her.

Moving on though, there's quite a few pieces that will catch the attention of readers. The moon, Kaguya, bamboo and Japan. It's Endou's version of The Story of Princess Kaguya. And I think that's really cool. They stretch the fabric of the original story so thin that you can shine a light through it, and Endou uses that light to illuminate the details that he's added. Kaguya does not appear to an old man in a stalk of bamboo. Rather, she appears in a space ship shaped like bamboo.

Much like Endou's marriage of sci-fi and fantasy with Blade of The Moon Princess, they form a transitional period in their storytelling between Tista and Spy x Family. Not quite as humorous as Spy x Family, and not quite as dark as Tista, Kaguya helms a story that straddles the middle of Endou's mind through this first volume. And I think that's something that will be immediately apparent to readers throughout the whole volume.

Though I say 'whole volume', there's two things that will immediately clue readers in: Anya and perspective. Now no, Anya does not appear in this first volume really. But I mean, just look at Kaguya's expressions, they exude the simplicity and laziness of Anya. While Ashe from the referentially titled Rengoku No Ashe might have been the inspiration for Anya's design, Kaguya represents a good portion of her soul.

Similarly, though in the opposite direction, is Endou's use of perspective. While it still exists in Spy x Family, it's to a far lesser degree than something like Tista. In his early days, he very much so had a penchant for blown perspective and the depiction of characters with small and narrow frames. Blade of The Moon Princess continues this trend, though perhaps on a lesser scale than before. The latter example in particular feels like it was pulled directly from Tista.

Anyways, let's refocus on the story to close things out. We know what Endou wants to do, we know where we're going and where it wants to end. It's a very confident series in that regard, which in turns provides me with confidence that it'll be a solid ride through its five volume run. It won't rush to fit it into two volumes, and it won't barely make it a story through one, it'll take its ideals about Kaguya's character, and take the time Endou needs to probably mold and shape it. It's the most promising exercise in Endou's storytelling prior to Spy x Family, and that has me very intrigued. A hot headed girl, stranded so far away from home, stuck with feelings of inadequacy and rage. But a girl that must nonetheless learn how to harness those feelings for the better, and use them to protect the people that form her kingdom. It's a well put and traditional approach with all the right twists and turns inserted by Endou. I'm very curious to see where it goes.