#which is not to say they're not good writers

[sneepity-snoop-snorpity-sneep]

I apparently come across as the same age as my younger coworkers, possibly because I am holding the vestiges of my whimsy in a deathgrip and also because they are experiencing the highs and lows of marriage and I'm not (seriously, I once had a conversation with an old lady at an urgent care where she was talking about her kids, stopped mid-conversation and went "you don't have any, i can see it in your eyes" TTvTT). If i were a cartoon I might be failing the above person's character design test

a lot of people do NOT 'look like adults'. Hell, in my experience a lot of folks look about the same if they're between 16 and 25 depending on the person and the only real way to find out where they fall on that range is to straight-up ask them

on one hand, yes, fiction and character design in cartoons specifically is meant to convey information about the characters to the audience quickly and easily - that doesn't mean shorthand like this is a good idea

visually conveying important information about your characters to your viewers is one thing, catering to the members of the audience who become viscerally uncomfy with characters not fitting in the exact boxes they think characters (and usually real people) should fit in is another thing ENTIRELY. People are gonna surprise you and do backflips around your expectations in real life just by being themselves sometimes, and frankly fiction gets better when this part of the human experience is included (at least i think it does)

like this whole complaint could've just stopped at "I don't like it when writers/designers sexualize characters whose role in the story doesn't have anything to do with their sexuality or lack thereof" and most folks would agree - like anybody from the clone wars fandom remember what they decided to have ahsoka wear for the first couple of seasons for no real reason? but that doesn't actually have any bearing on the character themself, again, see young ahsoka running around doing jedi commander stuff and having character arcs that her clothes are coincidental for at best (girl was literally in a war zone with not only no protective clothing, but not clothing at all covering at least three vital organs hhhhhhhhh)

and also, since this seems to be about hazbin hotel, I'd like to point out that there's probably some overlap OOP is seeing between 'character is being sexualized by the writers and/or fans' and 'character is in a story that includes adult themes about sexuality, lust, etc, and is shown to visibly have a sex drive/sex life/sexual experience', as many adults do.

But i still don't really see this as a bug over a feature, i mean....yeah hazbin hotel writes adults whose lives include sex-related stuff in a very different way than other adult shows which include sexuality (gonna use arcane and castlevania here, because i just recently re-watched both), but they're also all very different kinds of stories.

hazbin hotel, while not being quite the same kind of show like say family guy or south park, where you might find over-the-top sex/profanity based comedy, is the kind of adult animation that decided to have sex be a more relevant part of the setting and sometimes plot. Characters make sexual references, innuendos, jokes, etc, all the time even when there isn't any actual sex going on, while the other two shows I mention simply have sex being A Thing Adults Do Sometimes and there isn't (usually, with a particular exception *cough cough Lenore + Hector*) anything majorly plot-relevant about it.

but as far as your audience goes, that's really a difference in preference than a sign of good/bad writing or character design. Like i'm definitely more of a fan of the latter style of including sexuality in stories about adults. The hazbin hotel take on writing adults and sex isn't my cup of tea, but neither is it a deal breaker for adult media in general for me. This may be because I am Not Going To Pay Attention To Whatever Nonsense The Horny Fans Are Doing Now. i'm just not.

like a lot of the above complains seem to be rooted in how members of the audience will see the character, which is really not the greatest way to judge a work of fiction. Inevitably, at least some fans will draw porn of any character regardless of canonical age or if the story they're from actually has any kind of sexual content or not (doesn't Disney have an official vault of porn of characters from a bunch of their kids movies/shows? yeah) and if that's an issue for you you may not be curating your own online experience as much as you should. Gotta learn to think 'Do i actually want to see/engage with this or will it just make me unhappy' before u actually look at something. I regret to inform u i dont know any way outside of experiencing the consequences of NOT doing that to learn when I should. I'm talking about the moment when i see a unfamiliar word online ending in 'philia' and i take a moment to notice my curiosity before pondering if i really care to look it up

in conclusion, trying to box actual adult's appearance/behavior into boxes on who should and shouldn't be allowed to have a visible sexuality is just kinda reminiscent on the aspects of western shame culture that presume you can stop people behaving badly by making the potential targets of that behavior act so as not to encourage it.

Understandable gut motivation. Poorly thought out reaction

Alright.

At First I Was Going To Make A Joke About How Stupid This Thing Is, But Now That I’m Thinking About It This Is Just More Gross, Infuriating, And Sexist Than It Is Stupid And Funny.

Adult Are Adults.

Fictional Adult Are Fictional Adults.

I Don’t Care What Height They Are, If They Have Curves Or Not, If Their Personality Is Childish Or Adultish, Or If They Look Like A Child Or A Adult.

They Are Adults No Matter What.

Also “ProShippers Take Her And Run”… Can You Just… Not Do Or Say Anything Ever Again?

Either That Or Change Your Ways?

[miwiheroes]

okay time for my rant

i feel kind of upset that i know that a lot of people will be disappointed with season 5 byler because they have this one view: past byler moments need to be referenced.

assuming that it is endgame (bc yeah ofc it is), i don't think that will be enough for everyone, which i totally get <3 like if they do it in a poorly written way (i.e. no depth into mike's queerness or a cheating plot on el) i would totally get not being happy with it. but i know that some people will think that it's not that good because they may not reference past byler moments??

like some things that i've seen people hope for are understandable. for example, wanting a kiss with heroes in the bg, or wanting a mention of the painting. those make total sense because the writers set those things up in a way that implies it'll be referenced later on.

some things i just don't stand by. for example, wanting them to show ANY reference to them meeting each other for the first time, any reference to the crazy together scene. those are already canon moments. it's almost as if people needing these scenes to be referenced is a kind of insecurity in the existence of those scenes in the first place? like we need to them to be rehashed in order to make them like- double canon in a way?

now, i totally get wanting this to happen. for the reasons i have just expressed and the fact it would be really cool. but what i don't get is: saying that the new season's byler would be poorly written without a reference to a past moment.

i can almost see it now, post byler endgame, people getting mad there was no reference to their first meeting, people getting mad they didn't reference 'lets start a new party'. them saying it was poor writing. me going:

honestly......... i think it would be better written if they didn't reference these. More specifically, if the miwi flashback isn't them meeting each other for the first time, i would be equally as excited, because it means a NEW THING for us to reference, a new thing for me to explore in analysis.

the writers will hopefully give us some new lines. new soundtrack songs. new things to analyse and make memes about. i don't neeeed them to say they're crazy together for the third time*.

so if i catch anyone calling writers who have made an effort to create new, romantic, beautiful scenes that deepen the complexity of byler's relationship bad writing just because they didn't reference old moments, i am going to have an aneurysm <3 and then giggle in heaven, because why ur working urself up over literally nothing, i'll be sat, positive and happy, looking at fresh and new things to obsess over.

if you feel attacked by the post, im sorry, i just want to get you guys excited because no matter what we are getting new byler content, new lines and new complexities. sorry for making u feel bad in the future for criticising writers for taking the hard way out, and writing new lines LMAO

and in the possibility that they do reference these old moments, i'll also be happy, i just hate the idea that some people won't be happy if they don't do it, if that makes sense

*if you're wondering what the second time is, it's when mike gives will that post it note with the line on it.

[all-pacas]

house live-ish blogging: maternity

i love how the writers of this show only know like. 3 names. the baby is almost named amber. instead she is named max. max is also the name of the liver donating girlfriend in sleeping dogs lie. this show also has about six roberts, two chis, 5 rachels…

honestly love this episode. i wish the series had more "everyone pulling a 3 day shift, the only thing that matters is solving the Mystery" episodes, they're so good

i just looked up who wrote this episode to see if it was the same writer who wrote sleeping dogs lie re: the max thing. it isn't. instead it's peter blake, aka the chase whisperer: he also wrote the mistake, cursed, the itch, the tyrant, lockdown, and chase. (a couple shared credits but. damn. apparently this dude just wrote all the greatest hits for our useless nepobaby and his divorce. coincidentally, chase is great in this episode too. god now i want to do a tangent because the same writer wrote cursed/the mistake/lockdown/chase makes perfect fucking sense to me, because in each - when i say chase gets angry and resentful and shuts down when he's upset. when i say it's consistent. him lashing out at rowan isn't that different from him accusing cameron of never loving him, of accusing house of changing him. there's a throughline of these episodes: chase vulnerable, chase angry and upset, chase refusing to open up no matter who begs. and throw in the tyrant, his bonding with dibala and the way the murder is framed as chase lashing out in betrayal rather than moral imperative - man!!! ANYWAY)

i've always loved wilson's little "i can get you a key to the oncology lounge… we're getting TiVo" line. because when i was a kid, my dad got tivo. and when i say he bragged about it. when i say he would bring visitors into our house and show them the tivo and demonstrate the wonders of dvr in those olden days (of the early 2000s) (even if i was watching cartoons). so you know what wilson. i appreciate the flex. it is cool you're getting tivo.

in the script, it notes that chase is taking a nap while foreman studies and cameron reads houses mail. in the episode, chase is still taking his nap, but the other two are just standing around. i mention this just because it's interesting to see what character details are written and which are acting choices. to me.

the script also notes that the gays who lose their son are "comp lit grad students." not sure why we need to know this but i'm glad we do

foreman stepping up and lecturing cameron on bedside manner is. very funny. not that she doesn't need the lecturing in this episode (it's a Theme), but… considering how as time goes by, one of foreman's defining traits is terrible bedside manner… it's very main character of him lol. he truly is the best of the group in these early episodes. no weaknesses, only strengths.

cameron's "it's easier to die than to watch someone die" is so fascinating. it's so loaded with implication. what was her husband like? how much emotional labor was she doing for him? was he in denial of his prognosis until the end, meaning that cameron was stuck both taking care of him and pretending everything was okay? or is cameron, unwittingly, exposing her own selfishness here: does she actually kind of believe her pain is worse because she has to live with it?

that said i do like how even in this scene: cameron freezes up and is awkward at telling the patients bad news, but she's quick to (and good at) reassuring them a moment later. "kim is right," she says, using the patient's name. she's good at bonding with patients and comfort, just not when it's bad news. which, unfortunately, in her job…

i find the differential portions of this episode really interesting because it sets up as foreman has an idea, cameron has an idea, they argue their ideas, they want different treatments, house referees. they each get "assigned" a family and baby. neither are treated as more wrong or more right (although i guess cameron technically is — "her" baby is the one that dies because her treatment is wrong, but medically she did nothing wrong, it's more a larger theme about cameron struggling this episode). and meanwhile chase exists. this has been the case every episode so far lmao: foreman is the main ideas and treatment guy, cameron sometimes chimes in to back him up, chase offers no useful input or contributions. the difference is, this episode chase actually very much pulls his weight with the treatment and his work in NICU; he really is the Procedure Guy, not the Ideas Guy. which makes him a really interesting hire on house's part tbh - chase is almost useless in differentials (so far), he was hired just for his practical skills.

again, it is so weird to see foreman, champion of talking to patients. i mean, i do buy he knows how and is perfectly script accurate. but it was dropped as a trait so quickly

speaking of early installment weirdness: wilson calling cameron allison will never not be weird.

and likewise cameron's angry insistence that the women would rather have hope than truth is. very telling. like yes, we know she deals terribly with loss, but this is… what was her husband like? when did she find out he had cancer? does she wish she had been able to be ignorant longer? it's very clear – to the viewers and everyone in universe – that cameron is seeing this all through her perspective, that she's talking about herself at all times, but… (also imagine this perspective mixed with s6 and dibala. you think part of the reason chase didn't tell her for so long was because he really did think she'd prefer to be ignorant? how wrong or right was he in that?)

in the script, when the baby dies and chase is trying to revive it, there's a note that house puts his hand on chase's arm to get him to stop. not in the episode :( but i like their little interaction here: it's not much, but chase is clearly upset and house lets him go, doesn't scold him. house can in fact be pretty understanding about this stuff! he doesn't like wallowing but he has moments of being a good boss. and then he turns around and has zero sympathy for cameron lol.

cameron trying to foist the "inform the parents" thing on chase is very. hahaha. i always think of chase in forever trying to foist baby duties on her. it's not a great moment for cameron (it's not meant to be), but it… hm. i wouldn't say it's out of character; she never really gets better at dealing directly with death, but trying to weasel out of telling the parents by saying chase (or whoever) should do it seems… off, you know? her freezing up and wilson stepping in feels more on brand. but she's not supposed to be right this episode. she's lowkey supposed to suck.

(and from house's perspective: chase is sad about the dead baby. so is cameron. chase is still doing his job, he can be sad, it's not getting in the way. cameron is sad, and actively avoiding her job/trying to get others to do it for her. that is getting in the way.)

fascinating, too, that cameron is therefore stated in this episode to be bad at talking to patients (compared to foreman being good, and chase being a little awkward but fine).

"chase, you're the intensivist" -- love when the show tells us people's specialties. no one has called cameron an immunologist yet, but we have the guys now. and flash forward a few years, i don't think we technically ever learn thirteen or kutner's specialties (on screen).

in the lab end of the episode, cameron and chase are sitting way too close together. it is very funny how often this happens. i know it's because the actors were dating were not paying attention to body language but still. this is why everyone thought you were dating in s3, cameron

another good moment for cameron at the end of the episode, calling in the surviving baby's parents to hold her for a bit. (love that chase then reported this to house: it's not clear if house asked him how cameron was doing — he asks foreman, so it makes sense he'd check with chase too — or if chase reported it on his own, which also makes sense because chase telling house every bit of gossip he hears is a very consistent character trait lol)

speaking of foreman, his insisting that cameron has everything handled just fine is a) a blatant lie and b) very funny from foreman. which makes him sound like a douche but. he really did gain his ruthlessness later, didn't he?

actually, if house asked both the boys how cameron held up, and foreman lied and chase told a story of cameron having a Good Idea, that's kind of sweet. they're both covering for her/sticking up for her…

i haven't mentioned it but the clinic patient this episode always makes me laugh. shoutout to the actress, she just keeps saying this stupid stuff "oh man! wow!" but with this sincere, no brain cell enthusiasm that is so funny to me.

"do you think you could — " "no." "do the prenatal?" "no." "or deliver the baby?" "that would be no." "oh - kay!"

even though it's probably just a pillow they stuck under her shirt or something, i actually appreciate wardrobe remembered to have the woman who gave birth two days ago have a very noticeable stomach while sitting around in street clothes. realism!

house is oddly gentle with cameron in this scene at the end. "you look tired… you had a hard time this week." i know you can read it as oh, he's in love with her, but i don't think we're supposed to; i'm pretty sure it's a fragment of his nicer s1 personality. because we really don't see it again after s1, even with people or in situations where he's trying to be gentle. ("oh, it's because he's in love with cameron" i'm really not convinced that was the direction of this episode.) it also make's cameron's angry reaction a little odd - not that she wouldn't be defensive, but… house is being so nice, lol. he's not being a bastard at all! just wait until he really starts meddling in your life, cam!

i find it very unlikely that cuddy, tearing apart the hospital for days, didn't notice the old lady loitering around the maternity ward coughing constantly. i find it unlikely no one mentioned her. i get that we're not supposed to worry about these facts

house's soap opera doctor has exactly the same hairstyle as chase lmao

[stop-breaking-my-heart-dragonage]

I love the romances in datv (Neve my Beloved) but I can't get over all the talk about how it'd have the most romantic romances in the series. They aren't bad but most romantic? I wish I didnt go into it with that expectation lol

Oof. Yeah.

My opinion on Veilguard is complicated, but when it comes to the romances...? I feel that, anon. I feel that so damn hard.

The romances are one of my favorite things about a Dragon Age game because it's a choice that can, when done well, completely change your experience playthrough to playthrough, y'know?

And for me there are a handful of romances where if I don't choose them, if I do an alternate playthrough...? I miss them so goddamn much. I miss them enough that I actively struggle to even finish alternate playthroughs. That's how much they've impacted me.

I'll always hold Alistair up as like.... the romance for me. Honestly, I think DAO set the S-tier of romances with him, Leliana, Morrigan, and Zevran as far as writing goes and how interwoven their romances are with the HoF's arc and the plot... they're not just fluff that's tacked on, it's not just, "oh, if you romance them, you get one unique scene toward the end of the game, and some different dialogue!"

I could go on, and on, and on about Alistair and his romance with my Tabris. Hell, even outside of the romance, just their dynamic in the game. Their friendship! I could write essays about the little nuances and how beautiful and tragic his romance can be, and the branching paths, hhhhnnngggggg you can have so many different endings with him!

In DAO, you have many opportunities to flirt. You can give them gifts, and special gifts give you cutscenes where you actually talk about the gift you're giving them. You can set the pace of the relationship. You have different paths you can take and you can discover cute things, like okay.... for Alistair, there's the conversation where he gives you the rose. If you go out with only him in your party, and trigger that, you can get special extra dialogue because you two are alone.

Like... they thought about that. They thought about the player taking just Alistair around somewhere. Why would they? Why would you?

Unless you're roleplaying walking around Redcliffe together to gather supplies to bring back to camp and accidentally talk to him, triggering the scene on the docks.

It's little things like that, special things, that make every playthrough with a different romance feel unique. It feels like the writers put so much thought and care into every situation you'd be in, they thought about how the romance would not only affect your playthrough, but how it'd affect the character you're romancing beyond just... ending the game with a partner.

Hell, it makes you want to replay the game because if this romance was this good, what are the others like? Y'know?

Which is WHY when I heard them make the very bold claim that Veilguard would be the most romantic, I had doubts... because they're competing with Alistair. They're competing with Morrigan, Leliana, and Zevran. Not to mention literally everyone else in DA2 and DAI...... except maybe Sebastian.

If there's one thing I can say about Veilguard's romances, it's that at least they're better than Sebastian's... which is not a high bar because Sebastian's DLC, can only be romanced by a lady Hawke, and from what I've heard/seen of the romance, they don't even get a kiss...

Look, if Veilguard wasn't a Dragon Age game, I'd say the romances are fine, good even... for what they are. Because they do have good moments! They're just lacking, and in some cases, feel unfinished... like there are scenes missing.

I romanced Davrin on my first playthrough, Lucanis on my second. My third playthrough with Carver as Rook is undecided, though I'm thinking either Neve or Bellara.

With Davrin I played an elven Grey Warden, and that really enhanced his romance with me because 1. surprise, surprise, CJ really likes the Grey Wardens and when the opportunity for another Grey Wardens in love story to happen, she picked it, and 2. It felt like Nesryn and him had actual chemistry when talking about warden things, which led into feeling they had chemistry outside of that.

With Lucanis, I played a Lord of Fortune because I thought it'd be kind of funny for this himbo of a man, the literal embodiment of sunshine, to be a pirate who then falls in love with an Antivan Crow. And I have..... feelings. About Lucanis' romance. Especially as someone who also is an Andersmancer. It's good, but also not. It healed parts of me, only to then do more damage when I realized that Lucanis feels like the AO3 version of Anders who is chill and controlled and Justice is also in love with you, actually........ and that brings up conflicted feelings within me.

Looking back at these two now, I prefer Davrin's romance. But the problem with Veilguard's approach to romance, in my opinion, is not just the lack of content. It's not just the feeling that some of the companions have better chemistry with each other than they do with Rook. It's not just the weird pacing of it all.

God, how do I word this.... when I play Tabris, Alistair is crucial to her arc. Absolutely crucial. Remove the slow burn of their romance, or remove their friendship, and she's a completely different person.

When I play Ed Hawke, romancing Anders is interwoven into his arc. The playthrough wouldn't be the same if they remained friends. The impact of the ending would hit entirely different. Then, when I play Aris Hawke, romancing Isabela adds such a different flavor to the story. It's like night and day. And they're both great, that's the thing!

I think Cullen and Josephine are my favorite romances in DAI because they're not traveling companions, they're your advisors. It's different, and it adds layers to their romances. I'm in war table meetings with them. We're leading this operation together, and I find those dynamics so interesting.

In my opinion, the romances do not add anything crucial to Rook's story. At the end of my second playthrough, I wondered if I should bother trying the others out... which is not great!

Though, honestly, a criticism I have of Rook is in both playthroughs I did, they felt like the same character with different skins despite me picking different choices. Different faction, different dialogue.

Carver's run is going a little different but I think that's just my brain filling in those blanks, which.... yeah. I feel like any depth Rook and the romances had was concocted in my mind because the game didn't give me much to chew on.

So even though I did two romances that feel different, Rook remains the same in the end, and like.... that's not something I can say about HoF, Hawke, or the Inquisitor.

There's always going to be headcanon and personal writing when it comes to DA, that's how fandom works, y'know? But unlike the previous games, this actively feels unfinished, and like it expects me to finish it for them.

Yes, you get cute, flirty banter with them, and you get the scene where they go to your room... and from what I've heard Emmrich actually gets a bonus scene so like good for him.

I mean that genuinely, too. Seriously, good for him to be the standout of having an extra, romance specific scene. I haven't seen anyone mention any of the other companions getting one.

But do I feel like the romances impacted Rook to the same level of depth? No, unfortunately. And it sucks! Because I do enjoy the companions! And the bits we do get of the romances, I like!

But do not try to tell me they're the most romantic in the series because they're not, I'm so sorry. I want them to be! I want them to feel fleshed out and interwoven with Rook's arc within the actual game, and not through headcanon! I see the potential, I see the intrigue of certain Rooks with certain companions!

I could go on and on about this, and I will if anyone else asks, but yeah, anon.... I feel you.

Also, I'd like to hear other opinions on this since I've only done two of the romances, so maybe there is more depth to be found that I just don't know about. Maybe I haven't found my golden combo yet.

Plus, I just like reading about other people's experiences with DA romances, I find it super interesting.

[sandraharissa]

it's such a bizarre criticism too and shows they lack basic observation skills. they're trying to say that ppl who are raving about how good s1 was, which was way darker than s2, only dislike s2 bcos it was too dark for them?? have they paid attention to any s1 scenes with Jinx in them?

s2 is straight up a walk in the park compared to s1. Pretty much everyone got a happy ending, or at least they're ok. Deaths like Jinx's and Isha's are portrayed as beautiful and like, fulfilling to them?? with other characters quickly moving on instead of the deaths being portrayed as unbearable tragedies like in s1 and Jinx is probs not even dead anyway. and the writers trying to squeeze tears out of you by killing the same character for the third time, at a point where it's not even them anymore they're just a zombie, should indeed be a wake up call that they don't respect your intelligence.

The copium in the arcane fandom is so bad lol. Now they’re trying to say people didn’t like season 2 cause they can’t handle dark themes or dark queers or whatever.

You’re just straight up ignoring what people are saying.

It’s being criticized because it wrote these dark themes with all the brain power of a 14 year old angry at their parents at the back of a math class.

It’s not because caitvi is dark or whatever. It’s cause the writers were too obsessed with being edgy to care about the integrity of these characters who have existed independently for years.

[royalarchivist]

I say this in the kindest way possible, but I think this style of prose is more appropriate for a personal account rather than an update account. I have no idea who's being talked about half the time. 🥲

[ Tumblr meme via @mikaikaika ]

[jq37]

Descendants: The Rise of Red is kind of a bizarre movie to talk about critically because, imo, it almost doesn't make sense to talk about it in the usual terms of good vs bad or enjoyable vs not enjoyable when the way more obvious tension is finished vs unfinished.

Because, more than any other movie I've ever seen, it does *not* read as a full movie. And I don't mean in a "this movie has a cliffhanger" kind of way. The Empire Strikes Back and Across the Spiderverse fit that description. They end on big dramatic cliffhangers that point to a resolution in the third installment.

But Rise of Red just sets all this stuff up and then...ends without concluding anything. It doesn't feel like the first movie in a trilogy (or duology). It feels like the first act of a two-act musical. It very specifically reminds me of the end of the first act of Into the Woods where all the main characters sing the song Ever After about how they all fixed their problems with magic and nothing bad will ever happen to them again and then the narrator ominously says "To be continued" before the curtain drops. But in Into the Woods you know there's a second act and this movie wasn't sold as the first act of a bigger story. Like sure, it has the, "You didn't think this was the end" tag at the end like all the other movies, but those movies were complete, self-contained stories even though they had sequels. This was NOT a full story. It's half of one story.

Like, if we're supposed to take this as a full story, there are so many bizarre choices:

Why did they make sure to mention that Cinderella and Charming fell in love at the ball at the top if it wasn't meant to set up Back to the Future style, "Oh no, I accidentally got my mom banned from the ball so she's not gonna fall in love with Dad and I won't be born" shenanigans?

Why did Maddox very pointedly have that bit about "you could lose your mom completely" if that was never going to come into play? Red never did anything to endanger Bridget or endanger her own birth so it doesn't make sense as a warning in that way.

Why was there all this focus on this Carrie on prom night moment for Bridget if we LITERALLY NEVER SAW CASTLECOMING? Why dance around this moment and talk about it all cloak and dagger with no specificity if they weren't building up to some big reveal that it wasn't as straightforward as it seemed? And like, they leaned in HARD with making Bridget the nicest, sweetest, cotton candy princess as a teen so I need WAY more than, "She got pranked by known bullies she's been enduring with a smile very handily up to this point" to buy that she went from that to "murderous dictator". And even if she did become murderous, I find it insanely hard to believe that she'd include her best and only friend on the list of people she wants to suffer unless there was a betrayal. I find it INSANE that there wasn't a falling out scene at any point in this movie with how thickly they were laying on the admiration and camaraderie.

(Note: And adult Cinderella def has guilty vibes re: the Queen at orientation. Which I know I'm not imagining because it's literally spelled out in the Jr Novelization!)

Before the time travel element of the movie started, I thought they were going for something like they go to the past and realize that Bridget was bullied not by the VKs but by the spoiled royals, and Ella ends up joining in the bullying once she gets with Charming, betraying Bridget and justifying her whole "Love Ain't It" philosophy. Or Ella ditching her at the last minute to be with Charming meaning she has to deal with the monster prank alone and it was the being alone rather than the prank itself that hurt her (though that is NOT a good enough reason to go all off with their heads on your subjects). The fact that, as far as we know right now, it literally was just a relatively mild and reversible prank that caused all of this is just, such flat storytelling, you know?

But! All of this makes way more sense if this is meant to be the first act of a single contained story. And I don't wanna be all "Pepe Silvia, secret good 4th episode of Sherlock" about this but I did see this picture:

Which seems to indicate that this was written as a Part One. Which, if so, idk why they wouldn't advertise it that way but whatever. The point is, if that's the case then it means that we're potentially in bad pacing territory rather than straight up bad storytelling territory. Because this isn't a bad place to be halfway through your story:

The heroes, warned that time travel is dangerous, have gone back in time to change the heart of a brutal tyrant before she can stage a coup. They seemingly succeed in their mission and when they come home, everything is great! But then, the side effects of time travel start to catch up with them. Chloe realizes that, in breaking the vase, she prevented her mother from going to the ball and falling in love with her dad (who was conspicuously absent from the final scene btw) which means she's starting to be forgotten and erased from the timeline. And Red realizes that though this new version of her mom is as sweet and kind as the teen she once met, she's a complete stranger to her (fulfilling the Hatter's warning that she could lose her mom completely). So they have to go back in time once more to make sure the Ella and Charming fall in love again, perhaps at the cost of whatever bad thing that happened to Bridget happening again and bringing back the original version of her future self. But, now with more context of how her mom became that way, Red can now talk to her mother and persuade her to give people another chance.

Boom, that gives us time to go back and hit everything we haven't yet hit. We can pay off the time travel tropes that were set up but not explored. We can go to Castlecoming which feels so obviously set up to be the centerpiece of this story (like, come on, Back to the Future literally does the school dance thing. This is Time Travel Storytelling 101). We can actually get info about what the prank was and why it affected Bridget so completely.

(Note: This is a side thing but it really strikes me as so crazy that Bridget would so SUCH a big 180 here. Like, I know the Queen of Hearts is a silly, goofy, campy villain, but she straight up murders people and there's no way to get around that if we're taking her out of the surreal story she comes from and putting her in a (comparatively) grounded story. If I wasn't doing a betrayal plot, I would make the twist that the spell that turned Bridget into a "monster" didn't just have a physical effect, it had a mental effect and it magically twisted her personality to be the way it is now. So they broke the physical half of the curse, but neglected the other half and it's been festering the whole time, turning her as evil as she was sweet. Because like, a simple physical transformation isn't that big of a deal to have such heavy security--Bridget made cupcakes with a transformative effect and that was totally fine. I'm not saying that that's what's gonna be the case. I just think it would be an explanation that makes sense for why she changed so crazy much that makes more sense than a simple prank or even a betrayal. Her mom wasn't even evil! How did she go from zero to murder without even an evil mom to push her onto the path? But I'm super digressing right now.)

(Note #2: OK, one last thing. The trap on the book presumably would have hit the VK's and trapped them in Merlin's office regardless of what Chloe and Red did, right? That's like, net zero influence on the timeline. I genuinely can't tell if that's a straight up plot hole or set up to be like, "Oh no. Actually when she said that she was turned into a monster in front of everyone it was meant in a less literal way." Like she was just made to look bad and that was the real thing that pushed her over the edge. Like idk. It really feels like the only thing they really did that would change the timeline was get Ella banned from the dance and presumably out of the way where she couldn't hurt Bridget. OK NOW I'm done.)

Anyway, my point is that this is not how I would have structured my movie and I think this was a super weird way to go into the second era of Descendants movies, but they can still tell a complete story if that's their plan. I'm genuinely really curious to see if this pans out to be a fairly competently told story that just happens to be split over two movies or a complete fumbling of the narrative bag because it could really be either at this point and it's fascinating to me.

[lightbulb-warning]

i used to freehand comics all the time as a child and since the part i liked was the drawing part i would just draw panel after panel because i didn't want to stop drawing to think about icky icky words, plus the story TOTALLY still made perfect sense! to me! and noone else, but 'whoooo caaaaares omgggg its not like comics and sequantial art are a communicative meeediummmm lmaoooooo'. i spent my entire childhood telling myself stuff like "oh pfft I know this story by heart- ill SIMPLY remember the dialogue and write it later" ...and. I can't help but admire baby maiora's (call that a minora ba tm tsk) fucking audacity? hubris? confident wrongness? kid couldn't even remember to finish the comics in the first place? INCREDIBLE levels of unearned self assurance, wish that were me, genuinely- what an icon!!! anyway i think i have forever cursed myself

[itischeese]

Should I (attempt to) go back to posting weekly with less polished works, or post less often but much more finalized works (ie actually edited)?

(please note that the piece I posted most recently was, in fact, edited.

Also, If I post polished works less often, I will inevitably post much less of what I write; only the stuff that can be made good.)

[jasontoddenthusiastt]

It is not classist that Jason, a vigilante in a *family of vigilantes*, is violent like the rest | just | because he comes from a poor family

What's (more likely) classist is writers thinking he needs to be taught right vs wrong from Bruce and co and that he consequently makes snap judgments out of some childish grudge-fueled rebellion which makes him dangerous the way a toddler holding a knife is dangerous

[oh-meow-swirls]

was looking through old posts and i'm surprised to see that i seemingly didn't have any commentary on anything in 3 in chapter 7, 8 or 9, the posts related to 3's story go from "my first reaction when i saw yopple-bot was 'i love you. but also you are definitely the boss for this chapter-'" to "i have been in hell all day. hell being bada-bing tower." funny to me cuz those chapters are like, the best ones sdfkljsdfjfsdkjlfsdjkl-

[peaceblank]

Man, it's so annoying how recently there has been several things that really emphasize just how much it takes for some people to accept a character is jewish.

Be it from heavily coded in the text with an added word of god, to literally shown or out right stated in the text. Somehow, people will still crawl out of the woodwork to say, "well that doesn't mean they're jewish".

Meanwhile, in almost every piece of media a character could do absolutely nothing in regards to any religion and everyone will immediately just assume they're some flavor of christian. It is treated as the default and not something that has to be revealed. You do not need to dig and sift through the characters entire existence to justify having them celebrate christmas, but god forbid you have the briefest hint of giving them some other religion. People will come out of nowhere asking you why you would do this, demanding you cite your sources for why you would dare sully this character like that.

[welcometogrouchland]

Also in the replies of the Steph concept art on twitter announcing she was gonna be in a new project at DC (posted by Travis Mercer), there were at least 3 comments saying "will Tim be there?" I don't care how hard you ship timsteph I'm exploding you with my eyeballs if you do that on my girls post again

[coolspacequips]

Have been reading this sci-fi romance and like UGH u ever really wish a book was just at least a little better??? There's stuff in this that's interesting but also a lot about it that's so... Juvenile and kinda undercooked lol...... But it's so hard finding good romance bc for a lot of romance readers this is enough, except even then not really since they prolly didn't fuck nasty enough in this book for the ppl that just need the merest pretense to read smut (which is fine if that's what u like there's just an oversaturation of this, esp when you can have a light plot/heavy smut story with slightly better writing and internal world building without having to explain and describe the 'boring' parts 😅)

[throughdarkeningskies]

when I was a teen and I read everything I could get my hands on, I had this rule in my head to seperate 'literary' fic from 'chick-lit'. and the rule was this: if they have sex and its bad its literary. if they have sex and they enjoy it its chick-lit.

alternate variations:

- if there are dark serious themes explored and everyone is dark and serious about it it's literary. if dark serious themes are explored but the characters crack jokes about it its chick-lit

- if a man writes it its literary and if a woman writes it its chick-lit

- if its written with the most dry boring-ass prose possible it's literary. if its written the way an actual person would talk its chick-lit

[aeide-thea]

[fic crit, amatonormativity (blogger's own) cw]

revisited a story that i remembered really enjoying, but have had difficulty digging up for a reread because, as it turns out, it's a good 200 pages deep in the relevant pairing tag, and—

turns out that i do still really dig it, and also that the other thing i remembered about it is equally still true, which is that it totally fails to really resolve the emotional side of things! like, it's a fic full of Plot and briefly- but vividly-drawn OCs, and people from the main characters' pasts who show up in ways that work for the story but are also random enough to lend verisimilitude, and we get to see the elements of the foil's day-to-day life—what keeps them busy and burnished when they're not off Adventuring with our protagonist—in generous, engaging detail, and all of that remains really satisfying and compelling to me; but it's billed as a fic ft. a pairing, and yet all we see of that is an established, undiscussed level of ambiguous intimacy that's lovely and warm but queerplatonic at absolute most, and doesn't get tied into any sort of bow by the end, even a friendly one.

and the thing is—there's absolutely nothing wrong with that! if it weren't for the pairing tag i probably wouldn't even find it unsatisfying: it'd just be lovely warm plotty genfic, and i'd enjoy the hell out of it! but i am, for better or for worse, amatonormative enough that when i see a story with a pairing tag, i do personally expect some combination of Romance Feelings and/or sex to appear on the page, unless the author's notes inform me the relationship is queerplatonic or similarly asterisked, and having that expectation go unmet feels like a disappointment even when the fic is on all other fronts the opposite of disappointing. which i'm fully ready to accept is my own failing, rather than the story's! but. idk. pondering and processing. :)